Labour's Most Recent Shot in the Foot

What you see here is the work of Gerald Kaufman, Jewish, Labour Member of Parliament for the Longsight area in Manchester.

Your eyes do not deceive you. This is the destruction of a grave yard. A place where people pay their respects to those deceased, bulldozed, with plans to turn it into a car park.

The image outlines in red, a grave stone, cruelly ground into the earth, soon to be tarmaced over in favour of a car park.

A car park for muslims.

You see, not only is this a destruction of a graveyard. It's destruction of our heritage. A place of God, for those indigenous people of our country who proudly go about their faith with dignity, and no harm to others, is being converted to a Mosque for the use of those not indigenous, and those not of our traditional faith.

Those who are willing to live in our country, should be willing to accept and live by our customs.

There is no doubt that this is a disgusting feat of treachery, and the blame is directly upon Labour. And of course, the Member of Pariliament, Mr. Gerald Kaufman.

He need hang his head in shame. He has allowed for the destruction of memories of those deceased, loved ones of those of the area. How is this at all right?

This is a mile stone. This is where we really see New Labour stabbing us in the back. You voted them in. You fell for their lies. It's time for change, and time to fix this mess we are in.

It's time to fight back. Indigenous persons should not have to shout to be heard. Our governing bodies should not be favouring those not indigenous. And christ, they should not be favouring a foreign-derived religion.

Where is the respect for those who have deceased? Where is the respect for our own people?

It's nowhere to be found - and if we carry on allowing these Liblabcon pushovers to run the country, then no doubt we will soon be an Islamic state. And ultimately, we will surely be run by an Islamic government.

Gordon Brown's Perverse Apology

There is no need to clarify that what happened to American computer scientist Alan Turing was disgusting. Perhaps not the fact that he underwent chemical castration - but more so for the reason why he did.

Chemical castration is an effective way of killing sex drive, and in some cases it is a logical solution.

But alas, Alan Turing was given this medication because he was gay. It's awful, yes. It should never have happened.

But do consider this.

He was treated under the law. Perhaps the law was flawed - but nevertheless, what he underwent was the legal subsequent action, and perfectly just at the time. Homosexuality was illegal, and he was treated.

It's certainly very sad, and it's only right that Gordon Brown acknowledges this as such a terrible, terrible thing. But in no way should he have apologised.

After a petition that gained the interests of thousands, generated online on the Number 10 official website, Gordon Brown officially apologised for what happened to Alan Turing very recently. He apologised for the legal actions of our governing body, essentially telling the world 'well, we can look back and think that we were wrong, and I'm sorry that our people of that time acted upon the law and did what was right at the time'.

This is preposterous. One should never apologise for doing the right thing. Even though we can look back and say that it was wrong.

On a different note, if you're interested in signing a petition that's worth while have a look at the below link.

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/halalslaughter

Your Opinion: Why it's not really yours, and who you can blame

Free speech is no more. There's simply no denying it. The sheer fact that those who work in Quangos are not allowed to be politically active is simply preposterous. Those working for a government agency (but of whom are not necessarily in favour of the party ultimately in charge of said agency), cannot choose to support a party which would change the place that they work. Change the country. Change bloody everything.

They simply have to conform. Carry on working without a voice, in the hope that those who are able to support the party that they feel are the right choices, can gain enough awareness to bring in the party without their own help.

Since when was this a dictatorship? Since New Labour, of course.

Of course, opinion can be never forced out of you. It's there with you, whether or not you are free to voice it.

But then the question arises. Where did this opinion come from?

This is where the most influential modern power comes in. And no, it's not the government. I need not expand when I say that near enough everyone detests Labour in our current circumstances. I am of course, referring to the media.

The media, in the form of broadsheet newspapers, is something that can be argued has changed a hell of a lot. But I'd disagree. Instead, tabloids have come about, branching off from the old fashioned informative and sometimes opinionated broadsheets. If you're into tabloids, then there is no doubt that their mindless rantings have affected you over the years.

They may not be directly applying an opinion, but with stories that follow on from other stories (ie, the on going case of a 'famous' couple that recently split up.), an opinion or a belief can be formed. And this is the issue. For example, it is more than likely that you (assuming you fit the criteria I have already mentioned.) have chosen a 'side' with this recent break up of the famous couple. The writer may emphasise on good and bad points, of each of the individuals, and an inequality (or an imbalance) will inevitably lead to an opinion forming in your mind, based on these very much trivial pieces of information. Information that isn't important. This is a very basic example of how these ridiculous, gossipy and tastless prints can choose your opinion for you.

