This is a guest post by my younger sister
Channel 4 have decided that the new year should bring a new programme titled 'Make Bradford British'. It will be a Big Brother style TV show where contestants from different ethnic minorities are forced to live together for a 'radical social experiment'.
Apart from stating that they chose Bradford because it is one of the most 'racially segregated cities in Europe' (massive overexagerration), it has also chosen some of its contestants from the group of people who did not pass the standard criteria test (ratings!).
All I can see this doing is stirring up tension where we need it least. This programme is playing straight into the hands of racists.
Many people, myself included, feel that Bradford has moved on from times of the riots, and yes we do have areas of a certain minority here, but what city doesn't? Chinatown in London? Chapeltown in Leeds?
Oh wait, those cities don't have a very volatile recent past do they? That's what brings the money in, I forgot!
This show has been chosen to air by some ninny down south, who doesn't know what its like living here, who thinks they can decide how people feel, and as soon as it all goes tits up and the racist views re-surface, can just scarper back down there.
I've emailed the show telling them what I think, and I'm asking you all to do the same. It takes 5 minutes, and you get a reply too.
What happened to seeing if social minorities can live together by LEAVING THEM TO IT?
So please, lets try stop this rancid show being aired just to cause trouble.
Channel 4, DO ONE.
Showing posts with label EDL. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EDL. Show all posts
Thursday, 10 November 2011
Wednesday, 15 June 2011
Why I Am So Angry
Yesterday someone linked me to this, a poster that they thought I'd like. I do like it. (Click to make BIG - also, as I understand, it's free to print and reproduce it, and you are encouraged to do so)
But I'd like to add a few things to that, because it doesn't cover nearly half the things I feel angry about on a daily basis. So, here goes:
"Fuck patriarchy. Fuck rape culture. Fuck victim blaming, fuck slut shaming, fuck any bastard that would choose a clump of fucking cells over the life of the woman that hosts it. Fuck body fascism. Fuck lads mags. Fuck womens mags. Fuck objectification. Fuck saying a woman is empowered because you give her money to conform to your misogynistic ideals. Fuck binary gender norms. Fuck not citing your sources and churnalising some bullshit pseudoscience that landed on your desk. Fuck all pseudoscience. Fuck homeopathy, fuck acupuncture, acupressure, acu-whatthefuckingever. Fuck anything not proven by re-testable science. That includes God, you small-minded fucks. Fuck anyone who would use an imaginary sky pixie to push their bigoted, money-grasping agenda. Fuck economic libertarians, the selfish cuntpricks. Fuck EU sceptics, fuck climate change sceptics. Fuck James fucking Delingpole and every lie he's ever published. Fuck Littlejohn, the fat prick, railing against how bad it is in the UK from his mansion in fucking Florida. Fuck Melanie Philips, the delusional bitch. Fuck Philip Davies, the rent-a-gobshite. And fuck Nadine fucking Dorries, the evidence-denying, lying fucking shitwhore. And Frank Fields. Who thinks women are too stupid to choose but bright enough to raise kids. Fuck Eric Pickles. Fuck Theresa May. Fuck the police, fuck the riot squad, fuck the TSG, the violent twathounds. Fuck the CPS. Fuck the courts. Fuck the prison system. You think it works? Meet evidence. Fuck ATOS. Fuck anyone who would punish the worthy sick for the greedy well. Fuck racists, the fucking chodes. Fuck war for oil. Fuck the war on terror, fuck the war on drugs. Fuck The Big Questions. Fuck Question Time. Fuck Prime Ministers cocking Questions. Fuck giving my time to right-wing reactionary fucknuts. Fuck Moral Maze. There ain't nothing moral. Either you're a weeping dickshit or you're not. Fuck those who piss about the 'nanny state' because they're too fucking thick to have grasped metric in over 40 fucking years. Fuck those who think the ECHR is part of the EU. Fuck those who think that having your bins collected once a week is more important than foreign aid. Fuck people who want to take away minimum wage. Fuck the bastards exploiting the situation the banks gave us and calling the unemployed lazy when there's five unemployed to every job vacancy. Fuck unpaid internships. Fuck gap years. Fuck mummy and daddy paying for you to climb the corporate ladder. Fuck you bastarding fuckers who make my head want to explode every time I remember every shitty thing you've ever done."Stay angry people xx
Sunday, 6 February 2011
Woman Angry At Reading Stupid News
Today I stumbled across an awful story. A story so bad it made me break down and weep, cursing the cruelty that the world can inflict upon poor innocents. A story so utterly, utterly heartrending that I'm not sure I can bring myself to write about the terrible plight suffered by the victim. But I shall. I will remain strong, because this is a story that needs to be told to the world.
