Monday, 27 February 2006

Women's pay gap

Since when did women have a pay gap? How come we are worrying about women earning less than men, but not about men earning less than those women complaining about women earning less than men? Who are these females who produce statistics (how reliable?) that tell them what they want to hear? Women earn less in jobs that pay less. Why do they do it? Because it suits them, because it is all there is, because they want to, the reasons are many. But like most men, they take what is available! The average wage is about £21000! Not around here it isn't! If it is £12 -15000 I would be shocked.
The women who have babies and return to work have lost confidence! Lost confidence? These browbeating selfish bitches that fill offices, shops and factories throughout this land have lost confidence? And if so what then? You want equality? Then get up like a man and get on with it! How come men never lose confidence unless they are a footballer missing open goals eh?

Enough of this nonsense! False equality, and the pursuit of mythological lifestyle agenda that is the product of the emptiness of the left in the UK does not bring satisfaction of happiness to women or anyone else! This nation is more than ever living a lie! It stresses the individual, not society, any daft idea is considered worthwhile but the long term consequences are never considered. Women, like men, ought to be treated fairly, but this type of report does not bring fairness, it merely gives Westminster women chance to be smug. And poor old Gordon Brown has to go along with it if he hopes to be the next prime minister!

We are headed for a fall, and when it comes this world will not be able to understand it, or deal with it.

Sunday, 26 February 2006

Westboro Baptist Church in Topeka, Kansas & Iraq.

Now we all know Americans are daft! Nothing they say or do can convince us otherwise. The chances of them producing a nation of highly intelligent people is of course nil, and seeking such is a waste of time and energy. But there is a limit, even for them!
This small church from somewhere in Kansas (wherever that is in the States) has taken to protesting against the war in Iraq. The understanding is that God is punishing the US for allowing homosexuals to be regarded as normal. Homosexuality is of course regarded as a sin in Christian belief and this church is loud in condemning it.
However, the form of protest which they follow has nothing to do with any bible led conviction. These folks have taken to standing outside of funerals of US soldiers killed in Iraq, and protesting loudly that this is a result of the homosexual laws.

Two things must be said here. The first is that homosexuality is wrong! The bible makes that clear. It is one of the faults in our fallen nature that Jesus died on the cross to redeem! Think on it. God inhuman form dying for those doing wrong! That is love indeed!
The second point is seen in the first. God loves sinners like us, and wants them to change their ways. In Ezekiel God tells us how he 'Does not rejoice at the death of the wicked.' He hates to see people lost.
The conclusion must be that a God who loves, even those who ignore him, would not stand outside a grieving family and demonstrate about something the family probably do not comprehend.

People misread the book all to often, don't we all, but this church has forgotten that 'in wrath, remember mercy,' and that love would not protest so thoughtlessly!

Thursday, 23 February 2006

A Day Off

Great! What can be better than having a day off? And what can be better than having a day off when the snow is falling and the wind is blowing! Great!
There again, when one has sorted the mess in the cupboard, hoovered up the mess, ironed the shirts, been round Sainsburys, completed a limited (very!) exercise routine, made a mess of fixing the laptop, and had an e-mail form someone not seen for twenty years, the idea of enjoying the time seems far fetched! For a start I have failed to sleep since five thirty this morning, I have done little reading of the dozen books I am attempting to complete, and when it came to time to relax I had to cook dinner!

On my next day off, I am doing NOTHING!

Sunday, 19 February 2006

Hitler, Fascist or Inadequate?

Adolf Hitler, the man who led Germany to war with the world, the most renowned fascist in history, or was he? Most accept without question his political stance, but the more I read about him the less I am impressed with his fascism. Adolf Hitler cared little for the right wing in my view. His concern was always for his view! The rightist leanings in Germany fitted quite well into these views but not from an ideological point, instead it was merely personal hate!
Adolf decided the Slavs in Austria were bad, and Adolf decided a lot of things when bumming around Vienna in his teens, and once Adolf made a decision then in his mind it was the right one and all opposition was irrelevant. Opposition which had an intellectual basis was especially unwelcome, more so if he understood it was a correct basis, he then just shouted it down.

Hitler turned down the opportunity to lead the Nazi party, work was never his strongpoint, but in the course of time he accepted the views of his people that he was the leader, and once he accepted this, he ensured it was to stay that way, by fair means or foul. For our Adolf had no political dream except his pathological hatred of the Slavs, soon to be the Bolsheviks, and his intention to attack them, on the basis of freedom for the German people.
But it was all nothing more than his inadequacy as a man that lay behind all he did. His shyness, his inability to relate to women, his weakness, his laziness, all forced him deep into his 'self.' From there he viewed the world in weakness, and in defence of this showed himself strong.
An opportunist who was quick to grab the half chance, but with no real agenda, political or otherwise, but defend his empty weak 'self.'

It is the 'Self,' the core of our being in which we live. Hitler shows us the full extent of the 'self' when it is given over to it's own way. Christians in particular ought to read about this man and see just how awful selfishness can be! We excuse ourselves when we go wrong, but in doing so the depth of our own depravity is hidden.
Adolf Hitler shows us a glimpse of the sin within us, the damage done when 'self' rules. It relfects the size of the task facing God in Christ Jesus when he died on the cross. 'He took my sin' they cry. But have little understanding of how deep and hurtful this was for the Messiah.
Jesus dies for me, how then can I live indulging so many aspects of my 'self?'

Friday, 17 February 2006

Do I have something to be grateful for? Then I give thanks.
But I don't!
I don't want to 'give thanks.'

Because in doing so I admit that what I have does not belong to me, but comes from God.
This is hard to accept. I want to be in control of my life. I want to make the decisions because then I am safe! I will not allow anything to hurt me, or allow anything detrimental to enter my life to unsettle me. So I will not give thanks, because that means God is in control!

A brief reading of Jesus sermon on the mount indicates Gods care for his people.
Throughout the Old Testament (which means contract between God and his people) God shows his care, his love, to his rebellious Israel. Gods heart weeps at the behaviour of his own.
His judgments which must happen, come after long years of patience with them.
God suffers when he has to take action. His heart breaks when he judges his people.
Yet, in spite of knowing this, I find myself reluctant to trust him, reluctant to let him decide what is best for me, and unable or unwilling to give myself back to him.

I want to be god in my life!

It is not as though God wants to be a totalitarian overlord. I always make the decisions regarding my actions, but God the father wants me to love him, and be his friend.
Wow! That is something.
I have to make that decision. Take all he offers or live a miserable selfish life.
And I struggle with this.......

Sunday, 12 February 2006

British Troops Assault Young Iraqis

A video of British troops under fire from large groups of young Iraq teens has been shown today. After handing out aid to a suffering people, and beginning the reconstruction of a land torn apart by a Muslim leader, who killed thousands of his own people, these troops are attacked. Stones and even a home made grenade are thrown at them by a crowd of dozens. The troops react, they charge into the mob breaking it up and seizing one or two of the lads.
Taking them into their compound they then proceed to give the rock throwers a good hiding, which they deserve!
Cue crocodile tears and massive outrage!
TV stations and radio programmes are telling us how awful these terrible scenes are. Mock indignation is occasionally tempered with a grudging agreement that 'Maybe the troops were under fire and wanted a bit of revenge?' and how! Why should British soldiers endure such attacks without reply? How can anyone condemn them for their response? 'The News of the World' a paper notorious for its delight in sex scandals and digging the dirt on anybody and anyone, feigns mock horror and shouts 'shame' and pretends it is doing this, 'in the public interest.' Nothing to do with money making then?
Where did they get this video from? Was this whistle blower there at the time? Was he concerned about 'brutality' or just in it to make a few thousand pounds, and with that thirty pieces of silver put many troops lives at risk?

In spite of the mock outrage, maybe the police in this land would be advised to learn from this how to deal with yobs. If our constabulary were to spend a few hours taking the many yobs that destroy our housing estates, and keep folks trapped indoors in fear of their lives, then maybe this country would be improved. How, by taking aside the leading thugs and giving them the treatment meted out to these rock hurlers. Within a short time discipline would be restored, folks could walk free from fear, young folk would benefit with those who wish to cause trouble being taking out of the picture.

I can hear the mock outrage growing as I write.

