Blair In Blue

Good article from Hitchens in the Mail today, I suggest giving it a read.

He is truly what he once said he was – the Heir to Blair.

If he wins, he will – as the first Tory leader to win an Election in 18 years – have the power to crush all his critics in the Tory Party.

He will be able to say that political correctness, green zealotry, a pro-EU position and a willingness to spend as much as Labour on the NHS have won the day.

He will claim (falsely) that ‘Right-wing’ policies lost the last three Elections.

Those Tory MPs who agree with you and me will be cowed and silenced for good. The power will lie with the A-list smart set, modish, rich metropolitan liberals hungry for office at all costs who would have been (and who in the case of one of the older ones actually was) in New Labour 13 years ago.

And then where will you have to turn for help as the PC, pro-EU bulldozer trundles across our landscape destroying what is good and familiar and replacing it with a country whose inhabi­tants increasingly cannot recognise it as their own?

The Liberal Democrats? They agree with David. The Labour Party under exciting, new, Blairite Mr Miliband, heir to a Marxist dynasty?

He agrees with David, too. You will look from bench to bench in the House of Commons and see nothing but the people whose ideas have wrecked a great country in half a century, and who still won’t admit they’re wrong.

This system is only propped up by state funding and dodgy millionaires. The surge to the Liberal Democrats – because of who they are not rather than because of what they are – shows a great hunger for something genuinely different.

Yes indeed. I will not vote for any of the corporate three. It would be akin to choosing one of three doors that all lead to the same prison cell.

Woman not responsible for her own actions, boyfriend is.

A controlling boyfriend who forced his bank manager partner to steal almost £1million, which he blew on exotic holidays and fast cars was jailed for three years today.

Crack addict Keith 'Junior' Preddie, 30, banked more than £145,000 of the stolen cash and spent more on powerful motorbikes, BMWs, a failed business and trips abroad.

Ania Wadsworth, 28, said Preddie threatened, beat and intimidated her in to stealing so he could pay off his spiraling drug debts and fund an 'extremely extravagant lifestyle'.

I guess going to the police was too empowering for her or something.

She repeatedly walked out of a branch of Lloyds TSB with bundles of £25,000 in her handbag and manipulated internal accounts to fool auditors.  

Wadsworth admitted stealing the cash, but said she was a victim of 'battered woman syndrome' and Preddie had threatened to kill her if she did not hand over her wages and steal cash when he demanded.

Is there a battered man syndrome?

Wadsworth who had been a manager for five years, was unanimously cleared of theft after a three week-trial at the Old Bailey in January.

But Preddie, who bragged he was a high-flying record producer, was found guilty of money laundering.

He rocked back on his heels and needed support from dock officers as the sentence was announced. He was then led to the cells in tears. 

Jailing him, Judge Richard Hone QC said: 'There can be no doubt that it was you who put Ania Wadsworth under pressure sufficiently and persistently to steal nearly £1million from Lloyds bank over a period of approximately five years.

Five years of this! She didn’t seek help so she couldn’t have been that bothered. This article continues with the most gynocentric shit I’ve seen in a long time.

Wadsworth said she was beaten and dominated by Preddie, adding: 'He basically said there were people that were going to kill him so he had to pay them and if I didn't get money for him then he would kill me.' 

But jobless Preddie, who admitted having a £500-a-day crack cocaine habit, said he had spent only what he had been given as 'gifts'.

Any evidence for these beatings and threats? Otherwise it’s just hear-say, unless of course, a woman’s word is worth more than a man in the court. Note the next few clippings.

Wadsworth denied ever enjoying the trappings of wealth and said she rarely spoiled herself. 

Bullshit.

For his 21st birthday in 2000, Wadsworth flew both of them to New York.

The couple then went on a string of holidays to Greece, the Canary Islands, Amsterdam and New York, all funded by her. She also had trips to Rome, Venice and Cyprus.

The couple also put a new kitchen and bathroom in their flat in Crouch Hill, north London, and he poured thousands in to a fledgling record company which never got off the ground.

No trappings of wealth there. There is a possible motive for her actions though…

He also holidayed in Jamaica with friends and the Dominican Republic with a woman called Jade, who he started seeing behind Wadsworth's back.

Preddie then squirreled away thousands so that he could start a new life with his lover, who he wined and dined with Wadsworth's money.

Ouch. Date a bad-boy, get treated like shit, go along for the ride, claim a complete and utter lack of personal responsibility when it suits her and dump everything on the man. Funny, I thought feminism was about men and women being ‘completely equal’. I guess only when it’s expedient for them, then they can use the poor innocent female card.

Now that’s what I call equality.

Cash and sex

Tiger Woods’ main mistress has reportedly claimed the shamed golf star 'gave her lots of cash and hours of sex' as a present on Christmas Day.

Um, isn't that called being a prostitute? I'm sure she'll convince herself otherwise though, women (and sociopathic politicians) are good at that.

