Climategate: Dear Mr President

Was sent a link to an interesting open letter written to President Obama that is from 164 Scientists who, by the definition given to us by the AGW Lobby, are ‘deniers’.

“Few challenges facing America and the world are more urgent than combating climate change.The science is beyond dispute and the facts are clear” – President-elect Barack Obama, November 19, 2008

With all due respect Mr.President,that is not true.

What was that about the science being beyond doubt?  If the World Leaders go ahead with this scheme, it will mean the cull of 80% of our CO2 emissions.  And the ONLY way that’ll be possible is if the Bastards that Be cull 80% of the human population.  That is their endgame.  Everything else is a distraction.

Swiss Style Democracy

When will we have the same?  For if we wait too long, some of Britain’s boroughs may as well change National Allegiances the amount of “multi-culture” we have.

The Swiss system of democracy puts power firmly with the people, where the most important (as well as trivial) matters to the people can be put forward.

Swiss voters back ban on minarets

Swiss voters have supported a referendum proposal to ban the building of minarets, official results show.

More than 57% of voters and 22 out of 26 cantons – or provinces – voted in favour of the ban.

The proposal had been put forward by the Swiss People’s Party, (SVP), the largest party in parliament, which says minarets are a sign of Islamisation.

The government opposed the ban, saying it would harm Switzerland’s image, particularly in the Muslim world.

But Martin Baltisser, the SVP’s general secretary, told the BBC: “This was a vote against minarets as symbols of Islamic power.”

The BBC’s Imogen Foulkes, in Bern, says the surprise result is very bad news for the Swiss government which fears unrest among the Muslim community.

Our correspondent says voters worried about rising immigration – and with it the rise of Islam – have ignored the government’s advice.

In a statement, the government said it accepted the decision.

It said: “The Federal Council (government) respects this decision. Consequently the construction of new minarets in Switzerland is no longer permitted.”

Justice Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf said: “Concerns [about Islamic fundamentalism] have to be taken seriously.

“However, a ban on the construction of new minarets is not a feasible means of countering extremist tendencies.”

She sought to reassure Swiss Muslims, saying the decision was “not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture”.

Switzerland is home to some 400,000 Muslims and has just four minarets.

After Christianity, Islam is the most widespread religion in Switzerland, but it remains relatively hidden.

There are unofficial Muslim prayer rooms, and planning applications for new minarets are almost always refused.

Supporters of a ban claimed that allowing minarets would represent the growth of an ideology and a legal system – Sharia law – which are incompatible with Swiss democracy.

But others say the referendum campaign incited hatred. On Thursday the Geneva mosque was vandalised for the third time during the campaign, according to local media.

Amnesty International said the vote violated freedom of religion and would probably be overturned by the Swiss supreme court or the European Court of Human Rights.

‘Political symbol’

The president of Zurich’s Association of Muslim Organisations, Tamir Hadjipolu, told the BBC: “This will cause major problems because during this campaign mosques were attacked, which we never experienced in 40 years in Switzerland.

“Islamaphobia has increased intensively.”

And there was dismay among Switzerland’s Muslims upon hearing the result.

Farhad Afshar, president of the Coordination of Islamic Organisations in Switzerland, said: “The most painful thing for us is not the ban on minarets but the symbol sent by this vote.

“Muslims do not feel accepted as a religious community.”

Elham Manea, co-founder of the Forum for a Progressive Islam, added: “My fear is that the younger generation will feel unwelcome.

“It’s a message that you are not welcome here as true citizens of this society.”

Sunday’s referendum was held after the SVP collected 100,000 signatures from voters within 18 months calling for a vote.

In recent years countries across Europe have been debating how best to integrate Muslim populations.

France focused on the headscarf, while in Germany there was controversy over plans to build one of Europe’s largest mosques.

From the BBC, proving that can show political impartiality when they want to.  So long as it doesn’t rock the EU’s boat of course.

Why Britain is a magnet for migrants

I’m literally fuming.  Here I am, so far down the list of Council Housing Priorities that I’m in danger of drowning, while a Somalian woman with seven kids gets a five bedroom house costing £1,600 per week.  If there is such a thing as reincarnation, I want to come back as an African Muslim Lesbian Midget.

Bashir Aden

Taxpayers pay £1,600-a-week for family of ex-asylum seekers to live in luxury five-storey home

Daily Mail, 29th November 2009

A SOMALI family are living in a luxury £1.8m five-storey house in central London funded by the taxpayer.

Nasra Warsame, 40, has lived with seven of her children and her elderly mother in the six-bedroom house since October. Westminster City Council picks up the £1,600-a-week bill.

The fully-furnished house in walking distance of the West End has three sitting rooms, four bathrooms, with some bedrooms boasting balconies overlooking a courtyard.

The main lounge has two leather sofas, a flat-screen television and a glass coffee table. Annual rent for the new house would cost a staggering £83,200.

Meanwhile Mrs Warsame’s husband Bashir Aden, 50, and another of their children are living in a separate property in adjoining Camden. He said they live separately because the family is too big to fit under one roof. His two-bedroom flat is also paid for by housing benefit.

Outside the family’s main house Mr Aden, a butcher, said: ‘I’ve already had too much trouble with this house.

‘Yes, it is true I live in Camden, and yes, my wife lives here, but she has a lot of problems with this at the moment.’

Mrs Warsame and her seven children, aged between two and 16 years old, first lived in a council house in Maida Vale but it was thought too small by council officials.

Mr Aden said his family were forced to move in September because the five-bedroom home was not spacious enough.

He said: ‘That place was overcrowded. They moved her here for the children.’

An estate agent showed the family the spacious five-floor property near Edgware Road Underground station because the previous five-bedroom home in northwest London, was considered too small. The weekly rent, which was also covered by housing benefit, is understood to have been £800.

Mrs Warsame’s new home is part of an impressive 1960s development of modern apartments and houses. There is a large glass sculpture situated in the middle of a courtyard outside the family’s front door. Each room is painted white, with high ceilings.

It is understood the £1,600 rent being paid for by the council is twice the going rate for a property in the area.

‘The new house we moved into in October is a nice house and it is in a nice area,’ Mrs Warsame told the Sunday Times. ‘It is quiet and it is convenient and we do not want to leave.

‘It is better than the house we were living in in Maida Vale which was quite small. We were getting complaints from neighbours that the children were being too noisy.’

Mrs Warsame and her husband fled unrest in Somalia in 1991 and claimed asylum on their arrival in Britain. They have since been granted citizenship and all of their children were born here.

She lives in the house with seven of her children but the family could be evicted from their new house, as it is claimed the house has been rented out illegally.

Last year it was revealed that Afghan single mother Toorpakai Saiedi and her seven children were given a £1.2million property complete with 100ft garden by Ealing council in West London.

Mrs Saiedi, 35, received £170,000 a year in benefits. Some £150,000 of that is paid to a private landlord for the seven-bedroom house.

A cap has since been placed on payments for any property with five bedrooms or more, but this limit is different from one council to another.

Philippa Roe, Westminster Council’s cabinet member for housing, said: ‘It’s important to note that the amount of housing benefit payable for tenants is determined by government policy and not local councils. This rate is calculated and updated on a yearly basis according to the value of the local rental market. We have absolutely no discretion in this area.

‘Property rents in Westminster are among the highest in the country so it is perhaps unsurprising that a family claiming housing benefit for a property of this size would need to submit a claim for this amount.

‘We would, however, like to see the entire housing benefit system changed to enable local councils to have more control and essentially the ability to limit the amount of money claimed where appropriate.’

Words cannot convey the seething anger I’m feeling.  This is what causes resentment, the money thrown at newcomers.  Just like Utility Providers always working on enticing new customers, they seem to neglect those already with them.

Any people still scratching their heads and wondering why we’re inundated with asylum seekers?  If so, you may as well be blind as well as stupid.

Mr Griffin is off to Copenhagen

And the mainstream media cannot hold back with the Observer providing not only one opposing voice but six for fuck’s sake.  I for one am ecstatic that Mr Griffin will be among the EU delegates at the Copenhagen meeting in December.  While the rest of the Eurocrats are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of another reason for taking more cash from our pockets, Nick has stated publicly what most of us plebs think, that AGW is nothing more than a scam.

Climate change denier Nick Griffin to represent EU at Copenhagen

The Observer, Sunday 29 November 2009

Nick Griffin, the leader of the British National party, is to represent the European parliament at the UN climate change conference in Copenhagen, which opens next week.

