The following film produced in Britain is the creation of Ken Wales, who as a talented young man was given a scholarship by Walt Disney so he could go to a fine school and perhaps become a film maker. More important is the film itself. This film will embolden us, it will be a life-changing experience for all of us, making us fight for the unborn and the sex slaves of the international sexual gulag, not to mention the poor Filippino maids in the Middle East and the enslaved black Christians of southern Sudan (Darfur) and enslaved human beings everywhere.
I listened a couple days ago to the porcine Snoots of Bush House of the BBC give their latest "report" on slavery.
I listened to every single word, so I could tell if they misrepresented the history in any way. Guess what they did? It was an almost total, completely shameless whitewash (no pun intended).
They did not mention William Wilberforce once! Not once!
And they mentioned Pitt only once, in passing. Nothing really added.
John Newton--no mention either!
They gave more credit to the tyrant King George for signing the bill abolishing slavery in Britain, while observing that slavery went on in the empire for thirty years more (as if abolition of slavery is an instant process when you're dealing with a world-wide empire!).
No real mention either for the primary role of the Muslim Arab slave traders (just one one mention that Arabs were involved).
They credited a lone African ruler for speaking out, rather lamely, against slavery, who was rulling during the time the slave trading was going on. He probably, routinely, put wives to death who didn't please him, and beheaded anyone who didn't pay enough tax to the royal coffers--a real despot who would feel comfortable sitting next to the likes of Saddam Hussain or the head of the British Broadcasting Corporation!
No coverage whatsoever of the West and Central African tribes who raided the villages, seized the women and children and young men, and killed the men who could defend themselves and killed the elderly and sick who were no good to them for selling as slaves to the British slaveship captains.
They naturally did not mention anything about the current slave-trading and slave-holding and enslavement of thousands of Africans going on this very day in the Sudan!
Slave-holding is a long-accepted practice in African Muslim societies from one end of the Moslem world to the other--has been so since the time of the Muslim Arabs swept to power in North Africa in the 7th-8th centuries!
Until the latest regime deposing the former tyrant of the Sudanese central government, Sudan was radical Islamic, determined to wipe out the Christians of South Sudan, convert the pitiful survivors to Islam forcibly, while enslaving them and working them to death, or raping and fathering children on them, or selling them to Christian ministries who raised money in the U.S. to buy these wretched fellow Christians and set them free to return to their shattered villages and burned down homes, in the hope they can rebuild their lives and families somehow.
If the present regime fails and reverts to former policies, the repression will resume where it left off. That is always a possibility with Moslem regimes, since they are authoritarian to dictatorial in nature and misuse of force, and force rules whether for right or wrong, and usually it is for the wrong because that most often enriches and empowers the autocrats or party in power.
This was not a true report, British Broadcasting Corporation! This was not historical! It was revisionist start to finish. History was revised out, propaganda was substituted. This was a gross misrepresentation, perpetrated by the BBC by hauling in a number of ignorant, or dishonest, British university dons and so-called experts on the subject of slavery. What rubbish! What a nauseating farce!
This is the sickening kind of reportage that goes on constantly in the BBC and its broadcasts to the world. It is not fair and balanced journalism--it is screamingly fanatical propaganda for the secular humanist and atheist world-view and ideology, which is in its way just as bad as Nazism and Communism--actually a quantum leap worse, as we had those bad actors' records detailed and behind us, we thought, that they would serve as negative examples to warn society not to permit any such thing again.
We assumed wrongly. Their examples did no such thing. Either ignored or shown in a more favorable light, Nazism and Communism, both solidly in the Camp of Karl Marx and Engel's philosophy, the BBC should stand for Bumbling, Bombastic Charlatans. Their playbook is the like of Saul Olinksy's and Axelrod's in the U.S. under the Clintons and Obamas, a duplicitous agenda to take a society and people over and make them socialist puppets in the hands of an Almighty State that supposedly knows what is best for them.
The secular humanist-run BBC has become the reeking armpit of liberal-dominated London--by their own stinkingly biased reportage and anti-Semitism and anti-Christ agenda! Perhaps, their greatest error is no sense of humor regarding their cardinal doctrines, which are laughable and untenable and irrational, every one of them, and can be proven so without a great deal of research!
Take one cardinal doctrine: Diversity. That is easily refuted as a social practice that means anything. The human race comes from the same two parents, all of us do! All the differ ences do not produce races, but they produce individuals with differing characteristics to suit wherever they spent their existences over hundreds of years, exhibiting micro-evolution or adaptation. A good trait instilled into our DNA, the ability to adapt in this way to the vastly varying climes and habitats of Earth!
