StatCounter

Sunday, 7 June 2009

From Stalin to Mr Bean to Konstantin Chernenko

Matthew Parris spots the similarities between Gordon Brown and another sad case, Konstantin Chernenko.

Do read the whole of Matthew Parris's piece about Gordon Brown's Friday press conference, but here's a few extracts:
"And now, it appears, another living waxwork is to join the grisly ranks in modern history. Another sweating, stumbling shell of a political career, drained of power or genius, impelled and sustained only by anger and pride. Another brittle, prickly carapace gone all squishy inside, surrounded by a plotting politburo, theoretically able to launch nuclear weapons, attend international summits, pat the heads of schoolchildren and kiss the hands of popes and monarchs, but disconnected from the control of anything the Government actually does.

...

This is pathetic. This is toe-curlingly awful. This is so abjectly, senselessly broken-backed that it almost isn't interesting to watch. I've seen poisoned rats die slowly, too, and after a while the spectacle loses the appeal even of the macabre.

It is also an act of supreme selfishness on Mr Brown's part. Wrapping himself like some wingless albatross around his administration's throat, starving his own colleagues of oxygen in his mindless determination that other careers should not live in order that his should not die, he has brought his Government and his party to the ground, broken their legs - and yet still will not release his grip. They must crawl on, shackled together, past the humiliation of Thursday's elections and onward for another year: plans jettisoned, policies stalled, Bills postponed, shelving everything bold, all in the name of mere survival. Mr Brown's survival. Never mind Labour's, never mind the future of progressive politics, never mind the ideas and spirits of capable men and women in and around his Cabinet. "

Saturday, 6 June 2009

Barack Obama's Cairo speech analysed and criticised




And here it is given a good fisking.

And here Mark Steyn gives the speech the once-over.



Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

Let's all move to Doncaster, or not...

Doncaster have elected a former religious education teacher as Mayor, his platform is interesting to say the least. Cutting the mayor's salary from £62,000 to £30,000, cutting the number of Doncaster councillors from 63 to 21, bringing in harsher punishment for "young thugs"; introducing zero-tolerance for anti-social behaviour; stopping translation services for immigrants; and scrapping "politically correct non-jobs and encouraging the former employees to seek meaningful employment". Also Mr Davies also pledged to lower the council tax by "cutting extortionate levels of bureaucracy" and to hold a referendum on the mayoral governance of Doncaster. I believe I also heard that he would scrap Council support for Gay, Lesbian and Transgender month.

All sounds quite sensible so when I When I heard people describing the party as closet racists and Little Englanders I immediately smelt a rat so did a little digging. Here is their manifesto and constitution. What do you think?

The fortieth weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

The News of The World reports the simply shocking news that:
"Peter Mandelson tells closest former aides that Gordon Brown cannot win the next General Election "

"No shit, Sherlock"

Gibbering idiot


Will someone in the Labour party grow a pair and get rid of this idiot, he's an embarrassment to the Country.

I wonder if the BBC will show this verbal slip over and over and over again as they would have done if it was a Conservative politician or George Bush; somehow I think not.

The BBC aren't even reporting this gaffe. Their page devoted to the D-Day commemorations is entitled "Charles and PM pay D-Day respects" and has not a mention of Gordon Brown's gaffe, anyone might think the BBC were trying to protect Gordon Brown.


Thanks to Guido Fawkes for the spot.

A plea - Release Jay Sherman on DVD


I want more...

Lily Allen (yes again)


More Lily Allen nipple slippage for your information.

A reshaped Cabinet?

Gordon Brown's reshaped Cabinet comprises:
14 people who stay in the same position (or an expanded one)
4 who change positions
5 new members of the cabinet of whom one is a previous member of the Cabinet

And this is the reshaped Cabinet that will change the fortunes of Gordon Brown's government, one that even the BBC have to describe as a "limited cabinet reshuffle".

Fraser Nelson asks the unwanted question



Another snippet from Gordon Brown's press conference yesterday this time from Sky's coverage as it appears near the end of the BBC's here.

Watch Fraser Nelson ask Gordon Brown the key question about the truth behind Gordon Brown's "Tory cuts" claim and see the colour drain from Gordon Brown's face as he realises who he's picked to ask a question and that Fraser Nelson is daring to impugn his honesty. Gordon Brown's reply is the usual dissembling that he is now famous for.

Fraser Nelson covers his question, Gordon Brown's response and the true facts here.

First Secretary of State

Watch Gordon Brown's press conference and note how Gordon Brown totally ignores Andrew Porter's question about Peter Mandelson's new role and just waffles and twists and fails to answer the question fully although by bringing Hariet Harman into the answer I think does subliminally acknowledge the problem. The segment runs from 26:44 to 28:11.

Manic grin slowly got under control

Just watch Gordon Brown's frantically control his manic grin when Robin Oakley asks if every Cabinet Minister

"is in the job they were first offered in this reshuffle? Did any impose conditions for serving in your Cabinet and what difference do you think this bunch of people can make compared with the previous bunch?"

The question starts at 31:51, Gordon Browns fed-up with being here face is on show at 31:54, the manic grin is on show from 32:04 and controlled by 32:05. I would love a screen capture of that grin. Once again Gordon Brown fails to answer the first question about whether people are in the jobs they were first offered.

Glenys Kinnock (update)

A few questions:
1. as a former MEP when will Glenys Kinnock be in receipt of her EU pension?
2. as a present or future recipient of a large EU pension, where will Gordon Brown's Europe Minister's first loyalty lie?
3. Are Gordon Brown, Glenys Kinnock and another former employee of the EU, Peter Mandelson, aware that EU pensions are paid on the understanding that the EU can remove this pension, if in the view of the Commission or the Luxembourg Court, they "fail to uphold the interests of the European Communities".?
4. How does the above conditionality over the payment of the EU pension fit in with a Minister of the Crown's surely first loyalty to the UK?

Didn't Labour do well!

I see that:
"THINGS just got worse for Gordon Brown in St Ives where the Labour candidates in the county council elections were beaten by a Loony.

Despite failing to win the seat, Lord Toby Jug, Cambridgeshire’s first Official Monster Raving Loony Party Candidate, was celebrating his best ever result in decades of political campaigning by winning 566 votes – well ahead of Labour’s two candidates who finished last."

The democratic deficit

Whilst Gordon Brown witters on about the Democratic Renewal Council the facts are somewhat different. Gordon Brown's "re-shaped" Cabinet contains two members of the House of Lords (Mandelson and Adonis) - I am not counting the Leader of the House of Lords in this list. Then amongst Other cabinet attendees are the Minister of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Lord Malloch-Brown and Minister of State (Science and Innovation) at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills: Lord Drayson. Then amongst those who will attend Cabinet when their Ministerial responsibilities are on the agenda is the Attorney General, The Rt Hon Baroness Scotland of Asthal QC. So the great defender of democracy has five members of the House of Lords in or around the Cabinet with two more on the way - Alan Sugar and Glenys Kinnock. Well why should members of the Gordon Brown cabinet be elected
members of the House of Commons, that's not what Gordon Brown's definition of democracy is.

Now to Peter Mandelson, it would seem that his reward for backing Gordon Brown to the hilt over the last few days is two-fold:
First his department is expanded such that his new department becomes the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills which will be a merger between his old old Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform and the Department for Innovation, Universities and Skills - just think of the upcoming expense on renaming, rebranding and stationery.
Second Lord Mandelson is elevated to the position of "First Secretary of State", whatever that means.

The line to take

Guido Fawkes has the contents of an email sent by labour.org.uk to spokespersons on Friday morning. The briefing is headed "ELECTION BRIEFING: FRIDAY MORNING" and gives Labour droids all the relevant agreed lines to take in interviews with the media. How helpful... Take a look at the document and see how many lines therein that you can spot being used...

Glen Beck and Acorn

My apologies, someone posted a comment to my blog and I rejected it by mistake. Please do resubmit your comment as I would love to publish it along with my comments.

Glenys Kinnock!

I've been away from wifi, adsl and 3G all afternoon and evening which has been most frustrating as I had a radio but couldn't blog about the ever more incredible news. More in the morning about Caroline Flint, Geoff Hoon etc. .

For now all I can say is: Glenys Kinnock! Is Gordon Brown taking the piss?

