- July 2018
- January 2018
- November 2017
- August 2017
- December 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- March 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- April 2015
- March 2015
- February 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- April 2014
- March 2014
- February 2014
- December 2013
- November 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- July 2013
- June 2013
- May 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
Category Archives: Media
It starts out quite interesting, actually. It walks the reader through history as Cheney sees it first, starting off with the founding fathers and the usual stuff about freedom and liberty, and he dwells on the relationship between the US and Europe in the second world war somewhat.
Reading through the lines you start to see the changes in attitude from what started out as good sound principles of freedom and liberty to what we see today (not sure he intended that to show through as clearly as it does). From what I deduced, it was somewhere between the end of the Vietnam war and the arrival of Carter as president the US started to become noticeably aggressive and interventionist abroad.
The book implies that Reagan was single handedly responsible for bringing down the Berlin wall with his Brandenburg speech. Not true.
It is an interesting read initially for the non-American as it offers an insight into *why* Americans think as they do.
What is disappointing in a way is how he described the principles the US was founded on and its early development (I suppose we all knew them anyway but they are well presented therein). He describes a country that anyone would want to live in.
What I see as an outsider (and occasional visitor), is how far wide of that mark and those intended standards the US has become, both with actions abroad and the influence of big media and business on the masses and the political decision making. But that happens anywhere.
I had no opinion on Cheney one way or another, so I can read his opinions without any particular bias against the guy. He seems to have a dim view of Obama, but then again, so do most Americans.
I was finding untruths and flawed thinking early on. The bloke is the neocon of neocons.
He seems scornful of any president who didn’t want to bail into any country, all guns blazing, at the drop of a hat. He thinks the Iraq war was a terrific idea. Obama and Clinton have had scorn. He seems to like the Bushes.
It started out well but then goes downhill rapidly with his train of thought……
Then it gives a scary insight into the neocon mind. Example: Indignation that Assad didn’t step down as Obama “instructed” him to do. Really!
About a third of it is taken up with quotes from other neocons to support his worldview, with some commentary in-between.
Then follows page after page of quotes from Obama with him trying to rip it to bits. The thing was, after reading Obama’s stuff, I am actually starting to like the bloke. I didn’t before.
Then he launches into the real out there stuff: Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Guantanamo, etc. were all *super* ideas and they should have gone much, much further.
He thinks Russia is still the USSR, and must be hemmed in and castrated at any cost. He has similar views of China.
Then, there is page after page of what he thinks the next president should do, which basically is rule the world and start World War 3 to do it.
It rounds off with a General Cheeseburger rant about “exceptional”, greatest country in the world, apple pie on Sunday, blah blah.
I can only say its great that this old duffer was put out to grass. If one who thinks like him gets in the White House in 2016, there will be a world war for sure.
All in all it was a disturbing journey into a disturbing mindset. After reading it, I am surer than I ever was of the need to contain American aggression around the world and de-dollarise. I came out of it – unintentionally – with a new-found fondness for some of Obama’s ideas.
Exceptional: Why the World Needs a Powerful America
Dangerous: Why the World Doesn’t Need a Powerful America Continue reading
This article first appeared at journal-neo.org The New York Times in its recent article, “Russians Strike Targets in Syria, but Not ISIS Areas,” attempts to frame Russia’s recent actions in Syria as dishonest and dangerous. It reports: Russian aircraft carried … Continue reading
For the mainstream western media, lying about Russia is now just a routine part of the working day.
No British Sunday newspaper would be complete without the obligatory anti-Russian double page spread on the ‘threat’ Putin and Russia poses to somebody somewhere this week.
To get this right, one must not concern oneself with facts. Simply choose a country, any country will do, do some random Googling, make some stuff up to pad it out, but be sure to say you are “quoting a source” to absolve yourself of responsibility for what you write.
Better still, you can lend your article some surface credibility by quoting from or linking to the made up articles of others. They will return the compliment and quote yours when they write how Russia is poised to invade [insert country of choice] next week.
