Posts Tagged ‘Britain’

Sharia Courts ‘As Consensual as Rape’, House of Lords Told

Wednesday, October 31st, 2012

Muslim women in Britain are being forced to “live in fear” because of the spread of unofficial and unregulated sharia courts enforcing Islamic rules, the House of Lords was told.

Rulings by informal religious “councils” and tribunals are sometimes no more “consensual” than rape, peers were told.

The warnings came in the first ever full Parliamentary debate on the subject in the UK.

Baroness Cox, the independent peer and Third World campaigner, last year tabled a private member’s bill in the Lords setting out plans to rein in a network of unofficial self-styled “courts” which apply Islamic principles.

One study estimated that there are around 85 Sharia bodies operating in Britain, although there is no official estimate.

They include legally recognised arbitration tribunals, set up primarily to resolve financial disputes using Islamic legal principles but which have taken on a wider range of cases.

There is also a network of informal Sharia “councils”, often operating out of mosques, dealing with religious divorces and even child custody matters in line with Islamic teaching.

The bill, which had its first full debate yesterday, would make it a criminal offence for such bodies to style themselves as courts or those chairing them to pose as judges.

It would also limit the activities of arbitration tribunals and explicitly require them to uphold equality laws including women’s rights.

Baroness Cox told the House of cases she had encountered including a woman who had been admitted to hospital by her violent husband who had left her for another woman but still denied her a religious divorce so she could remarry.

Another woman was forced to travel to Jordan to seek permission to remarry from a seven-year-old boy whom she had never met because she had no other male relatives, she said.

A third who came to see her was so scared of being seen going in that she hid behind a tree whole another told her: “I feel betrayed by Britain, I came to this country to get away from all this but the situation is worse here than in my country of origin.”

Baroness Cox said: “These examples are just the tip of an iceberg as many women live in fear, so intimidated by family and community that they dare not speak out or ask for help.”

Meanwhile Baroness Donaghy added: “The definition of mutuality is sometimes being stretched to such limits that a women is said to consent to a process when in practice, because of a language barrier, huge cultural or family pressure, ignorance of the law, a misplaced faith in the system or a threat of complete isolation, that mutuality is as consensual as rape.”

Lord Carlile, the legal expert, was among those backing the bill but the Bishop of Manchester urged caution arguing that it could end up “stigmatising those individuals in communities it is aiming to help”.

And Baroness Uddin, the first female Muslim peer, said it would be viewed as “another assault on Muslims”.

Lord Kalms, the businessman, claimed that self-styled Sharia courts had already reached far beyond mediation to areas such as criminal law.

“To my knowledge, none of these cases has ever received police attention or investigation, and this is a scandal for which the police, among other authorities, must be held responsible,” he said.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Millions Desert Labour Because of Immigration with 80% of Former Supporters Wanting Drastic Curbs on Numbers

Thursday, October 25th, 2012

Millions of Labour voters have deserted the party in protest over mass immigration.

A poll reveals that nearly eight in ten former Labour voters support drastic curbs on migrant numbers.

It also shows huge support for sharp cuts in arrivals among those who have remained with the party.

In 1997, some 13.5million voted for Labour, but by the 2010 election that had fallen to 8.6million.

Analysis of the views of some of the five million ‘lost’ Labour voters by YouGov shows 78 per cent want net migration cut to zero.

That policy would mean foreign migrants would be allowed in only to replace people who left – in effect, a one-in-one-out rule.

The YouGov poll, published in Prospect magazine, interviewed thousands of Labour ‘defectors’. Pollsters also found that two-thirds of Labour party loyalists backed zero net migration.

Sir Andrew Green, chairman of the MigrationWatch think tank, said: ‘This is stunning research which is bound to affect Labour’s immigration policies.

‘We will see whether they have the courage to declare a limit on immigration or whether they try to duck this essential issue. The track record so far is not encouraging.’

Ed Miliband signalled this month that he wanted more done to tackle immigration, saying low-skilled immigration into Britain was ‘too high’.

But the Labour leader offered no policy proposals for how he would fix the problem.

Labour’s open-door migration policy led to the largest population explosion in Britain since the Saxon invasion.

Between 1997 and 2010 the foreign-born population of the UK increased by three million, while nearly a million British citizens left the country.

Last year net migration stood at 216,000, down from 252,000 in 2010.

Home Secretary Theresa May has imposed a cap on migrant worker numbers and led a crackdown on family migration and bogus students.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Ground Attack

Saturday, October 13th, 2012

Ground attack is a close relative to tactical bombing.  It is aimed at disrupting enemy forces at or near the front and during the course of the battle itself.  While strategic and tactical bombing raids are planned and directed at specific targets, ground-attack is often carried out against targets of opportunity, as they appear on a changing battle-field.  It is carried out by strafing and by dropping small munitions such as hand grenades.  Ground attack is carried out from very low altitudes and is thus both extremely accurate and extremely hazardous.

During the Battle of Messines, in June of 1917, British air force commander Hugh Trenchardordered the British pilots to fly low over the lines and strafe whatever targets presented themselves.  This was in order to harass the troops and break their morale.  During the Third Battle of Ypres which followed, this tactic was further pursued and developed with Sopwith Camels armed with four 9kg (20 lb) bombs raiding enemy trenches and approaches.  While effective, the loss rate of the attacking planes was very high.

At about the same time the Germans took delivery of the Halberstadt CL II.  This was a two seater tractor aircraft intended originally as an escort fighter for observer planes.  Realizing the effectiveness of direct ground attacks, flights of Halberstadt CL IIs were reorganized into attack flights (Schlachtstaffeln).

These planes were better equipped for ground-attack duties than the single-seater Allied fighters, which were particularly vulnerable to attack from above and behind, while the pilot was preoccupied with aiming and strafing.  In the Halberstadt the observer provided both warning and some level of protection from such attacks, and could assist by dropping bombs or grenades.

Erich LudendorffThe colossal, costly, and failed engagements of 1916 had led the military on both sides to seek out new weapons and tactics to change the way in which they waged the war.

The Germans developed a new tactic of “infiltration” – the use of lightly armed, mobile elite troops (Sturmtruppen) to break through the defensive lines and fight in the rear of the front line.  Ludendorff thought that the use of the Schlachtstaffeln would both aid the initial breakthrough, and help them consolidate those initial gains.

On the allied side of the front there was a willingness to rethink the use of the tank.  There had been much disappointment with its performance, but by mid 1917 the British command was open to the claims of Brigadier General H. Elles, the commander of the Tank Corps, that the tank had not been used on suitable terrain.

The British launched the Battle of Cambrai on the 20th of November 1917, attacking across dry and chalky ground, and using tactics developed by Lieutenant Colonel J. F. C. Fuller, the Tank Corps Staff Officer.

Fuller had coordinated three elements into his battle plan: an improved artillery system, massed tanks (over 320), and coordinated ground attack by 300 aircraft from fourteen RFC squadrons.  The planes attacked trenches, supply convoys, artillery emplacements and other front line installations.

They were highly effective, at times even saving the tanks from being pinned down.  But the cost to the airmen was high.  The German infantry had learned how to fight back against low flying aircraft, and once air reinforcements arrived the loss rate of ground attack aircraft was as high as 30 percent of aircraft deployed.  Entire squadrons were wiped out in less than a week.

On the ground, the initial success of the attack was so great that victory bells were rung in Britain for the first time since the beginning of the war.  But the celebration was premature.  The attack became bogged down, and the German’s counter-attacked.

John F. C. FullerIt was during this counter-attack that Ludendorff used his new infiltration tactics, and to great effect.  The spearheads of the Sturmtruppen were accompanied by carefully coordinated ground attacks, the pilot strafing and the observer dropping grenades.  They were so effective that a British Court of Inquiry found that the Schlachtstaffeln were one of the major causes of the success of the German counter-attack.

The RFC learned a number of important lessons at Cambrai.  British pilots, taking a leaf from the French, improvised better camouflage so as not to be so visible to defending fighters: in particular the twin bright roundels on the upper wing provided an easily visible and effective aiming point.  (One simply had to aim between them to target the pilot.)

Sopwith began developing an aircraft specially designed for the needs of ground attack warfare – its most significant feature being armour plating to protect the pilot.  This became known as the Sopwith Salamander.

In May of 1918 Fuller began developing plans for the next year of combat.  This became known as “Plan 1919.”  Hailed as the precursor of the “Blitzkrieg,” one of the keystones of the plan was integrated ground attack using the Salamanders.  Large scale production was underway at the time of the armistice, but in practice the Salamander never saw combat.

When the Germans launched their final great push in March of 1918, they placed such an emphasis on ground attack that it was considered to be the most important task of the German planes.  Flying Halberstadt CL.II, the improved Halberstadt CL.IVs, and the specialist all-metal Junkers J1, they initially enjoyed tremendous success.

For their part, the allies found it hard to perform ground attack duties, and indeed found it hard to coordinate their air power at all, because they needed to evacuate seventeen of their forward airfields.  But by late March they had reorganized and began to inflict heavy losses on the German airforce.

T.E. Lawrence "of Arabia"By the time of the last German offensive, in mid July, shortages of pilots, aircraft and gasoline meant that their was little air support.  In a mirror image of the battle of Cambrai, the Allied counter-attack was strongly supported by coordinated ground attack.

Perhaps the most dramatic use of ground-attack occurred in Palestine.  By September of 1918 the British had complete control of the air, largely through the efforts of the First Squadron, Australian Flying Corps, flying the excellent two seat Bristol F2 Fighter and a single Handley-Page O/400.  (Ross Smith, who later won the 1919 England-Australia air race, was one of the pilots of this squadron.)

Following the success of Allenby’s attack at Megido on the 19th of September, the Turkish divisions were forced to retreat through the narrow defile of Wadi Farra.  On the 21st of September the Australians trapped them there, when they bombed the head and the tail of the Turkish column.  Together with RAF SE5as and DH9s the Australians mercilessly bombed and strafed the terrified Turks.

In the words of T. E. Lawrence, “When the smoke had cleared it was seen that the organization of the enemy had melted away.  They were a dispersed horde of trembling individuals, hiding for their lives in every fold of the vast hills.  Nor did their commanders ever rally them again.  When our cavalry entered the silent valley the next day they could count ninety guns, fifty lorries, and nearly a thousand carts abandoned with all their belongings.  The RAF lost four killed.  The Turks lost a corps.”

Enhanced by Zemanta

Druids.

Monday, August 20th, 2012

The Druids were the priests or ministers of religion among the ancient

Celtic nations in Gaul, Britain, and Germany.  Our information respecting them

is borrowed from notices in the Greek and Roman writers, compared with the

remains of Welsh and Gaelic poetry still extant.

 

The Druids combined the functions of the priest, the magistrate, the

scholar, and the physician.  They stood to the people of the Celtic tribes in

a relation closely analogous to that in which the Brahmans of India, the Magi

of Persia, and the priests of the Egyptians stood to the people respectively

by whom they were revered.

 

The Druids taught the existence of one god, to whom they gave a name

“Be’al,” which Celtic antiquaries tell us means “the life of every thing,” or

“the source of all beings,” and which seems to have affinity with the

Phoenician Baal.  What renders this affinity more striking is that the Druids

as well as the Phoenicians identified this, their supreme deity, with the Sun.

Fire was regarded as a symbol of the divinity.  The Latin writers assert that

the Druids also worshipped numerous inferior gods.

 

They used no images to represent the object of their worship, nor did

they meet in temples or buildings of any kind for the performance of their

sacred rites.  A circle of stones (each stone generally of vast size)

enclosing an area of from twenty feet to thirty yards in diameter, constituted

their sacred place.  The most celebrated of these now remaining is Stonehenge,

on Salisbury Plain, England.

 

[See Stonehenge: The Druids used no images to represent the object of their

worship, nor did they meet in temples or buildings of any kind for the

performance of their sacred rites.]

 

These sacred circles were generally situated near some stream, or under

the shadow of a grove or wide-spreading oak.  In the centre of the circle

stood the Cromlech or altar, which was a large stone, placed in the manner of

a table upon other stones set up on end.  The Druids had also their high

places, which were large stones or piles of stones on the summits of hills.

These were called Cairns, and were used in the worship of the deity under the

symbol of the sun.

 

That the Druids offered sacrifices to their deity there can be no doubt.

But there is some uncertainty as to what they offered, and of the ceremonies

connected with their religious services we know almost nothing. The classical

(Roman) writers affirm that they offered on great occasions human sacrifices;

as for success in war or for relief from dangerous diseases.  Caesar has given

a detailed account of the manner in which this was done.  “They have images of

immense size, the limbs of which are framed with twisted twigs and filled with

living persons.  These being set on fire, those within are encompassed by the

flames.” Many attempts have been made by Celtic writers to shake the testimony

of the Roman historians to this fact, but without success.

 

The Druids observed two festivals in each year.  The former took place in

the beginning of May, and was called Beltane or “fire of God.” On this

occasion a large fire was kindled on some elevated spot, in honor of the sun,

whose returning beneficence they thus welcomed after the gloom and desolation

of winter.  Of this custom a trace remains in the name given to Whitsunday in

parts of Scotland to this day.  Sir Walter Scott uses the word in the Boat

Song in the Lady of the Lake: -

 

     “Ours is no sapling, chance sown by the fountain,

     Blooming at Beltane in winter to fade;” &c.

 

The other great festival of the Druids was called “Samh’in,” or “fire of

peace,” and was held on Hallow-even, (first of November,) which still retains

this designation in the Highlands of Scotland.  On this occasion the Druids

assembled in solemn conclave, in the most central part of the district, to

discharge the judicial functions of their order.  All questions, whether

public or private, all crimes against person or property, were at this time

brought before them for adjudication.  With these judicial acts were combined

certain superstitious usages, especially the kindling of the sacred fire, from

which all the fires in the district, which had been beforehand scrupulously

extinguished, might be relighted. This usage of kindling fires on Hallow-eve

lingered in the British islands long after the establishment of Christianity.

 

Besides these two great annual festivals, the Druids were in the habit of

observing the full moon, and especially the sixth day of the moon.  On the

latter they sought the Mistletoe, which grew on their favorite oaks, and to

which, as well as to the oak itself, they ascribed a peculiar virtue and

sacredness.  The discovery of it was an occasion of rejoicing and solemn

worship.  “They call its,” says Pliny, “by a word in their language which

means ‘heal-all,’ and having made solemn preparation for feasting and

sacrifice under the tree, they drive thither two milk-white bulls, whose horns

are then for the first time bound.  The priest then, robed in white, ascends

the tree, and cuts off the mistletoe with a golden sickle.  It is caught in a

white mantle, after which they proceed to slay the victims, at the same time

praying that God would render his gift prosperous to those to whom he had

given it.” They drink the water in which it has been infused, and think it a

remedy for all diseases.  The mistletoe is a parasitic plant, and is not

always nor often found on the oak, so that when it is found it is the more

precious.

 

The Druids were the teachers of morality as well as of religion.  Of

their ethical teaching a valuable specimen is preserved in the Triads of the

Welsh Bards, and from this we may gather that their views of moral rectitude

were on the whole just, and that they held and inculcated many very noble and

valuable principles of conduct.  They were also the men of science and

learning of their age and people.  Whether they were acquainted with letters

or not has been disputed, though the probability is strong that they were, to

some extent.  But it is certain that they committed nothing of their doctrine,

their history, or their poetry to writing. Their teaching was oral, and their

literature (if such a word may be used in such a case) was preserved solely by

tradition.  But the Roman writers admit that “they paid much attention to the

order and laws of nature, and investigated and taught to the youth under their

charge many things concerning the stars and their motions, the size of the

world and the lands, and concerning the might and power of the immortal gods.”

 

Their history consisted in traditional tales, in which the heroic deeds

of their forefathers were celebrated.  These were apparently in verse, and

thus constituted part of the poetry as well as the history of the Druids.  In

the poems of Ossian we have, if not the actual productions of Druidical times,

what may be considered faithful representations of the songs of the Bards.

 

The Bards were an essential part of the Druidical hierarchy.  One author,

Pennant, says, “The Bards were supposed to be endowed with powers equal to

inspiration.  They were the oral historians of all past transactions, public

and private.  They were also accomplished genealogists, &c.”

 

Pennant gives a minute account of the Eisteddfods or sessions of the

Bards and minstrels, which were held in Wales for many centuries, long after

the Druidical priesthood in its other departments became extinct.  At these

meetings none but Bards of merit were suffered to rehearse their pieces, and

minstrels of skill to perform.  Judges were appointed to decide on their

respective abilities, and suitable degrees were conferred.  In the earlier

period the judges were appointed by the Welsh princes, and after the conquest

of Wales, by commission from the kings of England.  Yet the tradition is that

Edward I. in revenge for the influence of the Bards, in animating the

resistance of the people to his sway, persecuted them with great cruelty This

tradition has furnished the poet Gray with the subject of his celebrated ode,

the Bard.

 

There are still occasional meetings of the lovers of Welsh poetry and

music, held under the ancient name.  Among Mrs. Hemans’s poems is one written

for an Eisteddfod, or meeting of Welsh Bards, held in London May 22, 1822.  It

begins with a description of the ancient meeting, of which the following lines

are a part: -

 

     ”. . . midst the eternal cliffs, whose strength defied

     The crested Roman in his hour of pride;

     And where the Druid’s ancient cromlech frowned,

     And the oaks breathed mysterious murmurs round,

     There thronged the inspired of yore!  on plain or height,

     In the sun’s face, beneath the eye of light,

     And baring unto heaven each noble head,

     Stood in the circle, where none else might tread.”

 

The Druidical system was at its height at the time of the Roman invasion

under Julius Caesar.  Against the Druids, as their chief enemies, these

conquerors of the world directed their unsparing fury.  The Druids, harassed

at all points on the main land, retreated to Anglesey and Iona, where for a

season they found shelter and continued their now-dishonored rites.

 

The Druids retained their predominance in Iona and over the adjacent

islands and main land until they were supplanted and their superstitions

overturned by the arrival of St. Columba, the apostle of the Highlands, by

whom the inhabitants of that district were first led to profess Christianity.

 

Iona.

 

One of the smallest of the British Isles, situated near a rugged and

barren coast, surrounded by dangerous seas, and possessing no sources of

internal wealth, Iona has obtained an imperishable place in history as the

seat of civilization and religion at a time when the darkness of heathenism

hung over almost the whole of Northern Europe.  Iona or Icolmkill is situated

at the extremity of the island of Mull, from which it is separated by a strait

of half a mile in breadth, its distance from the main land of Scotland being

thirty-six miles.

 

Columba was a native of Ireland, and connected by birth with the princes

of the land.  Ireland was at that time a land of gospel light, while the

western and northern parts of Scotland were still immersed in the darkness of

heathenism.  Columba with twelve friends landed on the island of Iona in the

year of our Lord 563, having made the passage in a wicker boat covered with

hides.  The Druids who occupied the island endeavored to prevent his settling

there, and the savage nations on the adjoining shores incommoded him with

their hostility, and on several occasions endangered his life by their

attacks.  Yet by his perseverance and zeal he surmounted all opposition,

procured from the king a gift of the island, and established there a monastery

of which he was the abbot.  He was unwearied in his labors to disseminate a

knowledge of the Scriptures throughout the Highlands and Islands of Scotland,

and such was the reverence paid him that though not a bishop, but merely a

presbyter and monk, the entire province with its bishops was subject to him

and his successors.  The Pictish monarch was so impressed with a sense of his

wisdom and worth that he held him in the highest honor, and the neighboring

chiefs and princes sought his counsel and availed themselves of his judgment

in settling their disputes.

 

When Columba landed on Iona he was attended by twelve followers whom he

had formed into a religious body of which he was the head.  To these, as

occasion required, others were from time to time added, so that the original

number was always kept up.  Their institution was called a monastery and the

superior an abbot, but the system had little in common with the monastic

institutions of later times.  The name by which those who submitted to the

rule were known was that of Culdees, probably from the Latin “cultores Dei” -

worshippers of God.  They were a body of religious persons associated together

for the purpose of aiding each other in the common work of preaching the

gospel and teaching youth, as well as maintaining in themselves the fervor of

devotion by united exercises of worship.  On entering the order certain vows

were taken by the members, but they were not those which were usually imposed

by monastic orders, for of these, which are three, celibacy, poverty, and

obedience, the Culdees were bound to none except the third.  To poverty they

did not bind themselves; on the contrary they seem to have labored diligently

to procure for them selves and those dependent on them the comforts of life.

Marriage also was allowed them, and most of them seem to have entered into

that state.  True their wives were not permitted to reside with them at the

institution, but they had a residence assigned to them in an adjacent

locality.  Near Iona there is an island which still bears the name of “Eilen

nam ban,” women’s island, where their husbands seem to have resided with them,

except when duty required their presence in the school or the sanctuary.

 

     Campbell, in his poem of Reullura, alludes to the married monks of

Iona: -

 

     “. . . The pure Culdees

     Were Albyn’s earliest priests of God,

     Ere yet an island of her seas

     By foot of Saxon monk was trod,

     Long ere her churchmen by bigotry

     Were barred from holy wedlock’s tie.

     ‘Twas then that Aodh, famed afar,

     In Iona preached the word with power.

     And Reullura, beauty’s star,

     Was the partner of his bower.”

 

In one of his Irish Melodies, Moore gives the legend of St. Senanus and

the lady who sought shelter on the island, but was repulsed: -

 

     “O, haste and leave this sacred isle,

     Unholy bark, ere morning smile;

     For on thy deck, though dark it be,

     A female form I see;

     And I have sworn this sainted sod

     Shall ne’er by woman’s foot be trod.”

 

In these respects and in others the Culdees departed from the established

rules of the Romish Church, and consequently were deemed heretical.  The

consequence was that as the power of the latter advanced that of the Culdees

was enfeebled.  It was not however till the thirteenth century that the

communities of the Culdees were suppressed and the members dispersed.  They

still continued to labor as individuals, and resisted the inroads of Papal

usurpation as they best might till the light of the Reformation dawned on the

world.

 

Iona, from its position in the western seas, was exposed to the assaults

of the Norwegian and Danish rovers by whom those seas were infested, and by

them it was repeatedly pillaged, its dwellings burned, and its peaceful

inhabitants put to the sword.  These unfavorable circumstances led to its

gradual decline, which was expedited by the subversion of the Culdees

throughout Scotland.  Under the reign of Popery the island became the seat of

a nunnery, the ruins of which are still seen.  At the Reformation, the nuns

were allowed to remain, living in community, when the abbey was dismantled.

 

Iona is now chiefly resorted to by travellers on account of the numerous

ecclesiastical and sepulchral remains which are found upon it. The principal

of these are the Cathedral or Abbey Church, and the Chapel of the Nunnery.

Besides these remains of ecclesiastical antiquity, there are some of an

earlier date, and pointing to the existence on the island of forms of worship

and belief different from those of Christianity.  These are the circular

Cairns which are found in various parts, and which seem to have been of

Druidical origin.  It is in reference to all these remains of ancient religion

that Johnson exclaims, “That man is little to be envied whose patriotism would

not gain force upon the plains of Marathon, or whose piety would not grow

warmer amid the ruins of Iona.”

 

In the Lord of the Isles, Scott beautifully contrasts the church on Iona

with the cave of Staffa, opposite -

 

     “Nature herself, it seemed, would raise

     A minster to her Maker’s praise!

     Not for a meaner use ascend

     Her columns, or her arches bend;

     Nor of a theme less solemn tells

     That mighty surge that ebbs and swells,

     And still between each awful pause,

     From the high vault an answer draws,

     In varied tone, prolonged and high,

     That mocks the organ’s melody;

     Nor doth its entrance front in vain

     To old Iona’s holy fane,

     That Nature’s voice might seem to say,

     Well hast thou done, frail child of clay

     Thy humble powers that stately shrine

     Tasked high and hard – but witness mine.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Cancer Sufferer Refused Treatment by the NHS Attacks David Cameron, Forcing Him to Defend His £12billion Foreign Aid Bill

Thursday, August 9th, 2012

David Cameron was today forced to defend sending £12 billion abroad in foreign aid when confronted by a woman who may die because the NHS will not fund the cancer treatment she desperately needs.

The Prime Minister was taken to task during a live radio interview this morning where he denied Britain was wrong to have increased funding to other states by 37 per cent despite huge cuts to home budgets.

A non-Hodgkin lymphoma sufferer, who used the name Anna because some of her family do not know she is ill, asked him why taxpayers’ money was going to other countries – such as India, even though it can afford its own space programme – and not to people like her.

India also has almost three times as many billionaires as the UK.

The 68-year-old from north London has stopped cancer treatment because of a dangerous allergic reaction, and the drug she needs is available in Germany but not in her area.

Tragically she is also a full-time carer for her husband, but is so ill he has been forced to go into a care home and she is living alone at home on only £68 per week.

The Prime Minister told LBC listeners he would look at her case but the UK has a ‘moral obligation to help people in other countries even when times are tough,’ he said.

‘Breaking promises to the poorest people in the world would not be the right thing to do,’ he added, saying without the aid more foreigners would seek asylum in Britain.

Speaking to MailOnline Anna said Mr Cameron should be making sure people in Britain are well looked after first.

‘I understand what he is saying, but I would say to him if your family is starving you wouldn’t go and feed your neighbours. He should be looking after people here.

‘I have offered to pay my own airfare to Germany to get this treatment, but every day I wake up waiting for news of whether a charity can raise the £250,000 I need to pay for it. I know I may be one of many people in this situation and I don’t think that is right.

‘We put all this money into Europe but we are unable to go there and get something for it.

‘My husband has gone into a care home because I cannot care for him myself. I am just consumed with grief.

‘All I want is to get my husband back,’ she said tearfully, ‘My life has stopped completely and I haven’t even told my whole family that I am ill. My grandchildren are frightened of my wig and I just want them back here too.’

The Prime Minister said that the Coalition had increased spending on the NHS.

‘It is very important that people get treatment,’ he told LBC, ‘We have not cut spending to the NHS we have increased it.

‘We have the cancer drugs fund and we are looking to extend that.

‘We are having a tough time at the moment but we must keep promises to the poorest countries in the world.’

Mr Cameron is under huge pressure to freeze or even cut Britain’s foreign aid spending.

India is still receiving nearly £300million from British taxpayers in aid, for example, despite the country being rich enough to launch its own space programme.

Their own ministers even described the sum they received as ‘peanuts’.

A powerful committee of peers attacked the Prime Minister’s pledge to increase aid spending by 37 per cent to more than £12billion a year in order to meet an ‘arbitrary’ United Nations target.

They said they fully supported humanitarian aid for disaster zones. But they pointed out that it accounts for less than 10 per cent of the vast budget of the Department for International Development (DfID).

In a devastating verdict they warned that the rush to increase spending ‘risks reducing the quality, value for money and accountability’ of the aid programme.

The finding is a major embarrassment for Mr Cameron who is said, while in opposition, to have adopted the target of spending 0.7 per cent of Britain’s income on aid, partly to help ‘detoxify’ the Conservatives’ image as ‘the Nasty Party’.

The cross-party economic affairs committee said ministers seemed more interested in the amount of money they were spending on aid than the results they were achieving.

The committee’s chairman, former Tory Cabinet minister Lord MacGregor, said: ‘We were unanimous in our view that legislation for a 0.7 per cent target is inappropriate, and that the Government should reconsider.

‘We believe aid should be judged by the criteria of effectiveness and value for money, not by whether a specific arbitrary target is reached.’

Enhanced by Zemanta

Gods

Tuesday, April 17th, 2012

The Celts’ gods were often named after natural things. For example the source of rivers would often have their own goddesses, though rarely many gods. Another theme with Celt gods were triple deities; not only goddesses, but numerous gods. For example the Mothers of Britain, or Cromm Cruach‘s slovenly, deific, and humanistic forms. The main deities of Celtic religion, contrary to much misconception, were usually male.

The world in some remaining myths is often depicted as having been forged by a god with a hammer, such as Dagda or Sucellos, who then poured all life from a magic cauldron or cup; a source of pre-Christian Holy Grail’ myths in Celtic societies.

While deities varied, several constant deities or demigods existed over a wide area. A great example is Lugos, a heroic sun god from Gaul and the southern, Gallic parts of Britain. He is also known as Lugh (in Ireland), Llew (in non-Gallic Britain), and Lug (among Celtiberians, who were not culturally true Celts). Early depictions of him exist as early as the Hallstatt era, suggesting him as one of the longest existing gods of Celtic religion.

Similar is the horse and fertility goddess, Epona, who was also worshipped by the Romans when they came to rule Gaul. She also seems to have existed from the early era. Finally, there is Sucellos, who is argued by some to have been the ‘creator of the universe’ in some Celtic religions. He is party to Dagda of Ireland, and was worshipped over an enormous area, including by non-Celtic peoples such as the Lusitani.

He was the patron god of the Ordovices tribe of Britain, and was built up by the Arverni and their allies to replace the druidic god Cernunnos, as the Gallic druids were allies of their enemies in the rule for Gaul; the Aedui. Other religious practices also existed; Celts seem to have universally removed body hair.

Some postulate this as religious, but was more realistically part of the Celtic propensity for cleanliness. Body hair kept dirt close to the body, and Celts were an extremely cleanly people, so this was unacceptable. However, Celts also took heads from dead enemies. This was definitely a religious practice in origin.

However, even post-Christian Gaels continued this practice into the middle ages; some Irish even took to scalping the heads that they took, so they could braid the scalp through rings on their weapons. The religious connotations by that point were slim, but it does imply that taking heads had incredible cultural importance to have persisted so long after the religious background had been removed.

Celts believed the soul resided in the head, and that capturing a head meant that one captured the soul of an opponent, and that when a Celt died, the dead whom he had collected would serve him as slaves for eternity.

Enhanced by Zemanta

THE HISTORY OF BRITISH CRIMES AND WARMONGERING

Monday, April 2nd, 2012

Today, when a Mr. Chamberlain stands forth as a preacher and announces to the rest of the world the pious goals of this war, I can only say: your own history speaks against you, Mr. Chamberlain. For 300 years your statesmen have always spoken thus, like you, Mr. Chamberlain, when war broke out. You have generally only fought for God or your religion. You have never had a material goal. But because the British never fought for material goals, God has rewarded you with so many material goods. God has not forgotten that Britain was always the warrior for truth, for justice, the champion of all virtues. They were richly rewarded for this. Over a period of 300 years, they have subjugated about 40 million km of earth; of course not because of egoism, not because they love to have power or gain riches or self-indulgence, no, quite on the contrary this all happened as part of God’s mandate and in the name of religion. Indeed, Britain did not want to be the sole champion of God, so it always invited others to come join this noble fight. It did not even try to carry the main burden alone; if you are doing work mandated by God like this, allies can always be sought.

 

This is the same thing they do today. And it has, as just said, been richly rewarding for Britain. 40 million km, and British history is a ceaseless row of rapes, of extortions, of tyrannical abuse, of subjugation, of pillage. There are many things that would be unthinkable in any other state and in any other people. War was declared for everything. War was waged to increase trade. War was waged to get other peoples addicted to opium. War was also waged, when necessary, to win goldmines, to attain power over diamond mines. There were always material goals, although of course they were noble embellished with ideals. The last war was also waged solely for ideal goals. That the side effects included winning the German colonies was God-willed. That our fleet was taken, that our German foreign assets were cashed, those are just side effects of this noble struggle for the holy religion. When Mr. Chamberlain walks around with carrying his Bible and preaches his goals of war, it seems to me as if the devil with a prayer book is closing in on some poor soul. And this is not even original anymore! This is old, no one believes him anymore. I think, he mistrusts himself.

 

Furthermore: a nation only burns itself once. Children only followed the rat catcher of Hameln once, just as the German people followed the apostle of the international brotherhood of nations just once.

 

So I praise Mr. Churchill. He speaks openly what the old Mr. Chamberlain only silently thought and hoped. He says it: our goal is the dissolution of Germany. Our goal is the destruction of Germany. Our goal is the extinction, if possible, of the German people. We want to beat Germany.    

 

Believe me, I appreciate this. And French generals, too, they speak openly on what this is all about. I think this facilitates communication. Why fight with such lying phrases? Why not speak openly? We prefer it that way. We know exactly which goals they have, if Mr. Chamberlain arrives, in Bible in hand or not, if he acts pious or not, if he tells the truth or lies. We know the goal; it is the Germany of 1648 that they want, that Germany – dissolved and torn apart.

Enhanced by Zemanta

The forgotten white slaves.

Tuesday, March 13th, 2012

They came as slaves; vast human cargo transported on tall British ships bound for the Americas. They were shipped by the hundreds of thousands and included men, women, and even the youngest of children.

Whenever they rebelled or even disobeyed an order, they were punished in the harshest ways. Slave owners would hang their human property by their hands and set their hands or feet on fire as one form of punishment. They were burned alive and had their heads placed on pikes in the marketplace as a warning to other captives.

We don’t really need to go through all of the gory details, do we? After all, we know all too well the atrocities of the African slave trade. But, are we talking about African slavery?

King James II and Charles I led a continued effort to enslave the Irish. Britain’s famed Oliver Cromwell furthered this practice of dehumanizing one’s next door neighbor.

The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.

Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.

From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland’s population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain’s solution was to auction them off as well.

During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.

The Irish arrived in Jamaica over 350 years ago in the mid-1600s at the time of British Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell’s capture of Jamaica. When British Admirals Penn and Venables failed in their expedition to take Santo Domingo from the Spanish, they turned their attention to Jamaica, not wanting to return to Cromwell empty-handed. With reinforcements from British-held Barbados (many of whom were Irish) they made quick work of dispatching the weak Spanish defence and soon realized that they needed workers to support their new prize. They looked eastward to islands already under British control, Barbados, St. Lucia, St. Kitts and Montserrat, and imported young, mainly male, bonded servants, many of whom were Irish.

In 1641 Ireland’s population stood close to 1.5 million. Following a 1648 battle in Ireland known as the “Siege of Drogheda” in which Irish rebels were brutally subdued, Oliver’s son, Henry, was named Major General in command of English forces in Ireland. Under his jurisdiction, thousands of Irish men and women were shipped to the West Indies to provide a source of indentured labour. Between 1648 and 1655, over 12,000 political prisoners alone were sent to Barbados. This was the first set to come involuntarily as prior to that the Irish had willingly chosen to subject themselves to terms of indenture for the chance to start a new life in the New World upon completion of their contracts.

By 1652, Ireland’s population had dwindled to a little over half a million famine, rebellion and forced deportation, all factors.Throughout the early years of the 1650s there was a push to send young men and women to the colonies in what the English believed was a “measure beneficial to the people removed, who might thus be made English and Christians; and a great benefit to the West India sugar planters, who desired the men and boys for their bondsmen, and the women and Irish girls in a country where they had only Maroon women and Negresses to solace them” (Williams, 1932, pp. 10-11). The 13-year war from 1641-1654 had left behind large numbers of widows and deserted wives. In addition, many Irish men, their properties confiscated by Cromwell had no means of making a living. By 1655 some 6,400 Irish had been shipped off when in March all orders to capture “all wanderers, men and women and other such Irish in their possession” were revoked (Williams, pp. 12-13).

FIRST STOP

The first stop for many of the Irish, Catholic and non-Catholic, was Barbados where they worked from 6 a.m. to 6 p.m. with a two-hour lunch break, under the command of an overseer. Shirt and drawers were their only clothes and their homes, cabins made of sticks and plantain leaves (Williams, 1932, p. 42).

Following the 1655 British conquest of Jamaica, Irish labourers were largely sent from Barbados as well as Ireland to get the island up and running under British control. Within a decade, when many Irish had served their terms or indenture, their names begin to appear among the lists of Jamaican planters and settlers (Williams, p. 53).

Book written by Joseph J. Williams in 1932, exploring the origin of the Irish in Jamaica.

LAST SHIPMENTS: 1800S

It is estimated that somewhere between 30,000 and 80,000 Irish were shipped from Ireland. One of the last shipments was made in 1841 from Limerick aboard the Robert Kerr. The Gleaner noted of these arrivals: “They landed in Kingston wearing their best clothes and temperance medals,” meaning they did not drink alcohol (as quoted in Mullally, 2003, part 2, pg. 1). The Gleaner also noted of another set of arrivals in 1842: “The Irish are repeatedly intoxicated, drink excessively, are seen emerging from grog shops very dissolute and abandoned and are of very intemperate habits” (as quoted in Mullally, 2003, part 3, p. 2). So the Irish gained a reputation for being something of a mixed blessing saints and sinners.

Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly were: Slaves. They’ll come up with terms like “Indentured Servants” to describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.

As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.

African slaves were very expensive during the late 1600s (50 Sterling). Irish slaves came cheap (no more than 5 Sterling). If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African.

The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master’s free workforce. Even if an Irish woman somehow obtained her freedom, her kids would remain slaves of her master. Thus, Irish moms, even with this new found emancipation, would seldom abandon their kids and would remain in servitude.

 

Enhanced by Zemanta

Churchill’s Trick by Joseph Goebbels

Sunday, March 11th, 2012

The neutral press has been asking recently how it is that Mr. Churchill has such influence on the English public and British public opinion. Despite the worst reversals and the most demoralizing defeats, regardless of initial suspicion, in the end they are captivated by this clever wordsmith and accept his foolish policies and military leadership. The question is both easy and hard to answer. The answer to the riddle is probably that although Mr. Churchill lacks all strategic sense in both politics and military leadership, he is an extraordinarily capable tactician. He is a virtuoso at democratic party and press leadership, and therefore is the best of the current English politicians, who as it is known are not gifted with any great intelligence. His methods are as primitive as one can imagine. His ideas are hardly original, and one can usually predict exactly what he will say or do. It is always the same thing with him.

When he began as British prime minister, he proclaimed the slogan that he has held to regardless of political or military events, through setbacks and defeats. It protects him against all criticism: “Blood, sweat and tears.” One can fight a war to its bitter end under that slogan without running the danger of being proven wrong. The people will hardly recall the slogan in the midst of victory, and in defeat he can pretend to be a prophet. Mr. Churchill is like a doctor who stands by the bed of a seriously ill patient and says: “He will die.” If the patient worsens, or even dies, he is proved right. He will not hesitate to remind people of his excellent prognosis. And if the patient gets better or even recovers, will one reproach the doctor that the patient got better despite his bad condition?

One cannot call such a practice particularly intelligent or original, but it does have its public. Up to the present moment, Mr. Churchill has carried it off. One does not need to be a prophet, one needs only to see through his trick to predict that, after the British Empire’s grave defeats in the past four weeks, he will say that he had expected and predicted nothing else. His farsightedness will be admired.

We can predict what Mr. Churchill will say in about two months, and thus predict what he will have to say today. One of his methods is to paint the past in the blackest possible terms, then to discover a silver lining in the present. No one will be able to find a speech of his from, say, last August in which he sees gray. One can only see how serious he thought the situation was then by seeing what he says about it today. His practice is to make the past look worse that it was in order to make the present seem better than it is. He confesses things are going poorly, but claims they were even worse before! That is not true, but he depends on the public’s forgetfulness. They will not take the trouble to see what he actually said last August, and then compare it to what he says today.

He claims that time is a traditional ally of his side. No one will claim that time has been a reliable ally of the English over the last two and a half years. England’s situation is far more precarious in 1942 than it was in 1939 or 1940. One also cannot imagine time working more in England’s favor in the future than it did in the past. Every month, indeed nearly every week, England loses one of its important holdings, and one must be remarkably foolish to think that England will have the strength during or after the war to regain its lost possessions.

In 1939 Mr. Churchill looked forward to 1940. In 1940 he looked forward to 1942. In 1942 he was thinking of 1945 as the year things would finally go England’s way. One can see the constantly changing dates, and see that the British prime minister clearly knows that Britain’s hands are tied. It can no longer be saved by its power, only through a miracle.

It was characteristic that in his last radio speech, Mr. Churchill was unable to find even a single argument that referred to the British Empire. He referred to the United Sates, the Soviet Union, and Chaing Kaishek. He hardly mentioned Great Britain. The empire is apparently no longer able to contribute to its own defense, despite the fact that it is a war for its very existence, and that its prime minister provoked it without any reason and without making the necessary preparations. This is clear from the contributions London has made to the war, both in terms of blood and labor. There is general displeasure among England’s allies at its wholly inadequate contributions. Mr. Churchill had to respond, for example, to public criticism in Australia by inventing some statistics. No one believes him. One has to be amazed at the thoughtlessness, not to mention cynicism, that began and carries out the war.

That is fine with us. Our polemics are not intended to improve anything, only to make clear to the public that the riddle of Churchill is really not a riddle at all, but only a primitive conjurer’s trick. We realize that this unfortunate man is England’s last hope in its present situation. Despite all the concealed and open opposition in the House of Commons, he cannot be deposed because there is no one to take his place. He is the embodiment of the curse of the evil deed, which has to keep doing evil. If he falls, a good part of the British will to resist falls too. The man on the street in England probably senses dimly that this war is Churchill’s war, that he began it and is the one who has to carry it on to a bitter end for the Empire. That explains his appeal to national unity. He has a parliamentary vote of no confidence as his last resort, to be called upon when he is in deep trouble.

He has a remarkably clever way of dealing with public unhappiness with himself, his policies or his war leadership. He allows a kind of pseudo-criticism. When the empire staggers under some blow, he retreats for a time to the background and lets people complain. He opens the release valve, one might say, to let the people’s rage dissipate.

One should not think that happens against his will. He knows how to play the game. He figures the loudest voices will shout themselves hoarse. When a so-called Churchill crisis is at its peak, he pulls out a deus ex machina. He smooths the waves, adds water to the wine, minimizes the defeats and explains that he had predicted it all. Even more, he had expected even worse, which thank God has not come to pass. One should rejoice that it only rained, not hailed. Singapore may have fallen, but he was expecting to lose India. He sees it as to England’s advantage that German ships sailed through the English Channel. He lies so well that the gullible might almost believe London’s claims that 600 Royal Air Force planes chased our ships back to German harbors, losing only 49 of them in the process! And if things look bad in East Asia, which no one doubts, they look good in the East. 1942 will be a difficult year, as he predicted — though of course he actually had predicted the opposite! — better days may come in 1943, or maybe in 1945. National unity must be preserved, and he of course is its guarantee. Anyone who attacks him proves that he is not English.

Such behavior would be unthinkable in any other country. A prime minister with so many failures, so many false predictions and windy promises, of which none came true, would be thrown out anywhere else. The English people like Churchill. He is its curse, its evil spirit, a man who has all the abilities to be Great Britain’s gravedigger.

We could not wish for anyone better. If there is no way for the Axis powers to win other than through the collapse of the British Empire, Mr. Churchill is fine with us. The war’s first round did not end with a sudden knock out punch; there will be further rounds. We have to slowly but surely pound the enemy until he becomes groggy. Now and again the enemy will hope to be saved by the bell, but a new round will follow. The decisive moment will come when he is knocked down by a lightning blow. We do not know when that will happen, we only know that it will happen. A prime minister who leads an empire into such danger is a considerable advantage for the other side.

We are happy Mr. Churchill is there. We certainly do not want to be rid of him. We want to keep him around, since he is the pathfinder for our total and radical victory.

Enhanced by Zemanta

immigrant-families-to-the-uk-win-the-lottery/

Thursday, March 8th, 2012

During this article we shall not refer to immigrants as asylum seekers, refugees or any other false term, they will simply be termed illegal immigrants because that is what they are. Readers should need no reminding of the generally internationally accepted terms to describe an asylum seeker, or where and how they should seek such asylum, these details are published elsewhere and a simple internet search will give the answers. Suffice it to say that if one accepts these rules, there is not one single immigrant currently resident in Britain who satisfies these credentials.

A recently highlighted case of an immigrant Somali family which falsly claimed asylum after arriving here by undisclosed means shows how lax we are as a country in controlling mass abuse of our hospitality. Mr and Mrs Khallif and their eight or so children arrived in Britain and were immediately provided with free furnished accommodation, every benefit imaginable and free access to the NHS, protection by our Police and free use of all council services. Add to this the provision of a rent and council tax free 6 bedroom house in an upmarket area, and you can see why we say that they have won the lottery. One can only imagine what kind of housing they were used to in Somalia, but they must have thought they had been given a palace. Both parents being completely bereft of any education, and the ability even after 4 years to speak English they remain unemployed, and completely dependent on the taxpayer. Having been used to a weekly income of around £6 The Khallifs must have felt extremely rich, however they believed that their life was incomplete. Their mansion in Coventry was not suitable because all their friends lived in London and they felt deprived. Unbelievably the authorities agreed, and moved the family to a West Hampstead, London, council owned property which had recently been refurbished at the public expense and valued at £2m. The rental value of such a property is estimated at C £8,000 per calendar month. Of course as stated before they are living completely on the state, which means us.

There are far too many points to discus here, or we would be writing for a month, but I would like just one official to explain to us ordinary British people why the following decisions were made, and just who made them.

1/ Why were they allowed into the country in the first place and how did they get here?
2/ How did they get the right to remain here and who gave it to them?
3/ Why were they given such expensive accomodation in Coventry and who decided why?
4/ Who granted them the right to move to West Hampstead and burden the local taxpayers to the tune of around £10,000 per month, and how on earth was the decision made in view of the housing crisis in the area where people are screaming out for homes?
5/ What on earth are Hampstead Council providing £2m social housing for, and why was it refurbished during such frugal times?
6/ And lastly will anyone be bought to account for this absolute scandal where people with no connections whatsoever to Europe, let alone Britain are treated is such a generous way?

This country is close to collapse in so many areas with social, criminal and, financial issues wildly out of control, yet decisions like this are made favouring foreigners. We must be crazy to accept these decisions, and somehow we must find out who is making them and demand they explain themselves in a public grilling similar to a government enquiry. If we do not call a halt to these travesties now, we will soon be an underclass in our own backyard.

Enhanced by Zemanta