Wednesday, 30 December 2009

Something this country's citizens appear to have forgotten

You DO NOT have a right to not be offended.

The latest "offence" people have taken, and presumably "demanded something was done about it" was a Birmingham Radio DJ's fairly reasonable response to the Queen's Speech, which he cut off halfway through with the comment "Bor-ing!".

Fair enough. The Queen's Speech is fucking boring. Exactly like church leaders, she likes to cling onto a belief that she holds some sort of relevance in today's society, when in truth many, many people simply couldn't give a fuck. She loses credibility points in my opinion for speaking with RP.

That's not the point though, the point is this:

The stations' owner Orion Media said a number of listeners had complained.

Mr Binns, who has previously been on BBC Radio 2 under the guise of spoof hospital DJ Ivan Brackenbury, said he had received a death threat following what he did.

A private radio station, funded by adverts, broadcasted something people found objectionable. So instead of just deciding to change the channel, resolve to never listen to it again, yada yada, what did they do? They put pen to paper, or picked up the phone, and complained about it. Why? Because they, like so many others now, firmly believed they had a right not to be offended.

Just like this lot.

Where on earth did this belief come from? It seems to be the latest fad reason as to why you can't say and do things now, not because of any damage you might do to yourself, or because it's a stupid idea, but because it might "offend someone".

So fucking what? I couldn't give a monkey's fuck if someone is offended, and I fail to see why anyone else should. Be offended! What the fucking hell does it matter? You don't suffer any permenant damage. Whatever happened to "Sticks and stones"?

I'm offended by the fact I can't say or do certain things in case somebody "takes offence", but does that matter? Apparently not.

Fuck me, what have we become?

Monday, 28 December 2009

Oh joy - Bristol aims to become a "city of sanctuary"

What's this then? Something to do with Donkeys? Nope.

Bristol is aiming to become only the second 'City of Sanctuary' in the UK.

If successful, it would join Sheffield as having a reputation of good support for asylum seekers and refugees.

Faith and community groups and charities are working towards attaining the status in the New Year.

Bristol already has a very high level of asylum seekers and refugees - if you take a walk through Lawrence Hill or Easton as an indigenous citizen of the UK (of any colour) you're definitely in the minority.

The obvious things that are glossed over in this article are 1) the cost, especially to Bristol's taxpayers and 2) the projected increase in asylum seekers/refuges as a direct result of promoting the city as welcoming them.

The only mention of any cost at all is the rather laughable quote from the Lib Dem councillor:

Lawrence Hill Liberal Democrat councillor Sue O'Donnell said: "If the investment is targeted correctly

What investment? Paid for by whom? Agreed by whom? And spent on what? I can't fucking believe this could be agreed to by the council when the details are so woolly (read: don't exist)

and we take guidance from the professionals

Who might they be? A charity that helps asylum seekers? Because of course they'll be so fucking impartial, won't they?

then we can get real tangible benefits for everyone in the community out of this."

What the fuck? Benefits? I don't suppose you'd care to list them, would you? As far as I'm aware, asylum seekers and refugees aren't allowed to work (and therefore contribute to society) by law, not that this really makes an awful lot of difference since (taking the example of Somlians) the women are forbidden to work by their husbands, who themselves have no intention of working anyway, preferring to stand on street corners chewing khat all day. Oh, but don't tell me, "multiculturalism" is all the benefit we need, right?

It's already hard enough to get onto the council housing list, there is a real shortage especially in Bristol.

Just wait until this dire economic situation really bites. Wait until the indigenous population can't get social housing because half of Mogadishu have been told how welcome they are here. This is going to do fucking wonders for the BNP's vote share here. You fucking cretins.

City of sanctuary? City of fucking hand-wringers more like.

I'd love to see how many supporters would still support it if they housed the refugees and asylum seekers in Redland/Bishopston/Cotham/Southville/Clifton rather than Easton/Lawrence Hill/St Pauls.

Wednesday, 23 December 2009

Southville Snobbery

With the latest Ashton Gate Supermarket developments, as detailed by The Evening Post:

Details of the plans for the Sainsbury's store proposed for Ashton Gate have emerged for the first time.

The new store, which would be the chain's biggest in the south west with a floorspace of about 96,800sq ft (9,000sq m), is bigger than the one originally planned by Tesco at Bristol City FC's current ground – but less in size than the combined shop space of two stores in the area.

