Common knowledge?
Can you imagine working for a company that has a little more than 600 employees and has the following employee statistics:
* 29 have been accused of spouse abuse
* 7 have been arrested for fraud
* 9 have been accused of writing bad cheques
* 17 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
* 3 have done time for assault
* 71 cannot get a credit card
* 14 have been arrested on drug-related charges
* 8 have been arrested for shop-lifting
* 21 are currently defendants in lawsuits
* 84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year
Which organisation is this?
It's the 635 members of the House of Commons, the same group that cranks out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line.
Tuesday, 6 May 2008
Saturday, 3 May 2008
REFLECTIONS ON THE ELECTION
The results of the local elections were perhaps a little disappointing but generally we held our own with a slight increase. There were also local issues and complications which always have an effect and which are difficult to quantify.
It is often difficult for a party such as ours whose policies are based on wider national issues to break into the local political scene which is mainly based on problems such as refuse collection and schools where the difference between our policies and those of the other parties is often small. Many of our policies reflect the danger to the country of increased immigration, the EU and illegal wars which are far more important to the future but often do not translate to a local level.
This explains the success of parties such as Independants and CAP who although fairly strong at local level are irrelevant nationally.Unfortunately people are often swayed by the minor issues while missing the big picture, especially in an area as yet relatively "unenriched". The trouble is that when "enrichment" happens and voters can see the writing on the wall we have more voter opposition.
However in standing when realistically we knew we had no real prospect of success we have shown our presence and that we will be there for people to vote for in a general election and give people who want to show their patriotism in the ballot box to be enfranchised. Also we do have an effect on the results far in excess of our vote. Steve Mc Ellenborough, although he polled only178 votes helped defeat the odious, uncouth and boorish Peter Franzen which must be a good thing for democracy and standards in local government.
We must redouble our efforts and continue our steady progress and eventually we will take our country back.
Congratulations to Richard Barnbrook on his success in London. This refects the increasing influence of the Party and that we can triumph inspite of the lies and venom directed against us by the other parties and the often foreign controlled media. They will find it more difficult to deny us a fair hearing in future.
My thanks to all who helped us and who voted for us.
Remember the longest journey starts with one step. We will eventually reach our goal and take our country back.
The results were as follows--
PEMBERTON
Lab 1387
CAP 406
Con 350
CHRIS HILTON BNP 334
WIGAN WEST
Lab 1089
Con 471
Lib Dem 462
SUSAN MATHER BNP 360
Ind 104
ASHTON
CAP 1766
Lab 1111
Con 248
ADRIAN JONES BNP 178
BRYN
Ind 1606
Lab 765
CAP 394
KEN HASLAM BNP 284
Con 204
ORRELL
Con 1608
Lab 969
CHARLES MATHER BNP 548
Ind 321
LEIGH SOUTH
Lab1372
Con 1000
CAP 476
GARY CHADWICK BNP 470
GOLBORNE/LOWTON WEST
Lab 1186
CAP 1110
Con 282
STEVE MC ELLENBOROUGH BNP178
IND 129
It is often difficult for a party such as ours whose policies are based on wider national issues to break into the local political scene which is mainly based on problems such as refuse collection and schools where the difference between our policies and those of the other parties is often small. Many of our policies reflect the danger to the country of increased immigration, the EU and illegal wars which are far more important to the future but often do not translate to a local level.
This explains the success of parties such as Independants and CAP who although fairly strong at local level are irrelevant nationally.Unfortunately people are often swayed by the minor issues while missing the big picture, especially in an area as yet relatively "unenriched". The trouble is that when "enrichment" happens and voters can see the writing on the wall we have more voter opposition.
However in standing when realistically we knew we had no real prospect of success we have shown our presence and that we will be there for people to vote for in a general election and give people who want to show their patriotism in the ballot box to be enfranchised. Also we do have an effect on the results far in excess of our vote. Steve Mc Ellenborough, although he polled only178 votes helped defeat the odious, uncouth and boorish Peter Franzen which must be a good thing for democracy and standards in local government.
We must redouble our efforts and continue our steady progress and eventually we will take our country back.
Congratulations to Richard Barnbrook on his success in London. This refects the increasing influence of the Party and that we can triumph inspite of the lies and venom directed against us by the other parties and the often foreign controlled media. They will find it more difficult to deny us a fair hearing in future.
My thanks to all who helped us and who voted for us.
