Sunday, 12 December 2010
Scandinavia going down the Islamic tubes?
Tuesday, 7 December 2010
The political war becomes visible in cyberspace. Operation Payback.
Saturday, 27 November 2010
Ed Miliband. My God, what a wanker.
Monday, 22 November 2010
And then we kill them - when do we start?
"The full extent of the police and criminal prosecution powers that the European Union has over British citizens can be revealed today," writes Mary Ellen Synon.
This is the result of a Mail on Sunday investigation, which has "uncovered an alarming array of new EU controls over justice and home affairs for which no one has voted, and most are unknown to the public."
Of course, the reason why most are "unknown to the public" is because the media rarely talk about them and, when they do, "no one seems to care". More specifically, no one in parliament seems to care for, as we wrote when that plaintive statement was made, in legislative terms, "the parliament has collectively lost the will to live".
Parliament is no longer really interested in its primary functions, we wrote, and has turned in on itself, to the extent that its internal, petty politicking has assumed an overweening importance, to the exclusion of everything else.
That was over two years ago, when Philip Johnston was railing against the creation of "a powerful new EU interior department, called the Standing Committee on Internal Security (COSI)." He had devoted some space to then home secretary Jacqui Smith's failure to mention it.
But then, as now, this was our old friend the Hague programme, about which we were sounding the alarm in 2004. But, if you had then asked the average British political blogger or MSM political correspondent about it, they would have thought you were referring to young William's last television appearance.
But since then, more than enough has been written about it for those who wanted to know about to keep themselves informed, not least the European Union - Tenth Report of 15 March 2005. And therein lies another part of the problem.
This does go back all the way to 2004, when we saw the European Council reaffirm the priority it attached to "the development of area of freedom, security and justice", claiming, as always, that it was "responding to a central concern of the peoples of the States brought together in the Union". Despite our concerns, nothing happened then and, six years later, as the Mail on Sundayraises the alarm (and not for the first time), precisely nothing will happen now.
Therefore, the real problem is that, unless the issue can gain political traction, and there is a felling that this is an issue that can get resolved, there is and will be nothing to drive it forward. People, and the media – in the short-term, at least - will take a lead from the politicians. And if the politicians do nothing, the issue dies.
But that is the short-term. As Booker reveals in his column today, more and more we see the "authorities" working to their own agendas, which have nothing to do with the principles of justice or good administration.
When it also dawns – as it eventually will – that the authorities are also working for an alien power (not "foreign" - but alien), as is increasingly the case with the police through the Hague Programme, then the last vestiges of consent will break down. The divide between "us" and "them" will become a permanent breach. And then we start killing them.
This is not a warning, nor a threat, nor a prediction, nor indeed an instruction. It is simply an observation. When the compact between the people and their rulers breaks down, the result is always the most extreme form of violence.
In Britain, however, having been tolerably well administered for several centuries, we have become slow to turn to serious violence. Thus, our rulers have got lazy and complacent and they think they can continue along the route they have taken. They can't. The worm will turn eventually. When it does, people will die. That now is the only certainty.
Education, grammar and the squealing of the Left
Teenagers will lose up to five per cent of marks in GCSE examinations if they fail to display high standards of written English.
The rules, which are likely to apply to all subjects, including mathematics and science, follow claims that thousands of children leave school without being able to compose a sentence, spell difficult words or write a coherent letter or email.
The move, to be outlined in an education White Paper next week, would reverse a Labour decision seven years ago to scrap rewards for good literacy.
Michael Gove, the Education Secretary, said the building blocks of English had been "demolished by those who should have been giving our children a solid foundation in learning". Business leaders such as Sir Stuart Rose, the Marks & Spencer chairman, have complained that too many young people leave school "not fit for work".
Last night, the change was backed by educationalists who suggested it would give schools a greater incentive to train pupils in the basics of spelling and grammar. The written English requirements will be among a string of radical reforms designed to restore rigour to the examination system in England and promote the study of traditional subjects.
Next week's White Paper will also propose:
- A return to traditional A-levels by moving away from bite-sized "modular" courses in some subjects in favour of tests at the end of two years of study.
- Allowing universities to script A-level exams and syllabuses to ensure sixth-form courses act as a better preparation for a degree.
- The introduction of an "English Baccalaureate" that rewards pupils for gaining five good GCSEs in English, maths, science, foreign languages and a humanities subject.
- A ban on schools using vocational courses as "equivalent" qualifications to boost their ranking in GCSE league tables.
- A review of the National Curriculum to outline the key "bodies of knowledge" that children should master at each stage of their education.
- A reading test for all six year-olds to identify those struggling the most after a year of school, ensuring they receive extra tuition.
The Coalition reforms are being billed as an attempt to reverse 13 years of "dumbing down" by Labour. Mr Gove has been critical of changes to the exams system which he claimed had widened the gulf between independent and state schools. Many fee-paying schools have shifted pupils towards alternative exams following claims that mainstream tests are too easy.
In a speech, Mr Gove attacked Labour's decision to abandon requirements for pupils to spell correctly and use proper punctuation and grammar in GCSE exams.
In the past, five per cent of marks in all GCSE exams were ring-fenced for high standards of written English. But the rules were scrapped in 2003.
Good spelling and punctuation is still rewarded in some exams, but the number of marks available differs between subjects and often candidates are only rewarded for good English in certain questions. They are usually told which questions these are.
Mr Gove said: “Thousands of children – including some of our very brightest – leave school unable to compose a proper sentence, ignorant of basic grammar, incapable of writing a clear and accurate letter.
“And it’s not surprising when the last government explicitly removed the requirement to award a set number of marks for correct spelling, punctuation and grammar in examinations.
“The basic building blocks of English were demolished by those who should have been giving our children a solid foundation in learning.
“Under this Government we will insist that our exams, once more, take proper account of the need to spell, punctuate and write a grammatical sentence.”
The move, which will not at first apply to A-levels, was given a cautious welcome by examiners. Jim Sinclair, director of the Joint Council for Qualifications, which represents exam boards, said: “The previous system fell into disrepute because of cases where candidates were writing competently, spelling flawlessly and using correct grammar – therefore picking up the five per cent – but the subject content of their answers was rubbish.”
He added: “I wholeheartedly support the desire to ensure that when young people leave formal education that they are functionally
literate and numerate but I would caution against using crude instruments to disproportionately reward spelling, punctuation and grammar.”
Prof Alan Smithers, the director of the Centre for Education and Employment Research at Buckingham University, said: “Clear expression is evidence of clear thought. It is reasonable to expect accurate spelling and good use of grammar in an exam.
“The results mean less if the examiner is trying to project on to a poorly written answer what he or she thinks the candidate was attempting to say.”
Thursday, 18 November 2010
Was it for this? Ireland shafted. Now they realise.
From The Irish Times. At least it shows that there are people in Ireland who've realised what shit the EU really is. Their political class sold them out, just as ours have.
IT MAY seem strange to some that The Irish Times would ask whether this is what the men of 1916 died for: a bailout from the German chancellor with a few shillings of sympathy from the British chancellor on the side. There is the shame of it all. Having obtained our political independence from Britain to be the masters of our own affairs, we have now surrendered our sovereignty to the European Commission, the European Central Bank, and the International Monetary Fund. Their representatives ride into Merrion Street today.
Fianna Fáil has sometimes served Ireland very well, sometimes very badly. Even in its worst times, however, it retained some respect for its underlying commitment that the Irish should control their own destinies. It lists among its primary aims the commitment “to maintain the status of Ireland as a sovereign State”. Its founder, Eamon de Valera, in his inaugural address to his new party in 1926, spoke of “the inalienability of national sovereignty” as being fundamental to its beliefs. The Republican Party’s ideals are in tatters now.
The Irish people do not need to be told that, especially for small nations, there is no such thing as absolute sovereignty. We know very well that we have made our independence more meaningful by sharing it with our European neighbours. We are not naive enough to think that this State ever can, or ever could, take large decisions in isolation from the rest of the world. What we do expect, however, is that those decisions will still be our own. A nation’s independence is defined by the choices it can make for itself.
Irish history makes the loss of that sense of choice all the more shameful. The desire to be a sovereign people runs like a seam through all the struggles of the last 200 years. “Self-determination” is a phrase that echoes from the United Irishmen to the Belfast Agreement. It continues to have a genuine resonance for most Irish people today.
The true ignominy of our current situation is not that our sovereignty has been taken away from us, it is that we ourselves have squandered it. Let us not seek to assuage our sense of shame in the comforting illusion that powerful nations in Europe are conspiring to become our masters. We are, after all, no great prize for any would-be overlord now. No rational European would willingly take on the task of cleaning up the mess we have made. It is the incompetence of the governments we ourselves elected that has so deeply compromised our capacity to make our own decisions.
They did so, let us recall, from a period when Irish sovereignty had never been stronger. Our national debt was negligible. The mass emigration that had mocked our claims to be a people in control of our own destiny was reversed. A genuine act of national self-determination had occurred in 1998 when both parts of the island voted to accept the Belfast Agreement. The sense of failure and inferiority had been banished, we thought, for good.
To drag this State down from those heights and make it again subject to the decisions of others is an achievement that will not soon be forgiven. It must mark, surely, the ignominious end of a failed administration.
Tuesday, 16 November 2010
Bailouts battering the bastard EU
Ireland crisis could cause EU collapse, warns president
Herman Van Rompuy, president of the EU, has warned it faces a 'survival crisis', with the risk of contagion spreading from Ireland across the continent
Oh, if only.
The Greek Bailout Crackup Is Here, As Austria Refuses Payments
Still, that's a bit of good news.Then there's Portugal to come.
Monday, 15 November 2010
Well happy being index nudged
Happiness index to gauge Britain's national mood
This is the kind of squit-brained nonsense you'd expect from the last government, but it's no suprise the new lot are just as interfering, autocratic and intellectually vacuous.One thing that would guarantee most of us feeling just a little bit happier would be to have politicians (and the whole bloody cabal of think tanks, advisers and pressure groups - as well as the fucking Civil Service) just bloody leaving us alone.
Sunday, 7 November 2010
The Taliban ain't your mates, lady, even if you do convert.
WEST VANCOUVER, British Columbia, Nov. 4 (UPI) -- A Canadian freelance journalist kidnapped in Pakistan has died, an Indian newspaper reported.
Khadija Abdul Qahaar, 58, of West Vancouver, British Columbia, "died following prolonged illness in the custody of the Taliban somewhere in northwest Pakistan or Afghanistan," The Indian Express reported.
Her death was not independently confirmed and the newspaper did not name its source or sources for news of her death, nor did it indicate when she died.
Qahaar, known as Beverley Giesbrecht before converting from Catholicism to Islam, was frail when she and two Pakistani men were kidnapped in November 2008, The Vancouver Sun reported Thursday.
Her unidentified captors demanded a $150,000 ransom for her and released video footage of her pleading for her life.
The Pakistani men were eventually released, but Qahaar was not heard from after August 2009.
Before the kidnapping, she was interviewing Taliban leaders in Pakistan's violent Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, or North-West Frontier province, for a documentary, the Sun said.
Qahaar changed her name and converted to Islam in response to the U.S.-led "war on terror" that followed the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against the United States.
She gave up her career as a magazine and Internet publisher, sold her assets and April 21, 2002, and started a Web site called Jihad Unspun with a stated aim of presenting uncensored reporting of global anti-terrorism activities and news from several Islamic Jihad groups.
Its articles were often highly critical of U.S. foreign policy, and critics accused it of being a hate site.
United Press International was not able to access the Web site Thursday.
Should we tell Lauren Booth?
Saturday, 6 November 2010
More statist shit - National Citizen Service
Fuck 'em.
Sunday, 31 October 2010
Useless ex-Labour Twat Lands Big Job
Saturday, 30 October 2010
Fat Arsed Talentless Labour Minger Fucks Ginger Vote
That's fucked the Ginger Vote.
Labour lost the election in May, if you remember. You can tell, can't you?
Irish Resistance Blarney Bollix Elite EU What?
She talks of Ireland as being 'postcolonial'. Obviously she hasn't taken into account the fact that although Ireland is no longer a British colony it is now a colony of the European Union. The political class of the country is completely bound in with its EU masters, as evidenced by the cowardly and undemocratic behaviour of Cowen in caving in to Brussels bullying over the re-run of the Lisbon Treaty referendum.
With traitors like that what chance have you got? Your enemy there, as here, is your own government, your own political class. The financiers and business people are only part of that elite.
Tuesday, 26 October 2010
Bastard puritans alcohol whinge
When will these interfering, statist, puritan fascists just fuck off and leave us alone?
