I love Oliver Cromwell on so many levels. Here is his speech from 1651 when he dissolved the rump parliament left over from the English Civil War. It seems as if the political profession has not changed much in the last 358 years.
Given the recent furor over expenses in the Westminster Parliament, and the continuing un-democratic trough feeding at the EU parliament, I think that these words are as applicable today as they were back then. I freely admit to stealing the following text from the http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/ site, but I have seen them echoed in various places over the last few days.
Here are the words :-
“...It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonoured by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.
Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?
Ye sordid prostitutes, have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd; your country therefore calls upon me to cleanse the Augean Stable, by putting a final period to your iniquitous proceedings, and which by God's help and the strength He has given me, I now come to do.
I command ye, therefore, upon the peril of your lives, to depart immediately out of this place! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors. You have sat here too long for the good you do. In the name of God, go!”
Scary isn’t it? So many similarities in sentiment to what a lot of us are feeling. I for one am fed up with our politicians, and to some extent our political system. The mob in Westminster is failing the majority of the people in this country, they have lead us to a loss of sovereignty to Brussels and to some military embaressments that have harmed our global prestige.
The ridiculous outcry over expenses, which were all made according to the rules of a system in place since 1972 and are really there so that MPs can claim extra income to supplement their relatively poor basic salary (poor when compared to professionals in industry, law and finance of equal or lesser authority). I am fine with that. Would it make more sense to just raise their salaries by 15-20% and drastically reduce allowances?
Of course it would be. It should be done, but come on – are a few inflated expenses claims within the boundaries of the systems and legality really all that important? Are the sums involved really worth the expenditure that is going to be made to “investigate” all the claims? Do the sums even begin to compete with the endemic wastage inherent in the Labour government above and beyond the arcane and archaic financial corridors of Westminster expense claims? Do they even begin to approach the level of financial siphoning and swindling taking place in Brussels? Do they anywhere close to the wastage of money on dubious military weapons development programmes and procurements? Of course they don’t – the whole thing is just a media frenzy designed to sell newspapers and make MPs look stupid (itself not always a bad thing of course…)
Its not the expenses "scandal" that annoys me - its the fact that all of the "big three" mainstream parties are now so similar in so many ways, and that none of them address the concerns that I have about the country and its future. While I do not begrudge them a fair, even generous wage, I do begrudge them being given that wage when they either ignore the issues I see as important, or indeed act in diametric oppossition to them. I have been saying this for years, but its no less true for the repition - UK politics is not about voting for a party in which you believe in, its about voting for a party which you dislike the least.
But what is the option? There are elections coming up in June. Where I live, there are local and council elections as well as the EU ones. Everthing from MPs to parish and town councils nearby are almost all Conservative, with the big exception of Aylesbury Town Council (LibDem). I will, of course, vote Conservative in all local polls that I am presented with. I may disagree with their silence on the EU and some other “right wing” issues that I, and millions of others, consider important, but they are worth the vote even if they are only marginally better than the gang of muppets currently in power.
Its when I come to the EU elections that I am slightly more confused. I loathe the EU, and its parliament doesn’t really do anything except cost money since all the decision making bodies in the EU are non-elected committees of bureaucrats. So, I am going to cast a protest vote of some description. I want the mainstream parties to wake up and realize that there is a hitherto silent majority out there do not subscribe to their lovely dovey liberal nonsense, a silent majority that worries about Islamic extremism, unfettered migration of the unskilled to our country, the failure of multiculturalism and a number of other things.
So, I have two choices really to cast my protest vote, neither one of which I actually like very much. There is UKIP, who I voted for last time. They have accomplished nothing since those elections, have been embroiled in their own expenses scandals, and have avoided total collapse due to infighting by only the slimmest of margins. They have a broadly centre-right collection of policies that has a lot of overlap with the Conservative party. But they are a paper tiger and, possibly, a spent force, despite recent polls showing that they are potentially picking up a lot of centre and centre right protest votes.
The other option is a bit more troubling, not least of which because I am actually leaning towards casting my vote their way. The BNP have ludicrous and impractical policies, their efforts at entering the mainstream are embarrassing and amateurish. Their economic policies are too left wing for me, and the odour of anti-Semitism bothers me badly, despite them publicizing their Jewish members and council candidates. I also have some problems with their genetic and colour emphasis – my xenophobia is purely culturalist and not racially based – I don’t care what people’s ethnic origins are as long as they assimilate to become British.
However, their anti-EU stance, their refusal to be politically correct, and their wariness of Islam and its effects on our country are all very attractive to me. They also seem to be very attractive to lots of other people – polls show that the BNP could very well get at least one (and possibly as many as seven or eight) MEP in the upcoming elections, legitimizing them to some degree (although nowhere near to the degree that they seem to think it will).
UKIP is the safe option, one that I have taken before. A vote for them is a “disillusioned centre-right Conservative showing his angst” vote. Nothing more. It has no other baggage, and really requires no other thought or soul searching on my part.
The real question is this - is voting for the BNP, and risking that this generally noisome bunch gets some real power, funding and legitimacy, a risk worth taking to send a rocket up the arses of the Westminster mob? I have no doubt that they would be a disaster in any real position of power and influence, but there is a good chance that, if the BNP do well, the mainstream parties will realize that there is a huge portion of the electorate that they are ignoring and marginalizing, a silent portion who want their own voices heard above the screams of racial and ethnic minorities, who they outnumber.
I have no idea who I will vote for next month. I doubt I will make my mind up completely until I get to the voting booth. I wonder how many other people of similar views to myself are wrestling with the same questions, and who might, on the day, cast a vote of protest that could very well have lasting consequences for our country politically and socially.
Not that it matters when looking at the EU itself – as stated, MEPs don’t actually do, and certainly can’t change, much. The real change will be May 2010 when we have a General Election. Hopefully the results of the EU elections and the “protest” votes will stimulate the Conservatives, who are almost certainly going to win the General Election, to look at the questions regarding the EU, immigration, and multiculturalism sensibly and realistically.
Saturday, 16 May 2009
Friday, 15 May 2009
Facebook Transplant Part 14 - Originally Posted 7/5/09 - The Sun Finally Sets...
After I have been off from work, and thus away from extended periods online, and have spent part of today wading through my customary blogs and online newspapers of choice.
I had been in blissful ignorance about WW3 about to happen in Georgia, the mutual expulsion of NATO and Russian diplomats as spies, and general “on the brink” news that would have interested me far more than the predictable and generic news items on Madeleine McCann two years on and the endless panic mongering about swine flu.
But, aside from the events in Georgia and the happy occurrence that NATO is showing some gonads and calling Russia’s bluff, I also stumbled across these two articles. Take the time to read them – they are very interesting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/5280118/Britain-will-be-missed-on-the-world-stage.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1177719/MAX-HASTINGS-Thatchers-legacy--America-falling-love-Britain-again.html
Both reinforce what I have been feeling for a few months now, pretty much ever since I have started reading a lot more on Imperial, Colonial, and early post-Colonial history with regards Britain. These “studies” have removed a lot of the romanticism that I once held about British military prowess.
A further reality check came by looking between the lines of the MOD and media propaganda about our performance of late in the War on Terror, something made a lot easier by the twin blogs http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/ and http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/. I look forward to one of the bloggers books, “Ministry of Defeat”, when it is released later on this year and urge you to pick up a copy – it will make you angry, believe me.
The long and the short of it is that, after a few decades of kicking and screaming in resistance following our loss of face and prestige during the Suez Crisis, I think that we are finally seeing the death throes of the UK as a projector of power and policy in the world.
Some would say that is a good thing, those wracked by misplaced post-colonial guilt, those who bleat about illegal wars, anti-Americanists, the Islamic lobby, and the Left in general. I for one say it’s an awful thing. I know that we have been a second tier player for the last 50 years or so, but we were still a player who had influence and something positive to offer our allies, especially our greatest ally, the US.
I am generally a big fan of the US. I don’t like everything about it, its attitudes, its institutions, its values, and a plethora of other aspects, but in the big scheme of things, I see America as definitely being one of the “good guys”, a label that maybe only a dozen countries deserve in my mind. America under his holiness St Obama? Well, I don’t know yet, although his weakness towards rogue states is very worrying and his determination to adopt the worst aspects (as opposed to the few very good aspects) of European socialism could harm the US in the long term. He has 100 days, I give him maybe a grade of 60% so far and will watch the rest of his 1st term with interest.
The US has not “needed” us for a very long time, not economically, not militarily, not socially – indeed, it is us that have needed them in all of these aspects, and who will continue to have that need. What is galling is that the semblance of respect and equality, however shallow and image based rather than substantial and real, is now gone and I seriously doubt we will ever get that “special relationship” back when we have so little to offer. Without the backing of the US, with only such toothless tigers as the UN and parasitical institutions as the EU in our corner, we will be sitting ducks for increasing Russian belligerence and Islamic radicalism/terrorism.
When you combine this loss of what little international prestige we once had, prestige largely due to the “special relationship”, with the shocking degradation of domestic Britain, then the future looks dark indeed.
We have the highest number of new HIV cases in the Western world, largely thanks to sub-Saharan African immigration, mostly illegal. We have the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in Western Europe and severe drug problems. Our police are shackled and watched relentlessly by the left – just witness the ridiculous and farcical aftermath of the G20 “demonstrations” and the media lead witchhunt. No wonder crime is through the roof. Binge drinking, obesity, Islamic extremism, dilution of British values and culture, crime, bad education – its hard to think of this country as even being the same one that accomplished so much. It’s a fall of even greater proportion than that of the Roman Empire degenerating into the basket case that is Italy.
Our economy is in tatters and, given that we have next to no real industry or agriculture here and that our economy was based largely on finanicial services which I do not ever see recovering to pre-recession levels, I am failing to see how we are going to recover enough to pay off the frankly terrifying levels of public debt that our esteemed Labour government is putting us in. Apparently, more people have signed an online petition at 10 Downing Street’s website, calling for Brown’s resignation, than voted for Labour in the last general election, which they won!
I guess the last relics of my romantic view of British power, influence and importance haven’t totally left me, since I am actually feeling physically sad about our current state of existence and don’t really see any way of improving it. I think I will dust off my ideas about immigrating to Canada, which at this rate will not only have a stronger and more dependable military, but will also have retained enough of what once made Britain great to satisfy me. I for one can’t think of anything that will fix us in the short term, let alone the long term, and maybe it is indeed time to search for greener pastures.
I had been in blissful ignorance about WW3 about to happen in Georgia, the mutual expulsion of NATO and Russian diplomats as spies, and general “on the brink” news that would have interested me far more than the predictable and generic news items on Madeleine McCann two years on and the endless panic mongering about swine flu.
But, aside from the events in Georgia and the happy occurrence that NATO is showing some gonads and calling Russia’s bluff, I also stumbled across these two articles. Take the time to read them – they are very interesting.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/5280118/Britain-will-be-missed-on-the-world-stage.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1177719/MAX-HASTINGS-Thatchers-legacy--America-falling-love-Britain-again.html
Both reinforce what I have been feeling for a few months now, pretty much ever since I have started reading a lot more on Imperial, Colonial, and early post-Colonial history with regards Britain. These “studies” have removed a lot of the romanticism that I once held about British military prowess.
A further reality check came by looking between the lines of the MOD and media propaganda about our performance of late in the War on Terror, something made a lot easier by the twin blogs http://defenceoftherealm.blogspot.com/ and http://www.eureferendum.blogspot.com/. I look forward to one of the bloggers books, “Ministry of Defeat”, when it is released later on this year and urge you to pick up a copy – it will make you angry, believe me.
The long and the short of it is that, after a few decades of kicking and screaming in resistance following our loss of face and prestige during the Suez Crisis, I think that we are finally seeing the death throes of the UK as a projector of power and policy in the world.
Some would say that is a good thing, those wracked by misplaced post-colonial guilt, those who bleat about illegal wars, anti-Americanists, the Islamic lobby, and the Left in general. I for one say it’s an awful thing. I know that we have been a second tier player for the last 50 years or so, but we were still a player who had influence and something positive to offer our allies, especially our greatest ally, the US.
I am generally a big fan of the US. I don’t like everything about it, its attitudes, its institutions, its values, and a plethora of other aspects, but in the big scheme of things, I see America as definitely being one of the “good guys”, a label that maybe only a dozen countries deserve in my mind. America under his holiness St Obama? Well, I don’t know yet, although his weakness towards rogue states is very worrying and his determination to adopt the worst aspects (as opposed to the few very good aspects) of European socialism could harm the US in the long term. He has 100 days, I give him maybe a grade of 60% so far and will watch the rest of his 1st term with interest.
The US has not “needed” us for a very long time, not economically, not militarily, not socially – indeed, it is us that have needed them in all of these aspects, and who will continue to have that need. What is galling is that the semblance of respect and equality, however shallow and image based rather than substantial and real, is now gone and I seriously doubt we will ever get that “special relationship” back when we have so little to offer. Without the backing of the US, with only such toothless tigers as the UN and parasitical institutions as the EU in our corner, we will be sitting ducks for increasing Russian belligerence and Islamic radicalism/terrorism.
