Search blog.co.uk

  • Nationalism the new target for left wing screechers

    The screechers have a new target for their hate, Nationalism. OMFG, I am sick of seeing on Facebook and other Sheeple sites posts from the army of bandwagon followers condemning nationalism.

    Hate attacks on Andy Murray because he voted Yes for Scottish Independence were deplorable, the bloke is entitled to his opinion FFS. The lefties hater did not stop there however, attacks on his mother are just disgusting (but entirely typical of the Labour voting, free speech hating, all-things-British loathing, bourgeois left scum.) I've searched and can't find anything on her publicly expressin an opinion. And Andy is 26, a gown man, a tennis champion, his mother is not responsible for him.

    As usual however the fuckwits are only showing their ignorance and political illiteracy in shrieking nationalism is evil, as if all Nationalism is Naziism. Fuck me, no wonder these cupid stunts hated Fifty Shades Of Grey, as people who can only see black or white, alpha or omega, all or nothing, that titles must have confused the crap out of them.

    I wonder if our turd-burglar loving, foreign paedophile loving, immigration loving, Britain loathing, Labour voting leftie contingent are aware that Clement Atlee, Ernest Bevin, Aneurin Bevan, Herbert Morrison and other leading members of the Labour government that created the welfare state and brought in reforms that broke the old class system and the power of the 'Downton Abbey' elite, were all nationalists?

    So here are a few quotes from left wing figures, all of whom could be describes as internationalist to some degree (they all wanted world domination... oh, and they all exterminated millions of their own people in pursuit of their goals.) If you are not politically illiterate or you have only been partially brainwashed, what you ought to spot here is all these murdering tyrants were fanatical supporters of big government paternalism, thus they had more in common with the modern Labour and Liberal Democrat Parties in the UK, the U.S. Democrats and the unelcted bureaucrats who run the EU than with traditional Conservative, socialist or Liberal values.

    Stalin: "People who cast the votes decide nothing. The people who count the votes decide everything.”

    Hitler: "By the skillful and sustained use of propaganda, one can make a people see even heaven as hell or an extremely wretched life as paradise.”

    Mussolini: "Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power”

    Mao: "If the U.S. monopoly capitalist groups persist in pushing their policies of aggression and war, the day is bound to come when they will be hanged by the people of the whole world. The same fate awaits the accomplices of the United States.”

    FOR THE RECORD: A commenter on Michael St. Mark's London Dada blog asked us to look at any definition of nationalism. There are two in my online dictionary:

    Nationalism, noun

    patriotic feeling, principles, or efforts.
    1 "an early consciousness of nationalism and pride" synonyms: patriotism · patriotic sentiment ·

    2 an extreme form of patriotism marked by a feeling of superiority over other countries.
    Powered by OxfordDictionaries · © Oxford University Press

    Well there's one of those (i.e. 50% I don't see anything wrong with, what's he bothered about?). In fact Mike's blog was not so much supporting Scottish independence as deploring the lies being told and bribes and promises being made to secure a No vote.

    Just wait until the vote rigging stories start breaking? What? Of course there was vote rigging; a) it's now par for the course in all elections and b) the Brureaurats of brussels wanted The Union intact. And the only times referenda in EU nations have gone against what the bureaurats wanted the result has somehow been overturned.

    RELATED POSTS:
    The fear that drives liberal hate
    Even leftie Huffington Post talks about liberal Nazis now
    Liberal extremism
    If you label yourself left you are probably extreme right
    The screeching left don't have a monopoly on goodness and truth
    The left's new class war on the poor
    Left wing intellectuals really despise the working class
    Intellectually banrupt left have only hatred and anger to argue for them

  • Obama administration ‘blocking' information from the press

    Obama White House makes war on free speech - via Russia Today

    Now some will say this story is worthless because it comes via Russia Today and ... well you can't believe anything those nasty Russian propagandists might tell you. And if you say, "I'll make up my own mind thanks," these people will wave a bit on paper bearing a university seal and say, "I've got a PhD that proves I'm more intelligent than you, so you must defer to my wisdom."

    A few things to understand there - first, the letters PhD actually stand for Phenomenally Dumb; second, Russia Today is not like the old Soviet Union's official newspaper Pravda, RT is funded by the Russian Government and staffed by British, American, Canadian and Australian reporters and its purpose is to provide and English language news channel that reports news the governments of western nations do not want reported and thus, governments being controlled by the same international financiers as the media, broadcast and print news will not touch.

