Thursday, November 26, 2009

ANOTHER COMMUNIST IN TOP EU POSITION


Sometimes I worry about my health, banging on about communist influence, Common Purpose, climate change as the new excuse for collectivisation, but then I just read how another member of the Labour party has been working for the KGB, or another senior 'appointee' in the EU is a communist:


Baroness Ashton of Upholland’s past came back to haunt her yesterday when the European Union’s new foreign affairs chief was forced to deny taking funds from the Soviet Union during her days as treasurer for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament.

Lady Ashton, a surprise choice for her post, was challenged to deny that she had contact with Russian sources while she was in charge of its accounts at the height of the Cold War.

The Times has learnt that concerns about her CND involvement are felt across countries from the former Iron Curtain now in the EU and that MEPs plan to question her about it when she appears before them for the hearing to confirm her in her post.

Nigel Farage, the UK Independence Party leader, raised the matter on the floor of the European Parliament yesterday, earning himself a reprimand for referring to Lady Ashton and Herman Van Rompuy, the new European President, as pygmies. continues


Share/Save/Bookmark

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

CLIMATEGATE - A COSMIC RAY OF SUNSHINE



Following the progress of the LHC and what goes on at CERN is fascinating, it is one of the few places in the World where cutting edge physics by real scientists takes place, they are trying to unlock the secrets of the Universe and it has some interesting by-products:


Cosmic rays and cloud formation (CERN)

CLOUD is an experiment that uses a cloud chamber to study the possible link between galactic cosmic rays and cloud formation. Based at the Proton Synchrotron at CERN, this is the first time a high-energy physics accelerator has been used to study atmospheric and climate science; the results could greatly modify our understanding of clouds and climate.

Cosmic rays are charged particles that bombard the Earth's atmosphere from outer space. Studies suggest they may have an influence on the amount of cloud cover through the formation of new aerosols (tiny particles suspended in the air that seed cloud droplets). This is supported by satellite measurements, which show a possible correlation between cosmic-ray intensity and the amount of low cloud cover. Clouds exert a strong influence on the Earth’s energy balance; changes of only a few per cent have an important effect on the climate. Understanding the underlying microphysics in controlled laboratory conditions is a key to unravelling the connection between cosmic rays and clouds. continues


I can't find the results, but I believe that the theory was born out by the initial experiment which is why they're building a bigger and better one. The results should blow the CO2 lobby away like so much hot air:


The initial stage of the experiment uses a prototype detector, but the full CLOUD experiment will include an advanced cloud chamber and a reactor chamber, equipped with a wide range of external instrumentation to monitor and analyse their contents. The temperature and pressure conditions anywhere in the atmosphere can be re-created within the chambers, and all experimental conditions can be controlled and measured, including the ‘cosmic ray’ intensity and the contents of the chambers.


CLOUD and Initial CLOUD proposal


Nothing should be decided at The Copenhagen (collectivisation of the World) conference, or anywhere else until the results of these experiments are known.

You can't argue with real physics.


Update: CERN has kindly provided some further links:


Share/Save/Bookmark

PMQS SUMMARY


Oh dear, where to begin?

Brown began, as usual, by paying tribute to the fallen in Afghanistan and also to the Cumbrian emergency services and PC Bill Barker who lost his life in the floods.

Cameron echoed his tribute and spoke of the community spirit which united the people of Cockermouth.  He didn't utter the word 'blitz' but he didn't have to - we all know what he meant.  Catastrophes unite people and that's not a lesson lost on would-be world leaders since 1945.

Cameron's 2nd question was about chivvying the insurance companies to pay out as soon as possible, particularly with Christmas just around the corner.

What is it with Jim Murphy?  The Scottish Secretary is trying to increase Labour support in Scotland by proposing tax-raising powers for the Scottish Assembly despite a poll showing that the desire for independence from the Union has fallen and the SNP vote is falling away in some areas.  I hate to get personal, really I do, but Murphy reminds me of Banquo's cadaverous ghost.  He did a good job for the government in pushing through the Lisbon Treaty debate in the House (guillotined debates) and so was made Scottish Secretary.  The Labour Party surely know the meaning of 'post-democracy/post-bureacracy/post-modern' but the problem is that we, the people, haven't yet tuned in.

Cameron then turned to Hizb'ut Tahrir and the funding of three Islamic schools by taxpayers.  He quoted some of their mission statements and asked if Brown had any evidence of their funding by taxpayers (? but we all know this, we all read the newspapers).  Brown said he had no evidence.

I'm at a loss here.  Does the man not read the press?  Is everything that happens in England so irrelevant to this man and his team as they pursue their 'global agenda'?

Cameron put him straight and asked him how money from the Pathfinder Scheme could find its way into the pockets of an extremist organisation.

Cameron has a point: we are being taxed so that this govt can give a proportion of that money to extremist organisations who want to undermine our democracy.  Brown, of course, said he had no knowledge and would 'look into it'.  All the while, Ed Balls looked like nothing so much as a naughty boy caught in an act of misfeasance:  red-faced, eyes down, hands clasping knees.  Naughty-naughty, spanky-spanky, see me in my office later.  The crux of the question was how the govt's anti-extremist fund can end up funding extremists, passed by OfSted and approved by the Charity Commission.  Cameron then lost it by asking for 'a much bigger inquiry' into how such things can happen.  We know how they happen - whisper it softly, 'Common Purpose'.  We're sick of paying for Inquiries - in fact we've had far more Inquiries since 1997 than ever before in a 12yr period.  To coin a football chant: 'you're sh!it and you know it take a hike...'

Brown said everything would be 'investigated in great detail'; and went on to praise 'the vast majority of law-abiding Muslims in this country' who are not terrorists.  I'm sure he's right but I expect more than platitudes and soundbites from a Prime Minister.  He seems to take every criticism and question as a personal affront.  He went on to say that 'we have investigated it; we have looked at it ...  If he [Cameron] has any  new evidence that should make us proscribe it [Hizb'ut Tahrir] we will look at this again... "

Cameron: Hizbut Tahrir say: "Jews should be killed wherever you find them".  On Islam4Uk and Choudhary: "magnificent people carrying out their Islamic responsibility," "calling for blood on the streets of London and New York".   He asked when the PM 'tell us that he will get a grip on this issue'.

Lots of downturned mouths (Burnham) and shakey dogs (Balls) whilst this exchange was going on.

Brown:   'We need full detailed evidence in the cold light of day and I think he will regret some of the remarks he has made.... ...'  He spoke of the DNA database - normally difficult ground but Cameron had used up all his questions.  Brown accused the Conservatives of reneging on an 'all-Party consensus'. 

According to Speaker Bercow the government's backbenchers are still 'excitable'  and need to calm down.  He looked like a public school Latin master yet spoke like a pompous prat -  in my experience the two are not mutually exclusive.

Bradshaw thinks he is going places - where, I don't know, but he sat with elbow propped on backrest, eyes wide and head nodding like a parcel-shelf puppy.  I suspect he's had a few accolades lately for all the media appearances he's made.

Straw of course sat to the right of his Precious - no chewing gum this week but a white ribbon in his lapel: is that the new Peace Pledge Union alternative to a white poppy?

So sorry, but I have to say, fucking bastards they've sold us down the river lock stock kit caboodle and barrel.

There was more from Clegg and backbenchers but I'm feeling rather unrepresented in Parliament now. Some questions hit home but I can't help feeling it will make no difference whatsoever.


Author: Goodnight Vienna


Share/Save/Bookmark

CLIMATEGATE - HIDE THE DECLINE



Via M4GW

Sign the: No. 10 Climategate inquiry petition


Share/Save/Bookmark

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

THE QUEEN'S SPEECH, PART II



Continuing on
from the previous missive about the Queen's Speech where Labour try to elicit votes,

Crime and Security Bill. This assesses parenting for ASBO'd children. The assumption is that the parents have absolute control over children. What is appropriate parenting? The idea there is a definition which is rigidly held can only be an outgrowth of the 'tickbox' mentality. Would adequate parenting allow for exceptional children? Should all children be treated identically? This is a furtherance of the 1960s education based system that the Labour Party is committed to, there shouldn't be Grammar schools because everyone is equal, equal in intelligence, despite there being an exclusive intelligence society called Mensa.
Although modern Labour 'tickbox' mentality has led to school league tables and 'grammar' school mentality of the parents has led to children attaining top performing schools, not based as before, on achievement and examinable ability, but parental ability to situate themselves in the schools catchment area. 'Money based' grammar schools vs 'Intelligence' based grammar schools, I know which I would prefer.
The more worrying aspect to this Bill is the Guilty and 'not-able-to-prove-yourself-innocent' aspect.
First, the Police have the power to bar suspected domestic violence offenders from the home. This is interesting when in the past I have come to know a police officer who lied about a situation and turned a vocal and 'slappy' dispute between a couple into a major trauma event episode of Eastenders/Holby City! The issues relating to this small section of the law is horrendous, and the resulting trauma to the innocent is diabolical.
Second, the DNA database, where the efforts are into obtaining 'innocent' DNA, not, analysing previous crimes and establishing a comprehensive database of unsolved crimes for future reference, which would negate the need to store the innocent's DNA.
Third, what about Contactpoint? An innocent remark at the age of 4 can haunt a person 20 years later? This does not allow a person to 'grow-up'. How many 20 year olds (or even 10 year olds) have you seen acting like a 4 year old? Naked nanny state philosophy!
Fourth, what about the Criminal Records Bureau where a police officer can allege some misdemeanour and no arrest is required, no proof, no investigation, no evidence, no chance to prove yourself innocent, and stands as a permanent record! Have you run a CRB check on yourself to find out what is on there?
This Bill surreptitiously expands the Police State, by keeping DNA for 'only 6 years' there is a message that giving DNA is not a serious issue - so now there's no excuse for giving DNA to the police. Which will be the focus of police attention, rather than determining and entering the DNA associated with unsolved crimes making the need to store everyone's DNA unnecessary!

Digital Economy Bill. This is interesting as this suggests that Ofcom is going to regulate the Internet, and determine how the Internet is to be used. The biggest problem with the Internet is that it is a public service, with too many corporate interests in its growth and capitalisation to allow a regulator to determine or infringe their activities on the Internet. There is nothing about improving the communications architecture, creating an national Internet architecture able to cope with the coming generations of Internet technologies. We are falling behind (unsurprisingly), and the Government has decided to bring the Nanny State online! Next, another of those 'not-a-tax-at-all-taxes-it's-a-toll' on people's online usage, with online lectures about how your usage of the Internet is not 'Labour Party approved'.

Energy Bill. This Bill is based in part on legislation that should have happened when the Energy Companies, British Gas and British Electric were privatised. Support for the poorer members of our society, this could easily be done by declaring that the surplus profits generated by effective monopolies will be taxed at 90%.
As for Ofgem regulating the Energy companies, this has the potential to lead to a court clash with MNE's on one side and a regulator with limited powers on the other, especially as the utilities companies are now foreigners, and do not feel any pressure to listen to the British prime minister but foreign investors, and can use British citizens as a closed economy with little choice, having entered monopolistic contracts for supply of utility.
As for the Carbon Capture issue, and new coal fired power generators. The alternative is nuclear power, the ultimate in clean energy, which is why the environmentalists hate nuclear power, it means we can continue to live 'electric' lives, and not return to a pre-industrialised world. Strong of IPCC chairman fame, argues that the way to save the world is to destroy the industrialised economies - hmm! No anti-nuclear power agenda there then!

Equality Bill. This Bill makes it the 'public sector's duty' to 'narrow the gap between rich and poor'. To think this is the point of taxation - taking from the rich to cover social costs of an advanced civilisation that the poor can not be expected to afford. That the rich are getting richer, is due to Labour not concerning themselves with anything other than tax receipts, so long as the tax receipts do not cost anything to obtain. The poor on PAYE is perfect fodder for easy taxation. Taxing MNEs and chasing the banker bonus's offshore is just too much effort.
The employment tribunals are interesting point of 'creating equality'. The loops that staff have to jump to prove that they have been unfairly dismissed is astronomical. In one case that I am aware of, the employer had no proof, no witnesses and supplied the evidence after the date set by the tribunal, and on his say-so the court found against the defendant who had evidence and witnesses.
The mention of equality in the mouth of Labour though is really an attack on the 'white working male'. For some reason Labour think that 'white working males' are the enemy in the employment market. Unequal pay, based on disreputable statistics. Example, man and woman, both get identical education, GCSE, 'A' Levels and degree. If the man works a 40 hour week collecting £26,000pa and the woman marries a multi-millionaire. The statistics record the £26,000pa for the man, and £0 for the woman (all money being unearned). The man is obviously earning more than the woman, what with him living in a rented accommodation because he can't afford to buy a house, and she living in one of several houses around the globe. We need some honesty when entering this debate, Harriot Harmon is pathologically incapable of doing that. So the 'white male worker' is under attack again. Yippee!
Noting that this is the same Labour Party who brought Heterophobia (the hatred of heterosexuals) to the state pensions. What is the minimum pension - repeat after Labour, it is £115 a week. Repeat after the 800,000 married women (i.e. heterosexual) victimised it is £25 a week!

Financial Services Bill - or 'Shut the door, the horse has bolted!'. The outcry over bankers getting bonus's is nothing compared to those without pensions looking incredulously at the governments gilt lined ones, the same government who bankrupted the pension schemes! (and now cry no reward for failure for the bankers - ahem!). The thoughts behind this is transparent - there needs to be a bogeyman for the people to take their frustration out on - and it cannot be the people responsible, the MPs, so the easy target is bankers and financial institutions. I am of the opinion that MP pensions should be used to pay for the bankrupt pensions across the country - by retrospective law, making the labour pensions as worthless as they made everybody else's. Wonder which of the Labour sycophants will stand up and state that G. Brown is a wonderful chancellor then, when his policies hit their pocket!

Flood and Water Management Bill. Hmm, following the floods of 2007... this Bill should've appeared in 2007 Queen's Speech, or 2008 at the latest! Interesting that the Conservatives have been fighting rural developments in housing on Flood Plains, which I assume is the 'Sustainable' drainage systems have to be considered for new building developments. I suffer from some degree of pride - I think I am intelligent, so why does the expression 'Sustainable' drainage systems come across as meaningless? Is the alternative a drainage system which a does not drain water, or b is a one use system? An interesting proposal that would be of value is that the drainage system has electricity generators built in, so that when flooding knocks out the grid electricity, the local population is not affected, but that means using Britain's Engineering ability, most of which can be found on the various flights out of the country to the rest of the world, for reasons of getting jobs, with decent pay, and garnering respect. I suspect 'sustainable drainage systems' is 'political gibberish' often blogged as 'Nu Labour speak'. Communities near reservoirs should be worried about, via risk-based regulation, which is clear, but this interestingly does not cover the issue of river 'flood plain' development, I guess that the Conservatives will eventually wind up spotting this.
As for the 'Water Companies more power to control customers' usage during droughts'. This is not matched by 'Water Companies more responsible for lack of supply of water after heavy rainstorms/floods'. The last real drought we had in Britain was 1976. Water companies should accept they are responsible for the supply of water, which includes water capture during heavy rainstorms. Labour penalising the people it can attack, not the companies responsible. A cowardly response to an important issue.

Personal Care at Home Bill. I have a bad feeling that this is intended to give Labour the leverage to stop 'carers allowance'. Too much money is being given out by the treasury (up to £50 a week per carer for at least 40 hours a week work - so much for minimum pay.) which could otherwise be syphoned off into Labour party pockets. Why pay for someone to care for the sick full-time when a social worker can do this for a couple of hours a day. As for the people with highest needs, that by the very expression 'highest needs' should mean being put into a nursing facility with 24hours medical attention. With contacts in the 'home carer' community, the needs of the incapacitated and sick are being ignored and the Bill looks good, with the hope that no-one notices that the exact opposite is required.
As for protecting the savings of 166,000 people, having deliberately destroyed the savings of people entering a nursing home and then selling their homes. This, cynically, is a shot at obtaining the OAP vote in the hope that their dementia means they have forgotten it was Labour who deliberately plundered and bankrupted their Pensions, because the pensions were earning too much!, and then attacked their savings.
Preventing 130,000 people who need to enter a care home, well that expression says it all, the very thing that these people do not need is independence, what they need is nursing care! The offer of adaptations does not mention the suggestion that there will be the needed full time carer.
This Bill is Labour at its purest and most despicable, attacking the poorest and most vulnerable in society, with a hope that no-one notices.


Author: Dr. Stephen Lathwell, BSc(Hons), MSc(Optoelectronics), PhD.
Independent Candidate Luton South


Share/Save/Bookmark