We will have to change societal rules devised in the 1960s and 1970s if we are to halt the steady decline in the western population, writes Desmond Fennell
LAST WEEK the news came from the United States that white people will be in a minority there in 2042, eight years sooner than previously predicted, according to US government projections. The reason for this is that in North America, as in Europe, the white population is not reproducing itself.
White women in western societies are producing on average fewer, sometimes much fewer, than 2.1 children per woman - the number of children required for the maintenance of a population. As things stand, therefore, the white race in the West is a dying breed.
There have been many instances of human groups not reproducing themselves, to the point of self-extinction or absorption into larger groups. The most common case has been a previously isolated tribe, when an outside agency has invaded and disrupted its way of life. The set of behavioural rules its members had worked out for themselves, and that made sense to them as a framework for life, gets disordered beyond repair.
They find themselves trying to live by a combination of rules that are partly remnants of their system, partly alien rules imposed on them. This haphazard combination does not make sense to them as a framework for life. So increasingly the will to reproduction flags, because it does not make sense to them to bear children into a senseless life.
It is likely that there is a similar reason for the flagging will of white westerners to reproduce their kind. Their historical background is in European or western civilisation which first took shape around a thousand years ago. That its core set of rules made sense is evidenced by its long endurance and by the mighty will to reproduce which it generated. Westerners overflowed from Europe to populate much of the world.
Then, beginning at the end of the second World War, white westerners, first in the United States, then in America's post-war European satellites, embarked on a great experiment. For the best of reasons - the pursuit of more justice, wealth and empowerment for all - they replaced many of the rules of European civilisation with new rules. Or rather, their democratic governments did this, employing left-liberals as their ethical guides, and enjoying enthusiastic support from the business corporations. The main rush of rule change took place in the 1960s and 1970s. Most white westerners, especially the younger generations, have made the new rules their own and have been living by them, or trying to.
The new collection of rules includes some of the old rules. It covers every sphere of behaviour: personal, interpersonal, male and female, parental and juvenile. It comprises, besides dos and don'ts, do-as-you-like rules.
People always assess for sense the collection of rules presented to them as a framework for life. They do so instinctively, drawing on generations of inherited experience. The point I am making is that this new collection of rules which white westerners have given themselves probably does not pass that litmus test. Probably it strikes growing numbers of them, deep down, as senseless, and therefore as a life framework which it does not make sense to bear children into.
That would not be surprising, given that it was thrown together in a very short time and based on idealistic theories rather than lived experience.
I have in mind an instructive parallel from the history of the Soviet Union. There, too, led by Russia, an idealistic experiment in rule-making was undertaken, with Marxist-Leninism as the ethical guide. In the latter years of that experiment, Russians noted with dismay an increasing fall in their fertility rate. The prospect appeared that they would become a minority in relation to the growing populations of the Union's Asian republics. In those populations, strong inherited cultures had rendered the impact of the Marxist-Leninist rules much lighter or next to null.
It is unlikely, even if the explanation I am offering for the flagging fertility of white westerners is accepted as valid, that any serious corrective measures will be undertaken. Our post-European collection of rules is the basis on which our successful consumerist system has been built, and everyone in power wants that to continue.
But if the reality were different, and white westerners could act in their own long-term interest, they would institute an authoritative, critical examination of their prevailing rules system. And that would begin - but only begin - by scrutinising the prevailing, "politically correct" rules that bear on women's lives, and particularly on motherhood.
• Desmond Fennell's latest book is About Being Normal in Abnormal Circumstances (Athol Books). His website is www.desmondfennell.com
This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times
BP boss Lord Browne sensationally quit yesterday after losing a bitter legal battle with his rent boy lover.
The disgraced peer, one of the country’s most successful businessmen, could now face perjury charges after admitting he lied in court over the affair.
Lord Browne, a close friend of Tony Blair, claimed he met Canadian Jeff Chevalier, who is in his 30s, by chance while exercising in a London park.
But the Daily Express can reveal that Lord Browne picked him out after surfing a sordid gay website called Suited And Booted. His error of judgment led to the degrading end of a glittering career which had seen Lord Browne turn the struggling oil giant into the most successful British company of the past decade.
The acrimonious breakdown of his four-year relationship with Chevalier also cost Lord Browne £15.5million in cash and shares which he gave up by resigning.
Recriminations from the case, fought out behind closed doors in the High Court, go right to the heart of Tony Blair’s Government. Lord Browne, 59, is alleged to have talked to his lover about conversations he had with senior Labour figures including the Prime Minister and Gordon Brown. Chevalier claims he became privy to many of Lord Browne’s secrets, including those of Mr Blair, the Chancellor and EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson.
Lord Browne, a regular visitor to Downing Street, is said to have shared much of what went on at No10 with his lover. The extent of Chevalier’s knowledge of the inner workings of Labour is said to have included the Prime Minister discussing “life after Government and aspects of his own character”.
It was claimed that Lord Browne, who was knighted in 1998 and made a life peer by the Prime Minister in 2001, invited Chevalier to dinner with Peter Mandelson and his gay Brazilian boyfriend Reinaldo.
The BP chief executive also allegedly discussed confidential business matters with Chevalier and misused company funds to support him.
During their relationship, Chevalier adopted his lover’s jet-set lifestyle after Lord Browne lavished gifts and “substantial payments” on him.
It is alleged that the Cambridge-educated peer helped Chevalier to secure a visa to enable him to remain in Britain.
Offering a tantalising glimpse of the jet-set lifestyle he enjoyed, Chevalier in his court papers recounts a shopping trip in Venice.
“Realising that my clothing was not formal enough for being in public with him, [Lord Browne] took me to the Venice Prada shop to buy me more formal wear.
“He would continue to buy me an array of clothing so that I could be presentable once he began to introduce me to his friends and acquaintances.”
Announcing his resignation, Lord Browne said: “In my 41 years with BP I have kept my private life separate from my business life. I have always regarded my sexuality as a personal matter, to be kept private.” The affair was revealed after it came to an end in 2006. Chevalier claimed he was “having to adjust to a drastically reduced lifestyle”.
He wrote to his former lover saying he was facing hunger and homelessness and asking for “some assistance”.
A judge described his approach as a “thinly-veiled threat”. When no money was forthcoming, Chevalier approached a newspaper to “spill the beans”.
This led to a court battle as the BP boss went all the way to the House of Lords in an attempt to silence him.
Lord Browne admitted he had lied to the court over the circumstances in which he met his gay lover. A judge yesterday ordered that Lord Browne did not have to reveal how he had met Chevalier. But the Daily Express can reveal he picked his lover from the gay website Suited And Booted.
The website boasts of being “London’s premier escort agency” and features dozens of semi-clad and naked models offering their services.
Last night a close friend of Lord Browne said the peer had been embarrassed about revealing the truth of how he met Chevalier and added that the couple had agreed they would never reveal the circumstances.
The friend said: “He felt ashamed and humiliated at the way he had come to know Chevalier and he did not want the world to know they had met on a gay website. When it came to the court hearing, Lord Browne stuck to that version but Chevalier chose not to.
“Lord Browne immediately felt guilty, knowing that he had not been honest. It was gnawing away at him and two weeks later he retracted his statement because he felt it was wrong to lie to a court.”
Lord Browne was forced to make a humiliating apology after acknowledging that he had not been truthful. He said yesterday: “My initial witness statements contained an untruthful account about how I first met Jeff. This account, prompted by my embarrassment and shock at the revelations, is a matter of deep regret.
“It was retracted and corrected. I have apologised unreservedly and do so again today.” But, in his judgment, Mr Justice Eady said the peer had used his status to try to convince the court his version of events was true.
The judge said Lord Browne had referred to “the honours he has received under the present Government when asking the court to prefer his account of what took place.”
The judge said of Chevalier: “A wholesale attack was being made on his credibility. It was said that he was a liar, unstable and adversely affected by dependence on alcohol and illegal drugs.”
It was claimed the allegation was largely based on Lord Browne’s butler saying his “wine stocks were diminishing”. Medical records later showed that the alcohol abuse claims were unfounded.
What do YOU think? Should Lord Browne be prosecuted for perjury, and should his lover be kicked out of our country? Comment NOW on Have Your Say.
Union fears United Biscuit jobs may go to India Jacobs cream crackers
UNION leaders fear 125 jobs at Merseyside’s United Biscuits bakery could be moved to India under a restructuring programme.
Trade union Unite says its members at the 99-year-old Aintree plant, which employs 750 people making products such as Jacob’s cream crackers, were told the jobs could go to the Asian country this year.
But the company today said no decisions on any restructuring have yet been made.
Unite claimed any job losses would be in stark contrast to last year, when workers won “bonuses and star awards for their achievements”.
Dying Newspapers Dying Nation: Repent or Perish! March 13, 2009
From the New York Times to the Raleigh News and Observer, there are For Sale signs hanging on the doors of prominent newspapers across America/UK with only a few buyers at hand.
While this must be very stressful for newspaper employees, editors and reporters alike, a large consensus of citizens are waving and saying "goodbye and good riddance!".
Public trust for the contents of the print media has reached all time lows. Most people who still read these papers have become adept at discerning the truth of what is happening by what is either distorted by the papers or what facts and perspectives are completely missing from articles like large elephants in the room.
Reading between the lines is what news consumers have been forced to do, as the ethics of journalism have been abandoned and many major print media institutions have become more concerned with attempts to politically indoctrinate their readers to fairly unsupported views, instead of telling readers what is really going on in our nation.
You can trust my word on this, because I am a man who is lucky to even be quoted before at all in publications like the LA Times, New York Times, Boston Globe, Washington Times, Washington Post, USA Today, and Chicago Tribune.
While the Washington Times stands alone, with their fair treatment of my positions in favor of more border security and immigration enforcement, almost every one of these other publications have abused me, my positions, and the truth!
If you do see a quote from me, the chances are higher than 50% that I've been intentionally misquoted by a reporter working for a newspaper that favors amnesty for illegal aliens. If you are lucky enough to even have an opportunity to hear my view, which is representative of the vast majority of Americans on immigration issues, you can usually find my quote just past the half way mark in any article, which has been determined to be the part of the article people are least likely to read or remember.
My opposition, those who favor amnesty for illegal aliens and open borders, will usually be found in the first and last of the article, which are the prime locations for quotes. I am lucky if the article quotes less than five opposition sources compared to my single doctored comment.
These are the least of the offenses offered by many of these publications, which now flagrantly try to portray me or any American who speaks out against illegal immigration as using some kind of "code words of hate", which mere exposure to these mythical codes could cause the American peasant class to lash out and harm blacks and Hispanics. While these outlandish attacks on free speech are ridiculous, they have traction in the land of unicorns and fairies in the newsrooms, where creative writers manufacture synthetic realities like a movie script.
These newspaper writers are taking their extreme left marching orders from low credibility political groups like the Anti Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Both of these groups have exchanged their prior credibility fighting racist groups, by overtly lying and defaming any American who speaks out against Amnesty or illegal immigration. They have labeled legal immigrants, blacks, Hispanics, and white Americans working together for border security 'nativist extremists' or the new KKK! Their lies and distortions have become so overt that many of us now call them the Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Lie Center.
In effect, these highly biased newspapers and the SPLC and ADL are engaging in rampant anti-immigrant behavior by equating legal immigrants with illegal aliens. My legal immigrant supporters are highly offended by this. Can you imagine the outcry, if a newspaper constantly compared tax cheats to law abiding tax payers or rapists to married couples trying to conceive a child?
These papers and these defamation groups are also engaging in racist behavior by attacking multi-racial groups that support immigration enforcement and falsely labeling them as hate groups! For political expedience, the papers and crew are equating illegal aliens with all Hispanics, even though half of the Hispanics in America are here legally. Can you imagine the outcry, if a newspaper compared drug dealers to black people or shop lifters to Hispanics? Only with the crime of illegally entering the US can we find the racist comparison between crimminal actions and a particular ethnic group.
The bottom line here is that the newspapers are massively abusing the ethics of journalism and their important role in the health of the American Republic for which our flag stands.
Gone are the days of true investigative journalism, as any ramped up news story has, to pass through intensive Political Correctness filters creating a world where every child in America has heard of the Duke Lacrosse Team, but not even one newspaper in North Carolina will mention the more than four documented and horrific gang rapes of innocent Americans by illegal aliens in the last few years.
The real gang rapes are suppressed and censored information because it might alarm the natives and the public might seek political change towards more immigration enforcement and border security. The Duke Lacrosse fiction novel was big news because it fits the story cliche that white people, especially wealthy white people are the cause of all of society's ills. Racial equality concerns have given way to racist one way streets in the modern print media. Of course, the Duke Lacrosse fiction story had to go out of the limelight immediately once the abused college students were exonerated.
The real problem with the newspapers goes far deeper than racial issues or even top political issues like illegal immigration.
The real problem with the American print media is with the truth. Many of them have sacrificed the truth at the altar of politics and engaged in unethical behavior to conceal the truth, while propagating lies. The results are manifest in our nation, and the results are a key reason America is in so much trouble and experiencing so much hardship today.
The same lack of integrity, the same lack of principles, the same disconnect from the American public, and the same greed and political corruption that infects Washington, DC is pandemic in the newsrooms and offices of the editors.
The newspapers have been lying to their readers by crafting political propaganda so thick that there should be a "paid for by" disclaimer beneath the articles as campaigns for public office are required to provide. I wonder if the Federal Elections Commission could handle the extra work load of regulating these paid political writers at the papers?
There's lots of talk in Washington, DC of regulating free speech on talk radio shows and the Internet. Could it be any more overt that corrupt politicians in DC are trying to protect their corrupt political advertisers in the print media? If we needed any regulation of free paid political speech in America, which I do not approve of, it should start with the newspapers.
After all, Internet news, blogs, and talk radio shows have rapidly growing and loyal audiences. This is because Americans are getting more accurate information via these mediums and if there is a political slant to the coverage at least it is overt and not masquerading as fair and balanced, as the newspapers claim.
I would bet you my left kidney that four out of five of these politically biased lying newspapers would all support a clamp down on talk radio and the Internet. They are elitists and espouse the elitist view that it is their job to determine what is news worthy to Americans, not the other way around.
They are top down operations who believe what they write that will cause life to imitate their art. Most American citizens feel their art should imitate true life instead! Just ask Harrison Ford. His new movie "Crossing Over" is a pro-amnesty for illegal aliens propaganda film that labels our Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers 'Gestapo'. The movie has completely bombed in the reviews and the theaters because of the movie's overt politics. Now, if Harrison Ford's new movie paid tribute to our brave ICE officers who put their lives at risk to apprehend illegal aliens and deport them, it would likely be a smash hit at the box office, instead of Ford's career ending with a whimper.
Many of these newspapers could be saved, rebuild trust, rebuild loyal audiences and loyal advertisers by firing large volumes of their staff members with liberal arts degrees and hiring realists with a more diverse range of political views and a more diverse range of educational backgrounds.
Many of these creative fiction writers at the papers need a new job, preferably one where they have to compete with illegal aliens and at illegal alien wage levels.
It is time to swim or drown, shake the tree and let the loose nuts and fruits fall to the ground! You need writers and employees who write for the American public, instead of global corporations and unpopular social engineering political views! Take two doses of populism and call me in five years!
These newspaper owners should go through the editorial staff and news rooms and fire every person who has ever written the phrase "undocumented immigrants", "jobs Americans won't do", "Comprehensive Immigration Reform". "Anna Nicole Smith", "Lindsay Lohan", or "Paris Hilton" in a news or opinion article!
Furthermore, don't just fire these fiction writers, dress them in clothing adorned with American flags and drop them off deep in a neighborhood in America controlled by MS-13 or SUR-13, or drop them off in Nuevo Laredo or Juarez, Mexico in their American attire. If they survive, they may come out of the experience with a hefty dose of reality from the tough streets of reality!
These papers can find plenty of new workers down in the soup kitchens at the churches or in the car lots and tent cities, where innocent American families have been cast. Grab some people who can write truthful articles from the perspective of average American citizens who are concerned and suffering and give them a week to write something readers like and appreciate.
The true political battle in America now is between the truth and the lies. This is a battle between right and wrong, good and evil, principles vs. corruption!
If civil engineers designed politically correct bridges they would collapse and when doctors lie, people die.
Only the truth and God, manifest in American citizens, can save America now as the atrophy of America's Judeo Christian values and principles has brought our nation to the verge of collapse and ruin. The Ten Commandments would serve these papers well, you know the parts about not lying about your neighbors and not placing other idols before God. From my intensive experiences with the newsrooms of America, I can tell you that my brief mention of God here will result in some discomfort among many in the newsrooms, and hopefully no explosive vulgarity or backwards Latin. Mentioning God in a classroom or newsroom could easily result into an inquiry these days.
These newspapers can be saved by hiring writers who have shared values with the American public, instead of elitists values shared by only a small percentage of the public. And by shared values, I do not mean the recent multiculturalist, Globalist, and radicalism we face today in America. I mean the shared values that have been prominent and dominant in America for the last 200 years!
We get enough political fiction out of Hollywood and the corporate TV commercial industry today, so let's start by returning the truth, in preference to fiction in our newspapers and some may be able to survive.
For those who fail to heed this advice, let those newspapers disappear from our land. I've been warning them for several years now that the New York Times, the Raleigh News and Observer, and others are like dinosaurs breathing their last gasps of comet dust. America would be better off without many of these destructive giants that fail to see they are no longer the top of the information food chain.
It is time to adapt or fail and adapting means newspapers need to become more like talk radio and more connected to and representative of the people of America like Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, and Glenn Beck and others in talk radio, Internet news, and on TV who represent Americans better than newspapers or lifetime politicians in Washington, DC.
Abandon the corrupt and dishonorable methods and practices that have fostered the recent failures in America, and return to the principles and values that once made America the most free, opulent, and successful society in human history. Adapt or fail, improve or perish, this is the challenge for all of America.
Logging you in...
http://www.thisislancashire.co.uk/news/lancashiretelegraph/4194101.Former_Lancashire_PC_loses___200_000/
ReplyDeleteWe will have to change societal rules devised in the 1960s and 1970s if we are to halt the steady decline in the western population, writes Desmond Fennell
ReplyDeleteLAST WEEK the news came from the United States that white people will be in a minority there in 2042, eight years sooner than previously predicted, according to US government projections. The reason for this is that in North America, as in Europe, the white population is not reproducing itself.
