Wednesday - April 27, 2016

File under WHAT THE HELL?: 9/11 Memorial Guards interrupt Choir students signing the National Anthem

I only wish I had nothing today. Because I think Nothing would be a better situation than this.  Choirs are proverbial for purity, honesty, and intelligence. When we talk of the scum of the day, what do we say? “He’s no choir boy.” So who has the nerve to hassle an actual choir?

Oh. That’s right.The people getting paid to guard the 9/11 memorial.

http://fox59.com/2016/04/26/middle-school-choir-ordered-to-stop-singing-national-anthem-at-911-memorial-gets-apology/

The Waynesville Middle School choir from Waynesville, N.C. was visiting New York City for a three-day trip last Wednesday when they stopped at the 9/11 memorial and decided to sing “The Star-Spangled Banner” out of respect for the dead.

They never got to finish.

Before the song was over, two National September 11 Memorial & Museum guards walked over and told the students they had to stop singing.

Some of these guards didn’t even remove their hats out of respect, as you can clearly see in the video.

So, why might you ask? So glad you did that! Let’s have a look see.

According to the 9/11 memorial’s website, groups wanting to perform must first obtain a permit.

What’s that you say? A Permit? Let’s find out more about this. And indeed, yours truly managed to dig another juicy fact up.... though it is from See-BS. But I think you’ll forgive me when I point out what this means…

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/school-choir-stopped-from-singing-national-anthem-at-911-memorial/

Groups wishing to perform at the Sept. 11 memorial are supposed to apply for a $35 permit. The North Carolina group did not.

So, in short this was about monies. That you must apply for a permit to have a performance on public/gubment managed land. Ok, I have my misgivings with the extent the permit system has gotten to but this is a fairly reasonable limitation. HOWEVER....

Let’s look at that wording again. Really, Really, REALLY look at it.

Groups wishing to perform at the Sept. 11 memorial are supposed to apply for a $35 permit. 

Is there ANY INDICATION WHATSOEVER- has ANYBODY ALLEGED AT ALL- that the Choir *WISHED TO PREFORM* at the memorial beforehand? NO, I THINK NOT. What they Came Wishing To DO was to visit the memorial and pay respects to the three thousand~ murdered innocents that this memorial pays tribute to.

“We just wanted to show respect to the people who lost their lives,” another student added.

In short, the time during which they could in any way have been construed as “wishing to preform” must have been after they got into the Memorial itself, with a astonishingly small window of opportunity to file for a permit, pay the money, or solicit profit, publicity, new students, or in short ANYTHING THAT WOULD USUALLY MOTIVATE PEOPLE TO PREFORM. Which is what the law was mostly meant to REGULATE, mind: use of public spaces for premeditated agendas, ESPECIALLY for profit ones (which is a reason why you don’t see as many advertisements filmed at the White House even when a certain Neo-Bolshevik is not in it). And of course to make sure that the government gets its’ fair share (such as it is) for it.

But Wait. There’s more.

According to the 9/11 memorial’s website, groups wanting to perform must first obtain a permit. The Waynesville students didn’t have one, but did get verbal permission from a security guard that day, music teacher Martha Weathers Brown said.

Maybe she’s lying, but the See-BS page also echoes this.

Chorus teacher Martha Brown told Fox that one security guard at the memorial plaza had given the students permission to sing, but another guard told them to stop.

So in short: this started about monies. That you cannot preform certain acts of reverence (like a memorial tune, which just googling “Dirge” will show is one of the oldest forms of human musical expression known) on your own time, for nonprofit without bowing down and kissing the ring of BigGov for the privilege before paying up. Even if doing so would require a rather obscene expenditure for the occasion and- in this case- precognitive abilities. Because some half-wit overwrought bureaucrat somewhere decided that something like THIS could be reasonably viewed as a Performance.

And on the other hand: this is about Gov mugs not being able to get their right hand and left hand on the same page, because if we assume the teacher is honest (which granted may be a question) this NEVER WOULD HAVE HAPPENED- the very thing that got the memorial staff wringing their panties out- unless ONE OF THEIR OWN hadn’t told them it was A-Ok. Only for a few others to go in and contradict it.

If there was one story to epitomize one reason to distrust government abilities and people- not the big, spectacular, horrifyingly damaging ones like Benghazi or Clinton’s email server, but the mundane, every day things- this would be one of them. It ENCAPSULATES just how greedy and incompetent this unfeeling blob that we pour trillions of dollars, many people, and immense trust in can be when given openings to get too big for its’ britches. I just wish it didn’t have to happen like this.

Which brings me to the final snippet.

Brown added that she understands why they were told to stop and used it as a teaching moment about respecting authority, showing students that these rules are in place to protect a sacred space from people who might want to be disrespectful.