If I then focus on broadsheets.

Obviously they offer a somewhat more cultural, intellectual view on current affairs. Current affairs that actually matter - not 'which celebrity had an affair with my next door neighbour's doctor's brother.). I'm talking of Politics.

Whilst a vast majority of the time, the aim of a broadsheet is to inform, it can also do exactly that which I have described in my section about tabloids. They form your opinion.

Take, for example, the British National Party. As described in my other blog, http://www.defyingperception.blogspot.com/, the BNP can be considered a very much misrepresented party. A victim of national newspapers, each with something to say, something to add, something to persuade and poison perception. A simple visit to the BNP homepage would outline their policies, and how amazingly logic they are. In fact, let me expand.


If I told you that there was a party that wanted to preserve British culture, I'd imagine you'd agree that that was a good thing.

If I told you that there was a party that wanted to make St. George's day a national holiday, I can't imagine that you would oppose that.

If I told you that there was a party that, instead of fossil fuels, wanted to make huge efforts to switch to wind power and hydrogen - you can't possibly complain.

And then, the matter which all newspapers, broadsheet or tabloid, like to focus on. Immigration.

If I told you that there was a party who respected those of another culture, another race - and is quite happy for current immigrant-derived persons, and first generation immigrants, to stay in the country, as long as they are willing to accept our own culture (which a large proportion do anyway), but wanted to cease immigration because of the adverse effects it was having on the culture of our nation - I can see how this can cause controversy. But it cannot be defined as racist. It simply cannot.

And there's you thinking they were a racist organisation.

You need to remember. All forms of media are not only there to inform the people, but make money. And after years of lies, the media is willing to play on whatever it can get, to rake in the cash. Even if it means distancing the people from the party they need to vote for. In many ways, the media is holding back society, and is equally to blame for the awful perception of the BNP in this, the modern day, as the liblabcon.

It's not your opinion. It's media lies, it's filth, distortions and myths that have been spoon fed to you through the media since before our current millenia. Nobody understands what is true any more. And this is why the party must do all that it can do to out these media lies whilst it is in the spotlight. Whether it's bad publicity from the flawed committee that is the EHRC, or good publicity from the chairman appearing on Question Time - the time is now. The time to fix these false perceptions.

And it's time for you to get your own opinion.

Feminism and Eqaulity

What you see here is the biggest flaw in modern labour. Their absurd policies behind, their lack of respect towards their own people aside - you are looking at the feminist who is happy for men in her own constituency to be discriminated against, in favour of a woman-strong government.

Feminism has always claimed to be about 'making women equal'. But alas, that is no more. Whether or not it was true in the first place, there is no more need to battle for women's equality - as it already, simply, exists.

Feminism is a much more radical movement nowadays, and our own Equalities Minister is doing a bloody good job at outing the discriminatory and unjust ideologies that these extremists believe are right.

Generalising is a terrible thing - but Harriet Harman obviously thinks otherwise. She believes that men are incapable of running Government by themselves. That's clearly a sexist statement.

She also proposes that 50% or more (remember the 'or more', that's important.) of top government positions should be held by women. Fair enough, equality would state that there be an equal amount of men and women in government positions, but this is not what she is proposing. She is proposing that either an equal amount, or larger proportion, of women should have power. Note that it obviously doesn't work the other way around. This is all the evidence we need to conclude that our own Equalities Minister is sexist. But then again, what did we expect from New Labour?

Feminists believe they are above the law. Abigail Adams, feminist extraordinaire, herself said

"If particular care and attention is not paid to the ladies, we are determined to foment a rebellion, and will not hold ourselves bound by any laws in which we have no voice or representation."

And that is still relevant today. Feminists believe that if the law is not, in the slightest, in favour of them, they have to go against these laws and fight for what is right. No! They have the right to fight for what is right, by perhaps becoming an activist for a party that could change such discriminatory laws, but not in fact defy the law.

A law which is has of course implemented means that order gender equality, and continue to promote such. Women are no longer stuck at home. Women can now vote.

It seems to me that the time for feminism is long gone - and achieving those last minute victories (which may include income differences between men and women - which has recently been pointed out to me), should not rely on feminism. It should be left to a logical government. A government which should be in power, but clearly isn't.

The way forward isn't extremism. Radical Feminism. No. It's having faith in Government, or taking action to help other parties which could help you if they gain power - rather than acting amongst many, many angry women who do no more than infuriate and cause controversy.