Thursday, 29 October 2009


If the current Government were a patient of the NHS, they would have pulled the plug ages ago.

I am fed up of 60’s socialist, uninformed, over educated, elitist snobs lecturing me on how things should be run. The same people that focused all their energy on rallies and opposing the government aka “rule of law” are now the law. In Britain, our government is going down the tubes and fast. We see every week the recession is getting worse, unemployment skyrocketing and the national debt out of control. Despite all that, our spineless, directionless government are arguing about how much money they are not making from expenses. Take the fact that immigration is at unsustainable levels and the national identity is almost nonexistent, you would forgive the average law abiding, taxpaying, caring and charitable citizen the chance to be a little pissed off.

While millions are finding it impossible to find jobs and the employed getting tired and overstretched at their current jobs, a crisis is looming in Britain. Over the last 3 weeks the postal union has walked out over 7 times complaining about, among other things, pay!! and there are more strikes to come. Yet the government stays silent. Why is it that the decent average citizen is always the one to clear up the union and government mess? Where is their say? Folks will say “Elections Stupid”. I would say, why the hell has there not been an election? Answer... Gordon Brown. No spine or will to fight. He is almost the Neville Chamberlain of my generation. Rose tinted spectacles about life and the economy, no enemies just people like Hitler upset about something he had for breakfast, “oh he won’t hurt a fly”!!! When an election was essential he buckled and refused because he was going to lose. Whatever happened to the idea of Country First?
Unfortunately, the current political parties are stuck; they are still arguing about the poor and failings in society, when the real monstrosity is the fact that millions are still not able to find a bloody job. Not once have I heard any politician in Question Time or PMQ’s ask about what can be done to get people working again. All we get from Brown is statements about jobless benefits. Where are the calls to make things easier for people to hire? What about the people who lost jobs as a result of Gordon Brown’s socialist agenda and are still not finding jobs? Yet all he can say is that you will get a cheque for £50 for your troubles of unemployment. That sums up Brown to a tee, gutless and a disgrace. A leader is someone that can inspire, if not, be someone you admire. If he is really working hard to solve the problem, then people will understand that and at least be proud of that. Is Brown really working hard? He is going to meeting after meeting and not accomplishing anything. I mean, have you noticed that he really has done one thing of note since he was crowned as Prime Minister.
If I were advising the Prime Minister (btw, I wouldn’t take it even if he begged me) I would suggest the following solutions to the problems which he has caused:


Lower Taxes on Business if less is going to the government in profits, then more resources can be put into employing additional staff and expanding companies. Secondly, I would issue you an ultimatum to the postal union or any union. Get back to work, or find that you job has been taken by the millions who have lost jobs. Then when the idiots file for unemployment, they receive no benefits from the government. Why should the tax payer assist you when you walked out on them?

National Debt

Socialist fruit cakes will say that if we pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan and any foreign policy situations, then the debt will be wiped out. I would say that if the idea of war is protecting freedom and killing terrorists then we should definitely stay the course and win, ALL THE TIME. However, if our goal is not to win and pay lip service to terror, then for the sake of our armed services and country we withdraw. Tony Blair believed in the war and its necessity for winning. Gordon Brown seems not to care at all. Based on that, I would withdraw and blame Brown for the chaos that will ensue. Secondly, I would scrap the idea of Redistribution of Wealth. It is a nice idea but one that can only be implemented and justified when the sun is shining. The government needs money and with fewer people paying taxes, they will have to make money somehow. By making everyone pay a fair share across the board flat tax that should put more money in the government coffers. Thirdly, CUT SPENDING. Efficiency and quality is needed now more than ever. The government needs to carry out a comprehensive overhaul of what we are spending. Cut the waste and make sure that service being provided is up to scratch. Fourthly, I would tackle illegal immigration hard. Track down the thousands of people that are draining our resources in benefits and halfway houses.

After those discussions and with all those plans in place (in my dreams) I would give Brown one last piece of advice:


Tuesday, 13 October 2009


Life is good for the President. He flies off to Copenhagen with Oprah in Air Force One to plug for the 2016 Olympics for his home state of Chicago. His reward for that bold and energetic move was that Chicago finished dead last in the vote.
Bruised ego or what??
Then cometh the hour cometh the academics. Last Friday Barack Hussein Obama was awoken to the news that 5 academics from Denmark decided as consolation for the Olympic snub, to award Obama the “Nobel” Peace” Prize. The chairman of the Nobel Committee was a person by the name of Thorbjorn Jagland, who happens to be a long-time leader of Socialist International. Socialist helps out Socialist what a surprise. Then the walking Teleprompter gave a mesmerizing speech about the award at the Rose Garden and talked about all his accomplishment for those, oh so productive 11 days of appeasement. What could be better than following in the footsteps of Yasser Arafat, Al Gore and Jimmy Carter???

