Wednesday - April 08, 2009

Mother stopped buying DVD because she was with her underage children. More UK, PC

This story is a week or two old but other things have been happening so fast I just couldn’t post it earlier.

Thing about this is, the IDIOT cashier “ASSUMED” the mom was buying a racy video (No, not porn) for kids. Why and by what right does a store employee have to assume any such thing?

You’re in a market that also sells videos as many do.  So you grab it and put it in your basket and some total officious jerk has the authority with no proof, to deny the purchase?

And what really gets me about this is that even though in the end a supervisor allowed the sale, the store says the cashier did the right thing.
NO the cashier did NOT.
What the cashier did with no proof whatever, is assume that mom was guilty of supplying her kiddie with a movie that had one of those not for under 16s attached to it. 

This is another example of the country gone to the fuckin PC dogs!
And what’s really so damn frustrating when all is said and done, is that people are powerless to haul off and smack the officious offender in the chops.  Ya know, I’d be willing to bet it would only take once or 2wice and others of like intrusive mindset would become worried enough about their own well being, that you’d begin to see a change in attitudes.

Not that I am at all in favor of exposing kids to adult material.  I am not.  But this was an adult. A mom out doing her shopping and some busybody making a decision for her.  And it happens all too often.

A mother was stopped while buying a 12 certificate DVD at a supermarket because she was with her young children – but was still allowed to buy a bottle of wine.

By Nick Britten
The Telegraph

Karen Richards, 39, said she was “amazed and outraged” after the incident at her local Morrisons.

She was shopping with her eight-year-old son, Sean, and nine-month-old baby when she was stopped at the checkout trying to buy the film “Ladies in Lavender”, a drama starring Dame Judi Dench set in 1936.

The assistant said she could not buy it because she was with her young children, but then allowed her to buy some red wine.

Miss Richards, from Weston-super-Mare, Somerset, said: “I could understand it if I had sent Sean in by himself to buy the DVD, but he was with me, along with my 9-month-old.

“Is Morrisons suggesting I should leave them both outside while I shop in case I want to buy something of a slightly adult nature?

“Does Morrisons not realise how totally ridiculous this is?”

She added: “The ironic thing is the staff member was quite happy to sell me a bottle of wine at the same time.

“It is further proof, if it is needed, that this ‘PC’ world of ours has gone barking mad.”

She said after talking to the supermarket’s supervisor she was eventually allowed to buy to film.

“I am all in favour of censorship and, of course if youngsters try to buy cigarettes and alcohol underage, they should be stopped.

“But with regards to films, I’ll decide what my son does or does not watch, not Morrisons.”

A Morrisons spokesman defended the checkout assistant’s decision and said customers suspected of buying an age-restricted product for a minor should be refused sale.

He said: “These rules are in place to protect our customers and their families, as well as the general public as a whole who, in the majority of cases, appreciate our vigilance.

“The DVD product in this case had an age restriction applied to it and the store followed procedure.

“We apologise if the customer felt the store was being over zealous.”

Miss Richards was eventually cleared to buy the DVD after a supervisor was called to verify her age.

Notice the “spokesman just couldn’t bring him or her self to just say they have it wrong. Oh no. That’d kill em. Schmucks.

Now then just to show ya. Here’s a short trailer.  I never saw the movie, wife did. She says it’s kind of in the same mood of Jane Austen.
NO child would sit thru this, they’d be bored.  The opening says clear for ALL AUDIENCES so I’ve no idea how it got a rating that says no underage allowed. Whatever ... take a brief view of this.

Posted by peiper     on 04/08/2009 at 09:44 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Oppression • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • Tyrants and Dictators • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - April 02, 2009

Revealed: The horrific moment the Taliban flog girl, 17, in chilling ‘punishment’ regime.

What FILTHY MISERABLE SCUM!
And this is exactly what these sub-humans want for us in the west people.
KNOW YOUR ENEMY !

There are a couple more pix but grainy.

By Debra Killalea
Last updated at 7:24 PM on 02nd April 2009

This is the chilling moment a 17-year-old Pakistani girl is punished in a horrific flogging by Taliban militants for being seen with a man who is not her husband.

The girl, who received 37 lashes at the hands of her brother and Taliban forces, has sent shockwaves throughout the once stable Swat Valley region.

The mobile phone footage shows the girl pinned down by two men while a third whips her as she begs for mercy.

‘Please stop it,’ the girl begs as the men, one of whom is believed to be her brother, continue their sickening act.

But some claim the commander ordered the flogging to get revenge after the girl refused to accept a marriage proposal.

Pashtun documentary maker Samar Minallah, who lived in Swat for two years in the late 1990s, handed the footage to the media.

The footage has sparked alarm across Pakistan and the west, which fears the Taliban is seeking to extend its influence across the region.

The girl in the video, named as Chaand, was punished in Matta in the Swat Valley.

She did not receive a trial and was punished according to the suspicious of one neighbour.

Ms Minallah said the incident had taken place within the last 10 days, following the signing of a peace deal between the provincial government and militants which saw them gain control of the valley’s judicial system.

She said the video is being circulated because the Taliban wanted people to see it.

‘They want to give the message that this is taking place after the peace deal because this is something they ideologically believe in,’ she said.

Journalists and human rights workers have confirmed the video was recent, but could not say exactly when it was taken.

Human rights officials also claim that the Taliban have committed many atrocities since the peace deal was signed with officials settling disputes ‘according to their whims.’

