YOU KNOW SOMETHING IS HORRIBLY WRONG...

...WHEN IT'S ENDORSED BY THIS BLOKE

For the full sorry story head to the Daily Torygraph, where Blairites has-beens  like McTeacake and Bomber Harris  feel at home, for very little money.

WELL WELL, I NEVER. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT RID OF

The Barclay Brothers (friends of Mrs Tahtcher) who live on the Channel Island of Sark,
where there is no company law,
have offered Cochrane a bonus to write his lying drivel,
according to 'Private Eye',
no huge friend of Scotland or our independence.
Never mind honest journalism, just don't lose the Tories the oil money.
Journalist? Dirty money grubbing little *&^%$£, more like.

PAS GRAND-CHOSE DE N’IMPORTE QUOI

One of the Queen's dogs savaged one of Beatrice's (a blood princess, no less) dogs, apparently. This is front page news for the Daily Telegraph. On the same subject, the day that prince Philip was admitted to hospital with a bladder infection, which they said would be treated with antibiotics, the first 15 minutes of the BBC's 6 o'clock news was dedicated to this. I don't wish the bloke any harm, but I'm seriously NOT that interested in the state of his bladder.
*****

Also the lead on the Today Programme on BBC, and for that matter the Daily Telegraph, is the death of a film director who flung himself off a bridge, in California. Again with due respect to the guy and his family who must be suffering, I'm not entirely sure that that warrants quite so much attention. 
*****

The English part of the UK government (because I know people get riled when I call it the English government, although it is based in England and makes decisions about England alone) has received favourably the notion proposed by Policy Exchange, a think tank close to David Cameron, that they should sell off social housing in nice areas and build new stuff in poor areas with the money. Although this may make some financial sense, it stinks of social apartheid to me. I hope we don't follow suit.
*****

Cameron has been on holiday in Spain, again, which is a bit rich after he lectured us about taking our holidays in the UK to boost the tourist industry. Anyway, he comes back this week to four rows all to do with England:

Ken Clarke refuses to move from the English Justice Department in the upcoming reshuffle....sort that Dave; 

MPs in English commuter land are revolting (OK, I know) over increases in rail fares, which will be 3% above inflation in England, when they are only 1% above in Scotland; 

MPs are revolting (again? do they ever stop) over the plan to raise the time shops are allowed to trade on Sundays in England, from 6 to 8 hours. Apparently Osborne thinks that this is the way to boost the economy. He obviously assumes that the more hours the shops are open, the longer people will spend money, which is, I suppose a not unreasonable supposition if you have a limitless supply of money to spend; 

He's probably heard of Scotland, because that's where a disproportionate amount of his tax revenue comes from; he may like to know that we have no restrictions on Sunday shopping here at all, and it doesn't make any appreciable difference to the economy. Most people spend what they can afford and a bit more...giving them an extra two hours to spend their income won't make any difference unless he gives them any more income to spend

MPs are...erm...up in arms ..., nah, they are revolting, over the government's proposals to allow building on the Green Belt in England. The government clearly has problems with its short term memory. Only a few months ago, the Spelman woman was forced into a U-turn on selling off forests because of a campaign by the Daily Telegraph, and leading posh people who matter, including Boris Johnson's sister. Have they forgotten about this, or do they think maybe that the Telegraph and Boris's sister are in Tuscany and won't notice?
*****
Click on pics to enlarge.

YES YES YES

Apropos of nothing really... and not connected to the video, it was interesting, yesterday, to see that in the staunchly unionist Tory newspaper, The Daily Telegraph, on the day of Alistair (yawn) Darling's launch of the No Campaign (no sorry that's negative) The Better Together Campaign (that's erm, better), and in the midst of a typically biased news account, that an opinion poll, based on the government's preferred question has: Yes = 45.73%, and No = 54.27%.


There was no option for Don't Know (as of course there will not be on the day... more than 2 years in the future). Earlier in the day, the yes and no responses were running at around 50-50 and I wouldn't be surprised if there wasn't a bit of a campaign to get that situation rectified, without actually cheating.


Nonetheless, this is, I suppose a rather surprising result, even as it stands at the moment, given the political leanings of the typical Telegraph reader.

The piece was titled "Alex Salmond is running scared of Scottish Independence", and was based on what Alistair Darling had said, rather than any actual fact. Perhaps good, unbiased, broadsheet journalism might have demanded a ..."says Darling" at the end of the headline, to make that clear. Clearly the "Scottish Political Editor", Simon Johnson, was more interested in the effect rather than the accuracy. 

SPIVS AND INCOMPETENT NINCOMPOOPS

I'm not one of those who thinks that military personnel are above reproach, but I do think that if our government sends them off to do America's their bidding, they have a duty to treat them decently.

So the next time that you hear Hammond or Cameron, or any of the rest of the hypocrites that make up the London government, lecture about how wonderful 'our brave boys' are, how they are heroes we should be proud of, the men who put the Great in Britain [someone needs to explain the origins of that name to them one day] then, remind yourself of this little carry on. 


Not that it is the first case of this kind. Troops have always been treated like dung, until they are needed... and they are frequently needed by the government in the none too subtle game of 'hiding behind the khaki'. 


The Telegraph article, to which I linked above, tells the whole story, but for those who prefer a shorter version, suffice it to say that the little pipsqueak of a Defence Secretary, Hammond, has overseen the paying off of troops who are within a very short time (in one case just 3 days) of qualifying for pension payments. 


One 40-year-old sergeant serving in the Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineers was only three days away from serving 22 years and qualifying for an immediate pension pot worth £108,000. He will now have to wait until he is 65 to receive the pension.


OK, they are generous pension situations, but whether or not you agree that they are warranted, given the extreme dangers involved in some of these guys' jobs [there are a fair few who will not collect any pension at all], these were the terms the guys signed up for. And Hammond has ridden roughshod over their contracts. The Military Covenant, my butt!

It takes a special kind of SPIV to do that, [whilst making no attempt to do anything about ministerial or parliamentary pensions, which are even more generous] and then call upon the citizenry to show more respect for them... Fortunately, or unfortunately, Hammond is that kind of SPIV.


But even worse...these morons at the MoD, seem not to learn from their mistakes. 


Not two months ago, 'Private Eye' reported that the MoD had sacked around 3,000 of its admin staff in order to save money, but had unfortunately neglected to undertake a skills needs analysis before they let them go (with redundancy payments). 


Unfortunately for the taxpayer, but luckily for the individuals, the MoD had decided, on what passes for mature reflection in London, to re-employ at least half of them, with no hope of clawing back the redundancy money! Duh!


Now The Telegraph goes on to report on the serving men's situation...

“The decision is not being made on the grounds of ability, experience or commitment, purely on cost. [Ring any bells?] It would appear that capable, experienced and dedicated officers are being sacrificed. 

"His [a redundant officer's father] suspicions were further raised after 38 out of 50 of his son’s Sandhurst 1999 intake have been sacked. In the most recent round of redundancies announced last week the Army lost 300 officers in total, who are seen as they most combat experienced for generations."

So, don't despair men; you may get a creepy phone call in a few weeks asking if erm... you'd like to erm... come back... bit of a cock up, doncha know, old chap...

And yet, can you believe, they have a billion pounds to spend on the first steps of updating a weapon [which will eventually cost many many billions] that we don't need and won't/can't use, but which will guarantee British prime ministers a seat at the top table for the next 20 years. 

Quad Erat Demonstrandum.

IS THE ESTABLISHMENT AND CLARENCE HOUSE OUT OF TOUCH?

Bruce Anderson, The Daily Telegraph, the paper of the establishment:

“....... Most of the students still do not understand the damage that Thursday’s riot did to their reputation and the extent to which they have alienated every decent person in this country....... The public is beginning to draw the obvious conclusion: if the police cannot even protect the Duchess of Cornwall, why should we believe that they will catch a burglar?....”

Of course being Scottish and having no need of any more qualifications may affect my views, but should this make my views so different from Anderson’s “decent people”? Will the Telegraph’s establishment move forward on this, based on what they fondly imagine “decent people” feel.

The riot was unfortunate, no doubt about that. There are people in hospital, one having had brain surgery. There are broken windows in the Supreme Court and some other government departments, and there is graffiti on some statues. Someone tore down the union flag.

Apart from the first one, none of these things really matter. I suspect that there are people working in Whitehall who will be relieved to know that their bombproof windows have been tested and found wanting, and hoping that the authorities will replace them with something that works. As for damaged statues and flags? Insulting to people’s memories, yes, maybe, but in the end they are stones and cloth. “Clarke’s Criminals” or “Smith’s Slackers” can repair the damage.

So am I out of line with “decent” people; am I an “indecent” person; or just a Scot? Or is Anderson’s, establishment coming at this from the wrong angle?

If they cannot protect Mrs Parker-Bowles how can they protect the masses from burglary?

Simples.

Clarence House sent the prince and his ‘wife’ out in a large-windowed Bentley or Rolls, her replete with jewels and clothes worth a fortune; him looking like a tailor’s dummy, and straight into the riots? I suppose they knew that there were such things as riots, and students, parents, lecturers, ordinary people? Yes?

Did it not occur to them that to rub this outrageous display of publicly funded wealth in the faces of people who were facing a struggle for the rest of their lives with the fees repayment, was a tad on the insensitive side? Do they not care, or are they just too stupid to understand? Or was there something more sinister?

Recent polls have shown an overwhelming majority of people don’t want Charles as king, or Mrs PB as queen. If Anderson and his like think that the days of “decent” people being repulsed by people standing up for their rights against a shower of lying, self serving MPs and an imperious, self important, relic of a prince, they are bang out of line.

It would be incredibly stupid of them to plan for future events, of which I’m sure there will be many, based on these suppositions. ‘Off with their heads’ was probably not really what the students, parents, lecturers and other people on Thursday’s protests had in mind. But it could easily come.

And Cameron-Clegg may wish to reflect that what happened to Charles the other day might spread to people who will promise anything to the public to gain power.... and once they have it discard their promises and pledges like Tesco carrier bags.

* I abridged Mr Anderson’s comments. He does question Stephenson’s management of the riots. Click on the quote or here for his piece.


Pics: Mr Anderson, who writes for David Cameron, wrote for Mrs Thatcher and who, according to Wikipedia, approves of torture, even of children in supposed ‘ticking bomb’ situations. (Wonder if he would do it himself, or who exactly he’d find who would.) together with scenes from the London protests