Monthly Archives: February 2012

Christianity gets less sensitive treatment than other religions admits BBC chief

Another fine example of liberal common sense. The BBC director-general Mark Thompson claims that Christianity is treated differently (code for ‘made fun of’) to other religions (code for ‘I’m such a wussy and coward that I’ll attack Christians because they turn the other cheek, but I won’t make fun of Muslims because they’ll blow me up’). So the BBC has carte blanche to mock Christians whenever they can because it’s fun and safe and Christians are ‘broad shouldered’? Well, blow me over. Thanks for clarifying that piece of obviousness. Mr Thompson goes on to say that mocking religion is more acceptable than mocking race (and just add Muslim and race and you have a totally taboo subject compared to White and Christianity). Oh these useful idiot liberals. And to think that people like Mr Thompson are employed into such high positions, where the general public are subjected to their anti-White, anti-Christian views constantly. Well, one can switch off the TV and not read their tripe – that’s the form of protest we White Christians can hold. After all, liberals love money and money talks with its feet.

BBC director-general Mark Thompson has claimed Christianity is treated with far less sensitivity than other religions because it is ‘pretty broad shouldered’.
He suggested other faiths have a ‘very close identity with ethnic minorities’, and were therefore covered in a far more careful way by broadcasters.
But he also revealed that producers had to consider the possibilities of ‘violent threats’ instead of polite complaints if they pushed ahead with certain types of satire.
Mr Thompson said: ‘Without question, “I complain in the strongest possible terms”, is different from, “I complain in the strongest possible terms and I am loading my AK47 as I write”. This definitely raises the stakes.’
But he added that religion as a whole should never receive the same ‘protection and sensitivity’ in the law as race.
Mr Thompson was making his comments during a wide ranging interview about faith and broadcasting, which included the furore provoked by the Corporation’s decision to screen the controversial show Jerry Springer: The Opera on BBC2 in 2005.
Hundreds of Christians rallied outside BBC buildings before and during the broadcast to protest about what they saw as blasphemous scenes such as Jesus Christ wearing a nappy.
At least 45,000 people contacted the BBC to complain about swearing and its irreverent treatment of Christian themes. 
Many said that no one would have dreamed of making such a show about the Prophet Mohammed and Islam. 
Mr Thompson has now appeared belatedly to accept their argument. In an interview, he said Islam was ‘almost entirely’ practised by people who already may feel in other ways ‘isolated’, ‘prejudiced against’ and who may regard an attack on their religion as ‘racism by other means’.
But he said that Christianity was ‘an established part of our cultural-built landscape’ which meant it was ‘a pretty broad- shouldered religion’.
He conceded that the broadcaster would never have aired a similar show about Mohammed because it could have had the same impact as a piece of ‘grotesque child pornography’.
In the interview posted online for the Free Speech Debate – a research project at Oxford University – Mr Thompson said: ‘The kind of constraints that most people accept around racial hatred, the fact that it may be in certain forms of expression or certain forms of depiction, may be outlawed because of the way in which they go to racial hatred and potentially the promotion and incitement of racial hatred.
‘I think religion should never receive that level of protection or sensitivity. 
But I think it is wrong to imagine that it therefore goes into the general swim and that a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammed is no more challenging than a debate about what two plus two equals.’
He added: ‘The point is that for a Muslim, a depiction, particularly a comic or demeaning depiction, of the Prophet Mohammed might have the emotional force of a piece of grotesque child pornography.
‘One of the mistakes secularists make is not to understand the character of what blasphemy feels like to someone who is a realist in their religious belief.’
When asked by his interviewer, the historian Timothy Garton Ash, if it was the case that the BBC wouldn’t dream of airing something ‘comparably satirical’ as Jerry Springer: The Opera about Mohammed, he said: 
‘Essentially the answer to that question is yes.’ 
He added: ‘The idea you might want to… think quite carefully about whether something done, in quotes, in the name of freedom of expression, might to the Jew, or the Sikh, or the Hindu, or the Muslim, who receives it, feel threatening, isolating and so forth, I think those are meaningful considerations.’
Mr Thompson, who is expected to leave his job after the Olympics, said he was a ‘practising Catholic’ who believed that the ‘truths of the Christian faith’ were objective rather than subjective.
He had never watched Martin Scorsese’s film The Last Temptation of Christ or Monty Python’s The Life of Brian because he was ‘quite personally sensitive to mockery of religious images’. 
But he said this did not mean that he was against either film being broadcast, adding that the best advice if you thought something might offend you was not to watch it.
However, he had no problem with the decision to show Jerry Springer: The Opera, and ‘thoroughly enjoyed it’.
Mr Thompson said the fatwa against Salman Rushdie over his novel The Satanic Verses, the September 11 terror attacks, and the murder in Holland in 2004 of film-maker Theo van Gogh, who had criticised Islam, had made broadcasters realise that religious controversies could lead to murder or serious criminal acts.


USA – Holder: Voter ID Laws Harmful to Minorities, Seniors, Young

Obama’s government is trying everything to stop states from requesting photo ID to vote later this year. Now, why would they possibly do that you ask? Well, it seems that there’s a bit of a problem with voter fraud in certain states and the states want to stop this. Obama and his fellow racist lackey, Attorney General Eric Holder, are suing these states to prevent them from passing the photo ID law. Their excuse is that it will harm minorities (code for ‘racist”), Seniors and young people! Now, how the heck does that work? If obtaining an ID document is free, then what prevents them from moseying on down to their nearest government building and requesting one? How can that be harmful? When you drive or use a credit card you are required to produce photo ID – so why shouldn’t this be a requirement when you vote? According to a recent report, 24 million Americans are no longer valid to vote and should be removed from the voter role. Seems like Obama and his cronies are once again playing the race card to prevent law and order in America. Only law-abiding citizens suffer of course as those 24 million ineligible votes will magically be cast for him…..nothing to see here racist folks, move along.

Attorney General Eric Holder defended the Justice Department’s litigation against states to stop voter ID laws, while testifying Tuesday to a House subcommittee.
The Supreme Court upheld the states’ right to require photo ID to vote in a 2008 case involving an Indiana statute. Nevertheless, the Justice Department has found other legal grounds to challenge the statutes passed by more than a dozen states.
Rep. Robert Aberholdt (R-Ala.) inquired about the action against his state’s voter ID law, and said he was puzzled as to why the federal government would oppose voter ID law, since most people frequently need photo ID to write a check or use a credit card.
Holder insisted the actions to squash voter ID laws were justified.
“With regard to photo ID, I think that too often people are neglecting a really important point is that there were mechanisms in place,” Holder told the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science and Related Agencies.
“Right here in Washington, D.C., I can’t just walk up to a voting booth and vote and just say I am Eric Holder and be allowed to vote. I have to come up with some way to prove who I am. The mechanisms that we’ve had in place I think have proven to be effective,” he said.
The laws were designed to prevent voter fraud. Aberholdt recalled that his brother was a poll watcher in Alabama when a woman came in and tried to vote under the name of a deceased person that would have been more than 100 years old.
About one in eight names listed on the active voter rolls, or 24 million nationally, are no longer valid or have significant inaccuracies, according to a report issued earlier this month by the non-partisan Pew Center on the States. The states with problems include Florida, California, Texas, Colorado, Ohio, Mississippi, Iowa, Indiana and West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Missouri.
The attorney general stressed there is no evidence that voter fraud is a problem that can be alleviated by photo ID laws.
“There really is no statistical indication that in person vote fraud has to be cured by the introduction of voter photo ID,” Holder said.
“And when one looks at the negative impact of these photo ID laws and the harm that has on minorities, young people, seniors, and the balancing we have to do, I think we should think long and hard about whether or not these photo ID laws – in curing a problem that I don’t think necessarily exists and have a negative impact on the ability of people to get to the polls – is a worthwhile policy initiative,” he added.
The Justice Department had already initiated legal action against South Carolina and Alabama for their voter ID laws.
In January, Texas sued the Justice Department for blocking the implementation of their voter ID law. Under the federal voting rights act, the federal government must approve changes to voting laws in certain states, including Texas.

Obama to UAW: ‘Trying to Climb to the Very Top’ Is ‘Greed,’ Not What America’s ‘About’

In his haste to bankrupt and finally destroy America, Obama is showing his true colors and his default primary communist thinking position. In a speech to those who worship him i.e. Unions and their workers, he said that trying to climb to the top was not American and greedy! Yeah, that’s about right. Everyone in America is aiming to be the same, average, unsuccessful boring person that Obama wants them to be, waiting for their messiah Obama to decide who gets what government goodies assigned to them. Pity he didn’t follow his own advice and stay a community organiser so that he too could be one of those average, boring people waiting for a government handout. Unfortunately for America, it seems that Obama is just a greedy piece of anti-American scum, rising to the top so that he could become President. Oh well, I suppose someone has to do the dirty work of holding power over everyone else. I’m sure he’s not enjoying it at all…

President Obama – in a speech to the United Auto Workers union – said that “trying to climb to the very top” was not what America is “about,” saying that it was “greed” and that in reality “we’re all in it together.”

“America’s not just looking out for yourself, it’s not just about greed, it’s not just about trying to climb to the very top and keep everybody else down,” Obama said at the UAW’s annual National Community Action Program Legislative Conference in Washington, D.C.
Instead, Obama – who climbed to the very top of American politics just three years ago – said that instead America was about being “all in it together,” and giving people “a hand up.”
“When our assembly lines grind to a halt, we work together, and we get them going again,” he said. “When somebody else falters, we try to give them a hand up, because we know [that] we’re all in it together.”
Obama also attacked critics of his bailout policies who say that saving failed companies does not reflect traditional American values.
“I keep on hearing these same folks talk about values all the time. You want to talk about values? Hard work, that’s a value. Looking out for one another, that’s a value. The idea that we’re all in it together and [that] I’m my brother’s keeper and [my] sister’s keeper, that’s a value,” Obama declared.
Obama criticized what he called the “you-are-on-your-own philosophy” of his opponents, saying they were “anti-worker” and “wrong.”
“You know, this notion that we should have let the auto industry die, that we should pursue anti-worker policies in the hopes that unions like yours will buckle and unravel, that’s part of that same old you-are-on-your-own philosophy that says we should just leave everybody to fend for themselves,” Obama said.
“Not to put too fine a point on it – they’re wrong,” he added.

UK: Freezing winters ahead due to melting Arctic Sea ice

We deniers have all been wondering how long it would take for ‘scientists’ to blame global warming/climate change for colder weather (and not hotter as per their last try). Well, it took them long enough, but here it is. The new scam ‘research’ goes like this: global warming is causing Arctic Sea ice to melt dramatically (lies), thereby altering atmospheric circulation patterns which encourages Arctic air to be blown into the Northern hemisphere, thereby more snow will fall and the colder it will be! How’s that for dodging reality and scaremongering? Wow, breathless in it’s intelligence. What else can they blame ‘climate change’ on I wonder? They’ve recently tried to warn us that horses will be smaller due to warming; and that earthquakes, volcanoes and tsunamis are a result of global warming (really??).  I guess we should all collectively believe these upstanding ‘researchers’ as they stumble from one theory to the next, all so that they can convince us deniers that the earth is warming dangerously and Armageddon is neigh. The more these ‘scientists’ try to scare us, the more stupid they look. And then they wonder why more and more people are waking up to this scam. Pull the other one. I don’t think they’ve heard of the fable ‘Peter and the wolf’ because if they had they’d stop now whilst they’re ahead.

Britain faces years of freezing winters because global warming is causing Arctic Sea ice to melt, researchers have found.

