Monthly archive

May 2017

Feminism has allowed the real rape crisis to occur

in Islamism by

For decades, feminism has been preached from the rooftops as a movement for equality, but if that were truly so, it would simply operate under the already existent banner of “egalitarianism”. I posit that not only is feminism unrelated to equality, but harmful to women. The result of decades of short-sighted attention-seeking feminist aggression is a society in which men are punished under law if they defend women!

Across Nordic lands, in Germany, here in the UK, such as in Rotherham, as rape stats reach a shocking, disturbing par with figures previously only seen in third-world states such as Lesotho, women certainly need to be protected, but feminists deny the real rape crisis, to invent one on campus, that better furthers their desire for power. Yes, all they do care for is power.

Where was the feminist uproar about the 1,500 girls raped in Rotherham? About Rochdale? It was men such as Tommy Robinson who spoke out, while feminists remained silent. Why are they quiet when little girls are being raped by barbarians? If they cannot stand up at such a time of crisis, then truly, what the hell are they for? Nothing but egotistical grandstanding!

Disgraceful virtue signalling by a bunch of hypocrites who don’t give a damn about protecting women. They did not march the streets with us to demand Justice for Chelsey. Where was the Women and Equality Party? No, they wouldn’t be there, for they are just a liberal elite ladies afternoon tea club. If they truly cared for women’s rights, they would be out on the streets furious with anger at the abuse of our little girls!

The fraudulence of feminism is plain to see. For so long have we been fooled by this farce. Oh how naive, so many men, in desperation to copulate, have ignored pure reason, but nodded without question to anything that is uttered from beautiful lips. The feminist would sooner have a tantrum about some made-up crap like mansplaining, or the wage gap, and some cuck, deep in the so-called “friendzone” will naively wave a banner for her, in some wild hope he may get laid.

Those who take the time to think, to study facts, to acknowledge history, realise that the feminist does not give a damn about individual rights, about children, in fact, they certainly do hate kids who invade their body, or hinder career plans. Curse biology! The bloody inconvenience of reality. No, all the feminist, the Amazonian, wants is ever more power, more attention, and that lust never will be satisfied.

These are some of the most damaged, most self-centered, arrogant, cruel people in existence, and by no means, should continue to stand on a pedestal as supposed warriors for freedom, for they are a key force in the decline of Occidental civilisation. Feminism, Marxism, Sharia law, these all be threats to the very pillars of our society, attempts to tear down our institutions, and therefore, if we are to achieve real freedom for women, against such evil, this feminism, we must stand.

2018 People’s Charter Conference #BrexitAndBeyond

in Brexit by

Sunday, 24 June 2018 at 10:00-22:00

London, UK

Don’t miss the Brexiteer / populist event of 2018 – our annual convention. Theme: #BrexitAndBeyond

There is a need to make a stand against the establishment which both took us into the EU and tried to make us stay. We need a points-based migration system, to be out the single market, and to regain pride in Britain. #FlyOurFlag #DrainTheSwamp #ThePeopleHaveSpoken!

(Speakers and mid-afternoon protest to be announced. Evening drinks reception. Please RSVP by clicking ‘GOING’ so that we can have an approximate idea of the turnout for the event. Tickets will be available soon.)

All welcome, whatever party- we are all on a ship heading in the same direction, reducing state intervention, even if we disagree about which port it should dock at, so let’s get that ship sailing.

The convention begins with Friday night drinks and a lecture to reflect on and celebrate the victory that was the people’s revolt of Brexit. Saturday will feature speeches on continuing the fight for freedom beyond Brexit. The afternoon will feature a session for young populists, including a speech by Joshua Thomas of the Young Chartists, and workshops on forming a Young Chartists society on your campus. A chance for you to meet passionate believers in freedom from around the UK. To have a refreshing break from the pessimism of “liberalism” found on campus 😉

What a perfect time to welcome keynote speakers from think tanks, and enjoy a number of panel discussions looking at the need for a good Brexit deal, free market economics, improving national security, flying the British flag, localism, free speech, cultural libertarianism / integration, Snoopers Charter, the need to disaffiliate from the NUS, the folly of 3rd wave feminism, points-based migration system, a stronger Commonwealth, benefits of the Prevent strategy, and traditional values.

There will also be workshops on how to form a Chartists group / YBL society on your campus, how to recruit members, how to raise a petition your local MP / student union, public-speaking, and debating techniques.

There are several awards given by the Peopls’ Charter Director to notable young patriots – these usually include:
– The “Young Populist of the Year Award” is the highest award given at at the YBL Convention. It is awarded to a dedicated student who in the spirit of Brexit has gone beyond what would be usually expected by working extra hard ‘in the trenches’, with proven examples of beyond the ordinary activism on campus, despite strong opposition.
– “Defender of the Magna Carta Award” is given to a populist of any age who has be the most outstanding that year in actively campaining for democracy. Likely to be given in 2017 to a Brexiteer who was very vocal in campaigning for Brexit.
– “Campus Freedom Activist of the Year Award” is given to a populist activistswho has be the most outstanding that year in actively campaining for free speech on campus, against SJW / PC crap.
– “The People’s Charter’s Blogger of the Year Award” is given to a leading populist member of the blogosphere.
– “The People’s Charter’s Parliamentarian of the Year Award” is given to a member of Parliament who The People’s Charter Foundation feel has done the most to stand up for for populism, i.e. speaking out for free speech on campus.

We look forward to seeing you there!

Young Chartists at the 2018 People’s Charter Convention

in Brexit by

Sunday, 24 June 2018 at 10:00-21:00

London, UK

This will be the Brexiteer / populist event of the YEAR! The afternoon will feature a session for young populists, including a speech by Joshua Thomas of the Young Chartists, and workshops on forming a YBL society on your campus. #ThePeopleHaveSpoken!

UK politics have become very centrist, with the “liberal elite” influencing all political parties. There is a need to make a stand against the establishment which both took us into the EU and tried to make us stay. We need a points-based migration system, to be out the single market, and to regain pride in Britain. #FlyOurFlag #DrainTheSwamp

(Speakers and mid-afternoon protest to be announced. Evening drinks reception. Please RSVP by clicking ‘GOING’ so that we can have an approximate idea of the turnout for the event. Tickets will be available soon.)

All welcome, whatever party- we are all on a ship heading in the same direction, reducing state intervention, even if we disagree about which port it should dock at, so let’s get that ship sailing. However, this event will certainly *not* be promoting the doomed direction of left-wing philopsophy, such as socialist-libertarianism, so called left free market anarchism.

The convention begins with Friday night drinks and a lecture to reflect on and celebrate the victory that was the people’s revolt of Brexit. Saturday will feature speeches on continuing the fight for freedom beyond Brexit. A chance for you to meet passionate believers in freedom from around the UK. To have a refreshing break from the pessimism of “liberalism” found on campus 😉

What a perfect time to welcome keynote speakers from think tanks, and enjoy a number of panel discussions looking at the need for a good Brexit deal, free market economics, improving national security, flying the British flag, localism, free speech, cultural libertarianism / integration, Snoopers Charter, the need to disaffiliate from the NUS, the folly of 3rd wave feminism, points-based migration system, a stronger Commonwealth, benefits of the Prevent strategy, and traditional values.

There will also be workshops on how to form a Chartists group / YBL society on your campus, how to recruit members, how to raise a petition your local MP / student union, public-speaking, and debating techniques.

There are several awards given by the Peopls’ Charter Director to notable young patriots – these usually include:
– The “Young Populist of the Year Award” is the highest award given at at the YBL Convention. It is awarded to a dedicated student who in the spirit of Brexit has gone beyond what would be usually expected by working extra hard ‘in the trenches’, with proven examples of beyond the ordinary activism on campus, despite strong opposition.
– “Defender of the Magna Carta Award” is given to a populist of any age who has be the most outstanding that year in actively campaining for democracy. Likely to be given in 2017 to a Brexiteer who was very vocal in campaigning for Brexit.
– “Campus Freedom Activist of the Year Award” is given to a populist activistswho has be the most outstanding that year in actively campaining for free speech on campus, against SJW / PC crap.
– “The People’s Charter’s Blogger of the Year Award” is given to a leading populist member of the blogosphere.
– “The People’s Charter’s Parliamentarian of the Year Award” is given to a member of Parliament who The People’s Charter Foundation feel has done the most to stand up for for populism, i.e. speaking out for free speech on campus.

We look forward to seeing you there!

Men’s March – for stronger families

in World News by

19 November at 10:00-21:00

London and California

LONDON and CALIFORNIA (BERKELEY)
UK: Trafalgar Square, marching peacefully to the Courts and on to Parliament
USA: Berkeley campus, California

International Men’s Day (IMD) is an annual international event celebrated on 19 November.

We need your help to march for strong families. 1 in 3 children live without a father (ONS, 2012). 1 in 4 children don’t consider their father to be part of their family (Childwise 2007).

We support fathers’ access to their kids. Family courts presume a mother to be the better parent, and disregard that kids need their fathers. We demand the courts maximise reasonable access in the interests of the children. The family unit is integral to a strong, stable society.

This causes incredible destress to men, who are cut off from their families. Dads are 3 times more likely to die after separation than mothers. (DWP 2015.) The biggest killer of men under 50 is suicide, and 75% of all suicides involve men (Calm 2013).

Little support is offered, because men are not deemed a minority group. Tens of thousands of lives, stolen from us – too many friends, fathers, sons, and brothers.

We want more research into prostate cancer, which many men die from each year.

We also believe false claims of a wage gap distracted people from the serious problems of workplace deaths, which proportionally more men are victims of.

84% of the hidden homeless are men (Crisis 2011).

40% of domestic violence victims are men (Parity 2010). However, women get lighter sentences than men.

Men are 35% more likely to die from cancer (except breast cancer. Cancer Research UK, 2013).

Game Over Corbyn (Brexity Right wing meetup)

in Brexit by

9 June at 19:00–22:00

Old Mary’s Cocktail Bar

24 Craven Terrance, W2 3QH London, United Kingdom

Traditional conservatives, kippers, rightwing libertarians, Labour Leave, populists, Pepe fans, you are all welcome!! Let’s Make Drinks Great Again!

We need to build a critical mass so that we can have a regular patriotic capitalist meet up above a pub, where we can have speakers challenging the globalist establishment that has sold out the British people.

 

Katy Perry demands Britain opens our borders and co-exists with ISIS

in Islamism by

Speaking after an Islamic terrorist bombed a concert in Manchester, killing multiple children, pop megastar Katy Perry made an impassioned plea for Britain to abolish its borders and effectively, a plea for it to co-exist with ISIS.

“Whatever we say behind people’s backs, the Internet can be a little bit ruthless as far as fan bases go but I think that the greatest thing we can do is just unite and love on each other,” Perry said, adding, “No barriers, no borders, we all just need to co-exist.”

While her music may impress some people, she has shown herself to be another clueless celebrity who is totally out of touch with real life. Every election, referendum, and so on, these famous faces are reeled out to tell us how to vote, but they clearly do not live in the same world. With her security detail, including bodyguards, what would Katy Perry know about life for you and I?

Her response to the Manchester bombing was to call for people to “co-exist”. As absurd as Corbyn’s call for cups of tea with ISIS. The concept of police arrests and prisons exists because some people are a threat to the safety of society.

This is the same airhead who furious about how she felt Trump’s “grab her by the p*ssy” comment sexualised women, proceeded to strip off naked to raise votes for Hillary Clinton.

Her call for the abolition of “barriers” or “borders” is absurd, because when Germany and Sweden tried that, rape levels soared. In fact, for the latter, they are the second highest, after Lesotho. As for France, its laidback approach to border control has resulted in terrorist attack after terrorist attack. If anything, we need to strengthen our border controls.

BREAKING: Army deployed to British streets as terrorism threat level raised to ‘critical’ (attack likely to occur)

in Islamism by

The British army are being deployed on the streets amid fears a further terror attack is about to occur. Up to 5,000 soldiers will be deployed amid fears that the Manchester suicide bomber had accomplices preparing further attacks, Theresa May has announced.

For the first time in 10 years, the Prime Minister raised the terror threat to the highest possible level (of five possible levels), from severe to critical, meaning an attack is “expected imminently”. It is the first time Britain has been on maximum terrorist alert since 2007, when a blazing car loaded with gas canisters was driven into Glasgow Airport.

Mrs May announced that the police had asked for military support, and the Defence Secretary Sir Michael Fallon approved the request, meaning Operation Temperer is now in force for the first time.

Troops will replace police officers at set-piece events including sports venues and concerts. With the FA Cup final this weekend, Mrs May acted on the advice of the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre after chairing two meetings of the Cobra emergency committee.

Investigators fear that the British-born bomber Salman Abedi, a 22-year-old of Libyan descent, was part of a wider network of Isil-inspired terrorists, including a bomb-maker, who may still be at large. Special Forces were deployed to Manchester ready to engage in the hunt for accomplices of Abedi, who killed 22 concert-goers in Britain’s worst terrorist atrocity for 12 years.

Outlining the increased risk, Mrs May said: “It is a possibility we cannot ignore that there is a wider group of individuals linked to this attack.”

Stop defending fundamentalist Islam; ban it!

in Islamism by

Lighting candles, changing Facebook photos, and so on, these are certainly gestures with good intent, but by no means sufficient a reaction.

This will not stop people fighting for ISIS and returning to the UK with little objection.

It will not overcome the fact the 90% of Islamic preachers (imams) are from countries where fundamentalist Islam is the norm, and that they import those ideas to the UK, including our prisons, which they now control.

It will not change the Wahhabist-state Saudi Arabia’s investment, and hence influence, on universities.

We need the Prime Minister to make a bold stand against the politically correct virtue signallers, who would utilise this tragedy, with grandstanding, to please their egos. A child has died!

When the country is being invaded, cognitive dissonance may make it satisfying for some to dismiss it as a false flag, but with nothing yet to suggest such, the sensible thing would be to respond to the present threat.

While the BBC is stirring up fears of revenge attacks against the general Muslim population, such has not occurred after any British terrorist attack. It is brushing over the real threat here and now; that actual murder has taken place on our streets, no rather, an act of war.

We need a leader who admits the real cause of this violence. The fundamentalist followers of Islam are at war with the West. This is not an isolated incident. This suicide bomber did not act alone. Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant declared war on Britain, and wishes to conquer us.

We need the head of government to speak out clearly against Sharia law, and follow through with an absolute ban, demanding one law for all, whatever religion people be. Freedom of religion must certainly only be tolerated if within the frameworks of British law, with respect for Western values. While cultural Muslims state they can integrate into British society, fundamentalists clearly cannot. How many children must die before the liberals wake up to this reality!

We need a government which has the needs of its own people as priority, a police force which arrests those who disrespect our laws, and a judiciary that is not afraid to convict, regardless of race or religion of the perpetrator.

In answer to the question, what should be done about “suspected terrorists”? Well, terrorists are by the nature of their act, usually dead. I believe the phrase intended here may be “suspected terrorism supporters”. The critical word here is “suspected”, which means, unproven, and there is a fundamental legal concept of “innocent until proven guilty”, so the correct approach is to properly investigate and effectively monitor all suspects. As for anyone who is actually proven to praise terrorism on social media, while we as a nation support the notion of free speech, as we are affectively under attack from another nation, ISIS, such persons are supporting enemy forces and should be promptly interned, as Nazi sympathisers were during WW2.

Owen Jones: Leftist Propaganda Minister

in Brexit by

We are in the midst of a propaganda war, where the greatest victim is truth. On one side we have the left, on the other we have the right and in between what remains of objective reality.

Both sides have their commanders. The Right have Peter Hitchens and Douglas Murray, among others, both of whom are more sincere in their approach than the Left’s Commander in Chief of Propaganda, Owen Jones.

