Education and Eton

The Eton clique at the head of the Conservative party is a slur often cast at David Cameron and his team, so I did a little Wikipeia'ing and came up with the following list of the shadow cabinet and their schools:

David Cameron -Eton College
William Hague - Wath-upon-Dearne Comprehensive
George Osborne - St Paul's School (Independent)
David Davis - Bec Grammar School, Tooting
Liam Fox - St. Bride's High School, State sector
Michael Gove - state and independent sectors in Aberdeen, latterly at Robert Gordon's College
David Willets - King Edward's School, Birmingham (Independent secondary)
Andrew Lansley - Not listed
Theresa Villiers - Not listed
Nick Herbert - Haileybury (Public school)
Chris Grayling - Royal Grammar School, High Wycombe
Peter Ainsworth - Ludgrove School in Wokingham and Bradfield College
Eric Pickles - Greenhead Grammar School
Sayeeda Warsi, Baroness Warsi - Birkdale High School and Dewsbury College
Pauline Neville-Jones, Baroness Neville-Jones - Leeds Girls' High School
Jeremy Hunt - Charterhouse School (Public school)
Francis Maude - Abingdon School (Independent)
Theresa May - Not listed
Alan Duncan - Merchant Taylors' School (Independent)
Owen Paterson - Radley College (Public school)
Cheryl Gillan - Cheltenham Ladies' College (Public school)


So that's just one from Eton College and a fair mix of other public schools, independent schools, grammar schools and comprehensives.


Let's take a look at that great bastion of classlessness, the Labour cabinet:

Gordon Brown - Kirkcaldy High School
Jack Straw - boarded at the fee-charging Brentwood School
Harriet Harman - St Paul's Girls' School (Independent) - NB: (niece of an Earl)
Alistair Darling - private Loretto School, Musselburgh, East Lothian
David Miliband - schools in London, Benton Park School in Leeds and Boston, Massachusetts before being educated at Haverstock Comprehensive School in North London
Jacqui Smith - Dyson Perrins High School in Malvern
Catherine Ashton, Baroness Ashton of Upholland - Unknown
John Hutton - Westcliff High School for Boys (selective non-boarding grammar school)
Ed Balls - independent Nottingham High School
Hazel Blears - Wardley Grammar School
Andy Burnham - St Aelred's Roman Catholic High School
Des Browne - Catholic St Michael's Academy in Kilwinning
Hilary Benn - Holland Park School (the "socialist Eton")
Alan Johnson - passed the 11 plus exam and attended Sloane Grammar School in Chelsea
John Denham - Woodroffe Comprehensive School
Douglas Alexander - Park Mains High School in Erskine
Shaun Woodward - independent Bristol Grammar School
Ruth Kelly - privately educated at Sutton High School
James Purnell - most of his education in France, returning to study his A Levels at the Royal Grammar School
Paul Murphy - St Francis Roman Catholic School in Abersychan, West Monmouth School in Pontypool
Ed Miliband - Haverstock Comprehensive School
Yvette Cooper - Comprehensive Eggar's School on London Road in Holybourne near Alton and Alton College
Geoff Hoon - independent Nottingham High School


Again a fair smattering of grammar schools, independent schools and comprehensive schools as well as the "socialist Eton"


Insulting a person because of where they were educated seems to make as much sense as insulting someone because of the colour of their hair or skin. Most children go to the school their parents send them to, full stop end of story. Maybe the class warriors in the Labour party should bear that in mind, but I doubt it - instead they will bang on about Eton toffs all the way into the dustbin of history.

FYI

Gordon Brown's father had the middle name of Ebenezer.

al-Nakba, the "catastrophe"

The BBC are still pushing the "narrative" of the al-Nakba, the "catastrophe", the story that the creation of the state of Israel in 1948 was a "catastrophe" for the Palestinians. The BBC still push the Palestinian line that Israel expelled the Palestinians from their land in 1948. There is an opposing point of view that the Palestinians were told to temporarily leave the area so as to allow the invading Arab armies to destroy the infant country of Israel. This view is all but ignored by the BBC and much of the rest of the world's media.

Here is an extract from Palestinian Media Watch that should be read by the closed minded at the BBC:

"The Arabs who became refugees in 1948 were not expelled by Israel but left on their own to facilitate the destruction of Israel, according to a senior Palestinian journalist writing in a Palestinian daily. This plan to leave Israel was initiated by the Arab states fighting Israel, who promised the people they would be able to return to their homes in a few days once Israel was defeated. The article in Al-Ayyam concludes that these Arab states are responsible for the Arab refugee problem.

A backbone of Palestinian English-language propaganda is the myth that Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Arabs from Israel and created Arab refugees. But in recent years, PMW has documented an increasing willingness among Palestinians to openly blame the Arab states and not Israel.

Following are five such statements of blame, starting with this most recent article and including testimony from refugees themselves and corroboration by Palestinian leaders. Clearly, there is a growing Palestinian willingness to blame the Arab leaders, which corroborates Israel's historical record.

1. Jawad Al Bashiti, Palestinian journalist in Jordan, writing in Al-Ayyam, May 13, 2008

"Remind me of one real cause from all the factors that have caused the "Palestinian Catastrophe" [the establishment of Israel and the creation of refugee problem], and I will remind you that it still exists... The reasons for the Palestinian Catastrophe are the same reasons that have produced and are still producing our Catastrophes today.
During the Little Catastrophe, meaning the Palestinian Catastrophe the following happened: the first war between Arabs and Israel had started and the "Arab Salvation Army" came and told the Palestinians: 'We have come to you in order to liquidate the Zionists and their state. Leave your houses and villages, you will return to them in a few days safely. Leave them so we can fulfill our mission (destroy Israel) in the best way and so you won't be hurt.' It became clear already then, when it was too late, that the support of the Arab states (against Israel) was a big illusion. Arabs fought as if intending to cause the "Palestinian Catastrophe". [Al-Ayyam, May 13 2008]

2. Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Palestinian Journalist in PA official daily, Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 13, 2006

"...The leaders and the elites promised us at the beginning of the "Catastrophe" in 1948, that the duration of the exile will not be long, and that it will not last more than a few days or months, and afterwards the refugees will return to their homes, which most of them did not leave only until they put their trust in those "Arkuvian" promises made by the leaders and the political elites. Afterwards, days passed, months, years and decades, and the promises were lost with the strain of the succession of events..." [Term "Arkuvian," is after Arkuv - a figure from Arab tradition - who was known for breaking his promises and for his lies."] "
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, December 13, 2006]

3. Asmaa Jabir Balasimah, Woman who fled Israel in 1948, Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006

"We heard sounds of explosions and of gunfire at the beginning of the summer in the year of the "Catastrophe" [1948]. They told us: The Jews attacked our region and it is better to evacuate the village and return, after the battle is over. And indeed there were among us [who fled Israel] those who left a fire burning under the pot, those who left their flock [of sheep] and those who left their money and gold behind, based on the assumption that we would return after a few hours."
[Al-Ayyam, May 16, 2006]

4. Son of man who fled in 1948, PA TV 1999

An Arab viewer called Palestinian Authority TV and quoted his father, saying that in 1948 the Arab District Officer ordered all Arabs to leave Palestine or be labeled traitors. In response, Arab MK Ibrahim Sarsur, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel, cursed those leaders, thus acknowledging Israel's historical record.

"Mr. Ibrahim [Sarsur]. I address you as a Muslim. My father and grandfather told me that during the "Catastrophe" [in 1948], our district officer issued an order that whoever stays in Palestine and in Majdel [near Ashkelon - Southern Israel] is a traitor, he is a traitor."

Response from Ibrahim Sarsur, now MK, then Head of the Islamic Movement in Israel:
"The one who gave the order forbidding them to stay there bears guilt for this, in this life and the Afterlife throughout history until Resurrection Day."
[PA TV April 30, 1999]

5. Fuad Abu Higla, senior Palestinian, Al-Hayat Al-Jadidah, March 19, 2001

Fuad Abu Higla, then a regular columnist in the official PA daily Al Hayat Al Jadida, wrote an article before an Arab Summit, which criticized the Arab leaders. One of the failures he cited, in the name of a prisoner, was that an earlier generation of Arab leaders "forced" them to leave Israel in 1948, again placing the blame for the flight on the Arab leaders.

"I have received a letter from a prisoner in Acre prison, to the Arab summit:
To the [Arab and Muslim] Kings and Presidents, poverty is killing us, the symptoms are exhausting us and the souls are leaving our body, yet you are still searching for the way to provide aid, like one who is looking for a needle in a haystack or like the armies of your predecessors in the year of 1948, who forced us to leave [Israel], on the pretext of clearing the battlefields of civilians...So what will your summit do now?"
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 19, 2001]

Conclusion
It is clear from these statements that there is general acknowledgement among Palestinians that Arab leaders bear responsibility for the mass flight of Arabs from Israel in 1948, and were the cause of the "refugee" problem. Furthermore, the fact that this information has been validated by public figures and refugees in the Palestinian Authority media itself confirms that this responsibility is well-known - even though for propaganda purposes its leaders continue to blame Israel publicly for "the expulsion.""

Now it makes sense

Last night the House of Commons voted not to reduce the upper limit for abortions from 24 weeks. I thought it slightly odd to hear Nadine Dorries being interviewed this morning in the Toady programme's prime just after the 8 o'clock news spot. Then it all started to make sense, the interview was angled to get the "admission" from Nadine Dorries that Labour MPs were generally more in favour of the right to an abortion than the Conservatives. One of the last points made was that if the Conservatives won the next election then restrictions on abortion would be more possible.

Very nicely done BBC, a bit of "dog-whistle" politics on behalf of the Labour party disguised as news analysis, your friends in the Labour party will be pleased.

Another broken Labour promise

In 1997 Labour promised a referendum before Britain joined the Euro, it was a way of kicking the EU question off of the agenda and so maximising the Labour vote. Last night the Conservative peer, Lord Blackwell, tabled an amendment to prevent any "backsliding" on the Labour government's euro vote commitment. However Labour peers queued up to vote against the motion and it was defeated by 195 votes to 135.

Lord Strathclyde said:

"This astonishing vote will arouse deep suspicion in the minds of the public in view of the broken promises from Labour and Liberals over a referendum on the Constitutional Treaty...It would be the easiest thing in the world for the government to have backed us in writing this commitment into law. After all, they claim it is their policy. There is something very fishy indeed about their refusal to do so."

Labour seem to be looking to cover their backs in various policy areas now that they have lost the support of the electorate. I predict many "tough decisions" will now be taken on the basis of a majority in the House of Commons rather than the popular will of the country.

Googling (Update 3)

A few more interesting Google search terms that have lead people to my site recently:

shortest serving prime ministers - For which this blog appears in 4th place

teri hatcher breasts - For which this blog appears in 8th place

Mixed Sex Wards and Labour's broken promises (further update)

I blogged about Labour's broken promises on ending mixed sex wards in December 2007, when I wrote that:

"Do you remember Tony Blair saying, whilst leader of the opposition, regarding mixed sex wards in hospitals ""Is it beyond the collective wit of the Government to deal with that problem?". Maybe you remember the Labour party's promises, made at the 1997 election and repeated in 2001, to bring an end to male and female patients sharing facilities in NHS hospitals.

You will be staggered to read here and here that the "Department of Health disclosed that eliminating mixed-sex wards is no longer an aim. A DoH spokesman said: "We have to get away from this idea of single-sex wards. That is not what it is all about. "Now we are in a situation where we are moving away from a set target on single-sex accommodation and moving towards the NHS locally taking privacy and dignity much more seriously. "It is possible to envisage patient privacy and dignity with patients of different sexes on the same wards but with proper segregation. "There are different ways of ensuring that. It's not about targets. Now it's much more about what the patient feels." The spokesman said a mixed ward divided into bays by fixed partitions - not necessarily fixed to the ceiling, but high enough that patients perceive they are in a separate room - counted as single-sex accommodation.""

In February 2008 I wrote that:

"I read on the BBC that "Lord Darzi said the government was committed to single-sex accommodation whereby wards are divided into male and female bays by fixed partitions... He said the goal was never to create single-sex wards as this was not achievable...A Department of Health spokesman said Lord Darzi's comments were "fully in line" with the government's "long-standing commitment on mixed-sex accommodation"...Ministers were insisting as recently as November 2006 that 99% of patients were being seen in single-sex accommodation.""

Today I read in The telegraph that:

"Figures obtained by the party under the Freedom of Information Act suggest two thirds of NHS trusts are still failing to meet set standards.

The data comes after Health Secretary Alan Johnson said just a few weeks ago that mixed-sex accommodation in the NHS will be abolished within a year, adding the goal was within "touching distance".

But the Tory figures show two thirds of hospital trusts are still failing to provide single-sex accommodation which, according to the Government's own guidance, is single-sex bays with three solid walls where patients do not have to walk past opposite sex bays to get to the toilet or washroom.

...


In total, 67% of trusts showed by at least one indicator that they were not complying with Government guidance on single-sex accommodation.

Just a third (33%) of trusts could show they met the minimum standards relating to both bays and access to toilets and washrooms, according to the figures."

Even the BBC have to admit that:

"Ministers had originally pledged to end mixed-sex accommodation by 2002.

By 2006 ministers were claiming it had been achieved in 99% of cases, but patients surveys soon showed this to be untrue."

This Labour government were elected partly due to such false promises as this and more should be done to hold them to account.

Now do you understand Labour's plan?

Was it Labour's plan all along to make life as miserable as possible for Conservative voters so that they leave the country and at the same time allow unchecked immigration to increase the pool of the lowly paid and so hopefully (for Labour) increase the number of Labour voters?

The Telegraph report that:

"The Office for National Statistics (ONS) will release figures showing that more than 200,000 Britons emigrated during 2006. That will take the total number who left the country between 1997 and 2006 to 1.97 million.

Another 1.58 million foreign nationals resident in Britain left during the same period.

However, 3.9 million foreigners arrived over the decade, including more than 500,000 in 2006."

Did you notice that one of the few good results labour had at the recent local elections was to take control of Slough council? Slough being an immigration hotspot ... Strange isn't it? Maybe this Labour government are not as incompetent as many in the blogosphere beleive, maybe they are actually very very devious.

Is Gordon on his way out

The whispers have started, Guido Fawkes reports that:

"The sage thought that if only a handful of members of the cabinet were to tell Brown to his face that he had to go for the sake of the party that would be that. Jack Straw would be the man deputised to do the job. Brown has been a disaster for the Labour Party, he can't be the change he promised, he is clearly physically and politically exhausted. Will Jack be the one to put him out of his misery on Friday?"

Political Betting reports that:

"Word reaches me that the former Health Secretary and fervent Blairite, Alan Milburn, is planning to mount a leadership bid to topple Gordon Brown in the aftermath of Labour’s likely heavy defeat in the Crewe & Nantwich by-election.

I cannot vouch for the accuracy of this but it comes from somebody I trust who has very close links within the party. Clearly something is going on out there and this weekend would be the ideal time to strike."

The Independent reports that:

"Backbench Labour critics of Gordon Brown plan to try to oust him by declaring he has lost the support of his MPs if he fails to revive his party's general election prospects.

...

If Mr Brown fails to halt Labour's slide, some MPs want the former cabinet minister Charles Clarke to challenge him for the party leadership by running as a "stalking horse".

Senior Labour figures describe such a move as a "kamikaze mission". They say cabinet ministers would rally behind Mr Brown and he would not resign to enter a leadership election as his backbench critics hope. They believe Mr Brown would defeat Mr Clarke in similar fashion to John Major's victory over John Redwood in a Tory leadership contest in 1995.

Instead, a majority of the Brown critics appears to favour forcing him out of Downing Street through a "tidal wave" of statements from MPs that he has lost their confidence because the public have turned against him.

"It would be better to let events take their course rather than [to] try to create events," one Labour MP said yesterday. "If it's a choice between Gordon Brown and Charles Clarke to be Prime Minister, Gordon would win. If it happens, the best option would be an avalanche or a tidal wave. No leader could withstand that.""

I will be happy to see Gordon Brown forced out of office as he has been a disaster for the UK for the past 11 years. I will so enjoy seeing him forced out of office against his will although no doubt an excuse will be found as to why he has had to retire. What worries me is that Labour will then call a general election and lose it leaving the Conservatives to shoulder some of the blame for the coming economic firestorm.

I want Gordon Brown, Jack Straw, Alistair Darling, Ed Balls, Harriet Harman, Tessa Jowell, David Milband, Des Browne, Hilary Benn, Douglas Alexander, Ruth Kelly, Yvette Cooper, Ed Miliband, Charles Clarke, Alistair Milburn, David Blunkett and the rest of the current Cabinet and ex-Cabinet members to have to shoulder all of the blame for what is going to happen to the UK and I want them to hate very minute of it. The look of embarrassed discomfort on their faces will be something to enjoy whilst the UK economy and society collapse around us. I fear that what is coming will be extremely unpleasant and I wish that I and Mrs NotaSheep had joined the two million and left the UK before this year.

Database and Surveillance Britain

Mr Eugenides has the very worrying details.

