Sunday - November 08, 2009

Get me a rope before Mandelson wipes us all out.  A RANT against the lord of darkness

It’s one of those literary like bleak English winters and I love it.  Dark sky, not a hint of blue anywhere and bitterly, bitterly COLD.

Since my first Sunday post earlier today, I have been ensconed in another room with comfortable chairs, three Sunday newspapers and all the magazines that go with them, and an electric fire as the Brits call the floor heater.  So lots to read and lots to ponder and I of course have to break away from that place, and come back to my puter to share things with BMEWS of what I always hope is of some interest.
Like this rant by Jeremy Clarkson on a man named Peter Mandelson.  Someone Americans won’t know or will not heard much of if anything at all.
I am therefore putting some information on this twice resigned under a cloud Labourite (LEFT) individual who has come back into govt., in our extended text.

Oh yes ... just so you people reading this know (Brits already do), Mr. (Lord actually) Mandelson is generally known as .....

THE LORD OF DARKNESS

Having resigned twice under a cloud and losing his seat as an MP, Labour made him a Lord so they could bring him back into the govt.
LyndonB will correct me where I may have it wrong.

So then .... Clarkson is on a serious rant today. He’s really angry.  Here’s an example.

Get out of this stupid, Fairtrade, Brown-stained, Mandelson-skewed, equal-opportunities, multicultural, carbon-neutral, trendily left, regionally assembled, big-government, trilingual, mosque-drenched, all-the-pigs-are-equal, property-is-theft hellhole and set up shop somewhere else. But where?

Now I’m guessing here but those could be a few of the reasons that LyndonB and Chris have left old Blighty for other shores.  There might well be other reason as well, but that’s a good start. 
So then, without further ado .....  Heeeeeeeerrrrrssssss Clarkson.

Get me a rope before Mandelson wipes us all out

Jeremy Clarkson
Sunday Times

I’ve given the matter a great deal of thought all week, and I’m afraid I’ve decided that it’s no good putting Peter Mandelson in a prison. I’m afraid he will have to be tied to the front of a van and driven round the country until he isn’t alive any more.

He announced last week that middle-class children will simply not be allowed into the country’s top universities even if they have 4,000 A-levels, because all the places will be taken by Albanians and guillemots and whatever other stupid bandwagon the conniving idiot has leapt onto in the meantime.

I hate Peter Mandelson. I hate his fondness for extremely pale blue jeans and I hate that preposterous moustache he used to sport in the days when he didn’t bother trying to cover up his left-wing fanaticism. I hate the way he quite literally lords it over us even though he’s resigned in disgrace twice, and now holds an important decision-making job for which he was not elected. Mostly, though, I hate him because his one-man war on the bright and the witty and the successful means that half my friends now seem to be taking leave of their senses.

There’s talk of emigration in the air. It’s everywhere I go. Parties. Work. In the supermarket. My daughter is working herself half to death to get good grades at GSCE and can’t see the point because she won’t be going to university, because she doesn’t have a beak or flippers or a qualification in washing windscreens at the lights. She wonders, often, why we don’t live in America.

Then you have the chaps and chapesses who can’t stand the constant raids on their wallets and their privacy. They can’t understand why they are taxed at 50% on their income and then taxed again for driving into the nation’s capital. They can’t understand what happened to the hunt for the weapons of mass destruction. They can’t understand anything. They see the Highway Wombles in those brand new 4x4s that they paid for, and they see the M4 bus lane and they see the speed cameras and the community support officers and they see the Albanians stealing their wheelbarrows and nothing can be done because it’s racist.

And they see Alistair Darling handing over £4,350 of their money to not sort out the banking crisis that he doesn’t understand because he’s a small-town solicitor, and they see the stupid war on drugs and the war on drink and the war on smoking and the war on hunting and the war on fun and the war on scientists and the obsession with the climate and the price of train fares soaring past £1,000 and the Guardian power-brokers getting uppity about one shot baboon and not uppity at all about all the dead soldiers in Afghanistan, and how they got rid of Blair only to find the lying twerp is now going to come back even more powerful than ever, and they think, “I’ve had enough of this. I’m off.”

It’s a lovely idea, to get out of this stupid, Fairtrade, Brown-stained, Mandelson-skewed, equal-opportunities, multicultural, carbon-neutral, trendily left, regionally assembled, big-government, trilingual, mosque-drenched, all-the-pigs-are-equal, property-is-theft hellhole and set up shop somewhere else. But where?

You can’t go to France because you need to complete 17 forms in triplicate every time you want to build a greenhouse, and you can’t go to Switzerland because you will be reported to your neighbours by the police and subsequently shot in the head if you don’t sweep your lawn properly, and you can’t go to Italy because you’ll soon tire of waking up in the morning to find a horse’s head in your bed because you forgot to give a man called Don a bundle of used notes for “organising” a plumber.

You can’t go to Australia because it’s full of things that will eat you, you can’t go to New Zealand because they don’t accept anyone who is more than 40 and you can’t go to Monte Carlo because they don’t accept anyone who has less than 40 mill. And you can’t go to Spain because you’re not called Del and you weren’t involved in the Walthamstow blag. And you can’t go to Germany ... because you just can’t.

The Caribbean sounds tempting, but there is no work, which means that one day, whether you like it or not, you’ll end up like all the other expats, with a nose like a burst beetroot, wondering if it’s okay to have a small sharpener at 10 in the morning. And, as I keep explaining to my daughter, we can’t go to America because if you catch a cold over there, the health system is designed in such a way that you end up without a house. Or dead.

Canada’s full of people pretending to be French, South Africa’s too risky, Russia’s worse and everywhere else is too full of snow, too full of flies or too full of people who want to cut your head off on the internet. So you can dream all you like about upping sticks and moving to a country that doesn’t help itself to half of everything you earn and then spend the money it gets on bus lanes and advertisements about the dangers of salt. But wherever you go you’ll wind up an alcoholic or dead or bored or in a cellar, in an orange jumpsuit, gently wetting yourself on the web. All of these things are worse than being persecuted for eating a sandwich at the wheel.

I see no reason to be miserable. Yes, Britain now is worse than it’s been for decades, but the lunatics who’ve made it so ghastly are on their way out. Soon, they will be back in Hackney with their South African nuclear-free peace polenta. And instead the show will be run by a bloke whose dad has a wallpaper shop and possibly, terrifyingly, a twerp in Belgium whose fruitless game of hunt-the-WMD has netted him £15m on the lecture circuit.

