A Lot Of Insanity Across The Pond (Updated)

The socialists running Britain are nuts. How nuts? Well, here are some of the news items in today's Daily Mail. Decide for yourself:

1. Health & Safety Nazis: A town hall has been banned by a health and safety inspector from flying the Union Flag on Armed Forces Day as climbing 8ft to reach the pole is 'too dangerous'. Story here.

2. A Right To Gay Sex In Public Areas: A local resident was upset that gay men were having sex in a nearby public area where families and children congregate. When police did nothing in response to his complaints, he filmed some of the gay men and posted it to a website. For that, he was arrested and, today, sentenced to four months in prison - suspended for a year and a half - and ordered to do 200 hours of community service. At trial, he was labeled "homophobic" by the prosecutor and was told by the Judge, "'Your actions were premeditated and quite deliberate in targeting a group of people we would describe as vulnerable." Story here.

3. And In A Related Story: "Dozens of police stations lowered the Union Flag and replaced it with a gay rights banner to mark a day of action against homophobia." That kind of puts the story above in a bit more perspective. The socialists in Britian have, as their current cause celebre, gays as a victim class and thus, entitled to special and unequal treatment. This is nothing more than a variant of the radical multiculturalism the left is using to destroy traditional British society. Story here.

4. Get Them While They Are Young: BBC unveils animated, yoga-loving hippies that teach children to get in touch with their emotions. Just what kids need today, lessons in narcissim and how to be as screwed up as the 60's generation now doing so much to screw up Western Civilization. Story here. As Lenin said: Give me four years to teach the children and the seed I have sown will never be uprooted.

5. Petty Bureaucrats Out Of Control: A woman was forced to leave a public pool when she began breastfeeding her baby. The baby and the teet were under cover so that nothing was exposed. Nonetheless, she was tossed because . . . . no food or drink was allowed in the pool area. Story here.

6. The British Army Can Now Pack Up - They Are Done As A Fighting Force - Why is that you might ask. Because the looney left has now decided to allow civil suits to be brought in court to challenge wartime decision making. "The judgment . . . makes the Ministry of Defence liable to civil prosecutions by families who claim that the treatment of soldiers who have died on operations overseas might have breached their human rights." This is beyond insanity, really. See story.

7. (Update) - A True Orwellian Nanny State: This one is a few days old, but I have to add it. Local Councils are recruiting and training children as young as seven to become snoops for any violation of local laws, such as neighbors having an overfilled trash bin or putting the bins out on the wrong day (both of which are now heavilly fined - about an equivalent of $200). Somebody tell these nuts that Orwell wrote fiction as a warning, not as a blueprint. Story here. A hat tip for this one to Dinah Lord.

Read More...

Summary only...

The Rot Of British Socialism

There is an utter rot at the heart of British socialism. Four stories over the past few days from across the pond highlight that rot - the joint attack on British identity by socialists and Muslims, the refusal to let Ghurkas immigrate to the UK, Health and Safety nazis run wild, and the British government's disarming of its citizenry, leaving them unable to defend themselves when their lives are at stake:

The Trinity Cross is a medal that has been awarded to "62 distinguished residents of the former colony of Trinidad and Tobago over more than 40 years." No longer. It has now been ruled "too Christian" and its design changed after a complaint was lodged by a Muslim lawyer. If the people of Trinidad and Tobago wish not to receive an award of a Trinity Cross, they can certainly refuse it. Why on earth should Britain acquiesce in order to assuage what is clearly just one more in a series of relentless attacks from today's politicized Muslims aimed at discrediting Britain's history and destroying it's Christian identity? Obviously, it suits the socialists of Britain who have in fact, since acquiesced to the Muslim demands. As I pointed out in the post Change and the Cessation of British History, the UK's socialists fully share the same interim goals as the radical Muslims - to defeat Christianity and discredit British history as something evil.

In Britain, immigration is at crisis proportions, largely because EU law mandates open borders. This has led to an ever growing spike in the radical Muslim population. Now, the Labour government has finally seen fit to draw a line in the sand as to that portion of immigration which it can control. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims who wish to destroy Western Civilization, they can immigrate. A few thousand Ghurkas, famed warriors whose regiments have fought and died for British freedom and the protection of Western civilization in all of her wars since WWI, they can't.

