Category Archives: Current Affairs

A True Role Model

Posted on by

I switched on the television news yesterday morning and caught the last part of an interview with a young army captain who had just been awarded the Military Cross for bravery in Afghanistan. The man was quite clearly a hero (the Military Cross is one of the country’s highest awards for gallantry) but, when lauded by the interviewer, the soldier modestly refused to be accepted as such.

Instead of describing the act of courage which led to the award he spoke instead of his pride in being part of a team of men all of whom, he inferred, would unthinkingly support their comrades in a similar manner, whatever the price. He spoke of loyalty, of duty, of honour and responsibility. Old-fashioned words and values, you may feel.

It was both humbling and heartening to listen to such a man. It was refreshing too, to be reminded that, in an age of largely negative news stories and constant disappointment in public figures, whether self-serving politicians or cheating multi-millionaire footballers, there are still some real heroes out there and true role models for our children.

Caught in a Trap

Posted on by

Evidently, London’s Fire Services are bracing themselves for a dramatic rise in call outs from people unable to release themselves or their partners from handcuffs and other restraints following today’s UK release of the “mummy-porn” film “Fifty Shades of Grey”.

According to a fire service spokesman (person, sorry!) they regularly have call outs from all sorts of adventurers who come a cropper, so to speak. There is concern at the higher levels of the fire service that the  release of the film is only likely to make matters considerably worse.

Asked to provide examples, the spokesperson revealed that in the past couple of years fire crews have attended 28 incidents involving people trapped in handcuffs, removed 293 rings including 7 from male genitalia and released men’s genitals from vacuum cleaners or toasters

Now, I’d like to think that I’ve got a fairly broad mind and am reasonably enlightened so that  I can just about understand the warped rationale behind messing around with a vacuum cleaner (though presumably not a Dyson!). However, on the basis that the action is voluntary, I cannot, for the life of me, comprehend the thrill or pleasure in inserting one’s genitalia into a toaster. Or is that just me?

War on Illiteracy

Posted on by

Recent news headlines have highlighted the Government proposals for a “war on illiteracy and numeracy” and an attack by the  Prime Minister “on school mediocrity”. Well, we do have an election in three months’ time so it’s hardly surprising that education (or lack of it) is to be one of the political battle grounds.

What caught my attention was the plan for every 11 year old to be able to pass a test on the 12 times table and to be able to write a short coherent story. I don’t want to hark back to “my day”, and I hope my memory doesn’t deceive me here, but I’m pretty sure that nearly every 7 or 8 year old in my rather ordinary state primary school class would have been able to do those things without too much difficulty.

Have standards really fallen that much in the last 50 years?  Certainly, when I look at some of the everyday examples of misspelling, punctuation and grammar displayed by adults I am not so sure. Here are some common errors.

First of all, the invention of the verb “of” as in stating or writing “I would of” instead of the correct “I would have” or “I would’ve”. Maybe my English studies were in some way deficient but I honestly cannot remember that particular verb!

Secondly, the confusion over the words “there”, “their” and “they’re” such as “I went to there house” or “Their will be lots of people at the party”. Is there any wonder that so many children are illiterate if this is the sort of example they receive from their parents’ generation?

Lastly, the use of “your” instead of “you are” or “you’re”. I remember once sitting on a Florida beach (thankfully, poor grammar is not a British monopoly!) when a light aircraft flew over the sun-kissed sands trailing a banner which read “Chelsea Your Amazing”.

I cringed and thought how sad that some guy (could have been a girl, of course) had paid all that money only for his message of love to be completely screwed up. Then I thought, rather cynically, the guy is probably so rich that the object of his affection is unlikely to be bothered by his illiteracy, assuming of course, that the lovely Chelsea was aware of it in the first place!

I doubt she would of made a fuss though and I imagine that there happily married by now!

Page Three Models

Posted on by

Why all the fuss about whether or not the Sun newspaper (a misnomer if ever there was one!) should continue to feature topless women on its page 3? Models willingly promote their careers by appearing topless and the public willingly purchase the paper. It’s called supply and demand and as long as there is no element of coercion and the models are all adults what is the problem?

