Skip to content

Category: Politics

Nick Griffin, Objectively anti-Scotland

Nick Griffin, Objectively anti-Scotland

Published by NiteMayr on March 26, 2010

But you were asking Gadaffi for money, weren’t you?

We were asking them for money if they were giving it, yes.

You had no reservation about going to a government that supported terrorists, and asking them for financial support?

We looked at Gadaffi’s ideas. A lot of what was said about Gadaffi in all probability is propaganda.

http://www.totalpolitics.com/magazine_detail.php?id=809

There you have it Scotland; if EVER you feel the need to vote for the BNP, make sure you remember, the BNP is funded in part by Libya and Libyans; remember them?

Passengers and crew

All 243 passengers and 16 crew members were killed. Eleven residents of Lockerbie also died. Of the total of 270 fatalities, 190 were American citizens.[18][19] The 270 victims of the bombing came from 21 countries.[19][20]
Dr Eckert told Scottish police that distinctive marks on Captain MacQuarrie’s thumb suggested he had been hanging onto the yoke of the plane as it descended, and may have been alive when the plane crashed. The captain, first officer, flight engineer, a flight attendant and a number of first-class passengers were found still strapped to their seats inside the nose section when it crashed in a field by a tiny church in the village of Tundergarth. The inquest heard that the flight attendant was alive when found by a farmer’s wife, but died before her rescuer could summon help.[11][page needed]

Prominent among the passenger victims was the 50-year-old UN Commissioner for Namibia, Bernt Carlsson, who would have attended the signing ceremony at UN headquarters on 22 December 1988 of the New York Accords.[21]

Paul Avron Jeffreys, former bass player with the UK group Cockney Rebel, was on the flight with his new wife Rachel, en route to their honeymoon celebration.[citation needed]

Another victim was poet Joanna Walton, girlfriend to and main lyricist of Robert Fripp‘s 1979 Exposure album.[citation needed]

Jonathan White, aged 33, the son of actor David White (who played Larry Tate on Bewitched), was also killed. He had recently graduated from UCLA.[citation needed]

Those Libyans; the ones that blew up that plane over Lockerbie, those ones.  The BNP supports them and is paid by them.

Remember, by extension, the BNP supporters of Terrorism!

Also; if there is an absurd absolutist position, Nick is bound to take it up!

Can you clarify something about climate change? On your website, it says: “The BNP accepts that climate change, of whatever origin, is a threat to Britain. Current evidence suggests that some of it may be man-made; even if this is not the case, then the principle of ‘better safe than sorry’ applies.”

Good lord, I will shoot someone for that. It’s clearly dated. Climate change does happen, no doubt. But the climate is always changing. I think that website stuff was written about three years ago. The whole thing is a hoax.

Not a Student of History ‘neither’

If we withdrew from Afghanistan, wouldn’t that be admitting defeat to Al-Qaeda?

No, because we’re not fighting Al-Qaeda. We’re fighting Afghan peasants and they’ve always beaten everyone. Of course we’re going to lose. We can’t win in Afghanistan. Even the Soviet Union couldn’t win there. The only way you could win there is if you nuked it, which can’t be done.

[Even the poorest student of recent history could point to the CIA’s secret war and Charlie Wilson’s tireless help there, not simple Peasant Gumption]

On Isreal:

The BNP has always had this reputation of being anti-Jewish. What’s your view on Israel and does it have the right to selfdetermination?

Yes, we’ve changed the position very radically from being knee-jerk support of the Palestinians, not solely from an antisemitic point of view, also sympathy. These are a people whose ancestral land has been taken away by recent arrivals.

[Translation:  It turns out some Liberals like to support the Palestinians; we took a long look at it and found ourselves conflicted, because some of those Liberals can read]

on being labelled a Fascist:

How do you react to being called a fascist?

We’re not fascist. If fascism is defined in its proper sense, it’s about worship of the state or of a man that personifies the state. Our tradition is very much in the British tradition of limited government with checks and balances and so on.

[If you change the definition from the commonly held one, we’re not, so there]

You could have fooled me. Half your policy programme involves a larger state.