He must have sat down that evening really pleased with himself and thought that he could do no wrong. However for those living on Planet Earth there are more pressing details that have been left waiting on the Presidents in tray that really matter to the American People.

Why has he completely ignored his commander in Afghanistan about troop levels? Troops are dying, morale is low and we are arguably losing the war. The report has been on his desk for almost 2 months but no word on a possible authorisation or new plan for winning the war. All we get from his Press Secretary Robert Gibbs is: “we are taking our time to evaluate all options to ensure that we get it right”. That answer is BS if you asked me. If they cared so much about getting it right then why have they rushed and continue to force down their expensive domestic agenda? Stimulus, TARP II, Health Care, Home Foreclosure, GM, Chrysler, AIG, bonuses, the list goes on.

The answer is simple: Obama is not trying but actively running the Carter Second Term.

Jimmy Carter was able to swing with force when the political wind was on his side. All of his accomplishments were only able to be carried out because the polls endorsed his idea. Whilst he should take some credit for the Egypt - Israel Peace Deal all he did was host the party, Begin and Sadat were ready to make peace it didn’t matter what venue. The Iran hostage crisis was difficult for Carter to deal with and the polls were mixed, so he ignored it for 444 days and was ridiculed for it. What happened then is much like what Obama is doing now in his reluctance to make the really tough decisions which will eventually be his undoing. The Afghanistan Dithering this week, next month it will be unemployment, the month after that it will be the collapse of the Dollar. All this could have been avoided if he actually took his time and focused on making proper decisions based on facts not ideology and focus groups.

What Obama needs is a major wake up call, however it must come from the American People. He has to made aware in no uncertain terms that his policies are not only tanking but destroying the fabric of American Society. Since he doesn’t have the leadership skills or the moral
fibre to reverse course on the same level that George W. Bush did with Iraq and the surge, America must prepare themselves for a rocky ride as things will only get worse.

Arise Jimmy the Second!

Monday, 24 August 2009


The disgraceful ruling from the United Kingdom to release unrepentant terrorist Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi early from a life sentence on “compassionate” grounds should make your blood boil. The fact that Gordon Brown and Peter Mandelson not only allowed but championed the idea makes me sick to my stomach.
Talking about sick, reports suggest that Convicted Ponzi schemer Bernie Madoff is dying of cancer in his North Carolina prison cell. Surely Kenny MacAskill, First Minister Alex Salmond, Prime Minster Brown and Peter Mandelson should be screaming for his early release on the same grounds of compassion?

Thursday, 6 August 2009


With America deeply in divided about President Obama’s healthcare bill, the Republic must stand up as one. Fair-minded Americans are seeing what this bill will do and are voicing their concerns loud and clear. In August the entire congress goes on leave for the summer recess. The majority of congressmen go back to their states and hold town hall meetings. Every single senator, representative and congressional aide is being bombarded with angry messages from constituents, and rightfully so.

Senator Jim De-Mint of North Carolina, a Republican, has voiced serious concerns about the “reform” that Obama is proposing. Obama has responded by using a prime time press conference to demonise the Senator and accuse doctor’s of major ethics violations just for the sake of the money. Now I know that the president is arrogant and to suggest that he isn’t is ludicrous. However, an alarming pattern is starting to develop. 200 days ago, Americans were drawn into Obama’s ‘new dawn’ but are now feeling the heat. Some would say that was just blind faith. I say that Obama is one of the greatest snake-oil salesmen in American history and you can’t simply blame his victims. For all of their faults President Clinton and George W Bush, respected the voters and honestly saw America as a shining city upon a hill whose beacon guides freedom-loving people everywhere. It’s clear from his speeches and deference to dictators and tyrants around the world that Obama sees America as the aggressor and as being the problem not the solution. On that view, the American people need to begin responding now. The next midterm elections are scheduled for November 2, 2010: and that is where the first major battle will be joined.

But the strategy must be prepared right now.

