Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
The Blue Pill.
With the recent dark-looks at Hollywood's casting couches being displayed across the first-world's media,
the focus seems to be on the moral outrage from discovering that such repugnant acts occurred.

The walrus of a movie producer, Harvey Weinstein is the sex-addicted pinata for October and the only
stance that may parallel the dirty bastard's standards, are the hesitant developing narratives of the movie
industry's well-known practice by the mainstream media.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2641]

As Mystic Wanderer recently pointed out in the Shout Box, this website is frequented by 'old foggies' and
as such a person, I can recall that the practice of a would-be star having to succumb to a Producer or
Director's carnal-demands, was an accepted way of developing one's career.

Of course it's wrong and anyone forcing themselves onto another for whatever reasons is a habit that
belongs in the jungle and doesn't necessarily means with the animals. But can Weinstein's sexual cravings
be solely be down to his own machinations...? And with all respect to those who were exploited by this
pig-of-a-human, I will offer my reasons for asking this question.

Of course, the majority of the public, the media and fellow-employees of the women involved were aware
that this type of activity took place. I'm sure that sections of California's law enforcement knew who abused
starlets and where it occurred. Obviously, those in Weinstein's inner-circle and the victims of him knew too.

If all of these factions were aware of this behavior and nobody ever utilised the forces available to stop it,
then the men and women who work and benefit from the global enterprise must have accepted it as part of
their business and ergo, allowed it.

So why wasn't it flagged decades ago?
Because it was accepted and covered-up -intentionally or not, by all those listed above.
Yeah, now the media around the world are offering their customers a half-hearted look of surprise and
indignation, but it's only based on the fact that the story has turned that way.
If the accounts could've been squashed, they would have been. That's what has happened for those decades.

Movie stars and singers have been ideal vehicles of social conditioning for years and ironically, the lifestyles
they live have never been questioned by the gullible public that they spout their nonesense to! 
But the Hollywood priests who annoint and bless a nobody into riches and comfort, seem -until recently, to be
beyond the rules of the society they indirectly control.

'Do as I say, not as I do'... this dark credo seems to be having light shone on it more than ever and I'm sure
the politically-controlled media will be all-hands-to-the-pumps to quell any public outrage of this crude behavior
of parts of the establishment.

More and more, it's becoming obvious that to the mushroom-kept public that when a person of note states
you are something defamatory, it's because that accuser is transmitting their own failings in the hope you'll
never discover their hidden secrets.

So I will suggest the MSM will offer the notion that Weinstein is a victim of a disorder that is rare, but is
regularly seen in the public environment. My betting is on a nuance-based narrative that is behavior stems
from a tradition of 'one-hand-washes-the-other' and the wealthly starlets should've brought it to light before
they became famous.

In my humble opinion, Kubrick was telling us.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
As the Harvey Weinstein alleged abuse scandal rolls on, the weekend arrives to give the mainstream news
time to hammer home the terrible situation of being a sex addict. The forced evolving of the narrative is assisting
to take Weinstein away from being a pervert and placing him as a victim of his unbridled urges.

A month ago, we had bad people catagorised as white males, men who oppress women by creating glass ceilings
and treating females as nothing but sexual toys. But in this particular case... it's a no-no.
If there is a lesson to be learnt in regards of media manipulation, this is a good one.
Are we to accept the Summer of Chaos is over?

Where allegations of abuse to women were taken at face-value in the case of a taped conversation of Donald
Trump and Billy Bush bullshitting to each other in private, the moral busy-bodies of the left screamed that the man
with the red tie should be jailed for what he inferred and yet in Harvey Weinstein's case, he's just a victim of this
supposed mental disorder.

The New York Times -who claim they broke the story (It was actually in The New Yorker too), paint Mr. Weinstein
as a 'volcanic personality' and map out how the failings in paying off the women finally caught up with him.
My personal view is that the action of paying for the silence over his sexual actions seems to be accepted as just
'business' and even in commentaries by the countless hacks of MSM, this bribery is rarely looked on as a negative,
shows the actual interest the mainstream press have about this type of behavior.
SOURCE:

And the right...? hell, let's say the MSM-accepted extreme-right. Surely the hill-billy Nazis living in trailer campgrounds
would have jumped on the chance to call this a perfect example of Jewish oppression in a materialistic environment?

