Another valid reason why we must leave the EU: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/us-trade-deal-full-frontal-assault-on-democracy
Tuesday, November 05, 2013
Article by by Atul Hatwal on the Labour Uncut website about the Falkirk gerrymandering scandal and the implications for the Labour leadership: http://labour-uncut.co.uk/2013/11/05/the-real-reason-labour-is-petrified-of-re-opening-the-falkirk-inquiry/#more-17436
Quoting The Times, Atul Hatwal writes: "Unite... gave red stars to those considered the union’s opponents, yellow stars to female members who might back it and double green stars to those the union had specifically ‘recruited for the selection’."
What on earth is going on here?
Whose idea was it to grade people with stars?
Are double-green stars first class, yellow stars second class, and red stars third class?
Quoting The Times, Atul Hatwal writes: "Unite... gave red stars to those considered the union’s opponents, yellow stars to female members who might back it and double green stars to those the union had specifically ‘recruited for the selection’."
What on earth is going on here?
Whose idea was it to grade people with stars?
Are double-green stars first class, yellow stars second class, and red stars third class?
The research paper might be valid, it might be a pack of lies
The Today programme discussed the new research paper, published by the Centre for Research and Analysis of Migration (CReAM) at University College London which attempted to prove that immigration was beneficial to the United Kingdom.
Unfortunately one cannot believe anything that a public body says about immigration.
Under the Public Sector Equality Duty public bodies such as universities have a statutory obligation to propagate a positive view of immigration.
Whatever the research carried out by Christian Dustmann and Tommaso Frattini they MUST conclude that immigration is positive - to do otherwise would be breaking the law.
Therefore the research paper might be valid, it might be a pack of lies.
There is no way of telling.
http://theconversation.com/revealed-immigrants-put-34-more-into-the-uks-economy-than-they-take-out-19845
http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_22_13.pdf
PS both the authors of the report receive funding from Norface, which appears to be a pro-immigration lobby group http://www.norface-migration.org/people.php
Unfortunately one cannot believe anything that a public body says about immigration.
Under the Public Sector Equality Duty public bodies such as universities have a statutory obligation to propagate a positive view of immigration.
Whatever the research carried out by Christian Dustmann and Tommaso Frattini they MUST conclude that immigration is positive - to do otherwise would be breaking the law.
Therefore the research paper might be valid, it might be a pack of lies.
There is no way of telling.
http://theconversation.com/revealed-immigrants-put-34-more-into-the-uks-economy-than-they-take-out-19845
http://www.cream-migration.org/publ_uploads/CDP_22_13.pdf
PS both the authors of the report receive funding from Norface, which appears to be a pro-immigration lobby group http://www.norface-migration.org/people.php
Monday, November 04, 2013
Dean Burnett is being provocative
Dean Burnett writes in the Guardian a 1,219 word article on why immigration is "essential" without once mentioning democratic consent.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/nov/04/immigration-is-essential-science
And yet post-war immigration has always been opposed by the majority of the population in every test of public opinion.
You cannot ignore the wishes of the majority and continue to claim the United Kingdom is a democracy, which is why the issue is of such burning importance.
Of course I realise that Dean Burnett is being provocative.
Let me be equally provocative and outline an easy, straightforward three-point plan to reverse post-war immigration:
Stage one - a referendum asking the people whether they want to reverse post-war immigration.
Stage two - use the Census data for 1951 to 2011 to identify post-war immigrants together with their descendants and dependants (the Census gives every individual's place of birth together with family relationships, and combining the data will identify over 90% of the post-war immigrant communities).
Stage three - use the tax system to remove any incentive for these individuals to remain in the United Kingdom, effectively giving them the status of failed asylum seekers.
I would much prefer that things should not come to this point. I would much prefer that the problem of immigration is addressed by stopping any new immigration and assimilating all existing immigrant communities. But Dean Burnett and the rest of the pro-immigration lobby should be aware that they are not the only people who can calmly and rationally propose outrageous and provocative policies should the need arise.
http://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2013/nov/04/immigration-is-essential-science
And yet post-war immigration has always been opposed by the majority of the population in every test of public opinion.
You cannot ignore the wishes of the majority and continue to claim the United Kingdom is a democracy, which is why the issue is of such burning importance.
Of course I realise that Dean Burnett is being provocative.
Let me be equally provocative and outline an easy, straightforward three-point plan to reverse post-war immigration:
Stage one - a referendum asking the people whether they want to reverse post-war immigration.
