Sunday 15 November 2009

The great unpublished # 2



Some more ‘letters to the editor’ of the Isle of Wight County Press, some were deemed unprintable, some were printed:

__________

31st August 2007 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Comparing the Goose with the Gander

Regarding the CP report “EXAM FIGURES SAID TO BE MISLEADING”, on 31st August 2007. I would like to point out to Katy Leslie, the NUT, and the NASUWT, that the figures may well be more damning rather than less so, for Island comprehensives.

Due to geographic isolation, Island children will have less opportunity to enter independent and grammar schools, therefore Island comprehensive schools must suffer less from the adverse effects of cherry picking than do mainland comprehensives. Assuming that Island and mainland children are born with the same distribution of intelligence, hence Island comprehensives must have a higher average intelligence and thence greater potential for academic success than do mainland comprehensives.

So even if we compared “like with like”, the Island comprehensives would need to score higher than their mainland counterparts in order to prove that Island schools are meeting the potential of Island children to the same extent. Further, why are there differences between Island comprehensives, if like implies like?

The abject failure exposed by the A-level results means we should scrutinize the teachers and not the children; after all, the potential of children is the closest thing to a constant in this exercise of statistics.

Finally I would like to ask all the Island schools and the college, to volunteer the statistic of numbers of male to female staff, so that the CP can publish alongside the A-level results for each establishment. I ask this in light of the correspondence between diminishing ratio of male to female teachers over the last few decades, with that of the diminishing ratio of boys to girls regarding A-level success. If it turns out that ‘masculinity’ or its absence from schools and colleges, corresponds with A-level success, then we will not only have a basis for a hypothesis, we would also have the basis for a solution.

Yours faithfully

James McComb

__________

3rd March 2008 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Buzz Off Love

If Emily Pearce’s article regarding the ultra-sonic Mosquito is true, have the Council completely devolved into misanthropic Morlocks, that they treat the young Wight Eloi with such ageist contempt? I suspect that with a working proportion of about 80% women, there is already an excess of feminist paranoia festering in the pits of County Hall. And this cult spills into Island schools, again overpopulated with feminist teachers, who regard the young as either “laddish thugs” to be dealt with, or as poor subjugated ‘potential rape victims’ to be nurtured into fellow man-hating Amazons. Maybe Stuart Love could improve his observations on anti-social behaviour if he stopped trying to be a six foot panty-liner, and looked into what causes innocence to become corrupted, if indeed they are guilty of anything. The solution Mr. Love, if you can bear the unfettering of apron strings, is to sack all the feminists, and give the jobs to Wightmen and women. This would terminate the feminists’ unbridled corruption of reality in schools, which is half the problem; and would decrease the amount of unemployment of Wightmen, which in turn should reduce the number of fatherless children, which is the other half of the problem. Failing that Mr. Love, you can always peruse the American CIA’s list of crowd control technology, and if you’re really worried about those horrible children, you could end up with your own ministry, The Ministry of Love. This rant was brought to you in light of the recent suicides of Bridgend, in Wales; let’s hope it doesn’t happen here… yet.

Yours faithfully

James McComb

__________

30th May 2008 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Parlour Games

The Isle of Wight College has invented a new parlour game based on an old family favourite of ‘pin the tail on the donkey’; it’s called: ‘stick the head up the ass’.

I refer of course to the much vaunted BEACON status that the College has managed to wangle out of OfSTED in some review held in May 2007. To the average Islander who has sampled the heady academic delights of our one and only College, this may come as some surprise; did somebody glue the egg to the spoon? Then again, in a one horse race the three legged donkey is Red Rum; to which my critics would argue that the beacon status is based on national comparisons, and I would counter that other colleges would not have the captive clientele afforded to our Island College; Hobson’s choice.

Never mind the quality, feel the width; speaking of which, the College has seen fit to advertise a year after the report, the position of “Head of Quality”. Talk about closing the stable door after the mule has bolted; or is this a tacit admission of the Generalised Peter Principle by the Principal, in that the title of beacon status has exceeded the College’s capabilities?

Of course if I am wrong, which is not impossible, and my personal experiences of the College is somewhat skewed by reality, of which the authors of the 16 page OfSTED report, resplendent with 31 instances of the term “outstanding”, have seen fit to overlook, then please accept my insincerest apologies. But I am left wondering whether this is an £80 million con, whereby some clever people, or are we simply that stupid, have managed to hide their bushel under the outstanding light of a beacon.