Yep... The HuffPost, a leading-light in Jour... Journali... sorry, my sarcasm has limits. The HuffPost has an article that
swims in that feculence and offers Tweets from David Duke and the like.
LINK:

Quentin Tarantino is stunned at the accusations about his friend and fellow-movie cohort... stunned -I say.
Well, considering the 'startling' flicks Mr. Tarantino made with Miramax, maybe his added statement of being
'heartbroken' is a little theatrical?

Weinstein -it seems, is being thrown to the dogs, but he is Establishment or at the very least feeds them, so I
would expect the mainstream media to treat him differently than just another female-oppressing white male
Jew who needs women to watch him feeding potted-plants with his 'essence'.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2651]
Harvey's one-true love.

Oh and of course, it'll be interesting to see how they blame this on Trump.
....................................

Since Antifa, BLM and the Berkeley riots seem to have died-down for now -and this decades-old Hollywood scandal
will be no doubt, be managed into a little 'one-off' incident, what are the Journalist-puppets gonna throw at us next
week?
It's not like anyone is aiming a nuke at their heads, now is it?!


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
(10-14-2017, 09:44 AM)BIAD Wrote: Where allegations of abuse to women were taken at face-value in the case of a taped conversation of Donald
Trump and Billy Bush bullshitting to each other in private, the moral busy-bodies of the left screamed that the man
with the red tie should be jailed for what he inferred and yet in Harvey Weinstein's case, he's just a victim of this
supposed mental disorder.

Oh and of course, it'll be interesting to see how they blame this on Trump.
....................................

It's beyond my understanding how the left fails to see how the MSM twists things to fit their agenda.
If they ever start talking about Trump's conversations again, I, PERSONALLY, will make sure to shed a bright light on this subject. I might even take it to the local t.v. news! 
I guess I ought to be getting my speech written because I'm sure, somehow, they WILL find a way to blame it on Trump.




Reply
Update On The Cyril Smith Sexual Abuse Investigation.


Quote:Rochdale inquiry: Boy 'was raped by Cyril Smith'

'A former pupil of a school where Cyril Smith was a governor has told an inquiry he was raped by the late MP.
The man, who cannot be identified for legal reasons, said he first attended the "horrible" Knowl View, in Rochdale,
in the 1980s when aged 12 or 13.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2662]


The witness confirmed a statement of the allegations read to the Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse.
Smith was a governor of the school twice; in the late 1960s and early 1970s, and again in 1994.

Counsel to the inquiry, Brian Altman QC, read extracts from a witness statement by the man, who attested to its
accuracy and provided short answers to questions.
The statement said that one night he was woken up by a "very big fat man" sitting on the bed molesting him.
The witness hid under another boy's bed until morning and he was "too scared" to tell staff what had happened.

'Painful rape'
He later learned the abuser was local MP Cyril Smith, the inquiry was told.
The complainant alleged that one night an unidentified male staff member "frogmarched" him from his bed to
another room where Smith was sitting on a bed. Smith made the boy strip before sexually abusing him.

The MP allegedly forced the pupil to lie face down on the bed and Smith "climbed on top of me - he was
enormous and I felt I was being crushed". Smith carried out an "incredibly painful" rape, the inquiry heard.

Martin Digan, a residential social worker at Knowl View from 1978 to 1994, told the inquiry he tried to raise
concerns about the school after he found documents relating to sexual abuse.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2663]
The inquiry is examining how Smith was allegedly able to target boys at Cambridge House hostel
and Knowl View school.

He said in 1994 he was "not proud" of photocopying a file of documents, including confidential reports relating
to abuse, after finding them in the headmaster's office. When he tried to raise concerns with local politicians,
he heard claims a "deal" had been struck after Cyril Smith threatened to "expose" allegations of sexual offending
by a senior member of the council if his own activities were publicised.

However, Mr Digan said that while working at Knowl View he had never heard of allegations against Smith by
residents directly.
The inquiry continues...'
SOURCE:


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
       
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
In the UK, there is a television programme on the BBC known as 'Crimewatch', where a moderator would
present the show and display how Police were investigating certain real crimes that the public could assist in.

