Traditional families hit by declining morals, say mothers

Traditional families hit by declining morals, say mothers

The traditional family unit is in meltdown due to plunging moral values and the rise of single parents, according to a survey of mothers.
..
Most blame the Government for fuelling the breakup, with almost two thirds claiming that Labour “doesn’t like traditional family set-ups and seems to favour single parents and working mums”.

It’s a bit typically women-firster to just interview mothers for this survey, but nonetheless it is revealing that so many see through the government’s spin and see that they’re not pro-family, but pro-single parent.

And while single mothers enjoy tax breaks, more than half of two-parent families are struggling to make ends meet and a third are in debt, according to the 21st Century Family Life Survey.

I’ve seen other statistics showing that a couple who work full-time and have two children are, on average, only £1 a week better off than an unemployed single-mother with two children.

House prices in the UK are outrageous; I’m on an average wage but I’m trying to figure out if I can afford to get a mortgage on even a simple one-bedroom flat. Yet at work a 19-year-old girl got pregnant (to a married guy) with the sole intention of getting a house on welfare and, within a month, was moving in to a two-bedroomed house, all rent paid by the taxpayer. House prices rise because they are priced for dual-incomes since women entered the workforce, plus the subsisided government housing that used to help low-income couples get a step on the property ladder is now pretty much solely for single-mothers.

Many mothers apparantly would like to cut their working hours; sadly, not possible. As I mentioned, women’s full-scale entry into the workplace in the last four-decades has diluted wages and the economy has adapted so that houses and many other necessary products require dual-incomes. I don’t have sympathy for these older women who don’t like working because usually they’re the ones who spent their younger years triumphantly storming in to the workplace and barging men out of the way, in doing so creating the exact conditions that prevent them from leaving the workplace in later years.

Most importantly, this survey shows how politicians, feminists and the feminine media are living in a fantasy world when they portray single-mothers as either wonderful strong and independent or pure innocent likkle victims. They hope – and probably believe – everyone else conforms to this politically correct view. In reality, most people know single mothers are, generally speaking, obnoxious selfish parasites and their children often delinquents and a drain on society.

For example, a woman at work was saying the other day that her brother, who is one of the few male primary school teachers left in the UK, was delighted after he had managed to get a transfer to a small rural school. Previously he had been at a school in the inner city, near an estate full of council houses and flats that are clearly populated almost entirely by single mothers. The woman explained that “my brother hated it there, the kids were horrible. 

The kids were grubby and rude, often out of control. He once caught two girls of ten smoking and they swore at him when he demanded they put the cigs out! They were all kids raised by single-mothers, I don’t think any had a dad.” She explained how, according to her brother, the new school he was at was in a village where “all the kids come from proper [i.e. two-parent] families” and they were all nice and well-behaved.

Interesting how she automatically saw the correlation between single-mother households and rude, ill-disciplined delinquent children. Most of society does, but no-one can dare say anything in public for fear of being shouted down and, if they are politicians, their resignation demanded. A judge last year publicly stated that, in his experience, most young criminals he saw in court were raised by single-mothers. That’s all he said, just an observation made through years of experience as a judge, yet he had to withdraw his comments and apologise after some female MPs and some charity for single-mothers rose up in fury at this “disgusting attack on single mums.”

This highlights another major warping of reality in the minds of feminists and politicians; they seem to believe poor single mums are constantly vilified and attacked, but in fact they’re the most protected demographic, beyond public criticism, even more so than women in general! And that’s saying something.

posted by Duncan Idaho

Read More

Secret Videos Taken at Muslim Hate Schools in Great Britain: Pupils Beaten and Taught “Hindus Drink Cow Piss”

Source

The true face of Islam…

(Daily Mail) — It is an assembly hall of the sort found in any ordinary school. Boys aged 11 and upwards sit cross-legged on the floor in straight rows.
They face the front of the room and listen carefully. But this is no ordinary assembly. Holding the children’s attention is a man in Islamic dress wearing a skullcap and stroking his long dark beard as he talks.
‘You’re not like the non-Muslims out there,’ the teacher says, gesturing towards the window. ‘All that evil you see in the streets, people not wearing the hijab properly, people smoking . . . you should hate it, you should hate walking down that street.’
He refers to the ‘non-Muslims’ as the ‘Kuffar’, an often derogatory term that means disbeliever or infidel.
Welcome to one of Britain’s most influential Islamic faith schools, one of at least 2,000 such schools in Britain, some full-time, others part-time.
They represent a growing, parallel education system.
The school is the Darul Uloom Islamic High School in Birmingham, an oversubscribed independent secondary school.
Darul Ulooms are world-renowned Islamic institutions and their aim is to produce the next generation of Muslim leaders.
In fact, these schools have been described as the ‘Etons of Islam’.
This school is required by its inspectors to teach tolerance and respect for other faiths. But the Channel 4 current affairs programme Dispatches filmed secretly inside it — and instead discovered that Muslim children are being taught religious apartheid and social segregation.
We recorded a number of speakers giving deeply disturbing talks about Jews, Christians and atheists.
We found children as young as 11 learning that Hindus have ‘no intellect’ and that they ‘drink cow p***’.
And we came across pupils being told that the ‘disbelievers’ are ‘the worst creatures’ and that Muslims who adopt supposedly non-Muslim ways, such as shaving, dancing, listening to music and — in the case of women — removing their headscarves, would be tortured with a forked iron rod in the afterlife.

Read More

Britain is suffering the results of earlier mistakes in its immigration policy.

In an interview with The Daily Telegraph, Siv Jensen, the 44-year-old leader of the Progress party who cites Baroness Thatcher as her inspiration, said: "What I have seen that the UK has done is to give in to the claims of sharia councils, and I don't think we should give into that. In Norway we have one law, and that is the Norwegian law."

Miss Jensen, who is unmarried, said Britain was suffering the results of earlier mistakes in its immigration policy.

"I see some problems arising – You've had problems with riots, you've had problems with radical groups who aren't very fond of democratic systems and freedom of speech, and I think those are criteria that you really have to stick to in the modern world."

Miss Jensen's party has grown to become Norway's third largest since it was launched in the 1970s, pushing a libertarian economic and social policy, combined with a vehemently anti-immigrant, anti-Islamic stand.

Ahead of parliamentary elections this Sunday, she could now enter into coalition for the first time with the more centrist Conservatives, who hold a wafer thin poll lead over their rivals Labour.


"We are ready to take on the responsibility," Miss Jensen said.

Miss Jensen has steered her party to recovery since the aftermath of the twin attacks mounted two years ago by far-Right terrorist Anders Breivik, a former party member. The party's support dropped to 12 per cent but a softening in her rhetoric since the attacks has helped them recover.

"Siv Jensen used to talk about 'the hidden Islamisation of Norway', and she doesn't do that any more," said Martine Aurdal, political editor of the Dagbladet newspaper and Miss Jensen's biographer.

In recent months the party has published a hard-hitting 'Immigration sustainability report', while she has allowed other members of her party a free voice.

Christian Tybring-Gjedde, who leads the party in Oslo, speaks about a cultural war with Islam.

