Saturday, 29 May 2010
I admit it isn't as bad as some MPs, I mean £750 - £950 a month rent isn't too bad for London.
If he goes, which might be very soon if the news reports are true, it will be a shame because he looked like he was making a very good start at the treasury.
I'm wondering who is winning the climate change / global warming argument?
An extract from the article;
The latest institutional retreat from uncritical support of the AGW hypothesis is one that will chill warmists to the core: the Royal Society has announced it is to review its public statements on climate change. The Society now believes that its previous communications did not properly distinguish between what was widely agreed on climate science and what is not fully understood. It has appointed a panel to review its statements, assisted by two critical sub-groups, including a number of Fellows who have doubts about the received view on the risks of increasing CO2 levels.
In previous blog entries I have written that I wanted to be told the truth about climate change and global warming. Up until last year I could of gone into either camp, but when the climategate files came to light I became a sceptic.
I have no scientific knowledge to go through all the data to come to any scientific conclusion, but I have read a lot from other sites like Watts Up With That and I became more sceptical about global warming.
Clearly, that kind of blind commitment to the AGW cause will no longer be endorsed by the Royal Society. It is a sign of the times. Two months ago the Science Museum in London changed the name of its Climate Change Gallery to the Climate Science Gallery, as it began to distance itself from the partisan assumptions of the climate lobby. In fact it was abashed by the derision to which its previous posture had been subjected by visitors. Its director said: “We have come to realise, given the way this subject has become so polarised over the past three to four months, that we need to be respectful and welcoming of all views on it.”
If these societies and groups are, as the article says 'began to distance itself from the partisan assumptions of the climate lobby.' Then the government and the EU should think again about going down the path of carbon taxing, and cutting down the emissions, which will cost us billions.
The argument hasn't been won by any side yet.
There should be an open debate on climate change / global warming with all the facts and figures, for and against, to finally assure the public one way or the other on what is really happening to our climate.
Are we actually causing global warming with the carbon emissions, or is it a natural occurrence?
The public need to be told one way or the other.
Wednesday, 26 May 2010
If this is being done throughout the country, no wonder children are leaving school with reading and writing problems.
Children are in school to be educated.
EU sets toughest targets to fight global warming
That is the headline to this article.
Europe will introduce a surprise new plan today to combat global warming, committing Britain and the rest of the EU to the most ambitious targets in the world. The plan proposes a massive increase in the target for cutting greenhouse gas emissions in this decade.
The European Commission is determined to press ahead with the cuts despite the financial turmoil gripping the bloc, even though it would require Britain and other EU member states to impose far tougher financial penalties on their industries than are being considered by other large economies.
The plan, to cut emissions by 30 per cent on 1990 levels by 2020, would cost the EU an extra £33 billion a year by 2020, according to a draft of the Commission’s communication leaked to The Times.
Do those bureaucrats in the EU not realise that the whole of the EU is in a financial mess, or don't they realise this because they live on another planet?
Sometimes I think that the bureaucrats want to bankrupt the countries in the EU on purpose, then they step in to take over the accounts of the countries, but on condition they give more powers to the bureaucrats.
These idiots who make these announcements, must live in a cocoon away from reality, because we all need to save money and make cuts to our spending, not spend more money to prevent something that could be a natural occurring event.
Has anyone wondered what the EU bureaucrats are doing to help save money?
Will they take a cut in their pay?
Will they save money, by cutting the amount of MEPs and bureaucrats?
What do you think?
Tuesday, 25 May 2010
I was trying to put into words what my thoughts were on the subject, until I saw this article. Philip Johnston says it all in the article
Was this really attempted rape – or children playing?
By Philip Johnston
Two boys aged 10 and 11 have been found guilty of the attempted rape of an eight year old girl. I find it almost impossible to get my head around this.
The evidence in the case suggested that they were indulging in the sort of curiosity that children have shown in each other’s bodies since the dawn of time. They were initially charged with rape until the little girl told the court that this had not actually happened.
Boys of that age are almost certainly pre-pubescent and their interest in the little girl almost certainly non-sexual. A jury at the Old Bailey heard the evidence and found them not guilty of rape but guilty of attempted rape. They will now be on the sex offenders register, though as the judge said he had no idea what that meant for children of this age.
Is there any other period in our history, or any other country in the world, where the pre-pubescent fumblings of children would result in a rape trial? We bombard children with sexual imagery and then are surprised when they show interest in what it means. It is astonishing that they were convicted but even more amazing is that it even came to court at all.
Have we lost all concept of childhood in this country?
“I don’t think anyone who has sat through this trial would think for a moment that the system that we employ is ideal,” said Mr Justice Saunders.
He can say that again.
Could this set a precedent or can common sense be brought in?
This case looks like it was just 3 children being curious, but the girl became scared and worried about what her mother would think.
The reasons why this case was brought to court needs to be looked at.
Now we have 2 boys found guilty of attempted rape, for just being curious. How will this effect their future lives?
What about the girl in this, how will she feel in the future about this, how will it effect her life in the future.
All the adults in this case, the police the CPS, the parents, the court system have to answer questions about this case and the future well being of the 3 children
Thursday, 20 May 2010
I found this article through Daniel Hannan's blog.
It is very interesting to read and it looks like it has some good ideas, but I don't have the economic knowledge to know if this could actually work.
Have a read and see what you think.
The Emperor’s New Clothes: How to Pay off the National Debt & Give a 28.5% Tax Cut
By Toby Baxendale.
I offer a £1,000 reward for anyone who can tell me why this logically won’t work, practical politics, for now, being another matter.
What follows is an attempt to show you that this can be done.
Remember the story about the Emperor whose only concern was not the welfare of his people but the state of his clothes? Lacking a new outfit for his procession, he instructs the finest clothe-makers to propose designs. Step forward Slimus and Slick, promising that only clever people will be able to see their splendiferous garments; they will be invisible to anyone stupid. In exchange for gold coin – real money – they make something special for the King. The King, seeing nothing when presented with these designs made out of thin air, worries that he must be stupid because he pretended to the fraudsters that they were wonderful. Word goes round that only clever people can see the garments, so everyone cheers the naked King during his procession. It takes a small child, on top of his father’s shoulders, to exclaim: “the Emperor has got nothing on!” Everyone falls silent. Then, one by one, they start muttering, “the Emperor is naked!”
I am going to tell you that our Emperor – the government – has no clothes and is indeed naked with respect to our money. The sooner we realise this the better. Then we can make real progress and prevent the imminent misery. Indeed, the realisation of its nakedness should reveal that we have a unique moment in history to do something very special: to make banking secure, pay off the national debt, and even enable a 28.5% income-tax cut.
We all know what notes and coins are: money, or cash. It allows us to exchange the fruits of our work for the goods of others. When we deposit cash in Bank A – say £100 – we lend this money to the bank. This may come as a surprise to most, as we think what we deposit in a bank actually remains “ours” beyond this point. But as soon as you make a deposit it becomes the bank’s i.e. “theirs.” They then lend what is called credit of £100 to an entrepreneur, who banks it in bank B. Like magic, we now have you, who have a claim to “your” £100, and the entrepreneur, who also has an equally valid claim to “his” £100. This happens 33 times for every £100 deposited in the UK economy on average, meaning that for every £100 deposited, it is lent out to 33 people. Some of the banks did this up to 60 times. This cash cannot exist in two places at the same time, let alone 60 places at once. So what bank A does, is write you an IOU. Yes, your bank-statement is a mere IOU, the bank saying “ bank A owes you £100 on demand.” This is called a demand-deposit. We now see that demand-deposits are created out of thin air! Indeed, these are just ledger-entries from one bank customer to another.
Tesco groceries can be paid by electronic transfer. All we are doing is moving our bank’s IOU to Tesco’s bank in exchange for their groceries. This is how the world works. Do we care that we are buying goods and services out of thin air? Like the Emperor, does he care – as long as all believe he is clothed? Well, the customers of Northern Rock did. So when more than a small percentage of them asked for their IOUs from Northern Rock to be repaid – or, as they thought, for “their” money back – it could not be, as the bank had already lent it many times, making it impossible to reimburse all they owed. Indeed, if the government had not pledged to underwrite all deposits, then there would be a very good chance that the whole system would have collapsed.
If we accept that the Emperor is naked then the path to solving all our current financial problems becomes clearer.
Consider this following programme of reform:
Print cash and replace all the demand-deposits/IOUs that exist in the system with that cash. This means the government printing approx £850 billion in cash and injecting it directly into the vaults of the banks and into the accounts of individuals. Thus, if you deposited £100 once thinking it was “yours,” it now really exists in cash, with the bank acting as custodian of your money.
Mandate all banks to hold your cash (100% reserved) on demand at all times.
Wipe from the bank ledgers all the demand-deposits/IOUs as banks would not owe you money anymore. This means the “thin air” money disappears, to be replaced exactly with cash money. Note: this is not inflationary, as the cash replaces the demand-deposit which acted as money. As we have established, it is only thin-air that the banking system has created to facilitate the multiplicity of lending of the same bit of money, so its total replacement with cash would mean the money supply stays exactly the same.
Require all banks to lend real savings that people knowingly place with banks to lend to businesses to get a return of interest and capital back when the business repays that loan. This is nice, simple and safe utility banking. This is what Mervyn King advocates.
As you are not a creditor of the bank anymore, the banking system will only have its assets and its capital, i.e. no liabilities. This means that there never again could be a bank run.
As for the banks, not having you the depositor as a liability anymore, they will suddenly be £850 billion better off, with no current liabilities and only assets (loans to business etc), post reform. The government can now put those assets into Mutuals, which would then immediately pay off the national debt, and leave the banks in exactly the same position net worth wise as they were prior to the reform, owned by their existing shareholders. As the national debt is still just under the £850 billion, which would be available as surplus assets of the banks, this could still be achieved.
No national debt means no interest costs (currently £40 billion p.a) associated with paying for our borrowing. Therefore, give an immediate 28.5% income-tax cut. Total income-tax raised is £142 billion.
