Saturday, July 19, 2014


First Magnus, a Belgian dance band around C.J. Bolland and Tom Barman.

Singing Man (released June 2014) is their latest single.

Then it's the turn of London Grammar with the single Strong. From their 2013 debut album If you wait.

London Grammar is a British triphop trio formed by Hannah Reid, Dominic 'Dot' Major and Dan Rothman.

Slaap wel en braaf zijn hee.


Sunday, July 13, 2014


I've been following Daniel Thomas at Cambrian Dissenters for some time now, and though he doesn't post often, his pieces are top-notch:


"When the senior Labour Party Minister and 'ex'-communist Peter, now Lord, Mandelson, informed the world that the post democratic age has arrived and that local government elections are pointless, very few people paid any attention to the substance of his pronouncement.

The British people, encouraged by a titillating media, appeared to be more interested in the fact that he had a Brazilian boyfriend than the disastrous effects his governments' actions would have on their traditional freedoms.

 photo Mandelson_reinaldo_avila_da_silva_zps14e25732.jpg

Peter "The Post Democratic Age has arrived" Mandelson with his boyfriend Reinaldo Avila da Silva. Expose these scoundrels.

It should have been taken for granted that a Labour government, who's core ideology is based on Marxism, would work toward a dictatorship with a gradual transfer of power from the individual to the state. What was not so obvious was that this march to dictatorship would be relentlessly pursued when the Labour government was replaced by a Conservative/Liberal Democrat coalition.

Its ironic that Great Britain with its Mother of Parliaments based on ancient freedoms derived from Magna Carta and The Bill of Rights, now resembles the failed Soviet Union rather than the beacon of liberty that set an example for the world to follow.

The gradual erosion of civil liberties has accelerated as the European Union strips the nation states of their sovereignty as it marches inexorably onward to its goal of a post democratic federal state.

This surrender of sovereignty, and the subsequent loss of civil liberties, has been facilitated by the replacement of the traditional politician, who was motivated by the desire to faithfully serve the public, with a generic group of agenda driven, career technocrats who are indistinguishable from each other regardless of party affiliation.

One would have thought that a Conservative/ Liberal Democrat government would live up to its name and restore some of the liberties stripped from the British people during thirteen years of unfettered Labour power, both nationally and locally, but this was not to be.

When the Equalities Act was proposed in Parliament by none other than the notorious feminazi, Harriet Harman, it was referred to as socialism in one Bill - it is now the law of the land causing misery as well as imposing job killing regulations on businesses large and small. It should have been repealed on day one but it's still there.

So are the one hundred or more new taxes imposed by the socialists. The private sector final salary pension schemes, which were wilfully and maliciously destroyed, remain destroyed.

The Con/LibDem coalition government is not only making no attempt to restore the civil liberties and individual freedoms that were removed by the Labour government, they are actively taking more away and surrendering whats left of British sovereignty to the unaccountable EU bureaucrats.

It may surprise outside observers that in Great Britain there are some fourteen hundred 'powers of entry' that allow warrentless invasion by twenty thousand officials into the private homes of its citizens. On taking power the Coalition government instigated a review of this scandal with the promise to reduce the number of legal intrusions.

Post review, the number of powers for warrentless intrusions was increased by nineteen, clearly demonstrating the total lack of commitment to civil liberties and individual freedom of British citizens by the political class.
(Story here)

Innocent until proven guilty is the bedrock of British law......until now. The taxman, in the form of the dictatorial Lin Homer of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs is agitating for the power to remove money from private bank accounts if she believes tax is owed. This is the same Lin Homer from yesterdays article who states categorically that she will use anti-terrorists laws to hound, silence and destroy any whistleblowers who report wrongdoing in this malign state monolith.
(Story here)

 photo lin-homer_zpsf9ae0ca6.jpg

Lin Homer, Institutionalized Thief.

Remember the Cypriot government raiding the private bank accounts of its citizens to pay for their own economic incompetence? The EU thinks this is a an excellent idea and suggest it is legitimised and adopted across their new superstate.

The Leveson inquiry report into press ethics suggested the government oversee the press that they hate so much. This has been enthusiastically adopted by all parties and the threats to investigative journalists have been increasing ever since.

Having set the censorship precedent it doesn't take a great leap of imagination to acknowledge that government censorship of the Internet and social media will not be far behind.

Spying on their own citizens is almost a mandatory activity for any self respecting dictatorship and the British government are up there with the best of them.

Under the guise of protecting the people from fraudsters, paedophiles and terrorists, the government want access to every email and phone call along with every website visit and all social media activity.
(Stories here and here)

Anyone looking at this preposterous nonsense in any detail will be struck by the sheer monumental hypocrisy of these people. If it wasn't so serious one would die laughing.

How can the people be protected from fraudsters by some of the country's most notorious fraudsters?

As the latest scandal unfolds it is confirming what has been speculation for decades: the Palace of Westminster, the BBC, the Church of England, the Roman Catholic Church, the Judiciary etc. etc. are all rife with paedophiles. Phone tapping and snooping on the public by institutions that contain such a high percentage of paedophiles is a bit rich to say the least.

