Thursday, 17 April 2014

Lib Dems Steal UKIP policy

When is a cut not a cut? When it is actually only a postponed increase. On the Oxford Lib Dem website, the Coalition's decision to postpone the RISE in petrol tax is presented as a "cut" in true Newspeak style:-
Commenting on the news that the Coalition Government has decided to postpone the August fuel duty rise, Jean said...

The smug leaflets being circulated by the Lib Dems boast that they have created "a stronger economy in a fairer society" The truth is that we are borrowing £1 billion per month to pay vast subsidies to the nations in the EU's single currency zone, so that the euro currency can stay afloat. Hundreds of thousands of angry people are demonstrating in France and Spain against EU economic policies. In Greece millions have just left, in despair. The Lib Dems' fairer society is neither liberal nor democratic. It means that EU commissioners and bankers are telling elected politicians what to do. Meanwhile there is a new class of fat cat eurocrat basking in the sun, enjoying a billionaire lifestyle at our expense. Their luxury mansions cost us as much as £25,000 per MONTH. What exactly do these EU ambassadors do for you and me? Nothing. They may now and then interfere clumsily in the Ukraine and try to stir up a war, but most of the time they are just chatting to each other in posh restaurants and lolling by the side of their pools. With the Lib Dems what you see is NOT what you get.

EU diplomat’s home costs £25,000 a month

[yes per month...not year...month. NO AUSTERITY FOR THEM]
 Irene Horejs, the Dominican Republic ambassador, inset, lives in a luxury villa
Irene Horejs, the EU's Dominican Republic ambassador, lives in a luxury villa (Orlando Barria)

THE property bill for the European Union’s diplomatic arm
has reached almost £69m a year, much of it spent on luxury
homes for EU representatives.
The Spanish EU ambassador to Russia is living in a rented
residence costing £25,000 a month and the Dutch EU ambassador
to Hong Kong is in an apartment that costs almost £17,000 a month.
MEPs in charge of controlling the budget have criticised the
expenditure as “outrageous” because many of the European
 diplomats live in homes whose cost greatly exceeds local
property prices.
In 2011 alone, the European External Action Service (EEAS),
 effectively the EU’s foreign office, which is run by Labour peer
 Baroness Ashton, signed contracts for its employees’ private
residences worth more than £55m. At the same time, an internal
 audit report found that the overall financial management of
embassies was either “not satisfactory” or "insufficient” in
33% of the cases examined.

One funny thing though...the Lib Dems' election leaflet boasts that
 they have reduced tax for the average family by £700 per year.
 Raising the income tax threshold is a policy they strongly opposed
 when the Conservatives first suggested it. And where did the
 Conservatives get it from? From the UKIP manifesto where it had
been for several years before...

Monday, 14 April 2014

The Brothelhood of Man

Amnesty International used to be a respected organization that spoke with moral authority.  I was a member for many years and supported it actively in many ways. When it devoted itself to "Prisoners of Conscience" it had a high moral cause and a high moral profile. By patient, dedicated research and correspondence, the old Amnesty helped, supported and gained the release of many famous or obscure victims of state tyranny who would otherwise have been forgotten by the world. We wrote letters to enquire about people who had disappeared in police or state custody, and to give support to their family.
Founded in the 1960s, by the Roman Catholic lawyer, Peter Benenson, who died in 2005, Amnesty undoubtedly did a lot of good. Then it was taken over  -  hi-jacked I would say  - by dubious people with a range of increasingly dubious agendas. 

A smiling bespectacled 70-year-old man lights a candle

Instead of campaigning for victims of political tyranny, it started to follow trendier causes of the permissive era. When it started to promote "reproductive rights" including of course abortion, many members dropped out, and we in Headington could no longer meet at the Roman Catholic convent. Many of the old faithful fund-raisers went on supporting it and I wonder how many of them were aware of what was happening. Campaigning to abolish the death penalty sounded very idealistic but when you looked at the details it meant that Amnesty was campaigning on behalf of violent criminals, some of them serial killers. At this stage I dropped out, feeling that my priority would always be helping the innocent, and when there were no more innocent victims to help, then I would turn my mind to the plight of the murderers and psychopaths.