Propaganda is a difficult thing to manage. You have to convince one group whilst galvanising the other, though the latter is always preferred. While the politics of Dr Goebbels’ are certainly unacceptable, it is a fact that his genius at propaganda was an asset to the Nazis. He managed to use fanatical leaps in logic, like using the parable of the Miracle of the House of Brandenburg, evoking the spirit of Germany’s founding father, to convince the German people that the war could still be won in 1945. Obviously it was not.

Looking at Owen’s video after the Labour defeat in Copeland, we see the ‘journalist’ point to a picture of Keir Hardie somehow equating him to Corbyn and transmorphing the ideals of then to now. He appears to have a critical edge to his propaganda but one that doesn’t outshine his dogmatic dedication to the party.

Another trait of propagandists is the repetition of key stanzas. After all, it was Goebbels who said “If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth” and it appears Owen agrees.

“Political leadership means saying, here’s what’s wrong with society, here’s what our vision of what society is instead, here’s how we get there. It means hammering at key messages ad infinitum, backed up with policies that are indicative of where the party is coming from.”

That along with the mild similarities between Owen’s “Landslide speech” and Dr Goebbels Last Speech, with the only disparities being the term “International Jewry” replaced with “The 1%”, and an emphatic German voice substituted for a meek Mid-Englander one; it’s hard to see the difference between Goebbels and Owen Jones.

One has to ask though: Is this propaganda? After all propaganda is simply the propagation of biased information and skewed facts. It is indeed possible that you are consuming lies without knowing it and that those lies may come from more familiar sources than Mr Owen Jones. There is a key difference however between my articles and Owen’s.

I’m not on television every day, repeating my stanzas and, even if I were, I certainly wouldn’t refuse to share a platform with those I disagree with, but rather I would seek to challenge them. In the spirit of the words of John Stuart Mill, we do not shy from debate, but seek to hone our arguments, which are not mere emotion, but logic based. Further, we aim to win over the audience.

Sure, I’m not fan of Marxists but it hasn’t stopped me debating them, destroying other echo chambers instead of building my own. You won’t lose friends for disagreeing with this article yet you certainly will if you don’t. We’re not the ones with mass media control, we have no influence over the narrative. We are driven by facts and the reality around us.

And this is ultimately the thing that separates us from the Owen Jones’s and the Goebbels; we do not have to squander a fragile reputation, propped up by the mighty Guardian, nor the impetus to lie.

Great Britain should look closely at how Venezuela’s democracy has been destroyed

in World News by

A couple of weeks ago, I had the opportunity to travel to London and participate in an activity prepared by the Venezuelan community living in Great Britain. The intention of that gathering, which was also held in many other major cities in world was, and still is, to universally, publicly, and undoubtedly show the atrocities of the dictatorial regime that has been in power in Venezuela since 1999. A totalitarian regime that used and abused the ideas of the socialism to get into power, as it did, invading all the democratic institutions, armed forces, police, judicial and economic system, all with no other desire than to remain in power at any cost, even the blood and life of hundreds of thousands of Venezuelans.

During that activity I was interviewed and asked about how our country was devastated as the idea spread worldwide that the “well-intentioned government, saviour of the poor from the evil of capitalism, made Venezuelan society richer, healthier, and happier.” I was asked why if socialism or communism was so great – they are the same with regards to the denial of the individual person and their values – we were all complaining. Then I was told that one of the candidates running for Prime Minister in the UK declares himself as an admirer of Hugo Chavez, his work and his “legacy”. As recently as 2013, the Islington MP paid tribute to controversial Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez.

I personally do not know Jeremy Corbyn, but there are some things I am hundred percent sure about him, and there are other areas where I still have doubts:

I am very sure that he doesn’t know me at all. We haven’t met, there is no possible way we have ever discussed any ideas about politics, economics, social, law, constitution, democracy or any other matter.

On the contrary, I have strong doubts about him really knowing Hugo Chavez, especially after I was told that he declares himself a follower of Chavez. Did Corbyn really know Chavez and his legacy? This leads us to two possibilities, but neither of them seem to be good ones.

In the first scenario, Corbyn and Chavez knew each other very well and they admired each other, and have the same ideas about politics, economy, human rights, democracy, liberty, prosperity, and so on. In the second scenario, Corbyn and Chavez did not know each other well, or rather Corbyn did not know Chavez, especially his REAL, work, his legacy. Then, like many others, Corbyn would be just another victim of the lies and the fallacies of what is called socialism in the 21st century.

I can’t in any way give advice or recommendations, and would not dare to express political opinions concerning a society in which I haven’t lived. I don’t have any relation to the UK whatsoever, other than some reading of its authors, its history, and maybe a couple of visits. I have no direct knowledge to give an opinion concerning British politics, and I am not pretending to do so.

Regarding Venezuela and the dictatorial regime stated by Chavez in 1999, I can for sure give my opinion of his work and legacy. His legacy is none other than death, crime, hunger, destruction, illness, lack of democracy, corruption, and many other issues. I live here, studied here and work here. My ancestors and I witnessed the destruction of the country, so I think my opinion about the Venezuela situation and Chavez’s legacy could be considered more reliable than Corbyn’s.

I cannot answer whether Corbyn truly knew Chavez, or if he realises that in 18 years, Chavez and his legacy completely destroyed the country, its economy, the security, the nation’s general health and welfare, and all that is the consequence of the socialism Chavez claimed was the path to follow. It would be illogical and dangerous that a person in Venezuela, Great Britain, France, United States, France or any other country that aspires to an important office, should identify with the Chavez regime and its barbarity.

