Ali Dizaei-A Politically Correct Icon Demolished

It was good to hear the news about Ali Dizaei, the London copper who was a right bastard but worshipped by the racist Black Police Officers Association, getting his comeuppance. Here is what was said about him:

Nick Hardwick, head of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC), which investigated the case, said that Dizaei was “a criminal in uniform” and “a bully”.

The problem with Dizaei was that he had become an icon of political correctness and always had black and race obsessed organisations on his side when he was in the shit. Dizaei played on this and seemd to think that his skin colour and ethnicity put him beyond the law. He even had his own website glorifying his career and 'activism'. Vainglorious prick. Ironically he has gone off to chokey for smacking his web designer and then faking evidence against him, sweet irony.

But even after all that, the politically correct racists are still at it:

But the NBPA (National Black Police Association), for which Dizaei was a vocal spokesman, expressed surprise at his conviction. Charles Crichlow, the president, said that it was “clearly an extremely difficult and traumatic period for Dr Dizaei and his family”.

Throughout his years of disciplinary problems the divisive loonies of the NBPA have used the old myth of 'racism' to defend him. Let's just hope he uses his time in chokey, slopping out a few times a day I hope, to ponder what damage politically correct prats like him and the NBPA have done to public-police relations.

Here is a superb piece about the scumbag from the Daily Mail.

Here is The Times coverage.

Glen Garioch Malt Whisky

On a visit to Oldmeldrum, near Aberdeen, just before Christmas I was fortunate to go on a guided tour of the Glen Garioch Distillery. I've just received an email from them informing me that their new website is now up and running, here is a link.

It's a wonderful place, a wonderful whisky and some of the friendliest and most helpful staff you could find. I thoroughly recommend a visit if you are up that way. It's owned by the same company who own Bowmore and Auchentoshan, so it's a great place to stock up on a couple of different single malts too.

And, no, I'm not on commission!

Parliamentary Privilege and Scum

My understanding, going back to the days of 'O' and 'A' Levels mostly, was that Parliamentary Privilege exists largely so that MPs can speak freely in the Houses of Parliament, without fear of Queen Elizabeth Saxe-Coburg-Gotha sending in the troops to drag them out for being nasty about the monarch. It asserted the supremacy of Parliament.

Indeed I have just checked with Answers.Com and here is a slightly longer definition than mine:

Legal immunities conferred upon members of a legislature with regard to acts they may perform in the legislature or on its behalf. The principal parliamentary privilege in the UK Parliament is that of freedom of speech in its proceeding, given statutory expression in article nine of the 1689 Bill of Rights. This marked the parliamentary victory over the royal executive in the struggle that had lasted for most of the seventeenth century and ended with the flight of James II and Parliament's choice of William II to succeed him. No member may be held to account by an outside body or individual for words spoken within Parliament. Similar notions exist in most other democratic legislatures. Also surviving, but of diminished importance, are the privileges of freedom from arrest in civil process, freedom of access to the monarch, and rights of punishment against those abusing parliamentary privilege or those held to be in contempt of parliament.

— Jonathan Bradbury

Now there is no way scum like David Chaytor and his pals can hide behind that to avoid facing trial for alleged expenses offences. As people like New Labour politicians, and Tories and Lib Dems, love to say to the rest of us when imposing ever more draconian "anti-terror" legislation: "If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear". If I were an MP who had done nothing wrong I would want to face a court to prove my innocence.

I just about remember the olden days when politicians "did the honourable thing", even when there was only a perception of wrong doing, but it could damage the government, parliament or the country. Not any more. Not with the bunch of amoral, self-seeking, money grubbing, authoritarian, unprincipled scum we have stalking the corridors and lobbies of the Houses of Parliament at the moment.

Atheists versus God Botherers

I'll be upfront from the off. I'm a libertarian and a practising Roman Catholic, there's even a Facebook group for us, so there are definitely more than just me.

Throughout my time in politics I have practised my religon without making a huge song and dance about it, for which some Christians would probably condemn me, but that's me. If religion comes up I'll get involved in discussion but tend not to be too evangelical, I suspect many political colleagues over the years didn't even know of my religion.

But increasingly I find myself commenting on religous affairs because of the increasing intolerance of non-believers, characterised by Dawkins and his ilk. Fair enough you don't believe but why bang on and on and on and on and on? It's very tedious. It reminds me of the nutty anti-smoking lobby. OK, you don't smoke but don't bang on and on, a la Dawkins, whining and whinging about people who do. We used to call it 'live and let live'.

