Sunday, 30 December 2012

Bring Back Fox-Hunting Now

Driving through a London suburb the other day, I saw a red fox trot boldly across the road in broad daylight with a smile on its face, as if it expected the traffic to get out of its way. It was near to a supermarket and perhaps it was interested in the contents of the shop's rubbish bins.
Thanks to Labour's anti-hunt legislation, there are now at least 250,000 foxes in the UK and about one in five of them is roaming at large through the suburbs of London and other cities. They plague every town, village and farm in the country. They can't help being carnivores, but as their numbers rise they are looking further and further afield for food. They damage crops and attack chickens, ducks, rabbits and geese if they can get hold of them. Gnawing their way through wooden sheds and steel mesh, they kill every bird in the coop, not just the one or two they can eat. They leave behind a mangled mess of blood, bones and feathers. You would have to house your poultry in a brick barn with iron doors to make it really fox-proof. Free-range poultry are particularly vulnerable.
Sentimentalists claim that foxes rarely attack humans or even other animals unless they are attacked first but this does not correspond to experience. In in Hackney, East London, recently a fox attacked and mauled two baby girls lying in a cot. The fox entered the house at night, through a ground-floor window and went upstairs following the scent of the children. Their parents Pauline and Nick Koupparis heard cries and came into the room but the fox was completely unafraid of them. By the time they fought it off, both children were badly mauled and had to be taken to the Great Ormond Street Hospital. 9-month-old Isabella was particularly badly injured, and needed intensive care, while her twin sister Lola will be facially disfigured for life.

Council pest control installed a trap in the Koupparis's garden and later turned up and shot that particular fox, but not long afterwards, another child was attacked by a fox in North London. Marius Rook, aged five, woke up screaming when a fox broke into his bedroom and bit his ear. He rushed to his mother's room and she rang the police, who merely used a rope to drag the fox into the garden, then released it. They told her that to destroy it would be inhumane.
In Brighton, in June 2010, a three-year-old boy was playing outside when he was bitten by a fox, which was living in the playground of the Dorothy Stringer nursery. The child was treated for injuries at the Royal Sussex county hospital. In 2002, mother Sue Eastwood reported that her baby boy, Louis, was injured when a fox crept into the house in Dartford, Kent while she slept. The fourteen-week-old suffered bite marks on his head.

Only last month, in November 2012, there were three cases of people attacked by foxes. In Sidcup, Mrs Louisa Power, 46, was pounced on by a fox as she walked home with her shopping. The fox ran off with her bag of food! On 21st November two teenagers, Kelly Lloyd and Jack Larkins, of Bexley, south-east London, were attacked by a fox as they stood at a bus stop. The animal bit Jack on the foot. The most serious case was that of an angler in East Sussex who woke up in his tent to find a fox sinking its teeth into his face! Andrew Thomas managed to suffocate the fox with his hands, but if he had been a child he would have stood little chance. He needed 26 stitches in his face, and nearly lost an eye.

Animal-lovers will persist in deluding themselves that all creatures are lovable and can be treated as pets. Martin Hemmington, founder of the National Fox Welfare Society, a rescue charity that treats and feeds sick foxes, admits he has been bitten many times in the line of duty, but still denies that foxes are dangerous. These people can delude themselves - but should they delude us?

The Boxing-Day meet used to be part of our British tradition, until it was outlawed by Labour, which has no love for our customs and culture, and no understanding of why hunting existed in the first place. Although I never ride and certainly never hunt (I have never killed any animal in my life apart from perhaps a few wasps) I would be happy to see the tradition revived. The anti-hunt lobby has created a problem for all of us, and the arguments they use are overwhelmingly sentimental or emotive. They know little about foxes and nothing at all about agriculture. When you tell them that foxes need to be kept down on farmland, they get hysterical and start accusing you of being a "sadist" who gets a "thrill" from seeing or contemplating an animal being hunted. If you're faced with a fanatic like that, try telling them that they are sadists who enjoy thinking about babies having chunks bitten out of their faces.

***10th February 2013. Another baby attacked by a fox in Bromley, London. Baby's finger bitten off. This situation is getting worse.

Saturday, 29 December 2012

Why Do We Hate Ourselves?

The Times weekend supplement for the Christmas season features a front-page photograph of a family, with the headline "Are you having a smug middle-class Christmas?" Inside, the cheery festive mood is kept up with a two-page quiz, "How middle-class is your Christmas? Take our test," all illustrated in full colour.
It is not only Christmas decorations and board-games with the family that are now supposed to make us squirm and cry "Bah, humbug!" The article launches a guilt-attack on everything from wood-burning stoves to Christmas cards. Guilt, guilt, guilt and snobbery galore. We are told that the bottles of wine we take when we visit friends are a "payment" and that the same ones are likely to come back to us. Rubbish, they get drunk on the spot and there is nothing wrong with being middle class. Unless we are all multi-millionaires or paupers, there is bound to be a middle class, end of story. Why is it that the people who read the Times newspaper are supposed to feel so guilty about celebrating Christmas, and why is it "smug" to have a good time? If that means it would be better not to enjoy ourselves, or to writhe in self-criticism and a sense of failure, well - stuff that!!! We don't need to hate ourselves to be moral.
The family in the photograph - mother, father and three children - are being subjected to a ritual humiliation because they are white, heterosexual, reasonably well-off and actually or nominally Christian. They are not vegetarian, unemployed, drug-addicts, in an ethnic minority, a one-parent household or anything else trendy, so they must be sneered at and snubbed like one of Anne Robinson's victims on her nasty TV quiz. I think that Britain is the only country I know that would indulge in this sort of masochism at Christmas, of all times. It reveals a national self-hatred that is unhealthy, negative and harmful.
In Saudi Arabia you are not allowed to celebrate Christmas. Last Wednesday night the religious police swooped on the house of a foreign diplomat there and arrested 41 people for doing just that. They were accused of being drunk and defying the laws against non-muslim religious observance. All the men and women present were taken away in police vans and are now in custody under conditions that will make them feel far from "smug". Is that what we want? Is that where our national self-loathing leads us?

Britain used to be a rich, proud and powerful nation. It has plummeted down in the last fifty years until it is now an omni-shambles, a poor, indebted, crippled country, that cannot even govern itself, or find homes for the injured servicemen who come back from Afghanistan and Iraq. We are torn apart by extremist ideologies, crying for the "rights" of prisoners to have votes or children or some such nonsense, and our education is lamentable. The only morality that seems to survive in some circles is a lingering guilt about being "middle class". This sort of self-hatred is the way to make our problems worse. We need to have a glimmering of self-respect if we are ever going to find our way out of the mess that we are in.

Saturday, 22 December 2012

Equally Stupid

Not content with slapping an extra £ billion or so on our contributions as a last-minute Christmas gift, the EU is now forcing women to pay far more for their car insurance. Any woman driver who renews her insurance or takes out a fresh policy will find that the cost is up to £300 more than last year, thanks to the EU's new rules on "gender equality". The change will hit young women hardest, and they are usually the ones who have the least money.
Of course insurance companies will not reduce the premiums they charge men drivers, so the result is in the aggregate for everyone to be paying more.

At the same time the EU is enforcing gender equality rules on annuity schemes, that will cost men up to £10,000 in their retirement. "Under the EU Gender Directive, firms will no longer be able to use a pension holder's sex as a factor when calculating annuity offers." Because men have a shorter life expectancy, they typically got an offer of a higher income in return for their premiums. But Gender Equality rules are abolishing that from this week. Result: men will pay the same, and end up getting less. Women will pay the same and be no better off. There are no winners in this game.
Two more examples of how the EU is making us all poorer all the time.

These rules of gender equality are barmy. They reveal a modern obsession with equality to the exclusion of common sense. Women, particularly young women, drive more carefully than men and have fewer accidents. This is because men and women are different. Risk-taking is only one of dozens of respects in which male and female are dissimilar. Life-expectancy is another. Modern science long ago disproved the nonsensical claim of Simone de Beauvoir "One is not born a woman, one becomes a woman." Beauvoir, writing in about 1948, had little or no scientific understanding of the matter. One is born either a male or a female baby, and only a female baby can become a woman. Our chromosomes and our hormones affect all of our mental, physical and emotional development. But the EU goes on enforcing notions that are 60 years behind the times.
The obsession with removing all discrimination is just not realistic. What is discrimination? Discrimination means treating two different things as if they are not the same. Because they're not.
Of course the lefties and EU-apologists will brush this aside. They will tell us it is "petty" to complain about financial loss when we are part of such a wonderful big scheme, and they will very likely claim that the whole story was invented by the Daily Mail!!! Before you believe them - wait till you see your next car insurance bill.