Gordon Brown goes digital (update)

Further to my post and others about Gordon Brown on YouTube appealing for questions, the dead tree media have picked up on the story. The Times have a sketch article by Ann Treneman that makes some nice points:

"Gordon Brown has launched something called “Ask the PM” on YouTube. His appeal for questions lasts only 40 seconds and yet each of those seconds seems a second too long. I suppose that it is so bad that it might almost be good. But the problem is that YouTube already has some great Gordo clips such as the all-time classic “Gordon Brown Picking His Nose”. This may be tasteless (though not to Gordon, apparently) but it's riveting.

Not so “Ask the PM”. The only question I had for Gordon after watching it was: “Why?”

...

The truth is that the whole “Ask the PM” venture is confusing, if not for Gordo then certainly for us (at the time of writing, it has had 13,230 hits compared with 249,839 for Gordon Picking His Nose).

...

Why, for instance, is our Prime Minister sitting in what appears to be the spare room? After all, he lives in Downing Street and so, we must assume, could have his pick of backdrops: sweeping staircases, cosy fireplaces, etc. But instead Gordon is plopped between a printer and a fridge that has (gasp) bottled water. Bottled water? I'm sorry but that is so uncool it's tropical.

The camera wobbles (why? a tribute to cinéma vérité?) as Gordon burbles on about his “new exciting new initiative”. “I will be here to answer your questions, questions you have about how globalisation is working.”

Gordon must have written this “script” himself. No one else would think that the question on everyone's lips would be: “How is globalisation working?” There may be a few other topics (financial meltdown, his odd smile, the polls) that intrude."

Gordon, I think you have been rumbled, the tide has turned you are now officially a "laughing stock", as I first documented last November when I blogged:

"Bad news Gordon but tonight when Graham Norton made a joke about you and the audience laughed approvingly it struck me - you are now officially a figure of fun!

The joke was about a picture of you and your wife looking glum at the Queen and Prince Phillip's 60th anniversary service.

"What happened to him?

Did he get his dream job and discover he's shit at it"

That and a gag about the missing data disks, and a piss take of Alistair Darling

-hello Darling, ... Darling, "you're a fucking idiot Darling, you're sacked"

Hatred is bearable for a government, Mrs Thatcher thrived on it. What kills a government is derision, it killed Major's government and it will kill Gordon Brown's. Trust me it will get worse, Graham Norton today, Jonathan Ross tomorrow and it will spread.

NotaSheep are you enjoying Gordon Brown's embarrassment? Oh yes I am, schadenfreude is a wonderful feeling."

Free speech?

The Guardian report a rather worrying development in the ongoing restriction on the right to free speech in the UK:

"A teenager is facing prosecution for using the word "cult" to describe the Church of Scientology.

The unnamed youth was served the summons by City of London police when he took part in a peaceful demonstration opposite the London headquarters of the controversial religion.

Officers confiscated a placard with the word "cult" on it from the youth, who is under 18, and a case file has been sent to the Crown Prosecution Service.

...

The incident happened during a protest against the Church of Scientology on May 10. Demonstrators from the anti-Scientology group, Anonymous, who were outside the church's £23m headquarters near St Paul's cathedral, were banned by police from describing Scientology as a cult by police because it was "abusive and insulting".

Writing on an anti-Scientology website, the teenager facing court said: "I brought a sign to the May 10th protest that said: 'Scientology is not a religion, it is a dangerous cult.'

"'Within five minutes of arriving I was told by a member of the police that I was not allowed to use that word, and that the final decision would be made by the inspector."

A policewoman later read him section five of the Public Order Act and "strongly advised" him to remove the sign. The section prohibits signs which have representations or words which are threatening, abusive or insulting.

The teenager refused to back down, quoting a 1984 high court ruling from Mr Justice Latey, in which he described the Church of Scientology as a "cult" which was "corrupt, sinister and dangerous".

After the exchange, a policewoman handed him a court summons and removed his sign.

...

Liberty director, Shami Chakrabarti, said: "This barmy prosecution makes a mockery of Britain's free speech traditions.

"After criminalising the use of the word 'cult', perhaps the next step is to ban the words 'war' and 'tax' from peaceful demonstrations?"

Ian Haworth, from the Cult Information Centre which provides advice for victims of cults and their families, said: "This is an extraordinary situation. If it wasn't so serious it would be farcical. The police's job is to protect and serve. Who is being served and who is being protected in this situation? I find it very worrying."

The article continues to discuss the Police links to Scientology which I find concerning:

"The City of London police came under fire two years ago when it emerged that more than 20 officers, ranging from constable to chief superintendent, had accepted gifts worth thousands of pounds from the Church of Scientology.

The City of London Chief Superintendent, Kevin Hurley, praised Scientology for "raising the spiritual wealth of society" during the opening
of its headquarters in 2006.

Last year a video praising Scientology emerged featuring Ken Stewart, another of the City of London's chief superintendents, although he is not a member of the group."

If true, this is a worrying and surprising aspect to the story.

The break-up of Pakistan

It would seem that Pakistan is fragmenting before our eyes. News reaches me that (my emphasis):

"On May 11, 2008, the secular government in Pakistan's North West Frontier Province (NWFP) finalized a deal with the Taliban groups for the implementation of shari'a in the province's seven districts. The Pashtun nationalist government in the NWFP, which came to power last month, had vowed to talk to the Taliban in order to establish peace in the region. The talks were held between the government, Pakistani Taliban and the outlawed Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e -Muhammadi (Movement for the Enforcement of Islamic Shari'a).

The Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Muhammadi, led by Maulana Sufi Muhammad, the Islamist leader recently released from prison under a deal with the government, is the dominant Taliban group in the NWFP. It is also a constituent of the Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan, which is led by Baitullah Mehsud.....


Under the deal between the NWFP government and the Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat-e-Muhammadi, which is controlled by Sufi Muhammad's son-in-law Maulana Fazlullah, a shari'a system of administration and justice will be implemented in seven districts. This will effectively create the world's first mini-shari'a state within Pakistan, with the provincial government practically ceding control to the Taliban in roughly 45% of the province....


According to the Roznama Khabrain report, "the [ulema of the] department of Amr Bil Maroof will train [sic] people in Islam, Islamic teachings, Islamic norms and laws." There will be total ban on singing and dancing, and the ulema, who will not be paid a salary, will be based in the local police stations of the seven districts and offer their services as part of their work for Islam.

Courts Will Deliver Islam-Compliant Punishments

The paper stated that shari'a courts will be created in the seven districts, and that these courts will have the power to deliver Islam-compliant verdicts such as amputating the hands of individuals convicted of theft, administering 80 lashes or stoning for convicted rapists, or enforcing qisas - a principle that permits "like punishment" for a crime...."

So having ejected the Taliban from Afghanistan the West now have to see the Taliban in power and inplementing repressive sharia law in part of our alleged ally Pakistan. I wonder if this story will get any coverage in the UK or does it not fit the chosen "narative".

We are all still paying for Tony Blair

The Mail online report that:

"In Jerusalem it has become much harder to get a room in the city's best hotel, a carved stone palace that was once the haunt of Churchill and Lawrence of Arabia.

The reason for the shortage is simple. There are only 86 bedrooms at the American Colony Hotel and ten of them ? more than an entire floor ? have been booked indefinitely by Tony Blair to be used as offices by his mission to the Middle East.

The cost, much of it borne by the British taxpayer, is considerable. The Mail on Sunday has obtained a copy of Mr Blair's contract with the hotel, which shows it is being paid nearly $1.34million ? about £700,000 ? annually for the office rooms alone.

When Mr Blair and his entourage of six bodyguards, a Press officer and Nick Banner, a former member of his team at Downing Street, are in town, the space available at the Colony shrinks still further.

Although the well appointed British Consulate-General is just three streets away, they sleep at the Colony ? adding about £2,000 per night to the bill, not including food.

Since Mr Blair's appointment last June, the mission has also purchased a £75,000 armoured car and spent £55,000 on security, £15,000 on phones, computers and stationery, £2,500 on car rental and £20,000 on general administration.

Naturally enough, when Mr Blair flies to Israel, something he does at least once a month, he and Mr Banner go first-class on British Airways, a return fare costing £2,424 each.

The bodyguards have to put up with club, which costs £1,732."

It is good to know that with or without a credit crunch, Tony Blair will continue to live in luxury at the British taxpayers' expense. Tony Blair and his free-loading wife are a rather unpleasant stain upon the history of the UK, I wish them nothing but unhappiness. As I was saying recently to a friend regarding a rich and rather grasping acquaintance of ours who is experiencing some personal unhappiness at the moment; "maybe now he will realise that money does not ensure happiness and that screwing as much money as possible out of people may make you rich but it will also ensure that if you hit personal trouble there will be very few people ready to help, and more ready to take pleasure."

Now the BBC encourage illegal immigration

The Sun have the story.

Now that is a car

1961 250 GT SWB California Spyder purchased for £5.5 million by Chris Evans.

