Mr Benn’s questions. A good clear message. The IRA
Ludicrous, completely ludicrous, all of them, pathetic, ludicrous, doesn’t matter how many chairs or honours or red hats, or indeed what oncological brilliance.  Ludicrous  little creatures who can’t cope with reality, the world around them, like something in Kew, a hothouse plant that only survives in a small range of temperatures, made of lies, an infrastructure of lies sustains them.
The oncological brilliance sits safely within the metal balls of insanity called Doctor.
 The most obvious reality of all is that of other human beings, distinct, independent, equal in rights, running on different tracks, not an extension of their sick monkey selves, theirs to do with as they please. The pathetic little apes can’t cope with it, can’t cope with people not assuming mad animals are more important, more intelligent, more ethical, better informed, more honest, more rational than they, can’t cope with any suggestion they are not being phrased in the most deferential of terms. 
 
Facts must not penetrate this world of sick chimpanzees.   Reality is abhorred, to be destroyed wherever it rears its head.  The world in their heads is as fed to them down the tit by their head monkeys and since of course the head monkey is both ominiscient and good, anything contrary to its ravings is a lie and bad.  Thus none of the alarmingly large number of facts I have presented here exists, is real.  There is no such thing as democracy.  Everyone believes in God.  Everyone respects authority and knows he or she must do as he or she is told. 
 
Delusion is to be maintained, protected, upheld.  On no account is democracy to be forced on these creatures.  Thus society is changed without a shot fired in anger.
 
It is possible many totalitarian regimes didn’t start as wholly evil.  They were forced to become more and more evil to protect the lies, maintain and uphold the lies, maintain the fantasy.
 
Keep them delusional, with no idea of the society around them.  Keep them intellectually and emotionally helpless and so terrified of reality.   On no account must they be expected to change. 
Everyone else must enter the world of the insane and share the fantasy.
 
Thus the question was not whether Jackson was illiterate; it was I couldn’t possibly have any grounds for saying he was, it ‘must have been’ an attack on his being gay. 
 
Ooh ooh, they’re the hard left, they get to beat up people, isn’t that great: in short the hard right with a veneer of red paint.   The nursing establishment is simply a phalanx of Marges, vicious narrow ignorant bumptious full of it  lower-middle class women   
 
Have you idea how distressed I was at having to push a heavy trolley of notes into an ancient cage lift, through a tunnel under the road, into another lift, how I felt when I began to experience back pain for the first time since my surgery 30 years previously. Ape vermin traitors think that right and proper, ape vermin traitors like Blair and Milburn, ape vermin sick filth like Saunders, Plucnski, McGuckin, Von Barsewisch, Boden, Linch, Goldstone, ape vermin filth who should be struck off.   And now the ape vermin capering filth are happy, the sly cowardly evil depraved, degenerate disease are  happy, vermin.   They have succeeded in crippling me.  They have succeeding in wrecking the rest of my life.  They crawl all over me impeding every move I make.  That makes ape vermin feel very  happy  Not as happy as knowing Government and opposition protect and uphold them, the security service protect and uphold them, their filth is untouchable.
 
Not as happy as knowing a precedent has been set.   A good clear message, isn’t that the jargon.
Oh, you’ve sent good clear messages all right, a normal educated literate literary intelligent, free democratic honest moral Englishwoman can be butchered, have my body torn up with the full consent of ‘Her Majesty’s Government’, the full consent of MI5, holding the coats of vermin, bowing them in,  happy to see me destroyed, couldn’t possibly do anything about it.  Democracy is dead in the water.  No-one is going to trouble to uphold democracy.  I’m sure with the multinational population of UCH your good clear messages are rocketing around the world.  
  
British doctors are no longer troubled by ethical standards 
British academics no longer bother about fact and reason. 
A woman’s body is up for grabs, can be brutalized in full view and no-one lifts a finger to stop it, 
No one would dream of upholding democracy, accountability, transparency, reason. 
Hysteria and insanity and lies will rule.  No fact will be considered of the slightest significance.  No facts will be established. 
Aren’t there just blue skies ahead. 
 
Thus the simple perversion of the evil Religious Hatred Bill, the very name of which enshrines the corruption that religion is of its nature good.  On no account must filth be told they’re filth.
 
One entirely simple act that costs nothing could reform the NHS: insistence on accountability and transparency.  Just tell them everything they do where a patient is not involved can be on the front pages the next day.   Take bets on whether Coffey will do it.  Her abysmal record at the DWP may provide a clue.
 
Me?  Oh, I just want nurse-vermin eating shit on camera.  Throwing themselves  around, screaming and sobbing would be good.  They could froth at the mouth and dribble too, not because anyone had said anything nasty to them but because they’d been asked simple questions.
 
Now, Nurse, if you will just answer that nice Mr Benn’s five questions:
What power have you got?
Where did you get it from?
In whose interests do you exercise it?
To whom are you accountable?
 How do we get rid of you?
 
 So yes, cried ‘Labour’, Vote for the IRA!  Vote for the British Nazi Party!  Vote for not just socialism but national socialism.  Just vote for the IRA and kill two birds with one stone, the IRA having been pro-Nazi, which is not to say that all Irish people were at all.  Neutrality is not a very Irish word.  It is probably true to say any Irish person with a political cell in his or her body found a way of helping one side or the other. 

