George Galloway

Well hurrah for the voters of West Bradford. Now I don't suppose George Galloway and I would agree on much politically but at least he is a man with convictions, character, a sense of humour and enjoys a cigar. So, in other words, there is a lot of good in the man and he is a vast improvement on most MP's, on both sides of the House of Commons, who seem to believe in nothing at all apart from their pathetic careers.

Let's hope the election of George is not a one off but the start of a rebellion by the electorate against our anodyne political leaders of all hues and we will see more upsets in by elections to come -not to mention of course the Euro Elections when I am backing UKIP to sweep the board and give Cameron a very bloody nose.  

Mrs Assad

There was a picture of Mrs Assad with her husband in the newspaper yesterday and very lovely she looked too. Not just good looking, but intelligent as well, judging by the copies of her emails released by a hacker  Of course she is a 'hate figure' for our 'right on' friends in our media and government but they ought to pause and think -where else in the Arab world can a woman be publicly photographed standing by her husband, in a dress with bare arms and a big smile on her face?  Certainly not in Saudi Arabia which, of course, is backing the Sunni rebels. Next to the picture there was another photograph of a pretty girl who is allegedly: 'a close adviser to Mr. Assad and who advises him how to present his brutal crackdown to the media in a positive light.'  Again I can't help wondering where else in the Middle East could a woman become head of media relations? 

Now I don't know what the future holds for Syria but if I was Syrian woman I know who I would be hoping would win the current Civil War, Mr Assad.  Meanwhile if Mr. Cameron is really so keen on democracy why doesn't he give the people of this country the chance to vote on - say - immigration - the continuing membership of the EU - or reform of that  Lawyers benefit- the  Human Rights Act - to name but three issues which if put to the people of this country would almost certainly produce results which go against what the cosy liberal London consensus believes in. A consensus which is every bit as Dictatorial in its way as that of Mr. Assad and has ruled this country ever since Margaret Thatcher left office.

Red Meat is Good for YOu

A fatuous body called the Harvard School of Medicine has come up with the finding that - according to my newspaper-  eating steak is bad for you - Wow! Not only that but that if we were to cut the amount of red meat we eat to only 42 gm a day (the equivalent of one steak a week) almost one in ten early deaths in men could be prevented. Wow again. Obviously-  if these findings had a grain of truth in them -there would be no Argentinians alive over the age of sixty as, for those of you who don't know, Argentinians are the world champions of red meat eaters consuming 55 kg per head per year - yes that is twenty times the amount the pathetic Harvard Medicine School boffins think is good for you- Twenty times! right so -obviously -there can't be many hale and hearty Argentinians around can there? Oddly there can. The average Argentinian male lives to 73.1 years, OK that is less than our 78.4 years but that discrepancy can easily be explained by the difference in GDP per person and the health care spend. /   

The same cretinous report also waxes lyrical about the dangers of eating smoked meats like bacon or scoffing processed meats like sausages and salami - so - once again -why are there so many Germans around nicking all the sun loungers when I am on holiday?  According to Dr Hu -co author of the report - they should all be dead well before they get to the age when they can afford to go on holiday because- as we all know - those of us anyway who have had the misfortune to taste German culinary efforts -  their entire life revolves round eating sausages and processed meats but - actually - the average German males lives 77.82 years, only six months less than your average Brit!

Lastly of course life is not about living for ever but about having fun and enjoying the good things that God has given us. So just remember when next time you wife tries to tempt you with a plate of ghastly spaghetti that the average Italian male only lives six months longer than the average Brit - but if the price of that extra six months is a lifetime of eating pasta pap then frankly - fuck it - eat red meat and have fun.

Francis Maude - a Nasty Tory

Francis Maude - a Minister in this weird government of 'all talents' we are currently afflicted with - maintains that the Tory party will always be seen as the 'nasty 'party unless it backs gay marriage, unmarried couples and does more to attract ethnic minority supporters. Now -there is a technical problem here- i.e. the nasty truth is that many ethnic minorities don't hold with Mr Maude's 'right on' attitude to gay rights or unmarried mothers, let alone gay marriage and, in fact, quite a few of these ethnic minorities consider gay anything to be a crime best punished by a particular gruesome and prolonged death while unmarried mothers are normally buried up to their neck in sand before everyone throws has fun throwing stones.  These inconvenient facts must cause any Conservative member keen to be seen to be a 'right on modern conservative' a problem. Does he embrace evangelical Nigerian Christians for example or the gay fascist marriage party?  Perhaps Mr. Maude could give us guidance on this issue.

Mr Maude's advocacy of gay marriage though has thrown up a another problem. By trying to placate one lobby he and David Cameron have unwittingly stirred up that sleeping giant, the Roman Catholic church and it's million UK members, not to mention the evangelical wing of the Church of England. The bad news for Mr Maude is that the issue of Gay marriage is not, as I suspect he and David Cameron thought, a non controversial affair, but is a highly controversial affair and - here is the irony - in their efforts to be seen as 'non nasty tories' Mr Maude and Mr Cameron have become 'very nasty tories' for those members of the Catholic Church and Church of England who oppose gay marriage as a matter of principle.          

.

Syria

I just wonder whether Mr Assad is such a bad bloke as he is portrayed in the press and I just wonder how long it would be, if the 'good guys' won, before we were wishing he was still around running the show.  It is all very well Cameron and the rest of the chattering classes getting their knickers in a twist about the death of a British journalist and some civilians in Homs but frankly this is what happens in a Civil war and, if one side chooses to fight it out in a City, then civilians will get killed.  It is a moot point incidentally whether the Syrian army should get the blame for the civilian casualties, I would have thought the rebels, who deliberately chose to fight their battle in a populated urban environment, are the real guilty party.

Still let's assume the rebels end up winning  it is odds on near certainty that the government which follows will make his regime look like a nursery school.  Why? Because this is the history of virtually every revolution, especially a revolution which is supported by the likes of Cameron, the Sunday Times, the Guardian et al, in other words by people whose chief distinguishing characteristic is a total lack of knowledge of history and a pathetic belief that all everyone wants is to live in a Western Democracy and respect each others human rights.   Well the bad news is that, based on the track record of 'liberal' revolutions, the last thing the eventual winners do is respect any ones human rights.

So just going back in history we will start off with the overthrow of that unspeakable tyrant, King Charles I.  Oddly the Civil war is still mistakenly taught in our schools as a sort of 'war of liberation' by the downtrodden masses against a tyrannical king which of course it was not.  The end result was the abolition of Parliament and the imposition of a military dictatorship. Moving on to the French Revolution, much supported by the liberal intelligentsia both here and in France, the benign and rather incompetent reign of Louis XVI was very soon replaced by the Reign of Terror, and the rule of extremists.  The same of course happened in the Russian Revolution and, nearer our time with the over throw of the Shah of Iran, widely welcomed by all 'right thinking people' in the BBC and in most of the press - the Guardian of course being particularly enthusiastic. The end result is that in Iran woman caught in adultery are routinely stoned to death, homosexuals are strung up and everyone lives in fear of the religious police. 

A friends of  son (an adventurous boy) is just back from a visit to Syria and gives a very different picture of what is happening in that country than that provided by our biased media.  In particular he tells me of the fear of the minority Christian population about what their future would be if the rebels where to win.  Assad's Syria  is tolerant of minorities and allowes women great freedom, aspects you would have thought would appeal to our chattering classes. So why are they so anxious that Mr Assad's regime would be toppled and replaced by rebels supported by those known tolerant regimes like the Saudis and, I almost forgot, Al Queda?