    This story, for example is not a Russia Today spin piece but comes via RT from Associated Press (AP) a highly respected news agency that is clearly getting frustrated with the control freakery of the American government, which routinely blocks access to information.

    You will not have seen a word about this war on free speech and press freedom being waged by the Obama Administration in the USA and that is why we must turn to Russia Today.

    The Russian government, after all, is not so stupid as to refuse to score political points by telling the truth when the truth will hurt those they want to hurt.

    War On Free Speech

    Uncovering information that should be available to the public has become increasingly difficult under the presidency of Barack Obama, an Associated Press bureau chief says. In some cases, it surpasses the secrecy of the George W. Bush administration.

    The White House's penchant for secrecy does not just apply to the federal government, according to AP's Washington bureau chief, Sally Buzbee. During a joint meeting of news editors, she stated that the same kind of behavior is starting to appear in state and local governments.

    Buzbee pointed out eight ways that the Obama administration is stifling public access to information – including keeping reporters away from witnessing any military action the United States takes as it battles Islamic State extremists in the Middle East.

    "The public can't see any of it,” Buzbee said, referring to the military campaign. "News organizations can't shoot photos or video of bombers as they take off – there are no embeds. In fact, the administration won't even say what country the [US] bombers fly from.”

    She also expressed frustration with the government's handling of the upcoming 9/11 trial, during which journalists are prohibited from looking at even non-classified court filings in real time.

    "We don't know what prosecutors are asking for, or what defense attorneys are arguing,” she said.

    Meanwhile, basic information about the prison complex in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba is being withheld from the public, despite the fact that the Bush administration freely shared this data. The media is unable to learn how many inmates are on hunger strike in the infamous prison, or how frequently assaults on guards take place.

    Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests have become harder than ever to process, Buzbee added. Government officials often fail to do so unless media outlets bring a lawsuit to bear.

    READ MORE: National security reporter shared drafts with CIA press office, emails reveal

  • So How Has Ebola Changed?

    ebola virus
    Ebola virus

    Previous outbreaks of Ebola were short lived and resulted an a few hundred fatalities at worst. So what has changed for the current Ebola crisis, which has now been going on for eight months to last longer and infect far more people than previously.

    This Ebola outbreak in Sierra Leone, Liberia and Guinea, instead of being a local crisis has evolved into a major emergency with significant political, social, economic, humanitarian and security dimensions.

    The suffering in affected region of West Africa and fears that the disease will spread into neighbouring states and beyond and beyond demand the attention of the entire world.

    As a United Nations report explains, the outbreak is now the largest the world has known. The number of confirmed cases are reported to be doubling every three weeks. There will soon be more cases in Liberia alone than in the four-decade history of the disease.

    As one would expect, nobody in Washington has been eager to explain exactly what a team from US University and the Department Of Defense Biological Weapons Research dept. was doing in their experiments involving the Ebola virus down in Sierra Leone for several years before the outbreak bagan, or why the US Government holds a patent on the Ebola virus. The government of Sierra Leone has seen fit to terminate the project and close the research centre however, which must give us grounds to suspect something dodgy was going on.

    Jane M. Orient, M.D. writing for The Association Of American Physicians And Surgeons used the alarming headline Ebola: False alarm, or poor man's atomic bomb?

    It is well know of course that not only the USA but Russia and China and very likely the second division military powers, Britain, France, India, Pakistan, Iran and Turkey have been trying to create a biological weapon of mass destruction for many years. The big question are did the US Government intend to release whatever mutant form of Ebola the Tulane University / DARPA team created at this time, or did it escape, and: now it is out of the box, can they get it back in.

    A few weeks ago I remarked in response to American scaremongering, that we in the west, because of our healthier environment and better nutrition probably had little to worry about. If what we are dealing with is a natural mutation of the Ebola virus, that still seems to be the case. If in fact the outbreak is a genetically modified version of the virus, then who knows what we are dealing with.

  • Bill Gates Foundation Giving Millions to Top University In Order To Influence GMO “Debate” - It Must Be Dodgy

    Liberty Beacon reports:

    Former Microsoft CEO and mega mogul Bill Gates has long utilized his vast fortune to push genetically modified organisms (GMOs) through his Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, but Gates’ efforts have been met with sharp criticism from millions of grassroots activists both home and abroad.

    The debate around GMOs has become increasingly one-sided in recent years, with activists spreading the word about the health dangers of genetically modified foods as well as the environmental risks (see here and here) of the lab-created crops via social media.

    Pro-GMO corporations have adjusted, attempting to fight back with their own PR campaigns (including this one where Monsanto offered money “mommy bloggers” to attend a presentation).

    Now, in an effort to “depolarize” the GMO debate, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation is making a multi-million dollar donation to one of America’s most prominent universities.

    Continue reading

    Being a former computer professional I have little time for Bill Gates, the world's richest (but not most competent) computer amateur, the man who made ' Not fit for purpose" acceptable quality to put into the market.

    Gates is not the genius his fanboys present him as however, does anyone really believe it is just a coincidence that a computer company founded by a university drop out with no professional experience and no actual software product to offer but was the son of a CIA director*, was chosen to supply the operating system for PCs marketed by the US Government's preferred supplier of computer systems?

    (Did you know that MS - DOS was not developed by Microsoft, but Gates' company, having already been awarded the contract, was allowed to 'buy in' a complete operating system from a former rival bidder - and thus we were stuck with the abysmal MS DOS rather than a much superior system from Digital research, DR - DOS.

    And does anybody believe that an overpriced product with as fundamentally flawed design and the IBM / Intel motherboard architecture then became the de facto standard for personal computing in the face of opposition from many cheaper and far superior products (including a couple of British offerings, the Acorn / BBC and the Apricot range,) without a big leg up from a very powerful *non-commercial-organisation with unlimited funds at its disposal. (Is Little Nicky referring to the US Government? You might well ask. I couldn't possibly comment.

    These things are not coincidence, nor it is a coincidence that one of the many security loopholes, which has been present in all windows systems since Win 98, and compounded by the addition of further 'accidental fuck ups' is the applet that opens the postern gate through which the CIA, NSA, GCHQ, (and also the tech - savvy world and his wife) can enter your PC, change setup, run scripts and take liberties with your personal data.

    Everything Bill Gates does is crooked, he is and always has been the US Government's man. And if he is pushing GMOs you can bet it is because the US Government is rewarding him.

    As far as I am concerned Gates and all the other pointy headed science worshippers can eat all the toxic shite grown from monsanto's GM seeds he wants to. I avoid it, I suggest you do too for commercial as well as health reasons (Black Hat Biotech) and support political parties that want to get us out of the EU, because those bandits in Brussels are currently negotiating a 'free trade' (TTIP) deal with the American and Canadian governments that will mean American corporations don't have to tell us what kind of toxic shite they are putting in food.

    TTIP will mean you don't get any choice about whether you eat foods containing GM or Genetically Engineered (GE) organisms or not.

    Now science tits will tell you there is no risk with Genetically modified organisms as food and will then tell a pack of lies about "scientific consensus". Well you know how the "Scientific Method" the pointy heads are always banging on about works. No matter how meticulous a piece of scientific research is, if it does not agree with the "Scientific Consensus" (i.e. the lie that will attract the most government money in research grants) it will not be accepted as evidence.

    The whole of government is as corrupt and rotten as an infected digestive system and Bill Gates is a bacterium in the lower intestine. Trust nothing the suppurating syphilis sore says.

    RELATED POSTS:

    Why Do Government Information Technology Projects always Screw Up? Because Everything Governmrent Touches Becomes Political
    Black Hat Biotech menu
    Corporate trade deals with USA and Canada are undemocratic
    GM danger evidence
    GM foods: The biotech lieotech propaganda machine
    US biotech corporations plan to control the food chain with GM seeds
    Genetically Modified foods will never be safe
    Science claims of GM safety and productivity demolished

  • The Left's Rhetorical Technique Explained

    In the first of what might become a long if irregular series of posts with the collective title, "Left Wing Authoritarianism for beginners," your friend and mentor Little Nicky Nicky Machiavelli will expose the origins of the socialist left's propaganda technique and its apparent dependence on slogans, dogma and mantras.

    But first let's play a little game, stop me when you think you know where this originates from, the Obama Administration Public Relations Office, the Labour Party Manifesto, Saul Alinsky's 'Rules For Radicals' or the writings of Karl Marx:

    The receptivity of the great masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan. As soon as you sacrifice this slogan and try to be many-sided, the effect will piddle away, for the crowd can neither digest nor retain the material offered. In this way the result is weakened and in the end entirely cancelled out.

    Well if you said "None of the above" you'd be right. The left's substitution of slogans for reasoned argument was recommended by none other than Adolf Hitler in his 1926 side splitter "Mein Kampf"; Chapter 6, "War Propaganda" (h/t George Chen).

    Does that explain why they want to reduce every debate to 'good guys versus bad guys' and never ever discuss the issues.

Footer:

The content of this website belongs to a private person, blog.co.uk is not responsible for the content of this website.