Straight off the bat I will say that I don’t believe in any one singular omnipotent being as the Theist’s believe, I believe that to be dangerous and unfair. Also I must admit that I feel it’s an inaccuracy for Atheist’s to state that there is “no God” and I shall explain why.
Similar to the way a very young child or a primitive tribe might perceive a thunderstorm, power is always a comparative element to any one entities existence. For the child to grow to adult hood similar to a primitive tribe that shall grow to better knowledge and wisdom, the perception of the thunderstorm becomes far more relative and thus finds itself a neat and tidy partition in our minds, no longer causing that thunderstorm to be so scary or perceived as something to revere.
Similar to this, when we review certain situations of events either past, present or predicted, often (as even the Atheist will admit to saying) we acknowledge in literature of such events by expressing our awe in words such as “Biblical Proportions” or “Wrath of God” so on and so forth, there within I believe lies the key to this.
If one anoints awe causing events as previously described, we have inadvertently created a partition of comprehension with a sense of a value that we recognise most to be able to comprehend or “deal with” the enormity of the situation. We simply label the moment as one thing of such a higher level of all power until such a time when adaption, knowledge and comprehension allows us to see the event as something far much more relative, the range being anything from defeating a phobia right up to seeing a nuclear explosion as nothing more than an expensive science experiment.
So thus this brings me to my point that to believe in only one God or one all powerful deity to be constantly feared and revered, this would essentially rid us of any chance to comprehend greater and more powerful entities, events and creations leading the human race to an ignorant existence, limited of exploration and never learning from ones mistakes, if the outcome is to fall to ones knees and beg forgiveness from something we don’t rightly understand.
However, simultaneously, saying that there is no God at all, I feel does not allow for one to accept power in a spiritual sense. It’s all well and good to occupy exploration within the fields of science and scientific theory but one thing without the other is of course an imbalance. Now it is widely prophesised that in the becoming of the Age of Aquarius, mankind is supposedly to have a great spiritual awakening, this obviously leading itself wide open to interpretation, however, I believe it is that interpretation we know very little about and I feel that the imbalance within humanity and mankind’s existence exists and extends from that ignorance.
That very imbalance and ignorance that allows us to kill or hate other human beings in the name of “God” and that same imbalance that allows science to create some of the most lethal weapons on Earth, yet many dangerous diseases are left to go on infecting without an available cure. So we have two extreme ends of a scale of mankind, one group science loving and the opposition to this God fearing, both of which might I add are utterly incapable of finding mutual cohesion.
So thus I conclude and state as to what I believe, is that God is in fact a label to a jar of which its contents we know very little if nothing about, if be it only in a spiritual sense which in turn is only faith based, the basis of which is a partition of a level of personal reverence on the foundation of individual relevance, so thus I state that if we are to ever comprehend God then Atheist and Theist factions must find a cognitive ability to address science exploration with spiritual understanding, there within lies the key to peace and comprehension, the choice is ultimately yours.
By VisionGhost © 2009
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Sunday, November 8, 2009
The War of the Pathetic
For an exceptionally long time, pretty much since YouTube started in February 2005 created by three PayPal employees then bought by Google in November 2006 for $1.65 billion, there has been the most prevalent cyber squabble I have ever witnessed which not only is becoming increasingly boring, seemingly engrossing the opinions of a pretty large majority of users I come across, but has also enveloped from these very people a whole new level of perhaps the most immature practices stemming principally from exploitation of the weaker aspects within YouTube’s function.
YouTube has become not only a haven for Cyber-Bullies but a playground for the ridiculously petty all of which share one similar characteristic, they all behind the invisible sword and shield collectively called “Free Speech!” It’s the greatest yet oldest excuse in the book for the most irrelevant of human communication. I will admit to say that intelligent debate is always healthy and results or theories be analysed thus to reach conclusion of studies and agreeable grounds made for further advancement.
But quite frankly this continual bickering utilising every aspect of YouTube from uploading videos containing not much more than vitriol based insults, false flagging, 1 starring videos and the ultimate so far of filing false DMCA’s which of course we all know is a criminal act punishable by a fine or a jail term, really does demonstrate human natures constant hunger for confrontation even at this belittling social level.