So actually I do see a reason to be miserable. Which is why I think it’s a good idea to tie Peter Mandelson to a van. Such an act would be cruel and barbaric and inhuman. But it would at least cheer everyone up a bit.

SUNDAY TIMES

Posted by peiper     on 11/08/2009 at 09:26 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • Politics • Taxes • UK •  
• Comments (9) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - November 07, 2009

Speaking of Obama, Heffer says he is beatable.  The question is, by whom?

There was a small photo in the hard copy of Ronald Reagan.  How I do miss that great man.
Anyway, this is an interesting take from an eminent Brit conservative.  There isn’t anything I care to add.  In fact, I can’t think of anything and it isn’t necessary anyway.
That’s your job.

I wonder, though, whether what has happened to Mickey (Mouse) is a metaphor for St Barack Obama, who perhaps needs an image makeover after an unsuccessful year of kowtowing to his friends in Congress. Finding a “dark side” to show to those who now call the shots in America – notably organised labour and other Leftist lobby groups – could well help his poll rating, as could an enhanced role for Minnie. Are Disney’s top men even now on their way to the White House for urgent talks?

it is quite clear that the rhetoric-filled incumbent is eminently beatable.

Barack Obama is beatable - but by whom?
The Republicans have a fundamental problem: they don’t have a leader to capitalise on Barack Obama’s weakness, says Simon Heffer.

By Simon Heffer

A year on from its meltdown in the Obama landslide, the Republican Party has cause to celebrate. As predicted, it won two state governorships this week – and that was predicted because of the disillusionment with the image machine that is President Obama and his chums. Those victories, in states Mr Obama won last year, Virginia and New Jersey, have caused not just many Republicans, but also their acolytes in the press, to proclaim they are on the road back, and that the spectre of George W Bush no longer hangs over them.
Perhaps they are right: but things don’t look entirely wonderful for them.
Like our Tories, the Republicans are finding it hard to avoid a civil war over ideology. A more significant electoral result, in this respect, came in a congressional by-election in New York state. There were effectively two Republicans on the ballot – a moderate, pro-abortion one called Dede Scozzafava, and one supported by most local Republicans, but running under the banner of the Conservative Party, Doug Hoffman. Last Sunday Miss Scozzafava withdrew from the race and said she would back the Democratic candidate. Her name was already on the ballot, she registered 5 per cent of the vote, and the Democrat won.
Those who have said that this shows the American people don’t want a Reagan-style Republican Party are, however, just plain wrong. Miss Scozzafava did not withdraw because she was popular: she withdrew because she was about to be thrashed out of sight. However, the battle over just how far to the Right the Republicans should be is one that is going to run, and cause problems, right up to the day in the summer of 2012 when their candidate is formally nominated to take on Mr Obama.

The Republicans also have a more fundamental problem: they don’t have a leader. George W Bush is in an outer darkness from which his forthcoming memoirs are unlikely to reclaim him. John McCain is still in the Senate and serving his country, but at 73, and with last year’s defeat on his record, the game is up. And Sarah Palin, who arrived with such a bang, has left with a whimper, weighed down by lawsuits, the towel thrown in in Alaska, and her baroque extended family having become one of America’s favourite soap operas.

In just under a year’s time, Mr Obama and his party will face what threaten to be gruelling mid-term elections. Sensible Republicans argue that anything could happen in that time and that the chances of winning back either the Senate or the House are slim. Despite the anti-Obama feeling in the country, and the unlikelihood of dramatic economic recovery over the next 12 months, they are probably right. However, the Republicans must demonstrate some momentum in those elections or they will never get out of the starting blocks in 2012: and it is quite clear that the rhetoric-filled incumbent is eminently beatable.

With that election almost three years away, nobody wants to be a Republican front-runner and invite early destruction (Sarah Palin, qv). However, media here have already identified two – Tim Pawlenty, the Governor of Minnesota, who strongly supported Mr Hoffman over Miss Scozzafava, and Mitt Romney, the multi-millionaire Mormon who ran for the nomination last year.

Governor Pawlenty sounds like he could be the man to beat – “We cannot send more politicians to Washington who wear the Republican jersey on the campaign trail but then vote like Democrats in Congress,” he said of his desire to back Mr Hoffman. So the fight will be entertaining, and possibly nasty – and that’s before they even take it to Mr Obama.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 11/07/2009 at 07:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • Politics • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

A PRO WAR EDITORIAL COMMENT FROM CHARLES MOORE, IN THE FACE OF CALLS TO END IT NOW.

Funny how plans to do one thing get put off by something someone else does.  In this case, our friend Christopher has posted a great cartoon, and one I wish I’d found first. And like most illustrations of that nature, it says a heck of a lot.

Well, I had intended to post my Weekend Women before doing anything else, and they’re all ready to go.  But first there was that cartoon and then what is obviously a negative war cartoon in our morning paper, followed by this pro editorial from Charles Moore.  With all that, I felt I HAD to share this first. In fact, my next will be one from Simon Heffer on defeating Obama.  So a busier Sat. morning then I expected. 

This is a very worthwhile read and I encourage all to do so.  It has been edited for space here so please catch the link for the entire piece. It’s worth it.

If we truly want to win the war in Afghanistan, we need to challenge its opponents much more fiercely. Politicians such as Nick Clegg, who congratulate themselves on asking the necessary, awkward questions, need to be interrogated about what they actually want. Do they want the first defeat of the most powerful military alliance in history at the hands of a small band of fanatics armed with little more than rifles and IEDs? Do they have any conception of what such a defeat would mean for the world order, for the stability of countries in the region, or for civil peace in every European city? Do they not understand that this fight will be seen all over the world not as a battle for control of some jagged mountains, but between values, and that, if our values do not win, they will lose? (Charles Moore)

FOR MOORE, CLICK HERE

The war in Afghanistan is necessary, so why aren’t we trying harder to win?
The campaign in Afghanistan is being let down by weak leadership, on both sides of the Atlantic, says Charles Moore

By Charles Moore
The Saturday Telegraph
Editorial

Forgive me for starting with a harsh point, but it needs to be said that the fact that 229 British servicemen have been killed in Afghanistan is not an argument for ending the war. There is a tendency at present to exploit people’s admiration for the soldiers’ courage as a means not of advancing the Allied campaign, but of trying to stop it.

Such arguments have much more force with a conscript army, but ours is a professional one. Men volunteer to fight and they know that when you fight, you may die. The death of 229 such professionals over the course of eight years is not, by the standard of most wars, a high number. Tomorrow, the nation remembers wars where that number of dead per day was commonplace. The recent losses are extremely sad, but not shocking or even surprising. In themselves, they tell you nothing about whether the war is right or wrong.

