Friday, 16 January 2009

Coming apart at the seams?

Ensuring equality and uniformity in education.

(This is reposted from my place because I haven't had time to come up with another one tonight.)

Something odd is happening.

Following on the heels of the lie that state schools are producing better results than public schools, Ed. ‘So What’ Balls has declared that poverty and so-called ‘disadvantage’ is no bar to academic success.

That’s true, as it happens, but why is he saying it now? After more than a decade of excuses for lousy teaching, dumbing down of exams, children applying to university with results the university know full well mean nothing, universities having to teach basic spelling and grammar because the schools didn’t bother, claims by Righteous all over the press and the internet that only rich kids succeed (led by the proclamations of the Toynbee), even Tom Harris being shouted down on his own blog for mentioning that perhaps some kids might be brighter than others and it might not all be down to money…

Now we have the Monster for Re-education himself, the man who wanted to remove any actual learning from school and replace it with touchy-feely subjects that naturally don’t include any actual touching or feeling because that would be bullying and sexual assault, declaring that schools are just making excuses for poor performance.

Well of course they are, you goggle-eyed cretin. We’ve been screaming it for years. Universities have told you. Some of the few remaining sensible teachers have told you. The legions of Burberry-clad drones you’ve produced could have told you, if they had left school with the ability to articulate. We know the schools are in a mess. Everyone knows. We also know who caused it. You, Balls, you flappy-eyelidded bloated buffoon. You and your Righteous warriors of equality and political correctness. You did it. Have you really only just realised?

Every time anyone mentions the idiocy that goes on in our schools, we are met with Righteous declarations of ‘Elitist Nazi racist BNP right-wing Tory bully-boy’ and told that every instance we highlight, every single one, is just an urban legend blown out of proportion by the media. Every time someone points out that differences in achievement might have more to do with differences in intelligence rather than social class, we are shouted down. Examples are held up of schools in ‘disadvantaged’ areas that perform poorly.

Well of course they perform poorly. Bouncy Balls has just admitted the reason. They can get more money by claiming to be full of poor disadvantaged thickos than by actually doing their jobs and teaching these kids some real knowledge. It’s profitable to have a high proportion of failure. It’s profitable to have a load of special needs kids, whether they really are or not. It’s profitable for the school and it’s profitable for the Righteous pretend charities that create and sustain the illusion that a huge percentage of the population has a vaguely-defined disorder or two.

This whole administration has been built on excuses, lies, dependency and benefits. All of it. The Incredible Blinking Man has apparently managed to keep his eyes open long enough to realise that it can’t work. Now the money’s run out, it can’t work. There is no endless stream of benefits. There is no more credit. There’s nobody to pay all the tax the Gorgon needs to sustain his vast army of State employees, especially when they retire.

For the last decade, schools have turned out people who will never find this or any other website because they can’t spell it. They can’t read books because books are full of correctly-spelled words they don’t recognise. They have no real skills, they have GCSE’s in administration and social work. They have been told that they are too good for menial but essential jobs, even when they aren’t. They have been told to expect nothing but the best, no life but the good life, and those evil middle class taxpayers will fund it all.

Thousands of those middle class taxpayers are now out of work. They aren’t paying tax any more. Raising taxes on the rest will put them out of work or out of the country. People are not buying stuff because they can’t afford to. Production and imports are falling because there is no market for the stuff here any more.

So now, somewhere in the dim recesses of the hive-mind of socialism, a lone neuron has realised that in order to make money, the country has to produce something. In order to do that, it needs people capable of producing something. The potential in all those schoolkids can only be realised if they are actually taught to use whatever abilities they are born with, and to stop expecting to have everything handed to them while they laze about in front of the TV with the Argos catalogue.

Too late, Blinky. You can’t fix this in time. You have a generation of worthless, self-important Entitled now and most of them will pass those attitudes on to their children. It will take at least a decade before any change is noticed, even if you make those changes right now. It will take at least two or three generations to undo the mess you’ve made.

He’s not the only one. The Ginger Midget has declared that the country’s immigration controls are a shambles. Yes they are, Bleary, and your Righteous drones have shouted down anyone who’s said that for years.

And Bananaman has stated that the war on terror isn’t working. You mindless oaf, Milkybar. Your government used it to set up cameras, ID cards, pseudoplods who don’t know the law, airports where you have to strip almost naked to get through security, photographers and trainspotters arrested as terrorists, and an opposition MP raided without a warrant. You used it to fine people for overfilled bins and against another country's banks. Now you admit it was all a sham? Too late.

You know the only gleam of hope in all this? They already sound like they’re in opposition.
I hope they’re practicing for the inevitable.

Of course, it could all be a distraction so we won't notice this


Anonymous said...

Have a look at ed strong, The Mother Blogger. You'll be glad you did. Honest.

Here's a sample:

Are the American Media Finally Seeing Through Israeli Propaganda Lies?
« H E » Propaganda & The Media :: Israel & Palestinian Resistance :: email
posted Thursday, 15 January 2009
Source: As Israel pulverises Gaza, questions and doubts about Israeli policy are becoming more prominent in the American media.
Israel's disproportionate retaliation in Gaza is increasingly recognized as both brutal and ultimately futile.

In destroying Gaza, Israel is also destroying the American taboo that has ensured the country such unstintingly favorable media coverage.

It's a common, almost clich├ęd observation that the American media is less critical of Israeli policy than the Israeli media.

In mainstream American depictions of the ceaseless misery of the Middle East, Israeli righteousness and Arab violence are routinely emphasised.

The reality of Israeli settlements and Palestinian suffering have been, at best, a footnote.

Conservatives often complain that the news isn't even more biased toward the Jewish state – or the most hawkish elements within it – but such carping both obscures and reinforces the real distortion in American Middle East coverage, serving as a pre-emptive warning to any outlet that might show too much sympathy for the Palestinians.

(The crudeness of Israel's most vociferous detractors on the far left doesn't help, since it further marginalises criticism of Israel as the preserve of cranks who can't see a difference between Dachau and Jenin.)

Slowly, though, something is changing. As Israel pulverises Gaza, questions and doubts about Israeli policy are becoming more prominent in the American media.

The failure of the war in Iraq and the attendant discrediting of neoconservatism has opened up new space in the American conversation.

With the American right dejected and weakened, there's less pressure on the press to display the kind of boorish one-sidedness that self-congratulatory conservatives like to call "moral clarity".

Israel's disproportionate retaliation in Gaza is increasingly recognised as both brutal and, in all likelihood, ultimately futile.

In destroying Gaza, Israel is also destroying the American taboo that has ensured the country such unstintingly favourable media coverage.

On December 31, CNN took on the contentious question of whether Israel or Hamas broke the ceasefire, precipitating the current fighting.

First, the network aired a clip of the liberal Palestinian legislator Mustafa Barghouti saying:

"The world press community or media community is overwhelmed with the Israeli narrative, which is incorrect. The Israeli spokespersons have been spreading lies all over.

"The reality and the truth is that the side that broke this truce and this ceasefire was Israel. Two months before it ended, Israel started attacking Rafah, started attacking Hamas and never lifted the blockade on Gaza."

Ordinarily, TV journalists would follow such a clip – if they even aired it in the first place – with one of Israel making its case, and would stop at that, leaving an audience already predisposed against the Palestinians to sort out the truth.

Instead, anchor Rick Sanchez did something that should be commonplace, but sadly is not: he endeavoured to find out who was right.

"And you know what we did? I've checked with some of the folks here at our international desk, and I went to them and asked:

'What was he talking about, and do we have any information on that?'" said Sanchez. And he reported that his sources confirmed that Barghouti was right.

Since then, questioning and outright condemning Israeli actions have become increasingly common in the establishment press. On January 8, the op-ed page of the New York Times ran three opinion pieces critical of Israel.

"When it is shelled by its neighbour, Israel has to do something," wrote columnist Nick Kristof. "But Israel's right to do something doesn't mean it has the right to do anything."

Last week, a new issue of Time magazine appeared, its cover showing a star of David behind rows of barbed wire and the headline "Why Israel can't win".

The extremely conservative Wall Street Journal opinion page ran a piece by George Bisharat with the headline "Israel is committing war crimes". "Israel's current assault on the Gaza Strip cannot be justified by self-defence," it began.

"Rather, it involves serious violations of international law, including war crimes. … Hamas fighters have also violated the laws of warfare, but their misdeeds do not justify Israel's acts."

No doubt, some of Israel's most aggressive partisans are going to be alarmed by this sudden shift in the American discourse. They're used to dismissing the world's criticism of Israel as the mutterings of antisemites and bien-pensant third-worldists.

The US has been a cocoon that protects Israel and its advocates from facing harsh judgments. But Israel has been ill served by America's endless indulgence.

What is happening in Gaza endangers, first and foremost, the benighted people who live there and who are dying by the hundreds.

It also endangers Israel itself, pushing already elusive prospects for peace ever more out of reach.

An American media that turned a blind eye to Israeli expansionism and human rights abuses ultimately made the Jewish state less, not more, secure.

Without the US putting pressure on Israel to dismantle the settlements and loosen the blockade in Gaza, leaders there had neither the incentive nor the political cover to do so.

Now that the American press is displaying a bit of courage in facing an unfolding catastrophe abetted by American leadership, perhaps our politicians will have room to do the same.

tags: israel media america propaganda lies

links: digg this technorati reddit


and another

Bombing Gaza: The Start of US/Israel War Against Muslim World
« H E » Israel & Palestinian Resistance :: Middle East: Zionism & Imperialism :: email
posted Tuesday, 13 January 2009
Source: This can only end in one way: a general war, perhaps a world war, pitting the U.S. and Israel against virtually every nation in the region.
In effect, the entire Muslim world. A new Hundred Years War, a molten eruption of religious conflict

Why is Israel pounding Gaza? Well, we know the official explanation, which goes something like this: if you Americans were being targeted by crude, albeit potentially lethal, rockets from, say, Mexico, on a daily basis, how would you respond?

Israel, we are told, had to take on Hamas. As Barack Obama put it, while campaigning in Sderot, the Israeli response is "part of being a country." They had no choice.

This is bollocks, as everyone but the brain-dead realize. To begin with, Hamas offered a truce and had abided by the previous cease-fire, but the Israelis weren't interested.

Instead, Tel Aviv chose to unleash what the whole world sees as an appallingly disproportionate response, raining death on one of the most tightly packed urban environments on earth and launching what looks to be an invasion and reoccupation of the Gaza Strip.

Of course, any military action by the IDF against Hamas' ragtag fighters is inherently disproportionate, given the radical imbalance in the power relationship between the two.

Israel, after all, has the most effective, high-tech military machine in the region, bought and paid for by U.S. taxpayers – and with no expense spared on account of that.

In any case, however, many are puzzled by what seems to be an inherently doomed project.

The attack will merely popularize Hamas, without changing anything, and Israel will wind up back at square one, caught in a Sisyphean nightmare of constantly re-invading the same territory, then retreating once again. But what if they don't retreat?

The assumption that this is an overreaction to the pinpricks inflicted by Hamas is flat-out wrong: the current conflict, which is escalating rapidly, has zero to do with a few rockets lobbed over Israel's impregnable perimeter.

That was merely a pretext, and a thin one at that. Yet the exhibition of such a reckless disregard for truth and world opinion hints at the real agenda at work here and underscores the arrogance underlying it.

If we step back and look at Israel's strategy in recent years, the Gaza reoccupation – or, at least, regime-change in Hamastan – makes perfect sense.

Sharon's was a tactical retreat: one small step backward, to be followed by a couple of giant steps forward. Lebanon's recent agony was step one. The Gaza massacre is step two.

The third is anyone's guess. Syria? Lebanon, again? Kurdistan might be fun.

No one knows, of course, but the general outlines of what is going down, as we say in America, were laid out in A Clean Break: A New Strategy for the Realm, a policy paper produced by a remarkable group of American analysts in 1996, for then-Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The realm being Israel, and the unique group that produced it characterized by their centrality in pushing for war with Iraq. Led by Richard Perle, the "Clean Break" group consisted of James Colbert, Charles Fairbanks Jr., Douglas Feith, Robert Loewenberg, David Wurmser, and Meyrav Wurmser.

All of these august personages, but especially Perle, can claim the dubious credit of having co-authored what the late Gen. William E. Odom ruefully referred to as the greatest military disaster in American history.

While Perle is now wailing over at The National Interest that he had nothing to do with it, that it was all George W. Bush's fault, neither history nor the gods will absolve him.

He and his fellow graduates of the Scoop Jackson Academy and Finishing School for Laptop Bombardiers are so on the record as being the earliest and most vociferous advocates of regime-change throughout the Middle East, and not just Iraq, that their denials of responsibility are a veritable pastiche of mendacity. Surely they jest.

