Skip to main content

NURTURED TO TART!

OK  

In this 21st century the boundaries of human prerogative have become somewhat challenged by the state.  Everywhere becoming the 1984 Orwellian nightmare of the Ministry of Love.  I have already written exclusively of the government attempting to contradict my heterosexual orientation, for their gay pagan rituals, and our police service attempts not to protect Her Majesty's subjects, from wanton crime, from the desperadoes.  On the contrary, they would rather score cheap points by blocking Her Majesty's Whitehall pavement, to test whether the subject is of cordial decorum or brutish prantagonism.  This blog is not about me, I have but written almost everything and am not alone in tyrannical subservience.  

The focus of this blog is the black child, to whom the government aims to homosexualise the classroom to control future numbers of the ethnic population.  Positive Eugenics aims to reprocriate the white population breeding rates and negative eugenics aims to destroy the black breeding rate.  This is done by prison incarceration, their aim to spread HIV into the population and also by attempting to homosexual the children so they do not reproduce.  This eugenics or genocide is also practised in the USA, where many black Brits are exiled to be swallowed up and doomed in that big population.  

In the 1980s Margaret Thatcher introduced section 28 into the school, to protect children from self interested homosexual radicalisation.  Children instead learned from the books of Little Red Riding Hood, the Three Little Pigs, Cinderella and Goldilocks and the Three Bears.  Children were able to hang on to their innocence and when they experienced puberty, were able to make their own choices as to what sexual orientation they belonged to; unperturbed by homos with their one sided agenda.  In the first decade of the 21st century, western governments with gay ideologues have now flooded into governments around the world.

In the UK, the politicians that were at university when the death penalty was outlawed for homosexuality are now in the House of Commons.  As students of liberal outlook they screamed for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (Blair and Clinton) shouted for homosexuals to not be sent to the gallows noose and shouted for anti apartheid in South Africa.  They now are in the House of Commons and define people of heterosexual outlook as terrorists and are attempting to homosexualise the children to reduce the numbers of the future master race.  I am a peaceful man, though must acclaim to the fact, that if I had children receiving such saucy preachings, I would approach the teacher with a base ball bat.  Though the love of a parent cannot be defined.  Click the section below approriate to your kids.

CLICK
http://www.councilofafricanamericanparents.org/

The two websites above are where parents can communicate these matters, and campaign for the innocence of the child.  Then once the child is an adult, they can decipher what sexual orientation they are without any MIND propaganda and brain wash.  I am not a parent though am qualified in psychology.  Has I have a very strong mind, I can understand the psychotic abuse the child will endure to confuse his thinking.  I therefore suggest that parents start a website for the scrapping of gay education in schools, or force the websites above to add it to their website(Better idea).  If you don't, your children natural course in life will be destroyed and you will complain and cry, but never rectify the wrong.  Give you children a chance at life, David Cameron does not see your children's future the way THAT you do.  He wants it to be AMAZING.   Don't leave them to kinky games,tests and preasure!

YOU MAY STOP THE VIDEO BELOW 
AFTER HILLARY CLINTON SECTION
 

 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

An Archaic Etonian Musket

On this day of our Lord, 14th August 2013, Britain’s once proud reputation as an island of jurisprudence and a subjective cloak of morality, has been seriously challenged by a Toffs’ Rebellion .  This challenge to our rights, have made me question the paradigm of our democratic status-quo.  This new polity defined as a Magna Britannicus Fascismo,   as created an Orwellian ubiquity of intrusion and terror.  Big Brother does not effect everyone directly, though the indirect effects has built up an unstoppable presence to the periphery and has now begun an unfettered attack on the children, without clemency or civilised protocols.  This offensive as been an attack on their innocence, virtue, culture and values.  This essay will  attempt to understand the headman of the Toffs’ Rebellion and ask the question, “Is this a war against the Age of Enlightenment’s values and principles?”  If it is, then will absolutism return to a digital age with the ...
Post a Comment
Read more

FOR WANTON MALICE

The powers that be, does not like me to write bloggs, or express myself under the Human Rights Act 1998.  I was once told a saying by a Northampton brethren, which still holds true to me today.  He said, "It is better to be hated for being who you are, that to be loved for being someone you are not."  Such great words, I then thought and it defines to me the virtues of integrity, the virtues of humility and the virtues of uprightness.  One must sometimes be hated by evil men, to be noble and good.  Our radical politicians have caused me much trouble, over the past 12 years, by stealing my wages and implementing terror on my passive personification.  Wanton malice have up warded the dregs of tyranny, from whence carnal plot and mischief have plagued our once democratic periphery.   This link defines the centuries old British government policy of divide and rule .  It was a clever and sometimes woeful strategy, that created an empire, of...
Post a Comment
Read more

YOU DID! WE KNOW! IT’S UP, WE SAW! YOU’RE IN!

“Justices and judges of courts at all levels continue to find cross examination not only a necessary, but also a sufficient method of confronting a variety of trial evidence and burdens.”  “According to McCormick, as early as 1668 a court rejected an out-of-court statement because “the other party could not cross-examine the party sworn.   “Professor Langbein tracked this as the transition from “[t]he oath based system [that] presupposed the witness’s fear that God would damn a perjurer. . . .”   was quoted by Jules Epstein, Associate Professor of Law at Widener University School of Law. To the average citizen of the Western World in 2013, such a statement is too obvious to even allow the brain cell to process methodically.  Those who are of a reasonable age will remember the echoes of nostalgic crisis and the call for patriotic vigilance in the defence of democratic values, libertarian ethos and lawful decency, during the Cold War.  W...
1 comment
Read more