It is, therefore, a bad idea for Gordon Brown’s public interventions on the subject of Afghanistan to be responses to particular deaths. Yesterday, he spoke in the wake of the murder of five British soldiers by an Afghan policeman. One feels that his timing, though not his content, was tacitly rebuked by General Nick Parker, the new British commander in theatre, who said: “I hope we don’t make strategic decisions on the basis of this low-level, terrible action.”

The actual words which Mr Brown used supported the Afghan campaign, but their psychological undertow was less encouraging: “Oh dear, oh dear. Don’t panic! Don’t panic!”
Mr Brown is well known for being an intensely political politician, forever calculating electoral advantage, but he does not understand the political effect of wars. His original hope in Afghanistan seems to have been that people somehow would not notice it much. He was not exactly against it, but he has never, as people say nowadays, taken “ownership” of it. This is a war: why has he never set up a war cabinet?

Posted by peiper     on 11/07/2009 at 06:53 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • UK • War On Terror •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - October 26, 2009

Biofuel refineries in the US have set fresh records for grain use every month since May.

Well, yet again I have to H/T LyndonB but this time there’s more.  Got my eyes opened WIDE on a subject that frankly I had given no thought to.

I don’t recall exactly what I wrote to Lyndon but his reply was this:

The US may be down (with an ass clown at the helm) but it is not out. It is still a superpower. Not just militarily but in terms of agriculture. Years ago I worked on Mississippi river barges which came up to Iowa empty and went back down to New Orleans full of soy beans and maize. Unless you have seen this first hand the sheer scale of this industry it is hard to get across. We loaded up barges with maize. Each of them were 200’ long and we then moved them out to the line boats which took them on to the gulf fifteen at a time. I therefore found this article by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard very interesting. The arabs and Chinese think they have the US by the balls. One through oil dependancy, the other through their dollar holdings. When I worked on the river one of the owners of the company once remarked that hunger was the most important factor to consider, because at the end of the day you can’t eat gold or drink oil. Something I feel a few of these piss pots would do well to remember.

And the link he provided me was the following which I found quite surprising not just for the info. What surprised me lots was the fact that I found it so interesting.  It isn’t a subject to set the blood rushing lets face it.  Like the rolling movements of the Qs on NASDAQ. But darn if I wasn’t glued to every line.  I had no idea.

Thanks L.

Food will never be so cheap again
Biofuel refineries in the US have set fresh records for grain use every month since May. Almost a third of the US corn harvest will be diverted into ethanol for motors this year, or 12pc of the global crop.



By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

The world’s grain stocks have dropped from four to 2.6 months cover since 2000, despite two bumper harvests in North America. China’s inventories are at a 30-year low. Asian rice stocks are near danger level.
Yet farm commodities have largely missed out on Bernanke’s reflation rally in metals, oil, and everything else. Dylan Grice from Société Générale sees “bargain basement” prices.

Wheat has crashed 70pc from early 2008. Corn has halved. The “Ags” have mostly drifted sideways over the last six months. This divergence within the commodity family is untenable, given the bio-ethanol linkage to oil.
For investors wishing to rotate out of overstretched rallies – Wall Street’s Transport index and the Russell 2000 broke down last week – this is a rare chance to buy cheap into a story that will dominate the rest of our lives.

Barack Obama has not reversed the Bush policy on biofuels, despite food riots in a string of poor countries last year and calls for a moratorium. The subsidy of 45 cents per gallon remains.
The motive is strategic. America is weaning itself off imported energy at breakneck speed. It will not again be held hostage by oil demagogues, or humiliated by states that cannot feed themselves. Those Beijing students who laughed at US Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner may not enjoy the last laugh. The US is the agricultural superpower. Foes will discover why that matters.

The world population is adding “another Britain” every year. This will continue until mid-century. By then we will have an extra 2.4bn mouths to feed.
China and Southeast Asia are switching to animal-protein diets as they grow wealthy, as the Koreans did before them. It takes roughly 3-5kgs of animal feed from grains to produce 1kg of meat.

A report by Standard Chartered, The End of Cheap Food, said North Africa and the Middle East have already hit the buffers. The region imports 71pc of its rice and 58pc of its corn. It lacks water to boost output. The population is growing fast. It will have to import, and cross fingers.
The UN says global farm yields must rise 77pc, which means redoubling Norman Borlaug’s “green revolution”. It will not be easy. China’s trend growth in crops yields has slipped from 3.1pc a year in the early 1960s to 0.9pc over the last decade.

“We’ve all heard the stark anecdotes: precious topsoil weakened by over-farming, dust clouds darkening the Asian skies, parched land becoming desert and rivers running dry,” said Mr Grice.
Since 2000, China has lost nearly 1,400 square miles each year to desert. Urban sprawl is paving over fertile land in the East. Water supply from Himalayan glaciers is ebbing. The Yellow River has been reduced to “an agonising trickle”. It no longer reaches the sea for 200 days a year.

Farmers are draining the aquifers. Environmentalist Ma Jun says in China’s Water Crisis that they are drilling as deep as 1,000 metres into non-replenishable reserves. The grain region of the Hai River Basin relies on groundwater for 70pc of irrigation.

China’s water troubles are not unique. North India lives off Himalayan snows as well. Nor can we take fertiliser supply for granted any longer since “peak phosphates” threatens.

One can be Malthusian about this. Grizzled commodity guru Jim Rogers certainly is. “The world is going to have a period when we cannot get food at any price, in some parts.” He advises youth to opt for a farm degree rather than an MBA, if they want to make serious money.

Mr Grice remains an optimist, believing that human ingenuity will rescue us. You can trade the “Ag” rally by investing in exchange traded funds (ETFs), but this amounts to speculation on food. There are ancient taboos against this practice.

Or you can invest in the bio-tech, fertiliser, and land services companies that will both make money and help to solve the problem. Monsanto, Syngenta, and Potash are popular, but trade at high price to book values. Golden Agri-Resources, Yara, Agrium, and Bunge are at better multiples.

Kingsmill Bond at Moscow’s Troika Dialog suggests the Baltic company Trigon Agri as a way to play the catch-up story in the Eurasian steppe. He likes sunflower processor Kernel, grain group Razgulay, and fertiliser firm Uralkali.

Strictly speaking, the world has enough land to feed everybody. The Soviet Union farmed 240m hectares in Khrushchev’s era. The same territory now farms 207m hectares. Troika says crop yields could be doubled in Russia, and tripled in the Ukraine using modern know-how. Africa’s farms could come alive with land registers, allowing villagers to use property as collateral for credit.

None of this can be done with a flick of the fingers. What seems certain is that the terms of trade between country and city will revert to the norms of the Middle Ages. Landowners will be barons again.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 10/26/2009 at 09:19 AM   
Filed Under: • CHINA in the news • Economics • Editorials • Environment • International •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - October 19, 2009

SOME LINKS TO PJTV… I think you’ll find interesting

From PJTV ...

I get this in my newsletter. There is no way (so far) to embed, so here’s an interesting link to Fred Barnes runs 15 minutes.

http://www.pjtv.com/?cmd=video&video-id=2572

BUT .....  This one only runs 3 minutes and I’d suggest seeing it first.

Can_MSNBC_Survive_Without_Rush_Limbaugh

Posted by peiper     on 10/19/2009 at 07:51 AM   
Filed Under: • Blog Stuff • Editorials •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Sunday - October 11, 2009

President John Bolton… I like it.

John Bolton is my best choice for President. Especially now, we need a President who is strong on national defense. I’ve read his book, Surrender is not an Option Put this man in the White House! At least he would defend us, unlike the current beta-male who ‘won’ the ACORN-tainted election.

Former UN Ambassador John Bolton on Øbama’s Nobelol prize:

In reality, I’m surprised at how ‘unnewsworthy’ Øbama’s Nobel award was. Nobody at work talked about it. I got the impression at work that, for or against Øbama, we were all ashamed. He doesn’t deserve it. And he’ll never deserve such a prize.

Posted by Christopher     on 10/11/2009 at 07:37 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • Obama, The One • Stoopid-People •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - September 17, 2009

Life happens…

Have you ever noticed how all the best songs are the sad songs?

For instance, Harry Chapin did two of my favorite songs in the 70’s, Cat’s in the Cradle, and this one, Taxi:

I think, as we grow older, we’ve all had something similar happen to us. Might be at a class reunion, might happen as Dan Fogelberg relates:

Sad, yes?

But, you know? I wouldn’t change a thing. I think I just sometimes grieve over what might-have-been. But just remember, look at what you have!

And what Obama wants to take away…

Posted by Christopher     on 09/17/2009 at 05:35 PM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • NOSTALGIA •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

EU: is Britain still a sovereign state?

EU membership has led to deep constitutional changes in the UK. But it would be wrong to say that we have been robbed of our sovereignty, says Philip Johnston. Our government has been an accomplice all the way .

By Philip Johnston
Published: 7:00AM BST 17 Sep 2009

Before Edward Heath signed the Treaty of Rome in 1972, all laws affecting the people of this country were made by their own directly elected parliament. The UK’s accession to what was then called the Common Market transferred sovereignty over a good deal of law-making from Westminster and Whitehall to Brussels.

There are many who did not realise that this was part of the deal. They thought Britain was signing up to a free trade area that would also entrench the peace that Western Europe had enjoyed in the decades after 1945. But the “ever closer union” envisaged in the treaty required greater harmonisation of laws in order that each member state should operate on the same basis as far as possible.

The constitutional upheaval caused by membership of what is now the EU was the greatest in the country’s history since the Glorious Revolution of 1688. For almost 300 years, the “old constitution” was self-contained and largely immune to outside influences.

All this changed when we joined the EEC. As Prof Anthony King observed in his book The British Constitution: “Not only did Parliament cease to be sovereign, Britain itself ceased to be an old-fashioned sovereign state. The fact of being a member of the EU permeates almost the whole of the British government – to a far greater extent than most Britons seem to realise.”

How great remains a matter of debate. Oddly, those who are the most enthusiastic supporters of the EU seek to play down its influence on our lives while those who loathe it see its tentacles everywhere.

HERE FOR THE REST OF THIS ARTICLE

It’s a lengthy read and so I’ve cut it here but the link above will take those interested to the remainder.

Now then, I am no diplomat, I am not trained in the law or treaties or anything else that has to do with this issue. But I read the papers, hear debates on radio, listen to people when the subject come up.

As I see it, the Euro powers that be are building (or trying to) a socialist super-state. Maybe it didn’t start out that way, and I doubt that really I do, but I think the end result will be that anyway.

I may have gripes with democracy but to some extent a democracy does have (I am led to believe) checks and balances I don’t think I recognize in the EU. 

They are for the most part an unelected body, a commission, and they decide policy and laws that are put together by bureaucrats and then rubber stamped by a euro parliament.  A parliament without powers as I understand it.

All one needs to do is change the names to understand what I’m trying to say.  Change the names and wallah, you have what socialists love.
A centralized socialist dictatorship.  Think about it.

Commission translates as === Politburo
Council of Ministers translates as === Central Committee

Ladies and gents ... welcome to The European Union of Socialist States.

Posted by peiper     on 09/17/2009 at 09:36 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Britain and France were never meant to be on the same side. From a former diplomat.

The Telegraph is running a series of double page articles over the next couple of weeks, that have to do with this damned European Union of which England is a member.  It has been quite an interesting and lengthy read so far, and educational.
This is merely one tiny portion of one part of one page.
Lyndon will LOVE this but I hope you’ll find some interest here as well.

rosbifs Nope. I haven’t a clue what those letters stand for.  But Mr. Collard does and I guess maybe that’s all that matters. (said with sarcasm)
But never mind.  This is interesting.  Except that I didn’t meet the charming people he refers to as I didn’t keep the same company he did and more likely still does.

EU: Britain and France were never meant to be on the same side
During my time in the Foreign Office it was my aim (achieved) to go through my whole career without setting foot in Brussels.

By Tim Collard
Published: 7:30AM BST 16 Sep 2009

I have always imagined Belgium’s capital as a homogeneous Europhiliac monoculture, where thoughtcrime can be sniffed at fifty paces and UKIP can’t get served in the bars. Europe was strictly for those of high career aspirations and even higher boredom thresholds, and I had neither.

My main experience of Euro-diplomacy was at our Embassy in China, where I sat on the EU Coordinating Committee, where we “coordinated” our position on issues of common concern. This opened my eyes to the realities of EU “partnership”; genuine transnational politics is still some way away.

If the Germans’ dog-like devotion to all things EU reflects a sincere commitment to the renunciation of war in Europe, the French seem to see the EU as a continuation of the Hundred Years War by other means. Among the strategic priorities of French foreign policy, getting one up on the rosbifs is certainly prominent.