"We can't celebrate Christmas in school, we can't sing Christmas Carols," he told the Telegraph. "This is a small part of our culture, which is being washed away gradually, and its very painful. We gave them a home, and now it's us who are having to adapt to their culture."

The report recommends the number of non-Western immigrants coming to Norway from close to 20,000 a year to about 1,500 a year.

To do this, it recommends renegotiating international refugee treaties, making it more difficult to get citizenship, and curtailing the rights of Norwegian citizens from non-Western countries to bring over their families.

Traditional Islamic marriages would not count as marriages for immigration purposes, while a spouse would need to have studied for seven years after primary school to be eligible to come to Norway, effectively ruling out family reunion with spouses from most Islamic and less developed countries.

When asked about the proposal to make Islamic marriages ineligible, Miss Jensen stressed that the report was not yet official party policy.

Miss Jensen rejected any comparison of her party's ideas on to those of Breivik. "I haven't really spent much time reading his crazy theories, but what he did was just very awful and he attacked our democracy and I think here, nobody blames us for his actions. That would be absurd."

Source: http://ow.ly/otCBT

Read More

Darts fan booted out of final because he looked like Jesus

Bearded Nathan Grindal, 33, was enjoying the match between star champ Phil Taylor and Kim Huybrechts when some of the 4,500-strong audience spotted his likeness to the son of God.

Chants of "Jesus" quickly spread through the rowdy crowd, interrupting play at Butlins in Minehead, Somerset. 

Security was called before six bouncers escorted upset Nathan from the Cash Converters Players' Championship, being shown on ITV4. As he left a chant of 'Stand up if you love Jesus' broke out, with many of the boozed-up crowd getting to their feet. 

Nathan, a labourer, was escorted to a nearby bar where security staff bought him a pint and told him to watch the rest of the final on the telly. He saw the legendary Taylor win then found himself being asked to pose for signed photos with fans as they left the arena. 

Nathan, who emigrated from his native Australia to Oxford six years ago, said: "I didn't go to the darts dressed as Jesus – I went as me. 

"It was all very weird and distressing. I didn't break down crying but I did get emotionally distraught. They were bullying me and picking on me, saying that I was someone else. 

"It would have been okay if the security hadn't made a fuss getting me out of the arena.”

Nathan, who began growing his beard four months ago, had booked a three-day stay at Butlins earlier this month with five pals to watch the darts. 

He added: “In his post-match interview, Phil Taylor said something like 'if I ever see Jesus again, I'll crucify him myself.' Now that's just hurtful. 

"I love darts, but I'm worried about ever going to see it live again, just in case the crowd turns on me like they did last time." 

Dave Allen, spokesman for the Professional Darts Corporation, said Nathan was ejected to prevent his presence becoming a nuisance to the players. 

He said: "There was a lot of chanting of Jesus and I think to avoid it becoming too much of a distraction for the players he was taken by security to another part of the complex." 

Mr Allen added: "There is plenty of audience participation. They are encouraged to support the players within certain boundaries. 

"The fact they can buy four-pint pitchers certainly helps."

Read more: http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4694296/one-hundred-and-deity.html#ixzz2FKPnwklN

Read More

The Manipulation of YOUR MIND By Cultural Marxist Government

Read More

Hitchens gunning for Cameron on the marriage issue

Sometime after David Cameron’s election as leader of the Conservative Party in Britain he began to make positive noises about the importance of the family – and of marriage as the institution which gave it stability in society. When the Tories won enough votes in the last general election to enable them to form a coalition government with the Liberal Democrats some thought things might improve.

The people to whom these things really matter were very hopeful that at last something might be done about the slippery slope on which they perceived both institutions were rapidly sliding into deep trouble. But not Peter Hitchens, London Daily Mail columnist and brother of the late-lamented Christopher. Hitchens says he saw through the real David Cameron from the word go. He pulls no punches in his reading of Mr. Cameron on the same-sex marriage issue.

Hitchens, whose pet name for the British PM is “Mr. Slippery”, in his column this weekend tells us a little smugly that “Hardly a day passes without someone ringing me up or writing to me to say that they now realise that our Prime Minister, Mr Slippery, is a fraud.” Many tell him that they are now sorry they are that they refused to believe him when he told them this, over and over again, before the last Election.

“Well, as the Scottish pastor said to his wayward flock as they called up to him from the flames of Hell ‘We didn’t know!’” Hitchens replies ‘You know now’.

Citing u-turns by Mr. Carmeon on other issues, he has no sympathy for his correspondents. The evidence was there and they should have known.

“But people would keep telling me”, Hitchens complains, “that he somehow ‘really means it’ about his (rather feeble) scheme to recognise marriage in the tax system. They seem to have thought that one day he would rip off his suit and reveal himself to be ‘SuperTory’.

“Well, as for marriage, he now claims to be much more concerned about helping a few hundred homosexuals get married than about helping millions of heterosexuals to stay married.”

As far as Hitchens is concerned, Mr. Cameron doesn’t care tuppence for homosexuals and he is just playing to a gallery which he thinks is important because it makes him look more “with-it”. “This is, in fact, a wind-up. I shouldn’t think Mr Slippery cares even slightly about homosexuals, and I wonder what he used to say about them in private before he learned how to be cool.”

But he knows that driving homosexual marriage through Parliament will enrage the suburban voters he despises. He longs to be assailed by them, because it will make him look good among the Guardian-reading metropolitans he wants to win over.

Read more Peter Hitchens here.

Read More

Danish TV unmasks Obama's empty rethoric

Read More

20 years of guilt: Burglar hands himself in after two decades on the run... and walks free

Adam Day, 40, was found guilty of breaking into a terraced house in Sudbury, Suffolk, in October 1992, but has walked out of court a free man

A remorseful burglar who handed himself in after almost 20 years on the run has walked free.

Adam Day, 40, who last night admitted giving himself up had been a massive relief, told Ipswich Crown Court he was a reformed character who now cared for his frail mother.

Day was found guilty of breaking into a terraced house in Sudbury, Suffolk, in October 1992.

Robert Sadd, prosecuting, said Day had been arrested for the burglary, during which a £300 video recorder was stolen, after his fingerprint was found at the scene.

He was bailed and told to return to court for sentencing. But instead panic-stricken Day fled to London where he slept in a camper van and stayed with friends the court heard yesterday.

He then returned to his parents' home in Acton, west London in 1997 after his father had a devastating stroke.

Day has lived there ever since believing he had got away with the crime. When he discovered there was still a warrant out for his arrest he gave himself up.

Judge John Devaux gave him a 12-month jail sentence suspended for 18 months and told him to pay £200 costs for burglary and absconding.

He said: 'It doesn't appear the police tried very hard to find you as during all these years in Suffolk you haven't been arrested and eventually you handed yourself in.'

Day said after the hearing he was hugely relieved his crime had been dealt with at last.

New person: Day told Ipswich Crown Court he was a reformed character who now cared for his frail 83-year-old mother

He added he had turned his life around and was now looking after his 83-year-old mother following his father's death in 2009.

Day said: 'It was a different person who was in court back then.'

He added he is now hoping to start a new college course in April and try to get a job.

Fonte

Read More

Francis Fukuyama Blames Europeans for the Failed Integration of Muslims

Source

I've been reading Fukuyama's book "The Origins of Political Order" recently and so far it's been very impressive.

But his analysis in a recent blog post (recapitulating a speech he gave last November) of what's gone wrong with European countries and their Muslim immigrants is deeply naive. He starts off with France.

A lot of people pointed to the riots that occurred in the French banlieues back in 2005 as evidence of an Islamist threat existed in France itself. I think that this is a complete misunderstanding of what happened there. ...What was going on in the French banlieues was very different. These were people that did not reject French identity; they in fact believed in the goals that the French society set for them but they were not allowed to achieve them. They could not get jobs; they were barred by racism from access to opportunities that white French people had and that was the source of their unhappiness.

OK, so French racism is to blame for the failure to integrate Muslims in France. What about Germany?

The German case is very different. German national identity evolved very differently from France. Partly due to the fact that the Germans were scattered all over Central and Eastern Europe, the process of German unification required definition of Germanness in ethnic terms. So legally their citizenship law was based on the legal principle of jus sanguinis. You become a citizen not if you are born on German territory, but rather depending on whether you have a German mother. Up until the year 2000, if you were an ethnic German coming from Russia, you could get citizenship far more easily than if you were a 2nd or 3rd generation Turk that had grown up in Germany, spoke perfect German and did not speak Turkish at all. Germans have changed their practice but the cultural meaning of saying I am German is still very different from the cultural meaning of saying I am French. It has a connotation that is more deeply rooted in blood. This means that when Angela Merkel says that multiculturalism has failed in Germany, I think she is only half right. She would be quite wrong to describe that failure one-sidedly as an unwillingness of Muslim immigrants and their children to want to integrate into German society. Part of the failure of integration comes from the side of the German society as well.

OK, so the German inclusion of ancestry as an element in the definition of their national identity (which the multicult would no doubt describe as 'racism') explains the failure of Muslim integration in Germany. What about Holland?

In Holland, national identity has always been defined by the pillarization (verzuilung)of Dutch society, its division into protestant, catholic and socialist pillars. The Dutch are famously tolerant but it’s a strange kind of tolerance. They tolerate people as long as they do things over there but not in my community. In a certain sense, it was a natural thing for Muslims to start arriving in the Netherlands and to create their own pillars, since that’s the way the Dutch themselves were organized. This lead to the emergence so-called “black” schools, in which you have only Muslim students with no opportunities to interact with native Dutch people. I think this has been one of the important obstacles in promoting faster and greater immigrant integration into Dutch society.

Hmm, so Dutch support for community "pillars" is to blame for the failure of Muslim integration there? OK, let's move on to Britain.

The failure of immigrant assimilation has in certain ways been the greatest in Britain – the European country that went for multiculturalism the most whole-heartedly. This was based on a mistaken interpretation of multiculturalism. In Britain there was a belief that pluralism meant you have to respect the autonomy of individual immigrant communities. The government had no role in actively trying to integrate them into a broader British culture. I had a colleague Robert Leiken who wrote a book called Europe’s Angry Muslims, that will be published in the United States very shortly, which gives some fascinating statistics in terms of the number of members of minority groups recruited into extremist organizations. In terms of the number of attempted violent acts by members of this community on a per capita basis he notes that Britain has the highest rate by far – much higher than in France, Holland, or Germany. The reason for that was that the British approach to multiculturalism that simply left radical imams to preach in their local communities without any interference from the authorities and without any effort by the state to actively use the education system to produce people that have allegiance to the British state. Again, the British have changed these policies in the last few years in the light of the subway bombings and other terrorist acts. But there is still a very problematic relationship between that country and its immigrant communities.

OK, so in Britain it's the laissez-faire approach to national identity that's to blame. The government should have intervened to suppress all the crazy preachers and brainwashed the Muslims into feeling British.

There's a pattern to his analysis; and the pattern is that Europeans are always to blame. This is basically just another application of the "European guilt" ideology that dominates our age. He goes through a list of European countries where Muslim immigrants and causing problems and then contrives a reason to blame the Europeans for the failure.

Altough he notes the diversity of the integration approaches that have been tried, there are two significant factors he does not mention. One is that non-Muslim third-world immigrants have not caused anything like the same degree of problems. Another is that the Muslims causing these problems are enormously diverse themselves: Turks in Germany, North Africans in France, Indian sub-continent Muslims in Britain.

The only reasonable conclusion a person who has not absorbed the ideology of European guilt could draw from the set of circumstances described is that the source of the problem lies with the Muslims, not the Europeans; and since the only thing these diverse Muslims have in common is Islam, the problem must lie very specifically in the ideology of Islam itself. Even if you knew nothing about Islam, you could reach that conclusion based on simple logic alone.

What does Fukuyama think about Hindu immigration polices in Europe and elsewhere? Or Shintoist immigration policies? Buddhist or Zoroastrian immigration policies? Of course he's probably never even thought in those terms. There's never been a reason for him to. And that right there points out the source of the problem.

Read More

The UK's New Law: Internet Bans For Criminals And "A Wider Group Of Offenders"

Source

The UK has a brand new law that enables police and courts to make use of what are called “cyber sanctions” to restrict access to the social networks and instant messaging services in cases of hacking, fraud and online bullying. Sex offenders and those convicted of 'harassment or anti-social behaviour' also can have their internet access restricted or terminated under the new law.

Officials are now looking into whether "cyber tag" technology could be used to monitor offenders and report to authorities if break their bail or sentence conditions by using the internet.

"The Ministry of Justice and the Home Office will consider and scope the development of a new way of enforcing these orders, using ‘cyber-tags’ which are triggered by the offender breaching the conditions that have been put on their internet use, and which will automatically inform the police or probation service," cyber security strategy said.

It added that if the regime is a success restrictions on internet use could be imposed on "a wider group of offenders".

Police forces across the country will also follow the example of the Met’s Police Central e-Crime Unit by recruiting “cyber specials”; internet experts will be encouraged to volunteer as special constables to help investigate online crime.

And exactly who will that 'wider group of offenders' consist of? People who don't don't hold the proper politically correct view of Islam, perhaps? People who have a differing view on Britons being disarmed, or who dislike the government's economic, immigration or foreign policies? People who have a dissenting view on Britain's participation in the EU? The possibilities are endless once this gets started.

And depend of some or all of these definitions of 'a wider group of offenders' to be instituted. Britain is fast approaching the status of a non-free country.

Read More

Child of five taken from parents for being obese: Social workers say they didn't do enough to control weight

Source

By Liz Hull

The most recent NHS figures show that one in ten children starting primary school is obese. (File picture)

A five-year-old has become one of the youngest children to be taken into care for being obese, it emerged last night.

Social workers decided the parents were doing too little to bring the youngster’s weight under control.

The child, whose identity is protected by law, had a body mass index of 22.6 – clinically obese for a five-year-old.

He or she is thought to have weighed around 4st 4lb – a stone and a half more than average.

The decision was taken by officials at Tameside Council in Greater Manchester.

The local authority has also taken a 14-year-old into care, according to figures obtained under the Freedom of Information Act.

The teenager had a BMI of 30.3, giving a weight of 13 stone – five stone more than average.

Another child was removed by Sunderland council, but officials refused to provide details of their age or weight, claiming it would breach data protection laws.

The Freedom of Information request sent to all local authorities asked how many children, in the past financial year, have been taken into care where obesity was cited as a contributing factor.

The vast majority responded and where care proceedings were instigated, gave general neglect as the reason.

In the previous year, 2009/10, four children were taken into care for obesity reasons: three from the London borough of Lewisham aged three, ten and 15, and an 11-year-old from Northumberland.

Sir Liam Donaldson, warned that healthcare chiefs would look at removing children from their families if they became so obese their health was at risk

In September this year, social workers in Dundee provoked outrage by removing four obese children from their parents.

Three girls aged 11, seven and one and a boy of five were placed into care to be ‘fostered without contact’ or adopted.

The most recent NHS figures show that one in ten children starting primary school is obese.

Overweight children are at far higher risk of heart disease, strokes, diabetes, asthma and cancer in later life.

Experts predict that obesity will cost the Health Service up to £6.3billion a year by 2015.

Sir Liam Donaldson, the former Chief Medical Officer, warned in 2006 that healthcare chiefs would look at removing children from their families if they became so obese their health was at risk.

The first reported case came in 2007 when an eight-year-old girl from West Cumbria was taken into care weighing ten stone.

In 2008, seven children were removed from homes in England. These included a six-year-old boy from Derby, an eight-year-old girl from Cumbria who had to wear size 16 clothes, and children from Lincolnshire, Wolverhampton and Tower Hamlets in London.

‘We sincerely hope that such occasions would be rare…but make the point that this would be the automatic response to a child at the other extreme – severe malnutrition'

NATIONAL OBESITY FORUM

A spokesman for the National Obesity Forum said it supported placing obese children into care, but only after everything possible had been done to try to reduce their weight.

‘We sincerely hope that such occasions would be rare…but make the point that this would be the automatic response to a child at the other extreme – severe malnutrition,’ the spokesman said.

A spokesman for Tameside Council said: ‘The point at which obesity turns into a child-protection issue is a complex and difficult area, and in these two cases there were other determining factors that led to the children being placed in local authority care.

‘Parents should be supported to address their child’s obesity, and social workers should only act if parents fail to engage with the proposed plan to improve their child’s safety and wellbeing.’

David Simmonds, of the Local Government Association’s children and young people board, said: ‘Social workers use their professional judgment about how best to keep children from harm.’

Read More

Is the Training of Women Doctors A Waste of Money?

Source.

Is the Training of Women Doctors A Waste of Money? UK GP shortage to worsen as young doctors switch to part-time work. UK More than half of all students taking up scarce places at medical school are women - yet, after 10 years, 60 per cent of them have given up, leaving a huge hole in the NHS. The same goes for teaching. Alice Thomson - Daily Telegraph 27/06/03 60% of women doctors will give up their 'careers' within about 10 years. The continuing deterioration of the National Health Service despite the enormous extra sums of money being put into it by the taxpayer is largely thanks to the training of more and more women to become doctors in the place of men. the requirement to give women 'equal opportunities' ... is leading to far worse conditions and shortfalls in the NHS In areas such as medicine, the requirement to give women 'equal opportunities' by demanding that medical schools try to train as many women as they do men to become doctors is leading to far worse conditions and shortfalls in the NHS - a service that is already failing the country abysmally. The fact that so many of these women doctors will take out years from their profession in order to have children and to look after them (with some never returning) is a major drain on a system that is already unable to cope. In theory, it sounds great to have as many women doctors working in the NHS as men. In practice, however, the consequence is that EVERYONE has to wait a good deal longer to be dealt with, and the entire service is considerably less efficient. And with waiting lists already far too long even for urgent surgical operations, the price for this 'equality' is rather high. And it costs some people their health and some people their lives. Most people have a great deal of sympathy with the view that women should be permitted to become doctors working for the NHS if they have the requisite abilities - even if they do log out of the system to bring up families. But there is a price to be paid! In the case of the NHS, everyone who uses it pays a price - particularly the old, the young, the weak, the vulnerable and the sick. In fact, the most needy of all pay the price! And these are mostly women. many times more women are negatively affected by an impoverished NHS than there are women doctors. Indeed, many times more women are negatively affected by an impoverished NHS than there are women doctors. Indeed, all women are affected by this. Further, of course, all of us will need medical treatment at some stage in our lives, and so all of us will suffer from the adverse effects of an NHS that is greatly diminished by the low long-term career aspirations of a relatively small number of women. Furthermore, the training of doctors is a very expensive business that stretches well beyond the five years that students spend at medical school. And with 60% of women doctors giving up their careers within ten years, the training of women to become doctors is largely a waste of taxpayers' money. Moreover, the country loses the potential talents of all those young men who would have embarked upon long-term careers in medicine were it not for the fact that women were taking up the places at medical schools. In addition, it is worth pointing out that - as with all the major professions - experience is just about everything. And so when women doctors in the NHS give up their careers after a few years of work, the country is denied the services of men doctors who would actually have had the same period of experience. And who would then have gone on to get even more experience! In other words, these future highly-experienced doctors are lost forever. In summary, the training of women to become doctors significantly degrades the health system. It harms the most needy of people the most. It negatively impacts on all of us. It is a waste of taxpayers' money. And it persistently deprives the country of a large number of highly experienced doctors. But that's feminism for you! As in so many other areas, it has a huge cost. And why do we inflict this huge cost upon the nation? We do this so that a few thousand women can benefit from having a career in medicine We do this so that a few thousand women can benefit from having a career in medicine, with most of them choosing to abandon it for something more to their liking. What is the solution? Do we stop women from becoming doctors by giving all the limited number of places at medical schools to men? Well, the purpose of this article was not to provide a particular solution to this problem, but to point out that this is yet another area where feminism extracts a very large price from just about everyone for the benefit of a few women. This needs to be pointed out rather than swept under the carpet. this issue also highlights the impossibility of achieving the 'gender equity' Furthermore, this issue also highlights the impossibility of achieving the 'gender equity' so often loudly espoused by current-day feminists with rarely a thought to what it might actually mean. The phrase 'gender equity' is virtually meaningless. For example, how, exactly, does one achieve 'gender equity' with regard to the training of women doctors? Do we force women doctors to stay at their posts so that the gender balance of highly-experienced doctors remains the same throughout the decades? Would this achieve 'gender equity'? No. It would not. And there would be permanent public outrage orchestrated by the feminists on the grounds of sex-discrimination. Do we train twice as many women doctors as men Do we train twice as many women doctors as men in medical schools to allow for the fact that half of the women will drop out - on the grounds that unless we do this women will not have access to the same number of experienced women doctors as men have to men doctors? Would this achieve 'gender equity'? No. It would not. Such a solution would clearly discriminate very heavily against talented young men who wanted to go to medical school. And it would result in the most enormous waste of taxpayers money and a diversion of scarce educational resources toward the very group of people - women - most likely to squander them, with the negative consequences being worst for the most sick and the most vulnerable people in our society. So. What 'equitable' solutions to this particular problem of women doctors choosing to quit the medical profession would 'gender equity' feminists actually propose? And what do we do about the feminist mullahs and their media lackeys who continue stirring up hatred toward men by blaming them for the fact that relatively few women eventually reach high office in the world of medicine despite the case being that it is clearly the women themselves who, statistically speaking, have little interest in achieving high office? And what would be so laughable about this sort of situation - were its consequences not so awful - is this. Because women doctors drop like flies out of the profession, there ends up being a shortage of doctors. This raises the value of doctors and, hence, their incomes, and so the average pay for men rises (as does their attractiveness to non-earning wives) while that of women, relatively, falls. Feminism ... is always concerned solely with the welfare of a few women Feminism is a very damaging and destructive ideology. It is always concerned solely with the welfare of a few women - in this particular case, those who have whims about being doctors - to the detriment of everyone else. Further, its proponents - the feminists - then foist hatred throughout the nation by vociferously blaming men for the failures of these very same women to reach statistical parity in high positions! Indeed, the only solution that can ever eventually satisfy the feminists is for men and women to be forced into being statistically the same in just about every conceivable way. Anything less and they will continue to cry 'discrimination' and constantly seek to portray themselves as perpetual victims and men as perpetual oppressors. Forty years ago, those who interviewed students who wanted places at medical schools used to grill them very aggressively with questions designed to find out how likely they were to stick with the profession once they had qualified. They did not want to expend their scarce resources training people who were going to end up wasting them. Nowadays, however, no expense is spared in order to pander to the selfish desires of a few women, no matter how detrimental these desires may be to the lives of everyone else. ... UK Crippling Africa's Healthcare Many doctors overseas apply to work in the UK each year The UK is crippling sub-Saharan Africa's healthcare system by poaching its staff, UK doctors have warned. we actually have to poach doctors from some very impoverished parts of the world Yep; we actually have to poach doctors from some very impoverished parts of the world because 60% of our own women doctors give up their jobs within ten years, with a further huge percentage only willing to work part time. Despite the appalling problems that this causes to our health service and, as indicated above, also to those impoverished people who live in countries that cannot afford to lose their doctors to us, we, in the UK, will continue to waste our precious medical resources training annually a few thousand women who wish to play around at being doctors for a short number of years. And we will continue to do this because nothing, absolutely nothing, must stand in the way of even a small number of women doing whatever they want to do, no matter how much is the cost to everyone else. The scale of the influx of foreign doctors and nurses into the British health service has been disclosed. It shows that nearly 190,000 doctors and nurses have come to the country from outside the EU in just eight years. Bleeding Africa Dry

Why Women Were 'Denied' Important Jobs £5700 For A Day The NHS paid one doctor £5,700 for a day’s work under a system which sees hospitals squander millions on agency medics to stand in at understaffed hospitals. The huge problems facing the NHS, and us, are significantly exacerbated because of the push to get more women to become doctors. But being a doctor is an important job. It also requires huge expense for training; in terms of both time and money. Perhaps, therefore, instead of listening to those man-hating feminists, who perpetually, and vociferously, blame men for the fact that women were denied important jobs in the past, we should take note that the three main reasons that women were 'denied' such jobs in the past were as follows. 1. Those jobs were important - for all of us. 2. Women did not want to do them. 3. Women would not have been much good at doing them - in comparison to men - because they kept quitting! As such, it was quite right that men were favoured in the past for such jobs. So, the next time that you hear the usual wailing about women being 'denied' important jobs in the past, I suggest that you respond with the following words. "And quite right too! We would probably also be better off if we 'denied' them those jobs in the future!" That'd shut 'em up! LOL!

10/10/98 Doctor gets £500k for needle prick BBC News The doctor developed growing anxieties about needles, blood and Aids A junior doctor has received almost half a million pounds in compensation after accidentally pricking herself with a needle. June Kelly: "The BMA says the size of the damages reflects a lifetimes's loss of earnings" The doctor, a house officer in a London hospital, had not picked up any infection from the injury, but she developed a phobia about needles and is now unable to work. The woman pricked herself on a needle left on a drugs trolley at Charing Cross Hospital, west London, in December 1992. Anxieties The doctor, who had been qualified for about a year, developed growing anxieties about needles, blood and Aids. She struggled to work before signing off sick almost two years later.

22/2/02 Part-Time Women GPs Hinder Plan to Expand NHS Nigel Hawkes The Times THE increase in women doctors is a timebomb for the NHS as their desire to work part-time means that the Government could meet its target of 2,000 extra GPs by 2004 yet still see a fall in hours worked, a new survey shows. The British Medical Association has repeatedly given warning that part-timers would blow a hole in the Government’s NHS Plan, as more than half of all new GPs are women. The survey, published in British Medical Journal, shows just how serious the problem is likely to be. Isobel Bowler, an independent health service researcher, and Neil Jackson, Dean of Postgraduate General Practice Eduction in London, issued questionnaires to all 470 GP registrars — GPs in training — in southeast England. They represented a third of all registrars in England. Almost 80 per cent returned the questionnaires. The results showed that 60 per cent of women GPs do not plan to work full-time. Only 30 per cent of them said that they planned to work full-time, compared with 75 per cent of the men. Since the majority of young GPs are women, this will make a big difference to the total number needed to meet the NHS Plan targets. The authors of the research conclude that the Government’s promise of 550 new training posts in order to achieve 2,000 new GPs will not be enough. “Qualified doctors currently in practice should be retained and encouraged to participate more in the workforce,” they say. The BMA says that the research backs up its own survey carried out last year, to which all GPs were asked to respond. “When we analysed it by age we found that younger GPs all intended to work part-time,” a BMA spokeswoman said. “More than three quarters of GPs under 30 are women, and even if they do no more than take their entitlement to maternity leave it will have a considerable effect.” The Department of Health’s own workforce figures show that last year the number of GPs in England, measured by the hours they will work, rose by just 18 to 25,938. Measuring numbers in this way is more accurate than a simple head-count, as it takes into account those who work part-time. In Wales, the number had actually fallen, by one. Doctors’ leaders condemned the increases as woefully inadequate but the Department of Health says that the true increase is 310, if trainees and those working under different contracts are included. The total headcount, the figure that the department emphasised, has risen to 30,685 in England. Training medical students could also be a problem in future because of the decline in the number of doctors who work in medical schools, a second paper in British Medical Journal says. Professor Paul Steart of the University of Birmingham says that academic medicine is great difficulty, with more than 10 per cent of posts unfilled. He says that the uncertain career structure for academics, combined with lower salary prospects because of a lack of opportunities for private work, are two reasons. Clinical research is also under threat, with the number of academics involved in it falling by 12 per cent between 1996 and 2001.

Irish Examiner 25/Aug/05 Female doctor bias causing staff crisis, warn consultants By Catherine Shanahan THE growing number of female doctors is causing a staffing crisis as they are avoiding jobs that involve weekend work and long hours, claim consultants.There is also a shortage of hospital doctors because women are looking for part-time hours and opting for general practice because the hours are more family-friendly. Figures from the Irish Medical Council show women (2,343) outnumber men (2,248) as doctors aged 20-35 for the first time. Dr Roisín Healy, A&E consultant at Our Lady’s Hospital for Sick Children in Crumlin, Dublin, said the feminisation of medicine was damaging. “I do think the status of the profession goes down the more feminised it becomes, that’s a sociological given. Men still have more clout - the more masculised a profession, the more it gets, for example, in terms of attracting funding for research.” Dr Chris Luke, director of postgraduate medicine at Cork University Hospital (CUH), warned the feminisation of medicine had significant implications. “We have grave difficulties staffing A&E departments around the country basically because the discipline is out of hours. “It seems to be a fact that women are making different career choices to their predecessors and by and large are opting for specialities that are not out of hours, or they are looking for part-time work.” Dr Luke said he was seeing shortages in training for surgery, A&E and anaesthesia - which all have high on-call rates - partly attributable to women opting out of out-of-hours work. He said implementing the Fottrell report was the only way to end the growing gender imbalance because it would replace the Leaving Certificate - where girls traditionally score higher - as the only assessment tool for entry to medical school. However, Dr Mary Gray, a Limerick-based GP who has reviewed studies of women in medicine, said the Leaving Certificate is a fair system. “There is no outside influence. I wouldn’t support any system that wasn’t based purely on merit. If you were to introduce a discriminatory system, making it easier for men, you are then discriminating against women.” ... Ah yes. One must not discriminate against a few thousand women's career aspirations even though EVERYBODY ELSE IN THE COUNTRY - especially the weak, the sick, the old and the vulnerable - has to pay a SIGNIFICANT price - with their health.

UK Too Many Women Doctors Too many women doctors working fewer hours than men will ultimately result in a major shortage of GPs, a leading specialist warns today. Canada - Women Doctors Slash Medical Productivity The growing ranks of female physicians in Canada will slash medical productivity by the equivalent of at least 1,600 doctors within a decade, concludes a provocative new analysis of data indicating that female MDs work fewer hours on average than their male colleagues. UK Nearly 70,000 patients had their operations cancelled less than 24 hours before they were due to go into theatre last year, despite a government drive to reduce last-minute postponements. 20/07/03 UK Patients who have major operations on the National Health Service are four times more likely to die than Americans undergoing such surgery, according to a new study. The difference in mortality rates was blamed on long NHS waiting lists, a shortage of specialists and competition for intensive care beds. 07/09/03 £5700 For A Day The NHS paid one doctor £5,700 for a day’s work under a system which sees hospitals squander millions on agency medics to stand in at understaffed hospitals. UK More than nine out of 10 of the girls believe it should be up to their husbands to provide for them. 20/10/03 "According to a survey of 5,000-plus teenage girls, their main ambition is to complete university then return to the homestead - whether their partners like it or not."

Read More

Obama’s top ten insults against Britain – 2011 edition

Source

In March last year I published a list of Barack Obama’s biggest insults against America’s biggest ally Great Britain, during his time in office. A lot of water has flown under the bridge since then, including the Gulf oil spill and the White House’s campaign against BP, the now infamous Obama-Sarkozy press conference earlier this year, and the release by Wikileaks of US government documents revealing the Obama administration had betrayed Britain in order to appease the Russians over the New START Treaty.

In honour of President Obama’s state visit to Britain this week, here’s an updated and revised list, as a reminder to readers of the president’s less than stellar track record when it comes to US-British relations. The US president will no doubt be careful not to offend his hosts when he travels to London, and he will receive a warm welcome from the Queen and the Prime Minister, as any American president would.

But the prospect of an embarrassing diplomatic gaffe or insensitive remark cannot be ruled out from a world leader whose administration has all too often specialised in them. As I noted in my original piece:

Without a shadow of a doubt, Barack Obama has been the most anti-British president in modern American history. The Special Relationship has been significantly downgraded, and at times humiliated under his presidency, which has displayed a shocking disregard for America’s most important partner and strategic ally.

There are a multitude of reasons for President Obama’s dismissive approach to the UK, and here are a few: an obsession with engaging and appeasing America’s enemies rather than cultivating allies; personal animosity towards Britain because of his grandfather’s role as a Mau Mau supporter in 1950’s colonial Kenya; Democrat resentment over British support for the Bush Administration over Iraq; left-wing disdain for the idea of Anglo-American exceptionalism and world leadership; support for supranational institutions such as the European Union over the supremacy of the nation state.

1. Siding with Argentina over the Falklands

For sheer offensiveness it’s hard to beat the Obama administration’s brazen support for Argentina’s call for UN-brokered negotiations over the sovereignty of the Falklands, despite the fact that 255 British servicemen laid down their lives to restore British rule over the Islands after they were brutally invaded in 1982.

In a March 2010 press conference in Buenos Aires with President Cristina Kirchner, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave Argentina a huge propaganda coup by emphatically backing the position of the Péronist regime.

In June last year, Mrs. Clinton slapped Britain in face again by signing on to an Organisation of American States (OAS) resolution calling for negotiations over the sovereignty of the Falkland Islands, a position which is completely unacceptable to Great Britain. To add insult to injury, the Obama administration has insisted on using the Argentine term “Malvinas” to describe the Islands in yet another sop to Buenos Aires.

2. Calling France America’s strongest ally

In January this year, President Obama held a joint press conference at the White House with his French counterpart, literally gushing with praise for Washington’s new-found Gallic friends, declaring: “We don’t have a stronger friend and stronger ally than Nicolas Sarkozy, and the French people.” As I noted at the time:

Quite what the French have done to merit this kind of high praise from the US president is difficult to fathom, and if the White House means what it says this represents an extraordinary sea change in US foreign policy.

Nicolas Sarkozy is a distinctly more pro-American president than any of his predecessors, and has been an important ally over issues such as Iran and the War on Terror. But to suggest that Paris and not London is Washington’s strongest partner is simply ludicrous.

These kinds of presidential statements matter. No US president in modern times has described France as America’s closest ally, and such a remark is not only factually wrong but also insulting to Britain, not least coming just a few years after the French famously knifed Washington in the back over the war in Iraq.

3. Downgrading the Special Relationship

Barack Obama very rarely refers to the Special Relationship, and has hardly even mentioned Britain in a major policy speech, either before or since taking office. The Anglo-American alliance is barely a blip on Obama’s teleprompter screen, and he acts as though it simply does not exist.

The Special Relationship has also been largely erased from the official lexicon of the State Department, and is barely used by US officials in London. Despite being America’s only major reliable ally when the chips are down, London is now treated in Washington as though it were the same as any other European power, albeit less charitably than either Paris or Berlin.

4. Supporting a federal Europe and undercutting British sovereignty

The Obama administration’s relentless and wrongheaded support for the creation of a federal Europe, from backing the Treaty of Lisbon to the European Security and Defence Policy, is a slap in the face for the principle of national sovereignty in Europe. British sovereignty is non-negotiable, and Obama’s willingness to undermine it is both insulting to Britain and self-defeating for the United States.

While the Bush Administration was divided over Europe, the Obama team is ardently euro-federalist. Hillary Clinton described the Lisbon Treaty as “a major milestone in our world’s history”, and in an interview with The Irish Times in 2009 stated: “I believe [political integration is] in Europe’s interest and I believe that is in the United States’ interest because we want a strong Europe.” And in May last year, Vice President Joe Biden described Brussels as the “capital of the free world.”

