Happy New Year 2008
I would like to take this opportunity to wish all our readers, friends and associates, as well as our enemies, a very happy & prosperous New Year 2008.
Christmas crisis brewing
Apparently there is a Christmas crisis brewing...
According to a UK government think tank, Christmas should be downgraded unless other religious festivals are marked on an even footing.
The Institute of Public Policy Research has suggested various ideas to make the UK more multicultural. It also wants "national culture" barriers to be torn down to help immigrants settle into the UK.
In a report due to be published in coming weeks, the organisation said: "If we are going to continue to mark Christmas - and it would be very hard to expunge it from our national life even if we wanted to - then public organisations should mark other major religious festivals too. Even-handedness dictates that we provide public recognition to minority cultures and traditions."
Duh? I beg pardon! To this one could only say that this is a “predominately” Christian country, though I am not a Christian, and if people have a problem with that then they do have an option; and that is to leave. No one has asked them to be here or to stay here.
You do NOT have the right to never be offended. This society is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you as an individual! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be. So, if someone says something you don't like either argue it out with them or leave it be.
You do NOT have the right to change our country's history or heritage. You do not have the right to impose Sharia Law on this country in any way, shape or form, or any other law. This country has a legal code and it is valid for all. This country has a freedom of religion, which means you are free, as is everyone else, to worship your God or no God; with no fear of persecution. You are given the freedom, nowadays, it was not always thus, to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. You are not forced to go to church every Sunday, as once was the case in Britain, not even on Christmas Day are you forced to attend, therefore do not try to impose your rules on us.
Unfortunately, it would seem, that the people of this country are, in general, spineless, and will permit, for the sake of “peace” to allow themselves to be trampled upon by others who do not mean to be peaceful.
© M Smith, December 2007
According to a UK government think tank, Christmas should be downgraded unless other religious festivals are marked on an even footing.
The Institute of Public Policy Research has suggested various ideas to make the UK more multicultural. It also wants "national culture" barriers to be torn down to help immigrants settle into the UK.
In a report due to be published in coming weeks, the organisation said: "If we are going to continue to mark Christmas - and it would be very hard to expunge it from our national life even if we wanted to - then public organisations should mark other major religious festivals too. Even-handedness dictates that we provide public recognition to minority cultures and traditions."
Duh? I beg pardon! To this one could only say that this is a “predominately” Christian country, though I am not a Christian, and if people have a problem with that then they do have an option; and that is to leave. No one has asked them to be here or to stay here.
You do NOT have the right to never be offended. This society is based on freedom, and that means freedom for everyone -- not just you as an individual! You may leave the room, turn the channel, express a different opinion, etc.; but the world is full of idiots, and probably always will be. So, if someone says something you don't like either argue it out with them or leave it be.
You do NOT have the right to change our country's history or heritage. You do not have the right to impose Sharia Law on this country in any way, shape or form, or any other law. This country has a legal code and it is valid for all. This country has a freedom of religion, which means you are free, as is everyone else, to worship your God or no God; with no fear of persecution. You are given the freedom, nowadays, it was not always thus, to believe in any religion, any faith, or no faith at all; with no fear of persecution. You are not forced to go to church every Sunday, as once was the case in Britain, not even on Christmas Day are you forced to attend, therefore do not try to impose your rules on us.
Unfortunately, it would seem, that the people of this country are, in general, spineless, and will permit, for the sake of “peace” to allow themselves to be trampled upon by others who do not mean to be peaceful.
© M Smith, December 2007
Brits gave up their gun rights...
...is again and again the slogan that we hear amongst members of the survivalist and patriot communities in the USA and the same slogan is now being taken up by the NRA as well, it would seem.
Nothing is further from the truth.
What those people, all of them, who think they know (everything) better, just do not WANT to understand, despite having been told repeatedly ad infinitum is the fact that the British people have NEVER had such a right as to the keeping and bearing of arms as that granted to US citizens and guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
Still, however, they insist on using Britain (and Australia) as an example as to what happens when a country gets disarmed, claiming that the people “gave up their right to keep and bear arms”.
You cannot give up and surrender something you have never had.
While it is correct that ever since the handguns were taken out of the hands of law abiding civilians, who legally owned those with proper issued firearms certificates and all that, gun crime has shot (pardon the pun) through the roof in the UK but gun in the hands of civilians, whether handgun or other, could have prevented that either. Why? Because no British “citizen” (and I use the term citizen loosely as theoretically the British are “subjects” rather than “citizens” under the law) who might have legally owned a handgun could have even contemplated – and this is the same with other guns, including shotguns – of using a legally owned gun in self-defence, let alone in order to prevent or stop a crime perpetrated against someone else. The user of such a weapon in such a scenario would have been charged with firearms offences and gone to jail, under a murder charge probably had the villain be killed in the process.
So, when are those with an agenda and a huge battleaxe to grind are going to stop using the UK (and Australia) as an example? Those that make such claims, e.g. that the Brits and Ozzies have given up their gun rights pedal nothing but lies, plain and simple and they know full well that they do.
Brits (and Ozzies) did not give up their rights to own (and use guns); they never had any such rights. Owning and using a gun was a privilege granted by the government, same as in Germany and other European countries, with the differences that there was a time when any Brit could go and buy a shotgun and own it without even the need for a license. This changed, however, due to the armed robberies that were being committed with shotguns, sawed off ones frequently, during the 1960's. That was the only difference between Britain, say, and Germany, where a license if required for shotguns, and that is all, generally, bound up with the official hunter's licence and such.
Please, American Survivalists and Patriots, get into into your heads. The British people never had any gun rights. It was all privilege and nothing more. Protect what you have but do not accuse the like of the Brits of being cowards and yellow for “having given up their gun rights”, as you call it, which they have NEVER had.
To reiterate once again: You cannot give up and surrender something you have never had.
© M V Smith, November 2007
Nothing is further from the truth.
What those people, all of them, who think they know (everything) better, just do not WANT to understand, despite having been told repeatedly ad infinitum is the fact that the British people have NEVER had such a right as to the keeping and bearing of arms as that granted to US citizens and guaranteed by the Second Amendment.
Still, however, they insist on using Britain (and Australia) as an example as to what happens when a country gets disarmed, claiming that the people “gave up their right to keep and bear arms”.
You cannot give up and surrender something you have never had.
While it is correct that ever since the handguns were taken out of the hands of law abiding civilians, who legally owned those with proper issued firearms certificates and all that, gun crime has shot (pardon the pun) through the roof in the UK but gun in the hands of civilians, whether handgun or other, could have prevented that either. Why? Because no British “citizen” (and I use the term citizen loosely as theoretically the British are “subjects” rather than “citizens” under the law) who might have legally owned a handgun could have even contemplated – and this is the same with other guns, including shotguns – of using a legally owned gun in self-defence, let alone in order to prevent or stop a crime perpetrated against someone else. The user of such a weapon in such a scenario would have been charged with firearms offences and gone to jail, under a murder charge probably had the villain be killed in the process.
So, when are those with an agenda and a huge battleaxe to grind are going to stop using the UK (and Australia) as an example? Those that make such claims, e.g. that the Brits and Ozzies have given up their gun rights pedal nothing but lies, plain and simple and they know full well that they do.
Brits (and Ozzies) did not give up their rights to own (and use guns); they never had any such rights. Owning and using a gun was a privilege granted by the government, same as in Germany and other European countries, with the differences that there was a time when any Brit could go and buy a shotgun and own it without even the need for a license. This changed, however, due to the armed robberies that were being committed with shotguns, sawed off ones frequently, during the 1960's. That was the only difference between Britain, say, and Germany, where a license if required for shotguns, and that is all, generally, bound up with the official hunter's licence and such.
Please, American Survivalists and Patriots, get into into your heads. The British people never had any gun rights. It was all privilege and nothing more. Protect what you have but do not accuse the like of the Brits of being cowards and yellow for “having given up their gun rights”, as you call it, which they have NEVER had.
To reiterate once again: You cannot give up and surrender something you have never had.
© M V Smith, November 2007
Britain threatened by US over proposed Iraq pullout
In the US certain quarters are threatening cooling of relations of the relations and also trade problems should the UK government go ahead with it proposed pull out of troops from Iraq.
It would appear that the relationship that is supposed to be two-way between the US and the UK is still the same as ever, or maybe even worse. The US plays the bully boy who says “if you don't do as we say that will have consequences”. It is about time Britain showed the mettle it once had. Do we really need the USA? No more than we needs Europe. Let us look after ourselves first. Let's get our boys home and get out of that ill conceived conflict. The people of Iraq do not want either the USA not the UK troops in their country. Let them get on with it themselves. If it leads to a break-up of Iraq into three separate entities then so be it as well. But, oh no, the problem is the oi, despite what we are being told and led to believe and the control of the oil is currently in the hands of the coalition; or shall we put a name to it, in the hands of Haliburton and other US companies. There is not even the slightest control over how much oil is going through the pipeline shipping the oil out of the country. Apparently, so this writer has been told by some sources, the measuring gear has been disconnected. No one knows how much oil is being exported and it is more than likely that only a very small proportion of the money gets back to the Iraqis.
On the other hand, there is more and more private military in Iraq now that the British troops are hardly needed anyway. But, with the British pulling out the US no longer would have the chance to say that it is not a US led and organized war.
How dare the American government and especially the establishment threaten a sovereign nation, such as the United Kingdom in such a way; a country that has stood by its side in more than one of those conflicts conceived by the USA in order to secure oil supplies. It never had anything to do with freedom and democracy, like when a senator in the House asked during the first Gulf War when the then president of the USA, Bush Snr. stated that we were fighting for freedom and democracy since when Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were democracies and the next day or so was then told by the president that, in fact, it was about the oil.
