News, Views and Nonsense is Moving.

Hi Fans. This blog is moving to WORDPRESS.COM at floroy1942.wordpress.com for the simple reason the layout is far superior, and I am sick and tired of font size and layouts changing on their own between completion and publishing with Blogger.
I have no great knowledge of html but have been forced to learn at least a bit to try and correct the stupid mistakes that the Blogger engine makes when I publish.
My last post is a prime example of the Blogger engine at work. Great gaps in the text, photo's not where they should be, text wraparound incorrect etc etc.
Every time I go back to edit the first thing I have to do is change the font size back to 'large' because the stupid thing keeps going to 'extra large'. This is annoying and my patience is exhausted.
Therefore I am moving to Wordpress. I hope you will continue to read my blog at the new address.
Best Regards,
Roy.

Haiti Earthquake - Why Was the World Not Prepared?

Haiti has shown yet again that the world is totally unprepared for natural disasters, and tens of thousands die as a result. One has to ask, of the 150,000 plus people that died, how many could have been saved if the aid had arrived within a day instead of a week?

Throughout the history of man, the world has witnessed a succession of catastrophes from Tsunami's, volcanic eruptions, earthquakes, floods, drought, pandemics and famines that have cost the lives of tens of millions of people across the world. Advances in methods of transportation in the last fifty years now allow aid to be sent to these areas, but it is still extremely slow to reach the victims due to the logistical methods currently employed. Instead of being prepared for the inevitable, we are forced to react after the event.

The various organisations and governments slowly gear up to send supplies and specialists to the scene, but it all takes time before we see 'feet on the ground' as it were. Governments promise millions of dollars to the relief effort, but this again takes time to organize. In the meantime, just as in Haiti, the lost souls cry out for aid that will arrive, eventually, but far too late for some.

Disasters, some cataclysmic in nature, have been part of Earth's history since the planet first formed. It is the way of things. The first such event recorded by science was the disappearance of the dinosaurs, and since then man himself has been struck many times.

The last one hundred years alone has seen ten major earthquakes, three volcanic eruptions, seven hurricanes, cyclones and floods, and nine pandemics and famines, all of which can be classified as major disasters. The cost in human lives of these tragedies is conservatively estimated at 1.7m for earthquakes, 73.000 for volcanic eruptions, 1.5m for hurricanes, cyclones and floods and 74.6m for pandemics (not including AIDS) and famines. The total estimated death toll from these events is almost 78m people, but the true figure will never be known.

Haiti is just another chapter in the long tale of woe and heartbreak suffered by the people of the world when nature strikes back at us. For all the good intentions of people and governments, the citizens of Haiti died waiting for the help promised. So why was the world not better prepared?

It is easy to be wise after the event, and to criticise from the comfort of your fireside chair, but when all is said and done the people did their best within the current system, and worked with the best intentions. I will not criticise the efforts of those who worked to ease the suffering of the Haitian people, but would rather look at what could be done to improve the process of aid to disaster areas.

The UN is often looked to for leadership by many less well-off countries in a crisis such as this, and rightly so, while the richer nations vie to be the first to provide aid and succour to the afflicted.

After a short time the huge aid machine starts into motion as governments and aid agencies begin gathering food, medical supplies and equipment for transportation to the affected area. Charities start the publicity campaigns to raise money for the victims, and governments come forward one by one with promises of cash. It all takes time. Time the desperate people of the affected area do not have. Haiti has amply demonstrated that people were dying for the want of simple things like water. The human body can survive for up to three weeks without food but only a day or two without water, especially in a hot climate like Haiti.

The regularity and severity of natural disasters is increasing decade by decade, and whether this is due to man's interference in nature is not something I wish to debate here. The important thing is, it's happening, and we need to be more prepared. So what to do?

Looking logically at what is facing us every few years, and scientific forecasts seem to indicate the time between events will get smaller with time, We need centralised aid and equipment to be ready for shipment anywhere in the world after a single phone call. Yes, I can hear the critics, Impossible!!! But is it?

Why should the UN Council not consult, and decide on strategic locations around the globe for stockpiles of disaster aid equipment, food, water and medical supplies. Many will say, but food and medical supplies have a limited life!!!! True, but what about military rations that stay good for years! Most medical supplies can be kept for a number of years without harm. Usually it is only certain drugs that have a short limited life.

So let us surmise that we have set up these UN Depots around the world in say, Buenos Aries to cover South America, Mexico City to cover Central America, Washington for North America, Berlin for Western Europe, Rhiyad for the Near East..........well, you know what I mean! It would become a network of logistical centres covering the globe, stationed for the most part at military airfields to allow rapid deployment using transport aircraft.

Agreements could be entered into with countries having heavy lift capable aircraft, military or civilian, that can be commandeered by the UN in time of crisis. These agreements would also include the use of military vehicles closest to the disaster area that can be used to distribute the aid once it reaches airfields within a reasonable distance from the area affected. The same would apply for helicopters that are so essential to the distribution of aid in many areas. Specialists in disaster rescue would receive equipment flown in from the nearest logistic centre.

OK! So let us put forward a simulated scenario for Haiti.

At 01.00hrs on January 30th a call is received by the UN Disaster Watch office that a 7.8 earthquake has hit Port-au- Prince in Haiti. The nearest Logistic Centre is The Mexican Air Force Base in Mexico City. A call goes out to the Commandant to activate the relief effort at 01,30hrs. He calls in his Base personnel who begin preparations for dispatch, bearing in mind that food, water and basic medical supplies are already palletised.

In the meantime, the UN office calls the Mexican, Cuban, Venezuelan, Columbian and American Military Command structures for transport aircraft, i.e. the closest countries with military transport aircraft. The manufacturing companies of 'sensitive drugs' on the continent are requested to supply previously agreed shipments of essential drugs, which may equal one days production for example. These are trucked to the nearest military airfield for onward shipment to Mexico City, or alternatively, the disaster area. The drugs and quantities required would have previously been decided upon by UN medical experts based on previous incidents and location.

In preparation for the arrival of the aid at the nearest airfield, the UN commanders, under its agreement, order trucks from both the Haitian and Dominican Republic Military which are directed to the airfields. Rescue Specialists and Medical Staff from surrounding countries, military or participating civilians, are directed to report to military airfields where they will be flown to Haiti. Their equipment will come from the Logistic Depot.

The required number of helicopters are requested from Cuba, The Dominican Republic, Jamaica and the Bahamas, including any suitable civilian craft of load carrying capacity.

It is estimated that the initial aid carrying aircraft from Mexico City could be on the ground within twelve hours. Also within that time period, sufficient trucks and helicopters should have arrived at the airfield to begin inland distribution. As surrounding nations gear up to the crisis, more transport means and supplies will be forthcoming. The rescue and medical teams from the closest countries could be on the ground within that same period.

I am well aware some will think they have found a flaw in this plan, i.e. that of money. So why does the UN not have a Central Disaster Fund that would be used to finance these operations. The Fund could have a target figure of say ten billion dollars that is administered by the UN Disaster Relief Office. The fund would be topped up when it is used. Richer countries line up to give large sums of money after a disaster, but why not pay a lesser amount annually into the central fund? If the will is there, an agreement could be reached whereby all countries donate to the fund each year based on their GDP. This would mean the affluent nations giving more than the poorer ones, but so what, they can afford it.

As soon as a crisis develops, money from the fund is used to compensate donating nations for their expenditure where required, and more important, help rebuild the damage done by whatever catastrophe has struck the unfortunates. There would be no need to rely on the generosity of gifts by the general public or Aid Agencies, nor governments to donate huge sums at a time when they may have concerns at home that need attention, like the current recession.

I realise that such an undertaking would require an enormous amount of work, planning, and above all co-operation between countries, but is it outside our capabilities? No I think not! If we are truly intent on relieving the suffering in the world when a catastrophe strikes, we can do it. Such natural disasters transcend petty disputes between nations and could affect us all at some time in the future. No country can hold up it's hand and say it will never happen to us.

The human race is undoubtedly changing the world, and scientists say not for the better. They predict that we will experience more and more natural disasters in the years to come, and who can say with a certainty they are wrong? For this reason we should do all we can to be prepared. This is one way we can do that.

It is time the UN did something positive for all of mankind.

Roy.


Note: My apologies for the poor layout, but Blogger is a damned nuisance in that no matter what I do, IT does what it wants!

UK Youth Sadists Sentenced - But is it Enough?

Britain has been rocked this last week hearing in graphic detail what happened when two young boys, aged 10 and 11, carried out one of the most sadistic crimes by a juvenile ever recorded. The two were accused of a prolonged 90 minute attack on two young boys of 9 and 11 last April when they battered, strangled, and violated them because they were bored and had 'nothing else to do'. The only reason they stopped, was because their 'arms were tired' from the continuous savagery.

For a full hour and a half, they cut their victims with barbed wire, throttled them with a cable, covered them with a burning plastic sheet, stubbed out a cigarette in an open wound after battering them with rocks and branches, and jumped, kicked and punched them in an orgy of violence. As if this was not enough, they forced the elder boy to strip from the waist down and carry out a sexual act on the 9 year old. The younger of the two brothers even used a mobile phone belonging to the 11 year old victim and video recorded part of the attack. You really couldn't make this up if it were a horror movie.

Today the pair were sentenced by Judge, Mr. Justice Keith, to be detained 'indefinitely', serving a minimum of five years. Stating that the two 'posed a very high risk of serious harm to others', he added that he hoped the family of the victims would 'appreciate that five years is the very least they would serve'. From the court artists sketch it is clear the brothers showed little interest in the court proceedings, and felt no remorse for what they had done.

I for one, would not consider that a tenth of what they should serve, but you can bet your last dollar that in five years or less they will be considered for parole by some 'limp wristed git' who feels sorry for them. By then they will be just 16 and 17 years old.

During the trial, a Child Protection Expert told the judge the younger brother in particular 'was a very high risk to the community', and also 'at risk of becoming a seriously disturbed psychopathic offender'.

Much was said during the trial of their home life, which included a violent alcoholic father who grew cannabis on his allotment, and an uncaring mother who put the drug into the boys food and drink so they would sleep and give her a quiet time. She also left them alone in the house when they were five or six to watch horror movies like 'Saw' and 'Chucky', considered too violent even by most grownups. The younger brother also had access to his fathers DVD collection of pornographic material, and smoked cannabis at home.

One of the most sickening parts to the whole affair is that the family was well known to Social Services and the Police as one of malcontents who were totally out of control. It is a pity this knowledge did not prevent the eventual savage attack that took place. As things now stand, nine months after the attack, both the victims are psychologically scarred, the younger one perhaps for life. For this the British Justice System hands down a sentence of a 'minimum of five years detention'.

It will not be long before the 'Goody Goody Brigade' try to convince us the two sadists are 'reformed characters', have 'learnt their lesson', and are fit to be released back into society at the tender age of 16 and 17.

If that happens, all I can say is watch out for the newspaper headlines when these two savages kill someone in another sadistic attack soon after release. Their arms will not grow tired too quickly then. Britain is breeding a generation of monsters the like of which has never been seen before.

To me it is long past time we brought back the death penalty.

Roy.

Latest news hot off the press.

It would seem from the latest news stories that the two just sentenced will be allowed out of prison in four years time to do their GCSE exams, and to top that, when they are released they will be given new identities and live in anonymity at the tax payers expense.  Can you believe this? It really is too bizarre!

More heartening news comes from the Police who have said the parents of the two brothers could well be facing charges of child neglect after an investigation.

Social Services have yet again been heavily criticized for not doing enough to solve the problems surrounding the family. It would seem a minimum of 31 chances were missed by the government department to intervene. Where have we heard that before? Some things never change! 

National Military Service - A Cure For What Ails Us?

Yahoo's editor has posed the question in his column: Should the UK reintroduce national service in the Armed Forces? In the last decade Britain's youth has become the most savage on the planet, and it is clear that neither government policies, nor the intervention of all the 'limp wristed' Goody Goodies have made an iota of difference. The British justice system is in tatters, with the courts incapable of handing out proper sentences for crimes committed by youths because the prisons are overcrowded or the Law considers them too young. The best the Government and Courts have been able to come up with is the infamous ASBO or Anti-Social Behaviour Order, which only places certain restrictions on them. These have become so ineffectual that they are viewed by most toe-rags as a badge of honour and are completely ignored anyway.

So what is the answer? Is the reintroduction of national service the solution to sorting out these malcontents once and for all? In short, I think the answer is yes, but not as we have known it in the past.

Sweden, Norway, Denmark, Germany, Switzerland and Greece have all reintroduced national service successfully to combat youth crime and the 'yob' culture. So why not Britain?

Comments on the news column show that many people are afraid their loved ones, once committed to national service, could end up in places like Iraq and Afghanistan and this fact is turning people away from the idea. To make this work a compromise is needed.

It has been suggested that young criminals be given the choice of jail time or serving in the army, with repeat offenders having the choice removed and being committed to serve a fixed term.  This could work in some cases but not all. The compromise suggested earlier would mean that young offenders be given the assurance they would not be sent to a war zone during their period of sentence. That takes care of parents concerns.

But what of the time spent in the Army? David Cameron of the Tory Party has suggested a non-obligatory period of six weeks for all 16 year olds, note the non-obligatory! Six weeks could never provide the necessary deterrent with violent youth because just as the malcontents got used to the idea they would be free with insufficient time to learn anything useful. Young criminals would need to spend a minimum of nine months in the loving bosom of the Army before any sort of character changes could manifest themselves. Within that time, it is fairly certain the constant application of strict discipline could begin to change the way these people think of themselves, and their place in society.

Each 'soldier' could in that time be fairly accurately judged by their instructors as to whether they are fit to re-enter society. If they are deemed not to have learnt anything they stay in until they have. Simple.

But what of the army? What could they do with all these nasty individuals? We are constantly hearing the army is under-manned and there is insufficient manpower to fight two wars, i.e. Iraq and Afghanistan. I am sure that handing over some of the UK Base tasks to the criminal element after sufficient training, would make more manpower available for the front from our volunteer army. But what jobs? Well, how about Transport, Administration, Security, Supply and Catering just to quote some examples. These are jobs that do not require intensive long drawn out training and could be done by many criminals. The added advantage is it would teach them a trade for use when they are released.

So how could you be sure those working in 'Supply' for example, (thinking they have been handed a golden opportunity to make some money on the sly) don't start selling army property behind everyone's back? Well, after finishing their 'Basic Training' and before any of them start becoming productive, they should be given a guided tour of the the National Military Detention Centre at Colchester. Just the sight of what goes on in that military prison will scare the pants off them. Normal prisons are holiday camps by comparison (well, come to think of it, they are anyway). After all, why should they not be subject to military justice while serving their sentence? If they do not break the rules they have nothing to fear.

There would of course need to be one major change to army thinking. The new 'softly softly' attitude to recruits would have to go out the window for the detainees. A soft hand with them would make the whole exercise a wasted effort. They need the iron fist to instil the normal  attitudes of decency, respect and responsibility that the rest of us take for granted. There are more than enough drill instructors who would love to put these misfits through the hoop.

The hard cases will only respond to men who are tougher and stronger than they are, and in any army drill instructor they will meet their match. It's the story of the ages; power respects power! I am sure any low-life who thinks he is tough will soon wilt when he is doing a ten mile run through the Cairngorms in pouring rain with a 30lb pack and an Army instructor yelling at his heels.

I am no psychologist, but I am fairly sure that nine months of army training will make for a more mature and responsible citizen. Once these young people have finished their 'sentence' they could be given the choice of staying in.

Some readers may now be thinking they have found a flaw in my plan, because many of the youth criminals today are as young as 10 and 11 years old. Does that matter? Naturally, there are ways to downscale the action plan to cover these junior horrors. Many of them think they are tough anyway, and their age is no reason to go soft on them because they are only 10 years old. If they are old enough to commit murder, as many have, they are old enough for a taste of junior army life.

One concession to their age could be made by making them do only six months instead of nine months or a year. No! Young as they are, they can still turn out for inspection and parade at 06.00hrs every morning just like army recruits. If they spend the day learning to march, to keep themselves and their environment clean plus continuing their education under strict supervision they are sure to learn the error of their ways. Many of the normal infantry training tactics used in the army today such as physical education and assault courses, scaled to fit the trainees of course, would be a benefit in teaching them to work as a team, to help and respect each other. After all, if it can work in other countries, why not Britain?

There will always be the few hard cases who think they are tougher than the system, and some will run away because after all, an army camp is not a prison. But that's OK, 48 hours in Colchester prison will soon make them realise that co-operation is the best way out, and 48 hours is all it will take.

All this would place a burden on the army, and would be expensive to set up, but consider this! In the medium to long term, how much government money would be saved by getting these criminals off the streets, along with the eventual major reduction in the crime rates across the country? I am well aware that the Upper Brass of the Army has already said it is against the idea of the army being used as a sort of 'prison service', but what other effective solution is there. I am sure that with the proper organization this whole plan could be made to benefit the Army in many ways.

Life in  the army can be hard, and training would be structured such that we would eventually get back to the situation where criminals, once they have been through the mill, will not return to crime for fear of having to go through it all again. As in the old days, the only way to fight perpetual crime is to make the punishment such that criminals will not wish to subject themselves to it again.

Say what you will, but the best deterrent for crime is the fear of punishment.

The days when a youth can commit murder and get away with it because of his/her age has to end. Only then can we all live in peace and without fear of a group of youths hanging around on a street corner. It is time we stopped being soft on criminals or we will end up with total anarchy.

It's time for positive action, but who will dare?

Roy.

The Insane Side of Health and Safety

Health and Safety, implemented to improve safety standards and working practices, has ended up a sordid mess. New rules are being introduced arbitrarily by  over-zealous individuals, who think they are doing the right thing, but are in reality making a mockery of the rules, and turning peoples lives into hell.

A power company, supplying large areas of Scotland, recently introduced new 'H&S' regulations for its staff. From now, all car drivers must reverse into parking spaces, and all people using the stairs must use the handrail. Disciplinary action will be taken against violators! Typical of someone's idea that they can implement regulations in the name of H&S for their idea of the 'common good'.

Among the more ridiculous interpretations of the rules these days is the case of an Old Age Pensioner George Pretty (72). He made a weekly run to the local fish and chip shop to get meals for the OAP's in the home he was in. He had been doing it for years, until some erstwhile Housing Warden told him he must stop because he did not have an insulated box to carry the meals in, and this was against H&S rules.

The Midlothian Council, again in Scotland, has been leaving all the lights on at night in a high school abandoned for the past seven years. The reason, vandals entering the property might injure themselves. According to a spokesman, they have a duty to do this because as owners of the property they can be sued if someone hurts themselves after entering the premises illegally.

Two regional BBC Show presenters wanted to do a trial on their programme to see who could change the wheel of a car the quickest. To satisfy H&S a mechanic was called in to do a risk assessment, and eventually the producer decided the trial could not go ahead unless a paramedic was standing by. Does this mean that should you ever suffer a puncture at any time, you must call an ambulance before you can change the wheel?

It would seem that even bar staff are allowed to interpret the H&S laws as they see fit. In March last year a woman, 26 weeks pregnant, was having a rare pint of lager with friends in a pub when she was asked if she would like another half. Having already decided that would be her limit, she was shocked to hear the bar-woman refuse to give the friend her drink because she was pregnant. She let it go without a fuss, but a little later, took a sip from a friends glass at which point the assistant manageress marched over and told her and her friends to leave the premises immediately because as a pregnant woman she should not be drinking alcohol. A blatant display of her using her limited powers to force her opinion of pregnant women and alcohol onto the unfortunate woman. To their credit, the brewery did offer the woman and her friends a full apology. As to the 'SS' managerial assistant, who knows, but I hope she never gets to be a manager.

For 43 years, 63 year-old Graham Alexander has cut the grass of the large roadside verge outside his house, until recently that is. He has now been told by Wiltshire Council that he must leave it for the contractors, because he is "endangering himself and others and could be hurt by the mower or flying debris." Should he continue he will be prosecuted.

This sort of insanity is not solely restricted to private individuals, it can affect government institutions too. The British Coast-Guard Service have done valuable work around the shores of Britain for hundreds of years, rescuing sailors and civilians alike when they get into trouble. Ever since the First World War they have been using flares fired from a flare pistol to illuminate large areas during a search for people or ships. Now they are forbidden for H&S reasons. The official view is that infra-red cameras, night vision goggles and spotlights have made the flares redundant. The Coast-guard do not agree, and still use them when necessary.

Isn't it amazing how people and times change, and how pathetic some people can be? To be fair, part of the reason for institutions taking the stance they do, is the rampant 'compensation culture' rife in Britain for the past twenty years. You can be sued by someone who breaks a nail while typing on your computer for example, or even by a burglar who gets hurt while breaking into your house. Crazy Huh!

It makes me wonder who the insane ones really are, those in the rubber rooms looking out, or those on the outside looking in!

Keep smiling - it ain't over yet!

Roy.

Best Army in the World - Not any More!

"OK! Can we all stand at 'Attention' please" - shuffle shuffle. - "No Mr Taylor, like this, heels together.....Mr Williams, please don't stamp your feet when you come to'Attention" you might hurt yourself. We don't do that anymore!". 

This is what you may well hear on parade grounds of the future British Army as recruits are taught to be soldiers. No longer will Sergeant Majors and Drill Instructors be allowed to bawl out recruits, they must now use a "gentler" approach. On orders from the Army Leadership, it's 'softly, softly' all the way. Instead of shouting orders at recruits and putting the fear of God into them, instructors must now "discuss tasks with recruits rather than bawling orders at them." A batch of 4,500 new military instructors are now being encouraged to "be progressive" at the Army Recruiting and Training Division's Staff Leadership School (ASLS) in Purbright Surrey, meaning they should now "motivate, encourage and enthuse new recruits."

Lt. Col. Matt Fensom, Commanding Officer of the school is quoted as saying, "There were limitations to traditional training techniques" in that "soldiers would not know what to do if the person giving the orders were not present (never seemed to be a problem in the past). "We don't want soldiers to be robots.....we need them to think for themselves." Young soldiers need to be "coaxed, reasoned with, and encouraged to think for themselves." Codswollop! I have never heard such a load of 'limp-wristed' garbage in all my life.

This 'about face' by the British Army is the result of an investigation into bullying within the ranks in recent times, which caused a furore in the Press in the last couple of years. The Army commissioned research into psychological  techniques to identify traits that would hold back recruits. This new policy is the result.

Never in all my years have I heard so much bulls**t! The old methods have served the British Armed Forces for hundreds of years and made it feared across the world, but now we come across a generation that is too fragile to handle it?

Sergeant Major: "OOH! I'm soooo sorry for shouting at you dear chap. You won't tell your Mummy and Daddy will you, because it will be in the papers tomorrow if you do! Please sit there and rest while I go and get you a nice hot cup of tea. Two sugars is it?"

As one veteran has said, this new policy will lead to a total breakdown in discipline. Hard discipline is necessary if you are going to order a soldier to put himself in harm's way, you don't spend a half-hour persuading him that it's the right thing to do! It must be instinctive to follow orders.

Today, an oft raised topic is soldiers returning from the front line suffering stress and Post-Traumatic Shock (PTS), and their first port of call on arriving home is a visit to the 'Head Shrink'. My Mother, who is nearly ninety and lived through WW2 always laughs with derision when she hears stories of our PTS'd soldiers of today. "My generation went through a world war, and when it was over we shouldered the load and  got on with life. The youngsters of today have no backbone at all, they've all gone soft." And I must say I agree with her.

When the newspaper reports started coming out a year or two ago about young recruits complaining because their drill instructors were shouting at them I cringed. What did these namby-pamby faggots expect, that the Sergeant Major would wake them with a cup of tea and a bun and politely ask them if they felt like going on parade? Worse were the parents who started flocking to the newspapers with complaints of brutality against their dear little boys! It put the Army in a bad light, with the subsequent affect on recruiting figures. All because some nasty Sergeant Major shouted at their precious little flower!

I served for twelve years in the RAF and suffered far worse than some of these idiots today, especially during my basic training. I remember well the Corporal drill instructors thundering into the billet for inspection, screaming their heads off. We had all laid out our kit and bedding in the prescribed manner, but it was not good enough. They marched up the long room tipping over each bed as they passed it. They were however generous in giving us ten whole minutes to right our beds, sort our stuff out, and get ready for another inspection. One recruit made a minor mistake so the drill instructor manhandled him into his own locker and locked the door. He came back after ten minutes and let him out. Needless to say, after such treatment, apart from minor infractions we passed all future inspections.

It may sound brutal to many modern ears but it was necessary, for the prime directive for any military man, be he soldier, sailor or airman is to obey orders without question. That is the only way for a military force to function, and you can only achieve this through iron discipline which is taught  by our bawling Sergeant Majors and Drill Instructors.

With the introduction of these new methods however, I feel we have started down the slippery slope towards having a military as useless as the Dutch. Who can forget Dutch complicity in the rounding up and slaughter of 30,000 refugees in Srebrenica  during the Bosnian war! What about complaints by a previous NATO Commander some years ago during a Navy exercise in the Atlantic who is quoted  as saying, "The Dutch, I wish they were on the other side. They are useless." Imagine an Armed Forces that has a Trade Union! Officer: "Right gentlemen, we are going war. " Union Representative: "What do you mean, we're going to war? The Union has not been informed of this. I am afraid I will have to consult with my members!"

This is probably the reason why the Dutch Government agreed to send it's Armed Forces into Afghanistan, only so long as they were in an area as far away as possible from where they could be shot at. Is Britain now heading the same way? I hope not!

Times have changed, and the people with it, but I cannot but help feel we are going to hell in a basket.

My old Flight Sergeant Instructor will be tossing in his grave!

Roy.

Britain - Home of the Loony's!

If it wasn't so sad it would be funny! For this post I have chosen five of the most ridiculous stories to come out of the UK this week. 
Firstly, in Southampton in southern England, a man turned up at the hospital's casualty department with his penis stuck in a length of steel tubing. The hospital staff could not release it because the situation had caused the man to become aroused thereby enlarging his penis and making it impossible. You really couldn't make this up!!!! Eventually his penis was freed from the pipe by a very delicate operation carried out by.....wait for it!.....Firemen with a metal grinder!!!!!! When I read this story I didn't know whether to laugh or cry. Apparently the man left the hospital without any explanation as to how he got his penis stuck in a piece of pipe.
Ed Balls the Schools Secretary for Great Britain is quoted as saying that primary school pupils (aged 7 to 11) and secondary schools (ages 11 to 16) should learn Mandarin i.e Chinese! His reason for such a statement is that Britain has increasing business ties with China and the business sector needs Chinese speakers. Does this mean that it must become part of the national curriculum and a requirement for all children to learn Chinese? I may be stupid, but I can speak Chinese!

He is right in one thing, it should be compulsory for all children in English schools to learn a foreign language; but Chinese? It would be far more useful for them to learn French, German or perhaps Spanish. Britain has for decades fallen behind other European nations in the teaching of foreign languages in schools, leaving it up to the pupils to decide. When it comes to languages the British are notoriously lazy.

Britain's erstwhile Prime Minister Gordon Brown has decreed that poor homes should be given a free laptop and broadband access so the parents can communicate with their children's school. So Gordon is of the opinion that the tax payer should foot the bill for this, and of course poor parents will immediately get 'on line' and follow their offspring's progress at school. I think it more likely there will suddenly be a glut of laptops being offered at knock-down prices in the local pubs to finance a few more pints of best bitter.

On a more serious note, A family of five bought a house for £285,000 and decided to have it structurally altered and renovated. They moved into a rented apartment while the builders were working. After the Christmas break they went to the house and found a group of Romanian squatters occupying the house. They had changed all the locks which prevented the owner from entering. He went to the Police, and on enquiring as to the legal status of the squatters being in the country was told he was racist. Eventually it turned out that the Romanians had become victims of a black con man who had 'rented' them the property. They thought they were legal and had every right to be there, but the black guy was not the owner. It took two weeks for the legal situation to be sorted out, and now, much to the families relief, things are back to normal. The Squatters, they moved into a house further down the street. The con man? He disappeared into a richer puff of smoke.

It has been known for years that Britain needs more jails, and now finally the Labour Government has made plans for more to be built. Britain is way ahead of the rest of Europe when it comes to the size of its prison population. For years, Judges have been given instructions not to send so many felons to jail, no matter how much they deserve it, because the jails are already overcrowded. Prisoners have been released after serving a fraction of their sentence to make room for the next influx of criminals. Many have been hardened criminals who go on to offend again and again after release. For the toe-rags inside for drug dealing, theft and rape etc. they do a fraction of their sentence and then its business as usual.

Strange though it may seem, this plan to build more jails has raised a storm of criticism. Groups, and even MP's, are decrying the move saying resources should be put into preventing crime, not punishing it. I suppose this means more Miss Goody Two-Shoes talking to hardened career criminals trying to convince them of the error of their ways??? I suppose this means that felons will get more non-custodial sentences while the 'Goody Brigade' go to work on them to convince them that it really isn't 'nice' to beat up old age pensioner ladies for the few shillings they have in their purses???? It really is too bizarre for words. These 'Goody Goody" idiots have done so much harm to the English way of life that they should be put against a wall and shot without the chance of parole. I have always been of the opinion that if a criminal is behind bars, he cannot commit more crimes. If the British Penal System were designed to make incarceration so hard that felons would never want to go back to prison after release (like the old days), that more than anything else would cut the crime rate.

Such a shame, but I think the whole country has gone to the dogs!

Woof Woof!

Roy.

In the Name of Allah?

Recently I received via e-mail something that disturbed me greatly, and made me think of where we are in the world today. I found the story so shocking that I just had to share it with the world.

From the accompanying text, it would appear a little boy of eight years old was caught stealing bread in an Iranian market and sentenced under Sharia Law. Graphic photo's of his sentence being carried out are below. The article does not mention why he stole, but it could have been simply because he was hungry. You will find the images shocking.
This action must rank as one of the most barbaric in modern times, not so much for its outright brutality, but that it is committed against a child of eight in the name of religion. This is the face of Islam most Muslims would rather you not see. 

In every other Faith known to mankind such an act, even under the guise of 'Justice', would not be tolerated. But, this is Sharia Law at work. A child's arm is crushed under the wheels of a car so as to be useless to him for the rest of his life. Yet, most Muslims will tell you Islam is a religion of peace and love!

I realise this article may well offend some Muslims who feel slighted because an 'Infidel' dare to criticize their religion. I am truly sorry for that, and wish to offend no-one, but the facts speak for themselves, and for me, the evidence is irrefutable. As an average person living in the 21st Century, I find it abhorrent that such acts as this can still be committed.

To be fair, Christianity has also gone through its own time of terror and unspeakable acts in the name of God. In the Middle Ages terrible  torture, disfigurement and execution were practiced by the Church in the name of The One True God. The Inquisition has gone down in history as a very dark period in the evolution of man, one that we should all be ashamed of. I make no excuses for this period, but I like to think we have matured and would not allow such things in the 21st century. Mankind has long evolved from the  beast he was, although recent history like that of the Holocaust in WW2 has shown us we have not yet shed the 'beast' which hides within us completely.

It is however distressing to hear (and see) that such bestial practices in the name of religion are still going on today. Have we learned nothing over the last two thousand years? It would seem not.

Iran is not the only devout Muslim nation that practices Sharia law, it is even creeping into places like Britain. If the Muslims had their way, the whole world would be governed by this barbaric practice. This is not to say that harsh penalties should not be meted out to those who transgress the laws of decency, but they should not include women being buried up their their necks and stoned to death for adultery, or public whippings. hangings, and beheadings.

You have to ask yourself who is responsible for these events, and the answer will always be the Muslim Clerics and Mullahs who hold absolute power over the Muslim world, no matter who is 'in government'. They retain their dominant position by ruling with an iron fist and corrupting passages of the Koran to serve their own ends.

We, as infidels, hear all the time that the Koran preaches tolerance, love, and above all peace, just like the Christian Bible, but you do not see this when a Mullah is secretly recorded telling his followers to go out and murder Christians! These evil men, and yes I do call them evil, have corrupted an entire generation into thinking they can best serve Allah by blowing themselves up on aircraft, trains and buses, or in busy market places. Would it not be more suitable for the Mullahs to strap on a bomb and sacrifice themselves for their beliefs? But no, they do not dare, they corrupt innocent young minds to do the dirty work for them.

The thing that amazes me most, is that if someone took the trouble to make an assessment of the total number of dead from terrorist acts over the years, the number of Muslim dead would far surpass the number of non-Muslim dead, including 9/11.  So this leaves the burning question, why are these people so intent on killing their own kind? What is it all for?

The sad fact is, there are millions of peace-loving Muslims in the world who would not dream of doing harm to a fellow human being, but because of the acts of a few radicals, many people treat all Muslims with suspicion. This in turn creates more dissension between Christians and Muslims until it eventually spirals out of control. If we are not careful, we could be heading for a war between faiths.

But what to do about it? How can we stop the spiral of violence between Christians and Muslims? A hard question to answer, but in my opinion, the only way is for decent, devout Muslims to step up to the line and be counted. The entire Muslim world has to make a united stand against the terrorists, and the Islamic clergy responsible for this kind of atrocity and say, "We will not accept this anymore".

We are after all brethren in the eyes of God, and no matter what name we give Him, there is only one God.

May the Peace of God be upon you.

Roy.

Britain - A Menace to the World?

It emerged today that America is blaming Britain for the rise in Islamic extremism. 

Leading policy makers in the American administration have accused Britain of being "a menace to the rest of the world" because of its failure to tackle Islamic radicalism within its borders. Is the accusation justified? Most certainly!

For years the British people and government have been pandering to the Islamic minority of the country for fear of being seen as anti-Islamic - Islamophobia. 

This sickness has found its way into every facet of British life to the extent that to utter a single word of criticism against Muslims or Islam, means you risk being   branded a 'racist', much the same as the sixties and seventies during the rise of 'Black Power'. English traditions going back centuries are slowly dying out because they may offend the Muslim population.

This criticism of Britain has come to light after the failed suicide bomb attack on a Detroit-bound airliner by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab who, it is said, was radicalised in London. For a time, he was president of the Islamic Society at the University College London (UCL) which has been severely criticised for allowing, and even actively encouraging, extremist Muslim preachers to give lectures on campus. 

There are many universities in Britain with the same lax attitude towards Muslim extremism, and these places of learning are a fertile recruiting ground for groups like al Qaeda. 

Evidence of this can be seen in the atrocities list of the past few years; Omar Sheik who killed Wall Street journalist Daniel Pearl in 2002 (London School of Economics); Asif Hanif and Omar Khan Sharif who blew themselves up in Tel Aviv in 2003 (King's College London); Abdullah Achmed Ali leader of the liquid bomb plot in 2006 (City University London), the list goes on. All received an education in British Universities, and all were most certainly recruited there by visiting 'lecturers' like Anwar al-Awlaki a well-known radical Yemen-based priest who has preached on various occasions at UCL among others, and gave spiritual guidance to both the failed Detroit bomber, and the Fort Hood assassin Nidal Hasan.

This institutionalised acceptance of allowing extremist and radical Islamic preachers to openly infect the minds of impressionable young men is beyond doubt a scandal, but all comes under the heading of Islamophobia. 

Another accusation, levelled by Marc Thiessen, former speech writer for George W. Bush and Pentagon aide, was that Muslim immigrants into the UK were marginalised, and segregated into 'ghetto's' instead of being integrated into society as in America. 

This I cannot agree with for the simple reason that Muslims in Britain do not wish to integrate into British society. They form these 'ghetto's' of their own accord by taking over entire areas, and even towns in their desire to live together as a separate community. This Islamization of towns is an on-going process and results, among other things, in them demanding Muslim schools, and British Schools teaching the National Curriculum in Arabic. This is wrong, but symptomatic of the failure of the government to ensure the immigrant population is spread wide across the country. How would Mr, Thiessen feel if Muslim immigrants in the States demanded High Schools taught their children in Arabic? 

Charles Allen, a recently retired CIA operative, claimed there is "a lack of assimilation, a great deal of alienation" towards Muslims in Britain, and to some extent he is correct, but not completely. 

When the immigrant population of Britain and the rest of Europe are ready to admit they should adopt the customs and language of their new country relations will  improve, but instead they demand we change our customs to suit them. If we do not, we are racist. 

The lack of willingness to assimilate on the part of most Muslims, coupled with the past failure of successive governments to ensure that ghetto's were not allowed to form in the first place, has led to a feeling of mistrust by many members of the British population which has of course been crystallised by the terrorist attacks in recent years. The one feeds off the other.

There is much to support the American feeling that Britain has become a 'hotbed' of extremism in the world, but the problem has gone too far for a simple solution. 

Britain, and indeed all European countries, need to stamp down hard on the  Imams who preach their hatred in the mosques, turning peaceful young men into extremists willing to sacrifice themselves in the name of Allah. 

It is also imperative the European Union law enforcement institutions project a more robust attitude towards the threat of terrorism within its borders, and as suggested by the news article, treat the terrorists as enemy combatants instead of just criminals.

However, in the long term it is only the Muslim people themselves who can put an end to this hi-jacking of their Faith for the purposes of terrorism. 

May peace come to all - Inshallah!

Roy.