Last night politicians and scientists reacted furiously to news that the far-right politician and climate change denier should be attending the summit on behalf of the EU.

Griffin, who was elected to the European parliament in June, confirmed last night that he would attend as the representative of the parliament’s environmental committee. World leaders, including Barack Obama and Gordon Brown, are hoping to forge a new global agreement to curtail greenhouse gas emissions.

Without such a deal, scientists warn that world temperatures will increase by more than 2C by the end of the century, triggering ice cap melting, sea-level rises, widespread flooding, the spread of deserts and devastating storms.

In a speech in the parliament last week, Griffin denounced those who warn of the consequences of climate change as “cranks”. He said they had reached “an Orwellian consensus” that was “based not on scientific agreement, but on bullying, censorship and fraudulent statistics”.

“The anti-western intellectual cranks of the left suffered a collective breakdown when communism collapsed. Climate change is their new theology… But the heretics will have a voice in Copenhagen and the truth will out. Climate change is being used to impose an anti-human utopia as deadly as anything conceived by Stalin or Mao.”

Griffin will be one of 15 representatives chosen to speak on behalf of the EU in Copenhagen. The shadow climate change secretary, Greg Clark, condemned the move last night. “It is utterly ridiculous that someone who doesn’t even believe in climate change should be seeking to represent Europe in Copenhagen. The BNP does not command the support of the people of Britain, let alone of the rest of Europe,” he said.

A spokesman for the Department of Energy and Climate Change said: “Membership of the European parliament’s delegation to Copenhagen is a matter for the European parliament. Its delegates do not represent the UK government or its views. Nick Griffin will not be part of the UK delegation.”

Tim Yeo, chairman of the Commons environmental audit committee, said the decision to choose Griffin showed the “bizarre way” the parliament operated. He added: “If the future prosperity of the human race, in the face of climate change, depends on the contributions of people like Nick Griffin, there is little hope for any of us.”

Professor Alan Thorpe, chief executive of the Natural Environment Research Council, said Griffin’s claim that thousands of scientists dispute the existence of man-made global warming was simply not true. “The intergovernmental panel on climate change draws on the views of most of the world’s leading climate scientists and they have been quite clear that the evidence shows, with a high degree of certainty, that human activities are now having a substantial effect on the climate. It is simply not the case that there is a substantial number who do not accept a link.”

Bob Ward, of Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment, said: “Griffin denies the overwhelming scientific evidence on climate change. This appears to be driven by a dogmatic strand of right-wing ideology that opposes any form of environmental regulation, usually hidden behind the dishonest claim that climate change is a left-wing conspiracy.”

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrats’ home affairs spokesman and a former MEP, said the European parliament always divided up positions on such delegations according to the parliament’s political balance. “Griffin was bound to get something at some stage. It is just a shame they didn’t send him to Iceland instead.”

Critics say Griffin addresses environmental issues when he believes he can use them to advance anti-immigration policies. His party claims that it would improve Britain’s transport infrastructure and reduce carbon dioxide levels by reducing the number of immigrants in Britain using roads, cars, trains and buses.

Gerry Gable, publisher of the anti-fascist magazine Searchlight, said Griffin once tried to win over environmentalists in the 1980s. “His core beliefs – that the white race is being threatened by an invading minority – are the so-called principles that have run through his nasty career.”

This is just one of many takes on Copenhagen the main stream media are pumping out preparing us for the upcoming event that the Elites hope will seal the deal on Earth’s total enslavement.  The Corruptibles wish to label all those who disagree, ‘deniers’ which will surely lead to a criminal offence of heresy if they get it their way.

The Daily Mail are going with “BNP leader Nick Griffin to represent Europe at climate talks” while the snobbish Telegraph article is entitled “BNP leader Nick Griffin will represent Europe at Copenhagen climate change summit”.

With all this flak, at least we know the BNP are on target.

The Rothschild Dynasty

Came across a brilliant little piece regarding the World Famous Rothschild Brand in an Indy article from 2004 written by Paul Vallely.  Has some great background on the Dynasty that has featured so heavily in our History of blood, work and tears, keeping Governments in debt since the 1700′s.

“The Rothschild story: A golden era ends for a secretive dynasty”

The news that the bankers Rothschild are to withdraw from the gold market, in which they have been a major player for two centuries, has been hailed as the end of an era.

In one sense, of course, it is. This was the company that smuggled gold coins across the English Channel to finance the Duke of Wellington’s advance through France to his final triumph at Waterloo over Napoleon (who, it turned out, had also borrowed money from the Rothschilds).

But in another way it marks out the continuation of an even older tradition – the ability of the family which has founded one of the world’s largest private banking dynasties to sustain their secretive fortune, which industry insiders count not in billions but in trillions, and keep it within the family.

Secrecy has been a hallmark of the Rothschilds from the outset. Mayer Amschel Rothschild, the son of an itinerant money lender and goldsmith who settled in the Jewish ghetto in Frankfurt-am-Main in 1744, specialised not just in clever accounting practices but also kept secret books and subterranean vaults which he ensured were never the privy of auditor, lawyer or taxman.

As the paterfamilias became more successful he despatched four of his five sons to different European capitals to take advantage of the rise of capitalism and the growth of international trade. Nathan he sent to London, James to Paris, Saloman to Vienna, and Carl to Naples, keeping the eldest, Amschel, at home with him in Prussia. Of these the two most important proved to be London and Paris, where the two main branches of the family developed a friendly rivalry, with the English branch developing the edge in business and the French in philanthropy, the arts and winemaking. But then in 1996 Amschel Rothschild, a 41-year-old man who had lived in the flamboyant style of many of his ancestors, hanged himself in a Paris hotel room. He was the Rothschild who had been groomed to take over as head of the English arm of the dynasty.

So when the bank’s chairman Sir Evelyn de Rothschild retired earlier this year the succession passed to the French side of the family. Baron David de Rothschild, who had been running the family’s Paris-based bank, inherited.

None of the Rothschild enterprises have been banks in the sense as understood by the man or woman in the street. What Mayer Rothschild founded in the 1760s was a business which grew from the humble beginning of selling rare coins to becoming the prime moneylender to greedy and spendthrift governments across Europe. One German contemporary quipped that Mayer was “the pride of Israel … before whose money box kings and emperors humbly bow”. And the novelist Thackeray said of Nathan that he was “not king of the Jews, but the Jew of the kings”. The brothers financed both sides in the Napoleonic wars and in the Austro-Prussian war too.

It has long been supposed that Nathan increased the family fortune 20-fold by speculating on the outcome of the Battle of Waterloo in 1815. The Rothschilds had a network of agents throughout Europe who, using fast boats, coded letters and carrier pigeons, got information to the family ahead of official sources. Victor Rothschild, third baron and former chairman of the London bank, N M Rothschild, always maintained that Nathan had made a killing by encouraging rumours that Wellington had lost when he knew he had won, though the historian Niall Ferguson in his magisterial history of the family recently disputed that.

Certainly, for all the family motto of Concordia, Integritas, Industria (Unity, Integrity, Industry), Nathan’s ability to depress stock prices by using the network of agents to spread rumours, true or false, and then buy the stock up after people panicked, was legendary.

More significant, however, was that in the process the Rothschilds created the world of banking as we know it today. Nathan operated principally as an underwriter and speculator in the early 19th-century bond market. He and his brothers invented, or at any rate popularised, the government bond, which allowed investors, big and small, to buy bits of the debts of sovereign states by purchasing fixed-interest bearer bonds.

Governments liked this because they could use them to raise colossal sums of money. Investors liked them because they could be traded – at prices that fluctuated in relation to the performance of the issuing government – and shrewd investors could make big sums. It brought investment in railways, the industrial revolution and ventures like the Suez Canal. The Rothschilds got a cut of everything.

It was a new kind of power. “I care not what puppet is placed upon the throne of England to rule the Empire on which the sun never sets. The man who controls Britain’s money supply controls the British Empire, and I control the British money supply,” Nathan said. The family developed a lack of awe for the powerful and important. A pompous aristocrat one day called on Nathan who was head down at his desk. Without looking up, the banker said: “Take a chair.” His caller, affronted, said: “You are speaking to the Prince of Thurn and Taxis.” To which Rothschild replied: “Take two chairs.” At one point he even rescued the Bank of England after a run on gold caused the collapse of 145 banks. In 1885 he was given the hereditary title of Baron Rothschild.

