Posts Tagged ‘Orwell’

Horrible thought isn’t it?

The Leveson inquiry seemingly ploughs on in investigating it’s four modules by ignoring every media organisation unless Rupert Murdoch owns it.

“Did he seek influence with politicians?” screams from every other media outlet.

Really? Do you even need to ask? Of course he did. Would you socialise with venal expense grabbing amoral parasites like that for fun?

But here’s the kicker that struck me.

So what? Why is that any different to someone signing a petition to get a politician to change their mind?

Or if you pay money to a union, why is it any different to a union paying a stack of cash directly to a political party or politician?

Everyone seeks to effect decisions that are made about them. To pretend otherwise is just plain stupid. What is wrong is that it is done in the dark, behind closed doors. After all, if the influence is not improper why not tell us about it?

Is Cleveland police the most inept or corrupt in the UK? The force that gave us Ray Mallon this week had a former officer clearing his name after himself being wrongfully arrested and convicted, (or “framed” in the colloquial). It cost the taxpayers nearly a million in a payout to him, yet not a single officer was disciplined as no-one was found guilty of misconduct. Surely these two rulings cannot both be true?

Although it could be said that the force is lead from the top given that both the Chief and deputy Chief constables are on suspension since last year (paid naturally) under investigation for corruption, although he still manages to do his best to keep local restaurants going with his expenses.

The culture appears pervasive. In 2010 Cleveland had the highest numbers of police officers suspended in the North despite having a third of the total officers of Northumbria. The majority allowed to resign or leave the force, ensuring that no criminal record of their behaviour follows them, and of course they keep the tax payer funded pensions.

With a reputation in the gutter, only making it harder for the good officers to do difficult jobs perhaps the time has come for it to be wound up and run from North Yorkshire or Durham? Sometimes it’s the barrel that makes the apples rotten, especially when so many seem to go bad…

Well at least someone has actually come out and said it at last.  The tinfoil hat brigade may suspect that this is the plan all along, I prefer to hope that it is just the self appointed idealogical elite taking advantage of a bad situation.

 

The German finance minister has launched his salvo at the already undemocratic Greek administration by stating that

Greece might delay its polls and install a technocratic government that did not include politicians such as Mr Venizelos and Mr Samaras, similar to Italy.

So the Reichs push towards the mediterranean coast having beaten France into a lapdog state and having imposed an administration on Italy, subservient not to the Italian electorate but the German dominated European Central bank now has Greece firmly in it’s sights.

Ignore whether the Greeks have lived it up on debts or not, that is their problem to solve ultimately. (It is the fanatical desire to ensure that no-one leaves the euro that is the root cause of all the taxes being thrown at the issue anyway.) Just think about what has been said. That a sovereign country should not hold elections and instead have a technocratic administration, run by unaccountable foreigners, for the benefit not of those that must ultimately pay for it but for those in other countries seeking to keep subsidy addicted farmers or an exporting car industry afloat. Not a tinpot dictatorship but the very cradle of democracy. That they should put aside law and due process and be dictated to by a German led alliance.

Worrying times.

Falklands - Goose Green

Piece in the Grauniad about a little patch of the UK a long way away. Peter Peston writes that the future for the kelpers as he expects a mixture of military incompetence and political spinelessness to sell them out, and he justifies it all by the expense of protecting them.

He goes on to state

They’d get on far better if Argentina was a helpful neighbour.

and

Do we want to keep paying and paying as the decades roll away? Paying to sustain a little colony that can’t grow and prosper without fear.

So we should just roll back and abandon them because it is an expense and an inconvenience. You fucking Quisling.

We were happy to use the place when we needed a seabase in the Southern Atlantic, both military and for whaling. In 1833 when the british settled the Falklands the country Argentina did not even exist. The Islanders voted overwhelming in a free vote to remain British. If the right to expect to be defended is subject to simple expediency then why not give up all overseas territories? Like Scotland they receive a net subsidy from the exchequer, most are nearer a foreign state than Whitehall, and I am sure a foreign power would love to take them all on.

As for military capability. We are woefully deficient in carriers and carrier aircraft. That is not the same as defenceless. unfortunately the capabilities we do have mean more direct action if attacked, such as tomahawk strikes on the Argentine mainland, and our submarine fleet is more than capable of implementing a naval blockade. Both require the political nerve to cause larger death tolls than would otherwise be the case, but our lack of planning leaves little choice.

Ultimately it is a simple question.

Do we support British subjects in a far flung place, support the rule of law, and the right of self determination?
or do we abandon them for short term political gain and economic expediency?

It will not be easy, or pleasant, or cheap. But the first duty of the state is the protection of it’s citizens. Be it from terrorism or direct attack. if it cannot do that what other purpose can it serve?

For a fraction of what has been spent in overseas misadventures, or that is poured away in aid to countries that pursue nuclear weapon programs, or that is thrown at the idle who think they deserve wages equivalent to the top 10% of society we could fulfil our duty to our fellow Brits.

Any administration that sells them out should be forever labelled as traitors and hounded from office. I promise to never vote for or support any organisation that is party to collaboration in doing so. Maybe if enough promised to do the same they would realise the consequences of their actions.

About the EU.

I’m not going to rehash all the current goings on but was reading an article in the Indy. All to do with referendums, treaties and the current fiscal fuckwittery.

In it was this gem of a quote, which sums up why the EU is rotten to the core far more aptly than any comment I have yet read, The Irish Finance Minister, Michael Noonan, right, said Ireland might be forced to hold a referendum on the new EU “compact” agreed in Brussels last week, when asked about the fact that The Irish public rejected the EU’s Nice Treaty in 2001 and the Lisbon Treaty in 2008, although both were accepted in later referendums. he said..

“We have won every referendum that has been put to the people, though on occasion we had to have two goes at it. I certainly wouldn’t like a replay.”

Basically we’ll keep asking you until you give us the answer we want.

Perhaps Syria should send monitors to oversee European democracy?

So now you must pay more for a glass of wine or beer because some people choose to abuse alcohol.

That is todays message from a group of self selected doctors and experts (whom I suspect are all well the far side of minimum wage), have written to the Telegraph to point out that some poor people abuse alcohol, and if we make it prohibitively expensive then the proles won’t be able to use up all those taxes in medical care.

Because what addicts won’t do is brew their own, or obtain illegal cheap supplies in exactly the same manner that society was able to declare victory in the war on drugs such as dope long ago.

Why should responsible people be penalised? In fact, the main losers in this scenario are the responsible poor. The people for whom a few beers or a bottle of wine remains a luxury item. Obviosuly they cannot be trusted to decide for themselves and must be treated like children, or farm animals. Nutured and looked after, prevented from harming themselves in order to maximise the productivity that can be obtained from them.

I do not care if the tax funded reseearch proves the link between cheap alcohol and it’s abuse. In the same way you are free to be offended, you are free to abuse yourself, and then take the consequenses of that action. Limiting everyones freedom needlessly to account for the actions of a minority is wrong.

To follow the logic of these self appointed betters we should ration alcohol. It would be fairer, limiting every person regardless of income to a specific amount. It would be interesting to see their reaction when told they cannot buy another bottle of bordeaux regardless of how much they are willing to pay…

Anyway, in the interest of a balanced opinion. If you or someone near you needs help then a good place to start

On the other hand, if as an adult you feel able to take responsibility for your own actions, may I recommend

OK, I’ll bite. Europe.

So, Davey Boy went to Europe with Angela and Nikolas to try and thrash out a way of supporting a single currency in order for olive farmers in Greece to be able to continue to borrow money in France to by Mercedes with.

Essentially the story now boils down to this.

Lots of governments lied about how much they borrowed to bribe their electorate with in order to join the euro as it allowed them to be compared with the low risk sovereign policies of Germany, this in turn allowed them to get lower interest rates on their borrowing so they could borrow more to bribe their electorates.. With me so far?

The euro was set up with a European central bank that couldn’t act as a central bank as it was specifically and legally set up unable to bail out sovereign debt in order to discourage irresponsible sovereign spending. Which as it turns out, still happened…

So what happened then?

First of all they ignored the legal bars and used the ECB to bail out sovereign debt.

Then the EU (remember them? – the one who can’t get their accounts signed off since the 1990’s due to corruption and incompetence?) Decided rather than issue Eurobonds, in effect guaranteeing each other’s borrowing, or funding the ECB properly to allow it to act as lender of last resort that they would try for a new treaty to get funding from all 27 EU members to prop up the ideological currency of 17 of them.

Germany refused to allow the ECB to borrow as they have a cultural aversion to bank leveraging
France refuses to allow the EU to slash its spending as it might be forced to examine the Common Agricultural policy
But they got together and thought, well those nasty bankers in London caused it all, let’s tax them to pay for it…

Except in this instance they’re wrong.
Banks did not cause the Euro problem. Governments spending more than they should did. In an exercise in basic maths that any 7 year old could explain eventually you cannot spend more than you have coming in. The UK is going through the painful process of adjusting its fiscal reality, and so will the rest of them.

I’m willing to bet the banking “Tobin” tax is never mentioned again now it would only effect the “Euro plus” bloc. It was a blatant land grab on an Industry located mainly in the UK. Why not tax luxury car manufacture? Or redirect the CAP payments? Maybe because that would affect their voters.

I would love to think Dave avoided signing the proposed treaty as he really was standing up for the UK (it really is the UK as well, finance is not limited to London, Edinburgh has significant operations in it as well). I suspect though it had more to do with the problem of a new treaty requiring a referendum. You know, the one they are so sure they would lose they can’t afford to have? So in order to keep doing things they are convinced the public do not want they must avoid at all costs?

After all, we can’t allow you the public to decide how they spend your money can we?

No, not Gadaffi, who was outlived by Lockerbie Bomber Al-Magrahi who was given 3 month to live and is still going after best part of 2 years…
Who saw that coming? Certainly not Gadaffi! (Or some jock quack either come to that…)

Anyway back to the point…Europe. Or rather the back bench debate in Parliament triggered by a petition on the government website to hold a referendum on the nature of our membership in Europe.

Finally something all the parties can agree on, or rather the leaders can. They have agreed that the electorate are not fit to be trusted with deciding for ourselves.

They all claim this is not the time to leave Europe blah blah… but that is not what the debate is about. The debate is simply and specifically whether there should be a referendum. It makes no presumption on the result of the referendum. It calls for the electorate, (remember them? the people who pay for all this?) to be allowed to choose the direction that this all-encompassing political relationship should take. It could even be argued that a vote to remain in Europe would strengthen the negotiating position of any UK delegation at Brussels.

Instead of which, the political elite have already decided that a referendum equates to a decision to leave the EU as it stands. Which makes this even worse. If, as they presume, the electorate are against our EU membership, then they are deliberately acting against the will of the electorate.

Essentially, they have decided the answer already. We must maintain our membership of the EU experiment, and continue to pay for the folly of others. Even if it means preventing any democratic debate, vote or decision possible.

So not only are they trying to prevent the electorate deciding for themselves, they are stating they know what we would say and they don’t like the answer so the reason they are preventing the referendum is to actually avoid having to listen to that answer.

Still think we’re free?..

Read yesterday that salty old sea dog and ex-First Sea Lord (1SL) Admiral West, Baron of Spithead, has sailed into choppy waters again by transmitting before checking the signal.

Now elevated to a labour life peer West was one of three authors commissioned to write a report for Labour on defence procurement.

Apparently his lofty perch has transformed him into a strident opponent of cuts to the armed forces however

…the former first sea lord said the UK was still a first-rate military power, “not like bloody Denmark or Belgium”. These countries were, he explained, “second-tier powers.”

Really? A first rate military power? I would suggest that one measure of whether a country can claim to be a first rate military power is the ability to act unilaterally when called upon to. (For those that claim that the age of acting alone is past, look at the support the UK received in 1982 from our NATO partners.)

The ability to act alone ensures you are not dependant on other nations to provide support or mutual defence. It is the rationale behind an independent nuclear deterrent that Admiral West has supported for his entire career.

For a Navy to be truly independant it must be able to maintain a combat air patrol. This requires 2 things. Carriers and Carrier Aircraft. Even countries such as Thailand and India who are so destitute we have to send international aid to can manage to deploy these.

Unfortunately the Sea Harrier, which had proven its capabilities in the Falklands, Kosovo, and numerous other conflicts was retired in 2006 before a replacement was even close to being ready. Without these aircraft there was little point to maintaining a Carrier fleet.

Care to guess who was 1SL between 2002 and 2006 when the decision was made to reduce the RN to a coastal defence force reliant on the RAF and other nations airfields?

Yep, you guessed it Gordon Brown favourite sailor Admiral West.

Want to know where his loyalties really lay?

In 2007 he was security minister, and adviser to Gordon Brown, he admitted in an interview that he was not totally convinced to the need to extend detention without charge to 42 days. Within 2 hours after a meeting with Gordon Brown he had reversed his opinion. “Being a simple sailor, not a politician, maybe I didn’t choose my words well,” he said of the U-turn.

Somewhat embarrassing as West was the minister charged with navigating the controversial legislation through the House of Lords.

And I thought integrity was a vital quality in a Royal Naval Officer.

If the Royal Navy, the bastion of this nations security for over 500 years has been reduced to that of a second tier nation, then Admiral West has figured largely in it due to the irreparable damage he wrought on his watch.

“Simple sailor” my short fat hairy arse. More like political climber who sold his soul and his service for a peerage and Gordon Browns approval.

Following the local Gazette newspapers new crusade to expose the corruption and piss taking by local MP Stuart Bell, (I know he’s got a knighthood I just cannot bring myself to use it) I though I would have a look at his website, and very telling it is to…

http://www.stuartbellmp.org is very slick, and so it should be, it cost the taxpayer enough to set up and was designed by Price Associates a top notch media company. nothing wrong there, but given that he is an MP for a town with the cutting edge University facilities for internet and digital media courses and associated local economy – you’d think he’d maybe want to support  the local economy a bit by putting some of those £5000 per week taxes he’s costing us back in it?

So what does the ever elusive Bell spend his media allowance on?

Well the first page on the menu describes parliament. A nice filler I guess, thats about it though.

Next comes the Biography, mainly about how well he did in his beloved France etc, membership of a union and so on. How he wrote a work for the Fabians entitled “how to abolish the house of Lords”. It it truly amazing the damascene conversion that takes place when troughing entitlement monkeys like him are able to get a piece of the pie. For someone who once wrote how to abolish the mainstay of the peerage system he didn’t put up much of a fight when a knighthood came calling! I’m also willing to bet that should a peerage become available he doesn’t refuse…also for a member of a party that is vocally opposed to hereditary patronage, elitism etc. he maintains membership of a 16th century once all male club, The Beefsteak Club (the only labour member apparently)

Possibly my favourite statement is in describing Middlesbrough

“Unemployment remains low, aspiration among young people is higher”

Which is odd. Given that the ONS statistics in the 3 months to June this year show Boro as the 4th worst place for unemployment in the country. It had 9.1% unemployment.  Perhaps this doddery old fart of an expenses pit is just a bit slack updating the website? Think again. the situation was even worse last year. In November 2010 Boro was THE worst place for unemployment. Just how big a self serving prick do you have to be to then write on your website “Unemployment is low”? Why not just walk round to some unemployed persons house and piss on the carpet whilst you’re at it? Then wipe your shoes with an expenses claim form and wander off laughing.

Don’t believe me? The below is a screen shot from the 11 Sep 2011, a week after this all kicked off. You’d think a competent person would at least check their own website given the degree of exposure they are receiving? Or is it just another example of the contempt he displays for the little people?

Lastly for now, and probably most damning, is the advertising of his “literary” works on an MPs website paid for by you the taxpayer. Apparently you pay for a website to help him supplement his meagre £65,000 wages (and £35,000 he pays his wife on expenses to be an office manager for an office that does not exist) by selling his books. Not only does he profit as author, but also as publisher since he a registered shareholder of SpenView Ltd, a private holding company which owns the shares of SpenView Communications Ltd and SpenView Publications Ltd

So is it legal to use a taxpayer funded .org website set up for MPs communications (Dawkins knows he does little enough of it) with the electorate to sell your own books written whilst being paid to be an MP? I suspect there is some weasely loop hole that he would escape through, but gut feeling? Corrupt self serving bastard.

Categories