lunes, 26 de marzo de 2012



I've just decided this would be a lot better on the banner of the 'blog of the decent left', Harry's Place.  It was inspired by a comment of one of its heterosexual Contributers, 'Sarah AB' when hedging her bets on whether or not it is wrong to arrest Christians if they express a biblical view on homosexuality.

Having been banned I was then unbanned there, and then amid mutual backslapping over how true to their principles they are, my last two posts have been blocked.  I have asked Sarah to have the honour to publically state this giving the mutual backslapping going on about them not doing this, and have offered her the helpful advice of changing her banner slogan to the above.

My two last comments she wouldn't post were concerning her willingness to have someone clearly malevolent and unhinged as 'Flaming Fairy', who obfuscates the disproportionate incidence of paedophilia among homosexuals (a minimum of 300%), babysit for her little boy.  I found it very disturbing that she as a mother, would have a homosexual who would teach her little boy that homosexuality is normal babysit, but not a Christian who wouldn't even broach the subject of sex.  Chilling.  This is what you have to do to fit in with the new age fascism in today's Labour Party - put your children at risk to prove 'ideological purity'.  If you have time to go through the comments on her post Brendan O'Neill on Gay Marriage, you may share my view that she is clearly intimidated by the homosexual fascists she rubs shoulders with in the Labour Party.  And HP is the blog of the 'decent left'!!  Another banner might be 'Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to choose which fascisms you like and dont like'.  It's homosexual Contributers, Gene and Alec - especially Alec - have a visceral hatred of Judeo/Christian sexual morality that might make even Richard Dawkins blanche.

This is the last post of mine she blocked:-

While dcook and I disagree on homosexuality, I thought his post above from a democratic perspective was excellent.  One thing I would take issue with him on though is the following:-

 If the Church wants to believe that homosexuality is wrong then while I don’t agree with them I would defend their right to hold that view. (I believe Peter Thatchell says the same thing)

I didn't get this impression when Peter Tatchell and his chums at OUTRAGE! hijacked Easter Sunday Service at Canterbury Cathederal because the then Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, didn't see eye to eye with Mr Tatchell on homosexuality.

While we're at it, we may as well take a look at what Mr Tatchell (occasional HP Contributer) thinks of having sex with children:-

The letter, dated 26 June 1997, is reproduced in full below

ROS Coward (Why Dares to Speak says nothing useful, June 23) thinks it is “shocking” that Gay Men’s Press has published a book, Dares To Speak, which challenges the assumption that all sex involving children and adults is abusive. I think it is courageous.

The distinguished psychologists and anthropologists cited in this book deserve to be heard. Offering a rational, informed perspective on sexual relations between younger and older people, they document examples of societies where consenting inter-generational sex is considered normal, beneficial and enjoyable by old and young alike.

Prof Gilbert Herdt points to the Sambia tribe of Papua New Guinea, where all young boys have sex with older warriors as part of their initiation into manhood. Far from being harmed, Prof Herdt says the boys grow up to be happy, well-adjusted husbands and fathers.

The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.

While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.

Peter Tatchell.

Thoughts anybody??  Alec, Flaming Fairy, Lamia?  Anything you'd like to share?

Alas, we shall never know.  I wonder if Sarah would have Peter Tatchell babysit for her?

domingo, 25 de marzo de 2012


I very much admire the blogspot of the 'decent left' 'Harry's Place'.  It's on the same page that any sincere democrat should be on with regard to the war against Jihad.  However, despite proclaiming in its banner "Liberty, if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they don't want to hear", as soon as I posted that homosexuality is a perversion I was put on moderation and my posts usually only go through if I mock the hypocrisy of its banner.

On this HP blog entry, I posted comments from another computer and they got through.  My post below is awaiting moderation and I believe the homobigots and their enablers at HP will be too insecure for me to tell its readers what they dont want to hear (although, just before pressing 'publish', I happily find myself proved wrong.  Respect due to Sarah AB @ HP).  Here is that post, under my real name of Graeme Thompson.  When one is speaking out against the premier fascist evil of our time, I think one should:-

Flaming Fairy, the aggression and hate that spews out of your posts says all that needs to be said about the true agenda of homosexuals like yourself.

The difference between you and me is that you call me a bigot because I oppose homosexual marriage, I call you a bigot because you are intolerant of opposition. Conducting a democratic debate on homosexual marriage means we address the merits of eachothers arguments without impugning the integrity and honour of one's opponent. There do exist honourable homosexuals and their supporters who can do this, but unfortunately, they are very few and far between. The end game of homobigots like you FF, is to sodomise democracy.

The examples I have given of how new age fascists like yourself are taking democracy out from under our feet are very well known, but instead of addressing what you know to be the incremental onset of your correctnick tyranny you choose to evade it with demands for links.
How hard can it be to type 'PCSO preacher' in Google? Or even 'christian cafe blackpool'? (An example of 'fascism creep' I haven't previously given).

It is my theory that the more intolerant a political homosexual is of opposition to their agenda the more proclivity they have to paedophilia. It's always when one holds one's nose and delves into paedophile propaganda one finds the most visceral hatred of Judeo/Christian morality.

It's perfectly feasible that if the homosexual lobby had a genuine commitment to democracy they could acheive their aims while maintaining respect for the Christian conscience. Just as pacifists have the right to conscientious objection at time of war Christians too could have the right to conscientous objection to, for example, giving sex therapy to homosexual couples and giving children in adopting/fostering to homosexuals. However, to the rampant bigots of the homosexual lobby, the interests of children count for nothing when it comes to the normalisation of homosexuality in society. With goodwill, the Christian conscience could easily be accommodated, but because of the hateful agenda of homobigots like yourself desperately needy children are denied good homes with good Christian families.

Here is the link (p49 onwards) that shows how disproportionate paedophilia is among homosexuals:-

And yet homosexuals can now adopt and Christians who refuse to teach little children that homosexuality is normal can't. O Brave New World.

Homosexual adoption and homosexual marriage are pretexts to lay the groundwork for persecution of the Church.

When 'civil partnerships' came in they were accompanied by the assurance that 'homosexual marriage' would not be introduced which given the track record of the homobigot lobby was so obviously going to turn out to be a lie.

As soon as homosexual marriage is introduced the Church will be prosecuted for not conducting homosexual weddings, no matter what assurances are currently being given. And this, is just the start of the tyranny that is to come.

NB:  I have now had a post witheld and have been banned by a homosexual HP Contributer Alec.  Aside from anything it is considerably rude for one contributer to usurp another's post in this manner.  The impression I got from Sarah is that her otherwise admirable commitment to free speech will quail beneath the Gaystapo glare of her homo-bigot co-Contributers Gene and Alec.

I've written to HP's email address and we shall soon see if Harry's Place needs to amend it's banner slogan to '(unless they're homosexual)'.

This is the comment that Alec witheld and banned me for:-

Sarah, I find it scarey that you, as a mother, would be willing to let someone babysit who obfuscates the disproportionate incidence of paedophilia among homosexuals and who is, frankly, clearly malevolent and unhinged.
You would let Flaming Fairy babysit your boy to teach him homosexuality is normal but would not let a Christian babysit for you who wouldn't even broach the subject of sex with your children.
These truly are dark times in which we live.

domingo, 19 de junio de 2011


Anyone who reads my comments on Biased BBC knows I am always quick to defend Nicky Campbell.  Criticisms made of him there leave me completely bewildered.  However, I have a criticism to make of him here.

On Thursday 16th June Nicky Campbell provided correctnick homosexual rights activist Symon Hill with a catwalk to strut his pink jackboots on and got up on the catwalk with him to strut around with them himself.

I caught this interview (1:41:00) at work after it got started, and as per usual I was thinking ‘top man’ of Nicky C for throwing challenging questions this guy’s way that you otherwise wouldn’t hear from most BBC interviewers, when the conclusion of the interview first descended into farce and then tailspinned into tragedy as Nicky C championed the cause of homosexual reichs.

Nicky Campbell asked his guest () if believing homosexuality was wrong was a form of homophobia and the following went unchallenged:

I think it is, yes, and I think nonetheless there are people who believe that who would still respect gay and bisexual people and stand up for their legal rights.

Yeah, right.  I’m sure if a guest said that some anti-Semites have respect for Jews and would defend their rights Nicky C would let this abject absurdity pass by as well.

Well, things recovered, but then Nicky C concluded thus:.

There are many mainstream Christians who feel uncomfortable about homosexuality who are not Jimmy Swaggart, they’re not that Republican woman Michelle Bachman who appeared on the scene who believes her country needs to be reclaimed from a gay mafia .  What did she say the other day?  She said that we’re in a bizarre world where a Judge will say to little children you can’t say the pledge of allegiance but you must learn homosexuality is normal.  She said a very effective way to promote homosexuality is to get a bunch of second graders and play them the Lion King and the teacher will say ‘do you know the music for this movie was written by a gay man?’.        

Not wanting schoolchildren to be indoctrinated with political propaganda is an extreme example of homophobia Mr Campbell?  Let’s dish out the pink swastika armbands to kindergarden children now shall we?  Who better to do so than this well known BBC ‘gay rights’ favourite and paedophile apologist who I'm sure no Council in the land would fail to deem fit as a foster carer under current legislation and Court rulings.

Correctnick homosexuals (sadly, just about 100% of the homosexual lobbyists that we hear it seems) call anyone a ‘homophobe’ who regards homosexuality as a perversion.  To classify one’s political opponents as suffering from a mental illness is by definition totalitarian and evil.  The Soviet Union used to commit dissidents to psychiatric wards for holding the insane notion that they were not living in a worker’s paradise.  When this barely veiled fascism raises its ugly head on the BBC, whether it comes from a correctnick bigot or an Islamist who copies their tactics, we have a right to expect from our national broadcaster a very firm challenge.

Of course, we rarely get it because the BBC is riven with correctnicks and those who fear incurring their displeasure.

When Nicky Campbell, an otherwise stellar example of the impartiality and bonhomie we want to see on the BBC is so openly in hoc with the totalitarian mindset of the correctnick homosexual lobby, we can hear just how loudly pink jackboots are marching through our land.

lunes, 7 de marzo de 2011


A Marxist strategy to subvert democracy.  The strategy aims to silence opposition by creating ‘thought crimes’ around issues of race, gender and sexuality as a pretext to victimise those who dissent from left-wing opinion.  The climate of fear that is produced is the means to exert ‘mind control’ to undermine democracy and attain totalitarian objectives.

The advent of Jihad terrorism and the totalitarian alliance between the Marxist Left and Islamism has seen ‘Islamophobia’ added to the panoply of ‘thought crime’.


On 1st March there Honours Lord Justice Munby and Mr Justice Beatson ruled that foster carers Eunice and Owen John could no longer foster because of their Christian views on homosexuality.

They accepted that this couple had an impeccable record as foster carers but had to deny them the right to foster more children under the age of 10 to 'put the interests of the child first'.  Some might find this reasoning somewhat contradictory.  Some might conclude from the evidence of there Honour's own Judgement that they completely disregarded the paramount interests of the child in favour of promoting the normalisation of homosexuality.

'Salieri' made this very interesting point commenting in the redoubtable Melanie Phillips' blog:-

March 3rd, 2011

"The law itself is the problem: a law drawn up and passed by the glorified social workers who ruled and wrecked this country between 1997 and 2010. The Council’s particular concern was - gasp - that the couple’s view “did not equate” with Standard no. 7.1 of the National Minimum Standards for Fostering Services: the duty to “value diversity and promote equality”."

'Value diversity and promote equality'.  This is a very broad phrase.  It can be given a whole variety of meanings.  Yet in the times in which we live we all know it has the totalitarian intent of 'unpersoning' anyone who dissents from the Marxist kulturkampf of Political Correctness.  The correctnick drafters of the legislation clearly had every confidence in today's subverted Judiciary to interpret their weaselspeak as intended.  They were greatly rewarded in their confidence by Justices Munby and Beatson.

Were this phrase to be interpreted according to the democratic values of a free society - as British Courts should interpret any nebulous wording in legislation - regardless of recent laws to normalise homosexuality, the interests of the child could and would only remain paramount by allowing the Johns the right to still provide under 10s a loving and caring foster home.

In the extremely unlikely event an under 10 year old foster child placed in their care by Derby City Council expressed to them sexual feelings for members of their own sex, compassionate and loving carers would be perfectly capable of telling the child their Christian views on homosexuality while leaving the child feeling valued as an individual.  Reasonable people have no difficulty in understanding this.

Instead, owing to the bigotry of the militant homosexual lobby now being enshrined in law - pending appeal -what is now the case is that a great deal of needy children have had their futures blighted by an already scarce amount of foster carers being made far more scarce by this ban on Christians.

If the Judgement of Munby and Beatson is allowed to stand on appeal, the imminent future we are now facing is that children can be taken away from their own parents if they tell them homosexuality is wrong and placed with homosexual 'carers' to 'undo the harm' they have had done to them.

'Carers' that will in all probability, have the same attitudes toward the young as this leading homosexual rights campaigner.

"ROS Coward (Why Dares to Speak says nothing useful, June 23) thinks it is “shocking” that Gay Men’s Press has published a book, Dares To Speak, which challenges the assumption that all sex involving children and adults is abusive. I think it is courageous."

Oh Brave New World.

sábado, 20 de noviembre de 2010

The Shooting Party

The Reason for this Self Indulgence ..

As the James Mason character said in ‘The Shooting Party’, the benefit of keeping a journal is that is saves you bothering other people with your thoughts.

I expect the entries on this blog will be sporadic and short-lived through disuse and being read by no-one, but for those peculiar moments when one thinks one has something of import to communicate to humanity and any passing spaceship, a blog does serve to humour oneself.

In trying to find the exact quote from the James Mason character above, I came across this rather wonderful snippet from the film on youtube above.