Money (That's What I Want) - How many of these versions have you heard before?

In the spirit of Radio London's Robert Elms "Cover to Cover" feature I thought I'd like to compare the Beatles and the Flying Lizards version of the classic song "Money (That's What I Want)" but then I discovered that this song has been covered so so many times and so I have gathered as many as I could find in this post:


The Beatles - 1963



The Flying Lizards - 1979



Barret Strong - 1959



Buddy Guy - 1968(?)



The Searchers - 1962(?)



John Lennon - 1969 (live)



The Trashmen - 1963 originally but this video is somewhat later



The Kingsmen - 1962(?)



Rolling Stones - 1963



Led Zeppelin - 1980



The Doors - 196?



Bern Elliott & The Fenmen - 1963



Jerry Lee Lewis - ?



Jerry Lee Lewis & The Bee Gees - 1973 (Barry Gibb not singing falsetto!)



The Sonics - 196?



The Smashing Pumpkins - 198?



Hanson - 200?



Josie and the Pussycats - 2001



Great White - 1988



Blues Brothers - This isn't the original, anyone know where I can find it on YouTube or similar?



Avengers - 2009



The Supremes - 1966



Jr Walker and the All Stars - 1966




Jimmy Barnes - 2009



Waylon Jennings - 1964




Boyz II Men - 200?



John Belushi (Animal House soundtrack) - 1978



The Storys - played over the closing credits of the much underrated British Fil - The Bank Job


RC Succession - 1983 - Kiyoshiro Imawano has spent too long watching Mick Jagger - Actually that's not "Money" but well worth a watch of the band whose 1988 covers album's release was suddenly canceled with small notice by Toshiba EMI claiming "The album was too wonderful to be released."



Also try and find versions by John Lee Hooker, The Who, Ike & Tina Turner, Pearl Jam, Shonen Knife, The Pretenders, Scissor Sisters, Secret Machines, The B-52s, Cheap Trick, Etta James and any others - do let me know in the comments...

Will US Health Care reform really save money?

The answer "no" is no real surprise is it?

The seventy-sixth weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

This week's award goes to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, as reported in The Telegraph for concluding that: 'Ten million middle-income households have lost out because of Gordon Brown’s repeated tax rises'.

Gordon Brown's tax changes have hit middle-income households the hardest - "No shit, Sherlock".

The EU wants more money and more power and it will get both

Two reports catch my eye this morning:

1) The Telegraph report that:

'Figures contained in Treasury documents published alongside the Budget show Britain is projected to hand over £6.4billion this year, and £7.6billion in 2010/11.

This compares with projections previously disclosed in last year's Budget of £5.6billion for 2009/10 and £7.9billion for 2010/11.

Over the two years the UK will have given £500million more than previously thought to Brussels.

The figure for 2009/10 - £6.4bilion - is more than twice the £3.1billion handed over in 2008/09.

The increase is due to a reduction in Britain's annual rebate first negotiated by Margaret Thatcher in 1984 to balance out a smaller benefit from EU farming payments.

In 2005, Tony Blair agreed, with Gordon Brown's backing, to staged cuts in the rebate for a promise of a review of EU subisidies. He was criticised for failing to extract any concessions. '

Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have sold this country out to the EU in return for nothing for the UK, but plenty for their friends and colleagues.


2) The Telegraph reports that:

'Germany and France have tabled controversial plans to create an "economic government of the European Union" to police financial policy across the continent.

They have put Herman Van Rompuy, the EU President, in charge of a special task force to examine "all options possible" to prevent another crisis like the one caused by the Greek meltdown.

His mission will be to draw up a master-plan for the best way to oversee and enforce economic targets set in Brussels as a key part of a bail-out package for Greece.

The options he will consider include the creation of an "economic government" by the by the end of the year.

"We commit to promote a strong co-ordination of economic policies in Europe," said a draft text expected to be agreed by EU leaders last night.

"We consider that the European Council should become the economic government of the EU and we propose to increase its role in economic surveillance and the definition of the EU's growth strategy."

Gordon Brown was last night examining the wording of the statement to see whether it was restricted to eurozone members or has possible implications for British economic sovereignty.

Officials are concerned that the language calling for an "economic government" could be another attempt at a power-grab in the wake of the Lisbon Treaty.'

Every event is used by the EU to accrue more power and to centralise control. The EUSSR is nearing completion and David Cameron will not protect the UK from its clutches.

What happened to this story?

A year ago I blogged about the discovery of a modern advanced Russian MiG-25 Foxbat plane being found buried in the sand after an informant tipped off U.S troops.

"The MiG was dug out of a massive sand dune near the Al Taqqadum airfield by U.S. Air Force recovery teams. The MiG was reportedly one of over two dozen Iraqi jets buried in the sand, like hidden treasure, waiting to be recovered at a later date. Contrary to what some in the major media have reported, not all the jets found were from the Gulf War era. The Russian-made MiG-25 Foxbat being recovered by U.S. Air Force troops in the photos is an advanced reconnaissance version never before seen in the West and is equipped with sophisticated electronic warfare devices... The recovery of the advanced MiG fighter is considered to be an intelligence coup by the U.S. Air Force.. The Foxbat may also be equipped with advanced Russian- and French-made electronics that were sold to Iraq during the 1990s in violation of a U..N. ban on arms sales to Baghdad.... The discovery of the buried Iraqi jet fighters illustrates the problem faced by ! U.S. inspection teams searching Iraq for weapons of mass destruction. Iraq is larger in size than California, and the massive deserts south and west of Baghdad were used by Saddam Hussein to hide weapons during the first Gulf war. U.S. intelligence sources have already uncovered several mass grave burial sites in the open deserts with an estimated 10,000 dead hidden there. In addition, Iraq previously hid SCUD missiles, chemical weapons and biological warheads by burying them under the desert sand. U.N. inspection teams found the weapons in the early 1990s after detailed information of the exact locations was obtained."

The BBC at it again (and a personal note)

The BBC have a very short piece headlined 'Hoon admits interview 'mistakes' '. I will quote the whole article as it seems strangely short and lacking in information to me:

'Labour MP Geoff Hoon has admitted he got it "wrong" after he was filmed saying he wanted to turn his contacts in government into money.

Mr Hoon and two other former ministers were suspended for bringing the party into "disrepute" after revelations in the Dispatches programme.

Mr Hoon said he "should not have said some of the things I said", adding that he had been "showing off".

But he insisted he was not offering to lobby ministers in return for cash. '

How peculiar, is Geoff Hoon admitting to lying to the 'lobbyists', it doesn't seem that way to me. Indeed if you read the last two quotes again... "should not have said some of the things I said" and "showing off" then it could be deduced that Geoff Hoon thinks that what he did "wrong" was get caught.

It seems to me that one reading of this brief article is that Geoff Hoon has acknowledged he made an error in saying what he shouldn't and that he was not offering to lobby ministers in return for cash but there is no denial that he ever lobbied ministers (or others) in return for payment in the past.

The other oddity about this article is that there is no link back to the original news report so as to set this in context, unlike normal BBC practice. There is something very odd about this Geoff Hoon confession story, very odd indeed.




Yes I have restarted blogging after yesterday's hiatus but I must admit to not feeling the enthusiasm I had prior to reading that vile BBC article that I blogged about yesterday. Thanks to the three people who wished me well in my Comments section; for some odd reason Blogger would only let me post Craig's comment but I appreciate all three. Blogging will be lighter than normal until I regain my blogging mojo.