Thursday, 20 December 2012

Miliband Stealing UKIP policies

What a very slippery, rubbery individual the leader of the Labour Party is. Flip-flop is an understatement. He can't make up his mind about the EU, he can't make up his mind about the unions, and now he is playing up to people's anxieties about uncontrolled immigration because one of his back room boys has told him that's the way the wind is blowing.
The Census results revealed that the policy of completely open borders has led to unparalleled numbers of people coming to this country, and that white Britons are now a minority in London. Well, surprise, surprise. Who didn't know that? Only somebody who never goes to London. If you stop in the street in London and ask people, "Is this Hyde Park?" the most likely answer you will get is "I don't know, I don't come from here, I just got off a plane" - that's assuming they understand English at all, which half of them don't. Quite a few people seem to be worried about this, and Ed is doubtless worried about UKIP's steady rise in the polls and the by-election results, so he went to Tooting and made a speech that said what a wonderful thing immigration was...BUT. The first part of his speech said all the usual things about how wonderful it is to be multi-ethnic and multi-cultural (note how he puts Christians last in his list of religious beliefs), then the second half said that people are coming in too fast and there is a problem assimilating too many all at once.
When he says "But at the same time we know there is anxiety about immigration. And what it means for our culture. The answer is not to sweep it under the carpet. Or fail to talk about it. Or say that people are prejudiced," this certainly makes a refreshing change. So does this mean Labour supporters will no longer be vilifying UKIP as racist?
Eddie the Unsteady is trying to have it both ways. He is a hypocrite when he says "we must control our borders". The fact is that because we are in the EU we cannot control our borders. And when he says that the answer is to control non-EU immigration more tightly, isn't that racist? After all, the black people are more likely to come from outside the EU.
Ed denied that there is a problem with multi-culturism. "Some people say that what we should aim for is what they call assimilation. They say that people can come here and be part of our culture but only on the condition that they just abandon theirs. Why is this vision so wrong for our country? Because it ignores fundamental truths about the British people and who we are." The example he used was a young woman who had just enjoyed an African-style party in Leicester with her family who came from Sierra Leone. And that was fine - it was her way of being British. Ed asserted that there is nothing wrong with "The reality of our multiple identities."
So does that mean that if her community wants to force her into an arranged marriage or cut off her clitoris that's OK too?
Ed shied away from ugly problems like that.
"We must live together across communities. Overcoming division, without asking people to lose their sense of themselves. A Britain where people of all backgrounds, all races, all ethnicities, all cultures, can practise their own religion, continue their own customs, but also come together to forge a new and better identity. But here is the challenge: to make this work, we’ve all got to work at it. We are one of the few countries in Europe without a comprehensive strategy for integration."
Maybe but we are not the only country in Europe to have problems with assimilation. Many of them feel that there are separate cultures. In Holland legal prostitution, legal drugs and "gay" marriage co-exist uncomfortably with women walking around wearing the burka. In Germany and Sweden the problem of Muslims attacking and terrorizing Jews is a mounting one. What exactly is Mr Miliband's strategy for making people with incompatible views live together and successfully interact?
It is flattering that he has taken some ideas out of the UKIP manifesto. Firstly, to demand that all immigrants learn English, and make this a requirement for those working in the public sector. But he can't do that with EU migrants because they have a right to work here. And what if the communities themselves don't want to assimilate or be integrated? That is a question he did not even raise.

Mr Miliband's speech was superficial and provided no real answers to our problems. Here is a tough question. Will Mr Miliband and the Labour party support Baroness Cox's Arbitration and Equality Bill, which seeks to liberate Muslim women from the self-appointed jurisdiction of Sharia courts? So far it is getting a very rough ride in the House of Lords where only Conservative and some Christian peers support it. Yet there are an estimated 85 Sharia courts operating in Britain. Integration? Assimilation?
When I see you championing this Bill in the House of Commons, Mr Miliband, I will believe that you are more than a vacillating windbag.

Tuesday, 18 December 2012

Plebgate Never Happened

It looks as if Andrew Mitchell will be completely exonerated from the charges of being rude to policemen after the release of CCTV footage that does not confirm their story and proves that a so-called eye-witness was not even there.
I apologize unreservedly to Andrew Mitchell for believing the story, and I hope he gets his job back. I was too reluctant to believe that police officers lied. They lied deviously and from motives that have yet to be completely revealed. In future I will be even more sceptical of what we hear in the media.
It's nice to know that public schoolboys do have some manners after all.

Clegg's Brainwave

Nick Clegg has found a way of reducing our budget deficit and paying off our National Debt as fast as we can. What a genius! He was on TV today advocating a means test for the pensioner bus pass.
Until 2006, pensioners only got free bus travel within their local authority area. They could use buses free to go shopping or to their local library or even to visit their MP's surgery and interrogate him or her about how they were voting in parliament. It seemed a reasonable reward for people who had worked and paid tax all their lives. Then the Blair government decided it could afford to be generous, or maybe just buy votes, by extending this to unlimited free travel on all buses anywhere in the country. At first they could use coaches free too. So Granny and Grandpa could now trek across the country to visit their grandchildren instead of staying at home. They could go up to London and shop in Oxford Street then go home to Yorkshire all by bus. Gordon Brown thought the scheme would cost the government £250 million per year but in fact like most Labour ideas it cost far more. Very soon the costs reached £1 billion and by 2009 the free coach travel had to be withdrawn.
In the last election, David Cameron promised that he would not stoop to such ignoble levels as to begrudge a pensioner their bus-pass. He talked as if it was an immemorial right to have free travel all over the country. But Clegg sees it differently. He objects to all those filthy rich pensioners who are getting bus-passes. He says he can save the treasury a lot of money by cutting back on the free travel given to multi-millionaires. "Why should Lord Sugar have a free bus pass?" is his leftie slogan now.
Trouble is that Clegg (who has probably never been on a bus in his life) doesn't seem to know how the system works. The bus companies are only compensated by their local authority for each journey that a pass-holder actually makes. When did anyone last see Lord Sugar using a bus? How many multi-millionaires who can afford cars and maybe chauffeurs to drive them, would go and stand at a bus stop braving the rain, the snow and the germs you pick up from other people? How many pensioners are multi-millionaires anyway? Most of those I know, even those with a bit of money, are worried about having to sell their homes to pay for nursing care when they need it. I suspect that Clegg's rich pensioners are very few and far between, and most of them never go on buses. So in fact his money-saving brainwave will bring almost no savings to the Treasury.
Clegg is a posh boy from a sheltered background and considering that he went to Westminster, it was a poor show only getting into Robinson College, Cambridge. I mean, Robinson, seriously, I ask you? The top Cambridge colleges have names like Pembroke, Queen's and Christ's, not Robinson. Anyway he is now so well-heeled with his EU jobs and EU pensions clocking up that when he retires, he will be able to afford to go everywhere by private helicopter, never mind cars and buses.
This reminds me of a joke about a posh boy who wrote home to his father, an Arab sheikh, from university: "Oxford is wonderful and I love it here, but I feel a bit embarrassed arriving everywhere in my Lamborghini when all the other students, and even the lecturers, travel by train." The reply was, "My dear son, I have transferred $20 million into your account, buy yourself a train."

Saturday, 15 December 2012

Lefties Demonstrate their Ignorance

On December 8th there were 45 demonstrations at Starbucks cafés all over the UK organized by the group UK Uncut. They were protesting at the way that Starbucks avoids paying corporation tax and blaming this for the fact that all over the country services such as refuges for victims of domestic violence are been closed down.
Starbucks responded by offering to pay £20 million in tax that it doesn't actually owe, because nothing they are doing is illegal. Will this make any difference at all to the cuts? Of course not. The EU has just wished us Happy Christmas by slapping another demand for an extra £1 billion per annum on our contributions to its budget.

The piddling little £20 million from Starbucks will vanish into the gaping black hole of EU extravagance and nobody will notice any difference.
Very few of the people who protest at tax avoidance even understand the difference between avoidance (legal) and evasion. They are simply not aware of the fact that the big multi-national corporations such as Vodaphone and Google are just taking advantage of EU legislation. They are entitled to register and operate in any European country and pay their corporation tax in the one with the lowest rates (which may be nil). What would happen if consumers here used people power to urge Vodaphone to pay more tax? They could organize a boycott of buying Vodaphone handsets. Probably it would just close down its manufacturing, making thousands of people in the UK redundant, and set up in China, where there is no corporation tax whatsoever. They would find a massive market for their products in China, India and the oil-rich Middle-Eastern countries.
So is this a solution to our problems with cuts? No way. Actually I have been boycotting Starbucks for a long time, firstly because their coffee is ridiculously over-priced and I know places where you can get takeaway coffee for £1. Secondly I think it is impertinent for a string of mere cafés to tell us what our definition of marriage ought to be. If they want to put froth in their coffee it is one thing, but I don't want to fund their frothy and specious arguments about politics. Just making lattes does not mean you are a legal expert.

The people who demonstrated against Starbucks think that getting more tax into the Inland Revenue will solve our problems. It won't. I think that looking at where the money is going is the first step and generating more jobs is the next. It might well be more helpful to abolish business taxes and thus encourage smaller enterprises to expand than to chase the odd £20 million here or there. But then I am one of those eccentrics who STILL don't realize that the entire EU is a fiction invented by the Daily Mail...

Wednesday, 12 December 2012

So Who Are the Racists?

