Wednesday, August 10, 2016

 

[Re-post] Theresa May's a poor choice over Andrea Leadsom

Pretty bad news that Theresa May became PM.
Andrea Leadsom was the star of the Vote Leave campaign – by far the best candidate on the BBC's 3x3 stadium debate a couple of days before Brexit day. She's a communicator; actually human, talks good sense, and actually knows a thing or ten about economics, the EU and trade. None of the toff bluster of Boris or the geeky oddness of Gove. She wiped the floor with the 'Remain' side's bizarre team of a jumped-up shop steward, an Asian mayor and a Lesbian Scot. OK, it can't have been that difficult, but Boris wasn't that great on the night.

     Theresa May hid for the entire campaign – declaring for the 'Remain' side she'd assume would win, but then cowardly hedging her bets – just as she's been hiding for her five useless years as Home Secretary, doing absolutely nothing about the high levels of non-EU migration, and personally cutting the boats patrolling our shores down to …. three. She's stayed in post only because everyone has long come to the conclusion that the Gnome Orifice is a basket case as unreformable as the EU, so they've given up getting in such a huff about it.

     Another school ma'am patronising, pompous bore, May has no people skills, never mind charisma, and looks like a tired hag. She has few if any discernible strengths, having risen through conscientiousness. That's all there is to her.

     Andrea Leadsom, by contrast, is highly personable, speaks English instead of Klingon, and actually believes in the EU departure she is going to have to negotiate. AND she's had the more relevant actual 'real life' experience negotiating and dealing with economics.

     All Theresa May can point to is years in government. Well, so could Gordon Brown. She's more or less just played dead to avoid targeted incoming.

     It's a no-brainer.

     UKIP wouldn't mind Leadsom defecting to 'em, and from an electoral point of view will be praying for Theresa May, of course.






 

9 Ways To Burn Fat Fast


9 Ways To Burn Fat Fast

Implement these 9 fat-burning tips that use exercise and diet and watch the body fat melt like the butter you're no longer using

The human body is a remarkably adaptable machine. Even if years and years of neglect have allowed pound after pound of fat to fill out your frame, you can rid yourself of that lard at a much faster rate than you brought it on board. In that sense, time is your side!

Take these nine easy-to-implement tips to heart, and progress will come in a hurry!
1. Stay Off The Scale

That you can gain muscle and lose fat is one of the reasons I stress to people not to follow the scale. Body composition and how you look in the mirror matters more than what the scale says.

You could train hard and eat right and build five pounds of muscle and lose five pounds of fat, and what will the scale say? That you still weigh the same.

Frustrating, even though you've made good progress. Use the scale as a guide, but how you look in the mirror, how you feel, and how your clothes fit are much better indicators of your progress.

You Can Watch This Video To Know More Secrets

 
2. Reduce Your Calories Gradually

If you're looking to lose fat, don't make huge calorie cuts. This will kick your body into starvation mode, reducing your metabolism and making it more difficult to burn off the fat.

To prevent this metabolic slowdown and allow your body to burn fat at an optimal rate, make smaller calorie reductions every week or two.
3. Vary Your Caloric Intake

This is another way to outsmart your body and continue to lose body fat without lowering your metabolism.

By varying your caloric intake every few days instead of eating the exact same amount of calories every day, keep the starvation mechanism in check and continue to burn fat.


Do you still to want know how to loss fat fast ??

Just Watch This Video


Monday, August 08, 2016

 

Testimonial from a Billionaire

Testimonial from a Billionaire?

I’ve seen internet marketers boasting testimonials from real millionaires.

But this lucky internet marketer got a testimonial from a…

BILLIONAIRE.

This has to be seen to really be believed:

He has also spoken to audiences in 11 countries as an internet marketing authority and has authored several books.

In one of his books, he co-authored it with the brilliant â€" Robert G.Allen, the New York Times best-selling author.

… And the best part about it? He’s going to share his secrets to help make a passive income online with you, right NOW!

 

 


P.S. The fact is, he is so pissed off with all the “noises” out there.

Sometimes, you don’t even know who’s real and who isn’t. That's why, he has decided to let you clone his exact system to make a passive income online.