Yet they just as surely were not jesting in "A Clean Break," where the case is made that Israel is in a rut: Israel is endangered by an inability to break out of its settler-colony

isolation, and, in the process, renew the Zionist project internationally. While no mention is made of the demographic time-bomb, it can be clearly heard ticking in the background.

A new aggressiveness is called for, the Perle group argued, a clean break with the passivity of the past. They recommended a policy of regime-change throughout the immediate vicinity of Israel:

"Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria.

This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq – an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right – as a means of foiling Syria's regional ambitions."

Perle and Co. urged Netanyahu to strike out in every direction. First, go north, they advised:

"Syria challenges Israel on Lebanese soil. An effective approach, and one with which Americans can sympathize, would be if Israel seized the strategic initiative along its northern borders by engaging Hezbollah, Syria, and Iran, as the principal agents of aggression in Lebanon."

Syria is deemed the penultimate prize, a ripe apple waiting to fall from the tree. All that's required is a little vigorous shaking.

Lurking behind these dominoes, however, is Israel's chief antagonist, Iran, the current target of the Israel lobby's campaign to gin up yet another war in the Middle East.

All these scenarios have played out, and quite recently, in rapid succession. Reading "A Clean Break," one might almost be scanning today's headlines. This is more than mere prescience: these are policymakers, not college professors, we're talking about.

Nearly all of them were central players in the foreign policy councils of the past administration. All are exemplars of the neoconservative network, a camarilla of pro-Israel ideologues that has wreaked such havoc in eight years that it may take 800 more before we recover.

A central pillar of neoconservative dogma is its passionate attachment – as George Washington would put it – to what it perceives as Israel's national interests.

"A Clean Break" contains an undertone of hostility to the U.S., which is seen as being put in an impossible position of mediating between irreconcilable foes. U.S. "intervention" in internal Israeli affairs is subtly bemoaned, and this fits in nicely with the theme of economic independence and a phasing out of economic aid – although they aren't quite ready to give up military aid until such time as Israel's armaments supply can be assured.

In any case, the clear implication of all this is to reduce U.S. influence and allow the Israelis to unleash their full military power in a bid to "shape the regional environment in ways that grant Israel the room to refocus its energies back to where they are most needed."

Elbow room – or Lebensraum?

Of course, any war Israel involves itself in will drag in the United States, its principal patron and protector.

In this, America is truly an empire of unique type – one that has been taken hostage by one of its own satellites. That, at least, is the intention, and, so far, the plan seems to be working.

The endgame is a general war against Israel's principal enemy in the region: Iran. The Lobby is already gearing up to make the new president miserable until he finally caves.

What we have to look forward to in the next four years is lots of aggressive "diplomacy," to be followed by even more draconian economic sanctions and the looming threat of war.

Israel is following the "Clean Break" plan almost to the letter, shedding its old role as a dependent settler-colony under continuous siege.

In Gaza – and, be assured, throughout the Middle East – Israel is asserting its new role as regional hegemon in a multi-polar world.

Israel, not the U.S., is taking the initiative and leading its great ally and "protector" around by the nose, with the Lobby serving as an effective rein on any sudden spasms of self-interest.

This can only end in one way: a general war, perhaps a world war, pitting the U.S. and Israel against virtually every nation in the region – in effect, the entire Muslim world.

A new Hundred Years War, a molten eruption of religious conflict that reaches into every continent and smolders for generations until the last embers of hatred and memory are cooled. A century of escalating terrorism and devastating war: is this what the American people want?

Well, no, but the past eight years have been an object lesson in how easily people can be bamboozled into something they most definitely do not want.

It can – and doubtless will – happen again. Indeed, the pattern is repeating itself with the new administration, and Obama hasn't even taken the oath of office.

Look at Gaza and see the future. Then go out and do something about it.

tags: us israel war gaza muslim

links: digg this technorati reddit


and another

The CIA Drug Cartel
« H E » Radical Left Politics :: Western Imperialism :: Sex...Drugs...Porn :: email
posted Thursday, 15 January 2009

Source: The CIA and Narco-Imperialism
Leon Panetta's nomination is Barack Obama's symbolic statement that his administration is making a clean break with the CIA's recent past.

But the agency will never relinquish its role as main architect of the international narcotics network.

Leon Panetta, the former congressman and Clinton chief of staff, has no background in any of America's spy agencies, foreign or domestic. And that's a wonderful reason for Barack Obama to nominate him to head the CIA.

Critics of Obama's choice of Panetta, a Washington insider, argue that the CIA chief should have experience in the agency's peculiar culture.

That's like saying that the best qualification for U.S. Attorney General is having spent a lifetime as a member of the Mafia.

The Central Intelligence Agency has been an institutional criminal enterprise for its entire existence.

I'm not talking about the business of espionage and its attendant lies and double-dealing. Hypothetically speaking, the tools of the spy trade can be used for good purposes or bad. But the CIA's historical nexus is the drug trade, an unmitigated evil.

One of the CIA's first assignments in the aftermath of World War Two was to undermine the electoral systems of France and Italy, to make sure that popular communist parties did not get close to power.

To that end, the CIA helped the Italian and French mafias get back on their feet by establishing the global drug trade. In return, the French and Italian gangsters acted as the CIA's muscle in Europe.

That unholy alliance set the pattern for the CIA's next six decades. Wherever the agency ventured, international narcotics delivery systems proliferated, and the drug trade flourished.

During the Vietnam War, the CIA organized the Southeast Asian heroin trade, centered in Burma's Golden Triangle, creating a global empire with profit centers in every Black neighborhood in the United States.

In the 1980s, the agency facilitated the spread of crack cocaine into America's ghettos, to enrich its allies in U.S. wars against leftists in Latin America.

Over time, it became standard operating procedure for the CIA to establish close relationships with the criminal classes in every area of operations, and to work through these criminals to achieve U.S. policy objectives.

Today, the CIA is Narcotics-Central for the planet, with its cocaine capital in Colombia and its heroin capital in Afghanistan.

As the overseer of narco-states and the main architect of the international narcotics network, the United States may be described as a narco-imperialist power.

Of course, the controversy over Leon Panetta's nomination to head the CIA doesn't even touch on the agency's role as Godfather to the international drug trade.

Rather, it's about what Barack Obama plans to do to detoxify and cleanse the agency of George Bush's torture, extraordinary rendition and assorted other War on Terror paraphernalia.

This is especially sensitive since there still exist a few Democrats who would really like to sort out where the CIA's crimes end, and George Bush's begin.

Leon Panetta's nomination is Barack Obama's symbolic statement that his administration is making a clean break with the CIA's recent past.

In the end, Obama is likely to keep more of the Bush War on Terror CIA than he rejects. But no administration can separate the agency from the international drug trade. That's part of the CIA's DNA.

tags: cia drugs cartel narcotics imperialism

links: digg this technorati reddit


A wee bit more full-on than the Death to Ragheads, money-money-money and tits 'n' totty of your favourite site, this is grown-up blogging, rarely see an ad from Amazon, scarce a mention of Derek Draper.

Sweet Dreams.

Anonymous said...

Blimey, wish I could cut n paste.

Cato said...

Great writing Leg-iron. 10/10.

Anonymous said...

Well, you can see the problem, I can see it and everybody I know can see it and have seen it for years but how can you change it?
I despair at the lack of proper 'Opposition' which is why this nightmare just goes on and on.

Londonistan-on-Thames said...

Anony 3:04 - You expect me to read all that? Less is more old boy.

Earthlet Nigel said...

Leg Iron,

What you say is very true. However those, statistically who can see through the lies are in a disunited minority, and so easliy ignored. Nu liebore wants to keep it this way. They don't wish or want to deal with intellectual dissent.

I looked at going into teaching, but the hoops and loops created deter many, myself included. This despite them saying they wished for ex-forces to enter teaching, truth is they don't want us in the system.

So it will continue unless radical change is made now.

The Penguin said...

Spot on as ever, Leg Iron.

Caught some of the outbreak of the truth at
but had yet to have a dig at the latest Balls.

The Penguin

JD said...

What a great and succinct article. It would seem the parasite has killed its host and will have to drop off and die. I hope it doesn't do too much more damage in the process. And yes, the opposition, or lack thereof is also responsible for not stopping the rot when it had the chance - no balls. Not like nulab - wrong type of Balls.I am so glad I can read and write. JD.

Bill d'Sarse said...

Anon 08:01
I despair at the lack of proper 'Opposition' which is why this nightmare just goes on and on.

Of course, if the current Opposition did what everyone thinks they should do they would fall into the bear trap laid by Labour. Outside a run up to a general election any good policies would be immediately adopted by Labour (been done before?) and any others trashed. So that would leave the Opposition with little reserve ammunition to kill them off in a GE. By doing as little as they can get away with, the Conservatives are playing the longer game with the aim of deposing this current bunch of charlatans. Labour are helping themselves out of the door as they are out of ideas and the Conservatives are not helping Labour stay by passing theirs across.

Dick the Prick said...

I can't remember the context but I seem to think that Blair knew on day 1 his plans would make things worse before they got better, calling them 'the lost generation'. However, what they hadn't counted on was their designs for later development were utter utter bollox.

My chum was a 'learning mentor' which seemed to be counselling kids who got disciplined! Surely pointless.

Anonymous said...

Bill d'Sarse, I wish I had your faith and can only hope that you are right. From where I sit I can see my local A&E shut down, my local hospital shutting down, my Post Offices shut down, my Police Station shut down, the local kids gathered in drunken gangs, immigrants in local housing with benefits, knuckle dragging gobshites roam the streets whilst the Police have totally disappeared, even the concept of collecting rubbish has long gone. If this is the Tories idea of keeping their powder dry I think it may be a trifle to late.

Ampers said...

Very good, Leg Iron,

I may "borrow" this for my blog, with full acknowledgements and a link to your site where this originally appeared if I may.

Dave said...

When will the NuLab trolls realise that they've been duped big time?

The education of the masses was started by the Church in places like the Potteries against the wishes of the landowners and factory owners. They did not want their workforce to be able to read or write, They feared a literate workforce. The church and the early labour movement enabled thousands to read and write and so improve their prospects. Before this there was no such thing as upward mobility.
I think that the "upper classes" vowed to wreak their revenge and return the masses to illiteracy. The "intelligensia" infiltrated both government and education and began the drip drip eroding of lieteracy.
The landowners, mill owners and factory owners may have gone, but their heirs are now seeing the fruits of thosee efforts.
We now have a functionally illiterate and unemployable underclass, just as it was pre 1800- only this time there are no "pits or pots" for them to work in.

Another doublespeak term must be added to Orwell's list
Education is illiteracy

And NuLab collaborated in the evil deed

Gareth said...

Growth = spending or debt
Debt = wealth
Prudence = profligacy
Investment = spending
Normal = abnormal
Best placed = furthest up Shit Creek
Security = Everyone a criminal

This is the brave new world of the Fabian Society.

Anonymous said...

Any way to stop George Galloway hogging the comments section here?

The ignorant tool has obviously never heard of the Islamic concept of hudna, revered and emulated by Hamas and other jihadists because it was conceived and used by Mohammed himself when he embarked on his early jihads against non-believers.

Hudna - it's worth looking up.

Sir Henry Morgan said...


What Ampers just said - me too.

Dave H said...

"They already sound like they’re in opposition."

Except I wonder how different NuConservative will be from NuLab. Cam has already ruled out a return to grammar schools and affirmed support for the academies.

That doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to the current bastards being given an almighty kicking.

electro-kevin said...

I don't believe that it's the teachers' fault.

They are glorified crowd controllers now. The basic problem is bad parenting funded and inadvertantly encouraged by bad government.

Take away the right of teachers to punish and assert authority then you may as well forget teaching altogether.

The rest - acceptance and hiding of falling standards - is to cover up the failure of leftist policy.

We're doomed.

mikey said...

"Great writing Leg-iron. 10/10."

same as that...wonderful stuff

Leg-iron said...

Ampers, Sir henry, anyone - as far as I'm concerned, anything I put up is public domain. Copy anything you think useful.

E-K, you're right, teachers are crowd controllers without crowd control authority. They can't punish and they're stuck with rules they don't like but can't change.

No wonder we're getting so few new teachers. It's getting downright dangerous in some of those schools.

Leg-iron said...

oops - I meant anything I write can be regarded as public domain. OH's stuff and posts from other sites might have other rules.

So any text marked 'Leg-iron' is free to use. Stuff marked for other authors comes under their rules.

Just to make it clear.

Damo Mackerel said...

The problem that I see is why are we so hell bent on keeping children in school until they're 16? The Government now wants to bring this up to 18. Doesn't the Government realise that schooling may not be suitable for everyone? Than to top it off, the young people of today are encouraged, no brainwashed into getting a place in some university. As if a university degree is the end all and be all.

Wouldn't it be better to lower the age to 14 and encourage some of those 14 years olds, ill tempered towards schooling, to take up positions in one of the trades or in the manufacturing industry... well what's left of it anyway?

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails