With more and more councils realising the mistake of having Bin Collections changed to fortnightly will our own Swale B C keep to a weekly collection?
I recently received the item below from a friend and by God does it make you think but then again you get what you vote for, its inmates have taken over the assylum
Makes you think!
Can you imagine working for a company/organisation that has a little more than 600 employees and has the following employee statistics?
29 have been accused of spouse abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad cheques
117 have directly or indirectly bankrupted at least 2 businesses
3 have done time for assault
71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit14 have been arrested on drug-related charges8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 are currently defendants in lawsuits84 have been arrested for drink driving in the last year
Which organization is this?
It's the 635 members of the House of Commons, the same group that Cranks out hundreds of new laws each year designed to keep the rest of us in line.
Thursday, April 26, 2007
Monday, April 23, 2007
BRITISH TAKE NOTE
Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks. A day after a group of mainstream Muslim leaders pledged loyalty to Australia and her Queen at a special meeting with Prime Minister John Howard, he and his Ministers made it clear that extremists would face a crackdown. Treasurer Peter Costello, seen as heir apparent to Howard, hinted that some radical clerics could be asked to leave the country if they did not accept that Australia was a secular state, and its laws were made by parliament. "If those are not your values, if you want a country which has Sharia law or a theocratic state, then Australia is not for you", he said on National Television. "I'd be saying to clerics who are teaching that there are two laws governing people in Australia: one the Australian law and another Islamic law that is false. If you can't agree with parliamentary law, independent courts, democracy, and would prefer Sharia law and have the opportunity to go to another country, which practices it, perhaps, then, that's a better option", Costello said. Asked whether he meant radical clerics would be forced to leave, he said those with dual citizenship could possibly be asked to move to the other country. Education Minister Brendan Nelson later told reporters that Muslims who did not want to accept local values should "clear off. Basically people who don't want to be Australians, and who don't want, to live by Australian values and understand them, well then, they can basically clear off", he said. Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation's mosques. Quote: "IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali, we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians." "However, the dust from the attacks had barely settled when the 'politically correct' crowd began complaining about the possibility that our patriotism was offending others. I am not against immigration, nor do I hold a grudge against anyone who is seeking a better life by coming to Australia." "However, there are a few things that those who have recently come to our country, and apparently some born here, need to understand." "This idea of Australia being a multi-cultural community has served only to dilute our sovereignty and our national identity. And as Australians, we have our own culture, our own society, our own language and our own lifestyle." "This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom" "We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!" "Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture." "We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us." "If the Southern Cross offends you, or you don't like "A Fair Go", then you should seriously consider a move to another part of this planet. We are happy with our culture and have no desire to change, and we really don't care how you did things where you came from. By all means, keep your culture, but do not force it on others. "This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, 'THE RIGHT TO LEAVE'.""If you aren't happy here then LEAVE. We didn't force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted." Maybe if we circulate this amongst ourselves, citizens will find the backbone to start speaking and voicing the same truths !
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Gordan replies
Here is Gordon's reply I do enjoy a Political argument keep it up the both of you
Dear Derek
Thank you for taking the trouble to respond to my email in which I asked you to make clear where I had said, or, had written that I wanted to see 2200 houses built as part of the Kent Science Park proposal. I assume that since you have removed this allegation from your website you accept that you were wrong. It would be good to receive an apology, but perhaps that is pushing my luck!
Can I now respond on a para by para basis to your rather long reply:-
1) It is simply wrong of you to say that any housing development at the Kent Science Park has "nothing to do with Government numbers". The Government, via the unelected South East England Regional Assembly, has imposed on Kent (and Swale) thousands of additional houses. The borough council has a statutory obligation to find sufficient land within the borough for those houses. It is quite obvious that if they find land in one part of the borough (whether that be Sheppey or Bapchild) it reduces the pressure on other parts of the borough. Unlike you, I have opposed these additional houses since before the last General Election and continue to oppose them now. You, on the other hand, are on record as saying that we need an additional 5000 houses in the borough (over and above those in the local plan). Where exactly do you want those houses built? It would perhaps help the debate if you would answer this question, which I have posed on numerous occasions.
2) You once again make the allegation that I am setting one part of the constituency against the other. WIth all due respect, that shows how little you understand the battle that we are collectively fighting to stop the over development of our borough. It is a battle shared by Islanders and those living on the mainland alike. Your allegation also highlights the difference between you and me. You have opposed the Kent Science Park development, and for that I commend you, however, you have at the same time supported an increase in the number of houses being built in Queenborough. Because I happen to have consistently opposed both these developments, I fail to see how this can be construed as "setting one part of the constituency" against the other. Are you suggesting that I drop my objections to an increase in housing in Queenborough - from the 750 homes that SEEDA wanted two years ago (which I accepted), to the over 2000 that they want now? How does my support for the residents of Sheppey in general, and Queenborough in particular, detract from my support for the Five Parishes Opposition Group? Whilst on the subject of Sheppey, perhaps you would like to explain to the residents of Halfway why you want to sell off the Minster College site for housing to pay for an academy spread across the Danley, Cheyne and St George's middles school sites!
3) I have exactly the same degree of opposition (and tolerance) to the additional houses being imposed on our borough, whether that proposed development is in Bapchild, Tunstall, Iwade, Queenborough or Minster. My position is exactly the same. Enough is enough!
4) It is quite true that I have a long standing commitment to the building of an A2-M2 link, because this will be not only an important part of Sittingbourne's long term roads' infrastructure, but is vital, once the Northern Distributor Route is eventually completed, if we are to protect, and improve, the quality of life for people living in Teynham, Bapchild and the other villages to the south of the A2. However, I am happy to "state categorically" that I would never support the route proposed by KSP. I should also make clear that, because of the strategic nature of the Southern Distributor Route (A2-M2 Link), I believe this road must be funded by the Government and should not be reliant upon a Section 106 linked to a housing development. In essence, no Government funding - no road! I trust this makes my position (which, incidently, is shared by members of the Sittingbourne and Sheppey Conservative Association) quite clear!
