am absolutely disgusted to hear that the surrounding Arab/Muslim countries have
refused point blank to help these refugees. Thus far they haven't accepted a single
refugee. That to me speaks volumes about how compassionate, united and open the
Islamic faith really is. If these wealthy and large neighbouring countries
can't and won't even help their fellow Muslims, what does that tell you about
the religion of peace? The dark irony here is that if these refugees were
allowed to settle in those countries it would be far easier for them to
integrate into those societies, given that they share a similar culture,
religion and values. Instead, the idiots over here have started another ill
thought out, bleeding heart campaign, welcoming the migrants. As I mention in
my last post, once these people leave the first safe country they come to,
whilst fleeing the horrors in Syria, they are no longer refugees, they then
become economic migrants. You may think that is cold and harsh, but it is a
Hitchens wrote an excellent article in his MOS column yesterday about the
migrant crisis. As usual he hits the nail on the head with everything he has to
say about it. He also echoes many of my fears about the impact that allowing
several thousand more Muslims (possibly up to 40,000) will have on our
communities, our schools, hospitals and housing. I believe he also talks about
how this influx will help to weaken our own native culture and destroy our identity,
and possibly help speed up the rate by which this country could soon be
converted into a predominantly Muslim one. We must NEVER allow that to happen.
I hate violence and confrontation nor am I condoning, encouraging or wishing
for it. However, if it came to a civil war I would fight with everything I had
to make sure this country was not taken over by the vile quasi-religious
culture that is Islam. I make no apologies for wanting to protect my Anglo-Saxon,
English values, cultures and democracy, which I strongly believe is far
superior to that of Islam. Furthermore, in terms of security, the papers are today full of stories about how IS are bragging that they've used the cover of the migrants to secretly get lots (possibly thousands) of their sleeper agents/bombers into Europe. Now, granted, that may be all bluster and rubbish and I hope that it is. However, something tells me there is more than a grain of truth to those statements. If that does indeed prove to be the case Europe and Britain are in HUGE trouble. This is another reason why we should NOT be taking in anymore migrants until we have purged the middle-east of these nut jobs. As I said in my last post, I am not without sympathy for these poor people, but we must look after our own country first and protect our own people before helping anyone else. In this regard, I completely agree with Australia's stance on migrants. Yes it may be cold and harsh, but at least they have the balls and the guts to put their own country and people first. If only we had politicians with the stomach to do the same.
another interesting point that was made about this crisis, both by Peter
Hitchens and by a few people I know who have recently travelled through Calais,
is that the vast majority of the people who are coming across the Mediterranean
and ending up in places like Calais are young men in their 20-30s. Many of them
are also from Africa, not just Syria and Libya, but the rest of the continent.
Now, call me cynical, but doesn't that further emphasis that this is far more
about economic migration, than simply a refugee crisis? Of course the MSM and
the bleeding heart liberals won't dare mention this as it doesn't fit their
narrative. This just goes to prove the old saying that in war the first casualty
is always the truth.
last thing which has really disturbed me this weekend was when I saw the father
of those two little drowned boys going back to the family home in Syria to show
journalists around. Something about that struck me as terribly wrong. If things
in Syria really are so bad and horrible with the civil war and IS breathing
down your neck; so horrible that you rightly and understandably flee with your
family to the safety of Turkey and then try and get into Europe, which results
in the heartbreaking death of your children. Why on earth would you go back to
the country you were fleeing from? To my mind, even if he is trying to show the
world the horrors they were trying to escape, it still makes his children's'
death a sham and a slap in their faces. In any case that idea doesn't work on me. To me if things are so bad (and I'm not saying
they're not) you do NOT go back to Syria for ANY reason. I would argue that you
don't sully the awful deaths of your children by going back to the hell hole you were
desperate to flee from. There was just something about seeing that which didn't
sit right with me and made me feel very uncomfortable. I'll leave it up to you, readers of this blog, to make up
your own minds as to why the father decided to do that.
crisis is the direct result of our idiotic western politicians and their stupid
vainglorious, misguided belief that you could bring democracy to a part of the
world that is locked in a deep rooted, tribal and fundamentalist culture and has been since the 9th century.
Today in the
Express newspaper, Anna Soubrey claims that this refugee crisis could have been
avoided if we'd bombed Syria. God give me strength! Spare me from the idiotic
and uneducated prattlings of deluded idiots.
Soubrey, bombing Syria would have made this crisis worse you ignorant woman.
This migrant/refugee crisis is the result of IS, which came about as a direct
result of the much lauded, at the time, 'Arab Spring' in Libya, Syria Egypt et al.
Those of us who know and understand that part of the world were all but
screaming at those idiots over here who were basically dancing in the street
and rejoicing at how wonderful it would be to finally have democracy in that
part of the world.
democracy as we understand it can't and won't EVER be possible in the middle
east because of the violent, tribal and deep rooted quasi religious cultural
practices that have been going on nearly since the dawn of time. 98% of that part of the world adheres to a deeply fundamentalist
version of Islam and it is the total antithesis of what we understand as
democracy in the west. Ergo, it was NEVER going to work/happen. Again, those of
us who know the history and culture of that part of the world could just see
the void being filled by the more extremist elements, who had been waiting
decades to finally seize power from the likes of Ghadafi and Assad. Ghadafi
himself warned several years ago that without him in charge of Libya the
hard-line, Islamist factions would swarm through his country and into Europe.
How right he was. Now, in no way do I think he or Assad are/were good people; yes they are/were brutal dictators, but say what you like, both men kept those extremists at bay and
held their countries together. Much like Saddam. However, these problems didn't start with the bombing of Iraq in 2003, these problems have been simmering under the surface for centuries. What we did was to remove the safety nets that had kept a lid on all this historical/cultural evil.
idiotic politicians are therefore partly to blame for this refugee crisis, we caused it by our
own arrogance. We, blindly believed that a part of the world that is locked in
primitive, tribal and cultural practices could free itself of that 9th
century, fundamentalist dogma and embrace westernised values. What a sick joke!
If we had
bombed Syria and overthrown Assad, IS would have completely taken over that
country and the horrors and evil we hear about would be even worse. Again, it
just shows how deluded and vainglorious our Westminster cretins really are.
Give me strength!
The only way
you are going to beat IS and I mean this very literally, is by deploying several million soldiers all at once (that goes
for all the other countries too) and we need to go through the middle east and
purge it of radicals. Then, here's the important bit, we (or more accurately America) need
to adopt our old Colonial systems and governance and be prepared to run that
part of the world for at least the next 30-50 years, following the models that
we had when Britain was an empire (granted we can't do that anymore as we don't
have the resources/money - this is why America
would have to do it)
That is the
only way you will ever beat IS and bring relative peace to that part of the
world. It must be completely purged of the evil of IS and then totally colonialised. Until we are
prepared to go down that road, that part of the world will forever be a hell
Britain should not be taking in anymore refugees. We are a relatively small
island and our infrastructure can't cope. Cameron can claim all he likes that
it will only be 4000, but once you back down and let them in, I can promise you
there will be thousands flooding our country. Furthermore, in terms of security
there could quite possibly be up to a thousand of those 4000 refugees who are IS
sleeper agents. IS have threatened to use this tactic themselves, so I'm not being over dramatic. Plus, by importing more Muslims into our country and their higher birth rates we are arguably speeding up the rate at which this, alien, quasi-religious culture will take over this country. At the rate they are out breeding us, it could be as little as 30 years before us indigenous, white English become the minority and are ruled over by Islam, We should be fighting back and stopping this from happening, not taking in more of them. From that standpoint I
totally agree with the Hungarian PM who doesn't want to take ANY migrants
because he doesn't want his country infected by Islam. God for him, if only we
had a PM with the balls to say things like that. Also, am I the only one who
absolutely hates the sick, emotional blackmail that is being thrown at us by
the spineless, bleeding-heart media?