Friday, 5 June 2009

A good day to smuggle out controversial news

I note that the BBC are reporting in the midst of their reshuffle update news that:
"Speaking about MPs' expenses, the Crown Prosecution Service says that "unless evidence is available which shows individuals deliberately misled the [House of Commons] fees office, it is highly unlikely that there could be a successful prosecution"."
Whilst I am not surprised at this turn of events, after all no MP, especially a Labour one, was likely to be prosecuted by the CPS; the release of this news today does smack a little of Jo Moore tactics.

Nick Robinson in fine spinning form

The BBC's reshuffle news contains this odd sentence:
"BBC Political Editor Nick Robinson said he understood that Mr Darling had turned down a move to the Home Office and Mr Purnell had been "sounded out" about the job of education secretary, which would have paved the way for Mr Brown's ally Ed Balls to become chancellor, but that was not now going to happen."
What odd wording, was it Alistair Darling's turning down of the Home Office or James Purnell's turning down of Education that blocked Ed Balls' move to The Treasury? The wording makes it sound as though it was the latter when surely it was Alistair Darling's refusal to move that stopped Ed Balls' promotion. Finding a replacement for Ed Balls would have been relatively easy.

John Hutton

I am confused, the BBC are reporting that John Hutton has resigned from the cabinet thus:
"Defence Secretary John Hutton has become the latest minister to quit the government - although he says he will remain loyal to Gordon Brown....

Mr Hutton said he thought fellow Blairite minister James Purnell had made "the wrong decision" and said Mr Brown was "the right man to lead our party and our country".

Mr Hutton told the BBC he was to stand down as an MP at the next election to pursue other projects."
Does nobody at the BBC think it worth reminding the public that it was John Hutton who memorably commented that Gordon Brown would be a "f***ing disaster as Prime Minister". Surely that sort of prescience deserves to be remembered.

The reshuffle

If Alistair Darling won't leave Number 11, and he knows how bad the figures really are, then Gordon Brown won't be able to fulfil his and Ed Balls desire for Ed Balls to be Chancellor. David Miliband has gone on record as supporting Gordon Brown so that's him sage at the Foreign Office. Alan Johnson hasn't publicly opposed Gordon Brown so I presume he will be promoted to Home Secretary with Gordon Brown hoping the Home Office claims another victim and Alan Johnson hoping he can survive their until Gordon Brown falls - that could be a close run thing. Jack Straw and Peter Mandelson have been loyal and supportive of Gordon Brown but there is no room for promotion for either if David Miliband stays at the Foreign Office.

What of the lower CAbinet positions? Is Gordon Brown strong enough to advance his own supporters or does he need to promote Blairites to forestall any attempted coup? Very tricky stuff for Gordon Brown, is he up to the job or will he just make matters worse?

If I could turn back time

Well I can't, but Political Betting seems to have done as its front page has this morning reverted to April 25th; now that is odd... Any ideas?

Here come the excuses

Last night I pondered what the major parties excuses for poor electoral performance would be. I predicted that the Labour lines would be
"Our reduced vote is due to the expenses scandal; why is nobody picking up on the Lord Ashcroft tax questions? The lack of votes means that we must change the electoral system to ensure perpetual Labour government."
So far I have a lot of 'the expenses system has wounded all parties so this is a crisis for all politics not just the Labour Party." I have also heard attacks on David Cameron's mortgage claims but interestingly these are not gaining much traction. No mention of Lord Ashcroft so far, but they will come.

Scepticism that you wouldn't get from the BBC


Adam Boulton on Sky News last night showing a lot more independence of mind and bravery than any BBC interviewer that I have heard interview a Labour politician.

I have to admit that I normally watch the BBC news until I get too irritated by the bias and switch off or walk out. Last night I watched Sky News and was very impressed by Adam Boulton, channel 501 may be a regular watch from now on.



Thanks to Iain Dale for spotting this piece of video.

Protecting Jack Straw

Yesterday afternoon the BBC were reporting that Jack Straw had taken "full responsibility" for failings by the Probation Service in the killings of Gabriel Ferez and Laurent Bonomo by Dano Sonnex and Nigel Farmer. "Full responsibility" I thought, if he's taking "full responsibility" then why is he not resigning? After all two people were brutally, sadistically murdered by men, one of whom was only at large because of failings of the probation and courts service that Jack Straw was taking "full responsibility" for.

This morning whilst The Times and others report Jack Straw's taking "full responsibility", the BBC have no mention of this phrase in their reporting. How odd...

This part of The Times report runs
"Mr Straw, who has met the families twice, said that Sonnex “could and should” have been in custody at the time of the killings. He said he took “full responsibility” for failings by the Probation Service but had never considered resigning and instead had set about putting things right. "
It's an odd sort of "full responsibility" that means you stay in position, drawing your huge salary, enjoying your large expenses and building a massive publicly funded final salary pension. It's an sort of state broadcaster that seems to expunge certain Minister's odd comments from its news coverage.

How much does John Humphrys earn? We do all pay his salary after all.

I missed John Humphrys interview of Edward Leigh on yesterday morning's Today programme. But The Times reports on the interview and it sounds like it was a doozy:
"“We, the public who pay your salaries, John, should have an idea of what you earn. I mean, you do a very good job but for instance: do you earn more than the Prime Minister, John?” he asked on Today.

“Well, I’d love to be able to tell you that,” Humprys replied.

“Why don’t you?” asked Mr Leigh. “It’s a free country.”

“Well. . . well,” the caustic presenter stuttered. “As far as most presenters are concerned, and I include myself in that, we're not going to break ranks because it's for the BBC to make this decision. We're freelances.""

I believe the expression, "they don't like it up 'em" is apposite here...

Thursday, 4 June 2009

Heavy voting rumours

The word at my local polling station is that voting was heavier than they expected and that is in a fairly solid Conservative ward.

James Purnell quits the Cabinet

A leadership election cannot be far off now. You can read some more of James Purnell's history with Gordon Brown here.

Whilst Sky lead on this story, the BBC seem not to have yet had instructions on how to spin this and so the news is leading on the Barry Sheerman story, whilst the BBC news website leads on the Obamamessiah.

James Purnell has also asked Gordon Brown to quit.

What will the excuses be?

Every election I like to guess what the excuses will be. So what will the Labour party's representatives on the media shows excuses be? Our reduced vote is due to the expenses scandal; why is nobody picking up on the Lord Ashcroft tax questions? The lack of votes means that we must change the electoral system to ensure perpetual Labour government.

I expect the Conservatives to do less well than the polls have predicted, so what will the excuses be? Our reduced vote is due to the public's dissatisfaction with politics as a whole; it is time for change, we want a general election.

What about the LibDems etc. etc.

Let the freakshow begin!

No not the Labour leadership election, although I can see why you might have jumped to that assumption. I am referring to that annual bore-fest that is Big Brother. This year we have:

Freddie - Posh but vaguely hip man - I think he thinks he's Jay Kay
Lisa - Brummie predatory lesbian - For some reason I keep thinking of The Slits
Sophie - Breast enhanced wannabe - A cliche
Kris - Himbo wannabe - I think he may model himself on Russell Brand
Noirin - Not as sexy as she thinks she is - Already hated by the crowd - Classy the first word she uttered was "fuck"
Cairon - Young, black, hip - Another cliche - The lowest slung jeans I have seen this year

... Sorry dropped out for a bit there

Sophia - very small 4'11" - former lupus sufferer - the most irritating laugh - but as a passionate Eurosceptic so she gets my vote!
Rodrigo - Bisexual Brazilian Christian - my tip to win




And that's it because I only watch the intro show...

Is Alan Johnson the new Michael Portillo

I see Michael Crick is claiming that:
"The Alan Johnson campaign is effectively now in place. People round him are all ready to go once, and if, Gordon Brown steps down.

Mr Johnson has quietly been meeting figures expected to play key roles in his operation, though he is keen to stress to every team member that he is certainly not plotting to get rid of Mr Brown, and does not want to be known as a plotter."
Any telephone systems being installed anywhere in London?

An interesting insight into the minds of the BBC

Earlier this week Eric Hammond the former trade union leader died and was described by the BBC as as "controversial" and then a list of his offences against the BBC Socialist narrative was given. I wrote at the time that I didn't remember certain Marxist trade union leaders' deaths being reported with anything other than utter reverence?

I was reminded of this today as I read Douglas Eden's piece in The Spectator on the deceased Trade Union leader Jack Jones. The piece reminds us that Jack Jones was outed as a Soviet agent by Oleg Gordievsky. In fact Oleg Gordievsky claimed to have been Jack Jones' last KGB case officer.