Amnesty has now gone so far downhill it is hardly recognizable. It has published a new policy document calling for the legalization of prostitution world-wide. It is calling prostitution "Human Rights". In this document, we find a gruesome hotch-potch of left-wing euphemism and ethical deformity. Equal right of access to prostitution is now proclaimed to be a Human Right! Yes the old, the ugly, the poor and the disabled must according to the new Amnesty, get their rightful entitlement to some "sex services" from "sex workers" to enhance their "quality of life."  The grossness of this is beyond belief. Prostitution must be "non-discriminatory"!!!! 
Does that mean that a customer cannot complain if he is offered a hideous old one-legged hag instead of the nubile young thing he was seeking? He cannot complain if he pays for a woman and gets a man in a dress, because that would be "transphobia"? 
 This sketch, as they used to say in Monty Python, is getting silly. 
The document starts  -
Policy Overview
Amnesty International is opposed to the criminalization or punishment of activities related to the buying or selling of consensual sex [notice that the word "sex" is used to mean a service, a commodity, whereas it really means a category, male or female] between adults. Amnesty International believes that seeking, buying, selling and soliciting paid sex are acts  protected from state interference as long as there is no coercion, threats or violence associated with those acts. Legitimate restrictions may be imposed on the practice of sex work if they comply with international human rights law (i.e., they are for a legitimate purpose, appropriate to meet that purpose, proportionate and non-discriminatory). Amnesty International believes states have a positive obligation to reform their laws and develop and implement systems and policies that eliminate discrimination against those engaging in sex work. Additionally, states must actively seek to empower the most marginalized in society, including through supporting the rights to freedom of association of those engaging in sex work, establishing frameworks that ensure access to appropriate, quality health services and safe working conditions, and through combating discrimination or abuse based on sex, sexual orientation and/or gender identity or expression."

What a lot of twaddle. Prostitution is by definition a form of abuse based on sex, and will always be dangerous regardless of how much money the state pours into "appropriate, quality health services and safe working conditions." A lot of the girls are trafficked and brought from one continent to another to exist as virtual slaves. The position Amnesty is taking up denies the moral dimension and condones the behaviour of the customers (mainly men) who behave in this way. It endorses and normalizes that behaviour, and calls on the state to patch up the symptoms. Why should we all take responsibility so that pimps can make a fortune?

Amnesty chief Colm O'Gorman gets a salary of E 99,000 per year. That is typical of the way men still exploit women. All the years that I was involved in Amnesty, I and the other volunteers, mainly female, were paid nothing. Not a penny. Many of the older supporters and fund-raisers I know are also women. They are being exploited by these unsavoury, self-seeking individuals at the top, who babble about "human rights" and all the time are crusading for crap.

Sunday, 13 April 2014

A Chance to Save Temple Cowley Swimming Pool

Something makes me think there must be a local government election coming along...
No, Oxford City Council has not suddenly decided to cough up the funds to refurbish Temple Cowley Swimming Pool, but it has made a concession that gives the campaigners some hope of saving it, ONLY if they can take it over as a business and keep it operational on an independent basis. They will need investment and a proper business plan.

From Save TCP website
The Council has approved our nomination for Temple Cowley Pool to be registered as an Asset of Community Value.*
> <>
 This means we have six months to put together a proposal to take over, develop and operate TCP. We already have some wonderful ideas, and a financially viable business plan along with lots of support from organisations and professionals wanting to be involved. We want you all to
be involved too, so welcome anyone who can volunteer to help with the project. And, because this is a community venture focused on retaining the services you want and need, where you want and need them, we want your
 *This does NOT mean that Temple Cowley Pool is saved*, just that we have more time and are part of a process that enables us to put a plan forward. We will continue to need everyone's help, including lobbying your councillors, especially with the local elections in May. *Meanwhile, our 7th Petition is debated in Council on Monday 14th April, 7pm, Town Hall, St Aldates. Please come down and watch our councillors debate our request to work together with them for a solution to keep TCP running.*

 And a reminder that if you haven't signed our latest online petition on 38 Degrees, please do so 
here <>


Wednesday, 9 April 2014

I Accuse...all those Responsible for the Shameful Injustice to Brendan Eich

To the shame of America, Brendan Eich, the co-founder of the Mozilla company, and the man who invented Java-script, has been forced out as its Chief Executive, merely because he opposed same-sex "marriage". If you use Mozilla Firefox, ditch it now!

Brendan Eich

This new Macarthyism shames democracy and proves what Anglican Mainstream has been saying for so long, that homo-fascism is a threat to fundamental Human Rights. Brendan Eich has a basic right to work regardless of his beliefs. He also has a right to participate in the civic life of his country, and a democratic right to scrutinize, support or reject whatever changes to the law are demanded by whatever group. He peacefully exercised that right. He was victimized by a queer mafia that takes a vindictive pleasure in bullying and abusing people.
Soon after his appointment these homo-fascist busybodies pried into his past and discovered that he donated $1,000 to "Prop 8" the campaign to stop same-sex marriage in California. Then the homo-fascists set out to target him, just like the Nazis, who got anyone who refused to join their party sacked. 
Below you will find links to two petitions that try to do something about this shocking injustice. First I want to list some of the people responsible for what has happened to Brendan Eich. Not just the homo-fascists but all the weak dithering liberals who have appeased them.
I ACCUSE Barack Obama, who capitulated to the pressure and the Hollywood money, and started to support "gay" marriage.
I ACCUSE the European Union, which spends hundreds of millions of pounds every year on promoting the barmy, sick LGBT agenda, even to the point of dictating to non-member states and spreading lies systematically.
I ACCUSE the UN which now bribes independent nations to introduce LGBT demands instead of the Human Rights they were established to uphold.
I ACCUSE the BBC, and all our TV channels, for promoting LGBT ideas uncritically and one-sidedly in too many ways to mention.
I ACCUSE newspapers such as the Guardian and Huffington Post for queer bias, and even the Daily Mail for printing reports of undoubtedly fake hate-attacks invented by LGBTs for publicity purposes.
I ACCUSE Amnesty International, which has been taken over by some of the nastiest LGBT bullies you can imagine.
I ACCUSE David Cameron who has abandoned the principles of the Conservative party and got elected under false pretences.
I ACCUSE Nick Clegg who is a dummy, leading a party totally infiltrated by LGBT extremists pursuing nothing but their own crazy agenda.
I ACCUSE the Labour Party, who under Tony Blair introduced the Trojan horse of LGBT legislation under the misnomer of "equality", and let nutters run our state school system.
I ACCUSE all the leaders and officials of political parties and professional bodies who have caved in to threats and tantrums from LGBT extremists.
I ACCUSE Justin Wellby, Archbishop of Canterbury, who has cringed and crawled to the self-appointed queer mafia of England and is being visibly manipulated by them. He too has Brendan Eich's blood on his hands.
I ACCUSE other pseudo-bishops such as Alan Wilson the Bishop of Buckingham, who has such an inflated opinion of himself it is surprising he does not float up into the stratosphere.
I ACCUSE feeble vicars such as the Rev Tim Stead of Headington Quarry, who thinks he needs to go along with LGBT notions to make himself look "cool".
I ACCUSE Pope Francis, who has made compromising, dithering public statements to appease the homo-fascist contingent.
I ACCUSE pious Anglican blogger "Archbishop Cranmer" who allows his blog to be just another outlet for LGBT bullying, abuse and propaganda  -- as if there weren't enough of those already.
I ACCUSE feeble academics such as Professor Kitty Datta who says we mustn't argue or scrutinize LGBT demands because "my daughter's gay". That is pathetic. Why should Brendan Eich be bullied and unjustly treated because your daughter's a hung-up man-hater?
I ACCUSE Prof Niall Fergusson and Prof. Roger Scruton, who both when challenged backed down from their views and crawled to the homo-fascist bullies. Every time someone does this it makes the bullies stronger and life harder for innocent people like Brendan Eich.
I ACCUSE all the universities in Europe and America, including Oxford, Cambridge and the Catholic universities, for allowing homo-fascist dictatorship to encroach on intellectual freedom and integrity.
I ACCUSE film stars like Daniel Radcliffe who let themselves be used to promote the LGBT agenda, when they are too young and foolish to understand how they are being manipulated.

