Monday, 30 March 2009
David Owen arrived as a boy politician in Rhodesia in 1977, oozing self confident smugness. He was the man to solve the problems of a distant and socially complex nation, or so he thought. It was immediately apparent to those Rhodesians, who had given their lives working to create a civilisation, that this man simply did not have the insight, maturity or capabilities to interfere with the intricate social structures which the Colonists had created. Much the same applied to the British government.
At that date the creators of Rhodesia hoped and planned that every inhabitant would and should receive a better, safer, healthier life if the nation were allowed to continue its remarkable creative prosperity. Those astonishingly capable pioneers had already demonstrated that by achieving the lowest infantile death rate in Africa and the highest literacy rate in Africa. The wisdom and experience of the colonists was paramount, and was there for the asking.
However David Owen and, later, Peter Carrington (and the British government) "knew better". What astonishing self-opinionated arrogance.
Peter Carrington was asked, after the collapse of Zimbabwe, what he thought of the outcome of that “independence”. “No one could have anticipated this outcome” was his way of excusing his failure.
The reality is that many wise and profound people did know it would end this way, but their soundly based views were brushed aside by "know-alls", flexing muscle which was politically vested, but not justified by any other capabilities.
To demonstrate the inevitable failure of this meddlesomeness by uninformed (and misinformed) busy-bodies, swinging lanterns of righteousness and moral rectitude, the attached (copyright) cartoon was commissioned. It was not published in 1977 because of a sycophantic deferentially of the press to the British politicians. However its message of the dangers of political bumptiousness remains valid today.
David Owen, born 1938, qualified as a medical practitioner in 1962, but tried politics in 1964, losing the election. He was Foreign Secretary, 1977 to 1979, responsible for setting the stage for the transfer of power in Zimbabwe. His opportunistic changing of political party allegiance caused him to be regarded as a “serial resigner”.
Owen’s appointment in the British House of Commons greeted by Jack Cunningham who said the choice "was regarded as somewhat eccentric. Owen is known for many qualities, but not as a mediator. Indeed he has balkanised a few political parties himself" [adapted from Unfinest Hour: Britain and the Destruction of Bosnia  Brendan Simms p137]
When the European Parliament voted for Owen’s dismissal the perception in America was that Owen was "not fulfilling his function as an impartial negotiator...” [Unfinest Hour, p167].
Edward Mortimer in the Financial Times said "Owen’s departure may have surprised some who did not realise he was still in the job." [Unfinest Hour, p 171-2]
Owen's versions of events in books which he authored books are said to differ considerably from most other sources. Owen's version of his time in the Balkans was derided by academics and reviewers as 'depend(ent) on factual error, false logic and sheer omission.'
He was one of the authors of the failed Vance-Owen and Owen-Stoltenberg peace plans offered during the Bosnian War
He testified in the trial of former Yugoslavian president Slobodan Milošević, and caused some controversy by asserting that Milošević was the only leader in the Bosnian war who had consistently supported peace, and that any form of racism was personally "anathema" to him. Bosnians gave him the nick name "Lord of the Dead”. Many Zimbabweans would concord..
Honored by life peerage in 1992 as Baron Owen of Plymouth
Peter Carrington ascended to the Baronetcy in 1938 as 6th Baron, and entered the House of Lords on his 21st birthday.
As British Foreign Secretary he chaired the Lancaster House agreement on the transfer of power away from the Rhodesian Colonists in 1979.
In his decisions he chose to ignore the opinions of those who had first hand knowledge of the country, and lifelong contact with the country and its people.
He was Foreign Secretary in 1982 when the Falkland Islands were invaded by Argentina. He took full responsibility for the complacency and failures in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to foresee this development and resigned.
Saturday, 28 March 2009
Various politicians and feminist groups frequently bemoan the low conviction rate in rape cases. However, whilst the Crown Prosecution Service continue to bring ludicrous cases such as this to court, it is inevitable that fair minded jurors will continue to acquit the real victims of these travesties.
