Hollywood’s Shameful Slandering of Two Dead New Zealand Heroes

 

There is nothing more despicable than disparaging a dead man who can’t defend himself.   

But writing an Oscar winning movie script to twist and distort history for your own benefit is sick.  

Argo is that movie. 

Don’t go see Argo, feed the scum behind the movie.      

The now dead individuals I’m referring are the then Kiwi Ambassador to Iran Chris Beeby and his Secretary Richard Sewell.  

The film incorrectly depicts New Zealand diplomats, Australians and the British embassy as well, turning away the US diplomats. 

So to get this right the role portrayed in the movie is Beeby and his team at The N.Z Embassy in Tehran turned away the U.S hostages in their hour of need - literally slammed the door in their faces.  

This is a load of American propaganda – utter lies scripted into the story to bolster America’s role in their rescue, write-out non North Americans altogether.       

“It's not an easy thing to do. You try to honour the truth of the essence, the sort of basic truth of the story that you're telling." is what the scum-bag Affleck has to say.   

Hollywood’s lies are called “creative choices.”  

Affleck is really proud of his Oscar winning that shamelessly tramples over the integrity of others.  

Make no bones about it Beeby and Sewell placed themselves at great personal risk assisting the sheltering of the hostages. 

Beeby even rented a flat so if their current location with the Canadians was discovered they would have a new hidey-hole.   

Rather than turning the American diplomats away as the movie would like you to believe  Beeby and team visited the fugitives as they sheltered in a Canadian diplomat's home, played chess and brought them New Zealand cheese to eat.

The night before the hostages were secreted away on a Swiss Air flight The New Zealand Embassy emptied their booze cabinet so they could have a going away party!   

At the time Iran was New Zealand largest market for lamb. 

Billions of dollars of trade were at stake had New Zealand’s role in hiding the hostages been discovered.   

Ben Affleck knows his film about the Iranian hostage crisis of 1979-80 distorts the facts and slanders two dead men who should be acknowledged as heroes in the hostage crisis and not falsely portrayed as cowards. 

 

I hope the movies flops.

 

 

 

 

 

Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd chasing Money in our Oceans not Whales

Worldwide shark populations are dwindling. 

Basking sharks, once prevalent around the Canterbury coastline are now a rarity.   

Because sharks come top of the food chain the Great Whites and Makos etc have relatively small population sizes and are much more vulnerable to overfishing.  

Many sharks are killed, deliberately and accidentally for their fins which end up as soup up in Asia.  

Meanwhile in the Southern Oceans an eco-pirate flotilla is fighting Japanese whalers. 

These also end up on the tables of Asian restaurants but all the neutral stats indicate whale populations are generally growing.   

So why don’t the likes of Greenpeace, Sea Shepherds of the world get out in the local oceans just 10 miles from the coast of N.Z and protect sharks and not whales?     

That’s because it’s not in their financial interests to save sharks. 

Sharks are feared creatures whilst cuddly whales are the eco-poster centrefolds.  

Greenpeace and Sea Shepherd groups have painted themselves into a corner, made ‘whales’ their bread and butter, money pit.    

Both groups are morally bankrupt.  

They are now no longer neutral in their desire to save animals. 

There IS currently a greater need to save dwindling shark populations rather than whales and who are they out chasing in the middle of no-where?  

The money that’s what!  

They only want to save creatures like whales, pandas and giant apes that will attract funds for them to keep their jobs.  

 

 

 

Greenpeace in New Zealand is little more than a McDonalds Franchise for Hippies

 

 

Make no bones about it saving whales and snails are big business in New Zealand.  

Greenpeace in New Zealand is not a charity. 

Technically Greenpeace runs a Charitable Trust in N.Z after that body lost a High Court appeal against the Charities Commission refusing to recognise it as a charity back in 2010.  

The commission raised the horny chest-nuts of Greenpeace’s political and illegal activities.    

So thus Greenpeace is a Charity in N.Z in name only, a self-bestowed one at that.   

In a good year Greenpeace rakes-in around NZD 10 million in donations from guilt-ridden middle class Kiwis of which around 20% is bled-off to its head-office in the Netherlands.    

To a casual observer Greenpeace structure resembles a global franchise – a very profitable one at that.  

In 2010 ‘not for profit’ Greenpeace N.Z did in fact make a tidy profit of NZD 1.8 million.  

In 2011 they Greenpeace in N.Z said they had a bad year financially and ‘only’ made NZD 550,000.   

Greenpeace loves nothing better than attacking, sometimes physically, rich evil Corporations, when on closer examination Greenpeace is little more than a global corporation itself. 

A McDonalds for die-dyed wearing hippies to gather around and dance naked in the new moon baying to mother nature.  

If only a few of Greenpeace’s Kiwi members who donate close to 10 million a year would wipe away their guilt for a second and start asking…..   

Why does Greenpeace in New Zealand need to make 20% per annum on its earnings?   

Am I happy having such a large chunk of my donation going offshore?   

Is it true that Greenpeace’s local ‘door knocker’ that signed me up was not a volunteer but a paid commission agent?  

Is it true Greenpeace’s rabid Hare Krishna like Funding Team I meet in town are all getting paid below what local Unions call a minimum liveable wage?  

I can’t see any published figures on the local web site, so how much does Greenpeace’s head honcho and the other management team in N.Z get paid? How does this compare to my income?   

