‘Bilingo’ Is Just Dirty Tricks

We’re all aware now of the Bilingo website, with its allegations of children in Ceredigion schools being denied access to the toilet because they didn’t ask in Welsh, and parents being told not to read in English to their children at bed-time. Though, job done, these bizarre and anonymous allegations soon disappeared from the website. By ‘job done’ I mean that these allegations were taken up and relayed by two major English newspapers, the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph. (It should go without saying that our very own Wasting Mule also ran the story.)

Unfortunately, ‘Bilingo’ is no isolated example of attempts to portray Welsh people as bigots and racists. This year we have seen an increasing number of such incidents, currently rising to a crescendo. But ‘Bilingo’ took it up to a whole new level due to the media coverage it generated. So why should an obscure website dealing with the education policy of a rural Welsh council be of interest to major London newspapers? The truth is, it’s of no interest to them; so I’ll explain why I believe the Mail and the Telegraph ran these stories.

I believe this ‘story’ appeared in these newspapers because MI5, the agency responsible for the UK’s internal security, asked them to run it. It was part of the quid pro quo arrangement between MI5 and certain media outlets that run stories at the agency’s behest. In return, ‘friendly’ newspapers get scoops and other favourable treatment. So my message to people reading this is: Stop wasting your time trying to unmask or identify ‘Bilingo’ because I strongly suspect it to be a creation of MI5. An exercise in black propaganda. The website was set up purely to justify, or to serve as the ‘source’ for, the the anti-Welsh fantasies MI5 wanted printed in the ‘papers.

One reason I suspect MI5’s involvement is the timing of ‘Bilingo’s appearance, roughly a month before the release of the damning Census 2011 information on December 11th. ‘Bilingo’ targeting Ceredigion also makes perfect sense. Because it is predicted that the figures for Ceredigion will show that for the first time ever in that area only a minority of the population now speaks the indigenous language. The figures may even show that the area now has an English-born majority.

The figures for Ceredigion, when added to those from other parts of the country, will so anger / alarm / frighten / incense Welsh people – even those who would not today regard themselves as ‘nationalists’ – that there will be an outpouring of concern, followed by demands that ‘something be done’. In response, the English media, plus its outlets in Wales, will dismiss these concerns as the voice of ‘Welsh racism’ – using ‘Bilingo’, the Labour Party – Third Sector RCC ‘Report’, horrific goings-on at Cilmeri (thankfully unearthed by the Labour Party), ‘complaints’ about the Young Farmers’ Eisteddfod, the Penrhyndeudraeth gunman case (meek English tavern-keeper forced to produce gun from fear of being lynched by ‘racist’ Welsh locals) and other scrupulously interpreted (or manufactured, as the case may be) ‘evidence’.

As if we need to remind ourselves, treatment of alleged racism in Wales varies greatly. For media and politicians seem interested only in exposing what they consider to be examples of Welsh racist behaviour. Consider some other cases. In Tywyn, south Gwynedd, last year, a group broke flagpoles on the promenade to get at the Welsh flags flying from them. More recently, some bloke from Swansea, after a few drinks, sang a rugby song on a bus.

Despite there being witnesses and even though the culprits in Tywyn were all identified, the English legal system (and that includes our Welsh police forces) decided not to prosecute. The drunken Jack was of course prosecuted and convicted of a ‘hate’ crime. In one case there was a considerable amount of damage done to property, and a nation insulted; in the other case there was no damage to property, no assault or injury. Does that make sense? Well, yes, it does; but only if you have an agenda needing ‘evidence’.

‘Bilingo’ is a pre-emptive strike; or – if you still have the stomach to view it in rugby terms – it is the UK State ‘getting its retaliation in first’. For the Census figures will make it clear to many people (not just ‘Welsh nationalists’) that Wales is being deliberately and systematically colonised. To deflect criticism of that policy, and to frighten off opposition, the following message will be promoted: ‘The Welsh are a nasty, racist lot – just check the court records, newspaper reports, ‘academic’ research – so don’t waste your sympathy on them, even if they are being made into strangers in their own country‘.

My message is, when the Census figures are released, let off a little steam if it helps; but remember, this is an ongoing and multi-faceted struggle we’re involved in. We need to organise ourselves, and use the Census information to present our case . . . not to politicians of course, and certainly not to the media, but to our people. Explain what is happening, and why; win over enough of our people; convince them to oppose England’s colonisation strategy, and no power on earth can stand in our way.

Let’s get organised and, for a change, think with our heads rather than with our hearts.

UPDATE 26.11.12: Incredibly, just a few hours after I posted the above piece the Daily Mail was printing another anti-Welsh article by Roger Lewis. The drift of Lewis’ attitude towards his subject, and the self-restraint we have come to associate with his writing, were both presaged perfectly in the title of this offering – Tyranny of the Welsh Taliban.

I leave it to you to read and form your own conclusions. My only comment is this. Lewis’ work read like something hastily cobbled together from ‘ingredients’ he’d collected earlier and stored away for future use. Either that, or someone had presented him with the ‘ingedients’ and the instruction to cook something up, and quickly.

Whatever the truth, Lewis’ piece, and the behaviour of the Daily Mail, only strengthens the suspicion I express in my original post.

AWEMA Reborn?

The news that AWEMA probably has a successor was dropped into my lap today by a combination of ennui and serendipity. Well, when I say ‘successor’, what I mean is, we have a new all-Wales anti-discrimination body representing the black and minority ethnic population (BME). It couldn’t really be a new AWEMA, could it? I mean, Naz and the gang are irreplaceable . . . God! I miss ’em! Will we ever see their like again? (Almost guaranteed, given how the Labour Party and the Third Sector operate in Wales!)

