Approximately 2 million public servants didn't turn up for work today and the Government has been attempting to turn the private sector against them in a divide and rule movement.
They tried this before with some success when they moved the argument away from bankers bonuses and got the public condemning those on benefits and disability benefit instead.
Now they are attempting to pit the private sector against the public sector with the cry of 'Look, they have better pensions then you, the bastards!'
The Governments argument is that the public servants strike to resist the 20% reduction in their pensions is unjustified because those people who don't work in the public sector have even worse ones.
Rather than work to drag up the worst pensions to the level of the decent public servants ones, they are looking to bust the decent ones down to the worst level.
Things are really bad but what they would really like is things to be bad for everyone, yes everyone suffering equally, that's the ticket and logical if you are a Conservative Prime Minister.
The nurses, policemen, firemen and teachers are not the bad guys here, it's a right wing Government using the excuse of a a weak economy to fulfil their political ideological dreams.
Wednesday, 30 November 2011
Tuesday, 29 November 2011
British Embassy Ransacked
Hundreds of Iranians have stormed the UK embassy in Tehran, chanting 'down with England' and 'down with America' and 'down with Israel' which is outrageous. America and Israel are much more evil than us, they should be down with first.My two personal highlights were the protester who was filmed running away with a picture of Queen Elizabeth II freshly nicked from our Embassy and the looter who was spotted scampering away clutching a large picture of Pulp Fiction.
Now i can see how a picture of the Queen might be hung in the British Embassy, but Vince and Jules?
The British government has confirmed a serious incursion at the UK embassy in Tehran and asked the Iranian government to make every effort to end the crisis immediately. Surprisingly the Iranian Foreign Ministry didn't tell us to go do one over our tightening of economic sanctions, but replied that it regrets the attack on the British embassy and is committed to ensuring diplomats safety.
There were the usual scenes of men dancing around Union Flag's that had been set on fire and even a man sat on the wall waving a satellite dish which is either a protest against western media pumping anti-government propaganda into Iran from outside the country, or he had just nicked it off the side wall. Either way they won't be watching The Simpsons in the Embassy tonight.
Just as a pointer to the Iranians for future ransackings of our property, it is the British Embassy, not the English Embassy. I'd hate to think that Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland are getting away with the hatred and i would like to repeat my earlier point that in any order of evilness and countries that should be downed, Israel is first, then America and then us. We are just America's poodle so leave us and our Pulp Fiction pictures alone.
Sunday, 27 November 2011
X-Factor Advert Breaks
While watching a two-hour special of Mythbusters, i noticed that the actual running time of the show, once it had the adverts taken out, was 1 hour 26 minutes meaning over a quarter of the show was advertisements.
I don't know who runs the television rules in America but here we have Ofcom and they have been getting bashed for the amount of advertisement breaks in the X-Factor programme.
For commercial television, which has seen a heavy reduction in advertising income recently, a blockbuster show like X-Factor offers mouthwatering opportunities. Aside from the traditional advertising spots, there is the chance to sell sponsorship bumpers which top and tail the commercial breaks.
Ofcom have denied that it has increased the amount of advertising time available for ITV from the standard 12 minutes per hour which is true, sort of.
The situation becomes complicated because the bumpers at the start and end of the break are counted as programming minuteage rather than as part of the ad break. Similarly, trailers for other ITV programmes are outside of the 12 minutes also.
So no, strictly there are not more advertisement breaks in X Factor, it still has the standard 12 minutes, but the advertisement breaks are longer because the Talk Talk adverts bookending the adverts and the ITV trailers mixed in with the adverts for toilet paper and margarine don't count so they can have 6 breaks 2 minutes long with all the trailers and bumpers slotted in to bloat the break time.
In the eyes of the Ofcom regulations, ITV and X-Factor are within the rules but to the viewing public, for whom the adverts start when Dermot O'Leary announces they will be right back and lasts until he welcomes us back, the adverts are actually more in number and last longer with the actual programme shaved a few minutes shorter.
I don't know who runs the television rules in America but here we have Ofcom and they have been getting bashed for the amount of advertisement breaks in the X-Factor programme.
For commercial television, which has seen a heavy reduction in advertising income recently, a blockbuster show like X-Factor offers mouthwatering opportunities. Aside from the traditional advertising spots, there is the chance to sell sponsorship bumpers which top and tail the commercial breaks.
Ofcom have denied that it has increased the amount of advertising time available for ITV from the standard 12 minutes per hour which is true, sort of.
The situation becomes complicated because the bumpers at the start and end of the break are counted as programming minuteage rather than as part of the ad break. Similarly, trailers for other ITV programmes are outside of the 12 minutes also.
So no, strictly there are not more advertisement breaks in X Factor, it still has the standard 12 minutes, but the advertisement breaks are longer because the Talk Talk adverts bookending the adverts and the ITV trailers mixed in with the adverts for toilet paper and margarine don't count so they can have 6 breaks 2 minutes long with all the trailers and bumpers slotted in to bloat the break time.
In the eyes of the Ofcom regulations, ITV and X-Factor are within the rules but to the viewing public, for whom the adverts start when Dermot O'Leary announces they will be right back and lasts until he welcomes us back, the adverts are actually more in number and last longer with the actual programme shaved a few minutes shorter.
