Marine assaulted by 3 bullies

Bullying and gang bullying is the epitomy of cowardice.  In a shocking video on Youtube an ex marine by the name of Wen Jones went to the rescue of a 14 year old boy Zion Write was being bullied by three much older (20 year olds) lads.  He could not walk by and intervened, at this point the bullies turned around and attacked him.  Tyler Dylan Carswell, Eric Michael Deiter and Cody Moore Roon viciously assaulted Jones.  Three young athletic men took on 43 year old Wen.  They kicked and punched him unconscious but fortunately were arrested.  Wen went to hospital as his eye socket had been fractured.  At some point these three morons are going to find being taken up on charge of a felony is only part of the punishment.  In prison the rule of fists is a common thing, perhaps they will even look back and repent on this behaviour, but of course if they do it will only be because they have understood the consequences of being a moron. 

Keep looking over your shoulders lads, soon you'll get a nasty surprise.

Get Clegg and Price OUT!

After watching a recent episode of Question Time I noted how a member of the audience said he was voting in Twickenham and he would vote strategically to remove Price.  I believe in the next year we'll see the Liberal Democrats getting the bloodiest nose ever.  There is talk in the media Clegg is going to have a tough time in his constituency of Sheffield Hallam.  Personally it will be not be too soon to see either of these politicians removed from politics permanently.  I'd also like to add Danny Alexander into the fray.  The common denominator is they are all Liberals. However, they are Liberals who have been openly vocal about the government and have shown how they have progressed. Yet they have not progressed with their own policies, they have acted like sycophantic lakeys to the Tory party.  Doing the dirty work and in doing this they have gone against the very principles of their own party. They have stamped on their own doctrines and in doing so they have screwed their own supporters. So it is of no surprise when watching QT someone else has a similar opinion.

Clegg, Price you will not be here for long, mark my words.

India, Pakistan, Sudan, Nigeria, backwards societies in a modern world

Being a westerner it's taken for granted there are certain rights a person has, to an oppinion, to freedom of expression, to not suffer from torture, rape, murder without there being a consequence. For a civil society and laws which the masses abide by and respect. If they don't respect then they are made to account for their actions.  Yet these rights do not exist in the entire world, it is different in some places and the most recent countries in the news are India, Pakistan, Sudan and Nigeria. 

India in Uttar Pradesh state has been the recent report of 2 young girls who were gang raped and murdered.  Their bodies were then hanged in a tree.  These girls were part of the low caste called dalit. Some Indian news reports use the term "alleged" however there is video on the internet of these young girls hanging from a mango tree and crowds of hundreds of people, mostly men I should add.  In this caste system, murder, rape, thuggery is used to keep lower caste people in their place. The girls were only 14 and 16 years old, they were cousins and had to go out to the fields to toilet.When one of the fathers of these girls went to the police he was first asked what caste he belonged to and when they found out it was the lower "other backwards classes" they just made fun of him. One of the abusers was also with the police. 

In Pakistan this week a woman was stoned by her own relatives after she left a Lahore court building. She was 30-year-old Farzana Bibi, and had attended court to confirm she got married to the man she loved rather than to a man her family wanted her to marry.  She went against the societal norms.  This type of killing is called a honour killing, but there is certainly nothing honourable about it. About 20 relatives crowded around her, they pulled her to the ground and then bashed her with rocks in their hands.  In this case, there were Police in the vicinity and the husband went to them begging for help and they did nothing.

In Sudan a woman has been sentenced to be hung until she is dead, because she was in their eyes a Muslim woman who committed apostasy by saying she was Christian.  Even though she argued she had been Christian all her life.  She was pregnant at the time of the sentence so was allowed to have her baby and will be allowed two more years of life before the sentence is carried out. What I don't particularly understand here is why she and her husband didn't leave the country and seek asylum before this happened.  Meriam Ibrahim has also been sentenced to receive 100 lashes because she committed adultery.  Another trumped up charge because she'd married a Christian in a Christian ceremony.  

Lastly the news continues with headlines of the 230 school girls who were kidnapped by a Nigerian fundamentalist group called Boko Haram.  It would be misleading to think Nigeria known to be the wealthiest and most prosperous developing African nation has civility.  As we see yet another instance of religious right wing and power crazy enthusiasts flexing their muscles.  The Nigerian army we are told are barely paid a living wage and have very little in the way of weapons, they are effectively demoralised. In radio broadcasts by Nigerian officials we hear blatant lies told, you can tell because they had not been rehearsed and don't hold up to questioning or any kind of logic.  It is the result of institutionalised corruption which I have been told runs through the veins of Nigeria.