The American people are disillusioned with both political parties and have lost trust in their elected lawmakers. They feel that American pride is being sullied for the sake of European plaudits and that their independence and future prosperity are being ground down into socialism under the guise of a recovery plan. Sooner or later the voters will become too weary to fight back. The Republic needs a tough-minded, strong-willed and patriotic individual to lead from the front. In short they need a new Ronald Reagan.
Someone who couldn’t care less what Europeans or others think of America because he is a champion of the decent values that America is all about. America at this moment in time is drifting into the abyss of European-style Socialism. Take it from a Brit living with the failings of socialised medicine, multiculturalism and open borders; you don’t want to go anywhere near this.

America needs a clearly contrasting alternative now and one that can offer real hope and genuine change. The new Reagan must be common-sense minded and be untainted by the current congress. That person must be willing to say what they mean and mean what they say. And speak from the heart, not the teleprompter. If I were to pit one individual against Obama in 2012 they would have to be able to engage him as forcefully on the economy as on foreign policy. People have said that Sarah Palin could be the one, or Mitt Romney. Both of them, in my opinion, are solid VP picks but don’t quite cut the mustard. My choice is Newt Gingrich.

America’s leadership needs to be grounded in common sense not cuffed in ideology. For Clinton the issue was the deficit. For Bush II it was 9/11 and the war on terror. Both of them fought hard for America’s values of freedom and prosperity. Obama is rubbishing the efforts of these predecessors and throwing them down the toilet of Socialism. If the American people ever wake up to this, they will find themselves living in a nanny state within a union that has lost its leadership of the free world.

America: I am going to be honest with you right now. You were first dazzled by the Obama dawn, then blinded to the swift erosion of American principles and are now feeling distinctly burned. This was not a warming sunrise but a burst of toxic radiation.

Take heart from the Iranian dissidents who felt their votes were stolen. Those who Obama was so slow to support and encourage. America’s votes were also stolen – in your case by a slick-talking snake oil salesman backed by a fawning media who would see and hear no evil and bought and paid-for by left-wing billionaires opposed to the very idea of nation statehood.

Unlike Iran, America is still a free society. People can make a stand without disappearing in the middle of the night. Start telling your elected representatives what you consider to be the right things to do and to represent common sense. Obama isn’t going to change, his books and rhetoric are clear for all to see.

The declaration reads: WE THE PEOPLE not WE THE GOVERNMENT.
People make a difference not governments. Look at Joanna Lumley in the UK who fought for the Ghurkhas and won against all the odds. History teaches us that when you focus your mind and your intentions are honest and true, you will succeed. It may be difficult but that’s life. Did you think that the abolition of slavery was easy for Lincoln?

Those who think Obama and the current congress are destroying the very fabric of the great nation they grew up in must speak up now or risk losing the freedoms they have long taken for granted.

Invest in real solutions not fake stimulus. Invest in ideas that enrich and empower people not the porked-up carcass of government.

Commonsense leadership needs to step up to the plate now.
Opening batsman: Newt Gingrich.
Read his books, watch his blog at Newt.Org
Judge for yourself.

Wednesday, 24 June 2009


FOX News' Major Garrett presses President Obama on toughening stance on Iranian protests. Could this be the first tough question that President Obama has faced from the media?

Decide for yourself and see what he had to say.

Tuesday, 23 June 2009


As the voices of the Iranian people are struggling to be heard, it is essential that our elected leaders and the international community speak up for freedom.

I believe very much in the looking at history and learning from it. President Barack Obama has stated throughout this crisis that he doesnt want America to be used as a political pawn so he is staying out of it. Whereas if you turn back to 1981 and watch the link below, you will be amazed to see what President Reagan had to say during a similar crisis.

Sunday, 7 June 2009


Who could have forgotten that picture??? This picture was taken September 2006 after Tony Blair finally informed the public of the date that he would be stepping down as Prime Minister.

What people may not remember is that seven Ministerial Parliamentary aides quit in protest at Tony Blair’s refusal to name the day of his resignation.
I still remember that day and watching the news with astonishment at what Gordon Brown had done to Tony Blair. I was incensed, not because I am a massive Tony Blair supporter, but I simply didn’t like the idea that he was being lynched. Tony Blair had just recently led his Labour Party to a 3rd consecutive general election victory and here you had a power hungry chancellor, orchestrating the downfall of one of the most successful prime ministers in British history.