The concept of accurate reporting and checking sources seems to be a thing of the past.
We all saw the headlines when MH17 went down that read “Putin’s Victims” and “Putin Killed My Son”. The idea being that because the missile that hit MH17 may have once been manufactured in Russia, this makes Russia, and Putin particularly, personally responsible.
Using this logic, if my cat were to get run over by a man driving a Volkswagen, I should pen a headline that reads, “Merkel’s Killer Car Mows Down Innocent Moggie in Cold Blood”. I would then find a picture of Merkel smiling and use a sub-headline that reads, “Sources Claim Merkel Sniggered When Told of Cat Catastrophe”.
This is what happens in the western media each week. But the target isn’t Merkel and her killer Volkswagens, the target is Putin and Russia.
In many respects the headlines matter more than the article itself. Rather than read them cover to cover, the public tend to graze through the papers absorbing the headlines and the next few lines, assuming them to be a reasonable synopsis of what the article will contain proof of before they move on.
They are subsequently misled when they read the typical western media headlines on anything to do with Russia. They go away with the impression Putin is a cackling Bond villain, in his secret cave, with his finger poised over a big red nuclear button. They imagine he has planes and ships permanently poised to invade the west at any moment, and only our continued vigilance prevents these invasions.
War is Imminent. Really?
When a western media hack wants to write something bad about Russia, always better to get the word WAR in the headline. Preferably in capitals. Here is a good example from the Express a week ago.
I wasn’t the only one to find this headline tiresome and misleading.
The Express’s Defence Editor who is responsible for publication of nonsense such as this, is a chap called Marco Giannangeli. I and others decided to engage him on Twitter to find out why he published such twaddle.
After a polite exchange of views, he quickly began to distance himself from the headline.
Upon opening the Express this Sunday, lo and behold, they decided to write something altogether more factual.
For a change, there was no photo of Putin shirtless, no tales of him being poised to invade New Zealand or somewhere, and not so much made up rubbish from unnamed “sources”.
Has the penny dropped? I doubt it will last if it has. But progress is progress however fleeting it may turn out to be.
I’d like to think I had a little something to do with this. Easier to write what actually happened than make stuff up about the UK going to war with Russia as they did last week.
In Other News.
The Mail on Sunday however, is as ever, today regurgitating US State Department propaganda today with this little gem.
Russia is “bombing innocents”, apparently. The insinuation here is that if this is so, it is done on purpose. That is the take-away the casual reader gets.
To the Mail’s credit, they also give column inches to a altogether more sensible journalist who actually knows something about Russia: Peter Hitchens.
The White House and Downing Street both seethe with genuine outrage about Russia’s bombing raids on Syria.
Yet the people Vladimir Putin bombed have views and aims that would get them rounded up as dangerous Islamist extremists if they turned up in Manchester. So why do British politicians call them ‘moderates’ when Russia bombs them?
It’s not as if London or Washington can claim to be squeamish about bombing as a method of war. We have done our fair share of it in Belgrade, Baghdad and Tripoli, where our bombs certainly (if unintentionally) killed innocent civilians, including small children.
I find Peter’s articles on Russia most refreshing. As a former Moscow correspondent, he has forgot more about Russia than most tabloid hacks will ever know.
Expect More Bias on Syria Reporting.
The western media will continue to report negatively on Russia’s actions in Syria. We will see more claims about the bombing of civilians.
The Russians made clear from the outset that ISIL (ISIS) were not the sole target of their mission.
From the outset they made it clear that ensuring the survival of Syria as a state, and the survival of the legitimate government of that state were the primary goals.
Lavrov, when asked about targets said that if it looked like a terrorist than it would be treated as such.
By definition, all terrorists are civilians; so too are ‘rebels’. It is convenient when writing propaganda to muddy the water this way.
The US now considers Al-Quada (Al-Nusra) to be ‘moderate terrorists’ and therefore to be supplied and protected by the various agencies available to the US.