We’re not fascist in that regard. It’s about a close, almost incestuous relationship, between the state and the corporations. It’s corporate fascism. The Thatcherite, Blairite PFI – that’s fascist. Another defining factor of fascism is the use of political violence as a political weapon against your opponents. And we’re the victims of a Marxist fascism – we do not practise or want to practise violence against anyone else.

There you go, Nick is Pro Terror, Anti-Scotland, Anti-Thatcher, Pro Curry, Pro-Seventies Britain (have you seen any news footage from 70s Britain, that’s what swept Thatcher into Power you BNP dunce)

The Nuclear Option

Published by NiteMayr on March 24, 2010

But I set out to learn, as the data became unclassified, about just what I had seen. Here is what I found out. Operation Plumbbob was a series of twenty nine tests nearly all above ground. They had begun on May 28, 1957 with “Boltzmann” and ended on October 5 that year with “Morgan.” The series, which was the most extensive ever done at Mercury, put 58.3 million curies of radio-iodine into the atmosphere. One-thousandth of a curie is what would be used in a liver scan. The radioactivity went all over the United States, with clusters in places like Maine. It is estimated that these tests caused some 38,000 thyroid cancers leading to about 2,000 deaths. The health burden of these tests put enough pressure—despite the protests of people like Edward Teller—to bring a halt to them. The same information can be gathered from an underground test witnessed only by mechanical devices.

From: http://blogs.nybooks.com/post/467905029/a-mushroom-cloud-recollected

Much has been made over the past year and a bit over any attempt to level the playing field in the States between the haves and the have-nots.  Strangely, a number of the have-nots have spent a large amount of time working against their own interests.  This should come as no surprise from a people who would kill thousands of their own people in the name of “defense” .  That said, it seems that when a country is actively irradiating it’s people and leaving ne’er expiring death spores across itself it would at least take time out to say, hey let’s make sure that everyone can afford decent medical care.

When you see an actual medicare user rally against “government health care” you understand how insane the Generation that did this to itself really is.

No sir, no Tax Funded babykilling

And then I’d eat the Rich!

Published by NiteMayr on March 19, 2010
If I were the Israelis, not only would I bomb Iran, but I'd do so in such a way as to create as much trouble for China, Russia, Europe and the United States as possible.
If I were the Israelis, not only would I bomb Iran, but I'd do so in such a way as to create as much trouble for China, Russia, Europe and the United States as possible. -- Glenn Reynolds

Glenn Reynolds tries to flail away at the world, showing that if he had the reigns of power he’d work day and night to plunge as much of the world into war as he could, because as a conservative he is also a great Christian thinker.

Could Canadian “Tea Party” folks be far behind?

Published by NiteMayr on March 3, 2010

For those of us who cannot affored to travel to the United States for private health care are left with only one choice, the government’s health care. And when you only have one choice, you really have no choice whatsoever.

Let’s dissect this notion as it presented:

  1. For those of us who cannot afford to travel to the United States for private health care…So, if there was Private health care in Canada you imagine you could afford it?  The last time I checked the cost of a flight into the USA was the gas to cross the border then 99 bucks on southwest to pretty much anywhere.  So minus those 300 or so dollars the rest of the (20 to 30 thousand dollars) are totally in reach?
  2. The Government’s health careChosen by an elected government and easily changed by wide complaint.  When the people (as a majority) are unhappy those folks in Ottawa are fairly quick to react as public opinion really does shape policy.
  3. When you can only have one choice…
    See point one; if someone cannot afford the new special private tier” they are stuck with the public (possibly underfunded due to the Private Clinics stealing funds from the public coffers like they do in the States) system anyway, how is that more “fair”.
Face it; with few exceptions, ensuring that every Canadian has access to the same level of care is at least more equitable than allowing the more affluent to bypass the line.  There’s nothing like a Queue to level the playing field.
Photo Credit to Ivy Dawned

LET THE RIGHTEOUS DO SOMETHING WRONG

Published by NiteMayr on November 3, 2009
THIS COUNTRY JUST PLAIN SUCKS FOR JUSTICE!
–4God
This comment was posted on an article about the bodies being dug up from the ground around a serial killer’s house:
Posted by 4God
November 03, 2009, 4:43PM

THE LEGAL SYSTEM AND THESE STUPID CIVIL RIGHTS LAWYERS WILL KEEP THIS SICK PERSON ALIVE LONGER THAN HE NEEDS TO BREATHE!

THIS COUNTRY JUST PLAIN SUCKS FOR JUSTICE! IT’S A SYSTEM AND IT DOES NOT WORK TOO GOOD WHEN IT COMES TO PENALIZING THE WRONG, BUT LET THE RIGHTEOUS DO SOMETHING WRONG AND YOU WILL SEE A BIG DIFFERENCE IN TIMING!

I HATE TO SAY THAT ‘MY’ COUNTRY IS GOING DOWNHILL, BUT IT IS AND CAN’T BLAME ANYONE BUT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN IT AND NOT THE GOVERNMENT BECAUSE THE CONSTITUTION SAYS WHAT …

WE THE PEOPLE AND WE THE PEOPLE ARE NOT DOING WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING…PERIOD…SO I SUPPOSE WE WILL SUFFER FOR OUR WRONG DOINGS!

These comments seem to show up all the time when there is something that offends the Churchie peoples.   “If we were in control we’d do something about this abomination”  given what happened to George Tiller, I think I can imagine.  Talk about incontrovertible truth that a flawed secular system is leaps and bounds beyond a theocratic one.   Look at how the “Very Christian” Michelle Malkin talks about Sharia Law:

“Nope. No stampede to get in front of the cameras and condemn the bloody ravages of sharia law.”

It’s not a ringing endorsement of said Theocratic Law, is it?  This same person said of Doctors like George Tiller, however:

“Oh, what a drag it is on abortionists to detect movement and signs of life in a baby who survived attempted murder.”

That’s not at all like calling him a criminal deserving of a death sentence, is it?  Not at all, right?

And There’s  Bill O’reilly:

“In the unresolved problem segment tonight, the investigation continues into the activities of abortionist George Tiller, known as Tiller the Baby Killer”

It’s all about blooding up the water for the conservative and the religious.  Blood begats blood and in the blood you will be saved and all that.  Bullshit.

This is a serial killer, who is sick.  Simple and easy.  Murder is difficult if you are sane and death is forever.  However much the religiously deranged want to say otherwise, death is forever and killing for killing isn’t going to resolve the crime it only provides catharsis.  How did this person get away with so many killings?  How did he hid so many bodies in his yard?  These are questions that need answers.

I don’t imagine ubiquitous monitoring is the answer, it certainly didn’t solve street crime in the UK, nor murder.  So I can’t offer a constructive response here.  I can say this, screaming for state-sponsored murder makes this person no better than those screaming for public beheadings in the “medieval” middle east, and I can’t help but think that as a person in the “Enlightened West” we should be “better” than that.

At least try and say what the ruling actually says

Published by NiteMayr on October 12, 2009

When a large media owner tells you that a government regulation is bad, you had better be willing to at least say “you know what, you feel the need to give me a substandard service while maintaining a monopoly handed to you by the very agency you are asking me to speak against.  I think I might not trust your word on this”

I received the following from Bell Canada:

Dear Customer,

Help stop your TV fees from increasing. CTV, Global and the CBC have recently asked the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) to significantly increase TV taxes.

The CRTC has been asked to do this by having Bell and the other operators pay more, which would result in higher fees for you.

We don’t think that’s right, you shouldn’t either. So please speak and have your say.

This is what’s happening.

The CRTC has told satellite and cable companies to hand over $100 million a year as of September 1, 2009. These fees are being passed on to you.

This money is passing through something called the Local Programming Improvement Fund (LPIF) – straight to media giants like CTVglobemedia and Canwest Global, straight to the CBC.

No new local programming, no improvement to anything other than the bottom line of broadcasters.

You are now likely paying for this on your TV bill.

You should also know that hot on the heels of that campaign, CTV, Global and the CBC are now lobbying for even more.

Each year, satellite and cable companies pay hundreds of millions of dollars to broadcasters. We contribute to the CRTC’s operating budget. Although to date these fees have not been broken out on monthly bills, you need to know they exist – especially because the TV networks still want more.

If the CRTC gives in to the broadcasters’ latest demand and lets local TV stations charge for their currently free over-the-air local signals, it would more than double the portion of your Bell TV bill going to government fees – and into the bank accounts of the broadcasters, like CTV, Global and the CBC.

In fact, if the CRTC lets broadcasters have their way, then government-imposed fees will be just shy of one billion dollars.

I’ve also seen the ads Rogers has been placing in the stream on various channels; here’s what the CRTC is proposing:

http://www.crtc.gc.ca/eng/news/releases/2009/r090706.htm

OTTAWA-GATINEAU —The Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) today announced that the Local Programming Improvement Fund will have over $100 million to distribute during the 2009–2010 broadcast year. The fund was created in October 2008 to support local television programming in markets with a population of less than 1 million.

“Canadians have made it abundantly clear that they value local programming,” said Konrad von Finckenstein, Q.C., Chairman of the CRTC. “We have taken steps to ensure that broadcasters, and particularly those in smaller markets, continue to provide Canadians with programming that reflects their needs and interests.”

As a temporary measure for the upcoming broadcast year, cable and satellite companies will contribute 1.5 per cent of their gross broadcasting revenues to the fund, an increase of 0.5 per cent. As a result, the total funds available will rise from $68 million to over $100 million. Television stations in smaller markets will be able to draw on these funds to maintain their spending on local news and other types of local programming. The Commission will consider the appropriate long-term provisions for the Local Programming Improvement Fund at a public hearing to be held this fall.

In addition, the Commission has harmonized its requirements for the broadcast of local programming in English- and French-language markets. Each week, local television stations will have to air a minimum number of hours of programming that is produced locally and that speaks to, and about, the community.

On May 15, the Commission renewed the licences of the major English-language networks for one year. At the same time, the licences of the TVA Group’s conventional television stations were renewed for two years. The specific licence terms and conditions for these stations were made public today.

Developing a new regulatory framework

The Commission today also launched a public proceeding to develop a new regulatory framework for conventional television broadcasters. The proceeding will include a public hearing starting on September 29, 2009, in Gatineau, Que.

“The rapid evolution of the communications industry is forcing everyone to rethink the model for conventional television broadcasters,” said Mr. von Finckenstein. “This fall, we will develop a new framework that will give broadcasting ownership groups the flexibility to adapt to this changing environment.”

“However, in exchange for greater flexibility, we expect broadcasters to make meaningful commitments regarding the production, acquisition and broadcast of high-quality Canadian programming,” added Mr. von Finckenstein.

Through this public proceeding, Canadians are invited to share their views on a number of specific questions related to:

* a proposed model to conduct future licence renewals on the basis of ownership groups rather than categories of television services
* the provision of revenue support for conventional broadcasters, including:
o the terms and conditions of the Local Programming Improvement Fund
o further safeguards to protect the integrity of Canadian broadcasters’ signals, and
o mechanisms for establishing, though negotiation, the fair market value of these signals
* possible models for the transition to digital television, and
* Canadian programming commitments by English-language television broadcasters.

Interested parties may submit their comments by August 10, 2009, by filling out the online form by writing to the Secretary General, CRTC, Ottawa, Ontario, K1A 0N2, or by fax at 819-994-0218.

Broadcasting Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-406
Broadcasting Notice of Consultation CRTC 2009-411
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-409 (Canwest)
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-407 (CTV)
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-408 (Rogers)
Broadcasting Decision CRTC 2009-410 (TVA)

Funnier still is the tagline from Rogers about “More American Programming” (this is the Rogers that brought us HBO Canada after all and gutted the local and charming City TV)

So yeah, the CRTC wants to pay for more locally produced TV (as locally produced TV is dying out in Ontario for sure) and the Cable and Satellite firms are going to charge you more because of it, so they can bring you what, less local TV?  Is that what they are agitating for?  It certainly seems like it.