The insistence that all rape allegations must be treated as equal, whatever the circumstances, is another of the crazy symptoms of the politically correct madness which has gripped the mindset of those within the establishment who have the power to destroy lives. Inevitably such a view travels in tandem with the equally crazy, and highly offensive, belief that no woman, or indeed anyone other that a white male, should be be required to accept some degree of responsibility for their own actions.
False allegations, which occur far more frequently than the sisters will admit, apart, the demand that the courts treat all rape allegations, no matter how frivolous, as equal, will continue to result in cases like the one above, where a mature and professional woman who got drunk on her own booze and then regrets the outcome is viewed by the law as no less a victim than a young girl pounced on by a hooded stranger and then attacked at knife-point in a dark alleyway.
Such an attitude is an insult to genuine rape victims, and also offensive to any self respecting woman, and it is hardly surprising that juries, including majority female ones continue to treat such prosecutions with the contempt they deserve.
However, by that point, it is a little late for the men, who have already had their lives turned upside down, whilst their actions, habits, sexual tastes and sometimes physical attributes are examined under a very public spotlight. Acquitted or not, very few innocent men escape from a rape or sexual assault trial unharmed, the allegation will follow them for life, it will impact on their careers and future relationships, and most will suffer emotional damage to some degree. All of this made so much worse by the fact that, from the day they were charged, they and their family were named and their ordeal was carried out in public. Well, at least that is what usually happens.
As many newspapers were saying, what happened to the unfortunate Peter Bacon is a very strong argument for for extending the anonymity granted to the accuser in rape trials to the accused prior to any conviction, an argument which I believe has considerable merit.
However, in Britain today, some men on trial for rape are already effectively granted anonymity unless they are eventually convicted. In the same week as Peter Bacon's 45 minute acquittal, yet another chef, serial attacker Kirk Reid, was convicted of two rapes and 24 sexual assaults, (although the police believe he is responsible for up to 71 attacks against women). The trial has been going on for weeks and 27 different women gave evidence relating to attacks which date back over six years to 2002, however, did anybody read anything about it in the media before Thursday when Reid was convicted? I certainly didn't.
Whereas our newspapers fed us daily updates about Peter Bacon and the inebriated lawyer, as far as the Reid trial was concerned, before he was convicted and they had no option other than to report the story, the media remained silent, despite the fact that the Reid trial was by far the more serious and indeed sensational.
What is the difference between the two cases? Firstly there is the race of the defendants. Admittedly a close look at Peter Bacon suggests that he may be of mixed racial origin, however, he is by no means as obviously a black man as Kirk Reid so clearly is. Also the cases are very different. The single allegation against Peter Bacon was made by a witness with a serious credibility problem, his acquittal was very much on the cards, meaning that he could be presented as the genuine victim he appears to be. In any event, whatever the outcome, a one-off event involving two people fumbling with each other whilst in an alcoholic stupor is hardly threatening to the general public, the case could safely be reported without fear that it might undermine the multi-racial paradise the press like to pretend we live in.
Not so the case of the sinister and violent, serial offender Kirk Reid, which presses all the button as raises all the issues the media seek to play down in relation to black males. (Hence the censorship)
A better comparison to the Reid case is the conviction, also in March, of white taxi driver John Worboys, who was convicted of sexual attacks on twelve different women. Like Kirk Reid, Worboys is suspected of a much larger number of crimes than those of which he was convicted . The cases are very similar and raise similar issues about police failings. However, the media coverage could hardly have been more different.
Look, for instance at the BBC news site, and the links to related news stories regarding the two cases. On the news story relating to Kirk Reid the only connected news stories are the dated March 26, following his conviction and focus on the police handling of the case. However, in respect of John Worboys, there are a series of links to various news stories about the case, dating back over a month to the outset of the trial and provide full details of the offences of which Warboys was accused.
