Romanians, victims of racism in Brighton [Români, victime ale rasismului în Brighton]

Some four and a half years ago, in August 2008, a Romanian “was battered with fire estinguisher” in King’s Road, a well-known seafront street of Brighton.

What an awful thing to happen in the fun-loving Brighton, often praised as a European capital of tolerance, open-mindedness, political corectness and restless partying!



The man – aged 28, father of two, and owner of a little demolition and earth-moving firm – would die after eight days in hospital.

Tragic as it was, the incident didn’t bear racial connotations. The Romanian victim, described as “a really kind-hearted guy” happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.



This excuse doesn’t seem to be valid in relation to the last violent attack to which two Romanians fell prey in Brighton a couple of weeks ago, in late January.

The two Romanians were specifically asked where they were from before being punched. Again, the beating took place in central Brighton – on a bus stop near the Royal Pavilion (pics 1 & 7).

It is the Sussex Police, not I (nor the Romanian media), that treats the crime as a “racially aggravating assault”, appealing to witnesses to come forward and say what they known.

These are places where I personally felt safe. However, this is no longer the case for many third (or even fourth!) class European citizens from Romania and Bulgaria.

Less and less welcome in Britain, Romanians and Bulgarians have been the target of a smear campaign lately.

They steal the jobs of Brits, they overburden the social security system and they generally cause a mess that Britan would be better off without.

By the beginning of next year, the restrictions on the UK job market for Romanians and Bulgarians should be lifted, and tabloids are aghast with this perspective.

But they felt the same in late 2006, before Romania and Bulgaria joined the EU. And the hordes of unwanted immigrants didn’t plunder Britain, did they?

It is not this group of underprivileged immigrants – the target of prejudice just like the Irish workers were in Victorian Britain – that would make the UK’s situation much worse.

Sadly, even for flagbearers of democracy like Great Britain it is easier to put the blame on various scapegoats, rather than uproot the true ills of society which are of a moral nature.

[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

UK’s motor vanity fair (27) [Bâlciul deşertăciunilor cu motor din UK]

We’re all more or less familiar, from countless Hollywood productions, with how American police cars look like.

Who wouldn’t remember the TV series (especially of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s) in which ‘good guys’ were chasing the ‘bad guys’ in cars like these?

It often took incredibly many police cars – crashed into one another, blown up, thrown over bridges etc – to catch the ‘bad guys’, didn’t it?

Actually, there have been so many movies (+ video games), that I bet we could find enough fan(atic)s able to identify which car is which without ever setting foot in America.

How about British police cars? Well, these few pictures can offer a glimpse on how they look like to anyone interested.

Not that there wouldn’t exist (here’s an example), but I personally don’t remember any British film with police cars involved in chasing criminals. James Bond movies are a different matter…

Therefore, I had no particular expectations in regard to British police cars, although I had seen with my own eyes that in New York, these vehicles really do look like in movies!

To be honest, I found these Brit cars completely unspectacular and somehow incapable of conveying the same impression of authority that American police cars bear.

Maybe there’s a political correctness directive that imposes police cars to look friendlier (like a plumber’s car or an ice cream van?!), instead of looking too intimidating?!

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

[EN] A few wonders from the UK / [RO] Câteva minunăţii din UK (24)

[EN] A very beautiful spot of London, Belgravia, where the Romanian Cultural Centre (ICR – London, pictured here) is located.

[RO] Un foarte frumos loc din Londra, Belgravia, unde Centrul Cultural Român (ICR – Londra, pozat aici) este localizat.

[EN] Inaccesible to common mortals, it is one of the richest neighbourhoods of the world, where most houses (up to 99%) are incredibly white.

[RO] Inaccesibil muritorilor de rând, este unul dintre cele mai bogate cartiere ale lumii, unde cele mai multe case (până la 99%) sunt incredibil de albe.

[EN] Is the money of most notable residents (like Roman Abramovich) where equally white?!

[RO] Sunt şi banii celor mai notabili rezidenţi (precum Roman Abramovici) la fel de albi?!

[EN] Although spared of rioters’ fury, it is not spared of crime, however, people living there can afford paying for little private armies.

[RO] Deşi ferit de furia răsculaţilor, nu este chiar ferit de criminalitate, totuşi, oamenii care locuiesc acolo îşi permit să plătească pentru mici armate private.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

Towards a grievous failure of British democracy [Către un eşec dureros al democraţiei britanice]

Six years ago, in that blazing autumn that saw France engulfed by violence (to a degree not seen since 1968 or even 1871), what is happenig today in many British cities (London + its suburbs, Birmingham, Bristol, Liverpool, Manchester, Nottingham) seemed utterly inconceivable.

The French had granted citizenship to immigrants, irrespective or nationality and religious background, therefore they should have considered the ‘risk’ implied by this more or less forceful integration, many British thinkers were probably imagining.

Whilst on the contrary, multicultural Britain had offered homes that retained all ethnic and religious peculiarities (from the fartherst corners of Asia and Africa to the Carribean and Eastern Europe) to millions of people.

The British model was deemed superior, many believed, because newcomers were not forced to adhere to abstract values such as those of the French Republic. 

Instead of that, they were likely to become law abiding citizens of a country that let them live their way, with little-to-none interference of the state in their lives.

The presumed solidity of this approach was hailed during the time when T. Bliar and his gang were in power (1997 – 2010), and every now and then Britons (and friends of Britain, like me :-) were exposed to ‘success stories’ about multiculturalism.

They sounded good: communities were interwoven by racial harmony, peace, understanding, respect for diversity, a climate of political correctness and allegiance to democratic values. All of these and economic prosperity overlapping.

Then the economic crisis struck Britain, followed by severe public spending cuts, and in early 2011, PM David Cameron openly acknowledged the failure of multiculturalism.

In theory, multiculturalism looked great – as appealing to the eye as these pictures of little streets from the City of London, a melting pot that, since the late 1600s to our days has been home to French Huguenots, Jews, Irish, Africans, African-Americans, Indians, Chinese, Pakistanis etc.

In practice, the often questioned multicultural achievements of British democracy lie shattered among the broken windows, broken skulls, and burning shops in British (only English, no Scottish, Welsh or Irish so far!!!) cities that no long before were ‘dream destinations’ for people from all over the world.

The mobs are not ‘united in diversity’ (as the EU motto claims) on the streets of British cities that I have so often praised as beautiful; there’s but a sort of ‘unity’ in discontent, rage, and meaningless devastation.

Not that I would find a political claim excusable, however, any political stance supported by the people on the streets could be at least understandable. Yet there is no such thing.

Just like the blitz riots in Canada’s most liveable city (2011), like those in France (2005), in the USA (1992), what is happening in the UK these days can’t be understood without taking into consideration the moral abyss into which Britain has been sucked for the past decades.

Unlike the localized Brixton Riots (of 1981, 1985, and 1995), these widespread events may have farther reaching consequences, in spite of (or precisely because of…) the hoodlums’ having no official agenda.

From one perspective, this makes the riots very convenient for everyone. Firstly, they look like a difficult (on the short term) but politically rewarding (on the long term – if dealed with wisely) task for the UK Government, which is very unlikely to draw any opposition to a massive crackdown.

Apart from Trotskyists and other weirdos, plus Tony Bliar’s former friend in Lybia, it’s hard to believe that anyone agrees with the violence in Britain.

Nevertheless, it is difficult to say whether UK’s law enforcement agencies, crippled by budgetary cuts, could come up with a swift response to the violence.

It appears that the summer of discontent has still reached Britain, and I wonder whether Cameron and Clegg have the strength to deal with a prolonged crisis (such as Margaret Thatcher’s miners’ strikes) in case the British riots will last as long as those in France.

Secondly, hordes of unorganised (?!) looters with no demand (albeit as skilled at using new technologies as those that ignited the so-called Arab Revolutions), and acting like mere Pavlov’s dogs, are also very convenient to Britain’s enemies. 

As the cradle of ancient democracy (Greece) is faltering, it’s sad – but not surprising, for a great nation where atheism is in full bloom – to see that the egg from where democracy as we know it today hatched (Great Britain) is crumbling.

[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

About public transport in the UK (15) [Despre transportul în comun în UK]

I must admit I did not commute through ‘unsafe neighbourhoods’ while I was in the UK, however, as far as I am concerned, I can say that I always felt reasonably safe and unthreatened in all British means of public transport that I used.

Even when a well oiled man was sleeping near me on a night journey in a Megabus, when a bunch of teenagers who had no ticket quarreled with a train conductor, or when a train was stopped in the middle of a field.

In spite of my (albeit limited) personal experience, I noticed many posters warning against vandalism, which gave a phone number to passengers, where they could “call in confidence and help stop vandals in their tracks.”

Unlike what I often wrote about Big Brother-ish excesses (see here, here, here, here or here!) in the UK, I don’t find it an exaggeration to offer such a number to people, and I can only decry that, in Romania, few people would bother to denounce such ‘common’ acts.

Around 20,000 railway offences are reported yearly in Britain, including trespassing dangerous restricted areas, vandalism, placing obstuctions on the line, stone throwing and serious criminal damage.

It often happens that vandals are just exuberant graffiti artists, nevetheless, I don’t it’s worth condoning their offences. One can hardly separate artistic creations from destructive acts leading to injury or death.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

Ortodoxia în East Sussex (8) [Orthodoxy in East Sussex]

În vremea când mergeam eu în biserica lor (ianuarie – martie 2008), grecii (mulţi ciprioţi) din Brighton strângeau bani pentru un iconostas nou. Aproape după fiecare Sfântă Liturghie era reînnoit acest apel către donatori.

Probabil, mai-marii comunităţii ajunseseră la concluzia că, în locul iconostasului de provizorat (de după preluarea fostului lăcaş anglican, în 1985 – imaginile 2-3 ) s-ar cuveni unul permanent, care să reflecte tradiţia ortodoxă.

Până la urmă, în noiembrie 2008, iconostasul cel nou era gata. Eu n-am mai apucat să-l văd împodobit, dar mărturia fotografică (imaginile 4-6) despre cum arăta o am de la o româncă ce mi-a mai oferit nişte imagini superbe pentru blog.

Nu l-am văzut, nici că o să-l mai văd cândva. Era Ziua Americii – zi cu ghinion ar zice grecii, o naţiune destul de antiamericană?! – a anului 2010, că cineva a pus foc bisericii (prima imagine).

Pe la 14:45 au sosit pompierii şi au stins incendiul, cu nu mai puţin de şase autospeciale. Nimeni nu a fost rănit, dar interiorul bisericii, cu statut de monument istoric potrivit normelor în vigoare în UK, s-a făcut scrum.

Focul nu a cruţat iconostasul mult-visat de comunitate (o imagine grăitoare pe un blog al unei parohii catolice din Brighton şi încă una mai mică), nici o sală care era folosită drept şcoală de limba greacă pentru copii.

Relatările găsite online (aici, aici, aici, aici şi aici) vorbesc de “pagube de mii de lire”, însă sunt şi pierderi nemăsurabile, căci nu ştiu de şi-or mai putea face grecii un iconostas precum cel ars.

Nu ştiu ce s-o mai fi ales de indiciul primit de Sussex Police că, între 14:20 şi 14:35, un Renault Scenic albastru a fost zărit în apropierea bisercii. Or fi prins pe cineva?

.

Poate că am mai aruncat aluzii de-a lungul acestui serial sau prin comentarii, însă nu am scris şi nu voi scrie vreodată în detaliu despre dezbinările şi intrigile întâlnite în parohia greacă din Brighton. Nu se cuvine unui bineprimit oaspete.

Ar fi cam acelaşi tip de rele obiceiuri – părute drept grijulii faţă de cele sfinte, dar neduhovniceşti – care macină Biserica Ortodoxă peste tot în lume. Aş zice doar “să stăm cu frică, să luăm aminte!”

.

Nu o dată, Preasfânta Treime ne dă semne să nu ne îngrijim prea mult de cele exterioare – poate frumoase şi bune, dar nu esenţiale pentru mântuire; cele care se pot face cenuşă într-o clipită, de parcă n-au fost vreodată.

De la vlădică la opincă, prea des uităm de cele nepieritoare la care ne cheamă Hristos, pe care niciun foc nu ni le-ar lua. Şi ne irosim viaţa istovindu-ne pentru celelalte, trecătoarele.

[Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la/For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to: Contents/Cuprins]

A ‘risk’ of reporting crimes in the UK [Un ‘risc’ al reclamării infracţiunilor în UK]

Personal data from four times more law-abiding citizens (a total of 181,917 people!) are being stored in British police databases than offenders, this article reveals.

Every time someone calls 999, they are politely asked to accept having their personal detalis introduced in the same database as those of 107,566 ‘aggrieved’ or ‘vulnerably aggrieved’ victims of crimes, while the names of only 38,259 suspects are held.

This yet another example of Orwellian Britain is known to happen only in the case of North Yorkshire Police. What about the other 38 territorial police forces in England, the 8 such law enforcement stuctures in Scotland or the 4 ones in Wales? Or the national ones?

.

Information is stored for at least 15 years and up to 100, in ‘the most serious cases’ – but who could check the criteria used to consider a case more serious than other?

According to someone from Privacy International, “a member of the public has to worry about approaching the police for fear of being put on a secret database with suspects,” yet this shouldn’t be the case, police officers believe.

A record of “callers who are victims of ongoing problems,” including data about their ethnicity (relevant in cases of hate crimes), could actually benefit the citizens, a spokesperson from the National Policing Improvement Agency says.

Oh, really? How many Brits feel safer after finding out that their data is stored by the police, possibly for a century from now on? What I considered a very polite gesture of Sussex Police (inviting crime witnesses to show up) may not be ‘risk-free’.

And if this wasn’t worrisome enough, here’s another ‘risk’ associated with being a citizen in the UK. Another ‘scientific myth’ is falling apart, as even DNA fingerprinting techniques (those supposedly ‘infailible’) “can sometimes give the wrong results.”

DNA analysts are subject to pressure, bias and mistakes just like any other human being, and who is comfortable with passing the responsibility of dictating someone’s fate (freedom or imprisonment) from a judge (and/or jury) to a scientist?

[For all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

About public transport in the UK (12) [Despre transportul în comun în UK]

Among the reasons because of which a British train may be late – and therefore make platforms crowded, and mess up people tight morning schedules – I personally experienced one of the strangest from a Romanian’s point of view.

Once, I was already late for a meeting in the City of London, when, halfway between Brighton and London’s Victoria Station, the voice of the train operator broke the silence.

Passengers took their eyes from what they were reading or from the window and heard the following message:

“The person who is smoking in the toilet cabin must immediately stop doing it, otherwise I will have to stop the train!”

People shrugged their shoulders, very few began to murmur something, while most of them indifferently returned to what they had been previously doing.

Less than 30 seconds later, the warning was heard again. This time most people had an anxious look on their faces, clearly waiting for something to happen next.

Suddently, the squealing of the brakes pierced the passangers’ ears. I personally am not sensitive to that noise, and I kind of enjoy seeing others seriuosly distrubed by that sound :-)

The train engineer got out of his cabin and rushed through the aisle of the cars, as if something really terrible had stopped the train.

He would come back 2-3 minutes later, sharing to us the news that he identified the toilet cabin where a cigarette had been lit. “But no sign of the offender”, he sighed.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]

God’s place in a humanist society (8) [Locul lui Dumnezeu într-o societate umanistă]

What I had in mind when I started this series was to try my best to describe how an ordered (for how long though?!) and rather amoral society (like Britain – but other countries could fit the description as well) functions.

And things work as long as the Nanny State manages to provide rules (laws, instructions, regulations, prescriptions) for most spheres of human life, so that people could be told what is good and bad, and be spared from the effort of judging by themselves.

“If it’s not expressly illegal/forbidden, it means it’s not bad/immoral” – this is the mindset of most Brits, the same as that shared by millions of people from the contemporary supposedly civilised world.

This is why one can see in the UK little announcemens or large billboards where you are given advice, interdictions and recommendations. Nowhere else is this visible than in the means of public transport.

Messages like these are being poked into your eyes because godless people are more and more less able to understand why something is (more or less strictly) forbidden, and something else is, on the contrary – recommendend.

As long as God’s voice in ourselves (our consciousness) has been suppressed ever since early childhood, a human being becomes a sort of Pavlov’s dog, conditioned to behave ethically only by interdictions and/or sanctions, plus immediate rewards, accessible like those on a supermarket shelves.

This is precisely why these poor civilised Brits, who have thown the Lord away from their hearts, now need a Big Brother, to constantly tell them what to do and what not to do, what is permitted and what is forbidden...

Or just to assure them that they are being watched. And that being watched is by no means an intrusion, an infringement of their rights, but some kind of a blessing. They are watched for their own good – so they are told.

These people believe that God’s presence in their consciousness is a hard thing to bear, yet inherently they need assurances – they fear for their lousy animalic lives, for the safety of their petty ambitions, for the comfort of satisfying their hedonistic aspirations...

Obviously, one doesn’t need God for these, thus Big Brother eventually becomes a necessity for any godless society. Something (anything but God!) must keep the society working.

The absolute madness of mass abortions, sexual education, gay rights (privileges, in fact), binge drinking, the global warming hysteria, consumerism – all these need to take place under watchful eyes.

These mad people rejected the eyes of the Supreme Being (The Holy Trinity), and replaced them with the look of an amorphous entity, this politically correct Big Brother.

All these atheists who want ‘to seize the day’ for their vain delights are foolishly gambling it all on ‘here and now’, on this absurd assumption that there is no God, there is no afterlife, no Heaven or Hell, no absolute Truth, thus no responsibility.

I am sure that they just say I’m just another madman, but I dare saying to them: “Beware! This gentle and apparently benevolent Big Brother is just a forerunner of the Antichrist!”

I don’t fear any of their labels, as we were warned centuries ago, by the Holy Fathers of the Lords’s only One Church, that such times will come, when the world will be so full of mad people, who will call madman enyone who refuses to join them in their insanity.

[For all the episodes of this series, and all the posts on this blog go to/Pentru toate episoadele din această serie şi toate postările de pe acest blog mergi la: Contents/Cuprins]