Climate change means autumn levels of sea ice have dropped by almost 30 percent since 1979 – but this is likely to trigger more frequent cold snaps such as those that brought blizzards to the UK earlier this month.
And Arctic sea ice could be to blame.
Dr Jiping Liu and colleagues studied the extensive retreat of the ice in the summer and its slow recovery focusing on the impacts of this phenomenon on weather in the Northern Hemisphere.
Information about snow cover, sea level pressure, surface air temperature and humidity was used to generate model simulations for the years 1979-2010.
The researchers say dramatic loss of ice may alter atmospheric circulation patterns and weaken the westerly winds that blow across the North Atlantic Ocean from Canada to Europe.
This will encourage regular incursions of cold air from the Arctic into Northern continents – increasing heavy snowfall in the UK.
Dr Liu said: “The results of this study add to an increasing body of both observational and modeling evidence that indicates diminishing Arctic sea ice plays a critical role in driving recent cold and snowy winters over large parts of North America, Europe and east Asia.”
While the Arctic region has been warming strongly in recent decades there has been abnormally large snowfall in these areas.
Dr Liu, of Georgia Institute if Technology in Atlanta, said: “Here we demonstrate the decrease in autumn Arctic sea ice area is linked to changes in the winter Northern Hemisphere atmospheric circulation.
“This circulation change results in more frequent episodes of blocking patterns that lead to increased cold surges over large parts of northern continents.
“Moreover, the increase in atmospheric water vapor content in the Arctic region during late autumn and winter driven locally by the reduction of sea ice provides enhanced moisture sources, supporting increased heavy snowfall in Europe during early winter and the northeastern and midwestern United States during winter.
“We conclude the recent decline of Arctic sea ice has played a critical role in recent cold and snowy winters.”
In November research showed there is less Arctic sea ice now than there has been at any time in the last 1,450 years.

Australia: Lefty TV hosts in hot water over comments on soldier

He’s a mountain of a man. At 202cm, SAS Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith is one of two soldiers to be awarded the Victoria Cross by the Queen for bravery. In June 2010, Corporal Roberts-Smith single-handedly neutralised two enemy machinegun positions and exposed himself to fire to protect his mates. Last Sunday, Channel 7 aired his story and he got to explain what happened that day. During that programme it was revealed that his wife had undergone IVF and that he had twin baby girls. This man is a hero and Australia is proud of him. However, yesterday, TV program The Circle decided it was great to mock him for not being able to sire kids the normal way, saying that he’s probably a dud in bed (dud root per Aussie slang). They also mocked his poolside picture saying that he’s going to dive to the bottom of the pool to see if his brains are down there. This is what Lefties revel at – mocking people who they think are backward twats. In this case it was easy to pick on this hero seeing as he’s in the army and fighting in Afghanistan – the pet-hate of the Left. Well, most of Australia has decided that this is unAustralian and are hitting the airwaves with their comments. You can always count on the Left to bring some class into our lives…..not. Hope this show gets yanked.

Ben Roberts Smith
Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith
HE’S one of the nation’s greatest war heroes, receiving a Victoria Cross for single-handedly storming a Taliban bunker manned with machine-gunners.

They host a lightweight morning gossip show.

Now the hosts of The Circle are under heavy fire after airing a photo of a shirtless Corporal Ben Roberts-Smith and calling him brainless.

Among the giggling troupe was veteran journalist George Negus, who laid the astounding sledge that Cpl Roberts-Smith “he could be a dud root”.

Just a day earlier, Cpl Roberts-Smith had appeared on Sunday Night for a candid interview about how he and his wife had used IVF treatment to conceive their twin daughters.

Those daughters were just five months old when Cpl Roberts-Smith stood up to draw machine-gun fire towards himself near the village of Tizak in Afghanistan’s Kandahar province.

That allowed his commander to lob a grenade in the Taliban bunker.

Cpl Roberts-Smith then stormed the bunker alone and killed the two Taliban members inside. His actions allowed the troops to move through and clear the village of Taliban soldiers.

It also saw him become only the second person to be awarded the Victoria Cross for Australia, after it was established in 1991.

“I’m sure he’s a really good guy, nothing about poor old Ben,” Negus said yesterday on The Circle where he was guest co-hosting at the time of the comment.

“But that sort of bloke, and what if they’re not up to it in the sack?”

Former Channel [V] host Yumi Stynes chimed in on the picture of Cpl Roberts-Smith poolside with: “He’s going to dive down to the bottom of the pool to see if his brain is there.”

This morning and back on the air Stynes revealed she was getting married, leading some online commenters to suggest it was a stunt to distract from a growing backlash over yesterday’s comments.

Yesterday The Circle made an apology on its Facebook page: “Gotta love live T.V.!,” the apology read.

“What started out as an innocent admiration of one of Australia’s heroes today unfortunately ended up changing direction.

“I hope you all know us well enough by now to know that we would never set out to upset anyone.
“Your feedback is very important to us and we appreciate your input on a daily basis.

“So sorry if we offended any of you today.”

Meeting with the Queen


USA: Affirmative Disaster

Da Blacks are not happy! Researchers at Duke have found that Affirmative Action via admission of more Blacks into Duke university are unsuccessful. Black students are switching from science and economic majors to the softer social sciences and humanities because they are easier to pass and less work is involved. This falsely gives the perception that Affirmative Action is working. This research deserves widespread attention by universities and policy makers, instead a number of Black students, alumni and professors are protesting the research and asking if Duke is a hostile environment for Black students! Why, yes, yes it is, so take your below average SAT scores and go find an all Black university which caters for your level of intelligence. The USA does not need anymore people with social science and humanities – there are enough liberal loony know-it-all’s already. The USA needs intelligent people to study maths and science and these below average Affirmative Action Blacks just suck up the university places in place of the more competent Whites and Asians all because of their skin color. It’s time this type of social engineering is exposed and Blacks admit that they are getting free pass after free pass based on the color of their skin and White guilt. Affirmative Action needs to be returned to the Socialist cupboard where it belongs, along with political correctness and equality goobly-gook. We are NOT all the same and the sooner we stop pandering to the Blacks the quicker we can get on with improving lives.

A growing body of empirical evidence is undermining the claim that racial preferences in college benefit their recipients. Students who are admitted to schools for which they are inadequately prepared in fact learn less than they would in a student body that matches their own academic level. As an ongoing controversy at Duke University demonstrates, however, such pesky details may have no effect on the longevity of the preference regime. 

Duke admits black students with SAT scores on average over one standard deviation below those of whites and Asians (blacks’ combined math and verbal SATs are 1275; whites’ are 1416, and Asians’, 1457). Not surprisingly, blacks’ grades in their first semester are significantly lower than those of other ethnic groups, but by senior year, the difference between black and white students’ grades has shrunk almost 50 percent. This convergence in GPA might seem to validate preferential admissions by suggesting that Duke identifies minority students with untapped academic potential who will narrow the gap with their white and Asian peers over their college careers. 

Now three Duke researchers have demonstrated that such catching-up is illusory. Blacks improve their GPAs because they switch disproportionately out of more demanding science and economics majors into the humanities and soft social sciences, which grade much more liberally and require less work. If black students stayed in the sciences at the same rate as whites, there would be no convergence in GPAs. And even after their exodus from the sciences, blacks don’t improve their class standing in their four years of college. 
This study, by economics professor Peter Arcidiacono, sociology professor Ken Spenner, and economics graduate student Esteban Aucejo, has major implications for the nationwide effort to increase the number of minority scientists. The federal government alone has spent billions of dollars of taxpayers’ money trying to boost minority participation in science; racial preferences play a key role in almost all college science initiatives. The Arcidiacono paper suggests that admitting aspiring minority scientists to schools where they are less prepared than their peers is counterproductive.
The most surprising finding of the study is that, of incoming students who reported a major, more than 76 percent of black male freshmen at Duke intended to major in the hard sciences or economics, higher even than the percentage of white male freshmen who anticipated such majors. But more than half of those would-be black science majors switched track in the course of their studies, while less than 8 percent of white males did, so that by senior year, only 35 percent of black males graduated with a science or economics degree, while more than 63 percent of white males did. Had those minority students who gave up their science aspirations taken Introductory Chemistry among students with similar levels of academic preparation, they would more likely have continued with their original course of study, as the unmatched record of historically black colleges in graduating science majors suggests. Instead, finding themselves in classrooms pitched at a more advanced level of math or science than they have yet mastered, preference recipients may conclude that they are not cut out for quantitative fields—or, equally likely, that the classroom “climate” is racist—whereas the problem may just be that they have not yet laid the foundations for more advanced work. 
Attrition from a hard science major was wholly accounted for in the paper’s statistical models by a freshman’s level of academic qualifications; race was irrelevant. While science majors had SATs that were 50 points higher than students in the humanities in general, students who had started out in science and then switched had SATs that were 70 points lower than those of science majors. Any student in a class that assumes knowledge of advanced calculus is likely to drop out if he has not yet mastered basic calculus.
The Duke paper, whose methodology is watertight, deserves widespread attention among educators and policymakers. An amicus brief seeking Supreme Court review of racial preferences at the University of Texas (in a case called Fisher v. Texas) has brought the paper to the Court’s attention. Predictably, however, a number of black students, alumni, and professors have portrayed the research as a personal assault. Members of Duke’s Black Student Alliance held a silent vigil outside the school’s Martin Luther King Day celebration in protest of the paper and handed out fliers titled “Duke: A Hostile Environment for Its Black Students?” In an email to the state NAACP, the BSA called the paper “hurtful and alienating” and accused its authors of lacking “a genuine concern for proactively furthering the well-being of the black community.” 
Read more here

Lite Moments

George Osborne: UK has run out of money

The British Chancellor has admitted that the UK is broke and he’s despondent that he can’t find any way to stimulate the economy. This is the same man who raised welfare payments by 5% and has INCREASED foreign aid and EU payments during the recession. They’re also intent on killing their economy with Green energy and building windmill farms. So, in between paying increased taxes, paying more for utilities for Greeny projects, and giving money away to tax cheats, welfare moochers and the EU, bailing out Greece and the other PIIGS countries and increasing foreign aid, this clown is wondering what he could do to stimulate his economy? Gee, no, I just don’t know what he could do to stop the spending and lower taxes, thereby stimulating his economy. Thank goodness this brilliant man is in charge of the tanking UK economy – anyone else would surely not succeed.

Britain and other leading economies are not ready to fund another eurozone bailout, UK Chancellor George Osborne said on Sunday.
Mr Osborne – the brilliant Chancellor in charge of looking after the UK economy

In a stark warning ahead of next month’s Budget, the Chancellor said there was little the Coalition could do to stimulate the economy.

Mr Osborne made it clear that due to the parlous state of the public finances the best hope for economic growth was to encourage businesses to flourish and hire more workers.
“The British Government has run out of money because all the money was spent in the good years,” the Chancellor said. “The money and the investment and the jobs need to come from the private sector.”
Mr Osborne’s bleak assessment echoes that of Liam Byrne, the former chief secretary to the Treasury, who bluntly joked that Labour had left Britain broke when he exited the Government in 2010.
He left David Laws, his successor, a one-line note saying: “Dear Chief Secretary, I’m afraid to tell you there’s no money left”.
Mr Osborne is under severe pressure to boost growth, amid signs the economy is slipping back into a recession.
The Institute of Fiscal Studies has urged him to consider emergency tax cuts in the Budget to reduce the risk of a prolonged economic slump.
But the Chancellor yesterday said he would stand firm on his effort to balance the books by refusing to borrow money. “Any tax cut would have to be paid for,” Mr Osborne told Sky News. “In other words there would have to be a tax rise somewhere else or a spending reduction.
“In other words what we are not going to do in this Budget is borrow more money to either increase spending or cut taxes.”
The strongest suggestion of help for squeezed family budgets came from the Chancellor’s claim that he was “very seriously and carefully” considering plans to help lower earners by raising the personal allowance for income tax, a proposal that has been championed by Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister.
But he implied there would be no more help for motorists struggling with record petrol prices this spring. “I have taken action already this year to avoid increases in fuel duty which were planned by the last Labour government,” he said.
The Chancellor’s tough words were echoed by Liberal Democrat Jeremy Browne, the foreign minister, who warned that Britain faced “accelerated decline” without measures to tackle its debt and increase competitiveness.
In an article published today in The Daily Telegraph, he writes that Britain’s market share in the world used to be “dominant” but was now “in freefall” compared with the soaring economies of Asia and South America. “This situation has been becoming more acute for years,” he adds. “It is now staring us in the face. So we need to take action.”
Mr Browne writes that reform of pensions, welfare and defence is essential to stop the departments “collapsing under the weight of their own debt”. “Just because the spending was sometimes on worthy causes does not in itself mean it was affordable,” he says.
“Doing nothing when your prospects are at risk of declining is not the safe option. More of the same may be superficially more popular in the short-term but that does not make it right.”
Amid warnings that Britain urgently needed to adopt a more pro-business outlook, senior Conservatives have urged the Government to get rid of the 50 pence top rate of tax.
Figures from the Treasury last week suggested the policy was not raising the expected amount of revenue and was threatening to drive leading business people and entrepreneurs away from Britain. Dr Liam Fox, the former Conservative Defence Secretary, yesterday argued for the top tax rate to be scrapped, but added that cutting taxes on employment was even more important.
“I would have thought the priority was getting the costs of employers down and therefore I would rather have seen any reductions in taxation on employers’ taxation rather than personal taxation,” he told the BBC’s Sunday Politics show.
Any efforts to scrap the rate this parliament would face severe opposition from within the Coalition.
Simon Hughes, Liberal Democrat deputy leader, said yesterday that keeping the current 50p rate was “the right thing to do”. He told the BBC: “I represent people in a pretty solid working-class community. What they’re concerned about is what happens to ordinary people out of work and where they get jobs.”
Last night, Labour argued Mr Osborne needed to take a more proactive stance on boosting growth by increasing public spending.
Chris Leslie MP, the shadow Treasury minister, said it was wrong of the Chancellor to argue that Britain was broke and to rely on business alone to create economic growth.
“George Osborne can’t complacently wash his hands and claim the lack of jobs and growth in the economy is nothing to do with him,” he said.
“He needs to realise that government has a vital role to play in creating an environment where the private sector can grow and create jobs.”
Harriet Harman, Labour’s deputy leader, urged Mr Osborne to cut VAT.
Meanwhile, the Chancellor made it clear he was resisting pressure to hand over up to another £17.5billion in taxpayers’ money to help bail out struggling European Union countries.
He said Europe had not “shown the colour of its money” by taking measures to help itself tackle its debt problems.
Until that happens, Britain will not give any extra funds to the International Monetary Fund.
The Chancellor was speaking as finance ministers from the world’s 20 most powerful economies met in Mexico.
Mr Osborne said: “While at this G20 conference there are a lot of things to discuss; I don’t think you’re going to see any extra resources committed (to the IMF) here because eurozone countries have not committed additional resources themselves, and I think that quid pro quo will be clearly established here in Mexico City.”