Many of the distinct characteristics of the family can be traced back to the will of the founder Mayer Rothschild. It stipulated that no public inventory should be made of his estate; that key positions in the House of Rothschild were to be held by family members; that the eldest son should inherit unless the rest agreed otherwise; that the family was to intermarry with first and second cousins to keep the fortune together; that anyone disputing these terms would be struck from the will. And that all this should apply in perpetuity.

In part this was about preserving not just their Jewish identity but a self-conscious position as role models for their poorer co-religionists. The Rothschilds expended much effort and money pressing for Jewish emancipation and equality across the continent.

Their Jewish solidarity was not heterogeneous. In 1938 Nathan’s great-great-grandson, Victor, shocked an audience by saying that in spite of “the slow murder of 600,000 people” on the continent “we probably all agree that there is something unsatisfactory in refugees encroaching on the privacy of our country, even for relatively short periods of time.” And the family split over the question of the dream of a Jewish homeland, with some members supporting the first Zionist settlement in Palestine and the Balfour declaration and others opposing it on the grounds that it would encourage anti-Semites to question the existing national identities of assimilated Jews around the rest of the world. None of which has allayed the wild fears of anti-Semites who throughout the 20th century branded the Rothschilds as part of a Jewish plot to take over the world.

The world has changed around the Rothschilds. At one point Nathan Rothschild was the richest man in Britain and probably in the world. In today’s terms he was wealthier than Bill Gates. But they never gained the foothold in America they needed. The world became corporate. Private banking got left behind.

Still, the family has moved down only from fabulously rich to enormously wealthy. And they adjusted to the times. They made billions in the 1980s from Margaret Thatcher’s privatisations of state-owned industries on which they advised. In France after their bank was nationalised by the Socialist president Francois Mitterrand they slowly built a new business which, under Baron David de Rothschild, has risen to the top ranks of the merger and acquisition league tables. They have pulled out of retail fund management – into which they went with much fanfare only three years back – and now they are pulling out of oil and gold in favour of the higher-margin areas of private banking and wealth management.

Do not spend too many tears. In 1997 the family’s Swiss holding company increased its profits by 66 per cent. The firm is not called Rothschild Continuation for nothing.

Mayer Amschel Rothschild (1743-1812), Founder of the family business

• Mayer, orphaned at the age of 12, was forced to make his own living with the help of the good name of his father in Frankfurt. He carved out a self-taught career as a dealer in coins and medals, branching out into state loans and trade in general commodities. He established the family name by placing a Roman eagle on a red shield (Rothschild in German) over the door of his counting house.

• Mayer established one of the Rothschild firm’s principles: to settle for less profit to ensure long-term business ties. A brisk market in English textiles prompted him to send one of five sons, Nathan, to England.

Jacob, 4th Baron Rothschild (b. 1936), Head of the English side of the family

• Chairman of NM Rothschild before resigning in 1980 to run Rothschild Investment Trust. He chaired the National Heritage Memorial Fund, handing out £1.2bn of lottery grants. He restored Waddesdon Manor, right, the family pile, and chairs Yad Hanadiv, the family foundation in Israel, which donated the Knesset and Supreme Court to the state

David de Rothschild (b. 1942), Head of the French family

• The head of the French family, David de Rothschild has escaped two catastrophes in France: he was born in New York after the Luftwaffe seized the family home in Paris and his mother fled from Nazi Europe; and, in 1981, President Mitterrand nationalised the French financial empire, Banque Rothschild. David and his cousins started afresh with PO Gestion, renamed PO Banque and thenRothschild & Cie Banque.

