Wednesday - June 18, 2008

Girl, 15, torched in gruesome attack by another girl.

This kind of thing is beyond words.  We really don’t expect this sort of thing from girls. Or anyway, we didn’t used to. Says something that I’m not surprised.

Police have a “suspect.” Wonder if arrested and identified, what her ‘penalty’ might be.  Ya know, they now have Super ASBOS. Wonder if she’ll get one of those.  The perp here should I believe forfit any claim to “human or civil rights” And a fitting punishment would be to do the same to her.  The punisment should damn well fit the crime.

Girl, 15, torched in gruesome attack by love rival who told her ‘You won’t be pretty anymore’
Last updated at 8:57 PM on 17th June 2008

A 15-year-old girl was set on fire using white spirit in a street ambush by a love rival who was jealous over a kiss.

Schoolfriends have said she turned up to a meet a friend when her attacker allegedly leapt from the bushes and doused her in the highly flammable liquid hidden in a Coca-Cola bottle.

Police say that as she flicked a lighter, the attacker said: ‘You won’t look pretty anymore.’

Resident Carly Costin rushed to the scene in Eltham, South-East London, with partner Jamie Kelsey after they heard the screams from their garden on Sunday afternoon.

‘It wasn’t a normal scream. It was a chilling, horrible sound like something from a horror movie,’ the mother-of-one said.

She saw the victim writhing in agony as her hair blazed until it was all gone.

‘The skin on the left side of her face was peeling off. She looked like she had been burnt under a grill.

Her T-shirt and bra had melted and her skin was bubbling,’ Ms Costin told told the Sun newspaper.

Mr Kelsey eventually managed to beat out the flames with a towel from the couple’s washing line.

The 15-year-old is in a ‘critical but stable’ condition in a specialist burns unit at Broomfield Hospital, Chelmsford, Essex.

One friend, who asked not to be named, said: ‘She was set up. It’s disgusting.

‘She was with two girls. One of them set her up and the other girl was innocent and had no idea what was about to happen.

‘The one who set her up phoned her to come and meet them and go to the shops, but the attacker was waiting.

‘She jumped out of the bushes and attacked her, spraying the liquid on her from a plastic bottle.

‘It was white spirit that she sprayed on her and then she lit it. She was set on fire.’

She added: ‘This is all over nothing. I’ve been told the girl who attacked her thought she had kissed or even slept with her boyfriend and was getting her back for it.’

Police say the attacker was with a baby in a pram at the time of the attack, and clearly intended to leave her victim permanently disfigured.

They have not yet confirmed the victim’s name.

A 19-year-old woman is being held on suspicion of attempted murder.
http://tinyurl.com/64wo46

Posted by Drew458     on 06/18/2008 at 12:29 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • UK •  
• Comments (8) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

On the run? Count it as time served, convicts told.  (more moonbat thinking)

What’ll they think of next?  Is this total and absolute stupidity er what? Great way to fight crime huh?

Be much interested to read what you folks think about this. Not that it matters to the powers that be but this really is bizarre. Do they stay up nights thinking this stuff up? Or does it come suddenly like a flas of lightening?

By James Slack
Last updated at 1:53 AM on 18th June 2008

Prisoners who go on the run could have the time cut from their sentence, internal Government papers revealed last night.

Convicts will be able to count both the day they absconded and the day they were caught as time spent behind bars.

A criminal could walk out of an open jail in the morning and hand himself in the next day, and both days would count as time served.

The Tories accused the Government of ‘rewarding bad behaviour’.

If an inmate is released in error by a prison governor, he could have all the time spent at large counted as if he had been inside, according to the new Prison Service rules.

This applies if he is unlawfully freed for as much as a quarter of his sentence and in ‘very exceptional circumstances’ even longer.

As prisoners are automatically released after half their sentence, this could mean a criminal could serve as little as one quarter or less of his term.

Prisoners can cite holding down a job or looking after their children as reasons to get a full discount.

The burden of proof is on the governor to show the prisoner knew he was supposed to be in prison.

It also emerged last night that there are 110 escaped or absconded prisoners at large. The average time spent on the run is three years - one convict is still at large after five years.

There are 161 criminals on the run who have not responded after being recalled from early release on End of Custody Licence - a controversial measure to ease overcrowding.

Last year, 510 prisoners absconded from open prisons.

Escapees and absconders who are caught usually do not face any action, as a mountain of paperwork is needed to secure a conviction.

The Tory justice spokesman, Nick Herbert, said: ‘Only this Government could reward prisoners by giving time off for bad behaviour.

‘We know that Ministers are desperate to reduce the prison population, but even by their standards of incompetence this latest policy is completely absurd.’

The revelations came as Justice Secretary Jack Straw admitted there will be no blanket ban on granting bail to murderers - despite a Government promise to review the law.

The Daily Mail revealed yesterday, that Whitehall lawyers have ruled such a move would be a breach of a suspected killer’s ‘human rights’.

The new rules on escaped and absconded prisoners are set out in a long instruction note to governors.

A Prison Service spokesman said: ‘A period of absence will not be treated as part of the sentence served, unless there are exceptional circumstances.’
http://tinyurl.com/3wcvo6

Posted by Drew458     on 06/18/2008 at 12:09 PM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Judges-Courts-Lawyers • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

FRANCE WANTS TO WHAT ? GOTTA BE A BAD JOKE. BRITS NOT LAFFING.

Somethin’ just a bit different.