FOAD, the lot of you.
State Snoopers - Data Retention Revived in UK (on the orders of the EU)
This moves clearly contradicts claims by both Coalition partners that they would cut back on Labour's surveillance state.
Why, then, are they reviving this programme?
Simple.
They have no choice. This is an EU requirement. Directive 2006/24/EC. Not that you'll get the British media mentioning the fact.
What's worse is this: Clarke warns on phone terror plan. That's the jug-eared Labout twat, not the cigar-smoking twat now back in office.
Labour were very keen to push this programme through the EU. For which they ought to be strung up.
Pity they didn't ask us about it.
Pity the UK media couldn't be bothered to tell us about it either. One thing you can be certain about - neither the politicians nor the useless twats in the media are going to admit the truth.
Monday, 25 October 2010
Gaza, the prison camp with a university, shopping mall, leisure parks, etc.
Not to forget, though, that in the end it's really the fault of the west and those pesky Jews in Israel:
For some, the west, and Israel, must shoulder some of the blame. "The broader picture of isolation in Gaza – international sanctions and closure – is a recipe for extremism to flourish," said Shaqqura. "We are gradually moving to a monolithic society as interpreted by the ruling party. Their ideology flourishes in poverty and isolation. You can see the impact of this clearly."
That's presumably the west that pumps billions of dollars and euros of aid into Gaza.
Sunday, 17 October 2010
The multikulti cockup. Multiculturalism cracks.
Merkel, speaking October 16 at a meeting of her Christian Democratic party in the city of Potsdam, said decades of allowing people of different cultural backgrounds to live side by side without integrating into mainstream society has not worked for Germany.
"In Frankfurt on the Main, two out of three children under the age of five have an immigrant background,” Merkel said.
“We are a country which, at the beginning of the 1960s, actually brought guest workers to Germany. Now they live with us and we lied to ourselves for a while, saying that they won't stay and that they will have disappeared again one day. That's not the reality. This [multicultural] approach -- saying that we simply live side by side and are happy about each other -- this approach has failed, utterly failed."
Merkel called on immigrants living in Germany to do more to integrate, including learning quickly to speak German.
Merkel's remarks come as she faces pressure from within her party to take a tougher line on immigrants who don't show a willingness to adapt to German society.
Her comments are also the latest from a mainstream German politician warning of problems allegedly connected to immigrants.
Saturday, 16 October 2010
Geert Wilders Not Guilty
Or, indeed, how most of the main broadcasters deal with it.Wilders not guilty on all counts - Update
Friday 15 October 2010
The public prosecution department on Friday afternoon stated that Geert Wilders is not guilty of discriminating against Muslims. Earlier on Friday it announced he should also be found not guilty of inciting hatred.
Prosecutors Birgit van Roessel and Paul Velleman reached their conclusions after a careful reading of interviews with and articles by the anti-Islam politician and a viewing of his anti-Koran film Fitna.
They said comments about banning the Koran can be discriminatory, but because Wilders wants to pursue a ban on democratic lines, there is no question of incitement to discrimination 'as laid down in law'.
On the comparison of the Koran with Mein Kampf, the prosecutors said the comparison was 'crude but that did not make it punishable'.
Dealing earlier on Friday with incitement to hatred, Van Roessel and Velleman said some comments could incite hatred against Muslims if taken out of context, but if the complete text is considered, it can be seen that Wilders is against the growing influence of Islam and not against Muslims per sé.
On Tuesday, the prosecutors said the MP should not be found guilty of group insult.
The public prosecution department was forced to take the case by the high court after anti-racism campaigners protested at its refusal to prosecute Wilders.
© DutchNews.nl
Tuesday, 14 September 2010
The NUJ Can Go Fuck Themselves
The main journalist trade union in Europe and the UK wants citizens to be given 'European Democracy Vouchers', funded by internet service providers, which can be used to buy newspapers and pay for online media subscriptions.Faced by the fact that their industry can't adapt by itself to changing market conditions, ie the internet, journalists are now demanding the taxpayer fund them (via a levy imposed on ISPs). If the arts can receive public subsidy then so should journalists, they argue, among other things.The vouchers, which would work in the same way as restaurant vouchers currently used in several countries, would be funded through a levy on internet service providers (ISPs), according to the National Union of Journalists in the UK (NUJ).
The idea was aired in a submission to the European Commission's consultation on creative industries, published in April (EurActiv 30/04/10).
Anyone familiar with the jourmalism produced by the British media will be aware that many of these goons are not worth being paid at all.
It's such an insane, ridiculous idea that the EU will probably give it serious consideration.
Friday, 10 September 2010
Kelvin MacKenzie does the business.
Cameron's nudge.
Roma expulsion must stop NOW: EU parliament stamps its useless feet.
Royal Mail and the (deliberately) concealed hand of the EU.
Wednesday, 8 September 2010
Wallstrom - another pointless professional politician.
Saturday, 4 September 2010
The anti-drink lobby can fuck right off.
Meanwhile the progressive gypsy Roma love-fest continues.
What you won't hear on primetime BBC - Blair and the threat of radical Islam
Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair has described radical Islam as the greatest threat facing the world today.
He made the remark in a BBC interview marking the publication of his memoirs.
Mr Blair said radical Islamists believed that whatever was done in the name of their cause was justified - including the use of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.
Thursday, 26 August 2010
Alan Grant talks about how Mega City One is like Fascist Britain on Vimeo
Multiculturalism and Its�Discontents
EU popularity plunges right across the bloc
France deports hundreds more Roma
BBC Bias Must Be Taken In Hand
This approach was in stark contrast to her interview with Labour MP Tom Harris about complaints that MPs were being abusive to IPSA staff over expenses claims. Not for him the aggressive interruptions, the harrying. No, at one point she even called him 'Tom'. How sweet. No mention that this incompetent system was set up by his boss, Gordon Brown, who, as it happens, is still leader of the Labour Party, although he hasn't made an appearance for 3 months.
No mention, either, that the Institute for Fiscal Studies is part funded by the BBC - and the EU - and various government departments.
I have no complaints about interviewers being tough with politicians - but I do resent the fact that the BBC, a publicly-funded body, subjects Coalition MPs to the kind of aggression that it rarely applied to any Labour MP during the 13 years of the last government's rule, and hardly ever covered some of the most egregious pieces of legislation (a lot of it from the EU) passed since 1997.
Time for a purge of BBC mandarins, time for the BBC's Charter to be rescued from New Labour's political interference, time for the Coalition spokesmen to be more robust with interviewers and time for government and others to stop paying attention to think tanks and other similar bodies, etc.
Wednesday, 7 July 2010
7th July Bombings (Apparently Committed By No One With A Reason)
Back when the IRA was busy murdering people and blowing things up they weren't quite so chary about saying who was responsible.
Wednesday, 12 May 2010
How The EU Works - By Threats
Our lovely colleagues in Brussels have turned sulky and nasty because we didn't simply roll over and commit billions to bail out their crappy euro.
This is how the EU works - lies, deception and bullying.
Sunday, 9 May 2010
Eu Wants Total Economic Control
Talks are under way about the Greek bailout package and so not much is making it into the media. Apart from the distinct possibility that our 'colleagues' will invoke Article 122 of the Lisbon Treaty to compel the UK to stump up to help bail out Greece.
This is what's disturbing (though not, of course, unexpected) - the use of the crisis for a power grab by the EU over the economic governance of member states:
The breakthrough comes as this week's summit of EU leaders in Brussels rapidly evolves from a policy workshop into an historic gathering that may catapult the EU across the Rubicon towards fiscal federalism and a de facto debt union. The EU's top brass are seizing on the crisis to push for a radical extension of EU powers, saying Greece has exposed the deep flaws in the structure of monetary union.Luckily for our friends in the EU, everyone here is too engrossed in the flimflam about PR, etc, to take any notice of what's happening.
Herman Van Rompuy, the EU's new president, has submitted a text calling for the creation of an "economic government" that shifts responsibility for economic planning from national authorities to the "EU level".
In a parallel move, Commission chief Jose Barroso said Brussels has treaty powers allowing it to take the reins of economic management."
This is a time for boldness. I believe that our economic and social situation demands a radical shift from the status quo. And the new Lisbon Treaty allows this," he said.
"Economic policy isn't a national, but a European matter. No modern economy is an island. When a member state doesn't make reforms, others suffer because of that."
Tuesday, 4 May 2010
A Referendum On The Lisbon Treaty After All?
Ever since the Lisbon Treaty (Constitution) was ratified it was clear that something would have to be done about the extra MEPs that it had created (but without actually allocating them 'seats'). In order to sort this out, changes will have to be made to the Lisbon Treaty soon. This will require all 27 member states to ratify it again.
Any chance Mr Cameron (for it seems likeliest he will be PM by then) will honour a previous promise to give us a referendum on whether to sign it or not?
No, thought not.
Monday, 3 May 2010
The Black Hole We're Going Down
Unfortunately, they are. Just like our politicians.
Care of Burning Our Money, a disturbing presentation of the UK's financial wasteland.
What we've had for the last year and a half is like the Phoney War: everyone knows the shit is coming but is pretending it won't. Here it comes.
Friday, 30 April 2010
Election Winner To Be Out Of Office For A Generation
Except if it's Labour, of course, because if they get in they'll make sure they can never be removed by election again. You better believe it.
Sunday, 18 April 2010
Saturday, 17 April 2010
Labour to create veterans' ID card
No end to Labour's authoritarian wastefulness, it seems.
The Labour Party have pledged to provide free ID cards for forces' leavers if re-elected to government.'Free' to service leavers - I like that. 'Free', as in 'free - until it becomes necessary'.
The pledge was made in the party's manifesto, launched on 12 March.
"A veterans ID card will help veterans access their improved benefits and will be free to service leavers," says the manifesto. "We will continue to strengthen mental health provision in partnership with the Combat Stress charity, and roll out our Welfare Pathway to give personnel and their families better support and advice."
The manifesto also reiterates promises made during the last parliament, including pledges to cut waste within the Ministry of Defence.
"We are reforming defence procurement," states the manifesto, "making further reductions in civilian staff, and cutting lower-priority spending on headquarters costs, travel and consultancy."
Sunday, 11 April 2010
Bankrupt! But Don't Talk About It In Front Of The Electorate.
And this, of course:
A third, closely related shadow which the political class has been only too keen to hide away has been the still barely understood extent to which it has handed over the running of our country and the making of our laws to that vast and mysterious new system of government centred on Brussels and Strasbourg. Nothing better exemplified how our politicians are caught by this system, like flies in a spider's web, than the shifty means whereby each of the three main parties weaselled its way out of keeping the manifesto promises of the last election that it would give us a referendum on the EU constitution, otherwise known as the Lisbon "reform treaty". Here was another great surrender of Parliament's power to decide how our country is run, and the MPs of all parties were not only happy to agree to it, but treated us all with contempt as they lied about it.
As I have often observed before, one of the consequences of this abdication of their responsibilities by our politicians has been the way in which vast tranches of policy-making which used to be the stuff of debate have simply passed into a limbo, where they are no longer properly discussed or even explained. Farming and the countryside, the fate of our fishing industry, our immigration rules, our laws on employment and how businesses are run, on the environment, on food safety, the regulating of our financial services, including the operations of the City of London – the key decisions in all these areas, and many more, have been handed over to a form of government which is unconcerned with our national interests and almost wholly unaccountable, with consequences which in almost every case have proved disastrous for Britain.
Yet on all these hugely important issues our political class remains virtually silent, because it no longer has any power to decide what happens. All our political nonentities are left to bicker over at election time is that ever shrinking area of policy-making still under our national control: schools and hospitals, crime… that's about it.
Thursday, 8 April 2010
BBC Labour Bias In Little Ways...
It seems to me that like Labour, the BBC does not understand why an increase in NIC is a tax on jobs.Perhaps Statism erodes the capacity for clear economic thinking but I listened in amazement to the BBC "Today" interview with Sir Stuart Rose, he of M&S fame. When Rose pointed out that the NIC increase with Brown and Clegg think so virtuous is a direct impediment to business growth, he was ignored on the substance of that argument and instead presented with the Labour attack line that IF government does not jack up NIC it will have to increase VAT. A false choice and talk of reducing Government efficiency was dismissed. Rose rightly pointed out that if VAT did rise, it would be a tax on consumption and therefore one has the choice to avoid it by limiting expenditure whereas an NIC increase hits all, this was met with silence. Then, most disgracefully, Humphrys suggested that Rose was saying these things because he would be offered a peerage to the Lords. Rose denied this but the impression was aimed at listeners, not Rose. More BBC attack dog stuff dressed up as news.I caught a little of this exchange and was pissed off to hear the tit of an interviewer (whoever he was) asking Rose if he wasn't being selfish criticising the government yet not coming up with any alternatives himself. Rose rebuffed him quite robustly, but I would have added that it's the job of government to come up with alternatives. That's what we pay the useless bastards for.
