It has been another of those busy weeks, so I'll have to be selective or this will end up too long for comfortable reading – not that the content necessarily makes for comfortable reading, of course, but I try to temper it with my own thoughts and experiences...
A Knock for Nick
Actually, several over the past two weeks; but this from Guido shows the Lib Dem leader's apparent dual standards when it comes to his own education as against his public stance against Michael Gove's education reforms. It's that question of 'unqualified' teachers – in reality, those not indoctrinated into the politically-driven 'training' style of the (as is now widely known) Lefty 'profession'.
That's what this whole debate is really about: it has nothing to do with standards and quality, only about control by political interests, as generations of unqualified teachers have shown. Nick Clegg himself is an example of the outcome of that freedom. There are times when qualifications are of value, but this turns out not only to be one of the exceptions, but also to be long-established.
While we're looking at hapless Nick, just a few days earlier Fraser Nelson was looking at this and other aspects of the Lib Dems and the behaviour of that party and its leader. It's Fraser in his telling-it-as-he-finds-it mode, and well worth reading throughout.
On a Lib Dem related matter, also in the Speccie on the same day, James Forsyth considered what David Cameron needs to offer Nick Clegg in order to keep the minor partner in the Coalition on board.
Now, if they had done what I outlined a while ago, this wouldn't be an issue for much longer, and the remaining programme of joint work should be well established. Remember: I (and a few others) thought that the two parties could start to separate into more distinct entities in their own right, starting from the recent conference season. Indeed, we have already seen fairly strong signs of that happening.
The idea is to reach a point whereby all the pre-election initiatives and legislation are either now complete or are currently going through the necessary stages, from now on, and nothing brand new (except for emergencies) should suddenly appear at this relatively late stage in the parliamentary five-year term. I'm reasonably confident that this is exactly how it has all been set up, behind the scenes, by the two party leaders.
Expect the separation to be made decisive and unambiguous by next year's autumn conference season, by when only tidying-up and minor (uncontroversial) legislative matters should be all that's left to be done before the May 2015 election. Meanwhile, as James says, the Conservatives in particular need to construct their manifesto – and it looks like it's already well in progress...
Leverage
In the ongoing saga of the UNITE Union, news of the intimidation techniques used by their so-called Leverage Team has reached the public awareness. It is noteworthy that they feel fully justified in applying such techniques, and have all the excuses ready. Of course, as the civilised world realises, only the lowest of the low would even contemplate such tactics, and only absolute trash would put them into practice.
The term 'Commie filth' didn't come about as a nasty insult devised especially for that purpose: it came into being from experience of what such types do in pursuance of their own agenda, here and anywhere else in the world. Put yourself in the position of someone on the receiving end – or, even more pertinently, one of their children.
There is no excuse in the Universe for that behaviour; and I think it might need to be treated as a much more serious offence than it is at present. Society should not be in effect encouraging this through a light-touch penal code.
I don't know how many members have now left the Union as a result of this (and all the other nasties that have been going on for years), but here's the story of one. Clearly noone with a shred of decency can now be a member of such an outfit – which tells us something about those who still are members and who have no plans to even consider leaving. Although I have no wish to turn the tables on them, it would be interesting to know how they'd respond if that did happen. Boot on the other foot, and all that...
The ongoing Falkirk candidate selection row continues this week with another delightful inside-track piece from former Labour member Dan Hodges. A batch of leaked emails has told much of the real story anyway, and it fell to the likes of Dan to write-up their significance, along with all the rest that has been going on during this unhappy (and hugely embarrassing, mostly for Labour) saga.
He correctly deduces, from the evidence now before us, that it is Ed[ward] Miliband whose personal reputation stands to take the greatest hit, rather than his party or even the Union that seemingly tried to rig the selection. As someone who has personally encountered selection rigging, I am very much alert to and cognisant of those methods described and other tactics used (only!) by the corrupt with their own agendas.
During all of the above, the ever-wily Jack Straw MP tried distancing himself from that Union, as this short video clip shows. Not that he was telling us anything we didn't already know, of course(!) Whether anyone believes his new-found stance is a matter for conjecture; but it's useful to have this on the record from a long-standing Labour MP, no matter how dubious his true motives!
Newman is the same old (Labour/Commie) man
Red Ed (Miliband) will continue to be unable to shake off that description while he is still subservient to the likes of UNITE's Len McCluskey, and also while he is ineffective at dealing with the numerous hard left (indeed, Communist) types firmly embedded within the Labour party and including both current elected members and those selected to stand in 2015. This is the story of one of the hopefuls.
To be blunt I have to say that it differs in no practical measure from those I have seen non-stop appearing within the Labour ranks and being picked as candidates, often getting elected (typically in safe Labour seats, but not only in those). Labour has, throughout most of its existence, been a Communist-style party with a very cleverly-manufactured public face to make it less obvious, and that certainly hasn't changed in the nearly forty months since Ed-M took on the party leadership.
Indeed, it has become the norm once again, and not even as well camouflaged as in earlier times – although that isn't helped by modern technology: it is much more difficult to conceal such truths nowadays, so it isn't necessarily down to poorer standards of deception. The example of Andy Newman will be just 'more of the same old Labour' to seasoned veterans like me; but might be more shocking to the younger generations who didn't live through the Foor/Scargill/Wilson (and the rest) years.
To anyone in that position, I can assure you that we've seen it all before, and it is and more-or-less always has been the true face of Labour, despite the veneer of seeming respectability and moderation they try to slap over the red rot to hide it from public view. They are just as totalitarian in nature as those running North Korea right now, and Labour-run governments have always headed in a similar direction, as is nowadays a lot better documented – and more easily publicly visible – than it was in my younger days..
Don't squander the advantage this generation has over mine: learn the lessons and learn them well! Today's world has not only better prospects of understanding the reality, but also has no real excuse for not doing so.
Completely Up The Poll
Jusr a brief mention of this very useful post from Dr Anthony Wells about misleading headlines to reports of and discussions of opinion polls. Long-term visitors to my 'blog will already be aware of how I always play it straight with everything I write, including polling news. The message here is not to be lulled into believing that all others act with such integrity when dealing with the same topic.
The good Dr Wells (whom I have met and talked to at some length) puts the record straight on a couple of recent examples of misleading headlines, and in the process reminds us to be sufficiently alert not to be taken in by such practices.
The Tommy-Knockers
It has been standard big media practice to 'knock' the English Defence League (EDL) and its founder Tommy Robinson. When said Mr Robinson decided to quit the EDL they media hacks and editors must have been in paroxysms of ecstasy: their boat had come in!
In reality, the EDL for all its many faults was never anything like the outfit it was portrayed to be, and some have cited considerable evidence – sometimes backed up with hard-to-challenge photographics records of what actually did happen at EDL meet-ups – that reminded one of the anti-Israel reporting that has been thoroughly documented in other 'blogs for years (I have studied much of that material myself).
Despite all of that, the EDL was known to attract the less idealistic and more thuggish elements of society – I'm sure not by design, and it was just an unfortunate side-effect – so there is some valid criticism of them 'out there'. Much, however, plainly isn't justified. I have been watching the scene for a couple of years now, so have become reasonably well clued-up on what is and what isn't accurate in the various reports I have encountered.
Daniel Hannan MEP has his own take on what he perceives to be a symbiotic style of relationship between the EDL, the Islamists (often a..k.a. Islamo-Fascists or, in the Hannan piece, Islamo-nutters) and even the ironically-named Unite Against Fascism (UAF) folk. By appreciating how all sides act at times, Dan paints what I think is not only a more comprehensive picture of this whole sorry business, but also a more helpful one than others tend to offer.
