Search This Blog

Wednesday 28 April 2010

Green Lies and Deceptive Science a Christian & Realistic View

Green Lies and Deceptive Science
By Berit Kjos - April 20, 2007 (Updated in 2009)
The Agenda: Using false science to create a "global crisis"
Club of Rome: "In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill..."[1] The First Global Revolution, Club of Rome, an elite think-tank (David Rockefeller, Gorbachev, etc.) working with the UN.
Stanford University Professor Steven Schneider (Nobel Prize winner along with Al Gore):"...we need to get some broad based support, to capture the public's imagination.... So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramatic statements and make little mention of any doubts.... Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."[2] 
Christine Stewart, Canadian Minister of the Environment: “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony... climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”[3]
The Truth: Climates has always been changing -- 1000 AD was warmer than today
Atmospheric physicist Fred Singer: "The earth continually warms and cools. The cycle is undeniable, ancient, often abrupt, and global. It is also unstoppable. Isotopes in the ice and sediment cores, ancient tree rings, and stalagmites tell us it is linked to small changes in the irradiance of the sun."[4, p.4]   Atmospheric physicist Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming
Edward Hunter (author of Brainwashing, an exposé of Soviet strategies for mind control): “The methods used to make ‘learning’ and confession palatable and workable are borrowed freely from … evangelism, psychiatry and science. The language and ideals of each of these fields were taken over and given new meanings and new interpretations in accordance with communist need. Brainwashing is a combination of fake evangelism and quack psychiatry in a setting of false science.” (1960, p.185)
"Then the Lord answered Job out of the whirlwind, and said: 'Who is this who darkens counsel by words without knowledge?...Where were you when I laid the foundations of the earth? ... To what were its foundations fastened?... Or who shut in the sea... when I said, ‘This far you may come, but no farther, and here your proud waves must stop!’" Job 38:1-6, 8, 11
As the Copenhagen conference on global warming ended with a rising snow storm that blanketed Europe with record-breaking freeze, the world was treated to a welcome glimpse of reality: Our planet has been cooling, not heating, in recent years -- in spite of human activities and the CO2-spewing jets of the global elite! (See Not So Hot)
No binding treaties had been signed when our would-be world managers flew home through the icy storms. Many had tried to conceal the damaging revelations of "ClimateGate," but their fraudulent science had been exposed to the world. Do you wonder whom we can trust when our leaders are trading integrity for a conspiratorial plan to undermine our freedom through outright lies? Their next steps toward global control will most likely take place behind closed doors -- out of sight like the leaders of the European Union and like our president's congressional puppets.
"'What we will need after Copenhagen is a little time,' said Yvo de Boer, head of the United Nations climate change secretariat.... 'Obama has committed to showing action and leadership on climate change.'" ("New climate change treaty could be ready in 2010")
Yes, he has certainly fueled this deceptive drive toward global tyranny. The magnitude of its lies and corruption is immeasurable -- far beyond what most honest Americans would even imagine. For example,
"...a British scientist and Wikipedia administrator rewrote climate history, editing more than 5,000 unique articles in the online encyclopedia to cover traces of a medieval warming period – something Climategate scientists saw as a major roadblock in the effort to spread the global warming message....
     "A major climate-change researcher told Deming, 'We have to get rid of the Medieval Warm Period.' ...Beginning in February 2003, Connolley rewrote Wikipedia entries on global warming, the greenhouse effect, the instrumental temperature record, the urban heat island, on climate models and on global cooling.... In February, he began editing the Little Ice Age. By August, he began to rewrite history without the Medieval Warm Period [described below]. In October, he turned to the hockey-stick chart." (See "Look who's erasing history of climate")
The actual Ups and Downs of Climate (The rest of this article was written in 2007)
scientific consensus on human-caused global warming! His claim that Greenland's ice will melt, causing oceans to rise twenty feet, is science fiction, not reality. Unadulterated scientific facts show us that, since 2005, Greenland's ice mass has been growing, not shrinking! So has its population of polar bears.
During a medieval period of global warming (significantly warmer than before the latest cooling trend), Norwegian vikings settled on Greenland's sunny coast. Its green grass seemed to welcome farming. But the climate cooled, and by 1350 AD, ice covered their fields and coastal waters. That "Little ice age" -- a natural shift in the revolving cycles of nature -- wiped out the entire community. What's more, during that warming period -- almost a millennium before the media would blame SUVs for warm days -- the Atlantic coasts were not buried by rising oceans. In fact, any slight variation in ocean levels are naturally moderated by increased evaporation during warmer cycles. Our Maker planned His creation well!
Opposing today's deceptive propaganda, "more than 17,100 basic and applied American scientists (physicists, geophysicists, climatologists, meteorologists, oceanographers, and environmental scientists) have dared to publicly disagree with the supposed "global warming" consensus. Their research showed that the increase of "atmospheric carbon dioxide during the 20th Century have produced no deleterious effects upon global weather, climate, or temperature. Increased carbon dioxide has, however, markedly increased plant growth rates."[5]
Other concerned scientists warn us that the ominous media predictions are "based solely on unproven scientific theories, imperfect computer models -- and the unsupported assumptions that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuels and requires immediate action."[6]
But the liberal media turns a deaf ear to the rational voices. Mention global warming and the name most likely to come to mind is Al Gore. His 1992 book, Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit helps explain why his disciples defend his deceptive message with religious zeal. It IS religious!  M. Scott Peck, the supposedly "Christian" author of The Road Less Traveled, called it a "holy book" that we "must have for our collective salvation."[7, back cover]
Notice the emphasis on earth-centered spirituality in the quotes below. Gore's spiritual blend matches the UN demand for a universal, unifying spirituality based on systems thinking -- a postmodern version of the timeless pantheistic belief that everything is interconnected. (See the butterfly story) Contemporary change agents have stretched this philosophy to include all systems: political, economic, social, and spiritual. With that in mind, ponder the faith -- and the deceptive suggestions --behind Gore's pseudo science and historical revisions:
"The richness and diversity of our religious tradition throughout history is a spiritual resource long ignored by people of faith, who are often afraid to open their minds to teachings first offered outside their own system of belief. But the emergence of a civilization in which knowledge moves freely and almost instantaneously throughout the world has. . . spurred a renewed investigation of the wisdom distilled by all faiths. This panreligious perspective may prove especially important where our global civilization's responsibility for the earth is concerned.... Native American religions, for instance, offer a rich tapestry of ideas about our relationship to the earth....'All things are connected like the blood that unites us all.'" (pages 258-259)
"The spiritual sense of our place in nature... can be traced to the origins of human civilization.... The last vestige of organized goddess worship was eliminated by Christianity." (page 260)
"Hindu environmentalist, Dr. Karan Singh, regularly cites the ancient Hindu dictum: 'The Earth is our mother, and we are all her children."[7] (page 261)
To help establish this earth-centered spirituality, Gore calls for "a central organizing principle – one agreed to voluntarily." Then he warns us that...
"Minor shifts in policy, moderate improvement in laws and regulations, rhetoric offered in lieu of genuine change—these are all forms of appeasement, designed to satisfy the public’s desire to believe that sacrifice, struggle and a wrenching transformation of society will not be necessary."[7] (page 274)
Only a major crisis would persuade the masses to consent to such a "wrenching transformation." Like Al Gore, the elite members of the Club of Rome knew that well. That's why they concluded that "global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill."[1]  Local abuses (polluted rivers, industrial waste, etc.) won't suffice. Unlike "global warming" with its sensationalized consequences, local problems seldom capture the imagination of the global community. They just aren't scary enough!
Green History
To understand the politics behind the environmental movement and its persuasive propaganda, let's look at the social ambitions that drive it. Its agenda was formed during the sixties, when four overlapping anti-establishment groups joined to form the Green Party in Germany: radical feminists, Marxists (the new Left), peace-niks (the anti-war movement), and hippies seeking spiritual enlightenment. Small wonder they chose Vladimir Lenin's birthday as their Earth Day.
Militant U.S. "Greens" formed a similar agenda: radical population control, a global welfare system (replacing capitalism with socialism), planetary governance (including national disarmament), and earth-centered spirituality.

The blend of these four counter-culture philosophies shows why pantheism and Marxism permeate environmentalism. Consider the sobering fact that William Reilly, former head of the Environmental Protection Agency, stated that private ownership of land is a "quaint anachronism."[8] According to former Washington governor Dr. Dixy Lee Ray, Reilly sought the "repeal of the Fifth Amendment to make it easier for government to seize private land."[8]
But the undisputed leader of the environmental movement during the last three decades has been Canadian billionaire Maurice Strong. Though usually operating behind the scenes, Strong is no minor player in this global contest for the minds of the masses. He led the UN Environmental Programme, directed the 1972 and 1992 UN Conferences on the Environment and Development, founded Planetary Citizens, directed the World Future Society and founded and co-chaired the World Economic Forum. He has been a member of the Club of Rome, trustee of the Rockefeller Foundation and Aspen Institute, a member of the UN Commission on Global Governance, and the Senior Advisor to the World Bank as well as to former UN Secretary General Kofi Annan.
Mr. Strong also founded the Earth Council. Working closely with Steven Rockefeller, Mikhail Gorbachev and Robert Mueller, he oversaw the drafting of the UN Earth Charter, which is housed in the notorious Ark of Hope. If this Charter wins the consent of "the people," it would only be a matter of time before its rules replace all rights granted by the U.S. Constitution.[9]
The Earth Charter opens with this declaration: "We stand at a critical moment in Earth's history, a time when humanity must choose its future...." It continues,
"As never before in history, common destiny beckons us to seek a new beginning. Such renewal is the promise of these Earth Charter principles.... This requires a change of mind and heart. It requires a new sense of global INTERdependence [systems thinking] and universal responsibility. ... The partnership of government, civil society, and business is essential for effective governance."[10]
This global contract clashes with Christianity. "Fundamental changes," it tells us, "are needed in our values, institutions, and ways of living." A new set of beliefs, values and behavior must unify "the one human family" to ensure lasting peace.
The Power behind the GREEN AGENDA
This grand purpose not only demands favorable propaganda -- the doomsday predictions that trade scientific facts for intentional deception. It also calls for unthinkable censorship. Contrary voices must be silenced.
It's happening in the UK. "Only a few years ago the Greens were merely a fringe group, today they are at the center of British politics," wrote Paul Johnson in his Forbes article titled "The Menace of the Lobby:"  
"This is largely because of the backing they have received from a majority of scientists over the issue of global warming, especially the unproved theory that it is caused largely by human activities. The Royal Society, the most prestigious of British scientific institutions, has thrown its weight strongly behind the Greens. Scientists who are known to be skeptical of global warming find it hard to get academic jobs and impossible to receive university funding for their research....
      "How many Greens are there? It is assumed they number in the millions.... The environmental fervor of most Greens borders on fanatical. Some call for the denial of climate change to be made a criminal offense, along the lines of legislation in European countries that makes denial of the Holocaust unlawful.... As a result a mass of legislation is being turned into law, subjecting any activities that increase greenhouse gas emissions or are seen as 'crimes against nature' to severe financial penalties.... It won't be long before all households feel their effects."[11]
America follows close behind. Under the banner of Sustainable Development, the UN/US plan for government control over all water, land, food and housing is progressing at full speed. Few Americans are even aware of the vast networks of regulatory agencies and community partnerships that are implementing the new system through Agenda 21 -- often disguised as Smart Growth or other pleasing labels for this all-consuming UN agenda.
While most of these new rules and regulation bypass Congress, some do not. A recent article titled, "Bill ties climate to national security" warns us that...
"The CIA and Pentagon would for the first time be required to assess the national security implications of climate change under proposed legislation intended to elevate global warming to a national defense issue.... The measure also would order the Pentagon to undertake a series of war games to determine how global climate change could affect US security....
      "John J. Hamre, who served as deputy secretary of defense in the Clinton administration, said global warming couched in security terms would make if far more difficult for politicians to ignore. 'What makes this interesting is the clear effort to make the politics of global warming broader.'"[12]
The Contrary Evidence
Meanwhile, the evidence against man-made global warming is overwhelming. Here are just a few links that tell the "other" side:
"Their experiments confirmed that cosmic rays, by ionising molecular particles, provide nuclei for condensation of water vapour, thereby significantly influencing cloud cover on the planet. In periods of high electro-magnetic activity in the sun, such as occurred during the past century, cosmic rays are deflected, resulting in a reduction of clouds. This effect plus greater direct radiation from the sun is likely a significant factor in global warming." Exploding stars influence climate on earth

