Jeff Randall talks a lot of sense in his article in the Telegraph:
As Harriet Harman slithered on the thin ice of dissemblance, cracks in her conviction were palpable. Blinking furiously, she appeared as someone who would rather plunge into freezing waters of ridicule than succumb to truth.
Asked by Jeremy Paxman on Newsnight to affirm her confidence in Michael Martin, the Commons Speaker, Miss Harman skated round an honest reply numerous times until falling over her own feet with a sullen confession: “I am not saying I have got full confidence in anything or anybody.”
It was the kind of encounter to which British viewers have become inured: in effect, a current affairs entertainment show, with a celebrity presenter posing questions and a slippery interviewee defying clarity through a fog of non-answers.
As a society, we have not just stopped expecting veracity from elected representatives, but we have also been brainwashed into believing that harsh realities are to be avoided lest they damage confidence, disturb sensibilities or upset the growing number of delicate flowers who protect themselves from legitimate criticism with the prophylactic of grievance.
It is as though there has been a conspiracy between disingenuous politicians, campaigners for political correctness and a malleable electorate to accept deliberate omissions and distortions as valid currencies of exchange for public discourse, while banning the gold standard of fact. (My emphasis)
This has been made possible because, as I have pointed out before, most recently two days ago:
The government decides what is to be “achieved,” then uses the “advice” given by registered ‘charities’ funded by other charities and government departments who they know will spin the case for the government.
The electorate has been made malleable due in part at least to declining standards in education and a dumbed-down media.
It is indeed as though there has been a conspiracy, but Mr Randall omitted to mention the most influential players: the world’s ‘elite’ figures in banking, industry, health, ‘education’ and a network of secret societies who are re-engineering society for their own selfish ends.
Why? Because they can.
They own the mass media, make the mass medications, have created a culture of dependency on state intervention.
Certain things are made to look cool, so that the young will be led in a certain direction.
One example is illicit sex. The “Want Respect? Use a Condom” campaign is cleverly disguised as an exercise in public health, but what does changing the meaning of the word ‘respect’ actually deliver?
I have mentioned this before, but I spoke to a pastor in Oxfordshire who runs a youth club in his town for non-churchgoers. The young men he speaks with think that the moral dilemma they face is whether to use a condom while having sex, rather than whether it is right to be having sex.
The “Want Respect? Use a Condom” campaign sponsored one of the Urban Music Awards in 2007. How ‘cool’ is that?!
The false notions being transmitted about equality mean a great many minds have been rewired to believe that abortion is a ‘woman’s choice’ and homosexual relationships are just ‘another kind of love’.
Just to make sure that there is no escape from the brainwashing, the New Labour Government is expected to implement sex and ‘relationship’ lessons in schools starting straight off in primary one. And it looks like there will be no arrangements for parents to opt out.
Why is no more than a small proportion of the public enraged by this?
Is it because parents have little time to themselves and do not have the energy left to be angry?
The homosexuals will say that there are different kinds of love and so all relationships should be treated as equal.
The feminists will say that girls need to learn that they own their bodies and have sexual rights including the ‘right’ to terminate pregnancy. It has been reported that this brainwashing has already begun in selected schools.
Here is yet another registered ‘charity’, Education for Choice.
On their home page they say that “anti-abortion campaigners are being allowed into schools to present their arguments to teenagers, and are making converts.”
It sounds like they do not like the term, ‘pro-life’.
The Guardian also seems to prefer ‘anti-abortion’ to ‘pro-life’ thus giving the impression that aborting a pregnancy is the default position.
It is Newspeak all the way now for our society: another method of distorting untruths into ‘truths’.
EfC must be scared as they have an online form where pupils can report what pro-life material they have been subjected to.
So, the pro-lifers are gaining ground in our schools; well great! It should lead to fewer abortions due to fewer illicit sexual encounters and therefore fewer precious NHS resources spent trying to clear up STDs.
But EfC’s head of policy and communications believes that what is needed is for schools to move away from presenting the issue as a dichotomy: abortion – is it right or wrong? “That’s so often how it’s addressed in schools, which completely ignores the sexual health aspect.”
This just confirms what I always say about “sexual health” propaganda. It is nothing to do with morals or decency, just part of a campaign to reduce society to a dysfunctional dystopia with rights and choices taking over from rights and wrongs.
No wonder victims are often treated worse than criminals when morals get booted out.
LIFE’s education officer is concerned that most people assume abortion is “perfectly fine” because it’s legal. “That’s the general perception. But really we don’t want kids to inherit these views. We want them to think about the principles they live by, what values are important to them. Every member of LIFE agrees “that because we believe human life begins at the moment of fertilisation, then the pro-life position is the only logical position to take”.
It is in all our interests, outside of the realm of mad social engineers, that human life is valued from its earliest moment, because a civilisation that betrays the trust of the most fragile and needy is capable, I believe, of total degeneration where the conditions will exist to enable our new masters to commit the most vile acts on any of us or all of us together.
The net result of all this conditioning is that these youngsters will grow up with totally warped ideas of what humanity is all about, probably start experimenting with sex very early and as a result of being coached into being dysfunctional, find it very difficult to find lifelong partners and raise families: exactly what the social engineers need to weaken society enough to fully control us.
It is not good enough for them to have dumbed down education to the point where even McDonald’s needs to give school leavers basic lessons in literacy and numeracy, nor does fingerprinting children in schools go far enough to train them to be owned by the state.
This project has a long way to go. Is it already too big to be put back in the box and sent on a one-way journey into outer darkness?
That is up to us – to see past the lies and act accordingly.