Thank goodness for the European Courts. An idiot’s idea of “Human rights” that keep armies of parasites at the public trough. And also for useless, craven, UK politicians.
It seems the unelected legislators who make up European court of human rights has decided it is unfair that criminals actually serving time are not allowed to vote. Do any of these judges have cousins who are of course “legitimate businessmen”?
Who brought the case before them? Would you believe it was almost literally... “Heeeeer’s JOHNNNY!!!" A "mad axe murderer” by your average man’s definition, who has been let out? And yes his name really is John and he killed his landlady with a genuine axe and then pleaded guilty to manslaughter with diminished responsibility.
You couldn’t make it up and be believed.
The UK government appears to be actually going along with this piece of insanity. For fear the Human rights industry will hit them with huge claims on behalf of the poor deprived inmates.
We can all imagine the likelihood of the French government going along with that – for about a millisecond!
They would probably simply shrug in that Gallic way and do just as they pleased, as they do over anything else that comes out of the EU that does not suit them. And the EU would do nothing.
So if our pointless politicians do go along with it, presumably the crooks will get to vote in the constituency where they are actually incarcerated, if that’s what they want, it being their place of abode. There are 48,000 of them concentrated in various places
The only exceptions will be those who commit the two truly terrible crimes of non-payment of debts or God forbid - contempt of court..
Presumably they will be able to vote in National, local council elections and parish council elections...
Presumably they will vote for candidates that suit them and as a block, given the way things work.
Cameron was making noises about making the local police chief an elected official.
So how long before local Councils in large prison’s catchment areas are packed with ex and unconvinced criminals. You know.. “legitimate businessmen” like Al Capone, or the Crays..
The question we need to ask ourselves is once what amounts to the mafia are in charge will they prove more effective that the political elite? Will the average citizen be better, or worse, off.
Compare the relative prosperity of Southern and Northern Italy.
One thing you can bet - the dustmen won’t go on strike any time soon - unless they are told to.
Meanwhile how long before the EU Court of Human Rights demands the vote for those they really have so much more in common with than anyone else - the clinically insane...
Wednesday, 3 November 2010
Another brick in the wall?
Cameron and Sarkozy have signed a deal to share military resources. It was kept pretty much off the public’s radar until it was a done deal. Did parliament get any say so?
It seems Cameron has locked the UK into it for the next 50 years. It is not clear if it can be got out of.
It is doubtful if any of the UK’s politicians will ever seriously try.
Cameron is busy trying to spin it up into great news and it is for the pro EU political elite.
It is difficult to reconcile this with his earlier bluster about not signing away any more of the UK’s sovereignty without a referendum. But this will be yet another instance where a slight change in the newspeak name of the thing magically utterly transforms it, so an old promise can be safely ignored and discarded. He is taking a leaf out of Gordon Brown’s book, on the Labour Party electionlies manifesto.
What it actually is is a tacit acknowledgement that thanks to his incompetent butchery of the UK's defence capability the UK is no longer capable of acting effectively on the world stage without support.
What it actually means is that the UK can now no longer act militarily, in many respects, without France’s agreement.
A mutual defence pact is one thing, even military co-operation, or joint expeditionary forces - but signing over a veto on when you use your military to a foreign power is a whole other ball game, more akin to treason.
Not that UK politicians have not been happily signing away sovereign power for decades, so he can reasonably expect the supine UK electorate to put up with that as they have done with so much else that more self respecting citizens would do something about.
Sadly it is probably unlikely there will ever be a tea party movement in the UK.
What is Cameron’s agenda? One suspects ever closer European integration and the construction of a seed of a EU military. How long before a "money saving treaty" with Germany comes along?
Then there is the argument that can now be used by the political elite that If co-operation works in this areas then why not others? They will then subtly suggest, as they so often do, that it will allow ‘Europe’ to be more ‘independent’ of the US.