I am of course talking in regards to the ever increasing cyber squabble between Atheists, Theists, Evolutionists, Creationists, Fundamentalists and/or whatever “ist” you wish to throw into the mix for that extra reactive value. Many would ask as to where I stand on this subject, well quite frankly I have to say that religion or any faith based theism is of absolutely no relevance to my life as much as pondering for long wasting hours the theories on evolution equates to a similar value. I have one life; one chance so thus I want to enjoy what I have and what is around me as best as one can for the foreseeable future, I really honestly thought that is what life was for.
But for quite a few more, maybe it isn’t like that, but I have to criticise as only a few days ago a wave of False DMCA’s were filed against some larger YouTube users and threats furthered against others such as, Coughlan666, DPRJones and so on.
Now, for those unfamiliar with what a DMCA is, let me explain.
DMCA stands for Digital Millennium Copyright Act and in short it is an act of two 1996 treaties which prevents broadcast, dissemination, copying for distribution and distribution of material without permission of the original copyright holder.
For a loose example and to the best of my understanding, should I come across a picture or photograph, part of a video what have you, that I wish to use for one of my Vlogs and it happens to be copyrighted from the source of its origin, that copyright holder can file a DMCA against me if I were to use that image in my video without their permission to have it removed, should the plaintiff of the action and the image be outside of any fair use policy as found on YouTube.
However, filing a false DMCA can land you in all sorts of trouble, for instance, if I were to use a sample of someone else’s video here on YouTube or otherwise, which is of course bound by the fair use policy then the original creator, file a DMCA against me, I can thus make a counter claim and should I wish to, I can sue that individual for essentially making false accusations, perjury and damages of which of course I would win.
Unfortunately, not everyone on YouTube knows this and so thus on the basis of pure ignorance, these squabbles start getting really messy. And if it wasn’t for the fact that filing a false DMCA is a very serious illegal act, it would be laughable from the extent of how childish this squabble is really becoming. Yet this action of filing false DMCA’s is just part of the temper tantrum of a knee jerk reaction simply because someone else disagrees with you on here. Much of what I see comes from Atheist’s who complain when they are “VoteBotted” which is the lowering of ratings of a mass majority of their videos or all of them, yet when I review the situation by looking over channels adhering to a Theist way of thinking, i.e. the opposition, I noticed their ratings are pretty much scuppered in a similar fashion. Not to even mention the pettiness of, 1 starring videos and comment voting!
So thus I conclude that from viewing both sides of the arguments, the actions and results, this current cyber squabble is perhaps the most immature and childish game of “six and a half a dozen of the other” I have ever seen in a modern cyber environment.
The war of the pathetic, surely there must be better things to be doing.
By VisionGhost © 2009
YouTube has become not only a haven for Cyber-Bullies but a playground for the ridiculously petty all of which share one similar characteristic, they all behind the invisible sword and shield collectively called “Free Speech!” It’s the greatest yet oldest excuse in the book for the most irrelevant of human communication. I will admit to say that intelligent debate is always healthy and results or theories be analysed thus to reach conclusion of studies and agreeable grounds made for further advancement.
But quite frankly this continual bickering utilising every aspect of YouTube from uploading videos containing not much more than vitriol based insults, false flagging, 1 starring videos and the ultimate so far of filing false DMCA’s which of course we all know is a criminal act punishable by a fine or a jail term, really does demonstrate human natures constant hunger for confrontation even at this belittling social level.
I am of course talking in regards to the ever increasing cyber squabble between Atheists, Theists, Evolutionists, Creationists, Fundamentalists and/or whatever “ist” you wish to throw into the mix for that extra reactive value. Many would ask as to where I stand on this subject, well quite frankly I have to say that religion or any faith based theism is of absolutely no relevance to my life as much as pondering for long wasting hours the theories on evolution equates to a similar value. I have one life; one chance so thus I want to enjoy what I have and what is around me as best as one can for the foreseeable future, I really honestly thought that is what life was for.
But for quite a few more, maybe it isn’t like that, but I have to criticise as only a few days ago a wave of False DMCA’s were filed against some larger YouTube users and threats furthered against others such as, Coughlan666, DPRJones and so on.
Now, for those unfamiliar with what a DMCA is, let me explain.
