The Roast Beef of Olde England

I had the pleasure of dining in Simpson's in The Strand last night, somewhere I haven't been to for quite some time (see my 2002 review).

I am pleased to report that the beef is still reasonably succulent and unctuous, yet it is sadly lacking one thing.

I fear that Nanny has put her big fat feet into even this most venerable of British institutions.

Why?

Imagine my horror when the silver carving dome on the beef trolley was pulled back to reveal a noble joint of beef sans the mandatory layer of fat!

I enquired as to where the fat had gone, and was told that although it was cooked with the fat on, the fat was removed once cooked.

Why?

Seemingly, so the chef would have me believe, you cannot carve beef with fat on it!

Utter bollocks!

I wonder who he thought he was talking to?

The British have been carving beef with fat on for years, as indeed Simpson's used to do.

The fat (which should be dark yellow, not pale white), not just when cooking, but also when eating adds flavour and texture. It is also well known that, like oil in a car engine, the blood needs fat in it to help it circulate!

My message to Simpson's is simple:

Bring back the fat!

Nanny will pay dearly for this outrage!

Tell them what you think via this link svy.simpsons@fairmont.com

Those of you who would like to try my own roast beef recipe, should visit "Accountants Can Cook" and download it there.

Nanny Bans Yobs

Dear oh dear, another fuss from Nanny's acolytes about what words can be used to describe people.

Funny how Nanny is so keen to "modify" our language.

As Orwell warned in "1984"; by controlling the language, that state can control what you think.

Anyhoo, this time Nanny's gimlet eye has fallen upon the word "yobs" (scummy type people who cause a nuisance of themselves). Seemingly Nanny thinks that the word "yobs" unfairly categorises a section of the community that is entirely blameless, ie teenagers.

As such Nanny's chums in Scotland Yard have banned its officers from using the word "yob", for fear that it might alienate young people.

Needless to say this edict has the backing of Sir Ian Blair, the Metropolitan Police Commissioner, who we discussed yesterday.

The ban applies to all reports submitted by officers to the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), which oversees the force.

The ban has been brought about because a "safer neighbourhoods" report by Chief Supt Stephen Bloomfield, put before MPA members, noted that Scotland Yard was "pro-actively tackling gangs and yobs across London".

Cindy Butts (can I say Butts on a public site?), the MPA's deputy chairman, got rather hot under the collar and told Sir Ian that the term was "alienating" saying:

"I have a problem with the language of 'yobs'.

It sort of sets up and defines too much a 'self' and 'other'."

Eh?

Asst Commissioner Tim Godwin replied:

"I agree.

I'm sorry about that.

We won't use that again."

Afterwards AC Godwin confirmed that the use of "yobs" was now officially banned. He claims that "yobs" could be taken as a slur on groups of law abiding youngsters, who gather for innocent reasons.

He said:

"It can reflect on groups of youths who congregate,

rather than those who carry out criminal activity.

We have to be careful because of the need to engage with young people."

You should engage with trouble makers by giving them a clip around the ear!

Needless to say there is now some confusion; other words such as "hoodlums" or "tearaways" have not been banned.

What about scumbags?

Will Sir Ian Blair be investigating Tony Blair who used the word in the Commons in 2004, or Labour which pledged in its 2005 manifesto to "exclude yobs from town centres"?

Maybe the police should in fact be focusing on catching criminals, rather than on the words used to describe them?

Whom Do You Serve?

Nanny loves to accommodate all views, faiths and political persuasions; so long as she agrees with them that is!

As such, it should come as no surprise to learn that when PC Alexander Omar Basha, a member of the Metropolitan Police's Diplomatic Protection Group, refused to be posted outside of London's Israeli Embassy, because he objected to Israeli bombings in Lebanon on "moral grounds", Nanny bent over backwards to accommodate his wishes and excused him duty.

The only trouble with this "bending" policy (can there be such a thing as a bent police officer?) is that police officers are meant to serve the law:

-NOT THE STATE

-NOT GOD

-NOT THEIR OWN PERSONAL PREJUDICES

Without fear or favour to anyone else.

Needless to say, now that this incident has become a matter of public knowledge, Nanny has assigned Sir Ian Blair to urgently inquire into the issue.

A senior source in the Metropolitan Police Federation said:

"Officers should not be allowed to pick and choose where they work in this way."

It is ironic that Sir Ian will be investigating this, as many blame him for the culture of political correctness that has infested the Metropolitan Police since he took over in February last year.

PC Nadeem Malik, an executive committee member of the Association of Muslim Police, said:

"There are around 300 Muslim staff working in the Met

and a number of Muslim police working in the diplomatic protection group

who do not have problem covering the Israeli Embassy.

These officers are Londoners, and Met police officers first and foremost."

Exactly, well said!

Ex-Met Flying Squad commander John O'Connor, said:

"This is the beginning of the end for British policing.

If they can allow this,

surely they'll have to accept a Jewish officer not wanting to work at an Islamic national embassy?

Will Catholic cops be let off working at Protestant churches?

Where will it end?

This decision is going to allow officers to act in a discriminating and racist way.

When you join the police, you do so to provide a service to the public.

If you cannot perform those duties, you leave.

The Metropolitan Police are setting a precedent they will come to bitterly regret.

Top brass granted his wish

as they were probably frightened of being accused of racism.

But what they've done is an insult to the Jewish community."

Just in case the Met haven't yet got the message. Police officers are meant to serve the law:

-NOT THE STATE

-NOT GOD

-NOT THEIR OWN PERSONAL PREJUDICES

Without fear or favour to anyone else.

Write this down and learn it for prep, I will be testing you on it later!

A Conundrum

Sorry for the delay today folks. I have just spent the last six hours at hospital with my parents, waiting for Dad to have a rather unpleasant intrusive medical examination performed.

However, as sedated as he was (around the equivalent of 5 pink gins* I would say) when we left, he posed this conundrum:





"Why is it that if the doctors and the government are so concerned about our diets, and what we eat, that they have a Burger King franchise in the entrance to hospital?"

Indeed, Mayday Hospital has a very nice Burger King slap bang in the middle of the entrance hall.

Answers on a postcard please.

*NB a pink gin is an old naval drink:

- Add one drop of Angostura bitters to a glass

- Swirl it around

- Throw the bitters out

- Add some ice

- Add a measure of gin

- Add a little water (the gin turns pink)

- Drink with gusto

Plod's Discrimination

Dear old Nanny really loves to try to re-engineer society, by artificially "skewing" demographics to suit her political dogma. Unfortunately history has shown that whenever governments try to "manage" reality, and impose their view of a perfect society, things go horribly wrong.

Despite the lessons of history, Nanny still keeps trying. A recent case in point being Nanny's chums in the Gloucestershire Constabulary who rejected 108 potential recruits because they were white men.

Now Nanny's coppers have come a cropper (Ha!..come on, I'm doing my best here folks!), they have admitted positive discrimination and have been forced to pay compensation.

Gloucestershire Constabulary claimed that that it had been trying to increase diversity, by selecting only women and candidates from ethnic minorities. That is all very well, but the average citizen in Britain (be he/she black, white, green or purple) would prefer to have police officers who could do their job rather than police officers who fit an artificial racial/sexual specification.

I would also note that discrimination on the grounds of race or sex is in fact illegal.

Don't they teach the police the law then?

Needless to say Nanny's chums, when faced with an employment tribunal in Bristol, had to own up to the fact that they were in fact breaking the law.

Happy with the fact that the police admit that they have been breaking the law?

I'm not!

The tribunal was told that Matt Powell, had applied to join the force in October 2005. A month later, after being told that he had progressed to the second stage of the recruitment process, he left his job as an IT team leader at Filton College to concentrate on his application.

In January 2006 he received a letter saying that he had been "randomly deselected". He was never given an explanation for his rejection.

In April the Commission for Racial Equality and the Equal Opportunities Commission started an investigation. They reported that the force had unlawfully discriminated on the grounds of race and sex.

The tribunal was told that 66% of white men, who applied to join the force last year, had been turned down. Every ethnic minority candidate who applied had been invited to an assessment centre.

Nanny has agreed to £2500 pay compensation to Mr Powell, and may now expect claims from the other 107 men, who were told by the force that they had been "randomly deselected".

Clive Tomer, chairman of the tribunal, said that Gloucestershire Constabulary had been

"at the very least disingenuous and at worst misleading".

In other words, they had lied.

Happy with the fact that the police lied?

I'm not!

Gordon Ramsey (not the chef), the head of human resources, said:

"We were trying to advance diversity in the force

and we thought at the time that this was lawful,

positive action.

When we found out after an independent investigation

by the Commission for Racial Equality that it wasn't lawful,

we accepted that."

I find that hard to believe that they didn't know that discrimination is illegal.

Do you believe them?

Racist Rev

Let me ease you into your Monday's with this absurd piece of Nanny nonsense.

It seems that Nanny is getting a bit flumoxed about race relations, and has got herself into such a state over them that she seems to be having some form of mental breakdown.

Aside from the usual crimes of race hate, Nanny has decided to add one more to the books; namely revving your engine in a racist manner.

I kid you not!

Ronnie Hutton recently spent two nights in jail, after being accused of "revving his car in a racist manner".

Hutton recently attended Stirling Sheriff Court on the above charges, after being hauled in for revving his Lotus engine at a Libyan couple one night last September 2005.

Witnesses claimed that he had been trying to intimidate a Libyan couple on the pavement. Hutton claimed that he was only revving the V8 engine to avoid another £15,000 repair bill.

However, off-duty Chief Inspector Eoin Jenkins thought he was targeting Muslim Isam Maigel and his wife Hana Saad.

When Jenkins, now retired, confronted Ronnie he was told to "fuck off".

Nanny decided to abandon the racist part of the charge, but still convicted Hutton of breach of the peace and fined him £150.

Hutton said:

"To be convicted for revving my car in a busy street is hard to take.

Does this mean anyone driving a noisy car in Scotland is now a criminal?"

It seems that the racist element of charges were only added some months after Hutton had been in the cell, and AFTER he had complained to the Procurator Fiscal about the incident.

Funny that!

Mr Maigel claimed in court that Hutton had degraded them "maybe because we are Muslim".

Hutton claimed:

"I've had problems with the Lotus since I bought it.

I paid £15,000 for a new engine in 2003.

As soon as I started the car the oil pressure light wouldn't go out.

I accept I revved the engine

it's a V8 twin turbo and is noisy and frightening.

I would openly apologise to this couple.

I am not a racist."

Be careful with your V8's folks!