Saturday, 30 June 2007

UK Company's Revolutionary Electric Vehicle.

I have just come across a UK company that has created a plug-in series hybrid car that has 900 miles range and can do 150mph. It is based on the BMW Mini.

The 900 miles range is achieved by total braking regeneration and a small 250cc petrol generator. Without the generator operating, the car has about a 200 mile range from its lithium-polymer batteries which is suitable for 99% of the time, I would suspect.

The vehicle has 4 hub-mounted 160bhp motors giving a total of 640bhp, which explains the 150mph top speed and the 4.5sec 0-60mph time. This might sound excessive, but, correct me if I am wrong, I'd say this explains the ability to perform total regeneration. A feeble car like the Prius can NEVER regenerate sufficiently as its motor can only generate so much power and so only suck back in so much power. This puppy can suck back in 640bhp during braking and I suspect a little more for short spells. I'd think twice when sitting at the top of some gorge in the South of France with a full battery, though - where is all the energy to go? (it has no mechanical brakes!).

From what I can gather, the vehicle has significant trickery in the motor and battery management, vital to be able to shove back in all that power during braking and to be able to pull out the maximum energy without melting the battery pack. This is the real sauce that makes the dish, I suspect. That, and making the hub motors last long enough - the unsprung wheel rim is not the ideal place for delicate electronics!

Still, the basic concept of generator charging a battery and having 4 hub-mounted electric motors giving rapid performance is not entirely new. Ferdinand Porsche built such a vehicle while working for the Lohner 1903. The vehicle had a 40 mile battery-only range and could achieve 1903 remember.

The 1903 Lohner-Porsche 4x4 series petrol-electric hybrid.

This undermines the anti-car lobby somewhat. On your marks, sandalistas and lentilists! Ready, steady...chew those carpets!

p.s. BMW (UK) have asked the creators at PML to say they have nothing to do with it and to convert your Mini would invalidate the warranty. Well, remind me to tell them to go shove their collective, unimaginative heads up a dead polar bear's bum.

Friday, 29 June 2007

Brown begins carve-up of England

Gordon Brown has announced 9 Regional Ministers. Funny that they mirror the intended EU regions.

No, it is not funny. No, it is not surprising. The dismemberment of the UK, and England in particular, by stealth, has begun. Each minister, I suspect will immediately connect into the shadowy QANGOs that already exist behind the scenes sucking up vast amounts of cash for no benefit and wedging themselves between the people and their government.

We will get yet another layer in England. Once you have the Regions (Scotland, Wales and NI are already Regions, BTW - I suspect they do not quite know the implications of that yet) the purpose of Westminster is in question. This is the intention, I am sure - the argument is built up slowly and with stealth to present a check-mate. Westminster is outflanked, bypassed and then dismantled.

Their real intention is to create the big fat EU Superstate and get their pimply backsides into comfy positions resulting in luxuriant pensions and a protected existence as they are whisked to and fro, caring not for the lives of the people they ignore and exploit represent.

I did not think it was possible to despise Tessa Jowell more than I did, but I do. I suppose infinite contempt can always grow, can it not?

I am a citizen of the UK. I am NOT subject to the Regions. I regard their formation as a subversive and traitorous act.

In less than 48 hours, Gordon Brown has shown his true intent. My suspicions regarding a unilateral abandonment of Britain's nuclear capacity - essential if Britain is to be subdued if it decides to reject the EU - grow stronger. I knew they would set about it, but not so quickly. This is a cunning plan. Inamongst all the blizzard of appointments one more set of posts easily gets lost. The lumpen illitariat, bored already and reaching for their soaps, will not care. Misison accomplished?

UPDATE: As at 18:30, no sign of the appointments on the BBC. Speaks volumes.

Thursday, 28 June 2007

Dame Shirley Williams: Nuclear Non-Proliferation

Gordon has appointed "her" to be in charge of Nuclear Non-Proliferation.

Firstly, "in charge" in respect to our Shirl must always be used in the broadest of terms, as we are well inside Chocolate Teapot territory.

Further, I totally expect Shirl to decide that we should give up OUR weapons and programmes as a "sign of good faith" to all other nations. Yes, I do think so, and my tea-soaked brain seems to recall that was her position in the past. I will say that again: I predict Shirley Williams will move to abandon our own weaponry as a unilateral gesture to encourage others. She is a self-loather par excellance.

This then leads me to suspect that Brown really does want to abandon the UK as a national and international entity, happy for it to be a province in the European Union of Soviet Socialist Regions. Of course, France will perform the suave moves they are famous for by promising to drop their own weapons if only the UK does too (they have form). Of course, once the UK falls for it does it, then the French will magic from some chalk cave network all their old warheads and all related technology in true (French) Blue Peter, saying "this is one I prepared earlier".

Removal of the UK's nuclear capability is necessary to prevent the UK being capable of UDI form the EU. It is all part of the plan. Watch them go about it.

Blair in the Middle East

Tony Blair is now the Quartet's Middle East Envoy.

No envoy will be perfect. Some demand an Arab, others would reject an Arab. Some demand a European, others reject a European.

