In the Guardian this weekend was a fluffy, myopic piece about Venezuela written by some left-wing student, named Pablo Navarrete, who has done some jobbing for the New Statesman's John Pilger and spent some time in Venezuela a few years ago. The article, entitled "Venezuela deserves a fair hearing" is so flawed it merits almost total clarification.

Venezuela- for obvious reasons (to those who know me) - is very close to my heart (I spend a great deal of time there and know the land well) and I'll not allow left-wing light weights to paint the place as some kind of haven when I know very well that its people  (and I tell you, I have mixed with the rich and poor, the weak and strong) are suffering there now far worse than they have ever been.

In his article in a section of the Guardian entitled Zeitgeist (this week as third class and spurious as the film) Navarette whines about how Western media outlets ("right-wing" outlets such as Murdoch's Fox News but even "liberal" outlets such as the BBC) offer distorted media coverage of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and his government (which has now been in power for eleven years).

Navarrete despairs, for example, that of 304 BBC reports concerning Venezuela published between 1998 and 2008 only three mentioned any of the Chavez Government's positive reforms (here Navarette mentions Chavez halving the Venezuelan poverty rate from 46.5% in 1998 to 23% in 2009). Navarette talks of his own participation in a documentary on the contemporary political situation in the country and his desire to provide "a platform for the voices of the government's grassroots supporters, who the mainstream media (in the West) routinely ignores". Navarrete discusses how he visited in particular the government's grassroots supporters and community activists in the barrios (low-income neighbourhoods / shanty towns) that encircle Caracas and how these supporters insisted they, the people, were the true force behind Venezuela's process of radical change. Navarrete then goes onto discuss the "threats" from the US (lazily declaring US military support to Colombia's President in hisfight against drugs and FARC as "US militarization of Colombia" and then erroneously claiming that the Obama regime is supporting a return to US support of dictatorships in the region following the overthrow of the democratically elected Honduran Government of Manuel Zelaya last year - as if the Americans were behind Zelaya's overthrow in the first place). Navarette's main point is that he feels Venezuela gets a rough press and that (what he calls) "the other Venezuela's voice" is not heard as the media (in the West) refuses (as if in some conspiracy against Chavez) to air it.

Where do I start?!

A plethora of extremist groups operating in Britain are praying for a hung parliament and a weak Flib-Flab coalition. Amongst them are the extremist sect Hizb ut Tahrir al Islami who know that a Conservative government in May will spell a sorry end to their existence - at least cost them a load of money and support as they face a ban in Britain.

Hizb ut Tahrir this year - as with previous elections - tells its supporters that "the aim of encouraging Muslim participation in the secular politics of Westminster is to see us endorse this kufr political system (based on man making laws), its values and policies, which have caused occupation and bloodshed, as well as leading to the misery of ‘Broken Britain' today. In the forthcoming UK-parliamentary elections Muslims are being told to vote for people who would be part of lawmakers in Britain's secular political system, whose root and branch is built upon man's sovereignty, rather than that of Allah. This would clearly be haram." In other words Muslims (yes, HT still claims to represent Muslims in spite of their bizarre take on the religion of Islam) are forbidden from participation in the upcoming elections and face hellfire if they do.

What Hizb ut Tahrir Britain do in private and say in public is most often completely different. They justify this stance - we in the West refer to it as lying - by misinterpreting the concept of Taqiyya (but let's not go there as to do so gets us into theological arguments and presumes that the concept was justified to protect something of any value in the first place). Hizb ut Tahrir says that it condemns violence yet its very own little version of Mein Kampf states clearly that once Hizb ut Tahrir runs a state that state will expand globally through violence. Hizb ut Tahrir says that it does not engage in thuggery in the UK yet time and again its footsoldiers have been caught up in selling drugs to kufr (according to HT this is not haram) and operating in gangs. Hizb ut Tahrir says that it has not ever attempted to infiltrate key British institutions yet high ranking members have been exposed working in government; even in a top position at the Immigration office. Hizb ut Tahrir's mendacity is as well-known.