On the other hand, we can also assume that Corbyn never knew the real Chavez, his legacy of destruction, the dictatorship; in this case, it is also very dangerous that some people could believe Chavez’s lies and wrongly believe that Venezuela is the seventh heaven on earth. It is not – we are now living through hell.

As I previously mentioned, I don’t personally know Mr. Corbyn, but if I did and if I had the opportunity to ask him a couple questions, I would ask him something like:

Did you know that democracy and economy in Venezuela was destroyed by the Socialism promoted by Chavez?

Did you know that people have to eat discomposing garbage directly from the garbage cans and trucks?

Did you know that Venezuela is the most corrupt country in the Americas and is among the worst 3 countries evaluated. There are no courts of justice, not even one tribunal that isn’t corrupted.

That is the most dangerous country due to criminality?

That there are no medicines, or medical attention, and all the reports given by the regime are false?

That freedom of expression is prohibited and the free and democratic media cannot make public the regime’s violations? 

Do you think that in Great Britain and the rest of the world the people should know what´s happening right now in Venezuela?

Do you know that at this exact moment while I’m writing this article, and while it is being read, there are students, mothers, older people, professionals and workers being killed by the National Guard and irregular armed groups that support the regime, only for asking for overdue elections, food, medicines, security and electricity?   

What do you think about Chavez and its legacy now?

One last thing…

Would you like to verify this and give to your followers the most accurate idea?

Let’s do something. I went to London and I freely walked its streets and got a feel for the city and UK society, again a very general overview and not enough to make a political opinion. Why don’t you come here, be my guest and see with your own eyes the real Chavez legacy, would you come and do it? [Editor-in-Chief’s note: Roberto, we do want to make a documentary about the legacy of Chavez, but sadly we do not currently have the budget for international trips.]

Whatever Corbyn’s opinions of Venezuela’s dictators are, I guess there is no problem at all in openly declaring your opinion about Venezuela being a dictatorship and all the oppression and deaths of the recent weeks.

Asda in Firing Line Over Alleged “Sexist” Jumper

in Brexit by

In a society which is becoming increasingly politically correct, a mother from Aberdeenshire has taken the concept to a level which many would deem too far.

If you need an example as to why political correctness should have no place in British society, look no further than Debbie Dee. The mother from Huntly, Aberdeenshire was left disgusted on her shopping trip to Asda after discovering an item of clothing which she believed to be highly controversial. The item of clothing was a blue jumper for £4, with the slogan “Boys Will Be Boys” displayed on the front. This left the mother from Huntly outraged as she described the jumper as “utterly sexist”.

In a Facebook post which has now been reportedly deleted, she posted a picture of the jumper online and stated that she believed the item of clothing was problematic because of the stereotype it perpetuated amongst men. Rather than accepting the item of clothing to be a merely innocent jumper, Debbie suggested that it sends out a negative image to children because the slogan may be used as a justification by men who behave offensively or in a misogynistic way towards women.

Though many may not agree with this, some individuals did sympathise with Debbie on the matter. According to the Sun, Lori Oxton commented by saying “more than sexist, it’s a potentially dangerous mindset for both men and women. Not what our kids should be taught as acceptable or our youngsters. Well done debs for catching this, I’m quite disgusted!”. Another social media user, Fran Moldaschi, wrote “this phrase is so harmful to our children – I’m horrified that Asda is willing to perpetuate this outdated platitude”.

In contrast to this, there were a number of social media users who did not share Debbie’s disgust towards the jumper. One individual added “rape, murder and terrorism are things which leave normal people gobsmacked and raging. Not Debbie Dee though. All she needs is a jumper”. In response to Debbie’s outrage, an Asda spokesperson stated “our aim is to make clothes people love, never to offend”.

Why We Need To Stamp Out Political Correctness

In my personal opinion, political correctness should have no place in any democracy. When I think about the meaning of true democracy, I think of free speech, and as a nation we pride ourselves on having the freedom of choice, the freedom of having our own personal views. But is this really the case in Britain today? Many people fail to grasp the fact that one of the clauses of living in a democracy is whilst we have the right to feel offended by others, we also have the right to express views that may so happen to offend others. If one cannot innocently express their views due to the risk of “triggering” others, then free speech is not free at all.

In regards to Debbie Dee, and her outrage towards the slogan “Boys Will Be Boys” seen on an item of clothing, we may argue that she has allowed herself to be offended on behalf of others by desperately inventing a message about sexism or gender fluidity from a slogan which simply intended to symbolise the carefree days of childhood, where boys are boisterous, noisy, and energetic. These days, they would be tranquillised for being too masculine. Asda have reiterated that it was not their intention to cause any offence by using this slogan, however Debbie, along with those supporting the mother from Huntly, have chosen to misinterpret the use of this slogan on the boy’s jumper in a way which they believe, to some degree, undermines the female gender.

For me, and perhaps many others, this story is a prime example of why political correctness is highly problematic and should be stamped out of British society. Instead of being a nation which embraces its liberty, we are rapidly becoming increasingly so the nation of political censorship, the nation which shuts down freedom of speech, and a nation where we become offended by harmless intentions. Are you offended by this slogan? However you feel is for you to decide, but you should not seek to impose your views on others by restricting freedom of expression.