At least 100 families raking in enough housing benefits to fund a £1MILLION mortgage each

Britain’s government is apparently conservative and has a conservative Prime Minister. Could have fooled me. Immigration is still sky high, and now the welfare scams are being revealed – things that the Tories promised to fix during their election campaign. The UK is truly sick. They will hound and vilify children as young as 3 for racism and Islamphobia, but will pay millions in welfare payments to people who will never contribute anything to the country. And this from a broke government of a broke country. Socialist utopia! It seems that Maggie Thatcher’s words ‘socialism is great until you run out of other people’s money’ will be ringing true for years to come – especially as the housing benefit costs the UK tax payers £22 BILLION a year . Pity no one listened to her back when she was being painted as an extreme right wing nut. In any case, any potential asylum seekers should make their way to the UK and leave Australia alone. The UK offers so much more…..

Hat tip: Mark

Mr Abdi Nur, 42, and his wife Sayruq Nur, 40, sought asylum in Britain in 1999 from Somalia
Asylum seeker Abdi Nur – in pajamas whilst tax payers work

At least 100 families receiving housing benefit are living in luxury homes on handouts that could fund £1m mortgages, figures have revealed.
More than 30 of those families are being given a staggering £1,500 a week to live ‘swanky’ lifestyles – more than three times the national average wage.
Of the 100 families, 60 have their rent paid by the state to the value of £5,000 a month, according to the Department for Work and Pensions.
At a time when millions of people are struggling to get on the housing ladder, the handouts would easily cover the monthly payments on a £1m mortgage.
The handouts are allowing families to live in upmarket parts of London such as Kensington, Chelsea and Westminster alongside wealthy neighbours such as Roman Abramovich and George Michael.
The figures have been criticised by campaigners and raised concerns that the Government’s plan to cap housing benefit is not being enforced.
Ministers announced last year that housing benefit, which currently costs the taxpayer £22billion every year, should be capped at £400 per week.
However, the latest figures from the DWP show there are close to 5,000 families still claiming more than the £400 cap. Although almost four out of every five people on housing benefit pick up less than £100 each week.
Public opinion has been riled by the cases of immigrants and asylum seekers who have been allowed to live in lavish flats at the expense of taxpayers.
In 2010 it emerged that a family of Somalian asylum seekers were getting £1.2m a year to live in Kensington, West London – a short walk from the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s new home in Kensington Palace.
Abdi Nur, 42, an unemployed bus conductor, his wife Sayruq, 40, and their seven children moved to the three-storey home in the fashionable area of the capital after complaining that their previous home had been in a ‘poor’ part of the city.
In another case last year, a Somalian family moved from a house in Coventry to a £2m property in West Hampstead, north London.
Saeed Khaliiff was given £2,000 a week for the home despite having no links to the area, which has been home to George Michael, Sienna Miller, Jude Law and Helena Bonham Carter.
The extravagant lifestyle is one that the majority of hard-working families can only dream of.
The figures will raise calls for the Government’s benefit reforms to be bulldozed through the Commons – despite pleading from Liberal Democrats. 
The data, made public under the Freedom of Information Act, show the areas of the UK that pay out the most in housing benefit are Birmingham (£469million per year), Glasgow (£337m), Brent (£306m), Westminster (£281m), Hackney (£267m), Newham (£264m), Enfield (£258m), Haringey (£254m), Liverpool (£254m) and Manchester (248m).
Emma Boon of the TaxPayers’ Alliance said: ‘This is further evidence that it is right to cap benefits. It is unfair to ask taxpayers to pay for swanky central London homes for others when they can’t afford to live in those postcodes themselves.
‘Many middle or low income families have to decide if they can afford to house their family in town, or if they have to move out to somewhere more affordable. It is not unreasonable to ask those on benefits to make the same choice.’
The DWP says the new rules which have been put in place mean that those families currently getting more than £400-per-week will be gradually taken out of the system and moved into cheaper accommodation.
A spokesman added: ‘These figures underline exactly why our Housing Benefit reforms are so necessary’.

Sweden braces for family immigration boom

And still Sweden is intent on cultural suicide. Sweden, in all their absent wisdom, are now allowing relatives of immigrants to obtain permanent residency, even though these people don’t have valid ID documents. In a country of 10 million Swedes, can you imagine what will happen to the social fabric when you allow 50 000 predominantly Somalis into the country per year? Do the Swedes honestly believe that adding 50 000 illiterate, low-skilled war mongers to their welfare bill is not going to have any effect on the country? Fuel, meet fire.  No wonder a record number of Swedes left the country last year. I think they’ve seen the writing on the Swedistan wall. Stupid is as stupid does. On the other hand, who cares? They actively campaigned against South Africa during Apartheid and now the chickens are coming home to roost. Enjoy!

The number of people seeking permanent residency in Sweden as relatives of immigrants already in the country will increase with 45 percent to 59,500 in 2012, a number comparable to 41,000 last year according to the latest predictions from Swedish Migration Board. 

The main reason behind the expected increase is a recent verdict in the Migration Court of Appeal (Migrationsöverdomstolen) which is set to make it easier to seek a residence permit for people from countries where it is difficult to produce valid identification documents. 

The larger part of the rise in applications is expected to come from Somalia

Two years ago, two precendential verdicts from the court had demanded tighter controls on ID papers for those seeking residency permits on the grounds of having relatives in Sweden. 

This hit Somali applicants the hardest as there are no official authorities in Somalia to issue the kind of identification papers which could be recognized by Swedish authorities. 

But in January this year, the court loosened regulations. The verdict means that if someone can confirm consanguinity through DNA-testing, there is no need to affirm the applicants’ identity in any other way. 

The Migration Board is therefore expecting a surge in applications from Somalia. 

“Legally the verdict will increase the chances of close family members to be reunited,” said Jonas Lindgren of the agency to TT. 

According to the Migration Board, there was already a large backlog of applicants who had been turned down when the court had asked for national ID papers. The rise is expected to come from Somali applicants.

“We have started to look at that group but the verdict will probably affect applicants from Afghanistan as well,” said Lindgren. 

However, Lindgren is confident that the agency can cope with the rise in applications, with some help from the government. 

“There is already long waiting times and there are many open cases that we are working on completing. We have therefore turned to the government and said that we are counting on needing an extra 100 million kronor ($15 million),” said Lindgren.