It is obvious that it is all about oil and – maybe, just maybe – also about getting a base, yet again, not too far away from Russian territory. It can be seen well enough that oil is the factor here for why, otherwise, is nothing been done about human rights abuses in the former Rhodesia, now called Zimbabwe, with the so-called president of theirs, the title of dictator would be more appropriate, Mugabe, destroying the once richest country on the African continent, next to South Africa. Or why is nothing done in other regions of conflict and human rights abuses and wholesale murder and ethnic cleansing on the African continent. The truth is that none of those countries have any exploitable oil reserves. That is the very reason.
Let's get our boys home and stop following the lead of the USA into every idiotic conflict. The same is true for Afghanistan. The lessons from the past should have given some idea that Afghanistan cannot be won either. It did not work in the time of the British Raj, nor did Czarist Russia succeed at that time. No one has ever been able to conquer Afghanistan. What does make them think that they could do it now? Both of those conflicts are futile and will also do nothing to stop so-called Islamist terrorists and terrorism. The truth is that it will create more terrorists.
Is it not high time that the UK told the US where to get off; a running jump off Beachy Head would be a nice idea.
© M V Smith, August 2007
It would appear that the relationship that is supposed to be two-way between the US and the UK is still the same as ever, or maybe even worse. The US plays the bully boy who says “if you don't do as we say that will have consequences”. It is about time Britain showed the mettle it once had. Do we really need the USA? No more than we needs Europe. Let us look after ourselves first. Let's get our boys home and get out of that ill conceived conflict. The people of Iraq do not want either the USA not the UK troops in their country. Let them get on with it themselves. If it leads to a break-up of Iraq into three separate entities then so be it as well. But, oh no, the problem is the oi, despite what we are being told and led to believe and the control of the oil is currently in the hands of the coalition; or shall we put a name to it, in the hands of Haliburton and other US companies. There is not even the slightest control over how much oil is going through the pipeline shipping the oil out of the country. Apparently, so this writer has been told by some sources, the measuring gear has been disconnected. No one knows how much oil is being exported and it is more than likely that only a very small proportion of the money gets back to the Iraqis.
On the other hand, there is more and more private military in Iraq now that the British troops are hardly needed anyway. But, with the British pulling out the US no longer would have the chance to say that it is not a US led and organized war.
How dare the American government and especially the establishment threaten a sovereign nation, such as the United Kingdom in such a way; a country that has stood by its side in more than one of those conflicts conceived by the USA in order to secure oil supplies. It never had anything to do with freedom and democracy, like when a senator in the House asked during the first Gulf War when the then president of the USA, Bush Snr. stated that we were fighting for freedom and democracy since when Kuwait and Saudi Arabia were democracies and the next day or so was then told by the president that, in fact, it was about the oil.
It is obvious that it is all about oil and – maybe, just maybe – also about getting a base, yet again, not too far away from Russian territory. It can be seen well enough that oil is the factor here for why, otherwise, is nothing been done about human rights abuses in the former Rhodesia, now called Zimbabwe, with the so-called president of theirs, the title of dictator would be more appropriate, Mugabe, destroying the once richest country on the African continent, next to South Africa. Or why is nothing done in other regions of conflict and human rights abuses and wholesale murder and ethnic cleansing on the African continent. The truth is that none of those countries have any exploitable oil reserves. That is the very reason.
Let's get our boys home and stop following the lead of the USA into every idiotic conflict. The same is true for Afghanistan. The lessons from the past should have given some idea that Afghanistan cannot be won either. It did not work in the time of the British Raj, nor did Czarist Russia succeed at that time. No one has ever been able to conquer Afghanistan. What does make them think that they could do it now? Both of those conflicts are futile and will also do nothing to stop so-called Islamist terrorists and terrorism. The truth is that it will create more terrorists.
Is it not high time that the UK told the US where to get off; a running jump off Beachy Head would be a nice idea.
© M V Smith, August 2007
Police call for return of Internment
One of Britain's most senior police officers has, so it is reported, demanded a return to a form of internment; with a power for police to lock up suspected terrorist indefinitely without charge while investigations are going on.
Police officers on the ground, so are we told, are asking for this, to enable them to investigate everything properly and without a rush. Right, sure they are. And on an airfield nearby a squadron of pigs is preparing for take off.
It is NOT the police services, I am sure, that are asking for this per se but it is the leaders of those police services being stooges for the powers that be who want a means of detaining anyone who they deem to be a danger to society – for that read also a danger to them and their agenda – without charge, trial and evidence.
Most British MPs would never go along with this if the demand would come from government directly whether from the Home Secretary or the Secretary responsible for Homeland Security. However, if they can be made to believe that the police, and especially the investigating officers, are asking for this then it will be much easier for the MPs to be swayed towards such a move.
Once those powers are granted to police (and other agencies) to detain suspected terrorists indefinitely in interment what is to say that those are not applied also to anyone else the powers that be deem to be a danger; a danger more to them and their shenanigans than to any member of the public. Who after all decides who is a terrorist and who not? What is the determination of a terrorist? They say that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Internment could also, I am sure, in the end be applied to all those that simply speak out against the doings of the government and its agencies. Free speech, we have been told only some months back by a minister of the Home Office is NOT an unalienable right but just a privilege granted to the British subjects and that it could be suspended or withdrawn at any time. We must remember that the UK does not have a written constitution where such rights are enshrined and that the often cited Magna Carta and the Bill of Right does not, actually, have any bearing on the rights of the ordinary subjects of Her Britannic Majesty; none whatsoever. Those rights were and still are, in truth, for the aristocracy and the King's and Queen's liege lords only.
Things are afoot in the European Union and the UK here especially that can only be seen as worrying and when viewed through the eyes of a Rom, a Gypsy, like myself then all those things are very reminiscent of the times of the Nazis and National-Socialism and the era of Stalinism. Both were and are but opposite sides of the same coin. The West is heading currently very much down the slippery slope of fascism yet again, fuelled by the fear of Muslim terrorists and also, for some reason the Gypsy is in the firing line.
All I am seeing is that the EU and not just the EU alone in headed down into dangerous waters that will entirely undermine all personal freedoms to the extent of turning all of its “citizens” into numbers.
I assume the reason they now are therefore also going after the Gypsy is because the Gypsy lives still outside the control of the state to some degree.
We, those of the Rom, and others that may be concerned, must keep a watchful eye on all those developments, especially those that are not paraded that openly. The freedom of all of us is under threat and it is not threatened by a handful of militants and such like but by our very governments.
© M V Smith, July 2007
Police officers on the ground, so are we told, are asking for this, to enable them to investigate everything properly and without a rush. Right, sure they are. And on an airfield nearby a squadron of pigs is preparing for take off.
It is NOT the police services, I am sure, that are asking for this per se but it is the leaders of those police services being stooges for the powers that be who want a means of detaining anyone who they deem to be a danger to society – for that read also a danger to them and their agenda – without charge, trial and evidence.
Most British MPs would never go along with this if the demand would come from government directly whether from the Home Secretary or the Secretary responsible for Homeland Security. However, if they can be made to believe that the police, and especially the investigating officers, are asking for this then it will be much easier for the MPs to be swayed towards such a move.
Once those powers are granted to police (and other agencies) to detain suspected terrorists indefinitely in interment what is to say that those are not applied also to anyone else the powers that be deem to be a danger; a danger more to them and their shenanigans than to any member of the public. Who after all decides who is a terrorist and who not? What is the determination of a terrorist? They say that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
Internment could also, I am sure, in the end be applied to all those that simply speak out against the doings of the government and its agencies. Free speech, we have been told only some months back by a minister of the Home Office is NOT an unalienable right but just a privilege granted to the British subjects and that it could be suspended or withdrawn at any time. We must remember that the UK does not have a written constitution where such rights are enshrined and that the often cited Magna Carta and the Bill of Right does not, actually, have any bearing on the rights of the ordinary subjects of Her Britannic Majesty; none whatsoever. Those rights were and still are, in truth, for the aristocracy and the King's and Queen's liege lords only.
Things are afoot in the European Union and the UK here especially that can only be seen as worrying and when viewed through the eyes of a Rom, a Gypsy, like myself then all those things are very reminiscent of the times of the Nazis and National-Socialism and the era of Stalinism. Both were and are but opposite sides of the same coin. The West is heading currently very much down the slippery slope of fascism yet again, fuelled by the fear of Muslim terrorists and also, for some reason the Gypsy is in the firing line.
All I am seeing is that the EU and not just the EU alone in headed down into dangerous waters that will entirely undermine all personal freedoms to the extent of turning all of its “citizens” into numbers.
I assume the reason they now are therefore also going after the Gypsy is because the Gypsy lives still outside the control of the state to some degree.
We, those of the Rom, and others that may be concerned, must keep a watchful eye on all those developments, especially those that are not paraded that openly. The freedom of all of us is under threat and it is not threatened by a handful of militants and such like but by our very governments.
© M V Smith, July 2007
Vegetarianism & Animal Welfare
Most of who have become vegetarians, except for those who follow a vegetarian lifestyle for reasons of religion, such as some of the Hindu faith, have done so because they think that eating meat is cruel because animals get slaughtered for it.
I wonder, however, if any of them have ever considered what would happen if all the world would suddenly go vegetarian. Have they ever considered what would happen to all the cows, chickens, sheep, pigs, rabbits, etc. that are kept for food, if we all suddenly would give up the eating of meat and meat products? I doubt that they have.
Due to the fact that the pasture land for cattle (and horses) would, if we all would go vegetarian, would have to be ploughed up as it would be required for the growing of vegetables, grain and such, in order to be able to feed the world. Those animals, bar a few, would all be the very first casualties. They would be killed and disposed off, probably as dog and cat food.
It can also be assumed that they would soon be followed by wild animals, such as deer, rabbits, and such, which would be bothering the crops.
People must wake up to the fact that, as soon as deer, rabbits, hares, etc. are no longer managed and culled for meat, they will become rampant and will invade the fields and gardens and either destroy the crops, causing famine, or they will be shot, trapped or even poisoned. Not such a fuzzy and cuddly prospect, is it now. And no, fences will not keep them out in the long run. I have seen deer jump so-called deer-proof fences in forestry and that with absolute ease. Such fences were over six foot tall.
I would suggest that we all, but especially the vegetarian lobby, took a reality check.
It is always amazing how many people do not have a cue of what they are talking about but try to “educate” and “convert” the world.
© M V Smith, July 2007
I wonder, however, if any of them have ever considered what would happen if all the world would suddenly go vegetarian. Have they ever considered what would happen to all the cows, chickens, sheep, pigs, rabbits, etc. that are kept for food, if we all suddenly would give up the eating of meat and meat products? I doubt that they have.
Due to the fact that the pasture land for cattle (and horses) would, if we all would go vegetarian, would have to be ploughed up as it would be required for the growing of vegetables, grain and such, in order to be able to feed the world. Those animals, bar a few, would all be the very first casualties. They would be killed and disposed off, probably as dog and cat food.
It can also be assumed that they would soon be followed by wild animals, such as deer, rabbits, and such, which would be bothering the crops.
People must wake up to the fact that, as soon as deer, rabbits, hares, etc. are no longer managed and culled for meat, they will become rampant and will invade the fields and gardens and either destroy the crops, causing famine, or they will be shot, trapped or even poisoned. Not such a fuzzy and cuddly prospect, is it now. And no, fences will not keep them out in the long run. I have seen deer jump so-called deer-proof fences in forestry and that with absolute ease. Such fences were over six foot tall.
I would suggest that we all, but especially the vegetarian lobby, took a reality check.
It is always amazing how many people do not have a cue of what they are talking about but try to “educate” and “convert” the world.
© M V Smith, July 2007
UK Terrorism Alert back to “Severe”
Britain lowered its security alert to "severe", in other words back to the status where it was before the attack on Glasgow airport.
M V Smith, July 4, 2007
M V Smith, July 4, 2007
UK Terrorism Alert on “Critical”
Britain raised its security alert to "critical" — the highest level possible and an indication that terrorist attacks are imminent. So, let’s be careful out there and keep our eyes open and be aware and ready to react as and when and how.
M V Smith, June 30, 2007
M V Smith, June 30, 2007
Rushdie Knighthood enough reason for suicide bombers - Pakistani minister
A Pakistani minister stated on Monday, June 18, 2007 that the British government’s decision to confer a knighthood on Salman Rushdie, the author of “Satanic Verses” is good enough reason and justification for suicide bombers to attack targets in Britain.
The Satanic Verses, published in 1988, provoked the ire of many Muslims and led to the issuing of a fatwa in 1989 by the then Iranian leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini.
However, this is neither here nor there, We do have, at least we still had, last time I checked, freedom of speech in the UK and the USA and no one can therefore, though they will try, Muslims and Jews alike, silence a writer. To, however, state that Rushdie's knighthood could justify suicide bombings is tantamount to a declaration of war. If that is so then maybe the British forces need to leave Iraq and have a little word in the ear of the Pakistani forces.
It beats me again and again that the so-called Muslims who espouse such violence and venom and who dare to call for a fatwa on a citizen of a free country and to state that the knighthood given to that author mentioned could be justification get away with such statements and, more often than not, the governments of the free world cave in to their demands.
Are we, as a people of a free country, willing to allow ourselves to be told who can and cannot receive an honor and decoration by other countries that have no freedom in their countries, threatening us with terrorist attacks if we do not take away the honor given to a person those governments disagree with?
I have nothing against Muslims nor any other faith and religion per se as long as they do not wish to impose their rule on others that are not of their beliefs. I have the same problem with the (fundamental) Christians who claim that they must covert everyone to their brand of religion, like those that destroy the Culture of the Romani People and Romani families by their actions. This, however, is another subject.
© M V Smith, June 2007
The Satanic Verses, published in 1988, provoked the ire of many Muslims and led to the issuing of a fatwa in 1989 by the then Iranian leader, the late Ayatollah Khomeini.
However, this is neither here nor there, We do have, at least we still had, last time I checked, freedom of speech in the UK and the USA and no one can therefore, though they will try, Muslims and Jews alike, silence a writer. To, however, state that Rushdie's knighthood could justify suicide bombings is tantamount to a declaration of war. If that is so then maybe the British forces need to leave Iraq and have a little word in the ear of the Pakistani forces.
It beats me again and again that the so-called Muslims who espouse such violence and venom and who dare to call for a fatwa on a citizen of a free country and to state that the knighthood given to that author mentioned could be justification get away with such statements and, more often than not, the governments of the free world cave in to their demands.
Are we, as a people of a free country, willing to allow ourselves to be told who can and cannot receive an honor and decoration by other countries that have no freedom in their countries, threatening us with terrorist attacks if we do not take away the honor given to a person those governments disagree with?
I have nothing against Muslims nor any other faith and religion per se as long as they do not wish to impose their rule on others that are not of their beliefs. I have the same problem with the (fundamental) Christians who claim that they must covert everyone to their brand of religion, like those that destroy the Culture of the Romani People and Romani families by their actions. This, however, is another subject.
© M V Smith, June 2007
China confirms bird flu outbreak
China has confirmed a new outbreak of the deadly H5N1 strain of the bird flu virus in the central province of Hunan, state media has reported.
More than 11,000 poultry died of the virus in Shijiping village near Yiyang city, the Agriculture Ministry said.
Some 53,000 birds have since been culled and officials say that the outbreak is now under control.
China's last reported case was in March, when chickens died at a poultry market near the Tibetan capital, Lhasa.
There were no reports of human infection in the latest outbreak.
A total of 15 people have died in China from the H5N1 virus and millions of birds have been culled.
Officials are working to vaccinate billions of domestic poultry by the end of May in preparation for the northward migration of wild birds in the summer, Xinhua news agency has said.
Since the H5N1 virus emerged in South East Asia in late 2003, it has claimed more than 180 lives around the world. Indonesia has been hardest hit, with more than 70 deaths.
Scientists fear the virus could mutate to a form which could be easily passed from human to human, triggering a pandemic and potentially putting millions of lives at risk.
Has Hell Frozen Over?
London, Friday, May 11, 2007
by M V Smith
Reports are difficult to get from that location but the First Minister of the Norther Irish Assembly Revered Ian Paisley has been visiting today the site of the Battle of the Boyne together with the Irish Taoiseach Bertie Ahern.
This could, so we all can but hope, be a great beginning for the two Irelands and be even better for the people of the divided country.
At the time of writing this article there are still no firm reports as to the weather conditions in hell but the two politicians have met and everyone seems to have had a great day. May this be the beginning of a lasting peace in Ulster and the associated areas.
© M V Smith, May 2007
Sharia Law compliable Bonds
London, April 23, 2007
The British government considers issuing bonds that are compliable with Sharia Law so that Muslim interested in investing can do so without qualms as, under Sharia Law, interest is illegal.
While I can understand this to some degree (and could someone please tell me how the Arab banks work) I am afraid that I feel that this is yet another concession to the militant Muslims in the UK (and elsewhere in Europe). The UK and the EU are being held to ransom by terrorists and this from people who claim that they do not negotiate with terrorists. If this is not basically the same, and we must not forget that, as far as this author is aware, there are already twelve Sharia Law courts in this country while I do not know of any Jewish courts (aside from the fact that most law officers in the UK appear to be Jewish) and when the Rom want courts of their own, and that only in order to settle matters of the Culture, then they are told that they cannot.
As I have said before in some articles on this subject I am afraid to say that I can see the vision of the late Enoch Powell come true in the not so distant future if the authorities in the UK and the EU do not get some – and pardon my language – balls and put a stop to this pandering to terrorists.
© M V Smith, April 2007
The British government considers issuing bonds that are compliable with Sharia Law so that Muslim interested in investing can do so without qualms as, under Sharia Law, interest is illegal.
While I can understand this to some degree (and could someone please tell me how the Arab banks work) I am afraid that I feel that this is yet another concession to the militant Muslims in the UK (and elsewhere in Europe). The UK and the EU are being held to ransom by terrorists and this from people who claim that they do not negotiate with terrorists. If this is not basically the same, and we must not forget that, as far as this author is aware, there are already twelve Sharia Law courts in this country while I do not know of any Jewish courts (aside from the fact that most law officers in the UK appear to be Jewish) and when the Rom want courts of their own, and that only in order to settle matters of the Culture, then they are told that they cannot.
As I have said before in some articles on this subject I am afraid to say that I can see the vision of the late Enoch Powell come true in the not so distant future if the authorities in the UK and the EU do not get some – and pardon my language – balls and put a stop to this pandering to terrorists.
© M V Smith, April 2007
Do they know something they are not telling?
The following article was in the Cambridge Evening News of April 2, 2007 and was circulated by an Emergency Management Network that I am a member of:
<><><>
Villages asked for extra burial plots just in case
BEMUSED villages are being asked if they can find space for mass burials in the event of a flu pandemic.
In a letter that conjures images of a plague-ridden countryside with bodies being tipped into mass graves, Cambridgeshire County Council is asking parish and town councils how much space they have left in graveyards.
The council even asks if parishes have their own grave diggers and if they would be willing to offer cut price burials in an emergency.
Parish councillors said the letter had caused a few surprised laughs but admitted it made sombre reading.
Coun Charlie Nightingale, chairman of Great Shelford Parish Council, said: "I think it's a bit of scaremongering.
"You would have thought they'd have better things to worry about, but then I guess they've got to plan for these things. We've got enough space in our cemetery for the next 30 years. It caused a stir when we read it out at parish council."
Coun Jane Coston, chairman of Milton Parish Council, due to discuss the letter tonight, said: "It's a bit bleak. The only bits of land we've got are the recreation ground and the allotments, and I don't think either of those would be suitable."
Coun Paul Oldham, vice-chairman of Milton Parish Council, added:
"Let's just hope they never need to make use of the answers they get back to a letter like this."
