Labour election fraud

In the run up to the local elections I thought I would post a link to this news item in the Times from a while back.

I am always amused when the main parties presume to lecture everyone on the criminality of a certain party without ever providing proof.

Fortunately there is a handy resource which lists the countless members and representatives of their parties that have committed offences, and in many cases very serious ones indeed.

It can be found here: Liars, Buggers and Thieves

It will be interesting to see whether this years elections will be free and fair or whether Nu Labour will continue to live up to it's reputation as the party that would disgrace a banana republic.

Labour election fraud ‘would disgrace a banana republic’

What a farce!

First they are not allowed to under MOD guidelines, then they are allowed to and now they are not!

Defence Secretary Des Browne said the Navy had faced a "very tough call" over its decision to allow the sailors among the 15 hostages to take payments in return for their accounts - the first of which were published today.
But he said everyone concerned recognised it had "not reached a satisfactory outcome" and lessons must be learned from a review of procedures ordered by the Ministry of Defence.
"I want to be sure those charged with these difficult decisions have clear guidance for the future," he said in his first comment on the controversy.

Clear guidance ....... NuLAbour........ Yet another example of Government by spin and focus groups.

You just couldn't make this lot up.

Labour 'facing large BNP challenge'

Jon Cruddas said the BNP was putting up 750 candidates - more than double the 350 it fielded in last year's local elections in England. Actually I believe it is 828!

The MP for Dagenham, east London, where the BNP won 11 council seats last year, said the BNP was "thriving" in some poor areas - particularly former Labour heartlands, where it was positioning itself as an alternative to the main parties. The BNP is thriving in plenty of areas, many of which are not poor at all as I am sure will be shown in the upcoming elections.

"The BNP is attempting to capitalise on peoples feelings of insecurity," he said.
Hmm, I wonder where this insecurity comes from?

"We have less than a month to convince people that the BNP represent a very real threat to communities and they should not be considered as a viable alternative to the mainstream parties or even to register a protest vote."

A threat to communities. I'm sorry Mr Cruddas but very few people are listening to you and your kind anymore. Why would we be interested in anything you have to say. We have had 10 years of Nu Labour during which time you could easily have convinced us that there is no viable alternative to your party by improving the country rather than turning it into the depraved lawless s&*t hole that it now is.

No, we have seen what it is to be run by Nu Labour, we have heard from both the other main parties that we could expect more of the same from them.

All this thugs, racist, sleaze anti-British crap you and your kind continue to spout doesn't wash anymore.

In the words of an honorable politician and patriot to his country:

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."

Your time is up.

Cruddas

Navy 15 to sell story.

Fortunately some in this country still know what patriotism is.

The 15 Navy personnel captured by the Iranians were thankfully released unharmed. People have expressed differing views of their conduct ranging from their actions being seen as heroic through to cowardly.

Whatever their actions were, a professional armed service described by Senior Officers as the "best in the world" should not have serving Officers and enlisted men behaving as cheap celebrities from a reality TV show.

I understand that not all of the sailors and marines intend to receive payment for their story and I commend this position.

To any who do and keep the money, shame on you. Shame on your Senior Officers, shame on the MOD and most importantly shame on Blair and this bankrupt administration for bringing disgrace to this nation.

Police priorities!

Interesting article regarding the priorities of the North Wales police service. It always suprises me how the police magically finds officers to spare when it comes to arresting anyone who doesn't fall into line with Nu Labour's dream.


The North Wales Police State?

Reduced crime risk continued........

A police force has admitted to letting off almost 100 sexual offenders with a caution in the last five years.

Figures reveal that no charges were brought by West Mercia Constabulary against 93 sex offenders - including eight rapists - between April 1 2001 and March 31 2006.
Instead of going to court, they were given a caution.

According to a police spokeswoman, "West Mercia Constabulary is committed to bringing offenders to justice and protecting members of the public. "

Cautions were given for 41 indecent assaults, eight rapes, 17 sexual assaults, nine sexual activity cases (including with a child), one gross indecency with a child, six unlawful sexual intercourse cases and 11 other sexual offences.

