There have been four major football disasters in Europe in the last 45 years – Ibrox 1971 (fans crushed) 66 dead, Heysel 1985 (fans fighting) 39 dead, Bradford 1985 (fire) 56 dead and Hillsborough 1989 (fans fighting) 96 dead. Curiously, Liverpool fans have been involved in two of these four – Heysel and Hillsborough – the two caused by rival fans fighting each other.
The Hillsborough inquiry, costing us taxpayers many millions, has finally come to a conclusion 27 years after the event – all those who died were innocent victims who were ‘unlawfully killed’. I’ve written before about how (even though my family comes from Liverpool) I suspect the whole thing is yet another attempt by whining scousers to portray themselves as eternal victims and then, in an age where nobody ever takes responsibility for their own actions, to ‘win the lottery’ by claiming vast amounts in compensation from British taxpayers.
I’m sure that in all these disasters the stadiums were dilapidated, the organisation terrible, the police reaction incompetent and then there were attempts by the authorities to cover up their own inadequacies. But in my opinion, if at Hillsborough and Heysel the fans had not behaved like a bunch of drunken, feral savages, perhaps there wouldn’t have been any need for the authorities to intervene in the first place?
However, I’ve been contacted by a reader who says he was at both Hillsborough and Heysel and so, in the interests of balance, here’s his side of the story. Readers can make up their own minds about where the truth lies – drunken, out-of control idiots from Liverpool or innocent victims of poor policing and dreadful crowd control.
“I was there. People arrived late due to major road works, joining the people outside the turnstiles. Some fans who had managed to get to Sheffield early had been to the pubs in the area, which was normal then and is normal now. Having a couple of pints and heading to a stadium to see the game and gaining access safely, even on late arrival, was a common event during the terrace stadium days. But, what happened that day could have been prevented by better police practice and better stewarding.”
“Nobody was trying to storm the turnstiles. Thousands of ticket holders became stuck outside the Leppings Lane end, due to the small number of entrances being unable to cope with the sudden and late arrivals. The police lost control of the situation. The order was given by the police to open a exit gate to let people in, to relieve the crowd pressure outside. The stadium was unable to deal with the surge through the gate, with people being forced down the tunnel behind the goal. The pen behind the goal overfilled and people were crushed to death.”
“So in my opinion, the fans could not be blamed for what happened in any way. Poor organisation of policing outside and inside the ground was very evident on the day. The lack of medical services at the stadium. A couple of ambulances allowed to the seat of the crush, with many, many more lined up in the road outside not given permission to go onto the pitch. All of theses factors caused this terrible event.”
“With regards to the Heysel tragedy, twelve months before in Rome, Liverpool fans, including many women and children had been attacked by Roma fans on exiting the stadium. Concrete and other items had been hurled down on them from a road above, injuring many fans. At Heysel a lot of Liverpool supporters had talked of not letting the Italians off if they began trouble this time.”
“Outside Heysel a number of Italians had slashed Liverpool fans with knives across the legs and backsides. Inside the stadium, zone Z was due to be a neutral area, next to the Liverpool fans. In fact it was almost full with Italians. With a small number of English in there. They came under attack from some Juventus fans. This was seen by Liverpool fans across the chicken wire fence. The Liverpool fans then charged at the Italians. They backed away causing many, many fans to be forced against the wall, which gave way. In my opinion our fans should not have charged, they should have let the police deal with the issues in zone Z. But, my feeling is the crowd had reacted due to the previous year’s events and incidents on the day.”
“What happened at both stadiums could have been prevented. Better policing at both. The wrong stadiums had been selected. Both were antiquated. The ticket allocations by the 2 football bodies left a lot to be desired. Segregation at Heysel. The larger Liverpool following at Hillsborough should have had the larger Kop end, with many more turnstiles.”
There’s a quote doing the rounds that some readers may have seen. “One day, millions of men will leave the Southern Hemisphere to go to the Northern Hemisphere. And they will not go there as friends. Because they will go there to conquer it. And they will conquer it with their sons. The wombs of our women will give us victory.”
This was supposedly taken from a speech made by Houari Boumedienne, President of Algeria at the United Nations in 1974, recorded on video & entered into the official UN protocol.
(Note: the Southern & Northern hemisphere reference dates back to ancient times in Islamic writings when the known world was centered around the Mediterranean, the South being North Africa & the North being Southern Europe from Spain to Greece)
It’s not certain that this quote is genuine as some commentators claim there is no record of it in UN archives and that it only appears on ‘white-supremacist’ websites. But I have looked at the UN archives and believe the quote may come from Petroleum, Raw Materials and Development – a memorandum submitted by Algeria on the occasion of the UN General Assembly in 1974 and then was included in a speech given by the Algerian President on April 10th 1974. So I tend to believe it may be genuine.
