Sunday, 12 December 2010

Scandinavia going down the Islamic tubes?

Explosions in Stockholm 'terrorism', but nobody's yet willing to say if they're Islamist attacks.

"Danish MP Jesper Langballe pleads guilty to hate speech after being denied the right to prove his case. " That's right; in Denmark you're judged guilty without evidence or defence.

Tuesday, 7 December 2010

The political war becomes visible in cyberspace. Operation Payback.

The war waged by the political classes on the people, supported by their friends in big business, has started to become visible in the actions of Operation Payback, a group of individuals keen to preserve the freedom of the internet and to attack those it considers the oppressors. Recent targets of their ire have been those companies involved in trying to suppress WikiLeaks and freeze its accounts (Visa, PayPal, etc).

All power to them. It's about time that people started fighting back against these bastards. However, it's not just in cyberspace that this war needs to be pursued. There will come a time when all those who support and further the institutions of the state in its encroachments on our liberties will have to be targeted individually. That includes the undemocratic commissars in Brussels.

Saturday, 27 November 2010

Ed Miliband. My God, what a wanker.

John Humphrys interviews Ed Miliband. With a leader like this Labour is guaranteed to wither in the wilderness. Thank God.

Monday, 22 November 2010

And then we kill them - when do we start?

Is this not inevitable? And how we do we make sure the right people get it in the neck? From European Referendum:

"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

The Telegraph
reports "Pupils will be penalised in exams for poor spelling, punctuation and grammar under a sweeping overhaul of the education system."

Just listen to the lefties squealing about this. Learning grammar, punctuation and spelling is obviously soooo hard. Amazing how someone like my late mother, who left school at 14 before the war and who had no other formal education, could write English that was grammatically correct and properly punctuated. Many of our young people lack these basic skills. And they get to university. Believe me, I have to mark their papers.

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

First we had Gordon's Brownshirts, not quite getting off the ground; now we have Cameron's Commandos, implementing the Big Society via National Citizen Service.

Fuck 'em.

Sunday, 31 October 2010

Useless ex-Labour Twat Lands Big Job

Jacqui Smith, useless ex-Home Secretary and now ex-Labour MP, has just landed a plum post with KPMG. Nice to have contacts, isn't it? Especially when you're a talentless, useless twat.

Saturday, 30 October 2010

Fat Arsed Talentless Labour Minger Fucks Ginger Vote

The unspeakably abhorrent Harman calls LibDem Danny Alexander a ginger 'rodent'.

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?

Lecturer Geraldine Moane suggests the Irish people should learn from their colonial past how to resist the impositions of the 'elite of financial and political decision-makers' who have wrought such economic damage on the country.

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

I can hear it now, drifting in from the tv in the other room - 'young people...alcohol consumption...'

When will these interfering, statist, puritan fascists just fuck off and leave us alone?
Publish Post
Every bloody week there's something in the papers or on tv about drinking. Most of the time the figures they provide can't be trusted. A lot of the time it's OldNewLabour's fake charities still peddling their dogmas.

FOAD, the lot of you.

State Snoopers - Data Retention Revived in UK (on the orders of the EU)

The previous government's Intercept Modernisation Programme has been revived by the new Coalition. This is,in plain language, the reintroduction of a plan to spy on all our telephone calls and internet activity - although, at the moment, that spying does not cover the actual content of communications.

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?


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.

I'm surprised that The Observer printed this article ('Gaza hardliners launch arson attack on family leisure park') after all the progressives' descriptions of Gaza as a prison camp and a humanitarian disaster in the making, etc. Presumably too much of the truth has started to leak out and they've decided to change tack. Now they acknowledge the existence of leisure parks and restaurants, but it's not Hamas who are setting fire to them or shutting them down. No, it's hardliners.

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.

Angela Merkel has said the multicultural experiment has failed: German Chancellor Angela Merkel says Germany's attempt to create a multicultural society has "failed, utterly failed."

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.

compiled from agency reports

Unfortunately, this is probably just a sop to the growing number of people angry about immigration, since Merkel's government are unlikely to restrict immigration or do anything about the problems they already have. But we can hope. What with Sarkozy also deporting Roma, and the Sweden Democrats breaking through in the elections, there may be signs that the political elite of Europe are having to realise they were wrong to ignore their electorates over this issue.

Saturday, 16 October 2010

Geert Wilders Not Guilty

Interesting to see if the BBC can bring themselves to mention this news on their main programmes:

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.


Or, indeed, how most of the main broadcasters deal with it.

Tuesday, 14 September 2010

The NUJ Can Go Fuck Themselves

Journalists call for 'internet tax' to rescue media

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.

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).

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.

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.

I used not to like Kelvin MacKenzie particularly but I've warmed to him after this:

Cameron's nudge.

David Cameron has a 'behavioural insight team', tasked with the purpose of showing us how we can be made to do as we're told without beating us with a big stick (like New Labour). He got the idea of 'nudging' from a book from an American (where else?) Richard Thaler.

David Cameron can fuck off. And his team can fuck off, too, and get themselves useful jobs cleaning toilets with toothbrushes.

And Richard Thaler can fuck off as well.

Roma expulsion must stop NOW: EU parliament stamps its useless feet.

Bad Frenchies! The EU toy parliament has demanded that France stop the 'illegal' expulsion of gypsies back to Bulgaria and Romania.

This report is so full of delicious ironies I wouldn't know where to begin. Let's savour the sight of our Europhiliac 'colleagues' arguing among themselves.

Royal Mail and the (deliberately) concealed hand of the EU.

Privatisation of the mail has resurfaced, as it was bound to do.

No mention anywhere, though, of the primary cause of this, ie EU directives requiring 'liberalisation' and 'full market opening' of postal services. Not in the BBC, anyway, though I don't suppose any of the rest of the British media will have the honesty to mention it, either.

Strange, too, that the media dutifully follow the falling profits/too much competition line they've been given, despite the fact that for the two previous years the whole group has actually been making a profit.

Service has noticeably declined here in Lincolnshire over the past five years. Most of what gets delivered is junk mail, different posties seem to appear every week and there is no consistency in time of delivery (except that it is always late morning at the earliest). Many items either sent to us or posted by us now take a week or more to arrive.

All our politicians conspire to keep the truth from us and the media aid them, irrespective of party bias. The unions oppose the changes but also refuse to point the finger at the EU (they can't, can they? because they support the Labour Party, who are as firmly wedged up the EU's arse as the LibDems).

So you can look forward to higher prices and lower standards. And you can kiss goodbye to six-day delivery as well; EU directives only require a five-day minimum service.

Wednesday, 8 September 2010

Wallstrom - another pointless professional politician.

I had the misfortune to see an interview on BBC News tonight with Margot Wallstrom, who is the UN's Special Representative on Sexual Violence in Conflict. I shit you not. I thought the name sounded familiar - Wallstrom is one of the EU's apparatchiks, having been the (unelected) Commission's (unelected) Environment Commissioner. Among other things. Wikipedia lists her outstanding career.

Wallstrom was talking tough about chasing down and bringing to justice the perpetrators of regular mass rapes taking place in the Congo - some of which seem to have happened when UN troops were a mere 20 miles away. Well, of course, 'we' won't do anything of the sort. The UN has proved increasingly useless in its peacekeeping activities over the last 20 years (witness Bosnia) and the idea that anyone will be brought to justice over these crimes in this God-forsaken part of Africa is pathetic.

What makes this more disgusting is the fact that the politicos are so in love with themselves that they create these well-paid, ineffectual, self-important positions, with our money, and constantly share them among themselves. I shouldn't think a single useful thing has ever resulted from all their talks, papers, committees, investigations and communiques.

Wallstrom's career is that of a model 'progressive'. These people are the bane of our lives and a danger to our freedom. How can we get rid of them?

Saturday, 4 September 2010

The anti-drink lobby can fuck right off.

Various righteous journos are aboard the minimum pricing for alcohol bandwagon. Today Patrick Collinson signs up with the puritans in the Guardian.