It is impossible to imagine a more skewed view. Indeed, the most recent idiotic justification for this policy was offered yesterday by Phil Woolas, the socialist Labour Party's Immigration Minister, who said "I can't say "let the nice people in and the nasty people not". We have to have a law." That statement came on the day another Ghurka died fighting for the UK in Afghanistan.

The socialist chattering class in Britain is so deeply immersed in multiculturalism that they seem congenitally unable to distinguish real friend from real foe. The UK's governing socialists reach out to Muslims without distinguishing between the non-radical and the radical, pretending they are all benign because they see in them a reliable voting bloc. They ignore the brutal reality that the huge portion of radicals among them are a viper in their midst that will, at the first chance, consume them and all of Britain whole. (I wrote on a similar, though exponentialy less severe problem in the U.S. here).

It would seem that the socialist's see their greatest enemy as those citizens within their borders who threaten socialist dogma. Thus we see socialists spend their greatest efforts in a war on free speech and Christianity (see also here) in an effort to destroy traditional society and remake it in their own secular marxian vision. As to actual external enemies, socialists invariably rationalize their hostility as justified using the canard of moral relativism. Thus these socialists clearly feel no great compulsion to act with loyalty to those who have defended Britain's traditional values against an enemy the socialists view as equal or morally superior to Britain itself. It is a travesty and a national disgrace.

Then there are the Health and Safety Nazis - another innovation of the socialists taken with the best of intentions - to protect the public from themselves by exercising intrusive control over their daily lives. The latest comes from Oxford University's Bodleian library, where a series of historic books have been kept on equally historic high shelves that, for four centuries, have been accessed, by step ladders. No longer. The public can't access these books anymore because the Health & Safety Officer has decided that using a step ladder is too dangerous for the general public. Using the dictatorial powers of her office, she has effectively shut down a portion of the library to the public.

This mentality, of not trusting the average person to take care of themselves, is a hallmark of the socialist left. Under Health and Safety laws, it simply stifles daily life. Its consequences turn deadly, however, when the government takes away all means for a person to defend themselves from society's predators. In Britain of today, you cannot protect yourself with a handgun as they are illegal. You cannot use a taser to momentarily stun an attacker, they too are illegal. You cannot even use pepper spray, as even that is illegal. What is left to allow the weak to defend themselves from the strong, the prey to fend off the human predator?

Well, there is the government, acting through the police. But police act retrospectively to arrest for crimes committed. They are not, as a rule, a particularly effective means to stop attacks before they happen. By the very nature of crime and predation, the chance of police being on the scene and able to intervene to stop an attack as it occurs is infinitesimal. And thus do you have people such as Melanie Griffiths, 39 year old mother of three, murdered in her house by a man who stalked her for over a month and after she called the police and asked for help on the eve of her murder. This from the Daily Times:

Mary Griffiths, a 38-year- old fitness instructor, had told friends that she was concerned for her safety because of the unwanted attentions of a man. At around 6pm on Tuesday she dialled 999 saying she was being harassed and asking for help.

Police assured her they would be with her within an hour, but never showed up.
She was discovered dying from stab wounds to the chest at her home in Bury St Edmunds, Suffolk, in the early hours of Wednesday.

. . . IPCC Commissioner Len Jackson said: 'People will be understandably shocked and concerned by this vicious attack on a woman in her own home. It is important that we look carefully at how the police chose to respond to contact from Mary Griffiths prior to her death. 'We will therefore carry out a full and independent investigation into the police response.'

The investigation is far too limited. It needs to include an examination of why Ms. Griffiths was denied all means of protecting herself by the British government. Indeed, as I wrote in the post A Constitutional Lesson In British History, the right to own a weapon for self protection is a part of the 1689 British Bill of Rights and, until less then a century ago, in a much more peaceful and law abiding Britain, anyone could own a firearm and travel about with it. Is the enlightened socialist Britain of today better off? If Ms. Griffith, who had been stalked for some time according to the article, knew full well the dangerousness of her situation, why was she not allowed the tools for her own defense. Are we all children in the eyes of the socialists, unable to live life without their constant adult supervision?