Seven Generations and two Centuries of Banking

• 1760s The orphaned Mayer Amschel Rothschild starts a coins and medals business in Frankfurt
• 1789 Mayer appointed an agent to William IX of Hanau
• 1798 Mayer’s son Nathan leaves Frankfurt to become a textile and general merchant in Manchester
• 1812 Nathan’s brother James establishes a banking house in Paris
• 1815 The English branch of the Rothschilds supply gold to the Duke of Wellington’s campaign at Waterloo
• 1820 Nathan’s brother settles in Vienna; his brother Carl starts a business in Naples
• 1836 Nathan dies
• 1840 NM Rothschild and Sons becomes one of the Bank of England’s bullion brokers
• 1850s Great houses are built. Bordeaux vineyards of Mouton and Lafite are acquired
• 1875 Lionel de Rothschild raises finance for British stake in the Suez Canal
• 1887 Rothschilds funds the creation of the diamond dealers De Beers
• 1901 With no male heirs, the Frankfurt dynasty comes to an end
• 1919 NM Rothschild & Sons chair new daily fixing of the gold price
• 1926 The company finances the spread of the London Underground
• 1929 Beginning of difficult years for family. Wall Street crash; rise of Nazi Europe
• 1960s Rothschilds look to US; start of Rothschild Inc
• 1981 France nationalises the highly successful Paris House but the family refuses defeat and starts new business.
• 1985 Rothschilds advises on British Gas privatisation

You’ve got to give it to Mayer, he was one smart bastard of a man.  Domination of the Nations is the goal of the Owners of Earth Plc, and I doubt the Rothschild’s Dynasty is alone in that goal but has certainly been a major player.

I bring up the Rothschilds’ as the present one has been making large donations to the Conservatives (again) and there has been rumours of tolls on motorways or some sort of road pricing GPS model of charging per mile, and of course the Rothschilds’ will have their cut.

There is no such thing as a free lunch, especially a multi-million £££ lunch.

Harry Brown: If you have a strong stomach, a must watch movie

Filmed on the Heygate and the Aylesbury Estate in Walworth.  It is the biggest estate in Europe they say.  One of the poorest too.  The Heygate is next to Elephant & Castle while the Aylesbury is next to Burgess Park and spreads from the Old Kent Road to Walworth Road and includes East Street Market for all your knock down goods and enough crime to deter you from ever returning.

Not only did they film Harry Brown here but Prince Harry and William visited the place once.  Probably to come and laugh, knowing snobbery.  Also, when I ‘graduated’ from Walworth School, lo and behold, we had three MPs there, Simon Hughes and David Blunkett, dog included, and some other prat, may have been a mayor, I was always mashed in School.  Some happy memories along with some bad come-downs.

I’m rattling on about the Estate as it sets the scene for the entire movie and shamefully, is pretty realistic about the blighted lives some lead due to the low-level but highly distressful low thuggery.  This drives the superb Michael Caine to despair after losing love ones has nothing left to lose so the character is so easily connected, this is everything Nick Love’s ‘Outlaw’ failed to be.  I thank the Lord that Mr Caine is able to afford to pick and choose his films now.  He has had some right howlers in the past.

The younger actors must get a mention along with the excellent supporting roles along all fronts.   To be opposite Michael Caine must raise the pressure.  A somewhat predictable story but so gritty and realistic due to the performance of the youngsters that again, it is hard to find any fault in this film.  Even the way it ties up.

At an hour and a half, I reckon there is a director’s cut planned, but the stuff that cut has made a fast pace movie that will have you raging, cringing, fuming and may even give you a few tears, although not me, I had something in my eye, I swear.

Now I know I should be berating Polichickens, the thieves, the cheats, the liars and all the other parasitic buggers that seek to impose their utopian dream of becoming nothing more than a compliant worker thus consumer at best.  Or cannon fodder due to the fact I’m a useless obstacle to the Corporate pursuit of the profitable nirvana that seeks to empower the few against the many.

But…

This is the film along with Kidulthood that should be essential viewing for the Masters of the Universe, so they can see the shite their policies of sapping the will of life out of so many people.  For every family has some member corrupted by the filth and displacement caused by bad social policy after bad social policy.

So I give Harry Brown 9 out 10.  The reason it hasn’t got 10 is because I weren’t in it.  I’ll be back to bad mouthing the elite soon enough, for I’m suffering BSNF (bullshit news fatigue).  And on top of that, I’ve run out of beer and cigarettes and to say it is raining cats and dogs is an understatement, more like that Mother Nature’s Climate Change.  Stupid scientists (sic).

 

George Soros: “New World Order… financial”

“Give me control of a nation’s money and I care not who makes the laws.” Mayer Amschel Rothschild

Mr Soros, speaking about creating a New World Order, financial of course, and I tell ya this for nothing.  What a boring orator!  Humming and arring all the way through.  The Bastards that Be are so confident now, having scared half the world to death, their adherents are open with their agenda.

