I was sent a link to a singer the other day, and she is an amazing singer for someone so young.
Have a listen and see what you think.
Her name is Lucy Kane.
Here's another;
Saturday 25 December 2010
Friday 17 December 2010
Time for me to go
Hello all.
Sorry for the lack posts, but I've been finalising my escape from this country.
As, some of you know this last year has been the shittiest year I have ever had.
First my wife left, to be with her wealthier scumbag, her reasons were that i was working to much, i was working 2 jobs to help pay for the bills, mainly hers. She took the kids with her and is refusing me access, due to the fact that the kids aren't mine (the kids are her sisters, we took them in when their parents died). I have been in contact through email and i have seen them without her knowledge, but only for a couple of hours at a time.
That was bad enough, but;
Then I was hospitalised because I got someone arrested for breaking in to my place of work.
I caught someone breaking into my place of work, I called the police, then I grabbed the little shit and literally sat on him till the police came.
Unfortunately, his friends didn't like the fact that I got him arrested. They were waiting till i was working nights again, and they pounced.
If you knew me, you would know I hate violence, but I knew i was going to get the shit beaten out of me so I thought let's do as much damage to them as possible. I took 2 of those fuckers out before the others took me out, one of them is now missing an ear, and the other one might have difficulty fathering children after I crushed his balls.
I was a mess, broken arm, broken ribs, concussion and internal bleeding to name a few of the injuries.
Now all of this was caught on the works CCTV system, the police took it away and with my evidence they were sure of a conviction for GBH.
Step in the CPS, The police were certain for a charge of GBH, but the CPS, for reasons of guaranteeing a conviction, they dropped it to assault.
The scum pleaded guilty to assault, and basically walked free from court. They were given suspended sentences of 2 years.
Thank you very much, another satisfied law abiding, tax paying member of the public. Justice doesn't happen in this country anymore.
Well I have now finalised everything for me to leave this country before it goes down the sewer.
Don't get me wrong, I love this country, but I can't stay here anymore.
I have sold my house, I've put some away for my kids, even though they aren't mine by blood, in my heart they are my kids. I'll pop back now and again to see them.
I've put the rest in an account, so it can't be touched by the government, but is easily accessible by me anywhere.
I'm going around the world, I'm going to do all the things I've wanted to do. I may end up in New Zealand, I have relatives there.
This blog was just my little place on the web, I have learnt a lot from the other bloggers out there. I have had a great time blogging and I hope the bloggers out there keep up the fight.
Thank you all out there who visited my blog and the friends i have made on twitter.
Take care, and be careful out there.
Sorry for the lack posts, but I've been finalising my escape from this country.
As, some of you know this last year has been the shittiest year I have ever had.
First my wife left, to be with her wealthier scumbag, her reasons were that i was working to much, i was working 2 jobs to help pay for the bills, mainly hers. She took the kids with her and is refusing me access, due to the fact that the kids aren't mine (the kids are her sisters, we took them in when their parents died). I have been in contact through email and i have seen them without her knowledge, but only for a couple of hours at a time.
That was bad enough, but;
Then I was hospitalised because I got someone arrested for breaking in to my place of work.
I caught someone breaking into my place of work, I called the police, then I grabbed the little shit and literally sat on him till the police came.
Unfortunately, his friends didn't like the fact that I got him arrested. They were waiting till i was working nights again, and they pounced.
If you knew me, you would know I hate violence, but I knew i was going to get the shit beaten out of me so I thought let's do as much damage to them as possible. I took 2 of those fuckers out before the others took me out, one of them is now missing an ear, and the other one might have difficulty fathering children after I crushed his balls.
I was a mess, broken arm, broken ribs, concussion and internal bleeding to name a few of the injuries.
Now all of this was caught on the works CCTV system, the police took it away and with my evidence they were sure of a conviction for GBH.
Step in the CPS, The police were certain for a charge of GBH, but the CPS, for reasons of guaranteeing a conviction, they dropped it to assault.
The scum pleaded guilty to assault, and basically walked free from court. They were given suspended sentences of 2 years.
Thank you very much, another satisfied law abiding, tax paying member of the public. Justice doesn't happen in this country anymore.
Well I have now finalised everything for me to leave this country before it goes down the sewer.
Don't get me wrong, I love this country, but I can't stay here anymore.
I have sold my house, I've put some away for my kids, even though they aren't mine by blood, in my heart they are my kids. I'll pop back now and again to see them.
I've put the rest in an account, so it can't be touched by the government, but is easily accessible by me anywhere.
I'm going around the world, I'm going to do all the things I've wanted to do. I may end up in New Zealand, I have relatives there.
This blog was just my little place on the web, I have learnt a lot from the other bloggers out there. I have had a great time blogging and I hope the bloggers out there keep up the fight.
Thank you all out there who visited my blog and the friends i have made on twitter.
Take care, and be careful out there.
Friday 29 October 2010
What do you have to do to get sent to prison?
Take a look at this scum. His name is Reece Kent, 19.
This shit beat up this gandfather.
Now you would expect Reece Kent to be sent to jail wouldn't you, but no he walks out of court with a suspended sentence.
An extract from the article;
A drunken thug who attacked a terminally-ill grandfather and kicked his head 'like a football' has walked free from court.
Reece Kent, 19, repeatedly punched Ken Oliver in the head before kicking him on the floor after he mistakenly knocked on the 62-year-old's door at 3.30am.
Cancer sufferer Mr Oliver - who has been given just three months to live - was left in a pool of blood on his doorstep with horrific injuries.
He spent a week in intensive care following the assault, with bleeding on his brain.
Kent admitted carrying out the unprovoked attack - which was filmed on a mobile phone by his friends - and pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm.
But Mr Oliver, a grandfather-of-three from Broxbourne, Hertfordshire, watched in disbelief as his attacker walked free from court last week with a six-month suspended sentence.
What do you have to do to get sent to jail?
You're more likely to get sent to jail for not paying your council tax than for grievous bodily harm.
If there is karma in the world, i hope it comes down on Reece Kent like a ton of bricks.
Reece Kent should be sent to Afghanistan so he can see, while he is beating the crap out of a grandfather, what our soldiers are having to go through.
What about all the soldiers from WW1 and WW2. I doubt very much that they gave their lives so we could be free, so scum like Reece Kent can beat up a grandfather.
What ever happened to 'the punishment should fit the crime',
It's all well and good the government getting to grips with the nations finances, but it better get law and order sorted as well, because I'm sick and tired of all the lawlessness i see on the streets.
This shit beat up this gandfather.
Now you would expect Reece Kent to be sent to jail wouldn't you, but no he walks out of court with a suspended sentence.
An extract from the article;
A drunken thug who attacked a terminally-ill grandfather and kicked his head 'like a football' has walked free from court.
Reece Kent, 19, repeatedly punched Ken Oliver in the head before kicking him on the floor after he mistakenly knocked on the 62-year-old's door at 3.30am.
Cancer sufferer Mr Oliver - who has been given just three months to live - was left in a pool of blood on his doorstep with horrific injuries.
He spent a week in intensive care following the assault, with bleeding on his brain.
Kent admitted carrying out the unprovoked attack - which was filmed on a mobile phone by his friends - and pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm.
But Mr Oliver, a grandfather-of-three from Broxbourne, Hertfordshire, watched in disbelief as his attacker walked free from court last week with a six-month suspended sentence.
What do you have to do to get sent to jail?
You're more likely to get sent to jail for not paying your council tax than for grievous bodily harm.
If there is karma in the world, i hope it comes down on Reece Kent like a ton of bricks.
Reece Kent should be sent to Afghanistan so he can see, while he is beating the crap out of a grandfather, what our soldiers are having to go through.
What about all the soldiers from WW1 and WW2. I doubt very much that they gave their lives so we could be free, so scum like Reece Kent can beat up a grandfather.
What ever happened to 'the punishment should fit the crime',
It's all well and good the government getting to grips with the nations finances, but it better get law and order sorted as well, because I'm sick and tired of all the lawlessness i see on the streets.
Friday 22 October 2010
Can Labour explain this please
As soldiers went short of kit, MoD wasted £½m on artwork like this
That is the headline to this article.
An extract;
Geoff Hoon spent nearly £560,000 of Ministry of Defence money on modern art while British soldiers were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan through lack of equipment.
The former Defence Secretary wasted the huge sum on 15 pieces of abstract art to hang on the walls of his department between 2003 and 2005.
Meanwhile, the Labour government faced criticism for putting servicemen and women in danger by scrimping on essential kit such as helicopters, radios and night goggles, and forcing their families to live in rundown military homes.