Nevertheless, Mr. Blair was forced to announce a date that he would be resigning, which then sparked a Labour leadership election. Unfortunately, there was not a soul around other than Gordon Brown that had the credentials and the authority to take on the leadership, which consequently resulted in Brown becoming Prime Minister.

Why am I talking now about events that took place in 2006?

If you haven’t followed the news this week then please let me give you a brief update:

• On Thursday night, James Purnell resigned from the cabinet and insisted that Gordon Brown resign as leader of the Labour Party.
• The next day, when the PM was carrying out an emergency cabinet reshuffle, he learned that 3 more members of his cabinet had resigned along with 2 MPs. The latter would now spark a by-election.
• The public learned that the PM was desperate to move Chancellor Alistair Darling and promote his buddy Ed Balls. Reports indicate that the PM asked Mr. Darling to resign but the Chancellor stood firm therefore asking Brown to sack him.
• Caroline Flint was one of the Cabinet members who resigned and she left with a parting shot to the PM by saying in a letter “I have the greatest respect for the women who have served as full members of Cabinet and for those who attend as and when required. However, few are allowed into your inner circle. Several of the women attending Cabinet — myself included — have been treated by you as little more than female window dressing. I am not willing to attend Cabinet in a peripheral capacity any longer.”
• Unconfirmed reports indicate that Foreign Secretary David Miliband was persuaded by Lord Mandelson not to resign.
• Gordon Brown invited Sir Alan Sugar, the host of the reality TV show “The Apprentice” to join his government as an Enterprise Tsar.

On top of all of that, there were local and European elections in the country last Thursday that have already seen Labour post record losses before even counting the European election votes.

So it seems like the whole of Gordon Brown’s political life is coming crashing down upon him. For me, his demise is sweet. Some people believe in the idea of putting your country first. Brooding Prime Minister Brown seems to have other priorities and his lust for power has come back to haunt him. What Labour colleagues are doing to Gordon Brown is exactly what Brown did to Blair in 2006. If Tony Blair opts to toast Gordon Brown’s demise with a broad smile on his face, who would deny him that?

People will soon start writing Brown’s political obituary and will look for a cause of death. My answer won’t be the expense scandal, the recession, smears or his appaling handling of the Ghurkhas. Whilst these certainly cut him up, the death blow for Brown’s permiership came on the October 6th 2007 in an interview with Andrew Marr of the BBC when he called off a general election. Ever since then, he has struggled to regain the authority he once had on the world stage as Chancellor.

The only thing that Sir Alan Sugar will be telling Gordon Brown of any significance is…………


Friday, 8 May 2009

Newt - AIPAC 09

The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) Policy Conference 2009 took place this week, where throngs of lobbyists descended onto Capitol Hill in Washington to hear leading voices in American & Israeli politics discuss pressing issues.
One of the leading voices who spoke at that conference, was Former Speaker of the House of Representatives, Newt Gingrich. I sincerely hope that Mr Gingrich will run for President of the United States in 2012 and provide a real opponent for Barack Obama. If Mr Gingrich does become President, then the Jewish people can be certain of a rock solid friend who will not bow down to Saudi Kings and send over $900 million dollars of “aid” to a terrorist organisation.

I found his speech incredible and wanted to share it with you.

I have copied the text of his speech and posted the link below.



