Lies, damned lies, and Stonewall

That’s the way the money goes, pop goes the Weasel

A few years back, I blogged about Greenpeace, and their alleged penchant in the past for bad-debting suppliers…one of which I happened to be running at the time. Then about two years ago (sorry, can’t find the link) I laid out some suspicions about Stonewall putting Gays up to creating discrimination confrontations – particularly in relation to hotel stays.

While this is something of a generalisation, I am bound to observe that all my dealings, research and ‘snout’ feedback about both of these organisations tends to mark them out as yet more institutions in Cool Britannia where the Leninsparts of the 1970-90 era that signalled total rejection of their mad creed went to hide. Whenever any pointless, daft, or downright anti-social issue comes up, and off they go to join it.

Climate change, gender politics, orientation discrimination, Islam….the list is endless. Those pulling this stunt range from George Galloway to whole swathes of the Irish Left who helped bankroll the Orwellian ‘Peace Flotilla’ of a few years back. Their aim is very simple: to destabilise bourgeois society via the back door. They also have two overriding things in common: distortion, and a liking for show trials.

While ‘via the back door’ might be the wrong parallel to use in relation to Stonewall, it remains an organisation I don’t trust; and I also resent its links to the liberal Establishment – as a result of which we all wind up indirectly paying for their cacophonous windbag of bollocks and bad science through our taxes. I’m indebted to Young Right enfant terrible Ed West for alerting me in this morning’s Twitter crop to yet more madness and mendacity at this truly controlling and illiberal organisation. Examples to follow.

First, however, a simple statement from the ‘About’ page of Stonewall’s website:

‘Stonewall receives no public funding and raises all its money itself”

Untrue. As the ‘charity’s’ accounts clearly show, it received £45,000 from the Home Office in 2010.

Here’s the potentially worrying part on the danger-of-corruption dimension: Stonewall voted the Home Office ‘Equality Employer of the Year’ at the end of that fiscal year. Well blow me. Or something.

Here’s another coincidence: being part of a growth industry – called Nobody Loves me it’s Not Fair – Stonewall found itself strapped for removal expenses. These came to…..£45,000.

Cash for awards scandal? I think we should be told.

But mainly I’d like to ask Theresa May-and-probably-will whether she intends to continue the Home Office, er, contributions. Yes, that’s a nicer word than ‘bung’, which of course may be entirely inappropriate.

Then I’d like to ask, well, anyone really, why Stonewall is a charity. We have Equal Rights legislation in the UK. Either it’s working (because all these controlling loons think it will) or it isn’t – in which case the laws should be repealed…and Stonewall allowed to keep its charitable status. They can’t swing both ways on this one. Sorry. Sorry.

Kop a load of these: The Lottery – £99,325. Equality & Human Rights Commission: £48,584. Scottish Government £99,386.

Are none of these public funding either?

Now read this and feel your bp going up:

‘We continue to pressure the BBC to improve its portrayal of Gay people in television programmes, and also about the near-invisibility of gay people…’

Aside from asking “Are they kidding?” – Graham Norton, Sandy Toskvig, Stephen Fry, Simon Amstell,  etc etc – what would the public reaction be, I wonder, if a Charity called, for example, Newscorp, pressured the BBC about its portrayal of Aussies in general and Rupert Murdoch in particular?

My main hope is that once Thompson the Armbiter finally departs the BBC, someone with more balls will come along and tell every censoriously affirmative minority pressure group to go forth and multiply. The drivel-muddled assumptions in the tunnel minds of those Who Would Have Us Obey go on and one. The Annual Report tells us how many plastic bottles they recycled, why they have 50% more female employees than they had a year ago…and this particular gem, which is straight out of Private Eye:

‘In May we published No Going Back, groundbreaking research into the experiences of lesbian, gay and bisexual asylum seekers.’

Misguided, misleading, and misanthropic: is this what we want charities to represent in Britain? 

Hat-tip as well by the way to @PeterPannier for bringing this profound hypocrisy to Ed’s attention.

 

21 thoughts on “Lies, damned lies, and Stonewall

  1. The usual liberal crap.

    In about 30 years there will be a charity campaigning for the rights of heterosexuals. The retarded section of society (of which Stonewall is a paid up member along with government and 95% of pointless “charities” and quangos) is always prone to extremes.

    How about this. Dear Stonewall, you’re gay, we get it. Everybody has grown up over the last 25 years and we mostly couldn’t give a shit anymore. Now shut up and get on with your lives. Find something else to define yourselves by.