The poor innocent victim I speak of? That victim was me, when I had to read this utter rubbish:
So, some time around the end of 2009 (I can't find exact dates), KFC, in response to customer feedback, decided to supply around 100 of its 'restaurants' with halal meat. Yes, this is the TERRIBLE INJUSTICE suffered by whinging EDL fwap-fodder Emma Lee. A woman who has, presumably, never heard the phrase "supply and demand" in her life.
KFC point out in their FAQ on the matter that the restaurants which are halal-only display the Halal Food Authority logo on the door, and were also chosen to be in close proximity to non-halal restaurants.
Emma Lee claims that she feels "completely violated" and "absolutely disgusted" that she ate food which was against her "beliefs" (I don't know how long being a stupid bigot has counted as a 'belief', but there you go).
She also tries to claim that this she opposes the move to halal-only on "religious and animal welfare grounds". Now, I've looked for a religion that forbids eating halal meat, but I can't find one, so I can only assume that what she opposes is the religion that halal meat comes from. As for animal welfare? Don't make me fucking laugh love, you're eating KFC.
Her story gets even stupider after that. She claims that she has "no problem with people who do wish to eat halal meat, that is their personal choice" (except if they want to buy it from a popular fast food chain of course, then she's opposed to it).
She then says "I just feel like I had my personal choice taken away from me by changing the meat without informing us so I could go elsewhere", and "I feel that everybody should know what they are eating".
The restaurant had a sign on the door, and a plaque on the wall, that she even says she read before ordering her food that said it was halal-only. She freely admits that she walked in, looked at a sign that said that the food was halal, ordered the food, sat down and started eating it, and only THEN did it dawn on her that she might be eating halal food (which I'm still not sure why she opposes).
Without getting into a huge debate about the rights and wrongs of eating any meat (yes, I am a vegetarian), I'd love to be able to ask Emma what her opinion on kosher meat is, given that that forbids the stunning of the animal before slaughter, unlike the halal meat in this case, which was stunned.
So, to summarise: Woman so thick it takes her brain ten minutes to process what is on a sign she read doesn't want people of a different religion to hers to be able to eat in the same restaurants, because the rights of a white woman who wants to be a bigot should trump the rights of all the local muslims. Or something like that.
Predictably, the local EDL dickheads have picked up on the story as an example of the inexhaustable tide of "islamification" across the UK. It's so nice of the Keighley News to give them bullshit like this to feed on, don't you think?
The poor innocent victim I speak of? That victim was me, when I had to read this utter rubbish:
"Woman angry at KFC meat policy".
A woman is angry that she ate halal chicken from Keighley’s KFC restaurant without realising.
Emma Lee did not realise that all meat sold at the outlet had been slaughtered in line with Islamic beliefs.
All fillets sold at the company’s Keighley restaurant are drained of blood and blessed by a Muslim slaughterman.
The policy was brought in to cater to the large Muslim population around the restaurant at Keighley Retail Park in Hard Ings Road.
KFC says the killing method complies with both Islamic teaching and rigorous animal standards. The takeaway giant insists the chickens are stunned before they are slaughtered and their care meets UK and EU laws.
Ms Lee, from the Skipton area, said she felt “totally violated” when she discovered what she had eaten during her visit.
She said: “I was absolutely disgusted. I have been eating food that is against my beliefs!”
Ms Lee said she objected to halal killing on both religious and animal welfare grounds. She said: “I have no problem with people who do wish to eat halal meat, that is their personal choice.
“I just feel like I had my personal choice taken away from me by changing the meat without informing us so I could go elsewhere.”
Ms Lee said that while queuing she noticed a certificate on the wall saying the restaurant was allowed to sell halal meat.
She added: “I sat down to enjoy my dinner and got thinking about this. I started to get a bit concerned. It turns out that all the meat they serve in store is halal meat. I feel that everybody should know what they are eating.”
KFC introduced halal-only meat at about 100 restaurants across the UK last year in communities where it anticipated a strong demand. Pork is not allowed under Islamic law, so the company’s Big Daddy burger with bacon was withdrawn.
Although the chickens are killed mechanically, the slaughter and preparation methods are certified by the Halal Food Authority.
