Marxist-founded Demos is terrified that schoolchildren are questioning the establishment

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Government front group Demos, an integral part of the British establishment which was founded by Marxists, is terrified that children are using the Internet to question what they are taught in school, and has vowed to abolish any such critical thinking to reinforce the education system’s role as a tool of indoctrination.

A BBC News report reflects Demos’ panic at “conspiracy theories” (ie any critical thought that questions the official consensus) being brought into the classroom.

It’s a delicious irony that we’ve highlighted many times before and it underpins the entire education system. While complaining that children are not engaging in “critical thinking,” Demos, a government front group, is abolishing any notion of critical thinking by telling students that they should only believe what the government and the mainstream media tells them is true – the same establishment that has been caught proliferating lies time and time again.

In reality, it is the very fact that students are increasingly engaging in “critical thinking,” ie questioning the official version of events, that has the likes of Demos so petrified.

Having been caught lying and covering-up all manner of scandals, from the WMD farce, to Climategate, to the death of Dr. David Kelly, the British establishment and its sycophantic media cheerleaders like the BBC are losing credibility fast, that’s why young people are turning to alternative sources of information to try and get the truth, something deemed intolerable by the system.

While young people are being intimidated out of critical thinking, they are simultaneously being bombarded with the likes of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth, which was sent by the government to British schools in 2007, a documentary found by a British high court judge to contain nine significant errors while making claims in “the context of alarmism and exaggeration.”

It seems believing in “conspiracy theories” is only acceptable for the likes of Demos and the British government if those “conspiracy theories” are generated by and supportive of the state.

Indeed, a University Professor in the United Kingdom recently conducted a comparative analysis of a BBC documentary on 7/7 “conspiracy theories” and an independent documentary in which the official story behind the London bombings is questioned. The Professor concluded that the documentary produced by “conspiracy theorists” was more accurate and more likely to be a truthful representation of the events of 7/7, but don’t expect the government to recommend it be included on the curriculum any time soon.

Other government front groups have also launched state-funded projects to “demolish conspiracy theories” about events like 9/11, or in other words ‘abolish’ any critical thinking about the event and reinforce official propaganda through the school curriculum.

Demos is a front for the insidious Common Purpose network, a group that Lt Cdr Brian Gerrish has exposed as playing a fundamental role in the advancement of Britain’s role in the new world order. Julia Middleton, Chief Executive of Common Purpose, sits on Demos’ advisory council.

The group has waged war on “conspiracy theories,” particularly the suggestion that 7/7 and 9/11 involved state complicity, and has urged the government to “fight back” by infiltrating conspiracy websites to spread state propaganda. Demos has also characterized people who question the official fable of 7/7 and 9/11 as extremists and terrorist recruiters.

The strategy mirrors that advocated by White House information czar Cass Sunstein, who in a 2008 white paper similarly called for conspiracy websites to be infiltrated and undermined in order to dilute their influence. In the same report, Sunstein also called for taxing conspiracy theories (any viewpoint that differs with the official version) and outright banning free speech of which the authorities disapprove.

Demos was founded in 1993 by marxists Martin Jacques and Geoff Mulgan, and was closely affiliated with Tony Blair’s Labour government. Mulgan went on to work inside Downing Street in 1997. Current British Prime Minister David Cameron also works closely with Demos and has given speeches at the group’s events.

Demos has routinely acted as a platform for elitists who wish to drastically alter society, eliminate freedoms, and sacrifice British sovereignty in pursuit of global government. On August 9, 2006, British Home Secretary Dr John Reid, another former marxist, gave a speech at a Demos conference stating that Britons “may have to modify their notion of freedom”, claiming that freedom is “misused and abused by terrorists.”

Demos is partnered with numerous other globalist organizations from government and industry, including IBM, The Carnegie United Kingdom Trust, and Shell International. The organization’s logo includes an all-seeing eye within its design.

