At last, a bit of commonsense with Swindon Borough Council getting rid of those ridiculous speed cameras. Let's hope the next move is to get rid of traffic lights, then all the other paraphernalia that makes motoring such a bind.
Martin Cassini, and others, must be pleased at this move in the right direction. But a little cynical part of me can't stop thinking that the only reason the Tories did it was because they pay £320,000 each year to maintain them, then the government keeps all the revenue from 'fines'.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Wednesday, October 22, 2008
Free Speech
Some time ago I posted about freedom of speech. I have just read this article on the UKIP website by Gerard Batten, MEP for London which goes into more detail about the dangers of the European Arrest Warrant.
Scary Old Gits
Those humourless prats at Age Concern are at it again, taking offence at the drop of a hat on behalf of old folk. This time they are ranting at Woolworth's for flogging halloween masks in a range they call 'scary old people'. It seems that Age Concern, forever patronising old biddies, think the masks are grossly disrespectful and old biddies will be mortally offended. So let's scrap pantomimes that depict ugly sisters in case they offend the siblings of the world, and ban Shakespeare's Merchant of Venice for being anti-semitic.
I was unlucky enough to catch a few minutes of GMTV this morning and the slimy cow Fiona Philips was sat there being all offended by the masks. The next thing they went to an Age Concern social centre in Hull to see how terribly offended the old biddies were. I was just thinking how ugly and scary the masks were when I realised the old folk in Hull weren't wearing masks. Scary!
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Mayor of London
Interesting to read the very politically correct reasoning of Ken Livingstone here, outlining why he wants Barack Obama to win the US election.
Oops, sorry, it's Boris Johnson. I got a bit mixed up there.
Oops, sorry, it's Boris Johnson. I got a bit mixed up there.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Elections 2009-A Prediction
On June 4 next year we have the European elections and the local elections, including county council elections. It is interesting that the governmnent has been so keen to move the local elections back from May but there is good reason. The EU elections have traditionally created abysmal turnouts, so by holding the locals at the same time, they are hoping to bump up the turnout in the EU election.
The EU elections are on proportional representation rather than first past the post, which massively assists smaller parties such as UKIP and the Greens. Smaller parties, with extremely motivated members and supporters, will turn out to vote in what are seen by the general populace as worthless elections thus giving them success that it is very difficult to replicate in first past the post elections. Low turnout through apathy is great for smaller parties. Have other elections at the same time and hope that supporters of the big three will then vote in the EU elections too while they're at it, thus damaging the smaller parties.
On that basis what better to bump up voter turnout than having the general election on 4 June too? I wouldn't bet against it. In fact I may just have a flutter on it being held on June 4th. After all, New Labour do enjoy playing around with our democratic process.
The EU elections are on proportional representation rather than first past the post, which massively assists smaller parties such as UKIP and the Greens. Smaller parties, with extremely motivated members and supporters, will turn out to vote in what are seen by the general populace as worthless elections thus giving them success that it is very difficult to replicate in first past the post elections. Low turnout through apathy is great for smaller parties. Have other elections at the same time and hope that supporters of the big three will then vote in the EU elections too while they're at it, thus damaging the smaller parties.
On that basis what better to bump up voter turnout than having the general election on 4 June too? I wouldn't bet against it. In fact I may just have a flutter on it being held on June 4th. After all, New Labour do enjoy playing around with our democratic process.
It's A Mad World
Most of us get an ever increasing feeling that business exists not so much to provide a decent service but, just like government, to squeeze us dry. In recent months we have had two particularly stress inducing episodes.
First there is our very own British Gas saga. I say 'our very own' because everybody seems to have a British Gas horror story. Back in April we got a bill for £780, that despite them taking monthly direct debits. I phoned and gave them the current meter reading. They promised me that the bill would be corrected, we do after all live in a terraced house rather than a country mansion. A few weeks later the red bill arrived. I phoned them again and, after a lenthy conversation discovered that they were unaware that two years previously we had had a new meter fitted. So I gave them all the details and was promised that the bill would be sorted and a new bill sent. I was told that the old meter was imperial, the new one metric so the bill would be nearer £30 than £800. All was well then. Or was it?
A few more weeks passed and I received a letter threatening court action if we didn't pay up. So I rang again and was told that they had all the details but another department was dealing with it and they would be informed that they had the wrong information. I was told not to worry they would sort it out. That was a relief. Or was it?
A few weeks later I got a letter telling me that they were starting legal action and would be cutting off our gas supply. So I phoned again and spoke to an extremely pleasant fellow who was actually as piss useless as all the other titheads I had spoken to. So, after about eight calls to him, promising each time that he was diferent and would sort it, I went hrough the ombudsman. Lo and behold within a day it was sorted. Or was it?
I was told that they had the new meter detals but had mistakenly taken the first reading from zero. It had been put in two years before we went back to British Gas. The actual bill, we found out in September, was £25, by then we had stopped the direct debits. So we paid the bill and changed supplier. So that was that. Or was it?
Two weeks ago we got a cheque for £470. It was for what British Gas owed us!
Last week I changed my car. Yesterday I rang the breakdown people to inform them of the new details. I was told that we had no cover. Luckily Mrs B had kept the receipts, we had stupidly bought Tesco's breakdown cover. I then made a second call to be told the same and that I should go back to the store for a refund. So I did.
At the store I was told that we did have cover but I had rung the wrong number. So I asked which number I should have rung. She gave me the correct number and it was the one I had rung. I then told her that was the one I had rung and she told me that I hadn't, so I said I had, and so the call went. That saga is still ongoing but Mrs B is dealing with it as I reached for my baseball bat eventually to take out my frustration on a nearby inanimate object.
And each saga was exacerbated by phoning and getting endless stupid messages and options to press before I got to speak to a human being, or somebody nearly human!
We really are all doomed.
First there is our very own British Gas saga. I say 'our very own' because everybody seems to have a British Gas horror story. Back in April we got a bill for £780, that despite them taking monthly direct debits. I phoned and gave them the current meter reading. They promised me that the bill would be corrected, we do after all live in a terraced house rather than a country mansion. A few weeks later the red bill arrived. I phoned them again and, after a lenthy conversation discovered that they were unaware that two years previously we had had a new meter fitted. So I gave them all the details and was promised that the bill would be sorted and a new bill sent. I was told that the old meter was imperial, the new one metric so the bill would be nearer £30 than £800. All was well then. Or was it?
A few more weeks passed and I received a letter threatening court action if we didn't pay up. So I rang again and was told that they had all the details but another department was dealing with it and they would be informed that they had the wrong information. I was told not to worry they would sort it out. That was a relief. Or was it?
A few weeks later I got a letter telling me that they were starting legal action and would be cutting off our gas supply. So I phoned again and spoke to an extremely pleasant fellow who was actually as piss useless as all the other titheads I had spoken to. So, after about eight calls to him, promising each time that he was diferent and would sort it, I went hrough the ombudsman. Lo and behold within a day it was sorted. Or was it?
I was told that they had the new meter detals but had mistakenly taken the first reading from zero. It had been put in two years before we went back to British Gas. The actual bill, we found out in September, was £25, by then we had stopped the direct debits. So we paid the bill and changed supplier. So that was that. Or was it?
Two weeks ago we got a cheque for £470. It was for what British Gas owed us!
Last week I changed my car. Yesterday I rang the breakdown people to inform them of the new details. I was told that we had no cover. Luckily Mrs B had kept the receipts, we had stupidly bought Tesco's breakdown cover. I then made a second call to be told the same and that I should go back to the store for a refund. So I did.
At the store I was told that we did have cover but I had rung the wrong number. So I asked which number I should have rung. She gave me the correct number and it was the one I had rung. I then told her that was the one I had rung and she told me that I hadn't, so I said I had, and so the call went. That saga is still ongoing but Mrs B is dealing with it as I reached for my baseball bat eventually to take out my frustration on a nearby inanimate object.
And each saga was exacerbated by phoning and getting endless stupid messages and options to press before I got to speak to a human being, or somebody nearly human!
We really are all doomed.
Sunday, October 19, 2008
Bishop of Lancaster And Gay Adoption
There has been an ongoing 'dialogue' between the Bishop of Lancaster, Bishop Patrick O'Donoghue, and the Catholic Caring Services in the diocese. For those who don't know the Catholic Caring Services provide adoption, among other services, to Roman Catholics. The problem is that government legislation means that from January 2009 adoption agencies will be forced to offer their services to gay and lesbian couples. This goes completely against the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church.
This morning at Mass we were informed that the situation has worsened. The trustees have voted to accept the new legislation and offer their services to same sex couples. As a consequence the Bishop has informed them that if they do go against the teaching of the Church, then he will have no option but to remove their designation as a Catholic service and sever their links to the diocese. Thank God for a Catholic Bishop who upholds the faith.
I am not clear about the complete ins and outs of the situation but suspect that the trustees are running more scared of the government and its enforcement agencies than they are of the Church or the Bishop of Lancaster. Those trustees who voted to abdicate their responsibilities won't be joining the honourable list of Lancashire martyrs, those who faced death not just malicious prosecution, defending their faith.
This morning at Mass we were informed that the situation has worsened. The trustees have voted to accept the new legislation and offer their services to same sex couples. As a consequence the Bishop has informed them that if they do go against the teaching of the Church, then he will have no option but to remove their designation as a Catholic service and sever their links to the diocese. Thank God for a Catholic Bishop who upholds the faith.
I am not clear about the complete ins and outs of the situation but suspect that the trustees are running more scared of the government and its enforcement agencies than they are of the Church or the Bishop of Lancaster. Those trustees who voted to abdicate their responsibilities won't be joining the honourable list of Lancashire martyrs, those who faced death not just malicious prosecution, defending their faith.
Lake District World Heritage
The Lake District has been pushing for World Heritage Status since 1985, and they are now making more of their fantastic towns and villages in their latest push, and quite right too. As well as beautiful fells, association with great artists and writers you will have to go far to better picturesque villages like Ambleside and Grasmere.
Let's face it, if a cultural wasteland like Liverpool can become 'City of Culture', the Lakes should have been made a World Heritage Site in 1985.
Here is the BBC coverage.
Friday, October 17, 2008
Oppressed Witches In Lancashire
We are heading towards that time of the year when witches get active and joe public goes out hunting for them, and I mean hunting in the nicest possible way. In Manchester people head for Alderley Edge seeking cavorting witches, here in north and east Lancashire it is Pendle Hill, for obvious reasons.
Now I've never been out seeking witches at either place, although we did celebrate the 'Day of the Dead' a few years back on Lake Patzcuaro in Mexico, but that's a whole different experience. However, having a few pints then going looking for witches, preferably the type who romp in the woods naked and luvly, seems like a fun thing to do I would have thought, but not Lancashire's 'Event Safety Advisory Group'. Oh no, they think you might have an accident and are stopping people going to Pendle Hill on Halloween. As you will see by reading the linked article the group involves the chief puritans, the Lancashire Police 'Service'. Bloody killjoys all of them, although I neither condone nor encourage the practice of witchcraft. But you should watch Wicker Man if only for that one scene!
So, it has been established that the Lancashire police are killjoys and party poopers. Or has it?
Follow that by reading this article and it seems that they are not such killjoys and party poopers after all. At least not if you enjoy copulating in a public park or a public lavatory.
Perhaps Deputy Chief Constable Michael Cunningham is after Sir Ian Blair's job when he rides off into the sunset.
Now I've never been out seeking witches at either place, although we did celebrate the 'Day of the Dead' a few years back on Lake Patzcuaro in Mexico, but that's a whole different experience. However, having a few pints then going looking for witches, preferably the type who romp in the woods naked and luvly, seems like a fun thing to do I would have thought, but not Lancashire's 'Event Safety Advisory Group'. Oh no, they think you might have an accident and are stopping people going to Pendle Hill on Halloween. As you will see by reading the linked article the group involves the chief puritans, the Lancashire Police 'Service'. Bloody killjoys all of them, although I neither condone nor encourage the practice of witchcraft. But you should watch Wicker Man if only for that one scene!
So, it has been established that the Lancashire police are killjoys and party poopers. Or has it?
Follow that by reading this article and it seems that they are not such killjoys and party poopers after all. At least not if you enjoy copulating in a public park or a public lavatory.
Perhaps Deputy Chief Constable Michael Cunningham is after Sir Ian Blair's job when he rides off into the sunset.
Anonymous Comments
There are many bloggers who, for a whole range of reasons, preserve their anonymity by using pseudonyms and that's fine by me. Many of the best bloggers are known by the identity of their blogs rather than their real names. Some of us choose to blog using our real names, it's personal choice and 99% of the time works extremely well.
Then there are people who don't actually blog but post comments on blogs. Again comment posters usually use their blog name be it their real name or otherwise. Then there are annonymous comment posters. This method of posting, where the poster appears on the blog as "anonymous" always seemed very rare, certainly on my blog, but it didn't particularly trouble me as they usually contributed something to the subject of the post.
However, since the beginning of September when I posted "A Eurosceptic Alternative" I have been receiving anonymous comments of a very, very mildly threatening nature. I say mildly because they are more the stuff of the playground than the kind of thing that gets you asking for police protection. That, in itself, says it all about the psychology of the comment poster, she really should get out of the playground more.
Having faced down irate militants in the 70s and 80s for strike breaking, copping for some pretty unpleasant treatment and very nasty threats for my trouble, I find this schoolgirl style goading tedious and pathetic rather than sleep depriving and cold sweat inducing. Even so, I have decided to no longer accept posts from "anonymous" because it is juvenile, boring and not to be encouraged.
Then there are people who don't actually blog but post comments on blogs. Again comment posters usually use their blog name be it their real name or otherwise. Then there are annonymous comment posters. This method of posting, where the poster appears on the blog as "anonymous" always seemed very rare, certainly on my blog, but it didn't particularly trouble me as they usually contributed something to the subject of the post.
However, since the beginning of September when I posted "A Eurosceptic Alternative" I have been receiving anonymous comments of a very, very mildly threatening nature. I say mildly because they are more the stuff of the playground than the kind of thing that gets you asking for police protection. That, in itself, says it all about the psychology of the comment poster, she really should get out of the playground more.
Having faced down irate militants in the 70s and 80s for strike breaking, copping for some pretty unpleasant treatment and very nasty threats for my trouble, I find this schoolgirl style goading tedious and pathetic rather than sleep depriving and cold sweat inducing. Even so, I have decided to no longer accept posts from "anonymous" because it is juvenile, boring and not to be encouraged.
Wednesday, October 15, 2008
More Fascist Legislation To Come
Left is Jacqui Smith sporting Mandelsonian moustache. Right is Stalin in drag.
Jacqui Smith is continuing apace with her plans to turn the UK into a police state, spurred on perhaps by the democratic defeat of her attempt to introduce 42 day internment. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.
Here is the story of how the government plans a national database to store details of all our phone calls and emails. Stalin, Hitler et al would be proud.
Tuesday, October 14, 2008
CBI Back C-Charge
It seems that a majority of CBI members polled support the proposed congestion charge in Manchester, according to this Manchester Online report.I've often wondered what motivates the CBI, apart from cash, and this makes me wonder even more.
Yet again motorists will be shafted in order to subsidise public transport. If you want to use public transport then you pay for it, don't expect me to pay for you. Many of us have stopped going to Manchester already, or at least we don't visit anywhere near as often as we did. We visit our parents and occasionally meet friends in Manchester if we can't avoid it. We no longer shop there. We visit the theatre very, very rarely now and no longer go in for a night out and spend the whole night there.
The main reason for our reduced visits is the hostility to cars. Parking is extortionate and road layouts appear designed to cause as much congestion as possible. Bus lanes lie empty for mile after mile while motorists sit in a lane that is crawling at best and often static for minutes at a time. The fewer buses there are the more bus lanes seem to appear.
One thing that the c-charge nutters seem to have missed is the developing housing crisis in the centre of Manchester and other cities. There has been such a huge boom in city centre developments in recent years, and most are studio apartments or one bed apartments, that the market has crashed, supply has exceeded demand. Already developers are going belly up and flats are being left empty. How soon before the city centre is riddled with the kind of slums last seen in the nineteenth century?
Until 25 years ago the city centre had few residents but filled at weekends with shoppers, theatregoers and clubbers, who now go elsewhere. As the slums develop and the shoppers go elsewhere there will be a huge increase in social problems in devastated city centres, aided and abetted by the c-charge.
Then we'll be taxed again to fund clearing up the mess.
Visit:
Stop The Charge
Manchester Against Road Tolls
Yet again motorists will be shafted in order to subsidise public transport. If you want to use public transport then you pay for it, don't expect me to pay for you. Many of us have stopped going to Manchester already, or at least we don't visit anywhere near as often as we did. We visit our parents and occasionally meet friends in Manchester if we can't avoid it. We no longer shop there. We visit the theatre very, very rarely now and no longer go in for a night out and spend the whole night there.
The main reason for our reduced visits is the hostility to cars. Parking is extortionate and road layouts appear designed to cause as much congestion as possible. Bus lanes lie empty for mile after mile while motorists sit in a lane that is crawling at best and often static for minutes at a time. The fewer buses there are the more bus lanes seem to appear.
One thing that the c-charge nutters seem to have missed is the developing housing crisis in the centre of Manchester and other cities. There has been such a huge boom in city centre developments in recent years, and most are studio apartments or one bed apartments, that the market has crashed, supply has exceeded demand. Already developers are going belly up and flats are being left empty. How soon before the city centre is riddled with the kind of slums last seen in the nineteenth century?
Until 25 years ago the city centre had few residents but filled at weekends with shoppers, theatregoers and clubbers, who now go elsewhere. As the slums develop and the shoppers go elsewhere there will be a huge increase in social problems in devastated city centres, aided and abetted by the c-charge.
Then we'll be taxed again to fund clearing up the mess.
Visit:
Stop The Charge
Manchester Against Road Tolls
Jacqui Smith-Queen Bitch
I have just heard Obergruppenfuhrer Smith on the radio berating those of us opposed to 42 day internment and promising that it will be sneaked through hidden in other legislation. As our democratic system has blocked her and Brown(shirts) fascist legislation I'll bet, with most people obsessing about the recession, they will sneak it in too and with virtually no public opposition.
She then went on to imply, which really angered me, that those of us opposed to 42 days somehow don't care about our country. Tell you what Smith, some of us were patriots when you and your ilk in the Labour Party labelled us xenophobes, Little Englanders, imperialists and very much worse, so we need no lectures from a pseudo-patriot like you.
She then went on to imply, which really angered me, that those of us opposed to 42 days somehow don't care about our country. Tell you what Smith, some of us were patriots when you and your ilk in the Labour Party labelled us xenophobes, Little Englanders, imperialists and very much worse, so we need no lectures from a pseudo-patriot like you.
Saturday, October 11, 2008
How Strange
Here is the BBC coverage of the unfortunate accident that killed Austria's Joerg Haider.
You may remember him as the leader of the far-right Freedom Party who upset the EU by joining the Austrian government in 2000. Ever the bastion of liberty and democracy the EU brought in sanctions.
The Soviet dictators used to bump opponents off in fake car crashes after beating them to death, but I doubt that even the EU would stoop to that.
You may remember him as the leader of the far-right Freedom Party who upset the EU by joining the Austrian government in 2000. Ever the bastion of liberty and democracy the EU brought in sanctions.
The Soviet dictators used to bump opponents off in fake car crashes after beating them to death, but I doubt that even the EU would stoop to that.
Friday, October 10, 2008
War On Terror, War On Iceland
So, to all those who respond, when HMG brings in ever more oppressive legislation, "if you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear", what do you say now?
Here is the tale of how the New Labour dictatorship has further abused its power.
Anti-terror legislation is supposed to be there to protect us from terrorists, no surprise there. It is now being routinely abused to suit whatever the government wants at a given time, no real surprise there either. This is exactly how dictators creepingly and stealthily whittle away freedom democracy and build a police state.
In my view, see post below, banks that fail should be left to fail, just as the EU/government has let Post Offices go to the wall. Invoking anti-terror legislation to kick Iceland smacks of fascism and bullying. Yes there has been stupidity by Icelandic money men, as there has been by money men all over the world, but this action by the government confirms many of our worst fears. That the 'war on terror' is merely a smokescreen to justify something far more sinister, just as 'weapons of mass destruction' were.