Mingora, the largest city in Swat district, has been under a mixture of traditional and Islamic law since the peace deal was signed on February 15.

Although the Taliban do not control the courts, they continue to carry out punishments in some regional areas.

The punishment is not the first to be dished out since the peace deal was signed with some sources claiming women have been whipped for harmless activities such as shopping.

Posted by peiper     on 04/02/2009 at 03:24 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Jack Booted Thugs • Oppression • Outrageous • Religion • RoPMA • Terrorists •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - January 10, 2009

Now even police can’t object to gipsy camp in picturesque village…because it’s racist .

First of all and most important my sincere thanks to Drew and all you other nice people for the kind words of support.  My wife has read all, and has asked me to convey her thanks as well.  It all surprised us very much.  I had no idea Drew was going to do that.
It’s funny how empty a small space can be.  A large weight has been removed but ..... just but.
Thank You All.

I can’t stay away for long when I see a headline like the one here.  I had no intention of doing anything today.  But this bit of continuing total lunacy just begs posting about.  Don’t mean to bore Americans with a problem we haven’t faced yet, but I want to keep what the Brits are living with at the forefront.  You can’t begin to know without living here, how serious this is. 

Brits who have always worked, paid all their many taxes, bought their houses and obeyed all the laws, take a look at their country and see the following.
People who have done NONE of those things and most likely will not ever do those things, demand and get special treatment and expect health care and schools and God only knows what else is on their list. This is ALL of it, the work of the left wing in this country.  And I won’t even get into immigration which Lyndon has covered so well in his comments on another post.

Click on the link for photo site at the bottom.  Take a look at the site they want to use.  Kiss the place goodbye.

By DAN NEWLING
Last updated at 10:38 AM on 10th January 2009

Police have been told they cannot object to a planned gipsy camp in a picturesque village.

Council chiefs have ruled that the local force’s professional opinion ‘breaches the Race Relations Act’.

The decision meant that councillors considering the planning application were not told how officers had been called to another local camp 109 times in just two years.

The row centres on the tiny village of Bletsoe (population 281) in North Bedfordshire.

Early last year residents learned that the owner of a farm on the edge of the village had applied for permission to build four ‘gipsy and traveller’ pitches on his land.

They formed an association to combat the plans and were delighted when Bedfordshire police joined them by writing a letter of objection to the council.

The police’s hard-hitting letter detailed their dealings with three other gipsy sites in the county.

Over a two-year period to January 2008, officers visited the three sites a total of 210 times. One site was visited 109 times.

The police were called out to deal with reports of fights, arson, assaults, stolen vehicles, violent disorder, anti-social behaviour, theft, child abduction and use of weapons.

Chief Superintendent Andy Street wrote: ‘The numbers, and nature, of incidents are not atypical for traveller sites. The likelihood of such sites causing problems for those living in close proximity is highly probable.’

However, Bedford Borough Council refused to take the letter into consideration when deciding whether to approve the site. Officials claimed that including it in the summary given to councillors would leave the authority open to a prosecution for racial discrimination.

So they returned the letter to the police and refused to let councillors see it. As a result, the police were forced to withdraw their objection.

Bletsoe resident Colin Deas, 72, a retired businessman who grew up in the village, said: ‘It seems to me that there are some things you simply cannot say if you are talking about travellers.

‘I am sure that the police would be allowed to say there was fear of increased crime if they were talking about a new housing estate. So what’s the difference?’

Bedford’s act of censorship is the latest illustration of how politically- correct councils appear to be appointing themselves as our ‘thought police’.

Only last week the Mail revealed how nearby Mid-Bedfordshire council labelled more than 3,000 local residents of the village of Stotfold as racists when they objected to a gipsy site.

They had simply expressed worries that the site could increase traffic, cause property prices to fall or increase noise levels.

Although councillors rejected the Bletsoe traveller camp plans last year, the landowner has now appealed and the case will be heard again next month.

A spokesman for Bedford council said: ‘The police objection was treated very seriously.

‘Legal advice indicated that the objection was not a material planning consideration and should not be reported to committee. In the light of such clear advice it was considered appropriate to return the correspondence to the police.’

PHOTO OF COUNTRY SITE

Posted by peiper     on 01/10/2009 at 11:34 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Jack Booted Thugs • Oppression • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - January 09, 2009

Family of Afghan rape victim cut her open and removed foetus without anaesthetic .

Yes, and these sub humans have human rights I want ya to know.

Can’t blame them right?  Only trying to protect family honor.  Good muslims all.

The mother and brother of a 14-year-old Afghan rape victim face charges after they cut her open and removed her foetus without anaesthetic, it has been reported.

By Ben Farmer in Kabul
Last Updated: 8:49PM GMT 08 Jan 2009

The girl is critically ill in hospital after her family sewn the girl up themselves and said she had been bitten by a dog to cover their crime.

A man accused of raping the girl, from the central Afghan province of Bamiyan, is under arrest.

The rural family apparently decided to perform an abortion when the girl was five months pregnant to protect the family’s honour.

Rape victims face extreme social stigma, imprisonment and abandonment or murder by their own families in Afghanistan.

Dr Ghulam Mohammad Nader, head of Bamiyan hospital, told the BBC that the girl had been able to explain what had happened but was in a critical condition with infected wounds. She is now being treated in the capital Kabul.

“The girl stayed at home for three or four days in her condition until her father took her to hospital,” he said.