So presumably the people who were against a Tesco opening up there for reasons of congestion and damage to local shops will be against a Sainsburys as well? Well no, it turns out it's not quite simple.

Some people are maintaining a credible stance, such as Charlie Bolton, who states

"I am likely to oppose it. I think the proposed size will mean the same problems as if it had been a Tesco store."

Exactly. But then Labour councillor Sean Beynon states

"When the Tesco plan was suggested, most people were opposed to it because they didn't want to see another supermarket in the area.

"In my view, therefore, this is potentially a good solution for the club and the community."

Which is typical of the kind of hypocrisy that many BERATE supporters were showing. They were totally against a Tesco opening, but not a Sainsburys, but they didn't have the bollocks to admit to being so snobby and to reveal their true anti-globalist colours, so instead they dressed it up to be a protest against a supermarket, when in fact it seems it was a protest against Tesco all along.

Of course, they'll try and gloss over this fact by stating that it's a replacement store rather than a new one but this is frankly irrelevant as Charlie correctly points out above, as it will still bring exactly the same problems (congestion, "damage" to local shops) as they claimed a Tesco would, replacement store or not.

Just admit it, BERATE supporters, you will never form a BERASE because it's not a supermarket you're against, it's a Tesco.

You fucking anti-capitalist snobs.

With an election coming...

...I imagine it'll soon be time for MPs to do the doorstep challenege to canvas votes.

I can't wait, I hope the local Labour MP calls round, I really do. The Jehovas will feel they were let off lightly in comparison.

Monday, 21 December 2009

Jandroid's propaganda department spins into action

With this press release.

Despite everyone here in Bristol I've spoken to complaining that none of the roads have been gritted (as it was blatantly obvious this morning that they hadn't been), in a manner worthy of Chinese State Television the Council are claiming that no, we're all wrong, and in fact:

All major routes were gritted three times overnight on Sunday and will be gritted again tonight. 80 tonnes of grit were used last night to deal with the freezing ice and snow conditions, compared to the 20 tonnes of grit we use on a normal night.

I'm sorry, but this is clearly bollocks. On the most major roads (which the council describes as "All 'A' roads, public transport routes and major residential roads" I've been on this morning like the A38 there wasn't a speck of grit, and it's clear that it hadn't been gritted since it started snowing about 10pm on Sunday. And what the fuck is all of this "4 times as much grit used" business? Presumably they only grit the roads at all if there's a chance of ice, and it's clear every road I drove on, and every road everyone I've spoken to has been on, was not gritted this morning.

Two vehicles are working in the day to deal with specific problems on the main routes.

I'd wager this is really the only gritting that's happened since this snow, and explains why some roads have since been gritted, although most have just turned slushy due to the volume of traffic, which will then freeze tonight, may not be gritted again, and then we'll really have carnage!

Exactly a week later...

...and it turns out the AA and I were both right.

Not a single fucking road in Bristol was gritted, and we've got a good 4-5cm of snow. It was carnage on the road this morning because people don't appear to know how to drive on ice or snow.

Thursday, 17 December 2009

Copenhagen conference showing it's true colours

Aptly demonstrated by Hilary Clinton:

The US Secretary of State said the science for climate change is now “undeniable” and the world must agree a deal in the next 48 hours.

Oh really. Prove it.

In a move that will widely be seen as a grand gesture to force developing countries to sign up to a deal, she said the US would be willing to pay into a global fund of $100 billion (£60bn) per year by 2020 to help the “most vulnerable” adapt to floods and droughts.

Here's the important bit. They want the richer nations of the world to give the poorer countries $100 billion a year. Basically redistribution of wealth.

Green truly is the new Red.

The $100 billion fund was first suggested by Gordon Brown in June this year

What a surprise

and America’s offer will boost the UK Prime Minister's credentials abroad.

He should be so fucking lucky.

It's quite amazing, the leaders of the world have pissed off both the AGW-sceptics and AGW-preachers alike. They've annoyed the sceptics by using an at best questionable theory to justify thinly-veiled redistribution of wealth, and they've annoyed the warmists by declaring the best way of dealing with the disasters they're all foretelling is by the redistribution of wealth.

