So Called "new" Electric Mini

Oh dear, the luddite crowd are out again, pushing a half-arsed attempt at making an Electric Mini. It is deeply flawed and backward. It is nowhere near as good as the Mini made by PML Flightlink, yet no-nothing politicos and attention seekers are lining up to be seen with another throwback and technological tide-pool.

Well, it has a range of 200miles vs the PML's 900 (using backup generator), if it runs down you are stuffed, unlike the PML version. It cannot possibly regenerate all the energy during braking, as the PML needs a 600HP powertrain vs the 200HP of the throwback. The rear seats are lost, unlike the PML. I suspect this loss is because the PML uses hub motors, so the bonnet area is empty and available for the storage of batteries and that the battery space need not be so large due to the full regeneration capability. 

The Mini E is basically someone removing the ICE, stuffing in an electric motor and then scrtatching their bonce about where to put the batteries, sacrificing the rear seats and so rendering the Mini, frankly, a joke.

The PML Mini is a true series hybrid following on from the work done by such luminaries as Porsche, who made is first Series Hybrid hot-rod in 1901 - it went 70mph and used 4 hub motors. Quite a hot-rod 4x4. 100 years later and the Mini can squeeze out 20mph more. Not very impressive.

But, with no-nothing morons elbowing their way infront of this sham vehicle, I fear that it will get all the publicity and the no-nothings will buy it.

Amazing nuggets from C4's Lost for Words initiative.

I was watching with admiration at the changes to pupils in the Channel 4 Dispatches programme the other day, two years on from when they began an experiment to introduce synthetic phonics to an East London school, Monteagle Primary (H. Lynne Thompson).

Two points leapt out at me. One was the bone-headed mentality of the Dept of Schools, Education, Children, Families, Non-judgemental nuclear relationship units not necessarily based upon shared genetic backround, My Little Pony etc. 

Instead of synthetic phonics, costing, for the school in question £27,000 per year for the entire school of 4-11 year olds, they recommend schools to use their chosen one-on-one remedial technique (name escapes me, anyone?) that would have cost £100,000 for each age group, i.e. £100,000 for the 7-year-olds, another £100,000 for the 8 year olds etc etc. The teachers/coaches would need to be specialists, only usable after extensive training and only able to handle 9 kids a year, hence the high cost. 

Note to self: I wonder if  those in DETRiTUS (Dept of Education Teachers, and Regulations in Training, Universities and Schools) who decided this approach have any direct, indirect or other link to the companies who provide such expensive training to those coaches? By contrast, existing teachers can learn synthetic phonics rapidly and teach large groups...

The second, more shocking point was that all the teachers at the school had not been taught how to teach children how to read. I'll say that again another way - Teacher Training College had NOT taught all these Primary School teachers how to teach kids to read. That is like going on a driving course and not being taught about the steering wheel, brakes and accelerator! What is double scary is that few of these Primary Schoolteachers even QUESTIONED the fact that this monumentally important aspect, the very foundation of primary education was absent. The term "Duh!" does not quite cover it. It is, I suspect, a testament to the utterly poor education those teachers got before going to Teacher Training College that is responsible - a lack of critical reasoning and free thinking.

Still, things are being done by a TV Channel that the State does not seem to have a grip on*. Figures. They now look to improve Maths - good luck to them, I am sure they will do a better job than the State.

* It does seem that the State has an initiative on synthetic phonics, but as is so often the case the real message gets lost in all the bureaucracy, turf and ideology and a religious minset adopted, so the resulting plan seems to involve taking delivery of a truck load of FAIL. The State cannot lead. When it follows it tries to barge in front or trip up the leader. Best it just GETS OUT OF THE WAY, eh?

An elephant has migrated into the room

We have seemingly sensible words by worthies on the topic of immigration, but they appear to ignore the elephant in the room, that of EU immigration. The article as presented by The Times appears disingenuous, intentionally mumble-swerving around the actual issue and pretending that the initiative addresses the core problem. People, including ethnic minorities, have concerns over uncontrolled mass immigration, yet the report only focuses on non-EU immigration, for that is the only area that the UK now has control over, having LOST sovereignty in EU immigration to Brussels. The Times appears to have abdicated, capitulated, is appeasing or outright agrees with this situation.

What is more scandalous is the report is from a body chaired by Nicholas Soames, MP and Frank Field, MP who should know better and use it to make a stink about the lack of control over the UK's borders brought about by the EU.

Uncontrolled immigration plus welfare state = trouble. Of  course, the Federasts want the EU superstate so it is just a "temporary aberration". Well, I was not asked and I am sure the EUdenrat has no intention of asking for it knows what people will say - they will say NO.