On my specific religion, Roman Catholicism, I get weary of the complete rubbish and lies, told by ignorant non-catholics or bitter lapsed Catholics usually, about things that they claim go on in the Catholic church. I was educated from infant school to grammar school by monks and never once witnessed sado-masochism or paedophilia. It's sad that I have had to state that on a regular basis over the decades. Nobody else I know educated by monks, priests or nuns suffered anything untoward either. Yes, I know there have been instances of priests committing evil acts, condemn those individuals not the priesthood or the whole church. There have been a higher proportion of teachers convicted of offences against children but critics don't attack the whole teaching profession. It does seem that all kinds of groups receive official protection from attack but not Christians.

So I was particulalry interested to read this article in today's Times by Hugo Rifkind.

I’m transfixed, in a mind-melty sort of way, by the allegation that Cherie Booth — in her lofty judge capacity, rather than her slightly-chippy-former- PM’s-wife capacity — gave a more lenient sentence to a man convicted of assault because he was religious. Shamso Miah was on his way home from his mosque when he joined the queue at a cash dispenser. After a disagreement about who was in front of whom, he punched somebody else in the face, breaking his jaw. Judge Cherie, the story goes, suspended his sentence, on the basis that he was a religious man, and already beating himself up about it. Albeit not literally. Presumably.

Now the National Secular Society has complained to the Judicial Complaints Office that this sort of thing is unfair to atheists, on the basis that, if Miah had been one, he’d have been off to chokey. It’s got everything, this story. Creepy religious Blairs? Check. Out-of-touch judges? Check. A slightly scary Muslim? Check. They’re probably knocking out a BBC Four docudrama about it as I type. But the nub of the matter, I think, is the old chestnut about the bearing, if any, that religious belief should have on abstract morality.

Judge Cherie seems to be on the same page as the Pope on this, in believing that religious belief gives you a sort of super, better morality, which outweighs everything else. The NSS, equally unsurprisingly, seems to find this quite offensive. My instincts are with it. Annoyingly, though, and as my philosophy degree taught me in week one, it’s only Cherie’s lot that make conceptual sense. There’s no such thing as abstract morality. It doesn’t even make any sense. If God isn’t the ultimate answer, what is?

This is precisely why secularists are always even more annoying that religious people. Often they’re even more annoying than Cherie Booth. It’s because they’re insincere. Sooner or later, I always think, secularists are going to have to bite the bullet, ditch “morality” and “fairness” and all that Goddish guff, and start talking about convenience. Crimes are wrong, because they are inconvenient. Value systems are good, because they make life nicer. Murder is a hassle. It’ll never be stirring stuff, but at least it’s honest.

I wonder why so many 'liberal' commentators don't practice the doctrine of live and let live towards Christians that they urge on the rest of us in relation to so many others in sociey. Perhaps that'll be one of the questions I ask when I join the Benedictines at Pluscarden Abbey next week on my retreat.

In conclusion I welcome reasoned discussion of religion, but I find ignorant attacks on religion tedious in the extreme. However, I would no sooner ban those attacks on religion than I would advocate banning the Burqa. So I hope that ignorant bigots like Peter Tatchell learn to practice the liberalism they claim to believe in, and stop calling for the Pope to be banned from visiting England later this year.

Sign of the Times

In an interview in today's Telegraph Deborah Mitford, Duchess of Devonshire states, when bemoaning the modern, touchy-feely, wimp culture:

"The disaster of someone dying was talked about for a bit and the person was mourned, but you didn't go on about it and take pills and have to be counselled.

Money and illness and sex were not talked about in those days and they are the only thing people talk about these days, aren't they? Self-pity and self-esteem, which are now the key things in schools, were not allowed."

Contrast that commonsense approach to the following, which appears in the same newspaper:

"Postmen have been told they do not have to deliver to homes on cobbled streets in bad weather, because rain makes them too dangerous."

Big 3 Palladium Orchestra

I found this band on BBC 4 last weekend when channel hopping. They were live at the Barbican in London, absolutely brilliant:

Pope Benedict XVI versus Political Correctness

It's great to see the usual misfits kicking off against the visit, later this year, of Pope Benedict. Of course the main fury seems to be vented as ever by Peter Tatchell, the most sexuality obsessed tyrant figure in the UK.

Tatchell's attitude seems to be that anybody, or anything, that doesn't fall exactly into step with his views and outlook should be banned. I don't see why. For God's sake he even attacks the wrong sort of gays.

On the question of "equality" why should the Catholic church, or any other church, be forced to employ people it disagrees with on grounds of morality and conscience? It wouldn't change the view of a single person within that church, or the fundamental belief of that church.There would probably just be a nod and a wink about a particular candidate who would then be found "unsuitable for the post", especially if she had a huge beer belly and a week's stubble on "her" chin. But would Tatchell, for example, really want to work for the Catholic church anyway?

I was once challenged by a gay friend about the churches attitude to homosexuality. He claimed that it was wicked and promoted hatred and homophobia. I asked him if I, or any of my family, had ever treated him in that way. He sheepishly replied that no we hadn't. I then asked him if he actually wanted to become a Roman Catholic. He reponded that he was an atheist, so I suggested he stop worrying about the Catholic church and gets on with his life.

There is room for all beliefs in this country. Don't try and ban the visit of the Pope, just as I would never try to ban the Naional Secular Society or the British Humanist Association.

The politically correct seem to be becoming ever more intolerant and fascistic. Maybe they fear the end of New Labour. If that's the case I wouldn't worry, Cameron is probably much more PC than Gordon Brown.

Harriet Harman Wins Award!

Because she's such a whining, whinging, 'equality' obsessed bitch I've decided to honour her. It's a long time since I awarded an Obie, so here's one for the Bitchfinder General, Harriet Harperson:

Victory For Commonsense Over Harriet Harperson

Equality dinosaur and Bitchfinder General Harriet Harperson has backed away from a confrontation with the churches:

Harriet Harman has backed away from a confrontation with religious leaders over who they can employ, making clear that she will not force contentious amendments to the Equality Bill through Parliament.

Ministers were astonished on Monday when the Pope said that the Bill violated “natural justice” and urged bishops to fight it. But that attack, along with the strength of opposition in the Lords and the limited time left to get Bills passed before the election, has sapped the Government’s enthusiasm to continue the fight.

Full story.

Wouldn't it be fantastic if she copped a 'Portillo' on May 6th the dreary old bag?!

European? Not me-I'm British!

New t-shirt at Liberty Corner Shop

Pope Benedict's Visit 2010

It was great news yesterday, at least for those of us in the Roman Catholic Church, that Pope Benedict XVI is to visit England later this year.

Of course there will inevitably be rabid demonstrations opposed to his visit. It increasingly seems that the glorious freedom and democracy the Labour government want to spread to places like Iraq doesn't apply to Christians in the UK.

The Pope was right to speak out against even more oppressive "equality" legislation that will force Catholics, and Catholic organisation, to go against deeply held moral and religious beliefs.

I for one will be there cheering the Pope as loudly as I can when he visits these shores.

UKIP's Nikki Sinclaire

Today's the day that Nikki Sinclaire MEP faces the kangaroo court that is the UK Independence Party NEC.

Her crime? Leaving the EFD Group in the European Parliament because of the number of right-wing loonies from assorted countries that are in the group. To give you an idea the Lega Nord, from Italy, were thrown out of the ID Group because of their extreme xenophobia. The ID Group was UKIP's EP grouping prior to the June '09 elections.

Miraculously they were rehabilitated by Nigel Farage immediately after the June '09 elections, much to the shock of many members, not least Nikki. Some say there expulsion was a cynical PR stunt prior to the elections.

Nikki discussed her intention to leave the group with Party Leader, Lord Pearson, who promsed her his full support. Sadly he has shown no support for Nikki's principled stand since she resigned from the group. Nikki has now been banned from using the UKIP name, can no longer describe herself as 'UKIP MEP' and is not allowed to use party offices or attend party meetings.

Contrast that with UKIP's treatment of Tom Wise. Tom Wise is now languishing in chokey having been found guilty of fraud, he couldn't keep his hands off his allowances when he was a UKIP member of the European Parliament. It seems he had a penchant for fine wines and cars but his exorbitant MEP salary wasn't enough. Tom Wise was never disciplined by UKIP.

It's now quite clear where UKIP's priorities lie.

I wish Nikki luck today but suggest that she remains true to her principles and remains an independent MEP, or joins a party that would value her courage and principles.