PANTHER -> Site news -> The diverse aspects of Ireland 1930-1945
by Ysabel Howard - Saturday, 22 October 2011, 03:38 PM

 
Just in case you're not sure what I'm talking about, I'm sure what I'm talking about: IRA-supporting, England-hating Nazi Catholics, to be exact. Terribly easy in the current climate of non-think of course for them to hide behind being Good Catholic Women and Men who will not have 'the Holy Church' reviled, and get the whole ratfink dumbfuck brain-dead unquestioning fascist fake Left screaming 'Religion is good, religion is holy' (thou shalt not think) on my back (literally)
____________________________________________________________________________________________
It pretty well comes down to 70,000 citizens of the Republic crossed the water to fight in the British Armed Forces, the IRA were rampantly pro-Nazi and everyone else was somewhere in between, with some flagrant bias one way and some flagrant bias the other.
Irish neutrality
Irish neutrality in World War II
The IRA is almost 100 percent proletarian in composition, its great reservoir of strength being the Belfast Falls Road area. The more petit-bourgeois Eire section is but a feeble reflection of the Northern movement. Yet it advocates no social policy whatsoever, for it considers itself to be not in any sense a political party, but purely and simply an army. Its sole aim is to expel foreign imperialism from Ireland. In 1939 it declared war on Britain. When the world war began it welcomed Germany as an ally in the common struggle.
The prevailing cult of national-socialist ideology within the IRA would vanish like a cloud of smoke at the first signs of a British-German concord. All nations and movements are judged in accordance with their attitude to Britain
Bob Armstrong, Workers' International News, Vol.5 No.9, February-March 1943

