StatCounter

Wednesday, 21 October 2009

What are the police up to now?

Computing report that:
"The Metropolitan Police wants to buy £3m of handheld units for law enforcement agencies that would be capable of capturing facial, iris and fingerprint biometrics as well as reading chips held on credit cards and passports."
This country really has a problem with freedom.


Thanks to Dock Green for the spot.

Who will rid us of this meddlesome minister?

Harriet Harman's at it again. This time whilst giving evidence to the Treasury select committee she called for the City to end the 'nightmare' of men-only boards. Harriet Harman, speaking as minister for women and equality, said that while there were no plans at this stage for quotas, 'further steps' would be taken if the City refused to act. She claimed without any evidence that companies with male-only boards were less likely to spot new opportunities and deal with risks.

Does anyone think that Harriet Harman is just a teeny bit obsessed?

Ed Balls goes for the sympathy vote - "So what"

The Mail reports that:
"the Schools Secretary revealed a softer side yesterday when he admitted he has spent his life battling a stammer"
A "softer side", don't make me laugh. Ed Balls was quite rightly described as a "bully" recently and he has very dubious connections to the putative Labour smear campaign that was unveiled earlier this year.

A "softer side", don't make me puke!

Going Underground?

If you do use London's "tube" on a regular basis then Going Underground is a blog that may be of interest. With such articles as People with the same names as tube stations; yes there are people called Warren Street, Colin Dale and Lewis Ham, this is a must read site.

News Flash - Gatwick Airport has been sold

BAA has agreed to sell Gatwick, the UK and London's second busiest airport, to Global Infrastructure Partners (GIP) who already own London City Airport for a fee of £1.51bn.

The serial EDM signatories

Yesterday's post about EDM 2057 brought to my mind the idea of serial Early Day Motion signatories, so I did some research with the following results:

Average number of EDMs signed by party MPs:
Labour - 150 (artificially reduced as Ministers are not meant to sign them) without the non-signatories the figure becomes 227

Conservatives - 47

Lib Dems - 347

Of the minor parties:
DUP - 349
PC - 397
SNP - 228
SDLP - 624
UUP - 281

What does this tell us? Well, that the left love gesture politics and that most EDMs are on matters that the left "care" about.


Who are the biggest serial EDM signatories, who really can't help themselves?
These are the 14 MPs who have signed over 1,000 of the just over 2,000 EDMs since December 2008:
Hancock, Mike - Portsmouth South - Liberal Democrats - 1642 (that's around 82% of all EDMs)

Cryer, Ann - Keighley - Labour Party - 1613

Simpson, Alan - Nottingham South - Labour Party - 1440
Vis, Rudi - Finchley and Golders Green - Labour Party - 1383

Drew, David - Stroud - Labour Party - 1342

McDonnell, John - Hayes and Harlington - Labour Party - 1336

Jones, Lynne - Birmingham Selly Oak - Labour Party - 1322

Corbyn, Jeremy - Islington North - Labour Party - 1306

Caton, Martin - Gower - Labour Party - 1295

Jenkins, Brian Tamworth - Labour Party - 1283

Leech, John - Manchester Withington - Liberal Democrats - 1282

Bottomley, Peter - Worthing West - Conservative Party - 1225

Etherington, Bill - Sunderland North - Labour Party - 1180

Hopkins, Kelvin - Luton North - Labour Party - 1082

So of the 14 biggest serial EDM signatories, 11 are Labour MPs, two are Lib Dems and one a Conservative.
The next Conservative MP appears at position 72.

Interesting?

Happy Birthday Ursula K. Le Guin

Happy 80th Birthday Ms LeGuin a great sci-fi/fantasy novelist and unusually a feminist one.

Is the UK really bankrupt?

The IEA fear it might be; based upon pension obligations.

"A Bankruptcy Foretold: The UK’s Implicit Pension Debt
Nick Silver
This paper argues that government debt levels should be calculated in line with
generally accepted accounting practice. As earned pensions obligations are included
under generally accepted accounting practice, any earned pensions obligations of the
government should be counted as debt. The UK government’s debt will therefore be
much higher than the official figure which has profound implications for fiscal policy."

Tuesday, 20 October 2009

Ice loss in the Antarctic; the truth, not "warmist" propaganda

The Register reports that:
"Scientists using a network of ground sensors emplaced in Antarctica say that NASA satellites have overestimated the amount of ice that is melting and running off into the ocean from the polar continent.

...

The WAGN boffins say they are sure that recent figures for ice loss calculated from GRACE readings have been overestimated, but they are not yet sure by how much. However, they say that there is no dispute about the fact that ice is disappearing from the antarctic sheet - this process has been underway for 20,000 years, since the thickness peaked during the last "glacial maximum".

"The published results are very important because they provide precise, ground-truth GPS observations of the actual rebound of the continent," said Vladimir Papitashvili of the Antarctic Earth Sciences Program at the National Science Foundation, which supported the research."

So ice levels are decreasing but that's compared to the 20,000 year ago "glacial maximum". I don't understand how that can be because I keep being told that man is to blamd for global warming via the pumping out of CO2 and yet the world was warming 19,850 odd years before man started producing CO2 in any major way. How can that be?

Here come the authoritarian "greens"

There is an Early Day Motion (number 2057) that says (my emphasis):
"That this House recognises that there is a climate emergency and that the catastrophic destabilisation of global climate represents the greatest threat that humanity faces; further recognises that the world is already above the safe level of atmospheric carbon dioxide concentration for a stable planet; further recognises the need to reduce this level to 350 particles per million or below; believes it is impossible to predict how close the world is to dangerous tipping points and that action to reduce emissions now is worth considerably more than doing the same later; further believes that immediate action is required to enact a program of emergency measures with substantial emissions reductions in the short term of the order of 10 per cent. by the end of 2010; further believes that the majority of money spent on reviving the economy should be on green measures and that at least two hours of prime time television per week should be used to explain the gravity of the crisis to the public; further believes that unabated coal and domestic flights should be phased out by the end of 2010, that a speed limit of 55 miles per hour should be introduced and investment made in energy efficiency and renewable energy, public transport and the retro-fitting of efficient insulation to existing housing stock technologies leading to the creation of a million green jobs by the end of 2010; and further believes that the introduction of such measures would send a positive signal to other countries leading up to the UN climate change summit in Copenhagen and beyond."

So who are the economic geniuses who believe that one million green jobs could be created? Have they any workings to get to this figure or are they just parroting what they have heard elsewhere? Who are the MPs who think that "at least two hours of prime time television per week should be used to explain the gravity of the crisis to the public"? I wonder if they think that viewing these two hours a week should be made compulsory?

Here are the EDM signatories with my comments about them:
Challen, Colin - Labour nitwit whose last EDM signature "congratulates all those refuse workers, members of the GMB and Unison, at Leeds City Council who have been solidly on strike since 7th September"

Bottomley, Peter - Sopping wet Conservative MP and serail EDM signatory

Hepburn, Stephen - Labour MP and a serial EDM signatory, maybe he feels has nothing else to do being as he has such a safe North East seat

Austin, John - Another Labour MP and serial EDM signatory including to protesting against anti-Israeli settlements

Pound, Stephen - Another Labour MP and serial EDM signatory who finds the time to suck up to Richard Branson, express "outrage at Israel's overwhelmingly disproportionate use of force in Gaza" and "welcomes the United Nations' mandated report led by eminent judge Richard Goldstone, which details transgressions by both the Israeli military and Palestinian groups during fighting from December 2008 to January 2009 in Gaza; notes that the report concludes that Israel's actions amounted to war crimes and possibly crimes against humanity due to disproportionate use of force that involved the deliberate targeting of civilian infrastructure and the use of illegal weapons and human shields as part of an intentional policy directed at the people of Gaza as a whole" - Oh how I look forward to this ignorant fool being kicked out by the electors of Ealing North next year.

Hoyle, Lindsay - Yet another Labour MP and serial EDM signatory

Holmes, Paul - Yet another serial Labour MP and EDM signatory

McDonnell, John - Another Labour MP happy to sign up to condemning "the continued illegal blockade of Palestinian Gaza territory by Israel; notes that the blockade causes immense pain and suffering to Palestinians in Gaza; is further concerned that medical and food supplies are not allowed into Gaza by the Israeli forces; further notes that the Israeli military forcibly boarded an aid ship while in international waters, in violation of numerous international laws; praises the work of the Free Gaza Movement ships Dignity and the Spirit of Humanity, which bring in much needed humanitarian assistance; and asks that the Government use all available diplomatic channels to end the blockade."

Clapham, Michael - Another Labour MP and serial EDM signatory, this one found time in his busy schedule to "warmly welcomes the award of the 2009 Nobel Peace Prize to President Obama"

Cryer, Ann - Another Labour MP and serial EDM signatory and of course one of the great House of Commons "troughers" of this parliament

Drew, David - Another Labour MP and serial EDM signatory, this one still thinks like a worried sixth-former and "calls on the Government officially to endorse the proposal for the adoption by governments of voluntary National Declarations of Commitment to Eradication of Hunger and Malnutrition by 2025"

Gerrard, Neil - This Labour MP one seems to hope to get some BBC work with his "notes that the BBC is recognised as setting a quality standard for broadcasting throughout the UK"

Hancock, Mike - Lib Dem and another serial EDM signatory

Stunell, Andrew - Another Labour MP who believes he knows what is happening in Gaza and is so wrong


I wonder how many more MPs will sign this EDM and why so many MPs sign so many EDMs to so little effect?

Going easy on a Labour recession



In a similar vein to this recently, the BBC are trying to reassure us that despite borrowing being the highest ever, it was less than predicted. The BBC keep looking to minimise worries over this recession but oddly during the "Tory Recessions" I don't remember the BBC looking for any signs of Green Shoots at all. Rather then it was all ceaseless misery and depression; a solemn intoning of the latest increase in unemployment figures and emotive pieces about the real misery behind the figures.

But that's the difference: to the BBC the Tories were responsible for their recessions and positively enjoyed them whilst this recession is entirely caused by external factors and the Labour party are bravely doing what they can for the British public - who should be damn well grateful. Any less than terrible news must be reported with a positive spin so as to try and create an atmosphere in which the Labour party can still win any election.



Debt:
Government Debt Rises By £14.8bn – In One Month

Public borrowing rose by a further £14.8bn last month, taking the half-yearly figure to its highest ever level.

September’s rise means Government net borrowing stands at £77.3bn for the six months of the financial year so far.

The Treasury expects borrowing to reach a record £175bn for the year as the cost of the recession drains public finances.

Total spending stood at £45.7bn over the month compared with just £35.4bn in receipts.
This is because the Government is having to spend more on outlays such as unemployment benefits but is receiving less as the jobless total rises.

Net benefit payouts were up nearly 10% on the same month last year to £13.8bn, while the Government’s VAT and income tax revenues were both down by more than 13% on 12 months earlier.

The Government spent £5.9bn in interest payments on the debt – 43% above the same month last year and the highest monthly payout on record, according to the ONS.

The nation’s net debt now stands at £824.8bn, representing 59% of the UK’s entire economic output – another new record.

It's all going terribly well for the country "best placed" to face the world recession...

Man Made Climate Change debunked

Weather Action respond to BBC2 'Climate Wars'. Do read the whole article to understand the lack of science behind the religion of Global Warming.

Here is the challenge that Weather Action have issued:
"I challenge - and there are other scientists who can also challenge - the 'Climate Wars' programme producer to a public televised debate with himself or any scientist they want to put forward."

The great Death Star conspiracy theory


One for the Star Wars geeks.


Thanks to Letters From a Tory for the spot.

Again with the homosexuals

What is it with Gordon Brown and homosexual issues? A few months ago he was apologising on behalf of the nation for its treatment of Alan Turing after the second world war. Today he is predicted to be about to announce that "gay MPs and peers should to be allowed to hold civil partnership ceremonies inside the Palace of Westminster."

What accounts for Gordon Brown's seemingly deep personal interest in this area?

The most influential tree in the world

Steve McIntyre explains why YAD06 is the most influential tree in the world. Try and read the whole article, I know maths and statistics make for a hard read but this is an important area. It maybe that the whole Man Made Global Warming religion is based upon one tree's growth pattern.

Labour's two million new jobs explained

As recently as Labour's 2009 Party Conference our duplicitous Prime Minister was claiming that "2 million more men and women providing for their families than in 1997." Today we are reminded once again that any statement by Gordon Brown needs to be checked and re-checked so as to remove the spin and misdirection.

Migration Watch report that: "The number of immigrants in the UK has increased by more than two million in the last eight years".

Now before you lefty types disbelieve that statistic because it comes from an organisation that you consider "obsessed" by race, do bear in mind that Migration Watch are simply reporting the figures in a report, by Oxford Economics, which was quietly slipped out on the website of the Department for Communities and Local Government last month with no attention drawn to it.

Monday, 19 October 2009

Inciting violence and inter-community hatred

Geert Wilders was, and by some still is, accused of inciting violence and creating inter-community hatred. To me it looks as though the hatred is there but it's on the other side...
"We'll have his head"
"the punishment... is capital punishment"
"warn him"
"Islam will dominate... so no matter where he runs, Islam will be implemented..."
"Islam will come and will conquer the UK, Islam will conquer Holland, it will conquer Rome, it will conquer the world."
"Islam will conquer the house of every person..."
"We will see Israel destroyed"


And the banners:
"Islam will dominate the world"
"Sharia for the Netherlands"
"Sharia will dominate the world"


The TV reporter is from the Iranian funded Press TV station and were the comments by the last interviewee about "two minutes" a threat?


Will the Metropolitan Police take any action against what may be incitements to violence? Somehow I doubt it.

Human Rights Watch's Colonel Richard Kemp speaks sense at the UNHRC session



Unfortunately the UNHRC are not interested in the truth, they want Israel gone.



Thanks to Isreallycool for the spot.

A radical idea abou replacing the EU

"Withdrawal rings my bell. I have a fantastic idea. Why not create a free trade bloc of EU Nations. We could call it The Common Market. No MEPs or commissioners or freeloaders or presidents. Just trade reps from each country. Now, is that a good idea? It's what we all voted for in the 70s!"
A comment by OldRightie on Muffled Vociferation; works for me too...

The coming world government?


Lord Monckton's contention on World Government is based on this document - section 38 on page 18.

"38. The scheme for the new institutional arrangement under the Convention will be based on three basic pillars: government; facilitative mechanism; and financial mechanism, and the basic organization of which will include the following:

(a) The government will be ruled by the COP with the support of a new subsidiary body on adaptation, and of an Executive Board responsible for the management of the new funds and the related facilitative processes and bodies. The current Convention secretariat will operate as such, as appropriate.

(b) The Convention’s financial mechanism will include a multilateral climate change fund including five windows: (a) an Adaptation window, (b) a Compensation window, to
address loss and damage from climate change impacts, including insurance, rehabilitation and compensatory components, (c) a Technology window; (d) a Mitigation
window; and (e) a REDD window, to support a multi-phases process for positive forest
incentives relating to REDD actions.

(c) The Convention’s facilitative mechanism will include: (a) work programmes for
adaptation and mitigation; (b) a long-term REDD process; (c) a short-term technology
action plan; (d) an expert group on adaptation established by the subsidiary body on
adaptation, and expert groups on mitigation, technologies and on monitoring, reporting and verification; and (e) an international registry for the monitoring, reporting and verification of compliance of emission reduction commitments, and the transfer of technical and financial resources from developed countries to developing countries. The secretariat will provide technical and administrative support, including a new centre for information exchange."



Thanks to Grumpy Old Sods for the spot.

This was obvious from the moment the story broke

As soon as I heard about the new scanners at Manchester Airport I realised that someone would use the "paedo" clause to protect children. And just a week later I am proved right as Action on Rights for Childen (Arch) claim the Rapiscan equipment could break the Protection of Children Act 1978, under which it is illegal to create an indecent image of a child. As a result, security staff at Manchester Airport have been banned from using new "see-through" security scanners on passengers aged under 18.

Excellent, do my rights not to be blown up count for less than the rights of a child not to be scanned?

A Brave New World

"Many dystopian novels have, as part of their premise, a tyrannical government that hides from public view information and opinions that could embarrass the authorities. In Fahrenheit 451 an elite squad of “firemen” go around burning down any house down which is discovered to contain books. In Nineteen Eighty-Four, the newspaper archives are altered retrospectively to ensure the state’s narrative is maintained. Some say that in the information age such restrictions could never be enforced.

In reality, the government does not need to go to any effort to hide the truth or subversive texts. All it has to do it ensure that sufficient numbers of people are not interested in the world around them. Make sure enough people get a shit education so that they grow up lacking curiosity in the way things work, make sure enough people are comfortable with their mundane existences, make sure that mass entertainment is sufficiently banal to stop people from opening their eyes and engaging their brains. As long as the number of people who can be bothered to keep themselves informed and are experienced enough to be able to form their own opinion is kept small enough, who cares what those people think?

If you want “power” in this country, you don’t need to have the best thought-out policies, you don’t need to be the brightest mind. This is socialism’s legacy: a nation so ill-educated that many haven’t even heard of the classics, where vast swathes of society don’t have to engage their brain to feed and clothe themselves, where generations of parents don’t feel the need to encourage their children to explore the world. This country is no longer run by a patrician elite, but by a cynical class of populist authoritarians who pander to every ignorant desire of the largest minority. Britain is a tyranny of the ignorant."
Read more at Behind Blue Eyes.

Peter Mandelson and his "blind trust"

Richard Littlejohn has some questions about Peter Mandelson and his "blind trust".

Humpty Dumpty - "Will nobody think of the children"

The Sun report that the BBC sanitised Humpty Dumpty for a CBeebies kids' show to give it a happy ending.

"Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall.

Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.

All the king's horses and all the king's men

Made Humpty Dumpty happy again."
Oh for heaven's sake. I learnt the "Couldn't put Humpty together again" line when I suppose I was under the age of two and it hasn't traumatised me, although I am not too fond of hard-boiled eggs.

Apparently the BBC have previous form in this area as the fascinating story of Little Miss Muffet was changed on the same channel so that she made friends with the spider rather than fled from it.

Deceptive bras

The Mail reports that:
"A hardline Islamist group in Somalia has begun publicly whipping women for wearing bras that they claim violate Islam as they are 'deceptive'.

The insurgent group Al Shabaab has sent gunmen into the streets of Mogadishu to round up any women who appear to have a firm bust, residents claimed yesterday.

The women are then inspected to see if the firmness is natural, or if it is the result of wearing a bra.

If they are found wearing a bra, they are ordered to remove it and shake their breasts, residents said."
Sharia law in action, still sanguine about when the Archbishop of Canterbury says that Sharia Law is "unavoidable", when Lord Phillips, The Lord Chief Justice says that there was no reason sharia law's principles could not be used in mediation and when Stephen Hockman QC the former chairman of the Bar Council said that "legal reforms to incorporate Islamic principles are inevitable. He warned that 'otherwise we will find there is a very significant section of our society which is increasingly alienated, with very dangerous results. '"?

Labour's friends in the EU

Tory Bear tells the truth about Labour's friends in the EU but somehow I don't think this will divert the Labour party or their friends in the BBC from attacking the "nasty party".

"TB is getting sick to the back teeth of Labour, and their stooges, attempting to create scandal around who the tories sit with in the European Parliament. The audacity that they have in these attacks can quickly be exposed with Google and rather appropriately given today’s attempt at journalism from the Observer – Wikipedia.

The Labour Party sit with the European Socialists grouping (PES), a bunch of nuts lefties that make Blair and Brown look slightly to the left of Hannan. Labour can try have a half-hearted smear attempt at the tory groupings, but it is a national embarrassment that the governing party of the day consort with communists, terrorists, murderers, anti-semites and 9/11 deniers.

Oh you didn’t know this? Well it’s not like it’s reported by the main stream media. Dan Hamilton wrote a great piece a few months ago and TB would like to share some of what he exposed. Lets just have a quick peek at a couple of Labour’s friends in Europe shall we...

First up we have former Italian Communist Party officer holder and Josef Fritzel look alike Giulietto Chiesa. A member of the Communist Party until 1991 Chiesa has since made a name for himself not only blaming Russia’s invasion of Georgia on European countries but more significantly as an extremely vocal 9/11 denier. His documentary Zero, as well as various essays and TV appearances have suggested that the US government was behind the planning and execution of the attacks. This lunatic is now the official European spokesman for the 9/11 Truth Movement.

Who else are close allies of the Labour Party in Europe?

How about Proinsias De Rossa, ever heard of him? Well he is a murdering terrorist who is linked to the killing of six British Policemen. This former IRA man originally joined the Communist and Allies group before transferring to the PES and taking an active role in the drafting of the European Constitution. What do you expect from a Labour Party who didn’t bat and eyelid when their guest Martin McGuinness was allowed to stroll around the Grand Hotel in Brighton almost 25 years to the day the IRA had murdered so many there.

So many loons to choose from, but TB’s absolute favourite scumbag has to be Andrzej Zbigniew Lepper the leader of the Polish Self-Defence of the Republic Party, who Labour sit hand in hand with in Europe.Where to start with their leader and the sleaze, the criminal activities and the general insanity of the man. Another former communist, he has done time for assault and even demanded sexual favours for jobs in his office. Famed for throwing hecklers onto piles of manure according to the BBC, the "chorus of his party song is: This land is your land, this land is my land, we won't let anyone punch us in the face.”

Perhaps most worrying is Lepper’s honorary degrees from the anti-Semitic Interregional Academy of Personnel Management. To give you an idea where these guys are coming from, their honorary professor is the white supremest David Duke.

So next time you hear some Labour tool having a go at tory allies, tell them to go take a long hard look in the mirror and then behind their own shoulders.

The hypocrisy is sickening."



Why should Labour pull this line of attack? It's not as though the BBC or the rest of the MSM are interested in Labour's bedfellows in the EU. The story is, and always will be, about the nasty Tories and their nasty friends. Don't fall into the trap of thinking the most of the UK media is anything other than institutionally biased against the Conservative party.

Robert Crumb bravely satirises the Christian & Jewish holy book, would he be so brave with the Koran?

THe Telegraph report that:
"A sexually explicit illustrated Book of Genesis by controversial artist Robert Crumb, which features Bible characters having intercourse, has been condemned by religious groups.

The book, which is released this month, carries the warning "adult supervision recommended for minors", and is described as "scandalous satire" by its publishers.

It includes graphic illustrations of Bible characters having sexual intercourse, and other scenes depicting naked men and women as well as "gratuitous" depictions of violence."


Robert Crumb is quoted as saying that he does not believe that the Bible is the word of God. "I take it all for myth from start to finish, with probably some faint relation to historical reality."

How about the Koran, Mr Crumb? Do you accept that that is the word of God or do you think it is myth from start to finish? Will you turn the Koran into a sexy cartoon, or is that beyond your levels of bravery?

Peter Hain and free-speech

Peter Hain, that bastion of probity, has threatened the BBC over its decision to invite Nick Griffin onto Question Time on Thursday. He is reported to have said that
"If you do not review the decision you may run the very serious risk of legal challenge in addition to the moral objections that I make.

"In my view, your approach is unreasonable, irrational and unlawful."
Why is free speech so anathema to so many on the left of British politics?

More global warming rubbish from Gordon "my favourite biscuit is a secret" Brown

Now Gordon Brown is claiming that we have 50 days to save the planet and that:
"In Britain we face the prospect of more frequent droughts and a rising wave of floods,"

"The extraordinary summer heatwave of 2003 in Europe resulted in over 35,000 extra deaths.

"On current trends, such an event could become quite routine in Britain in just a few decades' time. And within the lifetime of our children and grandchildren the intense temperatures of 2003 could become the average temperature experienced throughout much of Europe."
It's all rubbish Gordon, the Man Made Global Warming con is unravelling and when the people work out how they have been lied to they will be very, very angry.

Will this news make the BBC be less biased against the Conservative party or more aggressive against them?

It is hard to know which way the BBC will swing after Jeremy Hunt told the Financial Times that the BBC was "out of touch with the hard times the rest of the electorate is going through". The shadow culture secretary said that the BBC's structure had "failed" and added that the Tories in government would have a "very fundamental root-and-branch discussion with the BBC".

The fifty-eighth weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

This week's winners are the Ernst & Young Item Club. who according to the BBC say it is "still premature" to talk about the beginnings of a recovery despite growing optimism.

"still premature" - "No shit, Sherlocks".

Sunday, 18 October 2009

Sunday news catchup

So much news, so little time...

1. The Telegraph reports that:
"Jack Straw tried to prevent MPs' expenses claims from being published because he did not want the public to find out about renovations to his own home, documents seen by The Sunday Telegraph suggest. "
Jack Straw denies the story of course, but who would you rather believe Slippery Jack or The Telegraph? Easy one, no?


2. The BBC report that Gordon "decisive" Brown has finally made his mind over an important issue of national priority:
"Gordon Brown has revealed that he is partial to a chocolate biscuit, after he was accused of sidestepping a question during an online chat.

The prime minister said he had missed a question about his favourite biscuit during the live web chat with the parents' website Mumsnet.

He used the social networking site Twitter to reveal that he likes "anything with a bit of chocolate.""
24 hours to make his mind up over which biscuit he prefers; isn't great to have such a decisive man at the nation's helm?


3. The BBC report with a straight face that:
"Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has compared his justice secretary's actions to the principles of Indian peace champion Mahatma Gandhi.

It comes in the wake of the decision to release the"
Words fail me, I just wish they would fail Alex Salmond as well.

What's next for Jacqui Smith?

The Express reports that
"HUMILIATED former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith faces being hauled before a judge as Whitehall’s whistleblower vowed to prosecute her over Commons expenses.


Home Office mole Christopher Galley will meet fraud lawyers on Tuesday to bring a private prosecution against the disgraced ex-Minister.


The meeting comes as Sunday Express research reveals Ms Smith, and her porn-watching husband Richard Timney, are in line for a "600,000 pay-off if she loses her seat at the next election.


Under House of Commons rules, not only will shamed Ms Smith qualify for pension and severance pay but so too will her husband, who has worked as her parliamentary aide for 12 years.


In a final insult to taxpayers, the payout would include an incredible "500,000 pension pot for Ms Smith and a "33,000 "golden parachute" payment.


Liberal Democrat pensions expert Lord Oakeshott said: "Ms Smith is a teacher. How would you explain this in an ethics lesson: "I"ve been caught cheating on my expense claims. If I say sorry I don"t have to repay "100,000 to the public and I can just retire with a "500,000 pension pot from the taxpayer."
"Redditch pensioners on a pittance of "92.25 a week will know exactly what to do if Ms Smith brazens it out at the ballot box at the next election.""
Thoughts anyone? In my opinion Jacqui Smith like the other Labour MPs and Ministers who have been investigated, found wanting but never had serious action taken against them, will walk away unscathed and financially rewarded.

Now that's an explanation

Is there any way to derail te EU train?

It seems as though Vaclav Klaus is going to give into pressure and sign the Czech Republic's assent to the Lisbon Treaty. This means that the UK will be denied the referendum we were promised by all three main political parties before the last General Election. This is manifestly (pun intended) unfair and so could we not petition the Queen to dissolve Parliament thus forcing an immediate general election? Would that give a Conservative government enough time to organise a referendum and so belatedly kill of the Lisbon Treaty?

In fact the answer is almost certainly that unless the UK leaves the EU, or at least fundamentally renegotiates its conditions of membership, there is no rowing back. The EU is like a train on a set of rails heading in one direction, it cannot be steered elsewhere all it can be is slightly delayed by application of the brakes.

No dissent allowed on Man Made Climate Change

Canada Free Press have an interesting article and video showing what happens if you dare to question Al Gore and the eco-certainties he spreads.

Saturday, 17 October 2009

A little Latin lesson

ROMANES EUNT DOMUS - I think not...

ROMANI ITE DOMUM - That's better...

It's like I'm back at school!

Another claim that Barack Obama was born in Kenya, but this one's different

The Kenyan Sunday Standard back in 1994 reports that:
"Kenyan-born US Senate hopeful, Barrack Obama, appeared set to take over the Illinois Senate seat after his main rival, Jack Ryan, dropped out of the race on Friday night amid a furor over lurid sex club allegations."
Cold someone point out to me where Barack Obama denied this claim (stated as fact) at the time...

The United Nations Human Rights Council

I thought that the composition of the United Nations Human Right Council, the body that has once again criticised Israel, might be of interest. In the vote twenty-five countries voted for the resolution, six voted against, eleven countries abstained and five others, including the UK and France, chose not to vote. I wonder if we can work out who voted (or not) and in which way?

AFRICAN STATES
Angola
Burkina Faso
Cameroon
Djibouti
Egypt
Gabon
Ghana
Madagascar
Mauritius
Nigeria
Senegal
South Africa
Zambia

LATIN AMERICAN & CARIBBEAN STATES
Argentina
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile
Cuba
Mexico
Nicaragua
Uruguay

ASIAN STATES
Bahrain
Bangladesh
China
India
Indonesia
Japan
Jordan
Kyrgyzstan
Pakistan
Philippines
Qatar
Republic of Korea
Saudi Arabia

WESTERN EUROPE & OTHER STATES
Belgium
France
Italy
Netherlands
Norway
United Kingdom
United States

EASTERN EUROPEAN STATES
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Hungary
Russian Federation
Slovakia
Slovenia
Ukraine


An interesting mix of free and democratic countries all of which have impeccable human rights records and so should be free to pass judgement on Israel, I am sure you agree.



Incidentally can anyone confirm that Former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mary Robinson has expressed regret for what she called the council's practice of "adopting resolutions guided not by human rights but by politics."

Harriet Harman pwn3d

Andrew Neil comprehensively pwn3d on the Straight Talk show. Just watch the amount of blinking that Harriet Harman does especially when answering questions on the expenses scandal.

Second best exchange:
AN: "You wouldn't deny that there is real anger on the Labour backbenches with the way Gordon Brown has handled this."
HH: "Well I don't think it's a question of the way Gordon Brown has handled it. The first point to make..
AN: "But that was my question."


Third best exchange:
AN: "Let me try again, I'll only try one more time, then I'll give up"
HH: Then ignores the question yet again...


The best exchange was over Harriet Harman's internal party soundings from 21:16. Watch the exchanges a few times and note How Harriet Harman starts off very sure footedly but from 22:44 has great difficulty finding a way of not answering the question.


Harriet Harman did say that she will not stand for Prime Minister if there is a vacancy, if asked, nominated or selected - We will see...

"Sling him under a train"


If you can't quite understand what the delightful London Underground "Steward" says then the BBC have a helpfully subtitled version of this video here.

Ah the pleasures of travelling on the London Underground...

Happy Diwali

A happy Diwali to all my Hindu readers.

Friday, 16 October 2009

Should you care about CAIR?

Read this, now what do you think?

"Claim 1: According to Ibrahim Hooper, the organization's communications director, "CAIR has some 50,000 members." Fact: An internal memo prepared in June 2007 for a staff meeting reports that the organization had precisely 5,133 members, about one-tenth Hooper's exaggerated number.

Claim 2: CAIR is a "grass-roots organization" that depends financially on its members. Fact: According to an internal 2002 board meeting report, the organization received $33,000 in dues and $1,071,000 in donations. In other words, under 3 percent of its income derives from membership dues.

Claim 3: CAIR receives "no support from any overseas group or government." Fact: Gaubatz and Sperry report that 60 percent of CAIR's income derives from two dozen donors, most of whom live outside the United States. Specifically: $978,000 from the ruler of Dubai in 2002 in exchange for controlling interest in its headquarters property on New Jersey Avenue, a $500,000 gift from Saudi prince al-Waleed bin Talal and $112,000 in 2007 from Saudi prince Abdullah bin Mosa'ad, at least $300,000 from the Saudi-based Organization of the Islamic Conference, $250,000 from the Islamic Development Bank, and at least $17,000 from the American office of the Saudi-based International Islamic Relief Organization. "

Might the followers of Mao in the Obama administration have just had their first success?

The Washington Times reports that:
"President Obama recently shifted authority for approving sales to China of missile and space technology from the White House to the Commerce Department -- a move critics say will loosen export controls and potentially benefit Chinese missile development.

The president issued a little-noticed "presidential determination" Sept. 29 that delegated authority for determining whether missile and space exports should be approved for China to Commerce Secretary Gary Locke. "
See the second part of my piece earlier today for an explanation of the Maoist reference...

Decisive Gordon Brown

The BBC humourously report that:
"Who said Gordon Brown crumbles under questioning? The PM jammy dodged inquiries about his favourite biscuit as he took part in a live web chat.

Mumsnet users speculated that it might be Garibaldi or Nice. Another asked whether he dunked.

But Mr Brown was having none of it and left the hour long session with the question unanswered. "
An alternative way of looking at this story would be that the great fearty that is our Prime Minister is so scared of upsetting any more voters or so removed from normal conversation that couldn't even say what type of biscuit he preferred. I bet Peter Mandelson would be far readier to let the public know what he likes to dunk in his tea.

Sesame Street's Big Bird tells Michelle Obama some home truths


Very well done.


Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

The Obama administration and the "right-wing" media

This battle is getting very interesting; one side has the power, the other has a lot of viewers and listeners.

1. Rush Limbaugh appears to have problems with a Democrat party inspired "media lynch mob". As Toby Harnden asks:
"Which public figure can be quoted as having said something bigoted and disgusting and it doesn’t matter whether he did or not because he might have? Who can Big Media brand a racist without checking the facts? Who has to prove he did not say something racist, rather than the accuser proving he did?"
Somehow I doubt that the BBC will ask any similar questions... This is a must read article as it explodes many myths about "right-wing shock jocks" that the BBC and other left-wing media are keen to spread.


2. Glenn Beck has worries about Marxists in the Obama administration and asks "How many radicals is it going to take...? Do watch the clip, under the bombast there are some points that I, and others, have been making for some time now about the people who surround Barack Obama and what they have in store for the USA.

Open scientific debate or closed minds

Channel 4 are to screen a series of programmes Race: Science's Last Taboo, the first of which be "Race and Intelligence" in which Rageh Omaar questions scientists about Nobel Prize winner James Watson's claims that black people are less intelligent than other races. The Channel 4 blurb for this programme runs (my emphasis):
"In 2007, Nobel Prize winning US scientist James Watson was quoted referring to research suggesting that black people were less intelligent than other races. His comments caused a storm of controversy, Watson was condemned.

Although he apologised for the offence he caused, his public engagements were cancelled and he left his British speaking tour in disgrace.

Meanwhile, right wing websites hailed him as the new Galileo - a martyr to political correctness that was concealing the fact that there is indeed evidence that shows different races score differently in IQ tests. But are the tests biased? Is race really a scientific category at all?

In this documentary, part of the season Race: Science's Last Taboo, Rageh Omaar sets out to find out the truth, meeting scientists who believe the research supports the view that races can be differentiated as well as those who vehemently oppose this view. By daring to ask the difficult questions, Omaar is able to explode the myths about race and IQ and reveal what he thinks are important lessons for society."


This could have been an interesting impartial examination of the evidence for and against the claims of James Watson and others but somehow I think the programme's collective mind was made up before the programme was made as a Channel 4 spokesperson is quoted as saying that (my emphasis):
"This new season of programmes sets out to explode some of the myths about race and science and to cast light on the history and consequences of scientific racism.

The Season debunks the myths about science and racescience has been misused to legitimise racist beliefs and practices – these programmes are the antidote to that.

Season roundly dismisses the ideas: that race is a predictor of intelligence; that racial purity has scientific benefits and that any one race is superior to another."
So that's settled then. I wonder how Channel 4 stand on the accepted fact that Black athletes are naturally better runners than White athletes; is that racist science as well?

Friday morning catchup

So much news, so little time:

1. The Telegraph report that:
"British prosecutors were told more than two years ago that they had sufficient evidence to charge two Libyans over the killing of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, according to a leaked report.

A senior lawyer carried out an independent review of the case on behalf of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS), in which he said Matouk Mohammed Matouk and Abdulgader Mohammed Baghdadi could be charged with conspiracy to cause death.

Both men played instrumental roles in organising the shooting at the Libyan embassy in St James’s Square, central London, in 1984, the report said. "
So why was there no attempt to prosecute? What possible reason could there be? You guessed it:
"The secret report, which was commissioned by the CPS on behalf of the Metropolitan Police, was completed in April 2007, just six weeks before Tony Blair, the prime minister at the time, held a controversial meeting with Colonel Gaddafi in Libya. The meeting formally opened trade links between Britain and the north African country. "



2. The Telegrpah report on the truth behind Barack Obama's alleged modesty over his Nobel Peace Prize. No surprises there...


3. The Times report that:
"Almost half of hospitals fail to meet fully the core standards of care despite a decade of Government investment in the NHS, according to the health regulator’s annual report.

The Care Quality Commission (CQC) warns today that more than 40 health trusts are at risk of being refused new licences to operate, which will be issued next April. "
"Envy of the World"?


4. The Telegraph reports that the Zimbabwe power-sharing agreement is not going well...


5. The Guardian has found an excuse to swear as much as possible online; possibly the most f-words and c-words I have seen in an online article, makes Devils Kitchen seem like a novice at swearing.

Thursday, 15 October 2009

Wrong Harriet, wrong

The BBC loyally report the latest bleatings of Harriet Harman, as she tries to curry favour with MPs ahead of a Labour leadership election. Harriet Harman is reported as saying that Sir Thomas Legg's review of MPs' expenses must be based on the "rules and standards that obtained at the time".... "To do anything else would be arbitrary,". The fact is that the Green Book made it perfectly clear what could be claimed and once again I will repeat what I have said before:
"From The Green Book:

"Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties."

"Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage of the resources being claimed."


"Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else."


"Members are committed to openness about what expenditure has been incurred and for what purposes."


"Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses incurred, for making claims and for keeping records, even if the administration of claims is delegated by them to others."


From "The Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament":

"Holders of public office should take decisions solely in terms of the public interest. They should not do so in order to gain financial or other material benefits for themselves, their family, or their friends."


"Members shall at all times ensure that their use of expenses, allowances, facilities and services provided from the public purse is strictly in accordance with the rules laid down on these matters, and that they observe any limits placed by the House on the use of such expenses, allowances, facilities and services."


If that is not clear enough for Harriet Harman, her fellow troughers and the BBC how about this from May. It's further extracts from the Green Book with my comments:

"1.3 Fundamental principles

In July 1995, the House agreed to adopt the Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament – this can be found on the internet here – which includes a number of general principles of personal conduct. These are based on concepts of selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.
The broad principles set out below are derived from the Code of Conduct and underpin the allowance regime. When making claims against parliamentary allowances, Members must adhere to these principles.
The principles are:
Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage of the resources being claimed.

Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could properly perform his or her parliamentary duties.
Bar-B-Qs, David Miliband's pot plants, Gordon Brown's Sky subsciptions etc.


Allowances are reimbursed only for the purpose of a Member carrying out his or her parliamentary duties. Claims cannot relate to party political activity of any sort, nor must any claim provide a benefit to a party political organisation.


It is not permissible for a Member to claim under any parliamentary allowance for anything that the Member is claiming from any other source.


Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else.
Quoting from The Telegraph: "Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, changed his official “second home” designation four times in four years. Geoff Hoon, the Transport Secretary, also switched his second home, which allowed him to improve extensively his family home in Derbyshire before buying a London town house also funded by the taxpayer. Andy Burnham, the Culture Secretary, Caroline Flint, the Minister for Europe, and Paul Murphy, the Welsh Secretary, also bought flats — or the freehold on a property they already owned — and claimed stamp duty and other moving costs. Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, claimed thousands of pounds to improve his constituency home after he had announced his resignation as an MP. He sold the property for a profit of £136,000." Well to my eye these "give rise to, or give the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial benefit to themselves or anyone else"


Members are committed to openness about what expenditure has been incurred and for what purposes.
The actions taken by Speaker Martin, Gordon Brown and others in trying to restrict what information is to be made public and then today in getting the Police involved in looking for the leaker rather than investigating the possible frauds seems to go against the principle of "openness".


Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses incurred, for making claims and for keeping records, even if the administration of claims is delegated by them to others.
So excuses about mistakes being made by clerical staff are not allowable excuses, bear that in mind when listening to the squirming Members.


The requirement of ensuring value for money is central in claiming for accommodation, goods or services – Members should avoid purchases which could be seen as extravagant or luxurious.
New heating systems because the water is too hot, multiple flat screen TVs in one house, etc. etc. etc.


Claims must be supported by documentary evidence, except where the House has agreed that such evidence is not necessary.
All claims for just under the £250 disclosure limit should be considered suspect."

The same misinformation again

The BBC report that:
"The financial crisis would not have been as severe had there been more women in top City jobs, MPs have heard.

Investment banker Ros Altmann also warned MPs that current measures used to recruit executives need overhauling to ensure more women land senior posts.

A more cautious approach, rather than an "alpha male" one, would also be beneficial, Professor Charles Goodhart of the London School of Economics said. "
This smacks of Harriet Harman's line that the financial crisis probably wouldn't have happened if Lehman Brothers had been called Lehman Sisters. Of course this shows how out of touch with City reality so many people are. Alex masterley:
"...if Ms. Harman had done her research, she would have discovered that the systemic disaster that is the credit default swap originated from the derivatives team run by the ever so definitely female Blythe Masters (great name for a senior swaps dealer: you couldn't make it up, sheer nominative determinism). Indeed, during the boom years, the lefty feminist press made a great song and dance about the fact that her team booked $4 trillion of the things every year."

Two fine examples of not answering the question

From today's proceedings of the House of Commons:
"Mr. Baron: Will the Minister address this matter seriously and urgently? Answers to written questions show that between 1997 and 2000, for each page of primary legislation, there were 14 minutes of debating time on the Floor of the House. In the three Sessions ending in 2006, that figure had halved to seven minutes. We need either to increase the amount of time we have to scrutinise legislation, or to introduce less but better legislation.

Barbara Keeley: Averages are perhaps not the best way to look at this matter. I looked at recent Bill Committees, including the Equality Bill. It had six hours of debate on Second Reading, seven hours of evidence taking and 38 hours of scrutiny sessions in Committee—a total of 51 hours—and it will have further time on Report. Before that, there was extensive written consultation, which brought in 4,000 responses. It is an excellent Bill, and there has been a great deal of scrutiny."
"Averages are perhaps not the best way to look at this matter." but they are more informative than bare total time figures.


From later in the same document:
"Sir George Young:... When will the Chancellor present his pre-Budget report? In 2007, it was on 9 October. When he does so, will he be as open with the public about the tough decisions that lie ahead of us on public spending as my party was at our conference last week, and will he confirm that there will be 9 per cent. cuts in departmental cash limits as recently revealed? Can the Leader of the House also give an indication of when the parliamentary calendar for next year will be published? The arrangements around Easter will be of more than usual interest.

Ms Harman:... The right hon. Gentleman asked, too, about public spending, and there will be a debate on the economy next week. No doubt, the Economic Ministers leading for the Government in that debate will make it clear that, although there are encouraging signs of recovery, the economy remains fragile, and that although the recession is abating, we are not yet out of the woods. To pull the plugs, therefore, on important capital investment and support for people who become unemployed will not, I am sure, be part of the agenda to be set out next Monday."
And answer came there none. One might be forgiven for thinking that the Labour government were putting off the pre-Budget report for as long as possible...

Compare and contrast (part 2)

The BBC's decision to invite the BNP's Nick Griffin onto Question Time has aroused much anger from the usual suspects. The BBC's local council (Hammersmith and Fulham) are "worried" about protests and want the venue moved. United Against Facism is planning a mass blockade of the BBC studios on the day in a deny them the right to free speech protest. BECTU, The TV technicians' union, has attacked the BBC's decision and pledged to join a demonstration against the recording of the programme.
General secretary of BECTU Gerry Morrissey said: "We believe there should be no media coverage of the BNP." It seems that the argument runs something like this: the BNP must not be allowed to be heard as they are a racist party and their views are abhorrent and likely to cause inter-community strife.

Meanwhile Islam4UK are reported to have launched a campaign to impose Sharia law on Britain. The group have urged Muslims from all over Britain to converge on London on 31 October for a "March 4 Shari'ah" to demand the full implementation of Sharia law. Islam4UK declared "On this day we will call for a complete upheaval of the British ruling system its members and legislature, and demand the full implementation of Shari'ah in Britain." Have United Against Facism complained about this march in favour of implementing Sharia law in the UK? Have BECTU issued a statement decrying this march in favour of a law that would discriminate against women, subject homosexuals to the death penalty and in the words of Anjnem Choudary would mean that "people who commit adultery would be stoned to death and that anyone who becomes intoxicated by alcohol would be given 40 lashes in public" Surely the latter being something of interest to his members.


We seem to have from many on the left a willingness to deny free speech to a legitimate political party with more Local Council seats than the UKIP and as many MEPs as the Greens. Whilst the same people smile benignly as an extreme movement march in London. Double standards anyone?



Sharia law that would

The fifty-seventh weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

This week's prize goes to The Mail for reporting the staggering news that:
"Just one in six incapacity benefit claimants 'is genuine' as tough new test reveals TWO MILLION could be cheating"
Actually to be fair The Mail probably realised this already, so maybe the prize should go to those who though the Work Capability Assessment would show anything else.

Ice free by when?

As I reported this morning the BBC are scaring the populace with a report that
"The Arctic Ocean could be largely ice-free and open to shipping during the summer in as little as ten years' time, a top polar specialist has said."
Ice free by 2019, scary.

Oddly they have not referenced this report of theirs from 2007 that claimed
"Scientists in the US have presented one of the most dramatic forecasts yet for the disappearance of Arctic sea ice.

Their latest modelling studies indicate northern polar waters could be ice-free in summers within just 5-6 years. "
Ice free by 2012/13.

So in 2007 it was that the Arctic will be ice free by 2012/13, in 2009 is is ice free by 2019, what will the scary prediction be in 2011? The scare story is always there, it is just the date that it will happen that keeps being put back...

They don't like "deniers"

Poor Paul Hudson, the man who dared to question the religion of Man Made Climate Change, is under attack on his own blog. Take a look at some of the comments, some of these people are really quite scary in their blinked views.

A small victory...

The Today programme has an unusual piece on its website, apparently:
"0827
Yesterday on Today, John Humphrys interviewed Harriet Harman about MPs' expenses, and they discussed the case of the former Home Secretary Jacqui Smith. Ms Smith has been in touch with us to complain that we had made a mistake. In the interview we stated that "the Standards Commissioner himself found that Jacqui Smith had not been entirely honest in what she told us, and she had broken the rules." Today is happy to clarify that The Commissioner did find Ms Smith had broken the rules, but he did not make any judgement about her honesty."
So she broke the rules "honestly" or the Standards Commissioner just did not "make any judgement about her honesty"? I suppose when you are in Jacqui Smith's position you have to take what small victories you can.

A difference in emphasis on the BBC (part 2)

Last week the BBC reported very quietly on their science and technology pages that
"For the last 11 years we have not observed any increase in global temperatures.

And our climate models did not forecast it, even though man-made carbon dioxide, the gas thought to be responsible for warming our planet, has continued to rise."
This news that negates much of the Global Warming hysteria of the past 10 years was not deemed worthy of being headline news.

Today the BBC see fit to report as headline news on the Today programme and linked from the front page of their news website that:
"The Arctic Ocean could be largely ice-free and open to shipping during the summer in as little as ten years' time, a top polar specialist has said."



It's all in the emphasis...

A difference in emphasis on the BBC (part 1)

All day yesterday the BBC were reassuring the public that the "rate of increase in unemployment had slowed". Oddly during the "Tory Recessions" I don't remember the BBC looking for any signs of Green Shoots and reporting them as headline news. Rather it was all ceaseless misery and depression; a solemn intoning of the latest increase in unemployment figures and emotive pieces about the real misery behind the figures.

But that's the difference; to the BBC the Tories were responsible for their recessions and positively enjoyed them whilst this recession is entirely caused by external factors and the Labour party are bravely doing what they can for the British public - who should be damn well grateful. Any less than terrible news must be reported with a positive spin so as to try and create an atmosphere in which the Labour party can still win any election.

Wednesday, 14 October 2009

Compare and contrast

Two cases of women from Redditch have caught my eye and I think should be compared.

The first case is of Jacqui Smith who has been accused of having "inappropriately used (£42,130) for the maintenance of Jacqui Smith's home". Her punishment was to have to apologise to the House of Commons.

The second case is of Tracey Onions who was found guilty of dishonestly claiming Housing Benefit of £9,520.10, Income Support of £5,942.44, and Council Tax Benefit of £2,181.67 - a total of £17,644.21. Tracey Onions was not allowed to issue an apology she was "given a two-month prison sentence, suspended for 12 months, plus a 12-month supervision order."

Compare and contrast...


Interestingly the Redditch Standard article about poor Tracey Onions concludes
"Anybody wishing to report a suspected case of benefit fraud can e-mail benefitsfraud@redditchbc.gov.uk or call the fraud hotline on 01527 534 164 at any time.

Callers are asked to provide as much information as is known for the case to be investigated as fully as possible."

Another piece of scum found in the House of Lords


So this failure as Speaker, the first Speaker to have to resign, has ended up in the House of Lords where he will be able to stuff his face at our expense and expect people to pay due respect to him. I trust that an incoming Conservative government will deal with Michael Martin in a similar way to that with which the Labour government dealt with Lord Archer.

Is there a general election in the offing?

I'd say yes as we learnt today:

1. that Communities Secretary John Denham is to announce a plan to pump millions of pounds into predominantly white areas to help improve the education of young people, end benefit dependency and cut off support for far-right political groups (for which you can read the BNP who are taking votes from Labour). We are told that the move is partly in response to growing evidence that white boys are doing worse than any other cultural group in the education system, of course the main reason is to try and shore up the working class white vote (if there is such a thing).

2. Home Secretary Alan Johnson has accused the police of having the 'ludicrous and ridiculous' mindset that dealing with loutish behaviour is not their job. Apparently he is no longer prepared to tolerate police not responding to families besieged by louts. I wonder what has brought about this change of mind at the Home Office. 12 years of being soft on crime and soft on the causes of crime are meant to be erased from our memories by one speech are they?


So will anyone fall for these eye-catching initiatives? Or will most people see them for what they are; pre-election rhetoric that means absolutely nothing other than "Please vote Labour".

More accusations of sleaze surrounding Tony Blair

The Times reports that:
"Tony Blair, the favourite to become Europe’s first president, is believed to have accepted tens of thousands of pounds from a steel billionaire campaigning for Ukraine to join the European Union.

Victor Pinchuk, who is championing the country’s bid for EU membership, has already hired Stephen Byers, the former Labour cabinet minister, to press his case. He reportedly paid Blair to give a keynote speech in Ukraine.

...

Blair’s commercial activities and links to key business figures such as Pinchuk will come under scrutiny in any campaign for the EU presidency. The details of the role and contract of employment for the presidency are expected to be discussed by Gordon Brown and other leaders this month.

Pinchuk founded Yalta European Strategy (YES) to campaign for Ukraine to join the EU. Byers, the former trade secretary, is chairman of the board. Blair attended the annual YES meeting in the Ukrainian city of Yalta last year, giving the main speech.

Blair also attended an event sponsored by Pinchuk at the Davos summit in Switzerland this year, along with Bill Gates, Sir Richard Branson and Bill Clinton. He was not paid for this event.

A spokesman for Blair confirmed he was not paid for the Davos event but would not comment on the Yalta appearance. "
Words fail me.

The EU loyalty problem

The BBC report the first question at today's PMQs thus:
"1205 The first question is from Tory MP Ann Winterton - about the Lisbon treaty. Is the PM obliged to put the objectives of the EU ahead of those of the UK? Mr Brown, unsurprisingly, says he is not."
That's odd, because I have raised this point several times previously: most recently here regarding Peter Mandelson (and on several previous occasions) and also here regarding Leon Brittan, here regarding Neil Kinnock and others. You might also be interested in The Code of Conduct for Members of Parliament that has some rather interesting requirements that often seem to be ignored.

In fact Ann Winterton's question was somewhat more specific than the BBC report and of course Gordon Brown's reply, unsurprisingly, was not completely honest.

Here is the wording of Ann Winterton's question as per my transcription, I will add Hansard's version tomorrow:
"When the Lisbon Treaty comes into force the European Council will become a formal institution of the European Union. As the United Kingdom member of that institution will the Prime Minister confirm that he is bound by its rules and is thus obliged to further the objectives of the European Union in preference to those of the United Kingdom?"

This is Gordon Brown's reply:
"We joined the European Union in the 1970s, we hold by our obligations to the European Union but that does not prevent us representing the national sovereignty of this country."
Does that answer the question asked? I think not...



UPDATE:

Here is the exchange as per Hansard:

"Ann Winterton: ...

When the Lisbon treaty comes into force, the European Council will become a formal institution of the European Union, and the United Kingdom will be a member of that institution. Will the Prime Minister confirm that he is bound by its rules, and is thus obliged to further the objectives of the European Union in preference to those of the United Kingdom?

The Prime Minister: ... We joined the European Union in the 1970s, and we hold by our obligations to the European Union, but that does not prevent us from representing the national sovereignty of this country."

What is the EU?

According to Vladimir Bukovksy as reported in Brussels Journal it's on its way to becoming another Soviet Union. In a speech he delivered in Brussels three years ago Mr Bukovsky called the EU a "monster" that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fully fledged totalitarian state.
"In his speech Mr Bukovsky referred to confidential documents from secret Soviet files which he was allowed to read in 1992. These documents confirm the existence of a “conspiracy” to turn the European Union into a socialist organization."
Do read the whole piece but here is a long extract to give you a flavour:
"The idea was very simple. It first came up in 1985-86, when the Italian Communists visited Gorbachev, followed by the German Social-Democrats. They all complained that the changes in the world, particularly after [British Prime Minister Margaret] Thatcher introduced privatisation and economic liberalisation, were threatening to wipe out the achievement (as they called it) of generations of Socialists and Social-Democrats – threatening to reverse it completely. Therefore the only way to withstand this onslaught of wild capitalism (as they called it) was to try to introduce the same socialist goals in all countries at once. Prior to that, the left-wing parties and the Soviet Union had opposed European integration very much because they perceived it as a means to block their socialist goals. From 1985 onwards they completely changed their view. The Soviets came to a conclusion and to an agreement with the left-wing parties that if they worked together they could hijack the whole European project and turn it upside down. Instead of an open market they would turn it into a federal state.

According to the [secret Soviet] documents, 1985-86 is the turning point. I have published most of these documents. You might even find them on the internet. But the conversations they had are really eye opening. For the first time you understand that there is a conspiracy – quite understandable for them, as they were trying to save their political hides. In the East the Soviets needed a change of relations with Europe because they were entering a protracted and very deep structural crisis; in the West the left-wing parties were afraid of being wiped out and losing their influence and prestige. So it was a conspiracy, quite openly made by them, agreed upon, and worked out.

In January of 1989, for example, a delegation of the Trilateral Commission came to see Gorbachev. It included [former Japanese Prime Minister Yasuhiro] Nakasone, [former French President Valéry] Giscard d’Estaing, [American banker David] Rockefeller and [former US Secretary of State Henry] Kissinger. They had a very nice conversation where they tried to explain to Gorbachev that Soviet Russia had to integrate into the financial institutions of the world, such as Gatt, the IMF and the World Bank.

In the middle of it Giscard d’Estaing suddenly takes the floor and says: “Mr President, I cannot tell you exactly when it will happen – probably within 15 years – but Europe is going to be a federal state and you have to prepare yourself for that. You have to work out with us, and the European leaders, how you would react to that, how would you allow the other Easteuropean countries to interact with it or how to become a part of it, you have to be prepared.”

This was January 1989, at a time when the [1992] Maastricht treaty had not even been drafted. How the hell did Giscard d’Estaing know what was going to happen in 15 years time? And surprise, surprise, how did he become the author of the European constitution [in 2002-03]? A very good question. It does smell of conspiracy, doesn’t it?

Luckily for us the Soviet part of this conspiracy collapsed earlier and it did not reach the point where Moscow could influence the course of events. But the original idea was to have what they called a convergency, whereby the Soviet Union would mellow somewhat and become more social-democratic, while Western Europe would become social-democratic and socialist. Then there will be convergency. The structures have to fit each other. This is why the structures of the European Union were initially built with the purpose of fitting into the Soviet structure. This is why they are so similar in functioning and in structure.

It is no accident that the European Parliament, for example, reminds me of the Supreme Soviet. It looks like the Supreme Soviet because it was designed like it. Similary, when you look at the European Commission it looks like the Politburo. I mean it does so exactly, except for the fact that the Commission now has 25 members and the Politburo usually had 13 or 15 members. Apart from that they are exactly the same, unaccountable to anyone, not directly elected by anyone at all. When you look into all this bizarre activity of the European Union with its 80,000 pages of regulations it looks like Gosplan. We used to have an organisation which was planning everything in the economy, to the last nut and bolt, five years in advance. Exactly the same thing is happening in the EU. When you look at the type of EU corruption, it is exactly the Soviet type of corruption, going from top to bottom rather than going from bottom to top.

If you go through all the structures and features of this emerging European monster you will notice that it more and more resembles the Soviet Union. Of course, it is a milder version of the Soviet Union. Please, do not misunderstand me. I am not saying that it has a Gulag. It has no KGB – not yet – but I am very carefully watching such structures as Europol for example. That really worries me a lot because this organisation will probably have powers bigger than those of the KGB. They will have diplomatic immunity. Can you imagine a KGB with diplomatic immunity? They will have to police us on 32 kinds of crimes – two of which are particularly worrying, one is called racism, another is called xenophobia. No criminal court on earth defines anything like this as a crime [this is not entirely true, as Belgium already does so – pb]. So it is a new crime, and we have already been warned. Someone from the British government told us that those who object to uncontrolled immigration from the Third World will be regarded as racist and those who oppose further European integration will be regarded as xenophobes. I think Patricia Hewitt said this publicly."

What is QE meant to achieve?

Alex Masterley has spotted a change of mind...
"in a new speech, Charlie Bean says forget about the bit about making the banks flush with cash. No that isn't the point at all. The idea is to boost the value of gilts, forget about the idea of filling the banks with cash equivalent reserves, apparently that was not the point at all, even though that was what they said in March."

A comment found somewhere on the blogosphere

“I think Merkel will be satified with the Sudetenland, I don’t believe she will make further demands.”
Can one take the 1938 parallels too far?

Tuesday, 13 October 2009

Does the reverse not apply?

"If the president (of the Czech Republic) is obstructing the democratic process and opposing the decision of parliament as well as the will of the people, he is moving beyond the law and will need to face the consequences," a German diplomat told The Sunday Times.


What about when the Prime Minister and Parliament (of the United Kingdom) are opposing the will of the people of the UK?

Does the same rule not apply?

A victory for free-speech (in fact 2)

To add to the vanquishing of Messrs Carter-Ruck's injunction granted to prevent reporting of a question to be posed in the House of Commons, see Guido for the story today, we now have the news that Dutch MP Geert Wilders has won his appeal against a Home Office decision barring his entry to the UK. He now plans to visit the UK next week and show his film alongside Lord Pearson in the House of Lords. I presume that the usual suspects will launch protests (possibly violent ones) at this disgraceful use of free speech, free speech that they would like banned.

I wonder if the Home Office will now launch a further appeal on the grounds that no Muslim must ever be upset by the truth.

Brainwashing enviromentalist style (the fightback)



That didn't take long did it? Here is the original video.


Thanks to Theo Spark for the spot.

Panic on the streets of Berlin, Paris and Brussels

The EU bosses are worried that if a Conservative government is elected in the UK before the Lisbon Treaty is put into force then a referendum called in the UK would vote their project down. Leaving aside the fact that if the referendum is certain to be defeated then why has the UK's Labour lickspittle government ratified it there is another worrying story emerging.

It seems that the German and French governments, as well as that of the Swedes who hold the rotating EU Presidency, are putting pressure on the Czech President Vaclav Klaus to sign the Treaty as Fredrik Reinfeldt, the Prime Minister of Sweden, said to the signing ceremony in Poland "We do not need more delays". Meanwhile it is alleged that pressure is being put on the Czech Parliament to persuade their stubborn President to sign the Lisbon treaty, talk of impeachment proceedings or maybe stripping him of his treaty-signing powers is rife. Either of these routes would mean the Treaty being signed before any possible UK general election.

Sordid isn't it? The EU pushing a small member country to sign-up and shut-up so as to ensure that the popultaion of one of the big EU countries is denied a referendum, a referendum that they were promised by all their political parties ahead of the last general election. You might be excused for wondering why the EU are so desperate to impose the Lisbon Treaty if it is just a "tidying up exercise". Maybe it is somewhat more than that... We know it, they know it; it's just that they will continue to lie about it right up until the Treaty is in place and we are subsumed, even more than we are now, into the EU super-state.

The Brighton Bombing remembered

Not via the vile decision to invite the Brighton bomber Patrick Magee to a a ' forgiveness' event in the House of Commons today, but via the words and pictures of Lord Tebbit and his wife. Read the story ion today's Daily Mail and decide whether you think Patrick Magee deserved to be released from prison ridiculously early. Don't forget that Patrick Magee was sentenced to eight life terms (in 1986) with the recommendation that he serve at least 35 years; he was freed by this weak and terrorist appeasing government in 1999 under the terms of the Good Friday Agreement. Patrick Magee should have served his full jail sentence and his bosses and handlers in SinnFein/IRA should not be sitting in the Northern Ireland Assembly, the House of Commons or local government, instead they should be in prison alongside him.

That's a surprise

Number 10 report that:
"The Prime Minister has called for a “fresh openness” to mental illness across our society in a message to mark World Mental Health Day.

World Mental Health Day was started by the World Federation for Mental Health in 1992 to promote greater public awareness and understanding of mental health and mental illness.

Mr Brown said the Government was implementing a five-year plan to offer help to those suffering from mental health problems."
Quite right too.

The best person for the job is replaced after less than four months

Gordon Brown brought Glenys Kinnock back into his Government as Europe Minister this summer saying that she was the best person for the job. I note that yesterday she was moved to be responsible for Africa at the Foreign Office and replaced by Chris Bryant. Maybe Gordon Brown could let us know at what point Glenys Kinnock ceased to be the best person for the job of Europe Minister and why Chris Bryant is better suited to the role.

Rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic and Hitler directing non-existent armies on his war map spring to mind as analogies.

Barack Obama's broken promises

Some of the gloss seems to be coming off of the Barack Obama persona as people realise that like Tony Blair he's all froth and spin. The Telegraph have a list of ten broken promises, take a look, here's a couple:
"1.PROMISE BROKEN. Mr Obama said he would "not sign any non-emergency bill without giving the American public an opportunity to review and comment on the White House website for five days". But the "sunlight before signing" promise has already fallen by the wayside with Mr Obama signing three major bills without public scrutiny.

2.PROMISE BROKEN. Mr Obama repeatedly said he would negotiate health care reform in televised sessions broadcast on C-SPAN, the public service network. Instead, he his approach has been no different from his predecessors, holding talks behind closed doors at the White House and Congress."
Well done USA taken in by a well dressed, good-looking, conman; but don't be too upset the UK fell for Tony Blair before you. However some of us were warning you...

Happy Birthday Lady Thatcher

Monday, 12 October 2009

Some scientific musings on Man Made Global Warming

This is Derbyshire reports that:
"...after years of research, Derby historian Ron McKeown claims that global warming is not our fault.

"I'm not expecting my ideas to be very popular," said Ron. "I am just voicing the conclusions that my research has naturally led me to."

...

But Ron does say his studies imply that man's impact on global warming is fairly minimal in relation to other environmental influences, over which mankind has very little control.

His findings can be read in his booklet, The Man-Made Global Warming Debate and Historical Contradictions.

It follows on from his publication, The Rivers of Time, in which he investigated the role played by the Derwent and Trent rivers in the development of the region.

Ron collected his evidence by examining local maps, documents and artefacts recovered from archeological digs in the area, many dating back to Roman, Anglo-Saxon and Viking times. According to his data, there have been huge changes in the local landscape with water levels rising and falling significantly over the years.

Ron is particularly interested in evidence which suggests that large areas of Derby and its surrounding areas were once covered with water.

Ron believes Derby was originally created on land around Markeaton Brook which was more like a river than a brook at the time.

"My findings have led me to suggest that our climate has always fluctuated and that the earth has had periods when its climate was much warmer overall.

"So global warming, melting ice caps and higher sea levels may not be just a modern phenomenon," he said.

Ron speculates that there could be several factors which contributed to Derby's watery past but he is convinced that, at times, the world's temperatures were much warmer than today.

"In the past, Britain was described as the bread basket of Europe with two harvests a year.

"This implies a much warmer climate.

"It is possible that we are just emerging from a little ice age, which has misled scientists into believing that the earth should be 'naturally' cooler than it is at present.

"Temperatures will always fluctuate as a result of many environmental factors of which man is just one.

"I would go as far as to suggest that man's activity throughout the 19th and 20th century, coupled with relatively frequent volcanic activity has actually been keeping the planet uncommonly cool."

He goes on to explain his belief that layers of dust and pollution over many years may actually have insulated the earth from the heat of the sun's rays.

Ron's booklet on the evidence for his theories and on Derby's landscape though the ages can purchased from Darley Park Tea Rooms or by contacting Ron at www.derbyheritageforum.co.uk.

THE MAN-MADE GLOBAL WARMING DEBATE AND HISTORICAL CONTRADICTIONS

BY: Ron McKeown.

PUBLISHER: Tranters, Markeaton Printing Works.

PRICE: £3.50."
Very interesting indeed.



Thanks to Greenie Watch for the spot.