A View from Middle England

Richard Dawkins - Deity denigrater and general grump!

2008-05-09T12:47:00.007+01:00

I heard Richard Dawkins on the Today Programme this morning. He's a million-dollar book seller and all-round serious atheist. Nothing wrong with that. We can all be what we want to be. But does he have to be so petty, so denigrating of others, and generally so mean-spirited when he talks about believers? It sounds like he has a chip on his shoulder about this. He wants Britain to be a "God Free" zone. Well, to use a phrase "a snowball's got a better chance in Hell".

He appears to want to be nasty rather than nice in discussion. There is a real venom behind his words. He trivialises peoples' belief by referring to God as "an imaginary friend". He tries to suggest that believers should not be taken seriously.

Personally I think it a bit of a waste of time Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor debating with him. I'd rather just "let all grow until the harvest". I'm not worried by Dawkins and his ideas, but I am perturbed by his bullying nature.

I have this theory that if people like Dawkins were on the Titantic, they'd rather everyone drowned than a few were saved. I bet he'd rather think we all go out in a puff of smoke rather than some get celestial benefits. Better to denounce God as an imaginary friend than to believe in a Friend who could lead to Paradise.

Ron Paul Republicans on the rise in NC

2008-05-08T17:30:00.014+01:00

An interesting post from Conservative Heritage Times. If you thought that Ron Paul's campaign had bitten the dust think again. All over the USA little pockets of Pauline political power are stirring the loins of Americans who want change. The CHT says "Kudos last night to North Carolina voters for nominating B.J. Lawson, a bonified Ron Paul Republican to the nomination for the 4th Congressional District and re-electing Walter Jones Jr. to the sixth CD. Jones was the only GOP member of Congress to endorse Paul for President".

Jones’ election is important as it shows Republicans that oppose the war in Iraq, even in a district filled with military bases, do not have to face a political death sentence. Something that John McCain could well reflect on.

Lawson says "Big government inevitably becomes a tool for corporate and special interests instead of a guardian of individual liberty. Today, big government has given us significant problems: rising food prices, jobs going overseas, illegal immigration, porous borders, failing education, war and occupation, foreign oil addiction, unsustainable entitlement spending, and a crushing debt burden. It's time for us to come together as free Americans and restore prosperity and liberty." Isn't it funny that when Americans here this message they vote for it. How come the media and powers-that-be try to stop it? Simple! Because they are the problem and have a vested interest in stifling the message.

Good on you B J! As you put it so well "Freedom isn't free — it requires a lot of hard work. But liberty is priceless." I bet the people of Burma would wish they could vote for such freedom!

A blogger's life!

2008-05-08T10:20:00.006+01:00

A blogger's life indeed. One of the joys of modern blogging (as opposed to a couple of years ago, that is) is the number of interesting widgets that you can get. I was keen on Spotplex and thought they were very good. So it is with some sadness that I find today that they have gone offline, closed down. Maybe they were just too good and got big before their time. That can happen. I don't know, but the message has gone out that they have gone. It's a pity as we need all the good ones to survive.

I sort of new something was up when my posts were reacting rather erratically to the visitor counts. Oh well, it's a blogger's life indeed. I genuinely wish them well in the future.

Ten green bottles hanging on the......

2008-05-07T23:33:00.006+01:00

The Crewe and Nantwich By-election has managed to interest ten candidates to stand for election. As we know, only one will be hired, the others will be fired.

They are:-

Tamsin Dunwoody - Labour
Edward Timpson - Conservatives
Elizabeth Shenton - Liberal Democrats
Mike Nattrass - UK Independence Party
Robert Smith - Green Party
David Roberts - English Democrats
The Flying Brick - The Official Monster Raving Loony Party
Paul Thorogood - Cut Tax on Diesel and Petrol
Gemma Garrett - Independent
Mark Walklate - Independent

UKIP in Crewe and Nantwich

2008-05-07T16:44:00.004+01:00

UKIP are getting more professional and they have just launched a by-election site for Mike Nattrass MEP who is the UKIP candidate in Crewe and Nantwich. They have a battle bus too, so this should add to the fun as well as the publicity!

Only us criminals!

2008-05-07T12:37:00.004+01:00

In order for me to be a Junior Church helper, I've had to undergo the "robust" checking of the Criminal Records Bureau. Thankfully they did not get me mixed up with somebody else with a similar name who has a string of convictions. On BBC's Watchdog there were a number of people that were not so lucky.

I am now the proud owner of an Enhanced Criminal Record Certificate. It all sounds so Orwellian, but then that's par for the course in New Labour Britain. Anybody coming into the country for the first time and being shown such a document would think that we are all potential crooks and miscreants. I've passed OK on all five categories. The first category is the "Police Records of Convictions, Cautions, Reprimands and Final Warnings". It is all a bit reminiscent of school. "This is your final warning, I won't tell you again!".

Doesn't it all some up the sorry pass we've come to. The assumption is that we have to prove we are innocent of a crime, and then get a certificate that makes us feel as if we actually were a wrongdoer and we begin to doubt are own being. It does seem to me all a bit cart-before-the-horse but I readily appreciate the need for caution and care in matters regarding children and vulnerable people.

I just think they could call the certificate something else!

Republican Race goes round in circles

2008-05-07T10:42:00.005+01:00

According to the Daily Telegraph, the Republican race is really over. Click on to their "Republican Nomination Race" link and you go straight to the Democratic one. Ron Paul is still in with the desire to get as many delegates as possible, but there is no desire to show it from the Telegraph's point of view. Ron Paul got 8% in North Carolina, and Mike Huckabee did even better on 12%! In Indiana, Mitt Romney was on the ticket as well and managed 5%. These guys are out of the race apparently, but that doesn't stop some people wanting to vote for them!

The press is very "sided", so the maxim "don't always believe what you read in the papers" is very true.

It's all over for Hillary

2008-05-07T10:12:00.006+01:00

I felt that Barack Obama had the Democratic nomination in his grasp weeks ago. I still think he will be the nominee and that Hillary Clinton has missed the boat this time. She needs to decide whether she folds her tent now, at the end of the month or in June. Fold it she will have to.

This particular race is not about her being a woman and him being from an ethnic minority background. This is all about change. Obama has sensed that, as did Ron Paul for the Republicans. Americans are fed up with having to do two or three jobs to make ends meet. They are at the end of their tethers over fickle financiers and corrupt corporations. The war in Iraq has stretched their patriotic hearts to bleeding point and they see their jobs exported in return for cheap Chinese merchandise.

Is it any wonder that they want change? It wouldn't matter what colour Barack Obama was, he'd still come through. It is his message that resonates not his skin tones. He will be in the White House not for who he is but for what he has promised to do. Make lasting change happen!

New Labour Joke of the Week!

2008-05-06T12:46:00.004+01:00

"Labour sources in Crewe last night claimed voters were not raising the 10p issue with them."

From the Daily Mail.

John Edwards - damned if he does, damned if he doesn't!

2008-05-06T10:10:00.007+01:00

Senator John Edwards isn't exactly sitting on the fence. That would put him slightly above the fray. No, I put him in the corner of the stockade with a fiesty filly on one side and a charasmatic steer on the other. Whichever way Edwards goes, he's bound to get kicked!

In a People Magazine exclusive (as they say!) John and Elizabeth Edwards have been waxing in a fairly lyrical way about what they like (and dislike) about Clinton and Obama. All very good, but it's more that just curate's egg philosophy. It's really just saying they aren't telling us who they support. At least Jimmy Carter said everyone in his family was backing Obama, but he couldn't go that far (nudge, nudge; wink, wink) as he was a Super Delegate.

So what is the bottom line? They can't say. After all North Carolina is John Edwards territory and it may be the spark that sets off a second revolution, so he's staying mute. The couple said they will not endorse either remaining candidate, saving their political capital for their own causes – his, fighting poverty; hers, fighting for universal health care.