Stage two - use the Census data for 1951 to 2011 to identify post-war immigrants together with their descendants and dependants (the Census gives every individual's place of birth together with family relationships, and combining the data will identify over 90% of the post-war immigrant communities).
Stage three - use the tax system to remove any incentive for these individuals to remain in the United Kingdom, effectively giving them the status of failed asylum seekers.
I would much prefer that things should not come to this point. I would much prefer that the problem of immigration is addressed by stopping any new immigration and assimilating all existing immigrant communities. But Dean Burnett and the rest of the pro-immigration lobby should be aware that they are not the only people who can calmly and rationally propose outrageous and provocative policies should the need arise.
Health worker migration
Thoughtful article by Martin Drewry, director of Health Poverty Action, about the iniquitous and sinister implications of health worker migration from the developing world to the West: http://www.leftfootforward.org/2013/11/foreigners-stealing-our-health-worker-jobs/
Martin Drewry is absolutely right to say: "Wealthy countries should not have to depend on poor countries to supply their health workforce; they should train and retain more health workers and manage their health workforces better."
Martin Drewry is absolutely right to say: "Wealthy countries should not have to depend on poor countries to supply their health workforce; they should train and retain more health workers and manage their health workforces better."
Sunday, November 03, 2013
Sadiq Khan is trying to use the Indians who fought in the First World War
Sadiq Khan MP (Labour) writing in The Sun: "Muslims fought and died for this country in first world war".
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5239856/Sadiq-Khan-MP-Muslims-fought-and-died-for-this-country.html
Yes, but they were not the same Muslims who are living here now.
I have not seen any evidence (and British Future would be jumping up and down excitedly if there were) that demonstrates the Muslims who have arrived here as immigrants (against the wishes of the majority of the population we should note) are in any significant way related to the Muslims who fought for India, in alliance with the United Kingdom, in the First World War.
Presumably Sadiq Khan is trying to use the Indians who fought in the First World War as an excuse to justify the immigration of Muslims into the United Kingdom in 2013.
Same old Labour, still addicted to immigration.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/5239856/Sadiq-Khan-MP-Muslims-fought-and-died-for-this-country.html
Yes, but they were not the same Muslims who are living here now.
I have not seen any evidence (and British Future would be jumping up and down excitedly if there were) that demonstrates the Muslims who have arrived here as immigrants (against the wishes of the majority of the population we should note) are in any significant way related to the Muslims who fought for India, in alliance with the United Kingdom, in the First World War.
Presumably Sadiq Khan is trying to use the Indians who fought in the First World War as an excuse to justify the immigration of Muslims into the United Kingdom in 2013.
Same old Labour, still addicted to immigration.
Thursday, October 31, 2013
Wednesday, October 30, 2013
Over two hundred thousand Roma
Report on Channel Four News this evening that over two hundred thousand Roma have entered the country in the last ten years.
TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND !!!
To say that I am angry about this is an understatement.
But one must keep calm.
And assert politely but firmly that none (NONE) of these Roma have any legitimate status here, and will never have any legitimate status here whatever the self-serving lying politicians may say.
Indeed, let me talk directly to the Roma community:
TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND !!!
To say that I am angry about this is an understatement.
But one must keep calm.
And assert politely but firmly that none (NONE) of these Roma have any legitimate status here, and will never have any legitimate status here whatever the self-serving lying politicians may say.
Indeed, let me talk directly to the Roma community:
- You are here without my agreement.
- I do not want to share my country with you.
- I would like you to leave.
Secondary sources
That will be an improvement on Chavs, as out of 213 references in the book 127 (60%) were references to press clippings.
http://afroml.blogspot.co.uk/2011/07/chavs-by-owen-jones.html
"Cultural Catholicism"
Is it not alarming the way in which the Labour Party is targetting immigrant communities and making implied promises that society will be tailored towards them if they vote Labour?
Baroness Margaret McDonagh (General Secretary of the Labour Party from 1998 to 2001, and her sister is Siobhain McDonagh MP for Mitcham and Morden) was talking to a largely Irish audience at a meeting organised by Progress at London Irish Centre in Camden yesterday: http://www.progressonline.org.uk/event/campaign-for-a-labour-majority-how-can-labour-win-a-mandate-in-2015-with-lpis/
What does Margaret McDonagh mean by the extensive involvement of "cultural Catholicism"? (Is this code for Labour policy towards the monarchy? Is it a hint about Labour policy towards Northern Ireland? Is it an indication of Labour's policy on the Establishment of the Church of England?).
Why does Labour talk officially about integration of migrants, and yet unofficially is telling migrant communities they are special and can expect special treatment in terms of "social political outlook"?