Tony Blair has done things wrong but he HAS managed to resolve Northern Ireland between existing, not "new generation", foes, even.

The Palestinian leaders who truly want a solution instead of an excuse to continue violent extortion the struggle will be able to talk to someone with the ear of the EU and America. How valuable is that? I'd say priceless.

Wednesday, 27 June 2007

Gordon Brown: A splintery plank, but what kind?

Any old wood can look good with varnish or even a veneer. Simple plywood, if treated with care, stained and polished can look quite respectable. The Dad of an old friend of mine can coax it to look like mahogany as long as you do not get up close.

How does Gordon fit into the Thornill Wood Scale?

The TWS has five basic catagories:

  1. Hardwood: Solid, robust but rigid and hard, so awkward to work with.
  2. Softwood: Usually pretty solid but often soft. Easier to work with and more flexible. Bit knotty.
  3. Plywood: Not often from quality sources, but is stronger and stiffer than it first looks, if sometimes frayed about the edges. Can be polished and varnished to look almost as good as a Hardwood and if treated well can comfortably take all weathers.
  4. MDF: Nasty, ugly, thick and inflexible. Can be toxic when working with it due to it being made up of a collection of rejected ideologies stuck together. Chippy with it.
  5. Chipboard: Old, soft, rougher version of MDF. Suitable for walking over. Soaks up liquids easily but then rapidly disintegrates. Best not seen outdoors.
You might be surprised, but I find Gordon a Hardwood. Bit splintery, mind, and not cut out to the right shape for my liking, but hardwood, nonetheless.

Cameron is still in the softwood rating AFAICT. Anyone who says Kennedy is chipboard is not speaking on my behalf. Farage appears to be Plywood at the moment. Blears, Reid, Hewitt, Hodge MDF'ers all.

China and Darfur

Bronwen Maddox in The Times mentions a dimension to the carnage in Sudan that I have long held - the issue of China. Go read it - short, but to the point. I am glad to see this aspect gettting more light.

This is the start. Expect to see more of the same throughout Africa as Chinese companies seek to secure resources. When China secures a "blue water" port for its Navy along the African coast, expect India to light up.

You have been warned.

Thornhill's Law

Godwin's Law: As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

Thornhill's Law: As a Socialist government's rule grows longer, the probability of it resembling National Socialism or Stalinism approaches one.

EU, Romania and Bulgaria - a Trojan Horse?

The EU is now bleating about high levels of corruption, contract killings and other shady activity in Romania and Bulgaria, two countries they badgered the existing members of the EU to take in.

It complains it has no powers to deal with it beyond refusing to recognise court decisions like arrest warrants or company law, complaining that this is like only using our missile against our own navy. Diddums.

I am certain the issue was known before. It begs the question - why let them in in the first place? Why allow dodgy states with such a feeble application of the Rule of Law inside the gates, as it were? You hose the wellies down outside the kitchen door, not in the middle of the living room floor.

To me the strategy is clear. The EU will now ask itself for more powers to clean up and "take charge" of these two countries and in the process gain the power to "take charge" of any Nation they choose. They have messed something up so they can "fix it" to suit their own agenda.

Typical Sociofascists.

p.s. Seems Sarkozy is to push for less British jobs in Airbus. The ink is not dry, yet the mask starts to slip.

Monday, 25 June 2007

Schools Told to "ditch education"

STATE secondary schools are being told to ditch teaching lessons in academic subjects and replace them with month-long projects on propaganda issues such as global warming and other tripe.

The pressure to scrap the traditional timetable in favour of faffing about aimlessly in the classroom cross-curricular topics is coming from the government’s pet quango teaching advisers, the Qualifications and Curriculum Abolishers Authority (QCA).

It has provoked anger from traditionalists who believe it marks a return to discredited “trendy” techniques.

Schools piloting the new-style lessons for 11-14-year-olds have liquidated merged history, geography and some other trendy bollocks citizenship, with teachers making it up as they go along drawing up the lessons in teams.

Mick Waters, the QCA’s curriculum director, believes the changes will deliver gravy for his quango help spur enthusiasm and cut truancy. He said: “The challenge for schools is to ignore interfering twats like us create a nourishing and appetising feast that will sustain learners and meet their needs or somesuch patronising newspeak .

“Although the national curriculum is organised into subjects, we are going to totally ignore the proven concept it has never been a requirement to deliver it entirely as discrete we will experiment with an entire generation of children to satisfy our mastabatory craving for control and voyeristic meddling

Critics, however, have insisted that the project-based approach, which was popular in primary schools until the 1990s, led to pupils failing to master the basics and growing up to vote NewLabour and watch Big Brother .

Alan Smithers, professor of education at Buckingham University, said: “This will narrow what children learn. Trecherous disingenous scumbags People come with up these ideas for other people's children the less academic but they wouldn’t dream of letting their own children be taught in this way.”

The first sign of a backlash from teachers has emerged with a petition on the Downing Street website against the removal of some of the academic content from a science GCSE curriculum launched last September.

About 130 science teachers have signed the petition, which calls for the course to be scrapped because it requires pupils to discuss propaganda issues such as pollution and other codswallop but not to learn “hard science”, such as the periodic table in chemistry.