Is it true when you sign-up to a direct debit with Greenpeace for a set minimum amount Greenpeace can automatically raise this amount without my permission?  

How much does Greenpeace NZ have in the bank, investments as at today?    

 

Why am I so stupid signing-up with you guys when I could have given this money that local group trying to reduce the stoats, feral cats in order to increase native bird populations or the other one re-generating native fauna? I could do some real good I could see. 

  



 

This is my sort of Papal Protest!

Protests of this nature are deserving of our support and mutual admiration.  

If Oxfam had of had their way, you and I would be conversing in German.

                                            UNOFFICAL HISTORY OF OXFAM
 

Here’s some sordid history of Oxfam wants hidden away, re-written to suit their current persona as all round good guys.    

Going back to its beginnings the main man behind the formation of Oxfam was Theodore Richard Milford, technically Cannon Theodore Richard Milford.  

This Quaker dominated rabble of upper-class landed Englishmen weren’t initially just interested in humanitarian aid; they also thought the Allies should cease hostilities with Germany and sue for peace.  

Complete ‘put up the white flag’ madness. 

At the time, 1942, the Luftwaffe was raining bombs down on their houses, aid ships torpedoed by U-Boats, their countrymen dying in their hundreds every-day, but these trifling facts didn’t deter the Oxford Committee for Famine Relief. 

Many of the original members, drivers like Professor Gilbert Murray were scared from seeing action in World War One and believed strongly in the League of Nations cure-all diplomacy.  

Hitler didn’t.  

The first charitable act undertaken by Oxfam in the middle of WW2 was partitioning MP’s to break an Allied blockade of Axis dominated Greece much to the chagrin of the British Government, Churchill in particular. Their concerns that the aid would fall into enemy hands was in-part realised.  

Oxfam likes to paint their relief of Greece as a personal success but they don’t tell you is the Greeks were starving because the occupying Axis troops were plundering their resources.

They leave out the bit that Hitler and Mussolini ran the very same dictatorships Oxfam wanted their Government to negotiate with, for all intents and purposes surrender to.   

And in another David Irvingesque re-write of historic record concerning the Greek Famine of WW2 it was the Red Cross that brokered a deal so food could be delivered, undertook the logistics – not Oxfam, they proselytised and raised funds only.

No one running the Allied war campaign took a bunch of idle rich peaceniks like Oxfam seriously.     

Ironically Oxfam’s first true on-the-ground undertaking was to supply aid to a defeated and devastated Germany, campaigning for post-war Britain’s to reduce their rations and donate those reductions to Germans.

That’s right you read it right: Oxfam’s first shipment of humanitarian aid went to Germany.   

The atlases at Oxford and Cambridge in 1946 can’t have had Africa on them.  

As you would expect, these manoeuvrings by Oxfam just after WW2 went down like a cup of cold sick amongst their countrymen. 

Many of Oxfam’s original leadership also had links to the ultra-pacifist group The Peace Pledge Union who like the majority of Oxfam’s members were Conscientious Objectors during WW2. The PPU were against the bombing of Germany cities and in favour of repatriating captured Axis prisoners. In short: nutters some of which actually went to Germany to work in a twisted belief they could broker a peace by integrating into Nazi Germany.     

Both Oxfam and The Peace Pledge Union were despised by the majority of Brits as unpatriotic freeloaders, de-facto collaborators - which in reality, given the times, they were. 

If Oxfam had of had their way, you and I would be conversing in German.  

 

Footnote: The Song below rather appropriately translates as ‘House of Lies’

 

 

 

 

"If one person has an imaginary friend, they're crazy, if many people have the same imaginary friend it's religion"

Greenpeace Wants Billions to Starve

Last year Bill Gates via his Gates Foundation gave USD 10 million to British scientists to sort-out  a problem he hoped might help solve the looming world food crisis.

By the way this is the same Bill Gates Oxfam recently launched a hate campaign against claiming he and his ilk were simply not generous enough!  

95% of his wealth going to charity is not right & fair according to the puritanical Oxfam, but back to the story.  

Success of this research would potentially allow wheat, rice, corn and other global food staples to be grown in even the poorest soils of Africa, Asia and South America without the need for costly fertilisers, greatly expanding world food production.

What an admirable undertaking, only the process involved in developing more resilient plants incorporates the nemesis of eco-fascists like Greenpeace: Genetic Engineering.

In little more of an admission that hard-line dogma trumps hard pragmatism Greenpeace justified their position to see the end of this ground-breaking research by stating….

"If Mr Gates is serious about feeding the world's poor and helping us establish sustainable farming practices that will heal the environment and provide a future for humanity, he needs to look less towards GM crops and more towards nature"

"GM technology isn't about feeding the world or improving farmers' lives; it provides biotech and seed companies with the opportunity to own patents over crops and nature. It is about control of the global food system, and anyone who tells you different is lying."

In a tenuous link Greenpeace went to point out Gates has shares in Monsanto.

But a minuet fraction of Gates investments, a complete ‘green’ herring.  

On this one Greenpeace is seriously fucked-up, in-fact dangerously so.

Greenpeace wants to doom billions to starve simply because their beliefs state ‘Mother Nature will triumph over Science’

Vacuous prattle won’t feed starving children.    

Science can and will - given the chance.