In a slight twist to the US 'War on Terror' David Cameron has said recently, that he has identified the goings on in Iraq as having the potential to threaten us here in the UK.
He seems to mean that the people currently beheading and murdering their way around the Middle East may decide they don't like us and attack the West, including Britain. This makes me wonder if he saw the attacks on New York on the news. It was a while ago now, perhaps he has forgotten.
Then there have been the odd hopeless attempts to blow people and stuff up here. And the fact that so many of the nutters in this organisation called Islamic State (although that may have changed again by now) are from Britain.
Our country is in danger and has been for some time, from an ideology (not a specific, regional organisation) and that ideology is a branch of Islam. It is a totalitarian order in the mould of the Nazis and Soviet Russia, which is perhaps why it has the backing of the Left here in Britain.
If Cameron or any of the lightweights masquerading as politicians these days, actually wanted to protect this country they would recognise the truth in this and identify, openly the real enemy. Then start dealing with it here, by getting rid of those who live here, but claim to hate us.
We should also stand up for ourselves against the childish rantings of the Left. Their support for the rise in anti-semitism is akin to the early days of Hitler and is being used by the Left to achieve the same things. By acting like nice guys we are letting thugs, murderers and their political acolytes rage around us. We cannot wait until it is too late.
Why exactly the Left think they can use Muslims to help overthrow Western capitalism and then step in to run things as a totalitarian state themselves, I have no idea. Thinking as they do suggests they are thick and/or evil, but do they really think the totalitarian theology will stand aside for them? They hate you too, you idiots!
Tuesday, 19 August 2014
Thursday, 22 May 2014
Elections
Today, in mock signatures we put an 'X' in a box and then put our folded, hidden answers in a box. In the Polling station I attended this morning, the distant observer, with an idea of the order of the candidates would have no problem knowing who you voted for. Obscured the non-booths most surely were not. There are legal requirements around the running of elections, but in today's world of bureaucracies and politics, who 'in authority' need feel constrained by law?
But who will these people, trekking in rain to 'have their say' vote for? This left over of times when the liberty of the individual and the the sanctity of the Englishman in his freedom, is strangely at odds with the rest of our experience. Enormous effort is made to coerce us to vote according the the whims of those who know best, with the BBC and a chorus of other media outlets not just singing the praises of half-wits, but also screaming abuse at the usurper.
You see politics has settled into a cosy career, where as a politician you pretty much don't do anything, but strut around in the certainty of your importance and seek ways to enrich yourself. It is difficult to get caught out on anything of substance because you will espouse no policies, your party will contain no great thinkers. Ironically it will be stupendously easy to catch you on detail, as you won't have the faintest idea about your 'brief'.
Then up pops a party who generally have a list of policies that are supported by a very large section of the community (and certainly the forgotten class; the wage earning British person). I speak of course of UKIP. Now UKIP are seen as being like a bad smell to the career political elite, like the mediaeval poor who offended the rich by their very presence. UKIP don't have the manners of the Westminster bubble, donchaknow?
The politicians, to continue their work avoidance suggest that the attitudes of the people (the hoi polloi) is evidence of a need for education. The poor lambs don't understand in the way the elite does, so it either needs to be explained to them until they are compliant or the option to have a say be removed. They are such a hindrance to progress!
The idea that the elite might be wrong, in error, not just doesn't occur to them, the mere thought would fill them with horror. It could never be so, they would aver, because they know best and always have your best interests at heart (like when Blair increased his police escort and required traffic lights to change in his favour, it was for you. When an MP makes a fortune selling a second home you paid the mortgage on, it is for you).
So, UKIP have attracted ire from all across the spectrum of political entrenchment. They are racist, they will destroy Britain, they will cause riots on the streets (rivers of blood anyone?). None of it is true and the vitriol is extreme and so severe that you just know the fate of Britain or your welfare is not behind it. In fact you are being attacked just as strongly, because so many it seems will vote UKIP.
This is because we have been misled, they say. No it isn't. We have been misled on many things from the NHS to the police, from taxation to the Global Warming scam. But UKIP have one very useful talent; they scare these complacent, money wasting parasites to death.
But who will these people, trekking in rain to 'have their say' vote for? This left over of times when the liberty of the individual and the the sanctity of the Englishman in his freedom, is strangely at odds with the rest of our experience. Enormous effort is made to coerce us to vote according the the whims of those who know best, with the BBC and a chorus of other media outlets not just singing the praises of half-wits, but also screaming abuse at the usurper.
You see politics has settled into a cosy career, where as a politician you pretty much don't do anything, but strut around in the certainty of your importance and seek ways to enrich yourself. It is difficult to get caught out on anything of substance because you will espouse no policies, your party will contain no great thinkers. Ironically it will be stupendously easy to catch you on detail, as you won't have the faintest idea about your 'brief'.
Then up pops a party who generally have a list of policies that are supported by a very large section of the community (and certainly the forgotten class; the wage earning British person). I speak of course of UKIP. Now UKIP are seen as being like a bad smell to the career political elite, like the mediaeval poor who offended the rich by their very presence. UKIP don't have the manners of the Westminster bubble, donchaknow?
The politicians, to continue their work avoidance suggest that the attitudes of the people (the hoi polloi) is evidence of a need for education. The poor lambs don't understand in the way the elite does, so it either needs to be explained to them until they are compliant or the option to have a say be removed. They are such a hindrance to progress!
The idea that the elite might be wrong, in error, not just doesn't occur to them, the mere thought would fill them with horror. It could never be so, they would aver, because they know best and always have your best interests at heart (like when Blair increased his police escort and required traffic lights to change in his favour, it was for you. When an MP makes a fortune selling a second home you paid the mortgage on, it is for you).
So, UKIP have attracted ire from all across the spectrum of political entrenchment. They are racist, they will destroy Britain, they will cause riots on the streets (rivers of blood anyone?). None of it is true and the vitriol is extreme and so severe that you just know the fate of Britain or your welfare is not behind it. In fact you are being attacked just as strongly, because so many it seems will vote UKIP.
This is because we have been misled, they say. No it isn't. We have been misled on many things from the NHS to the police, from taxation to the Global Warming scam. But UKIP have one very useful talent; they scare these complacent, money wasting parasites to death.
Thursday, 1 May 2014
Independent Police Complaints Commission
Just a quick question. Why is it that in the latest iteration of the IPCC website it is much more difficult to find reports on police shootings and information in general? Just wondering.
Do You Dream Of Diesel?
After insisting that we use diesel in our cars to save the planet, we now hear that it is killing 7,000 people a year. Apart from the fact that everything an 'expert' says these days needs to be viewed with extreme caution, it seems that once again the Left make a mess of a pet scheme.
We removed lead from petrol because of a panic over it causing children to become less brainy. It wasn't having that effect, it was a panic. We stopped using DDT and allowed malaria to carrying on killing millions because some daft bat felt DDT was probably doing harm. Rachel Carson doesn't appear in our league of dangerous people who doomed millions, but she did with her idiotic book 'Silent Spring', that Leftie Hippies loved.
I suppose that when ideology has that firm a grip on you and you are extremely unlikely to suffer from the consequences of your actions, then the deaths of those millions wouldn't concern you, as a tree-hugging, planet-saving moron.
Governments aren't completely stupid though and no matter what we think of how deeply dippy it is to fall for the Global Warming scam, governments have not missed the opportunity nor been slow to act in raising taxes. No one worries about a few extra quid when you are paying to save the planet, surely? If you think that way, you may want to cut down on the number of Superman films you are watching.
Interesting, is it not that the much-better-for-us diesel, which also provides better mpg, is that bit more expensive than petrol. And then it kills you. Or might do. Personally, I always found the entreaties to use diesel, or worse take the bus as ridiculous every time my car disappeared in a cloud of smoke belched from the diesel engine of a bus.
On the subject of buses (this rant is now wandering all over the place!), I was brought up to pity the poor passengers with their uncomfortable and long journey to cover short distances, and the timetable of the bus company and the poor driver repeatedly stopping and then trying to rejoin traffic, and I let them out. Now, with their fascistic, under-used 'bus lanes' I think 'stuff 'em', they are on their own.And so does the State, little by little become the enemy of the people not their servant.
Although the poorly researched, clearly incorrect and of propaganda purpose only, film 'An Inconvenient Truth' was forced on schools, if ever a text book existed that was of great use to schools in preparing their charges for the world of Al Gore & co., then it is 'Scared to Death', by Booker and North. Don't read it though to be given a view, but to challenge yourself to find out more, follow up references, be critical and find out the substance of why it is suitable for even schoolchildren.
In other words, treat it in exactly the way that Al Gore and all the Global Warming liars do not want you to do regarding their output. The science is settled, there must be no debate, no more research!
We removed lead from petrol because of a panic over it causing children to become less brainy. It wasn't having that effect, it was a panic. We stopped using DDT and allowed malaria to carrying on killing millions because some daft bat felt DDT was probably doing harm. Rachel Carson doesn't appear in our league of dangerous people who doomed millions, but she did with her idiotic book 'Silent Spring', that Leftie Hippies loved.
I suppose that when ideology has that firm a grip on you and you are extremely unlikely to suffer from the consequences of your actions, then the deaths of those millions wouldn't concern you, as a tree-hugging, planet-saving moron.
Governments aren't completely stupid though and no matter what we think of how deeply dippy it is to fall for the Global Warming scam, governments have not missed the opportunity nor been slow to act in raising taxes. No one worries about a few extra quid when you are paying to save the planet, surely? If you think that way, you may want to cut down on the number of Superman films you are watching.
Interesting, is it not that the much-better-for-us diesel, which also provides better mpg, is that bit more expensive than petrol. And then it kills you. Or might do. Personally, I always found the entreaties to use diesel, or worse take the bus as ridiculous every time my car disappeared in a cloud of smoke belched from the diesel engine of a bus.
On the subject of buses (this rant is now wandering all over the place!), I was brought up to pity the poor passengers with their uncomfortable and long journey to cover short distances, and the timetable of the bus company and the poor driver repeatedly stopping and then trying to rejoin traffic, and I let them out. Now, with their fascistic, under-used 'bus lanes' I think 'stuff 'em', they are on their own.And so does the State, little by little become the enemy of the people not their servant.
Although the poorly researched, clearly incorrect and of propaganda purpose only, film 'An Inconvenient Truth' was forced on schools, if ever a text book existed that was of great use to schools in preparing their charges for the world of Al Gore & co., then it is 'Scared to Death', by Booker and North. Don't read it though to be given a view, but to challenge yourself to find out more, follow up references, be critical and find out the substance of why it is suitable for even schoolchildren.
In other words, treat it in exactly the way that Al Gore and all the Global Warming liars do not want you to do regarding their output. The science is settled, there must be no debate, no more research!
Tuesday, 22 April 2014
Well, Here We Are
Welcome all those sharing my existence, by which I don't mean reading this blog, but in fact just being alive at the same time. What is consciousness is a big question, but let's not do that just now and agree for now that it is 'not being asleep'.
So the primroses have given way to a massive bloom of bluebells in the woods and the warmer days see a good scattering of butterflies. Can it be true that warmer weather beckons? As the days grow longer, the trees green over and the Sun becomes stronger, I usually say, on the dog walk that 'soon we will be doing this in T shirts'. (It is more depressing when it turns to 'not so long ago we were doing this in T shirts').
Optimism and taking joy in the simple fact of a summers day are wonderful things and stave off the depression of greed and never having enough. We see this from the benefits claimant who thinks of themselves as a victim because they cannot afford the latest trainers or TV and in the mega rich who are searching for something that apparently money can't buy, but their ability to dodge needing an education (in life, but often it seems, at all) has left them ill equipped to identify what that might be.
David Moyes is no longer Manager of Manchester United which spurs many thoughts. Should he have been given the summer to reorganise the team and to hell with this season? Was it just too much for him and if so was he 'set up' by Ferguson to fail, to show even more clearly what a great Manager he was? Did Ferguson choose his moment with precision, even if he meant no harm to his replacement, as the team was becoming staffed with mediocre talent?
In the last game, against Everton Fletcher was probably Man U's best player, which is a terrible place to be as he is usually someone you can rely on to be useless. The defence is disorganised and was under Ferguson, the 'strike force' non existent. And the continued over-rating of Rooney continues. At the weekend he was less a £300,000 a week player and more £25,000. A year.
Usually, getting rid of the Manager is to increase the productivity on the pitch, but here it needs to be the start of a wholesale clear out. But can they afford what needs to be done?
So the primroses have given way to a massive bloom of bluebells in the woods and the warmer days see a good scattering of butterflies. Can it be true that warmer weather beckons? As the days grow longer, the trees green over and the Sun becomes stronger, I usually say, on the dog walk that 'soon we will be doing this in T shirts'. (It is more depressing when it turns to 'not so long ago we were doing this in T shirts').
Optimism and taking joy in the simple fact of a summers day are wonderful things and stave off the depression of greed and never having enough. We see this from the benefits claimant who thinks of themselves as a victim because they cannot afford the latest trainers or TV and in the mega rich who are searching for something that apparently money can't buy, but their ability to dodge needing an education (in life, but often it seems, at all) has left them ill equipped to identify what that might be.
David Moyes is no longer Manager of Manchester United which spurs many thoughts. Should he have been given the summer to reorganise the team and to hell with this season? Was it just too much for him and if so was he 'set up' by Ferguson to fail, to show even more clearly what a great Manager he was? Did Ferguson choose his moment with precision, even if he meant no harm to his replacement, as the team was becoming staffed with mediocre talent?
In the last game, against Everton Fletcher was probably Man U's best player, which is a terrible place to be as he is usually someone you can rely on to be useless. The defence is disorganised and was under Ferguson, the 'strike force' non existent. And the continued over-rating of Rooney continues. At the weekend he was less a £300,000 a week player and more £25,000. A year.
Usually, getting rid of the Manager is to increase the productivity on the pitch, but here it needs to be the start of a wholesale clear out. But can they afford what needs to be done?
Tuesday, 1 April 2014
BBC: No Point Complaining
To support the lies of the anti-capitalists pushing the Global Warming scam, the BBC has gone into overdrive with its propaganda. Now, whilst in a sane world this would attract a sustainable complaint, it is not the worst of it.
Last night the BBC wheeled on Roger Harrabin to talk about Global Warming. He said the glaciers in the Himalayas are melting (we dealt with that ages ago- isn't happening), the Arctic melting (he means in the summer, not mentioning it comes back in the winter) and other tired lines.
The problem is though, the BBC omitted to mention that their employee, given this airtime, has a vested interest in the continuation of the Global Warming theme. He has a financial interest. He is involved with Green projects from which he personally benefits.
The BBC feels that it is so morally superior that anything is justified. What is actually the case is that the stench of corruption is so prevalent, that they can't smell a new arrival.
Last night the BBC wheeled on Roger Harrabin to talk about Global Warming. He said the glaciers in the Himalayas are melting (we dealt with that ages ago- isn't happening), the Arctic melting (he means in the summer, not mentioning it comes back in the winter) and other tired lines.
The problem is though, the BBC omitted to mention that their employee, given this airtime, has a vested interest in the continuation of the Global Warming theme. He has a financial interest. He is involved with Green projects from which he personally benefits.
The BBC feels that it is so morally superior that anything is justified. What is actually the case is that the stench of corruption is so prevalent, that they can't smell a new arrival.
Expert, Textpert, Choking Smokers
Are there any honest scientists around these days? Any who got into science for the science and the thrill of discovery? Because the airwaves are constantly referring to 'experts' pontificating about something or other and they are usually more interested in their involvement than its veracity of accuracy.
Today, strangely soon after 5 a day was questioned due to the new hatred for sugar, we are told that 5 a day is not enough. No, to hell with the sugar, you need 7 portions a day of fruit and vegetables. Now I don't know about you, but I would expect this to be science based and tell us something important and provable.
I would expect that the science would show how our bodies interact with the food we eat and helps to prolong our lives. But nope, we still don't really understand that so it is a survey. Wonderful 'experts' have told us that they have found that people who live longer eat lots of fruit and vegetables. Were other aspects of their lifestyle factored out?
In fact, how do they know that the food they ate was a causative factor in their long life? What about genetics, exercise, wealth?
Then we have the wailing banshees of Global Warming. I cannot believe, actually, really cannot believe the news stories that reported the latest IPCC comedy script. How could anyone say, with a straight face that Global Warming has been worse than we feared, when there hasn't been any for 17 years?
Why are we even listening to people who a) can't explain why they didn't predict the lack of warming and b) can't explain how the supposed Global Warming actually occurs? Anyway, the rise in temperature over the last 150 years has been 0.7 degrees. This is not only insignificant and irrelevant, we also have no idea how out of kilter that is with historic climate variations.
What we do know is that it has been warmer and colder before without our CO2 having any input and that as we continue to pump out CO2 the temperature hasn't risen. Sure, anti-capitalist, AGW alarmists and even some people who support them and are scientists as well, have come up with some catch-all, speculative comments to explain away everything they get wrong, but generally they don't want to talk about it.
There is proof that CO2 isn't warming the globe, but none to say it does. All of the posing by the IPCC led by a railway engineer, doesn't change the fact that the only story they have is, there has been some overall warming and at the same time we have produced more CO2, so they must be linked.
Or maybe it was because Charles Dickens wrote some books, in that time window and reading them causes Global Warming. Really, that is no wilder than what we are asked to believe by the alarmists. Why otherwise would the latest IPCC report say Global Warming, even in the weird world they inhabit is less than we thought and the summary says 'we're doomed, doomed I tell you'.
Is it because the summary is for 'policymakers' so it is the bit that has to contain the con?
Today, strangely soon after 5 a day was questioned due to the new hatred for sugar, we are told that 5 a day is not enough. No, to hell with the sugar, you need 7 portions a day of fruit and vegetables. Now I don't know about you, but I would expect this to be science based and tell us something important and provable.
I would expect that the science would show how our bodies interact with the food we eat and helps to prolong our lives. But nope, we still don't really understand that so it is a survey. Wonderful 'experts' have told us that they have found that people who live longer eat lots of fruit and vegetables. Were other aspects of their lifestyle factored out?
In fact, how do they know that the food they ate was a causative factor in their long life? What about genetics, exercise, wealth?
Then we have the wailing banshees of Global Warming. I cannot believe, actually, really cannot believe the news stories that reported the latest IPCC comedy script. How could anyone say, with a straight face that Global Warming has been worse than we feared, when there hasn't been any for 17 years?
Why are we even listening to people who a) can't explain why they didn't predict the lack of warming and b) can't explain how the supposed Global Warming actually occurs? Anyway, the rise in temperature over the last 150 years has been 0.7 degrees. This is not only insignificant and irrelevant, we also have no idea how out of kilter that is with historic climate variations.
What we do know is that it has been warmer and colder before without our CO2 having any input and that as we continue to pump out CO2 the temperature hasn't risen. Sure, anti-capitalist, AGW alarmists and even some people who support them and are scientists as well, have come up with some catch-all, speculative comments to explain away everything they get wrong, but generally they don't want to talk about it.
There is proof that CO2 isn't warming the globe, but none to say it does. All of the posing by the IPCC led by a railway engineer, doesn't change the fact that the only story they have is, there has been some overall warming and at the same time we have produced more CO2, so they must be linked.
Or maybe it was because Charles Dickens wrote some books, in that time window and reading them causes Global Warming. Really, that is no wilder than what we are asked to believe by the alarmists. Why otherwise would the latest IPCC report say Global Warming, even in the weird world they inhabit is less than we thought and the summary says 'we're doomed, doomed I tell you'.
Is it because the summary is for 'policymakers' so it is the bit that has to contain the con?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)