Whilst I do
have sympathy for those poor people who are fleeing God knows what horrors, and
whilst I can accept that the blame for the destruction of their homelands does
lay partly with us. If they are genuine refugees, you get to the first safe
country and YOU STAY THERE; once you then decide to move on, as far as I'm
concerned, you then become an economic migrant and are no longer a refugee.
Harsh, maybe, but true. Now, whilst photos of dead children are heartbreaking and hard to take; who could not feel sadness for the little boy? That child's death is NOT our fault We should not be emotionally blackmailed into feeling
bad that we don't want to take in swarms of these migrants. Something to keep in mind is that over many decades,
since the second world war actually, Britain has taken in more genuine refugees
than any other country in Europe, we've done our bit.
Yes, I feel
sorry for these people but our country is at breaking point. We have a housing
shortage, countless people using food-banks, elderly and disabled people being
forced out of their homes, having their benefits cut. Charity begins at home
and until we have sorted our own people out and sorted this mess of a country
out, we should not be allowing more immigrants in. I will not be made to feel shame and neither should anyone else in this country. We in Europe are doing a great deal to set up camps in other middle-eastern countries. These camps might not be great, but they are safe and the refugees are being looked after. As far as I'm concerned that is enough and if we REALLY want to help these people we need to purge the middle-east of IS and then reintroduce complete colonialisation for at least 50 years.
some bad/offensive language used in this blog post, so you have been warned.
reading in the Express newspaper online, yesterday about how someone had put a
Lord Kitchener inspired poster up in a Wetherspoons, informing those Muslims
who didn't like our country and who wanted to live under Sharia Law to f**k off
back to their monstrous shitholes where they came from. Link to article: http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/600126/Racist-Lord-Kitchener-poster-Wetherspoon-s-Muslims-get-the-f-out-of-Britain
I have to
say I think this poster was a brilliant idea and I completely agree with the
sentiment of it. As some of you may know I have increasingly become very angry
at the way the PC brigades forced (and failed) attempt to ram multiculturalism
down our throats has escalated at pace over the last 15 years or more. I am
sick to death of it. In all honesty what has multiculturalism really enhanced
about this country, other than food which I can accept has been a big benefit.
My answer would be absolutely nothing. All it has done, in my opinion, is ghettoise
large parts of the country and turn them into shitholes. We have allowed in
totally alien cultures that are rooted in primitive and barbaric practices:
Forced marriage, honour killings, FGM, Halal slaughter and oppression of women
- the burka should be banned in this country. Furthermore, these practices are
not just exclusive to Asian societies, there have been other atrocities carried
out by other ethnic groups who still want to carry out primitive cultural and abhorrent
practices from their homelands. The torture and murder of Victoria Climbie
springs to mind. Additionally, it has
also made us feel shame at our own culture and twisted things so badly that we
feel afraid to express our own views, values and stand up for our own culture
because we might be branded racist, or God forbid, offend a minority. Although, strictly speaking that term racist shouldn't be used if you challenge Muslims or
Islam, because neither is technically a race, it is a religion. However, it is
actually becoming more of a political movement than simply a religion, which
helps to render the term of racism even more redundant. Be that as it may, I
have started owning the term of racist if it has been levelled against me for
my views and being proud of being called such. I have also been called a bigot,
a little Englander, fascist and other assorted terms, all of which I've
cheerfully accepted with a smile and said thank you to the assholes who have
thrown them out at me.
believe that my culture, values, principles and ways of conducting our life are
far superior than large sections of the Muslim (and other minority) communities.
I will and must make a point here that not all Muslims (or other minorities)
are bad and primitive, just as not all English people are good and right. There
are Muslims out there who you might regard as very modern and have fully
embraced western culture, values and ideas. These are the ones who I would
argue have seen the light and also realised that as they have come to live in
our country, it is only fair that they live as we do and integrate fully into
our society. I applaud those people and welcome them. As I have said before,
there is an old saying - when in Rome live as the Romans do.
this is the main point of the poster which inspired this blog. It doesn't say
that ALL Muslims should leave. It simply (and rightly) points out that those
who do not like this country, our values, our culture and who wish to live as
they have/do in the middle east should go back there. There is absolutely
NOTHING wrong, nor offensive about that. It is common sense and being proud of
our indigenous culture and society. Again, I welcome anyone who wants to come
here so long as they want to accept and assimilate our culture into how they
live their lives. If they wish to live as Muslims and keep Islam as their faith
and their cultural foundation, then they should go back to the middle east or
another Islamist country.
For far too
long this country has been far too tolerant and welcoming of other cultures,
cultures who have no desire to integrate and assimilate fully into our western,
liberal standards. Cultures who have no common ground with ours and whose
practices are the absolute antithesis of ours. Consequently, because of the
huge influx of migrants and people from such alien environments, this country
has struggled to cope. Our communities are increasingly fractured, filled with
bitterness, resentment and suspicion. Our infrastructure in terms of housing,
schools and medical provision is at breaking point. Indeed, we have schools in
parts of larger cities where English is relegated to sometimes only the fourth
common language spoken. There are reports of Islamic faith schools who openly
tell their students not to mix with us 'infidels' because we are unclean.
Additionally, look at the abuse of young girls by Muslim gangs in towns like
Rotherham, Rochdale et al and the Trojan horse scandal of schools in the
Birmingham area. Furthermore, there are a number of videos on youtube (if they
haven't been removed) showing English people in places like Birmingham being
told to get out of certain neighbourhood by Asian men who patrol areas of the
city to keep non Muslims out. I am told this also happens in Leicester,
Bradford and other towns with a predominantly Asian majority. Additionally, in those cities and possibly a few others, it is
possible to see signs proclaiming that this is a Sharia controlled area.
Indeed, in Dewsbury which is in my neck of the woods, they have Sharia courts
set up to deal with matters concerning Muslim people. I am sure this practice
also happens in other cities and towns too.
This, to my
mind, is totally wrong and needs to be stopped and dismantled. Communities who wish
for that sort of thing need to be told point blank to f**k off. Again, I say if
that makes me a bigot, a racist, a supremacist or any other derogatory term you
wish to throw at me, I am happy to own it and say, yes I am and you know what?
I am proud to be any and all of those things, because I believe that that sort
of thing is abhorrent, multiculturalism is wrong and it needs to be got rid of.
I am proud of my country, its history, its values, its democracy and my
culture. I am a proud nationalist and I actually think each country should have
a singular dominant culture and if you go and live in that country you should
be required to convert to that culture and assimilate into that way of life.
I salute the
person who put that poster up in Wetherspoons, you were speaking for a great
many pissed of English people who are tired of having to bend over and take it,
who think the same as what was written on that poster but dare not say such
things. Well, I am tired of having to keep quiet about things like that in case
it offends anyone. I will say that if you are an immigrant here of whatever
faith, creed or minority, or even if you were born here, but you do still hate
this country, us English, our values, culture and want to live as they do in
the middle east or elsewhere - bugger off back there then.
although yesterday people were allowed to comment on that story in The Express
online and quite a few people did, who all seemed to agree with what was
written on that poster, in no uncertain terms. I note that today it is not
possible to add comment. That is also very wrong, we should NOT be afraid to
offend people. It is time we started being far more vocal in our dislike of
those practices that don't have any place in our English culture. And we
certainly shouldn't feel ashamed of openly telling those minorities who don't
like this country, our values, principles and people to FUCK OFF!
like many of you, I have been watching the Labour Party leadership race with
keen interest. Now, although I am NOT a Labour supporter and think of myself as
being right-wing, I do find myself being drawn to Jeremy Corbyn.
you'll probably find that strange and hard to understand given that he is my
political polar opposite. However, what I admire and respect about him is the
fact that he is not trying to go for the centre-ground. He is not cut from the
modern political cloth of being all spin and no substance; party before country
and self before party. He actually (from what I can see from all that I've
heard and read) has those old fashioned, now deeply hated by modern
politicians, things called principles and a strong set of beliefs. Rather than
trying to gain power at any cost by appealing to the middle ground; he has
firmly set out his stall and drawn clear lines. He doesn't flip flop from one
focus group to the next or make a stunning number of U-turns (Andy Burnham is
your man for that.) He simply says this is me, these are my policies, these are
the things I believe in. If you like what you hear vote for me, if not don't.
another thing; the guy actually has clear, radical policies. Granted, this is
where I part company from him because as much as I wish his policies would
work, they are simply not practical. I love his ideas about renationalising
services and utilities, about re-industrialising the north by opening up the
pits and steel works and factories (oh how I wish that idea could be achieved).
Unfortunately, these ideas have been costed at around 100 billion pounds. No
way on earth can we afford that. Also, given that the EU has made nationalising
utilities all but illegal, it simply can't be done while we remain locked in the
EU. He may be a radical and open to the idea of a referendum on the EU, but I
think (God forbid) if he ever did become PM that kind of democracy, which is
still the antithesis of Labour and its belief in big state control, would be
quickly snuffed out. In short, I admire Mr Corbyn's honesty and his principles.
However, I think his ideas and policies - though well intentioned - are totally
bonkers and not in the least achievable. I have written before about why
socialism can't ever work so I'm not going to go into that here. However, all I
will say is that Corbyn's brand of socialism would scare away the wealth
creators with his level of taxes and the amount of borrowing that would need to
be done would basically kill this country.
aspect that I have enjoyed throughout this leadership contest has been the
likes of Blair and Mandleson et al, trying their damndest to throw Corbyn off
track. As my friend Rach pointed out to me today. These idiots don't get the
fact that the more they intervene the more likely people are to vote for Corbyn.
She is absolutely spot on. Actually she should be writing her own blog, which
would be amazing and brilliant to read, but oh well :) However, back to topic.
The issue there is that the ex heavy weights of the New Labour project just cannot
comprehend why their brand of politics is now so toxic to people. Although, I
suspect that this is largely because they never gave a rat's ass for the people
to begin with. To them what mattered most was gaining power by any means
possible and holding onto it. You see that's the problem with centre-ground
politics. It hides behind seemingly noble sayings like trying to be a broad
church, a politics for everyone, where every view is important and everybody
can feel they have a stake in society. In reality this is pure spin, style over
substance and completely hollow and empty. Being stuck in the centre is the
best method there is to enable a party to dupe people into voting for them, but
it doesn't give you any room to move so that you can take radical policy
decisions to REALLY sort out the country. Basically Blair's 'third way'
politics was just there for political elites to feather their own nests and
screw the British people. In addition, as Blair et al have pointed out (perhaps
fairly) if people vote Jeremy for Leader of Labour, it is highly unlikely that
Labour will get elected. However, what is the point of having a Labour party as
we had for 13 years, in power who are Tory-lite and are only interested in
looking after the elites? There is none. I would much rather have a principled,
honest and true working class Labour party, out of power and in perpetual
opposition than have them sell their principles and values just to win power.
After 13 years of Labour and 5 years of the 'heir to Blair', Cameron, people
are understandably excited by a fresh kind of politics (although not fresh to
anyone who is 35 and older). A politics of clear direction and seeming honesty.
Dare I say a politics of substance over spin?
thing to keep in mind with every attack that is launched on Jeremy from the
likes of Blair et al. If they are trying to attack you, you must be doing
the other leadership contenders are all firmly shackled (to varying degrees) to
the New Labour project and so can't and don't offer anything new. As far as I
can tell, other than a few watered down versions of Corbyn's ideas the others
have no policies for what they would do as leader. Again, people are waking up
to this and they don't want wishy-washy, vague, spin, focus group led
politicians. I firmly believe that the other candidates have been caught
totally unprepared for the phenomena that is sweeping through the traditional
Labour supporters of this country. The voting public are gradually realising
what a meaningless, vacuous empty shell centre-ground politics is and they
(quite rightly and reasonably) want a Labour party that stands up for the
working class and goes back to being true to its historical principles.
Interestingly, what this reaction from traditional Labour supporters has also
highlighted is just how undemocratic the New Labour project actually was. It
has turned the spotlight firmly on its vile singular goal of gaining power at
any cost and holding onto it. Again, this is evident because of the Labour
elites being horrified that the voting public look set to put in a leader who
is not one of the club and who has a totally different ethos to politics than
they do. Sorry, but that is democracy. It's about power being given to the mass
rather than a small group of elites and the elites within Labour are shitting
themselves. Personally, that gives me a tremendous amount of pleasure. I had to
laugh when one such elite seriously suggested that even if Corbyn wins the
leadership race, he should be instantly removed, hahahaha. In a nutshell, that
neatly encompasses exactly how New Labour viewed the British people and why
these disgusting, slimy bastards should be hounded out and thrown into a shit
pit. This is yet another reason why I hope Jeremy wins, because if he does I
believe he will kick out the scum who brought about New Labour and actually go
some way towards setting right some of the horrible things they did to this
country whilst in power.
several reasons alone, I wish Jeremy Corbyn well and I hope he wins the
election to become leader of Labour.
I have to
admit I've been laughing myself silly over the last couple of weeks at how
disgusted people are with how much back peddling David Cameron has done since
winning the election. Just one month in and he has already gone back on his
word about getting rid of/reforming the Human Rights act; then, just today,
threatening his ministers to vote with him on accepting ANY new EU deal or
Dear sheeple, who believed all the negative GE
campaigning and swallowed all the rubbish and over exaggerated promises made,
TOLD YOU SO! Not that that actually helps the country now. We are all stuck
with this cretin and his weak and pathetic government. I must admit, the
morning after the election I have rarely felt such anger and bitterness towards
my fellow countrymen (UKIP voters excluded). We had the perfect chance to
change things and to take the country in a new more positive 'common sense'
direction, but, as usual, we caved in and bottled it. That is the one HUGE flaw
in our cultural make-up. Our stoic, stiff upper lip, don't take a chance
mentality has stopped us time and time again from breaking free of the shackles
that have held us captive since the war. It's exactly the same mentality that
keeps abused wives/girlfriends going back to their abuser, just so they can
give them 'one more chance'. The results are always the same, more abuse, more
suffering and hardship. As far as I'm concerned the only true saying in
politics is this one: 'The people always get the politicians and the
governments they deserve.'
For those of
you who are wise enough to read Peter Hitchens' column in the Mail On Sunday,
he had been saying for months (actually years) that the Conservatives weren't
real Conservatives anymore and that Cameron as the 'heir to Blair' was exactly
that, a wet, liberal progressive who whole heartedly agreed with Blair's
policies and political direction. Mr. Hitchens also correctly pointed out that
all the pledges and fanciful promises made before the election were done
precisely because the Tories never expected to win an outright majority -
indeed, they probably didn't expect to win at all. The look of shock and
dumbfounded surprise on the faces of Dave and Gideon the morning after told the
which has REALLY made me laugh though, was talking to some true die hard
Torries, pre election, who firmly believd that Dave couldn't enact true
Conservative policies because he was shackled to the Libdems. However, with
this ultimatum today, he has once and for all shown his true liberal
progressive colours and completely killed any possible doubt that he has any
real Conservative leanings. I just know that the Conservative supporters I
spoke to previously, will be spitting feathers and asking for blood pressure
pills today. Oh there are non so blind as them who will not see.
regarding Cameron's promise to get Britain a better deal and repatriate powers
back from the EU. As I have said many times, he can't do that. The fundamental
law of the EU is Acquis Communautaire, which clearly states that once powers,
control and sovereignty has been handed over to the EU, that can't be handed
back, renegotiated or repatriated unless the member state enacts article 50 of
the treats and completely leaves the EU. Also, with the considerable and fundamentally
deep rooted changes Cameron is seeking from the EU; it would require ALL
members sates to vote on them and accept them. That would be like turkeys
voting to have three Christmases a year - will NEVER happen. Therefore, all of
the waffle coming from Cameron is pure spin and bullshit. In any case, Cameron
is so pro EU there is absolutely NO WAY he wants us to leave. Any little bits
he can get (which will be meaningless) from the EU will be lauded as a HUGE
victory and spun as a great deal for Britain and then his party will be forced
to accept that and fight tooth and nail to keep us shackled to another (even
more powerful) abuser.
