Category Archives: Politics
Original YT playout date: 13 June 2008
Here’s something that became topical again, commenting the initial rejection of the Lisbon Treaty – of course we all know what happened next – they were told they got that wrong and were told to vote again. In the mean time, they were told that their economy was ruined because of their vote, although of course it was about to go south because of the coing recession anyway, and they started to get scared and vote again.
Read the rest of this entry
The small but loyal group of supporters of this blog and its Thursday Polls might well, after last night’s performance, the night before that and no doubt coming up also in the UK Parliament be expecting me to make an EU-related poll today, but as we have had so much of this now, enough to almost drive a nation and a continental mental, i thought we could think about something else. For tose who want to think about the EU then the question I asked two weeks ago has become more relevant now than it even was then, and that poll is still open and I am watching carefully how the weight of answers is changing as we progress through this process, as indeed can you. That poll is right here.
Beyond that you can shortcut to all the existant polls here, and feel free to add your voice to any of them, as I tend to keep them open for a while in most cases.
For today, we look in fact not for the first time in my content (those who have been following the Play UK talk shows will know that this unhappy family is an inevitable topic of conversation in talk radio, and the Not The Tommy Boyd Show and James Whale show were no exceptions. James Whale in particular has been very supportive of Madeleine’s parents, Gerry and Kate McCann, pictured).
Now it emerges in today’s news that Netflix is going to release a film about Madeleine’s Disappearance called “The Disappearance of Madeleine McCann”. Gerry and Kate McCann have been critical of the film, saying that it might hiner the police investigation.
I would have thought the stronger argument would be that this tragedy is not supposed to be for the idle entertainment of the masses and the profit of a media organisation, but then really one has to wonder how many newspapers and associated advertising have already been sold on this story over the last 12 years. Gerry and Kate have been through a lot, not only through the loss of their child but also through being suspected themselves, even formally held as arguidos in the death of their child. Now I have been in a similar position as them, only thankfully for 12 minutes and not for 12 years, but even that was enough to tell you that this is not a pleasant experience, although my joy when the French police found George (who had run away, being autistic and adventurous, a dangerous pairing of traits) safe and well more than made for the evident suspicion of me by the French detective when he spotted the blood on the lintel (which happened to have been left over from George’s nosebleed the previous day – my explanation that it was his, but we thought we had managed to clean it all up was obviously not the best choice of words under the circumstances, as the detective’s “remain in my sight, please” indicated). For the record I personally believe Gerry and Kate are innocent, not because of my own experiecnes and not because it is impossible for them to have done such a deed in a moment of anger or through self medication and then covered it up through fear, but because deception specialists are really very good and they would be able to pinpoint leakage and would have got to the truth of the issue by now in such a high profile case if Kate and Gerry were not being truthful. So, despite being very naturally and by dint of being an auditor a rather unpleasantly skeptical person about human nature, I am with the McCanns, be sure of that.
I still wonder if they are right in saying that such a film will hinder the investigation. I am far from sure that the police alone, given all the cuts in manpower and the increasing reliance on technocracy which is not retrospective, is going to be enough to solve this case. I believe that, tasteless and unsavoury as this film may be, and I probably will not watch it myself, keeping the image of Medeleine and the whole story in the public eye may be exactly what it takes to wring some truth or even a confession out of a person who has managed to keep everything quiet. Or maybe, hopefully, one day a young woman with one bicoloured iris is noticed by a young neighbour who only knows about Madeleine because it was kept in the public eye. These days the police are not resourced but the ordinary public are greatly resourced. That is why I don’t think the McCanns are right to be against the film, even though I fully sympathise with their feelings about it.
What do you think?
Well Ruddy interesting it is too. This week, pseudoconservative Amber Rudd did an eggshell tiptoe on LBC (where news used to come first) talking about mean tweets and why that’s more important than knife crime, and when asked whether she came in for more abuse as a woman she said something like “It definitely is worse if you are a woman and worst of all if you’re a coloured woman. Diane Abbott gets a huge amount of abuse and I think that’s something we need to continually call out” (for the benefit of my readers who learned English properly, that’s modern-illiterate for “I think that is something which we should be continually challenging”. She wasn’t advocating calling out abuse across the street at Diane Abbott all the time, at least I hope not.)
The Shadow Home Secretary concerned then is reported as saying that she was offended to be called a “coloured woman”, that this was “an outdated, offensive and revealing choice of words”, even though she was live on the air and Diane of all people should know that that can result in utterances which are far from what we would like to say. Anyhow, that particular shibboleth has changed since Amber Rudd, who is a little sheltered being a Member of Parliament and a Cabinet member, learned her political correctness. It’s pronounced “chibboleth” now. If you are going to say “shibboleth” then you might as well say “sibboleth” like an ephphin’ Ephraimite. Talking about being “coloured” was encouraged not all that long ago, now it is something that enrages the self-righteous like little else.
