PLEAS READ BEFORE OPENNING
These people have infiltrated the British government hereby passing laws to protect their people.
The American government has also been infiltrated “ “ “ “ “ “ “
Now read on and check the pictures of our people in power or their 2nd in charge.
this is serious stuff - Please read to the end BEFORE opening the attachment....
the following is a copy of an article written by Spanish writer Sebastian Vilar Rodriguez
and published in a Spanish newspaper on Jan. 15, 2008.
It doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate the message to the rest of Europe - and
eventually to the rest of the world.
I walked down the street in Barcelona , and suddenly realised a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz ...
We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture,
a thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they were a great
and wonderful people who changed the world.
The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as
the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.
And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of
the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance;
religious extremism and lack of tolerance; crime and poverty due to an unwillingness to work and support
their families with pride.
They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth
and crime.
Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of us,
their naive hosts.
And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred; creative skills for destructive thoughts,
intelligence for backwardness and superstition.
We have exchanged the pursuit of peace for the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children,
for those who pursue death. Human life has no value to these people. They love to kill. It is their pleasure because,
thay say, killing is their route to paradise. They even kill other Muslims. Even their own families - as you'll see later.
What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe .
***********************************
From Hal, a Catholic American. A lot of Americans have become so insulated from reality that they imagine America can suffer defeat without any inconvenience to themselves.
How stupid they are!
Pause a moment, reflect back, and take the following multiple choice test.
These events are actual events from history. They really happened! Do you remember?
HERE'S THE TEST
1. 1968 Bobby Kennedy was shot and killed by:
a. Superman
b. Jay Leno
c. Harry Potter
d. A Muslim male extremist between the ages of 17 and 40
2. In 1972 at the Munich Olympics, athletes were kidnapped and massacred by:
a. Olga Corbett
b. Sitting Bull
c. Arnold Schwarzenegger
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
3. In 1979, the US embassy in Iran was taken over by:
a. Lost Norwegians
b. Elvis
c. A tour bus full of 80-year-old women
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
4. During the 1980's a number of Americans were kidnapped in Lebanon by:
a. John Dillinger
b. The King of Sweden
c. The Boy Scouts
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
5. In 1983, the US Marine barracks in Beirut was blown up by:
a. A pizza delivery boy
b. Pee Wee Herman
c. Geraldo Rivera
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
6. In 1985 the cruise ship Achille Lauro was hijacked and a 70 year old American passenger was murdered and thrown overboard in his wheelchair by:
a. The Smurfs
b. Davey Jones
c. The Little Mermaid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
7. In 1985 TWA flight 847 was hijacked at Athens , and a US Navy diver trying to rescue passengers was murdered by:
a. Captain Kidd
b. Charles Lindberg
c. Mother Teresa
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
8. In 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was bombed by:
a. Scooby Doo
b. The Tooth Fairy
c. The Sundance Kid
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
9. In 1993 the World Trade Center was bombed the first time by:
a. Richard Simmons
b. Grandma Moses
c. Michael Jordan
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
10. In 1998, the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed by:
a. Mr. Rogers
b. Hillary Clinton, to distract attention from Wild Bill's women problems
c. The World Wrestling Federation
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
11. On 9/11/01, four airliners were hijacked; two were used as missiles to take out the World Trade Centers and of the remaining two, one crashed into the US Pentagon and the other was diverted and crashed by the passengers. Thousands of people were killed by:
a. Bugs Bunny, Wiley E. Coyote, Daffy Duck and Elmer Fudd
b. The Supreme Court of Florida
c. Mr. Bean
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
12. In 2002 the United States fought a war in Afghanistan against:
a. Enron
b. The Lutheran Church
c. The NFL
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
13. In 2002 reporter Daniel Pearl was kidnapped and murdered by:
a. Bonnie and Clyde
b. Captain Kangaroo
c. Billy Graham
d. Muslim male extremists mostly between the ages of 17 and 40
14. And now we can add: In 2009, 31 people wounded and 13 American Soldiers murdered on base at Fort Hood
by a Major that was known as...
a: You guessed it - A Muslim male extremist between the age of 17 and 40.
But can you believe it? To ensure that Americans never offend anyone, particularly fanatics intent on killing them, airport security screeners will no longer be allowed to profile certain people. They must conduct random searches of 80-year-old women, little kids, airline pilots with proper identification, secret agents who are members of the President's security detail, 85-year old Congressmen with metal hips, and Medal of Honor winner and former Governor Joe Foss, but leave Muslim Males between the ages 17 and 40 alone lest they be offended!
Let's send this to as many people as we can so that the Nancy Pelosi's, Gloria Alders and other dunder-headed attorneys along with Federal Justices that want to thwart common sense, feel ashamed of themselves - if they have any such sense.
We cannot allow the socialist transformation being brought on by the current administration to continue. Look at what it has done to Spain ; to Europe . We all must stand together before it's too late and everything is lost.
The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000; that is ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:
Literature:
1988 - Najib Mahfooz
Peace:
1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
1990 - Elias James Corey
1994 - Yaser Arafat:
1999 - Ahmed Zewai
Economics:
(zero)
Physics:
(zero)
Medicine:
1960 - Peter Brian Medawar
1998 - Ferid Mourad
TOTAL: 7 SEVEN
The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000; that is FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:
Literature:
1910 - Paul Heyse
1927 - Henri Bergson
1958 - Boris Pasternak
1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon
1966 - Nelly Sachs
1976 - Saul Bellow
1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 - Elias Canetti
1987 - Joseph Brodsky
1991 - Nadine Gordimer World
Peace:
1911 - Alfred Fried
1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser
1968 - Rene Cassin
1973 - Henry Kissinger
1978 - Menachem Begin
1986 - Elie Wiesel
1994 - Shimon Peres
1994 - Yitzhak Rabin
Physics:
1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 - Henri Moissan
1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 - Gabriel Lippmann
1910 - Otto Wallach
1915 - Richard Willstaetter
1918 - Fritz Haber
1921 - Albert Einstein
1922 - Niels Bohr
1925 - James Franck
1925 - Gustav Hertz
1943 - Gustav Stern
1943 - George Charles de Hevesy
1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi
1952 - Felix Bloch
1954 - Max Born
1958 - Igor Tamm
1959 - Emilio Segre
1960 - Donald A. Glaser
1961 - Robert Hofstadter
1961 - Melvin Calvin
1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau
1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz
1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 - Julian Schwinger
1969 - Murray Gell-Mann
1971 - Dennis Gabor
1972 - William Howard Stein
1973 - Brian David Josephson
1975 - Benjamin Mottleson
1976 - Burton Richter
1977 - Ilya Prigogine
1978 - Arno Allan Penzias
1978 - Peter L Kapitza
1979 - Stephen Weinberg
1979 - Sheldon Glashow
1979 - Herbert Charles Brown
1980 - Paul Berg
1980 - Walter Gilbert
1981 - Roald Hoffmann
1982 - Aaron Klug
1985 - Albert A. Hauptman
1985 - Jerome Karle
1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 - Robert Huber
1988 - Leon Lederman
1988 - Melvin Schwartz
1988 - Jack Steinberger
1989 - Sidney Altman
1990 - Jerome Friedman
1992 - Rudolph Marcus
1995 - Martin Perl
2000 - Alan J. Heeger
Economics:
1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 - Simon Kuznets
1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1975 - Leonid Kantorovich
1976 - Milton Friedman
1978 - Herbert A. Simon
1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 - Franco Modigliani
1987 - Robert M. Solow
1990 - Harry Markowitz
1990 - Merton Miller
1992 - Gary Becker
1993 - Robert Fogel
Medicine:
1908 - Elie Metchnikoff
1908 - Paul Erlich
1914 - Robert Barany
1922 - Otto Meyerhof
1930 - Karl Landsteiner
1931 - Otto Warburg
1936 - Otto Loewi
1944 - Joseph Erlanger
1944 - Herbert Spencer Gasser
1945 - Ernst Boris Chain
1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 - Tadeus Reichstein
1952 - Selman Abraham Waksman
1953 - Hans Krebs
1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 - Joshua Lederberg
1959 - Arthur Kornberg
1964 - Konrad Bloch
1965 - Francois Jacob
1965 - Andre Lwoff
1967 - George Wald
1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 - Salvador Luria
1970 - Julius Axelrod
1970 - Sir Bernard Katz
1972 - Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 - Howard Martin Temin
1976 - Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 - Roselyn Sussman Yalow
1978 - Daniel Nathans
1980 - Baruj Benacerraf
1984 - Cesar Milstein
1985 - Michael Stuart Brown
1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
1988 - Gertrude Elion
1989 - Harold Varmus
1991 - Erwin Neher
1991 - Bert Sakmann
1993 - Richard J. Roberts
1993 - Phillip Sharp
1994 - Alfred Gilman
1995 - Edward B. Lewis
1996- Lu RoseIacovino
TOTAL: 129!
The Jews are NOT promoting brain washing children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow
themselves up and cause maximum deaths of non-Muslims. The Jews don't hijack planes, nor kill athletes
at the Olympics, or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is NOT one single Jew who has
destroyed a church. There is NOT a single Jew who protests by killing people.
The Jews don't traffic slaves, nor have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all Infidels.
Perhaps the world's Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the
Jews for all their problems.
Muslims must ask 'what can they do for humankind' before they demand that humankind respects them.
Regardless of your feelings about the crisis between Israel and the Palestinians and Arab neighbours, even
if you believe there is more culpability on Israel 's part, the following two sentences really say it all:
'If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel ." Benjamin Netanyahu
I thought this was going to be a joke with a punch line, but it is no joke!!
PLEASE BE WARNED. THIS MADE
ME FEEL SICK.
I have not included the Film Clip and I did not watch it myself (Martin Clarke)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not for kids or the squeamish.
I send this to all of you with a heavy heart and almost sick to my stomach.
for our leadership to grovel to the people who support this type of "justice"
makes me even sicker. For the people of this country to be so apathetic and
complacent with the encroachment of this sickening system of law is even
more sickening.
The young girl in this video was sentenced to death by an ISLAMIC Court
because she did not want to marry an old man the family arranged for her!
This is NOT Al Qaeda or the Taliban, but MUSLIMS following SHARIA LAW!
These are the same people who want to build a mosque across from Ground Zero,
where they killed 3,000 innocents on 9/11.
And New York is agreeing to this? Do we want this type of barbaric religion?
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
Monday, November 15, 2010
Rebel MP supports the people
Date: 15th November 2010
Release: Immediate
Subject: MP defies whip to stand up for local Equitable Life pensioners.
Local MP Gordon Henderson has again defied Government whips and voted for an amendment to the Equitable Life (Payments) Bill which called for any payments authorised by the Treasury to with-profits annuitants to be made without regard to the date on which such policies were taken out.
The amendment was made because the Government has decided that compensation should be paid only to those people who took out policies after September 1992, rather than include with-profit annuitants who took out policies before 1992 and yet were also subject to the regulatory failure surrounding Equitable Life pensions which is at the heart of the scandal.
The Government opposed the amendment on the grounds firstly that it believes the 1st Sept 1992 cut off point is a reasonable place in which to start, because policy holders would not have been aware of the regulatory failures until that date and secondly because it claims that with-profits annuitants prior to 1992 received more from Equitable Life than they would have done had there been no maladministration.
Mr Henderson explained why he defied a three-line whip to vote for the amendment:
“Both the justifications put forward for objecting to the amendment are ingenuous; the former because, whether or not they knew about it, pre-1993 with-profits annuitants were subject to the same maladministration as those after that date who will be receiving compensation, and the latter because if the Government believes that pre-1993 policy holders would not be able to make successful compensation claims, they why won’t they include them in the scheme?
“Unfortunately, when a vote was taken on the amendment the Government was able to win easily by 301 votes to 76. I was one of half a dozen Conservative members to defy the whips and support the amendment and I did so because before the General Election I, like many of my Conservative colleagues, signed a pledge to uphold in full the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
“That pledge was made to all Equitable Life policy holders who were affected by regulatory failure, not just those who found out about in when the scandal was publicised in 1992.
“When it came to the substantive motion, originally I was not entirely happy with the amount the Government has set aside for compensation which is £1.5 billion. One of Ombudsman’s recommendations was that policy holders should be compensated using their “relative loss” as a starting point. Everybody agrees that the total “relative loss” was between £3-£4.2 billion and policy holders were expecting to receive at least the lower of those two figures.
“However, the Ombudsman did qualify her recommendations by saying that any eventual payment should take account of the public purse. With this in mind I think it would have been appropriate for the Government to have reduced the figure of £3 billion by 25%, in line with the cuts it is making in Government departments in order to tackle the huge deficit we inherited from the previous Labour administration. That would have given a total of £2.25 billion.
“In the event I was delighted that the Government announced during the debate that any payments made under the scheme would be tax free. That is at least some good news for Equitable Life policy holders because it effectively pushes up the total net compensation package close to £2 billion.
“Despite my reservations about some aspects of the scheme, the Coalition Government must be commended for tackling this issue with such speed.
“The previous administration continually ducked the difficult decisions that had to be taken, which resulted in thousands of policy holders dying before a penny of compensation was awarded.
“Perhaps now those still left alive will get some compensation for the losses they suffered because of Government maladministration.”
....ends....
Release: Immediate
Subject: MP defies whip to stand up for local Equitable Life pensioners.
Local MP Gordon Henderson has again defied Government whips and voted for an amendment to the Equitable Life (Payments) Bill which called for any payments authorised by the Treasury to with-profits annuitants to be made without regard to the date on which such policies were taken out.
The amendment was made because the Government has decided that compensation should be paid only to those people who took out policies after September 1992, rather than include with-profit annuitants who took out policies before 1992 and yet were also subject to the regulatory failure surrounding Equitable Life pensions which is at the heart of the scandal.
The Government opposed the amendment on the grounds firstly that it believes the 1st Sept 1992 cut off point is a reasonable place in which to start, because policy holders would not have been aware of the regulatory failures until that date and secondly because it claims that with-profits annuitants prior to 1992 received more from Equitable Life than they would have done had there been no maladministration.
Mr Henderson explained why he defied a three-line whip to vote for the amendment:
“Both the justifications put forward for objecting to the amendment are ingenuous; the former because, whether or not they knew about it, pre-1993 with-profits annuitants were subject to the same maladministration as those after that date who will be receiving compensation, and the latter because if the Government believes that pre-1993 policy holders would not be able to make successful compensation claims, they why won’t they include them in the scheme?