The spokeswoman continued. "When an individual accepts a caution, it is important to remember that a person must admit wrongdoing in order to receive a caution and it represents an admission of guilt."

A caution for rape, a caution for gross indecency with a child ... protecting members of the public...... is it me or is there something not quite compatible about the two statements?

I have always supported the police in the past, but when I read things like this I truly believe that they are wasting their time. They may as well disband and let everyone spend their tax money on their own personal security. At least that way someone will genuinely be concerned for their safety.

NU Labour's police service, to protect and serve .... but who?

Modern policing

Public fearful despite reduced crime risk!

Firstly, let's clear this up right away. There is NO reduced crime risk, just the downgrading of so many offences to ensure that the figures say what Nu Labour want them to. How long will it be before armed robbery, GBH and aggravated burglary are downgraded?

I look forward to the day that Nu Labour announces that crime has totally been eradicated in the UK.

Anyway, despite all the NU Labour lies regarding crime statistics, such is the failure of their spin machine these days, it appears that they are struggling to fool many of the people:

Three-quarters of people believe Britain is more dangerous today than it was five years ago, a survey has found.

In a blow for the Government, more than half of the public say they are so scared of yobs and crime they avoid certain areas, and four out of ten will not go out at night on foot.

Four out of ten have become so worried they have beefed up their home security.
Alarmingly, some 61 per cent felt frightened of being alone at home during the night - with 14 per cent hiding a weapon close to the bed.

Welcome to Blair's Britain - tough on the victims of crime.

Since 1998, Violence against the person is up 111 per cent - from 502,788 incidents to 1,059,913 last year.
Sexual offences are up 72 per cent from 36,174 to 62,081. And robbery is up 47 per cent - from 66,835 crimes to 98,204.

Crime is up, the prisons are full, taxes are up, the national health service is in terminal decline, unemployment is rising, housing shortage continues to affect the British population, utility bills are out of control.

Still, as far as NU Labour is concerned we have all benefited from multicultural enrichment so I guess we've never had it so good.

Nu Labour, what a bunch of lying c*&%s.

Nu Labour failure

Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims

As part of the continued downward spiral of educational standards it should come as no shock to find that the latest casualty is history lessons. What does come as a shock though is that this time it is not just a matter of dumbing down the lessons and adjusting the emphasis so as to marginalise the majority indigenous population in favour of glorious integration policies.

This time, schools are dropping the Holocaust from history lessons to avoid offending Muslim pupils, because some teachers are reluctant to cover the atrocity for fear of upsetting students whose beliefs include Holocaust denial.

Now whilst I understand that history can be somewhat subjective, are we to now assume that those schools and teachers involved agree with the historical detail of the holocaust or not?

Because if the curriculum looks at the second world war and does not mention the holocaust, then guess what, you are denying it.

Perhaps those teachers who support the dropping of historical facts from the curriculum should be reminded that Holocaust Denial is a criminal offence in the following European countries punishable by the associated sentences:

Austria: 6 months - 20 years
Belgium: Fine - 1 year
Czech Republic: 6 months - 2 years
France: Fine or 1 month - 2 years
Germany: Fine or 1 month- 5 years
Israel: 1 year - 5 years
Italy (law against racial discrimination): 3 years - 4 years
Lithuania: Fine or 2 years -10 years
Poland: Fine or 3 months - 3 years, Romania: 6 months or 3-5 years

With extradition treaties between all European states, and groups pressing for Holocaust Denial to become an EU wide offence, let us hope that these teachers find it in themselves to have the "courage" to tell the truth regardless of how inconvenient it may be lest they find themselves with the conviction instead.

Teachers drop the Holocaust to avoid offending Muslims

Two Hundred Thousand Asylum Seekers to get Amnesty

Up to 200,000 asylum seekers will be allowed to remain in Britain because Home Office officials admit they will never be able to track them down.
The extraordinary amnesty is the latest embarrassment for Home Secretary John Reid, who has staked his reputation on his pledge to make the department 'fit for purpose'.
So says the article in the Daily Mail: Nu Labour Failure - Again

Home Office officials also stated that 18,000 immigrants are set to be deported because they have committed crimes in the UK.

18000 immigrants - a quarter of the prison population, 25%.

A Home Office spokesperson said: "We remain confident that we will be able to clear the entire current legacy of cases by July 2011."

2011 - 4 years from now, and yet still they come!

John Reid has staked his reputation on his pledge to make the department fit for purpose. Where to start! The only reputation Mr Reid has is the one he shares with the rest of the reckless, duplicitous, anti-British traitors and liars that riddle this Government and NU Labour at all levels.

And as for embarrassment, don't make me laugh. When will people wake up to the fact that nothing embarrasses these people; they don't care about what you think of them, they don't care what you think of their policies, they don't care what you think of what they have done to your country, they don't care about you at all, not even the tiniest bit.

Nu Labour may have already caused irreparable damage to this country, and yet where are the voices of opposition? Looking to Cameron or Campbell for any sort of opposition is a total waste of time. They stand idly by as this country is turned into the cesspool of the world.

Is it not enough that we have seen our freedoms severely curtailed, taxes raised to an all time high, waiting times (real waiting times not massaged Government figures) for medical treatment at an all time high, deaths in hospital from super bugs at an all time high, huge numbers of the population unable to get access to a dentist, unemployment (real unemployment not massaged Government figures) at an all time high, crime rates (real crime rates not massaged Government figures) at an all time high, our Armed Forces reduced to third world levels and no longer able to provide the necessary support for our brave service men and women, Health and safety rules beyond all reason, stiffer sentences for dropping a Ginsters wrapper than for committing assault, speeding motorists surcharged to pay for domestic violence teams!, being told to apologise (and pay compensation) for something that came to an end 200 years ago (200 years for f%$#s sake), and many many many other things that have befallen our once great nation.

As a well known man recently said: "I am conscious that when an essential core of our democratic freedom risks being undermined, subsequent generations will hold to account those who were able to raise their voices yet stayed silent."

Where are the voices of opposition?

I'll tell you where, HERE!

Iran declares war on Great Britain - Tony Blair share the nations dismay!

In what is clearly an act of war against our country, the Iranian government captures 15 British sailors and parades them in front of the camera for all the world to see.

What does Tony Blair do? What can he do? He and his Government have run our armed forces into the ground. The fact that the Iranians snatched the British navy personnel by using small boats does not come as any surprise as due to Tony and the rest, the Iranian navy may well soon be superior to our own.

As for the EU and the UN, what a waste of space they are. As usual, if you are not an "oppressed minority" (in their opinion) then you are not worth sticking up for.

Mr Blair, Government Ministers, main opposition parties in the UK, you are all a complete and utter disgrace.

You have let down the men and women you sent to fight in your name, you have let down the "British" people.

For God's sake go and let this country be run by people who have loyalty to the electorate and the courage and backbone to fight for what is right.

In the coming elections, I for one will be voting for the British National Party as they are the only party that represents the views and rights of the British people; the only party that would not send our troops off on world policing duties in the first place, but if our troops found themselves in this situation, would back them to the hilt.

I will be voting for them; if you care about this country and despair at what you hear on a daily basis, are disgusted by the sheer criminality and contempt shown by our Government towards it's own people, I suggest you do the same.

Thank you to Britain.

If he were alive today, I am sure my Great Great Great Great Great Great Great Grandfather would be pleased to receive the warm thanks and generous words from the grateful masses regarding his part in the abolition of slavery and subsequent enforcement of this around the world.

I imagine he would be very disappointed to hear that despite his best efforts, slavery is still very much a part of daily life in some wider reaches of the globe.

Still, with all the celebrations to mark his success, it's surely just a matter of time before all the wonderful caring people who are so deeply involved in the commemoration turn their attention to those nations and those people who still engage in this barbarous trade.

Isn't it?

