Osama on obesity...

Well, not yet but no doubt it could be among the next topics along with teenage pregnacy and personal debt that terror sheik Osama Bin Laden discusses on his talk show, blaming - as ever - the USA and globalisation. Well, with his latest release - no doubt in an attempt to draw new fans to his fight against the US - he mentions not global holy war this time but global warming. Ooh the EU and the BBC must love him* HOWEVER the UN has just indefinitely postponed its deadline (originally for tomorrow, Jan 31) for countries to accede to the Copenhagen Accord probably because both the Indian and Chinese governments have said they won't sign...perhaps Osama should look to these near neighbours of his instead of blaming the US all the time!

Of course it's not new to him: in his letter to the American people in 2002 he said "You have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history. Despite this, you refuse to sign the Kyoto agreement so that you can secure the profit of your greedy companies and industries."

No doubt he has recently observed the stalling of the Climate Change juggernaut and hopes to give it a boost; interesting the he's probably better off keeping quiet because what he wants is what many people think will happen as a consequence of global warming anyway:

"[it] could exacerbate the world's rich-poor divide and help to radicalize populations and fan terrorism in the countries worst affected"

That quote is from security and climate experts at a conference in London on "Climate Change: the Global Security Impact" exactly two years ago in January 2007 and where Britain's former UN ambassador said: "Violence within and between communities and between nation states, we must accept, could possibly increase, because the precedents are all around." (this along with just about anything and everything bad being blamed on climate change)

* THIS link - also from 2007 - to John Redwood's blog: to me it seems that Osama's point chimes with BBC and EU spin on Kyoto/Bali etc.

Osama on obesity...

Well, not yet but no doubt it could be among the next topics along with teenage pregnacy and personal debt that terror sheik Osama Bin Laden discusses on his talk show, blaming - as ever - the USA and globalisation. Well, with his latest release - no doubt in an attempt to draw new fans to his fight against the US - he mentions not global holy war this time but global warming. Ooh the EU and the BBC must love him* HOWEVER the UN has just indefinitely postponed its deadline (originally for tomorrow, Jan 31) for countries to accede to the Copenhagen Accord probably because both the Indian and Chinese governments have said they won't sign...perhaps Osama should look to these near neighbours of his instead of blaming the US all the time!

Of course it's not new to him: in his letter to the American people in 2002 he said "You have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history. Despite this, you refuse to sign the Kyoto agreement so that you can secure the profit of your greedy companies and industries."

No doubt he has recently observed the stalling of the Climate Change juggernaut and hopes to give it a boost; interesting the he's probably better off keeping quiet because what he wants is what many people think will happen as a consequence of global warming anyway:

"[it] could exacerbate the world's rich-poor divide and help to radicalize populations and fan terrorism in the countries worst affected"

That quote is from security and climate experts at a conference in London on "Climate Change: the Global Security Impact" exactly two years ago in January 2007 and where Britain's former UN ambassador said: "Violence within and between communities and between nation states, we must accept, could possibly increase, because the precedents are all around." (this along with just about anything and everything bad being blamed on climate change)

* THIS link - also from 2007 - to John Redwood's blog: to me it seems that Osama's point chimes with BBC and EU spin on Kyoto/Bali etc.

Obsessive optimist...

Fingers crossed: "The Obama administration has issued guidelines that Americans will get coverage not only for physical illness but for mental illness and substance abuse treatment also"...do you think there's an indication that the level of service could be a lottery?

It could be you!

News on TopNews. "New rules on mental health coverage formed". Note: I do not know if this is an official logo and it could be from anywhere, anyone seen it before?

Obsessive optimist...

Fingers crossed: "The Obama administration has issued guidelines that Americans will get coverage not only for physical illness but for mental illness and substance abuse treatment also"...do you think there's an indication that the level of service could be a lottery?

It could be you!

News on TopNews. "New rules on mental health coverage formed". Note: I do not know if this is an official logo and it could be from anywhere, anyone seen it before?

Oratio obliqua options...

Twits, twats, tweets...One minor debate going on at ConservativeHome is why David Cameron isn't on Twitter. A quick glance shows probably half for and half against the idea of DC twittering...but one comment stands out (no, not mine although I added my tuppennyworth which coincides with the second bullet point below) but towards the bottom GuyTheMac nails it: as I've linked to his blog I'm sure won't mind if I copy most of his ConHome comment here (my emphasis):

• The league tables for 'number of followers' are a nonsense - any quick google search will show you how to quickly 'buy' followers, and there is a juvenile (yet compelling) culture of 'I'll follow you if you follow me'. The magic is having quality followers not the quantity of them.
• For Cameron a 'quality' follower would probably be swing voter. The reality is that most people on Twitter are either IT Geeks, Media/Marketing Types or Political Animals - the vast majority of whom are dead set in who they will vote for. As others have remarked those who aren't political are unlikely to be inclined to follow Cameron.
• It is therefore simply not a good use of the Man's time and a distraction from methods of campaigning that could engage the people he isn't currently reaching.
• Staying off also avoids the potential banana skin of the ill-advised tweets after a shandy or two. I actually follow our local Labour MP in the hope she drops a clanger.
• Anyway, it's a neat technology and it has its place - but it aint the game changer its proponents think it is and DC is right in sidestepping it.

Looking at the league table published I think is a clear indication of what Guy says: the top 3 are Downing Street, Richard Bacon (For fuck's sake!) and Sarah Brown: IMHO all 3 must be falsely inflated, the 1st and 3rd by hordes of Labour minions - the 3rd probably hoping to boost Gordon's image by trying to convince anyone he is "normal" by association - the 2nd by complete morons. Anyway, last year Seldo told us ten things Twitter is not...

Oratio obliqua options...

Twits, twats, tweets...One minor debate going on at ConservativeHome is why David Cameron isn't on Twitter. A quick glance shows probably half for and half against the idea of DC twittering...but one comment stands out (no, not mine although I added my tuppennyworth which coincides with the second bullet point below) but towards the bottom GuyTheMac nails it: as I've linked to his blog I'm sure won't mind if I copy most of his ConHome comment here (my emphasis):

• The league tables for 'number of followers' are a nonsense - any quick google search will show you how to quickly 'buy' followers, and there is a juvenile (yet compelling) culture of 'I'll follow you if you follow me'. The magic is having quality followers not the quantity of them.
• For Cameron a 'quality' follower would probably be swing voter. The reality is that most people on Twitter are either IT Geeks, Media/Marketing Types or Political Animals - the vast majority of whom are dead set in who they will vote for. As others have remarked those who aren't political are unlikely to be inclined to follow Cameron.
• It is therefore simply not a good use of the Man's time and a distraction from methods of campaigning that could engage the people he isn't currently reaching.
• Staying off also avoids the potential banana skin of the ill-advised tweets after a shandy or two. I actually follow our local Labour MP in the hope she drops a clanger.
• Anyway, it's a neat technology and it has its place - but it aint the game changer its proponents think it is and DC is right in sidestepping it.

Looking at the league table published I think is a clear indication of what Guy says: the top 3 are Downing Street, Richard Bacon (For fuck's sake!) and Sarah Brown: IMHO all 3 must be falsely inflated, the 1st and 3rd by hordes of Labour minions - the 3rd probably hoping to boost Gordon's image by trying to convince anyone he is "normal" by association - the 2nd by complete morons. Anyway, last year Seldo told us ten things Twitter is not...

Osborne on overiding objectives...

How to stop Britain going bust again [Link]...maybe that should read "Stop Labour doing the same thing for a forth time", meaning not win four consecutive elections but take the UK to the brink of bankrupcy, again.

After last weeks backing of Obama's bank plan Osborne has again hit the ground running despite continued snipping from both within and without Conservative ranks. "The end of the recession removes the last excuse Gordon Brown has for sticking with next year’s reckless spending plans. The only reason now why the difficult decisions are being delayed until 2011 is that there is a general election in 2010."