I just pray
that after being so badly screwed in only a month, the sheeple of this pathetic
island will for once vote NO in the referendum and get us out of the stinking,
undemocratic, federalist, shit-pit that is the EU.
Election lumbers on with only a few days to go; I was watching the Daily
Politics election debates on education the other day. The first thing that
struck me was again how biased the BBC's Andrew Neil was when it came to giving air
time and space to talk to the party representatives. Both UKIP and The Greens
were basically pushed to the sidelines, whilst the other 3 parties were given
loads of time to prattle on with basically the same policies. To be bluntly
honest I can't really remember what the Lib/Lab/Cons were wittering about
because it's essentially the same crap they have been spouting for decades. I
was particularly scared when Labour's education representative, Mr. Hunt said (albeit
tongue-in-cheek to Andrew Neil) "Labour will re-educate you, Andrew."
Shudder! We had 13 years of Labour's vision of Education, Education, Education
and it was a hollow, data driven, politically dogmatic indoctrination of our
As I have
made very clear in other blog posts, I am a supporter of UKIP. I think they
represent real and genuine positive change for this country. They (at least for
the moment) don't come across as a slightly red or blue shade of vanilla. They
tell things how they are and they are saying the things that lots of my
friends, family, and England in general, have been saying for a LONG time.
Granted, to the progressive, leftie-liberal, PC brigade they may sound racist
and an anathema to their multi-cultural, morally relativist, utopian and
metropolitan wet dream. However, these are the people who have insulated
themselves from the harsh realities of life in modern Britain. These wet-ends
are not the ones who have had to watch their cities change completely as more
immigrants swamp them, making things incredibly difficult for a village, town
or city's infrastructure and essential services to cope with. I am always aware
of the words of Andrew Neather, advisor to Tony Blair, who published memos
several years ago, which clearly showed that Labour deliberately and callously
threw open the doors to uncontrolled mass immigration because they wanted to
change the cultural and societal landscape of this country; in order to simply
'rub the right's nose in diversity and make their arguments redundant.' For
that betrayal alone, Labour and their warped, failed ideology and corrupt dogma
should NEVER be given the keys to Number 10.
As a now ex
teacher/lecturer I have seen firsthand the incredible damage that both Labour
and the Conservatives have done to our education system, with their stupid
fantasies about the benefits of an egalitarian one size fits all approach. To
my mind, their dangerous meddling and inability to see that the comprehensive
model of education simply does not work, is essentially child abuse. They have
stolen opportunities and chances from generations of children, whose parents
can't afford to send their kids to private schools, or move house to get into
the catchment areas of good schools. Ask yourselves this question: If their
education policies have worked so well and improved the lives of children for
generations, why do politicians virtually always send their kids to private
schools instead of even the good/outstanding comprehensive schools in their own
constituency? Indeed, as was waspishly pointed out by Andrew Neil, all three
representatives of Lib/Lab/Con in this debate had been privately educated and
gone to top universities. They waffled some meaningless guff about this and
moved on quickly. Often you have to look at what these idiots don't say, or how
they act in tricky situations to get a real picture of where they are coming
from, rather than the vague, wordy, spun out 'on message' drivel they come out
is simple. Politicians know full well that the education available for the
masses of this country is fucking shit. It has been dumb down and raped of
practically any worth. Schools don't really teach children anything nowadays,
at least not in the way that we think of teaching. All they do is put kids on
an assembly line in a great exam factory, fill them full of things they need to
pass exams and make sure that the school can get an acceptable A-C pass rate
and have great looking data for Ofstead and league tables. God help any child
if they are not academic and not able to contribute towards those A-C grades.
My job for four years was working with pupils like that who weren't
academically inclined and who struggled like crazy with reading and writing and
so couldn't engage with the narrow and biased curriculum. On a practical level,
they could have run rings round me when it came to sports or trade based work.
However, those things are frowned upon in this country and are treated like the
bastard child of education. Consequently, there is so little provision
available for students like that. In my experience, it is only when they get to
year 10, have been totally turned off by school, got a reputation for disrupting
lessons (because they are so bored with academic stuff and can't understand it)
that they are begrudgingly found a place at a local F.E college and allowed to
go and do trade subjects. Where, lo and behold, they flourish and end up doing
been our problem since the 60s, when schools were hijacked by trendy leftie
progressives with their idiotic views about how humans and societies were
basically a collective and stopped seeing humans as individuals with different
skills, abilities and needs. And began promoting the need for a completely
comprehensive model of education. Actually, to be fair, Marx himself realised
this and knew that society wasn't totally collective. However, this piece of
common sense is largely ignored and frowned upon by Frankfurt school, 'Common Purpose'
as a result of our own snobby ignorance and a refusal to accept that different
types of learners require different types of schools and education, we have
condemned scores of highly practical children to five wasted years of torture,
wasting their talents and abilities and just for an added bit of fun, made them
feel useless, pathetic, thick and worthless. Great job.
when there are deep, vested interests, these powers that be will cling onto
their failed, corrupt and broken ideologies/systems and fight to protect them.
The way they do that now is by using meaningless stats and data about pass
rates in G.C.S.E exams to back up their claims that we have one of the best
education systems in the world. They will tell you how the exam success shows
that our young people are getting a great education and that they are able to
compete with children all over the world....Trust me, they are not and they
anyone with some common sense can see the reality is not like that at all. We
get countless stories from employers who say that when they try and take our
young people on, they can hardly read, write or use basic maths skills. They
complain, that our young people don't have a depth of knowledge or a good
enough understanding of skills to function in most workplaces. As I mention
above, this is because in schools we rarely teach children these skills or
equip them with the required knowledge because 90% of the focus is simply on
passing worthless, dumb down exams. It is a disgrace.
This is why
I support UKIP because they are the only party with the balls to want to smash
through all this progressive bullshit and want to bring back selection by
ability and want to challenge our snobby belief that only academic
qualifications count. They are following Germany's approach to education. In
Germany (I know this because I have friends who teach over there) they have
basically always believed that different types of learners need different
schools and that selection by ability is the best way to bring out the
abilities of their young people. However, unlike us and our pompous bias
towards academic subjects at the cost of vocational trades - which is what
created a very unfair and unbalanced two tier education system in this country
from the 1940s until the 70s - Germany spends vast sums of money ensuring that
all types of education and schools get the best equipment, teachers and
facilities. That is the vital difference. It is this ethos that UKIP are
seeking to copy and I know that if they succeed it will improve the education
system in this country beyond belief.
That is the
key reason that I support UKIP. They are the only party, who have a genuine
idea how to improve the education for our young people. Selection by ability
and having different school for different children is the best way to improve
things. The other three parties hate this idea and won't even consider it.
However, just remember that although they are happy for things to stay the same
and for your children to attend crappy schools, if you don't happen to live in
a good catchment area. They have the money and the connections to get their
children into the best schools in the country. That is the worst kind of hypocrisy
and I hate them for it. They are scum!
This post is
going to be a collection of my thoughts in relation to a number of recent
social and political events. It does contain some bad language, so you have been warned.
regards the horrendous sinking of the migrant ship off the coast of Libya. No
one who has a heart could fail to be moved by the images and pictures that
emerged over the weekend. Those poor people fleeing persecution, torture and
most probably death end up trapped on a sinking ship. It's almost beyond
comprehension. God knows what they must have gone through, especially given the
fact that it has emerged that IS are now slaughtering large numbers of
prisoners on the beaches of Libya. God help us. I hope that Mr. Cameron feels
deep, crippling pain at his decision to bomb Libya and help overthrow Gaddafi.
It was his actions, along with our western allies and their lust for power,
coupled with a dreadfully misguided belief that the much lauded 'Arab Spring'
could/would bring democracy to a part of the world that has shown, over and
over, that it will NEVER be fit or able to live under our moderate, liberal
democratic values which has helped to bring about the evil of IS. Yes, our
elites ARE ultimately responsible for the recent horrors that has befallen that
part of Africa and the Middle East - thank God Cameron didn't get his way when
he wanted to bomb Syria.
saying that the rulers of that part of the world: Gaddafi, Saddam or Assad are/were
good people, they were/are not and they did terrible things, but whichever way
you look at it, things were better under their control than ever they could be
under IS. Sometimes it really is better the devil you know. Oh yes, Mr.
Cameron, you sir have buckets of innocent blood on your hands. I make no wonder
swathes of our politicians were stunned
into silence over the weekend and unsure how to handle the situation. The
reason being is that these migrants and their horrible deaths represent the
very embodiment of their tragic and utterly misguided actions. I would further
argue that they were slow to respond because they genuinely don't know what to
do to make things right in those parts of the world, now that their feeble and
insufficient military interventions have failed and created far more problems.
In modern times the problem with all our military exploits has come about
because there simply hasn't been enough thought give to the post-war stage. We
have attempted to install 'friendly' governments and structures - such as in
Afghanistan and Iraq - which won't work because of the deeply fundamentalist
natures of the tribal systems. Again, I've said this many times but our version
of democracy can't and won't ever be achievable in those parts of the world
because their whole culture, history and societal make-up is the very
antithesis of democracy. That's why it has failed so spectacularly in Iraq and
Libya and I believe is on the points of failing in Afghanistan.
it would have been far better if America and to a much lesser extent ourselves,
had reverted back to and adopted England's model of colonialism. If they'd
realised that once military action was over, they were going to have to be
there for at least 50-70 years and set up full colonial administrations,
systems and governments; I honestly believe that would have avoided a great
number of the problems we have seen in recent decades. The problem with our
modern, short-term intervention approach is that it usually leaves one hell of
a vacuum, coupled with those basically pre-feudal, fundamentalist, tribal
structures it is recipe for unimaginable disaster.
should be done with these stranded migrants? This is a really tough question
because ultimately we are responsible, in large part, for the troubles that are
raging through that part of northern Africa and the Middle East. I hope to
goodness I never find myself in that situation, because in that eventuality I
would hope that another country would be kind enough to take me in. Having said
that, my gut reaction is to treat them at sea the best we can and then send
them back. That is not an easy decision and I say that with a sad and heavy
heart. However, as awful as their situation is, there is probably a good chance
that amongst those migrants is a number of purely economic migrants and quite
possibly a number of sleeper IS spies/terrorists. Furthermore, if we go soft
and take in one boatload now, then in the near future countless more will try
the same again and again, until we'll be swamped. Today Paul Abbott, the Aussie PM, has urged Europe to do what they do and turn back refugee boats. They have a zero tolerance approach to migrants who try to enter their country. From what I have read this hard and tough stance does seem to work and it stops many would be illegal migrants trying to get to Aus. It must be nice to live in a country where the politicians have balls and are not afraid of putting their own people first. At the end of the day we can't save the world. Yes,
we may have caused this but we and the rest of Europe can't take in masses of
migrants. The more we take in the more we will be viewed as soft and also the
greater the chances of being infiltrated by terrorists. This is another reason
why over the last few weeks/months I have become so incredibly angry with our pathetic
government for allowing back people who left this country to join or try and
join IS. They should NEVER be allowed back. You've made your bed now lay in it.
Ok, many of them have come back with absolute horror stories of depravity and
barbaric cruelty beyond imagination, but how do we know they are not agents of
IS who have concocted all this stuff? We don't.
I make no
apologies for taking such a hard-line view. If you hated this country so much
that you were willing to go off and join a group so inhumane and who detest and
hate everything we stand for and want to bring the same around the western
world, why the fuck should we take you back? In my opinion anyone who is
blinded enough to go and do something like that, when the horror of what awaits
them is very well documented, then they can happily go and die for all I care.
They deserve everything they get for being so stupid. I have zero sympathy.
Also, I would bet money that allowing these people back into our country will
eventually prove to be a massive mistake. (Please let me be proved wrong on
that.) I just have a horrible feeling that we are walking into a HUGE trap by
doing this. Again, bleeding heart, PC liberals have been spouting crap in the
media about how we need to let them back and give them a second chance. Am I
the only one who hopes that if this does prove to have been a trap, that the
people who get taken out first are these same do-gooders with their bleeding
As many long
time readers of this blog will remember, I am a huge supporter of UKIP. I think
they are a breath of fresh air in a very stale political system. Yes, I know
they are not perfect and their supporters/activists sometimes make huge gaffes
and come out with some views that I don't agree with (although sometimes I do.)
However, that just shows that they are real. They are not made up of 'on
message' sheep, who are so disconnected from the real world that real people
can't relate to them. I find their gaffes and there unrehearsed and sometimes
clumsy approach endearing. After decades of polished, spin and evading of
questions I love their honesty. I particularly back their policies on leaving
the EU, immigration control and more specifically on Education, as they are the
only party who champion the virtues of bringing back selection by ability.
main parties have all sold this country down the river. They are all wedded to
the increasingly dangerous federalist super state dream of Europe. They are all
indoctrinated with this evil progressive, liberal, PC dogma that has allowed
ethnic minorities to get away with abusing young girls and unrestricted mass immigration
from the EU and the Middle East, which has made large sections of certain
cities no go areas for white Brits. For that I lay the blame firmly at Labour's
door. God help us if they get elected again in May; we've already had umpteen glimpses
of their 'big state' socialist driven, controlling hell that awaits us should
people be stupid enough to vote for them. I find it so incredibly hard to
understand how people can have such short memories of what we ended up with after
13 years of that quasi-socialist rabble. By 2010 they had all but bankrupted
the country, everything was controlled by meaningless targets, data and quangos.
The PC brigade had pretty much made every form of free speech a crime and we
were ruled by an ideology that thought the state new best. Not to mention all
the taxes and borrowing and back door privatisation of both the NHS and
education through the use of PFI. Gordoom Clown and his cabinet (some of whom
are still very much in charge with Milliband, Ed Balls for chancellor,
anyone.....SHUDDER!) were the most hated and despised political leaders we'd
virtually ever had. And yet the sheeple of this country still seem set to vote
them back in to finish off the job. It beggers belief!
I know UKIP
won't win, I'm not as delusional as some supporters who comment on the Express
stories. Our FPTP system will make sure of that. However, I suspect they will
do better than expected and win a number of seats up and down the country.
Then, I hope we will begin to see some real choice in our politics with a party
who isn't afraid to tell it like it is and offend some people. A party for the
people who believes in its people and wants to but their values and culture
first. The biased BBC really will have a problem then; all their wet end
lefties must be crapping themselves. Although, actually, knowing how the left
think as well as I do, they are usually insulated by their self righteous sense
of always being right. I hope all that is going to change on May 8th.
Best of luck
UKIP, kick some arse and say it like it is!
Aside from all
the election nonsense that has now kicked into overdrive; one of the most
interesting and perhaps worrying stories over the last week was that of Mike
Holpin. The jobless, feckless person who has 40 children and has been named as
Britain's worst father. Good grief!
In the past
I wrote a great deal about the underclass scum and how you deal with them. I
also still believe that in order to understand them, you have to practically
get down in the gutter with them; then and only then can you truly appreciate
the depravity and the level to which this small yet significant sub-set of
human pond life have sunk.
As I used to
say, these people, the real core of the underclass (not the ones on the
periphery, but the real, rotten stinking core) can't EVER be helped and DON'T
want to be helped. Nothing you do will benefit them or change them or make them
into useful members of society. The ONLY way to stop this cancer from spreading
through our society is to stop them breeding. Not cut child benefit, not put
more resources into 'helping' them, not give them another social worker - stop
them breeding. End of.
first thing we as a society would need to do is to stop seeing having children
as a 'right' but see children as a 'privilege'. Once you change that mindset
you can then build on the premise that, like all privileges, they must first have
to be earned. By earned I don't mean spend more time in the bedroom, I mean
demonstrating first that you would make good, loving, supportive and committed
parents before being allowed to have children.
point for this belief came from experience of a family member who went through
the arduous and challenging process of adoption. The hoops and criteria they
had to jump through and pass to prove and demonstrate that they were the right
sort of people for adopting a child was unimaginably difficult and pushed them
to the very limit. Ultimately, this process proved beyond any shadow of doubt
that they were exactly the sort of responsible, loving and dedicated parents
suitable for adopting a child. Non but the most committed, strong, loving and
serious could ever have passed those criteria. Thankfully, now, they are the
loving, amazing parents to a beautiful little girl.
My point is
that if we have those strict criteria in place for adoption, similar criteria
should be placed on everyone who wants to have a child. They should have to
earn the privilege of having children. If we had the guts to do that you would
rule out ALL these feckless, scroungers, who just see children as a bit of fun
and a potential cash cow. The reason being, that the really feckless,
ner-do-wells wouldn't have the commitment, dedication, selflessness or even the
motivation to pass all those criteria. It would be too much hard work for them.
The irony being that - as my family members pointed out - no matter how hard
those tests and criteria were to pass, they were nothing compared to how hard
it is to actually raise, support and love a child properly. Hopefully, you get
my point here.
stage, I realise there will be those screaming Nazi and totalitarian arsehole
at the screen. Ask me if I give a chuff. I don't. I make absolutely no apologies
for taking such a hardline, draconian approach.
experienced first-hand, countless times, the damage, pain, suffering and
destruction of a child's life that can occur because of our progressive,
morally relativist, bleeding heart dogma that has infected this country more
and more since the 60s. Worse still I have heard horrendous, heartbreaking
accounts from family and friends who work for social services. Accounts so
disgusting and evil that I would give anything if I could have them eradicated
from my mind. So, if you think my views
too extreme, too right-wing, tough shit. I am totally unapologetic and stand by
them. You won't hear these views and solutions expressed by our politicians and
our media, but I promise you this; if we did have the guts to go down this
road, our society would be a hell of a lot better and we could stop a great
deal of the suffering of unborn children, because they would no longer to be
born to underclass scummy families.
So how would
I achieve this?
Contraception would be compulsory from the age of 13/14 (and we also need to
hurry up and develop a pill or contraceptive implant for males, too). Then, girls/women/men
could be given the privilege of coming off contraception once they have
signalled that they want to have a family and that they have passed a certain
number of criteria. These criteria would be:
2. A set level of educational attainment, probably
A'Level and/or vocational equivalent and/or higher. This would do two things.
First, it would at the very least give prospective parents an adequate level of
education/skills/training to be able to find a decent job so that they could
support themselves and their family. Secondly and more importantly, it would
help to demonstrate that these prospective parents had a sense of delayed
gratification and a certain level of 'stick-ability' which shows they can be committed
and work hard for something. They are not just going to quit when things get
difficult (vital for the pressures and stresses that a child brings)
Prospective parents must prove that they have been in a loving, supportive and
committed relationship for a set number of years. Again, this demonstrates a
high level of working towards a shared goal and a sense of delayed
gratification. They aren't just going to split up once the pressures and stress
Prospective parents must have held down a job for a set number of years and can
demonstrate that they are financially independent and can support themselves
and their children without state handouts.
these criteria had been met, then and only then could the contraceptives be
removed and the couple could either have a child of their own or adopt.
Now, I hold
my hands up and admit that this plan is not fool proof and could be open to
abuse. Even with these strict criteria in place, children could still end up in
abusive and unloving homes. Yes, true, I can agree with that. Nothing is ever
going to be 100% successful. However, as I've argued, it would stop large
numbers of innocent children being born to people who don't deserve to have
such a wonderful and amazing gift as a child in their lives. It would certainly
put off, these lazy, feckless good for nothing, underclass scumbags from
fathering so many children and then all but destroying their lives and ruining
that child's chances.
As totalitarian and draconian as this idea
sounds, if it stopped children being born into such horrendous environments,
then I'm all for it.
This week saw the return to the blogosphere (I hate that
term) of Mr. Winston Smith and a much welcome return it is. Winston was one of
the shining lights when it came to highlighting the disgusting and fundamental
problems for young people in care. His accounts often harrowing and
heartbreaking in equal measure were written not from a perspective of hate and
loathing of the underclass, rather from, I believe, a genuine desire to
highlight the issues in an attempt to make things better. You always got the
impression that even when he'd experienced a great deal of abuse from the young
people he was caring for, Winston still wanted the best for them, he still
wanted to help - to me that is the mark of a genuinely decent and generous
His newest post is about how, now that he's had some time
away from writing and away from the battlefield as it were, he has been able to
reflect on his views and the things he wrote. To do something like this takes
tremendous courage and strength to see one's own faults and to admit when
you've perhaps made mistakes. There are a number of points where Winston has
done this and tried to explain his reasoning and thoughts at the time. Again, I
applaud, Winston for this and I admire him for holding his hands up and having
the balls to say I made a few mistakes.
I know in the past we haven't always agreed (my comments
about what should be done with the London rioters he thought were too extreme).
I also know that our social perspectives are very different; I'm a VERY hard line right-winger where he
comes at things from a left-wing, socialist perspective. Even though I do not agree with his point of
view; I still respect him greatly for having a strong direction and a genuine
passion and a desire for things to be better. From that perspective, I believe we have some
common ground. We both want our society to be better, we just come at it from
Now, in his post he has talked about why he is still a
socialist and how his principals and views are shaped by left-wing ideas. I
will admit, as an ex lefty/socialist myself, his arguments are very persuasive
and they do have some merit to them. For example he blames the system of
extreme liberalism combined with excessive neo-liberal economic policies for
the growth in the underclass and increased inequality that has led to the
marginalisation of the working and lower working class. I also strongly agree
with his point about middle class teachers, social workers and other
professionals making excuses for working class anti social behaviour because of
the fact that they are working class. As I used to say many times on this blog,
that is a perfect example of miss-placed bleeding-heart, progressive dogma,
which tries to excuse behaviour by making these people out as victims of the
system. As Winston says: ' New Labour actually exacerbated the existence of the
underclass because they didn't understand that the values you instil in people
are just as important as the money you put in their pockets.' I would actually argue that New Labour knew
exactly what they were doing by fostering and promoting this unthinking, no
need to take responsibility for your own actions, victim mentality through
their use of social policy. They vastly increased the size of the underclass
and threw open the doors to untold poorly skilled and educated migrants so that
they could shore up their voter bases. I honestly believe that this experiment
in social engineering was done deliberately to secure votes for their party. Winston,
also, rightly, I believe, points out that the capitalist system will never
serve the interests of the working class, nor is it designed to help them out
of the mire. Quite so.
However, I part company from his arguments when he says: 'I have come to believe once
again that a fair, just and equitable societies can only come about when people
embrace a sense of collective purpose and work together for the common good.'
The problem with this belief is that for it to work you have
to have people working together 'collectively' for the common good - won't ever
happen on a large scale for an extended period of time. Here's why. Human
beings are all individuals, we are not and never have been a true collective
species. Admittedly, we do form into small tribes and even possibly extended
kinship groups; however, that has always been done to help further and improve
the chances of our groups, to pool resources to enable us to strive and attain
more than the next group. I know that there is the argument that because we are
so advanced now we have the capabilities of sharing resources so that nobody
need struggle or suffer. Indeed, that may be so, but the reason it doesn't
happen is because some people in their very DNA in their genetic makeup will
ALWAYS want more, will always want to exploit and control. Again, human beings
are not a true collective or altruistic species. We have glimpses of that, when
we can unite for the common good, but because of our competitive, individual natures,
we can't sustain that for very long. Another way of highlighting this is the
old example of hypothetically sharing out all the resources evenly (let's just
take money for this example) some people would spend it in a matter of days on
silly frivolous things and be left with nothing in a matter of weeks, whilst
others would save it or invest it wisely. We have been genetically pre
programmed to be that way and that is ultimately why a society based on a large
collective macro system is ultimately doomed to failure. These systems,
theoretically, be it capitalism or socialism, liberalism et al always work
brilliantly, because they see society functioning pretty much (there are a few
spaces open for divergent behaviour) as a homogenous mass. However, these
systems only work if basically every human is functioning to the best of their
ability and working collectively for a common goal. That is unrealistic, again
because of our individual natures. Now, I know that people will say yes but we
put laws, rules and regs in place to counter that and make people conform.
True, those rules and laws do help to curtail the problems and force people to
comply to a given system. For example, let's take a popular theme of the last
few years the fraud and illegal dealings of bankers that have left us all up
shit creek. We do indeed have laws, rules, sanctions and legislation to stop
bankers playing fast and loose and these should in theory have prevented the
bankers from getting us into such a terrible mess. However, as J.P' O Rourke
correctly put it: 'When buying and selling becomes regulated and legislated,
the first things to be bought and sold are the regulators and the legislators.'
In other words, humans will always find ways to bypass and get round laws and
rules if they go against their individual goals and ambitions.
Another important factor why these macro systems can't ever
work properly is because they don't actually exist. They are
societal/economic/cultural constructs that work through the use of shared goals
and aims. This is all well and good and very noble but as I mentioned above
when you factor in the intrinsic, individualism of human beings every grand
narrative that relies on something as weak as this is always bound to come a
cropper. This is why it would ultimately be pointless to try and change one
collectively driven system (capitalism/neo-liberalism) for another
(socialism). This is the great irony of
socialism because it can't or perhaps doesn't want to see that the same factors
which prevent capitalism from working effectively would, ultimately, stop it
from working properly, also. Again, I know people will argue that all you need to do is put in more
sanctions, laws and regs to make it (the chosen system) work better and more
effectively, but that is the same as treating the symptoms of an illness,
rather than the cause.
I honestly believe that until we have the technology to eradicate
intrinsic human faults, such as greed, our need to dominate, our need to
control and other negative individual traits on a genetic level, nothing is
going to improve. In the same way that we are now increasingly screening
embryos for genetic defects and illnesses, we are not that far off being able
to eliminate those negative characteristics, prenatal and replacing them with
desirable characteristics such as; greater compassion, a sense of collective
responsibility, love, kindness and gentleness et al. Until we are able to do
that our society will never become a more fair, equal and harmonious place,
because no matter the system, our individual drives and our detrimental human
faults will always win out over the long term and stop that needed sense of
collective and uniting social cohesion. That might sound pessimistic, but when
you consider the history of our species at no time have we EVER been able to
sustain a fair and just collective society. Furthermore, even today when we
could easily do that, it isn't possible because the ones who rise to the top
because they have that ruthless drive and ambition, will fight tooth and nail
to preserve what they have. Ultimately, at the moment, genetically we are not
an altruistic or collective species and that is why these grand systems can't
Finally, I just want to stress that this is not meant as an attack on Winston in anyway. I admire him and I respect him and his writings greatly. I hope that he will take this post in the friendly and warm spirit in which it is meant - because that is sincerely how I hope it comes across. I urge anyone reading this to pop across to his blog and have a read of his excellent post. There is much in it to applaud and, as I pointed out above, I agree with lots of the points he has made. Thanks, Winston.
So a teacher has been banned from teaching for life for
kissing an 18 year old student at a leavers' party. Good grief!
Yes, ok, Ruth Vaughn also had sex with the lad during his
second week at uni, but so what?
I know this is a topic that polarises people one way or the
other and in the midst of our paedophile obsessed culture this has stirred
strong feelings. As a ex teacher/lecturer myself, I know all the rules and regs
and let me firmly stress that I have NEVER engaged in sexual activity with any
of my students and that I in no way condone or make excuses for paedophiles.
However, I do think it's time we started using some common
sense in these matters. Yes, there are arguments about Ms. Vaughn being in a
position of trust, but at the end of the day, the lad was 18, therefore, as far
as I'm concerned that rule no longer applies. Furthermore, as the age of
consent is 16, I think that is the age at which the rules about being in a
position of trust should no longer apply. You can't have one rule for most of
society and another rule for other sections. Although, I am tempted to put in
the caveat that at 16 there should be no more than a 10 year age gap between
the two CONSENTING parties.
Again, let me make it ABSOLUTELY clear that I would not
support nor condone sexual activity with anyone (any child actually) under the
age of 16. That is sick, evil and just totally vile. I hope I've made that
clear. However, I do feel that from the age of 16 they are mature enough and able to make decisions about having sex for the first time. Hence why this is the age of consent
Having worked in a number of schools/colleges I can honestly
say that very few 16 year olds are as innocent as we would like them to be. They know what the score is and they should not be treated as children. Trust
me, 16 year old girls are nowhere near the gullible, sweet little lambs they
are portrayed to be. I can't think of one that I've worked with who didn't know
exactly what she was doing. Regularly, I saw them flirting very overtly with
male teachers and I've heard many talking explicitly about what they would do
to certain male teachers.....and believe me, they meant it.
However, in this specific case we are not talking about a 16
year old, but an 18 year old ADULT and a 24 year old woman. Regardless of the
fact that he was still at school (albeit for another few days) he was legally
an adult and at that point all they had done was share a kiss - so what? Big
deal. Unfortunately, now because of our over protective nanny state society,
Ms. Vaughn has been banned from teaching in Britain for life (although she can
appeal this in 5 years time). I honestly think this is too harsh and it just
demonstrates how silly and over reaching our rules and laws have become.
20/30 years ago it was quite common place for teachers to
date and marry their sixth form students. Indeed I heard of someone who did just that in his mid
20s and she was 18 - granted this was a long time ago, the guy is now in his
70s. Furthermore, when the head teacher found out that the pair were together,
he invited this person for a 'chat' and tried to give the then young teacher
advice on getting a mortgage together and setting up a home. In my opinion that
is how it should still be. We should be using common sense in these matters. If
both parties are over the age of consent (and it is mutually consenting) and certainly if they are both 18 and
older, then it can't and shouldn't in anyway be thought of as abuse.
Absolutely, we must do all we can to stop CHILDREN being
abused - God forbid nobody wants that. ( Again, let me state that I view anybody under 16 as a child). However, to sack someone and ban them
from teaching for simply sharing a kiss with an 18 year old is simply stupid
(the issue of being in a position of trust is simply immaterial.)
We all need to loosen up, use some common sense
and live and let live.
And surprise surprise, Islington is under the control of Labour. The party that thrust multiculturalism on us so they could 'rub the right's nose in diversity' seems ever more intent on pandering to our Muslim brothers. Stop it! It is still our fucking country. If they want to live here then they should have to live by our culture and values, not theirs.
The claim is that it costs too much to label and monitor which children are allowed to eat it and which aren't. No, it bloody well doesn't. You make it perfectly clear to parents of those religions who aren't allowd pork, that it will be served at those schools and if they don't like it, tough shit. They can always find another school.
Conversely, I wonder if halal/kosher meat is being served to non Muslim/Jewish children without them realising it?
We are far too soft in this country, we pander and bow down to other cultures and faiths at the expense of our own. I make no wonder large parts of London, Birmingham, Bradford et all are little more than segregated ghettos. How much longer before these places impose Sharia (if they haven't done so informally already) on those towns/cities?
It is wrong and our spineless politicians and ruling elites are stabbing white English/British people in the back and selling us out. It has to stop or in a matter of only a few years I would bet (though I hope I am proved wrong) there will be a civil war here. I am sick to death of this pathetic experiment in multiculturalism. It hasn't worked and it is destroying our once great country because of some failed, perverse ideological dogma.
I really hope UKIP storm through at the GE because if they don't I fear this country is lost.
I was reading in The Express yesterday that 40% of young women have experienced sexual abuse at the hands of their boyfriends. That is a shocking, abhorrent and heartbreaking statistic. No women should EVER be abused. Personally, I hate any slug (I won't dignify them with the title of man) who would dare lay a finger on a woman in anger. You are vile, evil scum.
However, I think I have come up with the perfect punishment for such bastards. If convicted of abuse, either sexual, mental or physical, I would immediately have them given a HUGE dose of HRT and make them live the rest of their lives as a female.
In addition, I also think that, for the vile bastards who carried out those attacks on young girls in Rochdale, Oldham and Rotherham to be made to live as a woman would be the ultimate punishment :)
The issues facing Rotherham just seem to get worse. Last
year it was revealed that 1,400
youngsters - mainly from troubled homes or children's homes - had been abused by predatory gangs of Asian
men, between 1997 and 2013. A new report
published yesterday has slammed the council and branded it 'not fit for
purpose'. Consequently, this has forced the entire political leadership to
The report states that: ' The council's culture is unhealthy: bullying, sexism, suppression and
misplaced 'political correctness' have cemented its failures. The council is
currently incapable of tackling its weaknesses, without a sustained intervention.
I did blog about this at
the time, but I had to remove my posts for personal reasons which I now regret.
However, some of you may
recall that the overriding issue as to why this abuse had been allowed to
happen and continue was because of the misplaced political ideology towards a
drive for multiculturalism at any cost. Although certain brave individuals had
tried to speak up and protect these vulnerable youngsters; they were beaten
down and silenced because of the ethnicity of the scum that were committing
these disgusting crimes and appallingly because of the status of the children
who had come forward. Whichever way you shape it, it is a disgusting and
shameful smear on the town. Again, though, the thing that made my blood boil
was because of the Labour controlled council's dogmatic and blinded need to protect
their warped ideological adherence to multiculturalism; rather than to protect
the children of the town from these gangs mainly because of their ethnicity. I
honestly can't find the words to express how angry that makes me.
I also know I said at the
time and I still mean this; If the people of Rotherham vote in another Labour
led council and MPs at the next election, they are as guilty of abusing those
children as the gangs who carried out the attacks. I realise that the odds against
such a thing happening are paper thin, given that Rotherham is a red rosette on
a donkey town. However, I just hope that the good people there can see past
their tribal loyalties and realise what a corrupt, politically blinded and
warped ideology Labour offer. I also hope that this report, which clearly
states that much of the council still suffers from that same corrupt, bullying
and politically bankrupt mentality, will stay in their minds and stop them from
blandly thinking, well that was back then, this lot have been different. Nope,
it is still as pervasive within the town as it was for all those years.
As has been adequately
demonstrated recently on various occasions; Labour's drive for multiculturalism
has damn near destroyed this country. Their spineless kowtowing to cultures
that are still rooted in primitive, barbaric and medieval beliefs at the
expense of our indigenous culture has not created unity, it has segregated us
even more, until we feel we are in the wrong for wanting to express our own
beliefs and cultural practices. Let me also add here that David Cameron's weak
and pathetic shame of a conservative party are no better. The heir to Blair has
indeed carried on his master's work.
Anyone who votes for one
of the three-in-one main political parties (especially Labour) at the next
election is voting to destroy our country and wipe our culture, history and
values off the face of the earth.
So Nigel Farage has been criticised for some of his comments
about multiculturalism and a 'fifth column' that potentially seeks to do us, in
Britain, harm in the wake of the Paris tragedy. In my experience, when the
three main parties gang up on someone to condemn them, it is invariably a sign
that the person who made the comments is telling the truth. Truth can often be
very unpalatable and hard to accept, nevertheless it is still truth.
Over the last decade we have had numerous examples of this
failed experiment in forced multiculturalism and the chaos and havoc it brings
to a relatively settled and unified society. Let me list a few of the ones that
stand out to me: Victoria Climbie (2000),
7/7 attacks in London (2005), London riots (2011), The sexual abuse and
exploitation of young girls in Rochdale, Oldham and Rotherham (2013/14)
Birmingham Trojan horse schools scandal (2014). These are all perfect examples
of what happens when you allow uncontrolled immigration into a small country and
you have totally incompatible cultures, customs and values trying to co-exist. In that regard, Mr. Farage's comments are
absolutely correct, I'm afraid.
I'm not saying that we should have no multiculturalism in
this country, far from it. However, for it to work it has to be kept to a
minimum. I think that an absolute maximum percentage of around 10 -15% of a
countries population should be made up of ethnic minorities. Furthermore, they
should only be allowed in if they have highly valuable skills and abilities
that can be of benefit to a host country. Finally, the host country should
ensure that the immigrants' cultural beliefs and values are a match with the host country.
For example, I would not allow in anyone who believed in, nor wanted Sharia Law,
thought and treated women as inferior or whose cultural beliefs were rooted
around witchcraft and superstition (such as in the Climbie case). These types
of dogmatic, primitive and undemocratic cultural values and beliefs are the
total antithesis of our native, English values. They are and always will be
totally incompatible. It is like oil and water, they will never mix.
As the saying goes 'the chickens have come home to roost.' I
personally hold Lib/Lab/Con responsible for the above examples of abuse over
the last decade. However, more specifically, I place at least 80% of the blame
at Labour's door. Andrew Neather's comments about opening the gates to mass
immigration to 'rub the right's nose in diversity' have, over the last few days,
haunted me. My biggest fear is that unless something is done VERY soon, I
believe that within 10 - 15 years this country will find itself in an all out
religious and cultural civil war. If we had strong leaders with a genuine
passion and love for their country, who wanted the traditional, native values,
beliefs and culture to be dominant, then and only then might this approaching atrocity
be diverted. Instead, what we have had for decades is wishy-washy, centre
ground, try to be all things to all people leaders and parties, whose only
concern has been to get through the doors of No. 10. Their only priority has
been to obtain power at any cost, without having genuine principals, a clear
and brave moral direction or a willingness to put country before party or their
own ambitions. Career politicians along with progressive, dogmatic, civil
service apparatchiks have all but destroyed this country.
Nigel Farage is spot on; there is a 'fifth column' of vermin
living in this country, who hold British passports, but who hate us and want to
destroy us and our culture. As I have said in previous posts; multiculturalism
hasn't worked and if we continue to listen to the lies and spin of our three in
one political party, who try to con us that it is a good thing, we will all
become targets for these people with their outdated, barbaric and oppressive
views. The time to act is now. The truth is hard to take sometimes and it is
very unpalatable for those who hold vested interests. However, we must be brave
and demand truth and be honest. We must demand that the numbers of immigrants
coming here are drastically reduced and that those who come are willing to
integrate and adopt our culture and values. If they don't want that we need
leaders who have the balls to kick them out. It is time to take a stand and
tell those who wish to wrong us and destroy us to FUCK OFF!
Islamic fundamentalism and its supporters must be eradicated
from this country, we must not be afraid of them. Disgustingly our liberal, kowtowing
media constantly try and tell us that these attacks are the work of a small,
disturbed minority and that their actions don't represent those of most Muslims
or Islam....Really? I would argue that this is done to try and hide the truth
from us and to maintain the illusion of multiculturalism. Just like the good
and brave would be whistle-blowers in Rotherham and Oldham et al were silenced
and prevented from exposing the abuse of young girls because the
councils/authorities were locked into a dogmatic ideology, that had to be
maintained at any cost. Those actions by the authorities were just as vile as
the actions of the abusers and in my opinion they should be put on trial and
As I have already said, if we don't take a stand now and
fight for our country and our traditional values and culture, we will be
overrun and become victims of radical Islam and its oppressive and medieval
beliefs. I don't want that, do you?
P.S, I'll start believing that there are moderate and open-minded Muslims, who genuinely denounce the violence that is done in the name of Islam, when we see large groups of them coming out in solidarity with us and France; proudly holding up the Charlie Hebdo cartoon which mocked their prophet. That would show real unity and also that Islam can tolerate freedom of expression through being examined, questioned and mocked ....I bet it won't happen.