Muslim Cartoons

We seem stuck in a Muslim wonderland these days. Lots of words and little thinking.
The cartoons which seem to upset so many Muslims were in my view of no real offence. By showing Mohammed with a bomb in his turban merely reflected the view given to the West by Muslims worldwide, that they are a violent people. If Islam dislikes the depiction of, what they call, the prophet, then that is up to them to change. It is not for them to riot worldwide and expect the West to accept their demand for an apology.
Having said that, it is strange how we accept the constant insulting of Christianity daily in the media, but worry about upsetting Islam. To me, the Messiah being ridiculed by those ignorant, or afraid, of his message is much more important than the imagined insult suffered by followers of Islam. It is important to remember that most of this outcry has been hijacked, indeed begun by extremists in the Islamic world who want confrontation, who desire a war with the West.
It is therefore important to stand up to these people, because reason and dialogue will never have an effect on them. Appeasement of Adolf Hitler was doomed from the beginning, it will not work here!
What to do?
It is best not to do that which will deliberately annoy another. So don't go out of your way to upset them. But satire of the other man is normal in this country, and in any free land. It must continue. This can be done while respecting his opinion, even if wrong.
The point here is that like it or not, Islam MUST accept the Wests view that freedom of expression, not license, is perfectly acceptable. In the end, if they do not like the cartoons they are free to say so, but this does not mean the cartoons should be banned, or that more ought not to be produced!
It is time for Islam and it's followers to change, not the West to comply with their wishes.

Monday, 6 February 2006


Yet another Superbowl has come and gone. Yet again I missed it, well, didn't actually.
Why the Yanks think this overlong, 'poor mans rugby,' is worth all the hype is anyone's guess.
Now I can understand the enjoyment of reaching a final in any sport, just as The Heart of Midlothian will be doing shortly with the Scottish Cup, but American football, in which the ball is rarely if ever near a foot, is nothing to shout about.
Large hulking brutes bashing into one another, one wee fella throwing the ball to another, who is usually crushed beneath mountains of defenders, that is not really satisfying is it?
If he is fortunate, the catcher can run past a few of the enemy, maybe even making it over the 'End Zone,' not that such an event should be hard as it runs from one side to the other. No need to score through the posts, or even to touch the ball down, just get there.
Just how simple and easy is this game eh? If a 'Touch Down' occurs, or even if the game halts for almost any reason, a dozen players leave the field and are replaced. Why? Are they tired already?

I know that in days of yore, the thugs who attended the major universities of the United States, took to playing rugby in a very violent fashion. I understand about nine dead in one season was it? No surprise that they changed the way the game is played. But what does it say about the folk who played in that manner? American, rich, white, bully boys! That's what! A reflection on the lack of concern for others that has a deep root within the US psyche. Their generals have never been concerned about their own casualties, in my opinion, and they are certainly not concerned about the casualties of anyone else.

The game reflects something about the depth of US culture. This sport is full of muscle, but has little intellect. It is hard, but quite simple, almost pointless. Yanks are full of such sports.
The hype that attends Basketball for instance. Here again there is little in this game to excite the brain. A ball is bounced from one end to the other, points are scored, and it occurs endlessly for ludicrous high score of 88-97, or some such. Basketball was invented by a Scotsman to help rehabilitate the sick, if I understand right. He did not encourage the hype surely. US motor racing is also high powered. Cars run at two hundred miles an hour, but in nothing more than an oval circuit. Little driving skill required, as in a contested Grand Prix for instance , and here again we see the 'thin depth' of American sport.

Is it wrong?
Is it worth watching?
Is it the greatest show on earth?
Don't be silly.

Sunday, 5 February 2006


So they do not like insults to Mohammed?
Cynics would say that the violence that rampages through Muslim, and in particular Arab, society is far more offensive than a cartoon. Whether it portrays a graven image or not.
The anti religious attitude prevalent in the West may mean little to many Muslims, but they just have to accept it exists, like it or not!
Christians suffer much more from the attacks from, usually unfunny, cartoons and comments, yet manage to cope. They are unprotected from abuse. Little credence is given to their faith, and Jesus IS the Son of God, and the ONLY way to God.
Politics has an influence in these uprisings throughout the Islamic world, we need to know more of what is going on behind the scenes.
I wonder if we ever will?