Newt Gingrich: Thank you, Donna. And I thank all of you for that warm welcome. The report
you just got from Jarrod and Darius is both a sign of what can be done to increase the pressure on
Iran at a practical, nonviolent, common sense way, and also a sign of what AIPAC achieves,
because their involvement first as students and now as leaders in their own right, was a direct
product of a leadership effort that I know that Howard Kohr and others made in order to broaden
dramatically the understanding for all Americans that AIPAC is not just about Israel. AIPAC is
about the American-Israel relationship, because the future of America and Israel are inexplicably
intertwined. A world which destroys Israel will certainly destroy the United States.
So we have a unique self interest in also having a broader interest. The fact is that the threats
around the world are real, they are imminent, and they require us as a nation to have a serious
adult conversation about reality. When the Polish people began rebelling against communism
after the historic visit of Pope John Paul the II for nine days in June of 1979, part of their effort
was a slogan. They said two plus two equals four. I know that may seem a little strange, but it
came in part from George Orwell's novel, 1984, in which the torturer on behalf of the state says,
"If we tell you two plus two equals five, it equals five. And if we tell you two plus two equals
three, it equals three. And who are you to dispute us?"
And the Polish people said, "No. If you tell us two plus two equals five, you're lying. If you tell
us two plus two equals three, you're lying." And so as a contest between the authoritarian effort
to impose falsehood and the right of a free people to tell the truth and have an honest debate, we
are actually engaged in the same contest today, in which many of our elites around the world are
utterly incapable of telling the truth, and utterly incapable of standing up for the truth, and utterly
incapable of having the courage to confront evil, no matter how obvious it is. Just a little over a
week ago, the Holocaust was remembered, and we heard words. But we need to understand the
difference between words and policies, between sentiments and actions, because we are at a very
dangerous time.
I would carry you back, as a former history teacher, to three other years that ended in nine. One
hundred years ago, in 1909, virtually no one in Edwardian England would've believed that the
British empire was about to be shattered, that a generation of young men was about to be
slaughtered, that the wealth they had accumulated for over a century was about to be spent, that
within a very few years, the Romanov empire, the Habsburg empire, the Wilhelmine empire,
would all disappear, and that their world would never fully recover from the shattering cost of
the First World War. Just 70 years ago, in May of 1939, decent people were trying desperately to
avoid the reality of Adolf Hitler. It's grandly painful to look back and to realize that those who
could see understood, and in fact, whether it was Winston Churchill or a group of younger
Tories, most of who had served in World War I and knew the horrors of war and therefore were
determined to stop Hitler before he became too successful and before he became too powerful.
But the agony of 1939, of what Churchill once said was the unnecessary war -- President
Franklin Delano Roosevelt asked him, "What should call this war?"
And he said, "We should call it the unnecessary war." He said, "No war was easier to avoid, if at
any point in the 1930s the democracies had had the courage to act in unison." But
they didn't. And in fact, Stanley Baldwin lied to the British people, reassured them when he
should've frightened them, told them they were fine when they were not safe at all, and
tragically, ended up very popular for the moment -- and so guilty that on his 90th birthday in
1945, Churchill would not send him greetings; on the grounds that millions had died because his
leadership had been such a failure.
Now go back 30 years, to 1979. When the world was teetering -- it's hard for us to remember
now -- but in 1979, the Soviet empire was on the march. It was inevitable. It was powerful. All
of our elites knew that we had to find détente, a fancy French word meaning understanding. And
everybody -- conservatives wanted to have détente, where we yelled at the Russians while we
lost. Liberals wanted to have détente where we hugged them while we lost, but all of our elites
knew that the Soviet empire was on the march, that our future was grim. A French intellectual
wrote a book called the end of democracy.
And along came one person. Callista and I just released a movie about him, called Ronald
Reagan, Rendezvous with Destiny. A -- a reporter asked Reagan, "What's your vision of the end
of the cold war?"
He said, "We win. They lose." The elites were terrified. The entire New York Times editorial
board contemplated moving to New Zealand. Reagan understood something very profound. He
understood, first of all, the American people tend to identify with sports, and they would
understand the word "we" -- and they would think that we should win. It was bold, it was radical.
CBS News never did quite get it. And he understood that they would understand "they," and
think that we win, they lose made sense. What was astonishing about Reagan is that in concert
with Pope John Paul the II and Prime Minister Thatcher, he actually designed a grand strategy to