Certainly, the majority of  the models interviewed in the more adult newspapers have no qualms over revealing themselves, with one stating that a ban “isn’t a triumph for feminism but a triumph for prudishness”. Another model complained of being dictated to “by comfy shoe-wearing, no-bra-wearing man-haters”, which, looking at some of the feminists appearing on our television screens, may be a fair description.

The whole story smacks of political correctness and the Sun is an easy and obvious target for those wishing to regulate our morals. There are far worse examples of sexual exploitation out there and the activists perhaps need to direct their considerable energy and anger towards more serious matters such as the eradication of child prostitution or the ending of the universal availability of hard core porn on the internet.

Postscript to Paris

Posted on by

As the dust settles following last week’s terrible events in France and yesterday’s uplifting worldwide displays of public solidarity Western governments must now address the problem of keeping their citizens safe.

All will be aware of the difficulties of fighting an enemy from within and the British Government’s experience of combating IRA terror in the 1970s and 1980s is no doubt still painfully vivid. However, many lessons must have been learned during those awful times and the experience gained must surely prove useful now.

The most obvious lesson is that for any terrorist to succeed, he must have a support network, or cell, with “safe houses” and the backing of accomplices within the society that he wishes to attack. This is undoubtedly the case in Britain today.

Our Government must stop pussyfooting around and ignore the clamours of politically correct liberals with their distorted views of civil liberties. There must be no safe houses and no safe communities either. If it means an increase in the number of armed police on the streets, so be it; law abiding citizens have nothing to fear.

A strong message has to be sent to those found guilty of preaching violence and sedition and to those found guilty of harbouring and supporting terrorists. If the perpetrators are UK citizens they will be imprisoned and if not they will be deported. That is neither right wing nor reactionary, it is common sense.

Pen Mightier than the Sword?

Posted on by

The slaughter of ten journalists in Paris earlier this week, for the “crime” of insulting Islam, was truly horrifying but hardly unexpected. As we know only too well, terrorism, particularly radical Islamic terrorism is the scourge of the modern age. What happened in Paris will undoubtedly keep happening in the West until the threat is removed. But how can we remove or at least neutralise that threat?

The big problem with terrorism is that it is virtually impossible to identify a terrorist. What does he look like? Where does he live? The old military adage about needing to know your enemy before you can defeat him is undoubtedly true but we do not know this enemy. We know that he will be a Muslim but that is all. So what do we do, do we outlaw Islam and close down the mosques? Hardly.

Action has to be taken however and the West, as a whole, has to get an awful lot tougher. We’ve tried reason and we’ve tried tolerance but it hasn’t worked. I have no idea what the solution is but I only hope for all our sakes that somebody in a position of power has the answer.

Meanwhile, somewhat predictably, the reaction of Western media is to proclaim solidarity, make noble statements of our right to freedom of speech and display symbols of defiance on social networks. The terrorists will laugh at our naivety and any journalist who continues to poke fun at Islam whether by written word or cartoon is literally dicing with death.

It may be very noble and brave to defend freedom of speech and to continue to lampoon Islam but there is a thin line between bravery and recklessness. Why risk your life when neither you nor, more importantly, the State are able to protect that life? The pen may well be mightier than the sword but not against the sword of Islam as the events of this week have tragically proved.

Freedom of Speech

Posted on by

I’m glad that the Sony Corporation backtracked on its decision to withdraw their film “The Interview” from general release. The film, featuring a fictional assassination of the North Korean leader, caused such offence in that country that it launched a vicious cyber-attack in the USA causing all sorts of computer chaos.

Sony’s tame response caused outrage amongst actors and politicians, including President Obama, who rightly argued that the freedom of all citizens (artists or otherwise) to express their views, without fear of censure, is a cornerstone of democracy.

However, I can’t help but suspect that most people, the President included, felt that the release of a film depicting the assassination of a foreign leader (no matter how heinous and repulsive he might be) was both crass and insensitive in the extreme. That said, there was no way that a foreign power could be allowed to dictate what movies the USA chooses to screen in its own cinemas.