Although the group poses as an independent think tank, Demos is little more than a public relations firm for the British government and security services. Its efforts to demonize conspiracy theories in order to “increase trust in the government,” as its own report states, is a transparent ploy to do the bidding of its masters, by demonizing anyone who challenges a corrupt, lying state and its nefarious activities as an extremist and a potential domestic terrorist, while infiltrating schools and acting as thought police to ring-fence what ideas children can and cannot entertain.

Counter-culture, or specially manufactured to effect social change?

After a young friend “liked” Wiz Khalifa on Facebook, a foul-mouthed rapper who promotes drug use, I felt the need to “like” him myself so I could leave this comment on his page:

Here’s the deal – the government makes drugs illegal to hike up the price on the black market, then they ship in the drugs and their friends in the music industry hire artists to advertise their product.

Clever scam, isn’t it?

Don’t be conned, drugs are bad and the government wants you to take them. They don’t want you to be successful and smart. Tell them to stuff their drugs and be yourself.

That probably seems bizarre to people who have not been initiated into the workings of government. Did you know that opium production in Afghanistan is higher now than before the 2001 invasion?

And where does counter-culture come from? And how do so many big corporations profit from it? Because they basically control both sides. In the 1960s, drugs and “free love” (promiscuity) were introduced into the mainstream for a reason. The controlled music industry played a massive part in the situation we see today, where just over half of the babies born are to unmarried women and where divorce rates are off the radar screen.

The family was the target and the “counter-culture” – those hippies and peaceniks – were used as tools to basically jeopardise the stability and happiness of their own children and grandchildren for political reasons. And not their political objectives.

As Lenin said, “Destroy the family, you destroy the country.”

He also said, “Our program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism.”

He knew that churches, like the family, had to be destroyed in order for the government to have total control. For the same reason, the family has been savagely attacked in the West and atheism is promoted at the same time as our Judeo-Christian traditions are being dismantled and our morals ridiculed for being “out-dated” or “discriminatory”.

The major piece of “counter-culture” that is feminism was manufactured, with CIA involvement, to fool women into believing that they could enjoy fun and power “having control over their own fertility”. Thanks to the usual culprits of government, the media and state education, feminist “values” have become more-or-less mainstream and have added to the problems we face as a society – by design. For many, the definition of abortion has changed from killing one’s unborn child to a woman’s right to control her own body. The rights of the husband, and particularly the human being getting wiped from the pages of history, are non-existent according to feminism.

One of the triumphs of the social re-engineers’ “rights” programme has been to make George Orwell’s “all animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” become reality.

Gay Rights probably really kicked off in the USA with the Stonewall riots in 1969, at the Stonewall Inn, in the Greenwich Village neighbourhood of New York. And this “blueprint” by homosexuals published in the 1980s, “The Overhauling Of Straight America,” was an agenda to infiltrate the media to portray homosexuals as harmless and denormalised, while painting those who disagreed with same-sex liaisons – i.e. the vast majority at the time – as bigots. They advocated the use of well known and effective propaganda techniques to “persuade” the masses to accept homosexual behaviour as normal and even to defend it. You can see how much of the programme has now been carried out and objectives achieved. It is well worth a read.

So, where are we now with music (or what is promoted as such)?

Well, we have this rapper clown Wiz Khalifa offering prizes on Facebook of roll-up papers for kids to make joints out of. He has over ten million “likes” which is very scary.

I think that what we witness is the music industry increasingly turning out a product which is designed to dumb down (via language and drug use) and sexualise (via language, body language and dress – or lack of), as well as encourage children to consider their parents to be out of touch, and like in the Soviet Union, the music industry’s program necessarily includes the propaganda of atheism, so blasphemy becomes ‘cool’ because the rapper and hip hop artist say there ain’t no God.

I wouldn’t be surprised if “counter-culture” is more heavily controlled than the mainstream. How ironic is that? What the music industry certainly aims for is to have the people exactly where they want us at any given time.

