Monday, September 15, 2014

After the vote.

We are a couple of days away from the result of the referendum on Scottish Independence.   The opinion polls suggest a close result likely to favour the No campaign.

In recent weeks there has been talk of David Cameron, the UK Prime Minister, being called upon to resign if Scotland votes yes.  The people that make these calls offer no logical reason for why he should do that, other than he has ‘lost’ Scotland.  That is complete poppycock!  As a Unionist, and Englishman, I fully understand the limited participation of Cameron  in the debate.  When he has spoken it is with an obvious and deep-seated passion for our United Kingdom.  Let’s be clear though, the Conservatives are not well liked in Scotland.  Indeed, in some parts they are loathed.  A Scottish friend, who sits in the No camp, said that the less Cameron speaks on the referendum, the better, as his Etonian pronunciation just pushes the ‘don’t knows’ into the Yes camp.  I see his point and it is a sad reflection of the current debate that he may be right.  There’s a part of me though that thinks that as the campaign draws to a close, some people of Scotland are seeing (hearing?) past the voice and listening to the message.  This is a message of our shared history  and a strong desire to have the United Kingdom  continue to lead the world in so many fields.

I think though, that whatever the outcome, Alex Salmond, First Minister of Scotland and Nicola Sturgeon his deputy, must stand down on Friday morning.  They have led a very divisive campaign.  Oftentimes, they have either wittingly or unwittingly unleashed the thuggish element which inhabits the nationalist fringes (North and South of the border) . 

They have  given a glimpse of what life would be like in  Scottish Nationalist Scotland – Independent or not.  A State controlled media, for example.  One that pushes-out the party line according to wee Eck.  Salmond became furious with Nick Robinson, of the BBC, because Robinson has dared to question some of the more outrageous statements made by Salmond and Co.   Bad boy  Nick – go sit on the naughty step!      It was perhaps telling that Salmond’s outburst against the BBC came just after his independence campaign was solidly endorsed by North Korea’s Supreme Leader – a fully paid-up member of the ‘It’s my country to do with as I want and don’t dare question me’ club.   In Pyongyang one can’t say that the emperor has no clothes but is still possible, just, in Edinburgh. 

Salmond and Sturgeon have taken Scotland down a very divisive road and pitted neighbor against neighbor.  Does anyone believe these two have the ability to bring the country together, from Friday?  These are little people with little minds.  I’ll admit Salmond has a way with words but throughout this campaign they have not managed to craft an answer to the fundamental questions that have been posed.  Ask a question Salmond or Sturgeon don’t like  and back they come with a non-answer or an accusation that ‘you are in the pay of the distant Westminster elite’.  Ask about the Scottish NHS and the accusations that it would not be safe with a No vote and you get all the rubbish about privatization and nothing about the fact that Health is a devolved responsibility and so currently and will continue to sit with Holyrood and not London!  Oh, and by the way, the NHS was established, ever before devolution by those ‘Westminster elite types!’


So come Friday whatever the outcome,  Salmond and Sturgeon could do one last decent act for Scotland, by tendering their own resignations.   They have said nothing, in their years in power, to indicate that they have the spirit to heal the divisions that their hubris has brought about.  

Saturday, September 13, 2014

Scotland's choice

I have written extensively on the subject of Scottish independence.

For the masochists and 'anoraks'  among you read here , here, here,here on currency, and again here on currency , here on Shetlands and Oil here on Scotland and debt , also here on debt, and again, here.  There have been other posts as well which, if you are so minded you can seek out.

Why so many posts?  Something like 18 by my count.

Well, as an Englishman, of Irish parents, with a son and a grandson born in Scotland, Scotland is personally important to me.  It is an integral part of a great nation - the United Kingdom.  A country that I love.  A country that has a Scottish part, a Welsh part, and Irish part and an English part.  I will be very saddened if the people of Scotland  were to take the irrevocable step of voting for 'independence' from the rest of the UK.

Why 'independence' and not independence?  Well frankly, it is a funny kind of independence that is currently proposed.  An independence that cedes economic policy power to the rest of the UK and, given the ever creeping federalising of the European Union, other powers to Brussels.  Exactly what will Scotland be independent of?  It seems to me that what is really happening is that Alex Salmond and the Scottish Nationalists resent, maybe even hate, the English and this is why they want independence.

Anyway, on Thursday 18 September 2014, a referendum will be held and Scotland's choice will be made.  At the moment it looks like a narrow majority in favour of the  No vote will be the answer.

In some ways that bothers me most.  Non-Scottish politicians have been falling over themselves to offer to grant more powers to the devolved parliament for Scotland.  This is wrong!  Scotland has more than enough power already.  It has had minor tax raising power since devolution was granted and has chosen not to use it.

Have a care !  You politicians may offer Scotland more power but what then of the English?  In the House of Commons, today, we have MPs elected for constituencies in Scotland and in Wales that can vote on matters that solely affect England's constituencies and yet MPs representing English constituencies cannot vote on devolved issues relating to Scotland or Wales.  Mind you, neither can those Scottish and Welsh MPs!

The argument runs that the Westminster parliament is not representative of Scottish opinion because the UK has had the temerity to elect Conservative governments.  Well, bear in mind that Labour relies on the support of 55 Scottish based MPs as part of its power base and this is an overwhelming boost to Labour's electoral chances - absent these seats, Labour would struggle to be the major party in Westminster, as England typically leans toward the Conservative Party.

Since this will be my last blog post before the referendum, I also wanted to mention the tactics of the Yes campaign.  These seem to fall into the following categories.  If faced with a question that is uncomfortable and for which you have no answer, accuse the questioner of 'scare-mongering'.  When your lack of a policy, e.g. on post-independence currency, is challenged, insist that the Westminster parties - all three of the major parties - are bluffing.  When the governor of the Bank of England and numerous other economists chip in with the same questions, repeat the 'they're bluffing ' response.

Then there is the really  nasty side to the debate.  This is exemplified by Jim Sillars, the former leader of the SNP.  He has basically threatened vengeance upon all of those companies that have the temerity to stand-up and be counted and voice their opinion that  a Yes vote is the wrong vote.  There is even talk of nationalising the likes of BP.  Is it any wonder that companies like Standard Life and Royal Bank of Scotland are saying that if there a Yes vote, they will re-domicile their headquarters outside of Scotland.  Obviously the currency uncertainty will play a part but they surely also have a fiduciary duty, in the light of Sillars' comments, to protect their shareholder's interests by avoiding nationalisation.

To the Scots reading this, I say vote No on Thursday and stay in the family of nations that is the greatest on earth.

To the other nationalities that are reading this, get in touch with your Scottish friends and implore them to vote No.

To the politicians I say, stop pandering.  Scotland already has more than enough power.  devolve no more.

Remember VOTE NO!

Friday, September 5, 2014

Be afraid !

Reports from Tripoli, Libya state that eleven commercial airplanes have been stolen.  At any time, knowing of such a theft in what is effectively a failed state,  would be worrying, however, coming so close to the 9/11 anniversary, this must be considered very concerning.

Of course the principal targets would likely be Western - so mainly US, UK or French interests but Egypt and Israel can't sleep easy, knowing of this theft, either.  Neither can Baghdad, Tehran or Jeddah be off their guard.  It is not known which of the multiple terror organisations or militias have taken these planes so the targets are unknown.  Given the random nature of the mindless violence that terrorists visit upon people, maybe knowing which group stole what plane might not even make any difference! 

There remains the possibility that these planes were stolen for the reasons usually given for thievery - I saw it there and thought I could steal it and sell it to feed my drug habit, or something like that - but I just don't see this as a crime of opportunity!  11 trained pilots and probably co-pilots and navigators just happen to be passing Tripoli airport during a battle between two factions and decide ' Hey, while all this is going on, why don't we steal those planes and then fence them, later on?  Yes, of course they are fueled and ready, let's go!