 
“Anti-semitism in the Labour Party?  Oh well that’s the fault of Muslims on about Palestine.”  Then someone will say, well, they all supported Hitler.  Indeed Muslims did.  So did a lot of people.  Islam of course is the perfect cover.  Nothing whatever to do with the deep rich vein of anti-semitism in the Roman Catholic Church.  Nothing is ever the fault of the Catholic Church which simply wishes for good in the world.
PANTHER -> Site news -> Priests out of step with Ratzinger
by Ysabel Howard - Saturday, 22 October 2011, 08:06 PM
Catholic Church In Italy Out Of Step With Ratzinger
"Shame!" screeched the Vatican’s official newspaper, L’Osservatore Romano, "Fake confessions in search of a shameful scoop!"
But what on earth had got the Vatican’s propaganda rag in such a flap? Well, it seems Ratzinger is not happy with Italian journalists who posed as ordinary Catholic congregants and went to confession to admit to invented sins. They wanted to find out just how in step with the Vatican the average parish priest is in Italy. "Shame! There is no other word to express our distress toward an operation that was disgusting, worthless, disrespectful and particularly offensive," L’Osservatore Romano said in an editorial.
The reporters made their fake confessions to 24 different priests in five Italian cities, including Rome. The magazine L’Esspresso, which published the results, said the idea was to see how priests handle difficult pastoral situations and whether they followed the strict dogmas laid out by church teaching.
What the journalists found was that priests are almost uniformly out of step with the Vatican on a range of social issues. The only matter on which they did unanimously follow the Vatican line was on abortion.
One of the reporters claimed in the confessional that she had let a doctor switch off the respirator that kept her father alive. "Don’t think any more about it," she was told by a friar in Naples. "If I had a father, a wife or a child who had lived for years only because of artificial means, I would pull out the plug."
More than once, the magazine said, priests gave quite different advice on what the Church regards as "sins" – on issues such as homosexuality, divorce, stem-cell research, euthanasia and prostitution. One reporter said he was HIV-positive and asked if he should use a condom with his girlfriend. One priest said no, another said it was more of a personal matter than one of conscience.
Another journalist posed as a researcher who had received a lucrative offer to work abroad on embryonic stem cells. With the extra cash, he said, he and his wife could think about starting a family. So should he take up the post? "Yes. Yes. Of course," came the reply.
Given the Vatican’s almost hysterical hatred of homosexuality, with its pronouncements that gay people are ‘intrinsically evil’ and ‘morally disordered’ it comes as a surprise to one gay man who went to one of the confessions to be told by the priest that the best solution was to "come out" and "be yourself".
L’Osservatore Romano said the deception was "a sacrilege, because it violated the sacred space in which a self-recognised sinner asks intimately to receive God’s merciful love." The paper failed to say that it made Ratzinger look like even more of an authoritarian bigot than usual. It also illustrated that truly compassionate people simply disregard his pronouncements.
Edit | Delete
See this post in context
PANTHER -> Site news -> 'The Vatican exists first and foremost to preserve its own power.'
by Ysabel Howard - Saturday, 22 October 2011, 08:04 PM
One paradox of the Polish pope is that while he is rightly revered for helping bring down the godless Communists, he has replicated something very like the old Communist Party in his church. Karol Wojtyla has shaped a hierarchy that is intolerant of dissent, unaccountable to its members, secretive in the extreme and willfully clueless about how people live. The Communists mouthed pieties about "social justice" and the rule of the working class while creating a corrupt dictatorship of bureaucrats. Russians boiled this down to a cynical adage: We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us. For American Catholics, the counterpart is: They pretend to lead, and we pretend to follow.
Like the Communist Party circa Leonid Brezhnev, the Vatican exists first and foremost to preserve its own power.
Pope John Paul II turns 82 this month, and he looks more mortal by the day. In his photo op with the American cardinals last week, he was so infirm and unintelligible that you wanted to avert your eyes out of pity. But let's not. The uncomfortable and largely unspoken truth is that the current turmoil in the Roman Catholic Church is not just a sad footnote to the life of a beloved figure. This is a crisis of the pope's making.
I do not mean that the pope condones child abuse, although his zeal to combat it ranks right down with that of, say, Cardinal Bernard Law, the pedophile-juggling head of the Boston archdiocese. Despite what you may have read, the pope has not apologized for anything, nor has he acknowledged anything amiss in the hierarchy's decades of dissembling — or, as he dismissively put it, the way church leaders "are perceived to have acted." The fact that the pope's passing reference to the rape of children as a "crime" was treated as a bolt of divine enlightenment reflects just how eager we are to let him off the hook.
It should be clear by now that this scandal is only incidentally about forcing sex on minors. There is no evidence so far that predator priests are more common than predator teachers or predator doctors or predator journalists. The scandal is the persistent failure of the church hierarchy to comprehend, to care and to protect. The Boy Scouts, not an organization in the vanguard of sexual enlightenment, adopted a clear, firm policy to protect children from molestation 19 years ago. The Catholic bishops and their Vatican handlers, meanwhile, are still parsing the rhetorical fine points of "zero tolerance," which is at best an empty slogan (does anyone favor "10 percent tolerance"?) and at worst a way of abdicating responsibility.
The pope lamented last week that the child abuse scandal is eroding trust in the church. But that is rather backward. American Catholics have reacted so explosively to this sordid affair precisely because they felt so little trust to begin with. The distrust is the legacy of Pope John Paul II.
One paradox of the Polish pope is that while he is rightly revered for helping bring down the godless Communists, he has replicated something very like the old Communist Party in his church. Karol Wojtyla has shaped a hierarchy that is intolerant of dissent, unaccountable to its members, secretive in the extreme and willfully clueless about how people live. The Communists mouthed pieties about "social justice" and the rule of the working class while creating a corrupt dictatorship of bureaucrats. Russians boiled this down to a cynical adage: We pretend to work, and they pretend to pay us. For American Catholics, the counterpart is: They pretend to lead, and we pretend to follow.
Like the Communist Party circa Leonid Brezhnev, the Vatican exists first and foremost to preserve its own power. This is disheartening for the many good Catholics who hope this crisis will provoke a renaissance in their church. Nobody quite says it this way, but one reason many Catholics see the moment as ripe for reform is that this pope is on his last legs. Soon, the hope goes, a vigorous new leader may emerge.
Maybe so. But like the Communists, John Paul has carefully constructed a Kremlin that will be inhospitable to a reformer. He has strengthened the Vatican equivalent of the party Central Committee, called the Curia, and populated it with reactionaries. He has put a stamp of papal infallibility on the issue of ordaining women, making it more difficult for a successor to come to terms with the issue. He has trained bishops that the path of advancement is obsequious obedience to himself. Alarmed by priests who showed too much populist sympathy for their parishioners, the pope, according to the Notre Dame historian R. Scott Appleby, has turned seminaries into factories of conformity, begetting a generation of inflexible young priests who have no idea how to talk to real-life Catholics.
Next month, after years of resistance, the American church is supposed to begin requiring that theologians teaching in Catholic universities accept a "mandatum" from their bishops, a pledge of allegiance to doctrinal orthodoxy. The American bishops fear this will stifle intellectual discussion, but the pope insists. No glasnost on his watch.
Nor is the pope about to let America's uppity laity exploit the current crisis to claim a greater voice in their own affairs. The American policy on handling sexual abuse is to be dictated by Rome. And while a large majority of Catholics want leaders who mishandled marauding priests to resign, the culpability of bishops is not even on the Vatican's agenda. It now seems clear that the pope declined to let Cardinal Law resign because he feared it might give the laity the idea their opinion mattered. Cardinal Law promptly marched home and quashed efforts by restive Boston Catholics to organize an association of parish councils. How Soviet is that?
What reform might mean in the church is something I leave to Catholics who care more than I do. I am what a friend calls a "collapsed Catholic" — well beyond lapsed — and therefore claim no voice in whom the church ordains or how it prays or what it chooses to call a sin.
But the struggle within the church is interesting as part of a larger struggle within the human race, between the forces of tolerance and absolutism. That is a struggle that has given rise to great migrations (including the one that created this country) and great wars (including one we are fighting this moment against a most virulent strain of intolerance).
The Catholic Church has not, over the centuries, been a stronghold of small-c catholic values, which my dictionary defines as "broad in sympathies, tastes, or understanding; liberal." This is, after all, the church that gave us the Crusades and the Inquisition.
That seemed destined to change after the Second Vatican Council of 1962-65, which relaxed the grip of the papal apparat and elevated the importance of individual conscience. The Vatican II spirit of a more open and dynamic church invigorated American Catholic support for civil rights and other liberal causes. But it soon ran smack-dab into the sexual revolution.
Probably no institution run by a fraternity of aging celibates was going to reconcile easily with a movement that embraced the equality of women, abortion on demand and gay rights. It is possible, though, to imagine a leadership that would have given it a try. In fact, Pope Paul VI indicated some interest in adopting a more lenient view of birth control, and he handpicked a committee of prominent Catholics who endorsed the idea almost by acclamation. The pope agonized, and then astonished Catholics by reaffirming the old ban.
"If you want to look for where credibility on human sexuality got lost, it got lost there," said the Catholic University sociologist William D'Antonio.
There is some reason to believe the man who changed that pope's mind on birth control was the Polish cardinal who would succeed him. Whether or not that is true, once Cardinal Wojtyla ascended to the papacy he adhered to the most austere, doctrinaire view of sexual ethics, and the most hierarchical concept of church governance.
Implored by Catholics to consider, at least, the lifesaving power of condoms in the age of AIDS, John Paul II was unyielding. He actually grouped contraception with genocide in a litany of "intrinsically evil" acts that condemn sinners to hell for eternity. "The vast majority of Catholic married couples, that is, stand on the wrong side of the abyss with Hitler and Pol Pot," as Charles R. Morris observed in his splendid history of American Catholicism.
In America most Catholics ignore the pope on this, as they do on divorce and remarriage, abortion, sex out of wedlock, homosexuality and many other things Rome condemns as violations of natural law. It seems fair to say that a church that was not so estranged from its own members on subjects of sex and gender, a more collegial church, would have handled the issue of child abuse earlier and better.
There is a dwindling population of older Catholic conservatives who say, in effect, the pope's the man, love it or leave it. And there is a growing population of American Catholics who are doing just that — withdrawing tacitly from Rome while keeping the faith in their own parishes, if they happen to have accommodating clergy, or in their own hearts. Whether the church will reform, or fracture, or continue this continental drift, I have no way of knowing, but I wonder how long faith withstands such a corrosive rain of hypocrisy.
Is the Pope Catholic? by Bill Keller, May 4th 2002

 
 

