Translate

Showing posts with label bastards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bastards. Show all posts

Friday, 17 July 2015

The truth about knife crime you won't read anywhere else



These knives are wielded by bastards and used on other bastards.

Bastards are mainly responsible for the crime figures, but the British worship sluts and must therefore put up with bastards and their bastard criminal behaviour.

Saturday, 3 May 2014

Is the average juror getting stupider and stupider even as the rules that make a fair trial more likely are done away with by PC libtards and feminists?

Is the average juror really capable of distinguishing between the number of accusations against an accused and the veracity of them?  Is it possible that they are not really capable of holding more than one thought in their heads at any given time?


it is worth reflecting on the wider issues posed by these historic cases. The problem is two-fold: one, the social climate in which defendants are tried is especially hostile to sex crime; and two, the courts have dismantled certain procedural safeguards that previously were in place to protect an accused, so the dice is now loaded against the accused in a way that it would not have been at the time of the offence. Thus, the requirement for independent corroboration in sex cases has been removed.

The most radical shift in criminal procedure is the abolition of what used to be called the ‘similar fact’ evidence rule. In a case called DPP v Boardman in 1975, the House of Lords acknowledged that offences could ordinarily only be tried together if the offender’s modus operandi showed a ‘strikingly similar’ method, such as a rapist who always wore a Batman costume. This enabled the defence to keep out evidence that might be prejudicial, such as cases where witnesses have colluded to give false evidence, or cases where one witness has simply been influenced by contact with another witness.

Unfortunately, in 1991 and 1995, the Lords took a different approach, and relaxed this rule. That has led to the current practice of ‘bundling’ of multiple sex allegations in the same trial. It’s called ‘corroboration by volume’, or ‘no smoke without fire’. And it is hugely effective, which is why it has become the prosecution’s favourite tactic.

This development coincided with the practice of police ‘trawling’ for complainants, which unfolded as a result of the ‘paedophile ring’ theory of abuse that police and social workers were following when investigating children’s care homes in the 1990s. The consequences for our justice system have been very serious. Time after time, juries are faced with extremely grave accusations of an historic nature, where there is no supporting independent evidence (such as medical evidence), but which turn simply on one person’s word against another’s.

As the historian Richard Webster pointed out in his Memorandum of Evidence to the Home Affairs Select Committee, which examined this problem in 2002: ‘When defendants are compelled to face large numbers of allegations of sexual abuse made by different complainants in a single trial, the presumption of innocence is almost inevitably destroyed.’

The emotional impact on a jury of a whole sequence of tearful complainants speaking of sexual violation cannot be underestimated. The obscenity and, sometimes, violence involved makes their stories extremely powerful, even where the vague nature of historic allegations (usually without any specific dates) make them well-nigh impossible to rebut convincingly, unless by chance some contemporaneous document is unearthed, which gives the accused a convincing alibi.

To make matters more complicated, it is now received wisdom among the victim/ survivor movement and the therapy industry that rape and other forms of sexual assault invariably scar victims for life, causing them years of torment. This reflects decades of feminist campaigning.

http://www.spiked-online.com/newsite/article/cliffords-sentencing-has-little-to-do-with-justice/14981#.U2VASfldVqU

As one expert pointed out in the landmark malicious falsehood case of Reed & Lillie in 2002:

‘when a collective belief [that children have been abused] takes root in a group, it is a very powerful force. It holds people in a group, who mutually reinforce each other, and it is quite difficult for professionals, unless they are very experienced, to stand back from the weight of that belief system.

A troubling feature of the present approach to historic abuse allegations is the deployment of the logical fallacy: ‘if so many people from different parts of the country are saying this, it must be true.’ Exactly the same naïve literalism was evinced about allegations of Satanic ritual abuse in the early 1990s, which turned out to be fantasy.

"The risk, the danger, the logical fallacy is indeed quite manifest to those who are in the habit of thinking about such matters. It is so easy to derive from a series of unsatisfactory accusations, if there are enough of them, an accusation which at least appears satisfactory. It is so easy to collect from a mass of ingredients, not one of which is sufficient, a totality which will appear to contain what is missing. That of course is only another way of saying that when a person is dealing with a considerable mass of facts, in particular if those facts are of such a nature as to invite reprobation, nothing is easier than confusion of mind; and, therefore, if such charges are to be brought in a mass, it becomes essential that the method upon which guilt is to be ascertained should be stated with punctilious exactness".

 it is not uncommon for ‘survivors’ making allegations to have had prior contact, for example via social media sites: another source of witness contamination.

http://www.barristermagazine.com/article-listing/current-issue/the-cult-of-victimhood-and-the-limits-of-the-law-part-1.html?fb_action_ids=636027906471846&fb_action_types=og.likes

Are some people just too stupid to serve on a jury?


http://www.express.co.uk/comment/expresscomment/379367/Are-some-people-just-too-stupid-to-serve-on-a-jury

If, as the Guardian, says the numbers of learning disabled people are increasing by 5% every year, in which year will Britain be 100% learning disabled?