Just when you think the world is coming to some kind of intelligent state you realise it never will. Lack of education, poverty and social systems seem to all get together to keep subgroups of people in their place. If it's not these factors then it is religion and religious leaders using biblical texts to their own needs.  A shepherd can only be followed if there are sheep.

Panorama - Don't Cap my Benefits, questions not asked

On BBC1 there has just been a program by Panorama it was called "Don't Cap My Benefits." It was about benefits claimants who were receiving so much money in benefits they now fell under the new regulations which meant those benefits would be capped. If in a family they only get £500 and if single parents it is limited to £350 per week. In this program claimants from Brent were followed to show the human face of how benefits cuts had effected them. In all cases it meant their rent would not be fulfilled by Housing Benefits, the shortfall would result in being evicted.  They in turn had no choice but to move home. In many instances they were offered alternative accommodation but it was out of London. Away from family, friends, the schools their children had been attending. Of the people followed on camera, there were a number of single parents.  Their plight really was painful to watch, especially seeing the upheaval from their homes in London to places like Birmingham. If not they were put through a psychological torture which pulled them apart in having to try and make a decision to move or not to move. However, in the instances of the number of single parents which were being capped their benefits, there was one question which kept coming to mind the program had omitted to enquire or even answer in any way.  It is a simple question. Where were the fathers?

It takes two to tango. Yet there were single women with children, either two or three children and the youngest appeared to be under the age of one.  These women had made choices, not just once but multiple times which had resulted in another child. There were no questions about this aspect of the program. Where was the fathers?  They could of been in the background and undeclared, for a single parent on her own with children from multiple fathers would be a pretty unfortunate situation to be in. Of course it happens, yet at the same time these women were claiming large amounts of money from the state. Especially if the sums involved are multiplied over months and years, they then become phenomenal.  Amounts which are eye watering. Another question failed to be asked by this program was what about the responsibilities to all the other tax payers in the UK who support those who claim benefits. There is a onus for them all to try to work, to try to make their situation better.  However, it was as though they had become settled into being single mothers, into accepting the handouts of the state and they'd rather not work or make their lives better. I couldn't help notice in two cases the single mothers involved either got a job working with children or in another did voluntary work with children.  The thought came to mind was they just wanted to be baby machines, and not contribute to the social contract or social expectations of paying your own way.  To which I can only return to the original question, where were the fathers and why were they not supporting the mother of their children?  Personally I would find it incomprehensible not to support the mother of my children. There is no doubt a question of suspicion raises its head.  Were the fathers on the scene but out of view? Again this is something Panorama did not go into investigating, when it really is part of the story as well.

The benefits cap is not just about reducing the national deficit and the benefits bill.  It is also about people taking responsibility for their own life.  About working, about contributing to society and paying their own way. The cultural norm of some parts of society to be unemployable or subsisting on state benefits for years on end has to come to an end game at some time.  Unfortunately for a lot of these claimants, the pressures of this end game are starting to bite.  Fortunately for the rest of society, the more people off benefits the greater the reduction in the deficit and the better prospects for the country.  Without this reality the future is bleak.

The Fiasco of Parliament's Question Time

Every time Prime Minster's Questions is aired democracy is turned into a pantomime. There is consistent jeering and booing from both halves of the house, but more than this Cameron engages in trivialising politics. It is like he has read an issue of a tabloid paper and his replies become juvenile retorts. These are not answers a democracy requires, they are not honourable for a political environment which is supposed to be representative of the people. Politicians then congregate into the respective parties and proceed to shout distractions to what is said from the other side of the house. Perhaps the reason for this is because they do not perceive what is said as serious. When listening to a question or to an answer it then appears as scripted with a quip in the tail meant only to disgrace the opposition. This is clearly not a question for the public to hear, it is one meant to score a point, but does the public really want to listen to this?  I don't, I'd prefer like to hear serious discussion and serious answers, not scripted.

The speaker jumps in, he shakes his finger at the benches he feels are being more vocal than they should be. Doing his best to get order but it doesn't work. Berkow, just doesn't have the real power to for anything else. His voice becomes nothing more than to temporarily pause to proceedings, I can't help think he should have some other power. One which gelds the questioners who act like diving footballers doing their best to pick up a penalty, they are making it a fiasco.  Shouts, interruptions, boos, these are group behaviours citing one section against another, they are not what politicians should be doing just as the PM's answers to questions quite often fall short of being any kind of answer at all. The opposition engages with this as well, they are not innocent, but neither side are getting it.  How can such people, voted for the people represent the people when their behaviour is worse than school children?  Once in a while a serious question or a serious answer does arise and they seem so few.  One thing is true, there is never a full answer.  If the mud slinging stopped then parliament would be 100 per cent better than what it is now. If the childish retorts stopped we'd learn more.

