Date: 28/05/2017
Name:
Email: Keep my email address private
Reply:
**Your comments must be approved before they appear on the site.
Authentication:

  
clear
You are posting a comment about...
Votes For Women

As many of you will have noted from Esme’s report here, earlier today, there is something very rotten in the Labour party in the U.K. today. I’d just like to add my two pennyworth to that report.

Also, many of you will be aware from that same report that the U.K. is going through one of its regular spasms of navel gazing, coupled with the telling of outrageous lies, that is commonly known as a general election. This awful, but entirely necessary, process bores the pants off most sensible people for anything up to a year before the actual event of polling day, which, in this case, is this Thursday, and enthrals the minds of lesser mortals such as the hacks of Fleet Street and the goons of the BBC, mainly because they see it as an excuse to cease reporting real news and as an opportunity to parade their unbiased political commentary – unbiased so long as it’s left of centre, that is; if it’s right of centre then it must be uneducated opinion, or even, heaven help us, fascistic mouthings, and everybody knows that those are ‘bad things’.

Wait a minute, wait a cotton-pickin’ minute. The left surely don’t have a monopoly of all that is good and worthy, do they? Of course they do! They stand for gender equality and women’s rights, which, for example, the main right-wing party can’t possibly stand for despite being the first British political party to elect (yes, elect) a female leader and then go to the polls with that female leader and win not one, not two, but three general elections that made that female leader Britain’s first female Prime Minister (Mrs Thatcher, in case you haven’t followed me).

The left, however, insist that they stand for women’s rights and they clearly demonstrated that this claim was absolutely, one hundred percent true by holding a hustings in a public hall (i.e. a hall available for hire by any group or person who needs a largish public space for a legitimate reason) in Hodge Hill in the English city of Birmingham on Saturday gone where almost equal numbers of men and women attended to listen to the left of centre candidates’ drivel – oops, sorry, enlightened left-wing drivel. The interested, well behaved audience sat, as you would expect, on either side of the central aisle facing the stage – all the women on one side of the hall and all the men on the other. Men and women were obviously present in roughly equal numbers and that was ‘a good thing’ and demonstrated the left’s commitment to gender equality and women’s rights and ......... but hang on a minute, hang on a darned-tootin’ minute, the men and women were segregated by sex, weren’t they? The women were all on one side of the hall and the men were all on the other side of the hall, weren’t they? Yes, dear readers, they were, and that clearly demonstrated the left’s absolute adherence to the principles of gender equality and women’s rights, didn’t it? ......... Didn’t it?

The members of the platform party – the anointed ones presenting themselves for the approval of the electorate – seemed perfectly happy with this wonderful demonstration of their deeply held convictions about gender equality and women’s rights. So happy were they, in fact, that not one of them, not a single one, said anything at all about it – and that was clearly ‘a good thing’ and ‘wise’ because not one of them would want to be seen to be against women’s rights and gender equality in the twenty-first century in the U.K, would they? ......... Would they?

Well, here’s the awkward thing, the thing about the left in Britain that they’d rather you forgot. The fact of the matter is that the audience at the Labour party hustings in Hodge Hill was almost entirely comprised of Mohammedans and they simply can’t be held to the same high standards as everybody else because that would ......... that would ......... that would ......... that would what, I wonder? Oh yes, of course, that would break the unwritten, stealthy and covert contract between the Mohammedans that previous Labour governments have deliberately let into Britain in their droves, and the very Labour party itself, the contract that silently says that the Mohammedans will always vote Labour and help the left to quash the right because the British political right-wing stands in the way of the left’s wanton destruction of British culture and society that must proceed so that Britain can be rebuilt as a grand socialist Utopia.

The self-same contract that led the leader of the Labour party to say, quite plainly, that if elected he would make ‘Islamophobia’ a criminal offence with appropriate punishments.

The self-same contract that saw the Labour party’s much vaunted support for gay rights revealed as just so much hot air when the last Labour government had to be dragged through the courts, kicking and screaming all the way, both in the U.K. and in Europe, by gay people in order for any equality before the law to be wrung from that unsavoury government’s reluctant grasp.

The self-same contract that saw the last Labour government enact laws about education that led to a proliferation of publicly funded so-called ‘faith’ schools that in reality were nothing more than madrassas indoctrinating Mohammedan youngsters with all the evils of virulent Wahhabism.

The self-same contract that led to fanatical Mohammedans of the most extreme kind believing that they would actually be allowed to get away with taking over state schools and turning them into madrassa-style institutions because the last Labour government made it plain that it would challenge any negative reports from Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Schools about any institution in which Mohammedan pupils comprised a large percentage of the student body.

The self-same contract that browbeat social work departments, and the perniciously left wing people who staff them and who are easily swayed by the latest politically correct lefty lunacy, into refusing to acknowledge that organised gangs of Mohammedans were, and still are, at work in Britain sexually assaulting vulnerable young girls and, in some much rarer cases, boys, because to admit the existence of these crimes would be ‘racist’. That this attitude also spread to the police forces of Britain is both shocking and shameful and a clear indication of the moral bankruptcy that eats into the heart of a country whenever the leftwing gains any sort of foothold.

The self-same contract that underpinned the last Labour governments attempts to enact a law closely enough written so as to prohibit any criticism of Mohammedanism – the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, but that did no more than make assault, criminal damage, offences under the Public Order Act 1986, and offences under the Protection from Harassment Act 1997 hate crimes only if it could be proved that such crimes were seriously aggravated by hatred of any victim’s religion, or lack of religion or beliefs. It was the Labour government’s inability to get anything stronger past the upper house of Parliament that was the final straw that persuaded that government to attempt to either reform or abolish the House of Lords. After having rammed the House of Lords Act 1999 through Parliament the Labour government then set out to remedy the defects, as it perceived them, of the Crime and Disorder Act by passing the Criminal Justice Act 2003, which requires any court to consider whether or not a crime which is not specified by the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 is, nonetheless, racially or religiously aggravated and to adjust sentencing accordingly. This has led to the ridiculous situation that if one is violently assaulted and robbed, but there is no suggestion that this crime against one was in any sense motivated by one’s race or religion, then one’s attacker is more than likely going to get a much lighter sentence than a non-violent robbery that was motivated by racial or religious ‘hatred’. In other words, the perpetrator’s punishment no longer depends solely on the severity of the crime he or she commits (indeed in practice its severity has turned out to be of minor importance) but on whether or not one was attacked by someone who ‘hated’ ones race or beliefs. This is, of course, good socialism and so it’s a ‘good thing’.

I could go on and on and cite instance after instance wherein the left’s evil compact with the Mohammedans who invaded Britain at the behest of the last Labour government has produced immoral, depraved, villainous, malevolent and degenerate results – think of the London borough of Tower Hamlets, for instance, where the vote rigging still goes on despite a (very reluctant) police investigation and a prolonged and revealing court case (oh, and the police attempted to arrest the complainants not the perpetrators, and they are, apparently, still trying to do so in what is seen by many as an attempt at revenge for showing up the shortcomings of the Metropolitan Police that were so ably enumerated by the judge, Richard Mawrey QC, who lambasted the Force in his statement – bear in mind that the criminal standard of proof, namely proof beyond reasonable doubt, is applied in the election court over which Judge Mawrey presides).

Yes, the Mohammedan vote rigging still goes on:

“Postal ballot papers for Thursday’s general election have been sent out to a block of flats in Tower Hamlets which has been a building site for months, council records seen by the Telegraph confirm.

The property – owned by Tower Hamlets council – is completely boarded up, surrounded by hoardings and without any sign of habitation. However, letters can still be delivered there. None of the people who supposedly applied for the votes lives at the property and at least one is dead.” (From Andrew Gilligan in 'The Telegraph')

The left’s prolonged love affair with primitive and evil Mohammedanism is obvious to anyone who cares to look. It hasn’t gone away and it shows no signs of doing so. The Labour party candidates who contentedly sat on that platform in Hodge Hill in front of a gender-segregated audience prove that.

Those candidates, those zealots for human rights and the equality of all peoples, deserve to be named and shamed. They were:

1) Liam Byrne, the last Labour Chief Secretary to the Treasury, who acknowledged Labour’s irresponsible and spendthrift ways by leaving the infamous and silly note revealing “there’s no money left” when Labour were forced out of office, which turned out to be horrifically true and has led to the last five years of austerity in Britain;

2) Tom Watson (a close ally of Len McCluskey, the unsavoury supporter of Lutfur Rahman the now dismissed and discredited mayor of Tower Hamlets, and the general secretary of the Unite union, which has given Labour £14m since the last election) who claims to support equal rights for everyone;

3) Jack Dromey, the defending Labour candidate from Birmingham Erdington, better known as the husband of Harriet Harman the Labour party’s point person of political correctness and the party’s deputy leader, who has always supported gender equality and women’s rights and has even gone around the country in a pink omnibus in a desperate attempt to win the female vote for the loony left;

4) Kahlid Mahmood, the sitting MP for Birmingham Perry Bar and the man who claimed well over a thousand pounds to stay at a five-star hotel in London with his girlfriend and charged the taxpayer for this (see here), as well as being the man with some highly dubious connections in Pakistan-administered Kashmir;

5) and lastly Sion Simon MEP who in the British parliamentary expenses scandal of 2009 had to repay approximately £21,000 that he had claimed to pay rent on a flat that was actually owned by his sister, and who supports the Labour party’s policy of no referendum being offered to the people on the subject of Britain’s membership of the EU in case we collectively make the “wrong decision” (so much for democracy, then), and who has represented a Birmingham constituency before moving on to the European parliament (where expenses are much more generous than at Westminster and claims are not so rigorously looked at).

Heaven defend us all from that motley crew of unwholesome, diehard, leftwing lunatics, but most of all, pray that Heaven defends all the women of Britain from their only-when-it-suits-them and distastefully opportunistic support for gender equality and women’s rights.



Subscribe

Categories

A.J. Caschetta (1) Alexander Murinson (1) Bat Ye'or (6) Brex I Teer (2) Brian of London (29) Christina McIntosh (794) Conrad Black (218) David P. Gontar (7) David Solway (67) David Wemyss (1) Dexter Van Zile (73) Dr. Michael Welner (3) Emmet Scott (1) Esmerelda Weatherwax (8644) Fred Leder (1) Friederich Hanson (3) G. Murphy Donovan (50) Gary Fouse (32) Geert Wilders (10) Geoffrey Clarfield (295) Hannah Rubenstein (3) Hugh Fitzgerald (20496) Ibn Warraq (7) Ilana Freedman (2) James Como (12) Jerry Gordon (2461) Jerry Gordon and Lt. Gen. Abakar M. Abdallah (1) Jesse Sandoval (1) John Constantine (116) John Hajjar (2) John M. Joyce (371) Jonathan Hausman (4) Joseph S. Spoerl (10) Kenneth Timmerman (24) Lorna Salzman (9) Louis Rene Beres (37) Mark Anthony Signorelli (11) Mark Durie (7) Mary Jackson (5064) Matthew Hausman (22) Michael Curtis (343) Mordechai Nisan (1) NER (2488) Nidra Poller (59) Nonie Darwish (3) Norman Berdichevsky (84) Paul Weston (5) Rebecca Bynum (7021) Richard Butrick (24) Richard Kostelanetz (7) Richard L. Benkin (21) Richard L. Cravatts (5) Richard L. Rubenstein (44) Robert Harris (78) Sam Bluefarb (1) Sha’i ben-Tekoa (1) Steve Hecht (13) Ted Belman (8) The Law (90) Theodore Dalrymple (715) Thomas J. Scheff (6) Thomas Ország-Land (3) Walid Phares (20) z - all below inactive (7) z - Ares Demertzis (2) z - Andrew Bostom (74) z - Andy McCarthy (536) z - Artemis Gordon Glidden (881) z - DL Adams (21) z - John Derbyshire (1013) z - Marisol Seibold (26) z - Mark Butterworth (49) z- Robert Bove (1189) zz - Ali Sina (2)
clear