Yours faithfully

James McComb

__________

18th June 2009 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Educating Mother Nature

What would Mother Nature know about raising kids? She is blind, deaf, and stupid, with a woeful neglect for her own offspring that verges on abuse. And yet with her faults, she has managed to evolve our lowly ape like ancestors into the scientific and technological splendour that became the human race. Without so much as a certificate in Women’s Studies, she relied mostly on sexist prejudice.

Why is it then, that we allow the educationalists to outlaw the concept of the difference of the genders? Do they have a grudge against Mother Nature; or do they think they can do better than millions of years of evolution? The consequence of these educationalists refusing to acknowledge the natural differences between boys and girls, is that children showing symptoms of natural behaviour are being diagnosed and treated as if they had an ailment. If we treated tomatoes with the same arrogance, there would be civil unrest and questions in parliament!

Boys in particular are being psychologically compromised with Ritalin during their formative years, when they fail to behave like little feminists. The educationalists cover up this social experiment by inventing a behavioural condition called ADHD, of which Ritalin just happened to be available as a cure, a few years before the disorder was defined!? Attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, has so many characteristic yet ambiguous symptoms, that if you watch anybody for long enough, they are bound to show signs of the condition. Imagine sitting through a whole term of politically corrected lessons, would it not be enough to drive a naturally healthy lad to distraction, thence into the arms of the educational psychologist?

No matter how qualified the educationalists think they are, they have yet to better evolution. The wanton feminisation of state schools has severely compromised the education of boys; and the use of Ritalin being nothing short of child abuse. I call for the total abolition of Ritalin, and any other psycho-active drugs used upon children; and for a public debate questioning the virtues of state sponsored feminism within our Island schools.

Yours faithfully

James McComb

__________

26th June 2009 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Battery Parents

Feminist cabals have inveigled themselves into government positions, and feminism has become an unelected de facto political party. Simone de Beauvoir was the nucleus for the new Marxist Feminist movement, which swept through America and Britain in the sixties and seventies; spawning such activists as Eve Ensler, who wrote of the alcoholic seduction of a 13 year old girl by a mature woman as “good rape”.

Feminism began a three pronged attack on the family; firstly they invented the myth of exclusive male domestic violence, then they changed the laws on divorce; this was to remove the fathers. Secondly they remove mothers; initially by goading mothers to work, thus necessitating nurseries; or by direct abduction via the Social Services, when single mothers are accused of dereliction of care, should they fail to follow the new regimes. And thirdly, as the family was being shattered at home, the schools were being subsumed by feminist teachers, to indoctrinate the remaining children to be the new revolutionary guard, to destroy the last stubborn remnants of family life.

Just as parental significance is diminishing, so the multibillion pound Social Services industry is burgeoning, to fill the voids that it created. The latest initiative is same sex foster parents; one has to remember that Social Services keep books of all the children in ‘dodgy’ homes, so that as foster parents become available then children can be picked from a ready supply from the legion of single parent families that aren’t using feminist sanctioned nurseries.

In America the Social Services are given government bounties for every child taken from poverty, and given further bonuses for fostering, particularly to gay couples. In Florida, this practice has resulted in about 40% of the adoptions being same sex couples; it makes financial sense for this proportion to continue to grow. Does Britain have a similar financial incentive for forced adoption, and gay preference? If so, then we must see this as a continued attack by feminists to abduct children from parents.

Finally we might ask the question: what is the functional difference between Social Services creating a market for gay adoption, and a paedophile ring that grooms a family to yield victims like a battery chicken lays eggs for breakfast?

Yours faithfully

James McComb

__________

24th July 2009 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Can We Afford The Police?

Despite over all crime dropping, or not changing that much, in the last few years, I've noticed a dramatic increase in the use of sirens. Are the police beating drums for business?

Here on the Isle of Wight - a seething cauldron of disorganised crime - many small festivals have to be cancelled owing to not being able to foot the policing bills. The extra costs, not being requested by the organisers, but imposed by the local authorities fear of the public.

Didn't the Mafia use to offer a similar deal? At least with the Mafia they had the good business sense to protect their 'clients', but the police lack this nous, and screw the client into closure.

Crime is expensive, and therefore estimable, just ask an insurance firm. If the police cost more than the crime, then we must consider their reduction.

And do we need an over-equipped police when we have a standing army looking for 'civil control' exercises? A soldier will have other concerns in their careers than bigging themselves up at the expense of hapless civilians, so potentially a soldier on the streets has less interest in making a career out of arrests, as for him it is just a temporary mission of many types.

Yours faithfully

James McComb

__________

27th July 2009 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Where’s the College for Men?

Debbie Lavin has wasted no time in implementing Harriet Harman’s Parthian shot, also known as the ‘Positive Discrimination Laws’, at the Isle of Wight College. Is this an effort to bury the news of Debbie’s pay hike I wonder? Speaking of subterfuge, the “openness policy” at the College must be a new move also, for I have been repeatedly denied the information of the gender breakdown of employment at the College. Are the readers aware that Debbie’s brave management move of equalising pay between men and women by dropping men’s wages, is a petty spite, owing to the fact that male workers at the College are almost as rare as hens teeth. Does anybody know the actual figures?

If the Island is to stand any meaningful chance of facing the future with hope, it is imperative that we have an advanced education service. Whether the feminists like it or not, men have higher IQ’s than women on average, and the proportion of men with IQ’s over 125 (typical of a first class university student) is twice that of women [Re: Richard Lynn and Paul Irwing]. If the selection process of our schools and College were based purely on merit, then we would expect to have more male educators than female; I estimate that the College employs no more than 20% men. If I am right, then our hopes for the future of our Island have been compromised by selfish misandry.

In times of plenty, this blatant prejudice against Wightmen would be no more than the default of contract between public funding for education and the College embezzling that money for feminist hobbies; but in times of economic and political desperation, it is a matter of life and death. Islanders must put their educational need above that of feminist want, now, to delay and cushion the inevitable economic and social catastrophe that awaits us all. We need smart men and women of true merit in charge, and not token, castrated drones, ruled by parvenues.

Yours faithfully

__________

17th August 2009 (unpublished)

Dear Editor,

Heil Hattie!

Nature is a wild and cussed beast, it has to be trammelled by fear, guided by the unblinking beacon of bureaucracy, and then caged with the full violence of law.

What do mothers know of child rearing, the impudent dames!? Get those whelps to the nearest Ofsted approved nursery archipelago, before they evolve into drug dealing rapists! If it’s correct enough for Haringay Social Services, then a glowing report from Ofsted is correct enough for the Isle of Wight. You there, Number 42, cowering at the back, why aren’t you cheering and clapping!? Are you being abused at home by your father? What do you mean no father, couldn’t your mum be bothered to go down to the dole queue, where most of the dads have been dumped. If you’re not being abused then you must be ill; let nursey wursey give you a nice big warm soft dose of Ritalin to make nursey feel better. And if you still don’t toe the line my boy, nursey wursey will send you down a dark place, where an evil eyed harridan will make you fill out your jobseekers agreement.

As our community is goaded towards equality and diversity, it is becoming less diverse, less equal, and less of a community. Raising glass ceilings by lowering standards means that the truly talented walk on the same level as the parvenues. Back in the ‘bad’ old days of Patriarchal elitism, any man, woman, or minority could rise by proof of their credentials. Today our society has devalued certification to the everyday perfunctory; therefore an employer must select by means other than skill, usually according to government quota, or familiarity of type. Hence we end up with an unequal and non-diverse public sector, dominated by white middleclass women. The bureaucratic Whitehall templates force a community’s economic and moral standards to the lowest common denominator, eventually we will lose the ability to care, from the cradle to the prison.

By eliminating our individual aspirations in favour of conformity, the government has sold our sense of ‘good’ to purchase their precious standard of ‘correct’. In this single act, we have allowed the orthodoxy of the political class to dictate to our very souls, for we have been denuded the ability to judge for ourselves. At best independent thought becomes trivial, by classing it as relative opinion rather than valid reason; at worst it is heresy, to be denounced and added to a database of deviancy. We have entered into a new dark age, without so much as a solitary goose step, we have been shuffled along in our comfortable shoes, toward a fascist state… Heil Hattie!

Yours faithfully

James McComb

No comments: