Well I haven't been around much the last year so missed out on ranting about the various Government crisis/Bank melt down/Government expense scandals etc.
But thought I would start off with a good one to get everyone agitated and thinking about stuff again.
The church. What does it stand for? Well its obvious it doesn't stand for morals and justice and protection of the young and innocent.
How so, you say? Whats our ranting nutter on about this time, you ask?
Well its come to light there is yet another sex scandal in the Catholic church.
Yep we had the Irish church fiasco a while back where the old fathers went off to happy retirement after all the child sex abuse and paedophilia. Well I say happy retirement, but I hope they burn in hell for what they did.
They were eventually found out and made to take the consequences (well the church was) as a lot of the perverted old duffers were long dead.
They cant suppress this sort of thing coming to light again, and it has done so with a vengeance with consequences that will affect the Pope this time.
Seems "His Holiness" and I say this very tongue in cheek here, led an investigation of an American priest involved in sexual acts with his congregation. He was only a Cardinal at the time, but appears that the whole thing was hushed up and glossed over like they always do.
Now "if the Meek are to inherit the earth" right, surely they need someone strong and just and righteous to protect them and help them along? Surely these meek people cant be calling on the Church then, as they want to hide all this stuff?
So much hypocrisy and so little time to write about it.
The Catholic church has shown less than a liberal attitude to homosexuality, but seems to want to hide abusing choir boys. This is Paedophilia which means the child has not reached a sexual age of maturity!
This seems okay in the churches eye, as they want to cover it up then? Retire the priest off and hush it all up. "Lets not tar ourself with his brush"; "it will affect the congregation and they will stop putting their cash on the plate"; "bad for business" etc etc
Guess they don't believe in right and wrong anymore. Protect the weak and the innocent is fine unless it reflects badly on us, then cover it up.
Bloody hell, the Church seems to be taking a leaf out of the UK Government these days! Or is it the Government taking a leaf out of the Church?
Friday, 26 March 2010
Thursday, 12 March 2009
Islamic protest at the home coming of Britsh Soldiers.
My rant of the moment is the gallant return of the Anglian regiment to Luton and the disgusting abuse the Islamic extremists hurled at them.
The regiment has had a hellish time, being shot at and bombed, all to protect a population from tyrants and despotic leaders who although a minority party in Iraq, led the country and oppressed the other 60% of the population.
The Anglians lost quite a few men to aide this country. Our government sent them to a war zone and they went because it was their job, not because they believed it was the right or wrong decision of our government.
As a democratically run country with the freedom of speech we have, it is the protesters right to protest. But what really got my goat was the women all dressed up in their black sacks and veils participating. Burkas they may be called, but I say they are oppression sacks! Perhaps they should look to their own before casting the first stone. How hypocritical for these people to slander the British Army as murderers of women and children and rapists of infant girls! They still oppress their women, and in my opinion, more than likely brain washed and force them to participate in rallies like these.
The army is split into battalions and then further down into units of men of about 20 or 30 to go on patrols. These men all swear to protect and serve the nation when they enlist. The army instills discipline in their soldiers. It roots out hot heads so 99.99% are descent people who follow the rules. The rest go to the Glasshouse and are discharged.
We follow a predominantly christian religion and it is incredible to me that these small intimate units of men would knowingly rape and kill when there is no need to kill. I am pretty sure that there is no cover up here. The reason you ask?
Ever told a secret to someone? How long before it came out? Yes. If there was any raping of 4 year old girls, out of disgust to the fellow who would do such an evil thing, this would never be tolerated and swept under a carpet. It is all lies and propaganda to besmirch a regiments reputation.
Now lets go back to the swearing an allegiance when these men and women enlist in the army.
Now I have been lucky in my time to see friends of mine be sworn in as British Citizens. They all swore an oath to protect and serve the UK and to follow the rules of the land. Yes they went through the legal channels to become legitimate British Citizens.
Where is this loyalty to the UK now from the extremists, I ask you? Did they leave it on the bus after they became a citizens of the UK?
Oh. So they were born here?
Okay. If they were born here, why are they protesting about a country they never intend on going to visit? Take the protest up with the Government. Stand outside the Houses of Parliament. It's their right. Protest to Brown and his cronies, not to a regiment that is just relieved to come home to see their loved ones.
