Friday, 6 July 2018

Pretty Girls In Fast Cars

I enjoy seeing a successful woman in an expensive car, be it Bentley or Porsche, I think it is highly appealing. My feelings are the exact opposite if the female is actually the wife of a rich man and does nothing with her day but fret about herself, book treatments and meet up with others in her air-head circle to talk about reality TV.

Basically, I have always been attracted to clever women. I am not threatened or intimidated by them, which is it seems, amazingly common with the male of the species. I like to think I am a fair judge, but can be ridiculously naïve at times. It has never occurred to me that men and women are anything other than different versions of the same thing. I never considered that they might be inherently inferior.

Likewise, meeting people who originate from places other than these shores who may have a different colour skin, I also just take them on the merit they present. Hell, when I was at school we saw that African people were darker skinned and that was as far as my thinking went; people lived in Africa too, but they had a darker skin.

I didn't make the 'intellectual' leap to conclude that this made me superior. Even when the distinct lack of any parallel with the societal developments in Europe was considered, when pushed all I would do is wonder why. Perhaps it was the heat?

So, if I met an 'African' I wasn't surprised by the colour of his skin. This means I am not Left wing. They shriek about it in perpetual surprise. Culture however, is something I am less forgiving about. God may have decided the colour of your skin, but you choose your culture.

If your culture is to treat women as inferior to men (because the men in question are fundamentally weak and resort to the tactics of the bully to gain and maintain ascendency), then I detest you. Or maybe your culture is to lie and cheat in order to gain advantage and power. This means you exhibit the fundamentals of Marxism. You see others as existing only for what you can get out of them.

Obama was elected because he was black and that is very wrong, both because his colour should be irrelevant, but also because black people should never have been deprived of opportunity, which would probably have meant a black President ages ago. But Obama was also a terrible President, not because he was black, but because he is a snake. Like our own Tony Blair, he was just out for himself.

Theresa May is terrible not because she is a woman or that she is white, but because she lacks principles. (And it seems, a spine). She has been told by the nation to take the UK out of the EU; she is a politician so she is bound, by Parliament's promise to obey that specific demand, but also because MP's are there to serve the public will. Additionally, she presented a party manifesto to get elected to power that emphatically restated that commitment.

Now, the wholly unsurprising attitude of the bureaucrats around her (that we should not leave the greatest agglomeration of bureaucrats the world has ever seen) is convincing her to do their bidding instead. Which is weak and unprincipled.

She keeps saying the opposite of what she does, but maybe I am wrong and will be surprised. Maybe she will say to the EU that she has tried to play nice but enough is enough, now stop being childish and sort things out properly. Maybe.

Saturday, 30 June 2018

Grenfell Blame Dodging

So far the Grenfell enquiry has heard lots of emotional stories from residents involved in the tragedy, who unsurprisingly were greatly affected. So what the point was, at an enquiry is beyond me. Now we have moved on to the response of the fire service. Personally, I would now be looking at the building and the work that had been done, the basic safety of the building and the responses to complaints from residents.

Then talk to the people completing the work and the materials used, who ordered what materials, who had oversight of that and who signed off on it. Only then would I move on to the emergency services role. But we are where we are, though I hope this is not to set a blame profile in people's minds, to prepare us for a full-on, several coats of whitewash final report.

We have had more emoting, which is a little poor from an emergency service but very much the fashion these days, very au courant. I'm sure it isn't part of a sympathy garnering agenda. The officer in charge and who maintained the standard response to a tall building fire of 'stay put', now much criticised, could not remember ever having any training about what to do in that specific circumstance. A sort of "I'm not to blame, how was I supposed to know" plea.

But then I hear (not from the enquiry -odd surely?) that this same officer had recently visited Grenfell for a fire safety check. In the discussion where I heard this a Fire Brigade Union rep, after giving the obligatory references to the officer being "brave" and "dedicated" which no-one had queried, said that he didn't know about the flammable cladding and the combustible window frames, amongst a list of other things he didn't know.

But the whole point is that he is there to check and to know and then to advise. A pathetic attempt at an excuse, but then, Union.

I was responsible for regulatory matters in setting up a temporary charity ice rink. It was in an old supermarket building that we adapted, so there was a lot to get right. There was a sprinkler system so we had to avoid impeding its operation.

There was netting over the top of the ice pad because hockey was going to be played and we needed to protect the lights from being hit by a puck. The fire safety guys were concerned about this, but I assured them, from my own knowledge and life experience that water would pass through a mesh with like, two inch holes in it. They were not happy though.

We had to get our rink expert to contact the manufacturer of the netting, in Canada to obtain the fire safety tests that the netting had undertaken and passed. I told them I was fairly sure that in the history of history an ice pad had never caught fire, but they just drew breath and said they needed that from an expert.

So, apparently some tiny little community charity ice rink should be held to standards so high they exceed the borders of sanity, but a multi-million pound project on peoples' homes should involve people who don't know much about fire safety, apparently.

I mean we now understand Grenfell had a faulty smoke extraction system, no smoke alarm or detectors inadequate fire doors and even some missing. Then there were the building materials and the way the work was being done. But it is beyond reason to expect an expert in fire safety to notice any of this?

Seventy two people died. When is it going to be important enough that we actually hold people to account, which would put us a good way along towards making sure it doesn't happen again. Because currently there exists a belief that senior and 'important' people (on big salaries, often paid by us) cannot be expected to be held responsible when they mess up. So it does happen again.

If we are starting with the fire service, my question would be why our senior fire officers do not respond to a situation as it presents itself, but follow 'protocols' that were thought up in an office and given to the fire service as a tick box.

You see 'stay put' requires firemen (non gender specific reference) to go into a burning building to rescue people if the fire becomes uncontained by their initial efforts. As was apparent from the outset, the fire was spreading at an unprecedented and unexpected speed. But standard operating instructions were followed as if nothing was unusual.

And by doing that, really brave indeed heroic firemen then go into a raging building to rescue those doing as they had been told. Or, God help us, they are ordered to stay put themselves and watch people die, as their failing senior officers now go on to the health and safety tick box of not putting their officers in danger. Convincing themselves, in the words of Shoesmith (Baby P), that while there had been an unhappy outcome, they could not be to blame because they had ticked all the boxes.

One thing I know: we all deserve better.

Solving Crime

Witness Appeal - Theft Of Motorbike Cutlers Mews Neath Hill

Thames Valley Police are appealing for information following a report of a theft of a motorbike from Cutlers Mews, Neath Hill.

Between 3am & 6am  on Saturday 30 June  a black motorbike vehicle was taken from Cutlers Mews Neath Hill without keys.
We are appealing for anyone who may have witnessed the offences taking place or who may have information to call our 24-hour enquiry Centre on 101, quoting reference 43180198091

If you don’t want to speak directly to police you can contact the independent charity Crimestoppers anonymously on 0800 555 111.No personal details are taken, information is not traced or recorded and you will not go to court.

Set up a Neighbourhood Watch Scheme in your area

Would you like to bring your community closer together, or do you have concerns about burglary, antisocial behaviour or the general environment in your street?

Through Neighbourhood Watch you can help the Police and your neighbours to strengthen your community.  You can make your area a better place to live.  The scheme is free to join

Consider setting up a NHW Scheme in your area, for more information email

This was emailed out by Thames Valley Police about a vehicle taking in Milton Keynes. They want to hear from anyone who actually saw the theft occurring, which is fine but exceedingly unlikely. If they had given a full description of the vehicle such as manufacturer and registration there is a greater chance someone would have seen it and could help. Someone might know where it is now, or who has it.

They might even see it being ridden around the streets, but reporting every black 'motorbike vehicle' you see may not be terribly helpful.

It strikes me that the police issue lazy rubbish like this because they are not that sure how to go about solving crimes, which also seems from anecdotal evidence at least, to be because they don't really care about solving crime either.

Thursday, 14 June 2018


It is irrelevant who died in the Grenfell Tower tragedy, race, colour, creed, illegal or whatever - it is a stain on the reputation of this country that it happened as it did. There is an anecdote that says that in Italy, to get the water turned on quickly in your new house you must bribe officials, but that in Britain officials don't take bribes, so nothing gets done quickly by bureaucrats.

This lack of corruption in Britain is still largely true, but due to the baleful influence of decades of Left ideological influence, the corruption that does exist led to Grenfell occurring becoming inevitable.

All levels of bureaucracy, councillors, MP's, civil servants, all now feel that they are above the law, if their personal opinion is that they are doing something necessary or good. The most graphic example is probably the MP's expenses scandal. Firstly, it took ages to get published as the press, who speak truth to power, were scared to carry the story for fear of 'reprisals'. When it did break, the shock on the faces of the MP's that anyone could think what they had done as wrong was amazing to behold.

They felt outraged and we see this again with the personal opinions of some MP's who wish to remain within the German empire of the EU, aghast that someone, anyone is allowed to oppose them.

Grenfell of course occurred because the council wanted cheap (not 100% a bad motive) but also decided that their role as overseer of safety could be dispensed with. So flammable material was placed around the tower and internally, fire doors, alarms, detectors, fire containment generally were all sub-standard or absent.

Who was responsible for signing off the fire safety of the building? Who signed off on the fire safety of the cladding? Who sold the panels and who agreed to fit them, knowing they were illegal and not fit for purpose?

The fire service advice to 'stay put' is entirely sound if the right preventative measures are built in as regulations require and the fire service are confident they can control the situation and get to people quickly. Whilst they couldn't know of the perfect storm of fire safety deficiencies inside the building, even on arrival they could see the extent of the fire and the speed with which it was spreading.

The criminal failure of the fire brigade as an organisation was not that 'stay put' existed, but that through years of Left influenced thinking about any nonsense but the business of firefighting, senior officers had no tradition, no experience and seemingly no training to react appropriately to a situation they are presented with, but rather stick to the bureaucratic, tick-box rule book. And so 'stay put' stays while people die.

And the enquiry will try to use detail to make everything seem less black and white and 'whilst this seems...' will be much heard, it will really be tasked with not finding fault, not apportioning blame (unless to a private company, preferably foreign). Because if you find bureaucrats at fault, that they didn't do their jobs properly, then it will move up to their bosses and then their bosses' bosses.

Ultimately members of the elite may find themselves being held to account and we will see the look of total shock and then outbursts of rage such as we have seen over expenses and Brexit (from Remainers)and Sharon Shoesmith. For the elite there must, on no account, be accountability. That would mean working for a living!

Thursday, 31 May 2018

When To Act?

Historically, things tend to get well out of hand before anything is done and often, before anyone realises there is a problem. Appeasing Hitler was to avoid war, but it made things so much worse. Thinking anyone could rely on France to act decisively to stop Hitler once he had invaded Poland was another great delusion. I mean, seriously, the French?!

And I guess, if we prevent a terrorist setting off a bomb we have no real idea how many lives were saved and any other consequences that might follow on. But, again looking at the Nazis, they spent years building up their party to be single-minded. They entrenched anti-Semitism as a core tenet and by constant repetition it became common currency that there was something wrong with the Jews.

So when war started, the brutality was immense, bestial and committed by ordinary soldiers as well as the special troops, SS etc. Part of the racial division was to ensure there was no Polish society as such, no education for the children, because then the Nazis would have their worker bees, who wouldn't know any better.

Coming back to the UK, we have had decades of education by idiots to produce idiots and propaganda that now sees our young, unable to think for themselves believing almighty tosh from the Left. Why would anyone do that? I mean, the fact that the Left install stupid systems of education wouldn't surprise anyone, but why persist with it when it is proven a failure?

Surely the only reason can be that the design objective of the 'system' was to produce functionally illiterate children, even after years of 'schooling'.

And how does any political movement get away with drastically changing the relationship of the government to the people and handing over national sovereignty without any debate or analysis taking place? How can the economically ruinous, anti-capitalism of the Climate Change scam also avoid debate? How but with a pliant and compliant populace.

Then of course there is the embedded anti-Semitism leaking out of every pore of the Labour Party. They can't contain it and they don't want to. They and then you are being subjected to propaganda so that you come to see Jews as abnormal and a threat to be 'dealt with' by our leaders.

Of course, in our codified, Left controlled society, any suggestion that the Left might be up to no good will bring accusations that you wear tin foil as a hat. Maybe I am wrong and drawing the wrong parallels, but what harm would it do to take robust action against the Hate Party (still known as Labour as of today)? What could go wrong if we properly educated our children and were allowed to know what the EU does?

Why would it be dangerous to allow debate about climate change and the actual real science? The worst that could happen is that people demand an end to the taxes and subsidies to ward off dragons and pixies (just as real as any danger from 'Global Warming'). And then the preachers of hate, Left wing activists can crawl back under a stone.

Wednesday, 30 May 2018

The Lessons Of History And Corbyn

It comes up from time to time, that Corbyn wants to turn Britain into a version of Venezuela. Hell, I've said it myself and with no understanding of economics (or reality) the current Far Left cabal masquerading as the Labour Party. no doubt could bring such a situation about in short order.

But something else struck me as I started re-reading Richard J Evans stupendous and (settle in) stupendously long book 'The Third Reich At War'. This was just how stupid, petty and childish the leadership of the Nazi Party was, jockeying for power and privilege, taking fine houses and other wealth for themselves, whilst planning inhuman actions.

Now, we have no current knowledge of warlike adventures planned by the Corbyn gang, but they certainly fit the mould as self-important, individually incompetent, desperate and devious clowns on the make. The way they suppress internal dissent, the ideology of violence, the lies and the deceit - no real interest in actual politics.

And I'm sure Momentum and its like can summon up their brownshirts in a blink, should some extra political muscle be called for. I fear these people who seem like fools may in fact be very dangerous fools.

And there are too many openings in the way our society acts and thinks, due to long term influence of the Left in schools, all public services and through the deployment of Political Correctness, for this authoritarian ambition to succeed. Take for instance Thames Valley Police. If you want to join they ask if you belong to any Right Wing parties. Why Right Wing specifically? Because the current feeling is that they are the problem.

Name the last violent action by a Right Wing group. You can't. (You may be led to suggest that the shooting of Jo Cox was such an event; it wasn't. The perpetrator was a nutcase, who read Far Right literature amongst other things. He didn't belong to a group, nor received instruction).

The Left however are endlessly involved in violence; every 'march' where windows are smashed, property burnt, heavy objects thrown off roofs onto police below. Every event that you can think of that erupted into violence had its origins in Left activism and agitation.

Except I guess, the Countryside March which was entirely peaceful, but so massive that Tony Blair was deeply shocked, so he had them attacked by the police and then blamed the marchers for the violence. Yeah, and David Kelly committed suicide.

Demos Does It Again

Reported in The Mail, the Leftie tank of thinking, Demos has decided that British people think communities have been harmed and the national culture undermined by mass immigration. This is a bit like saying 'more people coming into the country means there are more people in the country'

Actually, scratch that because according to the Left (and way too many Conservatives) unrestrained immigration leading to a surge in the size of the 'population' has no effect whatsoever on the demand for houses, schools, health services and certainly doesn't lead to more crime.

Anyway, back to the real world. Much too much, much too soon. I remember being shocked when I realised we, Britain, had denied citizenship to Hong Kong Chinese, so they didn't all come here when the colony was handed back to the Communist Chinese.

I thought we owed them something, but of course so many and at once was impossible to deal with (we didn't know how many would come but the prospect was bad enough). So, hard though it was, you kinda understand the thinking.

But switch to the satrapy of morons known as the EU and unlimited numbers of foreign nationals, to whom we most certainly owe nothing, can flood in. There will be no consequences. Well, except for good ones.

The good by the way is that rich Lefties, who don't have an immigrant influx issue, can get cheap servants.

And to add insult to injury, our civil servants - you know, the ones who don't think you should be allowed to say we should leave the EU and won't do their job if it is to that end - decide what they will do about immigration is throw out of the country good, productive long-term British people from the West Indies.

Compare and contrast the rabble of Islamist terrorists and foreign criminals we welcome with open arms and the film of black men coming off the boats, struggling with their suitcases (yep, they brought clothes, not pretending to be 'refugees' looking for handouts), dressed in suits and wearing trilby's. If you want people who intend to fit in, to integrate, what more could you ask for?

They spoke English and felt they had a right to come here as they were British and this is the Mother country. That's how they felt and I feel proud that they did. It's why I always insist on buying small, West Indian bananas; as a way of supporting friends.

But I suppose, if you are a Leftie civil servant, aware that your ideology supports and promotes racial division in an attempt to cause societal chaos, you would say 'yes, but they are black'.