Source: http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/fashion/woman-asda-jumper-complaint-boys-will-be-boys-gender-stereotype-identity-a7740156.html

 

Mainstream Media Admits Mohammed Was A Paedophile

in Islamism by

Squirming, the uncomfortable Channel 4 reporter acknowledges that Mohammed, the role-model for all Muslim men, was a paedophile who raped a nine-year old. The Channel 4 reporter also states that only in recent years have Islamic leaders, and that is only some, due to public condemnation of paedophilia, found Mohammed’s immoral conduct to be rather awkward.

Has a mainstream reporter finally read Sahih Al-Bukhari, which reveals how horrific the conduct of Mohammed was. His rape of a child is mentioned in Volume 5, Book 58, Number 236, “Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old”.

Meanwhile, the lack of maturity to provide consent is highlighted in Sahih Bukhari 8:73:151, where it says, “I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet”. To protect British children, any practise of Islam must strictly be within our legal framework.

A relevant admission from the mainstream media, which is rather unenthusiastic when it comes to reporting on case after case of Muslim gangs, which have raped thousands of British kids. It is long time that the dangers of Sharia law were acknowledged, and that it be treated not as an alternative, but as certainly inferior, to the legal systems of the UK’s constituent nations.

Fundamentalist Islam is a far larger problem than the government is acknowledging. A report by the Center for Social Cohesion found that One Third of British Muslim students support killing for Islam (Wikileaks cable), and a Pew Research survey in 2013 found that at least 1 in 4 Muslims do not reject violence against civilians.

Their intent is to replace our democracy with an international caliphate; the abolition of Western values and replacement of such with Sharia law. GfK NOP research revealed that 28% of British Muslims want Britain to be an Islamic state, while an ICM Poll last year found that 21% of British Muslims decline to condemn stoning adulterers.

At this critical hour, it’s not a time to virtue signal, to be politically correct. We must stand for supremacy of the laws of the constituent nations of the UK over the violence of Sharia law. The sacrifice of our ancestors must not be in vain.

Chaos: Labour suspends all of its councillors in Aberdeen

in Brexit by

Labour has suspended its nine-strong group of councillors at Aberdeen City Council after they agreed a coalition deal with their Conservative counterparts to keep the SNP out of power. Scottish Labour leader Kezia Dugdale said the party’s executive did not support the move.

Leader of Scottish Tories, Ruth Davidson, has praised their move:

Lib Dems manifesto demands a second EU referendum

in Brexit by

Don’t just whine from your sofa. We need action to stop the Progressive Alliance! DONATE NOW!
https://www.gofundme.com/makehardbrexithappen

The Lib Dems, the party whose name lays claim to being an advocate of democracy, have finally come clean about their determination to fight the people. The Liberal Democrats have put a second EU referendum at the heart of their general election manifesto, saying it would “give the final say to the British people”.

Luke Nash-Jones, Director of the People’s Charter Foundation states, “Farron has repeatedly tried to weasel out of this during interview, but now it is clear the LibDems, the voice of the stuck-up Islington dinner party set who mourn the fall of Blair, sneer down on the riff-raff, deeming us too stupid to be heard.”

Discussing the manifesto pledge on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Sir Ed Davey, the LibDem campaign chief, made the astonishing claim voters had yet to be offered a genuine vote on Britain’s European future.

In the run up to the referendum, the LibDems received a massive investment from Lord Sainsbury who also backs their fellow member of the so-called Progressive Alliance. This actually far outweighs any investment they have received over the last decade, and therefore it’s no shock they feel pressured to push for a second referendum.

Two years ago, the yellows lost almost 50 seats and were left with just eight MPs. Now, they seek to reverse these fortunes by seeking support of the 48% that backed the EU, though that plan is collapsing as the support of the EU has dropped to 22%. Liberal Democrats leader Tim Farron and his predecessor Nick Clegg are both at serious risk of losing their seats at the general election.


(Desperate to find voters. Is Farron asking a dog to back him?)

Conservatives in Farron’s Westmorland and Lonsdale seat are confident of pulling off a remarkable victory in Cumbria, while a drop in Lib Dem support in Sheffield Hallam has Labour confident that it can unseat Clegg, party sources have told Business Insider.

In words lifted form an Obama speech, Lib Dem election spokesman Sir Ed Davey told BBC Today they are the party offering “hope” and “change”. Luke Nash-Jones continued, “The Progressive Alliance are beyond a joke. While Diane Abbott struggles with maths during TV interviews, Tim Farron seems to also be arithmetically challenged, as he struggles to realise 52 is larger than 48.”

The LibDems are heavily aiming at the student vote, knowing that many students, brainwashed by liberal professors who dominate universities, these pro-Marxist madrasas. While their plan to legalise weed may not actually see a surge in usage, if Portugal’s experience is considered, it is clearly aimed at the youth vote.

Seemingly opposed to the health benefits of a good bike ride, they propose a free bus pass discount on single and return tickets for all 16-21 year olds, using the same mechanism as the National Concessionary Scheme for the over-60s. Ironically, for a party so pro-open borders, they demand recipients of the scheme be ordinarily resident in England, effectively blocking EU citizens.

The party, which has pledged to increase corporation tax to pay for its plans for schools and to lift the public sector pay cap, insists its plans are fully costed. However, cutting corporation tax would increase foreign investment, and provide more jobs.

