Friday, July 17, 2009
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Future articles are being posted on my Wordpress blog
My original articles will be appearing on my Wordpress blog: stewartcowan.wordpress.com and also on my site www.thelabourparty.org
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Nationalists’ “Political Earthquake” Rocks Labour Party
Will Labour listen now as they try and pick up the pieces after losing Glasgow East? .........
Stewart Cowan, 25/7/08
After a recount last night in the Glasgow East by-election, the SNP was confirmed to have taken Labour's 25th 'safest' seat with a majority of 365, overturning a massive 13,507 majority: a swing from Labour to the Nats of 22.54%.
John Mason, the new Scottish National Party MP for Glasgow East said, "Three weeks ago the SNP predicted a political earthquake. This SNP victory is not just a political earthquake, it is off the Richter scale. It is an epic win and the tremors will be felt all the way to Downing Street."
Margaret Curran, the Labour candidate said, "I regret that I did not win this for Labour tonight."
"I do believe the Labour Party has to listen and has to hear the message from the people of Glasgow East."
Well, what else was she supposed to say? It's the same old codswallop; the same old slapping down of labour's already downtrodden foot soldiers with the standard trite remark; the same old rhetoric to avoid supplying a proper answer.
Two years ago, the BBC had the headline: 'Labour will listen' says Blears.
"Labour will listen more to its rank-and-file members, Labour Party chairman Hazel Blears has pledged. She told a London conference, organised by left-wing think-tank Compass, that many rank-and-file were discontent with the leadership."
"Amicus union leader Derek Simpson said Labour was set for a general election defeat if it did not change direction."
Of course, some people just cannot admit that they have done a bad job and have to divert attention onto others.
The BBC piece said that Ed Balls accused Conservative leader David Cameron of hypocrisy.
"What we are hearing is the same old conservatism that prefers a minimal state and cuts in investment and leaves the poorest and the weakest in our society dependent on charity," he said.
10% tax band removed, Mr Balls? Hypocrite!
Massive influx of cheap labour, Mr Balls? Hypocrite!!
After May's local council election humiliation for Labour, their deputy leader, Harriet Harman, said:
“I think that we have got to really listen to what people were saying when they were expressing their views in the election yesterday."
“We have to reflect and listen to what people are saying – that is the whole point about having elections in our democracy.”
Maybe they really are good at listening; they just don't care to act on what they hear.
So the answer to the headline, "Will Labour listen now," is NO!
Because they are bought and paid for by global corporate and banking interests. They have been commandeered to look after the interests of the few while enslaving the masses through overbearing taxation, intrusion into our lives, weakening of the family, Christian influence and strong, decent communities so that the elite they serve can micromanage us out of the chaos and confusion they create.
Are any of the other mainstream parties much different?
Here is the full result from Glasgow East:
* John Mason, SNP - 11,277
* Margaret Curran, Labour - 10,912
* Davena Rankin, Conservative - 1,639
* Ian Robertson, Lib Dem - 915
* Frances Curran, Scottish Socialist Party - 555
* Tricia McLeish, Solidarity - 512
* Dr Eileen Duke, Scottish Greens - 232
* Chris Creighton, Independent - 67
* Hamish Howitt, Freedom 4 Choice - 65
Turnout: 42.25%
The by-election was necessitated by the resignation of Labour's David Marshall on health grounds.
Stewart Cowan, 25/7/08
After a recount last night in the Glasgow East by-election, the SNP was confirmed to have taken Labour's 25th 'safest' seat with a majority of 365, overturning a massive 13,507 majority: a swing from Labour to the Nats of 22.54%.
John Mason, the new Scottish National Party MP for Glasgow East said, "Three weeks ago the SNP predicted a political earthquake. This SNP victory is not just a political earthquake, it is off the Richter scale. It is an epic win and the tremors will be felt all the way to Downing Street."
Margaret Curran, the Labour candidate said, "I regret that I did not win this for Labour tonight."
"I do believe the Labour Party has to listen and has to hear the message from the people of Glasgow East."
Well, what else was she supposed to say? It's the same old codswallop; the same old slapping down of labour's already downtrodden foot soldiers with the standard trite remark; the same old rhetoric to avoid supplying a proper answer.
Two years ago, the BBC had the headline: 'Labour will listen' says Blears.
"Labour will listen more to its rank-and-file members, Labour Party chairman Hazel Blears has pledged. She told a London conference, organised by left-wing think-tank Compass, that many rank-and-file were discontent with the leadership."
"Amicus union leader Derek Simpson said Labour was set for a general election defeat if it did not change direction."
Of course, some people just cannot admit that they have done a bad job and have to divert attention onto others.
The BBC piece said that Ed Balls accused Conservative leader David Cameron of hypocrisy.
"What we are hearing is the same old conservatism that prefers a minimal state and cuts in investment and leaves the poorest and the weakest in our society dependent on charity," he said.
10% tax band removed, Mr Balls? Hypocrite!
