Great quotation

“Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder.”

Arnold Toynbee

Great quotation

“All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.”

Edmund Burke

Jack Ingram: That’s a Man

Here’s a song I like, as it is an antidote to the nihilism embraced by many non-believers, and instead it asserts strong and decent values.

Oops! The latest free Adobe Flash Player™ is required to view this content.

It is truly a shame it is so often left to the faithful to endorse these kinds of values, while one gets the impression that the typical atheist liberal would be more likely to admire Russell Brand or, indeed, he who is beyond any criticism whatsoever, hallowed be his name, St. Stephen of Fry, the paragon of virtue for all self-respecting liberals.

Great quotation

“Those who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”

Benjamin Franklin, 1755

An example of biased journalism

Radio Netherlands website has run an article on the popularity of Geert Wilders in that country, heavily biased against him, of course. I have “marked” the article here, supplying corrections which will expose the politically correct bias which is sadly evident across all of Europe’s mainstream publications:

“And the winner is… Geert Wilders’ Freedom Party. As elections are held for the country’s municipal councils in the Netherlands, it is already clear who will come out ahead. We need not wait for the ballots to be counted.

Right-wing populist Rising star Geert Wilders, pictured above casting his vote in The Hague this morning, has managed to dominate the agenda appealed to voters once again. Everyone’s talking about immigration, integration and Islam – the Freedom Party’s main issues. Evidence? Or they are talking about the Freedom Party (PVV) itself, and whether it should be ruled out of potential coalition talks due to allegedly racist standpoints. ? You tell us.

30,000 votes
The Freedom Party’s hold (Like a stranglehold? Nobody is forcing people!) on the Dutch national attention is the more remarkable given that it is taking part in only two of the 394 municipalities holding elections on Wednesday. About four percent of the Dutch population will be able to cast a vote for the Freedom Party. Good..

The municipal councils in these two cities, The Hague and Almere, right now are divided between 12 and 10 parties, respectively. The Freedom Party could become the biggest party in Almere with just 30 percent of the vote. Plus, turnout for local elections is always low. Good – reporting facts, avoiding blatant bias..

Add up all these factors, and about 30,000 votes for Mr Wilders’ party will make him the hands down winner on Wednesday. Can you be sure? What leads you to this conclusion?

All politics are national
Wednesday’s local elections were on the calendar long before the fall of the cabinet ten days ago. Local elections are always seen as a barometer for national politics, this time more than ever.

In the wake of the cabinet’s collapse (after failing to agree about extending the Dutch mission to Afghanistan), national elections have been called for 9 June. Wednesday’s municipal elections are the kick-off to what will be an intense three-month campaign.

Geert Wilders currently has nine seats in the lower house of parliament (out of 150), but his party has been polling much higher for the last year. The Freedom Party could become one of the largest, if not the largest party in The Netherlands.

And that on the basis of 20 percent support, due to the fractured nature of the Dutch electorate.

Wilders already in the driver’s seat
That steady support for Geert Wilders means that he is already much more influential than he was before the fall of the cabinet. The Netherlands is now being governed by a caretaker government. The cabinet must defer to parliament much more so than under normal circumstances. But not only is the current parliament more powerful – the wishes of potential coalition partners in the next government are also taken into particular account. No one wants to make policy that will be reversed after the next election.

So Mr Wilders’ current nine seats in parliament have already grown in influence in a certain sense, if not – yet – in number.

Proof in the pudding
Of course, many question the Freedom Party’s ability, or even its willingness, to govern. Who? Who questions this? It is not enough to merely cite “many” Taking populist standpoints Risking one’s life on principle is easier than making policy. A number of PVV policy proposals would be difficult to implement, but are attractive to some many voters: a ban on Muslim headscarves in public buildings, eliminating the fee for residential parking permits and eliminating the tax on dog ownership.

And that leads to another reason why Wednesday’s municipal elections matter. For the first time, in Almere and The Hague, the Freedom Party may be in a position to leave the opposition benches behind, and join the government. Governing at city level is not unlike governing at the national level – it involves forming coalitions, and making compromises.

Wednesday’s elections will tell us a lot about the state of play in Dutch national politics.”

6/10 Not too bad – some facts in here, but readers will be able to see your extreme liberal bias. You present Wilders as though he is some kind of villain, without giving any reasons why he should be seen as such. Stick to the facts.

Sir Lawrence Alma-Tadema: Under the Roof of Blue Ionian Weather

A requirement of all modern art seems to be that is stark, bleak and ugly. Enjoy this classic by way of contrast.

Richard Dawkins’ forums suspended

It’s hardly the biggest news in the world. Given some of the panic on the web one would think whole of the Internet was due to be shut down. Richard Dawkins’ web forums have been suspended pending an overdue clean up. I’ve been commenting at length on this here.

My original article critical of his forums has been receiving a massive amount of traffic, mainly from a cesspit of substandard debate which makes the Dawkins forums look as if they were frequented exclusively by leading intellectuals.

I have been called “an absolute f**king c**t” on this forum, as they flounder to find some fault in my argument. Finding nothing it can criticise validly, the inferior mind resorts to vulgarity. This is nothing, though, compared with what technical admin Josh has been receiving over at RD.net – an avalanche of despicable abuse which has motivated Richard Dawkins himself to make a statement.

What truly, utterly pathetic people these are who have nothing better to do than mail abuse to people because their crutch (an Internet forum not even on their own site) has been taken away (because of misbehaviour of contributors and moderators, mind you). If ever the phrase “Get a life” was relevant, it’s now.

Richard Dawkins has certainly received a wake up call as to what was going on at his forum, as he says himself above. This, despite him having said this previously, when writing of the marvels of the Internet:

“Of course there are negative aspects, but they are easily forgiven. I’ve already referred to the lamentable content of many chat room conversations without editorial control.

The tendency to flaming rudeness is fostered by the convention — whose sociological provenance we might discuss one day — of anonymity.

Insults and obscenities, to which you would not dream of signing your real name, flow gleefully from the keyboard when you are masquerading online as ‘TinkyWinky’ or ‘FlubPoodle’ or ‘ArchWeasel’.”

Richard Dawkins

To people who have not connected the dots yet, I don’t publish intellectually substandard comments on my site here, so don’t be surprised if your comment isn’t turning up. Don’t even waste your time posting it. That’s one of the benefits of having your own website: you can run it however you like, as you are finding out as Prof Dawkins exercises his executive control. Tough.

I’m going to e-mail some support to Josh now, and then probably have nothing more to do with this debate. It’s just not important enough. If you have any kind of life at all you’ll do the same.

NSS Secularist of the Year award

I’m touching on an issue that is very taboo here: race. While criticism of religion is now fairly passé, if you dare to even remotely question anything to do with perceived wisdom on race you will instantly be branded racist. Oh well, that’s the point here, to challenge the dogmas of political correctness, so here goes.

I recommended Pat Condell for the NSS Secularist of the Year award this year, for having  risked his life in promoting reason and secular values across the world for several years now. I recommended him last year too, but he didn’t win it. He didn’t win it this year either. The award went to The Southall Black Sisters.

Have you heard of them? Me neither. I don’t have time to write a lot on this but I must say there seems only to be a tenuous link with secularism in the work of the “Sisters”. This seems a rather politically correct decision. I would also add that (despite the good work they undoubtedly do) the name “Southall Black Sisters” smacks to me of racism. They say on their site:

“Southall Black Sisters, a not-for-profit organisation, was established in 1979 to meet the needs of black (Asian and African-Caribbean) women. Our aims are to highlight and challenge violence against women; empower them to gain more control over their lives.”

But there is arguably no real need for the emphasis on the “black”. All women should be entitled to fair treatment regardless of colour. If the organisation’s stated mission was to “oppose violence against women” this would of course include black women too. How about standing against domestic violence, full stop? That would be even better and even less biased. (The SBS are “right on the forefront of the feminist struggle in this country”.)

Likewise consider the “Black Police Association”, which Peter Hitchens interestingly referred to as a “grotesque, indefensible body” (read the article). It certainly seems to me very divisive and perhaps even racist. Ask yourself what would happen if some officers decided to form a “White Police Association”.

There is no need to invoke colour in these matters. People can’t have it both ways – they want complete inclusion and yet also insist on delineating themselves by their colour.

This certainly seems a PC decision regarding the award, because Pat Condell has obviously had far more influence in the secular field, and at far more personal risk to himself.

Daniel Hannan on elephants

An unusual title you might think – here’s his blog article and speech. I note this because Hannan is quite politically incorrect (often a sign of an intelligent mind) and points out what I will coin as the “Liberal Fallacy” – namely thinking that just because you see things a certainly way then surely everybody else around the world must see them that way too (especially given half the chance). It ain’t necessarily so, as Hannan points out with regard to Africans in this case.