The Scottish Executive (to give the pretend 'government' its proper title) floated this idea over a year ago and had to back away from it because it would most likely break EU law on competition. Presumably that remains the same. If this is the case and it prevents minimum pricing it will be the only time the EU has done anything remotely useful.

Whatever the outcome, I am vehemently against this for one very good reason: the price of booze, who drinks what and how much is no business of the state; the state can fuck off out of my life.

The leftover New Labourites and their quangos and fake charities are busy complaining about binge drinking and the fate of the homeless, etc. Binge drinking is obviously not good, but the problems caused are law and order ones to be dealt with according to existing legislation. If you drink till your liver explodes then it's a heath problem. Good job you've been paying huge amounts of tax to pay for your health care, then. It's also quite possible that binge drinking (no doubt exaggerated by the media) will prove to be a passing fad and will become less of a problem. As for homeless alcoholics, I'm sorry, but until I'm one of them I don't care. Putting up the price of booze will just make them poorer and probably drive them to worse alternatives (didn't they used to drink meths because it was cheaper than decent alcohol?). Does Mr Collinson and his self-righteous colleagues really care about alcos and the homeless? I doubt it. One thing is certain: they've got no right to increase the cost to me just to sate their ersatz concern for a minority.

Mr Collinson quotes Sweden as an exemplar of reducing alcohol consumption, etc. Well, this is not Sweden and I'm not Swedish. Mr Collinson can fuck off.

Add to this the fact that according to official figures we are drinking less in the UK than before, and you begin to see the impetus behind my ire. And we're paying more in duty than anyone else into the bargain.

It's the incessant fucking self-righteous preachiness of this that's pissing me off. Already this week alone we've had two big media stories about alcohol.

Leave me alone, you twats, and fuck off.

Meanwhile the progressive gypsy Roma love-fest continues.

Young gypsies to film their way of life.

Fie on you, BBC, for using racist out-of-date terms like 'gypsy'.

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

Alan Grant talks about how Mega City One is like Fascist Britain on Vimeo

The best bit is actually right at the end, where the interviewer asks Grant if he thinks Britain is a fascist state. He says yes and then explains.

Multiculturalism and Its�Discontents

Multiculturalism and Its�Discontents

It's not just within the area of religion that multiculturalism is wreaking havoc, but everywhere.

Read the comments, just to remind yourself of what the enemy thinks.

EU popularity plunges right across the bloc

You mean that the EU was actually popular with some folk?

EUobserver / EU popularity plunges right across the bloc

Strange, then, that the EU thinks that 75% of its 'citizens' want it to have more economic control. I don't remember being asked about this. Do you?

France deports hundreds more Roma

AFP: France deports hundreds more Roma

Good 'colleague' and major partner of the EU Axis plays fast and loose with the spirit of the EU and its laws in deporting EU citizens, many of whom will be back in France within months. That's what happens within a single 'state' with no real borders - you can't keep the 'citizens' out.

In addition, the policy of destroying the reality of the nation state, combined with the elevation of certain groups to untouchable victimhood, ensures that in the long run there will be racial and national conflict.

BBC Bias Must Be Taken In Hand

The BBC's pro-Labour bias is well documented in various blogs (notably Biased BBC), and yet it is amazing that the new coalition government has done nothing yet, as far as we know, to eradicate it. Last night I watched Emily Maitlis interviewing a Tory spokesman about the report from the Institute for Fiscal Studies which asserted that the poor would be worse off under the Coalition's cuts. She constantly interrupted him and was persistently aggressive in her manner. None of the other talking heads lined up by the BBC supported the government.

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)

The BBC News at 6 o'clock recalled the bombings in London on 7th July 2005. All well and good, except they omitted two vital words - 'terrorist' and 'Islamic'. Don't know how the other channels reported it but I assume it was the same.

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

Europe tells Britain not to ask for help in a crisis - Telegraph

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

Germany backs Greek bail-out as EU creates 'economic government' - Telegraph

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.