DMCA stands for Digital Millennium Copyright Act and in short it is an act of two 1996 treaties which prevents broadcast, dissemination, copying for distribution and distribution of material without permission of the original copyright holder.
For a loose example and to the best of my understanding, should I come across a picture or photograph, part of a video what have you, that I wish to use for one of my Vlogs and it happens to be copyrighted from the source of its origin, that copyright holder can file a DMCA against me if I were to use that image in my video without their permission to have it removed, should the plaintiff of the action and the image be outside of any fair use policy as found on YouTube.
However, filing a false DMCA can land you in all sorts of trouble, for instance, if I were to use a sample of someone else’s video here on YouTube or otherwise, which is of course bound by the fair use policy then the original creator, file a DMCA against me, I can thus make a counter claim and should I wish to, I can sue that individual for essentially making false accusations, perjury and damages of which of course I would win.
Unfortunately, not everyone on YouTube knows this and so thus on the basis of pure ignorance, these squabbles start getting really messy. And if it wasn’t for the fact that filing a false DMCA is a very serious illegal act, it would be laughable from the extent of how childish this squabble is really becoming. Yet this action of filing false DMCA’s is just part of the temper tantrum of a knee jerk reaction simply because someone else disagrees with you on here. Much of what I see comes from Atheist’s who complain when they are “VoteBotted” which is the lowering of ratings of a mass majority of their videos or all of them, yet when I review the situation by looking over channels adhering to a Theist way of thinking, i.e. the opposition, I noticed their ratings are pretty much scuppered in a similar fashion. Not to even mention the pettiness of, 1 starring videos and comment voting!
So thus I conclude that from viewing both sides of the arguments, the actions and results, this current cyber squabble is perhaps the most immature and childish game of “six and a half a dozen of the other” I have ever seen in a modern cyber environment.
The war of the pathetic, surely there must be better things to be doing.
By VisionGhost © 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
The Death Penalty is Hypocrisy
For a long time now I have taken a dim view of the excessive call and use of the Death Penalty or Capital Punishment. For one point, “punishment” is something I always deemed as a corrective measure to ensure the perpetrator sees the wrong in their ways and thus learns not to repeat the crime again. Even saying that now it seems so basic, it is something even a child could fathom. Exactly what can you learn from a punishment that ultimately ends your life?
Many people I find seem to forget themselves when presented with an individual, who undoubtedly has committed a very serious crime, whom we then call for their blood, death, public hangings and such like. Yet where is the justifying in the call for death and violence from those who deem themselves on the correct side of the law, be it judicial or moral. The mistake we make is we are very apt to leaping to the obvious in being so outrageously reactionary without anointing a level of intellect and thinking outside of the box. This is even before realising how vengeful we are as a race of people.
The Death Penalty and the call for it is wrong, inexcusable, unjustifiable and serves no useful purpose in either reducing crime or tackling the causes of crime in the first place. The right to life is inalienable and being that we have no choice to have been born, it serves as a self appointment to God like status to invoke a method to deprive an individual of their life via a judiciary system. After all, should the criminal once tried and found guilty of murder, in no matter what circumstances, be then sentenced to death, it really propels the ideal of two wrongs not making a right, plus, the judge has just made a hypocrite of himself as he has just ordered to have happen to another human being what that human being did to someone else. Yet we hide behind the excuse of “justice” to essentially OK this.
In worst case scenarios, when the wrong person is sentenced to death, killed, but then pardoned moments later, what use is that to the victim or the victims remaining family. The Death Sentence is not only barbaric it is also reflecting a very crude methodology of correction in what is the 21st Century. The years a criminal can wait for their eventual death can be as long as over a decade, in which time the mental anguish I think would break even the most strongest and tolerant of minds. Not to mention the moments before the event and to have their sentence put back again and again. Just imagine for a moment being innocent, on death row, facing that scenario everyday knowing your innocent and seemingly ignored as you live in a world that now bays for your blood, yes this world, this time, which we are and what we have become as a race of people.
Now try to imagine that scenario if you are as young as 14 years old, child inmates on death row is a reality in China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Pakistan, Uganda, Iran and America also perhaps many other places worldwide that we don’t know about yet. We march in protest against the illegal wars in our time yet seemingly the former be justifiable and goes almost unreported; similar to the current story circulating the internet of Amazonian Tribes burying their own children, alive, in the event of defects or imperfections, which might I add, is being covered up by Brazilian Authorities, supposedly out of respect for tribal culture. Which I think is an utter abomination.
Yet still there’s an even darker side to this, criminals to whom are acquitted only to kill again later but got away with it in the first place due to the ability to pay out for expensive and highly effective legal Council. It reminds me of a saying I once heard,
“Capital Punishment means those without the Capital get the punishment”
Therefore I conclude that there must obviously be an alternative to the Death Penalty. I believe that with a much larger investment and more effective coordination toward large scale prison factories, if trading into the tertiary sectors, thus reducing running costs, we could see an end to the Death Penalty globally. Prison Factories exist today but are often ignored by the authorities and are poorly run; especially in places such as China. Perhaps what we need here is a fresh perspective in dealing with violent criminals and/or repeat offenders. I think the American Government would be good to pave the way toward such an investment, as they have recently announced they are out of the recession; this investment would not only see the Death Penalty eventually abolished, but realise the long term effectiveness and benefits from compiling such a scheme for a modernised system for corrective punishment, which if producing a product or products that can be traded into a tertiary sector, it would literally after time, pay for itself. After all an overcrowded prison that produces nothing is always far more expensive for the tax payer be it death row or otherwise.
The Death Penalty, an expensive and barbaric standard in a 21st Century world, there are potential alternatives. Isn’t it about time we started exploring them?
By VisionGhost © 2009
Many people I find seem to forget themselves when presented with an individual, who undoubtedly has committed a very serious crime, whom we then call for their blood, death, public hangings and such like. Yet where is the justifying in the call for death and violence from those who deem themselves on the correct side of the law, be it judicial or moral. The mistake we make is we are very apt to leaping to the obvious in being so outrageously reactionary without anointing a level of intellect and thinking outside of the box. This is even before realising how vengeful we are as a race of people.
The Death Penalty and the call for it is wrong, inexcusable, unjustifiable and serves no useful purpose in either reducing crime or tackling the causes of crime in the first place. The right to life is inalienable and being that we have no choice to have been born, it serves as a self appointment to God like status to invoke a method to deprive an individual of their life via a judiciary system. After all, should the criminal once tried and found guilty of murder, in no matter what circumstances, be then sentenced to death, it really propels the ideal of two wrongs not making a right, plus, the judge has just made a hypocrite of himself as he has just ordered to have happen to another human being what that human being did to someone else. Yet we hide behind the excuse of “justice” to essentially OK this.
In worst case scenarios, when the wrong person is sentenced to death, killed, but then pardoned moments later, what use is that to the victim or the victims remaining family. The Death Sentence is not only barbaric it is also reflecting a very crude methodology of correction in what is the 21st Century. The years a criminal can wait for their eventual death can be as long as over a decade, in which time the mental anguish I think would break even the most strongest and tolerant of minds. Not to mention the moments before the event and to have their sentence put back again and again. Just imagine for a moment being innocent, on death row, facing that scenario everyday knowing your innocent and seemingly ignored as you live in a world that now bays for your blood, yes this world, this time, which we are and what we have become as a race of people.
Now try to imagine that scenario if you are as young as 14 years old, child inmates on death row is a reality in China, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Pakistan, Uganda, Iran and America also perhaps many other places worldwide that we don’t know about yet. We march in protest against the illegal wars in our time yet seemingly the former be justifiable and goes almost unreported; similar to the current story circulating the internet of Amazonian Tribes burying their own children, alive, in the event of defects or imperfections, which might I add, is being covered up by Brazilian Authorities, supposedly out of respect for tribal culture. Which I think is an utter abomination.
