Archive for March 1st, 2009

NEWSFLASH – Wilders expected to be in Number 10 by next year

March 1, 2009


Comment at end

1st March, 2009


An opinion poll in today’s Daily Blues indicates that the new British party of Geert Wilders – The Freedom Party – has leapt over all three traditional main parties in Britain.


At 50% of the poll, The Freedom Party has left the Tories standing on 20%, the Labour party on 19%, the Liberal Democrats on 7% and 4% Others.

This lead is higher than polls for Tony Blair’s New Labour prior to his victory with 43% in 1997, where results confounded even the pollsters, giving him a landslide victory. With a 30% lead over the second-comers, the Conservative Party, Mr Wilders’ party’s position looks unassailable.

Mr Brown has less than a year before he has to call a general election.

The Prime Minister’s press office today denied rumours that he was found chewing the Downing Street carpet on release of the latest poll.

Even calls … hysterical screams by Blairite cabinet members for the return of Tony Blair to lead Labour have been described as fanciful, despite being heard as far as Westminster’s New Arabia, aka Edgware Road.  Mr Blair, hearing the kerfuffle from his nearby home, muttered something about being ‘not bovvered‘.

Hearing the ‘Help Us Tony… P-U-R-L-E-A-S-E’ … calls he politely declined.  Having avoided a few close calls in the Middle East recently, he says he now has more appreciation of (political) survival than before. Suicidal intent, he is reported to have said, was for the mugs in parliament.

The mugs were last seen bending the ears of any passing lobby correspondent and spilling the beans on the REAL story of Labour’s destruction.  Mr Brown’s own ears, meanwhile, were noted to have turned scarlet and were emitting bursting plumes of bright yellow smoke.

Mr Blair’s reasons for not rescuing the political project so closely associated with him include an unwillingness to engage in an electoral contest with a party calling for a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and for the continued exclusion of Turkey from an expanded EU.

Mr Brown, asked about these particular policies said, “I often eat turkey in Lisbon, usually stuffed”.

Coaxed, in desperate tones by erstwhile colleagues for hints of the slightest possibility of a return to front-line British politics in the country’s hour of need,  Mr Blair smiled between sips of his new concoction Blair’s Cool Schadenfreude and replied, You’re having a laugh, aren’t you?”

All a bit of fun, in case you hadn’t guessed. But do remember this: If Mr Wilders becomes a British citizen – highly unlikely of course (his papers would get lost somewhere) – Geert Wilders COULD stand for Parliament in Britain.

Or he could always put himself up for the European elections, where EU citizenship is all that is required.

Food for thought?

Free Hit Counter

Saviours of the West Unite … You Alone Know What Is Right …

March 1, 2009

Tony Blair is in Gaza as I write. I’ll write on this when he’s safely out of there

Comment at end

1st March, 2009


click for SITA kit


But first – THE SHAMEFUL DENIERS OF FREE SPEECH – starting with ‘Shame of’ Chakrabarti

1. Shami Chakrabarti and “Liberty”; 2. The Conservative Party; 3. The Liberal Democrats; 4. Brown’s Government (but you knew that already, didn’t you? Well, didn’t you?)

Who said? “If what the terrorists want is a war of the worlds … the way to give them that victory is to shut down free speech and every semblance of an open society.”

(Shami Chakrabarti, Director of Liberty, after the 7/7/2005 terror attacks on London)

Odd how that criticism of the shutting down of free speech does NOT apply to Geert Wilders. Her civil/human rights sham of an organisation, Liberty, have NOT replied to ANY phone calls or e-mails asking about their position on defending HIS rights to speak out or to enter Britain. They’ve been rather busy fulfilling their OWN agenda. So that’s understandable. Isn’t it?  THAT’S what they’re there for, folks.

So, apologies for the “fundamentalist” tone of the heading, Ms Shame of Chakrabarti and followers! But things are getting desperate in the good ol’ UK. And you know what desperate people do …

This … and this … and this … and this



Bishop Hill asks THIS question: ‘Should Shami Chakrabarti Resign?’ Of course she should. Since legally it was WRONG to ban Wilders. And Liberty was SILENT on this. But she won’t.

On the Wilders ban, Bishop Hill says: “… anyone with the remotest interest in civil liberties should be fuming too. So where are our champions of civil liberties? Why have they not been shouting from the pages of every newspaper in the land? Davis, nothing. Chakrabarti, nothing. The Liberal Democrats? Don’t make me laugh.

Chakrabarti has no such excuse. She is the head of Liberty, a body that exists solely to speak out in favour of civil liberties. She has failed miserably to do so. Her silence over Wilders is not unprecedented either. She has made it abundantly clear that she doesn’t feel that freedom of speech extends to nasty people; her words on Question Time last week can have left nobody in any doubt about that. She also has previous form on the “disappearing act” she has performed in the last few days, notably when Liberty maintained a determined radio silence over the Sikh play Bezhti.

Chakrabarti has demonstrated over the years that she will not stand up for those whose views she deems unacceptable. She will not defend unpleasant views. She will not speak out for unpleasant people. She hates racists so much that she will allow fundamental British freedoms to be trampled underfoot in order allow these views she detests so much to be crushed, regardless of the importance of the freedoms that are lost with them, and regardless of the duties entailed in her position.

What is the point of the woman?

Chakrabarti and Liberty are not champions of civil liberties. In many ways they are a direct threat to the English model of individuals untrammelled in what they can say and think. She should stand down and make way for somebody who wants civil liberties for everyone, not just the favoured few.

But, imho, the question should not be put rhetorically, as though there IS no point in “the woman”. Intentional or not, the point may be more insidious than we yet understand, with invidious repercussions for all of us.


‘Torture’ is the first heading in the list of issues Liberty deals with. ‘Terrorism’ is next. Personally, I’m more concerned about terrorism than torture, since terror is random and its results affect the innocent.

Torture? Well, I’m not so sure about that. I leave that decision up to those in the know, and on the ground. Liberty, like Freedom, is NOT FREE.

Priorities, priorities. We all have them …  we all need them.  Liberty’s certainly got theirs!

2. The Conservative Party

Shamefully mute on this, they struggled to put out anything on this matter, even upsetting their own members. And THIS crowd could be running our country soon?

3. The Liberal Democrats

Chris Huhne said something seemingly contrary to liberalism. Ditto re upsetting his own party members. And THIS crowd could be holding the balance of power in a hung parliament? Hang the lot of them.

4. Gordon Brown & his Labour Government

Keith Vaz was put up to take the flak on this stupid decision to ban Wilders. He proved himself and his government devoid of real answers or principles. A truly dictatorial decision with which the mainstream press have colluded. Brown has shown Blair up for what he was – THE DEFENDER OF FREEDOM.


The bloggers, mainly American – with a few notable exceptions –  support FREE SPEECH. NOT the mainstream press.

Wake up fellow Brits. Your country needs you.

Non British Freedom-Defending Sites – Yes, EVEN defending OUR British freedoms


Geert Wilders Speaks at Ahavath Torah Synagogue

Dutch Politician Geert Wilders Banned From Britain

London, Feb 12, 2009 — Banned from Britain: Dutch parliamentarian and Freedom Party leader Geert Wilders, invited to screen his anti-islam movie Fitna in the British House of Lords, was refused entry to the UK on the grounds that the movie would incite hatred.

(Fitna is comprised entirely of news footage related to radical islam, and actual quotes from the qur’an)


I have not seen you personally, Mr Miliband, but I still believe you exist.

See also…



Wake up, and smell the daffodils

Free Hit Counter

(Video) UN Freedom Killers – Atheists Unite Against Religious Intolerance

March 1, 2009

Comment at end

1st March, 2009

A little like ‘radical moderation’, atheists united against religion seems at first glance oxymoronic. Atheists don’t usually CARE enough about religion to be up in arms over it.  Having said that CNN’s interviewer, Lou Dobbs, religious or not, suggests that ‘bulldozing the UN building’ might be a good start.  He is clearly sick of the United Nations.


So is this ‘rising up’ from atheists well founded?  As well founded as that of any other group.  More, imho, if we all share a high regard for freedom.

Take a look at the video below, and see what exactly one particular branch of religion seems to be intent on doing.  Nothing less, if this UN resolution is not stopped in its tracks, than destroying Free Speech. I recall Tony Blair’s use of the phrase ‘militant secularists’. I assume atheists/agnostics were included in that category too. If so, are they the foul-mouthed demonstrators that force the police to retreat backwards on London demos? I don’t think so, Mr Blair. If they are revolting in any way it is quietly and on the internet. I’m not convinced that they’ll be quiet much longer. To them democracy and free speech is the issue.

Religion, or ONE of them, seems to many of us to be of the MILITANT TENDENCY. Today’s militants are not secularists or atheists.

Video – Freedom Under Fire: U.N. Anti-Blasphemy Resolution – With Christopher Hitchens

February 25, 2009 on CNN’s Lou Dobbs with Christopher Hitchens

Criminalising criticism of Islam is the aim of this resolution. Although purportedly covering ALL religions, in reality which religion other than Islam is going to complain if criticised? Any time from today (1st March 2009) this resolution could be pushed through the UN.

The United Nations Anti-Blasphemy Resolution aims to curtail speech that offends religion, specifically Islam. Critics, religious groups and free speech advocates say the resolution is spreading Sharia law to the Western world. Christopher Hitchens joined Lou.

THE ANTI- BLASPHEMY RESOLUTION was passed as non-binding but they now want to make it binding on all members. The 57 group of Islamic countries which is led by Pakistan, and is the largest blok in the UN, is pushing for it. Last December the  General Assembly passed this non-binding resolution. This year a binding resolution is expected any time from today (March 2009).

Christopher Hitchens, author of “God Is Not Great. How Religion Poisons Everything”:

“Islam describes itself as the last and final revelation from God to humanity. If you have any doubts about this idea you’re not allowed to express an opinion because you are insulting us … making us feel hurt.  A fantastic claim and a fantastic claim that you can’t challenge it … that is  totalitarianism defined … it is a rape and butchery of the US constitution. There are Muslims who are prepared to use violence at the drop of a hat … but you cannot accuse them of being violent lest you be accused of blasphemy. The Universal Declaration of Human Rights – the then soviet union and Saudi Arabia did NOT sign. Don’t let them tell me that only those who criticise them are being blasphemous.”

The UN General Assembly is considering  a binding resolution urging member states to make it a  crime to criticise Islam. It would call on governments to pass their own laws making it binding against defamation of religion. The US says the implementation of this actually fosters intolerance and justifies restrictions on human rights and fundamental freedom . Even talking about the influence of Islam on terrorism could be classed as criminal.

This UN draft resolution vote on  ‘Combating Defamation of Religions’ taken on 24th November 2008, came up with this: 85 YES, 50 NO, 42 ABSTENTIONS. Even if we weigh this so that the abstentions are classed as “No” votes, put simply that means that with a swing of just 3 votes to the YES camp from the Abstentions this vote is easily carried at the next meeting due in a few days time.

And then ALL countries belonging to the UN will be required to put such an ACT into legislation. Read the one-page pdf document from Eye On The UN Note that ALL Islamic countries voted with this, while ALL modern secular/non-Islamic/western countries voted against.  Then tell me there is no clash of cultures. Even Iraq & Afghanistan voted YES.  After, some might say, all the west has done to try to free them from a fundamentalist herd instinct.

The poll of viewers after the Lou Dobbs programme showed that 98% said the UN restriction on Freedom of Speech in the US should NOT be tolerated.


SER. NO: 6L2 63RD
IrEM z 64 ( B )


YES: 85
NO: 50

SYMBoL: A/C.3 / 63 /L -22 /RF.v- t

HISTORY OF THE  United Kingdom Blasphemy Laws

2008 May 08, the UK’s blasphemy laws were repealed. From Wikipedia1:

  • In January 2008, a spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown announced that the Government would consider the abolition of the blasphemy laws during the passage of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill. The Government consulted with the Church of England and other churches before reaching a decision. The move followed a letter written to The Daily Telegraph at the instigation of MP Evan Harris and the National Secular Society and was signed by leading figures including Lord Carey, former Archbishop of Canterbury, who urged that the laws be abandoned.
  • In March 2008 Peers voted for the laws to be abandoned.
  • On May 8 2008, the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 abolished the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel in England and Wales, with effect from 8 July 2008.
  • From Wikipedia
  • The common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel were abolished in 2008. See now the Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006

Free Hit Counter