“He said a dog had bitten her so that people in the area wouldn’t know what had really happened.”

Habiba Sarabi, governor of the province, said the girl had been bound and taken to a stables for the abortion. Police are now trying to arrest her family.

muslim scum and family honor

How many billions have been spent on this place over the years?  Is it worth it?  Has anything changed in the last 1,000 yrs? Does anyone really think this place will ever be any different?

Posted by peiper     on 01/09/2009 at 01:13 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Oppression • Outrageous • RoPMA • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - January 03, 2009

THE GREAT ENGLISH SELL OUT.  THE WHOLE DARN COUNTRY. AND THE ENGLISH DON’T LIKE IT.

The views of all local comrades will be ignored unless they follow the ‘equality and diversity guidelines’ from the central planning committee. All comrades are entitled to give their opinion but the central planning committee reserves the right to override all public opinion and common sense.

John, London, UK, 3/1/2009 10:04

That BMEWS readers, is one of many like letters to the editor on the issue of Europe’s and the UK’s public cancer.
Gypsies/ Travelers. A blight in human form.

They can set up camp pretty much anywhere and they do. And it’s hell removing them. 
However, the govt. here is insisting that local councils find more camp sites for people who basically are nomadic. But never mind that for now.

This problem is faced by this country mostly due to one man.  The former Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott.  Of course, he isn’t alone but was a prime mover.
He is old fashioned leftist labour, (except for his lifestyle) and Tony Blair needed him to swing the left wing of his party to gain power.  That’s badly put perhaps and if he’s around I think Lyndon can explain it better.

Prescott had as his goal, his life’s desire, his answer to problems, STICK IT TO THE MIDDLE CLASS AND THE WEALTHY.  Make em hurt.
He was a very rough and tumble bruiser who really shined when using strong arm methods against political rallies of opposing political viewpoint. He was the bruiser that broke things up. 
You would not want to meet him on a dark night alone.  Come to think about it, maybe not even in daylight.  He’s been known to deck people.

One of his goals (and his legislation if I can use that term) is in effect now. It was his idea that the south where he perceived ALL the rich and middle class lived should get a taste of lower income housing in their neighborhoods, and so councils have been given a schedule that has to be met and extra housing built.  That is simplistic put that way but I know of no other way to state the case.

To give American a taste of Prescott, here’s one of his quotes.  He is btw, known for mangled sentences.

The objectives remain the same and indeed that has been made clear by the Prime Minister in a speech yesterday that the objectives are clear and the one about the removal of the Taliban is not something we have as a clear objective to implement but it is possible a consequence that will flow from the Taliban clearly giving protection to Bin Laden and the UN resolution made it absolutely clear that anyone that finds them in that position declares themselves an enemy and that clearly is a matter for these objectives.

GYPSIES AND TRAVELERS (difference?) ARE A RACIAL GROUP

By Paul Bracchi
Last updated at 10:43 AM on 03rd January 2009
Daily Mail

This idyllic corner of England is where council chiefs want to put a new gipsy camp.

Historic: The Old Mill, at Stotfold in Bedfordshire which was restored after it was destroyed by a fire in 1992. A gipsy camp has been earmarked for land bordering the old buildings

‘Housing crisis’ in the gipsy community

Six towns and villages have been earmarked for the camps - Stotfold (four pitches), Pulloxhill (eight), Greenfield (one), Arlesey (four), Upper Caldecote (five).

It would be difficult to imagine a policy which has caused so much anxiety and anger for local people. Much of that anger, understandably, is directed at the council.

‘Racism’ aside, you have only to visit the authority’s own website to understand the reason.

The council says it is trying to dispel some of the myths about gipsies and travellers. Information is one thing, propaganda another.

Anyone, apart from travellers themselves, could be in little doubt into which category the council’s ‘research’ falls.

Do gipsies and travellers work or pay taxes, asks one rhetorical question? Of course they do - ‘VAT is also paid on everything they buy’.

Presumably, the camp at Crays Hill in Essex is the exception that proves the rule, then.

A recent report, commissioned by the local council in Essex, found that people on the site were claiming almost £250,000 a year in dole money.

In other words, they were being funded by the taxpayer by an average of about £7,650 per plot annually.

Nevertheless, many of the Crays Hill fraternity owned expensive cars and vans.

But back to those other ‘myths’. Living in a caravan is not just ‘a lifestyle choice’ for many gipsies, insists Mid-Bedfordshire council, ‘but part of their social and cultural heritage’.

No mention of the fact that many of the gipsies at Cottenham in Cambridgeshire also have palatial second homes back in Ireland.

Then there is this gem. ‘Media reports and images are often inaccurate and discriminatory. In particular there is no evidence of higher crimes rates among gipsies and travellers.’

No doubt Gary Alderson and his team were unaware of the police raid on a gipsy camp near Market Harborough, Leicestershire, last year during which £1 million cash was found buried underground, stashed in cupboards and stuffed inside cuddly toys. Almost £5,000 was also discovered in a dishwasher.

The fortune came from illegally altering the mileometers on highmileage cars - bought at auction for next to nothing - and selling stolen caravans.

In fact, evidence contradicting the claims by Mid-Bedfordshire District Council - the kind which cannot be dismissed as ‘inaccurate and discriminatory’ - is to be found much closer to home.

At a site, in fact, run by the council itself in the village of Potton.

