Monday, 20 October 2008
I guess one can't accuse Coal-in of lack of loyalty to his ethnicity, if not to his party. It is of course indicative of the double standards in American politics, that almost every African American in the US, from Louis Farrakhan to Chris Rock, can come out in support of Kenya's favourite son, yet it is the whites supporting the McCain / Palin ticket who are accused of racism.
Wednesday, 15 October 2008
Tuesday, 14 October 2008
1) Wood Green Crown Court, North London
A teenager with learning difficulties was gang raped by up to ten youths who then showered her 'head to toe' with burning caustic soda, a court heard
The attackers left the girl 'naked, screaming, crying and in a desperate state' as they ran away laughing, it was alleged.
They had picked on the shy 16-year-old because they claimed she was a 'dirty ho who was asking for it', Wood Green Crown Court in North London heard.
The girl was left traumatised and severely disfigured by the attack.
Prosecutor Rosina Cottage said she may have been raped because she had recently slept with three men known to the gang.
'She was shy and insecure and with learning difficulties and thought that she would be liked by these boys if she had sex with them.
'Of course, the world can be an old-fashioned place and they did not like her.
'They thought she was, to use the words of a number of these defendants, ''dirty''.'
On January 9 this year Mark Hendricks, one of the men she had previously slept with, allegedly lured her to a unoccupied house in Tottenham, North London, where the other youths were waiting.
Miss Cottage said: 'She had no idea what was in store for her.
Continue reading here:
2) Alum Rock, Birmingham
A TEENAGER was today undergoing emergency surgery after being hunted down “like an animal” by a machete-wielding gang in a Birmingham street.
The slightly built 16-year-old fled in terror as he tried to escape from the 10-strong mob, who slashed him repeatedly across his neck and face when they finally trapped him.
The youngster begged for help from passers-by seconds before the savage attack in Alum Rock Road, Alum Rock.
Three of the gang, two armed with large machetes and a third with a wooden baton, caught up with the victim and rained down blows during the broad daylight attack at 5pm on Saturday.
Eyewitnesses saw the boy being chased from Woodwell Road by a gang of at least 10 youths in their late teens, who hit him indiscriminately as he pleaded for mercy.
It was only when shopworkers, neighbours and passers-by closed in on the gang that they fled towards the nearby park.
Interpreter Iftikhar Ahmed, who was cleaning his car when the attack unfolded, said: “The boy was only small and ran up to an old man in the street screaming ‘help me, help me please’.
Continue reading here:
The ethnicity of the victims in both stories is not clear, they could come from various communities. In both cases the media does not tell us the ethnicity of the perpetrators either, however, from the nature of the alleged crimes I think it can be safely assumed that they are not from the indigenous community.
Just two news stories from many similar ones on another average day in multi cultural Britain.
Hat Tip Green Arrow
Monday, 13 October 2008
Saturday, 11 October 2008
The fact that a report, deliberately timed to reach its findings weeks before the election, has found against her (or as much as it could) is hardly surprising, in fact it would probably have more credibility had it been report conducted by Robert Mugabe into Morgan Tsvangirai. Do the people behind this really believe that the US public will really fall for it?, and those who were planning to vote Republican will say “Ah shucks! I really liked that Palin broad, but after that I guess I should vote for that nice Mr Obama, after all there ain't ever anything nasty about him on the news!”?
The American electorate can occasionally be gullible, bur even they are not that dumb (I hope).
Of course one part of such an analysis would be correct there never is anything nasty about Obama in the press. The media treat the man whom Louis Farrakhan apparently calls “The Messiah” as if he is some delicate Spring flower who should never be forced to deal with anything so taxing as a serious question.
On the other hand, as far as the media is concerned, it is open season on Sarah Palin, and it is a credit to her that she has stood up to the onslaught quite as well as she has.
The attack has been relentless, in the lead up to the US elections in November the US TV channels are falling over themselves to provide non-stop daily satire featuring Sarah Palin, day after day the satirical skits and impersonations are only exceeded by by carefully edited news stories accusing Mrs Palin of “gaffes”, inexperience, negative campaigning or just being an all round Religious “nut”.
I know there are a number of reasons to feel a bit concerned about Sarah Palin, and she has certain characteristics which are a gift to comedians and impersonators however, the same applies to her Democratic opponent Joe Biden and even so to Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama. Yet Joe Biden troubling characteristics are all but ignored, and, as for Obama, he is treated with a manner not that far removed from how the North Koreans treat their “Dear Leader”.
The lack of balance in the treatment of the two is outrageous, but only to be expected, given the deep bias of the US media.
If challenged, the funny people on Saturday Night Live and the Daily Show will probably claim that Mrs Palin is subject to excessive parody, because she is a “Religious nut”. However, that is the image they have chosen to present of her, but how close is it to the truth? Certainly there are a lot of leaders across the world who are far more deserving of the title "Religious nut" than she is, however, the politically correct conformists in the media would never think of mocking them in the same way as they do Palin.
Furthermore, is she really that much of a “nut” and are her views really that unusual?
She is allegedly a creationist, which is unusual in the Godless country which Britain has become, but actually not so unusual in America, where large sections of the population have deep Religious faith. Odd as it may sound to a Brit, versed as we are in secular certainties, whilst the origin of man remains unproven Creationism is one of a number of legitimate view points. Darwin's theory is compelling but remains a theory, Whatever Professor Dawkins may tell you, science has not yet proven conclusively how the universe was created, and many, many people across the planet believe in a creator, why is that okay if they are Arabs, Africans or Mexicans but not okay if they are Europeans or Americans?.
If we believe in a creator, then we believe in things beyond out understanding, and if that disqualifies someone from running a country then most world nations will be looking for new leaders, including secular Britain. Furthermore, how exactly does her belief in a God as the creator, which she shares with the vast majority of the inhabitants of our planet, and certainly with the founding fathers of America, effect her ability to be an effective vice president?
Another stick which is used to beat her with is that she is opposed to abortion. Well frankly I think she has a point. Don't misunderstand me, I accept that there are times when abortion is necessary, indeed vital, but they are in the minority of cases. A significant number of all abortions in America and Europe are carried out for the sake of convenience, and it is there that I part company with the advocates of choice.
She is also pro-gun ownership, I disagree with her, as I do with most Americans and half of the population of Finland on the issue, but she is entitled to that view, and it certainly does not disqualify from standing for high office.
She is opposed to gay marriage, I think she is wrong on the grounds that a law which declares some citizens less equal than others is a bad law and devalues all citizens. However, I would guess that most of you who are reading this agree more with her than with me, and I respect your right to do so. In any event she shares that view with the leaders of Turkey, Russia. Poland, most of Africa and South America and all of Asia, and the current incumbent of the White House, are they all Religious wackjobs?
Her soon to be son in law, Levi Johnson, declared “I'm a fucking Redneck” who “Can't keep my Johnson in my pants” and “I don't want kids” .... er... well no he didn't actually, but the media never bothered to correct the story when Levi's alleged facebook page turned to be a fake.
Of course a lot is made of Palin's lack of experience, but exactly the same applies to Obama, after all, having a Kenyan Daddy no more amounts to a knowledge of foreign affairs than being able to see Russia from your porch. As to experience of leadership, Palin has run a state, Obama was a "community leader" in Illinois how does that make him so much more experienced than her?
Obama's main claim to fame is that, he voted against the war in Iraq, which with the benefit of retrospect can be made to appear a wise and intelligent position. However, that ignores the fact that, at the time he actually voted, most politicians and every intelligence agency in the West, including the French, Russians and Germans believed that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction ready to use against her neighbours, and possibly against Europe, which puts a slightly different perspective on his vote. At the very least it leaves his motives open to question. Of course, when it comes to Obama the questions are never asked.
There are other questions, including:
Why won't he publish a full sized copy of his birth certificate?
What was his connection with convicted fraudster Tony Rezko, who allegedly helped him and his wife purchase their home?
How close was he really to Bill Ayres co founder of the 1960's left wing radical group The Weather Underground?
Is it true that, until it sanitised it's website nine month ago, the church he had belonged to for twenty years declared that its first loyalty was to Africa?
Barack Obama may have perfectly good answers to those questions, however the press never ask them, and the satirists hardly ever touch on them except to mock those who do. I have a lot of contempt for so called Comedians, who are happy to mock one side but not the other, or like Sarah Bernhard, say that Palin "should be gang raped by black brothers" but would not dare say anything disrespectful about Obama.
Of course these tactics are nothing new to the Obama loving pundits, during the Democratic primaries, Jon Stewart on the Daily Show, relentlessly mocked Hillary Clinton, but treated Obama as if he was untouchable.
It seems that to question or criticise Obama is to risk accusations of "racism" which is a risk no Western media personality will take. As we see across the world, leaders who can not be criticised or questioned are the most dangerous, and if this politically correct politeness follows Obama into the Oval Office then the world is in danger.
Submitted by William Wallace
Imagine for a moment what life would be like in South Africa if the evil white man hadn't come to disturb the rustic idyll of the early black settlers.
Ignored by the Portuguese and Dutch, except as a convenient resting point en route to India. Shunned by the British, who had decided that their empire was already large enough and didn't need to include bits of Africa.
The vast mineral wealth lying undisturbed below the Highveld soil as simple tribesmen graze their cattle blissfully unaware that beneath them lies one of the richest gold seams in the world. But what would they want with gold?
There are no roads because no roads are needed because there are no cars. It's 2008 and no one has taken the slightest interest in South Africa, apart from a handful of botanists and zoologists who reckon that the country's flora and fauna rank as one of the largest unspoilt areas in a polluted world.
Because they have never been exposed to the sinful ways of the West, the various tribes of South Africa live healthy and peaceful lives, only occasionally indulging in a bit of ethnic cleansing.
Their children don't watch television because there is no television to watch. Instead they listen to their grandparents telling stories around a fire. They live in single-storey huts arranged to catch most of the day's sunshine and their animals are kept nearby.
Nobody has any more animals than his family needs and nobody grows more crops than he requires to feed his family and swap for other crops. Ostentation is unknown because what is the point of trying to impress your fellow citizens when they are not impressible?
The dreaded Internet doesn't exist in South Africa and cellphone companies have laughed off any hope of interesting the inhabitants in talking expensively into a piece of black plastic. There are no unsightly shopping malls selling expensive goods made by Asian slave workers and consequently there are no newspapers or magazines carrying articles comparing the relative merits of ladies' handbags.
Whisky, the curse of the white man, isn't known in this undeveloped land and neither are cigars. The locals brew a sort of beer out of vegetables and drink it out of shallow wooden bowls. Five-litre paint cans have yet to arrive in South Africa.
Every so often a child goes missing from the village, eaten either by a hungry lion or a crocodile. The family mourn for a week or so and then have another child. Life is, on the whole, pretty good but there is something vital missing. Being unaware of the temptations of the outside world, nobody knows what it is. Fire has been discovered and the development of the wheel is coming on nicely but the tribal elders are still aware of some essential happiness ingredient they still need to discover. Praying to the ancestors is no help because they are just as clueless.
Then something happens that will change this undisturbed South Africa forever. Huge metal ships land on the coast and big metal flying birds are sent to explore the sparsely populated hinterland. They are full of men from a place called China and they are looking for coal, metal, oil, platinum, farmland, fresh water and cheap labour and lots of it. Suddenly the indigenous population realise what they have been missing all along, their prayers had been answered : At last, someone to blame.
I suspect that questions will continue to be asked about Haider's death for some while to come, but that convincing answers may be less easy to come by.
Friday, 10 October 2008
Generously mentioning my post, Vanishing American goes on to say:
Then there is the superannuated 'Material Girl', Madonna, who is one of the early examples of the pornification of the female image over the last couple of decades. ......
Continue reading here
It is an interesting post on an interesting blog which I recommend to you.
The site also has a forum which those interesting in the fate of what is truly a Vanishing America may find of interest.
From the Desk of Fjordman
"We want to do away with the grade system [in today's schools]. Grades contribute considerably to stress and are not a fair and objective system of measuring the individual's potential."
The Green Party favor ideological Globalism in its purest form. They want a "world citizenship" to replace the national citizenship, totally free migration on a global basis, global taxes and a strengthened United Nations to ensure a just world order:
"We do not believe in artificial borders. We have a vision of unrestricted immigration and emigration, where people have the right to live and work wherever they please… We want Sweden to become an international role model by producing a plan to implement unrestricted immigration."
Continue reading at the Brussels Journal
Tuesday, 7 October 2008
Enjoy it, I doubt it will still be there in the morning
I have sent four requests to blogger asking them to check the blog so as to confirm that I am not a Spammer. However, after almost seven weeks, I am still in the same position.
Does anyone know how one can contact an real person at Blogger, so that I can find whether they are just being inefficient, or if I am being deliberately hindered from posting
Of course, being the inveterate racist he is, old Trev can't resist the temptation to heap the blame for what black people do onto the shoulders of white people, who he accuses of “failing to integrate with refugee children who had witnessed untold horrors in their early lives.”
However, if I may be so bold as to draw attention to a flaw Phillips' argument, it should be noted that a significant majority of those who are involved in knife crime are the children or grandchildren of immigrants. That is to say young people who have never set a Nike shod foot in Africa and who's closest encounter with “untold horrors” will have been via their iPod, some shared happy slapping on their mobile phones, or those they have, themselves, inflicted on some unlucky victim.
Could it not follow, therefore, that what we are seeing is less the result of trauma or lack of integration but rather a cultural phenomenon? Many of those causing havoc on our streets do originate from war torn parts of the dark continent, but what was it that made those parts war torn, and why are they being replicated here?
Recently a lot of the knife crime has involved members of the Somali community, who do indeed originate from one of the most violent countries on the planet. However, what is it that makes Somalia so violent and dangerous, is it the sand flies?, the camel spiders? Odd Indian Ocean breezes? or the Somalis themselves? If not. why is it that the children of Somali immigrants, most of whom have never seen a war zone, still behave as if they are in one?.
Brutality is nothing new to that region, during World War II, allied troops involved in the East Africa campaign feared most being captured by the Somalis, who were at the time fighting on the Italian side, for it was well known that death at their hands would be neither quick or kind.
Somalia aside, Phillips makes a particular reference to the Congo, where certainly the atrocities there have been particularly gruesome, however, gruesome atrocities are nothing new to the Congo, the horrors of the 1960 uprising are often compared to the Cambodian Killing fields under Pol Pot. It is said that few white females escaped the Congo uprising without being raped multiple times, be she grandmother, nun or toddler, and they were lucky when compared to the indigenous Congolese who belonged to the wrong tribes and whose victimisation continues to this day.
“Ah tribal conflict!!” Trev would no doubt splutter if confronted with such an argument “That was all the fault of Colonialism!” which, of course, is what he and the other multi-cultural fanatics shriek whenever confronted with the reality of inter-tribal violence, such as that seen in Rwanda, the DRC, Kenya and Uganda to name but a few. “That was all the white man's fault!”. NOT SO! Ethiopia was never a colony, there are no arbitrary colonial frontiers drawn across Ethiopia, however, like most of Africa, the country has been beset by tribal conflict for centuries, the most recent example being the attempted genocide of the Anuak tribe in 2004
It seems that not everything is the white man's fault, and that ethnic culture can involve more than spicy food and a sense of rhythm.
Trevor and his cronies are only too ready to tell us how we can benefit from exposure to different cultures, yet what they fail to mention is that other cultures have their downside, sometimes it comes waving a machete and that side too can be and frequently is) imported too.
A further source of street crime, and ongoing conflict with the African community comes from members of the West Indian community, specifically Jamaica. Most Jamaicans of African origin have never been near Africa, neither have their parents, grandparents and even great grandparents, yet Kingston, like the majority African American cities of Detroit and New Orleans in the USA, ranks amongst those world cities most beset with with crime, violence, rape and murder.
It seems culture may travel down the generations, good or bad.
However, Africa is not alone in importing the less welcome aspects to their culture, in many areas the violence and conflict we see, but which the media avoids reporting, comes from members of the Asian community. This also is nothing new, read the history of Asia and you will find that it is a violent one, the Afghans, for instance, did not discover their talent for torture pnly by practising on young Russian soldiers in the 1980's, their cruelty was infamous for centuries before that. Equally, inter-ethnic violence across the subcontinent started long before the Raj, let alone patrician, and wasn't our fault either.
Cultural violence is not the only unwelcome result of opening our doors to all-comers, foreigners can have other bad habits. Recent allegations of electoral fraud, in for instance, Birmingham, primarily involved members of the Asian community whose origins are in nations where such practices are endemic. Likewise, when considering London, where millions of pounds of taxpayers money vanished in odd deals involving black and Asian businesses, it is not unreasonable to remember where African and Asian countries languish in the International corruption league tables.
This is not a message of hate, although some will portray it as such. I do not wish harm on anyone. However, there are many huge problems in Africa, Asia and the rest of the third world, which need to be addressed at their source, not just spread around so that everyone shares the bad luck. A problem does not cease to be a problem by relocating it, that simply creates a whole new set of victims.
It would be ludicrous to suggest that, crime and violence, and some forms of corruption, did not exist in Britain before such high levels of third world immigration was imposed upon us, or that we may not have had a few cultural flaws ourselves. However, we are importing new ones, reintroducing cruelties which we long put behind us, and in many respects they are far worse than anything which existed here before. Moreover, should not the aim be to solve the problems we had, rather than introduce new and worse ones.
It is often said that one has to take the rough with the smooth, but the British people may one day realise how few smooth features there are to mass immigration, and quite how rough the rough bits can be, and that those rough bits are not our fault whatever the likes of Trevor Phillips may accuse us of.
I pray the British wake up soon because we have not yet seen the worst.
Monday, 6 October 2008
When a white male is passed over for a promotion he believes he is entitled to, he will often feel he has been unfairly treated, but when the unpromoted one is a women or even more so if they are a member of an ethnic minority, there is inevitably the temptation to attribute those feelings of unfairness to something else. This is obviously even more tempting when there is the potential for one's grievance to be soothed by a large cheque for a life changing sum they could only otherwise expect if they won the lottery.
Speaking of lucky dips, I think most people have formed their own views as to the merits of the Met's most senior Muslim officer Tarique Ghaffur's claims of discrimination, and as for the sometime president of the Black Police association, Commander Ali Dizaei, if there is anyone out there who has not yet got his number, then they really should not be allowed out on their own.
However, the fact that we know what is happening is probably irrelevant, political correctness has reached the point where the truth no longer matters. In all likelihood, Ghaffur's complaint will pay dividends and he, together with the other two to three dozen ethnic minority officers currently consulting their lawyers, will soon be supplementing their early retirement funds with handsome amounts of tax payer's money. The alternative would be for the Met to say that none of their enthusiastically recruited ethnic appointees were sufficiently able to be promoted to higher positions, which we , the complaining policemen and their smug lawyers all know the Met will never do.
As for Dizari, given his oft displayed talent for dodging even the most compelling evidence against him, one would be a fool to not to rate his chances of wangling some additional compensation out of the latest developments as better than evens.
When those who have been appointed to positions of trust in law enforcement act so blatantly and with such obvious contempt for society, is it surprising when society begins to lose faith in law and order, and indeed respect for the law itself?
Sunday, 5 October 2008
Before anyone writes to correct me, I do know that Deborah Kerr was born in Helensburgh, and is therefore actually Scottish, however, over almost two decades, from the late 1940's until the early 1960's, for much of the world she was one of a select group of women who represented the ideal of cool English beauty.
More than most, Kerr personified what was popularly referred to as an English Rose. Many of her contemporaries, such as the violet eyed Elizabeth Taylor, or the sultry Joan Collins, although born in Britain, seem firmly located in the mid-Atlantic, whilst the likes of the lovely Audrey Hepburn, actually born in Belgium, exuded a European chic which would break its kitten heel on a Yorkshire moor, yet even they aspired repeatedly to play English Roses. At that time an English Rose was what most British girls, and many woman across the world wanted to be.