The boy in the story stood on his father’s shoulders. I stand on the shoulders of great men who have advocated part of this reform: Irving Fisher, the greatest American economist, the Nobel Prize winners Soddy, Hayek, Buchanan, Tobin, and Allais. Recently, Kotlikoff of Boston University has published an excellent book, “Jimmy Stewart is Dead” advocating a similar reform. It is endorsed by more Nobel Winners: Akerlof, Lucas, Fogel, Prescott, and Phelps. I count 36 endorsements from the great and the good for the book. All endorse Kotlikoff’s move to what he calls Limited Purpose Banking which is another way to get 100% reserved (i.e. secure) deposits backed by cash rather than thin-air.
The Economist Huerta De Soto, in “Money, Bank Credit & Economic Cycles,” has seen the opportunity that presents itself to reform for 100% money while also paying off the National Debt. Following on from this, I suggest a substantial wealth-creating tax cut for the people. Just like the boy in the story, I do hope that people start to realise that the emperor really has no clothes, and that an enlightened approach can address this.
If this could work, will the politicians use it, or at least consider it?
Monday, 17 May 2010
Inspections should be carried out on every household to make sure families are keeping children safe, according to government guidance.
That is the headline to this article
All parents should allow health inspectors into their homes to check that windows, doors, cupboards and stairs do not pose a danger to children, it was claimed.
The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence said that every family with sons and daughters under the age of five should agree to a home safety assessment.
Is this what these people do all day, think how to enrage the people of this country and waste our money as well?
At least this is just a recommendation, for now.
The country does need to save money and I think this is one quango that we could do without, or at least trim it down severely.
Saturday, 15 May 2010
I have copied the whole article for you to read.
Who dares mutinies: How the SAS defied orders to launch the most audacious rescue of the Iraq war
At Credenhill camp, their UK base near Hereford, officers and troopers of 22 SAS were on parade in their best bib and tucker. Their usual jeans and combat overalls were replaced by spotless dress uniforms for a ceremony to consecrate a new resting place for the regiment’s fallen heroes. But then the quiet was shattered by dozens of mobile phones ringing.
Nearly 3,000 miles away in hot, dusty Southern Iraq, two of their own were in desperate trouble. Captured by insurgents, banged up in a cell and physically beaten, they were under threat of summary execution.
Even worse, the message coming along the grapevine was that nothing much was being done by British forces in Basra to save them. There was every chance, it seemed, that the new graveyard would soon be getting its first occupants.
What was particularly frustrating was that a situation like this was meat and drink to the honed and highly motivated men of the special forces.
The SAS had won its unrivalled public reputation by springing the hostages from the siege of the Iranian embassy in London back in 1980. Surely they could do the same for their own guys in Iraq, in 2005?
Except that no one, it appeared, would authorise such a mission.
The SAS needed clearance from defence chiefs in Britain but, concerned about the effects an assault might have on the fragile political set-up in Basra, they were sitting on their hands. The word coming from the top was that there were more important issues at stake than the lives of two soldiers.
The troopers were furious. No wonder that — as the Daily Mail exclusively revealed last week — the SAS came close to mutiny.
Its officers talked of resigning their commissions; among the men, there were mutterings about going on strike until the Government showed some bottle. After all, the nature of the job meant any one of them could find themselves in a similar situation.
Earlier that day, September 19, the two soldiers in question — a staff sergeant and a lance corporal — had been in a beat up local car cruising through the dusty Basra streets on a covert surveillance mission.
With a handful of colleagues in a second car, they comprised the total SAS contingent in Basra, the southern city where 8,500 British troops were tasked to back up the local police force in maintaining some semblance of order in post-Saddam Iraq.
The main SAS presence, known as Task Force Black, was based in Baghdad, engaged alongside U.S. special forces in a full- on covert war against Al-Qaeda. To the SAS, Basra was a backwater, where its tiny force’s main job was protecting MI6 agents.
For the Army there, however, the pressing issue was the loyalty of the local police they were trying to train. And whether they were, in fact, secretly in league with the increasingly unruly Shia militiamen, the so-called Mahdi Army.
To that end, the SAS patrol was out early, keeping tabs on a dodgy police captain. Disguised as Arabs, their job was simply to find out where he lived so that the Army could snatch him.
They had done that — ‘finished the serial’, in SAS speak — and were heading back to base when the first car turned a corner and ran straight into a police checkpoint.
This was no random stop-and-search. Suspicion was two way traffic in Iraq, and the police had been watching the watchers. They moved in, rifles readied, and motioned the occupants out of their car.
The hands of the SAS men reached for hidden weapons. There was no knowing who these men manning the barricade really were.
Shots rang out from both sides in a firefight that resulted in one policeman being killed and three more being wounded.
The SAS car roared away from the scene in clouds of dust, police vehicles hot on its tail.
But there was no escape. Their dog of a car was no match for the souped-up police vehicles. The sergeant and lance-corporal just had time to radio in their position before skidding to a halt and getting out, hands in the air, hoping to talk their way out of trouble.
Their captors were in no mood for negotiations. They grabbed the British soldiers, hustled them into their vehicles and sped away.
The men in the other, undetected SAS car stayed at a distance and tracked the convoy to the walled compound of the Jamiat police station, where they saw their comrades being bundled inside.
Here was a situation guaranteed to fill the minds of the British military with dread. Seared in the collective memory were the two corporals in plain clothes murdered by a mob of IRA supporters in Belfast in 1988.
More recently, in June 2003, six military policemen in the Basra region had been captured by militants and butchered. The failure to mount an operation in time to rescue them had shocked the ranks. Was a repeat really going to be allowed to happen?
The news of their colleagues’ capture raced round A Squadron, the main SAS force, at their base in Baghdad, a luxury villa that had once belonged to a sidekick of Saddam’s.
Two dozen troopers kitted up and, together with a logistical back-up team, made for the nearby airport and a waiting Hercules transport plane. Soon they were in the air and heading south to Basra.
By contrast, the wheels of officialdom were grinding more slowly. The British Embassy’s response was to contact the Iraqi Interior Ministry and make a formal request for the men’s release. They might as well have sent a postcard for all the good it would do.
Meanwhile, in Basra, a 100-strong Quick Reaction Force of Coldstream Guards was soon on its way to the police station.
It had no instructions to mount a rescue operation — it had just been ordered to contain the situation by cordoning off the building.
Inside the police station, in a room on the top floor, the two SAS men were stripped down to their T-shirts. Punched and kicked, they were accused of being Israeli spies.
This being the age of 24-hour TV, their captors went for instant publicity. Slumped on chairs, the two men, their faces bloodied, were filmed alongside the weapons and radio equipment captured with them. The images shot around the world.
To watchers from the Army — and particularly the SAS — the pictures were deeply worrying. The incident was swiftly getting out of control.
And to make matters worse, the square outside the police station was filling with angry Iraqis.
Rumours spread like a firestorm through the predominantly Shi’ite area and they came in their hundreds to demand vengeance for the death of the policeman at the road block.
Major James Woodham of the Royal Anglian Regiment arrived outside the police station to find a near riot.
He regularly liaised with the local police, and he was sent by his Army superiors to get inside and use his contacts to defuse the situation.
But the gates were closed in his face, and he saw machine guns mounted on the roof, aiming at the thin line of nervous British soldiers, many experiencing their first confrontation with stone-throwing Iraqis.
Nor was there much prospect of the situation cooling as reinforcements were on their way — for both sides. Helicopters were ferrying in more troops and the British force would eventually number 600.
They were matched by Muslim militiamen, who sped to the scene in trucks. Youths poured petrol into bottles to make firebombs. Somewhere in the hostile crowd, which was growing by the minute, were rocket-propelled grenades and anti-tank missiles.
The cool-headed Major used all his negotiating skills to talk his way inside. He was taken to see the two men. ‘They were pleased to see me,’ he recalled. His presence seemed to reassure them that steps were being taken for their release. Weren’t they?
Major Woodham quickly cleared up the matter of identity. The prisoners were not spies but British soldiers, he told the Iraqi police. But this made no difference. The police were insisting that an investigating judge should interrogate the two men.
Out of his depth with these legal matters, the Major sent for an Arab-speaking Army lawyer to continue the negotiations.
Out at the UK base at Basra airport, the commander of A Squadron was pleading with the acting British field commander, Brigadier John Lorimer, for permission to send his SAS troops to the rescue.
The TV images indicated that the two men were in acute danger. At the very least, there was the risk of an embarrassing show trial broadcast across the world.
Or worse — 18 months earlier, militants had kept the cameras rolling as they sawed off the head of a captured U.S. civilian worker.
But the Ministry of Defence in London and the Joint Operations Headquarters at Northwood just outside the capital instructed Brigadier Lorimer not to do anything that might inflame matters.
Back at the police station, the lawyer had arrived, a glamorous female soldier, Major Rabia Siddique.
In the intimidating crowd of police around her, she spotted the faces of known Islamic militants.
As a Muslim woman, she felt extremely vulnerable. At one stage, she was spat at and called ‘a whore’.
But she stood her ground. For an hour she argued with the judge that the men were protected by a legal agreement between the Iraqi government and Coalition Forces, and should be released.
Asking for proof that the prisoners were still alive, she was taken to a cell, where they were huddled in a corner, chained up and blindfolded. ‘They were dragged over and plonked in front of me,’ she recalled. ‘I told them not to worry, that we’d get them out.’
But that prospect seemed slimmer than ever as, outside the station, a full-scale battle was breaking out. In the blazing heat, British troops tried to contain the waves of rioters surging towards them. Soldiers opened fire on the petrol bombers, and the casualties they inflicted further enraged the mob.
As the fighting spread in the narrow Basra backstreets, a Warrior armoured carrier was hit. A soldier was seized by the pursuing mob and beaten until he was unconscious. With machine guns blazing, he was rescued by comrades who dragged him away by his hair.
Another Warrior took a direct hit and a ball of fire shot up from the turret. Soldiers came cannoning out through the air, frantically beating out the flames with their hands.