The Rotherham fostering scandal has had some interesting repercussions. The children in question were from an Eastern European gypsy family and the parents had never wanted to give them up into council care. So why were they interfered with? It looks very much as if Rotherham Social Services has got a policy of picking on gypsy families and telling them they are having too many children and are bad parents.
Sounds racist to me. Of course there are plenty of families of all sorts whose children have been snatched from time to time by bossy social services under a variety of pretexts. There is far too much of this going on. When people say that we need more couples to adopt, as there are so many children in care, they should stop and consider whether those children should ever have been taken from their parents in the first place. A lot of parents even flee this country just for the sake of hanging on to their own kids. We ought to do everything we can to support the natural parents who want to keep their children, helping them solve and cope with problems, not just taking their children away.
When Winston McKenzie, UKIP parliamentary candidate for Croydon North, heard about the Rotherham scandal, he was indignant and made some unguarded remarks about modern-day priorities when it comes to adoption and fostering. He is reported to have said that giving a child to a male homosexual couple is a form of "child abuse". I don't know whether Winston has been reading the research of Professor Mark Regnerus, which would lend some support to his views, but I do think that he is entitled to have his opinion and the fact remains that nobody has a "right" to adopt. Nobody has ever had any such "right" and the welfare of the children is the uppermost concern.
It is the lefties, trendies and Guardianistas of course, who have introduced this barmy notion of a "right to adopt". An academic has just warned the Home Secretary that even convicted paedophiles on the sex offenders register should have this "right to adopt" because otherwise we are denying their Yuman Rights.

Thank goodness there are still some people like Winston McKenzie who, although maybe a bit brusque, have got common sense, and having met him I would say that his heart is in the right place.
The reactions to Winston's comment were so blatantly racist that I didn't know whether to laugh or puke. Here is one typical remark found on Facebook:-

murphypresents Tom Murphy 15h
Look at this black boxking cunt says gay adoption is like child abuse ! Go back up the tree u came down !
Details Reply Retweet Favorite

Hundreds of similar messages appeared on "gay"-rights pages all over the internet, calling Winston a "nigger", a "wog", a "black sh-t", a "foreigner" because he comes from Jamaica and a "monkey-faced moron". They told him to "go back to the jungle" and "go back to where you belong" and one said "he's probably a cannible" (sic) Charming. I love the spelling!

Tuesday, 11 December 2012

Goodbye, Sir Patrick, We Are Missing You Already

"Will be sorely missed...." How often do we hear that polite cliché about public figures when actually we are rather glad to see the back of them?
Not Patrick Moore. He really will be missed. What a marvellous Englishman and what a marvellous character. For years of my childhood he broadcast The Sky At Night and was renowned for talking faster than anybody else on television. The reason was simply that the BBC gave him such a short slot and he was determined to fit the maximum amount of information into it. This was easy to burlesque and he was great parody material - please nobody mention Uranus - but still he genuinely fascinated millions with his astronomical lore. The planets, the stars, the constellations, the comets, the galaxies, the Moon which nobody then had yet set foot on, and even the moons of other planets... he packed incredible amounts of knowledge into his programme and incredible amounts of enthusiasm for his subject too.
Patrick was a great patriot and lied about his age and his health to get into the RAF in Word War II. As a navigator in a bomber crew, he took huge risks and was lucky to get through alive. His fiancée didn't. She was killed in an air raid and he never forgot her.
A few years ago I heard Sir Patrick speak live at a UKIP meeting. He was a loyal, active member of the party from its earliest days, and had no time for any politician who wanted to throw away what so many brave people of his generation had fought and died for - our national sovereignty. He was never taken in by the soft soap and the sugary promises of the political class. What a redoubtable man and if only there were more like him in the younger generation...

Thursday, 29 November 2012

Do We Need Press Controls?

I still don't understand why all the improper behaviour of the British Press uncovered by the Leveson enquiry could not be dealt with in some way by means of the privacy laws or by the Press Complaints Commission.
It is true that the police have not dealt particularly well with all cases of phone-hacking, E-mail hacking, intrusive paparazzi and so on, but would a new body with a new name necessarily be any better? It would not be infallible. Are we quite sure that the cure for press misbehaviour would not be worse than the disease?
Draconian laws and loss of freedom will never really be a substitute for morality. The papers acted without a sense of decency, and now they are threatened with a crackdown that might be the thin end of the state control wedge. What might be desirable is to exploit the competition between news media to keep them on the level. If one paper could expose others for invading privacy, resulting in a costly claim for compensation, might that provide a deterrent? It would plainly be unfair to tie up newspapers in a way that does not apply to the internet. Facebook U-tube and Twitter are all capable of spreading news too.
Very few people today even understand what freedom of speech means. I think the subject should be taught in schools, as a part of General Studies. Freedom of speech means the right to express your own opinion or report facts as truthfully as you can, if necessary in a blunt way. It also includes telling fictions so long as you don't try to pretend they are facts. It does not include abuse, swearing, threatening violence, lying, distorting, or circulating information that is stolen (from a copyright book for example). Public interest arguments complicate matters in some cases, and some information is classified ....but that's not what the Leveson enquiry was about. I have come across ignorant young people who think that libel and slander are part of "freedom of speech". This is a sad indication of how badly our younger generation has been educated. Libel and slander of individuals are not "freedom of speech" and objecting to them is not censorship. They are civil offences to be dealt with in the civil courts by means of private compensation.
Many countries in the world still regard state censorship as an unavoidable evil. The Sultan of Qatar (owner and controller of Al-Jazeera) has just sent a poet to prison for life for daring to criticize him.

The Leveson Report calls for a new watchdog to be set up, but that is not the only source of pressure. At the same time behind the scenes, the EU is pushing for closer controls. Remember that under EU law it is already illegal to criticize the EU. They would love to impose those guidelines and restrictions more rigorously, and that would be a disaster.
The European Commission political officer Marie-Madeleine Kanellopoulou, based in the EU's office in Westminster is reported as saying,
"We are following the Leveson inquiry to see the outcome. In the UK we have to deal with a very euro-sceptical British public and that's not helped by the hostile audience in the British press. We want to engage with the media, with stakeholders and non governmental organisations.... but repeated mis-representation in the media was making communication of the true facts about EU policy difficult...We are trying to rebut EU myths in the press but it is not easy because the Press Complaints Commission has a limited remit".

The danger is under the cover of Leveson, far-reaching powers to control and gag the press could eventually be allowed to creep in. And that is something that we absolutely must not permit to happen.


Monday, 26 November 2012

Stalinists Hacks of Rotherham Foster Myths about UKIP

It seems that the Politburo who run social services in Rotherham think UKIP is a racist party and even think that makes UKIP members unsuitable as foster parents.
How ignorant and bigoted can these lefties get? UKIP's policies are not racist. Yes, we are against granting citizen rights wholesale to an unlimited number of people from the EU - but that is not racist. UKIP's policy is to allow people to come here with a work permit if they are needed to do a specific job, but to keep out criminals, haters of this country and those who arrive just to claim benefits. Under the EU, we cannot discriminate between those groups. They are nothing to do with anybody's skin colour!
People who call us racist ought to ask themselves why Commonwealth citizens such as my sister-in-law who is an Indian citizen, now have to pay £1,000 for a visa to come to England. Yes £1,000! As a matter of fact, she was born in London. She earns a very handsome salary and is not going to be a burden on anyone. Why should she have to pay £1,000 for the right to visit England with her husband, a British citizen, while a Latvian can live here free and claim benefits?
Grow up, Rotherham. And if you don't put those children back, you will be hearing from us...

Friday, 23 November 2012

Prod off, Dave

So David Cameron thinks he needs to give the Church of England a jolly good "prod" from time to time, does he, to tell it what to do? Funny, I thought the reason people had religions was to tell the laity about morals, not for the laity to tell the church.
The fact is that David Cameron is burbling nonsense as usual. It is simply not true that the C of E is behind what he calls "wider society" in its attitudes. Why has there never been a woman head of the Bank of England? Look at our bankers - they are almost entirely men. Why has there never been a woman Chancellor of the Exchequer? Don't tell me that women are less good with money than men are, or I might die laughing. Why has there never been a woman director-general of the BBC?
It seems to have taken all of five minutes leafing through Lord Patten's address book to find the new executive chief of the BBC, and they have of course chosen a man, one with a public-school Oxbridge background. The pay is rumoured to be £800,000 p.a. which certainly exceeds the salaries of bishops. It's a lot more than most of my women friends take home, even if you count their child benefit and council tax rebate.

I don't hear David Cameron complaining. And I don't hear him complaining that the Muslims don't appoint women as imams and mullahs. Anyone who raised that subject would get a bomb pushed through their letter-box tomorrow morning.

Monday, 19 November 2012

Vacillating Miliband Cannot Make Up His Mind

Labour's position on the EU is looking sillier every day. One minute they hold a vote in Parliament against the EU budget increase and defeat the Coalition government, forcing Cameron to exercise his veto at the EU summit meeting.

Next moment, Ed is doing a flip-flop and saying that Britain really does not need vetoes!! He seems to be cringing cap in hand to Brussels and issuing an apology for being a naughty boy. In an interview with the Sunday Telegraph he now says "Britain must stop heading for the EU exit".

I expect that after the vote in the House of Commons, Ed got a stern talking-to from Tony Blair, (who wants to be EU president), Neil and Glynis Kinnock (who have both made a mint out of the EU) and Lord Peter Mandelson, whose glorious career as an EU commissioner reached its zenith on board the yacht of a Russian oiligarch. Mr Miliband probably got angry letters from the Labour MEPs whose lavish life-styles and fat-cat pensions depend on our EU membership.

