The failure of the left to force an agreement at the UN Copenhagen conference last week has obviously upset a lot of people in the media. The left wing newspapers (just about all of them) have been voicing their displeasure, but this wasn't so easy for the BBC who are, supposedly, impartial.
But the BBC are THE left wing media organisation. More than any other they encompass the beliefs and values of the left. They employ an almost entirely left wing staff and broadcast only left wing approved programming.
However, because they are "impartial" they are not allowed to put forward opinions on failures such as Copenhagen. So what to do? It's quite a conundrum but the BBC have now established a way around this.
What they do is they put forward a number of representatives from various left wing NGOs - such as Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth and WWF - and ask them their opinion. As if that matters!
Greenpeace, FoE and WWF are not democratically elected organisations. Their opinions are not required and should not be sought - and they are no more valid than my opinion. The BBC should no more be seeking the opinion of these organisations any more than they should be seeking the opinion of a large multinational corporation for their views on Copenhagen.
But in the days following the failure of the Copenhagen conference the BBC trotted out various spokespeople from the NGOs I mentioned for their opinion in a shameless display of grovelling to their puppet masters.
The worst thing about this is that they aren't even subtle about it. They are quite open about their unashamed bias now - they have stopped even trying to be impartial. It's a national disgrace that this organisation is now so institutionally biased and continues to receive public funding to put forward their putrid views.
Monday, December 21, 2009
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Ranting Stan's Irrational Hatred Of The Week: Jeans
I'm pretty sure this will not be a universally popular choice, but I don't care. I hate jeans.
I'm told that they have become so popular because these days it's all about comfort - but surely I can not be the only person who finds jeans the most uncomfortable choice to wrap your nether regions in? We're talking about a garment that started its life as cheap, hard wearing items for working men. They are stiff, have uncompromising seams that dig into you in the most awkward places and are held together by metal rivets! In what way is that comfortable?
I do own two pairs of jeans which Mrs Stan has bought for me, but I rarely wear them. I hate them.
I'm told that they have become so popular because these days it's all about comfort - but surely I can not be the only person who finds jeans the most uncomfortable choice to wrap your nether regions in? We're talking about a garment that started its life as cheap, hard wearing items for working men. They are stiff, have uncompromising seams that dig into you in the most awkward places and are held together by metal rivets! In what way is that comfortable?
I do own two pairs of jeans which Mrs Stan has bought for me, but I rarely wear them. I hate them.
Friday, December 18, 2009
The Blitz spirit
It took me just under an hour to drive the eleven miles into work this morning. This was entirely due to the adverse weather conditions. However, it usually takes me just under an hour to drive to the office due to the adverse traffic conditions - so nothing was lost. Away from the main roads the surface was slippery and treacherous, but on the whole the roads were tolerable.
And yet there were only six other people in the office.
Six.
There are usually a couple of hundred.
But only six bothered to even try to get in. I'm pretty sure that most didn't try because if they had they would have made it - there wasn't any real difficulty. The buses were running, the trains were running and the roads were manageable.
The local schools were closed and, in at least one case, the decision to close the school was taken before any significant snow had fallen!
What has happened to the British people? During the Blitz people would struggle into work through all sorts of difficulties often to find, when they arrived, that work had been bombed and there was nothing to do except help clear up. Now they give up when a little bit of snow falls.
This country is in the depths of a deep recession - a recession which I believe will still materialise into a long depression lasting a decade or more - and yet it seems that half the country can't be bothered to go to what work they do have. We deserve to end up as a third world nation if this is the sort of spirit we show - the give up and stay at home spirit.
Credit where it's due, though. The paperboy got up and delivered our paper this morning. Shame the postman couldn't make the same effort.
And yet there were only six other people in the office.
Six.
There are usually a couple of hundred.
But only six bothered to even try to get in. I'm pretty sure that most didn't try because if they had they would have made it - there wasn't any real difficulty. The buses were running, the trains were running and the roads were manageable.
The local schools were closed and, in at least one case, the decision to close the school was taken before any significant snow had fallen!
What has happened to the British people? During the Blitz people would struggle into work through all sorts of difficulties often to find, when they arrived, that work had been bombed and there was nothing to do except help clear up. Now they give up when a little bit of snow falls.
