Tories Blame The Immigrants For Everything

 Politics  No Responses »
Oct 062015
 

Well that speech wasn't much of a surprise; the Tories are busy blaming immigrants for every single one of their failings. It is hardly surpising that Theresa May is the one giving that sort of speach; she's on the lunatic fringe of the Tories and would probably be happiest if they brought back birching (especially if she got to wield the birch). 

Are you having trouble finding a house? The Tories say that immigrants are to blame.

Are you having trouble finding a job? The Tories claim that immigrants are to blame.

Did your cat go missing yesterday? The Tories claim that immigrants are to blame.

Is the TV on tonight boring? The Tories claim that immigrants are to blame.

Every sensible study into the impact of immigration into the UK has shown that they contribute far more than they take, and I for one am getting pretty sick of all this pandering to the fascist wing of the British public. It's also out of step with the mood of the nation – with many people looking at the Syrian refugee crisis and looking to help.

Anyone would think that the Tories are terrified that UKIP might start taking votes away from them, and have decided to adopt the far-right anti-immigration party's policies to steal their thunder. Not exactly the moral high ground.

Gun Control (Again)

 Politics  No Responses »
Oct 022015
 

In the wake of yet another senseless slaughter in the US perpetrated by a supposedly anti-Christian mindless thug, it is time yet again for the US to contemplate a sensible level of gun control.

The US does not have a problem with gun control; it has a problem with mindless violence. There are other countries in the world where gun ownership is at the same level or even higher than in the US – such as Switzerland.

But gun control is a sensible measure to take whilst the real problem – a tough problem to tackle – is dealt with. The fact that the US constitution protects gun ownership is a red herring; as the name implies (the Second Amendment), the US constitution is amenable to amendment.

And even that is a bit of a red herring – the second amendment does not protect gun ownership for the purposes of self-defence, playing with guns at a gun range, or murdering innocent animals,  It protects gun ownership for the purposes of making up a well-regulated militia :-

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Gun control regulations that do not prevent gun ownership by members of a well regulated militia are not in breach of the second amendment.

If for example the US brought in laws which required gun owners to be members of a well regulated militia (which as a minimum should ensure that militia commanders are subject to stringent checks), store their weapons in a militia armoury, and only be allowed to use those weapons under the supervision of militia officers, it would go a long way to preventing senseless slaughters.

The main aim with that is to ensure that gun usage is subject to collective decision making – crowd-sourcing the decision to use the weapons if you like.

If gun usage is controlled by collective decision making, there is less chance of a murderous maniac slaughtering innocent victims.

You may think that as a UK citizen, this is none of my business, but I dispute that. The victims of this latest senseless slaughter were my fellow humans, and as a human I have the right to stick my oar in.

Are Drone Strikes Self-Defence?

 General, Politics  No Responses »
Sep 082015
 

The big story of the day is the news that a UK drone strike took out an ISIS terrorist in Syria; one who used to be a UK citizen. After all, ISIS claims to be a nation state and so their "fighters" (actually terrorists) could be said to have given up their previous citizenship.

Arguing about whether it was justified is completely pointless without access to all of the relevant information which we won't get. It would be a very good idea for someone sensible (i.e. not a sleezy politician) outside of the intelligence community to review that secret information and to be the one authorising such activities.

But is a drone strike self-defence? It may well be under military terminology or even under international law.

In terms of ordinary understanding of self-defence, it is not – in terms of someone assaulting you, it is self-defence to break someone's arm as they are striking you; it is not self-defence to break their arm because they have promised to assault you tomorrow.As ordinary people understand the term, a drone strike is not self-defence.

It might be somewhat less contraversial to call a spade a spade and term this attack a "pre-emptive defence againt an imminent mass terrorist act" (or whatever phrase would fit the facts). On the face of it, using a drone strike to kill two terrorists only who are about to launch a terrorist attack, is the least-worst action. 

That does not justify so-called "collateral damage" (in honest spade terms, that would be the indiscriminate murder of innocent civilians), and anyone who authorises drone strikes that results in murder should be prosecuted.

The European Refugee “Crisis”

 General, Politics  No Responses »
Sep 032015
 

The news has been filled for a few weeks now with stories about "immigrants" making their way into Europe through various routes – across the sea to the Greek islands, and across land through Hungary. Of course technically they are all travellers until they stop moving and set up home (at which point they are immigrants unless they stopped moving before they left their home country.

It turns out that most of the travellers are from Syria or from Afghanistan which makes them refugees.

This is a special category of migrant, and such migrants have the right under international law to seek and enjoy asylum.

child_sea4

Anyone trying to limit that right of asylum is almost certainly a criminal under international law, and morally bankrupt to boot. Those thinking that we can't take any more should take a long hard look at that dead child above; you are as responsible for that death just as much as if you beat that child to death personally.

There is no refugee crisis except in the sense that the refugees are not being treated properly. The fact that Europe was going to see an increase in the number of refugees was entirely predictable given the situation in Syria; particularly given that Turkey is hosting 1.7 million refugees. If anything there has been a crisis of political leadershiop amongst European politicians, and a failure to take a strong moral position. With a handful of exceptions.

The UK government is busy playing osterich games by pretending that by dealing with the Syrian crisis in Syria will make all the refugees disappear. Yes the ultimate solution is to sort out the situation in Syria, but in the meantime there are refugees dying. 

The EU needs to start funding the cost of dealing with refugees so that the countries least able to afford to don't have to pay a disproportionate amount (i.e. Greece).

The EU needs to set up safe, secure, and comfortable refugee centres where refugees can be accommodated, assessed, and then allocated a new country to go to.

The EU needs to allocate refugees out amongst all of the countries of the EU on a fair basis, and need to shame the reluctant into accepting their fair share.

And we all need to slap down those who oppose treating the refugees properly.

 

Another Senseless Killing in the USA

 General, Politics  No Responses »
Aug 272015
 

So there has been another senseless killing in the USA, and the world has reacted by asking Americans to "Please stop killing each other". If you read this blog religiously, you will probably recall previous occasions when I have mentioned gun control (and related issues), but bear with me. One slightly tacky thing to point out is that this senseless killing onl made the news because it was shown on live TV – senseless killings in the USA are so common (I could probably link to hundreds of similar articles) that this would not ordinarily be newsworthy.

The gun control fans have of course emphasised that the USA needs proper gun control, and I'm not going to disagree. 

Any society as sick in terms of violence as the USA needs strong gun control because it's citizens cannot be trusted not to run amok.

Those who want to hang onto their guns need to come up with a solution to the problem of violence in the USA and they need to stop parroting ridiculous excuses for why guns should not be controlled.

 Older Entries  Newer Entries