LINEKER'S APPEAL MISSES THE TARGET.

As with most things these days, governments seem to have no idea as to what should be prioritised and what put on the 'back-burner'.

Over the last couple of weeks, the BBC and, no doubt, other media outlets, have been attempting to pick the pockets of viewers, listeners and readers with appeals aimed at helping the poor children of Brazil. The latest appeal that I've heard had former footballer Gary Lineker begging for money on Radio 4, using his most earnest tones of voice. While many may be conned into sending money to the 'ABC Trust' appeal, I find it unbelievably offensive.

'Action for Brazil's Children' has been around since 1998 and apparently tries to help the hordes of children who spend their lives as homeless drug addicts and thieves on the streets of Brazil's cities, while being run from offices in Bury St Edmund's, Suffolk. The organisation operates as a UK charity, therefore benefiting from a range of tax benefits, and has several high profile, and wealthy, patrons; it's founder is American born Jimena Paratcha who appears to have found a vocation to help children throughout Latin America, though she is now living in Sussex and concentrating on Brazilian children.

While this appeal is making the most of Brazil's recent place in our headlines, everyone seems to be ignoring the simple fact that the Brazilian government has spent many, many millions on creating the infrastructure needed for the staging of the FIFA World Cup and will spend a vast amount more, at least a few billions, on its preparations for the 2016 Olympic Games. Given that Brazil has a manifestly corrupt society and huge numbers of poor and homeless children, wouldn't all of this money be better spent on dealing with the corruption and providing homes, schools and education for them rather than on grandiose schemes which are principally about the glorification of the nation's political leaders ?

The 'ABC Trust' seems to have laudable aims but, as with all charities, one tends to wonder how much of the money raised goes on administration, how much falls victim to corruption and how much eventually finds its way to the cause for which it was raised. Equally, one wonders why the Brazilian government prefers to spend the equivalent of billions of dollars on sporting events than on solving its societal problems and helping its many people who live in abject poverty.

The simple question that I ask myself is "Is it my responsibility to help ?" The simple answer, in this case, is an emphatic "No". While the Brazilian government does nothing to end the corruption in its society and  wastes billions on frippery, I won't give a penny and neither should anyone else.

ROLF HARRIS GUILTY; WHO'S NEXT ?

Following on from Jimmy Savile, Stuart Hall and Max Clifford, we now have Rolf Harris convicted of an assortment of sexual offences against young people. Additionally, there have been others who've been acquitted for lack of adequate evidence, the on-going saga of 'Gary Glitter' and the allegations against former Liberal MP, Cyril Smith. Who will be next ?

There can be no doubt that some people in positions of power and influence have abused those positions in particularly nasty ways. That those brought to account in recent times have all been connected with very public and high profile jobs and yet were able to carry on their activities unchallenged for many years is a shocking indictment of the way in which our society has operated. People knew or, at the very least, suspected that things were 'not quite right' but did nothing. These people should also be in the dock, answering for their lack of action.

One suspects that more culprits will emerge as time goes by and the media will indulge in more hand wringing. That it is the media which was probably most culpable in failing to identify the activities of these perverted individuals over a period of many years seems to be ignored; indeed, the perpetrators so far brought to book appear to have been almost exclusively employed in aspects of the media. The facts suggest that the media is a major part of the problem, populated as it is by people with large egos, great influence and plenty of opportunity. 

Who will save us and our children from the all-encompassing and disgusting attentions of the media and its revolting inhabitants ? 

UKIP HAVE THE REST RUNNING SCARED.

The recent election results now have everyone looking around for reasons why no one should vote for UKIP ever again, why their success is transitory, and why they will be unable to make any progress at next year's General Election. The very fact of the efforts in this direction shows just how scared the other parties are.

UKIP did not win the Newark by-election but then, realistically, they never could. What they did was to get 26% of the vote and reduce the Conservative majority by some 10,000; that's no small beer. The Labour vote declined and the Liberals were all but wiped out, having their worst by-election result since WW2. Of course, by-elections are not General Elections, but the message is clear; the people have had enough of the same old party political and largely meaningless rhetoric.

The truly frightening thing is that the political hierarchy simply has not understood the message. Across Europe, the people have expressed dissatisfaction and yet the politicians have largely continued to ignore them and carried on down the same old path, towards an 'ever closer union'. The leading candidate for the top job in the EU is a man whose best days are well behind him and is a committed federalist, Jean Claude Juncker; no one seems to be listening.

David Cameron continues to spout the twaddle about renegotiation and his supporters talk about the certainty of success; others, including the US President, tell us that leaving the EU would be at least problematic but might well spell disaster. Gloom and Doom is the message should we dare to leave this beleaguered organisation.

Numbers are thrown around. Lost jobs in their millions, lost trade in the billions; none of it substantiated and none of it real. The truth is that the EU is a vast and unnecessary bureaucracy and leaving it would be a huge relief for our country. Yes, there would be some issues to resolve but mostly it would be a far bigger problem for the rest of Europe than for the UK. We remain one of the biggest economies in the world and a major financial centre; leaving the EU would do little to change either of these while relieving us of a vast array of intrusive and controlling legislation.

Who needs straight cucumbers, open borders or economic and foreign policies determined by countries with which we have nothing in common ? It's simple - we don't. Let's get out while we still can, notwithstanding the interference of a socialist US President who has no interest but that of his own country in mind.

NIGEL FARAGE : MAN OF THE PEOPLE

You always know when politicians feel threatened because that's the only time they show any real passion about anything.

In the last few weeks, Cameron, Clegg and Miliband, plus an assortment of their lieutenants, have come out swinging at their nemesis, Nigel Farage. The UKIP leader really has got under their skins and has finally been seen as a genuine threat to the cosy world which the three big parties have had to themselves for many years. In recent weeks, every slight failing of UKIP, Farage or any of their members has been pounced upon in order to show what a nasty lot they really are; every opportunity has been taken to denigrate them in every possible way. In fact, it's been quite interesting to see how the campaigns of the 'Big 3' have been focussed much more on decrying UKIP than in putting forward much in the way of meaningful and coherent policies of their own.

Thus far, Farage and his party have emerged relatively unscathed from the attacks against them, probably because the general public are only too well aware that much of the anti-UKIP rhetoric is simple 'politicking'. Last Saturday's 'Daily Telegraph' carried a report which, perhaps, summed up the real problem for the main parties and perhaps explains why they are so terrified of UKIP. According to it, Gillian Duffy, the woman branded a bigot by Gordon Brown, has said that Labour needs a straight-talking leader who is comfortable drinking a pint to reconnect with working class voters. She apparently went on to add that Ed Miliband is a 'privileged' career politician who lacks the authenticity of Nigel Farage.

Mrs Duffy is not the type of voter anyone would expect to come out with a good word about Mr Farage, but she did, and with a swipe at Miliband along the way. It's also undoubtedly true that her words are equally applicable to Cameron and Clegg, both of whom are from privileged backgrounds and neither of whom has ever had a real job in their lives; neither has any real connection to the people  they expect to vote for them. The one man who seems 'real' in the political dogfight of the day is Nigel Farage.

 

Frankly, Mrs Duffy has hit the nail on the head.

SCUDAMORE IS SEXIST. SO WHAT ?

The current furore over comments made by the boss of football's Premier League, Richard Scudamore, demonstrates just how far down the road of lunacy our society has now travelled.

Since time immemorial, men have made 'sexist' remarks about women and, no doubt, women have made equally 'sexist' remarks about men. Indeed, in my own experience, the conversation of women in this regard is every bit as coarse as that of men, often much more so. For some reason, no one seems to be much bothered if a woman abuses men, but no man dare open his mouth if it is to say anything which some woman may find offensive.

What this amounts to is a denial of every man's right to free speech while, for the time being, granting women total immunity to criticism. It is the emasculation of the male of the species on the altar of 'women's lib'. We now have a society in which men cannot even express thoughts or opinions without the fear of retribution being visited upon us. It will not be long before women find themselves subjected to the same oversight.

It is the beginnings of Orwell's terrifying prophecy. It is time both men and women fought back, before it is too late.

CLARKSON SAYS 'NIGGER' !

Once again, Jeremy Clarkson has managed to get a bit of publicity for himself. This time, he's been caught using a 'naughty word', last time it was for making derogatory remarks about Mexicans.

Clarkson is the type of self-serving, arrogant 'celebrity' that I despise. He appears to have no talent other than for being crude and childish; his imbecilic antics on 'Top Gear', allied to those of his equally stupid co-presenters, stopped me watching the programme many years ago. That he finds it necessary to court attention by the occasional 'slip of the tongue' shows just how desperate this pathetic man is for said attention.

All that said, that the media is in an uproar because he supposedly uttered the word 'nigger' is ridiculous. Our television, radio and films are littered with foul language every day and words that must cause, at the very least, a degree of discomfort to many and serious offence to some, are commonplace. Indeed, it often seems that the producers of programmes of all sorts go out of their way to encourage such profanity. 'Fuck' is heard all of the time; 'bastard', 'bugger', 'shit' and many others, words that were considered unacceptable or the language of the gutter when I was younger, are so common as to be almost part of the vernacular. Even the appalling 'cunt' is heard with greater frequency.

Amidst all of this, the word 'nigger' has become not just frowned upon but considered to be the most unacceptable of all words - why ? It is a word which has a specific meaning in that it refers to a colour - 'nigger brown'. In the film 'The Dambusters' the main character, Guy Gibson VC, is accurately portrayed as having a black dog which he named nigger - in recent showings of the film the dog's name has been blanked out, so politically correct have become those in charge of such things. That their action is pathetically stupid seems to escape them.

'Nigger' is not a particularly nice word, but it is just that, a word. 'Frog', Eyetie', 'Hun',' Spick', 'Polack', 'Honky', 'Yank', 'Yid', 'Paki', 'Chink', 'Jap', 'Kaffir', and many, many more are also just words that have been used in different parts of the world to refer to people from somewhere else, generally in derogatory ways. That we are now strongly discouraged from using these, while the vast array of disgusting profanities are everyday speech, is idiotic.

When I was child there was a simple saying : 'Sticks and stones can break my bones but words can never hurt me'. It's high time that our media, and the overly sensitive souls who rule us, grow up and accept that language is nothing to fear.

OSCAR PISTORIUS A SNIFFLING CRY-BABY ?

Listening to the sniffles of Oscar Pistorius is pretty sick-making.

This man is no shrinking violet and is, in fact, a hard-nosed competitor who took on the Olympic establishment in order to gain a place in the proper games at London 2012. Anyone who does that is unlikely to be a cry-baby.

Whatever the truth about the events of last year at his home in Pretoria, we've already heard that he had a liking for guns and a short fuse. This is a dangerous combination and one that led directly to the death of Reeva Steenkamp.

Whether he's guilty of murder or not, we have yet to discover, but his whiney and tearful displays in court certainly don't amount to evidence, they are just whiney and tearful displays and he should pack it in.