So after his brief moment as a Eurosceptic, Eddie the Unsteady is now back following the party line and telling us we must stay inside the EU whatever the cost. He is trying to have it both ways, telling the Confederation of British Industry that we must listen to some of the Eurosceptic arguments - yet at the same time refuse to consider leaving.
Er... yes, that's what he said.
Eddie the Unsteady is warning people that there are terrible "dangers" of leaving the EU. He said nothing at all in his speech about the massive costs of remaining inside it. Nothing about the major international strike that rocked six eurozone countries last week. Nothing at all about the appalling suffering of countries such as Portugal where the austerity regime is causing riots. Nothing at all about the removal of democratically elected leaders in Greece and Italy. Nothing about the way we pay to export our own jobs. Only some damn-fool story about how Japanese companies won't invest in us if we talk of leaving the EU.
Ed even asserts "the business community is genuinely very worried. I think they are genuinely worried that we're going to sleepwalk towards an exit under Cameron."
Nervously repeating himself because he knows he sounds so silly. What the business community is actually worried about is the danger of Britain REMAINING in the EU.
Pull the other one, Mr Miliband, it's got bells on it. It seems to me that Ed does not know what he is talking about. He is babbling a lot of nonsense, vacillating from side to side, and gambling on the fact that a percentage of robotic voters still think that voting Labour is just what you've got to do.

Too Depressed to Go to Gaol

So Margaret Moran, the Labour MP who fiddled the expenses system to wrongly claim £53,000, has been spared going to prison, because she told the judge she was "depressed". She cheated justice just as she had cheated her constituents and the tax-payer for so many years. It seems that she just had to get an obliging shrink to write that she was feeling glum, and had a bad case of the the blues, and the judge accepted this as a good enough reason to spare her the custodial sentence that is supposed to be statutory in cases of major financial fraud.
Mrs Moran will not have to go "inside", she will not have to sleep on a hard narrow bunk bed or take meals in a canteen with other felons, because she is depressed at the thought of it - while other convicted criminals are all overjoyed of course.

This may not be the stupidest decision a judge has made in England this year, but it makes you wonder what we have got sitting on our benches.
Did Mrs Moran get soft, sexist treatment? So far all the MPs gaoled as a result of the Parliamentary expenses scandal have been men.

If the court was soft on Mrs Moran it was positively perverse in the case of Abu Qatada. How foolish, how embarrassed, Home Secretary Chris Grayling looked on BBC Question Time last week when forced to explain this. Qatada is not a British citizen and he hates our guts but we can't throw him out and we let him live here on state benefits along with his large family. Jordan has said emphatically that he will not be tortured there but the lawyers paid for on Legal Aid argued that even this was not sufficient assurance. Harriet Harman also took the line that we ought to be able to get rid of Abu Qatada, and was careful not to mention that the reason we cannot do so is the bloody stupid Human Rights Act passed under the Blair Government, in which she was a leading minister. The Human Rights Act brought all the warped notions of the ECHR home to Britain and will forever be the criminal's best friend until it is abolished.
Qatada, who already inhabits a £400,000 house courtesy of the British tax-payer, is now demanding a bigger one to make room for his ever-growing beard. The only member of the panel who talked any sense was Nigel Farage. He could have been forgiven for laughing at the quandary the other panel members found themselves in. After all, doesn't it prove you are a fascist if you say that Britain has any problems at all with - er - immigration? Border control? Citizenship? Cheeky foreigners breaking our laws and then claiming benefits? That's just what you would read in the Daily Mail - isn't it?
I suppose Labour would say it is completely reasonable for Abu Qatada to be suing the UK government for £10 million now, in compensation for wrongful detention.
After all, we've got nothing better to spend that money on, have we? It's fine for children to be denied cancer treatment so that this non-citizen can get his "human rights".

Abu Qatada has something to thank Margaret Moran for. She along with Harriet Harman, was one of the Labour MPs who passed the Human Rights Act, without which Qatada could simply be put on a plane and chucked out of this country. If that happened he might indeed be feeling rather depressed but everybody else (apart from the lawyers) would be jubilant.

Wednesday, 14 November 2012


Today, November 14th 2012, is a historic day.

In six countries across the EU there is a General Strike by citizens and workers, unionized and non-unionized, against the economic policies of the European Union.

Literally millions of people in Portugal, Spain, Italy, Greece, Belgium and France have joined the rallies, marches and protests today. In the streets of capital cities and all big towns they are waving banners denouncing the austerity measures imposed by the EU. They are burning the EU flag, they are denouncing the EU for taking away their democracy and they are very angry indeed. Factories are closed and transport is being disrupted. Emergency services such as firefighters and ambulance drivers are joining the strike and major roads are impassable.

The Brussels-based European Trade Union Confederation called its first “Day of Action and Solidarity” against policies that it says are crippling much of the 17-nation eurozone. Their anger is fuelled by the fact that the EU has suppressed democratic government in Greece and Italy, and treated the elected rulers of Spain and Portugal as puppets to do Mrs Merkel's bidding. Not since Hitler marched into Poland has there been such an impudent overturning of any European democracy.

Armed and helmeted police are manhandling protestors, who scatter leaflets saying "They leave us without a future!" Violence is breaking out everywhere.
This is proof that the policies of the EU have FAILED.
The austerity measures are being imposed to save the euro currency, something the eurocrats are obsessed with, The suffering and desperation of people in the Mediterranean countries is now a MAJOR INTERNATIONAL CRISIS.
This is not just a matter of unemployment statistics. This is a matter of human suffering that we cannot ignore. In Spain, Emaia Egana, a woman who could not pay her mortgage and was being evicted from her home, committed suicide. She jumped from the fourth floor window of her flat, prompting thousands of angry people in the Basque city of Barakaldo to march last weekend in protest against foreclosures and homelessness:-

It is estimated that more than 400,000 families have lost their homes due to unpaid rents since the start of Spain's financial crisis in 2007. What remedy does the EU offer? None but more wage-cuts, pension cuts and mounting taxes. Austerity means people literally scavenging for food in dustbins.
Meanwhile the average pension of the Eurocrats who impose this regime is £5,200 per month. Yes per month. Even in retirement, they are literally living like millionaires, and they are demanding a RISE in their own budget while imposing these crippling cuts and poverty on us plebs;

Only two days ago there were major riots in Warsaw against EU power and influence:-

Hundreds of thousands of people marched there not for the first time, and streets blazed. Polish conservatives realize that the EU, which started by giving them hand-outs, has taken most of their national assets in return and is now imposing a an alien, atheistical morality that is totally against their own beliefs and culture. They have been sold into moral slavery.

It has taken the people of Europe a long time to wake up to the madness of the EU system. They were promised peace, prosperity and a golden future. What they have got now is more like an omnishambles, to use the work just picked as word of the year by the OED.
What can we in England do about it? Well funnily enough there is something. There is an election tomorrow all over England. Even if you don't believe in electing Police and Crime Commissioners, you can use it as a way of showing you care what is happening in France, Spain, Italy, Portugal, Greece and Poland. By voting for the UKIP candidate you can join those brave people protesting in the streets of Rome, Madrid, Lisbon and Athens. You won't have to face guns and truncheons, firebombs and water-cannons, just walk to your local polling booth and if you live in Thames Valley vote for Barry Cooper. To vote for anyone else is to vote for the failed policies and chaos of today's EU.
Labour has not got any answers. The Libdems have got no answers. The Conservatives have got no answers. The Greens have got no answers and can't even make the lights work. Only UKIP in this situation has any policies that make sense. Send a message that these suffering countries MUST be released from the stranglehold of the single currency and must be allowed to elect their own leaders and choose their own policies. National sovereignty must be restored. Oh and we must leave the EU too, by the way.
Don't be inward-looking and bigoted - vote UKIP!!

Thursday, 8 November 2012

EU Fiddling Comes of Age!

It is very important to keep up old traditions, Guy Fawkes, for example. Even though our Parliament has less and less power every year, and is filled with party hacks whose minds are mainly on fiddling their own expenses, we still set off fireworks and light a bonfire in memory of the trouncing of the Gunpowder Plot in 1605. It's fun and I will be going to a local firework display next weekend myself.
Same with the EU accounts. They have not been signed off by the auditors for eighteen years now in succession. The last time they passed inspection was back in 1993. Failing its audit has become a well-established tradition. To change it now would be something of a shock. If the EU, which has just called for a sizeable increase in its funding, was able for just one year to balance its books, able to explain where all its billions are going, I would be taken aback. Happily, it has run according to its track-record and once again made a large amount of our tax-money simply vanish into thin air. Hey presto! A swirl of the cloak, a tap of the cane, and it's gone!

Where are the missing billions? They have slipped into the bank accounts of informal advisors, friends of friends, somebody's wife or husband, somebody's private or fake company, somebody's alter ego under a false name in a distant country. All very traditional.

Traditions can be contagious sometimes. Funnily enough, the Labour MP for Rotherham, Denis MacShane, just suspended by the House of Commons disciplinary committee for fiddling his expenses, was Labour's Europe Minister.
He avoided investigation the first time round by pleading "parliamentary privilege" :-

Meaning that the law is just for plebs!
When Marta Andreassen, former chief accountant of the EU, tried to raise awkward questions about the missing billions, she was dismissed, bullied, intimidated and subjected to reprisals. That is why she is now a UKIP MEP.