PANTHER -> Site news -> 'Of course if it's anti-Semitism, it must be Muslims.' Bollocks, screaming bollocks
by Ysabel Howard - Sunday, 5 December 2010, 03:31 PM
That I have offended fascist Muslims I do not for the moment doubt or that my support for Rushdie was reviled as 'Islamophobia' and probably racism, but I plump for the nastier kind of Catholic as the root of all this shit, ruthlessly using Islam as cover
________________________________________________________________________________
'The Jewish Question' from La Civilta Cattolica, 1890
Extracts.  It is of course not, not, not the case that most modern Catholics are virulently anti-Jewish, just that it is not, not, not the case that most modern Muslims are virulently anti-Jewish.  Some priests, monks and nuns and Catholic lay-people risked everything to protect and rescue Jews and died alongside them. However, if you are wise, you do not ignore the virulent and sturdy strand of Jew-hate in Roman Catholicism - and you spit at one of the more purulent scams, which is to blame the camps on the First and Second Amendments, not, ever, nothing to do with us, what are you looking at us for, the preceding 1933 years of Christian Jew-hate.
ANOTHER CHALLENGE TO JEWS AND MASONS
The Point is against the Jews. It is against the Masons. It is against Interfaith. The Point maintains that the Catholic Church is against the Jews, against the Masons, and against Interfaith. And, by way of proving its contention, The Point quotes freely from Catholic saints and popes, who are unmistakably against the Jews, against the Masons, and against Interfaith.
Occasionally someone objects to this Point procedure. How do we know, snips our critic, that the Church hasn’t modernized her ideas since the time of the saints and popes whom we quote in our favor? Or, at least, how do we know she won’t?
Last month, our objector got his answer. It was in the form of a news bulletin from Rome, announcing that Catholics can soon expect to have a new saint; for the cause has been introduced and the first steps successfully completed in the canonization of Giovanni-Maria Mastai-Ferretti, His Holiness, Pope Pius IX.
Point Magazine for September 1956, edited Under Fr. Leonard Feeney M.I.C.M. — Saint Benedict Center
The Jewish Question in Europe:
The Causes, The Effects, The Remedies
from La Civilta Cattolica, vol. VII, no. XIV. 1890 (Oct, Nov, Dec)
(English Translation, 1998)
All that is Judaism is comprised of love and hate: the insatiable love of money, auri sacra fames, and the insatiable hatred of Christ. The love serves the hate; and the hatred and the love drive them on to the apogée of that power, which is the Satanic delirium of reprobate Israel.
In Germany, Austria and France, there is a school of thought which advances the most radical solution of liberation from the Jewish plague, but one which does not conform to the Christian spirit; and which is, at present, practically speaking, impossible.
Defense Without War
After proving with hundreds of facts and documents that, in general, the Hebrews are a plague on Christian society, and a scourge on the Church of Jesus Christ, they hold that the right of making war against them, as a public enemy, has thus been demonstrated. But they do not agree to resort to bloodshed, and rather propose two more restrained solutions: That the Jews return what has been stolen; and that they be banished from the nations. Through the confiscation of their property, and through exile, the great evil done by them in countries that have given them the legal right of equality, would be undone, and they would be punished for their wrongdoing.
Who can doubt that such confiscation would be just? The majority of the money possessed by the Jews was gotten by evil methods, accumulated by fraud, usury, and thievery. If no end is imposed on their scandalous accumulation, then in a few more decades, almost all of the fixed and liquid capital of the Christians will fall prey to them.
To take the ill-gotten gain from the thieves is most legitimate, if not by particular individuals, then by the nation so robbed.
Complications
What else? Another aspect is not agreed upon: that the goods accumulated by the Jews would be legitimately seized through the principle of the just war, with expropriation certainly being the lesser of two evils. Since the accumulation of wealth is the most powerful weapon employed by the Jews, and used toward the goal of exterminating religion and of oppressing the people, then, to say the least, in terms of a necessary defense, there is the right to take the money out of their clutches.
And another argument flows from that one, namely, that there is a right to compensation for the inestimable material and moral damage done to the Christian peoples.
In this is echoed the memorable sentence of the great Peter the Venerable; Serviant populis christianis, etiam invitis ipsis, divitiae Judaeorum(Let the wealth of the Jews, even themselves unwilling, serve Christian people). Although greatly to their vexation, the plenty harvested from the Jews is in the interest of the Christians.
That the first part of the remedy would result in a decrease in anti-Semitism, was expressed by the vow: Apply the laws to the Jews, the same Jews who have, with the sanction and approval of Freemasonry, ruled against the Church in Catholic countries. Through a two-pronged decree, let us proclaim the nationalization, with no exceptions, of all of the goods of the Jews. This would have the effect of immediately paying off the national debts.
More Complications
Now we turn our attention to a critical examination of what has been proposed. We note that such an idea has many examples in history. But, in order to be legitimate, first of all such a confiscation must be decreed by those who, in the various nations, have legally constituted authority; and secondly, that such be carried out according to the norms of Christian justice and charity.
Not all of the Jews are thieves, dissemblers, cheats, usurers, Freemasons, cads, and corrupters of customs. Everywhere, one can count among them a certain number who are not complicit in the racketeering and knavery of the others. Should the innocent be included in the punishment of the others?
The supporters of the heroic remedy answer that in war, even in the most just and holy wars, great numbers of innocents perish; that without distinction, the Hebrews act in solidarity with each other; that in all of their hearts, they nurture mortal hatred of the Christians; that all, under one guise or another, agree on the Christians’ destruction; that the experience of former centuries has demonstrated this, since the Hebrew has always abused the mercy and charity of Christians, in order to undermine them all over again. And that because of this, and not out of any vendetta, but because of the laws of necessary self-defense, the most ultimate position should be taken: Salus populi, suprema lex esto(The safety (or welfare) of the people shall be (an imperative) the highest law). At present, this idea is only a sketch, its details not filled in, and so we shall leave it for now; although emphasizing that justice and charity ought, always, to be upheld, and win out over the crudity of overly draconian ideas.
IV. Defense by Expulsion
According to the propagandists of that remedy, confiscation would not be enough; they would also want the public enemy to be exiled. They do not say: Death to the Jews! Rather, they say: Out with the Jews! Live, but far from us.
The Jewish Question in Europe: The Causes, The Effects, The Remedies
1934 The influential Jesuit magazine Civilta Cattolica published in Rome notes with regret that the antisemitism of the Nazis "does not stem from the religious convictions nor the Christian conscience... but from the desire to upset the order of religion and society," and added, "we could understand them, or even praise them, if their policy were restricted within acceptable bounds of defense against the Jewish organizations and institutions..." (Lewy)
A Chronography of political and religious conflict

 
 
 
My happiness is not contingent upon your approval, your liking. That of course your sick sad ego finds intolerable. You must matter to me, no? I must find you important, defer to you, take you into account. I do not. Thus in common with sick sad monkeys of all kinds, Nazi monkeys, Stalinist monkeys, religious monkeys, you force yourself into my life physically, impairing my mobility such that you are ever-present in my life. Vulgar little man, aren’t you, not a gentleman. 
 
As I have previously remarked: 
Having class is entirely distinct from being a member of a social class. You, I suspect, may be either what people think of as a 'real' aristocrat, ancient title and blah, or someone who thinks having a lot of money and mixing with the 'right people' makes him posh. 
Since, however, you are sly, cowardly, dishonest piece of puke, a thug, a wordless, mindless baboon, you have no class at all. 
You seem to think your culture (what culture?) important. We all have our cultures, of course, and within them many quaint customs that have not survived into the modern age. If we are to be civilized, we do not do such things any more. Perhaps you might ponder that? However, if you insist on being a product of the Stone Age, I would remind you that my culture used to have a fondness for stringing people like you up from lamp-posts. Shall you all swing together/Dressed in the old light blue? Just a thought. Perhaps we should therefore agree to differ?  
 
Hmm, that would be irresistible. No, not the stringing-up. A Labour Government was so mortified by the distress of an Old Etonian that it allowed him to cripple the grand-daughter of Labour pioneers. You do just have to see the funny side. 
 
But then it is terribly obvious that the entire ‘New Labour’ project was dedicated to the destruction of England, the destruction of freedom, the destruction of reason. 
Ah, the insolent deliberation with which democracy is rejected. Ah, the smooth voices of the clinically insane, it isn’t an issue, nothing may be said. How many doctors are psychopaths? Isn’t that an interesting question. How many doctors really believe that they are divinely or otherwise appointed to command and order things as they please? Apes find speech so unnecessary and reason too too taxing. The insolent, insolent out of hand refusal of the norms of a free and democratic society.
For the moment, therefore, old boy, you must be jolly pleased with the outcome. The slave-sluts of London medicine have proved wholly reliable. You know you can count on them to work to destroy democracy, rely on them to shit on freedom and to beat up women who displease you. They’ll do anything for you, cripple the grand-daughter of not quite the founder of the Labour Party, after all it must be all right if it’s Master’s will. Make you wet between the legs, does it?  
 
Animals are obedient. I’m a human being. 
 
You are of course a psychopath, sick mad child-monster-animal cannot see where it ends and someone else begins crouching in terror of reality of the rest of the universe, must control or fragile self will die, die if people don’t like it, die if people oppose it, die if people are themselves not what it demand they be, all must obey, what will happen if people have ideas of their own – well, in your case the loony drivel you call your religion becomes the preserve only of a handful of freaks. Keep them infantile, keep them obedient, claim to reward them with power, your power, they can determine what others may be. Cannot. Illusion. They have no power over me. You have no power over me. Except of course that of the thug. How impressive can you get. 
 
Reality REALITY REALITY frightens little monkey, other minds, other hearts the most freaking obvious reality to any of us is another human being who is separate, distinct, equal, not permitted, not permitted TERRIFIES little monkey. Monkey must have power. Power really impresses the slave-sluts. Ooh how great it is, how important, it doesn’t need to speak to its victim. It commands. Its slaves obey. Frightened little monkey, aren’t you. Absolutely fucking terrified of speaking to me, or of course to anyone who regards you as an equal not a master.  
 
And so there are questions, big fat obvious questions to anyone who is not a completely enslaved nutter. The problem with a free and open establishing of the facts? The strange proposition that some people are considered innately incapable of lying and so there is no need to establish the facts because the truth is already known. 
 
May not be. Forbidden. Monkey screams. I do not think you scream openly though of course your slave- sluts do, but rather fancy yourself as a cold hard man of steel. Can that veneer be shattered? Probably. 
And so instead of being taught to love their neighbours as themselves, to regard their neighbours as equals, they are taught a seedy hierarchical ‘respect’, taught systematically their own supremacy – are they not, brothers, sisters and comrades - taught that whatever drivel has been fed them as ‘reality’ is sacrosanct and may not be challenged and so of course they scream, taught psychosis, taught of course to be feral, to hit, to use no words, taught to despise language, logic, liberty and love. 
And you old boy will do anything to maintain Corruption, keep them mad, afraid, ignorant, dependent, subservient and all the politicians suck your cock, certainly in the case of the bastardized fascist fake Left because they too believe people are property, to be and do what the State requires. They are funny, aren’t they. They babble about equality and demand slavery. We are equal in rights. That absolutely petrifies you, doesn’t it, the mere idea someone can address you as a fellow human being not an overlord. Can say things to you you do not wish to hear. Or of course ignore you. 
 
They are repulsive. I am repelled. I trust I have made that clear, woodentops whose sole criterion for judging an idea is whether Master permits it, who would burn all the books if they knew what they contained, a cancer in the University, tumour cells replacing healthy tissue. 
 
I have to say one of the areas in which I am wholly lacking in knowledge is the law governing the keeping of dangerous animals but it would seem to me likely, whether one is the Master of Longleat or a fan of poisonous snakes, that the law demands they be securely contained that they pose no threat to others. You wish your dangerous animals at liberty to molest others and politicians concur. That has to be funny. When others do not even wish to contain the savage beast but merely to comment on its bestiality you cry 'They must not be hurt!' and politicians, who are either fools or evil, rush to assist and to attempt to enforce silence but what is the hurt but the existence of other human beings who are not like them.  
You really believe you are set on high to dictate to others, that you are some kind of superior life-form endowed with rights particularly over me, either born to or given by God the power to dictate reality. 
Hey it’s the Wizard of Oz. 
This ain’t Kansas, bubba. 
Keep them afraid, keep them animals, keep them impotent, incontinent, keep them terrified of words, monkey cannot cope with words, keep them hating and fearing human freedom, keep them enslaved, keep them convinced everyone is the property of their master. Keep them believing a psychotic frightened little monkey speaks for God, his will is God’s will, keep them incapable of question, keep them obedient, keep them intellectually incapable because if a cowardly thug represents God, then God is a cowardly thug. 
Keep them FRIGHTENED. Keep them hating freedom. Keep them shit and then they’ll hate the freedom to say they’re shit. Keep them frightened of words. How can words hurt control change you? You change you. Or rather obviously not. HATE FREEDOM hate no control, hate no-one kneel HATE IT. Frightens little monkey.  
Try going down to Yasgur's Farm, man. Perfect love casts out fear. 
What happens when people stop sucking your cock? Apart from your need for a hand-job of course. 
 
PANTHER -> Site news -> The Mind of God? 
by Ysabel Howard - Friday, 27 January 2012, 10:26 PM   
If you go on a trip through the universe, and there are many brilliant ones on the Web, you get a glimpse of what might be the Mind of God 
Of course mystics knew that yonks ago, 'no human mind can conceive the entity called God', can't remember the exact quotation. 
Meanwhile...'Hi, I'm God. No, I don't know much about the universe I created, I must admit. Thought the earth was its centre. I do get terribly upset about much skin human females show and whether they've had sexual relations with men who don't own them, and even more upset if anyone doesn't like the book I wrote. Sloppily researched, they say, no evidence, made it up as he went along. Thought he was supposed to be omniscient. And omnipresent. How can he not know? OK, OK, who am I trying to kid? I'm just a guy, trying to figure things out best I can. I got a lot of things wrong. Lots of politicians fulminate against guys who don't like the book I wrote. The trouble is, a lot of people are pretty thick and readily manipulated and there are a lot of people ready to manipulate them. I really didn't see it like that, you know. I mean, what I wrote is genuinely how things seemed to me to be.' 
Really, who are they trying to kid? What is wrong with saying how things looked to guys a long time ago is not necessarily how they are? 
And so the quantum world  killed the great head-monkey in the sky?  The great head monkey in the sky died when the first Hindu said, I am Brahma, when Jesus said the Kingdom of Heaven is within, when Al-Hallaj proclaimed I am God!  but still the diseased old monkeys preyed upon people, feasted off the hard-wiring and grew fat, all must bow down and worship the great head monkey in the sky, whose attributes are of course what the apes say they are and thus so remarkably resemble a twitching penis and are in all respects exceedingly antsy.  Oh how dreadfully upset the great monkey in the sky gets if you do not worship him.  
BUDDHISM, YOU KNOW, FRIGHTFUL THREAT TO THE CHURCH (see 'More about the new Uncle Joe' below) 
I found this years ago (upon the death of the previous Pope) on a Sri Lankan site, the link to which I have regrettably lost. People probably find Buddhism more, er Christian, or something. Herr Ratzinger is actually not out of it. Herr Ratzinger recognizes, which appears to be more than politicians or the Anglican hierarchy do, that the dominant spirituality amongst those who have any is not orthodox anything but heavily influenced 
by Buddhism, Hinduism and Christianity; the Age of Reptiles is over. 
  
…. 
Buddhist Channel reported that the full quote, delivered in an interview with L’Expresse in 1997, went like this: 
"If Buddhism is attractive, it's only because it suggests that by belonging to it you can touch the infinite, and you can have joy without concrete religious obligations,'' Ratzinger said. ``It's spiritually self-indulgent eroticism.'' 
  
… 
In 2000, the National Catholic Reporter published a list of Cardinal Ratzinger’s greatest hits, 
including a money quote from the same L’Expresse interview: 
"In the 1950s someone said that the undoing of the Catholic church in the 20th century wouldn't come from Marxism but from Buddhism. They were right." 
Reportedly, at the time Cardinal Ratzinger was incensed that there were allegedly more Frenchmen studying to be Buddhist monks than Benedictine monks. 
  
Yay, vive la France!  There is of course beautiful Buddhist meditation music.  There is also Sufi meditation music to soothe the tortured souls of the jihadis.  
 The general idea is that the inside comes to equal the outside, that you see what is there, and what is there is not an extension of your self, that which over you have unquestioned rights.  There is no reality more bloody basic than that of the existence of other human beings who are coming from somewhere else, who do not have identical views.  Did someone not say you love your neighbour as yourself.   
 
Why, nearly 70 years after Honest To God, 40 years after Taking Leave of God, is it insisted we are bothered by apes self-obsessed to the point of insanity, think all must defer to their drivel, walk on tippy-toes around it, find it inconceivable others have an equal right to our own diametrically opposed views, as of course why is society being reduced to the level of the snowflake, convinced of its own perfection arrantly ridiculous.  Of course we are all helpless without ‘God’, only the divine multi-vitamin or the collective action of the proletariat can save us.  You really don’t like people at all. 
 
Of course people can’t be people, can they, can’t be encouraged to be who they are, develop themselves, morally, emotionally, intellectually, no they can only be what your ape-garbage about ‘revealed truth’ tells them they may be  I mean if they were left to themselves they might say things like you talk out of your fucking arses, bunch of psycho nutters who think they can walk into my bedroom and dictate what may happen there. The content of my wardrobe for that matter (see below).  Women are not supposed to say, hallo, is there anyone at home in there?  I am actually a human being, hallo, hallo… 
 
The rent-a-mob of howling animals you generate is far too important to maintaining power than mere people, nothing more important than to keep them animal, irrational, ignorant, vulnerable, all Good what you say it is, all Truth, what you say it is.  And so of course among the more noticeable features of the current scenario no demand the animal learn to behave, no insistence it be other than sniggering gloating filth, no question it be told to say what it has to say in the open or save its breath.  
 
There are many, many concepts of God. The one most prominently displayed today is God the Fascist. As even a cursory glance at history tells us, religious people display the same gamut of behaviour from good to evil as the non-religious both upholding and opposing everything from the slave-trade to women's rights. 
 


And so we have been landed with yet another bunch of screaming monkey-nuts, with whom of course on essentials the ‘Holy Catholic Church’ is fully in agreement, a fine exemplar of the grotesque that fucked-up monkey Sacranie and his filthy murderous ape-rabble.  Why was it not said to them fine, practise your bloody drivelling religion.  No-one gives a fuck about sexually neurotic monkeys jabbering about the great alpha baboon in the sky.  Just don’t bloody bother anyone else 
 
And it is not a question of an unthinking rationalism.  Undoubtedly extra-normal events occur, if not often, for instance spontaneous remission.  Is the mind not a complex and wonderful thing? Jesus of course may be still alive somewhere, but so may everyone else who ever lived. 
 