Don’t just whine from your sofa. We need action to stop the Progressive Alliance! DONATE NOW!
https://www.gofundme.com/makehardbrexithappen

Feminists, such as Alison Saunders are ignoring the real rape crisis! #JusticeForChelsey

in Islamism by

In the case of Chelsey Wright, many are asking why the police won’t take action. There are serious questions, which Amber Rudd, Home Secretary, minister responsible for the police, must answer, such as why the hell they let someone suspected of rape out on bail. However, blame also rests with Jeremy Wright, and Alison Saunders, who are responsible for the Crown Prosecution Service. When Northumbria police presented the CPS evidence so that one of the alleged attackers could be charged, they dismissed it.

When it comes to rape, this case has some of the strongest evidence possible. DNA evidence, proof Rohypnol has been used, and bruising to the body. The only more compelling evidence would be the unlikely, CCTV footage or an outright confession. Any jury would conclude this was blatant rape, but the CPS let this go before court. It appears to be protecting not the victim, but the perpetrator.

This is not the first time that Ms Saunders’ moral judgement has been called into question. On the 28th of June 2015, she defended her decision not to prosecute former MP Greville Janner, 86, on 22 serious child abuse charges involving nine victims because, it was claimed, the Labour peer was incapacitated by advanced dementia, despite no court assessment of his health ever having taken place. It’s about time she is dismissed from office.

We are now in the bizarre situation in the UK where men accused of the most heinous sex crimes against women or even children can escape justice for decades, yet men who had drunken sex with a consenting adult woman last Saturday night could find themselves facing years behind bars. Obviously, people can be so intoxicated they are not able to consent, but there was blatant hypocrisy when in 2015, Saunders initiated a change in the CPS rules for prosecuting rape cases.

The new rules made a drunk man responsible for everything he does (and anything a drunk woman does with him) while a drunk woman is treated as a child with no culpability at all, simply by virtue of her consumption of large amounts of alcohol. To all intents and purposes, this meant a man is effectively guilty of rape until proven innocent in a court of law, even if there is no evidence. But when there is actual evidence, as in the Chelsey Wright case, Saunders takes no action.

They look the other way when an alleged criminal is well-connected or from a certain religion. It is disappointing to see the inconsistency, the hypocrisy, of feminists, such as the Director of the CPS, Alison Saunders, on £205,000 a year, who do not show the same enthusiasm in prosecuting the Muslim rapist of Chelsey Wright, or former MP Greville Janner on 22 serious child abuse charges, as they do for demanding working class men, but not women, be punished for engaging in sexual acts when drunk.

“Pink roads”: British car insurer demanding gender segregation

in Brexit by

Ending of racial segregation in US schools, the fall of apartheid, these are seen by society as some of the greatest achievements of mankind. Hence, the irony when sexist anti-male car insurer Sheila’s Wheels demands gender segregation on roads. 100 years after fighting to get women the vote, what would Emmeline Pankhurst, leader of the Suffragette movement, made of proposals for bright pink, female-only motorway lanes?

They claim to have “recognised the need to make UK roads safer for women drivers and have identified PinkZones, a concept that would see separate lanes for female drivers on UK roads, as a potential vision of the future”.

Handily identifiable in the universally female-friendly shade of luminous pink, reminiscent of the Labour pink bus scandal, the lanes would only be for drivers blessed with two X chromosomes. The proposal from Sheila’s Wheels claims the cost of creating the “Pink Zones” is a bargain: “46 times cheaper than HS2” — a proposed, high-speed mass transit rail system currently under consideration in England.

The repainting of the roads to create “Pink Zones” is just the first stage of the plan from Sheila’s Wheels. Stage two would be the creation of “women-only flyovers above some of Britain’s busiest roads.” The insurer also called for female-only fly-overs so women can assert not only their metaphorical but also literal hierarchy over male drivers.

“Separate lanes for women on roads would not only increase safety, but also would remove them from a potentially dangerous environment. PinkZones would be designed specifically for female drivers to enhance quality of life.”

Speaking on the concept, Andy Sommer, spokesperson for Sheilas’ Wheels said: “As the UK’s leading car insurer for women, Sheilas’ Wheels is serious about creating a safer road network for female drivers and we believe a discussion about how best to achieve this is long overdue.” ~Shiela’s Wheels, Pink Zones.

Peter Rodger, Chief Examiner, at Institute of Advanced Motorists said: “While PinkZones may be something of a utopia for female drivers, there’s clearly a need to identify how to provide a safer driving environment on the road. Driver safety is a paramount concern for us and we’re in favour of promoting further discussion about how to tackle the gender differences in driving to make it safer for all road users.”

The company doesn’t want all roads to be segregated, just the “most dangerous” ones. Researching into the concept, a survey conducted by YouGov on behalf of Sheilas’ Wheels revealed an awkward result: 68% of those polled said they would support separate lanes for certain drivers, with only 11% believing that men in the UK were safer on the roads than women.

Source: http://pinkzones.com/

YouGov research: Total sample size was 2, 423 GB adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 19-20 June. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all GB adults (aged 18+).

Localism Should Be Embraced on June 8, Not Neglected

in Brexit by

Since calling a snap general election, the Prime Minister has placed Brexit firmly at the centre of her election campaign. But are other important issues such as localism being left behind in British politics altogether?