He also quotes Aristotle (“That which nobody owns nobody will care for.”). I have a lot of time for Aristotle’s ethics and this quotation immediately put me in mind of the council housing up my street which is strewn with rubbish and never maintained by the residents. No further evidence of the truth of this remark is required, I think.

I met Mr Hannan last night and he is certainly an extremely eloquent speaker, and well educated. He endorsed Theodore Dalrymple’s observation that the removal of personal responsibility has led to considerable societal disintegration in the UK. One to watch, as pheonixes may one day (we can hope) rise out of the ruins of Broken Britain and start about the repair process.

The colours of London are black, blue and grey

If you travel on the London Underground, as I have done frequently for 20 years, you might notice something: from a palette of many different colours, some vibrant and happy, people invariably choose shades of only three: black, blue and grey.

There is nothing to stop people from choosing brighter colours: red, orange, yellow and green coats are available, and many others besides. But these are rejected in favour of tones which match the weather, the buildings and the mood.

The mood is one of tedium. The unpleasantness of being confined in close proximity (nose to nose) with strangers who might be chewing gum, coughing loudly or listening to their music without a care for anybody else. The prospect of travelling to a workplace where office politics count for more than hard work or honesty for the umpteenth time, with no end in sight while the mortgage needs to be paid. The probability of a train jerking to a stop in the tunnel with no explanation of the reason.

It has occurred to me recently that winter in the UK effectively lasts for six months (those being the months from October to March). It’s dull and grey nearly every day and might rain, sleet or snow on any day during these months. In order to complement this weather most citizens of London wear black, blue or grey.

London is afflicted by some of the most hideous architecture known to man. Much of this stands not so many miles from some of the finest architecture mankind has ever created. The only problem is, in clear indication of our decline, the great architecture was built more than 100 years ago (principally during the Victorian era) whereas the monstrosities were erected more far more recently – to be precise, from the 1960s onwards.

It is almost entertaining to consider the name given to the most offensive architecture blighting the skies of London: Brutalism. Brutal to the sensibilities it most certainly is. This architecture was surely designed to be ugly. It is invariably grey, featureless (aside from plain windows) and imposing in a blunt and unrefined manner. It has no redeeming features.

Most people wear clothes to match the buildings. People conform. They even conform in that many pay for painful piercings in places previously considered strange, get irreparable tattoos at the bottom of their backs or adopt liberal leftist views. These are truly paradigms of conformist behaviour posing as the radical.

I took to wearing yellow and orange jeans in my late teens, in an effort to introduce some colour to society. These days I am often in white or cream. It would be nice to see some reds, yellows or greens on the Underground. In Florida they wear such colours to compliment the pastel buildings and the sunlight – but we English are in far more need of them here.

Sadiq Khan MP replies on ritual animal slaughter

I have finally received a reply from Sadiq Khan, my local MP, to my report detailing government appeasement on ritual animal slaughter.

It took Mr Khan six months to reply. It seems he “overlooked” the report when it arrived, but my December letter has prompted him to finally respond. Maybe Pat Condell’s latest link, increasing its profile, helped prompt some action too.

You can see Mr Khan’s reply and an attachment enclosed, here:

Response from Sadiq Khan MP (PDF, 540.52 KB) — Downloaded 17 times

This is, predictably, a very mealy-mouthed non-reply. Mr Khan is at pains to disagree with me while at the same time trying to make it look as though he agrees with me. Let’s have a look in detail at what he says:

“I appreciate the points you raise.”

“Appreciate” is an an ambiguous word. It can mean “understand”, but it doesn’t necessarily mean “agree”. He does go on to say:

“I agree it may be preferable to [sic] for all animals to be stunned before slaughter to avoid their suffering…”

This essentially says nothing. He might as well have said “may not be preferable”.

“..yet I also accept that religious groups have a right to eat meat in accordance with their beliefs.”

“Accept” is a much stronger word, of course. And indeed they have a “right”? This is a strong assertion indeed. Anyway, Khan’s point here is called begging the question (in the old, correct use of the phrase): he is taking for granted exactly what my report, with bountiful evidence, is questioning, and he is refusing to address the arguments brought to the table.

Mr Khan then says something about a loosely proposed labelling system and has the cheek to enclose the government’s stock response to this matter, photocopied. I have already been sent this by DEFRA, as is everyone who writes to them on this matter. It is a non-reply again.

He then proceeds to tell me some basic information which I have already told him in much greater detail in my report.