This country is in the depths of a deep recession - a recession which I believe will still materialise into a long depression lasting a decade or more - and yet it seems that half the country can't be bothered to go to what work they do have. We deserve to end up as a third world nation if this is the sort of spirit we show - the give up and stay at home spirit.
Credit where it's due, though. The paperboy got up and delivered our paper this morning. Shame the postman couldn't make the same effort.
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
The descent into madness
As a self confessed "paedo whore" nursery worker is jailed for just seven years after sexually abusing children in her care for pleasure, a father who defended his family and home from violent armed attack is sentenced to prison while his attacker is let free and the Ministry of Defence decides to cut Britain's air defence so as to purchase 22 new helicopters which may - just may - be ready in time to help pull our troops out of Afghanistan rather than do any good while they are still fighting there our leader is in Copenhagen pledging to give billions of pounds of British taxpayers money to foreign countries to "solve" a non-existent problem based on an unsubstantiated premise that the world is going to fry as a result of what man does.
Yes - the lunatics really have taken over the asylum.
Yes - the lunatics really have taken over the asylum.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Suicide cult
The planned Christmas strike by BA cabin crew reminds us again that the problems which beset British industry in the seventies haven't gone away and that the biggest problem of all retains its capability to be self destructive.
The problems I refer to are, of course, industrial relations and the reason they remain so bad is predominantly down to the attitude of unions who refuse to acknowledge the lessons of the past and the role that they played in the demise of British industry.
Let me say, first of all, that I am not opposed to unions. They are, in theory, a good idea - but far too often they are led by militant and, to be quite frank, lunatic left wingers who still believe that capitalism is the enemy that must be slain. Let me also point out that I don't believe that the management of BA is free of culpability either - whenever there is an economic downturn it is the usual response of a business to cut pay, bonuses and jobs even if the business remains buoyant.
If business was more honest in the way it did these things rather than always looking for any old excuse to bash their own employees then maybe the unions would be less aggressive back - but business in Britain is incapable of thinking much beyond anything other than the current share price or the short term. However, this style of management is not a uniquely British thing whereas unions hell bent on destroying the industry their members work for is.
The British car industry was destroyed by militant unionism. It wasn't that long ago that the last major British car manufacturer shuffled into the pages of history when the unions hammered the last nail into Rover's coffin. Now it appears Unite (a daft name for a union if ever there was one) is determined to do the same to BA.
BA has made a massive loss. It's going to get even worse. No ifs buts or maybes - it is on its last legs. They really do need to reduce costs or the company will collapse. When that happens, the BA cabin crew won't just have lower pay - they won't have any pay which is exactly what happened to the employees of Rover the vast majority of which now work in call centres for a fraction of the money or claim the dole. Great job protecting the workers there!
I've got no doubt that once Unite have smashed BA into the ground they will then demand that the government step in to save the company - which won't happen. What would be the point? It didn't help the nationalised car industry or the nationalised coal industry or the nationalised steel industry.
And that's another point worth mentioning. Even though I am a right winger who believes in the capitalist economic system, I believe that nationalising an industry is sometimes both right and necessary. It wasn't nationalisation that destroyed our coal, car and steel industries - it was militant unions. Of course, it wasn't helped by some of the government decisions taken along the way - such as joining the "Common Market" which is now having a similarly ruinous effect on one of our last nationalised industries; the Post Office.
Throughout the latter half of the 20th century it was militant unionism that was largely responsible for destroying British industry. It seems they are determined to keep doing the same today. I don't think they'll ever stop until the last major British industry is consigned to history, but at least then we won't have to worry about militant unionism any more.
The problems I refer to are, of course, industrial relations and the reason they remain so bad is predominantly down to the attitude of unions who refuse to acknowledge the lessons of the past and the role that they played in the demise of British industry.
Let me say, first of all, that I am not opposed to unions. They are, in theory, a good idea - but far too often they are led by militant and, to be quite frank, lunatic left wingers who still believe that capitalism is the enemy that must be slain. Let me also point out that I don't believe that the management of BA is free of culpability either - whenever there is an economic downturn it is the usual response of a business to cut pay, bonuses and jobs even if the business remains buoyant.