bring to bear economic, political, intellectual and other pressures in such a way that within 11
years, the Soviet Union disappeared.
I cite these two examples because I think in the next few years, we will make decisions which
our grandchildren will realize meant that we were either once again in 1939 or once again in
1979. If we lack the courage to confront honestly how grave the threats are -- if we lack the
courage to describe evil as evil, and if we lack the courage to implement the policies that those
threats and that evil requires -- then in fact, we are in 1939. But if on the other hand, we are
prepared to tell the truth, and we are prepared to develop a worldwide coalition in favor of that
truth, then we will be even more surprised by the speed with which our opponents collapse, and
the degree to which those evil regimes disappear. And I think virtually -- I think in virtually
every case, if we are prepared to show great, strategic leadership, it could happen without firing a
shot. Remember, from Estonia to Latvia to Lithuania to Ukraine to Belorussia to Romania to
Hungary to the Czech Republic to Slovak Republic to Poland to East Germany, Uzbekistan,
Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan -- all leave the Soviet empire without
firing a shot.
The first key to the Reagan strategy and to the Thatcher strategy, and to the strategy that Pope
John Paul the II illustrated when he visited Poland, as we will do at the end of this month -- we're
making a movie called Nine Days That Changed the World, which we think has direct relevance
to the world we currently live in. In each case, those great leaders believed confronting evil head
on, describing it accurately, and bringing to bear the moral authority of a free people, was the
most powerful single step you could take. Now what would that mean? That would mean
absolute condemnation and defunding of Durban II and any future effort to organize hatred. That
would mean a systematic worldwide campaign to bring forth every illustration of the abuse,
destruction, enslavement, and brutality towards women which are at the heart of the extremist
wing of Islam, and are the key to the Taliban. That would mean moving to suspend Iran's right to
vote in the United Nations so long as its leader wanted genocide of Israel. That would mean
enforcing the disruption of gasoline supplies until the Iranian economy broke, the Ayatollahs
were ousted, and a new regime was in place without firing a shot. That would mean recognizing
honestly the enormous challenge of growing in Gaza a force for peace and prosperity and
freedom that was capable of taking on Hamas and capable of defeating Hamas, because as long
as Hamas dominates Gaza, there is no partner for peace, there is only an effort for genocide and
The great tragedy of the last administration was that it combined two enormous weaknesses that
were not characteristic of President Reagan or Prime Minister Thatcher or Pope John Paul II.
One you almost certainly will agree with. The other may shock you. The first was it was
inarticulate; and that's an enormous, enormous disadvantage, because a free society has to be
able to win the moral case that what it is doing is necessary, unavoidable, and morally legitimate.
The current administration will not be inarticulate.
There's a deeper challenge. It's a challenge that the last administration had, and that I very much
fear this administration has. The threats we are faced with are far more catastrophic than any of
our leaders are willing to talk about, and the challenges of unlocking those catastrophes are much
harder than any of our leaders have been prepared to talk about. The challenge of the Bush
administration wasn't that it tried too much; it was that it underestimated dramatically how hard
this is going to be.
Fixing Pakistan, which in some ways is the most dangerous country in the world today because
they already have probably over 100 nuclear weapons -- fixing Pakistan is an enormous problem.
Defeating the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in the northwest and in Afghanistan is an enormous
problem. Stopping a determined Iranian theocracy with its secret police and its Republican
Guards so that they do not get nuclear weapons, they do not fund Hamas, they do not fund
Hezbollah, they are not the leading exporter of terrorism in the world, is an enormous problem.
Recognizing that the leading funder of Sunni extremism on the planet is Saudi Arabia, and that
rather than bow to the king, we need a national energy policy to liberate the United States. Make
no mistake, an American energy policy developing American sources of -- of oil, American
sources of natural gas, American sources of coal, American sources of hydrogen, American
sources of biofuels, American sources of solar, of nuclear, and of wind -- an all-points system to
maximize American freedom from the Middle East would be the most powerful national security
policy. It was the deliberate driving down of the price of oil which bankrupted Gorbachev and
the Soviet Union, and if we made the same strategy, of deliberately driving down the price of oil,
the Iranians would presently not have the money to subsidize terrorism around the world.
Let me take just a minute to talk about the scale of the catastrophes -- and I want to do this, you
know -- I actively got involved when I was very young. My dad was a career solider, an
infantryman in the U.S. army in World War II, Korea, and Vietnam. I grew up traveling around