"The past, both recent and geologic, has seen large and rapid natural changes in temperature. Any onset of warmer temperatures [which increases the rate of evaporation] would be expected to produce a drop in sea level, not a rise." The Scientific Case against the Global Climate Treaty

"In almost a point-by-point refutation of Al Gore's unsupportable rant that 'the debate is over; man is warming the Earth,' Singer and Avery explain technically but lucidly why nearly
every cherry-picked fact in Gore's movie 'An Inconvenient Truth' is contradicted by science.... Man is in fact all but irrelevant to global climate, as the sun and its accompanying solar system rule." Careful Review of Science Refutes Global Warming Myths
How can Al Gore claim to have all the answers when honest scientists are just beginning to uncover the unfathomable mysteries of God's creation? His shallow "certainties" ignore the cyclical forces and natural fluctuation that have influenced the earth's warming and cooling phases through the ages. They include:
  • sunspot activity (increased solar turbulence, which heat the earth in 9 to 13-year cycles). During the coldest years in the "Little Ice Age," there were "virtually no sunspots at all..."[4, p.8]
  • major volcanic eruptions (can blast millions of tons of particles and gas into the stratosphere, blocking solar rays, and cooling the earth for years).
  • the gravitational pull of the moon (affects tidal forces and triggers volcanoes)
  • the annual decrease of stratospheric ozone each southern winter (our summer) when the sun's seasonal absence prevents ultraviolet rays from interacting with oxygen and producing ozone.
  • the earth's magnetic field (deflects storm tracks)
"We know more about the surface of Mars than the three-mile strip of state waters along our coast," admits Rikk Kvitek, director of the Seafloor Mapping Lab at California State University."[13]

Even so, faithful Job, who lived about 4000 years ago, knew some amazing facts about God's creation. Thousands of years before the celebrated discoveries of Newton and Galileo, Job described God' work to his critical friends:
""#000000" He hangs the earth on nothing. "#000000" He binds up the water in His thick clouds,
Yet the clouds "#000000" are not broken under it." Job 26:7
But Job didn't realize how little he actually knew. So God gave him (and us) a lesson. Here is only a fraction of that lesson, but take time to ponder it. And never forget the amazing sovereignty of God and the absurdity of human claims to improve the order of His magnificent creation.
The Lord answered Job...
"Have you entered the springs of the sea? Or have you walked in search of the depths? ...Tell Me, if you know all this.
"By what way is light diffused, or the east wind scattered over the earth? Who has divided a channel for the overflowing water, or a path for the thunderbolt...
“Can you bind the cluster of the Pleiades, or loose the belt of Orion?... Do you know the ordinances of the heavens?
“Can you lift up your voice to the clouds, that an abundance of water may cover you?..."  Job 38:16-40
Then Job answered the Lord...
'I know that You can do everything, and that no purpose of Yours can be withheld from You. You asked, ‘Who is this who hides counsel without knowledge?’ Therefore I have uttered what I did not understand, things too wonderful for me, which I did not know.” Job 42:1-6
Though we don't agree with today's politicized science and false conclusions, we do appreciate the responsibilities God has given us in caring for His creation. We shared some guidelines on that topic in our 1992 book, Under the Spell of Mother Earth. You may want to read chapters 1 and 3.
O Lord my God! When I in awesome wonder
Consider all the worlds Thy hands have made,
I see the stars, I hear the rolling thunder,
Thy power throughout the universe displayed:

Then sings my soul, my Savior God, to Thee:
How great Thou art, how great Thou art!
Then sings my soul! my Savior God, to Thee:
How great Thou art, how great Thou art!

Excellent outside resources: http://www.sovereignty.net/p/clim/cctutorial.htm and Secret Worlds: The Universe Within. This amazing videoshows the infinitely vast -- and the inconceivably tiny -- wonders of the universe we inhabit. Please watch it, then ask yourself, How could such an astounding universe simply evolve from nothing?

Endnotes:
1. Alexander King & Bertrand Schneider, The First Global Revolution (New York: Pantheon Books, 1991), 115. 
2. Jonathan Schell, "Our Fragile Earth," Discover (October 1989); 44. 
3.  Christine Stewart, then Canadian Minister of the Environment, speaking before editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald, 1998, and quoted by Terence Corcoran, “Global Warming: The Real Agenda,” Financial Post, 26 December 1998, from the Calgary Herald, December, 14, 1998. Cited by Fred Singer, page 4. (See note #4)
4. S. Fred Singer and Dennis T. Avery, Unstoppable Global Warming (Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2007).
7.Al Gore, Earth in the Balance: Ecology and the Human Spirit (Houghton Mifflin, 1992).
8. Dixy Lee Ray, Environmental Overkill (Washington: Regnery Gateway, 1993), 101.
12. Bryan Bender, "Bill ties climate to national security," Boston Globe, 4-9-07.
13.Barbara Feder Ostrow, "Undersea map reveals Maverick's secret," www.mercurynews.com, 4-17-07.
FOOTNOTE FROM HORWICH NATIONALISTS.
 IN EFFECT   IF YOU ARE CONSIDERING GOING GREEN BE CARE FULL , YOU WILL BE IN FACT GOING RED, BECOMING WHAT THEY CALL A USEFUL IDIOT. AS I LIKE TO CALL THE GREEN LEADERSHIP WATERMELONS GREEN ON THE OUSTSIDE RED IN THE MIDDLE!


Posted by at No comments:

Press Statement from British National Party Candidates


HERE IS A PRESS STATEMENT FROM YOU BOLTON BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY CANDIDATES IGNORED BY THE LOCAL MEDIA! SO WE ISSUE IT DIRECT TO YOU AND OTHER PARTIES!
Press Statement from
British National Party Candidates,
Bolton Metropolitan Council & general Elections 2010,

Subject,

Cross party Pledge,

We in the British National Party have no links what so ever with the English Defence League, and do not condone their tactics of mass rallies but we feel that in a Democratic country, all British patriotic groups have a right to peacefully voice their concerns at the devaluing of the British Way of life, culture and heritage, with out the fear of violence and intimidation by the Unite Against Fascism group!