A beautiful car now owned by a less than a beautiful man, it just doesn't seem fair...

John McCain with some advice for the Democrats

Now that's a politician with a nice dry sense of humour. It's a shame that as far as most of the UK media is concerned John McCain is old, old, old and George W. Bush (Mark II); maybe the truth will leak out...



Thanks to Mr Eugenides for the spot.

Gordon Brown goes digital

As I blogged earlier, Gordon Brown is taking his massive personality online and will be answering video questions submitted to the Labour party's YouTube channel.

Here's Gordon Brown's request for questions in all its glory...




His fake smile has been turned down from puke-inducing to just queasy-making which is an improvement, at this rate his presence on-screen will be merely anodyne by the time of the next general election. I do like the slightly wobbly camera work, not enough to seem edgy (in a late 1990's way) but enough to make you notice and wonder why they bothered.


Of course there is a better piece of video showing Gordon Brown entering the "digital" age and here it is...






Meanwhile, Play Political has some example video questions...

"never was charm more offensive"

Leo McKinstry in the Daily Express has a leader piece entitled " DOES ANYONE ACTUALLY BELIEVE A WORD THIS MAN SAYS ANY MORE?" (sorry but the Express does like SHOUTING). Here is an extract:

"Gordon Brown embarked on a so-called “charm offensive” towards the media last week.

And never was charm more offensive.

With a manic grin fixed on his face and meaningless slogans pouring from his mouth, he achieved the remarkable feat of being both tedious and disturbing as he toured the studios. 

Brown’s abject performance only emphasised his unfitness for the high office. Like a malfunctioning robot, he kept repeating the same formulaic statements about “long-term decisions” and “guiding the economy” through tough times. But his words had no resonance because they were utterly devoid of meaning. They were nothing more than hollow verbiage designed to deceive. 

As Labour’s dire ratings show, voters are not listening to Brown any more. Over the past year they have learnt to recognise that there is no connection between the PM’s words and his actions."

Do go and read the rest but here are some key phrases to whet your appetite:

"His entire premiership has become an exercise in brazen dishonesty."

"His office is obsessed with short-term headlines."

"Every step he takes is based on crude political calculations and the narrow tribal interests of Labour."

"What makes Brown’s deceit all the more repulsive is his pose as a champion of virtue."

"It is hard to stomach this from a man without a shred of integrity. Devoid of purpose, he has shown himself to be a serial coward and a dangerous charlatan."

£2.7 billion down the drain

Gordon Brown's £2.7 billion bribe appears to have failed. The News of The World reported yesterday that:

A "poll also reveals almost half of voters think Brown's £2.7billion giveaway this week to compensate for scrapping the 10p tax rate was the RIGHT thing to do—but 59 per cent say it's still a BRIBE.

And an astonishing one in four say it has made them even LESS likely to vote Labour on Thursday.

The poll shows a significant swing among young voters, with 56 per cent of 25-34-year-olds saying it is time for a change and that they will vote Tory in the by-election. Women have also turned against Brown with 54 per cent saying they will vote Tory."

Well done Gordon, you are so incompetent even your bribes fall flat.

Online Prime Minister's Questions

I hear that Gordon Brown is planning to launch an on-line version of PMQs. Apparently the great communicator has promised to respond to video clip questions submitted via the Downing Street YouTube website. We have until 21 June to put questions to Gordon, there is no indication as to how long he will take to respond, or what happens if he is no longer Prime Minister by then.

Snouts in the trough time

That delightful Speaker, Michael Martin, has overseen plans to offer MPs tax-free childcare vouchers worth thousands of pounds a year. MPs just don't seem to care how they are perceived, do they. They get a good salary, incredibly good expenses that only now they need to produce receipts for and yet they want more, more, more. Greed is the word.

The UN and Israel

The UN is institutionally biased against Israel; "between January 2003 and March 2008, tiny Israel - its population not half that of metropolitan Cairo's - was condemned no fewer than 635 times. The runners-up were Sudan at 280, the Democratic Republic of the Congo at 209, and Burma at 183. North Korea was cited a mere 60 times, a third as many as the United States." (thanks Archbishop Cranmer for the spot).

The UN routinely criticise Israel for practically everything whilst looking on benignly when other countries murder many thousands of their population.


Now I read that:

"A Palestinian headmaster and science teacher at a United Nations school in Gaza also built rockets for Islamic Jihad.

Awad al-Qiq's double life, revealed after he was killed last week in an Israeli airstrike, represents a major embarrassment for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, or UNRWA, according to a Reuters report. UNRWA has insisted to Israel and the world that it does not help Palestinian terrorists.

No one from the United Nations attended the funeral or visited Qiq's widow and five children, relatives told Reuters. UNRWA is looking into the issue.

Reuters reported that Qiq's body was wrapped in an Islamic Jihad flag at his funeral and that the organization's leaders called him a martyr who led their "engineering unit" -- code for bomb makers.

Israel's April 30 attack at Rafah, close to the Egyptian border, hit a workshop used for making rockets and weapons. Qiq was involved in developing rockets and mortars, an Israeli intelligence source told Reuters.

Israel has claimed for years that Palestinian terrorists use UNRWA equipment to fight Israel."

Matthew Parris in The Times

A brilliant article in The Times today by Matthew Parris today points out the problem at the core of Gordon Brown, he is never wrong. The article ends:

"...a cold, angry repudiation of the evidence itself, a look that suggests a different prism, a different picture; a strange, knotted, jaw-clenching, fact-defying, interview-wrecking rejection of what the rest of us see plain as daylight . . . this disturbs more deeply than everyday mendacity ever can. Where could a national conversation with such a man begin?"

Do read the rest here.

Gordon Brown; is he actually an idiot?

Whilst avoiding going to Crewe and Nantwich, in case he causes the Labour vote to reach zero. Gordon Brown has found the time to make a speech in Edinburgh to the general assembly of the Church of Scotland, billed as a strong reaffirmation of his personal and political vision. In the speech he said that the Government had to work harder to create a fairer society.

"I stand before you today to affirm my personal commitment to the church's enduring vision of the good society – the good society of compassion and justice that today is needed more than ever, at home in our own country and abroad in our world. And while I would respectfully suggest that our country is fairer today than in the past, I accept with humility today that our country is not yet fair enough and we must do more."

That's the standard rubbish that Gordon Brown likes to spout, it is hard to argue with and yet doesn't commit him to actually do anything concrete.


He went on to say (my emphasis):

"If anyone had said 50 years ago that the people of our world would achieve black civil rights, tear down the Berlin Wall, end apartheid, no one would have believed it."

Construction of the Berlin Wall wasn't started until August 13, 1961 - that's not yet 47 years ago. Gordon Brown seems to have as strong a grip on history as he does on economics. I wonder if the BBC will cover this slip; sorry what am I thinking...



Thanks to Mr Eugenides for the spot.

BBC news priorities

THe Independent are reporting that (my emphasis):

"Andrew Gilligan, left, was named Journalist of the Year last month for a series of scoops that led to the resignation of Lee Jasper, aide to the former London mayor Ken Livingstone. But I can reveal that the information Gilligan had access to had previously been seen by the BBC. I'm told that his source within City Hall, a Conservative member of the London Assembly, initially offered the leaked emails to BBC London's political editor, Tim Donovan, who rejected the story as being of no news value. It wasn't until a year later when Gilligan saw the info and investigated further that the scandal was uncovered, leading to Jasper's ignominious departure, and a triumph for the 'Evening Standard', Gilligan's paper."

I think "no news value" translates to "not of any value to our news agenda".

They insist they were destroyed by mistake!

This will come a massive surprise to you I am sure, The Times are reporting that (my emphasis):

"Some of Tony Blair’s expenses claims, which the High Court last week ruled should be disclosed to the public, have been shredded. The documents, itemising Blair’s claims for household expenses during a year of his premiership, were destroyed in the midst of a legal battle over whether they should be published. All MPs’ expenses are funded by taxpayers.

It is a criminal offence to destroy documents to prevent their disclosure under freedom of information (FOI) laws, but Westminster officials say they were unaware that the files were the subject of a legal challenge. They insist they were destroyed by mistake....

It has now emerged that some of Blair’s files covering claims for Myrobella, his constituency home, were destroyed by Commons officials after they rejected The Sunday Times’s FOI request in January 2005 to see his claims for £43,029 of public money covering a three-year period.

Norman Baker, who has campaigned for more transparency in his fellow MPs’ expenses, said: “How convenient that some of Tony Blair’s expenses have been shredded. This is either incompetence or obstruction of the Freedom of Information Act and should be properly investigated.”

The shredding of the files has emerged in documents from the protracted legal battle over MPs’ expenses. So far the efforts by the Commons authorities to block disclosure have run up legal bills likely to cost the taxpayer about £150,000."