The Socialists of Britain can be credited with solving the class distinction problems that existed in the UK when they took power decades ago. Britain of today is much more of a meritocracy today, and the better for it. But that necessary cure was imposed along with a bevy of unnecessary toxins. Those toxins will destroy Britain if it stays on its current trajectory. I oft wonder when the rank and file of Britain will finally say, enough is enough, and force the issue.

Read More...

Summary only...

Life In A Socialist Nanny State: When Petty Bureaucrats Have Power Over Life & Death

As this poster makes clear, the old warnings were nothing if not prescient.

Consider this scenario. A boat used by a local unit of eleven Coast Guard volunteers is awaiting repairs that are not scheduled until mid-summer. The volunteers decide to pay $4,000 out of their own pockets to have the repairs made immediately so that the boat will be available during the summer vacation season. Nonetheless, the Coast Guard is in no hurry to inspect the boat and, despite the repairs, keeps it listed as out of service pending an inspection scheduled several weeks down the road. The boat is still awaiting safety inspection when a life and death emergency strikes.

A girl is pulled 150 yards out to sea by a rip tide. There is a good chance she might drown.

The volunteers radio HQ for permission to launch. Permission is not forthcoming.

The volunteers "loose radio contact" with HQ. They launch their boat.

They save the girl's life. All return safely to shore.

What happens next?

The answer to that question depends on where you live. If you happen to live in socialist Britain, where the state now has ever expanding authority over every aspect of your life, then the Maritime & Coastguard Agency impounds your boat and threatens you with discipline. The fact that the boat had been repaired is meaningless without their beauracratic imprimatur - which they will only damn well get to when they decide they have the time. The fact that a girl's life was at stake is, on their scales, of lesser importance.

There really is an ever widening gap, actually its a canyon now, between the rank and file of Britain - who in fact are the heirs of William the Bastard, Nelson, and Churchill - and the chattering class who hold all the reigns of power in Britain - and who are the heirs to Robspierre and Marx. Here is the story from the Times - and my hats off to the leader of this Coast Guard unit who "lost radio contact" and launched to save this girl's life while MCA looked through its inspection records:

A volunteer coastguard crew face disciplinary action after going to the rescue of a teenage swimmer in a boat that had recently been repaired and was awaiting a seaworthiness inspection.

The four crewmen were on duty at Hope Cove in South Devon when the 15-year-old girl was swept out to sea by a powerful rip tide. They braved heavy surf to launch their 17ft rigid inflatable.

The girl was rescued by a diver and the coastguard crew brought her ashore. But within hours their boat had been confiscated and the station officer and his crew had been threatened with disciplinary action.

The boat had been out of service since June and the 11-strong crew, fed up with waiting for it to be repaired by the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA), spent £2,000 of their own money on the work. But the repairs had yet to be approved and the boat - which has rescued more than 120 people since 2000 – was languishing in the boathouse at the pretty fishing village awaiting a further inspection.

Ian Pedrick, 49, the station officer, radioed for permission to launch the boat because the girl was already 150 yards out to sea but the crew lost radio contact with coastguard headquarters at Brixham and went ahead with the rescue. [Heh]

Within three hours the boat was towed away by a senior MCA officer and is now locked in a garage at their office five miles away in Kingsbridge.

Mr Pedrick, who runs the Hope and Anchor pub near the beach, said that he had been ordered by the MCA not to comment on the incident.

Dave Clark, aged 54, a recently retired coastguard, said: “Everyone in the village is very angry. They feel the crew are being punished for trying to save a life.

“The boat at Hope Cove is vital because it takes 25 minutes for the lifeboat to get from Salcombe and a swimmer could easily drown. When the MCA withdrew the boat in June they said it would be for six weeks but the crew wanted it back as soon as possible so they paid for the repairs themselves.

“They were then told it had to stay off service until it was surveyed and that would have taken it out for the whole of the summer season. Anyone would have done the same thing when they saw the girl in trouble.”

A spokesman for the MCA said: “The health and safety of the boat crews and those who they may render assistance to is of paramount importance.”

He added: “Search-and-rescue effectiveness will not be compromised by the suspension of the general purpose boat. These general purpose boats are additional facilities and are not generally used as part of the first response to an incident.