‘Betrayed’

In 2002, a couple living 200 yards from the Potton camp took the authority to court after enduring a decade of lawless and anti-social behaviour at the hands of travellers who raced cars, dumped and burned vehicles, set rubbish alight and threatened residents.

The judge ruled that the council had not done enough to tackle the ‘nuisance’ which had blighted the lives of the couple. They were later awarded up to £30,000.

Little, it seems, has changed. In November, detectives arrested two men at Potton following an armed robbery at a supermarket.

Meanwhile, life-saving equipment stolen from local fire stations was discovered near the camp. The police helicopter now flies over the site day and night.

Is it any surprise that the people of Mid-Bedfordshire felt betrayed by the council long before those letters accusing them of racism started landing on their doormats?

One comment was not sent back to the council on one of its questionnaires, but is worth repeating nonetheless.

‘Many of these so-called travellers seem to think it is perfectly OK for them to cause mayhem in area, to go burgling, thieving, breaking into vehicles, causing all kinds of trouble including defecating in the doorways of firms and so on, and getting away with it.’

Guess who was speaking? It was Jack Straw, the former Home Secretary, in 1999 - shortly before the amendment to the race laws.

His comments were aimed at travellers like those at Potton, not Romanies.

So it seems its all right for a Home Secretary to make such observations, but not those people whose lives will be most seriously affected by the new traveller sites.

‘It is insulting to be branded a racist,’ said Brian Collier, 66, who is also chairman of Stotfold Council.

‘I trained as a teacher in London and the first school I worked in was in Chiswick where most of the children were non-white.

‘I have worked in schools in which there have been members of ethnic communities almost all my career.

‘I have served on the town council for 20 years and I have been in the Liberal Party since I was 23.

‘I come from a Lancastrian Methodist background and I am not a racist in any way. I have also lived in Stotfold for 28 years and I can tell you it is not a place that would attract any support for the BNP.

‘Our town council simply expressed the concerns of the people it represents. They have a genuine concern about crime.

‘They see what has happened at the Potton site and are fearful the same thing could happen here. Local people, the police, the courts, and Mid-Bedfordshire District Council are all well aware of the long history of serious criminality at this site.

‘The proposed site in Stotfold backs onto a planned nature reserve and is not far from the local Scout and Guide hut.

‘At the moment the proposal is for four pitches in Stotfold. It would mean around eight caravans - but the entire site actually comprises 44 acres so there is concern that as time goes by it will get bigger.’

Back at Huckleberry Cottage, the same sentiments are echoed by Frances and Gordon Huckle.

‘I love the town and want it to retain its charm,’ explains Mr Huckle. ‘My ancestors lived in this house in the 1880s and it is a very pleasant place to live.

‘Many families move here from London to enjoy a bit of peace and quiet, and we don’t want that to be ruined.’

In Britain 2009, it seems, and in Bedfordshire in particular, voicing such sentiments, quite simply, makes you a racist.

MORE GYPSIES

Due to the length of the article, I have done a lot of editing. For the entire story in proper form, see the link.

Posted by peiper     on 01/03/2009 at 02:50 PM   
Filed Under: • Oppression • Outrageous • UK •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - December 27, 2008

Council official evicted elderly tenants from bungalows… then moved in herself.

I believe this is outrageous Fraud is my term for it but it’s probably worse.

The worst of it is, the official is out of office due to what she did BUT is still getting FULL PAY!
I would like to think that if this happened back home in the US, the official would be sent to jail and no pay.

Hey ... no work ... full pay .... works for some.

ELDERLY RESIDENTS FORCED OUT ... COUNCIL OFFICIALS MOVES IN

By Andrew Levy
Last updated at 1:41 PM on 27th December 2008

As a council official with responsibility for helping the homeless, Kristine Reeves knows how much people value their homes.

Which makes it difficult to explain how she came to play a key role in evicting frail and elderly tenants from their bungalows - then moved into one with her partner.

The £52,000-a-year head of neighbourhood and strategic housing was just one of 18 council employees who took up residence in former sheltered accommodation at the Greyhound Opening site in Norwich.

She also benefited from the rent at the one-bedroom bungalow she took over two months ago being reduced from £69 a week to £47.

Similar properties in the area cost between £350 and £750 a month.

Miss Reeves, 38, has now been suspended on full pay by Labour-run Norwich City Council, which admits conflict of interest rules were flouted.

Council leader Steve Morphew has promised to ‘make good the damage’. Miss Reeves - who, according to Land Registry documents, bought a three-storey house worth an estimated £190,000 four years ago - was dismissive of her new accommodation yesterday.

She said: ‘These are not fit-for-purpose units at all. They are really very cold and you couldn’t swing a cat there.’

Some 25 old people were moved out under plans to replace their homes with 100 high-density flats and houses.
bungalows

The 18 council officials have now been given a month to move out of the properties.

Rather than hire security to prevent squatters moving in to the empty bungalows, officials decided to rent them to employees, without consulting elected councillors.

MIss Reeves moved in with her partner Graham Ross, also a senior housing official.

Former residents are furious. Widow Ida Hall, 89, said: ‘I didn’t want to leave. I liked my little bungalow. It was lovely.’

Simon Wright, LibDem candidate for Norwich South, said: ‘It’s absolutely abhorrent that officers involved in a decision to evict elderly, frail pensioners should then move in at reduced rents.’

After the scandal broke Angela Hadley, the council’s assistant director of neighbourhood development, who herself rented one of the properties for a time, resigned due to ‘severe ill health in her family’.