What is going on is that the US is struggling to find a way to justify it’s support of ISIS and other terrorists. Their support is now becoming obvious with the impact of Russian and Syrian activity upon ISIL (ISIS) and those other terrorists.
Of course these are not ‘terrorists’ but different facets of several mercenary armies bankrolled by the US and their allies; both directly and indirectly. Russia is thus correct to treat them all as being aspects of the same enemy.
The US isn’t writing the script any more. Russia will bomb other US-funded terrorists as well, even if they have pretty names. Anti-Assad terrorists are anti-Assad terrorists. It doesn’t matter what they call themselves.
Of course, our compliant western media will make some parping noises about the ones they know are western funded imagining that ‘our’ terrorists are better than ‘their’ terrorists somehow.
If you are at war with the elected government, and do terroristic things, you are a terrorist. Using that logic, the US is the world’s most prolific terrorist, but don’t expect that to be written in the newspapers either. Continue reading
This article originally appeared at TruePublica On the one hand, just five individual Billionaires in Britain get to control 80% what you read in printed media and on the other hand, just five Internet Service Providers get to control what 87% … Continue reading
What is the real story with Ukraine, Russia, the EU and America?
Anyone who reads Western media might feel that they have a handle on what is going on in Ukraine.
You have been misled by the Western media to hold one, and only one view: There is ‘terrorism’ perpetrated by ‘pro-Russian separatists’, armed by Russia, and Vladimir Putin is the main culprit. Especially with flight MH17.
End of story. Anyone who believes differently is a Russian propaganda merchant.
Vladimir Putin is the evil bogeyman (white cat optional). America wants to spread democracy across the world. The EU wants to ‘help’ Ukraine, etc.
The British newspapers are rather good at fooling you in this regard. Look at the headlines.
Yeah, not so much……..
Want the real story with Ukraine? Here it is. This is the big picture that very few in the media will tell you.
America together with the EU sought to bring Ukraine into their orbit. There were many ultimate aims to this, but one was the missile defence shield and NATO creeping ever closer to Russia, and that would have ultimately led to Russia being evicted from Crimea.
By doing so, Russia’s military capability would be decreased and Russia would be hemmed in. This can be seen as America trying to cut off Russia’s balls. Not gonna happen. Putin isn’t that dumb.
The ultimate aim of America, and maybe the EU, is to unseat Putin, as they would seek to unseat anybody that goes against the New World Order (for want of a better phrase – others might call it American world domination).
America is well known to fund regime changes. They tried it in Moscow, it was slapped down quickly. This time it worked in Ukraine. The elected president was ousted for not agreeing with the US/EU. Pliable US puppets (ie the junta) were installed in his place.
At this point is where the innocent people of Ukraine start to suffer, because the decisions from that point lie not with them. By now, elections are useless; elections will say whatever the puppet master makes them say, as will the media. At that point Ukraine became a chess board where the EU and the US together against Russia play for power and influence in what is a geographically important spot.
Interspersed with this is some local oligarchs, would-be politicians and others with their own interests all seeking to position themselves in a place where they can earn a slew of cash when this has played out. At this point, nobody is fighting on behalf of the people, but the duped people feel they are fighting for something. In this case EU membership and ultimately a better life.
They can wave EU flags all they like, EU membership is a very, very long way off for these people. Just that nobody told them. The people are victims. Their home is a battleground for foreign powers. Ukraine and its people dont get much of a say beyond this point. The future is pretty much out of their hands.
Once the dice are thrown, the game has to play out. This is what we have seen since Maidan. Russia moved quickly to secure Crimea so it doesn’t lose its naval port, then it needs land access to it, cheaper and faster than a bridge from Kerch.
The logical next thing to do is to encourage the eastern regions to break away; Russia supports that and the new puppet masters support the western regions remaining um…. independent. But that isn’t enough for the new Western overlords, so they support Ukraine keeping the east too – gotta try to castrate Putin. In so doing, it turns the people of Ukraine on each other, and many civilians die.