Massive influx of cheap labour, Mr Balls? Hypocrite!!
After May's local council election humiliation for Labour, their deputy leader, Harriet Harman, said:
“I think that we have got to really listen to what people were saying when they were expressing their views in the election yesterday."
“We have to reflect and listen to what people are saying – that is the whole point about having elections in our democracy.”
Maybe they really are good at listening; they just don't care to act on what they hear.
So the answer to the headline, "Will Labour listen now," is NO!
Because they are bought and paid for by global corporate and banking interests. They have been commandeered to look after the interests of the few while enslaving the masses through overbearing taxation, intrusion into our lives, weakening of the family, Christian influence and strong, decent communities so that the elite they serve can micromanage us out of the chaos and confusion they create.
Are any of the other mainstream parties much different?
Here is the full result from Glasgow East:
* John Mason, SNP - 11,277
* Margaret Curran, Labour - 10,912
* Davena Rankin, Conservative - 1,639
* Ian Robertson, Lib Dem - 915
* Frances Curran, Scottish Socialist Party - 555
* Tricia McLeish, Solidarity - 512
* Dr Eileen Duke, Scottish Greens - 232
* Chris Creighton, Independent - 67
* Hamish Howitt, Freedom 4 Choice - 65
Turnout: 42.25%
The by-election was necessitated by the resignation of Labour's David Marshall on health grounds.
Monday, July 07, 2008
Pretty in Pink: The Clown Prince of London at the End of a Very Bad Week
To show my willingness to write about bad politics across the board, I introduce another of my new websites: theconservativeparty.org.uk which asks, "Are the Tories suitable candidates to take over from Labour in this 'left-right' charade that is British politics?"
I will be concentrating on thelabourparty.org as long as the global banking cartel, transnational corporations, eugenicists, unelected think tanks, Eurocrats and UN bodies are using the Labour Party to control the British people.
This article's headline refers to London Mayor, Boris Johnson's appearance in yesterday's "Gay Pride" parade in the capital. Picture: Daily Mail.
Mr Johnson supported Section 28, which barred local councils, including schools, from promoting homosexuality. Despite being assured, just a few years ago, that ditching this piece of allegedly unnecessary legislation would not lead to homosexuality being promoted in schools, the opposite is happening.
Johnson once remarked that, "If gay marriage was OK - and I was uncertain on the issue - then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men; or indeed three men and a dog."
You cannot say he doesn't recognise a slippery slope when he sees one.
Also making an appearance in the parade were members of the British Army, Royal Air Force and Royal Navy.
The Times reports that, "The new orders allowed servicemen to wear full military uniform, but decorum was strictly enforced yesterday. Whistles, banners and decorations were not allowed. The units marched in neat formation amongst revellers, avoiding eye contact with the public."
I expect we will have to wait until next year to watch our servicemen and women dress as transvestites. That will make the enemy quiver in their boots, won't it?
I suppose all this helped the Mayor forget about the resignation of his deputy, Ray Lewis.
While newspaper reports mull over alleged sexual and financial misdemeanours, a press release has Mr Lewis saying that these are completely unfounded.
Mr Johnson believes that his "deputy Mayor Ray Lewis is being made to suffer now because he has had the guts to serve in this administration and because he has had the courage to speak out against a stifling orthodoxy that has failed too many of our children."
I certainly will not argue that much of what has become orthodox today is counter-productive, shambolic and downright wicked. How are youngsters supposed to know how to behave when they are bombarded with different messages about right and wrong?
One example being sex. In times past, the issue of whether or not to engage in sexual activity involved issues such as morality, self-worth, purity and concern about pregnancy and the resulting need to do the right thing should it happen, but now all this has been reduced by government and the media to the 'importance of taking precautions,' which rules out personal responsibility in all areas of normal human relationships, thus attempting to reduce youngsters to less than animals, devoid of instincts like fidelity, trust and honour and depriving them of the benefit of building a strong family.
Boris Johnson made a major error earlier in the week, in my opinion, when he advised youngsters not to intervene if they saw a fight.
The message is a U-turn of his utterance last year that people should take a risk and tackle thugs.
The police have been engineered to be more concerned with trivialities than serious crime and the Mayor now expects the public to be neutered as well: everyone powerless and pathetic against the darker elements in our society.
Doesn't it all make you proud to be British?
As Deborah Orr writes in The Independent, "Be afraid. Be very afraid. But try not to forget that fear is the enemy."
One of my favourite pieces of scripture is this:
"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casteth out fear: because fear hath torment. He that feareth is not made perfect in love." 1 John 4:18
Finally and politics aside, my condolences go to Boris Johnson, his wife and family on the death Sir Charles Wheeler, foreign correspondent for the BBC and father of the Mayor's wife.
Friday, April 25, 2008
Britain's Police Responses - Spot the Difference
Britain's Police Responses - Spot the Difference .........
by Stewart Cowan, 24/4/08
This article is also up on PrisonPlanet.com
Garry Newlove was kicked to death outside his house by a gang of drunken teenagers after he confronted them about vandalism.