In all, 19 British soldiers were badly wounded that day. The miracle, given the ferocity of the encounters, was that none died.
All this was captured on cameras in a Predator ‘spy-in-the-sky’ drone cruising overhead and flashing its pictures back to base and to armchair commanders in England.
But as the situation on the ground worsened by the minute, still nobody could be found to authorise a rescue mission. To this day, SAS sources believe a senior officer who could have made a decision was on the golf course and had his mobile phone switched off.
The implication is that he was deliberately not contactable.
There are now charges — from Tory MP Adam Holloway in a hard-hitting report on the incident — that politics were at the root of this studied inactivity.
The comforting picture presented by the MoD and the Government to the British people was of ‘our boys in Basra’ not at war but training and mentoring the Iraqi police.
This clear indication that local police — their ranks riddled with insurgents — were the problem rather than the solution, was a blow to that strategy. If two soldiers had to be sacrificed so as not to rock the boat, then so be it.
Inside the police station, things were in fact looking up as Major Siddique’s negotiations seemed to be making progress. The judge was willing to hand over the men into her custody in return for a signed letter from the Iraqi government authorising their release.
The letter was said to be on its way, if only a courier could get through the baying mob camped outside.
But then the mood changed dramatically. Dozens of militia in plain clothes poured into the room. She heard shouting and the ominous rattle of machine guns being primed. Pistols were waved in the air.
It was clear this was no longer a police matter. Shia militiamen were taking over. ‘I tried to carry on talking to the judge but he said: “I’m sorry. It’s no longer in my hands.” I felt control slipping through my fingers. I was afraid,’ said Major Siddique.
The intruders grabbed the two soldiers and took them away. Major Siddique was sure they were about to be shot. In fact, their captors — fearing a helicopter assault — had decided to move them to a safe house. They bundled them downstairs, dressed them in ankle-length Arab clothes and covered their heads with blankets as they emerged into the yard.
A scuffle broke out. The SAS men, co-operative until now, were not going quietly.
It was a good job they fought back, because overhead a keen-eyed observer in a circling Sea King helicopter spotted the fracas as the men were forced into the boots of waiting cars and driven away.
He relayed his commentary back to base — where SAS commanders realised time was running out.
From mobile phone calls intercepted by high-tech eavesdroppers, they discovered who had their boys — a militant group calling itself Iraqi Hezbollah. It didn’t augur well.
By now, the SAS force from Baghdad had arrived and was deployed a few miles away from the Jamiat police station. They were incandescent that political matters were reining them in. All they needed was the ‘go’ command.
And then they got it, in defiance of Whitehall — though precisely from whom remains unclear.
Some sources indicate it was the SAS commander on the spot who made the call. But other accounts say it was Brigadier Lorimer who seized the initiative by ordering an armoured column of regular forces to take the police station.
With helicopters buzzing overhead, Warriors and Challenger tanks brushed aside the crowds outside and crashed through the walls into the compound. Snatch squads burst into every room, ostensibly looking for the two SAS captives.
But the attack on the station — which Iraqi officials denounced as ‘barbaric, savage and irresponsible’ — was a feint. The real rescue mission was centred on a house nearby, where the SAS knew their men had been taken.
It was a classic assault of the type that they had practised so many times in the so- called Killing House at Hereford, blowing out windows and doors, hurling in stun grenades and storming in through the dust and smoke.
There was no opposition. In a locked bathroom, they found the sergeant and lance-corporal, bound but safe and alive. The militants holding them had melted away into the night.
In the aftermath of this success, all the supposed difficulties that had surrounded it melted away, too.
The rescue mission mysteriously assumed the mantle of having been authorised all along. A veil was drawn over the indecision of the top-brass back home.
But the SAS knew the truth — and at least one senior officer had now had enough of being a political pawn. In his report, Holloway reveals that the commander on the ground, who risked his career by going ahead with the rescue, subsequently left the Army because he was ‘disillusioned at the degeneration of the moral backbone of the British military generalship in the heart of Whitehall’.
The regiment had their men back, but no thanks, they felt, to high-ups on their own side. As the SAS motto goes, who dares wins — but it’s a damned sight harder if your hands are tied behind your back.
This proves one thing, the last government thought so little of our lads and lasses out there that they would let 2 of them die, just to keep the locals happy.
The following is taken from The Military Covenant
Soldiers will be called upon to make personal sacrifices - including the ultimate sacrifice - in the service of the Nation. In putting the needs of the Nation and the Army before their own, they fore go some of the rights enjoyed by those outside the Armed Forces. In return, British soldiers must always be able to expect fair treatment, to be valued and respected as individuals, and that they (and their families) will be sustained and rewarded by commensurate terms and conditions of service.
'Fair treatment and to be valued and respected', someone forgot about that on this day.
This must be just one of hundreds of examples of how the last government thought of our military.
Let's hope this new government will show the military the respect they deserve.
Thursday, 13 May 2010
Spain has followed Ireland and Greece in imposing 1930s-era wage cuts to slash the budget deficit, complying with EU demands for further austerity in exchange for the €720bn `shock and awe’ rescue for eurozone debtors.
That is the headline to this article
All nations who are in debt should find ways to save money, that isn't my problem.
What I find annoying is the EU demanding countries make cuts in pay, to be eligible for the 720bn euro rescue package, when the EU ministers increase their own pay.
See Daniel Hannan's video here
Let's not get into the fact that the accountants of the EU haven't signed off on the EU's budgets for about the last 15 years.
See Daniel Hannan's video here
If these countries want to save money, don't give any more money to the EU until they practice what they preach.
Tuesday, 11 May 2010
A coalition government hasn't been seen in a long time, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out.
It will be a bumpy road, but I hope all in government will do what's right for the country and not what's right for their own party.
There is a lot of pain on it's way, due to our debt and deficit, but I hope the country comes through it stronger.
My father installed in me a great sense of pride in this country, but over the last few years this country hasn't had much to be proud of.
The country is in a big hole and it's going to take sacrifices from everyone to get us through it.
The situation we are in reminds me of a quote by President John F Kennedy in his inaugural speech.
'Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country.'
There are a few people who have used the benefits system to get money for doing nothing, while the taxpayers of this country work their arses off to keep them in a better life than those who work for a living. They must be shown that that lifestyle is now over, and that they must man up and earn their money.
That is an example of my thinking when I look at that quote.
Some might say I'm being naive, but I want to be optimistic and have hope in this country, and for the future of this country.
Sunday, 9 May 2010
Britain faces paying out billions of pounds under a European Union deal intended to prevent another financial crisis like the one in Greece.
That is the headline to this article
When did we join the Euro?
We still have the Pound, so why is Britain helping to bail out Greece?
The reason is we were signed up to the European Constitution, oh sorry, the Lisbon Treaty by an unelected Prime Minister.
When Gordon Brown signed the treaty we lost the veto.
An extract from the article.
“When the markets reopen Monday we will have in place a mechanism to defend the euro,” said President Sarkozy yesterday. “This is a full-scale mobilisation.”
Euro-zone leaders are attempting to get round objections from countries such as Britain by invoking Article 122 of the Lisbon Treaty, intended to enable a collective response to natural disasters. This does not need unanimous agreement.
Sounds like a dictatorship to me..
By doing so, Mr Sarkozy has ensured a speedy confrontation with a new British prime minister and other leaders of non-euro currency countries. All 27 EU finance ministers must be present, but because decision will be taken by qualified majority vote, the 16 euro zone leaders can ensure its passage.
This is another example of how much power the EU has over the UK.
We didn't sign up to the Euro, so why should the British Tax payer help to bail it out. Any how, we haven't got any money left.
Saturday, 8 May 2010
It's enough to make Dixon Of Dock Green blush: Security firms paid £23m to guard police stations
Many will remember George Dixon faithfully standing guard underneath the old blue lamp.
But these days, you are just as likely to see private security staff outside a police station as an actual constable.
Figures have revealed police forces spend £23million on private security to protect their stations and headquarters
Far from the traditional image of a bobby keeping a lookout on the station steps - memorably portrayed by Jack Warner in the long-running TV series Dixon Of Dock Green - it seems that the safety of our police stations is being left in the hands of civilians.
Well, if it helps get the police out on the streets then I could live with that, but the police aren't on the streets they are still drowning in paperwork.
Friday, 7 May 2010
Britain needs to see a stable government, because the country is on a cliff edge.
Gordon Brown, and Labour, has to resign, they have been thoroughly beaten in the polls. They have no mandate at all.
We need to see stability soon, or god help us.
Gordon Brown is deluded. He is truly desperate to stay in power.
The country needed a Tory majority to govern properly, but they didn't get that.
I'll leave that to the experts.
Brown lost close to 100 seats, he has a smaller percentage of the vote, yet he still wants to govern.
There is a word for that.
It's called a dictatorship.
Brown has NO mandate, the public have spoken loud and clear.
The people of this nation doesn't want Gordon Brown as the Prime Minister.
I have seen a 16% swing to the Torys, an 11% swing to the Torys, and a 5% swing to the Torys.
Why aren't the Torys gaining more seats?
Take Edgbaston, the Torys need a 2% swing to gain the seat, but it is on a recount.
This is a very strange election so far.
Wednesday, 5 May 2010
When Labour came to power in 1997, they promised so much.
13 years later look at what this country has become.
Labour have all but ruined this country. You just have to look at some of my blogs, and others on the blogosphere, to see what has happened to this country over the last 13 years.
Education - UK slipped to 24th on English and math, pupils running riot in schools, pupils being taught by classroom assistants not qualified teachers, league tables,
Law and order - crime up, no (real) police on the beat, social breakdown, knife crime up, gun crime up, League tables,
Justice - criminals let out early to commit more crimes, ASBOs, prison sentences that don't fit the crime,
Hospital infections, not enough nurses to cover wards, care assistants on wards instead of proper nurses, league tables,
Economy ruined, 1.5 trillion in debt, our children and grandchildren will pay off this debt,
Millions on benefits,
A promise of a referendum on Europe broken, Immigration out of control,
War in Iraq, War in Afghanistan, Soldiers not given proper equipment, soldiers dying because of underfunding, soldiers dying because they weren't given the right vehicles, soldiers dying due to the lack of helicopters.
But the worst thing Labour has done is the breaking of the MILITARY COVENANT.
How can anyone vote for Labour after what they have done to this country?
I realise there is party loyalty, but for crying out loud what does it take for labour supporters to realise what 5 more years of labour will do to this country.
This country was once called GREAT BRITAIN, what Labour has done is reduce us to little Britain.
Labour should be sent, politically, to the stone age.
Thanks to http://uknewsnetwork.blogspot.com/ for this find.
Labour election fraud ‘would disgrace a banana republic’
That is the headline to this article which was first published in April 2005.
SIX middle-aged Muslim men, all pillars of their communities, won seats on Britain’s biggest local authority in the most corrupt election campaign since the Victorian era.
Vote-riggers exploited weaknesses in the postal voting system to steal thousands of ballot papers and mark them for Labour, helping the party to take first place in elections to Birmingham City Council.
They believed that their cheating would be hidden for ever in the secrecy of the strong boxes where counted votes are stored, never suspecting that a judge would take the rare step of smashing the seals and tracing the ballots back to the voters. Election corruption has been so rare in the past 100 years that lawyers have struggled to find examples since the late 19th century, when Britain was adjusting to the novelty of universal male suffrage.
If it was this bad 5 years ago, what could it be like now?
All postal votes must be scrutinised before being added to the votes of the ballot box. There is too much of a chance of fraud using postal votes.
I wonder if that is why Labour bought postal voting in?
Tuesday, 4 May 2010
If you are still undecided in how you vote take a look at Anna's blog. It shows the promises Gordon Brown has made and what finally happened afterwards.
While you are at Anna's blog take a look at this blog entry.
Let's send Labour, politically, back to the stone age.
Take a look.
What does Balls think of our military?
Not much, because he feels that he should pay for a wreath on Remembrance Sunday with his expenses.
Why didn't he pay for the wreath out of his own pocket?
I hope the people of his constituency sees this video and see what he is really like.
I have asked this before, but I thought Labour was a working man's political party.
With Balls, Harman and the Milliband brothers, to name a few, all going to private schools, is there any Labour ministers actually from a working class background?
When I look back on it now what surprises me is how disarmingly polite my attackers were.
"What are you doing?" asked one of the two, seemingly inquisitive, Asian teenagers who approached me on a quiet cul-de-sac in Bow, east London, shortly after 1pm yesterday.
"There's been a photographer around here, do you know her?" he added.
I didn't, but I explained I was a journalist for The Independent looking to speak to a man at an address in the area, who was standing as a candidate in the local elections, about allegations of postal vote fraud. "Can we see your note pad," the boy asked.
I declined and then the first punch came – landing straight on my nose, sending blood and tears streaming down my face. Then another. Then another.
Well someone has something to hide where this journalist was investigating.
What brought me to Bow yesterday were allegations of widespread postal voting fraud. Both the local Conservative and Respect parties in Tower Hamlets have been looking through the new electoral rolls for properties that have an alarmingly high number of adults registered to one address. The area has a large Bengali population and this type of fraud is unfortunately all too common. In some instances there have been as many as 20 Bengali names supposedly living in two or three-bedroom flats. When journalists have previously called, all too often there are far fewer living there. In some instances, no Bengalis at all.
It is worrying that the postal voting system can so easily be manipulated so people can commit fraud.
If it is that easy to commit fraud, then the postal voting system should be scrapped or severely changed so that it is near impossible to commit fraud.
Monday, 3 May 2010
A mother who received a promise from Gordon Brown that he would look into her son’s death in Afghanistan said she had been fobbed off with a standard letter and a copy of the Labour Party manifesto.
That is the headline to this article.
Gordon Brown promised so much when he became the dictator, sorry Prime Minister, but he has broken so many promises that we never believe what he says, but this broken promise can't ever be forgiven or forgotten.
Ann Probyn asked Mr Brown to investigate the circumstances of the death of her son, Guardsman Daniel Probyn, when she appeared on BBC One’s Politics Show seven weeks ago.
She said her son had been killed by a Taliban bomb in 2007 after his patrol was sent out without electronic equipment designed to protect against such devices.
Appearing again on the programme yesterday, she tackled David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, over the lack of response from Mr Brown. “Your leader promised to look into the events of my son’s death,” she said. “I was given a card, I phoned this number, and for seven weeks I haven’t heard anything.
“They just sent me this through – the manifesto, and just a normal formality letter. Why should I vote Labour when they are not doing anything to help me?”
It is common knowledge that, as chancellor, Gordon Brown starved the military of funds and equipment. Just how many of our soldiers lives has that cost in Iraq and Afghanistan?
Now we have a situation where Gordon Brown promised to look into the death of Guardsman Daniel Probyn, and what does the mother receive, she is sent the Labour party manifesto. How insensitive is that?
Gordon Brown can say what he likes on the election campaign, because we don't believe what he says anyhow, but don't fob off a mother of one of our honoured dead and send her a manifesto.
She, and all of the families of our honoured dead deserves to know how and why their sons, daughters, brothers, sisters, mothers and fathers have been killed and injured.
I haven't got any family or friends out in Afghanistan, but I feel just as passionate about what is happening to our boys and girls out there.
Gordon Brown, as well as Tony Blair, should be taken before a court to answer why they sent our military into 2 wars without the proper equipment.
I want them to explain why there wasn't enough helicopters, better armoured vehicles, better equipment in general. The equipment the troops have seems to of been bought because it was the cheapest.
While the troops are getting sub standard equipment the civil servants at the MOD get bonuses. How screwed up is that?
The Military Covenant should of been an unbreakable promise, but it has been broken by Labour.
Gordon Brown, Tony Blair and Labour should never be given the chance to have any control over our military ever again.
They have treated them and their families with utter disrespect, and that can never be forgiven ever.
'Hypocrite' Harman and her family's inheritance tax dodge on £750,000 estate'
Harriet Harman was accused of 'hypocrisy' yesterday for attacking Tory plans to cut inheritance tax although her own family exploited loopholes to shelter their fortune from the levy.
Are they thinking, shaft the little people, as long as they, the politicians, are ok.
I hope some karma is on it's way to her, and the rest of those troughers.
Sunday, 2 May 2010
Gordon Brown says this is a global financial problem. Yes it might be, but it was made a whole lot worse for this country by the decisions of Gordon Brown as chancellor and now as Prime Minister.
A few interesting facts about Gordon Brown
Saturday, 1 May 2010
It is called;
Remember The Fallen
Every November I stand silently in thought. It is always cold and often raining. My arms are locked into my sides, my chest is pushed out and I am ramrod straight.
As the Bugler sounds last post it takes every last ounce of my self-discipline not to cry. I don't cry because remembrance day is a Military occasion. It dictates a formality of dignified mourning.
There have been so many Military funerals these last few years. All too often we see coffins draped in the Union flag. The dead soldiers comrades carry their fallen friends with a professionalism I am so very proud of. For I know that inside, these young soldiers hearts are breaking.
The incumbent Government has asked so much of our fighting men and women these last 13 years - and all the while they have starved them of the equipment and funds they need to carry out this most difficult of tasks.
It is with thoughts of the economy we will vote, as well as immigration and health care. But if you will, please remember those fallen soldiers. At this very moment British troops are fighting and they are dying - let them know that although the Labour Party cares little about them, to us the Covenant means everything.
Next Thursday we have an opportunity to place a cross in a box. I would ask you not to put yours against the Party that has put so many crosses above so many boxes.
Posted by Cold Steel Rain at 13:00
Labour have Broken The Military Covenant and should be punished, if not legally then by voting them out of government and sending Labour, politically, back to the stone age.
Back in March The Telegraph reported that
'Gordon Brown has been
ordered to release
information before the general election about his
controversial decision to
sell Britain's gold reserves.
The decision to
sell the gold – taken
by Mr Brown when he was Chancellor – is regarded as one of
worst financial mistakes and has cost taxpayers almost £7
Mr Brown and the Treasury have repeatedly refused to disclose
information about the gold sale amid allegations that warnings were ignored.
Following a series of freedom of information requests from The Daily
Telegraph over the past four years, the Information Commissioner has ordered
Treasury to release some details. The Treasury must publish the
demanded within 35 calendar days – by the end of April.
The sale is
expected to be become a major election issue, casting
light on Mr Brown's
decisions while at the Treasury. '
Today is May 1 and I have not seen the release of this information. Has the Treasury disobeyed the Information Commissioner? If so, why? This information belongs to the people, if it's release is delayed until after the general election then this is a major scandal. I want every blog, every newspaper, every journalist to ask just one question of every Labour politician between now and Thursday - What have you got to hide that is so serious that you have not complied with the ICO?
Meanwhile gold reached $1,179 on Friday.
I hope Gordon Brown and Labour are asked about this.
Gordon Brown sold the Nation's gold at rock bottom prices and, in my opinion, wrong in so many ways. Those gold reserves belonged to the nation not to Gordon Brown and the Labour Party.
Muslim daubs war memorial with 'Islam will dominate the world' - but walks free after CPS says he was NOT racially motivated
That is the headline to this article.
A Muslim protester who daubed a war memorial with graffiti glorifying Osama Bin Laden and proclaiming 'Islam will dominate the world' walked free from court after prosecutors ruled his actions were not motivated by religion.
Tohseef Shah, 21, could have faced a tougher sentence if the court had accepted that the insults - which included a threat to kill the Prime Minister - were inspired by religious hatred.
But - citing a loophole in the law - the Crown Prosecution Service chose not to charge him with that offence and he escaped with only a two-year conditional discharge and an order to pay the council £500 compensation after admitting causing criminal damage.
All I have to say is, what would of happened if someone had written something like;
'Christians will dominate the world' On a muslim memorial?
Would the Christian be let off, like Tohseef Shah, with a £500 fine. I don't think so.
He would be up on a racial and religious hate crime, and probably be sent to prison.
Incidents like this must be punished properly by the law courts.