- This topic has 184 replies, 38 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 2 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
So a couple of 6 or 7yo old twins became the youngest to pass GCSEs at maths yesterday did they ? Yeah right, one of them got an F and the other got a G – of course these are now GCSE passes as although a grade C in GCSE is equivalent to grade C in the old O level, anything below O level grade C was considered a failure while grades D, E, F and G at GCSE are considered passes. Only if someone cannot muster the singular brain cell needed for a GCSE grade G would they receive the U for unclassified of failure. Even though with O levels, the equivalent of GCSE grade F and G would be Ungraded. A grade F GCSE is the equivalent of a grade 4 CSE and a G is the equivalent of a grade 5 CSE – they’re not trumpeting that about are they ? I suppose it doesn’t really matter splitting hairs on the lower level chaff but it is another example of the dumbing down of this country and the shocking drop in education standards over the past 20 years or so, which has if anything been accelerated by the desperate New Labour tactic of inventing and claiming success where none exists – billy liar syndrome. It is not a surprise that Britain also has record levels of debt and record levels of obesity and ignorance of general health issues – too many people these days are brought up with no level of personal responsibility or common sense and this can only be intelligence related – it doesn’t take super levels of intelligence to realise what is right and what is wrong and this will only get worse, it’s called evolution – I’m just ****
ing glad I won’t be about to see the future generations – it won’t take much to take over this country in 50 years or so will it – just a few KFC bargain buckets and a sky tv subscription and no-one would give a damn – the only wars this country is likely to win in the future will be tug-of-wars. This country is going down the s**t
ter as I originally said and while I acknowledge someone’s comment telling me not to be a miserable twat, this is nothing to be cheerful about and ignoring the problem is exactly what these new labour twats want you to do – for heavens sake don’t question the ****
s you might rumble what they’re up to. We seem to have record numbers of unprovoked violent assaults and murders and we are now not going to imprison shop-lifters, regardless of how many times they shoplift – they will be given community orders if anything and if they ignore them they will be given another one – super. Of course if I choose to carry a weapon about for personal protection and get caught I’ll be banged up in no time. I’ve gone off point here and I’ll just stop I think, it’s depressing me.When did the ‘Who can post the longest post?’ competition start?Some of the length and content of the stuff on here lately makes gamble :coolwink: seem normal :o
;)
Ark bit great!<br>totally agree sberry.
Ok Jilly?<br>ssshhhh…ot you will give Blair the idea to tax words.:o :biggrin:
Well the wolf is out of the sheep’s clothing. People laugh at me when I say this Government is fascist. Perhaps now you will reconsider.
Bliar has stated that we can PREDICT families whose children are likey to become criminals, and act early to prevent it. He talks about these kids being "a menace to society".
To me that puts him once again in bed with Hitler. He said something very similar about the criminal underclass, and their children being "a future menace to society".<br>Yes he also banned foxhunting and smoking in public.
See I am not suggesting Blair is going to put single mothers in gas chambers. What I am trying to point out is that they BOTH believe(d) in engineering society to produce the people they want. Model citizens. They are (were) social engineers.
I will tell you a little racing anecdote to highlight what os wrong with Blair’s plan.
In the early eighties I had just finished a teacher training course. I couldn’t get a job for a couple of months, but eventually did youth work. I worked in Barton Hill in East Bristol, just after the St.Pauls riots.<br>The newly elected Labour council poured money into the black community, and the white areas started to riot too. This meant that they eventually had a load of money pumped into it too. <br>I thought the kids in Barton hill were okay. A bit raucous, but generally traditional working class values.<br>Then the hippies came. It seemed every other person…both in the black and white communities( the arteficial construct in any case of labour) was a social worker or youth worker.<br>This ccommunity didn’t have a drug problem. Marijuana<br>came with the social workers. It soon had a drug problem. The pc hippies introduced it. I beat the living crap out of one so called social worker giving a bunch of kids a joint.<br>I never got on with any of these social workers. They had bigger problems than many of the kids that they wre supposed to help. The money mostly went to their wages; that was the worst of it. <br>I once designed a booklet for the youth centre. It was illustrated with pictures based on kids in the area. There<br>was one black punk kid  wore a tutu. Richard. So I put him in. That was rejected. The rest were accepted (by a committee of about 20 people) but when the booklet was done, some of my drawings had been very crudely altered. In every picture, a character had been "blacked in" . It was ridiculous because it was so obvious.<br>Anyway, I continued my own agenda, and feel I may have helped some of the kids a bit; certainly out of some scrapes with the Police.; while the hippies got on with wasting public money on themselves and their vegetarian cafes and PC courses for lesbians wanting to <br>save the whale and stuff which were populated with people from middle class influx. See the main problem in Bristol is that it is a city full of students who want to carry on like that, living there after they leave, so seek jobs in social services, teaching etc. It is full of them; ramming their values down working class kids throats and destroying traditional working class areas at best, and eventually turning on them as they get disillusioned themselves within council bureacracies and the Benefits agency.
I put on bands, with local kids supporting, and did Art exhibitions with local kids exhibiting alongside some Art students and established artists…which I feel did a lot for their ego and I hope that some of them went on to go to Art college themselves. But really the traditional social support for kids had vanished. At the time, the emblems of one of them were emblazoned over the kids t shirts with pride with a name that the hippies had never heard of: "Lonsdale". Problem is hippies can’t stand boxing. <br>(That will be next to be banned).
But on the whole, it was all a bunch of crap designed to give middle class people jobs and interfere in the traditional way of life of the people there.
The only problems were unemployment and poor housing; they never did anything about that.
So I left, came back to Wales and taught for a bit…until I realised that was a bunch of crap too. So we eventually went back to our roots and our love of racing and horses, and my (expelled from school for being a "social menace") brother and I started painting horses. We still are.
So then about 15 years ago, I am in the ring at Chepstow. I get a shout. "Oi, Mr. Dent!!!" I looked around and didn’t recognise anyone who would call me that. Finally I see the person on Stephen little’s stand. <br>I could hardly recognise him. His name was Ash, and he was the settler.<br>He had definitely at one point been one of Blair’s "menaces to society", as both my brother and I would have been classed too.
But he was different. Gone was his psychobilly quiff and barrel jacket and DM’s. He was in a Hugo Boss suit. His hair was immaculate. <br>Stephen Little somewhere along the line had discovered this lad’s genius at figures, and given him an opportunity. <br>All the social workers put together have never given a kid what Stephen gave him. A chance.
That is what is profoundly wrong with Blair and socialism. It seeks to blame people for the society that they have cocked up themselves; with their ill conceived <br>state interference.
This latest idea of Blair’s frightens the hell out of me.<br>Perhaps he forgets the ructions caused by his kids and jack Straws kids. Only if they are the kids of single mothers on council estates are they deemed "a menace to society".
Mind you; Blair would still have us down as a social menace. We follow the Hunt, smoke, like unsavoury women, want to give a horse a decent burial; don’t EVER fit in any of their damn boxes, and PARK OUR VAN too close to a junction. Perhaps his new policies will prevent people like us and Ash ever happening again.
<br>(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 2:10 am on Sep. 1, 2006)
<br>(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 2:15 am on Sep. 1, 2006)
<br>(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 2:19 am on Sep. 1, 2006)
<br>(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 2:26 am on Sep. 1, 2006)
<br>(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 2:29 am on Sep. 1, 2006)<br>
(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 2:35 am on Sep. 1, 2006)
Roll up, Roll up….
Get your Daily Mail here…. :biggrin:
(Edited by Sailing Shoes at 2:30 pm on Sep. 1, 2006)
Yes, I think his right-wing ranting might be taken a little more seriously if he was able to contain it to, say, 10 lines of print. But his vociferous support for foxhunting means his views on anything else have no credibility whatsoever as far as I’m concerned.
If you cannot see that foxhunting and racing go hand in hand then you are deluding yourself.
As I have stated many times I think the Daily mail is a middle class paper…they may think themselves as Conservative but there is a lot of profoundly disturbing moralistic crap in there that is hardly in the spirit of fundamental conservative ideology. Racism for one and animal rights agendas for another.
You think it is right that Blair believes that working class single mothers breed people who are a menace to society? THAT is more akin to the Daily Mail; not my thinking.
I am very very lucky to have a horse after he has retired that can entertain himself (as he did on the racecourse too!). Most get very very bored. Hunting brings them to life again and offers ex chasers a lifeline which means their life expectancy extends way way beyond the average life of a flat horse. <br>Without hunting they would be lost.<br>And I have devoted a good deal of my life to conservation issues. Hunting is regarded by 90% of condervationists as invaluable in protecting habitats.<br>It is the only discrimantory method of control of the fox polualtion, and in Nazi germany, the first and only country to ban hunting with hounds, the fox became extinct within 4 years.<br>In addition, when people talk about hunting they ususally say "terrified" fox "ripped apart alive" by hounds" cahsed by "toffs". NONE of this has any credence since the fox is not terrified (terror illicts freezing on the spot in all mammals) the fox is killed instantly so is ripped apart(as wolves would do to it in the wild) dead, and I have yet to meet any of these toffs on any of our local Hunts. I saw one at the Berkeley once though acknowledged.
I do NOT by the way hunt.
If you cannot say why you oppose hunting without relying on prejudice and emotive language(and I have YET to hear one) then you have no case. I suggest you look up the references on my profile first so you are prepeared for something which most anti hunting people aren’t though: EVIDENCE.
http://www.myspace.com/davedent
That is not a Tory view; that is a view of someone who has devoted his life to the study of animals. And not just see them as a medium on which to bet. It is also the view of a Libertarian. I will vote for whoever can guarantee me conservation at the top of the agenda and therefore hunting relegalised QUICKLY before it is too late; and a life free of state interference . This lot are going to end up stopping us picking our noses and taxing sex; and turning every piece of green land into concrete and intensive agriculture. They will also ban racing…certainly the jumps. A large proportion of Labour back benchers have already stated their opposition to it. The<br>government took a million pound bribe from AR groups…remember that.
My point in this thread is that Blair believes in social engineering. So do fascists and communists. It is dangerous. I know dozens of people from rough backgrounds who are law abiding citizens. How dare he say such crap.
You CANNOT rubbish an argument by stating that someone is a Tory; that is nonsense. It would be like me rubbishing an argument because you are LAbour. If you have a point against mine, state it rationally and logically. Otherwise you lose. <br>Unlike you I have no prejudice against a socailist persepective that I cannot argue against.
For example I think the socilaist idea for nationaisation of things like Rail, are indisputably better. But I have waited 9 years for them to mention it and had to hear it finally from David Cameron.
Yes I know Insomniac. It was parked nearly 6 metres away….far too close to the junction (NOT!)  I can’t go into detail about this as we are suing….but we were not charged with any offence.
This is an off topic forum. There are political debates. If you do not like to debate nobody is forcing you. It is called freedom of speech.<br>I welcome good debate ; but so far you anti hunting and pro Blair folk haven’t given me any.
GGD – It’s clear that you have strong pro-hunting beliefs. That’s fine by me, I was always against it being banned anyway.<br>You might wish to view The Racing Forum archive<br>Hunting ban<br>wher this topic was given a bloody good airing.  The disposition of  members towards fox hunting can be gleaned from there. <br>I wouldn’t worry too much about Blair / "New Labour" ‘s social engineering doing away with ruffians.  It would mean doing away with 97% of the Labour voting Scots. :biggrin:
(Edited by insomniac at 9:46 am on Sep. 2, 2006)
Quote: from GreenGreenDesert on 11:47 pm on Sep. 1, 2006[br]Hunting is regarded by 90% of condervationists as invaluable in protecting habitats.<br>
<br>Have you a source for this statistic? or have you grabbed the figure from thin air?
I don’t believe for a minute that a fox-hunting ban will impact racing in any but the most marginal manner.
Flat racing will be unaffected. Full stop.
Jumps racing is obviously more likely to see an effect but my belief is that those who enjoy riding across country will still find ways to do so and that breeding of NH horses will be largely unaffected (what is wrong, pray tell, with those ‘hunts’ where they lay a scent trail and the hounds follow that. No blood and gore at the end but surely the same thrill of hunting across coutry). Anyway – we can sustain teh NH game on ex-flat horses can’t we. :o
The issue of controlling foxes is a separate one and, in this day and age, if we can’t achieve that without a load of dogs and horses having to be involved in a gross spectacle then the pest control industry needs a good shaking.<br>
Most Hunts have already this season been banned from riding across a small minority of fearful of prosecution farmers land. This means no riding on their land full stop. <br>It also means the complete eradication of foxes in these areas (as happened in Nazi occupied Czechoslaovakia) through poison and snaring and gun.
It this spreads , there will be nowhere to ride apart form crappy bridleways. Horses (and their riders) will die of boredom. people will no longer want retired racehorses. I would NOT TOUCH ONE without the knowledge that if they got bored I could take them hunting. A bored throughbred is not a nice animal.
So what are you hoing to do with all the retired racehorses?
The 90% figure (conservationists) was anecdotal; and also based on the academis references on the net; but I have encountered at least a 100 in my wildlife work, and only come across ONE who was anti hunting, and he has since changed his mind.<br>Check out the references on my website.
http://www.myspace.com/davedent
Do it. You will find everything at the bottom in my profile just about leads to hunting and conservation. <br>Waht is happeneing in the countryside at the moment is awful; and why many hunts have now turned from guns to birds of prey to kill tyhe fox once flushed…which gives him a far better chance of escape. When again, CONSERVATIONISTS warned, and also suggested,  that this would , and could, be done, Labour politicians laughed. They should have realised that such birds are used to hunt WOLF in Mongolia. It is urban prejudice and unbelievable ignorance of hunting in all its manifestations yet again. An Eagle, a large falcon or owl, can take out fox . It isn’t as pretty as when the hounds do it though…the bird  takes longer about it.
But for the moment it offers a lifeline to the fox thankfully.
When are you townies going to do something about real animal welfare and the millions of mammals and birds killed in the most gruesome manner in cities with poison? I am sick to death of picking up dead cats with burst stomachs, owls too, because of rat poison (they eat the slow dying rat) and I find it far more distressing to see than the Hunt. What is that about? <br>If you have a problem with rats, get the gypsies in with their terriers. A problem with pigeons get the Hawk man in. And maybe it would be a little kinder to use hounds on the urban fox …met councils kill far more than hunts every year. Ring the GLC and ask if you don’t believe me.
When the WWF , the only true conservation charity, are making Big Game hunting reserves in Africa, and sable hunting reserves in Siberia you have to respect that new perspective. It is the ONLY long term effective method of conservation. Ask David Bellamy.
It is called Incentive conservation and you will struggle to find a REAL Conservationist professional who does not now support that.
If you want to see foxes in the future, and preserve the chaarcter of our countryside, and not have horses thrown on the scrapheap after racing, then you should get behind the fiight to save it.
I appreciate you have discussed this before; but it must remain in the cosciousness because you will NOT find many racing professionals who are not estremely worried by it.
Flat racing unaffected? Waht happens to all the poorer quality, and gelded horses then? There are tens of thousands of these animals enjoying a life after racing by hunting. I even a know former hunt sab who now goes hunting since he has had a horse.
Flat racing in its present form is unacceptable to me ethically but we do not want to do our dirty washing in public.<br>Jumps racing is beyond reproach in terms of after care for the vast majority of horses THANKS to hunting.  Also in its gentle nursing of young animals so they are fully formed when beginning. Let us not firget that; you know what I am talking about.
If the flat racing world does not back us on the issue, (and actually the vasy majority of professionals do)then Flat racing will come under far more intense scrutiny by the AR brigade. And it will be banned too eventually. Please remember PETA will never stop until the Thoroughbred is completely eliminated as a breed. And when we have a Government whose biggest contributor independent is the AR lobby look out. Both should be opposed by anyone who cares about horses, or conservation.
Back to the main point.<br>When you want to produce a society which conforms to the moral code of the people in Government, it undermines democracy itself. That is why the Arabs will never accept it; because one lot will use it as a mandate to opress another.
Blair believes that fiture "menace to society" can be stopped by early state intervention. That is the same as the fascist view. It is social engineering, and it stinks. <br>It is not disimilar to the absurd failure of compensatory education (which they also support), and preventataive measures rather than cure in health. It leads us up the garden path and is ethically without foundation.
You cannot prevent cervical cancer by stopping people smoking; though it was widely believed by the medical profession that you could. The nature of the evidence was no different to that which links lung cancer to smoking. If they concentrate on cure they would find things like Helicobactor and human papiloma far sooner. <br>I will like to make a small bet that they will find a viral link to lung cancer within five years. Anyone want to take me up?
Likewise you cannot prevent antisocial behaviour by state interference. Weren’t any of you guys brought up on "A Clockwork Orange?"
I remember my brother had some of that crap when he was young. Cild psychoatrists watching hos every move, and my mother’s head being filled with crap. He went off the rails because he realised that we had a crap life, and looked for am immediate solution to it. He was in the bookies at the age of 12 and in bed with  posh birds <br>a couple of years later and did speed. He was sent to be examined by psychiatrists by social workers. He ended up forcing the square pegs in the round holes. Roll on Ludwig Van.
Leave people alone and give them a helping hand when they ask for it instead of getting in their way. Give them an education that is academic and can enable them to reach lofty goals, instead of condening them to vicational education for jobs that often aren’t there; and even when they are they have no idea why they are doing them and it causes alienation…the true root of most social problems.
And if they do turn bad; then enforce the law.
The only way to "cure" the menace to society is to lock him up and have zero tolerance. That works. It deters.
REWARD those who try to start their own fledgling businesses; instead of blocking their every move with red tape.
Yesterday I took some real free range eggs to my local banghladeshi restaurant. They thanked me and said they would share them out and take them home. They are not allowed to use such eggs because of health and safety. Yet they are allowed to use supermarket eggs. I wouldn’t touch them with a barge pole, yet thay are allowed. That is just one little way in which government red tape is absurd.
I want a Tory government to lift every damn one of the 4000 laws and regulations introduced by new Labour;<br>and a commitment NOT to interfere with people’s lives<br> to engineer a Borg Hive.
<br>(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 8:54 pm on Sep. 2, 2006)<br>
(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 8:58 pm on Sep. 2, 2006)
Quote: from GreenGreenDesert on 8:47 pm on Sep. 2, 2006[br]The 90% figure (conservationists) was anecdotal;
hmmmmm ;)
Look up the references on my myspace, tap in "Incentive Conservation" to your browser, look at the results the big game reseerves are having, and the way in which people like the Navajo have excellent results. Canada too. Hunters and biologists and conservationists work hand in hand.
The principle is exactly the same ….if you need to hunt…for recreation, subsistence or pest control….you have to manage the hunted population at sustainable numbers and protect their habitat.
It is very common for example to find people in the Hunt rearing fox cubs whose mothers have been killed by careless urban drivers. Coverts and hedgerows are protected, and worked hard on by members of the hunts voluntarily often.
Even Greenpeace are coming around to the idea that at lest traditional indigenous hunting…even the Sami fur trade…protects habitats.
The WWF and Greenpeace will change their tune publically on all forms of hunting (as distinct from poaching) soon…they will have to. Here is one example why:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3622108.htm
Now this is unacceptable. This area once made its income form the fur trade. Reared chinchilla and hunted nutria.<br>These traditional things protected habitats. Ironic actually that they turned to gm soya as the market for fur collapsed anticipating world wide vegetarianism. Now 70% of the production goes into EEC animal feed<br>because nobody will eat it, and it has made the market hard for both free range animal farmers and legitimate soya prices.
The ONLY areas not affected by this disgrace is where the few chicngilla farms and native people who insist on protecting their hunting lands are.
So again we see that the animal rights movement has contributed to extinctions of animals.
If you have no incentive, no need , for animlas….then you take their habitat. That is how it works all over the planet.
The Rip Declaration on the Environment styates clearly taht indeigenous peoples have the right to manage their own habitats using "traditiona methods and practices" Article 21 I think it is; can’t remember offhand.
That means HUNTING and FUR TRADE.
That was produced by all the top Canservationists in the world.
It is easy to see that the same principle applies to habitat protection in the UK.
So less of the hmmmm please.
Wait till you hear what the Inuit and others have to say during next years International Year of the Arctic. Expect a damning criticism of what we are doing to the planet and an affrimantion of their rights to hunt and sell fur including seal pelts (as their only sustaninable resource) to the world.
You won’t find a conservationist not right behind them.
Yet STILL the ignorant Westminster politicans and their animal rights paymasters scream for seal furs to be banned. Still you have idiots like Anne Widdecombe (a Tory) wanting to ban the Guards from buying bearskins form Canada that come from sustainible hunting of a species that are at huge numbers, done WITH the supervisison of conservationists in the field.
(Edited by GreenGreenDesert at 3:52 pm on Sep. 3, 2006)
I’m not that bothered about the issues you bring up – just don’t like people quoting %’s as factual to back up their arguments.
I dont think that every debate should descend into your views on banning smoking/hunting with dogs GDD. The idea behind this thread is a good one and it is very disturbing that our countries government want to go down the Eugenics route by identifying criminals before they are born. I think the last thing people need in their lives is more Crackpot Gimmickry which will cost a fortune and achieve nothing. They would be better divvying up the cash between the trouble families and let them spend their way out of poverty.
Thanks for the links Dave, two quotes from the second made me raise my eyebrows:-<br>1) From Tony Blair
His government has made "massive progress" in tackling social exclusion ….
<br>and<br>2) From – get this -"Social Exclusion Minister" Ms Hilary Armstrong:
the government had raised "many, many people out of dire poverty and worklessness" it now needed to give them "the ability to see what they can do to raise their children’s opportunities".
First of all, despite what new Labour functionairies say, this government despite its large majority, hasn’t made "massive progress" in anything.<br>Regarding Ms Armstrongs comment, there is no REAL poverty in the UK (apart from a poverty of political integrity).
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.