It first aired in 1984 and became a household show with Nick Ross presenting and with special 'hot property'
episodes, Jill Dando would also help out. Ms.Dando would be tragically murdered in 1999 and a man named
as Barry George would be convicted of the crime. Barry George was later aquitted and rumours were rife that
during one of the show's investigations into a paedophile ring at the BBC, Jill Dando had been targeted for
assassination.

Now in 2017, Crimewatch is to be axed and I was surprised that the BBC website announced the show's
cancellation by stating The Sun newspaper was the one to reveal it.
The BBC website suggests '...It is thought the decision is based on falling ratings.' But isn't that odd...?
You would think that the BBC would know why a BBC programme is being axed.
BBC Link:

[PLEASE NOTE: Ten minutes after posting this link, the webpage was updated and altered]

But if one delves into the policies of the Government-funded company regarding diversity, one may wonder
if the increased amounts of immigrant crime and Islamic terror may have forced the BBC to cut back on offering
the UK public a window into a section of the community that deem certain offences allowable due their ideologies
and cultural backgrounds.

Like this:

Quote:'Parsons Green Tube station stabbing: One dead, two hurt.

A man has died and two others have been injured in a stabbing outside Parsons Green Tube station in London.
The attack happened just after 19:30 BST on Monday at the station where 30 people were injured in a terror attack
last month.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2664]


A 20-year-old man died in the stabbing, which is not being treated as terror-related.
The two injured people were taken to hospital and one was subsequently arrested.
The dead man's next of kin have been informed although formal identification has yet to take place.
He was pronounced dead at the scene at 20:30.

One man remains in hospital although his injuries are not thought to be life-threatening. The arrested man was taken
to a west London police station for questioning. Parsons Green Lane and the station were closed by police and
cordons put in place. The station has since been re-opened...'
SOURCE:

When it comes to the BBC, the lack of racial information in regards of identity of suspects will always tell a reader
many things of the the crime and the biased manner of the reporting. So, was it ratings that caused the Crimewatch
to be closed down or something in-house that certain liberal-minded people in the BBC didn't wish to exacerbate?

By the way, the crime mentioned above was reportedly done by a man on a moped and if further proof is warranted
for the knife-crime problem in the London area -where the BBC is situated, click on the links at the bottom of the
webpage of The Evening Standard.
The Evening Standard:


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
Update On Stabbing:

Quote:Parsons Green tube stabbing: Victim named as Omid Saidy.

'A man killed outside Parsons Green Tube station was stabbed after confronting a
drug dealer, Scotland Yard has said. Omid Saidy was fatally wounded and two others
were injured in the attack on Monday night.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2668]


The 20-year-old from Fulham died after confronting a drug dealer and another man
who was with him, the Met confirmed. The injured 16-year-old was discharged from
hospital and arrested on suspicion of murder and attempted murder.

A 20-year-old man suffered serious but non life-threatening injuries.
After confronting the drug dealer, the victim chased the two suspects in the direction
of Beaconsfield Walk, police said.
When he caught up with the pair, he was fatally stabbed.

A 20-year-old man who was a friend of the deceased came to his aid and was also
stabbed. One of the suspects, described as a black male dressed in dark clothing,
fled down Harbledown Road in the direction of Fulham Court.
The second suspect, a young white male, ran into Beaconsfield Walk.

Police believe he called for an ambulance a short time later for his own injuries.
Det Ch Insp Noel McHugh said: "A young man has tragically lost his life for simply
asking a drug dealer to move on.

"I urge anyone who can assist our investigation to come forward without delay."
A post-mortem examination is scheduled for Wednesday...'
SOURCE:


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
Some call it being screwed with your pants on and others see it as the simple plan of throwing enough alternative
sh*t at the masses, that the deplorable peasants who gobble up any information don't get to see what you're really
up to.

You're a racist/sexist/genderist or whatever, because the emotional outrage should... should keep the public busy
with internal naval-gazing and ignore the one thing that the majority of political figures aspire to.
Namely money and power.

Anyway, here's some of what's on the real side of the mirror.

Quote:FBI uncovered Russian bribery plot before Obama administration approved controversial nuclear deal with Moscow.

'Before the Obama administration approved a controversial deal in 2010 giving Moscow control of a large swath of
American uranium, the FBI had gathered substantial evidence that Russian nuclear industry officials were engaged
in bribery, kickbacks, extortion and money laundering designed to grow Vladimir Putin’s atomic energy business
inside the United States, according to government documents and interviews.

Federal agents used a confidential U.S. witness working inside the Russian nuclear industry to gather extensive
financial records, make secret recordings and intercept emails as early as 2009 that showed Moscow had
compromised an American uranium trucking firm with bribes and kickbacks in violation of the Foreign Corrupt
Practices Act, FBI and court documents show.

They also obtained an eyewitness account — backed by documents — indicating Russian nuclear officials had
routed millions of dollars to the U.S. designed to benefit former President Bill Clinton’s charitable foundation
during the time Secretary of State Hillary Clinton served on a government body that provided a favorable decision
to Moscow, sources told The Hill.

The racketeering scheme was conducted “with the consent of higher level officials” in Russia who “shared the proceeds”
from the kickbacks, one agent declared in an affidavit years later.

Rather than bring immediate charges in 2010, however, the Department of Justice (DOJ) continued investigating the
matter for nearly four more years, essentially leaving the American public and Congress in the dark about Russian
nuclear corruption on U.S. soil during a period when the Obama administration made two major decisions benefiting
Putin’s commercial nuclear ambitions.

The first decision occurred in October 2010, when the State Department and government agencies on the Committee
on Foreign Investment in the United States unanimously approved the partial sale of Canadian mining company Uranium
One to the Russian nuclear giant Rosatom, giving Moscow control of more than 20 percent of America’s uranium supply.

When this sale was used by Trump on the campaign trail last year, Hillary Clinton’s spokesman said she was not involved
in the committee review and noted the State Department official who handled it said she “never intervened ... on an
 [Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States] matter.”

In 2011, the administration gave approval for Rosatom’s Tenex subsidiary to sell commercial uranium to U.S. nuclear
power plants in a partnership with the United States Enrichment Corp. Before then, Tenex had been limited to selling
U.S. nuclear power plants reprocessed uranium recovered from dismantled Soviet nuclear weapons under the 1990s
Megatons to Megawatts peace program.

“The Russians were compromising American contractors in the nuclear industry with kickbacks and extortion threats,
all of which raised legitimate national security concerns. And none of that evidence got aired before the Obama
administration made those decisions,” a person who worked on the case told The Hill, speaking on condition of
anonymity for fear of retribution by U.S. or Russian officials.

The Obama administration’s decision to approve Rosatom’s purchase of Uranium One has been a source of political
controversy since 2015.

That’s when conservative author Peter Schweitzer and The New York Times documented how Bill Clinton collected
hundreds of thousands of dollars in Russian speaking fees and his charitable foundation collected millions in donations
from parties interested in the deal while Hillary Clinton presided on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United
States.

The Obama administration and the Clintons defended their actions at the time, insisting there was no evidence that any
Russians or donors engaged in wrongdoing and there was no national security reason for any member of the committee
to oppose the Uranium One deal.

But FBI, Energy Department and court documents reviewed by The Hill show the FBI in fact had gathered substantial
evidence well before the committee’s decision that Vadim Mikerin — the main Russian overseeing Putin’s nuclear
expansion inside the United States — was engaged in wrongdoing starting in 2009.

Then-Attorney General Eric Holder was among the Obama administration officials joining Hillary Clinton on the
Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States at the time the Uranium One deal was approved. Multiple
current and former government officials told The Hill they did not know whether the FBI or DOJ ever alerted committee
members to the criminal activity they uncovered.

Spokesmen for Holder and Clinton did not return calls seeking comment. The Justice Department also didn’t comment.

Mikerin was a director of Rosatom’s Tenex in Moscow since the early 2000s, where he oversaw Rosatom’s nuclear
collaboration with the United States under the Megatons to Megwatts program and its commercial uranium sales to
other countries. In 2010, Mikerin was dispatched to the U.S. on a work visa approved by the Obama administration
to open Rosatom’s new American arm called Tenam.