the world. I was born in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. And we were stationed in Orleans, France
when I was a freshman in high school. And we were living in a country that had been badly
damaged in World War I, bombed in World War II, lost the war in Algeria -- or was losing the
war in Algeria, had lost the war in South Vietnam, or Indochina, as it was then called. They had
100 percent inflation. Literally the summer we were there, the French paratroopers came to Paris,
killed the fourth republic and brought back General de Gaulle, who created the Fifth Republic, of
which President Sarkozy is now the latest example -- the most stable French government since
the monarchy.
And as a young kid from Pennsylvania, this was all wild. And then my dad took us, that spring,
to Verdun, the largest battlefield of World War I. And we -- this was a huge valley, in which
600,000 French and German soldiers lost their lives in a nine-month campaign. And we spent
every day touring this huge battlefield, and we stayed at night with a friend of my father's who
had been drafted in 1941, sent to the Philippines, served in the Bataan Death March, and spent
three and a half years in a Japanese prison camp. And so I looked at this extraordinary weekend -
- the great battlefields at day, the cost of defeat at night. I was going to be either a zoo director or
a vertebrate paleontologist. And I loved the natural world, and we were transferred that summer
to Stuttgart. And I literally spent the whole summer praying and thinking about what I had
experienced that weekend. And in August of 1958, I decided to do what I've done ever since.
So what I'm about to say to you is from my heart, and from everything I've learned in almost 51
years. We are on the edge of catastrophic problems. If you get a chance, read my good friend Bill
Forstchen's novel, One Second After, which describes the fate of a small town after an
electromagnetic pulse attack. This book was inspired by a report that Congressman Roscoe
Bartlett got seven nuclear physicists of enormous experience in our nuclear weapons industry to
jointly produce.
It's based on fact, it is accurate, and it's horrifying, and we have zero national strategy to respond
to it today. Actually three small nuclear weapons at the right altitude would eliminate all
electricity production in the United States, which is why I have said publicly I favor taking out
Iranian and North Korean missiles on their sites. We need to break the lawyer's sophistry that all
nations are equal, and we need to draw a sharp line that says if you have an evil regime, and you
engage in evil things, we are not going to let you fire off weapons would could have catastrophic
results -- period. The decent, the honorable and the law-abiding cannot survive by trying to apply
the same standards to the evil, the aggressive, the criminal and the vicious.
The second great threat is one or more nuclear weapons going off either in an American city or
an Israeli city or a European city or a Japanese city -- wherever they went off. They would have
horrifying consequences. And I strongly recommend Alex Berenson, a New York Times reporter
who recently wrote a novel called The Silent Man, which is about an effort to set off a
Hiroshima-sized weapon in the Washington D.C. area at the time of a State of the Union. And
recognize a Hiroshima-sized weapon has a radius of one mile. There are over 100,000 people in
that zone. The idea that you could stop them from driving it in a truck is a fantasy. This is an
enormous threat to our very survival.
You've watched the reaction to swine flu. An engineered biological attack, whether it was an
engineered virus or it was an anthrax attack, would have horrifying implications and be
staggering. And I'm not telling you these things to frighten you. I'm telling you these things for
the same reason you tell your children to put on their seat belts. We as a country need to develop
some national security seat belts. And then we need to recognize that there are some regimes you
will never be able to cut a deal with, because they are in fact evil.
I just want to make two last points. I don't know quite what that is, but I'm going to take the risk
of saying it anyway. The first is that talking in good faith with Adolf Hitler and seeking
reconciliation with Adolf Hitler would've been a complete dead loser, because he was in fact the
personification of evil, and as long as he was in charge, all humanity was at risk. Ahmadinejad,
if he gets the weapons, will be every bit as evil as Hitler. He tells us this all the time, and only
our unwillingness to admit that two plus two equals four blocks us from seeing what he is doing.
And finally, I want you to feel very comfortable going back home, telling all of your neighbors
and your friends you're involved in AIPAC because you're involved in the largest single
organization dedicated to the survival of their children and their grandchildren by confronting
danger head on and ensuring American safety fully as much as Israeli safety, because the two are
permanently intertwined. There is civilization, and there is anti-civilization. AIPAC personifies
being committed to our children and our grandchildren living in civilization. And if your friends
ask you why you're involved, I hope you'll turn to them and say, "Gosh, why aren't you involved
when it is your future for your children and your grandchildren." Thank you very, very much.