Even American politicians are not dumb enough to start WW3 by taking Russia on in a full frontal attack, so as usual, they do it by covert means, sly funding, and of course silly sanctions to punish Russia for daring to express an opinion about what goes on in its backyard.
The same political machine that made America insolvent seeks to do the same to Russia. But that is slowly backfiring. Russia will fight back with its own sanctions, and nobody will win the sanction game.
The end game is still up for grabs. It may be the separatists in the east are thwarted in the short term. But if so, I suspect that wont be the end of it. They will come back.
As for flight MH17, there is strong evidence that Ukraine shot that plane down. The hope might have been that it crashed in Russia, the west could blame Putin, call him a war criminal, and that would have been a game changer. But it crashed in Ukraine. Russia is holding intelligence on this. Unlike America, it didn’t get it from Youtube and Twitter.
So what of the Ukrainian people? I feel most of them are unfortunate victims of a power struggle; a power struggle that was started by an expansionist America/NATO and the country-gobbling EU seeking to push their influence right up to Russia’s borders in any place they can.
Few in the Western media get it. Or those that do won’t write it. One that will write it and DOES get it is Peter Hitchens. Read his blog >>here<<. Others in the western media are slowly catching on too, as these articles show: The Huffington Post: >>Let Eastern Ukraine Go<< The Washington Post: >>Why the sanctions against Russia probably won’t work<< Russia has the backing of China, much of Asia and many Muslim countries. The United States hasn't quite got the hang of world domination yet. Don't be a sheeple. Learn that western controlled media on the whole, can no longer be trusted to tell the truth. Continue reading
Russian Ukrainian Adventures Newsletter – Summer 2014.
It has been a while since we sent out a newsletter, several years in fact. So we thought one was long overdue.
We would like to bring you up-to-date on the happenings at RUA in recent months.
The Forum Continues To Go From Strength to Strength!
The forum has been rather busy in recent months. We remain not only the busiest Russian women information discussion forum on the net by far, but we are also now the largest by a sizeable margin, and have been for some time.
As RUA continues to grow, so does our membership. We picked up many more new members recently following our decision to close our sister site GoGabber.com (the old Lucky Lovers forum) to new posts. That resulted in a much welcomed influx or Russian and Ukrainian ladies to RUA. If you have recently joined us from GoGabber – welcome! You are in good company. You will find many people you already know here.
Unless you have been hiding under a rock the last few months, you will know about the troubles in Ukraine. As you would expect, the forum is replete with conversation and lively debate on the subject, and as it is such an emotive subject for many people, the topics have been quite frenetic. Continue reading
President Putin of Russia has recently made an address to the American people.
Yes, that’s right. Not the Russian people, the American people. Going right over Obama’s head to tell the American people the truth about Syria.
Let’;s look at the relationship between Obama and Putin.
In this context, the power relationship is that of Putin shaking Obama’s hand at the G20 with his hand above Obama’s, palm facing down and with his left arm grasping Obama’s right arm in a firm grip on his bicep. This is the handshake used to demonstrate dominance.
Putin is telling the US (and the rest of the world) the pecking order.
Lowest is Syria who are not even dealt with in the same group as the US; the Syrians are not partners.
Next comes the Americans as the junior partners
Top comes Putin and the Russians.
As with all well executed insults it is very hard for the recipient of the insult to complain about what has been said. The right people around the world will understand exactly the message.
Here are some key parts from Putin’s speech to the American people. With helpful translations.
RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people
Translation: Obama cannot be trusted. I’ll speak to you directly.
The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism.
Translation: Why are you inviting more attacks on your country? Why do you want continual war everywhere?
From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos.
Translation: Obama is trying to break international law by wanting to invade a sovereign state.
It is alarming that military intervention in internal conflicts in foreign countries has become commonplace for the United States. Is it in America’s long-term interest? I doubt it.
Translation: Stop warmongering.