US politicians still somehow happily seem to imagine the EU is an unmitigated good thing for the US, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. Is it that they think they know the nature of the beast? It wasn’t so long ago they thought it was a good idea to fund the Taliban...
It seems Cameron has locked the UK into it for the next 50 years. It is not clear if it can be got out of.
It is doubtful if any of the UK’s politicians will ever seriously try.
Cameron is busy trying to spin it up into great news and it is for the pro EU political elite.
It is difficult to reconcile this with his earlier bluster about not signing away any more of the UK’s sovereignty without a referendum. But this will be yet another instance where a slight change in the newspeak name of the thing magically utterly transforms it, so an old promise can be safely ignored and discarded. He is taking a leaf out of Gordon Brown’s book, on the Labour Party election
What it actually is is a tacit acknowledgement that thanks to his incompetent butchery of the UK's defence capability the UK is no longer capable of acting effectively on the world stage without support.
What it actually means is that the UK can now no longer act militarily, in many respects, without France’s agreement.
A mutual defence pact is one thing, even military co-operation, or joint expeditionary forces - but signing over a veto on when you use your military to a foreign power is a whole other ball game, more akin to treason.
Not that UK politicians have not been happily signing away sovereign power for decades, so he can reasonably expect the supine UK electorate to put up with that as they have done with so much else that more self respecting citizens would do something about.
Sadly it is probably unlikely there will ever be a tea party movement in the UK.
What is Cameron’s agenda? One suspects ever closer European integration and the construction of a seed of a EU military. How long before a "money saving treaty" with Germany comes along?
Then there is the argument that can now be used by the political elite that If co-operation works in this areas then why not others? They will then subtly suggest, as they so often do, that it will allow ‘Europe’ to be more ‘independent’ of the US.
US politicians still somehow happily seem to imagine the EU is an unmitigated good thing for the US, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. Is it that they think they know the nature of the beast? It wasn’t so long ago they thought it was a good idea to fund the Taliban...
Tuesday, 2 November 2010
Good money after bad
What is the point of politicians? I am sure they have their own reasons for being (Power? Money?) - but what is the point, the benefit, from the average citizens perspective?
Take David Cameron as an example. The EU wanted to increase it’s budget. As a negotiating position it suggested 5.9%. He was not going to stand for that – he said.
Now if you were thinking of buying something and there was a haggle possibility just you know the salesperson will ask double and let the unwary tourist knock them down and think they got a bargain. Did Dave never buy any jewellery for his wife in Greece?
This was of course readily agreed by the European Commission and rubber stamped by the European Parliament to keep the gravy high speed train rolling and would have cost the UK an extra £900m per year until it was put up again the following year.
The UK contributes a ridiculously large share of the operating costs of the EU. Who knows they might have been stupid enough to just go along with it.
So David Cameron makes militant noises and sets off apparently like St George himself to do battle with this hungry Wurm that nests on a pile of taxpayer’s gold.
Sadly the EU is an organisation it would be difficult to argue is fit for purpose, one who’s finances have, as far as I can tell, never been signed off as honest and above board by any accountants.
Put bluntly no accountant who wanted to stay in business, or to be able to portray themselves as honest, or marginally competent, is willing to chance their reputations and the prospect of doing time by signing off on them.
Now a question immediately occurs - well it would if you were not carefully steered away from it.
Why is it - when every European government is having to reduce their expenditure and operating costs - the EU feels the need to increase theirs, without apparently noticing everyone else is having to retrench.
So what was the result of all this tough negotiation, this rhetoric and spin? Was the budget actually cut, or even frozen - as it should have been if the EU reflected the states that make it up.
What did you expect? The budget was increased anyway of course, but by a mere 2.9% In real money 3% instead of 6%.
Dave Cameron is presumably not actually stupid so he must have some idea of the haggle, that suggests he knew quite well that 6% was a starting point. Maybe he thinks we are stupid.
The UKs massive contribution to the EU is a luxury it can’t afford, let alone increase. Even the EU recognised the UK had been rooked when it gave Thatcher a reduction in contributions, disguised as a face saving rebate. A rebate that Labour later pointlessly gave away big chunks of. Still it was only taxpayers money – plenty more where that came from.
How those European politicians must laugh when UK politicians turn up offering yet another opportunity to be fleeced yet again.
So Cameron comes back having committed the UK to pour a staggering extra £400,000,000 down the EU pissoire - and tries to spin that as tough negotiating! As some sort of great victory! Can’t afford too many more "victories" like that.
Getting back to that original question - What exactly is the point of David Cameron?
Take David Cameron as an example. The EU wanted to increase it’s budget. As a negotiating position it suggested 5.9%. He was not going to stand for that – he said.
Now if you were thinking of buying something and there was a haggle possibility just you know the salesperson will ask double and let the unwary tourist knock them down and think they got a bargain. Did Dave never buy any jewellery for his wife in Greece?
This was of course readily agreed by the European Commission and rubber stamped by the European Parliament to keep the gravy high speed train rolling and would have cost the UK an extra £900m per year until it was put up again the following year.
The UK contributes a ridiculously large share of the operating costs of the EU. Who knows they might have been stupid enough to just go along with it.
So David Cameron makes militant noises and sets off apparently like St George himself to do battle with this hungry Wurm that nests on a pile of taxpayer’s gold.
Sadly the EU is an organisation it would be difficult to argue is fit for purpose, one who’s finances have, as far as I can tell, never been signed off as honest and above board by any accountants.
Put bluntly no accountant who wanted to stay in business, or to be able to portray themselves as honest, or marginally competent, is willing to chance their reputations and the prospect of doing time by signing off on them.
Now a question immediately occurs - well it would if you were not carefully steered away from it.
Why is it - when every European government is having to reduce their expenditure and operating costs - the EU feels the need to increase theirs, without apparently noticing everyone else is having to retrench.
So what was the result of all this tough negotiation, this rhetoric and spin? Was the budget actually cut, or even frozen - as it should have been if the EU reflected the states that make it up.
What did you expect? The budget was increased anyway of course, but by a mere 2.9% In real money 3% instead of 6%.
Dave Cameron is presumably not actually stupid so he must have some idea of the haggle, that suggests he knew quite well that 6% was a starting point. Maybe he thinks we are stupid.
The UKs massive contribution to the EU is a luxury it can’t afford, let alone increase. Even the EU recognised the UK had been rooked when it gave Thatcher a reduction in contributions, disguised as a face saving rebate. A rebate that Labour later pointlessly gave away big chunks of. Still it was only taxpayers money – plenty more where that came from.
How those European politicians must laugh when UK politicians turn up offering yet another opportunity to be fleeced yet again.
So Cameron comes back having committed the UK to pour a staggering extra £400,000,000 down the EU pissoire - and tries to spin that as tough negotiating! As some sort of great victory! Can’t afford too many more "victories" like that.
Getting back to that original question - What exactly is the point of David Cameron?
Sunday, 31 October 2010
Back to the Future?
East Belfast movie maker George Clarke was going through a Charlie Chaplin box DVD set about a year ago when he noticed, right at the beginning of a clip he was watching, a woman walking by looking for all the world as if she were chatting on her cell phone/mobile/handy.
It seems replaying it and zooming in did nothing to alter that impression either.
So - could it be a sneak preview of a futre Dr Who companion?
One with the DR's special tweaks that lets cell phones work accross time?
Or maybe a member of security staff from the USS Enterprise quietly chatting with the ship on her communicator whilst it was on an adventure in the past. Who knows could the man in the hat be a shot of a heavily disguised Spock with a hat covering his ears and eyebrows...
It is not likely it could actually be a current cell phone running on the current systems. They require an extensive infrastructure to make them work, with a network of arials to allow them to connect through to the provider's exchange and route the call on to the recipient.