In the country their mothers and fathers and grand parents were born, there was no tolerance for such dissent. They have a right to protest but have done this to the wrong people. These extremists only want is to antagonise and be seen on the TV and national papers. Why waste the column inches on these people when that's what they want?
The regiment has had a hellish time, being shot at and bombed, all to protect a population from tyrants and despotic leaders who although a minority party in Iraq, led the country and oppressed the other 60% of the population.
The Anglians lost quite a few men to aide this country. Our government sent them to a war zone and they went because it was their job, not because they believed it was the right or wrong decision of our government.
As a democratically run country with the freedom of speech we have, it is the protesters right to protest. But what really got my goat was the women all dressed up in their black sacks and veils participating. Burkas they may be called, but I say they are oppression sacks! Perhaps they should look to their own before casting the first stone. How hypocritical for these people to slander the British Army as murderers of women and children and rapists of infant girls! They still oppress their women, and in my opinion, more than likely brain washed and force them to participate in rallies like these.
The army is split into battalions and then further down into units of men of about 20 or 30 to go on patrols. These men all swear to protect and serve the nation when they enlist. The army instills discipline in their soldiers. It roots out hot heads so 99.99% are descent people who follow the rules. The rest go to the Glasshouse and are discharged.
We follow a predominantly christian religion and it is incredible to me that these small intimate units of men would knowingly rape and kill when there is no need to kill. I am pretty sure that there is no cover up here. The reason you ask?
Ever told a secret to someone? How long before it came out? Yes. If there was any raping of 4 year old girls, out of disgust to the fellow who would do such an evil thing, this would never be tolerated and swept under a carpet. It is all lies and propaganda to besmirch a regiments reputation.
Now lets go back to the swearing an allegiance when these men and women enlist in the army.
Now I have been lucky in my time to see friends of mine be sworn in as British Citizens. They all swore an oath to protect and serve the UK and to follow the rules of the land. Yes they went through the legal channels to become legitimate British Citizens.
Where is this loyalty to the UK now from the extremists, I ask you? Did they leave it on the bus after they became a citizens of the UK?
Oh. So they were born here?
Okay. If they were born here, why are they protesting about a country they never intend on going to visit? Take the protest up with the Government. Stand outside the Houses of Parliament. It's their right. Protest to Brown and his cronies, not to a regiment that is just relieved to come home to see their loved ones.
In the country their mothers and fathers and grand parents were born, there was no tolerance for such dissent. They have a right to protest but have done this to the wrong people. These extremists only want is to antagonise and be seen on the TV and national papers. Why waste the column inches on these people when that's what they want?
Monday, 24 November 2008
VAT Cuts
Gordon Brown has decided to drop VAT to 15%.
He wants you to spend your money to help get his badly situated economy out of the mire.
How? Haven't we all borrowed to excess in the last decade and run up enough debt?
2.5% Vat cut. Big deal. Food, children's clothes, books, newspapers etc are mostly exempt or zero rated. You will only save a little on the Fuel bills you pay. Now has anyone noticed the catch? Unless you spend a vast amount, ie you have money to spare, you will benefit, but if you have little money to spare, your Xmas presents will cost a little less, but will you be tempted to spend?
The aim is to stimulate the economy just enough to keep us all employed and paying tax.
Well it's Tax what will go up when he decides to up the VAT again and then repay the GBP12 billion he would have to borrow extra, to pay for the initial VAT drop.
Gordon then gets a double whammy of tax. Your Income tax will have risen and the VAT is up to boot.
Well it seems the plebeian majority are finally listening to their conscience.
They now seem worried the economy may actually already be up "Canal De Merde" and don't want to get their hands dirty on the smelly end of the paddle. They are starting to save their money. Sorry Gordon. Not quite what you envisaged.
As the numpty Mr Darling has already borrowed GBP 70+Billion to prop up the banks and the salaries of the incompetents,spin doctors and the muppets of the Department of Stupidity and Red Tape, I can only envisage a massive rise in income tax. Next year he intends to borrow a further GBP110 Billion. He will do this by issuing Government Bonds and Securities and pay interest to the people who take up these issues. It will mean that he will be taxing you to pay for the interest payments to the pay back to the Bond holders, or he will forever be issuing new bonds to cover the old.