Wednesday, 25 March 2009


So Likud will form the next Israeli government under the old/new leadership of Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu. Whilst I congratulate the Likud on achieving this honour, one thinks that it might not last too long. The fact that there has been something like ‘400’ governments in the country since 1948 should tell you something about the system. Yes, people can and will blame the system and I agree it is in desperate need of reform. However, the real blame should go to the politicians and not the system. One of the things that I can’t tolerate is corruption in any walks of life but especially when it comes from elected officials. 9 times out of 10 they stay in power until they are convicted of whatever it is they are accused of doing. Yes we should live in a world of innocent until proven guilty, but when it comes to running our country we must ensure that people have trust in the officials that they elected. Prime Minister Ehud Olmeret has been under investigation for it seems like forever now but you would have thought that he’d have stepped down by now until everything was cleared up. WRONG. He stayed on and on and on and has totally discredited the office of Prime Minister of Israel. So yes, at the same time as it is refreshing to see Ehud Olmeret finally leave the public arena, I am still very sceptical as I think most of the Israeli electorate are about the immediate future.

We can discuss the policies of the new Likud led government till the cows come home but for now Bibi has a huge problem on his hands.


The fact that Likud didn’t get a majority of the mandates on election night is a worry for Bibi. Kadima were in ruins, Olmeret was disgraced and Schalit was still being held by Hamas. You would think that all Bibi had to do was show up and he would have won handsomely, but the Israeli’s simply do not trust Bibi. They would have preferred to have suffered another 2 years of Kadima than to have Netanyahu behind the switch and calling the shots.

Mr Netanyahu it is time that you put an end to this! The Israeli public have suffered for far too long with the stench of corrupted officials and false promises.

My challenge to the new Prime Minister is as follows: on your first day in power when you take your seat in your new office, your first thoughts will naturally be about Iran, Gaza, Al-Qaeda, the economy, electoral reform and Schalit. All of these issues are legitimate and in urgent need of attention. In my opinion your first item of business should be to go on TV and tell the nation the following: “if any of my cabinet or party members are under any sort of investigation whatsoever, then they must resign pending the outcome of the investigation and that includes me”

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; you must win back the trust of your people. Make the pledge, hold yourself to it and remind yourself every day. Then you can move onto the next item on the agenda...... FREE GILAD SCHALIT

Friday, 27 February 2009


When President George W Bush addressed the nation for the final time he said “You may not agree with some tough decisions I have made. But I hope you can agree that I was willing to make the tough decisions”.
During the campaign trail Barack Obama made promises on a whole range of issues. He promised a ‘reasonable’ withdrawal from Iraq, A massive ‘Stimulus’ bill to help the economy and a way to get the bank’s lending again.
I have noticed that President Obama is not shying away from making enormous decisions. It is debatable as to whether or not those decisions will succeed and only time will tell. Although isn’t it refreshing to see that someone in government is actually trying to do something to sort this economic mess out rather than just talk about!!!!!

Thursday, 22 January 2009


Would you trust a guy that broke the law?

In the last few weeks President Obama’s Secretary of Treasury designate Timothy Geithner was accused and admitted to not paying income taxes between 2001 and 2004. This is the guy that is expected to run the Treasury for at least the next 4 years but can’t pay his Social Security and Medicare taxes, but he said sorry!! You are probably wondering why I am bringing this up and I will tell you. Today President Obama pledged an era of transparency from his administration. Well sir, if you really mean what you say, you should rescind the nomination of Geithner immediately. I don’t care if he is the best man for the job, but what lesson are we trying to teach where we have complete dishonesty from public officials. This guy intentionally tried to beat the system and also hired an illegal immigrant to do work at his house. If this were a private citizen, I wouldn’t give to hoots but he’s not.

Obama was elected on the inspiration of change; I will believe it when I see it. By punishing Geithner for his mistakes, he will be sending out a clear signal to all the other members of congress and public figures that they are now under the spotlight and need to act responsibly in this era of change. I don’t believe that Obama is the real deal, but I am willing to be proved wrong. The problem with Geithner may be a blessing in disguise for him. All he has to do is make a call to his Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and then he will start to truly make a difference in Washington and send real shockwaves through Capitol Hill.

Will any of the above get done?? No. Geithner will probably be approved in the coming days if not, then next week by Congress and then people’s minds will be shifted to the next issue.

Why you ask....

The answer is simple... Obama has no interest in changing the way that Washington works it was only a Campaign ploy to rock the vote and it worked. And that is my problem. I believe that he is so in the tank for the establishment that he really has no control over his party. Yes he is a great orator and his rhetoric gets people going, but I still believe that he is all hot air. Of course he wasn’t going to run on the issue of “well I am the same as everyone in my party, but please vote for me anyway”. I urge the President to seek common sense in this matter and start looking at what Ronald Reagan did to the economy. Cut taxes across the board, limit government intervention and encourage individual responsibility. It worked then, so why won’t it work now? But he won’t be doing that. He is a socialist liberal who thinks that the government is the solution to all problems. He will expand the size of an already huge government and has promised a further $1trillion dollars worth of new spending.

My question to you is... If you are in debt, what do you do? In the real world, you cut back on unnecessary expenses and budget properly. The government is in HUGE debt. Obama, Democrats and Republicans know it but they are doing the exact opposite and spending like there’s no tomorrow. All I ask is that Obama looks at the problem of the economy with a little common sense, is that so much to ask?