We are all guilty, it's up to the Labour Government to decide when to arrest us

The news that Jacqui Smith will push through Parliament without a vote the new legislation on keeping innocent people's details on the DNA database, does not surprise me. This Labour government has shown time and time again that its instincts are totalitarian and anti-freedom. What shocks me is the lack of complaint from the opposition.

Multiculturalism as social isolationism

A comment to my piece entitled "The joy of multi-culturalism" has annoyed me somewhat. For my peace of mind here's the comment followed by my reply:

"Such social isolationism was commonplace in Britain while it was still Britain.
ou only spoke to people you had been introduced to.
Yet society back then held together."


"... We are around the same age but I observed adult interaction in the late 1960s/early 1970s and of course watched many English films from the 1930s and 1940s and whilst people wouldn't jump into intimate conversation with a stranger without very good reason, they would be polite to a stranger. A doffed hat, a cheery good morning, all would be offered and reciprocated with politeness and good cheer. To compare the world of Britain gone by with the self-imposed social exclusion of today is just plain wrong."

Ed Balls

If today's Telegraph story that Ed Balls claimed for two Remembrance Day wreaths on expenses then I am disgusted, not overly surprised but still disgusted.

I wonder if the BBC will highlight Ed Balls' claim for Remembrance Day wreaths as they did with James Gray. Of course the two cases are completely different; one relates to a sleazy Tory MP who is easily attackable and one to a close friend of the Prime Minister who must be seen as beyond reproach.


Here's Ed Balls defence:

"The claim for a wreath was submitted in error by a staff member, as part of reimbursement for the up front costs she paid for organising two veterans badge presentation ceremonies for constituents, including for room hire at Parkside Methodist Church and Wrenthorpe Village Hall. Ed paid for wreaths every year – in 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 - and this claim should never have been submitted in 2007. As soon as it was brought to Ed’s attention by the Fees Office he immediately reimbursed the staff member personally as he has done every other year. No erroneous payment was made by the Fees Office."

Can you spot what's missing?

Well that was a waste of money

In amongst The Telegraph's expenses revelations today is the news that Harriet Harman charged over £10,000 for media training. £10,000 and she still comes across as a hectoring harpie with less electoral appeal than John Prescott - money well spent I am sure you agree.

MPs expenses

I have deliberately not commented on every twist and turn of the MPs expenses scandal as I don't have the time and I would have run out of bile some time ago but the news today that nine Labour Cabinet Ministers have claimed for accountancy advice on their expenses is worthy of comment. Leaving aside the specifics for the moment, it seems to me that many MPS saw their salary as "theirs" and all "expenses" as reclaimable. In the real world a person is paid a salary and has to live on that salary, spending taxed income on travelling to and from work, on housing costs, on utility bills, on food and cleaning etc. etc. etc. In the world of many MPs it seems that everything was claimable and that was just plain wrong.

On this specific case, it seems that nine Labour Ministers claimed for accountancy advice on preparing their tax returns. This really hits home when you read that as well as Jacqui Smith, Hazel Blears, David Miliband, James Purnell, Douglas Alexander, Geoff Hoon and Hilary Benn and one unnamed Minister the same claim was put forward by Alistair Darling (the pretend Chancellor). When the front-man/fall-guy for Gordon Brown's economic failures is "allowed" to claim for taxation advice then you know the people using the expenses system have no shame. Gordon Brown and his minions have spent 12 years making the UK tax system more and more complicated, compliance more onerous and the penalties for making a mistake more and more serious and yet the people who enthusiastically called Gordon Brown an economic genius were able to claim as expenses for the tax advice they received.

Many MPs seem to have no shame but when you have a Cabinet that seems united only by greed and the fear of the electorate's response, what hope is there of an election to cleanse Parliament?

The Evil Empire

The Times reports that:

"A Victorian historian said that Britain “conquered... half the world in a fit of absence of mind”.

Chinese Communist Party leaders are not normally associated with absentmindedness, but rather with cool, calculated, long-term strategic thinking. Yet China might well now be building a mixture of influence and obligation - the modern version of an empire- in quite a British way, and one that promises to cause increasing tension with its giant neighbour and regional rival, India.