When you combine this loss of what little international prestige we once had, prestige largely due to the “special relationship”, with the shocking degradation of domestic Britain, then the future looks dark indeed.
We have the highest number of new HIV cases in the Western world, largely thanks to sub-Saharan African immigration, mostly illegal. We have the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in Western Europe and severe drug problems. Our police are shackled and watched relentlessly by the left – just witness the ridiculous and farcical aftermath of the G20 “demonstrations” and the media lead witchhunt. No wonder crime is through the roof. Binge drinking, obesity, Islamic extremism, dilution of British values and culture, crime, bad education – its hard to think of this country as even being the same one that accomplished so much. It’s a fall of even greater proportion than that of the Roman Empire degenerating into the basket case that is Italy.
Our economy is in tatters and, given that we have next to no real industry or agriculture here and that our economy was based largely on finanicial services which I do not ever see recovering to pre-recession levels, I am failing to see how we are going to recover enough to pay off the frankly terrifying levels of public debt that our esteemed Labour government is putting us in. Apparently, more people have signed an online petition at 10 Downing Street’s website, calling for Brown’s resignation, than voted for Labour in the last general election, which they won!
I guess the last relics of my romantic view of British power, influence and importance haven’t totally left me, since I am actually feeling physically sad about our current state of existence and don’t really see any way of improving it. I think I will dust off my ideas about immigrating to Canada, which at this rate will not only have a stronger and more dependable military, but will also have retained enough of what once made Britain great to satisfy me. I for one can’t think of anything that will fix us in the short term, let alone the long term, and maybe it is indeed time to search for greener pastures.
Facebook Transplant Part 13 - Originally Posted 28/4/09 - Another one in the eye for the Greenies
Yet another senior and respected scientist has come out against the current scare mongering and profiteering from the Green/Environmental lobby.
As usual, EU Referendum covers it better than I could possibly do so.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/04/shared-agenda.html
Not that it will make any difference of course - as EUR so rightly says, we are no longer combating scientific theories and ideas - we are combating something that has become an article of faith for a distressingly huge segment of society. Global Warming is now a religion of sorts - one wonders if it will end up doing as much damage as so many other religions have in the past. That so many intelligenct people subscribe to this nonsense is really the big tragedy and crime.
As usual, EU Referendum covers it better than I could possibly do so.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/04/shared-agenda.html
Not that it will make any difference of course - as EUR so rightly says, we are no longer combating scientific theories and ideas - we are combating something that has become an article of faith for a distressingly huge segment of society. Global Warming is now a religion of sorts - one wonders if it will end up doing as much damage as so many other religions have in the past. That so many intelligenct people subscribe to this nonsense is really the big tragedy and crime.
Facebook Transplant Part 12 - Originally Posted 27/4/09 - Reflections on the budget
Here is a post I made following the 2009 Budget
***
Overall an interesting week, showing once more that our government is getting desperate, playing the vote catching game as much as possible yet still displaying a frightening arrogance, ignorance, and incompetence. Darling’s ridiculously and fantastical estimations of economic recovery have been mocked and debunked by just about every reputable economist that matters. We are getting put more into debt than since WW2, our government has borrowed more money than all other British governments in history put together. The mind really boggles.
The introduction of a 50% tax band for the top 1% richest people in the UK might sound like a good idea, and indeed has a 56% approval rate from the sheepal polled this last weekend. Of course, to anyone of any brains at all, the 50% tax bracket will not raise even the paltry amount of money that Darling and Brown think that it will – even the treasury predicts that 69% of the 350K people who are eligible to pay it will somehow avoid it.
Yet even if all of those eligible paid the tax, would it really make a difference? Well, not really in the big scheme of things. The rich would simply spend less, and the loss of VAT would make the money coming in a zero sum game, not to mention that this will also put yet more strain on the beleaguered retail sector. This goes alongside the fact that the amount raised would, at the very best, be a drop in the water compared to the gaping void in our public finances.
No, what we are really seeing here is a blatant class war tactic in a cynical attempt to shore up Labour’s rapidly plummeting approval rating (in the low 20%s now). It seems as if the Politburo in charge of Labour have decided to abandon the middle ground completely and return to their traditional Left wing class warrior status. Not since the ban on hunting a few years back have we seen this level of blatant class war.
I am more than happy to see taxes increased if we see a corresponding increase in the quality of services. I would even pay more than 50% of my income (not that I am paying that now – my income is paltry enough to escape most of the hits in this budget) if I could be assured of world-class and efficient health, child care, education, and security services. I would point to the relatively successful socialist experiments in Scandinavia to demonstrate how this would work.
Instead we have a government who has been deficit spending for a decade to prop up an aging and inefficient public sector, especially the bureaucratic behemoth that is the NHS. It is true that New Labour has invested unprecedented levels into health and education, but it is also undeniable that we have not seen an improvement in services commensurate with this investment. We have seen our schools dissolve into indiscipline and a disturbing “validation not education” mentality. We have seen our hospitals wracked by super bugs and hygiene problems, not to mention basic (and fatal) incompetence in many cases.
We have seen huge numbers of administrators and bureaucrats installed at all tiers of public service to monitor government targets, not to mention just silly numbers of social engineers in the guise of diversity monitors and health and safety experts.
As Jeremy Clarkson so rightly said in Saturday’s Sun, these bloated public sector entities should be culled. I would go further though – put the money saved not into tax cuts, but into nationalisation of what little industry is left in this country. Yes, I said nationalise the industry – I am not only right wing, there is a broad swathe of the left in me too. Certainly if we are to have any hope of a secure and prosperous future we need to rebuild industry in the UK – the world will be a very different place after this recession/depression and I do not see London ever completely recovering its position as the overwhelming centre of financial services in Europe, let alone the world.
I also think it is telling that the budget sets aside much more money for green issues and foreign aid than it does for retraining and skills building in the UK. As more and more top scientists go against the money making and panic causing consensus about the environment collapsing unless we act NOW, I find it appalling that any of our stretched public finances are being spent on pointless, yet headline catching, green initiatives of dubious worth (such as off shore wind farms – expensive and worthless).
I once again stress that I do support research into alternative energy sources, mainly to remove our dependence on the OPEC nations, which are pretty much to a nation vile and despicable and who support anti-Western agendas. I also support recycling to limit use of landfill, unless we work out a way to dump all our crap in Italy. Would anyone notice?
New Labour seems to have been killed off last week, and a lurch to their traditional class warrior chip-on-their shoulder attitudes has taken place. Yet more manifesto promises have been broken and we still have a year before a general election can occur to put only a slightly better set of Muppets in charge. I am really getting more disillusioned and worried about the future of the UK, and especially my future here. Is the grass really greener anywhere else though?
***
Overall an interesting week, showing once more that our government is getting desperate, playing the vote catching game as much as possible yet still displaying a frightening arrogance, ignorance, and incompetence. Darling’s ridiculously and fantastical estimations of economic recovery have been mocked and debunked by just about every reputable economist that matters. We are getting put more into debt than since WW2, our government has borrowed more money than all other British governments in history put together. The mind really boggles.
The introduction of a 50% tax band for the top 1% richest people in the UK might sound like a good idea, and indeed has a 56% approval rate from the sheepal polled this last weekend. Of course, to anyone of any brains at all, the 50% tax bracket will not raise even the paltry amount of money that Darling and Brown think that it will – even the treasury predicts that 69% of the 350K people who are eligible to pay it will somehow avoid it.
Yet even if all of those eligible paid the tax, would it really make a difference? Well, not really in the big scheme of things. The rich would simply spend less, and the loss of VAT would make the money coming in a zero sum game, not to mention that this will also put yet more strain on the beleaguered retail sector. This goes alongside the fact that the amount raised would, at the very best, be a drop in the water compared to the gaping void in our public finances.
No, what we are really seeing here is a blatant class war tactic in a cynical attempt to shore up Labour’s rapidly plummeting approval rating (in the low 20%s now). It seems as if the Politburo in charge of Labour have decided to abandon the middle ground completely and return to their traditional Left wing class warrior status. Not since the ban on hunting a few years back have we seen this level of blatant class war.
I am more than happy to see taxes increased if we see a corresponding increase in the quality of services. I would even pay more than 50% of my income (not that I am paying that now – my income is paltry enough to escape most of the hits in this budget) if I could be assured of world-class and efficient health, child care, education, and security services. I would point to the relatively successful socialist experiments in Scandinavia to demonstrate how this would work.
Instead we have a government who has been deficit spending for a decade to prop up an aging and inefficient public sector, especially the bureaucratic behemoth that is the NHS. It is true that New Labour has invested unprecedented levels into health and education, but it is also undeniable that we have not seen an improvement in services commensurate with this investment. We have seen our schools dissolve into indiscipline and a disturbing “validation not education” mentality. We have seen our hospitals wracked by super bugs and hygiene problems, not to mention basic (and fatal) incompetence in many cases.
We have seen huge numbers of administrators and bureaucrats installed at all tiers of public service to monitor government targets, not to mention just silly numbers of social engineers in the guise of diversity monitors and health and safety experts.
As Jeremy Clarkson so rightly said in Saturday’s Sun, these bloated public sector entities should be culled. I would go further though – put the money saved not into tax cuts, but into nationalisation of what little industry is left in this country. Yes, I said nationalise the industry – I am not only right wing, there is a broad swathe of the left in me too. Certainly if we are to have any hope of a secure and prosperous future we need to rebuild industry in the UK – the world will be a very different place after this recession/depression and I do not see London ever completely recovering its position as the overwhelming centre of financial services in Europe, let alone the world.
I also think it is telling that the budget sets aside much more money for green issues and foreign aid than it does for retraining and skills building in the UK. As more and more top scientists go against the money making and panic causing consensus about the environment collapsing unless we act NOW, I find it appalling that any of our stretched public finances are being spent on pointless, yet headline catching, green initiatives of dubious worth (such as off shore wind farms – expensive and worthless).
I once again stress that I do support research into alternative energy sources, mainly to remove our dependence on the OPEC nations, which are pretty much to a nation vile and despicable and who support anti-Western agendas. I also support recycling to limit use of landfill, unless we work out a way to dump all our crap in Italy. Would anyone notice?
New Labour seems to have been killed off last week, and a lurch to their traditional class warrior chip-on-their shoulder attitudes has taken place. Yet more manifesto promises have been broken and we still have a year before a general election can occur to put only a slightly better set of Muppets in charge. I am really getting more disillusioned and worried about the future of the UK, and especially my future here. Is the grass really greener anywhere else though?
Tuesday, 12 May 2009
Facebook Transplant Part 11 - Originally Posted 24/2/09 - The Guantanamo "Britons"
No idea how I missed this earlier on - but here it is now
***
So, fourteen “Britons” have been returned to the bosom of “their” country and nation after being interned at Guantanamo bay for the last few years. The legality of their internment has been the subject of much chatterati angst about being held without charge, although it seems to me to be a pretty clear cut case of them being prisoners of war.
Not that accusations of torture are acceptable of course – as long as it is in fact actual torture and not the more soft and pathetic definitions of “torture” much maligned by the apologists and appeasers, perfectly acceptable (in my view) measures such as sleep deprivation, basic food, no entertainment, solitary confinement etc. I must say that minor operations without pain killers do border on “real” torture, but its hardly electrodes on the genitals is it?
But, for a moment, let us set aside the legality and conditions of their internment. Let’s actually look at these fine specimens of humanity for themselves. This information is garnered from online sources and today’s Daily Mail.
Binyam Mohammed, aged 30. Born in Ethiopia who sought asylum in the UK and granted UK residency, not citizenship. Arrested in 2002 following a “holiday” in Afghanistan during which he undertook weapons and other training, something which he himself admitted but that is glossed over by his supporters. He was arrested for allegedly being involved in a “dirty bomb” plot. He arrived back in the UK this month and is already ramping himself up to sue the hell out of everyone he can for his “mistreatment”. Don’t be fooled by the pictures on TV and in the papers – his pitiful condition is the result of a hunger strike, and not systematic abuse by his incarcerators.
Martin Mubanga, aged 36. Dual Zambian and UK citizen. Spent 33 months at Guantanamo after being arrested in Zambia for alleged terror links. He came back to the UK in 2005 and was released after questioning by the security services, although he has not been issued a new passport and is pretty restricted in his movements. He is suing the British government over their cooperation in his arrest.
Abdenour Sameur, aged 35. Algerian asylum seeker granted residency in 1999. Attended paramilitary training in Afghanistan and is rumoured to have taken part in military operations in the early part of the century before being arrested in Pakistan in 2001. He is back in the UK, but has dropped off the public radar, but hopefully not that of the security services. He seems to have avoided the litigious urges that have taken hold of his fellows – for now.
Jamil el-Banna, aged 46. Jordanian asylum seeker. Apparently an associate of Abu Qatada, Osama Bin Laden’s ambassador in Europe. Arrested in the Gambia in 2002. Also was wanted for questioning by the Spanish authorities regarding the Madrid bombings. Now comfortably ensconced in North London and busy suing the Security Services.
Omar Deghayes, aged 39. Asylum seeker from Libya who has been in the UK since the 1980s. Also was wanted for questioning by the Spanish for connections to the Madrid bombing. Has allegedly appeared on Islamist and Jihadist websites inciting various holy wars around the world. Suing the Security Services.
Bisher al Rawi, aged 41. Illegal Immigrant who arrived from Iraq in the 1990s but overstayed his visa. Arrested alongside Jamil el-Banna in the Gambia in 2002. Returned to the UK in 2007, released and is now suing the security services.
Richard Belmer, aged 29. Islamic convert and a British citizen. Received paramilitary training in Afghanistan. Returned to the UK in 2005 and is now suing the Security Services.
Jamal Udeen Al-Harith, aged 43. Islamic convert (born Ronald Fiddler of West Indian extraction). Actually captured on the ground in Afghanistan by the Taliban while he was trying to get into Afghanistan to help them fight! Rescued and re-arrested by US forces. Returned to the UK in 2004 and, amazingly, not suing anyone.
Moazzam Begg, aged 40. British born and British citizen, his parents are immigrants from India. Arrested in Pakistan for allegedly being an Al Qaeda recruiter. Admittedly has provided financial aid to various Moslem fighters, but denies ever being a combatant himself. After 3 years spent in Cuba, he returned to the UK in 2005 and has spent his time since helping people fight the internments at Guantanamo. His is, of course, suing the Security Services.
Feroz Abbasi, aged 29. Islamic convert, Ugandan immigrant and British Citizen. Arrested in Afghanistan after allegedly attending a number of paramilitary training courses. Returned to the UK in 2005, questioned, and released without charge. Not suing anyone at the moment.
Tarek Dergoul, aged 30. British citizen. Apparently not religious before his detention in Cuba, he claims to have been in Afghanistan (where he was arrested) on business, looking to capitalize on buying property cheaply from refugees. Wounded prior to his arrest and apparently was medically tortured during his internment. Has been back in the UK since 2004 and claiming disability benefit due to his wounds. Suing both the US and UK governments.
Ruhel Ahmed, aged 27. British Citizen. One of the “Tipton Three”. Has admitted to receiving weapons training in Afghanistan, where he was arrested. Returned to the UK in 2004 and is suing the Security Services.
Shafiq Rasul, aged 32. Another “Tipton Three” guy, also a British Citizen and also arrested in Afghanistan, where he admits that he was given weapons training. Suing the Security Services and the US government.
Asif Iqbal, aged 27. British Citizen and the third of the “Tipton Three”. Also arrested on the ground in Afghanistan. Suing the Security Services.
So there you go. Fourteen men, fourteen “Britons”. Nine British Citizens, one holding dual citizenship with Zambia, seven were born here, six of those born here of the second generation. Four asylum seekers and one illegal immigrant. All of the asylum seekers originated in Islamic countries. Two converts to Islam.
Of all of them, perhaps only Tarek Dergoul could be said to not have any concrete links to terror, either through themselves or through acquaintances, although Dergoul’s story is a bit weak. Several admit to undertaking paramilitary training in Afghanistan, training which I think that we can safely assume they intended to use against Allied forces on the ground, or indeed to perpetrate terrorist atrocities at “home” in the UK.
It is also distressing that most of these criminals have not been incarcerated in the UK. Another example of appeasement and cowardice on the part of our government. Surely training at arms with the intention of fighting the UK or its allies constitutes treason? Surely they are in fact perfectly justified prisoners of war and thus not entitled to formal charges and fixed sentences?
And now most of them are suing various people for their mistreatment and the collusion between the UK and the US for their arrest. This is all that people are focusing on – the aggrieved and hard done by “Britons”, conveniently ignoring the fact that most of them are in fact dangerous Islamists who intended to raise arms against the country that either provided them asylum or indeed protected, educated, and gave their parents citizenship.
I am appalled at this of course. Personally I had no problem at all with Guantanamo. I have no problem at all with holding people who admit to receiving paramilitary training at Islamist camps under lock and key forever if need be. I am perfectly comfortable with “tough” interrogation methods and very draconian and Spartan treatment of these traitors. I am even perfectly fine with their execution for treason, if only our government had the minimals to carry out such a sentence.
I am not comfortable with the media sympathy for men who would have fired on our own soldiers in Afghanistan if they had been given the opportunity. I am not comfortable with their claiming benefits and getting generous treatment from a contrite and shame faced government (who for once have NOTHING to be ashamed about). I am not comfortable with the precedent of these criminals being exonerated simply due to their being incarcerated without charge for so many years – they are NOT civil criminals, they are traitors and prisoners of a war being fought without borders.
I can only hope their attempts to sue the various governments and agencies involved in their incarceration fail completely, but I doubt that they will. In this issue, as in so many others, the government will doubtless roll over for the liberals and the special interests, for the radicals and the demonstrators, for the bleeding hearts and the short sighted chatterati. It makes me feel physically ill.
***
So, fourteen “Britons” have been returned to the bosom of “their” country and nation after being interned at Guantanamo bay for the last few years. The legality of their internment has been the subject of much chatterati angst about being held without charge, although it seems to me to be a pretty clear cut case of them being prisoners of war.
Not that accusations of torture are acceptable of course – as long as it is in fact actual torture and not the more soft and pathetic definitions of “torture” much maligned by the apologists and appeasers, perfectly acceptable (in my view) measures such as sleep deprivation, basic food, no entertainment, solitary confinement etc. I must say that minor operations without pain killers do border on “real” torture, but its hardly electrodes on the genitals is it?
But, for a moment, let us set aside the legality and conditions of their internment. Let’s actually look at these fine specimens of humanity for themselves. This information is garnered from online sources and today’s Daily Mail.
Binyam Mohammed, aged 30. Born in Ethiopia who sought asylum in the UK and granted UK residency, not citizenship. Arrested in 2002 following a “holiday” in Afghanistan during which he undertook weapons and other training, something which he himself admitted but that is glossed over by his supporters. He was arrested for allegedly being involved in a “dirty bomb” plot. He arrived back in the UK this month and is already ramping himself up to sue the hell out of everyone he can for his “mistreatment”. Don’t be fooled by the pictures on TV and in the papers – his pitiful condition is the result of a hunger strike, and not systematic abuse by his incarcerators.
Martin Mubanga, aged 36. Dual Zambian and UK citizen. Spent 33 months at Guantanamo after being arrested in Zambia for alleged terror links. He came back to the UK in 2005 and was released after questioning by the security services, although he has not been issued a new passport and is pretty restricted in his movements. He is suing the British government over their cooperation in his arrest.
Abdenour Sameur, aged 35. Algerian asylum seeker granted residency in 1999. Attended paramilitary training in Afghanistan and is rumoured to have taken part in military operations in the early part of the century before being arrested in Pakistan in 2001. He is back in the UK, but has dropped off the public radar, but hopefully not that of the security services. He seems to have avoided the litigious urges that have taken hold of his fellows – for now.
Jamil el-Banna, aged 46. Jordanian asylum seeker. Apparently an associate of Abu Qatada, Osama Bin Laden’s ambassador in Europe. Arrested in the Gambia in 2002. Also was wanted for questioning by the Spanish authorities regarding the Madrid bombings. Now comfortably ensconced in North London and busy suing the Security Services.
Omar Deghayes, aged 39. Asylum seeker from Libya who has been in the UK since the 1980s. Also was wanted for questioning by the Spanish for connections to the Madrid bombing. Has allegedly appeared on Islamist and Jihadist websites inciting various holy wars around the world. Suing the Security Services.
Bisher al Rawi, aged 41. Illegal Immigrant who arrived from Iraq in the 1990s but overstayed his visa. Arrested alongside Jamil el-Banna in the Gambia in 2002. Returned to the UK in 2007, released and is now suing the security services.
Richard Belmer, aged 29. Islamic convert and a British citizen. Received paramilitary training in Afghanistan. Returned to the UK in 2005 and is now suing the Security Services.
Jamal Udeen Al-Harith, aged 43. Islamic convert (born Ronald Fiddler of West Indian extraction). Actually captured on the ground in Afghanistan by the Taliban while he was trying to get into Afghanistan to help them fight! Rescued and re-arrested by US forces. Returned to the UK in 2004 and, amazingly, not suing anyone.
Moazzam Begg, aged 40. British born and British citizen, his parents are immigrants from India. Arrested in Pakistan for allegedly being an Al Qaeda recruiter. Admittedly has provided financial aid to various Moslem fighters, but denies ever being a combatant himself. After 3 years spent in Cuba, he returned to the UK in 2005 and has spent his time since helping people fight the internments at Guantanamo. His is, of course, suing the Security Services.
Feroz Abbasi, aged 29. Islamic convert, Ugandan immigrant and British Citizen. Arrested in Afghanistan after allegedly attending a number of paramilitary training courses. Returned to the UK in 2005, questioned, and released without charge. Not suing anyone at the moment.
Tarek Dergoul, aged 30. British citizen. Apparently not religious before his detention in Cuba, he claims to have been in Afghanistan (where he was arrested) on business, looking to capitalize on buying property cheaply from refugees. Wounded prior to his arrest and apparently was medically tortured during his internment. Has been back in the UK since 2004 and claiming disability benefit due to his wounds. Suing both the US and UK governments.
Ruhel Ahmed, aged 27. British Citizen. One of the “Tipton Three”. Has admitted to receiving weapons training in Afghanistan, where he was arrested. Returned to the UK in 2004 and is suing the Security Services.
Shafiq Rasul, aged 32. Another “Tipton Three” guy, also a British Citizen and also arrested in Afghanistan, where he admits that he was given weapons training. Suing the Security Services and the US government.
Asif Iqbal, aged 27. British Citizen and the third of the “Tipton Three”. Also arrested on the ground in Afghanistan. Suing the Security Services.
So there you go. Fourteen men, fourteen “Britons”. Nine British Citizens, one holding dual citizenship with Zambia, seven were born here, six of those born here of the second generation. Four asylum seekers and one illegal immigrant. All of the asylum seekers originated in Islamic countries. Two converts to Islam.
Of all of them, perhaps only Tarek Dergoul could be said to not have any concrete links to terror, either through themselves or through acquaintances, although Dergoul’s story is a bit weak. Several admit to undertaking paramilitary training in Afghanistan, training which I think that we can safely assume they intended to use against Allied forces on the ground, or indeed to perpetrate terrorist atrocities at “home” in the UK.
It is also distressing that most of these criminals have not been incarcerated in the UK. Another example of appeasement and cowardice on the part of our government. Surely training at arms with the intention of fighting the UK or its allies constitutes treason? Surely they are in fact perfectly justified prisoners of war and thus not entitled to formal charges and fixed sentences?
And now most of them are suing various people for their mistreatment and the collusion between the UK and the US for their arrest. This is all that people are focusing on – the aggrieved and hard done by “Britons”, conveniently ignoring the fact that most of them are in fact dangerous Islamists who intended to raise arms against the country that either provided them asylum or indeed protected, educated, and gave their parents citizenship.
I am appalled at this of course. Personally I had no problem at all with Guantanamo. I have no problem at all with holding people who admit to receiving paramilitary training at Islamist camps under lock and key forever if need be. I am perfectly comfortable with “tough” interrogation methods and very draconian and Spartan treatment of these traitors. I am even perfectly fine with their execution for treason, if only our government had the minimals to carry out such a sentence.
I am not comfortable with the media sympathy for men who would have fired on our own soldiers in Afghanistan if they had been given the opportunity. I am not comfortable with their claiming benefits and getting generous treatment from a contrite and shame faced government (who for once have NOTHING to be ashamed about). I am not comfortable with the precedent of these criminals being exonerated simply due to their being incarcerated without charge for so many years – they are NOT civil criminals, they are traitors and prisoners of a war being fought without borders.
I can only hope their attempts to sue the various governments and agencies involved in their incarceration fail completely, but I doubt that they will. In this issue, as in so many others, the government will doubtless roll over for the liberals and the special interests, for the radicals and the demonstrators, for the bleeding hearts and the short sighted chatterati. It makes me feel physically ill.
Facebook Transplant Part 10 - Originally Posted 17/4/09 - More Betrayal
I saw the headline a few days ago and couldn’t believe it. Finally some mainstream media approaching the problem. Yet it has all been over in a flash and a pan, with no debate being stimulated. British nationals are in Afghanistan trying to kill British soldiers and no one seems to care.
Well, some people do of course. The story that got me going on this can be found at the following links
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1170178/British-bomber-fighting-Taliban-British-soldiers.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/article2377463.ece
It is pretty plain that we have a huge problem that is not being tackled in the correct manner. Once again the Moslem refusal to integrate into British society and adopt British values and culture when living in the UK comes back to bite the multi-culturalists in the backside.
And once again all the effort by the chattering classes is towards apologism and appeasement. Now, despite my apparent rampant and all encompassing Isalamaphobia, I do realize that there are British Moslems who have achieved a level of integration, who would never raise arms against their fellow, and who subscribe to the more moderate and inclusive interpretations of Islam. However, it is my firm belief that this sort of British Moslem is in the minority, or at best a plurality, and not the majority claimed by the media and the left.
Until the powers that be realize that multiculturalism is a foolish tactic, that we cannot survive as a safe and secure society until groups are broken up and encouraged to integrate with the mainstream, native culture, these things will continue to come to light. I actually see it getting a lot worse domestically – the Islamists who have been trained in Afghanistan who return here could just as easily bring blood to these streets as those of Kabul.