A terrifying thought. What would this government have done to Iceland during the 1970's 'Cod Wars'. Nuked 'em I'll bet.
Here is the tale of how the New Labour dictatorship has further abused its power.
Anti-terror legislation is supposed to be there to protect us from terrorists, no surprise there. It is now being routinely abused to suit whatever the government wants at a given time, no real surprise there either. This is exactly how dictators creepingly and stealthily whittle away freedom democracy and build a police state.
In my view, see post below, banks that fail should be left to fail, just as the EU/government has let Post Offices go to the wall. Invoking anti-terror legislation to kick Iceland smacks of fascism and bullying. Yes there has been stupidity by Icelandic money men, as there has been by money men all over the world, but this action by the government confirms many of our worst fears. That the 'war on terror' is merely a smokescreen to justify something far more sinister, just as 'weapons of mass destruction' were.
A terrifying thought. What would this government have done to Iceland during the 1970's 'Cod Wars'. Nuked 'em I'll bet.
Wednesday, October 08, 2008
The Recession
When it comes to matters financial I am an absolute no-hoper. But one thing that does trouble me in the current situation, is the use of our taxes to bale out failing banks. I have visited my accountant this morning, to be told that my tax burden has increased, and I mentioned my view on the bale out of banks to him. Surprise, surprise he agrees with me, let them go to the wall.
One blog that I look up to in a certain amount of awe when I am wondering about matters financial is Mark Wadsworth's Blog. I can definitely recommend a visit and, a few days ago, he ran a poll on baling out banks and 51% believed they should be left to fail. Perhaps I'm not that dim after all.
The other concern is that the current trend, here, in the USA and elsewhere, is going directly against the free market system and will merely store up trouble in the future. It seems to be a gross distortion of free market capitalism and gives failing banks an unfair advantage over banks that have perhaps behaved a little more responsibly. It is corporatism and not free market capitalism to blame. So I was heartened to visit T Bishop Finger, another excellent blog, to find that he had posted a film of Ron Paul, the American libertarian, saying exactly that.
Other than that the only thing to say is tighten your belts!
One blog that I look up to in a certain amount of awe when I am wondering about matters financial is Mark Wadsworth's Blog. I can definitely recommend a visit and, a few days ago, he ran a poll on baling out banks and 51% believed they should be left to fail. Perhaps I'm not that dim after all.
The other concern is that the current trend, here, in the USA and elsewhere, is going directly against the free market system and will merely store up trouble in the future. It seems to be a gross distortion of free market capitalism and gives failing banks an unfair advantage over banks that have perhaps behaved a little more responsibly. It is corporatism and not free market capitalism to blame. So I was heartened to visit T Bishop Finger, another excellent blog, to find that he had posted a film of Ron Paul, the American libertarian, saying exactly that.
Other than that the only thing to say is tighten your belts!
Monday, October 06, 2008
Living Democracy Or Rotting Carcass?
A woman is either pregnant or she isn't. We either have free speech or we don't. Sadly like many other freedoms, we are gradually losing the right to free speech and many people are either too scared, or too stupid, to put up a fight to defend it.
The biggest example in the last week or so has been in the sporting world. Ten days ago Tottenham played Portsmouth. The Portsmouth player, Sol Campbell, was treated to 90 minutes of abuse from Spurs fans because, seven years ago, he left them to join arch rivals Arsenal. Poor Sol, not consoled by earning £100,000 a week he whined and the police are investigating with a view to taking legal action against the 2,000 or so fans involved. Nice to see that there is so little real crime in Portsmouth for them to be spending their time on.
What was particularly interesting was that for much of last week I listened to independent radio coverage of the story. What was stressed was that the abuse was not of a racial nature. The BBC, taxpayer funded organ of the state, eventually caught up with the story and immediately procaimed that the abuse was not only racial but homophobic. Well they would wouldn't they?
The press this weekend reported how the comedians Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse had two sketches cut from their current show. One was based on a Muslim character, the other on a drunken Catholic priest. As ever the pinko liberals at the production company feared they might cause offence. As a Roman Catholic my faith is strong enough to take some mickey taking or criticism, so get on with it.
In Labour's reshuffle 'controversial' Lancashire MP Phil Woolas has been made Immigration Minister. He earned the descripion 'controversial' because he said, wait for it, wait for it,that Muslim women wearing a veil can be seen as provocative. My word, I'm going to be really controversial now, here goes, today is Monday!
Also this weekend I heard news of the German government attempting to use the vile European (Union) arrest warrant for the first time. They are trying to have an Australian academic, based in Britain, extradited to face trial in Germany for holocaust denial. It is illegal in the Reich, but he spoke in Britain.
I don't care whether somebody uses homophobic language, racist language or calls somebody a fat northern git. Well actually I do, but I base my view of a person on a range of things, including their use of language. It is up to me to make a judgement on a fellow human being, part of that judgement based on their langauge, not the state.
On another level I would prefer the leader of a political party to make racist or homophobic comments openly so that I can avoid them like the plague. The problem with politically correct legislation is that it only drives nasty views underground, it doesn't, yet, cancel out the thoughts of the homophobe or the racist.
When I was growing up, from as early as I can remember, I was taught the following rhyme: 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me'. It's time the PC brigade grew up and accepted that free speech sometimes means being offended. That's life.
Is Britain really so insecure as a nation that we have to legislate against free speech? Sadly the answer is yes.
The biggest example in the last week or so has been in the sporting world. Ten days ago Tottenham played Portsmouth. The Portsmouth player, Sol Campbell, was treated to 90 minutes of abuse from Spurs fans because, seven years ago, he left them to join arch rivals Arsenal. Poor Sol, not consoled by earning £100,000 a week he whined and the police are investigating with a view to taking legal action against the 2,000 or so fans involved. Nice to see that there is so little real crime in Portsmouth for them to be spending their time on.
What was particularly interesting was that for much of last week I listened to independent radio coverage of the story. What was stressed was that the abuse was not of a racial nature. The BBC, taxpayer funded organ of the state, eventually caught up with the story and immediately procaimed that the abuse was not only racial but homophobic. Well they would wouldn't they?
The press this weekend reported how the comedians Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse had two sketches cut from their current show. One was based on a Muslim character, the other on a drunken Catholic priest. As ever the pinko liberals at the production company feared they might cause offence. As a Roman Catholic my faith is strong enough to take some mickey taking or criticism, so get on with it.
In Labour's reshuffle 'controversial' Lancashire MP Phil Woolas has been made Immigration Minister. He earned the descripion 'controversial' because he said, wait for it, wait for it,that Muslim women wearing a veil can be seen as provocative. My word, I'm going to be really controversial now, here goes, today is Monday!
Also this weekend I heard news of the German government attempting to use the vile European (Union) arrest warrant for the first time. They are trying to have an Australian academic, based in Britain, extradited to face trial in Germany for holocaust denial. It is illegal in the Reich, but he spoke in Britain.
I don't care whether somebody uses homophobic language, racist language or calls somebody a fat northern git. Well actually I do, but I base my view of a person on a range of things, including their use of language. It is up to me to make a judgement on a fellow human being, part of that judgement based on their langauge, not the state.
On another level I would prefer the leader of a political party to make racist or homophobic comments openly so that I can avoid them like the plague. The problem with politically correct legislation is that it only drives nasty views underground, it doesn't, yet, cancel out the thoughts of the homophobe or the racist.
When I was growing up, from as early as I can remember, I was taught the following rhyme: 'sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me'. It's time the PC brigade grew up and accepted that free speech sometimes means being offended. That's life.
Is Britain really so insecure as a nation that we have to legislate against free speech? Sadly the answer is yes.
Friday, October 03, 2008
A Eurosceptic Alternative
In August I was voted top of UKIP's list of candidates in the North West by party members. Although honoured that they had put such trust in me I felt distinctly uneasy. Within a week I had made the decision to stand down and resign as the party's Regional Organiser for the North West. Many people have asked why.
Until 2004 I had never voted, let alone participated, in a European election. I followed the Powellite path that voting in their elections only gave them a veneer of legitimacy. In 2004 UKIP had a leader who I trusted, a party chairman who I trusted and a lead candidate in the North West who I trusted, so I accepted and followed the party line.
The party position was, and still is, that taking seats in the European parliament deprived a Europhile a seat. That seats in the European parliament would open doors to mass media coverage. That taking seats in the European parliament would attract the resources to really fight, and start winning, Westminster elections.
I had close friends in UKIP who, even then, would not campaign in the European elections on principle. I respected their views but felt that we had no alternative. So what has happened since 2004 for me to change my position on Euro elections?
Since 2004 our results in local elections, and parliamentary elections, have not improved. There have been isolated good results such as Hartlepool but, coming in the immediate wake of the 2004 Euro elections, we would really have had to try hard to get a poor result there. The final nails in the coffin of that argument were the Crewe and Nantwich and Henley by-elections where we got just over 2% in both. Results that were as bad, if not worse, than pre-1999 when UKIP had no MEPs.
Depriving a Europhile a seat, and gaining mass media coverage, are virtually the same argument. Even friends who are pro-EU admit that the role of MEP is virtually worthless with no power and little influence. As a consequence the media have little interest in covering the work of MEPs, preferring to remain ensconced in the Westminster political village. Therefore MEPs stoop to coming out with outrageous comments to gain a cheap headline, losing the party credibility with the wider public, or end up pleased to have appeared on some obscure satellite channel politics show at 4-00am watched by a handful of insomniacs.
I said in my speeches at the hustings meetings that the party had become too Brussels focussed and that we needed to look closely at our future direction. One possible scenario in June 2009 is that UKIP may find itself with a massively reduced number of MEPs, possibly back to the 1999 level of three. That may be the doomsday scenario to some, but let's look at the political scene now compared to October 2003.
In 2003 the Tories were down on their uppers, unfit for local government let alone Downing Street. Labour were still riding high and less than two years away from another general election victory. Unbelievably Blair could still do no wrong. The Tories were led by the uninspiring Michael Howard, who always had the air of a stop gap leader, never that of a Prime Minister to be.
These circumstances led to a huge protest vote by Tories against their party in the 2004 Euro elections, which gave UKIP a huge boost. And, sad to say, the UKIP vote was also boosted by the Kilroy factor. The Euro was also a big issue at the time and prompted many people, from all parts of the spectrum, to vote 'against the EU and the Euro' by voting UKIP.
As things stand in June 2009 the Labour party will still be led by Gordon Brown, one of the most unpopular and lacklustre Prime Ministers in living memory, and that includes John Major! Even if they have a change of leader before then it will still be seen as the second unelected Prime Minister Labour have foisted upon us, either way they will remian unpopular. Blair's wow factor has well and truly gone. Next year it is likely to be Labour supporters who protest vote against their own party, and they won't vote for what they see as a Tory Party MK II. And there is no Euro factor now for UKIP, having chosen to leave the fight against the Lisbon Treaty to others will have serious repercussions next June.
Tory supporters are unlikely to do anything to slow down or stop a Tory Party currently managing, somehow, to build a level of electoral credibility and the image of a party preparing for government. There will be hard core Tory Eurosceptics who will vote UKIP, but by and large the Tory vote will remain loyal to adminster a further kick in the guts to Gordon Brown, or his successor.
The third voter category is the floater with no real party loyalty but who votes pragmatically. My guess is that next year they will also want to administer a serious blow to an increasingly unpopular Labour government. Their idea by doing that will be to warn him that in a real election he will be out. So they too will signal that by voting Tory next June, knowing that the Tories will not actually be forming a government as a result of their protest.
Part of the problem for UKIP in 2004 was that most of us were taken by surprise at the scale of the success, there was almost a 'what do we do now?' feeling in the party in the immediate aftermath. In my view the party should now be having serious discussions on what the response should be if what I have described is indeed the scenario after June 2009.
Over the last couple of years I have believed ever more strongly that our position should be to either not fight European elections or, if we do and win, that we should refuse to take our seats. That may be a radical departure from the current path but, in my view, is the one that will garner us the most popular support. Even then that would be seriously hindered if the leadership does not start taking seriously the whole range of policies that members, through working groups, have worked so hard to produce. The last ten years have proven, if proof were needed, that single issue parties create a protest when the time is right, but no lasting political achievement
However with the current leadership, people making such suggestions are more likely to be labelled 'nutters' than to be listened to as sincere people with the party's interests at heart. Even if their views do not dovetail exactly with those of the leader it is healthy, in a democratic party, for alternative views to be looked at and considered. That is politics.
I hope that this post will also allay rumours that I withdrew because of 'poor health and a lack of energy' or 'because I only expected to come third', as one rumour merchant has suggested. My health has never been better and I always fight to win.
Until 2004 I had never voted, let alone participated, in a European election. I followed the Powellite path that voting in their elections only gave them a veneer of legitimacy. In 2004 UKIP had a leader who I trusted, a party chairman who I trusted and a lead candidate in the North West who I trusted, so I accepted and followed the party line.
The party position was, and still is, that taking seats in the European parliament deprived a Europhile a seat. That seats in the European parliament would open doors to mass media coverage. That taking seats in the European parliament would attract the resources to really fight, and start winning, Westminster elections.
I had close friends in UKIP who, even then, would not campaign in the European elections on principle. I respected their views but felt that we had no alternative. So what has happened since 2004 for me to change my position on Euro elections?
Since 2004 our results in local elections, and parliamentary elections, have not improved. There have been isolated good results such as Hartlepool but, coming in the immediate wake of the 2004 Euro elections, we would really have had to try hard to get a poor result there. The final nails in the coffin of that argument were the Crewe and Nantwich and Henley by-elections where we got just over 2% in both. Results that were as bad, if not worse, than pre-1999 when UKIP had no MEPs.
Depriving a Europhile a seat, and gaining mass media coverage, are virtually the same argument. Even friends who are pro-EU admit that the role of MEP is virtually worthless with no power and little influence. As a consequence the media have little interest in covering the work of MEPs, preferring to remain ensconced in the Westminster political village. Therefore MEPs stoop to coming out with outrageous comments to gain a cheap headline, losing the party credibility with the wider public, or end up pleased to have appeared on some obscure satellite channel politics show at 4-00am watched by a handful of insomniacs.
I said in my speeches at the hustings meetings that the party had become too Brussels focussed and that we needed to look closely at our future direction. One possible scenario in June 2009 is that UKIP may find itself with a massively reduced number of MEPs, possibly back to the 1999 level of three. That may be the doomsday scenario to some, but let's look at the political scene now compared to October 2003.
In 2003 the Tories were down on their uppers, unfit for local government let alone Downing Street. Labour were still riding high and less than two years away from another general election victory. Unbelievably Blair could still do no wrong. The Tories were led by the uninspiring Michael Howard, who always had the air of a stop gap leader, never that of a Prime Minister to be.
These circumstances led to a huge protest vote by Tories against their party in the 2004 Euro elections, which gave UKIP a huge boost. And, sad to say, the UKIP vote was also boosted by the Kilroy factor. The Euro was also a big issue at the time and prompted many people, from all parts of the spectrum, to vote 'against the EU and the Euro' by voting UKIP.