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/in-what-year-will-britain-be-100.html

Q:  What causes inferior and degenerate offspring and learning and other disabilities?

A:   Careless copulation by sluts leading to widespread illegitimacy and racial and national degeneracy.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2009/11/humpback-whales-cleverer-than.html
Humpback whales cleverer than promiscuous human females living in a welfare state

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/science/130524/western-iqs-drop-14-points-last-century-study-says-2
Western IQs drop by 14 points in last century, study says

Are people getting stupider and stupider and more and more degenerate the sluttier women become?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2285670/Most-children-of-British-mothers-born-out-of-wedlock.html
Most British mothers SSMs, most British children bastards.







Are these women likely to be good mothers and care about the education of their children?
Peaches Geldof - an extremely bad example of liberal parenting?
DISGUSTING standards of parenting in Britain
Are the mothers in the countries that came top in the OECD league tables mostly SSMs and practitioners of liberal parenting? No?  res ipsa loquitur.


100 lashes instead of £100 would stop Slut Single Mums producing yet more variously-fathered feral criminal rioting bastards dragging the British average down in the OECD league tables.


The Bhagavad Gita:


"Out of the corruption of women proceeds the corruption of races; out of the corruption of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory, the loss of understanding, and out of this all evil." 

Friday, 18 April 2014

The Bhagavad Gita indicates the position we should take on SSMs if we are to save our civilisation

The Bhagavad Gita:

"Out of the corruption of women proceeds the corruption of races; out of the corruption of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory, the loss of understanding, and out of this all evil." 
"Out of the corruption of SLUTS proceeds the corruption of races; out of the corruption of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory, the loss of understanding, and out of this all evil." 
"Out of the corruption of TOLERATING SLUTS AND BASTARDS proceeds the corruption of races; out of the corruption of races, the loss of memory; out of the loss of memory, the loss of understanding, and out of this all evil." 

http://vedabase.net/bg/1/41/

sańkaro narakāyaiva
kula-ghnānāḿ kulasya ca
patanti pitaro hy eṣāḿ
lupta-piṇḍodaka-kriyāḥ

sańkaraḥ — such unwanted children [bastards]

TRANSLATION

An increase of unwanted population [bastards] certainly causes hellish life both for the family and for those who destroy the family tradition.

Thursday, 24 November 2011

SHIT happens when you don't call things by their proper names

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism#Rectification_of_names



If names be not correct, language is not in accordance with the truth of things.

If language be not in accordance with the truth of things, affairs cannot be carried on to success.

When affairs cannot be carried on to success, proprieties and music do not flourish.

When proprieties and music do not flourish, punishments will not be properly awarded.

When punishments are not properly awarded, the people do not know how to move hand or foot.

Therefore a superior man considers it necessary that the names he uses may be spoken appropriately, and also that what he speaks may be carried out appropriately. What the superior man requires is just that in his words there may be nothing incorrect."

(Analects XIII, 3, tr. Legge)



To be a racist is the worst thing to be, but what is a racist and what constitutes racism?

Is complaining about immigration racism and bigotry?

Is BASTARDY a good thing?

Slut Single Mums are mothers of bastards. What is wrong with this definition apart from the fact that this will cause offence to sluts and bastards? Why should we consider the feelings of sluts and bastards anyway?  Are they really better than married mothers or the legitimate?

A promiscuous woman is the worst sort of woman to be (and she is also the worst sort of employee), because she breeds bastards.

Why is "bastard" a derogatory term?

Because the stupidity and the low standards of the mother will be passed on to her offspring.  Not only that, the bastard will probably have had a deprived childhood and be deprived of the benign influence of a loving male parental figure and his family connections because of the stupidity and promiscuity of his or her mother.

Excuses and allowances will be made for him if one wishes to be compassionate, lowering standards of morality and education.

It is from Sluts and Bastards that the British developed their Culture of Excuses.

If no excuses and allowances are made then we will feel bad for being harsh and illiberal.

Now, we have got to the stage where even a party that is supposed to be promoting the interests of the white race dare not criticise these sluts, because most of their membership consists of sluts and bastards.

The BNP no longer dares to criticise these promiscuous women, who commit the foul sin that is the miscegenation of the unmarried, who are making the white race weaker, more stupid, more degenerate and more cowardly with every bastard born in Britain each minute of the day.

That is why British employers would rather gouge out their eyes than hire British employees, and that is why the government continues to let immigrant labour enter the country to replace the useless bastards of the sluts.

Damned if you are nice to sluts and bastards, and also damned if you are not.

Let us call a spade a spade, a slut a slut and a bastard a bastard, instead of calling them "one-parent families".  Then we will know exactly what to do with them.  

Thursday, 18 August 2011

Anti-Slut Campaign in Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland after the riots

"Don't howl Starkey down. Gangsta culture is a poison spreading among youths of all races"
(For 'gangsta culture' read 'SLUT SINGLE MUM culture')

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2026053/David-Starkey-Gangsta-culture-poison-spreading-youths-races.html


I am already known for being the victim of a BNP single mum with disabled children who got the Chairman to expel me from the party by kicking up a fuss when I pointed out to her that eugenics had always been discreetly practised before the welfare state and asked her why it was not her fault when she became a single mum after she was impregnated by a violent criminal who was not her husband. I am also known for challenging the likes of Ed West (whom I believe may have sired illegitimate children and is refusing to marry their mother),  Norman Wells of Family Youth Concern who persist in calling a spade a spatula and who tells me that his organisation is not in the business of bashing single mums.  (If it is not in the business of bashing single mums and feel thoroughly ashamed of themselves, then what the hell is his organisation for?  He could not answer, nor would he tell me what he thought was the preventing his organisation from being more successful because he would have had to use the dreaded F word - FEMINISM.)

Most important and egregious of all are those in the Tory Party such as Theresa Twat May and Cunt Cameron who have betrayed the principles of Conservatism and encouraged, as long ago as 2002, slut single mothers to breed at taxpayers' expense.

My sacrifice is already known. I refuse to cower before the worst of women and the worst of people. So all I have to do now is challenge them into having a public debate. Patience and persistence, not disorderly retreat and unprincipled apologies to the stupid, promiscuous, irresponsible and arrogant, who do not deserve it.

If I can count on the support of this rare group of people called right-thinking members of society - even if it is a grudging "I agree with her views though not with her choice of words"- then things can be taken further.

But I already know that scummy, emasculated, cowardly and hypocritical educated white middle class men will be too fearful of incurring the wrath of the feminazis. In this matter only the Muslims dare challenge feminism while the Jews, Christians and even the BNP cower before the slut single mum who multiply like cancer cells and turn their civilisation into the degraded degenerate demented stinking mess that it is Paedo Bastard Britain Slutland.  (Yes, feminism causes paedophilia too.)

Not even the BNP - can you believe that? Not even an ORTHODOX Rabbi will say anything against slut single mums encouraged by successive governments to breed at the expense of the taxpayer.

The Jews behave like cunning manipulative women who prevaricate and don't show their hand on account of their being a despised and persecuted minority while Christianity is the religion of slaves and women, and we cannot expect much from those with the mentality of slaves and whose heads are stuffed with feminine preoccupations and sensibilities, can we?

I can therefore only count on the Muslims now to support me in this, it would appear.  The Koran after all commands them to man up and enjoin what is good and forbid what is evil, but will they be too Westernised and Anglilcised and therefore too feeble-minded and feeble-spirited by now to do even this?

We can only wait and pray and see.   It was after all the Muslim community - the ones who had all the shops to loot - who suffered the most.  Whites are now as scummy mummily single-parented as blacks, these days, and that was really the point that David Starkey was trying to make.  Three of their brave young men got mown down by CHAV bastard scum the spawn of slut single mums.   Will they at least challenge feminism?  After all, they now live here and ought to care what happens to this society, if only out of self-interest.

Over to you, Muslim Council of Britain and Association of British Muslims.  

Monday, 4 August 2008

10 policies for Labour to reinvogorate itself

I cannot imagine any sensible person in the Labour government wanting to lead the Labour Party to defeat in the next election. (It is a very disturbing conclusion to reach that there are no longer any sensible people left in the Labour government, apart from the principled and admirable Frank Field whom I would love to see becoming PM through Telling the Truth.) A Camoronian premiership is a historical inevitability, surely? Nor can I understand why Brown will not formally stake his claim on his absolute right to lead Labour into defeat at the next general election.

Blair is the only other "sensible person" left in the Labour Party fit to lead it into defeat. Perhaps he should be invited back into government and a by- election arranged to let him back in if he be fool enough to accept.

As for the new policies required to bring enliven Labour's lacklustre performance and policy drift, may I suggest proposals to:

(1) introduce an elitist, nationalist, rationalist but non-racist, non-expansionist one-party state run along the lines of the host of the Olympics 2008 who are doing so well for themselves

(2) reintroduce capital punishment and the principle of condign and economical punishment of criminals

(3) constitutionally establish the principle of limited government

(4) abolish the welfare state and reintroduce the concept of the deserving and undeserving poor and a government department to distinguish between the two

(5) introduce compulsory health insurance and dividing its provision into

(a) basic
(b) standard
(c) luxury

(6) give the British a referendum on the EU on an "in or out" basis

(7) disestablish the Church of England (and break the too-long connection with defeat, decline and dementia) and invite "tenders" from other faiths to replace it. The Muslims will probably have a few ideas about how Anglican Islam could be established.

(8) reinforce the British tradition of having a "Special Poodle Relationship" with the world's superpower and henceforth take active steps to become a Pekingese lapdog

(9) allow children to learn Mandarin in British schools as they used to learn European languages

(10) withdraw child benefit from any parent unable to produce a marriage certificate to prevent Britain becoming even more a Land of Illegitimacy, Illiteracy and Innumeracy or, not to put too fine a point on it, The Land of Bastardy and Bastards ...

Mark Parker entertains doubts

26:00  Psyop is just another word for state propaganda. 35:39 @DigitalGnosis ​​I dont believe Homer was a person Homer was a pagan. There wi...