But force has proved ineffective and pointless. Afghanistan is reeling, and no one can say what will happen after international forces withdraw. Libya is divided into tribes and clans. In Iraq the civil war continues, with dozens killed each day. In the United States, many draw an analogy between Iraq and Syria, and ask why their government would want to repeat recent mistakes.
Translation: You lost the last three wars. In fact, you didn’t finish them. Why start a fourth?
I carefully studied his address to the nation on Tuesday. And I would rather disagree with a case he made on American exceptionalism, stating that the United States’ policy is “what makes America different. It’s what makes us exceptional.” It is extremely dangerous to encourage people to see themselves as exceptional, whatever the motivation. There are big countries and small countries, rich and poor, those with long democratic traditions and those still finding their way to democracy. Their policies differ, too.
Translation: Your president talks crap.
There is now a Whitehouse petition that says this:
Give to President Putin the Nobel Peace Prize Mr. Obama was given in 2009.
Where as Mr. Obama made a sincere commitment to starting a war with Syria, engaging our military in unwanted conflict, and doing so without the support of his people we resolve that Mr. Obama should deliver the Nobel Peace prize given to him in 2009 to a man of Peace, the President of Russia, Mr. Putin. Where as Mr. Putin enabled the United States to avoid an unwanted and unwarranted military action he has brought us to the “brink” of peace.
You can sign it >>here<<. I understand European mentality and I have a pretty good grasp of Russian mentality. As they are in Europe too. Think of it like this: If Obama decided to "address the Russian people" and tell them their presidents last speech was full of exceptionalist bollox, do you imagine it would make the front page of the nationals there? :chuckle: Syria has come out today and said they wont deal with the Americans at all with their chemical weapons because they cannot trust them. They also want the intervention by funding rebels stopped. A Putinesque stab in the tail just as Obama thought he had a get-out-of-jail-free card. The facts are that Obama, his puppet Cameron and the Socialist clown from France wanted to bomb Syria and effect regime change ultimately. Due to Obama and Kerry's warmongering, bumbling and incompetence, Putin has stole the show as peacemaker, shown himself to be a proper politician, staved off illegal American intervention and got Syria to give up its weapons. Without firing a single bullet. Given their own way, Obama, Cameron and Hollande would have been dropping bombs and killing innocents by now. Fact. Ergo, Putin has saved lives. Don't imagine the media will miss that. Is some of it contrived and stage managed? Probably. Point being Putin's street cred in Europe has gone through the roof overnight. Cameron, Hollande and Obama will lose their next elections on the back of it and have all lost credibility across the world. Rightly so. And then just to rub salt in the wound, Putin addresses the American people on the front page of the NYT and tells them their presidents speech was full of shite. :chuckle: However you spin it, Putin has come out smelling of roses and the rest of them look like the clowns they are. An American recently said this about the current mood in the USA: We (American populace) want nothing to do with the Obama-led warmongers and terrorist sympathizers in Washington. That is the only reason the big 'O' did not instigate a cruise missile campaign against Assad. It wasn't Putin's or Iran's opposition. Putin's military presence in the Mediterranean is laughable. It was the American people's opposition! Prior to last Monday, most polling showed opposition among US citizens ranging from 80% anti, 20% pro amongst Republicans and Independents to 60% anti, 40% pro amongst Obama Democratic supporters. Even amongst the elitist political leaders in Congress, he was predicted to resoundedly lose in the House of Representatives, and possibly even lose in the Democrat Party controlled Senate. Obie realized that he was marching to the beat of a different drummer and that America was not marching with him. If he had attacked Syria, against the fervently held feelings of the whole country, he would probably have been impeached within three months. You should be here to experience the mood in the USA now. There is a rebellious spirit throughout the nation. Possibly the transgressions of the looming Obie dictatorship have finally awakened us. We knew Bush was a bastard so we voted for Obie thinking peace and adult-inspired national leadership would be installed. Wow! Were we so totally wrong. I think that there is an addictive reason-depriving element in the air of Washington, DC that transforms all of our elected officials and federal bureaucrats into beings who believe that they are omniscient and omnipotent and that the rest of US citizens exist to pay taxes and to be abused by them. I never thought that the Libertarian Party would have any chance at leadership in this country. Now I think that this country will have no chance without installing it and its principles to our leadership positions. It's no secret, the Russians do not want a larger war in the Middle East. The US were gunning for just that. Now the threat of the US bumbling in again is reduced and at the behest of the President of The Russian Federation. So, yes, the Russians got what they wanted and the US got pushed back. Brave new world. One where the President of Russia comes out of it as peacemaker, and only the American government seem to support the Orwellian mantra written as fiction: "WAR IS PEACE," "FREEDOM IS SLAVERY," "IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH." Comments are welcome below, or you can join a forum debate here: US and Arab intervention in Syria. Continue reading
The BBC has announced that for the 50th anniversary episode of Doctor Who to be screened in November, will feature David Tennant!
Fans of the Doctor may also be pleased to know that Rose Tyler – aka Billie Piper – will also feature. Despite denying it on the Graham Norton show two months ago.
Has the BBC finally woken up and sniffed the skinny latte?
Perhaps the slothful revenue from Dr Who merchandising since they introduced Matt Smith as the Doctor has made them feel the need to bring David Tennant back.
Or perhaps it was the collapse of the viewing figures?
As the parent of an eight year old Doctor Who fanatic, who was bugged to buy almost any piece of Dr Who related paraphernalia that hit the market, I can also testify to the fact that since Matt Smith took the role, interest has waned and Power Rangers have once again reigned supreme in our house.
Even our four year old – who doesn’t entirely follow the story-lines – cant seem to wrap her head around Matt Smith in the role.
However, not being able to follow story-lines featuring Matt Smith isn’t something that only relates to four year olds. Hell, even I cant follow some of the story-lines Matt Smith has been given Its as if the whole show has become disjointed.
Only Karen Gillan’s endless long legs and equally long tresses have held my interest in the show.
While some of the Smith era story-lines have been a bit naff, its fair to say he has has his good moments in the role. David Tennant was always going to be a tough act to follow. Probably only a better known actor could have pulled it off in honesty.
Of the new show, Tennant’s successor, Matt Smith – also in the special with his new assistant played by Jenna-Louise Coleman (yummy!) – says fans “will not be disappointed” by the 3D show, due to air on 23 November.
The BBC say future episodes of the show, which is filmed in Cardiff, see the return of the Cybermen and old enemy the Ice Warriors, who last appeared during the Jon Pertwee era in 1974.
Is it time to retire Matt Smith and bring back David Tennant? The kids in our house think so. So do all their friends apparently.
Come on Mr Moffat and the BBC, Matt Smith had a crack at it, and Dr Who will rise like a phoenix from the ashes if you bring David Tennant back. But it will take more than one episode.
Bring him back for good and then you won’t have to rely on the presence of the female stars to hold interest in the show.
At least then, he wont have to keep trying to sell me Beardy Branson’s products every time I turn on the TV. Continue reading
For our friends in places other than the UK, Nigel Farage is the leader of a political party called UKIP: The UK Independence Party.
Their site is here: http://www.ukip.org/
They are a right of centre political party occupying the space the Conservatives once sat in – in the Thatcher years – before David Cameron (or Mr Slippery as some call him) became more interested in gay marriage and centrist Blairist politics than rebuilding Britain’s economy.
Their general aim seems to be to pull Britain out of the EU and thus removing the UK from the obligation we have of paying Billions of pounds to build roads in Bulgaria and such places; to regain control of our own borders, export terrorists back to Jordan or wherever, and for our courts to make their own decisions rather than being bound by ‘Human Rights’ decisions made in Brussels by unelected faceless people.
To me, Nigel Farage seems an unlikely party leader. And an even more unlikely Prime Minister. But his policies echo more and more common sense. He is from the Jeremy Clarkson school of common sense. And I subscribe to common sense.