Anyway, whether the quote is genuine or not, here’s a not so short (18 minutes) YouTube video about the future of the West. It’s probably worth watching a few minutes:
If you don’t want this future for Britain – Vote Leave!
Worried about immigration? Worried that our schools are bursting at the seams? Worried that our NHS is collapsing under the strain of our rapidly increasing population? Worried about your children ever being able to afford their own home? Worried about the fact that 46,000 new migrants enter Britain every single month? Worried about social cohesion breaking down as M*sl*m migrants isolate themselves in their own ghettoes and refuse to integrate?
Well, as Bachman Turner Overdrive so memorably sang “b-b-b-babe you ain’t seen nothing yet. Here’s something you’ll never forget!”
I had a quick look at the EU’s website. Well somebody has to. Here are a couple of sentences that the Remain campaign would rather people didn’t pay too much attention to:
“There are currently five candidate countries for EU accession: Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey.”
“In October 2012, the Commission recommended that Albania be granted EU candidate status. In June 2014, Albania was awarded candidate status by the EU.”
The above accession candidates all have very low GDPs per capita, high unemployment, ranging from 10% through 17% and 20+% to over 49%. Almost all are basket-case economies that will siphon Brobdingnanian amounts of money out of the four EU members (Germany, UK, Netherlands and France) paying most of the bills.
The chart below shows the net contribution by country. Most EU countries take out billions more than they put in:
Why does the EU focus on such abysmally poor countries? Because they are the only ones that want to join. Richer countries like Norway, Iceland and Switzerland tell the EU to sling its hook when invited to become members. But for poor, basket-case, corrupt,mafia-run sh*tholes like Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey, joining the EU means money galore – for the elites.
As these dysfunctional failed states move towards EU membership, all their citizens will have the ‘freedom of movement’ right to escape poverty by coming to live in the richer EU countries, especially Benefits Britain where they will get money, housing, free healthcare, free education for their children and unlimited opportunities to rob, rape and murder anyone they like.
In George Osborne’s ludicrous 200-page report claiming all British households will be £4,300 worse off by 2030 if we leave the EU, he ONLY predicts another three million migrants from the EU moving to Britain. If the five ‘candidate countries’ – Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey – are allowed in, perhaps Mr Osborne should adjust the three million slightly upwards towards thirty million or even more?
I wonder how our schools and the NHS and our housing and our benefits system will cope with this deluge of the impoverished, uneducated and unemployable?
How does failed US president Obama keep a straight face when ordering the British public to vote to remain in the EU?
The US is part of NAFTA – the North American Free Trade Agreement. This was signed by Canada, Mexico and the United States creating a trilateral trade bloc in North America. NAFTA came into force on January 1st 1994 and superseded the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement
So, NAFTA is a kind of North American Common Market just like we used to have in Europe before the political elites changed the European Common Market into their grand political project – the European Union.
But on signing NAFTA, did the USA allow Canadian and Mexican politicians and bureaucrats to run their country? Not as far as I know. Yet the lowlife, self-serving lying Obama insists that Britain should give up control of its borders, its lawmaking, its employment and social policies and its independence and submit to German control.
Obama’s hypocrisy is truly breathtaking. How does he keep a straight face? He must have had acting lessons.
Hopefully, the British people will be smart enough to vote for Brexit and, in the process, tell Obama to take a flying f**k at himself.
Once again we see that the EU referendum really is a battle of the elites against the people. We must not let the elites win!
Vote Leave!
America’s ‘great black hope’ was hopeless
As for Obama’s two terms as US president, what has he achieved? Chaos in Libya and Syria? The rise of the Islamic State? Letting hundreds of thousands of M*sl*m ‘refugees’ into the US while keeping out truly persecuted Christian genuine refugees? Making the US rich richer and the poor poorer?
Under Obama the bankers ran off with hundreds of billions of borrowed money that ordinary taxpayers will have to pay back while ordinary Americans saw their incomes stagnate and their standard of living fall:
Obama is lucky he is blackish. That makes people afraid to criticise him as they fear being accused of being “waaaccciiiisssstt”. After all, any time anyone dares criticise him, Obama is quick to play the ‘race card’.
Go home Obama. You betrayed all those who voted for you and now you’re trying to betray Britain and frighten us into accepting German rule.
