Police (after Common Purpose training) introduce us to the beginnings of Orwell’s 1984

Quick briefing: What is “Common Purpose”? – it’s a charity run by a “Communitarian” leader, which sells it’s expensive re-framing training to local authorities and police with the aim of developing leaders of the future – people in fact who will “lead outside authority”.

I’m sorry that that description isn’t more enlightening – there is SO much I could write about these evil people (I recommend you read the links I provided, for more), but suffice to say that in the UK, at any rate, wherever you see police or council workers doing something utterly ridiculous, you can bet your bottom dollar they’ve been re-framed (which means that their world-view has been altered to fit a Communitarian agenda).

Why is this important? Well it’s the only thing which explains how our once rational police force has descended into an Orwellian nightmare. They are no longer “fit for purpose”.

When police will only investigate burglaries at properties with even numbered addresses due to cuts in funding, or only visit “vulnerable” victims (i.e. not white, not middle class) for the same reason (this was later retracted), or when they don’t take action on shop lifting unless more than £200 worth of goods are stolen, yet they have time to harass a man for giving his entirely reasonable views on social media… well, we have a problem, don’t we?!

Yes, you read that right, they really did go and knock on this man’s door to “have a chat” with him about what he’d said on social media, even though he had not broken any laws. Does this make you feel uncomfortable? It does me!

I quote:

Police told Mr Boxford he had done ‘nothing wrong’ and was ‘not in trouble’ but that they needed to ‘have a chat’ with him about the online comments.

He was on his way out on January 30 when he heard a knock on the door.

‘I ignored it because I thought it was charity workers,’ he said.

‘But as I walked out of the door, I saw the police across the road.

‘I knew the officer so I said hello.’

Mr Boxford eventually let the officers inside and said: ‘They said a couple of times ‘you’re not in trouble’ and ‘you’ve done nothing wrong’.’

‘I said, ‘unless you’re going to arrest me or caution me I’m not interested.

‘I will not allow my democratic right to hold my elected representatives or their officers to account shut down.

‘I’m simply expressing my personal opinion about things in the public domain.’

Mr Boxford, a trainee driving instructor, said police could not tell him specifically what he had said or written to warrant the visit.

Remarkable. Who but a moronic copper would allow themselves to be used in a campaign to silence the free speech of another human – oh, did I misspell “masonic”? Perhaps that explains it! Many in the comments section thought so. I think, personally, that the Common Purpose training is the more likely cause, however.

The police are becoming the enforcement wing of the state in matters of free speech. They are heavily invested in promoting both islam and the LGBTQ agenda. The following images make that much clear:

sussex police.jpg

sussex police 2

sussex police 3

Yes, the police have a “diversity budget”, but not if that involves a diversity of opinion. No. They will stand with islam, but flaunt their support of homosexuals – those three tweets were all from the same force, by the way.

As long as they can continue to walk in high heels:

PC in red shoes.jpg
Photo credit: Western Mail

and paint their nails:

painted nails

in support of the agenda, the basis for the introduction of the police force (the protection of property) has been completely usurped!

I would actually call this “fiddling while Rome burns” myself!

The message is becoming clear – don’t you dare express an opinion online which the agenda doesn’t support. If someone complains about your social media post, the police will find time to come and harass you and intimidate you in behalf of the person who you offended, even if you have not broken any laws. Clearly police budgets are still too high if they have time for such behaviour!

This next one is just satire (for now).


For my American chums, Frazzles are bacon flavoured crisps. Let me also make clear that I do not condone the eating of Frazzles (I don’t want a knock at my door, do I?)

God Bless you



The fracturing of the spirit

Youch! Words can hurt. The old adage “sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me” was the “yaboo-sucks” of the playground when I was a kid. If you were bullied you were expected to pick yourself up and react with those words, retaining your dignity. In life we may well experience times when we are dealt with badly by random people – someone in a shop, or someone on the street. We know better than to be overly bothered by the opinions, and “perverse tongues” of strangers, but those words can be very hurtful. It is much worse when they come from those close to us. No one can hurt you or wound you like family, loves, or friends.