Indeed, anyone watching the BBC news over the last couple of months will be familiar with Warboys' mugshot and will have seen reports from the progress of his trial on both the local and national news, whereas Kirk Reid's name and face were unknown prior to his conviction.
So what was it that made the trial against the white Mr.Warboys so newsworthy whilst that against the black Mr, Reid remained unreported?. Why was black Mr. Reid granted press anonymity prior to conviction, whilst white Mr. Warboys' name and image were widely reported throughout his trial? Do I really need to ask?.
Now that the press have had to name Reid, it is interesting to note that, whenever he is mentioned his name is linked to Warboys, in a attempt to imply that both races are equally guilty of committing serial rape. In doing this the media are cynically depending on the fact that most of the public don't think, and will not realise that, given population demographics, this would only be true if there were between seven to eight of John Warboys for each Kirk Reid, which there aren't.
Kirk Reid is not the only one who benefited from pre-conviction anonymity, once again the media are being very selective in their reporting of the paedophile rings currently operating in various northern cities, details of the latest of which can be read on Lee Barnes blog here and here.
In respect of the latest case, the press refuse to mention the fact that the accused are Muslims of Asian origin, and that the alleged victims are white English children. Now why would that be, does anyone believe they would show similar reticence had the races been reversed?
There can be little doubt that, if and when these latest allegations come to court, if they are reported at all, the identity and ethnicity of the accused will be withheld unless, or until they are convicted, and even then, the ethnicity of the victims will be suppressed. Otherwise the media might have to admit that their cherished multicultural society has become a dysfunctional nightmare, and they would never admit that.
It seems that although all of us may still be just equal in the eyes of the law, that equality does not extend to press coverage.
Saturday, 14 March 2009
By Mister Fox
In the new South Africa racial genocide of South African Boers, who are Afrikaner farmers, is taking place as I write but the Western media who know all about it because they have agents and reporters in the country will not report it.
Click here to continue reading this insightful and well researched article by my friend Mister Fox.
UPDATE 18 March 2009
The total number of white farmers killed in the ongoing genocide now totals 3,039 following the murder of a couple at their farm in Brandvlei, their housekeeper was assaulted but not killed.
You will note from the report that the media persists in referring to the crime as a "robbery" and the perpetrators as "robbers", and indeed on this occasion, property was taken as well as lives. However, it is unthinkable that were over 3,000 members of any ethnic minority, other than white, been tortured to death by the majority population, that the media would treat these atrocities as "crime related".
Tuesday, 10 March 2009
We have seen this happen many times in Britain when liars seek to imply, without a shred of evidence to support such claims. that white victims were, themselves, racists aggressors who had provoked their killers to acts of self defence. Alternatively, victims are accused of “being in the wrong place”, “taking undue risks” or acting recklessly, as if one can be culpable of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, thus somehow reducing the guilt of the blacks, or Asians who were also there.
That is, of course, when they are not seeking to blame wider “whiter” society for somehow forcing black people to commit crimes.
Blaming the victim for what was done to them is not exclusive to Britain, it is even more prevalent across the Atlantic in America, where whites, despite being numerically the largest single group living beneath the poverty level, are also the single group not granted protected group status in relation to hate crimes.
It was in America that, just over two years ago, a crime was committed which demonstrated the true obscenity of the pretence that white people can not be the victims of hate crimes, that was the rape, torture and murder of a young couple by the name of Christopher Newsom and Channon Christian, allegedly by five black people.
What was done to Christopher and Channon, how they died, and what they suffered before they died, were, as in the case of our own Kriss Donald such as to make it so obviously a hate crime that only the most dishonest or agenda driven could deny it.