White women in western societies are producing on average fewer, sometimes much fewer, than 2.1 children per woman - the number of children required for the maintenance of a population. As things stand, therefore, the white race in the West is a dying breed.
There have been many instances of human groups not reproducing themselves, to the point of self-extinction or absorption into larger groups. The most common case has been a previously isolated tribe, when an outside agency has invaded and disrupted its way of life. The set of behavioural rules its members had worked out for themselves, and that made sense to them as a framework for life, gets disordered beyond repair.
They find themselves trying to live by a combination of rules that are partly remnants of their system, partly alien rules imposed on them. This haphazard combination does not make sense to them as a framework for life. So increasingly the will to reproduction flags, because it does not make sense to them to bear children into a senseless life.
It is likely that there is a similar reason for the flagging will of white westerners to reproduce their kind. Their historical background is in European or western civilisation which first took shape around a thousand years ago. That its core set of rules made sense is evidenced by its long endurance and by the mighty will to reproduce which it generated. Westerners overflowed from Europe to populate much of the world.
Then, beginning at the end of the second World War, white westerners, first in the United States, then in America's post-war European satellites, embarked on a great experiment. For the best of reasons - the pursuit of more justice, wealth and empowerment for all - they replaced many of the rules of European civilisation with new rules. Or rather, their democratic governments did this, employing left-liberals as their ethical guides, and enjoying enthusiastic support from the business corporations. The main rush of rule change took place in the 1960s and 1970s. Most white westerners, especially the younger generations, have made the new rules their own and have been living by them, or trying to.
The new collection of rules includes some of the old rules. It covers every sphere of behaviour: personal, interpersonal, male and female, parental and juvenile. It comprises, besides dos and don'ts, do-as-you-like rules.
People always assess for sense the collection of rules presented to them as a framework for life. They do so instinctively, drawing on generations of inherited experience. The point I am making is that this new collection of rules which white westerners have given themselves probably does not pass that litmus test. Probably it strikes growing numbers of them, deep down, as senseless, and therefore as a life framework which it does not make sense to bear children into.
That would not be surprising, given that it was thrown together in a very short time and based on idealistic theories rather than lived experience.
I have in mind an instructive parallel from the history of the Soviet Union. There, too, led by Russia, an idealistic experiment in rule-making was undertaken, with Marxist-Leninism as the ethical guide. In the latter years of that experiment, Russians noted with dismay an increasing fall in their fertility rate. The prospect appeared that they would become a minority in relation to the growing populations of the Union's Asian republics. In those populations, strong inherited cultures had rendered the impact of the Marxist-Leninist rules much lighter or next to null.
It is unlikely, even if the explanation I am offering for the flagging fertility of white westerners is accepted as valid, that any serious corrective measures will be undertaken. Our post-European collection of rules is the basis on which our successful consumerist system has been built, and everyone in power wants that to continue.
But if the reality were different, and white westerners could act in their own long-term interest, they would institute an authoritative, critical examination of their prevailing rules system. And that would begin - but only begin - by scrutinising the prevailing, "politically correct" rules that bear on women's lives, and particularly on motherhood.
• Desmond Fennell's latest book is About Being Normal in Abnormal Circumstances (Athol Books). His website is www.desmondfennell.com
This article appears in the print edition of the Irish Times
WHAT A BLOODY SHOWER!
ReplyDeleteBP CHIEF QUITS IN RENT BOY SCANDAL
Lord Browne could now face charges
BP boss Lord Browne sensationally quit yesterday after losing a bitter legal battle with his rent boy lover.
The disgraced peer, one of the country’s most successful businessmen, could now face perjury charges after admitting he lied in court over the affair.
Lord Browne, a close friend of Tony Blair, claimed he met Canadian Jeff Chevalier, who is in his 30s, by chance while exercising in a London park.
But the Daily Express can reveal that Lord Browne picked him out after surfing a sordid gay website called Suited And Booted. His error of judgment led to the degrading end of a glittering career which had seen Lord Browne turn the struggling oil giant into the most successful British company of the past decade.
The acrimonious breakdown of his four-year relationship with Chevalier also cost Lord Browne £15.5million in cash and shares which he gave up by resigning.
Recriminations from the case, fought out behind closed doors in the High Court, go right to the heart of Tony Blair’s Government. Lord Browne, 59, is alleged to have talked to his lover about conversations he had with senior Labour figures including the Prime Minister and Gordon Brown. Chevalier claims he became privy to many of Lord Browne’s secrets, including those of Mr Blair, the Chancellor and EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson.