Britain’s new economic model must be built on saving and private sector investment, not the unsustainable public spending and consumer debt of the past ten years.

"...built on saving and private sector investment, not the unsustainable public spending and consumer debt of the past ten years..." ...He goes on to say that the UK must become competitive again. Nothing new there; luckily, the stampede of companies set to leave the UK hasn't yet built up steam and I guess the only reason is that those companies, despite having plans to go are hanging on hoping to see Brown's brownstuff stripped away by the next administration...and stripped away it must be.

"Simpler taxes with lower tax rates, removing employment taxes on new businesses employing new staff, stopping the remorseless rise of red tape on small businesses."

The gist of the whole article is Osborne saying that to secure the UK's future growth what is needed is a complete change and a new government that understands what needs changing; clearly Brown doesn't but the jury is still out on whether GO himself does!

Osborne on overiding objectives...

How to stop Britain going bust again [Link]...maybe that should read "Stop Labour doing the same thing for a forth time", meaning not win four consecutive elections but take the UK to the brink of bankrupcy, again.

After last weeks backing of Obama's bank plan Osborne has again hit the ground running despite continued snipping from both within and without Conservative ranks. "The end of the recession removes the last excuse Gordon Brown has for sticking with next year’s reckless spending plans. The only reason now why the difficult decisions are being delayed until 2011 is that there is a general election in 2010."

Britain’s new economic model must be built on saving and private sector investment, not the unsustainable public spending and consumer debt of the past ten years.

"...built on saving and private sector investment, not the unsustainable public spending and consumer debt of the past ten years..." ...He goes on to say that the UK must become competitive again. Nothing new there; luckily, the stampede of companies set to leave the UK hasn't yet built up steam and I guess the only reason is that those companies, despite having plans to go are hanging on hoping to see Brown's brownstuff stripped away by the next administration...and stripped away it must be.

"Simpler taxes with lower tax rates, removing employment taxes on new businesses employing new staff, stopping the remorseless rise of red tape on small businesses."

The gist of the whole article is Osborne saying that to secure the UK's future growth what is needed is a complete change and a new government that understands what needs changing; clearly Brown doesn't but the jury is still out on whether GO himself does!

Optical oppression...

A number of bloggers have been spreading the word for a while; now the day is upon us: here the hat-tip goes to Constantly Furious. Tomorrow there will be a demonstration in Trafalgar Square a...'Mass Gathering in defence of street photography' (as usual, click on image)

"I'm a Photographer, Not a Terrorist! invite all Photographers to a mass photo gathering in defence of street photography"

There are many examples of unneccesary stop-and-search under the terrorism acts but, as Dave Hill tells us: "John Yates, Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations, has today reminded all MPS officers and staff that people taking photographs in public should not be stopped and searched unless there is a valid reason."

I hope the fact that this evening, just now in fact, the UK terror threat level was being raised from "substantial" to "severe" has nothing to do with this i.e. an excuse to close down/stifle the demonstration.

The new alert level means a terrorist attack is considered "highly likely".

Update: Saturday pm. Quite a good turn out by all accounts [Link]. The guy in the yellow jacket looks familiar ;-) OH... and they even had it on the evening news here. Article in Spanish HERE, (8:30pm).

Optical oppression...

A number of bloggers have been spreading the word for a while; now the day is upon us: here the hat-tip goes to Constantly Furious. Tomorrow there will be a demonstration in Trafalgar Square a...'Mass Gathering in defence of street photography' (as usual, click on image)

"I'm a Photographer, Not a Terrorist! invite all Photographers to a mass photo gathering in defence of street photography"

There are many examples of unneccesary stop-and-search under the terrorism acts but, as Dave Hill tells us: "John Yates, Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations, has today reminded all MPS officers and staff that people taking photographs in public should not be stopped and searched unless there is a valid reason."

I hope the fact that this evening, just now in fact, the UK terror threat level was being raised from "substantial" to "severe" has nothing to do with this i.e. an excuse to close down/stifle the demonstration.

The new alert level means a terrorist attack is considered "highly likely".

Update: Saturday pm. Quite a good turn out by all accounts [Link]. The guy in the yellow jacket looks familiar ;-) OH... and they even had it on the evening news here. Article in Spanish HERE, (8:30pm).

Oriental opportunities...

"UK about to miss a great opportunity"...Two good articles today highlighting the Eastern promise that the UK will not benefit from as much as it could, and I don't think there's a lot we can do about it. The advance of China and India added to "Hong Kong being the world's freest economy, followed by Singapore, Australia and New Zealand" and how economic freedom in the UK is heading the wrong way.

The first article from Allister Heath [City AM] talks of the "massive, unstoppable shift of power based on the emerging economies adopting more and more capitalist institutions and practices",

"[The UK's] reduced financial and monetary freedom and higher corruption and government spending. They suggest we stand no chance of truly benefiting from the rise of the emerging nations, a development which could go down as one of the UK economy’s greatest missed opportunities of all times"

The second, from Burning Our Money, ("The Chinese can now do pretty well everything we can, except 100 times bigger, 100 times better, and 100 times cheaper.") which amongst other things highlights both Governor of the Bank of England comments and Jeff Randall's interview of HSBC CEO, Michael Geoghegan:

"...People save first, they educate their children and then they spend. If you want to go and see where consumer goods are least used and bought, it’s in Asia...

...If we could be as efficient here in the UK as other manufacturers are around the world and cut away a lot of the government bureaucracy that makes it very expensive to do manufacturing in the UK..."

Oriental opportunities...

"UK about to miss a great opportunity"...Two good articles today highlighting the Eastern promise that the UK will not benefit from as much as it could, and I don't think there's a lot we can do about it. The advance of China and India added to "Hong Kong being the world's freest economy, followed by Singapore, Australia and New Zealand" and how economic freedom in the UK is heading the wrong way.

The first article from Allister Heath [City AM] talks of the "massive, unstoppable shift of power based on the emerging economies adopting more and more capitalist institutions and practices",

"[The UK's] reduced financial and monetary freedom and higher corruption and government spending. They suggest we stand no chance of truly benefiting from the rise of the emerging nations, a development which could go down as one of the UK economy’s greatest missed opportunities of all times"

The second, from Burning Our Money, ("The Chinese can now do pretty well everything we can, except 100 times bigger, 100 times better, and 100 times cheaper.") which amongst other things highlights both Governor of the Bank of England comments and Jeff Randall's interview of HSBC CEO, Michael Geoghegan:

"...People save first, they educate their children and then they spend. If you want to go and see where consumer goods are least used and bought, it’s in Asia...

...If we could be as efficient here in the UK as other manufacturers are around the world and cut away a lot of the government bureaucracy that makes it very expensive to do manufacturing in the UK..."

Hehehe...I'm a bit late to this poster fun and there are some really funny versions...all of which do as my own poster says (click to enlarge): no matter what they say each and every one reminds us just how appalling, corrupt and disgraceful New Labour have been. Bring it on!...

H/T Iain Dale and a Stratford Conservative: "a recent member of the UK Conservative party". Poster courtesy of Andy Barefoot.

Hehehe...I'm a bit late to this poster fun and there are some really funny versions...all of which do as my own poster says (click to enlarge): no matter what they say each and every one reminds us just how appalling, corrupt and disgraceful New Labour have been. Bring it on!...

H/T Iain Dale and a Stratford Conservative: "a recent member of the UK Conservative party". Poster courtesy of Andy Barefoot.

Once original...

The one hundred and eighty six years of chocolate history at Cadbury [off on a tangent: Gildy, Cadbury's was founded by those prohibited at the time from attending university...and Kraft Food Company was once the proud sponsor of The Great Gildersleeve!] today takes another turn as they recommended a £12bn takeover from the US giant and rival Kraft Foods. The public information related to the offer and approaches since Sept 2009 for acquiring the business is avialable on a microsite (disclaimer). Less then 2 years ago (May 2008) they separated the confectionery from the 'America Beverage' business (Schweppes) and Cadbury plc claimed a vision to be "the world's BIGGEST and BEST confectionery company". Oh well...it's not the end of the world: I have about 10 Kraft brands at home as it is I just hope they don't play with any of the recipes! Does this make Kraft the biggest - in the confectionery sector - above Mars? I think it does, just.

Once original...

The one hundred and eighty six years of chocolate history at Cadbury [off on a tangent: Gildy, Cadbury's was founded by those prohibited at the time from attending university...and Kraft Food Company was once the proud sponsor of The Great Gildersleeve!] today takes another turn as they recommended a £12bn takeover from the US giant and rival Kraft Foods. The public information related to the offer and approaches since Sept 2009 for acquiring the business is avialable on a microsite (disclaimer). Less then 2 years ago (May 2008) they separated the confectionery from the 'America Beverage' business (Schweppes) and Cadbury plc claimed a vision to be "the world's BIGGEST and BEST confectionery company". Oh well...it's not the end of the world: I have about 10 Kraft brands at home as it is I just hope they don't play with any of the recipes! Does this make Kraft the biggest - in the confectionery sector - above Mars? I think it does, just.

Obviously optimistic...

I was sent this yesterday by one of my US cousins in Minnesota: I'm not sure whether it's a wind-up but it certainly seems genuine! "This is an actual billboard in Minnesota on Interstate 35" (heading south just north of the Wyoming exit on the east side).

Maybe GWB is missed...all eyes on the looming landslide for Brown (don't panic: this Brown is in Massachusetts!)

Update 8am. Wednesday: well, he did it! And a great upset it is too for the Democrats in their safest seat bar one or two (e.g. Rhode Island is safer)

"Scott Brown, a truck-driving National Guardsman who was virtually unknown even in Massachusetts a few weeks ago, beat Martha Coakley [by 52% to 47%] the state attorney general who had expected to inherit the seat"

....Happy inauguration ceremony Obama! NOT.

Obviously optimistic...

I was sent this yesterday by one of my US cousins in Minnesota: I'm not sure whether it's a wind-up but it certainly seems genuine! "This is an actual billboard in Minnesota on Interstate 35" (heading south just north of the Wyoming exit on the east side).

Maybe GWB is missed...all eyes on the looming landslide for Brown (don't panic: this Brown is in Massachusetts!)

Update 8am. Wednesday: well, he did it! And a great upset it is too for the Democrats in their safest seat bar one or two (e.g. Rhode Island is safer)

"Scott Brown, a truck-driving National Guardsman who was virtually unknown even in Massachusetts a few weeks ago, beat Martha Coakley [by 52% to 47%] the state attorney general who had expected to inherit the seat"

....Happy inauguration ceremony Obama! NOT.

Outside overspending...

Another sensible idea: David Cameron has outlined how some of the money intended for international aid would be used by a future Conservatives administration for a new military stabilisation force [Times]. One presumes it would be loosely based on the US approach: USAID provides "Foreign Aid in the National Interest".

Naturally some charities aren't keen: CivilSociety reports that Kirsty Hughes of Oxfam has said that the plans undermine Cameron's 'headline' commitment, a commitment to spending 0.7 per cent of gross national income on aid that all the UK main parties have 'signed up to'...interestingly Crash Gordon wants to make that commitment a law (what is it with this tosser...laws for everything: law to reduce deficit, law to reduce CO2 emissions...) However, as Caroline Boin of International Policy Network [IPN] says "Gordon Brown’s publicity stunt won’t help the poor".

"Measuring the success of foreign aid by how much we spend is ridiculous. Spending more on poorly managed programmes, or even the salaries of DfID’s civil servants, would satisfy Brown’s law—but achieve nothing for international development."

Another interesting report from IPN: "A Closer Union. The Political Abuse of Foreign Aid" [Link: PDF ] The political abuse being the channelling of Foreign Aid to the TUC; I'm sure it's all correctly accounted for...perhaps it's this portion that most interests Brown and his wish for a law.

Outside overspending...

Another sensible idea: David Cameron has outlined how some of the money intended for international aid would be used by a future Conservatives administration for a new military stabilisation force [Times]. One presumes it would be loosely based on the US approach: USAID provides "Foreign Aid in the National Interest".

Naturally some charities aren't keen: CivilSociety reports that Kirsty Hughes of Oxfam has said that the plans undermine Cameron's 'headline' commitment, a commitment to spending 0.7 per cent of gross national income on aid that all the UK main parties have 'signed up to'...interestingly Crash Gordon wants to make that commitment a law (what is it with this tosser...laws for everything: law to reduce deficit, law to reduce CO2 emissions...) However, as Caroline Boin of International Policy Network [IPN] says "Gordon Brown’s publicity stunt won’t help the poor".

"Measuring the success of foreign aid by how much we spend is ridiculous. Spending more on poorly managed programmes, or even the salaries of DfID’s civil servants, would satisfy Brown’s law—but achieve nothing for international development."

Another interesting report from IPN: "A Closer Union. The Political Abuse of Foreign Aid" [Link: PDF ] The political abuse being the channelling of Foreign Aid to the TUC; I'm sure it's all correctly accounted for...perhaps it's this portion that most interests Brown and his wish for a law.

Observing opposition of opposition...

I've been away again and unable to post but a couple of things last weekend I wanted to post: a few examples of the BBC appearing to become more blatant in their political bias. The "least" obvious first: the image left was the first thing that caught my eye, it appeared on several online pages (maybe it still does). Now, they are just images aren't they? One of each party leader...but do I need to point out the subliminal message? Then last weekend I nearly spat out my coffee when I read such world-moving news that Dr. Who backs Gordon Brown. Great, that's his opinion but reading the article you find no news, no entertainment..."I think David Cameron is a terrifying prospect," and other snippets of pure political propaganda; does anyone think for a nanosecond a Conservative supporting actor would be allowed to get his opinions published in such a manner? I noted it and also saw it picked up by Labourlist and from Biased BBC, many more examples on that BBBC blog.

Also last weekend there was widespread coverage in print, online and TV of the soon-to-be-released memoirs of Peter Watt, ex-general secretary of the Labour party: "Inside Out: My Story of Betrayal and Cowardice at the Heart of New Labour." Coverage on the BBC website?...it's HERE but it may take you a while to find it.

Then we have "Is David Cameron too much of a toff to be Prime Minister?", programme and complaint picked up by Iain Dale.

Then we have the staged response on Question Time last Thursday - I know I shouldn't watch but it's like a scab: you keep picking at it, or a hole where a tooth was, the tongue keeps digging into the gap despite the pain - anyway, it had the usual effect of getting me shouting at the hotel room TV; someone who was clearly not born in 1990 saying that whatever Brown is like Cameron would be worse to a very loud cheer from several "audience" at the back, there was no such cheer for any other statement of answer, clearly contrived...as was the poor microphone placement for at least two non-leftie replies from the audience (they clearly forged their Labour membership to be able to get into the audience). OK, so I should be grateful that Hain was slaughtered (and rightly so...but he was allowed to go on and on!) but only because he was defending Blair and the decision to invade Iraq.

And finally from yesterday: the BBC invited Damian McBride ("the disgraced spin-doctor who resigned from Downing Street") to address staff in a private briefing alongside Charles Clarke (Labour MP) and Nick Robinson "to discuss whether Labour could beat the Conservatives in the general election". The article in The Times also states that "Mr McBride, who is still in regular contact with Downing Street officials...". So, clearly he hasn't been as ostracized as we were led to believe; why am I not surprised by this or the fact that the BBC are having such a briefing.

Observing opposition of opposition...

I've been away again and unable to post but a couple of things last weekend I wanted to post: a few examples of the BBC appearing to become more blatant in their political bias. The "least" obvious first: the image left was the first thing that caught my eye, it appeared on several online pages (maybe it still does). Now, they are just images aren't they? One of each party leader...but do I need to point out the subliminal message? Then last weekend I nearly spat out my coffee when I read such world-moving news that Dr. Who backs Gordon Brown. Great, that's his opinion but reading the article you find no news, no entertainment..."I think David Cameron is a terrifying prospect," and other snippets of pure political propaganda; does anyone think for a nanosecond a Conservative supporting actor would be allowed to get his opinions published in such a manner? I noted it and also saw it picked up by Labourlist and from Biased BBC, many more examples on that BBBC blog.

Also last weekend there was widespread coverage in print, online and TV of the soon-to-be-released memoirs of Peter Watt, ex-general secretary of the Labour party: "Inside Out: My Story of Betrayal and Cowardice at the Heart of New Labour." Coverage on the BBC website?...it's HERE but it may take you a while to find it.

Then we have "Is David Cameron too much of a toff to be Prime Minister?", programme and complaint picked up by Iain Dale.

Then we have the staged response on Question Time last Thursday - I know I shouldn't watch but it's like a scab: you keep picking at it, or a hole where a tooth was, the tongue keeps digging into the gap despite the pain - anyway, it had the usual effect of getting me shouting at the hotel room TV; someone who was clearly not born in 1990 saying that whatever Brown is like Cameron would be worse to a very loud cheer from several "audience" at the back, there was no such cheer for any other statement of answer, clearly contrived...as was the poor microphone placement for at least two non-leftie replies from the audience (they clearly forged their Labour membership to be able to get into the audience). OK, so I should be grateful that Hain was slaughtered (and rightly so...but he was allowed to go on and on!) but only because he was defending Blair and the decision to invade Iraq.

And finally from yesterday: the BBC invited Damian McBride ("the disgraced spin-doctor who resigned from Downing Street") to address staff in a private briefing alongside Charles Clarke (Labour MP) and Nick Robinson "to discuss whether Labour could beat the Conservatives in the general election". The article in The Times also states that "Mr McBride, who is still in regular contact with Downing Street officials...". So, clearly he hasn't been as ostracized as we were led to believe; why am I not surprised by this or the fact that the BBC are having such a briefing.

Obscurantism over...

They have seen the light! The blatant lying and disingenuousness has come to an end (we hope): "Darling and Mandelson win election policy battle with weakened PM". Alistair Darling has warned that Britain faces its toughest spending cuts for 20 years if Labour continues in office. [Times Online] Despite what I said yesterday - 'was the coup to dethrone Brown a storm in a teacup on a good day to bury bad news' - perhaps this was the reason for the oh-so-botched leadership challenge, a way to force Brown's hand.

Obscurantism over...

They have seen the light! The blatant lying and disingenuousness has come to an end (we hope): "Darling and Mandelson win election policy battle with weakened PM". Alistair Darling has warned that Britain faces its toughest spending cuts for 20 years if Labour continues in office. [Times Online] Despite what I said yesterday - 'was the coup to dethrone Brown a storm in a teacup on a good day to bury bad news' - perhaps this was the reason for the oh-so-botched leadership challenge, a way to force Brown's hand.

Outstanding opposition onslaught...

'Today finally saw a day's debate in the Commons on the Pre-Budget Report.'

"There is a fact here that we must all face: whoever is in government after the next general election will have to cut public spending... The fact is that this Government are being driven not by the needs of the economy and the medium and long-term best interests of the British people, but by the needs of the Labour party and the insistence of the Prime Minister and the Schools Secretary that the scale of the fiscal problem, the challenge of dealing with it and the true price of not dealing with it are to be concealed at all costs from the British public until after polling day. No price is too high to pay, provided the bill does not arrive until 7 May. No burden is too heavy to bear if it is the Prime Minister’s successor who will bear it.

"That is the most systematically reckless, cynical and dishonest strategy for dealing with a fiscal crisis that anyone in the House will be able to recall."

From Conservative Home quoting Shadow Chief Secretary Philip Hammond's speech today.

And was the "coup" to dethrone Brown a storm in a teacup on a good day to bury bad news? Who knows; seems a risky thing to do judging by the public's verdict of split political parties but I wouldn't put it past the corrupt, lying, pathetic toads.

And THIS needs shouting from the roof tops! "Gordon Brown looks like a Presbyterian but spends like a desperate gambler. He must be stopped before it’s too late"

So does an excellent blogpost from Burning our Money (need shouting from the rooftops):

For the last year, HMG has funded its humongous borrowing requirement by having its wholly owned subsidiary, the Bank of England, buy up a corresponding quantity of gilts in the open market. The subsidiary has funded these purchases by the simple expedient of printing money. The process has ensured that HMG's borrowing has not undermined the market price of gilts. Which in turn means that HMG has been able to borrow at historically low interest rates.

Unfortunately, this terrific scam is now coming to an end...

And those UK government bonds (gilts) are about to lose their biggest buyer...[Link].

Interestingly the gilts and the prebudget debate articles are connected not only by Brownstuff but by two brothers: Balls.

Outstanding opposition onslaught...

'Today finally saw a day's debate in the Commons on the Pre-Budget Report.'

"There is a fact here that we must all face: whoever is in government after the next general election will have to cut public spending... The fact is that this Government are being driven not by the needs of the economy and the medium and long-term best interests of the British people, but by the needs of the Labour party and the insistence of the Prime Minister and the Schools Secretary that the scale of the fiscal problem, the challenge of dealing with it and the true price of not dealing with it are to be concealed at all costs from the British public until after polling day. No price is too high to pay, provided the bill does not arrive until 7 May. No burden is too heavy to bear if it is the Prime Minister’s successor who will bear it.

"That is the most systematically reckless, cynical and dishonest strategy for dealing with a fiscal crisis that anyone in the House will be able to recall."

From Conservative Home quoting Shadow Chief Secretary Philip Hammond's speech today.

And was the "coup" to dethrone Brown a storm in a teacup on a good day to bury bad news? Who knows; seems a risky thing to do judging by the public's verdict of split political parties but I wouldn't put it past the corrupt, lying, pathetic toads.

And THIS needs shouting from the roof tops! "Gordon Brown looks like a Presbyterian but spends like a desperate gambler. He must be stopped before it’s too late"

So does an excellent blogpost from Burning our Money (need shouting from the rooftops):

For the last year, HMG has funded its humongous borrowing requirement by having its wholly owned subsidiary, the Bank of England, buy up a corresponding quantity of gilts in the open market. The subsidiary has funded these purchases by the simple expedient of printing money. The process has ensured that HMG's borrowing has not undermined the market price of gilts. Which in turn means that HMG has been able to borrow at historically low interest rates.

Unfortunately, this terrific scam is now coming to an end...

And those UK government bonds (gilts) are about to lose their biggest buyer...[Link].

Interestingly the gilts and the prebudget debate articles are connected not only by Brownstuff but by two brothers: Balls.

Happy New Year!

I'm now back in NOT sunny Spain but was pleased to arrive only 2 hours late on el día de los Reyes after driving over 200 miles (update: in all I drove 320 miles) through blizzards (I kid you not) to get oldest spanlet back to UEA. Much of Europe is suffering a cold snap; the image of Britain as seen from above (Photo: NASA/GSFC, MODIS Rapid Response via BBC) is quite spectacular - click on image for better definition image and associated news. There are very few places without snow, some tiny areas on the south coast by the looks of it...near Poole? and the freezing conditions are set to remain at least another week. Some are fairly happy about that...see HERE (hattip Dizzy Thinks for that image!)

Happy New Year!

I'm now back in NOT sunny Spain but was pleased to arrive only 2 hours late on el día de los Reyes after driving over 200 miles (update: in all I drove 320 miles) through blizzards (I kid you not) to get oldest spanlet back to UEA. Much of Europe is suffering a cold snap; the image of Britain as seen from above (Photo: NASA/GSFC, MODIS Rapid Response via BBC) is quite spectacular - click on image for better definition image and associated news. There are very few places without snow, some tiny areas on the south coast by the looks of it...near Poole? and the freezing conditions are set to remain at least another week. Some are fairly happy about that...see HERE (hattip Dizzy Thinks for that image!)