How convenient, how fucking convenient!

Maybe Tony Blair believes like Leona Helmsley that "We don't pay taxes. Only the little people pay taxes", although in his case he has added "We don't follow laws. Only the little people follow laws".

Gordon promised a “bonfire of quangos”, how has he done?

Unsurprisingly he's been a complete failure at this as at most things. The Times takes you through the basic figures about these "largely unseen and unaccountable bodies spend £101 billion a year, the equivalent of £1,662 for each person in Britain."

More information can be found at the TaxPayers Allinace and I am sure on Burning Our Money soon.

Shortest serving Prime Ministers

This information should be of interest to Gordon Brown.

Gordon Brown has currently been Prime Minister for 2 weeks short of 11 months.

This is a list of all the UK Prime Ministers who have served for under a year, I have not shown those whose first term as Prime Minister was less than a year but did serve subsequent terms as I find it impossible to believe that Gordon Brown would ever be chosen to lead the Labour party ever again once he has left office, nor have I included those Prime Ministers who served periods shorter than a year in a subsequent term in office.


Shorter terms have been served by:

George Canning who served just short of 4 months in 1827, he died shortly after taking office

The Viscount Goderich who served just short of 5 months from 1827, he resigned from office because he lacked support amongst colleagues

Andrew Bonar Law who served just just short of 7 months before retiring due to ill-health in 1923, he died six months after leaving office

The Duke of Devonshire who served for 7 and a half months from 1756

The Earl of Shelburne who served for just short of 9 months from 1782

The Earl of Bute who served for just over 10 months from 1762


So Gordon Brown is not the shortest serving UK Prime Minister ever, nor even the shortest serving 20th century UK Prime Minister. If he resigned before the 27th June this year then maybe he could spin this as follows: "I am the longest serving Prime Minister who has served less than a year as Prime Minister."





A history of UK Prime Ministers can be found here.

A timeline of UK Prime Ministers can be found here, I like the blank space at the top of the timeline that denotes Gordon Brown's tenure as Prime Minister - seems a fair assessment.

Global Warming: Mostly Hot Air

An excellent article at Pajamas Media about how the global warming industry is having to face up to truth that their theories may be no more than bunkum.

"Too many interested parties have too much invested in climate change alarmism to admit that the game is up just yet, but sooner or later their position is going to become untenable. And when it does, while acknowledging that many people embraced climate change alarmism for genuine reasons, we’ll have to decide what to do with those who knew or suspected their claims had no substance, but pressed on out of a desire to get rich or impose their ideologies on others."

Parking charge system 'medieval'

"Britain's automated parking and traffic fines system has been branded "close to theft" and "medieval" by a Tory peer."

So reports the BBC.

My recent experiences in London have shown me that the current system is set-up to raise income for the Borough concerned. There is no fairness or latitude in the system just "enforcement officers" with an overly officious manner who seem to take such joy in booking people and a backup system designed to make appealing as frustrating as possible.

Doctor Who - The Unicorn and the Wasp

The Unicorn and the Wasp features at the end a book - Death in the Clouds.

So this was indeed an Agatha Christie book and it does involve a wasp sting...

Spot the elephant in the room

What's missing from this BBC report that:

"One million more people in England could be on the waiting list for social housing within two years, council leaders are warning."

What else does the report tell us:

"About 4m people are now waiting for a council or housing association home, and the Local Government Association expects this to reach 5m by 2010."

And what might the causes of this problem be? Ah the BBC tell us:

"Factors driving demand include high house prices, the credit crunch, and fewer new homes being built, it says."

No other factors that might be relevant? How about, shh whisper it, immigration. How many people have been added to the UK population via immigration over the last 11 years? One million, two million...


PostScript:
The BBC further report that:

"Ministers say they want to build 70,000 affordable homes each year by 2011.

This would include 45,000 social homes for rent."


70,000 new homes, what an indentation that would make in 4 million homeless.

Labour - "Tough on crime?

The Home Office announced in 2006 that it had increased the maximum jail term for carrying a blade in a public place from two years to four. However the Daily Mail report that:

"Secret Home Office figures show that 1,226 suspects under the age of 18 were found guilty of carrying a potentially deadly blade in 2006.

But, despite promises of tough sentencing, only 72 were put behind bars - one in 17.

The average sentence was 3.4 months, which because of the early-release scheme meant that a typical offender spent just eight weeks behind bars.

The rest escaped with a fine, a community sentence or - in 113 cases - an absolute or conditional discharge.

Police sources said that the soft-sentence scandal is even worse than it appears because hundreds more under-18s caught carrying a knife are not brought before the courts.

They are given a warning, a formal caution or are monitored by a youth offending team - meaning as few as one in 50 youngsters caught with a knife or blade is sent to prison."

As I have blogged before, "Now do you wonder why crime is so high? The chances of a thief getting caught are slim, the chances of their case being proceeded with are less than 25%, the chance of getting convicted slim and the chance of actually being meaningfully punished even slimmer." It looks as though I may have over-estimated the chances of having a case against someone being taken to court.

Insincerity Brown

I have blogged before and here and elsewhere about Gordon Brown's fake sincerity in video messages. Here we have his message to Israel on the 60th anniversary of the State of Israel coming into being...






and here for old times sake is his message to Countdown on the 25th anniversary of the Channel 4 programme...






What a total fake Gordon Brown is, he just cannot do sincerity; he smiles at the wrong moments, he looks sad at just the wrong moment, the switch on-switch off facial emotions just look wrong. I hated Tony Blair, partly, for being just a smooth talking actor but at least he was partly convincing, Gordon Brown convinces nobody.



Thanks to Dizzy Thinks for the spot.

Will history repeat itself?

Portsmouth have just won the FA Cup for the first time since 1939, I hope that is not an omen...

BBC slurs

A bizarre story in The Telegraph today that:

"Baroness Thatcher once tried to seduce Sir Edward Heath during her hunt for a Conservative seat, a new BBC drama is claiming."

This seems quite unlikely as I thought that Sir Edward Heath was famous for two things; first for selling out the country by lieing about the consequences of joining the EEC and second for being most likely asexual or maybe a repressed homosexual.

The article concludes with one of my least favourite Labour MPs coming to the defence of the participants and a great line from the BBC:

"Denis MacShane, the Labour MP who is one of Sir Edward's biographers, refused to accept the suggestion.

He said: "It's delightful but wholly imagined. There is absolutely no evidence that Ted got closer to her than shaking her hand."

The BBC claimed the programme was a "light-hearted and imaginative film which delves under the skin of the Iron Lady for the first time".

The BBC spreading slurs against Conservatives is what we enjoy doing.


I wonder if the BBC will ever report any of the rumours that surround our current Prime Minister?

Films where the title is only mentioned in the last line of the film

Back in April I blogged about songs where the title is ONLY mentioned as the last line of the song. Today I remembered a film/play that nearly meets the criteria, during half time in the FA Cup Final between Portsmouth and Cardiff I turned over to BBC2 and saw the last 15 minutes of the 1952 version of "The Importance of Being Earnest", the one with Dame Edith Evans portraying Lady Bracknell, the last line of which is:

"I've now realised for the first time in my life the vital Importance of Being Earnest."

Are there any other films that meet this criteria?

BBC Have your Say

The BBC's "Have Your Say" section tries to frame questions to get the answer they want and they almost always pick the answers that they like as their featured quotes. Unfortunately if you click on "Readers Recommended" you find that most readers of Have Your Say are in fact opposed to the BBC world view. Two Have Your Say examples caught my eye this week, so here they are with the front page of top "Readers Recommended" in each case:

1. "Can Gordon Brown save the economy?

Gordon Brown has said he is the right man to steer the country through difficult economic times. Does he have a solid agenda?

The prime minister blamed "international factors" for rising oil and food prices as well as housing market problems and said he was taking the right action to deal with them.

On Wednesday, Mr Brown set out his draft legislative programme for the next year including more help for first-time buyers, a savings scheme for eight million low earners and more flexible working rights for parents.

However, this has been overshadowed by a raft of gloomy economic news with the governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King warning the "nice" decade was over.

Are you convinced by Gordon Brown’s claims? What do you think of his plans for the year ahead? Can he steer the country through challenging economic times?"


And the top "Readers Recommended", surely one person would have swallowed the BBC line that Gordon Brown is still the best man to lead the UK out of this entirely foreign sourced problem, or maybe not:

"Family finances?! What about the rest of the country? Everyone is in a mess, not just families.

Flexible working rights for parents is another questionable one. I'm all for it in theory, but why should we work harder/longer hours/worse shifts because we don't have children?

All he's doing is discriminating further against the young white british hard working childless population. You'd think one of his advisors would have mentioned to him he won't be PM much longer unless he sorts it out.