As a result, the same US news Media which sent juggernauts of reporters to Texas for trial of James Byrd Jnr's white killers. or to North Carolina for the ludicrous Duke Lacrosse hoax, have totally suppressed news of the case, to the point where it is only reported locally. Meanwhile the legal authorities, in a land where the constitution guarantees a swift trial, have delayed the prosecution of the main suspects for over two years, no doubt in the hope that public memory of the case will fade.
In addition, of course, the rumours, lies and historical revisions have been circulating like sharks around the USS Indianapolis. I speak not of the really vile rumours from deep in the dark bowels of anti-white hatred, and which I will not repeat here, but of the more prosaic and, therefore, far more venomous lies. These lies are of the, “they were in the wrong part of town”, “what were they there for?” type of poison, which is dripped into half hearing ears to gradually create a doubt, followed by a perception, and finally, in some cases, a belief.
The lies have reached the point where Channon Christian's parents have spoken out, clearly in distress and in defence of their daughter. To quote from the local news source:
You can read the full report by clicking here
KNOXVILLE (WVLT) – Gary and Deena Christian want to set the record straight about their daughter. Channon Christian had been dating Christopher Newsom for two months when they were carjacked and brutally murdered during the first week of January 2007.
You can tell by the way Gary Christian tightly clasps his hands that he holds a lot of anger inside over his daughter’s murder.
“I will never see a morning that I don't hurt," he said.
The restraint, strength and dignity shown by Mr and Mrs Christian in the face of the unbearable is truly admirable. They, and Chris Newson's equally grieving parents, will need those qualities in abundance because their suffering is not over. As the trial of their children's killers finally approaches, the defenders of diversity are preparing to re-abuse those innocent young people as much and as often as it takes to defend the evil myth they have imposed upon us.
The system, the media and the liars will betray Christopher and Channon, thank God the internet will not.
Monday, 9 March 2009
The day will culminate with an evening long television spectacular, where will will laugh at film of out fellow countrymen and women doing "something funny for money", and cheer each time the growing total of money raised runs across the TV screen.
As with most of these things. a significant amount of the money raised will be earmarked for those living in dire poverty Africa, and we are assured that this will be used to "improve lives".
Red Nose day has been going on for a number of years and succeeds various similar telethons and concerts for the same purpose dating back to the first "Live Aid" in the 1980's, where well meaning people, 99% of them white, have willingly donated money, in addition to the proportion of their taxes which in paid out in Aid to the third world, in the genuine hope of "improving lives in Africa".
Am I being cynical, but can someone please direct me to anything or anywhere in modern Africa, where lives are improving? In fact in the quarter century that this has been going on, lives across Africa have been getting progressively worse.
Sadly, for all their genuine good intentions, efforts like this which seek to help Africa, but which refuse to accept fundamental truths about Africa will continue to be exercises in well meant futility.
by Ian Mosley
The wonders of multiculturalism never cease to amaze. According to a Zimbabwe-based news site, possibly the only one in Zimbabwe still functioning: “Young men are attacked and their genitals cut off while they are still alive; children’s throats are slit and their organs removed; and border-crossers are caught with bags containing human heads and sexual organs.These stories and more are contained in a horror report on the trafficking of human body parts in Mozambique and South Africa, which has unveiled a scary reality: body parts are frequently used in traditional medicine and there is a commonly held belief that such medicine is very powerful.”
Notice the mainstream media never tells us about things like this. You can add to these stories the superstition -taken seriously by many African men- that AIDS can be cured by having sex with a virgin. Predictably, this has led to the rape of younger and younger children in Africa until “baby rape” has become an epidemic. Funny how this particular story of “Diversity” has failed to make a widespread appearance in the Western press. If the truth about Africa were published, the opposition to African immigration would greatly increase.
The web site goes on: “‘Ritual killings are common here; it’s like daily bread. We do not even get shocked when a person is found dead with body parts removed,’ said one of the South Africans interviewed. Last year, 413 Mozambicans and South Africans attended open workshops and 139 went on to be interviewed. Twenty-two percent of interviewees had first-hand experience of seeing a mutilated body or separate body parts. Furthermore, researchers could not find a single case in which someone caught carrying a body part had been prosecuted.”
Remember all the headlines about “oppressed” Blacks in South Africa back in the ’80s? I guess “oppressed” means that everyone was fed and the White police didn’t tolerate voodoo killings in contrast to the rest of the Dark Continent. Liberals demanded total political equality for the Blacks and this is what has resulted. Liberals of course never admit that their policies have led to failure. The current financial crisis in the US stemmed from high-risk subprime loans to minorities that the banks were compelled to make by federal regulators supporting liberal policies. Prior to this policy change, the banks were solvent and only made home loans to responsible people. The truth is a rare commodity these days.
The article continues “According to the Mozambican Human Rights League (LDH), which initiated the research, this is because there is no legislation - local or international - that criminalises the carrying of a body part… A total of 93 percent of the interviewees believed medicine containing body parts was more powerful. One of the researchers, Matshidisho Ntsiuoa, said she had spoken to a woman who had gone to a sangoma for help to fall pregnant. The sangoma gave her a belt to wear. From the belt hung the fingers and penises of children. Although the woman felt uncomfortable about the belt, she wore it. She paid R4 000 for the consultation… Most of the medicine is aimed at making businesses more successful, and the researchers are worried that with the Fifa World Cup approaching, body parts will be in higher demand as people try to capitalise on increased business opportunities.”
Here, we send our kids to business school and have them get MBA’s. In Africa they just use a bag of body parts for success in business. I wonder if Mr. Obama might start adorning his cabinet members with necklaces made of fingers to try to fight the worsening Depression.
Saturday, 7 March 2009
Now it seems that Ms Lloyd has suffered the occupational hazard of her kind, and has been used as a proxy punch bag by one of her suitors, and it wasn't Teddy!!. Anyone expecting to find a shred of sympathy at this point, is clearly reading at the wrong blog. Danielle takes the word dumb to an entirely new uniquely personal area, but surely, even for her. the truth must finally have started to dawn.
Friday, 6 March 2009
As the right to be held innocent until proven guilty is seldom applied to whites accused of killing blacks, the media and the Steven Lawrence race industry have declared these failures to be caused by racism on the part of the police investigating the crime. This has led to much politically correct soul searching by the police and both internal and public reports, including the ludicrous McPhearson report, which first introduced the term institutional racism to Britain.
Newspapers have declared the suspects "Murderers" and challenged them to sue, in the knowledge that in Britain, you need £1 million, to even consider such a thing, and a coroner's jury obediently declared that they had been told by the man on the telly he was killed by white racists. However, none have ever been convicted of Stephen's killing.
A black friend of Stephen's who was present when he was killed, and is the primary witness to what occurred, has since recently been elected to local government in Lewisham, South London.
Whatever the truth about Stephen Lawrence's murder, he and Anthony Walker, who's white killers have been convicted, remain the only two black victims of allegedly racially motivated murder in the UK within the last twenty years. However, their death are used relentlessly, by the left who pretend that they symbolise the truth about racial crime in Britain rather as the killing of James Byrd is in America, in order to hide the long, and ever growing, list of white victims of racial violence. The picture at the top of this post, is of the Stephen Lawrence Centre, built in Deptford, at tax payers expense, becoming what may be described as "The shrine to St. Stephen"
Mrs Lawrence has been a political activist since the 1980's and is now a doyenne of the left, at the front of many "ant-racist" campaigns, who can always relied upon to parrot allegations of racism against the police and wider society. She and her campaigns have received large sums in funding from various national and local government bodies, and she was recently filmed attending the inauguration of President Barack Obama in Washington, where her words of wisdom were sought by all UK TV channels.
Thursday, 5 March 2009
Whatever, the intentions may have been, the death of Stephen Lawrence and the actions of those around him and those who supported them, have been used to perpetuate a lie. Sadly it is a lie which has almost certainly cost other lives.