As for Tommy Robinson's departure from the EDL, this was recently covered in a BBC documentary. Ah, I can already hear alarm bells ringing in my readers' heads! Yes, you are right to be suspicious, though the BBC did a generally good job. However there were other aspects that need bringing to people's awareness – and Douglas Murray has done just that. As one might by now expect of Douglas, he covers not only all you need to know about the programme and its main Islamic participant in typical thoroughness, and then goes on to look at deeper questions.
It's fairly long; but I think you will find the time reading it through time well spent and 9as with Dan) helpful; and that is what we need most in regard to a topic that is somewhat sensitive and prone to misunderstanding and misrepresentation, including of its most media-visible players.
On The Record
Coming closer to home, I usually like to feature at least one item from my local area and (more often than not) its council. This week, it is the initiative by Eric Pickles to allow the public to record Council meetings in sound and/or video, perhaps including committees as well..
Of course, this will not become law for a little while, owing to parliamentary and legal procedures, and at this early stage no-one knows what will even be proposed, let alone finally passed into law or equivalent. Therefore it is hardly surprising that Medway Council did not permit recording by the public of a recent Overview and Scrutiny meeting.
This has infuriated local Labour, who (several weeks ago, a full three weeks before the policy proposal had even been announced) were planning to make and use such a recording for purely party political reasons (as everyone realised at the time, apart from any dullards if indeed any were present), and they are – predictably – having a go at the 'wicked Tories' for refusing such permission.
It also has to be said: if Labour now say "it’s wholly wrong for people not being able to record or film in public meetings", why did they do nothing whatsoever about this during their thirteen years in government? It has taken the Coalition Government just three years (barely a quarter of Labour's tenure) to come up with such a proposal: one that Labour clearly never actually wanted – at least until they could see a way of turning it to their own political advantage.
As always but always with Labour, what is dressed up as being in the 'public' interest is in reality pushed by them only when it is in their interest – nothing to do with the public at all...
Showing posts with label islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label islam. Show all posts
Friday, 1 November 2013
Wednesday, 16 January 2013
Muslim Patrols
This is something that has been brewing for several years now, and put into practice in at least one or two Muslim-dominated areas in London.
The Commentator covers recent developments including a couple of videos that show what this is like in practice, and the attitudes of those involved. The business of 'owning the streets' is an old, old story, and is not specific to any one faith, ethnic group or anything else of that ilk – it's a facet of human nature within some communities, and has been for decades if not longer.
From the Krays via those who run the 'hood' to so-called 'Muslim areas' (which are a fiction, of course) there will also be those with an excuse they have to tell themselves that, yes they can satisfy their lust for domination via intimidation and violence. They are all exactly the same as each other!
This does not help us to deal with it; there is a too-scared-to-tackle approach that the law-enforcement authorities have consistently demonstrated with this particular section of society living in Britain (but clearly not all of them think of themselves as being part of our society) when dealing with criminal and near-criminal activity.
This hardly inspires confidence that they will do anything beyond the nominal and minimal about what is being depicted in those videos. As their own communities either support them, are scared of them themselves, or are neutral and not inclined to move, act or speak out against them, the odds are stacked against this kind of activity being dealt with, and ordinary people will no doubt continued to be harassed, bullied and (no doubt) threatened.
Short of doing an Idi Amin and expelling all Muslims from Britain, I do not know of a solution to this growing and developing issue. It seems that nothing else will really work, despite (possibly) initial superficial appearances, as other countries have been finding with the same grouping as well. A few of them seem to have come to the same conclusion: it cannot be dealt with while they are permitted to remain in one's country.
Therefore we have a real problem, as Britain is not in the habit of acting in such a manner. Indeed, our reputation is of being far too accommodating for such a small country.
In the final analysis, the only people who can avoid forcing such a decision sooner or later are those communities themselves. Unless they deal firmly, sharply, completely and permanently with all of this stuff, and can demonstrate that it will never recur, they'll end up on the wrong side of that decision when the crunch time comes. The time to act is now; and if they fail to do so, they shouldn't be at all surprised if one day the lot of them are compelled to leave our shores for good.
The ball is firmly in their court!
The Commentator covers recent developments including a couple of videos that show what this is like in practice, and the attitudes of those involved. The business of 'owning the streets' is an old, old story, and is not specific to any one faith, ethnic group or anything else of that ilk – it's a facet of human nature within some communities, and has been for decades if not longer.
From the Krays via those who run the 'hood' to so-called 'Muslim areas' (which are a fiction, of course) there will also be those with an excuse they have to tell themselves that, yes they can satisfy their lust for domination via intimidation and violence. They are all exactly the same as each other!
This does not help us to deal with it; there is a too-scared-to-tackle approach that the law-enforcement authorities have consistently demonstrated with this particular section of society living in Britain (but clearly not all of them think of themselves as being part of our society) when dealing with criminal and near-criminal activity.
This hardly inspires confidence that they will do anything beyond the nominal and minimal about what is being depicted in those videos. As their own communities either support them, are scared of them themselves, or are neutral and not inclined to move, act or speak out against them, the odds are stacked against this kind of activity being dealt with, and ordinary people will no doubt continued to be harassed, bullied and (no doubt) threatened.
Short of doing an Idi Amin and expelling all Muslims from Britain, I do not know of a solution to this growing and developing issue. It seems that nothing else will really work, despite (possibly) initial superficial appearances, as other countries have been finding with the same grouping as well. A few of them seem to have come to the same conclusion: it cannot be dealt with while they are permitted to remain in one's country.
Therefore we have a real problem, as Britain is not in the habit of acting in such a manner. Indeed, our reputation is of being far too accommodating for such a small country.
In the final analysis, the only people who can avoid forcing such a decision sooner or later are those communities themselves. Unless they deal firmly, sharply, completely and permanently with all of this stuff, and can demonstrate that it will never recur, they'll end up on the wrong side of that decision when the crunch time comes. The time to act is now; and if they fail to do so, they shouldn't be at all surprised if one day the lot of them are compelled to leave our shores for good.
The ball is firmly in their court!
Sunday, 14 October 2012
Islamic Conversion
Here in the Spectator is an especially insightful and revealing look at the widespread practice of women 'converting' to Islam. It is being done by making it oh-so-easy, and entices in thousands of converts a year, the majority of whom are women.
It is well worth setting aside a quarter of an hour or so to read this fairly lengthy piece and then have a good think about it and what it means. With that method I have recently been openly advocating of taking a mental step and seeing this in its wider context, a number of things should pop out and make themselves evident.
I shall not go into those right now, as I believe it is important for readers to work these things out for themselves in matters such as this, but I might well re-visit this article in a week or so and go into such detail at that time. We shall see...
The comments to Melissa Kite's piece are very mixed and, in parts of the comment thread, go into areas that are well outside my expertise so I cannot contribute anything on those, either there or here. Despite that, there are some real truths being enunciated there (much of which most of us already knew, despite all the denials from Islamic mouthpieces) and the inevitable manipulators who try to pretend it is not so.
Fortunately, easily-observable facts have, over the years, shown who is right and who is not. One big myth is that a lot of what goes on is not down to Islam, such as killings; but contributors to the comment thread have provided easy-to-check quotations that show that they are, no matter how well it is camouflaged through technicalities and clever wording.
I think this article, along with at least some of the associated comments, is one of the most significant I have found on the whole topic, especially as it comes from a very personal and human appreciation of faiths and their significance to individuals. I have therefore taken a copy for my permanent records.
There is also some useful complementary material that helps to firm-up some of the more general aspects of real-world Islam at The Commentator.
It is well worth setting aside a quarter of an hour or so to read this fairly lengthy piece and then have a good think about it and what it means. With that method I have recently been openly advocating of taking a mental step and seeing this in its wider context, a number of things should pop out and make themselves evident.
I shall not go into those right now, as I believe it is important for readers to work these things out for themselves in matters such as this, but I might well re-visit this article in a week or so and go into such detail at that time. We shall see...
The comments to Melissa Kite's piece are very mixed and, in parts of the comment thread, go into areas that are well outside my expertise so I cannot contribute anything on those, either there or here. Despite that, there are some real truths being enunciated there (much of which most of us already knew, despite all the denials from Islamic mouthpieces) and the inevitable manipulators who try to pretend it is not so.
Fortunately, easily-observable facts have, over the years, shown who is right and who is not. One big myth is that a lot of what goes on is not down to Islam, such as killings; but contributors to the comment thread have provided easy-to-check quotations that show that they are, no matter how well it is camouflaged through technicalities and clever wording.
I think this article, along with at least some of the associated comments, is one of the most significant I have found on the whole topic, especially as it comes from a very personal and human appreciation of faiths and their significance to individuals. I have therefore taken a copy for my permanent records.
There is also some useful complementary material that helps to firm-up some of the more general aspects of real-world Islam at The Commentator.
Saturday, 12 May 2012
The Very Big Picture
This is the most important post I have ever written, building on some earlier posts that I never dared to take all the way. Now, though, the time is right to do so. Atheists need read no further, as they can have no clue about what is really going on in our world – it simply isn't possible without understanding the context.
Because this is a statement from me, more than anything else, and not intended to be a debate, exceptionally I am not accepting comments on this post.
Have you ever wondered why all these bad things that happen in the world are so prevalent, and why they go near-enough unchecked in practice, even in societies such as ours? Brian Gerrish has part of the answer when (in interviews) he has indicated – and sometimes illustrated with actual original documents he and his group has acquired – how organisations such as (predominantly) Common Purpose have their 'graduates' sabotaging public services.
The Common Purpose Mind Map diagram shows a huge and complex structure of interlinked and complicit orgnaisations and their particular lines of activity. I have linked to this before; yet it is worth reminding ourselves of the subversive and criminal nature of at least some of these outfits and their practices.
I have also mentioned such matters as New Labour's implementation of the treasonous Frankfurt School policies that are designed expressly and solely (and obviously when one looks at them with hindsight) to destroy a society and its culture from within. This, as I have said before, explains why getting rid of the death penalty for treason was such a high priority for the new Blair government in the late 'nineties, even though it was hardly consistent with their stated policy direction that was supposedly to be dealing with the country's urgent and vital needs.
The Mind Map, though, tells us much more than this, as do other sources and national and world history for at least the last century. It indicates that this is all too big and long-term for a single human lifetime, and when all put together it also points to a specific agenda that only one entity in the whole of existence would be pursuing anywhere near this strongly and single-mindedly, especially over such a long time-span.
Let's take a couple of examples: it is now blatent that the powers of government have for years been specifically targeting and marginalising adherents of one religion – Christianity – with a slightly less hostile approach to the Jews. This isn't just in this country (though it is very strong here and worsening all the time) but elsewhere in the world. I have been sent first-hand reports from a number of countries in the last couple of years and the trend is very clear.
Most recently in Britain, blogger Archbishop Cranmer has been challenged (incorrectly, on a number of substantive points) by the Advertising Standards Authorityfor carrying an advertisement that invites signatories to a petition. Note that he didn't create the advert, it just happens to be on his 'blog (and no doubt many others), so why is he the target? Good question!
The complaints and reaction show that a highly specific anti-Christian-morality agenda is at work here, and its targeting is even more blatent than most other such attacks on (specifically) God's people and their support of/for His word and stipulations.
Many people have cottoned onto to some or all of this, as these two comments from another site, reporting the Cranmer business clearly show, quite apart from those at his own site.
The clues are all pointing one way...
Another example: the promotion of certain other faiths, and the covering-up of their people's criminal activities by classifying them in other ways (often in a way demeaning to a whole continent!), is in effect encouraging some of the most vile activities by the lowest of the low. This is mostly done by much of the big media, also aided by the legal structure in this country.
Along with some of the basest of the Frankfurt School policies, such as their 'sexualisation of children' policy that we saw implemented by New Labour, the results are as we have seen in recent news as one instance, but that is just a tiny fraction of what is going on and which is more-or-less condoned in Britain nowadays.
Ponder this: it is very hard to see how Islam could possibly be the word or will of God (it's not consistent with His known nature e.g He NEVER gave us licence to harm one another in any way and we are ALL the same in His eyes; it is the word of one man uncorroborated by independent others; and that man was a warlord who continued un-transformed, unlike those who truly come into close contact with God) and probably never was. Indeed, there was no reason for an "update" to the New Testament, and one that contradicts it at that!
These are easy tests that anyone can apply, in light of Jesus' warning that others would come in his name (or his father's): God made sure that dozens of independent witnesses would testify within each Testament of the Bible, showing not only His own truth but guiding how we can assess those who were yet to come.
This has nothing to do with me: anyone can work it out for themselves, as many have already done...
Note that what is happening today is a continuation of extant policy that, no doubt, is almost inextricably intertwined in Gordon Brown manipulations combined with EU stipulations. That's the most likely way it was engineered – as it was definitely wanted by Blair and Brown as part of that now-proven set of Frankfurt School policies they implemented almost in full during their time in office.
Others have covered this in detail, and I have previously linked to some revealing posts by the likes of James Higham, Barking Spider and Anna Raccoon on these and related matters. Thus the body of evidence is well established and beyond reasonable challenge – indeed, I don't think there has been any serious attempt to challenge any of those bloggers' own contributions to this big debate, let alone my own.
Thus we see, in all of this (and there is plenty more I could cite), that the underlying agenda at the back of it all is an anti-Christian and anti-God's morality thrust, driving everything either directly or (sometimes) not so obviously through indirection.
Remember: there is only one entity in existence with this exact all-encompassing agenda, and only one who knows as an absolute certainty that Christianity is the only accurate and complete religion on Planet Earth!
It's all much too big, too complex, too long-term and too all-consuming to be another other than the devil himself behind it, using a Boskone-like network structure to deliver via (predominantly) the oh-so-compliant political Left, whose language he speaks. They are very easy to bring and keep on board, as all Lefties are either evil themselves or just very gullible and easily conned into doing the wrong thing if the sales pitch is sufficiently convincing – which it always is, of course
Others are also targeted, and some end up up being conned too, though perhaps not to the same degree. There will also be a (comparatively smaller) proportion of corruptible non-Lefties. That is human nature; and in any sufficiently large body of individuals there will always be some.
The left, though, steeped as they alreay are (and probably always have been) in self-interest, deception, manipulation and – no doubt in many cases – several base desires from the universal Lefty staples of theft and dictatorship to those lowest Frankfurt School aims, are a ready-made body of devil's disciples, whether or not many of them even realise that's what they are. It is no coincidence that the world's (especially non-military) dictatorships are almost universally Left-wing regimes, and Lefties are also responsible for most of the oppression, "disappearing" and actual mass-murder in the world.
So yes, the political Left are (unsurprisingly) Satanic in nature – and I could list dozens of other big clues, but they're easy enough to work out for yourself – but let's get the dog wagging the tail here: they are servants of Satan, not the other way around. Thus the left doesn't have to be Satanic, but it tends to be because it's such a close fit and those driving the movement around the world are the right type to fill those shoes. We can all, I feel sure, immediately think of several we had already realised are that evil, for a start.
If I were to write a book, I'd have the room to go into many more facets, examples and real world anecdotes from current and recent history that'd make this comprehensive, rock solid and beyond sensible challenge. I hope I have come close to that even in this not-too-long post.
The bottom line, though, is that ALL Lefties are working for the devil, knowingly or otherwise, and there is NO exception whatsoever. That's why no truly decent person can ever support them in any way, under any circumstances. There is no wriggle room on this one!
Of course, they are labouring under a misapprehension, that by destroying our society and culture they will be making way for a glorious Socialist revolution in which they will become the New Elite. They have the precedents of such as the former Soviet Union on which to draw. However, in reality, almost everyone was living in a state of perpetual fear of the very, very few at the top of the tree. All others were expendable minions; and especially with the EU planned to be the "new USSR" with Britain merely a district within that structure, no-one here will be any higher than a (single) governor or equivalent.
I have known all this for years, which explains my attitude towards the Left and why they never fool me. I know their true nature, and it is vile! There is absolutely nothing decent, honest or worthwhile about them, no matter how well it is presented. It's always a con, so don't be taken in if you do not wish to become, in effect, a Satanist yourself!
Because this is a statement from me, more than anything else, and not intended to be a debate, exceptionally I am not accepting comments on this post.
Have you ever wondered why all these bad things that happen in the world are so prevalent, and why they go near-enough unchecked in practice, even in societies such as ours? Brian Gerrish has part of the answer when (in interviews) he has indicated – and sometimes illustrated with actual original documents he and his group has acquired – how organisations such as (predominantly) Common Purpose have their 'graduates' sabotaging public services.
The Common Purpose Mind Map diagram shows a huge and complex structure of interlinked and complicit orgnaisations and their particular lines of activity. I have linked to this before; yet it is worth reminding ourselves of the subversive and criminal nature of at least some of these outfits and their practices.
I have also mentioned such matters as New Labour's implementation of the treasonous Frankfurt School policies that are designed expressly and solely (and obviously when one looks at them with hindsight) to destroy a society and its culture from within. This, as I have said before, explains why getting rid of the death penalty for treason was such a high priority for the new Blair government in the late 'nineties, even though it was hardly consistent with their stated policy direction that was supposedly to be dealing with the country's urgent and vital needs.
The Mind Map, though, tells us much more than this, as do other sources and national and world history for at least the last century. It indicates that this is all too big and long-term for a single human lifetime, and when all put together it also points to a specific agenda that only one entity in the whole of existence would be pursuing anywhere near this strongly and single-mindedly, especially over such a long time-span.
Let's take a couple of examples: it is now blatent that the powers of government have for years been specifically targeting and marginalising adherents of one religion – Christianity – with a slightly less hostile approach to the Jews. This isn't just in this country (though it is very strong here and worsening all the time) but elsewhere in the world. I have been sent first-hand reports from a number of countries in the last couple of years and the trend is very clear.
Most recently in Britain, blogger Archbishop Cranmer has been challenged (incorrectly, on a number of substantive points) by the Advertising Standards Authorityfor carrying an advertisement that invites signatories to a petition. Note that he didn't create the advert, it just happens to be on his 'blog (and no doubt many others), so why is he the target? Good question!
The complaints and reaction show that a highly specific anti-Christian-morality agenda is at work here, and its targeting is even more blatent than most other such attacks on (specifically) God's people and their support of/for His word and stipulations.
Many people have cottoned onto to some or all of this, as these two comments from another site, reporting the Cranmer business clearly show, quite apart from those at his own site.
The clues are all pointing one way...
Another example: the promotion of certain other faiths, and the covering-up of their people's criminal activities by classifying them in other ways (often in a way demeaning to a whole continent!), is in effect encouraging some of the most vile activities by the lowest of the low. This is mostly done by much of the big media, also aided by the legal structure in this country.
Along with some of the basest of the Frankfurt School policies, such as their 'sexualisation of children' policy that we saw implemented by New Labour, the results are as we have seen in recent news as one instance, but that is just a tiny fraction of what is going on and which is more-or-less condoned in Britain nowadays.
Ponder this: it is very hard to see how Islam could possibly be the word or will of God (it's not consistent with His known nature e.g He NEVER gave us licence to harm one another in any way and we are ALL the same in His eyes; it is the word of one man uncorroborated by independent others; and that man was a warlord who continued un-transformed, unlike those who truly come into close contact with God) and probably never was. Indeed, there was no reason for an "update" to the New Testament, and one that contradicts it at that!
