web analytics

On This Day…21.11

By ATWadmin On November 21st, 2006 at 9:01 am

1843 – Thomas Hancock patents vulcanised rubber.

1918 – At the end of World War I, the German Fleet is surrendered to Britain at its northern naval base at Scapa Flow.

1953 – The discovery of the Piltdown Man skull by Charles Dawson in Sussex in 1912 is finally revealed to have been a hoax.

1958 – In Britain, work starts on the Forth Road Bridge in Scotland.

1974 – Terrorist IRA bombs planted in two Birmingham pubs kill 22 and injure a further 120.

1995 – Presidents of Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia accept a US-brokered peace deal to end the 43 month war in Bosnia.

The Myth of Council Estates

By ATWadmin On November 21st, 2006 at 8:37 am

It is good news.  Council estates across the United Kingdom have improved markedly over the last number of years.  Research carried out by those two well-known bastions of neo-Conservatism, the LSE and the Joseph Rowntree Foundation, found a reduction in the number of empty properties and families in deprivation.  Whooppee!!

What the report did not seem to tackle, however, is how council estates got to be in the sorry condition many of them experienced.  If you were to pass any new housing development, be it private or social, you don’t see builders colouring the brickwork with graffiti, smearing dog excrement over green spaces or depositing puddles of human pee in the corner of a lift they have just finished ripping the wiring out of.

What I am trying to say is that council estates, whatever appalling architecture was pioneered in their construction, were not built as slums.  They were, and are, made that way by most of the types that live on them.  Sociologists and Lefties (mutually inclusive) talk about ‘sink estates’ as if they were built that way.  It gives them a convenient ‘get out’ clause to avoid placing the blame where it firmly belongs.  I have blamed Muslims for continuing to live in the same deliberate squalor here their forefathers inhabited in Pakistan.  I apply the same logic to many who live on council estates: they were brought up with the manners of pigs; therefore they live like pigs.

Many of you will be familiar with the hilarious film, ‘Rita, Sue and Bob Too’.  This film, certainly not for those with prudish minds, was filmed 20 years ago in the Bradford suburb of Buttershaw.  It was, at that time, one of the most deprived estates in the entire country.  Anyone who has seen the houses and flats in that area as they were then, cannot avoid thinking that a little piece of hell was deposited on Bradford’s urban landscape.

In 2006 the area is changed beyond all recognition.  Half of the estate has been demolished (including the addresses of both Rita and Sue in the film) and replaced with good-quality detached and semi-detached housing.  The vast majority of the ex-council houses have been bought and kept in good condition. Only a few council properties remain, and are neat and tidy.  The problem families were booted out and, today, it is more than reasonable to describe Buttershaw as a ‘middle-class area’.  Some of those aforementioned new dwellings are selling for more than £200,000.

A key in the transformation of Buttershaw was the expulsion of those who had kept it in the social doldrums for much of its life.  In other areas of Bradford, where estates have been renovated whilst retaining their criminal and vandalistic classes, the visual appeal of the area has been very short lived.  The moral of the story is this: if you want a waste bin to smell nice, you get rid of the rubbish.  If you want areas of social housing to prosper, you get rid of the rubbish!  Elementary my dear sociologists.


By ATWadmin On November 21st, 2006 at 7:39 am

In the alice-in-wonderland of contemporary international politics, it seems that Iranian psychopathic President Ahmadinejad can invite the Iraqi and Syrian presidents to Tehran for a weekend summit to "work out ways" to cooperate in curbing the runaway violence that has taken Iraq to the verge of civil war" – and the MSM swallows the entire fiction!

Iran is a key mover in creating the violence that the summit will "discuss." It’s puppet, Syria, is also enthusiastic in its desire to undermine democracy in Iraq. And yet, AMAZINGLY, the Iraqi President Jalal Talabani has accepted the invitation and will fly to the Iranian capital Saturday. 

Post-US mid term elections, Iran has become even more arrogant. It believes the West has lost the will to stop it’s political and nuclear ambitions. And I think it is right. Ahmadinejad is winning and the day of the second Holocaust gets closer. Make no mistake what Iran seeks to achieve – it wants the Jews OUT of Israel and it knows how it will do it. It observes a weak US, a supine UN and EU, and it determines that it is the new driving power. So in this new surreal world, 1938 all over again, it can hold a "peace summit", the media cheer on, and some of us look on aghast.


By ATWadmin On November 21st, 2006 at 7:26 am

One of the distinguishing features of a left-wing Government is its determination to assume the role of parent as regards its citizenry. The short hand way of expressing this is "Nanny State"! So, today we read that Nanny State intends to recruit more than 70 "super nannies" who will be tasked with "improving parenting in areas with high levels of anti-social behaviour"

They will be funded by the prime minister’s Respect Task Force to work in deprived areas. Mr Blair is to warn that poor parenting is bad for society and is also catastrophic for children. This comes after a Mori poll suggested 53% of people think poor parenting is the main cause of bad behaviour. In the poll for the Home Office, 85% of respondents blamed parents for allowing children to become out of control. 

The Government’s laughably entitled "Respect Czar" is behind this latest intrusion of the State into family life. Parents can volunteer for the courses, but many will be forced to participate when their children break the law or refuse to attend school.

Let me tell you why I think behaviour of some young people is so poor. I believe the sustained undermining of the traditional family unit is key. I believe that the undermining of marriage is central. I believe the collapse of Christianity is significant. I believe the failure of the Police to enforce existing  laws is influential. I believe the entire liberal culture, so ascendant in recent years, is the driving force. To pretend that sending in Super Nannies can solve a problem that Government creates is lunacy. And what next, dear Reader? How long before SuperMum and SuperDad are sent out by Government to "help" failing parents?

It’s a power grab by the State – that’s the long and the short of it! 

Storm in a teacup or matter of principle (or both)?

By ATWadmin On November 20th, 2006 at 10:29 pm

Which side are you on in the debate that is gripping the nation? I’m referring to whether an employee of BA should be allowed to wear a cross round her neck – one so small you’d need Sherlock Holmes’ magnifying glass to notice it was there.

BA policy states that uniformed staff cannot wear jewelry, or indeed anything that is not part of the uniform. However, they have allowed concessions for items of a religious nature, such as turbans, head scarves and bracelets. Nadia Eweida says her cross is not jewelry but a religious symbol. As with the title, the terms are not mutually exclusive.  Neither side looks set to back down, and now Nadia’s being supported by the Archbishop of York.

To my mind this is a result of successive governments encroaching into areas of private life and conscience, creating layer upon layer of legislation to bind us all in what we can think, say and do within our private lives (and I include private employers in this.) In the name of equality, race relations and human rights they have undermined not just our basic freedoms but our ability to deal with mundane questions such as work dress code. So now eminent judges, wealthy lawyers and stacks of tax-payers’ money are needed to settle disputes over school uniforms and other such things, where in the past we made do with common sense and discretion.

I say let her wear it . BA customers have no doubt complained about most aspects of their service at some time or another, but I guarantee no one has ever complained about a cross on someone’s neck.


Meet the new boss, same as the old boss

By ATWadmin On November 20th, 2006 at 2:21 pm

Putin.jpgDoes anyone seriously doubt that the Kremlin is behind the poisoning of Russian dissident Alexander Litvinenko? Or that it was a Kremlin man who shot dead Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya? Are we expected to turn a blind eye to such things, even if they take place in London?

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the initial green shoots of reform have withered on the vine, and ex-KGB boss Putin has rebuilt the evil empire in all but name. There may not be anything much this country can do to encourage change in Russia, we certainly don’t have much leverage, and there may be many strategic reasons for overlooking their (ahem) short-comings, but it’s a timely reminder if one is needed that Russia doesn’t play by our rules.

As with China, Russia is still acting much as they did during the Cold War, and taking advantage of the lessened security and increased business contacts. China especially has a huge spy network engaged in industrial espionage. The West should take a hard look at this attempted murder, and remember what it is that distinguishes us from places like Russia and China, lest we end up looking back on the days of liberal democracy and freedom of speech with the same nostalgia you see in the older generation of Russians for the “good old days” of Comrade Stalin.



By ATWadmin On November 20th, 2006 at 12:31 pm

795151-558440-thumbnail.jpgYes, I know lots of people say Blair is a hypocrite and they all have their reasons for believing this. Most of them are probably right, one way or another, but let me tell you why I believe Blair is a grotesque fraud. He’s in Afghanistan at the moment and he’s telling our troops that defeating the Taliban is vital to world security. WRONG.

Annihilating militant Islam is vital to world security – but the Taliban are but one small part of this jigsaw. Blair wants to cosy up to Iran and Syria – two leading advocates of global Jihad – in order to “change course” in Iraq. He also says he wants our troops to defeat the Taliban but as Mike Cunningham has explained, OUR is military is being short-changed in what they need to do the dangerous job required.

So whilst wiping out the Taliban is a key military objective – Blair cannot divorce it from the battle going on in Iraq. We must defeat and obliterate the militant Jihadi WHEREVER they are – and that includes in Britain!

I believe Blair’s fine words are entirely disconnected from his Government’s actions – and THAT is where the hypocrisy lies.  And lies. And lies again.


By ATWadmin On November 20th, 2006 at 12:21 pm

hamas-human-shields-thumb.jpgIt is down to the sheer humanity of the Israeli Military that it announces, in advance, that it intends to take action against known terrorist hideouts. But the Palis, true to form, have decided that they will take advantage of this information and use it to form human shields in defence of the Jihad killers bases.

Well, it now seems that Israel is reviewing its "advance warnings" policy after calling off two air strikes when Palis formed "human shields" around the homes of Palestinian militants in Gaza.

Good. If the terror-enablers are so keen to protect the terrorists, let them share the same fate. The world can clearly see the stygian depths to which Palestinians will sink to protectknown  killers – if it chooses to look. All this nonsense about Palestinians being the world’s most oppressed people is just so much JUNK. Instead, they may be the world’s most DEPRAVED people, embracing suicide-bombing, driven by anti-Semitic hatred and protecting known terrorists.

Pride and Sikh

By ATWadmin On November 20th, 2006 at 11:05 am

I have met many Sikhs in my time and have found them to be peace-loving, law-abiding, moderate and deeply principled people.  Can anyone remember when Sikhs last caused a social or societal upset in the UK?  No, neither can I.  That is why I was appalled when I read of the attack on a Sikh boy in Scotland, presumably an attempt by Neanderthals incapable of distinguishing between certain faiths.  For this attack was almost certainly revenge for the killing of a white teenager in Glasgow by four Muslims youths.

An interesting article in the Times of India has UK Sikhs blaming, correctly in my opinion, this ridiculous politically correct tag of describing everyone who hails from the Indian sub-continent as ‘Asian‘.  The continent has 37 countries for heaven’s sake!!  Even Cyprus, now a member of the EU, is geographically a part of Asia.  Do we refer to Cypriots, or, for that matter, Russians, Israelis or Japanese as ‘Asian’?  No!  So why do so for people of the sub-continent?

Whilst I view Muslims to be a severe pain in the a**e to just about every non-Muslim country these theologically-obsessed cretins have ever migrated to, the same certainly cannot be said for either Sikhs or Hindus.  Why should they suffer the backlash of an angry British society when they have done nothing to undermine that society; instead wanting to play a fulsome part of it?  Sikhs don’t want to transform western society into a micocosm of the Punjab.  What a pity the sick thugs who took their ire out on an innocent Sikh boy were too stupid to see that!


By ATWadmin On November 20th, 2006 at 9:31 am

jack2.jpgDid you read that modern technology has provided the first image of the face of Britain’s most elusive killer. An e-fit of Jack the Ripper has been compiled as part of an investigation, by one of Scotland Yard’s most respected former detectives, into the serial killer who terrorised London in the autumn of 1888.

And In a further development a geographical profiler has also pinpointed the street in which the killer is most likely to have lived. Investigators believe the culprit, who mutilated his five female victims after strangling them, was almost certainly interviewed by police but was discounted because he looked too "ordinary" and unlike the man that detectives suspected was responsible for the savage attacks.

I have read quite a few books over the years about the Whitechapel murders and I remember many years ago once going on a "walking tour" of that part of East London, just of Commercial Road, where those horrible murders took place. I suppose the public interest has never quite died away because the killer remained elusive. Did he end up killing himself, was he commited to an asylum, did he live to a ripe old age? The mystery remains shrouded in the Victorian fogs that covered London at that time. I doubt we will ever "know" whodunnit – but it remains an enduring mystery! I don’t know who did do it – all I know is that they would never get a fair trial nowadays…!