The letter reads: "Has the Town/Parish Council identified any additional land for burial sites for the future, or in order to cater for mass burials being required. Do you have your own grave digger(s), if so, how many? If contracted out please supply details.
"The charging policy for burials is greater than that for cremation, given the emergency situation only would you consider reducing this pricing to that of cremation, and if so what would be the implications?"
The letter is part of Cambridgeshire County Council's emergency planning in case the bird flu virus H5N1 mutates and becomes a danger to humans.
But yesterday (Sunday, 01 April) Mark Baker, the council's director of governance, said maybe the language in the letter was a little too strong.
He said: "There are no plans for digging large holes and putting people in. It is more a case of a number of individual burials in the same area.
"Rather than looking at a grave plot here and there, dotted within the existing cemetery, have they identified an extension which could take perhaps 30 or 40 burials?"
The review of burial space is the result of a pandemic flu planning exercise, operation Winter Willow. If a flu pandemic strikes, it is expected to last three or four months, during which time the death rate would treble.
Mr Baker said: "We're trying to identify if we have enough burial capacity within the county."
02 April 2007
<<><><>>
I just hope this is just a contingency plan and not a case of them knowing something and not telling us, the public... some food for though, eh?
Lessons to learn from the Dutch 'Riots' (March 2007)
It is time, I am afraid to say, that the governments of the European Union had the same kind of courage as the government of Australia and woke up to the fact that while equality is indeed the aim to go for one cannot give one group more rights than other ones.
Recently whites in Holland, as much as in the UK, perceive, rightly or wrongly (but rightly more like) that, for instance, Muslims are being treated with kid gloves in everything and are being pandered to their demands whether this is with regards to dress, e.g. the Hijab, the full face veil, etc. or as regards to Christian festivals such as Christmas where this is now being basically banned as far as mentioning the word Christmas goes by the pc crowd, the wearing of the symbol of the cross, etc., lest it offend someone.
My own community, the Rom, on the other hand, are never given any sort of a 'break' like that and there are many Rom in the UK, for instance, who begin to think like the BNP in these matters in that they too reckon that the Muslims, for example, are given preference above all other ethnic groups.
Personally I must say that I do not blame them one bit for thinking in such a way.
All our politicians, unless they want to see a backlash happen, must take a leaf or ten out of the book of the Australian government under John Howard and be prepared to tell those Muslims that demand Sharia law, et al, to, if they don't like living in a democratic and free country to hop it and leave to a country there there is Sharia law. Shouldn't be too difficult to find one.
I am sorry, but if in Rome then do as the Romans do. I doubt that we could not demand in Saudi Arabia, for instance, be treated different because we are not Muslims. The fact is that I know that we cannot demand to be treated differently. In this country they can chose not to drink alcohol; no one forces them to drink it. However, if a non-Muslim is in those Muslim countries he cannot – often not even in private in his own home – consume alcohol for it is illegal in those countries. So, there are no special rules in Saudi Arabia or Iran or such for non-Muslims. Why then should we make allowances in this country for them.
I do not have a problem with Muslims or any other religion or group. I am of an ethnic minority myself, namely of the Romani People, but I cannot see why any country should kowtow to one group and be dictated to under the treat of terror.
The Gypsy and the Jew have lived in this country and elsewhere for centuries and have never ever demanded this or that and they have lived their culture and religion alongside the general (British) public while the Muslims, especially the more-or-less 'radicalized' ones, want to make the UK and other (EU) countries where they live into countries with Sharia law. I have yet to hear a Jew complain about Christmas and the symbols. They just generally ignore them and get on with their own faith. Shame others cannot do the same. The Hindus and Sikhs neither have such attitudes. Only the Muslims, it would appear, have this problem.
If the Muslims in the UK, Australia, etc. want to live under Sharia law then, like PM Howard told them, they have the freedom to leave the country and move to one which has the law they desire. But the truth is that they do not want to live under the version of Sharia that has been set up by other countries; they wish to impose their version of Sharia law on other people, especially those that they consider infidels. This does not compute.
© M V Smith, March 2007
PRODUCT REVIEW - LED Lenser V2 Triplex
LED Lenser V2 Triplex - A Product Review
With new light chip technology
Cloverleaf reflector system
3 high quality LED’s, in fact a high intensity LED light chip
Solid metal casing
Durable nylon pouch and lanyard included
Burn Time: Up to 10 hours from 1 AA alkaline battery.
Dimensions: 141mm x 37mm
Weight: 160gms
Power Supply: 1 x AA alkaline battery (Two sets of batteries included: 2 x AA)
The patented pure metal housing is ergonomic and extraordinarily smooth to the touch. The patented photon tube reflectors cause the high power diodes to shine with undreamed of brightness. Due to its low power consumption, 1 x AA alkaline battery will provide up to 10 hours of light.