Yet still there’s an even darker side to this, criminals to whom are acquitted only to kill again later but got away with it in the first place due to the ability to pay out for expensive and highly effective legal Council. It reminds me of a saying I once heard,
“Capital Punishment means those without the Capital get the punishment”
Therefore I conclude that there must obviously be an alternative to the Death Penalty. I believe that with a much larger investment and more effective coordination toward large scale prison factories, if trading into the tertiary sectors, thus reducing running costs, we could see an end to the Death Penalty globally. Prison Factories exist today but are often ignored by the authorities and are poorly run; especially in places such as China. Perhaps what we need here is a fresh perspective in dealing with violent criminals and/or repeat offenders. I think the American Government would be good to pave the way toward such an investment, as they have recently announced they are out of the recession; this investment would not only see the Death Penalty eventually abolished, but realise the long term effectiveness and benefits from compiling such a scheme for a modernised system for corrective punishment, which if producing a product or products that can be traded into a tertiary sector, it would literally after time, pay for itself. After all an overcrowded prison that produces nothing is always far more expensive for the tax payer be it death row or otherwise.
The Death Penalty, an expensive and barbaric standard in a 21st Century world, there are potential alternatives. Isn’t it about time we started exploring them?
By VisionGhost © 2009
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
This Heterosexual Defends Homosexuality
Of all the conflict that we endure as witnessed in today’s media, we have become somewhat accustomed to war and embattlement; it never ceases to amaze me that even now at such a lowered social level we still seek to hate and prejudice against another human being’s practices of love and devotion, be it same gender or whatever the cause for your vilifying against the innocence of sexual persuasion. As what we are as a populous in a democratic state or country in which many have died and continue to do so to uphold.
It is that same hate that created the IRA, the same indifference that creates terrorism, the same hate that destroyed the American trade centre, the similar disproportionate methodology behind the thinking that creates conflict at even the basic configuration of human psychology. If only it be that which permits for such intolerance and persecution for human example of love and affection as it is only different to your own personal recognition of normality.
Isn’t it sad we have this debacle? Yet it is ourselves as the common supposed normality of heterosexuality that created in its self the Frankenstein’s Monster of Homophobia; which I would have thought had no place in modern society as it be that very intolerance all should fight against in favour of acceptance, after all that has been witnessed in the real wars of our modern world.
If marines, officers and/or soldiers waive their right to a life of freedom in preference to a defence of a “taken for granted” democracy, then surely all should uphold the recognition that no one persons sexuality or persuasion be any more or less superior in allowance for social acceptance from the other. It is in my opinion that formulating a mental exclusion and thus trying to implement that into law; be it political or social, against those of a sexual persuasion differing from yours, is essentially playing god.
The only sexual persuasion I deem utterly abhorrent and evil is of course, paedophilia. I find it an absolutely absurd mentally and wholly unjustifiable, that a convicted sexual predator can go before a judge and have their sentenced reduced on appeal after committing perhaps the most atrocious crimes imaginable, yet homosexual couples, be them gay or lesbian are denied the right to marriage to whom have probably never harmed another human being in their lives.
The existence of homosexuality has not and will not cause you any harm, infringe on the normality of your day and while the gay act of sexual intercourse may seem to many as an uncomfortable method of love making, it is in all honesty, none of anyone’s business.
As for gay marriage, well, as one does not have the choice of birth one is also not given the choice of which direction you swing, so thus I deem it an absolute disgrace and utter limitation of human understanding to assume that anyone outside of a gay relationship has the right to dictate who can and who can’t marry as a given demonstration of devotion between a couple be it same sex or otherwise.
Quite a few people state that the sight of two men kissing is “creepy” but let’s press on that for awhile.
If it be two grown men kissing in a same sex relationship, what is it when two grown women do the same in exactly the same coordination, what happens? Many heterosexual men find it a turn on, yet when heterosexual couples continue to lock chops for seemingly an eternity in full view of the general public, it becomes quite frankly an annoyance. So thus you’re going to get a reaction either way which might I add, is nothing more than a passing thought or something to point out to your friend next to you. However, in the event of violence against homosexuals, these occasions of beatings and violence are carried out by nothing more that low life thugs and thick headed louts to whom would enact violence against anyone they deem as an easy target. All these idiots need is a catalyst as an excuse.
So thus I conclude that homosexuality is here, it’s queer, it’s not going to go away so all of us should right now and for the determined future make a stand of acceptance in furthering our comprehension of same sex couples, their rights, their practices, be it gay or lesbian. Those who try to influence law via the distain of homosexuality, are in essence selfishly creating mountains from molehills and likewise those who wish to or have enacted violence against gays on the grounds of homophobia, are nothing more than as previously stated, thick headed thugs.
