The Labour Party elite's secret problem... they can't stand the working class

The Labour elite's secret problem... they can't stand the working class

This is Peter Hitchens' Mail On Sunday Column

How long does it take for the penny to drop? It is amazing how slow voters  have been to see  that the two major parties have been stolen from them, and are now their enemies.
I spend a lot of time here pointing out that the Tory Party is a now a nest of anti-British, anti-family liberals. But Labour is just as bad.
The Labour Party of 1945  was pretty Left-wing. But it was patriotic, Christian and genuinely working-class. It hated cheats and it loathed crime. Several members of the Labour Cabinet of 1948 voted  to keep the death penalty.
It did not support immigration. It set up the NHS to care for hard-working people whose illnesses were in many cases caused by that hard work. It was (rightly) deeply suspicious of the first steps towards creating what is now the EU.
It supported grammar schools, seeing that they gave the children  of the poor a ladder out of that poverty. It favoured strong national defences.
I suspect that millions of Labour voters still feel roughly the same way. But the party does not. Like the Tory top deck, Labour’s London elite loathe and despise their members.
We have absolute proof of this thanks to the meeting between Gordon Brown and Mrs Gillian Duffy during the last Election, when Mr Brown responded to Mrs Duffy’s completely reasonable fears about mass immigration by calling her a bigot behind her back. He apologised – for being caught – but who can doubt it was his real view?
This week we saw two more examples of the problem. One was the absurd shadow Minister Chris Bryant, trying to be strong on immigration. Mr Bryant has been told by Labour voters that their jobs are threatened by migrants, and so he wants to keep their votes by sounding tough.
 But in fact Labour –  as I have pointed out here more than once – deliberately created that immigration. Its leaders, 1960s revolutionaries who have never grown up, knew exactly what they were doing.
But now they fear they have been found out, and that millions of Gillian Duffys – who would die rather than vote  Tory – are now thinking of defecting to UKIP.
Luckily for us all, Mr Bryant’s speech blew up in his face like an exploding cigar. This is what ought to happen more often to politicians who dishonestly seek the votes of people whose opinions they despise.
The other interesting moment was a Channel 4 programme  in which three modern welfare claimants were subjected to the rules of the original welfare state set up by Labour.
That welfare state was a proper, decent thing – people who worked hard insuring themselves against age and illness, and genuine efforts to find work for all, even the seriously disabled.
It was completely unlike the Sponger’s Charter that modern Labour has set up, under which the genuinely poor tend to suffer, and cheats prosper. Labour, like the Tories, no longer speaks for any major part of the British people. It only pretends  to. When the penny does eventually drop, what a reckoning we shall see. But I wish it would be sooner.
Read mre at Peter Hitchens Blog here 