It starts with the eternal battle over language. It is written in the sacred scriptures of the EU that English and French have equal status as working languages, and all French diplomats are under instructions to conduct business in French when it is their turn to chair anything. This of course triggers passive resistance; our diplomats are all supposed to speak French, though some don’t and others conceal it, and the French are doing well if they can get 10 minutes into the meeting without everyone lapsing into English. The arrival in 1995 of various Scandiwegians sealed victory for Britain, as most of them couldn’t manage so much as a parley-voo, and no doubt the struggle is now utterly hopeless.

Dealing with China presented endless opportunities for one-upmanship. In the early Nineties it was all about holding a unified line on trade sanctions against China after Tiananmen Square. As at that time the Chinese only bought anything if we lent them the money to do so at negligible interest, these sanctions didn’t hurt us much, and the French took the hardest line in enforcing them. This was, naturellement, because they had found a devious way round them, involving fudging dates on contracts, and wanted the rest of us bound all the tighter.

When China’s economic situation improved, our hosts became worth sucking up to. Since 1990 the EU had brought an annual resolution before the UN Human Rights Commission condemning human rights abuses in China. In 1997 this position was being reviewed; not because the human rights situation had improved, but because the rewards available for sucking up certainly had.

The declared aim was to arrive at a united EU position. This proved difficult to achieve, and negotiations stretched over the rest of the year. But with a united position all 15 of us would benefit equally; it became steadily clearer that the Quai d’Orsay wanted to contrive a competitive advantage.

Deadline day drew near with no decision reached; all the blocking moves came from Paris. By this time one or two partners, principally the Dutch and Danes, had committed themselves to tabling the human rights motion, and as one of them (I forget which) held the rotating presidency, the proposal was formally put.

Once more than half of us had agreed, the French announced that they would not sign up, as no proper agreement had been reached. The Germans and Club Med chancers rushed to join them. Thus the French advantage was obtained, and the Dutch and Danes got a good commercial kicking from the Chinese.

All attempts to remonstrate with the French for this behaviour were brushed aside with Gallic insouciance. I was reminded of this episode when Tony Blair was persuaded to concede on the UK contributions rebate in return for a promised review of the CAP, with Chirac smirking away and saying afterwards that he would make sure the review didn’t change anything.

I’m no francophobe; I love the country, the charming, cultured people, the relaxed attitude to working, and the browsing and sluicing. But we were never meant to be on the same side. As for real EU partnership, we’ll never see that this century.

SOURCE IS HERE

Next Up:

EU: is Britain still a sovereign state?
EU membership has led to deep constitutional changes in the UK. But it would be wrong to say that we have been robbed of our sovereignty, says Philip Johnston. Our government has been an accomplice all the way .

Posted by peiper     on 09/17/2009 at 08:52 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • Education • EUro-peons • Government • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - September 16, 2009

How conservative pranksters made idiots of Obama’s favourite left-wing charity .

Perhaps some of you have already seen this.  Lyndon did and passed it on to me. I missed it coz I didn’t check everything, every day as I promised myself I would do.
So,, H/T to LYNDON and thanks again.

This is good folks. Really good. The reporting and the writing. What’s bad of course is the subject.

There were a number of comments on the site as always, but this one in particular (Thanks again to Lyndon for directing me there first) is of huge interest and so I’m posting it as well for all to see.

My postings might be light today. Will have to see as day goes on.

I have written a lot on other blogs about voter fraud. That the biggest fear of all is that future elections have been irretrievably rigged. That fear comes from knowledge of the years-long and completely insidious George Soros financed effort to elect far left secretaries of state. Secretaries of State for the individual states are the officials who are in charge of the voter rolls, policing the election voting venues and doing the vote count. This is the single official most able to rig elections (Al Franken, anybody?). And the single high state official most unknown to and uncared about by the public. So it doesn’t take much to get in a far left candidate, since very few in the public pay any attention.

How does this fit in with ACORN? Well, have we all noticed that ACORN has been hired for voter registration in all the states? And, until yesterday, had we noticed that ACORN was going to do the next census count? Do we all realize that not only does that census count control where government moneys are disbursed, but also that population count also is used in figuring the boundaries of Congressional districts. Did we have any concern that for the first time ever, former ACORN-lawyer President Obama has pulled the census count out of the Department of Commerce into the White House?

Call me crazy, but that sounds like a scheme to perpetrate massive vote fraud to me. (If there is a particular reason for having the census in the White House, the President hasn’t explained. And of course the press hasn’t asked.)

In the previous thread I listed many of my concerns about Obama. The census and election rigging should have been on that list, and probably as the biggest concern of all.

Incidentally, as of last night, the film maker may be subject to charges in the State of Maryland where it is illegal to tape record (i.e., the audio on the camera) someone without their consent. Don’t know how that will play out.

One last thing: my strongest reaction at seeing the ACORN videos was surprise that the ACORN employees were so knowledgeable and smart at gaming the system. I am a lawyer (who doesn’t practice and hates the litigiousness of society and the whole trial lawyers-tort bar - so don’t yell at me). So as I watched the videos, I kept thinking that those ACORN employees missed their calling and should have gone to law school!

Comment posted by: MSHER1

Just seeing the name, George Soros, makes me see red. No pun intended. That foreigner who has done so well for himself on our shores has been a recognized danger to America and has worked actively against the USA for years, is still alive and breathing and living well. WHY?
Why has he been allowed to continue his unwelcome breathing?  Can’t someone, somewhere nail that bastard?  Guess not or it would have been done by now.  Darn!

How conservative pranksters made idiots of Obama’s favourite left-wing charity ACORN

By James Delingpole
September 14th, 2009
The Telegraph

A skinny white prostitute and her pimp turn up at the office of Barack Obama’s favourite US “poverty action” charity ACORN (Association of Community Organisations for Reform Now). They want advice on a few problems, like how best to bring over a “couple” of - well, 13, actually - underage girls from El Salvador to work in this brothel they’ve got planned, without attracting too much heat from the authorities. How can they get a mortgage, how should they deal with their tax affairs, how do they legitimize their immoral earnings and so on?

ACORN’s expert advisers are more than happy to oblige, as this hilarious video - first posted at the BigGovernment site - reveals.

Hilarious because, of course, the footage is a stitch-up. It was filmed with a hidden camera and acted out by two very brave young US investigative journalists - Hannah Giles and James O’Keefe, keen to expose the dubious moral standards of the radical left organisation. (Using methods not unakin to those advocated by Obama’s preferred leftist agitator Saul Alinsky)

Since then they have struck twice more. First at one of ACORN’s Washington DC offices. Most recently in New York - where, among the advice they were given was to hide their illicit gains in a tin and bury it in their back yard.

A neat little scoop which has already caused several heads to roll at ACORN, and, as Toby Harnden reports today has led the US Census Office to break its controversial links (for chapter and verse see Stephanie Guttman’s blog on this) with the notorious organisation. But is it really any more significant than that?

Well, of course, those on the liberal-left would have you believe not. It’s just another of those typical right-wing smear campaigns that conservative “nut jobs” like Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart have so cynically concocted to discredit Democrats in general and the saintly Obama in particular.

Naturally I beg to differ. As something of a professional conservative nut job myself, I find that one of the hardest struggles of my daily existence is persuading the world that I’m not in this game just to be wilfully contrarian and I’m not in it because I’m a heartless, evil bastard who is never happier than when crushing the aspirations of the poor, the disabled or anyone from an ethnic minority.

The reasons I’m a conservative are a) because I do care actually and b) because I’ve seen the alternative and it sucks.

For a shining example of b) look no further than these ACORN video exposes, which show exactly what’s wrong with practical socialism. 1. Big government takes your hard-earned money. 2. It spends on it an organisations like ACORN so rotten to the core and with values so inimical to your own, that frankly it would easier if you’d taken 40 per cent of your income in a big suitcase down to the nearest housing project, allowed yourself to be mugged - and cut out the middle man.

James Delingpole

Posted by peiper     on 09/16/2009 at 07:13 AM   
Filed Under: • Blog Stuff • Commies • Editorials • Corruption and Greed •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - September 15, 2009

Multiculturalism: Europeans’ Guillotined From Their Cultures. Is America next? a must read.

If mass immigration continues adding 200,000 more people from disparate cultures from around the world into the USA monthly and well over 2.4 million annually—they will displace our national language, our culture and our way of life.

The United States speeds toward becoming a dysfunctional, unstable and hopelessly multicultural civilization. The metaphor of the Tower of Babel explains our plight.

And that’s how the article at Europe News ends.  BMEWS, you just have to read this.
H/T EUROPE NEWS

Multiculturalism: Europeans’ Guillotined From Their Cultures

OfficialWire
By Frosty Wooldridge

If you look at the horrendous social consequences growing in France, United Kingdom, Holland, Sweden, Belgium, Austria, Spain, Canada and elsewhere—you cannot wonder who dreamed up the concept of ‘multiculturalism’. Did they take into account human nature? Anthropological realities? Different tribes? Antagonistic cultures?

Immigrant citizens now bomb subways in England, trains in Spain, riots in Sweden and create growing slums in Amsterdam.
Given enough time, every human tribe attempts to become dominant. By sheer numbers, cultures work toward power. Notice that major religions like Catholics attempt to become dominant.

You may observe Mormons sending their kids out across the world for two years to add more numbers. Muslims invaded Europe centuries ago, but suffered defeat. Today, Libya’s Kaddafi said, “Allah smiles upon us in that we do not need to bomb or conquer Europe. Islam will become the dominant culture by mid century by peaceful immigration.”

Sweden, called the most successful society on this planet, recently suffered horrific clashes from its growing Muslim population that hates Jews. Instead of enjoying a tennis match with Israel in Malpo, Sweden, Swedish-Muslims firebombed and threatened to kill the Jews. You may see the results of multiculturalism here.

If not for those Muslim immigrants, the tennis matched would have been enjoyed by all Swedes! With 70 percent unemployment among Muslims, crime exploded, rapes tripled--but the local Islam imam said, “The best Islamic state in the world is Sweden!”
If you look into British society, you find two distinct and separate sections of once peaceful England. Muslims don’t like the British and the British tolerate the Muslims.

The same separation occurs in France. A French reader, Brigitte, said. “I believe the unfettered immigration into the USA is but one aspect of the “divide and conquer” rule of imperialism. As long as immigrants from all over the world are permitted to remain in the US, the “living space” (Lebensraum of the Nazis) they occupy--is denied English-speaking U.S. citizens.

“The multiculturalism that is being promoted creates resentment in the Anglo-Americans, which they dare not voice because it’s not politically correct to do so. It exists nevertheless and is building pressure and could one day find expression in brutality, perhaps mass slaughter, towards all aliens.

“Meanwhile the Puerto Rican Day parade is only one of a great number, each country having its own day and parade to display nationalistic and cultural pride in their country of origin and woe to whoever grumbles.

“This two-part policy is effective in feeding resentment on the part of the Anglo-Americans, contempt for the Anglos on the part of the immigrants, and thus the success in keeping all people of different origins estranged from one another is achieved.

“As long as Anglo-Americans are kept down by the multicultural ideology, they will not find common ground with the aliens, or alien-looking people. So the unity that would give strength to the people (united we stand) will never happen and imperialism will flourish. Here in France it’s just the same.”

My Mexican antagonist, Subcommandante Pedro read my latest column. He responded:

“In Boulder, Colorado, where I formerly taught school-rich, white, liberal mothers, driving $50,000 SUVs, sported bumper stickers that read, “Celebrate Diversity”. However, they drove their kids to all white schools away from legal immigrant enclaves that overwhelmed area schools.”

“Stupid, racist, lazy white cows! It is because of idiots like this that La Raza will emerge victorious. These are the dumbasses that voted our beloved Obama in on a landslide. Don’t worry Mr. Frosty, when the time comes these will be the first to go. They’ll probably still be talking about the “joys of tolerance” as the guillotine drops. Dumb stupid honkeys! God Bless America LMFMAO (Second “M” stands for “Mexican")!” Cordially, SubComandante Pedro, MeCHA Brown Berets Infiltration Brigades, LA, Alta CA, Aztlan

Another reader said, “In my view until we speak from our historical voice as the founding Nation of this country we do not have the standing that is necessary to even be listened to let alone have any power and influence. Especially concerning the all important policy of immigration! We are now the only community that has no name and no standing in the current environment of radical transformation of the U.S.! We are under a savage assault in every sector that determines a peoples’ identity and past! It is led by our own institutions and leaders. The ideology and game plan is one crafted by these transnational ethnic/religious elites.

“Now we have the parent of our Democratic Republic, England, trying to stamp out the capacity of the native English to defend their country, civilization, identity, and past against the assault meant to destroy all of these Nation building and preservation dynamics and values!”

This reader wrote, “Your efforts and the knowledge you give to people is very appreciated. There are not many honest men as you left anymore it seems--not on the subject of the illegals--since the profits are so vast and so enticing.

“I am a student at one of the biggest illegals running factories probably in the nation. The school is Metropolitan State College of Denver. I have been sworn at in online classes, and insulted. The professors are so in the agenda of the college that they allow even profane comments to be made to students who say anything even remotely against their agenda for the illegals. If you are a Caucasian--you better be prepared to denounce your ethnicity in order to survive at Metro and get that precious little degree.

“Everyone who is ‘White” at Metro is terrorized--they are all frightened to be put out of the college if they don’t say what is demanded. You know, how the “Whites’ have caused untold suffering to minorities since the beginning of time--and now we must understand and accept our new incoming people--the onslaught of the illegals for the profiteering, looters and robber capitalists.

Read the rest HERE

Posted by peiper     on 09/15/2009 at 09:40 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • EUro-peons •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - September 14, 2009

IT’S WRONG TO TEACH LITTLE KIDS PATRIOTISM … So say a number of teachers …makes ya wonder.

A few days ago an article appeared in the Telegraph that I have since lost.  However, I found an older version from 2008 that appeared in the Time and so present part of it here. I can make no sense out of continual apologies for the past and the left wing view that being a patriot is somehow a wrong thing to be.
Now of course the kiddies are getting the benefits (or might that be brainwashing?) from the liberal left.

Posted here as well is opinion of an editorial writer in The Daily Mail, who see it differently.  I think I can say for certain that if kids are in fact getting this sort of (non) education in early school days, it isn’t any wonder that the country is in the shape it’s in. 

‘Don’t teach children patriotism’
Nicola Woolcock
The Times (from Feb. 2008)

Patriotism should be avoided in school lessons because British history is “morally ambiguous”, a leading educational body recommends.

History and citizenship lessons should stick to the bare facts rather than encouraging loyalty to Britain when covering subjects such as the Second World War or the British Empire, the Institute of Education researchers said. Teachers should not instill pride in what they consider great moments of British history, as more shameful episodes could be downplayed or excluded.

The slave trade, imperialism and 20th century wars should be taught as controversial issues while students are deciding how they feel about their country, the report says.

Three quarters of teachers felt obliged to tell students about the danger of patriotism. The survey suggested neither pupils nor teachers wanted patriotism endorsed by schools.

Historians said last night, however, that it was impossible to teach the subject without patriotism or a recognition that British values were rooted in the past.

The report criticises the current drive to use citizenship lessons as a way of promoting pride in being British and developing a sense of belonging. It said: “To love what is corrupt is itself corrupting, not least because it inclines us to ignore, forget, forgive or excuse the corruption. And there’s the rub for patriotism.

The historian Tristram Hunt said of the institute’s report: “I think it’s a very immature approach to the topic. The point is not whether history was right or wrong from a 21st Century liberal-left perspective. It’s about teaching students to understand the mindset and context of our forebears.

TIMES SOURCE,MORE HERE

If children are taught that patriotism is wrong, Britain’s very identity is at stake
By MELANIE PHILLIPS
14th September 2009

A survey found three-quarters of teachers believed it was their duty to warn pupils about the danger of patriotism (posed by models)
One of the most startling aspects of our society at present is the way things that were once considered to be virtues have now become the object of intense disapproval, and vice versa.

A recent survey of teachers by London University’s Institute of Education found that some three-quarters of them believed it was their duty to warn their pupils about the dangers of patriotism.
Once upon a time, loving your country enough that you were prepared to die for it was held to be the highest virtue.
Indeed, without patriotism there would be no one serving in the Armed Forces.

For the past 1,000 years, it has given the people of these islands the strength and courage to repel invaders and defeat the enemies of liberty.
Is it not extraordinary that such affection for your country should now be considered so objectionable that children should be told it is positively dangerous?
One teacher said that praising patriotism excluded non-British pupils.

‘Patriotism about being British divides groups along racial lines, when we aim to bring pupils to an understanding of what makes us the same.’
But on the contrary, patriotism is what binds us together through a shared sense of belonging and a desire to defend what we all have in common.
What this teacher seemed to be saying was that children from immigrant backgrounds can’t have that shared sense of belonging because they are not really British. Is that not itself a racist attitude?
And if such children really are merely foreign visitors, it is even more extraordinary that teachers should tailor the education of children who are British to suit the few who are not.

But then, some of these teachers seemed unwilling to acknowledge the concept of citizenship at all, spouting idiotic nonsense instead about promoting ‘universal brotherhood’ or the need to ‘identify as humans’.
With no awareness of any irony (they probably don’t understand what that means either) some said promoting patriotism was a form of ‘brainwashing’.
So what, pray, is promoting ‘universal brotherhood’? Planet earth to teachers: make contact, please!

As the researchers who conducted this survey point out, much of history and politics is incomprehensible without understanding the power of patriotic sentiment.
Accordingly, they say, schools should ensure that pupils not only understand what patriotism is, but are also ‘equipped to make reasoned judgments about the place it should occupy in their own emotional lives’.

Surely that’s the point. Teachers should not set out to put across one point of view, which replaces education with propaganda. Instead, they should be giving pupils both knowledge and the ability to think about it and learn from it so they can arrive at their own conclusions.
But on the grounds that love for your country is wrong, many teachers have long stopped passing on to children the knowledge they need if they are to admire and identify with Britain. Somehow this has got mixed up with racism, xenophobia and the BNP.

Thousands of pupils are being allowed to drop history at the age of 13.

Professor Derek Matthews, an economics lecturer at Cardiff University, was so concerned at his students’ lack of historical knowledge that he set them four simple questions.
He discovered that only one in six knew that the Duke of Wellington led the British Army in the battle of Waterloo; only one in ten could name a single 19th-century British prime minister; some of his students had never heard of the Reformation; and one thought Martin Luther was an American civil rights leader.
Yet these students were probably in the top 15 per cent of their age group for educational success.
Despite - or perhaps, because of - this collapse of knowledge in the schools, there is a tremendous appetite for history among the general public.

GO HERE FOR MORE

Posted by peiper     on 09/14/2009 at 11:52 AM   
Filed Under: • Editorials • Education • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - September 11, 2009

excerpt … AN ODE TO AMERICA …. IT ISN’T NEW BUT WORTH A LOOK AGAIN.

The article was written by Mr. Cornel Nistorescu and published under the title ‘C’ntarea Americii, meaning ‘Ode To America ‘) in the Romanian newspaper Evenimentulzilei ‘The Daily Event’ or ‘News of the Day’.

~ An Ode to America ~

Why are Americans so united? They would not resemble one another even if you painted them all one color! They speak all the languages of the world and form an astonishing mixture of civilizations and religious beliefs.

On 9/11, the American tragedy turned three hundred million people into a hand put on the heart. Nobody rushed to accuse the White House, the Army, or the Secret Service that they are only a bunch of losers. Nobody rushed to empty their bank accounts. Nobody rushed out onto the streets nearby to gape about.

Instead the Americans volunteered to donate blood and to give a helping hand.

After the first moments of panic , they raised their flag over the smoking ruins, putting on T-shirts, caps and ties in the colors of the national flag. They placed flags on buildings and cars as if in every place and on every car a government official or the president was passing. On every occasion, they started singing: ‘God Bless America !’

I watched the live broadcast and rerun after rerun for hours listening to the story of the guy who went down one hundred floors with a woman in a wheelchair without knowing who she was, or of the Californian hockey player, who gave his life fighting with the terrorists and prevented the plane from hitting a target that could have killed other hundreds or thousands of people.

How on earth were they able to respond united as one human being? Imperceptibly, with every word and musical note, the memory of some turned into a modern myth of tragic heroes. And with every phone call, millions and millions of dollars were put into collection aimed at rewarding not a man or a family, but a spirit, which no money can buy. What on earth can unites the Americans in such way? Their land? Their history? Their economic Power? Money? I tried for hours to find an answer, humming songs and murmuring phrases with the risk of sounding commonplace, I thought things over, I reached but only one conclusion… Only freedom can work such miracles.

Cornel Nistorescu

(This deserves to be passed around the Internet forever.) It took a person on the outside - looking in - to see what we take for granted!

Posted by peiper     on 09/11/2009 at 10:52 AM   
Filed Under: • Blog Stuff • Editorials • FREEDOM • War On Terror •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - September 09, 2009

A Protest Attacked; A Blogger Threatened With Execution. all in the name of anti-fascists.

H/T The Brussels Journal

Readers, this is a lengthy but VERY worthy read. I have not posted all of it here so please see the link at the end.
Not at all surprising that the ppl who SHOUT about being anti-fascist and form groups calling themselves anti this or that, aren’t anti at all. All they are about is the stifling of any opinion not their own.  Call someone, anyone, a fascist and all argument is meant to be shut down.
Anyone critical of islam in any shape or form is, a fascist.  Fine. If that’s the case then I’m a died in the wool fascist.  These folks really fool no one and I’m pretty certain they know that as well.  Unfortunately they seem to have the numbers and the power to shut down anyone or any group who see things in a different light.  And the west has allowed this cancer to grow and to multiply at it’s core.  I greatly fear there will be an awful price to pay down the road.

So then, please read ALL of this. And read the threat at the end (link) and read the claim that this is now a muslim country.

From the desk of A. Millar
Wed, 2009-09-09 09:37

Emotions are running high in parts of Britain. Only a couple of weeks ago, rumors that a “Right wing” group was planning to march through the Bury Park region of Luton were spreading through the Muslim communities of the city. This turned out to be false. When no one turned up, the Muslim youths that had congregated attacked the police, throwing missiles and hurling abuse [video]. 50 extra police had to be drafted to contain the situation.

Last week, as it became known that the so-called English Defense League (EDL) was planning to protest in Birmingham, Mohammad Naseem, chairman of the Birmingham Central Mosque, told Muslims to “vent their feelings” at the EDL march, though he apparently believed that the police would separate the protestors and counter-protestors.

Dr. Naseem had also told his followers to form alliances with other counter-protestors, including with members of other religions and socialists. Such advice was ill advised, and probably unnecessary. Socialist – and especially Trotskyite – organizations have formed alliances with Islamist groups over the last few years, and have amassed tens of thousands of demonstrators across the country, in support of the terrorist organization Hamas. Even when they face no opposition, socialist leaders stoke the passions, and their protests almost invariably end in chaos. The police are often violently confronted. Retail property is smashed up. And Jews have been threatened and even assaulted.

The main socialist street protesting organization is Unite Against Fascism (UAF). Its supporters include Labour MPs, the head of the Conservative Party David Cameron, but its tactics and alliances (for example with extremist Muslims) have been questioned, even by those on the Left. David Toube lamented in the Leftwing Guardian not so long ago, that, “with its sectarianism, silence on antisemitism and blindness to Islamist Jew-hatred, Unite Against Fascism just isn’t up to the job.” Writing about the UAF’s recent demonstration outside of the “Whites only” British National Party’s annual festival, Lucy James, a research fellow at the Muslim-run Quilliam foundation, criticized the UAF’s tactics, saying that the “protesters soon became violent,” and that “protests become ineffective when they descend into thuggery and hooliganism.”

The English Defence League is composed of working class football fans. They are mostly – or perhaps they are all – White. They are roudy, wave flags and placards, and chant “England, England, England.” By most accounts, however, they are not violent. They also claim to oppose Islamic “extremists,” rather than all Muslims. At their recent Birmingham demonstration – held in the first week of September – one man was photographed holding a sign reading “No More Mosques,” which would seem less discriminating. However, others held signs reading “Say No To London Mega Mosque,” “Islamic Extremists Out: Make Britain Safe,” and “Jihadist Choudry! Leave OUR Children Alone.”

The “Jihadist Choudry” is Anjem Choudary, a prominent extremist Islamist, and head of Islam4UK – a reincarnation of the organization al-Muhajiroun, which was disbanded after British authorities threatened to ban it, following a number of high profile terrorist attacks and attempted attacks by its followers, including the so-called “shoe bomber” Richard Reid (who attempted to blow up an American Airlines jet) and Asif Hani, who blew up a café in Tel Aviv.

The UAF contends, however, that the EDL is composed of “racist and fascist thugs” whose core members are also members of the BNP. The UAF even turned up to an EDL demonstration in August with “Stop the fascist BNP” placards. For its part, the EDL carried placards with “We are not the BNP[,] and we are not racist” and “English Defence League[:] Black and White Unite.”

One photograph published in the Daily Mail also shows a group of EDL demonstrators at the recent Birmingham demonstration holding up a large Israeli flag – a statement, surely, against the anti-Semitism of the so-called “anti-fascist” coalition. The Israeli flag is routinely burned in pro-Hamas demonstrations in Britain, organized and dominated by the same Leftist and Islamist cadre as turned out to meet the EDL protest, and who burned the Union Jack in front of them.

Burning the British or Israeli flag is not an act of “anti-racism” or “anti-fascism.” It is provocative. (One need only imagine the reaction if EDL members had burned an Islamic flag.)

READ THE REST HERE

Posted by peiper     on 09/09/2009 at 01:20 PM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Editorials • Jack Booted Thugs • RoPMA • Terrorists • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner