By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 11:49 am
At first I thought I’d been propelled back in time when I read this excerpt in today’s Sunday Times. The Nazis preferred to execute those who were not of the Aryan Race; some contemporary doctors prefer execution on the grounds of a newborn’s disability. How the ghost of the Fuhrer must be giggling!
Don’t get me wrong, I am not for the promotion of life for life’s sake. For example, there are some babies born with such horrific disabilities they could not survive more than a few hours. I remember reading about a case here in West Yorkshire from the 1970s when a baby was born anencephalic (without the top of its skull in place). Given that no human being can survive without its crown and that meningitis would have set in within the space of a few minutes, the baby would have spent the rest of its very short life in absolute agony. In such circumstances the doctors would have been better to asphyxiate the baby instantly to prevent its suffering. Instead, they kept it on a drip for two days in order to show they had attempted to prolong the impossible – life itself.
However, we are not talking about these rare and noteworthy cases The so-called doctors in this article are talking about involuntary euthanasia not for the benefit of the child, but to spare parents the emotional and financial burden of caring for their offspring. Am I the only one to find this consensus of opinion utterly deplorable? Caring for disabled people in a professional capacity can be tiring enough; it must be very hard for the parents concerned. With respect, that is not the issue here. Disabled babies have as much entitlement to life as everybody else. For parents who cannot cope there is a multitude of agencies out there offering help and support services. In return for the hard work and effort, you get to spend your life with people who have an unconditional approach to love, and who are as delightful to be with as anyone ‘normal’ in society (in many cases they are a far better quality of person).
What will be interesting is the response of the liberal masses: those who protest about the taking of human life in terms of the death penalty for creatures like Saddam Hussain, yet are content to play footsie with appalling ideas such as this in the name of parental choice. The mind boggles!!
By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 10:19 am
I was compelled by some unknown force to share this particular gem with a wider readership, as it epitomises many things; amongst them being the total lunacy of the British sense of humour, and a true sense of the absurd! This from the wonderful economics commentary website of the Adam Smith Institute:-
An attractive blue and white blind appeared over the front of my butcher’s shop in the high street. I complimented the butcher on it.
"Yes," he said, "my customers bought it for me."
I expressed astonishment.
"Well," he continued, "do you remember that collection box I had on the counter with a ‘for the blind’ notice on it?…"
By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 9:26 am
Just back at ATW central having had my early morning debate with Moazzem Begg and Lt Tim Collins on "Sunday Sequence"!
I must say that William Crowley, the host of this programme and his team are most pleasant and it is a serious minded programme. The topics are always stimulating and I do enjoy being able to make a contribution. I am normally in a minority of one on the topics discussed, since liberalism is the creed of the day, but that’s the name of the game on the BBC, as you know.
As ever the time on-air flies by so quickly, and I got only a fraction of what I wanted to say broadcast.
So here’s my full unabridged take.
1. I don’t believe any of the lurid allegations that Mr. Begg makes about the treatment handed out to him at Gitmo. Unsubstantiated fantasies, I’m afraid – but it plays well in lefty world of the BBC. As I did point during the programme, it is know that Al Queda train their operatives to allege TORTURE and abuse. They understand the value of propaganda.
2. Robust Interrogation conducted within the Laws of the USA is fine by me. Dick Cheney is on record stating that the US does not use torture and I accept that. I also believe that if we can prevent future 9/11’s by being tough with the Islamic combatants interned in Gitmo we must do so.
3. We are AT WAR with Islamic terrorists. During the programme, William seemed uneasy when I said this. I repeat it – we are AT WAR with Islamic terrorists. What’s the big deal in stating the obvious here. Should I state we are at war with people "who just happen to be devout Islamists" and who want to kill us?
4. Amnesty Internationa’s elite may hate the US – and when it’s Secretary General Irene Khan compares Guantanamo to the Gulags, you KNOW the lefties have lost the plot! (Check out the respective death tolls)I’m sure Mr Beggs got a standing ovation for his US- loathing comments at this Amnesty International last night. I did challenge the local Amnesty International representative off-air to allow someone (E.G Me!)who takes ISSUE with the current Amnesty International agenda to give next year’s lecture – now that WOULD show they have some courage. But they don’t. I dare say if Bin Laden flew in tomorrow they would be queueing up to book him. ("Tell us about your pain Osama of having to leave your favourite cave due to those cruel US bombs")
So, another day another debate! You will be able to listen again to it if you click here and go to Sunday Sequence! Not sure when they post today’s programme but it should be there later on.
By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 8:15 am
When you have a boss who’s as weak as a matchstick suspension bridge, it is important to speak your mind on issues of pressing concern. I have wholeheartedly agreed with the Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, on a number of occasions and am pleased to do so again. Dr Ali has accused many in the Muslim ‘faith’ of being hypocrites; promoting a ‘dual psychology’ of victimhood and domination (a practice, incidentally, mastered by Sinn Fein/IRA). Crucially, Dr Ali has said it will never be possible to satisfy the demands of Muslims because their basic premise was to stifle criticism or action when they are perceived to be victims, but also to press their demands under a cloak of religious rights and entitlements when Islam would be advanced.
How long will we have to wait before the liberal wing of the Anglican faith (and as an life-long Anglican I can tell you there are thousands) begin their character assassination of Dr Ali (by contrast Muslims tend to practice actual assassination, as any friend of Theo Van Gogh will tell you)? Will The Archbishop of Canterbury support the right of one of his bishops to make this entirely reasonable analysis? Or will he take cover in his usual style by prostrating himself before the effective enemies of this country and, moreover, the religion of which he is a part?
Islam is a threat to our country and way of life if it is not kept firmly in-check. Instead of condemning Dr Ali, the people of this country should be applauding him for the astute articulation of some very accurate viewpoints. As for Rowan Williams, a slight alteration to the term ‘bishopric’ was never more appropriate.
By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 7:48 am
1605 – Guy Fawkes and several of his co-conspirators are arrested in London whilst attempting to blow-up the Houses of Parliament. Guards discovered them planting 30 barrels of gun powder in the cellar beneath the building. All are later executed for treason.
1872 – The Mary Celeste sets sail from New York harbour. The ship is found on the 5th December between the Azores and the Portuguese coast, mysteriously abandoned by her crew. The mystery was compounded by the fact that no distress signal had been sent.
1952 – In America, Dwight D. Eisenhower wins the US Presidential Election with Richard Nixon as his Vice President.
1972 – Three musicians from Sweden and one from Norway decide to form themselves into a group called Abba.
1991 – Millionaire publishing tycoon, Robert Maxwell, is found dead at sea – several hours after mysteriously disappearing from his yacht off the Canary Islands.
1997 – Bill Clinton wins a second Presidential term in the United States.
By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 7:39 am
Wonder what you make of the suggestion by the Government’s "Respect Czar" Louise Casey that people who repeatedly flout anti-social behaviour laws should be housed in "sin bins"? Casey, who heads the Respect taskforce, wants to extend family intervention projects to single people who have extremely "chaotic" lifestyles. In an interview with The Independent on Sunday, Ms Casey said that she believed that the expensive boarding-school style regimes were the answer to breaking the cycle of antisocial behaviour.
Pathetic. More liberal doodling.
We already have a place where law-breakers should go – it’s called P-R-I-S-O-N!
Maybe if Government stopped wasting taxpayers money employing the likes of Ms Casey – and started building more prisons with tougher regimes for the housemates- we might actually make some progress.
By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 7:25 am
Is anyone surprised to read that Pumpkin look-a-like (Hat-tip to my friend Alex Kane) Peter Hain would prefer to make "the rich" bear more of the burden for reducing carbon emissions by relating green taxes to income.
The Northern Ireland secretary, campaigning to become deputy prime minister under Gordon Brown, also suggested “innovative ways” were needed to stop the super-wealthy “racing away” from those on average incomes. Redistribution of wealth or "theft" as it is technically known is never far from the surface amongst our political elite.
Hain also advocates introducing “progressive” green taxes to hit those on big incomes hardest. So it’s not to do with how environmentally "responsible" one is, it’s to do with how much you EARN?
And therein lies the reality behind the so-called Green Agenda. In the hands of monsters like NuLabour, it just becomes ANOTHER blunt weapon to impose punitive taxation on those people who do not rely on Government for their income.
Hain should be congratulated for showing us all the petty hateful vindictiveness that lies at the heart of this cabal in power.
It looks like Labour and the Conservatives will now compete on who can impose the greatest level of taxation on the British people – in order to save the Planet, naturally.
By ATWadmin On November 5th, 2006 at 7:15 am
It’s simple. Saddam Hussein is a genocidal monster who has terrorised his own people for decades.
Today, within hours, Iraqi court is preparing to give its verdict on whether Saddam Hussein is guilty of crimes against humanity and if so, whether he should be executed.
Most Iraqis believe that he is guilty on all counts and therefore he should be legally executed.
In Iraq, hanging is the prescribed form of punishment.
No doubt the Saddamites and their Jihadi co-horts will attempt to murder even more people in the wake of the likely pronouncement from the Iraqi court. Let us hope that they too will follow the fate of their evil master. Hussein will shortly exit this world, and a much harsher punishment awaits him in the next.
Saddam has been found INNOCENT, he’s been pardoned and will assume his role as President.
No, only joking, he’s gonna hang. The BBC’s John Simpson has gone into mourning already – read his moving tribute to Saddam here.
By ATWadmin On November 4th, 2006 at 7:56 pm
I’ll be taking part in a BBC Ulster studio debate on "Sunday Sequence" tomorrow morning @ 8.30am with a certain Moazzem Begg – who is giving an Amnesty International lecture in Belfast tonight.
Mr Beggs was detained at Guantanamo Bay – as a suspected Al Qu’eda terrorist – but Blair and his pleadings got him and a few other out. You can read about Mr Beggs here – isn’t he sooo unlucky? I mean he is obviously an innocent man – whose only hobby appears to be collecting night-vision goggles, bullet proof vests and extremist Islamist literature. He has also attended terrorist training camps, as he freely admits, but just to observe. He was curious.
Beggs makes serious claims of "torture" against the US authorities at Gitmo. I seem to remember that recovered Al Queda terrorist training manuals specifically instruct their members to allege mistreatment and torture.
The discussion will revolve around "torture" and we may also be joined by Col Tim Collins.
As readers will know, my views are simple.
1. We are at war with militant Islam, and since 9/11, Madrid, Bali, London – we know what these savages are capable of doing. All legal measures should be taken to prevent further massacres, and tough interrogation of militant Islamists has already saved innocent lives.
2. Torture is an emotive term, dredged up by Islamists to appeal to the western liberals who run the MSM. The US does not torture, and does not break its laws, but rigorous interrogation practises must be used. The fact that Jihadi are agitating to blacken the US is old news. Shows the interrogation works!
3. The concept of the greater good is relevant here. Tough interrogation is vital to ensure we squeeze ANY pertinent information out of alleged Jihadists. It serves the greater good. Moral relativists such as Amnesty like to muddy the water here. I am fully in favour of what Dick Cheney and President Bush say in this regard.
So, I will elaborate on this tomorrow morning!
By ATWadmin On November 4th, 2006 at 7:37 pm
Read how Israeli troops are said to have opened fire on ‘unarmed women’ who were attempting to break a siege on a mosque where Palestinian terror suspects were holed-up! Now apart from the people, both Israeli and Palestinian who were actually involved, no-one knows exactly what went on in those hectic minutes of gunfire; but apparently at least two women are dead, with more injured.
As to the morals of this action, with the Palestinians claiming that they were all innocent, and the Israeli’s claiming that the women were attempting to smuggle female clothing to the gunmen; the Palestinians claiming that they were shot at recklessly, and the Israeli forces claiming that sniper fire was directed against male participants only!
The rights and wrongs will echo past the funerals, the weeping and the rending of clothing; the left-wingers calling for the Israeli soldiers to face imprisonment, and the counter-calls of the supporters of Israel denying ‘massacre’ accusations!
But isn’t it rather strange that Margaret Beckett, our own ‘bedouin caravanner’ calls on only ISRAEL to show restraint, and not the terror groups of Hamas, of Fatah and of Hezbollah?