Saturday, 26 November 2011
How To Solve The World Economic Crisis
UK owe to US 578 bn and UK due from US 834 bn
UK owe to France 209 bn and UK due from France 227 bn
UK owe to Spain 316 bn and UK due from Spain 74 bn
UK owe to Ireland 113 bn and UK due from Ireland 104 bn
UK owe to Japan 122 bn and UK due from Japan 101 bn
UK owe to Germany 379 bn and UK due from Germany 141 bn
Football teams have a tried and tested method of moving huge amounts of money between themselves in the transfer market. Put simply, Team A buys Smith from Team B for 10m paying 2m a year for 5 years. After 3 years, they sell Smith to Team C for 15m. Team A have already paid Team B 6m so they request Team C to pay them 11m and for Team C take over the 2m payments per year to team B, therefore paying off their remaining 4m. All three teams pay and receive what they are due and the books balance.
In the economic world, everybody owes, and is owed, money by each other. For example the UK owe France 209 bn, but then France owe us 227 bn. Why can't Cameron phone Sarkozy and suggest he take off the 209 bn we owe them from the 227 bn they owe us and then you just pay us the remaining 18 bn.
Then he can telephone Obama and say you owe us 834 bn, we owe you 578 bn, so let's just cancel out each others debt and you then just owe us 256 bn.
If all the countries of the World got on the phone to each other and worked out who owes who in this way then most of the countries deficits could be slashed. If we then juggled things around like in the football transfer scenario above so after cancelling each others debts, any outstanding balance is paid to another on behalf of someone else, we would clear up this whole mess or at the very least, drastically reduce the amount of debt held by each other.
Seems very simple to me which probably means there is a huge hole in my thinking but with a growing number of countries on the verge of going bankrupt, creditor nations are facing receiving next to nothing anyway so at least this way they will get what they are due.
It seems crazy that we are demanding someone like Japan pays us the 122 bn they owe us while Japan are demanding that we pay them the 101 bn we owe them with all the massive interest payment involved to both countries when we can just agree to them owing us the 21 bn difference instead.
UK owe to France 209 bn and UK due from France 227 bn
UK owe to Spain 316 bn and UK due from Spain 74 bn
UK owe to Ireland 113 bn and UK due from Ireland 104 bn
UK owe to Japan 122 bn and UK due from Japan 101 bn
UK owe to Germany 379 bn and UK due from Germany 141 bn
Football teams have a tried and tested method of moving huge amounts of money between themselves in the transfer market. Put simply, Team A buys Smith from Team B for 10m paying 2m a year for 5 years. After 3 years, they sell Smith to Team C for 15m. Team A have already paid Team B 6m so they request Team C to pay them 11m and for Team C take over the 2m payments per year to team B, therefore paying off their remaining 4m. All three teams pay and receive what they are due and the books balance.
In the economic world, everybody owes, and is owed, money by each other. For example the UK owe France 209 bn, but then France owe us 227 bn. Why can't Cameron phone Sarkozy and suggest he take off the 209 bn we owe them from the 227 bn they owe us and then you just pay us the remaining 18 bn.
Then he can telephone Obama and say you owe us 834 bn, we owe you 578 bn, so let's just cancel out each others debt and you then just owe us 256 bn.
If all the countries of the World got on the phone to each other and worked out who owes who in this way then most of the countries deficits could be slashed. If we then juggled things around like in the football transfer scenario above so after cancelling each others debts, any outstanding balance is paid to another on behalf of someone else, we would clear up this whole mess or at the very least, drastically reduce the amount of debt held by each other.
Seems very simple to me which probably means there is a huge hole in my thinking but with a growing number of countries on the verge of going bankrupt, creditor nations are facing receiving next to nothing anyway so at least this way they will get what they are due.
It seems crazy that we are demanding someone like Japan pays us the 122 bn they owe us while Japan are demanding that we pay them the 101 bn we owe them with all the massive interest payment involved to both countries when we can just agree to them owing us the 21 bn difference instead.
Friday, 25 November 2011
Court Finds Bush & Blair Guilty
Since they both moved into political retirement, Bush has kept out of the limelight and stayed in Texas while Blair had a go at remaining in the spotlight before quickly realising amid a deluge of insults and shoes that he had better keep his head down also.
While there are relatively few places that the unpopular pair could go on holiday and not be abused, if they had any plans to soak up the rays in Malaysia they had better think again because a court in Kuala Lumpar has declared them war criminals.
Though the verdict of the court carries no legal weight, the court held a trial and the decision was that:
'The Tribunal came to the unanimous conclusion that a prima facie case exists that President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair committed a crime against peace by their decision to invade and conquer Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein'.
The judge continued that 'Nothing in the United Nations Charter permits the actions undertaken by President Bush and Prime Minister Blair. The idea that the United States or United Kingdom was threatened by Iraq is preposterous.
The invasion of Iraq was an unlawful act of aggression and is an international crime. They acted with deceit therefore they are guilty as charged'.
The Court then recommended filing reports with the International Criminal Court against the two accused and that they both be included in the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission’s register of war criminals.
Luckily for the unloved duo, the Court has no power to enforce their decision but it is proof that their crimes have not been forgotten or forgiven and the pressure on them is ongoing.
Next up for trial is Donald Rumsfeld, the US Secretary of Defence during the Iraq War and the most smug faced person on the planet.
While there are relatively few places that the unpopular pair could go on holiday and not be abused, if they had any plans to soak up the rays in Malaysia they had better think again because a court in Kuala Lumpar has declared them war criminals.
Though the verdict of the court carries no legal weight, the court held a trial and the decision was that:
'The Tribunal came to the unanimous conclusion that a prima facie case exists that President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair committed a crime against peace by their decision to invade and conquer Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein'.