And now here are the petitions - 

This is an online petition to the Mozilla Company asking it to reconsider its hasty decision about Brendan Eich. He has the right to work and hold his views in a supposedly democratic country. So do we all. 

>>Will you join citizens from around the world in taking the NoZilla pledge?
Together our statement will be heard: "We do not support companies that do not support freedom of speech and conscience rights” -- starting with Mozilla (FireFox)
If you agree, please sign the NoZilla pledge:
Brendan Eich, the (now former) CEO of Mozilla -- which created and maintains the Firefox web browser – was forced to resign for supporting the true definition of marriage as only between 1 man and 1 woman.
Eich donated $1000 to a campaign formed to protect the definition of marriage in California (the famously known "Prop 8”). LGBT groups publicized this information and called on the Mozilla Corporation Board of Directors to fire Eich.
Mozilla caved to the request of the LGBT group by forcing Eich to resign.
Are we not entitled to our freedom of speech? What about our rights of conscience? Or -- what about our right to be politically active without consequences? All of this was taken away from Brendan Eich.
This request is a call to action to do more than signing a petition. Please be one of the #NoZilla pledge signers to #DumpFireFox!
To sign the NoZilla pledge:
Additionally -- Within this pledge, we have included instructions on how to uninstall FireFox.


Mozilla Co-Founder Brendan Eich Resigns as CEO, Leaves Foundation Board
You can "Like" Brendan Eich on Facebook. I have just done so. If lots of people did the same, it might get our message across.

Why Should MPs Get Cheap Champagne?

Members of Parliament are meant to be in the House of Commons to work. Yet tests on the outward drainage system have shown that some of them have drugs in their system and they enjoy a range of bars and common-rooms that provide cheap wine, beer, and spirits. Why? They should not be allowed to drink on the job. Alcohol is not permitted in most work-places. It is not conducive to them doing a better job and there is no reason at all why the tax-payer should be subsidizing it. Their so-called independent body just awarded them a pay rise of 11%, far more than the average working person. Let them pay for their own food and drink, and pay the full cost.

Pounds in their pocket: the test of whether or not MPs are worth the extra income will be taken at the ballot box
In the House of Commons restaurant, they get five-course meals, wines and spirits far below the cost of any restaurant outside. 
According to the Telegraph, which exposed the original MPs' expenses, scandal, the fare in the House of Commons restaurant is ultra-posh.
"In the Members Dining Room, MPs are served an artichoke and tomato salad with truffle dressing for £2.05, or a seared breast of pigeon with aubergine purée and spiced couscous for just £4.15.

A risotto of pea and broad bean with Golden Cross goat’s cheese costs £2.40, while MPs wishing to splash out on a char-grilled rib-eye steak with hand-cut chips and béarnaise sauce pay £7.80.
For pudding, they can enjoy a green tea and white chocolate brûlée for £2.05 or the cheese board for £3.10.
In the Terrace restaurant, a spinach, ricotta and sundried tomato pizza with a rocket salad costs £2.75, while at Moncrieff’s restaurant Members can enjoy a roasted half spring chicken with stuffing for £2.95.
Afterwards, they can head to the Pugin Room bar, where a glass of malt whisky, Cointreau liqueur or Grand Marnier costs £2.55. Glasses of 2009 Sauvignon Blanc or 2010 Merlot are £2.35."
And Parliament has altogether NINETEEN restaurants and NINE bars.
 They would have to pay three or four times that much anywhere else for such gourmet menus. 
Since the last General Election, the amount of money we pay for their cheap food and booze has gone soaring up. It amounts to £7 million per year. With 650-odd MPs that means each of them is costing you and me roughly a thousand pounds per year in subsidized meals and drinks, and it is a fact that they are now drinking more champagne than ever before. Yes, in this time of so-called austerity, they are popping the corks of bottles of Dom Perignon and Veuve Cliquot and making us foot the bill. 
This has to stop.
Amazingly, an e-petition on this subject got only 13,000 signatures!