These are easy tests that anyone can apply, in light of Jesus' warning that others would come in his name (or his father's): God made sure that dozens of independent witnesses would testify within each Testament of the Bible, showing not only His own truth but guiding how we can assess those who were yet to come.
This has nothing to do with me: anyone can work it out for themselves, as many have already done...
Note that what is happening today is a continuation of extant policy that, no doubt, is almost inextricably intertwined in Gordon Brown manipulations combined with EU stipulations. That's the most likely way it was engineered – as it was definitely wanted by Blair and Brown as part of that now-proven set of Frankfurt School policies they implemented almost in full during their time in office.
Others have covered this in detail, and I have previously linked to some revealing posts by the likes of James Higham, Barking Spider and Anna Raccoon on these and related matters. Thus the body of evidence is well established and beyond reasonable challenge – indeed, I don't think there has been any serious attempt to challenge any of those bloggers' own contributions to this big debate, let alone my own.
Thus we see, in all of this (and there is plenty more I could cite), that the underlying agenda at the back of it all is an anti-Christian and anti-God's morality thrust, driving everything either directly or (sometimes) not so obviously through indirection.
Remember: there is only one entity in existence with this exact all-encompassing agenda, and only one who knows as an absolute certainty that Christianity is the only accurate and complete religion on Planet Earth!
It's all much too big, too complex, too long-term and too all-consuming to be another other than the devil himself behind it, using a Boskone-like network structure to deliver via (predominantly) the oh-so-compliant political Left, whose language he speaks. They are very easy to bring and keep on board, as all Lefties are either evil themselves or just very gullible and easily conned into doing the wrong thing if the sales pitch is sufficiently convincing – which it always is, of course
Others are also targeted, and some end up up being conned too, though perhaps not to the same degree. There will also be a (comparatively smaller) proportion of corruptible non-Lefties. That is human nature; and in any sufficiently large body of individuals there will always be some.
The left, though, steeped as they alreay are (and probably always have been) in self-interest, deception, manipulation and – no doubt in many cases – several base desires from the universal Lefty staples of theft and dictatorship to those lowest Frankfurt School aims, are a ready-made body of devil's disciples, whether or not many of them even realise that's what they are. It is no coincidence that the world's (especially non-military) dictatorships are almost universally Left-wing regimes, and Lefties are also responsible for most of the oppression, "disappearing" and actual mass-murder in the world.
So yes, the political Left are (unsurprisingly) Satanic in nature – and I could list dozens of other big clues, but they're easy enough to work out for yourself – but let's get the dog wagging the tail here: they are servants of Satan, not the other way around. Thus the left doesn't have to be Satanic, but it tends to be because it's such a close fit and those driving the movement around the world are the right type to fill those shoes. We can all, I feel sure, immediately think of several we had already realised are that evil, for a start.
If I were to write a book, I'd have the room to go into many more facets, examples and real world anecdotes from current and recent history that'd make this comprehensive, rock solid and beyond sensible challenge. I hope I have come close to that even in this not-too-long post.
The bottom line, though, is that ALL Lefties are working for the devil, knowingly or otherwise, and there is NO exception whatsoever. That's why no truly decent person can ever support them in any way, under any circumstances. There is no wriggle room on this one!
Of course, they are labouring under a misapprehension, that by destroying our society and culture they will be making way for a glorious Socialist revolution in which they will become the New Elite. They have the precedents of such as the former Soviet Union on which to draw. However, in reality, almost everyone was living in a state of perpetual fear of the very, very few at the top of the tree. All others were expendable minions; and especially with the EU planned to be the "new USSR" with Britain merely a district within that structure, no-one here will be any higher than a (single) governor or equivalent.
I have known all this for years, which explains my attitude towards the Left and why they never fool me. I know their true nature, and it is vile! There is absolutely nothing decent, honest or worthwhile about them, no matter how well it is presented. It's always a con, so don't be taken in if you do not wish to become, in effect, a Satanist yourself!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)