Crossing the Atlantic by plane

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


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


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

Gibraltar note

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

Silencing dissent Obama style

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

I'm no Superman

This will be a tough day at work so I'd like to say that:

"I can't do this all on my own,
No I'm no....
I'm no Superman.......
I'm no Superman"

Scrubs, one of the best current comedies on TV.

BBC Middle East reporting

On the main news page of the BBC website, the only story under the Middle East heading is "West Bank fighting kills six Palestinians". Oh no I thought, what has Israel done now? So I followed the link to discover that contrary to the impression (maybe deliberately) given

"Six people have been killed in a West Bank clash between Hamas fighters and Palestinian policemen, officials say.

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

Officials said the police were loyal to Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, of rival group Fatah. "

So the story is one of inter-factional fighting not involving Israel at all, except for Hamas blaming everything on Israel:

"Hamas responded to the shooting with a statement from Gaza denouncing Mr Abbas's forces as "Zionist agents".

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

Right at the end of the article the BBC report a fact that seemed to be missing from most of their coverage of the Israel incursions into Gaza:

"Unlike the Fatah-dominated PLO, Hamas refuses to recognise Israel's right to exist and has waged a violent campaign against it for years. "

Gordon Brown's interview on the Today programme

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

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

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

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

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

Loyalty oaths

An odd little story on the BBC:

"The Israeli cabinet has rejected a controversial proposal to require Israeli citizens to take an oath of loyalty to the Jewish state.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oink oink

So many "snouts in the trough" stories this weekend but one that struck me was that:

"Mohammed Sarwar claimed interest on mortgage paid from Swiss bank account
A multi-millionaire Labour backbencher claimed almost £100,000 to cover mortgage interest that he paid from an account with a Swiss bank.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Another of Gordon Brown's genius ideas gets the respect it deserves

I read that:

"The Economic Affairs Committee... publishes its report on banking supervision and regulation. The committee has been looking at the role of the Bank of England, the Treasury and the Financial Services Authority (FSA), and whether failings in this area contributed to the banking and financial crisis in the Britain.

Although the report will not call for the wholesale reconstruction of the tripartite, it will urge the Government to give key elements of the FSA's current role back to the Bank of England."

Just in case you weren't aware who took power away from the Bank Of England and set-up
the tripartite arrangements, to much applause from himself and the brown-noses in the media, The Telegraph helpfully point out:

"The Bank ceded its role as a financial regulator to the FSA in 1997 when Gordon Brown, then Chancellor, gave it independence over monetary policy.

At the time, the then Governor Eddie George is said to have threatened to resign, warning Mr Brown that the decision could leave the financial system more vulnerable.

Although the Bank has since been authorised to issue warnings on vulnerabilities in the system, it has not had the "teeth" to follow these up.

For instance, in 2006 it warned that banks' increased use of securitisation left them exposed to major risks if the credit markets closed – a warning which, if followed, could have helped prevent Northern Rock's collapse. "

Another great idea of Gordon Brown's that has been finally seen for what it was.

"widely respected"!

The Times article about the claim that Gordon Brown has plans to make Ed Balls the next Chancellor of the Exchequer is a real scream. First of all it has been obvious for years that Gordon Brown wants his close friend Ed Balls to be his Chancellor of the Exchequer. Second Ed Balls is not a popular figure in the Labour party let alone the Country at large.

The Times' story is apparently based on "a top-level leak from Downing Street", now who might that be from? Gordon Brown or one of his aides trying to see how much ire the news generates or maybe one of Ed Balls many enemies trying to provoke a public reaction that makes Ed Balls' promotion remain in Gordon Brown's deranged imagination; who knows?

The funniest line in the article is this one:

"Balls, who is widely respected in the City, could appear a younger, fresher face than Alistair Darling to take on George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, in the run-up to the elections. "

"widely respected"! I can't think of anyone in The City who respects Ed Balls; but then again they have no respect for Alistair Darling or Gordon Brown either.

Sunday catchup

Too many items, too little time:

Gordon Brown's government screws up something else, this time the Queen's invitation to the 65th D-Day celebrations.

The BBC offer an apology for a Question Time panellist upsetting Muslims. Will they be offering any apologies for Tom Paulin's comments on Newsnight Review any time soon.

Hezbollah head for power in Lebanon; Israel may have a serious problem coming.

Michael Savage

"has employed top UK law firm Olswang to sue Ms Smith for libel after she put him on the Home Office’s 16 ‘least wanted’ list."