Remember the longest journey starts with one step. We will eventually reach our goal and take our country back.
The results were as follows--
PEMBERTON
Lab 1387
CAP 406
Con 350
CHRIS HILTON BNP 334
WIGAN WEST
Lab 1089
Con 471
Lib Dem 462
SUSAN MATHER BNP 360
Ind 104
ASHTON
CAP 1766
Lab 1111
Con 248
ADRIAN JONES BNP 178
BRYN
Ind 1606
Lab 765
CAP 394
KEN HASLAM BNP 284
Con 204
ORRELL
Con 1608
Lab 969
CHARLES MATHER BNP 548
Ind 321
LEIGH SOUTH
Lab1372
Con 1000
CAP 476
GARY CHADWICK BNP 470
GOLBORNE/LOWTON WEST
Lab 1186
CAP 1110
Con 282
STEVE MC ELLENBOROUGH BNP178
IND 129
Wednesday, 30 April 2008
AWAITING TOMORROW WITH OPTIMISM
Well that's it! We're in the hands of the voters now. We've tried our best.
Thanks to all who have helped our effort especially Anita, John and Bob without whom we would not have accomplished so much.
The response at the doors has been positive without the "screamers" (idiots who think abuse and ranting a substitute for reasonable discussion) bothering us.
Things have changed over the past 5 years and peoples attitudes to us have been much more friendly than previously as we become more mainstream and well known.
We of course have the usual hatchet jobs in the press and difficulties in advertising but this demonstrates the establishment and big business becoming more concerned about our progress, and nothing of note has been revealed. I regard their destructive tactics as a sign of their desperation and a compliment.
Compare that with the corruption incompetence and sleaze of the other parties and it could be said that we are whiter than white (no pun intended).
We are seen as representing a valid point of view and our concerns over the way the country is being destroyed is striking a chord with many people who have to suffer the consequences, unprotected by the ever more powerful state.
People have seen our policies and increasing numbers are realising that things will only get worse unless they are adopted.
We may not win but an increased share will demonstrate our progress and frighten the corrupt people running this council and government and will further the salvation of our country.
Thanks to all who have helped our effort especially Anita, John and Bob without whom we would not have accomplished so much.
The response at the doors has been positive without the "screamers" (idiots who think abuse and ranting a substitute for reasonable discussion) bothering us.
Things have changed over the past 5 years and peoples attitudes to us have been much more friendly than previously as we become more mainstream and well known.
We of course have the usual hatchet jobs in the press and difficulties in advertising but this demonstrates the establishment and big business becoming more concerned about our progress, and nothing of note has been revealed. I regard their destructive tactics as a sign of their desperation and a compliment.
Compare that with the corruption incompetence and sleaze of the other parties and it could be said that we are whiter than white (no pun intended).
We are seen as representing a valid point of view and our concerns over the way the country is being destroyed is striking a chord with many people who have to suffer the consequences, unprotected by the ever more powerful state.
People have seen our policies and increasing numbers are realising that things will only get worse unless they are adopted.
BUT AGREEING WITH US IS NO GOOD IF THEY DO NOT VOTE.
So I ask all BNP supporters to VOTE tomorrow.
We may not win but an increased share will demonstrate our progress and frighten the corrupt people running this council and government and will further the salvation of our country.
BEST OF LUCK TO ALL OUR FRIENDS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY.
Monday, 28 April 2008
Electoral Fraud
As can be seen from the extracts published here - and the original document linked to at the bottom of the post, the British government – a Labour government – is wilfully refusing to see any evidence of electoral fraud. Note that: wilfully refusing. They simply will not set in place systems to even record instances of electoral fraud. So how can anyone expect that they will set in place procedures to prevent it?
As the lawyers say “Cui bono?” or “Who benefits?” This most usually refers to who benefits in financial terms, but it needn’t necessarily refer only to financial aspects of criminal or any other matters. How did they come by this expression?
The Roman orator and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero, in his speech Pro Roscio Amerino, section 84, attributed the expression Cui bono? to the Roman consul and censor Lucius Cassius Longinus Ravilla:
L. Cassius ille quem populus Romanus verissimum et sapientissimum iudicem putabat identidem in causis quaerere solebat 'cui bono' fuisset.
The famous Lucius Cassius, whom the Roman people used to regard as a very honest and wise judge, was in the habit of asking, time and again, 'To whose benefit?'