It is no wonder politics has a bad name for itself, but then we all know it's about power and money.  It's not really about the constituents and more of who can shout the loudest. One day they will be judged, then these alleged representatives will only be allowed to represent themselves.

Cable seller of the Crown Jewels

The Lib Democrat conference is on and they are all gathering together to pat themselves on their narrow shouldered backs of how well they had done in a coalition government. Of course we all know they have been appalling.  I noticed though as one famous and nefarious Lib Dem MP was briefly and politely interviewed how no questions were asked about the Post Office sell off.   The Guardian newspaper on the 20.11.13. reported the sell off at 330 pence a share compared with a current valuation of 550 pence a share meant the sale had lost £2.2 billion. Such a phenomenal amount equates the complete negligence on behalf of the coalition government and in particular Vince Cable who was a key player.  Though, personally I can't help feel as business secretary he was given a poison pill by the coalition government. Whatever happened it was going to be unpopular, but the worst thing of all has happened the gross under valuation and sell off of Great Britain's crown jewels.  This seems to be a constant thing which happens whenever a Tory government comes into power and it seems the people who always make the most out of selling public assets are those who are already wealthy and seeking to get wealthier.  Every single one of those shares should of first been offered to the British Tax payers as free shares. The minimal restriction on selling to private investors was so low as to mean this government only wanted to sell shares to institutional investors overseas, they effectively rather give tax payers money to free loaders in different countries than their own population.

It would of made interesting news had the interviewer the bollocks to of asked a difficult question.  I think it should of been more along the lines of "Mr Cable, don't you feel it would be appropriate of you to resign from government after the atrocious short selling of the Post Office?" Or, "Mr Cable, can you explain why the population of the UK should consider voting for the Liberal Democrats when the selling of the Post Office at a vastly under valued level represents exceedingly bad judgement and governance?" A more simple question could also of been, "Do you honestly think your party will ever recover it's reputation as a democratic party after being in coalition?"

Every time there is a Tory government there is always a single guarantee, the poor, the working classes will be pushed into greater poverty.  Cable you and Clegg have your days numbered, watch this space.

Yanukovch brings the Ukraine to it's knees

What do Viktor Yanukovych, Saddam Hussein, Mohammed Morsi, Bashir Al-Asad and Hitler have in common?  It's simple, they were or are all power crazy in their own way.  Two are dead, one has absconded, one is in jail and one is still in power. It seems democracy doesn't rule when a country's ruler decides the people under them are nothing more than pawns. However, we see Al-Asad doing his best to play of different nations against each other so he can stay in power.  Whilst unfortunately Victor Yanukovych ran away like a frightened little girl who had been just spooked the three bares and greedily ate all their porridge.  Fortunately for the people of the Ukraine they have formed an interim parliament, unfortunately for them it looks like Putin has now decided to get involved in the game. Perhaps Putin was impressed by Yanukovych's wonderful home, the one with the replica Spanish galleon.  Most of the Ukrainian people didn't like Yanukovych's penchant for corruption, which had permeated through their society.  Further they want to move more towards Europe, whilst he has his sight set on Russia.  Like Al-Asad, Yanukovych to has played off different minority groupings in order to help justify his rule.  As the old adage goes, "divide and conquer" which is certainly what he has done. Although he ran away like a little girl he has found a big brother in the form of Putin.  The problem is Putin is not just a big brother he is a giant and already he is now starting to make his move on the Ukraine again.  It is another power play.  If his friend Yanny wasn't so greedy and wasn't so corrupt he would not be in this position. The reality for Europe is they will not get involved because it is too impracticable, certainly at a military level there is nothing they can do.  The Ukraine could just of found it is now going to be in a fight with Putin.  They may not of liked the corruption, but now their lives could be on the line. Depending on what hostility they show.

So democracy is a freedom in itself, and some people such as Al-Asad and Yanukovych don't know the definition. Unless they happen to think it is something related to fine wine sipped in a Spanish Galleon.  Of course like the greats villains of the world Yanukovych may find he'll one day be in the dock of a war tribunal.