Instead of being negative, though, one ought to focus on the positive and identify what Diane Abbott would be perfectly happy to be called, or if not happy, then at least not be needing to be apologised to. What Milady Ambergris ought to have said is maybe a harder thing to assess, though. In the sentence “Abuse is worse if you are a …. woman” referring to what she meant by saying a “coloured” woman, what would you have said?
If you write “black” then you also exclude Islamic, which as we all know is another race, quite different from the Christian race, even though both these religions spanned the world and Mohammed was born not all that far from Israel and looked a bit Jewish by all accounts.
So there you go, you cannot win with the left. Even if you try to play their game by being empathetic to the abuse received by Diane Abbott for being a female with a racial minority appearance, you get trumped for not using the termes du jour. So what, I ask you, could she have said and what shouldn’t she have said?
Well, this week we read the not entirely unexpected news that we have wasted the two year and seven month period between voting and supposed to be leaving without managing a deal, and we were lways told that that meant we would leave without a deal. As usual it seems we were told lies and they now seem, both the UK leadership (horse laugh) and the EU, intent on extending the Article 50 period, which seems that the impossible is possible after all.
In a short time we will in fact know whether there is going to be an extension or not, but Theresa May is really leaving it till the last minute, two weeks before the final deadline, to ask for the extension.
The EU is then placed in a position of power, and will call the shots of whether they accept this or not, apparently all the states must agree and already one gerontophilic gnome who is the unpopular dictator of one of the less meaningful of the European countries has said his country (which incidentally we went to war to defend on two occasions) will veto the extension of we don’t have a plan.
Of course Macron won’t see it that way. He will think he is saving the British from themselves, and many British may well agree with him.
He will think he is doing the UK a “grande service de reconnaissance” for our co-operation with France putting blood on the ground against Nazi Germany. He will be thinking that he can leverage a second referendum in which the British people will decide that they do love the federalist vision after all, and “come back and stay for good this time”, as political commentator Paul Young puts it. Oh that we might indeed vote to stay, but to stay and fight the globalists and federalists, aligning ourselves with the Eurosceptic governments which include the Eastern side and Greece, Italy, Denmark, increasingly Holland. We will see after the next round of Euro-elections just how far the discontent has spread and in fact we are still only at the begiining of the resistance.
Corbyn has already been forced to say he will supposrt a second referendum, although how this makes him less Anti-Semitic is beyond me. Now May, who has discounted the Second Referendum all along, can pull the excuse that “Macron made me do it”.
Today’s poll won’t be open for long as it is a prediction poll and there won’t be any sense in it once we know the results, so please hurry up and vote and share this. The idea is to try to predict if there will be an extension, how long, and if there will be the condition of the UK having a second referendum.
There are so many variables that it is impossible to catch all, please just vote for which of the scenarios you think most likely. Not what you want to happen.
From “Mariam El-Bobini”, the new Disney Musical about an ISIS bride who flew in by means of a magic burqa.
Super Caliphatalistic Fragile Ego Lupus
All these women went off freely now they want to dupe us
If they say it loud enough the media’ll join their stupors
Super Caliphatalistic Fragile Ego Lupus
Umm diddle iddle iddle um diddle ISIS
Umm diddle iddle iddle um diddle ISIS
They travelled half way round the world, and everywhere they went
They got seduced by terrorists in a desert tent
They got to watch beheadings and girls sent to slavery
While they had tasty kebabs and a lovely cuppa tea – whooh!
Super Caliph etc.
Sham Shamima Sham Shamima Sham Sham Sherie,
I think myself lucky you’re not my mummy
Sham Shamima Sham Shamima Sham Sham Sheroo
Good luck will rub off when they prosecute you.
And a tankful of NATO makes the ISIS fall down
ISIS fall down, the ISIS fall down
Yes a tankful of NATO makes the ISIS fall down
In a most delightful way.
Baghdadi feathering his nest had very little time for rest
While dodging missiles aimed right at his lair
And every task he undertook, inspired by that book
Became undone, as we all had our fun,
Tankful of NATO makes the ISIS fall down
The ISIS fall down, yes the ISIS fall down
Yes a tankful of NATO makes the ISIS fall down
In a most delightful way.
Would anyone like to suggest further re-edited Mary Poppins lyrics to suit the Shamima Begum case? Your poetic efforts welcomed in the comments below. Or maybe suggestions on how to adapt the screenplay of Mary Poppins to suit the ISIS Brides situation. Instead of the Suffragettes campaigning for women’s votes as in the original, there could be a campaign by woman demanding not to be allowed to vote. Instead of a run on the bank, maybe something to do with the price of Brent Crude? Your creative ideas, please!
Well, this week we read the welcome news that Covington student Nick “the Smirk” will be suing the wishy-washy wibberal Washington “Oh Father I cannot tell anything other than a lie, Trump chopped down your cherry tree” soon-to-be Ex-Post. The sum he is playing for is 250 million dollars. One can but laugh. If he gets anything close to that, of course, it will cause tremendous sea-changes in the way the media work in similar cases in the future.
Maybe if it goes too far newspapers will be too scared to write anything that is not bland, and already old news and fully substantiated.
Now you can be the Judge in that trial. Here are some possible awards you can make in favour of Nick Sandmann, all in multiples of 25, to be consistent with what they are bidding for.
1. Ode to Nancy Pelosi
Drain drain drain
This cold gray swamp
Let them feel the pain
Administered by Trump
Make it clean again
With that drainage pump.
Nancy, Nancy, Nancy,
Don’t think we are nosey
But your tastes look too fancy
We are not so dozy
As to give public finances
For private costs of Pelosi…
2. Ode to Diane Abbott:
O come, thou Bob Mugabe, come
To England’s humble shores
And take thine erring sister home
Back to yours.
Sir Simon Schama tried to shame her
Party for its views
But they carry on to blame the
Schoah on the Jews.
Abbott takes enormous fees
When telling students “hello”
Her comedy begs the question, “Please,
Abbott, where’s Costello?”
She has a great command of figures
A la Dr Evil
And all the population sniggers
Although I doubt that she will.
So Bob, please come and get her
Before she does more harm
And you in charge can set her
Of some stolen farm.
3. Ode to David Lammy
The enemy within.
It’s not his skin
At fault you’ll find
It’s just his mind.
More odes of odium and prose of opprobrium to come.
Responding to your article in todays Daily Telegraph.
The polarisation of opinion is destabilising and will lead to more unrest and personal injuries and deaths. but the ones driving this are the Left and not the Right. In fact the hard left are treating people who have what used to be a centrist and mainstream view as if they were right-wing fascists and making ordinary members of society, especially those who are male, white, Christian and taxpaying, feel as though they are being made pariahs and being made to pay for the privilege, to use the word they normally use to oppress us and make it look like we’re the oppressor.
We need to get back to a code of what is and what is not acceptable as mainstream, and the key parameter that nobody seems to be talking about is respecting the issue of freedom of choice.
If a person has the freedom to choose something, then they also have the responsibility for their choice, and maybe can be called upon to justify it. Where someone doesn’t have a choice, they did not exercise a freedom and therefore people should not expect them to justify it, that seems to me to be the most important aspect people never think of. In my own philosophy it stands next to the so-called “golden rule” of doing to others what you would like them to do to you. Because even that golden rule refers to things where people still have free agency.
If someone does to me something I don’t like but did not choose to do it, let us say that they bump into me but only because they were pushed unexpectedly by someone else, then I cannot blame them. They did to me probably something that they wouldn’t want me to do to them, but they didn’t choose it, hence the agency rule overrides the golden rule.
Taking this as a guide, Sara, one could begin to make a code which gradually replaces what we see as Neo-Marxist political correctness into a code based on chivalry, good-manners and that good-old Christian concept of neighbourly love. If you are the Commissioner for countering extremism, then what you need to do first if you will pardon me telling you your job (which is something I admittedly don’t like when someone does to me, but it does happen all the time and this is for the greater good) is to DEFINE what is extreme and what is not extreme by reference to adherence to these high-level principles.
What is fashionable and unfashionable in terms of specific doctrine can change over time, but certain ideas like fairness to all, or that he who pays the piper calls the tune, therefore people paying taxes should not be pushed away from the front line of access to the benefits bought by those taxes, in case of need. You need to consider defining what the traits are of something that could be described as extreme and anything which can justify itself with motherhood concepts ought not to be so defined.
As a final note, anyone who has 100 Muslim organisations braying to have them removed from office must be doing something right. Rather a lot right, even. So I’m hoping to hear of your successes in the future.
David J. James
I say, I say, I say: what’s the difference between a social worker and a Rottweiler
I don’t know, what IS the difference between a social worker and a Rottweiler?
You get your kids back off a Rottweiler.
I say I say I say: what’s the difference between the Soviet Union and the European Union?
I don’t know, what IS the difference between the Soviet Union and the Euopean Union?
You get your countries back off the Soviet one.
Guv: Hey, Peeps, shall we remain in the European Union or shall we leave?
Peeps: Well, you know what, Guv, in view of what Merkel is doing and how Obama threatened us with the end of the queue for trade deals, I suppose, marginally, we’d better go, hadn’t we? I am sure we’ll find a way to be independent.
Guv: OK, that’s what we’ll do, then.
Peeps: OK, Good luck. Sie schaffen das, hur hur hur.
Two and a half years later:
Guv: Well, Peeps, it’s now nearly three years later, Obama is long gone, Merkel’s on her way out, there’s lots of countries in the EU that would be our allies these days for a less federalist Europe. The guy in charge of the USA is all infavour of our leaving now, but for his own benefit. It’s clear that the whole business of leaving has a lot more issues than we knew about before, and you’ve got 5% more young people who wanted to stay in the electorate now, so are you QUITE SURE you still want to leave?
Peeps: How dare you ask us again? We gave you a clear signal? Wanna go undermining our demotrachic rights?! Disgusting!!!!