Wednesday, 7 November 2012

America Loses Its Own Election

Jim Turner, a Democrat Party supporter from North Carolina, boasted on his Facebook page that he was voting FIVE times in the presidential election. He had already voted four times using postal votes and was going to vote in person as well.

"I have voted once in Beaufort, once in Henderson, twice in Emerald Isle and will vote again in my precinct, in PKS, I will do whatever it takes to save our country from the world envisioned by Mitt and his fear mongering followers. I do not want my granddaughter to have to re-fight the battles won by women 40 years ago or to make less than my grandson for performing the same work he does. This election is not about taxing the wealthy. It is about the American spirit and caring for our fellow man. Let's continue to move forward, not slip in the dark past."

By moving forward, he means into a world ruled by fraud, dishonesty and cheating in public life. One man, one vote is now "the dark past". His granddaughter will be happy to live in a country where her likelihood of getting a job at all is far less than it was in her grandmother's time and he regards that as a triumph!

There can be no doubt that the massive - and highly sophisticated - campaign of electoral fraud run by the Democrats in this and the last USA presidential elections made a difference. An American friend tells me that Obama won in all the states that do not require you to show proof of identity before voting. Not in the others. Curious coincidence, that.
The other decisive factor was that nine million Americans who wanted to vote Republican would not vote for a Mormon. An online survey taken weeks before the election revealed that for a large percentage of Christians this was a major issue. Result? America remains in the hands of an incompetent President, a windbag who can't succeed in either war or peace.
Unemployed, homeless people queuing up for food hand-outs in emergency welfare stations did not vote for Barack Obama to get a second term. It was the middle-class, the class obsessed with political correctness, that voted for Obama. To the middle class, those who still have jobs at all in their sinking economy, sex and sex-related issues were paramount. They ignored the fact that America's national deficit is now even greater than when Obama came to power. The USA owes even more trillions of dollars now to China than it did in 2008, and both of Jim Turner's grand-children will have to spend their lives paying that back. Yet all he cares about is whether his grand-daughter will, if she gets accidentally pregnant, and wants an abortion, be required to pay the $150 herself. $150 seem to count more with him than FIVE TRILLION.

Mr Turner thinks that Mitt Romney's followers are "fear-mongering" does he? So who invented the massacre of the US embassy staff in Libya? Was the murder of Christopher Stevens a fiction? Perhaps Mr Turner is one of those folk who give credence to the 9/11 conspiracy theory - the idea that it was all staged by the Bush government to give them an excuse for a grievous war in Afghanistan etc etc You know the sort of thing. If all this is fear mongering, why exactly is President Obama carrying on his drone-attacks on Taliban targets within Pakistan? Why did he bother to get Osama bin-Laden tidied out of the way?
I'm not expecting Mr Turner and his likes to feel any concern whatever about the persecution of Christians in Pakistan and in those places affected by what is laughably called the Arab Spring. An Anglican church and school in Mardan, Peshawar, have just been burnt down by rampaging Muslims who deliberately burnt all the bibles they could find and desecrated the premises:-

They seem to have forgotten that in the recent floods, the diocese of Mardan provided free emergency help for all the victims, who were mainly Muslim. Wilson Chowdhry of the BPCA said in the news release, “No Christian in Pakistan is safe. Any community whether in a city or in a more rural location can at any time become the target of similar aggression. Please pray for all Christian brothers and sisters in Pakistan.”
Last month, Islamic gunmen attacked the Catholic cathedral in Hyderabad, murdering 28 people:-

Democrats are not in the least worried about such signs, as that would be "fear-mongering". But when they use blatantly illegal tactics such as plastering polling stations with gigantic murals depicting Obama, his campaign slogans and a long list of his promises, they are only revealing the utter contempt Democrats have for "Democracy" itself.
I read a curious story on Mike Huckabee's blog some time ago. It said that way back in the early 1990s, a group of 18 people who had been denied mortgages by one of the biggest lending companies in America brought a court case saying they were being discriminated against. Many of them were black and some were single parents. They won their case, the companies were all legally compelled to give mortgages to high-risk applicants and this led to the sub-prime disaster that led to the banking crisis... The group that organized the case was ACORN and the lawyer who handled it was called Barack Obama. Where or not you believe that is up to you, but it has certainly been on the internet for a long time without any one bringing a libel case.
What is certain is that Obama's wonderful new health care scheme will cost a huge number of people their jobs and it is singularly ill-timed when unemployment is already soaring. The Stryker Corporation, a medical appliance firm whose owner gave massive donations to Obama's campaign, is now closing a plant in Orchard Park New York, and sacking 96 workers because it cannot afford the costs of Obamacare. Thousands of small companies will be driven out of business and medium sized ones will be put under strain to cope with the cost and the paperwork.

Since Obama's re-election the Dow-Jones has dropped steeply and Americans will have plenty of reasons to regret the outcome.

Sunday, 4 November 2012

EU Pay to Export Your Jobs

One of the things the EU spends your money on is the structural fund, which subsidizes enterprises within and beyond the EU itself. It doesn't only pay for lavish new metro systems in Athens (free tickets while we pay £3.50 per stop in London), it pays to set up new manufacturing plants in Eastern Europe, which of course includes Turkey.
Turkey? Yes, Turkey. Although it is not actually inside the EU it has been getting millions and millions of euros for the past decade to spend on everything from sewage systems to factories. Why should the Turks pay for their own infrastructure when they can get our money for it instead? After all, we in the UK are only £1 trillion in debt and if we can't pay then our children and grandchildren will be forced to do so.
At the time of the 2010 General Election I pointed out to a group of trade unionists in East Oxford that EU money was being used to re-locate companies such as Twinings in Eastern Europe, thus destroying the jobs of British workers. They were confused and embarrassed. They could not explain this in terms of the capitalist class oppressing the working class. In Eastern Europe wages are lower, rents and house prices are lower, overheads are lower and the company can make a quick profit by selling its premises here in the UK for house-building. It really is a system whereby we pay to export our jobs.
But the EU does not only export our jobs within its own boundaries, it has been brazenly exporting them to Turkey and elsewhere. The reason why the Ford car company in Southampton is closing down is that it got a grant from the EU structural fund several months earlier to set up its production in Turkey instead of in the UK. It will save by paying workers less money, and the British workers will be unemployed.

Criticizing this as bad for Britain is not "racist". It has got nothing to do with the skin colour of the rival workers. It is not motivated by any unreasonable antipathy to people migrating from one place to another, when they can do so by consent and make a real, needed contribution in their host country.
It is just downright perverse to pay to destroy your own job. It is bonkers. If there's one thing more frustrating than losing your job in the first place, it is the knowledge that you paid to do so. This has not happened through inevitable economic forces, nor has it been caused by the machinations of the banksters (whom I have no wish to defend) but it has been caused by direct interference paid for with our own money.
We are being forced to put ourselves on the dole. We are being compelled to pay to export our own jobs, then to pay to keep the unemployed on benefits, and then we wonder why our benefits bill is so high and our national deficit refuses to go down.
When Paul Nuttall appeared on BBC's Question Time programme on 26th October, Conservative minister Claire Perry snapped at him waspishly, "So Paul, what policies have you got to cut the deficit?" then immediately carried on speaking without giving him any time at all to reply. Paul could have replied "Well, if we left the EU we could stop paying to destroy our own jobs." We could also avoid paying 20% VAT on new houses, which is the EU's latest bright idea. We could avoid paying extortionate bail-outs, and avoid the soaring cost of EU Green energy policies, which are adding 15% to our energy bills each year.
When the fiasco over awarding the rail franchise for the West Coast Main Line was revealed, only after the Virgin Company went to court, people made a lot of fuss about the fact that the process for awarding the contract had cost tax-payers £40 million. Pretty terrible, yes but don't forget that we pay £50 million to the EU every single day of the year, and they now want to raise our contributions steadily every year until 2020.
Our exit from the EU disaster zone is long overdue. It is long past time to leave. People hate UKIP for being right. They heap bile and venom on us because we talk good sense. We must get out of the EU madhouse.

Stop Press The EU has given a French company, Sociêté de Développement de Résidences Touristiques, 1 million euros in "aid" for building a luxury golf resort in Morocco. The grant was to ensure that the holiday villas were "energy efficient" e.g. they will have double-glazing, air-conditioning and swimming-pools, while the local people live in concrete boxes with one room for a whole family and earn £5 per day.

Thursday, 1 November 2012

EU Budget Increases Unpopular It Seems

It seems that there are a few people, even outside UKIP, who don't quite see why the EU should go on increasing its own administrative spending and lavishing more and more billions on itself while keeping the economies of Europe in the tight grip of austerity.
Austerity meaning widespread unemployment, people eating out of bins, and severe cut-backs in the most basic services. Meanwhile the likes of Baroness Ashton are allowed to increase their own funding, spending more on foreign travel and top-quality public relations advisors.
Don't get me wrong. I have no doubt that the mess in the economies of Greece, Italy and Spain has got a lot to do with their own excessive borrowing, prodigal spending and endemic tax-evasion. I am not excusing their bad management or their short-sighted policies, but the trouble is that being inside the single currency zone prevents them from easing their way through the crisis by means of devaluing their currency.
The problems are their own fault, but the imposition of austerity as the only possible solution is the fault of the EU and its obsession with having a single currency.
So yesterday our MPs had the chance to vote Yes or No on whether to acquiesce in higher payments towards the EU's own corporate budget. Can we afford to give them even more billions after all those bail-outs, those contributions of £50 million per day, those creeping taxes and the soaring cost of the EU's Green energy policies? Surprise, surprise, the Labour opposition saw its chance to defeat the government and crack a whip over the Coalition. With the help of 50 rebel Tory MPs, the Nos won and Ed Miliband is the latest, bewildered candidate for a Eurosceptic label.
Will it make any difference? I doubt it. Even if Cameron vetoes the EU budget, I expect it will be passed and we will end up paying it. The days when one member state could actually stop anything by using its veto are long past. Cameron hasn't got the guts to leave the EU and neither has Ed Rubber-band, the bendy-all-elastic-any-policy-politician. Unless we find a leader who has got the guts to EXIT the EU, a UKIP leader in fact, we will end up paying that increased contribution. The money will go towards paying the vast pensions of Nick Clegg, Manuel Barroso and their limousined chums.
Labour has for thirty years given solid unwavering support for our EU membership. In the background stand the figures of Blair, Kinnock and Mandelson, all deeply committed to the EU in principle - if such characters can be said to have any. Blair has been rumbling on the sidelines of politics lately, talking about how we need an EU President and it should be a strong, charismatic, elected leader who can prevent the EU from breaking up. I wonder whom he has in mind for the job? I can't guess, can you?

Tuesday, 30 October 2012

Importing Ash-trees? How Stupid Can They Get?

Forty years ago the Dutch elm disease ravaged woodlands and farmlands all over this country and wiped out a handsome, beloved tree that was synonymous with our traditional landscape. The elm tree, painted by Gainsborough, Constable and Turner, has almost vanished from our land.
And it seems we have learnt nothing. For the past ten years, a fungal infection called ash dieback disease has been destroying ash trees all over the world, and yet our government has done nothing at all about it. Ash dieback has already destroyed 90% of the ash trees in Denmark, one of our nearest neighbours, yet until last week it was completely legal in England to import ash saplings from Denmark. Now several British woodlands that planted the imported saplings have been found to harbour dieback disease. 100,000 trees have been hastily destroyed - but it is too late.
What the government should have done was to ban ash imports as soon as the disease was identified.
The whole idea of having to import ash saplings is completely ridiculous. Few trees are more naturally prolific than the ash, and I regularly throw away little ash seedlings, one or two feet high, that sprout as weeds in my garden. Their long, pinnate leaflets are rather similar to those of an elder tree but more pendant. They are seeded by the beautiful clump of three ash trees in a neighbour's garden, visible from my kitchen window. This grove was planted as a boundary marker a hundred years ago and looks wonderful when the moon is in the high branches. I wonder how long they will last now? Wherever there are ash trees, their winged seed-pods, airborne on the slightest breeze, scatter themselves widely and germinate readily without human help. To admit we are paying for imported ash saplings is a damning admission of horticultural incompetence.
It's like paying to import air.
If Britain now loses its ash trees, this will be an environmental tragedy. We are losing our native trees one by one and they are being replaced by unsuitable imports such as the ghastly Leylandii and the hideous Thuja. Our native birds, butterflies and insects cannot live and survive in the alien species. The officials who are supposed to take care of our woodlands and our environment are doing a very poor job.



Monday, 22 October 2012

Licence for Licence - can the BBC survive?

We all paid Jimmy Saville because we all have to pay the TV licence fee if we have the box in our house. Never mind if we never watch BBC - you can't prove it and they don't care. You must pay for your TV licence and now that the Rupert Murdoch scandals are fading into history, we face again one of the moral dilemmas of our time. Which is worse: having a state broadcasting corporation that is corrupt, biassed and riddled with cronyism, or having media moguls such as Rupert Murdoch dominating the scene, owning more and more of our TV channels and newspapers, for private profit, without any claim of being neutral?
I never watched Top of the Pops, or Jim'll Fix It, because I found Jimmy Saville so utterly repulsive and it seems that my instincts were absolutely right. He was not just ugly, he was peculiar, vain, egotistical and terribly unfunny. He was loathsome, but the Beeb puffed him up into one of the greatest "celebs" of our time and that is an ethos we have got to learn to question.
Who is this new elite, the celebrities made overnight by TV, pop chart or film and endowed with glamour and enviability? Why do the media encourage us to worship them? Obviously, because our culture lacks anything else more solid to worship. The media set up celebs as idols, and some of these gods even claim to have a morality. Saville was a philanthropist, a do-gooder who made children's dreams come true, and he seems to have used that image successfully to disguise his unsavoury side. The permissive era of the sixties encouraged letting it ALL hang out, losing your inhibitions, right? It was inevitable that some nasty things would crawl out from under the stone.
From time to time over the years I have become irate with the BBC on account of its gross political bias towards the left and the Greens, and its flagrant slander of other political persuasions. I have tried cutting off my TV licence payments, but if you do you can be sent to gaol and when you eventually resume paying they force you to pay all the missing installments. They deduct these from your bank account regardless of whether you watched TV at all during that period. And what do they spend the money on? Revolting creeps like Jimmy Saville who molest youngsters in orphanages and then boast about it to their pals. Isn't it about time the BBC shook off this notion it has of a divine right to broadcast and to enjoy credibility? As more and more reports come in, it seems that the Beeb rivals the Catholic church when it comes to child molestation cover-ups.
I wonder if the BBC can survive this and I wonder if it deserves to survive. If we are paying for people like Saville, it does not. But I suppose what we are paying for at the end of the day is the chance to watch programmes of longer than fifteen minutes without interruption for advertising.

Postscript. There has been some discussion in the Daily Telegraph about how Harriet Harman, deputy leader of the Labour Party,are deeply implicated in the promotion and protection of paedophilia. It is a fact. The BBC-lefty-paedo-network is well documented. According to the Daily Telegraph 9th March 2009, Harriet Harman was the lawyer who personally represented the Paedophile Information Exchange when it was sheltered by the NCCL in the 1970s. Harman helped the PIE argue for lowering the age of consent and oppose and resist laws on child pornography in 1978. She went on representing them until 1982.
The view taken by Harman was the courts should have to prove that a child or young person was harmed rather than assuming any under-age sexual activity was a crime.

Harman was Legal Director of NCCL in 1980. And Motion 31 at the NCCL’s AGM that year went as follows:
“This motion notes with disapproval the continued harassment of the
organisations Paedophile Information Exchange and the Paedophiles
Action for Liberation, who are working for the rights of adults who
are sexually interested in children. We affirm that the existence of
these and any other lawful pressure groups should be threatened by
neither press nor police”
So Harman was directly involved at a senior level in an organisation that promoted and campaigned for paedophilia. [Source for this is Phyllis Bowman's 'Right to Life', drawing on original archives of NCCL in Hull.]
Any public inquiry into the BBC’s collusion with and covering up for Jimmy Savile needs also to look at the broader landscape
of high level paedophilia and its promotion, including especially
members of the NCCL. In particular, you will find that the research
which led to the implementation of Section 28 of the Local Government Bill uncovered a massive programme targeting children in schools, including those of a very young age, by socialist homosexual groups funded by the GLC.
These days, of course, they are backed by David Cameron, Theresa May
and Boris Johnson:

Thanks to the friend who sent me this!


Friday, 19 October 2012

Headington Shamed in Binge Drinking Report

I am horrified to read in the Oxford Times that Oxford's binge-drinking problem is worst in the South-East area. That puts Headington to shame. What on earth are we in the North-East of Oxford going to do to catch up?
All I've had to drink tonight, and it's a Friday, is two glasses of Tuscan red (Giordano Toscano Rosso Gold Label 2007), which is hardly a binge. Earlier this evening a young Facebook friend told me he was tippling from a bottle of absinthe, which is 80%. That's the sort of competition we are up against. It's about time that we all went out to the pubs, the off-licences, and the supermarkets, to say nothing of the corner-shops, and took full advantage of the fact that no Scottish Nationalist spoilsport has yet imposed a minimum price for booze on us HERE.


Let Them Eat Cake

Martin Schultz, the President of the EU Parliament, has put a picture of himself on his Facebook page beaming with delight as the team of four highly-trained chefs of the Parliament present him with a special cake to celebrate getting the Nobel Peace Prize.

Mr Schultz commented wittily "I'm not sure I'm going to share it with my 753 colleagues!" No indeed, that would not leave much for Mr Schultz. He will take the cake home and eat all of it himself.
He will definitely not share it with any of the rioters who were throwing petrol bombs and bricks in Athens today.

The almost universal derision that has greeted the announcement of the Peace Prize is a sign that opinion world-wide is beginning to turn against the failed EU project. Just reading some of the comments that people are putting on Mr Schultz's page gives you an idea of how popular he is. Beneath the photo of him holding the cake, a Dutch reader named Rowan-Ewout Dekker has posted:-

Dear Mr. Schulz, how about an apology for your statement in today's edition of "Volkskrant" that the Dutch people are "small minded" ?
Do you think that it's appropriate to say such a thing about an entire nation? You of all people should know that spreading offensive stereotypes about a certain group of people can lead to bad things... It would also be nice if you could control yourself a bit with regards to how you respond to people who don't support your Imperial euro-federalist dream. You have called euro-sceptics "mentally weak", "fascists" and now "small minded". Show some respect for other opinions ok?