Homosexuality? It’s just another way of today, so get used to it!
By VisionGhost © 2009
It is that same hate that created the IRA, the same indifference that creates terrorism, the same hate that destroyed the American trade centre, the similar disproportionate methodology behind the thinking that creates conflict at even the basic configuration of human psychology. If only it be that which permits for such intolerance and persecution for human example of love and affection as it is only different to your own personal recognition of normality.
Isn’t it sad we have this debacle? Yet it is ourselves as the common supposed normality of heterosexuality that created in its self the Frankenstein’s Monster of Homophobia; which I would have thought had no place in modern society as it be that very intolerance all should fight against in favour of acceptance, after all that has been witnessed in the real wars of our modern world.
If marines, officers and/or soldiers waive their right to a life of freedom in preference to a defence of a “taken for granted” democracy, then surely all should uphold the recognition that no one persons sexuality or persuasion be any more or less superior in allowance for social acceptance from the other. It is in my opinion that formulating a mental exclusion and thus trying to implement that into law; be it political or social, against those of a sexual persuasion differing from yours, is essentially playing god.
The only sexual persuasion I deem utterly abhorrent and evil is of course, paedophilia. I find it an absolutely absurd mentally and wholly unjustifiable, that a convicted sexual predator can go before a judge and have their sentenced reduced on appeal after committing perhaps the most atrocious crimes imaginable, yet homosexual couples, be them gay or lesbian are denied the right to marriage to whom have probably never harmed another human being in their lives.
The existence of homosexuality has not and will not cause you any harm, infringe on the normality of your day and while the gay act of sexual intercourse may seem to many as an uncomfortable method of love making, it is in all honesty, none of anyone’s business.
As for gay marriage, well, as one does not have the choice of birth one is also not given the choice of which direction you swing, so thus I deem it an absolute disgrace and utter limitation of human understanding to assume that anyone outside of a gay relationship has the right to dictate who can and who can’t marry as a given demonstration of devotion between a couple be it same sex or otherwise.
Quite a few people state that the sight of two men kissing is “creepy” but let’s press on that for awhile.
If it be two grown men kissing in a same sex relationship, what is it when two grown women do the same in exactly the same coordination, what happens? Many heterosexual men find it a turn on, yet when heterosexual couples continue to lock chops for seemingly an eternity in full view of the general public, it becomes quite frankly an annoyance. So thus you’re going to get a reaction either way which might I add, is nothing more than a passing thought or something to point out to your friend next to you. However, in the event of violence against homosexuals, these occasions of beatings and violence are carried out by nothing more that low life thugs and thick headed louts to whom would enact violence against anyone they deem as an easy target. All these idiots need is a catalyst as an excuse.
So thus I conclude that homosexuality is here, it’s queer, it’s not going to go away so all of us should right now and for the determined future make a stand of acceptance in furthering our comprehension of same sex couples, their rights, their practices, be it gay or lesbian. Those who try to influence law via the distain of homosexuality, are in essence selfishly creating mountains from molehills and likewise those who wish to or have enacted violence against gays on the grounds of homophobia, are nothing more than as previously stated, thick headed thugs.
Homosexuality? It’s just another way of today, so get used to it!
By VisionGhost © 2009
BNP = Belligerent Nuisance oh & err Politician?
In every politically based media storm, the far left and right use the tennis court of debate to volley back & forth views and opinions in the obvious goal of scoring the ace to game, set and match. As was witnessed by thousands of viewers on BBC’s, Question Time in which the controversial figure and leader of the BNP - British Nationalist Party, Nick Griffin, entered into such an arena, admittedly not to the warmest of welcomes.
But that is hardly surprising when you consider his views to be either overtly extreme, uncomfortable to consider and nonsensical to see any form of fruition in modern Britain.
I myself am not leaning toward the far right, as I believe that the conduct of the extreme right should be chosen only as a defence against an aggressor of a similar nature. But that simply isn’t the case today, the way I see it right now, the only aggressor is admittedly in truth ourselves, to that extent I believe Nick Griffin (BNP Leader) feeds on that persona of Britain to further a cause which seems to me to be at least 60 years out of date.