5) I cannot answer for Paul Carter, and his colleagues on Kent County Council, who will no doubt answer for himself, except to say that the KCC has a duty to take a strategic overview of the county's future. Sometimes that strategic overview might conflict with opinions on a local level. Inevitably that leads to debate about the best way forward. That is what democracy is all about. In many ways it is no difference to your position in Parliament where on occasions you disagree with the actions taken by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (such as over the war in Iraq).
6) Similarly, I do not intend to comment on the views of Swale Borough Council, except to point out that the Local Plan, which includes provision for the limited expansion of the Kent Science Park (with certain conditions) was agreed by all the political parties on the Council.
7) I am not quite clear why you are connecting my stance on the KSP with my views on the reorganisation of education on Sheppey. I have never tried to hide the fact that my position on Sheppey's education system is at odds with my Conservative colleagues on the KCC. It would be a poorer world if we were not able to disagree on occasions! I am even more confused about why you feel the need to drag my views on Europe into a debate about housing! The phrase "scraping the bottom of the barrel" springs to mind! As it happens I fully support David Cameron as Leader of the Conservative Party and I have no reason to believe that he does not support my position as the Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman in Sittingbourne & Sheppey. If David did rebuke me publically, he certainly failed to notify me of that rebuke!
8) For your information, I circulated my open letter to ALL the local newspapers in our area, as I did your short email (I assume to Roger Truelove, and copied to me by mistake) in which you asked for advice about what to do about my complaint! I also made clear to the newspapers that the original lie had been removed from your website. In the circumstances I felt that was only fair.
I have copied your letter and this response to our local newspapers, plus all the recipients of your email, including David Cameron.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman
Sittingbourne & Sheppey
Dear Derek
Thank you for taking the trouble to respond to my email in which I asked you to make clear where I had said, or, had written that I wanted to see 2200 houses built as part of the Kent Science Park proposal. I assume that since you have removed this allegation from your website you accept that you were wrong. It would be good to receive an apology, but perhaps that is pushing my luck!
Can I now respond on a para by para basis to your rather long reply:-
1) It is simply wrong of you to say that any housing development at the Kent Science Park has "nothing to do with Government numbers". The Government, via the unelected South East England Regional Assembly, has imposed on Kent (and Swale) thousands of additional houses. The borough council has a statutory obligation to find sufficient land within the borough for those houses. It is quite obvious that if they find land in one part of the borough (whether that be Sheppey or Bapchild) it reduces the pressure on other parts of the borough. Unlike you, I have opposed these additional houses since before the last General Election and continue to oppose them now. You, on the other hand, are on record as saying that we need an additional 5000 houses in the borough (over and above those in the local plan). Where exactly do you want those houses built? It would perhaps help the debate if you would answer this question, which I have posed on numerous occasions.
2) You once again make the allegation that I am setting one part of the constituency against the other. WIth all due respect, that shows how little you understand the battle that we are collectively fighting to stop the over development of our borough. It is a battle shared by Islanders and those living on the mainland alike. Your allegation also highlights the difference between you and me. You have opposed the Kent Science Park development, and for that I commend you, however, you have at the same time supported an increase in the number of houses being built in Queenborough. Because I happen to have consistently opposed both these developments, I fail to see how this can be construed as "setting one part of the constituency" against the other. Are you suggesting that I drop my objections to an increase in housing in Queenborough - from the 750 homes that SEEDA wanted two years ago (which I accepted), to the over 2000 that they want now? How does my support for the residents of Sheppey in general, and Queenborough in particular, detract from my support for the Five Parishes Opposition Group? Whilst on the subject of Sheppey, perhaps you would like to explain to the residents of Halfway why you want to sell off the Minster College site for housing to pay for an academy spread across the Danley, Cheyne and St George's middles school sites!
3) I have exactly the same degree of opposition (and tolerance) to the additional houses being imposed on our borough, whether that proposed development is in Bapchild, Tunstall, Iwade, Queenborough or Minster. My position is exactly the same. Enough is enough!
4) It is quite true that I have a long standing commitment to the building of an A2-M2 link, because this will be not only an important part of Sittingbourne's long term roads' infrastructure, but is vital, once the Northern Distributor Route is eventually completed, if we are to protect, and improve, the quality of life for people living in Teynham, Bapchild and the other villages to the south of the A2. However, I am happy to "state categorically" that I would never support the route proposed by KSP. I should also make clear that, because of the strategic nature of the Southern Distributor Route (A2-M2 Link), I believe this road must be funded by the Government and should not be reliant upon a Section 106 linked to a housing development. In essence, no Government funding - no road! I trust this makes my position (which, incidently, is shared by members of the Sittingbourne and Sheppey Conservative Association) quite clear!
5) I cannot answer for Paul Carter, and his colleagues on Kent County Council, who will no doubt answer for himself, except to say that the KCC has a duty to take a strategic overview of the county's future. Sometimes that strategic overview might conflict with opinions on a local level. Inevitably that leads to debate about the best way forward. That is what democracy is all about. In many ways it is no difference to your position in Parliament where on occasions you disagree with the actions taken by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown (such as over the war in Iraq).
6) Similarly, I do not intend to comment on the views of Swale Borough Council, except to point out that the Local Plan, which includes provision for the limited expansion of the Kent Science Park (with certain conditions) was agreed by all the political parties on the Council.
7) I am not quite clear why you are connecting my stance on the KSP with my views on the reorganisation of education on Sheppey. I have never tried to hide the fact that my position on Sheppey's education system is at odds with my Conservative colleagues on the KCC. It would be a poorer world if we were not able to disagree on occasions! I am even more confused about why you feel the need to drag my views on Europe into a debate about housing! The phrase "scraping the bottom of the barrel" springs to mind! As it happens I fully support David Cameron as Leader of the Conservative Party and I have no reason to believe that he does not support my position as the Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman in Sittingbourne & Sheppey. If David did rebuke me publically, he certainly failed to notify me of that rebuke!
8) For your information, I circulated my open letter to ALL the local newspapers in our area, as I did your short email (I assume to Roger Truelove, and copied to me by mistake) in which you asked for advice about what to do about my complaint! I also made clear to the newspapers that the original lie had been removed from your website. In the circumstances I felt that was only fair.
I have copied your letter and this response to our local newspapers, plus all the recipients of your email, including David Cameron.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Conservative Parliamentary Spokesman
Sittingbourne & Sheppey
So Derek did lie. His Reply
It seems that Derek Wyatt did lie and he has admitted that in this
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: gordon.henderson3@tesco.net
Cc: CAMERON, David ; paul.carter@kent.gov.uk ; leader@swale.gov.uk
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 11:54 AM
Subject: A reply to your open email letter
Dear Gordon,
I acknowledge receipt of your letter concerning housing development
and the KSP proposals.
I have had some difficulty with interpreting exactly what you meant
in a recent statement about your two "major" differences with 5POG and
in particular to "some members of 5POG appear to believe that the
answer of solving the problem of delivering the number of houses
imposed on Swale by the Government is to put them on Sheppey." Of
course, you know that any housing development in the KSP area would
have nothing to do with "Government numbers" and would only go
forward because KSP have been encouraged by colleagues in your party
to regard their ambitions as key regeneration objectives.
However, your remarks do raise some interesting issues, firstly why
a parliamentary candidate should want to set one part of the
constituency against another, but secondly as a friend of 5POG I
would like you to make public what evidence you have for making such
remarks about any of the Group.
A reasonable interpretation by any independent reader would be that
you have a lower tolerance level for housing development in the
Bapchild and Tunstall area than you have for Sheppey. However if you
are prepared to say that you cannot envisage any circumstances in
which you would support any housing development of any kind in line
with the KSP proposals, then I would welcome that.
Moreover if you (along with other Conservatives) want to reserve the
right to support an A2/M2 link road, something with which I
disagree, then it would be most welcome if you could state
categorically that you would never support the route proposed by KSP.
It is the Conservatives' lack of clarity on the road, plus the
positions taken by the Conservative Leadership on KCC about the role
of KSP in County Regeneration aims, plus the position of
Conservative controlled Swale, that makes it clear that there is a
divide between the Conservatives on the one hand and the 5POG and
myself on the other.
It does seem to us in the Labour Party that you frequently seek to
isolate yourself from the consequences of decisions made by your
elected colleagues in local government. You must surely be aware that
Paul Carter has said openly in full Council Chamber at KCC that Kent
Science Park is a key part of the Conservative administration's
regeneration policy. You will be aware that the Leader of Swale
Council is also a Conservative County Councillor, is therefore signed
up to this policy, and certainly does not publicly disagree with Mr
Carter on the KSP issue. You will surely have seen press coverage of
visits by Mr Carter and Mr Bowles to Kent Science Park and the
supportive comments they are reported to have made.
You must surely be aware of the Economic Policy position of the
Conservative administration on Swale Borough Council too, which also
gives key priority support to KSP.
It is absolutely absurd for you and other Conservatives to pretend
that the vaulting ambitions of the KSP proposals have nothing to do
with signals given by leading Conservatives in local government.
Your position on this seems a little akin to the Sheppey education
issue, where you seek to attack the decisions and actions of the
Conservative administration at KCC, but imply that they are not really
in control and that the officers should take the blame. You will know
too that we have noted Mr Cameron's rebuke to you for supporting the
UKIP inspired BOO campaign. This was reported in the Daily Telegraph
and you have never sought to make any public comment on it.
However, you have asked me to withdraw the statement on my website
about a precise number of houses that you might support in the KSP
area, and so I have done so. (This is the apology for the lie)
I note that in your letter to me, you copied in a journalist on the
Kent Messenger Group. I wonder why you did not also include the East
Kent Gazette. However, I assume you want the press to be involved in this exchange
and so I will be releasing this reply to the local press and to David Cameron, Paul Carter
and Andrew Bowles.
Yours sincerely
Derek Wyatt MP
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: gordon.henderson3@tesco.net
Cc: CAMERON, David ; paul.carter@kent.gov.uk ; leader@swale.gov.uk
Sent: Monday, April 16, 2007 11:54 AM
Subject: A reply to your open email letter
Dear Gordon,
I acknowledge receipt of your letter concerning housing development
and the KSP proposals.
I have had some difficulty with interpreting exactly what you meant
in a recent statement about your two "major" differences with 5POG and
in particular to "some members of 5POG appear to believe that the
answer of solving the problem of delivering the number of houses
imposed on Swale by the Government is to put them on Sheppey." Of
course, you know that any housing development in the KSP area would
have nothing to do with "Government numbers" and would only go
forward because KSP have been encouraged by colleagues in your party
to regard their ambitions as key regeneration objectives.
However, your remarks do raise some interesting issues, firstly why
a parliamentary candidate should want to set one part of the
constituency against another, but secondly as a friend of 5POG I
would like you to make public what evidence you have for making such
remarks about any of the Group.
A reasonable interpretation by any independent reader would be that
you have a lower tolerance level for housing development in the
Bapchild and Tunstall area than you have for Sheppey. However if you
are prepared to say that you cannot envisage any circumstances in
which you would support any housing development of any kind in line
with the KSP proposals, then I would welcome that.
Moreover if you (along with other Conservatives) want to reserve the
right to support an A2/M2 link road, something with which I
disagree, then it would be most welcome if you could state
categorically that you would never support the route proposed by KSP.
It is the Conservatives' lack of clarity on the road, plus the
positions taken by the Conservative Leadership on KCC about the role
of KSP in County Regeneration aims, plus the position of
Conservative controlled Swale, that makes it clear that there is a
divide between the Conservatives on the one hand and the 5POG and
myself on the other.
