Royal “Bellamy Salute” Shows “American Sympathies”


Front page of The Sun, showing their “context” (agenda).

It is true that Edward VIII, seen here  while he was Prince of Wales, was an admirer of the Nazis, even after the war, but for most people in the early 1930s, the Nazi salute was just comical posturing. The full horror of the Nazi regime was unknown, even though the atrocities had begun. The other adult in this scene would become Queen to Edward’s successor, George VI, and would vociferously oppose the Nazis (even before war started), and gain popularity by refusing to be evacuated, even during the Blitz, saying “The children won’t go without me. I won’t leave the King. And the King will never leave.”

The two children, the present Queen and her sister Margaret, were about 8 and 3 years old, and would have no inkling of any of the things the salute represented.

Mockery of the salute was quite common, but it was already in use elsewhere before the Nazis adopted it. Among other nations, the USA used it during the Pledge of Allegiance, after it was introduced by Christian Socialist minister and author Francis Bellamy in 1892. It was still in use up to December 1942.

I am not, of course, seriously suggesting that it is the American salute being used here, but it does serve to show how innocuous the gesture was seen as at the time.

American schoolchildren pledging allegiance to the flag in 1941

American schoolchildren pledging allegiance to the flag in 1941

And mockery seems to be what’s going on in the short clip obtained (possibly illegally) by The Sun, and published today on their website, with stills in the printed version of the rag. The headline, “THEIR ROYAL HEILNESSES” clearly attributes blame to all those in the film.

My hobby is adding colour to old black and white photos, and the Royal family’s album is a rich resource, but I can hardly be accused of being a Monarchist. Like The Sun‘s owner, Rupert Murdoch, I’m more of a republican (though not in the sense of the American political party).

Unlike Murdoch, I’m not prepared to stoop to this kind of dishonest propaganda to promote my views.



Poor people are poor because they don’t know how to get something from nothing

Politics and Insights

It’s truly remarkable that whenever we have a Conservative government, we suddenly witness media coverage of an unprecedented rise in the numbers of poor people who suddenly seem to develop a considerable range of baffling personal ineptitudes and immediately dysfunctional lives.

We see a proliferation of “skivers” and “scroungers”, an uprising of “fecklessness”, a whole sneaky “culture of entitlement”, “drug addicts”, a riot of general all-round bad sorts, and apparently, the numbers of poor people who suddenly can’t cook a nutritious meal has climbed dramatically, too. We are told that starvation is not because of a lack of money and access to food, but rather, it’s because people like freebie handouts at food banks and they don’t know how to budget and cook, that’s according to the Conservative Baroness Jenkin of Kennington.

She recommends that poor people eat porridge, since it only costs 4 pence a bowl. You can…

View original post 1,204 more words

The Worst Of Margaret Thatcher Meets The Worst Of Tony Blair, We Need To Fight These Bastards Like Never Before

the void

five-more-years-no-wayWhen the richest 20% of people vote to attack the poorest 20% – a crude but not unfair summary of what just happened in the election – then any talk of democratic mandates or majorities is redundant.  What we are left with instead is human decency – do we want to live in a society where diabetics die because they cannot afford the electricity to chill their medicine?  Or where children are socially cleansed away from their schools, friends and families because neither benefits or wages are enough to pay soaring rents?

Do we want to live in a country where strikes are virtually banned, or where dissidents can be targetted by the full force of the state even when they have committed no crime?  And if anyone complains they will be smeared as thugs by the bullying right wing press and told they have no right to protest? …

View original post 685 more words

Ciaran Goggins and Ched Evans – Partners in Perversion

Ciaran Goggins

Ched Evans recently made an apology to his victim, albeit a half-hearted one.

“I wholeheartedly apologise for the effects that night in Rhyl has had on many people, not least the woman concerned”, he said. That comes over as “mistakes were made”, an often used “apology that avoids taking responsibility.

He went on to say “It has been claimed that those using social media in an abusive and vindictive way towards this woman are supporters of mine. I wish to make it clear that these people are not my supporters and I condemn their actions entirely.’

One of the people that Evans and his family are distancing themselves from, possibly on legal advice, is Ciaran Goggins, a serial pervert, troll and stalker who has boasted of being accused of rape himself, though the complainant didn’t pursue the case, and downloading child porn, but only for “research purposes”.


A spokesman for the website “Justice for Ched”, set up by Evans’ family, claimed that, though Goggins was a ‘vocal’ supporter of Evans’ claim of innocence, they had only ‘very recently’ become aware of his social media comments.

Which is odd, because Goggins was in regular contact with Evans’ mother, Helen Roberts, and they followed each other on Twitter, even over several Goggins personas as account after account was suspended. Surely, even if Roberts missed the offending tweets as he made them, the creation of so many accounts would have made her wonder what he was up to.

