"Squeeze 'em 'til the pips squeak."

Many will recognise the statement made by former Labour Chancellor, Bilderberger and all round bigot, Denis Healey; an acknowledgement that the left is all about 'the politics of envy'.
It may satisfy some basic instinct which makes you feel good if somebody richer than yourself is heavily taxed but that does not mean it is good for the nation:-
1} The 'Robin Hood principle' simply does NOT work, largely because
2} The higher the taxation the LESS is collected. The lower the taxation - the MORE is gathered. This is why Gordon Brown has had to target us all with 'stealth taxes' in a clandestine attempt to clobber ORDINARY people.
3} The super rich rarely pay excessive taxes. They move money around internationally in ways not available to mere mortals. It is no use 'shouting the odds' - that is how it has always been and in the computer age......
4} A recent poll of top executives reveals that a large majority claim that our punishing tax regime has made the country less attractive to inward investment - and that affects the entire economy.
5} If proof were needed - some 20% of big enterprises have relocated chunks of their business overseas in successful bids to reduce their tax burden AND MORE STILL ARE CONSIDERING IT!
We must live in a real world - not one based on venom, malice and spite - not really the best of Christian principles, are they?
Incidentally, the better the economy - the better off we all should be.


LINK: www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2006/11/27/cncbi27.xml

Public school burglars.

The two burglars aged 17 from Norwich Public School were yesterday quite correctly not sent to prison. After all, their six burglaries had only caused, major distress and heartache, £12,500 of stolen goods and just £6,000 worth of damage. McEvoy and Sorensen-Pound received a swingeing Community Punishment Order and a suspended sentence.
The sixth householder trapped them in a locked doorway and shouted at them to sit down which they did until police arrived.
For justice to have been properly served, the Police should have arrested the victim for kidnapping and charged him with actual bodily harm for the 'distress' caused by raising his voice. A custodial sentence would have been inevitable.
I expect that lawyers are being briefed as we speak, to allow these two unfortunates, from dreadful backgrounds to sue the nasty man who almost ruined their educational prospects by wickedly getting them expelled from school.

Something to consider.

In the days when you could be hanged for stealing a small amount of goods, there were several ways of viewing such harsh penalties.
The first was that hanging could not possibly deter somebody who lived in absolute poverty as theft gave a chance of life with just a risk of death, whereas death through the poverty was perhaps inevitable. A justifiable risk, then.
No. It was only the people who had something to lose who could be deterred - and clearly they were. It is only under such extreme circumstances that it may be reasonably argued that 'only the poor generally hang'.
A second point is that in those severe days even the very worst of mothers impressed upon their children the consequences of their actions; the dangers of the gallows. I wonder how many mothers from the anti-social underclass of today encourage their offspring not to steal - or worse - as the consequences are so terrible?

Smacking.

What do you do as a parent when your child has defied you? Well, if some TV programmes are to be followed you enter a complex procedure of ignoring and isolating the child; you let them work out their frustration and ensure that they never win.
The last part is certainly true and the earlier parts do have some, albeit limited, merit. What you do not do is physically abuse children into submission.
I raised two boys. The older was slippered , I think twice. Could we have avoided physical punishment totally? - Yes.
The younger was wilful and would on occasions, take you on. He was capable of calculated defiance and even then,earned a slippering or smacking perhaps less than a dozen times throughout his entire childhood. Without the physical punishment - which was NEVER used arbitrarily - I think he could have become uncontrollable like SO many more have done.
Professor Al Aynsley-Green is now fighting to ban even the mildest smacks.These people are dangerous. These people are unscriptural. These people have done immeasurable damage before when they banned the cane in schools. The deterioration in discipline is almost unbelievable.
Sorry Prof. Every human being NEEDS a little honest fear of consequences.
The worst thing of all is that these wretched do-gooders cannot differentiate between loving chastisement and abuse. Shame on them!

Unholy ignorance.

Bear with me a moment. Let us assume that the claims of Christianity are indeed true. Let us consider the life of a child born today. The parents - who have no knowledge of Christianity because of their own upbringing - fail to send the child to Church or Sunday School.
At infant school the child becomes confused by the tiny bits from a wide variety of religions thrown at him/her and is unable to distinguish between Jesus and Father Christmas. In junior school, the child is cheated of its cultural heritage and continues to be unable to clarify this mishmash of religions. At the same time the child is taught virtually nothing of either Old or New Testament.
By secondary school the child is effectively instructed that 'all religions lead to God' and the underlying or subliminal message is that this is only taught because you cannot dump religions altogether as certain minority, ethnic groups might be offended.
Let us now take the disingenuous liberal/left premise which has insinuated its sinister way throughout the educational system in recent decades which is that "We must not impose religion on young minds, they will be able to DECIDE for themselves when they are older."

Firstly, on what evidence or base of knowledge is this so-called decision to be made?

Secondly, will the education have fired sufficient interest in the child for him/her to embark on a spiritual quest?