It does seem to us in the Labour Party that you frequently seek to
isolate yourself from the consequences of decisions made by your
elected colleagues in local government. You must surely be aware that
Paul Carter has said openly in full Council Chamber at KCC that Kent
Science Park is a key part of the Conservative administration's
regeneration policy. You will be aware that the Leader of Swale
Council is also a Conservative County Councillor, is therefore signed
up to this policy, and certainly does not publicly disagree with Mr
Carter on the KSP issue. You will surely have seen press coverage of
visits by Mr Carter and Mr Bowles to Kent Science Park and the
supportive comments they are reported to have made.
You must surely be aware of the Economic Policy position of the
Conservative administration on Swale Borough Council too, which also
gives key priority support to KSP.
It is absolutely absurd for you and other Conservatives to pretend
that the vaulting ambitions of the KSP proposals have nothing to do
with signals given by leading Conservatives in local government.
Your position on this seems a little akin to the Sheppey education
issue, where you seek to attack the decisions and actions of the
Conservative administration at KCC, but imply that they are not really
in control and that the officers should take the blame. You will know
too that we have noted Mr Cameron's rebuke to you for supporting the
UKIP inspired BOO campaign. This was reported in the Daily Telegraph
and you have never sought to make any public comment on it.
However, you have asked me to withdraw the statement on my website
about a precise number of houses that you might support in the KSP
area, and so I have done so. (This is the apology for the lie)
I note that in your letter to me, you copied in a journalist on the
Kent Messenger Group. I wonder why you did not also include the East
Kent Gazette. However, I assume you want the press to be involved in this exchange
and so I will be releasing this reply to the local press and to David Cameron, Paul Carter
and Andrew Bowles.
Yours sincerely
Derek Wyatt MP
Monday, April 16, 2007
Why Vote for 5POG?
Letter sent to EKG & KM
Monday, 16 April 2007
Dear Editor
It has just come to my attention that the Five Parishes Opposition Group (5POG) is putting up a candidate in West Downs at the forthcoming Swale Borough Council Elections with the LibDems and Labour candidates withdrawing to support 5POG. I can understand that these two parties would want to withdraw from the contest as 1) It is an un winnable seat for either of them as West Downs has a very good Conservative Councillor 2) They can save money and resources by not entering 3) they can redirect man power no other wards 4) by withdrawing they may get an independent and so cost the Conservatives a seat.
I wonder if Labour and LibDems voters in the ward will happy to vote against the Conservatives just because the party they normally support has refused to enter, most electors are getting fed up with political parties treating them like sheep
What is most fascinating is why any sensible person would vote for a single issue party? A councillor is their to represent all people in their wards in all matters not just one, single issue groups will spend 100% of there time on that issue that’s what they would have been elected on so what happens to all the other issues and what happens if an elector has a problem who is against their views? The advantage of being a member of a political party, you have the organisation machine behind you, if you are new councillor you have the experienced councillors in your party to guide you but most importantly you have the weight of numbers when it comes to voting. No matter how right a lone voice is it is still a lone voice. When 5POG where a focus group they were affective because they could utilise all the political parties but making an agreement with the LibDems/Labour they are direct opposition with Conservatives who are the governing party on SBC.
Monday, 16 April 2007
Dear Editor
It has just come to my attention that the Five Parishes Opposition Group (5POG) is putting up a candidate in West Downs at the forthcoming Swale Borough Council Elections with the LibDems and Labour candidates withdrawing to support 5POG. I can understand that these two parties would want to withdraw from the contest as 1) It is an un winnable seat for either of them as West Downs has a very good Conservative Councillor 2) They can save money and resources by not entering 3) they can redirect man power no other wards 4) by withdrawing they may get an independent and so cost the Conservatives a seat.
I wonder if Labour and LibDems voters in the ward will happy to vote against the Conservatives just because the party they normally support has refused to enter, most electors are getting fed up with political parties treating them like sheep
What is most fascinating is why any sensible person would vote for a single issue party? A councillor is their to represent all people in their wards in all matters not just one, single issue groups will spend 100% of there time on that issue that’s what they would have been elected on so what happens to all the other issues and what happens if an elector has a problem who is against their views? The advantage of being a member of a political party, you have the organisation machine behind you, if you are new councillor you have the experienced councillors in your party to guide you but most importantly you have the weight of numbers when it comes to voting. No matter how right a lone voice is it is still a lone voice. When 5POG where a focus group they were affective because they could utilise all the political parties but making an agreement with the LibDems/Labour they are direct opposition with Conservatives who are the governing party on SBC.
So Derek Wyatt did lie
Please read email I recieved it seems Derek Wyatt MP did lie
Dear All
Following my earlier open letter to Derek Wyatt, I have today received the following email (I assume by mistake!) which appears to have been sent by Mr Wyatt to Roger Truelove ("Christine" is Roger's wife and the Swale Borough Council candidate in Woodstock).
If you doubted who is the real puppet master behind our local Labour MP just read the last sentence!
Obviously, Mr Wyatt received sound advice about what to do because the "lie" has been removed from his website.
I await a response and an apology, but I won't hold my breath!
Best regards
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: Gordon Henderson
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 8:26 AM
Subject: RE: An Open Letter to Derek Wyatt
I’ve looked at what I have written; where did he say he wanted the housing as haven’t we repeated this in Christine’s leaflet.
How should I respond I thguht the housing issue was on his web site but no longer.
Derek
Dear All
Following my earlier open letter to Derek Wyatt, I have today received the following email (I assume by mistake!) which appears to have been sent by Mr Wyatt to Roger Truelove ("Christine" is Roger's wife and the Swale Borough Council candidate in Woodstock).
If you doubted who is the real puppet master behind our local Labour MP just read the last sentence!
Obviously, Mr Wyatt received sound advice about what to do because the "lie" has been removed from his website.
I await a response and an apology, but I won't hold my breath!
Best regards
Gordon
----- Original Message -----
From: WYATT, Derek
To: Gordon Henderson
Sent: Sunday, April 15, 2007 8:26 AM
Subject: RE: An Open Letter to Derek Wyatt
I’ve looked at what I have written; where did he say he wanted the housing as haven’t we repeated this in Christine’s leaflet.
How should I respond I thguht the housing issue was on his web site but no longer.
Derek
Sunday, April 15, 2007
WHAT IS EASTER
Easter Weekend proved to be a very sunny weekend as a friend of mine said a good holiday break but I did feel a certain amount of guilt as I sat in my caravan enjoying the sun. Why? Well as someone who was brought up a Catholic, fervently believing in Christ, and importantly I believe in the Christian Ethic and Morals, yet I never attended Mass. My excuse to myself was that I did not need to attend Church to believe in God or was I just lazy? As I began some serious navel gazing I started to look at the world as a whole and England especially and it relationships with Easter.
Most English people believe Easter is just a public holiday where they can enjoy themselves and go shopping but surely it is more then that?
Easter is the most important period in the Christian Diary it emphasises the core belief of Christianity “That Jesus was the Son of God, he suffered death on the cross to save mankind and rose from the dead” I am not trying to preach but want to put in perspective why we an Easter Break as I believe most people think it is a “Chocolate Egg Festival” Although I can understand Easter Sunday when he rose from the dead can be treated as a joyous occasion a time to celebrate, Good Friday should be a very austere day a day of great sorrow that Jesus had to suffer crucifixion. Yet on Good Friday lots of shops, cinema, tourists attraction was open, what few laws there are to govern trading on Good Friday were abused with some shops moving there tills outside claiming they were an out door market.
England is a Christian country its laws, morality and ethics are based on Christian beliefs for over thousand years so therefore why cannot this country and its government honour its core beliefs. Easter has become nothing more then a commercial excuse to make money and if you make MONEY your God you will be heading for disaster.
To finish on a more topical note if you lived in a Moslem country would you be allowed to do what we do on Easter on an important Moslem festival?
Martin Clarke
Most English people believe Easter is just a public holiday where they can enjoy themselves and go shopping but surely it is more then that?
Easter is the most important period in the Christian Diary it emphasises the core belief of Christianity “That Jesus was the Son of God, he suffered death on the cross to save mankind and rose from the dead” I am not trying to preach but want to put in perspective why we an Easter Break as I believe most people think it is a “Chocolate Egg Festival” Although I can understand Easter Sunday when he rose from the dead can be treated as a joyous occasion a time to celebrate, Good Friday should be a very austere day a day of great sorrow that Jesus had to suffer crucifixion. Yet on Good Friday lots of shops, cinema, tourists attraction was open, what few laws there are to govern trading on Good Friday were abused with some shops moving there tills outside claiming they were an out door market.
England is a Christian country its laws, morality and ethics are based on Christian beliefs for over thousand years so therefore why cannot this country and its government honour its core beliefs. Easter has become nothing more then a commercial excuse to make money and if you make MONEY your God you will be heading for disaster.
To finish on a more topical note if you lived in a Moslem country would you be allowed to do what we do on Easter on an important Moslem festival?
Martin Clarke
IS DEREK WYATT MP A LIAR?
Please read this and make your own descision, hopefully Derek Wyatt will answer if he does I will post his reply
Martin Clarke
An open letter to Derek Wyatt MP
14th April 2007
Dear Derek
You have today posted on your website the following statement in relation to the Kent Science Park:-
“The Tories support an extension of the footprint outside of the current park and their spokesperson Gordon Henderson wants 2200 extra houses. The houses would support the funding of the southern ring road.”
I know that you are worried about losing your seat at the next General Election but is it really necessary to tell such outrageous lies to try and blacken my name in the hope of gaining an advantage?
As we have made clear in all our literature, local Conservatives support an expansion of the Science Park inside its existing boundaries, but oppose any expansion outside those boundaries. That is the position also of the Five Parishes Opposition Group.
On a personal level, I have made clear my opposition to any housing development attached to the Kent Science Park proposal. I have also made clear that although I support the Southern Distributor Route (the A2-M2 link) my support is conditional upon the road being built in a location acceptable to local communities and being funded by the Government. The A2-M2 link should not be reliant upon a housing development to fund it.
As you are well aware this is a very sensitive issue in the area and misrepresenting my position in this way borders on the libellous. I would therefore be grateful if you would provide details of exactly when and where I said, or wrote, that I wanted “2200 extra houses”.
If you cannot provide this information please remove this statement from your website immediately and refrain from repeating these false accusations in the future.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Martin Clarke
An open letter to Derek Wyatt MP
14th April 2007
Dear Derek
You have today posted on your website the following statement in relation to the Kent Science Park:-
“The Tories support an extension of the footprint outside of the current park and their spokesperson Gordon Henderson wants 2200 extra houses. The houses would support the funding of the southern ring road.”
I know that you are worried about losing your seat at the next General Election but is it really necessary to tell such outrageous lies to try and blacken my name in the hope of gaining an advantage?
As we have made clear in all our literature, local Conservatives support an expansion of the Science Park inside its existing boundaries, but oppose any expansion outside those boundaries. That is the position also of the Five Parishes Opposition Group.
On a personal level, I have made clear my opposition to any housing development attached to the Kent Science Park proposal. I have also made clear that although I support the Southern Distributor Route (the A2-M2 link) my support is conditional upon the road being built in a location acceptable to local communities and being funded by the Government. The A2-M2 link should not be reliant upon a housing development to fund it.
As you are well aware this is a very sensitive issue in the area and misrepresenting my position in this way borders on the libellous. I would therefore be grateful if you would provide details of exactly when and where I said, or wrote, that I wanted “2200 extra houses”.
If you cannot provide this information please remove this statement from your website immediately and refrain from repeating these false accusations in the future.