Still there are other possible explanations - maybe time traveler with a walkie-talkie..
Of course there is the alternative that it is just coincidence, or someone who is hard of hearing, or even a hoax, by whoever put the original DVD together, we all saw Forest Gump at famous historical events, computing has moved on since that movie was made.
Even so, it fires the imagination dosn't it?
It seems replaying it and zooming in did nothing to alter that impression either.
So - could it be a sneak preview of a futre Dr Who companion?
One with the DR's special tweaks that lets cell phones work accross time?
Or maybe a member of security staff from the USS Enterprise quietly chatting with the ship on her communicator whilst it was on an adventure in the past. Who knows could the man in the hat be a shot of a heavily disguised Spock with a hat covering his ears and eyebrows...
It is not likely it could actually be a current cell phone running on the current systems. They require an extensive infrastructure to make them work, with a network of arials to allow them to connect through to the provider's exchange and route the call on to the recipient.
Still there are other possible explanations - maybe time traveler with a walkie-talkie..
Of course there is the alternative that it is just coincidence, or someone who is hard of hearing, or even a hoax, by whoever put the original DVD together, we all saw Forest Gump at famous historical events, computing has moved on since that movie was made.
Even so, it fires the imagination dosn't it?
Monday, 18 October 2010
Quote of the day
Dane - Geld
It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say: ~~
"We invaded you last night-we are quite prepared to fight,
Unless you pay us cash to go away."
And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
And the people who ask it explain
That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld
And then you'll get rid of the Dane!
It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation,
To puff and look important and to say: ~~
"Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
We will therefore pay you cash to go away."
And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
But we've proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
You never get rid of the Dane.
It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
For fear they should succumb and go astray;
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
You will find it better policy to say: ~~
"We never pay any-one Dane-geld,
No matter how trifling the cost;
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
And the nation that pays it is lost!"Rudyard Kipling
Saturday, 16 October 2010
Spin me right round baby, right round
One of the few legitimate functions of government must surely be defence of the nation, or what is the point of it at all?
No it seems the UK State is reneging on even that basic duty. The coalition Government is attempting to spin a poorly though out attempt to save money as only an 8% cut in defence spending.
This is not really the case of course, but why did we ever expect honest dealing from politicians. When all is taken into account it is at least a 15% cut.
This after years of sustained, one can't help but suspect, essentially ideologically driven government neglect - and despite spin to the contrary, continuous real cuts in defence spending, even in a time of actual war thanks to the previous government.
It was to be hoped that things might have changed with the removal of the incompetent Labour administration but no.
These reductions from a government that is for some insane reason ring-fencing foreign aid budgets in preference to maintaining a credible defence capability, a government that seems to be surrendering the UK's ability to project any credible force globally.
One might be tempted to wonder if this is part of some cunning backdoor pro EU defence force thinking - but alas suspects it is more just simple lack of foresight, incompetence and a lazy hope that the US can take care of the bad guys out there for us (that seems prevalent in so many governments throughout the world) - whilst of course looking down their noses at the US for being willing to actually grasp the nettle.
It isn't as if the UK is unable (despite successive governments discouragement and denigration of them) to produce brave men and women ready to fight and chance dieing in the nation's interests.
Nor is it there is not the know-how and skills to equip them.
Or even as if there isn't the will within the population.
As usual it is politicians who fail to actually reflect the will and desires of the people.
So tell me - How does this 'democracy' stuff work exactly?
No it seems the UK State is reneging on even that basic duty. The coalition Government is attempting to spin a poorly though out attempt to save money as only an 8% cut in defence spending.
This is not really the case of course, but why did we ever expect honest dealing from politicians. When all is taken into account it is at least a 15% cut.
This after years of sustained, one can't help but suspect, essentially ideologically driven government neglect - and despite spin to the contrary, continuous real cuts in defence spending, even in a time of actual war thanks to the previous government.
It was to be hoped that things might have changed with the removal of the incompetent Labour administration but no.
These reductions from a government that is for some insane reason ring-fencing foreign aid budgets in preference to maintaining a credible defence capability, a government that seems to be surrendering the UK's ability to project any credible force globally.
One might be tempted to wonder if this is part of some cunning backdoor pro EU defence force thinking - but alas suspects it is more just simple lack of foresight, incompetence and a lazy hope that the US can take care of the bad guys out there for us (that seems prevalent in so many governments throughout the world) - whilst of course looking down their noses at the US for being willing to actually grasp the nettle.
It isn't as if the UK is unable (despite successive governments discouragement and denigration of them) to produce brave men and women ready to fight and chance dieing in the nation's interests.
Nor is it there is not the know-how and skills to equip them.
Or even as if there isn't the will within the population.
As usual it is politicians who fail to actually reflect the will and desires of the people.
So tell me - How does this 'democracy' stuff work exactly?
Friday, 17 September 2010
Good Intentions?
The UK Coalition government are desperate to save the pennies.
We all know why - Mainly because Gordon Brown and the Labour Party did the political equivalent of getting a terminal diagnosis and then going on a credit card spending spree.
Unfortunately they didn't have insurance...
Now we are all going to have to pay for it - In a way it is fair enough - as collectively we enabled them to do it to us by voting for them... Oh except we never did vote in Gordon did we? But yes we did vote in Labour.
"Not in my name" - as they say.
So the Coalition are scrabbling around for Ideas - and I am prepared to believe for the moment they at least have good intentions - but some of the stuff they come up with seems just stupid or suicidally desperate - and we all know what the road to hell is reputedly paved with...
Firstly, why on earth are they ring fencing foreign bribes.. er aid.
They are planning on blowing some £7.8 billion on it this year. This is a huge amount - and charity, as they say, begins at home. Anything that is not a strategic policy aimed at propping up friendly states, or ensuring terrorism is suppressed should be cut to the bone.
What are they planning at the same time? Oh yes. To damage our armed forces and nuclear deterrent while we are fighting what amounts to two wars.
Reward those who are willing to defend the big society with their lives by making them unemployed!?
Wake up and smell the coffee people.
We all know why - Mainly because Gordon Brown and the Labour Party did the political equivalent of getting a terminal diagnosis and then going on a credit card spending spree.
Unfortunately they didn't have insurance...
Now we are all going to have to pay for it - In a way it is fair enough - as collectively we enabled them to do it to us by voting for them... Oh except we never did vote in Gordon did we? But yes we did vote in Labour.
"Not in my name" - as they say.
So the Coalition are scrabbling around for Ideas - and I am prepared to believe for the moment they at least have good intentions - but some of the stuff they come up with seems just stupid or suicidally desperate - and we all know what the road to hell is reputedly paved with...
Firstly, why on earth are they ring fencing foreign bribes.. er aid.
They are planning on blowing some £7.8 billion on it this year. This is a huge amount - and charity, as they say, begins at home. Anything that is not a strategic policy aimed at propping up friendly states, or ensuring terrorism is suppressed should be cut to the bone.
What are they planning at the same time? Oh yes. To damage our armed forces and nuclear deterrent while we are fighting what amounts to two wars.
Reward those who are willing to defend the big society with their lives by making them unemployed!?
Wake up and smell the coffee people.
Friday, 14 May 2010
Something worthwhile?
The new administration has done something worthwhile. Or it will if it follows through with it You might say it has justified it’s existence.
More than the previous administration did during its entire tenure anyway.
What? - You may ask.
They are to abolish New Labour’s fascist ID card system and the sinister national Identity Register.
Let's hope they make moves towards dismantling the system designed to nationally track all under 18s too.
Further promising indications towards the restoration personal liberties and freedoms are that they are considering making changes to how the National DNA database is administered and functions.