Thirdly, why would the child ever bother going to Church as their education has indicated that this is irrelevant and the media has poured paraffin on the flames by always portraying Christians as cranks and/or hypocrites?

Fourthly, have the TV and Playstation been challenged in the young person's development by this marginalising of Christianity?

It is abundantly clear that only children in very specific situations will be exposed to the Gospel. We began with the assumption that Christianity might be true.
Well then, here is a pretty pickle. Christianity teaches that ALL mankind is going to hell and that there is only one way of avoiding that.
If Christianity is true - and hundreds of millions of us worldwide , through experience KNOW that is indeed the case - just think how well our young people have been served. They could have avoided hell and now will not.
Extreme? - No. Simply the reason why people like my wife and I open a Christian School - desperate measures to reach the eternally lost.

LINK: http://www.attitudedesign.co.uk/journal/?p=172

Make money - get divorced.

Mark and Janet Fensome are newly-weds who need to watch the pennies after all they have only been married for three weeks.
Popping down to the local Job Centre, they were to discover that there was an easy way to make an extra £1,250 per year. Advice was given to them that they should DIVORCE then carry on as normal.
In fairness I must admit that the upper ranks of that service have hastily said that that advice should not have been given.
Why? Wasn't it true? - I think we all know the answer to that one.
Just when will the Church in our nation stop navel-gazing and start to put a few rockets up the rears of the odious politicians who have brought these endless disgraceful situations into being.

Christians have a massive block of voting power - we should get organised and wield it!

LINK: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=418657&in_page_id=1770

Admission they were wrong?

It has always been a basic tenet of feminism and the so-called 'women's rights' movements that a woman's entitlements to work and pursue a career are significantly more important than the welfare of their children. The poor little nippers have to be abandoned into the much vaunted child care at the very earliest opportunity.
The negative consequences of this in our society can easily be seen. For some, there really is no alternative; for some the father could be used but usually isn't and for many the decision is taken out of the purest selfishness.
Labour's Children's Minister Beverley Hughes, recently admitted that her government's policy of pushing babies straight into childcare after birth "is not in their best interests."
This situation is of course, complicated by vast numbers of single mothers created by the short sightedness of Major's administration and that of the hapless Blair. 'Allowing single motherhood as a career choice' MUST be abandoned as policy.
A return to Christian values would help as Christian teaching always requires responsibility for ones actions If governments addressed the aspect of 'rewarding' people for their irresponsibility, our society would improve and rapidly.

LINK: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=407043&in_page_id=1770

Value-free futility.

How governments and the usual suspects have tried to cut teenage pregnancies! How they have signally failed! This was a major target for Blair and co, but still they increase.
"More sex education!" They all shriek. Really?

Have they checked first to find out precisely how many girls did NOT know that sex causes pregnancy?

- Well then, just how much more information do you do you actually need?
Sex education is part of the answer - but schools must stop teaching it thus: " We know you WILL all have sex so we are going to teach you how to reduce the consequences."
Note the weaknesses which are fundamental. You can tell youngsters a massive amount about sex - I DO - I teach the subject - but a moral framework and preferably a Christian one is the starting point. It may not be perfect but is streets ahead of the value-free, comprehensive baby-producing factories.
Of course, an irresponsible media needs to be checked and "pregnancy as a career choice" must both be addressed before there can be any significant improvement.
Furthermore, why is it that the vast majority of comprehensives refuse to teach their pupils precisely what an abortion is? Why do they refuse to show the excellent films such as 'The Silent Scream' whilst rushing to give information about how to get an abortion?

LINKS: http://www.silentscream.org/
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=418657&in_page_id=1770

Name that chicken.

As if our farmers do not have enough on their plates with unending European Union regulations but poultry farmers have now become victims of a new EU directive which requires them each to buy £5,000 worth of machinery to print information about their chickens on every single egg.
"This egg was laid by Flossie, an 11 month old leghorn whose parents were Cyril and Betty. She was born on the 28th December 2005 and laid your egg on Friday the 24th of November 2006. When asked for a comment, she allegedly said: 'Cluck!' This naturally-produced, hermetically sealed, food product originated from 'Le joli oeuf' battery farm for abused avians,"
For the sake of all pity when will these people give up and let us all get on with our already over-regulated lives? [I didn't even like the little lion very much!]

LINK: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=417637&in_page_id=1770

The latest score.

The Archbishop of York condemns anti-Christian attitudes at BA - The Arcbishop of Canterbury TRAVELS with them and accepts their hospitality in their VIP lounge.

York 1 Canterbury 0.


**** UPDATE: 25/11/06 Rowan Williams has finally got the message and criticises but only as BA are on the point of surrender! Score remains 1 - 0.

LINK: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=418032&in_page_id=1770

Unfair practices.

I first encountered continuous assessment during my four year degree course and it made an impression. Those parts which were exam-based, I had to understand and learn. When the exams arrived, I had to revise it ALL. But when the course used continuous assessment, I only needed to do it once AND I could be selective and omit much material altogether. The end result being that I knew some parts considerably less well than others.
There has been a frenzy of coursework in the last 30 years - all achieving the same, inferior results.
When I began teaching, I was obliged to set, mark and grade CSE papers in French, Spanish and European Studies. I was also required to visit other schools to 'check' their grading and it was immediately apparent that standards varied wildly by up to two full grades and although theoretically you could challenge this, it would have needed enormous amounts of moral courage, as you 'rocked the boat'. Teachers favoured their own pupils; presented dishonest samples for moderation; massaged grades and 'guided' pupils.
The honest teacher is then in an invidious position. If you do not adopt the same practices your candidates are severely disadvantaged. If you do, then you have difficulties sleeping at nights.
A neutral examination system is a must. All setting and marking should be external. Any other system will always contain unfairness.
The arguments which were usually based on 'some pupils can't do exams' are weak and can in no way justify wrecking the former quality which had existed. Little wonder that examination grades are so 'improved.'

The system promulgates passive knowledge at the expense of active knowledge.

Meet the lovely EU

In 2003 there were more than 8,000 cases of fraud and irregularities worth well in excess of half a billion - [note that was not million] - not throughout the EU BUT in the Common Agricultural Policy alone! AND that's just what they know about!
For 12 consecutive years the accounts have not been signed off. Imagine that this were your local Council and what might strike the fan if this became known after just ONE year.
Incidentally, there was no Court of Auditors prior to theses 12 years so we must assume that it could have been even worse in the past.
The government will not permit a neutral Cost Benefit Analysis on the spurious grounds that "the benefits of the EU are self evident" - well, they aren't to me!
Why are the othe main parties not pleading for a CBA? - You may well ask! they have been too busy taking 30 pieces of silver from the non-democratic EU Commission.
The Bruges Group estimates that the annual cost to the UK is a mere £50 BILLION annually! They have invited Blair to confirm or deny. Silence!

Touchingly, Gordon Brown has set his pitbull Ed Balls to sort it all out. [Note the photo and permit yourself a wry smile!]
Please forgive the large amounts of exclamation marks - it is quite clear why they are needed!

Good news from C of E.

Good news last week that PC Prince Charles may not be allowed by the C of E to have a coronation making him "Defender of the Faith" with the "the" bit left out! Only 900 years of Christian tradition does this pathetic man want to ditch. I have always supported the monarchy but not necessarily for much longer.
Further good news on the Anglican front from Archbishop of York John Sentamu, who has attacked the British Airways attitude of supporting all religions - Christianity excepted, of course.
I do hope my readers will join me in boycotting BA. I am already ignoring the Red Cross, the NSPCC and refuse to spend any time in Torbay. I shall not spend a single penny of mine to add to the economy of any town or region where Christianity is marginalised. Enterprises such as the Coop Bank have also been ditched.
My small protest is not much - but hopefully it can be a start.

GOOD news. 20/1/07, it is reported that B.A. have backtracked over a staff member wearing her cross.

BNP creeping gradually forwards.

A friend who works on the factory floor in a large Sheffield workplace informs me that the bulk of the people he speaks to are now confirmed BNP supporters. They despise the Lib Dems, hate the Tories and have seen through Labour.
If UKIP do not put up a candidate - and sometimes even when they do - these folks will vote BNP. We must not be too surprised. The Nazis were, after all, a socialist party as designed by Goebbels and others of socialist inclination. The name was not a blind or a coincidence. The BNP - apart from policies on crime and immigration are basically left-leaning. The evidence of my pal's assertions can be noted in the Beighton ward inter al, where the BNP claimed second place. It is only a matter of time before the BNP win a Council seat in Sheffield.
Thankyou very much! Thanks are due to the liberal elite who have shamelessly and naively prepared the fertile soil for this unwelcome growth.

[There is of course, one thing worse than the BNP itself and that is the baying hordes of the Anti-Nazi league and similar extremist, liberal left and anti-racist groupings - especially those who are too thick to spell. Note photo!]

LINK: http://www.uaf.org.uk/resources/0604BNPcand.pdf

Bureaucracy not policework.

It now takes a Police Officer an average of ten hours and six minutes to process the paperwork for a single arrest. No wonder coppers do not ever want to arrest people - unless of course, the weather outside is inclement.
A Sheffield PC told me more than ten years ago that the number of forms to be filled in was 44 per arrest!
Several weeks later I ran into the then Chief Constable Richard Wells, at a function and challenged him on this. He assured me that the bureaucracy was on its last legs. So I see! The bureaucratic society is a direct consequence of liberal elite policies - although precisely why escapes me. I expect it is all part of that unending desire to control and centralise.

Exeter's shame.

The Exeter University student body has decided to persecute its Christian Union. A number of its rights and entitlements have been suspended as it is deemed to break 'equal opportunities rules'.
The problem is that members of the CU are required to affirm their belief in Christ. This means that it is not open to everybody.
That thrice-cursed word "inclusivity" again!
Are these lefties so stark, staring bonkers that they believe that a Christian body should accept atheists as actual members? - Absurd! AND of course, there are no reports as to how it deals with its Muslim students.
I would wager a small fortune that double standards are being fully applied. [As is now the custom]
What really pigs me off is that these sad youngsters are supposed to be showing some signs of intellect if they are at uni - but they are literally incapable of genuine reasoning and logic. Welcome to the future.

LINK: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2006/10/24/nosplit/dt2401.xml
Arthur Rowe.

Halal Easter Eggs?

Halal Easter eggs and halal hot cross buns? - Am I just being plain silly? - Well, no. If you go to Oakwood Comprehensive in Rotherham , they have just attempted to put together a CHRISTMAS meal based entirely on halal chicken.
This is offensive on so many levels! Fortunately Head Teacher Jan Charters has been put in her place with the exercise of some parent power and has had to backtrack.
I disapprove of the cruelty; the hypocrisy when compared to foxhunting; the anti-Christian bias; the pro-Muslim bias; the political correctness; the misuse of education; the simplistic thinking and a great deal more besides.
We had to set up a Christian School purely as a response to these sort of idiotic practices - oh, incidentally - a significant proportion of our youngsters are from Islamic backgrounds. If you wish not to offend - the best way is to show that you are not totally wet. That earns respect!
A number of our pupils come from the catchment area of Oakwood!

Is it not a scandal that our parents have had to set up a school and have to PAY to educate their children [after already having paid their taxes] as they are so desperate to remove them from the multiple problems evidenced in current state education?

LINK: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2977086.stm

Three cheers for the N. Wiltshire Tories.

If your wife is suffering from breast cancer , what do you do? - Well, in the case of James Grey the tory MP for N. Wiltshire, the answer is easy. You begin an affair, ditch her and institute divorce proceedings.
What do you do if you are his local Conservative Association? - You deselect him, that's what.
I thought I was destined never again to write something positive about the conservatives. Not so!.
I think we must refer to this as "residual decency."


LINK: http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4153/is_20060914/ai_n16739883

The myth of "low self esteem."

There are a great many people out there who for a variety of reasons, often mental, more often domestic, possess low self esteem.
Having taught for more years than I care to mention and having sat in Courts for a decade, I am confident that what I write here is broadly accurate.
Those who do suffer from low self esteem tend to be amiable or withdrawn low-achievers.They can be taciturn, suspicious, often bullied and occasionally attention-seeking. Equally, they may shun attention. Some are pathetically grateful for the interest shown in them and to quote a former colleague, now a Head Teacher, may well have "parents you would not wish on a chimpanzee."
From a crime point of view, these may well turn into low grade offenders as they are often 'very easily led'. These kind of youngsters are easily identifiable when old enough to hit the adult courts.
So just why am I quibbling with the concept and describing it as a "myth" when I have just proved its very existence?
What I have just done is described the genuine examples. My problem is that every offender - especially if young - is seemingly branded with having 'low self esteem' and it is just one more excuse not to punish the seriously vile yobs - ironically the very people who frequently manipulate that low self esteem of the genuine group.
I speak of the arrogant, the swaggering, the couldn't-care-less,the greedy, the amoral, the self obsessed and sometimes the downright evil.
Toby Meredith is one such character in my novel. Such people are credited themselves with having low self esteem. This would be laughable were it not so deadly serious. No inferiority complexes there. A 'superiority complex' fuelled with hubris, perhaps. One more piece of rubbish thrown at Magistrates by unscrupulous defence solicitors.
This makes me angry as the genuine are marginalised and it is one more excuse for the others not to have to take responsibility for their actions.
Before anybody makes the point, I am certainly aware that there is some overlap between the two groups but this does not invalidate what is stated here.

It is probably only those who are genuine who will ever benefit from positive, community sentencing in our courts.
The other group will simply laugh when they see the non-existence of deterrence and retribution.

LINK: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-esteem

So mature, Dave.

Rumours are circulating that "Call-me-Dave" is indulging in some infantile behaviour. The reports appear to be reasonably well-based.
Daniel Hannan MEP is one of that small and ever dwindling band of Tory notables who dare to speak up against the European Union and all its attendant evils, so I am surmising that he must have said something out of place. If I have to guess, I would reckon that it may be something to do with 'Dave' having failed to keep his leadership election promise to withdraw the Tories from the highly EU-loving EPP group in the EU Parliament.
When I was a child my Mum always told me off for peevishness - not a word we hear too much of these days, is it? Yet more reasons why Christians cannot vote for the appalling main parties!
LINK: http://www.hannan.co.uk/

Beware of idealists.

If you are a thinking person, you will have already recognised one of the greatest truths in life and history.

IDEALISTS CAN NEVER BE TRUSTED!

It is right and proper that people embrace ideals but idealists are a totally different kettle of fish and seldom pragmatic in any people-centred way, they are so blinded by the thought process itself, ALL else becomes invalid to them. They are the dangerous; the do-gooders; the trotskyites; terrorists and sowers of dissension.
Their life view is perceived as so valid that it can be presented democratically but if it meets opposition, then any methods are acceptable to implement the ideas. These may include: dishonesty, violence, suspension of liberty, terror, war, dictatorship. The ideals themselves are slavishly adhered to at the cost of democracy and free speech.
Stalin, Pol Pot and even Hitler meet the criteria. The best current examples you ask? - Well, we are talking about any ideas which emerge from the liberal elite - what did you think political correctness was actually for? It serves a purpose.
Note how readily the EU also fits the pattern.
The test? - Easy. Am I allowed to debate it - or will I be shouted down or ignored?
Funny how idealists as described are nearly always from the oppressive left.

Liberal christianity; a contradiction in terms.

I despise liberal christianity precisely because it is not Christianity at all. It is a poor shadow; a dimmed image; a corruption which believes more in Man than in God.
Put simply. If a liberal christians do not like a particular scriptural teaching, they abandon it or claim that 'society has moved on'.
Put even more simply, this means that their belief is that Man knows better than God - although a great many attempts are made with disingenuous arguments to disguise this.
They claim the Faith is "all about love" which Christians obviously do not like to be seen as arguing against.The problem is that "love" is defined by them in a manner which is inimical to Bible teaching.
The big question becomes "Is God Supreme; omnipotent or not?"
If He is incapable of leaving us a reliable record then what is the point of it all - He is merely a second rate divinity.
You cannot have it both ways - either trust in God or don't bother wasting your time. There is NO middle route.

What a surprise!

Apparently, The Institute for Public Policy Research - Tony Blair's favourite think tank as it is liberal left in attitude - has made a remarkable discovery.
It seems that children from a stable background - particularly those living with married parents are less likely to be living off the state. They are more self-reliant, less likely to become single parents themselves and are even less likely to indulge in smoking.
I could have pointed them to other surveys which would have added to this and demonstrated that these children: do better at school, are less likely to be prowling the streets, are infrequent in their visits to court, they are less likely to take drugs and much, much more.
The liberal left are so dim that they need to rediscover the wheel! Even so - if their feminist harridans and their 'special case status for homosexuals' advocates can be reined in, perhaps there is a glimmer of light down the tunnel.
The trouble is, you just know that it is all hot air and will be ignored as they will to continue to plough their amoral, idealistic furrows.
There is a rather better and even more relevant 'think tank' - it is called the Bible!

Shooting oneself in the foot.

I do so love it when the liberal left accomplish one of their unbelievably self-destructive acts. Normally they hate hypocrisy but in their own case they are prepared to make exceptions.
With the utmost crass insensitivity, St Andrews University is in the process of awarding an honorary degree to Muhammed Khatami the cuddly, former President of Iran who supports the execution of homosexuals. Just how do these radical opposites remain such cosy bedfellows?
It actually gets better - or worse if you prefer - the degree is to be awarded by the Lib Dem leader, Menzies Campbell!

John Sentamu does it again.

Every now and then, there is a chink of light appears, even in the upper reaches of the Anglican Church. To add to the Bishop of Rochester, we have the Archbishop of York who continues to impress.
Even the Daily Mail - not a paper which embraces Christianity in any other than a vague it- must-be-a-generally-good-thing kind of way, yesterday devoted a two page spread to the excellent John Sentamu.

Christian socialism.

Many people believe that socialism and Christianity have a great deal in common; that both are concerned with the creation of a better society. This idea is false.
Socialism is no more no less than a diluted form of marxism; less extreme but with similar goals. Both wish to control the individual in order to create the kind of society which they wish to impose. Marxism is merely more direct and more immediately dangerous.
Socialism believes effectively in the inherent goodness of mankind something which is completely out of line with Christian teaching and means that the house is being built on sand.
When compared, which is the more realistic view of humanity? Is it goodness or sin?
Mankind is not capable of digging himself out of the hole he has created for himself - society simply worsens year on year with no light at the end of the tunnel.
Is it a coincidence that as socialist ideas across all three major parties increase, and attacks on Christianity attempt to marginalise it as a force for good, that the world gets worse?
The world can only be improved as more people yield themselves to the Saviour. To be a Christian and a socialist requires compromise. Large chunks of socialism are built on the politics of envy - hardly a sound Christian base.

See posting on Marx the satanist - July the 4th.

What is the truth?

Well. Do we need one and a half million extra homes built on these overcrowded islands just to cover immigration, or is the recalculated figure likely to be 2 million?

Muslims and government promote BNP?

Which is the more frightening and offensive in an allegedly democratic society? You must decide. You have three choices and I am not entirely sure which is the correct answer:-
1) Bands of aggressive, extreme Muslims parading publicly through our streets, making threats to kill 'infidels' and remaining unchallenged and a single, token arrest.
2) Nick Griffin making use of his inalienable rights of free speech to make pointed remarks about such instances, with no hints of inciting violence, secretly filmed, in a private meeting.
Or
3) A government without any evenhandedness which, when it loses a case in open court against Griffin - effectively TWICE - wants to make new laws to 'protect' us from - Griffin?
These questions can be framed in a variety of ways and it is difficult to get past a number of very disturbing matters. The only thing I do know is that these fools who rule us clearly desire a BNP government!

Red poppies on an important day..

This Blog holds no brief for those who embrace the white poppy as an alternative for Remembrance Day. It is an attempt to politicise a non-political issue. No alternative is required. Can we not, just for once, show some unity as a nation?
Of course, the liberal left and liberal Christians frequently unite 'to spit in the face' of the rest of us, so the answer is probably a resounding 'no'.
They always claim to be interested in 'people' - which the evidence clearly demonstrates to be false. Enormous amounts of honest folk who had to leave homes to fight a common foe and their concerned families are deeply insulted and hurt.
Two years ago today, November the 11th, I attended my Dad's funeral; an old soldier and I think on how deeply he would have been offended. He left too many friends and colleagues on the battlefields of France, Holland, the Ardennes and Germany.
The lefties must remember two things. It is essential that people are put before their utopian ideals and secondly, the decent should never be targets.
Were the Flanders Fields covered in white poppies or red? - Not white, eh? - Then have they not missed the point altogether?

IN FLANDERS FIELDS the poppies blow,
Between the crosses row on row,
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below.
We are the Dead.
Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved and were loved, and now we lie In Flanders fields.
Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high.
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow In Flanders fields.

Lieutenant Colonel John McCrae.

LINK: http://www.sovereignty.org.uk/siteinfo/newsround/11nov.html Bogle: Green Fields of France.

The good side.

An Anglican friend recently took me to task regarding my frequent attacks on the C of E. It was not that he disagreed with any of the points made, quite the opposite in fact, but he did want me to point out that being a very broad church, there are some excellent sections where any evangelical Christian could not fail to feel at home.
I know that these exist. I know they are as good as stated but I feel that it can only be a matter of time before such groups will be driven to secede by the leadership and the infestation by so-called liberal Christians.



[Photo: Jim looking very anglican.]

A measly second.

This Blog has endeavoured to show our hapless Chancellor precisely where he is going wrong, that high taxation is not a Christian virtue and that this country always 'tops the world leagues' in areas which should be a shame and a humiliation for a modern, civilised nation.
News is in that the UK has been pipped in an important survey and are lying in second place to India. - Hmm! India, eh? That has you scratching your head.
Yes. Gordon has not yet managed to achieve top spot but is undoubtedly working on it. We have the second most complicated tax system on the planet.
Go for it Gordon. Try harder. We know you can get there!

Reverend Joe Wright's prayer, 1996.

The Reverend was asked to give the opening prayer at the Kansas Assembly. Many delegates - undoubtedly wracked with guilt - walked out. If that was the case then, what about now?

Heavenly Father, we come before you to ask your forgiveness. We seek your direction and your guidance. We know your word says, "Woe to those who call evil good." But that's what we've done. We've lost our spiritual equilibrium. We have inverted our values. We have ridiculed the absolute truth of your word in the name of moral pluralism. We have worshiped other gods and called it multiculturalism. We have endorsed perversion and called it an alternative lifestyle. We've exploited the poor and called it a lottery. We've neglected the needy and called it self-preservation. We have rewarded laziness and called it welfare. In the name of choice, we have killed our unborn. In the name of right to life, we have killed abortionists. We have neglected to discipline our children and called it building self-esteem. We have abused power and called it political savvy. We have coveted our neighbor's possessions and called it taxes. We have polluted the air with profanity and pornography and called it freedom of expression. We have ridiculed the time-honored values of our forefathers and called it enlightenment. Search us, oh, God, and know our hearts today. Try us. Show us any wickedness within us. Cleanse us from every sin and set us free. Guide and bless these men and women who have been sent here by the people of the State of Kansas, and that they have been ordained by you to govern this great state. Grant them your wisdom to rule. May their decisions direct us to the center of your will. And, as we continue our prayer and as we come in out of the fog, give us clear minds to accomplish our goals as we begin this Legislature. For we pray in Jesus' name, Amen.

Pick on believers.

Politically correct officials have introduced parking charges outside a Church in Plymouth.
"So what? - Such thimgs happen." You may say.
BUT, the given reason was because not to do so would be "to discriminate against other faiths."
At this point you may feel liked emigrating to somewhere with more religious tolerance - How about Saudi Arabia?

Bilderberg Shadow Chancellor.

The Shadow Chancellor George Osborne has finally hit the big time. He recently trundled off to Ottawa to meet up with the highly sinister Bilderbergers.
This bodes ill for our nation if 'Dave' manages to win power. Surely it is a sign that his government would be starting to toe the EU line even more than the tories do at present - and to think many conservatives voted for him in the mistaken belief that he was more anti-EU than David Davis.
Remember too 'Dave's' promise to take his party out of the pro-EU grouping of conservatives in Brussels?
It seems he must have been 'economical with the truth', does it not?
Not too much Christians can cast a vote for there, is there?

Link: See posting for 18th of September.

Michael Nazir-Ali

The Bishop of Rochester is well known for talking sense.

The Church of England's only Asian bishop has criticised many Muslims in Britain for having a victim mentality.
The Bishop of Rochester Michael Nazir-Ali, whose father converted from Islam, told The Sunday Times that he believed that some Muslims had a "dual psychology" in which they desired both "victimhood and domination".
He said: "Their complaint often boils down to the position that it is always right to intervene when Muslims are victims, as in Bosnia or Kosovo, and always wrong when the Muslims are the oppressors or terrorists, as with the Taliban or in Iraq.

Interesting.

The ultimate gimmick.

To put an ASBO in place takes a concerted effort, usually from the afflicted community working in tandem with Council and Police. The meetings and attention to endless detail are frightening and to achieve - or to fail to achieve - the imposition of an ASBO can cost thousands of pounds and take what seems an eternity to the local people who have been targeted and victimised by some couldn't-care-less yob.
Once in place the ASBO is seen as a badge of honour by the recipient and makes his/her mates quite envious; covetous even.
The aim of the system was to prevent the person being in situations where their type of offending occurred - so, an ASBO might be given stating that "You may not hang around on such and such a street corner." If they do stick to the order, they just find a new corner.
Common sense dictates that you therefore say "No street corners." Then come the legal objections. "Far too broad. Unfair to the hoodlum!"
Recent figures show that even after all these concessions, over 90% of orders are breached and that an incredibly minute 6% are jailed for breach. [Do remember that the original intention was "Breach and you go down." 100%. certain]
What an exercise in utter pointlessness. You have failed to prove to the young thug that their lifestyle is simply not worth it.
If our do-gooders and politicians are unwilling ever to punish - why not simply say:- "We have no desire to punish - ever. We despise the people who are enduring rampant crime. We don't care!"
Awful as all of this is from New Labour, consider the recent bilge from the Leader of the Opposition. No hope of punishments from that source. Lib Dems? - They are even more wet!
Once again. Are they all trying to push voters to the BNP?

The trouble is that JPs and Judges feel unhappy about jailing somebody "Just for standing on a street corner " - and even if they do get the point, chances are guidelines no longer allow it. Only 37% are currently jailed for committing an offence when subject to an ASBO!
The liberal left - don't you just adore 'em?

Credited, I believe to a Julia Howe.

ASBO, ASBO, little law,
How we wonder what you're for,
Chavs and yobs who love to fight
Terrorise us every night.
Toothless, useless, little law,
How we wonder what you're for.
On the streets with hoods and knives,
How they terrorise our lives,
Though they all should be in bed,
All you do is boost their cred'.
ASBO, ASBO, can't you see
You are an accessory.

ASBO, ASBO, little law,
How we wonder what you're for,
Words will never rule the street,
We need coppers on the beat.
Toothless, useless, little law,
How we wonder what you're for.

My total scorn.

The scorn I feel for liberal-left attitudes cannot be properly stated.They are a poison running through our society purporting to be a force for good. I recall that "Satan can show himself as an angel of light."
In Wood Green, their local vicar, Bob Green has cancelled the Remembrance Day Service as "it is not sufficiently multi-cultural." May shame be heaped upon this miserable curmudgeon.
When I think of the pain that this man is inflicting on so many people with his blinkered selfishness, I am extremely angry. When I think of the hurt he will have done to the very oldest in our society - who had to undergo a World War - I run beyond words.


I for one, shall remember them!

One step nearer dictatorship. Ikebana!

I thank Robin Page for these words of wisdom and concern over the totalitarian gagging of councillors:

"A ridiculous code of conduct was then introduced in 2001 - an exhaustive 22-page document covering everything from treating others with respect to declaring any gifts or hospitality worth £25 or more, it was aimed at controlling councillors what they could say and how they said it. It is a code that severely restricts free speech and debate. Previously a chairman would control councillors and the councillors themselves would have to declare if they had pecuniary or non-pecuniary interests. But under the new code virtually everything became a matterof' ‘prejudicial interest', which meant that if a councillor had previously expressed views on a subject outside the council he was prejudiced and therefore could not speak about it in council meetings. If he did, he would be reported to a monitoring officer, the local Standards Committee and then the Standards Board for England, an intimidating new London-based quango employing 100 staff and a team of ethical standards officers each paid £61,000 a year. It's a cross between Monty Python and a kangaroo court.This absurd, undemocratic and intimidating system, in which informers, commissars and quislings thrive, covers every parish council, district council, county council and unitary authority in England. It's not just an insult to the ideal of free speech, it causes anxiety and career-threatening consequences to those who simply say and do what they believe.This is, quite plainly, not a code of conduct but a Government gag. Ironically, the man who introduced this neo-Stalinist nonsense was that paragon of good behaviour, John Prescott, who is to democracy what Attila the Hun was to flower arranging. "

High taxation is not Christian.