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."
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.

Tuesday, 4 May 2010

A Referendum On The Lisbon Treaty After All?

England Expects: A Good Day to Bury Bad News?

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

Burning our money: Tackling Our Fiscal Black Hole - People Ain't Dumb

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

According to the Governor of the Bank of England whoever wins the next election will have such a tough time enforcing austerity that it will 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.

Saturday, 17 April 2010

Labour to create veterans' ID card

Defence Management

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.

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."
'Free' to service leavers - I like that. 'Free', as in 'free - until it becomes necessary'.

Sunday, 11 April 2010

Bankrupt! But Don't Talk About It In Front Of The Electorate.

Don't let the voters know we face bankruptcy - Telegraph Christopher Book on the crisis which our politicians won't face up to in public.

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...

Comment by Biased BBC on this morning's interview with Sir Stuart Rose of M&S:
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

The BBC, Those Pesky Rapist Jews And The Silent Palestinians

Robin Shepherd Online » Post Archive » A tale of Israeli “rapists” that has enraged the Palestinians but won’t make the BBC

An interesting story via Biased BBC.

Baroness Scotland Couldn't Be Lying, Could She?

Baroness Scotland, who broke a law she had been instrumental in introducing, has been accused of lying:
The Attorney General was accused of lying yesterday when she gave evidence at the trial of her cleaner.

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.
Baroness Scotland was only fined half the full amount applicable under the law she herself steered onto the statute books.

She also kept her job.

Baroness Scotland is unelected.

Baroness Scotland votes Labour.

Tories Stop Cider Tax

A smidgin of good news among the horse-trading badness of it all:
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.

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.
From citywire.

Wednesday, 31 March 2010

Democracy - EU-Style, ie NOT

Commission sets out rules for citizens' initiative
Commission sets out rules for citizens' initiative
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.
So 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.

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

BBC News - David Cameron promises to create 'neighbourhood army'
David Cameron has said that a Conservative government would train a 5,000-strong "neighbourhood army" to set up community groups.

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.
More proof that there's really little difference between the major parties, all of whom are hung up on this communitarian 'progressive' approach.

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: Beware of newsmen wearing lip gloss | Mail Online

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

All three main UK political parties are apparently in agreement about when to change the clocks and by how much. You can read details here.

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

Labour want to hit the rich for being, well, rich.

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

British Soldiers Unable To Vote In General Election - “No Helicopters, No Equipment, No Vote”, says Dan Byles | Dan Byles

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

Do unto others: on the appropriation of citizen empowerment - Neighbourhoods

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.

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 '' 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?
Why can't these people just fuck off and leave us alone?

Thursday, 18 March 2010

One Database You CAN Opt Out Of - NHS Summary Care

Kept quiet by the state, of course, but here's one database you can request an opt-out from: the Summary Care Record. There's a link to a printable form at the bottom of this page.

Monday, 15 March 2010

W Anchor Mann

Seconds Out, Round One « MANNISMS >>

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?

EU to recommend more cuts for Britain | Reuters

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?

Not that I'm cynical or believe that Labour will stoop to just about anything to stay in power, but what are the odds on a major terrorist 'incident' happening between Easter and the general Election? The sort that shows Brown playing at being the Great Leader and Protector of his country? And then being re-elected by a grateful electorate.

Saturday, 13 March 2010

The Progressive Mulgan UK Australia Fuck-up Connection

Doing a bit of poking around on the interwebs to chase up info on the imminent publication of Making Good Society by The Commission of Inquiry into the Future of Civil Society (yes, that is correct), ie the Carnegie Trust, and its Chair(man), the leftishly-ubiquitous Geoff Mulgan, I discovered that among Mulgan's many jobs is 'part-time adviser to Prime Minister Kevin Rudd in Australia'.

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...

Gordon Brown asked for assurances that soldiers overseas can vote in the General Election - Telegraph
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.

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.''
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?

Conservatives Will Inherit EU Merde-Sturm

Conservatives may by forced to call early EU referendum - Telegraph

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.”