The only way that 89 year-old Harold Camping will be correct in his timing is coincidence. Consider this,

But of that day and that hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels which are in heaven, neither the Son, but the Father.

Even Christ doesn’t know the day, but Harold Camping does?!

That would make him God the Father. I doubt he realises that he could be accused of blasphemy. But it gets even worse, Camping has already predicted the Second Coming – that was in 1994 and I can reveal to you that he got it wrong. Even he must see that he is no prophet, but he’s having another stab in the dark anyway (even if he is convinced it is all mathematical).

But, the head of the Christian radio network Family Stations Inc has said that he is sure an earthquake will hit on May 21, sweeping true believers to heaven and leaving others behind to be engulfed in the world’s destruction over a few months.

“We know without any shadow of a doubt it is going to happen,” he said.

I am not laughing. I hope his followers haven’t given away all their worldly goods, as can happen when people fall hook, line and sinker for such characters.

But atheists are not convinced.

No! Really?

Some of you will know, and if you didn’t it may shock you, that I was a Mormon for a short time. I met a lot of very nice and kind people and if any of them are reading this I am not trying to be mean, but stating the facts as I see them.

I won’t go into the circumstances now, but when I started inviting the missionaries into my flat, I was of very low spirit (if you exclude all the alcohol I was consuming). I did believe that the Mormon “prophets” really were what they claimed to be, but fairly soon I started to wake up to reality.

I was given a thick tome about the “prophet” Joseph Fielding Smith by a missionary I got on well with. This particular Smith was the grandson of the brother of the church’s founder, Joseph Smith. Joseph Fielding Smith was the Mormon President from 1970 until his death in 1972, aged 95. In those days black people were not permitted to enter the “priesthood” and JFS wrote in the 1950s that they would never be allowed unless perhaps in the far distant future or on another planet.

It happened in 1978. On Earth.

I have just come across this interesting “prophecy,” which Joseph Fielding Smith announced to stake conference in Honolulu in 1961:

We will never get a man into space. This earth is man’s sphere and it was never intended that he should get away from it.

The moon is a superior planet to the earth and it was never intended that man should go there. You can write it down in your books that this will never happen.

I don’t remember any Mormon telling me that they doubted that men have walked on the moon, so it is illogical for them to believe both this “prophet” and NASA.

Of course, most Mormons will neither know nor care about old prophecies which have been proven to be false, despite the Bible warning about false prophets many times. This is because they believe that whatever the “living prophet” says supersedes the errors of past “prophets.”

And if that sounds crazy, it’s because it is. But don’t laugh too hard, especially if you are a LibLabCon voter, as you are enticed by charlatans of the political variety!

If stories of the Second Coming serve any purpose, they remind us (if we need reminding) that we never know when that day will be and to be ready for it. The evil upon the earth today seems to be increasing all the time and the former civilised countries of the West are decaying badly. Satan seems to be making his final big push. He has plenty of willing angels in the filth-spewing media and politically correct governments.

Another thing to ponder upon is the question posed in the title of this post:

Is Christ really coming back later today?

One day, people will be saying. “Christ came back today, but I wasn’t ready.”

Two MSPs have given these well known “ecofascists” their time and attention – and a conference in the Scottish Parliament. Unsurprisingly, Greenie Patrick Harvie is one. The other is the SNP’s Dr Ian McKee.

One campaigns for homosexual and environmental issues and the other is a retired medical doctor and Deputy Convener of the End of Life Assistance (Scotland) Bill Committee.

They both think a lot of people need to be wiped off the earth.

That’s what I love about “democracy” – you have the chance to vote for such lovely, lovely people.

The radical group is urging First Minister Alex Salmond to launch a Government campaign to curb family size, using the slogan “two’s plenty”.

OPT is calling for Scotland’s population to be cut by a quarter.

Dr McKee, whose wife organised the Holyrood conference, insisted: “The world has finite resources and we can’t go on growing at the current rate. This is a taboo subject for politicians but I think it is something the Scottish Parliament should be discussing.”