The judge continued that 'Nothing in the United Nations Charter permits the actions undertaken by President Bush and Prime Minister Blair. The idea that the United States or United Kingdom was threatened by Iraq is preposterous.
The invasion of Iraq was an unlawful act of aggression and is an international crime. They acted with deceit therefore they are guilty as charged'.
The Court then recommended filing reports with the International Criminal Court against the two accused and that they both be included in the Kuala Lumpur War Crimes Commission’s register of war criminals.
Luckily for the unloved duo, the Court has no power to enforce their decision but it is proof that their crimes have not been forgotten or forgiven and the pressure on them is ongoing.
Next up for trial is Donald Rumsfeld, the US Secretary of Defence during the Iraq War and the most smug faced person on the planet.
Tuesday, 22 November 2011
Whatever Happend To...
While moving around some of the right wing sites on the internet, you do tend see quite a bit of amusing rhetoric regarding the protests in America. I was reading one recently that urged it's readers to arm themselves and fill their pantries in preparation of the oncoming Anarchist Socialist revolution. Wonderfully insane and i mentioned recently how Communism, Socialism and Marxism are all jumbled together in the minds of the enlightened right wingers who warn of the coming Soviet take over.
Stalin and Lenin are the usual historical bogey men the brickbats are thrown out but for some reason, the third of the revolting trio seems to escaped unscathed.
Apart from a mention by The Stranglers in their song 'No More Heroes', poor old Leon Trotsky hardly ever gets a mention, it's always those other two hogging the hate which is even more stranger when you consider Trotsky was the one who advocated permanent revolution which would have spread Communism worldwide. The other two lightweights were content to hold what they had.
If it wasn't for the occasional joke about ice picks, Trotsky would just never be mentioned and he was as much part of the Russian Revolution as Joseph and Vladimir.
He got one of the main roles in George Orwell's Animal Farm as Snowball who was later forced out of the farm by Napoleon after overthrowing Farmer Jones and yet he is spared the wrath of nutty right wingers who warn that people protesting against banks will lead to a re-run of the Great Purges from Maine to that place down the bottom full of oranges, old people and voting machines that don't work properly.
I say Trotsky should be treated with as much laughingly bad hyperbole as Stalin and Lenin by right wingers who want to scare their readers and i'm sure Barack Obama would agree, and he's a card carry Communist. Apparently.
Stalin and Lenin are the usual historical bogey men the brickbats are thrown out but for some reason, the third of the revolting trio seems to escaped unscathed.
Apart from a mention by The Stranglers in their song 'No More Heroes', poor old Leon Trotsky hardly ever gets a mention, it's always those other two hogging the hate which is even more stranger when you consider Trotsky was the one who advocated permanent revolution which would have spread Communism worldwide. The other two lightweights were content to hold what they had.
If it wasn't for the occasional joke about ice picks, Trotsky would just never be mentioned and he was as much part of the Russian Revolution as Joseph and Vladimir.
He got one of the main roles in George Orwell's Animal Farm as Snowball who was later forced out of the farm by Napoleon after overthrowing Farmer Jones and yet he is spared the wrath of nutty right wingers who warn that people protesting against banks will lead to a re-run of the Great Purges from Maine to that place down the bottom full of oranges, old people and voting machines that don't work properly.
I say Trotsky should be treated with as much laughingly bad hyperbole as Stalin and Lenin by right wingers who want to scare their readers and i'm sure Barack Obama would agree, and he's a card carry Communist. Apparently.
Sunday, 20 November 2011
Brutal Oppression In America
As in the Arab Spring back in March, the Egyptian protesters today were holding up gas canisters with 'Made in USA' stamped on them. The cameras cut away to Egyptian riot police launching another brutal baton charge to disperse the crowd, dismantling their tents and tearing down their banners.If you had left the room and came back a minute later, you would still be seeing riot police brutally assaulting protesters and you would assume this was the same story, but it wasn't, these uniformed thugs were American police.
Among the victims of what was charitably described as 'heavy handed policing', a pregnant 19-year-old girl was pepper-sprayed as was Dorli Rainey, an 84-year-old woman. The reaction from the Police Department was a dismissive statement that Pepper Spray is 'no more dangerous to someone who is 10 or someone who is 80.'
The most disturbing scene was the policeman, Lt John Pike, calmly pepper spraying a line of unarmed students who were taking part in a peaceful campaign in California. Not only did he spray them at point blank range once, but then he walked back along the line to dish out another dose.
The police are there to protect and serve, but who exactly are they protecting and serving? Not the protesters obviously, but to use pepper spray, baton charges, tear gas, rubber bullets and sound canon against unarmed civilians posing no threat is just wrong in every way.
Over 1500 citizens so far have been arrested with journalists being threatened, beaten and arrested, 26 at the last count, for reporting on the police action. If this was anywhere else we would rightly be condoning it and branding the leadership a brutal regime, but there are people defending this action.
It cannot be simply written off as an over reaction of the police to something non-life threatening, non-deadly or a few bad apples which is a useful cover-all in the UK when police are caught out.
This is showing that in America, those that seek to protest against what they disagree with, will be put down with brutal force. If the protesters take up arms, as they did in Egypt, Iran, Libya and now in Syria, the Obama reaction would be exactly the same as Mubarak, Ahmadinejad, Gadaffi and Assad. Widespread slaughter because if they do this to unarmed civilians, and heaven knows how there has not been any fatalities yet, they will hit harder with lethal force if the protesters come armed next time.
In America of all places, it seems that if citizens peacefully seek to voice their grievances with the government, they will be threatened, ridiculed, bullied, attacked, assaulted and then arrested.
If this is how America deals with it's own version of citizens protesting, brutal oppression, then it has even less right to lecture any other country on how they should be behaving.
Friday, 18 November 2011
Osborne The Techno-Prat
We have heard the term 'technocrats' quite a bit recently with the news that the Italian Government has been cleared of all politicians and replaced by people with an economic background.
The theory is that people with experience of high finance are the best people to get the Italian economy back on its feet and it is a theory that i have some sympathy with even if i have misgivings with the Democracy side of things being swept to one side.
Whether this works or not we shall have to wait and see but it is obvious that in the UK, we do not have Technocrats so much as, well, idiots like George Osborne as the latest news from Northern Rock demonstrates.
The bank cost the Government £1.4 bn who then priced it at £1.12 bn but have now sold it to Virgin for £747m who had an original bid of £1.25 bn turned down a few years ago.
The Chancellor described the sale as 'The best deal for the British taxpayer' while his fellow Tory colleagues said it had been 'sold for a song'.
How the man in charge of our finances can call selling something for £400m less than the asking price a good deal is baffling, especially when you hear that what Virgin has paid for is only the profitable parts of the bank, we have helpfully broke off and keep hold of the parts of the bank that holds the £20 bn of toxic assets.
The idea of having people in charge who have an idea of what they are doing is sounding attractive so expect to hear how the Conservative Christmas Party at the local brewery has been cancelled this year. George Osborne is organising it. Smug faced moron.
The theory is that people with experience of high finance are the best people to get the Italian economy back on its feet and it is a theory that i have some sympathy with even if i have misgivings with the Democracy side of things being swept to one side.
Whether this works or not we shall have to wait and see but it is obvious that in the UK, we do not have Technocrats so much as, well, idiots like George Osborne as the latest news from Northern Rock demonstrates.
The bank cost the Government £1.4 bn who then priced it at £1.12 bn but have now sold it to Virgin for £747m who had an original bid of £1.25 bn turned down a few years ago.
The Chancellor described the sale as 'The best deal for the British taxpayer' while his fellow Tory colleagues said it had been 'sold for a song'.
How the man in charge of our finances can call selling something for £400m less than the asking price a good deal is baffling, especially when you hear that what Virgin has paid for is only the profitable parts of the bank, we have helpfully broke off and keep hold of the parts of the bank that holds the £20 bn of toxic assets.
The idea of having people in charge who have an idea of what they are doing is sounding attractive so expect to hear how the Conservative Christmas Party at the local brewery has been cancelled this year. George Osborne is organising it. Smug faced moron.
Tuesday, 15 November 2011
Star Spangled Banner Rewrite
Oh, say! can you see by the dawn's early light
What so proudly we hailed as the riot police came steaming;
With drawn guns under the stars, fought the perilous fight,
O'er Zuccotti Park we watched protesters start screaming,
In the pepper sprays red glare, nightsticks fly through the air,
By daylight the proof that no protesters left there:
Oh, say! does that first amendment banner still wave
In the land of the free o'er the tents of the brave?
What so proudly we hailed as the riot police came steaming;
With drawn guns under the stars, fought the perilous fight,
O'er Zuccotti Park we watched protesters start screaming,
In the pepper sprays red glare, nightsticks fly through the air,
By daylight the proof that no protesters left there:
Oh, say! does that first amendment banner still wave
In the land of the free o'er the tents of the brave?
Sunday, 13 November 2011
Katie Get Your Gun
A few years ago the Queen was on the end of much praise for putting a badly injured pheasant out of it's misery by wringing it's neck. What wasn't mentioned was that the injury was caused by Her Majesty blasting the bird out of the sky in the first place.
Our Royal family do like a bit of bloodsport, it if isn't taking pot-shots at harmless creatures for a bit of a lark, they are leading packs of dogs to rip apart foxes or rather they were until those bally commoners ruined their fun.
Now the Royal firing squad has another member to add to their team, Princess Kate, who has been having some private tuition in the art of bravely standing a hundred feet away and shooting at living things in preparation for the Boxing Day pheasant shoot at Sandringham.
Kate will spend her first Christmas with the Royal Family and is having the extra tuition because 'she is not the best shot'.
My first thought was to suggest a novel idea to her that she graciously decline the invitation to shoot at things but then on reflection, a loaded shotgun in the hands of somebody with lousy aim and a field full of Royals.
I say give her a gun, actually, give her two and get her some intensive training from that Cheney fellow.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it's Prince Andrew gingerly picking buckshot out of his backside Boxing Day Eve but i will be happy with any of them being unable to sit comfortably at the News Years celebrations.
Our Royal family do like a bit of bloodsport, it if isn't taking pot-shots at harmless creatures for a bit of a lark, they are leading packs of dogs to rip apart foxes or rather they were until those bally commoners ruined their fun.
Now the Royal firing squad has another member to add to their team, Princess Kate, who has been having some private tuition in the art of bravely standing a hundred feet away and shooting at living things in preparation for the Boxing Day pheasant shoot at Sandringham.
Kate will spend her first Christmas with the Royal Family and is having the extra tuition because 'she is not the best shot'.