Suzanne McBride, co-strategic director for community and neighbourhoods, has ‘left the authority’.

Laura McGillivray, the council’s £121,000-a-year chief executive was said to have been unaware of the scandal.

Miss Reeves and the other occupants have now been given a month’s notice to quit. 

PHOTOS HERE

Posted by peiper     on 12/27/2008 at 12:06 PM   
Filed Under: • Oppression • Outrageous • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - February 06, 2008

Story starts in ‘05 and ends here in ‘08 with apology.  From the one harassed!

Story starts in ‘05 and ends here in ‘08 with apology.  From the one harassed!

Teacher fired airgun in gang row

By Nigel Bunyan

Last Updated: 1:32am GMT 04/02/2005

A teacher who fired an air pistol during an altercation with a gang of youths told police she had “had enough” of the law being on the side of criminals.Linda Walker, 47, claims she suffered weeks of abuse and vandalism at the hands of youngsters near her home in Urmston, Manchester.She finally snapped when she suspected they had vandalised her son’s car. Following an initial row, she ran back into the house and returned with a Walther air pistol and an air rifle.

She fired up to six shots into the pavement as she stood “nose to nose” with the convicted burglar she saw as her chief protagonist. She put both weapons down as armed police raced to the scene.

A jury at Minshull Street Crown Court, Manchester, heard that Walker later told officers: “I know you do your best, but the law is on their side. That’s why I rang 999 and ran out like a mad woman possessed, because I’d had it up to here. Everybody gets to that point where they’ve had enough. I’ve got to that point.”
http://tinyurl.com/62276

Air gun teacher told she can work againLast Updated: 1:13am GMT 06/02/2008

A teacher who was jailed for confronting a group of youths with a pellet gun was told Tuesday that she could carry on teaching.
Linda Walker, 50, broke down in tears at a disciplinary hearing as she described how “ashamed” she was of her behaviour.

I’m a slow fellow. Someone will have to explain to me just why the victims should express remorse.

She said that she fired the weapon into the ground to deter the gang, which she believed had subjected her family to months of harassment.Following the incident in August 2004, Mrs Walker was jailed for six months for possessing a firearm with intent to cause fear of violence, and affray.

She spent a total of 38 days in custody but the appeal court later quashed her jail sentence, replacing it with a 12-month conditional discharge.

http://tinyurl.com/2epbg7

Posted by Drew458     on 02/06/2008 at 03:10 PM   
Filed Under: • Oppression • Self-Defense •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - June 19, 2007

Uncle Ted Is On Fire

The Nuge layes it out for the wild-eyed vegans who want to control everyone else’s eating habits. 

‘Live and let live’ foreign idea to left

By Ted Nugent, Texas Wildman

I like sizzling meat on the grill. Wild, huh? Anybody? Now, we all know ol’ Nuge isn’t by any stretch of the imagination a weirdo when it comes to an omnivorous diet

Especially here in the great Republic of Texas, a smiling, drooling preference for succulent, protein-rich, nutritious backstrap over aromatic mesquite coals is as American and natural and right as Mom, apple pie and the flag. It’s beautiful, really.

But a culture war rages against such universal, self-evident truths. It would be laughable if it were not so deranged. Some weirdos actually are on a crusade to outlaw the consumption of flesh.

I have musical touring associates who have been fired from their jobs with ex-Beatle Paul McCartney for sneaking a hamburger.

You heard that right. Fired for eating meat by an animal-rights maniac, hard-core vegan bass player

As they say, go read the rest.

Posted by Drew458     on 06/19/2007 at 05:12 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Oppression • Outrageous •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - April 29, 2007

Paranoia Alert

Don’t look now but ... somebody is watching you at this very moment. No matter where you go in Britain, you’re under surveillance 24 hours a day, seven days a week. But before the rest of us here in America and in quite a few countries around the world get all smug and start chuckling about our Brit friends’ loss of privacy, you better look over your shoulder. There is probably a camera close by even if you’re in Washington, New York, Los Angeles or even Bumphuk, Iowa.

Face it, in an era where terrorists are all around us we have surrendered any pretense of privacy in order to be safe. Then again, this started long before Osama got uppity and started blowing up buildings. No, dear friends, our government started installing cameras ages ago to catch speeding violators, Wal-mart started installing cameras to catch shoplifters, toll booths were equipped with cameras to catch people trying to sneak through, banks, liquor stores and every convenience store on the planet installed cameras to record robbery attempts and employee theft.

Heck, even libraries have cameras nowadays to catch book thieves. You can’t make a phone call any more without hearing the message “This call may be recorded for quality purposes la-dee-da-dee-dah”. Turn on your computer and connect to the internet and Microsoft wants to know what you’re doing. Your internet service provider is keeping track of where you surf. At work, your phone calls are subject to being monitored and your e-mails are kept on backup tapes forever in the event you decide to flirt with that secretary on the 2nd floor and she wants to sue for harassment ... ten years from now.

Do you have a cell phone? If so, Sprint and Verizon know exactly where you are at all times. The FBI, CIA, KGB and MI6 can’t keep track of all the ways they now have at their disposal in order to monitor your every move. Stakeouts are a thing of the past. Who needs ‘em with cameras everywhere? We’re only one step away from “1984” ... and that is a two-way television that watches you while you watch it, as Orwell predicted. He was only off by about 20-30 years.

