It seems the New-Labour State has, in the face of it’s own advisors best advice, decided to reclassify cannabis as a class b drug.
Given that this decision is not based on the merits of the case, especially as having it de classified saw a 4% drop in its use, the immediate question that arises is, “What is their agenda?”
Interestingly, they effectively plan to record a persons details on the first “offence” and fine them on the second “offence”.
I don’t know what the percentage of the UK population is that at some time has tried cannabis but I suspect it is very significant. I would imagine thousands of essentially law abiding otherwise non criminal users are detected by the police every year.
To give an idea of the numbers, when surveyed 10% of people asked actually admitted they had used an illegal drug in the past year, that is around 3,100,000 people. Given that many of the repondants may not have admitted using drugs and that the majority of drug use involves cannabis that is a huge pool of potential cannabis users.
One effect of these new rules is likely to be a massive increase in the number and rate of additions to the New Labour State’s disguised National DNA Database.
Another effect is likely to be a considerable increase in revenue for the State in the form of fixed penalty or so-called “on the spot” fines.
Could either of these considerations influenced a cash strapped government anxious to push through a massively unpopular national DNA database?
Then there is the matter of pretending to be ”tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime”…
Tuesday 27 January 2009
Tuesday 20 January 2009
Welcom to A new US president
Today is the inauguration of President Elect Obama as the 44th President of the United States of America. Arguably one of the most powerful offices on the planet.There is an incredible optimism associated with this particular inauguration. It is seen as a sea change in US politics and society. It is doubly poignant as it comes after Martin Luther King Jnr’s day and is in many respects the realisation of his dream.
Everyone speaks of a black president. As someone pointed out to me it is largely in people’s minds. Barak Obama is in fact 50% black and that somehow makes him just “black”. You could use the same logic to say he was “White”.
Whatever, many people have invested a huge amount of hope in him. Maybe they should dial back on that just a little? He is human, not a superman. He does not have a magic wand.
If people build him up unrealistically in their minds they are likely to be correspondingly unrealistically disappointed if he can’t deliver on their every wish.
So here is a hope that people don’t expect too much and too fast and then get annoyed if he can’t do miracles. Especially with all the troubles the world is beset with right now.
Between Memorial Bridge and Arlington Cemetery, there is an inscription on the memorial to the Seabees, the U.S. Navy Construction Battalions. It says:
“The difficult we do immediately. The impossible takes a little longer.”
Tuesday 13 January 2009
Quote of the Day
" The most formidable weapon against errors of every kind is reason."Thomas Paine
" At least two thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity, idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political idols."Aldous Huxley
" Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity."Martin Luther King Jr
" To those searching for truth - not the truth of dogma and darkness but the truth brought by reason, search, examination, and inquiry, discipline is required. For faith, as well intentioned as it may be, must be built on facts, not fiction - faith in fiction is a damnable false hope."Thomas Edison
Potential threat UKs food security in New EU Rules
There are the beginnings of worries for security and self sufficiency in a number of areas, especially energy security, as recently highlighted over the European dependency and vulnerability to continued supply of gas from Russia.
Now it seems the UK’s food security is threatened by the EU. Another area where the UK no longer retains sovereignty over it’s own laws. They are now dictated by the EU.
Though it never really saw light in the MSM the reason Gordon Brown could not reduce VAT enough to be any practical use was that he was not allowed to reduce it below 15% by EU law.
So how is our food security damaged by the EU? Because they are changing the rules on how pesticides and the like are assessed. They have decided that scientific assessment is no longer a good enough test. Now they want to base it the ‘rigorous’ test of "perceived hazard" instead. What next, consulting astrologers?
Presumably this plays well with the green lobby and will help drive up prices to aid the Organic producers, but it has the potential to seriously threaten many of the UK’s crops and virtually wipe out carrot growing in the UK.
The National Farmer’s union is opposed. Their deputy president Meurig Raymond stated: "The lack of sound science behind the plans is a major concern,"
"We cannot support measures which reduce the tools available to farmers and growers to produce crops and that could ultimately jeopardise future food supply and security."
One of the main problems is that because of the UK’s generally damper climate than Europe certain pesticides are much more useful to combat diseases particularly associated with wet weather like potato blight.
The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs are also concerned. A spokesperson stated: "We believe the proposals could hit crop yields without noticeable benefit for human health.”
"We've done our own impact assessment on the matter but the European Commission has not."
It is feared close to a quarter of produce will be lost in the UK if the plans go through, including the total carrot crop and a 20% reduction in cereal production.
Now it seems the UK’s food security is threatened by the EU. Another area where the UK no longer retains sovereignty over it’s own laws. They are now dictated by the EU.
Though it never really saw light in the MSM the reason Gordon Brown could not reduce VAT enough to be any practical use was that he was not allowed to reduce it below 15% by EU law.