His widow, Helen, has warned MPs at a Home Affairs Select Committee about the serious faults with police and court procedures.
Among a catalogue of complaints, she said that police had turned a blind eye to a series of incidents before her husband's murder.
“Garry saved somebody from a beating but the police came after the event so there was no policing. We were told down the telephone that we were 15th down the line as they were too busy in Warrington town centre."
Compare this to the police response a few days ago to a group of elderly bowlers who were playing a protest game about increased fees at a municipal green. Within ten minutes two policemen arrived in a car, followed by three more police cars with sirens wailing.
An anonymous caller had said a burglary was taking place, but the police soon realised this was not true.
I am not choosing rare examples of polar opposites; Britain has become infamous for this tale of two attitudes.
On the one hand, drunken youths strut around brazenly terrorising estates while the police have become almost impotent.
On the other hand, disproportionate force is used on normally law-abiding citizens who are not a real threat to anyone.
Is it because the police forces are full of cowards who choose to pick on soft targets like pensioners or schoolchildren name-calling or innocent bystanders taking photographs rather than tackle a gang of out-of-control drunken thugs who might have knives?
I am sure that a lot of policemen join the force with a genuine desire to fight real crime, so why do we constantly hear of extremely petty and trivial police action when so many people are being tormented by real criminals?
Many people are awakening to the fact that a surveillance state with systems of conditioning and control is being quickly assembled.
The real criminals do not really matter. They help the 'authorities' instil fear in the law-abiding citizens.
This everyday serious crime and the 'war on terror' condition the public to allow the Government to remove freedoms their forefathers fought for in return for what they think are measures to keep them safe.
It is the majority that is being taught to accept being looked at by cameras everywhere and be questioned by one 'authority' or another and to be scared to say what they really want to in case they are heard saying the 'wrong' thing.
If you search on Labour's official website you will not find a lot about their famous promise that they would be "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".
I found this reference from last year here:
"Labour’s first priority is the safety and security of our citizens and communities. This is at the heart of everything we do. We’ve made the fight against crime and anti-social behaviour our priority. Britain is safer under Labour.
In 1997 we promised to be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime, and we have done just that."
So just ignore reality, trust government statistics and wait for the knock on the door about something you said, while your granny has just been raped and murdered down the road an hour after calling the police about someone behaving suspiciously in her garden.
by Stewart Cowan, 24/4/08
This article is also up on PrisonPlanet.com
Garry Newlove was kicked to death outside his house by a gang of drunken teenagers after he confronted them about vandalism.
His widow, Helen, has warned MPs at a Home Affairs Select Committee about the serious faults with police and court procedures.
Among a catalogue of complaints, she said that police had turned a blind eye to a series of incidents before her husband's murder.
“Garry saved somebody from a beating but the police came after the event so there was no policing. We were told down the telephone that we were 15th down the line as they were too busy in Warrington town centre."
Compare this to the police response a few days ago to a group of elderly bowlers who were playing a protest game about increased fees at a municipal green. Within ten minutes two policemen arrived in a car, followed by three more police cars with sirens wailing.
An anonymous caller had said a burglary was taking place, but the police soon realised this was not true.
I am not choosing rare examples of polar opposites; Britain has become infamous for this tale of two attitudes.
On the one hand, drunken youths strut around brazenly terrorising estates while the police have become almost impotent.
On the other hand, disproportionate force is used on normally law-abiding citizens who are not a real threat to anyone.
Is it because the police forces are full of cowards who choose to pick on soft targets like pensioners or schoolchildren name-calling or innocent bystanders taking photographs rather than tackle a gang of out-of-control drunken thugs who might have knives?
I am sure that a lot of policemen join the force with a genuine desire to fight real crime, so why do we constantly hear of extremely petty and trivial police action when so many people are being tormented by real criminals?
Many people are awakening to the fact that a surveillance state with systems of conditioning and control is being quickly assembled.
The real criminals do not really matter. They help the 'authorities' instil fear in the law-abiding citizens.
This everyday serious crime and the 'war on terror' condition the public to allow the Government to remove freedoms their forefathers fought for in return for what they think are measures to keep them safe.
It is the majority that is being taught to accept being looked at by cameras everywhere and be questioned by one 'authority' or another and to be scared to say what they really want to in case they are heard saying the 'wrong' thing.
If you search on Labour's official website you will not find a lot about their famous promise that they would be "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".
I found this reference from last year here:
"Labour’s first priority is the safety and security of our citizens and communities. This is at the heart of everything we do. We’ve made the fight against crime and anti-social behaviour our priority. Britain is safer under Labour.
In 1997 we promised to be tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime, and we have done just that."
So just ignore reality, trust government statistics and wait for the knock on the door about something you said, while your granny has just been raped and murdered down the road an hour after calling the police about someone behaving suspiciously in her garden.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