I’m sorry, but WHAT?

How can you respect authority that Can’t even make up its’ own mind?

How is a permit based cash grab demand based on a Highly Tortured reading of the term “preform” going to protect this hallowed ground?

Let me emphasize that this land is not private property. This is a NATIONAL MEMORIAL. It belongs to WE THE PEOPLE. And if there is a reason for it to exist AT ALL it is to honor the memories and allow for mourning of the murdered dead (ya know, kinda like this!) And here we have tweedledee and tweedledum interrupting a CHOIR doing that and trying to state that their authority (which is again given in trust to them by WE THE PEOPLE) gives them the right to interpret bureaucratic minutiae like this.

I am not an anarchist. I am not even sure I agree with the saying that “The government that governs best governs least.” I do believe that governmental authority DOES play a highly important role in maintaining and preserving our freedoms and other things.

BUT I ALSO KNOW THAT THERE ARE FIELDS WHERE THE AUTHORITIES DO NOT AUTHORIZE IN, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED TO.

To quote the thing that empowers these authorities....

http://www.archives.gov/exhibits/charters/bill_of_rights_transcript.html

Amendment IX

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

So now the Memorial staff are saying they’re oh so very sorry, the guy reacted incorrectly, you’re welcome to come back..blah blah blah. Maybe they even mean it. But I think in many ways that it is less important than the fact that this happened at all. That some small cogs in the Federal juggernaut honestly thought that This of all things was worth worrying about or treading on their coffers. And the fact that even the teacher is telling them this is a lesson about “respecting authority.”

If we cannot go to lawfully mourn and remember our dead at the location dedicated Specifically to it- if we are forced to put what is essentially Deeply Inoffensive expression under scrutiny for fear that it will offend some bit of overwritten and invasive statutory or regulatory law- then I do believe we will have lost just a little bit of our freedom, and the terrorists who committed this massacre will have won a victory. A little victory, not the war, not something that gives them the Bag-tinted dystopia they want all over the world. But something that makes that victory Just A Little Bit Closer. And honestly if an invasive state keeps sticking its’ nose in and forcing us to heed it on this invasive level, sooner or later people might think that the change over to caliphate will be a matter of convenience.

What can I even say about this? I’ve written enough… so I’ll just ask that you please, Please read the Fox link. It has the video in all its’ nature. And consider letting our dear *employees* in the government know exactly what we think of this.

Posted by Turtler     on 04/27/2016 at 04:04 AM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Education • Government • Corruption and Greed • Homeland-Security • Jack Booted Thugs • Justice - LACK OF • Nanny State • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • War On Terror •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - February 03, 2015

Time To Move. Right NOW.

San Fran Cops Honor 10 Year Old Boy

Fairfield police last week recognized a 10-year-old boy and his father for courageous actions they took in September, police said.

Nathaniel Biggs was visiting the Cordelia branch of the Solano County Library on Sept. 15 when he saw a friend put a semi-automatic handgun into a backpack. When Nathaniel’s father Jason picked him up at the library, Nathaniel told his father about what he had seen, and Jason called Fairfield police.

Officers responded and located and detained Nathaniel’s friend without incident. Officers also located the handgun and a fixed blade knife and a Shuriken in the backpack of Nathaniel’s friend.

Police said because of the information provided by Jason and Nathaniel, police were able to recover an illegally possessed and stolen firearm.

On the one hand .... gosh, isn’t this great, kid helps stop the violence, because #kidslivesmatter. And so forth.

On the other hand ... little nanny state do gooder sells out his friend. How old do you think a 10 year old boy’s friends are anyway? 10? Maybe 12? Certainly not 24. Not with a backpack doing homework at the library. The friend was 11. With a gun, and a big knife, and a throwing star. Do you think that kid is still in jail? Hell no. And have you heard the expression “stitches for snitches”? Wasn’t it great of the police to publicly honor the kid and for the press to run the story with his name and photo? Just in case friend 11 didn’t figure out who outed him?
{ psssst, hey dad - what time is it? Time to move son, right the fug now! }

Says the police: Without their involvement, the firearm would not have been recovered and the child would have continued playing with it, possibly with disastrous results. This is a perfect example of what can be accomplished when alert citizens speak up and partner with the police department. Together we can make Fairfield a safer community!

Sorry to rain on your parade, but if the kid also had a big knife and a ninja star, there wasn’t any playing going on. Kid had a 3 layer plan to either fend off or deliver death. There’s a serious, serious problem here of some kind. Gangs, criminals, bullying, abuse, something. 

Posted by Drew458     on 02/03/2015 at 03:23 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Guns and Gun Control • Nanny State •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - November 14, 2014

a national food policy?

Shades of Stalin!