“Unfortunately, when a vote was taken on the amendment the Government was able to win easily by 301 votes to 76. I was one of half a dozen Conservative members to defy the whips and support the amendment and I did so because before the General Election I, like many of my Conservative colleagues, signed a pledge to uphold in full the recommendations of the Parliamentary Ombudsman.
“That pledge was made to all Equitable Life policy holders who were affected by regulatory failure, not just those who found out about in when the scandal was publicised in 1992.
“When it came to the substantive motion, originally I was not entirely happy with the amount the Government has set aside for compensation which is £1.5 billion. One of Ombudsman’s recommendations was that policy holders should be compensated using their “relative loss” as a starting point. Everybody agrees that the total “relative loss” was between £3-£4.2 billion and policy holders were expecting to receive at least the lower of those two figures.
“However, the Ombudsman did qualify her recommendations by saying that any eventual payment should take account of the public purse. With this in mind I think it would have been appropriate for the Government to have reduced the figure of £3 billion by 25%, in line with the cuts it is making in Government departments in order to tackle the huge deficit we inherited from the previous Labour administration. That would have given a total of £2.25 billion.
“In the event I was delighted that the Government announced during the debate that any payments made under the scheme would be tax free. That is at least some good news for Equitable Life policy holders because it effectively pushes up the total net compensation package close to £2 billion.
“Despite my reservations about some aspects of the scheme, the Coalition Government must be commended for tackling this issue with such speed.
“The previous administration continually ducked the difficult decisions that had to be taken, which resulted in thousands of policy holders dying before a penny of compensation was awarded.
“Perhaps now those still left alive will get some compensation for the losses they suffered because of Government maladministration.”
....ends....
Local MP says yes to rent cuts
The local Labour Party housing spokesman, Cllr Mike Hayward, criticised me in this week’s Gazette for supporting the Coalition Government’s proposals to radically reform housing benefit.
I make no apology for wanting to reform the benefit system “so that we do not subsidise people to live in the private sector on rents that ordinary working families could not afford”.
I am surprised that Cllr Hayward and his colleagues do not support that policy because only six months ago at the General Election those are exactly the words included in the Labour Party manifesto!
The truth is that the current outrage from Labour politicians is just so much hypocrisy. The Labour Party left the country with a 43 billion pound deficit that has resulted in us having to pay £120 million every single day in interest charges on the Labour debt.
Part of the reason for that deficit is the scandalous way in which the previous Government allowed the housing benefit bill to rocket. Now I have no problem with paying benefits to those who need them, but it is simply wrong that some people are able to claim over £100,000 a year to live in large houses in the most expensive parts of London. Such extravagance is unacceptable when hard working individuals and families are struggling to find affordable private rents or to pay their mortgages.
The Government is proposing to place a cap on housing benefits of £250 per week for a one bedroom property and £400 per week for a 4 bedroom property. I appreciate that those caps will from next year be less in areas outside London, but then property prices are much lower outside London. Just turn to the To Let pages in the Gazette and check out the sort of house you can rent for £1600 per month!
The Labour Party compounds its hypocrisy by itself proposing a cap on housing benefits whilst at the same time refusing to tell us at what level that cap would be set!
In addition to hypocrisy, a charge of scare mongering can be levelled at the Labour Party also. Up and down the country they are concocting stories about thousands of vulnerable people being hit by the reform of housing benefits. Cllr Hayward points out that Swale has 8000 social houses, insinuating that the tenants of those houses will be worse off under the changes. He knows, or should know, that the proposed benefit changes do NOT apply to social housing, only homes in the private sector.
Cllr Hayward also points out that there are 4000 households on Swale Borough Council’s housing waiting list and claims that these people will be displaced from the housing register by people migrating to our area from London.
Perhaps Cllr Hayward would like to explain why he thinks that the council of which he is a member should give people from London preference over local people who are already on the housing list.
Finally, Cllr Hayward says that we need an MP who stands up for the area rather than toeing the party line. I think my record over the past six months proves that is exactly what I do!
Regards,
I make no apology for wanting to reform the benefit system “so that we do not subsidise people to live in the private sector on rents that ordinary working families could not afford”.
I am surprised that Cllr Hayward and his colleagues do not support that policy because only six months ago at the General Election those are exactly the words included in the Labour Party manifesto!
The truth is that the current outrage from Labour politicians is just so much hypocrisy. The Labour Party left the country with a 43 billion pound deficit that has resulted in us having to pay £120 million every single day in interest charges on the Labour debt.
Part of the reason for that deficit is the scandalous way in which the previous Government allowed the housing benefit bill to rocket. Now I have no problem with paying benefits to those who need them, but it is simply wrong that some people are able to claim over £100,000 a year to live in large houses in the most expensive parts of London. Such extravagance is unacceptable when hard working individuals and families are struggling to find affordable private rents or to pay their mortgages.
The Government is proposing to place a cap on housing benefits of £250 per week for a one bedroom property and £400 per week for a 4 bedroom property. I appreciate that those caps will from next year be less in areas outside London, but then property prices are much lower outside London. Just turn to the To Let pages in the Gazette and check out the sort of house you can rent for £1600 per month!
The Labour Party compounds its hypocrisy by itself proposing a cap on housing benefits whilst at the same time refusing to tell us at what level that cap would be set!
In addition to hypocrisy, a charge of scare mongering can be levelled at the Labour Party also. Up and down the country they are concocting stories about thousands of vulnerable people being hit by the reform of housing benefits. Cllr Hayward points out that Swale has 8000 social houses, insinuating that the tenants of those houses will be worse off under the changes. He knows, or should know, that the proposed benefit changes do NOT apply to social housing, only homes in the private sector.
Cllr Hayward also points out that there are 4000 households on Swale Borough Council’s housing waiting list and claims that these people will be displaced from the housing register by people migrating to our area from London.
Perhaps Cllr Hayward would like to explain why he thinks that the council of which he is a member should give people from London preference over local people who are already on the housing list.
Finally, Cllr Hayward says that we need an MP who stands up for the area rather than toeing the party line. I think my record over the past six months proves that is exactly what I do!
Regards,
Thursday, November 11, 2010
Maybe we in the UK can learn from Barack Obama
Sent to me by Curt Sheare in the USA
The article below was written by Gary Hubbell, a rancher, fishing guide and real estate agent, in Aspen Colorado of all places....Someone picked this up and began circulating it. To confirm its authenticity, someone emailed Gary and received the following reply:
Yes, indeed, I did write that. Thanks for your compliments.
Regards,
Gary Hubbell, Broker/Owner
Email: grandviewranch@gmail.com
Web: www.uccoloradobrokers.com
Web: www.aspenranchrealestate.com
EXCELLENT ARTICLE. NEVER EVER WOULD I HAVE THOUGHT THIS WOULD COME OUT OF ASPEN ,
http://www/.aspentimes .com/article/20100228/ASPENWEEKLY/100229854/
Barack Obama has awakened a sleeping nation
Gary Hubbell
Aspen Times Weekly February 2010
Barack Obama is the best thing that has happened to America in the last 100 years. Truly, he is the savior of America 's future.
Despite the fact that he has some of the lowest approval ratings among recent presidents, history will see Barack Obama as the source of America 's resurrection. Barack Obama has plunged the country into levels of debt that we could not have previously imagined; his efforts to nationalize health care have been met with fierce resistance nationwide; TARP bailouts and stimulus spending have shown little positive effect on the national economy; unemployment is unacceptably high and looks to remain that way for most of a decade; legacy entitlement programs have ballooned to unsustainable levels, and there is a seething anger in the populace.
That's why Barack Obama is such a good thing for America. Here's why.
Obama is the symbol of a creeping liberalism that has infected our society like a cancer for the last 100 years. Just as Hitler is the face of fascism, Obama will go down in history as the face of unchecked liberalism. The cancer metastasized to the point where it could no longer be ignored.
Average Americans who have quietly gone about their lives, earning a paycheck, contributing to their favorite charities, going to high school football games on Friday night, spending their weekends at the beach or on hunting trips - they've gotten off the fence. They've woken up.. There is a level of political activism in this country that we haven't seen since the American Revolution, and Barack Obama has been the catalyst that has sparked a restructuring of the American political and social consciousness.
Think of the crap we've slowly learned to tolerate over the past 50 years as liberalism sought to re-structure the America that was the symbol of freedom and liberty to all the people of the world. Immigration laws were ignored on the basis of compassion. Welfare policies encouraged irresponsibility, the fracturing of families, and a cycle of generations of dependency. Debt was regarded as a tonic to lubricate the economy. Our children left school having been taught that they are exceptional and special, while great numbers of them cannot perform basic functions of mathematics and literacy. Legislators decided that people could not be trusted to defend their own homes, and stripped citizens of their rights to own firearms. Productive members of society have been penalized with a heavy burden of taxes in order to support legions of do-nothings who loll around, reveling in their addictions, obesity, indolence, ignorance and "disabilities." Criminals have been arrested and re-arrested, coddled and set free to pillage the citizenry yet again. Lawyers routinely extort fortunes from doctors, contractors and business people with dubious torts.
We slowly learned to tolerate these outrages, shaking our heads in disbelief, and we went on with our lives.
But Barack Obama has ripped the lid off a seething cauldron of dissatisfaction and unrest.
A former Communist is given a paid government position in the White House as an advisor to the president. Auto companies are taken over by the government, and the auto workers' union - whose contracts are completely insupportable in any economic sense - is rewarded with a stake in the company. Government bails out Wall Street investment bankers and insurance companies, who pay their executives outrageous bonuses as thanks for the public support. Terrorists are read their Miranda rights and given free lawyers. And, despite overwhelming public disapproval, Barack Obama has pushed forward with a health care plan that would re-structure one-sixth of the American economy..
Literally millions of Americans have had enough. They're organizing, they're studying the Constitution and the Federalist Papers, they're reading history and case law, they're showing up at rallies and meetings, and a slew of conservative candidates are throwing their hats into the ring. Is there a revolution brewing? Yes, in the sense that there is a keen awareness that our priorities and sensibilities must be radically re-structured. Will it be a violent revolution? No. It will be done through the interpretation of the original document that has guided us for 220
"FANTASTIC" years--- the Constitution. Just as the pendulum swung to embrace political correctness and liberalism, there will be a backlash, a complete repudiation of a hundred years of nonsense. A hundred years from now, history will perceive the year 2010 as the time when America got back on the right track. And for that, we can thank Barack Hussein Obama.
Gary Hubbell is a hunter, rancher, and former hunting and fly-fishing guide. Gary works as a Colorado ranch real estate broker. He can be reached through his website, aspenranchrealestate.com
The article below was written by Gary Hubbell, a rancher, fishing guide and real estate agent, in Aspen Colorado of all places....Someone picked this up and began circulating it. To confirm its authenticity, someone emailed Gary and received the following reply:
Yes, indeed, I did write that. Thanks for your compliments.
Regards,
Gary Hubbell, Broker/Owner
Email: grandviewranch@gmail.com
Web: www.uccoloradobrokers.com
Web: www.aspenranchrealestate.com
EXCELLENT ARTICLE. NEVER EVER WOULD I HAVE THOUGHT THIS WOULD COME OUT OF ASPEN ,
http://www/.aspentimes .com/article/20100228/ASPENWEEKLY/100229854/
Barack Obama has awakened a sleeping nation
Gary Hubbell
Aspen Times Weekly February 2010
Barack Obama is the best thing that has happened to America in the last 100 years. Truly, he is the savior of America 's future.
Despite the fact that he has some of the lowest approval ratings among recent presidents, history will see Barack Obama as the source of America 's resurrection. Barack Obama has plunged the country into levels of debt that we could not have previously imagined; his efforts to nationalize health care have been met with fierce resistance nationwide; TARP bailouts and stimulus spending have shown little positive effect on the national economy; unemployment is unacceptably high and looks to remain that way for most of a decade; legacy entitlement programs have ballooned to unsustainable levels, and there is a seething anger in the populace.
That's why Barack Obama is such a good thing for America. Here's why.
Obama is the symbol of a creeping liberalism that has infected our society like a cancer for the last 100 years. Just as Hitler is the face of fascism, Obama will go down in history as the face of unchecked liberalism. The cancer metastasized to the point where it could no longer be ignored.
Average Americans who have quietly gone about their lives, earning a paycheck, contributing to their favorite charities, going to high school football games on Friday night, spending their weekends at the beach or on hunting trips - they've gotten off the fence. They've woken up.. There is a level of political activism in this country that we haven't seen since the American Revolution, and Barack Obama has been the catalyst that has sparked a restructuring of the American political and social consciousness.
Think of the crap we've slowly learned to tolerate over the past 50 years as liberalism sought to re-structure the America that was the symbol of freedom and liberty to all the people of the world. Immigration laws were ignored on the basis of compassion. Welfare policies encouraged irresponsibility, the fracturing of families, and a cycle of generations of dependency. Debt was regarded as a tonic to lubricate the economy. Our children left school having been taught that they are exceptional and special, while great numbers of them cannot perform basic functions of mathematics and literacy. Legislators decided that people could not be trusted to defend their own homes, and stripped citizens of their rights to own firearms. Productive members of society have been penalized with a heavy burden of taxes in order to support legions of do-nothings who loll around, reveling in their addictions, obesity, indolence, ignorance and "disabilities." Criminals have been arrested and re-arrested, coddled and set free to pillage the citizenry yet again. Lawyers routinely extort fortunes from doctors, contractors and business people with dubious torts.
We slowly learned to tolerate these outrages, shaking our heads in disbelief, and we went on with our lives.
But Barack Obama has ripped the lid off a seething cauldron of dissatisfaction and unrest.
A former Communist is given a paid government position in the White House as an advisor to the president. Auto companies are taken over by the government, and the auto workers' union - whose contracts are completely insupportable in any economic sense - is rewarded with a stake in the company. Government bails out Wall Street investment bankers and insurance companies, who pay their executives outrageous bonuses as thanks for the public support. Terrorists are read their Miranda rights and given free lawyers. And, despite overwhelming public disapproval, Barack Obama has pushed forward with a health care plan that would re-structure one-sixth of the American economy..
Literally millions of Americans have had enough. They're organizing, they're studying the Constitution and the Federalist Papers, they're reading history and case law, they're showing up at rallies and meetings, and a slew of conservative candidates are throwing their hats into the ring. Is there a revolution brewing? Yes, in the sense that there is a keen awareness that our priorities and sensibilities must be radically re-structured. Will it be a violent revolution? No. It will be done through the interpretation of the original document that has guided us for 220
"FANTASTIC" years--- the Constitution. Just as the pendulum swung to embrace political correctness and liberalism, there will be a backlash, a complete repudiation of a hundred years of nonsense. A hundred years from now, history will perceive the year 2010 as the time when America got back on the right track. And for that, we can thank Barack Hussein Obama.
Gary Hubbell is a hunter, rancher, and former hunting and fly-fishing guide. Gary works as a Colorado ranch real estate broker. He can be reached through his website, aspenranchrealestate.com
Great Speech Gordon
Great Speech by our Local MP Gordon Henderson
Mr Speaker, whenever I receive documents originating from Brussels I feel as if we are being manipulated by some clever Count Dracula who hypnotises us with reassuring words, whilst at the same time is eyeing up our jugular.
The problem is that the more we struggle to escape the grip of this grotesque European vampire, the tighter we fall within its grasp as it slowly sucks the very blood from our democracy.
These two papers on economic policy co-ordination are typical of the sly and insidious way in which Britain is being entrapped by the EU.
We are being asked to agree to these communications, but just look at the size of them. Can any member, hand on heart, say that they have read every word of these documents?
I suspect that the EU thinks that if they flood us with enough words, we will just give up and accept all their proposals without protest.
No doubt ministers will assure us that the proposals are nothing to worry about and that they only relate to Eurozone countries.
If that is the case, Mr Speaker, let’s tell the EU that because we are outside the Eurozone, and have no intention of ever joining the Eurozone, we want nothing to do with their proposal for economic policy co-ordination. We can then adjourn the debate and all go home early.
But of course that isn’t going to happen, not least because these proposals ARE something to worry about and they DO have an impact on Britain.
I am sure that members can dip into these documents and find any number of examples of the way in which if we are not careful, the EU will try to take control of our economy by the back door, let me give just one example...
The first Communication suggests that the Commission should play a greater role in macroeconomic surveillance in future, in order to prevent Member States from building up imbalances that could pose a threat to their competitiveness or macroeconomic stability.
The second Communication expands on that suggestion by proposing a scoreboard of competitiveness indicators, including productivity, labour costs, employment, productivity, current accounts, foreign assets and real exchange rates... pretty well the whole gamut of a country’s economic policy.
The second Communication further proposes that the scoreboard should be used to assess Member State’s performance against all these indicators, in order to develop tailored recommendations for individual Member States.
It goes on to say that if necessary the Commission could issue a warning directly to a Member State under the new provisions in Article 136 TFEU, and recommends – there’s that word again – that in addition to preventative monitoring systems, there should also be an enforcement mechanism, which they call euphemistically: an “excessive imbalances procedure”.
But it gets worse, because the communication makes clear that the monitoring, which would determine the so called recommendations, and eventually enforcement, “would go into more detail for eurozone Member States”. Let me read that bit again... “would go into more detail for eurozone Member States”.
What that phrase means, of course, is that non eurozone countries would be monitored, but to a lesser degree.
So there you have it, if we agree these communications, Britain’s economy would be monitored and if the EU wasn’t happy with our performance it could “recommend” improvements.
As we all know, today’s EU recommendation often becomes tomorrow’s EU legal obligation.
I am sure that I will be accused of exaggerating the threat to our economic independence and that ministers will assure us that they will not let the EU interfere in our budgeting process.
However, over the past three decades the British public have been let down by too many ministers, in too many governments, to have much faith that our present frontbench team will be able to stand up to the steady drift towards European Federalism, particularly when that is the settled policy of at least one partner in the Coalition.
Mr Speaker, I am sorry to be such a cynic, but unfortunately my cynicism has been forged by a history of sacrificing Britain’s independence on the altar of European unification.
Sadly, it is for that reason that I will be voting for this amendment and if it is defeated will be forced, with great regret and a heavy heart, to vote against the Government on this issue.
Mr Speaker, whenever I receive documents originating from Brussels I feel as if we are being manipulated by some clever Count Dracula who hypnotises us with reassuring words, whilst at the same time is eyeing up our jugular.
The problem is that the more we struggle to escape the grip of this grotesque European vampire, the tighter we fall within its grasp as it slowly sucks the very blood from our democracy.
These two papers on economic policy co-ordination are typical of the sly and insidious way in which Britain is being entrapped by the EU.
We are being asked to agree to these communications, but just look at the size of them. Can any member, hand on heart, say that they have read every word of these documents?
I suspect that the EU thinks that if they flood us with enough words, we will just give up and accept all their proposals without protest.
No doubt ministers will assure us that the proposals are nothing to worry about and that they only relate to Eurozone countries.
If that is the case, Mr Speaker, let’s tell the EU that because we are outside the Eurozone, and have no intention of ever joining the Eurozone, we want nothing to do with their proposal for economic policy co-ordination. We can then adjourn the debate and all go home early.
But of course that isn’t going to happen, not least because these proposals ARE something to worry about and they DO have an impact on Britain.
I am sure that members can dip into these documents and find any number of examples of the way in which if we are not careful, the EU will try to take control of our economy by the back door, let me give just one example...
The first Communication suggests that the Commission should play a greater role in macroeconomic surveillance in future, in order to prevent Member States from building up imbalances that could pose a threat to their competitiveness or macroeconomic stability.
The second Communication expands on that suggestion by proposing a scoreboard of competitiveness indicators, including productivity, labour costs, employment, productivity, current accounts, foreign assets and real exchange rates... pretty well the whole gamut of a country’s economic policy.
The second Communication further proposes that the scoreboard should be used to assess Member State’s performance against all these indicators, in order to develop tailored recommendations for individual Member States.
It goes on to say that if necessary the Commission could issue a warning directly to a Member State under the new provisions in Article 136 TFEU, and recommends – there’s that word again – that in addition to preventative monitoring systems, there should also be an enforcement mechanism, which they call euphemistically: an “excessive imbalances procedure”.
But it gets worse, because the communication makes clear that the monitoring, which would determine the so called recommendations, and eventually enforcement, “would go into more detail for eurozone Member States”. Let me read that bit again... “would go into more detail for eurozone Member States”.
What that phrase means, of course, is that non eurozone countries would be monitored, but to a lesser degree.
So there you have it, if we agree these communications, Britain’s economy would be monitored and if the EU wasn’t happy with our performance it could “recommend” improvements.
As we all know, today’s EU recommendation often becomes tomorrow’s EU legal obligation.
I am sure that I will be accused of exaggerating the threat to our economic independence and that ministers will assure us that they will not let the EU interfere in our budgeting process.
However, over the past three decades the British public have been let down by too many ministers, in too many governments, to have much faith that our present frontbench team will be able to stand up to the steady drift towards European Federalism, particularly when that is the settled policy of at least one partner in the Coalition.
Mr Speaker, I am sorry to be such a cynic, but unfortunately my cynicism has been forged by a history of sacrificing Britain’s independence on the altar of European unification.
Sadly, it is for that reason that I will be voting for this amendment and if it is defeated will be forced, with great regret and a heavy heart, to vote against the Government on this issue.
An answer to Immigration Figures
As promised I have found out more on immigration figures as an answer to Richard Bailey
Dear Mr Clarke,
Thank you for your mail.
As most illegal immigrants work in low paid jobs then legalising them would cost a lot of money because they would be entitled to social housing, health and pensions in old age yet would contribute less in tax during their working life. We estimate that the Lifetime costs of each working illegal immigrant once regularised are £220,000 for a single person, £560,000 for a sole earner family with two children and £170,000 for a two earner two child family. For an unemployed immigrant the estimated Lifetime Costs are £660,000 for a single person and £1,030,000 for a two child family.
Our website contains a number of briefing papers on illegal migrants and an amnesty http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPapers
People who employ illegal migrants take advantage of their status by often paying below the minimum wage and not respecting other aspects of employment law such as health and safety and holiday entitlement, which means they have a cheaper source of labour than if they employed a British citizen. Unemployment in London is around 10% so there are plenty of people who could be working in jobs. Rather than keeping them on benefits wouldn't it be better if employers had to offer a decent wage for jobs such as cleaners.
Migrationwatch UK is an independent think tank. Our purpose is to monitor developments, conduct research, and provide the public with full and accurate facts placed in their proper context. We also make recommendations for policy. Our focus in on numbers.
Unlike the huge pro-immigration lobby, primarily funded by the British taxpayer, we receive no funds from the government, nor from the lottery, and have no intention of seeking them. We intend to remain entirely independent but this means that we rely on public donations to support our work. We are the only rational body making an effective case against the massive levels of UK immigration. Our administrative costs are minimal and we do not use any part of donations to pay fund raisers. Every penny goes directly to the cause.
If you feel that this is an important issue and would like to help you can send us a donation in the following ways:
You could call 01869 337007 and donate by credit card or send a cheque to MWUK, PO Box 765, Guildford, GU2 4XN. If you prefer internet banking our account number is 01442587, sort code 30-90-42. A standing order form can be found at:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.com/pdfs/Standing_order_Jun04.doc
Regards
Matthew Pollard
Executive Director
Migrationwatch UK
Dear Mr Clarke,
Thank you for your mail.
As most illegal immigrants work in low paid jobs then legalising them would cost a lot of money because they would be entitled to social housing, health and pensions in old age yet would contribute less in tax during their working life. We estimate that the Lifetime costs of each working illegal immigrant once regularised are £220,000 for a single person, £560,000 for a sole earner family with two children and £170,000 for a two earner two child family. For an unemployed immigrant the estimated Lifetime Costs are £660,000 for a single person and £1,030,000 for a two child family.
Our website contains a number of briefing papers on illegal migrants and an amnesty http://www.migrationwatchuk.org/briefingPapers
People who employ illegal migrants take advantage of their status by often paying below the minimum wage and not respecting other aspects of employment law such as health and safety and holiday entitlement, which means they have a cheaper source of labour than if they employed a British citizen. Unemployment in London is around 10% so there are plenty of people who could be working in jobs. Rather than keeping them on benefits wouldn't it be better if employers had to offer a decent wage for jobs such as cleaners.
Migrationwatch UK is an independent think tank. Our purpose is to monitor developments, conduct research, and provide the public with full and accurate facts placed in their proper context. We also make recommendations for policy. Our focus in on numbers.
Unlike the huge pro-immigration lobby, primarily funded by the British taxpayer, we receive no funds from the government, nor from the lottery, and have no intention of seeking them. We intend to remain entirely independent but this means that we rely on public donations to support our work. We are the only rational body making an effective case against the massive levels of UK immigration. Our administrative costs are minimal and we do not use any part of donations to pay fund raisers. Every penny goes directly to the cause.
If you feel that this is an important issue and would like to help you can send us a donation in the following ways:
You could call 01869 337007 and donate by credit card or send a cheque to MWUK, PO Box 765, Guildford, GU2 4XN. If you prefer internet banking our account number is 01442587, sort code 30-90-42. A standing order form can be found at:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.com/pdfs/Standing_order_Jun04.doc
Regards
Matthew Pollard
Executive Director
Migrationwatch UK
A Joke For Richard Bailey
CATHOLIC COFFEE
Four Catholic men and a Catholic woman were having coffee.
The first Catholic man tells his friends, "My son is a priest, when he walks into a room, everyone calls him 'Father'."
The second Catholic man chirps, "My son is a Bishop. When he walks into a room people call him 'Your Grace'."
The third Catholic gent says, "My son is a Cardinal. When he enters a room everyone says 'Your Eminence'."
The fourth Catholic man then says, "My son is the Pope. When he walks into a room people call him 'Your Holiness'."
Since the lone Catholic woman was sipping her coffee in silence, the four men give her a subtle, "Well....?"
She proudly replies, "I have a daughter,
slim,
tall,
38D breast,
24" waist,
34" hips.
When she walks into a room people say,
"Oh My God."
Four Catholic men and a Catholic woman were having coffee.
The first Catholic man tells his friends, "My son is a priest, when he walks into a room, everyone calls him 'Father'."
The second Catholic man chirps, "My son is a Bishop. When he walks into a room people call him 'Your Grace'."
The third Catholic gent says, "My son is a Cardinal. When he enters a room everyone says 'Your Eminence'."
The fourth Catholic man then says, "My son is the Pope. When he walks into a room people call him 'Your Holiness'."
Since the lone Catholic woman was sipping her coffee in silence, the four men give her a subtle, "Well....?"
She proudly replies, "I have a daughter,
slim,
tall,
38D breast,
24" waist,
34" hips.
When she walks into a room people say,
"Oh My God."
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Debate with Richard baily
As a follow up to my last article on Pensioners I have had a major debate with Dr Richard Bailey on Facebook I have copied it below
Richard Bailey Oh dear!
Monday at 20:54 · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke I sense sarcasm?
Monday at 23:10 · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey Words fail me!
Monday at 23:17 · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke Or are frightened to voice your true feelings?
23 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey I suppose it is PC nonsense to point out that the figures you reproduce are false (they refer to two entirely different groups), and the conclusion you draw is morally objectionable.
Apart from that, I have no problem!
22 hours ago · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke If that is the case give us all the correct figures and condem the circular. Is it morally wrong to put the interest of British Tax paying Pensioners before people who enter this country illegally and are therefore criminals?
22 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey As soon as you mix together genuine refugees with illegal immigrants, you are being either confused or dishonest, Martin.
My problem with the figures is that they are wrong precisely because they conflate two separate groups.
I agree that pe...nsioners deserve a lot more.
I agree that illegal immigrants should be detained and if necessary sent back.
But I also believe that it is simply incorrect to imply (as you do) that refugees are the same group as illegal immigrants.
And it is morally wrong to use the situation of refugees to promote some unconnected social and / or racial agenda.
See more
21 hours ago via · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke Why is it being dishonest if the two groups get the same ammount? or if they don't supply the evidence all well and good saying the figures are wrong but you have to prove it Plus in my opiniom a refugee is an illegal immigrant and should b...e treated as such until our Government decide their status
Of course it racial If you are British you are in the country legally had you not noticed its Johny Foreigner who are illegal immigrants. What social agenda is their?
See more
19 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey You aren't following my point. Martin. The two groups are different: one is legal, and pays taxes; the others aren't and don't.
There is no point talking about 'figures' unless we are clear what is being discussed.