You blew it Obama. Time to get out of our lives and get on the lecture circuit to earn millions while also getting millions more working for the bankers who put you into power and have controlled everything you did:
Yesterday I produced a few charts supporting the view that, by taking in proportionately more migrants from the Religion of Rape than any other country, Sweden has committed cultural and social suicide.
Just over the border from increasingly violent and Third-World Sweden, we have damp, cold, bleak Finland. How are things going there? I haven’t got any figures yet. But here are some jolly photos of Finnish girls, young Finnish girls, in fact extremely young Finnish girls successfully integrating with adherents of the Religion of Rape.
The Third-World migrants seem to be very happy. I wonder what the girls’ parents think?
I have already written about how the UN Human Development Index has predicted Sweden will become a Third World country by 2030 because Sweden has taken in more M*sl*m migrants per head of population than any other country:
Of course, that’s just a forecast and the *slamophiliacs who are running Sweden (into the ground?) can dismiss such a forecast as mere speculation.
So, I’ve found some reliable hard numbers (apart from the rapidly increasing numbers of rapes that the Swedish authorities and compliant Swedish media try to conceal) which prove, beyond any doubt, that mass M*sl*m immigration is destroying Sweden.
There’s a survey done every three years, the PISA survey (Programme for International Student Assessment), which compares the educational performance of over 500,000 students in 65 countries. Here’s how Sweden scored in 2003, 2006, 2009 and 2012:
Oh, and here is the what’s happened in Swedish schools since 2000:
Ooops! Not looking too good, is it
In 2000, Sweden was one of the best performers coming 9th in reading, 10th in science and 15th in maths. In the most recent test for which I have been able to find the results – 2012 – Sweden had fallen from 9th in reading to 36th, from 10th in science to 38th and from 15th in maths to 38th.
Commenting on the collapse in educational standards in Sweden, the OECD wrote “the country’s performance in the OECD’s PISA survey has declined over the past decade from around average to significantly below average. No other country taking part in PISA has seen a steeper fall“.
The Guardian has written quite a few articles about the unfolding horror story that is Sweden’s educational system and has consistently blamed Sweden’s decline on its policy of ‘free schools’ (not under local education authority control) which has been copied by the Tories and which the Guardian naturally opposes. No Guardian article ever mentions Sweden’s M*sl*m immigration.
The M*sl*m migrants children seem to cause two types of problem. Firstly, they don’t want to learn and well over half of all immigrant children in Sweden fail to reach the required educational level. Secondly, they are so disruptive and violent that they prevent other children learning.
Here’s link to a short video showing M*sl*m immigrant children studying hard at a Swedish school so they can become well educated and make a positive contribution to Swedish society:
I thought readers might find this mildly interesting.
Hopefully you all know that there are now two main ways you can sell your home. Up till just a few years ago, anyone selling a home pretty much had to go through a traditional high-street estate agency (‘realtor’ for any American readers). Then along came the Internet with property websites like Rightmove, Primelocation and Zoopla. These property websites enabled the rise of Internet-based estate agencies. As they don’t need to maintain expensive high-street branches filled with over-ambitious, bonus-hungry young estate agents, Internet-based estate agencies can help you sell your home much more cheaply than a traditional high-street agency.
One of the best of the new Internet-based estate agencies seems to be Purplebricks. If you want to sell your home through them, you contact them through their website and book an appointment for their local property ‘expert’ to visit you. Usually this person is someone who used to work for a traditional high-street estate agency. The Purplebricks rep will take photos of your home, get all the measurements and details and post your home on the main property websites – Rightmove, Primelocation and Zoopla.
That will cost you between £700 and £800. In comparison, a high-street estate agency will charge about 1.25% (I think). So, for my home selling at £300,000, I would have to pay a high-street agency around £3,750 plus VAT (total £4,500). If using Purplebricks works out, I’ll save about £3,800.
I have just put my home on the market with Purplebricks. I set up a diary on the Purplebricks website giving my availability and then anyone interested in seeing my property makes an appointment online. Yesterday I did my first two viewings.
A few days after my property went live, I got this letter from a local traditional high-street estate agency trying to put the boot into Purplebricks and pressure me to abandon Purplebricks and use his traditional high-street estate agency instead:
Sorry for the direct approach but I have noticed that your property has just gone on the market with Purplebricks.
I was wondering if they have discussed with you how they intend to market your property to achieve a sale. The reason for my question is that I have found that, as you pay them upfront, they tend to not offer the guidance and feedback you need to actually sell. After all, you have already paid them for their service and this is just to advertise your property online.
At ******** you only pay us if we find you a buyer that completes on your property. This means you are protected from paying high upfront fees before you have seen or tried the service.
I would love the opportunity to meet with you to discuss our service and I can personally guarantee that you will not be disappointed. To show you how keen I am to work with you, I am currently able to offer a fantastic 25% discount off our fees and reimburse any upfront fees you have paid to Purplebricks.
Please can you contact me so I can discuss this further?
Desperate? Or what?
Whether you use a traditional high-street estate agency or one like Purplebricks depends on whether you feel your property needs to be ‘marketed’ or whether you believe just having Purplebricks stick it on the main property websites will be sufficient to reach most potential buyers.
Moreover, having bought and sold properties before, I’m not sure exactly what ‘guidance and feedback‘ mentioned in the letter from the high-street estate agency would be worth several thousand pounds.
As for selling my home. I believe I can do that much more effectively than some pushy 23-year-old from a high-street agency who knows little to nothing about the property. I can explain with genuine enthusiasm why I bought my home, list all the benefits of living in it, can answer any questions about it and can honestly explain what improvements I think buyers should make and how much those would cost.
I’ve only done two viewings so far. But both couples are seeing quite a few other properties and both have remarked how much more enjoyable and useful it was being shown the property by the owner rather than some slimy high-street estate agency lackey.
Of course, using an Internet-based estate agency may not be everyone’s cup of tea. And I haven’t yet had an offer for my property. But my first few days with Purplebricks makes me feel we are seeing the slow but inevitable virtual extinction of the traditional high-street estate agencies.
Here’s an urgent message to all voters from David Cameron, George Osborne and all our parasitic, self-serving, greedy top bureaucrats, business bosses and bankers:
If we leave the EU, a plague of locusts will destroy this year’s corn harvest
If we leave the EU, all our farm animals will explode
If we leave the EU, our rivers will turn to blood.
If we leave the EU, all our trees will wither and die
If we leave the EU, all our most prestigious buildings will collapse into piles of rubble
If we leave the EU, our money will become worthless
If we leave the EU, our dogs will all get rabies and bite us
If we leave the EU, our cars will spontaneously combust
If we leave the EU, all our motorways and roads will melt
If we leave the EU, the sun will never rise again and Britain will become an Arctic wilderness
If we leave the EU, we will all freeze and starve to death
So, you stupid plebs – be afraid. Be very afraid. Vote Remain! Hand our country over to German and French control and keep us elites in the well-paid comfort to which we have become accustomed.
Of course there are a bunch of swivel-eyed, moronic outers who believe;
If we leave the EU, we will will save over £50m a day
If we leave the EU, we will get control over our borders and can decide who can come to live in Britain
If we leave the EU, we can deport foreign criminals, rapists and murderers
If we leave the EU, we can make advantageous trade deals with our old allies like Australia and Canada and with rapidly-growing Asian countries
If we leave the EU, we will be able to make our own laws
If we leave the EU, we will unshackle our country from a sclerotic, economically-declining, failed totalitarian experiment
If we leave the EU, we can save our country from becoming a poverty-stricken, excrement-covered, violent, Third-World Islamic hell-hole like Belgium or Sweden are becoming
If we leave the EU, we will thrive and, seeing our freedom and success, other countries will also demand to be liberated from the French and German controlled scam that is the European Union
If we leave the EU we have a bright future.
If we stay in the EU we are damned to eternal enslavement!
A reader sent me this piece below. It comes from a journalist on the Russia TV website
It’s questionable now whether David Cameron will be able to survive 2016 as prime minister. The crushing combination of the ‘Panama Papers’ and the UK Brexit referendum may well be enough to pulverize ‘Teflon Tory’ and bury him.
David Cameron, a man born into great wealth and privilege, was fast-tracked to power by influential neocons. After just four years as an MP he was anointed as Tory party leader, even though his rivals had much stronger credentials and greater public appeal.
Since his elevation ‘Call Me Dave’ has certainly not let his backers down! His governments, under the pretext of ‘austerity’, have cut welfare payments and social services and helped the one percent become even richer. The top rate of income tax was cut and corporation tax has also been slashed.
Remaining publicly owned assets have been privatized, or have been earmarked for privatization with rich City insiders and party donors benefiting. In 2013, the Royal Mail, in state hands since its inception in the 16th century, was privatized, with a hedge fund whose co-head of development strategy was the best man at Chancellor’s George Osborne’s wedding, netting a profit of £36m.
The government now plans to sell the Land Registry – in public hands since the days of Queen Victoria.