France set to hijack our Royal Navy to create a European military force
By Benedict Brogan Last updated at 11:11 AM on 18th June 2008

The Royal Navy could have to hand over one of its aircraft carriers to Brussels under plans for a joint European naval fleet.

French politicians said yesterday that Gordon Brown is negotiating a scheme that would mean an end to the centuries-old independence of Nelson’s ‘Senior Service’.

The revelation is likely to embarrass Mr Brown, who is already under fire for failing to pull the plug on the European constitution.

The French have been pressing for the creation of a joint European military force to match the might of U.S. forces for years.

The defence co-operation project, proposed by French president Nicolas Sarkozy, is expected to be a centre-piece of the French presidency of the EU, which begins in July.

It would see a British aircraft carrier become a permanent part of an EU naval force, along with ships from other countries.

An aide to French defence minister Herve Morin said negotiations with Britain were well advanced on creating a ‘European naval group’.

But the fact it is France leading the push for an EU defence force will be seen by many as a direct threat to Britain’s military independence.

Tory defence spokesman Dr Liam Fox said: ‘The EU’s military ambitions know no bounds. If they think the Royal Navy will sail under the EU flag they had better think again.

‘How is it supposed to work? Are we supposed to say, “Sorry, it’s our turn to use the aircraft carrier”? It’s ridiculous.

‘The whole concept of sharing naval assets with any other country is sheer nonsense. The idea of the Royal Navy flying the EU flag makes a mockery of centuries of British naval tradition.’

Work is also under way to create a fleet of A400M military aircraft which would be available to EU members on a timeshare basis.

The French are also looking to introduce military exchanges that would, for example, allow Polish officers to have some of their training in France, helping to create a more integrated European military culture.

In Berlin, a government spokesman said Germany would give the plans serious consideration.

‘We’ll have to wait and see what sort of proposals the French pres-idency unveils,’ he said.

France and Britain have been looking for ways to increase military cooperation for at least a decade and are working on creating a joint fleet of helicopters for deployment in Afghanistan.

The MoD is pursuing talks with the French in part because it is facing budget pressures that are forcing it to share costs.

The Government is expected to give the go-ahead this week for the Royal Navy’s two new aircraft carriers as part of an Anglo-French project.

The French are happy to cooperate because they are also under pressure to spend less.

Mr Sarkozy said yesterday that he planned to create a smaller French army which is better equipped to respond to modern day threats and announced plans to cut more than 50,000 military posts, reducing it to 225,000 personnel.

http://tinyurl.com/3vqjaj

Posted by Drew458     on 06/18/2008 at 11:38 AM   
Filed Under: • Insanity • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Osama bin Laden’s “right-hand man in Europe”, has been released from jail.

Abu Qatada: Islamic cleric is released from jail
By Duncan Gardham and Gordon Rayner
Last Updated: 5:59AM BST 18/06/2008

Abu Qatada, the radical Islamic cleric described as Osama bin Laden’s “right-hand man in Europe”, has been released from jail after a judge ruled that there were no grounds to keep him in prison.

The decision to allow him to return to his home in London – where he will receive around £1,000 per month in state benefits – made a mockery of the government’s promise to crack down on terror suspects, and embarrassed the Home Office, which had pledged to deport Qatada to Jordan to face terror charges.

The Home Secretary, Jacqui Smith, said she was “extremely disappointed” at the court’s decision to bail Qatada, while the Conservatives branded the decision “offensive”.

Mr Justice Mitting signed an order to release Qatada on bail, with strict conditions, following an earlier Court of Appeal decision to refuse his deportation on the grounds that it would breach human rights law.

The judge was sitting at the Special Immigration Appeals Commission (SIAC) in London, the same court which had previously described Qatada as “a truly dangerous individual” who was “heavily involved, indeed at the centre of terrorist activities associated with al-Qa’eda”.

But because Qatada has never been convicted of a criminal offence in the UK, and because he cannot be deported, the judge ruled that he had to be freed pending a last-ditch attempt by the Home Office to have the deportation ruling overturned in the House of Lords.

After being freed from HMP Long Lartin in Worcestershire he is scheduled to be driven to Acton in West London where he must spend at least 22 hours a day at home, wearing an electronic tag.

Police are expected to maintain a constant presence outside Qatada’s home to protect him from vigilante attacks, at an annual cost of tens of thousands of pounds.

The taxpayer will also fund at least £12,000 per year in benefits for Qatada, his wife and five children, even though Qatada was once found to have £170,000 in cash in his possession when he was stopped by police.

Qatada, 47, has been accused of helping to inspire the September 11 attacks after videos of his sermons were found in the flat used by three of the hijackers, including their leader Mohammed Atta.

He is wanted in his native Jordan for allegedly plotting a series of bomb attacks in Amman in 1998 and for providing finance and advice to terrorists planning a series of explosions there on Millennium night.

Although he has been convicted in his absence, he had been promised a retrial, and in 2005 the government secured an agreement with Jordan that returned terror suspects would not be tortured and would be given a fair trial. However, the much-trumpeted Memorandum of Understanding fell at the first hurdle after the Appeal Court judges said evidence against him might have been obtained through torture.

Even if the government is successful in its appeal to the Law Lords, Qatada could take his case to the European Court on the grounds that deportation would breach his right to a fair trial under the European Convention on Human Rights.

It leaves the government’s strategy for deporting terror suspects in tatters, as 11 other suspects awaiting deportation hearings, who include Jordanians and Algerians, are likely to rely on the ruling to keep them in Britain.

Despite Tony Blair’s promise in the aftermath of the suicide bombings on July 7, 2005 that “the rules of the game have changed”, no terror suspects have yet been forcibly removed from the country.

Last night Jacqui Smith said: “The Government’s priority is to protect public safety and national security and we will take all steps necessary to do so.

“I am extremely disappointed that the courts have granted Abu Qatada bail, albeit with very strict conditions. I am appealing to the House of Lords to reverse the decision that it is not safe to deport Qatada and the other Jordanian cases.”

There’s more. If interested here’s a link:  >> http://tinyurl.com/4dedma

Posted by Drew458     on 06/18/2008 at 02:19 AM   
Filed Under: • RoPMA • Stoopid-People • Terrorists • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - June 17, 2008

fell off stepladder sues , for £50,000 over ‘inadequate training’ .  I couldn’t make this up.

I had no intention of booting as early as I have, but I just couldn’t ignore this. First, I think the old bastard is a bloody liar!  Go ahead fart face. Sue me.
This sort of lunacy shouldn’t even be taken up by any lawyer to begin with.

In the past I have ranted on about Health and Safety here in the Nanny State.  On occasion, Lyndon has also had a comment or three on the subject.
But reading this morning’s paper earlier then usual, I just thought I was still asleep reading the actual instructions H & S has had printed up.

I wish the telegraph had printed H & S instructions online as well as hard copy.  I’ll try and scan it in awhile.

I don’t know about you ppl reading this, but the subject isn’t really a Moonbat. A liar maybe. A jerk?  Could be.
No. The Moonbats are the ppl in the legal system that allow this sort of thing to go forward.  The real Moonbats are the folks who actually do buy his fairy tale. And they certainly do exist.  He sees an opportunity to take in some free money.  The system allows for that and caters much to dishonest ppl.

It can only get worse.

Caretaker who fell off stepladder sues for £50,000 over ‘inadequate training’
By John Bingham
Last Updated: 10:20PM BST 16/06/2008

A school caretaker who was injured falling off a six-foot stepladder is suing his employer for £50,000 claiming he was not trained how to use it properly

Anthony Gower-Smith says his bosses did not show him how to use the 6ft ladder safely, although he admits using others for at least 30 years without mishap.
Mr Gower-Smith, 73, fell while removing a card display and staples from a wall in the gym at Awbridge Primary School near Romsey, Hampshire, in January 2004.

He fractured his skull, broke a cheekbone, split a kidney and spent time in the intensive care unit in nearby Southampton General Hospital, Winchester County Court heard.

Mr Gower-Smith, a former garage proprietor, is suing Hampshire County Council for liability, claiming they did not tell him how to properly use a stepladder.

He is claiming damages of at least £15,000 pounds and up to £50,000 pounds. The council denies negligence.

Mr Gower-Smith told the court he had signed a form to say he had received “ladder training” but said this only consisted of being warned not to stand on the top platform or work at higher than three metres off the ground.

“I thought that was the extent of ladder training,” he told the court. “I didn’t know there were other things regarding ladders.”

Mr Gower-Smith said he started work at the school in October 2002 and had induction training with caretaker support officer Chris Higgins.

He denied that Mrs Higgins had given him other safety advice such as placing the ladder at right angles to the wall being worked on. The court heard that the ladder was placed side on to the wall, potentially making it more unstable, when he fell off.

Mr Gower-Smith said he had filled in a form at work, ticking boxes to indicate he had received training about aspects of the job including ladder safety.

“When you are given something to sign by your superior you just sign it,” he said.

Mr Gower-Smith denied he was standing on the top platform when he fell but the court heard that he told police officers called to the incident that he had been standing on the top and had blamed himself.

“I don’t remember what I said,” he told the court. “I was dazed. But I wasn’t on the top step because I had no need to go to the top step.

“I was in and out of consciousness. I was blaming myself for coming off the ladder.

Not until afterwards did I think about it.”

In a statement of defence, the council said Mr Gower-Smith, of North Baddesley, near Southampton, was negligent, adding “The claimant knew perfectly well how to use a stepladder.”

Mr Recorder Christopher Moger QC asked Mr Gower-Smith if he had a stepladder at home. He said he had.

The judgement is expected this week.

http://tinyurl.com/3vs7xf

Posted by Drew458     on 06/17/2008 at 01:39 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (3) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - June 16, 2008

Fuel shortages spread as tanker drivers’ strike, gas stations running dry.

Due to past and VERY bitter experiences with unions, I am not too quick to defend them and simply wish they’d go away.
But ... I’m not 100% certain they are to blame for this crises.  More research needed to refute or back up what I’m hearing, so will not make personal comments on this topic.

In our area, there are gas petrol stations with signs out saying that the pumps aren’t working. In other words, they haven’t anything to sell anymore as ppl topped up just before the strike or just after it started.  So far no lines as there isn’t anything to line up for in some areas.

Fuel shortages spread as tanker drivers’ strike enters fourth day
By David Millward, Transport Editor
Last Updated: 3:44PM BST 16/06/2008

Motorists are facing increasing fuel shortages with queuing spreading to several parts of the country as the strike by Shell’s tanker drivers entered its fourth day.

Fuel rationing was imposed by some garages in the South West, while drivers were facing difficulties filling up in parts of Wales, Worcestershire and in the South East.

Alarmingly Shell was not the only retailer to see its pumps running dry. Esso’s garage in Barry, south Wales, was completely out of fuel.

There were long queues reported at the service station at Junction 30 of the M5 near Exeter. 