Here’s the link again:


http://clipartonline.info/best1000/cbpassive.htm

 


Thursday, August 04, 2016

 

Theresa May's a poor choice over Andrea Leadsom

[Re-post because of resumption of imposter junk posting]
Pretty bad news that Theresa May became PM.
Andrea Leadsom was the star of the Vote Leave campaign – by far the best candidate on the BBC's 3x3 stadium debate a couple of days before Brexit day. She's a communicator; actually human, talks good sense, and actually knows a thing or ten about economics, the EU and trade. None of the toff bluster of Boris or the geeky oddness of Gove. She wiped the floor with the 'Remain' side's bizarre team of a jumped-up shop steward, an Asian mayor and a Lesbian Scot. OK, it can't have been that difficult, but Boris wasn't that great on the night.

     Theresa May hid for the entire campaign – declaring for the 'Remain' side she'd assume would win, but then cowardly hedging her bets – just as she's been hiding for her five useless years as Home Secretary, doing absolutely nothing about the high levels of non-EU migration, and personally cutting the boats patrolling our shores down to …. three. She's stayed in post only because everyone has long come to the conclusion that the Gnome Orifice is a basket case as unreformable as the EU, so they've given up getting in such a huff about it.

     Another school ma'am patronising, pompous bore, May has no people skills, never mind charisma, and looks like a tired hag. She has few if any discernible strengths, having risen through conscientiousness. That's all there is to her.

     Andrea Leadsom, by contrast, is highly personable, speaks English instead of Klingon, and actually believes in the EU departure she is going to have to negotiate. AND she's had the more relevant actual 'real life' experience negotiating and dealing with economics.

     All Theresa May can point to is years in government. Well, so could Gordon Brown. She's more or less just played dead to avoid targeted incoming.

     It's a no-brainer.

     UKIP wouldn't mind Leadsom defecting to 'em, and from an electoral point of view will be praying for Theresa May, of course.




 

The 1 food ingredient secretly making us fat

The 1 food ingredient secretly making us fat
 

I'm a big fan of eating natural foods and avoided processed junk.

So today I want to talk about some important information from Dr. Charles.

On his website he goes into detail about the #1 food ingredient secretly making us fat.

>>> Watch This Video From Here

What's this dangerous ingredient?

High Fructose Corn Syrup, which is a man made sweetener that is cheaper to produce and actually sweeter than sugar.

Here's what makes it so harmful:

When HFCS is ingested, it travels straight to the liver which turns the tasty, sugary liquid into FAT.

HFCS does not cause the pancreas to produce insulin. As a result, our bodies are "tricked" into a vicious cycle, eating food that gets immediately stored as fat and never feeling full.

It is associated with blood sugar problems, ADD/ADHD, depression, fatigue, B vitamin deficiency, indigestion, tooth decay, and most importantly... WEIGHT GAIN

So what's the solution? Just avoid HFCS?

Unfortunately it's not that easy.

You see, HFCS is added to so many foods that historically have not contained sugar, like peanut butter, bread, yogurt and juices.

So it's very difficult to avoid completely.

Also, even if you eliminated HFCS from your diet, it wouldn't repair the damage that has already been done.
There's another step you have to take first.

This is exactly why Dr. Charles created his Fat Loss program... to help your body repair the damage from toxins like HFCS... and lose a lot of weight in the process.

The video on his website will give you more details and has a lot of awesome free info about weight loss in it:

>>> Solution By Dr. Charles From Here

The food industry is well aware that HFCS is a problem. But instead of eliminating HFCS, the corn lobby in Washington,
DC has asked the FDA to change the name of HFCS to "corn sugar."

They think that just changing the name will fool us into thinking it's healthier.

P. S. Fat Loss Program Not to public use to long time >>

 


Thursday, July 07, 2016

 

Andrea Leadsom SURELY over Theresa Bloody May

Andrea Leadsom was the star of the Vote Leave campaign – by far the best candidate on the BBC's 3x3 stadium debate a couple of days before Brexit day. She's a communicator; actually human, talks good sense, and actually knows a thing or ten about economics, the EU and trade. None of the toff bluster of Boris or the geeky oddness of Gove. She wiped the floor with the 'Remain' side's bizarre team of a jumped-up shop steward, an Asian mayor and a Lesbian Scot. OK, it can't have been that difficult, but Boris wasn't that great on the night.