The response was feeble  - it said that regulating this matter lies with the House of Commons itself!
The petition should be re-opened and it deserves a million signatures.
I think that there should be no alcohol served anywhere in the House of Commons. MPs are there to work and should be sober. If they can't follow that rule, they are not fit to be representing us or legislating for us. Drunkenness explains a lot about the ludicrous mistakes they have made in the past twenty years and the crass laws they have passed. A tea-room should be all they get. If they want to drink they should go out to a pub and if they want to eat gourmet food, they should pay at a restaurant like anyone else.

Oh No Here Comes Ian Hudspeth with another new scheme

The Oxfordshire County Council tells us it has not got enough money to build a safe crossing over the A40 between Risinghurst and Barton, or to repair the road bridge over the Eastern by-pass to Shotover. It leaves the major road into Oxford from London in a shocking state for year after year, with a road surface that looks as if a bomb hit it, and a haphazard so-called "cycle lane" along the pavement where bikes can collide with pedestrians and have to dodge around lamp-posts and bus-stops.
Then it comes up with grandiose schemes to spend tens of millions on a mono-rail system around the ring road, and install trams (yes trams!) in St Giles. The infamous Ian Hudspeth who was responsible for messing up the city centre with his schemes ten years ago is behind this nonsense too.

Oxfordshire trams

We are being flashed artists' impressions of an updates St Giles, paved in concrete and invaded by super-trams that look like Eurostar. It's ugly, it's insensitive to our historic city, and it is nonsense. We don't need to ban cars from yet more of Oxford. Banning cars in one place leads to congestion in others. What we need is just the commonsense to allow traffic, including low-emission buses, to pass straight through the centre of the town as it used to do. The pedestrianized centre created by Ian Hudspeth is inconvenient, cluttered by buskers and trivial stalls, and it has not helped the existing markets and shops to do more business.
Where does the County Council imagine it is going to find the money to enlarge Oxford train station or to re-build Frideswide Square? The latter has already had millions spent on it, and now the County Council is condemning it as a "cluttered congested junction". 

Of course its a cluttered, congested junction, because people coming in and out of the city need to get through it in their cars or on buses. The Council's idea for improving anything is always to ban traffic, thus crippling transport. They would have done better to leave it alone in the first place.
More pictures of the County Council's grandiose, silly ideas can be seen on its website.
And yes, the website address below is correct with a misspelling of Frideswide. She's only the Saint who founded Oxford and set up the cathedral and the university so what does she matter?

Monday, 7 April 2014

Catherine Bearder Libdem Disregards Human Rights

The lead candidate for the Liberal Democrats in the EU elections on May 22nd 2014 is Catherine Bearder, now an MEP, who has a terrible record on Human Rights.
She approves of Human Rights being disregarded and trampled on. She has put this in writing.
I wrote to Catherine Bearder asking her whether she approved of the Law Society banning a conference of Christian lawyers scheduled to be held there on May 23rd 2012.  These lawyers were paid-up members of the Law Society which means that they were entitled to use the premises so long as they booked it through the official procedures. This they had done. Then at the last minute they were kicked out. 
After the usual two-week delay, Ms Bearder replied that she did not wish to challenge the Law Society's decision.
She thought they had a "right" to do what they liked on their own premises. 
Oh have they indeed? What about the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 18, the right to freedom of religion, and Article 19, the right to freedom of expression, and Article 20, the right to peaceful assembly?
What would be the reaction if any public body banned a Muslim conference? We would have riots and blood on the streets. All the liberal-leftie media would bend over backwards to make it clear that they were not anti-islamic. So why is it OK to ban Christians?
Bearder's letter was short, impatient and did not even stop to consider the human rights issues I had raised. She has no interest in representing you, the voters.

Four other MEPs, James Elles, Sharon Bowles, Keith Taylor and Peter Skinner have not bothered to reply. We can take it they are also anti-Christian and opposed to freedom of speech. This is not just a matter for concern to Christians, or to religious people. It is our fundamental human rights being eroded.
Originally posted FRIDAY, 25 MAY 2012