Vigilante crime is flourishing in the UK

More often than not, it seems, vigilantes are just thugs.  Merriam-Webster online dictionary defines a vigilante as a self-appointed doer of justice, but adds that the word sometimes carries the suggestion of the enforcement of laws without regard to due process or the general rule of law.

As I write, the abduction of Shannon Matthews has recently been dominating the news.  In 2008, 9yo Shannon was reported missing by her mother Karen Matthews in their home town of Dewsbury.  She was eventually found being held captive by the uncle of a man called Craig Meehan, who at the time was the boyfriend of Karen Matthews.  Matthews was sentenced to prison, as was Meehan's uncle.

Although not linked with the abduction, Meehan was jailed for possession of indecent images of children.  It has recently been reported that he has been viciously attacked by a gang of thugs, who presumably saw themselves as self-appointed punishers.

It is also reported that David Norris - one of the two men convicted of killing Stephen Lawrence in 1993 - has launched a lawsuit against the government because he was viciously attacked by three black men in prison.  It is worth noting that Norris had not been convicted of the murder at that point, and so was technically innocent.  However the attack on him would have been wrong even if it had taken place after his conviction.

As an aside, the murder of Stephen Lawrence is almost universally reported as having been racially motivated, which I won't argue with right now.  I do wonder though whether or not the attack on David Norris should be seen as racially motivated.  Would the inmates who attacked David Norris have attacked him if he - like them - had been black?  I would be surprised if HMP Belmarsh did not at that time contain at least one black inmate who had attacked and perhaps even murdered someone.

I hope that the men who attacked Craig Meehan will be prosecuted and imprisoned.  I await the outcome of David Norris's lawsuit.

The politics of denial

Followers of this blog may be aware that I have for some time now planned to write in detail about the supposed holocaust perpetrated by the German National Socialist regime in the 1940s.  Some may also be wondering why it matters.

In the past week my blog has enjoyed its highest readership in France, the USA, and Greece.  Two of those are countries where free speech is denied to those who seek the truth.  A simple search on the internet reveals that in September 2014 the Greek parliament voted to outlaw any denial of the supposed holocaust, whereas a similar law has existed in France since 1990.

It is never made entirely clear why such laws exist, but links are often made with the inevitably vague concepts of racism and anti-semitism.  I have some questions.

Have the lives of Jewish people in France improved since 1990?  Have the lives of Jewish people in Greece improved since 2014?  Are Jewish people in those countries better off than Jewish people in Britain and the USA where holocaust denial remains legal?

I repeat what I wrote in an earlier post: 

According to a recent press report Britain is currently experiencing a sharp increase in incidents of anti-semitic hate crimes.  [If I remember correctly, the press report did not link these hate crimes with holocaust denial.]  In France the situation is far worse, with many Jews emigrating to either Britain or Israel.

In other words, many Jews feel safer in Britain where it is legal to deny the holocaust than they do in France where it has been illegal for more than a generation.  If anyone still thinks that holocaust denial laws exist for a good reason, then maybe they could leave a comment.  

I remember watching The Cook Report on ITV in 1997 when Roger Cook confronted Nick Griffin about his views, and in particular asked him about the holocaust.  (This programme can normally be found on Youtube by searching for Cook Report BNP.)  It is worth noting that Roger Cook raised the matter, and not Griffin.

About ten years later, a programme was broadcast called BNP Wives (which can also be normally found on Youtube), in which a member of the British National Party called Marlene Guest was shown distributing leaflets during a by-election campaign which refuted allegations that she was a holocaust denier.  I couldn't help but wonder if this were the best possible use of her time.  Surely people tend to vote in elections on the basis of what is happening in their lives today, and not on the basis of what may or may not have happened many decades ago.

The best advice I can give to anyone who is active in a political party is to stay away from this topic as much as possible.  If anyone asks you your view on the supposed holocaust, then reply that you are campaigning on the lack of affordable housing locally - or whatever issues matter to the local electorate at that time.

I am glad that I live in a country where the denial of free speech has not yet extended to twentieth century history, and I cannot help but feel sorry for people who live in countries such as Greece and France.

It seems to me at times that the whole concept of the supposed holocaust of Jews in the 1940s derives from a belief that the life of a Jew is of greater value than the life of a gentile, but then maybe I am wrong about that.  Another simple search on the internet reveals that abortion is permitted in Israel, and that the overwhelming majority of Jews in the USA are tolerant of abortion.

If a Jewish woman has an abortion, then a person of Jewish parentage dies.  Does anyone care to deny that?

Related previous posts include:
The Jews are afraid, but what about the rest of us?
Another very British holocaust

A tale of two immigrants

I had planned today to write about Donald Trump, but that can wait.  Two news items have caught my eye, both concerning immigrant women.  Sanaa Shahid is a lawyer who has lived in Scotland all of her life.  Irene Clennel is currently being held in a detention centre in Scotland awaiting removal back to her native Singapore.

Mrs Shahid has made the news because she filmed a man called Alexander MacKinnon – also a lawyer – abusing her on a train, and telling her in particular that she should not be in the country.  He subsequently admitted a racially aggravated public order offence, and was made to pay a fine and other costs totalling just over £1400.  The comments on the website of The Daily Mail display little sympathy for him.

Mrs Clennel came to Britain in 1988, and a couple of years later married a British man.  They are still married, and have a home in County Durham.  Together they have two children and a granddaughter.  So far as I am aware she has never committed any crime.  The Daily Mail report does not explain on what basis she has been denied any further stay in this country, but quotes a government official as saying that all applications to remain are considered on their individual merits.  The comments are overwhelmingly supportive of her.

The deal is this.  If you are an ordinary person then it appears that you cannot legally tell an immigrant that they should not be in the country.  However if you are the evil government then you are allowed to tell an immigrant that they should not be in the country, and you can also enforce their removal.

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