The petition reads: “Many anticipated it as ‘science fit only for the pub’. Now, at the end of its first year . . . science teachers (particularly physics teachers) are indeed judging it to be overly simplistic, devoid of any real physics and inadequate preparation for further study. This GCSE will remove Britain’s technological base within a decade.”

Stuart Billington, head of physics at a large comprehensive, said: “I would never allow my own children to sit in my own classroom and be taught such a steaming pile of horse shit shambles masquerading as ‘science’ . . . You can imagine how I feel delivering it to 100 other people’s children every week.”

The QCA last week produced a single blank sheet of A4 examples of what will be expected from state secondary schools next year when the changes to the timetable for 11-to-14-year-olds are introduced.

They include a school that has suggested 16-year-olds could be paid to sue or discredit help teachers in class. Wombwell High, a comprehensive in South Yorkshire, has already dropped single subject lessons for a third of its timetable. Teachers argue the toss endlessly work in teams and the projects begin with four classes working together in the hall but end up down the chippy after breaking into slot machines on the high street .

Tolworth girls’ school in Surbiton, Surrey, has reclassified English as a foreign language “communication”.

The project-led approach took hold in primary schools in the 1970s after a report from a government-appointed bunch of dopeheads education committee who always have a great record in such things .

Teachers were bullied, bluffed or misled told to abdicate their responsibility to educate emphasise soft skills and “learning by doing”. Schools were told to scrap projects in 1992 after an inquiry found pupils were being failed miserably by this trendy horse-dung missing out on the basics.

Waters has told schools they need to build the timetable around the “needs” of pupils. He said: “At the moment most schools are in the traditional mindset, which means they organise the day into a meaningful form take content and divide it up into fragments called timetables. They do it as it has always been done.

“The idea [of the new nonsense timetable] is to offer less education prescription and more opportunity to dream, idle and entrophy interpret the curriculum. Cutting across all subjects are insert trendy buzz-word to give a false sense of meaning curriculum dimensions; a set of themes including creativity, cultural understanding and diversity.”

The real article can be found here.
(no offence to Geraldine Hackett, only the bozos behind the "idea").

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 Constitution: Blair/Brown attempting to cede FROM the UK?

I have been thinking. Dangerous, I know.

The EU agreement is about transfer of sovereignty to the EU. Maybe not total, but a transfer nonetheless. The nature of the transfer as I see it shall render the remaining sovereignty ineffective or irrelevent (energy, borders for example), so the idea that it is only "partial" is specious - that is like saying a severed arm is the person while the remaining body is only a part of it and does not count - sovereignty becomes "inquorate".

Example: Commission shall not have a representative from each country at all times, therefore any particular country might not be involved in decision making at all times - to me this is loss of sovereignty, for a nation is subordinate and not even fully participating. Subsidiarity is another case, as it is the delegation of powers to the National level at the discretion of the Centre. To say the Nation is Sovereign is like saying a subordinate is the CEO.

Thus, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown are, in effect, trying to attempt cession TO the EU.

My understanding is that this is just not possible under UK law. The PM, Parliament or Monarch just does not have that power and cannot grant themselves that power.

If individuals want to personally subject themselves alone to the rules of the EU, then fine - bugger off.

I gave no authority to transfer MY freedoms, nationality, sovereignty etc. to a foreign power and as such why should I have to recognise it?

War, Carl Philipp Gottfried von Clausewitz once said, is politics by other means. The EU is gaining what is normally gained via War.

I do not recognise this as a valid political act - does that mean I am now at war?

Sunday, 24 June 2007

Sikh Regiment

I have long commented about my support for the formation of Sikh Regiment in the British Army. I think it would be an a excellent thing and I am very glad to see that my thoughts echo that of the Army itself and of the Sikh community. Alas, the Commission for Racial Exploitation Equality have nagged, bamboozled and guilt-tripped the powers that be into dropping the idea. For crying out loud this is not about saying "you, Mr Singh, can ONLY join this regiment", but that it is about honouring and recognising a group who have served so well in the past.

A throat says: "The creation of a separate regiment according to ethnicity would be segregation, which amounts to discrimination under the Race Relations Act. Anything that creates separation between regiments can only have a detrimental effect upon our Armed Forces' operational effectiveness."

If this is indeed how the Act would rule, then the act is irrational - it is an ass. It needs review, repeal or just pragmatic and rational use. However, seeing as we are talking lawyers, repeal and start again might be a better way.

Alas, the CRE do not wish to render themselves redundant, so their actions - often displaying an intent to patronise and kept racial groups in a subordinate position to further an egotistical and parasitical agendae - should always be viewed with suspicion....hold on a mo'! We have to PAY for these clowns!

I hope the publicity around this nonsensical decision will prompt a swift reversal.

Saturday, 23 June 2007

The EU Monster is Revealed

Shaved Gibbon No1 and Shaved Gibbon No2 have decided to sign the latest EU Constitution Treaty which, according to these guys, (hat tip, Iain Dale)is basically the EU Constitution in a Cinderella outfit. Not long past midnight it will rapidly revert to its true form. It basically enables the EU to speak for the UK in international fora, veto almost any national decisions, force Napoleonic legal structures upon us, control energy, ENERGY!, transport, welfare, immigration...well, just about anything. Any remaining "Maginot red lines" to me appear to be easily undermined or out-manaeuvered at will. Anyone who thinks we are protected by them is an utter fool.