What a prudent Chancellor should have done Gordon, would be to save some funds. Put it away for a rainy day. But he didn't. Well the rainy day is the global recession brought about due to Sub Prime greedy bankers, who lost the plot and forgot that some people just cant afford houses.
Now they have no interest from the mortgagees to pay on to the bond holders of the bonds the bankers issued, to get more money to lend to more poor people to buy more houses.
It's a vicious circle.
The Bankers forgot what would happen if people couldn't repay the initial interest. People/Pension Plans/Other Banks pull out of the bond, eventually causing panic and creating a run on the banks. That's why the governments of Europe and the USA are guaranteeing banks now, as they cant afford to have a recession like the 1930's.
The UK Government are so desperate that interest rates could soon be cut to zero. Then there will be competition to sell goods as shop keepers try to tempt custom just to stay afloat. People will always hold off for a better price, and this creates negative inflation ie things get progressively cheaper, in the fight for custom. This will mean that the global economy actually will be like it was in the 1930's, the thing they are trying to avoid.
The UK isn't in the best position to prevent this. It's Government has borrowed way to much in the past. It is suffering from already low interest rates. It has said it will increase it's big projects to stimulate jobs, and will spend its way out of the recession. Well it's hands are tied as the normal tools to cut a recession are to cut interest rates, and borrow to spend on economic projects. As I say, it has to issue Government bonds to pay for this. It has technically borrowed so much, and has had to prop up the banks it cant let fail, I cant see who the hell can afford to buy these bonds. The interest rates on these bonds will probably be better than you or I can get for our cash sitting in our current and deposit accounts in our banks.
If it was yours or my company that was doing the same, we would already be bankrupt and living in a cardboard box under Blackfriars Bridge.
Somewhere along the line someone will realise that you cant spend what you haven't got.
We will then be stuffed with increasing interest rates to prevent spending, and higher taxes to balance the books and then it will all come around again in another 30 odd years.
He wants you to spend your money to help get his badly situated economy out of the mire.
How? Haven't we all borrowed to excess in the last decade and run up enough debt?
2.5% Vat cut. Big deal. Food, children's clothes, books, newspapers etc are mostly exempt or zero rated. You will only save a little on the Fuel bills you pay. Now has anyone noticed the catch? Unless you spend a vast amount, ie you have money to spare, you will benefit, but if you have little money to spare, your Xmas presents will cost a little less, but will you be tempted to spend?
The aim is to stimulate the economy just enough to keep us all employed and paying tax.
Well it's Tax what will go up when he decides to up the VAT again and then repay the GBP12 billion he would have to borrow extra, to pay for the initial VAT drop.
Gordon then gets a double whammy of tax. Your Income tax will have risen and the VAT is up to boot.
Well it seems the plebeian majority are finally listening to their conscience.
They now seem worried the economy may actually already be up "Canal De Merde" and don't want to get their hands dirty on the smelly end of the paddle. They are starting to save their money. Sorry Gordon. Not quite what you envisaged.
As the numpty Mr Darling has already borrowed GBP 70+Billion to prop up the banks and the salaries of the incompetents,spin doctors and the muppets of the Department of Stupidity and Red Tape, I can only envisage a massive rise in income tax. Next year he intends to borrow a further GBP110 Billion. He will do this by issuing Government Bonds and Securities and pay interest to the people who take up these issues. It will mean that he will be taxing you to pay for the interest payments to the pay back to the Bond holders, or he will forever be issuing new bonds to cover the old.
What a prudent Chancellor should have done Gordon, would be to save some funds. Put it away for a rainy day. But he didn't. Well the rainy day is the global recession brought about due to Sub Prime greedy bankers, who lost the plot and forgot that some people just cant afford houses.
Now they have no interest from the mortgagees to pay on to the bond holders of the bonds the bankers issued, to get more money to lend to more poor people to buy more houses.
It's a vicious circle.
The Bankers forgot what would happen if people couldn't repay the initial interest. People/Pension Plans/Other Banks pull out of the bond, eventually causing panic and creating a run on the banks. That's why the governments of Europe and the USA are guaranteeing banks now, as they cant afford to have a recession like the 1930's.
