Drug reclassification. A problem for our puritanical politicians.
This looks quite interesting. A committee of MPs have recommended a total revamp of our way of classifying drugs. Read more
here.
Interesting that tobacco and alcohol are high up there on the list. With all the changes taking place with smoking and drinking is it possible that there will be radical changes made? I can't quite see them being at the stage where they will ban either of those. But why make it a criminal offence to use ecstasy when both tobacco and alcohol score much higher in the harm stakes?
Of course the argument could be that making ecstasy, or similar, legal would lead to changes in their positions on the table. That may have a case but then the same case would undoubtedly stand for classifying alcohol and tobacco as it would reduce their harm. So, if it is about reducing harm they can't have it both ways. It's discrepancies like these that make people ignore the laws because they are based on our politicians views and not hard facts. As in alcohol equates to a class A drug but is not one and ecstasy is a class A drug but is a lot less harmful. Nearly everyone drinks in moderation so they equate it to their own experiences and think 'Screw them'. And who can blame them.
My view is that we should declassify all drugs. Let's treat them like commodities and make sure they are to a good standard and we get a tax input from them. Knowing our government and it's love of taxes the street price for most will probably rise.
A good idea, surprisingly from politicians, and needed doing before now. Bit of a problem for them though with alcohol and tobacco being so high up the table.
Interesting choice of analogy.
Just a thought. Read Blair's comments
here.
And on a totally unrelated subject did we ever get to the bottom of what hold Blunkett and Prescott have over Blair?
Well when we meant open we really meant...
Seems that they are looking at changes to the Freedom of Information Act so that expensive enquiries can be rejected. Seems too many people have been finding out about too many secrets and that has to be stopped. They are looking at introducing charges for the requests as well. Read more
here.
Of course the mere fact we are already paying for these clowns is an irrelevance or that there should be anything that is difficult about gathering together some information. If the information exists then collecting it and supplying it can't be too difficult. If it doesn't exist then say so.
In my view, and I've said it
before, everything that our government does should be available on the web. Bar of course a genuine exception on national security grounds such as names of spies, missile targets and similar. Decided by an independent party not our masters. The costs for this would be minimal. The systems are already there and then there wouldn't be any requests, expensive or otherwise as people could happily trawl to their hearts content.
As it is this change will only be to cover up things like how much the taxpayers pays for Blair's holiday costs and Prescott's council tax payments as, in a government that can't
balance it's own books, it would clearly be too difficult for our government clowns to work either of those out.
Oh the conceit of our wonderful leaders.
Yet again I am amazed at the conceit of our Leaders. In this article where Jack Straw is criticising the way the UK is dealing with the affair in the Middle East. Not the one we started the other one with Israel and Lebanon.
There is a statement there where Tony Blair's spokesman says the PM wants to retain influence as he concentrates on solving the problems in Lebanon.
How absolutely wonderful. What planet is he living on? He has not successfully brokered peace in Northern Ireland, he has not successfully done anything in Afghanistan and Iraq. He is making threatening noises towards Iran and Syria. Yet he wants to concentrate on solving the problems in Lebanon. Obviously Bush will give him a pat on the head for implying that the West is looking at doing something but solving the problem may be a teensy weensy bit out of Blair's reach.
Although it does now sound like more of the Labour party are evolving a backbone. Must be the radiation from the papers on Nuclear Weapons and Nuclear Reactors. Read more
here. I'm also getting a different feeling from Jack Straw since he was replaced at the FCO. Maybe I will reconsider having him tried for war crimes and executed when I take over the country. It seems to have made Blair change his tune on the
conflict, although they did say give it a week or so and that is now up. So it could be the time is right according to Bush's plan.
Disproportionate response. A tool of retribution.
Thinking about disproportionate response made me think we need more of it not less.
If we had disproportionate response here then we wouldn't see as many criminals. The crime would not be worth the risk. Here of course we are civilised so if someone stabs you and trashes your house they get a small fine and a small sentence. If it was a large fine and a really large sentence then it would make others think twice. Unfortunately our society does not believe in that. So we wonder why we have a high crime rate and our kids are uncontrollable.
I want criminals to be fearful of their actions and thus make a conscious decision not to do the crime. At the moment doing the time is so inconsequential that doing the crime becomes more attractive.
How about 1st crime you get your sentence. Mugging = 3 years or something. No parole. 20% off for a guilty plea, if the evidence is not overwhelming. Next offence is burglary, base sentence is 5 years so punishment is 5 x 2 as it's your second offence = 10 years and so on. That way after a couple of crimes persistent offenders would be away for a while a people that steal a chocolate bar will not get life as chocolate bar = 6 months or so.
I wouldn't think we would even have to build new jails. As the first lot go in the rest would be considering other options like real work.
A new source of revenue to take the heat from the motorist.
Boy did I laugh when I came across this today. One of the cyclists in work was talking about it and pointed it out to me.
It seems that cyclists are jumping red lights and cycling on pavements. No! I don't believe it. And Red Ken, our London mayor, has plans to stop that on his patch. As usual, as Ken is a Labour politician, it seems to revolve around registration of the vehicles. Read more
here.
Could it be that Ken sees a way to make more money in his congestion zones now that bikes seem to be taking over from cars? Is his income less than expected?
Never mind. He sees a way to increase revenue. Stage one registration. It's for the children. One may get run over by a cyclist on the pavement or running a red light. If it saves only one it will be worthwhile. How many millions will it cost to fund the registration database? How long before each vehicle needs a license to ride? Am I being cynical. Of course I am. Silly me.
I can just see a whole government industry growing up. Registration, riding tests, licensing, cycle police, MOT tests. SORN for the winter months. Why should they be any different from motor bikes?
I've seen pedestrians walking across roads like they owned the place. Oh wait! They do. They, and cyclists (yet), are not charged for the roads that others have paid for. They are not licensed or subject to usage fees. Wait till they need to have these ID cards stuck on their foreheads so
Mad Red Ken can identify them on CCTV and charge them for the privilege of being in his city.
I for one am laughing my socks off at this. Now is the time to buy your bikes. You will be able to sell them on the black market to terrorists in ten years. Everything you do outside the laws strict parameters seems to fund terrorists.
My cyclist friend is not amused. He used to shoot pistols and knows only too well what our useless government does once things are registered.
From my viewpoint I think we should go for it. Everybody seems to support things that curtail what I want to do. So screw 'em. Let the greenies see what it is like to be persecuted because of a lifestyle choice. I for one can't wait.
Spot the difference.
Scenario
One : A three year old girl disappears. The police make a decision to treat the case as a kidnap. They catch the guy and he gets jail time.
Scenario
Two : A man is shot eight times in a crowded tube station. CCTV covers the area. There are several police men witnessing the attack plus at least a dozen members of the public. Forensics are able to identify the weapon used and who pulled the trigger. Several of those involved have perjured themselves to cover up. There is no doubt what happened at any stage in the event.
Which one do we feel comfortable making any officers face a misconduct panel? Which one is likely to lead to police officers getting a reprimand which impacts on their career?
Drug education.
Seems that we should be teaching our kids more about the dangers of drugs in schools. Read more
here.
Now maybe it is just me but I'm sure that when I was a lad we didn't have sex education or drugs education but we were taught how to read, write and do sums. Now we spend so much time preparing our kids for failure, teaching them things that have little use in the real world and failing to teach them the minimum they really need.
We should spend the younger years teaching them basics and until they have an understanding of that they continue with those basics. Once they have mastered that then they could move on to the PC and government inspired stages. Not that they should of course.
No one should leave school in this day and age not being able to read, write or do basic maths. No one. How soon before we have a whole generation that is bared literate. Just fodder for the educated few's factories on minimum wage.
You have just got to laugh.
Read
this and then wonder exactly when computers will ever replace humans.
Assumption is the mother of all f^Â& ups. These guys assumed a lot.
I'm in the process of remortgaging.
Just looking at moving to a new provider and reducing my costs. Seems that renegotiation every few years reduces your payments. I thought I'd have a go and it sure looks that way as I'm going to be £80 pm better off.
Of course my first hurdle is that I now need to supply my passport for ID. Why? Seems it's a government requirement to stop money laundering or something. What? How does it do that? The agents don't know but no ID means no deal. I'm going to save about £80 a month so I'm forced to do something. So I tell them I don't have a passport. Seems a KGB style Driving License is just as good. Just having my passport renewed I don't want to lose it and all the associated trauma. If I lose my driving license I'll just do without until I need to produce it then I'll act surprised and say I've just lost it and apply for a new one. What they are going to do if the ID cards replace passports and driving licenses? In the future I won't be able to get my allocation of air or use buses or trains till my ID card is back. What a country we live in. I know it's trivial but it is one of many straws that are breaking my back.
Anyway it seems that just changing your mortgage provider takes about six weeks. What with all the legislation on money laundering and the hoops everyone goes through. I suppose I'm lucky in a way. I don't have to go through the potential trauma of being gazumpted.
If only this had a chance of bringing justice.
It appears that the High Court has overturned a decision that stopped a full public inquiry into why the UK entered the Iraqi conflict with the US. Read more
here. A good decision by people our government wants to put on a leash.
Unfortunately, by the time this goes through and the results come out it will be more of a case of 'We made a mistake and
with hindsight we could have done better. No one to blame and
no evidence of any pressure being brought to bear on the run up to war. However, here are a few changes that would ensure that mistakes like this don't happen again.' My emphasis. Then Tony will make a speech about 'Hindsight and changes need to be made and how he supports these changes'. B4$^&rd.
Blair will be long gone and does anybody really thing anything will happen to him? Everyone will talk about how it will never happen again and how our democracy has been perverted by the will of one man. On the plus side he did not go into bat with someone that would whup our asses unlike other charismatic leaders in the past. Is that a sign of a common bully?
So little chance of justice. Blair will not have his speaking career shortened by a visit to the Hague. Not until he meets an Iraqi with a long gun and a grudge. Hopefully though the enquiry will force a change to stop this happening again. Best we can hope for.
Another milestone.
My daughter turned 18 today. Another milestone in the travel through life.
Seeing her and all her friends makes me think it wasn't that long ago she was the one in nappies and being driven around. Well OK, only the nappies have changed. They are now on someone else.
Happy Birthday. Now got to go and tidy up after her barbecue tea. Excellent weather for it too.
Disproportionate response. That's what we actually need.
What exactly does disproportionate response mean? Does it mean that a country of 6.5M people has to kill just one enemy for every one of it's citizens killed. That means an investment of 6.5M people from a Arab population of 200M we can finally annihilate Israel.
Now I don't believe in certain excesses but in this particular case I don't see any option. Hell, even the bad guys are going to agree the proportion of Arabs that an Israeli equates to. They have two to release and expect hundreds of Arabs to be released in exchange. Surely that can define the level of attrition that is acceptable.
I don't see Israel having an alternative to what is going on now. The way I see it is they have tried to compromise and give in to certain demands of the Palestinians and yet the demands continue and any compromise is seen as a step towards total removal not a step towards a final compromise. How can you really reach a compromise with people who just want your total annihilation as a starting point?
Maybe Israel should take advantage of this event to really give the Palestinians and Hezbollah a bloody nose. Give them so much of a punishment they will not want to do this for a long time and may even enter into real negotiations. Unfortunately for Lebanon it has allowed these people to exist within it and now they are paying the price. If the Lebanese were not happy to have Hezbollah there then they should have removed them or requested help to do so. I do think they have the dirty end of the stick but inaction is a decision in it's own right. Maybe in the future they will think twice before allowing these people free reign in their country.
For us to interfere and give the aggressors the support they need is to grant them victory. They want this. They want Israel to be seen as the bad boys. They can start what they want they can blow up what they want and just because it's not an official government body they don't expect any retaliation. They hide behind innocents and then point to the bodies and say look what Israel has done. But at the same time proclaim that there are no innocent infidels and treat Israeli civilians as combatants. Only our interference allows this to happen.
We should just stop tying the Israelis hands and let them sort it out on a level playing field. Look at Gulf War II. We are supposed to be playing real war and look at the civilian casualties we have generated. Israel is playing terrorist wars, as it has been for some time, and it knows how to play that game. We won't face a war crimes tribunal and nor will the Israelis, providing they stop when the US tells them to.
These Arabs won't know what to do. They hate us because we invaded Iraq and they hate the Israelis because, well, they just do. So much to do so few suicide bombers.
I for one am so fed up with this whole sorry situation I would be happy to let them have a month to sort it out. Goodbye Palestine. I won't miss you.
It should not be happening at all but the ones complaining now are the ones who started it. They know what to do to make it stop. I for one want it to stop but not on your terms.
Soon. In cosmic terms.
Too hot to do anything so I have just been pottering about reading or browsing the web. The servers in the house are shut down because they were getting too hot and I had a disk failure. So I'm on a laptop at the moment.
I come across this article about a glimpse of a soon to be supernova. Read more
here. Now I've always been impressed with scientists calculating out everything from the big bang to using suns gravity to examine planets. Really is brilliant the way they work it out. Theory out for review and back for refinement until they have a theory that holds water. Then they only have to wait a billion years to test it but it still amazes me how right they are even those from the 1600s using the equipment they had then. Human ingenuity is impressive.
It seems all our information on supernova comes from observing long exploded stars and theorising. So I was quite interested in reading that they are watching a star which seems on the verge of coming a supernova. Any minute now. In cosmic terms any time from now to 100,000 years it's going to blow. Apparently,they are so rare that the last one seen by humans was in 1572. It seems this will be an opportunity to check out some of the theory. Hope we are still here if it is at the latter end of the timescale. Although, if we are, we will hopefully be observing a little closer.
I think I have been watching too much science fiction. You see, I think we should be at the stage where we are working on interstellar travel. Warp engines and the like. Let's get out there and start expanding. Bush's plans for going to Mars do not seem to be progressing. All the money going on Iraq and homeland security.
Makes you think though. In cosmic terms our wars and advances have taken place in a blink of an eye. Because space is so vast and we won't get a return for many years we won't invest in anything. Got to get a quick return you see. The sooner we start the better. Or it will be too late for us as a species.
Happy Birthday.
It's my granddaughters birthday today. She is one already. Tempus fugit. Time does fly by. She is the reason I started this blog. One year on and she is doing great. Unlike the society she lives in where I think things have only gone downhill.
Anyway,off to the Zoo for a party she doesn't understand where she will get spoilt again and she will have a good time.
Happy Birthday.
Can we toss our way to a new record.
Reading
this about a sponsored masturbate-a-thon. Sounds like fun. Sex with someone you love. It's also a way we can get Britain in the record books. A potential world record could be ours if we handle it correctly.
I particularly liked the phrase "It's time to find out if the only things allowed to be stiff in Britain are upper lips."
I'd volunteer but hardly seems worth going all that way for a two minute session when I can contribute at home.
One thing though is someone going to comment on the trillions of sperm that will be thrown away. Surely that must be a crime or something. Could it be recycled? Flushing away isn't going to help our water shortage.
Maybe they should hold it in the house of commons. They are all a bunch of w4%73r$ there. We are bound to create a new world record if one of our wonderful leaders joined in.
Better stop now before it goes downhill.
On your moral NZ high horse.
I was reading this article about a New Zealand Policewoman who has a second job as a prostitute. Now prostitution is legal in NZ and so you wouldn't think this is a problem. But of course it is. Seems she has to have counselling and is put under pressure because of this job.
Now the bit I found funny was clearly they are grasping at straws to put pressure on her. Apparently, this job leaves her open to extortion as prostitution is still managed by organised crime. What a load of rubbish. How is that going to happen? They can't blackmail her because it seems everyone knows. What other pressure can they apply that could not be applied to another other police officer? Why is she not trusted any more than others who access information and protect criminals under the cover of the badge?
I love the comment from Ron Mark, the law and order spokesman for the New Zealand First political party "I know a hell of a lot of police officers who struggle with the cost of living in Auckland but they don't all rush out and become prostitutes,". I agree. Most just take bribes so they don't seem to have a second job. What is worse a legal tax paying job or someone abusing their position? I think he knows which one he is concerned about.
We are all prostitutes in a way. I sell my body to my employer for several hours at a time and they use it to make money. Some people put up with their sweaty boorish husbands as they provide a roof over their heads and food on the table at a slightly higher standard of living than they could do on their own. Others want companionship. Blokes pay for sex through prostitution or through marriage. One means you pay for a long time the other means moralistic b4$^4&ds make you feel guilty. Either way you are screwed twice.
Read the story
here.
I've just reached the end of my support for the UN.
The UN is now threatening Israel with War crimes charges. Read more
here. Only a little shot across the bows but never the less a verbal threat.
This is now the end for me for my support of the UN.
Now let me put a few statements down.
1) I think we need an organisation with the general aims of the UN.
2) I think we need one that can influence world events.
3) I think we need one that acts as a democracy across the whole world.
I don't think the current UN, as is, does any of that. Nor can it do so.
1) It doesn't seem to follow it's own aims. It picks and chooses what it is going to deal with and in general, probably all we hear about, it makes things worse.
2) It's only influence seems to be the power of the US. Where it conflicts with US policy it is useless.
3) How can it act democratically when countries like the US and China have, theoretically, the exact same influence as Darfur. The vetoes are not exactly fine tuning. They are blunt instruments intended to ensure no one powerful got forced into anything. Probably because they would take their ball home if they didn't.
I think the UN needs to be completely revamped. It's goals scaled down and only certain parts are regenerated. With full backing from all countries, including the US and the UK, where everyone gets a say proportionally, by heads of population but costs are to the same proportions. In addition it needs to forget chasing ghosts such a civilian disarmament and political games such as starting or policing wars and stick to things like providing aid, food, medical supplies and clothing, and general security, shelter, power/water infrastructure and recovery ops, where required. When that is working then look at expanding the role towards what they thought they were doing. Financial, war crimes trials, disarmament and politics is way down the line. Perhaps never.
This latest threat from them just shows how biased the current UN is.
They threaten war crimes because of targeting civilian areas. Falluja anyone.
They threaten war crimes because of disproportional response. 100,000+ Iraqis.
At least Israel is fighting for it's life we can say that for the coalition. So if they want to get someone for war crimes why don't they go for Blair and Howard. They were not attacked and yet instigated a vigilante action against who they thought was involved. In the UK, and I would have thought the US and Oz, you, and your partners, would get jailed for that. Just a thought, Blair must be within reach, hint hint. If you want to show you are serious.
As of now I think the UN is a flawed monster and should be disbanded and replaced by something more along the lines of the Red Cross or Médecins Sans Frontières, as examples. Let's get rid of all these corrupt and useless politicians. Jeez, I didn't think anyone would be as bad as our bunch but these seem to fit the bill and I've reached the end of my tether with these and the similarly crap EU.
Your papers please!
It's not far from the situation where we will need to show papers to get on a bus or train. Yet another survey shows that we now need to show ID on average 11 times a year estimated to increase to 17 in 2010. Read more
here.
Looks like the cold war being over was a feint while the communists infiltrated us politically and introduced detention without charge, identity cards and summary executions.
I love the way the government justifies anything they do.
Reading this article about the house packs that are being made compulsory. Although they are not coming into force in 2007 as planned. Read more
here.
The bit that tickled me. As these things normally do is the little bit of justification at the bottom.
'The government says the packs will cost about £650 for each seller to put together, but save buyers £1m a day, which they currently waste in aborted transactions.'
Sounds reasonable but note the change of scale, from an individual cost to a total cost which does not give any solid figures for comparison. There could be 1m houses going on the market every day and even at just £650 a pop that makes the £1M saving pale into insignificance. Although some are talking about £1,100 for the packs. The bottom line is that the buyer will have to pay for these packs so the cost of buying will undoubtedly go up.
In my experience, which is all I have, I have only known one person who was gazumped. Out of dozens. So I'm going to stick a figure of 10% in to be overgenerous as I am. So to save 10% of the people from the costs of gazumping we will make everyone pay to spread the cost and, by the way, it still won't stop gazumping.
Gazumping is where once someone has made an offer and it has been accepted the seller is expected to honour that agreement. The agreement is not in writing nor is the agreement enforceable in law, mainly because the buyer may have to opt out if he can't get funding or sell his own house. The seller then receives another offer that is more money or is more in line with his requirements. If he accepts this offer the first buyer is classed as gazumped. This happens with everything sold. Selling a car, first one with the money usually gets it. It's because houses take so long to buy there is more chance for someone to rethink and return with a better offer. The packs are aimed at reducing the time for the transactions by removing searches etc. and thus the time for better offers to come in. I can be gazumped on a car in a matter of hours. Can't see the packs making a house buy in a day so it isn't going to go away and people will adapt to fit into the shorter timescales.
All in all, a move in the right direction but perhaps if the government removed the bureaucracy involved in buying a house and opened up things like searches it would make a real difference without any additional costs then they would see an improvement. Removing regulation. Is that possible?
Gazumping may reduce or even stop but I don't see how, so that target of £1M may not be achievable. A government initiative that may not meet its targets and increases bureaucracy and costs for the public. Who could believe it? In the mean time, as usual, costs go up for everyone.
Why didn't we think of this crime fighting initiative?
Seems that North Cotswolds is introducing this revolutionary new crime fighting initiative. They are installing CCTV in Post Offices to reduce robberies. Read more
here.
I'm sure that will fix it. No one will be able to do any more robberies now as being caught on camera is such a great deterrent.
We are getting it wrong. Everything is under control.
New figures apparently show that crime is increasing and the home office has been dealt a blow because of these figures. Read more
here.
Now we all know that this gives a false impression. Crime is in fact falling. The reason for the increase in figures is due to new reporting. All violent crimes are now counted. Baby's kicking mums before birth is now a crime, kids being kissed by parents when they fall, telling a child 'No', the terrible twos is a recognised trouble area that needs dealing with. All these are crimes which are now recorded. As the next stage in dealing with these crimes we are targeting the under twos identified by social workers and nurses with a view to resolving the problems. £12.50 has been put aside for a new playpen for each town.
I feel safer already. Everything is being brought under control. Those toddlers were making my life hell. Little rascals smoking, drinking, breathing and stabbing people. Won't be long before they are all locked up.
Spam. A radical solution is needed.
Just been looking at the Spam filter recently provided with my web hosting company
1&1. It has several options and every time I look at it I get the feeling that it's going to deprive me of Emails from someone I want to communicate with.
Some of the more recent ones don't even make sense. All the modifications to get past the filters mean that it is gibberish and because they can be detected just by a quick look it makes them easy to process. The only problem is the sheer volume of them. I've even started getting them from the Emails I've set up especially to deal with certain companies. Tut tut.
Spam only works because it is cheap and once the initial outlay is invested it costs very little to send out millions of Emails. Even a small fraction of a percent return on those Emails translates into profit. Anyway I think it's time for a radical approach and here it is.
Because the spammers must put contact details in the Emails then we should intercept that communication. Phone numbers, Email and Snail mail, redirect the lot to a funded intercept organisation. Filter out the ones who are responding to the Spam and kill them. The response rate will drop and voila, end of problem.
Looks good to me but I'm sure there are a couple of flaws in there. Minor ones of course.
Is it just me that thinks this was a set up?
Reading the articles on Bush's 'unguarded' words to Blair. Everybody seems to think that it is all kosher because Bush used a naughty word. Despite the fact it would get him a £80 fine in the UK I suspect that these pair knew what they were doing. Every politician is aware of open mikes and these two ain't stupid. Well, not when it comes to PR anyway.
Nothing was said that put them in a bad light yet other people were put in a situation where they needed to show some action or be seen as uncooperative or ineffectual. Yet, it was delivered in a deniable way.
1) It nothing to do with us.
2) Israel is only defending itself from those terrorists.
3) It could stop if the terrorists just stop.
4) Isn't it about time the UN did something to stop these things.
5) We will do what we can to help.
All reasonable and above board. Not what I would expect from Bush or Blair with their kill them all attitude. Maybe I'm just too suspicious.
Read the story
here.
Why do I find these accidents interesting?
There have been a few accidents where people have ran themselves over in their own cars. It's not really funny but my sick sense of humour makes me smile anyway. I can't work out exactly how they manage to do it either but it seems to be a recent problem and getting fairly common. Gone are the days of drunken drivers push starting cars and falling while they get in and being ran over. Lately they all seem to be driving along a road and then something happens and they are run over by their own vehicle. Must make for an interesting tale at the insurance company. 'This guy is suing himself as he was stupid driving a vehicle'
Here is one of the latest. Not a lot of details but still enough to make you wonder how it happened.
What a farce. More on the knife amnesty.
Here is some more on the knife amnesty previously mentioned
here.
It seems that it was not sufficient to just take the knifes down for recycling they had to shut the yard, so no one could walk in off the street, and police officers attended the actual mutilation process.
Then the massive task commenced and "All the knives took about five minutes to mutilate," says George Bond, director of recycling company.
Read more
here.
No wonder we can't get anyone to come when we have a burglary.
Another group I don't understand.
I'm beginning to this I don't have any empathy at all. When I read of the suicide bombers and I think I understand why they do these things I then get hit with something else that makes no sense and I'm back to rethinking this new aspect to the whole thing. I'm not 100% but I believe I understand the ballparks.
Then comes along this revelation about Fire Fighters in Liverpool coming under attack from people who booby trapping buildings they then set on fire. Read more
here.
The explanation in the text is that 'disaffected youths think that firefighters are part of the establishment and are a fair target'. That thinking is not too far away from civilians are a fair target too. Pity that they are probably a part of that group but I'm sure that won't make them suicidal. I wonder if they see themselves as unable to change the status quo with a vote so they need another way to make changes. Now that I can understand, but to target firefighters, that does not make sense to me.
It's the same thinking as those in Iraq. Easy establishment targets. That does not sound like a good thing.
Are we really surprised with this decision?
A little news story and a few blogs have been reporting the news that the assassins of Jean Charles de Menezes will not be facing any charges. Instead the Police will face charges of breaching the Health and Safety rules which means the only punishment is ours, we of course will be paying the fines for the H&S offences. Read more
here.
Now to be honest who really expected any of these guys to face a court? Right from the start we were all going on about a cover up and a whitewash. It was clear that nobody was going to pay for the act.
I can see it now. PC Plod to senior management. The chaps are a bit miffed about Smithers possibly being charged because he went a bit overboard with those seven shots and old blinky making a small error on the clothing and log because he was otherwise engaged. We don't think it is right. These rag heads are terrorists you know and you can't make an omelette without breaking eggs. Anyway, thought I would let you chaps know that our chaps are going to stop carrying guns if there is any charges brought. We could get shot by the rag heads and it now appears our own chaps are shooting us as well with the benefit on 20/20 hindsight. It's not right you know. Our chaps are your chaps and we need a bit of leeway.
These guys stick together. They are all they have nowadays. I wonder how many 'I don't know' and 'I don't recollect' were in the answers to the interviews.
I don't even blame the government for this. It's looking after your own. The Police do it, the Army does it and small communities do it.
It's not justice though.
This cannot be right. After that successful amnesty.
It appears that during the highly
successful amnesty on knives, which netted over 100,000 deadly weapons that stabbings continued. Read more
here. Strange that.
It would appear that the law abiding were the ones that handed in their knives, with the bulk being domestic knives. Of course, that is OK, because most crimes are performed with domestic knives. Ooops. That must mean that bad guys are not going to have a problem replacing the weapons. What a surprise. Bad guys never have a problem with getting things, drugs, guns, goods and knives. One of the weapons of choice at the moment seems to be a short blade like a Stanley knife. I'm just putting up wallpaper M'Lud. They have no chance of stopping stabbings when you can buy a good weapon at Tescos or B&Q with no questions asked almost 24 hours a day.
A long time ago I carried two knives on me all the time. One a Swiss Army knife I was given by the company I was working for and another for harder work. I one area where I worked metal was a no go so I found a polymer knife that replaced my work knife. I tested it on a metal detector and no show. I carry that one occasionally, where it is legal of course. I bought a batch thinking they would be banned but so far they are not. The blade does not sharpen well and what there is dulls quickly but even dull still will cut through flesh.
It's been said many times by people more eloquent than myself that all that happens when you ban things is that law abiding citizens are denied access to these things and the bad guys just ignore the laws. Why is it that vote happy politicians and these do gooders that want to ban things never accept that they are not going to solve the problems via this method. All it does is disarm the law abiding and allow the bad guys free reign.
The US now has data supporting the relationship between civilians able to defend themselves and crime over several years yet, even in the US, there are still some that ignore the facts and make up data to support their own viewpoint.
Personally, until now, I've never wanted a gun for self defence. Watching what is going on around me I now know that our beloved leaders and the do gooders would rather we died in droves just as long as they could ensure we are unarmed. That is one reason I found
this so funny although, in reality, it was a tragic event. It's unusual for those who force you to do something to be in the position where it is them who have the repercussions. There are more people who have sensible statements on weapons. Like this
guy and this
one. Now, I would have a set of guns if they were legal.
Absolutely brilliant. Our special relationship.
George Galloway on the special relationship with the US.
"We all want a special relationship with the United States, All we want is a special relationship that doesn't resemble that between Ms Lewinsky and a former US President: unequal, disreputable, with the junior partner always on their knees."
Absolutely brilliant. It's things like this that make Gorgeous George so interesting.
Read the full article
here on the extradition process which was being discussed at the time.
I feel richer already. Wait a minute. What's that smell?
After showing how much we can save as part of the Gershon Review Gordon Brown is showing he is willing to go much further in his bid for PM. A £30Bn saving across the Government. Read more
here. I feel richer already.
Of course we will never save a penny. It will be the same sort of savings we made for the Gershon review and we can read what happened about that
here at 'Burning our Money'.
That's a bovine smell reaching my nostrils.
The noose tightens on Blair. Both of them.
Lord Levy has been arrested in connection with the loans-for-peerages inquiry. Read more
here.
I couldn't stop myself laughing. Now his DNA is being shared with the world as part of our criminal DNA DB. Wonder how he feels now about the extraction of DNA while under arrest? He of course is no different from any others accused of an offence except for his title 'Lord'. Wonder how much he paid for that?
I wonder if they will arrest Blair when they go for him? That would be wonderful but I bet they already have instructions from Ian Blair. Who also hopefully is feeling the noose tightening regarding the De Menezes assassination. I'm sure the three who are being considered for prosecution would want to make a few things public. Read more
here.
Will Blair be able to help Blair and will Blair be there long enough to protect Blair. (Fill in the first names yourself. It works either way.)
Sauce for the Goose.
I was reading this article about the murderer Michael Stone wanting his highly personal medical information kept from the media. He apparently was OK with it being used by those who have a need to see it but not the general public. Read more
here.
To be perfectly honest I'm a bit torn on this one. Someone who does this loses rights in my opinion but should they be rights like this? I'm torn towards privacy but in the end I couldn't care because of his crimes.
Now the interesting bit was Mr Justice Davis ruled on the case an said "I refuse to grant Mr Stone any of the relief he seeks. The public interest requires publication of the report in full."
Mmmmm. A nutters mental health can be made public to satiate the public but we can't have a enquiry into something a bit more critical regarding our security. Surely, the public interest requires publication of the 7/7 report in full.
Of course the mental report won't point to anyone in government. So not a problem to release that then.
A well thought out succession plan.
I was reading this article about Castro's designated successor being his 75 year old brother. Castro at 80 is clearly thinking ahead to when he will be too old to run the country and he wants to leave his legacy in the hands of someone younger and more able to keep the revolution bubbling along for a new generation. He clearly has not thought this through. I hope this is just a feint to keep his real successor hidden from poisoned cigars for a bit longer. Read more
here.
The story was really about our American friends sticking their fingers where it is not wanted again. Must surely be classed as interfering in the internal affairs of another country. The US clearly has a problem with poor little Cuba. With the history of the US interfering in internal politics you would think they would just leave Cuba alone. After all Castro has done nothing except wind up the US for decades, or maybe that's it, they don't want to seem impotent and so fed up with this boil on their bum that they perform all these petty sanctions and are funding a rebellion. If they had left it alone and treated Cuba like Mexico Castro probably would have stood aside by now.
A very good question.
Read this
article on Israel and then think about it.
Does it make sense to you?
More 'For your own good' taxes.
Reading this
article about putting a £20 tax on every flight to pay towards the environmental impact of your journeys. They estimate that air fares will double in the next decade as well. I was wondering how they were going to get Blair and his chums to cough up when they get
Blair Force 1 up and running but that is another story. I'm sure *cough* they will take that sort of thing into consideration when they reduce air travel for us all.
I made me wonder when we would start getting salt, sugar, chocolate, etc. hit with a 40% tax to discourage people to use so much of them because, you know, they are bad for you. A McTax will be on it's way for those corporations who are doing nothing to help our obese children.
All proceeds will go towards buying Blair a home on the Riviera or Barbados, or both, so he doesn't have to put up with the freeby holiday claims he gets hit with several times a year. There should be enough in the pot to sort Prescott out with a secluded bedsit in central London as well. Something with a secret side entrance. He will only need one room I can't imagine him as a great entertainer or conversationalist.
Or maybe I'm being too cynical I'm sure all the proceeds will go directly to something that will *cough* help with the reduction of emissions.
Err.... Why so late? and why is it uncertain?
It says here that the Police 'may review' the case after baby Chloe's inquest found she had 40 broken bones. May! Unbelievable. There is something seriously wrong with our society if these people are not done for murder. It's bad enough they have been walking around free up to now. Anyone would think they were politicians and immune to the repercussions of their actions.
The photos have been well chosen though. He looks a right cocky git and she looks just dozy. Read the story
here and
here.
Someone should break his legs then teach him to walk. Preferable some big bruiser in prison who can cuddle up to him at night.
Our society is failing the weak who have no voice and no capability of defense. It's a national disgrace and the departments set up, at great cost btw, seems to concentrate on the families who have little chance of doing anything as serious as this. Here is a related
story about our wonderful social services.
Crown copyright.
I've been catching up with the situation with
Craig Murray and have been reading about the Crown Copyright slant on
silencing him.
Of course, like a lot of things, this made me think. What exactly is Crown Copyright? The government produces masses of documentation every day which we pay for with our taxes. To say that something which can be retrieved by a single member of the British public cannot then be reproduces must rank up there with 'There is no link between Iraq and 7/7.'
I'm still of the opinion every document that is produced by our government should be available on a government archive website the only exceptions are defense information where it would give intelligence to the enemy. There should be no such think as crown copyright for any UK citizen.
Any port in a storm for these guys. Next think he will find he is being sued because he is telling everyone he worked for the government and the word government is crown copyright.
These Norwegians have big balls.
Whether you agree with whale hunting or not you have just got to admire the balls of this hunter.
Read the story
here. Found this on Right Wing Howlers site.
I feel a slight lack of confidence.
I was reading this article about our home grown suicide bombers and my confidence in our security service, already at an all time low, has taken another lurch downwards.
To quote the text;
'Pakistani intelligence sources have suggested the men may have met with al-Qaeda's number two, Ayman al-Zawahiri, in Pakistan's tribal areas sometime in January 2005. British officials say they have no evidence confirming the meeting but they don't discount the possibility that it took place.'
Mmmm. 'Suggested' implied that this is a theory and in reality they are just guessing. 'no evidence' says that someone has come up with this theory and they have no idea. 'they don't discount the possibility' means 'Well, it could be true'
Next;
'It is not known who it was or the exact nature of the contacts but the methods used, designed to make it difficult to identify the individual, makes the contacts look suspicious.'
No kidding. I would never have guessed that they wanted to cover their tracks. I'm doing the same myself and I don't have anything to hide in quite the same way but don't we pay them a lot of money to get past this and find out? Clearly not.
All in all totally useless statements. They are clueless and it shows. Read the full story
here.
My confidence is heading downhill on this whole issue.
Brittania still rules the seas.
I was reading this article about pirates. It seem the British government is not doing enough to combat piracy on the high seas. The title made it clear it was not the usual sort of piracy. Read more
here.
Now I though there must be a vast surge of pirates in the North Sea or in the channel but nope, they are talking about piracy in the seas off the coast of Iraq. Why are we even doing any of this anti piracy work there now? We don't rule the seas any more and don't have the resources to perform this role. Even if we did why should I pay for it.
It seems that attacks have increased by 168%. Almost as much as my latest council tax bill and nowhere near as much as our local parking. Both higher priorities to me. Until I can afford that round the world cruise of course.
Win win all round. Is this a first for Government?
It seems that there is some new legislation for people that let houses that starts tomorrow. They have to register and meet certain criteria before they can legally rent their houses. The registration alone could be £1100 and is subject to normal, local government, inflation. Plus the changes to the residence will cost a significant sum. Read more
here.
So, what are the benefits? It seems it is win win all around.
The owners win because they can now put up their rent to meet the increased demand because a lot of people will now give this up and leave it to people who want to do it for a living.
The government wins as it gets to set up a new department to run this, they get extortionate fees for checking homes and they get to document lots of new bits of information. Plus look out for a register in the future for all those living in rented accommodation. It will be
for the children to help prevent terrorism.
The people that rent houses will win because they get a new illuminated sign above their door in their single room lit 24Hrs a day all for the extra costs they will pay in increased rent.
This will stop the hundreds of deaths we read about every year. I think. Hurrah for the nanny state.
Independence Day. Bah humbug.
This was the day I got married so it always brings back memories when people mention independence day in the US.
Happy Birthday America. You did the right thing ditching our Government. Looking around now you just don't know how much foresight your guys had.
When you wear a white hat things are different.
It seems that Blair is getting a grilling from the Commons liaison committee where he is accused of being a Dictator and of being weak at the same time. Mmmmm. Read more
here.
Anyway I just had a vision of Blair saying he was no dictator then I thought of the many others who had undoubtedly said the same thing. Saddam, Stalin, Amin, Mugabe, Kim Jong-il and Hitler as starters, the list must be endless. Now it made me think that nobody seriously put Blair in with these guys, yet anyway. Why is that? Is it because for decades we have put ourselves out as wearing the white hat. We are seen, to ourselves, as being the good guys and everything we do is righteous and is for the greater good.
This is of why we are seen as so hypocritical to the rest of the world. We insist that the rest of the world follows the NPT to our interpretation but we continue to upgrade our nuclear weapon systems for a world that no longer need really needs them. We stop DDT where it could do the most good and force thousands to die needlessly while polluting the world ourselves and all to save profits from being reduced. We imprison and execute people without due process whilst objecting to tin pot dictators doing the same. This list goes on as well. Is it because they can't object as violently as we can or they are perceived as wearing black hats? If the world was the UK we would put an ASBO on ourselves to stop bullying.
In this world we live in is there still anyone with a pure white hat? Up until Bush and Blair came in I would have said the US, Canada, Oz and the UK seemed to be clearly white hat. Now it appears that fear has gotten to them all. I'm hoping that the people are still the same and when the smoke clears, as it will eventually, and our fear dissipates, for whatever reason, we can step up to the mark and continue where we left off a decade ago. Unfortunately unless there are changes, in both sides, I don't see that happening without lots more bloodshed. The only question is if the black hats can mount another attack on the US similar to 911 or will they go for easier targets such as the UK or the real easy ones in the middle east. The US and it could very well be gloves off. Which would have it's advantages. Others, including the UK, and it would just go on and on.
Unfortunately, I tend to be a planner. So I've of the viewpoint we should make plans for a peaceful solution with a fallback of extermination. We could wear a black hat for a while and blame it on a few politicians while we resolve the short term issues. Then back to a white hat and a new lot of politicians while we resolve the long term issues.
She must be some party animal.
If she manages to overcome the obstacle that is her husband to make them number one sought-after party guests. Read more
here.
Unbelievable. I would guess Tony has given them up.
I thought late term abortion was treated as murder.
Seems you can get away with it if you say you were doing something constructive. Like trying to teach a twelve week child to walk. Read more
here.
These cases never ever seem to come up with any form of justice. Hopefully, someone will teach them a lesson soon. I meant walking or something if anyone asks. It being clearly so dangerous.
Why am I apprehensive about this seemingly good thing?
I was reading this article about Fair Trade in Wales and Scotland. Read more
here. It seems that this, if successful, could lift thousands of poor third world farmers out of poverty.
Now maybe this is why I'm apprehensive. Does this mean it will become compulsory to buy Fair Trade goods? Does it mean that all Government agencies will now buy Fair Trades in preference to anything else? Of course, it's not their money and it will undoubtedly lead to an increase in costs. Everything they do does so why will this be any different. I'm also not convinced that making someone a preferred supplier and without a negotiated discount is of benefit to no-one, except the supplier of course. Why are these guys more deserving that the others who were competing successfully on the world market and will be rewarded for that by being removed from suppliers lists.
Maybe I need to be an economist to understand. The extra money will come in handy when I need to buy the goods in the future.
Let's just get it over with.
It seems Hamas is now threatening attacks in Israel. Read more
here. I didn't know they had stopped.
This fighting could go on for hundreds of years until eventually Israel falls. Attrition will eventually reduce them to a few thousand that will then be displaced by the UN in a peace keeping role. While Israel fight with their gloves on, attacking offices at night and not using their full complement of weapons, Hamas builds up support and eventually wears concessions out of the West which Israel will end up having to keep.
I reached the conclusion that every time Israel conceded something the Palestinians seen it as stage 1 not as a full and final settlement. When the enemies goal is extermination can the other party be any less ruthless?
I was hoping for a peaceful end to this but now I don't see anything but more and more bloodshed. Maybe Israel should just take a tip from Georges book and declare them a rogue state and invade. Print up some cards and shoot everything that moves. Invite Bush's puppy along for the ride as well. It's been a while since the UK was in Israel. Do you think we could fit this in before Iran?
This can't be right.
It seems a committee of MPs have found that terrorist groups have been given a boost and are a threat to the UK. Read more
here.
This just can't be true. Mr Blair said it wasn't and he seemed so sincere I was convinced. Next thing you know he will have lied about other things as well such as why we went to war.
A plan for the future
Went round to my neighbours today for a BBQ as part of the footie match process. Unfortunately, it was a bit subdued due to the result but the food was good.
Anyway while I was there one of the other neighbours, who has just returned from duty in Iraq, was telling us a bit about life over there and in the army. Now clearly something has changed because a few years ago we got into a heated discussion on Iraq. He was all for it and now he is not. He is nothing but critical about the whole thing and especially the way the armed forces are being screwed. Sounds like he is looking for a nice security role in a large corporate. He is quite high up in his unit and privy to some classified briefings which I suspect is the reason he has changed his mind about things but of course he doesn't want to go into details. Bummer.