No, I’m not kidding. Do you see that little cable TV box next to your TV? I bet you think it’s just passing signals through to your TV for your entertainment? You may even have convinced yourself that it’s not capturing viewing information that can be used to manage programming in your area and/or sold to advertising agencies for targeted marketing campaigns. If so, you are incredibly stupid.

Cell phones with cameras are all over the place. It’s not just government or merchants spying on us ... we’re spying on each other 24/7. Everybody knows what everybody is doing and it’s all being recorded somewhere to be used against you when the opportunity arises. So go on about your business today and pay no attention to those camera lenses, GPS devices and microphones all around you. They’re just looking out for you.

Now adjust your tinfoil hat and try to have a nice day ... and welcome to a brave new world.

Britain Becoming A Big Brother Society, Says Data Watchdog
(THE INDEPENDENT-UK) - 29 April 2007

Britain is in danger of “committing slow social suicide” as such Big Brother techniques as surveillance cameras and recording equipment spread into every aspect of our lives, the nation’s information watchdog will warn this week.

A new report from Richard Thomas, the information commissioner, will say that the public needs to be made more aware of the “creeping encroachment” on civil liberties created by email monitoring, CCTV and computer tracking of our buying habits.

It is understood that one of the concerns in Mr Thomas’s report is the use of special listening devices which can be placed in lamp posts, street furniture and offices. These are already widely used in the Netherlands to combat crime and anti-social behaviour.

More than 300 of the cameras with built-in microphones have been fitted in benefit offices and city centres. The equipment can pick up aggressive tones on the basis of decibel level, pitch and speed at which words are spoken.

Westminster council has already started piloting the listening devices, but experts say the use of these microphones raises questions about how surveillance can be used to intrude into the private lives of citizens.

He will also call for greater regulation of companies that supply surveillance technology which provides “convenience or safety for the more affluent majority”, but not for the vulnerable such as children, immigrants and the elderly.

His warning comes as MPs launch their first inquiry into the impact of surveillance in Britain. The Home Affairs Select Committee will investigate the use of video cameras to monitor high streets and residential areas as well as the holding of personal information on both government and commercial databases.

On Tuesday, Mr Thomas, who last year warned that Britain was “sleepwalking into a surveillance society”, will tell the committee at its first hearing that new safeguards must be introduced to protect the public from the increasing intrusion of surveillance into their daily lives.

Civil liberty campaigners have already warned that Britain is becoming a Big Brother society where its citizens are increasingly being watched. There are more than four million CCTV cameras in this country, one for every 14 people, and the national DNA database which was set up by police to combat crime now holds 3.5 million profiles.

Posted by The Skipper     on 04/29/2007 at 01:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Oppression • Science-Technology •  
• Comments (6) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - December 05, 2006

Food Nazis Strike In New York

Forget the cigarette Nazis. Now we have to contend with the food Nazis. Your government is going to make sure you stay healthy whether you like it or not. Perhaps the good politicians in New York will have a heart and allow restaurants to have a “fat area” outside the back door (next to the smoking area) where customers can go stand in the rain with other similar addicts and enjoy a fried chicken leg or a basket of greasy french fies. These will be the next group of bad people alienated from society and forced to indulge their greasy habit in dark alleys and secret deep-fry hideaways on the edge of town.

What will the nanny-state come for next? How long will it be before somebody realizes that over 45,000 people die in automobile accidents every year and it’s time to ban autos. Besides, they will argue, walking is healthy. It’s coming. Pretty soon our behavior will be monitored for politically correct actions 24/7 and we all will have transmitters which will send data on our food consumption and daily exercise habits to a central computer for assignment of punishment if we deviate from government-mandated rules. Sieg heil!

Experts Say New York Trans Fat Ban a Healthy Move
_{NEW YORK (ABC NEWS) - December 5, 2006}

Following the New York City Board of Health’s unanimous decision to phase trans fats off the city’s restaurant menus, experts say the move could be an important step in saving many people from heart disease.

The measure, first proposed on Sept. 26, will take effect July 1. By this date, restaurants will be barred from using most frying oils that contain artificial trans fats. And by July 1, 2008, they will have to eliminate artificial trans fats from all their foods.

Experts believe trans fats cause harm because they raise “bad” LDL cholesterol and lower “good” HDL cholesterol. This combination has been found to contribute to heart disease — perhaps even more so than saturated fats.

“This is one of the most important actions taken by a city or state health department in many years,” says Michael Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest in Washington, D.C. “The trans-fat ban will save thousands of lives over the next decade.” Jacobson says that other cities and states should adopt the measure, “as long as the FDA and Congress sit on the sidelines.”

“This is a good idea,” says Keith-Thomas Ayoob, associate professor in the department of pediatrics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine. “Trans fat is not a necessity, and there are suitable substitutes.”

“Some opponents of this ban have characterized this as ‘big brother in the kitchen,’” says Meir Stampfer, professor and chairman of the Harvard School of Health’s department of epidemiology.

“To those I would ask, ‘Do you oppose the regulations requiring employees to wash their hands? Do you oppose regulations limiting pesticide residue in food?’” Stampfer adds that consumers probably will not even notice the absence of trans fats.

“This ban does not ban any food item, and its implementation will likely be virtually invisible to consumers,” Stampfer says. “It bans an industrially produced artificial ingredient in the food supply that responsible manufacturers should have taken out themselves long ago.”