My first thought was to suggest a novel idea to her that she graciously decline the invitation to shoot at things but then on reflection, a loaded shotgun in the hands of somebody with lousy aim and a field full of Royals.
I say give her a gun, actually, give her two and get her some intensive training from that Cheney fellow.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that it's Prince Andrew gingerly picking buckshot out of his backside Boxing Day Eve but i will be happy with any of them being unable to sit comfortably at the News Years celebrations.
Saturday, 12 November 2011
Another Leader Bites The Dust
If i were being charitable, i would describe the now former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Burlosconi as a colourful character. In a less charitable mood, i would say he was an imbecile of massive proportions.
Although Italians should be celebrating the end of Burlosconi, the way he has gone leaves a bitter taste in the mouth because it wasn't the Italian people that booted him out, he was forced out by the markets and the leaders of France & Germany, the second leader they have removed in a fortnight.
Greece neared default and the elected Prime Minister was shunted aside and replaced with the unelected Lucas Papademos, a former Governor of the Bank of Greece and Vice President of the European Central Bank. Now Italy are heading towards a Greek style meltdown and Burlosconi is eased out and the unelected former European Commissioner, Mario Monti, foisted upon the Italian public.
The proper thing to do would have been for Greece and Italy to hold snap elections but it appears the EU doesn't do democracy, you know that thing we invade other countries for not having, but it certainly likes putting it's 'friends' in power.
I am amazed that the Italians & Greeks have just allowed someone else to decide who can and can't run their country, regardless of how bad a job they are doing. There have been protests calling for Burlosconi to go for the past few years but he managed to stay and then last week the banks and brokers got worried and he is gone in a week.
Without doubt Burlosconi has been an awful Prime Minister and racked up a wide range of scandals including being found guilty of lying in court, bribing tax inspectors, false accounting, consorting with minors and is currently under trial for paying a juvenile prostitute.
Certainly he was a liability and yes he was a moron who shouldn't have been within a mile of power but that should be up to the Italians to decide, not those sitting in bank managers chairs and the leaders of France and Germany.
Although Italians should be celebrating the end of Burlosconi, the way he has gone leaves a bitter taste in the mouth because it wasn't the Italian people that booted him out, he was forced out by the markets and the leaders of France & Germany, the second leader they have removed in a fortnight.
Greece neared default and the elected Prime Minister was shunted aside and replaced with the unelected Lucas Papademos, a former Governor of the Bank of Greece and Vice President of the European Central Bank. Now Italy are heading towards a Greek style meltdown and Burlosconi is eased out and the unelected former European Commissioner, Mario Monti, foisted upon the Italian public.
The proper thing to do would have been for Greece and Italy to hold snap elections but it appears the EU doesn't do democracy, you know that thing we invade other countries for not having, but it certainly likes putting it's 'friends' in power.
I am amazed that the Italians & Greeks have just allowed someone else to decide who can and can't run their country, regardless of how bad a job they are doing. There have been protests calling for Burlosconi to go for the past few years but he managed to stay and then last week the banks and brokers got worried and he is gone in a week.
Without doubt Burlosconi has been an awful Prime Minister and racked up a wide range of scandals including being found guilty of lying in court, bribing tax inspectors, false accounting, consorting with minors and is currently under trial for paying a juvenile prostitute.
Certainly he was a liability and yes he was a moron who shouldn't have been within a mile of power but that should be up to the Italians to decide, not those sitting in bank managers chairs and the leaders of France and Germany.
Thursday, 10 November 2011
FIFA Wrong In Poppy Backtrack
I feel a bit disappointed that FIFA has backed down in the great Poppy row that has blown up over the England football team wanting to wear a poppy on their kits in the match against Spain this weekend.
I'm not sure why the English FA decided this year in particular to make such a fuss over it, the FIFA rules regarding the non wearing of symbols on countries shirts has been respected since the World Governing bodies creation but this year the Prime Minster and Royal Princes have not just asked but arrogantly demanded that England are treated as an exception to the rule despite it being a long established rule that has failed to perturb the FA in decades of previous Novembers matches.
Fifa's reasoning for turning down the FA's request to have the poppies on the kit was that it would 'open the door to similar initiatives across the world, while jeopardising the neutrality of football'.
I wanted to hear FIFA say no and keep with it but now a precedent has been set for any of FIFA's 208 members to use their footballers for political or religious reason.
This does seem to be a part of the hysterical furore that has grown around the wearing, or non-wearing, of poppies over the last few years.
For some, not wearing the symbol is an act of betrayal, spitting in the eye of all those who have died in wars and conflicts through the ages and the whole thing seems to have been hijacked by vocal people insisting that it is a patriotic display of support for 'our heroes'.
The English FA, Prime Minister and Prince William were wrong to make any demands of FIFA to treat us differently to every other country in the world and FIFA were equally as wrong to give in to our childlike demands.
Will the same people screaming for the inclusion of a poppy be quite so vocal if the Indians wanted to wear a symbol to commemorate the millions killed in the reign of the British Raj or the Afghanistan team wanting do something for all those who have died under the recent Western occupation?
I'm not sure why the English FA decided this year in particular to make such a fuss over it, the FIFA rules regarding the non wearing of symbols on countries shirts has been respected since the World Governing bodies creation but this year the Prime Minster and Royal Princes have not just asked but arrogantly demanded that England are treated as an exception to the rule despite it being a long established rule that has failed to perturb the FA in decades of previous Novembers matches.
