web analytics


By ATWadmin On December 20th, 2006 at 6:23 pm

795151-599532-thumbnail.jpgDo YOU agree that those poor saddos that steal steal women’s underwear from washing lines should be added to the sex offenders’ register? The Government thinks so, but as far as I can see this is un-necessary bureaucracy and it sort of devalues the point of a sex offenders register. Men who steal ladies underwear off washing lines need a stern talking to and fined for their odd behaviour. If they repeat it, and are convicted, then the fine should be punitively increased – but I really don’t see how it is a "sex crime"?


By ATWadmin On December 20th, 2006 at 1:20 pm

Apart from being a cool song by The Buzzcocks from long ago, this also appears to sum up how people in Northern Ireland feel about our wonderful Police Service. Yes – it’s been revealed that almost 80% of people have "confidence" in the PSNI, the world’s most politically correct and neutered policing SERVICE!What amused me most about this seasonal PR story dressed up as news was that the media headline that followed it was all about an armed robbery that took place in the Park Centre, one of Belfast’s busiest shopping centres. Oddly enough, our wonderful Police Service seemed to miss that.

Probably too busy churning out postive pre-Xmas publicity!


By ATWadmin On December 20th, 2006 at 1:03 pm

Now I don’t wish to be pedantic or indeed cruel but I wondered what you make of those who have complained that the BBC are wrong to label the five women murdered by an alleged strangler in Sussex as "prostitutes." Whilst this was undeniably their trade, apparently some people think that the term "sex-worker" would be better. Less judgmental, you see. I disagree.

I think that for once the BBC are using the right term to describe the sordid activities these unfortunates pursued. I am sure it is horrible for their families to have their daughters all to public fall from grace blazoned across the media but let it also act as a warning. Prostitution is a dead end street. Let’s not dress it up in flowery PC rhetoric. Those men who use prostitutes are equally wretched. Sometimes we need to call things by their proper name. The BBC is correct to do so.

‘never mind the width, feel the quality!’

By ATWadmin On December 20th, 2006 at 11:08 am

795151-599045-thumbnail.jpgTwenty-eight years ago, my family and I lived in a suburb to the west of Johannesburg, adjacent to a beautiful sweeping valley which ranged to the north towards Pretoria. The escarpment upon which the suburbs stood were at the high point of the valley, and the view, despite the impact of the roads and buildings, was both grand and settled. A proposal was made by ESCOM, the then generator of all electric power in South Africa, to run a line of huge pylons right up the centre of the valley carrying ultra-high voltage lines to improve power capacity to the gold mines further south of the Witwatersrand, and they were  confident of success. A storm of disapproval rained down on the council, and their Chief Engineer, who openly wished afterwards that he hadn’t opened his mouth, spoke the magic words, “To counter the effects and impact upon this beautiful place, we shall, of course, be painting the pylons green!”

Run time forward to the present date, and focus on the proposal to site 341 huge turbines in the Thames Estuary. Check out the explanations and ‘Environmental Impact Statements’ made to soothe the brow of people who argue against the placement of even more of these huge windmills! Check out the statements showing how they will not produce the ‘Greenhouse Gases’ produced from conventional power stations! Revel in the joy with which our political masters announce that more and more will be built!

What you don’t read about is the truth that conventional or nuclear power stations will still be needed to provide back-up for these monstrosities, because the wind just doesn’t blow long or hard enough to make them economically viable! What you also don’t read about is the huge but hidden subsidy for every KiloWattHour of power produced from these ‘Don Quixote’ versions of a Whitehall wet dream, where the builders and operators get £200,000.00 every year from each of these ‘rotary cash cows’. ‘Costing the Earth’ was the byword of the Environmental Lobby;

what they didn’t disclose was who is paying these costs!



By ATWadmin On December 20th, 2006 at 9:34 am

Why doesn’t the EU just come out and be honest about the fact that it seeks to basically BAN flying – except for its’ own very important social engineers? Today we hear that the EU’s environment commissioner is to propose including airlines in the Emissions Trading Scheme (ETS), which aims to ..ahem…."tackle" climate change.

At first the plan would include flights within the EU, expanding to include flights in and out of the EU by 2012. It means extra taxes on the Airlines, which means prices will increase. The pitiful reason given by the EU and the likes of NuLabour’sDavid Milibanned is that it will "tackle climate change" is left unchallenged in the MSM.

Note the use of misleading figures in the BBC report…

Air travel currently accounts for between 3% and 8% of unwanted gases – figures issued by the industry and environmental groups vary within this range.

What are these "unwanted gases"? And what does this % mean? Is this a cute way of avoiding saying that whilst 3% of anthropogenic emissions may come from aircraft,  anthropogenic emissions themselves only make up around 4% of atmospheric C02. Against this context, the EU plans are statistically meaningless – but I’m sure the extra revenue  will come in handy. They are using the concerns we all have about global changes to TAX us. It’s a revenue-raid by the political Left dressed up in soppy "save the world" rhetoric and we must not fall for it.


By ATWadmin On December 20th, 2006 at 9:23 am

Villainous Company expounds on the trouble that accompanies free will…..well worth a read…

The existence of free will necessarily implies the presence of both good and bad choices, but somehow in the perverse politically correct atmosphere we live in, it has become unacceptable to notice that some people persist in making foolish choices which cause problems for other people. The even more bizarre aspect of this development is that it is generally the most ardent advocates of freedom who seem most upset at any suggestion that people be held to account for the consequences of their own choices. But without responsibility, we are not truly free – we are just children doing as we please and allowing the nanny state (or other people) to clean up the messes we make. Recognizing that freedom necessarily entails responsibility may at times be harsh, but ultimately it is a far more respectful alternative than the condescending stance which will excuse anything rather than risk the startling thought that if we are free beings, we must answer for all our actions, right or wrong.


It is this RESPONSIBILITY aspect to personal behaviour that seems to cause real trouble for the political left. It is as if they are in DENIAL that some people are foolish. that some people choose very badly, and yet there must be no consequences for such poor judgement.

Hat-tip to Bird Dog @ Maggies Farms for the story…


By ATWadmin On December 20th, 2006 at 9:03 am

scales of justice.jpgYes, I know it is pantomime season but anyone watching the farce that surrounds events leading up to and following the brutal murder of WPC Sharon Beshenisvky can’t be laughing very hard. It was bad enough that a gang of Somali …ahem… "Asylum seekers" killed this lady, but now it is revealed that one of those wanted for the murder has allegedly escaped from the UK  – dressed up as a Muslim in full niqab attire. Even worse, it now appears that this Muslim gangster had been FREED from prison six months earlier because the Home Office officials feared it would be "too dangerous" to deport him to his home nation since that might "infringe" his human rights.

I repeat my view that the Human Rights legislation so favoured by the Euro-elite and the political left is a massive threat to our democracy since it paralyses common sense. Where we went wrong here was in allowing these Somali criminals access to the UK. Once located, they should have been immediately deported. End of discussion. Instead we now witness the sight of one of these wanted killers deporting himself rather than face justice. Justice may not be blind, but it appears to suffer from human rights cataracts.

Another day, another murder, another travesty of ‘justice’

By ATWadmin On December 19th, 2006 at 6:50 pm

 Ho-hum. Nothing special to report, today. Just another normal day, with a typical scene being played out in a British court.

Judge Lady Paton said: "To assault and rob a complete stranger, who was simply looking for a taxi home after a night out, was evil enough. The continued attack on Mr Jamieson amounted to sadistic and sickening savagery, almost beyond comprehension. Mr Jamieson’s family has been left with an irreplaceable loss and terrible grief. The sentences must reflect this."


– Leslie and Cowie received life terms, with minimums of 20 and 18 years and Paton was jailed for 10 years.


It would have been reassuring if Judge Paton had continued his (her?) summing-up thusly:

"As I say, the sentences OUGHT TO reflect this…but due to several reasons, such as our membership of the EU, the enshrinement of the European Convention on ‘Human Rights’ into our Human Rights Act, and the sentencing guidelines which I am obliged to follow as a result of these factors, the sentences, will of course, not reflect this at all. Sorry!"  

