A JOURNALIST, HIS BOYFRIEND AND THE LAW.

Whatever has been going on, one has to wonder if the 9 hour detention of a Brazilian national, David Miranda, would have made a news story, let alone major and continuing headlines, if he was not the boyfriend of a left wing journalist.

 

The media, notably led by the Guardian and the BBC, has had this non-event as their leading story for 2 days now and it shows no sign of going away. In fact, it appears that Mr Miranda was detained quite legally and that he has, indeed, been complicit in certain activities which may be deemed dubious or, even, illegal.

 

I don't normally side with the state in such matters but on this occasion what did it do that was wrong ? If Mr Miranda had been a bearded or handless sheet-wearing Muslim, would there have been any fuss made ? I doubt it. This is a simple case of the left wing objecting to a largely right wing government; it's nonsense and it's time the story was consigned to the dustbin where it belongs.

 

 

FRACKING PROTESTERS SHOULD BE SHOT.

The relatively new method of extracting gas from the ground - 'fracking' - has been introduced in the United States with very little noise and is proving to be hugely successful. In this country, a horde of professional protesters are threatening to disrupt its introduction, to the enormous disbenefit of the nation. The current activities of such people near the village of Balcombe in Sussex almost defy belief.

 

Whether or not 'fracking' is safe I have no idea; I suspect it is no more dangerous than many other industrial processes and is unlikely to result in major catastrophes such as the 'Torrey Canyon' disaster, the Exxon Valdez oil spill or the Deepwater Horizon disaster. It is also unlikely that it will result in as many deaths as did coal mining during its hundreds of years of operation. However, none of this seems to deter organised gangs of protesters who seem to emerge from nowhere whenever there is something about which they can complain.

 

What really gets me is that these protesters appear all over the country at the drop of a hat - young and old, families with children, single mothers, louts with long hair and tattoos, girls with coloured hair and an assortment of body piercings. Where do they come from ? Where do they live ? What do they live on ? Do they have jobs ? Do they pay income tax, council tax, road tax and so on ?

 

I suspect the answers to these questions are generally ones which would cause the hackles to rise and the blood to boil in any hard working household where their taxes are paid and the laws obeyed. One suspects that many, if not most, of these unkempt protesters have rarely, if ever, worked, have no fixed abode and live on a mixture of state benefits and the products of thievery; their children probably have no settled life or schooling. In short, they are the dregs of society but attempt to excuse their behaviour by hiding behind an environmentalist badge of honour.

 

Why are these people allowed to exist in the way that they do ? Why are these non-contributors to our society allowed to disrupt it so much ? Why are our police and politicians so lily-livered when it comes to dealing with them when they're so quick to pounce on others for exceeding speed limits or dropping litter ?

 

Does anyone have any answers ?

TAILGATERS AND LANE HOGGERS TARGETED BY NEW LAW.

From today, motorists face yet more laws designed to penalise them. Already they are subject to all manner of nonsense and now there is to be more.

 

Anyone caught, and caught is the operative word, using a mobile telephone or not wearing a seatbelt, will face higher 'on-the-spot' fines; should they dare to argue and refuse the instant penalty, they will no doubt face even harsher penalties in court, where there will be no mercy. Additionally, so-called 'tailgaters' or 'lane hoggers' will also face new 'on-the-spot' penalties, with fines of £100 and 3 penalty points being issued by police; again, should drivers wish to argue their case, the courts will no doubt take the word of the police rather than listen to the accused drivers and penalties are likely to be even more harsh.

 

In my view, 'on-the-spot' penalties are almost always wrong. The supposed offender is effectively accused, tried and sentenced without any opportunity to mount a defence, with every stage of their prosecution being managed by the same people; this cannot be justice, however it's defined. When it comes to the new offences of 'tailgating' and 'middle lane hogging', how will these be enforced ? As a rule, there are very few police vehicles on our roads and the roads themselves are often so busy that both offences will be almost impossible to either determine or take action on. How close will a driver have to be to the car in front, for how long and at what speed, to be accused of tailgating ? How long and under what specific conditions will a driver have to be in the middle lane in order to be accused of 'hogging' it ? These laws are little more than propaganda from a government desperate to be seen to be doing something, or anything, rather than nothing. They are, of course, also likely to be money-spinners as well, effectively just another tax on the already hard-pressed motorist.

 

Nonsense such as this is the mark of a government in terminal decline. May it soon be put out of its misery.

ILLEGALS GO HOME !

The Home Office has sent a number of vans around London with slogans telling illegal immigrants to either go home or face arrest. Various people have complained that this is racist or, at least, will 'stir up racial hatred' and now the Advertising Standards' Authority (ASA) is investigating.

 

Exactly what this can possibly have to do with the ASA is a mystery to me. Why telling law-breakers to either desist from their law breaking or face being arrested should be unacceptable is also a mystery. Burglars, muggers and even motorists are regularly targeted by campaigns aimed at either preventing their behaviour or catching them; what is so different about illegal immigrants ?

 

As far as I'm concerned, the sooner the hordes of illegal immigrants in this country leave, whether voluntarily or by compulsion, the better. If this campaign encourages some of them to bugger off of their own accord, all well and good, and they can take the wishy-washy liberal whingers with them, too.