The UK needs to restore its sovereignty, restore the relationship with Europe to a healthy, open and sustainable level - that of trading partner for mutual benefit, not a master-slave relationship with control ceded to Brussels. Our MPs and Parliament have NO authority to cede sovereignty to another power, yet they have done it. There exists in English a word for such behaviour: Treason.

Polly: Carbon Cretin.

I am going to break with my normal approach of pressing the "track changes" button, for in this case, I don't think Polly is being disingenuous or hypocritical. She is just barking mad.

Energy use has to be cut soon, so it's odd that this techno-savvy cabinet still shies away from a simple credit system.

What is with the "has to be cut"? No. Energy use will increase around the world. It is not the use of energy, but how, what and where. As for the government being "techno-savvy", one only needs to look at the dismal failures in IT and other areas to know the Government is incompetent at this. Why break a habit?

Awful August, the weather forecasters call this unseasonably cold, wet month, as holiday-makers huddle against intermittent monsoon downpours, reminded that global warming doesn't necessarily mean a Mediterranean Britain.

Post Hoc fallacy. By the way, Polly, environazis are now hiding behind the more general and weedle-worthy term "climate change".

Every month, reports from climatologists deliver worse predictions of the speed and tipping points for irreversible climate change.

They are paid to, dear.

A 4C temperature rise is the latest warning: it would bring unimaginable horror in its wake.

Would, if it were true. Is it? No proof.

The time to act gets shorter, but the political will to act lags ever further behind the science that tells politicians they must do so.

The time to act does not get shorter, it is just that the dire warnings are getting shriller and for good reason - the AGW game is nearly up.

Latest figures, including air travel, shipping and energy used in our goods manufactured abroad, show no cut in Britain but an 18% growth in emissions.

Goods manufactured abroad, eh? Like in China, perhaps. Go there and ask them to cut their output if you believe it is the case. No? Thought not.

If the market is the answer, soaring energy prices should drive down emissions. Road traffic figures showed a 2% drop in car use, with demand for petrol briefly 20% down - but already it is rising again as the price falls.

And? Your point is? The market is functioning correctly - you sound as if you WANT to see high energy prices.

On household energy - responsible for 27% of emissions - it's too early to know the effect of 30% price increases. But as one hour of an old-fashioned lightbulb still only costs 0.8p, energy prices may not be noticed by those who already consume most.

Now, Polly, you are joking right? If one hour of an old-fashioned light bulb only costs 0.8p, then surely the energy consumed is very small also. The reall issue is HEATING. Inside the above is a subconcious nagging to buy low energy, high mercury, flicker-on, shimmer while on "low energy" bulbs. Lead by example. I bet Chez Toynbee is not bedecked with such bulbs, or would remain so for long. Even Polly's dim-bulb brain can detect the hesitation caused by CFLs.

Those who will make serious cuts are the poorest and debt-averse pensioners. Official fuel poverty figures are expected to rise to 5 million people this winter: more deaths are expected among the old and cold. Back in Labour's optimistic can-do days in 2000, the Warm Homes and Energy Conservation Act created a legal obligation to eliminate fuel poverty among the vulnerable by 2010, a target missed by so many light years that Friends of the Earth is seeking a judicial review to get the act enforced. Gordon Brown's plan to buy off the problem with £100 vouchers for the poor is no answer.

An unenforceable Act does not mean we spend more time trying to enforce it. It means it should be scrapped.

What does the public think the answer should be? The Institute for Public Policy Research has just conducted the most extensive consultation so far, with focus groups in Newcastle, Camden, Southwark, Bristol and rural Suffolk across all social groups, as well as a nationwide opinion poll and interviews with energy companies, climate change NGOs and consumer organisations. The results pointed in one clear direction.

Seventy-four per cent said they are "very concerned" or "fairly concerned" about climate change - so politicians can ignore the shrinking, unconcerned minority.

Climate change is not the same as AGW, Polly. I am concerned about climate change, but I do not buy into the man-made back-to-the-caves mentality of the "enviro" lobby.

Seventy-one per cent thought action was necessary to curb people's energy use.

Then where is your problem? 71% will then curb their energy use, so energy use will be down. Or do you consider them like yourself - hypocritical?

But there was pessimism about the public changing its behaviour: only one in 10 thought people would drive less or take fewer flights.

Oh, ok, so "other people" need to cut back.

Naturally, favourite choices were the painless ones - the cheaper, environmentally friendly options. Least popular was any system that taxed energy use.

Common sense at last.

They were offered three possible government actions.

A false trichotomy.