What is the solution? Well, I don’t agree with the more rabid spewings of people like the BNP about voluntary repatriation, but I do think that those who are British by birth or who act in a treasonous fashion should be imprisoned for life (I would prefer execution, but let’s not go there). Those who are nationalised, or even illegal, as opposed to born here should be sent home, no matter the human rights situations there.
Not that this will happen of course. Situation and event will follow situation and event again and again, and every time they do excuses will be made and the multicultural party line will be trotted out by the liberate as the only solution, that we should alter our habits, our laws, our foreign policy to satisfy the demands of those recently come to our society.
I am also fully aware of the irony of an immigrant (me) saying these things. I would hasten to point out that I am not talking specifically of Britain in the previous paragraph – the things I have written there are applicable to all Western countries, especially those with a higher proportion of Moslems in their population than here in the UK, places like France and Holland. Not that you often hear of Dutch Jihadists, but the French have more than their fair share of malcontents thanks to the legacy of Algeria. Despite having not been born here, I am pretty obviously Western in culture and outlook, and thus I see no dichotomy between my origins and what I say here.
This has obviously annoyed me and been playing on my mind, but thank goodness some sunshine is on the horizon – the revolting Jaqui Smith looks she is finally about to lose her job, unless Gordon saves her yet again. After irregularities with her housing expense claims, her husband charging pay-per-view to parliamentary expenses, and of course her allowing the offices of Tory MP Damian Green to be raided without warrant, and indeed for that MP to be arrested and questioned regarding leaks from her department (something that all parties actually rely upon).
The latter is what actually looks like it will finally do her inhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/5166088/Damian-Green-affair-A-further-disgrace-by-Jacqui-Smith-an-unworthy-minister.html
I just really hope so – its past time that this awful woman was out of public office. I have been waiting for this moment since the whole Geert Wilders debacle.
Well, some people do of course. The story that got me going on this can be found at the following links
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1170178/British-bomber-fighting-Taliban-British-soldiers.html
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/campaigns/our_boys/article2377463.ece
It is pretty plain that we have a huge problem that is not being tackled in the correct manner. Once again the Moslem refusal to integrate into British society and adopt British values and culture when living in the UK comes back to bite the multi-culturalists in the backside.
And once again all the effort by the chattering classes is towards apologism and appeasement. Now, despite my apparent rampant and all encompassing Isalamaphobia, I do realize that there are British Moslems who have achieved a level of integration, who would never raise arms against their fellow, and who subscribe to the more moderate and inclusive interpretations of Islam. However, it is my firm belief that this sort of British Moslem is in the minority, or at best a plurality, and not the majority claimed by the media and the left.
Until the powers that be realize that multiculturalism is a foolish tactic, that we cannot survive as a safe and secure society until groups are broken up and encouraged to integrate with the mainstream, native culture, these things will continue to come to light. I actually see it getting a lot worse domestically – the Islamists who have been trained in Afghanistan who return here could just as easily bring blood to these streets as those of Kabul.
What is the solution? Well, I don’t agree with the more rabid spewings of people like the BNP about voluntary repatriation, but I do think that those who are British by birth or who act in a treasonous fashion should be imprisoned for life (I would prefer execution, but let’s not go there). Those who are nationalised, or even illegal, as opposed to born here should be sent home, no matter the human rights situations there.
Not that this will happen of course. Situation and event will follow situation and event again and again, and every time they do excuses will be made and the multicultural party line will be trotted out by the liberate as the only solution, that we should alter our habits, our laws, our foreign policy to satisfy the demands of those recently come to our society.
I am also fully aware of the irony of an immigrant (me) saying these things. I would hasten to point out that I am not talking specifically of Britain in the previous paragraph – the things I have written there are applicable to all Western countries, especially those with a higher proportion of Moslems in their population than here in the UK, places like France and Holland. Not that you often hear of Dutch Jihadists, but the French have more than their fair share of malcontents thanks to the legacy of Algeria. Despite having not been born here, I am pretty obviously Western in culture and outlook, and thus I see no dichotomy between my origins and what I say here.
This has obviously annoyed me and been playing on my mind, but thank goodness some sunshine is on the horizon – the revolting Jaqui Smith looks she is finally about to lose her job, unless Gordon saves her yet again. After irregularities with her housing expense claims, her husband charging pay-per-view to parliamentary expenses, and of course her allowing the offices of Tory MP Damian Green to be raided without warrant, and indeed for that MP to be arrested and questioned regarding leaks from her department (something that all parties actually rely upon).
The latter is what actually looks like it will finally do her inhttp://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/5166088/Damian-Green-affair-A-further-disgrace-by-Jacqui-Smith-an-unworthy-minister.html
I just really hope so – its past time that this awful woman was out of public office. I have been waiting for this moment since the whole Geert Wilders debacle.
Facebook Transplant Part 9 - Originally Posted 30/3/09 - One in the eye for the Greenies
I see-sawed over the climate issue for a while, even semi-buying into Al Gore's monstrosity of a film for a few days. I have since abandoned such scare mongering fallicies in favour of cynical belief that environmental issues are all just ways to exert more control over us and to extract more money from us while doing it.
This is supported by an article in the Telegraph last Friday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
In this article, a very intelligent man named Nils-Axel Mörner puts some good scientific proof up against one of the key components of the entire argument - rising sea levels. Increased Carbon = Global Warming = Ice Caps Melting = Rising Sea Levels = Mass Destruction.
Given that Nils-Axel Mörner is probably the leading global expert on rising sea levels, I would say that he is perfectly placed to make these observations. Its past time that more people wake up and realize that this is all one big con.
Now, I am not against recycling - it makes sense that we will run out of landfill space at some point. I do resent that our councils just collect it all to sell it on, thereby making yet more money from us on top of exhorbatant council taxes, but that is by the by. But I am against the endless guilt tripping and imposition that the whole damned "environmental movement" subjects us all to ever day.
This is supported by an article in the Telegraph last Friday.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/christopherbooker/5067351/Rise-of-sea-levels-is-the-greatest-lie-ever-told.html
In this article, a very intelligent man named Nils-Axel Mörner puts some good scientific proof up against one of the key components of the entire argument - rising sea levels. Increased Carbon = Global Warming = Ice Caps Melting = Rising Sea Levels = Mass Destruction.
Given that Nils-Axel Mörner is probably the leading global expert on rising sea levels, I would say that he is perfectly placed to make these observations. Its past time that more people wake up and realize that this is all one big con.
Now, I am not against recycling - it makes sense that we will run out of landfill space at some point. I do resent that our councils just collect it all to sell it on, thereby making yet more money from us on top of exhorbatant council taxes, but that is by the by. But I am against the endless guilt tripping and imposition that the whole damned "environmental movement" subjects us all to ever day.
Facebook Transplant Part 8 - Originally Posted 27/3/09 - St Obama Loses his Halo
I have been thinking about writing this little rant/blog for a few weeks now. I must admit that the cautious optimism that I felt regarding the election of St. Obama has faded almost completely and I now look at him as potentially the worst president in decades.
I read today a very interesting piece in the New York Post. http://www.nypost.com/seven/03252009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_foreign_failures_161154.htm?&page=0. Unfortunately, the UK press, not to mention our government, is so enamoured with St. Obama that any criticism is largely left unuttered, or explained away with vapid clichés and sound bytes. The cult of celebrity of St. Obama seems unassailable – even the snubbing of our personality-deficient Prime Minister is swept under the covers with astonishing speed.
I have been stewing over the “snub” of Gordon Brown for a while now. I personally can’t stand the man, but this is very worrying for the “special relationship” between the USA and UK. For those of you who don’t know, during his recent visit to the US, Brown presented a very thoughtful and pertinent present to St. Obama, and in return was given a crappy boxed set of DVDs. (More info here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1159627/To-special-friend-Gordon-25-DVDs-Obama-gives-Brown-set-classic-movies-Lets-hope-likes-Wizard-Oz.html).In addition, the entire time they were together felt forced and insincere. St. Obama’s staff even cancelled a joint press conference (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5837571.ece).
It’s actually quite pathetic how all of our political big wigs in all major parties pander to the ill informed public approval for St. Obama. Not a single opportunity to attach themselves to his ascendance goes unused – even in Prime Minister’s Question time Labour backbenchers take every chance to try and tie their own faltering government’s feeble attempts to keep the country on track to a “wider plan” being launched by St. Obama.
Why is St. Obama squandering all of the international good will that his election brought? Naiveté? Indifference? Closet isolationism? I have no idea, but he is showing a shameful indifference to international alliances in favour of trying to curry influence with major powers such as China, Russia and even the EU as opposed to supporting the smaller scale but historically far more loyal, reliable, and even moral allies. Instead of rebuilding America's place in the world, I think that he is doing just as much damage as Bush ever did, but this time to steadfast and loyal allies and partners.
His antagonism for the British might be understandable if the rumours of his Grandfather being mistreated in colonial Kenya are actually true. If they are, and there doesn’t seem to be any proof, they demonstrate a worrying inability to let bygones be bygones – hardly something that you want to see in the first black president in US history, and possibly a harbinger of his being unduly influenced by racially motivated groups and ideals during his administration.
His domestic and economic policy is also somewhat worrying. I don’t pretend to have the faintest idea of how to reverse the recession, but something fundamental inside me recoils from the idea that massive deficit spending is the solution. I am not alone either, as can be seen from the comments of the latest EU president (http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/26/obamas-budget-policies-under-attack-overseas/ - I love the Czechs).
So, in the two months or so since he has taken over as the most powerful man in the world, the shine has definitely come off St. Obama for me, and I think for a lot of other people, especially the left and liberals, although the latter would not dare to voice their disillusion.
I read today a very interesting piece in the New York Post. http://www.nypost.com/seven/03252009/postopinion/opedcolumnists/os_foreign_failures_161154.htm?&page=0. Unfortunately, the UK press, not to mention our government, is so enamoured with St. Obama that any criticism is largely left unuttered, or explained away with vapid clichés and sound bytes. The cult of celebrity of St. Obama seems unassailable – even the snubbing of our personality-deficient Prime Minister is swept under the covers with astonishing speed.
I have been stewing over the “snub” of Gordon Brown for a while now. I personally can’t stand the man, but this is very worrying for the “special relationship” between the USA and UK. For those of you who don’t know, during his recent visit to the US, Brown presented a very thoughtful and pertinent present to St. Obama, and in return was given a crappy boxed set of DVDs. (More info here http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1159627/To-special-friend-Gordon-25-DVDs-Obama-gives-Brown-set-classic-movies-Lets-hope-likes-Wizard-Oz.html).In addition, the entire time they were together felt forced and insincere. St. Obama’s staff even cancelled a joint press conference (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article5837571.ece).
It’s actually quite pathetic how all of our political big wigs in all major parties pander to the ill informed public approval for St. Obama. Not a single opportunity to attach themselves to his ascendance goes unused – even in Prime Minister’s Question time Labour backbenchers take every chance to try and tie their own faltering government’s feeble attempts to keep the country on track to a “wider plan” being launched by St. Obama.
Why is St. Obama squandering all of the international good will that his election brought? Naiveté? Indifference? Closet isolationism? I have no idea, but he is showing a shameful indifference to international alliances in favour of trying to curry influence with major powers such as China, Russia and even the EU as opposed to supporting the smaller scale but historically far more loyal, reliable, and even moral allies. Instead of rebuilding America's place in the world, I think that he is doing just as much damage as Bush ever did, but this time to steadfast and loyal allies and partners.
His antagonism for the British might be understandable if the rumours of his Grandfather being mistreated in colonial Kenya are actually true. If they are, and there doesn’t seem to be any proof, they demonstrate a worrying inability to let bygones be bygones – hardly something that you want to see in the first black president in US history, and possibly a harbinger of his being unduly influenced by racially motivated groups and ideals during his administration.
His domestic and economic policy is also somewhat worrying. I don’t pretend to have the faintest idea of how to reverse the recession, but something fundamental inside me recoils from the idea that massive deficit spending is the solution. I am not alone either, as can be seen from the comments of the latest EU president (http://washingtontimes.com/news/2009/mar/26/obamas-budget-policies-under-attack-overseas/ - I love the Czechs).
So, in the two months or so since he has taken over as the most powerful man in the world, the shine has definitely come off St. Obama for me, and I think for a lot of other people, especially the left and liberals, although the latter would not dare to voice their disillusion.
Monday, 11 May 2009
Facebook Transplant Part 7 - Originally Posted 24/3/09 - 5 Dead Politicans that are better off that way
This was another "top 5" list that I wanted to do. This time I chose politicians who have been dead for a while.
***
This list does not include the obvious culprits – I think that we can all agree that the world is a better place now that Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Franco, Peron, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Mao Tse Tung, Salazar, Robbespiere, the Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, and their like are dead. Their infamy is beyond dispute, and rightly so.
Instead, this list is meant to highlight some more obscure historical personages who have since shuffled from this mortal coil. In most cases, a more expeditious shuffling would probably have saved us all a lot of trouble, but alas that was not meant to be. This list is made mostly of British and American men, the reasons that I have included them on the list will be self evident in their individual entries. I hasten to add that each of these men were not exclusively bad – many accomplished great things. However, they each in their own way did something that, in my opinion, has had significant and negative repercussions in our world today.
#1 – Harold Wilson
Harold Wilson was a Labour politician who served as Prime Minister twice in the 60s and 70s. The one and only reason that he is on this list is quiet simply Rhodesia. It was during his tenure as PM that the promises of responsible self government and dominion made following the referendum in 1922 (after Southern Rhodesia rejected a union with South Africa) was broken.
This broken promise lead directly to Rhodesia declaring independence from the British Empire in 1965, which lead to 15 years of guerrilla warfare and finally the installation of a Marxist regimen in Zimbabwe, which in turn lead to the shocking conditions and situation in that unhappy land today.
A more expedient and compromising stance might have mitigated Rhodesian nationalism and paved the way to a slower, but far more stable and productive path to democracy, racial and social equality in the country. Once again, the post-WW2 Labour obsession with divesting itself of the colonies as quickly as possible lead to premature and unprepared independence of Zimbabwe, just as it did with so much of Africa and India, leading to atrocities at the time, and often to tragedies to this day.
#2 – Edward Heath
A contemporary of Wilson, Edward Heath was a Conservative politician who served as Prime Minister between Wilson’s times in office. Also culpable of betrayal with regards Rhodesia, the real reason he is on this list is mainly due to his actions in response to the popularity of Enoch Powell.
Heath was ruthless in his hold on power as leader of the Conservatives, and the grass-roots support that Powell received due to his controversial (and somewhat prophetic) opinions about immigration worried him greatly. In response he set out to marginalize and discredit Powell before the latter could challenge Heath’s leadership of the party, a challenge that he might well have succeeded in making.
While this is just the standard political in fighting that we have come to expect, the path that Heath took had a far more long lasting effect than merely neutralizing a rival – it is Heath who was the first Conservative leader to embrace the fallicy of multiculturalism, with all the of the subsequent problems that this “experiment” has resulted in. In many ways, I blame Heath more than the liberal do-gooders and blind idealists for what is going on in Britain today.
To compound his crime of sowing the seeds of the death of British culture and identity, he also set in motion the end of its sovereignty and independence by taking Britain into the EEC in 1973, something which we can see as a very mixed blessing with hindsight.
#3 – Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Now, FDR is arguably the most popular President of the United States ever. He did some amazing things while in office, and I have great admiration for many of his “New Deal” initiatives. I am also grateful for his support, both overt and clandestine, during the dark period of WW2 when Britain stood alone.
However, I cannot forgive him two things. Firstly, he was devoted to the removal of the British Empire as a world power. The aid that he provided was crucial to Britain’s survival, but in gaining that aid Britain effectively allowed Roosevelt to make the Empire too expensive for a debt ridden Britain to maintain. This was a conscious move on his part, and the events that his attitude towards the Empire caused allowed the far-too-rapid dissolution of the Empire and premature independence for dozens of colonies, which in turn has lead to millions of deaths and turmoil that continues today.
FDR was also naively attached to the alliance with Stalin. He spent so much time making sure that the British Empire would cease to exist, he blindly allowed the creation of a far more evil and dangerous Stalinist Empire in Europe, and indeed through much of the territory that once fell under the Union flag. Say what you like about the good and bad of the British Empire, but nothing could ever persuade me to agree that it was more morally defunct than the USSR. The whole Cold War is pretty much his fault in my opinion.
#4 – Gamal Abdel Nasser
The only non-Anglo-American on the list is on here for being the catalyst for the event that first showed that the Cold War could become hot, and indeed the event that removed all doubt that the world was now to be shared between the super powers of the USA and USSR – the Seuz Crisis.
In nationalising the Suez canal in 1956, Nasser caused the humiliation of France and Great Britain when the United States withdrew their support from their allies to avoid confrontation with the Soviet Union, a confrontation which, with historical hindsight, the Soviets would have almost certainly lost even if they did not back down in the face of American ICBMs (the USSR would not be able to match US ICBM numbers for years).
Nasser was also a founding figure in modern Arab nationalism. With is anti-Western rhetoric, he in many ways reignited the mistrust between the West and the region in the post-war period, which when combined with a growing Islamic fundamentalism has lead to the clash of cultures that we all suffer under today.
#5 – Clement Attlee
Clement Attlee won the general election in 1945, ousting Churchill in an example of national betrayal that was merely the forshadowing of the public stupidity and selfishness that we now take for granted in the UK.
While a lot of what Attlee did I agree with – I have often said that I am actually quite socialist when it comes to a lot of social programmes. However, it was the way that he instituted these programmes that has left many of them in shambles today. Instead of social support, his programmes created an environment of social expectation. Instead of helping rebuild a productive society, he helped instead to create a culture of entitlement and sloth. Instead of stream lined and efficient industry and welfare programmes, he over-nationalised most of the countries infrastructure and set in motion the towering edifices of bureaucracy that we labour (no pun intended) under today as tax payers.
So, I blame Attlee not for his policies, but the idealism that his core socialist beliefs lead him to. This idealism was naïve in the extreme for such an experienced politician, and what should have been the shining example of the welfare state in Europe has instead turned into a farcical and horrendously expensive effort that has fallen far behind the rest of Europe in efficacy and standard.
***
This list does not include the obvious culprits – I think that we can all agree that the world is a better place now that Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Franco, Peron, Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Mao Tse Tung, Salazar, Robbespiere, the Ayatollah Khomeini, Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, and their like are dead. Their infamy is beyond dispute, and rightly so.
Instead, this list is meant to highlight some more obscure historical personages who have since shuffled from this mortal coil. In most cases, a more expeditious shuffling would probably have saved us all a lot of trouble, but alas that was not meant to be. This list is made mostly of British and American men, the reasons that I have included them on the list will be self evident in their individual entries. I hasten to add that each of these men were not exclusively bad – many accomplished great things. However, they each in their own way did something that, in my opinion, has had significant and negative repercussions in our world today.
#1 – Harold Wilson
Harold Wilson was a Labour politician who served as Prime Minister twice in the 60s and 70s. The one and only reason that he is on this list is quiet simply Rhodesia. It was during his tenure as PM that the promises of responsible self government and dominion made following the referendum in 1922 (after Southern Rhodesia rejected a union with South Africa) was broken.
This broken promise lead directly to Rhodesia declaring independence from the British Empire in 1965, which lead to 15 years of guerrilla warfare and finally the installation of a Marxist regimen in Zimbabwe, which in turn lead to the shocking conditions and situation in that unhappy land today.
A more expedient and compromising stance might have mitigated Rhodesian nationalism and paved the way to a slower, but far more stable and productive path to democracy, racial and social equality in the country. Once again, the post-WW2 Labour obsession with divesting itself of the colonies as quickly as possible lead to premature and unprepared independence of Zimbabwe, just as it did with so much of Africa and India, leading to atrocities at the time, and often to tragedies to this day.
#2 – Edward Heath
A contemporary of Wilson, Edward Heath was a Conservative politician who served as Prime Minister between Wilson’s times in office. Also culpable of betrayal with regards Rhodesia, the real reason he is on this list is mainly due to his actions in response to the popularity of Enoch Powell.
Heath was ruthless in his hold on power as leader of the Conservatives, and the grass-roots support that Powell received due to his controversial (and somewhat prophetic) opinions about immigration worried him greatly. In response he set out to marginalize and discredit Powell before the latter could challenge Heath’s leadership of the party, a challenge that he might well have succeeded in making.
While this is just the standard political in fighting that we have come to expect, the path that Heath took had a far more long lasting effect than merely neutralizing a rival – it is Heath who was the first Conservative leader to embrace the fallicy of multiculturalism, with all the of the subsequent problems that this “experiment” has resulted in. In many ways, I blame Heath more than the liberal do-gooders and blind idealists for what is going on in Britain today.
To compound his crime of sowing the seeds of the death of British culture and identity, he also set in motion the end of its sovereignty and independence by taking Britain into the EEC in 1973, something which we can see as a very mixed blessing with hindsight.
#3 – Franklin Delano Roosevelt
Now, FDR is arguably the most popular President of the United States ever. He did some amazing things while in office, and I have great admiration for many of his “New Deal” initiatives. I am also grateful for his support, both overt and clandestine, during the dark period of WW2 when Britain stood alone.
However, I cannot forgive him two things. Firstly, he was devoted to the removal of the British Empire as a world power. The aid that he provided was crucial to Britain’s survival, but in gaining that aid Britain effectively allowed Roosevelt to make the Empire too expensive for a debt ridden Britain to maintain. This was a conscious move on his part, and the events that his attitude towards the Empire caused allowed the far-too-rapid dissolution of the Empire and premature independence for dozens of colonies, which in turn has lead to millions of deaths and turmoil that continues today.
FDR was also naively attached to the alliance with Stalin. He spent so much time making sure that the British Empire would cease to exist, he blindly allowed the creation of a far more evil and dangerous Stalinist Empire in Europe, and indeed through much of the territory that once fell under the Union flag. Say what you like about the good and bad of the British Empire, but nothing could ever persuade me to agree that it was more morally defunct than the USSR. The whole Cold War is pretty much his fault in my opinion.
#4 – Gamal Abdel Nasser
The only non-Anglo-American on the list is on here for being the catalyst for the event that first showed that the Cold War could become hot, and indeed the event that removed all doubt that the world was now to be shared between the super powers of the USA and USSR – the Seuz Crisis.
In nationalising the Suez canal in 1956, Nasser caused the humiliation of France and Great Britain when the United States withdrew their support from their allies to avoid confrontation with the Soviet Union, a confrontation which, with historical hindsight, the Soviets would have almost certainly lost even if they did not back down in the face of American ICBMs (the USSR would not be able to match US ICBM numbers for years).
Nasser was also a founding figure in modern Arab nationalism. With is anti-Western rhetoric, he in many ways reignited the mistrust between the West and the region in the post-war period, which when combined with a growing Islamic fundamentalism has lead to the clash of cultures that we all suffer under today.
#5 – Clement Attlee
Clement Attlee won the general election in 1945, ousting Churchill in an example of national betrayal that was merely the forshadowing of the public stupidity and selfishness that we now take for granted in the UK.
While a lot of what Attlee did I agree with – I have often said that I am actually quite socialist when it comes to a lot of social programmes. However, it was the way that he instituted these programmes that has left many of them in shambles today. Instead of social support, his programmes created an environment of social expectation. Instead of helping rebuild a productive society, he helped instead to create a culture of entitlement and sloth. Instead of stream lined and efficient industry and welfare programmes, he over-nationalised most of the countries infrastructure and set in motion the towering edifices of bureaucracy that we labour (no pun intended) under today as tax payers.
So, I blame Attlee not for his policies, but the idealism that his core socialist beliefs lead him to. This idealism was naïve in the extreme for such an experienced politician, and what should have been the shining example of the welfare state in Europe has instead turned into a farcical and horrendously expensive effort that has fallen far behind the rest of Europe in efficacy and standard.
Facebook Transplant Part 6 - Originally Posted 14/3/09 - Rant about the Luton Protests
After coming back from training in Sweden this week, my wife acquainted me with the following story http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/4968576/Muslim-extremists-shout-abuse-at-British-soldiers-during-home-coming-march.html
Now, I could obviously not allow such an event to pass without comment.
Once again we see two things here. Firstly, there are British born/resident Moslems who have such a fundamental hatred of the UK and our values, traditions, and international efforts that they feel compelled to demonstrate this hatred against men and women who are just doing their jobs. I could understand (if dislike) demonstration against the government for government policies, but why demonstrate against the army?
Secondly, the media once again offers biased coverage and does not transmit the full story. After giving air time to the scummy fringe elements that conducted the demonstration (thus awarding them massive publicity), they failed to give equal air time to this movie http://subrosa-blonde.blogspot.com/2009/03/what-bbc-didnt-show-about-luton-protest.html (its from a distgusting Scottish nationalist blog but it’s a good, reliable link).
They have also rallied the normal talking head apoligists pointing out that it is a small minority of Moslems, that there moderate majority are just as outraged etc etc ad nauseum.
Now, I know its only 20 people out of the 20000 Moslems that live in Luton. That is not the point. That there are doubtless hundreds who agree with the sentiments but could not bother to show up for the protest is undoubtable. That the media coverage has once again given such scum a platform for their venom and hatred will only exacerbate the problem.
The entire event has also pointed out another distressing trend – a desire not to antagonize the Moslem community on the part of the traditionally apolitical military establishment. Apparently they resisted the whole idea of a parade on these grounds, which I find cowardly in the extreme. Once again the high command plays politics to prevent the brave rank and file (and junior officers) from getting the recognition and applause that they so richly deserve.
Overall it makes me sick – it makes me sick that we can not expect our brave military personnel, who have endured so much under their inept high command and back stabbing and weak governmental leadership, to receive the respect and gratitude that they so richly deserve. It makes me sick that, once again, its blamed on a small fringe of the Moslem community without any governmental exhortations to that community to police itself better, to make concrete, public assertations as to their loyalty and their Britishness.
I really wish people would bloody wake up and start calling it as they see it as oppossed to constantly making excuses. If we had been as weak as this in the 1930s, we would have ended up with Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists in government before we knew it – or at the very least an appeasement government lead by Lord Halifax who stayed neutral in WW2, allowing the evil that was Hitler’s fascism to reign supreme in Europe. It seems as though the blood spilt in the last great war has put fear into our leaders and our society – we no longer have the courage to pay the price that needs to be payed to confront an insiduous, dangerous, and utlimately desructive influence in our world. Radical Islam is in every way as evil as Nazism, perhaps even more so due to its hiding under the guise of religion…
Now, I could obviously not allow such an event to pass without comment.
Once again we see two things here. Firstly, there are British born/resident Moslems who have such a fundamental hatred of the UK and our values, traditions, and international efforts that they feel compelled to demonstrate this hatred against men and women who are just doing their jobs. I could understand (if dislike) demonstration against the government for government policies, but why demonstrate against the army?
Secondly, the media once again offers biased coverage and does not transmit the full story. After giving air time to the scummy fringe elements that conducted the demonstration (thus awarding them massive publicity), they failed to give equal air time to this movie http://subrosa-blonde.blogspot.com/2009/03/what-bbc-didnt-show-about-luton-protest.html (its from a distgusting Scottish nationalist blog but it’s a good, reliable link).
They have also rallied the normal talking head apoligists pointing out that it is a small minority of Moslems, that there moderate majority are just as outraged etc etc ad nauseum.
Now, I know its only 20 people out of the 20000 Moslems that live in Luton. That is not the point. That there are doubtless hundreds who agree with the sentiments but could not bother to show up for the protest is undoubtable. That the media coverage has once again given such scum a platform for their venom and hatred will only exacerbate the problem.
The entire event has also pointed out another distressing trend – a desire not to antagonize the Moslem community on the part of the traditionally apolitical military establishment. Apparently they resisted the whole idea of a parade on these grounds, which I find cowardly in the extreme. Once again the high command plays politics to prevent the brave rank and file (and junior officers) from getting the recognition and applause that they so richly deserve.
Overall it makes me sick – it makes me sick that we can not expect our brave military personnel, who have endured so much under their inept high command and back stabbing and weak governmental leadership, to receive the respect and gratitude that they so richly deserve. It makes me sick that, once again, its blamed on a small fringe of the Moslem community without any governmental exhortations to that community to police itself better, to make concrete, public assertations as to their loyalty and their Britishness.
I really wish people would bloody wake up and start calling it as they see it as oppossed to constantly making excuses. If we had been as weak as this in the 1930s, we would have ended up with Oswald Mosley and the British Union of Fascists in government before we knew it – or at the very least an appeasement government lead by Lord Halifax who stayed neutral in WW2, allowing the evil that was Hitler’s fascism to reign supreme in Europe. It seems as though the blood spilt in the last great war has put fear into our leaders and our society – we no longer have the courage to pay the price that needs to be payed to confront an insiduous, dangerous, and utlimately desructive influence in our world. Radical Islam is in every way as evil as Nazism, perhaps even more so due to its hiding under the guise of religion…
Facebook Transplant Part 5 - Originally Posted 5/3/09 - Jimmy Carter Rant
I got sent this from a friend in Australia
http://www.africancrisis.co.za/Docs/Soldier_of_Fortune_CIA_Stings_Rhodesia.pdf
It makes for inetersting reading. Setting aside the politics of Soldier of Fortune, I think that is a good reflection of the politics and betrayals of the late Cold War period, and also a reflection of the skewed morals and priorities with regards Africa that the West sometimes displays, and also about how many of the current problems in Zimbabwe are the result of regional African leaders and the influence that they had with people caught in the throes of post-colonial guilt. Looks like nothing has changed for the better in the last 30 years...
http://www.africancrisis.co.za/Docs/Soldier_of_Fortune_CIA_Stings_Rhodesia.pdf
It makes for inetersting reading. Setting aside the politics of Soldier of Fortune, I think that is a good reflection of the politics and betrayals of the late Cold War period, and also a reflection of the skewed morals and priorities with regards Africa that the West sometimes displays, and also about how many of the current problems in Zimbabwe are the result of regional African leaders and the influence that they had with people caught in the throes of post-colonial guilt. Looks like nothing has changed for the better in the last 30 years...
Saturday, 9 May 2009
Facebook Transplant Part 4 - Originally Posted 26/2/09
This is part 2 of my most loathed list. Following this I have a much longer list of special mentions, which I will post at some point in the future.
***
Here is the remainder of my "Top Ten" list, including the much alluded to #8. I expect this one to get some more arguments and comments going. I hope that you at least find my choices and my reasons for them interesting and food for thought, even if you do not agree with me.
#6 Lord Nazir Ahmed
Nazir Ahmed is the first Moslem peer in British history, which is actually kind of cool. What is not cool at all is that he is using his position to push a very vehement multi-cultural agenda when he should in fact be encouraging British Moslems to integrate and assmiliate into British society.
Lord Ahmed was a leading voice in opposition to Geert Wilder’s last week, allegedly even threatening to rally ten thousand protesters if the Dutch MP was allowed to screen his film in the House of Lords. Yet the same Lord Ahmed has hosted a variety of Islamist clerics and preachers of violence, especially towards Jews, at the Lords in the name of “dialogue”.
Lord Ahmed represents the danger of the “moderate” Moslem majority in the UK. While decrying violence and preaching cooperation and coexistence, an investigation into a lot of his comments and actions show that he does not seek coexistence, instead he strives towards the alteration of traditional British values and freedoms to accommodate Islam. This is a stance common amongst even moderate Moslems, and yet is just as insidious and dangerous in the long term as suicide bombers are in the short one.
On top of this, Lord Ahmed killed someone in December while messing about with his mobile phone while he was driving. He got a 12 week (6 on license) jail sentence for dangerous driving and a one year driving ban – most people get closer to a year in jail for this offense (which is pathetically low as it is), but of course it would not be very politically sensitive to incarcerate such an august personage for taking someone’s life.
His Wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Ahmed
Lord Ahmed also represents the last name on my top-ten list to be involved in some way with a pro-Islamist or anti-Semitic agenda. Lest you think I am just Islamaphobic (ok, I provisionally admit it), lets tear into the last four names on my top ten to see if I can offend anyone else in some way by saying it how I see it.
#7 Thabo Mbeki
Thabo Mbeki, until recently the President of South Africa is on this list for a few reasons. As someone with links to Zimbabwe, I would have to say that my primary reason for loathing and despising Mbeki is that he let Mugabe get away with murder (literally) for so long. As the head of the regional power, he could easily have curbed Mugabe’s excesses years ago, thereby preventing the implosion of the Zimbabwean economy and the starvation and oppression of his people. That he did not is reason enough for scorn.
Not that Thabo does not have anything else to qualify him for this list. Under his watch, crime in South Africa has run rampant, anti-white discrimination camouflaged as affirmative action has caused a massive brain drain in South Africa, and HIV/AIDS has spread with alarming rapidity. The latter fact is in no small part to Mbeki’s saying that it was poverty, not ignorance and irresponsible sex, that caused AIDS.
I must admit to feeling a bit sorry for him and the way he was sent out of office, but he did not deserve to stay given that he has accomplished next to nothing despite the potential for good that he had, both for the region and his own country. Its his own failure to fulfil his and his country’s potential that puts him on the list.
Thabo Mbeki on wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thabo_Mbeki
#8 Nelson Mandela
Ah. We have arrived at possibly the most controversial name on my list. Nelson Mandela. I would wager that many who read this who might have agreed or sympathised with some of my other points would disagree on this one.
I have put Nelson on the list for two reasons, reasons which I believe eclipse his otherwise amazing life and accomplishments, not least of which was keeping South Africa whole post-apartheid and not succumbing to feelings of vengeance and retribution (which he was and is surely entitled to after his treatment).The first reason is much the same as the one I gave for Thabo Mbeki. Nelson Mandela was the one man with the unquestioned moral and political authority to have stopped Robert Mugabe. That he did not could be attributed to his now advanced age, but it would not have taken more than a few press statements and a speech or two to remove the hesitation on the part of regional leaders to unite against the excesses of Mugabe’s regime. The few words and efforts that he did make were no where near what he should have done, and I think were more to play to public opinion rather than any true feeling on his part.
The second reason goes back to few years ago when he publically stated that actions against terrorists in Afghanistan and the imminent war against Iraq was racially motivated and neo-Imperialist in tone. Now, I have my own views about Iraq (more on that on another rant in the future), but I think that Nelson should have known better. A man with his global moral authority and esteem should be more responsible with his statements as they gave a level of moral legitimacy to various anti-war and pro-Islamist lobbies who otherwise would have been restricted to their normal empty rhetoric.
Those are my reasons for putting Nelson on the list. If you disagree, and I am sure that most of you will, argue your case in the comments section.
If you need it, here is Nelson’s wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_mandela
#9 Hugo Chavez
Hugo Chavez is the the current President of Venezuela. He is a militant left winger who has forged his nation into a dangerously undemocratic power in a region of the world (South America) which has a tenuous grasp on democratic principles at the best of times. Endemic corruption and inefficiency has meant that his countries oil wealth has not really benefited its people – once again, a left-wing leader can be seen ripping off his country.
He is also vociferously opposed to the United States, siding with anyone else who also criticizes them, so he has aligned himself with a really nasty bunch of people over the years, especially many of his OPEC colleagues. He goes one step further through anti-Semitic rhetoric and really seems to revel in the notoriety that his statements and stances grant him.
Putting Chavez in my top ten was not an easy decision given the number of other arseholes out there in the world, but in the long run, I see Chavez as more of a danger to peace and prosperity in the Western Hemisphere than the aging Castros in Cuba, and the sooner that his own people see that he is ripping them off and leading them down a dangerous path the better.
Chavez on Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_chavez
#10 Al Gore
Aaaaa Al Gore. Where did it all go wrong? From the comforting non-existence as Vice President to a very charismatic (and in my opinion effective) President to the worlds leading eco-warrior, picking up a Nobel prize along the way.
Al Gore is really on this list since he is the face of something that really strikes a negative chord with me – environmentalism. Now, I am not an idiot. Pollution is bad. No body likes to cough up a lung after breathing caustic fumes. Recycling is good (although I admittedly don’t do any at the moment), afterall, there is not exactly infinite room on the planet for dumping all of our refuse. I think that these points are a given.
But what really burns my arse is the implication that I should curtail my habits and feel guilty about being a consumer. I resent the notion that the developed world should take on the burden of all anti-pollution initiatives while China throws up coal-burning power stations by the score and the fires associated with deforestation cause more CO2 to enter the atmosphere than the entire global air-transport sector. I also get really angry at the “facts” being presented as a fait accompli when there is NO SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS about global warming.
So, Al Gore, in making that annoyingly one sided and biased movie, pretty much earned my ire on every one of these points. That he is hailed as such a visionary and paladin of righteousness is nauseating when all he has done is excel at simplistically presenting one side of a complex argument and managing to get it accepted as the one, unblemished and total, truth.Oh yeah, he also “invented” the internet according to him. What a muppet.
Gore’s wiki contenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore
So, that it all – my top ten. I have decided to periodically post some of the runners up – some real idiots, racists, Islamists, bastards, anti-Semites/Zionists, liberals, apologists, appeasers, dictators and wannabe dictators, do-gooders and left-wingers. So far the list has 16 names on it – I am sure that it will grow over time - watch this space.
***
Here is the remainder of my "Top Ten" list, including the much alluded to #8. I expect this one to get some more arguments and comments going. I hope that you at least find my choices and my reasons for them interesting and food for thought, even if you do not agree with me.
#6 Lord Nazir Ahmed
Nazir Ahmed is the first Moslem peer in British history, which is actually kind of cool. What is not cool at all is that he is using his position to push a very vehement multi-cultural agenda when he should in fact be encouraging British Moslems to integrate and assmiliate into British society.
Lord Ahmed was a leading voice in opposition to Geert Wilder’s last week, allegedly even threatening to rally ten thousand protesters if the Dutch MP was allowed to screen his film in the House of Lords. Yet the same Lord Ahmed has hosted a variety of Islamist clerics and preachers of violence, especially towards Jews, at the Lords in the name of “dialogue”.
Lord Ahmed represents the danger of the “moderate” Moslem majority in the UK. While decrying violence and preaching cooperation and coexistence, an investigation into a lot of his comments and actions show that he does not seek coexistence, instead he strives towards the alteration of traditional British values and freedoms to accommodate Islam. This is a stance common amongst even moderate Moslems, and yet is just as insidious and dangerous in the long term as suicide bombers are in the short one.
On top of this, Lord Ahmed killed someone in December while messing about with his mobile phone while he was driving. He got a 12 week (6 on license) jail sentence for dangerous driving and a one year driving ban – most people get closer to a year in jail for this offense (which is pathetically low as it is), but of course it would not be very politically sensitive to incarcerate such an august personage for taking someone’s life.
His Wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Ahmed
Lord Ahmed also represents the last name on my top-ten list to be involved in some way with a pro-Islamist or anti-Semitic agenda. Lest you think I am just Islamaphobic (ok, I provisionally admit it), lets tear into the last four names on my top ten to see if I can offend anyone else in some way by saying it how I see it.
#7 Thabo Mbeki
Thabo Mbeki, until recently the President of South Africa is on this list for a few reasons. As someone with links to Zimbabwe, I would have to say that my primary reason for loathing and despising Mbeki is that he let Mugabe get away with murder (literally) for so long. As the head of the regional power, he could easily have curbed Mugabe’s excesses years ago, thereby preventing the implosion of the Zimbabwean economy and the starvation and oppression of his people. That he did not is reason enough for scorn.
Not that Thabo does not have anything else to qualify him for this list. Under his watch, crime in South Africa has run rampant, anti-white discrimination camouflaged as affirmative action has caused a massive brain drain in South Africa, and HIV/AIDS has spread with alarming rapidity. The latter fact is in no small part to Mbeki’s saying that it was poverty, not ignorance and irresponsible sex, that caused AIDS.
I must admit to feeling a bit sorry for him and the way he was sent out of office, but he did not deserve to stay given that he has accomplished next to nothing despite the potential for good that he had, both for the region and his own country. Its his own failure to fulfil his and his country’s potential that puts him on the list.
Thabo Mbeki on wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thabo_Mbeki
#8 Nelson Mandela
Ah. We have arrived at possibly the most controversial name on my list. Nelson Mandela. I would wager that many who read this who might have agreed or sympathised with some of my other points would disagree on this one.
I have put Nelson on the list for two reasons, reasons which I believe eclipse his otherwise amazing life and accomplishments, not least of which was keeping South Africa whole post-apartheid and not succumbing to feelings of vengeance and retribution (which he was and is surely entitled to after his treatment).The first reason is much the same as the one I gave for Thabo Mbeki. Nelson Mandela was the one man with the unquestioned moral and political authority to have stopped Robert Mugabe. That he did not could be attributed to his now advanced age, but it would not have taken more than a few press statements and a speech or two to remove the hesitation on the part of regional leaders to unite against the excesses of Mugabe’s regime. The few words and efforts that he did make were no where near what he should have done, and I think were more to play to public opinion rather than any true feeling on his part.
The second reason goes back to few years ago when he publically stated that actions against terrorists in Afghanistan and the imminent war against Iraq was racially motivated and neo-Imperialist in tone. Now, I have my own views about Iraq (more on that on another rant in the future), but I think that Nelson should have known better. A man with his global moral authority and esteem should be more responsible with his statements as they gave a level of moral legitimacy to various anti-war and pro-Islamist lobbies who otherwise would have been restricted to their normal empty rhetoric.
Those are my reasons for putting Nelson on the list. If you disagree, and I am sure that most of you will, argue your case in the comments section.
If you need it, here is Nelson’s wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_mandela
#9 Hugo Chavez
Hugo Chavez is the the current President of Venezuela. He is a militant left winger who has forged his nation into a dangerously undemocratic power in a region of the world (South America) which has a tenuous grasp on democratic principles at the best of times. Endemic corruption and inefficiency has meant that his countries oil wealth has not really benefited its people – once again, a left-wing leader can be seen ripping off his country.
He is also vociferously opposed to the United States, siding with anyone else who also criticizes them, so he has aligned himself with a really nasty bunch of people over the years, especially many of his OPEC colleagues. He goes one step further through anti-Semitic rhetoric and really seems to revel in the notoriety that his statements and stances grant him.
Putting Chavez in my top ten was not an easy decision given the number of other arseholes out there in the world, but in the long run, I see Chavez as more of a danger to peace and prosperity in the Western Hemisphere than the aging Castros in Cuba, and the sooner that his own people see that he is ripping them off and leading them down a dangerous path the better.
Chavez on Wiki
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_chavez
#10 Al Gore
Aaaaa Al Gore. Where did it all go wrong? From the comforting non-existence as Vice President to a very charismatic (and in my opinion effective) President to the worlds leading eco-warrior, picking up a Nobel prize along the way.
Al Gore is really on this list since he is the face of something that really strikes a negative chord with me – environmentalism. Now, I am not an idiot. Pollution is bad. No body likes to cough up a lung after breathing caustic fumes. Recycling is good (although I admittedly don’t do any at the moment), afterall, there is not exactly infinite room on the planet for dumping all of our refuse. I think that these points are a given.
But what really burns my arse is the implication that I should curtail my habits and feel guilty about being a consumer. I resent the notion that the developed world should take on the burden of all anti-pollution initiatives while China throws up coal-burning power stations by the score and the fires associated with deforestation cause more CO2 to enter the atmosphere than the entire global air-transport sector. I also get really angry at the “facts” being presented as a fait accompli when there is NO SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS about global warming.
So, Al Gore, in making that annoyingly one sided and biased movie, pretty much earned my ire on every one of these points. That he is hailed as such a visionary and paladin of righteousness is nauseating when all he has done is excel at simplistically presenting one side of a complex argument and managing to get it accepted as the one, unblemished and total, truth.Oh yeah, he also “invented” the internet according to him. What a muppet.
Gore’s wiki contenthttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_gore
So, that it all – my top ten. I have decided to periodically post some of the runners up – some real idiots, racists, Islamists, bastards, anti-Semites/Zionists, liberals, apologists, appeasers, dictators and wannabe dictators, do-gooders and left-wingers. So far the list has 16 names on it – I am sure that it will grow over time - watch this space.
Facebook Transplant Part 3 - Originally Posted 19/2/09 - Most Loathed List Part 1
This was one of what was intended to be a series of "most loathed" lists, and indeed I have published a few such over the weeks. This is the first part of my "Top 10 Most Loathed" list.
***
I have long been considering people that the world would be better without. I have been working on this over the last week or so, and here are #s 1 through 5. I have stuck to living people who have infuriated me in one way or another over the last few years. I hasten to point out that some of the them (ok, one of them, #8) could instead be called one of the good guys, but he has still annoyed the hell out of me of late and so on the list he stays. You will have to wait until Part II to see who he is, which should be posted at some point early next week.
Until then, I present this crop of human refuse. Comments are, as usual, welcome. I dont expect you to all agree with me, but I just wanted to vent my spleen.
#1 Robert Mugabe
The number one spot in this list was a no brainer really. What other individual is more deserving of derision and mockery than this idiot? Handed a prosperous nation with excellent health care, high literacy, abundant resources and enough food output to feed several other nations, over the last quarter of a century he and the corrupt cabal that succours him have raped Rhodesia/Zimbabwe and destroyed it. How no one has yet found a ‘7.62mm solution’ for this bastard is a miracle, and indeed, a damned shame.
I could wax eloquent on the subject of just what a useless waste of skin and bone this octogenarian is, but there are more than enough column inches on this subject around, and in any case most of you are Zimbos or know enough that I do not need to elaborate further.
Here is his wiki link should any of you have been living in a cave the last few years and know nothing about him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_mugabe
#2 George Galloway
Now this individual actually stimulates more pure rage in me than Mugabe does. I am almost numb to Bob’s behaviour these days, yet this scum bag can get my goat simply by appearing on my TV screen or on the pages of a newspaper. Galloway’s ideologies and politics would grate on me at the best of times. He is an old school socialist with both a working class and Scottish chip on his shoulder. He is aggressive in his articulation, blatantly anti-Semitic and too smug and too holier-than-thou by half.
On top of this is the fact that he has his nose firmly rammed up the backside of sectors of the Moslem community in the UK that are either anti-British, anti-Democracy, or pro-extremist, or indeed all three. Having some dubious actions in his past that could, and in a better world, would, equate to treason and providing succour to the enemy makes Galloway one of the most reprehensible and disgusting people in the country.
Galloway left the Labour party a few years back because it was “too” right wing! He went on to found the Respect party, which is basically a platform for Moslem rights and political lobbying interests without any manifesto beyond the gradual creep of Sharia law and Moslem morals into British society in the guise of equal rights and non-discrimination.
Here is this nasty piece of work’s wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway
#3 Jacqui Smith
The current Home Secretary in the Labour party, Jacqui Smith manages to combine the worst elements of political correctness, militant feminism, Moslem extremist appeasement, cowardice, authoritarianism, double standards and apologism all in one pointless little package.
Now, I can live with her trampling liberal sensibilities while getting measures like the 42 days detention law passed since it happens to coincide with my personal preferences, but her “Big Brother” leanings with regards email and mobile phone monitoring is a little too Orwellian for my liking.
What really makes her despicable is her shocking double standards. As Home Secretary she has final word on who can come into this country. She allows radical Islamists more or less free entry in the interests of dialogue, yet she bars people like Geert Wilders on the spurious claim that he would incite social disquiet and could be a danger to the public order.
She is afraid of a small minority to the extent that she will discard centuries of Free Speech tradition to appease the minority of Moslems who are anti-British, anti-Democracy and pro-violence, and for that reason she deserves nothing but mockery and scorn. I hope the current investigation into her finances and expense claims turns up something that will necessitate her resignation and future obscurity.
Her wiki link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacqui_Smith
#4 Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Going a bit more global, this guy is a real piece of work. Since becoming President of Iran in 2005 he has, amazingly, done more to destabilize the region and alienate the West than the Ayatollah Khomeni managed. His continued pursuit of nuclear weapons, constant pledges to eradicate Israel, and his general belligerence is only equalled by North Korea in its potential for unleashing wide scale military horrors in this generation.
Ahmadinejad is a lodestone for anti-American and anti-Western thought in the “legitimate” political arenas of the world – he was after all elected to his office and therefore is a democratically valid statesman. The post-Khomeni years presented a massive opportunity for Iran to reconcile with an increasingly global society and provide expedient and rational leadership to the Shiite Moslem world. Instead they have firmly aligned themselves in the “us vs. them” world in which we now live.
The problem is that Iranians (Persians) have a habit of Empire building and organizational abilities normally absent in the wider Moslem world for the last 1000 years or so, and that in itself is bloody frightening.
Here is Ahmadinejad’s wiki link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad
#5 Ken Livingstone
Aaaa “Red” Ken. What list of the top arseholes in the world would be complete without his name appearing on it? That he is so far down the list is more a reflection of just how many bastards there are in the world right now rather than the fact that he is not a poor excuse for a human being.
Ken used to be the head honcho of the trade unions in the UK back when they had way too much power and influence. He is an old school socialist, a real class warrior that does everything he can to harm “the establishment”.
When he was mayor of London he made a concerted effort to stimulate multi-culturalism instead of true assimilation. He also instituted a congestion charge for cars entering the city, which caused millions of pounds lost in business but kept the green lobby happy. That he failed to gain a 3rd term as Mayor of London, losing to the awesome Boris Johnson, is one of the few political highlights of the last few years and almost makes me think that the general voting public in the UK are getting some small piece of a clue.
What really burns my arse about Ken Livingstone is very similar to what gets me about George Galloway. Ken is very pro-Moslem to the extent of arguing against any measures to curb terrorism. He hides behind civil liberty arguments but in reality his stance is just one more expression of his anti-establishment ethos. He has also gotten away with some nasty public anti-Semitism that would have resulted in immediate disgrace and resignation for a politician who said similar things about any other minority.
Here is Red Ken’s wiki link. I wish he and George Galloway would just bugger off to some little island somewhere and stay away from us all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Livingstone
***
I have long been considering people that the world would be better without. I have been working on this over the last week or so, and here are #s 1 through 5. I have stuck to living people who have infuriated me in one way or another over the last few years. I hasten to point out that some of the them (ok, one of them, #8) could instead be called one of the good guys, but he has still annoyed the hell out of me of late and so on the list he stays. You will have to wait until Part II to see who he is, which should be posted at some point early next week.
Until then, I present this crop of human refuse. Comments are, as usual, welcome. I dont expect you to all agree with me, but I just wanted to vent my spleen.
#1 Robert Mugabe
The number one spot in this list was a no brainer really. What other individual is more deserving of derision and mockery than this idiot? Handed a prosperous nation with excellent health care, high literacy, abundant resources and enough food output to feed several other nations, over the last quarter of a century he and the corrupt cabal that succours him have raped Rhodesia/Zimbabwe and destroyed it. How no one has yet found a ‘7.62mm solution’ for this bastard is a miracle, and indeed, a damned shame.
I could wax eloquent on the subject of just what a useless waste of skin and bone this octogenarian is, but there are more than enough column inches on this subject around, and in any case most of you are Zimbos or know enough that I do not need to elaborate further.
Here is his wiki link should any of you have been living in a cave the last few years and know nothing about him.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_mugabe
#2 George Galloway
Now this individual actually stimulates more pure rage in me than Mugabe does. I am almost numb to Bob’s behaviour these days, yet this scum bag can get my goat simply by appearing on my TV screen or on the pages of a newspaper. Galloway’s ideologies and politics would grate on me at the best of times. He is an old school socialist with both a working class and Scottish chip on his shoulder. He is aggressive in his articulation, blatantly anti-Semitic and too smug and too holier-than-thou by half.
On top of this is the fact that he has his nose firmly rammed up the backside of sectors of the Moslem community in the UK that are either anti-British, anti-Democracy, or pro-extremist, or indeed all three. Having some dubious actions in his past that could, and in a better world, would, equate to treason and providing succour to the enemy makes Galloway one of the most reprehensible and disgusting people in the country.
Galloway left the Labour party a few years back because it was “too” right wing! He went on to found the Respect party, which is basically a platform for Moslem rights and political lobbying interests without any manifesto beyond the gradual creep of Sharia law and Moslem morals into British society in the guise of equal rights and non-discrimination.
Here is this nasty piece of work’s wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Galloway
#3 Jacqui Smith
The current Home Secretary in the Labour party, Jacqui Smith manages to combine the worst elements of political correctness, militant feminism, Moslem extremist appeasement, cowardice, authoritarianism, double standards and apologism all in one pointless little package.
Now, I can live with her trampling liberal sensibilities while getting measures like the 42 days detention law passed since it happens to coincide with my personal preferences, but her “Big Brother” leanings with regards email and mobile phone monitoring is a little too Orwellian for my liking.
What really makes her despicable is her shocking double standards. As Home Secretary she has final word on who can come into this country. She allows radical Islamists more or less free entry in the interests of dialogue, yet she bars people like Geert Wilders on the spurious claim that he would incite social disquiet and could be a danger to the public order.
She is afraid of a small minority to the extent that she will discard centuries of Free Speech tradition to appease the minority of Moslems who are anti-British, anti-Democracy and pro-violence, and for that reason she deserves nothing but mockery and scorn. I hope the current investigation into her finances and expense claims turns up something that will necessitate her resignation and future obscurity.
Her wiki link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacqui_Smith
#4 Mahmoud Ahmadinejad
Going a bit more global, this guy is a real piece of work. Since becoming President of Iran in 2005 he has, amazingly, done more to destabilize the region and alienate the West than the Ayatollah Khomeni managed. His continued pursuit of nuclear weapons, constant pledges to eradicate Israel, and his general belligerence is only equalled by North Korea in its potential for unleashing wide scale military horrors in this generation.
Ahmadinejad is a lodestone for anti-American and anti-Western thought in the “legitimate” political arenas of the world – he was after all elected to his office and therefore is a democratically valid statesman. The post-Khomeni years presented a massive opportunity for Iran to reconcile with an increasingly global society and provide expedient and rational leadership to the Shiite Moslem world. Instead they have firmly aligned themselves in the “us vs. them” world in which we now live.
The problem is that Iranians (Persians) have a habit of Empire building and organizational abilities normally absent in the wider Moslem world for the last 1000 years or so, and that in itself is bloody frightening.
Here is Ahmadinejad’s wiki link
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad
#5 Ken Livingstone
Aaaa “Red” Ken. What list of the top arseholes in the world would be complete without his name appearing on it? That he is so far down the list is more a reflection of just how many bastards there are in the world right now rather than the fact that he is not a poor excuse for a human being.
Ken used to be the head honcho of the trade unions in the UK back when they had way too much power and influence. He is an old school socialist, a real class warrior that does everything he can to harm “the establishment”.
When he was mayor of London he made a concerted effort to stimulate multi-culturalism instead of true assimilation. He also instituted a congestion charge for cars entering the city, which caused millions of pounds lost in business but kept the green lobby happy. That he failed to gain a 3rd term as Mayor of London, losing to the awesome Boris Johnson, is one of the few political highlights of the last few years and almost makes me think that the general voting public in the UK are getting some small piece of a clue.
What really burns my arse about Ken Livingstone is very similar to what gets me about George Galloway. Ken is very pro-Moslem to the extent of arguing against any measures to curb terrorism. He hides behind civil liberty arguments but in reality his stance is just one more expression of his anti-establishment ethos. He has also gotten away with some nasty public anti-Semitism that would have resulted in immediate disgrace and resignation for a politician who said similar things about any other minority.
Here is Red Ken’s wiki link. I wish he and George Galloway would just bugger off to some little island somewhere and stay away from us all.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Livingstone
Friday, 8 May 2009
Facebook Transplant Part 2 - Originally posted 13/4/09 - The Geert Wilders Affair
Here is another early rant - it was posted around the time of the Geert Wilders incident and is actually the first one that I posted after previously ranting on my daily status updates.
***
I dont know how many of you are familiar with the story of an elected Dutch MP being denied access to Britain even though he was invited by a member of the House of Lords to screen and discuss a short film he had made to support his manifesto of Islam being a dangerous religion that exhorts its followers to violence through the words of the Koran. Our Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, decided that he would be too dangerous to host here due to threatened Moslem protests and promises of Violence. This has, of course, incensed me beyone all measure. Not wanting to spout too much bile and vitriol, I thought that I would just send you some links.
First up is a link to the movie that has caused all the trouble. Its around 15 mins long and worth watching even if you dont agree with views espoused in it. No point in agreeing with him being banned if you havent even bothered to see why (take note Miliband and Brown - watch the film before commenting on its content).
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=216_1207467783
Then here are a couple of articles that I found quite good referring to it, and of course to what banning Geert Wilders (the MP in question) means for us all.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDVhODU5MDQ2OTg5OGNmOWJkNjk3MTRlYTg4MGJjZjM=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/philipjohnston/4604985/Whatever-happened-to-free-speech.html
The Telegraph article is excellent, and the comments below by members of the public hide some gems as well, especially regards the argument for banning the Koran completely due to its incitement to racial and religious violence, which contravenes EU and most national law. A ridiculous idea of course, but a good example of how far the double standards and appeasement goes.
And in case you want to see a bit more about Geert Wilders himself, here is his Wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Wilders
He is that particularly Dutch type of "right-winger". He is gay friendly, libertarian and vehement in his pursuit of the freedoms that Western Civilization and the traditional permissiveness and liberalism that is part of Dutch culture and history. He is not especially reactionary and religiously conservative, traits that are normally applied to the "right". Nor is he overtly racist - his problem is with a religion and its followers, with the culture of Islam, not the colour of its adherents. He is also not at all anti-semitic, but of course these days, and in one of the ironies of history, that makes him extremely right wing since anti-semitism seems to be the purview of the left these days (witness shameful media coverage of the recent Gaza incidents).
I would also hasten to point out that I do not especially like the fellow or agree with everything that he has to say - I am rather to left of him in most things myself, but the controversy surrounding his quite legitimate right to have his views and express them in the way that he has, not to mention the legality of barring a democratically elected politician from an EU country from the UK, highlights a lot of what is wrong both with the country as a whole and the Labour government in particular. I may have certain un-pc and unfashionable views on the Islamisation of Europe and the perils of multi-cultural hypersensitivity and non-assimilation, but I am no Haider, Le Pen or Griffin myself. Even if you do not agree with ANYTHING that Wilders has to say, I am sure that you agree that he not only has the right to say it, but indeed should be protected from those that would curtail that right.
***
I dont know how many of you are familiar with the story of an elected Dutch MP being denied access to Britain even though he was invited by a member of the House of Lords to screen and discuss a short film he had made to support his manifesto of Islam being a dangerous religion that exhorts its followers to violence through the words of the Koran. Our Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, decided that he would be too dangerous to host here due to threatened Moslem protests and promises of Violence. This has, of course, incensed me beyone all measure. Not wanting to spout too much bile and vitriol, I thought that I would just send you some links.
First up is a link to the movie that has caused all the trouble. Its around 15 mins long and worth watching even if you dont agree with views espoused in it. No point in agreeing with him being banned if you havent even bothered to see why (take note Miliband and Brown - watch the film before commenting on its content).
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=216_1207467783
Then here are a couple of articles that I found quite good referring to it, and of course to what banning Geert Wilders (the MP in question) means for us all.
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDVhODU5MDQ2OTg5OGNmOWJkNjk3MTRlYTg4MGJjZjM=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/columnists/philipjohnston/4604985/Whatever-happened-to-free-speech.html
The Telegraph article is excellent, and the comments below by members of the public hide some gems as well, especially regards the argument for banning the Koran completely due to its incitement to racial and religious violence, which contravenes EU and most national law. A ridiculous idea of course, but a good example of how far the double standards and appeasement goes.
And in case you want to see a bit more about Geert Wilders himself, here is his Wiki link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geert_Wilders
He is that particularly Dutch type of "right-winger". He is gay friendly, libertarian and vehement in his pursuit of the freedoms that Western Civilization and the traditional permissiveness and liberalism that is part of Dutch culture and history. He is not especially reactionary and religiously conservative, traits that are normally applied to the "right". Nor is he overtly racist - his problem is with a religion and its followers, with the culture of Islam, not the colour of its adherents. He is also not at all anti-semitic, but of course these days, and in one of the ironies of history, that makes him extremely right wing since anti-semitism seems to be the purview of the left these days (witness shameful media coverage of the recent Gaza incidents).
I would also hasten to point out that I do not especially like the fellow or agree with everything that he has to say - I am rather to left of him in most things myself, but the controversy surrounding his quite legitimate right to have his views and express them in the way that he has, not to mention the legality of barring a democratically elected politician from an EU country from the UK, highlights a lot of what is wrong both with the country as a whole and the Labour government in particular. I may have certain un-pc and unfashionable views on the Islamisation of Europe and the perils of multi-cultural hypersensitivity and non-assimilation, but I am no Haider, Le Pen or Griffin myself. Even if you do not agree with ANYTHING that Wilders has to say, I am sure that you agree that he not only has the right to say it, but indeed should be protected from those that would curtail that right.
Facebook Transplant Part 1 - Originally posted 16/2/09 - Palestinian use of Funds
This was one of my first "blogs" post using Facebook notes. Even though it is actually my second post there, it works better as an introduction so I posted it 1st here.
****
Since my recent resolution to keep politics out of my status updates and stick to m facebook “notes” I have decided to do a semi-regular update about things that just annoy the hell out of me and should outrage every right thinking person not blinded by the multiculturally-hypersensitive media PC brigade.
Anyone reading any further should know that I am not at all PC or faddish in my views, and while my personal beliefs are a bewildering and eclectic mix of left, centre, right, liberal, conservative, and authoritarian depending on the issue, I would normally be labelled “extreme right” by most people even if its not true. In all honesty I should admit to a severe pro-Zionist stance when it comes to Israel.
So, what has stoked my ire today? A visit to one of my favourite blogs, http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/, this morning lead me to the following story.http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/02/oddly-enough.html
Yeah – you read right. There is a children’s television programme in Palestine, funded by the Palestinian authorities (and thus by European and NGO aid packages) mind-washing a entirely new generation of young Palestinian kids into growing up to be terrorists. Nice. Gives you a warm fuzzy feeling doesn’t it? I especially like the concept of Assud, the pink jew-eating rabbit. That’s bound to build some bridges and sort out the problems in the region in the next generation isn’t it? Of course, its all understandable and acceptable because, as the media tells us, the evil Israelis are behind EVERY problem in the area (sounds familiar doesn't it? Goebbels would be proud).
Makes me sick and reinforces my resolution to NEVER send donations to charities that will give money to places like Palestine or Africa, no matter how many heart wrenching commercials of urban wreckage and blank eyed waifs are aired. It will almost certainly be diverted to non-humaitarian purposes through corruption, ideology or both. Think about that next time you see a "Gaza Appeal" spot on TV. Your kind hearted donation could very easily go towards perpetuating the problem for an entirely new gneration to struggle with.
****
Since my recent resolution to keep politics out of my status updates and stick to m facebook “notes” I have decided to do a semi-regular update about things that just annoy the hell out of me and should outrage every right thinking person not blinded by the multiculturally-hypersensitive media PC brigade.
Anyone reading any further should know that I am not at all PC or faddish in my views, and while my personal beliefs are a bewildering and eclectic mix of left, centre, right, liberal, conservative, and authoritarian depending on the issue, I would normally be labelled “extreme right” by most people even if its not true. In all honesty I should admit to a severe pro-Zionist stance when it comes to Israel.
So, what has stoked my ire today? A visit to one of my favourite blogs, http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/, this morning lead me to the following story.http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2009/02/oddly-enough.html
Yeah – you read right. There is a children’s television programme in Palestine, funded by the Palestinian authorities (and thus by European and NGO aid packages) mind-washing a entirely new generation of young Palestinian kids into growing up to be terrorists. Nice. Gives you a warm fuzzy feeling doesn’t it? I especially like the concept of Assud, the pink jew-eating rabbit. That’s bound to build some bridges and sort out the problems in the region in the next generation isn’t it? Of course, its all understandable and acceptable because, as the media tells us, the evil Israelis are behind EVERY problem in the area (sounds familiar doesn't it? Goebbels would be proud).
Makes me sick and reinforces my resolution to NEVER send donations to charities that will give money to places like Palestine or Africa, no matter how many heart wrenching commercials of urban wreckage and blank eyed waifs are aired. It will almost certainly be diverted to non-humaitarian purposes through corruption, ideology or both. Think about that next time you see a "Gaza Appeal" spot on TV. Your kind hearted donation could very easily go towards perpetuating the problem for an entirely new gneration to struggle with.
Its been a very long time, but I am back.
I have been "blogging" on my facebook account of late, and I thought that I would duplicate the posts here just in case anyone wants to follow my ravings here rather than there. I think its also easier to share my musings with a wider audience via this medium should people wish to pass on the URL to others who may be interested. So, for the next few days I will post something from my facebook archives one at a time so that this blog gets "up to date".
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
