Monday - December 07, 2009

Drews post, Let’s Put Air Shocks On The Bus, and Abraham Lincoln

H/T Macker for this.

Until Drew’s post yesterday, I had never heard of this guy.  It’s so totally beyond the pale, as to be almost unbelievable.  That it’s beyond reason goes without saying.  I don’t get it. I don’t understand. I don’t accept this kind of public perversion, but then why not? Look at what passes for public entertainment these days.  Look what passes for acceptable and normal behavior. Look what passes for art and talent.  Look to the left and their values.  Things are accepted today that at one time would have shamed people.  But shame doesn’t seem to play a very large roll in public life anymore.  And to be very, brutally honest, conservatives have not been able to stem the tide. Have we?  And in our own defense I should also say we never really stood a chance of doing so.  Because the enemy is, and no surprise is it? Us.

I did see the links Drew provided and he was right.  Pretty damn sick stuff.

I had been going on about what I call our 5th column for so long, that even I got sick of it.  Doesn’t make it less true though.

Which leads me to this.  I found it in the preface to a book I read only in the last week.  It is credited to Abraham Lincoln. I thought it fit.

“At what point shall we expect the approach of danger? By what means means shall we fortify against it?  Shall we expect some trans-Atlantic military giant to step the ocean and crush us at a blow?

Never!

All the armies of Europe, Asia, and Africa combined ...  could not by force, take a drink from the Ohio, or make a track on the Blue Ridge, in a trial of a thousand years.

At what point then is the appraoch of danger to be expected?

I answer, if it ever reach us, it must spring up amongst us.  It cannot come from abroad.  If destruction be our lot, we ourselves must be its author and finisher.  As a nation of free men, we must live through all times, or die by suicide.”

Abraham Lincoln
January 27, 1838

Posted by peiper     on 12/07/2009 at 08:29 AM   
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Homosexuality • Judges-Courts • Lawyers • Liberals • Outrageous • UK • USA •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Sunday - July 05, 2009

IS THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY BEING LED INTO A SWAMP? HITCHENS OF THE MAIL THINKS SO.

On Friday I posted a story about the deviant pride parade and how David Cameron, the head of what passes for the conservative party here, made an apology for something 20 years ago concerning homosexual rights.  ?  Or as Drew correctly pointed out, extra special rights.

Well ... along came Gordon Brown, the Prime Minister, and he said that he was very proud of the gains and legislation with regard to queer rights.  He wished those who were taking part in (yesterday’s) odd-person parade well, but said he couldn’t attend due to security concerns. I’m pretty sure he said that.
Oh but ...  his wife would attend and march in his sted. 

At the time I thought, what’s with these two guys?  Are they one upping each other? I guess.  It’s the pink vote, dummy. 

Well, I didn’t post that one Friday because I’d already done a couple things on that subject and was afraid I’d overdue it.

Saturday just wasn’t my day and I left off posting anything and felt guilty for it.  Being the weekend when we get so many papers I figured there’d be lots to share today and oh boy. 

Going through The Telegraph I came upon this cartoon and and a very good editorial by Peter Hitchens on the subject in The Sunday Mail.

Just to ID for those who don’t know.  That’s supposed to be Brown on the left in red and Cameron on the right.

And then ... good grief Charlie Brown ....  or as WC Fields might have said. “Godfrey Daniels!” This story appeared in the Mail and again I was going to ignore it.  But .... how can this one be ignored?

Balls bans children’s ‘gay’ jibes as government cracks down on sexual bullying
By Brendan Carlin Last updated at 8:02 AM on 05th July 2009

A fresh move to ban children from using the word ‘gay’ as an insult was made by Schools Secretary Ed Balls last night.

He said insults based on sexuality should be taken ‘as seriously as racism’. His department is now set to publish new guidance to crack down on ‘sexist and sexual’ bullying.

But Tory MP Philip Davies condemned Mr Balls for producing ‘more politically-correct nonsense’.

THE REST OF THE ARTICLE IS HERE

Then there is this from Peter Hitchens.
Keep in mind, the Tories are conservatives.  Labour is the politically correct left.  The two might well be interchangeable on many issues.  Like sexually deviant behavior. Both are in favor of it and will defend to the death their agenda and the right to the use of the word Gay. Oh yeah. And extra special rights.

Dave, leader of the ‘Heather has two Mommies’ Party...

Let’s think of all the things the Conservative Party might want to apologise for.

Privatising the railways, joining the Common Market, loading the police with paperwork, devastating the Armed Forces with cuts, introducing the GCSE, flattening half of British industry by accident in the early Eighties, failing to oppose the Iraq War, sacking the brave miners of Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire who defied Arthur Scargill’s bullying mobs...I could go on. 

But no. What it has said sorry for is something called ‘Section 28’, which stopped local authorities from promoting homosexuality in schools.

David Cameron journeyed specially to a ‘Gay Pride’ event to kowtow to the sexual revolution and simper: ‘We got it wrong. It was an emotional issue. I hope you can forgive us.’

Forgive them for what? Section 28 resulted from a fuss over the appearance of books aimed at children, intended to spread the view that single-sex couples could bring upchildren without any disadvantage to those children.

I still remember the titles: ‘Jenny Lives With Eric And Martin’ and ‘Heather Has Two Mommies’.

Less than 25 years ago, only revolutionaries such as Ken Livingstone endorsed this sort of thing.

Mainstream politicians and newspapers alike were as doubtful about it as most people still are in their private thoughts.

Nowadays, opinion formers and MPs have been scared into conformity, and the unhappy majority have learned to keep quiet about their concerns, for fear of the Thought Police.

This supposedly wicked law was little more than an expression of opinion by Parliament.

Nobody was ever prosecuted under its provisions. Try as they may, the homosexual liberation movement have never produced evidence of any martyrdoms resulting from it.

What they still hate about it is that it was the last stand of those in British politics who were not cowed into silence or acquiescence by the sexual revolution.

They want to make sure that the victory of self-indulgence – which is what this is really all about – is irreversible.

That way, there is no chance that the stable married family, or the society it supported, can ever come back.

And guess who is helping them? Why, the party that is supposed to stand for conservatism.