KFC’s website states: “The edicts and requirements for Halal accreditation are strictly followed. A verse is recited from the Qu’ran by an appropriate person at the point of slaughter.”
KFC said the animals were not dead prior to slaughtering and all blood was drained from their bodies. It added: “We remain committed to the same animal welfare standards and insist our poultry is stunned before slaughter – a pain- free process that makes the animal insensible to pain and suffering.
“We will only purchase high quality, Grade A, farm-assured chicken from the same leading suppliers used by major retailers.”
So, some time around the end of 2009 (I can't find exact dates), KFC, in response to customer feedback, decided to supply around 100 of its 'restaurants' with halal meat. Yes, this is the TERRIBLE INJUSTICE suffered by whinging EDL fwap-fodder Emma Lee. A woman who has, presumably, never heard the phrase "supply and demand" in her life.
KFC point out in their FAQ on the matter that the restaurants which are halal-only display the Halal Food Authority logo on the door, and were also chosen to be in close proximity to non-halal restaurants.
Emma Lee claims that she feels "completely violated" and "absolutely disgusted" that she ate food which was against her "beliefs" (I don't know how long being a stupid bigot has counted as a 'belief', but there you go).
She also tries to claim that this she opposes the move to halal-only on "religious and animal welfare grounds". Now, I've looked for a religion that forbids eating halal meat, but I can't find one, so I can only assume that what she opposes is the religion that halal meat comes from. As for animal welfare? Don't make me fucking laugh love, you're eating KFC.
Her story gets even stupider after that. She claims that she has "no problem with people who do wish to eat halal meat, that is their personal choice" (except if they want to buy it from a popular fast food chain of course, then she's opposed to it).
She then says "I just feel like I had my personal choice taken away from me by changing the meat without informing us so I could go elsewhere", and "I feel that everybody should know what they are eating".
The restaurant had a sign on the door, and a plaque on the wall, that she even says she read before ordering her food that said it was halal-only. She freely admits that she walked in, looked at a sign that said that the food was halal, ordered the food, sat down and started eating it, and only THEN did it dawn on her that she might be eating halal food (which I'm still not sure why she opposes).
Without getting into a huge debate about the rights and wrongs of eating any meat (yes, I am a vegetarian), I'd love to be able to ask Emma what her opinion on kosher meat is, given that that forbids the stunning of the animal before slaughter, unlike the halal meat in this case, which was stunned.
So, to summarise: Woman so thick it takes her brain ten minutes to process what is on a sign she read doesn't want people of a different religion to hers to be able to eat in the same restaurants, because the rights of a white woman who wants to be a bigot should trump the rights of all the local muslims. Or something like that.
Predictably, the local EDL dickheads have picked up on the story as an example of the inexhaustable tide of "islamification" across the UK. It's so nice of the Keighley News to give them bullshit like this to feed on, don't you think?
Tuesday, 4 January 2011
'Never Surrender' - unless you're a paedophile, apparently.
I'd like to start by thanking the good folks at @exposingtweets for their permission to use their screencaps in this, my first post. They really are brilliant, and inspired me to begin writing this. You should follow them on Facebook and Twitter. I'd also like to apologise at my complete lack of any technical abilities whatsoever - this will hopefully become better over time.
As you may know, Richard Price is a high-ranking member of the EDL. How high ranking he actually is is something that has been called into question and will be mentioned later. Price is also a convicted sex-offender.
Last night, Indymedia gave a verbatim quote from The Times, reporting that a leader of the EDL had been placed on the sex offenders register. The facts are thus:
Richard Price was arrested in 2009 for 'Public Order offences' (translation: 'being a violent, racist scumbag') whilst on an EDL march. During the course of the investigation, the police searched his house. They found cocaine and crack cocaine there, and seized his computer. On his computer, police found indecent images of children. Price pleaded guilty to four counts of making indecent images of children and two counts of possessing cocaine when he appeared at Birmingham Crown Court in June 2010. He was banned from owning a computer for a year, given a three year community supervision order and ordered to sign the sex offenders register for five years. In December 2010, Price was jailed for three months for public order offences and banned from attending marches outside Birmingham for ten years. The EDL labelled him a 'political prisoner' and campaigned for his release.
Last night, when the story broke, the EDL released a hastily-put together, and frankly laughable, version of events as a public statement on Facebook (since deleted but kept here). In this, they claimed that:
1) The computer Price was using was second hand, and the pictures were already on there.
2) The pictures were on the lowest level on the child pornography scale - which was likened to 'pictures of children in a swimming pool'.