I want Hoon, and the rest of those Labour politicians to explain why did they spend so much money on art when there was a lack of equipment for our troops.
I wonder what was going through the mind of Hoon, other Labour politicians and civil service staff at the time.
Should we buy the best equipment for our troops or spend huge amounts of money on art to hang on the walls?
We all know the answer to that.
One word that comes to mind thinking of Hoon and the rest of the people who bought the art instead of equipment.
That is the headline to this article.
An extract;
Geoff Hoon spent nearly £560,000 of Ministry of Defence money on modern art while British soldiers were dying in Iraq and Afghanistan through lack of equipment.
The former Defence Secretary wasted the huge sum on 15 pieces of abstract art to hang on the walls of his department between 2003 and 2005.
Meanwhile, the Labour government faced criticism for putting servicemen and women in danger by scrimping on essential kit such as helicopters, radios and night goggles, and forcing their families to live in rundown military homes.
I want Hoon, and the rest of those Labour politicians to explain why did they spend so much money on art when there was a lack of equipment for our troops.
I wonder what was going through the mind of Hoon, other Labour politicians and civil service staff at the time.
Should we buy the best equipment for our troops or spend huge amounts of money on art to hang on the walls?
We all know the answer to that.
One word that comes to mind thinking of Hoon and the rest of the people who bought the art instead of equipment.
SCUM
EU Madness again
I have just read the following on Ambush Predator, and i am so shocked.
Have a read and see what you think.
That’ll Do, Pig…
Awwww, look at their little snouts! Look at their tiny feet! Look at their…
Oh:
Once you cede control to any ghastly organisation hatched by Europe, you have no say.
No appeals, no last-minute phone calls…
Red Dead River Hogs...?
Have a read and see what you think.
That’ll Do, Pig…
Cuddling up to their mother, these African piglets were more than an endearing attraction for zoo visitors.
They were also the successful product of a breeding programme aimed at keeping alive endangered species.
Awwww, look at their little snouts! Look at their tiny feet! Look at their…
Oh:
Zoo managers had hoped that many more of these rare Red River Hogs would be born in future. But yesterday it emerged the piglets had been killed by one of the zoo’s own vets.God lord, is there nothing the EU can’t screw up?
The pair, named Sammi and Becca, were destroyed at Edinburgh Zoo to comply with the controversial requirements of a European breeding project – after being deemed ‘surplus to requirements’.
It is feared that three other piglets currently at the zoo could also be culled. The move has outraged staff and horrified animal welfare campaigners. One staff member said: ‘We didn’t have any say. I found it pretty disgusting and was rather upset.’
Once you cede control to any ghastly organisation hatched by Europe, you have no say.
You might be as proud as punch with your success in breeding an endangered species, indeed it may be the only one of it’s kind in the UK, but if there’s too many of that species in captivity across the continent to suit the suits in their cosy offices, then Piglet gets the Big Sleep.
No appeals, no last-minute phone calls…
The culls have come about because of the zoo’s membership of the European Association of Zoos and Aquaria, which runs the European Endangered Species Programme (EEP). It manages the breeding of endangered animals in zoos.Want to get out of Europe now, bunny-huggers? Or do you want to see more
Thursday 21 October 2010
Anyone fancy a change.
I found the following on G.O.T. Blog, and it's called Climate Change Deniers Day. I think it's a great idea.
If your sick and tired of all the rubbish that is coming out of the warmist camp recently, take a look and see what you think.
If you want to 'Rage against the Machine', join the party.
If your sick and tired of all the rubbish that is coming out of the warmist camp recently, take a look and see what you think.
If you want to 'Rage against the Machine', join the party.
Wednesday 20 October 2010
Are the words savings and cuts in the EU dictionary?
British payments to EU set to rise £900m next year
The European Parliament voted through a budget rise yesterday that will cost Britain an extra £900 million next year – on the day George Osborne announced deep cuts to public spending.
That is the headline to this article.
An Extract;
A £6.5 billion EU budget rise that would increase EU spending by six per cent to £114.5 billion – of which £9.2 billion would be the British contribution – was voted through by MEPs in Strasbourg.
The increase, which Britain has so far failed to block, will cost the British taxpayer an extra £884 million and is a sum equivalent to the costs of employing an additional 14,000 NHS doctors, 29,000 nurses, 34,000 police constables or 52,000 Army privates.
Today we have heard what the government is going to do to get the nations finances in order; it has had to make cuts, severe in places, to get the budget back on an even keel.
On the same day as the UK Government announces the cuts, the MEPs at the eu insane asylum parliament voted for an increase to the eu budget.
An extract;
Daniel Hannan, the Conservative MEP for South-east England, attacked his colleagues for voting through budget increases that would undermine attempts by national governments to cut public spending.
"This vote shows how utterly divorced MEPs are from reality and how far the European parliament is from a representative body," he said. "There is not a country in Europe that is not going through cuts but we have a situation where the EU is sucking up the savings."
MEPs also voted to double the parliament's budget for champagne receptions, increased spending on their courtesy limousines and maintained £8 million in funding for Europarl television, despite refusing to release the channel's viewing figures, thought to be in the hundreds.
Those MEPs who voted for the increase are only lining their own pockets with the taxpayer’s money of Europe.
We have people in France rioting against an increase in the age when they retire; we have also had demonstrations in the UK at the cuts announced today.
Why don't they go to Brussels and demonstrate and riot there. The eu is rotten to the core with the waste and fraud. If we didn't have to pay for the eu we would be better off.
If the UK Parliament won't put a stop to this, then it's time for all the people in Europe to rise up together and show the eu we mean business, we won't take this shit anymore.
The European Parliament voted through a budget rise yesterday that will cost Britain an extra £900 million next year – on the day George Osborne announced deep cuts to public spending.
That is the headline to this article.
An Extract;
A £6.5 billion EU budget rise that would increase EU spending by six per cent to £114.5 billion – of which £9.2 billion would be the British contribution – was voted through by MEPs in Strasbourg.
The increase, which Britain has so far failed to block, will cost the British taxpayer an extra £884 million and is a sum equivalent to the costs of employing an additional 14,000 NHS doctors, 29,000 nurses, 34,000 police constables or 52,000 Army privates.
Today we have heard what the government is going to do to get the nations finances in order; it has had to make cuts, severe in places, to get the budget back on an even keel.
On the same day as the UK Government announces the cuts, the MEPs at the eu insane asylum parliament voted for an increase to the eu budget.
An extract;
Daniel Hannan, the Conservative MEP for South-east England, attacked his colleagues for voting through budget increases that would undermine attempts by national governments to cut public spending.
"This vote shows how utterly divorced MEPs are from reality and how far the European parliament is from a representative body," he said. "There is not a country in Europe that is not going through cuts but we have a situation where the EU is sucking up the savings."
MEPs also voted to double the parliament's budget for champagne receptions, increased spending on their courtesy limousines and maintained £8 million in funding for Europarl television, despite refusing to release the channel's viewing figures, thought to be in the hundreds.
Those MEPs who voted for the increase are only lining their own pockets with the taxpayer’s money of Europe.
We have people in France rioting against an increase in the age when they retire; we have also had demonstrations in the UK at the cuts announced today.
Why don't they go to Brussels and demonstrate and riot there. The eu is rotten to the core with the waste and fraud. If we didn't have to pay for the eu we would be better off.
If the UK Parliament won't put a stop to this, then it's time for all the people in Europe to rise up together and show the eu we mean business, we won't take this shit anymore.
Sunday 17 October 2010
Does Multiculturalism Work?
The following was found on IanPJ Twitter.
Have a read of this article from Reuters.
Merkel says German multiculturalism has failed
(Reuters) - Germany's attempt to create a multicultural society has "utterly failed," Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday, adding fuel to a debate over immigration and Islam polarising her conservative camp.
Speaking to a meeting of young members of her Christian Democrats (CDU), Merkel said allowing people of different cultural backgrounds to live side by side without integrating had not worked in a country that is home to some four million Muslims.
"This (multicultural) approach has failed, utterly failed," Merkel told the meeting in Potsdam, south of Berlin.
Merkel faces pressure from within her CDU to take a tougher line on immigrants who don't show a willingness to adapt to German society and her comments appeared intended to pacify her critics.
She said too little had been required of immigrants in the past and repeated her usual line that they should learn German in order to get by in school and have opportunities on the labour market.
The debate over foreigners in Germany has shifted since former central banker Thilo Sarrazin published a book accusing Muslim immigrants of lowering the intelligence of German society.
Sarrazin was censured for his views and dismissed from the Bundesbank, but his book proved highly popular and polls showed a majority of Germans agreed with the thrust of his arguments.
Merkel has tried to accommodate both sides of the debate, talking tough on integration but also telling Germans that they must accept that mosques have become part of their landscape.
She said on Saturday that the education of unemployed Germans should take priority over recruiting workers from abroad, while noting Germany could not get by without skilled foreign workers.
In a weekend newspaper interview, her Labour Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) raised the possibility of lowering barriers to entry for some foreign workers in order to fight the lack of skilled workers in Europe's largest economy.
"For a few years, more people have been leaving our country than entering it," she told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung. "Wherever it is possible, we must lower the entry hurdles for those who bring the country forward."
The German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK) says Germany lacks about 400,000 skilled workers.
Yet Horst Seehofer, chairman of the Christian Social Union (CSU), the CDU's sister party, has rejected any relaxation of immigration laws and said last week there was no room in Germany for more people from "alien cultures.
(Writing by Sarah Marsh; editing by Noah Barkin)
The German government sees what is happening when you have immigrants who don't adapt to the country's own culture, so why can't the British Government see the same?
The UK has had 13 years of uncontrolled immigration, and we have seen what happens; eg. Religious Extremism, human trafficking of women forced into prostitution.
Yes they are some of the worst cases, but it has increased in the last decade.
We do need controls, not just from outside the eu, but from inside the eu as well.
Have a read of this article from Reuters.
Merkel says German multiculturalism has failed
(Reuters) - Germany's attempt to create a multicultural society has "utterly failed," Chancellor Angela Merkel said on Saturday, adding fuel to a debate over immigration and Islam polarising her conservative camp.
Speaking to a meeting of young members of her Christian Democrats (CDU), Merkel said allowing people of different cultural backgrounds to live side by side without integrating had not worked in a country that is home to some four million Muslims.
"This (multicultural) approach has failed, utterly failed," Merkel told the meeting in Potsdam, south of Berlin.
Merkel faces pressure from within her CDU to take a tougher line on immigrants who don't show a willingness to adapt to German society and her comments appeared intended to pacify her critics.
She said too little had been required of immigrants in the past and repeated her usual line that they should learn German in order to get by in school and have opportunities on the labour market.
The debate over foreigners in Germany has shifted since former central banker Thilo Sarrazin published a book accusing Muslim immigrants of lowering the intelligence of German society.
Sarrazin was censured for his views and dismissed from the Bundesbank, but his book proved highly popular and polls showed a majority of Germans agreed with the thrust of his arguments.
Merkel has tried to accommodate both sides of the debate, talking tough on integration but also telling Germans that they must accept that mosques have become part of their landscape.
She said on Saturday that the education of unemployed Germans should take priority over recruiting workers from abroad, while noting Germany could not get by without skilled foreign workers.
In a weekend newspaper interview, her Labour Minister Ursula von der Leyen (CDU) raised the possibility of lowering barriers to entry for some foreign workers in order to fight the lack of skilled workers in Europe's largest economy.
"For a few years, more people have been leaving our country than entering it," she told the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung. "Wherever it is possible, we must lower the entry hurdles for those who bring the country forward."
The German Chamber of Industry and Commerce (DIHK) says Germany lacks about 400,000 skilled workers.
Yet Horst Seehofer, chairman of the Christian Social Union (CSU), the CDU's sister party, has rejected any relaxation of immigration laws and said last week there was no room in Germany for more people from "alien cultures.
(Writing by Sarah Marsh; editing by Noah Barkin)
The German government sees what is happening when you have immigrants who don't adapt to the country's own culture, so why can't the British Government see the same?
The UK has had 13 years of uncontrolled immigration, and we have seen what happens; eg. Religious Extremism, human trafficking of women forced into prostitution.
Yes they are some of the worst cases, but it has increased in the last decade.
We do need controls, not just from outside the eu, but from inside the eu as well.
Could this actually be true?
I found the following on Captain Ranty's Blog. It's called 'Unbound, Released, Free.'
Have a look and listen carefully to what is said.
I ran this video a while back.
You should watch the whole thing for context but the fun starts at around 5 minutes and the jaw-dropper, the statement that finally convinced me that what I am doing is right, comes at around the 7 minute point.
Take a look. Be amazed at the pure simplicity of it all.
Those of you that don't get it didn't pay attention. Watch it until you do.
You are unbound. You are released. You are free.
In point of fact, you were never shackled in the first place.
You just assumed you were.
CR.
Have a look and listen carefully to what is said.
I ran this video a while back.
You should watch the whole thing for context but the fun starts at around 5 minutes and the jaw-dropper, the statement that finally convinced me that what I am doing is right, comes at around the 7 minute point.
Take a look. Be amazed at the pure simplicity of it all.
Those of you that don't get it didn't pay attention. Watch it until you do.
You are unbound. You are released. You are free.
In point of fact, you were never shackled in the first place.
You just assumed you were.
CR.
Saturday 16 October 2010
The eu Wasting Money, no, they would never waste our Money
The following is taken from this article, originally found on Subrosa's Blog
EU president used official motorcade for 'family holiday' trip
Herman Van Rompuy, the EU president, has come under fire for using his official motorcade as a taxi service to take his family on 325-mile round trip to Paris airport en route to a private holiday.
An extract;
Aides for Mr Van Rompuy admitted to The Daily Telegraph that he used official cars and chauffeurs to take him, his wife, four children, two of their spouses and two grandchildren more than 162 miles to France to catch a holiday flight in August.
His official motorcade was then waiting for the family group to bring them back to Brussels from Paris when they returned from their private vacation, thought to be in the Caribbean.
The cost of an equivalent trip, hiring three S-class Mercedes cars and drivers from the Brussels based "Belgian Limo" company, would be over £4,000.
The rail connections are considered secure enough for EU heads of state and government, including David Cameron, the Prime Minister, who, while considered a greater security risk than Mr Van Rompuy, regularly uses the Eurostar to travel from London to Brussels.
and;
Mr Van Rompuy's aides would not discuss the holiday but compared the family's security needs to those of Barack Obama, the American President and justified the use of the cars for the 325-mile private round trip as a necessary "securitisation" measure.
A security measure for the eu president?
I'm pretty damn sure a terrorist group doesn't have him on their radar.
Now the US President is the number one target for terrorists and other nutters out there, so you expect a large motorcade for the US President, but for Van Rompuy, don't make me laugh.
"All costs of the private part of the holiday, down to the last euro, were met by the president. The security requirement was paid for out of his office budget."
Excuse me, but who pays his wages and office budget?
Yes, the poor old taxpayers of Europe.
How many more ways can we get screwed by the eu?
Plenty, they are always thinking of ways to screw the Taxpayer.
Keep a close eye on them and you'll see.
EU president used official motorcade for 'family holiday' trip
Herman Van Rompuy, the EU president, has come under fire for using his official motorcade as a taxi service to take his family on 325-mile round trip to Paris airport en route to a private holiday.
An extract;
Aides for Mr Van Rompuy admitted to The Daily Telegraph that he used official cars and chauffeurs to take him, his wife, four children, two of their spouses and two grandchildren more than 162 miles to France to catch a holiday flight in August.
His official motorcade was then waiting for the family group to bring them back to Brussels from Paris when they returned from their private vacation, thought to be in the Caribbean.
The cost of an equivalent trip, hiring three S-class Mercedes cars and drivers from the Brussels based "Belgian Limo" company, would be over £4,000.
The rail connections are considered secure enough for EU heads of state and government, including David Cameron, the Prime Minister, who, while considered a greater security risk than Mr Van Rompuy, regularly uses the Eurostar to travel from London to Brussels.
and;
Mr Van Rompuy's aides would not discuss the holiday but compared the family's security needs to those of Barack Obama, the American President and justified the use of the cars for the 325-mile private round trip as a necessary "securitisation" measure.
A security measure for the eu president?
I'm pretty damn sure a terrorist group doesn't have him on their radar.
Now the US President is the number one target for terrorists and other nutters out there, so you expect a large motorcade for the US President, but for Van Rompuy, don't make me laugh.
"All costs of the private part of the holiday, down to the last euro, were met by the president. The security requirement was paid for out of his office budget."
Excuse me, but who pays his wages and office budget?
Yes, the poor old taxpayers of Europe.
How many more ways can we get screwed by the eu?
Plenty, they are always thinking of ways to screw the Taxpayer.
Keep a close eye on them and you'll see.
The British Way of Life
The following is the headline to this article
Islamic face-veil part of 'British way of life'
The full Islamic face-veil is a part of the “British way of life” and should be celebrated along with religious symbols such as the crucifix, according to a report published today.
An extract;
Opponents of the veil claim it oppresses women and presents a barrier between those who wear traditional dress and the rest of society.
But in a new report from think-tank Civitas, Alveena Malik, a former faith adviser to the last Labour government, said the test of whether religious symbols are appropriate should be based on whether they are practical.
In a new report, Women, Islam and Western Liberalism, Mrs Malik said: “We in Britain need to take a different direction from others in Europe and to accept the veil as part of a modern British way of life.”
Sorry sweetheart, but the British Way of Life doesn't include that.
An example of the British way of life is;
The Queen, the changing of the Guard, Winston Churchill, Fish & Chips, Spotted Dick, a pint of real ale, Cucumber sandwiches, cricket, football (or soccer if your from the US), rugby, Wimbledon & queuing to name just a few.
No matter how muchuncontrolled immigration multicultural diversity we had under Labour,
Islamic face-veil part of 'British way of life'
The full Islamic face-veil is a part of the “British way of life” and should be celebrated along with religious symbols such as the crucifix, according to a report published today.
An extract;
Opponents of the veil claim it oppresses women and presents a barrier between those who wear traditional dress and the rest of society.
But in a new report from think-tank Civitas, Alveena Malik, a former faith adviser to the last Labour government, said the test of whether religious symbols are appropriate should be based on whether they are practical.
In a new report, Women, Islam and Western Liberalism, Mrs Malik said: “We in Britain need to take a different direction from others in Europe and to accept the veil as part of a modern British way of life.”
Sorry sweetheart, but the British Way of Life doesn't include that.
An example of the British way of life is;
The Queen, the changing of the Guard, Winston Churchill, Fish & Chips, Spotted Dick, a pint of real ale, Cucumber sandwiches, cricket, football (or soccer if your from the US), rugby, Wimbledon & queuing to name just a few.
No matter how much
THE BRITISH WAY OF LIFE WILL SURVIVE.
If you would like another opinion about this go to 'Ranting Penquin' blog and read his blog about the subject.
If you would like another opinion about this go to 'Ranting Penquin' blog and read his blog about the subject.
Monday 11 October 2010
US physics professor: 'Global warming is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life'
The following is taken from the James Delingpole Telegraph blog.
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts describes it thus:
This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.
It’s so utterly damning that I’m going to run it in full without further comment. (H/T GWPF, Richard Brearley).
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.
3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.<
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety
Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
I hope people share this article with as many people as possible.
Global warming is just a con and is just about certain people making money, Al Gore are you listening.
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics at the University of California, Santa Barbara. Here is his letter of resignation to Curtis G. Callan Jr, Princeton University, President of the American Physical Society.
Anthony Watts describes it thus:
This is an important moment in science history. I would describe it as a letter on the scale of Martin Luther, nailing his 95 theses to the Wittenburg church door. It is worthy of repeating this letter in entirety on every blog that discusses science.
It’s so utterly damning that I’m going to run it in full without further comment. (H/T GWPF, Richard Brearley).
Dear Curt:
When I first joined the American Physical Society sixty-seven years ago it was much smaller, much gentler, and as yet uncorrupted by the money flood (a threat against which Dwight Eisenhower warned a half-century ago). Indeed, the choice of physics as a profession was then a guarantor of a life of poverty and abstinence—it was World War II that changed all that. The prospect of worldly gain drove few physicists. As recently as thirty-five years ago, when I chaired the first APS study of a contentious social/scientific issue, The Reactor Safety Study, though there were zealots aplenty on the outside there was no hint of inordinate pressure on us as physicists. We were therefore able to produce what I believe was and is an honest appraisal of the situation at that time. We were further enabled by the presence of an oversight committee consisting of Pief Panofsky, Vicki Weisskopf, and Hans Bethe, all towering physicists beyond reproach. I was proud of what we did in a charged atmosphere. In the end the oversight committee, in its report to the APS President, noted the complete independence in which we did the job, and predicted that the report would be attacked from both sides. What greater tribute could there be?
How different it is now. The giants no longer walk the earth, and the money flood has become the raison d’être of much physics research, the vital sustenance of much more, and it provides the support for untold numbers of professional jobs. For reasons that will soon become clear my former pride at being an APS Fellow all these years has been turned into shame, and I am forced, with no pleasure at all, to offer you my resignation from the Society.
It is of course, the global warming scam, with the (literally) trillions of dollars driving it, that has corrupted so many scientists, and has carried APS before it like a rogue wave. It is the greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud I have seen in my long life as a physicist. Anyone who has the faintest doubt that this is so should force himself to read the ClimateGate documents, which lay it bare. (Montford’s book organizes the facts very well.) I don’t believe that any real physicist, nay scientist, can read that stuff without revulsion. I would almost make that revulsion a definition of the word scientist.
So what has the APS, as an organization, done in the face of this challenge? It has accepted the corruption as the norm, and gone along with it. For example:
1. About a year ago a few of us sent an e-mail on the subject to a fraction of the membership. APS ignored the issues, but the then President immediately launched a hostile investigation of where we got the e-mail addresses. In its better days, APS used to encourage discussion of important issues, and indeed the Constitution cites that as its principal purpose. No more. Everything that has been done in the last year has been designed to silence debate
2. The appallingly tendentious APS statement on Climate Change was apparently written in a hurry by a few people over lunch, and is certainly not representative of the talents of APS members as I have long known them. So a few of us petitioned the Council to reconsider it. One of the outstanding marks of (in)distinction in the Statement was the poison word incontrovertible, which describes few items in physics, certainly not this one. In response APS appointed a secret committee that never met, never troubled to speak to any skeptics, yet endorsed the Statement in its entirety. (They did admit that the tone was a bit strong, but amazingly kept the poison word incontrovertible to describe the evidence, a position supported by no one.) In the end, the Council kept the original statement, word for word, but approved a far longer “explanatory” screed, admitting that there were uncertainties, but brushing them aside to give blanket approval to the original. The original Statement, which still stands as the APS position, also contains what I consider pompous and asinine advice to all world governments, as if the APS were master of the universe. It is not, and I am embarrassed that our leaders seem to think it is. This is not fun and games, these are serious matters involving vast fractions of our national substance, and the reputation of the Society as a scientific society is at stake.
3. In the interim the ClimateGate scandal broke into the news, and the machinations of the principal alarmists were revealed to the world. It was a fraud on a scale I have never seen, and I lack the words to describe its enormity. Effect on the APS position: none. None at all. This is not science; other forces are at work.
4. So a few of us tried to bring science into the act (that is, after all, the alleged and historic purpose of APS), and collected the necessary 200+ signatures to bring to the Council a proposal for a Topical Group on Climate Science, thinking that open discussion of the scientific issues, in the best tradition of physics, would be beneficial to all, and also a contribution to the nation. I might note that it was not easy to collect the signatures, since you denied us the use of the APS membership list. We conformed in every way with the requirements of the APS Constitution, and described in great detail what we had in mind—simply to bring the subject into the open.<
5. To our amazement, Constitution be damned, you declined to accept our petition, but instead used your own control of the mailing list to run a poll on the members’ interest in a TG on Climate and the Environment. You did ask the members if they would sign a petition to form a TG on your yet-to-be-defined subject, but provided no petition, and got lots of affirmative responses. (If you had asked about sex you would have gotten more expressions of interest.) There was of course no such petition or proposal, and you have now dropped the Environment part, so the whole matter is moot. (Any lawyer will tell you that you cannot collect signatures on a vague petition, and then fill in whatever you like.) The entire purpose of this exercise was to avoid your constitutional responsibility to take our petition to the Council.
6. As of now you have formed still another secret and stacked committee to organize your own TG, simply ignoring our lawful petition.
APS management has gamed the problem from the beginning, to suppress serious conversation about the merits of the climate change claims. Do you wonder that I have lost confidence in the organization?
I do feel the need to add one note, and this is conjecture, since it is always risky to discuss other people’s motives. This scheming at APS HQ is so bizarre that there cannot be a simple explanation for it. Some have held that the physicists of today are not as smart as they used to be, but I don’t think that is an issue. I think it is the money, exactly what Eisenhower warned about a half-century ago. There are indeed trillions of dollars involved, to say nothing of the fame and glory (and frequent trips to exotic islands) that go with being a member of the club. Your own Physics Department (of which you are chairman) would lose millions a year if the global warming bubble burst. When Penn State absolved Mike Mann of wrongdoing, and the University of East Anglia did the same for Phil Jones, they cannot have been unaware of the financial penalty for doing otherwise. As the old saying goes, you don’t have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing. Since I am no philosopher, I’m not going to explore at just which point enlightened self-interest crosses the line into corruption, but a careful reading of the ClimateGate releases makes it clear that this is not an academic question.
I want no part of it, so please accept my resignation. APS no longer represents me, but I hope we are still friends.
Hal
Harold Lewis is Emeritus Professor of Physics, University of California, Santa Barbara, former Chairman; Former member Defense Science Board, chmn of Technology panel; Chairman DSB study on Nuclear Winter; Former member Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards; Former member, President’s Nuclear Safety Oversight Committee; Chairman APS study on Nuclear Reactor Safety
Chairman Risk Assessment Review Group; Co-founder and former Chairman of JASON; Former member USAF Scientific Advisory Board; Served in US Navy in WW II; books: Technological Risk (about, surprise, technological risk) and Why Flip a Coin (about decision making)
I hope people share this article with as many people as possible.
Global warming is just a con and is just about certain people making money, Al Gore are you listening.
Monday 6 September 2010
Barbaric
I ask everyone to go to Catosays Blog.
The blog I'm asking you to go and see is titled Barbarians and words cannot descibe the shock and anger of what i saw.
I warn you it is GRAPHIC and very VIOLENT, so be warned.
Here is the video. Please be warned it is a Very violent video.
It shows what happens to women and girls in muslim countries.
The blog I'm asking you to go and see is titled Barbarians and words cannot descibe the shock and anger of what i saw.
I warn you it is GRAPHIC and very VIOLENT, so be warned.
Here is the video. Please be warned it is a Very violent video.
It shows what happens to women and girls in muslim countries.
Sunday 29 August 2010
An Open Letter to Sandwell council
The following is taken from http://faulkstalks.blogspot.com/. It is a continuation from Anna Raccoon's blog Fighting them on the Sandwell
You can read the letter below or click on the link An Open Letter To Sandwell Council to go to the blog.
To Whom It May Concern
I understand from the press and legions of political bloggers that I read that once again you have excelled yourselves in your zeal for keeping a tidy district. I am sure that you are proud of your efforts to achieve this. I use the term 'once again,' because I understand that on various occasions you taken decisive action against people who have by their behaviour - knowingly or otherwise - transgressed your precise (or might I say 'exacting'?) standards, and who have been victimised accordingly.
Your action against a widow - whose 'offense' was to pinch out a cigarette she was smoking at a bus stop, thus dropping the lighted end on your immaculate street - has proved that you are a council that leads the way in mercilessness and malice. It is abundantly clear for all to see that you hold these qualities to the highest degree.
Permit me to courteously remind you of a few facts:
First of all, as a council, you are the servants of the area. You are not their lords/masters/despots/satraps/kings. This may not be how you would like it to be, but that is how it is. Please consider this - as painful as it may be to you.
Secondly, your local populace earns money which, through their hard work or investment, goes to pay for your wages. In other words, you are beholden to those whose living subsidises your way of life - and, doubtless the sumptuous premises in which you work and from where you issue your diktats and generate the various trendy 'diversity' projects upon which you lavish taxpayer's hard-earned cash.
Thirdly, this is still nominally a free country. It is not a Soviet Socialist republic or a fascist dictatorship - yet. I realise that as a Labour council, there are people in your ranks who have qualified as Common Purpose 'graduates,' and who have enthusiastically imbibed the anti-democratic values and practices that it is intended to subvert. That this country has not yet fully circumvented the vaguely democratic values that has under-girded it may not be to your liking, but again - that's how it is. Deal with it. This is still a free country. There are still regular, law-abiding people who pay your substantial wages who abhor the petty vindictiveness which you have displayed to the lady in question along with others who have also fallen foul of your nastiness. There are doubtless those in your very district who fought in the Second World War to oppose the very principles which you have so enthusiastically applied - authoritarian fascism. You have betrayed them - and all the others of the same generation who endured bereavement and a myriad of hardships and made sacrifices to fight oppression and tyranny for the sake of you and I. I hope you are pleased with yourselves.
Finally, let me remind you that until this country becomes a repressed third-world, third-rate vassal state of an emerging totalitarian socialist Utopia, there will continue to be people like this present writer who will vehemently oppose you and your despotic ways and will take every opportunity to publicly register their undying contempt for the supercilious attitude and inhuman ways in which you operate. And until we are silenced by some secret police force, we will continue to do so.
Now the above letter is about a specific incident at a specific council, but don't you think it could be about almost any council in the country?
You can read the letter below or click on the link An Open Letter To Sandwell Council to go to the blog.
To Whom It May Concern
I understand from the press and legions of political bloggers that I read that once again you have excelled yourselves in your zeal for keeping a tidy district. I am sure that you are proud of your efforts to achieve this. I use the term 'once again,' because I understand that on various occasions you taken decisive action against people who have by their behaviour - knowingly or otherwise - transgressed your precise (or might I say 'exacting'?) standards, and who have been victimised accordingly.
Your action against a widow - whose 'offense' was to pinch out a cigarette she was smoking at a bus stop, thus dropping the lighted end on your immaculate street - has proved that you are a council that leads the way in mercilessness and malice. It is abundantly clear for all to see that you hold these qualities to the highest degree.
Permit me to courteously remind you of a few facts:
First of all, as a council, you are the servants of the area. You are not their lords/masters/despots/satraps/kings. This may not be how you would like it to be, but that is how it is. Please consider this - as painful as it may be to you.
Secondly, your local populace earns money which, through their hard work or investment, goes to pay for your wages. In other words, you are beholden to those whose living subsidises your way of life - and, doubtless the sumptuous premises in which you work and from where you issue your diktats and generate the various trendy 'diversity' projects upon which you lavish taxpayer's hard-earned cash.
Thirdly, this is still nominally a free country. It is not a Soviet Socialist republic or a fascist dictatorship - yet. I realise that as a Labour council, there are people in your ranks who have qualified as Common Purpose 'graduates,' and who have enthusiastically imbibed the anti-democratic values and practices that it is intended to subvert. That this country has not yet fully circumvented the vaguely democratic values that has under-girded it may not be to your liking, but again - that's how it is. Deal with it. This is still a free country. There are still regular, law-abiding people who pay your substantial wages who abhor the petty vindictiveness which you have displayed to the lady in question along with others who have also fallen foul of your nastiness. There are doubtless those in your very district who fought in the Second World War to oppose the very principles which you have so enthusiastically applied - authoritarian fascism. You have betrayed them - and all the others of the same generation who endured bereavement and a myriad of hardships and made sacrifices to fight oppression and tyranny for the sake of you and I. I hope you are pleased with yourselves.
Finally, let me remind you that until this country becomes a repressed third-world, third-rate vassal state of an emerging totalitarian socialist Utopia, there will continue to be people like this present writer who will vehemently oppose you and your despotic ways and will take every opportunity to publicly register their undying contempt for the supercilious attitude and inhuman ways in which you operate. And until we are silenced by some secret police force, we will continue to do so.
Now the above letter is about a specific incident at a specific council, but don't you think it could be about almost any council in the country?
Monday 23 August 2010
Someone needing everyones support
I have just read Anna Raccoon's Blog entry called Fighting ‘them’ on the Sandwell. After reading it I had to spread the word.
It involves a council who is taking an old lady to court over some litter. The litter in question is some burnt ash from a cigarette.
Read the whole story below;
70 years ago this week, Winston Churchill made his famous speech immortalising the words ‘Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.’ He did so to rally every man and woman in these Isles to support the war effort: “because we have been nurtured in freedom and individual responsibility and are the products, not of totalitarian uniformity, but of tolerance and variety.”
Sheila Martin was a fragile babe in arms when her Mother heard those words. Too young to understand the menace behind the Messerschmitts and Heinkels screaming overhead and disturbing her slumber. She was the intended beneficiary of Churchill’s words, one of the generation of children that depended on the bravery of British men such as her Father, away in France fighting for the freedom, tolerance and variety that was Britain’s hallmark.
Today, Sheila is once more fragile; she is 70 years old and was widowed 30 years ago. She tells me she has survived five heart attacks; she suffers from asthma, angina and high blood pressure. She only smokes the occasional cigarette these days, partly for health reasons, partly because her minimal state pension doesn’t stretch to any more.
70 years after Churchill’s speech was made, she has retired from a lifetime of hard work.
She was part of that unsung army of hard working, clean living, decent individuals, who cheerfully got up every morning and trudged off to put in a decent days work for a paltry wage as a ‘Mrs Mop’, raised her family, nurtured her marriage, made ends meet, saved little, but asked little in return, save the freedom, and tolerance that her older relatives had fought to provide. She is not a politically aware lady, nor insolent, nor ambitious for financial rewards.
In common with other ‘Smokers’ who may not like the new laws prohibiting them from smoking where others may be offended by the practice, she respected the law of the land, and complied. She is no campaigner against such laws.
Thus it was that she found herself standing at a bus stop, waiting for the bus which would take her home, and taking the opportunity to smoke a cigarette in the open air – there was no bus shelter. She could no longer smoke a cigarette on the top deck of the bus. She had not been able to smoke a cigarette with the cup of tea she shared with her daughter in town. Now she must stand in the road to enjoy the ‘freedom, tolerance and variety’ of the British Isles.
She only smoked half the cigarette; as the time drew close for the bus to arrive, she ‘nibbed’ the cigarette, letting the lit end fall to the ground, and thriftily stowing the other half of the cigarette in her handbag for a later occasion. It was her last cigarette until pension day.
Two of Sandwell’s famed ‘enforcement wardens’ approached her – a man and a woman. They told her that they were issuing a ‘Fixed Penalty Fine’ of £75 under Section 87 (1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 as amended by Section 18 of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005. This mouthful of gobblygook was lost on Sheila; she had no idea what she had done wrong and put the piece of paper in her pocket.
Once home, friends and neighbours clustered round to read this piece of officialdom. Sheila still had the ‘end’ of the cigarette, with its precious inch or so of un-smoked tobacco in her handbag, so how could she be accused of littering the street – it had to be the cigarette ash they were talking about?
I have spoken to Sandwell Council, they tell me that they do not issue fixed penalty notices for cigarette ‘ash’ – I am sure they don’t. I am equally sure that Mrs Martin is telling the truth when she tells me that the half cigarette with its ‘butt’ was still safely in her handbag when she returned home. So we are left with the quandary of whether the ‘lit’ end of a cigarette, which will become cigarette ‘ash’ within seconds, constitutes parliament’s intention when they defined litter as including:
In section 98 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (definitions), after subsection (5) insert—
“(5A)“Litter” includes—
(a) the discarded ends of cigarettes, cigars and like products, and
(b) discarded chewing-gum and the discarded remains of other products designed for chewing.”
If a court holds that it does, then every smoker is liable for a £75 fine every time they smoke a cigarette in the street. I do not believe that to be parliament’s intention.
On Friday, the threatening ‘Final Demand’ from Sandwell Council, warning her that she now faces a £2,500 fine plus costs (and possible imprisonment if she does not pay that) expired. The next opportunity for Mrs Martin to contest this matter will come in ‘some months time’ – the council cannot tell me when her case will arrive at the top of their back log of cases to appear in the Magistrates court.
Sheila Martin is frightened, intimidated, and feels helpless in the face of this prosecution. She is in delicate health, aggravated by stress, and I have asked the council to reconsider their decision to press ahead with what may well be an interesting test case defining a cigarette end, but which will be at the expense of a frail and elderly person. They have referred me to their ‘revised Enforcement Policy’ – which makes for terrifying reading, a fine example of the totalitarian government Sheila’s Father fought so bravely to prevent. (available HERE)
Nick Hogan, who I was instrumental in rescuing from prison after similar council action, has joined with me, the Libertarian Party and the Sunday Mercury, to ensure that Sheila suffers as little as possible from the council’s intransience.
We have already arranged for some very high powered legal representation for her, to put her mind at rest, and I have promised her that she will go to prison ‘over my dead body’ – she is obviously unable to pay this fine, or incremental increases of it, and I have personally guaranteed her that somehow I will make sure that she doesn’t have to pay it herself, nor go to prison.
There is no need for money at present, all the legal beagles so far involved are kindly donating their time and expertise free of charge – although if there are any other lawyers out there who would like to join the team, this is one broth that will not be spoiled by too many cooks. My e-mail address is on the contact section of this blog.
70 years ago we were prepared to ‘fight them on the beaches’ – how appropriate that today we prepare to f’ight them on the Sandwell……’
UPDATE:
CAMPAIGNERS have vowed to raise funds to help an elderly widow who has been threatened with a £2,500 fine for dropping cigarette ash on the pavement.
Sheila Martin, 70, was smoking at a bus stop when a Sandwell Council warden pounced and handed her the £75 fixed penalty for littering.
The frail granny, from Oldbury, has refused to pay – and now faces a £2,500 penalty or even prison.
But on-line campaigners who freed a pub landlord from jail for a similar offence earlier this year have now come forward to lend their support.
Nick Hogan, former landlord of The Swan and Barristers in Bolton, was jailed for six months for failing to pay fines and costs totalling £10,136 after being guilty of allowing customers to light up.
But he walked free after an internet campaign raised £10,000 to secure his early release in just 10 days.
Web blogger Anna Raccoon was instrumental in securing his freedom and has now vowed to help Mrs Martin.
She said: “As a result of articles I wrote, the generosity of my readers and with the co-operation of other bloggers, we managed to raise the money in 10 days and get Nick released from jail.
“Now we are prepared to turn our efforts to helping Sheila Martin. If she does not pay the fine, she could be sent to jail just as Nick Hogan was.
“That is oppressive persecution and we should not stand by and watch an elderly widow treated like this.
“My readers are happy to support Sheila in any way we can, to enable her to fight this penalty.”
Last night Mrs Martin said: “I am so touched by all the support people have been giving me all week.
“I thought I was all alone and now I realise I am not. It has made me feel so much better.”
Simon Clarke, Director of Pro-smoking Group FOREST, also offered his support. He said: “What is happening to her is just another example of the bully state.
“Smokers are easy targets and while we do not condone littering, this case is just a complete overreaction by Sandwell Council.
“We will not allow this frail old lady to be bullied and we will do everything we can to help her.”
I am so angry right now, How can this council take a frail old lady to court over something as trivial as burnt ash.
Spread the word and if you want go to Anna Raccoon's Blog and show your support.
It involves a council who is taking an old lady to court over some litter. The litter in question is some burnt ash from a cigarette.
Read the whole story below;
70 years ago this week, Winston Churchill made his famous speech immortalising the words ‘Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.’ He did so to rally every man and woman in these Isles to support the war effort: “because we have been nurtured in freedom and individual responsibility and are the products, not of totalitarian uniformity, but of tolerance and variety.”
Sheila Martin was a fragile babe in arms when her Mother heard those words. Too young to understand the menace behind the Messerschmitts and Heinkels screaming overhead and disturbing her slumber. She was the intended beneficiary of Churchill’s words, one of the generation of children that depended on the bravery of British men such as her Father, away in France fighting for the freedom, tolerance and variety that was Britain’s hallmark.
Today, Sheila is once more fragile; she is 70 years old and was widowed 30 years ago. She tells me she has survived five heart attacks; she suffers from asthma, angina and high blood pressure. She only smokes the occasional cigarette these days, partly for health reasons, partly because her minimal state pension doesn’t stretch to any more.
70 years after Churchill’s speech was made, she has retired from a lifetime of hard work.
She was part of that unsung army of hard working, clean living, decent individuals, who cheerfully got up every morning and trudged off to put in a decent days work for a paltry wage as a ‘Mrs Mop’, raised her family, nurtured her marriage, made ends meet, saved little, but asked little in return, save the freedom, and tolerance that her older relatives had fought to provide. She is not a politically aware lady, nor insolent, nor ambitious for financial rewards.
In common with other ‘Smokers’ who may not like the new laws prohibiting them from smoking where others may be offended by the practice, she respected the law of the land, and complied. She is no campaigner against such laws.
Thus it was that she found herself standing at a bus stop, waiting for the bus which would take her home, and taking the opportunity to smoke a cigarette in the open air – there was no bus shelter. She could no longer smoke a cigarette on the top deck of the bus. She had not been able to smoke a cigarette with the cup of tea she shared with her daughter in town. Now she must stand in the road to enjoy the ‘freedom, tolerance and variety’ of the British Isles.
She only smoked half the cigarette; as the time drew close for the bus to arrive, she ‘nibbed’ the cigarette, letting the lit end fall to the ground, and thriftily stowing the other half of the cigarette in her handbag for a later occasion. It was her last cigarette until pension day.
Two of Sandwell’s famed ‘enforcement wardens’ approached her – a man and a woman. They told her that they were issuing a ‘Fixed Penalty Fine’ of £75 under Section 87 (1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 as amended by Section 18 of the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005. This mouthful of gobblygook was lost on Sheila; she had no idea what she had done wrong and put the piece of paper in her pocket.
Once home, friends and neighbours clustered round to read this piece of officialdom. Sheila still had the ‘end’ of the cigarette, with its precious inch or so of un-smoked tobacco in her handbag, so how could she be accused of littering the street – it had to be the cigarette ash they were talking about?
I have spoken to Sandwell Council, they tell me that they do not issue fixed penalty notices for cigarette ‘ash’ – I am sure they don’t. I am equally sure that Mrs Martin is telling the truth when she tells me that the half cigarette with its ‘butt’ was still safely in her handbag when she returned home. So we are left with the quandary of whether the ‘lit’ end of a cigarette, which will become cigarette ‘ash’ within seconds, constitutes parliament’s intention when they defined litter as including:
In section 98 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 (definitions), after subsection (5) insert—
“(5A)“Litter” includes—
(a) the discarded ends of cigarettes, cigars and like products, and
(b) discarded chewing-gum and the discarded remains of other products designed for chewing.”
If a court holds that it does, then every smoker is liable for a £75 fine every time they smoke a cigarette in the street. I do not believe that to be parliament’s intention.
On Friday, the threatening ‘Final Demand’ from Sandwell Council, warning her that she now faces a £2,500 fine plus costs (and possible imprisonment if she does not pay that) expired. The next opportunity for Mrs Martin to contest this matter will come in ‘some months time’ – the council cannot tell me when her case will arrive at the top of their back log of cases to appear in the Magistrates court.
Sheila Martin is frightened, intimidated, and feels helpless in the face of this prosecution. She is in delicate health, aggravated by stress, and I have asked the council to reconsider their decision to press ahead with what may well be an interesting test case defining a cigarette end, but which will be at the expense of a frail and elderly person. They have referred me to their ‘revised Enforcement Policy’ – which makes for terrifying reading, a fine example of the totalitarian government Sheila’s Father fought so bravely to prevent. (available HERE)
Nick Hogan, who I was instrumental in rescuing from prison after similar council action, has joined with me, the Libertarian Party and the Sunday Mercury, to ensure that Sheila suffers as little as possible from the council’s intransience.
We have already arranged for some very high powered legal representation for her, to put her mind at rest, and I have promised her that she will go to prison ‘over my dead body’ – she is obviously unable to pay this fine, or incremental increases of it, and I have personally guaranteed her that somehow I will make sure that she doesn’t have to pay it herself, nor go to prison.
There is no need for money at present, all the legal beagles so far involved are kindly donating their time and expertise free of charge – although if there are any other lawyers out there who would like to join the team, this is one broth that will not be spoiled by too many cooks. My e-mail address is on the contact section of this blog.
70 years ago we were prepared to ‘fight them on the beaches’ – how appropriate that today we prepare to f’ight them on the Sandwell……’
UPDATE:
CAMPAIGNERS have vowed to raise funds to help an elderly widow who has been threatened with a £2,500 fine for dropping cigarette ash on the pavement.
Sheila Martin, 70, was smoking at a bus stop when a Sandwell Council warden pounced and handed her the £75 fixed penalty for littering.
The frail granny, from Oldbury, has refused to pay – and now faces a £2,500 penalty or even prison.
But on-line campaigners who freed a pub landlord from jail for a similar offence earlier this year have now come forward to lend their support.
Nick Hogan, former landlord of The Swan and Barristers in Bolton, was jailed for six months for failing to pay fines and costs totalling £10,136 after being guilty of allowing customers to light up.
But he walked free after an internet campaign raised £10,000 to secure his early release in just 10 days.
Web blogger Anna Raccoon was instrumental in securing his freedom and has now vowed to help Mrs Martin.
She said: “As a result of articles I wrote, the generosity of my readers and with the co-operation of other bloggers, we managed to raise the money in 10 days and get Nick released from jail.
“Now we are prepared to turn our efforts to helping Sheila Martin. If she does not pay the fine, she could be sent to jail just as Nick Hogan was.
“That is oppressive persecution and we should not stand by and watch an elderly widow treated like this.
“My readers are happy to support Sheila in any way we can, to enable her to fight this penalty.”
Last night Mrs Martin said: “I am so touched by all the support people have been giving me all week.
“I thought I was all alone and now I realise I am not. It has made me feel so much better.”
Simon Clarke, Director of Pro-smoking Group FOREST, also offered his support. He said: “What is happening to her is just another example of the bully state.
“Smokers are easy targets and while we do not condone littering, this case is just a complete overreaction by Sandwell Council.
“We will not allow this frail old lady to be bullied and we will do everything we can to help her.”
I am so angry right now, How can this council take a frail old lady to court over something as trivial as burnt ash.
Spread the word and if you want go to Anna Raccoon's Blog and show your support.
Tuesday 20 July 2010
Taking some leave.
This might be my last blog entry for a while. I have some personal shit to sort out.
Life can be hard, but you work through it. You do what you think is best for you and your family, but then something blindsides you.
You work hard for your wife and kids and then something, or someone, out of know where comes along and kicks you in the arse so hard you land in another continent.
Today, I have landed in painville, nothing physical, but emotional.
This blog was always small fry compared to others, it was just my place to rant about what was, and is, happening to this country.
I will pop in now and again to read;.
Anna Raccoon,
Old Holborn,
Obo the Clown,
Cold Steel Rain,
Dick Puddlecote,
Barking Spider,
Thoughts of Oscar,
Bollogs, Uncle Marvo
Grumpy Old Twat
To name just a few of the many great bloggers.
Take Care guys and girls.
I may be back, but we will just have to see.
Life can be hard, but you work through it. You do what you think is best for you and your family, but then something blindsides you.
You work hard for your wife and kids and then something, or someone, out of know where comes along and kicks you in the arse so hard you land in another continent.
Today, I have landed in painville, nothing physical, but emotional.
This blog was always small fry compared to others, it was just my place to rant about what was, and is, happening to this country.
I will pop in now and again to read;.
Anna Raccoon,
Old Holborn,
Obo the Clown,
Cold Steel Rain,
Dick Puddlecote,
Barking Spider,
Thoughts of Oscar,
Bollogs, Uncle Marvo
Grumpy Old Twat
To name just a few of the many great bloggers.
Take Care guys and girls.
I may be back, but we will just have to see.
Friday 16 July 2010
Real Heroes and Legends
Below is Ian Collins, of Talksport' Speaking with Siobhan O'Dowd who created the 'Raoul Moat Legend facebook page.'
If, in her eyes, Moat was a hero and a legend, what does she think about the brave people who go out and risk their lives to help and save people; for example;
The Fire Service
The RNLI Lifeboat Crews, who are volunteers,
The Ambulance / Paramedic service,
The Police, yes people may say they are not heroes, but at heart I'm sure all policemen and women want to protect the public.
People may not agree with all of the above, but no one can disagree with the next one.
The Military, especially the ones in Afghanistan at the moment, and the ones who have served in conflicts, and wars, past.
WW1, WW2, Korea, The Falklands, Northern Ireland, The Gulf War, Kosova and Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq.
To Siobhan O'Dowd and to all those 'people' who think Raoul Moat is some sort of legend and hero. Click the link below and see real heroes and legends.
Real Legends and Real Heroes
If, in her eyes, Moat was a hero and a legend, what does she think about the brave people who go out and risk their lives to help and save people; for example;
The Fire Service
The RNLI Lifeboat Crews, who are volunteers,
The Ambulance / Paramedic service,
The Police, yes people may say they are not heroes, but at heart I'm sure all policemen and women want to protect the public.
People may not agree with all of the above, but no one can disagree with the next one.
The Military, especially the ones in Afghanistan at the moment, and the ones who have served in conflicts, and wars, past.
WW1, WW2, Korea, The Falklands, Northern Ireland, The Gulf War, Kosova and Bosnia, Afghanistan, Iraq.
To Siobhan O'Dowd and to all those 'people' who think Raoul Moat is some sort of legend and hero. Click the link below and see real heroes and legends.
Real Legends and Real Heroes
Tuesday 13 July 2010
Forced Adoptions
Forced adoption is a truly dreadful scandal
Social workers are removing children from loving families without proper justification, says Christopher Booker
That is the headline to this article, by Christopher Booker
In recent months, I have been reporting on what is one of the most alarming scandals in Britain today – the secretive system that allows social workers to remove children from loving families without any proper justification, and to send them for adoption or fostering with no apparent concern for their interests.