It is likely, therefore, that Hizb ut Tahrir members will be voting in May.  They will be voting either Labour or Liberal Democrat (whichever they think will keep the Tories out of Number 10). They'll probably not risk showing up at the polling booth in case someone takes a picture. They'll send in their postal votes and pray that the Conservatives do not get their chance to destroy Hizb ut Tahrir in Britain (from where now HT's global operations are funded and organised).

A Labour minister has said his Party has been infiltrated by Islamists who want to remove democratic principles and exercise political influence and power on all levels to create an ‘Islamic social and political order' in the United Kingdom.

Jim Fitzpatrick, Minister of State for the Environment, said the group called the Islamic Forum of Europe (IFE), an Islamist organisation based in London, has placed sympathisers in elected Government offices and claims tobe able to achieve ‘mass mobilisation' of voters for the upcoming elections.

The Islamist group is dedicated, in its own words, to changing the ‘very infrastructure of society, its institutions, its culture, its political order and its creed ... from ignorance to Islam'.

Speaking to The Sunday Telegraph, Mr Fitzpatrick said the IFE had become, in effect, a secret party within Labour and other political parties.

‘They are acting almost as an entryist organisation, placing people within the political parties, recruiting members to those political parties, trying to get individuals selected and elected so they can exercise political influence and power, whether it's at local government level or national level,' he said.

Mr Fitzpatrick, the MP for Poplar and Canning Town, said that the Islamists believe that the UK should develop Sharia law and behave ‘completely at odds' with Labour's programme.  He said the IFE had infiltrated and ‘corrupted' his party in east London in the same way that the far-Left Militant Tendency did in the 1980s.

A six-month investigation into the IFE and its political activities revealed it had ‘consolidated' its influence at the London Borough Council of Tower Hamlets, which has a budget estimated at £1bn.

The desperate, amateur, left-wing blogger - Timothy Ireland - has officially cracked up. Into even tinier, little pieces. His latest outburst declares - and he actually means it - that I am a "terrorist"!

Is Britain's care in the community policy so all-embracing that now we are importing nutters from the Commonwealth?

Ireland's wavy line of warped logic claims I am engaged in a hate campaign against him (FALSE - three uncomplimentary but perfectly legal pieces, including this, on my part compared to hundreds of illegal posts and tweets by him, the proven stalker). Ireland claims that I am behind the (also relatively unknown and marginal) Cheerleaders' various hits against him (FALSE - even the Cheerleaders themselves have come out publicly and said I am nothing to do with them, as have the authorities to whom I have turned twice now, purely of my own volition, to log my complaints about Timothy Ireland and others) and therefore I am obviously a terrorist!

Tim Ireland has become the web's Don Quixote with his boot-licker, Richard Bartholomew, (another marginal blogger) his Sancho Panza (Rucio more like; looks-wise at least). When I drove past Ireland's council estate the other day I saw a fire - I presumed it was just another joyrider getting rid of vehicular DNA evidence and didn't bother to investigate. Now, come to think of it, it was probably Ireland's family burning his fiction collection (that would include his blog database and posts by his multiple personalities). A black smoke fire it was - I was forced to temporarily close my sunroof.  

I am definitely a terrorist. By day I wear a pinstripe, shirt and tie. At night I get into a balaclava and camouflage gear and prowl the streets of Tooting Bec annihilating lefties with a Kalashnikov I picked up on Alibaba. Ireland must have read about my assassinations in his daily Sun. You can't miss me - I'm that most fearsome terrorist who declares "got you, you rotter" after each leftie downing. You'll find my mugshot on Britain's Most Wanted next to Osama Bin Laden, the unbrushed yellow teeth of my commie prey hanging round my neck; a graveyard of blood-spattered CND badges pinned to my flak jacket as sick mementos of the painful deaths of my tortured victims. And a far left party will win the next election and make us all wear foul cardigans and kagoules, force us to re-use tea bags and condoms; switching sterling for bogeys and replacing our Jaguars with mules.