I guess getting rid of people to satisfy Gaia is still kind of taboo, but the media and state “education” have made so many other taboos appear normal, like abortion, homosexual acts and increasingly, Dr McKee’s area of interest, bumping off old and sick people, that it’s probably just a matter of time before sacrificing live infants to appease the gods of nature is once again seen as acceptable.

[Dr McKee] added: “I think the Government could encourage families to have less children.

“There is a lot of societal pressure to have children. I think it seems very sensible to put forward the case that people should consider carefully limiting the size of their family.”

Either the man is stupid or, em, no, he is stupid. The fact is that Europeans and North Americans aren’t even having enough children to sustain the population. “Family Planning” has, for decades now, been extremely successful in convincing the public that they only need two children. Feminism has convinced millions of women that they should be separated from their one or two children at an early age to go out to work.

That part of the agenda has already been carried out: mission accomplished for the eugenicists.

[T]he OPT believes Scotland and Britain must do their part to stabilise the world’s population, which could rise to more than nine billion within 40 years. They want the UK population to fall to as low as 30 million, with Scotland playing its part in the reduction.

Can you imagine what needs to happen to achieve this? And these people have been allowed to hold a conference in Parliament.

On immigration, the OPT believes there should be a zero cap on net immigration, meaning numbers would be strictly limited to replace those leaving the country to live elsewhere.

In order to halve the UK population with no net migration, a strict one child policy over decades would be required, like in China. Here too would be a land of forced abortions and sterilisations.

Look who some of the patrons of the Optimum Population Trust are…

Sir David Attenborough OM CH CVO CBE – the naturalist we grew up to love and trust.

Dr Jane Goodall DBE, Founder of the Jane Goodall Institute, and UN Messenger of Peace. (Yes, eugenics is peace!)

Susan Hampshire OBE (remember her?), Actress and population campaigner.

Professor Aubrey Manning OBE, President of the Wildlife Trusts and Emeritus Professor of Natural History, University of Edinburgh – another naturalist who would rather cuddle a dung beetle than a human.

Jonathon Porritt CBE – of course. Another friendly face who would rather you were dead and buried. Or is cremation more environmentally-friendly (if you extract the mercury fillings first, obviously)?

Sir Crispin Tickell GCMG KCVO, Chancellor of Kent University, Director of the Policy Foresight Programme at the James Martin Institute, and former UK Permanent Representative on the United Nations Security Council.

After I posted those Alan Watt videos on eugenics, Frank Davis pondered upon the likelihood of major world events being predetermined by a global elite, and largely decided against it.

If you look at those involved with the OPT, you can get a glimpse into how things work. Alan Watt explained that he had come to the conclusion that there had to be an elite leading the world because “the big players” like Henry Kissinger, the Huxleys and Lord Bertrand Russell belonged to the same institutions and history had panned out according to what they had called for in their writings.

This little OPT humanity-hating cabal consists of everyone they need to change the UK’s attitudes and laws. They have the nation’s most recognisable authority on the earth – a broadcaster who receives almost unrivalled respect. They have two UN representatives, and of course the UN supports China’s one-child policy. They have scientists and professors who can talk up the agenda to their naive university students and their equally naive colleagues. They will write for major newspapers about why we need a one-child policy to save the earth.

And notice how the majority of patrons have been “honoured” with British Empire medals. One of these is Sara Parkin OBE, who is “Founder Director and Trustee of Forum for the Future, Chair of the Richard Sandbrook Trust, Board member of the European Training Foundation“.

The ETF is the EU agency which supports education and training in countries surrounding the EU. Eugenics is a global agenda, not just for us lucky ones in the EU.

Forum for the Future is also concerned with “global challenges” like climate change and population growth. Look how they are getting their agenda across,

Since 1996 our Masters in Leadership for Sustainable Development has been training the sustainability leaders of the future. Last year we celebrated the graduation of our 165th student, and many graduates are already making their mark as think-tank directors and government advisers.