  2. GLBT groups in Ulster are financed by extremist protestant groups.The GLBT are linked directly into the London GLBT groups,the money will keep flowing as long as the GLBT target the Catholic church in whatever way possible.This is taking hate to whole new level.

  3. Don’t think the BBC will end up with someone with balls somehow, that’s not the way it works, they will end up with whoever the Establishment decrees, that someone will continue to run the BBC the way the Govt. like it run. Hoi
    polloi are now permanently excluded from any choice or decision making process.
    It’s all too late for change for the Police, MSM, the Banks, Westminster etc.etc.
    We are witnessing change that is irreversable. It’s why the Elite care not a jot, they know there is nothing we can, or come to that, try to do about it.
    We just have to get used to it.
    Unless…..War? That’ll do it I guess, so it’s the best we can hope for? probably…
    My father and his father would not have fought in two world wars if they had had any inkling that this would be what would have become of The United Kingdom, that’s for sure.

  4. If I may be uncomplicated for once:

    If nothing else you are right to raise the issue of rising blood pressure. I cannot say adequately just how heartily sick and tired I am of having these various and for all I know nefarious groups and individuals ramming their assorted lifestyle down my throat and demanding I like it.

    It isn’t enough that I don’t care how they live their lives, apparently I have to love them for it. I really wish to goodnes they would just bu**er off and do what I do, live my life in my way whilst hoping I don’t get up too many peoples noses. (But if I do, tough)

    They obviously already know all that; so everything they do is clearly designed to put them at some advantage over me and others who don’t share their beliefs and lifestyle. In which case best ‘they’ tread carefully because frankly I’m getting hacked off with it all and may just start to aggravate them for the hell of it. In the same way I am trying to aggravate TPTB because they are such a bunch of tossers. (Is that one allowed without asterisks? Apologies if not.)

    I’m just toddling off to take my blood pressure reading. Which is not being helped by the way WordPress is behaving, I’m even having trouble posting a comment now.

  5. I’m off to have a quiet lie-down now. After that I am going to write a letter to my MP. On second thoughts, I think I will just have a quite lie-down.

      • I can vouch for that, I’ve known people bending over in soho bars with the express purpose of getting a job in the media

  6. Another prime example of cultural marxists and their bastardisation of British society by corrupting what was once the honourable tradition of charitable endeavour in these isles. Very few, if any, of charities currently operational are free of this corrupting influence as it is almost impossible to survive outside of its malevolent purview.

  7. Stonewall do have a lot of influence, both in Westminster and the Civil Service. They work with the Security Service for example in providing guidance on recruitment policies and ensuring the organisation pursues a
    PC agenda. I believe they are now inbedded in most sectors. I also suspect, and this is my conjecture, that they are probably behind the campaign to wreck the Church of England re gay clergy. Beware of what you are taking on.

  8. John, John, John

    How many more times do we need to tell you where to look for the connections between all these organisations (the ‘third’ sector I think they call it) and the local authorities and the government?

    The bond that joins them all is called Common Purpose. Google it. Their mantra is ‘leading beyond authority’ (i.e. ultra vires in the case of public sector authorities). ACPO is another one infested from top to bottom by Common Purpose. Money flowing in all directions from one body to another, so much so that it’s almost impossible to trace.

    Try to find out how much eavc local authority paid Common Purpose for ‘training’ courses last year. It will make your eyes pop. Find out how many senior officers in Councils and police forces are ‘graduates’ of Common Purpose. Have a look at the list of local ‘advisory’ groups (the secretive panels that select people to join their organisation).

    I’m told that this has all been set up in preparation for the ‘post-democratic’ age. In the greater scheme of things, Stonewall is a minnow. But apt that you should spot it in this centenary year of the Titanic.

  9. Society would be better served promoting pomosexuality as its default position rather then letting minorities, however large, dictate dictums.

  10. Surelly Stonewall have a point.
    There’s always been massive discrimination against gay men in the UK light entertainment industry.

  11. The problem isn’t Stonewall – it’s the definition of ‘charity’ in the UK. Any non-profit can register as a charity, be it a pro-gay group, a pro-life group, or an environmental group.
    Stonewall would be foolish not to avail itself of ‘charity’ status, since every other lobbying group does it as well.
    Instead of demonising Stonewall, why not simply petition the government to re-define ‘charity’ and prevent political lobbyists from attaining that status?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s