Four more examples have come to light in the past week. The first came to my attention via Lynn Boleyn, a former councillor from Dudley, who first became concerned about "forced adoption" when she sat on various committees concerned with child care. Last week, she was in court with a mother of five girls, whose family tragedy began when her partner was sentenced to 14 years for abusing the eldest girl, who was sent to live with a relative. Although there was no evidence of their mother harming them in any way, the other four girls were seized by Dudley social services and placed in foster care. Three were kept together, separated from their two-year-old sister whom the council now wants to put out for adoption.
The three girls, aged 11, 10 and 7, are desperately unhappy, constantly asking to be reunited with their mother. But on Friday, a judge said he had no power to stop social services summarily withdrawing them from their local school to be sent to a new home. The 11-year-old was looking forward to being in the school play and the end of term Leavers' Service. She has now been torn away from friends she has known since she was four, the nearest thing to stability left in her life. The children's wishes were not taken into account.
A second case concerns another woman, for 20 years an NHS nurse who served with the Royal Army Medical Corps in the first Gulf War. Until recently, she was a semi-professional dog breeder, living happily at home with her eight-year-old son (his father having walked out when she was pregnant).
In March, their home was raided by two RSPCA officials and five policemen, complaining she had too many dogs in the house. Her home was untidy because she was clearing an attic, but the seizing of the dogs (breaking the leg of one of them) left it a befouled mess.
Acting on a tip-off from the RSPCA, Leeds social workers then intervened, and expressed surprise that the house was tidier than they expected. Nevertheless, they told the mother to bring her son's clothes to school, from where he was taken into foster care.
After three months, during which he has only been allowed short supervised "contact" with his mother, the boy is miserable, constantly asking when he can return home. His mother has repeatedly had to draw the social workers' attention to various conditions, such as head lice and threadworm, which indicated that he was not being properly cared for. Last week they announced that they were moving him to another foster home.
Although there was no evidence that she was anything other than an admirable mother, apart from the temporary mess made of the house in March, the social workers say her son cannot be allowed home until they have both undergone "psychiatric assessments". These cannot be arranged until October. Nor has the boy yet been given a guardian to represent him, as the law lays down.
My other two cases come from Ian Josephs, the former county councillor and businessman who runs the Forced Adoption website and has helped hundreds of families in a similar plight. When, in January, a couple brought their newborn son to hospital with a fractured arm, Coventry social services were called in on suspicion that the child might have been injured by his parents. After the mother had been arrested, handcuffed and held by the police for nine hours, the couple were terrified that their baby would be taken from them. Although not charged with any offence, they are on police bail, which prevents them from leaving the country.
The child's Irish grandmother took the baby to Ireland, where he is now surrounded by a large, supportive family. Social services are attempting to get an order through the courts for the grandmother to return to England with the baby.
My last case is so shocking that I will return to it in more detail at a later date. It centres on a London couple who, earlier this year, had their six children seized by social workers on what appears to be flimsy hearsay evidence (I have seen the court papers).
The mother was pregnant again. Last month, after the boy was born, three social workers and five policemen entered the hospital ward where she was breastfeeding at 3am, wresting the baby from her by force. They then discovered that they had nowhere to keep him. The boy was put into intensive care, where his mother was taken to breastfeed him for four days, until she was fit to leave the hospital. She saw her baby for the last time two weeks ago.
I will return to this story when I have had some explanation from the council responsible.
I have blogged about this, in my opinion, inhumane act before.
Why didn't these social workers going after the poor children that really needed to be taken into care like Baby Peter, Khyra Ishaq and Victoria Climbie.
It does look like they are going after soft targets instead of the ones that need the real help.
What worries me is that they are ignoring the children and their concerns and emotional well being.
Are the social workers putting children up for adoption because of quotas? Read here, here and here.
There are very good social workers out there working to protect children, and I do wish that their work was in the headlines more than the others, but we don't hear about their stories.
Social workers are removing children from loving families without proper justification, says Christopher Booker
That is the headline to this article, by Christopher Booker
In recent months, I have been reporting on what is one of the most alarming scandals in Britain today – the secretive system that allows social workers to remove children from loving families without any proper justification, and to send them for adoption or fostering with no apparent concern for their interests.
Four more examples have come to light in the past week. The first came to my attention via Lynn Boleyn, a former councillor from Dudley, who first became concerned about "forced adoption" when she sat on various committees concerned with child care. Last week, she was in court with a mother of five girls, whose family tragedy began when her partner was sentenced to 14 years for abusing the eldest girl, who was sent to live with a relative. Although there was no evidence of their mother harming them in any way, the other four girls were seized by Dudley social services and placed in foster care. Three were kept together, separated from their two-year-old sister whom the council now wants to put out for adoption.
The three girls, aged 11, 10 and 7, are desperately unhappy, constantly asking to be reunited with their mother. But on Friday, a judge said he had no power to stop social services summarily withdrawing them from their local school to be sent to a new home. The 11-year-old was looking forward to being in the school play and the end of term Leavers' Service. She has now been torn away from friends she has known since she was four, the nearest thing to stability left in her life. The children's wishes were not taken into account.
A second case concerns another woman, for 20 years an NHS nurse who served with the Royal Army Medical Corps in the first Gulf War. Until recently, she was a semi-professional dog breeder, living happily at home with her eight-year-old son (his father having walked out when she was pregnant).
In March, their home was raided by two RSPCA officials and five policemen, complaining she had too many dogs in the house. Her home was untidy because she was clearing an attic, but the seizing of the dogs (breaking the leg of one of them) left it a befouled mess.
Acting on a tip-off from the RSPCA, Leeds social workers then intervened, and expressed surprise that the house was tidier than they expected. Nevertheless, they told the mother to bring her son's clothes to school, from where he was taken into foster care.
After three months, during which he has only been allowed short supervised "contact" with his mother, the boy is miserable, constantly asking when he can return home. His mother has repeatedly had to draw the social workers' attention to various conditions, such as head lice and threadworm, which indicated that he was not being properly cared for. Last week they announced that they were moving him to another foster home.
Although there was no evidence that she was anything other than an admirable mother, apart from the temporary mess made of the house in March, the social workers say her son cannot be allowed home until they have both undergone "psychiatric assessments". These cannot be arranged until October. Nor has the boy yet been given a guardian to represent him, as the law lays down.
My other two cases come from Ian Josephs, the former county councillor and businessman who runs the Forced Adoption website and has helped hundreds of families in a similar plight. When, in January, a couple brought their newborn son to hospital with a fractured arm, Coventry social services were called in on suspicion that the child might have been injured by his parents. After the mother had been arrested, handcuffed and held by the police for nine hours, the couple were terrified that their baby would be taken from them. Although not charged with any offence, they are on police bail, which prevents them from leaving the country.
The child's Irish grandmother took the baby to Ireland, where he is now surrounded by a large, supportive family. Social services are attempting to get an order through the courts for the grandmother to return to England with the baby.
My last case is so shocking that I will return to it in more detail at a later date. It centres on a London couple who, earlier this year, had their six children seized by social workers on what appears to be flimsy hearsay evidence (I have seen the court papers).
The mother was pregnant again. Last month, after the boy was born, three social workers and five policemen entered the hospital ward where she was breastfeeding at 3am, wresting the baby from her by force. They then discovered that they had nowhere to keep him. The boy was put into intensive care, where his mother was taken to breastfeed him for four days, until she was fit to leave the hospital. She saw her baby for the last time two weeks ago.
I will return to this story when I have had some explanation from the council responsible.
I have blogged about this, in my opinion, inhumane act before.
Why didn't these social workers going after the poor children that really needed to be taken into care like Baby Peter, Khyra Ishaq and Victoria Climbie.
It does look like they are going after soft targets instead of the ones that need the real help.
What worries me is that they are ignoring the children and their concerns and emotional well being.
Are the social workers putting children up for adoption because of quotas? Read here, here and here.
There are very good social workers out there working to protect children, and I do wish that their work was in the headlines more than the others, but we don't hear about their stories.
Monday 12 July 2010
Raoul Moat
I followed the news story regarding Raoul Moat, and i wasn't surprised by the ending, he was either going to commit suicide or put the police into a scenario where the police had to shoot him.
I was starting to write my thoughts on the subject when I read Anna Raccoon's blog post on the subject. Once I read her blog post I knew anything I came up with would never do the subject justice.
So I ask you to go to Anna Raccoon Blog and read her blog post regarding Raoul Moat. She hits the nail on the head in her post.
I was starting to write my thoughts on the subject when I read Anna Raccoon's blog post on the subject. Once I read her blog post I knew anything I came up with would never do the subject justice.
So I ask you to go to Anna Raccoon Blog and read her blog post regarding Raoul Moat. She hits the nail on the head in her post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)