Sunday, Feb 26th

Last update:04:30:27 PM GMT

You are here: In the News Arts and Media

Arts and Media

George Michael Died on Christmas Day

E-mail Print PDF

No doubt ‘tributes’ will pour in for George Michael.

He died of supposed ‘heart failure’... but the photos of him clearly show the ravages of AIDS. I might be
corrected, but that’s what he looked like.

There was a time when singers were quickly dismissed if they were publically declared to be homosexual, but these
people keep on pushing and younger folks accept homosexuals as if they were ‘good’ just because they sing well.

Michael, like Freddy Mercury, has now been rewarded for his time spent lurking around men’s toilets and other dark places. His sexual wickedness has caught up with him. Many homosexuals have had their lives ended prematurely by their evil sexual choices. Michael, as with Mercury, will have his life sanitised for public mourning! (Although Owen Jones of the Guardian (overtly homosexual) wants to celebrate Michael's brazen homosexuality: 'George Michael was a defiant gay icon. His life must not be sanitised', 26 December 2016)

But, the life of every homosexual is just a corpse waiting to be taken to the grave.

Make no mistake, homosexuals are hated by God, as are their lives. Scripture says they will enter hell for their abominations.

And so we say farewell to yet another peddler of perversion.

Hard words? Then see him as God sees him, an evil man waiting for Judgment Day.

BBC’s Strategic 470% Positive Discrimination in Favour of Homosexuals

E-mail Print PDF

Can the BBC please explain why when the Office for National Statistics (ONS) estimated “In 2015, 1.7% of the UK population identified themselves as lesbian, gay or bisexual (LGB)”, the BBC wants to target LGBT (homosexuals) ‘On Air-Portrayal Targets’ and ‘Workforce Targets’ of 8%?

How does this 470% positive discrimination in favour of homosexuals, reflect balanced programming and recruitment?

"Answers on a ‘postcard’...."

Equality and diversity is BBC speak for a blatantly biased, discriminatory, illegal, on-air and recruitment policies and targets that the British Licence fee payer is forced to embrace and swallow. Stop your social liberalism now!

BBC Propose Broadcasting Muslim ‘Call to Prayer’ on a Friday

E-mail Print PDF

It is widely reported that the BBC are considering whether to broadcast the Muslim Call to prayer and to reduce its Christian 'bias' in programming. (Telegraph, May 2016)

How can the BBC even justify calling Islam a religion when its core scriptures are completely intolerant of infidels or kafirs (Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims) and its teachings promise its follows a passport to paradise for slaying them? How does that fit with the BBC’s Diversity and Inclusion Strategy 2016?

Islam is not a religion it is a political ideology that rejects Judaeo-Christian values and freedom of conscience and speech. The BBC dares not offend a Muslim in its news reporting by self-censoring images and words, but will delight in portraying Christians as bigoted fools and cultural numpties for opposing homosexuality and same-sex marriage. Yet, every human is born of a man and a woman - a very inconvenient fact!

What will the British people think when the BBC starts broadcasting the Muslim’s war cry “Allahu Akbar” (Allah is the greatest) and “La ilaha illa-Allah” (There is no god but Allah) every Friday at a call to prayer? You might as well let ISIS have a free pass to take over the BBC network. If you start allowing a call to prayer on a Friday, do you think it will stop at one day and only once a day?

Stop trying to sanitise the idolatrous and abominable pseudo-religion of Islam and stop forcing the British people to embrace and swallow its oppressive and destructive pus and vomit. Islam has no place in the civilised world let alone the UK.

Get real and use your journalistic training to be objective and portray Islam as it is and abort your politically correct social liberalism.

Sign the petition 'Protect Christian programming and coverage at the BBC'.

Hijab worn by presenter on Channel 4 mid-day news.

E-mail Print PDF

Tuesday 27 September 2016, the news presenter was wearing an hijab.

In view of the VERY serious consternation in the West about the insidious infiltration of the West by Islam, using ‘cultural’ weapons (burka, burkini, etc), was this choice of presenter genuine?

Was she chosen because she is superior to white, non-Muslims?

Or was it, as I suspect, a provocative pro-Islam move to bring Islam even closer to the people, by dominating the news?

I know what it was – a definite statement of pro-Islam. It is getting viewers used to seeing the signs of Islam. What comes next – BBC-style news favouring Palestinian terrorism and Islamic violence?

No offence to the presenter, but it begs serious questions.

It is noted that Ofcom has rejected complaints that it was inappropriate for Channel 4 News to allow a Muslim journalist to present coverage of the Nice truck attack (Guardian, 22 August 2016).

So a Muslim can murder and injure scores of tourists in a terror attack in Nice and then another Muslim report their 'success' on Channel 4 news.

Would a Nazi be allowed on Channel 4 News to report on the 'success' of the gas chambers in killing Jews at Auschwitz?

Be Divergent!

E-mail Print PDF

I don’t normally watch a secular film, but on this occasion... I just watched a film named ‘Divergent’ (rated ‘12’ and no foul language etc)  (2014). I bought it for £3 in a superstore (Tesco? Asda?) because of what I suspected was the concept... brainwashing by PC methods. (Please note I am not saying that the film 'Divergent' is in anyway edifying for a Christian. Watch at your own discretion.)

And I was right.

It made me shudder, because it contains strong elements of fascism – something I have fought against for years. In the film young people were persuaded by psychological pressure (which they did not realise was there) to conduct mass shootings of people not wanted in the walled city. Those who were considered ‘divergent’ were sought out and thrown outside the city walls and killed. The symbolism was accurate and heavy, reminding me of Nazi Germany and ISIS who brainwash people to do what they would not normally do, including murder (actual psychology trials confirm people are willing to do this). Basically, it shows what happens when a few individuals do not comply with the (fascist) rule and demands of a very few, just like today. It also displayed very strong PC commands by people in power. For me, the violence portrayed mimics Nazi rule.


Page 1 of 4

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  4 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »