Sunday, April 20, 2014

Telling it like it is

It's often grimly amusing when the MSM discover what's actually going on with islamic extremism and seeks to present it as extreme rather than something that the quran actually advocates. The current 'Trojan Horse' scandal in Birmingham (and elsewhere) schools being a case in point where non-islamics are being forced out of majority muslim schools to make way for what the MSM and Ofsted call extremists or in my view actual muslims who believe what their paedophile prophet actually preached...
A Muslim hardliner who says adulterers should be stoned to death and that gay men and fornicators should be lashed 100 times has set up an Islamic school that has received almost £1million of taxpayers’ money.
Ibrahim Hewitt, one of Britain’s most prominent Islamic firebrands – who also heads a charity branded a ‘terrorist’ organisation by the US – is the founder and chairman of trustees of the Al-Aqsa school in Leicester, which teaches 250 boys and girls aged between three and 11.
He has vilified homosexuals as paedophiles and said a man can take on a second wife if his first fails to satisfy him sexually. Mr Hewitt has published his views in a book on Islam, which he claims has sold more than 50,000 copies in Britain.
The preacher is the author of a book called What Does Islam Say?, which spells out his vision of ‘true Islam’. In it he advocates the killing of adulterers by stoning. The book says: ‘Any act that destabilises marriage will also destabilise society. Hence the Islamic punishments for such acts are severe… Married men and women found guilty of adultery are to be stoned to death.’
The book also advocates 100 lashes for fornication and sodomy with both men and women, and condemns homosexuality as a ‘grave sin’.
Mr Hewitt says in the book: ‘Islam, like most other major faiths of the world, categorically forbids homosexual practices (sexual relations between two men or between two women), regarding them as a great sin. In a society under Islamic law, such would be severely punished.’
He then compares homosexuals to paedophiles or those who commit incest. The book says: ‘If people have such desires [homosexuality], they should keep them to themselves, and control their desires to avoid forbidden practices.
‘The advice would be the same as, say, to someone who had sexual desires for minors or for close family: that having the desires does not legitimise realising them.’
The book also argues that men and women are not equal, and men have a right to assume leadership over women. ‘Islam recognises the leadership of men over women, but it does not recognise the domination of one over the other.’
He adds: ‘If a woman is unable to satisfy the sexual or other needs of her husband he may consider taking another wife, rather than the common Western practice of secretly taking a mistress.’
Mr Hewitt has in the past said that ‘political Zionism is a threat to world peace’ and has objected to the setting up of Holocaust Memorial Day.
Thing is, he's absolutely correct in his book about what islam actually says, same as the barbarians who butchered Lee Rigby were doing exactly what islam said.
That is the problem we face with the powers that be in this country and their leftard enablers in local government and public services. They simply do not believe what islam say, you saw it with Cameron and his pronouncement that what the butchers of Lee Rigby did wasn't real islam when it bloody well was!
So what we have is a concerted attempt by islamists to infiltrate and take over certain schools and start teaching what the quran actually says and promote what the hadith's (interpretations of the quran) permit such as segregation, paedophilia, misogyny, murder, homophobia and hatred of Jews.
This isn't just in Birmingham though, it's anywhere in the UK we've allowed the blight of islam to thrive and multiply. Essentially we've allowed an intolerant, political, mind control, supremacist, expansionist, thugocracy masquerading as a religion to take root in towns and cities all over England and dictate to us via the morons in power how they are going to behave and only now do the morons in charge realise the problem they have on their hands even whilst trying to deny its there.
Thing is, we don't know what's being said in mosques, we don't know what's being said in schools they control, but we do know the results of seeing what happens to countries they control and people they don't like once they get into a majority.
There is no place for islam in a civilised country...

Saturday, April 19, 2014

This is insane

What is it with public services that they now feel the need to share out our personal data, even with the proviso that it will be anonymous? You'd think they'd know that trust in them is at an all time low because of the low standards that they have maintained in recent years. Also there's the fear that with many things they do that this is the thin end of the wedge.
Taxpayers' personal data could be shared with private firms under plans drawn up by Revenue & Customs (HMRC).
If given the go-ahead it would allow HMRC to release anonymous tax data to third parties including companies, researchers and public bodies.
But former Conservative minister David Davis told the Guardian the plans were "borderline insane".
An HMRC spokesman said "no final decisions" had been taken, and it was committed to "confidentiality".
The newspaper reported that "charging options" were being examined by officials, suggesting that firms could pay to access the data.
But concern has been raised over the plans in the wake of the initiative - a proposed anonymous sharing of NHS medical records - which is currently suspended after fears were raised as to exactly what information would remain anonymous.
I don't think that whoever came up with this insane scheme realises what can be done and extrapolated in an electronic environment and I rather suspect that it's money making on the part of those seeking such data rather than statistical analysis. I also believe that somehow or other the headline that actual names and addresses have been  'accidentally' released will crop up sooner or later.
Simply put, whenever I see a headline that some public body wants to release private data to interested parties I want to opt out straight away, same as I did with my doctor and the 'Care Data' fiasco. What's mine is mine and whilst I have allowed those public bodies to hold it, they have no right to offer it to anyone else, simply because I can't trust them or know just exactly what it is they are selling and whether they are going to change the rules and assume consent once its given to be a permanent thing.
The answer is and always must be no!

Friday, April 18, 2014

Protecting their own

There have been various hospital scandals around, North Stafford springs to mind, there was the MRSA scandal in my own neck of the woods and only the other day Maidstone Hospital who had the MRSA scandal shut down its gastro-keyhole surgery department because it couldn't guarantee the safety of its patients after the op.
In every case there's been some sort of attempt at a cover up and in the worst cases rather than clean up their act, they've a tendency to go after the whistleblower.
A cardiologist sacked after blowing the whistle on shocking NHS failures was cleared of any wrongdoing yesterday – after a 13-year battle thought to have cost the taxpayer £10million.
Dr Raj Mattu, a leading heart surgeon, endured more than a decade of extraordinary bullying by his NHS bosses.
He was sacked after he exposed the fact that two patients had died in dangerously overcrowded bays at his hospital.
Instead of listening to his concerns over the shocking standards of care on the wards, bosses first suspended, then sacked him and then spent millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money pursuing him through an employment tribunal.
They also submitted more than 200 false allegations about him to the General Medical Council – all of which, he says, were rejected.
Dr Mattu wrote to the head of the NHS Sir David Nicholson – dubbed the Man with No Shame – about his treatment and the appalling care at the Walsgrave Hospital in Coventry, but received no reply.
Now, after the 13-year ‘David and Goliath’ battle, a tribunal yesterday found the surgeon had been unfairly dismissed.
This sadly is how things are done in the NHS, because managers back up managers and anyone rocking the boat is hounded out by the managerial clique running the place be they a doctor or a porter. They see it as faults = getting sued and in these days of no win no fee I sort of can see how the mentality developed. Though what I can;'t see is why they don't try to improve the problem rather than attempting to dismiss or sideline the whistleblower with false claims. Improving the bays would surely have cost a lot less than £10 million you'd think?
They very fact that they hounded this man through his career and into illness speaks volumes of the arrogance 'can do no wrong' attitude of the people running the HNS. Despite costing the NHS £10 million you can bet the next whistleblower will be treated in the exact same way in order to stop them lifting the lid on bad practices.
NHS the envy of the world? Don't make me laugh.

Thursday, April 17, 2014


How I am coming to loathe the Human Rights Act, it seems to contain a get out clause for any criminal looking to be deported and a license to make money for the legal establishment. Two cases caught my attention this morning, Haroon Aswat can't be deported to the USA on charges of setting up a terrorist training camp because he has paranoid schizophrenia and the court want to ensure he will be sent to a psychiatric facility, not a prison, paranoid schizophrenic being the default position for most jihadi's these days. And then there was this...
An illegal immigrant who stabbed a 15-year-old schoolboy to death less than a year after arriving in Britain cannot be deported because he claims to be gay, judges ruled yesterday.
The 29-year-old Jamaican was jailed for life aged 16 when he and another schoolboy knifed Abdul Maye to death over a £10 debt outside his school in east London.
A judge at the Old Bailey ordered that he be kicked out of Britain once he had served a minimum of eight years.
Judge Paul Focke told the thug, who cannot not be named for legal reasons: ‘You are a Jamaican national and within months of coming to this country you committed murder.
‘I am of the view that your continued presence in this country will be detrimental to its citizens.’
But yesterday, the Court of Appeal ruled that he could not be sent back to Jamaica because he could face degrading treatment for being homosexual that would breach his human rights.
In an extraordinary judgement which has provoked outrage, Lord Justice Kay said he believed his mother’s evidence that he was gay – even though the Home Office said he ‘had made no mention of it’ until his first appeal against deportation failed.
 Well wasn't that bloody convenient, he hid the fact that he was gay until he was about to be deported and was only believed because his mum said so
What a joke the Human Rights Act is, it's supposed to protect our rights and yet all it seems to do is allow murderers, rapists and thieves to remain amongst us often illegally and most definitely unwelcome by the population as a whole.
Frankly I don't care what the Jamaicans do to him if he's returned, I have a sneaking suspicion that if he managed to hide the fact that he's gay this long, he would manage OK in Jamaica. If not, who cares? (well his mum obviously)
The HRA ought to be renamed the Criminal Rights Charter as all it seems to do is allow those who we don't want to remain amongst us posing a threat to the individuals of this country and the vast mass of law abiding people here.
The only way to rid ourselves of it would be to leave the EU, what's not to like?

Wednesday, April 16, 2014


Apparently there has been a shocking rise in the number of people who are using food banks, though why this is shocking I don't quite know.
A food bank charity says it has handed out 913,000 food parcels in the last year, up from 347,000 the year before.
The Trussell Trust said a third were given to repeat visitors but that there was a "shocking" 51% rise in clients to established food banks. It said benefit payment delays were the main cause.
In a letter to ministers, more than 500 clergy say the increase is "terrible".
The government said there was no evidence of a link between welfare reforms and the use of food banks.
However, the Trussell Trust, the largest food bank provider in the UK, said benefits payments had been a particular problem since welfare changes were introduced just over a year ago.
Some 83% of food banks reported that benefits sanctions - when payments are temporarily stopped - had resulted in more people being referred for emergency food.
And more than 30% of visits were put down to a delay in welfare payments.
The second biggest reason, given by 20% of food bank users, was low income.
To paraphrase the film 'Field of Dreams' if you offer it, they will come.
I've been on benefits before, I've even had difficulties with the benefits office over missing payments, yet never has my family gone hungry, I've always managed to find a way and never been tempted by charities. Still, if someone were to offer free food then yes I'd take it, but I'd spend the money saved on something else because I'd have some spare cash after doing it, granted it might cover fuel costs to getting to an interview, but there would have been savings.
So when a charity giving away free food tells me that there's been a shocking rise in 'customers' I'm not surprised, people will use it if it's available and people have less pride these days in doing so, owing to benefits dependency lifestyles.
Fact is, these charities don't realise or factor in whose pockets the money to pay benefits comes from, they seem to think its the governments. We who pay taxes fund benefits and the benefits budget is far too high owing to government incompetency and the fact that some people will not work no matter what.
There are an awful lot of things wrong  with the country and benefits lifestyle is one of them and the government is right to tackle it. However offering free food and then bitching about the fact that people take it is not helping, if anything it's prolonging the problem...

Tuesday, April 15, 2014


I don't know what it is about western governments and their desire to appear good by spending taxpayers money on what they deem 'worthy' projects abroad. The evidence is out there that the majority of cash given is simply siphoned off into the pockets of kleptocrats and into their pension funds in various tax havens.
Britain hiked its aid spending by more than any other country in Europe last year, figures show.
Foreign aid soared by 28 per cent last year, meaning the UK hit its target of spending 0.7 per cent of GDP on overseas development.
It left Britain with the second most generous aid budget in the world, outstripped only by the United States, and it came as a series of developed nations cut back on their aid spending.
The figures will reignite concerns among Tory MPs that the aid budget is ill-directed and has ballooned at the expense of other Whitehall departments.
Britain spent £10.6 billion on official development assistance in 2013, up from £8.3 billion in 2012, according to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development – a hike of 27.8 per cent.
You'll note that the MP's appear to be more concerned that spending on their departments is lagging, rather than the taxpayer is being stiffed for the bar bill so to speak. Even if we weren't spending the cash abroad, it would still end up being wasted by the government in other words.
The problem is, the government have no control over what the aid is spent on, oh they can stipulate that it must be used for stuff, but once it's out of their hands, that's it and the begging bowl is back in place with little to see for what it's been used for save a marked increase in banking funds elsewhere.
Politicians and the state are not the best people to decide what money should be spent upon, the only people who are, are ourselves. If we wish to give to charity, we should pick the charity, it really ought to be that simple. I rather suspect the government and politicians would be surprised what we spent it on... or perhaps not which is why they do it their way.
Charity begins at home and we should decide who it goes too.

Monday, April 14, 2014

Closing ranks

One of the more noticeable things about the public services is their determination to to never admit to a problem, particularly in the NHS. Almost the first thing that happens is denial, followed by a cover up often enough followed by various professional bodies in that service letting the perpetrator of a mistake, error, or bad practice off with nary a slap on the wrist...
Public services still need to learn lessons from the Stafford Hospital scandal on how to handle complaints, says a committee of MPs.
Concerns about failings at the hospital - expressed by patients and local doctors - were ignored.
The Commons Public Administration Select Committee (PASC) wants changes including having a minister with responsibility for complaints handling.
It says there is a "culture of denial and failure" in public services.
The government said it was "committed to improving" services and the Stafford Hospital scandal had been a "turning point".
Committee chairman Bernard Jenkin said: "There needs to be a revolution in the way public services are run, and how the public perceives government.
"As things are, most people believe there is no point in complaining.
That's always been the perception when dealing with unelected officials wherever you go, even in some private companies where the company ethos seems to revolve around protecting the company no matter what and no matter who gets hurt or trampled upon. So you reach the point where you simply don't bother any more despite poor service because getting mired down in the system or being fobbed off just isn't worth your time save if it's very serious and then you get bogged down often waiting for years for it to be resolved and like as not, not getting an apology despite the failure of the service.
Indeed it does appear as if the rationale of the public services is to defend the public services no matter what.
The only way it will change is if the system allows transparency and we all know that simply will not happen as the culture of denial of blame goes right to the top.
Still, come the revolution, the list for stringing up grows ever longer...

Sunday, April 13, 2014

Took their time didn't they?

The islamic republic of Tower Hamlets has been the centre of islamic extremism and electoral corruption in the UK for at least a decade now. Blogs like this and others have been repeating the allegations and news from the area for a number of years and even the MSM has disclosed a great deal of details on what's allegedly been going on.
As ever it seems to take a few years before the government and the political classes to catch on to what's going on with the concerns of the general public rather than back a losing horse in the name of multi-culturalism and diversity.
A London council at the centre of an investigation into alleged fraud is also under scrutiny over its links to Islamic extremism, according to a classified government document leaked to The Telegraph.
Ministers sent inspectors to Tower Hamlets council, in east London, last week to investigate the alleged abuse of public resources to reward supporters of Lutfur Rahman, its controversial directly-elected mayor.
However, the leaked document, classified “restricted”, makes it clear there may be another, publicly unstated motive for the action — deep concern among ministers and the Prime Minister over the council’s alleged support for extremist-linked bodies.
As early as last year, the document shows, David Cameron’s task force tackling extremism and radicalisation secretly drew up a special “Tower Hamlets action plan” to address problems with the council.
MI5, police counter-terrorism command, a number of other agencies and “senior local officers” from the council itself have “discreetly” provided information about the authority, it says.
Three community centres owned by the council or its housing agency, Tower Hamlets Homes, are named as venues for extremist activity in the area’s “counter-terrorism local profile”, according to the document.
Two are used by al-Muhajiroun, a group linked to dozens of convicted terrorists. Another has been the venue for weekly meetings of the racist and separatist party Hizb ut-Tahrir, and “may still” be, the document says.
Isn't it nice to know that those who hate the UK are being given cash, facilities and support in our communities? Now granted what an individual believes is none of anyone's business, save only if it impinges harmfully on others, which islam tends to do in spades. Misogyny, homophobia, intolerance, corruption and separatism are not of course unique to islam, other religions have their moments too, but only islam does not play by civilised rules and insists that its way is the only way and anyone disagreeing either has to pay protection money (Jews and Christians only) or dies (everyone else) in its most basic form. That there are a lot of decent muslims out there appears to be despite their religion rather than because of it.
Yet why do I have the suspicion if say the BNP had won control over a council and had managed to persuade people to elect a BNP mayor that had they created a mess in proportion to the one in Tower Hamlets would never have gotten so far and that arrests would have been made and politicians and councillors disbarred from standing in elections? I mean I might be wrong, but somehow I doubt it as 'ol whitey' either tends not to be so corrupt or when they do, different rules apply, save only if they are politicians of course.
I rather expect the dog and pony show that is the islamic republic of Tower Hamlets to roll and roll as any arrests made will only be replaced by further corrupt individuals, either that or they'll get off by playing the race card.
It's what they do after all...

Saturday, April 12, 2014

Nothing changes

Rochdale, the town where children of all genders were at risk because institutional blindness, corruption and fear of racism or the authorities had child abuse happening on almost an industrial scale.
In May 2012, nine men were jailed for horrific abuse committed against teenage girls in the town. It made headlines all round the world.
When the father of one of the victims called me to tell me how his daughter’s cries for help had been ignored by the authorities I started to make my own enquiries. I spoke to the director of children’s services, Cheryl Eastwood, and was staggered by her attitude. She implied that young girls who were being systematically raped were making lifestyle choices and said that this kind of abuse was ‘a new phenomenon’ on which they [social services] hadn’t received guidance. You don’t need guidance from central government to know that when someone is reporting being raped it’s seriously wrong, I told her.
A few weeks earlier, a police officer had told me fellow officers had suggested the victims on council estates should have been drowned at birth. It also emerged that when one of the girls reported her abuse to a police officer, the officer yawned.
The cover-up of abuse by Cyril Smith (former Rochdale MP), the failed police investigations into his crimes, had ensured the public cry of outrage that needed to be heard was silenced.
For Smith’s young victims it was because they were bad boys from troublesome backgrounds who needed disciplining.
For the young girls who were victims of grooming gangs it was because they were bad girls from troublesome backgrounds who were making lifestyle choices.
This is what happens when the people in power decide that they know best, this is what happens when dogma trumps decency. When protecting the perpetrators because of their position or religion or colour of their skin became far more important than protecting the victims of their abuse.
Yet not one single prosecution will be brought against the council, its social services department, the Liberal Democrat Party who connived with the police to cover up Smith's crimes, the police or anyone else connected to the wholesale abuse who ignored it or actually hid it deliberately because to them the victims were lesser breeds and deserved (somehow) what was happening to them.
Even today Rochdale and those in power there are in denial of what happened, there has been no apologies and there are still ongoing attempts to sweep things under the carpet. Those who ignored the victims were even allowed to leave taking golden handshakes with them and are still at work elsewhere in the same business.
These people ruined kids lives as much as their abusers did, yet they've gotten away scot free, the next scandal comes along and they hope we forget. The corruption goes all the way to the top and won't stop until we hang them all.

Friday, April 11, 2014

So why allow them back?

The Syrian civil war is none of our business despite the attempta by governments in the West to try and get us involved. There is simply no desire amongst the UK people to fight for the barbarians of either side, civilian casualties or not. One of the problems we do have is that islamoloons from the UK are going over there to fight, which if they are killed is a good thing, the bad thing though is that they get even more radicalised and then want to come back...
The crisis in Syria has emerged as the biggest threat to Britain’s security, The Telegraph can disclose.
The threat to the UK from returning fighters from the Syrian civil war is now the same as that from al-Qaeda terrorists in the borderlands of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
The increased risk will refocus attention on the decision by David Cameron - backed by MPs in the House of Commons - not to intervene as the Syrian conflict worsened last August.
For the past two years, British jihadists have been able to gain access bomb and weapons training as well as further radicalisation.
There are fears that British men who have been radicalised there are also being encouraged to return to the UK to carry out attacks here rather than staying to fight.
You'll note the slight attempt to rewrite history there by claiming Cameron backed by his MP's not to intervene when it was actually a commons revolt against Cameron which forced him not to intervene as he was all gung ho about joining in.
But doesn't it strike you as odd that the government simply doesn't revoke the passports of these people? After all if they love Syria enough to fight for the place then it strikes me that they can bloody well stay there, it's not like they will be model citizens when they return. No doubt they'd scream 'human rights' if we blocked them, but frankly as non-citizens we don't have to care, let them be someone else's problem, we really do not want a spate of Lee Rigby style barbarism hitting the UK.
The civil war in Syria is none of our concern, the idiots who go from here to fight are, doing so ought to mean a revocation of their passports and no return allowed, save perhaps those who go to give medical aid. Bit those who go to fight? Keep them out, we don't need them or their radicalised religious views.

Thursday, April 10, 2014

And whose fault was it in the first place?

Well gosh, Labour intend to do something about our addiction to cheap labour by immigrants. What they intend to actually do remains a bit of a mystery of course, the reason we have cheap labour via immigrants is because of EU laws, industrial need and Labour's ruinous policy of mass uncontrolled immigration from elsewhere.
Britain risks becoming “dependent” on cheap migrant labour, Yvette Cooper will say today.
A Labour government would create laws to stop bosses using migrants to under-cut the wages of British workers, and the “serious exploitation” of migrants by businesses would be made a criminal offence, she will say.
Miss Cooper will also attack the Government for having a “worst of all worlds” stance, in which illegal immigration is getting worse while businesses are unable to find people with the skills they need.
Last month, James Brokenshire, the immigration minister, accused better-off families and big businesses of helping to support mass immigration by demanding cheap labour and services. Miss Cooper will say: “This kind of exploitation should be illegal. But the law isn’t working. We need change.
“The truth is that, for too long, exploitation in the labour market – a cause and effect of low-skilled immigration and illegal immigration – has gone unchecked.
Words, words, words... That's all they are, the only way to prevent immigration is to control our borders, to do that we need to leave the EU. Changing the law won't change a thing, particularly for EU citizens as it's illegal to treat other EU citizens as different to your own. Changing a law to prevent bosses from paying anything but the minimum wage just means the rest of us pay more as prices will rise and no doubt companies will still take on immigrants because they are prepared to do the work as our benefits culture means that a lot of people are quite comfy where they are.
This whole idea is simply ludicrous and won't/can't work, not unless we regain our sovereignty and can act in our best interests rather than the socialist wet dream of the EU and its insidious bureaucracy.
Cooper is just spouting the politicians mantra of saying what she thinks we want to hear, if she doesn't realise there's nothing we can do about it whilst being in the EU then she's either stupid or ignorant (possibly nay probably both)
Problem is there are some out there who will believe her... and vote for them...

Wednesday, April 9, 2014

It's a cultural thing

It may be me just living in a fantasy land, or I was brought up a little strange, but part of the good manners ingrained in me was that if you made a mistake, you admitted it and apologised. Unfortunately owing to the previous governments allowing the way to no win no fee legal attempts getting some people or organisations to apologise is difficult. Add the politicians into the mix and it becomes possible to see a trend of only apologising when you have no choice and only as a last resort.
VICTIMS of poor service and shoddy goods are usually happy with just an apology, new research reveals.
The findings suggest that Britain’s greedy “compensation culture” may not be quite so rampant after all.
Far from demanding compensation, almost half of disgruntled customers say they would be satisfied with a simple “sorry”.
The study by the Ombudsman Services’ Consumer Action Monitor comes as figures show there were 38 million complaints about poor service and sub-standard goods last year.
Energy firms are the worst offenders, mainly due to bills and poor customer service. Complaints to power suppliers rocketed by 224 per cent between January and March this year compared to the same period in 2013 – the largest leap ever recorded.
Retail outlets and internet telecom giants are the next biggest offenders.
More than a third of customers polled think large firms are only interested in profit and do not care when things goes wrong.
Chief Ombudsman Lewis Shand Smith said: “The research shows that consumers just want to be treated fairly and this includes admitting fault where necessary. Sometimes a simple apology is all it takes.
Naturally with politicians, having a sorry dragged out of them Maria Miller style having stolen taxpayers funds even if paid back means they should go, that they don't speaks volumes about politicians. Yet at core I believe that for many when dealing with a mistake, an apology at the beginning would have settled things. Not everyone of course and sometimes things go way too far for an apology, but for minor mistakes, people aren't too bothered and simply want the company to play fair rather than obfuscate or deny.
We seem to have become a very much money oriented society, companies want our cash and people want cash back sometimes for the most minor of things, you only have to read the MSM to see some of the stupid things judges will allow a payout for.
Perhaps simply a demand that the company apologises whilst all costs are given to them if they are in the wrong would suffice...
Might stop some from persuing frivolous claims and get the company to apologise a lot more quickly.
As for politicians, well hanging is still far too god for a lot of them...