A political agenda, supported by Mrs Lawrence, and embodied by that travesty the McPhearson report, has tied the police's hands and hindered their ability to prevent violent crime.
Mrs Lawrence is not a stupid person, she has been a political activist since before Stephen died, she must know the truth, and that her son's tragic death is being exploited by an agenda which seeks to disguise that truth.
However much sympathy we may have for her loss, her recent comments in which she complained that young black men were being "disproportionately targeted" by the police in their efforts to control knife crime, seeking to perpetuate a myth, in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary are outrageous. For a woman who has lost her own child, to violent crime, and knowing the influence she has, to deliberately place the lives of other children at risk for the sake of a racist fairy tale, is unforgivable.
As I have said here before, the Poles, Czechs and Latvians were used as a smokescreen by the media and the government, who even encouraged a level of anti-Polish feeling, by, for instance, focusing so strongly on them whenever the subject of immigration came up. European immogrants were deliberately used as a distraction, to hide Nu-Stazi's true purpose, which is to import as many new Permanent, non-European, residents into the country as possible.
The only real problem with the Europeans was that they were used to keep wages artificially low, however, even if things had remained as they were before the sub-prime lead financial crisis, most of them would not have stayed for more than a few years. The Poles, Czechs and other Eastern Europeans were here to work, not to shirk. That is not so with the Somalis, that is not so with the Algerians and Iranians, and it is certainly not the case with the Bangladeshi immigrants or most of the West Indians, they ain't going anywhere!
To be fair, would you go back to where they came from?
Get on any bus in South or East London, Leeds, Bradford or Birmingham and you will see the second fastest growing group in the country. No-European pensioners (the fastest growing group, of course, is immigrant mothers). This vast number of people. Arrived in Britain over the last forty years and, and they intend to stay. And why wouldn't they, there is no old age pensions, subsidised housing and free health care in the places they left, and unlike the Poles and Estonians, when did you last see a black man or an Asian rough sleeper? There certainly are not very many.
We are constantly told that we need to import immigrants to support an ageing population, however, it seems that in fact we are importing immigrants to support ageing immigrants. In turn. the latest batch will grow old as well, and there are even more of them.
Yes, the Poles are going home, but they are the only ones who are.
Could it be that the dark arts of Soviet era Pravda are being practiced again in Britain to massage the truth and preserve the multicultural dream? I'll leave it to you to decide
Tuesday, 3 March 2009
I have written about this before, however, as with the wider media, it seems there is a widespread desire to pin the blame for the situation we are now in on those convenient greedy, rich, bankers, and, for some, to applaud the gesture politics of our leaders when they announce that they will curb the earnings of the captains of Industry or claw back legally agreed pension arrangements, as if this will have any impact whatsoever on the enormity of the challenge facing us.
I, however, take the view that, although many bankers and financiers are guilty, their crimes amount mainly to playing money launderers to the real criminals, namely agenda driven politicians intent on social engineering.
Bill Anderson at Lew Rockwell has made a fascinating discovery in the form of an article published in the New York Times in September 1999, the following exert from which, I hope he will not mind me quoting in full:
In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.
The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.
Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits. (emphasis mine)
In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.As Bill says in his posting, isn't it strange how smart people can forget stuff so easily?.
''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called sub prime market.''
I know I am still in a minority in not heaping all the blame on the greedy bankers, but my guess is that in years to come, historians and economist will admit that what we are living through today, was not caused by speculators, loan sharks and bankers, nut by politicians with an agenda.
Note: If you agree with Bill's article "Fannie's Smoking Gun" or think it deserves wider readership, please forward it on.
Alternatively, if you are a digger, you can DIG it by clicking here
Monday, 2 March 2009
CNN, of course remain in character and continue to lie by omission by failing to mention the race of the suspects, or publish their pictures. They do so deliberately, in the knowledge that most casual readers will have been sufficiently brainwashed to assume that the accused are white.