In foreign policy, Cameron continued where Bomber Blair left off. In the same way that Tony Blair helped destroy Iraq, ‘Tory Blair’ helped wreck Libya. A country that had the highest living standards in Africa was transformed, thanks to NATO’s ’humanitarian intervention’, into a failed state and a haven for radical jihadists and terrorists.
Cameron and his governments also played a very negative and destructive role in relation to Syria, enthusiastically supporting ‘regime change‘ and championing the cause of violent jihadists and terrorists – euphemistically labeled ‘rebels’- who were fighting to overthrow a secular government implacably opposed to Al-Qaeda and its affiliates.
In 2013, Cameron, faithfully serving neocon interests, tried desperately to get Parliament to support airstrikes on Syrian government targets. Thankfully, that was defeated. Had it not been, then it’s likely that Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) and Al-Qaeda affiliates would now be in charge of the whole of Syria.
If ever a British Prime Minister deserved to lose a General Election it was David Cameron in 2015. ‘Call Me Dave’ had presided over the longest fall in living standards in the country for 50 years.
His government had pledged to improve public finances, but in fact had made them worse: the UK’s debt increased by 50 percent under Cameron‘s watch.
Furthermore, Cameron’s foreign policy has undoubtedly made the world a much more dangerous place.
However, helped once again by a very friendly media, and in particular the Murdoch press – which thought it of the utmost importance that we saw a photo of Labour leader Ed Miliband eating a bacon sarnie on the front page of the Sun, Cameron scraped home in last year‘s election.
In the 2015 election campaign there was little, if any, proper discussion of the Conservatives’ many failures in office… If there had been proper media coverage of the way Tories have sold off public assets to their City chums, and the future privatizations Cameron and Co have planned (Chancellor George Osborne has pledged to sell off £20 billion more of state assets by 2020), then the Tories would not have got anywhere near the amount of seats they did.”
It’s clear that Cameron was chosen, from quite early on, as the best ‘front man’ for taking the neocon project on to the next stage. The question now is: will those who helped put Cameron into power – and who did everything they could to help him stay in 10 Downing Street during the 2015 General Election campaign – continue to support him?
Up to now Cameron has been the ‘Teflon Tory’ – the man against whom no charge seems to stick. While Tony Blair is rightly reviled for what he did to Iraq, Cameron has largely escaped censure for his role in the destruction of Libya. Even allegations of Cameron taking part in a weird initiation ceremony involving the head of a dead pig at Oxford didn’t do too much harm to his ratings.
The ‘Panama Papers’ leaks, however, could be a game changer. In Parliament last week, Cameron tried to draw a line under the revelations by making a Commons statement. Toadying Tory MPs stood up to declare that The Great Leader had done nothing wrong. One MP, the very wealthy oil trader Sir Alan Duncan, tried to make out the outrage over the Panama Papers was due to envy over people’s wealth – and made a snobbish reference to ‘low-achievers’.
The smug, self-congratulatory mood was splendidly punctured by veteran left-wing Labour MP Dennis Skinner, who dubbed the prime minister ‘Dodgy Dave‘.
The neocons who backed Cameron in 2005 are divided over Europe, which also doesn’t help the PM’s cause. Michael Gove, who helped mastermind Cameron’s campaign in 2005, is one of six Cabinet ministers campaigning for Britain to leave the EU in a referendum that Cameron – given the dip in his ratings – could easily lose. Even if the ‘Remain’ side does sneak home narrowly, Cameron would still be very vulnerable.
We know just how ruthless the Conservative Party can be when they feel they’ve got a leader who’s gone past their sell-by date: even the fact that she had won three general elections wasn’t enough to save Mrs Thatcher in 1990.
Cameron has already declared he won’t serve a third term as prime minister, but it must now be doubtful that he will even be able to survive 2016. Whether it’s the ‘Panama Papers’ or the EU referendum in June which finishes him, the dream ride for the ‘Teflon Tory’ has almost certainly come to an end. About time, too!
I’ve recently put a new short video I made onto YouTube.
It’s called “Management Consultants’ Tricks” and is based on a song some consultants from McKinseys – the world’s leading management consultancy – sung at a Christmas dinner as they mocked their clients’ stupidity and celebrated getting their massive bonuses.
The video probably won’t mean much to readers who have never been affected by management consultants, but here it is anyway:
David Craig, on April 27th, 2016
“There are currently five candidate countries for EU accession: Albania, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Turkey.”
“In October 2012, the Commission recommended that Albania be granted EU candidate status. In June 2014, Albania was awarded candidate status by the EU.”