The new outfit of which I speak is Race Council Cymru (RCC) and, like AWEMA, it is based in Swansea. In fact, just a few streets away from Castell Malik. (Though according to the website Swansea is in ‘West Glamorgan’ . . . which went out of existence in 1995.) The website suggests RCC is a somewhat new organisation, for it’s very light on information and almost devoid of history. Which should be no surprise if it is replacing AWEMA. Because this might mean it was formed in a bit of a hurry. Anyway, what does the website tell us?

Click to Enlarge

Well, for a start, RCC seems to be run by a ‘Volunteer CEO’, Mrs Uzo Iwobi CBE, a Nigerian with a background in the police, the Commission for Racial Equality, and academe. The profile given on the website does not say if she’s a Labour Party member. If ‘Volunteer’ means unpaid then this suggests an attempt to avoid the, er, ‘misunderstandings’ of the recent past. But if Mrs Iwobi isn’t being paid, then how does she earn her crust, and does she have staff to help her run RCC? (Worth asking of course because AWEMA gave staffing arrangements and salary levels the attention they deserve. Old Naz was firm about that.) Nor could I find information about funding. For even if Mrs Iwobi is giving her time for nothing, there must be expenses; if only hers, plus office rental, website, and other incidentals.

Information was provided on the Board of Trustees. These are: Judge Ray Singh CBE (Chair); ‘Chief'(?) Mel Jehu, retired career cop (Vice Chair); Mrs. Norma Glass MBE (General Secretay); and Mr. Richard Davies (Treasurer). How nice to see a member of our Jewish community represented on the Board. The following have been co-opted to the Board: Mrs. Mutale Merrill OBE (CEO, BAWSO); Ms Rocio Cifuentes (Director, EYST); Mrs Sujatha Thaladi (Director, MEWN Cymru); Mr. Martin Jones JP (Adviser to the Board of Trustees).

As an example of the slipshod nature of the RCC website, under the photo for each Trustee we are invited to ‘Read More’, but no further information is provided for either Ms Cifuentes or Mr Jones; and for a couple of the others it merely repeats what’s on the main Trustees page. But some of these names rang bells. Rose Mutale Nyoni Merrill is the wife of Travers Merrill, Chief Executive of the troubled Rhondda Life Ltd, mentioned recently in this post. Ms Cifuentes has also caught my eye. Unsurprisingly, Mrs Thaladi’s outfit, MEWN Cymru, has also been mentioned on this blog. It begins to look like just another round of BME / Third Sector musical chairs.


I only found out about RCC through an item today on the BBC Wales website (which disappeared completely, even from the regional page, soon after I tweeted about it!). Anyway, this story concerned a report compiled for RCC by Professor Heaven Crawley, Director of the Centre for Migration Policy Research at Swansea University. Think about that for a minute – an organisation wanting certain ‘findings’ asks an academic who also stands to benefit from those same findings to conduct research on its behalf. And guess what? Prof. Crawley found that there is indeed a lot of racism in Wales. (Example: People ‘looking’ at women wearing the hijab. Or, “My friend, right . . .”.) Cue filling out grant application forms and smooching politicos.

I don’t know about you, but I’m getting pissed off with people moving to Wales, often getting red carpet treatment, or being given lucrative and prestigious publicly-funded posts – only for them to turn on us. It doesn’t matter whether they are ranting bigots or retiring academics; too many seem determined to portray us Welsh in the worst possible light, because it serves a certain agenda. Given away by the enthusiasm with which the Labour Party, the anti-Welsh Labour Party – often using the Third sector – joins in the attacks.

Don’t dismiss what I’m saying out of hand because you happen to be on the Left, and perhaps view me as a reactionary oddball. Just give some thought to the intellectual continuum that allows ‘respectable’ academic research such as that done by Professor Crawley to give succour to creatures like this (play video). For isn’t it a proven fact that we Welsh are intolerant and racist! (Not forgetting, “ignorant bastards”.)

That’s how it works: some drunken Jack makes an out-of-order remark to a Muslim woman and this and similar incidents are amassed and inflated by Labour’s Third Sector and supportive academics into a damning corpus of evidence against a whole nation; done in order to reduce resistance to further English colonisation and to undermine demands for more control over our national life. I can see it, which is why I will speak out. But it seems to be a bit of a blind spot for our patriotic Left.

Cilmeri 2012

In the absence of any information to the contrary I assume that the arrangements for this year’s commemoration – held on December 8th and 9th – follow the same timetable as last year. Though I have no idea who the speakers are, or if there’s entertainment on the Saturday evening. (How difficult would it be to circulate bloggers like me with the details? If you want people to turn up – let them bloody well know about it!) Also conspiring to keep down the numbers of those attending Cilmeri has been the Labour Party which, in recent months, has come up with the kind of ‘Shock! Horror! – Nationalists! revelations that devalue political discourse. (Yea, even Welsh political discourse.) I have commented on this silliness in a previous post, but I’ll return to it later.

For those who’ve never been to Cilmeri, but might consider going, here’s a brief run-down of where it is, what it’s about, what goes on there, and who turns up. Cilmeri is a couple of miles from Builth on the A483 (Llandovery road). Despite being a rather out-of-the-way place it is surprisingly easy to get to. The A483 links with the A40 and the A470 runs through Builth. In addition, you can catch a train from Swansea and Llanelli (or, from the other direction, Shrewsbury) to Cilmeri Halt. What draws people to Cilmeri is the monument to Llywelyn Ein Llyw Olaf, last Prince of Wales of the House of Gwynedd, who is known to have been killed near here by English soldiers in 1282.

Commemorations began in the 1960s, those wonderful years when I was young and anything seemed possible. (Wistful sigh.) Inevitably, those organisations then active in Wales, such as the FWA, were in attendance. But just about everyone was welcome, for it was a chance to meet people you might not have seen for years. The Big One was of course the 700th anniversary in 1982. That well-known warmonger and general no-good boyo Gwynfor Evans was there, as were other notables in the crowd of at least two thousand. I stress this because the truth about Cilmeri is that – apart from the ceremony and the speeches at the memorial itself – it’s rather a fun event, attracting an eclectic mix of people. Even the Labour Party is represented. For Councillor Ray Davies of Caerffili – accompanied by his Red Warblers – is a regular; and I know he’s not the only Labour Party member who attends.

So we have a Welsh day out to which everyone is welcome which, I suppose, leaves the question: why is the Labour Party at Assembly level so hostile towards Cilmeri? It would be nice to say that Labour’s attitude to Cilmeri was an isolated case; that in other ways Labour was entirely supportive of celebrating Welsh identity and remembering Welsh history. But it’s not. Cilmeri is the rule, not an exception. So how do we explain this? I suggest there are two strands interwoven to produce the kind of nonsense we’ve heard from Vaughan Gething AM and others in recent months.

First, there’s the traditional Labour view that Wales did not exist until we experienced the Industrial Revolution, which created an urban working class. The struggles of Llywelyn, and Glyndŵr, were devoid of any national (let alone, nationalist) dimension. It was simply an ongoing struggle between brutal, land-grabbing feudalists, some of whom may have been Welsh, certainly, but were driven by exactly the same impulses as their Anglo-Saxon, Norman, Anglo-Norman and, finally, English, rivals. Though I’ve never understood how the Industrial Revolution could simultaneously bring into existence Welsh nationhood and the class consciousness that rejects national feeling as something imposed from above to divide the international proletariat. But then, there’s a lot I don’t understand about socialism . . . maybe I wasn’t listening.

The other strand is altogether more difficult to explain, for reasons that will become obvious. There is an old theory that says the Labour Party in Wales was built up and initially supported by immigrants to the industrial areas – mainly English and Irish – in rejection of the ‘Welsh’ Liberal Party, the chapels, the Welsh language, and the rest of the ‘package’. Which means that from its earliest days, the Labour Party in Wales was un-Welsh, if not anti Welsh. Obviously this position was softened over time, as the Welsh working class anglicised itself, and the Labour Party produced leaders who were unquestionably Welsh. But at some levels, this belief in the English-Irish Labour Party, hostile to everything Welsh, persisted.

So while I don’t expect to see Vaughan Gething at Cilmeri next month – even though he’d be most welcome, I’d even buy him a Babycham! – it would be nice to see the Labour Party give some thought to finally killing this old perception, rather than breathing new life into it by running to the media with silly stories that turn out to be nothing more than patriotic Welsh people celebrating their heritage and their identity. If this is so offensive to the modern, post-devolution Labour Party then maybe the old prejudices are not dead.

(The arrangements for the northern commemoration on Sunday the 9th are the same as last year with the only difference being the wreath-laying at Gwynedd CC HQ being at 11:30 this year. I know this because someone had the good sense to inform me!)

The Enemy Within 3: Common Purpose

Most people visiting this blog don’t necessarily share my mildly right of centre views, and so I suppose they won’t be regular readers of the Daily Mail. (Though neither am I, preferring the Telegraph.) So they won’t have read the in-depth article by Richard Pendlebury carried by the Mail last Friday about the organisation Common Purpose. Described by the Daily Mail as “the Left’s old boy network”, which in some respects it is.

Common Purpose is, according to its founder, Julia Middleton,an organisation that trains and educates people who can then “lead beyond their authority and can produce change beyond their direct circle of control”. Now give that ambition some thought for a minute; conjure up in your mind the image of the police constable who, due to his Masonic rank, has unseen authority over higher ranking officers in the police service. Surely a situation we should be seeking to end, rather than allowing it to be imitated by another organisation?

Talking of her inspiration for Common Purpose, Ms Middleton quotes in her opus Beyond Authority, a certain Doug Miller: “You start with clear and defined objectives . . . Then you establish what the objectives are . . . they are usually people. So you have to establish what motivates them, and then decide if you can win them over by the power of the idea . . .
Sometimes, if it gets messy, you might have to run over them, undermine them, go around them or discredit them. As a last resort, you consider bullying them, or buying them off”.

“Discredit them . . . bully them . . . buy them off”. Sounds more and more like the Freemasonry we’re more familiar with. Because of course, in a country without a public school system to produce the Old Boy network it is Freemasonry that Common Purpose has to challenge and displace in Wales. Especially in local government. Given Common Purpose’s established links with the Labour Party it is easy to see the organisation’s influence in the Local Government Act 2000. This legislation gave us the cabinet system, in which a chief executive aided by a small number of compliant councillors can rule a local authority. What a wonderful arrangement, especially if the chief executive and a couple of the cabinet members are Common Purpose ‘graduates’.

The downside of course is that the cabinet system undermines democracy. For it makes redundant the majority of the elected councillors in order to give authority to a paid official without a democratic mandate. But then, this is probably what CP means by ‘leading beyond authority’. To see the pitfalls and drawbacks of the cabinet system we need only look to poor old Carmarthenshire; now the laughing-stock of Welsh local government, being unfavourably compared with North Korea, its people crying out for UN intervention.

It should be obvious to you by now that Common Purpose is a Leftist freemasonry, a creature of New Labour. It may even have been set up specifically to counter the influence of what it sees as Rightist elements such as the Freemasons, unfriendly newspapers and other bogeymen (by behaving in almost exactly the same way!). Being part of the Labour Party network of influence it should not surprise anyone reading this to also learn that Common Purpose is very well represented in the Third Sector. Ah! the Third Sector, yet another way of exercising authority, influencing politicians, accessing public funding – and all done without the inconvenience of having to submit one’s programme to the judgement of the Great Unwashed.

Here’s a short video of Julia Middleton talking about Beyond Authority. I don’t wish to be unkind . . . but something in those eyes, and the Cheltenham Ladies’ College delivery, make me feel rather uneasy.

Because Common Purpose is Leftist and right-on, inclusive (unlike men-only Masons), anti Telegraph and anti News International, supported by the Guardian, we can almost guarantee that Plaid Cymru thinks it’s a wonderful organisation. Blinding itself to the danger of so much power passing into the hands of so few – unelected – people, in local government, Third Sector, civil service and other fields, many of whom had no connection with Wales before coming here to take up positions of power and / or influence.

Common Purpose is just another mechanism for maintaining and exercising England’s control over Wales. Just because Common Purpose ‘graduates’ tend to be more hip and presentable than their more obviously corrupt and venal Freemason counterparts, just because they may not go in for knee-flashing and funny handshakes, should not make them any more acceptable. They have other ways of recognising each other, and helping each other. Ways of which the ‘outsider’ will be ignorant. So in practical terms, is there any real difference between Freemasons and Common Purpose?

Common Purpose is a threat to democracy. The operations of Common Purpose are inimical to Wales’ interests and hostile to Welsh traditions, for we have always believed in openness and democracy. Make enquiries and expose this outfit wherever and however you can. It is another enemy within . . . and its influence is spreading.

‘The Tywyn Territorial’ 2, Bilingo and Friends

The arsehole I quoted in my previous post done gone all shy on us, and has made his account with WalesOnline available only to ‘friends’. (Don’t laugh! How can you be so mean?) As his account is where I mined the gems used in yesterday’s post, and because I have no intention of wading through page after page of bigotry on WO, the supply is at an end. However! I managed to grab more gems than I used in my earlier post. So, to keep you chuckling over the weekend, here they are. I have not bothered with comments this time as I’m sure you can make up your own.

OTHER NEWS: Please compete the Libingo survey. As for BiLingo itself, someone is telling me that he is convinced it’s Gogwatch and Glasnost re-born. Any other thoughts out there?

The BiLingo Twitter account, @OG58630160, seems to have gone out of business and been replaced by @BilingoWales. This new account has an eclectic mix of Followers, none of whom may actually support BiLingo! (DET no longer one.) The tweets are worth reading, such as “ONE world ONE language”. And to think that we mistook this for the work of a local bigot, when in reality it’s a plan for the English language to conquer the world!

The other Twitter account from which I received an unsolicited tweet supporting Bilingo, @tibtabx, seems to be in a state of suspended animation. While @belowlandsker, who also tweeted me a few days ago in support of BiLingo, has seen no activity today.

Bilingo, Tibtabx and Belowlandsker all set up websites and /or Twitter accounts very recently, give evidence of being known to each other (if not connected), and all push the same message. Which ties in with what was suggested to me earlier today: One person working behind multiple identities.

If this can be proved, then certain media outlets can be made to look very, very stupid. Do what you can.

UPDATE: Someone else making the Gogwatch connection.

The Enemy Within

Just over a week ago I got to know of BiLingo, a website critical of Ceredigion’shttps://i0.wp.com/3.bp.blogspot.com/-1q8Nczx35DI/UKP-NWgHjvI/AAAAAAAAEZo/RUw0-GB1v64/s1600/BiLingo+1.PNG?resize=404%2C87 language policy. Going to BiLingo’s Twitter account (OG58630160) I saw that it had just two followers: an American who follows everybody, and Dafydd Elis Thomas. Which was odd, seeing as BiLingo described itself as a group of concerned parents . . . parents who were obviously not concerned enough to follow their own Twitter account!

BiLingo is in the news again today, so I checked back on Twitter. Now there are 14 followers (not all sympathisers), but BiLingo now claims to be no more than a “Mouthpiece for concern over the current administration of the Language Strategy in Ceredigion schools”. In other words, just another sad and lonely bigot with a computer and an internet connection.

Even before tweets in the past few hours drew my attention again to BiLingo I received a tweet this afternoon from @tibtabx. A hostile tweet which made no sense at all, seeing as it seemed to be answering something I hadn’t said. Naturally, I wanted to learn more about the sender, so I checked, and found this. (Left.) Now I don’t profess to be too clever with social networking and lots of other things connected with computers and the internet, so I’d like some help here. My guess is that this is a new Twitter account, but why would it be blocked to others?

Getting back to BiLingo, the reason for the Twitter activity this evening is that there are stories in both the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph today uncritically repeating BiLingo’s accusations. Which I find amazing. Two ‘reputable’ English newspapers have run articles that smear a county (if not a whole country), its education system, and its teachers, on the word of an unnamed source. For nowhere, in either article, do we read the name(s) of whoever’s making these allegations. No doubt this serves the purpose of suggesting fear of retribution.

But of course we’ve always had the anti-Welsh among us, it’s nothing new. The real lessons to take from this episode should be: 1/ Never trust the English media. 2/ We’ve been too reasonable for too long with people like BiLingo, and look where it’s got us! From now on be as intolerant and unreasonable as they are. What’s to lose? The press coverage won’t get any worse. And once they realise they aren’t going to get their own way they’ll shut up or go home.

UPDATE 16.11.12: Predictably – seeing as it has been ‘cleared’ by important English newspapers – the Wasting Mule has summoned up the courage to use this ‘story’ today. (Which reminds us yet again why dead fish should be treated with more respect.) But if it was an anonymous nationalist website making outlandish claims would the WM use that story? No. Or rather – and I’ll tell you something now from personal experience – once alerted to the allegations the ‘Welsh’ media would have seen it as their duty to ‘unmask’ (the word they’d use) the author. Why is this case different?
Probably because the sentiments being expressed by BiLingo chime with the views of too many in the ‘Welsh’ media. Furthermore, I guarantee that whoever is behind BiLingo has a whole package of grievances. Because do you really think this person is happy with the political and constitutional direction in which Wales is travelling, and that language teaching in certain Ceredigion schools is their only grievance?
Whover is behind BiLingo has generated a lot of publicity hostile to Wales and the Welsh language. They have achieved this in a dirty and underhand way that would not have been tolerated if similarly unsubstantiated allegations had been made by ‘the other side’. This is shoddy and biased journalism. There should be no more publicity until we have the name or names of those behind Bilingo.

Freedom, Information, Power, Freedom

Last year I reported on a worrying case of criminality in Tywyn that saw flagpoles and the Welsh flags flying from them vandalised by what the Cambrian News described as “adults, local to the area”. Here’s a link to my post with the article itself on the right, click to enlarge.Tywyn Promenade
When, despite the perpetrators being caught red-handed, no prosecutions followed I decided to find out why, using a Freedom of Information request to North Wales Police. My request, dated September 10th, was worded thus:
On May 7th2011 your force arrested eight people in Tywyn, Gwynedd in connection with vandalism to flagpoles and the Welsh flags flying from them on Tywyn promenade. I enclose a copy of the report that appeared in the Cambrian News.
I wish to know:
A) The outcome of that investigation.
B) The disposal result for all the offenders.
C) If this crime was recorded as racially motivated; and if not, why not.

Finally, I wish to request a copy of the investigation report with personal information redacted.

A couple of days later I received a phone call from the North Wales Police Freedom of Information and Policy Unit asking if I’d accept the information by e-mail. I agreed, and on the 14th I received an e-mail acknowledging my FoI request and promising a response by October 10th.

When no response was received by the promised date I e-mailed the Unit asking if I was going to get a reply. I heard nothing in response so I reported North Wales Police to the Information Commissioner on October 12th. I e-mailed the Unit again on the 14th, and finally, on the 22nd, I sent a recorded delivery letter, asking why I’d had no response.

This prompted a reply mailed on October 24th containing a hand-written letter from the Freedom of Information Unit, telling me that the writer had tried to phone both my home and mobile numbers without success and enclosing copies of two e-mails sent me; one on October 2nd, the other on October 10th (in response to my e-mail of that day).

Now the remarkable thing is that I did not receive these e-mails, nor did I receive the phone calls. In case the e-mails had got trapped in my spam filter, I waded through the junk for those periods but was still unable to find them. Nor could I find any record of the phone calls. If I hadn’t answered my phones, why not leave a message? Remarkable. Four claimed attempts to contact me not one of which was successful. However, the copy of the e-mail allegedly sent on October 2nd did give a response, of sorts. It said:

“The Freedom of Information Act requires that responses cannot provide information which will breach the Data Protection Act 1998. The information that you have requested relates to a third party for example a person other than yourself (section 40(2)). Therefore, in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act 2000, this letter acts as a Refusal Notice under section 17 (1) of the legislation.

I can however inform you that the incident been (sic) detected with two individuals receiving conditional cautions for Criminal Damage.

The incident was not logged as a hate crime. North Wales Police do not have a record of why not however; you may find the following link ‘What is a Hate Crime’ section of our website of assistance (gives link).”

I can only assume that the first part of the e-mail refers to my request for, ” . . . a copy of the investigation report with personal information redacted”. Though, quite honestly, I don’t know what the e-mail is trying to say; for Section 17 (1) makes no obvious reference to requesting information about unnamed third parties. (Here’s a link to the Freedom of Information Act 2000.) Then, despite the incident being witnessed, and eight people arrested for causing over £1,000 worth of damage, just two were cautioned, and only cautioned. And Gogplod claims to have no idea why the incident was not logged as a hate crime.

Thinking about it a few days later, it occurred to me that there was a possibility that the owner(s) of the poles and the flags had chosen not to proceed with the case. So on October 31st I wrote again to the Information Unit asking:

“Did the owner(s) of the damaged property request that you not proceed with the case, or did he / they decide to withdraw the charges, or not press charges? If so, did the owner(s) give any reason(s) for this decision?”

The reply was posted on November 6th and, basically, said the same as the earlier response – ‘Section 40(2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 means we don’t have to give you this information . . . or at least that’s how we choose to interpret it. So sod off!’

Even if I didn’t go about the FoI the right way – maybe I could have worded it better – the fact remains that last year in a Welsh seaside resort a gang of yobs pulled down flagpoles and ripped up the Welsh flags flying from those poles. (They may even have destroyed the poles to get at the flags.) Despite there being witnesses to the offence, and despite the perpetrators being apprehended, they were not prosecuted. Why?

If the flags destroyed had been union jacks, then I guarantee that the Unionist and anti-Welsh elements to be found in the local lodges and ex-service groups, golf club and business associations, would have frothed and fumed before invoking the memory of our Glorious Dead and London 2012 to demand prosecutions – probably floggings and deportations. But Welsh flags obviously count for less; nobody in the clubhouse or the Legion is going to make a fuss over a flag they view with suspicion as the preferred banner of those with questionable loyalty to her Britannic Majesty.

Maybe this highlights a fundamental problem with modern Wales. We are trying to rebuild a country from the top down. In my reading of history I can’t recall this ever being done. Small nations achieve progress and independence by creating their own grass-roots organisations that grow and rival those of the State or the dominant group within the State, thus leading to political change. Here in Wales we seem happy with an Assembly in Cardiff while the country itself, at sub-national and local level, is still controlled by a viper’s nest of British, or even blatantly English, organisations.

This must change. There should be no room in twenty-first century Wales for organisations operating on a national, a regional, or a local level that are not unequivocally Welsh, and committed to serving the national interest. Otherwise devolution is just a sham. Welsh icing on what remains a cake made up of English ingredients.

In The Interests Of Balance

I am indebted to the person who sent me this cutting from the Cambrian News of December 26, 1996. (Click to enlarge.) It is a letter from the woman shown in the post before last ‘If That’s The Way They Want It’. First, let me admit, it’s quite well written; and would I’m sure persuade many people of the rightness of her argument . . . if they hadn’t seen the film clip. And that’s her problem; she knows she’s in trouble before she starts as the film shows her in a very bad light. So this letter is part damage limitation, part blame-shifting. It’s a lengthy letter so I’m not going thrhttps://i1.wp.com/4.bp.blogspot.com/-6a3iFphguPw/UJudh38Bx-I/AAAAAAAAEWY/VEXE8mIAnKI/s1600/Gorddu.png?resize=220%2C822ough it point by point, I shall just focus on five elements that caught my eye.

‘Not Just Me’

To believe the letter-writer, there were appalling things going on off-camera, with Welsh supporters of Dafydd Huws hurling racist abuse at her and other protesters. (Including Welsh protesters!) She also claims that Dafydd Huws spoke in English to some other film crew. But of course we only have her word for all this. And, inevitably, the council is also at fault.

“The Developer”

Curiously, the writer never once refers to Dr. Huws by name, he’s always “the developer”. (Ten times by my count.) Did she hate him so much that she couldn’t even bring herself to write his name! Was she offended that some Welsh peasant could become a psychiatrist? (Though being a psychiatrist I’m sure Dafydd Huws would have picked up on the avoidance of his name.)


I didn’t count how many times she used ‘racist’ or ‘racism’ but it was worked to death. (As it invariably is in these situations.) Well-heeled English colonists presenting themselves as the downtrodden victims of racism is ludicrous. They are colonists, taking over someone else’s country. Reading her letter I was reminded of an earlier English use of this tactic.

In the mid 19th century the Boers left Cape Province to found their own republics, The Free State and Transvaal. It was soon realised that the latter was rich in gold and diamonds. Inevitably, the English wanted to get their hands on these riches. So they encouraged English settlers to move into the Transvaal, knowing that – as non-citizens – they would not be allowed to vote. Up went the cry of ‘Persecution!’ and invasion followed to secure the gold and diamonds rescue the oppressed English settlers.

It’s an old trick. ‘Intolerant French’ in Canada, ‘Savage Irish’; and that’s before you even get to the non-European peoples. Send in some settlers, wait for the inevitable response to their arrogant behaviour and their acquisitive ways, then use resistance to these interlopers as the justification for invasion! Here in Wales, in the 21st century, it’s obviously a little different. But the same pattern can be discerned. The colonists cry ‘racism’ – Welsh people fear being so branded – opposition reduces – more colonisation results – new territory is secured for English expansionism.

Celtic Solidarity

Having just mentioned Ireland, I was intrigued by how she tried to use her husband’s Irish origins against Dr. Huws and his supporters. Though it did suggest the sound of straws being clutched . . . know what I mean – that thin, plaintive sound of utter despair just before somebody goes under?

But let’s take her statement at face value (for the redacted name does suggest Irish origins). In which case, the history of the native Irish people – the oppression, dispossession and expulsion from their own lands – sits rather awkwardly with hubby lining up with English colonists in a dispute with fellow-Celts. Most Irish people – certainly the Irish I know – would say he was on the wrong side.


Again, in talking of her husband, she wrote: “He was furious at being told to ‘go home’ – having lived in this area for a long time he is home – unlike the developer who, for all he uses his mother’s address in Llandre, actually lives in Caerphilly”.

So this area around Mynydd Gorddu is their home because they live there, but not Dafydd Huws’ home because he now lives somewhere else. This is perhaps the most revealing thing the woman had to say. For nothing sums up the difference between us and them better. For her and her rootless kind ‘home’ is where you happen to live. Perceptions of ‘home’ are devoid of emotion or sentiment; it all comes down to monetary valuations, boundaries, etc.

Something I remember my late friend, Barrie Edwards, taking exception to . . . by taking a sledgehammer to some ornamental stonework. Done to register his contempt for the new owner of his nain’s old house. I won’t deny that he’d had a drink or twa when he did it, but to hear his explanation would have bemused the developer’s opponents. For to him, all the new owner had was a bit of (expletive) paper giving him legal ownership of stones, nothing more. There was another dimension to that house, something very personal that gave Barrie ‘ownership’ in a way the interloper could never understand.

Given that hubby is of Irish descent, and that he and his lovable spouse have a curious understanding of home and belonging, here’s the great Irish tenor, John McCormack singing The Old House.

Loyalty Betrayed

This post was prompted by a comment made yesterday to my post of October 18th, which set off the train of thought you will find below. Though the comment itself merely drew my attention to the new language movement, Dyfodol i’r Iaith (A Future for the Language), and a speech made to its first AGM by Professor Richard Wyn Jones, a member of the new group’s Executive Committee. First, the comment; which read in full: “I was following the tweets from the new movement Dyfodol.net Richard Wyn Jones was speaking and he said that “Cefnogaeth y Cymry Cymraeg yn Refferendwm 2011 y Sofietaidd o uchel medde RWJ.” 

Not sure Jac about your Welsh but he’s saying that the level of support in the 2011 referendum was at soviet levels amongst Welsh speakers. I suppose that means extraordinarily high but that since devolution this group have made the least use of the chances created. Or should that be that this group have seen the least benefits offered to them? Of course, these people may not be just supportive of devolution just because they speak Welsh; they are born and bred here for generations on the whole. There’s a brief summary of his speech on their web site. But it agrees with what you have said many times that those who have supported devolution have seen few benefits. Of course, the academic, and I believe the good man that he is, has concentrated on the language. It is after all a speech made during the setting up of a language pressure group. Just thought it may be of interest to you.”


In making a reference to the late and unlamented Soviet Union I’m sure Richard Wyn Jones didn’t mean to suggest that Welsh speakers were coerced into returning such a high Yes vote in last year’s referendum, but I suppose we know what he means. In a nutshell, Welsh speakers, particularly first language Welsh speakers, tend to be more nationalistic, partly due – and as the commenter points out – to the fact that “they are born and bred here for generations”. But this would also apply to many anglophone Welsh, so there must be other factors at work.
click to enlarge
The commenter moves on to say that despite their support for devolution Welsh speakers have not done well out of it. I can’t agree entirely, for some certainly have (see below) but the Fro Gymraeg as a region has definitely suffered under devolution. As have the other areas that voted Yes in the 1997 referendum. To explain this, let’s remind ourselves of political analyst, Denis Balsom’s, political division of Wales (left), drawn up in 1985. Here we see the country divided into three parts along considerations of identification and language.
The ‘Fro Gymraeg’, is the region covering those districts with the highest percentages of first language Welsh speakers, (but also includes districts with the highest percentages of their population born outside Wales). ‘Welsh Wales’ is that region containing the districts with the highest percentages of Welsh born and high percentages identifying as Welsh. Finally, ‘British Wales’ is the label for those parts of the country with weaker identification with Wales and / or higher percentages of English born in the population than Welsh Wales, plus low numbers of Welsh speakers. We can all argue about whether this district or that should be moved to another ‘region’, but this is still a good model for understanding Welsh politics and much else.
click to enlarge
Balsom’s model proved remarkably accurate twelve years later with the referendum of September 18th, 1997 on whether to set up a Welsh Assembly. This vote showed Y Fro Gymraeg voting Yes, as did Welsh Wales (with the exception of Torfaen and the addition of Bridgend). Predictably, British Wales voted No. (See map, right.)

click to enlarge

These divisions, with minor alterations, keep cropping up again and again. Another example would be the division of Wales for EU structural funds. (See map, left.) Those areas qualifying in 2000 for Objective One, the highest level of funding, because their per capita GDP was below 75 per cent of the EU average, were almost exactly the same areas that voted Yes in 1997. (The addition of Denbighshire and Conwy can be explained by the GDP of these relatively affluent areas being brought down by ‘dumping ground’ resorts such as Rhyl.)

click to enlarge

Which brings us back to Prof. Jones, and his remarks about last year’s referendum. (See map, right.) I believe there were a number of reasons why we saw such a high Yes vote from Welsh speakers. Patriotism and culture obviously play a part, as they did in 1997 but, given that most Welsh speakers live in the Fro Gymraeg, there was another reason. One that most commentators will ignore or deny. The changes taking place in the Fro Gymraeg are resented by many local people. Some are angry at becoming strangers in their own communities. And who can blame them!


If Welsh speakers are more nationalistic than the anglophone Welsh then it stands to reason that neither the UK government nor its branch office in Cardiff docks will want to see an increase in the number of first language Welsh speakers. For this group has the potential to destroy the colonial relationship with England. The more first language Welsh speakers there are, the greater the threat. Knowing this, how has the UK State dealt with this danger?

The strategy employed has incorporated the following measures.
1Focusing economic growth and government jobs in Cardiff to draw thousands of well
educated and qualified first language Welsh speakers to the city from the Fro Gymraeg.
Thereby depriving the Fro of much of its natural leadership. A mild form of ‘decapitation’.
2In the Fro Gymraeg we have seen massive immigration – almost exclusively from England –
that has, in some places, and within a generation, turned Welsh-speaking villages into
communities that are not simply English speaking, but demographically English.
3 To disguise the damage done to the Fro Gymraeg by 1 & 2 the State has:

  • Encouraged cosmetic ‘respect’ and ‘visibility’ for the language that results in situations such as the Tesco store in Porthmadog being awash with bilingual signage, only half of which its almost exclusively English-import staff can read.
  • Bought off (there is no other way of putting it) some of the more vocal language ‘activists’ of recent decades.
  • Encouraged the growth of Welsh medium and bilingual schools in English-speaking areas so that it can – statistically, at least – point to an increase in the number of Welsh speakers. In reality, many of these ‘Welsh-speaking’ children do not use the language once they leave school.
So as the number of ‘Welsh speakers’ rises Welsh as a community language dies, due to an inexorable fall in the numbers of first language Welsh speakers, linked with, and partly attributable to, the colonisation of the language heartlands. Threat dealt with! This is such an obvious deception that you have to ask why the ‘language lobby’ has fallen for it. But fallen for it it has. For there has been no serious campaigning for the Welsh language for over two decades.
The Good and the Great of Dyfodol i’r Iaith will be no different. They’ll hold their conferences and their workshops; they’ll issue their press releases; they’ll bring out scholarly, well-researched papers; they’ll build up a harmonious working relationship with politicians and civil servants . . . and achieve little beyond yet more ‘official recognition’ for the Welsh language, which will offer nothing of any practical value to 95 per cent of Welsh speakers, and do nothing to save the Fro Gymraeg. This will be explained as ‘working with the system’ rather than being ‘confrontational’. In much the same way as socialists justify accepting peerages.
********************************************So what do all these maps tell us? Has Wales changed in the age of devolution? The tripartite division still holds good for now, though the Fro Gymraeg is of course doomed. Not so much because it’s being ‘nibbled away’ at the edges, but because it’s collapsing from within. While areas of British Wales do seem to identify more with Wales now than they did previously. In the case of Cardiff, this owes a great deal to the internal migration referred to above. Leaving Welsh Wales as the least changed region.

The areas that voted Yes in 1997 did so for two reasons. One reason was a simple declaration of their Welshness. The other was the hope that the economic situation of their area would improve under a Welsh government. They have been betrayed; Welsh Wales and Y Fro Gymraeg are poorer today – relative to ‘British Wales’, the UK, and Europe more generally – than they were in 1997. Devolution is undermining the Welsh identity of these areas while simultaneously deepening their poverty. This betrayal can only happen when the loyalty of a section of the population can be taken for granted, made easier by the fact that too many within that population refuse to believe that ‘their’ government is not acting in their interests. The sad truth is that too many of those who care about the future of Wales placed their trust in a system (for this is not a party political issue) that never had any intention of repaying that trust.

So, taking the long view . . . Wales in 2012 is no different really to Wales in 1812 or even 1312. It doesn’t matter what the system is called, or how it’s presented, it remains the same: a system designed by others, to benefit others, and to keep us Welsh at the bottom of the pile. (With a few allowed to rise for the purposes of window-dressing.) It is surely time for more people to wake up to this fact; to stop playing silly party political games; stop being selfish, and realise that we are engaged in a struggle for our national survival.

UPDATE 03.11.12 Earlier today I noticed this tweet about Wilkinson’s store in Pwllheli. The situation is the same in the company’s store in Porthmadog. I also mentioned Tesco in Porthmadog in the original blog. There are countless other examples. So I have to ask why doesn’t the county council, or the town council, step in to defend the interests of the people they claim to represent? The short answer is that if they draw attention to this blatant discrimination it is they who will be accused of racism! This is Wales 2012.
A comment to the original blog gave this link to a remarkable piece of film. Click to start, tick the box ‘Ydw’ then click ‘Iawn’ and go to 12:30 into the film where you’ll encounter this bitch. (Left.) Now I am totally opposed to wind turbines, but there is something to be said for them if they encourage people like this creature to move back to where they belong.
Comments to this post, and indeed all my posts, say we need a new political party. An uncompromisingly nationalist party. I’m not so sure. When intolerant harridans like her stalk our land, when discrimination is rampant, when we are pushed around and spat on but no one speaks out, something more is needed.
Because we are dealing with people, both individuals and organisations, that have no respect for us, and simply want to take over our country, being ‘reasonable’ should no longer be an option.

UPDATE 07.11.12 The link provided in the earlier update has been changed by S4C, or someone else. How very odd.

The London Clearances

Over the past 24 hours or so quite a few people have picked up on the Guardian story about London councils planning to move people out to various towns and cities. I was also directed to the Daily Mail’s version, and it’s this that prompts this brief post. For the MailOnline version takes comments, and some of these I found fascinating.

Because even though many destinations were mentioned for London’s unwanted benefits recipients it was surprising how often Wales figured in the comments. And the comments didn’t just come from Wales. Many of those that did, though, seemed well aware of the already existing problems. Here’s an unscientific selection:



It should be encouraging to read that people in England, Scotland, Ireland, the US and Canada care about us and our country, but there’s little they can do. It’s really up to us to start making a stand against this and the many other ways in which the English system shows its contempt for us Welsh. And we’d better start soon, because time is not on our side.

‘If That’s The Way They Want It’

A comment to my previous post drew attention to a compilation by Y Byd ar Bedwar (a current affairs programme on S4C, the Welsh language channel) celebrating the 30 years that both the channel and the programme have been with us. In particular, I was referred to coverage of a dispute between the late Dr. Dafydd Huws and a group of protesters to his wind farm project in Ceredigion.

My views on wind farms are well known; I detest them as ugly, expensive and useless. Even so, Hell would have to host the Winter Olympics before I’d line up with the creatures we see on this clip. Who they are I don’t know (maybe someone out there recognises them). I assume they’re husband and wife, though I suppose they could be siblings (they look the type).

Dafydd Huws behaves with remarkable restraint and dignity, qualities that would have to be explained – in very simple language – to these two. Speaking his native language in the county where he was born, a language spoken by most locals, is just too much for the Gruesome Twosome. You see . . . how can I put this? They have ‘moved to the country’; to a rural part of the same country they were living in before they moved. They have definitely not moved to a different country, belonging to a different nation with its own history, culture, language and loyalties. And because that’s how they see it, someone wishing to speak Welsh is simply being awkward, as if he’d arbitrarily decided to address them in Swahili or Finnish.

Let’s pick up on some of the remarks made. The harridan refers to “this community” . . . mmm, and how long has she been part of it? (And would you want to be part of any ‘community’ of which she was a member?) A few seconds later she utters: “If you’re not going to speak English you might as well f o“. Exhibiting the traditional English attitude to other languages and cultures. A few seconds later she calls Dr Huws “an ignorant bastard”, presumably for speaking Welsh. Just before the clip finishes her companion chips in with, “If that’s the way they want it”. That? Way? They? What is the fat, gormless bastard trying to say?

Meibion Glyndŵr and a couple of other organisations aside, every political party and organisation has, over the past forty years, failed to honestly face up to what is happening in Wales. We are being colonised. Handing out welcome packs to English colonists, telling them about Wales, hoping they’ll integrate, is a waste of time and money. And an acceptance of defeat. These two in the film are all too typical of the people taking over our country – clearly the welcome packs influenced their attitudes!

The colonisation is no longer confined to the rural areas. The whole country is under threat, from the towns of the north coast to the southern Valleys. All manner of undesirables are being dumped on us. People are being murdered and raped by degenerates that shouldn’t even be in Wales.

Colonisation is now the single most important issue facing Wales, because if it is not checked Wales has no future as a nation. So instead of welcome packs the time has now come to a) curb the influx b) make sure those here understand that they’re here on our terms; if they don’t like it, then, as the harridan in the film so eloquently put it, they can f o.