Recently European Comr. for Agriculture, Dacion Ciolos, has said, "any business that relies upon subsidies (grants, tax breaks) is NOT A REAL BUSINESS." (Oh dear, that's practically every Third Sector set up!)
Part 3)www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgQFvFVAVv0Not on Heathrow flight path, what is going on over London?Chemtrails?How come some do Chemtrails and some don’t!
Part 6)www.youtube.com/watch?v=CJM-O34PZfAUFO caught on handheld camera. Fake clouds – so obvious.Glimpses of blue sky through the muck and dirt of the brown pollution clouds formed from crap being deliberately dumped in our atmosphere.
What is wrong with this image? Absolutely nothing!
The Equality and Human Rights Commission is threatening to use 'costly legal action' against schools which require female pupils to wear skirts.
Official guidance from the Commission says the traditional school dress code may breach the rights of girls who feel compelled to live as boys.
OMG!
The guidance has been produced ahead of the Government’s Equality Bill which is likely to come into force this autumn.
The bill has been masterminded by hardfaced, hardline Harriet Harman, the Labour deputy leader, making it “a legal requirement” for public authorities, including schools, to consider the impact on minority groups of all their policies — including how school uniforms might affect transsexual people.Read more:
This, of course, totally disregards the fact that many young girls of whatever sexual orientation, when starting to menstruate, feel very uneasy, uncomfortable and embarrassed, and a loose skirt with a slip underneath provides the comfort that no classmates need be aware of this private and sensitive fact.It is also a reason why PE and sport lessons are separated by sex in the adolescent/ teenage years.
How many adolescent and teenage girls were consulted for their opinions in drawing up these pathetic, very male-orientated “guidelines?”
Answer? Probably none!
Do all young girls want to have to wear tight trousers all day in school? When having their period?
Answer? Probably not!
What about the children of naturists?
Should they have the Human Right to go to school naked in the warm weather? After all for naturists, clothes are a tyranny!
This is a joke question by the way, to demonstrate how stupid Fabian Nu Labor are!
No I do not actually advocate children go to school naked!
The UK goes more nuts by the hour!
The Looney Lefties are alive and well, in Fabian NuLabor!
Ed Balls (pictured, with Oona Stannard of the Catholic Education Service (CES) and Vincent Nichols, archbishop of Westminster), secretary of state for Children, Schools and Families, has spoken this morning on BBC Radio 4's Today programme on his sex education bill, which will be debated later today in the House of Commons (please read and act upon SPUC's latest campaign alert). Mr Balls has also writtten a letter on the same subject, published in today's Times newspaper.
Here's some of what Mr Balls said on the Today programme (my emphases in bold):
"If you are currently a Catholic school ... you could choose to teach only to children that contraception is wrong, homosexuality is wrong. That changes radically with this bill." (at 06:30 mins)
"A Catholic faith school can say to their pupils we believe as a religion contraception is wrong but what they can't do is therefore say that they are not going to teach them about contraception to children, how to access contraception, or how to use contraception. What this changes is that for the first time these schools cannot just ignore these issues or teach only one side of the argument. They also have to teach that there are different views on homosexuality. They cannot teach homophobia. They must explain civil partnership. They must give a balanced view on abortion, they must give both sides of the argument, they must explain how to access an abortion, the same is true on contraception as well." (from 07:20 to 08:47 mins)
"To have the support of the Catholic Church and Archbishop Nichols in these changes is, I think, very, very important, is a huge step forward." (at 09:05 mins)
"[Catholic schools] cannot teach that homosexuality is wrong and that therefore it is OK to discriminate on homosexuality" (at 10:42 mins)
"[T]he Catholic Church, which I really welcome, is supporting, for the first time, compulsory sex education with an opt out at 15" (at 12:25 mins) (JS: Mr Balls knows that the opt-out i.e. parental right to withdraw children from SRE classes, ends at 15, not starts. Also, what is unappreciated is that no child of any age will be able to withdraw themselves from SRE.)
"[S]tatutory lessons on sex and relationship education...includes education about contraception and the importance of stable relationships, including marriage and civil partnerships. It will not allow the teaching of homophobia. All maintained schools and academies will be required to teach the full programmes of study. This includes promoting equality and encouraging acceptance of diversity ... The bottom line is that...discrimination is prevented in all schools."
Mr Balls's statements today not only confirm, but add further truth to the warnings that SPUC has been issuing for months about the government's plans - and the English and Welsh Catholic bishops' complicity in those plans. Please make sure that you have read and acted upon SPUC's latest campaign alert on the Commons debate later today.
(P.S. The reason why the Catholic Church's teaching on homosexuality is so important for the pro-life cause can be found in Pope John Paul II's Evangelium Vitae. In paragraph 97, Pope John Paul teaches that it is an illusion to think that we can build a true culture of human life if we do not offer adolescents and young adults an authentic education in sexuality, and in love, and the whole of life according to their true meaning and in their close interconnection.)
Courageous British MEP Nigel Farage savaged Bilderberg member and global governance proponent Herman van Rompuy during a speech in front of the EU parliament, labeling the EU President “the quiet assassin of European nation states,” while van Rompuy sat and squirmed.
UK Independence Party leader Farage took the opportunity of van Rompuy’s first appearance in Parliament to harangue the EU President for his open contempt for national sovereignty.
Van Rompuy announced 2009 as the “first year of global governance” when he was appointed to be President back in November, just days after he called for a Europe-wide tax that would be paid directly to Brussels at a Bilderberg Group dinner in Brussels on November 15th.
Van Rompuy, addressing the EU Parliament in French, repeated the call for global governance during his speech yesterday.
“It is thanks to the EU that the G20 was born; We took the initiative to create this embryo of world governance,” stated the unelected EU President.
Farage said van Rompuy had “the charisma of a damp rag and the appearance of a low grade bank clerk” before outing him as the perfect figurehead for EU authoritarianism.
“The question that I want to ask and that we are all going to ask is: who are you? I had never heard of you; nobody in Europe had ever heard of you. I would like to ask you, Mr President: who voted for you? And what mechanism – I know democracy is not popular with you lot – what mechanism do the peoples of Europe have to remove you? Is this European democracy?” asked Farage.
“Sir, you have no legitimacy in this job at all, and I can say with confidence that I can speak on behalf of the majority of the British people in saying: we do not know you, we do not want you, and the sooner you are put out to grass, the better,” said Farage as he was heckled by other Parliament members.
Farage labeled van Rompuy “capable, competent, and dangerous,” before continuing, “I have no doubt that it is your intention to be the quiet assassin of European democracy and of the European nation states. You appear to have a loathing for the very concept of the existence of nation states; perhaps that is because you come from Belgium, which of course is pretty much a non-country.”
Farage now faces an official reprimand next week from Jerzy Buzek, the Parliament President, and Socialist leaders, furious that Farage has found an avenue through which to repeatedly highlight dictatorial nature of the EU, are calling for his resignation.
However, despite the corporate media attacking Farage for his “rude” personal attack on van Rompuy, similar rhetoric was not directed towards EU members who have called Farage a Nazi or a “monkey in a tree - (showing his bottom and shitting on everyone,” by a Hungarian EU Cow MEP) - revealing a clear double standard where critics of the EU are made examples of while proponents are protected.
As we previously reported, shortly after the announcement of van Rompuy as EU President, Farage made headlines when he exposed the fact that the EU is an authoritarian dictatorship ruled by unelected bureaucrats to the detriment of national sovereignty.
Farage slammed the EU for its aggressive and dictatorial tactics, stating, “It’s taken you eight and a half years of bullying, of lying, of ignoring democratic referendums to get this treaty through (referring to the Lisbon Treaty)”.
During the same speech, Farage identified van Rompuy as little more than a puppet for the real EU power base headed by “post-industrial revolution” advocate and European Commission President, Manuel Barroso.
As we have highlighted in the past, despite accusations by EU Parliamentarians that Farage is “opening the door to fascism” by merely being critical of the EU, in actual fact Nazism and the EU have some very disturbing parallels. Indeed, the two are fundamentally intertwined and the origins of the EU can be traced directly back to the Nazis.
The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.
This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which was forced through in Ireland last year despite the population having already rejected it in a previous national referendum.
Watch the clip below.
The fact that the EU was a brainchild of top Nazi economists and industrialists, formulated as a means of preserving dictatorial power and then implemented by a former Nazi working under the auspices of the Bilderberg Group in 1955, proves that the entire European Union system is poisoned with a legacy and a raison d’être of totalitarianism.
This is becoming increasingly obvious in the 21st century as popular social movements across Europe rise up to oppose the blatant power grab being undertaken by the EU via the Lisbon Treaty, which was forced through in Ireland last year despite the population having already rejected it in a previous national referendum.
Examining the New World Order
(This post is entirely opinion, the soldiers are doing all they can in the impossible situations the corrupt government has forced them into)
Today the 13th British soldier this month (since the 8th of June, the BBC article is specific to state) died in our "noble" attempts to capture the elusive Osama Bin Laden (Joke! They never intended on capturing this probably dead, extremely useful "boogieman".) and bring stability to Afghanistan and the region (again, joke! the polar opposite was the true motivation). He became the 110th British soldier in total to die at, specifically 11 AM on the dot. I wouldn't say they are dying for nothing because that would be unfair, they are dying to satisfy the elite's blood lust and to further their "new world order" agenda (they desperately needed total chaos in the middle east to kick off world war 3, hence why they carried out 9/11 and invaded Iraq etc). REVOLT!
For Darth Queen and Country. Below occult monument was opened by the Queen last year.
One of many occult monuments to their blood sacrifices throughout history. (# 11, split circle or 2 mirrored C's, so 33 etc.)
'Nothing else to do round here' I think the illuminists that write this shit get off on what they've done to these poor kids' minds.
Signing up to join the armed forces (of any kind, not including local independent militias) is, in myopinion akin to willingly walking up the steps of a Mayan pyramid to have your heart ripped out, soldiers are nothing more than occult blood ritual sacrifices for the twisted elite and also mind control guinea pigs, naturally.
Opening the eyes of the world to America's freedoms, next to an inverted US Army pentagram, all 3 of this trinity of sacrificial lambs are only 17 years old. (note the advert with mi6 (and A) on the overlapping page, there was also an advert for Panasonic with the Olympic interlocking rings in this segment)
Brainwashed tools, look at their entraining policy... isn't the opposite the case at the moment (with the credit crunch and all that).
"The 74-year-old Buddhist monk took the unusual step of mingling with reporters afterward meeting with the President, telling them he was "very happy" with Obama's support and even engaging in a playful snowball fight.
The White House later put out a picture of the two Nobel Peace Prize laureates conversing in the 45-minute meeting and issued a statement in the name of spokesman Robert Gibbs backing the Dalai Lama's goals.
"The president stated his strong support for the preservation of Tibet's unique religious, cultural and linguistic identity and the protection of human rights for Tibetans in the People's Republic of China," Gibbs said.
"The president commended the Dalai Lama's 'middle way' approach, his commitment to non-violence and his pursuit of dialogue with the Chinese government," Gibbs said.
The Dalai Lama has built a global following through his spiritual lectures.....
The Dalai Lama, who fled his homeland for India in 1959, advocates a "middle way" of seeking greater rights for Tibetans while accepting Chinese rule."
That’s his take on applying the Buddhist Middle Way, as taught by the Buddha 2500 years ago, to the Tibetan's current plight.
This is definitelynot the same thing as the Third or Middle Way of Communitarians like Amitai Etzioni and Henry Tam, or the satanic One World Goverment ethos, and has nothing whatever to do with the Theosophy movement, the Lucifer Trust, or the “teachings” of "Madame Blavatsky," the Russian charlatan, and her foolish followers who have "borrowed" many aspects of Buddhism for their own evil purposes, influencing the New Age movement and the United Nations! Not clever !
Interactive graphic on Tibet. The exiled spiritual leader, the Dalia Lama, has met US President Barack Obama in Washington despite pressure from China.
Tibetan activists demonstrate in front of the White House in Washington, DC prior to a meeting between US President Barack Obama and the Dalai Lama. Obama has offered support for Tibet's spiritual leader and his Himalayan homeland, defying Chinese anger by meeting the exiled monk.
US President Barack Obama has offered support for Tibet's spiritual leader the Dalai Lama and his Himalayan homeland, defying Chinese anger by meeting the exiled monk at the White House.
Ethan Huff
NaturalNews Monday, February 15th, 2010
In response to growing awareness about the dangers of artificial sweeteners, what does the manufacturer of one of the world’s most notable artificial sweeteners do? Why, rename it and begin marketing it as natural, of course. This is precisely the strategy of Ajinomoto, maker of aspartame, which hopes to pull the wool over the eyes of the public with its rebranded version of aspartame, called “AminoSweet”.
Over 25 years ago, aspartame was first introduced into the European food supply. Today, it is an everyday component of most diet beverages, sugar-free desserts, and chewing gums in countries worldwide. But the tides have been turning as the general public is waking up to the truth about artificial sweeteners like aspartame and the harm they cause to health. The latest aspartame marketing scheme is a desperate effort to indoctrinate the public into accepting the chemical sweetener as natural and safe, despite evidence to the contrary.
Aspartame was an accidental discovery by James Schlatter, a chemist who had been trying to produce an anti-ulcer pharmaceutical drug for G.D. Searle & Company back in 1965. Upon mixing aspartic acid and phenylalanine, two naturally-occurring amino acids, he discovered that the new compound had a sweet taste. The company merely changed its FDA approval application from drug to food additive and, voila, aspartame was born.
G.D. Searle & Company first patented aspartame in 1970. An internal memo released in the same year urged company executives to work on getting the FDA into the “habit of saying yes” and of encouraging a “subconscious spirit of participation” in getting the chemical approved.
G.D. Searle & Company submitted its first petition to the FDA in 1973 and fought for years to gain FDA approval, submitting its own safety studies that many believed were inadequate and deceptive. Despite numerous objections, including one from its own scientists, the company was able to convince the FDA to approve aspartame for commercial use in a few products in 1974, igniting a blaze of controversy.
In 1976, then FDA Commissioner Alexander Schmidt wrote a letter to Sen. Ted Kennedy expressing concern over the “questionable integrity of the basic safety data submitted for aspartame safety”. FDA Chief Counsel Richard Merrill believed that a grand jury should investigate G.D. Searle & Company for lying about the safety of aspartame in its reports and for concealing evidence proving the chemical is unsafe for consumption.
Despite the myriad of evidence gained over the years showing that aspartame is a dangerous toxin, it has remained on the global market with the exception of a few countries that have banned it. In fact, it continued to gain approval for use in new types of food despite evidence showing that it causes neurological brain damage, cancerous tumors, and endocrine disruption, among other things.
The details of aspartame’s history are lengthy, but the point remains that the carcinogen was illegitimately approved as a food additive through heavy-handed prodding by a powerful corporation with its own interests in mind. Practically all drugs and food additives are approved by the FDA not because science shows they are safe but because companies essentially lobby the FDA with monetary payoffs and complete the agency’s multi-million dollar approval process.
Changing aspartame’s name to something that is “appealing and memorable”, in Ajinomoto’s own words, may hoodwink some but hopefully most will reject this clever marketing tactic as nothing more than a desperate attempt to preserve the company’s multi-billion dollar cash cow. Do not be deceived.
“Labour threw open the doors to mass migration in a deliberate policy to change the social make-up of the UK, secret papers suggest.
A draft report from the Cabinet Office shows that ministers wanted to ‘maximise the contribution’ of migrants to their ‘social objectives’.
The number of foreigners allowed in the UK increased by as much as 50 per cent in the wake of the report, written in 2000.
Labour has always justified immigration on economic grounds and denied it was using it to foster multiculturalism.
But suspicions of a secret agenda rose when Andrew Neather, a former government adviser and speech writer for Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett, said the aim of Labour’s immigration strategy was to ‘rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date’.
Mr Neather said he helped to write the 2000 report which outlined a strategy to ‘open up the UK to mass migration’.
The document was not published in its original format over fears of an adverse public reaction.….”
THE UNEDITED DOCUMENT
The highlighted text below was contained in the original draft of the document drawn up in 2000 for a discussion on immigration policy - but deleted from the version published in 2001.
1) The emerging consensus, in both the UK and the rest of the EU, is that we need a new analytical framework for thinking about migration policy if we are to maximise the contribution of migration to the Government's economic and social objectives.
2) Indeed, over the medium to longer term, migration pressures will intensify in Europe as a result of demographic changes. But this should not be viewed as a negative - to the extent that migration is driven by market forces, it is likely to be economically beneficial. On the other hand, trying to halt of reverse market-driven migration will be very difficult (perhaps impossible) and economically damaging.
3) Chapter 4, focusing on the Government's aim to regulate migration to the UK in the interests of social stability and economic growth,argues that it is clearly correct that the Government has both economic and social objectives for migration policy.
4) The more general social impact of migration is very difficult to assess. Benefits include a widening of consumer choice and significant cultural contributions. These in turn feed into wider economic benefits.
5) In practice, entry controls can contribute to social exclusion, and there are a number of areas where policy could further enhance migrants' economic and social contribution in line with the Government's overall objectives.
6)It is clear that migration policy has both social and economic impacts and should be designed to contribute to the government's overall objectives on both counts. The current position is a considerable advance on the previously existing situation, when the aim of immigration policy was, or appeared to be, to reduce primary immigration to the 'irreducible minimum' - an objective with no economic or social justification.
"Only Severe Cuts to Immigration will Stop Population Hitting 70 million well within 25 Years.
February 10, 2010
Even if the birth rate were to drop to levels not seen for 100 years the UK population is almost bound to hit 70m within 25 years unless there is a dramatic cut in immigration levels, says a new report out today.
An analysis of the Government’s own figures – issued on the eve of a speech by the Home Secretary on immigration and population - clearly shows that, even on such an unlikely birth rate, currently projected levels of immigration will cause the population of the UK to reach 70 million shortly after 2031 and then go on growing.
‘The Government is trying to suggest that a fall in the birth rate might keep our population below 70 million. They are desperate not to admit that their policies will mean a population increase to this unprecedented figure because they know it is of enormous concern to a great many people. Yet once again their own figures trip them up and no amount of obfuscation will disguise the facts,’ said Sir Andrew Green, chairman of think-tank Migrationwatch which carried out the research into the official figures...."
India puts on hold first GM food crop on safety grounds
The cultivation of the BT brinjal aubergine variety has divided opinion
India has deferred the commercial cultivation of what would have been its first genetically modified (GM) vegetable crop due to safety concerns.
Environment Minister Jairam Ramesh said more studies were needed to ensure genetically modified aubergines were safe for consumers and the environment.
The GM vegetable has undergone field trials since 2008 and received approval from government scientists in 2009.
But there has been a heated public row over the cultivation of the GM crop.
The BBC's Geeta Pandey, who was at the news conference in Delhi, says Mr Ramesh's decision has put any cultivation of GM vegetables in India on hold indefinitely.
'Difficult decision'
"Public sentiment is negative. It is my duty to adopt a cautious, precautionary, principle-based approach," Mr Ramesh said.
He said the moratorium on growing BT brinjal - as the variety of aubergine is known in India - would remain in place until tests were carried out "to the satisfaction of both the public and professionals".
The minister said "independent scientific studies" were needed to establish "the safety of the product from the point of view of its long-term impact on human health and environment".
Mr Ramesh said it was "a difficult decision to make" since he had to "balance science and society".
"The decision is responsible to science and responsive to society," he said.
India is the largest producer of aubergines in the world and grows more than 4,000 varieties.
Indian seed company Mahyco - partner of US multinational corporation Monsanto - which has developed BT brinjal, says the GM vegetable is more resistant to natural pests.
But anti-GM groups say there are serious health concerns and they allege that consumption of GM crops can even cause cancer.
The government-controlled Genetic Engineering Approval Committee (GEAC) approved BT brinjal for commercial cultivation in October 2009.
Following an uproar from farmers and anti-GM activists, the environment minister held a series of national consultation meetings across India.
Several of the aubergine-growing Indian states have already said they were opposed to BT brinjal.
India allowed the use of genetically modified seeds for cotton in 2002.