In recognition of the abysmal, undemocratic, authoritarian Statist, Sociofascist Superstate of 27 that will hopefully soon be just 26 puppet governments Nations I have created a flag in the name of transparency and mutual understanding.

The New European UberReich Union Flag

I hope the UK or at worse, England, will revert to a trading relationship with the EU and that all the other countries do likewise, e.g. Lativa, Lithuania, Poland, The Czech Republic, The Netherlands, who I hope will soon see the EU as the rotten apple it is.

"We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not comprised. We are associated but not absorbed. And should European statesmen address us and say, 'Shall we speak for thee?', we should reply, 'Nay Sir, for we dwell among our own people'." - W.S. Churchill

Friday, 22 June 2007

Yet Moron Education

The Devil and noble James Bartholomew make some focused posts on the appalling news that 25% of school-leavers leave with nothing valuable to show for it.

I need not repeat their views here, but only to say that if they leave with nothing, or even something that is worthless as GCSEs are rapidly becoming, then why keep them there 2 years longer?

I agree with James that the core problem is the State Monopoly. I am not a fan of monopolies.

It is criminal that this is allowed to happen. What is also criminal is the Educational Establishment - so blinkered by Statist and Sociofascist dogma that they are blind to it all. Such a group are not worthy and certainly not to be trusted to form policy or educate our children.

The Statists truly do wish to create a "Lumpen Illitariat" of juveniles. Not adults, juvenules.

The Myth of Islamophobia

This chap makes a very good fist on Youtube of articulating a rational, reasonable and logical view or two on this topic.

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.

Thursday, 21 June 2007

Barroso In Reality Distortion Field

In an interview with the BBC regarding the EU Treaty European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said:
"Sometimes I hear people saying that for Parliament to approve it would be by the back door. Is that the respect some people show their Parliament, maybe the greatest Parliament in the world? I don't consider Parliament the back door. Britain is the country that exported Parliamentary democracy to the world. Do the British people consider Parliament the backdoor? Do the British people who killed their king to protect the rights of Parliament consider it the back door? Is that the respect some people show their Parliament , maybe the greatest Parliament in the world? I don't consider Parliament the back door."

Mr Barroso, you forget - Parliament is not a blank cheque - something you might find unfamiliar, seeing as you operate in one of the most obscene blank cheques the world has ever known. Parliament killed the King to defend the rights of the People, which Parliament represents. It is not an issue of respect of the People towards Parliament, but one of Parliament towards the People.

Mr Barroso - we have the measure of you, and I have you in my eye, sir. In my eye.

Wednesday, 20 June 2007

Tory NHS Reform: British Leyland, meet your next patient...

The Conservatives have announced their plans for the NHS.

Instead of moving towards a government regulated but independent, pluralistic, self-tuning (via said pluralism) and responsive (same) health service which I have outlined we will still have a monolithic entity. This looks similar to the BMA view which I briefly commented on earlier.

Power will still not be devolved into the hands of those who PAY for the service, so it will always be dysfunctional. The cart is before the horse. If you give power to Doctors and other professionals it is at least better than now and to an extent welcome insofar as it gives respect and trust to those who know more than faceless bureaucrats. However, the objective of that power is to meet the healthcare needs of patients. Therefore you will see the power exercised indirectly and via a prism. It will also be exercised without the benefit of hundreds of thousands of small, subtle corrective hints that individual patient choice will give. Choice here should not be the false choice of "you can choose between four pre-selected and equally overloaded hospitals". The choice should be to the extent of "I am changing health insurance provider because they are too expensive" or that "I will go to any hospital but X, because I hear bad things about it". Such choice will either trigger improvements or result in the closing of dysfunctional parts. Shape up or ship out.

The Conservative reforms do no appear to move forward in this respect. If anything, they run the risk of putting another unaccountable entity in the rather too long a loop.

UPDATE: Phil A (in comments) has found this article on Bromley's woes. I suggest you read it. A key point in that article is the following:
The outcome is that hospitals that are cheaper to run will face cuts, while patients will be crammed into the more expensive PFI hospitals in an attempt to make them profitable.
This is most worrying and to me looks almost criminal - the PCT is forced to use the worst option due to the contract terms imposed by the slimey toe-rags PFI contractor. People need to be fired.

In such a case and under Roger's reforms, if the PCT cannot unhook the Hospital it would need to remain with that Hospital, tied to it like an albatross, and all other Hospitals would be moved to a new PCT in the interim. As outlined in the plan, the Hospital/PFI operator would need to reform itself or see the runt PCT implode. Such implosions would be contained within the runt PCT and not affect healthcare for the population using the main PCT. Roger would like to see those responsible made life Directors of the runt PCT and so any such fall-out would splatter them. That is not possible, but worth a jolly good try.

UPDATE2: Earlier I said people need to be fired. Upon reflection I was wrong. People need to be fired, re-hired and fired again just as they take out their little pencil case and packed lunch (containing a Viscount biscuit, I suspect). Each time they will not pass "Go", nor collect a redundancy package.

Quotes to be reminded of: Milton Friedman pt.1

Long overdue. The following quotation is key to understanding where I am coming from. Before you can argue about why I think the way I do, first get your head around this:

There are four ways in which you can spend money. You can spend your own money on yourself. When you do that, why then you really watch out what you're doing, and you try to get the most for your money.

Then you can spend your own money on somebody else. For example, I buy a birthday present for someone. Well, then I'm not so careful about the content of the present, but I'm very careful about the cost.

Then, I can spend somebody else's money on myself. And if I spend somebody else's money on myself, then I'm sure going to have a good lunch!

Finally, I can spend somebody else's money on somebody else. And if I spend somebody else's money on somebody else, I'm not concerned about how much it is, and I'm not concerned about what I get. And that's government. And that's close to 40% of our national income. - Milton Friedman

Once you have understood the above, which is undeniably true, you might want to re-visit how you think money should be spent.

Sometimes collecting and spending tax revenue, or, more accurately, Other Peoples' Money (OPM) is the least-worst option, but in the UK it is currently 43% 45% of GDP AND RISING and there is NO WAY that even a sizeable minority of the cash is spent in the least-worst way.

Update: Mark in the comments mentions that the government currently borrows another 3%, there are liabilities of 5% in pensions and PFI of (only?) 1%.

"Many a trough betwixt cup and lip" as it were.

Tuesday, 19 June 2007

New Job Posting No.2


Salary: £26- £28 p/h
Date posted: 31 May 2007
Closing date: 30 Jun 2007

A farcical position has a risen for a Smokefree Apparatchik.

The role will involve the implementation of the Denial of Smoking Action Plan. This will involve intelligence gathering and dissemination of propaganda, indoctrination, patronising and misleading fellow apparatchiks of Councils and Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) and especially the poor hapless non-voting taxpayers of the Business Community. Preference will be given to candidates who have previous form.

The ideal candidate will have excellent communication and interpersonal skills and be competent at delivering a sound and achieveable project plan.

We require candidates who have been an Environmental Health Officer or other Health Practioner. Alternatively, we may consider a professional with a history of working within a Council but we don't care what sort as long as you are brainwashed and have had your moral compass demagnetised. A good understanding of the box-ticking issues around Environmental and Consumer Protection Law will be a delight to us. Must have knowledge of current developments around
Denial of Smoking oppression.

The contract is for a 6 month period, but be yea not afraid, it will most certainly run and run. Due to the level of intollerance required for this vinctive and utterly non-productive role, the taxpayer is being forced to pay you between £26-£28 p/h, while WE will get a hefty cut of the spoils.

Enforcement Yobs acts as both an Employment Agency and Employer and we cannot see any wrong in that whatsoever.

Lets look at the original, as it is such an appalling mess...

Smokefree Coordinator
Salary: £26- £28 p/h
Date posted: 31 May 2007
Closing date: 30 Jun 2007

A formidable position has a risen for a Smokefree Coordinator. [I'm steaming, does that count?]

The role will involve the implementation of the smoke free action plan. [capitals anyone?] This will involve report writing and presentation, training, giving advice and information to stakeholders of council primary care trust (PCT) [yet more capitals needed...], and the business community [and probably advice to the writer of this ad who has little grasp of punctuation]. Preference will be given to candidates who have previous projects experience. [flippin Nora...]

The ideal candidate will have excellent communicative [what do you want? a disease? - the word is communication, dear] and interpersonal skills and be confident in delivering a project plan. [we don't care which one, just any would do...Metrics. Metrics]

We require candidates who have been a Environmental Health Officer or other Health Practioner. Otherwise a professional with a history of working within a council [...will what? come round and tell you off?, criticise the curtains?]. A good understanding of the enforcement issues around Environmental and Consumer Protection Law. Must have knowledge of current developments around smoke free legislation. [there is not one correct sentence in this entire paragraph]

The contract is for a 6 month period, due to the level of experience required for this is paying between £26-£28 p/h. [i.e. in the region of £50k a year - one thing is smoking - our money, as in "up in smoke"]

Enforcement Jobs is a member of the Red Snapper Recruitment Group [more like Red Grasping Piranha] and acts as both an Employment Agency and Employer [cuts both ways, I suspect...] .The Red Snapper Recruitment Group is an equal opportunities employer. [equal opportunities seem to extend to the borderline literate]


p.s., if you notice more ridiculous bullshine, let ol' Roger know...

T-Mobile: Pull the other one... 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.

Islamist Attempt at Gaining a Veto No.94

In respect to the Salman Rushdie getting a Knighthood, we have Lord Ahmed on the box asking for the honour to be withdrawn. As always, underneath the immediate issue is an attempt to drive in the wedge of veto over UK affairs.

If Lord A had any decency, he would state clearly that anyone trying to use this as an excuse for violence is an imbecile. Some might say that if he did he would be criticising himself...but I couldn't possibly comment.

In my view Lord A derives importance and status from "community issues". I suspect it is not in his interest to resolve such things but to have them rumble on as an open sore so he can continue to maintain his rice-bowl.

UPDATE: The Assembly of the North West Passage have (Khyber) passed a resolution saying the honour was part of a move to "hurt the feelings of Muslims". How on EARTH can they think they have the right to attribute the motives of others?

You cannot take offence if none was given.

Thursday, 14 June 2007

FibDumbs on Housing - more irrational dreaming.

Oh dear - The Fibberall Dumboldtwats have come up with another stream of irrational nonsensitude.

Sir Ming is a nice gentleman, but he really should stop listening to his party, as they are a bunch of morons, judging by this latest crop of ideas. I suspect in their impatience for results they did not wait for anything productive to grow, but just harvested the manure they spread shortly beforehand.

Sir Ming is right, sort of, when he says that Labour is ghettoising housing, leaving poor and vulnerable people living on large ‘sink estates’ which offered little hope or opportunity. He also said it was a national disgrace that one million children still lived in overcrowded accommodation and 130,000 children lived in temporary housing.

However, Sir Ming forgot to mention that it was not Labour that ghettoised people or created 'sink estates' per se. In my view it is the very concept of State-built/run/subsidised social housing that creates these problems. Sir Ming also forgets to mention the proportion of all these suffering children that were intentionally born into such conditions by their parent or parents and that the State actively encourages such births due to the prevailing mechanisms of Welfarism.

Sir Ming is, however, bang on when he says VAT should not apply to housing renovations, which are, in effect, necessities in most of the cases or if not they tend to increase Council Taxes. This is more an issue of taxation, not Social Housing, however.

Moving on to the other "ideas", we see they are strangers to reason.

Gerroff Moi Laaan'

He intends to allow local authorities to buy land zoned as farmland at farmland prices, re-zone it and then sell it on for a proft. This is almost jaw-droppingly naive, scandalous, corruptible, totalitarian hogwash. Local councils are bad enough without allowing them to get their greedy hands on land for redevelopment by their squalid golfing partners while taking a slice in to the bargain. On one level you can see that they have a point, for the council does get some form of payback for the increase in value of that land due to re-zoning but the mechanism and mode is so utterly ham-fisted and open to abuse. I have long considered Lib-Dems to be naive fools and this proves it yet again. Now, if the council built a tram line or electric trolleybus infrastructure - cables, transformers etc - to serve the land (note: not some poxy excuse of a bus service that will be withdrawn once the bunting is down) then I could understand more, for they would be seriously increasing the value of that land and integrating it into the community. However, as it stands the "idea" denies the original landowner its true value and tempts local councils to re-zone for fiscal purposes (which is polite) not community benefit. The scope for corruption is immense.

Would it not be better to allow land to be bought by developers of transport - rail, tram or trolley companies, for example - subject to local referendum, who then are the people to sell off the land for housing development once the infrastructure is in place? London grew like this. Surely we want people to live in houses with predictable, non-polluting forms of transport into centres of employment. Better still, build the housing right over certain stretches of the new railway and even over some stations. Hong Kong does this all the time. Each rail station becomes a massive high rise hub of housing, shops, offices. The MTR of Hong Kong works its assets hard and most benefit. Maybe it is indeed TfL that does the expansion into the Thames Gateway. They get the land, build the rail, tram, tube connections and develop the immediate station and air rights, then sell off the land around to fund the project. This might reduce some of the issues that happened around the Jubilee extension. If someone has a better idea, I am all ears!

Rental by Any Other Name

Another concept is equity sharing, but in this case the Lib-Dems want to not only control the price that the original property is sold at, but to also control the RESALE price too. This would mean, in effect, that once people are in such properties it is highly likely they will have to remain in such, limiting their choices in terms of purchaser and next home. They are unlikely to achieve "escape velocity" unless the housing market seriously crashes and then they would probably have achieved it anyway without the risk of a mortgage! Alas, this is a manifestation of do-goodery and patronising infantilisation of the population. It will simultaneously distort the market, imprison people and subject them to risks they would otherwise not encounter. They should be honest about what the true effect would be and just say they want to build Section Houses, Nursing Staff Quarters etc. for key workers and be done with it.

Communism by Any Other Name

The idea of spreading about the problem of sink estates has been bandied about by both NeueArbeit and the Lib-Dumbs. We already suffer from borderline Communism in planning where people are forced to build in "affordable housing" into their schemes which means the State has its dirty, interfering fingernails into each private housing project. This takes it further and seeks to spread out the sink estates like some perverse blend of homeopathic plague. Sink estates are not sinks because they are large, but because of the nature of some of the people in them and the nature of the relationship between the residents and their landlord, the State. Note that private Social housing rarely if at all becomes a sink estate. Spreading them about will not change the nature of the people, nor the landlord. In fact all it will do is make the total impact of the small number of dysfunctional residents more widespread. The State is an appalling landlord. "Social Housing" is by definition antisocial.

To resolve this:
  • The Welfare State should be a safety net, not a hammock in which entire lives can be conceived, grow and then reproduce again.
  • Housing to be provided mostly by the voluntary and private sectors where there is no "right" to housing, as all that "right" does is result in a hard, unwanted, unavoidable obligation on the taxpayer to provide it. If the obligation were truly desired, i.e. voluntary, then those individuals who wish to gladly pay money towards subsidised housing can fund the voluntary sector (OK?).
  • Immigrants should not be provided State housing as they are, by definition, economic migrants and as such should be capable of looking after themselves.
  • People who increase the size of their families while living in State housing either via additional children, marriage or the accumulation of "dependents" should not be considered for review of living space.
  • Confirmed, granted Asylum seekers should be given time-limited assisted housing (say 6 months) until they are also economically active (which we are told they mostly are, right?) and then market rates should apply.
  • We have many people not economically active including vast amounts of the 900,000 of Gordon's paper-pushing "salaried unemployed" whilst importing or at least allowing the inflow of labour. That needs to change.

The Lib Dem solution is like trying to cure dysentery by handing out nappies.

Fix the problem, not the symptom.

Wednesday, 13 June 2007

More Points on the Graph of Statism pt.2 - Eviction

Now we have the Citizens Advice Bureau not being very smart.

They are calling for a change in the law (grief, soon they will want a change in the law for repainting the back bedroom) to prevent Landlords from evicting tenants who complain about the state of their accommodation (rented of their own free will, mind). In typical Sociofascist form they bleat that a tenant has the "right" to home improvements. Huh? I was right - a law about repainting the back bedroom!

If I am a Landlord renting out a grotty squalid damp, rat-infested hovel I am likely to be charging something in the "Hovel" pricing band, not the "Shagpalace" band. If I am forced to retain a tenant AND do repairs and renovation I am going to want to up the rent to "Tidyhome" or even "Shagpalace" levels. But I suspect the Landlord will be forced to keep the rental at the same level as before, which is absurd. If the Landlord remained free to raise it as high as they want to, which can force an eviction by default or, as this will almost certainly require, some new body to perform arbitration, price setting, inspection etc etc...oh good grief you can see where this is all heading, can't you - the nationalisation of the private rental market with price fixing, demands for licensing, control and sign off for improvements, enforced acceptance of "disadvantaged" or "deprived" "family units" etc etc.

Frankly, those Sociofascists have failed to provide housing so are now going to set about removing or controlling any alternative that exists so as not to expose their own shortcomings.

Tuesday, 12 June 2007

PollyT: Babies who need big money and unflagging commitment

Yes, Polly, you are one of those babies, but I do not recognise your need as valid.

However, to the core issue. Has it ever occured to Polly to ask how many children in poverty were born into it by their parents?

Has it ever occured to Polly that it is the parents' responsibility, if it is anybody's, to prevent or lift their own children out of poverty, or even to think twice about having them?

Until the country stops paying the poor to have kids, the issue of child poverty will not go away until everyone else is so impoverished by the welfare and parasitical social services burden that the poor are joined by the rest of us and so the concept of relative poverty is meaningless. That is sociofascist policy, for sure.

I was going to go through Polly's article, but it contradicts itself, has false dichotomies, other nonsense, but most of all it has illogic and unreason in the face of such obvious evidence. And she is paid for doing that?

Monday, 11 June 2007

Words and Phrases To Detest pt.2 - "Social Exclusion"

This phrase is loaded with presumption. It implies those who are "socially excluded" are subjected to some proactive force, some conspiracy that should not be there, should be compensated for, or reversed. It has many similarities to the terms "Deprivation" and "Disadvantaged".

If "social exclusion" were narrowly applied, such as in the case of disabled people, then it might have weight, but the social services industry never miss a trick to have a remit broadened or creep a mission, so this label is also applied to people who are lazy, feckless, criminal and antisocial and is used, of course, as a ticket to gain Other Peoples' Money.

Judging by the present use of the term, a 40+ white male is 'socially excluded', but I think you will find that the Parasites could not bring themselves to use it in that case.

Maybe the best way is to just ask those parasitical self-loathing creatures infesting Social Services who is NOT socially excluded.

Friday, 8 June 2007

Question: Is Organic "Green"?

I wonder if anyone dares find out if Organic produce creates significantly more CO2 than "normal" farming?

If it does, expect to be deafened by the sound of knickers being twisted.

Wednesday, 6 June 2007

Further EU Authoritarianism - Common Immigration Policy

Now we have the EU wanting to decide a common immigration policy.

Under the flimsy guise of "helping out Malta" and other countries facing onslaught, the EU wants to internally "trade" such migrants.

The EU is talking utter nonsense. Making it easier for migrants means...more migrants, numbnuts! Of course, the EU would LOVE nation states to get weaker and to have large numbers of "thankful"§ voters who care not for the precise nature of the country they are in, so there are alternate motivations at play here. A further alternate motivation is to remove more sovereignty and interfere still further in the legal frameworks and judicial systems of member states.

Spain had a real problem in some of its tiny enclaves. A bit of stick, tough no-nonsense behaviour and huge publicity showing the chances of death or almost certain regurgitation back into the Sahara seems to have quietened that down a bit.

I am sure the Canary Islands had a similar "surge" when word got out to the people smugglers that this was a potential soft underbelly into Britain the EU. That rumour was firmly quashed, IIRC, and things are quieter. All strength to Spain's arm.

If Malta was seen as a conduit instead of a firm, no-nonsense Nation with true patriots willing to let illegals bob in the swell as the least-worst option available, it would become a doormat.

If the EU wants to wring its hands about mass economic immigration, for that is what this really is, not "asylum", then the best solution is to FIX THE COUNTRIES OF ORIGIN.

I'll say that again - the best way to fix this problem is to fix the countries of origin so those people have no real incentive to migrate. Yes, it means exposing China's duplicity in Africa. Yes, it means exposing the Kleptocracies and yes it does mean not feeding the arms trade. It also means not permitting "amnesties" at any time ever. Information travels too far and there are too many people "working the numbers" to allow such naivety to occur in such a crowded place as the UK.

Fix the problem, not the symptom. Migration is the symptom. Dysfunctional States are the problem.

What would Roger do? Well, I would create a special economic zone on or just off the W African coast free of the grasping hands of State, Army and Politicians. In that zone we have low taxes, very very strong Rule of Law - let us say we clone Hong Kong and let Africans have a shot at it under UK administration.

The zone would NOT permit people to enter the EU, but would permit those people to live under something approaching English Common Law and to be free to make money and live their lives. It might be tough to create it on the mainland, so one of the Canaries might have to be converted for the purpose (preferably not one that is about to slide its rocky butt into the Atlantic).

Now, how much would a 99 year lease on a defendable 1000sqkm of W African coastline (with river and port potential) cost, I wonder?

§ something given in such a way often results in contempt by the receiver for the giver. EU, you have been warned.

More Points on the Graph of Statism

Further to the ever increasing moves towards authoritarianism, I recall recently seeing on BBC's morning porridge serving (aka BBC Breakfast) a piece on organ donation. One of the guests was an almost cliche shrill eager and earnest but dangerous sort§ who wished that donation be "opt out, not opt in". Part of her argument was that in Europe this is very commonplace.

Well, of course it is common in Europe as even your ass belongs to the State unless they say otherwise.

English Common Law is pretty consistent on this issue - freedom unless said otherwise. Napoleonic Law in Europe is "No, unless we say so".

Maybe this is why they are trying to cut down on smoking and drinking, so the quality of organs they are lining up to harvest from us will be of a higher quality...

§ dangerous in that they sincerely believe they are doing others "good", and so have no qualms in doing them harm in other ways to achieve this "good".

Tuesday, 5 June 2007

The State Machine as Terminator

Further to excellent posts by Mr Eugenides and Devil's Kitchen on the issue of patronising, authoritarian, interfering knob-jockeys wanting to impose price controls on alcohol, the issue prompts me to misquote from the excellent Terminator:

Kyle Reese: Listen! And understand! The State is out there. It can't be bargained with! It can't be reasoned with! It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead!

Update: from further BBC reports. hat tip Phil A.

"Big" Vern

It seems "Big Vern" Vernon Coaker (who would be wearing a sheepskin coat if the weather was not so clement...) says

"It is unacceptable for people to use alcohol and urinate in the street, vomit and carry on. It's almost regarded as acceptable to drink to get drunk and we want to change that attitude."

Well, I think it is unacceptable for a Government to use our money, urinate over our traditions, freedoms and rights, vomit up more legislation and then carry on. It's almost regarded as acceptable to fleece the taxpayer and I WANT TO CHANGE THAT ATTITUDE!

If there is a problem with drunken yobs on the streets, lock 'em up in short term solitary, fine them properly and treat their behaviour as seriously as we "hazardous middle aged drinkers" do. It is not as if nothing has been said along those lines in the past!

Monday, 4 June 2007

Change for Change's Sake - "New" London Olympic Logo

Instead of the original, restrained "Thames" logo, we now have this:

Now, it is eyecatching, but it really looks like some talentless amateur has been let loose with the 4-pen pack of Platignum felt-tips.

I find it impossible to to imagine that this thing took more than 400 seconds to create. Even the typeface for "london", not even capitalised, is an utter disgrace. It has all the artistic and creative merit of one of those "jokey" office posters written in "MS Comic Sans" with one of the crushingly predictable pieces of "clap art". Frankly, I am surprised that it did not include the "bending man with magnifying glass" image so often seen in talentless materials.

What is really sad is that some chum has had the hubris to trademark this nonsense. Thats another £140 down the drain, then.

The logo for the bid is infinitely less-worse:-

Ok, so it is not as "eyecatching", but if you want eyecatching, may I suggest a pic of Tessa Jowell's rancid head on a spike. That would raise a cheer, at least.

Blog Polls

I am flattered to be nominated (so far!) in the following blog polls:

Best Brit Blog or column

Best Blog Name

Best Political Blog or column

Of course, such 'umble feelings does not prevent me from being delighted if further votes and catagories are forthcoming!

Friday, 1 June 2007

Mike Read's Dodgy Syrup

I am sorry, folks. After briefly glimpsing Mike Read, London Mayoral Candidate on 18DS - was he wearing an ear-to-ear rug?

Someone tell me he was not rugged up? London Mayor with a dodgy syrup? Might explain why some of his ideas were a little woolly...