How far into the swamp will the Tories allow Mr Cameron to lead them before they realise what he is?

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 07/05/2009 at 01:35 PM   
Filed Under: • Homosexuality •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Thursday - May 21, 2009

Law ‘will force churches to employ gay staff’

“Christians are sick to the back teeth of equality and diversity laws”

Yeah well, Christians aren’t alone in that feeling.  And as one who is neither religious or Christian, I see this as yet another means to push attitudes and diversity BS on churches who clearly are being taken advantage of.

Of course, I can’t imagine why anyone who knows that their company isn’t welcome, still wants to come to the party. Why?
I guess to prove a point of some kind and in many cases simply to do something to advance their own agenda. Whatever. 
People who are not haters but simply see the homosexual lifestyle as outside normal behavior and believe religiously that it’s wrong, should not be forced to accept them inside their environment. That is, the church and employees. But it appears that for now anyway, religion loses.
Again.

all hail multi culture and diversity.  the new religion.

Churches will be banned from turning down gay job applicants on the grounds of their sexuality under new anti-discrimination laws, a Government minister said.

By Matthew Moore
The Telegraph

Religious groups are to be forced to accept homosexual youth workers, secretaries and other staff, even if their faith holds same-sex relationships to be sinful.

Christian organisations fear that the tightened legislation, which is due to come into force next year, will undermine the integrity of churches and dilute their moral message.

It comes amid growing concern that Christians are being unfairly targeted by discrimination laws, following a number of high-profile cases of courts finding against believers who stand up for their faith.

Religious leaders had hoped to lobby for exemptions to the Equality Bill but Maria Eagle, the deputy equalities minister, has now indicated that it will cover almost all church employees.

“The circumstances in which religious institutions can practice anything less than full equality are few and far between,” she told delegates at the Faith, Homophobia, Transphobia, & Human Rights conference in London.

“While the state would not intervene in narrowly ritual or doctrinal matters within faith groups, these communities cannot claim that everything they run is outside the scope of anti-discrimination law.

“Members of faith groups have a role in making the argument in their own communities for greater LGBT acceptance, but in the meantime the state has a duty to protect people from unfair treatment.”

Under existing equalities legislation, any roles deemed to be necessary “for the purposes of an organised religion” are excluded from gay rights protection.

But the Equality Bill, which is currently passing through parliament, for the first time defines this as applying only to those who lead the liturgy or spend the majority of the time teaching doctrine - essentially just ministers, bishops and their equivalents in other faiths.

A spokesman for the Christian Institute, a religious charity, said that many churchgoers had deep concerns about how the bill would be enforced and accused politicians of hypocrisy.

“It would be absurd to pass a law demanding that the Labour Party employ card-carrying Conservative members, but that is effectively what churches are being told to do. We just want the same exceptions as political parties,” he said.

“Christians are sick to the back teeth of equality and diversity laws that put them to the back of the queue. We are quite prepared to accept that people will take a different view to use on moral and ethical questions, but that should not mean we have to withdraw from public life.”

Recent cases including the nurse suspended for offering to pray for a patient and the British Airways worker sent home for wearing a visible cross have left many believers afraid to go public with their faith at work.

Neil Addison, a Roman Catholic barrister and expert on religious discrimination law, said that the new legislation would leave churches powerless to defend the fabric of their organisation.

“This is a threat to religious identity. What we are losing is the right for organisations to make free choices,” he said.

A spokesman for the Church of England said that while it supports the broad objectives of the Bill it “retains some concerns about the practical application of some specific aspects”.

The Equality Bill, which was introduced to the Commons by Harriet Harman, the Minister for Women and Equality, will also strengthen laws against gender, age and disability discrimination.

A Government Equalities Office spokesman said: “The Equality Bill will not force a church to accept someone as a priest regardless of their sexual orientation or gender.

“Churches, synagogues, mosques and others will continue to have the freedom to choose who they employ in jobs which promote their religion. But where they provide services to the public they will have to treat everyone fairly.”

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 05/21/2009 at 11:40 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Homosexuality • Liberals • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Friday - May 15, 2009

Canterbury, the city that simply isn’t queer enough (according to equality campaigners)

HAS TO BE MY LAST POSTING FOR TODAY and so I am leaving you with this loony tune bit of whatever it is.
It’s another one of those ... I couldn’t make this up story.  And why not in PC England?

Yeah, another queer story but this just could not be ignored or avoided it is so G--damn over the top.
Not satisfied with all the other crap these abnormal folks have been given, one group now wants a CITY to be more queer friendly.
Hey .. didn’t I say it was loony tunes?

This is what occurs when blackmail is in charge. First it’s a parade and then it’s acceptance and then laws to protect, and then it just goes on and on.
I can’t imagine what’ll come next or what new fangled demand we’ll read about. But here’s the latest.

Apparently some folks think a city should announce how friendly it is to a particular group. Maybe every city in the country should be required to state how friendly they are to these people. Then extend that to muslims, the flat earth society, oh heck. Pick one.

By Beth Hale
The Daily Mail

With its ancient cathedral and literary associations, you might regard Canterbury as one of Britain’s most cultured cities.
But for one section of society it seems, it is quite the opposite.
The campaign group Pride in Canterbury has condemned it as a ‘cultural wilderness’ because it has no gay bar and fails to extend a proper welcome to the homosexual community.

Historic: The city has an ancient cathedral, but is a ‘cultural wilderness’ for gays
Every year millions of people visit Canterbury Cathedral, a haven for pilgrims since the Middle Ages. The city’s place in literary history was secured by Chaucer’s Canterbury Tales.
But Pride in Canterbury is concerned with more present-day issues.

The local council, it says, has failed to ‘send out signals’ that gays are welcome.
As well as the absence of a suitable bar, a play staged at the city’s Marlowe Theatre presented a gay character in a ‘stereotypical’ way.

The group is awaiting the outcome of an official complaint to the local government ombudsman.
Spokesman Andrew Bretell said: ‘We do not believe the council wants a thriving lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community in our city.

‘They’re more interested in ticking their equality boxes than they are in dealing with the real issues.’