5,000 teenagers a year have repeat abortions

Part of the 'empowering women' (population control) agenda. When you look deep enough you start to see how many goals cross ideologies. In this case, environmentalism and feminism.

More than 5,000 teenagers had an abortion last year that was at least their second termination.

This means that one in 20 of the teenagers who became pregnant ended it with their second or further abortion.

It caused further controversy yesterday over the Government's teen pregnancy strategy, which has not only failed to hit its targets but last year also saw numbers of conceptions among teenagers actually increase.

Critics have accused ministers of relying increasingly on abortion to deal with teen pregnancy.

The latest figures – released to MPs by the Department of Health – show that repeat abortions have become common among teenagers.

They revealed that in 2008 there were 5,218 repeat abortions among girls under 20 in England, and a further 15,029 among those aged between 20 and 24.

Around one in 12 of abortions performed on teenagers were second or further repeat abortions.

The figures for repeat abortion among teenagers come amid a continuing rise in overall numbers of women having second or further abortions.

Last year nearly 65,000 women who had already had an abortion went through a second, third or further pregnancy termination.

Yet another false rape accuser gets off

A wife who cried rape because she felt guilty about cheating on her husband in their home was spared jail yesterday.

Helen Dalby went to extraordinary lengths to stand by her false claim, having a full medical examination and even helping create an e-fit of her imaginary attacker.

But despite wasting £3,800 of public money and showing little regard for two men arrested, she was given a ten-month suspended jail sentence after admitting perverting the course of justice.

Third of children never see dad after a divorce

More than one in three children never see their father again after their parents split up, research into family breakdown shows.

And nearly one in ten is so traumatised by the separation that they have considered suicide.

Children are often used as ‘emotional footballs’ and left feeling ‘used, isolated and alone’, with many turning to drink, drugs and truanting.

Sandra Davis, head of family law at Mishcon de Reya, which carried out the survey of more than 4,000 people, said: ‘This research highlights that despite their best intentions, parents are often using their children as emotional footballs.

Notice how this article opens with fathers not seeing children, implying it is their choice (and thus are 'deadbeat dads'), but when it comes to children being used as emotional weapons, they generalise. I mean, if so many children are kept by the mother, and the father has NO CONTACT, you must assume that the majority of emotional abuse would come from the mother. But you cannot criticise mothers right, the all-perfect little things.

‘They can be seen as tangible objects. There has to be change to give our children a voice that’s meaningful.

‘The process now encourages an adversarial approach, but it needs to be about communication between the parents.

How about equal rights to the children, which is actually enforceable?

‘Therapeutic input, not litigation, is the answer and will reduce the emotional and financial cost of separation.’

For 38 per cent of children, separation meant they never saw their father again.

Although 70 per cent of parents said their children’s welfare was the most important factor in a divorce, a quarter of children said they had been forced by one parent to lie to the other.

I wonder which sex did that the most. Still, this will keep being promoted for two reasons. Men are the enemy of tyrants and women are the majority voting base.

The gentler sex

A two-year-old girl was punched in the head by muggers who demanded money from her mother.

The 23-year-old victim was shopping with her daughter in Wembley, north-west London, when a pair of girls tried to rob her.

The attackers, who Scotland Yard said were thought to be in their teens, hit the mother on the arm before punching the toddler in the head. None of the victim's belongings were taken.

Detective Inspector Rebecca Reeves, from the Metropolitan Police, said: 'Although the victim and her daughter do not have any visible injuries, this was a frightening experience for them.'

Police have released a CCTV image of the two alleged attackers taken after the attempted robbery at around 5pm on Tuesday, November 3.

Both women were of Mediterranean appearance, with long dark brown curly hair and aged between 14 and 18.

One was 5ft and wore a white jacket, black mini-skirt, tiger stripe leggings, black flat shoes and carried a large black fake leather bag.

The second wore a black jacket, blue denim skinny jeans, black Ugg-style boots and had a large brown fake leather bag with gold details.

Anyone with information should call the police on 07917 067 281 or Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555111.

Why they didn't have the shit kicked out of them when they did that, I don't know. Lucky I wasn't there, and I don't give a fuck if they're female. Feral chav scum.

Harriet Harman Humiliated By Reality.

Fucking commie man-hating bitch.

Harriet Harman was yesterday slapped down by national statisticians over her claims that women are paid a fifth less than men.

The Women and Equality Minister was told she must no longer use a single figure to describe the complex differences in the earnings of men and women.

Instead she will have to give three measures - among them one which shows that far from earning less than men, women in part-time jobs are actually paid more on average than their male counterparts.

The ruling from the Office for National Statistics is the culmination of a running row between Labour's deputy leader and Whitehall watchdogs, who called her use of figures on the gender pay gap 'misleading'.

To these Marxist zealots, (whether they be feminists, environmentalists, socialists or whatever) reality comes second to pushing their agenda. They will distort, lie, cheat, suppress, oppress and do whatever else they can to achieve their aims.