At this point it becomes obvious he has probably not even read the report. In fact I’d put money on it (after all he says himself that merely “looked at” it).

Mr Khan next says:

“Please don’t hesitate to make contact if there are any other concerns that you would like to raise with me on this or any other matter, or if you would like me to make further representations to the Government on your behalf.”

This stock sentence is inserted (in a slightly different font size) despite the fact I had specifically asked him in my letter to:

1. Clearly state his position on the topic of ritual animal slaughter
2. Raise the topic in parliament on my behalf

He has done neither of these things.

What I would like him to do (as I have already told him) is point out that the law is inconsistent on this matter, and that the lack of labelling is an urgent problem which needs addressing immediately. How dare he, you might well wonder, ask if he can be of any more help when he as pointedly been of no help at all in the first place?

Well, of course, Sadiq Khan’s seat in parliament is safe. Just take a drive down Tooting High Street to see why. He doesn’t want to rock the boat. But what he should do is stand up for what is right: a consistent law for all, with no exemptions for ritual slaughter which causes animals unnecessary pain. Also labelling clearly showing whether animals have been barbarically butchered. Indeed, you might just not want to eat meat that an imam has been praying over – at the moment you don’t even have the right to know about it.

Our society is changing around us. It’s fragmenting. Civilisation seems in many ways to be going into reverse.

What can you do about this?

• Read my report
• Write to Mr Khan
• Write to your own MP
• Vote Labour out

If you live in the Tooting area this means you vote for Mark Clarke or anyone else but Mr Khan. I’m not to the point of voting for the BNP, though Labour seem hell-bent on pushing everyone in that direction. I will probably vote UKIP or Conservative. I suggest you do the same.

On dealing with Tooting police

I am generally greatly in favour of the police*, of course – without them there would be total anarchy. I especially like the rank and file officers, generally speaking. The senior management seem to be in league with the leftist cabal running government and I suspect many become overly concerned with self promotion and protection, and with political correctness and expedience at the expense being loyal to the truth, and indeed to their staff on the ground (I expect most of the staff feel this way about them too).

Rank and file police do an unenviable and dangerous job. Since people generally impose few moral standards upon themselves these days, it is generally up to the police to maintain the fabric of society as best they can, though often they end up simply trying to clear up mess after events.

Just recently my phone went missing. I got it back, because I called the police and the plain clothes officers got involved. I strongly suspect the phone was stolen and not “found” and I might yet press charges if CCTV delivers (I love CCTV and if they would like to install a camera in my garden I’d be much obliged). The plain clothes police who turned up were very professional – I find most police are pleasant and professional. Let me warn potential criminals: plain clothes police are unidentifiable. The man looked like he was just out doing his Sunday shopping and the woman would not have been out of place in a nightclub (several nose studs, very casual clothes). These are experienced people doing a hard job – interesting to meet.

One cannot say the same of those who answer the phone for Tooting Police though (these are presumably police officers too). On the occasion mentioned I called the police on my way down to an arranged rendezvous with the person who I believe had stolen my phone. I explained that I was going to meet this person and would like the police to be on standby, nearby. The woman said “Why are you doing something so dangerous as going to meet them on your own, sir?”, incredulous. I said “I’m not going on my own. That’s why I’m ringing you”.

It took a bit longer to get my point across, but eventually the police turned up, although I was never phoned back, the promise having been made. Well, it seems no-one ever phones anyone back these days. Whenever anyone tells me they’ll phone me back I make a note in my calendar to call them.

I had to call the police again this evening. There was a road traffic accident directly outside my house – one car driving into the back of another. This left shattered glass all over one side of the carriageway. Eventually both parties just got back in their cars and drove off without alerting anyone, then for the next 10 minutes I saw cars crunching over this glass, some swerving into the adjacent carriageway to avoid it. Cyclists slammed on brakes, dismounted, went on the pavement. I thought, ‘Before long this will cause a worse accident’.

So eventually I did my civic duty, since obviously no-one else was going to do it. I phoned up the police again, twice in one week. I expected the officer to say something like: “No problem, sir. Thanks for letting us know. We’ll have a van there in five minutes.” Then maybe one officer would guide the traffic while someone else cleaned up the mess.

Instead, the man told me it was nothing to do with them and I should phone the council. I should phone the council. Phoning the police is not enough then. I thought once I had put the issue into the system they would take care of that. Obviously not. I asked him: “Is not not a crime in any way to leave all that glass all over the road unreported then?”. “You’ll have to phone the council”, he replied.

When I did phone the council the man was far more helpful and very surprised the police had not told him themselves.

Another occasion worthy of mention is when I was in Argos, not long ago, and an evidently psychotic person was threatening to kill a member of staff. The air was thick with a very clear and present danger. The altercation went on for a good 10 minutes, while staff waited for police to arrive. Twenty-five minutes later they did arrive, by which time of course the man had gone (but it had been touch and go). A deplorable response time to a potentially very dangerous situation.

Clearly the police are stretched in Broken Britain. I thought Boris was going to do something about this. Now would be a good time to start.

After my call to the council this evening, I reflected on why the people involved in the collision had not phoned the police themselves. Then I realised the probability. If you were illegally in the country, or driving uninsured, how likely would you be to phone the police?

*Please note: you’re not allowed to call them the “police force” any more – it has to be “police service”. In Broken Britain “PC” stands for something other than “Police Constable”.

Welcome to Malmø

We’re having a lot of trouble from Islamisation in the UK, in France, in the Netherlands and in most European countries. But Sweden’s okay, isn’t it?

Oops! The latest free Adobe Flash Player™ is required to view this content.

Letter to the NSS

Dear Sir,

This week sees two notable British people proclaiming that the most important thing to them in their lives is their religion. The first is Rizwan Ditta, who has just finished serving a very short prison sentence for possessing material likely to be useful to terrorists. True to the Qur’an, he states “I believe that my loyalties and priorities, even though I’ve been born and bred in England, lie with the Muslims”.

Hot on his heels is Sir Mota Singh QC who is arguing for children (Sikhs) to be allowed to take knives into schools. “The fact that I’m a Sikh matters more to me than anything else,” he said – which would show contempt for the law were it not for the fact that the law allows an exemption in this case for Sikhs, as it does for Muslims and Jews when it comes to ritual animal slaughter. So much for one law for all.

Best regards,

Gavin Orland

Mark Steyn writes…

Mark Steyn has posted up some fascinating photos showing that more women wear the hijab in Cairo now than they did in the 1970s. Obviously the number has greatly increased in London too – to the point that I can hardly set foot outside my door without seeing anti-social face coverings and emblems or religious irrationality within seconds. Indicators of the Islamisation of the UK.

Steyn’s experience of liberals matches my own:

“Whenever I give a speech on Islam, some or other complacenik always says, “Oh, but they haven’t had time to Westernize. Just you wait and see. Give it another 20 years, and the siren song of Westernization will work its magic.”

This argument isn’t merely speculative, it’s already been proved wrong by what’s happened over the last 20 years. Compare the Cairo University class of 1959 with those of the 21st century, and then see if you can recite your inevitablist theories of social evolution with a straight face.

The idea that social progress is like the wheel or the internal combustion engine — once invented, it can never be uninvented — is one of the laziest assumptions of the Western Left.”

Excellent director Kathryn Bigelow is no feminist

I do hope Katheryn Bigelow wins Oscars for her outstanding film The Hurt Locker. It was perhaps the best film I saw last year.

It is heartening to see also that this talented film maker is no feminist either – she has no time for conspiracies that women are being kept out of film making, and has no interest in belittling men (indeed, she celebrates masculinity in her films). “I don’t look at these things in terms of gender lines”, she says. “It must be odd to hear me say that, but I just don’t.”

Quite right too. Talent will out, whether it is male or female.

Bigelow is also gracious with her ex-husband James Cameron. Most striking of all is that this very capable director manages to make action packed, gripping and thought provoking films while not only disassociating herself from feminism, but also retaining her femininity (just look at the photo). Perhaps that’s no coincidence. Credit to Katheryn Bigelow and good luck to her at the Oscars!

p.s. Especially for the liberals out there: the film presents the inside point of view of American, yes, American bomb squad technicians risking their lives disarming bombs to save the lives of people in Iraq. You’ll love it…

Pat Condell on Geert Wilders’ trial

Pat says it all, as usual, and very well indeed:

Oops! The latest free Adobe Flash Player™ is required to view this content.

Quick letter to NSS

“Geert Wilders (currently on trial for telling the truth in the Netherlands) has again been invited by members of the House of Lords to come and show his short film Fitna there.

The Telegraph reports here that Lord Ahmed has again threatened to mobilise 10,000 Muslims to block Mr Wilders from entering the House of Lords. If this is true then Lord Ahmed should be arrested for breach of the peace. I’m tired of this man’s threats.

Best regards,

Gavin Orland”