And the reason why they’re so open?  Simply because they have no need to hide it, sitting in impregnable fortresses protected by Our Police and Our Soldiers, who could possibly rid us of these enslavers?

And who knows, maybe it will be for the best for humanity on the whole.  Doesn’t make me feel any better of course, for there will be losers and if the Corruptibles have their way, it’ll involve us plebs marching into sacrifice once more for reasons that will be cleared up by the victor. If Germany had won WWII, our children would be learning how Britain helped train the Polish Army and Navy that attacked Germany’s coast, causing the entire war.  It’d be us painted as the Axis of Evil, not they.  For throughout human history, civilisations clash, evolve or become absorbed by others, along with their people, so maybe this is just the next step in Societies Natural Path, expanding merciless, consuming all that do not conform or adapt while rewarding those who learn how to ride the waves and ensuring the masters who control the waves remain in control.

I will witness the Demise of Democracy in my lifetime at the current rate Earth PLC is going.  The Democracy model worked for the Bastards that Be back when it was just the land-owners who had the vote.  Seems logical that the Corporate Owners of the Earth would want the same priviledge seeing as us pesky tenants keep multiplying meaning more peasants to pander to.  So this most probably means a New Corporate World Order where we’re all treated as employees or future cuts, to put it nicely.

Many thanks to BNPCrusade for finding and uploading

Welcome to Fascism.  Look on the bright side though, we still got hot water.  Even better, we may be allowed another election next year where we can vote out the Corruptibles.

Who to vote for though?  The Tories’ donations are very high, probably due to the Giants of Industry who finance the machine along with the ones hoping to make a buck out of the public purse if Cameron’s Conservatives get in, so a vote for them is a vote for the European Corporate State for sure.

Lord Pearson has become the Ukip’s leader and I like his idea of a hung government.  A coalition between the BNP and Ukip would sort this Nation out (and for any Libertarians reading, I’m sure a few will be casted your way).  Instant withdrawal from the EU, an end to the mass importation of people called immigration and a dilution of State Powers.

One can hope.

Champange Socialist: Labour peer Baron Brooke

Infamy!  Infamy!  All these God-damn parasites have got it in for me!

One of the Bastards that Be, a former trade union boss made Labour peer in 1997 for services rendered to NuGov.  Not the people, oh no, us mere peasants matter not, as long as the Gravy Train Express controls was taken over by NuGov and kept rolling, he got his peerage.  And those already onboard didn’t want it to stop no matter what, taking us first into the European Union, which will mean a Global one is surely on the cards, which will finally complete the Brave New World the Elites so wish to create.

Back to the matter at hand, the crooked Baron Brooke has been caught up in the expenses row now with the disclosure of him pocketing £140,000 of our taxes over seven years for overnight allowances even though his home was in Battersea.

Our taxes, gone, just like that.  Frittered away to plump up the incompetent stooges who help sign away our doom.  F***ing bloody marvellous.

Labour peer Baron Brooke claimed £140,000 for ‘overnight allowance’ while living just three miles from House of Lords

MailOnline – By Neil Sears

When he was a trade union boss, Clive Brooke was a keen advocate of financial moderation.

In a report he wrote with church leaders, he said people must show ‘a generous spirit, and not pursue economic advantage to the limit’.

But then Clive Brooke became Lord Brooke of Alverthorpe – and began filling in his expense forms.

Over the past seven years he has been claiming close to the maximum allowance in overnight subsistence payments despite owning a £700,000 townhouse just three miles from Parliament.

The Labour peer has made the claims – totalling more than £140,000 in the accounts available – on the basis that his main residence is a house in Brighton on which he and his wife Lorna, 66, have no mortgage.

Lord Brooke, 67, and his wife have owned their three-storey London home, in Battersea, a seven-minute drive from Parliament, for 23 years and are on the electoral roll there.

He stays in the London house, which is a stone’s throw from the Thames, whenever he sits in the Lords.

The rest is not even worth reading.  Mr Plod, instead of patting me down saying I look like a crackhead, go investigate that!  Until you do, expect no co-operation from me.