Price: approx. GBP 24.99
Agents in the UK: Ledco Ltd. www.ledco.co.uk
Manufacturers: Zweibrüder Optoelectronics GmbH www.zweibrueder.com
Well, so much for the information from the manufacturer and UK distributor. However, I must say that I am most impressed, as as I have mentioned before on occasions, I do not impress easily, with the design and especially the light output from this little light. It is about the size of the so-called “Mini Maglite”, the one that uses 2xAA batteries as power source, but that is about where the comparison ends. The power source in this one that I have tested and am using is one single AA alkaline cell and considering that, the light output is awesome and then some more.
The light source is a three LED light chip in a cloverleaf pattern (see picture) and the diodes produce an extremely bright and intense white light.
As far as I understand this version of the flashlight is also available in Mossy OakTM camouflage.
The only drawback that could be mentioned is that the beam cannot be focused but, then again, there are others of the same manufacturer where this is indeed possible and I do hope to be able to review – should the manufacturer/agents be prepared to furnish me with the samples for review – some of their tactical flashlights, including the new one that is aimed at the law enforcement market. I have seen it and handled it already but have not been able to put it thru its paces properly, not having a review sample to hand.
All I can say is that this surely is a lot of light in a small package and don't let the price deter you. This is a solid little flashlight made of solid stuff and I am sure it will give many, many years of reliable service.
Reviewed by Michael Veshengro Smith ©
With new light chip technology
Cloverleaf reflector system
3 high quality LED’s, in fact a high intensity LED light chip
Solid metal casing
Durable nylon pouch and lanyard included
Burn Time: Up to 10 hours from 1 AA alkaline battery.
Dimensions: 141mm x 37mm
Weight: 160gms
Power Supply: 1 x AA alkaline battery (Two sets of batteries included: 2 x AA)
The patented pure metal housing is ergonomic and extraordinarily smooth to the touch. The patented photon tube reflectors cause the high power diodes to shine with undreamed of brightness. Due to its low power consumption, 1 x AA alkaline battery will provide up to 10 hours of light.
Price: approx. GBP 24.99
Agents in the UK: Ledco Ltd. www.ledco.co.uk
Manufacturers: Zweibrüder Optoelectronics GmbH www.zweibrueder.com
Well, so much for the information from the manufacturer and UK distributor. However, I must say that I am most impressed, as as I have mentioned before on occasions, I do not impress easily, with the design and especially the light output from this little light. It is about the size of the so-called “Mini Maglite”, the one that uses 2xAA batteries as power source, but that is about where the comparison ends. The power source in this one that I have tested and am using is one single AA alkaline cell and considering that, the light output is awesome and then some more.
The light source is a three LED light chip in a cloverleaf pattern (see picture) and the diodes produce an extremely bright and intense white light.
As far as I understand this version of the flashlight is also available in Mossy OakTM camouflage.
The only drawback that could be mentioned is that the beam cannot be focused but, then again, there are others of the same manufacturer where this is indeed possible and I do hope to be able to review – should the manufacturer/agents be prepared to furnish me with the samples for review – some of their tactical flashlights, including the new one that is aimed at the law enforcement market. I have seen it and handled it already but have not been able to put it thru its paces properly, not having a review sample to hand.
All I can say is that this surely is a lot of light in a small package and don't let the price deter you. This is a solid little flashlight made of solid stuff and I am sure it will give many, many years of reliable service.
Reviewed by Michael Veshengro Smith ©
What is Germany up to?
Germany wants to change term of presidency of EU
by M Veshengro Smith January 16, 2007
Germany, which today has taken over the rotating presidency of the European Union, besides “urging” (I see there wore than urging) all member states to adopt the European Constitution in the next couple of years, tries to change the length of time of the presidency of the EU that is held by individual countries from the current six months to a much longer period. The reason given for this desire is that not enough can be achieved in six months and one would need a longer timespan to make a real impact.
Is that the really the true reason? The desire to be able to archive more for the good of the EU?
As someone who is rather viewing Germany with different eyes and a healthy suspicion I would say we are headed again for something else with Germany and I would like to issue here a “severe weather warning”. For very good reason the EU presidency was laid out in such a way of a six-monthly rotating term, namely in order to prevent any one country being able to go too far in what they want to archive and put upon the EU, in the same way as the Swiss president only serves for one year, thereby avoiding crony-ism and such like and the accumulation of power in someone's – or in the case of the EU, some country's – hands.
What is Germany's true intention, I ask, and this makes my hackles stand up in concern. I fear Germany has never given up the ideas and ambitions of the Third Reich after the defeat through the Allied Powers in WWII. All that has been done was to put things into hibernation. Now it seems the time has come for them to reanimate them and for this they need a longer EU presidency.
With the Constitution the rotating presidency will be, so I understand, done away with altogether and there will be an elected president (by whom, I would like to ask, for I doubt that we all get a shot at electing this all-European president) and a all-European government (in the end).
We must be ever vigilant, Gypsies and all Anti-Fascists, to the rise of the new Nazis (which are but the young guard of the old Nazis) in Europe, and especially we will have to watch Germany. We cannot and must not trust the government of that nation that cause two world wars and the destruction of over a million of our Gypsy People, and countless others.
© M V Smith, January 2007
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