More...Blackpool bids for French visitors with ‘sophisticated’ new tourism campaign: watch the video here

The nearest gay bar is 17 miles away, in Margate, he added.

‘Unless they are sending out signals that they welcome gays, then they are not creating conditions where there is likely to be a gay bar.

‘We are not trying to turn Canterbu
ry into Blackpool or Brighton, but we do think it’s important for the gay community to have a focal point – somewhere they can go to and see LGBT culture.
‘The area doesn’t send out an image that it’s OK to be gay. We’re trying to work with the council to do this and don’t feel we have made big demands, but we have had no success.’

Last year, the group complained to Canterbury City Council. When that failed, it went to the ombudsman, which rules on the complaint next week.
The council’s chief executive Colin Carmichael said it refuted any suggestion that it does not want to engage with the gay community.

‘The council has provided Pride in Canterbury with funding of more than £4,000 since 2005 through our grants system to help them identify the needs of the gay community and promote their concerns.’
A source added: ‘No council in the land would set up a bar – gay or otherwise. It would be seen as a colossal waste of taxpayers’ money.’

There was also sympathy for the council on the streets.

Bernard Makin, 41, who runs a fast-food stall, said: ‘I can’t imagine a gay American bloke saying, “Well, I’d love to see one of the most beautiful cathedrals in the world – but let’s go somewhere else because there’s no gay bar”.’
The ombudsman has already told Pride in Canterbury its key complaints are unlikely to succeed.

MAIL

“The nearest gay bar is 17 miles away, in Margate,” he added.

Well so what?  It isn’t like you’d have to walk all the way in your ballet shoes. There are cars ya know. Jeesh.

Posted by peiper     on 05/15/2009 at 11:35 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Homosexuality • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Wednesday - May 13, 2009

Gay rights campaigner led a double life as leader of paedophile ring.

Some of you I know are saying, oh what a surprise. They aren’t like that.
Actually, all of em aren’t like this.  But it sure as hell, is scary as hell, that any are exactly like this.

Generally I’m with Drew on the subject. I haven’t any need to attack anyone and can mind my own business as long as they aren’t hijacking good English words and insisting, as too many of them do, that I change my attitude with regard to their lifestyle.  It may be ‘normal’ for them but I’m unconvinced as ever that it doesn’t fly in the face of nature. 

Which bring me to this article. One of the subjects of which is a ‘campaigner for homosexual rights’ AND ... scary stuff here .. allow gay homosexual adoption of children.  But wait ... this gets downright disgusting.

There are a lot of photos of the guilty at the link.  I would be willing to bet my last dollar that these scummy bastards will NOT serve full jail time and at some point some shrink will declare some “cured” as tho that’s possible.  This is a very troubling story.  That folks like this exist at all is itself some sort of crime.

That some have been caught before and then been allowed to walk free after a time is also a crime. Every early release and every slap on the wrist creates another VICTIM!  I believe that to be true.

I’m fishing for words here and coming up blank. 

Read this and you will understand.  But a warning .... I read without expecting it and it was sickening.  I wish the heck I hadn’t to be honest. I’m posting it because I want people to know about this.  And for those of you here in the UK, study the faces well and if ever you should happen to see em in your neighborhood ........

Gay rights campaigner led a double life as leader of paedophile ring that carried out a catalogue of child abuse
By DAILY MAIL REPORTER

PHOTOS AND BIOS OF ACCUSED HERE

A paedophile ring has been smashed after eight men were found guilty of a horrifying catalogue of more than 50 child pornography and abuse charges.

Among the crimes was a shocking sexual attack carried out on a three-month-old baby boy by an executive adviser on child sex issues.

James Rennie, chief executive of a publicly-funded gay rights group, was one of the men exposed yesterday as members of Scotland’s biggest paedophile ring.

Rennie, 38, molested the toddler son of unsuspecting friends - a little boy he had been trusted to babysit - recording the abuse and sharing it with other perverts.

In the course of the police investigation, the boy’s parents were forced to watch a video of their baby son being violated by Rennie.

Last night, after the eight men were found guilty of a string of child sex charges at the High Court in Edinburgh, the child’s parents reacted with disgust.

They said: ‘For over 15 years, James Rennie seemed the closest of family friends and it is hard to put into words the extent of the betrayal he has exacted upon us.’

During their investigations, police recovered tens of thousands of still and moving images of the most vile child abuse

Police sources revealed yesterday that the activities of 70 other men around the UK with links to the case are being investigated.

More than 35 people have been arrested or been subject to enforcement action. Two investigations are continuing in Scotland.

One of the most worrying aspects of the case is the way Rennie was able to reach a position where he could influence Executive policy on child sexuality.

A trained teacher, Rennie became the boss of LGBT Youth Scotland, a publicly-funded support group for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender young people.

He took on the £40,000 a year role when the group was set up in 2003 and became the Executive’s most important and influential adviser on gay issues affecting children.

Under his leadership, the group backed proposals to allow gay queer adoption. As well as appearing in the Scottish parliament, he was invited to a Royal Garden Party and to Downing Street.

Yesterday, Rennie, from Edinburgh, was found guilty of indecently abusing the baby boy. The abuse began when the child was three months old and continued for several years. Rennie filmed and photographed himself committing the abuse, sent the images to others and allowed another man to listen on the phone while he molested the child.

He allowed the boy, whom he called his ‘nephew’, to be abused by another paedophile and also offered him to other deviants in a series of emails.

When his home was raided in December 2007, Rennie had gone to the trouble of hiding computer hard drives, discs and CDs in a gap next to the water tank in his kitchen. Between these storage devices and his laptop computer, he was found to be in possession of thousands of images, many of them at the most extreme level of the scale.

Rennie carried out his vile activities as part of a Scottish paedophile ring swapping images of child pornography on the internet.

He was suspended as soon as LGBT Youth Scotland was told of his arrest in December 2007 and resigned soon afterwards.

Last night, a spokesman for LGBT Youth Scotland, which received £1.1million in 2008 from the Executive, councils and health boards, said: ‘We are appalled by the abuse and exploitation of children by James Rennie, and wholeheartedly welcome his conviction. Our immediate thoughts are with the children and families who have been directly, and indirectly, abused by him and the other co-accused also convicted.