They are already winning small seats in our neighbourhood:
Friday, 8th March 2013
UKIP National Executive member Louise Bours made a welcome breakthrough on Thursday with a comfortable win in a local Cheshire by-election, the party’s first council victory in the North West.
Louise topped the Tories in the Congleton Town Council poll with 769 votes, leaving the Conservatives on 587, one Independent candidate on 263 and a second Independent on 125.
Following the victory Cllr Bours said: “I am both proud and humbled by the people of Congleton West placing their trust in me.
“Throughout our country on May 2 voters will be given the choice to at last have their voice heard. UKIP councillor’s will deliver that voice and will bring to councils across our country, common sense and trustworthiness so badly lacking’.
Do you think UKIP is a credible party?
Should the UK leave the EU?
Is Nigel Farage a credible party leader?
Would you vote for UKIP? Continue reading
Anyone who knows Mottram knows about the traffic problems and the lack of funding for the Mottram Bypass.
We have another article on Real Deal about the Mottram Bypass here: e-petition deliver Mottram – Mottram Bypass – Stuck in Traffic?
Local MP Jonathan Reynolds has recently taken up the reins on the issue and sent local residents a long and informative letter on the subject.
The locals of Mottram are glad that someone is finally back on the case.
It is clear to anyone who lives in or near Mottram that the bypass is a much-needed road.
However, if the funding is ever going to be available is anyone’s guess. If the funding actually becomes available, it will be many years until it is built and in operation.
Is there a medium term solution maybe?
A good medium term solution wouldn’t cost millions.
A good medium term solution would be useful to keep in the distant future if a bypass is ever actually built.
Well, we at Real Deal have come up with an idea.
Politicians and the media are free to steal this idea and present it as their own. It goes like this:
This is a two pronged attack on the traffic problem. The first being to dissuade some of the trucks from using Mottram as a convenient cut through instead of using the M62.
The second being to implement a scheme at the junction of Mottram Moor / A57 Hyde Road / Stalybridge Road / Market Street / B6174 (Post Office) that calms the traffic somewhat and allows pedestrians to cross.
This where Mottram could learn something from Poynton in Cheshire. The main junction in Poynton suffered similar traffic problems to Mottram and they did something about it. Watch the video below to see what they did.
Such a scheme might work quite well at the Mottram Moor / A57 Hyde Road / Stalybridge Road / Market Street / B6174 junction.
Similar to the scheme in Poynton, it would allow both sides of Mottram not to be cut off from each other as they are now. It would slow the angry traffic and perhaps alleviate the long queues towards the junction that form on Stalybridge Road and Market Street.
The other prong of the attack is to make what is currently a convenience for trucks into an inconvenience that costs money.
That means installing one of these:
You put one at the beginning of Hyde Road at the end of the M67 (where the Big Baps butty van is) and make all trucks larger than 3500kgs pull into the side to pay £5 to pass through Mottram.
You put another one on the far side of Tintwistle somewhere to collect another £5.
You charge traffic both ways at both points.
Drivers with delivery notes indicating a delivery between the two points get though for free maybe.
Cars and vans below 3500kgs go free and do not need to pull off and stop.
This means HGV’s pay £10 to use Mottram and Tintwistle as a cut through. Many will choose not to pay and use the M62 instead – as they should. And that will cut the traffic down to allow the scheme above like they have in Poynton to work.
The best part?
The best part is not only does it create jobs…………..
Not only does it reduce heavy traffic through villages……………….
Not only is it self funding…………
But it will make a profit. What to do with the profit? Well, why not ring fence it and use it to build the bypass with?
This way, even the bypass pays for itself!
When the bypass is built, Mottram village is left with a nice little shared traffic/pedestrian area, and people may even want to sit on that bench next to the statue of Lowry and not fear about getting choked on fumes.
Your comments are welcome on this topic. Comments do not appear immediately to prevent spam. Continue reading