Wednesday, 7 April 2010
Baroness Scotland Couldn't Be Lying, Could She?
The Attorney General was accused of lying yesterday when she gave evidence at the trial of her cleaner.Baroness Scotland was only fined half the full amount applicable under the law she herself steered onto the statute books.
Baroness Scotland falsely claimed to have seen a passport and Home Office letter showing that her Tongan maid had the right to work in Britain, a court heard.
But according to the Tongan's barrister, the Labour peer saw no such documents - and her claims that she had done were a lie.
The astonishing accusations were made repeatedly at the first day of the fraud trial of the cleaner, Loloahi Tapui.
She also kept her job.
Baroness Scotland is unelected.
Baroness Scotland votes Labour.
Tories Stop Cider Tax
The Conservative Party last night forced Labour to drop three planned tax rises in a victory on the first day of the month-long election battle.From citywire.
The 10% increase on a pint of cider will be scrapped, with prices dropped again on 30 June.
Plans for a new 50p tax on phone lines to help pay for rural areas to receive improved access to broadband were also dropped.
These measures were announced by chancellor Alistair Darling just weeks ago in his Budget.
Plans originally announced last year for tax relief on holiday homes were also scrapped. The plans would have put the tax treatment of furnished holiday lets on a par with that for other property rental businesses. The travel industry had warned that the changes would have cost tourism millions of pounds with the loss of thousands of jobs.
The Labour party needed Tory approval to rush through the finance bill before the dissolution of parliament. The bill turns the Budget into law. The Tories would not sanction the fast-tracking of the legislation unless the three tax hikes were abandoned.
Phillip Hammond, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, said it was a ‘major victory for businesses and consumers across Britain’.
The scrapping of the taxes marked a coup for the Tories on the day that prime minister Gordon Brown sought approval from the queen to hold the general election on 6 May.
Wednesday, 31 March 2010
Democracy - EU-Style, ie NOT
Commission sets out rules for citizens' initiativeSo there you have it: instead of just voting directly for the people who make your laws, you now have the ability to go through a complicated and ridiculous procedure, which will be vetted by unelected officials - all on the off-chance that the (unelected) commissioners think it's worth bothering about.
By Constant Brand
31.03.2010 / 16:46 CET
One million signatures needed from nine countries
The European Commission today (31 March) set out the rules for using a “citizens' initiative” which allows one million people to ask the Commission to propose new laws.
Using the initiative, which was introduced by the Lisbon treaty, will require at least one million signatures from at least nine of the 27 member states.
Organisers will also to make sure they get a minimum number of names from each country, based on the so-called digressive proportionality system, which is used to divide up seats between member states in the European Parliament.
Maroš Šefčovič, the EU commissioner handling the “European Citizens' Initiative”, said the measure will mark “a real step forward in the democratic life” of Europeans.
Šefčovič presented a draft guidebook on how the initiative will work on Wednesday. “It should not be too difficult, not too technical or complicated for citizens”, he said.“It is a concrete example of bringing Europe closer to its citizens and it should foster a lively debate about what we are doing in Brussels”.
The plan, which still needs the backing of the European Parliament and member states, will give citizens across the 27-nation bloc their first direct say in setting the EU's legislative agenda, a procedure which could lead to gridlock in EU decision- making.
But it will not go as far as other similar direct democracy instruments like those in Switzerland or California, where citizens can bypass parliaments to pass new rules and regulations via ballot initiatives or referenda.
Šefčovič acknowledged the initiative would also allow interest groups and political parties to launch signature drives, raising doubts about how effective the initiative would be in bringing citizens closer to the EU.
“We are trying to be as open as possible, we would not like to limit who would be the organisers ... so political parties clearly fall within the remit,” he said.
The initiative opens the door for people to voice their position on an array of contentious issues, including the use of genetically modified crops to Turkey's entry talks, all of which fall under the remit of the Commission, which has powers to draft and amend EU rules and regulations.
Under the proposed rules, those wanting to change EU legislation will have to organise and collect at least one million signatures from at least nine of the 27 member states.
Added to those requirements is another complex one that will force organisers to make sure they meet a minimum number of names from each country, based on the so-called digressive proportionality system, which is used to divvy up seats between member states in the European Parliament.
At least 72,000 signatures will be needed from Germany for example, 54,750 from the UK and only 4,500 each from tiny Malta and Luxembourg.
The initiative will have to be formally filed via a special Commission website, after which organisers will have one year to collect the signatures.
Šefčovič said he had introduced several safeguards to prevent extremists or other “silly” initiatives from hijacking the process. An initial check will be done once an initiative is filed on the website to see whether the proposed signature drive abides by European rights and values.
A second check is done once organisers reach 300,000 signatures to see whether it falls under its legislative powers and is viable.
The names collected either online or on paper will have to be verified by national authorities and the organisers of the initiative will have to disclose who finances their campaign.
A group representing thousands of EU-based non-governmental organisations, including Greenpeace, the European Trade Union Confederation and the European Women's Lobby welcomed the proposal calling it “an important new step to increase public participation in EU decision-making.”
Seventeen member states already have similar initiatives at national level.
Welcome to democracy, EU-style.
How about starting an initiative to get the UK expelled from the EU? I'm sure we could make ourselves so disliked that we could easily get 1,000,000+ signatures.
More Communitarian Shit From The Political elite
David Cameron has said that a Conservative government would train a 5,000-strong "neighbourhood army" to set up community groups.More proof that there's really little difference between the major parties, all of whom are hung up on this communitarian 'progressive' approach.
The Tory leader said in a speech this offered a "positive alternative to Labour's big government" approach.
"Our aim is for every adult citizen to be an active member of an active neighbourhood group," he said.
Meanwhile, Labour is promising communities more powers to take over the running of local services.
We don't need - or want - citizen groups. What we want is local councils to do the jobs they're always done and to do them well - so we don't bloody have to.
Why don't you just fuck off and LEAVE US ALONE.
Sunday, 28 March 2010
Newsmen Wearing Lip Gloss
Martin Bell on how tv reporters have become celebrities and fakes - and sacrificed their trade in the process. Worth quoting in full.
One day at the height of the banking crisis I was so concerned about my few diminishing investments that I watched the BBC News Channel doing a live report from the City. It was eight o'clock in the morning and broad daylight. The reporter, venturing out of the cocoon of the TV studio, was standing in the street outside the Bank of England - and he was wearing lip gloss. In my book, real men don't wear lip gloss, not even inside TV studios, never mind outside them. There is something deeply untrustworthy about it. It gives a journalist the look of a snake-oil salesman.
But that's the way the TV news world has been going since, about 15 years ago, it started abandoning the standards and values that it inherited. It wasn't just a matter of accuracy - although I was shocked to hear an executive on one of the rolling news channels defending the broadcasting of a falsehood in the heat of the moment as 'part of the unfolding story'. It was a matter of substance. I recently wrote an introduction to a new edition of William Howard Russell's Despatches From The Crimea. I was impressed by their authenticity. He was there, and what he wrote about was what he saw. It wasn't easy for him. He had his tent cut down. He was threatened with censorship. But he persisted. And, reading his reports, I concluded that readers of the Times in 1854 were better informed about the Crimean war than readers of any newspaper today, or viewers of any TV network, about the war in Afghanistan.
Television is especially at fault. What it lacks in substance it tries to make up for in style. In TV, as in politics, presentation is now paramount. Spin is king of the hill. The BBC led the retreat from the real world into the froth and fluff that masquerades as it. The Corporation was worried about a decline in audiences for all of its mainstream news programmes. It commissioned a mass of audience research and concluded that what was needed was less reporting and more story-telling. Its journalists were re-branded as performers.
All the world was a stage and they were the strolling troupe of players who would be the actors on it. It was not enough to stand there and explain what was going on. They were expected to walk and talk and wave their arms at the same time. The BBC even hired a style coach from Iowa to teach them how to do it. A veteran correspondent was told to acquire a new set of hand signals. It was known - heaven help us - as 'being in the moment'. And all the networks, not just the BBC, went down this road with results that you can see every day on every programme - not so much the TV news as Strictly Come Reporting.
I was once told by one of the practitioners of these dark arts that if I learned them I too could become a wealthy and high-profile anchorman. Fame and fortune, a six- or even seven-figure salary, would be within my reach. 'All you need, Marty,' he said (he was from NBC News of America), 'is sincerity - and if you can fake that you've got it made!'
So the TV news business, which used to be a sober-sided affair, became entwined with the culture of celebrity. There was a pecking order; and to become a TV news celebrity you needed a title. You started as a reporter. You then became a correspondent (a correspondent is a reporter who has lunch). Then an editor or special correspondent. And then maybe a programme presenter. And this was the point of it. You wouldn't just be where the news was. You would actually be the news. And the stories that you told would be at least in part about yourself. John Simpson is a master of this art.
Even now the BBC News Channel runs a regular promotional video showing some of its leading players at the heart of world events. The message is that wherever news breaks the BBC is there, the first and the best. One of the images is that of Huw Edwards, the estimable presenter of the Ten O'Clock News, wearing a flak jacket and talking to soldiers within the relative safety of the Basra Air Station. That was more than two years ago, but it is re-run every day as if it were yesterday. The real story of the defeat and debacle in southern Iraq, and the breaking of the spirit of some very fine soldiers, was never told, by Huw or anyone else.
If you ask why not, I think I know. For all kinds of reasons, mostly understandable, the journalists have retreated from the real world into the comfort of green zones and well-protected hotels. They are seldom on the scene any more. They are doing their stuff on rooftops or in front on video walls. Some of them are very good journalists, but they can no longer report from the thick of things because it is just too dangerous to do so. A warning shot across everyone's bows was the fate of the BBC's Frank Gardner, a brave and brilliant correspondent, who was singled out and gunned down in Saudi Arabia in 2004 - and that was not even, technically speaking, a war zone. His cameraman was killed. Gardner is still reporting, but from a wheelchair.
The terms of trade were changed by 9/11. After that the danger was not of being caught in the crossfire but of being kidnapped, ransomed and executed.
One of the last to try it the old way was Stephen Farrell of the New York Times, who was captured last September by the Taliban when he travelled, without military protection, to the scene of a Nato bombing in Kunduz, Afghanistan. He escaped, but his interpreter and a British soldier were killed in the rescue operation. It is hard to think of anything more damaging to military/media relations than the death of a soldier trying to save the life of a journalist.
So reporters are either 'embedded' - attached to and travelling with a military unit - or they never leave Camp Bastion. I know about embedding. I was a pioneer of it, and keep on my files an identity card, serial number 001, issued by the MoD as Authority For A War Correspondent Accompanying A British Operational Force. This was for the first Gulf War in 1991. I traded freedom for access and went to war alongside the Queen's Royal Irish Hussars. It was a privilege to be there, although in the end it wasn't that much of a war.
Afghanistan, by contrast, is one hell of a war - and the only access to it is through embedding. Some of the coverage has been vivid and in the best traditions of the business. Bill Neely for ITV News, Vaughan Smith for Channel 4 News and Ross Kemp for Sky deserve all kinds of medals for terrific coverage. But it is fragmentary. What is missing, when the shooting starts and the Nato rockets and bombs go in, is the sight of any Afghans and the news of what has happened to them. In a war being fought to win their allegiance, it is a black hole in the coverage.
Embedding can also benefit the journalists, if they choose to learn the lessons in front of their eyes. Soldiers do teamwork, because their lives and operations depend on it. But TV people do not do teamwork. News is like politics: it tends to attract driven and frantically ambitious characters who believe that they can only succeed at each other's expense. (The fiercest competition, as with political parties, is not between organisations but within them.)
This leads to some very strange practices - and malpractices. Those of us who have been in TV a long time know that the work of some of its legends, which we whisper sometimes among ourselves, includes reports that were outright frauds. They looked and sounded like news, and one of them won a prestigious award, but they were from start to finish the most disgraceful and appalling fabrications. These included staging certain scenes, passing off reconstructions as the real thing, topping up the soundtrack with extra gunfire, peppering a script with falsehoods and using counterfeit cutaways to suggest that the reporter was at the front line when in fact he was nowhere near it. Most of these characters have retired - but one of them at least is still in action and doing rather well. He works for one of the major broadcasters. I hope that he has changed his ways. They certainly needed changing.