Fifa's reasoning for turning down the FA's request to have the poppies on the kit was that it would 'open the door to similar initiatives across the world, while jeopardising the neutrality of football'.
I wanted to hear FIFA say no and keep with it but now a precedent has been set for any of FIFA's 208 members to use their footballers for political or religious reason.
This does seem to be a part of the hysterical furore that has grown around the wearing, or non-wearing, of poppies over the last few years.
For some, not wearing the symbol is an act of betrayal, spitting in the eye of all those who have died in wars and conflicts through the ages and the whole thing seems to have been hijacked by vocal people insisting that it is a patriotic display of support for 'our heroes'.
The English FA, Prime Minister and Prince William were wrong to make any demands of FIFA to treat us differently to every other country in the world and FIFA were equally as wrong to give in to our childlike demands.
Will the same people screaming for the inclusion of a poppy be quite so vocal if the Indians wanted to wear a symbol to commemorate the millions killed in the reign of the British Raj or the Afghanistan team wanting do something for all those who have died under the recent Western occupation?
Tuesday, 8 November 2011
White House Say No ET
Barack Obama's administration has said it has no evidence that extraterrestrial creatures exist in response to a White House petition signed by over 5000 people demanding that the White House disclose the government's knowledge of extraterrestrial beings. More than 12,000 signed another petition seeking answers to the question of an extraterrestrial presence engaging with us humans.
In response, Phil Larson of the White House office of science and technology policy, said that the US government has no evidence that life exists outside Earth, or that an extraterrestrial presence has contacted any member of the human race.
As someone who strongly believes that out of the trillions and trillions of stars, it would be improbable that there isn't life evolving on one of the rocks circling them although many disagree. The main reason being why have we not seen them?
I answer simply because if they did take a look at us, they would keep their distance because to an outsider we must look like the last race in the Universe anyone would want to to make contact with.
Taken as a whole, we are not a peace fearing people by any stretch of the imagination. Our whole history is one of war and oppression and developing bigger and better weapons to kill each other with. We have wiped out entire species and been daft enough to seriously pollute our own environment.
If we came across another species and it was setting about doing the same thing as us, we would back off and avoid it and if the aliens have any sense at all, they have done the same thing and scarpered back to whence they came with the message of giving that blue planet a miss, they are crazy.
In response, Phil Larson of the White House office of science and technology policy, said that the US government has no evidence that life exists outside Earth, or that an extraterrestrial presence has contacted any member of the human race.
As someone who strongly believes that out of the trillions and trillions of stars, it would be improbable that there isn't life evolving on one of the rocks circling them although many disagree. The main reason being why have we not seen them?
I answer simply because if they did take a look at us, they would keep their distance because to an outsider we must look like the last race in the Universe anyone would want to to make contact with.
Taken as a whole, we are not a peace fearing people by any stretch of the imagination. Our whole history is one of war and oppression and developing bigger and better weapons to kill each other with. We have wiped out entire species and been daft enough to seriously pollute our own environment.
If we came across another species and it was setting about doing the same thing as us, we would back off and avoid it and if the aliens have any sense at all, they have done the same thing and scarpered back to whence they came with the message of giving that blue planet a miss, they are crazy.
Monday, 7 November 2011
Socialism In A Nutshell
Rather predictable that the right wing is against the Occupy Wall Street protests that are currently sweeping not only America, but the Western World, but the Fox News team really outdid themselves this weekend.
Not only did they manage to accuse the protesters of being anti-Semitic because they are in support of the 99%, which leaves 1% which is roughly the percentage of Jews in the population, but wheeled out the usual insults of the protesters being anti-Americans, Marxists, Anarchists and Communists.
The Communists and Socialists insults crop up quite a bit in right wing rhetoric and Fox News had a helpful analogy to explain to it's viewers just what a Communist regime would mean for Americans.
Under Capitalism:
10 workers get paid £10 an hour and it takes them 10 hours to make a car. The car gets sold for £10,000. They all get paid £100 each and the remaining £9000 goes to the boss.
Under Communism:
10 workers get paid £10 an hour and it takes them 10 hours to make a car. The car gets sold for £10,000. They all get paid £100 each and the remaining £9000 go to the Authorities.
And now the part Fox failed to mention - Under Socialism:
10 workers get paid £10 an hour and it takes them 10 hours to make a car. The car gets sold for £10,000, They all get paid £100 each and the remaining £9000 is shared amongst them.
So Fox is correct that under Communism, all profits do go to the State as the State owns everything but they neglected to mention that under Socialism, the workers own everything so the profits are shared amongst them. The only difference between Socialism and Capitalism is who is the boss, a board of shareholders who take the profits or the workers who take the profits.
Despite the cries of the Right Wing, Socialism is not the Soviets under Stalin or North Korea, it is simply a system where the financial rewards are more evenly distributed and who wouldn't want that?
Think it wouldn't work in the real world? Department Store John Lewis’s is owned by it's staff, all 70,000 of them, and last year they shared just over £100 million profit between them, each receiving a bonus of nearly seven weeks’ pay. Last year each worker received the equivalent of 10 weeks pay.
Because John Lewis is owned by its staff from the boardroom to the shop floor, each receive the same percentage payout. This year it is equal to 13% of basic salary and that is Socialism in action and this proves that it works.
Now imagine if the banks did this with their tens of billions of pounds of profit, profit that at the moment go to the shareholders. What the Occupy protesters want are the profits of Capitalism to not go to the handful of companies shareholders but to be shared out amongst the people so Society as a whole benfits.