Underneath a "very nice 360 degrees panorama of the European Parliament in Strasbourg" (only one of their many very nice and lavish buildings) somebody called Uturunka Dulom has commented:-

Beautiful, when I become homeless I would like to get a bedroom there!

And below that, where Mr Schultz shows how generously he supports an anti-poverty charity, the same person writes:-

I would like to help, but, in this moment, I cannot afford to pay 10 euros a month. I pay too many useless taxes in Spain. I am using private health insurance because all public services are almost bankrupt, electricity and gas supplies get higher and higher, Internet is very expensive as well as phone calls and I am earning -40% money in my job that during 2011.

Underneath the announcement of the prize itself, there are hundreds of messages, many of them scathing such as this one:-
Michael Voemel a joke not more!
12 October at 17:57 ·

and this one:-
Lamberto Censi and where was The European Parliament when in SARAJEVO, SREBRENICA and all Bosnia and Herzegovina happened massacres and violences?.. you should be ashamed!!

Charles Dornach links to an article that says the EU is "more like war than peace":-
13 October at 14:32

Erich Mainusch writes: A bad joke for the poor!!! But who cares. And the stupids are happy.

So the comments go on and on, in German, Polish, Czech, Latvian etc etc.
And a Spanish commentator,Isac Ramòn Castellanos, adds this sombre reflection in Italian:-

Non possiamo considerare un regime legitimo che fa violenzia contra suo popolo.

(We cannot consider a government legal when it commits violence against its own people.)

Mr Schultz, the writing is on the wall. Your wall. For all you greedy corrupt fat cat Eurocrats (including the Maltese commissioner who just resigned after an investigation by OLAF the details of which are not being released to the public who just pay for these things).

Listen to the voices. They are telling you that the EU is a failure and its tyranny is making more and more people chafe.

Sunday, 14 October 2012

The Plot Thickens

The social event of the year in Headington Quarry just has to be the annual Meeting of the Ramsey Road Allotment holders. Yes it's time for all the muddy-fingered slug-bashers of Quarry to gather, pay their dues and decide all the important things that allotment holders have to decide.
I don't think anyone recognized me when I turned up at the meeting in a skirt with my hair combed, they are all so used to seeing me in my baggy gardening jeans, oldest jumper and fisherman's hat. But I recognized them as the valiant diggers and hoers, planters and weeders, whose efforts in general far surpass my own.
Of course, weather wise, it has been a pig of a year. Late frosts, torrential rain, severe storms in spring, short cool summer, early chilly autumn, more torrential rain. There was much deep discussion of the potato blight, the plague of snails and the difficulty of getting things to ripen. It helps if you put a pumpkin on a couple of bricks, raising it just a few inches off the ground so that it gets more sun.
Many of us had already resorted to picking our green tomatoes and bringing them inside to ripen on a window-sill.
The amazing success of the year has been the raspberries. They survived the weather that destroyed so many other kinds of fruit and produced an absolutely bumper crop. I am swamped with them. My freezer is full of raspberries and I have made jam for the first time in my life. This is partly for the satisfaction of defying the EU ban on re-using jam-jars.
There was also much talk about unwelcome tree-roots, the advantages of wood-chip paths and the relative merits of different sorts of manure.
Council compost is not much good at all. It tends to have all sorts of unwanted debris in it. The manure they provide did not get a thumbs up from the allotmenters (or allot-men? allotpersons?) either. It comes from a riding stable and is too coarse. The very best manure for horticultural purposes is bovine. That of course, figures. Farmers all over the world for thousands of years have kept cows, not only for their milk and their meat but for their wholistic contribution to the ecological cycle i.e. what comes out of the other end of them. Good manure should not be too new. It's like wine, it needs to laid down for a year or so before you use it.
The allotments have a boss and he assured us he knew where to get the right sort of stuff and it could be kept lying around for an appropriate time so that it gets nice and stale. Ideal!
So having decided how to spend our annual budget, we all went for a drink and chatted about planting autumn peas and beans. If you missed it - well, I'm sorry but this is rather an exclusive event and only a select few were invited.

Saturday, 13 October 2012

Remind You of 1939?

From time to time I hear this:"Doesn't the way some people are pointing to Muslims as a threat remind you of the way that Jews were treated in the 1930s?"
No. It reminds me of the way that Nazis were being treated in the 1930s. In the pre-war era, the obvious signs of a rising threat were being pointed out by perspicacious observers such as Churchill, and ignored by those who preferred to pursue a line of cowardly appeasement.

When the US ambassador in Libya was murdered last month by Arab Spring fanatics, I was staggered to hear the President of the USA issue what amounted to a public apology for "offending Muslim sensibilities". Apparently being offended by a film gives Muslims the right to commit outright homicide on an innocent person and his colleagues in the embassy.
And the EU's Lady Ashton issued a joint statement with the Arab League and the Organization of Islamic Countries apologizing to Muslims who were offended by the film. I would like to dissociate myself completely from this statement, which amounted to a retreat from the democratic principles of free speech and freedom of conscience.

Last week forty-six Christians in Nigeria were massacred by Boko Haram extremists. Boko Haram are another apt-to-be-offended Muslim group enraged by the fact that the authorities had a week earlier rounded up some of their ring-leaders and placed them under arrest.
Most of the murdered Christians were students living in a hostel. They were shot or stabbed to death, then the nearby church was burnt down.

Meanwhile in Pakistan, a girl was shot for saying that she believed in education for women. A mob has been going around setting fire to Christian churches and destroying ancient Buddhist temples in protest against the American film "Innocence of Muslims" whose supposed insults to their religion they could not even understand. Of course, it is just a pretext for doing more openly what they do surreptitiously most of the time.

And in Egypt, where the Islamic extremists have now taken over the government, Christians are being targetted for ethnic cleansing. Actually this is nothing new. For the past 60 years the Muslim majority in Egypt has driven out first the Jewish citizens and then more gradually the Christians. It is estimated that 4 million Copts have been victimized and pushed out by this regime that complains very loudly about displaced Palestinians.
Now the Egyptian government is using the film "Innocence of Muslims" as a pretext to speed up its persecution campaign. Eye-witnesses report, "Violence against Christians occurs every day, and the state usually takes the side of the Muslim murderers." Atheists and those who advocate a secular society are fellow-victims, being spied on and imprisoned for their views.

Of course if you don't mind being slaughtered and ethnically cleansed, then this won't bother you at all.

>> And here is the case of a Christian pastor in Uganda who had acid thrown in his face by Muslim attackers as he left Church on Christmas Eve. Umar Mulinde's face was wrecked the flesh hanging off the bone. His crime? Leaving Islam.

>>Here is an account by a young Frenchwoman of life in a suburb near Paris in 2012. She has reported the problems to the police who say they dare not interfere because they are being intimidated:-

Churchill, when trying to alert Parliament to the threat of Nazism, in 1938, said:
"I foresee and foretell that the policy of submission will carry with it restrictions upon the freedom of speech and debate in Parliament, on public platforms, and discussions in the Press, for it will be said - indeed, I hear it said sometimes now - that we cannot allow the Nazi system of dictatorship to be criticised by ordinary common English politicians. And do not suppose that this is the end. This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip, the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year by year, unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time."

Friday, 12 October 2012

Peace Prize? EU Must Be Joking

How nice that I have now got the Nobel Peace prize - and so have you, and all of us in fact, since we are citizens of the European Union and the EU has just been collectively awarded the prize by the Norwegian committee.

What a pity that the prize is utterly worthless and has fallen into disrepute because it's been given to so many absurd recipients for such bizarre reasons. Frankly, I wouldn't waste a tea-bag celebrating it, let alone open the champagne.

The last person to get it, you may remember, was Barack Obama. He got it almost as soon as he was elected President of the USA. After getting the Peace prize, he continued the war in Afghanistan for another four years and US troops are still there. After having Osama-bin-Laden assassinated he embarked on the current campaign of drone-bombing Taliban targets in Pakistan. All of which may be very necessary but does it really come under the heading of "peace"? Using necessary force to maintain a just peace, maybe. But that sounds to me remarkably similar to "war".
Let's face it, the real reason he got the prize was because there wasn't a specific award for being the first black (or blackish) person elected President of the USA. Obama's latest contribution to "peace" has been to cringe and grovel to the fanatics who murdered the US ambassador to Libya. Christopher Stevens was an islamophile who had nothing to do with the film that appeared in America but he and his colleagues were hacked to bits in a devout religious protest. Then Obama grovelled and said that insulting Islam was totally utterly inexcusable.
Blessed are the peacemakers!
Then there was Al Gore. He got the Nobel Peace Prize for spreading wild predictions that the melting polar ice-cap was going to raise sea-levels all over the globe by about two hundred feet in a century, and promises that we could stop this catastrophe by buying carbon emission permits. The permits made Al Gore very rich but seem to have had no impact on sea levels, and those who believe his theory about CO2 need to explain why the polar ice-cap on Mars is shrinking at exactly the same rate as our own. Have they got cars and aeroplanes, central heating and fridges too, on Mars?
Previous recipients of the Nobel Peace Prize include our dear friend Gerry Adams, who recently shook hands with the Queen when she visited Ireland (meanwhile the Duke of Edinburgh gave him the coldest shoulder I have ever seen). And let's not forget Yasser Arafat whose terrorist PLO murdered the entire Israeli Olympic team in about 1972. Since 1948, when they attacked Israel, the Arab League has caused unending war by stubbornly refusing to accept the legitimacy of the state of Israel which was founded by international agreement. They claim that the non-Jews who left Israel because of the war they started are victims, yet a greater number of Jews were expelled from surrounding Arab zones and have happily re-settled themselves elsewhere. Even Wikipedia admits that the Arab League was an ally of the Nazis and the PLO has simply carried on Nazi policies ever since.
Blessed are the peace-makers?
So what did the EU do to get the Nobel Peace prize? Supposedly it achieved "six decades of advancement of peace, reconciliation and human rights in Europe." Peace as in riots in Spain, Greece and Warsaw this past week? 7,000 extra police flown into Athens alone to keep the angry, starving crowds at bay during the visit of Angela Merkel.
Peace as in protestors in Madrid being clobbered and injured by police in the streets, and then viciously beaten up in recrimination attacks later? Peace as in photographs of people with cracked skulls and broken collar-bones?
Peace as in bullets, tasers, water-cannon and tear-gas being used to keep down mobs in Warsaw, protesting against the steep new taxes and cuts in just about everything? Human rights as in setting up a European police force whose members are immune from prosecution?