But if you do want some f...igures, see Sue Skipper's recent post:
Immigration: The facts we are never told
* There are between 310,000 and 570,000 illegal immigrants in the UK, according to Home Office estimates
* If allowed to live legally, they would pay more than £1bn in tax each year
* Deporting them would cost £4.7bn and leave acute shortages of cleaners, care workers and hotel staff cIf allowed to stay, the net benefit of nearly £6bn would pay for 300 new schools, 12 district hospitals or 200,000 new nurses
* Nearly 50% of foreign-born immigrants leave Britain within five years
* Migrants fill 90% of low-paid jobs in London and account for 29% of the capital's workforce. London is the UK's fastest-growing region
* Legal migrants comprise 8.7% of the population, but contribute 10.2% of all taxes. Each immigrant pays an average of £7,203 in tax, compared with £6,861 for non-migrant workers
* There were 25,715 people claiming asylum last year. If allowed to work, they would generate £123m for the Treasury
See more
13 hours ago · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke I will check out the stats before I comment
If all these immigrants left our own indiginous population would get work at reasonable rates instead of having 3 million unemployed who claim unemployment benefit and do not pay taxes all your im...migrant labour is doing is paying for British to be on the dole which no doubt some enjoy
There would no longer be bed shortage and school class sizes would go down and we would not need 300 new hospitals
See more
12 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey Which indigenous population? You're German. I'm Irish. We are a nation of mongrels! As far as I can tell, each influx of 'immigrants' has brought something new to the country. And long may it it continue!!
12 hours ago via · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke You are quite aware of what I meant by indigenous as reagard top my myself I have English, Germanm and Irsih in me but I am mainly from the Angla saxon tribe mother came from Westphalia. Yes immigrants in the past have made a big contributio...n to England and they positive part of our history in a time when we needed them. That is not the case now we have millions of British Subjects unemployed which have created a non working under class and please do not quote how much better foreign workers are and how hard they work most under cut our workforce a great deal work for 6 months and return home as you said so do not pay tax and then return 6 months later. Some have created gheto's in our inner cities not speaking our lanquage or understanding iour history or culture. England is having to biuld more houses and hospitals, schools to accomadate this influx and please do not tell me they are paying their way because not all of them work, plus a big number work in the balck economy.
You want get out more and meet real people who are struggling to bring up families some from your days in Karate then maybe you will understand what is happening
Richard Bailey Martin, it's a shame you're returning to the ploy of explaining away people who disagree with you as being due to them not talking to enough / the right type of people.
It's also dodgy, as I'm willing to bet my man parts that I meet more pe...ople and from a wider range of social groups than you every year!
See more
7 minutes ago via · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke What a reply ofcourse I am expalining away people who disagree with me would not be much of a debate if I did not.
I expect you may meet people from different social classes you are a much travelled man and of of course once again I stay in ...Sittingbourne and have never travelled or met people out of my small group therefore I must bbe inferior to you or maybe you do not know who I meet and associate with but I bet my man parts I have more connection with the working man and his problems then you
See more
See more
Richard Bailey Oh dear!
Monday at 20:54 · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke I sense sarcasm?
Monday at 23:10 · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey Words fail me!
Monday at 23:17 · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke Or are frightened to voice your true feelings?
23 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey I suppose it is PC nonsense to point out that the figures you reproduce are false (they refer to two entirely different groups), and the conclusion you draw is morally objectionable.
Apart from that, I have no problem!
22 hours ago · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke If that is the case give us all the correct figures and condem the circular. Is it morally wrong to put the interest of British Tax paying Pensioners before people who enter this country illegally and are therefore criminals?
22 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey As soon as you mix together genuine refugees with illegal immigrants, you are being either confused or dishonest, Martin.
My problem with the figures is that they are wrong precisely because they conflate two separate groups.
I agree that pe...nsioners deserve a lot more.
I agree that illegal immigrants should be detained and if necessary sent back.
But I also believe that it is simply incorrect to imply (as you do) that refugees are the same group as illegal immigrants.
And it is morally wrong to use the situation of refugees to promote some unconnected social and / or racial agenda.
See more
21 hours ago via · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke Why is it being dishonest if the two groups get the same ammount? or if they don't supply the evidence all well and good saying the figures are wrong but you have to prove it Plus in my opiniom a refugee is an illegal immigrant and should b...e treated as such until our Government decide their status
Of course it racial If you are British you are in the country legally had you not noticed its Johny Foreigner who are illegal immigrants. What social agenda is their?
See more
19 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey You aren't following my point. Martin. The two groups are different: one is legal, and pays taxes; the others aren't and don't.
There is no point talking about 'figures' unless we are clear what is being discussed.
But if you do want some f...igures, see Sue Skipper's recent post:
Immigration: The facts we are never told
* There are between 310,000 and 570,000 illegal immigrants in the UK, according to Home Office estimates
* If allowed to live legally, they would pay more than £1bn in tax each year
* Deporting them would cost £4.7bn and leave acute shortages of cleaners, care workers and hotel staff cIf allowed to stay, the net benefit of nearly £6bn would pay for 300 new schools, 12 district hospitals or 200,000 new nurses
* Nearly 50% of foreign-born immigrants leave Britain within five years
* Migrants fill 90% of low-paid jobs in London and account for 29% of the capital's workforce. London is the UK's fastest-growing region
* Legal migrants comprise 8.7% of the population, but contribute 10.2% of all taxes. Each immigrant pays an average of £7,203 in tax, compared with £6,861 for non-migrant workers
* There were 25,715 people claiming asylum last year. If allowed to work, they would generate £123m for the Treasury
See more
13 hours ago · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke I will check out the stats before I comment
If all these immigrants left our own indiginous population would get work at reasonable rates instead of having 3 million unemployed who claim unemployment benefit and do not pay taxes all your im...migrant labour is doing is paying for British to be on the dole which no doubt some enjoy
There would no longer be bed shortage and school class sizes would go down and we would not need 300 new hospitals
See more
12 hours ago · LikeUnlikeRichard Bailey Which indigenous population? You're German. I'm Irish. We are a nation of mongrels! As far as I can tell, each influx of 'immigrants' has brought something new to the country. And long may it it continue!!
12 hours ago via · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke You are quite aware of what I meant by indigenous as reagard top my myself I have English, Germanm and Irsih in me but I am mainly from the Angla saxon tribe mother came from Westphalia. Yes immigrants in the past have made a big contributio...n to England and they positive part of our history in a time when we needed them. That is not the case now we have millions of British Subjects unemployed which have created a non working under class and please do not quote how much better foreign workers are and how hard they work most under cut our workforce a great deal work for 6 months and return home as you said so do not pay tax and then return 6 months later. Some have created gheto's in our inner cities not speaking our lanquage or understanding iour history or culture. England is having to biuld more houses and hospitals, schools to accomadate this influx and please do not tell me they are paying their way because not all of them work, plus a big number work in the balck economy.
You want get out more and meet real people who are struggling to bring up families some from your days in Karate then maybe you will understand what is happening
Richard Bailey Martin, it's a shame you're returning to the ploy of explaining away people who disagree with you as being due to them not talking to enough / the right type of people.
It's also dodgy, as I'm willing to bet my man parts that I meet more pe...ople and from a wider range of social groups than you every year!
See more
7 minutes ago via · LikeUnlikeMartin Clarke What a reply ofcourse I am expalining away people who disagree with me would not be much of a debate if I did not.
I expect you may meet people from different social classes you are a much travelled man and of of course once again I stay in ...Sittingbourne and have never travelled or met people out of my small group therefore I must bbe inferior to you or maybe you do not know who I meet and associate with but I bet my man parts I have more connection with the working man and his problems then you
See more
See more
Monday, November 08, 2010
Illegal Immigrants get more then Pensioners
The following is an email sent to me not the first time I have read. One thing is for sure nothing will be done all the time we are beholden to the European Court of Human Rights
So ‘Pathetically’ True …
OH BRITAIN
We're "broke" and can't help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans, Homeless etc.,
Are you aware of the following?
The British Government provides the following financial assistance: -
BENEFIT
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Weekly allowance
£100
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£250
Weekly Spouse allowance
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
£25
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£225
Additional weekly hardship allowance
£0.00
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£100
TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
£6,000
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£29,900
Please read all and then forward to all your contacts so that we can lobby for a decent old age pension.
After all, the average pensioner has paid taxes and contributed to the growth of this country
for the last 40 to 60 years.
Sad isn't it?
So ‘Pathetically’ True …
OH BRITAIN
We're "broke" and can't help our own Seniors, Veterans, Orphans, Homeless etc.,
Are you aware of the following?
The British Government provides the following financial assistance: -
BENEFIT
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
Weekly allowance
£100
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£250
Weekly Spouse allowance
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
£25
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£225
Additional weekly hardship allowance
£0.00
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£100
TOTAL YEARLY BENEFIT
BRITISH OLD AGED PENSIONER
£6,000
ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS / REFUGEES LIVING IN BRITAIN
£29,900
Please read all and then forward to all your contacts so that we can lobby for a decent old age pension.
After all, the average pensioner has paid taxes and contributed to the growth of this country
for the last 40 to 60 years.
Sad isn't it?
Local MP on Reform Committee
Date: 8th November 2010
Release: Immediate
Subject: MP appointed on Regulatory Reform Select Committee
Local MP, Gordon Henderson has been appointed to an important Parliamentary committee which scrutinises regulatory proposals before they are approved by the Government.
The Regulatory Policy Committee provides independent scrutiny of legislation and advises ministers on whether there is sufficient evidence and analysis to support a new regulation, before they decide in favour of moving ahead with it or not.
Mr Henderson said,
“The Regulatory Policy Committee is an important part of the Coalition Government’s commitment to a “one-in, one-out” approach to new regulations.
“Ministers recognise the way in which red-tape is slowly strangling businesses and they are determined to control and reduce the burden of regulation. The “one-in, one-out” system requires any new regulatory cost to be compensated for by cuts in the costs of old regulations.
“The Regulatory Policy Committee will examine the likely impact that any new regulation is likely to have on businesses and advise ministers whether the costs outweigh the benefits.
“I have set as one of my priorities during the next five years to forge strong links with my local business community and I have visited a large number of companies in the last few months to find out what problems they face. The recurring complaint I receive is about the amount of red-tape imposed on them.
“Being on this committee will give me a real input into the Government’s battle to reduce the costs imposed on our local business by government regulations.”
....ends....
Release: Immediate
Subject: MP appointed on Regulatory Reform Select Committee
Local MP, Gordon Henderson has been appointed to an important Parliamentary committee which scrutinises regulatory proposals before they are approved by the Government.
The Regulatory Policy Committee provides independent scrutiny of legislation and advises ministers on whether there is sufficient evidence and analysis to support a new regulation, before they decide in favour of moving ahead with it or not.
Mr Henderson said,
“The Regulatory Policy Committee is an important part of the Coalition Government’s commitment to a “one-in, one-out” approach to new regulations.
“Ministers recognise the way in which red-tape is slowly strangling businesses and they are determined to control and reduce the burden of regulation. The “one-in, one-out” system requires any new regulatory cost to be compensated for by cuts in the costs of old regulations.
“The Regulatory Policy Committee will examine the likely impact that any new regulation is likely to have on businesses and advise ministers whether the costs outweigh the benefits.
“I have set as one of my priorities during the next five years to forge strong links with my local business community and I have visited a large number of companies in the last few months to find out what problems they face. The recurring complaint I receive is about the amount of red-tape imposed on them.
“Being on this committee will give me a real input into the Government’s battle to reduce the costs imposed on our local business by government regulations.”
....ends....
Sunday, November 07, 2010
Atheist Richard baily
If any of you are on my facebook go to Richard Bailey via Atheist Ireland. Richard and I are having a great debate
Thursday, November 04, 2010
Coalition is Rubbish
I was a Conservative and was quite excited when we had this Coalition Government but they seem be turning native i.e. getting used there position of power. They have become as arrogant as all previous Government ministers and MP’s in that they believe they know what is best and treat the Electorate like stupid little children totally ignoring the will of the people.
There are two things more then anything else that affects the Democratic will of the people of Great Britain
1) The European Court of Human Rights, this loathsome Act continually over turns our laws and in most cases to the determent of the British People
2) The European Union most of our laws are now made by the EU once again to the detriment of the British People. With 80% of the population of GB wanting a Referendum on the EU and 70% of those wishing to leave why doesn’t our government do something? Simple when the British Politics they join the EU gravy train what did Cameron promise A cut in the EU budget but instead he got us an increase.
We need what Switzerland does in that on any major issue there is a referendum.
Not all are like the ones have mention local MEP Daniel Hannan is outspoken critic of the EU and local MP Gordon Henderson is not frightened to represent the wishes of his constituents just read below his stand against Prisoners getting the vote.
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
Date: 3rd November 2010
Release: Immediate
Subject: Gordon Henderson warns Government over votes for prisoners
Local MP Gordon Henderson has warned the Government he will vote against any legislation that allows those convicted of serious crimes, such as murderers, rapists and paedophiles, to vote in elections.
Mr Henderson’s warning came after the Government announced that it was looking at ways to implement the ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that said that Britain is breaking the law by refusing to give prisoners the vote.
Mr Henderson said:
“I am most unhappy that we are being dictated to by a foreign court. Britain is a sovereign nation and the Westminster Parliament should decide how we treat those who break our laws.
“I think that my constituents will be as appalled as I am if serious criminals such as murders, rapists and paedophiles are allowed to vote.
“Prison has two functions, the first is to punish prisoners and the second is to try to rehabilitate them. Part of the punishment regime is to deprive inmates of their liberty and their right to take part in the democratic process.
“If you let prisoners vote then the level of their punishment will be reduced and that simply cannot be right, which is why I warned the Government that when legislation is placed before the House I will vote against it, whether or not we are given a free vote.
“However, I do believe that it is probably right for some prisoners to have a vote in certain circumstances. For instance, people who are on remand should be entitled to vote because they have not been convicted and I think there is an argument for allowing a vote to those prisoners who have almost served their time and who are transferred from a secure prison to an open prison, as part of the process of adsorbing them back into Society.”
Ends
Note to editors:
Gordon Henderson made the following statement in Parliament:
“The shadow Secretary of State for Justice urged during his question that any legislation that comes forward should be subject to a free vote. I do not really care whether there is a free vote or not, because I shall vote against any such legislation.”
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/03.htm#d2e1561
There are two things more then anything else that affects the Democratic will of the people of Great Britain
1) The European Court of Human Rights, this loathsome Act continually over turns our laws and in most cases to the determent of the British People
2) The European Union most of our laws are now made by the EU once again to the detriment of the British People. With 80% of the population of GB wanting a Referendum on the EU and 70% of those wishing to leave why doesn’t our government do something? Simple when the British Politics they join the EU gravy train what did Cameron promise A cut in the EU budget but instead he got us an increase.
We need what Switzerland does in that on any major issue there is a referendum.
Not all are like the ones have mention local MEP Daniel Hannan is outspoken critic of the EU and local MP Gordon Henderson is not frightened to represent the wishes of his constituents just read below his stand against Prisoners getting the vote.
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
Date: 3rd November 2010
Release: Immediate
Subject: Gordon Henderson warns Government over votes for prisoners
Local MP Gordon Henderson has warned the Government he will vote against any legislation that allows those convicted of serious crimes, such as murderers, rapists and paedophiles, to vote in elections.
Mr Henderson’s warning came after the Government announced that it was looking at ways to implement the ruling by the European Court of Human Rights that said that Britain is breaking the law by refusing to give prisoners the vote.
Mr Henderson said:
“I am most unhappy that we are being dictated to by a foreign court. Britain is a sovereign nation and the Westminster Parliament should decide how we treat those who break our laws.
“I think that my constituents will be as appalled as I am if serious criminals such as murders, rapists and paedophiles are allowed to vote.
“Prison has two functions, the first is to punish prisoners and the second is to try to rehabilitate them. Part of the punishment regime is to deprive inmates of their liberty and their right to take part in the democratic process.
“If you let prisoners vote then the level of their punishment will be reduced and that simply cannot be right, which is why I warned the Government that when legislation is placed before the House I will vote against it, whether or not we are given a free vote.
“However, I do believe that it is probably right for some prisoners to have a vote in certain circumstances. For instance, people who are on remand should be entitled to vote because they have not been convicted and I think there is an argument for allowing a vote to those prisoners who have almost served their time and who are transferred from a secure prison to an open prison, as part of the process of adsorbing them back into Society.”
Ends
Note to editors:
Gordon Henderson made the following statement in Parliament:
“The shadow Secretary of State for Justice urged during his question that any legislation that comes forward should be subject to a free vote. I do not really care whether there is a free vote or not, because I shall vote against any such legislation.”
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/03.htm#d2e1561
Wednesday, November 03, 2010
Russian navy captures Somalian pirates Then disposes of them!..
End of problem! Amazing video! Court held on the High Seas
A brutal but effective way to deal with the piracy mess. Looks like the Russians get their act together before we even have a clue.
Just like Hiroshima , an act like this can save a lot of lives and prevent major future loss of life and property. An historic and effective
Way of dealing with the lawless. They did make one mistake. They should have saved one pirate and sent him home with the story...
Read the info below the link before watching the film clip.
RUSSIAN NAVY CAPTURES SOMALIAN PIRATES
This videotape shows Russian Navy commandos on a Somalian pirate ship shortly after the pirates had captured a Russian oil tanker. The Euro Union navy that patrols these waters would not interfere because they feared there could be casualties.
All explanations are in Russian with a single exception of when a wounded pirate says something in English and the Russian soldier says "This is not a fishing boat.". All conversations between the commandos are in Russian. If you don't understand Russian, the pictures speak for themselves.
The soldiers freed their compatriots and the tanker. The Russian Navy Commandos moved the pirates back to their own (pirate) ship, searched the pirate ship for weapons and explosives, and then they left the ship and exploded it with all remaining pirates hand-cuffed to it.
The commandos sank the pirate ship along with the pirates and without any court proceedings, lawyers etc. That is, they used the anti-piracy laws of the 18th and 19th centuries where the captain of the rescuing ship has the right to decide what to do with the pirates. Usually, they were hung.
I would think from now on, Russian ships will not be targets for Somalian pirates
A brutal but effective way to deal with the piracy mess. Looks like the Russians get their act together before we even have a clue.
Just like Hiroshima , an act like this can save a lot of lives and prevent major future loss of life and property. An historic and effective
Way of dealing with the lawless. They did make one mistake. They should have saved one pirate and sent him home with the story...
Read the info below the link before watching the film clip.
RUSSIAN NAVY CAPTURES SOMALIAN PIRATES
This videotape shows Russian Navy commandos on a Somalian pirate ship shortly after the pirates had captured a Russian oil tanker. The Euro Union navy that patrols these waters would not interfere because they feared there could be casualties.
All explanations are in Russian with a single exception of when a wounded pirate says something in English and the Russian soldier says "This is not a fishing boat.". All conversations between the commandos are in Russian. If you don't understand Russian, the pictures speak for themselves.
The soldiers freed their compatriots and the tanker. The Russian Navy Commandos moved the pirates back to their own (pirate) ship, searched the pirate ship for weapons and explosives, and then they left the ship and exploded it with all remaining pirates hand-cuffed to it.
The commandos sank the pirate ship along with the pirates and without any court proceedings, lawyers etc. That is, they used the anti-piracy laws of the 18th and 19th centuries where the captain of the rescuing ship has the right to decide what to do with the pirates. Usually, they were hung.
I would think from now on, Russian ships will not be targets for Somalian pirates
Monday, November 01, 2010
Pill for 13 year olds
Contraceptive Pill for 13 year olds
Yes it has been reported that a Health Department on the Isle of Wight are to issue 13 year olds with the pill without consulting their parents or Doctor and people like Peter Tatchell of Gay Pride are campaigning to have the age of consent brought down to 14.
I may be 60 and old fashioned but has nobody yet worked out the more detailed sex education you give to children the more they will try to experiment and giving them the pill at 13 purely for contraceptive purposes will say to kids OK you have taken the pill now you can have as much sex as you want without getting pregnant. How long before it is a legal requirement as soon as girl reaches puberty she will have to take the pill and through peer pressure forced to have sex.
It no surprise to me that the more intimate sex education you give, that there will more under 16 pregnancies and do not blame the kids, blame the bureaucrats who are obsessed with sex, sometimes you must wonder if they get some sort of stimulus out of this obsession. 18 years ago I was a School Governor and I can remember arguing with the Chairman when we came to sex education He argued that they talk about sex in a loving relationship I argued that we should talk about sex with in marriage need less to say I lost but I am told that now even Loving relationship is not even mentioned. Having Sex is something you do for fun like playing a computer game.
When I was in my teens we new next to nothing about sex we had the basics taught but that was it, most of us had married parents in fact I did not know anyone who did not have married parents. Sex was meant to be in the marriage bed and that was it. Of course young people will try it out but one they would be very careful who they told and it was still considered ungallant to brag about a conquest, courtship was long none of this moving in together after a few weeks. If your parents found out you were having sex there would be all hell to pay and if you got pregnant you got married no questions asked, mind you in those days you respected your parents. Yet I knew no one who was under 16 who was pregnant, if a girl was sleeping around she was termed “Old Bag” or a “Hoare” as for being a single mother it was unheard of in those days we had the quaint old fashioned notion that you had children in marriage, Marriage that where a Man and Women said vows mainly in a church to stay together and remain faithful even in my day that did not happen all the time. If a girl got pregnant outside of marriage she would bring instant shame on the Family sadly even in my early days the Father would not be castigated which he should have been as it takes two to Tango. It seemed old right for boy to sow his wild oats but not a girl that’s some thing I never agreed with
I expect the majority of you reading this will be saying that Clarkee must be a dinosaur and the modern person has the right to do anything they like. So what have we got?
1) The highest teenage pregnancies in the Western World
2) Various forms of VD at an all time high
3) Aids in both male and female , no longer just Homosexual disease
4) Women with children with multiple fathers
5) All time high of single mothers
6) All time high of unwanted babies
7) All time high of abortions
8) Sex becoming just become a pleasurable act rather then an act of love
Of course you have the knock on effect more houses to cope with single mothers, more people claiming housing benefits plus other benefits, more time and money dealings with sexual transmitted diseases etc.
When I speak to younger people about this, they just laugh and tell me I jealous because I missed out because I stayed with one women only. Well it is true I have been married for 40 years with 3 children from one women, I do not have sexual diseases, I do not have any unwanted children and I do put women hood on a pedestal who are not be treated just as sex objects and I have old fashioned Christian morals Yes looking at to days society I am a dinosaur but I just wonder how many people out there would like to be dinosaur as well. Just think it will be Saturday soon and I will miss getting boozed up, having a good old snort plus have a joint then finish of the evening by a good lay with near total stranger, followed by Kebab and then throwing up every where and I am jealous to have missed all that?
Martin Clarke
Yes it has been reported that a Health Department on the Isle of Wight are to issue 13 year olds with the pill without consulting their parents or Doctor and people like Peter Tatchell of Gay Pride are campaigning to have the age of consent brought down to 14.
I may be 60 and old fashioned but has nobody yet worked out the more detailed sex education you give to children the more they will try to experiment and giving them the pill at 13 purely for contraceptive purposes will say to kids OK you have taken the pill now you can have as much sex as you want without getting pregnant. How long before it is a legal requirement as soon as girl reaches puberty she will have to take the pill and through peer pressure forced to have sex.
It no surprise to me that the more intimate sex education you give, that there will more under 16 pregnancies and do not blame the kids, blame the bureaucrats who are obsessed with sex, sometimes you must wonder if they get some sort of stimulus out of this obsession. 18 years ago I was a School Governor and I can remember arguing with the Chairman when we came to sex education He argued that they talk about sex in a loving relationship I argued that we should talk about sex with in marriage need less to say I lost but I am told that now even Loving relationship is not even mentioned. Having Sex is something you do for fun like playing a computer game.
When I was in my teens we new next to nothing about sex we had the basics taught but that was it, most of us had married parents in fact I did not know anyone who did not have married parents. Sex was meant to be in the marriage bed and that was it. Of course young people will try it out but one they would be very careful who they told and it was still considered ungallant to brag about a conquest, courtship was long none of this moving in together after a few weeks. If your parents found out you were having sex there would be all hell to pay and if you got pregnant you got married no questions asked, mind you in those days you respected your parents. Yet I knew no one who was under 16 who was pregnant, if a girl was sleeping around she was termed “Old Bag” or a “Hoare” as for being a single mother it was unheard of in those days we had the quaint old fashioned notion that you had children in marriage, Marriage that where a Man and Women said vows mainly in a church to stay together and remain faithful even in my day that did not happen all the time. If a girl got pregnant outside of marriage she would bring instant shame on the Family sadly even in my early days the Father would not be castigated which he should have been as it takes two to Tango. It seemed old right for boy to sow his wild oats but not a girl that’s some thing I never agreed with
I expect the majority of you reading this will be saying that Clarkee must be a dinosaur and the modern person has the right to do anything they like. So what have we got?
1) The highest teenage pregnancies in the Western World
2) Various forms of VD at an all time high
3) Aids in both male and female , no longer just Homosexual disease
4) Women with children with multiple fathers
5) All time high of single mothers
6) All time high of unwanted babies
7) All time high of abortions
8) Sex becoming just become a pleasurable act rather then an act of love
Of course you have the knock on effect more houses to cope with single mothers, more people claiming housing benefits plus other benefits, more time and money dealings with sexual transmitted diseases etc.
When I speak to younger people about this, they just laugh and tell me I jealous because I missed out because I stayed with one women only. Well it is true I have been married for 40 years with 3 children from one women, I do not have sexual diseases, I do not have any unwanted children and I do put women hood on a pedestal who are not be treated just as sex objects and I have old fashioned Christian morals Yes looking at to days society I am a dinosaur but I just wonder how many people out there would like to be dinosaur as well. Just think it will be Saturday soon and I will miss getting boozed up, having a good old snort plus have a joint then finish of the evening by a good lay with near total stranger, followed by Kebab and then throwing up every where and I am jealous to have missed all that?
Martin Clarke
Sunday, October 31, 2010
Housing Benefit Cut a good idea
When the Governement announced it was to crack down on housing benefit and the figure of £400 maximun for a 3 bedroomed house I naturally thought that was per month and thoght that was draconian but when I realised that was per week or approx £1734 pcm I couldnot believe it. Who in their right mind would pay that much rent for a 3 bedroom house here in Sittingbourne where rents are high the average is £800 pcm. So why is that idiot Boris Johnson complaining about? If someone can pay over £20,000 a year on rent they must have some job I would have thought with living costs etc you would have to be on over £50,000 and by deffintion there job must be highly skilled, if they were made redundant you would expect them to find a job relatively quickly maybe even moving to a different part of the country.
So who are these long time unemployed who live in such expensive houses? If someone live on state benefit or as like to call Charitable handouts they should be moved to areas where the living expenses are cheaper. I here that some of the reasons for not moving them is that they have family in the area, well they must be rich relations, the children at a nice school well there are nice schools in the sticks, they need medical treatment are we to believe they can only get this in well of area's?
Why don't people realise that sucking of the state is costing us to much money and the real poor will not be hurt by this cap on housing benefit.
So who are these long time unemployed who live in such expensive houses? If someone live on state benefit or as like to call Charitable handouts they should be moved to areas where the living expenses are cheaper. I here that some of the reasons for not moving them is that they have family in the area, well they must be rich relations, the children at a nice school well there are nice schools in the sticks, they need medical treatment are we to believe they can only get this in well of area's?
Why don't people realise that sucking of the state is costing us to much money and the real poor will not be hurt by this cap on housing benefit.
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Thomas Jefferson
This was sent by Curt Shearer
Think how this applies today
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe . Thomas Jefferson
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world. Thomas Jefferson (Wish the last government had read this)
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government. Thomas Jefferson (To right we have 4 types of Parliament, County Councils, District Councils, Parish Council plus all the Quangos and we must not forget the corrupt European Union)
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
He said that in 1802 and it has taken over 200 years for us to listen
>
>
Think how this applies today
When we get piled upon one another in large cities, as in Europe, we shall become as corrupt as Europe . Thomas Jefferson
The democracy will cease to exist when you take away from those who are willing to work and give to those who would not. Thomas Jefferson
It is incumbent on every generation to pay its own debts as it goes. A principle which if acted on would save one-half the wars of the world. Thomas Jefferson (Wish the last government had read this)
My reading of history convinces me that most bad government results from too much government. Thomas Jefferson (To right we have 4 types of Parliament, County Councils, District Councils, Parish Council plus all the Quangos and we must not forget the corrupt European Union)
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.
Thomas Jefferson
To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical. Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson said in 1802:
I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property - until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”
He said that in 1802 and it has taken over 200 years for us to listen
>
>
Friday, October 29, 2010
Minimum Wage
A complaint was made about a small businessman not paying the minimum wage to his workers, so a Government official visited him to investigate the accusation
The Government official asked: "I need a list of your employees and how much you pay them."
The Small businessman replied: "Well, there's my worker who's been with me for 3 years. I pay him above the minimum wage plus give him free room and board
"Then there's the mentally challenged worker. He works about 18 hours a day and does about 90% of all the work around here. He makes about £10 per week, pays his own room and board, and I buy him a pack of beers every Saturday night so he can cope with life.
He also sleeps with my wife occasionally.
The Government official asks: "That's the person I want to talk to...the mentally challenged one.
Small businessman : "That would be me."
The Government official asked: "I need a list of your employees and how much you pay them."
The Small businessman replied: "Well, there's my worker who's been with me for 3 years. I pay him above the minimum wage plus give him free room and board
"Then there's the mentally challenged worker. He works about 18 hours a day and does about 90% of all the work around here. He makes about £10 per week, pays his own room and board, and I buy him a pack of beers every Saturday night so he can cope with life.
He also sleeps with my wife occasionally.
The Government official asks: "That's the person I want to talk to...the mentally challenged one.
Small businessman : "That would be me."
Thursday, October 28, 2010
BANANAS Super Food
Banana Facts-amazing
I am going to eat a banana in one minute. What an amazing fruit?
A professor at CCNY for a physiological psych class told his class about bananas. He said the expression "going bananas" is from the effects of bananas on the brain. Read on:
Never, put your banana in the refrigerator!!!
This is interesting..
After reading this, you'll never look at a banana in the same way again.
Bananas contain three natural sugars - sucrose, fructose and glucose combined with fiber. A banana gives an instant, sustained and substantial boost of energy.
Research has proven that just two bananas provide enough energy for a strenuous 90-minute workout. No wonder the banana is the number one fruit with the world's leading athletes.
But energy isn't the only way a banana can help us keep fit. It can also help overcome or prevent a substantial number of illnesses and conditions, making it a must to add to our daily diet.
Depression: According to a recent survey undertaken by MIND amongst people suffering from depression, many felt much better after eating a banana. This is because bananas contain tryptophan, a type of protein that the body converts into serotonin, known to make you relax, improve your mood and generally make you feel happier.
PMS: Forget the pills - eat a banana. The vitamin B6 it contains regulates blood glucose levels, which can affect your mood.
Anemia: High in iron, bananas can stimulate the production of hemoglobin in the blood and so helps in cases of anemia.
Blood Pressure: This unique tropical fruit is extremely high in potassium yet low in salt, making it perfect to beat blood pressure. So much so, the US Food and Drug Administration has just allowed the banana industry to make official claims for the fruit's ability to reduce the risk of blood pressure and stroke.
Brain Power: 200 students at a Twickenham (Middlesex) school ( England ) were helped through their exams this year by eating bananas at breakfast, break, and lunch in a bid to boost their brain power. Research has shown that the potassium-packed fruit can assist learning by making pupils more alert.
Constipation: High in fiber, including bananas in the diet can help restore normal bowel action, helping to overcome the problem without resorting to laxatives.
Hangovers: One of the quickest ways of curing a hangover is to make a banana milkshake, sweetened with honey. The banana calms the stomach and, with the help of the honey, builds up depleted blood sugar levels, while the milk soothes and re-hydrates your system.
Heartburn: Bananas have a natural antacid effect in the body, so if you suffer from heartburn, try eating a banana for soothing relief.
Morning Sickness: Snacking on bananas between meals helps to keep blood sugar levels up and avoid morning sickness
Mosquito bites: Before reaching for the insect bite cream, try rubbing the affected area with the inside of a banana skin.. Many people find it amazingly successful at reducing swelling and irritation.
Nerves: Bananas are high in B vitamins that help calm the nervous system.
Overweight and at work? Studies at the Institute of Psychology in Austria found pressure at work leads to gorging on comfort food like chocolate and chips. Looking at 5,000 hospital patients, researchers found the most obese were more likely to be in high-pressure jobs. The report concluded that, to avoid panic-induced food cravings, we need to control our blood sugar levels by snacking on high carbohydrate foods every two hours to keep levels steady.
Ulcers: The banana is used as the dietary food against intestinal disorders because of its soft texture and smoothness.. It is the only raw fruit that can be eaten without distress in over-chronicler cases. It also neutralizes over-acidity and reduces irritation by coating the lining of the stomach.
Temperature control: Many other cultures see bananas as a "cooling" fruit that can lower both the physical and emotional temperature of expectant mothers. In Thailand , for example, pregnant women eat bananas to ensure their baby is born with a cool temperature.
Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD): Bananas can help SAD sufferers because they contain the natural mood enhancer tryptophan.
Smoking &Tobacco Use: Bananas can also help people trying to give up smoking. The B6, B12 they contain, as well as the potassium and magnesium found in them, help the body recover from the effects of nicotine withdrawal.
Stress: Potassium is a vital mineral, which helps normalize the heartbeat, sends oxygen to the brain and regulates your body's water balance.. When we are stressed, our metabolic rate rises, thereby reducing our potassium levels. These can be rebalanced with the help of a high-potassium banana snack.
Strokes: According to research in The New England Journal of Medicine, eating bananas as part of a regular diet can cut the risk of death by strokes by as much as 40%!
Warts: Those keen on natural alternatives swear that if you want to kill off a wart, take a piece of banana skin and place it on the wart, with the yellow side out. Carefully hold the skin in place with a plaster or surgical tape!
So, a banana really is a natural remedy for many ills. When you compare it to an apple, it has four times the protein, twice the carbohydrate, three times the phosphorus, five times the vitamin A and iron, and twice the other vitamins and minerals. It is also rich in potassium and is one of the best value foods around So maybe its time to change that well-known phrase so that we say, "A banana a day keeps the doctor away!"
PASS IT ON TO YOUR FRIENDS
PS: Bananas must be the reason monkeys are so happy all the time! I will add one here; want a quick shine on our shoes?? Take the INSIDE of the banana skin, and rub directly on the shoe....polish with dry cloth. Amazing fruit !!!
I am going to eat a banana in one minute. What an amazing fruit?
A professor at CCNY for a physiological psych class told his class about bananas. He said the expression "going bananas" is from the effects of bananas on the brain. Read on:
Never, put your banana in the refrigerator!!!
This is interesting..
After reading this, you'll never look at a banana in the same way again.
Bananas contain three natural sugars - sucrose, fructose and glucose combined with fiber. A banana gives an instant, sustained and substantial boost of energy.
Research has proven that just two bananas provide enough energy for a strenuous 90-minute workout. No wonder the banana is the number one fruit with the world's leading athletes.
But energy isn't the only way a banana can help us keep fit. It can also help overcome or prevent a substantial number of illnesses and conditions, making it a must to add to our daily diet.
Depression: According to a recent survey undertaken by MIND amongst people suffering from depression, many felt much better after eating a banana. This is because bananas contain tryptophan, a type of protein that the body converts into serotonin, known to make you relax, improve your mood and generally make you feel happier.
PMS: Forget the pills - eat a banana. The vitamin B6 it contains regulates blood glucose levels, which can affect your mood.
Anemia: High in iron, bananas can stimulate the production of hemoglobin in the blood and so helps in cases of anemia.
Blood Pressure: This unique tropical fruit is extremely high in potassium yet low in salt, making it perfect to beat blood pressure. So much so, the US Food and Drug Administration has just allowed the banana industry to make official claims for the fruit's ability to reduce the risk of blood pressure and stroke.
Brain Power: 200 students at a Twickenham (Middlesex) school ( England ) were helped through their exams this year by eating bananas at breakfast, break, and lunch in a bid to boost their brain power. Research has shown that the potassium-packed fruit can assist learning by making pupils more alert.
Constipation: High in fiber, including bananas in the diet can help restore normal bowel action, helping to overcome the problem without resorting to laxatives.
Hangovers: One of the quickest ways of curing a hangover is to make a banana milkshake, sweetened with honey. The banana calms the stomach and, with the help of the honey, builds up depleted blood sugar levels, while the milk soothes and re-hydrates your system.
Heartburn: Bananas have a natural antacid effect in the body, so if you suffer from heartburn, try eating a banana for soothing relief.
Morning Sickness: Snacking on bananas between meals helps to keep blood sugar levels up and avoid morning sickness
Mosquito bites: Before reaching for the insect bite cream, try rubbing the affected area with the inside of a banana skin.. Many people find it amazingly successful at reducing swelling and irritation.
Nerves: Bananas are high in B vitamins that help calm the nervous system.
Overweight and at work? Studies at the Institute of Psychology in Austria found pressure at work leads to gorging on comfort food like chocolate and chips. Looking at 5,000 hospital patients, researchers found the most obese were more likely to be in high-pressure jobs. The report concluded that, to avoid panic-induced food cravings, we need to control our blood sugar levels by snacking on high carbohydrate foods every two hours to keep levels steady.
Ulcers: The banana is used as the dietary food against intestinal disorders because of its soft texture and smoothness.. It is the only raw fruit that can be eaten without distress in over-chronicler cases. It also neutralizes over-acidity and reduces irritation by coating the lining of the stomach.
Temperature control: Many other cultures see bananas as a "cooling" fruit that can lower both the physical and emotional temperature of expectant mothers. In Thailand , for example, pregnant women eat bananas to ensure their baby is born with a cool temperature.
Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD): Bananas can help SAD sufferers because they contain the natural mood enhancer tryptophan.
Smoking &Tobacco Use: Bananas can also help people trying to give up smoking. The B6, B12 they contain, as well as the potassium and magnesium found in them, help the body recover from the effects of nicotine withdrawal.
Stress: Potassium is a vital mineral, which helps normalize the heartbeat, sends oxygen to the brain and regulates your body's water balance.. When we are stressed, our metabolic rate rises, thereby reducing our potassium levels. These can be rebalanced with the help of a high-potassium banana snack.
Strokes: According to research in The New England Journal of Medicine, eating bananas as part of a regular diet can cut the risk of death by strokes by as much as 40%!
Warts: Those keen on natural alternatives swear that if you want to kill off a wart, take a piece of banana skin and place it on the wart, with the yellow side out. Carefully hold the skin in place with a plaster or surgical tape!
So, a banana really is a natural remedy for many ills. When you compare it to an apple, it has four times the protein, twice the carbohydrate, three times the phosphorus, five times the vitamin A and iron, and twice the other vitamins and minerals. It is also rich in potassium and is one of the best value foods around So maybe its time to change that well-known phrase so that we say, "A banana a day keeps the doctor away!"
PASS IT ON TO YOUR FRIENDS
PS: Bananas must be the reason monkeys are so happy all the time! I will add one here; want a quick shine on our shoes?? Take the INSIDE of the banana skin, and rub directly on the shoe....polish with dry cloth. Amazing fruit !!!
Saturday, October 23, 2010
Richard says Martin you can not Spell
Thought you would interested in my latest bout with Richard Bailey on Face Book
This time it is about the Royals
Richard Bailey They are a phenomenally wealthy, publicly funded, work-shy, in-bred, unelected, public institution.
God bless 'em, I say!
II expect you would like to see a President and guess where he would come from Yes one of the Political Parties most probably with money educated at a Public School and Unniversity Good God am I seeing a pattern here
Richard does stir up a debate Great Stuff
This time it is about the Royals
Richard Bailey They are a phenomenally wealthy, publicly funded, work-shy, in-bred, unelected, public institution.
God bless 'em, I say!
Martin Clarke Lets have an elected President then you will see the expenses
Richard Bailey That's the spirit, Martin. If you can't make an actual argument just rely on cliches!
Martin Clarke They are a phenomenally wealthy, publicly funded, work-shy, in-bred, unelected, public institution NOW THAT IS A CLICHE a very tired one at that
Richard Bailey I know what to buy you for Christmas, Martin: a dictionary!
'work-shy' is an interpretation of their work patterns (admittedly using a certain colloquialism gut effect). Everything else I wrote is just FACT.
They can't be cliched because the...y are not frequently trotted out in place of an argument. And they are TRUE.
On the hand, implying that a US-style president is the only alternative to the monarchy is misleading. The Irish model (figurehead, without constitutional powers) if the most popular form I'm waste of.
That it will be more expensive is just guesswork. How could you possible know? What we do know is that the Irish President costs a tiny fraction compared to the Queen (not to mention her hangers-on).
And the pop about envy is so weak that it doesn't deserve a reply.
Therefore= cliche!See more
Martin Clarke I appolloggise for my bad speling unlike you I didnot have a Public School education or went to university and I am so grateful that I know some one of your such high intterlect and apprciate you ciorrecting me so I can keep learning otherwise I will have no future it seems Jane Austin could not spell and had bad grammar just think how famous she could have become if she had. As you you know I come from Kent and once worked on a farm so I expect my diction is incorrect as well. Thankyou
II expect you would like to see a President and guess where he would come from Yes one of the Political Parties most probably with money educated at a Public School and Unniversity Good God am I seeing a pattern here
Richard does stir up a debate Great Stuff
At last an MP who speaks for the people
Date: 22nd October 2010
Release: Immediate
Subject: Local MP leads rebellion against European budget increase
Local MP, Gordon Henderson would like to see the Government unilaterally reduce the United Kingdom’s contribution to the EU budget for 2011 by the average percentage cut imposed on Whitehall departments.
Mr Henderson also insisted that if the European Commission and Parliament are not happy with the Government’s decision and kick up a fuss, then the Government should hold an immediate referendum on Britain’s continued membership of the EU and let the British People decide our future once and for all.
Mr Henderson’s demand was made in a speech in the House of Commons, where Mr Henderson told fellow members that the EU Commission proposed to increase the EU budget next year by 5.8%, which in real money represents an increase of £6.2 billion pounds. The UK alone could expect to pay nearly £2 billion more in the coming year.
Mr Henderson expressed his concern that during an era of financial uncertainly and austerity, the British Government were expected to hand over to the European Union billions of pounds to waste on grandiose schemes such as the European External Action Service and the Institute of Gender Equality in Vilnius, Lithuania, and for which incidentally he said, the United Kingdom is being asked to cough up £800,000 next year.
Economic Secretary to the Treasury. Justine Greening MP said:
“In the wake of the worst financial crisis in living memory, there is no justification for an increase in the EU's annual budget of nearly 6%.
“We are already talking to our partners in Europe and in our group-the European Conservatives and Reformists. The Whip in charge of that group assures us that they will be voting against a rise in the European Parliament when it comes before them.”
Mr Henderson said, “I am delighted that the Government recognise the stupidity of the European Commission’s decision to increase its budget next year, however, I would like them to go one step further and actually reduce the amount British tax payers are expected to give Brussels.”
Mr Henderson was one of 34 Conservative MP’s who voted against the Government position.
....ends....
Note to the Editor: A full transcript of Gordon Henderson’s speech follows:
SPEEECH ON EU BUDGET
Mr Speaker, over the last few months we have spent a lot of our time debating one or other aspect of the financial crisis in which the country finds itself.
Britain has a huge deficit and the British public have collectively built up a mountain of personal debt. All in all we are in a real mess.
The Government has set out on a series of measures to reduce the National Debt and I know that many individuals, including people in my own constituency of Sittingbourne and Sheppey, are trying hard to cut their own indebtedness. These are tough times for us all.
And we are not alone; many other countries around the World, including many in Europe, face huge financial challenges and are struggling to balance their books without pushing their national economies into another recession.
So in this era of uncertainty and austerity, what does that organisation of probity and good governance, the European Commission do? It proposes to increase the EU budget next year by 5.8%, which in real money represents an increase of 6,102 thousand million pounds! That’s right; £6.2 billion pounds.
Mr Speaker, what planet do European Commissioners live on? I’ll tell you where: They live on the planet of self indulgence. They live in a cushioned climate of privilege in which the Brussels gravy train doesn’t stop long enough for them to see what is happening in the real world.
To be fair our own British Government at least recognises the stupidity of the European Commission, as the Economic Secretary to The Treasury wrote in her briefing notes: “...the Government is very concerned by the proposed increase in payment appropriations of 5.8%”. Very concerned? I would be absolutely lived!
So at least one out of three cheers for the Treasury for that statement, but sadly, Mr Speaker, I can’t bring myself to give them any more cheers, because my Honourable Friend lets herself down by going on to address the profligacy of the EU by saying that the Government will propose that the EU Budget remains at cash levels equivalent to the 2010 Budget.
I bet all those ministers who have been tasked with producing a twenty percent cut in their department budgets are a bit narked about that one. I am sure that in the present economic climate that they would be delighted to be given a zero growth budget.
Mr Speaker, like many other honourable and Rt. honourable members, I have been inundated with letters and emails complaining about the proposed cuts in benefits, increases in tuition fees and changes to public service pensions.
There is a great deal of disquiet out there and coming from a constituency which has some of the most deprived areas in the South East within its boundaries, I share some of that disquiet.
But I am happy to go into bat on behalf of the Coalition Government and argue the case for those cuts because I think that in their heart of hearts most of the people in my constituency understand that we have no choice but to push through those cuts if we are to reduce the mountain of debt we inherited from the previous Government.
But Mr Speaker, I would not be able to look my friends and neighbours in the eye if we drove through a programme of painful cuts in our public services, while at the same time bunging the European Union billions of pounds to waste on grandiose schemes such as the European External Action Service and the Institute of Gender Equality in Vilnius, Lithuania, and for which incidently, the United Kingdom is being asked to cough up £800,000 next year.
Mr Speaker, next year the European Commission proposes to spend over £7 billion pounds on administration. By my calculation the United Kingdom’s contribution to those administration costs will be around £1 billion. If Government departments and public bodies in this country are being asked to cut their administration costs, then it is surely right that the European Commission should be expected to do the same.
Now I know that my honourable friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury will say that the British Government will be pressing the EU to deliver greater value for money. But does anybody in this Chamber really believe that our friends across the English Channel in the European Commission will actually listen to them?
And when the Draft Budget is eventually presented to the European Parliament for debate later this year, do Treasury ministers really think that anything other than a small group of British MEP’s will take a blind bit of notice of their view?
I think not, which is why I would like to see the Government unilaterally reduce the United Kingdom’s contribution to the EU budget for 2011 by the average percentage cut imposed on Whitehall departments.
If European Commission and Parliament don’t like it and kick up a fuss, then we should hold an immediate referendum on Britain’s continued membership of the EU and let the British People decide our future once and for all. Perhaps we can hold it on the same day as the AV Referendum!
Mr Speaker, I support this amendment and would urge members on all sides of the House to do the same.
Release: Immediate
Subject: Local MP leads rebellion against European budget increase
Local MP, Gordon Henderson would like to see the Government unilaterally reduce the United Kingdom’s contribution to the EU budget for 2011 by the average percentage cut imposed on Whitehall departments.
Mr Henderson also insisted that if the European Commission and Parliament are not happy with the Government’s decision and kick up a fuss, then the Government should hold an immediate referendum on Britain’s continued membership of the EU and let the British People decide our future once and for all.
Mr Henderson’s demand was made in a speech in the House of Commons, where Mr Henderson told fellow members that the EU Commission proposed to increase the EU budget next year by 5.8%, which in real money represents an increase of £6.2 billion pounds. The UK alone could expect to pay nearly £2 billion more in the coming year.
Mr Henderson expressed his concern that during an era of financial uncertainly and austerity, the British Government were expected to hand over to the European Union billions of pounds to waste on grandiose schemes such as the European External Action Service and the Institute of Gender Equality in Vilnius, Lithuania, and for which incidentally he said, the United Kingdom is being asked to cough up £800,000 next year.
Economic Secretary to the Treasury. Justine Greening MP said:
“In the wake of the worst financial crisis in living memory, there is no justification for an increase in the EU's annual budget of nearly 6%.
“We are already talking to our partners in Europe and in our group-the European Conservatives and Reformists. The Whip in charge of that group assures us that they will be voting against a rise in the European Parliament when it comes before them.”
Mr Henderson said, “I am delighted that the Government recognise the stupidity of the European Commission’s decision to increase its budget next year, however, I would like them to go one step further and actually reduce the amount British tax payers are expected to give Brussels.”
Mr Henderson was one of 34 Conservative MP’s who voted against the Government position.
....ends....
Note to the Editor: A full transcript of Gordon Henderson’s speech follows:
SPEEECH ON EU BUDGET
Mr Speaker, over the last few months we have spent a lot of our time debating one or other aspect of the financial crisis in which the country finds itself.
Britain has a huge deficit and the British public have collectively built up a mountain of personal debt. All in all we are in a real mess.
The Government has set out on a series of measures to reduce the National Debt and I know that many individuals, including people in my own constituency of Sittingbourne and Sheppey, are trying hard to cut their own indebtedness. These are tough times for us all.
And we are not alone; many other countries around the World, including many in Europe, face huge financial challenges and are struggling to balance their books without pushing their national economies into another recession.
So in this era of uncertainty and austerity, what does that organisation of probity and good governance, the European Commission do? It proposes to increase the EU budget next year by 5.8%, which in real money represents an increase of 6,102 thousand million pounds! That’s right; £6.2 billion pounds.
Mr Speaker, what planet do European Commissioners live on? I’ll tell you where: They live on the planet of self indulgence. They live in a cushioned climate of privilege in which the Brussels gravy train doesn’t stop long enough for them to see what is happening in the real world.
To be fair our own British Government at least recognises the stupidity of the European Commission, as the Economic Secretary to The Treasury wrote in her briefing notes: “...the Government is very concerned by the proposed increase in payment appropriations of 5.8%”. Very concerned? I would be absolutely lived!
So at least one out of three cheers for the Treasury for that statement, but sadly, Mr Speaker, I can’t bring myself to give them any more cheers, because my Honourable Friend lets herself down by going on to address the profligacy of the EU by saying that the Government will propose that the EU Budget remains at cash levels equivalent to the 2010 Budget.
I bet all those ministers who have been tasked with producing a twenty percent cut in their department budgets are a bit narked about that one. I am sure that in the present economic climate that they would be delighted to be given a zero growth budget.
Mr Speaker, like many other honourable and Rt. honourable members, I have been inundated with letters and emails complaining about the proposed cuts in benefits, increases in tuition fees and changes to public service pensions.
There is a great deal of disquiet out there and coming from a constituency which has some of the most deprived areas in the South East within its boundaries, I share some of that disquiet.
But I am happy to go into bat on behalf of the Coalition Government and argue the case for those cuts because I think that in their heart of hearts most of the people in my constituency understand that we have no choice but to push through those cuts if we are to reduce the mountain of debt we inherited from the previous Government.
But Mr Speaker, I would not be able to look my friends and neighbours in the eye if we drove through a programme of painful cuts in our public services, while at the same time bunging the European Union billions of pounds to waste on grandiose schemes such as the European External Action Service and the Institute of Gender Equality in Vilnius, Lithuania, and for which incidently, the United Kingdom is being asked to cough up £800,000 next year.
Mr Speaker, next year the European Commission proposes to spend over £7 billion pounds on administration. By my calculation the United Kingdom’s contribution to those administration costs will be around £1 billion. If Government departments and public bodies in this country are being asked to cut their administration costs, then it is surely right that the European Commission should be expected to do the same.
Now I know that my honourable friend the Economic Secretary to the Treasury will say that the British Government will be pressing the EU to deliver greater value for money. But does anybody in this Chamber really believe that our friends across the English Channel in the European Commission will actually listen to them?
And when the Draft Budget is eventually presented to the European Parliament for debate later this year, do Treasury ministers really think that anything other than a small group of British MEP’s will take a blind bit of notice of their view?
I think not, which is why I would like to see the Government unilaterally reduce the United Kingdom’s contribution to the EU budget for 2011 by the average percentage cut imposed on Whitehall departments.
If European Commission and Parliament don’t like it and kick up a fuss, then we should hold an immediate referendum on Britain’s continued membership of the EU and let the British People decide our future once and for all. Perhaps we can hold it on the same day as the AV Referendum!
Mr Speaker, I support this amendment and would urge members on all sides of the House to do the same.
Friday, October 22, 2010
Budget hurts thanks to Labour
The Budget Strikes
All of us were bracing ourselves for the budget, already our Judo Club has had to drop its prices to keep members, I have several flats which I rent two of which are occupied by unemployed people who receive housing benefit they may have to move out because they will not receive the full rent, mind you in some cases cutting back on their luxuries i.e. takeaways, Alcohol, Sky TV might do them a favour health wise.
Yet I accept that we all have to make sacrifices but several things have annoyed me :
1) The press reported that a women in a wheel chair harangued the PM about losing benefit but had anyone asked what her income was and what her disability was? She may be genuine but a lot are not
2) That degusting wasteful European Union areproposing a 5.9 per cent increase in its budget at a time when public services in this country are being slashed and a lot of that goes on Jollies for the bureaucrats
3) Foreign aid budget to cost every family £500 with 17 foreign aid fat cats are earning more than £90,000 plus all the corruption, on TV the other day we were told in the Sudan the aid is used to blackmail Christians into become Muslim i.e. to Christian villages change religion or starve, how many of these countries receiving aid are also buying war planes, tanks etc. Time has come to recognize that Charity starts at home and if we are support these countries we need to over see them even take over their government.
4) Labour politicians who stand and condemn the cuts its because of them we are in this mess
5) Finally the Unions who screaming about Job Losses where they were when Immigrant Labour was taking British peoples jobs? 1.5 million foreigners have returned to take on Jobs while 5 million Brits are unemployed, unions start looking after the working man rather then getting involved in political strife
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
All of us were bracing ourselves for the budget, already our Judo Club has had to drop its prices to keep members, I have several flats which I rent two of which are occupied by unemployed people who receive housing benefit they may have to move out because they will not receive the full rent, mind you in some cases cutting back on their luxuries i.e. takeaways, Alcohol, Sky TV might do them a favour health wise.
Yet I accept that we all have to make sacrifices but several things have annoyed me :
1) The press reported that a women in a wheel chair harangued the PM about losing benefit but had anyone asked what her income was and what her disability was? She may be genuine but a lot are not
2) That degusting wasteful European Union areproposing a 5.9 per cent increase in its budget at a time when public services in this country are being slashed and a lot of that goes on Jollies for the bureaucrats
3) Foreign aid budget to cost every family £500 with 17 foreign aid fat cats are earning more than £90,000 plus all the corruption, on TV the other day we were told in the Sudan the aid is used to blackmail Christians into become Muslim i.e. to Christian villages change religion or starve, how many of these countries receiving aid are also buying war planes, tanks etc. Time has come to recognize that Charity starts at home and if we are support these countries we need to over see them even take over their government.
4) Labour politicians who stand and condemn the cuts its because of them we are in this mess
5) Finally the Unions who screaming about Job Losses where they were when Immigrant Labour was taking British peoples jobs? 1.5 million foreigners have returned to take on Jobs while 5 million Brits are unemployed, unions start looking after the working man rather then getting involved in political strife
Martin Clarke Sittingbourne
Monday, October 18, 2010
My reply to Skipper
Martyn Skipper posted in HATED BY THE DAILY MAIL
Martyn Skipper 17 October 21:33
I'd like to invite all my gay, socialist, unemployed Polish friends to join... oh yes, and all my intelligent, democratic, free-thinking friends too!
My reply
do not have any Homosexual Friends, I do not have any socialist Friends, I do not know any unemployed Polish I do know many unemployed British People but I see they are not included in your list, obviously as someone who did not go to Uni and left school at 15 to take an apprenticeship I am not one of your intelligencer, I have yet to find out what democratic means as for free thinking that was abolished under Harriet Harman
So I expect I will have to reject your invitation as I do not fit any of the categories
Will continue to read the Daily Mail and the Sun the largest circulating newspapers or as some say the Peoples Newspapers will leave the small circulations newspapers like the Guardian and Independent to the Left wing Professional Nerds
Martyn Skipper 17 October 21:33
I'd like to invite all my gay, socialist, unemployed Polish friends to join... oh yes, and all my intelligent, democratic, free-thinking friends too!
My reply
do not have any Homosexual Friends, I do not have any socialist Friends, I do not know any unemployed Polish I do know many unemployed British People but I see they are not included in your list, obviously as someone who did not go to Uni and left school at 15 to take an apprenticeship I am not one of your intelligencer, I have yet to find out what democratic means as for free thinking that was abolished under Harriet Harman
So I expect I will have to reject your invitation as I do not fit any of the categories
Will continue to read the Daily Mail and the Sun the largest circulating newspapers or as some say the Peoples Newspapers will leave the small circulations newspapers like the Guardian and Independent to the Left wing Professional Nerds
Sunday, October 17, 2010
Middle Class Whingers
I am getting sick and tired to listening to the whinging of the so called middle class professionals First it was our children's university fees should be free we can afford to pay, Yet the same children have gap years and spend a good proportion of their time and money having fun and getting drunk. Next they demand Child allowance because £50,000 a year earnings is not enough. I can understand why anyone should get Child allowance why should the state pay you to have children, yes help those on low income but it should not be universal. The latest 3 professional beat up a man in a tube for fun and laughed afterwards and did they get prison oh no just 4 months suspends wonder what they would have got if they unemployed kids from a Council estate
Friday, October 08, 2010
New Immigration Laws
It's just a matter of choice!!!
Subject: New Immigration Laws
New Immigration Laws: PLEASE read to the bottom or you will miss the message
1 There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
2. All ballots will be in this nation's language.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
3. All government business will be conducted in our language.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they are here.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
6. Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps,
no health care, or other government assistance programmes.
Any burden will be deported.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least equal
to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
8. If foreigners come here and buy land... Options will be restricted.
Certain parcels including waterfront property are reserved for citizens
naturally born into this country.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
9.. Foreigners may have no protests; no demonstrations, no waving of a
foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our prime minister
or his policies. These will lead to imprisonment and deportation.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted &,
when caught, sent to jail until your deportation can be arranged.
All assets will be taken from you.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Too strict?......
The above laws are the current immigration laws of the Muslim countries !
These sound fine to me, NOW, how can we get these laws to be British immigration laws??
Map Of My Country:
Let me make this perfectly clear!
THIS IS MY COUNTRY!
And, because I make
This statement
DOES NOT
Mean I'm against immigration!!!
YOU ARE WELCOME HERE,
IN MY COUNTRY!
Welcome!
To come through legally:
1. Get a sponsor!
2. Get a place to lay your head!
3. Get a job!
4. Live By OUR Rules!
5. Pay YOUR Taxes!
And
6. Learn the LANGUAGE like immigrants
Have in the past!!!
AND
7. Please don't demand that we hand over our lifetime
savings of welfare benefits to you.
If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone,
Then
YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM!
When will BRITS STOP giving away
THEIR RIGHTS?
We've gone so far the other way...
Bent over backwards not to offend anyone.
But it seems no one cares about the
BRITISH CITIZEN
that's being offended!
WAKE UP BRITAIN
If you agree..... Pass this on.
If you don't agree.. Delete it!!
Subject: New Immigration Laws
New Immigration Laws: PLEASE read to the bottom or you will miss the message
1 There will be no special bilingual programs in the schools.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
2. All ballots will be in this nation's language.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
3. All government business will be conducted in our language.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
4. Non-residents will NOT have the right to vote no matter how long they are here.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
5. Non-citizens will NEVER be able to hold political office
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
6. Foreigners will not be a burden to the taxpayers. No welfare, no food stamps,
no health care, or other government assistance programmes.
Any burden will be deported.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
7. Foreigners can invest in this country, but it must be an amount at least equal
to 40,000 times the daily minimum wage.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
8. If foreigners come here and buy land... Options will be restricted.
Certain parcels including waterfront property are reserved for citizens
naturally born into this country.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
9.. Foreigners may have no protests; no demonstrations, no waving of a
foreign flag, no political organizing, no bad-mouthing our prime minister
or his policies. These will lead to imprisonment and deportation.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
10. If you do come to this country illegally, you will be actively hunted &,
when caught, sent to jail until your deportation can be arranged.
All assets will be taken from you.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Too strict?......
The above laws are the current immigration laws of the Muslim countries !
These sound fine to me, NOW, how can we get these laws to be British immigration laws??
Map Of My Country:
Let me make this perfectly clear!
THIS IS MY COUNTRY!
And, because I make
This statement
DOES NOT
Mean I'm against immigration!!!
YOU ARE WELCOME HERE,
IN MY COUNTRY!
Welcome!
To come through legally:
1. Get a sponsor!
2. Get a place to lay your head!
3. Get a job!
4. Live By OUR Rules!
5. Pay YOUR Taxes!
And
6. Learn the LANGUAGE like immigrants
Have in the past!!!
AND
7. Please don't demand that we hand over our lifetime
savings of welfare benefits to you.
If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone,
Then
YOU'RE PART OF THE PROBLEM!
When will BRITS STOP giving away
THEIR RIGHTS?
We've gone so far the other way...
Bent over backwards not to offend anyone.
But it seems no one cares about the
BRITISH CITIZEN
that's being offended!
WAKE UP BRITAIN
If you agree..... Pass this on.
If you don't agree.. Delete it!!
I answer Richard Bailey
Richard Bailey wrote an article on Facbook condeming MigrationWatch an organisation I support the attached letter explains why. I told Richard I would contatc MigrationWatch and here is their reply
Who is:
Sally Bercow, political commentator and wife of Commons speaker John Bercow MP aspiring Leftwing Labour Polatician
see article at bottom of page
Dear Martin
Thank you for writing to us. With regards to Sally Bercow's comments our full response is now on our website www.migrationwatch.com
I'm glad you are a supporter. Our focus is on immigration numbers. Our work is based on official statistics from such sources as the Home Office and the Office of National Statistics. With all statistics there is room for debate about what the numbers mean for the future which gives groups in favour of immigration room for spin. What is fact however is that net migration to the UK in 2009 was 196,000 people and as a result the UK is becoming a more congested and constrained place to live.
Unlike the huge pro-immigration lobby, primarily funded by the British taxpayer, we receive no funds from the government, nor from the lottery, and have no intention of seeking them. We intend to remain entirely independent but this means that we rely on public donations to support our work. We are the only rational body making an effective case against the massive levels of UK immigration. Our administrative costs are minimal and we do not use any part of donations to pay fund raisers. Every penny goes directly to the cause.
If you feel that this is an important issue and would like to continue helping you can send us a donation in the following ways:
You could call 01869 337007 and donate by credit card or send a cheque to MWUK, PO Box 765, Guildford, GU2 4XN. If you prefer internet banking our account number is 01442587, sort code 30-90-42. A standing order form can be found at:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.com/pdfs/Standing_order_Jun04.doc
Regards
Matthew Pollard
Executive Director
Migrationwatch UK
Article from the Times Oline
Sam Coates, Chief Political Correspondent says
Sally Bercow reveals past full of binge-drinking and one-night stands
John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, has been criticised by MPs after his wife gave an extraordinary interview to launch herself as a Labour politician.
Sally Bercow, 40, described her battle with drink and fondness for one-night stands in her twenties, and criticised David Cameron as a “merchant of spin”. MPs reacted with astonishment, pointing out that Mrs Bercow lives in Speaker’s House at taxpayers’ expense and questioning whether this compromised the Speaker’s independence. Mr Bercow was a Tory MP before becoming Speaker, but was elected with support of Labour MPs.
In the interview published today, Mrs Bercow said that she wanted to get rid of “skeletons” from her past before standing as a Labour councillor in Pimlico, central London, in a bid to become an MP at the next election. She said: “I was a big binge drinker in my twenties. I started drinking at Oxford, being a party girl, and it got out of control.
“I got a grip for a while, but in the mid-Nineties I was working in advertising and I would drink wine at lunch then go out and drink a bottle in the evening, most evenings really. I had no stop button.” Asked whether this was as excessive as she had implied, she added: “Well, OK. It was sometimes more like two bottles, except I promised John I wouldn’t say that. Have I mucked it up already?”
She became teetotal in 2000 after realising that she had put herself in danger. “I was an argumentative, stroppy drunk, picking arguments with my bosses over stupid things. Plus I’d lose my judgment and put myself in danger. I’d fall asleep on the Tube and end up in Epping or Heathrow. And I’d get into unlicensed minicabs in the early hours. All the things we’d tell our daughters not to do.”
Mrs Bercow also confessed to casual sexual encounters because of alcohol. “The weren’t romantic. They were more like flings. I wasn’t looking for love. But it’s true that I would end up sometimes at a bar and someone would send a drink over, and I’d think, ‘Why not?’ and we’d go home together. I liked the excitement of not knowing how a night was going to end. It was all very ladette — work hard, play hard.
“I want to run for Parliament as a Labour candidate so this has all got to come out and I’d rather tell it myself,” she told the London Evening Standard.
Mrs Bercow has been criticised recently for the way that she presented her qualifications on her CV, but she denied any intention to mislead. She also rebuffed criticism of her spending on a redecoration of Speaker’s House that she said was necessary because the dark red upset her autistic son, Oliver, 5, one of their three children.
She suggested that David Cameron was a fake. “He favours the interests of the few over the mainstream majority. I do think the Tory party is for the privileged few and what it stands for isn’t in the interests of most ordinary people.” She also said that Mr Cameron could send his children to private school because there was no “real commitment” to state education.
Mr Cameron did not support Mr Bercow’s candidacy but a spokesman refused to be drawn on the issue and said that the party was supportive of the office of Speaker. Mrs Bercow may not send her children to grammar schools in her husband’s Buckinghamshire constituency because she opposes selection.
She revealed that after dating Mr Bercow for six months “he dumped me for being too argumentative. But you have to remember that he was a right-wing headbanger at the time. He’s much more rounded and moderate now, and he’s rethought a lot.”
Asked how it might work if she was an MP while her husband was Speaker, she said: “He’d be so tough on me though. I’d never get a question when he was in the chair. I’d have to wait till the deputy speaker was in.”
Nadine Dorries, a Tory MP who opposed Mr Bercow’s selection as Speaker, said: “We desperately need to restore authority and respect to Parliament. What this interview has done is remove any painstaking progress Parliament has made and reduced the Speaker and his office to that of a laughing stock.
“How can we ask the people to trust us, when the man who holds us to account has such poor judgment that he allowed his wife to give such an appalling, self-obsessed interview?”
Who is:
Sally Bercow, political commentator and wife of Commons speaker John Bercow MP aspiring Leftwing Labour Polatician
see article at bottom of page
Dear Martin
Thank you for writing to us. With regards to Sally Bercow's comments our full response is now on our website www.migrationwatch.com
I'm glad you are a supporter. Our focus is on immigration numbers. Our work is based on official statistics from such sources as the Home Office and the Office of National Statistics. With all statistics there is room for debate about what the numbers mean for the future which gives groups in favour of immigration room for spin. What is fact however is that net migration to the UK in 2009 was 196,000 people and as a result the UK is becoming a more congested and constrained place to live.
Unlike the huge pro-immigration lobby, primarily funded by the British taxpayer, we receive no funds from the government, nor from the lottery, and have no intention of seeking them. We intend to remain entirely independent but this means that we rely on public donations to support our work. We are the only rational body making an effective case against the massive levels of UK immigration. Our administrative costs are minimal and we do not use any part of donations to pay fund raisers. Every penny goes directly to the cause.
If you feel that this is an important issue and would like to continue helping you can send us a donation in the following ways:
You could call 01869 337007 and donate by credit card or send a cheque to MWUK, PO Box 765, Guildford, GU2 4XN. If you prefer internet banking our account number is 01442587, sort code 30-90-42. A standing order form can be found at:
http://www.migrationwatchuk.com/pdfs/Standing_order_Jun04.doc
Regards
Matthew Pollard
Executive Director
Migrationwatch UK
Article from the Times Oline
Sam Coates, Chief Political Correspondent says
Sally Bercow reveals past full of binge-drinking and one-night stands
John Bercow, the Commons Speaker, has been criticised by MPs after his wife gave an extraordinary interview to launch herself as a Labour politician.
Sally Bercow, 40, described her battle with drink and fondness for one-night stands in her twenties, and criticised David Cameron as a “merchant of spin”. MPs reacted with astonishment, pointing out that Mrs Bercow lives in Speaker’s House at taxpayers’ expense and questioning whether this compromised the Speaker’s independence. Mr Bercow was a Tory MP before becoming Speaker, but was elected with support of Labour MPs.
In the interview published today, Mrs Bercow said that she wanted to get rid of “skeletons” from her past before standing as a Labour councillor in Pimlico, central London, in a bid to become an MP at the next election. She said: “I was a big binge drinker in my twenties. I started drinking at Oxford, being a party girl, and it got out of control.
“I got a grip for a while, but in the mid-Nineties I was working in advertising and I would drink wine at lunch then go out and drink a bottle in the evening, most evenings really. I had no stop button.” Asked whether this was as excessive as she had implied, she added: “Well, OK. It was sometimes more like two bottles, except I promised John I wouldn’t say that. Have I mucked it up already?”
She became teetotal in 2000 after realising that she had put herself in danger. “I was an argumentative, stroppy drunk, picking arguments with my bosses over stupid things. Plus I’d lose my judgment and put myself in danger. I’d fall asleep on the Tube and end up in Epping or Heathrow. And I’d get into unlicensed minicabs in the early hours. All the things we’d tell our daughters not to do.”
Mrs Bercow also confessed to casual sexual encounters because of alcohol. “The weren’t romantic. They were more like flings. I wasn’t looking for love. But it’s true that I would end up sometimes at a bar and someone would send a drink over, and I’d think, ‘Why not?’ and we’d go home together. I liked the excitement of not knowing how a night was going to end. It was all very ladette — work hard, play hard.
“I want to run for Parliament as a Labour candidate so this has all got to come out and I’d rather tell it myself,” she told the London Evening Standard.
Mrs Bercow has been criticised recently for the way that she presented her qualifications on her CV, but she denied any intention to mislead. She also rebuffed criticism of her spending on a redecoration of Speaker’s House that she said was necessary because the dark red upset her autistic son, Oliver, 5, one of their three children.
She suggested that David Cameron was a fake. “He favours the interests of the few over the mainstream majority. I do think the Tory party is for the privileged few and what it stands for isn’t in the interests of most ordinary people.” She also said that Mr Cameron could send his children to private school because there was no “real commitment” to state education.
Mr Cameron did not support Mr Bercow’s candidacy but a spokesman refused to be drawn on the issue and said that the party was supportive of the office of Speaker. Mrs Bercow may not send her children to grammar schools in her husband’s Buckinghamshire constituency because she opposes selection.
She revealed that after dating Mr Bercow for six months “he dumped me for being too argumentative. But you have to remember that he was a right-wing headbanger at the time. He’s much more rounded and moderate now, and he’s rethought a lot.”
Asked how it might work if she was an MP while her husband was Speaker, she said: “He’d be so tough on me though. I’d never get a question when he was in the chair. I’d have to wait till the deputy speaker was in.”
Nadine Dorries, a Tory MP who opposed Mr Bercow’s selection as Speaker, said: “We desperately need to restore authority and respect to Parliament. What this interview has done is remove any painstaking progress Parliament has made and reduced the Speaker and his office to that of a laughing stock.
“How can we ask the people to trust us, when the man who holds us to account has such poor judgment that he allowed his wife to give such an appalling, self-obsessed interview?”
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