‘We had no suspicion whatsoever of the crimes James Rennie was committing. He was obviously skilled at hiding his actions and adept at deceiving people. There is no suggestion James Rennie directly threatened the safety of young people accessing our services.’

Last night the Executive said that it would continue to fund LGBT.

When he was arrested, Rennie had a steady boyfriend, but trawled the internet looking for gay sex dates.

He also used the internet to meet other paedophiles, including Neil Strachan, a child molester who was jailed for three years at Edinburgh Sheriff Court in 1997 for abusing a boy of between five and seven.

Strachan, 41, joined Rennie for a sex session with Rennie’s ‘nephew’ at his flat in Meadowbank when the boy was between one and three.

Rennie then boasted about the encounter to another paedophile, Lachlan Anderson, 51, from Cumbernauld, Dunbartonshire. Anderson is currently serving a 20-month sentence after being caught with a collection of child pornography, including images of Rennie abusing the child. He was brought from jail to give evidence at the trial.

Strachan was found guilty of attempting to sodomise a different 18-month-old toddler on the night of Hogmanay 2005 at his flat in the Dalry area of Edinburgh.

Last night, the boy’s mother said: ‘ The anguish I feel towards Mr Strachan is indescribable.

‘I feel that no matter what punishment is given to Mr Strachan it will never be able to compensate for the hurt, devastation and great deal of stress brought to me and my family.

‘Mr Strachan used and abused our trust in order to satisfy his and others’ sick needs.’

Strachan’s 23-year-old boyfriend Colin Slaven was cleared of taking part in the sex act, which was photographed and sent to Rennie.

Rennie involved John Milligan, 40, in his sick acts by allowing him to listen to the baby boy being abused.

Milligan also discussed getting his hands on the child - and passed on images of Rennie’s abuse to others.

The paedophile ring was uncovered when photos of naked boys were found on Strachan’s computer. He handed it in for repair at a company in England in 2007.

A computer engineer found one indecent image of a child on the machine and police were called in.

An examination by Northumbria Police revealed other images.

The inquiry moved to Edinburgh, where Operation Algebra was set up in October 2007 by Lothian and Borders Police.

Detective Superintendent Allan Jones, senior investigating officer in Operation Algebra, said of the men: ‘Many of them wouldn’t stand out from a general member of the public; but in the background they lead this double life, looking at some of the most vile material you would ever care to imagine.

‘Quite what motivates them and why they take this course of action I really don’t know. What I do know is we can’t be forgiving of it and we’ve got to pursue it to the nth degree to make sure that this material is stopped.’

A jury found Rennie, Strachan, Milligan, Ross Webber, 27, and Craig Boath, 24, guilty of plotting to arrange access to children to carry out acts of gross sexual abuse. It is the first time a conspiracy charge has been used successfully in Scotland to convict perverts.

Church bell ringer Neil Campbell, 46, was cleared of that charge. But all six, along with Slaven and John Murphy, 44, were found guilty of charges relating to child pornography.

Having been convicted of actual physical abuse of children, Rennie and Strachan face a possible life sentence.

Prosecutor Dorothy Bain, QC, asked for ‘a full risk assessment’ which would allow the court to impose an order for lifelong restriction - under which a judge imposes a minimum sentence but the accused are only freed when the parole board considers it safe to do so.

They then remain under strict supervision for the rest of their lives.

Judge Lord Bannatyne said: ‘I am going to go down that route and investigate an order for lifelong restriction for both these accused.’

All eight men were remanded in custody to await sentence.

Posted by peiper     on 05/13/2009 at 12:28 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Homosexuality • UK •  
• Comments (9) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Saturday - March 07, 2009

AN UPDATE TO A PREVIOUS STORY. BOTTOM LINE .. PC WINS, CITIZENS LOSE. TIS ALWAYS SO

"It is outrageous for a school or local authority to think it can ride roughshod over parents and impose lessons upon children that arouse such widespread concerns.”
Comrades, comrades.  Calm yourselves.  This is our brave cowardly new world being created and the state with co-operation of Comrade Minister for Thought and Behavior approves.  Besides, it’s all about “diversity” which will all be explained in the new revised edition of UK version of Little Red Book.

Lesbian Gay Homosexual Bisexual Transgender History Month

Amazing. Pollution gets a month all its own.

Now then, I am not certain about the Transgender thing to be very honest.
It is my understanding only based on news articles and a very few interviews during news programs, that these people are not necessarily homosexual, but instead may be born with parts of em from both sexes.  ???  Do I have that right?  I have also read about it in links and am under the impression that a person somehow knows early on that the “body they have isn’t really theirs.” I’ve seen that quote more then once.

I’m not a doctor and have no training whatever in things of that nature and so think transgender ppl may (I stress that word, “may") be very legitimate, as opposed to a lifestyle I find really odd at best and disgusting at worst.

My views on the subject are known and the point of this story really belong in a heading like Parents Rights.  Apparently they have none when up against the homosexual lobby which appears very willing to force their point of view on children’s education.  Maybe the correct term is INDOCTRINATION.

Tis really a sick fraken world!

Parents face court action for removing children from gay homosexual history lessons
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:56 AM on 07th March 2009

More than 30 pupils were pulled out of a week of teaching at a primary school which included books about homosexual partnerships.
The controversial content was worked into the curriculum at George Tomlinson School in Waltham Forest, East London.

The council has declared that children who missed the lessons will be viewed as truants.
The ruling means some families could breach rules that children should not be absent for more than 19 days a year.
Sanctions include spot fines, parenting contracts and ultimately court action.

The parents, who objected to the lessons on moral and religious grounds, said the content was more appropriate to secondary age pupils.
Pervez Latif, whose children Saleh, ten, and Abdur-Rahim, nine, attend the school, said he knew of up to 30 withdrawals from the lessons.
The 41-year-old accountant said Christian and Muslim parents had objected to the theme linked to Lesbian ,queer, Bisexual ,Transgender History Month.