This is, however, an important case. We know for certain that, no matter how awful a crime is, if the victim is white, and the perpetrator is not, hate crime charges will never be brought. However, the more that members of protected groups continue to commit hate crimes against each other, it becomes more obviously ludicrous to claim that none of the overwhelmingly greater number of violent crimes against whites are hate related.
It also exposes more clearly, the intrinsic evil of a race hate crimes law which categorises a single ethnic group, white people, as "not protected".
Others actually believe that the “Certificate of Live Birth” which has been published, is a birth certificate, which of course it is not. The document which Obama has produced is insufficient proof of identity to obtain a gun licence in West Virginia, let alone a bank loan.
This particular document's primary purpose appears to be for the use of hillbillies, hos and hoodlums, who give birth in a trailer or tenement block, and then later need to prove that they have an infant in order to claim welfare. Assuming the document is genuine, it proves nothing other than that a baby by the name of Barack Obama was in Hawaii in 1961, it is not proof that he was actually born there.
In any event Obama claims to have been born in an Hawaiian hospital, albeit one in which al the staff died young, given that none survive who were present at the event. In which case, a real birth certificate would have been issued. So why hasn't it been published, and why is president of America paying huge lawyers fees to prevent it being published?
Anyone who believes the troop of Hawaiian politicians who keep popping up to declare “I'm seen it and its cool” needs to change their middle name to gullible. Birth Certificates are neither state secrets, neither are they radioactive, a copy can be made public without putting the union at risk. Furthermore, presidents do not have a right of privacy on such issues, after all, we know more about George Bush's colon than most of us would wish to.
If, as they try to pretend, Obama has published a document which proves beyond doubt that he is a natural born American, as the Constitution requires, where are the press headlines claiming that the blessed one had “confounded the doubters”, the Obama loving media would certainly have run such headlines, if they were comfortable that he had done so.
How much longer can the media continue to ignore the questions? Those who claim that they are ignored because they are not newsworthy are plainly disingenuous, there are now two serving soldiers in Iraq who are refusing to accept Obama as their legitimate commander in chief, and a retired Major General demanding he release the birth certificate, how much more newsworthy can it get?.
You may ask why does it matter, Obama has been elected, the people have spoken, whatever the Constitution may say, and they are certainly not going to impeach him. However, it does matter, if the allegations are true, then the American people were deceived, it also means that the President of America, the most powerful person in the world, is a potential target for blackmail, and I think most people would find that troubling.
Now they aren't even trying to camouflage or deny what they are doing. They are not selling products or services; they are selling a social 'vision', an ideology, showing us what their imaginary utopia would look like if it were achievable.
More TV ads project images of racial harmony
Ever see an inner-city schoolyard filled with white, Asian and black teens shooting hoops? Or middle-aged white and Latino men swigging beer and watching the Super Bowl on their black neighbor's couch? Or Asians and Latinos dancing the night away in a hip-hop club?
All it takes is a television.''
Continue reading this insightful piece at The Vanishing American Blog
Sunday, 1 March 2009
Here is some interesting and cautionary reading matter for a Sunday:
We have all heard politicians talk about diversity, tolerance, understanding, multiculturalism, immigration, integration, assimilation, the melting pot and so on. What do they mean by this?
And what is their long-term goal? "The goal of abolishing the white race is on its face so desirable that some may find it hard to believe that it could incur any opposition other than from committed white supremacists." So says former Harvard Professor Noel Ignatiev, whose magazine is called "Race Traitor."
Anti-racists will rarely admit their goal as clearly as Professor Ignatiev does.
Continue reading at Western Voices
Harvard Hates the White Race?
Is the multicultural campaign really about diversity? Or is it about stamping out Western civilization and the “white race” itself?
Continue reading this 2002 article at V Dare