Essentially they're saying that if you're rich enough, and can afford to pay for enough "carbon credits", you can emit as much CO2 as you like.

This was never about the environment.

Wednesday, 16 December 2009

My, Jandroid WILL be pleased after all her desperation to get everyone on board and "marketing the city", Bristol has been shortlisted as a host city for the world cup.

Still, this still relies on FIFA including it as a final choice of venues, and more importantly, England winning the title of hosting country in the first place. Oh yeah, and BCFC have to win their appeal against North Somerset's planning decision.

When you consider these hurdles, it makes the effort of "marketing", and completely fabricating figures of supposed money being spent by the predicted tourists etc even less worth it. But yet, despite a lot of people simply not giving a fuck whether we host it or not, Jandroid ploughs on. I dread to think of the costs.

Way to go, Jandroid!

Jandroid, pleased

Tuesday, 15 December 2009

Bet he was a fearsome sight

Ben Fogle has apparently "chased away burglars".

TV presenter Ben Fogle has described how he chased four burglars from his house as they were trying to break in.

He was in the kitchen of his home in Kensington, west London, when he spotted the men jumping over his fence.

I bet he was a fearsome sight, eh?

I say, you young ruffians! Begone, lest you see the wrong end of my garden hose!

Monday, 14 December 2009

Well, we'll see then, won't we

The AA has warned that half of the UK's local authorities only have enough road salt for six days of continuous freezing. And it turns out they're right:

But the Local Government Association said the suggestion councils were not ready was "ridiculous scaremongering".

...but didn't deny it. Also "scaremongering" implies that they'd prefer it wasn't reported at all.

The organisation added local authorities' reliance on "just in time" deliveries left too many of them vulnerable to a lengthy big freeze or major snowfall.

Like last winter?

He told the Today programme it was "ridiculous" for the AA to focus solely on the amount of salt, which could be increased within 48 hours and moved around the country.

Fucking didn't happen well enough last winter, though did it? Happily, the AA have a habit of doing this - pointing out things the government really wish they wouldn't, such as what percentage of fuel cost is duty. It looks like in this situation, they're going to be right again.

"If the AA thinks the only way councils can ensure they have enough salt is by stockpiling it, it is showing startling ignorance.

"Councils realise how important it is to keep roads clear. It's up to councils, not the AA, to decide whether it is a good use of their council taxpayers' money to stockpile more salt or have other plans in place to make sure they can get enough grit to keep Britain moving."

Well, we'll see, won't we. I bet the AA are right about this one as well.

Friday, 11 December 2009

War for Oil?

Remember the start of the Iraq invasion? Remember the reasons given by many, including this smarmy cunt?

Whilst we suspected Oil was high on the list, this was always strenuously denied, usually with bollocks like "It's not that simple".

But look...

A joint venture between the UK's Shell and Malaysia's Petronas oil companies has won the right to develop Iraq's giant Majnoon oil field.

A total of 44 companies are bidding for 10 fields in the second such auction since the invasion in 2003.

Well, what a fucking surprise.

Although Majnoon is a huge oil field, with reserves of 13 billion barrels of oil, it currently produces just 46,000 barrels per day.

Shell and Petronas have pledged to increase that output to 1.8 million barrels per day.

Their venture will receive a fee of $1.39 a barrel. In June this year, a winning bid to develop an Iraq oil field received $2 a barrel.

Would anyone who so confidently stated that oil wasn't the primary motivating factor like to rethink their position?

The most unlikely people

...have done a study in support of 20mph speed limits.

UK cities should have more 20mph speed zones, as they have cut road injuries by over 40% in London, a study claims.

In particular the number of children killed or seriously injured has been halved over the past 15 years, the British Medical Journal reported.

The London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine study estimates 20mph zones have the potential to prevent up to 700 casualties in London alone.

Well, I can't think of anyone more qualified to do a study on 20mph zones.

The researchers compared data on road collisions, injuries and deaths in London between 1986 and 2006, with speed limits on roads.

Is it a quiet time for tropical disease research, then?

After adjusting for a general reduction in road injuries in recent years, they found that the introduction of 20mph zones were associated with a 41.9% drop in casualties.

What kind of adjustment? Why is any kind of adjustment needed? Either 20mph zones make a difference or they don't. Or maybe they've been attending the CRU's classes on data fiddling?

He estimated that 20mph zones in London save 200 lives a year, but this could increase to 700 if plans to extend the zones were implemented.

Is this using the "adjusted" figures, perchance? And I rather think this figure is calculated using the same method as the amount of money lost to music piracy each year (as in it's completely made up, because they have no idea if people would have bought the music if they couldn't otherwise download it - in this case they can't firmly state 200 lives have been saved because they've don't conclusively know that they would have been lost if the 20mph limit wasn't there).

Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, said: "This research confirms that one of the most effective ways of protecting vulnerable road users, especially children, is the introduction of 20mph zones.

All very well. For the record, I think that 20mph zones in residential areas/around schools/high streets, etc are generally a good thing, provided we don't see "feature creep" of people then pushing for these limits in non-residential areas as well.

But I would ask: What the fuck has happened to this gentleman?

Surely, with the introduction of 20mph speed limits, education for pedestrians and cyclists should come with it? After all, leaving aside the extreme minority of cases where a car has mounted a pavement, if a pedestrian was hit in the road by a car, it's likely they weren't looking properly, a mistake which is exacerbated by a car travelling at excess speeds. Cars need to keep to the speed limit, but by the very same token, pedestrians need to be aware of how to look for traffic properly, and pick safe places to cross.

It's all very well having this plastered over every advert break:

But let's have a little balance, shall we?:

Thursday, 10 December 2009

Jandroid will not be happy

However, I think this is fucking hilarious.

Bristol City's chief executive Colin Sexstone has condemned North Somerset councillors after they dealt a potentially serious blow to plans for the football club's new £92-million stadium.

Although the decision to deny planning permission for a vital part of the scheme could yet be overturned at a further meeting or on appeal, by the time this happens the Football Association will have made up its mind whether to include Bristol as a host city for England's 2018 World Cup bid. The new stadium is central to Bristol's hopes.

They have rather successfully pissed over the border onto Jandroid's chips, haven't they? I don't give a fuck about football really so I'm not bothered - but she must be fucking livid. She's put all this effort and taxpayer's money into this bid, and now it could all have been a waste of time as this stadium was central to it.

It was a fucking shit location for the stadium anyway - Bristol just doesn't have the infrastructure in that area to cope. What ever happened to the stadium by Temple Meads idea, anyway?

Tuesday, 8 December 2009

Won't somebody think of the children?

The cheeeeeeeeelllldren?

The campaign intends to encourage children to not give out personal information on the web, block unwanted messages on social networks and report any inappropriate behaviour to the appropriate bodies, which may include the website, teachers or even police.

Sounds like a good idea, right?

The measures were drawn up by the UK Council for Child Internet Safety (UKCCIS), which was set up following Dr Tanya Byron's review into inappropriate material on the internet and in video games.


Oh right. Nice to see our old friends the IWF on that list.

Thing is, I can't help feeling that these kind of campaigns always pave the way for simply more draconian measures, all in the name of "thinking of the children". It doesn't help when they (deliberately) use emotive language like:

One measure that has been discussed by the group is the use of a "panic button" on social network sites to flag up inappropriate content.

And how on earth will this panic button be monitored and acted on? If it's going to be there for everyone, people may just click it whilst viewing completely innocuous content just for a laugh. Then somebody, god knows who, will have to investigate the site that was reported, and make a completely fucking arbitrary decision, based on a combination of their own personal feelings and fuck all, on whether to block the site or not - this was illustrated perfectly with the IWF and the Scorpion's Album Cover. And since it's not possible for the ISP to know the age of the person browsing the internet, they'll block it for everyone.

I fear what this is just a pre-cursor for a Chinese-style firewall. The Wikipedia article on China's firewall doesn't state what justifications were used in the introduction of it, only the reasons (a fear of not being able to control the publications of the China Democracy Party).

However, I think the government know that the UK wouldn't accept a similar firewall without some pretty good justification - after all, look at the opposition to ID cards. I think they've realised pretty much the only justification is the cheeldren.

Monday, 7 December 2009

A sense of perspective is needed, I think

ITV have apologised because one of the contestants on their ridiculous fucking show cooked and ate a rat. According to the RSPCA in New South Wales,

it was "not acceptable" an animal had been killed as part of a performance.

I'm sorry, but It's a fucking rat.

How many people are tucking into chicken, or fish, or sausages, or steak tonight? I know I am. What's the difference?

Taxing the bankers

I was going to blog about this, but frankly CF has done a fantastic job already, so I'd recommend you read that, as I agree with every word.

Sunday, 6 December 2009

More thoughts on the MET Office, and climate marchers

Since the MET office are supposedly releasing temperature data to dampen the effect of the leaked CRU emails, one thing I can't stop thinking about:

The MET office has VAST amounts of computing power. Far more than most other companies or organisations in the UK. I expect they have some of the best Meteorologists working for them. They've been solely in the business of predicting the weather for over 150 years.

And yet, they can barely fucking tell me - accurately - what the weather is going to be like next week. Given this, can somebody tell me why the fuck should I trust their climate change alarmism?

And if I can't trust supposedly the experts, why on EARTH do the great unwashed and politicians - politicians, for fucks sake - think I'm going to believe what they say?

I don't understand the first thing about climate science - christ, it seems from the leaked emails that the CRU barely did - so how come these fucking Trustafarians are now self-declared fucking experts on the case? Not only can they tell me what's happening with the climate, they can tell me what's going to happen in the future, and more importantly, they can tell me - conclusively - what's causing it. How? I guarantee you that not a single fucking person on that "climate wave" march had even the first clue about actual climate science.

And another thing, why the fuck is everybody now falling over themselves to "Stop Climate Change". Why are we trying to stop the climate changing? That's what climate does, you fucking morons. It's done it, unaffected by man's actions, for 30 million years.

Get a fucking grip.

Saturday, 5 December 2009

MET Office to release climate data

The MET office are apparently going to release climate data early next week presumably to try and silence all the debate that has come from the CRU emails.

The Met Office has announced plans to release, early next week, station temperature records for over one thousand of the stations that make up the global land surface temperature record.

Oh really. And this will be the full data, incorporating all weather stations, without any of the "adjustments" that the CRU are so fond of? How will we know? I will be highly suspicious of the data if it does show the temperatures rising, simply because of what we've learnt so far from these emails. If they did apply "adjustments" to make the average temperatures rise to "hide the decline" how would we know that they had?

And let's say hypothetically that even if the data is legit, and it does show earth temperature's rising over the last 150 years, what will the MET office's opinion be on the fact that the Medieval Warming Period shows temperatures higher than they are now?

One thing I do know, the science is not fucking "decided". Let's hope that the so-far-biased press like the BBC don't use the release to claim that it is. They've already given as little coverage as possible to these emails, and even then, clearly reluctantly.

Wednesday, 2 December 2009

Squeal, piggies...


MPs will be allowed to appeal against repaying expenses judged to have been overclaimed, says a Commons committee.

Many MPs were angry that an audit of second home claims over five years imposed retrospective limits on claims for cleaning and gardening.

Millions of the people that voted you in were angry when you applied retrospective tax to cars, but you didn't give a fucking rats arse then, did you? Funny, then, when the same happens to you, you don't like it.

Fuck the lot of you, you grasping cunts.

Ain't that the truth

The Global Warming Flowchart, and how the warmists see it

How we should deal with the issues presented by Global Warming:

How the warmists actually see it:

The latest pointless crackdown

Evironment officers to prowl London's streets looking for people dropping cigarette butts.

Every day about 7,000 cigarette butts are dropped in the City. They are accompanied by lighters, matches and cellophane wrappers.

Now 10 environment officers will be prowling - and issuing the fines to irresponsible smokers. Those who give false details will be fined £1,000.

How do you propose to do that, shit-for-brains?

Darling: Hands off city (!)

According to the BBC,

Chancellor Alistair Darling has warned against more European Union regulation of the UK financial services industry.

Warned against? Fucking warned against? Listen, badger brows, we don't have the authority to do that any more, because our esteemed fuckwit signed all that away. That came into effect yesterday. Fancy thinking that today you can then send "warnings" to the EU. Can't you see how meek and pathetic this looks? Bit of a case of barn door and horse I think.

Mr Darling is expected to warn other EU finance ministers he will not accept new powers for European authorities to take decisions on future bail-outs for which British taxpayers might have to pick up the bill.

But do you have the authority to reject these powers, Darling? I bet you'll find that you don't. Welcome to the Lisbon Treaty.