21st Century Sexual Insanity

Sexual Insanity

When a society starts to hit rock bottom, you can be sure that sexual anarchy was a big part of the chain of events leading up to it. When immorality skyrockets, then societies plummet. When people start going over the top with all things sexual, then it is not long before their nations start going over the cliff.
Sexual insanity abounds wherever we look. Each day new headlines alert us to yet more sexual perversion and sexual suicide. Yet all this is being defended and promoted by our intelligentsia and so many activist groups. Consider just the most recent example of this moral madness.
In Germany we now have “bestiality brothels”. I kid you not. Let me simply present to you the entire article on this:
“Animal sex abuse is on the rise in Germany, with bestiality brothels being set up across the country, according to a state animal protection officer demanding stronger laws to protect mankind’s furry and feathered friends. Madeleine Martin, the animal protection official for Hessian state government, said the law needed to be changed to make sex abuse of animals – known as zoophilia – a crime.
“‘It is punishable to distribute animal pornography, but the act itself is not,’ she told the Frankfurter Rundschau daily paper on Friday. ‘There are even animal brothels in Germany,’ she said. Sex with animals was being increasingly seen as a lifestyle choice, and thus more acceptable. ‘The abuse seems to be increasing rapidly, and the internet offers an additional distribution platform,’ she said.
“She said the justice authorities had found it exceptionally difficult to convict a man from Hesse, who had offered pictures and instructions for animal sex abuse over the internet. ‘Zoophilia must be completely banned in the reformed animal protection law,’ said Martin, referring to the governments plan to rework that section of the law.
“Sex with animals was banned until 1969, when the animal protection law was introduced, but failed to include a specific ban on zoophilia, the Frankfurter Rundschau said. Martin said the current legal situation makes it too difficult for authorities to intervene – an animal has to be shown to have massive injuries before the animal protection laws prescribe action.”
There you have it folks. Commentary really isn’t even needed here, but it is nonetheless worth pointing out a few inconvenient truths. Firstly, this has not just sprung out of nowhere. This is simply the logical and inevitable outworking of the radical sexual revolution which began in the late 60s.
The push for complete and utter sexual freedom is now simply resulting in the inevitable directions we read about above. And why not, is the only thing we can really ask. If all sexual constraints have been seen as binding and restrictive, and complete sexual expression is seen as the only way to go, then why are we surprised at all this?
Indeed, when we have leading academics telling us there is absolutely nothing wrong with bestiality, then we certainly will see all this become a new lifestyle choice. Princeton University’s Peter Singer is one such leading intellectual to tell us of the joys of animal sex. See here for example: www.billmuehlenberg.com/2011/05/23/sweden-sheep-and-sexual-suicide/
And with the sexual activists working overtime to destroy marriage, insisting that it has nothing to do with one man and one woman for life, then of course anything goes. Homosexual marriage and group marriage are thus entirely logical options and acceptable lifestyle choices. So why not human-animal love?
Why discriminate against a person’s sexual preferences? They may even be born with an orientation in this direction, so who are we to judge these people and deny them their right to love as they see fit? Equal love must win the day, and people must be free to engage in any relationship they desire.
Indeed, reading this article, it seems that behind it is this very sort of thinking. After all, do we find in it any moral denunciation of this sexual perversion? Do we find any clear condemnation of individuals who get their kicks with animals?
No, the only thing that seems to be of concern is that the animal might get harmed! Now I am all in favour of keeping animals safe from unnecessary harm and danger. But is that the only thing we can say about bestiality today? Is that the only ethical consideration that comes into play here?
If animal wellbeing is the only moral consideration in the bestiality debate, then we have well and truly lost the plot. Then we as a society are likely beyond redemption. Then we have well and truly fallen off the cliff. Mark Steyn nicely summarises the bitter fruit of this decades-old act of sexual suicide:
“The wreckage is impressive. The Sexual Revolution was well-named: it was a revolt not just against sexual norms but against the institutions and values they supported; it was part of an assault against any alternatives to government, civic or moral. Utopianism, writes the philosopher Roger Scruton, is ‘not in the business of perfecting the world’ but only of demolishing it: ‘The ideal is constructed in order to destroy the actual.’ Who needs families, or marriage, or morality? Who needs nations, especially nations with borders? We’ll take a jackhammer to the foundations of functioning society and proclaim paradise in the ruins.”
Quite so. We are now witnessing before our very eyes what may be the final destruction of the West. Whether there is any turning back from this point remains to be seen. But the sexual revolutionaries have not given us the utopia they promised. They have given us instead death and destruction. They ought to be real proud of themselves.
www.thelocal.de/society/20120203-40531.html

Societies die when they’re based on lies

Societies die when they’re based on lies

Aug 2013

by Brett Stevens.

When a civilization is new and healthy, there exists something called “common sense” that you can expect most people to have some of.
People actually try to learn it. They study it in others, remember different aspects of it, and pass it on. It’s considered a good thing that you can have without regard to age, wealth, education or sociability.
As civilizations go on down the path of aging, they replace knowledge of reality with knowledge of themselves. People lose common sense, but they sure can read bus schedules, clip coupons, decipher political speeches and recite jokes from their favorite TV shows.
Somewhere in here, the society becomes based on lies. The illusion is that these are government lies; the truth is that they are lies told by individuals to make themselves seem more important, generous, compassionate or hip.
For example, there’s a lot of people out there trying to convince you that they have good souls and that they have found divinity. Some are preachers, but most are everyday folks and/or celebrities.
I knew one group of people who would go on missions to a desolate third world country. They’d show up, build toilets (the ones from the year before were no longer work), teach kids how to use condoms, and then go home.
Others are out there giving money to the poor, or making defenses of human rights. Some are even leakers or “whistleblowers.” All are competing for your attention, and they want you think that they have something holy within them.
I have some ugly news for such people: there is only one way to have good or holy in your soul, and that is by having it. You can’t fake it by imitating acts that you think mean holiness, and then have all of us accept that you have found wisdom.
These people would like us to think they’re Christ come down from the Mount, Buddha after seven days under the bodhi tree, or shamans emerging from mystical chants in sweat lodges. They’re not. They’re people acting like they’ve found something they obviously have not.
When someone has truly found divinity — this is something that occurs in degrees — the last thing they’re going to do is waste any time trying to convince you if this fact. Their good deeds will all be secret.
Most commonly, they won’t be doing anything you recognize as a good deed. Why? Because they’re aiming at the next generation of problems that you haven’t seen yet. They’re not trying to establish holiness in their souls; they’re trying to use that holiness to protect us.
Any fool can go out there and become a dime-store Mother Theresa and give to the downtrodden, or crusade for human rights. Those are social clichés in our society that symbolize goodness, compassion and other things that make people seem appealing to us.
In fact, it’s so common that we accept it like a rite of passage. College — check; give to the transgender minority amputee New Age orphans — check.
While people would like you to think this is normal behavior, only in a dying society is that so. It’s a form of disguise, a manipulation, and the type of role that an actor or late-night television pitchman might take.
As said above, this is a lie, and it’s part of a society based on lies. These are not lies that government uses to manipulate us. They are lies that we use to manipulate each other.
If all things spoken were measured, when the number of lies exceeds the number of truths, you know we are disconnected from reality and heading for a fall. But few will notice, because they’re too busy paying attention to the lies.

WAKE UP AMERICA! IV - American Patriot Ann Barnhardt on Usurper Obama

Ann Barnhardt "Islamic Sexuality: A Survey of Evil" Part 1 of 4

SHOCKING: OBAMA INTENDS TO COLLAPSE US ECONOMY - EXCLUSIVE - Ann Barnhardt

UK Column Live - 31st July 2013

Obama: Craven Puppet of Racist Israel

Beauty Will Save The World (playlist)

Brian Gerrish ( UK column ) Explains the whole planned destruction of Br...

Sinking Sands: How resort for Londoners turned into worst place to live ...

Immigrants get better education, jobs than native Brits - report States

Reuters / Stephen Hird

Reuters / Paul Hackett

Immigrants get better education, jobs than native Brits - report

Reuters / Toby Melville

From RT

A new report on UK immigration has dispelled old beliefs that newcomers are mostly low-educated workers. A greater number of foreigners get higher degrees and better jobs than native Britons, figures released by the Office for National Statistics show.
Unlike widespread stereotypes, nearly 90 percent of foreign nationals living in the UK speak English very well, the data revealed. 3.6 million foreign nationals aged three and over reported that they "could speak English well, very well or as their main language."

Only 1.7 percent (70,000) of foreign nationals reported that they could not speak English at all.

Twenty-one percent of foreign nationals were employed in banking, finance and insurance, compared with 17 percent of UK nationals. Thirty-eight percent of foreign nationals gained qualifications at degree standard or higher, compared with 29 percent of natives, according to the Office for National Statistics.

“UK nationals were more concentrated in the public administration, education and health sector [29 percent], compared with foreign nationals [23 percent],” the ONS report showed; the census was taken in March 2011.

Many were found to be in the UK to study, with the proportion among foreign nationals “more than double that of UK nationals: 17 percent compared with 8.1 percent.” The difference, the report said, “is partly related to the younger age structure of the foreign national population.”

Meanwhile, a recent analysis by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) confirmed that immigrants actually give more than they take.

According to recent opinion polls, cited in OECD latest report, about 50 percent of citizens in European countries and in Canada believe that immigrants contribute less in taxes than they receive in health and welfare services and that "they are a big burden on the public purse," supported by higher taxes paid by native-born citizens.

"Migration represents neither a significant gain nor drain for the public purse. Immigrants are pretty much like the rest of the population," the report concluded.

The ONS report also showed that the majority of both UK and foreign nationals aged 16 and over were "economically active [64 percent and 65 percent respectively] and in employment [61 and 60 percent]".

For those in employment, foreign nationals were most concentrated in professional (20 percent) and elementary occupations (19 percent) while UK nationals were most concentrated in professional (18 percent) and associate professional and technical occupations (13 percent), the ONS findings revealed.

Earlier this week anti-immigration campaigners from independent think-tank Migrationwatch UK said that the number of immigrants arriving in the UK from the European Union was undercounted by half a million over a 10-year period, "a difference the size of Manchester."

The mistake was discovered by the ONS when they compared the results of the recent census with the population that they had expected to find on the basis of births, deaths and the official immigration figures.
 
This discovery means that net foreign immigration between mid-1997 and mid-2010 now totals very nearly 4 million, according to Migrationwatch UK. Allowing for the 1 million British citizens who emigrated in that period, net immigration comes to 3 million. The revised numbers would show that net immigration reached a peak of 325,000 in 2005 – six times the level of 1997. By 2010 it had fallen to 260,000.
 
“Four million immigrants in 13 years is an astonishing figure – the highest in our history, including the Norman Conquest in 1066. This new information underlines the scale of the task faced by the present government in getting the numbers down,” chairman of Migrationwatch UK, Sir Andrew Green, said.

Migrationwatch has called on the Statistics Authority to insist that the official figures be revised.

“There is no point in burying bad news in obscure documents. That simply destroys trust. It is hard to think of set of statistics that is more important to the public,” Green added.

UK Column Live - 26th July 2013

The debt time bomb that is Britain.

Unfunded Liabilities Crisis Is Upon Us NOW! You MUST Own Gold & Silver. ...

Labor saving: UK rising rich & poor gap fueled by immigration

Britain's Left Wing Education Shame

The Difference Between Putin and Obama. - You Got to See This!!