It may be, of course, that the frauds are rare and most reporters are decent and honourable people. We used to think the same of our MPs.
I believe, from where I've been and what I've seen, that we live in the most dangerous times since 1945. Something wicked this way comes - if not from Helmand and the border between Pakistan and Afghanistan, then from Jihadist training camps in Yemen or Somalia. But the conflicts there go virtually unreported.
And TV is increasingly retreating into an easy, soft and anaesthetic news agenda. Jordan is not a country but a celebrity. Gordon Brown weeps on prime-time. Politicians are learning the arts of reality television. Their safest haven is the GMTV sofa. Everything becomes a journey to tug at the heartstrings. Even Tony Blair's book is to be called The Journey.
My former profession has also been on a journey. It has been seduced by celebrity. It has loitered too long in la-la land. It has taken wrong turns and worshipped false gods. But when events in the real world come to strike us - the world that it has so assiduously ignored - it will have to return to its roots in serious journalism. That will wipe the smiles from the presenters' faces. And maybe the lip gloss too.
Europe Saves Our Time
I've managed to annoy Mrs ChartersandCo by suggesting that the hidden hand of the EU may be at work here.
Which, of course, it is. The proposed changes bring us into line with Central European Time. Nothing wrong with it in this case, but I just wish the British politico-media would be a bit more honest about things.
Mrs ChartersandCo rounded on me by saying that groups such as RoSPA were in favour of it, so it had nothing to do with the EU.
Except of course, RoSPA gets stacks of funding from the government and its agencies, so they're obviously going to be called in defence. Go check its accounts. Kerching. Fake charity.
I'm not telling the Mrs about that one, though. I want a quiet life. I think I'll keep schtumm from now on.
Saturday, 27 March 2010
Labour Aspirational Hit The Rich Claptrappery
They also want to encourage people to have aspirations, to become successful and, well, rich, I suppose.
No contradiction there, then.
Sunday, 21 March 2010
How Gordon May Stop Squaddies Voting Against Him
Blogged about the possibility of this happening a week or so back.
We all know what's going on here, don't we, Gordon?
Wonks Wonking In Wonkdom
Kevin Harris takes a pop at those bossy, interfering wonks and politicos who decide what 'we' need for 'our communities', in this case Matthew Taylor and his current vehicle, the RSA:
I posted some musings last month about the way empowerment has become an industry: its recognition as an issue in policy is welcome but its neutralising assimilation distasteful.Why can't these people just fuck off and leave us alone?
Meanwhile I've been watching as that well-known authority on local activism, the RSA, plans to follow up on its idea for a 'new community development qualification' by toying with notions of 'citizen power' as if it were a conceptual plaything. I was invited to the launch of this project recently, but I still haven't understood why a local project required a London 'launch' with Triffickly Important People speaking.
The invitation noted:
'With political disengagement on the rise and public services feeling the squeeze, it has never been more important to realise the potential of people to affect change at a local level by shaping the identity and direction of the places and public services they use.'
OK, I'm with you so far, how you gonna do that? 'The potential of people': any particular people?
'This pioneering project led by the RSA in partnership with Peterborough City Council and Arts Council England East, will experiment with different ‘models of social change’ across a range of spheres including civic behaviour, education, local enterprise, rehabilitation and treatment services.'
Ah I see, not led by local people then. But experimenting with their lives and their place, how thoughtful. Well you wouldn't want to risk increasing political disengagement, would you?
The text went on to explain the RSA's belief that 'the goals of individual fulfilment and social progress require an ambitious model of citizenship'... It has to be a model, because the wealthy elite like to play with things and then go off and do something else, leaving ordinary people to, er, well tidy up and make do afterwards I suppose.
David Wilcox has been trying to inject some sense of responsibility and offered a couple of comments here, with a gentle irony that seems either too subtle, or too late, or both:
'I know that there's a strong theoretical commitment to citizen engagement, empowerment etc. But isn't there a slight danger that without some evidence of citzens at the heart of the project this will look like social architecture designed in John Adam Street?'
The rhetoric ('We do want to involve people in all aspects of the project') isn't hard to find but sounds as hollow as always. When I started to wonder about the '.co.uk' url, it struck me that not only is this an audacious attempt by wonkdom to appropriate, govern and direct citizen empowerment from the top-down; it also implies it can be turned into a project of social entrepreneurship.
It may seem trivial to be pricking the RSA's pomposity (although they seem to work hard at it). But I'm more concerned with a growing suspicion that one of the legacies of new Labour will be the erosion of the validity of radicalism by treating it as intellectually fashionable and appropriating its language. If you do unto others and call it empowerment, what will residents call real empowerment when the time comes to get you off their territory?
Thursday, 18 March 2010
One Database You CAN Opt Out Of - NHS Summary Care
Monday, 15 March 2010
W Anchor Mann
Labour MP John Mann threatens to sue blogger.
Uses House of Commons notepaper. Is that legal?
Anyway, I don't care whether Mr Mann is in the right or not in this matter. He's a Labour MP and is therefore a cunt. Sorry, wanker.
Will The BBC Report This?
According this report the European Commission's view coincides with that of the Conservative Party, ie that more cuts need to be made sooner rather than later. A view not shared by Labour and the Lib Dems, both of whom are more heartily committed to the EU project than the Tories. Nice irony.
Bet it doesn't appear on BBC, though.
By Marcin Grajewski
BRUSSELS (Reuters) - The European Commission will tell Britain to do more to cut its ballooning budget deficit in the medium term, saying the country's fiscal programme lacks ambition, a draft from the EU executive showed on Monday.
The draft, obtained by Reuters two days before publication, said the programme failed to guarantee Britain would meet a European Union deadline of 2014-15 for cutting the deficit to below the bloc's cap of 3 percent of economic output.
"The overall conclusion is that the fiscal strategy in the convergence programme is not sufficiently ambitious and needs to be significantly reinforced," said the draft, expected to be approved by the Commission on Wednesday.
"A credible timeframe for restoring public finances to a sustainable position requires additional fiscal tightening measures beyond those currently planned," it added.
Britain's plan envisages cutting the gap to 4.7 percent of gross domestic product in the fiscal year 2014-15 from 12.1 percent planned for 2010-2011. That means it will fail to meet the deadline given by EU finance ministers late last year.
But even this target may be missed because British economic growth could turn out lower than the government expects, the draft said.
"The achievement of the consolidation forecast by the UK authorities, is further clouded by the likelihood that the macroeconomic context could be less favourable than envisaged by the authorities, as well as the uncertainties relating to the banking sector loans and investments insured by the government."
The programme forecasts economic growth at 2.0 percent in 2010-11 and then 3.3 percent each year until 2014-15.
Brussels has little leverage to force Britain to follow its recommendation made under the 27-country EU's budget discipline rules. Britain is not a member of the 16-nation euro zone so cannot be fined for breaching the deficit limit.
Still, the assessment may prove embarrassing for Prime Minister Gordon Brown ahead of this year's general election.
The Commission will also publish on Wednesday its assessment of the fiscal programmes of Austria, Germany, Belgium, Spain, Finland, Ireland, Italy, France, the Netherlands and Slovakia.
They will then be studied by EU finance ministers. The ministers in theory can change the Commission's recommendation, but this happens rarely.
Budget deficits are swelling across the EU as the economic crisis undermined government revenues and fiscal stimulus programmes boosted spending.
The draft said Britain's fiscal plans for 2010-2011 appeared adequate but those for subsequent years seemed lax.
Britain should publish this year "the detailed departmental spending limits underlying the overall expenditure projections" for the period after 2010-11, it added.
(Editing by Dale Hudson)
What Odds On Terrorist 'Outrage' or Incident Before Election?
Saturday, 13 March 2010
The Progressive Mulgan UK Australia Fuck-up Connection
Not content with contributing to the continuing fuck-up of the UK he is now helping to do the same to Australia. The Aussie political class seem to have generated their own bunch of fucknuggets who are trying the same tricks as here, eg censoring the internet, etc.
I hope the Aussies show more gumption and guts than the British public and tell the government and its advisory lickspittles where they can shove their ideas.
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Gordon Knows They Won't Be Voting For Him, So...
During Prime Minister's Questions, Richard Benyon, a Tory MP and former soldier, said postal trials by the Army Families Federation had revealed limitations in the current arrangements.Interesting. Given that this administration is one of the most corrupt and contemptible ever, it would come as no surprise to find that service personnel in Afghanistan were somehow 'unable' to cast their votes in time. How many of them will be voting for Gordon, do you think?
He warned that a ''perverse situation'' could arise where the armed forces were fighting for people in foreign countries to have the vote but could not cast a ballot themselves.
''It is unlikely that the vast majority of our armed forces serving overseas will be able to vote in the coming election,'' Mr Benyon said.
''Will you intervene to ensure that we don't have the perverse situation that we have people fighting abroad for others to have the right to vote but we are denying that right (to them).''
Mr Brown said Justice Secretary Jack Straw was making the ''best arrangements possible'' to ensure service personnel overseas would be able to cast their vote.
And he said: ''It is absolutely right that everyone should have the chance to cast their vote in every election.''
Members of the armed forces are able to register as a ''service voter'', linking them to a fixed address in the UK for three years to allow flexibility when posted overseas.
Those abroad on election day can apply to vote by post or proxy, though the Electoral Commission recommends service personnel to appoint a proxy.
The body's website says: ''If you're based abroad, you need to be aware that, due to election timetables, you may not receive your ballot paper until shortly before election day.
''Depending on where you're based, there may not be enough time for you to return your ballot before voting closes (10pm on election day), so voting by post may not be the best way for you to vote.
''In these circumstances we would encourage you to appoint a proxy in the UK to vote on your behalf.''
Conservatives Will Inherit EU Merde-Sturm
I wonder if Dave and his mates have decided they'd rather not be running this country after the next general election.
Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, has raised the prospect of new EU treaty only months after the Lisbon Treaty took force.
Mrs Merkel said that a new EU accord would be required to create a new European Monetary Fund able to bail out crisis-hit members of the euro like Greece. “We would need a treaty change,” she said.
Talk of a new EMF has led to warnings that power of tax and spending could be centralised in European institutions.
When the Lisbon accord was proposed, European leaders said that it would be the last attempt to change the EU’s basic rules for many years.
But some European politicians have taken the recent financial crisis as an opportunity to suggest more changes. The European Commission has said the crisis is a chance to improve Europe’s “economic governance”.
Britain is not a euro member, but it is a signatory to the Maastricht treaty that created the single European currency. Maastricht bans one euro member giving direct financial aid to another.
EU rules mean that any change in the union’s fundamental rules must be approved by all EU members in a new treaty.
Any new treaty that creates a “gouvernement économique” based in Brussels and Frankfurt would face stiff opposition from Eurosceptics across the British political spectrum.
Both Labour and the Conservatives signalled they would oppose any new EU treaty, and the issue has the potential to be a political embarrassment to both.
When David Cameron dropped his commitment to hold a referendum on Lisbon last year, he reassured voters and Eurosceptic Tories that a Conservative government would put any future treaty to a referendum.
Conservative officials confirmed that the referendum “lock” would be applied to any new EMF treaty.
Mark Francois, the Conservative shadow Europe minister, said: “A European Monetary Fund must create no financial or legal obligations on Britain.”
However, the Conservatives are wary of letting Europe become a major issue at the general election, fearing that Labour could use the subject to portray them as an unreformed right-wing party.
Labour promised a referendum on the European Constitution, the forerunner of Lisbon, but then dropped the commitment.
Mr Brown told the Commons in 2007 that he would not accept any change in Europe’s rules for another decade.
Downing Street confirmed on Tuesday that the UK would oppose any new treaty brought forward to set up an EMF.
Downing Street said: “The Government opposes further institutional change in the relationship between the EU and member states for this parliament and the next.”
Asked about Mrs Merkel’s remarks, No 10 said: “We don’t actually expect further institutional change.”
Mats Persson, director of Open Europe, a think-tank, said that any new treaty could be a move to centralise power over tax and spending policies.
He said. “This will be seen, rightly, as a step towards fiscal federalism. That would be a step in the wrong direction for the UK.”
Even though Britain is outside the euro, Mr Persson said it was “not inconceivable
that the UK could take part in some way” in a new European bail-out fund.
As an example, he said, the UK pays to help fund the running costs of the European Central Bank, despite not being a member of the European single currency.
Nigel Farage, a UK Independence Party MEP, said: “British participation in a European IMF will prove to be a bottomless pit down which taxpayers’ money can be poured in an attempt to save a lost cause.”