And the US Ambassador to London, Louis Susman, has warned Britain that “all key issues must run through Europe.” According to a report by The Parliament.com, in a private meeting with British MEPs at an event in the European Parliament in January, Susman called for a stronger British commitment to the EU, emphatically warning against British withdrawal:

I want to stress that the UK needs to remain in the EU. The US does not want to see Britain’s role in the EU diminished in any way. The message I want to convey today is that we want to see a stronger EU, but also a stronger British participation within the EU.

This is crucial if, together, we are going to meet all the global challenges facing us, including climate change and security.

5. Betraying Britain to appease Moscow over the New START Treaty

In February, The Daily Telegraph broke a major story with damaging implications for the Special Relationship, revealing that Washington “secretly agreed to give the Russians sensitive information on Britain’s nuclear deterrent to persuade them to sign a key treaty.” According to The Telegraph report:

Information about every Trident missile the US supplies to Britain will be given to Russia as part of an arms control deal signed by President Barack Obama next week. Defence analysts claim the agreement risks undermining Britain’s policy of refusing to confirm the exact size of its nuclear arsenal.

A series of classified messages sent to Washington by US negotiators show how information on Britain’s nuclear capability was crucial to securing Russia’s support for the “New START” deal. Although the treaty was not supposed to have any impact on Britain, the leaked cables show that Russia used the talks to demand more information about the UK’s Trident missiles, which are manufactured and maintained in the US.

Washington lobbied London in 2009 for permission to supply Moscow with detailed data about the performance of UK missiles. The UK refused, but the US agreed to hand over the serial numbers of Trident missiles it transfers to Britain.

6. Placing a “boot on the throat” of BP

The Obama administration’s relentless campaign against Britain’s largest company in the wake of Gulf oil spill was one of the most damaging episodes in US-UK relations in recent years, with 64 percent of Britons agreeing that the president’s handling of the issue had harmed the partnership between the two countries according to a YouGov poll.

The White House’s aggressive trashing of BP, including a threat to put a “boot on the throat” of the oil giant, helped wipe out about half its share value, directly impacting the pensions of 18 million Britons.

This led to a furious backlash in the British press, with even London mayor and long-time Obama admirer Boris Johnson demanding an end to “anti-British rhetoric, buck-passing and name-calling”.

7. Throwing Churchill out of the Oval Office

It is hard to think of a more derogatory message to send to the British people within days of taking office than to fling a bust of Winston Churchill out of the Oval Office and send it packing back to the British Embassy – not least as it was a loaned gift from Britain to the United States as a powerful display of solidarity in the aftermath of the 9/11 terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. Obviously, public diplomacy is not a concept that carries much weight in the current White House, and nor apparently is common sense.

8. DVDs for the Prime Minister

Readers of this blog will know I’m no fan of Gordon Brown, but whatever one thinks of his third-rate premiership, Brown traveled abroad not as a private individual but as the leader of America’s closest ally. He represented 61 million Britons including the Armed Forces, as well as a huge amount of British trade and investment with the United States.

He was however treated shabbily when he visited the White House in March 2009, and denied a Rose Garden press conference as well as a dinner. To cap it all, the decision to send him home with an assortment of 25 DVDs ranging from Toy Story to The Wizard of Oz – which couldn’t even be played in the UK – was a breathtaking display of diplomatic ineptitude that would have shamed the protocol office of an impoverished Third World country.

9. Insulting words from the State Department

The mocking views of a senior State Department official following Gordon Brown’s embarrassing reception at the White House in March last year says it all:

There’s nothing special about Britain. You’re just the same as the other 190 countries in the world. You shouldn’t expect special treatment.

One would have thought that this kind of monumentally shallow insult would have resulted in at least a formal apology and a reprimand for the official involved, but unfortunately Obama administration apologies are strictly reserved for the French and assorted enemies of the United States.

10. Undermining British influence in NATO

Despite Nicolas Sarkozy’s distinctly unflattering opinion of Barack Obama, the US president has gone to great lengths to appease French interests, even going as far as apologising to the French people in Strasbourg for hurting their feelings over the war in Iraq. The Obama administration has also done its best to give Paris a lead role in the NATO alliance at Britain’s expense, granting it one of two supreme NATO command positions – Allied Command Transformation (ACT). This, despite the fact that France has for decades been ambivalent and obstructionist over NATO, and is failing to carry its weight in Afghanistan

Read More

Tom Martin sues LSE's Gender Institute for teaching sexism

Read More

Richard Dawkins - Apostasy in Islam

Read More

Anarchist student at the centre of St Paul's protest is the son of a property tycoon

An activist at the centre of the Occupy London protest camp is the son of a rich property developer, it has emerged.

Jack Hartcup, who is studying a philosophy degree, has played a major part in the demonstrations against capitalism outside St Paul's Cathedral and at the Dale Farm illegal travellers' site.

But until three years ago, the 21-year-old student was living in one of his father's £1.5millon apartments in North London.

Anti-capitalism protester Jack Hartcup is the son of a property developer whose business owns the £10m Eclipse building in North London. Until just a few years ago, the student lived in one of the £1.5m apartments there

He has insisted he does not share his 54-year-old father's ideals.

‘I’m an anarchist and I don’t believe in leadership,' he said.

‘I’m not set to inherit this fortune. I don’t believe in property.

‘My father has done very well for himself but I don’t intend to do what he does. He has gone along with the capitalist system.’

The Anglia Ruskin student, who hopes to become a philosophy teacher, has been a striking figure at the protests, wearing a leather jacket emblazoned with the words 'hate hate' emblazoned across his back.

Different ideals: The student, pictured with a friend, insists he doesn't want to be like his father. He said: 'My father has done very well for himself but I don't intend to do what he does. He has gone along with the capitalist system.'

His Facebook page is crammed with posters and videos encouraging others to protest.

He also boasts about being caught graffiting and having his jacket and trainers confiscated by the police.

In a post on the social networking site he says: ‘I had them repremanded (sic) off me when I was caught spraypainting a wall. both the leather jacket and dms had the same colour paint on them so they took them for evidence’.

Last night he said: 'I’ve been at Dale Farm and I’ve been here, but I’m not the centre of anything.

'I want to see real change in this country at an economic level. I don’t want to see us destroy the planet.

'It’s not something you can do by voting every four years. People are so tied down with jobs and other commitments, they can’t protest.'

His 54-year-old father, James, is the director of Eclipse Building Ltd, which owns the Eclipse building – a £10million development in North London.

Row: Occupy London protesters outside St Paul's Cathedral last night. Their demonstrations have forced the closure of the iconic landmark

Sham? The protests at St Paul's have been accused of being a 'big charade' with only one in ten tents occupied overnight, suggesting that the majority of the 300 'defiant' protesters return home after dark to sleep in warm beds

Violence: Protesters and police clash at the Dale Farm traveller site, where Mr Hartcup also said he demonstrated

Until 2008, Jack Hartcup was registered as living with his father in one of the 14 luxury flats, which sell for more than £1.5million and cost up to £1,500 per week to rent.

His grandmother, Adeline Hartcup, wrote Children Of The Great Country Houses; the book was published by the National Trust and explores the lives of children brought up in a privileged world.

Mr Hartcup's father confirmed he was aware of his son’s involvement with the Occupy London movement - which challenges the very nature of his own business - but refused to comment further.

It comes as the protests at St Paul's - which have forced the cathedral to close - were accused of being a 'big charade’ with only one in ten tents occupied overnight.

Footage from a thermal imaging camera shot by a police helicopter revealed that the ramshackle camp is almost completely empty during the cold nights.

It suggests the majority of the 300 ‘defiant’ protesters at the cathedral return home or to hotels after dark to sleep in warm beds.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2053126/St-Pauls-protests-Jack-Hartcup-son-property-tycoon-centre-Occupy-London.html#ixzz1bnX4kTcf

Read More

Gun-free England plagued by knifepoint robberies

Now what? Will England ban knives?

A rise in knifepoint robberies was last night blamed on overseas demand for expensive mobile phones.

The number of robberies carried out with a knife went up by seven per cent last year.

Police in England and Wales recorded 14,980 robberies at knifepoint over the 12 months to June, up from 13,994 a year earlier.

Total robberies were up 3 per cent, to 76,786 from 74,887.

Chief constable Jon Murphy, crime spokesman for the Association of Chief Police Officers, said: 'While there were falls in most police recorded crime and particularly in violence against the person, the increase in robbery and robbery with knives is a cause for concern.

'We believe this is in part driven by demand for mobile phone handsets, which can fetch more than double their worth on the black market abroad.'

He warned users to protect their handsets, such as iPhones and BlackBerrys, with passwords to stop personal details being stolen along with their phones.

The British Crime Survey of more than 40,000 households showed overall crime was up 2 per cent in the year to June, to 9.7million offences.

A Downing Street spokesman claimed many of the rises were not 'statistically significant'. But shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper said the Government 'needs to take urgent action to cut crime instead of just cutting police'.

Read More

Glad I Left Decadent England Behind

English ex-pat David Richards, 24, lives near the beach (left) in Dalian in North East China. He contrasts the civility of life there with the decadence of
Brighton Beach and English life in general.

by David Richards
(henrymakow.com)

Two cities I have visited, Brighton in England and Dalian in China, possess beaches that are startlingly similar. Yet the behavior by each set of holiday-goers couldn't be more different.

Dalian beach is a wholesome environment where families relax and elderly people do Tai Chi. Brighton beach is a scene of vice and depravity, hosting drug-fuelled raves and gay sex.

I currently live in Dalian, a prosperous coastal city in North Eastern China. The city has many beaches to cater for wealthy Chinese holiday-goers.

One particular beach is very reminiscent of a traditional English seaside holiday. There is a fairground with a rickety Ferris wheel, bumper cars and arcade games. There are stalls selling candyfloss and ice cream. Extended families play card games under parasols and children play in rock pools.

The beach is also pebbled and has a pier; characteristics that make it look virtually identical to Brighton beach. The similarity ends there.

BRIGHTON

Brighton is a liberal paradise housing all kinds of alternative lifestyles, sexual experimentation and drug use. The city is known as the gay capital of England and has a large permanent gay community. Every year it hosts a world-renowned gay pride festival.

It is the sort of place you don't blink twice seeing a 6 foot 5 black-transsexual in a mini-skirt down your local grocery store.

I visited the city because I have some friends and an aunt who lived there. During my time in the city I stayed in different homes and youth hostels, meeting a lot of people. Most were into drugs and/or various new age ideas.

The locals are very sexually promiscuous and proud of it, mistaking their fixation on their carnal desires as the height of liberty.

I wasn't comfortable with Brighton's promiscuity. I lost my virginity when I was 19, and while that doesn't seem very old in retrospect, by the standards of my generation it is very late.

I lost it late not due to any lack of desire or opportunities, but because I couldn't work with the mating rituals of my generation, namely getting drunk and kissing random people and then 'seeing' each other. I would talk to a girl and like her, but recoil when she would get drunk at a party and stumble towards me like a zombie, expecting us to kiss in front of 15 onlookers. I couldn't butcher sex from intimacy.

Being a virgin in a promiscuous generation riddled me with doubts and insecurities. What was wrong with me? Why couldn't I act on my desire? The longer my virginity went on, the insecurities built up like water against a dam.

I was still virgin when I lived in Brighton so I found the open sexuality of the city provocative.

English girls are out of control wherever you go but more so in Brighton. One example sticks in my mind.

I went to a bar on the pier with a large group of young people who all worked together. One of the guys was apparently quite a player and slept with many girls. A big-breasted blonde girl in the group was furious with him for some unspecified reason, and when he went to the toilet she started screaming and shouting obscenities about him- that he was nasty and treated people badly etc- and then spat in his pint (which he returned to and drank). Later in the night she went home with him!

I was in Brighton during the gay pride festival (left.) It featured floats representing the gay community from all over the world. When I was there Amnesty International sponsored a pink tank to drive through the city, on top of it were lesbians with crew cuts drinking cans of lager and laughing like hyenas. I couldn't work out what they were celebrating, as no one in Brighton is homophobic. Who were they in defiance of? It seemed to me to be their own sense of inadequacy.

Most of the gay men you see in Brighton are not like the funny charming ones on TV; they're largely ugly middle-aged men who smell of alcohol. They stand outside bars smoking, leering at every young guy that walks past.

On the night of the festival many non-gays also come out. The locals view it as their own Mardi Gras; a time for party and free expression. Many guys also reckon that girls are easier during Gay Pride. I found the scene of people running around desperately trying to quell their sexual desire depressing.

With many mentally unstable people on drugs, Brighton beach can be dangerous. I remember being accosted one evening one the beach by a 'gay chav.' For non-British readers, a chav is a teenage delinquent from an underclass background. They wear sports tracksuits and 'bling', and abuse drugs and alcohol. The boys pride themselves on being macho, so the bizarre sight of a 'gay chav' is presumably unique to Brighton.

The teenage boy stumbled up to me holding a knife and told me in a camp but menacing voice he was going to fuck me. Luckily the beach was fairly crowded and fear snapped him out of his drug-induced frenzy, and he ran off.

CIVILIZATION REGAINED

In great contrast, the scene on Dalian beach is wholesome. Families play together on the beach, old men gather in groups to play chess and smoke. 50 people gather around a karaoke machine and sing old songs. In the beach promenade there is a stereo system and in the evenings middle-aged couples dress up and ballroom dance while dozens watch.

Young couples take strolls along the beach and in the evenings can buy a lighted hot air balloon and release it into the sky: their love shining over the city.

I am not writing this to glorify Chinese people, but to show how far we have been degraded. Before the Illuminati attacks on family values and morality, the scenes at Brighton beach were wholesome like those in Dalian.

While Dalian is not a particularly interesting city, with little cultural value or nightlife, I much prefer living here than in Brighton. It is a settled environment where I can focus on work and building a good future. In Brighton, with its myriad perversions and altered states, I cannot achieve emotional equilibrium.

I am young man from a lower-middle class background, so I wont be given an easy ride to a successful life. What I do in my twenties will dictate my future. You reap what you sow.

If I choose to live a hedonistic and degenerate lifestyle I wont be going anywhere.

Source

Read More