Mitchell and Webb are very funny and their snooker commentators are two of my favourite of their characters. They kept up the pretence that there were special secret snooker words to the song "Lady in Red"; then blow me if they didn't perform the song "Table of Reds"...
and here are the lyrics:
"Never seen you looking so shiny as you did tonight
Never seen your baize so tight
You are amazing
I've never seen so many players wonder if the long pot is on
Looking for a little Cann-on
A cut as thin as a thong
And I have never seen such a clearance
Such a clearance of all the pocks in every way
No more safety play
Table of reds
Is dancing with me
Cush to cush
Nothing is wrong
This big pink is on
But where’s the cue ball gone
And I hardly know
To play with stun or side
Never to forget
This shot to nothing life
Never to forget
My Table of Reds"
and here is the live "extended rest" version... with Chris deBurgh himself...
As above and then...
"Never seen you looking so oblong as you did tonight
Never seen your angles so right
You were a table
Never seen so many players tremble when they contemplate you
Chalking 'til their tips turn blue
Shaping for a screw
And I will never need another
I could reach that awkward green if you said yes
I won't need the rest
Table of reds
Is dancing with me
Cush to cush
Nothing is wrong
This big pink is on
But where’s the cue ball gone
And I hardly know
To play with stun or side
Never to forget
This shot to nothing life
Never to forget
My Table of Reds, table of reds..."
Monday, 21 January 2008
Here's HAL
I read that robots that can lie may be closer than we thought.
"The team at the Laboratory of Intelligent Systems at the Federal Institute of Technology created the little experimental learning devices to work in groups and hunt for "food" targets nearby while avoiding "poison." Imagine their surprise when one generation of robots learned to signal lies about the poison, sending opponents to their doom.
The little wheeled robots had neural circuitry with about 30 "genes" that determine their behavior, and how much they react to light in the environment. The food sources charged up the robots' batteries while the poison drained them, and by using the genes of the most successful feeders in 50 successive generations, the team was hoping to select the fittest.
Three colonies of bots in the 50th generation learned to signal to other robots in the group when then found food or poison. But the fourth colony included lying cheats that signaled food when they found poison and then calmly rolled over to the real food while other robots went to their battery-death. Eerily wicked, to say the least. Saving the robots' honor, luckily, there were also a few "hero robots" that signalled danger and then rolled to their death to save the others."
Of course we may be reading more into this than there actually is. It is possible that the first bot 1 wasn't "lying". Maybe bot 2 was spying on bot 1 and misread the lights or maybe bot 1's programming or detection of charge/poison was askew. Anyway is bot 1 capable of knowing that it is being observed?
If the story does bear examination then watch out for any computers with "a soft voice and a conversational manner".
"The team at the Laboratory of Intelligent Systems at the Federal Institute of Technology created the little experimental learning devices to work in groups and hunt for "food" targets nearby while avoiding "poison." Imagine their surprise when one generation of robots learned to signal lies about the poison, sending opponents to their doom.
The little wheeled robots had neural circuitry with about 30 "genes" that determine their behavior, and how much they react to light in the environment. The food sources charged up the robots' batteries while the poison drained them, and by using the genes of the most successful feeders in 50 successive generations, the team was hoping to select the fittest.
Three colonies of bots in the 50th generation learned to signal to other robots in the group when then found food or poison. But the fourth colony included lying cheats that signaled food when they found poison and then calmly rolled over to the real food while other robots went to their battery-death. Eerily wicked, to say the least. Saving the robots' honor, luckily, there were also a few "hero robots" that signalled danger and then rolled to their death to save the others."
Of course we may be reading more into this than there actually is. It is possible that the first bot 1 wasn't "lying". Maybe bot 2 was spying on bot 1 and misread the lights or maybe bot 1's programming or detection of charge/poison was askew. Anyway is bot 1 capable of knowing that it is being observed?
If the story does bear examination then watch out for any computers with "a soft voice and a conversational manner".
Ken Livingstone
I have blogged a lot about Ken Livingstone recently, but then there has been a lot to comment upon. Earlier today I blogged "about a piece by Nick Cohen entitled "Why Ken Livingstone is not fit for office"." In it I included some comments by Nick Cohen about tonight's Dispatches programme which included this extract from Nick Cohen's Guardian article "It is a minute organisation - I doubt it has more than 100 members - but Livingstone has given a fair proportion of them jobs with six-figure salaries at the public's expense. John Ross, Livingstone's economic adviser on £121,000, is typical. He is so lacking in economic knowledge that he decided that the Russian Communist party was a force for the future in 1991, two years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. His economic advice at the time was for the ruling class to learn 'that they will be killed if they do not allow a takeover by the working class'."
This reference to John Ross provoked a response from a "GLA spokesman" which I have published in the comments to the above piece but I repeat here (as I know a lot of people never read the comments to an article):
"The Greater London Authority does not politically vet potential or existing employees, nor carry records regarding their political views, and it would indeed be unlawful and a breach of employment and human rights for it to do so.
The only important, and lawful, criteria regarding the record of Greater London Authority staff is to be found in policies that have been successfully delivered.
Details of the work of the senior GLA staff, that have directly contributed to making London a more successful city, can be found here: http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=15355
The Mayor has written to Channel 4 pointing out the Dispatches programme scheduled to be shown this evening is a clear attempt to influence the electoral process and in breach of the special impartiality requirements to maintain objectivity standards in broadcasting. The full press release can be read here: http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=15357"
Ken Livingstone may have achieved his objective of stopping this programme from going out as still, 2½ hours before transmission time, the Dispatches home page carries no mention of tonight's programme. Their listings page just says "The Court of Ken
Dispatches investigates the current London mayoral system and the way in which this office operates."
Ken Livingstone has a habit of getting what he wants so I would not be surprised if tonight's show was pulled. If not then you can expect the attacks on Boris Johnson to get more and more vicious.
This reference to John Ross provoked a response from a "GLA spokesman" which I have published in the comments to the above piece but I repeat here (as I know a lot of people never read the comments to an article):
"The Greater London Authority does not politically vet potential or existing employees, nor carry records regarding their political views, and it would indeed be unlawful and a breach of employment and human rights for it to do so.
The only important, and lawful, criteria regarding the record of Greater London Authority staff is to be found in policies that have been successfully delivered.
Details of the work of the senior GLA staff, that have directly contributed to making London a more successful city, can be found here: http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=15355
The Mayor has written to Channel 4 pointing out the Dispatches programme scheduled to be shown this evening is a clear attempt to influence the electoral process and in breach of the special impartiality requirements to maintain objectivity standards in broadcasting. The full press release can be read here: http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=15357"
Ken Livingstone may have achieved his objective of stopping this programme from going out as still, 2½ hours before transmission time, the Dispatches home page carries no mention of tonight's programme. Their listings page just says "The Court of Ken
Dispatches investigates the current London mayoral system and the way in which this office operates."
Ken Livingstone has a habit of getting what he wants so I would not be surprised if tonight's show was pulled. If not then you can expect the attacks on Boris Johnson to get more and more vicious.
Jacqui Smith's kebab
The press are full of Jacqui Smith's revelation that "Asked whether she would feel safe walking the streets of Hackney, one of the most deprived parts of London, she replied: "Well, no, but I don't think I'd have ever have done." Asked why she would not feel safe on Hackney's streets at night, the Home Secretary replied: "Well, I just don't think that's a thing that people do, is it, really?" She was also questioned about how she would feel if she was walking through the affluent area of Kensington and Chelsea after dark. Miss Smith responded: "Well, I wouldn't walk around at midnight and I'm fortunate that I don't have to do that.""
In an attempt to undo some of the damage, her aides apparently claimed she had recently popped out in the evening to "buy a kebab in Peckham". It transpires that "the owner of the kebab shop in question told the Daily Mail yesterday that Miss Smith had been accompanied by a burly minder when she dropped in for a £3.90 doner last Wednesday - at teatime not late at night."
I am a relatively streetwise Mr NotaSheep, but I try not to walk alone or with Mrs NotaSheep at night on London's streets. To be honest a lot of London's streets are probably unsafe in broad daylight. The gangs of feral youths that "own" the streets now know that the chances of a policeman catching them in the act of mugging a passerby are almost zero, the chances of any CCTV actually working or producing a decent image or not being used to take photos of cars parked six inches onto a yellow line or one minute into a proscribed period are also nil and even if caught the chances of being charged let alone convicted are somewhat slim and as for having to go to prison for more than six months, the odds are infinitesimal.
Here is just one example of the way even convicted "yobs" are sentenced:
1. From today's Sun
Nicholas Hague (22) "kicked to the ground and repeatedly stamped on" Susan Collins (60) after being freed early from jail for manslaughter - he had helped kick a man to death in the street. So how much time in jail did he get for the earlier manslaughter, that's helping kick someone to death? The answer 18 months, you will not be surprised to hear that although "Hague had received an 18 month jail term in 2005 after admitting helping another man kick Gary Kneen, 31, to death in Warrington in 2004...he was freed shortly afterwards due to time spent on remand."
Now he gets released early from prison after serving time for manslaughter and kicks and stamps on a 60 year old lady. "Sentencing him at Warrington Crown Court yesterday, Judge Nicholas Woodward branded him a “dangerous young man”." So what sort of sentence does he get? 20 years? No... OK, 10 years? No, "Hague was yesterday jailed indefinitely for GBH". Indefinitely, finally a judge takes the matter seriously. Oops sorry, "the judge recommended he serve at least 3½ years". That's 3½ years, do he'll probably serve less than 18 months, less any time he's spent on remand. I am sorry to show you this, but here is a picture of his victim Susan Collins ...
What do you think, was that an adequate sentence for Nicholas Hague?
This Labour government tell us the country is safer than 10 years ago and Ken Livingstone tells us that crime is down in London. The trouble is, we know the truth and the truth is that the streets are more dangerous than 10 years ago and law-abiding people feel unsafe to walk 400 yards across the West End on a Saturday night after a meal out or a visit to the theatre, let alone pop out to buy a kebab in Peckham.
This Labour government have all but destroyed that which holds the fabric of society together and as the economy collapses this year the results on the street will not be pretty.
In an attempt to undo some of the damage, her aides apparently claimed she had recently popped out in the evening to "buy a kebab in Peckham". It transpires that "the owner of the kebab shop in question told the Daily Mail yesterday that Miss Smith had been accompanied by a burly minder when she dropped in for a £3.90 doner last Wednesday - at teatime not late at night."
I am a relatively streetwise Mr NotaSheep, but I try not to walk alone or with Mrs NotaSheep at night on London's streets. To be honest a lot of London's streets are probably unsafe in broad daylight. The gangs of feral youths that "own" the streets now know that the chances of a policeman catching them in the act of mugging a passerby are almost zero, the chances of any CCTV actually working or producing a decent image or not being used to take photos of cars parked six inches onto a yellow line or one minute into a proscribed period are also nil and even if caught the chances of being charged let alone convicted are somewhat slim and as for having to go to prison for more than six months, the odds are infinitesimal.
Here is just one example of the way even convicted "yobs" are sentenced:
1. From today's Sun
Nicholas Hague (22) "kicked to the ground and repeatedly stamped on" Susan Collins (60) after being freed early from jail for manslaughter - he had helped kick a man to death in the street. So how much time in jail did he get for the earlier manslaughter, that's helping kick someone to death? The answer 18 months, you will not be surprised to hear that although "Hague had received an 18 month jail term in 2005 after admitting helping another man kick Gary Kneen, 31, to death in Warrington in 2004...he was freed shortly afterwards due to time spent on remand."
Now he gets released early from prison after serving time for manslaughter and kicks and stamps on a 60 year old lady. "Sentencing him at Warrington Crown Court yesterday, Judge Nicholas Woodward branded him a “dangerous young man”." So what sort of sentence does he get? 20 years? No... OK, 10 years? No, "Hague was yesterday jailed indefinitely for GBH". Indefinitely, finally a judge takes the matter seriously. Oops sorry, "the judge recommended he serve at least 3½ years". That's 3½ years, do he'll probably serve less than 18 months, less any time he's spent on remand. I am sorry to show you this, but here is a picture of his victim Susan Collins ...
What do you think, was that an adequate sentence for Nicholas Hague?
This Labour government tell us the country is safer than 10 years ago and Ken Livingstone tells us that crime is down in London. The trouble is, we know the truth and the truth is that the streets are more dangerous than 10 years ago and law-abiding people feel unsafe to walk 400 yards across the West End on a Saturday night after a meal out or a visit to the theatre, let alone pop out to buy a kebab in Peckham.
This Labour government have all but destroyed that which holds the fabric of society together and as the economy collapses this year the results on the street will not be pretty.
Update on Ken being backed by Muslim charities
I blogged here and here about the "Prominent Muslim organisations and individuals (that) have pledged to back Ken Livingstone as mayor of London, saying it is in the "best interest" of Muslims to vote for him in this year's elections on May 1."
Today Guido Fawkes reveals that the Charities Commission has written to the charities "We have written to the charities involved to advise them on the type of political activity a charity can be involved in.".
A copy of that letter would be an interesting read...
Today Guido Fawkes reveals that the Charities Commission has written to the charities "We have written to the charities involved to advise them on the type of political activity a charity can be involved in.".
A copy of that letter would be an interesting read...
BBC biased in favour of Israel!?
