US upgrades Israel to status above any other country

The House Foreign Affairs Committee approved on Wednesday a bill that would enhance US-Israel defence ties and waived US entrance visa for Israelis.

Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen and Congressman Ted Deutch initiated the bill as they are the top two members on the committee's Middle East subcommittee; they strongly supported the bill, which was unanimously approved.

The bill named Israel a "major strategic ally" of the United States. It included measures that would encourage enhanced cooperation such as missile development, energy and security. No other state has ever got this status.

Source: https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/news/americas/10152-us-upgrades-israel-to-status-above-any-other-country

Canada: Progressive Parents Claim To Be Raising A Genderless Child

When Storm was born, the couple sent an email to friends and family: “We've decided not to share Storm's sex for now — a tribute to freedom and choice in place of limitation, a stand up to what the world could become in Storm's lifetime (a more progressive place?...).”

Source: ParentCentral

Occupied Germany: Chancellor Merkel urges fight against anti-semitism

Source: http://www.expatica.com/de/news/german-news/germany-s-merkel-urges-fight-against-anti-semitism_65799.html

German Chancellor Angela Merkel called Saturday for fresh efforts to counter anti-semitism and to remember the Holocaust on the 65th anniversary of the defeat of the Nazi regime in World War II.

"Fighting anti-semitism at the root is a challenge for the whole of society, even if the vast majority of people do not think in an anti-semitic way," she wrote in a long piece in the Suddeutsche Zeitung daily.

Since Germans are not "antisemitic", according to Merkel, why should they bother with something they do not believe in the first place? To keep self-loathing alive! To quote the "enemy" Ahmadinejad, how long will Germans have to hate themselves?

Merkel vowed that she would "always" fight against anti-semitism even if that led to "insulting letters about being a 'puppet of the Jewish conspiracy' and worse".

Merkel does what she is supposed to do and tries to outcompete other traitors by surprising even Jews with such boundless servility.

She encouraged Germans to talk unflinchingly about World War II and the Holocaust, when Nazi Germany masterminded and carried out the murder of six million Jews.

Inviting Germans to talk unflinchingly is not something Jews would desire. Talk unflinchingly, however, is in this context an euphemism for keeping self-loathing alive, and Germans have all learnt reading through the lines.

"It is essential for the understanding of our identity and of our future to talk about Nazism and the extermination of the Jews," she wrote.

More of "let's keep self-loathing alive"! "Masters will be pleased with this!", she thinks. But having Germans hate themselves is an objective ALREADY ACCOMPLISHED (otherwise they wouldn't have ellected Merkel in the first place) and this pathetic attempt to overkill must look disgusting even to the most heinous of Jews.

COMMENT:

Germany no longer exists. The country that bore this name died along with everything good Germans had to offer in 1945. They fought bravely, but they lost and, with them, the whole world lost. 

US under Jews: William A. White found guilty for the crime of being semitically incorrect

Done in by his own words, Internet hatemonger William A. White was convicted Friday of threatening people from Virginia Beach to Canada.

Source: http://www.roanoke.com/news/roanoke/wb/230282

As said in an above post, even though American law protects one's right of free speech, speech may only be free once it doesn't "incites to violence". By claiming "incitement to violence" in every single case of speech found displeasurable by Jews this last remnant of democracy is effectively annulled.

Because no crime was committed, one is judged for alleged "intentions" and the nature of the trial is by default incompatible with law. It is not by accident, therefore, that all these trials conducted against anti-Semites are modern replica of Stalinist show trials conducted against various "enemies of the people", deemed to be dangers to society and best dealt with death or hard labor.

Now what is the crime of William A. White: he spoke against Jews and, worse still, he tried to organize a movement for our interests (which goes automatically against Jewish interests). By these mere actions, he should have expected the consequences, because organized resistance is not something any master tolerates. Here the totalitarian nature of our government stands revealed: they have to condemn the errant and for the sake of image have to give it a legal veneer. To do that, they follow exactly the age-old tried and tested methods used by Soviet propaganda (or rather the latter is just a child of the same Jewish parent):
1. First, the person is demonized by the media! Because media is under Jewish control (directly or indirectly), it can say just about anything about someone, while giving the accused no means to properly defend himself. Because the crime is ideological, accusations are taking root heavily on a fertile ground of propagandistic imagery created not just by the same media but by a thoroughly Semitized education system as well, where reverence to Jews as unassailable saints or to their propasphere (multiculturalism, feminism, zionism) as "justice" incarnate are the rule.
2. After a sensible amount of demonization, the necessity of having this "social danger" safely contained seems immediate in the public mind. In order to instrument a case in US, Jewish activists start claiming of having been threatened and Holocaust imagery is once again invoked. Because Jews are saints and any disagreement or let alone action against them is by default "evil", "Nazi" and above all "anti-Semitic" (which means to believers much more than hostility to an ethnic group), when Jews claim of being victimized, they gather an almost universal rallying behind their decision. Not only are they blindly believed, but an impending Holocaust is thought to follow unless the "anti-Semite" is removed from society.

