Another very British holocaust

You may have missed it, but Friday just gone was holocaust memorial day.  This annual event was initiated in 2001, and marks the day when the concentration camp at Auschwitz was captured – I won’t say liberated – by the Russian army.  It is supposed to be an opportunity to remember not only the supposed extermination of Jews by the German National Socialist regime, but also of subsequent acts of genocide in four countries – Bosnia, Cambodia, Rwanda, and the Darfur region of Sudan.

To be fair, the holocaust memorial day website does contain limited information about those four genocides, but I am not aware that holocaust memorial day has ever been used in this country to mark any genocide other than the one that never actually happened.

This week my local newspaper quotes a local MP as referring to the supposed extermination of Jews by Hitler’s regime as the biggest mass murder in history.  Here are some facts.

The number of Jews who died under Hitler’s regime is normally cited as around six million.  Many historians believe that Stalin’s communist regime in the Soviet Union killed far more people than that, and likewise many historians believe that Mao Tse Tung’s communist regime in China killed far more than six million people.  I believe that some historians maintain that more than six million African people were murdered in the Congo Free State.

Also, I believe that it is a matter of recorded fact that more than eight million babies have been slaughtered in abortion clinics in this country since 1967.

This year’s holocaust memorial day saw the film Denial released in cinemas in the United Kingdom.  It tells the story of the libel trial which bankrupted David Irving.  The judge in that case ruled that Irving distorted evidence to suit his agenda.  I wonder if the judge in that case would deny that eight million is a larger number than six million.

Related previous posts include:
A very British holocaust
The Pope visits Auschwitz 
The Jews are afraid, but what about the rest of us?
Is holocaust denial a bad thing?
Of Jews and paedophiles

The demise of the minicab driver

It appears that self-driving cars could be on our streets in just a few years from now, and it is reported also that Google is developing plans for a driverless minicab service.  The implications appear considerable.

I can think of four reasons why driverless minicabs might be preferable to traditional ones.

With no need to pay a driver’s wages, a driverless minicab would presumably be less expensive.

There have been numerous instances over the years of women travelling alone being raped by minicab drivers.  A driverless cab would therefore appear as the safer option to many women.

A driverless minicab could be available at any time of the day or night, and on any day of the year.  Have you ever tried booking a minicab on Christmas day?

There is no obvious reason why a driverless minicab would be more expensive to hire on public holidays than on any other day of the year.

In short, there is good reason to believe that the days of the minicab driver are numbered.  A simple search on the internet indicates that there are in the region of 298,000 cab drivers in the whole of the United Kingdom, and so we are potentially looking at 298,000 people losing their livelihoods – or at least having to change their occupation.

If the price of your minicab journey decreases, then you are left with more money to spend on something else.  It is how you choose to spend that money which will determine what happens to the people currently working as minicab drivers.

Update: since writing this, I have become aware that driverless buses are being trialled in various cities, such as Paris.  Buses are not like minicabs, however.

Driverless buses would need either to operate free of charge or else have some mechanism to ensure that every passenger either pays a fare or else is exempt from paying a fare (for example a small child).  Also, many passengers might not feel as safe on a driverless bus as they would on a bus with a driver.

Related previous posts include:

Uber lose tribunal claim

The murder of Andrea Bocelli

As the inauguration of Donald Trump as President of the USA approaches, it is reported that Andrea Bocelli and Jennifer Holliday are among the long list of famous performers who will not be taking part.

My first comment is that these performers are missing out on publicity, although to be fair a lot of them are major celebrities who perhaps do not feel the need for such publicity.  Nevertheless, the perfomers who will take part - Jackie Evancho and Toby Keith - may well benefit from increased sales of their recordings.

Jennifer Holliday initially agreed to perform, but then pulled out and gave the reason that she stands with the LGBT community.   I am not sure what Doland Trump has done which supposedly has annoyed the LGBT community, but it does make me wonder about the mindset of people in that community.

I am not LGBT, but I do have bills to pay, and it is only by the grace of God that I have never been the victim of a burglary or mugging.  Am I right in concluding that people in the LGBT community also have bills to pay?  Surely it is fair to say that everyone in the LGBT community either has been the victim of a burglary or a mugging or else could be tomorrow.

There are times when it is tempting to conclude that all homosexuals put their sexuality at the centre of their existence.  At the risk of sounding homononphobic, I don't believe that.  Whatever Trump may have said concerning sexuality, I would be very suprised if not one LGBT person voted for him.  People normally vote in elections on a wide range of issues, and each person who votes has their own set of priorities.

The more worrying issue for me is that Andrea Bocelli apparently backed out of the inauguration ceremony because he received death threats.  If this is true, then I hope that the people who sent the death threats will be prosecuted and sent to prison.

I have never in my life sent anyone a death threat, and neither have I ever received one, but there are times when I wonder if I am perhaps the only person in the world who has neither sent nor received a death threat.  Examples of people who have in the past received death threats include:

• a man in London who campaigned to save some historic railway arches from demolition;
• Caroline Flack when she was dating Harry Styles;
• the American singer Rebecca Black, when she was thirteen years old.

People who send death threats, regardless of the provocation, really disgust me, and most if not all of them ought to be imprisoned.


Related previous posts include:
Another teenager dies in pre-communist Britain 
Ryan French is dead

Metro comment and Niemoeller's prayer

I have already discussed Niemoeller's prayer in a previous blog post, and it is now relevant to mention it again.  Just a few days ago, on 4 January 2017, the Metro newspaper published its first ever editorial comment.  It was on the subject of press freedom.

For many years the press in the United Kingdom was regulated by an organisation called the Press Complaints Commission.  In September 2014 this was replaced by the Independent Press Standards Organisation.  The government is now considering putting pressure on the British press to register instead with a regulatory body called Impress, which is largely funded by Max Mosley.  Any newspaper which does not register with it would do so at the risk of financial ruin.

As an aside, in 2008 Max Mosley successfully sued a national newspaper which had reported on him indulging in a sex orgy with five prostitutes.

A few years ago I made numerous complaints to the Press Complaints Commission about factual inaccuracies in newspapers, one of which involved myself.  Not one of these complaints was upheld, and in not one case did the newspaper in question even admit the possibility that they might be in error.

The Metro comment makes reference to the role of the press in reporting the Rotherham sex grooming scandal, but this is hardly their strongest card.  Paedophile grooming gangs have been operating in the north west of England for far longer than the seventeen years in which the Metro has been in print.  In which year did the Metro first report on it?  In which year did any other national newspaper first report on it?

The truth is that it was almost entirely the efforts of the British National Party which dragged this sordid matter into the public domain, and  yet I cannot think of a single British newspaper which has ever acknowledged this.  In fact I cannot think of a single British newspaper which has ever said anything remotely positive about any patriotic political party.

On the one hand I do not want the British press to be cajoled into submission by an overbearing government, but on the other hand I wish that the people in charge of the British press would display at least some humility regarding their many failures.

Related previous posts include:
Britain First and Niemoeller's prayer
Of Jews and paedophiles