3) The search of Price's house was only done to dissuade him from protesting
4) Price only pleaded guilty because he was told that if he did, there would be no publicity or media coverage, and if he didn't, he would have to go through a full public trial. Apparently this is 'what anyone would do'
5) Price was not, and at no point had he ever been, part of the EDL leadership.
They made no mention of the drug or public order offences at any point.
Taking these points in turn:
1) Whilst this may be true (and I doubt it is, due to point 4), it is (usually) possible to get time and date stamps that show when something was placed on a computer hard drive. All Price needed to do was prove when he bought the computer to show that the images were already present.
2) Whilst it is true that Price was charged with making images of the lowest level on the SAP scale (NOT the COPINE scale - as EDL leaders mistakenly believed after a quick Google), this is defined as "nudity or erotic posing with no sexual activity".
3) As mentioned above, the search of Price's house was in relation to Public Order offences.
4) Find me a man that wouldn't go to trial to clear his name of paedophilia when he knows he's innocent, and I'll give you a medal. There is NO conceivable way that someone would agree to sign the sex offenders register for five years to avoid a trial if they know they are innocent. The very notion is laughable in the extreme.
5) This suggests otherwise.
So, what now?
Well, today we've had members of the EDL defending him, EDL leaders deleting posts that question their version of events and, best of all, swift back pedalling from the idiots in charge
We can only hope that at least some people who have previously affiliated themselves with this odious group finally see the scales fall from their eyes and wake up to the lies, deceit and bile that is spewed by their 'leaders', and leave.
EDIT: It appears they already have
As you may know, Richard Price is a high-ranking member of the EDL. How high ranking he actually is is something that has been called into question and will be mentioned later. Price is also a convicted sex-offender.
Last night, Indymedia gave a verbatim quote from The Times, reporting that a leader of the EDL had been placed on the sex offenders register. The facts are thus:
Richard Price was arrested in 2009 for 'Public Order offences' (translation: 'being a violent, racist scumbag') whilst on an EDL march. During the course of the investigation, the police searched his house. They found cocaine and crack cocaine there, and seized his computer. On his computer, police found indecent images of children. Price pleaded guilty to four counts of making indecent images of children and two counts of possessing cocaine when he appeared at Birmingham Crown Court in June 2010. He was banned from owning a computer for a year, given a three year community supervision order and ordered to sign the sex offenders register for five years. In December 2010, Price was jailed for three months for public order offences and banned from attending marches outside Birmingham for ten years. The EDL labelled him a 'political prisoner' and campaigned for his release.
Last night, when the story broke, the EDL released a hastily-put together, and frankly laughable, version of events as a public statement on Facebook (since deleted but kept here). In this, they claimed that:
1) The computer Price was using was second hand, and the pictures were already on there.
2) The pictures were on the lowest level on the child pornography scale - which was likened to 'pictures of children in a swimming pool'.
3) The search of Price's house was only done to dissuade him from protesting
4) Price only pleaded guilty because he was told that if he did, there would be no publicity or media coverage, and if he didn't, he would have to go through a full public trial. Apparently this is 'what anyone would do'
5) Price was not, and at no point had he ever been, part of the EDL leadership.
They made no mention of the drug or public order offences at any point.
Taking these points in turn:
1) Whilst this may be true (and I doubt it is, due to point 4), it is (usually) possible to get time and date stamps that show when something was placed on a computer hard drive. All Price needed to do was prove when he bought the computer to show that the images were already present.
2) Whilst it is true that Price was charged with making images of the lowest level on the SAP scale (NOT the COPINE scale - as EDL leaders mistakenly believed after a quick Google), this is defined as "nudity or erotic posing with no sexual activity".
3) As mentioned above, the search of Price's house was in relation to Public Order offences.
4) Find me a man that wouldn't go to trial to clear his name of paedophilia when he knows he's innocent, and I'll give you a medal. There is NO conceivable way that someone would agree to sign the sex offenders register for five years to avoid a trial if they know they are innocent. The very notion is laughable in the extreme.
5) This suggests otherwise.
So, what now?
Well, today we've had members of the EDL defending him, EDL leaders deleting posts that question their version of events and, best of all, swift back pedalling from the idiots in charge
We can only hope that at least some people who have previously affiliated themselves with this odious group finally see the scales fall from their eyes and wake up to the lies, deceit and bile that is spewed by their 'leaders', and leave.
EDIT: It appears they already have
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)