Anyway, it seems that Roberts and the rest of her clan aren’t too upset with Goggins. On his own blog he says “After a long association I am no longer with the “Justice for Ched” campaign, following an amicable split I wish the activists all the best.”
Not that that is stopping him trolling for Evans. The pseudonymous Jean Hatchet, who set up the petition objecting to Evans’ automatic return to football (successfully so far) is being targeted by Goggins, though his aim is a bit off. He keeps posting what he insists is her real name, but he keeps getting it wrong, and putting at risk women who have nothing to do with any campaign, along with family members, including children.
Not that Jean Hatchet should be put in danger because somebody disagrees with her, which is why she’s using a pseudonym. Anyone trying to expose her identity is trying to get her attacked. As the “wrong” women’s names are often accompanied by an address, one can assume that Goggins wants that attack to be physical.
Ciaran Joseph Goggins is a very stupid and dangerous troll.
Screenshots of Goggins’ tweets are from Name The Problem.
More about Goggins from Jean Hatchet here.

You Want Respect? Earn It!

MoHebdoMost people commenting on the murders of Charlie Hebdo staff last week have said, unequivocally, that there is no excuse for the killings. However, there was a body of opinion that claimed that they “brought it on themselves” by being “offensive”.

A simple counter argument could be that I find religion itself offensive, and my solution is to refrain from taking part in it. Maybe the murderers, who claimed to be acting on behalf of their prophet, Mohammed, should have taken the same stance, and refrained from buying the magazine that so upset them. That’s assuming they even saw it. The violence that followed the publication of cartoons in Denmark was stirred up, largely, by people who hadn’t seen them.

This is the cover of the first edition of Charlie Hebdo since the murders (My own take on it is above):


A few people have whined about this cover. (“It’s not exactly hilarious, is it?” missing the poignancy, and the point.)

There have also been more people asserting that the magazine staff were, at least partly, to blame for their own deaths. “They should show some respect, there are millions of Muslims who will be upset!”


The kind of offensive behaviour that should be illegal already is. If the cartoons about Mohammed had been pasted on the walls of a mosque, that would be harassment, Going into a mosque and shouting abuse would be the same. Calling for Muslims to be assaulted, or even killed, is illegal.. Laughing at Islam should not be illegal, and cannot be a justification for murder. The same applies, of course, to any religion.

One of the most ridiculous apologies for religious terrorists was that, if it’s OK to mock Islam, it should be OK to mock the Holocaust.

I’m undecided on whether the Holocaust should be open to mockery. I certainly don’t find any humour in it, but I can appreciate the argument that, in the interest of free speech, one should be free to say pretty much anything, short of incitement to repeat any of the atrocities. In any case, the two subjects are not in the same category.

The Holocaust saw upwards of 6 million real people slaughtered, while Mohammed is a fictionalised version of a man who lived and died in the sixth century. Even now, there are people who can remember the horror of the former. Nobody alive can have met the latter.

Blasphemy is a victimless crime. If there really was an all-powerful god, he would be perfectly capable of fighting his own battles. That so many adherents, of various versions of the delusion, have felt it necessary to kill in his name suggests to me that they don’t really believe what they preach. I couldn’t possibly respect such hypocrites.

There are some religious people I can respect though, like Ahmed Merabet, a Muslim police officer, killed while upholding the values the murderers despised so much. I don’t respect his religion, not one bit, but his integrity in upholding French secular law is another matter.


If all that appears muddled to you, try this post from “The Gerasites”. It’s much clearer!

The election campaign lies have started already (#UK #politics #austerity #bedroomtax #welfare)

Order Of Truth

elliesWell – it’s started already.

Only a couple of days into the New Year and the political machines are in motion churning out a stream of propaganda and misinformation.

With £78 million to spend on their election campaign, the Conservatives have an incredible amount of money they can use to try and fool the public into thinking they are worthy of another term in government.

Unfortunately for the Conservatives, most people are able to see past this charade and reflect on the woeful mismanagement of the country’s resources by one of the most incompetent governments in recent history.

Knowing that they have been responsible for almost destroying the foundation of British society the Conservative leadership are attempting to buy the election – that is the only resource they have.

Their track record is abominable. Their lies and deceit seem to know no bounds. Their actions during their time in office…

View original post 1,028 more words

Harassment by Work Programme Providers of the lowest form

Diary of an SAH Stroke Survivor

The abuses of work programme providers have been blogged many times before but I am sure many of you agree all abuses must be blogged time and time again until these providers leave those in the ESA Support Group alone and more so if they have a degenerative condition that has a terminal prognosis.

So with the above in mined I turn to one lady from Bristol who has terminal cancer at just 37 years old and has a life expectancy of 0 – 3 years so it is sad indeed that she can expect just half her life lived, she says in her facebook message that she has come to terms with what will happen (very brave indeed) but the short life left would be much better if she was not harassed by work programme provider Prospects Group @ProspectsGroup and I for one agree.

It is hard enough having…

View original post 378 more words