Quantum immortality 
Proponents of the idea point out that while it is highly speculative, there is nothing in the notion of quantum immortality that violates the known laws of physics 
  
An easier to understand example is the one given in quantum suicide where a physicist sits in front of a gun which is triggered, or not triggered, by radioactive decay. With each run of the experiment there is a 50-50 chance that the gun will be triggered and the physicist will die. If the Copenhagen interpretation is correct, then the gun will eventually be triggered and the physicist will die. If the many-worlds interpretation is correct, then at each run of the experiment the physicist will be split into a world in which he lives and one in which he dies. In the worlds where the physicist dies, he will cease to exist. However, from the point of view of the physicist, the experiment will continue running without his ceasing to exist, because at each branch, he will only be able to observe the result in the world in which he survives, and if many- worlds is correct, the physicist will notice that he never seems to die therefore proving himself to be immortal, or at least according to quantum immortality. http://www.biologydaily.com/biology/Quantum_immortality 
 
It is a question in fact of the dirty old pervert monkeys in Rome, as the dirty old pervert monkeys in Riyadh thinking us all savages, lo, this is a display of great power before which we must fall on our faces, lo this is a mighty god,  and if we don’t of course they have no hesitation in trying to force us to our knees, oh are we not all evil without God.  Just what is their fucking problem  - if skin and bodies are so evil, why did this God of theirs create them.  It can scarcely be beyond an omnipotent being to create disembodied life, or for that matter cover us all in a decent fur-coat.  What is the fucking problem of some old monkey who thinks I should be a mother or a virgin?   
 
Why have I been bothered with these bloody monkeys?  But it’s more than merely being bothered of course.  Why was my body thrown to animals to tear at?  Why of course am I regarded as a separate species, one whose body is public property, one with whom no-one need reason  Women only understand violence, do we not.  Oh indeed I understand, apes.  Hey, apes, women can talk, you, Ardeshna, the sick sad little monkey who put its finger to its lips, enjoining me to silence, ever heard women can talk, ape-boy?  All childish prattle, no doubt.  Is it a British subject?  Then naturally it wants me silent concerning its treason.  Women do not write novels.  Women do not worry our pretty little heads about the future of our countries.  Women do not of course go hiking in the Highlands on our own, get dirty and sweaty. That is most unladylike (as though the monkeys knew anything about ladies), unfeminine, a woman’s place is on her back.  Women simply should not do that kind of thing and if they do the spawn of desecration, getting hot and wet between the legs, are more than willing to serve their master’s purpose and prevent it.  And of course nursing is so suitable for a women.  A woman to pretend to be an intellectual is merely grotesque. 
 
And perhaps after all it is not who the pluperfect fucking Christ do jumped-up little pieces of infected shit think they are, but what the pluperfect fucking Christ do they think I am to be accepting of their sickness?  Perhaps the exceptionally disgusting and depraved deformed animal, the sniggering gloating mental defective they call Matron, Saunders, might like to give chapter and verse on that one; precisely, ape, what gives you to believe that I may be treated like a disobedient servant-girl, beaten, crippled, ignored, washed down the drain?  But of course do we not leap agilely from bough to bough: why is it imperative such a creature retain its position, be protected and upheld?  To whom is it imperative? 
 
I think I want it all, ‘Holy Father’, and this is actually my country, whatever particular psychotic delusions you harbour in that respect, however many gibbering grovelling slave-monkeys wormed their way into Downing Street.  It is a country where people stand upright, all people, including gay people and female people.  It is a country unbothered by primitive ravings. 
 
Anyone want in particular a little chat about the absolute malevolence, spite, venom, evil that has not only crippled me in the now, but which attempted to ensure that my old age would be blighted, increasingly intolerable. 
 
The nature of my responses to these creatures of course depends on how detached I am feeling at the time.  I seriously let them get under my skin, which I regret, solely for the effect on my own well being. At no time have they shown themselves to be anything other than the spawn of desecration, apes, vicious, malignant wordless, mindless baboons. 
 
Shall we try again, Bobbles my sweet? 
How can one possibly take seriously a creature  whose sole claim on one’s  
attention is that he has a large club with  which he does not hesitate to hit  
one, a creature so absolutely  ludicrous and devoid of the slightest grasp on  
sanity that he thinks to  demonstrate his intellectual superiority by hitting one, a creature who  has obviously never been anywhere near a university, never  
met an  educated person. Oh Bobbles that's just so you, isn't it, and you're a  
coward, too! All in all, old boy, you are the scum of the bloody  earth 
 
Of course it wouldn't matter if I weren't surrounded by the diseased  prostrating themselves before you and eager to do thy will. Other sick   animals think I'm supposed to be frightened of or in awe of a sick  animal,  impressed by an ape wielding a club. You leave no mark on me bar the  obvious. 
 
Anyone who thinks loonies are confined to Islam needs to get a  life. Bobbles and I know that.  
 
For approximately seventeen centuries men  acknowledged that authority comes only from God, and temporal rulers sought the  approval and the blessing of their bishops who, by divine right, ruled in their  dioceses as  successors of the Apostles. Then came the Philosophists. As always,  the  Power of Darkness used pride to achieve his aims, the pride of human   reason. As always he called the Light, Darkness and the Darkness, Light   (Isaiah 5:20). That is why the Medieval times are now referred to as the "Dark  Ages"; (in fact, the Dark Ages were pre-Medieval), and why  philosophism is  referred to as "Enlightenment". ...When the first battle had been won, the Devil  moved from the religious field into the  philosophical field, and conceived  Rationalism, which put human reason  before Revelation. 
Satan’s Master Plan from The Catholic Treasure  Chest  
 
"First, the wearing of men's dress by women  affects the woman herself, by  changing the feminine psychology proper to women; second, it affects the woman as wife of her husband, by tending to vitiate  relationships  between the sexes; and third, it affects the woman as mother of  her  children by harming her dignity in her children's eyes . . . This  changing  of the feminine psychology does fundamental, and, in the long  run, irreparable  damage to the family, to conjugal fidelity, to human  affections and to human  society." 
 That Difficult Question of Immodesty and Women Wearing Men's  Clothing  by Marian Therese Horvat, Ph.D. 
 