UK Armed forces racist - John Smith an enlightened NULabour MP

UK armed forces 'institutionally racist' - so says John Smith (NuLabour MP) .

""The UK's armed forces are failing to recruit enough ethnic minorities because they are institutionally racist" he claims.

John Smith - who spent four years in the RAF - said it was the only explanation for the fact that less than 10,000 of the UK's 200,000 personnel were from ethnic minorities."


The only explanation!

He added: "I am not saying that people in the armed forces, individuals, are racists. I have no knowledge of that.
"What I am saying is that the armed forces are, by definition, de facto institutionally racist and it's about time this Parliament did something about it."

I tell you what you should do Mr Smith, and that is introduce quotas. That will solve your problem once and for all. That will sort out all the institutional racism once and for all. And whilst we're at it, lets have quotas based on sexuality and maybe even religious beliefs.

Of course, that might be a little problematic for this Government, as it seems that organisations can only be truly institutionally racist when they are "hideously white". I wonder if there are any organisations that under a quota system would be found to be not white enough? Hmm, I wonder.

No room for justice

I am taking a bit of a liberty by cutting and pasting from the comments section at the Daily Mail. If anyone objects, let me know and I'll take it off. It talks about the consequences of the prison fiasco and what I see as the Governments culpability in the death of an innocent woman.

There is already a crime of corporate manslaughter, why not one for Government manslaughter?

It's a terrifyingly familiar story. Twice the courts had the chance to put drug addict Sean Francis behind bars for beating his girlfriend and threatening to kill her. Twice they let him walk free.

So what happened next? Less than 24 hours after his second release, it emerged yesterday, Francis stabbed Wendy Billing to death in front of their toddler son.
There'll be many more cases like that in the months ahead.

When Francis struck last September, magistrates and judges were already under intense pressure from the Home Office to ease prison overcrowding by granting bail and awarding non-custodial sentences.

Today Ministers have cranked up that pressure tenfold, with a panic-stricken letter to the courts urging them to set free all but the most serious criminals.

How could they so shamelessly neglect their duty to protect the public?

For years, Ministers have been warned of the desperate need for more prison places. Why, the Home Office's own statisticians predict we may need another 20,000 by 2011.

Even if Home Secretary John Reid gets round to providing all the 8,000 extra places he promises - and there's precious little sign of that - he'll still be more than 12,000 short.

Who knows how many more Wendy Billings will have to pay with their lives for the Government's abject failures?

Remember Tony Blair's promise, all those years ago, to be 'tough on crime'? Of all his empty pledges, it's turning out to be the emptiest of the lot

BNP, UKIP, Socialism, Conservatism!

Interesting article in the Telegraph regarding UKIP and the Conservatives, nice piece by EU Referendum and especially interested that others are nodding towards the BNP as the New Conservatives!

But, for those who would not now vote for UKIP even if hell froze over, there are other options, not least the British National Party. The problem here is that, although it is branded "extreme right-wing", it is in fact a far-left party. And while UKIP is capturing the disaffected right, BNP is Hoovering up votes from the disaffected old Labour left. In the heady days of the Thatcher revolution, these were the people - the "White van man" - who gravitated to the Conservatives and gave them 18 years of power.

Perversely, while the leaders of the main parties would all like to claim the mantle of Thatcher, the recipient of her now disillusioned support is Nick Griffin, the leader of the BNP. Effectively, he is the true heir of Thatcherism.


EU Referendum link: The wilderness is getting rather crowded
Telegraph link: Cameron mocks the 'loonies and fruitcakes' of UKIP at his peril

Criminals to get free passes under Nu Labour

I knew 2007 was going to be a very interesting year for Britain, but I really didn't expect so much to have already happened. It's not even the end of January and yet we already have the melt down of law and order in this country, but guess what, it's all for the benefit of the taxpayer.

Desperate Ministers will beg judges to stop sending criminals to prisons - because they are full.
A letter will be sent to courts across the country admitting that jails are officially in crisis.
It pleads for only the most violent or dangerous criminals to be given a custodial sentence. Magistrates are also being asked to allow bail to all but the most serious crime suspects.

