Links
- Is my Blog HOT or NOT?
- Email: lord_harris[AT]lycos[DOT]com
-
MYSTERY CARROT AWARD
for website adequacy
Archives
WANTED: CONTRIBUTORS FOR THIS BLOG
Friday, August 20, 2004
Errr... no.
The headline of the Daily Express today screams "The Grief that Puts Blair to Shame!!!!!!!!" (minus the exclamation marks.) It is not available online unfortunately but I shall reproduce parts for your reading pleasure.
The basic gist of the story is this: The 14 year old sister of a soldier who was killed in Iraq wrote a letter to the PM fiercely criticising him over the Iraq war. Of course The Daily Express feels this is some sort of proof that... well I don't know what but they are making a big deal out of it.
However, something's just not right. It's like the environmentalists who print crappy drawings done by toddlers saying things like "please don't hurt the environment Mr Bush" or "pollution makes me sad!" The implication is that because the artists are young and innocent (read: pliable) it somehow adds more weight to their argument. Rubbish.
I hate to have to fisk a letter written by a girl who is understandably very upset but it has to be done because I cannot accept this attitude that, because her brother died, her words are sacrosanct. Actually, rather than fisking the whole article, I shall provide a summary and fisk that. Sort of.
Summary: You sent my brother (and lots of other young men) to war to be killed. You bastard. I think this war is really about [insert assorted conspiracy theory] and I hate you you should die etc. etc.
Many people in the anti-war crew often evoke the emotive image of young men being "sent" to die on the battlefields. However, they are not conscripted. They choose to be in the army and should be fully aware that being killed is merely an occupational hazard in that line of work. It's not the same as being forced to go to war.
The whole letter (and accompanying article) is just a big load of stop-the-war coalition spiel and while I do feel empathy for her, I do not feel it is a good idea to treat this with any more degree of reverence than any other extended anti-war drivel.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
The basic gist of the story is this: The 14 year old sister of a soldier who was killed in Iraq wrote a letter to the PM fiercely criticising him over the Iraq war. Of course The Daily Express feels this is some sort of proof that... well I don't know what but they are making a big deal out of it.
However, something's just not right. It's like the environmentalists who print crappy drawings done by toddlers saying things like "please don't hurt the environment Mr Bush" or "pollution makes me sad!" The implication is that because the artists are young and innocent (read: pliable) it somehow adds more weight to their argument. Rubbish.
I hate to have to fisk a letter written by a girl who is understandably very upset but it has to be done because I cannot accept this attitude that, because her brother died, her words are sacrosanct. Actually, rather than fisking the whole article, I shall provide a summary and fisk that. Sort of.
Summary: You sent my brother (and lots of other young men) to war to be killed. You bastard. I think this war is really about [insert assorted conspiracy theory] and I hate you you should die etc. etc.
Many people in the anti-war crew often evoke the emotive image of young men being "sent" to die on the battlefields. However, they are not conscripted. They choose to be in the army and should be fully aware that being killed is merely an occupational hazard in that line of work. It's not the same as being forced to go to war.
The whole letter (and accompanying article) is just a big load of stop-the-war coalition spiel and while I do feel empathy for her, I do not feel it is a good idea to treat this with any more degree of reverence than any other extended anti-war drivel.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, August 17, 2004
Looking at this article, I was struck by the caption underneath the picture at the top. It reads:
|
-------------------------------------------------------
"Tax credits reward parents who work"
Interesting. I was always under the impression that being paid a wage was your reward for working. I guess not.
""One interesting thing we found was that women in receipt of the credit were less likely to marry than they were in 1997. Perhaps they have more financial independence." "
Yeah, because financial dependence is the only reason to marry.