So how is our food security damaged by the EU? Because they are changing the rules on how pesticides and the like are assessed. They have decided that scientific assessment is no longer a good enough test. Now they want to base it the ‘rigorous’ test of "perceived hazard" instead. What next, consulting astrologers?
Presumably this plays well with the green lobby and will help drive up prices to aid the Organic producers, but it has the potential to seriously threaten many of the UK’s crops and virtually wipe out carrot growing in the UK.
The National Farmer’s union is opposed. Their deputy president Meurig Raymond stated: "The lack of sound science behind the plans is a major concern,"
"We cannot support measures which reduce the tools available to farmers and growers to produce crops and that could ultimately jeopardise future food supply and security."
One of the main problems is that because of the UK’s generally damper climate than Europe certain pesticides are much more useful to combat diseases particularly associated with wet weather like potato blight.
The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs are also concerned. A spokesperson stated: "We believe the proposals could hit crop yields without noticeable benefit for human health.”
"We've done our own impact assessment on the matter but the European Commission has not."
It is feared close to a quarter of produce will be lost in the UK if the plans go through, including the total carrot crop and a 20% reduction in cereal production.
Friday 2 January 2009
Quote of the Day
" The media's the most powerful entity on earth. They have the power to make the innocent guilty and to make the guilty innocent, and that's power. Because they control the minds of the masses."
Malcom X
" During a war, news should be given out for instruction rather than information."
Joseph Goebbels
" The interpretation of our reality through patterns not our own, serves only to make us ever more unknown, ever less free, ever more solitary."Gabriel Garcia-Marquez
" If they give you lined paper, write the other way."
William Carlos Williams
When is a Terrorist not a terrorist?
Has anyone else noticed how “terrorists” are suddenly “militants”?
I first noticed it when all the UK news channels suddenly seemed to start referring to the terrorists who attacked Bombay as “Militants”. Murdering scum encapsulates it nicely for me. Certainly they are terrorists. Undoubtedly Islamicist ones as well.
Difficult to think what else to call them but terrorists.
The term “militants” brings to mind the industrial unrest of the 70s in the UK, maybe Arthur Scargill’s lamentable comb over look and donkey jackets. The unions generally didn’t go in for suicide bombings, rocket attacks, or tote Kalashnikovs. Even the IRA drew the line at suicide bombings.
Now the people firing missiles into Israel, who seem to be the proximate cause of the recent flair up, are also “militants”, at least to the mainstream media.
It is difficult to imaging two such organisations as the BBC and Sky randomly and spontaneously starting to use the term at the same time, or to understand why they might - so one must presume it is not spontaneous.
Who’s agenda then? Unless they are running some sort of news cartel then logically it is likely to be the UK Government.
Why would it suit New Labour to phase out the term terrorist? News-Speak? Or more NewSpeak?
What don’t they want us thinking now…
I first noticed it when all the UK news channels suddenly seemed to start referring to the terrorists who attacked Bombay as “Militants”. Murdering scum encapsulates it nicely for me. Certainly they are terrorists. Undoubtedly Islamicist ones as well.
Difficult to think what else to call them but terrorists.
The term “militants” brings to mind the industrial unrest of the 70s in the UK, maybe Arthur Scargill’s lamentable comb over look and donkey jackets. The unions generally didn’t go in for suicide bombings, rocket attacks, or tote Kalashnikovs. Even the IRA drew the line at suicide bombings.
Now the people firing missiles into Israel, who seem to be the proximate cause of the recent flair up, are also “militants”, at least to the mainstream media.
It is difficult to imaging two such organisations as the BBC and Sky randomly and spontaneously starting to use the term at the same time, or to understand why they might - so one must presume it is not spontaneous.
Who’s agenda then? Unless they are running some sort of news cartel then logically it is likely to be the UK Government.
Why would it suit New Labour to phase out the term terrorist? News-Speak? Or more NewSpeak?
What don’t they want us thinking now…
Thursday 1 January 2009
New Year 2009
Another year rolls into the past and the next hoves into view.
Farewell 2008. Let us hope 2009 brings better things to and for, the world and each of us, than the year just gone did.
Having New year on top of Christmas seems to be over doing things. Should we take a leaf out of the Roman's book and move it to when the world wakes up?
Would that have the southern hemisphere putting in a bid to move it completely?
In any event - Have a Happy Peaceful and Prosperous New Year - Everyone!
Farewell 2008. Let us hope 2009 brings better things to and for, the world and each of us, than the year just gone did.
Having New year on top of Christmas seems to be over doing things. Should we take a leaf out of the Roman's book and move it to when the world wakes up?
Would that have the southern hemisphere putting in a bid to move it completely?
In any event - Have a Happy Peaceful and Prosperous New Year - Everyone!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