Don't let those who try to discredit the Occupy Protests with their talk of anarchists and Communists wanting to turn the West into North Korea, they are out to protect themselves and their bank balances and they will try to convert as many useful idiots to their cause as possible. Don't be a useful idiot for the right wing.
Not only did they manage to accuse the protesters of being anti-Semitic because they are in support of the 99%, which leaves 1% which is roughly the percentage of Jews in the population, but wheeled out the usual insults of the protesters being anti-Americans, Marxists, Anarchists and Communists.
The Communists and Socialists insults crop up quite a bit in right wing rhetoric and Fox News had a helpful analogy to explain to it's viewers just what a Communist regime would mean for Americans.
Under Capitalism:
10 workers get paid £10 an hour and it takes them 10 hours to make a car. The car gets sold for £10,000. They all get paid £100 each and the remaining £9000 goes to the boss.
Under Communism:
10 workers get paid £10 an hour and it takes them 10 hours to make a car. The car gets sold for £10,000. They all get paid £100 each and the remaining £9000 go to the Authorities.
And now the part Fox failed to mention - Under Socialism:
10 workers get paid £10 an hour and it takes them 10 hours to make a car. The car gets sold for £10,000, They all get paid £100 each and the remaining £9000 is shared amongst them.
So Fox is correct that under Communism, all profits do go to the State as the State owns everything but they neglected to mention that under Socialism, the workers own everything so the profits are shared amongst them. The only difference between Socialism and Capitalism is who is the boss, a board of shareholders who take the profits or the workers who take the profits.
Despite the cries of the Right Wing, Socialism is not the Soviets under Stalin or North Korea, it is simply a system where the financial rewards are more evenly distributed and who wouldn't want that?
Think it wouldn't work in the real world? Department Store John Lewis’s is owned by it's staff, all 70,000 of them, and last year they shared just over £100 million profit between them, each receiving a bonus of nearly seven weeks’ pay. Last year each worker received the equivalent of 10 weeks pay.
Because John Lewis is owned by its staff from the boardroom to the shop floor, each receive the same percentage payout. This year it is equal to 13% of basic salary and that is Socialism in action and this proves that it works.
Now imagine if the banks did this with their tens of billions of pounds of profit, profit that at the moment go to the shareholders. What the Occupy protesters want are the profits of Capitalism to not go to the handful of companies shareholders but to be shared out amongst the people so Society as a whole benfits.
Don't let those who try to discredit the Occupy Protests with their talk of anarchists and Communists wanting to turn the West into North Korea, they are out to protect themselves and their bank balances and they will try to convert as many useful idiots to their cause as possible. Don't be a useful idiot for the right wing.
Thursday, 3 November 2011
Same Old Faces Threatening Yet Another War
Western intelligence officials are saying that it will take Iran two or three years to get the bomb but we have been told that Iran was two or three years away from building the bomb for the last three decades.
Not that we have ever let a small thing like evidence get in the way of a bout of anti-Iran propaganda, we are again being warned that Iran gaining nuclear weapons capability is imminent and such a possibility would spell disaster for America and Israel with only there 5500 nuclear warheads to defend themselves with.
Reports are being circulated that the UK is examining contingency plans which involve aerial attacks on Iran's nuclear enrichment plants, in dealing with Iran and it's nuclear ambitions. The same people that bought us the Iraq, Afghanistan and Libyan wars are openly talking about attacking yet another country.
These same countries are saying to Iran 'We may have thousands of nukes, have invaded more countries than you under false pretences but you can't have nuclear power stations because you might try and develop weapons at some undetermined point in the future like we've had for years'.
As anyone who has been paying attention for the past ten years will know, it is obvious why Iran might want a bomb of its own. If the fate of Saddam and Gadaffi showed us anything, it's that the Wests enemies should not give up their nuclear weapon programmes. If you've got oil, we are coming for it and we won't be diverted by heavy civilian casualties (although the death of our own military personnel might cause a few wobbles), nor the potential that the war would quickly escalate from Iran to bring in Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah to reap havoc.
The irony is that if Iran did comes out and say they had developed the bomb, it would probably save millions of them from being slaughtered by the West and Israel who seem to have carte blanche to commit any atrocity it likes with unreserved support from America.
Unlike the Labour Party under Tony Blair in 2003, we can only hope there are enough voices in Government to tell the Prime Minister, and in Washington to tell the President 'Stop listening to the dangerous rubbish from Netanyahu, who is legendarily untrustworthy, and don't get involved in yet another stupid war'.
If the Americans are dumb enough to continue the gunboat diplomacy on behalf of Israel, the very least Britain should do is take a leaf from Harold Wilson's book when LBJ was asking for Britain to join the fight in Vietnam and tell them to take a hike.
Of course we won't and the trio led by a compulsively lying warmonger, an out of touch rich kid and the Nobel Peace Prize winner will be merrily killing in another avoidable war.
Isn't it obvious yet that the biggest threats to peace are in Washington, Tel Aviv and London, not Tehran.
Not that we have ever let a small thing like evidence get in the way of a bout of anti-Iran propaganda, we are again being warned that Iran gaining nuclear weapons capability is imminent and such a possibility would spell disaster for America and Israel with only there 5500 nuclear warheads to defend themselves with.
Reports are being circulated that the UK is examining contingency plans which involve aerial attacks on Iran's nuclear enrichment plants, in dealing with Iran and it's nuclear ambitions. The same people that bought us the Iraq, Afghanistan and Libyan wars are openly talking about attacking yet another country.
These same countries are saying to Iran 'We may have thousands of nukes, have invaded more countries than you under false pretences but you can't have nuclear power stations because you might try and develop weapons at some undetermined point in the future like we've had for years'.
As anyone who has been paying attention for the past ten years will know, it is obvious why Iran might want a bomb of its own. If the fate of Saddam and Gadaffi showed us anything, it's that the Wests enemies should not give up their nuclear weapon programmes. If you've got oil, we are coming for it and we won't be diverted by heavy civilian casualties (although the death of our own military personnel might cause a few wobbles), nor the potential that the war would quickly escalate from Iran to bring in Syria, Hamas and Hezbollah to reap havoc.
The irony is that if Iran did comes out and say they had developed the bomb, it would probably save millions of them from being slaughtered by the West and Israel who seem to have carte blanche to commit any atrocity it likes with unreserved support from America.
Unlike the Labour Party under Tony Blair in 2003, we can only hope there are enough voices in Government to tell the Prime Minister, and in Washington to tell the President 'Stop listening to the dangerous rubbish from Netanyahu, who is legendarily untrustworthy, and don't get involved in yet another stupid war'.
If the Americans are dumb enough to continue the gunboat diplomacy on behalf of Israel, the very least Britain should do is take a leaf from Harold Wilson's book when LBJ was asking for Britain to join the fight in Vietnam and tell them to take a hike.
Of course we won't and the trio led by a compulsively lying warmonger, an out of touch rich kid and the Nobel Peace Prize winner will be merrily killing in another avoidable war.
Isn't it obvious yet that the biggest threats to peace are in Washington, Tel Aviv and London, not Tehran.
Wednesday, 2 November 2011
Beiber Baby Bruhaha
Teenage pop star Justin Bieber has said that claims he fathered a child with a woman he met at one of his shows are 'demonstrably false' and he will 'vigorously pursue all available legal remedies' in response to the claim.The 20 year old woman, Mariah Yeater, claims she had sex with Bieber after a concert in October 2010 and said she is sure that he is the father because 'there were no other men she had had sex with at the time' and is demanding a paternity test.
Someone, is obviously lying and whoever it turns out to be, they are obviously being badly advised because after the paternity test the truth will come out.
Unless he has never had sex with this women, then he should not be making any claims that he is not the father as if it turns out that he is this will only come back to slap him in face twice as hard.
If this woman is making false claims then she will be forever branded a gold digging harlot and face a counter claim for trying to extort money.
Her lawyers claim 'There is credible evidence that Justin Bieber is the father of her baby' and pointed out that Bieber has not denied he had unprotected sex with Ms Yeater following the concert.
Bieber tweeted that he was going to ignore the rumours and asked he be judged on his music instead which is a strange thing to ask because to anyone who isn't a 12 year old girl, if he is the father his music is rubbish and if he isn't the father, his music is still rubbish.
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
UNESCO Vote
Heaven knows the Palestinians haven't had much to cheer about. Oppressed, downtrodden and bullied by their stronger, aggressive neighbour, it will take any victory and the UNESCO vote was a small victory.
The big UN vote for membership as a full member state is pencilled in for November 11th and the US has veto power at the Security council and has threatened to use it but it had no such power at UNESCO so instead lobbied hard to try and force the Palestinians to back down.
It threatened to cut all US funding for UNESCO, 22% of its annual budget, but UNESCO members have put politics before money, voting by 107 to 14 for the Palestinian bid.
This was not only a welcome failure of US power, but shows just how isolated America and Israel has become.
In the No column were Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sweden, United States of America and Vanuatu. When all the support you can muster is a handful of island nations and a few 'proper' countries, you must realise that you are backing a loser and Israel is hemorrhaging worldwide support.
It's response to the UNESCO vote was to suspend the transfer of tax money which it collects for the Palestinian Authority and to accelerate the construction of 2000 settlements on land where the Palestinians aim to found an independent state.
A small victory for Palestine maybe but a massive loss for the American and Israeli policy of keeping Palestine down with never ending talks which only achieve more Palestinian land illegally grabbed by Israel.
Now onto November 11th and the anticipated American veto in support of an increasingly isolated, and rightly maligned, Israel and the vitriol that will bring.
The big UN vote for membership as a full member state is pencilled in for November 11th and the US has veto power at the Security council and has threatened to use it but it had no such power at UNESCO so instead lobbied hard to try and force the Palestinians to back down.
It threatened to cut all US funding for UNESCO, 22% of its annual budget, but UNESCO members have put politics before money, voting by 107 to 14 for the Palestinian bid.
This was not only a welcome failure of US power, but shows just how isolated America and Israel has become.
In the No column were Australia, Canada, Czech Republic, Germany, Israel, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Solomon Islands, Sweden, United States of America and Vanuatu. When all the support you can muster is a handful of island nations and a few 'proper' countries, you must realise that you are backing a loser and Israel is hemorrhaging worldwide support.
It's response to the UNESCO vote was to suspend the transfer of tax money which it collects for the Palestinian Authority and to accelerate the construction of 2000 settlements on land where the Palestinians aim to found an independent state.
A small victory for Palestine maybe but a massive loss for the American and Israeli policy of keeping Palestine down with never ending talks which only achieve more Palestinian land illegally grabbed by Israel.
Now onto November 11th and the anticipated American veto in support of an increasingly isolated, and rightly maligned, Israel and the vitriol that will bring.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)