Peace as in helping the Shi-ite extremists trying to take over Syria? Peace as in saying nothing at all about the brutal persecution of Christians in Egypt? Human rights as in giving prisoners the vote and stopping us from kicking out Abu Hamza for year after year after year?
Reconciliation as in appointing a bunch of former criminals to take charge of the European Stability Mechanism, the biggest currency-grab in history, and granting those crooks immunity from prosecution?

The Prize Committee also thinks that the EU has somehow managed to advance democracy in Europe. Apart from in Italy and Greece where it has calmly dismantled the democratic system and put its own puppet rulers in charge. And Spain, where it has done much the same in a more discreet fashion. And France and Ireland where it has ignored the outcome of national referenda. We all had a vote, didn't we, on the appointment of Baroness Ashton?

All in all, I am not too flattered to get the Nobel Peace Prize. It's a bit like being offered a pair of second-hand trousers that have been worn by a series of people you particularly dislike.
I would be more pleased to win the prize for the best spuds at my local village fete. It would mean so much more!


Sunday, 23 September 2012

We've GOT a Referendum Already

All the opinion polls agree that at least half of the British public now wants to leave the EU. According to some polls, it is a sixty-five percent majority.
Even with the biassed pro-EU press that we have got it is getting harder and harder to prevent the public finding out some of the grim facts about the failure of the European Union plan.
Our media virtually ignored the huge protest demonstrations going on in Spain during this past week, where angry mobs of people have taken to the streets in protest against the austerity regime imposed by Merkel and Co. Here in England that was brushed aside, But most people do get to know, one way or another, about the mad EU laws, the thousands of petty restrictive regulations, the corruption, the economic melt-down into debt and disaster, the endless bail-outs of hundreds of billions, the spreading unemployment, the autocracy, the replacement of democratically elected leaders by puppets from Brussels...
Yes, people in Britain want to leave the EU. And a hundred thousand of them signed a petition to the government asking for a referendum on the subject. What was the result? There was a debate about it in the House of Commons. How exciting! except that nobody went. The MPs were all told by their LibLabCon bosses to stay away. The few who attended stood and talked to a row of empty green benches. The petition was treated with contempt. That is all you can expect from our political class. They are not in it to listen to you and me.
However often the leaders of the LibLabCon talk about offering a referendum, I don't believe they will ever give one. They are lying skunks... ahem, sorry, they are not wholly reliable when it comes to carrying out undertakings given. If they did it would be conducted just like the one in Ireland when the Irish voted against the Lisbon Treaty and were then simply made to vote all over again, until they gave a Yes answer. Huge amounts of EU money (our taxes) were used to finance propaganda on the Yes side of the campaign.
Well here is some good news for everybody who wants a Referendum. You've already got one. Every election held in this country is a referendum on whether we should stay in the EU, and to vote NO all you have to do is to vote UKIP. UKIP is the party that has consistently opposed EU membership and predicted all the calamities and loss of democratic rights that we now see happening. If you vote UKIP in a local, parliamentary or EU election, you are voting to leave the corrupt, chaotic EU and regain our birthright of governing ourselves. There is another EU election coming up in 2014 and it cannot be stopped. More and more people (even the BBC) are predicting that UKIP who came second in the last one will win in 2014.
What better referendum could we have?
Yes it's long time to wait until 2014. But it's getting closer all the time. The worst thing you could do if you want a referendum is to vote for the newly-formed splinter-group calling itself "We Want A Referendum". This so-called party is not really political party but only a pressure-group, as it has no policies apart from holding a referendum on leaving the EU. It is led by Nikki Sinclaire, the former UKIP MEP who is still being investigated for irregularities in her expenses claims. They were petty offences and most other MEPS claim far more, but they were stupid offences, and Nikki's stance now is stupid. Why vote for "I Want a Referendum" when we have already got a referendum if we use the forthcoming elections as just that?
Why vote to get what you have got already, and thus miss your chances of taking part in that referendum? It doesn't make sense. The calibre of people Nikki is recruiting into her new pressure-group-party does not inspire confidence. The star performer is apparently someone called Katie Hopkins. I had never heard of her, until she appeared on the Daily Politics Show where her performance was not brilliant. We were told that she had been a contestant on a TV show called The Apprentice. Gosh, is that all? You can see just how popular Katie is and what people think about her by going to this link on the internet:-

Hmmmm...not many votes to be picked up there I feel.

So if you want a referendum, smile: YOU'VE GOT ONE. If you don't want a referendum then vote for the party that demands one and you will get nothing at all. So everybody will be happy.

Saturday, 22 September 2012

£15,000 Litter Bin for Headington

Oxford's Labour Council is still notorious for having equipped the city centre with some hideous benches that are quite unbenchlike and cost £30,000 each. Yes, £30,000 per bench.
Now they are keeping up their reputation for conspicuous extravagance by ordering a new sort of litterbin. Priced at a mere £15,000 the so-called "smart" litter-bins are solar-powered and and can send e-mails.
No, it's not April 1st. The wonder-bins use solar power to compress large amounts of waste and then use the internet to contact the council and announce that they need to be emptied. One of the first has already been installed in Bury Knowle Park in Headington. One of the many advantages of this £15,000 bin is that it will enable to council to save money by dispensing with the services of mere humans. Four people will be made redundant by the trendy smart-bin and will be sent to the dole queue. After all, if they're not solar-powered or wind powered, people are a bit superfluous now aren't they? All those unwanted CO2 emissions. Bins don't have children to clutter the place up either.
The new bin is so smart maybe it should have its own Facebook page. There it can put photographs of its family, their dog, their cat and any other bins it has made friends with. It can invite you to its parties and if it gets drunk you can report it for "BINge drinking".

An ideal receptacle you might think for the next Labour manifesto?

Thursday, 13 September 2012

The Nonsense of Hate Crime

"Hate crime" is a such a weird concept - as if it's possible to have a friendly murder, a nice kind theft or beat someone up as a favour!!!!!
This category was invented by people who not only illogical but seem to lack a sense of humour. For there to be such a thing as a "hate-crime", there would need to be a sort of crime that is not hostile or hurtful. Otherwise why have two distinct categories?
Ask yourself how it is possible to carry out an assault, a burglary or a financial fraud as an act of warm affection. Does the criminal who knocks over an old woman, steals her handbag with all her money and leaves her lying on the pavement with a broken wrist and collarbone, act out of philanthropy? Does he show her how much he cares about her and about society in general?
You would have to be crazy to think so. And the people who framed these laws about so-called "hate-crime" are just that. Crazy. If somebody is cheated out of all their savings by a deliberate scam are the criminals motivated by love? If a drug-pusher sells cocaine to teenagers, or a drunken driver kills another road-user, are they showing altruism? Showering benevolence on their fellow-man? Does it matter what skin colour or religious belief the respective parties have? No, all crime is "hate-crime" and all crime is bad.
So there is no reason at all to have a separate category for "hate-crime". The term tries to turn the police into politicians and psychiatrists, instead of what they are - merely state employees whose job is to protect everybody if they can, and, when a crime takes place, get the baddies arrested and charged.
When I was a candidate for the local council, my house was vandalized on the day of the election, but nobody called that a "hate-crime". Only some people it seems, can be hated, while others just get their front doors smashed in out of neighbourly kind feeling.
At this moment, when there are cuts in what we spend on policing and social care for the elderly, why have we got so much money to spend on hate-crime that there are special advertisements recruiting local co-ordinators for hate-crime reporting?
Yes, if you want to report a crime against one particular religious group, you will get special funding and a special form to help you do it, and a local co-ordinator paid to ...well, to co-ordinate you. If you have a problem of any other kind, you have to cope with cuts and staff shortage.

The good old principle is that everybody should be equal in the eyes of the law. It is a sound principle and it is a fair principle. I applaud Godfrey Bloom for standing up for this principle and I wish all success to his campaign to become Police and Crime Commissioner for Humberside. Backed by a former Deputy Chief Constable of Humberside, Mike Speakman, GODFREY BLOOM is the only credible candidate.