What has happened to Christmas? The Leftist PC obsession with honouring every faith but Christianity has led to such stupid things as "Winterval" and "Celebration Lights" instead of Christmas lights and Nativity scenes. All this is done purely and simply so as not to "offend" minority religions (and one in particular).
The latest subscriber to this stupidity seems to have arrived in the shape of Oxford with their "Winter Light Festival". At the light switch on there were performances from break dancers, hip hop dancers and Samba drummers. Hardly Christmassy is it? What happened to the Salvation Army band playing Christmas carols at traditional switch ons?
How long will it be before the word "Christmas" is obliterated from the English language and replaced by the word "holidays"? We have already seen the term "holiday tree", "holiday cards", "holiday lights" and "happy holidays". It is time that people stood up and fought back against this creeping, offensive destruction of our traditions and culture.
It you don't, it will soon be too late.
Happy New Year.
31 December 2008
18 December 2008
Foreign doctors - we DON'T need them
With all the furore over the al Qaeda doctor who was convicted of attacking Glasgow Airport last year, and the Jordanian doctor who was acquitted of terrorist charges, the question has been raised about the dependence of the NHS upon foreign doctors.
For years, one of the liberal left's arguments for immigration has been that we "need" doctors from abroad or the NHS would cease to function.
That is rubbish. The UK has 32 medical schools, which turn out hundreds of medical graduates each year, meaning that we do not need to import overseas medics in order for the NHS to be able to function! We have enough graduates coming out of our own medical schools to not need a foreign doctor in this country again!
A while ago, it was in the news that the government would try and crackdown on foreign medics taking British training posts to try and prevent our own new doctors facing unemployment. If we were in dire need of all these foreigners then such a move would not be necessary, but the fact that it is means that the foreigners are not so vital to the NHS as the left wingers would have us believe, and that we can staff our hospitals perfectly well from our own home grown talent.
For years, one of the liberal left's arguments for immigration has been that we "need" doctors from abroad or the NHS would cease to function.
That is rubbish. The UK has 32 medical schools, which turn out hundreds of medical graduates each year, meaning that we do not need to import overseas medics in order for the NHS to be able to function! We have enough graduates coming out of our own medical schools to not need a foreign doctor in this country again!
A while ago, it was in the news that the government would try and crackdown on foreign medics taking British training posts to try and prevent our own new doctors facing unemployment. If we were in dire need of all these foreigners then such a move would not be necessary, but the fact that it is means that the foreigners are not so vital to the NHS as the left wingers would have us believe, and that we can staff our hospitals perfectly well from our own home grown talent.
16 December 2008
Poles - yes they DO take our jobs!
I have just been browsing through an old website when I came across the following report (this report was written last year):
Now, if the British workers who wanted jobs were being denied them because the Poles in the jobs all speak Polish, then the Poles should be put on the first plane back to Warsaw, Wroclaw or Cracow and "their" jobs given to the local British people who want them.
Today's newspaper carry a headline that nearly all the jobs created in the past seven years have been taken by immigrants. The story that they only take jobs that British will not do is a lie, I know that for a fact having seen places which once employed British workers but no longer do so, preferring instead the Polish influx.
To read the shocking story of how British workers are being denied the chance to work, click here. The fact that these jobs are advertised abroad first, thereby giving foreigners priority, is nothing short of a scandal. No other country would put foreigners before its own people.
British workers are being denied jobs in agriculture because they do not speak Polish. The huge influx of migrant workers from the eastern European country, who have taken jobs in agriculture, now means that a knowledge of Polish is vital for those wishing to take agricultural work.
The east of England has been inundated with migrant workers, who take jobs in fruit picking, packing and food processing plants. Farms and other employers rely on gangmasters and agencies to supply them with immigrant staff. They are denying work to local people, who find there is little or nothing available in the Job Centre and so try the local employers in person. Gangmasters then tell locals that they will not find them work because all the staff speak Polish.
North East Cambridgeshire MP Malcolm Moss raised the issue in the House of Commons. He said that the migrants were displacing the locals in the workplace, working in places where traditionally local people had worked. He also said that it “was no good saying that migrants were only taking the jobs that local people did not want.”
The number of eastern Europeans, particularly Poles, who are working in Britain could be as many as 800,000.
Now, if the British workers who wanted jobs were being denied them because the Poles in the jobs all speak Polish, then the Poles should be put on the first plane back to Warsaw, Wroclaw or Cracow and "their" jobs given to the local British people who want them.
Today's newspaper carry a headline that nearly all the jobs created in the past seven years have been taken by immigrants. The story that they only take jobs that British will not do is a lie, I know that for a fact having seen places which once employed British workers but no longer do so, preferring instead the Polish influx.
To read the shocking story of how British workers are being denied the chance to work, click here. The fact that these jobs are advertised abroad first, thereby giving foreigners priority, is nothing short of a scandal. No other country would put foreigners before its own people.
12 December 2008
Mothers into work - the real agenda?
Earlier this week, the government published its changes to the welfare system, and, unsurprisingly, they have been widely criticised.
One aspect is that mothers whose children have reached one year old will be forced to look for work. I believe that, if a woman wishes to stay at home and bring up her children then she should have the right to do so. Likewise she should not be prevented from working purely and simply because she has children and would like to work. But no, the meddling government wants to force all mothers to have their children effectively brought up by the State (which is what it would amount to if all mothers had to leave their children with approved childminders all day!)
Also, it is becoming popular to teach children at home, thereby saving them from the awful brainwashing and political correctness now ever-present in British schools. If this measure forcing women with children who are a year old to go to work becomes law, then this would prevent them from opting to teach their children at home, and therefore subject the children to being brainwashed into hating their country and their race, and instead believing that other races were here before us and are effectively superior to us.
The government will not like white children being schooled into thinking that white British people have achieved great things, they want to ram slavery down their throats and "black history" instead of our own history. Home schooling would prevent such politically correct dumbing down, and our masters in Westminster (or should that be Brussels?) do not like that.
Now there is the sinister implication that any toddler refusing to eat curry is a racist (no, I am not joking, the report is here). Does this also apply to Asian children who turn their noses up at traditional British food? Will they be deemed racists who are refusing to integrate into British society? No, you can bet it won't!
One aspect is that mothers whose children have reached one year old will be forced to look for work. I believe that, if a woman wishes to stay at home and bring up her children then she should have the right to do so. Likewise she should not be prevented from working purely and simply because she has children and would like to work. But no, the meddling government wants to force all mothers to have their children effectively brought up by the State (which is what it would amount to if all mothers had to leave their children with approved childminders all day!)
Also, it is becoming popular to teach children at home, thereby saving them from the awful brainwashing and political correctness now ever-present in British schools. If this measure forcing women with children who are a year old to go to work becomes law, then this would prevent them from opting to teach their children at home, and therefore subject the children to being brainwashed into hating their country and their race, and instead believing that other races were here before us and are effectively superior to us.
The government will not like white children being schooled into thinking that white British people have achieved great things, they want to ram slavery down their throats and "black history" instead of our own history. Home schooling would prevent such politically correct dumbing down, and our masters in Westminster (or should that be Brussels?) do not like that.
Now there is the sinister implication that any toddler refusing to eat curry is a racist (no, I am not joking, the report is here). Does this also apply to Asian children who turn their noses up at traditional British food? Will they be deemed racists who are refusing to integrate into British society? No, you can bet it won't!
11 December 2008
Using history to brainwash our children
The latest example of the brainwashing of British children comes in the guise of the history curriculum. Gone are the days of learning about Churchill and instead our children are to learn about the American civil rights movement, the slave trade and Islamic empires.
No mention of teaching them about how many of the world's greatest scientists and inventors were born in our country, no mention of teaching them about the great people of history such as Horatio Nelson, the only Nelson our children will learn about in future will be Nelson Mandela!
The idea of ramming the slave trade down the throats of our children is to make them feel guilty about the past, and give them a hatred of their country instead of pride in it. Is the white slave trade a part of the curriculum? You can bet it won't be.
Another sinister aspect of teaching is the teaching of black history. Our children are to be taught that the blacks were basically here before the Anglo Saxons, and there was a large black community in the 1600s.
If that is the case, how come many British people never saw a black person until the late 1940s after the arrival of the Windrush?
Another dangerous piece of brainwashing is the tale that Britain has had black queens. One of them was said to have been Queen Phillipa, the mother of the Black Prince. The Black Prince gained his nickname by the colour of his armour, but not according to the anti-white zealots who are brainwashing our children, they say it was because he was black!
Queen Phillipa, does she look black? No, because she isn't.
Those who say this woman is black are obviously colour blind. The only black thing about her is her hair.
To read more about the Black Prince (and see a picture of him with red hair!) click here.
On the subject of black Britons, the website dedicated to "100 Greatest Black Britons" features some who are obviously not black and a huge number who were not born in Britain.
To read more about the travesty of the history curriculum click here.
No mention of teaching them about how many of the world's greatest scientists and inventors were born in our country, no mention of teaching them about the great people of history such as Horatio Nelson, the only Nelson our children will learn about in future will be Nelson Mandela!
The idea of ramming the slave trade down the throats of our children is to make them feel guilty about the past, and give them a hatred of their country instead of pride in it. Is the white slave trade a part of the curriculum? You can bet it won't be.
Another sinister aspect of teaching is the teaching of black history. Our children are to be taught that the blacks were basically here before the Anglo Saxons, and there was a large black community in the 1600s.
If that is the case, how come many British people never saw a black person until the late 1940s after the arrival of the Windrush?
Another dangerous piece of brainwashing is the tale that Britain has had black queens. One of them was said to have been Queen Phillipa, the mother of the Black Prince. The Black Prince gained his nickname by the colour of his armour, but not according to the anti-white zealots who are brainwashing our children, they say it was because he was black!
Queen Phillipa, does she look black? No, because she isn't.
Those who say this woman is black are obviously colour blind. The only black thing about her is her hair.
To read more about the Black Prince (and see a picture of him with red hair!) click here.
On the subject of black Britons, the website dedicated to "100 Greatest Black Britons" features some who are obviously not black and a huge number who were not born in Britain.
To read more about the travesty of the history curriculum click here.
04 December 2008
The decline of the British education system
The dumbing down of the British education system is one of the biggest crimes against our young people.
Up until 1987, school pupils studied for the Ordinary level (better known as the "O" level) which they would take when they were 16. Another exam, the Certificate of Secondary Education (known as the "CSE") was also available to 16 year olds, a grade 1 in the CSE being considered as an equivalent to the O level.
The O level involved quite a lot of work and revision, and it was rare for a pupil to take more than eight. Any pupil passing eight O levels was considered bright! If they went on to take the Advanced level (or "A" level) they would normally study three subjects, four was extremely rare. It took two years to complete the A level course, and anyone getting the top grade was lucky.
Since 1987, the exams have become progressively easier, as the GCSE was easier than both the O level and the CSE (I know for a fact that they are because I've taken all three types of exam!) then A levels had to be made easier to compensate for the dumbing down of the exam system.
Now we hear of 16 year olds getting 11 or 12 A* GCSEs, and then going on to get five or six grade As at A level, which would have been impossible at one time owing to the amount of work involved and the complexity of the syllabus.
The sad fact is that these "geniuses" are being conned into thinking they are super-intelligent. The fact that many cannot even construct a properly punctuated sentence, have no idea how to use the apostrophe (thinking it must always go before a letter "s" even when it is not being used to indicate the possessive!) and in many cases are unable to even spell.
Recently we went to an open evening at a sixth form college. On the wall were various displays of the work done by students, and the level of spelling was appalling. The fact that these bad spellers are being conned into thinking they are highly intelligent is nothing short of criminal.
The worrying thing is that this generation will be the next generation of professors, doctors, vets etc.
The exam system should go back to teaching subjects properly, ensuring that students are mentally taxed and are not allowed to opt for such ridiculous subjects as "media studies" instead of more valuable topics.
For an example of what I am talking about, read this report about how students did not have a clue how to answer old O level questions.
Up until 1987, school pupils studied for the Ordinary level (better known as the "O" level) which they would take when they were 16. Another exam, the Certificate of Secondary Education (known as the "CSE") was also available to 16 year olds, a grade 1 in the CSE being considered as an equivalent to the O level.
The O level involved quite a lot of work and revision, and it was rare for a pupil to take more than eight. Any pupil passing eight O levels was considered bright! If they went on to take the Advanced level (or "A" level) they would normally study three subjects, four was extremely rare. It took two years to complete the A level course, and anyone getting the top grade was lucky.
Since 1987, the exams have become progressively easier, as the GCSE was easier than both the O level and the CSE (I know for a fact that they are because I've taken all three types of exam!) then A levels had to be made easier to compensate for the dumbing down of the exam system.
Now we hear of 16 year olds getting 11 or 12 A* GCSEs, and then going on to get five or six grade As at A level, which would have been impossible at one time owing to the amount of work involved and the complexity of the syllabus.
The sad fact is that these "geniuses" are being conned into thinking they are super-intelligent. The fact that many cannot even construct a properly punctuated sentence, have no idea how to use the apostrophe (thinking it must always go before a letter "s" even when it is not being used to indicate the possessive!) and in many cases are unable to even spell.
Recently we went to an open evening at a sixth form college. On the wall were various displays of the work done by students, and the level of spelling was appalling. The fact that these bad spellers are being conned into thinking they are highly intelligent is nothing short of criminal.
The worrying thing is that this generation will be the next generation of professors, doctors, vets etc.
The exam system should go back to teaching subjects properly, ensuring that students are mentally taxed and are not allowed to opt for such ridiculous subjects as "media studies" instead of more valuable topics.
For an example of what I am talking about, read this report about how students did not have a clue how to answer old O level questions.
03 December 2008
Americanisms Part 2
A few days ago I opened this blog by posting about the ever-increasing use of American terms ahead of English ones.
Here is an example of what I am talking about - the Scarborough Evening News carries a short report entitled "Santa's in the 'hood". Now "'hood" is the American ghetto slang for "neighbourhood" and the Scarborough Evening News are reminded that we are in Britain not the LA ghettoes!
Report here.
Here is an example of what I am talking about - the Scarborough Evening News carries a short report entitled "Santa's in the 'hood". Now "'hood" is the American ghetto slang for "neighbourhood" and the Scarborough Evening News are reminded that we are in Britain not the LA ghettoes!
Report here.
01 December 2008
Britain and the Euro - loss of our financial independence
The President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, says that our country is closer than ever to joining the Euro.
This would mean our interest rates, and other financial matters, being controlled by the European Central Bank, which is based in Frankfurt. Presumably this would also mean that London would no longer be an important financial centre. The EU would still allow us to mint our own coins, but all notes would be produced in Germany.
People who believe that this is a great idea should stop and think that, once a country no longer has control over its own finances, then it is no longer an independent country.
Would you like to think that Germany decides our interest rates,inflation and other matters relating to our financial state?
Surrendering the Pound in favour of the Euro would be the same as signing up to a federalist, totalitarian, tyrannical monster. We already have lost many of our own controls, but when we lose our financial independence too we shall no longer be our own nation.
This would mean our interest rates, and other financial matters, being controlled by the European Central Bank, which is based in Frankfurt. Presumably this would also mean that London would no longer be an important financial centre. The EU would still allow us to mint our own coins, but all notes would be produced in Germany.
People who believe that this is a great idea should stop and think that, once a country no longer has control over its own finances, then it is no longer an independent country.
Would you like to think that Germany decides our interest rates,inflation and other matters relating to our financial state?
Surrendering the Pound in favour of the Euro would be the same as signing up to a federalist, totalitarian, tyrannical monster. We already have lost many of our own controls, but when we lose our financial independence too we shall no longer be our own nation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)