Sunday, March 30, 2014


The more I read about Nigel Farage the more I like him but sadly he and his party can not make a Government. As I have said before I will vote for my local MP Gordon Henderson in spite of him being a Conservative, he just happens to be a good MP.  So when I vote at the next election I will vote for the man not the party. No matter what party gets into power unless we withdraw from the EU a National Government will become no more then a debating chamber. Labour and LibDems are refusing to give the Electorate a right to determine their future i.e. a Referendum, Cameron says will give us one if elected but look at the false promises he has made in the past and if he has to have a Coalition with those disgusting LibDems you can bet your bottom Dollar part of the agreement will be we do not have a Referendum.  

I pulled this comment of the DM

The more that UKIP and Nigel Farage are smeared, patronised and mocked, the more this will awaken voters that the Establishment are scared that there cosy 'it's your turn to be PM this time' arrangement is looking shaky. As Nigel said : our laws are made in Brussels and it is costing us £billions to be ruled by lunatics. Putin stands up for Russian interests. That is why he is attacked by Obama and Cameron who are basically told what to do by the banksters and EU

I was listening to Radio 4 and the Environment Agency spoke about dredging he went on to say how many kilometres were to be dredged? Since when has Kilometres been a measurement in the UK? The word is Miles it seem typical of these Europhile agencies to change all our measurement to what is used in the EU. Did you know that is illegal to use Kilometre and Metres on the public highway to indicate distance

The Gay marriage issue has shown a totally one sided view of this legislation in Parliament, Press, TV and even Radio everyone who opposes it is shouted down. Only 1.5% of the population according to the last Government Survey are Gay yet they have so much power and influence and it seems this power is orchestrated by Government
Can I give you one example how on LBC there was a debate on Gay Marriage and as expected there was a lot of calls from those religious people who believe the Bible word for word and believe God produced this book rather then Man. Now I am a Christian and believe in Jesus etc. but I also accept that man produced the Bible and man has frailties. This group of people do leave themselves to further justification on what they believe and the presenter ridiculed them, when they could bring justification to their argument. Yet when those who were pro Gay Marriage the same intense investigation was not used by the presenter. For example when a Gay Man said that the Abrahamic religion (Christian, Moslem, Judaism) was only 2000 years the assumption therefore being that Marriage between Male and Female were only instigated since then. This is obviously completely false many groups of people through the ages have recognised marriage between man and women as the correct way for this institution and the Jewish religion dates back at least 3000 years. My point is that the presenter question the facts of people on the Bible but did not question the gay man on his account of marriage in fact he sided with him.
Most probably the worst piece in this programme was when a Moslem was questioned about Marriage, his argument was that changing the status of Marriage can alter things in the future, something I have mentioned in previous blogs. The caller was very respectful calling the presenter sir and never raising his voice. He asked the question that what if in 20 years time, someone tried to insist that someone in an incestuous relationship should be able to marry. He qualified his question by saying this would be wrong but because of Gay Marriage this could happen. The presenter who virtually accused him of being a paedophile tore him to shreds; he just refused to understand the logic of the question basically, which  “once the horse has bolted closing the stable door is pointless”
I like listening to LBC and on the whole they normally produce a well-balanced programmes but they do have a slight pro Gay bias when it comes to Gay issues maybe this is because they have several openly Gay presenters but even though the Gay Community are only 1.5% of the population they need people to speak up for them. Pity the do not apply the same to people who believe in the Bible?

On the issue of gay marriage everyone I speak to are either against or could not careless I have yet to find one person in favour but then again I am only nodding terms with 4 Gay Men and do not know any Lesbians. The experiment of Gay marriage and Gay people adopting children will take at least 20 years before we can come to any real conclusion but by then I expect the Secularist who govern this country will have redefined marriage again

Have a look at this for some Balance in the Gay Marriage Issue

Saturday, March 29, 2014

Gay Marriage a threat to Democracy

When I woke up this morning I was extremely depressed until I read the articles below at long last I saw in print people who agree with me on how Gay marriage is wrong. Interesting enough the first article is someone of Asian Origin and the other is a Gay Man.

Obviously I believe in marriage between a man and women as I believe this is the best way to bring up children, as are proved by many surveys. Marriage is much more then just loving someone it is about social cohesion the bringing of different families and communities together. What has annoyed me more about Gay Marriage is not that just about the fact that only 1.5% have an abnormal sexual preference it is about Government hypocrisy and the unravelling of the core beliefs of a Christian Society being led by a Militant Secularist agenda

The Liberal Elite, which is supported by all the Major Political Parties, have never once consulted the electorate on the issue of Gay Marriage and before the vote on this issue did any MP consult their electorate NO.

The name of the act that came in force today was “Same SEX Marriage” and their argument was that people of the same sex should have as much right to marry because they Love each other. In fact it is only for Gay people can a Brother marry a Brother, Sister marry a Sister NO it still against the law. I believe I am right in saying that a Normal Sexed couple will have their marriage consummated when they have penetrative sex? this is not the case with same sex marriage. So if sex is taken out of the equation, which it is in a same sex marriage, why cannot two siblings marry? I say it will unravel why because you start to interfere with long time-accepted tradition you have to evaluate the future. Eventually the Government will have to accept siblings marrying also Polygamy, which is recognised in many countries will have to be accepted and those with the perversion of being Bi-sexual will be allowed to marry. To say this will not happen is ignoring fact, fact all the time we are part of the European Human Rights Act there is a strong possibility that not allowing this section of the community to Marry will fall foul of Human Rights legislation.  This act will allow challenges that Gay people can marry in church no matter what the Government say European Law sadly out weighs British Law another good reason to leave both the EU and ECHR

It is interesting that those in Civil Rights Partnerships, an act for gay people only, will not be allowed to Marry. So what has happened to the rights of this part of the Gay Community after all the Civil Partnership as stated by the legislation is not marriage

A Secular Liberal Elite supported by the Political Wing of the Gay Movement with out a true consultation of the electorate a sad day for Democracy has instigated this Gay marriage

AMANDA PLATELL: The real gay marriage bigots are its intolerant supporter

A wedding day is always a special occasion and especially so, of course, for the first homosexual couples marrying today.
I wish them every happiness for the future. But that does not alter the fact that I still disagree with the concept of gay marriage.
No doubt I’ll receive a barrage of abuse for even admitting as much. For surely the saddest legacy of the whole gay marriage debate is how it has brought about the most appalling bigotry — not against homosexuals, but against those who oppose the new law.
For evidence of that, you only had to watch BBC Question Time on Thursday. One audience member, Marilyn Barmer, was booed and hissed for even having the temerity to ask: ‘Why do we need to change the definition of marriage that has existed for thousands of years, when equality already exists?’
A perfectly reasonable question, you might think. Yet from the outraged response of the audience, it was as if she’d been proposing the execution of every first-born. Others who echoed her views were similarly subjected to jeers, sneers and contempt.
I can’t help wondering if that’s the reaction the BBC — our self-appointed Ministry for Political Correctness — sought to provoke by hosting the show in Brighton, the gay capital of Britain.
But then this was just a microcosm of the way the gay marriage legislation has been forced through by our political masters. Anyone brave enough to voice unease has been branded a bigot whose views were so beneath contempt they didn’t even deserve to be heard. 
In modern Britain, the chattering-class thought-police have decreed that their liberal value system is morally superior to the traditional beliefs of millions of ordinary Britons.
A poll that went out at midnight after Question Time said two-thirds of people support gay marriage, but a third still do not. That doesn’t make them homophobes. Indeed, I suspect the vast majority welcomed the introduction of civil partnerships, yet simply feel that gay marriage is a step too far.
Do they not have a right to a voice? The gay community has fought all along for tolerance, and rightly so. But surely it should extend both ways.

Ironically, many of the most vicious attacks have not come from the gay community — many of whom remain ambivalent about gay marriage — but from politicians cynically trying to parade their touchy-feely credentials.
And never mind that this meant trampling over the beliefs of many Christians, Muslims, Sikhs and others opposed to gay marriage.
That’s not social progress, it’s a form of intolerance every bit as ugly as homophobia

Why gay weddings do NOT advance the cause of equality
  • Andrew Pierce (who's proud of his own civil partnership) says gay marriage is a political gimmick that doesn't address the real problems

Defending the plan to allow young women to stock up on the morning-after pill, Nick Clegg dismisses fears that it would lead to promiscuity as ‘medieval’. Only a man with three sons could be that naive.
Neil Kinnock had to apologise for making a joke suggesting that if Eric Pickles ran the marathon he might die. Who’s the nasty party now?
Work and Pensions Secretary Iain Duncan Smith and his Labour shadow Rachel Reeves were interviewed on the Today programme by the petulantly screeching Evan Davis. In one of the most biased interviews I’ve heard, a contemptuous Davis interrupted IDS 25 times, Miss Reeves six. Perhaps Evan’s talents would be better suited to fronting shopping channel QVC, rather than the BBC’s flagship political show.
Having almost lost their lead against the Conservatives, Red Ed takes umbrage with the poll findings that claim only 19 per cent of people now see him as a PM in waiting. He’s right to protest. Surely it couldn’t possibly be that many.

Friday, March 28, 2014

Greedy Rich is not Capitalism

I will be well pleased when the find this lost plane because the whole thing is boring me to tears.

Below is an email sent to me from the US. What made me wild is how any individual needs this type of money. The more I read and watch about USA and UK Government convincing me that most of our Major Politicians are corrupt. Not necessarily for their own financial gain but for there own ideals which in most cases goes against the will of people.

We now see individual making Millions why people starve, we see our Government giving money to corrupt governments, which goes to a rich cartel while their people starve. Then we are expected to donate to Charities with their highly paid Executive Managers, we are expected to support and donate to Red Nose, Sport Relief etc. . Programmes that make the TV companies money and give free publicity to Celebrities and spots man?

Back in the 19th Century three were the genuine poor, not the so-called poor of today, they received no help from Government. The people who helped were the Church and Rich Benefactors. These Benefactors were true Christians they made their money and passed on their good fortune to the less fortunate. Where are these Benefactors today all in their Mansions with there Private Planes, Yachts and Posh cars?

My political views are very right wing and I believe in the Capitalist system purely because Socialism does not work.  What we have today is the evil side of capitalism, the capitalisms of selfishness and greed. I see nothing wrong in making money as long as it is not at the detriment of others, if you make money why not  help other to make a better life. Yet this an old fashioned Christian ideal something that is being lost in the Secular World

March 29th a day to remember a day when England went mad and allowed those with abnormal sexual desires to Marry. I refer to the disgusting Law allowing Same Sex Marriage. Nigel Farage is right when he says he is against this perverted marriage legislation until we leave the EU and European Court of Human Rights because if we don’t Churches will be eventually be forced to perform Marriages under the Human Rights Act

This is not about politics…. It is about individuals who are greedily and are cheating the public for their own benefit.   It needs to stop.

 Corruption at its best ! ! !


Hi Folks: 

The US has entered into a contract with a real estate firm to sell 56 buildings that currently house U.S. Post Offices. The government has decided it no longer needs these buildings, most of which are located on prime land in towns and cities across the country. The sale of these properties will fetch about $19 billion. 

A regular real estate commission will be paid to the company that was given the exclusive listing for handling the sales. That company is CRI and it belongs to a man named Richard Blum. Richard Blum is the husband of Senator Dianne Feinstein and is shown with her in the picture above. (Most voters and many of the government people who approved the deal have not made the connection between the two because they have different last names).

Senator Feinstein and her husband stand to make a fortune (EST at between $950 million and $1.1 billion!!) from these transactions. His company is the sole real estate on the sale. CRI will be making a minimum of 3% and as much as 6% commission on each and every sale. All of the properties that are being sold are all fully paid for. They were purchased with U.S. taxpayers dollars.

The U.S.P.S. is allowed free and clear, tax exempt use. The only cost to keep them open is the cost to
actually keep the doors open and the heat and lights on. The United States Postal Service doesn't even have to pay county property taxes on these subject properties. QUESTION? Would you put your house in foreclosure just because you couldn't afford to pay the electric bill?

Well, the folks in Washington have given the Post Office the OK to do it! Worse yet, most of the net proceeds of the sales will go back to the U.S.P.S, an organization that is so poorly managed that they have lost $117 billion dollars in the past 10 years! 

No one in the mainstream media is even raising an eyebrow over the conflict of interest and on the possibility of corruption on the sale of billions of dollars worth of public assets. How does a U.S. Senator from San Francisco manage to get away with organizing and lobbying such a sweet deal?

Has our government become so elitist that they have no fear of oversight? And it's no mere coincidence that these two public service crooks have different last names; a feeble attempt at avoiding transparency in these type of transactions.

PLEASE Pass this info on before it's pulled from the Internet. 

I even verified it on Snopes:

and Snopes usually puts a liberal spin on whatever it reports. 

Thursday, March 27, 2014

Well Done Nigel

'Europe has blood on its hands in Ukraine': Farage faces angry backlash after siding with Vladimir Putin in TV debate

  • Nick Clegg and Nigel Farage take part in televised debate on Europe
  • Snap poll shows 57% think Farage won, but 36% said Clegg
  • Questioner asked why Ukraine wants to join EU as UK looks to leave
  • Clegg said Europe had promoted peace, democracy and rule of law
  • But Farage accused Brussels of ‘imperialist, expansionist’ agenda
Nigel must have been reading my Blogs because this is what I have been saying since this whole debacle started.

Nigel Farage wiped the board with that slimy creep Nick Clegg although he did make some mistakes on statistics which hopefully he will research for the next debate. Yet all Clegg could do was try and frighten people to stay with the EU with the big lie 3 million people will lose their jobs if we leave the EU what RUBBISH he went on to say that only 5% of legislation came from the EU he says backed up by the House of Parliament Library? This is run by Civil Servants who totally believe in remaining in the EU, they have the knack of hiding the truth and statistics till it is convenient for them to be released, do they honestly believe we walk around with our eyes shut?
One of the best remarks were I remember, Nick, you and all your gang – all the big corporates – all telling us 12 years ago that if we didn’t join the euro, all inward investment would cease, the City of London would disappear,’ he said.
‘All I can say is thank God we didn’t listen to you, otherwise we would have been in one hell of a mess.

The State gets hysterical about paedophiles - then lets under-age girls stockpile morning-after pills. How crazy, says KATHY GYNGELL
  • Burgeoning youth culture of sexual anarchy is condoned not challenged
  • Taxpayer-funded condoms and contraceptives have been dished out
  • Sex-education advice is explicit but devoid of any moral framework
Not only the state but parents as well they allow their girls some as young as 12 to dress like those tarty Celebrities treat sex the same as drinking coke, then wonder why the are pregnant at 14, 15 and 16. They allow their children to sleep with each other before they are married. Yes an old fashioned concept none of my children were allowed to sleep together in my house till they were married, they knew the rules and never asked. My stand was you live under my roof you abide by my rules, Sadly two of them are divorced and one is getting a divorce. Yet none of them were parents in their teens thank god.