‘We as parents did not receive any guidance that this was going to happen,’ he added. ‘There was just a newsletter mentioning the week and that certain themes would be taught.
‘I didn’t want my children to be learning about this. I wrote a letter to the chairman of the governors explaining that I would be taking my children out of school and he wrote back saying that there was no other option.
‘If I am faced with court action, then I will just explain that these are my views. It was also very difficult explaining to my nine- and ten-year-old boys why they were being removed from school.
‘I found it difficult to explain topics such as homosexual relationships at such a young age.’

One story covered in a lesson was King and King, a fairytale about a prince who turns down three princesses before falling in love with one of their brothers.
Another book, And Tango Makes Three, features two male penguins, Roy and Silo, who fall in love at a New York zoo.
Sarah Saeed, 40, took her eight-year-old daughter out of school during the week.

She said: ‘It is not an appropriate age for the children to be learning such matters. We have our own way of explaining things to them and they should not be subjected to this.
‘I was aware they were going to be learning about homosexual relationships through stories.
‘If the council takes action against me I will tell them that I told the school beforehand I would be taking my child away if they did not change their policy.

‘She has a 100 per cent attendance record otherwise. This is the only time and this is the only choice I had.’
Parents have a legal right to withdraw their children from religious education and sex education lessons – apart from science lessons which cover biological reproduction as part of the national curriculum.

A spokesman for Waltham Forest Council said: ‘As part of the borough’s policy of promoting tolerance in our schools, children are taught that everyone in our society is of equal value.
‘At George Tomlinson, parents were invited to meet with teachers and governors several weeks ago to discuss what work would
be taking place throughout the national LGBT History Month and how this work would be delivered.
‘Regrettably, some parents chose to remove their children from school.

‘The council does not condone any unauthorised absence from school and action has been taken.’
Norman Wells, director of the Family Education Trust, said: ‘It is a fundamental principle of education law that children must be educated in accordance with the wishes of their parents.
‘It is outrageous for a school or local authority to think it can ride roughshod over parents and impose lessons upon children that arouse such widespread concerns.

‘The only action that needs to be taken is to offer an apology to the parents concerned.’
George Tomlinson is close to a school which launched a gayvery queer version of Romeo and Juliet called Romeo and Julian – also to mark the alternative history month.

Posted by peiper     on 03/07/2009 at 07:05 AM   
Filed Under: • Education • Homosexuality • Jack Booted Thugs • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Tuesday - March 03, 2009

Church schools could be forced to promote Islam and homosexuality, Catholics fear .

teachers must promote equality and value diversity

Church schools could be forced to promote Islam and homosexuality under a new legally-binding code of conduct for teachers, it is feared.

By Martin Beckford,
Religious Affairs Correspondent

The code is accused of undermining the religious ethos of Christian schools by promoting secular morality and will discriminate against devout staff and drive them out of the classroom, the Roman Catholic church has warned.

As The Daily Telegraph disclosed last month, the General Teaching Council – the profession’s regulator – has published a draft code of conduct that all teachers will have to sign.

It will be used by the GTC in assessing misconduct cases, but also by school governors and local authorities in recruitment and discipline.

Principle 4 of the draft code states that teachers must “proactively challenge discrimination” and “promote equality and value diversity in all their professional relationships and interactions”.

However religious groups fear that these requirements could be used by liberal groups or parents to discriminate against Christian teachers, or to target faith schools.

An alleged lack of commitment to equality and diversity was used by a health trust to suspend Caroline Petrie, a Baptist community nurse, after she offered to pray for an elderly patient.

Oona Stannard, head of the Catholic Education Service, an agency of the Bishops’ Conference of England and Wales, told the GTC in a written submission that “there was an understandable fear that the call to ‘proactively challenge discrimination’ could be used to oppose faith schools per se, and the rights that they have in law, for example, to select leaders who are of the faith”.

She went on: “This anxiety extends similarly to the direction to ‘promote equality’.

“It would be unacceptable to expect anyone to be required to promote something contrary to their own faith beliefs and, indeed, it would not be possible for a person of faith to promote another faith – ‘this is a matter of conscience.’

Miss Stannard added that there were grave concerns in the Church over the question of whether Catholic teachers would in good conscience feel able to register under the new code.

The Christian Institute, a charity that supports worshippers who feel discriminated against in the workplace, claims the GTC code could be used by educational establishments to insist that staff promote homosexual rights or other religions such as Islam, going against the beliefs of many Christians.

It fears teachers could be turned down for jobs unless they agreed to use materials designed by homosexual rights groups in the classroom, and would face disciplinary action if they tell pupils in RE lessons that Jesus Christ is the only means to salvation.

Colin Hart, director of the Christian Institute, said: “Respect for people as people is not the same as respecting or valuing every religious belief or sexual lifestyle.

“Forcing this on Christian teachers is to force them to go against their conscience.”

TELEGRAPH

(see, this is where folks fall down on the issue. Forcing them against their conscience?  No.  That only applies to muslims and one or two others.
It’s muslims who must be protected from doing that.  Funny how Christians and even Jews miss that. Where’d Christians ever get the idea they’d be protected as well?  Silly ppl. )

Attention comrade classmates. All raise now and together we sing our new anthem approved by central committee for diversity and kulture.
The following has been approved for comrades by the dept. of Health and Safety as well.  Ready class?  Begin.

“TOMORROW BELONGS, TOMORROW BELONGS, TOMORROW BELONGS TO .................... ?????????????

Posted by peiper     on 03/03/2009 at 04:24 AM   
Filed Under: • Education • Homosexuality • Muslims • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Friday - February 27, 2009

SICK and QUEER ‘Romeo and Julian’ school play sparks political correctness debate.

Oh good.  So now even Shakespeare is reduced to homosexuality.

Once again, I really can’t find the words.  And why is it that any time someone questions or disapproves of the latest homo behavior or pc stunt it’s put down to a phobia?  It isn’t darn it. 

“ the school in all its departments is determined to make an environment where all students can achieve their potential, regardless of their sexuality.”

They can’t do that without perverting the classics?  Guess not.

Gay Queer ‘Romeo and Julian’ school play sparks political correctness debate
A school has been accused of “mind-blowing” political correctness after it staged a homosexual version of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet - called Romeo and Julian.

