State-snooping | Just maybe…

5 06 2010

News that the State Spying Machine is still in full swing.  I’m not stupid enough to believe that the Government or even Companies for that matter, wish to know your every move, and so only the most serious threats to their domination should be worried, the criminals slightly worried and the law-abiding very annoyed.

Annoyed due to the fact that your next-door neighbour who happens to be a nurse gets to gander at your progress at the wart clinic.  Annoyed as CCTV operator zooms in through your windows.  Annoyed so much in fact, that you may just bump yourself up into the two categories the Police State was meant to counter.

‘Big Brother’s’ little brother: Illegal snooping by town hall staff is up sixfold

By Jack Doyle, Daily Wail.  Last updated at 3:33 AM on 5th June 2010

More and more town hall bureaucrats have been caught snooping on private details held on a giant ‘Big Brother’ tax and benefits database.

Instances of unlawful hacking of the Customer Information System, which belongs to the Department of Work and Pensions and holds the personal records of 85 million people, have increased sixfold in a single year to more than two a week.

Council staff have looked at accounts belonging to their friends, family members, neighbours and even celebrities.

Some were dismissed as a result  –  but two thirds were let off with little more than a slap on the wrist.

Astonishingly, the DWP does not hold details of the number of its own staff caught doing the same thing.

This means the real level of unauthorised access could be much higher.

The revelations raised major questions about the number of people allowed to access the system.

In addition to workers at 445 local authorities across the UK, it is open to some 80,000 DWP employees and 60,000 workers from other government departments.

Civil liberties campaigners called for drastic cuts in those allowed to view the data.

Alex Deane, Director of Big Brother Watch, said: ‘This just goes to show that our private data is not safe with councils  –  the less they have of it, the better.’

The database holds a record of every single individual issued with a National Insurance number, including those who have died, each containing up to 9,800 pieces of information.

That includes details of their ethnicity, address, and tax status.

In addition, the system records the full income details of anyone receiving any kind of benefit, including 11.5million state pensioners, 2.65 million people on incapacity benefit and four million who claim pension credit or some kind of income support.

Freedom of Information Act requests revealed 124 security breaches by council staff last year, including those found looking at the accounts of friends, family, neighbours, or celebrities.

That is a sharp increase from just 20 in 2008/9. Of those 26 were dismissed and eight resigned during the disciplinary process. But 37 were given a written or verbal warning and 43 received no reprimand at all.

Officials at the department were so concerned about the scale of the problem that they contacted councils last year to warn of sanctions. But the scale of the problem increased regardless.

Organisations caught up in last year’s suspected breaches included London’s Islington, Barnet, Lambeth, Greenwich, Tower Hamlets, Hackney and Westminster councils as well as Town Hall staff in Birmingham, Bristol, Leeds, Sunderland, Liverpool, Bradford, Middlesbrough, Cambridge and Plymouth.

Prof Peter Sommer, an information security expert from the London School of Economics said: ‘It is bizarre and deeply unfortunate that DWP appear not to hold these essential security breach statistics.’

A spokesman for the Department for Work and Pensions said: ‘DWP thoroughly deals with the risk to CIS by the small number of employees who commit unauthorised access.

– ‘DWP works closely with local authorities to investigate suspicions of unauthorised access enabling managers to consider disciplinary action where appropriate.’

– Every Google web search could be stored for up to two years under a controversial EU proposal that has the backing of more than 300 Euro-MPs.

‘Written Declaration 29’ is intended to be used as an early warning system to stop paedophiles.

But civil liberty groups say it is ‘completely unjustifiable’ intrusion into citizens’ privacy  –  and would not be effective because most paedophiles operate in chatrooms and private communication.

Not only that though, but also the leftarded Guardian are carrying a similar story.  This one feigning shock outrage at the anti-terror Police funding number-plate recognition cameras in Birmingham’s Muslim areas.  Considering that those who carry out Jihad usually do so due to an Islamic  religious persuasion, I would say that makes sense.  I’m just pee’d off that not only do the civil Police wish to do the job on the cheap, so do our anti-terror Cops.

On a side note, love how the preacher of the British multicultural paradise (so long as they don’t have to live in them) refer to British land as ‘Muslim areas’.  Where’s the diverse neighbourhoods we dreamed about?  Why all this segregation?  Is it natural?  And if so, why do governments seek to disrupt that balance?

We have been ruled by fools since year dot.  It will never change.

Advertisements




BNP | The witch trial begins

24 05 2010

Lovely NUJ-styled headline from the Telegraph regarding Adam Walker’s hate-crime trial at the General Teaching Council’s very own kangaroo court.  BNP teacher ‘described immigrants as filth’ is a blatant misrepresentation of the individuals’ view on NuBritons more worthy of appearing in the leftarded Guardian or Mirror.

Onwards with the most important bits though:

Bradley Albuery, GTC presenting officer, alleged that the postings demonstrated views suggestive of both racial and religious intolerance.

In one posting, Mr Walker claimed the BNP had risen in popularity because “they are the only party who are making a stand and are prepared to protect the rights of citizens against the savage animals New Labour and Bliar (sic) are filling our communities with”.

In another posting on the same day, Mr Walker wrote: “By following recent media coverage of illegal animals and how they are allowed to stay here despite committing heinous crimes, I am, to say the very least, disgusted.”

Another posting claimed that some immigrants hated people who were white and had western values.

And..

Mr Albuery said: “This case is not about the BNP or whether teachers should be members of that lawful party.

“This case is about the actions and behaviour of a registered teacher, using a school property on school premises in school time.”

The defence on the other hand paint a very different picture.

The teacher, who worked at Houghton Kepier for more than six years, resigned after his head teacher asked IT staff to investigate his use of the internet.

In a statement read to the hearing, Mr Walker said that he had not communicated his political thoughts and beliefs to staff or pupils at the school.

“I have always sought to bring out the best in my pupils,” he said.

“I have certainly never discriminated against an individual on grounds of race, faith or sexuality. Part of why I became a teacher is to help people overcome social disadvantage and reach their full potential.”

Commenting on the content of his postings, Mr Walker said he had been influenced by media coverage of a female PC shot dead by two illegal immigrants and the murder of British hostage Ken Bigley in Iraq.

“Looking back now I feel that I was unduly influenced by the hostile climate the media created,” he said. “This led me to express intemperate views which lacked complexity and balance.

“I should have taken more time to think about the possible offence my words might have caused and I think I could have expressed myself more carefully and positively.

“I have never condemned all immigrants or asylum seekers. My comments relate to those I perceive as coming to our country and committing criminal offences or otherwise behaving badly.

“In many cases, I cut and pasted views from a variety of sources in order to provoke debate and these were not attributed.”

Fine and dandy for the schools to stage mock shootings yet a teacher takes five minutes out of his day to surf the internet, the full force of the GTC Thought-Cops will descend upon them.

I’ll think I’ll let the kids at St Paul’s & St Micheal’s school sing us out:

Now here are schools actively encouraging the children into supporting Dianne Abbott, wannabe leader of the Labour Party.

One rule for them, another for us.  Some equality that is.





Google | Sorry, we’ve been evil

16 05 2010

The largest and most powerful corporation on Earth with the world-famous motto “Don’t Be Evil” has been forced to apologise for ‘hijacking’ WiFi waves then proceeding to hoover up all data within the catchment area indiscriminately.  All with the aid of the very mobile fleet of Google-endorsed Street View Cars.  Those motors with the special cameras taking photos of your valuables.

Google apologises for collecting personal web data

Google has been forced to apologise after admitting it has been wrongly spying on people’s internet use for more than three years.

By Roya Nikkhah, Telegraph.  Published: 9:45AM BST 15 May 2010

The internet giant’s Street View cars, which were launched last year to take photographs for its Google Maps service, have mistakenly collected information sent over unencrypted Wi-Fi networks.

Information gathered by the cars’ antennae could include parts of an email, text or photograph or even the website someone may be viewing.

About 600 gigabytes of data was taken off Wi-Fi networks in more than 30 countries. Google said it plans to delete all the information as soon as it gains clearance from government authorities.

The admission will raise more privacy worries about the company, which issued a public apology on Friday.

Google said that it only recently discovered the problem in response to an inquiry from German regulators, who began to examine why Google was using the cars to collect Wi-Fi data at all.

A month ago, Google said that it was only collecting the name and location of local Wi-Fi networks, information, it argued, that was publicly available and which would help improve its location services.

The company said that as soon as it became aware of the problem, it grounded its Street View cars from collecting Wi-Fi information and segregated the data on its network.