S, The City


As a single person with the lion's share of taxation it's about time people like me got a look in on some of the benefits of paying such high taxation.

Unfortunately I have a private pension, healthcare and higher than average wage so, basically, I'm stuffed.

If I sat on my lazy behind doing nothing I'd have my rent paid, council tax paid, home insurance paid and enough money to sit at home with what time I get up being my biggest worry.

What about people like me?????

Peter W, Manchester, United Kingdom


Putting family finances first?

If he hadn't spent the last ten years as chancellor messing them up in the first place he wouldn't need to put them right, would he.

What a cheek!

Nothing but more rubbish from a tired, desperate man with a thick, brass neck.

[Vulpus_rex], London, United Kingdom


Bluntly no. His priorities display the limited thinking of a tired, battered government with nothing in mind but short term survival.
He should be helping everybody not just families. In fact it is about time the elderly and the single got something.
More control over the police? More meetings, less bodies on the beat, more crime.
A constitution for the NHS? Why? It will be more words and less substance. I want to be treated, not have to wade through reams of useless messages!

[recrec]




The government's only priority is saving its own skin.

Huge Canoe, Up a creek, without a paddle, United Kingdom



'put family finances at the heart of the government's programme'

What about the single ppl - dont they count.

It is about time you where fair to everyone not just the family.

If not you deserve to be out of office.


.

[Katanamochi]



I simply don't trust Gordon Brown or what he says.

Dan Purkis, London, United Kingdom



What we really want is less taxes and more benefits for working families. And less benefits for scroungers.

[KAOwen], Bristol, United Kingdom



he really is out of touch with reality if he thinks the poorest people in this country can afford to save at the moment!

[hindlegoffadonkey]



Gordon has said nothing new. Once upon a time we had Mortgage relief, flexi-time for most workers, final salary pensions and lower taxation. Now we have no mortaged relief, standard working hours(unless you are part-time), money purchase pensions and very high taxation.

As a single person who works full time, I am thinking, what do I gain out of the mess which Gordon has put us into. Top quality Pensions are rare and we pay too much tax. It's time for Gordon to go.

Gillian Moore, London, United Kingdom



Just how many top priorities is this man now giving his full attention to?

All words and in six months we will still have seen no substance. This is times for the by election. Lets hope people still sock it to him!

[TheCrazyFool]



Knee jerk, reactive and a thinly disguised veneer over a disastrous policy decision. Spin-happy Labour have never had the right priorities, they just like to talk a lot about whatever they think are the electorate's current pain points.

The sad thing is that so many were taken in and voted for them, three times in a row!

[examino]



I will not support any government which tries to support high house prices. There is very little point going to work each day if you can't afford your own decent sized home. You might as well reproduce like bunnies and live on the state. Frankly people who do this have a better standard of living than those renting in the private sector.

I own my own house. If I didn't, I wouldn't bother working.

Anon, UK



No government has it wrong in taking money from families in tax when they are working and paying it back in family tax credit. It does not give people a pride in wanting to work but rather that it is not worth working and easier to sit at home on benefits, thus breeding a benefit culture. It does not have crime under control and exacerbates the problem by encouraging single mothers to live alone on benefits with no strong male role model to discipline children, thereby leaving a broken society

Janet White, United Kingdom



"Why is it that there are so many muppets on HYS that know nothing and do not acknowledge all the improvments that Labour have actually made over the years."

Hello?

Illegal wars, a 51% real-term hike in taxation since 1997, failure to improve public transport, a health service bottom of the European league tables, ten million on benefits, massively curtailed civil liberties and lastly £1.15 a gallon.

If you consider those to be "improvements", then you're on your own my friend.

Paul, London "


Not much solace for the BBC there, the public are not as pig-ignorant as the BBC believe them to be.


2. "What's the solution to the Palestinian refugee issue?

Palestinians are marking the 60th anniversary of the outbreak of the first Arab-Israeli war, known as al-Nakba, or "the catastrophe". What can be done to resolve the Palestinian refugee crisis which was one of the outcomes of the war?

More than 700,000 Palestinians fled their homes or were expelled in 1948, during the war that followed Israel's declaration of independence.

The anniversary is being marked with a series of marches and protests and comes on the second day of US President George W Bush's visit to Israel. He is there to join the Jewish state's 60th anniversary commemorations and to push forward peace talks.

Do you live in the region? Are you a Palestinian refugee? What would be a lasting solution for the refugee problem?"

I think we can see how the BBC see this story, as they only want Palestinians to air their views; not that the BBC think there is a valid Israeli view - in the BBC collective mind: Israel = bad, Palestinian = good.


"There has never been a Palestinian state, and there never will be. During Ottoman rule there wasn't even a province called Palestine. The Arabs who call themselves Palestinians are actually Jordanians, Egyptians and Syrians, and after the failed attempt to destroy Israel in 1948 these nations should have absorbed the 'Palestinian' refugees, instead of forcing them to live in squalid camps in perpetual war with Israel.

Aussie Pride, Cronulla, Australia



Jordan seized the West Bank in 1948, and annexed it. The annexation was never contested. Therefore, all West Bank Palestinians are Jordanians, and are Jordan's problem, not Israel's.

That should solve half the problem.

[Corruptuser], United States



Well Jordan was going to be part of Palestine until the Arabs decided that war was their favoured option because they wanted ALL the land.

They lost that war, and with that they lost Palestine.

Now the Arabs must think of a way to accommodate the Palestinians into Jordan.

Lostin Space



"What's the solution to the Palestinian refugee issue?"

What refugee issue? There would be at most only a few thousand original refugees from 1948, the rest of the 'Palestinians' are the children and grandchildren of these refugees. Refugee status isn't magically passed down to future generations.

Aussie Pride, Cronulla, Australia



Electing Hamas certainly isn't conducive to a diplomatic solution to the problem. Declaring war on Israel as history has shown isn't either.

[Ifancyapint], United Kingdom




Pack your bags. It's only a hop and a skip to your homeland in Jordan.

Gemma A.




How many refugees are there today?

If there were 700,000 sixty years ago, then it means that most of them have already died, and the current 'refugees' are children and grandchildren of those original ones. For people claiming those should be allowed to return think about all the wars in Europe in the 18th century. I'm sure each of you have at least one ancestor that fled during a war never to return. Let's quit being self-righteous here. Nothing happened on that war that did not happen before

Chen




"What can be done to resolve the Palestinian refugee crisis which was one of the outcomes of the war?"

Stop bashing Israel, plz.

The crisis was not just an outcome of the war - it has also been caused by Arab countries' unwillingness to harbor or help Palestinians. Do you think Jordan wants the West Bank back?

[Spironline], Denmark




Well I find it incredible that a Palestinian can be born anywhere in the world today and have automatic 'refugee' status afforded to them.

Obviously what should have happened to Palestinian refugees, was that they would have been taken into Arab countries as Israel took in the Jewish refugees.

Now the only solution is of course the return to Jordan which is Palestine.

First Name Last Name




Many more Jews, around 850.000, were ethnically cleansed from Arab countries at the same time.
Isn’t it disingenuous not to mention them when discussing this issue?

Millions of Germans were ethnically cleansed from East Prussia etc…about the same time the Arabs launched their war to “drown the Jews into the sea”.
Has anyone ever heard complaints from German refugees?

Why should the Germans pay a price for their wars of aggression but the Arabs can get away scot-free?

Why?

Fernando Carreras, Amsterdam




There are no real refugese in 2008 from former Palestine, only the decendnts of former refugese & this goes for Jews as well as many other people arround the globe

We can not turn the clock back, The ME of 60 years ago does not exist any more, the homes of former Arab & Jew inhabitants no loner exist.

It time to move on and end the suffering of those who are under the dilusion that time can be reversed.

It is time to make peace & leave the past behind, we owe it to our future generation

Dr Mookie Fallah (Israeli Arab), Herzalia Israel




Is this even a question? 5 minutes of research tells you that the Arab armies forced them out of their homes so they could beat the Jews, promising them a quick victory. 60 years later, and Israel is the Middle Easts strongest nation. So, the Arabs can make due on that promise since they forced them to leave in the first place, and open their own borders to them. I find it disturbing that the BBC only seems to report the poor palestinians plight, and keeps ignoring Israel in their behalf.

Seer, USA



I'm sick of them. They can afford 22,000 balloons and countless rockets and guns and yet continue to yelp about their lack of funds.

Jane, Trenton, USA




Only one solution. The right to return to the occupied land
[drarni], Finland

I just hope the Jews thrown out of the West Bank having lived there for centuries/millennia get the 'right of return' into the parts of the Palestinian-occupied west bank.