It truly warms the cockles of my heart to know that this time next year (while I am standing in the freezing cold street outside the pub in order to enjoy a cigarette, thanks to this socialist "ban it all" governaziment), the sick murdering thugs such as these three (and the b*****d responsible for the Ipswich murders) will be sitting in their nice warm cells, enjoying a smoke while they browse the TV channels. Call that justice?? I don’t.

I’d grant them one last cigarette as a last request, before dealing out the only punishment fitting for such crimes:




The Magnificent Two

By ATWadmin On December 19th, 2006 at 11:28 am

Do people watch BBC’s Politics Show?  I always turn off after Countryfile.  I stopped tuning in to Auntie’s political and current affairs programmes a long time ago.  Here’s why.  Have you see the shortlist of the aforesaid production’s ‘heroes’?  It sums up the underlying balance of this corporation (we on the Right are forced to fund by law): have a hard core of toss pots vying for the top spot and sprinkle in a couple of Conservative icons to give an unconvincing impression of impartiality.  So who gets your vote?:

  1. Tony Benn – the best mate of anyone and everyone who hates this country.  A figure whose lip-service to hard-line socialism hasn’t stopped him accumulating vast sums of personal fortune.
  2. Neil Kinnock – an abject political failure who lost two elections and couldn’t even land a killer blow against Thatcher over the Westland affair and the Heseltine debacle.
  3. Alex Salmond – another Left winger and voice of petulant Scottish nationalism.  One of the principal figures of separatism in our political system.
  4. Clare Short – an unprincipled big-mouth whose publicity-seeking endeavours vastly exceed her limited intellect.  Someone who has flirted with odious manifestations of Irish insurrection.
  5. Shirley Williams – a soaking-wet liberal from the Chamberlainesque branch of perspectives on UK foreign policy.

And just to show we give out the right signals on impartiality we’ll also include Thatcher and Tebbit in the line-up.  If anyone out there detests having to fund this bastion of Guardianistability more than me, please speak up.

“…and that is the sentence of this jury, the newspapers, and the t.v!”

By ATWadmin On December 19th, 2006 at 10:11 am

“But that was in another year, and besides the wench is dead” This particular phrase, paraphrased as it is from Marlowe’s ‘The Jew of Malta’, is the subject of my little polemic today! Our eyes and ears have been literally blasted with news, discussions and opinions regarding the murder of five young women in the Ipswich area. Now in a previous post, I collectively described them as ‘whores’, and I make no apology for that whatsoever; because I hew to the old analogy “If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck…etc”. But, and it is a big BUT, these women, and the persons suspected of committing the crimes against them, are entitled to the full protection of the law. So when the BBC broadcasts an interview, allegedly recorded previously for background purposes only, with a man who claimed to have intimate knowledge of all five, I begin to suspect that these broadcasters are working towards their own agenda entirely.

In times not so long past, once a person had been arrested, never mind charged, with an offence, ALL comment ceased in regard to that particular person; because if he or she came to court, a robust defence may well be raised as to the chances of a fair trial, seeing that their names had possibly been plastered all over the newspapers. The defence team would have assumed that this avenue could well lead to an acquittal, on the grounds that the allegations had been broadcast far and wide, and the jury’s minds may well have been compromised by the early publicity! But the BBC, through their mouthpiece deputy director of BBC News, Adrian Van Klaveren,, decided that it was ‘fair comment’ and "We felt in these very extraordinary and very rare circumstances there was actually a justification for doing that." A media lawyer also said  "Juries are pretty robust, and they’re always told to forget anything they may have read in the press, and the trial these days is usually up to a year after somebody is arrested.

Now we read that a second person, so far unidentified has also been arrested regarding these murders; so the question must be asked, what of the first suspect, already tried and sentenced in the public’s mind and hearing, by a truly reprehensible interview with a sad and lonely individual, who was gulled into releasing his most private thoughts to a couple of truly unscrupulous reporters! If innocent, will he get his job back at Tesco’s? Doubt it! Will he ever be able to walk down the street without the nods and winks behind his back?

No way! In the eyes and ears of his neighbours, he’s been found guilty, because the BBC and the Mirror virtually said so!