How we produce and consume food has a bigger impact on Americans’ well-being than any other human activity. The food industry is the largest sector of our economy; food touches everything from our health to the environment, climate change, economic inequality and the federal budget. Yet we have no food policy — no plan or agreed-upon principles — for managing American agriculture or the food system as a whole.

That must change.

I’d have to disagree. Why we allow people who think like this to continue drawing breath? THAT must change. Leave us alone!

If you like what ObamaCare is doing for health insurance, you will love what a federal program to control what we eat does for food, as it takes into account “the environment, climate change, economic inequality” et cetera ad nauseam.

A federal stranglehold on how food is produced, distributed, and consumed will allegedly guarantee the following:

● All Americans have access to healthful food;
● Farm policies are designed to support our public health and environmental objectives;
● Our food supply is free of toxic bacteria, chemicals and drugs;
● Production and marketing of our food are done transparently;
● The food industry pays a fair wage to those it employs;
● Food marketing sets children up for healthful lives by instilling in them a habit of eating real food;
● Animals are treated with compassion and attention to their well-being;
● The food system’s carbon footprint is reduced, and the amount of carbon sequestered on farmland is increased;
● The food system is sufficiently resilient to withstand the effects of climate change.

In this time of illegal immigration I think first we have to define ‘All Americans’. And what is this ‘our public health and evironmental objectives’? Define ‘toxic’? I don’t see people keeling over dead-right-there (DRT) from bad stuff in the food. As for the production of our food, it is already transparent. Anybody can take a tour of a slaughter house or processing center. I just bought 1/4 of a cow. 170# of various cuts, hamburger, tongue, liver, etc. I’ve taken two tours of the farm. I’ve been behind the scenes at the local butcher’s. I’ve been to pig farms, chicken farms. It’s already transparent. All you have to do is request a tour and go. As for the marketing? By definition that’s transparent. You see it on TV, you hear it on radio.

Food industry already pays a fair wage.

“…a habit of eating real food.” I’m certain I’ve never eaten imaginary food. Last time I saw that trick was in the movie ‘Hook’.

Animals are already treated with compassion.

Carbon footprint? I still can’t get anyone to show me a ‘carbon footprint.’

Climate has always changed. The ‘food system’ — whatever that means — has always survived.

This has been tried before, and it worked wonderfully, according to Walter Duranty of the New York Times. Joseph Stalin used it suppress resistance to collectivization in the Ukraine. This was called the Holodomor.

Only those with a vested interest in the status quo would argue against creating public policies with these goals.

If you like going to the supermarket and seeing the shelves covered in food that you want to eat at a price you can afford, you have a vested interest in the status quo. If you want to stand in line for a bowl of gluten-free government gruel, don’t bother putting up any resistance to endlessly encroaching liberalism.

National Food Policy worked for Stalin.

Liberal Masterminds Demand National Food Policy

Posted by Christopher     on 11/14/2014 at 04:49 PM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Commies • Daily Life • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Economics • FREEDOM • Government • Insanity • Jack Booted Thugs • Nanny State • Oppression •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - September 29, 2014

building a nanny state, one kiddie at a time. one classroom at a time.

The training for a nanny state starts very young.
One day, many of the 10 year olds mentioned in the article, will I guess be members of parliament. One may even become a prime minister.

No doubt a number of civil right lawyers among them too.

You’ve gotta be taught ( with nod to line from a song in South Pacific )

btw .... the term ‘to be told off’ has a slightly different meaning over here.  Or it’s used in a slightly different way. For example, being told they have the wrong lunch is being ‘told off’. 

Crisps are what Americans refer to as potato chips.

The packed lunch police aged just 10:

They check for unhealthy food in younger pupils’ meals - but parents are not happy

Hall Road Primary Academy in Hull has told Year 6 to check pupils’ dinners
10 and 11-year-olds inspect children’s lunchboxes for crisps and chocolate
Furious parents have launched a petition against the lunch police scheme
Some children are not eating because they are afraid of being told off

By Daily Mail Reporter

A primary school has appointed 10-year-olds as ‘packed lunch police’ with the power to inspect the food younger pupils bring to school – and even issue warnings if it is unhealthy.

Parents have started a petition against the scheme after receiving a letter telling them to pack only healthy items.

Brooke Johnson, 34, whose children Charlee, seven, and Riley, five, are pupils, said: ‘It’s crackers. I decide what my children eat for lunch, not a 10 or 11-year-old.’

The letter from Hall Road Primary Academy in Hull states: ‘Year 6 will be packed lunch police and will be checking what children have in their lunches, with warning slips given if lunches do not meet our standards and awards for those that do.

‘Your packed lunch may include bread, pasta, crackers, rice, wraps, meat, cheese, fish, small yoghurt, fruit and vegetables. In order to be a healthy school, your packed lunch may not include crisps, chocolate spread, fizzy drink/energy drinks or food that needs heating up, eg micro chips.’

All pupils in the first three years of primary education have been provided with free school meals from this month – partly to stop parents giving children unhealthy food. But parents can still send their children with a packed lunch if they wish.

Miss Johnson, who started the petition, added: ‘My little girl came home from school starving because she hadn’t dared open her lunchbox.

‘She knew I had packed her sandwiches, crisps, a sausage roll, a small chocolate bar and apple juice.

‘I don’t see why she should risk being given one of these warning slips by another child just for eating her packed lunch. It’s ridiculous.

‘If these kids are inspecting my children’s sandwich fillings, how can I be sure they are washing their hands after going to the toilet and aren’t picking their noses? One six-year-old boy was given a warning slip just for having a Kellogg’s cereal bar.’

But the icing on the cake is this quote from the headmistress. Which I think is a gross exaggeration if it isn’t a downright lie.

Headmistress Caroline Holliday said: ‘This healthy-eating campaign has been driven and implemented by our children themselves.’

Yeah. Sure it is. Cos as we all know well, kids that age aren’t interested in playtime. They want to study politically approved correct diets.

mail on line

Posted by peiper     on 09/29/2014 at 05:56 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - November 21, 2013

Food police

Mom fined $10 by daycare for packing ‘unhealthy’ lunch

Unhealthy?

lunch of leftover roast beef, carrots, potatoes, an orange and milk.

Sounds healthy to me. This isn’t even a gov’t school. It’s a private daycare. Oh, she left a grain dish out. I’m sure the kids had plenty of grains in their breakfast cereal. One meal does NOT show the kids’ entire diet. That was a very healthy lunch. Healthier than any lunch I ever packed: PB&J, applesauce, cookies or cheese and crackers.

Posted by Christopher     on 11/21/2013 at 10:22 AM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Family • Nanny State •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - October 08, 2013

they ain’t got the balls

Officials at Weber Middle School in Port Washington are worried that students are getting hurt during recess. Thus, they have instituted a ban on footballs, baseballs, lacrosse balls, or anything that might hurt someone on school grounds.

Tossing a football during recess has long seemed to be a rite of passage for kids in the school community.

“I think we need the soccer balls, the footballs and everything, so we can have some fun,” one student said.

But the students will have no such option anymore. They were just informed that during recess, football is out and Nerf ball is in. Hard soccer balls have been banned, along with baseballs and lacrosse balls, rough games of tag, or cartwheels unless supervised by a coach.

Students were not thrilled about the news.

Port Washington schools Supt. Kathleen Maloney said the change in policy is warranted due to a rash of playground injuries.

“Some of these injuries can unintentionally become very serious, so we want to make sure our children have fun, but are also protected,” Maloney said.

Without helmets and pads, children are much more susceptible to getting hurt, experts said.

...

Several districts from outside Long Island are already contacting Nassau County educators. Soon, additional schools may be jumping on the banning balls bandwagon.

The Port Washington district said the softer foam balls put students in the best situation to cut down the chance of getting injured.

I think they should just wrap your child in thick, organically grown, pesticide and peanut free cotton batting, and set them in rows in a nice quiet dim room with indirect lighting. That will make the indoctrination sessions easier too. It’s for their own good after all.

Posted by Drew458     on 10/08/2013 at 11:13 AM   
Filed Under: • Education • Nanny State •  
• Comments (7) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - September 30, 2013

A ‘Must Read’ article…

I seriously urge everybody to just say ‘NO!’ to ObamaCare. Don’t participate. Don’t sign up. Don’t pay any fines or fees. Don’t even file tax returns if they ask about your health insurance.

Here’s that ‘must read’ article.

Posted by Christopher     on 09/30/2013 at 07:55 AM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Commies • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Government • Health-Medicine • Jack Booted Thugs • Nanny State • Obama, The One • Tyrants and Dictators •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - August 07, 2013

Get your drone hunting license!

This is too good!

Deer Trail, a small Colorado town, is considering an ordinance that would allow its residents to hunt for federal drones and shoot them down.

The ordinance states, “the Town of Deer Trail shall issue a reward of $100 to any shooter who presents a valid hunting license and the following identifiable parts of an unmanned aerial vehicle whose markings and configuration are consistent with those used on any similar craft known to be owned or operated by the United States federal government.”

If passed by the town board, Deer Trail would charge $25 for drone hunting licenses and they would be valid for one year.

The Feds and Obama better wake up. The country is in almost total revolt over ObamaCare, drones, NSA spying, Moochelle’s school lunches, etc. 

Posted by Christopher     on 08/07/2013 at 07:28 PM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Government • Corruption and Greed • Nanny State • Obama, The One •  
• Comments (5) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - March 26, 2013

UK Nanny State Takes The Prize

Because a pointy flapjack can be dangerous. And someone could put an eye out.

I kid you not.  Even more amazing is that some Brits, even those at ‘Elf & Safety, find this ban to be just a bit too much. Mind blowing, isn’t that? Health & Safety has actual limits, and finds some things - anything, even - to be too restrictive? I’m agog.

A school’s decision to ban triangular flapjacks after a pupil was hurt has been labelled “half-baked” by the Health and Safety Executive.

It follows an incident at Castle View School in Canvey Island, Essex, when a boy was hit in the face by a flapjack.

Catering staff at the school have been told only to serve square or rectangular flapjacks.

The school said the “isolated accident” had led to a review of “the texture and shape of the flapjacks” provided.

A spokesman for the Health and Safety Executive said: “We often come across half-baked decisions taken in the name of health and safety, but this one takes the biscuit.

“The real issue isn’t what shape the flapjacks are, but the fact that pupils are throwing them at each other - and that’s a matter of discipline, and has got nothing to do with health and safety as we know it.

Granted, what they call a flapjack is something completely different that what we call a flapjack. Where ours are light and fluffy yet filling tasty pancakes, theirs are sticky leaden wedges made from raw oats, bird seed, and syrup. Maybe with some dessicated old fruit thrown in, then baked into weapons-grade firmness in the oven. You probably could put an eye out. Certainly they’d do a number on your fillings.

h/t to Stoaty

Posted by Drew458     on 03/26/2013 at 09:29 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - February 12, 2013

Closing That Inconvenient Loophole, Part Two

The U.S. government spent about $2.2 billion last year to provide phones to low-income Americans, but a Wall Street Journal review of the program shows that a large number of those who received the phones haven’t proved they are eligible to receive them.

The Lifeline program—begun in 1984 to ensure that poor people aren’t cut off from jobs, families and emergency services—is funded by charges that appear on the monthly bills of every landline and wireless-phone customer. Payouts under the program have shot up from $819 million in 2008, as more wireless carriers have persuaded regulators to let them offer the service.

Suspecting that many of the new subscribers were ineligible, the Federal Communications Commission tightened the rules last year and required carriers to verify that existing subscribers were eligible. The agency estimated 15% of users would be weeded out, but far more were dropped.

A review of five top recipients of Lifeline support conducted by the FCC for the Journal showed that 41% of their more than six million subscribers either couldn’t demonstrate their eligibility or didn’t respond to requests for certification.

The program, which is administered by the nonprofit Universal Service Administrative Co., has grown rapidly as wireless carriers persuaded regulators to let people use the program for cellphone service. It pays carriers $9.25 a customer per month toward free or discounted wireless service.

Americans pay an average of $2.50 a month per household to fund a number of subsidized communications programs, including Lifeline.
...
Until last year, FCC rules didn’t require carriers to certify to the FCC that subscribers were eligible. Consumers could self-certify, and in many states documentation wasn’t required.

Carriers said many of the disqualified subscribers simply didn’t reply when asked to prove their eligibility. They also said the FCC rules on self-certification, and the absence of a national database of participants, made it hard to keep ineligible people from signing up.

No good deed goes unpunished? Nah. This was a BS idea from the get go. It would have been easier to allow a one time $40 charge on the EBT to get a phone, and then an extra $10/mo for purchasing minutes. At least that way the only people getting the phones would be those already on the dole. But wait; having to flash you EBT would almost be like asking for ID when you vote. Therefore it’s raaaacis!!

Posted by Drew458     on 02/12/2013 at 12:18 PM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Saturday - January 05, 2013

comrades in labour party will tell ppl how and what to eat. and it’s all for the kiddies.

This is another one of those, I must share before going on to other things.

I have no doubt that things loaded with sugars and salts etc. can be overdone. Perhaps not even healthy.  But shouldn’t what you feed your children for breakfast be up to you?  As I think about this, and not being a fan of either product or even a parent, I also wonder if the govt. or in this case a political party (Labour), should be able to TELL people what to consume.  Or tell them what to feed their kids. OK, knee jerk reaction is of course hell no.  Then what about parents who are clueless or maybe don’t believe the warnings and continue to give kids this product?  Are they bad parents?

Any way we view this, I can not think but this is a very bad idea.  What’s next if they get this through?  There are loads of things out there that aren’t good for us. They may be okay but taken to extreme ... not so good.  Forget things like tobacco and drugs.  I am only referring to ..... foods. 

Apparently some talking heads here have discovered that it is not only America that is way overweight (we are???)but there is a serious weight problem here in the UK, which is having a bed affect not only on the health of the public and especially, the kiddies.  Oh no.  It’s also costing the economy and the National Health Service millions, to treat weight related illness.  Something they say, must be done.

And so enter politicians and govt. and legislation and the outlawing or at least the modification of some favorite foods.  I guess parents just are not listening to the folks who know all things. 

Make high levels of fat, sugar and salt in children’s food ILLEGAL, say Labour

By James Chapman

Labour is to propose new legal limits on levels of fat, sugar and salt in children’s food.

Shadow health secretary Andy Burnham will say urgent action must be considered to tackle spiralling levels of obesity.

One option to be considered in the party’s public policy health review is to outlaw products with more than a maximum level of fat, sugar and salt which are targeted at children to try to reverse the trend.

A consultation paper identifies a number of breakfast cereals containing more than 30 per cent sugar according to research by Which?, including Kellogg’s Frosties, with 37.0g of sugar per 100g and Tesco Choco Snaps with 36.1g per 100g.

The latest research by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), shows that in the UK, 26.6 per cent of girls and 22.7 per cent of boys are now considered ‘obese’.

Meanwhile, the National Child Measurement Programme last month reported that one-third of children in England are either overweight or obese by the time they leave primary school. Overweight children are at a greater risk of developing diabetes and cancer.

It is clear that the current voluntary approach is not working.

Mr Burnham said: ‘The findings of the OECD should shock us out of our complacency.  We need to open our minds to new approaches in tackling child obesity.

‘Labour wants to lead this debate. That is why we are asking the public and experts if new limits for sugar, fats and salts would be the right approach. Like all parents, I have bought products like cereals and fruit drinks, marketed as more healthy, that contained higher sugar levels than expected. I don’t think that any parent would be comfortable with their child eating something that is 40 per cent sugar.

Mr Burnham has begun consulting with the public and experts on the issue, and is considering proposing a 30 per cent cap on sugar in cereals.

Professor Gabriel Scally, former regional director of public health at the Department of Health, said: ‘The continued rise in childhood obesity is an urgent call to action and must not be ignored.

‘I applaud the Labour Party for tackling the issue of the foodstuffs filling our children with the empty calories that fuel obesity. Helping parents protect and promote the future health of our children is exactly what we need to be doing.’

Paul Wheeler, of Kellogg’s, said: ‘Frosties has been on sale for more than 60 years and by now we think people know there’s sugar in them - we’re not hiding it.

‘The problem with ideas like this is they want an easy, silver bullet solution to what is a very difficult issue. It all boils down to the fact we believe parents, and not the government, should choose what their kids eat.’

A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘By working with industry through the Responsibility Deal we have helped to reduce fat, sugar and salt in foods.

‘There is now less salt in the food we buy, companies are cutting and capping calories and artificial trans fats are being widely taken out of food.’

The spokesman added: ‘We are working to reduce the amount of salt in food further, cut saturated fat consumption and we are exploring how to promote healthier food choices more widely. We also want more businesses making pledges so we get bigger results.’

source

Sure, cut the salt and the sugar so we can put it back in at home. 

Over time I have noticed the odd food here and there doesn’t taste as good as I remember it.  Hadn’t occurred to me till recently, as I started looking at the labels more, that ingredients are being reduced, along with the weights and measures. Not the price though.

Posted by peiper     on 01/05/2013 at 12:26 PM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Commies • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Nanny State •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - June 06, 2012

Firms face compulsory quotas if they don’t put women in top jobs

A nice socialist solution?
Mr. Cable as you’d guess, is a left winger and this sort of thing is dear to his heart.
Can you imagine setting aside a prescribed number in a case like this to be able to check the pc boxes.
Well, the new head of state in France is working on it. His declared goal of a cabinet made up of 50% female has been reached. Not my concern and good for them. But I can’t help but wonder as others do, what sort of qualifications do they come to the job with? Or was the qualification, female?

Mr. Cable and a few friends are most concerned that there aren’t enough ladies on the boards of companies. Not demeaning women in any way but, how many are there who want to but can’t because evil men are keeping them out?  Not saying women haven’t been unfairly treated many times in the job market. But Cable and crew are assuming the companies are some sort of anti female conspiracy trying to keep women out. So, his solution is to arbitrarily fix a number to be grafted onto businesses with boards.
Affirmative action anyone? 

More then anything else however, this reminds me of a brainless lefty suggestion by a member of the previous govt. Some of you regulars might recall my post on the subject of, fishing.  Think it’s a joke? Think again.

A few years ago it was said that the famed fishing rivers of England were enjoyed by too many white middle aged men. So the brainless twits on the left thought it would be a good idea to make fishing and fishing lessons available.
To muslim women.  Who it was found, were not to be found enjoying England’s fishing streams and rivers or wherever it was fish go to relax.

I always thought it was my local Tesco, since that’s where my wife had always caught the fish she brought home.
Needless to say, the plan went nowhere. But that anyone thought it was something worthy of a govt. program says a lot about the loons.

Firms face compulsory quotas if they don’t put women in top jobs insists Vince Cable

By JAMES CHAPMAN
PUBLISHED: 22:07, 4 June 2012 | UPDATED: 22:07, 4 June 2012-06-06
Businesses could be hit with compulsory quotas to increase the number of women on boards unless they raise the number voluntarily said Vince Cable.
The Business Secretary said he was ready to introduce legal targets if firms had failed to ensure a quarter of executives at board level were female by 2015.
He also suggested that if he were prime minister, half of the Cabinet would be women.
Mr Cable said there were encouraging signs that firms were beginning to heed calls for gender equality – revealing figures suggesting that in the past three months, half of new appointments to FTSE company boards have been women.

He said he planned to ‘name and shame’ companies that fail to make further progress. One in ten of Britain’s biggest firms still has all-male boards.
‘It’s very, very important that women are there in numbers,’ Mr Cable said.

‘Our objective is to get a quarter of all board membership being women by 2015.
‘Our current approach, which is trying to change the culture, trying to name and shame, I think will work. If it doesn’t, we can look at things like quotas.
‘There is a body called the Financial Reporting Council that requires companies to declare publicly what they do.
‘So companies will be in the future publicly identified and there will then be a role for me to go out and say publicly, “This is a disgrace, you should change your behaviour”.’
Asked whether he woul0d introduce quotas if that approach failed to deliver the target figures, the Business Secretary said: ‘I would, yes. I think that’s a perfectly legitimate last resort. But I think the current approach that we have adopted is beginning to produce serious results, so let’s give it a chance.’

NOW HERE’S WHERE THINGS PICK UP AND GET REALLY INTERESTING. Mr Cable is not the lone voice on the subject. Oh no.
There is this super body of unwanted gas bags.

The EU has announced a consultation on how to increase women’s presence on corporate boards, warning that progress towards equality is too slow.
Mandatory quotas are being threatened if member states fail to make sufficient progress.

The EU’s Justice Commissioner, Viviane Reding, has warned that on current rates of change, it will take more than 40 years for women to hold 40 per cent of board positions in Europe’s publicly traded companies.
In Britain, companies are working towards a voluntary target to increase the percentage of women on FTSE 100 boards to 25 per cent, up from 12.5 per cent last year. But business leaders have warned against compulsory quotas.

On BBC Radio 4’s Woman’s Hour the Business Secretary also took a swipe at David Cameron’s failure to meet an aspiration that a third of his ministers should be women. There are five women – all Conservative – in the Cabinet.

In a reference to the new French president’s decision to make half of his top team female, Mr Cable said: ‘If I ever finish up in Mr Cameron’s job, and who knows what could happen, you might well get a Francois Hollande moment.’
Meanwhile, Tory MP Peter Bone demanded that Vince Cable be sacked from the Cabinet after it emerged that the Business Secretary was in contact with Labour to discuss a possible alliance following the next election.

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 06/06/2012 at 01:12 PM   
Filed Under: • Big Brother • Big Business • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • DIVERSITY BS • Nanny State •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - April 13, 2012

elf ‘n’ safety and a vote against competition

Were there any rules like this when we were kids in the olden times?

Two volunteer football coaches have been suspended – for allowing kids to play competitively against each other.

A couple of volunteer coaches who spend hours of their time running a junior league, are to be taken to task and have been ordered to stop their activity, after receiving a complaint.  That’s how it was reported. A complaint. I take that as meaning just one goof ball wasn’t happy but hey. That’s all it takes is one.
However, just to get it straight and be fair it should be explained that these miscreants did violate a very important rule.

They breached regs which clearly state that there is a ban on kiddies under the age of 11, from taking part in competitive matches, as per the Central Wales Football Assoc.
Here’s a quote for ya BMEWS.

To protect the losing side, rules dictate that teams belonging to the league must play each other on a friendly basis, with no league table or points being recorded.
In England, the Football Association imposes a similar rule banning under-eights from playing competitive league and cup games.

The coaches, who commit around 1,000 hours a year to organising junior football, were accused of flouting anti-competition rules by organising an additional ‘festival of football’ tournament this season.

The coaches’ suspension takes effect from next year.

Now then, is it any surprise to anyone that you will read the following in this morning’s Daily Mail.  The story above is the sort of thing that leads to the article below.  And just like Drew’s story posted about the New Hampshire gun owner and comments made asking what this world was coming to, well take a look. It’s come to this and it is not the first time in the last year we have read about this kind of lunacy. What makes it so miserable and so dangerous is, there are authorities in power who believe in this kind of thing.  And enforce it against all logic.