If you listen to the liberal church you would be excused for thinking that high taxation is a a sound, moral way forward. It originates from trite, Robin Hood attitudes. Similarly, you will be asked to believe that the greater the state interference in life, the more just the government.
This is effectively what socialists and lib Dems tend to take as an article of faith and the area which Cameron's tories are now considering.
Unfortunately, this has a number of predictable effects. The state becomes the 'nanny state'. It encourages dependence and discourages the virtue of self-reliance. Ultimately, it makes society more unfair as many are pushed into becoming non contributors.
If governments were genuinely using the excess monies to help the genuinely needy and excellent social projects such as Health, it would be harder to attack but the records of successive governments in spending money badly and encouraging worthless bureaucracy are lamentable.
So rapacious is our present government that it extracted £145 BILLION more from the country last year - a figure beyond imagination. The proportion of national income going to line Treasury coffers is now more than 37% - way beyond even ultra high tax Germany.
Destroying competitiveness damages enterprise.Christians should not blithely assume that these levels of taxation are legitimate.
Is it the plutocrats who pay? Of course not. It is the ordinary person who works. The sting in the tail is that we are so propagandised that most people do not even see the depth of the injustice. Taxation is rising in the UK but worldwide, this is now beginning to be seen as a major social negative.

Christmas Present Problem - Solved!

The lurid thriller designed to be given to non-Christians!
[ My Minister's wife said it should be made into a film!]


LINK TO AMAZON:-

http://www.amazon.com/Unassuming-Assassin-Arnott/dp/1846850258/sr=11-1/qid=1162554090/ref=sr_11_1/104-0242889-4639929

How to create BNP voters.

What really gets most people about political correctness is the double standards. We have seen this week how a judge who was sentencing in a murder case did not add to the sentence given on the grounds of the crime being racially motivated. The perpetrator was from an ethnic minority and had murdered somebody white. He referred to the victim's colour and race twice during the act and yet this evil deed was deemed not to be racially motivated.
Had it been the other way round, with a fraction of the evidence, the outcome would have been in no doubt - and I know - I did the magistrates' training!
Meanwhile, at Millais school, Christian girls have been banned from wearing 'chastity rings' as this goes against the school policy on wearing jewellery. Fine but for one small fact. Sikh girls have been allowed to wear kara bracelets which in similar fashion to the rings represent 'restraint from doing evil'.
If these appalling people want to wreck peaceful coexistence between communities, it is hard to find ways of creating more resentment than they are doing. Are the politically correct BNP infiltrators in deep disguise? - I sometimes wonder!

Climate change information.

The United Nations' Inter-governmental Panel on Climate Change has recently pointed out that the United Kingdom's Hadley Centre has over-estimated the likely effects of climate change by two-thirds. As this is not revealed to the general public, we can only conclude that we are being deliberately misled.

I have no comment to add.


LINK: http://www.ipcc.ch/

1 Corinthians 7 verse 5.

If there is one thing we all know as an absolute fact, it is that Christians are against sex. Everybody says so! Many think that Christians believe that it is only for the procreation of children - I do not know which Pope was responsible for that unscriptural idea! It has certainly fuelled the propagandists' cause.
The trouble is that this is really just one more 'urban myth' - and one which has been deliberately used by the enemies of the Church.
In The Old Testament we have one of the more erotic pieces of literature from the ancient world. It is called 'The Song of Solomon (or Songs).'
In 1 Corinthians, Paul speaks of sex and marriage and goes on to explain how each should 'fulfil their marital duty'. This is about SEX. But he does not leave it there, he goes on to say "Do not deprive each other....." He is talking about SEX. Read the context .And, he does NOT mean occasionally!
So do Christians oppose sex? They do BUT only out-of -context sex. The correct context is within marriage, which for the modernists who do not understand, is between one man and one woman.

Adopt this approach and it would cause a few social problems, BUT it would eliminate MILLIONS.

Propaganda from the BBC.

Evangelical extremists murdering Muslims? - Why, it must be the BBC. It must be "Spooks" again.

Right in one!

Taxed til the pips squeak.

We always top the league tables the people do not want us to top . Whether this be on alcohol abuse, drug use, teenage pregnancies, crime, illegal immigration,there we are, looking down at all those nations less successful in climbing leagues than we are. Our Chancellor of the Exchequer will not care one jot that we now top the league for the highest taxation of property owners in the world. We pay 64% more than the French and 7 (YES SEVEN) times more than German homeowners.
The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development recently released these interesting stats.
With Gordon Brown it is "Every one a winner!"
You will be happy to know that it costs 70% more in Gordon's New Labour paradise to live in your own home than the world average.
"Well maybe they have higher taxation across the board on other things." - Wanna bet?

LINK: OECD. http://www.oecd.org/home/0,2987,en_2649_201185_1_1_1_1_1,00.html

Remember the Lib Dems? They are the ones whose think tank came up with the idea of the 1% p.a. Council Tax on house values so that Gordon's rip off can be effectively doubled. Do you recall that politicians are supposed to be "the servants of the people?" - I wonder where that went wrong!