According to the AA there was also confusion with some garages running out of diesel, while others were unable to supply unleaded petrol.

Elsewhere, a garage in the Gorton area of Manchester has raised prices by 14 pence a litre, charging motorists 129.9 pence for unleaded.

Its prices were on a par with half a dozen remote forecourts on Shetland and the Isle of Wight, which have traditionally charged far more than the national average.

“The impact of the strike is really being felt today particularly in Wales and the South West. In some localised areas motorists are struggling to find fuel,” said Edmund King, the AA’s president.

In the South West the fuel situation was described as “dire” by Ray Holloway, president of the Petrol Retailers Association.

This led several independent retailers to impose limits as low as £10 as they wait for new stocks to arrive, according to the UK Petroleum Industry Association.

“It’s been happening at rural areas,” said a spokesman. “Supplies have been getting quite low away from major centres like Truro.”

The problem had been caused by picketing at a Plymouth refinery which meant that supplies were not only being blocked to Shell forecourts, but other garages were getting embroiled in the dispute.

According to the latest Government figures 647 garages – including 249 Shell outlets – have either run dry completely or had to turn away motorists looking for diesel or petrol.

That number is expected to rise today as the strike by 641 drivers hits home.

Next weekend could be even worse unless a deal is reached between the drivers’ union, Unite and the Shell’s contractors: Hoyer UK and Suckling Transport.

The two sides have restarted talks raising hopes that the dispute, in which the union has submitted a 13 per cent pay claim, could be settled before the next four-day walkout on Friday.

If agreement is not reached, there are fears that next weekend could be even more difficult because of an overtime ban which will run between the walkouts.

http://tinyurl.com/3l82f3

Posted by Drew458     on 06/16/2008 at 11:04 AM   
Filed Under: • Economics • Oil, Alternative Energy, and Gas Prices • UK • Unions-Labor •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Friday - June 13, 2008

vocal campaigners in the call for a British referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

EU treaty: Telegraph campaign for British referendum
By Tom Peterkin in Dublin
Last Updated: 2:48PM BST 13/06/2008

The Daily Telegraph has been one of the most vocal campaigners in the call for a British referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Let The People Decide petition calling for a referendum has become one of the biggest campaigns in the newspaper’s 152-year history.

People have signed up either on line or via coupons through the post in droves - and at a rate of more than 1,600-a-day at its peak - since it was launched in July last year.

Well over 100,000 people have signed up to the petition and on the eve of Ireland’s poll our leader pages explained why Ireland should vote no.

“As the only EU country to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, Ireland today carries the can for the cowardly evasion of its partners,” the leader said.

The Telegraph has argued that Labour has wriggled out of holding a referendum despite promising to do so in its manifesto for the 2005 election.

The Government made a commitment in its 2005 manifesto to hold a national vote on the EU Constitution before it was halted by the French and Dutch votes.

(I remember that too. It was thought at the time that French would certainly vote yes.  But when both they and the Dutch said No way Jose, it sent a shocking message to those who took for granted that others would willingly give away their sovereignty.  Then, the powers that be in Brussels tried to ignore the votes and said that the French and Dutch would be given “another chance to vote correctly.” Oh, that went down a bomb.  Worse yet, the (then) Blair govt. backed away from a promise to the country that the voters here would have a say thru a referendum.  Blair saw the writing on the wall clear as day.  There has still been NO referendum on the issue.  And make no mistake about it.  The ppl do want one.  Stay Tuned.)

Critics have claimed that the Lisbon Treaty, which replaced the EU Constitution, contains 90 per cent of the original document.

The rejection of the pact by Irish voters will increase pressure on other countries to offer a referendum, although Ireland is the only one of the 27 member states constitutionally bound to do so.

http://tinyurl.com/57kcmz

Posted by Drew458     on 06/13/2008 at 11:12 AM   
Filed Under: • Patriotism • Politics • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Thursday - June 12, 2008

The shifting battle against the Taliban

Busier then a duck in a flood and under the weather with spring sniffles but ....this is (I believe) a darn interesting piece and so just had to blog it.

Afghanistan Analysis: The shifting battle against the Taliban
By Tom Coghlan in Camp Bastion, Helmand Province
Last Updated: 1:21PM BST 12/06/2008

Britain’s counter-insurgency campaign against the Taliban is shifting from one phase into another.

The war of pitched battles is all but over. The Taliban’s leadership structures have been ravaged by covert British special forces raids; their ability to coordinate operations largely curtailed.

The insurgents have been pushed out of the fixed positions that they were able to hold in Garmser in the south of the province and Musa Qala in the north.

They take a bloody nose wherever they choose to stand and fight. They know they cannot win outright.

So instead the Taliban appear to have accepted that they must play the long game. The political will of governments in the face of public opposition to costly, distant wars is the Achilles Heel of Western democracies.

The technological know how of Taliban roadside bombs is improving and their numbers are up 34 per cent on last year, possibly thanks to help from Iran’s government.

And steady attrition through roadside bombs and suicide bombs are the means that Taliban fighters will use to try to ensure that a steady flow of Nato body bags ultimately undermines the political will of Western countries to ‘stay the course’.

The Taliban have been suppressed but they cannot be defeated entirely while they continue to operate out of safe havens in Pakistan; not unless the Afghan people decisively reject them and force them out. And not until there are viable Afghan government structures and security forces that the populous are prepared to put their faith in.

As British commanders are fond of saying, “the population is the prize.”

There is little love for the Taliban amongst the majority of Helmandis. But equally there is little love for foreign troops on the part of a people that distrusts outsiders of any hue. And there is the complicating problem of the region’s vast narcotics economy.

Britain is theoretically in charge of destroying this even as its troops on the ground are charged with making the people like and trust them.

Building a viable government, infrastructure and security forces is, then, the task that lies ahead of the British government and its army and the wider international community.

Western governments are gathering in Paris for a major conference that will address the huge hurdles to the creation of these structures. It will also see the Afghan government requesting a further $51billion in aid.

The challenge is far greater than the military work that has already been accomplished by British soldiers on the ground. It is the work of a decade, perhaps two; particularly given the poverty of Afghanistan (compared to Iraq) in educated human resources and economic potential, as well as the staggering corruption problems its narco economy helps to drive.

Nonetheless, if the first step is creating credible security forces, the Afghan army shows promise. In Kabul a huge US funded training programme is churning out trained soldiers at a rate of one battalion, 700-800 men, every week. The army is expected to reach around 70,000 men by the end of this year.

On the frontline in Helmand those soldiers, mentored by British and American soldiers, are being equipped not just with boots and helmets, but also with new flak jackets, M-16 rifles, helicopters, trucks and Humvee armoured cars.

Of course this could turn out to be another Western trained army with ‘all the gear, but no idea’.

Shiny new battalions of South Vietnamese soldiers rolled out of US army training programmes with state of the art equipment in the early 1970s to crumble ignominiously in battle.

But the signs so far are that the Afghan National Army has the will to fight, and increasingly the skills. Three weeks ago Afghan National Army soldiers mentored by the Royal Irish Regiment conducted their own sweep operation through the dangerous ‘Green Zone’ south of the town of Sangin, establishing a new base in previously Taliban dominated territory and then beating back several Taliban attacks.

British officers and NCOs may have fretted over their failure to converse food, their refusal to carry adequate water and ammunition, and their unwillingness to train when back at base. But when the bullets flew the ANA fought back.

From two battalions of Afghan troops in the province in 2006 there are now seven. And while British forces are rarely much more than tolerated, the Afghan National Army appears to command a degree of respect and even affection.

These are early days and it is a process that will take a great deal of time.

The irony is that perhaps the biggest single threat to the British mission in Afghanistan, is not the Taliban, the drug smugglers, corrupt Afghan politicians or the malign influence of other regional powers, but simply the will of the public in Western countries to keep supporting a distant war that has now killed 100 British soldiers and is likely to kill a great many more.

http://tinyurl.com/48pmdc

Posted by Drew458     on 06/12/2008 at 10:50 AM   
Filed Under: • Terrorists • UK • War On Terror •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - June 10, 2008

WHAT IN THE HECK IS WRONG WITH THESE JERKS?  oh, right. THEY’RE FREEKIN IDIOTS!

I would be sorely tempted to come back with a gun!  OK, I might not if I had time to think about it.  But this is so damn fuckin nannyish and stupid.
Are the Brits getting dumber?  And for the company to defend this is equally outrageous .

2 fuckin percent booze in a BB sauce?  This is maddening. Really it is.

Barbecue sauce madame? Do you have any ID?
By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 12:34 AM on 10th June 2008

Controversial: The offending bottle of sauce

Cashiers at a Tesco refused to sell a woman barbecue sauce --because she did not have any ID.

Claire Birchell, 25, was told she could not buy the Jack Daniel’s sauce because it contains 2 per cent alcohol and she could not prove she was old enough to buy it.

Staff even refused to sell the bottle to her brother-in-law, Philip Dover, 27, who was with her at the time and did have ID, because they said he would just give it to her.

Miss Birchell had been hoping to stock up on the sauce while she was visiting her parents in Flitwick, near Bedford, as the shops near her home in Liverpool do not sell it.

So she was astonished to be told she could not buy the condiment because it contains a small amount of whiskey.

Mr Dover said: ‘We just could not believe it. It’s not as if we were going to go and sit down the park drinking it.

‘Claire lives in Liverpool and she can’t buy the sauce up there so she was really
disappointed she couldn’t get it in Flitwick. It just seems crazy over a sauce.’

Mr Dover added that he had gone back to the store a few days later and bought a bottle of the sauce without any problem.

It is not the first time Tesco staff have been accused of being overly-strict in policing sales to minors.

Last month the store stopped selling alcohol to parents if they were with their children in case they passed it on to them.

This meant many shoppers who took their children on their weekly shop found they were denied the beer and wine in their trolley.

At the time Tesco defended the move saying they preferred staff to ‘err on the side of caution’.

Supermarkets have become increasingly strict over the selling of alcohol as the Government has imposed tougher rules and penalties.

Any shop caught selling drink to under-18s three times in three months faces a £10,000 fine.

Find this story at http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1025362/Barbecue-sauce-madame-Do-ID.html

Posted by Drew458     on 06/10/2008 at 11:15 AM   
Filed Under: • Nanny State • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - June 09, 2008

100 British dead in Afghanistan: A moment for sombre reflection

Because I think it’s important enough.  The numbers may be small by comparison, but the consequences and the angst of the families are the same as ours.
And maybe more so because so many really don’t understand why they are there. 

By Con Coughlin
Last Updated: 1:27AM BST 09/06/2008

The confirmation that the British death toll in Afghanistan has officially reached the 100 mark should be a moment for sombre reflection on a mission that has far exceeded expectations in terms of the demands it has made on our Armed Forces.

It is just two years since the government first committed British troops to southern Afghanistan as part of Nato’s mission to assist the Afghan government with the reconstruction of the country after thirty years of almost incessant civil war.