Whilst researching for a piece on Ken Livingstone and Yusuf al-Qaradawi, I came across this article on "Sourcewatch" about "Labour Friends of Israel". In it Labour Friends of Israel (LFI) is described as "a Westminster based lobby group working within the British Labour Party to promote the State of Israel". There is much on the funding of the Labour party by LFI members and trips to Israel, the tone is very censorious but no more than I would expect from Sourcewatch. However the sentence that caught my eye was in the "Taming the Media" section. It reads "LFI has used its influence to intimidate British media into adopting an openly pro-Israel position. A recent study by the Glasgow University Media Group revealed the systematic bias in BBC and ITV’s coverage of the Israel-Palestine conflict which often reproduces the official Israeli narrative uncritically, whereas very little time or detail is devoted to the Palestinian side." Yes Glasgow University's Media Group thinks that the BBC is biased in favour of Israel! I think that says a lot about the politics of the Glasgow University Media Group. The Sourcewatch article continues "Some, who dared to criticize the Israeli position have faced bans, as Faisal Bodi, of BBC Radio 4’s The World Tonight did. According to Bodi, LFI members play a "crucial propaganda role, carrying the flag for Israel in parliament, and lobbying editors to toe the Israeli line". Tim Llewellyn, a Veteran Middle East correspondent for the BBC, has gone to the extent of calling BBC’s reporting on the Israel-Palestine conflict downright “dishonest”. He has attributed it to the “unremitting and productive” efforts by “Israel's many influential and well organised friends". However, this still did not preclude LFI’s Andrew Dismore from expressing “concern” about the BBC for being “anti-Israeli and biased towards the Palestinians." This charge could not have been more frivolous given that BBC has referred to Jerusalem as Israel’s ‘capital’ – a view otherwise shared outside of Israel by two out of the world’s nearly two hundred countries."
Maybe a trip to Biased BBC or a look at parts of USS Neverdock, this Stephen Pollard article, thisHonest Reporting article (and many others) or maybe this piece from Martin Walker in the Times.
Maybe a trip to Biased BBC or a look at parts of USS Neverdock, this Stephen Pollard article, thisHonest Reporting article (and many others) or maybe this piece from Martin Walker in the Times.
Ken Livingstone and Yusuf al-Qaradawi
From The Guardian's Comment is Free comes an article by Martin Bright, political editor of the New Statesman. He writes about the Labour government's "love affair with radical Islam". Much of the article is worthy of reading, so do so BUT the line that caught my idea was this one "Just this month, the British government paid for Yusuf al-Qaradawi to attend a conference in Turkey to discuss the future of European Islam"
That's the UK government paying for Yusuf al-Qaradawi (the well known part of the Muslim Brotherhood leadership) to travel to Turkey.
Here are some of Yusuf al-Qaradawi's views, taken from Wikipedia:
"Qaradawi on homosexuality
On June 5 2006, on the Al Jazeera "Sharia and Life" programme he regularly features on, al-Qaradawi reiterated orthodox views on homosexuality. When asked about the punishment for people who "practise liwaat (sodomy) or sihaaq (lesbian activity)", al-Qaradawi replied: "The same punishment as any sexual pervert - the same as the fornicator." (MEMRI translation)"
"Qaradawi urged the Taliban to reconsider its decision to tear down the Buddha statues in Afghanistan in 2001. He was quickly criticized for supporting "idol worship". Upon meeting with leaders from the Taliban, Qaradawi reversed his position and praised the act of the destruction of the statues."
"Suicide bombings
Qaradawi strongly supports Palestinian attacks on Israeli targets, including against civilians, believing they are legitimate form of resistance. Qaradawi claims that hundreds of other Islamic scholars are of the same opinion.
Defending terrorist bombing against off duty soldiers Qaradawi told BBC Newsnight that:
"An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."
"I consider this type of martyrdom operation as an evidence of God's justice."
"Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do".
At the press conference held by the organizations sponsoring Qaradawi's visit to London, Qaradawi reiterated his view that "martyrdom operations" are a justified from of "resistance" to Israeli occupation. In the past, Qaradawi has justified such terrorist actions on the basis that all Israel civilians are potential soldiers since Israel is a "militarized society.""
In case you had forgotten, Yusuf al-Qaradawi is the Islamic Cleric that Ken Livingstone believes is "a progressive figure". You can read about Ken Livingstone and Yusuf al-Qaradawi here. You can read Ken Livingstone's justification for inviting al-Qaradawi here, noticeable by its absence is any mention of al-Qaradawi's support for terrorist attacks on Israel - you may want to look at my piece on the Clash of Civilisations conference where Ken said "I would not have a created Israel... it was a travesty..", at this point. You may also want to take a look at Harry's Place for thsi article from 2005 exposing Yusuf al-Qaradawi's views on homosexuality
"Having said this, I should stress here that Muslim jurists have held differing opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements...As to the issue of how the homosexual person is judged in an Islamic State, the Companions of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessing be upon him differed among themselves on this issue, and this led to different views maintained by Muslim Jurists. For example, in the Hanafi school of thought, the homosexual is punished through harsh beating, and if he/she repeats the act, death penalty is to be applied. As for the Shafi`i school of thought, the homosexual receives the same punishment of adultery (if he/she is married) or fornication (if not married). This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times. Hence, the Shafi`i compares the punishment applied in the case of homosexuality with that of adultery and fornication, while the Hanafi differentiates between the two acts because in homosexuality, the anus (a place of impurity) may also be involved while in adultery (and fornication), the penis/vagina (which are reproductive parts) are involved. Some scholars hold the opinion that the homosexual should be thrown from a high building as a punishment for his crime, but other scholars maintain that he should be imprisoned until death."
Maybe someone should tackle Ken Livingstone about these views of his "progressive figure". If you do then I suggest that you not be Jewish or work for the Evening Standard or a Rupert Murdoch owned media outlet or have been to public school or drive a car or indeed do or be anything that in our Mayor's view might disqualify you from being able to question anything that he knows is the correct thing to do.
That's the UK government paying for Yusuf al-Qaradawi (the well known part of the Muslim Brotherhood leadership) to travel to Turkey.
Here are some of Yusuf al-Qaradawi's views, taken from Wikipedia:
"Qaradawi on homosexuality
On June 5 2006, on the Al Jazeera "Sharia and Life" programme he regularly features on, al-Qaradawi reiterated orthodox views on homosexuality. When asked about the punishment for people who "practise liwaat (sodomy) or sihaaq (lesbian activity)", al-Qaradawi replied: "The same punishment as any sexual pervert - the same as the fornicator." (MEMRI translation)"
"Qaradawi urged the Taliban to reconsider its decision to tear down the Buddha statues in Afghanistan in 2001. He was quickly criticized for supporting "idol worship". Upon meeting with leaders from the Taliban, Qaradawi reversed his position and praised the act of the destruction of the statues."
"Suicide bombings
Qaradawi strongly supports Palestinian attacks on Israeli targets, including against civilians, believing they are legitimate form of resistance. Qaradawi claims that hundreds of other Islamic scholars are of the same opinion.
Defending terrorist bombing against off duty soldiers Qaradawi told BBC Newsnight that:
"An Israeli woman is not like women in our societies, because she is a soldier."
"I consider this type of martyrdom operation as an evidence of God's justice."
"Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do".
At the press conference held by the organizations sponsoring Qaradawi's visit to London, Qaradawi reiterated his view that "martyrdom operations" are a justified from of "resistance" to Israeli occupation. In the past, Qaradawi has justified such terrorist actions on the basis that all Israel civilians are potential soldiers since Israel is a "militarized society.""
In case you had forgotten, Yusuf al-Qaradawi is the Islamic Cleric that Ken Livingstone believes is "a progressive figure". You can read about Ken Livingstone and Yusuf al-Qaradawi here. You can read Ken Livingstone's justification for inviting al-Qaradawi here, noticeable by its absence is any mention of al-Qaradawi's support for terrorist attacks on Israel - you may want to look at my piece on the Clash of Civilisations conference where Ken said "I would not have a created Israel... it was a travesty..", at this point. You may also want to take a look at Harry's Place for thsi article from 2005 exposing Yusuf al-Qaradawi's views on homosexuality
"Having said this, I should stress here that Muslim jurists have held differing opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death? While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements...As to the issue of how the homosexual person is judged in an Islamic State, the Companions of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessing be upon him differed among themselves on this issue, and this led to different views maintained by Muslim Jurists. For example, in the Hanafi school of thought, the homosexual is punished through harsh beating, and if he/she repeats the act, death penalty is to be applied. As for the Shafi`i school of thought, the homosexual receives the same punishment of adultery (if he/she is married) or fornication (if not married). This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times. Hence, the Shafi`i compares the punishment applied in the case of homosexuality with that of adultery and fornication, while the Hanafi differentiates between the two acts because in homosexuality, the anus (a place of impurity) may also be involved while in adultery (and fornication), the penis/vagina (which are reproductive parts) are involved. Some scholars hold the opinion that the homosexual should be thrown from a high building as a punishment for his crime, but other scholars maintain that he should be imprisoned until death."
Maybe someone should tackle Ken Livingstone about these views of his "progressive figure". If you do then I suggest that you not be Jewish or work for the Evening Standard or a Rupert Murdoch owned media outlet or have been to public school or drive a car or indeed do or be anything that in our Mayor's view might disqualify you from being able to question anything that he knows is the correct thing to do.
Cameron apes Radiohead with ‘pay as much tax as you want’
Ah satire.
I particularly liked "Labour Chancellor Alistair Darling slammed the tax plan as ‘insane and completely unworkable’ before going to the House of Commons to announce the idea as official government policy."
I particularly liked "Labour Chancellor Alistair Darling slammed the tax plan as ‘insane and completely unworkable’ before going to the House of Commons to announce the idea as official government policy."
Ah diddums
Read this and wonder at the cheek of the man who never answers a question from David Cameron if he can help it and has now resorted to asking David Cameron questions instead. Gordon Brown is a fraud and finally this fact is becoming realised by more and more people.
Here we go...
Here we go...
"Global stock markets have tumbled, with European indexes heading for their worst day in four years, amid growing fears of a recession in the US.
London's FTSE 100 index fell 3.6% to 5685.2, in Paris the Cac-40 fell 6.7%, and Frankfurt's Dax dropped 5.4%.
Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index slid by 3.9% to its lowest close since October 2005, while India's Sensex shed 7.4%. "
Unlike Yazz, I am afraid that the only way is most definitely not up.
"Global stock markets have tumbled, with European indexes heading for their worst day in four years, amid growing fears of a recession in the US.
London's FTSE 100 index fell 3.6% to 5685.2, in Paris the Cac-40 fell 6.7%, and Frankfurt's Dax dropped 5.4%.
Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index slid by 3.9% to its lowest close since October 2005, while India's Sensex shed 7.4%. "
Unlike Yazz, I am afraid that the only way is most definitely not up.
A must read
I can add nothing to William Rees-Mogg's piece in today's Times entitled "They lied yesterday; they will lie tomorrow - The Lisbon treaty is a dangerous betrayal".
Read it and spread the word to everyone you meet.
Read it and spread the word to everyone you meet.
The EU Treaty is not the same as the EU Constitution
Every time you hear someone say that the EU Treaty is not the same as the EU Constitution, just remind them that Giuliano Amato, the former Prime Minister of Italy, has said that the revived EU constitution has deliberately been made 'unreadable' to help fend off demands for a referendum: 'EU leaders had decided that the document to be drawn up by an intergovernmental conference should be unreadable... If this is the kind of document that the IGC will produce, any prime minister - imagine the UK prime minister - can go to the Commons and say "Look, you see, it's absolutely unreadable, it's the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum"... Should you succeed in understanding it there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new.''"
You can compare the two by looking at Open Europe's comparison document.
You can compare the two by looking at Open Europe's comparison document.
Difficult to debate without the text in context
I blogged in July about how:
"David Miliband has said: 'The constitutional concept, which consisted in repealing all existing treaties and replacing them by a single text called "Constitution", is abandoned'. There is, therefore, no need for a referendum."
"Valéry Giscard d'Estaing here, the god-father, architect, and creator of the Constitution for Europe, has declared: 'This text is, in fact, a rerun of a great part of the substance of the constitutional treaty... the public is being led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly'. He said that differences between the new treaty and the constitution 'are few and far between and more cosmetic than real'. In comparing his role here in drawing up the blueprint to that of America's founding fathers, he said the term 'constitution' had been dropped simply to 'make a few people happy'."
"Jean-Luc Dehaene MEP, the former prime minister of Belgium, noted that '95 per cent of the constitution was back'. He said it was no surprise that voters were confused: 'We drafted a treaty with a constitutional content and form. Now we have a treaty with a constitutional content without the form. But both are a treaty and neither is a constitution. The ambiguous use of words has led to misunderstandings'."
"Giuliano Amato here, the former Prime Minister of Italy, has said that the revived EU constitution has deliberately been made 'unreadable' to help fend off demands for a referendum: 'EU leaders had decided that the document to be drawn up by an intergovernmental conference should be unreadable... If this
is the kind of document that the IGC will produce, any prime minister - imagine the UK prime minister - can go to the Commons and say "Look, you see, it's absolutely unreadable, it's the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum"... Should you succeed in understanding it there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new.''"
I read yesterday that "In an almost unprecedented display of contempt for Parliament, the Government will tomorrow ask MPs to approve the EU treaty even before they have a proper chance to examine what it is they are voting on." Christopher Booker continues "Despite Gordon Brown's promise that the Commons would be allowed three months to discuss the treaty in detail - as a sop for breaking his promise that it would be put to a referendum - the only text MPs will be allowed to see is a mass of disjointed amendments to previous EU treaties which, out of context, are virtually meaningless."
Anyone would think that Gordon Brown's Labour government didn't want MPs to know what they were voting for or against. "Only after this week's crucial Second Reading will MPs be able to read the first "consolidated" text of the treaty, putting all those amendments in context, in such a way that their significance can be understood." Of course this text isn't being provided by Gordon's gang, it is being produced by "a small private business organisation, the British Management Data Foundation (BMDF), run from the Cotswolds by Brigadier Anthony Cowgill and his son Andrew, and funded by some of Britain's leading blue-chip companies."
If any MP wants to see the Treaty and the Constitution compared then he can look at Open Europe's document. Apparently it is being recommended by the EU "For those who are interested in getting an English consolidated, comparative version with track changes"...