This is because to them, the end justifies the means, even if that means ignoring common sense, reality and human nature. This is why none of them should ever get positions of power. All they are good for is providing food for vultures as they hang by piano wire from London Bridge.

Women are the biggest misogynists

When I was growing up, the only girl among four brothers, my mother was always going on at me (and only me) about being 'nice'.

Girls had to be nice to everyone. Boys didn't share these restrictions. If someone wasn't nice to them, they certainly weren't going to be nice back.

But nice girls like me - well, we had no choice in the matter.

As with many things my mother told me, it is only decades later that I can see what good sense she spoke.

Because when you liberate girls - and women - to say what they really think about everyone else without censure or fear of disapproval, then you let the struggle for supremacy among females out of the bag.

It is an ugly and mean way of behaving - and I believe it is stripping away the bonds that hold females together as friends.

My mother kept on at me so tiresomely when I was a little girl because she knew female rivalry started young. My brothers would be encouraged to compete with each other at games and sports, while I was taught that comparing myself with others was not good for girls.

I know she would recoil in horror at the way young girls now eye each other up in public, checking out the colour of their Converse trainers or the Claire's Accessories bow in their hair.

I have watched my nine-yearold daughter pass a girl of a similar age in the street and they are like two stereotypical jealous women in a production of Carmen - all narrowed eyes and furrowed brows as they slowly look from the feet to the face and back again, often with accompanying adults blithely unaware.

Read the comments! It says what I have been saying for years, and will always say. Women are always so quick to label men 'misogynists' for two main reasons, first, to shame the man into giving her what she wants and two, she is projecting her own hatred of women onto him.

The Truth about Global Warming stories

Remember this,

"The threat of environmental crisis will be the 'international disaster key' that will unlock the New World Order." [Mikhail Gorbachev, quoted in "A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind", by Marilyn Brannan, Associate Editor, Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, p. 5.]

Everyone knows the term New World Order alludes to a global centralised technocratic super government. Like the EU but global and even worse.

Now this is released.

A United Nations document on “climate change” that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

This is the main thrust of the climate change scam. Pushing for a supranational legal framework, specifically designed to usurp the sovereignty of nation states but by proxy, the individual sovereignty of us all.

I add the following quotes for your consideration.

David Rockefeller Sept. 23, 1994 "This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - 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."

Note the image on the right of the blog, of the newspaper.

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. 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." -David Rockefeller, from his own book, Memoirs.

We are moving toward a new world order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.” — Mikhail Gorbachev 1987

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National auto determination practiced in past centuries"--David Rockefeller in an address to a Trilateral Commission meeting in June of 1991

"The invisible Money Power is working to control and enslave mankind. It financed Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Zionism, Socialism. All of these are directed to making the United States a member of a World Government ..." -- AMERICAN MERCURY MAGAZINE, December 1957, pg. 92.

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." — SIR JOSIAH STAMP, (President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain)


“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” — Statement made before the United States Senate on Feb. 7, 1950 by James Paul Warburg

"I am convinced that the agreement [Bretton Woods] will enthrone a world dictatorship of private finance more complete and terrible than a Hitlerite dream. It offers no solution of world problems, but quite blatantly sets up controls which will reduce the smaller nations to vassal states and make every government the mouthpiece and tool of International Finance. It will undermine and destroy the democratic institutions of this country - in fact as effectively as ever the Fascist forces could have done - and will undoubtedly present a new menace, endangering world peace. World collaboration of private financial interests can only mean mass unemployment, slavery, misery, degradation and financial destruction. -- Labor Minister of Australia, Eddie Ward, during the inception of the World Bank and Bretton Woods, he gave this warning.

All throughout history, tyrants have sought global domination. Our time is no different. The human race struggles against itself, seeking to drag itself away from these primitive insecurities, trying to quench them with never ending power and wealth. As far as Britain is concerned, people should educate themselves on a few things. The nature of money, how banks operate, and if you own yourself or if you are a slave to others. I will elaborate on this shortly.

Make no mistake, running serves no purpose whatsoever. We are born to fight for our freedom against parasites, and by God, this is what I shall do!

Government response to e-petition for equal rights regarding rape accusations

Rape-equal-right - epetition response

The original petition;

“We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to assign equal anonymous rights to both rape victim and accused until verdict is given.”

Details of Petition:

“It seems more than obvious that whilst rape is a very serious crime, being accused of rape is just as serious. With rape, the stain of being accused does not wash away with the verdict, it stains a character and prevents an equal footing guarenteed by law, especially since until the verdict is given, the accused is innocent. There is no plausible argument for releasing the name of the accused as this does nothing to further justice, but only serves to punish them outside of the judicial system. The only punishment for rape, should be passed down by a judge, not by newspapers, their peers, or their employers. Therefore revealing their identity is an unjust punishment without basis in english law. We therefore request that ALL parties to a rape case are anonymous, until a verdict is reached.”

The response is as follows, with my comments;

The Government does not agree that releasing the name of an accused is a punishment and does not agree that there should be anonymity for defendants in rape cases. The Government is satisfied that the law as it stands is operating satisfactorily and has no plans to change it.