Google is now asking for a third party to review the software that caused the problem and examine precisely what data has been gathered.

In a blog post, Alan Eustace, Google’s senior vice president of engineering and research, wrote: “Maintaining people’s trust is crucial to everything we do, and in this case we fell short.

“The engineering team at Google works hard to earn your trust – and we are acutely aware that we failed badly here.”

Google said the problem dated back to 2006 when “an engineer working on an experimental Wi-Fi project wrote a piece of code that sampled all categories of publicly broadcast Wi-Fi data”.

That code was included in the software the Street View cars. “Quite simply, it was a mistake”, said Mr Eustace.

He added: “This incident highlights just how publicly accessible, open, non-password protected Wi-Fi networks are today.”

Dan Kaminsky, the director of penetration testing for security firm Ioactive, said that there was no intent by Google.

He said: “This information was leaking out and they picked it up. If you are going to broadcast your email on an open Wi-Fi, don’t be surprised if someone picks it up.”

John Simpson, from Consumer Watchdog, an American consumer group, said: “The problem is [Google] have a bunch of engineers who push the envelope and gather as much information as they can and don’t think about the ramifications of that.”

The launch of Street View cars last year prompted widespread protest, with critics claiming that the information provided on Google Maps would invade the privacy of home owners and help burglars.

The Information Commissioner’s Office cleared Street View of any breach of the Data Protection Act earlier this year.

With Corporations like Google, who needs Dr Evil.






BNP | Fulltime Anti-BNPers

16 05 2010

A campaign of hate directed at the British National Party in Barking, sanctioned by the Establishment, coordinated by Searchlight, promoted by the Mirror and performed by the deluded is the main reason why there was no political earthquake.

Since last June, when 1,000,000 Britons decided to use their democratic right and voted for Mr Griffin and Mr Brons in the EU elections, Searchlight’s chief Nick Lowles has organised the undemocratic use of subversion, indoctrination and incitement to hatred to oppose them.

So how did they do it?  From the dreaded Hope Not Hate blog hosted by the leftarded news-polluter, the Daily Mirror:

We have had brilliant support from pensioners, black and Asian voters, white voters, young voters, women and men. On Monday 385 people delivered 55,000 leaflets and even on polling day we had 175 people out knocking up the vote.

So saturating the area with anti-BNP literature for the run-up to the election and, with 175 people manning the polling booths, it’s no wonder the BNP polled so little.

Nick Griffin was belittled, vilified, treated like dog dirt and told he was a third-class citizen who wasn’t wanted in Britain.

Argumentum ad hominem it’s called, attacking the person instead of the argument and has worked throughout the centuries as people are too stupid or lazy to see the motive behind the comments.

The world is upside down.  That or there is definitely something in the water.





GE10 | BNP analysis

15 05 2010

It has been near enough two weeks since the result of the election and finally we are finding out how the Establishment fended off the Nationalist advance in Barking.

Thanks to the leftarded Guardian, find out it was not policy or personality that smashed the BNP in Barking but an Obama-style campaign of PR and intimidation coordinated by the Establishment’s agents.

The answer is a tale of determined activism by Griffin’s opponents, aided by the antics of his self-harming party. That activism began to develop a sharp focus two weeks after those Euro elections, when Lowles chaired a meeting of MPs, anti-BNP campaigners, church groups and trade unionists. He gave them a detailed breakdown of the BNP’s support. The message was stark.

“A decision was made to draw a line in the sand,” says one Labour party figure who was at the meeting. “The coming general election was going to be the defining moment. Everyone knew that if they won then, it would be almost impossible to remove them in the future.”

There was never a single anti-BNP campaign in Barking. There were meetings, events, leafleting initiatives run by Hope Not Hate – which coordinated much of the activity – and also by Labour and Unite Against Fascism. Hope Not Hate set up a base in derelict premises, and volunteers travelled across the country to prepare it for the coming battle; putting up a new ceiling, plumbing in toilets and setting up a print room. Some slept on the floors.

“The response was truly overwhelming,” says Lowles. “On one day of action, we had 541 people; on another, 385; and even on election day itself, 176 people came out to help get the vote out.” Many of the volunteers had not been involved in political activity before. “We had teenagers travelling up from Kent, old ladies from the other side of London turning out. It felt like a liberating experience for people who felt like we were doing something politically important.”