This issue is very worrying on two counts. 

The act itself leaves many of us and our loved ones, vulnerable to the actions of madmen who seem to think human life of little or no value.  People who would fly a plane into a building and not be worried about the ensuing death.

Equally concerning though, is the lack of any noise or activity from the media.  I know that the American MSM try to avoid all Libya stories because, whisper it very quietly, that is kind of, like, Benghazi territory and no one can speak of that, lest it tarnish the reputation of the sainted Obama and blessed Hillary!  But hey!  There are eleven commercial passenger planes missing and there is every likelihood that these are now in the hands of terrorists.  That should really concern us all and all of the posturing that is coming and to come from the NATO summit, will mean nothing if these planes are flown against civilian targets.

We face a more than usual uncertain future until this risk is eliminated.


Saturday, August 30, 2014

Scotland's debt - a question for OAPs

In the independence referendum debate, the SNP have found themselves repeatedly on the back foot particularly regarding post-independence currency.

Nicola Sturgeon, the Deputy leader has repeatedly stated that there is no need for a Plan B, see here for a February 2014 outing on the subject.

Alex Salmond, the leader of the SNP and First Minister of Scotland has belatedly decided he has 3 Plan Bs.  He too was castigated by Alistair Darling in the first televised debate and so came up with not one, not two but three currency plans.  Say what you like about Salmond, he gives you value for money - three plans for teh price of one!  What a man!

Retain Sterling as part of a currency union (something which all three rUK parties have categorically refused to countenance), retain Sterling as some sort of Sterlingization position - where Scotland's monetary policy is then decided in Westminster and not Edinburgh and according to the needs of the rUK economy and not Scotland's or, join the Euro.

My view is that if Scotland votes for independence, then part of the price they will have to pay, to join the European Union, will be to adopt the Euro.

That aside though, John Swinney the Scottish Finance Secretary has weighed-in to the debate and added the full depth of his intellectual prowess.  He has said (and try to hear this without the necessary petulant voice which neatly captures his point) - If Scotland cannot be part of a currency union with rUK, then Scotland will take on none of the UK debt or liabilities. So there, nah, nah, nah!

Consider this though.  Most all governments operate using the debt markets to one degree or another.  Current national debt for the UK is in excess of £1.3 Trillion or 80% of GDP and climbing (this is why George Osborne gets a 'Could do much better' on his end of term report!). For the US the debt mountain is more than $17.8 Trillion for Federal debt or 105% of GDP and a further ~$5 Trillion for debt owed by the individual states.  Germany's debt is around 80% of GDP and that is probably understated when the European Central Bank commitments are properly considered.  Norway is a country much mentioned by Scottish Nationalists.  They too need to go to the debt markets.  Their debt to GDP ratio is in the acceptable 30% range but still the Norwegian government has to borrow.

So, John Swinney's first genius act as the economics guru for Scotland is to send a message to the world of finance that Scotland doesn't pay its debts!  It welshes on them!  It runs away from its obligations! 

So here is question # 1 for Scotland - who do you think will lend you money?  International banks and finance organizations have a thing about debt defaulters - they don't like them.  In fact to go further, they shun them.  Argentina defaulted on its debts and this had two consequences - a great depression which lead to riots and social unrest and hardship and, it could no longer borrow money.  Oh and yes, Argentina has oil as well!

And here is question # 2 - this time for Scotland's pensioners and would be pensioners.  You have paid in to a system, all of your working life but that system was predicated on you getting a pension at a set time in the future.  If an independent Scotland repudiates its debts, who will pay the pensions of Scotland's OAPs?  Certainly not the rUK.  