If business was more honest in the way it did these things rather than always looking for any old excuse to bash their own employees then maybe the unions would be less aggressive back - but business in Britain is incapable of thinking much beyond anything other than the current share price or the short term. However, this style of management is not a uniquely British thing whereas unions hell bent on destroying the industry their members work for is.
The British car industry was destroyed by militant unionism. It wasn't that long ago that the last major British car manufacturer shuffled into the pages of history when the unions hammered the last nail into Rover's coffin. Now it appears Unite (a daft name for a union if ever there was one) is determined to do the same to BA.
BA has made a massive loss. It's going to get even worse. No ifs buts or maybes - it is on its last legs. They really do need to reduce costs or the company will collapse. When that happens, the BA cabin crew won't just have lower pay - they won't have any pay which is exactly what happened to the employees of Rover the vast majority of which now work in call centres for a fraction of the money or claim the dole. Great job protecting the workers there!
I've got no doubt that once Unite have smashed BA into the ground they will then demand that the government step in to save the company - which won't happen. What would be the point? It didn't help the nationalised car industry or the nationalised coal industry or the nationalised steel industry.
And that's another point worth mentioning. Even though I am a right winger who believes in the capitalist economic system, I believe that nationalising an industry is sometimes both right and necessary. It wasn't nationalisation that destroyed our coal, car and steel industries - it was militant unions. Of course, it wasn't helped by some of the government decisions taken along the way - such as joining the "Common Market" which is now having a similarly ruinous effect on one of our last nationalised industries; the Post Office.
Throughout the latter half of the 20th century it was militant unionism that was largely responsible for destroying British industry. It seems they are determined to keep doing the same today. I don't think they'll ever stop until the last major British industry is consigned to history, but at least then we won't have to worry about militant unionism any more.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Ranting Stan's Irrational Hatred Of The Week: Orange street lights
I don't care if they are more efficient or more effective - whoever came up with the idea of bathing our night time streets in an eerie, unearthly orange glow really deserves to swing from one of those lamp posts.
I grew up in the sixties when the majority of lamp posts used conventional white lighting. Obviously I wasn't a driver back then, but I can honestly say that I never noticed a particular problem with those sort of lights - and yet some meddling idiot decided to remove the comforting glow of simulated daylight and replace it with a sulphurous shroud of yellowy orange. For God's sake - why?
It's ridiculous and I hate it.
I grew up in the sixties when the majority of lamp posts used conventional white lighting. Obviously I wasn't a driver back then, but I can honestly say that I never noticed a particular problem with those sort of lights - and yet some meddling idiot decided to remove the comforting glow of simulated daylight and replace it with a sulphurous shroud of yellowy orange. For God's sake - why?
It's ridiculous and I hate it.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
The double standards in demonstrations
I had hoped to post about this yesterday, but the w word intervened again (that's w for work - not wife!) and it had to wait.
Basically, it's about the double standards that exist in society today at all levels as demonstrated by the repeated calls in the media, from the police and various politicians for a group opposed to the islamification of Europe to call off a planned protest in Harrow later this month.
Personally speaking, I don't like marches, protests and demonstrations. It's not that I have a problem with them in principle - I don't - my main concern is that the vast majority of them are now hijacked and controlled by large politically motivated groups which often have no real interest in the local issue other than an opportunity to push their own political dogma.
Hence a minor protest by a group of residents concerned about council plans to turn their allotments into a block of flats gets taken over by Greenpeace and turned into a mass worldwide demonstration against "climate change". That's a bit of an extreme example, but I do know of some instances where something like that has happened and the original complaint of the protesters has been forgotten in the end.
Having said all that, I do recognise the right of anyone to peaceful protest - but it seems that certain elements in society, including elements of authority, do not. The group calling itself "Stop The Islamification Of Europe" have been urged to call off their planned protest outside Harrow mosque because it is alleged that it may spark violence.
Why would it? If, as we are frequently told, Islam is the Religion of Peace then why would there be any violence? Are the protesters planning to beat each other up?