First, a carbon tax could be added to all energy not generated from renewables. Second, a cap on the amount of carbon that companies could emit in selling their energy to consumers would force them to generate more from renewables: they would pass on the extra cost to consumers. But both of these were regarded as too unfair, with the impact felt least by the wealthy who burn most energy.

Very free with your use of percentages, eh? The rich are a small number in the scheme of things. Tax will either not affect them or they will move away and THEN it will not affect them. People get rich and are determined to stay rich so people like you cannot dictate how they live.

Personal carbon trading was the most popular option: it was the fairest and it wasn't seen as a new tax.

Most popular or the least worst of an appalling shortlist? In a way it is not a tax, but a form of privatised rent-seeking, as we shall see.

Here's how it works: each year everyone gets equal carbon credits to spend on petrol, home heating or air travel. People exceeding their quota can buy more credits. People who use less can sell credits. It encourages home insulation, energy saving and less driving or flying. Since low earners use less - 20% have no car, 50% don't fly - they can profit by selling to those with big houses, foreign holidays and gas-guzzling cars. It would be a powerful but voluntary agent for redistribution.

Firstly, you gloss over a massive factor in all of this - the State will need to track EVERY purchase we make in the areas so deemed by the State to have an impact. Very soon it will cover food, clothing, technology, everything. Secondly, it is NOT "voluntary" as people are not free to step outside the scheme. It will demand that all such purchases are paid electronically, so getting more information into the hands of the State (which it can, of course, sell without our permission to marketing organisations).

Failure to pursue personal carbon trading (or any other method) joined the long list of good causes killed by Labour cowardice.

I am not disputing that there is a long list of good causes killed by Labour cowardice, but this load of old crock is certainly not amongst them.

At Defra, David Miliband took it up with enthusiasm and commissioned a feasibility study, but after he made a strong speech advocating it, Gordon Brown at the Treasury banned any further mention.

Yes, I recall that "carbon credit card" idea. It was barking mad authoritarian moonbattery then, and it is still authoritarian moonbattery today.

Miliband was moved away and what was called a "pre-feasibility study", limped out with the judgment that this idea was "ahead of its time".

Yes, the Police State is not quite in place yet. Wait a few years when the EU is fully in control, then it will be a doddle.

They guessed it would cost £2bn a year to run, threw up sundry obstacles, and the report disappeared.

Only £2bln? From government IT? I wonder if those "sundry obstacles" were things like "impractical", "too expensive", "massive invasion of privacy", "AGW unproven".

Odd that a government with computers thinks it can't introduce a simple credit system, when a Nectar or Oyster card shows how easily home and car fuel bills and airline tickets could be deducted.

"A government with computers"? - Jesus wept! You forget, polly that oyster and nectar are OPTIONAL. One can still pay by cash. It is not a "simple credit system", but yes, we see the plan. I have long thought Gordon Brown has lusted after the idea of eliminating cash as a means of payment and this would move further in that direction. You also gloss over the "idea" of inter-personal trading of "carbon credits". People don't trade Nectar points on the open market, do they? Even if it did work what do you think would happen, numbnuts? The "rich" would buy up points and live as before. The poor, due to, erm, poverty, will sell points to pay for the energy that they can afford. The ONLY result is that the Government invades our life and a bunch of useless, non-productive parasites and IT supplies who cannot hack it in the private sector cream off huge wedges of taxpayers cash, some of it sticking to the governments ever-outstretched hands.

By supporting a carbon credit system, you, Polly, show yet again that you have absolutely NO IDEA how a market works and cannot get your Socialism-addled noggin to think beyond the immediate and self-serving.

Historian Mark Roodhouse of York University draws comparisons with his work on wartime rationing. Back then the state provided ration books for all, covering not just fuel but coupons valuing virtually every individual item in the shops from clothes to food.

We were under siege and supply was limited, UNLIKE NOW. Even then, the black market thrived.

Have we become more administratively incompetent since then?

Absolutely, for we now have a Government chock-full of morons, product of the dumbed-down "show-and-tell" coursework generation.

Roodhouse records the wartime internal debates about whether to cut national consumption by raising prices. "They concluded rationing was the only way to achieve dramatic cuts without feeding inflation or causing social unrest," he reports. They, too, considered making ration coupons tradable but decided equality of sacrifice was essential. But Roodhouse considers tradable carbon rations "would improve on the system, preventing black markets in unused coupons".

But this does not "improve on the system" for one is comparing apples with oranges, with actual hard scarcity and one trying to be synthesized by Authoritarian Government Fiat.

The trading element makes carbon rationing feel more voluntary and less oppressive.

Only to a moron, perhaps. "Feel" is not the same as "is". This IS involuntary and it IS oppressive.

In distribution of wealth, Britain is now back to 1937 levels of inequality, regressing backwards every year:

Yes, war followed by 60 years of the Welfare State. Well done. Thanks, you spiteful creatures!

that's what makes any kind of carbon tax or reliance on high prices impossible, the burden falling too unfairly.

Ah, so if the Socialist dream of a lumpen clay was actually achieved, higher prices could have been used. Oh what joy!

Doling out ad hoc energy vouchers to the poor at the taxpayers' expense is the wrong answer, and it only adds to the poverty trap by making the step up harder to climb.

Polly, I want to you to remember that statement and when you come up with any more ideas about redistribution and welfare, replace "ad hoc energy vouchers" with the current madcap idea that is rattling around your bonce.

Will Brown at least pay for it with a windfall tax on profiteering energy companies?

No, not even if he implemented such a windfall tax, for Brown pays for NOTHING. We, the taxpayers, pay for EVERYTHING in varying degrees. It is a zero-sum game (bit like your IQ) - energy companies will sandbag again or just not bother to build infrastructure, for how could they if Grabber Gordon keeps shoving his clunking fist into their savings and stealing all the notes?

But if personal carbon trading is "ahead of its time", that is exactly where we need to be.

It is not "ahead of its time" (unless...see above re EU), but is "a head up its arse".

Cowardly political leaders dare not tell voters the plain truth that we need to cut energy use.

It is not about telling here, Polly, you are proposing that people are FORCED. Big difference. Anyhow, since when have they got all honest?

If Miliband makes his run for the leadership, plain speaking about the climate will be one of his pitches - and bravery on personal carbon trading will be a test of candidates' seriousness about both climate and social justice.

Both "climate" and "social justice" are concepts for the subjugation of people and the removal of freedoms. I think Miliband is too smart to lash carbon credits to his leadership mast. Oh no, if he is still for it, he will bring it in once he has counted all his chickens after his premiership is hatched.

Keep up my mortgage payments, says Phillips (Track Changes)

Pay my mortgage Fight class divide, says Phillips

Mr Phillips said he was people were "very keen" for change

The Equality and Human Rights Commission must be given something to do the power to fight the class divide in Britain, its rent-seeking chairman has said.

Trevor Phillips told BBC Radio 4's World at One he would launch a "new assault" on common sense inequality and wanted an excuse for extension to the organisation's existence remit.

The economic slowdown meant his people were "very keen" for something to do change.

Everyone was "happy to take some of the payment pain as long as that payment pain is shared amongst me and my mates fairly", Mr Phillips added.

'Extremely self important'

A report by the commission now says there is too much "vertical" division in Britain between social classes.

It states: "We are not just limiting our job description [of inequality] by gender or race but we are also looking at this extremely important issue of our mortgage payments class."

Mr Phillips said: "We have decided to invent tackle the causes that supposedly drive inequality in our society to suit our warped, self-serving agenda and I think, to be honest, the public is very, very easily misled keen on this at the present time.

"People can see the economic slowdown coming. Everyone but us is happy to take some of the pain as long as that pain is shared fairly and what we want to do is to make sure that the burden doesn't fall on us unfairly on some groups rather than others."

BBC home affairs editor Mark Easton said this was "a radical departure which is likely to be criticised by some as an implicitly political policy from a statutory body that must remain independent of party ideology". No sh*t, Sherlock!

It would "mean taking on the wealthy and educated middle class who are already struggling to keep their heads above water despite the best efforts of rent-seeking parasitical self-loathers adept at playing the system to the advantage of their families", he added.

The commission was invented established in 2007, replacing the Equal Opportunities Commission as the QANGO keeping Phillips in free sandwiches and to give him a reason to put on silly glasses and shave his peanut-shaped head of a morning..

My apologies to the BBC.

Housing: It's The State, Stupid.

We see some extraordinary nonsense from the hatchet-faced angler fish Caroline skin Flint, suggesting the unemployed be denied access to council housing.

The unemployed will gravitate towards subsidised housing, and council housing is the vast bulk of that. Who does she think will be in council housing?

Well, for me the interest is an issue behind the inanity, imbecility and general puffery of her "policy" which is being and has been well shredded in the press and on blogs. I need not go into the point that she is systematically an awful, nasty piece of work. An arrogant, robotic Blears-in-waiting sound-bite generating question swerving, ladder-kicking lickspittle of the political class. Anyone who saw her in "reset mode" during the Politics Show when she projected a reality distortion field around the question of denying some bearded hate-mongering scrote entry into the UK that the Town Clerk of Britain refused to confront should be used in evidence and played as a backdrop to her eventual air tap dance.

But I digress...

For me the real issue is the involvement of the State in housing. If the State were not landlord of last resort or a builder and operator of vast housing stocks, interfering Authoritarian rent-seekers like Flint would not be able to get her polished fingernails into people's lives in this way - it would just not be her business. The remit of the State would be about if people are entitled* to various benefits such as unemployment or housing, not to give it out with moralistic strings, or, as Samizdata's Guy Herbert coins, Moralitarianism **

This "policy" is just the tip of the evil iceberg that is Statism and the Authoritarianism that it fosters. Once you get the State "in charge" it cannot help but grab control. Once you make the State responsible you prevent people being responsible for themselves and the consequences of their actions. You infantilise people via the poisoned chalice of Welfarism. You make them dependent and thus a client. The dependency implies strings and strings ask to be tugged and teased, like some grotesque Mafia Godfather. This is no surprise. The State is Enforcer in Chief, after all.

The answer is to remove the temptation. The State should not provide vast amounts of housing directly. Look at what they become - economic deserts. If anyone uses the term 'deprived', let them know what entity, if any, does the depriving - the State. Who stops people moving from one location to the other, treating people like cattle? The State.

I believe the key to State/subsidised housing lies in a simple rule: that nobody in receipt of State benefits including housing benefit in cash or in the form of subsidised State housing should be able to increase said allocation of housing. This specifically applies to those who enlarge their families via births, marriages, taking on more "dependents"***, importing family members, bigamous foreign-wed wives or whathaveyou. If you are living in State housing with your mum and you pop a sprog, tough - there you stay. No more rooms. No separate flat. No bump up the list. You want more kids, then do what all the poor working taxpayers have to do - earn more to pay for it, squeeze up or move under your own steam.

* sorry, I hate this word.

** another term came up in that thread - "benetax" a form of tax and benefit mix loved of the FibDumbs. Sounds like a haemorrhoid cream, and quite right as that hits to me at where I think it deserves to be shoved.

*** technically they cannot be "dependents" as someone who is dependent on another - in this case the State - is not really in a position to have their own dependents in truth.

Iain Dale Mocks Jacqui Smith rightly, but Rumsfeld wrongly

Iain Dale compares Jacqui Smith's with Donald Rumsfeld over her embarrassing gibberish and his very accurate and succinct but systematically misunderstood and unfairly mocked "known unknowns" speech, which proved HE knew something that all the lame-brain dullards scribbling around him did not.

Jac, appearing as she does with frightening consistency like some mediocre HR Manager from a cardboard box factory, came out with this gem over the 42 day detention rule:

"It won’t be hypothetical if and when it occurs. We are not legislating now on
the basis that we are bringing it in now for something that might happen in the
future; we are bringing it in now for something that might happen in the future;
we are bringing in a position for if it becomes unhypothetical. If,
unfortunately I and many other experts are right and we do need it in the future
it is in place."

Jacqui Smith has known non-working braincells, has unknown non-working braincells, but clearly no known working braincells!

FencePost No.4: Food Police

They really are trying to do it. The Government are serious about controlling what we eat.

The tip of the iceberg was rumbled in DEFRA's intent, now denied, to change the buying habits of the UK away from fresh milk to UHT. The lights came on and they were found standing around a hole. They denied everything, but we knew then and we certainly know now that that act and now this, is about implanting yet more Fence Posts.

Apart from the control aspect we have people who should know better try and not just excuse it but support it, wrapping it up in the language of science and reason.

The linked article above concludes:

Whenever individuals' behaviour is controlled by habits that they should control, we are at the fulcrum of the relationship between domination and freedom. Government has been reluctant to intrude, but now it must.

The author, Anthony Giddens, is right in saying that it is at the fulcrum of domination and freedom. The issue I have is with the very last word - "must". The Government can intrude if one person harms another - in fact some can say that is a must and the very purpose of Government and should be its prime, nay, only role. Here we are talking about "saving people from themselves" not because they ask, but because self-appointed types decide for them. Instead of pursuing the line of addiction to bad foodstuffs, Anthony should take a long hard look in the mirror and see his addiction to Socialism. He has his Socialist a hammer and he considers us all nails and is quite happy for other Socialist Hammer wielders to set about us. And he is in the House of Lords. He should be utterly ashamed of himself.

As in the case of the Milk debacle, Authoritarianism, control of production remaining in the hands of private organisations but obedient to the State. It has a word: Fascism.

The Devil deals out a visceral response and expresses it better than I could and with more wit.

One can only imagine the poverty of talent that must exist and the desperation and grasping for position and career that results in people like Dawn Primarolo being in charge of anything at all. Are they so short of talent? The answer, I suspect, is yes when you decide to limit your tide talent pool to those willing to endure the indignities and moral bankruptcy of the New Labour hierarchy.

I see you, HMG. I see the Fence Post going in. We caught you doing it a day or so before and you squealed like a stuck pig in denial but this time you try again, probably because this was planned and you could not stop it. One could imagine that this was part of a coordinated "rolling thunder" of announcements by QUANGOs "Trusts" to bludgeon the population.


This Government is the longest Socialist Government the UK has had...and boy does it show.

The Milk of Human Blindness

The Times reports today (via, Tim Worstall), that faceless interfering ricebowlers at DEFRA are seriously suggesting that the milk industry shift, as they so quaintly put it "to ensure that some 90 per cent of milk on sale will not require refrigeration by 2020".

This means we will be expected to switch to that god-awful UHT. Currently 93% of our milk is fresh. We consume fresh milk despite all the inconveniences because it is infinitely better than UHT, which, to me, has one purpose, to both colour and reduce the bitterness of bad warm drinks sometimes passed off as tea or coffee. Fresh milk is better to me because it tastes good. I can drink a pint of fresh milk and sometimes get a primordial desire to do so, but I can barely tolerate 5g of UHT. However, DEFRA wish to change consumer behaviour and force us to go backwards, to accept substandard food and drink in the name of the Great Green God. No, not really, but upon the dogma of that "religion" in reducing our sin carbon footprint.

DEFRA appears to have been infested with that mind virus, the Green Religion of Unthought. This is "Global Warning" - not Global Warming, but the trend now for using the threat of some future as an excuse and cover for, basically, totalitarian, authoritarian or just plain Robber Baronetcy.

What I see, apart from the blatant social engineering, undermining, guilt, bullying, memes, insults and just plain Fascism, is a convenient way to destroy our fresh milk habit and industry. The aim, I suspect, is to turn the UK into a market for ghastly UHT from anywhere in the EU. Right now, European calcified water and fat emulsions UHT is pretty much ignored in the UK and rightly so. One reason, apart from the fact that UHT is just plain shyte, is, I suspect, tea.

The UK are tea drinkers. Unlike coffee, tea is almost always drunk with milk and that milk needs to be fresh milk unless you are a self-flagellating zealot who is happy to train your taste buds to accept mediocrity or worse in the pursuit of your punishment dietary regime.

One of the excuses for this issue is the energy used in refrigeration. I suspect this is a bit of a con, really. A refrigerator is just a mover of heat, not a creator of cold. If you chill the contents you are warming the outside. If you want to reduce the amount of pumping losses, then you create more efficient refrigerators using such wonderful devices as Stirling Engines or, duh, put DOORS ON THEM. You do NOT use the PATHETIC excuse of "carbon footprint" to try and destroy an industry which exists solely due to consumer choice (note that) so that the world can bend to fit the prejudices, plans and non-sequiturs of a bunch of imbeciles at DEFRA.

Pound to a penny there is an EU directive at the bottom of this.

UPDATE: The BBC covered this at 1PM today, but just parroted the government lie line and had no real exposure, almost like a softening up exercise. Self-loathers!

The Sun is on Gordon's Ass...

It seems via Guido Fawkes The Sun has used an image of Churchill to tease Gordon.



I prefer my previous take on it, for Brown is a Chamberlainesque appeaser, not a defiant leader of a nation:




...but then I would, wouldn't I.

One thing that worries me is the "Dads Army" "Little Englander" inference in the Sun's imagery and the link between Churchill and stuffing the country. I prefer to focus on the delusional, dogmatic, irrational betrayal angle and not pollute the Churchill meme.

Brussels Throws a bone: Beware.

Brussels has decided not to pursue its fanatical obsession with eradicating Imperial weights and measurements...for now.

I suspect this is just to try and diffuse the EU Treaty issue. Once signed, I suspect metrication will be enforced more brutally and the UK will be unable to do a thing about it, seeing as Sovereignty will have been ceded by the Traitorous Scumbag Gordon Brown and his lickspittle party of spineless, imbecillic, toadying, no-nothing 'kwits.

As far as I can tell, Gordon Brown must be lined up for the head of the ECB AT LEAST, or even something greater in return for his "loyal service" in not having a Referendum. Mark my words, he is on a promise. This control freak would not risk the control he has over the UK if he were not in line for an even BIGGER fiefdom.

Gordon Brown, you Communist, authoritarian, insecure, vain, bone-headed villain. YOU, Gordon, are ceding from the UK. Fine. If YOU want to, YOU go, YOU cede YOURSELF, alone, but you have NEVER had the mandate or could EVER have the authority to cede MY Sovereignty unless I personally and explicitly agree to it, nor the Sovereignty of any other individual who has in turn not explicitly and personally agreed to it. You do NOT have the authority to offer up the nation to that craven, duplicitous, sociofascistic rabble in Brussels. Your "red lines" are a joke. They are Maginot Lines. They can and WILL be outmaneuvered in a trice and I know you know that they can be. Even you, you dandruff-encrusted, snot-mining baboon are not THAT stupid, but you ARE stupid enough to think that we are ALL fooled.

However, congrats to you and all politicians and media parasites since 1945 in creating a population mostly made up of dependent sheep who are more concerned at the outcome of next week's Corrie than the fate of their nation and who have the critical reasoning of a bacterium and the self-responsibility of a 2 year old. Yes, infantilisation: Job done, Socialists, you utter venal, parasitical scum.

Bombings: The Muppet Show Has Returned

Regardless of how sophisticated such people get over time, we need to ridicule and humiliate these hysterical, self-righteous, carpet-munching, book-burning muppets.

The chap yelling "Allah" must now feel a right Jessie. His god has abandoned him. There he is, after a failed attempt, trashed motor, no casualties but his own and now at risk of MRSA. Boy, I bet it stings. He has been systematically lied to, brainwashed, cheated, tricked and misled into this farcical blag that would put Zippy and Bungle to shame. The real shit-for-brains coward who cooked this "plot" up is likely never to risk his own well-stroked beard.

I would not be surprised if this chap, should he survive, realises his god was never with him, never supported his actions and so reverts to normality and rejects the Islamist lie.

UPDATE: No peep so far from the apologists and "community leaders". Still, I am sharpening my fisking cutlass in preparation...

Sociofascist Media on the Prowl pt.2

A report from Keele University talks about petty crime and, frankly, dishonesty amongst "middle classes".

Petty theft - e.g. pens and envelopes from employers, use of cash to avoid V.A.T. and not handing back too much change - is on the rise. The body count is rising.

What do they speculate as the reason? Loss of Welfare provision and protection by the State, miss-selling of pensions and mortgages basically, is their message. What. The.

I am disappointed that they did not protest about denial of "the means of production".

No, you imbecile, people pay cash because instinctively they feel they are paying far too much to Grabber Gordon. They lift pens. As if that has never happened. It also depends on how they classify "middle class" - I do suspect they classify it as white collar and the background of the population so described has changed over the years. It is not easy sneaking out a personal fax or three on a building site, is it? As for the ridiculous assertion about withdrawl of the State teat, it is more likely that people have got used to the corrupting effect of that teat that is the reason, not the withdrawl.

The bleating about miss-selling...oh my goodness, I could hardly hear his words for the sound of axes being ground.

Thankfully there was a lady with common sense on BBC Porridge this morning (did not catch her name) who basically suggested it was a result of excessive taxation and unfairness shown by the authorities. Whoosh as that went totally over their heads as they went "la la la". She also said that there were far more important crimes to focus on. Hear hear!

Yup - Blair and Co are dishonest parasites, so they set the example to an impressionable minority who do petty theft, so lets talk about them, not our traitorous leaders, nor the real violent yobs to systematically taunt then kill people for the crime of walking to the supermarket. Keele Uni - stick your head up a dead (polar) bear's bum. It will do us all some good.

Remind me to look more closely at anyone I hire from Keele, in case they try to take back the means of production using pens and threats of inflicting a paper cut to the nethers. Oh, and to see if they to are not a COMPLETE AND UTTER MORON.

EU Treaty Changes - Blink and you will miss it

A reference to "free and undistorted competition" was pulled from the draft after French pressure late on Thursday, according to the Twelve Regions Broadcasting Corp BBC.

Instead, the treaty refers to "social cohesion" and "full employment".

Ok: "free and undistorted competition"...into "social cohesion" and "full employment".

Did you miss it? If you did, don't blink when you read it - stare very hard. Spot the difference, anyone?

"Social cohesion" read: "lumpen proles" and "dependent masses"

"Full employment" read: "Salaried unemployed".

"Free and undistorted competition" read: wealth, prosperity, social mobility, competitiveness in the face of global threats.

Clearly the concept of feee and undistorted competition is too much for old Nucklehead Sarkastic Nicolas Sarkozy to bear. Clearly he wants something around an Oligarchy?, a Merchantilist Cartel, perhaps?

With words like this the EU will die - the only choice the UK has is if it wants to join the Suicide pact EU Experiment.

T-Mobile: Pull the other one...

...it makes my phone ring.

T-Mobile have obviously been reading from the New Labour Book of Spin (Das Neues Arbeitsbuch von Propaganda) when they attempt to present a rip-off as a benefit, a simplification:

From 26th September we're making the cost of browsing the whole Internet on your phone with web'n'walk simpler. Rather than pay for the amount you download until you spend £1, there will be a simple daily fee of £1 which gives you 24 hours unlimited browsing.

So...instead of up to £1, it will be £1 from the very first bit of information. Scumbags. That might be "simple" for the guys at T-Mobile, but to try and put it across as a benefit to the customer is disingenuous at best and downright INSULTING.

Message to T-Mobile: tell that shaved gibbon of a marketing wonk you employ that we are not fooled. Your plan was fair and sensible before. Now it is downright idiotic - people will shun your data services until they have a bunch to do, so instead of getting millions of pennies and some pounds you will just get even fewer pounds, moron.

More Nuclear Wrangling

Such a shame that Gordon Brown sold off our own Nuclear Power Station technology provider in the shape of Westinghouse to the Japanese. I hear that their technology is to be used to build a multitude of new Power Stations in China for a tidy profit.

Ok, so we now need power stations too. Gordon has sold off a major UK provider, . Not only have we lost potential foreign exchange revenue and intellectual property, we are now facing the prospect of paying foreign companies to build our infrastructure.

People think Gordon is some kind of economic genius. On this he is an imbecile.

Kofi Annan - shameless.

Kofi Annan has trotted up to address the Joint Houses of Parliament in the UK.

It seems he thinks the question of why slavery was tollerated for so long needs to be asked. It is not good enough that Britain gave it up voluntarily on moral grounds driven from a grass roots movement and then used its force of arms to impose that ban. No, Annan has to trot down the compensation pathway. For shame.

Well, how about dealing with the present, Mr Annan? How about discussing the real, present day issues in Africa caused by Africans and Arabs, Sec Gen. Annan? Darfur and the Chinese connection? Speak out on that? Ask Africans how they are treated now by Chinese versus the Europeans before? Ask that.

Africa is in poverty because of Kleptocratic leaders. Period. Africa starves because people are kept in subsistence farming and every time a war or drought occurs their lives are straws in the wind.

Africa needs industrial farming, an urban or suburban workforce and most of all Rule of Law. Kofi Annan delays that process by blame-shifting the here-and-now and instilling a compensation culture. In that he is shameless.

Hazel Blears - Totally MAD

I know I am not one for fence-sitting in regard to old Haze, but I can restrain myself no longer. Hazel Blears has the utter conceit to run for Deputy. Why should this poisonous creature ever consider herself fit to run a whelk stall let alone be DPM.

Hazel appears unable to separate truth from fiction, spin from fact. Questions are ignored and instead of an answer this rancid monster spews forth a torrent of disingenuous, sanctimonious political clap-trap. Totally at ease in delivering such nonsense with a straight face, Hazel is either utterly corrupt and contemptuous of the Public or is a deluded and deranged mental case.

We need to know who votes for her in the election so we can make our views plain.

Des Browne, NATO

...as in No Action, Talk Only.

So, the buck stops with him? Ok, then that would mean resign. But then again, that assumes the Minister has any true sense of responsibility. Words, it seems, are all that matter in NeueArbeit. They substitute policy, action, thought and even honour.

He wants to keep his job. I am sure the old chesnut about "so close to the May elections" will be trotted out blah blah.

Tone talked of "no reverse gear". His entire cabinet and ministers appear have not a single resignation letter between them.

What Gordon Brown Should Say This Budget

1: Flat Taxes, in particular a personal allowance of £12k so people doing a 40hr minimum wage job are under the banding. He won't because he loves to keep people dependent via "tax credits" and loves his social engineering. UKIP have made a reasonable fist of it so far. I think the rates can come down significanlty once it is running.
2: Own up to the massive off-balance-sheet debt. No, he won't do that, as this would expose him as the fraud that he is.
3: Reverse the Pensions "claw back", as old Labour would call this if the Tories did it.

In Education, I suspect Gordon will pledge to spend the same per child as the private sector and also impose new rules on Private Schools qualifying for charitable status, i.e. get his dirty fingernails into them so he can control what they do, who they take and how they teach them. His meddling may well ruin the schools, then he can say they are not value for money.

Fact is, if Gordon is willing to spend the same as the private sector, why not just let parents choose between private and State sector? As with taxes, Gordon loves to make people "grateful" and dependent and loves his social engineering. He knows people would flock to the private sector.

We will have "green taxes" but if Gordon was serious he would not have sold off Westinghouse part of BNFL to Toshiba, thus removing a lucrative advanced Nuclear Power Station technology provider. They could have cranked out power stations to remove our dependency on fossil fuels and thus reducing our carbon footprint to negligable levels. Dogma over prudence. Instead, they are going to crank out power stations for China and the profits go to Japan. The man is an ass.