Deja vu in the UK: No water, no fuel and a Liberal Government

For the first time since the 1970s, the Liberal Party is in power.  In the 70s they formed a coalition with the Labour Party, and now they form one with the Conservatives.  The economic situation is almost a perfect repetition of that of the last Liberal regime, and even the weather has joined in the eerie similarities with the 1970s.

In the 1970s, the Liberal (Lib-Lab) government enacted economic policies which outraged the people to the point where they took part in acts of civil disobedience, which are very untypical of the British character.  The Liberal regime, oozing with liberal tolerance, sent in their uniformed thugs to crack the skulls of the people who dared to democratically object to their insane policies.  The current Liberal (Lib-Con) regime is equally hated, and equally happy to set their psychopathic police on the people.

In the 1970s immigration became an issue, and the government simply lied as they opened the country's borders to vast numbers of newcomers who arrived so quickly and in such large numbers, that they couldn't be assimilated.  This new regime differs from the previous one only insofar as the volume of new immigrants is much higher, and rather than simply lie to the people, they have legislation in place to prevent people voicing dissident opinions lest they be incarcerated for thought crimes.

In the 1970s the Liberal regime took the baton of betrayal from the regime it replaced, and pushed for the abolition of the UK within the super-soviet EU.  The new Liberal regime is even more anti-British than the one of decades ago, and for all the patriotic rhetoric, is even more pro-Soviet and anti-UK than any sane people could have thought.

In the 1970s the Liberal regime presided over a nation wracked with discontent, with strike after strike against the traitors in Westminster.  At one point, the threat of a strike by petrol suppliers led to the issue of petrol ration books.  Looking at the queues for fuel today in anticipation of a fuel strike, one can see the comparisons.

In the 1970s the UK experienced glorious sunshine which led to hose-pipe bans and drought in many parts.  Again, hose-pipes are banned in many areas, and droughts have been declared.  Even the baggy-trousered chavs can be compared to the ridiculously attired hippies of the 1970s.

It is indeed uncanny how the hated Lib-labs have been reincarnated so fully as the Lib-Cons.  Will the British people now learn that putting faith in the three two one party system is futile?  Or should we expect a landslide victory for the alleged opposition at the next election, and for this circus to continue over again?  I would like to place a bet regarding the possible outcome, but I doubt any bookmaker would entertain such a sure bet.  Poor Britain - will she ever learn?

The murder of femininity

In much of the western world, but especially the UK, the natural qualities of women are viewed as the result of male oppression, and in their place are subsituted harmful parodies of femininity, based upon ludicrous ideas of the supremacy of material gain, and an over-emphasis of physical attributes.  The attack on the feminine is rife throughout the Judaised west, as is evident in the media portrayal of women as whores or workaholics.  The natural role of a woman as mother and carer is mocked as a male construct, whereas in fact these traits are the fullest expressions of feminine beauty.

For girls growing up exposed to the western media, manufactured 'pop' music and the Hollywood film industry, the message is ceaselessly repeated: to succeed you must be a whore, and to be faithful to one man is to be old-fashioned (which of course, can never be allowed). 

Typical of the media obsession with sex as the key to success is an article in the Daily Mail, concerning the model Candice Swanepoel, who at 15 years of age (still a child) took a job as a semi-naked personality-less walking clothes horse, to shew her school bullies that she was better than them.  Really?  Regardless of whether she was bullied, the message to school girls is that by exposing one's flesh, one can achieve material gain, and therefore by the acquisition of wealth, be a better person than those who do not go down this route.  With this logic, is it any wonder that girls are getting pregnant at ever earlier ages?  To be a sex object is to be popular.  This is nothing short of the promotion of prostitution, and pædophilia.

On television and in films, sex is promoted as the be-all and end-all of human achievement.  The notion that it is ok for a girl to be promiscuous, because boys are, is childish logic which sits alongside the 'he started it' argument.  It is not ok for anyone to be promiscuous!  Of course the whole anti-feminine movement is Talmudic in origin with the sick and twisted 'eye for an eye' ideology; which fails to address the wisdom of mutual blinding.

Brought up in an atmosphere in which ideals are mocked, and instant gratification is the model, it is only to be expected that a considerable number of girls will adopt the negative lifestyle of the manufactured role models.  Television programmes such as Sex and the City debase women.  Women are naturally sexual beings, but are much more as well.  The gossip media's preoccupation with divorce and adultery effectively normalises the abnormal.  Girls are taught that they must experiment with lesbianism and that it would be evil to not 'date' outside one's own race.  Homosexuality and ethnic identity destruction are added to the litany of horrors with which children, and girls in particular, are assaulted.

The music industry no longer focuses upon talent, but upon debauchery.  The likes of Beyonce and Avril Lavigne who began their careers singing about virtue and even opposing the sexualisation of music, have now joined the flesh-fest which encourages girls to be unpaid whores.  To succeed as a 'celebrity' one must be willing to sleep one's way to the top.  This instruction is repeated in every aspect of the celebrity-worshipping culture, and so honour and faithfulness have suffered.

When vacant individuals who become rich and famous for no other reason than having the dubious talent for having promiscuous sex and exposing  their bodies, become role models, all is not well with society.  The tendency of celebrities to marry, then within weeks divorce, makes a mockery of marriage.  When this attack on marriage is joined by government as in the pro-homosexual London regime, it is time to take notice of what is obviously an orchestrated assault on decency.

In the UK we have the ridiculous EDL.  This group of thugs like to misquote the Qur'an and to focus on the fake Islamic sect created by the Talmudist, Abd al-Wahhab.  The primary reason that the multi-culti EDL hate Islam is the fidelity of Muslim women to their husbands, and their modest dress.  Indeed, if Muslim girls would only dress like whores and have sex with the disgusting vermin of the EDL, they would have no problem with Islam!  The EDL have swallowed the Talmudic lie that the women of Christian Europe are, and have always been, shiksas.  Certainly the type of female who will have sex with an EDL thug does merit the label shiksa, but such damaged goods are not representative of English women in general, which must irk the scum of the EDL.

It is only since the judaisation of the UK became endemic after the slaughter of the UK's finest in two Zionist World Wars, that femininity came under serious attack.  European women have always been honoured by their men folk.  Motherhood is a noble and rewarding vocation which no form of employment can rival.  The labelling of motherhood as a chore which denies a woman her freedom is pure evil.  Only by breaking real families can the Talmudic destruction of the Goyim be achieved.  Getting girls to behave as unpaid prostitutes acclimatises them to a belief that promiscuity is normal and faithfulness is a perversion.  This tragic phenomenon has only become so prevalent through the concerted effort of the Talmudist in government and their kin in the media and entertainment industry.  It is not the norm, nor ever has been.

In traditional Europe, women dressed modestly and wore little or no make-up.  An unjudaised European woman has more in common with a Muslim woman as far as dress and fidelity are concerned, than with the damaged image-obsessed girls and women of our current unfortunate times.  If the EDL were really concerned with defending England, they would be campaigning for the outlawing of pornography, the protection of marriage (real marriage between one man and one woman), the punishment of adultery (by either party), the treatment of homosexuals, and the adoption of modest dress by men and women alike.  Instead they defend perversion and campaign for all women to dress and act as low-class call girls, regardless of faith, marital status, or age ( like the pædophile Simon Sheppard, they like 'em young).

England has the disadvantage of not having a distinct National Dress, unlike most of Europe, including our neighbours in Scotland, and Wales (including Kernow and Brittany).  An English National Dress would help to reconnect us with our ancestors, and it is perhaps indicative of the despotism of the internationalist mafia who comprise the Establishment, that our culture has been assaulted more than the rest of the UK or the territories occupied under the Talmudic 'royal' banner.

Femininity should be cherished.  We need to protect our children from exposure to popular 'culture'. In the 1970s and 1980s there was a woman named Mary Whitehouse, who campaigned against degeneracy.  She was vilified by the media, but if anything her campaigns were soft on our enemies.  In her days there were only three (later four) television channels in the UK (none operating 24 hours per day), there was no Internet, and films could only be seen on television or at a cinema.  The debilitating influence of the media is now much worse than in Whitehouse's day, thus avoiding exposure is much harder.  In Whitehouse's time, political correctness was confined to rabid Marxists and not the norm as it is now.  Our struggle is hard but that is no excuse for surrendering without a fight.  There is an 'off' button on the television - use it!

A concerted attack on femininity is underway.  All of us who cherish family, morality, and all which the internationalists seek to eradicate, are duty-bound to expose the corruption of our children, especially girls, and to do all in our power to push back the influence of the enemy.  We may not be able to stop the filth getting on television etc, but we can stop it getting into our homes.  Vermin like the EDL will always exist, but we can highlight their hypocrisy and distance ourselves from their odious internationalist propaganda.  

By educating our children with decency, and a sense of worth which doesn't require material rewards or the approval of those who have absorbed the toxin of feminism, we can make a difference to our kin.  And in the end, the fight against internationalism is a fight for our nearest and dearest.  We are on the long journey to victory over the global enemy, and to paraphrase the Chinese philosopher Laozi, every journey begins with the first step.

Rural Living versus Urban Existence

Spring has arrived, and with it the natural urge to reconnect with the land. As an Urban-dweller presently trapped in an area which resembles the opening scenes of Monty Python's Meaning of Life, (albeit one with a vast Muslim population, rather than a Catholic one!) I am acutely aware of the contrast between Urban Existence, and Rural Life.

There are those who claim that the entire population of the Earth could live in England; and this is probably correct if everybody was forced to live in a vast expanse of concrete.  The implication in the assertion that England is far from over-crowded, is that the quality of life of urbanites is in no way inferior to the quality of life of those who live close to nature.  I wonder how many of those who parrot this misleading and useless information would be willing to live in such an urban monstrosity?

Urban life is not real.  We have manufactured pleasures which are reliant upon technology and commerce.  Many of us do not even have a small garden in which to enjoy some connection with living matter.  Our children play in the streets, not the fields, and many do not understand that the food they eat comes from somewhere other than the supermarket or fast-food take-away.  It is alarming but true, that some parents do not bother to take their children on trips to the country; favouring instead trips to 'theme parks' where they can be bombarded with the noise, lights and fumes of the mechanised rides.  Fun is associated with money; hedonism is regarded as the highest virtue; decadence and debauchery are considered normal.  Urban life is a lingering death.

Rural living links the people to the land, and for this reason provides a barrier against the machinations of the State.  Such is the antipathy of the Establishment to anything which goes against the internationalist agenda, that even the word Peasant has negative connotations in England.  Peasants are the backbone of the land.  It is the Stockbrokers, Bankers and Bureaucrats who should be reviled, not the honourable peasantry.

Travelling from one urban centre to another, I have the opportunity to get off the main roads and to enjoy a longer travel home through the countryside.  The magnificence of nature has the power to restore the senses after a hard days work.  When I was a Civil Servant, I lived and worked in the same town, and didn't see so much as a single field or farm animal throughout the week.  For a period I had no car, and didn't see anything of nature for months.  The stress of work became a permanent feature of life with no reconnection with nature to cleanse the urban decay.  The need for a link to the land should not be underestimated.

An alarming trend in England is for the towns to be extended along the main roads which link them.  This is creating urban corridors of strips of concreted land, behind which swathes of countryside are becoming enclosed; the cut off rural land is then considered a part of the urban setting and is 'developed'.  On my travels I can see this process in action.  In the Bradford Metropolitan District, the city of Bradford is growing along its main arteries, in a manner not dis-similar to the reaching tentacles of an octopus.  Where these arteries connect with major roads connecting other towns, long stretches of new built houses are springing up.  In time, the unspoilt countryside which provides much needed relief from the bland grey buildings of Bradford and its satellite towns, will be built over.  The rise in crime which will follow is a direct result of the severing of the bond between land and people.

In England literally millions of new houses are being built; turning the 'green and pleasant land' into a grey unpleasant slum.  It is noteworthy that those who designed the 'vertical streets' (tower blocks) of modern towns, do not choose to live in them.  The social engineers who dictate how we should live, defend themselves from the evils of urban life; living either in enclosed communities where the plebs cannot go, or in large houses with enough land for a private garden at the very least.  The social engineers and urban architects would not consider living as those imprisoned in their creations have to.  I do not begrudge these people the right to live in a way which is mentally and spiritually satisfying; although I do find their hypocrisy irksome.

It is human nature to live in close proximity to the land.  One need only think of lottery winners who immediately buy a large house with enough land to ensure privacy for the occupants.  Do lottery winners living in the country use their winnings to buy a flat in a typical urban tower block, boxed in by people on every side, with such niceties as the stench of stale urine in the noisy and bumpy lifts?  Methinks not.  

Rural living allows for the development of real communities in which genuine human links exist.  A rural life with space to grow food for one's own consumption, or maybe to trade with neighbours, reduces one's reliance upon supermarkets and all the dangers associated with such evils as genetically modified and otherwise doctored food.  A child who can see animals behaving as nature intends, will have no need of the bizarre neo-Soviet sex-education lessons of the Establishment's schools.  Of course, the Establishment want us to be reliant on the internationalist corporations for our survival, and for our childrens' education.  The countryside is a threat to their plans.

Why is natural living scorned?  Who abhors rural and manually productive life?  There is a people who take pride in being 'cosmopolitans', and who see city life as the only worthy life.  These people have ruined England, and indeed everywhere they have touched.  These people reject the natural labour of the peasantry, favouring instead to manipulate finance whilst studiously avoiding any real work which is to the genuine benefit of the people.  Thankfully the Edict of Expulsion (1290) is still on the statute books so removing these negative beings from our land only requires enforcing the law!

The State argue that more houses must be built across the UK to accommodate the millions of migrants from across the EU and further afield.  This is complete lunacy.  We do not need more immigration.  We have millions of unemployed people in this country already, and bringing more people in to compete for work will only exacerbate the problem.  The solution to housing millions more people coming into the country is to not allow them in.  There is nothing 'racist' about protecting the land and ring-fencing the country's resources for those to whom it belongs.  The policy of the Establishment is the real racism, as can be seen by the anti-Eastern European hysteria of the media which sits side by side with sob stories demanding the admission of more people from the non-European world.  Building new homes is about socially engineering the extermination of the indigenous population, and if it enriches greedy building corporations at the same time, all the better.

A country which cannot feed itself is at the mercy of the corporations who control the transport networks and the production of food.  For the British Isles, the reliance upon shipping is especially pertinent.  During the Second World War the population of the UK was many millions fewer than it is today, and the available farm land was much greater; yet still the country would have reached starvation point if the transatlantic food supply had been cut.  The policy of building over agricultural land, and driving the population up, is a policy which in years to come will result in starvation in the UK.  This can only be averted if the non-indigenous population are helped to return home to lands which are free of the international pariahs who have driven them out, and if the UK cities are broken up to provide direct access to the land for all the people.  It doesn't take the powers of Nostradamus to see that very serious problems will come if current trends are not halted and reversed. 

The obliteration of the land is nothing new.  The Zionist regime in London promoted the destruction of rural Wales for the benefit of the 'English' rulers.  This prompted the creation of the resistance movement, Meibion Glyndŵr, who destroyed the colonial outposts of the London regime.  Certainly many ordinary people were affected, but the message was sent loud and clear that the Welsh country is sacred to the Welsh people.  In the case of new built housing scarring the land, any action which can make building economically un-viable is merit worthy to stop the criminal destruction of our land.  This could include occupation of building sites, obstruction of supply routes or any other methods which are not injurious to human life .  If it could be done in Wales, why cannot the English and Scots stand up for what is theirs?

We are a part of the land.  Urban life is un-natural and is hazardous to both physical and mental health.  Rather than joining in the Talmudic howling against the peasantry, we should be standing by our brethren who live outside the cities.  We can look after our children by taking every opportunity to get them out of the cities to visit farms, woodland, and the real country beyond the concrete jungle.  Our ultimate objective must be to abandon the cities altogether and give our children the chance to live in a sane and cultural and spiritually strong environment; they will not get anything of worth in the urban environment, unless one considers materialism, degeneracy and decadence virtuous.

We need to halt the expansion of towns into our sacred land, and indeed to demand that the current cities be broken up.  Against all that is wholesome and sane, the Government have announced plans to make it easier for the land to be desecrated by the vandals of the building industry, in order to turn our land into a concrete mess with nothing to distinguish the territory or people from that of anywhere else in the world.  We must resist this.  Too much of our land is already under concrete, and we cannot tolerate the further destruction of the land of our ancestors, which we are duty bound to keep safe for our descendants.  If the State has its way, there will be no 'Green Belt', no countryside, and ultimately, no country to pass on to those who come after us.  The Government is at war with the people, and we need to readjust how we deal with them to take this alarming fact into account.  If not for ourselves, then for those who will inherit this nightmare world, we must take action to stop the enemy now before their victory is assured.  If they win, we will not recover.  This is a struggle for life itself.  To sit on the sidelines and watch their victory is to collaborate in our own demise.  The battle is no longer taking place over in far off lands, it is here, it is now.

Stand by Marriage. Say no to the anti-natural mafia.

Marriage is unique

Throughout history and in virtually all human societies marriage has always been the union of a man and a woman. Marriage reflects the complementary natures of men and women. Although death and divorce may prevent it, the evidence shows that children do best with a married mother and a father.

No need to redefine

Civil partnerships already provide all the legal benefits of marriage so there's no need to redefine marriage. It's not discriminatory to support traditional marriage. Same-sex couples may choose to have a civil partnership but no one has the right to redefine marriage for the rest of us.

Profound consequences

If marriage is redefined, those who believe in traditional marriage will be sidelined. People's careers could be harmed, couples seeking to adopt or foster could be excluded, and schools would inevitably have to teach the new definition to children. If marriage is redefined once, what is to stop it being redefined to allow polygamy?

Speak up

People should not feel pressurised to go along with same-sex marriage just because of political correctness. They should be free to express their views. A public consultation on the proposals to redefine marriage has been launched. Although the Government says it is determined to press ahead regardless, the consultation provides an opportunity for members of the public to say they do not agree with redefining marriage.

Source: Coalition For Marriage

Thanks to Final Conflict for drawing attention to this campaign.  At the above link is an electronic petition in defence of marriage, and against the outlawing of the terms Husband and Wife - I kid you not, the Government seek to erase these words from the English language.  Take a moment to sign the petition and let the Establishment know that they do not have the support of the people, and that we will not allow our most sacred institutions to be spat by perverts 'and' politicians.

Remembering Mussolini; the Benevolent Dictator

I had a very strange encounter yesterday.  In the course of business I met a relative of the man who murdered Mussolini.  He took great pleasure in describing how his relative had been a Partisan working for the British State.  He had been part of a gang of terrorists who captured Mussolini as he tried to leave Italy, and had personally murdered him in a manner comparable with the recent brutal slaying of Moammar Qadaffi of Libya.

I was at a loss of what to say to this elderly Italian who bragged about an act of murder as if it was something to be proud of.  The man related how his family had been in Britain from the early part of the last century, and had volunteered to fight their kin back in Italy.  To hear a man speak in romantic tones of treachery, fratricide, and the Zionisation of Europe was an odd experience.

Benito Mussolini was murdered in cold blood by terrorists fighting for the Zionist Internationale, or as it is frequently called, the New World Order.  Mussolini's crime was to overturn the economic domination of the usurers, and to root-out the Freemasonic agents of the international money power.  At no time did he set up concentration camps for Jews, yet still he has been labelled as a key figure in the fabled holyhoax.  The economic ideals of Mussolini greatly benefited Italy.  He was a European Nationalist, but a fervent Italian patriot, with no thought of global domination - unlike those who fought against him, and are even now building a single Global Slave State.

Mussolini is still beloved of many of the Italian people, and has a mausoleum to his memory in Predappio.  Meeting an Italian in England who is happy to revel in acts which have contributed to the demise of not only Italy, and England, but in fact all of the European world, is sadly appropriate for the country which celebrates the enemies of humanity, and persecutes those who fight for the truth.  I wonder if he would be so outspoken if he was in the company of good, proud Italians?

There are many internationalists who are happy to betray their countries and nations, but the number of anti-internationalists is growing at a rate which should not be underestimated.  Our enemies have no morality and no humanity, and for this reason their cruelty and materialism will not prevail.  Incidentally, the defamer of Italy was invited to attend a commemoration in the Netherlands of the Partisan murderer - due to the Partisan meeting natural justice in the Netherlands not long after murdering one of Europe's loyal sons.  There will be no mausoleum for the murderer, and his name will not be remembered.  The enemies of Europe may be crowing now, but their lies are losing their hypnotic power, and the actions of the likes of NATO will not be tolerated much longer.  The free world is awakening, and forbidden truths are being spoken.

Benito Mussolini - Requiescat in Pace

Wireless Technology: A Danger to Life and Liberty

Wireless technology is everywhere.  Whether it is the ability to send a document from a laptop to a printer in another room, or the new mobile 'phone applications which allow us to pay for goods without cash or bank cards, the rise of 'wi-fi' technology is a fact of life.  But is this a good thing?

Does it really make a difference to our qualities of life if we no longer have to plug a wire from a computer to a monitor?  Are we really better off if we can spend our free time ignoring our families whilst we mash buttons on our video games system, knowing that the latest Xbox/Play Station etc can link to our over sized flat screen televisions without the use of a cable?  

What is the obsession with not having wires?  Is it really such a pain to tuck wires out of view?  Indeed, is it so important to gaze at a screen for hours on end, that we just have to be free of anything which could distract our focus?  Even if for a moment we forget about the propaganda spewed forth from the television, and instead restrict our attention to the ability to use devices from the comfort of our sofas, (rather than having to undertake the arduous task of walking across a room), are our lives enriched by this 'freedom'?  Do the Establishment love us so much that they wish to free us from mundane chores which may take minutes of our valuable time from us?  Or is there something more to this technological advancement than we are supposed to know?

Wi-fi utilises radio waves which can pass through obstacles such as walls and people.  Wi-fi shares the same dangers as mobile 'phones, yet there is silence with regards to the proliferation of wi-fi zones.   How many of us have wireless routers at home, which transmit wirelessly even when plugged in with a cable?  For an experiment, turn all your wifi devices off; you will find that there is a perceptible improvement to your health when you limit the level of wireless radio waves you are exposed to.  Admittedly, it is tricky to get hold of equipment such as modems which do not operate as wireless transmitters, and the proliferation of such devices makes it nigh on impossible to avoid some degree of exposure to the transmitted waves, but even the simple act of turning your equipment off when not in use will reduce the level of exposure. 

To some, the Internet has become an addiction, and there is a genuine feeling of withdrawal if access is not immediately available.  This is especially the case with people who are drawn into anti-social networks such as facebook.  It is a modern tragedy that for some people the threat of having to exist in the real world, and to communicate with people face-to-face, is considered something to avoid.  It is easy to mock, but this is a real problem, and those who find themselves automatically going online, or turning on a television, need to take steps to cut down on their usage of such technology.  It is quite refreshing to have no intrusive television or similar device taking up time which can be spent engaging in genuinely social pursuits which do not require modern technology: such as talking to one another; going out; enjoying the real world.  One of the reasons for the rolling out of technology such as the Internet, games systems etc, is to limit real human social contact, and thereby to undermine the fabric of society.

The greatest leap forward in wireless transmission - the technology developed by Nikola Tesla for delivering electricity for free through the ether - was suppressed years ago.  The current obsession with allowing people to operate electrical equipment without wires, is not motivated by a desire to make our lives easier, but rather to destroy our privacy so that those who direct our lives can do so more efficiently.  The liberating discovery of wireless electricity was suppressed because it had the potential to end the economic stranglehold of the energy companies who made (and still make) obscene profits by selling power which should be available for everyone at very little cost.  

In these days of environmental hysteria, the work of Tesla should be put into practice on a global scale, thus ending the use of fossil fuels, nuclear energy, and the ridiculously inefficient wind farms.  But, of course, the global warming lie is a tool for the enslavement of humanity, and practical solutions to the manufactured energy and pollution crises, would free humanity from the chains of international serfdom.  Our rulers could not allow that to happen.  Imagine a world in which energy was effectively free; a world in which self-sufficiency in energy could be the springboard for self-sufficiency in the cultivation of food?  The Establishment could not survive without the ability to keep us hungry and cold, thus the work of Tesla remains unexplored, and if mentioned at all, mocked.  Useful wireless developments are suppressed, but dangerous technologies of dubious value are pushed on us.  The damage to health is a partial reason, but not the main one.

Wifi is the gateway to the erosion of freedom to control the information we restrict for our own use; this is precisely the intention, and the real motivation for its development.

If you send a document to a printer via a cable, only you are party to what is printed.  If the printer is wireless, then the information is transmitted in a manner which anyone with the necessary software can intercept and read.  This could apply to literature for a campaign against the powers-that-be, and thereby could lead to serious repercussions if the Establishment were to send their goons to mete out unofficial justice to persuade you not to criticise them.  There are many State fronts, such as the EDL and UAF who would be very happy to undertake the work of their hidden (and often unknown to the rank and file) masters.  Maybe you have nothing to hide?  But what of your financial and personal information?  There is vast scope for fraud and for your privacy to be compromised by using this technology.

All wireless devices transmit information which can be intercepted, and as such are valuable tools for the Police State.  Even seemingly innocuous information can be used to build up a character profile, which can be used against you.  We are entitled to privacy, but using wireless devices gives up our control over what others see.

Alongside wifi, there is the technology to store information remotely online.  A hard drive is not perfectly secure, but it is much safer than using remote storage.  Putting documents on the Windows Sky Drive, or on remote sharing sites such as Dropbox opens up great opportunities for the State, and other criminals to intercept information.  They may be convenient, but is it worth the security risks of using such software?

Hewlett Packard are developing software which will be installed on all new printers.  This software communicates with the Internet, to assess what kind of documents, images etc you are printing, ostensibly to make life easier and enable you to use your devices more efficiently.  In reality this is spy software which communicates with HP and other interested parties, and divulges information which could be used fraudulently, or could be used by the State to build up evidence of your dissident behaviour.

The Police State is growing daily, because people are helping to build it.  We don't have to help this process by unquestioningly accepting new gadgets, software and devices which appear to make our lives a little easier.  Many people are sleep-walking into the surveillance state by not stopping to think of the potential sinister uses of technology.

We can defend ourselves by taking time to think about what devices and software we use, and the method of connection.  It isn't really such an ordeal to use a cable, or walk across a room.  But it is an ordeal to be incarcerated by the Thought Police.  Don't get sucked in by having to have the latest technology.  Best of all, do not allow technology to dictate your lifestyle.  There is a whole world out there.  Take the time to live in it.  If we continue sleepwalking, we may one day wake up to find that our worst nightmares were the sweetest of dreams, when compared to the reality which our enemies are building for us. 

UK Budget: Not Robin Hood but Robbin' Bastards!

In the UK, the Zionist regime have just issued another Budget for the Establishment.  The Coalition of limp-wristed liberals and counterfeit conservatives have once again shewn their contempt for the people, by introducing a series of measures which will yet again redistribute wealth from the ordinary people to the ruling elite.

In the northern county of Yorkshire, 10% of people of working age are now unemployed.  The percentage of people out of work varies across the UK, but not vastly.  Once the powerhouse of the entire UK, and by extension the British Empire, Yorkshire was transformed from a natural nation with a strong agrarian population, into an urban centre with vast wealth for the rulers, and abject poverty for the masses.  Yesterday's Budget is but another step along a path to the annihilation of natural living and human dignity; it does nothing to lower unemployment, or to help those who are out of work in any part of the UK.

After the terror of the industrial period, in which child labour was the norm, and the agrarian population were forced into degenerate urban living, much of the UK outside the financial City of London was abandoned to rot, with the urban centres fast becoming third-world slums.  The manufacturing base of the UK was destroyed to make way for the servile service economy.  Every tragic twist in the life of the ordinary people of the UK has been orchestrated by the despotic regime in London.  Our country has been used and abused to benefit the Establishment; including the social-engineering through mass-immigration and the deliberate obliteration of our formerly self-sufficient economy.  Every part of the UK has suffered through the Talmudic mania of the Establishment for an international financial empire. To the rulers, we are indeed cattle; fit only to fight in their wars, and to provide their wealth.

The March 2012 Budget has been proclaimed as a Budget for the Workers, but there have been no measures to support local economies.  Instead, corporation tax has been cut, which will allow for the large corporations to continue to wipe out smaller businesses.  Reducing the tax burden on the conglomerates only fuels the demise of local economies as supermarkets and large concerns drive all competition out of business.  No measures were taken against companies employing staff overseas.  The UK Establishment have no problem with corporations making vast profits by overcharging people in the UK for services which utilise people in far away call centres where they can be paid a pittance.  This practice could be stopped overnight if the government wished, but it is not, simply because they serve the internationalists and not the people who elected them.  

The lunatic regime in London have committed the over-taxed serfs to a programme for the construction of more renewable energy generating wind farms.  Sadly, these wind farms do not work.  Not only do they scar the landscape and kill birds, they use more electricity than they produce.  Of course, the construction of such white elephants is part of  the 'man-made climate change' hysteria, which is a step towards a single global authority.  This part of the budget is openly internationalist, and is an insult to the people.

Direct taxation has been reduced for the super-rich, and there has been a rise in the general tax allowance.  Isn't allowance an interesting word?  Yes, the Establishment have decided that we are 'allowed' to keep a little more of our own money; brazenly stating that they have control over our money!  This rise in the untaxed 'allowance' is immediately wiped out by a massive rise in the cost of petrol and diesel.  In the topsy-turvy UK, there are no measures to discourage employers employing people not living locally, so commuting is a fact of life for most people.  The increase in fuel 'duty' (again, an interesting word!) simply transfers the money not stolen by direct taxation, to theft by indirect taxation.  Considering the cost of fuel, the result of the two measures is to rob the people of more of our money, whilst appearing to take less.  To emphasise this theft, fuel duty increases this week, but the tax allowance does not rise for a full twelve months.

The changes to income tax maintain the Talmudic-Marxist system of Graduated Income Tax, which is stated in the Communist Manifesto and the Protocols of Zion as a prerequisite for the global enslavement of the people in a materialistic One World State.  Income tax is an obscenity which was introduced as a temporary measure during the Napoleonic Wars.  The Bogeyman, Napoleon Bonaparte, is long dead, but Income Tax continues.  UK Politicians have lied to the people since Pitt the Younger's time, at the very latest!  Income should not be taxed.  What a man earns belongs to him, and of course, likewise for a woman.  Rather than tinker with taxation of earnings, if the government really wanted to help the people, they would abolish Income Tax, and instead garner all revenue by indirect taxation of non-essential material goods, and by imposing taxes on larger businesses, thus supporting small traders and penalising corporations with no loyalty to the country, let alone the local economy.

Of course, the Budget - as always - went against what is good for the people, and further enriched the internationalists and those who collaborate in the enslavement of humanity.  It would be tempting to label this Budget a Traitors' Budget, but considering the familial ties of the politicians in the London regime to the Zionist Internationale, this would not be quite correct.  What we have witnessed is an Occupiers' Usury Budget, put in place by a people who have no place in the UK, or indeed Europe.

Where is the spirit of Robin Hood?  Why do we put up with this despotism?  It is said, "Give Unto Cæsar that which is Cæsar's", not 'Give unto Juda'.  We have no moral duty to give what is ours to the mafia who control our country.  There are ways to avoid paying them anymore than we absolutely have to.  We need to research how to keep hold of what is ours, and deny these vipers any more protection money.

We need to trade with one another in cash or in kind, but do so without paying our enemies a penny.  Don't give in to the oppressors without finding ways to avoid their thieving grasps.  There are ways to protect our families and communities from the tentacles of the State.  We need to examine our options, and put what best serves us into practice.  The Establishment exists because we allow it to.  Stop feeding the common enemy.