Let's see how the BBC handled Jack Jones' death: His obituary last updated 22 April 2009 has no mention of him being a Soviet spy, just the usual
"He was politically-minded from an early age and a Labour Party ward secretary at 15. At 23, he was the youngest member of Liverpool City Council.

He fought with the International Brigade in the Spanish Civil War and was wounded.

Jones began his full-time union career in 1939 as a district organiser for the Transport and General Workers' Union and during almost a quarter century in the Midlands did much to improve the wages and conditions of car workers and their bargaining methods.

...

He was influential in ending two crippling national dock strikes in the early 1970s, though some militant extremists in his union reacted violently against the second settlement.

...

He made great efforts to ensure that the TUC stood shoulder to shoulder with Harold Wilson in his successful bid to recapture power in the first 1974 election and his return in the second.

Jones, above all others, was responsible for shaping and producing the so-called "social contract" between the new Labour government and the TUC and in fighting it through Congress, despite threatened opposition from the other giant union, Hugh Scanlon's AUEW.

...

He was a passionate advocate of industrial democracy, believing that workers had the right to a greater say in all matters affecting their pay and livelihood.

...

He turned down the offer of a peerage, but accepted the title of Companion of Honour, which he said he regarded as a tribute to the whole trade movement."


The BBC also have a "Tributes to union stalwart Jones" page full of such insights as:
""Mr Brown described Mr Jones as "truly a leader of working people" who had fought for justice throughout his life.

"Jack Jones was always there to help people in need," the prime minister said, recalling that Mr Jones fought in the Spanish Civil War in the 1930s and campaigned for pensioners' rights until his death.

"All of us who were personal friends of Jack will miss his advice, his courage and his inspiration. My thoughts are with his family."

Veteran Labour politician Tony Benn described Mr Jones as "one of the finest men" he ever met.

"I feel a real sense of personal bereavement," he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

"Everything he said, he believed. He was bitterly attacked [but] if he was powerful it was only because he represented people." "
What no mention of Jack Jones' suspected role as a Soviet spy?

Does Gordon Brown realise that his "personal friend" has been called a traitor to the Country? On this matter, don't forget that it was Gordon Brown who once wrote of:
“the gross inequalities which disfigure Scottish life”, and argued that the times cried out for “a new commitment to socialist ideals”. He urged “a coherent strategy” of reforms designed “to cancel the logic of capitalism” and to lead “us out of one social order into another”. This would involve “a phased extension of public control under workers’ self-management and the prioritising of social needs by the communities themselves”. He called for “a planned economy” and for “workers’ power”, identifying himself with “Scotland’s socialist pioneers, Hardie, Smillie, Maxton, Maclean, Gallacher, Wheatley and others”—a pantheon that included both revolutionary and reformist socialists. What was needed was “a positive commitment to creating a socialist society”."



So why do the BBC think that Eric Hammond was "controversial" for supporting "no-strike agreements" but that Jack Jones was a "union stalwart" despite being suspected of being a Soviet spy?

A kindred spirit for "To miss with love"

To miss with love has been off-line for a while so if you want to read material from a like mind try this.

Postal votes

I have warned many times about the incidence of poll fixing in upcoming elections and I see that An Oxfordshire Geek thinks the same:
"With voting under way in the combined EU and Local Government Elections, early indications are of a record turnout from voters across the UK.

Initial reports from counting rooms indicate that use of postal votes is at its highest since records began, and observing officers are noting that early indications show a very different story to that expected by the opinion polls.

Labour electoral observer Bert Redflag said, "the polls said that New Labour was down-and-out in these elections, heading for fourth place. But with counting of postal votes under way, we are seeing massive support from the electorate, and we're confident of taking control of numerous Tory-held Councils as well as massively increasing our numbers of MEPs".

Initial figures based on postal voting show that so far, 76,380,000 postal votes have been received - all voting Labour. Compared against the 44 million UK citizens registered to vote, this equates to a turnout figure of 173.5909%, the highest since records began.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown welcomed the high turnout, saying, "this shows that I am so popular, people are voting many times and even the dead are levering themselves out of their graves to vote New Labour. There is no chance that this is electoral fraud in any way. I'm just really popular, honest".

Messages of congratulation for the PM have been pouring in from democratically-elected leaders around the globe including Kim Jong-Il, Mahmoud Ahmedinajad, the Burmese leadership and Robert Mugabe, who had provided Brown with campaign advice in the run-up to the election."
Satire? Really?

Alan Johnson says he could do no better than Gordon Brown

The BBC report that:
"Asked about Gordon Brown's position Mr Johnson told the BBC: "He is doing the job and there is absolutely no one who could do that job better.""
So Alan Johnson thinks he would be no better a Prime Minister than Gordon Brown is, interesting...

David Carradine RIP



Grasshopper will be remembered forever.


And here in Kill Bill 2, talking not fighting

The BBC just can't help themselves




So what do you see happening in that piece of video? I see Boris Johnson wading through knee high water when the riverbed gives way and he sinks up to his waist before being helped to his feet by the lady accompanying him and a couple of others.

The BBC describe the event thus
"The Mayor of London Boris Johnson has fallen into a river while launching a drive to urge Londoners to volunteer.

While helping to clear up the River Pool in Lewisham, south-east London, he tripped and fell in, getting wet up to around his chest, then stumbled away.

Mr Johnson was helped to his feet by volunteers who he was helping remove litter and plants from the river. He thanked them as they helped him up. "
And the headline they choose - "Boris Johnson stumbles into river"

Now are the BBC lazy, incompetent, biased or all three? Their copy says that he "tripped and fell in" then "stumbled away" but the headline says "stumbles into river", why the disparity? Could there be some political bias in the choice of words? What do you think?

"How pointless regulations are ruining British pub life"

Reason.com have many examples, here's a few:
"If you want to buy a drink at a pub in Oldham, northern England, you must stand in an orderly "post-office-style" line. It must be a straight line, starting one meter from the bar, with barriers, signage, and a "supervisor." There must be no drinking while standing in line, and no drinking within one meter of the bar. Customers cannot order more than two drinks at one time. And if a pub wants to advertise discounted drinks, it must give the police and local council at least seven days' notice."

"One Staffordshire pub hurriedly axed its 25-year-old dominos team, when police discovered that it lacked a license for sporting activity. Once the landlady had acquired a license, though, she discovered that nobody would be allowed to watch the dominos, since this "would constitute a live sporting event" and require a further license. The pub was also missing other key licenses, she said: "I was told that I couldn't have music playing, I can have the TV on but with no sound. The regulars can't sing any songs."

Dancing also requires official paperwork. One unlicensed York pub was threatened with a £20,000 fine, after an "impromptu jig by pensioner Mavis Brogden." There is a license for live music—in addition to which London pubs must fill in a risk-assessment form, giving the names, addresses, aliases, and telephone numbers of all performers, as well as the style of music being performed and the target audience. There is even a "spoken word licence." One Cambridge pub had to cancel its monthly poetry readings because it lacked specific permission. When the landlord protested that they only wanted "a small number of people to talk quietly," the council's "environmental health officer" was firm: "Licences are there to be adhered to and we have them for all sorts of reasons—there need to be checks in place.""

"One policy document suggested a 70-decibel limit on pub music, on the basis that "music speeds up drinking patterns by drowning out conversation and arousing the brain." The document also proposed warning signs about the dangers of alcohol and bans on cocktails with "suggestive names" such as "Sex on the Beach.""


This is what happens when a Country elects totalitarians and relinquishes responsibility in return for care.

GCSE Maths

Try the BBC's GCSE Maths questions and see what you think. I've done it, 7/7 of course but here are my thoughts on an exam aimed at 16 year-olds:

Q1: Seems about the level of my Prep School entrance exam at age 8 or 9.

Q2: Seems about the level of my Prep School entrance exam at age 8 or 9.

Q3: Seems about the level of my Prep School entrance exam at age 8 or 9.

Q4: Now this was hard as it's along time since I've thought much about geometry.

Q5: That seems a bit easy for an early 1980's Maths O'Level.

Q6: That is just ridiculously easy, almost beyond belief.

Q7: Quite a nice question as it makes the student think, possibly the only question (along with Q4) that I would consider an adequate test of a student's grasp of Maths at age 16.

Jilted John's finest moment


Jilted John - "Jilted John"

"Here we go 2-3-4"

"Gordon is a moron"


Quite seriously "True Love Stories" Jilted John's albumn is a classic, I really must dig it out.

A "code of conduct"

Muffled Vociferation concisely points out that:
"The Prime Minister said he planned to introduce a binding "code of conduct" for MPS and warned other public institutions they would also face tougher scrutiny as part of a bid to clean up the system.