Scared enough yet? This is how they do it. They use the mass media; they train the young to be “leaders”; they are involved with their fellow eugenicists at the UN.

That Scotsman article ends with this,

A recent paper by the OPT claimed that if couples had two children instead of three they could cut their family’s carbon dioxide output by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York.

That’s what children are to these monsters: a waste of air. Useless eaters. Parasites.

But they are the parasites, attaching themselves to every broadcaster, school, government department, and everywhere else they can, to promote their sickness and kill off sane and measured debate.

This is why it doesn’t matter which main party you vote for – the politicians aren’t in charge.

Beans and silly sausage?

No, it’s not a gripe about the Tories increasing the overseas aid budget to help regimes like Pakistan’s that buys weapons of mass destruction (real ones) and puts people on death row for talking about Christ.

Today is the BBC’s annual attempt to get the land’s couch potatoes to phone up and donate money to “good causes”. To the Children In Need viewer, charity begins at home – and ends there in most cases – in the sense that they are “entertained” in their living rooms during the 36 hours the show runs (it only feels that long!) and don’t even need to leave the chaise longe to telephone Pudsey’s special “give us yer effing money” number. Not that the loveable, perpetually injured bear would use Geldoffian profanities.

While soap opera “stars” make fools of themselves on the telethon, the real heroes of the hour are those brave men and women all across the land being sponsored for sitting in baths of cold baked beans – not thinking that they are wasting an awful lot of food which could feed the hungry.

I think the problem is that, with an increasingly dumbed down population, we need to be told when to give and to whom. I have lost count of the number of charities who write to me with literature whose text and pictures are aimed at making me feel guilty. I have news for them: I don’t! Many of them are big businesses with highly-paid staff in some cases – I don’t mean the many faithful volunteers, but the chief execs, directors and area managers.

I had written more about specific charities I have studied, but have decided to keep it for another post as it has ended up longer than expected.

Have we lost the real meaning of “charity”?

I have made the effort to talk to some of the alcoholics who stay at one of the town’s hostels (called bed and breakfasts) and invited a couple into my home for cups of tea and meals and given practical help with such things as dealing with the “authorities”.

Not that everyone could do that, but being a reformed drinker myself, it is easier for me to understand them and not be afraid. It would be easier if I gave £20 to an alcohol charity to employ someone to go to the B&B to make a cup of tea and offer advice!

Not nearly as rewarding though.

If we as a nation have to be either made to feel guilty or “entertained” in order to give money or help to people/charities then something has gone badly wrong with our attitude towards others less fortunate.

I don’t know if buses are still carrying this advert, but I came across it lately on an old leaflet from 2008 which was in my “to read” pile. I have finally read it! The leaflet was issued by Arab World Ministries whose noble mission is “Building Christ’s Church among Arab peoples.”

Before discussing the best way of bringing the truth of the Gospel to Muslims and Arabs of other faiths, I want to comment on this strange advert. Although it is not exactly topical news, I hope you will stick with me as I try to uncover what Muslims expect from the rest of us in Britain.

The first thing I noticed on the advert was the cute child. He’s harmless isn’t he? Wouldn’t hurt a fly. And he is wearing a baseball cap, which is even on back-to-front, so he is completely Westernised. One of us. Nothing to fear. Islam is Peace.

Then I wondered about this thing about being proud. Isn’t pride a great sin in Islam? In other words, the advert is just saying what the campaign people think we want to hear.

Then I thought, well wait a tick. Are they ‘proud’ to be British or just proud to be British Muslims? There is a huge difference, which we probably aren’t supposed to notice. Being British and being a Muslim are totally separate, let’s call them, conditions. I am British – and Scottish, and a Christian. I have never described myself as a British Christian. Why should I? I am these two things, plus many more (cue hilarious suggestions in the comments section).

Am I proud to be British? I try not to be proud of anything, as it is a sin, indeed it cometh before destruction. I am glad to be British and Scottish. Even if I was prone to pride (okay, I succumb like everyone else sometimes. I’m not perfect), I am certainly not proud of the laughing stock our country has become due to our politicians enslaving us with almost every EU, UN and envirofascist diktat they are presented with.

How could anyone, Muslim or otherwise, be proud of 200,000 abortions a year (apart from Diane Abbott, maybe, and her fellow bloodthirsty feministas)?

How could anyone, Muslim or otherwise, be proud of our government waging immoral wars for corporate empire?

Let’s be honest, the modern Western way of life is totally at odds with Islam. Can a true Muslim be proud of being British? Is it really possible? Maybe being a British Muslim is something they can take some comfort in as it is bound to be better than being a Muslim in most other parts of the globe.

It doesn’t mean they are willing to assimilate or give ground to the people who live in the country they are pretending to be proud of.

When we visit the Islam is Peace website, we are greeted by the cute wee boy again. He looks remarkably light-skinned on my monitor. Coincidence? They tell us that Islam is a complete way of life and the unifying belief in one God (sic) brings Muslims from all over the world together as one family.

The “family” therefore is Islam, not Britain, unless perhaps we become another Islamic nation.

On the campaign video, the first thing they tell us is, “Islam is NOT about hostility”. The campaign was begun as a response to the bombings of 7/7/05, but even so, I can’t think of any other religion who would use this as an introduction to understanding their belief system.

Imagine a video intended to give a good impression of Catholicism and starting with, “Catholicism is NOT about systematic child abuse by priests”. I wouldn’t give credence to anything which followed that statement, would you?

After another smiling child, we read, “Islam is NOT violence”. This is followed by a smiling baby. It’s probably not worth your time watching this video. To sum it up, some Muslim ladies with English accents say that they are peaceful and British and two white men – someone from the advertising company and a bus driver – say what a good idea it is to advertise peace on buses.

Another video outlines the campaign’s “5 Point Plan”. Number one is to fight Islamophobia; to monitor and fight Islamophobia wherever it occurs.

Ostensibly about peace, we can see straight away that the campaign is about much more than fighting towards this noble objective. It’s about power. Of course it is; Islam is the family.

Number Two is about creating dialogue between the Muslim Community and the rest of Britain, ensuring that [the Muslim's] voice is always in the mainstream media. To partner with business and government to ensure [Muslims'] concerns like racism and social exclusion are understood.

The rest of Britain is seen as a separate entity, which is why they can only be proud to be British Muslims and not proud to be British. To partner with business and government is, of course, code for more legislation to have our society changed to suit them. It makes sense, though. The more ground the 97% of non-Muslims give, the less agro we are likely to get in return. Except that, because Islam is the family and an admittedly separate community, there is no middle ground and concessions will be neverending once they start, and they have started.

Number Three calls on the government to make lasting peace in areas of conflict around the world, helping eliminate the injustices that foment division and nurture violence.

Peace in Britain, therefore, depends on our government’s foreign policy. I am dead against these wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well, as I am sure is the majority of the UK, but I don’t threaten the lives of innocent civilians because I oppose them.

Number Four is about being creative so that Muslims have [their] finger on the pulse on the British mainstream to understand what [the Muslim 'Community'] wants the world to hear.

The BBC has already been found to be pro-Muslim and anti-Christian.

Number Five is about dialogue and friendship, to create a culture of understanding, because Mohammed said that anyone who believes in Allah, let him be good to his neighbour.

There will be peace just as soon as we become an Islamic country. Except that there won’t, because the inevitable factions will develop and we know what happens then. Even if they don’t, the rest of us (which will be far less than the current 97% after further social engineering and Cameron’s crusade to welcome Turkey to our EU family) will be living under a repressive Islamic regime.

The only conclusion I can reach after looking at this campaign – and this one is meant to reach out to all of Britain with peace and understanding – is that Islam offers no peace and no freedom.

This is what that Arab World Ministries leaflet says,

“It is not hard for us to meet and make friends with Muslim people. They are warm, friendly people waiting to meet us. Speak to the Pakistani shopkeeper. Talk to the Muslim ladies as you wait with them at the school gate. Invite your neighbour to tea. Before long you will have a friend with whom you can share all sorts of matters, including your relationship with God.”

Christians have many duties. One is to bring souls to Christ. Not by the sword nor with threats of violence. We are to love our neighbour regardless of foreign policy or media brainwashing. We are to help the poor and infirm and demand justice for the afflicted.

Our society, largely based on Judeo-Christian values, was successful because justice had a sure foundation, not one based wholly on the agenda of whatever political system was in place or on a religion that calls for severe beatings for women who have been gang-raped.

A few people were persuaded to fight our way of life due to the mind-control efforts of the early feminists and ‘gay rights’ militants. Like Islam in the UK, gentle persuasion and reason weren’t an option for them to change society due to their limited numbers, so it had to be achieved by stealth: legislation against perceived injustices and manipulation of the media (and therefore, the people) – exactly what the Islam is Peace 5 Point Plan is advocating.

After decades of this re-engineering, those of us who retain some sense of reality have become the ones subjected to abuse. We are the ones being called names. The media have managed to make patriotism seem like xenophobia: the “Little Englander” who dares to want to preserve his civilised society. Our national flag is considered by some to be racist. Taxi drivers and binmen in various parts of England were prohibited from displaying St. George flags during the World Cup.

It seems that pride, for those who want it, is only for the select few. You can be proud to be a British Muslim and proud to be gay and of course, proud to be a woman who needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle.

Personally, I can live without pride. I have seen how it afflicts others.

The shows they watched included the popular soaps and talent shows, but they also hoped to find “positive portrayals” of homosexuals and bisexuals in The Gadget Show, Football Focus, You’ve Been Framed and Blue Peter.

Yes, Blue Peter.

Or maybe they chose these programmes specifically because they didn’t expect to see any mention of sexuality (of any sort) and so this would make their “findings” look better for them.

As I wrote on Anna’s blog, because homosexuals know that their behaviour is disgusting, the activists hope that the day will come when every single voice of dissent has been silenced forever and they can finally sit back and stop feeling dirty and guilty. They think that if we all accept them (via ‘education’ and mass media indoctrination), they will finally be able to accept themselves.

But my recent blog post which offers a cure for homosexual desire suggests that homosexuals will never be able to accept themselves in their current condition.

So what does this have to do with legalised paedophilia?

Consider this…

The law permitted two “consenting adults” over 21 of the same sex to engage in indecent sexual behaviour in private.

Over the following 40 years, the age has been reduced from 21 to 18 to 16 (i.e. legalised pederasty now).

The media has been instrumental in making all of this appear acceptable and will do so also with paedophilia.

There are already various people talking about children’s “sexual rights” and calls for the age of consent to be reduced further, including by Peter Tatchell.

There have been plans to change the law in N. Ireland (drawn up in London for the provincial guinea pigs) which would have enabled 13 year olds to legally have sex with each other (and an 18 year old man could legally have sodomised a 15 year old boy) and in 2008 Scotland’s children’s commissioner argued for much the same thing.

21 – 18 – 16 – 13 – ?

How low can this agenda get?

As Ed Balls again tries to push through his legislation which would compel all primary schoolchildren to be indoctrinated with sex ‘education’ from the age of 5 and the aforementioned Children’s Commissioner said that the Scottish Government should consult 8-year-olds on changes to the law on underage sex because it “affects” them and as parental rights are constantly being undermined (e.g. no opt-out for the proposed 5 year olds’ sex ed) then things will continue to get worse.

“Children’s rights” are at the expense of parental rights which in fact means that the State is assuming all the rights.

You may remember the fuss last year when the NHS in Sheffield issued a leaflet encouraging schoolchildren to have sex or masturbate twice a week to help their cardiovascular system.

The Mail also reminds us,

[The leaflets] came to light just a week after it emerged that teenagers who took part in a £6million Government initiative to reduce teenage pregnancies were more than twice as likely to fall pregnant as other girls.

The scheme tried to persuade girls not to get pregnant by handing out condoms and teaching them about sex.

Standard Government-issue advice. No wonder we are where we are. While waiting for my recent doctor’s appointment, I had a good look at the posters on the walls. A number of them were directed at youngsters and reminded them of the confidentiality they are entitled to, i.e. the State can know, but not the parents or legal guardians.

When the media have done their ‘job’ once again of re-engineering the opinions of the masses, multitudes will be convinced that children should be having sex because it is a) their ‘right’ b) a healthy choice (with free contraception and abortion if required) and c) none of the parents’ damned business anyway.

The organisation, which carried out 65,000 abortions last year, has circumvented a ban on the commercials because it is a charity and does not make a profit from its services.

According to the Mail, the so-called charity receives an estimated £30million a year from the NHS to carry out abortions.

A legal battle has been mounted to try and stop the broadcast, but I have just called Channel 4 at 12.50pm and they have confirmed it is still scheduled for broadcast. I had my complaint logged as well as my comment that I will not be watching Channel 4 again if this advert goes ahead. Of course, I no longer have the telly, but occasionally I have access in someone else’s house and I really won’t be switching to it.

The advert can be seen on the Guardian’s site. It is devious. It doesn’t mention abortion, but instead asks “Are you late?” and then offers viewers their ‘helpline’. Then at that stage, of course, they can start to offer their killing ’services’.

The ‘charity’ is named after Marie Stopes, the eugenicist who was so infatuated with Adolf Hitler that she sent him poetry. Stopes, who opened Britain’s first abortion clinic, was a fruit loop if ever there was one…

Stopes, a racist and an anti-Semite, campaigned for selective breeding to achieve racial purity, a passion she shared with Adolf Hitler in adoring letters and poems that she sent the leader of the Third Reich.

The feminist also attended the Nazi congress on population science in Berlin in 1935, while calling for the “compulsory sterilisation of the diseased, drunkards, or simply those of bad character.” Stopes acted on her appalling theories by concentrating her abortion clinics in poor areas so as to reduce the birth rate of the lower classes.

Stopes left most of her estate to the Eugenics Society, an organization that shared her passion for racial purity and still exists today under the new name The Galton Institute. The society has included members such as Charles Galton Darwin (grandson of the evolutionist), Julian Huxley and Margaret Sanger.

Ominously, The Galton Institute website promotes its support and funding initiative for “the practical delivery of family planning facilities, especially in developing countries.” In other words, the same organization that once advocated sterilizing black people to achieve racial purity in the same vein as the Nazis is now bankrolling abortions of black babies in the third world.

Stopes extended her vile doctrines even to her own family. She cut her son Harry out of her will after he married a near- sighted woman – actually the daughter of Barnes Wallis, inventor of the bouncing bomb deployed by the Dambusters.

She planned to adopt a child herself-but stipulated that “the boy must be completely healthy, intelligent and uncircumcised”.

This dehumanisation process which has been ongoing for over a century is affecting all of us in a big way.

You can sign the petition here and call Channel 4 on 0845 076 0191.

My inital comment on the subject was in reply to someone called Bovved, who praised the ‘charity’s’ tireless fundraising. I replied,

NB: the Fakecharities website:

When I noticed that this simple comment had been removed, I added this one:

This has also been removed.

Maybe they don’t want the wider public to realise how much influence a few big business and government-sponsored, unelected people meeting in a room have over the rest of society.

P.S. And they haven’t approved my ‘Real Street’ logo.

H/T dprogram.net