The appalling decision to charge a teacher because her (Muslim) pupils decided to name a teddy bear after the most famous boys name in Islam should (and must) result in all aid being stopped to the area, the removal of Sudan from the International Community and the closure of their Embassies in the EU.
The US would not stand for this and neither should we!
I'm not going to go on about Islam but all Muslims should raise their voices against this and stop hiding behind an out of date book made up some 100 yrs after the Prophet died. Another nail in Islams coffin. More than 6 million muslims converted to Christianity last year alone so don't fall for the hype. Conversions to Muslims was much lower and mainly misdirected under age females and wives forced to do it.
I've always beleived in live and let live but this is just another example of Islam biting the hand that's feeding the majority of Muslims from Western Charity!
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Monday, May 21, 2007
Jeremy Clarkson has been let off' because he used the phrase 'ginger beer' which is rhyming slang for queer. You CANNOT change such things. I hope Clarkson fights it.
Some things are a bit less than manly, a little girly. Some men are less than manly , a little girly - sorry but that's the way they behave. How are they to be described? You cannot dump a concept of maleness = strength etc just because 2 % of the population are 'gay' which, by the way,in the OD has 24 refernces to happy feelings partying etc and TWO, just TWO concerning homosexuality!
Gays also refer to themselves as 'queer'. Well how can anyone object to the word being used by non gays?
Also note that in 99% of all other countries JC wouldn't have been spoken to but there again this government goes down (ooooops) without the queer or gay vote!
How things will change in but a few years when scientists can offer parents to remove the gay gene?
Some things are a bit less than manly, a little girly. Some men are less than manly , a little girly - sorry but that's the way they behave. How are they to be described? You cannot dump a concept of maleness = strength etc just because 2 % of the population are 'gay' which, by the way,in the OD has 24 refernces to happy feelings partying etc and TWO, just TWO concerning homosexuality!
Gays also refer to themselves as 'queer'. Well how can anyone object to the word being used by non gays?
Also note that in 99% of all other countries JC wouldn't have been spoken to but there again this government goes down (ooooops) without the queer or gay vote!
How things will change in but a few years when scientists can offer parents to remove the gay gene?
Sunday, April 22, 2007
Just a second thought. Are we to assume that anything the Germans were involved with should not be talked about? Volkswagon drivers are in for trouble then!
We should also remember that the Germans invented the modern telescope, motorcycle, pedal cycle, discovered X Rays, mercury thermometer, Levi jeans, kindergartens, moveable print press, the globe, contact lenses and the Gieger counter. Are we to associate all of these with the Nazis as they did make use of them during their reign of tyranny!
We should also remember that the Germans invented the modern telescope, motorcycle, pedal cycle, discovered X Rays, mercury thermometer, Levi jeans, kindergartens, moveable print press, the globe, contact lenses and the Gieger counter. Are we to associate all of these with the Nazis as they did make use of them during their reign of tyranny!
Brian Ferry is the latest to fall out with the weird fanatic PC brigade existing in the UK today.
The Nazi uniform was smart and very reminicent of the Romans as was the architechture and the formation of it's army. Caesar had a Pretorian Guard, Hitler had the SS. They used banners and symbols in much the same way as the Romans.
I agree with Ferry that the images produced by the Nazis in 'conning' their own people were truly stunning and very very effective.
How can this be offensive in anyway? He should have stood up for what he said instead of apologising effectively for something he didn't say or even think about to protect his cash income!
The Nazi uniform was smart and very reminicent of the Romans as was the architechture and the formation of it's army. Caesar had a Pretorian Guard, Hitler had the SS. They used banners and symbols in much the same way as the Romans.
I agree with Ferry that the images produced by the Nazis in 'conning' their own people were truly stunning and very very effective.
How can this be offensive in anyway? He should have stood up for what he said instead of apologising effectively for something he didn't say or even think about to protect his cash income!
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Some local louts have just trashed the Church. The Vicars response? We are all to blame! We shouldn't go looking for them as we should be doing something as a town.
They have nothing to do, nowhere to go. I remember hearing that phrase 40 yrs ago!
I have nothing to do. I could develop a hobby, visit people, design something, help at home, start a business - Oh no I'll trash the church!!
Unbelievable.
They have nothing to do, nowhere to go. I remember hearing that phrase 40 yrs ago!
I have nothing to do. I could develop a hobby, visit people, design something, help at home, start a business - Oh no I'll trash the church!!
Unbelievable.
Monday, February 19, 2007
Tuesday, January 23, 2007
The recent Big Brother and the manifestation of racism, I'm afraid' is a major embarrassment. No not to Channel Four who've done very well out of it. No not the Government who, no doubt, will seek further laws and control.
No it's an embarrassment to the British people who will now realise that we do not live in a tolerant society. Our 'tolerance' is enforced by law and as such any racism, anti LGB groups (lesbian, Gay and Bi-sexual - this is new Government speak) etc which actually does exist is supressed, not by desire as it is in a true tolerant society, but by threat of fine, loss of job and status or imprisonment.
These laws have created a veneer of tolerance. It is so easily scraped away.
No it's an embarrassment to the British people who will now realise that we do not live in a tolerant society. Our 'tolerance' is enforced by law and as such any racism, anti LGB groups (lesbian, Gay and Bi-sexual - this is new Government speak) etc which actually does exist is supressed, not by desire as it is in a true tolerant society, but by threat of fine, loss of job and status or imprisonment.
These laws have created a veneer of tolerance. It is so easily scraped away.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Why do we have to start positive discrimination? The new laws coming out this year insist that regardless of your religeous view, moral view, upbringing or personal tast you cannot discriminate because of sexual orientation. That's not a tolerant society, that's a police state in it's embryonic stages. If we are properley governed, made to think and educated correctly then we would not need such laws. The government failed in that so it seeks to bring it about with potential threat and punishment! That's New Labour for you.
You can be pretty sure that no large organisation will ever be prosecuted regardless but some small ones will go to the wall. Older people, Christians, Muslims (well perhaps not) and Jews will also feel the Police pinch on their collars.
For a Muslim to even have discussions with an open gay couple will break his belief let alone anything else. But these are the obvious ones. It's the ordinary guy the police will go for - easy pickings. Like the couple arrested for wanting hand out leaflets against Gay marriages (sorry legal arrangements) - easy (although as usual thrown out by people with some sense - or fear of upsetting the other 98% of the population)
In the late 70s and 80s the quick way to make a buck or get your way as an Asian or black guy was to accuse someone with the line "It's because I'm black/asian/indian/jew etc etc". It took years for that to stop whilst many people suffered because they were accused in many cases wrongly and their lives/businesses suffered. This will happen with Gays and there's simply no need for it.
To refuse products and services to people who are gay is illegal NOW. There are many acts which can be used already on the statute books. Such action is based on bigotry, sexual discrimination and is illegal. The Government know that it can be defended and they do not want it tested in the courts. This law is simply unbeatable and they know it.
Under current legislation it is up to the authorities to prove that you are refusing on such grounds. Now under the new act and defence will be required to prove that they wern't! What happened to not guilty before verdict?
Lets take an example. If two guys came to me and wanted me to phtograph their wedding and I was busy (in reality), they could suspect that I was denying them because of my views on their sexuality with me even saying so! That suspicion is enough for th Police to investigate. I would then have to prove to the Police that there was no such reason and how do I do that?
By the way I do same sex couples as I'm in business and a shoots a shoot! But I have had to turn business away in the past for personal reasons. Have I now got to explain to every client why I cannot accept their commission?
Now think about caterers, venue owners, chaffeurs, vicars, priests, taxi drivers indeed any small business which simply does not want the business for whatever reason. Anarchy will follow this law.
You can be pretty sure that no large organisation will ever be prosecuted regardless but some small ones will go to the wall. Older people, Christians, Muslims (well perhaps not) and Jews will also feel the Police pinch on their collars.
For a Muslim to even have discussions with an open gay couple will break his belief let alone anything else. But these are the obvious ones. It's the ordinary guy the police will go for - easy pickings. Like the couple arrested for wanting hand out leaflets against Gay marriages (sorry legal arrangements) - easy (although as usual thrown out by people with some sense - or fear of upsetting the other 98% of the population)
In the late 70s and 80s the quick way to make a buck or get your way as an Asian or black guy was to accuse someone with the line "It's because I'm black/asian/indian/jew etc etc". It took years for that to stop whilst many people suffered because they were accused in many cases wrongly and their lives/businesses suffered. This will happen with Gays and there's simply no need for it.
To refuse products and services to people who are gay is illegal NOW. There are many acts which can be used already on the statute books. Such action is based on bigotry, sexual discrimination and is illegal. The Government know that it can be defended and they do not want it tested in the courts. This law is simply unbeatable and they know it.
Under current legislation it is up to the authorities to prove that you are refusing on such grounds. Now under the new act and defence will be required to prove that they wern't! What happened to not guilty before verdict?
Lets take an example. If two guys came to me and wanted me to phtograph their wedding and I was busy (in reality), they could suspect that I was denying them because of my views on their sexuality with me even saying so! That suspicion is enough for th Police to investigate. I would then have to prove to the Police that there was no such reason and how do I do that?
By the way I do same sex couples as I'm in business and a shoots a shoot! But I have had to turn business away in the past for personal reasons. Have I now got to explain to every client why I cannot accept their commission?
Now think about caterers, venue owners, chaffeurs, vicars, priests, taxi drivers indeed any small business which simply does not want the business for whatever reason. Anarchy will follow this law.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)