North Korea has now responded with an alleged racial jibe by calling President Obama a “monkey”. So what, I doubt it’s the worst thing that Obama, or any previous president, has been called and I’m sure the President is unlikely to lose any sleep over it.

Notwithstanding any of the above, the President may well have sent a private message to Sony’s management along the lines of, “OK guys, please feel free to express yourselves however you may wish but next time, how about making a movie about a fictional country and a fictional leader even if it is obvious to all and sundry to whom and what that movie is referring?”

I suspect however that, no matter how good Hollywood may be at generating publicity and making shed loads of money, true satire is probably just a little bit beyond its capabilities.

Misguided and Dangerous

Posted on by

Two horrible acts of terrorism took place this week, firstly the killing of two innocent hostages in an Australian cafe and secondly, the slaughter of 132 children in their Pakistan classrooms. All were victims of Muslim extremism.

Sadly, as has been clearly demonstrated in recent years, there is nothing the West can usefully do about the atrocities committed by the Taliban in their own countries. They are beyond our control and the only hope is that the oppressed citizens of Pakistan, Afghanistan and other countries ruled by Muslim fanatics will somehow rise up and overthrow their tyrannical rulers.

We can, however, do something about the threat within our own countries. The Sydney terrorist was evidently known to Australian police and was in fact on bail when the hostage-taking and subsequent murders took place.

I have no idea why he was allowed out on bail but I do know that in the UK certain criminals from ethnic minorities remain at large because our police are too frightened to arrest them and the courts are reluctant to apply due process of law for fear of accusations of racial or religious prejudice. Such misguided policies are a recipe for disaster as the killing of the soldier, Lee Rigby, on a London street last year clearly demonstrated.

The task of the police and judiciary in any democracy is to act fairly and impartially irrespective of colour, nationality or religious belief. To act in accordance with the rules of political correctness rather than common sense is both dangerous and foolish in the extreme.

The Beginning

Posted on by

Well, it’s started. Yesterday the Government announced the first major transfer of powers from Westminster to Scotland in keeping with the promises made to the separatists prior to the September referendum on Scottish independence.

To most of us, this devolution of powers, including control over income tax, seems pretty momentous and almost revolutionary but, predictably, the Scottish Nationalists Party don’t feel they have gone far enough and want more. They will continue to want more until they achieve their aim of full independence and the break-up of the United Kingdom. The clue lies in their name.

That’s fair enough and as this blog stated back in September the eventual break-up of the UK, at least in its current form, seems inevitable. If a majority of the Scottish people want to go it alone so they should.

The pro-independence lobby is not yet in the majority however and our Government must continue to bear in mind that the Scots are no better than the rest of us and whatever rights and privileges are given to them must be given equally to the people of England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Invasion of Privacy

Posted on by

Apparently Sir Cliff Richard is considering taking legal action against the BBC for the invasion of privacy suffered when the Corporation dispatched a helicopter and a small army of reporters to broadcast live a police raid on his South Yorkshire home in August this year.

The raid was part of the investigation into allegations of sexual abuse made against virtually every public celebrity in the country. Of course, a substantial number of those investigations were justified and none more so than that into the behaviour of the late Jimmy Saville. The problem is that the Saville scandal has resulted in a witch hunt with many allegations proving groundless and shown to be no more than an attempt by certain people to get rich quick on the back of spurious compensation claims.

It looks as though the investigation into Sir Cliff Richard falls into that category. If no police charges follow and it is proven that the BBC liaised with South Yorkshire police to get an exclusive on the raid then I hope Cliff Richard does take legal action.

For our once widely respected national broadcaster to behave in this way is unforgivable. This is not responsible reporting, this is victimisation and sensationalism and it only adds fuel to the arguments of those who wish to do away with the near £150 television licence fee that we pay each year for the benefit of the BBC.

If the BBC wishes to conduct its affairs in such a grubby manner it is not worthy of our money. Maybe it should be forced to compete in the open market place with all the other television stations. If this means the showing of commercials on the BBC, so be it.