One hopes that before too long there will be a move to purge the records of innocent people that Labour were so keen to collect. The police never kept innocent people’s fingerprints, elimination prints were disposed of after use. There is no reason why DNA can not be treated the same and it might make people more willing to provide it for elimination purposes if they knew it would be disposed of after.
It looks as if the biometric passport may also go the way of all flesh and public CCTV cameras may be reigned back to some extent.
If the coalition administration actually manages to deliver on any of these it establishes it as more concerned for the citizen’s liberty and rights than the previous authoritarian Labour administration.
More than the previous administration did during its entire tenure anyway.
What? - You may ask.
They are to abolish New Labour’s fascist ID card system and the sinister national Identity Register.
Let's hope they make moves towards dismantling the system designed to nationally track all under 18s too.
Further promising indications towards the restoration personal liberties and freedoms are that they are considering making changes to how the National DNA database is administered and functions.
One hopes that before too long there will be a move to purge the records of innocent people that Labour were so keen to collect. The police never kept innocent people’s fingerprints, elimination prints were disposed of after use. There is no reason why DNA can not be treated the same and it might make people more willing to provide it for elimination purposes if they knew it would be disposed of after.
It looks as if the biometric passport may also go the way of all flesh and public CCTV cameras may be reigned back to some extent.
If the coalition administration actually manages to deliver on any of these it establishes it as more concerned for the citizen’s liberty and rights than the previous authoritarian Labour administration.
Wednesday, 12 May 2010
Last one out the box close the lid
What a difference a day makes - as the song goes.It seems the UK is to have a coalition government.
Things looked pretty bad over the last day or so. This by contrast to that seems not quite so worrying.
We are seeing a hint of light at the end of the tunnel and hoping against hope it is not the 17:15 to Cambridge and we are not all about to become the stuffed toy on the front of the dust cart, to mix and match metaphors.
Suddenly being polite and reasonable seems to be the order of the day. I do wonder about the timing of Gordon Brown's resignation and if it's timing was designed to strain the chances of a Liberal Democrat/Progressive Conservative Coalition.
Suddenly everyone is busy saying what a statesman he was as if he was dead, I guess he is politically - so I shall refrain from mentioning any inconvenient truths, the gold reserve or pachyderms quietly milling about in the corner of the room.
Experience suggests that the chances are a coalition is likely to come apart at the seams. Driven apart by internal fault lines when push really comes to shove - look at the Lib-Lab pact. Things are certainly going to get difficult before they get any easier, are the Lib Dems up to it?
Still maybe Cameron and Clegg are really serious about government in the national interest and may really be able to drag enough of their parties along with them.
One way they could save a huge amount of money would be to demand Thatcher's negotiated payments discount back from the EU that Blair blithely gave away. Maybe ask for a bigger one of their own.
The UK pays a disproportionately large amount in to the EU to pay for civic improvements in the likes of Portugal and allow French farmers to continue to live in the manner to which they have become accustomed, etc.
Not likely to happen one suspects what with Nick being a Europhile, still it would plug a big hole in the nation's finances.
Maybe we’ll get the best of both Liberal Democrat and Conservative policies and less useful ones will somehow cancel each other out.. Keeping each other honest with each party will acting like the other’s watchdog.
Maybe to save money they will have to hold back the expansion of the state and buy us some breathing space. Maybe some of them will actually even want to do that. Shame that the Liberal Democrats, like Labour and in favour of robbing the dead in the form of low thresholds on inheritance tax. Penalising the south disproportioantely.
I am keeping my fingers crossed - but I am also keeping an umbrella handy against the chance flying pigs coming home to roost turn out to have minimal bowel control.
Goodness knows we need politicians to get over confusing the national interest with their party's interest or even their own personal interest. The thought of them actually doing it seems almost too much to hope for or to actually believe.
Still, they say a cynic is a disappointed optimist, It seems there is a tiny bit of optimist left in me that can still occasionally and probably briefly surface...
It’s only a tiny ‘Obama moment’ of hope that I’ll probably pay for later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