25 firemen who scrambled to rescue a seagull from a 3ft-deep pond refused to wade in because of regulations - leaving it to Joe Public to save the bird

· Emergency crews forced to watch as bird centre volunteer dons waders and rescues bird from waist deep waters
· Health and safety rules prevented firefighters from risking their lives in the shallow pond
· It is the latest in a string of incidents in which health and safety rules have left 999 crews powerless during an emergency
By ELEANOR HARDING and MARK DUELL

It looked like a major emergency – 25 firemen standing at the water’s edge assessing the life-threatening situation before them.
Stranded 200ft out and struggling for survival was the victim they had come to rescue...a seagull.

And if that scenario were not ludicrous enough, there was worse to come.
The firemen were then barred from going into the 3ft-deep water because it was judged to be a health and safety risk.
As crews from five fire engines stood beside the pond in South London for up to an hour, it fell to a member of the public to pull on his waders and rescue the bird, which was caught up in a plastic bag.

Ted Burden, who watched the seagull incident unfold, said: ‘The bird must have been in the water for the best part of an hour by the time he was rescued.
‘The plastic bag was caught right around his foot and he was gradually sinking.
‘It was a bit ridiculous really. Five fire crews turned up, but because of protocols they couldn’t go into the water. The water was not really any more than waist deep.

‘The gull was rescued just in time. When their feathers become too waterlogged, they get hypothermic and drown.
‘Luckily the gull escaped uninjured. He was just a bit shocked.’

The firemen attended Carshalton Ponds in South London at 2pm on Saturday, responding to a call from the RSPCA, which had been contacted by a passer-by.
Crews arrived from Sutton, Wallington and Croydon fire stations. There were no police or health and safety officers present.

After a health-and-safety assessment it was decided not to allow the trained rescuers to enter the water, as it would put their lives at risk.
A London Fire Brigade spokesman defended the numbers of firemen sent out, saying it was a standard response to an animal being in trouble.
But she added: ‘We are not willing to put the lives of our firefighters at risk for the sake of a seagull.

Defies logic. Why is it standard procedure to send out all those guys if three feet of water in a pond is life threatening, to a group trained in safety and saving lives?  Read the entire article. Authorities knew from the get go it was a bird in trouble. But apparently it might not have mattered if it was a person as we know by now.

‘Our firefighters get called out to lots of different incidents and never know what they’re going to find when they get there.
‘At any incident we need to make sure we have enough staff on hand in case something goes wrong and to ensure that our firefighters, and the public, are safe at all times.’
The fire service later stated that not all the crews had remained at the scene for an hour.
However, a brigade source said firemen were frustrated by the strict protocols they had to follow, which sometimes did not fit the real situations they had to deal with.
The source added: ‘Although we have the facilities to effect a rescue, we are not allowed to do it for a bird. There is no leeway.’

more from the story

England can thank its lucky star it wasn’t this generation of wimps in charge in 1940. 

Bet there are some Germans who wish they had been.

Posted by peiper     on 04/13/2012 at 04:40 AM   
Filed Under: • CULTURE IN DECLINE • Daily Life • Nanny State •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - March 22, 2012

It’s For Their Own Good

Teachers are banning schoolkids from having best pals — so they don’t get upset by fall-outs. Instead, the primary pupils are being encouraged to play in large groups.

Educational psychologist Gaynor Sbuttoni said the policy has been used at schools in Kingston, South West London, and Surrey. She added: “I have noticed that teachers tell children they shouldn’t have a best friend and that everyone should play together.

“They are doing it because they want to save the child the pain of splitting up from their best friend. But it is natural for some children to want a best friend. If they break up, they have to feel the pain because they’re learning to deal with it.”

Russell Hobby, of the National Association of Head Teachers, confirmed some schools were adopting best-friend bans. He said: “I don’t think it is widespread but it is clearly happening. It seems bizarre.

“I don’t see how you can stop people from forming close friendships. We make and lose friends throughout our lives.” The Campaign for Real Education, which wants more parental choice in state education, said the “ridiculous” policy was robbing children of their childhood.

Because it’s your right to never feel emotional pain, disappointment, or even the least inconvenience in life. And it’s for the chiiiildren, so that makes it okay. Right?

And in 15 years when they find they’ve raised a generation of amoral heartless robots who kill without the slightest compulsion, they’ll wonder why. Breaking down the culture by destroying the family unit, the sanctity of marriage and relationships, and even the emotional bonding between children is all part of the Marxist plan. The only affection allowed is towards the state.

Posted by Drew458     on 03/22/2012 at 11:30 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • UK •  
• Comments (4) • 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