/** Tools */

12 June 2009

Britain's got fascists

The results of the UK tranche of the European Elections are in and everyone is left wondering how so many votes got doled out to a party of people who never go anywhere without adorning themselves in the tawdry bunting of the British flag.

Brainwashing: It's only subliminal if you don't notice


Anonymous said...

it's only subliminal if you lump together loads of pictures of people wearing red, white and blue. You could do the same with yellow, green and brown if you could be bothered.

The Antagonist said...

You could do the same with yellow, green and brown if you could be bothered.

So could you. Then you could explain why you think the glut of yellow, green and brown are in any way significant or relevant.

Anonymous said...

Quite right, not significant or relevant at all. What do Jon Snow's ties signify? Monster Raving Loony Party? Does the red and black colouring of the BBC symbolise the Nazi agenda of the famously pro-Palestine broadcaster? As I said, lump together pictures of any variety of colours and you can find any meaning you like. But you're only kidding yourself.

Anonymous said...

"famously pro-Palestinian"? The BBC?

Well lookie here! Looks like we've got ourselves a debater!

paul said...

Famously pro Palestinian since 1948

That would make an excellent strap line for their corporate logo.

Große Lüge said...

All this was inspired by the principle--which is quite true in itself--that in the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.

Anonymous said...

Ref: Große Lüge

Anonymous said...

I must say that this is an impressive website. I love how your posts tie in with current politics so well. You seem to really love your site. Aside from my medical practice, I have a deep interest for all things related to politics. Keep up the great work and please visit by my blog sometime. The url is http://healthy-nutrition-facts.blogspot.com

Anonymous said...

The British Constitution Group

I Pledge: -

1. To boycott the main political parties until our sovereignty has been reinstated, our rights respected and the rule of law obeyed. (We encourage British citizens to vote for any candidate who will endorse our right to self-governance, but question the integrity of any MP or candidate who claims to do so whilst remaining a member of a political party not so-committed.)

2. To renounce EU citizenship and reject entirely any constitution but our own.

3. To acknowledge Royal Assent to be the exclusive authority of Her Majesty, representing the sovereignty of the people.

4. To declare loyalty to our constitution and uphold same.

5. To give support to the cause of the reinstatement of our national sovereignty by way of a regular monthly contribution.

Anonymous said...

Were is Susan Boil? She is great and shuld be on your page. Please put a picture on of her. Do you like the dancers Diver city? I loved it when they put thatt kid in the bag. Sick!

Anonymous said...

A hard-hitting article from the so-called mainstream media:


Who needs lunity?

Anonymous said...

Hard hitting? Look like a sales pitch.

Anonymous said...

Well it doesn't advocate an armed revolution, which is what you probably expect of the 'mainstream' media. It informs readers with the facts about the worrying amount of surveillance in our society and how this is set to increase massively. I don't understand why you think it resembles a sales pitch. It must be because you can't stand the idea of the 'mainstream' media writing it rather than some semi-literate conspiratard.

The Antagonist said...

I'm not sure what your problem or point is, Anonymous.

What on earth could be even remotely worrying about the amount of surveillance in our society?

After all, it's been said many times by our charming, trusthworthy and democratically elected representatives that, "If you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear".

Plus, as we live in a democracy, not some totalitarian, authoritarian regime that feels at liberty to do whatever it wants, we can vote all the surveillance and monitoring out of existence any time we like.

Anonymous said...

Maybe not vote it out Ant, but in Germany ANPR was deemed illegal after a test-case brought by three motorists. If only we could be bothered, hey Ant? I suggest you stop typing and start fighting. You don't need to turn the whole system upside down when something goes wrong.

The Antagonist said...

Alright then, you, your fervour (expressed, somewhat ironically, by typing) and a couple of your fighting mates can bring the UK test case -- some of the work is already done if a European precedent has been set -- and I'll write about it, publicise it and support it in whatever other ways I can.

Furthermore, I'm offering to do all that, irrespective of your case and cause being a middle class concern about a system of surveillance that only tracks the number plates of those who can afford to run cars.

Anonymous said...

A middle class concern? You really have no idea Antagonist. Outside the major conurbations, you have to own a car or you can't get to work. There simply isn't the public transport. Every single one of the people I work with on minimum wage owns a car, because they have to. Stop looking at everything in terms of class. Cornwall is England's poorest county, how do you think people in Cornwall get to work?

P.C. Gone Mad said...


The Antagonist said...

My earlier offer to publicise your ANPR test case still stands. Do let me know of any progress.

"Three-fifths of households in the bottom quintile of the income distribution in 1996-1998 did not have a car, while almost half of those in the top quintile had two or more cars. For some households, use of a car may be a necessity rather than a reflection of income." - Office of National Statistics

If poverty, minimum (in reality, maximum) wage, social inequality, and public transport aren't class issues, what are they?

Middle England said...

With observations such as my fervour being expressed somewhat ironically, you'd feel right at home here in middle England.

Anonymous said...

Watch out for those damned statistics Ant, that means three-fifths of the bottom fifth. Now think about that. That's about 12%. I take it the other 88% are middle class?

The Antagonist said...

Have a brownie point for being able to read and do simple maths.

Twelve percent of the population are very poor instead of just plain old poor, so perhaps they matter even less than the households for which "use of a car may be a necessity rather than a reflection of income".

Unless, of course, one (the latter) of those groups happens to include poor old you, in which case the personal becomes political and it becomes time to whinge and whine about what rotten misfortunes have befallen you.

Good luck with the ANPR test case.

Anonymous said...

Yes it's the simple maths that seems to have eluded you Ant. Do pick another topic, I find this so much fun. You need to start ignoring me again.

paul said...

Rest assured,anon, the entire alliance is behind you on this one and we wish you well on your campaign. Keep us posted on your progress.

Anonymous said...

In that case paul, you would agree that the 'mainstream' media of our 'fascist' state is capable of producing articles critical of it (which, by definition, means that we do not live in a fascist state).

You would also agree that just three motorists and one court case can put a stop to even the most pernicious forms of surveillance in our society.

And, of course, you would be right behind me in arguing that we, the subjects of the so-called 'fascist' state, are perfectly capable of changing the system from within it.

If we are in agreement on all this paul, then who needs loonity?

paul said...

If you know what I am going to think, why bother telling me?

Because you don't know what I would, but feel inclined to assert what you would like me to agree to.

The agreements you ascribe to me seem an awful lot to draw from a statement of support for your position on surveillance.

The article in question is hardly critical. It quotes only the advocates of the system and enlarges only on the stated benefits, while saying nothing about the 'orwellian/big brother' aspects the eye catching opening and headline refer to.

I would not say it is hard hitting journalism. If it was critical of the government or the scheme, why were no critical questions relevant to the headline put to mr whitely?

You might choose to define a fascist state as one which does not allow critical articles (which your example is clearly not), but I think that is an extremely narrow definition.

As for three motorists and a court case, that hasn't happened here yet, so it is perhaps to early to tell.

You are the one that keeps referring to a 'fascist' state, while I don't, though I see many areas of policy,in place and planned, which would be of great use to the complete implementation of one.
I do not think such states appear overnight, cut out of whole cloth.

As for changing the system from within, that's done all the time, but by our executive and its favoured interest groups, very rarely by subjects.

As for 'loonity', I don't really know what you mean by that, so you, as usual, assume too much to say I agree. If you explain it, I could say yes or no.

Anonymous said...

Why would anyone get excited about a lame surveillance article that is nearly four years old?

paul said...

ask anonymous

Adrian Peirson said...

In the New World Order we will all be chipped.
Treanor News Website

www.qurantutoring.com said...

That would make an excellent strap line for their corporate logo.