As things stand in June 2009 the Labour party will still be led by Gordon Brown, one of the most unpopular and lacklustre Prime Ministers in living memory, and that includes John Major! Even if they have a change of leader before then it will still be seen as the second unelected Prime Minister Labour have foisted upon us, either way they will remian unpopular. Blair's wow factor has well and truly gone. Next year it is likely to be Labour supporters who protest vote against their own party, and they won't vote for what they see as a Tory Party MK II. And there is no Euro factor now for UKIP, having chosen to leave the fight against the Lisbon Treaty to others will have serious repercussions next June.
Tory supporters are unlikely to do anything to slow down or stop a Tory Party currently managing, somehow, to build a level of electoral credibility and the image of a party preparing for government. There will be hard core Tory Eurosceptics who will vote UKIP, but by and large the Tory vote will remain loyal to adminster a further kick in the guts to Gordon Brown, or his successor.
The third voter category is the floater with no real party loyalty but who votes pragmatically. My guess is that next year they will also want to administer a serious blow to an increasingly unpopular Labour government. Their idea by doing that will be to warn him that in a real election he will be out. So they too will signal that by voting Tory next June, knowing that the Tories will not actually be forming a government as a result of their protest.
Part of the problem for UKIP in 2004 was that most of us were taken by surprise at the scale of the success, there was almost a 'what do we do now?' feeling in the party in the immediate aftermath. In my view the party should now be having serious discussions on what the response should be if what I have described is indeed the scenario after June 2009.
Over the last couple of years I have believed ever more strongly that our position should be to either not fight European elections or, if we do and win, that we should refuse to take our seats. That may be a radical departure from the current path but, in my view, is the one that will garner us the most popular support. Even then that would be seriously hindered if the leadership does not start taking seriously the whole range of policies that members, through working groups, have worked so hard to produce. The last ten years have proven, if proof were needed, that single issue parties create a protest when the time is right, but no lasting political achievement
However with the current leadership, people making such suggestions are more likely to be labelled 'nutters' than to be listened to as sincere people with the party's interests at heart. Even if their views do not dovetail exactly with those of the leader it is healthy, in a democratic party, for alternative views to be looked at and considered. That is politics.
I hope that this post will also allay rumours that I withdrew because of 'poor health and a lack of energy' or 'because I only expected to come third', as one rumour merchant has suggested. My health has never been better and I always fight to win.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
More On Rubbish Riots In Naples
The following comment arrived today on my post Rubbish Riots In Naples. I felt it warranted another airing so I'm posting it below too.
Just so you all know, the rubbish crysis is still going on.
Berlusconi on the 18th of July has publicly claimed that he solved the problem.
That is not true.
The rubbish has been removed from the center of the city, but in the peripheral areas and in the provinces, the problem is still the same.
Journalists are being intimidated and warned to not spread news on the rubbish still in the streets, and people who try to protest are intimidated as well.
Just check the following youtube videos:
In the first one, some people are being intimidated by the police to avoid their protest reaching the palace where Berlusconi is announcing that the "rubbish emergency" has been solved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTgrBV6ExEQ
Berlusconi declared the emergency solved in the 18th of July 2008.
You can see with your eyes what is happening
21 July (13km from Naples)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5Sa6mTbXq4
8 August, says the date on the newspaper
(Firefighters are blocked by the trash and there's rubbish burning)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY0V5-Fxj2M
8 September, just a couple of Kilometers from the city port.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYlAw88E3rA
People that make this videos public are risking.
They have organized crime against them. The organized crime profited from the emergency, and too much media attention was ruining their businessess. Bringing back the attention of the media and the eyes of the world upon the problem is the only way to fight them effectively.
From Italy: please, don't forget this.
Just so you all know, the rubbish crysis is still going on.
Berlusconi on the 18th of July has publicly claimed that he solved the problem.
That is not true.
The rubbish has been removed from the center of the city, but in the peripheral areas and in the provinces, the problem is still the same.
Journalists are being intimidated and warned to not spread news on the rubbish still in the streets, and people who try to protest are intimidated as well.
Just check the following youtube videos:
In the first one, some people are being intimidated by the police to avoid their protest reaching the palace where Berlusconi is announcing that the "rubbish emergency" has been solved.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTgrBV6ExEQ
Berlusconi declared the emergency solved in the 18th of July 2008.
You can see with your eyes what is happening
21 July (13km from Naples)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5Sa6mTbXq4
8 August, says the date on the newspaper
(Firefighters are blocked by the trash and there's rubbish burning)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IY0V5-Fxj2M
8 September, just a couple of Kilometers from the city port.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYlAw88E3rA
People that make this videos public are risking.
They have organized crime against them. The organized crime profited from the emergency, and too much media attention was ruining their businessess. Bringing back the attention of the media and the eyes of the world upon the problem is the only way to fight them effectively.
From Italy: please, don't forget this.
Yest Another Data Cock-up
This time MI5 have been at it.
A hand held computer was stolen when a burglar, yes a burglar, got into a house being used by MI5 in Greater Manchester. The enemeis of the UK must be quaking in their boots.
A hand held computer was stolen when a burglar, yes a burglar, got into a house being used by MI5 in Greater Manchester. The enemeis of the UK must be quaking in their boots.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)