Tom smith



The Huseini family forced Arab migration to the TransJordan area to counter Jewish immigration and claim the area for the Jordanians. The so called "Palastinians" are Hashemite Jordanians. Let the Arabs give them back what they were forced off of to migrate to the partitioned lands of Palastine. The long term solution is one state. Israel is the economic powerhouse in the region. It has the brains, the ambition and the will to make the area prosperous. Terrorist Islamists stand in the way.

Collin Canadian "



Not much agreement with the BBC/Palestinian view there either.

This survey cannot be accurate

According to The Sun, via thelondonpaper (a London free newspaper):

"Eight out of ten people don't know how to boil an egg and even fewer can roast a chicken, a new survey has revealed."

This cannot be correct and if it is then it is a sad indictment on Britain today.

Can anyone see a flaw in this plan?

Yahoo News report that:

"The White House said Washington and Riyadh were also to sign an agreement on nuclear cooperation that would clear the way for Saudi Arabia to receive enriched uranium for its reactors, without the need to master the fuel nuclear cycle itself as Iran has done.

"This agreement will pave the way for Saudi Arabia's access to safe, reliable fuel sources for energy reactors and demonstrate Saudi leadership as a positive non-proliferation model for the region," it said.

Washington charges that Iran's nuclear programme is cover for a drive to develop an atomic weapon, a charge denied by Tehran.

Uranium enrichment, the process which can produce for fuel for nuclear power stations -- or, in highly extended form, the fissile core of an atomic bomb -- lies at the centre of US concerns."

Is supplying enriched uranium to the country that spawned all of the 9/11 terrorists a terribly good idea.

“There’s got to be something seriously wrong with a country that lets a hijacker work at an airport. It’s shocking.”

“There’s got to be something seriously wrong with a country that lets a hijacker work at an airport. It’s shocking.”

You'd have thought so, wouldn't you. So take a read of this from the Sun:

"GUN cops at Heathrow discovered a notorious hijacker at the wheel of a car they pulled over – and were amazed to learn he had a JOB there.

Nazamuddin Mohammidy, 34 – hired to clean British Airways offices – is one of nine Afghans who threatened to blow up an airliner during a four-day siege at Stansted in 2000."

Go on read the whole story; you absolutely could not make this sort of crap up!

Did anyone truly believe Gordon Brown enjoyed the music of the Arctic Monkeys?

Of course not; and it now seems that his favourite group is more believably the Bee Gees. The BBC report that:

"Band member Robin Gibb told The Times that the prime minister played their songs "every day", adding: "Gordon likes our music and I like him.""

I can just picture Gordon, hairbrush in hand singing:

"Life goin' nowhere. Somebody help me.
Somebody help me, yeah.
Life goin' nowhere. Somebody help me.
Somebody help me yeah. Stayin' alive."

Do Sky News know the London Mayoral election is over?

It would seem not, as there are still plenty of links to this page that offers to help you choose who to vote for as London Mayor. Maybe a touch out of date?

Winston Churchill on Europe

Some pro-EU fanatics are prone to claim that Winston Churchill was in favour of a United Europe. There are being disingenuous; he was in favour of a unified Continental Europe but he did not want the UK to form part of such a state. As he said:

"We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not comprised. We are interested and associated, but not absorbed. and should a European address us and say "Shall we speak for thee?" we should reply, "Nay sir, for we dwell among our own people".

Zimbabwe

You must read this from Peter Oborne in The Daily Mail, via Archbishop Cranmer and ConservativeHome for the final shocking pictures - I must admit I didn't realise imeediately what they were of, but when I did I felt physically sick. Maybe a campaign of emailing these pictures to Thabo Mbeki should be started; but would he even care? Robert Mugabe is a murderous thug and his protectors in Africa and the rest of the world should be made to account for their actions.

"On budget"?

The BBC faithfully "report" the National Audit Office's report on the National Programme for IT including the claim that:

"It said that the fixed-price contracts used meant that their costs remained "broadly unchanged", despite the delays, but that it was likely to be 2014 or 2015 before every NHS trust was running the care records system.

Tim Burr, head of the NAO, said: "The challenge involved in delivering the National Programme for IT has proved to be far greater than envisaged at the start, with serious delays in delivering the new care records systems.

"Progress is being made, however, and financial savings and other benefits are beginning to emerge."

He said that the priority now was to finish developing and deploying the systems.

A spokesman for Connecting for Health, which is overseeing the project, said it "regretted" the delays.

He added: "The new IT systems in the NHS are on course to deliver better care and an estimated £1.14 billion in savings by 2014.

"The National Programme for IT has already delivered a total of £208 million in savings by providing quicker, more efficient and convenient patient care.""

On budget? Which budget, the original budget of £2.3 billion, the revised budget of £6 billion, the next budget of £9 billion or the last budget of £12.4 billion? So if the system is "on budget" at £12.4 billion then it is over five times ove the original budget.

I doubt that the BBC will ask this question, can't put any more pressure on the Government at this important time.

Avert your eyes

Mmmm lovely...

Those are Gordon Brown's hands by the way, for the full story see the BBC.

How would the US and UK media report this sort of "mistake" if it had been made by George W. Bush or John McCain? (reprise)

Since the UK and US media have not picked up on this piece of video, I have decided to show it again in the name of fairness, because you can be damn sure the media would have played any video of George Bush or John McCain, making the same comments, over and over again...




That's Barack Obama saying he had visited 57 US States so far, had one more to visit and would unfortunately be unable to visit Hawaii or Alaska. Not a peep from CBS, ABC etc. in the US and certainly nothing from the BBC in the UK. Can you imagine the sheer joy these media outlets would have taken if this had been a Republican politician making the same mistake? Remember the constant broadcasting of the video of Dan Quayle misspelling "potato" and of George Bush trying to exit through a locked door after a press conference. Surely all Americans know how many States there are in the Union, 50. I await Barack Obama's explanation for this piece of video; maybe like Hillary Clinton he "misspoke", maybe he's actually an idiot or maybe (like so many left wing politicians) he's so used to exaggerating statistics that he does it automatically now.


The media "narrative" is that Republican politicians are stupid and so anyone who votes for them must be stupid, whereas Democrat politicians are good honest people as are people who vote for them A verbal slip by a Republican shows stupidity, a lack of knowledge by a Democrat shows tiredness or just isn't worth mentioning.





Thanks to Instapundit for the spot.

Sheer genius

"Are you not pregnant"

"Not unless sperm xan get through a sash window, no!"



From Victoria Wood's dinnerladies.

The new Barack Obama

Barack Obama may already be yesterday's news; now the Republican party have their own ethnic hero; Governor Bobby Jinjal an Indian American (that's subcontinental Indian not Native American Indian). The moves to get John McCain to appoint Bobby Jinjal as his Vice Presidential running mate have already started. Bobby Jinjal is not quite 37, was born and raised in Louisiana but graduated from Oxford University (attending as a Rhodes Scholar). His experience looks good and as far as I can tell he has no links to crooked businessmen or racist preachers. Could this be the man to lift John McCain ahead of his Democrat rivals and to end the media innuendo about racism within the Republican party?


You can see Bobby Jinjal in action on the Jay Leno show here, quite eloquent isn't he...


Could an Indian in the White House help the largest democracy in the West (the USA) forge stronger links with the largest democracy in the East (India) and so act as a counterweight to the totalitarian states of Russia, China and the soon to be EU superstate?







PostScript:

On the subject of racist Republicans could someone please teach the media some history; it was the the Republican Party that has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks since its founding in 1854, whilst as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S's: Slavery, Secession, Segregation and now Socialism.


As The National Black Republican Association explain it:

"It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860's, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950's and 1960's.

During the civil rights era of the 1960's, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court which resulted in the 1954 Brown vs. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman's issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was President Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil rights Act while he was a senator, as did Democrat Senator Al Gore, Sr. And after he became president, John F. Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph who was a black Republican. President Kennedy, through his brother Attorney General Robert Kennedy, had Dr. King wiretapped and investigated by the FBI on suspicion of being a Communist in order to undermine Dr. King.

In March of 1968, while referring to Dr. King's leaving Memphis, Tennessee after riots broke out where a teenager was killed, Democrat Senator Robert Byrd, a former member of the Ku Klux Klan, called Dr. King a "trouble-maker" who starts trouble, but runs like a coward after trouble is ignited. A few weeks later, Dr. King returned to Memphis and was assassinated on April 4, 1968.

Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860's, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon‘s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation‘s first goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.

Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Senator Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans.

Critics of Republican Senator Barry Goldwater who ran for president against Democrat President Lyndon Johnson in 1964, ignore the fact that Goldwater wanted to force the Democrats in the South to stop passing discriminatory laws and thus end the need to continuously enact federal civil rights legislation.