The UK Government are so desperate that interest rates could soon be cut to zero. Then there will be competition to sell goods as shop keepers try to tempt custom just to stay afloat. People will always hold off for a better price, and this creates negative inflation ie things get progressively cheaper, in the fight for custom. This will mean that the global economy actually will be like it was in the 1930's, the thing they are trying to avoid.
The UK isn't in the best position to prevent this. It's Government has borrowed way to much in the past. It is suffering from already low interest rates. It has said it will increase it's big projects to stimulate jobs, and will spend its way out of the recession. Well it's hands are tied as the normal tools to cut a recession are to cut interest rates, and borrow to spend on economic projects. As I say, it has to issue Government bonds to pay for this. It has technically borrowed so much, and has had to prop up the banks it cant let fail, I cant see who the hell can afford to buy these bonds. The interest rates on these bonds will probably be better than you or I can get for our cash sitting in our current and deposit accounts in our banks.
If it was yours or my company that was doing the same, we would already be bankrupt and living in a cardboard box under Blackfriars Bridge.
Somewhere along the line someone will realise that you cant spend what you haven't got.
We will then be stuffed with increasing interest rates to prevent spending, and higher taxes to balance the books and then it will all come around again in another 30 odd years.
Tuesday, 15 July 2008
Knife Crime.
When I was a lad a penknife was used to cut names in trees, peel and core apples, or to sharpen pencils. Yep that's right we used it as a tool. It didn't even enter our heads to walk up to someone, pick a fight and stab them with it.
It seems this day and age a penknife carrier is a criminal. But surely it's the man or woman behind the knife and how he uses it that makes the criminal?
There have been 20+ knife stabbing/killing crimes in the last few months.
So I say this. All the politicians on the TV who try to show the stabber the damage done to the stabbed in hospital, it's a bloody joke, pardon the pun.
A victim is never going to want to see them! They may want to take some revenge too, so who ever thought, I know, lets bring them together again, is plain stupid.
Now I bash the Americans and their stupidity quite a lot, as they seem to do stuff that only suits themselves. But the mayor of New York which at the time was quite a nasty area, brought about a zero tolerance plan. Three strikes and you get locked up for ever. That was just for minor petty crime! You get life and sometimes death for the bigger crimes.
So to the idiots Hazel Blears the one time Secretary of State for Communities and now Deputy Leader of Labour, and Jacquie Smith the Home Secretary come on TV stating there is a knife problem and it isn't easily fixed. COMPLETE CRAP!
They both "don't want to walk the streets at night because they feel unsafe", yet they have a police escort and bodyguard. So if they don't want to walk about with guards as protection, is it any wonder youths carry weapons to protect themselves?
Whats the solution? Zero tolerance. Carry a weapon with intent, and I mean here if you belong to a known gang culture, you get 5 years minimum prison sentence. Lets not pussy foot around.
If you are walking home at night and you have a knife on you and you aren't camping, that also means to me you intend to use it as protection or for force and you also get the sentence.
Killers whether using guns or knives should be hung.
There is an exception here. Sexual abuse and prolonged bullying in marriage or relationships where you snap and kill does not fall under this category.
Where there is unequivocal evidence and eyewitnesses, then hanging must take place to be a deterrent.
Victims have lost their rights in favour of the criminal.
So Blears and Smith, it is easy. Stop bullshitting the journalists and trying to become little media Divas. Amend the legal statutes for quick convictions when there is overwelming evidence. Lock people up for longer. Bring back Hanging. Set up a Zero Tolerance policy and stick to it.
GET SOME DECENT JUDGES THAT ARE IN TOUCH WITH THE EVERYDAY PEOPLE - NOT FROM CLOUD CUCKOOLAND - as an example, why lock up a shop lifter for two years, when you can kill a family while being on your mobile, whilst driving a car, and yet get a smaller sentance? Sentances dont seem at all comparable for the crimes caused. For one, say you took a pair of socks. The other is blatant negligence when in charge of what can be a lethal weapon in a poor drivers hands.
You may even want to use the dreaded common sense approach, which we seemed to be losing in this day and age.
I say a victim has the rights and the criminal loses theirs! If a criminal breaks into my home or vandalises my property, I should be allowed to defend it and myself with as much force as I deem fit to use, because the criminal should not be there in the first place! If I stab him, I am with in my rights to, only because he was doing something he shouldn't be doing.
Of course any out of normal hours calling at a house, with reputable people, they will knock at the door, and, or telephone you. So don't attack the postman just for giving you your gas bill. . .
It seems this day and age a penknife carrier is a criminal. But surely it's the man or woman behind the knife and how he uses it that makes the criminal?
There have been 20+ knife stabbing/killing crimes in the last few months.
So I say this. All the politicians on the TV who try to show the stabber the damage done to the stabbed in hospital, it's a bloody joke, pardon the pun.
A victim is never going to want to see them! They may want to take some revenge too, so who ever thought, I know, lets bring them together again, is plain stupid.
Now I bash the Americans and their stupidity quite a lot, as they seem to do stuff that only suits themselves. But the mayor of New York which at the time was quite a nasty area, brought about a zero tolerance plan. Three strikes and you get locked up for ever. That was just for minor petty crime! You get life and sometimes death for the bigger crimes.
So to the idiots Hazel Blears the one time Secretary of State for Communities and now Deputy Leader of Labour, and Jacquie Smith the Home Secretary come on TV stating there is a knife problem and it isn't easily fixed. COMPLETE CRAP!
They both "don't want to walk the streets at night because they feel unsafe", yet they have a police escort and bodyguard. So if they don't want to walk about with guards as protection, is it any wonder youths carry weapons to protect themselves?
Whats the solution? Zero tolerance. Carry a weapon with intent, and I mean here if you belong to a known gang culture, you get 5 years minimum prison sentence. Lets not pussy foot around.
If you are walking home at night and you have a knife on you and you aren't camping, that also means to me you intend to use it as protection or for force and you also get the sentence.
Killers whether using guns or knives should be hung.
There is an exception here. Sexual abuse and prolonged bullying in marriage or relationships where you snap and kill does not fall under this category.
Where there is unequivocal evidence and eyewitnesses, then hanging must take place to be a deterrent.
Victims have lost their rights in favour of the criminal.
So Blears and Smith, it is easy. Stop bullshitting the journalists and trying to become little media Divas. Amend the legal statutes for quick convictions when there is overwelming evidence. Lock people up for longer. Bring back Hanging. Set up a Zero Tolerance policy and stick to it.
GET SOME DECENT JUDGES THAT ARE IN TOUCH WITH THE EVERYDAY PEOPLE - NOT FROM CLOUD CUCKOOLAND - as an example, why lock up a shop lifter for two years, when you can kill a family while being on your mobile, whilst driving a car, and yet get a smaller sentance? Sentances dont seem at all comparable for the crimes caused. For one, say you took a pair of socks. The other is blatant negligence when in charge of what can be a lethal weapon in a poor drivers hands.
You may even want to use the dreaded common sense approach, which we seemed to be losing in this day and age.
I say a victim has the rights and the criminal loses theirs! If a criminal breaks into my home or vandalises my property, I should be allowed to defend it and myself with as much force as I deem fit to use, because the criminal should not be there in the first place! If I stab him, I am with in my rights to, only because he was doing something he shouldn't be doing.
Of course any out of normal hours calling at a house, with reputable people, they will knock at the door, and, or telephone you. So don't attack the postman just for giving you your gas bill. . .
Thursday, 5 June 2008
Joke - What is a tragedy?
Tragedy:
While President G.W. Bush was visiting a primary school he visited one of the classes.
They were in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings.
The teacher asked the President if he would like to lead the discussion on the word 'tragedy'.
So the illustrious leader asked the class for an example of a 'tragedy'.
One little boy stood up and offered: 'If my best friend, who lives on a farm, is playing in the field and a tractor runs over him and kills him, that would be a tragedy'.
'No,' said Bush, 'that would be an accident.'
A little girl raised her hand: 'If a school bus carrying 50 children drove over a cliff, killing everyone inside, that would be a tragedy.'
'I'm afraid not,' explained the President. 'That's what we would call a great loss.'
The room went silent. No other children volunteered.
Bush searched the room. 'Isn't there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?'
Finally at the back of the room a small boy raised his hand.
In a quiet voice he said: 'If Air Force One carrying you and Mrs Bush was struck by a friendly fire missile and blown to smithereens, that would be a tragedy.'
'Fantastic!' exclaimed Bush. 'That's right. And can you tell me why that would be a tragedy?'
'Well,' said the boy, 'It has to be a tragedy, because it certainly wouldn't be a great loss and it probably wouldn't be a f*cking accident either.'
---------------------------------------------------------
Here is my two pennies on this joke -
It's Absolutely true I am afraid.
He was probably the clever English Exchange Student who's tank commander father was shot at by friendly U.S fire in the first gulf war!
Have I told you how much I abhor G.W Bush and what he stands for? Probably, but here is some more if you weren't paying attention.
Now we get a pussy like Obama or a forces nutter like McCain who will carry on imposing the American Foreign Policy on us.
Yep, they do have one, subject to the rest of the worlds belief - to shoot and bomb anyone who doesn't like the USA - so that would be anyone who isn't a middle class American then!
We had better watch out in the UK then, as it's only Tony and Cherie Blair, "Bush's Poodles" that do like them. The trouble is the Blair's aren't quite finished milking the UK for more money before they fuc~ off to U.S shores.
It seems they have 27? houses now and a US led mortgage crisis created by greedy bankers to deal with!
We probably have another years worth of Cherie's mindless 2nd autobiography, and many more of his crappy after dinner speeches at £100,000.00 per speech before they piss off to the Cult of America.
Yep it seems to be a cult.
They seem to brainwash and bamboozle the world.
I am sure if I came out and blatantly set up a cult, it would be illegal. The good ol' U.S. of A have a whole country of idiots, of whom 70% don't have a passport to see the world outside it's own borders, and where 70 % live within 10 miles of where they were born and grew up.
Illegal immigrants from Mexico, and the like, still want to live there - utterly amazing!
While President G.W. Bush was visiting a primary school he visited one of the classes.
They were in the middle of a discussion related to words and their meanings.
The teacher asked the President if he would like to lead the discussion on the word 'tragedy'.
So the illustrious leader asked the class for an example of a 'tragedy'.
One little boy stood up and offered: 'If my best friend, who lives on a farm, is playing in the field and a tractor runs over him and kills him, that would be a tragedy'.
'No,' said Bush, 'that would be an accident.'
A little girl raised her hand: 'If a school bus carrying 50 children drove over a cliff, killing everyone inside, that would be a tragedy.'
'I'm afraid not,' explained the President. 'That's what we would call a great loss.'
The room went silent. No other children volunteered.
Bush searched the room. 'Isn't there someone here who can give me an example of a tragedy?'
Finally at the back of the room a small boy raised his hand.
In a quiet voice he said: 'If Air Force One carrying you and Mrs Bush was struck by a friendly fire missile and blown to smithereens, that would be a tragedy.'
'Fantastic!' exclaimed Bush. 'That's right. And can you tell me why that would be a tragedy?'
'Well,' said the boy, 'It has to be a tragedy, because it certainly wouldn't be a great loss and it probably wouldn't be a f*cking accident either.'
---------------------------------------------------------
Here is my two pennies on this joke -
It's Absolutely true I am afraid.
He was probably the clever English Exchange Student who's tank commander father was shot at by friendly U.S fire in the first gulf war!
Have I told you how much I abhor G.W Bush and what he stands for? Probably, but here is some more if you weren't paying attention.
Now we get a pussy like Obama or a forces nutter like McCain who will carry on imposing the American Foreign Policy on us.
Yep, they do have one, subject to the rest of the worlds belief - to shoot and bomb anyone who doesn't like the USA - so that would be anyone who isn't a middle class American then!
We had better watch out in the UK then, as it's only Tony and Cherie Blair, "Bush's Poodles" that do like them. The trouble is the Blair's aren't quite finished milking the UK for more money before they fuc~ off to U.S shores.
It seems they have 27? houses now and a US led mortgage crisis created by greedy bankers to deal with!
We probably have another years worth of Cherie's mindless 2nd autobiography, and many more of his crappy after dinner speeches at £100,000.00 per speech before they piss off to the Cult of America.
Yep it seems to be a cult.
They seem to brainwash and bamboozle the world.
I am sure if I came out and blatantly set up a cult, it would be illegal. The good ol' U.S. of A have a whole country of idiots, of whom 70% don't have a passport to see the world outside it's own borders, and where 70 % live within 10 miles of where they were born and grew up.
Illegal immigrants from Mexico, and the like, still want to live there - utterly amazing!
Monday, 2 June 2008
Is it right to shop your family for criminal behaviour?
Well yesterday the mother of two sons who badly beat a man in the street, met their victim.
Anyone think this is unusual? Yes it is. The woman met and apologised to him for their behaviour.
This lady is Carol Saldinack, the victim is Marc Parkinson. Mr Parkinson now has a damaged eye and is lucky to be alive.
The thing that makes this unusual it that Mrs Saldinack turned in her two sons to the police for their appalling action. She found out when the boys told their sister ad she found out. The consequences were now she is isolated from her family who cant believe she would do this.
The good thing is the rest of us hard working and law abiding people have stood up in support of her actions.
She has tried to bring her family up the right way, but and unfortunately failed to instill in the rest of them a sense of right and wrong. Good for her for having a moral backbone and the strength of character to do this. I think she is better off with out her family if they deem it fit and proper to stick together with the perpetrators rather than support the victim. This culture we live in today seems only to stick up for them and not victims. This has got to stop.
You wonder why kids carry knives in the street? It's to defend themselves, but once you have knife pulled on you, you have to try to kill the opponent because they will try to kill you.
That's why there are so many stabbings.
Again I harp on about liberalism. It's time we stood up and said stop being liberal!
Crack down on crime and unsocial behaviour with an iron fist. Up the sentencing and bring back
hanging as an ultimate deterrent, and use it for crimes such as murder. The USA had a three strikes and prison for life policy. Perhaps we need something as harsh to bring some law and order to the streets.
Anyone think this is unusual? Yes it is. The woman met and apologised to him for their behaviour.
This lady is Carol Saldinack, the victim is Marc Parkinson. Mr Parkinson now has a damaged eye and is lucky to be alive.
The thing that makes this unusual it that Mrs Saldinack turned in her two sons to the police for their appalling action. She found out when the boys told their sister ad she found out. The consequences were now she is isolated from her family who cant believe she would do this.
The good thing is the rest of us hard working and law abiding people have stood up in support of her actions.
She has tried to bring her family up the right way, but and unfortunately failed to instill in the rest of them a sense of right and wrong. Good for her for having a moral backbone and the strength of character to do this. I think she is better off with out her family if they deem it fit and proper to stick together with the perpetrators rather than support the victim. This culture we live in today seems only to stick up for them and not victims. This has got to stop.
You wonder why kids carry knives in the street? It's to defend themselves, but once you have knife pulled on you, you have to try to kill the opponent because they will try to kill you.
That's why there are so many stabbings.
Again I harp on about liberalism. It's time we stood up and said stop being liberal!
Crack down on crime and unsocial behaviour with an iron fist. Up the sentencing and bring back
hanging as an ultimate deterrent, and use it for crimes such as murder. The USA had a three strikes and prison for life policy. Perhaps we need something as harsh to bring some law and order to the streets.
No more drinking on the tube. . .
Can someone tell me why there was a massive party on the tube this weekend to celebrate the alcohol ban? The ban is used as an excuse, that's all.
I can think of nothing worse than sitting on the tube with hundreds of revelers binge drinking and creating havoc. Needless to say most tubes I use don't have the toilet facilities to cope.
There is the damage to stations and the tubes, and the excess police presence required to make sure it went off with out trouble - but still the idiot element was out in force.
Now I know there is always a minority who spoil it for the magnitude, but seeing the scenes in the paper this morning, it was totally irresponsible of the London council and the Mayor's office to let this go ahead.
Drinking on the train does lead to intimidation of the many people who just want a quiet journey home. I for one am glad it is now outlawed on the tube.
I can think of nothing worse than sitting on the tube with hundreds of revelers binge drinking and creating havoc. Needless to say most tubes I use don't have the toilet facilities to cope.
There is the damage to stations and the tubes, and the excess police presence required to make sure it went off with out trouble - but still the idiot element was out in force.
Now I know there is always a minority who spoil it for the magnitude, but seeing the scenes in the paper this morning, it was totally irresponsible of the London council and the Mayor's office to let this go ahead.
Drinking on the train does lead to intimidation of the many people who just want a quiet journey home. I for one am glad it is now outlawed on the tube.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)