- More ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 12/05/2006 at 03:52 PM   
Filed Under: • Fine-Dining • Oppression •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - October 27, 2006

Quote Of The Day

“We’ve got a nation of people who have one eye looking out for the next speed camera, another looking for a speed limit sign and another looking at the speedometer - which is a bit of a shame, when you only have two eyes.”

-- PAUL SMITH, head of a British group that opposes the use of cameras to catch speeders.

Posted by The Skipper     on 10/27/2006 at 07:55 AM   
Filed Under: • Oppression •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - August 16, 2006

Dhimmitude

This is how the takeover begins. Muslims infiltrate a Western country, refuse to assimilate and then start demanding the people and government of their new home comply with their rules and laws. You can probably guess what comes next. If not, consider the word ... dhimmi ... and the fact that the word “Islam” translates as “submission”. Our Brit friends better wake up before it’s too late ...

Dhimmi (also zimmi, Arabic ذمي, often translated as “protected") is the legal status of a free non-Muslim subject of a state governed in accordance with sharia — Islamic law. The word dhimmi is an adjective (but used like a noun in English). It is derived from the noun dhimma, which means “pact of liability”, and denotes the legal relationship between non-Muslim subjects and the Islamic state. Dhimmitude is the “specific social condition that results from jihad,” and as the “state of fear and insecurity” of “infidels” who are required to “accept a condition of humiliation.”

-- Wikipedia

Give Us Shari’a, UK Muslim Leaders Tell Gov’t
_{LONDON (CNSNews.com) - August 16, 2006}

British Muslim leaders meeting with government representatives to discuss ways of combating extremism are calling for the establishment of Islamic law (shari’a) to govern Muslims’ family life.

“We told her if you give us religious rights, we will be in a better position to convince [Muslim] young people that they are being treated equally along with other citizens,” said Syed Aziz Pasha, secretary general of the Union of Muslim Organizations of the U.K. and Ireland.

Pasha was among some 30 Muslim leaders, described as moderates, who met with Ruth Kelly, the minister responsible for communities, amid raging debate in the country over what to do about the terror threat.

The government is appealing to Muslim figures to work harder to prevent extremist views from taking root in their communities, particularly among young people.

The campaign was accelerated after the July 2005 London bombings, and given new urgency in recent days after police discovered what they said was a conspiracy to blow up U.S.-bound aircraft, killing thousands of air passengers and crew.

As of Tuesday, police were holding 24 suspects, all reported to be Muslims. Pasha stressed that he was calling for the introduction of shari’a codes covering marriage and family life, and not for criminal offenses.

Shari’a is controversial because it provides for punishments including limb amputation for theft and death for apostasy. The legal code is applied in varying degrees in countries including Saudi Arabia, Iran, Sudan, Libya, Nigeria, Pakistan and Indonesia.

Shari’a in family affairs deals with issues such as dowry, inheritance and sharing of assets. In some traditions it also allows men to beat wives who refuse to obey them and won’t submit to non-physical admonition, and to end a marriage by declaring “I divorce you” three times.

Pasha said Muslim leaders were ready to cooperate with the government, but wanted a partnership."They should understand our problems then we will understand their problems.”

Other Muslim leaders, however, disagreed. Khalid Mahmood, one of four Muslim lawmakers in the House of Commons, said shari’a could not apply in Britain because it was not an Islamic state.

An ICM poll of British Muslims earlier this year found 40 percent of respondents supported the introduction of shari’a in predominantly Muslim areas of Britain, while 41 percent were opposed to the idea.

About 2.7 percent of Britain’s 60 million people are Muslims. In another opinion survey of Muslims this year, by polling company NOP, 22 percent of respondents agreed that the London bombings, which killed 52 people, were justified because of Britain’s foreign policies. Among Muslims aged under 45, the figure rose to 31 percent.

- More on Muslim demands in Britain here ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 08/16/2006 at 08:04 AM   
Filed Under: • Oppression • RoPMA •  
• Comments (13) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - June 07, 2006

Exploitation Of Illegal Aliens?

Mayor Nagin’s “chocolate city” is starting to smell more like burritos than chocolate with 100,000 illegal aliens flooding into the city to work for dirt-cheap wages ($10 per hour). Of course you know the big bad Haliburton and others are exploiting these poor hard-working criminals by paying them twice the minimum wage and only four out of five workers are given protective gear. Dick Cheney should be ashamed of how his company is trampling the civil rights of these poor, downtrodden workers - at least that’s what AP thinks.

Than again, they could always go to California or Florida and pick fruit for $7,500 per year (about $3.25 per hour). I haven’t heard anyone complain about those wages or the mega-rich companies like Dole or Archer Daniels Midland that have been paying those wages for decades. Why all the sympathy now - unless it’s just one more way to attack the Bush administration.

Face it though, if you criminally invade someone else’s country and are in hiding all the time, you are going to get screwed on wages and job conditions. Perhaps the Mexicans need to re-think their whole strategy. If they’d only come here legally, then they could bitch and complain all they want - just like the rest of us. Until then, they’re hosed ...

Illegal Workers Face Hardship in Big Easy
_{June 7, 2006, 6:49 AM EDT}

NEW ORLEANS (AP) - They are the backbone of post-Hurricane Katrina reconstruction: Workers who converge at dawn and wait to be picked up for 14-hour shifts of hauling debris, ripping out drywall and nailing walls.

