IPPF scandal ignored by the BBC

The Non Reporting of the IPPF scandal by the BBC

 

When the scandal broke that members of Planned Parenthood were selling the aborted babies’ bodies, many in the pro-life movement thought: here is something that will expose the whole abortion industry for what it is, callous murder. Something akin to the holocaust perpetrated by Nazi Germany during the Second World War.  Another parallel between the holocaust and the mass abortion industry of today is the dismembering of victims for other uses.

 

The recent scandal surrounds the videos released by the Center for Medical Progress, which drew attention to the PPFA’s profit-oriented practice of selling the body parts of aborted babies.  However, this has become a non scandal because the secular press are in the main ignoring it. The BBC, who will search the globe for a sniff of victimhood regarding homosexuals, Muslims or gender issues, will not report it.

 

The non issue once again became ‘visible’ when the female presidential candidates were being discussed on BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour.  When the issue of abortion, PP, and Hilary Clinton was brought up by a guest who tried to talk about the IPPF videos, she was quickly closed down; the shutting down of her on-air was so marked that many who heard it were shocked.

 

The Christian Democratic Party general secretary and treasurer Paul Kennedy, is trying to bring questions of fairness and bias to the attention of the BBC’s Director of Editorial Policy and Standards. You may wish to do the same. Write to BBC, BC2 A1, Broadcast Centre, 201 Wood Lane, London, W12 7TP.

However, even the BBC cannot shut the social media up, see below link to a shocking You Tube video "Planned Parenthood Uses Partial-Birth Abortions to Sell Baby Parts"

 

Note on the Christian Democratic Party. CUT does not endorse any political party. We ask our members to monitor their local candidates and MPs on whether or not their views and voting records are compatible with Christian values.

The Unnatrual World

Screen life or real life?

This is the headline on the front of the most recent copy of “Natural World”, a magazine produced four times a year by the UK’s Wildlife Trusts. The headline refers to the life experiences of the majority of the UK’s children (though might equally be applied to many of the UK’s adults).  A study carried out in 2012 found that 11-15 year-olds spend about 7.5 hours a day looking at screens. Presumably 7.5 hours is an average, meaning that many spend more time than this in front of television sets, computers, tablets and on their smartphones. Given that children of this age are likely to spend 8 – 10 hours a day sleeping, and at least 6 hours a day in school during term-time, this leaves less than 2 hours a day for all other activities including outdoor play.

While the government recommends that children should be actively exercising for at least an hour a day, only 21% of boys actually do so, and still fewer girls – 16% (Department of Health survey, 2011). School playtimes ensure that children are outside (weather permitting) for anything from 30 minutes to an hour each school day, which suggests that for most children this is actually the only exercise time they get. Even travelling between school and home involves minimal activity for most; in 1971 80% of children did this journey on foot, but by 1991 only 10% of children walked to and from school. Twenty-five years on, this percentage is hardly likely to have increased.

Over and above issues of children’s physical health and development, the question arises of how they are relating to reality.   In 2008 the National Trust carried out a survey which revealed that 50% of children could not tell a bee from a wasp. However, 90% of them could identify a Dalek.

Are bees and wasps real? And are Daleks real?  Are most children living largely in a fantasy world, heads turned away from the created world which buzzes and rustles and whispers all around them?  -  My local Wildlife Trust distributes its own newsletter along with “Natural World”, and the current newsletter carries an article on “Lost Words”. The most recent edition of the Oxford Junior Dictionary (aimed at children aged about 7 years upwards) omits the names of such once-familiar natural objects as acorn, buttercup, conker, dandelion, blackberry. On the other hand, it includes the following: bullet-point, celebrity, chatroom, voicemail, BlackBerry.

Yes, you read that right. There is no blackberry but there is a BlackBerry.

The wildlife trusts are concerned about the loss to the coming generation of experiences and activities which used to be commonplace among children, - playing conkers, blowing dandelion clocks, holding a buttercup under your friend’s chin to “see if she likes butter”.  And of course about the reduced amount of physical exercise which children would naturally engage in while simply playing out of doors, - running, jumping, climbing and exploring, developing strength, co-ordination and balance in doing so.

But implicit in the “screen life or real life?” question is a still more fundamental concern; that technological developments and the lifestyle which many families are encouraged or indeed almost forced to adopt have created a huge rift between the real world and the pseudo-world presented to children and adults alike via the entertainment industry and so-called social media.      

We are looking at a generation around whom the whole of God’s creation sings and dances, and yet who seem to be drifting through creation oblivious to it.

By the Prayer Crusader with St Theresa of Avila

A celebrity of dissipation

David Bowie

Pop superstar, and prophet of bisexuality, who offered a generation up to the dark god of decadence, has died.

David Bowie
Pop priest of decadence.
Photo Wikipedia
 

We cannot be judgmental on the state of David Bowie's soul at the point of his death; we simply do not know. But there can be no doubt that he helped lead a generation into accepting homosexuality. Putting his arms around guitarist Mick Ronson during Top of the Pops in the early 70s, dressed in a shiny clingy costume with his group The Spiders from Mars, their look was deliberately ambiguous, gender bending, androgynous; their aim was to be attractive to both sexes.  When questioned about his sexuality he said he was "Gay" but later he said that he lied, that he was actually tri-sexual, a pop star quip.

He was a superstar like no other, a prophet of societal change and a priest who offered sexuality on the altar of fame, his was a heady cocktail of glamour, catchy songs, art-rock and risqué decadence. All broadcast into people's homes on the new colour TVs of the early 70s. The age of Gary Glitter and Jimmy Savile and other sexual deviants.

 

What did David Bowie the priest sacrifice on his way to fame and international stardom? - clearly it was many young people's sexuality. How many people died of Aids/HIV because of the explosion of homosexual activity during the 70s and 80s?

The Main Stream Media is of course going well over the top in their praise of Bowie, but they will not mention how many people died of Aids and drugs because of the influence of gender bending pop stars. Bowie also flirted with Nazi images, kitsch shiny boots etc.; however, I expect it will be traditional Christians, who try and point out that much damage was done to society by Bowie and other pop stars like him, but its us who will be labelled fascists.

 

David Bowie RIP. Please pray for his soul and for the souls of those who are/were influenced by him 

A new form of terrorism

Muslim attacks on Western Women -

is this a new form of terrorism?

German police are shocked at the sheer number of violent sexual attacks on women. New Year’s Eve in Cologne and other German cities saw groups of "Arab or North African origin," men, according to German police, targeting women. The one word they and the Media will not use is "Muslim" for these attacks are being perpetrated by young Muslims. I know it's shocking to us in the West to admit this, for fear of being accused of racism, but if it's the truth it should be recognised. At CUT of course we will not tolerate any form of racism. But these attacks in Germany on women are a new phenomenon that needs to be addressed. However, the media - particularly the left liberal national broadcasters - are always ready to spring to the defence of Muslims. They will not address the issue so it's left to the individuals concerned, bloggers and some newspapers to state the obvious: that this is yet another form of terrorism; they want western women to conform to Muslim types of dress.

 An epidemic of rape in Western Europe

 

At CUT we have reported that some binge drinking women have let themselves down. It is not only these women who are to blame but also our media that has destroyed their faith and left many only with drink.  Even though they may end up very drunk, western men, in the main part, do not take advantage of them. However, it appears that rape is being used by some Muslims as part of their general interaction with the west, especially by newly arrived immigrants. A gang of over 1,000 were reported in Cologne targeting and molesting women. In their own countries women are kept down, hidden, or if they go out, covered from head to foot so as not to attract the attention of men. In some Muslim countries sexual violence is a way of life. Is this how western women will end up? The ridiculous mayor of Cologne, Henriette Reker, a supporter of mass immigration, seems to be hinting that this would be a solution, saying that women are causing these attacks and that they should have a "code of conduct". So what is she proposing: that western women adopt similar dress as in Muslim Countries? 

Is this how western women should dress, so as not to
be molested by Muslims?

Anit-Islamic State group brings down BBC

Anti-Islamic State group Brings down BBC website!

On New Year's Eve the BBC's website crashed and was offline for several hours. At the time many believed that the BBC were just having technical problems, however it has now emerged that an anti-Islamic State group deliberately targeted the BBC site and brought it down in what is known as a cyber attack.

The group known as New World Hacking said it carried out the attack to "test of its capabilities". However, it already knows its capabilities having waged a campaign against other nasty organisations, including the Ku Klux Klan.

So what was the real reason that an anti-Islamic State group targeted the BBC? Could it be that people around the world are beginning to wake up to the fact of just how destructive the BBC actually is? Perhaps these anti-Islamic State hackers realise just how cowardly the BBC have been in its reporting of Islamic terror. Lets face it for the most part they have ignored the plight of the Christians living in the middle East, to many who complain about BBC bias it has seemed that the BBC  concentrate their reporting on the Yazidis, Kurds,  and other Muslims groups. It's clear that these groups have suffered, but Christians are being targeted and killed in their thousands, some communities have been wiped out. Middle East Christians are even afraid to go into refugee camps as they are even being killed there. Yet the BBC are failing to report this.

So perhaps the bringing down of the BBC's website by an anti-Islamic State group is poetic justice?

How BBC new are reporting on this