I have a hunch Elizabeth Edwards is more astute politically than her husband. Achieving the goal of universal health care will help alleviate poverty but fighting poverty, although laudable, is fairly nebulous and does not guarantee a more healthy population. My guess is that the pair of them will need to find a compromise over the symbolism of electing the first woman as president or the first first-generation African-(Kenyan)-American as president.

It really is make-your-mind-up time in the Edwards' kitchen. Anymore dithering and it will be a touch of the Harry Trumans. Heat of the kitchen, and all that!

All change at Crewe - Oh, and Nantwich too!

2008-05-05T11:24:00.009+01:00

The Crewe and Nantwich By-election will be upon us very soon. An unseemly rush to hold the election, an unseemly scramble for candidates to be nominated. All very unseemly in the unseemly world of New Labour.

The election will be on the 22nd May and Labour have announced that Gwyneth Dunwoody's daughter Tamsin will fight the seat. There has been a long tradition in British politics for spouses or other relatives to take over the party cause in by-elections. Some would say this is a way to keep the electorate on side with a sympathy vote, others think it gives a natural feeling of dynastic continuity. After all, an MP in the Westminster model of democracy is very much wedded to a constituency. In fact, constituents are known to get the hump on occasions as with Mark Woodnutt in the Isle of Wight or the Leyton by-election of 1965 when Harold Wilson thought it a good idea to drop Patrick Gordon Walker onto the constituency. Leyton voters thought otherwise, and gave him a big raspberry at the ballot box.

On the matter of raspberries, Gordon Brown's been getting the pick of the crop recently. However, he will be looking to the voters in Crewe and Nantwich to give him a juicy plum instead. The Conservatives will be wanting to stem a particular tide of historical political by-election fact. The fact that the last Conservative by-election gain from Labour was Mitcham & Morden, in June 1982. And that was only because the sitting MP decided to test the electorate after defecting to the SDP. He was advised not to do it, but did it anyway. So it is little wonder that no defector has done it since, the last being Bob Spink to UKIP.

All eyes will be on the Conservatives here. Can they beat a 26-year gap in by-election success? David Cameron should say loud and clear what the Tories will do on taxation, helping the poor, about local democracy, cleaning up Westminster politics, and tackling abuses in immigration and employment. He should lay out a proper set of policies on penal reform (not just building more prisons) and he should tackle the abuses that the minority of businesses use in helping create a perception of rip-off Britain. We've seen the corporate cowboys telling us that they have "robust business models" in place, when they have nothing of the kind. Firmer regulation not more regulation, that should be the way forward.

A Conservative Party that has policies that are properly understood and agreed with by the electorate will be a winner. Ones that give the impression of spin and deception won't.

Rumsfeld in the frame

2008-05-04T18:31:00.008+01:00

I always had a feeling that Donald Rumsfeld was a dodgy character. To men like Rumsfeld, the political skullduggery comes easily. Ken Livingstone, the defeated Labour candidate for London mayor, said that he preferred political intrigue and committee "work" to the actual managerial activity his post required. Rumsfeld's certainly no Livingstone, but in this they have a certain kinship.

Ricardo Sanchez, the commander of U.S. Forces in Iraq in 2003-2004, has written a new memoir, Wiser in Battle - A Soldier's Story, an account of his life and his service in Iraq. Sanchez basically blows the lid off Rumsfeld's rotten barrel of political poison. Remember, Rumsfeld was the man who gladhanded it with Saddam Hussein. That was before Saddam fell out with the Americans and started selling Iraqi oil in euros.

Sanchez had a run-in with the devious Rumsfeld. Interestingly, in this excerpt from Time Magazine, it is Sanchez's wife who gets the point, commenting on the "offer" Sanchez was given by Rumsfeld. "Ricardo, they are just trying to buy you off and keep you silent," said Maria Elena. "I don't think we should mess with them anymore."

But for me the telling piece is this. From that, my belief was that Rumsfeld's intent appeared to be to minimize and control further exposure within the Pentagon and to specifically keep this information from the American public. The very things I detest most in political hierarchies - spin and deception. Rumsfeld had both in bucketloads.

The Time extract ends with this -

That decision set up the United States for a failed first year in Iraq. There is no question about it. And I was supposed to believe that neither the Secretary of Defense nor anybody above him knew anything about it? Impossible! Rumsfeld knew about it. Everybody on the NSC knew about it, including Condoleezza Rice, George Tenet, and Colin Powell. Vice President Cheney knew about it. And President Bush knew about it.

There's not a doubt in my mind that they all embraced this decision to some degree. And if it had not been for the moral courage of Gen. John Abizaid to stand up to them all and reverse Franks's troop drawdown order, there's no telling how much more damage would have been done.

In the meantime, hundreds of billions of taxpayer dollars were unnecessarily spent, and worse yet, too many of our most precious military resource, our American soldiers, were unnecessarily wounded, maimed, and killed as a result. In my mind, this action by the Bush administration amounts to gross incompetence and dereliction of duty.

Those that blindly follow the Bush administration and praise "our boys out there" should sit back and think that it is American soldiers being unnecessarily wounded, maimed, and killed as a result of lies and deception. Such action as described by Sanchez that the Bush administration was involved in does amount to gross incompetence and dereliction of duty. It borders on the unforgiveable!

BNP's Barnbrook shunned as a pariah

2008-05-04T16:47:00.004+01:00

The wonders of democracy work well with some people. In a free vote it's up to the people to choose whom they want to represent them. If you don't like the result, well, you've probably lost the argument. Labour lost much of the argument in London and elsewhere due to the 10p tax fiasco. Now we are getting crodocile tears mixed up with cupboard love. I've seen Harriet Harman dishing out this mawkish monotone today and it is unconvincing.

In London, Richard Barnes, the Conservative leader on the 25-member assembly, has said, "The BNP will have problems finding secretaries and getting support from the staff here, and I will totally support people's right to say they don't want to serve them. They may have a foot in the door but they won't get anywhere near the levers of power." Mr.Barnes may think he's being clever, but I think it just shows a lack of judgement and a denial of the democratic process. The lack of judgement is that this poncy behaviour, much beloved of New Labour, just plays into the hands of the BNP. In fact, they are now threatening legal action if Barnes and others prevent Barnbrook from getting the support he is entitled to. It shows also a lack of imagination in dealing with the BNP. If Barnes and the Conservative group have no real policies to counter those of the BNP, then that's a loss to the democratic process. We've had all sorts of mixed messages on immigration, policing, and multi-cultural funding from the Conservatives, so it is little wonder that Barnbrook was able to capitalise on this.

But it is also a denial of the democratic process. Richard Barnes is basically saying the same as Brigadier Terence Clarke did 40-odd years ago in Portsmouth. Clarke lost to Labour and he promptly denounced the voters (including his own, it seemed) as "You're all bloody fools!". I'm sure Barnes thinks similar things about BNP voters. However, denouncing the electorate and getting into high dudgeon does little good.

I don't want to see the BNP given anything other their legal rights. If it is the considered opinion of the "main parties" that certain political parties are banned, let them do so. Otherwise it is what the electorate chooses and not the self-serving paragons of virtue. I will never vote BNP, but I will also never behave with such schoolboy antics as Richard Barnes is now embarking on.

Like it or not, over 1 million people in Britain are prepared to vote BNP. The London poll showed that over a quarter do not want the three main parties and are prepared to say so in the ballot box. Richard Barnes should grow up politically and realise that support for the BNP is based quite a bit on the fact that sleaze continues in Parliament, lies have been told about Iraq, and generally politicians are held in low esteem. The way forward is for the Conservative Party to address the concerns of the people, clean up their personal expenses act, and deliver meaningful policies. That way lies a successful Conservative Party.

BNP take seat on London Assembly

2008-05-03T09:35:00.007+01:00

For the first time the BNP is represented on a "top tier" level of government. The regional assembly for London is the only one that is elected, all the others being quangos not wanted by the rest of England. So this Assembly allows for a proportional representation element and the BNP got above the 5% threshold. Richard Barnbrook, the mayoral candidate, will be the first BNP AM. He will be hoping this is no false dawn! One thing is for certain. I won't be around long enough to see a BNP PM if ever that eventful day should occur.

London Elects is the body that oversees this marathon adventure. The BBC was getting excited about turnout. Up to 45% - that's why the count took so long. "They were expecting a much lower figure!", they squeaked. Oh, really? So if it went to 60 or 70% would we be in the Zimbabwe realms of electoral counting? "A decision will be made at the end of next week. Will everyone stay calm, please!" Doesn't bear thinking about.

In the Top-up Vote, which is London-wide, the three main parties only got 72.39% of the vote between them. This means 27.61% voted for other parties. This is staggeringly high and shows that a proportional system will deplete the support for the supposed main players. On many occasions, we are told by politicians about opinion polls that the real poll is on the day. This day shows that the Conservatives are on 34.0%, Labour on 27.12%, and the Liberal Democrats on 11.22%. That poses the question - How can the Westminster system of election continue in a multi-party situation?

We have a failing Prime Minister in government on the "successful win" of his predecessor, who himself managed only to secure the support of 20% of the total electorate. The Labour Party has a large majority in the House of Commons, but little support in the country. The London Assembly has only a part elected by PR, but this London election shows that over a quarter of Londoners, in their hearts and minds, do not want the "three main parties".

Food for electoral thought!

Boris is the next Mayor of London

2008-05-02T20:13:00.006+01:00

Boris Johnson is the new Mayor of London, his rivals conceded tonight. The Evening Standard in London is predicting that the Tory MP scored a stunning election victory to end Ken Livingstone's eight-year reign and round off a disastrous 24 hours for the Labour Party. Gordon Brown is sitting in the Downing street flat with his cocoa wondering where it all went wrong. Probably on the day a certain Tony Blair waltzed into his office in the House of Commons for the first time and almost immediately began a cheesy relationship. Gordon's antennae were on the blink that day!

So now it is Boris. The liberally-minded libertine-leaning fellow travellers of New Labour think Boris is a buffoon. Far from it. He is a very clear-headed thinker who will be a great asset for London. A character who can play the international stage. Gone will be the nasal drone of Ken Livingstone, a man who has been barely tolerated by the New Labour hierarchy. In his place will come a man who will be fair-minded but not favourful when it comes to distributing the largesse of London. You won't see many brown paper bags in Boris' office.

A new dawn begins.

Polling day for some of us

2008-05-01T13:16:00.004+01:00

Those living in London get to choose a new Mayor today, plus electing those who ostensibly look after the devolved powers of the "London Region". Whatever else happens, I hope that Ken Livingstone has more time to spend with his newts!

As for the rest of us in England, some have elections others don't. I have a vote (actually two because I've got a proxy for my wife as Continental Airlines don't provide ballot boxes!) and I will be wandering off later today in the direction of the polling station. Being that this is Solihull, nothing that the hapless Prime Minister does will affect the outcome much as we are a Conservative/Libdem battleground. However, I do hope that he gets a proverbial bloody nose today.

Welsh councils are voting also and they should provide the best territory for giving Mr. Brown a big political raspberry!

Lesbians come out fighting - nominally speaking!

2008-05-01T12:45:00.007+01:00

What's in a name? Sometimes not a lot, other times it is your very identity. If I was a Lesbian I would not be too pleased if everytime I told people I was one it provoked amusement, silly laughter and innuendo. That is apparently the sort of thing that happens to Lesbians every day. They have the good fortune to live on the Greek island of Lesbos. Now, as we know, female homosexuals have appropriated the name. In fact, for most people around the world, it is the latter they think of before considering the people of Lesbos (if they ever do).

A similar fate beheld the people of the French region of Alsace. Alsatians are a people of distinct background with a language and culture. Canine it is not. For some reason, they managed to get dog owners and breeders in England to call the animal a German Shepherd rather than Alsatian, although some do lapse on occasions. Some name identities are confused by association of ideas. Mongolians or Mongols had to endure being likened to Down's Sydrome simply on account of their facial features. Siam (now called Thailand) disliked the term siamese twins preferring to get the world to speak of conjoined twins.

Can the people of Lesbos succeed in protecting their name? Judges in Greece will have to decide whether to grant an injunction against the Homosexual and Lesbian Community of Greece and to order it to change its name. Apparently history is on the side of the campaigners. Sapphos, the Greek goddess whose name is linked with female homosexuality and was a native of Lesbos, was no lover of other women, but a heterosexual female who had a family, and committed suicide for the love of a man. So that puts the record straight, then!

Boston cell phone party - no danger at all!

2008-05-01T09:12:00.006+01:00

In the "I can't be bothered" department of politics, I think Massachussetts Senate President Therese Murray takes the prize for this month's Clutz Award! She says of a bill to ban people from holding cell phones or sending text messages whilst driving (which may die in the state Senate this year), "I haven't given it any thought. No one has asked me for it, so it's not something that is at the top of my radar." Such a casual approach to potential death and injury on the roads. What does she care? Not a lot, because she hasn't given it any thought. Well, she has actually because she's talking about it, but this is arrogant politician speak for "I don't care!".

I know that using a mobile phone whilst driving is a potential hazard. When it was still lawful, or at least not illegal, in England to do so, I found it distracting to say the least. Now with the ban, now four years old, it is quite apparent that it causes accidents leading in some cases to death. In England in August 2006, a lorry driver who caused a woman's death because he was distracted by his mobile phone was jailed for four years. John Payne, 31, had been punching the keypad of his new phone and failed to spot a traffic queue ahead. His lorry crashed into a Peugeot 106 driven by Trinity Taylor, 23, rolling over the top of the car crushing it, and killing her. Outside Winchester crown court, after Payne was sentenced, Ms Taylor's family said motorists caught using mobiles should face as much stigma as drink-drivers.

I wonder what the politically astute Senate President thinks of drunk drivers? At one time they were socially accepted. And that is the trouble. Casual behaviour leading to a superior arrogance behind the wheel is still socially acceptable for mobile phone use. Rep. Joseph F. Wagner, D-Chicopee, a key architect of the House bill, said there's been a proliferation of drivers holding and talking on their cell phones whilst driving in Massachussetts (and presumably the whole country!). Wagner said it's a distraction for drivers to use cell phones, and he's backed up by statistics from the Registry of Motor Vehicles. Wagner said the bill is needed to improve safety on the roads and save lives. All this is lost on the Senate President, as she hasn't "given it any thought".

I'm all for freedom and liberty, but there comes a time when freedom to be stupid, reckless, or just be downright anti-social is to deny others the right to a freedom to enjoy security and safety.

Therese Murray is simply a silly woman!

The vulgarity of New Labour

2008-04-30T16:32:00.002+01:00

Just after PMQs today the Government moved the writ for a by-election in Crewe and Nantwich. This election is caused by the death of Gwyneth Dunwoody, the fiesty Labour MP who was a long-serving proponent of traditional socialist values. Because of the undue haste in pushing this election through (the funeral hasn't yet been held) some members rightly felt this was unfortunate. Nicholas Winterton (Conservative MP for Macclesfield) and Simon Hughes, for the Liberal Democrats, both voiced sadness at this move. When Ann Winterton (Conservative MP for Congleton and wife of Nicholas) spoke, she was interrupted by John Spellar. When Spellar eventually rose, it was to speak in the typically vulgar tones associated with his side of the house.

I noticed Geoff Hoon, the Chief Whip, looking decidedly uncomfortable, and the words from Harriet Harman bordered on the humbug. They could have waited a week, at least. It just goes to show what a shower these rather nauseating people are. I can't wait to see them gone.

As for the local elections tomorrow, don't vote Labour, please. They just don't deserve it.

Obama shows no reverence to the reverend

2008-04-29T23:38:00.003+01:00

Barack Obama has quite rightly distanced himself from the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., who has some flaky ideas indeed. Whatever else one may think the American government has done or not done, only a moron could think that it might have brought AIDS to black neighbourhoods and that it has conducted terrorism. Obama said of Wright, "I may not know him as well as I thought". That is true of many friendships and relationships.

Some are saying that this may be a pivotal moment in Obama's campaign. I can't think why. Just because an ageing pastor comes up with some odd-ball comments, it does not mean anyone remotely associated with him thinks the same. If that was the case, we could all catch this thought disease and end up thinking all kinds of stuff.

As the woman vicar said to the bishop!

2008-04-29T23:08:00.004+01:00

For those who say the Church should get modern I suppose adultery and infidelity are not what they are thinking of. The real world has both in spadefuls it seems. It is therefore very sad when such things encroach on the lives of Church members and clergy. Not that those of us in the Church are less capable of falling short. Far from it.

In the Church in Wales, the Right Rev. Carl Cooper resigned as Bishop of St David's yesterday. He had apparently been having an affair with a married woman who was also the bishop's chaplain and communications officer. The Daily Mail erroneously described her as a vicar, but then all priests in the Anglican Church are vicars to the popular press, even if they are curates, chaplains, rectors, assistant priests or priests-in-charge.

This is a sad state of affairs, literally. What I find difficult is that both sides seem more attuned with the ways of the world rather than trying to reconcile their actions with their faith. With the modern approach to a more laissez faire version of Anglicanism, the "moving out" and "splitting up" comes before trying to maintain marriage vows.

The New Testament (1 Timothy 3:2, 12) says, "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach. . . ." Not all live up to that and one should never judge, but giving in quite so easily seems to me to suggest a lack of willingness to try again.

Brown dismisses Levy's Blair claims

2008-04-28T23:12:00.004+01:00

In the "Well he would say that" department of political life, Gordon Brown brushes aside assertions made by Lord Levy. When something like this is revealed, it is either true, partly true or a fabrication. I've said that I feel it is true, or at least as true as Lord Levy remembers it. These kinds of remarks are not normally forgotten.

Either Lord Levy is a liar or Tony Blair is a liar. Lord Levy writes in his memoirs that "He (Blair) kept saying that he had never realised how duplicitous Gordon was, and what 'a liar' ". So Tony Blair thought Gordon Brown was a liar. There's a lot of them about in New Labour, that's for sure.

Gordon Brown told the BBC in an interview that Blair's office "has made it clear that this in not an accurate reflection of what Mr Blair has said". Not an accurate reflection. But are we to deduce from that that it did reflect some truth. In all this we will all have to make up our own minds. However, the facts of this leave one thing very plainly true. There is at least one liar amongst them.

No love all in Levy/Blair tennis match

2008-04-27T18:13:00.005+01:00

Tony Blair must be some kind of rotten chum to his friends. When the going gets tough, let them hang out to dry. When they fight back, call them liars. It's all a bit pot calling the kettle black. Blair's been dissembling since his schooldays. It seems to be an inherent character trait. Those at Fettes with him felt a sensible distance was required at times, otherwise they too could be hauled up in front of the Headmaster. Gordon Brown came to believe that he couldn't trust Blair's integrity. No doubt, Blair felt likewise. It had long gone past the point where the dog was chasing its tail. The tail had a life of its own!

Blair first got to be friends with Michael Levy at a Jewish fundraising dinner party in 1994 and they eventually ended up as tennis partners. Levy is better known now as Lord Levy, chief fundraiser for Blair's New Labour organisation. I have no doubt that in the ten years since his enoblement (granted by Blair in 1997), Levy and Blair chatted about Brown, amongst others. I do not disbelieve Levy. Not because I have any reason to, but because Blair's denial sounds so hollow.

I would say that Blair said to Levy that he believed Gordon Brown “could never beat” David Cameron at the polls. That has more than a ring of truth in it. Lord Levy wrote in his memoirs that Tony Blair “told me on a number of occasions he was convinced Gordon ’could never beat Cameron’”. He said the former premier felt he could have won a fourth term had he not stood down last summer. All this rings true for me.

Many journalists will attest to the fact that the Blair/Brown relationship was mostly a tense one. John Prescott has openly said he had to mediate between the two. Blair's weak and limp denial makes Lord Levy out to be a liar. I very much doubt that. Levy has been angered by the way he has been allowed to be humiliated in the cash-for-honours scandal. However, he has hit back by revealing truthful statements rather than fanciful concoctions.

So I have no time for Blair, a serial dissembler. What I find vaguely interesting is that on reception into the Roman Catholic Church, Blair must have been told about certain credal values. He appears to have ignored bearing false witness whilst in the Anglican Church. I trust his mentors in his new spiritual home now have gently reminded him of this commandment from Moses' tablets!

No Playboy at playtime for the boys in Baghdad

2008-04-26T01:00:00.007+01:00

Censorship? No, it's more about decency. That's what Paul Broun unveiled in his House bill last week (April 16). The upstanding Congressman from Georgia says his Military Honor and Decency Act would amend a provision of the 1997 Defense Authorization Act that banned sales of “sexually explicit material” on military bases. Paul's all worried about the morals of the boys fighting the insurgents and renegades in Iraq and elsewhere.

“Allowing sale of pornography on military bases has harmed military men and women by escalating the number of violent, sexual crimes, feeding a base addiction, eroding the family as the primary building block of society, and denigrating the moral standing of our troops both here and abroad,” Broun said. Now don't you hold back, Paul! You tell those guys that reading this stuff can make them go barmy and bawdy, and even belligerent. One part of the provision states that if a print publication is a periodical, it would be considered sexually explicit if “it regularly features or gives prominence to nudity or sexual or excretory activities or organs in a lascivious way.” Nudity lascivious, then? Too much control, Paul. Too much of you bothering about other people's private business.

The same thing's happening in Britain. Some New Labour control freaks want to add all sorts of stuff to the catch-all Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill. Thankfully we have such people as the Earl of Onslow to look out for us and our freedoms. Commenting on the definition of "extreme pornographic images" during a debate on the bill, the Earl said -

"My Lords, are we not facing the terrible problem of definition? Where you have a definition that says that an extreme pornographic image is an image which is, "(a) pornographic, and (b) an extreme image", that is like saying a dog is a dog or a horse is a horse; it gets you absolutely nowhere.

There is a wonderful museum in Paris, the Musée d’Orsay, which is full of the most beautiful pictures. One of them was commissioned by the Turkish ambassador in around 1860. It is a close-up painting of a lady’s genitalia, and I believe it is called the Mother of the World—

Lord Faulkner of Worcester: “L’Origine du Monde”.

The Earl of Onslow: I thank the noble Lord. My bet is that the Turkish ambassador commissioned that painting for sexual arousal, and yet there it is, displayed in the Musée d’Orsay. Some Greek vases have pictures of Priapus on them. If Priapus was to do the things he is threatening to do, it is fairly likely, because of the size of what he has got, that they would result in serious injury to a person’s bits and pieces. We are here in the problem of definition.

I wonder what the Congressman thinks of such a painting. Would he include it in his bill? Paul Broun should ponder on definition, because it will be a problem for him as much as anyone else.

O'Connor not 4 Justice 4 England (or London)!

2008-04-25T23:28:00.004+01:00

Matt O'Connor, the substitute candidate for Mayor of London on behalf of the English Democrats, says he has halted his campaign to become mayor. O'Connor replaced Garry Bushell, the well-known columnist, social pundit and all-round diamond geezer. Appearing on Vanessa Feltz's radio talk show on BBC London, O'Connor complained about lack of publicity. I can't think what he is meaning, as he got quite a bit. The trouble was it was all about him and his past exploits in Fathers4Justice.

As Sir Alan Sugar might say on firing a hapless candidate in The Apprentice, "You're a complete shambles. You're fired!". The English Democrat campaign had an air of mystery laced with a we-know-something's-going-on-behind-the scenes inclination. It was badly thought out with little or no contribution from leading EDP people. O'Connor's website has been pulled leaving him saying, "With the benefit of hindsight I probably should not have stood for them".

I would have thought that the Kilroy episode with parts of UKIP turning into Veritas turning into whatever would have sobered the mind. Anyway, he's still on the ballot so it that sense nothing has changed. If O'Connor is right and he get's no more publicity he can't complain. He'll get the vote he would have got if he hadn't resigned!