In general it ought to be assumed that a careless word here or an abrupt word there is not intended to harm – indeed while we are told to guard our tongues, it is the perverse tongue which seems to have the power to harm us the most.

Proverbs 15:4 says:

A wholesome tongue is a tree of life: but perverseness therein is a breach in the spirit. [KJV]

There are many different translations of this proverb, and you can see them all here: Link. I think it takes looking at the original words and their meanings to bring out the full depth of meaning this verse has:

proverbs 15 4.jpg

Let’s look at three words here. You can do this word study yourself at the link here.

Firstly marpe, Strong’s 4832. For brevity I will use only the Strong’s exhaustive concordance, it’ll make the images easier to read. You can read the full page at the link above.


Healing – curative – wholesome. So a tongue which is healing (some translations say soothing, but healing is more correct, I think) is a tree of life! So when we build people up, we do them good!

Next let’s look at waselep, Strong’s 5558.


A tongue which is perverse – distorted – vicious. Ouch, we’ve all known people like that, haven’t we? We avoid them when we can!

Lastly let’s look at seber, Strong’s 7667, which deals with the effect this perverse, vicious tongue has on our spirit!


It can fracture – ruin – destroy our spirit. So when people say cruel things, when they are perverted (which means to be vicious, cruel – some translations say devious) they can fracture, ruin and destroy our spirit within us.

If you know someone like that, whilst it’s imperative for you to forgive (which is a decision, NOT a feeling – if you are struggling with that give it to God, He’ll get your feelings into alignment with your decision if you surrender it to Him) it’s also very wise to protect yourself from that person at all costs.

I’d also like to remind you that this goes both ways. It is not just the barbed words of others which can fracture your spirit within you, but your words also can affect your own spirit, not only other people’s!

James 3:6 tells us:

And the tongue is a fire. The world of iniquity among our members is the tongue, which defiles the whole body, and sets on fire the course of nature, and is set on fire by Gehenna. [WEB]

Jesus also tells us in Matthew 15:11:

Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man; but that which cometh out of the mouth, this defileth a man. [KJV]

Our words can defile us, as well as hurt others. Our perverse tongue wounds others and destroys us too.

In conclusion, we must always be ready to speak truth in love – to rebuke with love, and to speak the truth. This can be shocking to others, but it does them good! It is constructive! But when our words are not constructive, they can be destructive. If we mock, berate or demean others we are hurting their spirit, breaking them down and bringing them to a point where their spirit is fractured, or even destroyed. Our intentions – the intentions behind our words and actions – mean everything!

I wish you Shabbat Shalom, dear brothers and sisters!

God Bless you




Oh for shame! This story is heartbreaking. Shame on the council – SHAME on them! To take away a homeless person’s only source of warmth and protection – it goes beyond mere indifference, doesn’t it? Link

A 66-year-old homeless man found dead in a town centre allegedly had his sleeping bag taken away by the local council days before.

The rough sleeper, known only as ‘Kev’, was found under a flyover in a car park in Bournemouth, Dorset, yards from the council’s offices.

Kev’s body was discovered by a friend who claims Bournemouth Borough Council had ‘removed his sleeping bag and possessions’ from the site during a recent tidy-up.

Previously, the council has come under fire for playing bagpipe music throughout the night to stop homeless people sleeping at the town’s bus and railway station.

They were also criticised for buying one-way tickets for rough sleepers to leave the town.

The unnamed friend, who had known ‘Kev’ for 18 months, said: ‘I put my hand on him to shake him and that’s when I knew something was wrong and my heart sank.

‘A couple of weeks ago he said the council took his sleeping bag.

‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

God speaks to us in Matthew 25: 31-43:

31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy[c] angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’

41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’

44 “Then they also will answer Him,[d] saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.” [NKJV]

I have no words.

God Bless you


What has Russia done to upset the elites?