Between 2009 and January 2012, Mikerin “did knowingly and willfully combine, conspire confederate and agree with
other persons … to obstruct, delay and affect commerce and the movement of an article and commodity (enriched
uranium) in commerce by extortion,” a November 2014 indictment stated.

His illegal conduct was captured with the help of a confidential witness, an American businessman, who began making
kickback payments at Mikerin’s direction and with the permission of the FBI. The first kickback payment recorded by
the FBI through its informant was dated Nov. 27, 2009, the records show.

In evidentiary affidavits signed in 2014 and 2015, an Energy Department agent assigned to assist the FBI in the case
testified that Mikerin supervised a “racketeering scheme” that involved extortion, bribery, money laundering and kickbacks
that were both directed by and provided benefit to more senior officials back in Russia.

“As part of the scheme, Mikerin, with the consent of higher level officials at TENEX and Rosatom (both Russian state
-owned entities) would offer no-bid contracts to US businesses in exchange for kickbacks in the form of money payments
made to some offshore banks accounts,” Agent David Gadren testified.

“Mikerin apparently then shared the proceeds with other co-conspirators associated with TENEX in Russia and elsewhere,”
the agent added.

The investigation was ultimately supervised by then-U.S. Attorney Rod Rosenstein, an Obama appointee who now serves
as President Trump’s deputy attorney general, and then-Assistant FBI Director Andrew McCabe, now the deputy FBI
director under Trump, Justice Department documents show.

Both men now play a key role in the current investigation into possible, but still unproven, collusion between Russia and
Donald Trump’s campaign during the 2016 election cycle. McCabe is under congressional and Justice Department inspector
general investigation in connection with money his wife’s Virginia state Senate campaign accepted in 2015 from now-Virginia
Gov.

Terry McAuliffe at a time when McAuliffe was reportedly under investigation by the FBI. The probe is not focused on McAuliffe's
conduct but rather on whether McCabe's attendance violated the Hatch Act or other FBI conflict rules.

The connections to the current Russia case are many. The Mikerin probe began in 2009 when Robert Mueller, now the special
counsel in charge of the Trump case, was still FBI director. And it ended in late 2015 under the direction of then-FBI Director
James Comey, whom Trump fired earlier this year.
Its many twist and turns aside, the FBI nuclear industry case proved a gold mine, in part because it uncovered a new Russian
money laundering apparatus that routed bribe and kickback payments through financial instruments in Cyprus, Latvia and
Seychelles. A Russian financier in New Jersey was among those arrested for the money laundering, court records show.

The case also exposed a serious national security breach: Mikerin had given a contract to an American trucking firm called
Transport Logistics International that held the sensitive job of transporting Russia’s uranium around the United States in return
for more than $2 million in kickbacks from some of its executives, court records show.

One of Mikerin’s former employees told the FBI that Tenex officials in Russia specifically directed the scheme to “allow for
padded pricing to include kickbacks,” agents testified in one court filing.

Bringing down a major Russian nuclear corruption scheme that had both compromised a sensitive uranium transportation
asset inside the U.S. and facilitated international money laundering would seem a major feather in any law enforcement
agency’s cap.

But the Justice Department and FBI took little credit in 2014 when Mikerin, the Russian financier and the trucking firm
executives were arrested and charged.

The only public statement occurred a year later when the Justice Department put out a little-noticed press release in August
2015, just days before Labor Day. The release noted that the various defendants had reached plea deals.

By that time, the criminal cases against Mikerin had been narrowed to a single charge of money laundering for a scheme that
officials admitted stretched from 2004 to 2014. And though agents had evidence of criminal wrongdoing they collected since
at least 2009, federal prosecutors only cited in the plea agreement a handful of transactions that occurred in 2011 and 2012,
well after the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States’s approval.

The final court case also made no mention of any connection to the influence peddling conversations the FBI undercover
informant witnessed about the Russian nuclear officials trying to ingratiate themselves with the Clintons even though agents
had gathered documents showing the transmission of millions of dollars from Russia’s nuclear industry to an American entity
that had provided assistance to Bill Clinton’s foundation, sources confirmed to The Hill.

The lack of fanfare left many key players in Washington with no inkling that a major Russian nuclear corruption scheme with
serious national security implications had been uncovered.

On Dec. 15, 2015, the Justice Department put out a release stating that Mikerin, “a former Russian official residing in Maryland
was sentenced today to 48 months in prison” and ordered to forfeit more than $2.1 million.

Ronald Hosko, who served as the assistant FBI director in charge of criminal cases when the investigation was underway, told
The Hill he did not recall ever being briefed about Mikerin’s case by the counterintelligence side of the bureau despite the
criminal charges that were being lodged.

“I had no idea this case was being conducted,” a surprised Hosko said in an interview.
Likewise, major congressional figures were also kept in the dark.

Former Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Mich.), who chaired the House Intelligence Committee during the time the FBI probe was being
conducted, told The Hill that he had never been told anything about the Russian nuclear corruption case even though many fellow
lawmakers had serious concerns about the Obama administration’s approval of the Uranium One deal.

“Not providing information on a corruption scheme before the Russian uranium deal was approved by U.S. regulators and engage
appropriate congressional committees has served to undermine U.S. national security interests by the very people charged with
protecting them,” he said. “The Russian efforts to manipulate our American political enterprise is breathtaking.”...'
SOURCE:
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
Here's a fluff-piece that skirts around the real discussion of why the Blue Pill tastes better than the red one,
but it provides some information as to why the 'Trump Effect' is being constantly berated by the mainstream
press. In regards of the UK, guess where the old-guard MSM were educated?!

As Gordi may be able to assist, the south of the UK is where the majority of the wealth is.

Quote:Oxbridge uncovered: More elitist than we thought.

'The sheer dominance by the top two social classes of Oxford and Cambridge University admissions has been
revealed in newly released data. Four-fifths of students accepted at Oxbridge between 2010 and 2015 had
parents with top professional and managerial jobs, and the numbers have been edging upwards.

The data, obtained by David Lammy MP, also shows a "shocking" regional bias, with more offers made to Home
Counties pupils than the whole of northern England.
Mr Lammy said he was "appalled to discover" Oxbridge is actually moving backwards in terms of elitism.

Unveiling the data, covering offers to students in England and Wales in the years 2010 to 2015, he described
the universities as the "last bastion of the old school tie" and highlighted stark regional divisions.

Nationally about 31% of people are in the top two social income groups. They are the doctors, the lawyers,
the senior managers. The data reveals these top two social classes cleaned up in terms of places, with their
share of offers rising from 79% to 81% between 2010 and 2015.

This was despite both universities spending £5m each a year on efforts to cast the net wider for students,
according to official figures.

The data on admissions by region provided by the universities themselves showed:
*More than a quarter of Cambridge offers went to eight local authority areas
*Just under a quarter of Oxford offers went to eight local authority areas
*London and south-east England received 48% of offers from both Oxford and Cambridge
*The Midlands received 11% of Oxford offers and 12% of Cambridge offers
*The North West, the North East, Yorkshire and the Humber between them received 15% of
Oxford offers and 17% of Cambridge offers.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2677]


The University of Cambridge made nearly 2,953 offers to four home counties, and 2,619 offers to the whole
of the north of England. Whereas Oxford made 2,812 offers to applicants in five home counties and 2,619 to
students in the whole of northern England.

Applications were, however, significantly higher from both the counties surrounding London and around the
universities themselves.

'Access measures'
A spokesman for Cambridge said its admissions were based on academic considerations alone, adding that
the greatest barrier to disadvantaged students was poor results.
"We currently spend £5m a year on access measures leading to 190,000 interactions with pupils and teachers."

An Oxford spokesman said: "We absolutely take on board Mr Lammy's comments, and we realise there are big
geographical disparities in the numbers and proportions of students coming to Oxford.

"On the whole, the areas sending few students to Oxford tend also to be the areas with high levels of disadvantage
and low levels of attainment in schools. "Rectifying this is going to be a long journey that requires huge, joined-up
effort across society - including from leading universities like Oxford - to address serious inequalities."

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2679]


Mr Lammy said the scale of the regional divide went far beyond anything he could have imagined.
He accused Oxbridge of failing to live up to its responsibilities as national universities, saying: "Oxbridge take over
£800m a year from the taxpayer - paid for by people in every city, town and village.

"Whole swathes of the country - especially our seaside towns and the 'left behind' former industrial heartlands
across the North and the Midlands are basically invisible. "If Oxbridge can't improve, then there is no reason why
the taxpayer should continue to give them so much money."

Mr Lammy added: "Whilst some individual colleges and tutors are taking steps to improve access, in reality many
Oxbridge colleges are still fiefdoms of entrenched privilege, the last bastions of the old school tie."
He called for a centralised admissions system to be introduced at the universities and for Oxbridge to communicate
more directly with talented students by writing to all straight A students to invite them to apply.

Analysis
By Branwen Jeffreys, BBC News education editor.
We should all care who goes to our top universities because they end up running the country.
Less than 1% of the adult population graduated from Oxford or Cambridge, but the two universities have produced
most of our prime ministers, the majority of our senior judges and civil servants, and many people in the media.

So surely it's good news that more of their students are from state schools?
As this research shows, that's only part of the story. The home counties of southern England are significantly
wealthier than the north. You just have to look at how many children are from families earning so little their children
qualify for free school meals.
In Buckinghamshire it's just 5.5% of pupils, in Surrey 6.8%. Travel north to Middlesbrough and it reaches 27.9%,
and Rochdale 20.5%...'

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2678]

SOURCE:

The BBC actually as a 'News Education Editor'...?!! How elite.


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
           
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply
Meanwhile, at the religion of peace...

Quote:Afghan suicide mosque attacks kill scores of worshippers.

'Some 60 people have been killed in two separate attacks on mosques in Afghanistan, officials say.
A gunman entered a Shia Muslim mosque in Kabul before opening fire and detonating an explosive,
killing at least 39 worshippers.

An attack on a Sunni Muslim mosque in Ghor province killed 20 people.
So-called Islamic State (IS) said it carried out the attack on Kabul's Imam Zaman mosque, but provided
no evidence for the claim.

The group has previously targeted Shia mosques across Afghanistan.
The new attacks bring to at least 176 the number of people killed in bomb attacks across the country this
week.

One eyewitness told the BBC that the scene at the Imam Zaman mosque, in the west of Kabul, looked like
a "front line". Another witness, Mahmood Shah Husaini, said people had been praying when the bomber
detonated his explosives.

The attacker is reported to have opened fire as worshippers gathered for Friday prayers, before detonating
a bomb. Kabul police spokesman Basir Mojahid confirmed the incident at the Shia mosque in Kabul, but did
not give further details.

[Image: attachment.php?aid=2683]


A spokesman for the Afghan interior ministry said investigators were working at the scene to determine the
"nature of the explosion," AFP news agency reports.

The attack on the Sunni mosque in Ghor, central Afghanistan, also killed a pro-government militia commander,
according to reports. Details of the attacks remain unclear and the number of casualties is likely to rise.
Dozens of worshippers were also injured, Afghan's health ministry said.

Friday's attacks come just days after police in Kabul said they had arrested a would-be suicide truck bomber,
averting a major incident. In August, more than 20 people were killed in a bomb attack against worshippers in
Kabul. IS, a Sunni Islamist militant group, said it had carried out the attack.

A truck bomb in the Afghan capital in May killed more than 150 people and wounded some 400 more, most of
them civilians. No group claimed to be behind that attack but the US-backed Afghan government accused the
Haqqani group, an affiliate of the country's biggest militant group, the Taliban.

Afghanistan has seen a spate of suicide attacks and bombings in recent months.
There have been four major attacks on Afghan security forces this week alone:

On Thursday, 43 Afghan soldiers were killed after two Taliban suicide bombers in Humvee armoured vehicles
destroyed a military base in the southern province of Kandahar. Two police officers were also killed in in Ghazni
province.

On Tuesday, Taliban suicide bombers and gunmen killed at least 41 people when they stormed a police training
centre in the eastern city of Gardez while two police officers
Also on Tuesday, at least 30 people died in car bombings in Ghazni

Afghanistan's army and police have suffered heavy casualties this year at the hands of the Taliban, a Sunni group
who want to re-impose their strict version of Islamic law in the country...'
SOURCE:

Islam: The divide between Sunnis and Shia


Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
   
[Image: attachment.php?aid=953]
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)