There is more of this sectarian gerrymandering planned by the Labour Party aimed at Asian, Chinese and Jewish migrant communities: http://labourmajority.org.uk/events/upcoming/#.UkrOdn-eb_Y
This should be seen in the context of overwhelming levels of immigration, including an open-door policy under the last Labour government.
The Conservative Party needs to wake up and see what is happening here. In particular we must end the ability for Irish Republic and Commonwealth incomers to vote in British elections. Otherwise what has happened to the Republican Party in America is going to happen to us.
It does not take many immigrants per marginal constituency to turn the seat Labour, especially if individuals such as Baroness McDonagh are going round promising them the earth if they only vote Labour.
Tuesday, October 29, 2013
Without socialism the "left" is nothing
Although Marko Attila (sic) Hoare is correct in this Guardian article to point to the ideological bankruptcy of the left, he is less sure in trying to analyse the right: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/29/what-does-left-wing-mean-redistribution-wealth?CMP=twt_gu
Left-wing must mean socialism, the collective principle applied to society, but socialism has become discredited.
Without socialism the "left" is nothing, therefore their descent into self-doubt and increasing irrelevance.
The right on the other hand has a complete programme for society - Christian, monarchist, nationalist (mildly), traditionalist (of course), family-orientated, self-reliant, venerating private property, valuing individual liberty.
This all comes as a package, for instance it would be difficult (if not impossible) to have a Conservative society without Anglicanism (however lefty the clerics get).
Marko Hoare sees none of this, and tells us the only dividing line is one of economics - which seems a very marxist way of looking at the situation.
I also suspect that Mr Hoare confuses Conservatives with libertarians (they are very different).
But the failure of ideological leftism is a tribute to the strength of Conservatism.
Increasingly the left (by which we must mean the Labour Party) is reduced to crying "me too (but slightly differently)" to the Conservative vision of society.
Left-wing must mean socialism, the collective principle applied to society, but socialism has become discredited.
Without socialism the "left" is nothing, therefore their descent into self-doubt and increasing irrelevance.
The right on the other hand has a complete programme for society - Christian, monarchist, nationalist (mildly), traditionalist (of course), family-orientated, self-reliant, venerating private property, valuing individual liberty.
This all comes as a package, for instance it would be difficult (if not impossible) to have a Conservative society without Anglicanism (however lefty the clerics get).
Marko Hoare sees none of this, and tells us the only dividing line is one of economics - which seems a very marxist way of looking at the situation.
I also suspect that Mr Hoare confuses Conservatives with libertarians (they are very different).
But the failure of ideological leftism is a tribute to the strength of Conservatism.
Increasingly the left (by which we must mean the Labour Party) is reduced to crying "me too (but slightly differently)" to the Conservative vision of society.
It is nonsense to talk about a civic national identity
It is a mistake for Sunder Katwala to talk about "civic national identity" in reference to what he calls "Englishness".
English identity predates cities and was already fully formed centuries before any civic identity emerged, therefore it is anachronistic to say that urban-dwelling people are English in any cultural sense of the word.
Indeed if you look at any large city in England you will see that well over half the urban area is not "city" at all, but suburbia - urban areas pretending to be rural (with half-timbered mock-Tudor houses, trees along all the roads, pubs pretending to be country inns etc).
London has more parks and open green spaces than any other European capital, and it is a cliche to describe it as a collection of villages. Even so, surveys of Londoners routinely report that a majority aspire to moving out of the city to the countryside. Many achieve this aspiration through buying second homes.
Therefore it is nonsense to talk about a civic national identity.
The majority of the population may live in the urban areas but this is through necessity, not choice.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/28/liberals-englishness-flags-national-holidays
English identity predates cities and was already fully formed centuries before any civic identity emerged, therefore it is anachronistic to say that urban-dwelling people are English in any cultural sense of the word.
Indeed if you look at any large city in England you will see that well over half the urban area is not "city" at all, but suburbia - urban areas pretending to be rural (with half-timbered mock-Tudor houses, trees along all the roads, pubs pretending to be country inns etc).
London has more parks and open green spaces than any other European capital, and it is a cliche to describe it as a collection of villages. Even so, surveys of Londoners routinely report that a majority aspire to moving out of the city to the countryside. Many achieve this aspiration through buying second homes.
Therefore it is nonsense to talk about a civic national identity.
The majority of the population may live in the urban areas but this is through necessity, not choice.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/28/liberals-englishness-flags-national-holidays
Monday, October 28, 2013
As a former student and member of ULU I agree with Stella Creasy MP that the ULU decison to ban participation in Remembrance Sunday is shameful:
http://london-student.net/news/10/28/ulu-will-represented-remembrance-service/
http://london-student.net/news/10/28/ulu-will-represented-remembrance-service/
Very interesting article on immigration by Simon Danczuk, Labour MP for Rochdale: http://uk.news.yahoo.com/comment/talking-politics/left-must-tough-immigration-094547516.html#F5wNSfH
A very mealy-mouthed compromise
Helen Lewis (New Statesman) was not wearing a poppy when she appeared on Sunday Politics yesterday.
However she disguised this fact by wearing a very busy dress of red flowers on a dark background, so most people will not have noticed.
This seems a very mealy-mouthed compromise.
Either she is a socialist red in tooth and claw protesting against the militarism of the imperial British state.
Or she is a running dog revisionist of the new bourgeoisie, betraying the revolutionary masses with her cowardly compromises.
One cannot run with the fox and hunt with the hounds Ms Lewis.
Vote-rigging in the Falkirk constituency
It's all kicking off again at Falkirk: http://labourlist.org/2013/10/could-miliband-re-open-the-falkirk-selection-inquiry/
Thousands of compromising e-mails are being released to the police by Grangemouth owner Ineos. The Unite union organiser Stevie Deans was stupid enough to carry out vote-rigging in the Falkirk constituency using his work e-mail! He and Unite are well and truly busted.
As the e-mails belong to Ineos, perhaps when the police are finished with them they could be put on a website for us all to have a look?
And when is the Labour Party report on Falkirk finally going to be published?
Thousands of compromising e-mails are being released to the police by Grangemouth owner Ineos. The Unite union organiser Stevie Deans was stupid enough to carry out vote-rigging in the Falkirk constituency using his work e-mail! He and Unite are well and truly busted.
As the e-mails belong to Ineos, perhaps when the police are finished with them they could be put on a website for us all to have a look?
And when is the Labour Party report on Falkirk finally going to be published?
Jo Brand needs a bloody big boot up her fat arse
No mercy should be shown to Jo Brand.
Remember what she did to Carol Thatcher?
Those who live by the sword should die by the sword.
Jo Brand needs a bloody big boot up her fat arse - one that kicks her off broadcast media for good.
Anyway she's a tired old 90s act in a tired old 90s format show. All this dated stuff needs to go. Thank you and goodnight, as they say.
I note that Stella Creasy MP was trying to defend Jo Brand yesterday on Twitter yesterday. This will not do. You can imagine the outcry if someone said Stella Creasy was a druggie.
And perhaps the BBC might consider how much damage this sort of incident does to their reputation. I speak as a friend of the BBC. And yet I will not defend the licence fee when this sort of thing happens.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2477780/BBC-accused-defaming-Prince-Harry-Jo-Brands-cocaine-joke.html
Remember what she did to Carol Thatcher?
Those who live by the sword should die by the sword.
Jo Brand needs a bloody big boot up her fat arse - one that kicks her off broadcast media for good.
Anyway she's a tired old 90s act in a tired old 90s format show. All this dated stuff needs to go. Thank you and goodnight, as they say.
I note that Stella Creasy MP was trying to defend Jo Brand yesterday on Twitter yesterday. This will not do. You can imagine the outcry if someone said Stella Creasy was a druggie.
And perhaps the BBC might consider how much damage this sort of incident does to their reputation. I speak as a friend of the BBC. And yet I will not defend the licence fee when this sort of thing happens.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2477780/BBC-accused-defaming-Prince-Harry-Jo-Brands-cocaine-joke.html
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Beaufort by Ron Leshem
Have just finished reading Beaufort by Ron Leshem. I picked this book up on impulse, attracted by the reference to Beaufort Castle, a mysterious crusader fortress in southern Lebanon (mysterious because very few historians can get a close look at it). It's a work of fiction, but based on real events - the experiences of a garrison of soldiers from the Israeli Defence Force.
There's actually very little about the castle in the book - the soldiers are stationed at a modern concrete fort built beside the ancient structure. Written in the first person, the novel recounts the last months of the IDF garrison before withdrawal from southern Lebanon. Claustrophobic, alarming, often gross.
Israel-Palestine is an issue I can never make up my mind on. You listen to one side and it sounds utterly just and convincing, then you listen to the other side and it sounds equally just and convincing. So you are left with the impression that both sides are in the right (which means also that both sides are in the wrong).
Beaufort the novel revealed that Israel is a state under constant attack, and pays a heavy price to maintain its security.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