3. Law enforcement, who "protects public safety" (save when roaming nigger gangs are mugging, raping at leisure) has now all the grounds it needs to instrument a case. The "criminal" is accused of incitement to violence and his words are used as grounds of accusation for imagined violent outcomes.
4. The trial is nothing more than a pitiful masquerade required to pronounce the GUILTY verdict. The only part deserving mention is how defence is part of accusation (otherwise the lawyer himself is accused of the same "crimes" as the defendant, as it happened with Sylvia Stoltz, who stands alone among those who took defense seriously). 

US under Jews: Hate Crimes Bill passes Senate

Source: http://jta.org/news/article/2009/07/17/1006603/senate-passes-hate-crimes-bill

WASHINGTON (JTA) -- The Senate approved legislation that would expand federal involvement in investigating hate crimes.

By a 63-28 vote Thursday, the measure was attached to the defense authorization bill, considered "must-pass" legislation by the Senate. Five Republicans joined every Democrat present to vote in favor.

The Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act would permit greater federal involvement in investigating hate crimes and expand the federal definition of such crimes to include those motivated by gender, sexual orientation, gender identity and disability. Supporters say the legislation would allow federal authorities to pursue hate-crimes cases when local authorities are either unable or unwilling to do so.

The House passed a similar bill in April, and President Obama has said he would sign the legislation. The bill has passed both houses of Congress previously, but has not survived the conference committee process.

A number of Jewish groups, headed by the Anti-Defamation League, have been working for a decade to enact the measure.

Britain under Jews: UK court sentences two men for mocking Holocaust online

Author: Michael Freund

Source: http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1246443788062&pagename=JPArticle%2FShowFull

A court in the northern English city of Leeds sentenced two men to prison on Friday after they were convicted of multiple counts of possession, publication and distribution of racially incendiary materials.

Simon Sheppard, 52, was sentenced to four years and 10 months in prison, while Stephen Whittle, 42, was handed a term of two years and four months, in connection with what Judge Rodney Grant described as "unpleasant and very serious" charges.

The two had published articles and other material mocking the Holocaust and referring to the Auschwitz death camp in Poland as a "holiday camp" for Jews. They also disseminated racist leaflets against blacks and other minority groups, and published the material on Web sites run by Sheppard.

This is the first time that suspects in the United Kingdom have been convicted and sentenced to prison for inciting racial hatred on the Internet.

The investigation of Sheppard and White was launched back in 2004, after they reportedly dropped off a copy of a comic book called Tales of the Holohoax at a synagogue in the city of Blackpool.

Last July, the two skipped bail and went to the United States, where they attempted to seek asylum before being deported back to England in June.

Addressing the two men in court, Grant said, "Such offenses as these have, by their very nature, the potential to cause grave social harm, particularly in a society such as ours which has, for a number of years now, been multi-racial."

The judge added that "these are serious offenses."

"I can say without any hesitation that I have rarely seen, or had to read or consider, material which is so abusive and insulting... toward racial groups within our own society," he said.

Jewish "democracy" in Britain at work: Thought police muscle up in Britain

BRITAIN appears to be evolving into the first modern soft totalitarian state. As a sometime teacher of political science and international law, I do not use the term totalitarian loosely. 

There are no concentration camps or gulags but there are thought police with unprecedented powers to dictate ways of thinking and sniff out heresy, and there can be harsh punishments for dissent.

Nikolai Bukharin claimed one of the Bolshevik Revolution's principal tasks was "to alter people's actual psychology". Britain is not Bolshevik, but a campaign to alter people's psychology and create a new Homo britannicus is under way without even a fig leaf of disguise.

The Government is pushing ahead with legislation that will criminalise politically incorrect jokes, with a maximum punishment of up to seven years' prison. The House of Lords tried to insert a free-speech amendment, but Justice Secretary Jack Straw knocked it out. It was Straw who previously called for a redefinition of Englishness and suggested the "global baggage of empire" was linked to soccer violence by "racist and xenophobic white males". He claimed the English "propensity for violence" was used to subjugate Ireland, Scotland and Wales, and that the English as a race were "potentially very aggressive".

In the past 10 years I have collected reports of many instances of draconian punishments, including the arrest and criminal prosecution of children, for thought-crimes and offences against political correctness.

Countryside Restoration Trust chairman and columnist Robin Page said at a rally against the Government's anti-hunting laws in Gloucestershire in 2002: "If you are a black vegetarian Muslim asylum-seeking one-legged lesbian lorry driver, I want the same rights as you." Page was arrested, and after four months he received a letter saying no charges would be pressed, but that: "If further evidence comes to our attention whereby your involvement is implicated, we will seek to initiate proceedings." It took him five years to clear his name.

Page was at least an adult. In September 2006, a 14-year-old schoolgirl, Codie Stott, asked a teacher if she could sit with another group to do a science project as all the girls with her spoke only Urdu. The teacher's first response, according to Stott, was to scream at her: "It's racist, you're going to get done by the police!" Upset and terrified, the schoolgirl went outside to calm down. The teacher called the police and a few days later, presumably after officialdom had thought the matter over, she was arrested and taken to a police station, where she was fingerprinted and photographed. According to her mother, she was placed in a bare cell for 3 1/2 hours. She was questioned on suspicion of committing a racial public order offence and then released without charge. The school was said to be investigating what further action to take, not against the teacher, but against Stott. Headmaster Anthony Edkins reportedly said: "An allegation of a serious nature was made concerning a racially motivated remark. We aim to ensure a caring and tolerant attitude towards pupils of all ethnic backgrounds and will not stand for racism in any form."

A 10-year-old child was arrested and brought before a judge, for having allegedly called an 11-year-old boya "Paki" and "bin Laden" during a playground argument at a primary school (the other boy had called him a skunk and a Teletubby). When it reached the court the case had cost taxpayers pound stg. 25,000. The accused was so distressed that he had stopped attending school. The judge, Jonathan Finestein, said: "Have we really got to the stage where we are prosecuting 10-year-old boys because of political correctness? There are major crimes out there and the police don't bother to prosecute. This is nonsense."

Finestein was fiercely attacked by teaching union leaders, as in those witch-hunt trials where any who spoke in defence of an accused or pointed to defects in the prosecution were immediately targeted as witches and candidates for burning.

Hate-crime police investigated Basil Brush, a puppet fox on children's television, who had made a joke about Gypsies. The BBC confessed that Brush had behaved inappropriately and assured police that the episode would be banned.

A bishop was warned by the police for not having done enough to "celebrate diversity", the enforcing of which is now apparently a police function. A Christian home for retired clergy and religious workers lost a grant because it would not reveal to official snoopers how many of the residents were homosexual. That they had never been asked was taken as evidence of homophobia.

Muslim parents who objected to young children being given books advocating same-sex marriage and adoption at one school last year had their wishes respected and the offending material withdrawn. This year, Muslim and Christian parents at another school objecting to the same material have not only had their objections ignored but have been threatened with prosecution if they withdraw their children.

There have been innumerable cases in recent months of people in schools, hospitals and other institutions losing their jobs because of various religious scruples, often, as in the East Germany of yore, not shouted fanatically from the rooftops but betrayed in private conversations and reported to authorities. The crime of one nurse was to offer to pray for a patient, who did not complain but merely mentioned the matter to another nurse. A primary school receptionist, Jennie Cain, whose five-year-old daughter was told off for talking about Jesus in class, faces the sack for seeking support from her church. A private email from her to other members of the church asking for prayers fell into the hands of school authorities.

Permissiveness as well as draconianism can be deployed to destroy socially accepted norms and values. The Royal Navy, for instance, has installed a satanist chapel in a warship to accommodate the proclivities of a satanist crew member. "What would Nelson have said?" is a British newspaper cliche about navy scandals, but in this case seems a legitimate question. Satanist paraphernalia is also supplied to prison inmates who need it.

This campaign seems to come from unelected or quasi-governmental bodies controlling various institutions, which are more or less unanswerable to electors, more than it does directly from the Government, although the Government helps drive it and condones it in a fudged and deniable manner.

Any one of these incidents might be dismissed as an aberration, but taken together - and I have only mentioned a tiny sample; more are reported almost every day - they add up to a pretty clear picture.

Hal G. P. Colebatch's Blair's Britain was chosen as a book of the year by The Spectator in 1999.

Source: 
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,,25361297-7583,00.html?from=public_rss