Think about it, the 'divorce' has become messy and one partner has decided, in a moment of pig-headedness, that they are not paying anything for the mortgage on the house or maintenance for the children - they're offsky!  A little way down the road, this partner realises that they actually need to get a new mortgage and they need a share of the house sale proceeds, to pay their new debts and a house deposit.  They find that they can't get a new mortgage because they have a default against their name and numerous county court debt judgements against themselves, relating to the jointly held debts that they walked away from and even their lawyer tells them they have no chance of getting any help from the former partner, because they can cite abandonment and abdication of fiscal responsibility and so the individual is, if you will excuse the expression, buggered! 

That is the position in which Scotland will find itself, post-independence if they adopt Swinney's policy.

Of course, that all pre-supposes that after a Yes vote, the rUK will allow Scotland to just walk away from its share of debt.  Why should they?  Why should Scotland which has enjoyed and continues to enjoy the fruits of the debt - schools, hospitals, roads, etc., - be allowed to wipe the slate clean.  Need I remind Salmond, Swinney, Sturgeon and the voters of Scotland, that this is a referendum on independence.  All legislation to enact the consequences of a Yes vote must be passed by Westminster.  Can you really see English and Welsh and Northern Irish MPs voting to allow Scotland to walk away 'Scot free' (no pun intended) from its obligations?  Can you?  Why would they agree to burden their rUK constituents with debt for Aberdeen Royal Infirmary or Mrs MacGregor's pension? 

Come to think of it, I don't know why I am so bothered about Swinney's comments unless its just this arrogance that thinks all of the power in this debate, lies in Holyrood.

I hope Scotland votes No on September 18.

Friday, August 29, 2014

Carswell and UKIP

I am not sure that the defection, from the Conservative Party to UKIP, is really such a surprise.  Carswell is refreshingly independent and has pursued issues in such a manner.  He has long been an opponent of the continually encroaching nature of the European Union and its repeated erosion of the long held rights of Britons. 

What should be worrying for the Conservatives is that Carswell is at the forefront of exploring the new 'e-led' ways of engaging with voters and so his defection represents a real loss.

Equally, it shouldn't be any surprise that Carswell has resigned his seat and so forces a by-election.  This is the action of a man of principle and sets an honourable example for others to follow.

There are rumours that up to eight other Conservative MPs are considering defecting to UKIP.  Some of these will be based on principles, as was Carswell's and some will be based on fear and political calculation - they expect a high threat from UKIP in the next election. 

This defection is a problem for Cameron and the Conservatives. 

Labour too, are not immune though its adherents are perhaps more in tune with the leftist/statist policies and direction of the EU.  Labour too, has often displayed a country last approach to issues as clearly evidenced by their obsession with the failed multi-culturalist policy.

For Cameron and the Conservatives, this defection is the fruit of a failed policy.  Cameron has offered a referendum on the UK's continued membership of the European Union but there is a very strong sense that his heart really isn't in it and that he will present whatever terms he manages to renegotiate as a significant victory and so justifying the UK remaining in the EU.  "Today, fresh from all-night discussions with our EU partners, I can announce that the UK has retained the right to have round dustbins and on that victory, I will be recommending that the UK stays in the EU" or something like that!

The election of Jean Claude Juncker showed how ineffectual Cameron has been in Europe and how he was out-maneuvered by Angela Merkel and I have no doubt, by his own advisers.  Betrayal would not be too strong a word for how the UK was treated and yet Cameron still thinks he can treat with such people.  Either he is a fool or he takes the British people for fools.  Carswell can see this and so can the rapidly growing band of UKIP supporters. 

The EU is a paper tiger.  They led Ukraine to believe that they would support them and now that push has come to shove, they have deserted them in the face of Russian aggression and real-politik.  Cameron and the UK government should abandon EU organisations and withhold funds from the EU beast, forthwith.  Let the EU take us to whatever kind of court that they want.  How many tanks does the European Court have?  Tell them to go to the socialist hell towards which they are daily pulling the UK. 

Cameron should make it clear that the negotiations have already started and that we will use bully boy tactics to get what we want.  If there are counter-measures taken, then we will retaliate.  The UK has always prospered in the past, when it has stood by basic principles.  We can be taught nothing from the newly found  'democracies' of Europe - and I include Germany and France and Italy as being new! - about doing the right thing and following our long-held traditions.

All we need and want from the EU is a trade agreement.  We don't want directives on how long we work - the sovereign government of the UK can decide on that.  We don't want orders on what shape is acceptable for a banana or a cucumber or how much of the fish in Britain's waters, we can catch - the sovereign government of the UK can decide on these things.  We certainly don't want to rely on a European Army or Foreign Service to represent our interests - we know that they won't!

The EU has no legitimacy and the UK should have no part of it.  That is the message that will stop the defections and will restore the Conservatives to power.  Oh and by the way, those defections aren't just in Westminster!


 

Common decency shouldn't require the sack.

When you listen to or read stories about the scandal in Rotherham, why not let your justifiable horror and anger be slightly smoothed by you simultaneously playing Social Care Bingo.   Listen out for those key words and phrases that get trotted out every time that there is a similar scandal.  'Care' agencies, not joining the dots, cannot be allowed to happen again, Labour, not resigning, overworked, police, social services, vulnerable, Asian grooming gang, multi-agency - when you have heard them all, call 'house' to yourself and declare yourself a winner.

I say the foregoing not to in anyway belittle the suffering that families and young people were subjected to but only to illustrate how we keep on hearing the same feeble answers to questions raised about different but similar events.

Another phrase that gets bandied about is 'political correctness'.  As in, the police do not follow-up on the accusations that are made because to do so would break a political correctness taboo - they would be obliged to target the gangs of exclusively Asian men that are visiting  these horrors upon our young children.

In case all of the above sounds alien to you, let me bring you up to date.

An independent report has just been published relating to events in Rotherham, England with particular reference to widespread allegations of sexual abuse carried out by gangs of Asian men.  In the period between 1997 and 2013, at least 1,400 children were subjected to sexual abuse at the hands of Asian men.  In most all cases, repeatedly so.  These children were then further abused by the system.  Police didn't believe them or their parents and didn't follow-up on allegations.  The Police lost evidence.  The Social Services department of Rotherham council didn't pursue allegations.

Some of you may already have heard of Rotherham and its Social Services department.  They are one and the same group that removed foster children away from a family because that family were found to be members of the UK Independence Party (UKIP).  This is a party that, amongst other policies promotes the withdrawal of the UK from the European Union and also tougher immigration policies.  Given what we now know about Rotherham Social Services, it might have served those foster parents better if they had simply declared themselves as paedophiles and rapists instead of the supporters of a legitimate political party.  A party that is, because of its popular policies, seriously threatening to the major parties.

Let me though get back to this latest scandal. 

Look again at the dates mentioned above - 1997 to 2013.  In 2002, following increasing concern amongst youth workers and mounting evidence, a 'draft report' was prepared which highlighted these concerns and the strong evidence of child sexual exploitation being carried out on a large scale.  This report didn't see the light of day because senior police and council officials objected to the criticism of their organisations contained therein.  So the abuse continued and probably still continues. 

An opportunity to face-up to the failings of the perennially Labour-run council was missed and young children paid the price for years and years.  Lest I being accused of bringing party politics into this issue and making political capital out of this tragedy - a charge regularly trotted out by Labour, to deflect justifiable criticism - let me say that on the abdication of responsibility for its failings, Labour has previous form.  I have written here on the awful Mid Staffs events and here on the tragedies in Cumbria.  These can be considered just the tip of the incompetence iceberg that is Labour.

The Labour party cannot distance itself from responsibility.  These events happened on their watch!  They were in charge and they chose either to simply close their eyes or willfully to ignore the plight of the abused children on the grounds of political correctness.  If Labour had pursued the allegations, they would have exposed the cancer eating at the heart of the Asian community in Rotherham and other Labour-run towns.  A cancer that has gangs of Asian men - most all, seemingly Muslim - preying on young girls (though young boys were also targeted) .  Grooming them and then gang-raping them and forcing them into prostitution and trafficking them.

And so to the title of this piece. 

The Labour Party councillor in charge of Children's Services for 2005 to 2010 was Shaun Wright.  He resigned in 2010, as mounting evidence of the abuse became more widely known.  He was subsequently selected, as the Labour Party candidate for the elected position of Police and Crime Commissioner for South Yorkshire - I am not making this up!  In what was previously styled as the Socialist Republic of South Yorkshire, he was duly elected.  Note, prior to the emergence of UKIP, ballot papers in such areas were not so much counted as weighed, such was the dominance of Labour. 

This Shaun Wright  is still in office.  His deputy, Tracey Cheetham, has resigned.  Ms Cheetham is also a Labour party councilor and, since she represents Barnsley, another rotten Labour borough but one not so far stained by the muck sloshing around in Rotherham, she can be seen to be doing the decent thing and quitting.  Mr Wright has quit too.  Not his £85,000 a year job but the Labour Party.  Mr Wright seems to believe that resigning from Rotherham Council, in 2010 was all the resigning he needed to do!

Mr Wright isn't alone though.  Martin Kimber, the Chief Executive of Rotherham Council has also chosen to remain in his £158,160 paid post.  The 'Strategic Director of Children and Young People Services' is the fifth person to hold that title since 2009.  The £112,080 is no doubt a comfort and would be difficult for many to simply give-up.  Some might say that Mr Kimber, appointed in 2009 and the Strategic Director of etc., came late to the scene and don't need to resign.  I say that that is simply rubbish!  They get these high salaries and inflation-proof and high pensions because they  are supposed to take responsibility.  Kimber earns a higher salary than David Cameron, the UK Prime Minister!

Mr Wright should resign or should be fired and when fired his pension should be withheld.

Mr Kimber should resign or should be fired.  So too should the 'Strategic Director of Children and Young People Services'.

The pensions of the former Chief Executives and the former  'Strategic Director of Children and Young People Services' should be cut.  These people simply didn't earn them. 

The Police too should clean house.  Police officers simply didn't do their job.  The Jay Report tells tales of the police being told about suspected abuse and the police ignoring this because they had other matters to pursue.  Police officers need to be fired and pensions cut.

They all failed to do their jobs and they all failed the people of Rotherham.  Mostly though, they all failed the young people who have had their lives ruined by their negligence and by the criminal behavior of others.   

The politicians in Rotherham should also resign, if their tenure started before 2013.  They too have failed the people of Rotherham.  I suspect that part of their failure was politically motivated.  They simply didn't want to alienate a core constituency - the Asian vote - by highlighting the atrocities being meted out by members of that community.  Enough being coy.  Asian community is the politically correct term for Pakistani males.  For it is them, Pakistani men, that have committed these crimes - crimes against young children.  Some of these Pakistani men are now in prison but many more are out there, still committing these awful crimes.  Check out the stories on the Oxford and Rochdale sexual exploitation rings and you will find the common thread.  The political elite and police and councils cowering behind political correctness refuse to name this menace - predatory Pakistani males - for what it is. 

If these council officers, police officers and local politicians had the merest shred of common decency, then they would resign, immediately.  If they don't they must be sacked.






Saturday, August 23, 2014

Answer to the ISIS dilemma

Western governments are in denial.

Right now they know that there is no appetite for any kind of 'boots on the ground' nor for any tie-up with the odious Assad regime. 

So what can they do to address this very significant threat? 

They are no doubt counting on ISIS' fifth columns within the USA, UK and France to commit bombing atrocities such that a groundswell of opinion for military intervention builds.  They must calculate how many bombings are needed.  Another Boston or maybe a spectacular like 9/11 or another Fusilier Lee Rigby or 7/7 in London?  Or maybe this time in Paris, which has a very special concern about its growing and self-alienated Muslim minority?

We should be alarmed because these atrocities will occur.  There is an inevitability about this that has escaped the media.

Islam is a religion of dominance.  Its adherents allow for no 'non-believers'.  You are either a Muslim and follower of Mohammed or you are an infidel.  Simply put, ones that doesn't follow Islam.  It will come as no comfort to Christians, Jews, Hindus, Taoists, Buddhists, Atheists or those that follow the Jedi tradition, that their long and  often deeply held beliefs, count for nothing.  They are infidels and they must either convert to Islam or be punished.

The punishment is now being meted out on a daily basis in Iraq, to Christians and to Yazidis.  Also now, we hear, to Shiite Muslims.  The punishment is death.  There is no concept of co-existence, no 'my way or the highway'.  It's the Muslim way or death! Nothing extreme about this Sunni Muslim religion!  Think about this when you next hear some liberal fool tell you that Islam is the religion of peace!   Look twice and listen thrice at the 'moderate' Islamist that says that these fanatics don't represent the true face of Islam.  Simply put, these fanatics do represent Islam.

Catholics and Protestants fought many wars and caused countless deaths in furtherance of the schism in Christianity but the numbers have the potential to fade into insignificance compared to the deaths that will flow from the conflict between the two strands of Islam.  The 8 year long Iraq/Iran war cost the lives of an estimated million souls but that can be viewed as an appetizer for the multi-course banquet of death that awaits.  The 200,000 deaths in the proxy war being fought in Syria is also barely a taste of things to come. 

Right now, Sunni Saudi Arabia, with its extreme (though that term is relative) Wahabi sect, is at war with Shiite Iran and, in Syria and Iraq, the Saudis are in the ascendancy.  I say this, not to seek support for Iran, who are as likely to be as murderous as are the Saudi and Qatari backed ISIS fanatics.   Rather, this is a statement of the current state of play, however, should as seems ever more likely, Iran complete its quest for nuclear weapons, then the whole dynamic changes. 

In this goal of achieving a nuclear capability,  the Iranians are being aided by the inept policies of the Obama administration and a resurgent Russia (also a beneficiary of Obama's failed policies) as well as a feeble European Union foreign affairs effort.

The civilised world faces an existential battle. 

Communist China is feeling the effects of this.  India has seen this in the recent past, so has , Argentina, France, Nigeria and the aforementioned USA and UK to name just some of the countries.  Even the peacefully neutral Swedes and Norwegians are experiencing the conflict between their open societies and those of their Islamic migrant communities.  Denmark too has seen the illiberal consequences of allowing a cartoonist to publish his works.  Indeed Russia too, has tragic experience of trying to co-exist with the 'religion of peace' but Putin, having, some in the West say 'brutally dealt' with Islamic dissidents and terrorists, is currently playing a different game to secure Russia's borders and to poke America and the EU, in the eye at every opportunity.

So the solution?

First some history. 

When the Iraqi dictator, Saddam Hussein, invaded Kuwait in 1990, Margaret Thatcher was reported as telling the American President, George H Bush, not to go 'wobbly' and to have 'stiffened his spine' on the issue of confronting Saddam.  She saw the threat posed by Saddam and so too did Bush #1 quickly come to this realisation.

With, ISIS, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Qatar, the civilised world faces a similar choice - either we fight now, in the sands of Arabia and Persia or we fight soon on the streets of London, Paris, New York, Beijing and Dehli.

Make no mistake, this is a fight that isn't going to go away.  It takes a certain type of fanaticism to hack-off the heads of people that don't follow your brand of religion.  The same kind of fanaticism that causes people to fly planes into buildings or walk into a hotel and randomly shoot people or to strap on a suicide bomb vest and detonate the bomb in a crowded market place.  Does it sound like these are people that can be reasoned with?  The lure of the 72 virgins is just too great for these people.  So since death is what they most want, death should be visited upon them and their supporters.

The solutions are not pretty but there is nothing nice about the aftermath of a suicide bombing or the beheading of innocents.

The world needs to decide where it stands and then back-up their declared position.  Russia needs to say if they are with the West or against it.  There can be no fence-sitting or neutrality.  Why?  Well this is about all-out war.  And it will be bloody and terrible.  ISIS and similar intolerant organisations need to be destroyed, not neutered, annihilated completely. 

Similarly Saudi Arabia and Qatar need to be brought to heel.  They cannot enjoy the fruits of western civilisation and industry while at the same time seeking the destruction of those societies.  The leadership of these countries need to be changed to reflect the required new direction that these countries must take.

Iran must immediately cease funding its proxies in Lebanon and Palestine and completely destroy its nuclear programme.  Again, regime change is needed.

Pakistan must give-up its nuclear weapons.  At this time the state is too unstable to be trusted with such weapons.  Its security services operate as a 'state within a state' and must be brought under democratic control before they decide to pass on enriched uranium to Islamic terrorists.

In Iraq and Syria, the allies - those that are 'with us' - need to impose a very heavy and brutally ruthless, military solution.  Any opposition, any, must be crushed and crushed completely.  There can be no hand-wringing in the media or from liberals in the West.  The consequences of a softly-softly approach can already be seen on the streets of our cities where ISIS fellow-travelers become ever more bold in pushing their murderous ideologies.  Where Islamsists kill a British soldier , on the streets of the capital and try to hack-off his head.  Where Islamists explode bombs at the finish-line of a marathon race.  Unfeeling brutality and force must be met with the a multiplied version of the same.  Make no mistake though, this will mean bombs dropped by planes and so called civilian casualties but we will also require to put 'boots on the ground'.  We will also need to impose economic sanctions against these people - starve them of the goods and yes, foods,  that their people need.  Frankly faced with pictures of the victims of ISIS or the pictures of starving ISIS followers, I would always be moved by the former and never by the latter.

The approach to Iraq and Syria must also be applied in North Africa and Nigeria.

In the home countries, Islamists must also make a decision.  Are they with their home country, in the existential fight against radical Islam or are they with the enemy?  If the latter, then they must be imprisoned - yes whole families interred.  You, as an Islamist, cannot live in the USA, UK or France etc., and burn the flags of those countries or spit on its soldiers.  You cannot declare certain areas as alcohol-free or forbid people to have dogs or women to walk around without a hijab.  These home countries and their traditions existed ever before you did.

Immediately, the oxygen of publicity must be deprived to Islamic organisations, the Muslim Council in the UK and CAIR in the USA are at best, just apologists for their murderous co-religionists.  They place an equivalence on the actions of these barbarians with those of the West  They insist on applying the laws of the host countries when it suits them, while all the time trying to impose Sharia law.

Immediately, any of the ISIS fighters, from western countries, that return 'home', must be imprisoned.  They must be taken out of circulation.

Immediately, the 'hate' legislation that exists in so many countries must be applied against these people that would threaten our very existence.  They may not all be prepared to be front-line 'fighters' but they support, with their hate-filled words, the elimination of Western ways.    There is a 'hands-off' policy linked to the failed  multi-culturalist policies that the West has adopted, which exempts Muslims from the application of law.  This has to stop.

Immediately, the Palestinian boil needs to be lanced.  The Abbas regime in the West Bank must be issued with an ultimatum.  Either you accept the right of Israel to exist or we (the West) will immediately cease all aid and impose a blockade to starve you into submission and we will fund opposition to Fatah, that does want peace.

In respect of Gaza, a similar ultimatum.  Either give-up the ISIS like Hamas terrorists or face the brutal consequences of your continued intransigence.  You have to decide if you want war or peace but know that war will be total and Gaza flattened!

The UK Prime Minister, David Cameron has talked of a generational struggle against this poisonous ideology and other politicians are coming to realise the battles that must be fought.  As said earlier though, this isn't about the traditional 'West'  This struggle affects India, China, Latin America, Africa and indeed, all of the world.

Who are you with?