I can only ask (I think I can guess), because the front page of the Daily Mail is full of the “threat from Putin”, which is NO THREAT AT ALL!

russia article.jpg

When you read the contents however, it is clearly a plea from a military man for more money for the military (and in the case of the UK this is justified as we have cut military spending to laughable levels). He is using Russia as an excuse to increase spending, and the media have grabbed onto his words as being meaningful (for propaganda purposes!). I quote: (Link)

Using the dire warning to make the case for more money for the armed forces, General Carter said:

  • Britain could scale back its military withdrawal from Germany to allow personnel to race to Eastern Europe if war breaks out;
  • Syria’s civil war was exploited by Moscow to get its troops combat-ready while testing long-range missiles and other equipment;
  • Russia’s conventional forces give it a ‘calculable military advantage’;
  • Hostile action would be hard to predict and the time to address the threats was now.

General Carter’s major speech came as experts issued their own warnings about the threat from Russia and the need for Britain to spend more on defence.

I believe that General Carter is, perhaps, a man with limited knowledge of the causes of the conflict in Syria, which is based more on Moscow’s desire to sell oil to Europe (which the Saudi’s don’t want, as they have their own pipeline they are planning). America has backed the Arabs over our white brethren in Russia! Shame on them!

The battle over the pipelines also shows that the lives of military men are worth nothing in comparison to power over the supply of oil (now what was that about the environment and pollution?). They don’t care how many are killed as long as there is no competition lowering the price of oil.

Instead of speaking the truth, the media lies and tells us that Russia is a threat (a threat only to Arab oil interests and the elite’s puppets like ISIS!).

Thankfully the British public aren’t buying any of it! And no we are NOT going to fight our brethren in Russia – NEVER! The top comments on the article give me great hope – in the top ten there is not one which supports the propaganda given to us:

russia comments

As one astute commenter above says “…why have the DM been told to put this out? What is it that’s happening that the Government wishes to distract us from?”

That’s a very good question, and one we ought to consider. Russia is the media’s current “bogeyman”, and the British public no longer fears it – we’ve grown up, and we know we don’t want to fight people who have never attacked us.

My message to the elites – NO WE WILL NOT FIGHT THE RUSSIANS – WE LOVE THEM!


God Bless you


Nothing we ever do for Islam will do – they will never stop their demands

This really sums up the West’s relationship with Islam. I saw today that a Primary School has been forced into an embarrassed climb-down over it’s recent rule change which prohibited the wearing of the hijab (headscarf) for girls aged under eight years old.


I quote from the article (Link)

The ban was imposed before Christmas to help five- and six-year-olds integrate better after staff noticed they were often reluctant to join in playground games because their headscarves were cumbersome. The campaign against the ban gathered momentum last week after locals began a petition opposing it, and Islamic activists and Left-wing Newham councillors criticised the decision.

How interesting I thought, because I recall only a few months ago that a £2Million campaign by Transport for London was scrapped after it showed a child aged 3-4 years old wearing, you guessed it, the hijab: (Link)

headscarf 2.jpg

So which is it, Islam? You say that the hijab is bad on a small child because this makes it look as though they should be covered (i.e. they are old enough for men to look at), and then you demand that small children should be covered in school, why exactly?

Because your religion is perverse? Let’s face it, you either have a law related to this or you don’t! Is it because Islam brings out in you a desire to mess the British people around for the fun of it? Why is it one rule when you say so and another rule, yet again, when you say so?

What will Britain be like when they become the majority? It will be filled with just such hypocrisy, I expect, and the minority white population will be told how high to jump and be expected to do it. I do so hope that I will not be resident in the UK by then.

God Bless you



Just when you thought things couldn’t get any sillier…

Well, let me tell you, they can, and they have. Thanks to the NHS (which is apparently NOT in crisis if this nonsense is anything to go by).


So men, who don’t have cervixes, and who claim to be women, will be offered screening for something they don’t have, but women who do have breasts and cervixes (unless they have gender reassignment surgery) will not be offered screening for either?!

This is some convoluted thinking – and remember someone (a whole committee of people, I expect) was paid good money to think up this nonsense.