Apparently he is suing for £100,000. More good news for Gordon Brown, I wonder how the BBC will spin this story.

Well I think grammar is important

Pr0n Corrections

See more like this on kontraband.com

More on Spain and Gibraltar

Following on from this last week I read today that:

"They've tried invasion, diplomacy and downright skulduggery to grab a piece of Gibraltar during the past 300 years.

But now the Spanish have played their trump card by laying claim to 20 square miles of sea around the Rock...in the name of the environment.

And it seems to have worked – for the moment, at least. For the EU has granted Spain legal rights over British waters surrounding Gibraltar.

But the move has sparked protests from Britain and the Gibraltar government and led to a confrontation between Royal Navy and Spanish warships.

The grab for the section of British Gibraltar Territorial Waters (BGTW) came about when Spain convinced the European Commission to include Gibraltar’s waters within a new 69sq mile EU marine conservation area called the Estrecho Oriental, to be maintained by Spain.

However, under EU law, only the member state with sovereignty over the land or sea in question can apply for it to be designated an EU conservation site – meaning the EU has recognised Spain’s possession of British water."

That's Spain making a land (well sea) grab aided by the EU. Don't you just love the EU, such good friends to us...

The next time you hear the Spanish decrying British imperialism in Gibraltar, just remember Ceuta and Melilla - Spain's Imperial territories in North Africa.

Ron speaks

The normally taciturn Ron Mael speaks!

And the opinion polls just get worse for Labour

If Gordon Brown wasn't such an utterly contemptible person, I'd almost feel sorry for him. But as he is a complete and utter, five star piece of excrement on the sole of the UK shoe, I feel nothing but joy at the prospect of him having a really crap time of it tonight.


The latest opinion polls have been published:
ICM's poll for The Telegraph shows:
Conservatives 40%(+1%) Labour 22%(-6%) and LibDems 25% (+5%)
Yes that's Labour in third place, when was the last time that happened in a poll? I am assuming not even in the hey day of the SDP.

ICM's Euro opinion poll for The Telegraph shows:
Conservatives 29% Labour 17% LibDems 20% UKIP 10% Greens 11% and BNP 5%
Labour third again and interestingly the Greens polling higher than UKIP.


Could it get any worse for Labour? Just wait until Thursday...

Fraud - Differentiating by degree?

The Telegraph carry the news that:

"MPs who have used taxpayers’ money to pay for “phantom” mortgages on their expenses should be investigated by the police and prosecuted, David Cameron says in an interview with The Daily Telegraph. "

For a while now I have thought that The Telegraph's coverage of the expenses story has been indiscriminate. We need to differentiate between:
1. MPs who have committed fraud - for example by claiming mortgage repayments on a mortgage that had already been repaid
2. MPs who have pushed the boundaries of House of Commons expenses versus tax law to the limits - for example those who have built property portfolios on the back of flipping so as to avoid Capital Gains Tax
3. MPs who have submitted expense claims that seem to have been based on falsehoods - for example every month claiming up to the no receipts required limit
4. MPs who have claimed or tried to claim for ridiculous items that should not be claimed for - for example moat cleaning, £2,000+ televisions etc.
5. MPs who have worked the system and so are guilty of no more than greed
6. MPs who have made only reasonable claims

The MPs who fall into category 1 need to be investigated and charged by the police, prosecuted and tried. All should be made to resign immediately if found guilty and receive no severance pay.
The MPs who fall into category 2 need to named, shamed and if not able to be prosecuted then to have the party whip withdrawn from them.
The MPs who fall into categories 3 and 4 should be made to face reselection by their constituency party ahead of the general election.
The MPs who fall into category 5 should consider themselves fortunate to have no action taken against them.
The MPs who fall into category 6 deserve no praise, they just did what they should have done.

Now to the future for MPs who have to resign or lose their seats. If they fall into categories 1-4 then they should not be considered for elevation to the House of Lords or for paid positions on Quangos or any position in Public "Service". They should find work in the private sector and learn what the real world id all about.

Gordon Brown speaks the truth

Cassetteboy - Gordon Brown

See more like this on kontraband.com

Thanks to Cassette Boy, via Kontraband

21st Century Britain

Read this and despair:

"A teenager was tied to a tree and forced to drink petrol before being doused in the liquid and set alight by two love rivals.

Simon Everitt, 17, was bundled into the boot of a car and driven to secluded woodland where he was lynched by Jimi-Lee Stewart, 24, and Jonathan Clarke, 19.

All three men had been sleeping with the same married woman, 19-year-old brunette Fiona Lysaght, who, a court heard, had 'played the boys off against each other'.

During a period of a few months she slept with all three of them, sometimes 'cheating on one with another', causing tensions to boil.

Stewart and Clarke, who are now 25 and 20 respectively, were yesterday convicted of murder.

During the four-week trial, the jury heard the slaying was inspired by the spoof British horror movie Severance, in which a woman is bound to a tree and turned into a human torch.

An accomplice, Maria Chandler, 40, who drove the men to the murder scene in Mautby, near Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, was also found guilty of murder.
Jimmy-Lee Stewart, found guilty of murdering Simon Everitt who was doused in petrol and set alight
Jonathan Clarke found guilty of murdering Simon Everitt by pouring petrol over him and setting him alight."

The death penalty

When an American is sentenced to death, the BBC like to publish a piece examining the horror of the death penalty and the problems it brings if there was mistaken identity etc. etc. etc. However when the Country doing the judicial killing is Iran then the story is covered somewhat differently.

This story concerns

"Three men convicted of bombing an Iranian mosque two days ago have been publicly executed, state media says.... The bombing killed at least 19 people during evening prayers in the south-east city of Zahedan on Thursday. The three men, who were hanged on Saturday morning "

So the bombing was on Thursday and two days later the men have been charged, tried and executed not for carrying out the explosion but for "illegally bringing explosives into Iran and giving them to the main person behind the bombing.".

So does the BBC decry this summary justice? Of course not, they just report

"Authorities said they were tried and had legal representation."

The BBC view is an odd one

The story of Naseebah Bibi's forced imprisonment of her three daughters-in-law and the use of one as her slave for 13 years has received much coverage, even on the BBC, but their coverage is somewhat odd. Their latest piece entitled "Slavery mother-in-law divides town" is a masterpiece of BBC multiculturalist speak. No opinion is more valid than any other, all are equal and moral judgements are bad; here are some examples:

"On the surface Naseebah Bibi did not appear to be an out-of-the-ordinary figure."

Seems fair? Here's the picture of the ordinary Naseebah Bibi
So this is not "out-of-the-ordinary" in BBC land?

"Since the details of the 63-year-old's "enslavement" of the three emerged her actions have been described as "inhumane", "horrific" and "outdated".

But to some women she is held in awe and, instead of anger, they pity her. "

There are two sides to every such story and the BBC will put them in some instances.

"Blackburn, with a population of 105,000 - of which nearly a quarter are Muslim Asian - is greatly divided when it comes to Bibi."

Interesting, so in this city of 25% Asian Muslims and 75% not, who do the BBC quote? There are quotes from four people -

"One woman said: "I feel sorry for the elderly lady [Bibi], she has not been treated well and I think it is a clear case of revenge."

Nas, a local community worker, said: "As a first generation Asian we have experienced these things first hand and I don't think it's enslavement."

Shop owner Jamil, who knows the family, said he was shocked that this could happen to "such a nice family".

Musharrat Zia is the director of Practical Solutions, an organisation which works to challenge stereotypes and negative myths about different cultures. "

Religions and backgrounds are not documented but on the surface the last three would seem to be Muslims so at least 75% of the quoted people are from the 25% minority in Blackburn.


Now the moral equivocation:

1. "Nas, a local community worker, said: "As a first generation Asian we have experienced these things first hand and I don't think it's enslavement.""

That's the sort of community worker we need isn't it? One who thinks imprisoning people and using one as a personal slave is not enslavement; how open-minded, how modern, how multicultural.

2. Shop owner Jamil... condemned Bibi's abusive actions, saying: "It's acceptable to treat women like this in other countries but not in our country, in England no, it's not acceptable.""

Oh marvelous, so enslavement is fine in other countries, just not here. How does this fit in with the BBC's obsession with the UK apologising for slavery over 100 years ago? Slavery in the British past is evil but slavery in the Muslim present is culturally acceptable?

3. "Musharrat Zia is the director of Practical Solutions, an organisation which works to challenge stereotypes and negative myths about different cultures.
... "This practice is quite outmoded, its outdated.... It may have been perceived as the norm in her generation in other countries, but that should make her set a precedent by not doing it."

See above, I really don't see why I should dignify such remarks with anything extra.


Britain in 2009 and slavery makes a comeback - isn't multiculturalism just grand?