All errors should be reported to

Friday, April 27, 2018

Britain revives the death penalty -- for children

On August 13, 1964, Britain executed Peter Anthony Allen and Gwynne Owen Evans for the murder of John Alan West. This was supposed to be the last executions by the state in that nation.

But nearly 53 years later, Britain executed Charles Matthew William Gard.

His death was not by hanging. They did not draw and quarter him. The British did something far worse. They starved him to death by denying him medical treatment because the treatment was too expensive.

Charlie was 11 months old.

His death at the hands of government come from the same people who lecture Americans on how we let people die because we don't have socialized medicine -- a lie -- we provide the best care for the poor through Medicaid.

The British refused to allow his parents to seek treatment in the United States.

Now the same Britons want to kill Alfie Evans, another child whose crime is costing the state to much money for medical treatment.

I visited London for a week in 1977 when I was 23. I always planned to return when I retired.

That dream is as dead as disco.

And Charlie.

And soon Alfie...


  1. I've never been to London. Will now never go. UK has gone off the rails.

  2. There is another - Isaiah, and all children in the future who might come along, and those who did not get publicity n the past.

    That despite extraordinary efforts by many people, large donations, even Rome and the Vatican, the socialist eugenicists in the formerly "Great" Britain refused to reconsider. They say "costs" - but when that is eliminated, what excuse is left?

    Saving face for the failed system. Were the lives of Charlie or Alfie somehow improved and extended by the treatments sought and promised by outsiders, it would put the lie to socialzed medicine.

    I wonder - can a charge of "Crimes Against Humanity" be leveled at the NHS at the UN? This certainly would fit the bill!

  3. "The British refused to allow his parents to seek treatment in the United States." Shouldn't that be the British government?

  4. Ron in Ohio Sez;

    Fantastic opinion piece Don, God! I wish it were not necessary to pen it though.

  5. Irreversible problems are not reversible by just endlessly pouring resources into them one could use elsewhere. The NHS is not what we should strive for here but the Brits like it so let them have it. All "life" is not worth living.
    London is full of Arabs now in the tourist areas. In them, especially in the West side near Hyde Park, it is pretty safe still. The city still has much to offer for about a 3 day stay. The British Museum is worth half a day itself. If you like golf Scotland at Gleneagles is worth some time.
    Many many ordinary Brit families have children living in the US and are pro USA. The upper crust not so much. Don't worry, you won't meet any.

    1. Did the Brit tourist bureau get you to post here.

  6. No but I go every year and have been since 1961 because I have friends worth keeping who live there. I lived and worked there for a few months. It's not a place for me personally. But The place is deeply connected to the past of the West at its best, observable in the Breitsh Museum Elgin Marbles and in St Pauls Cathedral where they have memorilaized the courageous men of ther own past. They are no longer the people who built an empire but neither are we the people who tamed the west. Don's trashing them with this tear jerker is without merit. And I respect Don much.

    1. Moslem barbarians destroy monuments to everything and everyone. Before long the British Museum will be gone, and St. Paul's will be deformed into a mosque.

      That's because "the people who built an empire" no longer live there, and there are no courageous men to oppose the savages.

      The sun has set on the British Empire, and I mourn its passing.

    2. Yes, England had a great past. Unfortunately, they have no future. The girls of Rotherham wonder where their men were, while they were being raped en masse. Do you know? Could you tell them?

      Oh yeah: they were forcibly preventing a chld's parents from taking their child abroad fo r(even hopeless) medical treatment.
      The fact that England has manpower to spare on one and not the other tells everyone, all around the world, all anyone needs to know about England.

  7. Self-Identification.

    Anonymous - you are becoming this site's resident troll. All "life" is not worth living.

    PD - this is no "tear-jerker." Nice try at complete minimalization of the topic.

    This pure and simple eugenicism - by design.

    PD - Anon by rep does not respect Don, and your caveat is clearly your agreeing with Anon.

  8. Ron in Ohio Sez;

    jb, I gotta' agree 100% - That "All life is not worth living" B-S is just Lib-O B-S! ie; "Planned Parenthood". ALL "life" IS worth saving and living! As far as the "tear-jerker" part - I don't believe Don meant it as such - Instead - Back to the ALL "life" IS worth saving and living! part that I believe Don and I both, along with jb) believe, with all our hearts.

    You two, Anonym-ass and Paul Damus both, need to grow a pair of - HEARTS & COMPASSION.

    1. Ron
      Allowing someone to exist on a machine with a plastic tube in his windpipe until every vein in his body is sclerosed and he dies of an infection from an untreatable microbe is not compassion.

    2. The NHS would not let the parents take him out and seek treatment elsewhere. They were willing, if not eager, for him to die.

    3. Which - Dude - THAT was NOT the case! Why do you present it as such. That is duplicitous! He was off the machines. And still, somehow beyond the incredible, extraordinary powers of almighty commie docs, continued to live.

      Why do you continue to shovel your BS?

    4. Sam - your comment got in before -

      My response was to the troll above you.

  9. And the govt threatened social media users who commented on this case. Don would have been nicked and put in the slammer. So
    Much for freedom of speech over there too.

  10. Read the writings of Aleksandr Isayevich or Wurmbrand - or their testimonies before Congress, and one would easily understand why the formerly "Great Britain is but a commie 3rd world country with nukes.

  11. We’re it not for the Royal Family, I’d be writing off Britain completely. Too many knives. David Hogg, ya gonna take that on next? Interesting that Mr. T’s first state dinner was with...France?

  12. zr -

    I am not at all sure what is sacrosanct about the royal family. To the Brits, yeah, - already mentally and physically enmeshed in their journey to full blown communism. How have the "royals", though, actually helped over against that?

    Like - nada?

    We on this side of the pond rejected the royals for what they are, simply put, and became what we are!!! We bailed them out in WWI and especially in WWII! Without us rebels of/from the "Crown" - Churchill would have been speaking German from '41 till he passed in '65.

    C.S. Lewis and Orwell and others spoke proleptically of the horror that is presently occurring in the dear, old Isle.

    A P.S. to Ron in Ohio - my friend - ditch the "Anon" and use "Ron" or "RiO" - gives the rest of us an easier ID and all. jb

  13. "We have to kill the babies so we can claim a need to import your replacements"-- official motto of the NHS, and libs the world over. As well as the Chamber of Commerce.

  14. London is the birthplace of Das Kapital. Freedom was a shortlived concept over there. While they are not Communist, they definitely are socialist.

  15. Texas has laws that gives hospitals the right to remove life support over the objections of the family. One father went to extreme means to save his son's life. See