Diversity as a 20th and 21st century socialist mantra, on the other hand, made a state doctrine to be used for manipulating people into groups and using them as minorities politically ever since Eleanor Roosevelt created minority groups, that has nothing to do with genetics but only to power politics played by elites and dictatorships and authoritarians and elitist politicians like Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt. Diversity is built in to our fabric, we are not separate races of humanity, we are one race exhibiting different characteristics as we reside in a particular climate and region long enough.
For "diversity" be used politically demands a hard, cruel cynicism and a barbaric defiance of biology that is reprehensible and distasteful and uncivilized, whether a PH.D espouses that kind of misuse or a n internationalist and socialist and Islamicist Community Organizer ne'er-do-well and charlatan such as Barak Obama champions it.
Mixing groups of differing characteristics in skin color and height and weight and features does nothing to promote tolerance and peace and tranquility in the society, because the deliberate policy mandated by state authorities and laws produces the opposite: "racial" antagonism and "victimization" and "inequality" and the "cause of reparations to be paid by the white oppressors to the black victims".
Certain wide gaps in credibility yawn open immediately to my view. What about blacks paying reparations to fellow blacks in Africa, such as in Rwanda? How about from tribe to tribe in the Congo? How about in Egypt where the Arab majority bitterly persecutes the Coptic Egyptians who are indigenous and Arabs are not? How about Europe, which has despite its veneer of sophisticated civilization evidenced thousands of years of tribal warfare and aggression, based on tribal identity? How about its systemic persecution of Jewish people over the last two thousand years which is still on-going, gaining in virulence since WWII's Holocaust of the Jews, Gypsies, and Slavs?
Woe, woe is Western Civilization, for where are George Orwell and G.K. Chesterton when we need them? --Ed.
Another BBC report was centered on slavery in Mauretania, a Muslim hell-hole of a nation in the Sahara of Africa, which means it is mostly all rock, sand, burning heat, waterlessness, and deadly snakes--not a place anyone would want to go normally.
The BBC must have had a bad hair day and was telling the truth for once!
It did a scathing report, which is amazing to me. It stated that the government of Mauretania is in denial about the rampant slavery in the country. Most of the population is enslaved--the BBC said.
Yet the government officials claim there is no slavery, since they passed a law forbidding slavery! But no one told the slaves this! They are illiterate, impoverished, starved, and being worked slowly to death, so how can they appreciate the technicality of a law in a far-off capital that states on paper that they are free? Their owners too, will they give up valuable slave property unless they are forced by the state?
We must acknowledge the reality, not take the evasive talk of the professional politicians of Mauretania for truth. Slaves are slaves! Mauretania's 9th century-style society is based primarily on slavery.
The only thing I would fault the newsman on the ground for is this: he did not connect the slavery problem with the Muslim religion. Of course, slavery existed long, long before Islam came to the area by force, but Islam then had the responsibility and the power and means to end this inhuman practice and evil, but it did not. It has had 1,300 years to end slavery--but it shows no sign of doing so yet.
No one is standing up in the United Nations calling for a UN resolution or sanctions against Mauretania, until they end this terrible evil. Where is Amnesty International or the other secular human rights organizations? Where? Probably off having tea with the dictator of Sudan and congratulating him on the wonderful progress he is making in insuring there is no mistreatment of Christian Sudanese in the south of the Nuba Mountains and in the state of Dafur.
Mauretania is an unbelievable, horrible hell-hole for thousands of human beings who are voiceless and powerless to help themselves, but these are people that deserve our active consideration, simply because they are God's precious children, and He cares for them and wants them set free and given means too to work for a better life!
The propagandistic, guilt-driven BBC is still hammering the same, old, politically correct theme of British colonial slavery in yet more broadcasts using the same snooty, condescending Cambridge and Oxford accents!
I heard another calling for Prime Minister Tony Blair to apologize for British involvement in the slave trade. It is the so-called 200th year anniversary, if I heard them right.
Why set the anniversary back so few years? Why not show the world you know some history, BBC, and set it back to Mohammed's reign as Potentate of Islamic Arabia in the 7th century? His household was no doubt full of slaves. He endorsed slavery, in practice, and his followers naturally continued the evil, right up to March 2007, in fact!
I really believe this is a smokescreen, just another ploy, like the secular humanists in America always drumming on the non-issue of the Witchcraft Trials in Salem by a group of Puritans, while their own aggressive agenda of intolerance goes unchecked and uncontested. What is the nastiness the guilty consciences of the BBC are hiding?
Bush House desperately needs a thorough decontamination and exorcism of evil spirits of intolerance and atheism and hatred and falsehood, once it is turned over, lock, stock, and whiskey barrel, to a Bible printing society, as happened to the house of the arch-Christian hater, Voltaire, in Switzerland--a man the Bible calls a fool for denying God, and who vowed that Christianity, because of his books, would be dead in 100 years.
Well, we passed his deadline a century or more ago--and Christianity is sweeping the world (not religious Christianity, but the real kind this time, born of the Spirit of God and the teaching of the Bible).