Lord Browne, a regular visitor to Downing Street, is said to have shared much of what went on at No10 with his lover.
The extent of Chevalier’s knowledge of the inner workings of Labour is said to have included the Prime Minister discussing “life after Government and aspects of his own character”.
WHAT A BLOODY SHOWER!
ReplyDeleteIt was claimed that Lord Browne, who was knighted in 1998 and made a life peer by the Prime Minister in 2001, invited Chevalier to dinner with Peter Mandelson and his gay Brazilian boyfriend Reinaldo.
The BP chief executive also allegedly discussed confidential business matters with Chevalier and misused company funds to support him.
During their relationship, Chevalier adopted his lover’s jet-set lifestyle after Lord Browne lavished gifts and “substantial payments” on him.
It is alleged that the Cambridge-educated peer helped Chevalier to secure a visa to enable him to remain in Britain.
Offering a tantalising glimpse of the jet-set lifestyle he enjoyed, Chevalier in his court papers recounts a shopping trip in Venice.
“Realising that my clothing was not formal enough for being in public with him, [Lord Browne] took me to the Venice Prada shop to buy me more formal wear.
“He would continue to buy me an array of clothing so that I could be presentable once he began to introduce me to his friends and acquaintances.”
Announcing his resignation, Lord Browne said: “In my 41 years with BP I have kept my private life separate from my business life. I have always regarded my sexuality as a personal matter, to be kept private.” The affair was revealed after it came to an end in 2006. Chevalier claimed he was “having to adjust to a drastically reduced lifestyle”.
He wrote to his former lover saying he was facing hunger and homelessness and asking for “some assistance”.
A judge described his approach as a “thinly-veiled threat”. When no money was forthcoming, Chevalier approached a newspaper to “spill the beans”.
This led to a court battle as the BP boss went all the way to the House of Lords in an attempt to silence him.
Lord Browne admitted he had lied to the court over the circumstances in which he met his gay lover. A judge yesterday ordered that Lord Browne did not have to reveal how he had met Chevalier. But the Daily Express can reveal he picked his lover from the gay website Suited And Booted.
The website boasts of being “London’s premier escort agency” and features dozens of semi-clad and naked models offering their services.
Last night a close friend of Lord Browne said the peer had been embarrassed about revealing the truth of how he met Chevalier and added that the couple had agreed they would never reveal the circumstances.
The friend said: “He felt ashamed and humiliated at the way he had come to know Chevalier and he did not want the world to know they had met on a gay website. When it came to the court hearing, Lord Browne stuck to that version but Chevalier chose not to.
“Lord Browne immediately felt guilty, knowing that he had not been honest. It was gnawing away at him and two weeks later he retracted his statement because he felt it was wrong to lie to a court.”
Lord Browne was forced to make a humiliating apology after acknowledging that he had not been truthful. He said yesterday: “My initial witness statements contained an untruthful account about how I first met Jeff. This account, prompted by my embarrassment and shock at the revelations, is a matter of deep regret.
“It was retracted and corrected. I have apologised unreservedly and do so again today.” But, in his judgment, Mr Justice Eady said the peer had used his status to try to convince the court his version of events was true.
The judge said Lord Browne had referred to “the honours he has received under the present Government when asking the court to prefer his account of what took place.”
The judge said of Chevalier: “A wholesale attack was being made on his credibility. It was said that he was a liar, unstable and adversely affected by dependence on alcohol and illegal drugs.”
It was claimed the allegation was largely based on Lord Browne’s butler saying his “wine stocks were diminishing”. Medical records later showed that the alcohol abuse claims were unfounded.
What do YOU think? Should Lord Browne be prosecuted for perjury, and should his lover be kicked out of our country? Comment NOW on Have Your Say.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDdlY3vqmzg&eurl=
ReplyDelete(A MUST WATCH)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzgO2DE4-b4&eurl
ReplyDelete(ANOTHER YOU MUST WATCH)
Union fears United Biscuit jobs may go to India
ReplyDeleteJacobs cream crackers
UNION leaders fear 125 jobs at Merseyside’s United Biscuits bakery could be moved to India under a restructuring programme.
Trade union Unite says its members at the 99-year-old Aintree plant, which employs 750 people making products such as Jacob’s cream crackers, were told the jobs could go to the Asian country this year.
But the company today said no decisions on any restructuring have yet been made.
Unite claimed any job losses would be in stark contrast to last year, when workers won “bonuses and star awards for their achievements”.
Dying Newspapers Dying Nation: Repent or Perish!
ReplyDeleteMarch 13, 2009
From the New York Times to the Raleigh News and Observer, there are For Sale signs hanging on the doors of prominent newspapers across America/UK with only a few buyers at hand.
While this must be very stressful for newspaper employees, editors and reporters alike, a large consensus of citizens are waving and saying "goodbye and good riddance!".
Public trust for the contents of the print media has reached all time lows. Most people who still read these papers have become adept at discerning the truth of what is happening by what is either distorted by the papers or what facts and perspectives are completely missing from articles like large elephants in the room.
Reading between the lines is what news consumers have been forced to do, as the ethics of journalism have been abandoned and many major print media institutions have become more concerned with attempts to politically indoctrinate their readers to fairly unsupported views, instead of telling readers what is really going on in our nation.
You can trust my word on this, because I am a man who is lucky to even be quoted before at all in publications like the LA Times, New York Times, Boston Globe, Washington Times, Washington Post, USA Today, and Chicago Tribune.
While the Washington Times stands alone, with their fair treatment of my positions in favor of more border security and immigration enforcement, almost every one of these other publications have abused me, my positions, and the truth!
If you do see a quote from me, the chances are higher than 50% that I've been intentionally misquoted by a reporter working for a newspaper that favors amnesty for illegal aliens. If you are lucky enough to even have an opportunity to hear my view, which is representative of the vast majority of Americans on immigration issues, you can usually find my quote just past the half way mark in any article, which has been determined to be the part of the article people are least likely to read or remember.
My opposition, those who favor amnesty for illegal aliens and open borders, will usually be found in the first and last of the article, which are the prime locations for quotes. I am lucky if the article quotes less than five opposition sources compared to my single doctored comment.
These are the least of the offenses offered by many of these publications, which now flagrantly try to portray me or any American who speaks out against illegal immigration as using some kind of "code words of hate", which mere exposure to these mythical codes could cause the American peasant class to lash out and harm blacks and Hispanics. While these outlandish attacks on free speech are ridiculous, they have traction in the land of unicorns and fairies in the newsrooms, where creative writers manufacture synthetic realities like a movie script.
These newspaper writers are taking their extreme left marching orders from low credibility political groups like the Anti Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Both of these groups have exchanged their prior credibility fighting racist groups, by overtly lying and defaming any American who speaks out against Amnesty or illegal immigration. They have labeled legal immigrants, blacks, Hispanics, and white Americans working together for border security 'nativist extremists' or the new KKK! Their lies and distortions have become so overt that many of us now call them the Defamation League and the Southern Poverty Lie Center.
In effect, these highly biased newspapers and the SPLC and ADL are engaging in rampant anti-immigrant behavior by equating legal immigrants with illegal aliens. My legal immigrant supporters are highly offended by this. Can you imagine the outcry, if a newspaper constantly compared tax cheats to law abiding tax payers or rapists to married couples trying to conceive a child?
These papers and these defamation groups are also engaging in racist behavior by attacking multi-racial groups that support immigration enforcement and falsely labeling them as hate groups! For political expedience, the papers and crew are equating illegal aliens with all Hispanics, even though half of the Hispanics in America are here legally. Can you imagine the outcry, if a newspaper compared drug dealers to black people or shop lifters to Hispanics? Only with the crime of illegally entering the US can we find the racist comparison between crimminal actions and a particular ethnic group.
The bottom line here is that the newspapers are massively abusing the ethics of journalism and their important role in the health of the American Republic for which our flag stands.
Gone are the days of true investigative journalism, as any ramped up news story has, to pass through intensive Political Correctness filters creating a world where every child in America has heard of the Duke Lacrosse Team, but not even one newspaper in North Carolina will mention the more than four documented and horrific gang rapes of innocent Americans by illegal aliens in the last few years.
The real gang rapes are suppressed and censored information because it might alarm the natives and the public might seek political change towards more immigration enforcement and border security. The Duke Lacrosse fiction novel was big news because it fits the story cliche that white people, especially wealthy white people are the cause of all of society's ills. Racial equality concerns have given way to racist one way streets in the modern print media. Of course, the Duke Lacrosse fiction story had to go out of the limelight immediately once the abused college students were exonerated.
The real problem with the newspapers goes far deeper than racial issues or even top political issues like illegal immigration.
The real problem with the American print media is with the truth. Many of them have sacrificed the truth at the altar of politics and engaged in unethical behavior to conceal the truth, while propagating lies. The results are manifest in our nation, and the results are a key reason America is in so much trouble and experiencing so much hardship today.
The same lack of integrity, the same lack of principles, the same disconnect from the American public, and the same greed and political corruption that infects Washington, DC is pandemic in the newsrooms and offices of the editors.
The newspapers have been lying to their readers by crafting political propaganda so thick that there should be a "paid for by" disclaimer beneath the articles as campaigns for public office are required to provide. I wonder if the Federal Elections Commission could handle the extra work load of regulating these paid political writers at the papers?
There's lots of talk in Washington, DC of regulating free speech on talk radio shows and the Internet. Could it be any more overt that corrupt politicians in DC are trying to protect their corrupt political advertisers in the print media? If we needed any regulation of free paid political speech in America, which I do not approve of, it should start with the newspapers.
After all, Internet news, blogs, and talk radio shows have rapidly growing and loyal audiences. This is because Americans are getting more accurate information via these mediums and if there is a political slant to the coverage at least it is overt and not masquerading as fair and balanced, as the newspapers claim.
I would bet you my left kidney that four out of five of these politically biased lying newspapers would all support a clamp down on talk radio and the Internet. They are elitists and espouse the elitist view that it is their job to determine what is news worthy to Americans, not the other way around.
They are top down operations who believe what they write that will cause life to imitate their art. Most American citizens feel their art should imitate true life instead! Just ask Harrison Ford. His new movie "Crossing Over" is a pro-amnesty for illegal aliens propaganda film that labels our Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers 'Gestapo'. The movie has completely bombed in the reviews and the theaters because of the movie's overt politics. Now, if Harrison Ford's new movie paid tribute to our brave ICE officers who put their lives at risk to apprehend illegal aliens and deport them, it would likely be a smash hit at the box office, instead of Ford's career ending with a whimper.
Many of these newspapers could be saved, rebuild trust, rebuild loyal audiences and loyal advertisers by firing large volumes of their staff members with liberal arts degrees and hiring realists with a more diverse range of political views and a more diverse range of educational backgrounds.
Many of these creative fiction writers at the papers need a new job, preferably one where they have to compete with illegal aliens and at illegal alien wage levels.
It is time to swim or drown, shake the tree and let the loose nuts and fruits fall to the ground! You need writers and employees who write for the American public, instead of global corporations and unpopular social engineering political views! Take two doses of populism and call me in five years!
These newspaper owners should go through the editorial staff and news rooms and fire every person who has ever written the phrase "undocumented immigrants", "jobs Americans won't do", "Comprehensive Immigration Reform". "Anna Nicole Smith", "Lindsay Lohan", or "Paris Hilton" in a news or opinion article!
Furthermore, don't just fire these fiction writers, dress them in clothing adorned with American flags and drop them off deep in a neighborhood in America controlled by MS-13 or SUR-13, or drop them off in Nuevo Laredo or Juarez, Mexico in their American attire. If they survive, they may come out of the experience with a hefty dose of reality from the tough streets of reality!
These papers can find plenty of new workers down in the soup kitchens at the churches or in the car lots and tent cities, where innocent American families have been cast. Grab some people who can write truthful articles from the perspective of average American citizens who are concerned and suffering and give them a week to write something readers like and appreciate.
The true political battle in America now is between the truth and the lies. This is a battle between right and wrong, good and evil, principles vs. corruption!
If civil engineers designed politically correct bridges they would collapse and when doctors lie, people die.
Only the truth and God, manifest in American citizens, can save America now as the atrophy of America's Judeo Christian values and principles has brought our nation to the verge of collapse and ruin. The Ten Commandments would serve these papers well, you know the parts about not lying about your neighbors and not placing other idols before God. From my intensive experiences with the newsrooms of America, I can tell you that my brief mention of God here will result in some discomfort among many in the newsrooms, and hopefully no explosive vulgarity or backwards Latin. Mentioning God in a classroom or newsroom could easily result into an inquiry these days.
These newspapers can be saved by hiring writers who have shared values with the American public, instead of elitists values shared by only a small percentage of the public. And by shared values, I do not mean the recent multiculturalist, Globalist, and radicalism we face today in America. I mean the shared values that have been prominent and dominant in America for the last 200 years!
We get enough political fiction out of Hollywood and the corporate TV commercial industry today, so let's start by returning the truth, in preference to fiction in our newspapers and some may be able to survive.
For those who fail to heed this advice, let those newspapers disappear from our land. I've been warning them for several years now that the New York Times, the Raleigh News and Observer, and others are like dinosaurs breathing their last gasps of comet dust. America would be better off without many of these destructive giants that fail to see they are no longer the top of the information food chain.
It is time to adapt or fail and adapting means newspapers need to become more like talk radio and more connected to and representative of the people of America like Rush Limbaugh, Lou Dobbs, and Glenn Beck and others in talk radio, Internet news, and on TV who represent Americans better than newspapers or lifetime politicians in Washington, DC.
Abandon the corrupt and dishonorable methods and practices that have fostered the recent failures in America, and return to the principles and values that once made America the most free, opulent, and successful society in human history. Adapt or fail, improve or perish, this is the challenge for all of America.