The Hope Not Hate campaign was supported by Joe Rospars, chief digital strategist for Barack Obama from 2007 until his inauguration, and his company Blue State Digital.

Rospars said it was the “best example” of a British organisation applying the lessons of the US presidential elections. “We are seeing a genuine community-based organisation, with people coming together around a common purpose,” he said.

Campaigners were able to identify the key groups least likely to vote for the BNP – women, pensioners and people from ethnic minorities. They built up an online volunteer force of 140,000 people, and Rospars advised on how to use them for maximum impact. In the month before election day, Lowles says more than 1,000 volunteers descended on Barking, delivering 350,000 specially tailored leaflets and newsletters.

At the same time, the Dagenham MP John Cruddas, and his neighbour who seemed most under threat, Barking MP Margaret Hodge, were fighting a parallel ground war against the BNP. Hodge escalated the effort she had begun some four years earlier to reconnect with voters Labour had lost to the BNP. Their rise in Barking had seen the then culture secretary heavily criticised by many inside her own party. For her, this election result represents a triumph for decency, and personal redemption.

“When Griffin announced in September that he would stand, that gave me a real scare,” Hodge says. “My husband had not long died, and I was still in grief. It was a tough period. I was quietly confident that I would win, but I really wanted to smash him. And I was really concerned about the prospects for the council.”

Hodge, with the help of volunteers from Unite Against Fascism, turned to the politics of shoe leather, knocking on doors and listening to people’s concerns. “‘What do you want to talk about?’ I would ask. It was up to them.”

Most talked about street cleaning, wheelie bins and antisocial behaviour, but inevitably many raised the BNP trump card of immigration. Even black residents raised the issue with Hodge. “I would say to them: ‘I can’t turn the clock back, but this is why the borough has changed, and we must make it work for all of us.’ Some people hated that. Some would understand. But they came to feel I was listening.”

Of  course the internal problems of the BNP didn’t help but the mobilisation and coordination between the Establishment and Vested Interests would put Robert Mugabe to shame.

And you still believe you live in a democratic country?





World | Leftarded Armies of Doom

11 05 2010

“Progressive Politics” will be a term we’ll be hearing a lot more if Labour and the Liberals team up.  But what is it exactly?  Simply put, the Progressives seek to social engineer everything we hold dear at the political level.  Of course, we get the government we deserve and the more people produced that can’t tie their shoelaces together, the more we will suffer at the hands of fools.

As my grasp of the English language is failing me due to the heavy workload along with the headache of worrying about Labour-Liberal degenerates coming out holding hands, an article sent to me from a compatriot worthy of reading from the fine Brussels Journal.

Can We Coexist With The Left?

Brussels Journal.  From the desk of Fjordman on Sun, 2010-05-09 08:59

The American writer Lawrence Auster had a debate with his readers regarding the possibility of splitting the USA along ideological lines. According to reader Tim W, modern Left liberalism is a universal totalitarian ideology, not a “live and let live” concept. The goal of its adherents is a world government from which no one can escape. Leftists “need conservatives but conservatives don’t need leftists. To be blunt, they can’t let us go. We’d be happy to be rid of them, because to us they’re nothing but parasites and/or oppressors. But they can’t get rid of us because we do most of the work, pay most of the taxes, provide the stability and morality that allow their depravity to thrive with less damaging results. Furthermore, the white conservative population is the buffer protecting white liberals from the minorities.”

A number of commentators questioned the viability of such a political division. Muslims believe not only that Islam is the best religion, but that it is the only true religion and that all people must be brought into its fold. Likewise, Leftists sincerely believe that Leftism is the only valid ideology, and that the whole world must be brought under its heel. Just like the very existence of self-governed communities outside of Islamic rule is considered an intolerable act of aggression by devout Muslims, so the existence of self-governed non-Leftist communities anywhere, at least if they happen to be white, is unacceptable to Leftist True Believers. They don’t just want to rule themselves; they want to rule everybody else as well.

Good arguments were presented in favor of secession, but opponents point out that attempted partition would likely trigger coercion and force when the ruling oligarchs fear losing control. If the Left sees everything it has promoted for generations about to be overturned it might resort to violence. Above all, opponents questioned whether the whole idea of “just wanting to be left alone” is defeatist and leaves the opponents with the initiative. Perhaps the battle cannot be won until we go on the offensive and take the ideological war to the enemy.