Englishness such as that portrayed by Kerr had a currency, and her predecessors, like Phyllis Calvert or the exquisite Margaret Lockwood, who were great stars in Britain despite making less impact in Hollywood, were quintessentially and passionately English whilst those who did make it big in Hollywood, such as Greer Garson and Anna Neagle occasionally seemed to overplay their Englishness to the point of caricature.
Another great British movie star, the troubled Vivien Leigh, the first Lady Olivier, who's heyday preceded Deborah Kerr's by about a decade is now primarily remembered as the feisty Southern Belle, of Irish Origin, Scarlett O'Hara, in “Gone With the Wind” or as the tragic Blanche DuBois, a role, perhaps too close for comfort, in "A Streetcar named Desire". However, at the zenith of her fame, and to her bedazzled fans at the time, she was nothing less than an iconic English Rose.
As a Scott, Deborah Kerr was perhaps playing a role when she donned the mantle of Englishness, but, actors play roles which suit the culture of their age and as a true Brit, she seems to have instinctively known what the role required. A grace and refinement, which transcended class, a reserved sensuality that is is never slatternly and most vitally, a sense of honour, kindness and decency which radiated from any rose worthy of the name. Although Kerr personally had physical beauty in abundance, great beauty is not an essential requirement of an English Rose, rather the English Rose had an inner beauty, which has a far longer lifespan than transitory physical beauty and travels into old age with those English women who possess it.
Kerr carried that grace and refinement into all her celluloid roles, even managing to play Karen Holmes in the famous beach scene in From Here to Eternity with a dignity which never came close to the down and dirty blatantness favoured by the Susanna Yorks Glenda Jacksons and Charlotte Ramplings who were to follow her.
Indeed, those who have seen the film will remember that it was Burt Lancaster's body which was primarily on display amongst the surf and not Kerr's.
Of a different, but equally famous role. I have occasionally heard people wrongly describe Deborah Kerr's great venture into musicals, lip-synching to Marni Nixon's voice in Rogers and Hammerstein's The King and I, as an early venture into interracial romance. However, even a cursory analysis of themes of the movie reveals the error of such an assessment, whilst demonstrating a respect for other cultures, the story clearly exposes the chasm which exists between races, and with the King's death demonstrates how damaging and indeed fatal, attempts to impose one culture upon another will inevitably be.
Kerr was a class act, and for almost two decades, she embodied how much of the world viewed English women, depite attempts by Diana Dors or Yvonne Mitchell to present an alternative image.
However, it is not my aim to celebrate the career of Deborah Kerr, who sadly died last year, but to question why an ideal she represented and which had existed for centuries, up to a generation ago, has now almost completely vanished, to be replaced by something which is it's complete antithesis. Why is it that, when our mother's generation aspired to become an English Rose our daughters seem to favour the common ragwort.
The female celebrities of our age are the likes of the slatternly Cheryl Cole, the tattooed and substance dependant Amy Winehouse and the largely bionic Katie Price, women whom a generation earlier would have been lucky to appear in the red lighted windows of Amsterdam or the Reeperbahn, if in Europe at all, rather than the front pages of children's magazines.
Today, little girls play with dolls called Bratz, which appear to represent mixed race, botox enhanced, re-pubescent sluts in minuscule, buttocks exposing, skirts, and nobody views that as unhealthy. From an early age, the next generation of women are being taught to admire females who are one step up from being backstreet hookers, some less than a step, and informed that the ultimate female ambition is to be a pelmet skirted executive at work, and a slapped up gangsta's Ho at home.
I used to think that the type of girl who fell for the “spread your legs and show your power” school of feminism were victims of cynical male voyeurs, but I now suspect that the aims behind it are more sinister than that, can it be that those who seek our downfall believe that by turning the sort of people who our parents would have viewed as the lowest of the low in to social icons, they can undermine the values which built our society.
Furthermore, by enticing young white women to behave as whores they will inevitably become more receptive to the sort of, frequently non white, men who will treat them as such. Is this really what those who campaigned for women's rights fought for?
As far as the women's movement is concerned many believe the rot set in during the late 60's, when those who aspired to parity with men were replaced by radical lesbians or fanatics who viewed all sex between men and women as acts of rape and scorned contemporary attitudes to femininity as subjugation. However, I doubt that even the most man hating of bull dykes ever thought they would see a day when women believe they can gain respect by exposing their bare bottoms.
It is as if feminism lost its way, fell asleep and woke up in a Bangkok cathouse.
What seems to be a desire to be demeaned extends well beyond young girls, visit the city any day and you will see women, old enough to know better, travelling to work in suits which are too short and too small to qualify as smart, and who no doubt wonder why there is still a glass ceiling.
In politics, similarly embarrassing spectacles can be seen, does our Home Secretary, Jackie Smith really believe she can be taken seriously, reading some statement on terrorism or social upheaval, when her exposed cleavage fills most of a wide angle TV screen, or do ambitious ministers like Caroline Flint really expect to be viewed as anything other than a token women when she wears skirts split to areas best left to the contemplation of one's gynaecologist?
I am certainly not suggesting that western women embrace the burkah, but how can society, let alone male society, respect women who do not respect themselves. The English Rose of yesterday had self respect, yet one has to wonder if today's common ragwort, dressed in what amounts to little more than two band aids and a pocket handkerchief, even understands the concept.
This is a subject I have touched on before, the propaganda aimed at young women is so relentless one has to wonder if there is a deliberate aim to it. Does a nation fall when its women become whores? If that the game plan? For that certainly seems to be what is happening.
The male role model is also changing, but not to the same degree as the female, for every Ashley Cole or Pete Doherty, our celebrity culture still embraces a few remaining chiselled jawed men who would not took out of place in the company of Cary Grant and David Niven. But where are the Ann Todds, the Margaret Lockwoods the Joan Greenwoods or indeed the Deborah Kerrs? How often does one see a female celebrity under 50 who could be fairly called a lady?. There may be some but there are not many left and they do not appear in the magazines our children read or the TV shows they watch.
In an age when the queen's own granddaughter (allegedly) cavorts in the nude and ogles black men we must sadly accept that the the English Rose has become an endangered species whilst the common ragwort thrives in plague like proportions.
Thursday, 2 October 2008
I have always been grateful for the fact that in Britain, so called "Holocaust denial" is not a crime although a number of other thought crimes are, and that, at least in that area, scholars can debate the facts of history.
The fact that what Australian historian Dr. Fredrick Töben is accused of doing is not a crime in Britain makes it even more shocking that he was arrested on an aircraft passing through Britain's Heathrow airport on the strength of an extradition warrant issued by the German government.
I may not agree with Dr Töben, or know if what he says has any merit, however, the treatment he has received at the hands of Britain is outrageous and exposes as a joke what any claim that there is free speech in this country.
What follows is a letter written by Lady Michèle Renouf to the Australian High Commissioner, detailing the behaviour of the British police, presumably with the approval of the British Government.
Michèle, Lady Renouf,
2nd October 2008
As you will be aware the British police and Crown Prosecution Service have executed a Mannheim-originating warrant on an Australian national, the historian Dr. Fredrick Töben, who was arrested on board an aeroplane at Heathrow while simply in transit from the USA to Dubai.
Even as he had no intention of entering Britain, he was seized off the aeroplane and brought into this country where his alleged crimes do not even constitute an offence.
For the first time, therefore, the European Arrest Warrant is being used in a manner that we in Britain were assured would not be applied in Britain,which has declined to adopt a 'Holocaust denial' law, because it is contrary to British traditions of freedom of enquiry and expression.
The situation is summed up in today's Times under the headline:'
Extradition bid raises fears of 'thought crime' offences'.
I trust that the High Commission will provide consular assistance to Dr.Töben and will monitor this disturbing and unprecedented development so as to keep our fellow Australians informed of what they can expect from the UK legal system when travelling or in transit.