Yours sincerely
Gordon
GORDON HENDERSON
Friday, April 13, 2007
Life On Mars? No Pet, it's life on Venus
Richard Littlejohn wrote this great article
Life on Mars? No, pet, it's Life on Venus
09:57am 13th April 2007 Comments (40)
The second series of the BBC’s time-travel cop show, Life On Mars, ended this week, watched by seven million viewers. For the uninitiated, it featured a modern policeman, DI Sam Tyler, who fell into a coma and woke up in 1973. He was horrified by the crude racism, sexism and casual brutality of Seventies DCI Gene Hunt, of the Manchester CID, who stole the series.
But what if a 1970s copper was transported forward in time? What would he make of New Scotland Yard 2007?
More....
Teachers blame Life On Mars for homophobic bullying
(SCENE ONE: Hunt wakes with a raging hangover to find himself slumped over a desk. He reaches into his pocket, pulls out a packet of Kensitas and lights up.)
Where the hell am I?
Put that out.
What?
This is a designated no-smoking facility.
What are you bloody talking about?
Scroll down for more...
I ask the questions.
Who are you, darling?
Detective Inspector Suzi Obafemwi. And this is my squad room.
YOUR squad room? Stop messing about, petal, and get us a drink, there’s a good girl. My gob feels as if a rabid badger has crawled in there and died.
Don’t you ‘good girl’ me, you patronising bastard.
Come on, luv, stop playing games. You’re not a bloody DI. For a start, you’re a tart. And you’re coloured, unless this hangover is playing havoc with my eyesight.
How dare you call me a prostitute, you racist pig?
Don’t get your hotpants in a twist, sweetheart. When I said ‘tart’, I didn’t mean, er, it’s a term of endearment, like.
Not round here it isn’t. And I’m not ‘coloured’, I’m black.
Only trying to be polite. It took me five years to learn to say ‘coloured’.
Who are you?
DCI Gene Hunt, from Manchester.
You must be the new guv’nor. We’ve been expecting you.
Sorry, luv, I don’t mean to be rude. It’s just that where I come from, we haven’t got any black, female, detective inspectors.
What, in Manchester? In 2007?
Two thousand and what?
Seven, SIR.
You make ‘sir’ sound like a toe-end in the goolies, luv. You think I’m who?
Our new boss.
But I only came down here for a leavingdo at The Feathers. Old Barlow, firstclass thief-taker.
Who?
Chief Superintendent Charlie Barlow.
Never heard of him.
He’s a bloody legend, flower. Cracked the 1971 diamond vaults job.
I wouldn’t know. I wasn’t born then.
Eh?
This is 2007, remember?
Bloody Nora, I know this weak Southern beer doesn’t agree with me, but someone must have spiked my drinks.
You certainly stink of booze.
My head’s banging like a bloody Lambeg drum in an Orange Lodge parade. Pour us a scotch, there’s a luv.
This is also an alcohol-free working environment. You don’t want to let the Commissioner catch you smelling like that.
I thought he liked a drink.
That was the last one, Captain Beaujolais.
Captain Birdseye?
No, Beaujolais. He went off to run the Diana inquiry.
Diana Dors? She hangs around with some pretty dodgy characters. That Alan Lake, he’s a wrong-un.
Princess Diana.
Who’s she? If this really is 2007, I must have fallen into a coma.
You were certainly comatose when I found you.
Anyway, seeing as I’m here, we might as well get on with it. What are you working on at the moment?
Cash for ermine.
Someone fencing stolen fur coats?
No, the Prime Minister’s been selling seats in the House of Lords in exchange for political donations.
They’ve always done that, flower. You might as well try to stop dogs licking their wossnames. What else?
There’s been a spate of homophobic crime.
Homo-what?
Phobic. A writer went on Radio 4 and said she thought gay marriages were abhorrent.
So what? There’s no law against it.
There is, guv. It’s a hate crime.
I hate crime, too. Anyway, who ever heard of two poofs getting married?
It’s all the rage. Civil partnerships, they call it. And I wouldn’t let anyone in this building hear you using language like that.
Like what?
Derogatory terms to describe members of the gay community, sir. Some might find it offensive.
Come off it. There aren’t any woofters in Scotland Yard.
Oh, yes there are, guv, at the very highest level. There’s even a Gay Police Association.
You’ll be telling me next that there’s a Black Police Association, as well.
Correct. I’m the vice-chair.
Bloody hell. Anyway, where is everyone - down the pub? I could do with a large one myself.
Out on inquiries, or attending diversity training. At least, those who aren’t off sick.
Sick? What, sleeping off a session, you mean?
Stress, mainly. Half the Met took at least three weeks off sick last year. Cost £36 million.
Jeesus. I’ve never missed a day in my life. I’d sack the lot of them.
You can’t do that, they’d sue for wrongful dismissal on the grounds of racial or sexual discrimination.
You’re kidding. What about those who aren’t throwing a sickie?
A couple of officers are interviewing a ten-year-old boy who called another kid ‘gay’. We’ve also launched a major crackdown on hopscotch. And Simpkins has been seconded to the golliwog squad.
The what?
It’s a special unit set up to prosecute shopkeepers found to be selling racially-inflammatory soft toys.
Aren’t we nicking any real villains?
DS Harper arrested a man on the Underground for carrying an offensive weapon.
A knife or something?
No, a cricket ball. And we felt the collar of a man reading out the names of war dead next to the Cenotaph.
That’s what it’s bloody there for.
It’s inside the exclusion zone, to prevent terrorism.
Effin’ IRA.
Haven’t you heard, guv, that’s all over.
Don’t tell me - Gerry Adams is the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.
Of course not. He’s deputy to Ian Paisley.
Are you sure you haven’t got any scotch?
’Fraid not. I can offer you a tea.
Milk and three sugars, please, treacle.
No treacle, just camomile and ylang-ylang.
If not the bog-trotters, then who?
Who what?
Terrorism.
Al Qaeda.
Who’s this Al geezer when he’s at home.
International Islamic jihadists. They’ve already let off four suicide bombs on London Transport.