But because many are in the country illegally, immigrant workers rebuilding New Orleans are especially vulnerable to exploitation, according to a study released Tuesday by professors at Tulane University and the University of California at Berkeley.

The illegal immigrants often work in hazardous conditions without protective gear and earn far less than their legal counterparts, the study said. Nearly one-third of the illegal immigrants interviewed by researchers reported working with harmful substances and in dangerous conditions, while 19 percent said they were not given any protective equipment.

Illegal immigrants also were paid significantly less—if at all—earning on average $10 per hour, compared with $16.50 for documented workers, the study said. “What is fundamentally unfair is these are workers who have responded to a national priority to rebuild this city and yet whose rights are being violated,” said Laurel Fletcher, director of Berkeley’s International Human Rights Law Clinic and one of the study’s co-authors.

Under federal labor law, illegal immigrants are afforded the same health and safety protections as documented workers. Regardless of their legal status, laborers can sue most employers under the Fair Labor Standards Act for violation of the minimum wage law and overtime regulations, the researchers said.

The federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration said it has conducted more than 7,000 on-site inspections in the New Orleans area. The U.S. Department of Labor said it was concerned about wage and safety violations and had hurried to establish a Gulf Coast office.

“I’m not surprised that there are wage violations in the whole Gulf Coast rebuilding area—all of the conditions are there for that to occur,” said Victoria Lipnic, assistant secretary of labor for employment standards.

“But we’ve tried to be very proactive in our enforcement effort.” Before last year’s hurricane, Louisiana had one of the smallest Hispanic populations in the country—2.5 percent of residents compared with 12.5 percent nationally.

Census data indicates nearly 100,000 Hispanics moved to the Gulf Coast region after Katrina, lured by promises of high wages and plentiful work. It is unclear how many have come to New Orleans, though the study estimates one-quarter of the construction workers in the city are illegal immigrants.

While 83 percent of documented workers interviewed by the researchers said had access to medicine when needed, only 38 percent of illegal immigrants did. Around one-third of illegal immigrants said they understood the hazards of removing asbestos or mold, compared with more than 65 percent of documented laborers. Thirty-three percent of legal workers received medical attention when needed for a reported problem, compared to 10 percent of undocumented workers.

Some of those waiting for work said they are afraid of complaining. “It’s too dangerous for my body,” said 29-year-old Saul Linan, an illegal immigrant from Mexico. “But I don’t say anything. If I do, the boss says, `Hey, if you don’t work hard, I’ll take you to immigration.’”

Posted by The Skipper     on 06/07/2006 at 01:19 PM   
Filed Under: • Illegal-Aliens and Immigration • Oppression •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - June 06, 2006

Kelo Eviction!

Well, it has finally come down to this in New London, Connecticut. The madness that SCOTUS wrought last year is in its final phases. The city has moved everyone out of the area that was appropriated stolen for “development” - except for two citizens of these United States who are having their right to own property literally ignored and over-ridden ... by the Supreme Court Of The United States.

Do you want to talk about giving up your rights in time of war? Sure, go ahead. There may be good reasons for that - but what satanic reason can you give me for a local government literally stealing a citizen’s land? I’ve been screaming about this for over a year in various posts and now we’re in the end game and the slimey, sleazy, dastardly bullies at New London City Hall are about to tear down two houses around their owner’s ears - and fine them for not moving.

Conn. City Leaders OK Riverfront Evictions
_{June 6, 2006, 8:48 AM EDT}

NEW LONDON, Conn. (AP) - City officials voted to evict two residents whose refusal to give up their riverfront houses helped lead to the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark ruling that governments may seize property for private development projects. The City Council voted 5-2 in favor of eviction Monday. An attorney for the residents said they are considering continuing to fight.

“You are a disgrace to the city, the state and the nation,” one of the residents, Michael Cristofaro, told council members who voted to evict. The city has been trying for a decade to redevelop the once-vibrant neighborhood at the point where the Thames River joins the sea. Seven homeowners challenged the city’s plans to seize the property and build a hotel, convention center and upscale condominiums, saying eminent domain can’t be used to make way for private development.

But the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 last year to uphold the city’s right to take the homes, saying municipalities have broad power to do so in favor of private development to generate tax revenue. Since then, five of the homeowners have settled with the city and agreed to leave. Two holdouts, Cristofaro and Susette Kelo, the lead plaintiff in the lawsuit, still refuse to sell.

The vote came five days after a settlement deadline. One resident agreed to a settlement just minutes before Monday’s meeting began, The Day of New London reported. The city attorney plans go to court to seek removal of the remaining two families and obtain the properties in the Fort Trumbull neighborhood, a process that could take three months. Scott Bullock, a lawyer for the residents, said they will consider asking the state to pull funding for the development.

City councilman Robert Pero, who supported the effort to remove the families, noted that the issue has been through state agencies and three courts. “This was a plan that was well thought out,” he said. “The development of this peninsula needs to move forward.” But Charles Frink, one of the two council members who voted against the plan, said supporters should admit their mistake. “I can’t accept a possible reduction in taxes by having neighbors thrown out of their property,” he said. “This is morally abhorrent to me. I refuse to profit from my neighbor’s pain.”

- BizzyBlog has the full timeline of this heinous act ...

- CoyoteBlog has the story on the follow-up to Kelo ...

Posted by The Skipper     on 06/06/2006 at 11:46 AM   
Filed Under: • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Oppression • Outrageous •  
• Comments (7) • 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 © 2004-2015 Domain Owner