Well it is not satisfactory for the ever increasing numbers of men now finding themselves the victim of fraudulent rape accusations, is it?

Complainants in rape cases are granted anonymity in order to encourage them to come forward. The potential harm and distress caused by publicity could discourage complainants from bringing proceedings and thus enable very serious offenders to escape justice.

And what of the very real harm and distress caused by tarnishing innocent men with the horrible brush of ‘rapist’. Men have their lives threatened, been physically attacked, their families and friends attacked, livelihoods ruined, even committed suicide, purely because they are not offered the protection of anonymity until proven guilty.

Note I said proven guilty, not proven innocent, which is what this government policy seems to assume for men in this situation. So much for equality and so much for the Rule of Law.

Defendants in rape cases are not properly comparable with complainants but with defendants in other kinds of criminal case. Defendants accused of other criminal offences do not have anonymity, regardless of the offence involved.

Correct in a way, defendants in rape cases are not properly comparable. Defendants, when their name is plastered all over the media, have their lives destroyed regardless of the outcome. The damage is already done.

This is about trying to make examples of innocent men to please feminists. This is about one rule for the accuser and another for the accused. This is about the government doing its best to encourage rape accusations, whether they be true or not and pushing for convictions, whether the man is guilty or not, for higher statistics which inevitably equals more laws and regulations over peoples’ behaviour and more money for feminist, man and family hating quangos.

This is about demonising all men as rapists, instilling fear and encouraging female mistrust of all men.

This is state-sanctioned misandry for power and political gain, nothing else.

This is the real face of feminism.

Invisible Empire Official Trailer

The official trailer for Invisible Empire, written and directed by Jason Bermas, and produced by Alex Jones.

Women are deficient in intelligence

Harriet Harman, the feminist fuckface who believes that discriminating against men isn’t actually discrimination (maybe she doesn’t think men are people). Also, at Pat Condell points out on Youtube, another bloody feminist who claims women are oppressed, only to hear a deafening silence from them in regards to treatment of women under Islam.

You know, stoning to deaths, the rapes, the marriages of 10 year old girls to old men, honour killings, women being worth half a man etc. These are not merely the actions of a ‘few individual Muslims’. The view that women are inferior runs throughout Islam, throughout the Quran.

So, Harriet the fuckface stated that men cannot be trusted to run businesses on their own etc (what Industrial Revolution?).

In Iran, the opposite is true, when Iranian clerics object to women as cabinet ministers: "there are religious doubts over the abilities of women when it comes to management"

Quoth Ali, the rightful successor to Muhammad according to the Shi'ites:

"O' ye peoples! Women are deficient in Faith, deficient in shares and deficient in intelligence. As regards the deficiency in their Faith, it is their abstention from prayers and fasting during their menstrual period. As regards deficiency in their intelligence it is because the evidence of two women is equal to that of one man. As for the deficiency of their shares that is because of their share in inheritance being half of men. So beware of the evils of women. Be on your guard even from those of them who are (reportedly) good. Do not obey them even in good things so that they may not attract you to evils." - The Peak of Eloquence, sermon 80.

On the Sunni side of the street (sorry), this quotation is in accord with Bukhari 1.6.301:

The women asked, "O Allah's Apostle! What is deficient in our intelligence and religion?" He said, "Is not the evidence of two women equal to the witness of one man?" They replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her intelligence. Isn't it true that a woman can neither pray nor fast during her menses?" The women replied in the affirmative. He said, "This is the deficiency in her religion."

So where are all the feminists now, those femmies who say unless women are automatically given 50% of the board room and cabinet positions, (but funnily enough, not 50% of building site or scaffolding positions) they are oppressed and victims of a patriarchy, but their misandric government are importing millions of Muslims who believe women are inferior, because their prophet said so, with the ensuing rise of crimes as a result.

Hello, hello? Bunch of pussies.

Councils to be able to restrain ‘stalkers’ even if found innocent

People may be given restraining orders even if they have been found not guilty of any offence, under a controversial extension of the power of the courts unveiled yesterday.

From the end of next month, courts will have greater freedom to grant the orders against those suspected of harassment or domestic violence.

Restraining orders are designed to stop stalkers harassing victims, or abusers to stop harming their partners.

In some cases, they place restrictions on going near a victim's house or workplace.

Currently courts can issue restraining orders only following conviction for two types of offences, harassment or putting someone in fear of violence.

Under the new rules, an order can be made following conviction for any offence and even when a defendant is acquitted.

And the police state grows ever larger. The councils can now impose restraining orders on innocent people if they ‘suspect’ that person. What next? Taking men falsely accused of rape and throwing them in prison anyway?

I suppose this all goes into the ‘evil men’ feminist statistics, because you know this will be directed against men. It also continues the state desire to encroach utterly on every aspect of our lives, usually by pretending to be doing it in ‘our best interests’.