We should shoot them on sight. We did, guv, only we killed the wrong man. He was a Brazilian.
So what are we doing?
We’re gathering all the intelligence we can. Some of the lads are staking out a suspected bomb factory.
Why don’t we just surround the place with a couple of hundred armed officers, steam in and take the place apart.
Tried that, too. In Forest Gate. Pulled it apart brick by brick. One of the suspects got shot.
You make that sound like a bad thing. I’d drive them to the nearest multi-storey car park and dangle them off the side by their ankles until they confessed.
Don’t quote me, guv, so would I. But the Commissioner would never allow that. You really are quite a throwback.
Isn’t there anyone at the Yard like me?
Well, there’s one officer who seems to be able to do what the hell he likes, harass women, that sort of thing.
Who is he?
Name of Ali Dizaei. He’s written a book.
A book? The only thing I’ve ever written is a bent confession. Come on, Suzi, sod this for a game of soldiers, you can buy me a drink and then we’ll go out and see who we can fit up.
You’ve been watching too much Life On Mars, guv’nor.
Life on Mars, petal? This is more like Life on Venus.
Life on Mars? No, pet, it's Life on Venus
09:57am 13th April 2007 Comments (40)
The second series of the BBC’s time-travel cop show, Life On Mars, ended this week, watched by seven million viewers. For the uninitiated, it featured a modern policeman, DI Sam Tyler, who fell into a coma and woke up in 1973. He was horrified by the crude racism, sexism and casual brutality of Seventies DCI Gene Hunt, of the Manchester CID, who stole the series.
But what if a 1970s copper was transported forward in time? What would he make of New Scotland Yard 2007?
More....
Teachers blame Life On Mars for homophobic bullying
(SCENE ONE: Hunt wakes with a raging hangover to find himself slumped over a desk. He reaches into his pocket, pulls out a packet of Kensitas and lights up.)
Where the hell am I?
Put that out.
What?
This is a designated no-smoking facility.
What are you bloody talking about?
Scroll down for more...
I ask the questions.
Who are you, darling?
Detective Inspector Suzi Obafemwi. And this is my squad room.
YOUR squad room? Stop messing about, petal, and get us a drink, there’s a good girl. My gob feels as if a rabid badger has crawled in there and died.
Don’t you ‘good girl’ me, you patronising bastard.
Come on, luv, stop playing games. You’re not a bloody DI. For a start, you’re a tart. And you’re coloured, unless this hangover is playing havoc with my eyesight.
How dare you call me a prostitute, you racist pig?
Don’t get your hotpants in a twist, sweetheart. When I said ‘tart’, I didn’t mean, er, it’s a term of endearment, like.
Not round here it isn’t. And I’m not ‘coloured’, I’m black.
Only trying to be polite. It took me five years to learn to say ‘coloured’.
Who are you?
DCI Gene Hunt, from Manchester.
You must be the new guv’nor. We’ve been expecting you.
Sorry, luv, I don’t mean to be rude. It’s just that where I come from, we haven’t got any black, female, detective inspectors.
What, in Manchester? In 2007?
Two thousand and what?
Seven, SIR.
You make ‘sir’ sound like a toe-end in the goolies, luv. You think I’m who?
Our new boss.
But I only came down here for a leavingdo at The Feathers. Old Barlow, firstclass thief-taker.
Who?
Chief Superintendent Charlie Barlow.
Never heard of him.
He’s a bloody legend, flower. Cracked the 1971 diamond vaults job.
I wouldn’t know. I wasn’t born then.
Eh?
This is 2007, remember?
Bloody Nora, I know this weak Southern beer doesn’t agree with me, but someone must have spiked my drinks.
You certainly stink of booze.
My head’s banging like a bloody Lambeg drum in an Orange Lodge parade. Pour us a scotch, there’s a luv.
This is also an alcohol-free working environment. You don’t want to let the Commissioner catch you smelling like that.
I thought he liked a drink.
That was the last one, Captain Beaujolais.
Captain Birdseye?
No, Beaujolais. He went off to run the Diana inquiry.
Diana Dors? She hangs around with some pretty dodgy characters. That Alan Lake, he’s a wrong-un.
Princess Diana.
Who’s she? If this really is 2007, I must have fallen into a coma.
You were certainly comatose when I found you.
Anyway, seeing as I’m here, we might as well get on with it. What are you working on at the moment?
Cash for ermine.
Someone fencing stolen fur coats?
No, the Prime Minister’s been selling seats in the House of Lords in exchange for political donations.
They’ve always done that, flower. You might as well try to stop dogs licking their wossnames. What else?
There’s been a spate of homophobic crime.
Homo-what?
Phobic. A writer went on Radio 4 and said she thought gay marriages were abhorrent.
So what? There’s no law against it.
There is, guv. It’s a hate crime.
I hate crime, too. Anyway, who ever heard of two poofs getting married?
It’s all the rage. Civil partnerships, they call it. And I wouldn’t let anyone in this building hear you using language like that.
Like what?
Derogatory terms to describe members of the gay community, sir. Some might find it offensive.
Come off it. There aren’t any woofters in Scotland Yard.
Oh, yes there are, guv, at the very highest level. There’s even a Gay Police Association.
You’ll be telling me next that there’s a Black Police Association, as well.
Correct. I’m the vice-chair.
Bloody hell. Anyway, where is everyone - down the pub? I could do with a large one myself.
Out on inquiries, or attending diversity training. At least, those who aren’t off sick.
Sick? What, sleeping off a session, you mean?
Stress, mainly. Half the Met took at least three weeks off sick last year. Cost £36 million.
Jeesus. I’ve never missed a day in my life. I’d sack the lot of them.
You can’t do that, they’d sue for wrongful dismissal on the grounds of racial or sexual discrimination.
You’re kidding. What about those who aren’t throwing a sickie?
A couple of officers are interviewing a ten-year-old boy who called another kid ‘gay’. We’ve also launched a major crackdown on hopscotch. And Simpkins has been seconded to the golliwog squad.