The actual concern is not with the original march - but that counter demonstrators from so called "anti-fascist" groups are planning to do whatever they can to curtail the rights of fellow citizens to hold demonstrations. Incredibly, the irony of such a plan is lost on these "anti-fascist" groups who can not seem to understand that their attempts to silence other opinions is itself fascistic in nature or indeed that they are demonstrating in favour of Islam, an ideology which embodies fascistic principles.
If the police, media and politicians are really concerned about the possibility of violence then they should be telling these anti-free speech groups to call off their protest as that is far more likely to spark violence. Indeed, it is actually the intention of these groups to provoke violence as that is the tactic which will see the protest by SIOE abandoned and increase the likelihood that future planned marches by the group will be prevented by the authorities.
But these "anti-fascist" groups are are not some cobbled together group of concerned citizens. They are funded by the mainstream parties - including the Tories - and the unions. They are made up of well known left wing political activists, communists and anti-capitalists and they have not been shy in using violence and intimidation in the past.
Personally, as I've hinted at, I'm opposed to the protest by SIOE outside Harrow mosque. If the people of Harrow want to protest then they should be free to do so, but I don't like large political groups doing this sort of thing. If SIOE want to protest they should do so outside government offices and buildings. ANY organisation or group of protesters which is not local to the place in which they are protesting should be restricted to holding their protest in designated areas - such as public parks or town squares - but that is just my personal opinion.
However, given that our regulations permit these groups to hold their protest outside a mosque in Harrow then they should be permitted to do so and not be subject to intimidation by counter protests or by the authorities to abandon their lawful demonstration.
Basically, it's about the double standards that exist in society today at all levels as demonstrated by the repeated calls in the media, from the police and various politicians for a group opposed to the islamification of Europe to call off a planned protest in Harrow later this month.
Personally speaking, I don't like marches, protests and demonstrations. It's not that I have a problem with them in principle - I don't - my main concern is that the vast majority of them are now hijacked and controlled by large politically motivated groups which often have no real interest in the local issue other than an opportunity to push their own political dogma.
Hence a minor protest by a group of residents concerned about council plans to turn their allotments into a block of flats gets taken over by Greenpeace and turned into a mass worldwide demonstration against "climate change". That's a bit of an extreme example, but I do know of some instances where something like that has happened and the original complaint of the protesters has been forgotten in the end.
Having said all that, I do recognise the right of anyone to peaceful protest - but it seems that certain elements in society, including elements of authority, do not. The group calling itself "Stop The Islamification Of Europe" have been urged to call off their planned protest outside Harrow mosque because it is alleged that it may spark violence.
Why would it? If, as we are frequently told, Islam is the Religion of Peace then why would there be any violence? Are the protesters planning to beat each other up?
The actual concern is not with the original march - but that counter demonstrators from so called "anti-fascist" groups are planning to do whatever they can to curtail the rights of fellow citizens to hold demonstrations. Incredibly, the irony of such a plan is lost on these "anti-fascist" groups who can not seem to understand that their attempts to silence other opinions is itself fascistic in nature or indeed that they are demonstrating in favour of Islam, an ideology which embodies fascistic principles.
If the police, media and politicians are really concerned about the possibility of violence then they should be telling these anti-free speech groups to call off their protest as that is far more likely to spark violence. Indeed, it is actually the intention of these groups to provoke violence as that is the tactic which will see the protest by SIOE abandoned and increase the likelihood that future planned marches by the group will be prevented by the authorities.
But these "anti-fascist" groups are are not some cobbled together group of concerned citizens. They are funded by the mainstream parties - including the Tories - and the unions. They are made up of well known left wing political activists, communists and anti-capitalists and they have not been shy in using violence and intimidation in the past.
Personally, as I've hinted at, I'm opposed to the protest by SIOE outside Harrow mosque. If the people of Harrow want to protest then they should be free to do so, but I don't like large political groups doing this sort of thing. If SIOE want to protest they should do so outside government offices and buildings. ANY organisation or group of protesters which is not local to the place in which they are protesting should be restricted to holding their protest in designated areas - such as public parks or town squares - but that is just my personal opinion.
However, given that our regulations permit these groups to hold their protest outside a mosque in Harrow then they should be permitted to do so and not be subject to intimidation by counter protests or by the authorities to abandon their lawful demonstration.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