When a woman is dressed immodestly, she becomes the temptress for men  Many women will say they wear the modern  fashions because they are more comfortable, and the weather is hot (Remember, it  is very hot in Hell). This brings us to the area of sports. Regretably, all too  many sports  are taboo for us Catholics, not that they are in themselves a sin  or a  near occasion of sin, but because of the skimpy attire that such sports   "require". Think of these sports and the clothes people usually wear  when  playing the following sports or activities: swimming, baton  twirling, tennis,  basketball, dancing (disco dancing and little girls  who take dancing lessons)  and gymnastics. Let us take swimming for an  example, since people usually wear  less clothes when swimming than any  other sport. Swimsuits have no sleeves,  have very low necklines, no  coverings for the legs and usually has the whole  back exposed. When we  think of the saying, "in proportion to the amount of  flesh exposed  mortal sin seems to increase", shouldn't we avoid the bathing  suits like the plaque? Do you think this suggestion is crazy? You say yes, then   let us ask another question. Do you prefer to have the mortal sin of  immodesty  on your soul and the untold number of mortal sins of your  being a temptress or tempter and causing others to sin?  
 
One might say that our little girls can't do  anything. You are wrong,  because, if you modify the costumes and attire that  the girls wear, in  most cases they can still participate if you are Catholic  enough to  stand up for the proper moral dress code. In addition to the   modifications, our girls can go bicycle riding and horse back riding if  they  have a full skirt and the skirt reaches at least to the middle of  the calf;  
and, of course, skating can be done in a skirt. Our girls  should be pursuing  
lady-like activities and hobbies which will prepare  them for marriage and their  
proper role as mother and wife. They should  be learning to sew, embroider,  
knit, crochet, cook, make rosaries, sing  good Catholic songs and other decent,  
patriotic songs, play musical  instruments (we'll need an organ player  
eventually for our chapel),  paint and draw. Above all they should be learning  
to talk, dress, sit,  walk, stand, kneel, stoop and act like a lady at all  times. Our girls  have many options open to them, if they will only pursue them  
in a moral decent manner. 
http://www.catholicapologetics.info/morality/modesty/dress.htm 
 
This guy had a real problem with living in the United States, bastion of  Protestantism and infidelity,  where Satan had ensured that the supreme  authority of the Church was rejected.  
   
Throw in a couple of Muslim loonies for good measure Made for each  
other, aren't they. 
 
AI: You have misunderstood the reality. As a Muslim I believe Allah…created whole universe;  he created the UK. It doesn’t belong to you, it doesn’t belong to the Queen, it  doesn’t belong to the Anglo-Saxons…Allah has  put us on the planet earth to live wherever we want and implement the  Sharia rules. 
   
Transcript of BBC interview with Abu Izzadeen 
 
"As for those who cannot offer resistance or cannot fight, such as  women, children, monks, old people, the blind,  handicapped and their  likes, they shall not be killed, unless they actually  fight with words  [e.g. by propaganda] and acts [e.g. by spying or otherwise  assisting in  the warefare]. Some [jurists] are of the opinion that all of them  may be killed, on the mere ground that they are unbelievers, but they make an  exception for woman and children sind they constitute property for Muslims."--Sheikh Ahmad ibn Taymiyyah 
 
Guess it's never occurred  to him he'll run into 24 inch-waist SAS 
 
Now, pet, I imagine that in  what passes for your mind England and the  English like everyone else and  everywhere else belong to God. It’s a possibility. There is, however,  something in between England and  God in your model, is there not. You, little  you. You represent God and  rule England on God’s behalf.  
 
There are a  few problems here, as those nice young men in their clean white coats I’m sure  would be glad to explain to you.  
 
1) there is not one shred of evidence  for your conviction you carry out God’s will 
2) If you do carry out God’s  will, then God is clearly a grossly  mentally disturbed being to whom no sane  and civilized person would give two seconds’ attention  
3) There is not one  shred of evidence for  the existence of this God of yours. You believe he  exists. Others do  not. What is not demonstrable cannot be binding. You must see  that. Some people believe this God exists. Others do not. They can’t both be  right and it is impossible for any individual to be bound by both beliefs. 
  
So we have a situation here, Houston Control, where this fucked-up  baboon  
thinks he carries out God’s will. The territory he inhabits may  be summarized  
as the supreme authority of the Church which I must be  made to accept. The  
fruits of the independent exercise of the hearts and minds of humans are the  
work of Satan. This is to what Blair and the  rest of the New Labour rabble  
consider me subject. It's perhaps not so  much a question of why haven't they  
been arrested as of why haven't they been sectioned. 
 
 Wonders of the Universe is a 2011 television series produced by the BBC, Discovery Channel, and Science Channel, hosted by physicist Professor Brian Cox. Wonders of the Universe was first broadcast in the United Kingdom on BBC Two from 6 March 2011. The series comprises four episodes, each of which focuses on an aspect of the universe and features a 'wonder' relevant to the theme. It follows on from Cox's 2010 series for the BBC, Wonders of the Solar System. An accompanying book with the same title was also published.  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonders_of_the_Universe 
6 March 2011 was a Sunday. 
The initial episode gained viewing figures of 6 million people when it was first shown on the BBC, and it was the first BBC factual show to top the iTunes chart.[2] 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wonders_of_the_Universe 
The long decline in Anglican churchgoing is levelling off, the Church of England has said. 
A spokesman said average weekly attendances overall fell by 0.3%, to about 1.1 million in 2011, representing a "stabilising" of attendance figures 
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22426144 
So what were the other 50+ million doing. There’s more than one service a day, 1.1 million of the viewers then went off to church.  OK, 5:1.  It’s not so much a statistic as a metaphor. 
The West has had mediaeval religion dumped on it.  You’d have to be a screaming nutter not to understand the West is not thrilled by it.