“ Nothing is easier than self-deceit. For what each man wishes, that he also believes to be true.”Demosthenes
Tuesday, 12 February 2008
Quote of the day
Diana Death enquiry pushed to £6 Million and rising
It emerges that £6 million has been spent investigating the death of the Princess of Wales – and that is only so far. You can be absolutely sure the final figure will be considerably more than that .
Why? Largely because one sad grieving old man, being fed what people think he wants to hear by people who can collect money from him, plus some fully paid up members of the tinfoil hat squad, will never accept an outcome that does not fit in with their pre conceived conspiracy theories.
No matter how many enquiries, investigations, whatever, they will not be satisfied with the truth they will only be satisfied with what they want to hear, what they sadly imagine to be the truth.
Any reasonable person can not escape the fact that this junket has gone on long enough – far too long and spent far too much taxpayer’s money.
No body with a realistic understanding of the world can imagine anyone would plan an assassination like that. That is the stuff of convoluted best selling novels. There were simply too many random factors at play and too many witnesses.
Much of what happened that night was clearly chance resulting from decisions made on the fly by Dodi Fayed, his driver and the random actions of the paparazzi. No one in their right mind would rely on so many random factors coming together to plan for them.
One can empathise with Mr Fayed for thinking the way he does and he may have some excuse.
He employed the driver, his beloved son made many of the key decisions that lead to the accident. He will be desperate to believe it was anyone or anything, other than himself, or his son that may have been responsible for this sad accident.
His idea of the way Royal families behave may be influenced by how certain middle eastern royal families who actually govern their countries do react and judge their honour. It would be understandable if a grieving old man, a man who’s understanding of the way some things work in the UK may be less than clear, were to project what he is familiar with, his expectations, on another princess.
With the best will in the world it is difficult to equate the plain speaking Prince Philip with King Khalid.
If Mr Fayed wishes to continue to flog a dead horse indefinitely perhaps it would be better done at his own expense rather than the put upon British Taxpayer’s.
Why? Largely because one sad grieving old man, being fed what people think he wants to hear by people who can collect money from him, plus some fully paid up members of the tinfoil hat squad, will never accept an outcome that does not fit in with their pre conceived conspiracy theories.
No matter how many enquiries, investigations, whatever, they will not be satisfied with the truth they will only be satisfied with what they want to hear, what they sadly imagine to be the truth.
Any reasonable person can not escape the fact that this junket has gone on long enough – far too long and spent far too much taxpayer’s money.
No body with a realistic understanding of the world can imagine anyone would plan an assassination like that. That is the stuff of convoluted best selling novels. There were simply too many random factors at play and too many witnesses.
Much of what happened that night was clearly chance resulting from decisions made on the fly by Dodi Fayed, his driver and the random actions of the paparazzi. No one in their right mind would rely on so many random factors coming together to plan for them.
One can empathise with Mr Fayed for thinking the way he does and he may have some excuse.
He employed the driver, his beloved son made many of the key decisions that lead to the accident. He will be desperate to believe it was anyone or anything, other than himself, or his son that may have been responsible for this sad accident.
His idea of the way Royal families behave may be influenced by how certain middle eastern royal families who actually govern their countries do react and judge their honour. It would be understandable if a grieving old man, a man who’s understanding of the way some things work in the UK may be less than clear, were to project what he is familiar with, his expectations, on another princess.
With the best will in the world it is difficult to equate the plain speaking Prince Philip with King Khalid.
If Mr Fayed wishes to continue to flog a dead horse indefinitely perhaps it would be better done at his own expense rather than the put upon British Taxpayer’s.
Monday, 11 February 2008
Quote of the day
“ Confidence... thrives on honesty, on honor, on the sacredness of obligations, on faithful protection and on unselfish performance. Without them it cannot live.”“Franklin D. Roosevelt
Egg faces possible enquiry over cancelled cards
Egg’s dubious cancellation of the cards of customers who are reliable users has now led them to be reported to the Financial Services Authority. This has now been referred to the Office of Fair Trading (OFT).
New Labour MP, Nigel Griffiths stated: "I am very pleased about that. It shows how seriously they are taking it. I cannot tell you the number of complaints I have had - they just keep flooding in."
Many customers who have had their cards summarily cancelled were adamant that they always paid their bills on time and had excellent credit ratings.
Mr Griffiths said he would be introducing a Commons motion demanding an inquiry into the matter and that he was "in no doubt that is the reason" for the cancellations.
New Labour MP, Nigel Griffiths stated: "I am very pleased about that. It shows how seriously they are taking it. I cannot tell you the number of complaints I have had - they just keep flooding in."
Many customers who have had their cards summarily cancelled were adamant that they always paid their bills on time and had excellent credit ratings.
Mr Griffiths said he would be introducing a Commons motion demanding an inquiry into the matter and that he was "in no doubt that is the reason" for the cancellations.
Friday, 8 February 2008
Are credit card companies over extended?
Are the credit card companies feeling the pinch more than they would care to admit?
In the last decade or so, many of us will have been aware of credit card companies thrusting increased spending limits on people, when they are nearing their current limit and use of the card has slowed.
We are all unfortunately used to what you might call postal SPAM, urging us to take out new cards together with partially completed (where do they get the details?) application forms that we then have to destroy in order to avoid the threat of identity theft.
Recently I have become aware of instances of credit limits being reduced, presumably because of some new panicked arcane algorithms applied to the owners spending habits.
I became aware of a new one the other day though. A credit card actually pulling out of the agreement - for no discernable reason at all. The person pays all their bills on time. In withdrawing the company wrote assuring that there was no problem with the person’s credit record and they could continue to make payments (how kind of them).
Given the current financial climate the owner had prudently cut back on using it and was just making the regular payments in order to reduce it. With the intent of maintain this until some assets were freed up and they could clear the card - though it is surely unlikely the card operator could have known this. Though it does rather smack of breaking up with someone before they can call it off with you.
One can only conclude that the company may be becoming slightly desperate and also possibly needs to look more carefully at it’s computer algorithms as they have lost the sort of reliable customer one would think they would be desperate to hang on to.
Let's hope we arn't going to see any more 'Northern Rocks' too soon - Do we all need to worry more than the Government would have us believe?
It would be interesting to know if anyone can add to this.
In the last decade or so, many of us will have been aware of credit card companies thrusting increased spending limits on people, when they are nearing their current limit and use of the card has slowed.
We are all unfortunately used to what you might call postal SPAM, urging us to take out new cards together with partially completed (where do they get the details?) application forms that we then have to destroy in order to avoid the threat of identity theft.
Recently I have become aware of instances of credit limits being reduced, presumably because of some new panicked arcane algorithms applied to the owners spending habits.
I became aware of a new one the other day though. A credit card actually pulling out of the agreement - for no discernable reason at all. The person pays all their bills on time. In withdrawing the company wrote assuring that there was no problem with the person’s credit record and they could continue to make payments (how kind of them).
Given the current financial climate the owner had prudently cut back on using it and was just making the regular payments in order to reduce it. With the intent of maintain this until some assets were freed up and they could clear the card - though it is surely unlikely the card operator could have known this. Though it does rather smack of breaking up with someone before they can call it off with you.
One can only conclude that the company may be becoming slightly desperate and also possibly needs to look more carefully at it’s computer algorithms as they have lost the sort of reliable customer one would think they would be desperate to hang on to.
Let's hope we arn't going to see any more 'Northern Rocks' too soon - Do we all need to worry more than the Government would have us believe?
It would be interesting to know if anyone can add to this.
Quote of the day
" With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion."Steven Weinberg
Arch Bishop suggests adoption of aspects of Sharia Law in the UK
About now there must be quite a few people, especially in the corridors of power and possibly within the Anglican Church tuning over the phrase: “Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?” in their minds - or possibly paraphrasing it and substituting turbulent for pestilential.
Not content to be presiding over the apparent disintegration of the Anglican Church the Arch Bishop of Canterbury Dr Williams has chosen to start stirring things up by unhelpfully suggesting the adoption of some of Sharia law in the UK appeared to be “unavoidable”, attracting criticism from across the (rather narrow these days) political spectrum.
Such comments can only put back the possibility of Moslem integration into British society.
He did raise some valid points in his speech, identifying problems - but his conclusions, solutions and ideas; betray him as misguided, weak and rather foolish.
If the law of the land does not apply equally and fairly for all then it is not the law of the land at all. Ghettos where different laws apply will just entrench the no-go areas the Bishop of Rochester, Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali spoke of.
Better we separate religion from the state formally and entirely.
Parliament should be the place the law is decided and it should be uniform - though unfortunately that is becoming less so, as more and more, actual power, is brazenly transferred to the EU, amid political denial.
It seems almost traditional now that Arch Bishops of Canterbury will say something controversial from time to time, possibly in an attempt to appear ‘relevant’.
But maybe it is time for this one to consider stepping down in favour of a more capable pair of hands – and who knows – converting ;-)
Not content to be presiding over the apparent disintegration of the Anglican Church the Arch Bishop of Canterbury Dr Williams has chosen to start stirring things up by unhelpfully suggesting the adoption of some of Sharia law in the UK appeared to be “unavoidable”, attracting criticism from across the (rather narrow these days) political spectrum.
Such comments can only put back the possibility of Moslem integration into British society.
He did raise some valid points in his speech, identifying problems - but his conclusions, solutions and ideas; betray him as misguided, weak and rather foolish.
If the law of the land does not apply equally and fairly for all then it is not the law of the land at all. Ghettos where different laws apply will just entrench the no-go areas the Bishop of Rochester, Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali spoke of.
Better we separate religion from the state formally and entirely.
Parliament should be the place the law is decided and it should be uniform - though unfortunately that is becoming less so, as more and more, actual power, is brazenly transferred to the EU, amid political denial.
It seems almost traditional now that Arch Bishops of Canterbury will say something controversial from time to time, possibly in an attempt to appear ‘relevant’.
But maybe it is time for this one to consider stepping down in favour of a more capable pair of hands – and who knows – converting ;-)
Thursday, 7 February 2008
Quote of the day
" Tis not the eating, nor 'tis not the drinking that is to be blamed, but the excessJohn Selden (1584-1684)
" The excess of our youth are checks written against our age and they are payable with interest thirty years later"Charles Caleb Colton (1780-1832)
Study shows predisposition to ‘obesity’ is largely inherited
An authoratitive study indicates that so-called ‘obesity’ is strongly influenced by genetic predisposition. The figure they quote is 77%.
Interesting news that, based on past performance, the Government Health fascists will probably do their best to ignore, or claim proves the exact opposite of what it means.
Also it should be remembered the ‘obesity’ definitions were tweaked to take in more people. Increasing the numbers of officially overweight, or obese, in the US alone by 28 million over night.
This does not mean that, because you are predisposed towards being fatter you will actually be fatter - Just that you will probably have to work much harder at avoiding it than others.
Much what many people have been convinced of for years…
Interesting news that, based on past performance, the Government Health fascists will probably do their best to ignore, or claim proves the exact opposite of what it means.
Also it should be remembered the ‘obesity’ definitions were tweaked to take in more people. Increasing the numbers of officially overweight, or obese, in the US alone by 28 million over night.
This does not mean that, because you are predisposed towards being fatter you will actually be fatter - Just that you will probably have to work much harder at avoiding it than others.
Much what many people have been convinced of for years…
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)