     Theresa May hid for the entire campaign – declaring for the 'Remain' side she'd assume would win, but then cowardly hedging her bets – just as she's been hiding for her five useless years as Home Secretary, doing absolutely nothing about the high levels of non-EU migration, and personally cutting the boats patrolling our shores down to …. three. She's stayed in post only because everyone has long come to the conclusion that the Gnome Orifice is a basket case as unreformable as the EU, so they've given up getting in such a huff about it.

     Another school ma'am patronising, pompous bore, May has no people skills, never mind charisma, and looks like a tired hag. She has few if any discernible strengths, having risen through conscientiousness. That's all there is to her.

     Andrea Leadsom, by contrast, is highly personable, speaks English instead of Klingon, and actually believes in the EU departure she is going to have to negotiate. AND she's had the more relevant actual 'real life' experience negotiating and dealing with economics.

     All Theresa May can point to is years in government. Well, so could Gordon Brown. She's more or less just played dead to avoid targeted incoming.

     It's a no-brainer.

     UKIP wouldn't mind Leadsom defecting to 'em, and from an electoral point of view will be praying for Theresa May, of course.


Tuesday, June 14, 2016

 

FCUK EeuU: all the ECONOMIC arguments are firmly on the ‘Out’/’Leave’ side, not just those re immigration and democracy

The EU is one great out-dated 'tragedy of the commons' exercise by elites, that survives on the life-support of kicking the can down the road and digging an ever deeper hole. The exponential cost of the never-ending long unaffordable bail-outs is going to land on the UK doormat sooner or later, never mind whatever supposedly was promised.

France is now forecast to go bankrupt in under five years – and you don't have to look far to see the signs. It's like going back to the UK in the 1970s, but with an endemic refusal to look at any solution. The rest of the EU Med nations already are effectively bankrupt.

The EU administration itself is as bankrupt as it is corrupt: its own books have not been signed off by auditors for the best part of two decades.

The UK needs to be as far away as possible when the EU rustbucket sinks if we're to avoid being sucked under with the contagion.

This alone is sufficient reason to say FCUK EeuU.

     The EU's inexorable economic and cultural decline amidst an otherwise growing world is compounded by the intractable problem of the two dozen plus countries making up the EU forever unable to get their act together to sign a trade deal with even one of the new big economies across the world, to which UK exports should have grown massively to dwarf our current falling levels to Europe.

As one country, we can quickly make simultaneous trade arrangements with India, etc, and – what is more – draw them up in our own interests, not those of Germany and France.

And that alone is another sufficient reason to 'vote leave'.

     As for the supposed virtues of the 'single market': this is a myth as Norman Lamont points out. Nations outside the EU are far more successful in importing into it than nations within the EU are at exporting to each other. Tariffs are very low at 3%, which is less than half what we pay in the effective tariff of our EU membership fee.

And there alone is another sufficient reason for 'out'.

     Then there's the huge costs of EU regulation falling on the more than four in five UK firms who don't export to the EU at all.

As for the supposed great majority of economists … blah blah: there's no mention of the 90%+ who never replied to the invitation to support the 'Remain' side.

The multi-national fat cats – yes, the ones who dodge paying their corporate taxes – of course are in league with the 'PC'-fascist political elites, who have nothing but contempt for their citizens in a blame game to excuse themselves for believing in bullshit bastardised Marxism..

     Of course, the democracy and immigration arguments seal it; but getting out of the EU really is a no-brainer.


Friday, April 29, 2016

 

The Labour Party and the Left hates not just all Jews: it hates us all -- 'the workers' as men, 'whites', heterosexuals.