At the time Downing Street’s spin-doctors went into over-drive in their attempts to persuade a sceptical British public that, if all went according to plan, not a shot would be fired in anger as the mission was all about reconstruction and the eradication of the country’s poppy crop – which accounts for 90 per cent of the heroin sold on Britain’s streets – rather than joining battle with the Taliban.

Thankfully senior British officers on the ground such as Brigadier Ed Butler, who commanded 3 Para battlegroup during Britain’s initial deployment in the summer of 2006, realised that nothing would be achieved in the country’s lawless and inhospitable Helmand province unless British forces physically evicted the Taliban from the towns and villages it had been allowed to re-occupy in the south of the country.

Brig Butler, 48, whose untimely resignation from the British Army was announced at the weekend, went on to cause the government further embarrassment by unhelpfully pointing out that the invasion of Iraq had prevented British forces from securing Afghanistan much sooner because vital resources were diverted to overthrowing Saddam Hussein’s regime before the Taliban had been properly dealt with.

Consequently, far from failing to fire a shot in anger, for the past two years British front line troops have been involved in the fiercest combat operations experienced since the Falklands war, and suffered significant casualties in the process.

While British forces have succeeded in destroying the Taliban’s fighting capability, they have also paid a heavy price in terms of dead and injured.

The lengthening death toll will no doubt lead to calls for Britain to end its contribution to a war many argue can never be won. But to do so would not only have catastrophic consequences for Afghanistan, it would seriously compromise our national security.

The reason our troops are fighting in Afghanistan is to prevent Islamic extremists rebuilding the terrorist infrastructure that enabled them to carry out the September 11 terror attacks against the United States.

Many of the subsequent terror plots against the West – including attacks against Britain, such as the London bombings of July 2005 – originated from the lawless tribal areas on the border between Afghanistan and Pakistan.

This is no time for the government to lose heart. Instead it must ensure that it provides our dedicated and courageous service men and women with the support and equipment they need to ensure the sacrifices of the past two years are not in vain.

http://tinyurl.com/46jy6w

Posted by Drew458     on 06/09/2008 at 03:10 PM   
Filed Under: • Military • UK • War On Terror •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Wednesday - June 04, 2008

Third payout from Scotland Yard in race prejudice case.  (and ALL by the same guy!)

(Racially approved)

Cop wins third payout from Scotland Yard in race prejudice case
By Richard Edwards, Crime Correspondent
Last Updated: 3:40PM BST 04/06/2008

An Asian police officer who was twice paid compensation for racial discrimination from Scotland Yard has won a third five-figure payout - and launched a further two complaints.

Det Sgt Gurpal Virdi was this week awarded £70,400 for victimisation after he was passed over for promotion for having exposed race prejudice at the Metropolitan police.

It takes the total he has won from the force to more than £300,000 and the Sikh officer is seeking further compensation in two more tribunal claims in the next three months.

After winning the case, Sgt Virdi, 49, urged Commissioner Sir Ian Blair to take tough measures to stamp out discrimination in the force, saying that “no amount of training appears to be working”.

Mr Virdi, who joined the Met as a PC in May 1982, was awarded £150,000 by a tribunal in August 2000 for race discrimination after he was unfairly dismissed from the force. He had been sacked after being wrongly accused of sending racist hate mail to black and Asian officers at Hanwell police station.

He was reinstated in February 2002 and an internal investigation found major mistakes had been made in what was seen as a landmark case in race relations within the police service.

Sir John Stevens, then Commissioner, apologised and agreed Mr Virdi should be paid another £90,000 in an out-of-court settlement by the force for “injury to his feelings”.

On his return to duty, he worked for assistant commissioner Tarique Ghaffur, the Met’s most senior Asian officer, on community issues and policy.

In 2005, encouraged by senior officers, he applied for promotion to detective inspector at a time when the Met had a shortage.

He was endorsed by his line manager and it was agreed that he satisfied all the official criteria. But he was turned down by a review panel and his appeal was rejected.

In its judgment on liabilty, the tribunal ruled that Mr Virdi’s promotion application was treated differently to that of someone who had not taken legal action against the force.

It said the process was “shoddily operated” and noted that he was now unlikely to get another chance of promotion before he retires.

Mr Virdi’s award included £61,621 for loss of earnings and pension and £8,780 for injury to feelings.

Speaking after his latest award, Sgt Virdi said: “If Sir Ian Blair is serious about tackling victimisation and discrimination in the ranks of the Met, then he must take some form of disciplinary action as no amount of training appears to be working.

“Having spent nearly ten years fighting discrimination in the Met, I am delighted that the tribunal has once again decided in my favour. With four years left to serve, I am looking forward to continuing my career with a unblemished record.”

Mr Virdi is involved in two more employment tribunals, including a fresh victimisation claim next week alleging that he was ostracised on his return to work and his appraisal downgraded.

In September a tribunal will decide on allegations that he has also been the victim of bullying.

Sarah Drury, vice chairman of the Metropolitan Police Federation, said: “We hope the Met will learn the lessons and treat all officers in a fair and transparent manner.”

While winning the victimisation claim against the Met, Mr Virdi failed in a claim of race discrimination. Scotland Yard is appealing the tribunal’s decision on victimisation.
http://tinyurl.com/4ungl6

Posted by Drew458     on 06/04/2008 at 12:00 PM   
Filed Under: • Racism and race relations • UK •  
• Comments (2) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

Criminals rest easy.  (don’t worry, be happy)

Yes, I know it’s an old article.  But, has anything changed since this was written in ‘05?
I think you already know the answer to that one.
I’m posting this I suppose due to all the crime related things I’ve posted here lately. I can’t help it I guess because it’s so damn prevalent and the crimes so horrific.  They stand out due to their nature.