“We have identified serious breaches of health and safety procedures and they are currently being investigated. The boat has been stood down for a further eight weeks while we investigate the possibility of repair or replacement.”

Read the entire story. This is, at its very basic, a contest between Soviet style state bureaucrats who want to exercise complete power and control and people who, in the traditions of Western civilization, are willing to exercise individual responsibity. Roland White, who did an article on this issue some months ago, hits precisely on the nature of the problem - the division of power between individuals and the state:

Having conducted a thorough risk assessment, I must warn you that the following item may have an adverse effect on your blood pressure. It is a familiar tale of life under the health and safety terror. If you feel like banging your head against a wall upon reading it, please wear the appropriate protective helmet.

The stories are legendary: school trips have been cancelled; children are forced to wear protective goggles while playing conkers; pantomime actors have been told not to throw sweets into the audience; and no self-respecting bag of nuts now comes without the warning: “May contain nuts”. The good news is that somebody has at last decided to take action. The bad news is that it’s Gordon Brown, who never takes even the slightest of political risks without a full safety harness.

To judge the extent of the problem, perhaps you would care to join me on the cliff edge at Saltburn-by-the-Sea, Cleveland, from which 13-year-old Faye Harrison was clinging by her fingertips one cold day last January. Imagine Faye’s relief when the coastguard arrived in the reassuring shape of Paul Waugh, a rescue volunteer with a dozen years’ experience.

Deciding that it would take too long to fetch the proper safety equipment, he immediately climbed down to help her. It was a big risk but by that time Faye was clutching at tufts of grass with nothing but the icy sea below her. . . . For the next half an hour he clung to Faye until they could be winched to safety.

You would think the Maritime and Coastguard Agency would have celebrated another job well done, wouldn’t you? But what happened instead was an internal inquiry into a breach of health and safety regulations. Paul resigned from the service in disgust.

. . . [Sir Norman Bettison, chief constable of West Yorkshire] accused the “health and safety Taliban” of stopping police from serving the public. He recalled the incident in Oxfordshire in 2004 when two women were shot at a barbecue party and died because police and ambulance crews had been ordered to stay at a safe distance. “I can tell you, as a police professional with some experience of firearms incidents, that it is the health and safety zealots who are responsible,” he said.

That incident was the tip of a very large iceberg. Little by little health and safety is chipping away at life’s small pleasures. Just last week Ofsted, the schools inspectorate, reported that teachers were reluctant to take students on geography field trips. Not long afterward, an amateur dramatic group in Cornwall revealed that it had been ordered to keep two plastic swords and a popgun under lock and key after performances of Robinson Crusoe.

Everybody probably has their own example: just down the road from me a little playground – nothing more than a couple of swings – was closed because the parish council could no longer afford the insurance.

. . . To save us from this rising tide (at least until the coastguard can bring their safety harnesses) Brown has done what all politicians do in a crisis. He has set up a committee. . . .

Can the real problem be solved by a committee? No, because the real problem lies at the heart of modern politics: dividing the balance of responsibility between the individual and the state. Can you and I risk fairy cakes at the WI fete, or must the law decide that our health must come first and ban such items? Or, if not ban them, make it too expensive to insure the fete? [emphasis added]

If you look at it that way, Brown is not best placed to provide the solution: he is part of the problem. Last year it was revealed that Labour has added an average of 2,685 new laws and regulations each year since coming to power in 1997. You cannot even enjoy a glass of wine at home now without feeling the righteous wrath of Dawn Primarolo, the health minister. . . .

Read the entire article. As I have said many times, Britain of today is a laboratory experiment on the ill effects of socialism grafted on top of the traditions of Western civilization. The experiment is becoming more unstable by the day.

In the meantime, if you happen to go swimming in Hope Cove and suffer an emergency, your life depends on your ability to keep your head above water for half an hour to an hour, until an officially inspected rescue boat from the MCA is able to reach you. At least for the next eight weeks. Until the MCA conducts their twenty minute sea worthiness inspection of the Hope Cove boat.

(H/T Brits At Their Best and an Englishman's Castle)

Read More...

Summary only...