One of the comments on the Mail site says this;

This is a positive step in the right direction to reduce the Islamic honor killings, and reduce the deplorably high rate or rape in the UK.

- FeFe, Wash D.C., 21/8/2009 08:40

Well, rape convictions have been consistently falling, and you want to use mass immigration of people from Islamic countries as a pretext to impose vague fuzzy draconian laws on us all?

More importantly, this decision violates the Rule of Law and that alone makes it completely unacceptable, I couldn’t give a fuck about people’s feelings.

Fairness – the weasel word

Planning laws are deliberately biased in favour of gipsies and travellers, a Government minister has finally admitted.

After years of official denials on the issue, Communities Secretary Shahid Malik confessed that travelling families are treated differently from 'the settled community'.

Justifying the policy, the minister said: 'Fairness does not mean treating people equally; it means addressing the different needs of different people.'

Read that carefully. Fairness does NOT mean treating people equally, it means treating people differently according to their needs.

Their needs should be irrelevant. The Law is the Law. There are two types of egalitarian, the ones who call for equality of opportunity (Rule of Law) and those who want equality of outcome. (Socialism). Guess which one this slimy little shit is speaking of. Still this slimy Muslim dickhead usurper has no qualms with undermining the ancient Rule of Law. As he himself has said, what he really wants is a Muslim dominated Parliament and the establishment of a Britain ruled by a vicious, barbaric seventh-century death cult.

Anyway, equality of outcome is when you pay the same prize money to the winner of Women’s Wimbledon than you do to the mens’, ignoring the fact that the men play more sets. It would be like paying me the same salary as you only I work three days a week, you still work five.

You may as well take it further and say pay everyone the same, regardless of what they do and how much they work. Would look lovely on paper no? Imagine what society would really be like however. No tractors for you!

You should not be surprised though, Communism was designed specifically to collapse Western, individualist capital based societies as they believed their New Internationalist Order could only truly be born from the ashes of the old.

John Cleese's ex-wife will leave divorce richer than him

Work that one out.

John Cleese has been forced to agree a divorce settlement of nearly £12.5million with his third wife.

The deal is likely to leave her richer than him.

He will hand over £8million to Alyce Faye Eichelberger in cash and assets, plus £612,000 a year for the next seven years, despite them having no children.

The payout will reduce 69-year-old Cleese's overall wealth to around £10million.

He has, however, managed to find a sense of humour about the settlement, saying: 'I got off lightly. Think what I'd have had to pay Alyce if she'd contributed anything to the relationship.'

Revelations about the divorce, which it is understood will be rubberstamped imminently, have come from Cleese's friend Michael Winner.

The film director and restaurant critic said: 'His ex-wife Alyce Faye Eichelberger told me on a previous spat..."John doesn't know what's going to hit him. I'll take him for every penny". She kept her word.'

Only in this bullshit feminist society could a woman even assume they would be able to take so much of a man’s hard earned wealth.

'Alyce lived in a council flat when they met. There are no dependent children. Yet she's getting some $13million in cash and assets (£8million). Plus a further $1million (£612,000 a year for seven years).

'As he put it "What I find so unfair is that if we both died today, her children would get much more than mine".

No dependent children, he made all of the money, yet she is going to take most of it, and that is on top of enjoying the fruits of his labours ALREADY since 1992.

Psychotherapist Miss Eichelberger, 64, the third Mrs Cleese, was originally claiming £900,000-a-year maintenance, two houses and half of his earnings since they married in 1992.

Wow. How women can even get off demanding such things is unbelievable. No honour or respect whatsoever. What’s love got to do with it.. indeed.

And they wonder why marriage rates are falling like a rock. Which is part of the Marxo-feminist plan of course. Destroy the nuclear family.

Still, even on the level of screwed up divorces, this is something else.

Yet another false rape accuser

Nice to see the good old female superior conscience still applies…

A woman faces jail after luring a man into having sex with her and then crying rape in a plot to claim thousands of pounds in compensation.

Sarah-Jane Hilliard, 20, applied for £7,500 from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority days after falsely accusing Grant Bowers, 19, of raping her.

Yesterday, the telesales employee was told she faced a jail term, after her web of lies was exposed in court in May.

Let’s see what disgracefully lenient sentence she will get.

Officers contacted Mr Bowers and told him he would not be charged and instead arrested Hilliard for perverting the course of justice.

Ah but as is always the case with false rape accusations, the damage to the man is already done. He has no right to anonymity before a verdict you see, whereas women do, whether they are lying or not.

But this did not save him from being made a hate figure. 'The last 11 months have been horrendous,' he said.

'I've lost all my self- confidence. I don't know why she did it but her lies have ruined my life.'

Mr Bowers's father, Tony, 48, said his son had to move out of Basildon because of threats against him. He said: 'After the court case people started kicking the door of his flat in and shouting "rapist" though the letterbox.

'He moved into temporary accommodation but he heard that people were offering £100 to find out where he was. He's been threatened and chased through town with a knife too.

It is possible he could have been stabbed, maybe killed over this bitch. All so she can play the victim and get some money off of the state taxpayer, the damage to the young INNOCENT man continues;

In Hilliard's trial at Basildon Crown Court in May, Andrew Jackson, prosecuting, said: 'This incident has changed Mr Bowers.

'He speaks of his lack of confidence approaching young women, not trusting them and having trouble sleeping.

'He was physically sick through worry, constantly teary and feeling like he wanted to cry.'

I am not surprised. The damage this can do to a man is unbelievable, although our feminist society has no interest in truly accepting the harm it can cause to males, preferring to just tell them to ‘be a man about it’.

Now, just were is the ‘but she was a poor victim’ excuse… you know it is around here somewhere…

Jacqueline Carey, defending, said Hilliard had an 'extremely difficult period in her past' which she had discussed with a psychiatrist.

Hilliard was found guilty and was due to be sentenced yesterday but that was adjourned until next month to wait for further psychiatric reports.

Poor girl. She must have had such a hard past…

WHO GIVES A FUCK. She is a criminal, she lied to the police about a crime, she has perverted the course of justice, conspired to manipulate public funds (fraud) and has put an innocent young man’s life at risk for her own selfish ends.

Fuck her feelings. The lying, manipulative, narcissistic bitch.

Women in Islam

There has been a fair bit of talk lately on this issue with the Burka, or Burkini or whatever. Recently it was banned in France (well done lads);

A French mother was banned from wearing the three-piece outfit at her local swimming pool.

Carole, a 35-year- old Muslim convert, was told it was ' inappropriate' on hygiene grounds, but she insists the ban is racial discrimination.

It follows French President Nicolas Sarkozy recently attacking Muslim burkhas as a 'sign of subservience' for women and saying they should be banned.

Racial discrimination. For a religious garment. Race and religion are two different things, so we already know the mental limitation of this female, I mean she converted to Islam so don’t expect any sort of intellect here.

Women have rights that are similar to men, but men are "a degree above them." 2:228

Pat Condell weighed in on the subject with typical clarity and humour, worth a watch.

Like Pat, I too am wondering where all the rabid feminists are on this subject. Harriet the Man Hater, all too happy to portray women as victims of their sex (while equal at the same time, go figure) hasn’t uttered a peep. I suppose Muslims must come before white women in her twisted cultural Marxist worldview. Feminists are social parasites and they make me sick.

A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282

Now it is probably common knowledge now that the wearing of this Burka is not a requirement of Islam. More Muslim women seem to wear it in the West than they do in the Middle East, which just me think it is a form of Islamic cultural warfare. Doing their utmost to broadcast that they want to be different, see us as different and do not wish to communicate in the way we in the West have done for hundreds of years.

"All married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." You can't have sex with married women, unless they are slaves obtained in war (with whom you may rape or do whatever you like). 4:24

There was a female Muslim convert on LBC the other day defending wearing the Burka, saying she joined Islam because it is ‘liberating and peaceful’. Dressing up like an out of shape ninja is liberating is it? She said she liked the ‘modesty’. So she wanted to dress modestly and joined Islam to do it? She couldn’t just, you know, DRESS MODESTLY?

Women are feeble and are unable to devise a plan. 4:98

She obviously has done ZERO research into Islam, preferring to just listen to local Muslims talk shit about it, themselves probably knowing next to nothing about it. Did you know the Islamic rule for leaving the religion is death, and they imposed this rule because they were worried many Muslims would leave Islam on Mohammed’s passing, after finding out the true hatred and violence ingrained in the religion?

Believing women must lower their gaze and be modest, cover themselves with veils, and not reveal themselves except to their husbands, relatives, children, and slaves. 24:31

Of course you didn’t. Like usual, people don’t do their own research anymore, being infantile and lazy (like the humans in Pixars’ Wall-E) choosing instead to base their worldly knowledge on sanitised nonsense drip fed to them via the corporate media and the state. View this strange article in the Telegraph;

Women are allowed in mosques but there are always separate rooms in which they pray.

The Koran doesn’t specifically say married couples should be separated at weddings, but it is a long-standing custom.

It is customary that the male and female guests are served separate wedding banquets and only at the end do the married couple sit together, sometimes under a headscarf while prayers are read.

This separation of sexes is part of the religion’s emphasis on chastity and modesty, which is also reflected in the way many Muslim women cover their faces and bodies in public.

Isn’t that sweet? Islam just wants its women to be chase and modest. Nothing to do with viewing women as inferior to men then. Nothing to do with women being seen as meat by Muslim men, interpretations of which lead to women being raped, and then found guilty of sex outside marriage! An example from Pakistan.

Hudood laws are a tool in the hands of men - with these laws they can rape women and be totally unaccountable.

Under Hudood if a woman makes a rape allegation she must provide four pious male witnesses or face a charge of adultery herself.

So a woman is in the ridiculous position of having to produce four Muslim adult male eyewitnesses, men who just stood there and watched.

If sex by force is not proved, this woman can be charged with "zina" - sex outside of marriage.

Uzma Saeed believes the Hudood ordinances should be repealed

About 60% of women in our jails have been imprisoned as a result of Hudood laws.

This Islamic rule was superseded by the Women Protection Bill in 2006, but that bill has come under attack for being un-Islamic.

The Religious political parties however are against the Bill calling it un-Islamic. They argue that the bill goes against articles 2a and 227 of the constitution of Pakistan, which state respectively that "Islam will be the state religion" and "No laws will be passed which are repugnant to the Koran and sunnah."

There is no doubt about it. Men and women are not equal under their God. Girls have been stoned to death for being raped, from November ‘08;

A 13-year-old girl who said she had been raped was stoned to death in Somalia after being accused of adultery by Islamic militants, a human rights group said.

Religion of Peace? Fuck off. There are a number of things you need to take into consideration if you want to formulate a thorough understanding about the true face of Islam.

1. The teachings of the Koran, Hadiths and Sunnahs, Shariah etc

2. What Mohammed himself did and said (remember he is the example of the perfect man to all Muslims, so they must agree and defend all of his actions).

3. What actually occurs in Islamic states around the world today.

4. What has occurred in Islamic states throughout history.

5. What is happening in Western states with mass immigration of Muslims.

Just listening to a few apologists on the corporate media or some ignorant Muslim is insufficient in building an honest understanding of this so-called Religion of Peace.

If you want a summary of the treatment of women under Islam from a technical perspective, start here;

Women’s Worth in Islam

And some more info on the ideology.

The Myths of Islam

Tamiflu and Swine Flu vaccine research

I hope you guys are paying attention to the latest wave of news regarding the negative effects of Tamiflu, and that is an ‘established’ antiviral.

Google News Listing

Remember the Swine Flu vaccine (which they are subtly demanding the whole world takes) has had no such ‘testing’. On top of that it (Relenza) contains the adjuvant AS03. This can be confirmed by the following page on the Glaxo website, which states;

The vaccine will comprise antigen of the recently isolated A (H1N1) influenza strain and also contain GSK's proprietary adjuvant system AS03.

AS03 contains Squalene plus Vitamin-E (Why?) plus Polysorbate-80 (Tween-80) which is another additive that crosses the blood-brain barrier and is thought to create adverse effects (it's in Gardasil).

Regarding squalene;

Your immune system recognizes squalene as an oil molecule native to your body. It is found throughout your nervous system and brain. In fact, you can consume squalene in olive oil and not only will your immune system recognize it, you will also reap the benefits of its antioxidant properties.

The difference between “good” and “bad” squalene is the route by which it enters your body. Injection is an abnormal route of entry which incites your immune system to attack all the squalene in your body, not just the vaccine adjuvant.

Your immune system will attempt to destroy the molecule wherever it finds it, including in places where it occurs naturally, and where it is vital to the health of your nervous system

Polysorbate-80 is known to cause infertility.

Polysorbate 80 (also known as tween 80) is a stabilizer used in a wide variety of products including ice cream, milk products, vitamin tablets, lotions and creams and medical products like vaccines and anti-cancer medications.

It is toxic and should not be eaten, drunk, put on the skin or injected.

According to Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology, Volume 95, Number 6, December 2005 , pp. 593-599(7), "it is of current relevance as a 'hidden' inductor of anaphylactoid reactions", and "Polysorbate 80 was identified as the causative agent for the anaphylactoid reaction of nonimmunologic origin in the patient. Conclusions: Polysorbate 80 is a ubiquitously used solubilizing agent that can cause severe nonimmunologic anaphylactoid reactions."

Put in plain English, polysorbate 80 can affect your immune system and cause severe anaphylactic shock which can kill.

It also goes by the name Tween 80 (Polysorbate 80) -- Polyoxyethylene Sorbitan Monooleate (polyoxyethylenesorbitan monooleat);

“Gardasil contains Polysorbate 80, which is linked to infertility in mice,” noted Dee Nicholson, National Communications Director for Freedom in Canadian Health Care. [Nov 2007] Sleight of Handling: More Merck Magic Tricks With HPV Vaccine By Christopher C. Barr

A study published in December, 2005 discovered that Tween80 can cause anaphylaxis, a sometimes fatal reaction characterized by a sharp drop in blood pressure, hives, and breathing difficulties. Researchers concluded that the severe reaction was not a typical allergic response characterized by the combination of IgE antibodies and the release of histamines; it was caused by a serious disruption that had occurred within the immune system. Exploring Vaccines

According to the World Intellectual Property Organization, which is part of the United Nations, scientists from the organization are developing vaccines specifically to damage fertility as a method of contraception. A suggested ingredient for the vaccine is tween 80 (polysorbate 80): “In a preferred embodiment the vaccine comprises oil, preferably a biodegradable oil such as squalene oil. Typically, the vaccine is prepared using an adjuvant concentrate which contains lecithin in squalene oil. The aqueous solution glycoprotein is typically a phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) solution, and additionally preferably contains Tween 80.” (Fertility Impairing Vaccine And Methods of Use’ This application claims the benefit of U. S. Provisional Application No. 60/070,375, filed January 2,1998, U. S. Provisional Application No. 60/071,406, filed January 15,1998.) Exploring Vaccines

It also contains Thiomersal;

Thiomersal (INN) (C9H9HgNaO2S), or sodium ethylmercurithiosalicylate, commonly known in the United States as thimerosal, is an organomercury compound (approximately 49% mercury by weight) used as an antiseptic and antifungal agent.

No mercury or mercury derivative should ever enter your body, there is no safe quantity. Mercury itself is extremely toxic to living organisms;

The World Health Organization declared there is no safe level of mercury for human beings - in other words, mercury is so poisonous that no amount of mercury absorption is safe. (1992)

We now know Thiomersal is an organic mercury compound;

Compounds of mercury tend to be much more toxic than the element itself, and organic compounds of mercury are often extremely toxic and have been implicated in causing brain and liver damage. The most dangerous mercury compound, dimethylmercury, is so toxic that even a few microliters spilled on the skin, or even a latex glove, can cause death.

There is also a possible mass sterilisation vector to these vaccines, considering the toxic ingredients and the deliberate stoking up of fear by governments, supranational organisations (WHO) and the MSM. There is a long list of documented sterilisation via vaccine programmes.

Vaccines: Sterilisation & Abortion

Mercury, Autism and the Global Vaccine Agenda

Obama’s current ‘science czar’ John P. Holdren co-wrote a book called Ecoscience advocating mass global sterilisation programmes using vaccines, medicated tap water and other vectors. Another one of the books’ authors, Paul H. Erlick is another rabid depopulate the planet advocate.

I strongly recommend you check all of the links on this page, read through the respective articles and do you own additional research.

Think about it, if this is the information we can uncover about these vaccines, imagine what we don’t know, and even if you don’t believe everything on here (hence you should self-check) the mere fact that so much negative data exists regarding them should make you think twice with ‘just trusting the government, they know best’.

The final responsibility for your health and that of your children does not rest with the WHO or your government, they don’t love you or your family, you are merely a statistic to them. Would you trust that complete strangers will look out for you and your family with more love and attention than you would?

Of course not.

Women strike back

Good for them. Some punch-above-their-weight union (TUC) want to ban women wearing stilletos at work. Like it is any of their fucking business. It is oppressive and sexist apparently, but this writer isn’t having any of it;

… She wasn't being flippant - she was right. Old-style feminists hate heels, dismissing them as just another way to oppress women.

Designed specifically to distort the body, thrusting out our bottoms, lengthening our legs and arching our backs, they merely serve, the sisterhood argues, to turn us into sexual objects.

Feminists just can’t get their hateful little minds around the fact that women may actually like doing things that feminists don’t agree with, but they can never tell women off for their behaviour because women will just turn around and say ‘I thought you were about sexual liberation, independence, freedom of choice etc.’ So they just somehow blame men for it. Fucking pathetic.

Mandi Norwood, the former editor of Cosmopolitan magazine who once famously said 'I always wear heels to work. I can't think in flats', was speaking for the post-modern generation of career women who have rediscovered heels as both an asset and a sexual and professional weapon.

So the news that the TUC wants to ban them from the workplace on the grounds that they are sexist and even dangerous might seem to be another joke from the department of Haven't They Got Anything Proper To Worry About if it weren't so dense, so wrong, and so patronising.

But isn’t that the case with the whole of government and its quangos/ fake charities? The TUC is obviously attempting to impose another layer of control over people under the guise of protecting them. Because you know, people can’t look after themselves anymore, like little children. Or cattle. Adults need controlling. For freedom you understand.

Heels are for show, to add authority, to make you feel groomed and feminine, not for running marathons.

They don't, as the TUC seems to think, turn women into mush-brained idiots who don't know where blisters come from.

I am trying to get my head around the idea of some fucking union even dreaming of having the moral authority to tell the collective workplaces of an entire country how things should be run. That is why you start your own business, because you believe you can do all of that yourself and you’re tired of being told what to do. The only problem I know with heel’s is that they can damage expensive flooring. But that is an issue for individual businesses to deal with, not some centralised Stalinist gang with a God complex.

Remember, feminism was never about freedom. It was, is and always will be about control. The control of women and the demonisation of men. You can see this when women get criticised for making choices not in the feminist playbook. Like wanting to be a stay at home mum or entering a beauty pageant. It is just another example of social engineering, of the ‘we know what is best for you’ brigade. I get women telling me feminism is about equal right, then why is it called feminism, shouldn’t it be called equalism? There is a reason why the goals of feminism are virtually identical to those of communism… The overthrow of (spiritually) libertarian societies in favour of socialist dictatorships. It is just one arm of the NWO octopus but I’ll elaborate on that later.