Petty Tensions In Scotland But Serious Tensions In Crimea

Whilst a foolish member of the Labour-run Aberdeen Council proposes to ‘ban’ Alex Salmond and his government ministers from council estates and all council property, tensions are running high in Crimea.

It seems part of the problem is identity. Russia and Ukrainian forces have always worked together in Crimea as part of the deal worked out when Ukraine got independence from the Soviet Union in 1991.  All over Crimea people are being forced to choose their identity - Crimean, Russian or Ukrainian.

Who would have thought that more than 20 years after the collapse of the Soviet Union these issues of identity and power would reassert themselves so dangerously? 

I confess I understand little about Putin’s reasons for his behaviour, other than what I’ve read in the oft-inaccurate press, but some bloggers and commentators have attempted to give their opinions. Craig Murray offers a little history and James Delingpole wonders ‘Why are people so hot for war with Putin?’

Perhaps the image below is one reason and the Washington Post has its take on it too.

click to enlarge

Tweet

The Price of Labour's Multiculturalism Policy?

This is Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab photographed during a school trip to England in 2002 from his native Nigeria.

He is the man whose attempt to blow up an American plane was averted only by luck and courage.

His actions will cause more misery to those who require to travel by air. Longer security queues; the use of laptops is going to be forbidden; no passenger will be able to visit toilets within an hour of landing - we can be sure the list will be lengthened.

This man was on the security lists of the US and the UK. His father, just a few weeks ago, alerted officials about his 'radicalisation'.

Back in the 90s France called Britain 'Londonistan' as they watched this country become the central hub of Islamic terrorism in Europe. Nothing has changed. We have a government which is obsessed with multiculturalism and 'human rights'.

Melanie Phillips tells it as it is. Definitely an article we should all read.

Another site worth reading which discusses military strategy and terrorist threats is here.

Tweet

The Cost of Unelected Mandelson's Empire

I don't usually recommend individual posts as my day would be consumed by publishing, but Guthrum of Old Holborn fame, has a post about the cost of Mandelson's empire. It wouldn't surprise me if many of you agree with his/her opinion. I certainly do. Read it here.

Tweet

UPDATE on Why Can't the Westminster Government Understand NO

UPDATE

I posted this earlier but I would like to bring your attention to a post by Peter Curran who write the Moridura blog.  In his latest post, along with his thoughts about nuclear, he has details of a Radio Scotland interview Alex Salmond had with Gary Robertson this morning.

As some of you can't access the BBC iPlayer I do hope you will find this worthy of a read. I certainly did.  

Tweet

Why Can't the UK Government Understand No?

Today's Scotsman has a dreadfully cheap headline 'Minister provokes nuclear war over Scotland's energy future.'  Aside from the over-dramatic headline, it seems we're to receive a visit from the UK government's Energy Secretary Ed Milliband today. Amazing isn't it, never see a high heid yin from Westminster for months and then suddenly they're all here to show us what a wonderful job they're doing for us all.

Ahead of his visit, Mr Milliband yesterday challenged the SNP to reverse its opposition to nuclear power "for the sake of the planet as well as jobs."  Now, where have I heard that before?  He went on, "Credible solutions to the challenge of climate change require we use the full range of low-carbon fuels.  Even previous opponents of nuclear power have accepted that it is wrong to rule out new nuclear in these circumstances." Dizzy has some interesting information about nuclear companies which is worth a read.

While Mr Millband is promoting his love of nuclear energy, our own Jim Mather will be visiting the Isle of Lewis where a controversial 53 turbine wind farm near the Callanish standing stones is expected to be given the go-ahead shortly.  A spokesman for Mr Salmond accused Mr Milliband of trying to dictate Scotland's energy policy and of frustrating its efforts towards renewables. "We would never seek to interfere in the energy debate south of the Border," he said. "Similarly it's not Ed Milliband's job to dictate an energy strategy north of the border."

Scotland doesn't want new nuclear.  We want to base our future and our children's future on renewable energy.  Why can't the UK government understand the word NO?  For many reasons I suspect not least some of them given by Dizzy on his blog.  We know where we're going with our energy policies and it's time Westminster realised we won't be bullied by them or anyone else.

Tweet

REBEL REBEL REBEL

GORDON Brown is due to host a meeting of the UK Cabinet in Glasgow on Thursday 16th April (this week).

A DEMONSTRATION IN GLASGOW 15th-16th APRIL WILL SEND A STRONG MESSAGE FROM ORDINARY SCOTS TO GORDON BROWN AND THE UK GOVERNMENT.


MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD

H/T to Wardog

Tweet

WHEN THE PEERIE STOPS

Now that the great and the good and the not so great and the not so good have left, the dissection of the G20 communiques begins.  The best analysis I've read so far is from Wat Tyler at Burning Our Money. It's written with knowledge but in simple English for those of us who are just weary of endless financial non-words being spoken to us each day. Craig Murray also has a post which fits with my view.

I posted this photograph to remind you of the meaning of hero worship and the phrase 'the cat's got the cream'.

For a definition of the Scots word peerie look here but it does have another meaning in the Western Isles.  

Tweet

MS SMITH KNOWS HOW TO RUB IT IN

The past couple of days I've read some of the wit going round about Jacqui Smith's husband and have to admit, some of it was very clever. Mr Jacqui Smith's DIY efforts are no business of mine and I couldn't care less if he struts round their home every day in her underwear and high heels, but I do care when our taxes are being misused.

Ms Smith said this weekend that the films shouldn't have been charged because the claim was for her internet connection.  The claim was £87, so let's deduct the £10 for helping her unimaginative husband and we have £77 which she is charging us every month for an internet connection.  Then of course, something which has been overlooked is that the taxpayer paid for the TV, it's on the list here.

She certainly knows how to rub it in doesn't she, the fact that MPs can claim for anything without question and we've paid a great deal for Ms Smith to be an MP.  It would be interesting to know how long this 'internet connection' fee has been claimed but I doubt if we'll ever know.

Not only do the expenses of MPs need to be abolished and their pay raised to say £100,000 from which they pay their own expenses and staff, but the office which checks these claims needs to be far more vigilant.  Fortunately for us taxpayers, one person was in the past few days. 

Tweet

FAIR TRADE NOT FREE TRADE

A Politician of Integrity

I make no apology for taking the following directly from Scunnert Nation's blog.

'The governor of the State of Maine, John Elias Baldacci, sent this letter to Rob Portman, then still the US Trade Representative.  Will Alex Salmond follow his lead and send a letter to Peter Mandelson instructing him to remove Scotland from the GATS negotiations in order to protect the rights and sovereignty of the Scottish people?

I write to request that you carve Maine out of new service offers you are proposing in the context of the current Doha Round of negotiations. Maine does not wish to be bound to GATS rules for any new service sectors, including but not limited to, those proposed in your May 31, 2005 offer.

I would also like to clarify the scope of the service-sector commitments made in 1995. ... Please carve Maine out of all sectors relating to health care, including health insurance, hospitals and other health care facilities, construction and related engineering services, wholesale distribution and the cross-border nursing commitments under Placement and Supply Services of Personnel.

Maine also has a diversity of zoning and land use laws that are determined by local communities and reflect an evolving effort to decide democratically how our cities and towns will grow. In many places, land use laws include quantitative limits, particularly in environmentally sensitive areas or historic districts. In light of the fact that many other developed countries have specifically made exceptions for these policies, while the United States failed to do so, we ask that you carve Maine out of all sectors that implicate land use, including retail distribution, hotels and restaurants, and rranchising.

Please carve Maine out of the libraries, archives, museums, and other cultural services sector.

As I have stated in my previous correspondence, liberalized trade should not be promoted at the expense of state sovereignty and the democratic principles upon which this country was founded. We have an important opportunity ahead of us to develop a more effective system of state-federal consultation that requires prior informed consent from states in order to evaluate the full impacts of trade agreements on areas of domestic concern. I am a firm advocate of international trade, and I believe a strong economy with vibrant trade relationships is possible without sacrificing measures needed to provide safeguards for workers, consumers, the environment and democratic governance.

I look forward to working with your office to promote a stronger and more democratic trade agenda that benefits all.'

Tweet

UPDATE on GORDON BROWN INSULTS VETERANS AGAIN

UPDATE

Some of you will know that since my initial post the Big Lottery Fund offered to fund the trip to Normandy for the 65th anniversary of the D-Day landings for 500 veterans.  The Daily Mail led a campaign this week and the veterans have now almost raised enough with their help. 

The Lone Voice has brought to my attention that Peter Hodge Hon. Secretary of the Normandy Veterans has said, "There's no way in the world I'm going to agree with the National Lottery standing up and saying they sent out veterans to Normandy in the 65th anniversary.  The people of this country have put the money together and the veterans this year will be going to Normany with the blessing and the appreciation of the British people and there is no way, that 10 weeks before the kick-off, they (the National Lottery) are going to take the credit for this."

Good for Peter Hodge, I wish we had more of his kind in this country, people who are prepared to stand up to government's ridiculous solutions to problems that shouldn't have existed in the first place.  You've more than returned your double insult Mr Hodge, well done.

Tweet

WE THE PEOPLE STIMULUS PACKAGE

This is a video made for America but oh so applicable to the UK. A must see.


Courtesy of Old Holborn

Tweet

CRAIG MURRAY'S APPEAL FOR HELP

As my regular readers know I seldom quote other blogs without comment.  This post from Craig Murray requires no comment apart from the fact that we are a democracy and each citizen is entitled to freedom of speech.  It starts:

'March 4, 2009

Your Help Needed - Reveal Torture to Stop It

On Tuesday 10 March the Parliamentary Joint Committee on Human Rights will discuss whether or not to hear my evidence on the UK government's policy of using intelligence from torture. They discussed whether to hear my evidence on 3 March but failed to reach a conclusion.

The government is lobbying hard for my exclusion. I need everybody to send an email to jchr@parliament.uk to urge that I should be allowed to give evidence. Just a one-liner would be fine. If you are able to add some comment on the import of my evidence, or indicate that you have heard me speak or read my work, that may help. Please copy your email to craigjmurray@tiscali.co.uk.

Please also pass on this plea to anyone you can and urge them to act. Help from other bloggers in posting this appeal would be much appreciated.' 

'I was British Ambassador in Uzbekistan from 2002 to 2004. '

The remainder of the post outlines the key points he wishes to make.  Do consider sending an email to jchr@parliament.uk.

Note:  This post is not because I necessarily agree with Craig's opinions but I do believe in British citizens having rights.

Tweet

WHEN IS A CHARITY NOT A CHARITY

The past few days I've been thinking how to avoid  the media overkill of the saviour of the world and of course the excuse we have for a Prime Minister's visit to America next week.  This has resulted in me visiting blogs which I usually find are somewhat irrelevant to us here in Scotland and, if I'm truthful, so many are such expert bloggers they put me to shame.

The Devil's Kitchen has come up with a well written, candid post on UK charities (with a link to the Fake Charity site) and the closeness of some to the UK government.  Like DK I always thought at least 80% of a charity's funding came from public donation.  Please do read this article, I'm sure there is information in it that will surprise most of us.

My greatest disappointment is the funding Age Concern receive, because a very good friend of mine is a past president of that 'charity' and we've had many discussions about how it could help the elderly of Scotland more.  Now I know why she couldn't put up a good argument. Alcohol Concern and Ash have always appeared to be sycophants rather than protesters and I gave them credance because of my own bad habits.

My charities are limited;  I donate to the Ninewells Cancer Trust (they've finally got a website), they don't advertise and the staff are the creme de la creme of cancer research. They're a small unit with a world-wide impact  and reputation plus all of the donations stay within the Trust here in Scotland.   It wasn't until my Dad died of cancer 21 years ago that I found out about them and that was from one of the nurses at Dundee hospice.  Any extra I have goes to the Salvation Army.

Thank you Dizzy for bringing this gross misapplication of public money to our attention.  I do hope David Cameron et al see your post. Something has to be done and there is a very good suggestion here.

My thanks to Devils Kitchen for your post.       

Tweet

POLYGAMY UK

A cartoonist's idea of British polygamy

My definition of bigamy or polygamy is 'a hetrosexual male's fetish to publicly show his testosterone-driven ability to attract gullible women and reward them by offering illegal marriage ceremonies. '  Now you won't see that definition in any dictionary as it's not very politically correct is it and we can't have that.

Of course polygamy is against the law in the UK  and the result of breaking this law is imprisonment for up to 8 years.  That may be true, but if this story in the Daily Mail (yes I do read other newspapers!) is to be believed it is a law disregarded by more and more people who live in Britain. 

How people live their lives is no concern of mine but when, as a taxpayer, I have to contribute towards paying for the religious practices of others, then it is my concern. I'm angry that this is being ignored by our politicians, police and other bodies who are duty bound to ensure our laws are upheld.  We all pay towards these services and they're letting us down by not doing their jobs.  How do we start to insist that UK law is relevant to everyone when we have the Archbishop of Canterbury suggesting sharia law should be accepted here?  One person, Baroness Walsi, has now spoken out so all credit to her, although she doesn't go as far as to insist religious polygamous marriages will not be acceptable in Britain, but only that they should be formally registered.  Not good enough Baroness, in fact not good at all.  

Our country is a Christian country and people who live here will respect our Christian laws or leave.  If you believe the article many bigamists and polygamists are milking our benefit system and that in turn is supporting the illegal marriages, creating a vicious circle. 

A recent review by four Government departments  -  the Treasury, the Work and Pensions Department, the Inland Revenue and the Home Office  -  has concluded that 1,000 men in the United Kingdom are now polygamists, although some say the figure is higher.

Are the Government figures of around 1,000 foreign men living polygamously a gross underestimate? 

Recently, a senior imam in Finchley, North London, said there are at least 4,000 men involved in such marriages. Meanwhile, to show just how far some men have stretched the teaching of the Koran, another senior Islamist, Dr Ghayasuddin Siddiqui, of the Muslim Parliament of Great Britain, has revealed a case of a man living here with five wives. 

What is more, the review found, a Muslim man can claim state support of more than £10,000 a year to keep his wives, if the wedding took place in one of those countries where polygamy is commonplace, such as Bangladesh, Pakistan, India, Saudi Arabia and across huge tracts of Africa.

Baroness Walsi says the politicians are afraid to tackle the problem because of 'cultural sensitivity'.  Time the politicians realised that the cultures of the UK  ie English, Welsh, Scottish and Irish are sensitive too and they don't approve of this going on under their noses. I just wonder how many bigamists and polygamists live in Scotland.

Would I have another view if there was a religion which permitted women to have multiple husbands?  Who knows.

Tweet

Binyam Mohamed

The news wires were full of the return of Binyam Mohamed to Britain yesterday.  He alleges he was subject to 'medieval torture' by the US authorities and the UK authorities were in collusion with them. I don't want to discuss the political stooshie surrounding MI5 and the Foreign Office's involvement, but I'd like some answers to some simple questions.

Ethiopian born Binyam Mohamed arrived in Britain in 1994 aged 16 seeking asylum which was refused, but he was given the right to remain until 2004. According to the Telegraph, he worked as a caretaker in a north London mosque while studying electronics and it appears he was housed by a London council as, when he left here in 2001, he sub-let his home and that is against council housing rules.

He left here and travelled to Pakistan and Afghanistan, after converting to Islam, to 'conquer his drug problems and to see Muslim countries with his own eyes' according to friends but he admitted he had received paramilitary training at the al Farouq training camp (reference Wikipedia).  He was arrested, by Pakistani authorities, at Karachi airport in 2002 attempting to fly back to Britain using a false passport. 

Is a caretaker of a mosque paid enough to fund a drug habit as well as cover his living costs? Did Mr Mohamed receive any benefits to help with living costs?  Where did he get the money to go on an extended 'holiday' to Pakistan and Afghanistan? The flight alone isn't cheap.  Why would anyone with a drug habit go to a Muslim country for 'assistance' with it?  It's well documented Muslim countries are much less tolerant of such addictions than the west.  Mr Mohamed has no family in Britain but his sister is a US citizen and he has a brother Benhur who lives outside Britain. 

It's difficult to find the total cost of this case to the British taxpayer so far, but it can be assumed it's into the million bracket and this is only the beginning.  Mr Mohamed has done his homework regarding his human rights and it sounds as if he intends to seek compensation from the UK government for their involvement in his alleged mistreatment.  The human rights lawyers must be rubbing their hands with glee at the thought of all the lovely money rolling in from this case, our money of course because it will all be funded by legal aid.  Think of how many pensioners' lives could have been saved this winter with this amount of money, it could have helped them keep warm instead of dying from hypothermia.

His lawyers are insisting Britain owes Mr Mohamed and should provide a comfortable life for him. I disagree. We have already brought 10 UK residents back from Guantamo and 2 men who have refugee status (Times).  

One MP, Tory backbencher Philip Davies, spoke out yesterday and perhaps spoke for many more than himself,when he said, "Why on earth we should be taking in this chap? If he was a UK citizen, fair enough. But he's not and only happened to be living here for a few years.

'We also don't know if this chap is a risk. If he is a danger then is he putting people's lives at risk, let alone the huge cost of the police and security services monitoring him?"

Tweet

THE ERADICATION of our FREEDOM in the name of TERRORISM

Typical summer photograph isn't it - one of my holiday snaps - we all have them. The UK government didn't know about this holiday of mine but they will know when I go abroad in future. They will even know my credit card details. By the end of this year they hope to have finished compiling 95% of the 250m annual passenger movements in and out of the UK every year the Sunday Times reports.

The Wythenshawe spy centre will house more than 300 police and immigration officials, plus technicians, who will be checking our details against M15, benefit agency and other watch lists.

'The intelligence centre will store names, addresses, telephone numbers, seat reservations, travel itineraries and credit card details for all 250m passenger movements in and out of the UK each year.'

'Phil Woolas, the immigration minister, defended the plans. “The UK has one of the toughest borders in the world and we are determined to ensure it stays that way. Our high-tech electronic borders system will allow us to count all passengers in and out and targets those who aren’t willing to play by our rules.”'

Are we going to accept this?  Are we going to sit back and allow our elected representatives to ignore this?  Phil Woolas says 'we have one of the toughest borders in the world.'  Someone tell me he's joking - please.  We're an island and any child could tell you it's easy to supervise the coastline of an island, if proper control is in place.

Back in the 70s the then UK government radically reduced the customs officers who policed the Scottish coastline and I understand their numbers have been gradually further diminished.  Increasing them would protect Scotland much more and not only against terrorists but drug smugglers who know our coastline isn't well managed.

This whole operation, as you will read in the full article, has been kept secret. Why? Surely the public would have been pleased to know that the UK government is taking serious action to protect our borders from terrorists.  Could it be that we may not be so happy to know that our every movement is now to be recorded and kept for 10 years?

This is little to do with protecting us from terrorists, it's far more to do with destroying our freedom.

Tweet

THE END OF A BEAUTIFUL FRIENDSHIP? (Courtesy of ConservativeHome)

Update:  "With ironic understatement, a Downing Street spokesman yesterday left little doubt that the remarks had caused some irritation in No 10. He said: "The Elysee have been in contact this morning to assure us that these remarks were not meant as a critique of UK economic policy - which is nice." Sunday Herald

Tweet

BBC BIAS EXPOSED ONCE AGAIN

It's not often I read the Daily Record but this comment (or perhaps diatribe) by Joan Burnie sums up my opinion of the British Broadcasting Corporation, named the EBC by many north of Watford.  The BBC's biase has always been towards the south-east of England.  The quality of news we receive in Scotland is laughable.  'Scottish' programmes are made for England, such as the cringeworthy Monarch of the Glen, but I admit the History of Scotland is one of the best they've produced for years.

For many, television is their sole entertainment and the BBC have a vast amount of money to spent because of the mandatory licence fee imposed.  One suggestion I could give them - that's to stop sending so many staff on reporting missions.  If newspapers behaved like that they would have been bankrupt years ago.

I'm still waiting to know the actual numbers of staff who were in the US for the inauguration.  Perhaps a FOI letter is the next course of action ...

Tweet

Scotland Denied the Right to Control Inquests for Scots in HM Forces

Overnight the BBC reported there had been movement, between the UK government and the Scottish government, regarding the inquests of Scots military personnel.

Since UK Forces have been so involved in current wars, the present UK government regulated that all military inquests would be held in Wiltshire, England. That included Scots and Welsh as well as English soldiers.  Prior to the Wiltshire coroner holding the inquests, they were held by the Oxfordshire coroner, but for reasons unknown, the MOD decided our dead would arrive at RAF Lyneham and they changed the inquests to Wiltshire in 2007.  Scots families have waited up to 4 years for inquests to be held for their loved one and, if that's not enough, they have the ordeal of the enquiry being held hundreds of miles from home.

Now the UK government has decided that they may ask the Lord Advocate to undertake a Fatal Accident Inquiry (FAI), but they refuse to transfer the control to the Scottish parliament. The reasons for this decision show, once again, the UK government's disdain for the Scottish people.

"Sometimes, unfortunately, more than one Service person is killed in the same incident - perhaps one from Scotland and another from England or Wales - and there should only be one inquiry in such circumstances.

"In other cases, the family's own preferences may not be easy to determine, especially for more complex, divided families. This means that careful consideration will need to be given to which jurisdiction is best placed to pursue the investigation.

"Ultimately, the decision will need to be taken at UK level, working in partnership with colleagues in the devolved administration, on a case by case basis in the best interests of the particular Service families concerned."

'If more than one soldier is killed in an incident there must be only one inquest'.  Why?  Much of the evidence is given in writing and if there are witnesses attending the RAF would be very willing, I'm sure, to fly them from Lyneham to Leuchars - a journey of less time than a car journey from London to Wiltshire. There is no legal reason why only one inquest should happen in these circumstances.  The only reason is it saves the MOD money and the UK government refuses to devolve more powers to Scotland or Wales.

'The family's own preferences may not be easy to determine...'.  Surely, when anyone dies it is the next of kin or person the deceased has appointed, who decides where they are to be buried.  What's so difficult about the same sensible criteria being applied in these circumstances.

This is a quote from the MOD Handbook 'Board of Inquiry and Coroner's Inquests' for bereaved families.  It contradicts the Armed Forces Minister.

"For deaths overseas, however, by convention, it is not the Coroner for the district where the body is repatriated who has jurisdiction but the “home” Coroner, that is, the Coroner in the district closest to the Next of Kin."

My disgust at the way our dead soldiers are treated is palpable.  Our Prime Minister can't spare the time to pay the UK's respects to our dead by attending the short ceremony which occurs each time a bodybag arrives at RAF Lyneham.  All they receive is a 5-second platitude at PMQs.  Not much of a thank you for protecting the people of this country is it.  Many service personnel could earn far more in civvie street but wish to serve their country.  The least we can do is acknowledge that and a small part would be for Scotland to be in control of the inquests of Scots.

A few years ago the wiping out of great Scottish regiments was insulting enough. How much more contempt will Scots accept.

Update:  BBC news has just reported Barack Obama is honouring fallen US servicemen/women in a series of events running up to his inauguration.  Gordon Brown will shortly announce a similar event I expect.  I doubt if such an occasion would ever actually happen but talk is cheap isn't it.

Tweet