It's not just Ken Livingstone et al who has lost it. The Labour Party's hatred towards not just Israel but Jews generically as a group they deem 'non-oppressed' and, thereby, 'the oppressor', is just the start of an opening of a can of worms the like of which has never been seen in politics. The Left long ago adopted the cartoon representation of the world into a binary split of 'the oppressed' and 'the oppressor' in the wake of the complete failure of Marxist political philosophy to produce a revolution in the West. The Left's support hitherto of 'the workers' not only ended, but flipped completely to cast 'the workers' as 'the oppressor' even more than the 'boss' class. The new 'oppressed' then became by default -- but on no rational basis whatsoever -- women, ethnic minorities and homosexuals. It was and remains the greatest fraud in all political history, and it will prove terminal for the Left once everyone wakes up to more than the realisation that Liebore and the Left hates us all, to discover just why and how Liebore and the Left hate us all.

See my long paper on this: THE ORIGIN OF 'IDENTITY POLITICS' & 'POLITICAL CORRECTNESS': Not Consideration for Minorities but Hatred for the Mass of Ordinary People; Specifically 'the Workers' -- Tracing the Roots of Why and How it Arose and Developed Reveals the Greatest Political Fraud in History. http://www.stevemoxon.co.uk/identitypoliticsandpc.php


Friday, April 08, 2016

 

[Re-post] BBC Archers travesty of the researched reality of domestic violence, which is of MALE not female victims in the main

[Re-post because of imposter posting despite password changes]

The BBC across all its broadcasting continues relentless extreme totalitarian gross misrepresentation of the nature of domestic violence. The now very well evidenced conclusion that most domestic violence – and particularly that most extreme domestic violence is FEMALE-perpetrated – the BBC tries to hide in the Archers storyline by the woman being provoked by 'controlling' behaviour, when in reality the partner most likely to be 'controlling' is the female; this being the basis of domestic violence being predominantly BY women & girls.

This is because pair-bonding, we now know, evolved in the female, not the male interest. Women and girls try to exert control on their male partners to prevent them defecting, because female mate-value – fertility and how this is variously signalled – declines rapidly with age, and the female requires the male to repel any socio-sexual interest by lower-quality males (so as to facilitate access by males of still higher quality than the partner).

* See my several papers reprinted at stevemoxon.co.uk

Eg; Moxon SP (2014) Partner violence as female-specific in aetiology. New Male Studies 3(3) 69-92. http://www.newmalestudies.com/...

ABSTRACT
Male-specific self-inhibition of violence towards women, corresponding to an evolutionarily highly-conserved male-specific dedicated neural pathway, and a female-specific actual preference in a couple context for physically violent e_xpression of aggression, prompted by oxytocin (the very hormone underpinning pair-bonding): these findings together indicate that a new theory of partner violence [PV] is required, with a female-specific aetiology. This anyway is apparent from the great disparity between the actual and predicted sex-differential in PV injury rates; the only plausible inference from which is overwhelming female compared to male perpetration. It is conceivable that what male-perpetrated PV there may be is by aberrant (psycho-pathological) individuals, with the remainder of male-on-female violence rather than being PV per se – directed as such, with intent to cause harm – is better understood as by displacement from male intra-sexual aggression.
The basis of a female-specific PV aetiology is that pair-bonding is now known to have evolved in the female interest to maximise female fertility, and therefore at root women have a stronger interest in preventing partner defection – manifesting in 'controlling' b_ehaviour which may become violent -- whereas at root men would have little to lose if not something to gain.
Reviews and studies for decades have shown that PV is perpetrated at least as much by women; but now evident in data is that this is predominantly so – in many and the most important respects by multiples. This new understanding of PV is a reversion to what in former times would have been the intuitive, popular view of the phenomenon, before the imposition of an extreme ideological conception of a supposed 'patriarchal' [sic] 'terrorism' [sic] of exclusively or predominantly male perpetration.
Though now comprehensively discredited, this persists, as it was created, through a need within the political-Left mindset to salve cognitive-dissonance regarding the failure of Marxist theory. In blaming 'the workers', envisaged as being all-male; they were replaced, as the supposed new 'disadvantaged' and 'oppressed' in need of 'liberation', by the generic category of all women. Consequently, it became imperative both to deny the extent and even the existence of PV that is female-on-male, whilst inflating levels of male-on-female PV and falsely ascribing to it a special perniciousness. Being in line with deep-seated pro-female and anti-male prejudice rooted in the biological imperative to control male access to sex, what would otherwise be seen as arcane political posturing, instead has appeared plausible.







This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?