So in light of this government’s wilful refusal to prevent, or even properly record, matters of electoral fraud, we have to follow Cicero’s rule. Who benefits? It is a racing certainty that if someone else was benefitting at the expense of the Labour party, the government would be all over the issue like a rash – it being a Labour party government.
You will not come away from this posting – or the link it’s extracted from – with any confidence in the integrity of our electoral system, any confidence that the fraud is “accidental”, or any confidence that this Labour government has the slightest intention of putting things right.
Cui Bono?
HOW MUCH ELECTORAL FRAUD IS THERE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM? HAS THE INTRODUCTION OF POSTAL VOTING ON DEMAND INCREASED ELECTORAL FRAUD?
Handout for presentation at the 20th Annual Seminar of the Association of Electoral Administrators
Brighton, 26 February 2007
Contrasting claims.
“ ... evidence suggests that it is rare ... Ministerial statement in the House of Commons “
“ ...the system invites fraud. Judge Richard Mawrey QC on the Birmingham election petitions “
“ … evidence suggests that it is very rare ... Ministerial statement in the House of Lords “
“ He said the current postal voting system was “wide open to fraud.” BBC report of verdict of Judge Peter Openshaw QC in the Blackburn case “
“ Electoral fraud is extremely rare ... President of the Association of Chief Police Officers “
“ It is the view of the SPU (Special Prosecutions Unit) that widespread use of postal votes has opened up a whole new area to be exploited by the fraudster, and the opportunity has been taken. Assistant Commisioner Andy Hayman, Metropolitan Police “
“ ... everyone agrees that electoral fraud is extremely rare. Minister, Department for Constitutional Affairs “
“ Chief Supt Dave Murray, of Thames Valley Police ... was alarmed by how easy it is to abuse the [postal voting] system. ... Police concluded that at least six per cent of postal votes cast in the Redlands ward [in Reading] were bogus. Report of letter to the Electoral Commission, Andrew Sparrow, Daily Telegraph “
“ ... there is no evidence to suggest that the actual level of fraud is widespread. Local Government Association Executive “
“ [There is]“a growing body of evidence that widespread absent vote fraud is taking place in the United Kingdom.” Resolution by 18 members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the council of Europe “
“ … electoral fraud ... remains a very rare occurrence. Statement by Department for Constitutional Affairs spokesperson in response to report on the Electoral Commission by the Committee on Standards in Public Life “
“... postal voting unlocked a pandora’s box that some unscrupulous people were able to exploit. John Turner, Chairman, Association of Electoral Administrators “
Has there been any research into the number of cases of electoral fraud or any central collection of data?
“ The Electoral Commission intends to commission research into this issue in 2003–04. Electoral Commission, December 2002 “ [note date]
“Reply by the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs to parliamentary question asking him to list cases of electoral fraud that have resulted in a custodial sentence in the last five years: I regret that information on electoral fraud cases has not been systematically collected or held centrally. The Electoral Commission is working with the Crown Prosecution Service to develop a process to identify and monitor electoral fraud cases. Hansard 11 November 2003 “ [note date]
“ Reply by Electoral Commission to Freedom of Information Act request made in 2006 by The Times: The Commission does not hold, and cannot compile, a complete list of electoral prosecutions and convictions, or allegations of offences. There is no GB-wide database of such allegations or offences across Great Britain, or for each country. Electoral Commission, June 2006 “ [then note this date. Compare to above dates]
“ We currently do not know the extent of electoral fraud because up until now, we have taken the ... view that this is Britain and such things do not happen here. There is now evidence that such things do happen here, although we do not know to what extent because we do not have the mechanisms or systems of audit to find out. Liberal Democrat MP House of Commons, 22 June 2005. “
“ Testimony before the Committee on Standards in Public Life: Nobody appears to have done detailed research in relation to it [electoral fraud]. Statement by a Minister in the Department for Constitutional Affairs,Committee on Standards in Public Life, evidence session held on 21 September 2006. “
There is a dearth of clear and comprehensive statistics:
No comprehensive statistics of electoral offences reported to electoral authorities, to the police or to the Crown Prosecution service.
No statistics on cases prosecuted or on the number of persons convicted;
No statistics of numbers prosecuted for electoral registration and postal voting offences;
No comprehensive statistics of number of persons receiving prison sentences;
No statistics on tendered ballots.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: A tendered ballot is a special ballot cast when an elector comes to a polling station and finds that a vote in his or her name has already been cast. The number of tendered ballots is thus an indication of the extent of incompetently carried out eletoral fraud. Competently carried out fraudulent voting does not risk discovery when the genuine elector comes to the polling booths: votes are cast in the names of electors known to be dead or abroad or in the names of non-exisitent persons whose names have been entered onto the register of electors.
How many investigations, prosecutions and convictions for electoral fraud have there been in recent years?
THE OFFICIAL VIEW
Since 1998 there have been only four recorded prosecutions for electoral fraud. Ministerial statements to both Houses of Parliament, April 2005.
OTHER EVIDENCE
Number of cases of “electoral offences” referred to the Crown Prosecution Service, 2000-2006
2000 48
2001 57
2002 51
2003 70
2004 61
2005 65
2006 38
[I suggest that comes out at a little more than four. We used to learn arithmetic when I went to school. Maybe mathematics changed with the new millennium? Or perhaps as far back as 1997?]
Is electoral fraud “very rare” in Britain, as the Department for Constitutional Affairs still insists? Or should we believe Richard Mawrey QC, the judge in the infamous Birmingham vote rigging cases of 2005, that the government is “in denial” about standards of conduct in British elections — especially local elections — that “would disgrace a banana republic”? …
In April 2005 there was a ministerial statement to the Commons that there had been only four recorded prosecutions for electoral fraud in seven years. The operative word was “recorded”. Few cases were on a central record because there had been no effort to record them. …
When I finally received a set of basic statistics from the Crown Prosecution Service a few days ago, they revealed that there were no fewer than 390 cases of alleged electoral offences in the past seven years. It is not yet known how many of them resulted in prosecutions. What is certain is that they run a coach and horses through the government’s complacent claims.
Chief Superintendent Dave Murray, of Thames Valley police, reportedly wrote to the Electoral Commission in 2005 that vote riggers would develop “a feeling of untouchability” because the law made it so hard for them to be successfully prosecuted. Police had uncovered evidence of widespread postal voting fraud in the Redlands ward of Reading. Of 46 postal vote applications examined, only two were authentic. But the identity of those who had forged the applications could not be proved.
In several cases the number of forged votes has run into the hundreds or thousands. Mawrey’s estimate was of at least 1,000 forged votes in the 2004 elections in the Birmingham city ward of Aston and 1,500-2,000 in nearby Bordesley Green.
My analysis of some 20 cases shows that a majority of them involve wards in inner cities with high proportions of Asians. … A majority involve abuses of postal voting.
Please … the above consists of extracts only, click the link below and read it all. And after reading it, ask yourself:
Cui Bono?
Who benefits?
http://tinyurl.com/67rrzr
Cui Bono?
As the lawyers say “Cui bono?” or “Who benefits?” This most usually refers to who benefits in financial terms, but it needn’t necessarily refer only to financial aspects of criminal or any other matters. How did they come by this expression?
The Roman orator and statesman Marcus Tullius Cicero, in his speech Pro Roscio Amerino, section 84, attributed the expression Cui bono? to the Roman consul and censor Lucius Cassius Longinus Ravilla:
L. Cassius ille quem populus Romanus verissimum et sapientissimum iudicem putabat identidem in causis quaerere solebat 'cui bono' fuisset.
The famous Lucius Cassius, whom the Roman people used to regard as a very honest and wise judge, was in the habit of asking, time and again, 'To whose benefit?'
So in light of this government’s wilful refusal to prevent, or even properly record, matters of electoral fraud, we have to follow Cicero’s rule. Who benefits? It is a racing certainty that if someone else was benefitting at the expense of the Labour party, the government would be all over the issue like a rash – it being a Labour party government.
You will not come away from this posting – or the link it’s extracted from – with any confidence in the integrity of our electoral system, any confidence that the fraud is “accidental”, or any confidence that this Labour government has the slightest intention of putting things right.
Cui Bono?
HOW MUCH ELECTORAL FRAUD IS THERE IN THE UNITED KINGDOM? HAS THE INTRODUCTION OF POSTAL VOTING ON DEMAND INCREASED ELECTORAL FRAUD?
Handout for presentation at the 20th Annual Seminar of the Association of Electoral Administrators
Brighton, 26 February 2007
Contrasting claims.
“ ... evidence suggests that it is rare ... Ministerial statement in the House of Commons “
“ ...the system invites fraud. Judge Richard Mawrey QC on the Birmingham election petitions “
“ … evidence suggests that it is very rare ... Ministerial statement in the House of Lords “
“ He said the current postal voting system was “wide open to fraud.” BBC report of verdict of Judge Peter Openshaw QC in the Blackburn case “
“ Electoral fraud is extremely rare ... President of the Association of Chief Police Officers “
“ It is the view of the SPU (Special Prosecutions Unit) that widespread use of postal votes has opened up a whole new area to be exploited by the fraudster, and the opportunity has been taken. Assistant Commisioner Andy Hayman, Metropolitan Police “
“ ... everyone agrees that electoral fraud is extremely rare. Minister, Department for Constitutional Affairs “
“ Chief Supt Dave Murray, of Thames Valley Police ... was alarmed by how easy it is to abuse the [postal voting] system. ... Police concluded that at least six per cent of postal votes cast in the Redlands ward [in Reading] were bogus. Report of letter to the Electoral Commission, Andrew Sparrow, Daily Telegraph “
“ ... there is no evidence to suggest that the actual level of fraud is widespread. Local Government Association Executive “
“ [There is]“a growing body of evidence that widespread absent vote fraud is taking place in the United Kingdom.” Resolution by 18 members of the Parliamentary Assembly of the council of Europe “
“ … electoral fraud ... remains a very rare occurrence. Statement by Department for Constitutional Affairs spokesperson in response to report on the Electoral Commission by the Committee on Standards in Public Life “
“... postal voting unlocked a pandora’s box that some unscrupulous people were able to exploit. John Turner, Chairman, Association of Electoral Administrators “
Has there been any research into the number of cases of electoral fraud or any central collection of data?
“ The Electoral Commission intends to commission research into this issue in 2003–04. Electoral Commission, December 2002 “ [note date]
“Reply by the Parliamentary Secretary, Department for Constitutional Affairs to parliamentary question asking him to list cases of electoral fraud that have resulted in a custodial sentence in the last five years: I regret that information on electoral fraud cases has not been systematically collected or held centrally. The Electoral Commission is working with the Crown Prosecution Service to develop a process to identify and monitor electoral fraud cases. Hansard 11 November 2003 “ [note date]
“ Reply by Electoral Commission to Freedom of Information Act request made in 2006 by The Times: The Commission does not hold, and cannot compile, a complete list of electoral prosecutions and convictions, or allegations of offences. There is no GB-wide database of such allegations or offences across Great Britain, or for each country. Electoral Commission, June 2006 “ [then note this date. Compare to above dates]
“ We currently do not know the extent of electoral fraud because up until now, we have taken the ... view that this is Britain and such things do not happen here. There is now evidence that such things do happen here, although we do not know to what extent because we do not have the mechanisms or systems of audit to find out. Liberal Democrat MP House of Commons, 22 June 2005. “
“ Testimony before the Committee on Standards in Public Life: Nobody appears to have done detailed research in relation to it [electoral fraud]. Statement by a Minister in the Department for Constitutional Affairs,Committee on Standards in Public Life, evidence session held on 21 September 2006. “
There is a dearth of clear and comprehensive statistics:
No comprehensive statistics of electoral offences reported to electoral authorities, to the police or to the Crown Prosecution service.
No statistics on cases prosecuted or on the number of persons convicted;
No statistics of numbers prosecuted for electoral registration and postal voting offences;
No comprehensive statistics of number of persons receiving prison sentences;
No statistics on tendered ballots.
AUTHOR’S NOTE: A tendered ballot is a special ballot cast when an elector comes to a polling station and finds that a vote in his or her name has already been cast. The number of tendered ballots is thus an indication of the extent of incompetently carried out eletoral fraud. Competently carried out fraudulent voting does not risk discovery when the genuine elector comes to the polling booths: votes are cast in the names of electors known to be dead or abroad or in the names of non-exisitent persons whose names have been entered onto the register of electors.
How many investigations, prosecutions and convictions for electoral fraud have there been in recent years?
THE OFFICIAL VIEW
Since 1998 there have been only four recorded prosecutions for electoral fraud. Ministerial statements to both Houses of Parliament, April 2005.
OTHER EVIDENCE
Number of cases of “electoral offences” referred to the Crown Prosecution Service, 2000-2006
2000 48
2001 57
2002 51
2003 70
2004 61
2005 65
2006 38
[I suggest that comes out at a little more than four. We used to learn arithmetic when I went to school. Maybe mathematics changed with the new millennium? Or perhaps as far back as 1997?]
Article in the Sunday Times, 21 January 2007
Postal voting is a giant fiddle
Postal voting is a giant fiddle
Is electoral fraud “very rare” in Britain, as the Department for Constitutional Affairs still insists? Or should we believe Richard Mawrey QC, the judge in the infamous Birmingham vote rigging cases of 2005, that the government is “in denial” about standards of conduct in British elections — especially local elections — that “would disgrace a banana republic”? …
In April 2005 there was a ministerial statement to the Commons that there had been only four recorded prosecutions for electoral fraud in seven years. The operative word was “recorded”. Few cases were on a central record because there had been no effort to record them. …
When I finally received a set of basic statistics from the Crown Prosecution Service a few days ago, they revealed that there were no fewer than 390 cases of alleged electoral offences in the past seven years. It is not yet known how many of them resulted in prosecutions. What is certain is that they run a coach and horses through the government’s complacent claims.
Chief Superintendent Dave Murray, of Thames Valley police, reportedly wrote to the Electoral Commission in 2005 that vote riggers would develop “a feeling of untouchability” because the law made it so hard for them to be successfully prosecuted. Police had uncovered evidence of widespread postal voting fraud in the Redlands ward of Reading. Of 46 postal vote applications examined, only two were authentic. But the identity of those who had forged the applications could not be proved.
In several cases the number of forged votes has run into the hundreds or thousands. Mawrey’s estimate was of at least 1,000 forged votes in the 2004 elections in the Birmingham city ward of Aston and 1,500-2,000 in nearby Bordesley Green.
My analysis of some 20 cases shows that a majority of them involve wards in inner cities with high proportions of Asians. … A majority involve abuses of postal voting.
------------------------------------------------
Cui Bono?
Who benefits?
I seem to recall that this country once had an electoral system we could trust - before we started importing millions of people from cultures where electoral fraud is rife – and before this Labour government changed the rules on postal voting.
Cui Bono?
Friday, 25 April 2008
Global warming, er, cooling, er, warming er ...
... make up your own mind.
Here is a science lecture on global warming. It constitutes four films with a combined length of a little over 30 minutes. They are not at all dry and boring, and I recommend that all readers watch them.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/another_inconvenient_truth_about_the_global_warming_fraud/
Here is a science lecture on global warming. It constitutes four films with a combined length of a little over 30 minutes. They are not at all dry and boring, and I recommend that all readers watch them.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/another_inconvenient_truth_about_the_global_warming_fraud/
Wednesday, 23 April 2008
ATTACK ON FREE SPEECH
Two days ago I was asked if Wigan BNP would like to place an advertisment in the Wigan Reporter. After much thought we decided to take advantage of the offer in spite of the cost. I spent several hours in communication with the girl at the paper who was very helpful and paid for the adverts. At 3.15pm today I was rung by the editor and told that he was unwilling to publish our advert as there was a problem with our mentioning Tibet and comparing it to the situation in this country. Also he said that there were statements about the other Parties which were untrue.
I told him I had not said anything that was not true and they had previously published allegations that our membership contained Nazis. This he denied.
I think the Left wing NUJ have stuck their oar in and that we are getting too close to the truth which they can not tolerate.
I told him he could "stick his paper" , we would want our money back and that in future we would use the internet and thus evade this unjustified censorship.
The good thing about this is that they have lost money, we have kept ours and hopefully people in using the internet, will stop reading their censored rag cost them sales as a result.
Read the advert and see if you can see anything objectionable.
If you agree with me that it is OK, please spread it around on the net as an example of censorship and help us regain our freedom of speech.
I told him I had not said anything that was not true and they had previously published allegations that our membership contained Nazis. This he denied.
I think the Left wing NUJ have stuck their oar in and that we are getting too close to the truth which they can not tolerate.
I told him he could "stick his paper" , we would want our money back and that in future we would use the internet and thus evade this unjustified censorship.
The good thing about this is that they have lost money, we have kept ours and hopefully people in using the internet, will stop reading their censored rag cost them sales as a result.
Read the advert and see if you can see anything objectionable.
If you agree with me that it is OK, please spread it around on the net as an example of censorship and help us regain our freedom of speech.
Tuesday, 22 April 2008
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)