Why We Don't Need The Royal Mail

As the Royal Mail descends further into chaos (strikes, post office closures and late deliveries) it is time for the long suffering customers to step back and ask themselves if they really need the Royal Mail.

In truth, none of us needs the Royal Mail. Here are a five reasons why we no longer need the Royal Mail:

1 There are other companies to deliver mail and packages

2 The service is at best unreliable, and is currently subject to the whim of the unions

3 We have email, mobile phones and the internet, all of which can be used to send messages

4 Bills can be paid online, or via the telephone

5 Large amounts of "snail mail" is in fact junk mail, and it therefore unwanted and unnecessary

The unions and management need to wake up to the fact that their services are no longer necessary; failure to do so will mean that they will all be out of work.

The Yob Epidemic

The British media is making much of the current "yob" epidemic, that is allegedly engulfing towns and cities throughout the UK.

Scarcely a day goes by when the media, and publicity seeking politicians, aren't "tut tutting" about yobbish drunken behaviour perpetrated by youths on the streets of Britain.

Whilst it may vent their spleens to "tut tut" about it, very little constructive solutions are produced as to how this behaviour is to be curtailed and controlled.

The refrain is usually:

1 Something must be done

2 Society is to blame

3 The parents are to blame, and

4 Let's ban something (eg drinking under 21, yet we are still happy for 18 year olds to die in Iraq)

The root cause of the problem is varied:

1 Lazy parenting

2 The granting of "human rights" to an ill disciplined, moronic mass of teenagers who have yet to develop intellectually or socially

3 Too much money being given to children by over indulgent parents

4 Lousy role models in the media

5 Invisible policing from the local police forces

The solution is difficult, but not impossible:

Those yobs that create a disturbance and a nuisance on the streets should be punished in a way that hurts them the most, ie hurt their egos. They should be sentenced, not to prison where they learn nothing more than how to commit more crime, but to a period in the stocks where they can be humiliated by their fellow citizens.

Drunken yobbery can be resolved by a session in the stocks, and by the tattooing (for say a month) on the foreheads of the yobs the following phrase:

"I am a drunken yob"

Any shop or pub found serving people with said tattoo on their heads, would immediately lose their licence.

Parents should stop giving their children so much pocket money. A child/teenager with too much money in their pockets will simply buy shit or booze/drugs. Therefore take their spending power away from them, and they won't be able to buy booze.

Parents should be made fully responsible for the behaviour of their brats, up until the age of 18. When their brats are caught breaking the law, the parents should have what is most dear to them confiscated by the state; namely their TV's, CD's, pc's and mobile phones. Should that not work, then their benefits should also be targeted.

Like it or not, they should be made to take responsibility for their brats.

Local police forces that seek to remain invisible, in spite of complaints by residents of yobbish behaviour on the streets, should be sued for failure to provide adequate police cover.

None of the above will be easy to implement. However, it will produce results.

The Rushdie Affair

There are three questions that arise from the recently announced award of a knighthood for Salman Rushdie:

Firstly, given the comments by Pakistan's religious affairs minister, Mohammed Ijaz ul-Haq, in the national assembly in response to the knighthood:

"if somebody has to attack by strapping a bomb to his body to protect the honour of the Prophet, then it is justified."

Why does the West call Pakistan an ally in the so called "war against terror"?

Secondly, it would seem that the committee that recommended Rushdie for the knighthood did not think that the award would provoke the furious reaction that it has done in parts of the Muslim world.

Additionally it seems that that English Pen, the writers' organisation that organised the lobbying for Rushdie's knighthood, had thought that the honour would lead to better relations between Britain and Asia.

What planet do these people live on?

Thirdly, why was Rushdie given the award in the first place?

He decamped from London to New York in 2000.

There are many excellent writers who are physically based in Britain, what is so special about Rushdie?

The award was made on the basis of a recommendation by English Pen. They provide an answer to the third question.

As per their website:

Salman Rushdie is a major writer whose works of imagination have engaged and galvanised society as important writing does. International PEN takes no position on the honours given by any government but celebrates writers being honoured and opposes those who would, through intimidation and inflammatory statements, try to curb freedom of expression. The 144 Centres of International PEN in 101 countries worldwide may however, choose to recommend such honours. Rushdie was honoured for services to literature and that service has also included his own defence of freedom of expression for writers around the world.

Therefore it would seem that they wanted to have Rushdie knighted, not so much for his writing, but for the fact that it would make statement to the world about freedom of expression.

Maybe the award was not so much made on the basis of Rushdie's literary talents?

A Child Is Born

The current furore in the evangelical wing of the Republican Party, over the pregnancy of Mary Cheney is highly revealing.

It underlines the tragic collapse of the Republican Party from being merely a right wing party, to being one infested with and controlled by Christian Fundamentalists (who are one goose step short from wearing a swastika and burning down mosques).

Religion and politics should be kept as far away apart from each other as possible. When they mix, tragedy and disaster is bound to follow.

Let us hope that the putrid vitriol being unleashed by these so called "Christians" finally wakes the American people, and the ordinary members of the Republican Party, up to the dangers of allowing a political party to be taken over by intolerant extremists.

McCarthy almost destroyed the Republicans, so will the Christians if they are not stopped.

Joining The Dots

Tony Blair and George Bush are very keen to join the dots, and persuade us of the "connectivity" between certain threats and events. They seek to use this "connectivity" to persuade us to support the so called "war against terror", being waged against the "crescent of evil" (previously known as the "axis of evil").

Joining the dots is a very simplistic and dangerous approach in use a complex situation. Mankind often sees connections and patterns, where often there are none.

Were we to believe it there are patterns in the sky that resemble Great Bears and Ploughs, yet on close examination there are nothing but unconnected lights in the sky with no resemblance at all to these objects.

The same can be said for the patterns and connections that Blair and Bush see on planet earth. Invariably the "connections" are not as strong as they would have you believe, the dots are being joined to promote their particular political fetish/objective.

Joining the dots is a dangerous political simplification, and should be treated with extreme caution.

Advice To Bush and Blair

Gentlemen,

In order for there to be a meaningful and effective solution created that will address the current turmoil in Lebanon, it is essential that there is a ceasefire first.

Think about it.

The Real Reasons for the "Low" Level of Unemployment

The "low" levels of unemployment in Britain are due to the following factors:

• 7 million people work for the state (ie the private sector supports them)


• Unemployment is regularly being redefined as "sickness"


• Large numbers of under 25's are now in full time "educashun", learning nothing useful at "pretend" universities. They will not be able to find work when they leave, but will be saddled with a lifetime of debt.

We are allowing ourselves to be deluded by a dishonest and untrustworthy government, and are sleepwalking towards disaster.

CIA Airlines

Click the image to see a larger version.

The Cricket Test Revisited

In the aftermath of the revelation that lthe recent London bomb attack was carried out by British Muslims, there has been an earnest volley of questions fired off at British Muslims by the media; as to what possessed these young men to murder their fellow countrymen.

Rather disturbingly many of those questioned, whilst saying that they do not approve of or condone murder, were quick to say that many Muslims are angry about British foreign policy. Whilst not explicitly saying that this anger should be an excuse for murder, those questioned imply that it may be a reason for the attack. This clutching at straws for a reason has provided a "shroud of respectability" to cover the decapitated corpses of the bombers.

This attempted "justification" for the bombing is absurd. There are many people in Britain who do not support our current foreign policy; ie they know that the Iraqi venture was criminally irresponsible, given the scandalous lack of thought and planning that had been devoted to the rebuilding of Iraq once the regime had been decapitated.

However, despite not approving of the British foreign policy, British citizens do not pack a rucksack with C4 and rush to the nearest tube station intent on murdering their fellow citizens.

I am afraid that the reason for the attack is far more simple, and basic, one of blind hatred for the West and its culture.

The bombers did not regard themselves as being either British, or indeed Western; they had rejected the culture and values of their birth country, in favour of their highly selective and morally reprehensible interpretation of the values and principles of Islam. In other words, they regarded their birth nation as the enemy.

How could such a state of affairs come to pass, whereby citizens born in Britain totally reject its values and democratic principles?

The answer, and the blame, lays full square at the door of the Muslim community in Britain. It is evident that the Muslim community, particularly in the North, has steadfastly refused to integrate into "mainstream" British society. They remain isolated and cut off; they appear as outsiders looking in, with suspicion and contempt for the British way of life.

This contempt is reinforced generation after generation, as the children born into the Muslim community are taught customs and practices (outwith religious ceremonies and worship) that are "not common practice" within the British way of life. In particular the role of women in Muslim society, as demonstrated by the dress code, is one area of significant difference. It has been argued by some, that the burqa is designed to show respect for women and the sanctity of the family; a cynic might ask why it is that men are not required to wear them as well. The emphasis within the Muslim community is on women being seen to be moral and modestly dressed at all times, Western women are regarded as little better than whores.

This contempt shown for the West is inevitably transmitted, in a closed community, from generation to generation. Western society is regarded as being morally decadent and degenerate. This is evidenced most aptly by the actions of the parents of one of the bombers. When, a few years ago, the teenager went through a rebellious period he was packed off to Pakistan; thus taking him away from the "corrupting influence" of the West. This action speaks volumes about what the Muslim community thinks of the West, and of British society.

Given the isolated and closed nature of many of the Muslim communities in Britain, it is hardly surprising that a generation is being brought up filled with hatred and contempt for their non Muslim contemporaries. Until the Muslim community recognises this failing and not seek "easy answers and excuses" for the bombing, such as British foreign policy, we will see more young men decapitate themselves in the name of a futile and evil cause.

Norman Tebbit was once mocked for his infamous "cricket test" analogy, whereby a citizen’s allegiance was tested by identifying which cricket team he supported. A similar, and very uncomfortable, question needs to be asked by British Muslims of themselves namely; which takes priority, Islam or Britain?

Where they answer in the former, it may be time for them to consider leaving. Where they answer in the latter, they must open up their communities; and accept that it is up to them to integrate with British society, not the other way around.

London

London has been a major city for over 2000 years.

It has survived fire, flood, plague, rioting, the Luftwaffe and the IRA.

Yesterday's attack by human scum will not destroy it, London will survive long after their intellectually and morally bankrupt theocracy has been consigned to the dustbin of history.

The EU Constitution - The Longest Suicide Note In History

Much has been written about the proposed EU constitution; there are those who claim that it is a blueprint for the future of the EU, and there are those who claim that it is the harbinger of a new European dark age.

Now that it has been placed into the deep freeze, ie killed, by the leaders of the EU I would like to add my "two cents" to the discussion. However, unlike other commentators, I will be brief and get to the heart of the matter.

The EU constitution was destined to fail for the following reasons:

• It is over 300 pages long, no voter (or indeed politician) on the planet could possibly understand it. The American Founding fathers wrote a constitution, which was a success, of a mere 20 pages.


• The US constitution begins "We the people..", the EU constitution begins "His majesty, the King of the Belgians..".


• Those countries that ratified the constitution did so via their own politicians, they did not trust their people to support it. Two of the three countries that trusted their people, France and the Netherlands, were given the two finger salute. In other words, the citizens of the EU do not want a European constitution.


• The US constitution was written with the support of the people, who had just fought the War of Independence. The EU constitution was written by an isolated political elite, who did not consult the people.


• The EU constitution attempts to impose an outdated model of state intervention on the citizens of the EU. Many of those citizens live in countries that have abandoned state intervention, in favour of free market economies. Until the member states of Europe agree as to whether they want a free market or outdated state intervention, the European project will go no where.

Any new attempt to revive a European constitution will have to take account of the above points, if it is to have any hope of success.

Make Poverty History

There is currently quite a media frenzy over the forthcoming concert in aid of the "Make Poverty History" campaign.

People are being encouraged to go along to the concert, march on the G8 summit at Gleneagles and to buy a white wristband.

The idea being that this will spur world leaders into canceling the debt owed by Africa, and to channel more aid to that region.

This is all very well and good. However, it is naive in the extreme:

• Canceling the debt will not serve the people of the region. At some stage they will need to borrow more money, those that have lent money in the past and have had that debt cancelled will not be inclined to lend more money in the future.



• Channeling large sums of money into Africa does the people of the region little good. The majority of that money goes straight into the pockets of the corrupt leaders of Africa, as they equip themselves with ever more luxurious palaces and larger fleets of presidential aircraft. Until Africa addresses its internal corruption, money sent there will never reach its target. In fact aid does nothing more than perpetuate the corruption.



• The purchase of the white wristband has turned into a nothing more than an egotistical fashion statement. People are using the band to pretend that they care, and to go along with the media frenzy that has accompanied this campaign.



• The white wristbands have been made by sweat shop labour in China, the purchase of these fashion items in fact does more harm than good; by lining the pockets of the sweat shop owners.

The solution to Africa's ills lies in the hands of Africans, not ours.