They even used the correct colour scheme to please the trans lobby.

I quote from the Daily Mail article above: (Link) [emphasis added]

Women who believe they are men are not being offered routine NHS screening for breast and cervical cancer amid fears that it might offend them. 

But astonishingly, an official guidebook states that men living as women are being invited for cervical smear tests – even though they do not have a cervix. 

The advice, spelt out in a 24-page booklet published by Public Health England, was last night described as politically correct ‘lunacy’ which was putting lives at risk. […]

The PHE booklet, NHS Screening Programmes – Information For Trans People, ‘explains who we invite for screening’. 

Trans people who register with their GP as being their birth sex will automatically be invited to screening appropriate to that. 

But if they register as their ‘new’ gender, they will not be. 

So if a trans man – who was born female – registers as male, he ‘won’t be invited for breast screening’ at 50. 

Likewise, it tells those born as girls: ‘If you are registered with a GP as male, you won’t be invited for cervical screening.’ 

Most trans men do not have their wombs removed – only a small number have full sex-change surgery. 

However, if a trans woman – born male – ‘registers as female, you will be routinely invited for cervical screening’. 

Trans health adviser Aedan Wolton, who features in a related NHS Choices video, said smear tests could be uncomfortable for ‘trans masculine people’ – born female – as it challenged how they perceived themselves. 

‘This is unsurprising as the experience is often a very gendered one; from the waiting room, to the words used during the smear, it is often a procedure designed for women,’ he writes in an accompanying blog. 

Conservative MP David Davies, who has campaigned against Government plans to let people legally ‘self-identify’ their own gender, said: ‘This NHS effort to be politically correct is putting the lives of women who claim to be men at risk.’ 

It was also ‘wasting the time of men who claim to be women by offering them tests for organs they do not have’. 

Why is the state – already cash-strapped, or so it tell us (whilst never running out of money for bombs, I might add) humouring these adults, these deluded people? This is beyond the scope of the state’s role, and is, surely for each individual to navigate with their health provider, but no – we must have guidance in place, we must have procedures, and we must play along with these tragic, suicide prone and wrong-thinking people who have rejected themselves. The state and the cash-strapped NHS is now enabling this charade to continue!

The comments from the public give some hope – even after moderating the comments the top few were these:

top comments trans.jpg

The tragedy of the trans movement is that it is driven by a belief that somehow “otherness” is what will make them feel better. That the grass is greener in the other gender, or that they even know what it means to feel what the other gender is feeling. That is wrong – you don’t know what a woman feels and changing how you look will never make you a woman. You are simply trying to modify your physical body to conform to something many Christians recognise as demonic oppression – it’s not who you really are.

You are not born into the wrong body because God does not make mistakes. Ultimately the rejection of self which trans people are suffering from is a form of body dysmorphia. They don’t like how they look because it doesn’t chime with how they feel inside – this phenomenon happens to people who go on to have a lot of plastic surgery, but we don’t say of those people that they are brave, or that they are becoming their true selves, we recognise their illness for what it is – a rejection of their true self.

The true self of the trans person can never be who they become – it is who they were born. Something which has gone awry in their thinking, in their feelings, and perhaps opened a door to demonic oppression as well has simply skewed their mirror – distorted how they see themselves and created an unfillable void of longing for something which God never intended them to have. Sadly, even post surgery, these people are at massively greater risk of suicide – because the fact is the grass is not greener in the other gender, and becoming something else doesn’t solve the desire to become something else – you were you to start with.

It is bad enough that these folks have a problem which medicine and surgery cannot solve, it is worse that the state is now spending money trying to align itself with such behaviour. We must, finally, recognise again the branch, which is Cultural Marxism (satanism by another name) which supports this fragmentation of society for its own dark aims. The root – the only enemy we have (and it’s the same enemy the trans folks have too) – is satan himself.

Resist the devil and he will flee from you, we are told in James 4:7 – this statement is as true for the Christian battling besetting sin as it is for the trans person considering changing sex.

God Bless you