As reality is now, whites are considered potential extremists merely for existing, whereas the most revolting non-white organizations imaginable go free. For example, groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, which has the stated goal of destroying Western civilization, are labeled “moderates,” whereas whites who want an immigration policy that prevents such people from settling in their countries are demonized as “racist extremists” by the media.

As Lawrence Auster says, white Leftists show “absolute moral disgust and horror against white non-liberals for their (almost always falsely imagined) discriminatory attitudes toward nonwhites. The only two moral actors in this script are the white liberals, who are good, and the white non-liberals, who are evil. The nonwhites are not moral actors in the script. They are the passive, sacred objects around whom the moral drama between good whites and evil whites is played out.”

In April 2010, the former left-wing US President Bill Clinton warned commentators to tone down their anti-government rhetoric for fear of inflaming hate groups, as polls suggested that public trust in the US government was at its lowest point for half a century. Clinton tried to conflate the anti-tax Tea Party movement with the 1995 Oklahoma City terrorist bombing, and implicitly voiced support for limiting certain forms of speech that might challenge the left-wing ruling regime. In an interview with The New York Times newspaper, Mr. Clinton was worried about the fact that “Because of the Internet, there is this vast echo chamber and our advocacy reaches into corners that never would have been possible before.” He warned against those who were too negative regarding the policies of Leftist politicians.

In 2009, the same Bill Clinton said that Americans should be mindful of their nation’s changing demographics, which led to the 2008 election of Obama as president. He told an Arab-American audience that by 2050 the U.S. will no longer have a majority of people with a European heritage and stated that “this is a very positive thing.” This was merely eight years after Arab Muslim terrorists staged the deadliest attack against the US mainland in peacetime, killing thousands of US citizens. Yet a dramatic increase in the number of Arab Muslims in his country does not worry Mr. Clinton at all. The only “terrorism” he is concerned about might be protests from people of European origins who oppose their own dispossession.

Bertha Lewis, the chief executive officer of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now or ACORN, spoke in March 2010 before the Young Democratic Socialists conference. There she predicted a USA headed toward violence that will “dwarf the internments during World War II.” Curiously, this statement was hardly reported in the mass media. She said that immigration is a big battle. “And the reason this is so important is, you know, here’s the secret: (whispering) We’re getting ready to be a majority, minority country. Shhhh. We’ll be like South Africa. More black people than white people. Don’t tell anybody.”

Lewis encouraged people, based solely on the color of their skin, to “get yourselves together, get strong, get big, and get into this battle,” the battle here just defined as the dispossession of whites. She’s the head of an organization that’s been a good friend of the current President Barack Hussein Obama. ACORN was a political issue in the 2008 United States Presidential Election over allegations of voter registration fraud. As President, Obama has repeatedly insulted staunch friends and allies of his country while openly siding with its Islamic enemies.

In April 2010 US President Obama, with unusual frankness regarding his anti-white coalition, appealed to “young people, African-Americans, Latinos, and women who powered our victory in 2008 [to] stand together once again” for continued “change,” essentially the manifestation of an intifada on European Americans. Notice that his message was essentially the same as that of the radical Bertha Lewis of ACORN, only slightly less openly militant. A few days later, the same Mr. Obama with astounding hypocrisy in an address urged both sides in the political debate to tone down their rhetoric. This because using phrases like “Socialists” in his view “closes the door to the possibility of compromise” and “can send signals to the most extreme elements of our society that perhaps violence is a justifiable response.”

The problem is that extremist left-wing elements have received tacit approval for carrying out violence and intimidation for years. This trend is escalating because of thugs such as the Antifa groups in Western Europe. These Leftist vandals get away with what they do because they know they have the quiet backing of the media and the political elites. Also in 2010, the University of Ottawa in Canada cancelled a speech by the U.S. conservative writer Ann Coulter because organizers feared left-wing protesters would turn violent. The American Renaissance conference that same year met with extreme harassment, including death threats. Yet as AR leader Jared Taylor lamented, the story received virtually no coverage from the mainstream Western media, nor from Democratic Presidents Obama or Clinton. The question here is not whether you agree with the people at American Renaissance, the question is why a legal, white political organization cannot meet peacefully when Communists or organizations affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood can do so.

In her book A God Who Hates, the Syrian-born ex-Muslim Wafa Sultan comments on the Islamic “culture of shouting and raiding.” She states that “My experience has been that two Muslims cannot talk together without their conversation turning into shouts within minutes, especially when they disagree with each other, and no good can come of that. When you talk to a Muslim, rationally, in a low calm voice, he has trouble understanding your point of view. He thinks you have lost the argument. A Muslim conversing with anyone else – Muslim or non-Muslim – cannot remember a single word the other person has said, any more than my mother could remember a single word of what the preacher in our local mosque said.”

Former Muslim Ali Sina notes that “there is very little difference between the Left and Islam. What is lacking in both these creeds is the adherence to the Golden Rule. Just as for Muslims, everything Islamic is a priori right and good and everything un-Islamic is a priori wrong and evil, for the Left, everything leftist is a priori oppressed and good.” Facts don’t matter. Lying about opponents and their intentions is so widespread “that it is considered to be normal.”

After it was revealed that much of the data regarding alleged man-made global warming was deliberately fabricated, which constitutes one of the largest and most expensive anti-scientific frauds in history, most of its Leftist backers continued as if nothing had happened. The fact that they had promoted outright lies and slimed their opponents based on these lies mattered little. They believe they had the right to do so, as long as their intentions were right. Muslims, too, are allowed to lie to further the spread of their ideology. This strategy is called taqiyya.

Just like Muslims, both national Socialists and international Socialists totally lack respect for Socratic Dialogue, the reasoned search for truth which has been a hallmark of Western culture at its best. This is why such a large percentage of Western converts to Islam are either neo-Nazis or Marxists: These groups already think a great deal like Muslims. Their creed is the Absolute Truth, which should rule the world and must be imposed on others by brute force if necessary. They consequently have no need for reasoned debate. Others should submit to their rule or be violently squashed. End of story. People of European origins who stick to their cultural heritage constitute the embodiment of evil for Leftists, just like the infidels do for Muslims. Since white Westerners invented capitalism, some radical Socialists apparently believe that a “Final Solution” to the Capitalist Problem involves the annihilation of whites.

Terms such as “ethnic cleansing” should not be used lightly, but the writer Paul Weston is unfortunately correct here: What is happening with the native population throughout Western Europe is a state-sponsored campaign of ethnic cleansing. The only thing that’s unique about Britain is that Andrew Neather from the ruling Labour Party admitted this openly, in writing.

NATO, led by the USA, bombed the Serbs for “ethnic cleansing” back in 1999, thereby facilitating the Islamic ethnic cleansing of Christians in the Balkans. So, if the Western Multicultural oligarchs are against ethnic cleansing, I guess they must now bomb Britain, where the authorities have publicly admitted that they are deliberately displacing the native white population of their country. So why isn’t that happening? Could it be because very similar anti-white policies are currently followed in all Western nations without exception?

Let me add that I don’t think all Leftists have a well-thought-out plan to destroy the West. I have some in my immediate family, and they don’t think like this at all. They sincerely believe that what they are doing is the right thing. The hardcore ones who deliberately want to kill the West might be a minority, but at the end of the day this distinction matters little.

In many cases you can compromise, but in others you cannot. If somebody tries to poison you then you have to resist. It doesn’t matter in the long run whether those who do this do so because they deliberately want to kill you or because they are fools who accidentally kill you while intending to do something noble. The bottom line is: You die. You cannot be slightly dead, just like you cannot be slightly pregnant. If the Leftists and the Globalists have their way then our civilization will die, plain and simple. That’s why this ongoing struggle is likely to get ugly, because no compromise is possible. Since similar ideological struggles are taking place throughout the Western world, this situation could trigger a pan-Western Civil War.

the Left’s obsession with mass immigration and multiculturalism is complex, some who have the best intentions for those concerned but with an equal measure of those with ulterior motives.  The more division is society, the more need for leftarded social engineering plans to ‘cultivate and celebrate’ the transformation for NuBritons rather than highlighting the ‘displacement and disfranchisement’ suffered by TruBritons.  That is the end (desired?) result, the call for more governmental interventionalistic policies.  And to suppress dissenting voices, both subjects are dangled in front of their opponents in the vain hope that the argument can be closed down with accusations of bigotry.

For a lucky few, the benefits of immigration was the extra competition in the job market caused wages to deflate and rents to increase.  The burden of accepting those lower wages and higher rents was placed on the many but we live in a globalised world, where survival of the cheapest has replaced survival of the fittest.