Why should single mums be bribed into working? If they can't be bothered to work anyway and earn money to support themselves and their offspring then they should live in poverty. That might provide an incentive. Plus, ever mindful as I am of children (hate the little blighters really), if they refuse and the child is living in poverty and/or neglect they can be placed in foster homes.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
NOOOOOO
It's sad to see the Tories jumping on the anti-mobile phone mast bandwagon. This is the sort of health scaremongering I would expect to come from Labour or Lib Dem. Nearly everybody in the country has a mobile and yet no-one wants to live near a mast. Well here's a newsflash: MOBILE PHONES NEED MASTS TO WORK! Unfortunately, everyone seems to think that masts are good as long as there isn't one near me.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
|
-------------------------------------------------------
Friday, August 13, 2004
Quote of the Day
It had to happen sooner or later. I have joined the legions of bloggers who have a quote of the day feature.
"Of course, this is the same sort of discrimination we use every day when we choose to eat a delicious steak instead of a bag full of broken glass, or when we choose to hump our special lady instead of a burning cactus. Why, we wouldn't even be here if our ancient monkey ancestors hadn't quickly learned to discriminate pretty much around the clock." - The Gintleman (comments section)
|
-------------------------------------------------------
"Of course, this is the same sort of discrimination we use every day when we choose to eat a delicious steak instead of a bag full of broken glass, or when we choose to hump our special lady instead of a burning cactus. Why, we wouldn't even be here if our ancient monkey ancestors hadn't quickly learned to discriminate pretty much around the clock." - The Gintleman (comments section)
|
-------------------------------------------------------
Wednesday, August 11, 2004
Showing Promise
Michael Howard's performance has not been that great lately. His disgraceful opportunism over the Butler report coupled with the recent Lib-Dem style populist policies adopted by the Tories has left me wondering if there is really any point left in the Tory party.
Fortunately, The speech made today by Michael Howard displays the promise which he has been lacking in recent months. For once, he is refusing to pander to liberals and special interest group and has unveiled some impressive policies on policing which are not only tough on crime but are a savage kick in the teeth for political correctness.
"The element of the speech which received most comment beforehand was the announcement that the Conservatives would not implement the Macpherson recommendation on issuing receipts to those stopped.
That decision was described as "deeply disappointing" by Simon Woolley, director of Operation Black Vote, which encourages ethnic minorities to participate in the democratic process.
He said it was "sanctioning the demonisation of black and Asian youth"."
No, it is allowing the police to stop and search people who they think look suspicious, regardless of race, rather than filling ethnicity quotas. Not only that, but it saves a hell of a lot of time spent having to write out receipts for everyone stopped.
Interestingly enough, there have never been any statistics released (as far as I am aware) as to how many people stopped and searched are actually found with drugs or other illegal items.
Other main policies:
"Increase police officer numbers by 40,000 "
More police officers is always good.
"Introduce zero tolerance policing"
Good. Give 'em what they deserve.
"Build more prisons and end early release scheme"
Ha! This one's going to get right up the noses of wet liberals everywhere! I like it.
"Increase drug rehab places from 2,000 to 20,000"
Interestingly enough, this is a policy more at home in the Labour or Lib-Dem manifesto but nevertheless I feel it is a worthy one. After all, I'm all for prison as a form of punishment but I do feel there is little point jailing drug offenders only to release them to offend again. I think the best approach to this is "punish and rehabilitate", an idea which has curiously never been explored by either side.
Well there's some good ideas from the Tories but is it all just hot air?
|
-------------------------------------------------------
Fortunately, The speech made today by Michael Howard displays the promise which he has been lacking in recent months. For once, he is refusing to pander to liberals and special interest group and has unveiled some impressive policies on policing which are not only tough on crime but are a savage kick in the teeth for political correctness.
"The element of the speech which received most comment beforehand was the announcement that the Conservatives would not implement the Macpherson recommendation on issuing receipts to those stopped.
That decision was described as "deeply disappointing" by Simon Woolley, director of Operation Black Vote, which encourages ethnic minorities to participate in the democratic process.
He said it was "sanctioning the demonisation of black and Asian youth"."
No, it is allowing the police to stop and search people who they think look suspicious, regardless of race, rather than filling ethnicity quotas. Not only that, but it saves a hell of a lot of time spent having to write out receipts for everyone stopped.
Interestingly enough, there have never been any statistics released (as far as I am aware) as to how many people stopped and searched are actually found with drugs or other illegal items.
Other main policies:
"Increase police officer numbers by 40,000 "
More police officers is always good.
"Introduce zero tolerance policing"
Good. Give 'em what they deserve.
"Build more prisons and end early release scheme"
Ha! This one's going to get right up the noses of wet liberals everywhere! I like it.
"Increase drug rehab places from 2,000 to 20,000"
Interestingly enough, this is a policy more at home in the Labour or Lib-Dem manifesto but nevertheless I feel it is a worthy one. After all, I'm all for prison as a form of punishment but I do feel there is little point jailing drug offenders only to release them to offend again. I think the best approach to this is "punish and rehabilitate", an idea which has curiously never been explored by either side.
Well there's some good ideas from the Tories but is it all just hot air?
|
-------------------------------------------------------
Monday, August 09, 2004
BBC Bias?
Do the BBC really hate Michael Howard? Look at this page. Let's see... we got Charles Kennedy and Tony Blair looking visionary and yet statesmanlike then we got Michael Howard.... who looks like someone is crushing his balls in a vice.
Now, obviously the BBC can't help the way Mr. Howard looks but the thing is they seem to use this exact picture in any story about him. Surely they must have other pictures of him where he looks like less of a pillock? It's almost as if they are purposefuly trying to make him look like a loony...
|
-------------------------------------------------------
Now, obviously the BBC can't help the way Mr. Howard looks but the thing is they seem to use this exact picture in any story about him. Surely they must have other pictures of him where he looks like less of a pillock? It's almost as if they are purposefuly trying to make him look like a loony...
|
-------------------------------------------------------
Tuesday, August 03, 2004
Wanted!
I am looking for someone else to become a contributor to this blog. Basically, although I enjoy writing this blog, I lack both time and inspiration to post as often as I would like and so I feel that having another writer to make the posting more consistent would greatly benefit the readers and, subsequently, the blog traffic.
In keeping with the theme of this blog, I am looking for someone 18 or under, although I will accept 21 as the upper limit. I am also looking, ideally, for someone who considers themselves to be left-wing because I think it would make the blog very interesting to have contributors with largely opposing viewpoints and, as far as I know, it has never been done. Failing that, however, I will be happy to take on another Tory boy (or girl) so please do feel free to e-mail me.
If you are up for it, then either let me know via the comments box or send me an e-mail.
I would also be very appreciative if anyone reading this who already has a blog would be so kind as to draw attention to this on their own blog as I would like to get the word out as far and wide as possible.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
In keeping with the theme of this blog, I am looking for someone 18 or under, although I will accept 21 as the upper limit. I am also looking, ideally, for someone who considers themselves to be left-wing because I think it would make the blog very interesting to have contributors with largely opposing viewpoints and, as far as I know, it has never been done. Failing that, however, I will be happy to take on another Tory boy (or girl) so please do feel free to e-mail me.
If you are up for it, then either let me know via the comments box or send me an e-mail.
I would also be very appreciative if anyone reading this who already has a blog would be so kind as to draw attention to this on their own blog as I would like to get the word out as far and wide as possible.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
This would be quite funny if it was on a satire website such as Bullshit news. Unfortunately, it is on the official website for this country's governing political party. What on earth does it say about them that they spend time and money making childish little websites like that.
Of course, it is typical of Labour's current strategy. Rather than thinking up good ideas of their own, they just spend all their time trying to discredit the Tories. The debate in the commons every Wednesday seems to go something like this:
Conservative MP: Question about policy X
Tony Blair: "Umm... you are a smelly old fart!"
Labour MPs: "HAHAHAHAHA HOW DROLL!"
Speaker: "STFU"
Michael Howard: "Twat."
I'd say that's a pretty close representation of the truth. Another PMQ's favourite is this:
Michael Howard: Does the prime minister agree that he is a dick?
Tony Blair: Well, if I am a dick what does that make you?
Michael Howard: The prime minister is dodging the issue. I have evidence that he is a dick.
Tony Blair: Well you are a bigger dick.
Michael Howard: No, you're the only dick around here.
Tony Blair: Dick
Michael Howard: Dick
Tony Blair: Dick
Michael Howard: Dick
Charles Kennedy: The truth is, you're both dicks and I am superior to both of you.
Obviously that is not an exact transcript but the parallels are certainly there if you look closely. Every debate seems to start with MH making an accusation. Then TB makes the same accusation back at him (usually as a reference to his previous roles in government.) This slanging match continues for a while unabated until Charles Kennedy steps in with the bold sword of irrelevance, relishing in his utter superiority over those... those... rogues.
It's "yah-boo" politics at it's finest, my friends. |
-------------------------------------------------------
Of course, it is typical of Labour's current strategy. Rather than thinking up good ideas of their own, they just spend all their time trying to discredit the Tories. The debate in the commons every Wednesday seems to go something like this:
Conservative MP: Question about policy X
Tony Blair: "Umm... you are a smelly old fart!"
Labour MPs: "HAHAHAHAHA HOW DROLL!"
Speaker: "STFU"
Michael Howard: "Twat."
I'd say that's a pretty close representation of the truth. Another PMQ's favourite is this:
Michael Howard: Does the prime minister agree that he is a dick?
Tony Blair: Well, if I am a dick what does that make you?
Michael Howard: The prime minister is dodging the issue. I have evidence that he is a dick.
Tony Blair: Well you are a bigger dick.
Michael Howard: No, you're the only dick around here.
Tony Blair: Dick
Michael Howard: Dick
Tony Blair: Dick
Michael Howard: Dick
Charles Kennedy: The truth is, you're both dicks and I am superior to both of you.
Obviously that is not an exact transcript but the parallels are certainly there if you look closely. Every debate seems to start with MH making an accusation. Then TB makes the same accusation back at him (usually as a reference to his previous roles in government.) This slanging match continues for a while unabated until Charles Kennedy steps in with the bold sword of irrelevance, relishing in his utter superiority over those... those... rogues.
It's "yah-boo" politics at it's finest, my friends. |
-------------------------------------------------------
Friday, July 30, 2004
I really do find Hazel Blears an intensely irritating woman. Whenever I see her being interviewed on TV the utter crap that spews forth from her mouth just makes we want to put an axe through the TV.
This here article is no different.
"It was possible that Labour could, as in other countries, govern for decades not just years, she told the magazine of the independent body for Labour members and trade unionists.
But a "sustained period of Labour in power" was needed "to move our society in a socialist direction", she argued. "
What she clearly fails to grasp is that not moving society in a socialist direction is exactly what is keeping Labour in power. Ok, so conservatives like myself will find plenty to moan about this government but in all fairness they been mostly governing from the "centre." Just as we are always told how a "lurch to the right" will destroy Michael Howard's (and the Conservative party's) chance of ever being in government, as soon as Labour move to the left and really start hitting people's wallets, they will seal their fate.
"If Michael Howard can be beaten we will have finally driven a stake through Thatcherism's heart," she said."
That may or may not be so but nevertheless she should really stop pretending that socialism is anything but a discredited ideology.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
This here article is no different.
"It was possible that Labour could, as in other countries, govern for decades not just years, she told the magazine of the independent body for Labour members and trade unionists.
But a "sustained period of Labour in power" was needed "to move our society in a socialist direction", she argued. "
What she clearly fails to grasp is that not moving society in a socialist direction is exactly what is keeping Labour in power. Ok, so conservatives like myself will find plenty to moan about this government but in all fairness they been mostly governing from the "centre." Just as we are always told how a "lurch to the right" will destroy Michael Howard's (and the Conservative party's) chance of ever being in government, as soon as Labour move to the left and really start hitting people's wallets, they will seal their fate.
"If Michael Howard can be beaten we will have finally driven a stake through Thatcherism's heart," she said."
That may or may not be so but nevertheless she should really stop pretending that socialism is anything but a discredited ideology.
|
-------------------------------------------------------