By Murray Wardrop
Last Updated: 7:20AM GMT 27 Feb 2009

The play was performed by teenagers at a mixed school in east London to coincide with Lesbian, Gay, odd, Bisexual and Transgendered (LGBT) History Month.

The original text was reworked to incorporate the gay decadent twist by the comprehensive’s drama teacher, Jo Letson, to raise awareness of homophobic bullying.

However, the version, which was praised by actor Sir Ian McKellen when he saw it last month, caused a stir in parliament on Thursday.

Calling for a debate on political correctness during questions on upcoming Commons business, Tory MP Philip Davies said: “This is mind-blowing.

“Anyone with an ounce of sense would want their children to be learning Romeo and Juliet rather than Romeo and Julian.”

The MP for Shipley in Yorkshire added: “Romeo and Juliet is one of the greatest works ever written. It is a play that every child should study.

“It is very worrying that this literary masterpiece is being used for such a politically-correct purpose.”

But Commons leader Harriet Harman rebuked him, saying: “I seem to remember that in Shakespearean times, boys would play girls and girls would play boys and the whole point was trying work out which was which.

“There is going to be a debate next Thursday about new equality legislation so we can ensure everybody in this country is treated with fairness, respect and not subject to prejudice and discrimination – and indeed cheap shots – from you.”

The play was performed by students aged 14 to 16 at Leytonstone School last month.

Sir Ian, himself a leading Shakespearean actor and spokesman for the gay rights group Stonewall, said he had been “moved” to watch children addressing homophobia on stage.

He said: “It was moving to watch young people wanting to tackle homophobia in their own ways at Leytonstone School.

“Romeo and Julian” provokes just the sort of discussion which is needed on gay issues but beyond that the school in all its departments is determined to make an environment where all students can achieve their potential, regardless of their sexuality.”

The school’s headteacher, Luke Burton, said: “The student performances were outstanding and reflected the hard work of students and staff.”

QUEERS AND THE BARD

Posted by peiper     on 02/27/2009 at 06:54 AM   
Filed Under: • Homosexuality • Sex • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Thursday - January 29, 2009

A Post For Peiper

Peiper’s got a bad case of the sniffles. Probably brought on by the terrible cold weather over there in the UK, combined with the traditional English cost saving home construction concept of not building a house with a proper furnace. So he’s offline for a few days, but that isn’t stopping him from reading the daily newspapers. Perhaps he should get some blood pressure meds from National Health as well. So I’ll do a few UK based posts for him until he gets better.

It matters not that endless studies have shown that a “parenting unit” of one man and one woman is the superior way to raise a normal, balanced child. The law is the law, and to prove the law is in effect quotas must be kept.

Two young children are to be adopted by a gay couple, despite the protests of their grandparents. The devastated grandparents were told they would never see the youngsters again unless they dropped their opposition. The couple, who cannot be named, wanted to give the five-year-old boy and his four-year-old sister a loving home themselves. But they were ruled to be too old - at 46 and 59.

For two years they fought for their rights to care for the children, whose 26-year- old mother is a recovering heroin addict. They agreed to an adoption only after they faced being financially crippled by legal bills.

The final blow came when they were told the children were going to a gay household, even though several heterosexual couples wanted them. When the grandfather protested, he was told: ‘You can either accept it, and there’s a chance you’ll see the children twice a year, or you can take that stance and never see them again.’

The man said last night: ‘It breaks my heart to think that our grandchildren are being forced to grow up in an environment without a mother figure. We are not prejudiced, but I defy anyone to explain to us how this can be in their best interests.’

Social workers themselves have admitted that the little girl is ‘more wary’ of men than women.

How’s that for opening a big can of worms? No priority is given to the actual grandparents who were willing to adopt their own grandchildren. So “keeping it in the family” has no weight. No priority was given to any hetero couple willing to adopt the children, because the law says “We’re all equal”. And while we might all be equal as adults out in society, are we really all equal when it comes to raising children? Is this news article, and the major dust-up it’s causing in the UK, just aspects of latent prejudice? What about single parent households? What if the gay couple were both female?
Is this article raising the old canard that male homosexuality implies pedophilia, or is completely normal for any female of any age to be ‘more wary’ of men than women? Maybe this is just sour grapes on the grandparent’s part? On the other hand, why did they have to go to court and fight for years, at a tremendous expense, for the right to legally raise their own kin?

Go read the rest of the article, and also read Melanie Phillips’ take on things, then have your say. There are lots of aspects to this story that are debate worthy.


And another thing ... Hillary be damned, in this case it really is all about the children. And that should be the overwhelming factor. Always.

The prevailing argument that all types of family are as good as each other as far as the children are concerned simply isn’t true. While some children emerge relatively unscathed from irregular households, children need to be brought up by the two people ‘who made me’ - or, in adoptive households, in a family which closely replicates that arrangement. Where that does not happen, the child’s deepest sense of his or her identity as a human being is at some level damaged.

A child needs a mother and father because their roles in bringing that child up, and the way the child sees each of them, are not interchangeable. They are different and complementary, which is why if one of them is absent the child suffers, in many cases very badly indeed. For very young children the absence of a mother, whose nurturing role cannot be replicated even by the most loving and attentive of fathers, is particularly tragic.

Therefore to say that depriving children of a mother figure is in their best interests - as the Edinburgh social workers have said - is clearly ridiculous.

Don’t overlook the state of mind in the UK. Or lack thereof perhaps? To them, it’s a big question worthy of debate, on whether you should let your daughter have her boyfriend sleep with her in her own bed while she’s living in your house. My answer to that one was obvious: if you want the benefits, then take on the responsibilities. Go get your own apartment and a job, then you can shag your ears off whenever.

Posted by Drew458     on 01/29/2009 at 09:48 AM   
Filed Under: • Homosexuality • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Tuesday - November 25, 2008

SO, YOU DON’T WANT TO VIEW TWO MEN HAVING SEX IN PUBLIC?  TOUGH LUCK SEEMS TO BE THE MESSAGE.

Well once again I’ve had to go through an article and strike the word ‘gay’ and replace it with the more accurate and truer meaning.  And believe me it is a bother to do that, but I am not gonna stop.  Damn it I want our language back.  Grumble.

Anyway ... this article from The Mail reminds me of the mantra of the homosexual community from some years ago when they were chanting,
“We’re here, we’re queer, get used to it.” Interesting that they were using a more descriptive term for their behavior then.  And the public has gotten used to it. Some have.  The media certainly has and as I’ve said to the point of boredom, as long as they and the general public go along with the hijacking of the language and forcing people to get used to having it in public places as described in this story, then nothing will ever improve.  In fact, it’s a certain bet that things will only get worse.  How could they not? 

Mother and teenage daughter who stumbled on open air gay homosexual sex told to ‘use a different path’ by police

By James Tozer
Last updated at 7:46 AM on 25th November 2008

A mother shocked by seeing two half-naked men having sex while out walking the dogs with her daughter was told by police to take a different route in future.

Marie Cragg, 44, spoke of her disgust at the officers’ reaction and said she feared the woodland beauty spot would be turned into a no-go area for ordinary members of the public.

The men seen by Miss Cragg and her 18-year-old daughter Jessica were stripped from the waist down and carried on with their activities even after they knew they had been spotted.

‘I called the police and never heard anything back,’ Miss Cragg said.

‘Then later I was talking to the community officers, and they said they knew what goes on and I should change our walk.

‘You should not have to see that, should you? They can go into the woods and go wherever they want - it’s sick.

‘They saw me and didn’t care and just carried on. I could have been a childminder with kids. I would rather go past a gang of hoodies - they are making the place seedy.’

The encounter happened on a public footpath where Miss Cragg was walking the family dogs, Molly and Ruby, near their home in Penwortham, near Preston, last week.

It follows a briefing last month by the deputy chief constable of Lancashire,
Mike Cunningham, in which he called for police to turn a blind eye to outdoor sexual activity.

Under the Sexual Offences Act anyone who takes part in ‘dogging’, where couples meet for sex in car parks, and cottaging, where men meet for sex in public lavatories, face arrest for outraging public decency, voyeurism and exposure.

But Mr Cunningham, who is also a spokesman on homosexual issues for the Association of Chief Police Officers, argues that offenders should only be prosecuted as a last resort because of the potential impact on their lives of making their activities public.

Miss Cragg, who also has a 21-year-old daughter and a 15-year-old son with her partner, said police already seemed too tolerant.

It is the second time this year she has caught a pair of gay queer men having sex in the area, which is near a primary school.

‘When it happened again I just said to Jessica, ‘Oh my God!’,’ she added.

‘I’ve got nothing against gay homosexual men, but why can’t they do it in the privacy of their own homes?

This is the path on which dog walker Marie Cragg saw two semi-naked men having sex. After reporting the incident, she was left stunned when police told her to ‘use a different path in future’

‘The park belongs to everyone and it’s just not right to say people going for a walk and enjoying the countryside should stay away.

‘Something needs to be done so law-abiding people can go there without having to see things like that.’

The area, known as Cheggy Hollows after the local term for the conkers collected there by generations of children, has a network of paths which has become a magnet for gay queer men seeking open-air sex.

Miss Cragg, a site supervisor at a primary school, said of the police presence: ‘They put signs up saying ‘police patrolling’ but you never see them.’

Lancashire Police insisted officers had attempted to trace the men but confirmed Miss Cragg had been advised to take another route.

Chief Inspector Jon Bullas said: ‘What this lady and her daughter had to endure is shocking to say the least. I am aware that police officers were at the location within 20 minutes but could not find the two men described.

‘We are continuing to patrol this area and need to make clear that this sort of activity will not be tolerated.

‘The lady was given advice by an officer to use a different route but I would like to emphasise that the path is not a no-go area.

‘If people are concerned for their own safety, we would recommend that they take a less isolated route, particularly if alone.’

(Has nothing to do with “safety” and all to do with decency and decorum.  What the heck ever happened to DECORUM?)

http://tinyurl.com/65682x

Posted by peiper     on 11/25/2008 at 06:10 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Homosexuality • Sex •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Friday - November 14, 2008

THE LAND OF THE RISING SCUM?  HATE TO THINK IT BUT MANY BRITS SADLY AGREE WITH LITTLEJOHN.

Welcome to Britain, land of the rising scum.... We’ve cornered the market on welfare layabouts, drug addicts and feral gangs.

By Richard Littlejohn
The Daily Mail

The first time it properly dawned on me that the game was indeed up was about 20
years ago in Blackpool, where I was covering the Labour Party conference.

As I made my way from the Clifton Hotel, opposite the main pier, past Yates’s Wine Lodge towards the Winter Gardens, at approximately 9.30am, I had to step into the road to avoid a family walking four-abreast on the pavement in the direction of the sea front.

They were all breakfasting on fish and chips from polystyrene containers, washed down with what I seem to remember was Irn-Bru, in the case of the children, and Special Brew, for the parents.

The whole family — mum, dad, son, daughter — was dressed in matching turquoise shell-suits and imitation designer-label trainers. They all had earrings. Each wore a baseball cap.

The father’s cap was distinguished by a plastic dog turd stuck to the peak, beneath a logo which proclaimed: ‘S***head.’

I can remember thinking to myself, as I watched them window-shopping at the pork butcher’s: ‘What chance have these kids got?’

The other thought which occurred to me was, given that the children were aged, at a guess, eight and six, and this was late September: why weren’t they at school?

Now I know what some of you are thinking. Don’t rush to judgment, Rich. They could have been a blameless, sophisticated couple, who had taken their children out of their fee-paying convent school for the day to treat them to a field trip to study the varied marine life to be found in the Irish Sea off Blackpool, and had decided to dress down for the occasion.

Feeding them fish and chips for breakfast was simply a way of giving them an authentic working-class day-trip experience to broaden their horizons and drum home the message that not everyone starts the day with organic muesli from Waitrose.

(Waitrose, a very upscale market chain. The family also owns large tracts of property, generations old.)

The novelty baseball cap could have been an ironic, post-modern take on the nature of unbridled consumerism or a witty protest about societal stereotyping.

Then again, they could just have been scum.

You know what? I’ve just thought about it again. I’m going with scum. Sorry, but there’s no other word for it.

For all I know, those children could have grown up to become brain-surgeons.

My guess, though, is that they’re both living on benefits in some scruffy council garret, halfway up a burned-out tower block, surrounded by raggedy children who look pretty much like they used to on their jolly outing to Blackpool.

Only the fake designer labels have changed.

We’re now on to second- and third-generation scum, sustained by a patronising and non-judgmental welfare juggernaut. We’ve always had what sociologists prefer to call an underclass. But not on this scale and never so visible.

A quick glance at the news is all it takes to confirm the worst. In Haringey, North London, the child of a dysfunctional ‘family’ is tortured to death under the noses of social services. When the tragic Victoria Climbie died in similar circumstances on the same manor, we were assured it would never happen again. I wrote at the time that it could and it would. It has.

(note to Drew.  am not posting the story or pix on the torture killing of baby but did snail mail the article and photos. I’m not used to being shocked, but I still am after seeing and reading .)

The £100,000-a-year, hatchet-faced harridan in charge of the social services washes her hands of the death, refuses to resign and boasts of providing a ‘three star’ service,
backed by pie charts, graphs and a perfect paper trail of criminal incompetence and wilful neglect.

Somewhere out there, there’s a baseball cap with her name on it.

Frankly, I can’t bring myself to read the details of this horrific case, other than to note that the father was an SS freak and the mother spent all day in pornographic chat rooms on the internet, when she wasn’t smoking in the street. What did they do for money? What do you think?

In Yorkshire, a ghastly-looking woman and her gormless boyfriend’s uncle are on trial for abducting her daughter and attempting to extract a reward for her safe return. They look as if they have stepped straight out of Little Britain, in which Matt Lucas and David Walliams’s Burberried chavs captured perfectly the gruesome reality of so much of our modern landscape.

(this is in reference to a woman who with accomplice had her own daughter kidnapped and cost the state over £3 million pounds in the search while she went on TV begging for her daughter’s return. The plan was to have the accomplice free the kid and then discover her and save her thus collecting some $100,000 in reward money. The child was kept tied to a long strap in an apartment for 24 days. )

The women are the worst of the lot, giving birth to a procession of bay-bees by different, transient fathers and expecting — nay, being encouraged by — the state to pay for their upbringing.

The Government’s preferred solution is to keep on throwing money at the problem, hiring legions of social workers and ‘parenting skills advisers’ to keep the scum in check, while importing hundreds of thousands of immigrants to do the jobs our indigenous idle are paid not to do.

It doesn’t work and things aren’t going to get any better. It’s at least 20 years too late.

The game’s up. 

Note to readers.  I have edited the story a bit and the rest is at the link to the Mail.
The situation really is as bad as described by this reporter.  And heaven only knows what isn’t discovered.  It just seems that for an island with some 65 mil onboard, the scale of horrific doings by some very bad people continues almost unchecked.  My brain can’t cope with or understand how any human being can use a 17 month old baby as a punching bag.  I can’t comprehend why the people who do this should not be put to death in the very same manner.  http://tinyurl.com/5mm2ze

The reference to Little Britain is a supposed comedy show with a couple of gays homosexuals, one of who is in drag and very gross in size and looks.  The left wing Guardian newspaper claims the show had become a huge hit with Americans.  I sincerely hope not.
It’s my understanding and I could be wrong, that after previewing in the states, it bombed.  Now then, an expression here that goes, “ he or she or it went down a bomb” means they’ve done well.  Maybe when the Guardian heard that LB “bombed” in the states they mistook that for success.
The lead is degenerate, disgusting and his schtick is a twisted scowl.  Note guy in pink dress on left.  That look is all he does.  Well, not exactly.  He and former boyfriend who got married, recently became the first queer couple to divorce.  Well ........ so much for loving vows..

Posted by peiper     on 11/14/2008 at 09:13 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Homosexuality • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Monday - November 10, 2008

My reply II

Flapjawman sent me another email… here is my response.

This is actually a compliment. Consider, if you will, how few Mormons there are in the world, much less in Kalifornia.

Trust me when I say that there aren’t not enough Mormons in Kalifornia to sway the vote. Must be a bunch of other Christian churches, and otherwise decent folk, who thought that there was no right to be a sodomite.

But, we have the Temples… obvious targets for the mobs. Much like Lot in Sodom.

BTW, just what ‘rights’ are violated? Do not homosexuals have the same marriage rights as anyone else? The right to marry someone of the opposite sex? The same rights as pedophiles?  The incestuous? Marriage as an institution has many restrictions. Note that the Left tries to violate them all. Woody Allen has violated all of them without even marrying the female.

No rights are violated. I can’t marry my sister. Why not? There’s no good reason for such a restriction, unless possible genetic problems with progeny are the issue. In this day and age, we can abort.

But that would not be a problem in a homosexual ‘marriage’. Progeny is not an issue for queers.

So, if progeny is not the issue, why have marriage at all?

Ahhh! Grasshopper! You’ve stumbled upon the goal of the homosexuals. Destroy marriage, and you destroy the civilization.

Posted by Christopher     on 11/10/2008 at 11:59 PM   
Filed Under: • Democrats • Editorials • Homosexuality •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Monday - October 27, 2008

WELL, IF THE THEME BE HUMOR TO START THE DAY, HOW’S THIS. (and heaven help SF)

H/T J. Miller

( “not that there’s anything wrong with it” )Seinfeld

IMAGINE BEING A COP IN SAN FRANCISCO

Chief Heather Fong (left), the first SFPD female chief of police;

Theresa Sparks (center, former male), president of the San Francisco Police Commission, CEO of a multimillion-dollar sex toy retailer, and a transgender woman.

Sgt. Stephan Thorne (right, former female), the first transgender SFPD police officer.

Oh, Lord, please help us!

Posted by Drew458     on 10/27/2008 at 07:51 AM   
Filed Under: • Homosexuality •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

   Sunday - October 19, 2008

The Homosexual Agenda – What’s the Point?

A little trans-sexual . . . humor?

Posted by Christopher     on 10/19/2008 at 12:07 AM   
Filed Under: • Fun-Stuff • Homosexuality • No Shit, Sherlock •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks (0) • Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2008 Domain Owner