Monthly Archives: July 2008

Labour still not listening as they reduce the age of consent and aim to legalise abortion in Northern Ireland

Following on from my last article about Labour’s dismissive waffle about how they will start “listening” after every defeat, here is another couple of recent examples, this time relating to Northern Ireland, of the Government’s sheer arrogance and MPs’ contempt for public opinion.

The age of consent in Northern Ireland has just been reduced from 17 to 16 (naturally for homosexuals as well – to appease Labour’s PC deities). This is despite unmarried teenage sex and all it brings being less of a problem in the province and despite strong opposition to the change by the public and politicians of different parties.

They were told what was ‘best’ for them by the liberal atheists in Westminster.

Now, six MPs (none from N. Ireland), are trying to get a change in the law so that abortions can be legally carried out in the province, again despite MPs from all the main parties, the DUP, UUP, SDLP and Sinn Fein, all voicing their opposition to the move.

Labour MP, Diane Abbott, said: “We think we have got a very good chance of getting the amendment through.”

Yet again, the gutter politics of Labour seem unstoppable; everyone being primed to stand together – in “equality” – at the gates of Hell – wishing they had stood up for decency and justice before they were lost completely.

Maybe the Government has been told to get rid of Ulster. Perhaps this complete contempt for the wishes of the people of the province is an attempt to make even loyalists despise the British Government enough to want a united Ireland in preference.

Or perhaps these are just two more crass exercises of shoving people around to make them accept things they don’t want to accept – to make them serve the god of ‘equality’ and the sins and fads of the hour – to try and bring down family life and corrupt young people as they have done so successfully on the mainland.

Leave a comment

Filed under UK Politics

Nationalists’ “Political Earthquake” Rocks Labour Party

Will Labour listen now as they try and pick up the pieces after losing Glasgow East?

Stewart Cowan, 25/7/08
After a recount last night in the Glasgow East by-election, the SNP was confirmed to have taken Labour’s 25th ‘safest’ seat with a majority of 365, overturning a massive 13,507 majority: a swing from Labour to the Nats of 22.54%.

John Mason, the new Scottish National Party MP for Glasgow East said, “Three weeks ago the SNP predicted a political earthquake. This SNP victory is not just a political earthquake, it is off the Richter scale. It is an epic win and the tremors will be felt all the way to Downing Street.”

Margaret Curran, the Labour candidate said, “I regret that I did not win this for Labour tonight.”

“I do believe the Labour Party has to listen and has to hear the message from the people of Glasgow East.”

Well, what else was she supposed to say? It’s the same old codswallop; the same old slapping down of labour’s already downtrodden foot soldiers with the standard trite remark; the same old rhetoric to avoid supplying a proper answer.

Two years ago, the BBC had the headline: ‘Labour will listen’ says Blears.

“Labour will listen more to its rank-and-file members, Labour Party chairman Hazel Blears has pledged. She told a London conference, organised by left-wing think-tank Compass, that many rank-and-file were discontent with the leadership.”

“Amicus union leader Derek Simpson said Labour was set for a general election defeat if it did not change direction.”

Of course, some people just cannot admit that they have done a bad job and have to divert attention onto others.

The BBC piece said that Ed Balls accused Conservative leader David Cameron of hypocrisy.

“What we are hearing is the same old conservatism that prefers a minimal state and cuts in investment and leaves the poorest and the weakest in our society dependent on charity,” he said.

10% tax band removed, Mr Balls? Hypocrite!

Massive influx of cheap labour, Mr Balls? Hypocrite!!

After May’s local council election humiliation for Labour, their deputy leader, Harriet Harman, said:

“I think that we have got to really listen to what people were saying when they were expressing their views in the election yesterday.”

“We have to reflect and listen to what people are saying – that is the whole point about having elections in our democracy.”

Maybe they really are good at listening; they just don’t care to act on what they hear.

So the answer to the headline, “Will Labour listen now,” is NO!

Because they are bought and paid for by global corporate and banking interests. They have been commandeered to look after the interests of the few while enslaving the masses through overbearing taxation, intrusion into our lives, weakening of the family, Christian influence and strong, decent communities so that the elite they serve can micromanage us out of the chaos and confusion they create.

Are any of the other mainstream parties much different?

Here is the full result from Glasgow East:

  • John Mason, SNP – 11,277
  • Margaret Curran, Labour – 10,912
  • Davena Rankin, Conservative – 1,639
  • Ian Robertson, Lib Dem – 915
  • Frances Curran, Scottish Socialist Party – 555
  • Tricia McLeish, Solidarity – 512
  • Dr Eileen Duke, Scottish Greens – 232
  • Chris Creighton, Independent – 67
  • Hamish Howitt, Freedom 4 Choice – 65

Turnout: 42.25%

The by-election was necessitated by the resignation of Labour’s David Marshall on health grounds.

Leave a comment

Filed under UK Politics

Concerns about proposed database holding details of every UK telephone call and email

Following speculation that the Government is considering the development of a database to record details of every telephone call, email, internet search, text message and online purchase, the Information Commissioner (pdf) Richard Thomas, is warning of serious data protection issues.

The fight against terrorism and other serious crime is, of course, ostensibly the reason for such outrageous snooping and as Mr Thomas says this would be ‘a step too far for the British way of life’.

Even if only the telephone numbers are recorded and not the calls, if you can believe it, the implications of this together with intercepting text messages and logging internet use are immense.

This information would enable the ‘authorities’ to create profiles of the population. They would know our circle of friends and other contacts, our political and other views, what we buy, what we read.

It is exactly the sort of information the ‘authorities’ require to regulate the population in a police state.

Where will our information end up? Being lost or left on a train like other high profile cases? Here’s just one example of secret terrorism files being found by a member of the public.

I find it offensive to suggest that the purpose of gaining information from spying on us twenty-four hours a day is to bring criminals to justice. The culture today is pandering to wrongdoers while incarcerating the innocent and of analysing people’s speech in case they can be accused of committing a ‘hate’ crime.

What does the Government do with Islamic extremists who hate this country and want to see the end of it?

It gives them millions of pounds worth of benefits, housing and legal aid.

The Tax Payers’ Alliance (pdf) reports on the cost of Big Brother Government and also on the wasted millions spent on those who preach hatred.

Abu Qatada has called for the murder of non-Muslims, but has not been deported to Jordan to face terror charges because of human rights legislation.

“The total cost to taxpayers to date of welfare benefits, incarceration, legal appeals and police monitoring [of Qatada alone] is almost £1.5 million.”

I am completely convinced that this latest proposal to use mass surveillance is not for the benefit of the general population.

Speaking at the launch of his annual report, Richard Thomas will say: “I am absolutely clear that the targeted, and duly authorised, interception of the communications of suspects can be invaluable in the fight against terrorism and other serious crime. But there needs to be the fullest public debate about the justification for, and implications of, a specially-created database – potentially accessible to a wide range of law enforcement authorities – holding details of everyone’s telephone and internet communications.”

“Do we really want the police, security services and other organs of the state to have access to more and more aspects of our private lives? “Speculation that the Home Office is considering collecting this information from phone companies and internet service providers has been reinforced by the government’s Draft Legislative Programme which, referring to a proposed Communications Data Bill, talks about ‘modifying procedures for acquiring communications data’.”.

Citing the expansion of the DNA database and the centralised collection and retention of data from Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) cameras, Mr Thomas believes that there has not been sufficient debate on proposals to collect more and more personal information without proper justification.

Richard Thomas says: “We welcomed last month’s report from the all-party Home Affairs Committee warning of the dangers of excessive surveillance. I entirely agree that before major new databases are launched careful consideration must be given to the impact on individuals’ liberties and on society as a whole. Sadly, there have been too many developments where there has not been sufficient openness, transparency or public debate.”

Leave a comment

Filed under Police State