Can someone please tell the moron, that there is already a comprehensive "Code of Conduct". It's the Code of Conduct that these MP's have broken or doesn't this one count anymore?"

One of the most unsurprising pieces of news for years

Surprised?

"The BBC Trust has dismissed a complaint about an episode of Bonekickers, a BBC One drama series about a team of archaeologists, that involved a fundamentalist Christian beheading a Muslim (as so often happens in real life, right?). The Trust has backed an earlier BBC ruling that there is "no reason why viewers would have been given the impression that the fanatics in the programme were evangelical Christians or that the programme gave an offensive portrayal of such people".

We are deep into the realms of BBC bias and ignorance here. Only a BBC drama series would, to quote the complainant, "transfer the practice of terrorist beheadings from Islamist radicals to a fantasised group of fundamentalist Christians". And only the staff of the Beeb, or perhaps the Guardian, would be so ignorant of Christianity as not to realise that nearly all fundamentalists are evangelicals of one sort or another (though most evangelicals are not fundamentalists)."

Barack Obama and the muslim world

I wonder how many Jewish staffers Barack Obama has accompanying him on his visit to Saudi Arabia. I also wonder how they feel about entering a Country which according to the UK Foreign Office's travel advice for people visiting Saudi Arabia:
"On occasion, Saudi visas have been refused when passports have reflected travel to Israel or indicated an Israeli birthplace."
Is Saudi Arabia the real "apartheid state"?

The VAT rate cut

I have just read the British Chambers of Commerce's latest monthly business survey, which took in 430 firms of varying sizes across the country. They report that
"only 11.4 per cent reported that the VAT cut had benefited their businesses; 76.6 per cent said that it had had no impact; and 12.1 per cent put it down as a burden."
Another storming economic policy success for Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling, the most incompetent PM and Chancellor since Callaghan and Healey. In fact that is a little unfair on James Callaghan and Denis Healey as neither of them claimed to be economic geniuses who had "abolished boom and bust".

Barack Obama - no criticism allowed

The BBC Today programme this morning included this piece:
"0814
US President Barack Obama is preparing to give a much-anticipated speech in Cairo, on the second leg of his tour of the Middle East and Europe. Madeleine Albright, secretary of state under President Clinton, and Amr Moussa, secretary-general of the Arab League, discuss if it can provide a fresh start to an old relationship strained for many years."
Two people praising Barack Obama, well why should the BBC even acknowledge the presence of "doubters" let alone "opponents". And the conclusion of bot interviewees and the interviewer? Need you ask? The conclusion is that Israel is problem number 1.

One small step

"It's one small step for man, one giant leap for mankind"

We have known for years that Neil Armstrong missed the "a" before "man" in his first momentous words spoken on the moon. Yes this makes the words less clear in intent than they might be, but they must constitute some of the most memorable words ever spoken.

The BBC treatment of Israel as opposed to Iran

The BBC report that:
"Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has said his country is not planning unilateral military action to disable Iran's nuclear programme."
This doesn't seem any different to the way that the BBC report Iran's denials of plans to wipe Israel off of the map. However this later extract reads oddly:
"The right-winger, who grew up in the Soviet Union, has a reputation for outspoken rhetoric: it is not clear how his words square with other policy statements on Iran by Israeli government officials. "
It is odd how the BBC instinctively mistrust any statement made by a "right-winger" Israeli but trust the equivalent Iranian spokesman.

Autoplaying video

I had a regular visitor complain last night about auto-playing video clips.

This is interesting, in a geeky sort of way, because I hadn't noticed that any annoying video was autoplaying on my site. But that could be because the only browser I normally use is Firefox with the Flashblock add-in. This add-in allows you to choose whether to play flash video or audio files so nothing autoplays.

Oddly I have IE set-up in a similar way but when I load my site the two videos that are not YouTube sourced do auto-play, which is rather irritating.

If you find yourself suffering with this problem then I suggest you swap to Firefox and Flashblock.


However in this case to keep a regular visitor happy, I have archived all posts over three days old so my site should now be pleasurably silent.

Another opinion poll

The Telegraph report the latest YouGov poll which indicates that Labour could be pushed into fourth place. The poll reports that amongst voters certain to vote the Conservatives rate 26%, UKIP 18%, Labour just 16%, LibDems 15%, Greens 10% and BNP 5%.

I predict UKIP doing rather well in the EU elections, I think a lot of normally Conservative voters will lend their votes to UKIP to try and push David Cameron towards a more Euro-sceptic position.

Wednesday, 3 June 2009

Tiananmen Square - lest we forget

Nascent free speech and freedom in China was extinguished 10 years ago.


"the troops have been firing indiscriminately... their own army was firing wildly at them... savagery of the situation... this army was launching into an unarmed civilian population as if charging into battle"

Remind me when the United Nations or the world's media called for the Chinese government to be charged with crimes against humanity.



Tank man - "A Chinese man stands alone to block a line of tanks heading east on Beijing's Cangan Blvd. in Tiananmen Square on June 5, 1989."






Do also listen here to Kate Adie, the BBC reporter in the first clip above, on how many people died 20 years ago and how the Chinese state still persecutes the protesters today.


So why do we give the Chinese state such a free ride on human rights when this is such recent history and indeed still going on? How many people have been killed or unjustly imprisoned by the Chinese state over the past 20, 30, 40, 50 years?



Meanwhile I note that:
"China has begun imposing an information blackout ahead of the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre, blocking access to popular networking websites such as Twitter and BBC television reports inside China.

The measures came as the authorities tried to close all avenues of dissent ahead of Thursday's anniversary, placing prominent critics under house arrest and banning newspaper from making any mention of the pro-democracy protests.

Viewers of the BBC's world channels in Beijing found their screens turning black whenever reports on the anniversary were being aired and four foreign television crews attempting to film in Tiananmen Square reported being stopped by police.

Print publications were also affected, with many subscribers to The Economist magazine receiving their weekly copies with the Tiananmen-related pages ripped out. Readers of the Financial Times and South China Morning post also reported missing pages.

Over the last 20 years China's ruling Communist Party has refused to apologise for the deaths of hundreds, and possibly thousands, of protesters who were shot or crushed by tanks on the night of June 3-4, 1989.

Ignoring calls at home and abroad to pardon jailed demonstrators and "reassess" the events at Tiananmen, party officials have unwaveringly maintained the line that the protests were "counter-revolutionary riots" that were suppressed for the good of the country."

Saying that nobody saw the the economic disaster coming is just not true

Frank Dobson was on BBC Radio London's Eddie Nestor hosted Drivetime programme this evenimg. During the interview Frank Dobson pushed the Labour party line (enthusiastically spread by the BBC) that absolutely nobody had seen the worldwide economic crash coming. Not a politician, not an economist, not a journalist; really?

Back in February I blogged about Peter Schiff who in 2006, 2007 & 2008 predicted what has now happened.

Below is the relevant video and do watch out for the derision that was poured upon Peter Schiff for making such predictions. I really would like the fool laughing from around 3:40 to account for his actions then and to comment on who was eventually right and who was wrong. The share-tipping of "Financials" from 6:30 is really quite scary as is the scorn poured upon Peter Schiff for declaring that the Emperor was naked.

Why are Conservatives so mean?



Andrew Klavan on culture with a message to American graduates and others.

"Liberty is harder than slavery, it's full of risk and unequal outcomes. It require you to stand on your own and suffer the consequences of your choices. But in the end it's the only way of life worth living. The only way you might one day graduate from academic fantasies of a state run utopia and grow to be men and women instead of sheep."


Do read up on Alexis de Tocqueville



Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

An accelerated timetable to replace Gordon Brown

An accelerated timetable to replace Gordon Brown is detailed in The Guardian as
"Rebels organising to unseat Gordon Brown have put together a detailed timetable for his removal that would see him turfed out of Downing Street in the first week of July.

The rebels have been told by two former and one current member of Labour's national executive committee that the timescale for a challenge to the prime minister could be shrunk to as little as 23 days.

If that happened, a new prime minister would be in Downing Street by as early as 2 July and able to complete three weeks as leader before parliament breaks for the summer recess.

Rebels believe the truncated timetable will be key to persuading cabinet colleagues of the wisdom of joining a plot to unseat Brown. One of the reasons they believe some have resisted is the fear of a long, drawn-out process that would run into the autumn, with Labour ceding more ground to the Tories."
I do hope this isn't true, I was so looking forward to months and months of the Labour party tearing itself apart in public and private.

The Guardian are tracking the reshuffle rumours

Worth keeping an eye on this article today as it gets updated. These are some fairly current thoughts:
"2.40pm: The word from Downing Street is that the reshuffle is going to be wideranging. The latest rumours doing the rounds are:

• Home secretary is likely to go to the Northern Ireland secretary, Shaun Woodward. The ex-Tory is a good communicator (he was John Major's chief spin doctor before the Tories' unexpected victory in 1992), and Brown trusts him.

• The post of communities secretary is expected to be offered to John Denham, the universities secretary. He is the only member of the current cabinet who resigned over the Iraq war, and he has huge credibility in the Labour party.

• Chancellor: despite intense speculation that the job was definitely going to Ed Balls, it's not so clear today.

Darling's aides won't comment on the rumours that he is refusing to move to the Home Office, which probably means they are true.

David Miliband does not want to leave the Foreign Office, and the Home Office is about the only other place Darling could have been moved without suffering abject humiliation. Now it is looking as though he could stay.

• Foreign secretary: Forget the speculation about the job going to Lord Mandelson. Westminster sources reckon Miliband will stay put.

• Northern Ireland secretary: Peter Hain is very keen on a cabinet comeback. If Woodward goes, Hain could get his old job back.

Other candidates for promotion:

• Margaret Beckett could return to a full cabinet job. Brown has lost two women from the cabinet and is in need of a safe pair of hands.

• Lady Vadera, a formidable Brown ally, is tipped for promotion.

• Liam Byrne, the Cabinet Office minister, would like a department of his own.

• Jim Knight, the schools minister, is highly rated."

MPs mileage claims

A piece of the ongoing expenses scandal that escaped my attention was mileage claims so it was with great interest that I read this in The Mail. Apparently:
"Politicians are milking their transport allowances by claiming largely unverified mileage which would take some of them around the world.

They received £1.9million in petrol money alone in 2007-08, as well as £2.2million on train tickets and nearly £900,000 on air fares. "


I am a Londoner so here are just two examples of London Labour MP's claims:

"Labour MP Rudi Vis received £5,292 for driving about 15,000 miles even though his Finchley and Golders Green constituency is just nine miles north of Westminster."

"Stephen Pound (Labour) Distance from Westminster: 11 miles. Amount claimed: £4,251. Total miles said to have been covered: 11,004. Said he drove between his constituency and Westminster two or three times a day to 'get out and about'."


Let's take an average of 10 miles per one way trip for these two North/West London MPs which makes 20 miles a round journey for these Honourable Members. Now the House of Commons itself says that the House of Commons sat for 165 days in the 2007/08 session but let's be generous and assume that not only did these two MPs attend every sitting day they also went to the Palace of Westminster for other important Commons business on another 35 days (that's almost three days a month), thus making a nice round total of 200 travelling to Westminster. Now 200 days at 20 miles a round trip makes 4,000 miles. So why the claims for 15,000 and 11,004 miles?

Could Stephen Pound please substantiate his claim of travelling two or three times a day to the Palace of Westminster? If he did do this regularly surely he would have diary entries to show he was frequently between his two places of work.


Completely coincidentally; I note that Stephen Pound voted 'Aye' in the Freedom of Information (Amendment) Bill, Clause 1, Exemption Of House Of Commons And House Of Lords back in 2007. In other words he was one of the 98 MPs who voted to keep their expense details secret.

Allegations of dodgy vote counting and the elections aren't until tomorrow

Craig Muray claims that:
"I have irrefutable evidence that this is happening again, and New Labour are engaged yet again in criminal electoral activity in Jack Straw's constituency."
Read his article and keep an eye open for other such claims coming out about these elections. The Labour party does not want to lose power and what has happened in the past and indeed what will happen over the next few days is as nothing to the chicanery that will accompany the next general election.

Gordon Brown organiser?

All I will say is D-Day 65th anniversary. Read more here and here.

The man is incompetent, he's an embarrassment to the Country; he must go and go soon.

BBC Today programme bias

Did I dream it or was the recently deceased Trade Union leader, Eric Hammond, described as "controversial" followed by a list of his offences against the BBC Socialist narrative. I don't remember certain Marxist trade union leaders' deaths being reported with anything other than utter reverence?

A small but very revealing piece of BBC bias at PMQs today

Listening to the BBC 5Live coverage of today's PMQs it was noticeable that the reporter, Rob Orchard (?), decided it was important to inform us that Sir Peter Tapsell used to be a stockbroker. Why give us this fact, why is this relevant? Does this reporter ever introduce a Labour MP with information that they have never had a job outside of politics? To my ears he seems only to repeat their name and party, so why the special treatment for Sir Peter Tapsell?

PMQs 03.06.09

David Cameron's first question - No relevant answer from Gordon Brown
David Cameron's second question - No relevant answer from Gordon Brown
David Cameron's third question - No relevant answer from Gordon Brown
David Cameron's fourth question - No relevant answer from Gordon Brown
David Cameron's fifth question - No relevant answer from Gordon Brown
David Cameron's sixth question - No relevant answer from Gordon Brown

Stabbed by a chipmunk

Hazel Blears more of a man than the rest of the Cabinet put together.

The wake

The BBC Today programme this morning sounds like a cross between a wake and a piece of Labour Party navel gazing. Even James Naughtie in his interview with Harriet Harman sounds like he is losing patience with his party. He even pushed Harriet Harman more than most Today interviewers have in the past, although he still deferred to let her spout the usual mix of platitudes and prepared soundbites.

Is it nearly all over?

The Guardian leader today reads:
"...The tragedy for Mr Brown and his party is that his chance to change it has gone. Although he still purports to be a radical, he has adopted the caution of an establishment man. He cannot lead a revolution against his own way of doing government, and yet a revolution is necessary. Grandstanding on his claims to good intentions, the prime minister demands the right to carry on, even as the cabinet implodes around him. The home secretary, the chancellor, and perhaps even the foreign secretary may go, and Labour faces its worst defeat in its history on Thursday, but the prime minister does not recognise his direct responsibility for the mayhem.

The truth is that there is no vision from him, no plan, no argument for the future and no support. The public see it. His party sees it. The cabinet must see it too, although they are not yet bold enough to say so. The prime minister demands loyalty, but that has become too much to ask of a party, and a country, that was never given the chance to vote for him. Had there been a contest for the leadership in 2007 - and had Mr Brown called a general election - he would probably have won. He decided not to do these things. And he has largely failed since.

...


The blunt reality is that, even if he set out a grand programme of reform now, his association with it would doom its prospects. Proportional representation would transform parliament, but if Mr Brown put a referendum on the ballot, it would be defeated because he backed it. A draft constitutional renewal bill was published more than 12 months ago - but what has come of it? This week Mr Brown announced a national democratic council that might (to see it in a generous light) form the basis of the sort of constitutional convention that led to Scotland's modern parliament. But it is too late. The chance for him has passed.

...


The needs of the Labour party and the country are obviously not the same. Labour members must ask themselves this weekend whether they think Mr Brown is best placed to put its values into action, and win popular support for them. The public, in tomorrow's elections, will consider whether Mr Brown is the right man to lead the country. And anyone advocating a change of leadership must make it clear whose interests will gain from it. This paper believes Britain has often been at its best when Labour has been at its strongest. People who disagree with that will welcome its implosion, knowing that it will make a Conservative landslide inevitable. That is why they are not clamouring for Mr Brown to go. Progressive thinkers do not have this luxury. Of course many people, who see the better angels in Mr Brown's nature, do not want his dreams to end like this. His premiership would be one of the briefest in history. He would never have fought an election. But fate can be unjust.

All must agree that the die is cast and a hard judgment made. Otherwise progressive politics will be dragged down at a general election in May 2010 that could lead to a much bigger defeat than Labour suffered in 1979. That might bring a chance for other parties to take it forward, as the Liberal Democrats are trying to do in this election. But they are not placed to enter government. Labour has a year left before an election; its current leader would waste it. It is time to cut him loose."


TTFN Gordon?

Tuesday, 2 June 2009

Party Election Broadcast by the Labour Party

What a shock, it's dark images, doom laden music and claims of what nasty things David Cameron would do. Just realised that the man hitting the punchbag was meant to be David Cameron or a Tory be-suited thug.

Eddie Izzard speaks his mind and says he will be voting Labour.

That was it! Have Labour really given up?

The questions Gordon Brown should have been asked

Richard Littlejohn lists the questions that he thinks interviewers should have asked Gordon Brown recently:


"Not for the first time, I'm left wondering why anyone bothers to interview Gordon Brown.

He is genetically incapable of giving an honest answer to a straight question and cloaks everything in a bogus morality.

Brown sticks to his script and drones on regardless of what he has been asked. He lies, dissembles, completely ignores the question, refuses to accept any responsibility for anything, or tries to claim credit for something which is actually nothing to do with him.

Half the time he doesn't even get asked the right questions.

Both Andy Marr and Evan Davis had the opportunity to ask him about his own expenses claims, but flunked it.

It would have been a waste of time, obviously, but the interviews could have gone something like this. . .

'Prime Minister, for the past 12 years you have lived virtually free-of-charge in a grace-and-favour flat in Downing Street. Why were you claiming second-home allowance on a property five minutes' walk from the Palace of Westminster?'

'What people want me to do is get on with the job . . .'

'Actually, what people want is a General Election, but we'll come back to that. You spent thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money on that property, even splitting the cost of a new kitchen over two accounting periods to claim the maximum available...'

'Look, I'm disgusted and that's why we are setting up a National Committee on Constitutional Renewal. . .'

'Why have you now put that flat in your wife's name? Is it to avoid Capital Gains Tax when you come to sell it?'

'Appalled, angry, Presbyterian conscience, moral compass, Gentlemen's Club...'

'Why have you flipped your second home to your house in Scotland and renovated that at taxpayers' expense, too?'

'My father was a Church of Scotland minister. . .'

'Do you regret selling Britain's gold reserves at car-boot sale prices, now that it's risen to over $950 an ounce?'

'I was brought up in a family where integrity and telling the truth. . .'

'Then why don't you just answer the bloody question?'

'This is a global financial crisis, which began in America. I am getting on with the job...'

'Prime Minister, go away.' "


All joking aside, the questions about Gordon Brown's housing arrangements do seem to be off the agenda of all interviewers. I would like to know two things.

First why our Prime Minister who has lived for the past 12 years in grace-and-favour accommodation in Downing Street claimed second-home allowance on a property five minutes' walk from the Palace of Westminster?

I'd also like to know how he justifies the transfer of his flat to his wife, you can read more about that here.


It seems to me that interviewers, especially BBC ones) are too respectful of Gordon Brown, maybe as well they are scared of what he might do in revenge for being asked a really probing question.

Reshuffle rumours

I hear that Jacqui Smith is to stand down as Home Secretary at the upcoming Cabinet reshuffle. The BBC report that:
"Jacqui Smith is to stand down as home secretary in the cabinet reshuffle, sources close to her have told the BBC.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown is set to shake up his cabinet after Thursday's European and English local elections.

...

It is understood Ms Smith, the first woman home secretary, intends to defend her Redditch seat at the next election.

Mr Brown confirmed to the BBC he is planning a reshuffle but refused to be drawn on individual ministers' roles."

That's a major Cabinet position freed up to shuffle Alistair Darling into, if Gordon Brown really tries to promote his old friend and colleague Ed Balls to the position of Chancellor of the Exchequer. Unless of course David Blunkett really is coming back after two forced resignations to takeover the Home Office; well Gordon Brown did bring back Peter Mandelson. In which case where to put Alistair Darling? Tea boy perhaps as any other cabinet position would be a demotion, unless he moves to the Foreign Office. But then what to do with David Miliband... Tricky things reshuffles, here's someone else who was worried about a reshuffle...


I wonder if Gordon Brown will keep a place in the new Cabinet for John Hutton. After all John Hutton was the Labour MP who went on record as saying that Gordon Brown would be a "f***ing disaster as Prime Minister", surely that sort of prescience deserves to be rewarded...

I hope this new blog is satire

If No Leader But Gordon is satire then it is quite nicely done. If however it is for real then it is the work of a seriously confused individual...

"In these times of Global meltdown, caused exclusively by capitalist bankers on the other side of the World, one man above any other, gives us hope to carry on.

He is a shining light to one and all, a feather in the cap of Socialists everywhere. We never hear him complain, for that is not his way. Instead, he manfully gets on with the job of inspiring us all to live our lives in the knowledge that no matter how bad things may seem, we can always rely on Gordon Brown to carry us through these dark and dismal days, safe in the knowledge that he has our best interests at heart.

Ladies and gentlemen, Socialists and heathens, I give you our great leader, the one, the only, Gordon Brown. "

"Egypt mufti issues fatwa on use of WMD"

The BBC report under the headline "Egypt mufti issues fatwa on use of WMD" that:
"Muslims should not use weapons of mass destruction and possess them only as a deterrent, a top Islamic cleric says.

Grand Mufti of Egypt Ali Gomaa said using such weapons would violate Islamic teachings as Muslims as well as non-Muslims could be killed.

He issued the religious ruling, or fatwa, following reports that the use of such weapons was legitimate, the state news agency Mena said.

His ruling comes just days before the visit of US President Barack Obama. "
Interesting, so the problem with Weapons of Mass Destruction is that Muslims might be killed as well as non-Muslims.

Let's read on...
"The grand mufti, who is state-appointed, said it was also not allowed for Muslims to kill civilians even during a declared war. "
I think this may be a reference to the "innocent" point that I have made before, which is that many Islamic scholars believe that (as Anjum Chaudri said):
"When we say innocent people we mean Muslims, as far as non-Muslims are concerned they have not accepted Islam and as far as we are concerned that is a crime against God... As far as Muslims are concerned, you are innocent if you are a Muslim, then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are a non-Muslim then you are guilty of not believing in God... I must have hatred to anything that is not Islam"
Here's the video...
I wonder if the BBC would like to bear this in mind in future, before accepting the "innocent" or "civilians" point being made by Islamic scholars; definitions are importnat and their definitions might not be what you expect.

It's Flipper


One for the kids, well the adults who were kids in the 1970s.




Thanks to The Red Rag for the spot.

What's missing from this news report?

The BBC finally get around to reporting the House of Lords' Economic Affairs Committee report on the banking crisis. The BBC report that:
"There has been fresh criticism of the way banks were supervised by the Treasury, Bank of England and Financial Services Authority (FSA).

The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee said the so-called tripartite system had failed and must be reformed.

Its defects were highlighted by the failure of Northern Rock.

The report said the problem was that it was not clear who would be in charge in a crisis. It said the Bank of England should get a clear executive role.

The Lords' findings mirror the report of the House of Commons Treasury Committee, which said that the tripartite financial authorities had been insufficiently prepared to deal with Northern Rock's difficulties and needed to communicate better with each other.

"Without a clear executive role, the Bank can do no more than talk about financial stability. This exposes it to reputational risk without generating any clear benefit," the Lords' report said.

Financial stability

It recommended taking the responsibility for supervising the banking system as a whole away from the FSA and giving it to the Bank of England.

The committee's chairman, Lord Vallance of Tummell, told the BBC that the new powers that the Bank of England has been given by the Banking Act 2009 do not go far enough.

The report criticised the FSA for concentrating on its consumer protection role at the expense of its responsibility for maintaining financial stability.

The Lords also called for the authorities to be given more power over foreign banks operating in the UK.

"The degree of control that our supervisors and regulators here in the UK have over bank branches of foreign banks is very limited," Lord Vallance said.

"If there is a crisis then the money tends to rush back to the home of the bank itself leaving the problem with the UK taxpayer." "

In the whole of that report there is not a single mention of who set-up the tripartite regulatory arrangements, that's odd. Back in 1998 the BBC reported the Queens Speech thus:
"The Financial Services Authority, the financial markets' new super regulator, will be given greater power, to create a safer environment for investors and tackle market abuse... The United Kingdom's financial markets are currently regulated by a number of separate organisations, among them the Building Societies Commission, the Insurance Directorate, the Investment Management Regulatory Organisation, the Personal Investment Authority and the Securities and Futures Authority.

But the distinctions between these markets have become blurred, and mergers have led to one company operating in many areas.

Therefore the government has been searching for a new approach to financial regulation.

In May 1997 the Chancellor of the Exchequer, Gordon Brown, announced he wanted to change the whole system, merging all regulators under the roof of a single body, the Financial Services Authority (FSA).

The FSA was launched in October 1997 - in fact emerging from the Securities and Investments Board, and this summer it was given the responsibility for banking supervision.

The new legislation will give it the powers necessary to do the whole job, and create a single regulator.

The FSA is expected to be fully operational in Autumn 1999."

Ah that's who set-up the tripartite system, Gordon Brown. Now why do you think the BBC are so coy about reminding people of that fact in 2009?

The BBC reporting Israel

Jeremy Bowen, that paragon of fairness, was interviewed on the BBC Today programme this morning. The subject was Barack Obama's upcoming speeches on the Middle East to be given in Cairo and Saudi Arabia. You can hear the whole interview here. There was much worthy of comment in the interview but it was a remark near the end that caught my ear:
"Well his cabinet is dominated by people who absolutely believe in settlements, who absolutely believe that the land the settlements are built on is Jewish land, it should be Jewish land in perpetuity. Some of them believe that that land was given to them by God in a miracle..."
The "narrative" being spread here was that it is the Israelis who are extreme and motivated by religious zeal. How odd I thought that Jeremy Bowen never talks about the foundation of the Palestinian claims on Israel. To save me looking up the records, Pounce on the Biased-BBC blog produced an example. It's from Article 11 of the Hamas covenant and runs:
"The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf consecrated for future Moslem generations until Judgement Day. It, or any part of it, should not be squandered: it, or any part of it, should not be given up. Neither a single Arab country nor all Arab countries, neither any king or president, nor all the kings and presidents, neither any organization nor all of them, be they Palestinian or Arab, possess the right to do that. Palestine is an Islamic Waqf land consecrated for Moslem generations until Judgement Day. This being so, who could claim to have the right to represent Moslem generations till Judgement Day?

This is the law governing the land of Palestine in the Islamic Sharia (law) and the same goes for any land the Moslems have conquered by force, because during the times of (Islamic) conquests, the Moslems consecrated these lands to Moslem generations till the Day of Judgement."
Would that claim be worthy of comment oh great BBC experts? Or would that bring up the fact that many Muslims see all lands that were Muslim in the past as being Muslim lands "till the Day of Judgement". In case you are wondering, that would include most of Spain and Portugal, much of France, most of the Balkan countries, Hungary, parts of Italy and even parts of Switzerland. A map to illustrate this point can be found at Euro Heritage.




By the way note that the Israeli cabinet is described at 2:56 as highly conservative, yet another try to link Conservatives with views that the BBC detest.

Amother opinion poll (2nd thoughts)

Further to my earlier piece on the latest ComRes opinion poll that shows:
"Conservatives 30% (-10%), Labour 22% (+1%), LibDems 18% (nc)"


I wondered at the causes of the drop in the Conservative vote and reported on Political Betting's thoughts.

As I slept last night I had a thought. Maybe a large number of Conservatives are moving to UKIP for the EU and local elections and are using opinion polls to make their point.

Another opinion poll

ComRes for The Independent is the latest poll and it's an odd one:

Conservatives 30% (-10%), Labour 22% (+1%), LibDems 18% (nc)

On the face of it a disaster for the Conservatives albeit that all their voters appear to have gone other than to Labour or the LibDems.

Maybe Gordon Brown will convince himself that the polls, like the economy, are moving in the right direction and that calling a snap general election would be a good idea…

Of course Political Betting may have a rational explanation, or then again maybe the UK political system is in meltdown, maybe Gordon Brown has succeeded in bringing down the whole house of cards on top of him...

Monday, 1 June 2009

Latest opinion poll

This one is an IPSOS/MORO one:
Conservatives 40% (-1%), Labour 18% (-10%), LibDems 18% (-4%)

As Political Betting report:
"It must be remembered that MORI have a very strict filter on their headline figures and ONLY include those who are 100% certain to vote. This can have the effect of the pollster showing quite turbulent findings. Clearly, at the moment, Labour supporters have little certainty to vote - hence the 18% poll share.

I stand to be corrected but the 18% Westminster share must be the lowest total ever for Labour and for a governing party. Confidence seems to have just collapsed.

Just 18% (compared to 23% last month) are satisfied with the way the Government is running the country, and more than three-quarters (77%, vs. 70% last month) are dissatisfied. "

Even so, Labour look dead in the water, shame isn't it...

Vilifying Israel

The BBC's Middle East news page is a great example of how the BBC view Israel. One or more of the lead stories are always anti-Israel and today is a good example:

Number 2 story today concerns claims, reported as fact, that "Several Palestinian workers have been hurt in an attack by a group of Israeli settlers in the northern West Bank.". The regular stoning attacks by Palestinians on Israeli cars is never reported just like the regular rockets being fired into Israel were not reported upon.

Number 3 story today concerns " A UN team investigating possible war crimes in Gaza, led by Richard Goldstone, arrives in the territory from Egypt." The BBC love to report stories of Israeli war crimes, oddly the huge numbers of civilians killed by Muslim countries or groups seem to slip by the BBC without a mention of war crimes.

Top Other Story concerns "One of Israel's most famous entertainers has been accused of ordering attacks on TV executives who turned down his ideas." A minor story but as it shows an Israeli in a bad light, it's a major story.


With this obsession about Israel, which comprises less than 2% of the Middle East's population and less than 0.2% of the land, it is odd that the BBC have not covered the news that Ephraim Katzir, Israel's fourth president and one of the county's pioneers, has died. Ephraim Katzir emigrated at the age of 6 from Kiev to British-ruled Palestine. He was a member of the Haganah, the Jewish militia group that fought for Israel's independence. Katzir, a prominent biochemist and physicist, was one of the founding scientists of the Weizmann Institute of Science. Ephraim Katzir served as President from 1973 to 1978 during a pivotal time is Israel's history; including the outbreak of the Yom Kippur War in 1973 when Israel's neighbours and near neighbours invaded Israel in an attempt to destroy Israel, the invasion happening on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar. Ephraim Katzir was also President when the Egyptian President Anwar Sadat visited Jerusalem in 1977. Maybe the BBC don't like to inform people that Israel is outnumbered, surrounded and hated by most of its neighbours.

St Barths (SBH) crash landing

crash SBH from Mo Po on Vimeo.



I've landed at St Barths airport quite a few times as a passenger not a pilot and it can be scary but that landing was started too late. In my view the pilot should have aborted and gone around again.



Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

Peter Mandelson's back...

Here's something I just read in The Mail, unsurprisingly there is nothing on the BBC about it. Apparently:
Peter "Mandelson is under attack over a deal that could see some production at Vauxhall moved to a Russian firm controlled by one of his close friends.

Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch, is a key mover behind the rescue of the car manufacturer, which employs 5,500 in the UK.

Under a deal hammered out over the weekend, some car production could shift to Mr Deripaska's car maker GAZ in low-cost Russia.

That could threaten thousands of jobs at Vauxhall plants in Luton and at Ellesmere Port in Cheshire.

General Motors, which owns Vauxhall, will this morning file for bankruptcy protection, making it one of the biggest corporate failures in U.S. history.

GAZ has teamed up with Canadian car parts giant Magna and Russian bank Sberbank to buy Vauxhall and its German sister firm Opel, the European arm of General Motors.

Lord Mandelson is facing accusations of manufacturing a deal to favour Mr Deripaska.

Their relationship sparked controversy last year after it emerged that the Business Secretary - then a EU Commissioner - stayed on the billionaire's £80million yacht anchored off Corfu.

It was later claimed that Lord Mandelson signed off on valuable trade concessions to the Russian tycoon - a charge both men have denied.

He faced criticism recently for giving van maker LDV - controlled by Mr Deripaska - a £5million handout to smooth its rescue by Malaysian firm Westar. "


The Mail goes onto report the worries of Conservative and LibDem spokesmen:
"Last night, Liberal Democrat treasury spokesman Lord Oakeshott said: 'The Business Secretary clearly has a conflict of interest given his past contact with Oleg Deripaska. He must steer well clear of any deals on Vauxhall with Mr Deripaska lurking in the shadows.'

A Tory frontbencher said there was an 'air of suspicion' over the deal because of Lord Mandelson's links to Mr Deripaska. "

And on the BBC not a word. In fact until I read that piece in The Mail I had no idea that Mr Deripaska was involved in any way with the Vauxhall deal, I suppose it is my own fault for relying on the BBC for unbiased news.

I am labelling this post "BBC bias and BBC/NuLab but I suppose it is feasible that the BBC like much of the media is in fact not biased towards Peter Mandelson but scared of him. If ever a man had "something of the night" about him, it is Peter Mandelson and not Michael Howard.

Gordon Brown's interviews Sunday and today

Gordon Brown seems to be trying very hard to push the idea that he is the best man to sort out Britain's problems as he is working hard to do so.
"People know... that I'm determined... I work hard... and I get on with the job"


What utter rubbish, just because Gordon Brown is the main architect of the UK's economic and social destruction does not mean that he's the right person to set it right. In fact the opposite is more likely the case; by being in charge of the economy and much of home policy during the last 13 years, Gordon Brown is almost certainly the wrong person to be in charge because he didn't understand or deal with any of the causes of the problems that we're suffering from. In fact by his deliberate ignoring of professional advice he all but destroyed the UK's private pension schemes, the regulation of the banks and many other aspects.

The Sun have taken the next step

I have commented a few times before about The Sun newspaper's role in determining UK election winners and how the paper seemed to moving ever closer to saying vote Conservative. Today Trevor Kavanagh advises:
"YOU want a general election? You want Gordon Brown out?

...

The way you vote - or don't vote - on Thursday will decide the fate of this failed Prime Minister and the timing of the General Election.

It will determine whether we have a clean break and a fresh start - or another disastrous year of scandal and economic paralysis.

This is not just about greedy politicians. It is about the failure to govern - the unwillingness to address the crises of unemployment, immigration, crime, MRSA - and a TRILLION Pounds of unaffordable debt.

Another 12 months of hard Labour is an intolerable prospect for most voters.

This week offers "the little people" a rare chance to do something about it.

So it's up to you and me. We don't have to put up with this wasteful, incompetent, blundering Government any longer.

All we have to do is turn out and vote ABL - "Anything But Labour".

The beauty of it is that you don't even need to vote at all.

If you are a jaded but loyal Labour supporter, sitting on your backside is a form of protest, too. But as this newspaper argues today, the best way to get your message home - at least on Europe - is by using your ballot paper and voting Tory.

Gordon Brown betrayed us all by promising a referendum on the hated EU Constitution - then reneging on that promise.

...

The mood of voters is souring fast against the European Union - and not just in Britain.

...

For Gordon Brown, the war could soon be over. "

Is it true, could Gordon Brown be soon on his way to well deserved ignominy?

Crossing the Atlantic by plane

The tragic news that an Air France Airbus 330-200 looks as though it may have crashed whilst crossing the Atlantic reminds me of one of the reasons why I hate using twin engined planes on transatlantic flights. British Airways fly Boeing 777s on many transatlantic routes and I hate using these planes. A plane crossing the Atlantic should have a minimum of three engines and since the Lockheed L-1011 Tristar, the McDonnell Douglas DC-10 and the McDonnell Douglas MD-11 are all pretty much out of service in the Western World that means a four engined plane.


Recently I read somewhere that an aeroplane engineer when asked why he only flew in planes with four engines, replied that it was because there were no five engined planes.


Notes for the technically interested:
Interestingly the FAA used to enforce the "60-minute rule", whereby the flight path of any twin-engined jet plane was restricted to within 60 minutes' flying time from a suitable airport in case of engine failure. This would prevent twin engined jets from flying the Atlantic and indeed it was this rule that lead to the popularity of three engined jets. Unfortunately the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) has the "Extended-range Twin-engine Operational Performance Standard" which permits twin-engined commercial aircraft to fly routes that, at some points, are farther than a distance of 60 minutes' flying time from an emergency or diversion airport with one engine inoperative. There are in fact several ETOPS rules ranging from 120 minutes, through 138 minutes, 180 minutes up to 207 minutes and a 240 minute rule is in effect on a case to case basis.

Gibraltar note

Just a note to the Spanish, Gibraltar's citizens will vote in the EU elections on Thursday as part of the UK's south-west constituency.

Silencing dissent Obama style

Take a read of this and wonder at the way that the Obama team seem somewhat too happy with totalitarianism.

I'm no Superman


This will be a tough day at work so I'd like to say that:
"I can't do this all on my own,
No I'm no....
I'm no Superman.......
I'm no Superman"



Scrubs, one of the best current comedies on TV.

BBC Middle East reporting

On the main news page of the BBC website, the only story under the Middle East heading is "West Bank fighting kills six Palestinians". Oh no I thought, what has Israel done now? So I followed the link to discover that contrary to the impression (maybe deliberately) given
"Six people have been killed in a West Bank clash between Hamas fighters and Palestinian policemen, officials say.

Three policemen, two members of Hamas and another man were killed in a gun battle when police went to arrest the Hamas men in a dawn raid in Qalqilya.

Officials said the police were loyal to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, of rival group Fatah. "
So the story is one of inter-factional fighting not involving Israel at all, except for Hamas blaming everything on Israel:
"Hamas responded to the shooting with a statement from Gaza denouncing Mr Abbas's forces as "Zionist agents".

"Their crackdown against and pursuit of wanted men with the help of the enemy [Israel] lays down the foundation for resistance" by Hamas, Reuters reported the group as saying."

Right at the end of the article the BBC report a fact that seemed to be missing from most of their coverage of the Israel incursions into Gaza:
"Unlike the Fatah-dominated PLO, Hamas refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist and has waged a violent campaign against it for years. "

Gordon Brown's interview on the Today programme

Gordon Brown did a typical job of trying to move the goalposts and move to a new electoral system in a hopefully vain attempt to reduce the chances of Labour losing the next election. He completely ignored Evan Davis's question that was repeated over and over again as to whether the current batch of MPs should be the ones to decide upon a new electoral system. Gordon Brown was as slippery as ever over this and Evan Davis couldn't pin him down.

Then the Damian McBride affair was brought up and Gordon Brown tried to take the moral high ground. He refused to say he was "surprised" about the email, preferring to use the word "shocked".

Gordon Brown claimed to have kept his promise to end spin and to have always told the truth.

"Mistakes" was Gordon Brown's favourite word in this interview; the biggest mistake in Britain is having Gordon Brown as Prime Minister. He also did his usual trick of repeating the lines he wanted to get out over and over again. He completely ignored Evan Davis's question about the general public wanting a general election and a change of government.

When I listen to Gordon Brown being interviewed I think of the Eurasia, Eastasia enemy name swaps in 1984. Gordon Brown seems to believe that if he does a 180 degree about-turn from position A to position B but says he has always held position B then that should be accepted as true.

Loyalty oaths

An odd little story on the BBC:
"The Israeli cabinet has rejected a controversial proposal to require Israeli citizens to take an oath of loyalty to the Jewish state.

Under the plan, introduced by the ultra-nationalist Yisrael Beitenu party, citizenship would be granted only to those who swore allegiance.

The proposal angered Israel's Arab minority, which comprises 20% of Israel's population.

The plan can still be brought before parliament, but is unlikely to succeed.

The measure was thrown out by eight votes to three at a meeting of the Cabinet on Sunday.

Yisrael Beiteinu , which won the third most seats in February's election, sought to introduce the oath as well as a ban on annual commemorations denouncing the establishment of the state of Israel in 1948.

During the election campaign, the party focused on perceived disloyalty among Israeli Arabs, drawing widespread criticism as well as support.

Many Israeli Arabs mark the Nakba , or the Catastrophe, when about 700,000 Palestinians fled or were forced from their homes in the war which followed Israel's declaration of independence."

How bizarre that a Country might want its citizens to be loyal to the Country. How weird, well weird to BBC people who have little loyalty to the UK.

Oink oink

So many "snouts in the trough" stories this weekend but one that struck me was that:
"Mohammed Sarwar claimed interest on mortgage paid from Swiss bank account
A multi-millionaire Labour backbencher claimed almost £100,000 to cover mortgage interest that he paid from an account with a Swiss bank.

Mohammad Sarwar, the MP for Glasgow Central, who has an estimated fortune of £16 million, has claimed close to the maximum under his second homes allowance since 2004.

He claimed almost £2,000 every month for the interest on his mortgage on a £600,000 apartment in an exclusive block in Vauxhall, south London, just over the river from the Houses of Parliament.

Mr Sarwar, the chairman of the Scottish Affairs Select Committee, also claimed more than £3,000 for ground rent and service charges every year as well as around £1,500 for council tax and hundreds of pounds for home phone bills that included calls to Pakistan.

Mr Sarwar claimed a total of £174,882 in expenses last year but turned up for only 55 per cent of votes, spoke in only nine debates and asked 55 parliamentary questions.

Since 2004 he has claimed a total of £86,497 in second homes allowance (Additional Costs Allowance) and a total of £638,640 in other expenses, including office and staff costs.

In June 2006 the Parliamentary Fees Office wrote to Mr Sarwar to ask for repayment of £580.39 after an audit of his claims discovered that he had submitted some claims twice – and therefore had been reimbursed twice.

His mortgage is paid from a UK branch of the Swiss-based Habib Bank AG Zurich."