Why 60 years? Well, it was approx 60 years ago, Britain’s then Prime Minister Winston Churchill led Britain to victory against the Germans in the 2nd world War, also, might I add, with the help of numerous nations which included that of what is termed in the politically correct manner as “Post Visual Ethnic Origins” a poignant moment in history that I reckon even Griffin would grimace to admit. So when he stated on Question Time that Churchill would have chosen the BNP on the grounds of a single quote...
“Immigrants come to Britain only for our benefits system”
Well, let’s press on that. Quoting a former and since long dead Prime Minister of Britain is one thing, but, quoting a former and long since dead Prime Minister of a Britain from over 60 years ago is quite another. The obvious flaw of the BNP is exposed; they are an out of date, out of touch and a glowing example of a British temper tantrum which has grown out of control and yet apparently becoming increasingly popular.
When I read today that 1 in 5 Britons would consider voting for the BNP, I nearly fell about laughing, I guarantee you that 60% of those 1 in 5 are the same people who find it’s a really good laugh to write “Jedi” in the religion box on census forms. The other remaining 40% either don’t have an independent thought in their heads or are the ones pertaining to the forever dissatisfied no matter what time it is or what the weather is doing on any given day of the week.
The very people I find embracing the BNP over immigration are the ones who thus return to their very comfortable 3 bedroom, semi detached homes with too much material ownership and little enough aspiration to think that the greatest failing of, themselves, is that they have never learnt to share what they have.
When the poorer people from abroad or should I say, the less economically advantaged, say the Polish for an obvious example, arrive in richer countries, they should be embraced.
Why? Because it’s become far too easy to sneer and hate the reality of immigration and the thought that Britain, as well as places such as Ireland, might actually be joining the 21st Century and it’s about time the rest of us did the same, to accept multiculturalism and understand that we are in actuality far better off with them. If Britain and Ireland are being seen as the Economically Advantaged countries most local to mainland Europe, then we should ultimately set the example as being pioneers in basic political maturity to being the most accepting and fairer of nations.
Griffin states that the doors to immigration should be closed, that now is quite simply the most pathetic idea of a solution I have ever heard, for 2 massive reasons. Firstly, “shutting the borders” is equivalent to the idea of...
“My car makes a strange noise when changing from 3rd to 4th gear so the solution is to leave it on the side of the road, abandon it and thus walk home!”
It just doesn’t make sense! To implement a working solution to an ongoing problem you have to have in place an already existing working mechanism, whether it be efficient or otherwise, to ensure that improved practices within that sector are viable and effective to augment.
Secondly and this is the answer I would have given to the gentleman on Question Time who asked...
“Why are immigrants still coming here despite rising unemployment?”
I would have thought the answer was quite easy but hey, this is what happens when conversing with the blind faith supporters of hateful & radical extremism. To answer the question and make my second reason I would say this, that it is imperative they keep coming as they provide a vital balance to the lower end sector of whatever sector they gain employment within, as the remaining middle class simply can’t make the sacrifice financially to take on a job at NMW or else are simply too proud to do so.
It means that the sandwich in the deli gets made, the hospitals get cleaned and the convenient store stays open when you desire a beer. If we were to shut the gates as Griffin put it, the effects on these sectors would be catastrophic.
So thus I conclude that the BNP simply are a made up party of selfish, tired and out dated political opinions marred in paranoia fed hatred only succeeding by encompassing the absolute pinnacle examples of what is wrong with Britain today as a nation as well as other countries that have nationalist parties, Nationalists who turf and preach their political opinions simply by overtly scrutinising and exaggerating the truth of current failings of whatever party is in power and in opposition of far right views, Nationalists who point the ever erect finger in the squealing vitriol at anything they perceive is not accustom to their belief and feel they have the right to damn it to hell, for example the public display of affection between homosexuals to which I myself fully support as any demonstration of love/affection in this day and age is essential.
The BNP, they call themselves Nationalist, I call them plain Nasty!
By VisionGhost © 2009
But that is hardly surprising when you consider his views to be either overtly extreme, uncomfortable to consider and nonsensical to see any form of fruition in modern Britain.
I myself am not leaning toward the far right, as I believe that the conduct of the extreme right should be chosen only as a defence against an aggressor of a similar nature. But that simply isn’t the case today, the way I see it right now, the only aggressor is admittedly in truth ourselves, to that extent I believe Nick Griffin (BNP Leader) feeds on that persona of Britain to further a cause which seems to me to be at least 60 years out of date.
Why 60 years? Well, it was approx 60 years ago, Britain’s then Prime Minister Winston Churchill led Britain to victory against the Germans in the 2nd world War, also, might I add, with the help of numerous nations which included that of what is termed in the politically correct manner as “Post Visual Ethnic Origins” a poignant moment in history that I reckon even Griffin would grimace to admit. So when he stated on Question Time that Churchill would have chosen the BNP on the grounds of a single quote...
“Immigrants come to Britain only for our benefits system”
Well, let’s press on that. Quoting a former and since long dead Prime Minister of Britain is one thing, but, quoting a former and long since dead Prime Minister of a Britain from over 60 years ago is quite another. The obvious flaw of the BNP is exposed; they are an out of date, out of touch and a glowing example of a British temper tantrum which has grown out of control and yet apparently becoming increasingly popular.
When I read today that 1 in 5 Britons would consider voting for the BNP, I nearly fell about laughing, I guarantee you that 60% of those 1 in 5 are the same people who find it’s a really good laugh to write “Jedi” in the religion box on census forms. The other remaining 40% either don’t have an independent thought in their heads or are the ones pertaining to the forever dissatisfied no matter what time it is or what the weather is doing on any given day of the week.
The very people I find embracing the BNP over immigration are the ones who thus return to their very comfortable 3 bedroom, semi detached homes with too much material ownership and little enough aspiration to think that the greatest failing of, themselves, is that they have never learnt to share what they have.
When the poorer people from abroad or should I say, the less economically advantaged, say the Polish for an obvious example, arrive in richer countries, they should be embraced.
Why? Because it’s become far too easy to sneer and hate the reality of immigration and the thought that Britain, as well as places such as Ireland, might actually be joining the 21st Century and it’s about time the rest of us did the same, to accept multiculturalism and understand that we are in actuality far better off with them. If Britain and Ireland are being seen as the Economically Advantaged countries most local to mainland Europe, then we should ultimately set the example as being pioneers in basic political maturity to being the most accepting and fairer of nations.
Griffin states that the doors to immigration should be closed, that now is quite simply the most pathetic idea of a solution I have ever heard, for 2 massive reasons. Firstly, “shutting the borders” is equivalent to the idea of...
“My car makes a strange noise when changing from 3rd to 4th gear so the solution is to leave it on the side of the road, abandon it and thus walk home!”
It just doesn’t make sense! To implement a working solution to an ongoing problem you have to have in place an already existing working mechanism, whether it be efficient or otherwise, to ensure that improved practices within that sector are viable and effective to augment.
Secondly and this is the answer I would have given to the gentleman on Question Time who asked...
“Why are immigrants still coming here despite rising unemployment?”
I would have thought the answer was quite easy but hey, this is what happens when conversing with the blind faith supporters of hateful & radical extremism. To answer the question and make my second reason I would say this, that it is imperative they keep coming as they provide a vital balance to the lower end sector of whatever sector they gain employment within, as the remaining middle class simply can’t make the sacrifice financially to take on a job at NMW or else are simply too proud to do so.
It means that the sandwich in the deli gets made, the hospitals get cleaned and the convenient store stays open when you desire a beer. If we were to shut the gates as Griffin put it, the effects on these sectors would be catastrophic.
So thus I conclude that the BNP simply are a made up party of selfish, tired and out dated political opinions marred in paranoia fed hatred only succeeding by encompassing the absolute pinnacle examples of what is wrong with Britain today as a nation as well as other countries that have nationalist parties, Nationalists who turf and preach their political opinions simply by overtly scrutinising and exaggerating the truth of current failings of whatever party is in power and in opposition of far right views, Nationalists who point the ever erect finger in the squealing vitriol at anything they perceive is not accustom to their belief and feel they have the right to damn it to hell, for example the public display of affection between homosexuals to which I myself fully support as any demonstration of love/affection in this day and age is essential.
The BNP, they call themselves Nationalist, I call them plain Nasty!
By VisionGhost © 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