I have always been a strong believer in grassroots politics, which, for me, means local candidates, local policies, for local people. However, far too often in recent elections, I have seen local candidates using national policies in the hope of winning seats in Westminster and local government. I personally disagree with this approach to election campaigning, where voters are subjected to what I would describe as ‘umbrella manifestos’ – simply meaning national policies in multiple constituencies or a ‘one size fits all’ approach. Though I accept the electorate tend to vote for their preferred parties as opposed to individual candidates, voters also want to select candidates they can trust; this means candidates who have a clear plan to protect local services, and even candidates who have already made a positive difference to their constituencies through their work in local government. While, most understandably, Brexit will certainly be at the centre of general election campaigns, and with very good reason, we do also need to be sure to also remember local issues.

Some would speculate that Theresa May will use this election as an opportunity to eradicate UKIP by luring its supporters towards a cross by Conservative candidates in the ballot box, suggesting that after achieving their ultimate goal, UKIP no longer have a part to play in British politics. However, UKIP leader Paul Nuttall has other ideas, and has recently stated “I really do believe that you haven’t seen the end of UKIP. I’ve read UKIP’s obituary so many times, we always come back and we always come back stronger”. The party faces a major challenge to their very existence, especially after losing 145 seats in the local elections, which took place across the country on May 4 2017. Many of these seats were lost to the Conservatives, who have managed to attract UKIP supporters by promising to deliver the Brexit they voted for in June 2016.

Meanwhile, in light of the Labour Party’s draft manifesto being leaked, it seems that pie in the sky politics is evident once again on the left as Comrade Corbyn has proposed policies such as the abolition of university tuition fees and renationalising Britain’s railways, without providing any details as to how they propose to fund such policies of course. Like UKIP’s Paul Nuttall, Jeremy Corbyn is also playing into the hands of the Prime Minister. In a recent BBC interview with political editor Laura Kuenssberg, the Labour leader was asked six times if he would take Britain out of the EU, if he becomes Prime Minister on June 8. Rather than providing what should be a simple ‘yes’, Jeremy Corbyn asserted that “Brexit is settled”. His lack of clarity on this issue will be used as a weapon by Theresa May, who has made it clear to voters that under her leadership, Britain will be leaving regardless of the type of deal we receive in negotiations. Whilst the policies in the Labour Party’s draft manifesto may resonate with a chunk of the electorate, the party has placed no emphasis on localism or politics at its grassroots, and has resorted to the use of sound bites such as ‘for the many not the few’.

There was a time when the Liberal Democrats were champions of localism in British politics, but not anymore. Under the leadership of Paddy Ashdown, while not exactly a champion of liberty, the party did nonetheless gain 46 seats in the 1997 general election by building local bastions of support in target constituencies over a prolonged period of time. This was carried out by gaining a foothold in local elections, campaigning on local issues, and ultimately using these tools as a means to gain seats in Westminster. The strategy was known as ‘the Ashdown effect’. The former leader established this strategy after years of local campaigning in the constituency of Yeovil, and by this tapping into local feeling, overturned the Conservative majority of 11,382 by winning in the 1983 general election with a majority of 3,000.

But under the leadership of Tim Farron, the party has moved away from this election tactic in stark contrast. Gone are the days of ‘the Ashdown effect’, where local issues were at the heart of the Liberal Democrat’s election strategy. Now, we are in the days of nice but dim Tim, who, like his colleagues, is hell-bent on keeping Britain in the EU and ignoring the democratic vote of 17.4 million people. The party have pledged to campaign to keep Britain in the single market, despite a government issued leaflet clearly stating before the EU referendum on June 23, that a vote to leave the EU would also mean leaving its institutions, including the single market. Despite the leaflet being issued at the cost to the British taxpayer, nice but dim Tim is incapable of accepting this fact, and insists that membership of the single market was not on the ballot paper when the UK voted to leave on June 23. Therefore, one might argue that a party which once championed localism has lost its way, and jumped on the Brexit bandwagon.

Final Thoughts on Localism

For me, the Stoke on Trent by-election in February 2017 highlighted two clear points. Firstly, we learnt that the issue of Brexit will not be enough for parties to win seats in Westminster. The UKIP leader saw an opportunity to be elected in a constituency he labelled as ‘the Brexit capital’ after it voted to leave the EU by 69.4%, yet still failed to get over the line.

Unfortunately, it seems that Paul Nuttall has not learnt this lesson as the party announced he would be standing for election in the constituency of Boston & Skegness, where the people voted overwhelmingly in favour of leaving the EU by 75.6%. Despite failing to be elected in the so called ‘Brexit capital’, he still believes that he stands a chance in Boston & Skegness due to its mass support for Brexit. This brings me on to my second point, which is that constituents do not want opportunist politicians being parachuted into constituencies where they have no affiliation to whatsoever. Local people deserve local candidates, individuals who have a clear understanding of the area they are standing to be elected in, along with a sound awareness of the issues their constituents face on a daily basis.

I would like to make it clear that this article is in no way, shape or form anti-Brexit. I wholeheartedly believe that as a nation, we will prosper once we have left the failed EU project behind, and can once again be a country with an optimistic global outlook. However, I find it disappointing that I am yet to discover a candidate in any political party who has a local agenda when campaigning. As the UK prepares to vote on June 8, our MPs should remember that we deserve candidates who are passionate about not just Brexit but also the communities we live in, candidates who share the same vision as their constituents, and candidates who put people before party.

Go to Top