Events in Sri Lanka, as that nation finally brings an end to a quarter-century-long civil war, are the latest example of China's growing overseas reach. The victory of the Sri Lankan Government was assisted by the supply of arms from China, especially fighter jets, as The Times revealed on May 2, while the Chinese are also building a spanking new port on the southern coast of the country, which the Chinese Navy will be able to use for refuelling and repairs.

This is part of a broad move by China into the Indian Ocean, which India has traditionally considered its sphere of influence. Chinese engineers are building another port at Gwadar in Pakistan; roads are being cut or improved through Burma to help trade routes between Yunnan province in China and the Indian Ocean; ties are being improved with island nations such as the Seychelles; surveillance stations are being sited or upgraded on Burmese islands. "

Somehow I do not expect the usual protesters who protested at everything the USA did under George Bush to say a word.

Does the 9/11 Flight 93 memorial deliberately point to Mecca?

I know I have covered this before but I see that the story continues.

Gratuitous nudity time - NSFW

Starship Troopers Shower Scene

Oh come on...

The Times's reveals that

"ANDY BURNHAM, the culture secretary, has apparently avoided thousands of pounds in capital gains tax by channelling a £16,600 property windfall through the parliamentary expenses system.

Burnham was given the money by a property developer to persuade him to move out of a flat he rented in Dolphin Square, a desirable apartment block near the Palace of Westminster. Tax experts say he would normally have been liable for a tax bill of up to £6,665 on the windfall.

The Commons authorities instead agreed to bend their own rules, and added the windfall to his second home allowance, which is exempt from tax. The special deal meant he was able to claim more than £32,000 on his second home allowance for a single year - far beyond the maximum £21,643 then permitted under the Commons rules. It is believed to be the highest amount ever claimed. "

So will Gordon Brown use his famed moral compass to dismiss Any Burnham or will he continue to protect his favourites like Ed Balls, Yvette Cooper, Geoff Hoon and Andy Burnham? Will the BBC report this sleaze story or will they prefer to concentrate on Conservative MPs?

The report continues

"Burnham was also given permission to claim expenses for the Dolphin Square apartment and a new flat in Lambeth at the same time.

Parliamentary rules state an MP can claim against only one property, but the arrangement was approved by the fees office. Burnham’s Dutch wife, Marie-France van Heel, handled most of the claims.

Other MPs refused to accept the money when they moved out. Tom Harris, the former Labour transport minister, was offered £10,000 by Dolphin Square but turned it down.

However, Tony Wright, chairman of the public administration select committee, accepted a £10,000 payout to surrender his tenancy agreement. He opted to remain at Dolphin Square, paying a higher rent. The disclosures raise Continued fresh questions about the apparent double standards operated by Gordon Brown, who last week refused to censure James Purnell, the work and pensions secretary, and Geoff Hoon, the transport secretary, for their failure to pay capital gains tax. He previously said a similar move by Hazel Blears was “totally unacceptable”."

What is it with Spanish speaking countries and British territories?

Recently I have reported about the Argentinians rattling their sabres again at the Falklands. Today I read that the Spanish are trying their hand at threatening Gibraltar again. Once again I have to ask if a Gordon Brown lead Labour government with David Miliband as a Foreign Minister is in any state to protect our territories.

It's the reduction of the punishment that most annoys me about this story

The Times report on the true scale of the damage wreaked on the UK and Nato by the notorious cold war traitor Geoffrey Prime, who was a former GCHQ spy who went on to sell secrets to the KGB revealing that Britain and America had cracked high-grade Soviet military codes. The crimes were huge and in my book amounted to treason but in any case in the early 1980s he was sentenced to 35 years in jail for spying with an additional three years for indecent assaults on young girls.

Of course in New Labour Britain such a sentence means nothing and so Geoffrey Prime was released early in 2001 and of course in upside down Britain was given a new identity to keep him safe from reprisal attacks. The sheer stupidity of our Labour rulers and the probation system never cease to amaze me.

What a disturbing thought

Margaret Beckett is fingered by The Telegraph...

Mark Steyn on Multiculturalism

Watch especially from 5:00...

Global Warming - Whwre's the evidence?

Canada.com reports the "inconvenient truth":

"They drift along in the worlds' oceans at a depth of 2,000 metres -- more than a mile down -- constantly monitoring the temperature, salinity, pressure and velocity of the upper oceans.

Then, about once every 10 days, a bladder on the outside of these buoys inflates and raises them slowly to the surface, gathering data about each strata of seawater they pass through.

After an upward journey of nearly six hours, the Argo monitors bob on the waves while an onboard transmitter sends their information to a satellite that in turn retransmits it to several land-based research computers where it may be accessed by anyone who wishes to see it.

These 3,000 yellow sentinels -- about the size and shape of a large fencepost -- free-float the world's oceans, season in and season out, surfacing between 30 and 40 times a year, disgorging their findings, then submerging again for another fact-finding voyage.

...

When they were first deployed in 2003, the Argos were hailed for their ability to collect information on ocean conditions more precisely, at more places and greater depths and in more conditions than ever before.

No longer would scientists have to rely on measurements mostly at the surface from older scientific buoys or inconsistent shipboard monitors.

So why are some scientists now beginning to question the buoys' findings? Because in five years the little blighters have failed to detect any global warming. They are not reinforcing the scientific orthodoxy of the day, namely that man is causing the planet to warm dangerously. They are not proving the predetermined conclusions of their human masters. Therefore they, and not their masters' hypotheses, must be wrong.

In fact, "there has been a very slight cooling," according to a U.S. National Public Radio (NPR) interview with Josh Willis at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory, a scientist who keeps close watch on the Argo findings.

Willis insisted the temperature drop was "not anything really significant." And I trust he's right. But can anyone imagine NASA or the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) or the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change -- the UN's climate experts -- shrugging off even a "very slight" warming.

A slight drop in the oceans' temperature over a period of five or six years probably is insignificant, just as a warming over such a short period would be. Yet if there had been a rise of any kind, even of the same slightness, rest assured this would be broadcast far and wide as yet another log on the global warming fire.

Just look how tenaciously some scientists are prepared to cling to the climate change dogma. "It may be that we are in a period of less rapid warming," Willis told NPR.

...


The big problem with the Argo findings is that all the major climate computer models postulate that as much as 80-90 per cent of global warming will result from the oceans warming rapidly then releasing their heat into the atmosphere.

But if the oceans aren't warming, then (please whisper) perhaps the models are wrong."

So the world's oceans aren't warming they are cooling, that's odd I don't remember the BBC reporting this - maybe it escaped their attention...

The report continues:

"The supercomputer models also can't explain the interaction of clouds and climate. They have no idea whether clouds warm the world more by trapping heat in or cool it by reflecting heat back into space.

Modellers are also perplexed by the findings of NASA's eight weather satellites that take more than 300,000 temperature readings daily over the entire surface of the Earth, versus approximately 7,000 random readings from Earth stations.

In nearly 30 years of operation, the satellites have discovered a warming trend of just 0.14 C per decade, less than the models and well within the natural range of temperature variation."

Hold on but the BBC say that Global Warming is no longer even open to debate, it's established fact - maybe that's why the BBC ignore such inconvenient truths...

The report concludes:

"I'm not saying for sure the models are wrong and the Argos and satellites are right, only that in a debate as critical as the one on climate it would be nice to hear some alternatives to the alarmist theory."

I take a slightly different view - I am saying the models are wrong, most computer models of the real world are in some way wrong, and I am asking why the debate has been shut down?

Odd AOL search term

Question 1: Who why would someone search for - man pound sheep pussy?

Question 2: Why is my blog the number one returned site?

Eco-warriors or vandals?

The Mail reports that:

"Environmental activists have carried out a spate of attacks on 4x4s under cover of darkness.

Tyres have been let down or slashed, with notes left on motorists' windscreens accusing them of contributing to climate change.

More than 100 so-called Chelsea Tractors have been targeted in recent weeks in wellheeled suburbs of South Manchester. "

Eco-warriors or just plain vandals? You decide...

The joy of multi-culturalism

From The National Post comes a story to warm the hearts of all committed multi-culturalists:

"When the landlady of my Toronto apartment building said an outraged neighbour had filed a complaint about me over an apparently inappropriate hallway interaction with his wife, my mind raced through the countless conversations I've had with fellow tenants, none of which seemed a possible source of offence.

It turns out, it wasn't a salacious transaction that had caused the complaint, but rather a neighbourly and -- to me -- entirely forgettable greeting, little more than a brief "good morning" as I passed my neighbours on the way to work.

Still, it was enough of an affront for the man -- once a doctor somewhere in the Middle East, my landlady clarified -- to feel I had broken a cultural taboo. The incident started an awkward feud which has involved warnings not to repeat my indiscretion and one face-to-face shouting match, which included allusions to my impending death.

I expect the battle will wage on, as we appear to be stuck at an impasse.

His Muslim upbringing has ingrained in him a sense of entitlement to demand I not speak directly to his wife; and my prairie upbringing has ingrained in me a duty to strive for polite cohesion with my neighbours.

My landlady, who has handled the complaint with tittering trepidation, hasn't helped dispel the friction. She has told me to adhere to the demands because the man "could be dangerous," directing me to literally turn my back to the couple as they pass, never make eye contact and never hold the elevator for them, no matter what.

Life among neighbours has become increasingly complicated by multiculturalism, in this case making even the most affable salutation or good Samaritan gesture a practice in walking on eggshells. But in trying to adapt to a patchwork of often conflicting cultures, has civility become the casualty of accommodation?

I grew up in Manitoba, where it was an affront to your neighbour not to be cordial. If you didn't greet them by name you could be talked about in hushed voices and risked being labelled standoffish. Community amongst neighbours was not something to consider, it was a way of life. Call it prairie law.

Since moving to Toronto, I have lived in condos where asking your neighbour for the proverbial cup of sugar is greeted by skeptical, confused faces and closed doors.

But the majority have been open to the time-passing chats that break down barriers.

My midtown apartment building is home mostly to young professionals and is the definition of nondescript. I frequently hold doors for people carrying packages and say "you're welcome" if they show gratitude. I have run errands for unfamiliar neighbours because I was heading out into the rain anyway and there was no point in us both getting wet. I chat like a fool while waiting in the laundry room.

Of course, denying me the right to greet a woman in our shared hallway fails to measure up to reported conflicts that have caused a culture clash, such as Canada's reaction to a recent Afghan law allowing some husbands to withhold food until their wives agree to sex, or the case of a Toronto-area father and son accused of killing a daughter who refused to wear a hijab at school.

I discussed my situation with the head of a prominent Muslim women's rights organization, who was understandably more concerned with the living conditions of the woman in question. She described the segregation of sexes as one of the worst examples of fundamentalist Islamic misinterpretation and dismissed the idea that my greeting could be construed as an offence.

Keep smiling, keep saying hello, she advised. The successful cohesion of cultures requires concessions from both sides. Offence or not, I have continued to greet those I share a building with, although the couple next door continue living in reclusion.

The alternative to this is to live amongst strangers in an icy standoff, fearful that the slightest attempt at community might be viewed as an affront. The alternative is to abandon prairie law, turn your back and close your eyes. And that sounds terrible.

mcoutts@nationalpost.com"

Such joy, such happiness has been introduced into our lives.

BSE, Climate Change and Science Journalism

David Whitehouse on the BBC's approach to reporting Science.

In the Name of Love

Thompson Twins - "In the Name of Love"

I loved this song when it came out and played the 12" single over and over and over again. So when I saw the video for the far inferior "Hold on Now" on MTV 42 (or whatever) I just had to put this up.

Watching us all the time

Did you know this was going to happen? Oh come on it was obvious, this Labour government and its state police force just want to know everything about what we are doing, where we are going and who we are talking to - and if we complain "what have we got to hide?".

The latest story concerns this:

"A national network of cameras and computers automatically logging car number plates will be in place within months, the BBC has learned.

Thousands of Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras are already operating on Britain's roads.

Police forces across England, Wales and Scotland will soon be able to share the information on one central computer.

Officers say it is a useful tool in fighting crime, but critics say the network is secretive and unregulated. "

But this is just to be used against criminals, right? Wrong!

"John Catt found himself on the wrong side of the ANPR system. He regularly attends anti-war demonstrations outside a factory in Brighton, his home town.

It was at one of these protests that Sussex police put a "marker" on his car. That meant he was added to a "hotlist".

This is a system meant for criminals but John Catt has not been convicted of anything and on a trip to London, the pensioner found himself pulled over by an anti-terror unit.

"I was threatened under the Terrorist Act. I had to answer every question they put to me, and if there were any questions I would refuse to answer, I would be arrested. I thought to myself, what kind of world are we living in?"

Sussex police would not talk about the case. "