The way the EU Treaty is being pushed through the House of Commons is a disgrace but it will happen because the BBC (and much of the other MSM) decided some time ago that the EU Constitution/Treaty was too complicated to explain to the general public and anyway the EU must be good after all Tuscany is in the EU and we all like holidaying there in the summer - mmm Chianti, jolly good stuff.
"David Miliband has said: 'The constitutional concept, which consisted in repealing all existing treaties and replacing them by a single text called "Constitution", is abandoned'. There is, therefore, no need for a referendum."
"Valéry Giscard d'Estaing here, the god-father, architect, and creator of the Constitution for Europe, has declared: 'This text is, in fact, a rerun of a great part of the substance of the constitutional treaty... the public is being led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly'. He said that differences between the new treaty and the constitution 'are few and far between and more cosmetic than real'. In comparing his role here in drawing up the blueprint to that of America's founding fathers, he said the term 'constitution' had been dropped simply to 'make a few people happy'."
"Jean-Luc Dehaene MEP, the former prime minister of Belgium, noted that '95 per cent of the constitution was back'. He said it was no surprise that voters were confused: 'We drafted a treaty with a constitutional content and form. Now we have a treaty with a constitutional content without the form. But both are a treaty and neither is a constitution. The ambiguous use of words has led to misunderstandings'."
"Giuliano Amato here, the former Prime Minister of Italy, has said that the revived EU constitution has deliberately been made 'unreadable' to help fend off demands for a referendum: 'EU leaders had decided that the document to be drawn up by an intergovernmental conference should be unreadable... If this
is the kind of document that the IGC will produce, any prime minister - imagine the UK prime minister - can go to the Commons and say "Look, you see, it's absolutely unreadable, it's the typical Brussels treaty, nothing new, no need for a referendum"... Should you succeed in understanding it there might be some reason for a referendum, because it would mean that there is something new.''"
I read yesterday that "In an almost unprecedented display of contempt for Parliament, the Government will tomorrow ask MPs to approve the EU treaty even before they have a proper chance to examine what it is they are voting on." Christopher Booker continues "Despite Gordon Brown's promise that the Commons would be allowed three months to discuss the treaty in detail - as a sop for breaking his promise that it would be put to a referendum - the only text MPs will be allowed to see is a mass of disjointed amendments to previous EU treaties which, out of context, are virtually meaningless."
Anyone would think that Gordon Brown's Labour government didn't want MPs to know what they were voting for or against. "Only after this week's crucial Second Reading will MPs be able to read the first "consolidated" text of the treaty, putting all those amendments in context, in such a way that their significance can be understood." Of course this text isn't being provided by Gordon's gang, it is being produced by "a small private business organisation, the British Management Data Foundation (BMDF), run from the Cotswolds by Brigadier Anthony Cowgill and his son Andrew, and funded by some of Britain's leading blue-chip companies."
If any MP wants to see the Treaty and the Constitution compared then he can look at Open Europe's document. Apparently it is being recommended by the EU "For those who are interested in getting an English consolidated, comparative version with track changes"...
The way the EU Treaty is being pushed through the House of Commons is a disgrace but it will happen because the BBC (and much of the other MSM) decided some time ago that the EU Constitution/Treaty was too complicated to explain to the general public and anyway the EU must be good after all Tuscany is in the EU and we all like holidaying there in the summer - mmm Chianti, jolly good stuff.
The EU Treaty (again)
Do you remember my article about the Select Committee on Foreign Affairs? Well they have just issued their third report and you can read it all here, the Conclusions and recommendations can be read here. You might be interested in their conclusion 27 -
"27. We conclude that there is no material difference between the provisions on foreign affairs in the Constitutional Treaty which the Government made subject to approval in a referendum and those in the Lisbon Treaty on which a referendum is being denied. (Paragraph 219)"
Maybe Gordon Brown, David Miliband or some other Labour government spokesman could answer this point... Maybe the BBC could raise this point when any Labour apparatchik spouts the party line that the EU Constitution and the EU Treaty as are as different as fish and fowl; there again, don't hold your breath.
"27. We conclude that there is no material difference between the provisions on foreign affairs in the Constitutional Treaty which the Government made subject to approval in a referendum and those in the Lisbon Treaty on which a referendum is being denied. (Paragraph 219)"
Maybe Gordon Brown, David Miliband or some other Labour government spokesman could answer this point... Maybe the BBC could raise this point when any Labour apparatchik spouts the party line that the EU Constitution and the EU Treaty as are as different as fish and fowl; there again, don't hold your breath.
Where's Gordon?
Gordon Brown missed the public signing of the EU Treaty in Lisbon and had to sign it separately. Now I learn that he will return too late from his trip to Asia to vote in the first amendments to be discussed as the debate on the Treaty starts today. This is the man who "wrote" a book entitled "Courage", isn't it?
Bye bye Rebate, bye bye
The hard won EU rebate was signed away last week, did you hear about it on the BBC or in much of the MSM? Charles Moore wrote a nice piece about this for Saturday's Telegraph that I think you should read.
The article starts "This week, almost unnoticed, the House of Commons voted to increase hugely the amount Britain pays to the European Union. From now until 2014, the British net contribution will be £5.5 billion each year. Under the previous framework, our net contribution was £2.8 billion." and continues to point out the perfidy of Tony Blair and suggest possible reasons why he might have followed the path that did.
"Just after he won the last election in 2005, Mr Blair was very much the popular champion. "The EU rebate will remain," he declared, "and we will not negotiate it away. Period."...Yet in December 2005, Mr Blair negotiated the rebate away. Period."
"In the last five days of the negotiations, Mr Blair's Government conceded an extra one billion euros to be spent on EU administration in order, as Parliament was later told, to get "a political consensus for an agreement". The Commons vote this week implements all this."
Charles Moore suggests that the concession was made in order for Tony Blair to clear the way to be the first President of the European Council. Could that be the case? Could Tony Blair have sold out the UK in order to further his position and income? I think we all know the answer to those questions...
The article starts "This week, almost unnoticed, the House of Commons voted to increase hugely the amount Britain pays to the European Union. From now until 2014, the British net contribution will be £5.5 billion each year. Under the previous framework, our net contribution was £2.8 billion." and continues to point out the perfidy of Tony Blair and suggest possible reasons why he might have followed the path that did.
"Just after he won the last election in 2005, Mr Blair was very much the popular champion. "The EU rebate will remain," he declared, "and we will not negotiate it away. Period."...Yet in December 2005, Mr Blair negotiated the rebate away. Period."
"In the last five days of the negotiations, Mr Blair's Government conceded an extra one billion euros to be spent on EU administration in order, as Parliament was later told, to get "a political consensus for an agreement". The Commons vote this week implements all this."
Charles Moore suggests that the concession was made in order for Tony Blair to clear the way to be the first President of the European Council. Could that be the case? Could Tony Blair have sold out the UK in order to further his position and income? I think we all know the answer to those questions...
More on the Kinnocks
I blogged last week about Neil Kinnock's son's problems in Moscow. Today I read something that sets the timeline out - "Stephen Kinnock, son of Neil and Glenys, ...used to work in the British Council’s extensive Brussels office when daddy was Commissioner and mummy a Member of the Toy Parliament, which she still is. He then returned to the London headquarters just as daddy became Chair of the organization".
Just thought you'd like to know.
Just thought you'd like to know.
Galileo
I have blogged before about the EU's waste of money on the Galileo system to replace the US's free GPS system, you can read my previous posts here, here and here. Now I read that the Labour apparatchik Lord Bassam of Brighton mislead the House of Lords in a debate last week when he denied that part of the EU agricultural budget had been used to fund the increase in the Galileo budget.
This Labour government routinely lie to Parliament and the public and there are no consequences; why is nobody able to hole them to account?
This Labour government routinely lie to Parliament and the public and there are no consequences; why is nobody able to hole them to account?
More on Ken Livingstone
First, from The Guardian's Comment is Free a piece by Nick Cohen entitled "Why Ken Livingstone is not fit for office". A fine piece of writing which contains much that the BBC would rather the London voter did not know. Nick Cohen's piece starts "To understand why Ken Livingstone is unfit to be the Labour candidate for mayor of London, you have to grasp that he has never moved away from the grimy conspirators of the totalitarian left, who have always despised the democratic traditions of the Labour movement. There is a queasiness about dragging them into the light because so many of the baby boomers now in power wasted their youth in Marxist-Leninist politics. But it is better to overcome queasiness than fail to treat a sickness and Ken Livingstone began by travelling with the sickest sect of them all: the Workers' Revolutionary party." Do read it all...
It also provides a nice preview of tonight's Dispatches programme on Ken Livingstone - which is oddly not being trailed on the Dispatches web page, I do hope Ken Livingstone hasn't managed to get it pulled. Apparently the programme to be presented by The New Statesman's political editor, Martin Bright, "is expected to claim that many of his senior advisers were members of a Trotskyite faction which plotted to turn the capital into a “socialist city state”. In fact the organisation is the little known "Trotskyist cult called Socialist Action" (see Nick Cohen's article). As Nick Cohen says "It is a minute organisation - I doubt it has more than 100 members - but Livingstone has given a fair proportion of them jobs with six-figure salaries at the public's expense. John Ross, Livingstone's economic adviser on £121,000, is typical. He is so lacking in economic knowledge that he decided that the Russian Communist party was a force for the future in 1991, two years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. His economic advice at the time was for the ruling class to learn 'that they will be killed if they do not allow a takeover by the working class'."
It also provides a nice preview of tonight's Dispatches programme on Ken Livingstone - which is oddly not being trailed on the Dispatches web page, I do hope Ken Livingstone hasn't managed to get it pulled. Apparently the programme to be presented by The New Statesman's political editor, Martin Bright, "is expected to claim that many of his senior advisers were members of a Trotskyite faction which plotted to turn the capital into a “socialist city state”. In fact the organisation is the little known "Trotskyist cult called Socialist Action" (see Nick Cohen's article). As Nick Cohen says "It is a minute organisation - I doubt it has more than 100 members - but Livingstone has given a fair proportion of them jobs with six-figure salaries at the public's expense. John Ross, Livingstone's economic adviser on £121,000, is typical. He is so lacking in economic knowledge that he decided that the Russian Communist party was a force for the future in 1991, two years after the fall of the Berlin Wall. His economic advice at the time was for the ruling class to learn 'that they will be killed if they do not allow a takeover by the working class'."
The EU Treaty/Constitution comes to the House of Commons today
I will be covering this matter in depth over the coming weeks, but before the debate in Parliament even starts I will make these five predictions:
1) Labour ministers and backbenchers will still insist that the Treaty bears no resemblance to the Constitution, that the Constitutional process is dead and that the Constitution and the Treaty are "as alike as fish and fowl"
2) The BBC will favour the pro-Treaty side by at least 3 to 1 on any discussion programme
3) The BBC will use the phrase "Conservative splits over Europe" as often as they can
4) Labour ministers will use the phrase "Conservative splits over Europe" as often as they can
5) Gordon Brown will bully enough Labour MPs into supporting the bill and so avoiding a referendum
You can draw your own conclusions as to why points 3 & 4 are so similar
1) Labour ministers and backbenchers will still insist that the Treaty bears no resemblance to the Constitution, that the Constitutional process is dead and that the Constitution and the Treaty are "as alike as fish and fowl"
2) The BBC will favour the pro-Treaty side by at least 3 to 1 on any discussion programme
3) The BBC will use the phrase "Conservative splits over Europe" as often as they can
4) Labour ministers will use the phrase "Conservative splits over Europe" as often as they can
5) Gordon Brown will bully enough Labour MPs into supporting the bill and so avoiding a referendum
You can draw your own conclusions as to why points 3 & 4 are so similar
BBC male presenters and the contents of their trousers
I have read far too much about this this weekend. Today I read in the BBC's entertainment (!) pages that Jeremy Paxman has expressed concern about the quality of Marks and Spencer's underwear, he was quoted as having said in an email to the company that "Their pants no longer provide adequate support" - the mind boggles. But not as much as mine did when I read yesterday that Evan Davies, the BBC's economics editor and presenter of Dragons Den has the nickname of "Tinsel Tits" because his nipples are pierced, "and he is said to have a Prince Albert in the trouser department".
Labour can't afford to fund the whole of the Police pay increase
Strange how the Labour government say they can't afford to fund the whole of the Police pay increase to cover three months backdated as agreed at a cost of around £30 million but can afford to guarantee Northern Rock for five years forwards at a cost of over £1 billion...
Sunday, 20 January 2008
Letter of the week
The contrast between the way that the tiniest infringement of the speed limits is punished with a fine and penalty points (and so possible loss of job), whereas serious anti-social behaviour is all but ignored by the forces of law and order has been remarked upon so often that even I have refrained from posting on the subject. However there is a letter in yesterday's Telegraph that I think bears wider readership:
"Brian Watson, Nottingham
Sir - I am fed up at seeing photographs of families such as the Newloves, whose lives have been ripped apart by the violent actions of the disaffected few.
How can the law-abiding majority get it through to the Government, judges and police that we will not tolerate the casual way they seem to treat young thugs?
When will they deal as swiftly and decisively with the feral low life who ruin our communities as they did when I was caught by a camera doing 34mph in a 30mph zone on a ring road at midnight?"
"Brian Watson, Nottingham
Sir - I am fed up at seeing photographs of families such as the Newloves, whose lives have been ripped apart by the violent actions of the disaffected few.
How can the law-abiding majority get it through to the Government, judges and police that we will not tolerate the casual way they seem to treat young thugs?
When will they deal as swiftly and decisively with the feral low life who ruin our communities as they did when I was caught by a camera doing 34mph in a 30mph zone on a ring road at midnight?"
Saturday, 19 January 2008
London house prices fell by 6.3% in last quarter of 2007
That's just the start, we are in for a serious economic recession. At least we know who is to blame - it's the bloke picking his nose in Number 10, Gordon "end to boom and bust" Brown. As he whimpers quietly to himself, occasionally roaring out an order to one of his hand picked team to announce an initiative or have himself photographed at yet another school, maybe he will realise that the game is up and his reputation in history will be of the man who finally screwed the UK economy and the country up so much that repair was impossible.
Do I need a whole new blog just to cover Ken Livingstone?
The Daily Telegraph today reports that Ken Livingstone wants to turn Parliament Square into a paved pedestrian piazza and major tourist attraction in time for the 2012 Olympics. Part of the plan will involve moving the eight "listed" statues in the square, including that of Winston Churchill. The other statues are of other great statesman " Abraham Lincoln, Robert Peel, Lord Palmerston, Jan Christian Smuts, Lord Derby, Benjamin Disraeli and George Canning. There is of course also the compulsory statue in Ken Livingstone's London - that of Nelson Mandela. I presume that if Ken decided to just keep one statue it would be Nelson Mandela's rather than Winston Churchill's. Alternatively maybe Ken would replace them all with just one statue to represent all that is best with his world view - that of Yusuf al-Qaradawi.
Another Ken Livingstone related story
The dirt just keeps on flowing; here's the latest on Ken Livingstone - once again from The Standard:
"Senior aide Lee Jasper initiated a smear campaign against Trevor Phillips to stop him becoming head of the new Equalities superwatchdog, Dispatches claims.
Mr Livingstone had an acrimonious relationship with Mr Phillips who was Labour chairman of the London Assembly in the Mayor's first term from 2000 to 2004.
Dispatches claims it was Mr Jasper's job to discredit Mr Phillips, before he was appointed to head the new Equalities and Human Rights Commission in 2006.
The Mayor's adviser on equalities and policing allegedly recruited Anne Kane, a long time associate of the Mayor and former member of Socialist Action, to conduct negative research on Mr Phillips.
Dispatches claims she received £14,400 of taxpayers' money and that her work was signed off by the Mayor himself.
In June 2006, Mr Jasper sent her an email asking her to draft an article outlining his opposition to Mr Phillips, who was then head of the Commission for Racial Equality. She later reported back to Mr Jasper that Mr Phillips was "rattled" by one article."
Do read the rest of the story about our esteemed Mayor and his political tactics - no opposition to the true way is allowed.
"Senior aide Lee Jasper initiated a smear campaign against Trevor Phillips to stop him becoming head of the new Equalities superwatchdog, Dispatches claims.
Mr Livingstone had an acrimonious relationship with Mr Phillips who was Labour chairman of the London Assembly in the Mayor's first term from 2000 to 2004.
Dispatches claims it was Mr Jasper's job to discredit Mr Phillips, before he was appointed to head the new Equalities and Human Rights Commission in 2006.
The Mayor's adviser on equalities and policing allegedly recruited Anne Kane, a long time associate of the Mayor and former member of Socialist Action, to conduct negative research on Mr Phillips.
Dispatches claims she received £14,400 of taxpayers' money and that her work was signed off by the Mayor himself.
In June 2006, Mr Jasper sent her an email asking her to draft an article outlining his opposition to Mr Phillips, who was then head of the Commission for Racial Equality. She later reported back to Mr Jasper that Mr Phillips was "rattled" by one article."
Do read the rest of the story about our esteemed Mayor and his political tactics - no opposition to the true way is allowed.
Friday, 18 January 2008
Worldwide economic disaster
It would appear that the Japanese economy may be on the brink of recession with all that that will entail for the world economy. The US, Japan, the UK and the "Euro Zone" economies are all teetering on the brink; 2008 looks like being a very hard economic year for us all.
Islamic Terrorism Is Anti-Islamic
Read this article entitled "Government renames Islamic terrorism as 'anti-Islamic activity' to woo Muslims".
Having read it, I think we have a new phrase to add to George Orwell's "War Is Peace", "Freedom Is Slavery", "Ignorance Is Strength" and that is "Islamic Terrorism Is Anti-Islamic"
It appears that "Ministers have adopted a new language for declarations on Islamic terrorism. In future, fanatics will be referred to as pursuing "anti-Islamic activity"...
"Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that extremists were behaving contrary to their faith, rather than acting in the name of Islam."
As "Robert" says on the web "Ms. Smith, your statement that "there is nothing Islamic about the wish to terrorise, nothing Islamic about plotting murder, pain and grief" certainly expresses a mainstream view. I have just a few questions. How do you propose to counter the recruitment among peaceful Muslims that is being conducted by these "anti-Islamic" Muslims, who quote the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Islamic law to portray their "anti-Islamic" behavior as not only Islamic, but the only true Islamic position? Wouldn't combating that call for a searching and honest examination of the actual contents of those texts? Aren't you making that examination a bit more difficult to do by pretending that it need not be done, and that the strife is already o'er, the battle done, and the "moderates" have beaten back the ideological challenge of the "extremists"? How can sincere Islamic reformers prevail when you act as if there is nothing in Islam that needs reforming?"
The Daily MAil's editorial on this subject included this line ""It's like describing the Nazis as being engaged in 'anti-German activity'. Goebbels would have been proud of such double speak.""
Having read it, I think we have a new phrase to add to George Orwell's "War Is Peace", "Freedom Is Slavery", "Ignorance Is Strength" and that is "Islamic Terrorism Is Anti-Islamic"
It appears that "Ministers have adopted a new language for declarations on Islamic terrorism. In future, fanatics will be referred to as pursuing "anti-Islamic activity"...
"Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said that extremists were behaving contrary to their faith, rather than acting in the name of Islam."
As "Robert" says on the web "Ms. Smith, your statement that "there is nothing Islamic about the wish to terrorise, nothing Islamic about plotting murder, pain and grief" certainly expresses a mainstream view. I have just a few questions. How do you propose to counter the recruitment among peaceful Muslims that is being conducted by these "anti-Islamic" Muslims, who quote the Qur'an, Sunnah, and Islamic law to portray their "anti-Islamic" behavior as not only Islamic, but the only true Islamic position? Wouldn't combating that call for a searching and honest examination of the actual contents of those texts? Aren't you making that examination a bit more difficult to do by pretending that it need not be done, and that the strife is already o'er, the battle done, and the "moderates" have beaten back the ideological challenge of the "extremists"? How can sincere Islamic reformers prevail when you act as if there is nothing in Islam that needs reforming?"
The Daily MAil's editorial on this subject included this line ""It's like describing the Nazis as being engaged in 'anti-German activity'. Goebbels would have been proud of such double speak.""
Health and Safety (part 2)
I though this was likely to be too liitle, too late and I think I was right. Today we read that "A village amateur dramatic group performing Robinson Crusoe has had to tell police about the use of plastic swords because of health and safety fears.
The Carnon Downs Drama Group, at Perranwell, Cornwall, must lock up its two plastic cutlasses, six wooden swords and a toy gun when they are not in use and appoint a "responsible guardian" for them."
Get a sense of perspective, or even a grasp on reality...
The Carnon Downs Drama Group, at Perranwell, Cornwall, must lock up its two plastic cutlasses, six wooden swords and a toy gun when they are not in use and appoint a "responsible guardian" for them."
Get a sense of perspective, or even a grasp on reality...
Tony Blair 'cannot be president of EU'
"Valérie Giscard d'Estaing, the former French president and the father of the now defunct EU constitutional treaty, said that Europe's first president must have majority support from his home country, which should be a nation that "respects all its European commitments". Something that he claimed Britain did not do.
"Tony Blair cannot be president of Europe," agreed Edouard Balladur, the former conservative French prime minister close to Mr Sarkozy, writing in yesterday's Le Monde newspaper."
Read the rest here. You know my feelings...
"Tony Blair cannot be president of Europe," agreed Edouard Balladur, the former conservative French prime minister close to Mr Sarkozy, writing in yesterday's Le Monde newspaper."
Read the rest here. You know my feelings...
Laptop porn (part 2)
Following my post about the new Macbook Air I have found some rather neat parodies
and my favourite....
and my favourite....
Ken Livingstone's record - the claims and the facts
A nice piece by Andrew Gilligan in the Standard today. Do read it all and make sure that Ken gets kicked out of power in May.
More on Ken Livingstone
The Evening Standard are reporting that "Mayor Ken Livingstone faces another blow to his re-election campaign amid a fresh series of damaging allegations.
A Channel 4 documentary is to claim that the Mayor's inner circle of advisers breached strict rules which ban City Hall employees from working on election campaigns.
The Dispatches programme, to be broadcast on Monday, is to claim that key aides raised funds, wrote articles and conducted briefings for the Mayor's election campaign in 2004 even though they were being paid by the taxpayer at the time.
In the programme a "whistleblower" claims three of the Mayor's most senior advisers ran the campaign while on the public payroll.
Dispatches maintains that although any breach of the GLA rules would not necessarily have been a criminal offence it should still have been punishable by disciplinary action."
It wouldn't surprise me, the trouble with Ken Livingstone is that he believes (like many of our Labour masters) that the normal laws and rules do not apply to them. Maybe there will come a day when the ordinary Londoner can take their revenge on Ken Livingstone and his henchmen; whether via the ballot box or otherwise...
A Channel 4 documentary is to claim that the Mayor's inner circle of advisers breached strict rules which ban City Hall employees from working on election campaigns.
The Dispatches programme, to be broadcast on Monday, is to claim that key aides raised funds, wrote articles and conducted briefings for the Mayor's election campaign in 2004 even though they were being paid by the taxpayer at the time.
In the programme a "whistleblower" claims three of the Mayor's most senior advisers ran the campaign while on the public payroll.
Dispatches maintains that although any breach of the GLA rules would not necessarily have been a criminal offence it should still have been punishable by disciplinary action."
It wouldn't surprise me, the trouble with Ken Livingstone is that he believes (like many of our Labour masters) that the normal laws and rules do not apply to them. Maybe there will come a day when the ordinary Londoner can take their revenge on Ken Livingstone and his henchmen; whether via the ballot box or otherwise...
Ken Livingstone at The Clash of Civilisations Conference last year
You may be interested in what Ken Livingstone says at around 6 minutes 30 seconds into this clip...
"I would not have a created Israel... it was a travesty.." I won't type the rest of his remarks, go listen for yourself.
"I would not have a created Israel... it was a travesty.." I won't type the rest of his remarks, go listen for yourself.
Wind power
Take a read of this article on the sheer stupidity of relying on wind power. Nice link to the ever sensible Burning Our Money.
This Labour government seems incapable of logical thought.
This Labour government seems incapable of logical thought.
Extradition
Apparently "Proposals, to be agreed by Baroness Scotland QC, the Attorney-General, at a meeting of EU justice ministers next week, enshrine "procedural" guidelines setting out the circumstances for quick extradition of people convicted in their absence.
A draft text, seen by The Daily Telegraph, notes that existing rules do not "deal consistently with the issue of judgments rendered in absentia". "This diversity complicates the work of the practitioner and hampers judicial co-operation," it states.
Human rights and civil liberties campaigners fear the new EU rules breach a fundamental principle of British justice: that defendants must have their day in court to defend themselves.
Britain does not convict people or hold trials in their absence but many EU countries, including Belgium, France, Spain Greece and Italy, do so on a regular basis.
David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: "This is another disturbing development from Brussels. Extradition of British nationals to face prison in European jails, based on trials in absentia, would undermine fundamental principles of British justice."
The Conservatives are concerned that Government ministers are giving too much away, including a planned hand-over of "a wide range of personal data" to other European states. "This is the latest Government failure to defend the British idea of fairness in Europe. Now there is a real risk that British citizens will be abandoned to face European punishments without trial," Mr Davis said."
This Labour government are all but totally spineless when it comes to negotiating with the EU; our ministers seem to just roll over and let the EU have their way with them.
A draft text, seen by The Daily Telegraph, notes that existing rules do not "deal consistently with the issue of judgments rendered in absentia". "This diversity complicates the work of the practitioner and hampers judicial co-operation," it states.
Human rights and civil liberties campaigners fear the new EU rules breach a fundamental principle of British justice: that defendants must have their day in court to defend themselves.
Britain does not convict people or hold trials in their absence but many EU countries, including Belgium, France, Spain Greece and Italy, do so on a regular basis.
David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said: "This is another disturbing development from Brussels. Extradition of British nationals to face prison in European jails, based on trials in absentia, would undermine fundamental principles of British justice."
The Conservatives are concerned that Government ministers are giving too much away, including a planned hand-over of "a wide range of personal data" to other European states. "This is the latest Government failure to defend the British idea of fairness in Europe. Now there is a real risk that British citizens will be abandoned to face European punishments without trial," Mr Davis said."
This Labour government are all but totally spineless when it comes to negotiating with the EU; our ministers seem to just roll over and let the EU have their way with them.
More Peter Hain news
Apparently the Telegraph are reporting that "The Electoral Commission confirmed to me yesterday that it wrote to Mr Hain, at the beginning of his campaign, outlining his obligations and his duties relating to the declaration of donations. The letter explained to him that he was legally responsible for his campaign, and it was his responsibility to ensure that all donations were declared within 30 days of receipt. Forms were provided for him or his team to do just that. All these forms had to be signed by him personally. Indeed, we know he received the forms, because he did declare some donations on May 31."
Another Labour Stealth Tax
This Labour government is fast becoming a parody of itself. The latest wheeze is to tax employees if their employer provides parking spaces. What a fantastic idea, let's stick to London for the moment.... So the employee can choose to travel on the already over-crowded public transport system (assuming there is a suitable route), or cycle (because we all live within 10 miles of work), or walk (because we all live within 4 miles of work), or work from home (thus increasing energy consumption) or PAY THE TAX thus helping Gordon Brown cover part of his financial black hole. I assume that this tax won't apply to overweight Scottish politicians who live less than a mile from their place of work but still get driven there in a chauffeur driven car - of course not!
No, really! Who would have thought it...
Apparently "NAO says public being 'taken for a ride' by PFIs". The Telegraph reports that "The discrepancies in the amounts paid for the simplest changes to public finance initiative (PFI) projects such as providing new locks or keys have been laid bare in a report.
The National Audit Office, the Whitehall spending watchdog, found that the cost of installing a new electrical socket ranged from £30.81 to £302.30.
A new lock cost anything from £15.09 to £486.54, while the price of a key ran from £4.26 to £47.48.
While one PFI contractor was prepared to put up a new noticeboard for free, another charged £149.71.
In all, Government departments and other public bodies spent more than £180 million on changes to operational PFI projects in 2006."
The PFI Companies are experienced and money minded negotiators, the "officials" who are told to negotiate with them don't stand a chance. PFI was a way of getting public spending up without it showing on the Government's books and so breaking Gordon Brown's golden rule. It is a con trick and we will be paying for it all long after Gordon Brown has lost his job and has retired to Scotland to spend more time with his pension.
The National Audit Office, the Whitehall spending watchdog, found that the cost of installing a new electrical socket ranged from £30.81 to £302.30.
A new lock cost anything from £15.09 to £486.54, while the price of a key ran from £4.26 to £47.48.
While one PFI contractor was prepared to put up a new noticeboard for free, another charged £149.71.
In all, Government departments and other public bodies spent more than £180 million on changes to operational PFI projects in 2006."
The PFI Companies are experienced and money minded negotiators, the "officials" who are told to negotiate with them don't stand a chance. PFI was a way of getting public spending up without it showing on the Government's books and so breaking Gordon Brown's golden rule. It is a con trick and we will be paying for it all long after Gordon Brown has lost his job and has retired to Scotland to spend more time with his pension.
Health and Safety
The last 10 years have seen the rise and rise of the Health and Safety industry, turning sensible concern into interfering and controlling. Quite hysterically I read that "Nut warning labels on peanut packets and rules banning conker matches and homemade cakes at school fetes could be targeted by a new watchdog set up by Gordon Brown to encourage a spirit of adventure.
The new Risk and Regulatory Advisory Council is part of a drive to improve the way risk is understood and managed by Government and is likely to be a shot across the bows of the "health and safety police".
The council will look at policies such as unnecessary food labelling - for example, when the words "may contain nuts" are printed on packets of peanuts.
There is concern that health and safety laws are stopping the public from having fun."
Brilliant, after 10 years of encouraging this bollocks, now Gordon Brown will spend even more public money on a body to investigate reducing some of the policies. "Good money after bad" is one phrase that comes to mind; another is "f*** off Gordon".
The new Risk and Regulatory Advisory Council is part of a drive to improve the way risk is understood and managed by Government and is likely to be a shot across the bows of the "health and safety police".
The council will look at policies such as unnecessary food labelling - for example, when the words "may contain nuts" are printed on packets of peanuts.
There is concern that health and safety laws are stopping the public from having fun."
Brilliant, after 10 years of encouraging this bollocks, now Gordon Brown will spend even more public money on a body to investigate reducing some of the policies. "Good money after bad" is one phrase that comes to mind; another is "f*** off Gordon".
CCTV doesn't work
At last what we all thought has been confirmed, CCTV doesn't deter drunken yobs.
Apparently "Graeme Gerrard, head of CCTV at the Association of Chief Police Officers, said that although Britain was now a virtual surveillance state, cameras usually failed to act as a deterrent for drunken yobs.
He told a parliamentary committee that while other countries were astonished at the scale to which Britons were snooped on by the authorities, the evidence suggested CCTV had little impact on levels of late-night violence.
He also admitted the public had been "misled" into believing that installing camera systems would have a big impact on anti-social behaviour.
Around £200 million has been spent on erecting more than four million CCTV cameras across the country over the past 10 years, leading the Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, recently to talk about "Surveillance Britain".
Ministers have repeatedly stressed the benefits of CCTV on the grounds that they act as a deterrent.
But speaking to the Lords constitution committee, Mr Gerrard, deputy chief constable of the Cheshire constabulary, said: "Most of the pressure [for CCTV] comes from the public.
"Some of them may get disappointed when the CCTV goes in that actually... it doesn't deter most crime. I think they are perhaps misled in terms of the amount of crime that CCTV might prevent.
"Before CCTV can effectively deter people, they need to know the cameras are there. They have got to be thinking about the consequences of their behaviour.
"It is very effective in places like car parks, where offenders are going out to break into cars, and are thinking rationally. In terms of town centres, where a lot of the behaviour is violent behaviour, often fuelled by alcohol, people aren't thinking rationally. They get angry, the CCTV is the last thing they are thinking about.
"Even the presence of police officers doesn't deter the disorder on the street, so cameras are unlikely to deter them."
David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said the Government had undermined civil liberties for no apparent reason."
What a shock... This Labour government have messed so much up over the last nearly 11 years.
Apparently "Graeme Gerrard, head of CCTV at the Association of Chief Police Officers, said that although Britain was now a virtual surveillance state, cameras usually failed to act as a deterrent for drunken yobs.
He told a parliamentary committee that while other countries were astonished at the scale to which Britons were snooped on by the authorities, the evidence suggested CCTV had little impact on levels of late-night violence.
He also admitted the public had been "misled" into believing that installing camera systems would have a big impact on anti-social behaviour.
Around £200 million has been spent on erecting more than four million CCTV cameras across the country over the past 10 years, leading the Information Commissioner, Richard Thomas, recently to talk about "Surveillance Britain".
Ministers have repeatedly stressed the benefits of CCTV on the grounds that they act as a deterrent.
But speaking to the Lords constitution committee, Mr Gerrard, deputy chief constable of the Cheshire constabulary, said: "Most of the pressure [for CCTV] comes from the public.
"Some of them may get disappointed when the CCTV goes in that actually... it doesn't deter most crime. I think they are perhaps misled in terms of the amount of crime that CCTV might prevent.
"Before CCTV can effectively deter people, they need to know the cameras are there. They have got to be thinking about the consequences of their behaviour.
"It is very effective in places like car parks, where offenders are going out to break into cars, and are thinking rationally. In terms of town centres, where a lot of the behaviour is violent behaviour, often fuelled by alcohol, people aren't thinking rationally. They get angry, the CCTV is the last thing they are thinking about.
"Even the presence of police officers doesn't deter the disorder on the street, so cameras are unlikely to deter them."
David Davis, the shadow home secretary, said the Government had undermined civil liberties for no apparent reason."
What a shock... This Labour government have messed so much up over the last nearly 11 years.
Excuse me Miss...
Poor Sarah Green, she is/was a teacher at Stockport Grammar School, she has been suspended for appearing in a "saucy" advert - filmed two years before she joined the school. Should she keep her job? Decide for yourself, you can see her performance here ..... she is the office worker...
Apparently one parent (no doubt of the "will nobody think of the children" persuasion" is quoted as saying "It is possibly not suitable for this person to be teaching impressionable students".
Apparently one parent (no doubt of the "will nobody think of the children" persuasion" is quoted as saying "It is possibly not suitable for this person to be teaching impressionable students".
Law and Order
The way that Adam Swellings was released on bail when he had pleaded guilty to punching and kicking a man is disgusting. The fact that 10 hours after being bailed he was drunk and drugged up when he and his mates kicked Gary Newlove to death shows just how the forces of law and order in this country have given up their role of protecting the general public. The human rights of one prisoner were allowed to take precedence over public safety. People who kick and beat defenceless members of the public do not deserve bail, they do not deserve our sympathy; to be perfectly honest, I question if they deserve to live. We have a major problem with violent crime in this country and we need to solve it before parts of the UK become war zones.
Too many subjects
I posted very little yesterday because I found so many subjects that wound me up. I aim to catch up today...
It's the way the BBC tell them
Once again I find myself drawn to the BBC UK Politics home page. What do we see today? Three main stories, as usual the main one above and two less important beneath:
1. "China trade to boom, says Brown
Gordon Brown says the UK's trade relationship with China is "crucial", as he arrives there for a three-day visit."
This article is accompanied by a photo of Gordon Brown looking all dynamic.
2. "Russia actions 'stain reputation'
UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband says Russia's actions against the British Council are a "stain" on her reputation"
This article is accompanied by a photo of Davis Miliband looking of voting age.
3. "Respect agenda 'ditched' - Tories
The government has "given up" on a policy intended to cut youth crime, Tory leader David Cameron claims."
This article is accompanied by a photo of Mr Newlove, the man murdered by a gang on Britain's ever safer Labour streets.
Did you notice that when a Labour minister is reported upon, it is for something that he "says" but David Cameron merely makes "claims".
The BBC - still proud to support Gordon Brown and keep Labour in power.
1. "China trade to boom, says Brown
Gordon Brown says the UK's trade relationship with China is "crucial", as he arrives there for a three-day visit."
This article is accompanied by a photo of Gordon Brown looking all dynamic.
2. "Russia actions 'stain reputation'
UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband says Russia's actions against the British Council are a "stain" on her reputation"
This article is accompanied by a photo of Davis Miliband looking of voting age.
3. "Respect agenda 'ditched' - Tories
The government has "given up" on a policy intended to cut youth crime, Tory leader David Cameron claims."
This article is accompanied by a photo of Mr Newlove, the man murdered by a gang on Britain's ever safer Labour streets.
Did you notice that when a Labour minister is reported upon, it is for something that he "says" but David Cameron merely makes "claims".
The BBC - still proud to support Gordon Brown and keep Labour in power.
Thursday, 17 January 2008
Laptop porn
I am not an Apple Mac kind of NotaSheep but this advert for the new Apple Macbook Air has me strangely excited...
Could I be unfaithful to my Sony VGN-T2XP?
Could I be unfaithful to my Sony VGN-T2XP?
Lawyers
There is an interesting story that I read on an Australian news site entitled "Man named Jihad caught driving with loaded gun, tazer". The story runs "A MAN who had ammunition in his pocket and a loaded pistol on the back seat of his car when he was pulled over told police he was, "going hunting with my uncle".
The gun was ready to fire when police pulled over Mahmud Jihad, 26, in Rooty Hill on Tuesday.
Also in a bag in the back seat was a tazer, Mount Druitt local court heard yesterday.
A further three pistols - including a Russian semi-automatic - were found when police raided Jihad's Shalvey home later the same day.
Along with the cache of guns and ammunition found in the bedroom of the builder's labourer, was $59,550 in cash.
Jihad yesterday faced court on 15 charges, including having a firearm in a public place.
The court heard Jihad was sentenced to 12 months' jail in 2005 for similar offences.
Jihad's estranged parents and sister were in court yesterday when he applied for bail.
His lawyer Charles Zarb argued that although his client had priors for similar offences, he had always turned up at court, even when a jail sentence was likely.
But prosecutor Pauline McCann said Jihad's actions demonstrated that he was an active risk to the public.
Jihad was refused bail and remanded in custody to appear again on March 28."
Did you catch the grounds for requesting bail? "His lawyer Charles Zarb argued that although his client had priors for similar offences, he had always turned up at court, even when a jail sentence was likely."
The gun was ready to fire when police pulled over Mahmud Jihad, 26, in Rooty Hill on Tuesday.
Also in a bag in the back seat was a tazer, Mount Druitt local court heard yesterday.
A further three pistols - including a Russian semi-automatic - were found when police raided Jihad's Shalvey home later the same day.
Along with the cache of guns and ammunition found in the bedroom of the builder's labourer, was $59,550 in cash.
Jihad yesterday faced court on 15 charges, including having a firearm in a public place.
The court heard Jihad was sentenced to 12 months' jail in 2005 for similar offences.
Jihad's estranged parents and sister were in court yesterday when he applied for bail.
His lawyer Charles Zarb argued that although his client had priors for similar offences, he had always turned up at court, even when a jail sentence was likely.
But prosecutor Pauline McCann said Jihad's actions demonstrated that he was an active risk to the public.
Jihad was refused bail and remanded in custody to appear again on March 28."
Did you catch the grounds for requesting bail? "His lawyer Charles Zarb argued that although his client had priors for similar offences, he had always turned up at court, even when a jail sentence was likely."
Wednesday, 16 January 2008
More on Ken Livingstone
Here you can see Ken Livingstone being interviewed on the BBC about various matters. The most interesting thing is his comment at around 5 minutes 50 seconds when he is asked "What is Ken Livingstone going to do about the financial mismanagement at the London Development Agency?" Ken calls the Evening Standard "the Evening Boris" and goes onto state that "there have been 18 allegations, we've now had the external auditors investigate these, 15 have been dismissed completely". He also made the incredible remark in reply to the interviewer saying "but it's not an independent enquiry, is it?" that "if you want to say to an independent firm of auditors that they are taking direction from me, they'll probably sue you!". Also listen to the question about Brixton Base at around 7 minutes 15.
For an answer to these points you may want to read this from the Evening Standard (my emphasis). "Ken Livingstone has been accused of "misleading the public" after claiming an internal probe into the City Hall grants scandal was independent.
The Mayor was attacked by MPs from all three big political parties over his claim about the London Development Agency review. It examined allegations that LDA cash was misappropriated by friends of his adviser Lee Jasper...
Questioned on TV news show BBC London last night, Mr Livingstone said: "We've just had one independent inquiry - the [LDA's] external auditors looked into this. They've dismissed 15 allegations."
But today the London Assembly heard evidence from two senior LDA officials dramatically at odds with Mr Livingstone's claims.
Andrew Travers, who led the review, told Assembly members: "The review has been conducted by a team of LDA staff supported by a team of internal auditors - the conclusions of the review are mine alone."
LDA chief executive Manny Lewis said the review had spoken neither to Mr Jasper, nor to anyone from the suspect projects or not employed by City Hall."
The article continues "Labour MP Kate Hoey, Lib-Dem Lynne Featherstone and Conservative Greg Hands accused the Mayor of misleading the public. Mr Hands, MP for Hammersmith and Fulham, said: "It is deeply misleading for Mr Livingstone to suggest that the LDA has either been cleared or that the enquiry is independent."
Ms Featherstone said: "Ken has no shame. It is almost as if if he shouts loud enough he makes what he is saying true, but the evidence shows that what the Mayor has said is not true.""
Do feel free to draw your own conclusions; I know I have.
Could we tax-paying Londoners finally be about to get rid of Ken Livingstone? Dare we hope, or will he somehow come back yet again to torment us even more? Unfortunately I fear the latter.
For an answer to these points you may want to read this from the Evening Standard (my emphasis). "Ken Livingstone has been accused of "misleading the public" after claiming an internal probe into the City Hall grants scandal was independent.
The Mayor was attacked by MPs from all three big political parties over his claim about the London Development Agency review. It examined allegations that LDA cash was misappropriated by friends of his adviser Lee Jasper...
Questioned on TV news show BBC London last night, Mr Livingstone said: "We've just had one independent inquiry - the [LDA's] external auditors looked into this. They've dismissed 15 allegations."
But today the London Assembly heard evidence from two senior LDA officials dramatically at odds with Mr Livingstone's claims.
Andrew Travers, who led the review, told Assembly members: "The review has been conducted by a team of LDA staff supported by a team of internal auditors - the conclusions of the review are mine alone."
LDA chief executive Manny Lewis said the review had spoken neither to Mr Jasper, nor to anyone from the suspect projects or not employed by City Hall."
The article continues "Labour MP Kate Hoey, Lib-Dem Lynne Featherstone and Conservative Greg Hands accused the Mayor of misleading the public. Mr Hands, MP for Hammersmith and Fulham, said: "It is deeply misleading for Mr Livingstone to suggest that the LDA has either been cleared or that the enquiry is independent."
Ms Featherstone said: "Ken has no shame. It is almost as if if he shouts loud enough he makes what he is saying true, but the evidence shows that what the Mayor has said is not true.""
Do feel free to draw your own conclusions; I know I have.
Could we tax-paying Londoners finally be about to get rid of Ken Livingstone? Dare we hope, or will he somehow come back yet again to torment us even more? Unfortunately I fear the latter.
Organ donation and the move to "presumed consent"
Take a listen to tonight's Moral Maze on Radio 4's "listen again" feature. Absolutely fascinating and just what the BBC should be producing. Some seriously good arguments against what Gordon Brown's government is proposing. What the penultimate witness had to say really scared me.
Have a listen and think about what actually do we mean by death.
Having listened to the programme, do you think Michael Buerk fancied the first witness? The man was positively gushing.
Have a listen and think about what actually do we mean by death.
Having listened to the programme, do you think Michael Buerk fancied the first witness? The man was positively gushing.
Like father like son
Apparently The British Council "St Petersburg office director Stephen Kinnock was followed, stopped and released by authorities on Tuesday. Mr Kinnock - son of former Labour leader Neil - was held by the side of the road on Tuesday night and accused of going up a one-way street the wrong way and of smelling of alcohol. The British Consul in St Petersburg came to pick him up an hour later." That would be the same Neil Kinnock who was fond of a drink or several with his curry on the South Ealing Road all those years ago.
Incidentally, I wonder would Stephen Kinnock's position as St Petersburg office director of the British Council be in any way connected with a certain 'The Rt Hon Lord (Neil) Kinnock of Bedwellty' being the 'Chair of the British Council'? Is the entire Kinnock family on the "public service" gravy train? Neil was UK Commissioner of the European Commission from 1995 until 2004, and is now Chairman of the British Council. Glenys (his wife) is a MEP and is a Member of the European Parliament's Development and Co-operation Committee and a substitute member of the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. She is also co-president of the African, Caribbean and Pacific-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly and is Labour spokesperson on International Development in the European Parliament. She is President of Steel Action in the European Parliament. His son, Stephen, is as we have already established a director of the British Council and is married to Helle Thorning-Schmidt, who is the leader of the Danish Social Democrats political party. Neil and Glenys's daughter, Rachel, works in the Political Office at No 10 under Gordon Brown.
I wonder how the interview and selection processes were carried out.
Neil Kinnock hasn't done badly for a man who once preposterously claimed to be the "first Kinnock in a thousand generations" to go to university. A thousand generations was it Neil?
Mind you this was also the man who railed for years against the House of Lords but somehow dropped his objections when Tony Blair created him Baron Kinnock, of Bedwellty. He was appointed to the House of Lords as part of Tony Blair's scheme to get a Labour majority in the unelected second chamber, a scheme that has worked not that you would know it from the way that Tony Blair portrayed it as a place still full of Tory toffs.
In researching this article, well looking for the name of the Indian restaurant where "the incident" took place, I came across this review of a book entitled "The Labour Party in Wales 1900-2000 edited by Duncan Tanner, Chris Williams and Deian Hopkin". I particularly enjoyed this part "They say that Kinnock was later "electorally destroyed by a hostile press in part because of his Welshness". Well, maybe. There is certainly no shortage of anti-Welsh prejudice in the London media. But Kinnock's real problem was not that he was a 'Welsh windbag', it was just that he was (and is) a windbag. Just remember the Sheffield rally. Or the tedious regularity that Kinnock has boasted of his handiness with his fists (the curry house incident, the Labour conference toilets etc).
Kinnock is one of these professional Welshmen, a caricature Welshman, a not very bright, loquacious chancer who talks a lot but says very little. This is a man who clearly yearns to be remembered as some sort of tragic Shakespearian character who selflessly gave his all for the good of the party and, when necessary, fell on his sword. He sees himself as a principled fighter who 'made the party electable' again, while sticking to his principles.
The reality is a little different. As a leader, Kinnock was possibly the biggest failure in Labour's history. He presided over disastrous defeats, despite ditching every last shred of principle that had accidentally become entangled to him in his rise up the greasy pole. And he hardly fell on his sword either - retiring to become a megabureaucrat in Brussels."
I like that description.
Was the restaurant called Sagar, or am I muddling up my Ealing curry houses?
Incidentally, I wonder would Stephen Kinnock's position as St Petersburg office director of the British Council be in any way connected with a certain 'The Rt Hon Lord (Neil) Kinnock of Bedwellty' being the 'Chair of the British Council'? Is the entire Kinnock family on the "public service" gravy train? Neil was UK Commissioner of the European Commission from 1995 until 2004, and is now Chairman of the British Council. Glenys (his wife) is a MEP and is a Member of the European Parliament's Development and Co-operation Committee and a substitute member of the Committee on Citizens' Freedoms and Rights, Justice and Home Affairs. She is also co-president of the African, Caribbean and Pacific-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly and is Labour spokesperson on International Development in the European Parliament. She is President of Steel Action in the European Parliament. His son, Stephen, is as we have already established a director of the British Council and is married to Helle Thorning-Schmidt, who is the leader of the Danish Social Democrats political party. Neil and Glenys's daughter, Rachel, works in the Political Office at No 10 under Gordon Brown.
I wonder how the interview and selection processes were carried out.
Neil Kinnock hasn't done badly for a man who once preposterously claimed to be the "first Kinnock in a thousand generations" to go to university. A thousand generations was it Neil?
Mind you this was also the man who railed for years against the House of Lords but somehow dropped his objections when Tony Blair created him Baron Kinnock, of Bedwellty. He was appointed to the House of Lords as part of Tony Blair's scheme to get a Labour majority in the unelected second chamber, a scheme that has worked not that you would know it from the way that Tony Blair portrayed it as a place still full of Tory toffs.
In researching this article, well looking for the name of the Indian restaurant where "the incident" took place, I came across this review of a book entitled "The Labour Party in Wales 1900-2000 edited by Duncan Tanner, Chris Williams and Deian Hopkin". I particularly enjoyed this part "They say that Kinnock was later "electorally destroyed by a hostile press in part because of his Welshness". Well, maybe. There is certainly no shortage of anti-Welsh prejudice in the London media. But Kinnock's real problem was not that he was a 'Welsh windbag', it was just that he was (and is) a windbag. Just remember the Sheffield rally. Or the tedious regularity that Kinnock has boasted of his handiness with his fists (the curry house incident, the Labour conference toilets etc).
Kinnock is one of these professional Welshmen, a caricature Welshman, a not very bright, loquacious chancer who talks a lot but says very little. This is a man who clearly yearns to be remembered as some sort of tragic Shakespearian character who selflessly gave his all for the good of the party and, when necessary, fell on his sword. He sees himself as a principled fighter who 'made the party electable' again, while sticking to his principles.
The reality is a little different. As a leader, Kinnock was possibly the biggest failure in Labour's history. He presided over disastrous defeats, despite ditching every last shred of principle that had accidentally become entangled to him in his rise up the greasy pole. And he hardly fell on his sword either - retiring to become a megabureaucrat in Brussels."
I like that description.
Was the restaurant called Sagar, or am I muddling up my Ealing curry houses?
Gordon Brown gets something right
Yesterday Gordon Brown told ITV's News at Ten: "Peter Hain has confessed to his mistakes and he has apologised in the most profuse terms for what has gone wrong.
"It was a mistake that was made, it was an incompetence that he has readily admitted to."
At last some sense from Gordon Brown, even if he did go on to plead "This now goes before the Standards Committee in the House of Commons and before the Electoral Commission and I believe that they will understand that this was a failure but there was no corruption involved, no illegal donation made, and I hope that they will be able to accept his apology."
In further Peter Hain news:
The Telegraph reports that...
"One of the undeclared gifts, the £10,000 from the GMB, came as the union was fighting to save 2,500 jobs at 43 Remploy factories.
Ministers had claimed the Government-owned plants - which employ disabled workers - cost too much to run.
The donation was banked on September 4 last year, according to Mr Hain.
On September 25, during a well received speech to the Labour conference, he announced a £555million plan to safeguard Remploy's future.
Mr Hain insisted there would be no compulsory redundancies and pledged to try to win more contracts for the firm.
Two months later, he rubber-stamped plans to close only 17 sites - fewer than half of those earmarked for the axe. A further 11 were to be merged.
The Tories demanded answers from Mr Hain last night.
Mark Harper, the party's disabilities spokesman, said: "Now we know that the GMB made sizeable secret donations there will be concerns that Peter Hain's decisions were influenced by union cash.
"Unless he can deal with this straight away his time will be up. This business appears to get murkier and murkier."
Tory MP David Davies said: "The whole thing looks very shady and very sleazy.
"He has been around long enough to know there is no such thing as a free lunch or a free £10,000.
"You can't be seen to take money one minute and then make a decision which benefits the donor the next." "
Please stay in post Peter you are doing so much damage to this Labour government it is worth it!
"It was a mistake that was made, it was an incompetence that he has readily admitted to."
At last some sense from Gordon Brown, even if he did go on to plead "This now goes before the Standards Committee in the House of Commons and before the Electoral Commission and I believe that they will understand that this was a failure but there was no corruption involved, no illegal donation made, and I hope that they will be able to accept his apology."
In further Peter Hain news:
The Telegraph reports that...
"One of the undeclared gifts, the £10,000 from the GMB, came as the union was fighting to save 2,500 jobs at 43 Remploy factories.
Ministers had claimed the Government-owned plants - which employ disabled workers - cost too much to run.
The donation was banked on September 4 last year, according to Mr Hain.
On September 25, during a well received speech to the Labour conference, he announced a £555million plan to safeguard Remploy's future.
Mr Hain insisted there would be no compulsory redundancies and pledged to try to win more contracts for the firm.
Two months later, he rubber-stamped plans to close only 17 sites - fewer than half of those earmarked for the axe. A further 11 were to be merged.
The Tories demanded answers from Mr Hain last night.
Mark Harper, the party's disabilities spokesman, said: "Now we know that the GMB made sizeable secret donations there will be concerns that Peter Hain's decisions were influenced by union cash.
"Unless he can deal with this straight away his time will be up. This business appears to get murkier and murkier."
Tory MP David Davies said: "The whole thing looks very shady and very sleazy.
"He has been around long enough to know there is no such thing as a free lunch or a free £10,000.
"You can't be seen to take money one minute and then make a decision which benefits the donor the next." "
Please stay in post Peter you are doing so much damage to this Labour government it is worth it!
House prices fall - I did warn you
House prices drop 'at fastest rate in 15 years'.
Gordon's Brown's end to boom and bust looks believable doesn't it?
Gordon's Brown's end to boom and bust looks believable doesn't it?
Innovative Minds?
Take a look at Innovative Minds a website from a company that develops Islamic software. My attention was drawn to two pages, firstly their Boycott Marks & Spencer page which lists the reasons why M&S should be boycotted; their support the Zionist state of Israel. It's odd because on the very rare occasions that I go to M&S's flagship store on Oxford Street (Marble Arch End) it is full of Arab women from Middle East countries. Apparently these women do salve their consciences by cutting out the Marks & Spencer labels from their garments before flying home.
The second page that I found of interest was the one for a Islamic Fun games CD. It is described as "A collection of Islamic Games on CD-ROM. The best way to educate your child - they learn whilst playing!". Apparently "SUBJECTS your child will learn include: Dinniyyat, Akhalaq, Al-Qur'an, Arabic, Nabuwat, Fiqh, Aqaed, Sirah, Hadith, Ummah, Tahara, Salat, Hajj, Leadership, Islamic History, Islamic Politics, Islamic Science" All very laudable I am sure however that doesn't really cover all that is on the CD. The CD blurb continues "Your child will learn about Islam by playing lots of exciting games, full of colourful animations and cute sounds effects. Six different games to choose from, with lots of levels - each time they play its different - lots of fun! The games revolve around an Islamic database of over
1000 questions - each with audio, and lots of images. Three separate age groups supported : 5-7 years, 8-10 years and 11 and over - each with its own database of questions. Makes a great gift. It will keep the whole family entertained for years to come !"
So what are the games? The first five are standard young children's computer games as you can find on hundreds of CDs - "TREE HOP - Help the cat retrieve its ball." and "Two Bunny Race - Two player game - which bunny will cross the finish line first?" and similar BUT The sixth game is a little more unusual...
"THE RESISTANCE (*)
You are a farmer in South Lebanon who has joined the Islamic Resistance to defend your land and family from the invading zionists"
Here's a screen shot
It would appear that the child has to answer a multiple choice question and if they get it right they can shoot at a tank flying the Israeli flag.
Innovative Minds have obviously received criticism of this game because they helpfully provide an explanation - "Some in the media have kicked up a fuss over this game. It seems that the media is silent when they, the zionists, use their tanks to slaughter our children but when our children play a shoot-em up game where they shoot zionist tanks in return for correct answers we are accused of training terrorists and instilling hatred towards Jews! On the contrary the questions in the game educate children not to fall for the zionist lie that zionism, jewishness and Judaism are synonymous but to understand that zionism, a racist ideology, has nothing to do with Judaism - one of the questions in the history/politics section asks "What is the difference between a Jew and a zionist?"." I would like to know what the Innovative Minds answer to that question is. However more pertinently, the whole premise of the game is incorrect, there are no Israeli tanks in South Lebanon - there are however armed units from Hezbollah and the Syrian army, but then they are part of the Ummah.
One final image, I had a browse through the rest of their site and this image to represent "Women in Islam" I found instructive
The second page that I found of interest was the one for a Islamic Fun games CD. It is described as "A collection of Islamic Games on CD-ROM. The best way to educate your child - they learn whilst playing!". Apparently "SUBJECTS your child will learn include: Dinniyyat, Akhalaq, Al-Qur'an, Arabic, Nabuwat, Fiqh, Aqaed, Sirah, Hadith, Ummah, Tahara, Salat, Hajj, Leadership, Islamic History, Islamic Politics, Islamic Science" All very laudable I am sure however that doesn't really cover all that is on the CD. The CD blurb continues "Your child will learn about Islam by playing lots of exciting games, full of colourful animations and cute sounds effects. Six different games to choose from, with lots of levels - each time they play its different - lots of fun! The games revolve around an Islamic database of over
1000 questions - each with audio, and lots of images. Three separate age groups supported : 5-7 years, 8-10 years and 11 and over - each with its own database of questions. Makes a great gift. It will keep the whole family entertained for years to come !"
So what are the games? The first five are standard young children's computer games as you can find on hundreds of CDs - "TREE HOP - Help the cat retrieve its ball." and "Two Bunny Race - Two player game - which bunny will cross the finish line first?" and similar BUT The sixth game is a little more unusual...
"THE RESISTANCE (*)
You are a farmer in South Lebanon who has joined the Islamic Resistance to defend your land and family from the invading zionists"
Here's a screen shot
It would appear that the child has to answer a multiple choice question and if they get it right they can shoot at a tank flying the Israeli flag.
Innovative Minds have obviously received criticism of this game because they helpfully provide an explanation - "Some in the media have kicked up a fuss over this game. It seems that the media is silent when they, the zionists, use their tanks to slaughter our children but when our children play a shoot-em up game where they shoot zionist tanks in return for correct answers we are accused of training terrorists and instilling hatred towards Jews! On the contrary the questions in the game educate children not to fall for the zionist lie that zionism, jewishness and Judaism are synonymous but to understand that zionism, a racist ideology, has nothing to do with Judaism - one of the questions in the history/politics section asks "What is the difference between a Jew and a zionist?"." I would like to know what the Innovative Minds answer to that question is. However more pertinently, the whole premise of the game is incorrect, there are no Israeli tanks in South Lebanon - there are however armed units from Hezbollah and the Syrian army, but then they are part of the Ummah.
One final image, I had a browse through the rest of their site and this image to represent "Women in Islam" I found instructive
Tuesday, 15 January 2008
Killed for an orange
I came across a short sad story in the Daily Telegraph today. It appears that "A medical student was stabbed to death ina greengrocer's after a row over the attempted theft of a 20p orange. Khalil Nasseri,2 4, was helping out in his cousin's store in Brixton, South England, when he was attacked. It is believed he was killed in a row linked to a dispute with a group of men at the store over an orange two days earlier."
That's modern London, a man killed in a dispute over a stolen orange.
That's modern London, a man killed in a dispute over a stolen orange.
Inflation
Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling endlessly tell us that they are on top of inflation and that it is running to target at around 2%. We all know that the 2% figure that the CPI is currently running at around is an irrelevant figure. As I have blogged before the CPI excludes so much that it is worthless.
I see from the Daily Telegraph that wholesale food prices rose 7.4% over the last 12 months. MySupermarket analysts report that food prices at Tesco, Asda and Sainsbury rose by 12% last year. The Office of National Statistics report that beef, pork and lamb products increased by 3.7% in December alone.
So the next time the government tries to peg a group of workers' pay increase at a generous 2.5% over 3 years, remember what the real rate of inflation is.
I see from the Daily Telegraph that wholesale food prices rose 7.4% over the last 12 months. MySupermarket analysts report that food prices at Tesco, Asda and Sainsbury rose by 12% last year. The Office of National Statistics report that beef, pork and lamb products increased by 3.7% in December alone.
So the next time the government tries to peg a group of workers' pay increase at a generous 2.5% over 3 years, remember what the real rate of inflation is.
They had been given National Insurance numbers
Why had the illegal immigrants who were working in the security industry been able to get National Insurance numbers? Because this Labour government have no control over these matters. Things have become so bad that I even found myself agreeing with Keith Vaz on Channel 4 News about this matter.
The department responsible is of course Peter Hain's Department of Work and Pensions. Is he now in the top 5 incompetent Labour ministers?
The department responsible is of course Peter Hain's Department of Work and Pensions. Is he now in the top 5 incompetent Labour ministers?
Bias in BBC headlines and lead text
The BBC know that most people who visit their news website look at the headlines to see what's going on in the world and actually click on very few stories. With this in mind they slant the headlines and lead text accordingly.
Today on the "Middle East" page we have the main headline and lead text:
"Israeli Gaza City raid kills 18
Eighteen Palestinians, including 13 militants, die in an Israeli raid in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip."
The second story has a headline and lead text of:
"Four killed in Beirut explosion
Four Lebanese bystanders die in a bomb blast targeting an American embassy vehicle in Beirut, US officials say."
Interesting how in the first piece the deaths are quoted as facts, whilst in the second the deaths are just what US officials say.
If you click into the first stort the lead text now reads "At least 18 Palestinians, including at least 13 militants, have died in an Israeli raid in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, reports say."
It is only a screen of viewing down, because the BBC know that most people who click on a story just read the first few lines or first screens worth before moving on, that we discover that "The raid began when an Israeli undercover army unit targeted a house in the Zeitoun area used to launch rockets at Israel, but the Israelis were spotted by Palestinian gunmen who opened fire." The BBC will, if challenged, say that we put the justification in the article (and indeed they did) but far enough down that most people don't read it.
The BBC proud to denigrate Israel as often as possible. It all helps the partnerships with Arab media organisations.
Today on the "Middle East" page we have the main headline and lead text:
"Israeli Gaza City raid kills 18
Eighteen Palestinians, including 13 militants, die in an Israeli raid in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip."
The second story has a headline and lead text of:
"Four killed in Beirut explosion
Four Lebanese bystanders die in a bomb blast targeting an American embassy vehicle in Beirut, US officials say."
Interesting how in the first piece the deaths are quoted as facts, whilst in the second the deaths are just what US officials say.
If you click into the first stort the lead text now reads "At least 18 Palestinians, including at least 13 militants, have died in an Israeli raid in the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, reports say."
It is only a screen of viewing down, because the BBC know that most people who click on a story just read the first few lines or first screens worth before moving on, that we discover that "The raid began when an Israeli undercover army unit targeted a house in the Zeitoun area used to launch rockets at Israel, but the Israelis were spotted by Palestinian gunmen who opened fire." The BBC will, if challenged, say that we put the justification in the article (and indeed they did) but far enough down that most people don't read it.
The BBC proud to denigrate Israel as often as possible. It all helps the partnerships with Arab media organisations.
Can you see where this is heading?
The Independent are reporting that "Ministers are planning to implant "machine-readable" microchips under the skin of thousands of offenders as part of an expansion of the electronic tagging scheme that would create more space in British jails... instead of being contained in bracelets worn around the ankle, the tiny chips would be surgically inserted under the skin of offenders in the community, to help enforce home curfews. The radio frequency identification (RFID) tags, as long as two grains of rice, are able to carry scanable personal information about individuals, including their identities, address and offending record."
Would anyone like to bet that somewhere within Whitehall or a Labour think tank they are not already considering the benefits of extending this scheme to the entire population. If they did try to extend this scheme to the whole population you just know the "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear" brigade will up for supporting this scheme. Mind you, I doubt that there is any type of surveillance system that these people would not support. Maybe they could start with a programme to chip all children, after all what responsible caring parent wouldn't want to prevent their child being abducted by the bogeyman - "will nobody think of the children" will as usual be the call.
Would anyone like to bet that somewhere within Whitehall or a Labour think tank they are not already considering the benefits of extending this scheme to the entire population. If they did try to extend this scheme to the whole population you just know the "if you've nothing to hide, you've nothing to fear" brigade will up for supporting this scheme. Mind you, I doubt that there is any type of surveillance system that these people would not support. Maybe they could start with a programme to chip all children, after all what responsible caring parent wouldn't want to prevent their child being abducted by the bogeyman - "will nobody think of the children" will as usual be the call.
Don't give this government ideas...
This Labour government has made it harder and harder to choose between candidates for a job; you cannot ask about age or marital status so why not also prevent employers from asking why a candidates CV is full of lies. Go and read The Daily Mash for the full story. I particularly enjoyed this sentence "The government has now expanded the list of 'no-go' interview questions, allowing candidates to portray themselves as hard-working and intelligent, rather than lazy fantasists who spend all day playing Facebook Scrabble."
The Diana inquest
I will not comment, why bother BUT I do like this excerpt from The Daily Mash's coverage.
"Burrell also revealed that Diana was reluctant to have sex with anyone who was not a surgeon or at least had some form of advanced medical training.
"Oh, she loved the surgeons," he said. "Whenever she saw a good looking man on television I'd immediately have to find out if they had any surgical experience.
"If not she usually would make do, as long as they had seen a recent episode of ER."
Burrell said he was the 'hub at the centre of Diana's spokes', while her brother, Earl Spencer, was the water bottle and Elton John was a set of Shimano cantilever brakes, priced at £8.99 from Halfords."
The Daily Mash right on the money there...
"Burrell also revealed that Diana was reluctant to have sex with anyone who was not a surgeon or at least had some form of advanced medical training.
"Oh, she loved the surgeons," he said. "Whenever she saw a good looking man on television I'd immediately have to find out if they had any surgical experience.
"If not she usually would make do, as long as they had seen a recent episode of ER."
Burrell said he was the 'hub at the centre of Diana's spokes', while her brother, Earl Spencer, was the water bottle and Elton John was a set of Shimano cantilever brakes, priced at £8.99 from Halfords."
The Daily Mash right on the money there...
Oops
From Reuters via MSNBC comes this heartwarming story of married life:
"WARSAW (Reuters) - A Polish man got the shock of his life when he visited a brothel and spotted his wife among the establishment's employees.
Polish tabloid Super Express said the woman had been making some extra money on the side while telling her husband she worked at a store in a nearby town.
"I was dumfounded. I thought I was dreaming," the husband told the newspaper on Wednesday.
The couple, married for 14 years, are now divorcing, the newspaper reported."
"WARSAW (Reuters) - A Polish man got the shock of his life when he visited a brothel and spotted his wife among the establishment's employees.
Polish tabloid Super Express said the woman had been making some extra money on the side while telling her husband she worked at a store in a nearby town.
"I was dumfounded. I thought I was dreaming," the husband told the newspaper on Wednesday.
The couple, married for 14 years, are now divorcing, the newspaper reported."
The Progressive Policies Forum
"If it quacks like a duck, looks like a duck, and smells like a duck, it is a duck".
Unfortunately apart from Peter Hain's press statement describing the Progressive Policies Forum as a 'think tank', in all other respects the Progressive Policies Forum seems to moo, have trotters and smell faintly of hay. In other words I am not sure what the Progressive Policies Forum is, but it doesn't seem to be a think tank.
Unfortunately apart from Peter Hain's press statement describing the Progressive Policies Forum as a 'think tank', in all other respects the Progressive Policies Forum seems to moo, have trotters and smell faintly of hay. In other words I am not sure what the Progressive Policies Forum is, but it doesn't seem to be a think tank.
Peter Hain - a query or two.
Peter Hain has excused his non-disclosure of donations by saying that he was too busy because he has two jobs. In which case why was he spending so much money, more than twice that which any other candidate spent, trying to land another job? Which job would he had to have cut back on had he won the election? Or is the role of Deputy Leader entirely without responsibility? If the latter is the case, then why did he want the position?
The Peter Hain affair just keeps on rolling
Now you can read in the Times that "The election watchdog is considering referring Peter Hain to the police over his failure to declare more than £100,000 in donations, Mr Hain’s prospects of clinging on to political office darkened last night as he was accused by an authoritative source of showing “contempt” for the laws on political funding. The Electoral Commission began an investigation into the Work and Pensions Secretary after he admitted last week that he had failed to declare properly £103,000 in gifts to his failed deputy leadership bid.
The watchdog now faces a stark choice between letting him off without punishment or recommending a criminal prosecution if it finds that he broke rules on when donations should be reported.
The scale of the donations, as well as Mr Hain’s claim that he was too busy to ensure that the rules were followed properly, have increased significantly the likelihood that it will seek to make an example of him."
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear...
Even the BBC have had to report this, but they have also made prominent that "He says he has been "open and clear" and will co-operate with any inquiry.".
Of course BBC/Nu Lab couldn't leave it at that and so have decided to throw some more mud at the Conservatives with this bit of nonsensical conflating "Meanwhile, the BBC has learned that Tory leader David Cameron failed to tell the Electoral Commission about three free flights he took during his leadership campaign in 2005.
The donated flights are registered in David Cameron's name in the Commons register of members' interest, but do not appear in the Electoral Commission's record.
The commission says a donation of more than £1,000 must be declared and it is estimated these flights would have cost between £3,000 to £8,000.
However Mr Cameron's office said the costs could be split between the number of people on board, keeping the amount for Mr Cameron below £1,000 on at least one of the flights."
The BBC never happier than when attacking the Conservatives and supporting Labour.
The watchdog now faces a stark choice between letting him off without punishment or recommending a criminal prosecution if it finds that he broke rules on when donations should be reported.
The scale of the donations, as well as Mr Hain’s claim that he was too busy to ensure that the rules were followed properly, have increased significantly the likelihood that it will seek to make an example of him."
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear...
Even the BBC have had to report this, but they have also made prominent that "He says he has been "open and clear" and will co-operate with any inquiry.".
Of course BBC/Nu Lab couldn't leave it at that and so have decided to throw some more mud at the Conservatives with this bit of nonsensical conflating "Meanwhile, the BBC has learned that Tory leader David Cameron failed to tell the Electoral Commission about three free flights he took during his leadership campaign in 2005.
The donated flights are registered in David Cameron's name in the Commons register of members' interest, but do not appear in the Electoral Commission's record.
The commission says a donation of more than £1,000 must be declared and it is estimated these flights would have cost between £3,000 to £8,000.
However Mr Cameron's office said the costs could be split between the number of people on board, keeping the amount for Mr Cameron below £1,000 on at least one of the flights."
The BBC never happier than when attacking the Conservatives and supporting Labour.
Monday, 14 January 2008
Yet more on Peter Hain
I am no fan of The Independent newspaper, in fact I refuse to buy it as I consider it mostly full of pernicious propaganda; however Guido Fawkes has drawn my attention to an interesting article by Andreas Whittam Smith on the Peter Hain affair. He makes some good points, so take a read.
The 'Islamic Jesus'
Take a read of this AFP report entitled "'Islamic Jesus' hits Iranian movie screens".
Apparently "A director who shares the ideas of Iran's hardline president has produced what he says is the first film giving an Islamic view of Jesus Christ, in a bid to show the "common ground" between Muslims and Christians.
Nader Talebzadeh sees his movie, "Jesus, the Spirit of God," as an Islamic answer to Western productions like Mel Gibson's 2004 blockbuster "The Passion of the Christ," which he praised as admirable but quite simply "wrong".
"Gibson's film is a very good film. I mean that it is a well-crafted movie but the story is wrong -- it was not like that," he said, referring to two key differences: Islam sees Jesus as a prophet, not the son of God, and does not believe he was crucified."
So the "common ground" would appear to be that Jesus existed and was a prophet but not that he was the son of God, or was resurrected. I think the idea of "common ground" might be a little fanciful.
Apparently "A director who shares the ideas of Iran's hardline president has produced what he says is the first film giving an Islamic view of Jesus Christ, in a bid to show the "common ground" between Muslims and Christians.
Nader Talebzadeh sees his movie, "Jesus, the Spirit of God," as an Islamic answer to Western productions like Mel Gibson's 2004 blockbuster "The Passion of the Christ," which he praised as admirable but quite simply "wrong".
"Gibson's film is a very good film. I mean that it is a well-crafted movie but the story is wrong -- it was not like that," he said, referring to two key differences: Islam sees Jesus as a prophet, not the son of God, and does not believe he was crucified."
So the "common ground" would appear to be that Jesus existed and was a prophet but not that he was the son of God, or was resurrected. I think the idea of "common ground" might be a little fanciful.
EU Treaty "debate"
I read at EU Referendum that an Early Day Motion (EDM) has been put down stating "This House notes that the second reading of the European Union (Amendment) Bill is set down for one week from this EDM, on 21st January 2008, and therefore asks the Government to immediately publish the short and long titles of the Bill, and to set out an analysis of full text of the Treaty, including its protocols, declarations and similar material; and to immediately publish a note of any implications of the Treaty which are additional to the existing provisions of Community or Union Treaties currently in force, or which place further obligations on the Crown, Courts and Parliament of the United Kingdom; and to set out the nature and scope of any amendments that are allowable to the Bill during its passage through parliament and to set out if the currently stated objective of the European Union of "ever closer union" will be mentioned in the either the Bill or the Treaty in any way whatsoever; and whether there will be any change, as a result of the Treaty, to the provisions of European Communities Act 1972 Clause 2 : 1 relating to the powers of Crown or Parliament."
What are the chances of the Labour government taking a blind bit of notice?
Do read the rest of the article and wonder what happened to British democracy.
What are the chances of the Labour government taking a blind bit of notice?
Do read the rest of the article and wonder what happened to British democracy.
Are they for real? Update
It appears that common sense won the day. "We invited you to help us decide whether our new body maps should include genitalia or whether their nether regions should be masked. Nearly 7,000 people voted, with the vast majority in favour of the anatomically correct pair."
If you look at the two sets of images, the differences are not exactly huge... If I were the male model I'd be upset by the publicity.
If you look at the two sets of images, the differences are not exactly huge... If I were the male model I'd be upset by the publicity.
Even more on Lee Jasper/Ken Livingstone
Quite a long article this time, so go read it all here.
Here's a taster...
"A cross-party group of MPs from the capital has called for a full inquiry into the Mayor and his London Development Agency over allegations that cash was misappropriated by friends of Mr Livingstone's adviser Lee Jasper.
The MPs - one Labour, one Liberal Democrat, and one Conservative - accused the LDA of "misrepresenting" its own internal review into a number of suspect projects paid millions of pounds in public money....
The LDA has published its own internal review into suspect projects - but it mentions only six of the 13 identified by the Standard.
All 13, run by friends and business associates of Mr Jasper, have received large sums of LDA money but have little, if anything, to show for it. Several have failed to account for the money.
The total amount paid by City Hall to the 13 suspect organisations is at least £3.3 million....
In press releases on Friday, the LDA and the Mayor claimed the review had concluded that allegations of impropriety were "unfounded." Mayoral press officers claimed Mr Jasper had been cleared. In fact, when the review was later published, it became clear that three of the projects were to be reported to the police.
A fourth is already under police investigation and a fifth may be referred to police subject to the outcome of an audit."
Wouldn't you have thought that this was a major story? Strange how the BBC are playing it down quite so carefully. Do you think they are worried that any publicity might impact on the London Mayoral Elections and affect their candidate, Ken Livingstone.
Here's a taster...
"A cross-party group of MPs from the capital has called for a full inquiry into the Mayor and his London Development Agency over allegations that cash was misappropriated by friends of Mr Livingstone's adviser Lee Jasper.
The MPs - one Labour, one Liberal Democrat, and one Conservative - accused the LDA of "misrepresenting" its own internal review into a number of suspect projects paid millions of pounds in public money....
The LDA has published its own internal review into suspect projects - but it mentions only six of the 13 identified by the Standard.
All 13, run by friends and business associates of Mr Jasper, have received large sums of LDA money but have little, if anything, to show for it. Several have failed to account for the money.
The total amount paid by City Hall to the 13 suspect organisations is at least £3.3 million....
In press releases on Friday, the LDA and the Mayor claimed the review had concluded that allegations of impropriety were "unfounded." Mayoral press officers claimed Mr Jasper had been cleared. In fact, when the review was later published, it became clear that three of the projects were to be reported to the police.
A fourth is already under police investigation and a fifth may be referred to police subject to the outcome of an audit."
Wouldn't you have thought that this was a major story? Strange how the BBC are playing it down quite so carefully. Do you think they are worried that any publicity might impact on the London Mayoral Elections and affect their candidate, Ken Livingstone.
More on the Lee Jasper/Ken Livingstone story
Andrew Gilligan has an update on his story over on "This is London". It is quite short so I have reproduced it here for your convenience... (my emphasis):
"A "schedule of allegations" published separately from the main LDA review includes new information about Diversity International and Brixton Base. It leaves Ken Livingstone and the LDA deeply embarrassed by their denials about the projects.
On Diversity International, run by a close friend of Lee Jasper, Joel O'Loughlin, the Mayor accused the Standard of "distortion and manipulation" for reporting that the LDA offered Mr O'Loughlin £250,000 and a consultancy in spite of a record of irregularities. But the schedule states "an in-principle agreement was reached for the LDA to pay Diversity International £250,000 and a £35,000 per annum consultancy".
Brixton Base, whose patron and "champion" is Lee Jasper and whose director is his close friend Errol Walters, received £535,000 from the LDA over two years to start a "creative training hub." But in that time it ran only three short courses.
From the LDA grant, £287,000 was paid for "premises" even though Brixton Base occupied an LDA-owned building. The premises money was paid to Brixton Base which was supposed to pay it straight back to the LDA as rent. However, more than a year ago, says the schedule, Brixton Base stopped paying. It owes the LDA £191,243 in rent - something Mr Livingstone failed to mention when he said the project was in good shape.
He has claimed our reporting on Brixton Base is a "tissue of lies" and says there is a "full audit trail" on the project with "chapter and verse on how the money's been spent". The schedule, however, makes clear that Brixton Base's LDA grants were suspended in June last year - six months before Mr Livingstone denied there was a problem. More funding was refused due to "concerns in respect of the rent arrears and the submission of [an] audited statement of grant expenditure".
The schedule makes clear that no audit of Brixton Base has been completed. When it is, says the main report, the project may become the fifth LDA grant involving Mr Jasper's friends or associates to be referred to police."
Interesting claims? I wonder if they are true...
"A "schedule of allegations" published separately from the main LDA review includes new information about Diversity International and Brixton Base. It leaves Ken Livingstone and the LDA deeply embarrassed by their denials about the projects.
On Diversity International, run by a close friend of Lee Jasper, Joel O'Loughlin, the Mayor accused the Standard of "distortion and manipulation" for reporting that the LDA offered Mr O'Loughlin £250,000 and a consultancy in spite of a record of irregularities. But the schedule states "an in-principle agreement was reached for the LDA to pay Diversity International £250,000 and a £35,000 per annum consultancy".
Brixton Base, whose patron and "champion" is Lee Jasper and whose director is his close friend Errol Walters, received £535,000 from the LDA over two years to start a "creative training hub." But in that time it ran only three short courses.
From the LDA grant, £287,000 was paid for "premises" even though Brixton Base occupied an LDA-owned building. The premises money was paid to Brixton Base which was supposed to pay it straight back to the LDA as rent. However, more than a year ago, says the schedule, Brixton Base stopped paying. It owes the LDA £191,243 in rent - something Mr Livingstone failed to mention when he said the project was in good shape.
He has claimed our reporting on Brixton Base is a "tissue of lies" and says there is a "full audit trail" on the project with "chapter and verse on how the money's been spent". The schedule, however, makes clear that Brixton Base's LDA grants were suspended in June last year - six months before Mr Livingstone denied there was a problem. More funding was refused due to "concerns in respect of the rent arrears and the submission of [an] audited statement of grant expenditure".
The schedule makes clear that no audit of Brixton Base has been completed. When it is, says the main report, the project may become the fifth LDA grant involving Mr Jasper's friends or associates to be referred to police."
Interesting claims? I wonder if they are true...
Are they for real?
Apparently "The NHS is asking patients whether a new interactive body map should be correct in every detail - or whether the genitals should be left off."
What!
The article continues "The state-of-the-art body maps have been developed for the NHS Choices website. The maps, to be launched next month, allow users to strip away the dummies' skin to explore information about diseases and treatments. The public will be able to vote on the issue via the website."
Sounds quite useful and maybe even interesting for non-medical people.
"Professor Sir Muir Gray, chief knowledge officer for the NHS, is opposed to any censoring of the images.
He said: "I'm all for the genitalia, anything else would just be an overly prudish Victorian approach.
"It's completely bonkers: the edited versions resemble space aliens. People have to accept this is the 21st century."
Sir Muir conceded that some parents might not want their children to see anatomically correct naked images.
But he said the evidence suggested the straightforward approach was more effective with young people. "
Thank you Mr Muir, you are correct but the "Will nobody think of the children" brigade will no doubt stick their oars in. Mind you if I was a 10 year old boy with a sore on the end of my penis, I might be rather confused by the "The censored version of the body map images" shown here ...
Could this story get any more ridiculous? Of course it can "Sir Muir is proposing an optional 'drag and drop' fig leaf for the NHS virtual Adam and Eve, so visitors have the option keeping the body-maps covered up."
As Private Eye would say "You couldn't make it up!"
I notice that the BBC chicken out of showing both the censored and uncensored images, after all children might be using the website.
What!
The article continues "The state-of-the-art body maps have been developed for the NHS Choices website. The maps, to be launched next month, allow users to strip away the dummies' skin to explore information about diseases and treatments. The public will be able to vote on the issue via the website."
Sounds quite useful and maybe even interesting for non-medical people.
"Professor Sir Muir Gray, chief knowledge officer for the NHS, is opposed to any censoring of the images.
He said: "I'm all for the genitalia, anything else would just be an overly prudish Victorian approach.
"It's completely bonkers: the edited versions resemble space aliens. People have to accept this is the 21st century."
Sir Muir conceded that some parents might not want their children to see anatomically correct naked images.
But he said the evidence suggested the straightforward approach was more effective with young people. "
Thank you Mr Muir, you are correct but the "Will nobody think of the children" brigade will no doubt stick their oars in. Mind you if I was a 10 year old boy with a sore on the end of my penis, I might be rather confused by the "The censored version of the body map images" shown here ...
Could this story get any more ridiculous? Of course it can "Sir Muir is proposing an optional 'drag and drop' fig leaf for the NHS virtual Adam and Eve, so visitors have the option keeping the body-maps covered up."
As Private Eye would say "You couldn't make it up!"
I notice that the BBC chicken out of showing both the censored and uncensored images, after all children might be using the website.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