Well, old or not, please read this because it says a lot.  In fact, it says it all.  I’m also posting it because of another story that just has to be seen and I’ll get to that shortly.

Criminals rest easy, the Met is chasing race and gender targets

By Leo McKinstry
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 09/06/2005

It is an iron law of modern civic life in Britain that the more an organisation trumpets its commitment to equal opportunities, the more it will be accused of discrimination. For the neurotic focus on equality leaves it vulnerable to vexatious and frivolous complaints.

That is certainly what has happened in the Metropolitan Police, a once proud body renowned across the world for its integrity, but now crippled by an ideological obsession with race and gender. The disastrous mismanagement was highlighted this week by an industrial tribunal case, in which three white police officers are taking action against the Met for alleged discrimination, claiming that they have been the victims of a politically correct witch-hunt.

It is fair to say that the Met has had a problem with racism but the force has now lost all sense of proportion. The three officers were investigated - and one of them suspended - after they were said to have made offensive anti-Muslim remarks in front of a female Asian officer during a race-awareness training course. After months of inquiry at the highest level of the Met, the three men were finally cleared of any wrong-doing.

Scotland Yard’s most senior Asian officer, assistant commissioner Tarique Ghaffur, who looked into the case in 2002 and gave the verdict of innocence, said that he “found it incredible that this matter was taken up”.

But in truth there is nothing incredible about the way this ludicrous case was handled. Since 1999, when the Macpherson report into the death of the black teenager Stephen Lawrence accused the Met of “institutional racism”, London’s police force has been paralysed by anxiety over the issue of diversity. Eager to prove its anti-racist, pro-gay, feminist credentials, the Met prefers to fight supposed prejudice than real crime.

One sorry result of this neurosis about discrimination is the creation of a vast bureaucracy, which does nothing but waste resources. The Met is now awash with race units and equality action plans, all geared towards heightening the climate of grievance.

So within the shambolic organisation there is a consultation, diversity and outreach unit; a diversity directorate that includes six separate diversity teams covering everything from age to sexual orientation; a diversity champion; an equal opportunities and diversity board; a positive action team; a lesbian, gay and transgender advisory group and a cultural and communities unit.

Today’s senior London coppers might not be much use in defeating criminality, but they are superb at organising meetings and generating reports. They can talk like the most fluent pseudo-Marxist academic about “contextualised learning on race” and act like the most politically correct Blairite civil servant in demanding that “performance in respect of race and diversity be measured through a corporate measurement framework” or seeking to “facilitate the change process through the establishment of the development and organisation improvement team (DOIT)”.

Increasingly the Met resembles one of those extremist Left-wing councils of the 1980s. Recruitment policies are driven by skin colour and sex, above quality of applicant. The bias towards women and ethnic minority candidates is quite explicit, with priority given for training places towards those who speak a second language or “have knowledge or experience of a community group”. The goal is to have 25 per cent of the Met non-white by 2009, but even the National Black Police Association has said that this is “a ridiculous target”, for its achievement would require 80 per cent of new recruits to be black or Asian over the next four years.

And 35 per cent of current recruits are female, hardly an inspiring thought given the soaring levels of violent crime on the streets of the capital.

(A SOARING LEVEL OF CRIME. WRITTEN THREE YEARS AGO. WELL IT’S STILL FLYING HIGH)

Indeed, the Met is now quite explicit about its enthusiasm for social engineering. Its Confidence and Equality Strategy paper, published last month, states, “mainstreaming diversity is essentially about creating a fairer society in its widest sense, when everyone can participate and have the opportunity to realise their full potential”.

This kind of socialist utopianism is nothing to do with crime, but it now permeates the Met’s work. So, typically, the Met runs a fashion show at Tate Modern, costing £110,000 for disaffected teenagers in Southwark. In the same vein, Scotland Yard has asked Asian businesses to hire “vulnerable youngsters” from their own communities to divert them from crime, while senior Met officer Michael O’Keefe recently visited India to examine the concept of “corporate social responsibility”.

It is just as keen on gay rights, and will be one of the key hosts for “Celebrate”, a European gay police conference in London at the end of the month. The central theme is the “ability to actively celebrate difference, not merely to tolerate or even respect it”. The Met is also to be represented at the “Big Gay Out” festival in London next month.

The tragedy of all this activity is that it is severely detracting from the central job of the police in protecting society. The British public spends £2.7 billion on the Met, which now employs no fewer than 32,000 officers and 13,400 civilian staff. But, because of warped political priorities, the number of officers on patrol is minuscule, and rates of clear-up for crime remain dismally low. At September 2004, just 18.3 per cent of crimes were resolved, while the rate for burglary was 13.2 per cent and for robbery, 16 per cent.

It is no wonder that the middle-classes in London have lost faith in the police. Once the police could be regarded as their allies in the provision of security and the protection of property; today they are in the vanguard of the social revolution.

Meanwhile, the police officers’ trade union, the Police Federation, exploits the atmosphere of victimhood to entrench its position, upholding outdated working practices and systematic abuses. Where manufacturing and the private sector were forced to change over the past three decades, the Metropolitan police service remains one of the last bastions of the producer-led culture, its workforce abusing its monopoly position as flagrantly as the nationalised industries of the Seventies. That is why rates of absenteeism - currently an average of 7.4 days a year for police officers and 9.3 days for civilian staff - remain so high. And there is no sign of change.

Management is just as big an appeaser of its own failing workforce as it is of criminality. The public, which pays for this farce and has to suffer ever-increasing crime, deserves better.

Posted by Drew458     on 06/04/2008 at 11:32 AM   
Filed Under: • Democrats-Liberals-Moonbat Leftists • Racism and race relations • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (0) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Tuesday - June 03, 2008

Islamic extremists should get therapy …… (That isn’t a joke people. It’s being suggested here)

I just can not put any comments in here.  Drew? You out there?
I’m not even gonna say how stupid I think it is. Just that it is.  But then, the Brits (many) are very liberal thinkers and mean well. Meanwhile, the slime will bury em one day in the future with enuff of this touchy-feely crap.

Islamic extremists should get therapy, Home Office tells local councils

by James Kirkup, Political Correspondent
Last Updated: 9:00AM BST 03/06/2008

Islamic extremists could escape prosecution and instead receive therapy and counselling under new Government plans to “deradicalise” religious fanatics.

The Home Office is to announce an extra £12.5 million to support new initiatives to try to stop extremism spreading.

The central element of the Home Office plan is a new national “deradicalisation” programme that would persuade converts to violent and extremist causes to change their views.

Controversially, the new plan makes clear that people who fall under the influence of violent organisations will not automatically face prosecution.

Instead, the presumption should be that some such individuals would face therapy and counselling from community groups instead of criminal charges.

Documents being distributed to local councils explain that many people who get drawn into extremism have often suffered some sort of personal trauma or crisis that makes them vulnerable to exploitation.

“We do not want to put through the criminal justice system those who are vulnerable to, or are being drawn into, violent extremism unless they have clearly committed an offence,” a Home Office report says.

“It is vital that individuals and communities understand this and have the confidence to use the support structures that we shall be developing.”

Most of the new funding will be set aside for grants to community groups that challenge the messages of violent extremists should be supported.

The plan includes a suggestion that local councils should map their areas religion, surveying and recording the faiths and denominations of local residents.

New guidelines for councils say: “A deeper understanding of local communities should be developed to help inform and focus the programme of action - this may include mapping denominational backgrounds and demographic and socio-economic factors.”

The Home Office has told councils they must be prepared to ask police to vet anyone involved in projects that receive government anti-radicalisation funding.

If a group is found to be promoting violent extremism, local agencies and the police should consider disrupting or removing funding, and deny access to public facilities, the document added.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said: “A key element of our strategy aims to stop people getting involved in extremist violence.

“We are investing at local level to build resilient communities, which are equipped to confront violent extremism and support the most vulnerable individuals.”

Shadow home secretary David Davis said of today’s publication: “This is pointless when the Government is fuelling the problem it is seeking to solve with its draconian approach to 42 days.”
http://tinyurl.com/5s3gpn

Posted by Drew458     on 06/03/2008 at 03:43 AM   
Filed Under: • Crime • Stoopid-People • Terrorists • UK •  
• Comments (4) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

   Monday - June 02, 2008

U.S. accused of holding terror suspects on ships (do we care? I sure don’t.)

Don’t ya just love when they say, “citing sources?” Who exactly. Schmucks never say.  They make it all up and the USA always has to be the villain.

Reuters - 1 hour 3 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The United States has been secretly detaining terrorism suspects aboard floating “prison ships,” a British legal charity charged on Monday, but the Pentagon described the report as inaccurate.

The charity Reprieve, citing sources including U.S. military officials, parliamentary bodies and former prisoners, said it believed the U.S. government had operated as many as 17 shipboard prisons, particularly in the Indian Ocean region.

( This must be yet another one of those ass wipe lefty anti-USA groups. Never heard of em before this. Screw em. I wish we could take out these sort of mindless lying bastards.  And even if they weren’t lying, I’d like to see em dead anyway.  I really do hate these ppl. )

“Prisoners have been interrogated under tortuous conditions before being rendered to other, often undisclosed locations,” Reprieve said, adding that it would issue a detailed report later this year.

Department of Defence spokesman J.D. Gordon called the report “inaccurate and misleading.”

“We do not operate detention facilities on board Navy ships. DoD detention facilities are in Iraq, Afghanistan and Guantanamo,” he said.

The United States has denied torturing terrorism suspects, but a Justice Department report last month cited FBI agents as warning that some CIA questioning techniques were “borderline torture.”

The military has acknowledged holding John Walker Lindh, a U.S. citizen accused of being a Taliban and al Qaeda supporter, on ships after his capture in Afghanistan in late 2001.

Lindh was held on two ships, the Bataan and Peleliu. The government says he was given medical treatment and was not tortured. Gordon said the ships were a considered safe place to question Lindh away from the battlefield.

Reprieve named three others, including Australian David Hicks, as suspects believed to have once been held on U.S. “prison ships.” It cited a former prisoner held at the U.S. detention facility at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as saying about 50 others were held on the Bataan.

Gordon said fewer than 10 terrorism suspects were held, on the Bataan and Peleliu, in late 2001 and early 2002. He also dismissed Reprieve’s count of up to 17 ships as misleading. (Reporting by Randall Mikkelsen, editing by Alan Elsner)

http://tinyurl.com/5sk4bx

Posted by Drew458     on 06/02/2008 at 02:21 PM   
Filed Under: • Commies • Terrorists • 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