So would all the parliamentary and local Bolton Borough Candidates in the forthcoming elections for the Bolton Metropolitan area, agree with the Assistant Chief Constable Garry Shewan, from Greater Manchester Police (GMP), who accused UAF (Unite against Fascism) supporters and of deliberately inciting violence and attacking officers. At the EDL rally in March, And is quoted as saying. (The Independent 22/03/10)
"We have seen groups of people, predominantly associated with the UAF, engaging in violent confrontation," he said. "It is clear to me that a large number have attended with the sole intention of committing disorder and their actions have been wholly unacceptable. They acted with, at times, extreme violence and their actions led to injuries to police officers, protesters and members of the public.
"The police are not and should not be the target of such violence and anger, and this protest and the actions of some of the protesters is roundly condemned by GMP and by Bolton Council."
Although it states it that Bolton council condemns the violent tactics of the Left wing UAF, We feel it would be for the benefit of the electorate of The Bolton Metropolitan area to know that along with all the British National Party Candidates in the forthcoming Bolton elections, That all the other parties candidates Strongly condemn the violent tactics and actions of the UAF and their affiliated groups. And that the right of free speech and assembly for all to protest should not be subject to violent intimidation and violence no matter how strongly the opposition disagree with their opponents views.
End Statement,
Posted by at No comments:

NU LABOURS BROWNS CONTEMPT FOR THE BRITISH PEOPLE

Once again the Nu Labour Marxist elite in the person of it,s leader Gordon Brown have shown the contempt for the White working class British people, it is now a fact that they view all of us as bigots for expressing concerns over how our Nation and NHS services are being over stretched by immigrants both illegal and legitimate. The insult is made even more worse by the fact that the Mrs Duffy was a Labour supporter. How much longer must the British people just stand back and be treated with such contempt by the Political establishment , and by that I mean not only the Nu Labour Party but the Liberal & Conservative parties also. We are a people under the threat of complete destruction of not just our culture & religion but as a race as well from these closet inverse racists that now frequent the corridors of power. 
there is only one alternative to save us from these Monsters in the forthcoming elections on May the 6th and that is the, BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY , Not just for the next 4 years but for the survival of our nation and it,s people,  
VOTE FOR

 


FULL TRANSCRIPT  OF THE INCIDENT. 
Duffy: We had it drummed in when I was a child with mine … it was education, health service and looking after the people who are vulnerable. But there's too many people now who are vulnerable but they can claim and people who are vulnerable can't get claim, can't get it.
Brown: But they shouldn't be doing that, there is no life on the dole for people any more. If you are unemployed you've got to go back to work. It's six months.
Duffy: You can't say anything about the immigrants because you're saying that you're … but all these eastern European what are coming in, where are they flocking from?
Later, as he was leaving
Brown: Very good to meet you, and you're wearing the right colour today. Ha, ha, ha: How many grandchildren do you have?
Duffy: Two. They've just got back from Australia where they got stuck for 10 days. They couldn't get back with this ash crisis.
Brown: We've been trying to get people back quickly. Are they going to university. Is that the plan?
Duffy: I hope so. They're only 12 and 10.
Brown: Are they're doing well at school? [pats Duffy on the back] A good family, good to see you. It's very nice to see you.
In the car
Brown: That was a disaster. Well I just ... should never have put me in that woman. Whose idea was that?
Aide: I don't know, I didn't see.
Brown: It was Sue [Nye] I think. It was just ridiculous.
Aide: I'm not sure if they [the media] will go with that.
Brown: They will go with that.
Aide: What did she say?
Brown: Oh everything, she was just a sort of bigoted woman. She said she used be LABOUR. I mean it's just ridiculous.
Posted by at No comments:

Marxist Teachers Go Public & Intefere in Democratic Process


This is NOW a fight like no other fight before it
THE National Union of Teachers (NUT) is trying to stop the BNP gaining more council seats in the upcoming elections by leafleting homes across the city. Dozens of union members and other volunteers targeted homes in the Stoke, Trent Vale, Hartshill and Penkhull areas yesterday . Jason Hill, president of the union's Stoke-on-Trent branch, said: "From our perspective as teachers, we are very concerned about the fact the BNP has a number of school governorships in the city and we don't want them to get any more. "We believe having BNP members as governors is incompatible with the values we are supposed to hold as teachers." The NUT's day of action was linked to a wider protest against the far-right party, which was organised by the North Staffordshire Campaign Against Racism and Fascism and Unite Against Fascism. Other areas which have been leafleted in recent weeks include Bentilee and Abbey Green.
Make no mistake, the British National Party is doing extremely well, both politically, financially and in its growing membership.
There is no doubt about this at all, but you will not hear it in the news or see it discussed on television.
The reason I know that our strength is growing immensely is primarily because I hear and see it myself, and because I can also see for myself what the government and the LibLabCon are doing in their fruitless, hectic and undemocratic attempts to make the British public believe that it is us rather than them who are EVIL.
Please don't confuse the word evil with me being religious because I declared a long time ago, my lifelong support for truth which I could myself validate.
Therefore I am an agnostic in terms of belief in diety and I am also a Christian and I recognise that my Christian principles of tolerance have been taken advantage of by Marxists.
Marxists have infiltrated the LibLabCon and they are evil in their unceasing global desire to break nations.
The LibLabCon and YOUR GOVT , has engaged The Teachers Union to drop Marxist propaganda through letterboxes in Britain.
In any other country bar Zimbabwe, this would be a criminal offence but not here in Zanu-Britain.
Poor people along with their unsuspecting children, are being subjected to political propaganda in our schools, our colleges, our universities and our work places, and we are now being harassed in our homes by Marxists who are bent on Global domination.
The National Union of Teachers [NUT's] has an appropriate name.
They are clearly nuts, but thankfully at this time they are not completely nuts.
I personally know teachers who tell me they remain quiet about their support of the British National Party and for British democracy because they live and work in fear of losing their jobs.
I hear it, and I see it and yet for obvious reasons I cannot tell you who these people are.
Now like GA today, I am not going to provide links here because by now, if YOU are too stupid and lazy to have found the truth out yourself, then YOU DESERVE TO HAVE YOUR COUNTRY AND YOUR WAY OF LIFE - DESTROYED - BY THESE MAD NUTTERS WE HAVE IN POLITICS - IN GOVT - IN UNIONS - AND IN SOCIETY IN GENERAL.
These nutters were once locked away in asylums but now they have taken over our country.
Marxists have used nutters to shift blame to and to divert the public eye, but make no mistake that the government, David Cameron, trades unions, former Militant the Socialist Workers Party, Hope Not Hate, Searchlight, the Black Police Association, and many more groups such as Common Purpose and the Fabian Society along with Nothing British, have been eating up your taxes, telling the people lies, brainwashing your children, threatening those who resist them, and making laws against you solely to destroy your ability to resist them.
YOU ALONE CAN MAKE THE DIFFERENCE!
The ONLY way this time is to vote for the British National Party but there are indeed many other ways to regain control of our country notleast full blown revolution and war which will eventually occur quite naturally as larger numbers of people discover that their lands have been infested by self-serving anti-British Globalists and by other alien ideologues.
I am predicting that these Marxists will not release power through the ballot box.
I am predicting that yet again they will commit fraud at the ballot box.
I am predicting that people like me will still be here, next time with the links as future truths becomes known, I will be here to prove the next round of fraud being committed against our nation, and I will still be here giving truth along with my opinion well after the Marxists have completely ruined the British political system.
Nothing will stop me speaking the truth, and nothing will make me shut up except death.
People like me will never give up and people like me will one day be ready to take up arms against Marxists if they continue to harm my people and my country.
People like them who took away our democracy, our culture, our sovereignty and our right to protest unfettered by Marxist traitors who call themselves TEACHERS and 'anti-Fascists', will not win this land for their evil dream.
Right now I am declaring my readiness to fight against any government which seeks the destruction of the beliefs I hold and which I know are shared by many millions of others.
Right now I am declaring my belief that one day I will have no other choice unless something politically can change the Marxists who are currently in control of my country.
Right now I am declaring that this country is no longer under the control of democrats but that it is a communist state which I am morally and legally bound to resist.
I ask one question:
Why is the government not banning interference in the electoral process by people who are not standing as political candidates?
Posted by at No comments:

Tuesday 27 April 2010

Bognor Regis Civic Society Condemns Labour, Tory and Lib Dems

Bognor Regis Civic Society Condemns Labour, Tory and Lib Dems for Refusing to Debate BNP

April 27, 2010 - By BNP News
The BNP's Andrew Moffat.
The impartial community Bognor Regis Civic Society (CiViC) has taken the unprecedented step of formally condemning the Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat parties for being too scared to debate the British National Party at an election hustings.
“The Parliamentary class is already loathed and regarded with contempt by the voters,” said BNP candidate in the Bognor Regis and Littlehampton constituency, Andrew Moffat.
“First there was the MPs’ expenses scandal. Now, they refuse to subject themselves to the scrutiny of their own voters and debate the real issues in open forum,” Mr Moffat said.
“This is an outrage of unprecedented disrespect and demonstrates disgraceful manners against the organisers,” he said.
“It is quite clear they were not prepared to discuss mass immigration and the imposition of the multicultural society, the Iraq and Afghan wars, or the EU, all in respect of which there has been no democratic consent or consultation whatsoever.
“I further suspect that local MP Nick Gibb did not want to have his parliamentary expenses scrutinised by his voters and I had hoped to raise this. That provided an added incentive for him to run away.
“Clearly, there is no difference between the Lab/Lib/Con on the major issues. They are all the same and all to blame,” Mr Moffat said.
“If they had an issue, they should have debated it in open forum instead of running away. That is the democratic way of doing things. These pompous candidates have shown unprecedented contempt for their own voters.
The meeting went ahead with the three remaining candidates and there was much constructive debate and questioning.
The organisers of CiViC condemned the three absent candidates to much applause. At the end of the evening, a vote was taken to issue a formal rebuke to each of the candidates and, but for two exceptions, was supported by all present.

Posted by at No comments:

Lib Dem Candidate Reveals His Party’s “Mongrel Nation” View

Lib Dem Candidate Reveals His Party’s “Mongrel Nation” Vision for Britain

April 27, 2010 - By BNP News

Liberal Democrats are ignorant and hate Britain, says BNP’s Danny Seabrook.
The Liberal Democrat hatred of British people has been revealed with comments made by their St Albans candidate that they see Britain as a “mongrel nation,” says Danny Seabrook, British National Party candidate in Hertsmere.
In an interview with pupils of St Albans School as part of a BBC project, Lib Dem candidate Sandy Walkington said: “We’ve always as a country been strongest when we have welcomed immigration, and we are all mongrels.
“This is the most mongrel country in the world.
“In 200 years time, we’ll all be coffee coloured, and I welcome that,” Mr Walkington said.
“The remarks are utterly disgraceful and are the clearest indication yet that the Lib Dems have an utterly twisted world view and even outright hatred for British people,” Mr Seabrook said.
“Quite apart from the sheer hatefulness of calling British people ‘mongrels,’ which is a term most often used for dogs, Mr Walkington has also displayed his appalling ignorance and stupidity on the topic of the ancestry of British people,” Mr Seabrook continued.
“All educated people know that the historical, archaeological and genetic evidence has proven beyond any doubt that up to 80 percent of the indigenous people of the British Isles have been here at least since the end of the last Ice Age, circa 14,000 years ago, and many from even before then.
“Even the most ‘recent’ large-scale settlements from continental Europe, namely the Saxons and Vikings, arrived in Britain around 1,500 years ago and each individual group only make up less than five percent each of the British people,” Mr Seabrook continued.
“Compare this history to the Maori people of New Zealand, who are internationally recognised as the indigenous folk of that land.
“The Maoris have been in New Zealand for 730 years — and I am sure Mr Walkington and his party would not call those people mongrels or deny that they are indigenous.
“The BNP is the only party to stand unequivocally for the rights of the indigenous people of Britain and their right to remain the majority population of this island,” Mr Seabrook said.
Recommended reading: Four Flags: The Indigenous People of Britain (DNA, History and the Right to Existence of the Native Inhabitants of the British Isles).
Contrary to what the liberal left Tory/Labour/Lib-Dem/UKIP-EHRC allege, the native people of the British Isles are a distinct, identifiable and homogenous indigenous people who have every right to exist and be free from invasion and domination — like any other indigenous people on earth.
This booklet proves that the vast majority of the British people have ancestors going back to the last mini ice age more than 12,000 years ago.
Table of contents:
1. Introduction (Deals with the denial of indigenous status to the British people)
2. Indigenous People — A Definition (uses UN and other definitions)
3. Haplogroups and the Genetic Identification of Peoples (explains Y-Chromosomes, mtDNA and Autosomal DNA in detail, and how they are used in forensics and history to identify and track peoples to specific areas)
4. The Haplogroups Which Mark the Indigenous People of Britain (explains which haplogroups are indigenous to Britain)
5. A History of the Peopling of Britain (a potted history of the people who have made up Britain through settlement, i.e. Euro base population, Celts, Romans, Angles, Saxons, Jutes, Danes, Normans — including figures on actual numbers of settlers and their genetic impact as measured by haplogroup)
6. Four Flags, One Nation: The right of the people of the British Isles to existence and freedom from colonisation, domination and dispossession of their lands and culture.
* Genetic evidence shows that the vast majority — nearly 80% — of all British people have ancestors going back to the end of the last mini ice age 12,000 years ago;
* Genetic evidence shows that the Celtic, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, Viking/Danish and Norman conquests had negligible impacts upon the British people (less than 5 percent each);
* Genetic evidence shows that the Irish people have far more in common with the British than both sides of that traditional divide realise.
* The people of the British Isles have been indigenous peoples for far longer than many other nations who are already classified as “indigenous” by the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues.
This booklet also shows how the indigenous people of Britain are fully protected by the United Nations Charter on Indigenous Peoples from “dispossession of their territory” through “mass population transfers” and from “forced integration and assimilation” and “destruction of their identity and culture” (all according to the United Nations).
Even more importantly, the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples states that all indigenous peoples have the right to define who is part of their nation and who is not.
Posted by at No comments:

Has the Leader of the Bolton Liberal Democrats Got A Secret?

HAS THE LEADER OF THE BOLTON LIBERAL DEMOCRATS SECRETLY CONVERTED TO ISLAM?

In a recent story in the Bolton Evening News about the Leader of the Bolton Liberal Democrats Cllr Roger Hayes (Political leader's sex den smear fury, BEN 27/04/10 Cllr Hayes stated that his partner possibly his wife Jaleh was a Muslim. So it is well known that according to Islamic teachings and law that only a Muslim man can marry a Muslim woman, 

 So we believe in it is the Public interest, not only to non Muslims but also the Muslim population of Bolton has Cllr Hayes converted to Islam and if so why has been failed to mention it.

 Also he should make his possible conversion public on the grounds that in his role on the Stronger Communities Partnership with Bolton Council a future accusation of preferential treatment on the grounds of religious bias could be avoided, if deciding on a issue that involved a religious theme.  

Also I am sure that many ordinary Muslim residents of Bolton  would be interested in the matter and may consider it showing a lack of sensitivity towards their faith and beliefs if he has not converted to Islam whilst marrying a Muslim woman whilst serving on the Stronger Communities Partnership Bolton Council, a body that is alleged to bring the beliefs of all communities to each others attentions in order to stop any cultural misunderstandings, as it seems to me that Cllr Hayes has thrown a slap across the face to Islamic beliefs if he has not become a Muslim himself, whilst living with a lady of Muslim beliefs.

I am sure that Cllrs Hayes would like to clear the matter up as it is impossible for his Partner/Wife to become a Christian or an atheist or live together as it was once called living in sin , as that would unfortunately carry a why-muslim-women-cant-marry-non-muslim-men/  “The marriage of a Christian man to Muslim women is an invalid marriage. Allah says in the Koran”. And also some Islamic scholars have issued Fatwa’s claiming that through such a marriage Cllrs Hayes Partner/Wife would become an apostate which carry the death sentence within Islam.

Posted by at No comments:

Enoch Powell's Prophetic Rivers of Blood' speech


This is the full text of Enoch Powell's so-called 'Rivers of Blood' speech, which was delivered to a Conservative Association meeting in Birmingham on April 20 1968.

The supreme function of statesmanship is to provide against preventable evils. In seeking to do so, it encounters obstacles which are deeply rooted in human nature.

One is that by the very order of things such evils are not demonstrable until they have occurred: at each stage in their onset there is room for doubt and for dispute whether they be real or imaginary. By the same token, they attract little attention in comparison with current troubles, which are both indisputable and pressing: whence the besetting temptation of all politics to concern itself with the immediate present at the expense of the future.
Above all, people are disposed to mistake predicting troubles for causing troubles and even for desiring troubles: "If only," they love to think, "if only people wouldn't talk about it, it probably wouldn't happen."
Perhaps this habit goes back to the primitive belief that the word and the thing, the name and the object, are identical.
At all events, the discussion of future grave but, with effort now, avoidable evils is the most unpopular and at the same time the most necessary occupation for the politician. Those who knowingly shirk it deserve, and not infrequently receive, the curses of those who come after.
A week or two ago I fell into conversation with a constituent, a middle-aged, quite ordinary working man employed in one of our nationalised industries.
After a sentence or two about the weather, he suddenly said: "If I had the money to go, I wouldn't stay in this country." I made some deprecatory reply to the effect that even this government wouldn't last for ever; but he took no notice, and continued: "I have three children, all of them been through grammar school and two of them married now, with family. I shan't be satisfied till I have seen them all settled overseas. In this country in 15 or 20 years' time the black man will have the whip hand over the white man."
I can already hear the chorus of execration. How dare I say such a horrible thing? How dare I stir up trouble and inflame feelings by repeating such a conversation?
The answer is that I do not have the right not to do so. Here is a decent, ordinary fellow Englishman, who in broad daylight in my own town says to me, his Member of Parliament, that his country will not be worth living in for his children.
I simply do not have the right to shrug my shoulders and think about something else. What he is saying, thousands and hundreds of thousands are saying and thinking - not throughout Great Britain, perhaps, but in the areas that are already undergoing the total transformation to which there is no parallel in a thousand years of English history.
In 15 or 20 years, on present trends, there will be in this country three and a half million Commonwealth immigrants and their descendants. That is not my figure. That is the official figure given to parliament by the spokesman of the Registrar General's Office.
There is no comparable official figure for the year 2000, but it must be in the region of five to seven million, approximately one-tenth of the whole population, and approaching that of Greater London. Of course, it will not be evenly distributed from Margate to Aberystwyth and from Penzance to Aberdeen. Whole areas, towns and parts of towns across England will be occupied by sections of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population.
As time goes on, the proportion of this total who are immigrant descendants, those born in England, who arrived here by exactly the same route as the rest of us, will rapidly increase. Already by 1985 the native-born would constitute the majority. It is this fact which creates the extreme urgency of action now, of just that kind of action which is hardest for politicians to take, action where the difficulties lie in the present but the evils to be prevented or minimised lie several parliaments ahead.
The natural and rational first question with a nation confronted by such a prospect is to ask: "How can its dimensions be reduced?" Granted it be not wholly preventable, can it be limited, bearing in mind that numbers are of the essence: the significance and consequences of an alien element introduced into a country or population are profoundly different according to whether that element is 1 per cent or 10 per cent.
The answers to the simple and rational question are equally simple and rational: by stopping, or virtually stopping, further inflow, and by promoting the maximum outflow. Both answers are part of the official policy of the Conservative Party.
It almost passes belief that at this moment 20 or 30 additional immigrant children are arriving from overseas in Wolverhampton alone every week - and that means 15 or 20 additional families a decade or two hence. Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. We must be mad, literally mad, as a nation to be permitting the annual inflow of some 50,000 dependants, who are for the most part the material of the future growth of the immigrant-descended population. It is like watching a nation busily engaged in heaping up its own funeral pyre. So insane are we that we actually permit unmarried persons to immigrate for the purpose of founding a family with spouses and fiancés whom they have never seen.
Let no one suppose that the flow of dependants will automatically tail off. On the contrary, even at the present admission rate of only 5,000 a year by voucher, there is sufficient for a further 25,000 dependants per annum ad infinitum, without taking into account the huge reservoir of existing relations in this country - and I am making no allowance at all for fraudulent entry. In these circumstances nothing will suffice but that the total inflow for settlement should be reduced at once to negligible proportions, and that the necessary legislative and administrative measures be taken without delay.
I stress the words "for settlement." This has nothing to do with the entry of Commonwealth citizens, any more than of aliens, into this country, for the purposes of study or of improving their qualifications, like (for instance) the Commonwealth doctors who, to the advantage of their own countries, have enabled our hospital service to be expanded faster than would otherwise have been possible. They are not, and never have been, immigrants.
I turn to re-emigration. If all immigration ended tomorrow, the rate of growth of the immigrant and immigrant-descended population would be substantially reduced, but the prospective size of this element in the population would still leave the basic character of the national danger unaffected. This can only be tackled while a considerable proportion of the total still comprises persons who entered this country during the last ten years or so.
Hence the urgency of implementing now the second element of the Conservative Party's policy: the encouragement of re-emigration.
Nobody can make an estimate of the numbers which, with generous assistance, would choose either to return to their countries of origin or to go to other countries anxious to receive the manpower and the skills they represent.
Nobody knows, because no such policy has yet been attempted. I can only say that, even at present, immigrants in my own constituency from time to time come to me, asking if I can find them assistance to return home. If such a policy were adopted and pursued with the determination which the gravity of the alternative justifies, the resultant outflow could appreciably alter the prospects.
The third element of the Conservative Party's policy is that all who are in this country as citizens should be equal before the law and that there shall be no discrimination or difference made between them by public authority. As Mr Heath has put it we will have no "first-class citizens" and "second-class citizens." This does not mean that the immigrant and his descendent should be elevated into a privileged or special class or that the citizen should be denied his right to discriminate in the management of his own affairs between one fellow-citizen and another or that he should be subjected to imposition as to his reasons and motive for behaving in one lawful manner rather than another.
There could be no grosser misconception of the realities than is entertained by those who vociferously demand legislation as they call it "against discrimination", whether they be leader-writers of the same kidney and sometimes on the same newspapers which year after year in the 1930s tried to blind this country to the rising peril which confronted it, or archbishops who live in palaces, faring delicately with the bedclothes pulled right up over their heads. They have got it exactly and diametrically wrong.
The discrimination and the deprivation, the sense of alarm and of resentment, lies not with the immigrant population but with those among whom they have come and are still coming.
This is why to enact legislation of the kind before parliament at this moment is to risk throwing a match on to gunpowder. The kindest thing that can be said about those who propose and support it is that they know not what they do.
Nothing is more misleading than comparison between the Commonwealth immigrant in Britain and the American Negro. The Negro population of the United States, which was already in existence before the United States became a nation, started literally as slaves and were later given the franchise and other rights of citizenship, to the exercise of which they have only gradually and still incompletely come. The Commonwealth immigrant came to Britain as a full citizen, to a country which knew no discrimination between one citizen and another, and he entered instantly into the possession of the rights of every citizen, from the vote to free treatment under the National Health Service.
Whatever drawbacks attended the immigrants arose not from the law or from public policy or from administration, but from those personal circumstances and accidents which cause, and always will cause, the fortunes and experience of one man to be different from another's.
But while, to the immigrant, entry to this country was admission to privileges and opportunities eagerly sought, the impact upon the existing population was very different. For reasons which they could not comprehend, and in pursuance of a decision by default, on which they were never consulted, they found themselves made strangers in their own country.
They found their wives unable to obtain hospital beds in childbirth, their children unable to obtain school places, their homes and neighbourhoods changed beyond recognition, their plans and prospects for the future defeated; at work they found that employers hesitated to apply to the immigrant worker the standards of discipline and competence required of the native-born worker; they began to hear, as time went by, more and more voices which told them that they were now the unwanted. They now learn that a one-way privilege is to be established by act of parliament; a law which cannot, and is not intended to, operate to protect them or redress their grievances is to be enacted to give the stranger, the disgruntled and the agent-provocateur the power to pillory them for their private actions.
In the hundreds upon hundreds of letters I received when I last spoke on this subject two or three months ago, there was one striking feature which was largely new and which I find ominous. All Members of Parliament are used to the typical anonymous correspondent; but what surprised and alarmed me was the high proportion of ordinary, decent, sensible people, writing a rational and often well-educated letter, who believed that they had to omit their address because it was dangerous to have committed themselves to paper to a Member of Parliament agreeing with the views I had expressed, and that they would risk penalties or reprisals if they were known to have done so. The sense of being a persecuted minority which is growing among ordinary English people in the areas of the country which are affected is something that those without direct experience can hardly imagine.
I am going to allow just one of those hundreds of people to speak for me:
“Eight years ago in a respectable street in Wolverhampton a house was sold to a Negro. Now only one white (a woman old-age pensioner) lives there. This is her story. She lost her husband and both her sons in the war. So she turned her seven-roomed house, her only asset, into a boarding house. She worked hard and did well, paid off her mortgage and began to put something by for her old age. Then the immigrants moved in. With growing fear, she saw one house after another taken over. The quiet street became a place of noise and confusion. Regretfully, her white tenants moved out.
“The day after the last one left, she was awakened at 7am by two Negroes who wanted to use her 'phone to contact their employer. When she refused, as she would have refused any stranger at such an hour, she was abused and feared she would have been attacked but for the chain on her door. Immigrant families have tried to rent rooms in her house, but she always refused. Her little store of money went, and after paying rates, she has less than £2 per week. “She went to apply for a rate reduction and was seen by a young girl, who on hearing she had a seven-roomed house, suggested she should let part of it. When she said the only people she could get were Negroes, the girl said, "Racial prejudice won't get you anywhere in this country." So she went home.
“The telephone is her lifeline. Her family pay the bill, and help her out as best they can. Immigrants have offered to buy her house - at a price which the prospective landlord would be able to recover from his tenants in weeks, or at most a few months. She is becoming afraid to go out. Windows are broken. She finds excreta pushed through her letter box. When she goes to the shops, she is followed by children, charming, wide-grinning piccaninnies. They cannot speak English, but one word they know. "Racialist," they chant. When the new Race Relations Bill is passed, this woman is convinced she will go to prison. And is she so wrong? I begin to wonder.”
The other dangerous delusion from which those who are wilfully or otherwise blind to realities suffer, is summed up in the word "integration." To be integrated into a population means to become for all practical purposes indistinguishable from its other members.
Now, at all times, where there are marked physical differences, especially of colour, integration is difficult though, over a period, not impossible. There are among the Commonwealth immigrants who have come to live here in the last fifteen years or so, many thousands whose wish and purpose is to be integrated and whose every thought and endeavour is bent in that direction.
But to imagine that such a thing enters the heads of a great and growing majority of immigrants and their descendants is a ludicrous misconception, and a dangerous one.
We are on the verge here of a change. Hitherto it has been force of circumstance and of background which has rendered the very idea of integration inaccessible to the greater part of the immigrant population - that they never conceived or intended such a thing, and that their numbers and physical concentration meant the pressures towards integration which normally bear upon any small minority did not operate.
Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. The cloud no bigger than a man's hand, that can so rapidly overcast the sky, has been visible recently in Wolverhampton and has shown signs of spreading quickly. The words I am about to use, verbatim as they appeared in the local press on 17 February, are not mine, but those of a Labour Member of Parliament who is a minister in the present government:
'The Sikh communities' campaign to maintain customs inappropriate in Britain is much to be regretted. Working in Britain, particularly in the public services, they should be prepared to accept the terms and conditions of their employment. To claim special communal rights (or should one say rites?) leads to a dangerous fragmentation within society. This communalism is a canker; whether practised by one colour or another it is to be strongly condemned.'
All credit to John Stonehouse for having had the insight to perceive that, and the courage to say it.
For these dangerous and divisive elements the legislation proposed in the Race Relations Bill is the very pabulum they need to flourish. Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organise to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest with the legal weapons which the ignorant and the ill-informed have provided. As I look ahead, I am filled with foreboding; like the Roman, I seem to see "the River Tiber foaming with much blood."
That tragic and intractable phenomenon which we watch with horror on the other side of the Atlantic but which there is interwoven with the history and existence of the States itself, is coming upon us here by our own volition and our own neglect. Indeed, it has all but come. In numerical terms, it will be of American proportions long before the end of the century.
Only resolute and urgent action will avert it even now. Whether there will be the public will to demand and obtain that action, I do not know. All I know is that to see, and not to speak, would be the great betrayal.
Posted by at No comments:

BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY BROADCAST GENERAL ELECTION 2010

BRITISH NATIONAL PARTY ELECTION BROADCAST ,
PLEASE WATCH WE ARE FIGHTING NOT JUST FOR YOU!
BUT FOR YOUR CHILDREN!
Posted by at No comments:

Love it or Hate it.

Is the Marmite Case a Smear?

April 27, 2010 - By BNP News
British National Party chairman Nick Griffin will personally defend the party at the London High Court in the Marmite smear campaign case this coming Thursday 29 April, and all supporters are encouraged to attend to take part in a ‘Love Britain’ demonstration.
The case will hear debate on the reasons and costs concerning Marmite manufacturer Unilever’s injunction against the BNP in which they demanded that the party not use Marmite logos in its TV election broadcast.
“As the BNP had never intended to do such a thing — as evidenced by the fact that the BBC had already been given a copy of the tape before the story flared up — the injunction was wholly unnecessary,” Mr Griffin told BNP News.
“The reality is that Unilever had engaged in a smear campaign against the BNP for several weeks, linking us through imitation and obvious innuendo to their ‘hate party’ advertising programme,” Mr Griffin said.
“As if that was not bad enough, Unilever’s advertising department then made a joke out of the very serious attack upon myself and my BNP colleagues outside of Westminster.
“Even though that attack involved life-threatening darts and other missiles being thrown at us, Unilever saw fit to parody it with a video showing their ‘hate party’ leader being smeared with Marmite by a mob.
“This and the earlier video were both clear and obvious cases of incitement to violence and hatred against myself and all BNP members,” Mr Griffin continued.
The case will be heard on Thursday 29th April at the Royal Courts of Justice, Chancery House, 53–64 Chancery Lane, London WC2A, at 10.00am.
All supporters are encouraged to attend to take part in a “Love Britain” demonstration.
* Mr Griffin has asked all supporters to formally complain to the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) about the Marmite smear campaign.
Complaints can be lodged online by clicking here.
In the part of the complaint form where it asks what type of advertisement, please select Internet, Phones & Video games.
In the part of the form where it asks subtypes, please select Internet Ads.
In the part “Where did you see/hear the advert?” please enter the following URLs:
http://alturl.com/uzyb and http://alturl.com/ibmz
In the part “When did you see/hear the advert?” put in the date you first saw the advertisement.
In the part “Who was the advertiser?” put in Unilever, and in the part “What was the product?” put in Marmite.
In the part “Description of Complaint” say that “The advertisements in question incite hatred against Mr Griffin and the BNP in general and constitute gross interference in the political system.”
* The BBC’s bias against the BNP was revealed last night once again when the party political election broadcast was transmitted several minutes earlier than advertised, obviously with the hope that many viewers would miss it.
Then, in a shocking further display of bias, much coverage was given to a small gaggle of fewer than 20 Communist and Socialist Workers’ Party ‘protestors’ outside the BBC — yet the same media ignored completely the thousands and thousands of English people who took part in the annual Sandwell St George’s Day march the weekend before.
Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)