The what?
It’s a special unit set up to prosecute shopkeepers found to be selling racially-inflammatory soft toys.
Aren’t we nicking any real villains?
DS Harper arrested a man on the Underground for carrying an offensive weapon.
A knife or something?
No, a cricket ball. And we felt the collar of a man reading out the names of war dead next to the Cenotaph.
That’s what it’s bloody there for.
It’s inside the exclusion zone, to prevent terrorism.
Effin’ IRA.
Haven’t you heard, guv, that’s all over.
Don’t tell me - Gerry Adams is the Prime Minister of Northern Ireland.
Of course not. He’s deputy to Ian Paisley.
Are you sure you haven’t got any scotch?
’Fraid not. I can offer you a tea.
Milk and three sugars, please, treacle.
No treacle, just camomile and ylang-ylang.
If not the bog-trotters, then who?
Who what?
Terrorism.
Al Qaeda.
Who’s this Al geezer when he’s at home.
International Islamic jihadists. They’ve already let off four suicide bombs on London Transport.
We should shoot them on sight. We did, guv, only we killed the wrong man. He was a Brazilian.
So what are we doing?
We’re gathering all the intelligence we can. Some of the lads are staking out a suspected bomb factory.
Why don’t we just surround the place with a couple of hundred armed officers, steam in and take the place apart.
Tried that, too. In Forest Gate. Pulled it apart brick by brick. One of the suspects got shot.
You make that sound like a bad thing. I’d drive them to the nearest multi-storey car park and dangle them off the side by their ankles until they confessed.
Don’t quote me, guv, so would I. But the Commissioner would never allow that. You really are quite a throwback.
Isn’t there anyone at the Yard like me?
Well, there’s one officer who seems to be able to do what the hell he likes, harass women, that sort of thing.
Who is he?
Name of Ali Dizaei. He’s written a book.
A book? The only thing I’ve ever written is a bent confession. Come on, Suzi, sod this for a game of soldiers, you can buy me a drink and then we’ll go out and see who we can fit up.
You’ve been watching too much Life On Mars, guv’nor.
Life on Mars, petal? This is more like Life on Venus.
Thursday, April 12, 2007
Vineyard A report to the Press
I recently had a disagreement with a Local bar in the town over their conduct in dealing with illegal activities on their premises, namely drug dealing. The bars policy was to eject people for dealing drugs in the bar this in its self may on the surface seem to be correct accept I believe it is there duty to inform the police so that these dealers can be arrested or be released if a false accusation has been made through malicious accusation, I was also told that if ejected they are not automatically banned i.e. they can return the following day.
As a Licensee, Martial arts Coach to local children and an ex councillor this worried me so I contacted the manager who was very young and inexperienced this may explain his rude and belligerent manner my next course of action was to write to the management company of these chain of Pubs/Bars to ask what was their policy on illegal activity in their premises and 5 weeks later I got the standard answer we agree with our management but no explanation.
With the Local Council now being the local authority I made application to have their license reviewed but as expected nothing is to be done and the reasons are as follows “The Council cannot go the expense of conducting a review hearing if it has no prospect of success” so much for Due Process, so much for combating crime, so much for Swale B C and the Police protecting the Public, this country and this town are being flooded with drugs and when some one tries to stop the abuse they are ignored. So long as the Council do not spend money, so long as the Police can spend their time chasing people for being Politically Incorrect and as long as the pub chain can continue to make money lets turn a blind eye to drugs.
WHAT A COUNTRY! With the election on us ask your prospective councillors what they think! You can read all the letters on http://www.sittingbourne.org/letters_2007.htm
Disgusted
Martin Clarke
As a Licensee, Martial arts Coach to local children and an ex councillor this worried me so I contacted the manager who was very young and inexperienced this may explain his rude and belligerent manner my next course of action was to write to the management company of these chain of Pubs/Bars to ask what was their policy on illegal activity in their premises and 5 weeks later I got the standard answer we agree with our management but no explanation.
With the Local Council now being the local authority I made application to have their license reviewed but as expected nothing is to be done and the reasons are as follows “The Council cannot go the expense of conducting a review hearing if it has no prospect of success” so much for Due Process, so much for combating crime, so much for Swale B C and the Police protecting the Public, this country and this town are being flooded with drugs and when some one tries to stop the abuse they are ignored. So long as the Council do not spend money, so long as the Police can spend their time chasing people for being Politically Incorrect and as long as the pub chain can continue to make money lets turn a blind eye to drugs.
WHAT A COUNTRY! With the election on us ask your prospective councillors what they think! You can read all the letters on http://www.sittingbourne.org/letters_2007.htm
Disgusted
Martin Clarke
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
POLICE PC
An article appeared in the Daily Telegraph today from the Conservatives, I put a reply in the comments box:
Everything mentioned in the article may be true but two things have been at the heart of why we the public have no respect or faith in the Police
1) Senior Officers are more interested in climbing the promotions ladder, putting forward their political views and appeasing their political masters rather then policing without fear or favour
2) It is no surprise that crime detection and Police standards seems to be on the decrease since Political Correctness took over in the Police. A prime example is positive discrimination where a Police Officer is selected and promoted because of their Sex, Sexual orientation, religion and religion rather then their ability to do the job. The job of the Police is to uphold the law not represent society, falling standards in the Police are a direct result of PC.
Everything mentioned in the article may be true but two things have been at the heart of why we the public have no respect or faith in the Police
1) Senior Officers are more interested in climbing the promotions ladder, putting forward their political views and appeasing their political masters rather then policing without fear or favour
2) It is no surprise that crime detection and Police standards seems to be on the decrease since Political Correctness took over in the Police. A prime example is positive discrimination where a Police Officer is selected and promoted because of their Sex, Sexual orientation, religion and religion rather then their ability to do the job. The job of the Police is to uphold the law not represent society, falling standards in the Police are a direct result of PC.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
