Friday, 15 February 2008


The corpse of terrorist Imad Moughniyah was laid to rest on Thursday, his soul presumably already rotting in hell where he belongs.

Predictably, terrorist Nasrallah is threatening murder of Israelis in 'revenge'. What is it that motivates scum like them? What is it that motivates thousands of simpletons to follow them and prance around for the benefit of the media, demanding death to Israel, the US and anyone else they can think of?

Why oh why oh why did the US not elect a President with more brain cells than Dubya? Instead of invading Iraq, we should have gone back to the arrangement that Thatcher and Reagan had of keeping Saddam in power so that he would keep a tight control on the extremists. We could then have used the available military and economic resources to invade and subdue the fascists in Iran and Syria, dispatching Hezbollah, Hamas and the rest of the nutters back to Allah.

Even the Daily Mail recently criticised the treatment of the terrorists at Guantanamo Bay. Have the aliens landed and removed the brain cells from decision makers and media across the world? The only bad thing about Guantanamo is that the US is being considerably more humane than the terrorists deserve.

Tuesday, 12 February 2008

Al Aynsley-Green

No, I had never heard of him, either. However, he is the man who earns well into six figures of your hard-earned taxes to be something called the Children's Commissioner. "What does he do?" Dumb question. Does it sound like a real job to you? Me neither.

Anyway, he is spearheading a campaign to ban a device which older people can use to protect themselves against young thugs. The high pitched alarm can only be heard by young people.

Fantastic idea. So why does this Aynsley-Green think it is a bad idea? Because it 'demonises' young people and is 'creating a ...divide between young and old'. Utter bollocks. What creates a 'divide between young and old' is where older people are being attacked, mugged, robbed and their properties vandalised. A shopkeeper who has been using it has found it massively useful in dealing with thugs.

Predictably enough, Shami Chakrabarti also thinks it is a bad idea. Without reading any more, that pretty much seals it for me. Anyhoo, her objection is that we would not tolerate 'a device... that caused blanket discomfort against one race or gender'. Utter bollocks! If a woman could use it to cause discomfort to a rapist, who would object? So long as the people of 'one race or gender' are engaged in criminal activity, why should anyone have a problem with people defending themselves?

Unfortunately, the McCommissioner, Kathleen Marshall is equally stupid, supporting calls for the ban.

If these ever become widely available, I will buy one and use it. No question.

Update: They ARE available - here. Pricey, but well worth it for people like my neighbour who are plagued by thugs.

China's human rights record

Atheist Nick Clegg has criticised the British Olympic Association's attempt to prevent British athletes commenting on China's human rights record, and also Broon's failure to raise the issue of human rights on his recent visit to China.

Clegg is absolutely right. This year's Olympics are a massive event for China, to showcase their nation to the world. The Chinese authorities are desperate for nothing to happen which would cause them a humiliating loss of face. It is also a golden and unique opportunity for public figures - athletes, politicians, whoever - to ensure that China does suffer the loss of face it deserves. The abominable tortures employed against members of Falun Gong and Tibetans, to use two examples, need to be highlighted.

China's growing economic and political power means that there is very little anyone can do against this totalitarian state. One of the few things that will make an impact is to take this chance to shine a spotlight on its nasty little secrets just as it opens its doors to the world.

Sunday, 10 February 2008

Can't get no satisfaction

Unfortunately, Wendy Alexander will not be going to prison over the donation scandal. This is despite the fact that the Electoral Commission has decided that she broke the law.

Now, I am no lawyer. But should any lawbreaking by someone in the kind of position that Wendy Alexander holds not be referred to the procurator fiscal? If there is insufficient evidence to prove the allegation of covering up the donation, should it not be brought into an open court, with Wendy in the dock so that we can establish the truth?

Still maybe it is just as well. Labour has absolutely NO ONE who could take over as its Scottish leader. Wendy's weekly humiliation at First Minister's Questions as she fails yet again to land a punch on Alex Salmond is hilarious to watch. Back in August, I forecast that she would not be a success, but not in my wildest dreams did I imagine how poorly she would do.

Don't trust a Labour manifesto

Another thing I missed when I was away: a UKIP member has failed in a court case which claimed a breach of contract by Broon in failing to keep the manifesto pledge on holding a referendum on the European Constitution/Treaty?

How did the one-eyed nosepicker defend himself? Did his barrister argue the finer points of whether the Treaty is the same as the Constitution? There is a case to be made there - perhaps.

No, simpler than that! It was defended by arguing that manifesto pledges cannot be trusted, anyway. Of course, there are precise legal niceties involved in the statement, "manifesto pledges are not subject to legitimate expectation". However, an honest politician would surely consider him or herself to be bound by them. No wonder politics is in the gutter.


I returned with the school party from our trip to Auschwitz and Krakow. It was a valuable experience for all of us. Last time I was in Poland, it was the Warsaw ghetto that stuck in my mind. This time, it was the main watchtower at Birkenau. As I walked up the steps, I reflected on the German guards who had made the same journey. I tried to imagine what went through their minds as they got up in the morning and went to work.

What did they say in the pub, when asked what they did for a living? What did they think about as they looked out of the windows of the watchtower to where 70,000 people were starving? What did they tell themselves, that their job was all about? What did they later tell their grandchildren, when asked what they did during the War? How did those who believed they were creating the 1000 year Reich and the master race come to terms with the fact that they had brought about their country's greatest humiliation and shame?

Resign, you utter clown

I returned from Poland to discover that the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, had become the latest of Christ's enemies to abuse his privileged position. To have him support the introduction of Shari'a law must be utterly chilling for any Muslim who has come to this country to escape from the sort of nutters who actually know what Shari'a law really means.

Williams claims that he is not calling for 'parallel laws'. If that is true, then it demonstrates that he really is talking through his bottom. Because there is no other way that extreme Islamists would interpret it.

Over the last year, we have been celebrating the anniversary of the end of the slave trade. Let us remember what played a big part in precipitating it: it was British judges in the early 19th Century ruling that slaves who arrived on these shores were no longer bound by the laws of their former countries and therefore became free. We desperately need to enforce the same principle to protect Muslims and the rest of us from those who want to flog homosexuals before throwing them off cliffs; stone women to death for having sex; hang people for drinking alcohol and consider that a woman who has been raped deserves to be punished for bringing shame on her family.

There is no halfway house here. There is no point in appeasement, and I use the word deliberately. If you pretend that we could have Shari'a law for some matters and not for others, you are living in cloud cuckoo land. Once you accept the principle that some members of our society do not enjoy the same protection as others, it is well-nigh impossible to justify not yielding to future demands. If you want to live in a fascist state where Shari'a is the law, go and live there. You will be walking on the tortured bodies and graves of people who were not given a choice. Anyone who comes to this country deserves the full protection of our law.

Why Israel needs to be vigilant

The Marxist, atheist, Labour voting, coke snorting, antisemitic BBC scum are up to their biased reporting again. I suppose, to be fair to them, that "The two Israeli brothers, aged eight and 19, were injured as a rocket landed yards away from where their family was running to seek shelter" is one way of describing an 8 year old boy, celebrating his father's birthday, having his leg mutilated and requiring partial amputation as a result of terrorists firing a rocket at him.

Personally, I find the BBC reporting to be stomach-churningly vile, of a cynical and dishonest nature that Joseph Goebbels would have been proud of. It is not an isolated incident, of course: I have reported it here, for example. When the BBC apologised last year for truthfully saying that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, it was obvious that the lunatics were in complete charge of the asylum.

I pray for the injured boys and their family; I pray for all the people of the Holy Land, and I even pray for the terrorists who launched this and other attacks. I pray that the terrorists will reject whatever it is that motivates them and learn to reject evil.