It urges that suspects such as burglars be bailed rather than remanded and follows on from Mr Reid's recent statement that taxpayers' money should not be 'squandered' on locking up or monitoring offenders who would be better punished in the community.

Ah, so as usual it is for our benefit that criminals will be allowed to act with impunity!

How many additional victims will be created due to the incompetence of this Government? Should all victims of crime be able to sue the Government for negligence when they are attacked by someone who should have been behind bars. No wonder the Government has no interest in mandatory sentencing when it needs to change the rules on a daily basis.

Mr Reid has promised that there will be an additional 8000 places in the spring so does that mean offences committed in the next few months will receive lesser sentences than those later on in the year?

And when will the new prison places be available, just in time for the May elections perhaps?

And one final question, why the sudden massive explosion in the prison population, in the number of people awaiting trial and the number of people who would ordinarily have gone to prison if there had been room? Surely it's not down to, no wait, just let me move this elephant out of the way.

Britain under Nu Labour, criminals never had it so good.

Ministers beg judges - don't jail any more criminals!

School faces court battle over veil ban

Just a quick post as off out for the evening. Nobby sent me this link about the new row over veils in schools.

No point me commenting as there are already 81 comments and rising.

Sometimes you have just got to believe that the time is approaching when common sense will once again prevail.

School faces court battle over veil ban

Law 'threat' to Catholic adoption

Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor has written to the Cabinet to say church teaching prevented its agencies placing children with homosexual couples.

He says forcing agencies to act against their consciences would constitute discrimination against Catholics.

The Equality Act is due to come into effect in April.
It outlaws discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services on the basis of sexual orientation in a similar way to rules on sex and race discrimination.

Although I do not support discrimination against any group in principle, I am totally against any organisation or legislation that prevents discrimination by discriminating against others

The problem with Nu Labours desire to outlaw discrimination in any form is that it has to discriminate in order to not discriminate! Now we have the example in which the Equality Act will place the rights of homosexuals not to be discriminated against above the right of Religious Groups to have the freedom of conscience and religion; in other words, everyone is equal in their right not to be discriminated against, but some are more equal than others.

Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor says Roman Catholic teaching about the foundations of family life rules out the choice of homosexual adoptive parents.
The cardinal said the closure of the seven agencies would represent a wholly avoidable "tragedy".
Its agencies are said to handle 4% or about 200 of all adoptions a year but about a third of those children judged difficult to place.

BBC Religious Affairs Correspondent Robert Pigott said the letter suggests the Catholic Church is ready for a fight.

Well it is about time that they did put up a fight. A certain other religious group in this country continues to grow in influence due to the vocal nature of it's "congregation".

Interestingly enough, this new legislation also conflicts with their views on sexuality, and so left unchallenged, Nu Labour could well have to face the ignominy of presiding over a contest between homophobia and islamaphobia.

Shameless!

No I'm not referring to the new series of the Channel Four comedy drama about the family from Manchester, rather another family who currently hail from London but who would certainly give the Gallaghers a run for their money.

The Human Rights Act, the modern day criminal and terrorists charter, does in fact appear to provide more than just a cover to prevent photographs of escaped prisoners being published, or terrorists and illegal immigrants from being deported.

And who better to exploit the provisions of her husbands, sorry, Her Majesty's Governments legislation than one of the top Human Rights Lawyers in the land.

"Cherie Blair accused Britain’s top civil servant of violating her human rights as he tried to rein in her fondness for freebies, it was claimed yesterday.
She left the Cabinet Secretary ‘gobsmacked’ by claiming she was entitled to cut-price designer clothes under the Human Rights Act.
And she repeatedly argued with officials over claims that she tried to exploit her position to make money. "

Although the revelations have been dismissed by a Downing Street spokesman as mostly untrue or widely exaggerated tittle-tattle, it does appear that as with most things Blair (or Nu Labour) there are more questions than answers.

"Among the clothes Mrs Blair is said to have acquired was a £10,000 red and gold brocade dress by Lindka Cierach which she wore to an awards ceremony in October 2003 and again at a dinner in Nigeria the following month.
When Sir Andrew criticised her over the discounts, she reportedly told him he was infringing her rights ‘under Article 1 of the European Convention on Human Rights on an individual’s right to do as they like with their own property’. "

In all the confusion over gifts, holidays and the like, it might be useful if extra assistance was made available on the day that the Blairs move out of No 10. After all, it might have only taken one removal truck to move them in, but who knows how many it will take to move them out?

Blair's right to freebies

Not fit for purpose!

In a mature, democratic, intelligent society, one accepts that for many jobs there may well be one or two prerequisites. To be a Veterinary Surgeon one must be academically qualified, to be a driver one must have a certain level of eyesight and have passed a test, employment in the fire service requires a certain level of fitness and so on.

So what about the police service, how about a serving police officer who is not able to touch half of all members of the public? Ridiculous, silly, that would never happen!

Well remember, this is Blair's (and Brown's) Britain, and here commonsense gives way all the time to political correctness and the appeasement of certain religions.

A muslim woman police officer has sparked a new debate by refusing to shake hands with Britain's most senior police chief for religious reasons.
The incident happened at a passing-out parade where Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair was inspecting a line-up of 200 recruits.

In addition to refusing a traditional congratulatory handshake from Sir Ian, the WPC - who wore a traditional Muslim hijab headscarf - also declined to be photographed with him as she did not want the picture used for 'propaganda purposes'.

The woman had earlier insisted that it was contrary to her religious teaching for her to touch a man.

Imagine another police officer on patrol who is attacked and calls upon this colleague to assist, what will be the response?

Is it not enough that we have police officers refusing to protect certain sectors of society due to their religious beliefs? It is completely outrageous.

Thousands of applications are turned down each year by young men and women who would love to be police officers, warts and all.

By all means recruit from minority groups if it will ensure an all inclusive police service, but one thing must be certain, the recruits themselves must be fit for purpose.

Unable to carry out my duties

EU police powers or police state?

According to the Observer:

"The EU faces a damaging split over moves led by Germany to impose a radical law and order package. If enacted into European legislation, it would allow armed police to operate with impunity outside their home countries, privatised armed 'sky marshals' on civilian flights and a wide range of joint operations against alleged illegal migrants."

"The plans are provoking opposition in Whitehall and among senior British police officers. Many of them recall how, in 1996, a Dutch parliamentary inquiry revealed that tonnes of illegal drugs had been exported from the Netherlands to Britain with the assistance of Dutch undercover agents, who had allowed informants to run amok.
'We have learnt the hard way how difficult it is to regulate undercover operations,' one source said, citing a series of high-profile Customs and Excise cases that collapsed in the Court of Appeal after irregularities came to light. 'We need to be extremely wary.'"

When I first read it I was of the opinion that it should be opposed at all costs, but when you consider that most of the law of this land is dictated by Europe, why not have a European police force. After all, detection rates in some police "service" areas are as high as 3%, could foreign police "forces" do any worse?

Mind you, the EU does not have a good reputation for the practical application of cooperation

For example, what was the response when Mr Reid faced the first crisis over prisons last year, and asked his European counterparts to accommodate some of their nationals currently in British jails? NO,NO,NO,NO,NO!

You see, when it comes to Europe it is always a one way street.

I don't blame the EU, after all the same principal applies here as to most things, if you don't like it, leave. No, the problem unsurprisingly is with Nu Labour who are determined to finish off any independence this country has, and they are making good progress.

So why not let foreign armed police into Britain, let them make the news by either shootings in public or lots of high profile arrests, after all, when you consider that the majority of new applications to the Northern Ireland police service were from Polish Nationals, we're half way there already.

Of course, a radical alternative might be to consider the EU as a trade partnership instead of allowing it to continue imposing it's will on oppressed Nations who at no time voted for it, but then, that would be called democracy, and this is Great Britain after all!

EU faces split on police powers