If one is guilty then we are all guilty

The BBC's sympathetic piece about the mother-in-law of Mohammed Siddque Khan's life since her son-in-law was the ringleader of the plot that killed 52 innocent people on London's transport network 7 July 2005. Apparently

'Farida Patel, from Dewsbury, told an anti-racism conference in Bradford how police searched her family's homes.

She said her life "came falling down" when armed police knocked on her door.

Mrs Patel said: "When I opened the curtains all I saw was armed police officers with guns looking at me.

"When they walked in I asked 'why are you here', they said they are investigating the 7 July bombings and they will need to search the premises.

"They told me, my son and my daughter-in-law to take a few essentials and find alternative accommodation for a few days. That turned into two weeks."

The home of Mrs Patel's daughter, who was separated from Khan at the time of the bombings, was also searched.

Mrs Patel told The Monitoring Group conference that it was the most "difficult times of our lives".'

I really don't see what Mrs Patel's gripe is; her son-in-law was responsible directly and indirectly for the murder of 52 innocent people and the mutilation of many more, did she expect the police to not investigate family connections? Did she expect them to come unarmed and risk being attacked by other murderous Islamist fanatics?

My views on 7/7 are documented and I don't intend to go into that again but I am sick of the BBC putting articles like this one up. When was the last time the BBC interviewed the grieving relatives of those who dies on 7/7? When was the last time the BBC interviewed those who were maimed on 7/7 and whose lives have not been the same since?

The BBC disgust me; their support for Islamic terrorists in the Middle East, Afghanistan, Russia is bad enough but their trying to drum up sympathy for a relative of a man who caused so much death and destruction, without covering the plight of the victims and their families shows what a perverted sense of priorities the BBC have.

Writing this article has really affected me, I may not blog again for a while.

“It is hard to imagine the circumstances when saying ‘f*****g Jews’ in a gym used by other people... could be considered reasonable.”

"It is hard to imagine the circumstances when saying ‘f*****g Jews’ in a gym used by other people, and overheard by two strangers 20 ft away, could be considered reasonable."

The words of District Judge Howard Riddle at the original trial of Rowan Laxton who was recently cleared, at a rehearing of the case, of racially aggravated harassment, having previously been found guilty.

Hard to imagine indeed.

Thanks to Harry's Place for the spot.

Pick your favourite cricket programme presenter

Sky's Charles Colville or ITV4's Mandira Bedi; tough choice?

The BBC admit...

The BBC have an interesting piece on comparing the economy in 1997 and 2010, take a look:
Inflation: 1996 ~ 1.9% 2010 ~ 3.0%
Government borrowing: 1996/97 ~ £27bn 2009/10 ~ £178bn
National Debt: 1996/97 ~ £347bn 2009/10 ~ £799bn
Growth: 1997 ~ +3.0% 2009 ~ -5.0%
Interest Rates: 1997 ~ 5.94% 2010 ~ 0.5%
Health Spending: 1996/97 ~ £42.8bn 2009/10 ~ 119bn (Do you feel the NHS is three times better?)
Education Spending: 1996/97 ~ £37.8bn 2009/10 ~ £88bn
Average House Price: 1997 ~ £55,621 2010 ~ £161,320
Unemployment: Jan 1997 ~ 2.23 million Jan 2010 ~ 2.45 million
Personal Debt: 1997 ~ £492bn 2010 ~ £1,460bn

So it's inflation up by 57%, Government borrowing up by 659%, National Debt up by 230% and Growth down from a healthy 3% to negative growth of 5%.

In return for that we have interest rates down albeit because the economy is tanking, massively increased spending in health and education (might this have anything to do with the deficit and National debt being raised?).

Average house prices are up thanks to Gordon Brown's deliberate creation of a housing bubble and I think that might be somewhat linked to the almost trebling of personal debt.

Unemployment is only slightly up but I think that figure needs to viewed with some suspicion bearing in mind the off-the count figures.


So 13 years of Labour rule - on balance good or bad for the economy?

David Cameron finally says it like it is

"Those statements by Labour are quite simply lies... "They are appalling people... The sooner they are out of the government of this country the better."

This is more like what the people want to hear. Tell the truth and shame Labour, their record is appalling and the people want to hear that the Conservatives have some fire in their bellies.

The BBC with a carefully worded headline

There should be a prize awarded to the BBC employee who chose to headline a report about David Cameron's claim that 'The "scandals" besetting Labour are "worse" than those which afflicted the Conservative government of the mid-1990s' with the headline 'Cameron: Scandal worse than 1990s'. Nicely done, I wonder how many people read the headline and think the story is about a Tory scandal rather than a Labour one?

More on the Steve Purcell story

I have blogged before about the rather odd Steve Purcell story and wondered why it has received so little coverage. Today I see that Tory Bear has raised the question

'A scandal far from London is edging closer and close to the door of Number 10. In amongst the plants and moans that normally take up the latter stages of PMQs there was a rare gem of a very intriguing question from the SNP's Angus Robertson asking Gordon about a conference call to discuss the suitability of Labour's disgraced cocaine king Steven Purcell as the candidate in the Glasgow East by-election in 2008.

AR: "Given that the Prime Minister will have looked closely at the tragic case. Will he confirm whether a Downing Street staffer took part in a conference in July 2008 which discussed the suitability of Stephen Purcell?

GB: I know nothing of what he says but I shall look at it.

'

Tory Bear wonders if

'you might be getting an idea why Gordon Brown was not exactly keen on drawing attention to the UK media about a story which has him and numerous senior Labour leaders wining and dining with people who have some seriously dodgy connections and backgrounds. If its full implications broke before the sixth of May it may not just destroy Scottish Labour but bring down Brown.'

Tory Bear also has three questions that he feels need answering. Take a read of Tory Bear's article and ask yourself why this story has received so little exposure?

That's an odd question to ask

A small article in The Telegraph catches my eye, I repeat it in full first:

'Martin Popplewell, quizzing Gordon Brown for GT magazine, put it to the Prime Minister that, if he had to have a homosexual relationship, would it be with Will Young, Brad Pitt (who happens to be heterosexual) or Lord Mandelson?

"Oh, come on," Brown told the journalist, laughing. "You're not going to expect me to answer the question, given what Peter would say, whatever I said."

"Don't tell Peter," Popplewell responded.

"Well, he'll know," Brown replied, plaintively. "You know what Peter's like."'

That's an odd question to ask Gordon Brown unless you bear in mind the rumours that have been circulating for many years about Gordon Brown, Peter 'outed by Matthew Parris' Mandelson and Tony 'Miranda' Blair.

And still the power generation claims of the wind-power lobby get reported as fact

The Telegraph reports the breaking off a wind-turbine blade at a wind farm and ends the piece with this claim: 'The Whitelee windfarm... turbines can generate 322MW of electricity, enough to power 180,000 homes.'

Of course the key word there is 'can' because as well know windfarms rarely produce electricity at anything like capacity. Indeed The TimesM recently reported that:

'THE first detailed study of Britain’s onshore wind farms suggests some treasured landscapes may have been blighted for only small gains in green energy.

The analysis reveals that more than 20 wind farms produce less than a fifth of their potential maximum power output.

One site, at Blyth Harbour in Northumberland, is thought to be the worst in Britain, operating at just 7.9% of its maximum capacity. Another at Chelker reservoir in North Yorkshire operates at only 8.7% of capacity.

Both are relatively small and old, but larger and newer sites fared badly, too, according to analyses of data released by Ofgem, the energy regulator, for 2008.

Siddick wind farm in Cumbria, now operated by Eon, achieved only 15.8% of capacity, the figures suggest. The two turbines at High Volts 2, Co Durham, the largest and most powerful wind farm in Britain when it was commissioned in 2004, achieved 18.7%.

Turbine efficiency is calculated by comparing theoretical maximum output with what the farms actually generate. The best achieve about 50% efficiency and the norm is 25%-30%. '

I cannot find the generation figures for Whitelee but I doubt that it is more than 50% of the 322MW figure quoted in The Telegraph.


As an aside I have just looked at the always fascinating Neta site and see that for the last 24 hours this was the breakdown of power generation by type of power source:
Gas - 52.3%
Coal - 24.3%
Nuclear - 19.8%
Pumped Storage - 1.2%
Wind - 1.1%
Non pumped storage Hydro - 0.7%
Interconnect - 0.6%

That 1.1% is 12,206MWh; I wonder what the claimed capacity of UK Wind Farms is?

ChrisM reports in my comments that "Current capacity is 4122 MW with another 10,000 MW under construction". If this is true then wind farms were running at around 12.3% over the period I examined; impressive!

Fact-checking UNITE

Flying With Fish fact-checks UNITE's statement and the claims made within, here are a few extracts:

'- Unite The Union release: Only nine crew turned up for work today out of 1,100.

- BA Strike Fact: Without even having to verify the number of British Airways cabin crew who reported for duty, Unite The Union is releasing conflicting information. In a public statement Unite is stating only 9 BA cabin crew members reported for work, however in a Text Message sent to all BA cabin crew members of Unite, the union stated this “only 26 crew reported for duty today.“ Was it 9 members or 26 members?

...

- BA Strike Fact: There is no evidence of any British Airways aircraft having broken an emergency exit door. Unite has refused to reply to enquiries citing this incident or the flight it occurred on. If indeed this occurred, I’d like Unite The Union to please state what flight this occurred on.

- Unite The Union release: Only nine Heathrow flights have gone with passengers.

- BA Strike Fact: Unite the Union claims only nine flight departed with passengers, but goes on to only list seven flights … including Amsterdam, Dubai, Entebee, Frankfurt, Miami, Paris, and Prague. Again, without having to do much investigation, in the process of researching the passenger experience during the BA Strike I have heard from 11 people who flew with British Airways yesterday … none of which flew on the seven flights above. I heard from passengers who flew with BA to Madrid, New York (x3 on 2 separate flights), Boston, Newark, Munich, Milan, San Francisco, Zurich and Glasgow. Given that Unite states that BA 207, a 747-400 operating between London Heathrow and Miami, flew with passengers, a minimum crew for that flight alone exceeds 9 crew…, which leads to again questioning Unite’s statement, that only 9 crew turned up for work. Further more, volunteer crews are not operating on 747 aircraft, further evidence that Unite is unable to keep its facts straight … even within its own press release.'

Do read the whole piece and compare it with the BBC's acceptance of UNITE's claims.

What about UNITE?

On Monday Harriet Harman spoke about 'Lobbying and Paid Advocacy' and this was part of what she said:

"From 1 October last year, the Government now publish, for the first time, on a quarterly basis, details of Ministers' meetings with outside interest groups. It is therefore fully transparent which organisations a Minister has met and what the meeting was about."

Are the meetings between Gordon Brown (a Minister) and Charlie Whelan (a representative of an outside interest group - UNITE) reported in this way? If not, why not?

Italian driving

Ah the memories of Italian driving on the Autostrada, always 'interesting', sometimes terrifying.


Thanks to Subrosa for the spot.

Peter Oborne names the 'fixers' but is censored

I wonder who the three names were? Peter are you out there?


Thanks to 'Lobbyists are...' in Guido's comments for the video spot.

Something does not add up

Gordon Brown decides that there is no need for a parliamentary inquiry into the Labour MPs and peers (current & past).

Harriet Harman declares that "They (the departments) have assured the cabinet secretary that they are satisfied that there has been no improper influence on government policy or ministerial decisions."

The Labour party have suspended three MPs from the Parliamentary Labour Party over claims they were prepared to influence policy for cash.

So the Labour government line is that the only guilty parties are the Blairite former ministers and that no government departments or ministers are implicated in any way. For some strange reason I don't believe them; Lord Adonis and Peter Mandelson need investigating over their part in these claims. Don't forget that there have been stories about Peter Mandelson's amenability to lobbying for some time - the Hindujas and Oleg Deripaska spring to mind as examples from the resent past.

The Large Hardon (?) Collider

Thanks to various, including Dizzy Thinks for the spot.

'State spending now accounts for more than half of Britain's economy, for the first time since OECD records began.'

Read this Telegraph piece and realise just how much damage Tony 'multi-millionaire' Blair and Gordon 'fearty' Brown have done to this country.

'Remember the competitive, entrepreneurial Britain of which Cabinet members boasted for so long? State spending now accounts for more than half of Britain's economy, for the first time since OECD records began. Money from Whitehall and town halls made up 52 per cent of Gross Domestic Product last year, and the proportion is certain to rise. If Tony Benn had been Prime Minister in the 1970s, even he would have been hard pressed to engineer this intensity of state dependency – though he would have been delighted if he had.

When Labour came to power in 1997, government spending accounted for 40 per cent of GDP. That was a respectable figure, comparable to that of the United States. Now Britain has overtaken most European countries in state spending. Admittedly, the recession accounts for the big jump from 47.5 per cent a year ago. But the long-term trend has been shaped by Labour's eye-watering spending increases over a decade, cynically designed to build up and reward a public-sector workforce that could be relied upon to return the favour at election times.

The figure of 52 per cent should be at the forefront of our minds when Alistair Darling, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, delivers his Budget on Wednesday. We should also note that, according to the OECD, state spending will account for more than 53 per cent of GDP in 2010 and 2011. This tells us something important. Whatever Mr Darling announces this week, the damage has already been done. Gordon Brown is a believer in "back loading" – announcing harsh (and bad) policies that do not take effect for a long time. He lit a long fuse on National Insurance increases and penal 50 per cent taxation; many useless social engineering projects are just beginning. Perhaps the Prime Minister guessed that someone else would have to clear up the mess. There is a whiff of scorched earth in the air. '

get angry, get even...

Peter Mandelson disappeared from the Stephen Byers lobbying story pretty quickly didn't he

When the Stephen Byers lobbying story broke there were two strands, one was that Stephen Byers had boasted that he had persuaded Lord Adonis to avoid hitting National Express with huge penalties last year after it pulled out of its franchise to operate the East Coast main line.

"Between you and I, I then spoke to Andrew Adonis and said, 'Andrew, look they’ve got a huge problem. Is there a way out of this?' And then we sort of worked together - basically the way he was comfortable doing it, and you have to keep this very confidential yourself."

The other was that Stephen Byers claimed to have successfully lobbied Lord Mandelson on behalf of Tesco to block costly food labelling regulations.

Now the Lord Adonis story is being followed up by the BBC, albeit concentrating on the less than convincing government denials, whereas the Peter Mandelson story is relegated to a short denial. Let's look at The Mail's coverage and then the BBC's. The Mail reports the departmental denials thus:

'A Department for Transport spokesman yesterday acknowledged that Lord Adonis had spoken to Mr Byers about the issue but he said it was a ‘chance meeting’ at Westminster, at which no minutes were taken.

He insisted that the conversation had not influenced the final decision and that National Express had not escaped penalties.

...

In a statement last night a spokesman for the Business Secretary said: ‘Peter has known Stephen in the past but has barely seen him since returning to government. He has certainly not spoken to him about food labelling regulations and would not expect to.’'

The BBC's report takes a slightly different tack:

'Transport Secretary Lord Adonis has dismissed claims he was involved in a secret deal over a National Express rail franchise as "pure fantasy".

It follows undercover footage of ex-minister Stephen Byers claiming he had persuaded the minister to allow the firm to withdraw on favourable terms.

Mr Byers said later he had overstated his case and never lobbied ministers.

And Lord Adonis told peers there was "no truth whatsoever" in claims he came to "any arrangement" with Mr Byers.

But Lord Adonis's confirmation that he had had "a brief conversation" with Mr Byers in the House of Commons last June about the East Coast mainline led the Tories to step up calls for an inquiry by Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell into the claims. '

That "brief conversation" could be problematic...

The Mandelson link is dealt with thus:

'In undercover footage due to be broadcast on Channel 4's Dispatches programme on Monday, Mr Byers was also recorded saying he had intervened on behalf of Tesco to delay and amend food labelling proposals, by phoning Business Secretary Lord Mandelson.

The Business Department has denied the claims and Tesco said they were "completely fictitious". '

"completely fictitious"; like a mortgage application?


Meanwhile Gordon Brown decided there was no need for a government investigation and seems to expect that we will trust his judgement, whilst also suddenly becoming a huge fan of controlling lobbyists access to parliament.

Also the BBC reports that

'Harriet Harman told MPs that the prime minister had asked Sir Gus O'Donnell for assurances that the departments of business, transport and health - about which allegations were also made in the documentary - had looked into the claims.

She added: "They have assured the cabinet secretary that they are satisfied that there has been no improper influence on government policy or ministerial decisions."'

How in depth were the departmental investigations, who was asked and was any independent verification of claims attempted? I think we all know the answer to these questions, but it is interesting how the Peter Mandelson angle is rapidly disappearing from the BBC; what hold does he have over the BBC? Will the BBC mention this story on Newsnight? If they do will Peter Mandelson be mentioned at all?

Steven Moffat just as left-wing as you'd ecpect

Dr Who leaves me conflicted; I am a long time fan and think that the David Tennant Doctor is up there with Pertwee and Tom Baker as the best Doctor's BUT I despise the right-on plot lines that have infiltrated Dr Who in recent years under Russell T Davies direction. I always thought that Steven Moffat wrote some of the best episodes and so was pleased at him replacing RTD as head honcho of the Dr Who series. 'Blink' was a msterpiece and the lesser loved 'Madame de Pompadour' I thought was just clever enough to get you thinking. However this Guardian interview shows Steven Moffat to be just as 'right on' as RTD; I just hope he does a better job of keeping his political and social views out of the new series, RTD was too fond of thrusting homosexuality down the viewers' throats.

The Guardian interview includes such classic lines as:

'If I'm not mistaken, Steven Moffat suddenly shudders. But the new Doctor Who showrunner... isn't chilled by the thought of malevolent monsters, unappealing aliens or sinister villains soon to appear in the Whoniverse. Rather, he winces at the prospect of a Conservative government – and specifically the influence that Rupert and James Murdoch may exert over it, its media policy and its attitude to the BBC.

"I hope the Tories don't win. Let's not beat around the bush,"'

and

'The burden Moffat bears...something of which he's very conscious."To me, a 'brand' sounds evil," he says, "reminiscent of men in tall hats running factories and beating small children'

Why do so many, otherwise intelligent, people on the left of British politics see life in such a strange way?

#CashGordon is back

Cash Gordon is back and presumably harder to hack this time...

#cashgordon

The Cash Gordon site has taking the UK blogosphere by storm. Read The Telegraph and The Guardian for opposing views. Then read Tory Bear for some analysis of left-wing hypocrisy. Then you might care to read political Scapbook and the comments for an idea of the left-wing 'fightback' allegations. Then a quick perusal of Dizzy Thinks for a reasoned answer to those points.

Then the matter gets darker, the site now redirects to coverage of Michael Gove's speech and Dizzy Thinks explains why that is better than where the previous attack left it pointing

'the developers who were paid to create it didn't, it seems, protect against code injection. The Twitter feed was scrolling as people used the hashtag #cashgordon. The problem was that by inserting javascript into the Tweet comment it was possible to browser hijack people and redirect them elsewhere e.g. to old men getting it on as in Lemon Party*.

People began to do it spades and it's been taken offline and word is that it's being fixed currently.'

So that seems like a good idea ruined by lack of IT systems security; looks like the Conservatives are ready for government as that scenario describes so much of the current Labour government's IT system...



UPDATE: The Register has a good summary of this story.

Climate Change snippets

A couple of Climate Change articles caught my eye this weekend and I thought that I would share them with you. The first is from a site that is new to me The Hockey Schtick and the article that I spotted shows some interesting pictures of the 'disappearing' glaciers can be found here, in the meantime here's two photos of the intersection of the Hintereisferner and Kesselwandferner glaciers, one from 1956 the other from 2003; not really shrinking is it?




The second piece is from the excellent Joanne Nova and concerns 'hiding the decline'. Here's the chart that I thought the most interesting but do read the whole piece, and then the comments which are often most illuminating.

Harry Carpenter R.I.P.

Harry Carpenter the voice of BBC boxing has dies at the age of 84; no more will Frank Bruno be able to ask "Know what I mean, 'arry?"

The world of broadcasting has lost one of the true greats; I grew up listening to his commentaries of Ali's fights, Wimbledon tennis, the Boat Race and other events and I for one will miss him.

Samantha Cameron

Definitely sexier than Sarah Brown; but then David Cameron is far better looking than Gordon Brown, not that that is difficult. Anyway you can't beat a bit of 'posh totty'.

What about the seriously injured

The long term injured who to this day bear the scars of the 7/7 terrorist atrocity get little or no attention form the UK media, likewise those seriously injured in Iraq and Afghanistan. So I was pleased to read Trixy's thoughts and you should read them too. Here's a well written extract:

'The summer of 2009 will be etched in the memory of many as we heard of the loss of so many young men and, as these men were flown home and buried with their deserved full military honours, the wards at Selly Oak and Headley Court were packed to bursting with wounded and limbless men. In total there were 158 serious and very seriously injured soldiers in 2009; an average of 13 per month.

In the first two months of this year we have seen 24 serious casualties: 17 very seriously injured and 7 seriously injured. Thats an average of 12 without counting those who were injured from the rifles battlegroup recently. That's almost the same and yet nothing.

I wonder why these figures haven't hit the headlines? I wonder why Bob Ainsworth and Bill Rammell haven't been talking about assistance for these men and their families? Those whose lives are changed forever rather than those who are squabbling, policy-less, to grip onto second homes and lavish expenses at our expense.

But don't hold your breath to hear the stories of those who have suffered and turned their lives around. For the MoD control what they can and can't say to the national press. And that means Bob Ainsworth and Bill Rammell. And do you think they want you reminded of these injured soldiers when they're trying to win your vote?'

The injured should not be forgotten, especially when their injuries are as much the fault of Gordon Brown's under-resourcing of the UK's armed forces as are the more headlining deaths of servicemen.

US Health care reform

The Wall Street Journal has a fascinating reprint of an article from Milton Friedman from 1996. I especially enjoyed the extract from Alexander Solzhenitsyn's 'The Cancer Ward':

'In the words of Dr. Oreschenkov in conversation with Lyudmila Afanasyevna, a longtime patient and herself a physician in the cancer ward: "In general, the family doctor is the most comforting figure in our lives. But he has been cut down and foreshortened. . . . Sometimes it's easier to find a wife than to find a doctor nowadays who is prepared to give you as much time as you need and understands you completely, all of you."

Lyudmila Afanasyevna: "All right, but how many of these family doctors would be needed? They just can't be fitted into our system of universal, free, public health services."

Dr. Oreschenkov: "Universal and public—yes, they could. Free, no."

Lyudmila Afanasyevna: "But the fact that it is free is our greatest achievement."

Dr. Oreschenkov: "Is it such a great achievement? What do you mean by 'free'? The doctors don't work without pay. It's just that the patient doesn't pay them, they're paid out of the public budget. The public budget comes from these same patients. Treatment isn't free, it's just depersonalized. If the cost of it were left with the patient, he'd turn the ten rubles over and over in his hands. But when he really needed help he'd come to the doctor five times over. . . .

"Is it better the way it is now? You'd pay anything for careful and sympathetic attention from the doctor, but everywhere there's a schedule, a quota the doctors have to meet; next! . . . And what do patients come for? For a certificate to be absent from work, for sick leave, for certification for invalids' pensions: and the doctor's job is to catch the frauds. Doctor and patient as enemies—is that medicine?" '

"If any of you go into work tomorrow, your life won't be worth living,''

Allegedy the fraternal greetings from one (or more) union member(s) to others in the BA Cabin Crew strike. The Telegraph has more details, including these claims:

''There was this constant air of menace. At one stage a message was posted on the BA cabin crew internet forum that ''named and shamed'' the pilots who had volunteered to retrain so that they could work as cabin crew during a strike.

Several were warned to be careful of the food cabin crew served when they returned to work. A lot of them were totally freaked out by that. This is a highly unionised business.

If you don't do as the union says you are ostracised. And that isn't easy in a job that so depends on team work – on-board and off the plane.

"Being abroad, sometimes for several days if you are waiting to work on a return flight, you are cooped up with your colleagues. '

Those big brave union bullies -

'Inside Heathrow, she says, menace and unease are everywhere. When BA suggests a new service Unite generally instructs its members to ignore it.

"Ridiculous things,'' Suzy says. "We were asked to distribute hot towels on short haul. Unite said no. We got on board and everyone was in a state. "

'Ex-Governor George says Bank deliberately fuelled consumer boom'

Why isn't this headline news? Why isn't the BBC covering this incredible admission?

The Independent reports that:

'The Bank of England deliberately stoked the consumer boom that has led to record house prices and personal debt in order to avert a recession, the former Bank Governor Eddie George admitted yesterday.

Lord George said he and his colleagues on the Monetary Policy Committee "did not have much of a choice" as they battled to prevent the UK being dragged into a worldwide economic slump by slashing interest rates. And he said his legacy to the current MPC was to "sort out" the problems he had caused.

Lord George, who headed the Bank for a decade from 1993, revealed to MPs on the Treasury Select Committee that he knew the approach was not sustainable. "In the environment of global economic weakness at the beginning of this decade... external demand was declining and related to that, business investment was declining," he said. "We only had two alternative ways of sustaining demand and keeping the economy moving forward - one was public spending and the other was consumption.

"We knew that we were having to stimulate consumer spending. We knew we had pushed it up to levels which couldn't possibly be sustained into the medium and long term. But for the time being, if we had not done that, the UK economy would have gone into recession just as the United States did."

He said he was "very conscious" that stimulating consumer demand could give rise to problems in the future. "My legacy to the MPC, if you like, has been 'sort that out'," he said. Under Lord George's governorship, rates were slashed from 6 per cent in 2001 to 3.5 per cent in 2003, pushing house price inflation above 25 per cent and high street spending growth to its highest since the late-Eighties boom.'

Maybe David Cameron could raise this question with Gordon Brown at PMQs on Wednesday although I doubt he'll get a sensible answer.

Sid James hoofs it up in 'Bermondsey'

From Joe Brown's 1964 film release 'Three Hats For Lisa'. Just saw a clip of this on UK Gold or similar and just had to post it.

Who said Congress Procedures are boring?

The Democrat US healthcare shenanigans explained in 90 seconds, you can spare 90 seconds can't you?

Quote of the day

'I like Virgin. And I flew Singapore Airlines recently, which was out of this world. But there is nothing quite so joyous as leaving the hustle and bustle of a superheated Third World hellhole and being greeted on the big BA jumbo by a homosexual with a cold flannel and a refreshing glass of champagne.'

Jeremy Clarkson in The Times.

'It was like Zulu'

The Telegraph have a report of a battle in Afghanistan where

'For two gruelling weeks in the area of Luy Mandah, 30 soldiers fought a 360-degree battle with the Taliban in the most arduous conditions. The combat was often at close quarters where bayonets were fixed and hand grenades became the weapons of choice for the beleaguered British troops. By the battle’s end, every man in the platoon was credited with at least one Taliban kill. '

Read the whole article and prepare to marvel at the bravery of the UK army and wonder how Gordon Brown could so under-resource them.

New Labour just like Old Labour

The Times reminds us that

'LABOUR’S new 50% tax on high earners will leave Britain with the highest income-tax rates in the G8, just a year after the UK had the second lowest in the influential grouping.

It will have the joint highest personal tax alongside Japan among the world’s leading economies.

Analysis by Ernst & Young, the accountants, also found that just four of the 30 countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) will have higher tax rates than the UK when the new top tier is introduced in April.'

13 years of Labour government and the UK is back being an overtaxed, over-regulated, economic basket case and once again a Conservative government will have to take the unpleasant, unpopular but necessary decisions and so have the hatred of the liberal elite and the great unwashed unleashed against it.

Another Labour government odd links to Trade Unions story

'Whitehall departments are spending millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money paying the salaries of trade union officials. '

So starts The Telegraph in its story that:

'Ministries and Government agencies spent more than £17 million paying staff to carry out “trade union activities” last year.

Some departments are paying staff to work full-time on trade union business.

And some full-time civil servants spend three days a work carrying out union activities and still receive a full salary from the Government.

Public spending on union activities was disclosed in official figures released to MPs.

The Ministry of Justice said it paid its staff to carry out 43,208 days of trade union activity in 2008/09. The estimated total salary cost to the taxpayer was £6.5 million.

HM Revenue and Customs paid its staff for 48,902 days of union activity during, at a cost of £5,918,065

In the current financial year, the Department for Work and Pensions has budgeted to pay its staff to carry out 42,460 days of trade union activity, at an estimated cost of more than £5 million.

Several ministries said they effectively employ full-time union representatives at public expense.'

And on and on and on.

'The total annual bill for trade union activity in Whitehall is likely to be significantly higher than £17 million, because several ministries and agencies have refused to provide figures for their spending. '

I vaguely remember reading about this sort of activity many years back but this passage was news to me:

'Union representatives have had a statutory right to “reasonable paid

time off” to carry out trade union duties since 1975.

Labour gave union representatives more rights to paid time off in 2002, passing a new law allowing union members paid time off for union training courses.'

This is just ridiculous and is yet another way that the Trade Unions and the Labour party are funding each other WITH TAXPAYERS MONEY.

'Mark Wallace of the Taxpayers’ Alliance said... “There is no reason why taxpayers should subsidise the trade unions at all, and this multi-million pound bill must be stopped. The unions are explicitly political organisations, and they should make do with what money they can raise from their members.

“Many taxpayers will be horrified to learn that their money is being used to fund the unions and their big-state, high tax message. It is bad enough that they are issuing threats of strike action, but having to pay for the people organising the strikes adds insult to injury.” '

So far not a word on the voice of the Labour government website.

Another Labour scandal, this time cash for access

The Mail reports

'Labour has been plunged into a cash-for-access row after three former Cabinet Ministers were secretly filmed discussing how they could help a fake lobbying company – with one boasting that he was a ‘cab for hire’ for £5,000 a day.

In the most damaging revelations, ex-Transport Minister Stephen Byers claimed that he managed to save ‘hundreds of millions of pounds’ for one company by using his influence with his successor Lord Adonis over a rail franchise.

Mr Byers also claimed that he had boosted the business interests of Tesco by phoning Peter Mandelson, and said that he could bring Tony Blair to meet clients of the lobbying company which was, in fact, a front for an undercover operation.'

REad the whole piece, compare it with the BBC article and ask yourself why the differences in emphasis? The Mail article explains the charges before reporting the responses from the Labour politicians. The BBC as is their way get the defence in as early as possible.

The full story will be Channel 4's Dispatches programme on Monday at 8pm.

The Guardian unbiased as ever

The Guardian lists 'The 10 best political blogs' - No huge surprises but no place for Iain Dale and rather more left of centre blogs than readerships might justify. However their descriptions seem a trifle warped. Guido Fawkes' blog (at position 10) description commences

'Staines is a former member of the Committee for a Free Britain, a shadowy organisation funded by Sir James Goldsmith and Rupert Murdoch.'

But Will Straw's blog (at position 4) leaves the fact that he is Labour uber-apparatchik Jack Straw's son for later in the passage.

'“Nonsense,” says George. “Sam is totally down with the kids on the street.” “New Bond Street,” points out Eric.'

The rise of Samantha Cameron satirised in The Times, here's a clip do read the rest:

'Friday “I’m not sure this is really working,” says Eric Pickles, surveying some of the press coverage of the past few days. “In fact, I’m starting to suspect that some voters might be finding it all slightly patronising.”

“Nonsense,” says George. “Sam is totally down with the kids on the street.”

“New Bond Street,” points out Eric.

“It’s still a street,” insists George. “And to be honest, some bits north of Claridge’s are actually quite grotty.”'

Read and understand that the war between Islam and the West continues apace

The Times report on the variety of foreign fighters lining up to fight the Western troops in Afghanistan, quite a disparate collection and worrying enough on its own but it was the following line that really caught my eye:

'The fighters from the IMU and its splinter group, the Islamic Jihad Union (IJU), moved to Pakistan’s tribal belt after being driven out of Afghanistan with the Taleban in 2001. They brought with them thousands of family dependants... they are viewed as a growing threat by countries such as Germany, where they have succeeded in penetrating the Turkish expatriate community, as well as recruiting German Muslim converts.'

Still want Turkey to join the EU?

I've Been To A Marvellous Party

The Divine Comedy - almost as good as Noel Coward's original...

Imagine if Sam met Michael

Imagine the furore that would be created if it was reported that Sam Cameron had been spotted having lunch alone with Lord Michael Ashcroft. The BBC would be outraged, there would be endless discussions on the Today programme and Newsnight, Michael Crick would do a humorous piece about the choice of venue for the lunch and might even doorstep David Cameron to get his reaction. Victoria Derbyshire and Richard Bacon on 5Live would be outraged at the possible next Prime Minister's wife lunching with a non-dom.

Oddly the only report that I have seen of Sarah Brown's lunch for two with Lord Swaraj Paul was on Guido Fawkes. Not a word from James Naughtie, Jeremy Paxman, Michael Crick or the 5Live left-wing presenters.

Double standards?

For more about Labour's Lord Paul, I heartily suggest a look here there is much of interest to learn.

The difference between 'deficit' and 'debt'

'Debt is owning the bank money.
Deficit is earning £100 a week and spending £200 a week.
So when Brown saying reduce the deficit by half he means we'll be spending £150 a week, even though our income is only £100 still.
So, under Gordon Brown our debt will increase - until we can no longer borrow money and the proverbial hits the fan.'

The excellent definition offered by 'GDT' in the comments to Fraser Nelson's Spectator piece entitled 'Why Cameron must never say "deficit".'

Read the whole article and the comments, there is much sense there.

The tyranny of children

Some idiot of a neighbour has decided that their small suburban back garden is the perfect place to have a dozen small children play some sort of competitive ball game. As a result Mrs NotaSheep and I have had to close our windows and sit with curtains drawn and the television on trying to blot out some of the noise.

So to all those people who are looking forward to long summer afternoons in their garden, remember that in many cases rather than the tweets of birds and buzzes of bees they will end up listening to the screams of neighbourhood brats.

Of course if anyone gets up the nerve to go and complainm then the parents say "but they are only children", "were you never a child" or "get away from my house or I'll call the police and say your a paedo". Yes, children are above criticism but in my view often below contempt.

A brave man

Islamophobic rant by Cleary Gottlieb lawyer David Toube
Uploaded by themissingpoint. - Watch the latest news videos.
Note the woman chanting "fascist, fascist, fascist..." ad nauseum, the usual resort of the left and those who detest free speech.

I would not have the bravery of David Toube (of Harry’s Place) or the self-control if I was in his position.

Meanwhile Socialist Unity show this video and claim that (my emphasis):

"This is a video of David Toube, blogger from Harry’s Place making an Islamophobic rant. The women sitting behind him is none other than Gareth Peirce one of the most respected Human Rights solicitors in Britain. Not one of the charges made are true accept to those who want to believe such things. Toube has made a habit of attacking people personally in a very public manner. His inflammatory tone and actions fuel the growth in xenophobic hatred when most sound people are seeking to subdue such emotions."

Nice to see that the left don't bother with such outmoded conventions as correct spelling - I think they mean "except" rather than "accept".

Tim Worstall explains why Dennis MacShane is wrong about Stalin, Hitler & comparing them

Tim Worstall takes Dennis MacShane to task and quite nicely:

"As I’ve said before, we can note the difference between people being killed on the grounds of race and and those being killed on the grounds of class. But it’s the killing of people which should be bringing the condemnation, not the grounds for the killing. For it’s the killing of people that’s wrong, d’ye see?

And thus there is a moral equivalence between Nazism and Communism.

Indeed, we might even go further….facism existed in various flavours and only in one instance did it become that pit of evil whereas almost everywhere communism has gained power the flavour of the death camps was similar."

There's plenty more about Dennis MacShane here.

Freedom to travel in the UK?

Nanny Knows Best relates the story of 'Tom Shaw, a musician with the band the Magic Mushrooms, who had the misfortune to be travelling by South West Trains the other day.' Apparently:

'Mr Shaw was writing a list of song titles which his band would play at a forthcoming gig. Included in the list was a band name The Killers and song titles Take Me Out and Cigarettes and Alcohol.

Oooh!!

Can you guess what happened next loyal readers?

Yes, that's right, two members of the train company's security staff approached Mr Shaw and asked him to leave the train at Fareham railway station. In the eyes of "security" Mr Shaw had been behaving "suspiciously".

Once out of the train, Mr Shaw was asked to show them the piece of paper that he had been writing on.

The "security" staff then made Mr Shaw explain song by song what the list was about.

It seems that there was something of a security flap on at the time, thus "justifying" the approach by "security", a number of arrests had been made in the area including a man who had murdered his wife.

A South West Trains spokeswoman gave this remarkably unsettling and worrying quote to MSN:

"We employ a team of highly professional rail community officers who work closely with the British Transport Police in protecting the security of passengers on the rail network. During a routine high-visibility patrol back in early March, they talked with a passenger on the platform at Fareham station.

The team clarified the nature of the individual's business, were satisfied with his explanation and the man went on his way.

We would like to thank the passenger for his co-operation and understanding of the need to be vigilant in the current environment."

"to be vigilant in the current environment"!!

What the hell is going on in these people's minds?

Is this to be the excuse used by jobsworths and train companies etc for every infringement of our personal freedoms?'

That's what 13 years of Labour authoritarian rule have lead to and I hate it.

ID Cards update

Big Brother Watch details the ways in which Gordon Brown's totalitarian Labour government intends to force segments of the population to take an ID card. Meanwhile Victor Cardiss in the comments remarks that:

"two hundred and sixty countries are introducing the same Biometric ID card, yet they insist an calling it a 'national' ID card.
The same private, American company will administer the database in each country (though it may have a different name in each).
By the time it becomes compulsory you'll need it for everything and you'll look like a bit of a Ludite for not wanting one. It will however have so many problems that the government will have to come up with an incredible, global solution.... The personal ID Chip!
(http://www.wethepeoplewillnotbechipped.com/main/news.php)"

The man who's beach is not for sale

The Telegraph report the story of St Lucian Claudius Lousien who lives in a corrugated lean-to, without electricity or water, but has turned down an offer of $60m for his land. Good man...

Spotted by BIS

I see that my article about the Union Modernisation Fund and the Union Learning Fund was picked up by BIS's dashboard.

'Brown has been trying to use the tools of state to rig the election since he took over'

Fraser Nelson has a must read piece in The Spectator about the Labour government's propaganda war, do read the whole piece but here's an extract or two:

'Gordon Brown has been shameless in using the tools of state to advance his party political objectives – to him, government is electoral war by other means. Anyone who has turned on a commercial radio station recently will have worked out his latest trick: a mass propaganda splurge before an election campaign. Get on a bus, and it can be 100 percent state adverts – advising how Big Brother will help you get a job, buy a car, see off door-to-door salesmen, give you a job in the prison services – anything you want.

...

As we say in the Spectator’s editorial in tomorrow’s edition, Brown has been trying to use the tools of state to rig the election since he took over. His tactic is to employ as much of the electorate as he can (for every three private sector jobs since 1997, there have been five public sector jobs – a million more state workers) and his propaganda budget is simply another means to achieve the same end.'

'The envy of the world' (part xx)

The Independent report

'A man was left infertile after surgeons botched an operation on his testicle.

Doctors at the West Suffolk Hospital in Bury St Edmunds were tasked with removing the man's right epididymis - a coiled tube which carries sperm away from the testicles - but they removed the left one instead. '

Yes the NHS truly is 'the envy of the world'. I believe the expression that comes to mind is - they dropped a bollock there; I'm sorry...

Some weekend fun

Dizzy Thinks reports that a certain URL (http://www.thec**tfactory.com) is redirecting to the Eton College website, this gives me an idea...

Who can come up with the best choice of domain to redirect to The Labour Party website?

"You've been in to see the Prime Minister, was it a cash or cheque you gave him Mr Whelan"?

If you don't know where that quote comes from then you need to subscribe to the Guy News video, otherwise you won't be able to see the video at Guido Fawkes. Actually it is on YouTube already.

Oh such shocking news - The Telegraph finally pick up on the Union Modernisation Fund and the Union Learning Fund

The Telegraph report the simply shocking news that (my emphasis):

'Unite, and the two unions that formed it, received the public money under two little-known funds to improve management and training for its members.

It has been the biggest beneficiary of one of the schemes, the Union Modernisation Fund, and received a sixth of all the money given out under the Union Learning Fund.
The figures have led to fresh claims that Britain’s biggest union has taken over the Labour Party after donating almost £30million over the past decade and employing a key adviser to Gordon Brown as its political director.

...

Francis Maude, the Shadow Cabinet Office Minister, said: “This really looks like money laundering - taxpayers' money is being funnelled into Unite then put straight back into Labour's coffers.

“It's a real racket, with taxpayers' money being round-tripped into Gordon Brown's re-election fund. We must have much greater transparency on what unions are receiving from the Labour Government in return for their backhanders.”

...

Since 1998, Unite, Amicus and the TGWU have received £17,396,498 under the Union Learning Fund, 17 per cent of the total money handed out by the Government.

...

details of where the money goes are not published while annual evaluation reports ceased several years ago.

An analysis commissioned by the Government but carried out by York Consulting in 2006 found there was no framework “against which the employment/economic impact can be measured” and that “unions do not collate monitoring data in a form which is consistent and which is accurate and reliable”.

It stated: “Although the evaluation has tried to generate ‘evidence’ from unions of the impact of the ULF particularly on their strategic development, it is difficult to substantiate the majority of claims from unions against other sources.

“Unions, are to a large extent, dependent upon external funding. ULF has been a major part of that funding. Therefore, statement demonstrating a positive impact, could typically be expected. In addition, employers can only offer a first hand estimate of the value and impact of ULF on their workforce. There has been no attempt currently to develop quantifiable impact analysis indicators.”

Unite has been given £382,469 under the Union Modernisation Fund since 2006. This is higher than the amount received by any other union including Unison (£345,832), which represents public sector workers; Usdaw (£291,075), the shop workers’ body; and the GMB (£257,476).

The Union Modernisation Fund is administered by Lord Mandelson’s Department of Business, Innovation and Skills. In total, it has given out more than £7m since it was set up in 2006.'

Is anyone shocked at this news?

'Can Gordon Brown handle the real world, honestly?'

Hugo Rifkind in masterly form in The Times:

'I worry, a bit, about what’s going to happen to Gordon Brown. When they let him out, I mean. People serve a life sentence in jail; they come out and the world is a bit baffling.

When Gordon leaves Downing Street, that’s surely how it’s going to be. All those new things he’s going to need to worry about. Keys. Broadband connections. The gas man. And honesty.

It’s the latter that worries me particularly. I started thinking about this on Wednesday, when he apologised for misleading the Chilcot inquiry over defence spending during his time as Chancellor. Because planet politics, I reckon, is actually quite a forgiving place. “I do accept,” the PM told the House of Commons, “that in one or two years, defence expenditure did not rise in real terms.” And that seems to be the end of the matter. Even though it wasn’t “one or two” years at all. It was four.

Call me a pedant, but “four” isn’t a bit like “one or two”. It’s at least double. I mean, demonstrably. And out in the real world, you just don’t get away with pretending the one is the other. Think about what’s going to happen the first time he goes to Tesco on a Sunday morning, to pick up some brunch. “I have one or two bagels,” he’ll say, plonking down his basket. “But you have four bagels,” the checkout man will say. And what’s going to happen then?

Because what won’t happen, you can bet, is the former Prime Minister blushing, and admitting that yes, actually, he does have four bagels, but he was pretending to have fewer for his own personal advantage. No. Either he’ll flatly deny the existence of the latter two bagels, while doing that weird thing with his jaw, or he’ll try to pretend they’re only nominal bagels and he’s planning on setting himself a legal obligation to give them back in a fortnight. It won’t work. He’ll get carted off. '

Masterful stuff.

The Guardian doing a BBC

The Guardian article about the case file re another MP being passed to the CPS includes this:

"Elliot Morley, the MP for Scunthorpe, David Chaytor, who represents Bury North, and Livingston MP Jim Devine, along with Conservative peer Lord Hanningfield, have been charged with theft by false accounting and appeared in court last week."

That's three MPS with no party mentioned and one peer whose party is mentioned, let's see if we can work out why...

The MPs are:
Elliot Morley, the LabourMP for Scunthorpe
David Chaytor, the Labour MP for Bury North
Jim Devine, the Labour MP for Livingston

No I can't see why their political party was not mentioned, probably an oversight.

The Sun finally catch on

The SUN quite sweetly declare that

"A SUN investigation has unearthed an alarming BBC bias against the Tories in the run up to the Election.

Covert smears on David Cameron's Conservatives are being made right across the state-owned network - sparking hundreds of viewers' complaints.

News coverage, chat shows and even kids' TV are guilty. We found:
#

BBC News gave disproportionate coverage to the row over Tory donor Lord Ashcroft's tax status;
#

LABOUR panellists were given more time to speak on flagship political show Question Time;
#

A POLL on The One Show ignored issues with Gordon Brown to ask only, Is David Cameron too much of a toff to be PM?
#

THE Tory leader was stitched up when footage of him adjusting his hair was sneakily fed to all broadcasters;
#

THE Basil Brush Show featured a school election with a cheat called Dave wearing a blue rosette."

OK I didn't know about the Basil Brush incident but the rest have been covered here, at Biased-BBC and at Beeb Bias Craig. The latter site being quite possibly also responsible for this section

"The Sun's analysis showed Labour politicians on Question Time were allowed to speak for a full minute longer than Tory counterparts.

On March 11 ex-Labour minister Caroline Flint got SIX minutes more than Tory Justine Greenings.

And on February 18 Labour veteran Roy Hattersley spoke for nearly three minutes longer than Tory Rory Stewart."

Well who cares who broke the stories so long as the news about BBC bias gets spread beyond us bloggers and into the real world. Would be nice if The Sun had linked to us though...

Do you think Barack Obama answers any of Bret Baier's questions?

I warned Americans that Barack Obama would be another Tony Blair; it looks as though I may have been mistaken, he could be worse.

Busy day - so here are some links

It's going to be a busy day today and anyway the themes for my blog would have been the same as they have been for some days now: the BBC's obsession with Lord Ashcroft and accentuating every piece of positive economic news whilst hiding the bad economic news, the Labour party's leaderships willingness to obfuscate the truth and the media's relentless attempts to demonise Israel. So here are some links that I think you should read:
1. The latest BBC article about Lord Ashcroft, fisk it yourself, I can't muster the enthusiasm let alone spare the time.


2. The BBC's article revealing that 'The public sector wastes at least £25bn a year because of a failure to reform outdated procurement and outsourcing practices'; just remind me which 'prudent' politician has been Chancellor or Prime Minister for the last 13 years.


3. The Telegraph's news, not covered by the BBC, that 'Labour does plan to raise taxes next year if it wins the election, Lord Mandelson revealed yesterday. The First Secretary admitted that “further” raising of taxes beyond the range of measures already announced would have to be considered a year from now.

Public spending cuts would also have to be examined, he said.'. Now why would the BBC not want to report this news?


4. The Mail's article revealing that ' Millions of pensioners could lose up to £200 in a 'penny-pinching raid' on the elderly, it emerged last night.

The Government will freeze vital top-ups to the basic State pension after quietly dropping a pledge to increase them in line with inflation every year.' Again not a word on the BBC about this matter.

5. The Mail has details of Tony Blair's multitude of sources of income - very interesting reading for believers in Iraq war conspiracy theories.


That should keep you busy until I get back...

Is it 'money laundering'?

The Telegraph reports on UNITE and its receipt of monies from 'two little-known funds to improve management and training for its members.

It has been the biggest beneficiary of one of the schemes, the Union Modernisation Fund, and received a sixth of all the money given out under the Union Learning Fund.'

...

'Francis Maude, the Shadow Cabinet Office Minister, said: “This really looks like money laundering - taxpayers' money is being funnelled into Unite then put straight back into Labour's coffers.

“It's a real racket, with taxpayers' money being round-tripped into Gordon Brown's re-election fund. We must have much greater transparency on what unions are receiving from the Labour Government in return for their backhanders.” '


The Conservatives are fighting back at Labour's slurs about Lord Ashcroft but so long as the BBC push the Lord Ashcroft story and ignore the UNITE funding story, the Conservatives might as well be pissing into the wind. Time to take the attack to the BBC, have the Conservative leadership got the balls?

A piece of history

"1921: At the Cairo Conference attended by Winston Churchill and T.E. Lawrence (better known as “Lawrence of Arabia”) it was agreed that Transjordan (an Arab State) should be separated from Palestine “thus enabling Britain to fulfill its wartime pledges to both the Arabs and the Jews.” The decision reinforced the right for Jews to “be able to settle the land from the Mediterranean to the Jordan, from the Galilee to the Negev.” Then called Palestine, this comprised the area of both Israel and the West Bank today."

Did you get that? TransJordan was to be the Arab State and Palestine (Israel & the West Bank) to be a Jewish homeland; please take note BBC.


Thanks to Double Tapper for the spot.

Possibly the scariest motoring video I have ever seen

This is video of a foreign registered lorry pushing a Renault along the motorway whilst the driver is, presumably, unaware.

I can only imagine how scared the driver and passengers in the Renault must have been. Also how did the truck driver not notice the increase in resistance to his forward motion, let alone the original collision?

Hiding the truth, BBC style

The BBC report that:

'At least 10 people have been killed in an attack on a mainly Christian village near the violence-hit Nigerian city of Jos, officials say.

Eyewitnesses said houses were burnt and villagers were cut down with machetes. State radio reported that the raiders were disguised as soldiers.

State government spokesman Dan Manjang said the attack happened in Riyom area.

Hundreds of people have died in communal violence between Muslim and Christian groups near Jos this year.

Although the clashes take place between Muslims and Christians, observers say the underlying causes are economic and political.'

So that's no indication of who attacked the 'mainly Christian village', no differential drawn between the numbers of Muslims and Christians killed and 'observers' quoted as saying that the causes are ' economic and political' and so not religious.

Contrast that with Yahoo News report (my emphasis):

'Attackers killed 12 people Wednesday morning in a small Christian village in central Nigeria, officials said, cutting out most of the victims' tongues in the latest violence in a region where religious fighting already has killed hundreds this year.

The attack almost mirrored the tactics used by those who carried out similar massacres in Christian villages last week when more than 200 people were slaughtered.

Under the cover of darkness and a driving rain, raiders with machetes entered the village of Byie early Wednesday, setting fire to homes and firing gunshots into the air to drive frightened villagers into the night, witness Linus Vwi said.

"It was raining. They took that advantage," Vwi said.

Vwi said he and about 20 neighbors rushed into the surrounding wilderness, cowering in bushes as they listened to screams.

He said the attackers spoke Fulani, a language used mostly by Muslim cattle herders in the region. Officials and witnesses blamed Fulani herders for the killings last week.

...

The latest killings add to the tally of thousands who already have perished in Africa's most populous country in the last decade over religious and political frictions. Rioting in September 2001 killed more than 1,000 people. Muslim-Christian battles killed up to 700 people in 2004. More than 300 residents died during a similar uprising in 2008.'

Two questions for the BBC:
1) Why so shy of explaining that is most likely Muslims to blame for these murders and why no mention of the mutilations?
2) Over 2,00 people have died in such battles in Nigeria in the last 10 years and yet this story will never feature as a headline news story, whilst the deaths of a far smaller number in 'Palestine' will always be headline news, why?