The Church Bans the BNP

The Church of England bans the BNP

A Repost...I am forced to comment further on the blatant two-faced hypocrisy of the Church of England. Now I do not know what the true grounds they had for putting a ban on the BNP although my guess would be they used the tired old accusation of it being as a racist/white supremacist organization. Their quoted reason ‘Activities declared "incompatible" with Church teaching on race equality.’

True we do have race inequality in this country, the inequality is the discrimination against our race; the indigenous race is not equal to the other races that are colonizing our country. This reverse Racism we are experiencing has been accelerating since WW2. It became more apparent since immigration from the third world commenced and has increased on a mammoth scale.

For a moment let us remind ourselves of the saying ‘one swallow does not make a summer’. How many BNP supporters with racist tendencies does it take to make the BNP a racist organization? Does Islam see Christians as equal if not why not ban Islam and the building of Mosques in our country? Let me take this further if I may.

The Church, Roman Catholic Church and the Church of England clergy have for decades sexually abused children and many cases the senior clergy have either closed ranks or covered up this vile practise. Even Nuns were renowned for repeated physical abuse of children. I would like to refer to the ‘Lost Children’.

Children were sent to the four corners of the Empire, many were told their parents were dead when in fact they were alive, put onto farms in places like Australia and Canada and worked like slaves, and in many cases sexually violated. It was decades long institutionalized Paedophilia within the Clergy, and was covered up by senior bishops,  still with me?

So the question that is begging to be asked is how many Paedophile priests does it take to make the Catholic Church a hotbed of Paedophilia ‘Incompatible with general morality?’ 

The same applies the Church of England clergy. One could ask was it institutionalised within the Church as the accusation of Racism being institutional within the Police? 

If child sex abuse is not compatible with church teachings why it did flourish, and when it was discovered why was it covered up and the offending perverts transferred to other Diocese. The Catholic Church particularly has had to pay enormous sums in compensation for this abuse of children and is still paying it to this day.

Now I could say I find the Clergy’s behaviour quite incompatible with human morality and ‘incompatible with Church Teachings’ so should Churches be banned? Who judges the morals of the church, the robed closet perverts? Frankly all I see is blatant hypocrisy when the church pre-judges the BNP morality when they need to get their act cleaned up first before judging the ‘incompatibility’ of a legally constituted political party.

Maybe the C of E should be looking inward and rooting out their perverted transgressors. Incidentally I always thought there was separation between the Church and the State, guess not.

There is a cancer at present that is running s right through our society, it involves the Elite, the Police Hierarchy plus the departments from where their orders emanate. The MSN, print and TV, the CPS, the Clergy, the educators, foreign-born Negro immigrants in token positions in local government and Westminster for political expediency and thousands of special ethnic interests groups, Government incompetence and local council corruption involving of conflicts of interest

Our enemy is a Cancer that is eating away at a once homogenous stable, civilised, cohesive society where a person identified strongly with his fellow man and freedom of speech was not something the government decided on the degree of freedom allowed, our birth-right is something that is acquired or inherited at birth, It is not given out freely to the third world poor on arriving at Heathrow Airport and automatically makes them British whatever the Government might tell them. 

I repeat Birthright refers to something that is acquired or inherited at birth.

Our Birth-right goes hand in hand with Nation-hood. What is nationhood? It is a community of persons not necessarily constituting a state but bound by common descent, language and history. Nationhood shouldn't be dictated or manipulated by a few, but in today’s Great Britain it is being systematically being destroyed for a purpose our people have yet to understand

It is almost like an elite club which not everyone can join, particularly loyal patriots who are not welcome in this New World in the making. Should I worry? No morally bankrupt despotic system lasts forever however democratic it appears on the surface.

To the clergy might I suggest a little more attention to your bible might not go astray, "he who is without sin among you let him cast the first stone"

Midsomer Revisited.

Midsomer Revisited

There is no debate, argument or discussion; the change in the demographics of the countries of the West is meticulously well planned and deliberate. The degree is apparent when Programs on ITV and BBC are now written to reflect the unwanted diversity of peoples that reflect the lowest depths that ‘modern’ England has is now sunk. We are invited to immerse ourselves totally in an unashamed bacchanalian orgy of unabashed indulgence in Multiculturism, ethnic harmony and racial understanding. But who the hell asked for this change, a Mr Keith Vaz seems to think this make us a Modern Britain? I will get to that revolting alien creature later.

I have commented before and it is essential to understand the sole purpose of deliberately inviting an overwhelming multitude of foreign cultures and people of non-European ethnicity to populate Europe and the UK was for over time create a perception there is no discernible native ethnic grouping, it is more than just a perception it is the cornerstone to achieve a single totalitarian Europe bereft of Nationhood and identity.

If Coudenhove Kalergi plan comes to fruition then the man of the future Europe will be hybrid or a person of mixed race. Diversity and Political Correctness are methods used to describe the tools of destruction used to destroy the homogeneity of people, it could be tribes it could be nations.

Kalergi said “In time the races and classes of today will gradually disappear due to the elimination of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-negroid race of the future, similar in appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples and the diversity of individuals.”

Alternately if that is not the case then there could only be one or more of three reasons for the deliberate, unsustainable numbers of migrants encouraged to migrate to Europe. One; Europe’s economies were in such poor shape after WW2 more people were in demand to kick-start the economies. Two; the more people looking for work meant they would have accept coolie wages which suited big business and race was never an issue and lastly the population was getting older result less people working to pay pensions for the aged, at the time Islam was never factored in, but nevertheless over time Nation States will cease to exist, they were seen as a dinosaur of yesteryear.

No, I suggest the Third World is not being targeted for demographic change it is ONLY the WEST. This political interference into TV program content has nothing to do with showcasing and embracing our ‘Rich’ diversity it is being done to subliminally instil the perception in people’s minds this country has ceased to be the homeland of White indigenous people.

I apologise if anyone takes offence for my mentioning of skin colour. England is the ancestral home of the Angles and Saxons and people of Northern Europe and they do not want to be overwhelmed by Africans or people of the coconut islands of the Caribbean and beyond. Showcasing our rich diversity in the New Midsomer Murders could easily mirror modern day Slough, Dewsbury, Newham or a host of other English towns.

Midsomer is NOT a TV show about a ‘quintessential African’ village or a village on the Pakistani/Afghanistan border it was about ENGLISH people, ENGLISH Villages and the ENGLISH way of life, this was before the cultural Marxist realised that the programme had no Multi-hued or Non English actors in the cast, it could not be allowed to continue in this vein.

A strange anomaly was found that ethnic minorities apparently avoid this show. A study in 2006 found that Midsomer Murders was "strikingly unpopular" with minorities. Removing the ‘Quintessentially Englishness’ of the show for political expediency I think ITV will now find that indigenous people will also avoid watching this masterpiece of demographic engineering like the plague,

Food for thought, in Midsomer there has been on today’s count 51 deaths, 222 of which were murders, but this figure changes by the day as the American debt changes by the second. To date not one murder was committed by a Black person that is a plus surely. Will ITV ever show a murder commited by a black in the new Midsomer Murders with the new format I doubt it, you see that is considered racial profiling and thus racist but nevertheless totally irrelevant to the numbers of these people in our jails. It really highlights the comic absurdity of this show and others just for the sake of political correctness.

At the time Labour a MP Keith Vaz, chairman of his party’s “Ethnic Minority Taskforce” whatever that, is a penniless refugee from Aden whose parents were poor Indians from Goa said: ‘I am appalled at Mr True-May’s comments after he said he said he did not use black and Asian people in the series because ‘it wouldn’t be an English village with them’. This Vaz person standing on his hind legs pontificating that the decision to exclude ethnic minorities from Midsomer Murders not only misrepresents modern Britain, but also dismisses ‘the valuable role ethnic minority’s play in enriching our country.’ Omitting to say that parts of Modern Britain resemble Third World  cess-pits.

It highlights the dumb, pig-ignorance of this parasitic foreigner not to understand the show had nothing whatsoever to do with race or showcasing “the valuable role ethnic minority’s play in enriching OUR country.” whose country? This creature’s country is India. Midsomer Murders was about a quintessentially English village as Bollywood films are quintessentially about India and as the Follies Bergère is quintessentially French. If the commentator is black the discussion always defaults to race, what’s the matter with these people? I smell a fundamental lack of self-esteem.

I would say his position of chairman of the Labours party’s Ethnic Minority Taskforce was won purely on the fact that his black skin colour was wholly and solely the essential obligatory requirement for his position, a position not afforded to a white person; Bloody hypocrite.

It was pointed out that in Midsomer there have been a few blacks in the show over the years but only in very minor roles. I suggest if the ITV wanted an African theme then that maybe they should have dispensed with Barnaby and Jones altogether replacing them with a couple of Zulus, Hutus or even Hottentots and construct a back-lot with African village huts and rewrite the script, that should at least please Vaz. The problem is Midsomer would then really begin to resemble Slough or a dozen or more other ‘English’ towns.

Back to TV programming, I do not believe it is simple case of the ITV taking upon itself to make these changes; the order comes from much higher it is more than coincidence that this idiocy is rampant right across the sick mainstream media. I can understand John Nettles leaving the show after it was forced to use a variegated or multi-hued-cast.

By the same token I can understand how the Catholic Bishops would feel if the Vatican demanded that the new Pope’s job be given to a African women with a huge lower lip implant and a bone through her nose purely for the sake of inclusivity to visually embrace the church’s rich multi-racial diversity.

This idiocy has to stop somewhere and the boardrooms of the BBC and ITV might be a good place to start. I expect to read of a Negro actor who got his acting break on Downton Abbey, Upstairs Downstairs, Midsomer Murders or Grantchester but the day I read of a white actor getting his acting break on a ‘quintessentially Black’ show is when it is discovered that Santa Claus is a real person after all.

I sometimes wonder if a group of faceless people are intending over time planning to wipe all traces of Caucasian people from the history books.

I want to use the words of a conversation by two very famous men. They describe accurately the true meaning of Political Correctness.

A DEFINITION OF THE TERM "POLITICAL CORRECTNESS, EXPERTLY DEFINED.

For the last six odd years, almost all of the things I wanted to write or say, have been stymied by a recently coined term referred to as "POLITICAL CORRECTNESS"! Although I consider myself rather fluent in the English language, that term was not in my vocabulary. My curiosity got the best of me and I decided to do a little research and after two weeks of chasing fruitless leads, I found what I'd been looking for at the Truman Library and Museum in Independence Missouri. An unnamed source there sent me copies of four telegrams that were between Harry Truman and Douglas MacArthur on the day before the actual signing of the Surrender Agreement.

The contents of those four telegrams below are exactly as received, not a word has been added or deleted!

(1) Tokyo, Japan
0800-September 1,1945
From: General D A MacArthur
To: President Harry S. Truman

Tomorrow we meet with those yellow bellied bastards and sign the Surrender Documents, any last minute instructions!

2) Washington, D C
1300-September 1, 1945
To: D A MacArthur
From: H S Truman

Congratulations, job well done, but you must tone down your obvious dislike of the Japanese when discussing the terms of the surrender with the press, because some of your remarks are fundamentally not politically correct!

(3) Tokyo, Japan
1630-September 1, 1945
To: H S Truman
From: D A MacArthur and C H Nimitz

Wilco Sir, but both Chester and I are somewhat confused, exactly what does the term politically correct mean?

(4) Washington, D C
2120-September 1, 1945
To: D A MacArthur/C H Nimitz
From: H S Truman

Political Correctness is a doctrine, recently fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and promoted by a sick mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a piece of SHIT by the clean end! 

……….. I wish that explanation was attributed to me. PS. “Vibrant Diversity” is another, meaningless, empty description put about by the sick mainstream media.

What is Sovereignty?

What is Sovereignty?

Sovereignty, the authority of a State or

Nation to govern itself.

Sovereignty is understood in jurisprudence as the full right and power of a governing body to govern itself without any interference from outside sources or bodies. In political theory, sovereignty is a substantive term designating supreme authority. So why does the UK take orders from Brussels?

Sovereignty, Constitution, self-rule, who gave ours away to a European consortium?

Russia's president Vladimir Putin says his country would consider making loans to Greece if the two countries move forward on joint energy projects. 

This news would not have been received warmly by the silk suited bureaucrats in Das Kapital as Greece is within THEIR sphere of influence and it is Brussels who decides who gets loans from European Banks and the IMF within the occupied satellite countries of Europe, not Russia. The Greek Prime Minister said "Greece is a sovereign country that over the past years has been facing a difficult economic situation," a rich, masterpiece of understatement.

I could not help but notice the dreaded EU flag behind Putin and the Greek prime Minister during the photo shoot. Was Mr Putin paying tacit homage to the fact that Greece was one of the EU’s renegade territories, a satellite country that had the temerity to venture outside of the EU’s jurisdiction begging for loans?

The question is, like the United Kingdom IS Greece a sovereign nation? I am not sure about the sovereignty bit; I know we certainly used to have a constitution. Both the UK and Greece accepted and signed the EU Draft constitution cleverly disguised under the name of the Lisbon Treaty which takes precedence over their own constitutions. If a county had its own constitution it would have its own laws and it would have control over its borders surely. No, we have lost an Empire, lost self-rule and signed up to some-else’s constitution. Something smells here. Sovereignty, Constitutions, Royal Family?

Our own German Royal family, the Battenberg’s, whose 240 bedroomed house is exempt from the bedroom tax has more to do with Lilliputian characters putting on a show for the peasantry, for the adoring people waving their little flags. I admit it does encourage tourism and offers the adoring herd bread and circuses. They get a chance to see people just like them but wearing uniforms of Admiral of the Fleet and Colonels, dripping with gold braid and medals. It may have been acceptable in Richard the First time but we have moved on.

Voyager has left our Solar System and has headed into the unknown; we are sending probes to mars and still a man calling himself Black Adder (rod) whose jolly fun job is to wear a silly suit and hammer on a door in Parliament demanding entry to the House. His day job, or rather official duties also include responsibility as the usher and doorkeeper and to make sure blown light bulbs and broken chairs are replaced and maintenance is up to scratch. I put the hammering on doors in Parliament equal in entertainment value to “I am a celebrity get me outta here” I sometimes wonder if I am a character in some-one else’s dream, or nightmare perhaps.

Who else was a Lilliputian? Well it was Field Marshal Douglas Haig, 1st Earl Haig, KT, GCB, OM, GCVO, KCIE, ADC who having the dubious honour of being one of the most stupid of Generals Great Britain had ever given birth and was responsible for the magnitude of the battle of the Somme which still stuns the imagination.

The Somme was an epic of both slaughter and futility; a profligate waste of men and materiel such as the world had never seen. On the morning of July 1, 1916, 110,000 British infantrymen went "over the top." In a few hours, 60,000 of them were casualties. Nearly 20,000 of these were either dead already or would die of their wounds, many of them lingering for days between the trenches, in no man's land. The attacking forces did not gain a single one of their objectives.

It does not end there I’m afraid, on the day after the debacle, Haig, this fool of a man stated that the enemy "has undoubtedly been shaken and has few reserves in hand," he discussed with subordinates methods for continuing the offensive. It was going to be a war of attrition until every last British soldier was killed or wounded. You might wonder how as a General of his ilk lived to the age of 69, keeping his head down and avoiding the machine-Gun bullets helped.

Haig's army had suffered more than 400,000 casualties. For the British, in the grave judgment of noted military historian John Keegan, "the battle was the greatest tragedy…of their national military history" and "marked the end of an age of vital optimism in British life that has never been recovered."

If it is of any consolation at the end of the next war of any substance there will not be a body count of the dead but a body count of the living. My question was not answered. Are we a Sovereign Nation if we do not have supreme authority of a state or Nation to govern itself? The simple reason is we do not have full authority to govern ourselves because we are hampered by treaties we have signed with foreign countries.

So have we been left with part Sovereignty If so where or when did the treason occur and who was responsible? Last question is why these are Lilliputian people still in power and standing before you as candidates in the next General Election as our next Prime Minister, haven’t they done enough damage to the country already?