Oh how I despise the Leftarded Armies of Doom.

“When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside cannot hurt you.”  Thanks to the Leftarded Deluded of Great Britain, the enemy are not only within, they are at this very moment, deciding who will rule us.





UK | The Good (Analysis), the Bad (Result) and the Ugly (Conclusion)

8 05 2010

History of UK Plc government

1945, we had Labour. 1951, Conservative. 1964, tiring of the ‘Same Old Tories’, hand the wheel back to Labour. 1970 and the new decade called for a new government, again Conservative. 1974, scratching their collective heads, the British flock back to Labour. 1979, the year of my brother’s birth saw the electorate return to Conservative control. 1997, and we were bamboozled by NuLabour.

The electorate wanted change.  Some change.

At least it is a hung parliament, the more bickering they do in the Houses of Swine, the less chance of them doing something stupid.

Although, going by the last announcements, the Political Mandarins are discussing Britain’s future behind closed doors without so much as a nod to the electorate.

Gordon Brown is making a resilient last stand (and probably selling the rest of the nations’ assets) and a form of bouquet tennis between Clegg and Cameron once more confirms that the Houses of Swine couldn’t organise a piss-up in a brewery.

The Good

We now have a hung parliament meaning in twelve months or less, we shall be heading to the polls again.  That or the final touches are applied to the One Party EU State.  But that’d be an act of war.

Closer to home, even though the British National Party didn’t make the political quake as publicised, they did however  increase their own vote share by 1.2% with the only ones topping that being the Conservatives.  The Nationalists also battled in more wards this time round with 563,743 souls opting for BNP, that divided by 338 candidates equals 1667.87 votes per ward.

the Bad

26,13,8,943 of our compatriots still have faith in the Status Quo, you know, the Establishment that for the last seventy years have steered us into every iceberg floating.  88.1% of the electorate voted for the continual Eunification of the British Isles.  88.1% of the electorate voted for the continual occupation of Afghanistan.  88.1% of the electorate voted for the continual thievery, corruption and lies.  88.1% of the electorate voted for the continual erosion of our individual liberties.  88.1% of the electorate voted for the continual State-sanctioned discrimination against whitey.  88.1% of the electorate voted for the continual globalisation.

No wonder so many TruBritons now deem themselves expatriates.  We are surrounded by the unseeing and unceasing deluded armies of drones incapable of thinking ‘outside the box’.  Can even understand how our less-knowledgable ancestors used to burn witches.

the Ugly

Mutterings from fellow bloggers have suggested that in times of uncertainty, people like to rely on the familiar and it does sound plausible.  My own thoughts are more sinister.  Like Newton stated that his own findings resulted on previous scholars breakthroughs, the same applies to powermongers.

Tyrants standing on the shoulders of past tyrants.

Over hundreds of years the magnates of power have directed, swayed and coerced the public mood using events (pre-planned or otherwise) and propaganda (news-polluting) and even education (indoctrination).  Bread and Circuses is the term for the Entertainment Wing while Police State suffices for the security end of operations.  And with the aid of technology, psychology and chemistry, the majority can be controlled with less, or as we say in the business world, more efficiently and at half the cost.

Add to that thirty odd years of deliberately gerrymandering a dependable electorate utilizing social engineering, mass immigration and accompanied by the constant promotion of a divisive multiculturalist society.  No mention of the extra interventional government that is bound to be needed to keep the peace between such a vibrant and diverse society.

Sadly, the chickens are coming home to roost for many boroughs and I doubt that Proportional Representation will solve it.  For too long we have been programmed and guided by those who know better.  Like captive birds, we are kept in our cages in a variety of ways, be it educational, economical, social, or just that I feel such a damn attachment to Blighty.

Mindless Musing

Our Government positions itself as an International Corporation.  Fact is, Corporations have no soul or conscience, only shareholders.  And if you’re not a shareholder, you’re either stock or a cost.  The only intention of Government is to Govern and the more dependents, the more need for robbing Peter to pay Paul.  Like some mad crack addict, the Government are only ever interested in issuing new Passports.  More transactions means more work and the more work, the more opportunities to have a go on the money-go-round.

Gods.  Mad.  Funeral Pyre.

Just thankful that it rains often in Blighty otherwise it would have kicked off years ago.