As far as protection from Muslim terrorists is concerned, the government are using a crisis to further snoop on their own citizens and further erode their liberties.

The government opened the borders and allowed in terrorists and potential terrorists against the wishes of the people. The lunacy of this is that the politicians want the people to surrender their liberties and freedom to the government so that they can be protected from people they didn't want in the country in the first place.

The people would be better protected if the government stopped immigration from Muslim countries that promote jihad and stopped handing out passports, visas and work permits to people such as London bombers Muktar Said Ibrahim and Ramzi Mohammed.
(Story here)

The British government is currently in the process of surrendering more sovereignty from the peoples' elected representatives to the unelected bureaucrats of the EU in the form of the EU Arrest Warrant and the surrender of DNA and fingerprint databases. Databases which include the most private and personal data imaginable from people who have not been convicted of any crime.

The standard criteria for any dictatorship are press censorship, phone tapping and snooping, penal taxation, warrantless intrusion into private property, raiding of bank accounts together with using state institutions to persecute individuals as per HMRC.

Where Great Britain surpasses most dictatorships is with the use of rigidly policed political correctness, or Cultural Marxism to give it its proper name.

The Orwellian Minister for Culture is proposing to deny funding for a film or production that doesn't meet his criteria for political correctness, which are, 'ethincally, sexually and socially diverse'. To be eligible for funding films must tick two out three boxes: on screen diversity, off screen diversity, creating opportunity and social mobility. At least one character must be positively reflecting diversity. How long before Shakespeare and Dickens are removed from public libraries because they are politically incorrect?

The Minister, Ed Vaizey, is nothing more than a modern day book burner.
(Read the story here.)

 photo edvaizey_zps54faf990.jpg

Ed Vaizey, "Culture" Minister: Full of Shit but just as well very dangerous.

The establishment and all of Great Britain's institutions have been politicised and stuffed to the gunwales with Common Purpose trained operatives and their army of sycophantic petty bureaucrats. It is this that is stifling freedom of speech, freedom of expression and freedom to communicate openly.

The British people are waking up but its a slow process, the fear is that they will not wake up in time to prevent their sleepwalking into a dictatorship from which there will be no return

Posted by Daniel Thomas at 2:31 PM

You really shouldn't miss how The Conservative Woman rips that ball-less creep Vaizey in her article, link see above:

"According to Tuesday's Daily Telegraph, film-makers applying for funding from the British Film Institute will in future be tested against a “Three Ticks” scheme to prove that they are ethnically, sexually and socially diverse – both on-screen and in the production team. To be eligible, films must tick at least two out of the three following boxes: on-screen diversity, off-screen diversity and creating opportunity and social mobility. At least one leading character must be “positively reflecting diversity”.

Films are more likely to receive funding if they “explicitly and predominantly explore issues of identity relating to ethnicity or national origins, a specific focus on women, people with disabilities, sexual identity, age and people from a socially disadvantaged background”.

Culture Minister Ed Vaizey has, according to the Telegraph, praised the scheme and declared that all television, film and performing arts companies should follow the BFI's example.

Pride and Prejudice: nice title, suggests overturning the social order. Feisty female author and heroine. But, oh dear, far too many toffs and not much social mobility, unless you count Elizabeth's audacious leap from the Bennett household (modest unearned income and small frock allowance) to Pemberley (landed estate). Fitzwilliam Darcy seems sadly unable to explore issues of identity in relation to ethnicity or national origins.

A few tweaks might be necessary to reach the target. Maybe recast Darcy as an Arab prince (better cut the wet shirt scene though). At least one of Lizzy's sisters could be in a wheelchair, and her bosom friend Charlotte Lucas might be a secret lesbian, whose marriage to Mr Collins is a sham.

Captain Wickham's background could just about pass for socially disadvantaged – he certainly resented Darcy's superior status. And maybe there were paedophile issues, as his romance with Darcy's little sister almost certainly took place before she reached the age of consent..."

Some 6 or 7 years ago, my wife and I watched Pride & Prejudice on DVD at home and I must say we both enjoyed this brilliantly made, romantic costume film enormously:

 photo pride_prejudice_zps8590146b.jpg

It is amazing that in so short a time political correctness has deteriorated so badly that, if it depended on the UK government, a movie like that wouldn't be made anymore.

The news coming out of Britain lately is so utterly depressing that I need to end on a positive note, and now that we're talking about Pride and Prejudice, why not with this exerpt (okay, not all the shots are from the movie we're talking about - see it as a Jane Austen tribute. Still...):

The living sculptures of Pemberley, composed by Dario Marianelli and performed by Jean-Yves Thibaudet. Immensely Beautiful...

... but if Bag Full of Shit Ed Vaizey had his way, you wouldn't be able to watch or hear it, since there's no gay sex in it, the characters are all despicably white, and it's choke full of Upper upper class people.