Those who wrongly criticize Goldwater, also ignore the fact that President Johnson, in his 4,500 State of the Union Address delivered on January 4, 1965, mentioned scores of topics for federal action, but only thirty five words were devoted to civil rights. He did not mention one word about voting rights. Then in 1967, showing his anger with Dr. King's protest against the Viet Nam War, President Johnson referred to Dr. King as "that Nigger preacher."

Contrary to the false assertions by Democrats, the racist "Dixiecrats" did not all migrate to the Republican Party. "Dixiecrats" declared that they would rather vote for a "yellow dog" than vote for a Republican because the Republican Party was known as the party for blacks. Today, some of those "Dixiecrats" continue their political careers as Democrats, including Democrat Senator Robert Byrd who is well known for having been a "Keagle" in the Ku Klux Klan.

Another former "Dixiecrat" is Democrat Senator Ernest Hollings who put up the Confederate flag over the state capitol when he was the governor of South Carolina. There was no public outcry when Democrat Senator Christopher Dodd praised Senator Byrd as someone who would have been "a great senator for any moment," including the Civil War. Democrats denounced Senator Trent Lott for his remarks about Senator Strom Thurmond. Senator Thurmond was never in the Ku Klux Klan and defended blacks against lynching and the discriminatory poll taxes imposed on blacks by Democrats. If Senator Byrd and Senator Thurmond were alive during the Civil War, and Byrd had his way, Thurmond would have been lynched.

The thirty-year odyssey of the South switching to the Republican Party began in the 1970's with President Richard Nixon's "Southern Strategy" which was an effort on the Part of Nixon to get Christians in the South to stop voting for Democrats who did not share their values and were still discriminating against their fellow Christians who happened to be black. Georgia did not switch until 2002, and some Southern states, including Louisiana, are still controlled by Democrats.

Today, Democrats, in pursuit of their socialist agenda, are fighting to keep blacks poor, angry and voting for Democrats. Examples of how egregiously Democrats act to keep blacks in poverty are numerous.

After wrongly convincing black Americans that a minimum wage increase was a good thing, the Democrats on August 3rd kept their promise and killed the minimum wage bill passed by House Republicans on July 29th. The blockage of the minimum wage bill was the second time in as many years that Democrats stuck a legislative finger in the eye of black Americans. Senate Democrats on April 1, 2004 blocked passage of a bill to renew the 1996 welfare reform law that was pushed by Republicans and vetoed twice by President Bill Clinton before he finally signed it. Since the welfare reform law expired in September 2002, Congress had passed six extensions, and the latest expired on June 30, 2004. Opposed by the Democrats are school choice opportunity scholarships that would help black children get out of failing schools and Social Security reform, even though blacks on average lose $10,000 in the current system because of a shorter life expectancy than whites (72.2 years for blacks vs. 77.5 years for whites).

Democrats have been running our inner-cities for the past 30-40 years, and blacks are still complaining about the same problems. Over $7 trillion dollars have been spent on poverty programs since President Lyndon Johnson's War on Poverty with little, if any, impact on poverty. Diabolically, every election cycle, Democrats blame Republicans for the deplorable conditions in the inner-cities, then incite blacks to cast a protest vote against Republicans.

In order to break the Democrats' stranglehold on the black vote and free black Americans from the Democrat Party's economic plantation, we must shed the light of truth on the Democrats. We must demonstrate that the Democrat Party policies of socialism and dependency on government handouts offer the pathway to poverty, while Republican Party principles of hard work, personal responsibility, getting a good education and ownership of homes and small businesses offer the pathway to prosperity."

Thanks to SandMonkey for the spot.

Geekery of the highest order

That's The Who's "Baba O'Riley" completely synthesized by Windows.

Gordon Brown on the rack

Enjoy John Humphrys actually try and hold Gordon Brown to account. John Humphrys doesn't actually call him a liar but we can draw our own conclusions. Gordon Brown's habit of answering a different question to that which he is being asked is really annoying and at least (in this interview) sometimes John Humphrys pulls him up on it.

The cutting debt argument used by Gordon Brown really pisses me off as he doesn't include the amount of off-balance sheet debt he has incurred and hidden via PFI schemes.

Can someone remind Gordon Brown who introduced the 10% rate that he then decided to get rid off so as to simplify the tax system.

If the reason things are going wrong is "international factors" that are outside of our control, then how is Gordon Brown going to solve these same problems?

Islamaphobia is the problem?

Islamaphobia is the problem or so we are told when someone dares to criticise Islam's intolerance or refer to Islamic terrorism. However the rise in Islamaphobia in the UK seems to be mostly imaginary whilst the rise in attacks on Jews and Jewish property is ever increasing. The latest is in The Standard and is reported as:

"Vandals sprayed shops, pavements and walls outside four synagogues in Clapton Common and Stamford Hill on Tuesday night. Worshippers were yesterday confronted with slogans such as "Jihad to Israel" and "Jihad to Tel Aviv"."

Attacks on Jews are normally portrayed as being by right-wing thugs from the BNP or similar; I think the content of the above graffiti points to a more Islamic perpetrator .


I am intrigued by the comments of Jules Pipe, the Mayor of Hackney; he is reported to have said:

"Hackney is a tolerant place and we've never seen anything like this before. Our graffiti removal teams are working with the police to remove it as quickly as possible to minimise any further distress."

A "tolerant place", tolerant of what or who? Does he think that the presence of Jews in his borough has to be tolerated?

Undercover Mosque

Last November Iblogged that:

"Today we read that "Channel 4 has been vindicated by the media watchdog Ofcom after police complained about an investigative programme that exposed extremism in British mosques. West Midland's police had faced criticism for targeting the producers of the show rather than the controversial preachers depicted in it. Ofcom added fuel to that debate by praising Undercover Mosque as a "legitimate investigation, uncovering matters of important public interest." The watchdog added: "Ofcom found no evidence that the broadcaster had misled the audience or that the programme was likely to encourage or incite criminal activity. "On the evidence (including untransmitted footage and scripts), Ofcom found that the broadcaster had accurately represented the material it had gathered and dealt with the subject matter responsibly and in context."...Following today's ruling, the Channel 4 called the police's actions "perverse" and said they had, in some people's eyes, given "legitimacy to people preaching a message of hate".""

Today I learn that Channel 4 has won £100,000 from the West Midlands police force and that the West Midlands Police will also apologise at the High Court following the comments it published about the Dispatches programme "Undercover Mosque".


I believe that is what is called "a result".


Will the BBC cover this story as heavily as they did the news that the West Midlands police force was launching the original investigation? Previous experience leads me to believe the answer is no.

Islamic Terrorism in India

Further to my item about the bombings in Jaipur. I see that the BBC have finally posted an article that refers to "the Bangladesh-based militant group, Harkat-ul-Jihad-al-Islami".

It is strange how the split between India and Pakistan created an all but entirely Muslim state (Pakistan) where religious minorities are at best downtrodden and at worse subject to threats and intimidation; whilst the Hindu state (India) kept a large Muslim minority, as well as sizeable Christian ad Buddhist minorities, and tries to encourage equality, free speech and rights for all. It is even stranger that India is criticised when things go wrong despite their best efforts, whilst Pakistan is not criticised for not really even trying to be fair. I see similarities with the way that Israel is always criticised whereas the surrounding Muslim countries are allowed more latitude.

An interesting article on Gordon Brown's popularity or lack of it

From Sky News comes this article by Michael Thrasher (billed as an "Elections expert") entitled "Brown's Fall From Grace Is Spectactular". Take a read it is quite interesting...

"it is clear that Brown's fall from grace with the electorate is one of the most spectacular for a Prime Minister....

Immediately Brown took over in June 2007 the ratings moved positive, a repeat of the Thatcher/Major experience.

Major's early months benefited from the allied victory in the first Gulf war; Brown's by a strong performance in managing crises caused by the floods and foot and mouth.

But there the similarities end.

While Major had a cushion of positive ratings those for Brown were half as strong before the decline set in.

Moreover, the steepness of Brown's descent since calling off the talk about an early election resembles Major's fall from grace in autumn 1992.

Assuming that he remains in post Brown now has little time to bring his ratings back to where it is conceivable that he could lead his party to its fourth consecutive general election victory.

Of course it does not follow that positive ratings for the PM are a pre-requisite of victory but strongly negative ones will certainly signal defeat."

More Labour stealth tax plans

The BBC are reporting that:

"There are no plans for an England-wide "bin tax" - and even if it were to happen it would not be for several years, Gordon Brown has said.

The prime minister said councils were welcome to submit proposals to charge or reward people according to the amount of rubbish they threw away.

But only "a very small number" of pilots were being backed.

"We've got no commitment to go any further - not at all... and it couldn't happen for years," he told GMTV."

The translation for that defence is - There are plans but nothing will be implemented until after the next General Election.