Click to get your own widget

Saturday, September 24, 2011

Catastrophic Global Warming - Scotsman Debate Continues

  My letter in reply to Mr Turnball's letter here (stuff edited underlined).
Roy Turnball'a response to my letter (Friday) saying that the recent claimed figure of Greenland melt is completely false agrees on that fact. He depends on the "imprecise nature of previous records" to deny certainty on this lack of melting but that cuts both ways. If the records aren't that good alarmists can't rely on them to claim any warming let alone catastrophism.
Moreover he doesn't dispute the fact that Antarctic ice is growing.
I note that, despite repeated requests, neither he nor any alarmist is able to name a single independent scientist anywhere in the world promoting the governmental catastrophic warming scare story. This, on its own, proves it is not part of science and that all those claiming a "scientific consensus", without any of these scientists in it is unworthy of trust on any other subject either.
Mr Turnball's defence of Gore's claim of 20 ft sea level rise is disingenuous because Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" film was not about the last ice age but about current alleged warming. The sea level claims were merely 2 among many convenient untruths in the film,
Indeed, apart from the fact that he ran for President it is difficult to find anything that is unequivocally truthful. Mr Gore may be a Nobel winner enriched by the methods Sarah Palin recently denounced as "crony capitalism" but he seems not seriously restricted by knowledge as his claims that smoking is a serious cause of global warming and that 2,000m down is "millions of degrees" hot shows.
And on the subject of another attendee at the forthcoming "renewables" shindig in Edinburgh, Chris Huhne but a different letter from Scottish Renewables (Friday) an organisation funded by government to lobby for ever more windmill subsidies, denouncing Tavish Scott, former Scottish LibDem leader who as party leader supported billions in windmill subsidies for not quite matching Huhne's enthusiasm for windmills.
It us true that Mr Huhne given as a reason for massive subsidy of windmills that they will be cheaper and "in the long run, protect us from future hikes in gas prices". However he has also said that development of the new shale gas field in Preston, with potential profits comparable to North Sea oil, will be halted purely to stop cheaper gas undercutting subsidised windmill power. It is unreasonable of Scottish Renewables to demand that Nicol know which of 2 expensive and destructive statements by his LibDem colleague, that windmills need subsidised because they are cheaper than gas or that gas needs banning because it is cheaper than windmills, should be taken as the party line for the day.
I am sure Gore, Huhne and Salmond will get on well
  The last couple of paragraphs deleted refer to another letter yesterday and the Scotsman were fully entitled not to let me take on 2 at once. The nothing "unequivocally truthful" remark, while true may have been considered overly contentious.

  The repetition of my call for the naming of any scientist supporting catastrophic warming is courteous since an apparent answer to that is published alongside my letter.
Bravo to Roy Turnbull (Letters, 23 September) for trouncing Neil Craig's misrepresentation (Letters, 22 September) of research on Greenland ice melting.

Mr Craig has repeatedly demanded examples of scientists who accept warming, but are not paid by the state.
Well, now he has one. Me. As I am an industrial chemist, he may object that my work is not in climate science. Likewise for the scientists working on low-carbon technologies for Shell, BP and Chevron, whose websites support the global warming consensus.
For non-state-funded climate scientists, who accept warming, he need only look at private universities like Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford and Yale.
Of course he will not do this as it contradicts the deniers' conspiracy theory of climate scientists promoting warming to keep the grants coming in. Or the related conspiracy theory in which it is all an excuse to raise taxes.
Never mind that even state-funded climate scientists continued to warn of warming during the Bush administration, even though it was the last thing the science-denying, tax-averse Republicans wanted to hear.

  I have sent an answer which I think answers this unexpected reply well., though it may lead to Dr Moreton advancing into an untenable position. I hope it will be in on Monday. This correspondence seems to be developing legs.

Labels: , ,

Friday, September 23, 2011

This comes from the Global Warming Policy Foundation newsletter. There is a link but you need to subscribe: However it is such vital good news for our future that it will almost certainly be avoided by the MSM. To be fair the BBC news did carry a short mention on Weds, 3/4 of the way through, leading with the fact that "environmentalists" were opposed and making no mention of the billions of £s it is worth

1) Cuadrilla Unveils Huge UK Shale Gas Resources
Petroleum Economist, 21 September 2011
Helen Robertson and Kwok W Wan

UK junior Cuadrilla Resources today claimed it is sitting on 200 trillion cubic feet (cf) of shale gas from just two wells drilled in northwest England. It hopes to start commercial production by mid-2012.

The company, which has been exploring for shale gas at sites near Preston in Lancashire and Bank, near Liverpool, has drilled two wells so far and is in the process of drilling another.

“We’re excited,” Dennis Carlton, Cuadrilla’s executive director told PEU. “It’s a significant number [200 trillion cf], but we need to refine it and make sure we can quantify it.”

Cuadrilla explained this was an estimate for gas in place, not necessarily ultimately recoverable volumes. The company said it would not know exactly how much gas could be recovered until it had finished exploration phase and the results had been analysed. This would likely be next summer.

It plans to drill five to six wells in the next year and that ultimately around 10 wells would be needed to confirm the initial resource estimate, which was calculated by the company itself.

Cuadrilla’s Grange Hill site is shut in pending the results of an investigation by the department of energy and climate change (Decc) following two tremors at the firm’s drilling sites earlier this year. Some environmentalists claimed the tremors could have been caused by Cuadrilla’s hydraulic fracturing (fracking) operations in the area, a charge Cuadrilla denies.

The firm, which has been unable to frack since the investigation started, said the report should be released by mid-October. If Decc concludes that the tremors are the result of fracking, it could potentially halt the company’s shale-gas aspirations in Lancashire.

However, Carlton told PEU he is confident Decc will find in Cuadrilla’s favour. If it doesn’t, the company will concentrate on developing its other licences in the Netherlands and Poland. “To pack up and move out of the UK would be a big blow to a small company, but it was part of the game plan. For anyone with four or five projects across Europe you can guarantee that they aren’t all going to work. We’re not going to put all our eggs in one basket,” he added.

There has been some local opposition to the company’s drilling plans, includng a demonstration of around 150 people near the company’s Bank site last week. When Cuadrilla chief executive Mark Miller announced the company’s 200 trillion cf estimate in Blackpool today, there was also a small group of protestors outside.
But the company is confident it will manage to convince the public that it can develop northwest England’s shale gas safely, and has also played up the potential financial benefits it could bring to the region. Miller said he wants to create an “Aberdeen effect” in Lancashire. He claimed the company could contribute £5 billion ($7.8 billion) to £6 billion to the local economy over the next 30 years through job creation and business taxes.

UK gas market turned on head

If even a fraction of Cuadrilla’s shale-gas reserves are recoverable, it would turn the UK gas market on its head. This includes drastically reducing UK imports of Norwegian and Dutch gas by pipeline, as well as liquefied natural gas (LNG) from as far away as Qatar and Nigeria.

“If they say a 200 trillion cf recoverable resource over 30 years, that's 190 billion cubic metres (cm) a year, or 500 million cm/d. Even 50% of that is double what the UK is producing today,” one UK gas trader said. This would be enough to meet the whole of the UK gas demand in the peak winter period, with consumption usually around 400 million cm/d.

Cuadrilla’s shale gas estimate dwarfs Norway’s huge Troll gasfield, which has recoverable reserves of 33 trillion cf, and Ormen Lange, which holds 8.6 trillion cf of recoverable gas. And it even overshadows the 187 trillion cf of technically recoverable shale-gas reserves that the US Energy Information Administration believes Poland possesses

But some UK gas traders were sceptical about whether the mid-2012 production start date would produce volumes sufficient to affect prices.

“It’s nice to say, but hard to promise,” one UK gas trader said. “The planning rules are bit different [in the UK] to the US, which makes it harder to access the gas,” another said.

The UK has been importing more and more gas to meet rising demand as North Sea gas production has gone into decline. LNG imports now account for around 25% of UK consumption.

Preston is 85 miles from Scotland so it seems likely that if conditions are right there they will be right here.

However the big condition is clearly politics. If it doesn't work it will likely be because of the politicians - like everything else.

Scotland's oil, in a good year, provides £12 bn however that doesn't count the multiplier effect of  money spent here which we already benefit from. The north of England would gain from such an effect there and of course nothing says this is all the gas available so the bonus may well ultimately match North Sea oil.

  Again - assuming our ecofascist parasites don't stop this being used as they have with so many technologies and as they already have here for nearly half a year.

  Chris Huhne the minister has previously said that we need massive subsidy of windmills because they are cheaper, in the long term, than gas.
    Demonstrating all the honesty, integrity and desire to loot us all for which he, his party and British mainstrem parties generaly are so well known he has  now said this find will be suppressed because we need massive suppression of new gas fields because it is cheaper than windmills.

   ""We will not consent so much gas plant so as to endanger our carbon dioxide goals,"

  Clearly any Pseudoliberal and indeed Conservative, Labourite or SNPper who ever suggests that their parties are not actively trying to deepen the recession  must be, by definition, a wholly corrupt, lying, thieving, pensioner murdering ecofascist parasite without the tiniest trace of personal honesty. If nobody can dispute that, taken together, the entire lot of them possess far less human decency and honesty than my toenail clippings cutting my toenails would be less of a crime against humanity than stringing up every last one of the bastards from lampposts.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, September 22, 2011

Neither Greenland Nor Anywhere Else Melting - Scotsman Letter

  This letter in the Scotsman today.
For anybody worried that there might be some justification to alarmist claims of Greenland melting a peer reviewed paper confirms melting "not statistically significantly different from the reconstructed melt extent during 20 other melt seasons, primarily during 1923–1961."`So not only less than medieval and 5,000BC warmings, but not more serious than the 1930s.

Antarctic ice, 10 times that of the Arctic, is growing.
Moreton and Turnball (letter Tues) picked up my error of saying that the warmists had falsely claimed 12% of Greenland melted instead of 15%.
The none-trivial bit is that neither is true. In turn, Mr Turnball should answer a question I asked him here previously. From among the 60% not paid by the state can be name a single, scientist, anywhere who supports the widely advertised catastrophic warming "consensus"?
Al Gore claimed, untruthfully, massive sea level rises had already taken place and that they would shortly reach 20 feet. He is in Scotland shortly, along with Chris Huhne and Alex Salmond to congratulate us on having the worlds most destructive CO2 regulations, requiring the destruction of 80% of our electricity supply and economy over the next 8 years.
Gore has managed to avoid ever having to answer any serious questions while talking such obvious nonsense as that smoking causes global warming and that 2,000m down is millions of degrees. Really.
I trust Moreton and Turnball's eye for detail, and indeed the massed Scottish media will, equal to me, seek his acknowledgement of such glaring alarmist inanities

Refs - publisher confirms origin of the 15% nonsense

reconstruction of annual Greenland ice melt extent, 1784–2009 was done by Oliver W. Frauenfeld

Antarctic Ice growing

Gore's "inconvenient truth" untruths

" says smoking causes global warming

" says lava millions of degrees
  It is interesting that both Moreton and Turnball made no attempt to argue that Greenland was melting or on any part of the warming scam but simply saying I had "erroneously" said the error was 12% rather than 15%. I don't know if the use of that word is coincidence though if they got together to make the same obviously trivial mistake that would seem a tactical error. The original letter had contained both the figures 12 and 15 and I regret reading it without due diligence. However complaining of underestimating the degree of inanity of alarmists suggests they are both desperate to disagree sceptics and unable to find anything important on which they can do so without being obviously wrong.
     When I write to papers I always try not merely to defend my position but to carry the argument to the enemy. Defence followed by counter-attack wins battles, defence alone doesn't.
      In this case I carried the offence to Al Gore, whose errors are, to mine, like a mountain to a molehill. as Dellors points out.
     My question about whether the Scottish media will even attempt to ask him, or any ecofascist, any difficult questions about the inane lies he has told seems to have been answered by the removal of my mention of the most ridiculous of these lies |(leaving the word "really" as unconnected to its element as a beached whale). This is poor poor editing, particularly since the Scotsman had already asked me to cut down my original draft from 450 words to 250.
   Basically if you are Al Gore you can tell absolutely any lie in the interest of making yourself a crony capitalist billionaire and you will get a Nobel, described as having "got the science mostly right" by Al Gore, as much space as you want in the MSM to lie and an almost total suppression of any media urge to real journalism.
    Ah well we all know the game is fixed but if you don't play you can't'win.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, September 21, 2011

Corruption on Edinbirgh Council - Corruption in Government, Like Dead Fish, Starts from the Head

fraud, wrong-doing and incompetence in the Property Conservation Department at Edinburgh City Council. This department is responsible for overseeing the statutory notice system, that seems unique to Edinburgh, where private buildings with multiple owners (e.g. tenements or blocks of flats), can be issued with a notice by the Council stating that the building is going to be repaired and that the cost will be passed to the owners. These repairs are commonly to roofs, or external masonry not only to make sure that they are wind and water tight, but to make sure that there is no danger to passing pedestrians from falling slates or blocks of stone.
Council surveyors arrange the work through ‘approved contractors’ and recoup the cash from owners, the local authority also receives 15% of the final bill. The value of statutory notices issued by council surveyors has increased dramatically in recent years, from £9.2m in 2005 to more than £30m in 2010, that’s £4.5 million in fees to the Council!
The problems at the Council were first highlighted by a group of old established Edinburgh roofing companies that found that while they were included on the approved lists of contractors, they were no longer receiving any work, despite having a long history of working with the council. One of those companies approached us here at Tenders Direct and it was immediately obvious to us that there were serious problems with the way that the approved lists were being drawn up and the way in which contracts were being awarded.
The companies approached the Council with their concerns and as often happens were given the brush off. This time though the contractors were determined to pursue their claims, as there was little work available elsewhere and one by one these family firms were going out of business as the council work dried up. Eventually they managed to arrange a meeting with Mark Turley, Director of the Council’s Services for Communities, who acknowledged that there was a problem. The Council then appointed Deloitte to carry out an investigation into the running of the department and the Fraud Squad at Lothian & Borders Police is conducting a parallel investigation.
So far 15 members of staff, half the department, have been suspended pending further investigation, but the casualties in this affair may still have a long time to wait for any redress. It will take years to investigate the cases of the residents of Edinburgh who may have been overcharged and/or been subjected to sub-standard workmanship. All repairs, other than emergencies, have been halted, which means that the small family owned building and roofing contractors still don’t have enough work and are struggling to stay in business long enough until the flow of work restarts.
The senior officials and elected members of Edinburgh City Council are culpable in this affair,

   So do we really believe that nobodty in Edinburgh Council knew this had gone up from £9.2 million to £30 million in 4 years? Do we really believe none of the councillors, or anybody in the Scottish government had heard anything of this? Do we really believe none of the people defrauded had made any complaint to anybody in authority?
   Well certainly in the last case the answer is that we cannot because at the same time BBC Scotland did a programme on the subject. Unlike the above they concentrated on the homeowners ripped off rather than the contractors frozen out. That it can be extensively opposed from 2 different directions proves how extensive it is and that it cannot not have been known.
Some quotes from the BBC "Scotland's Property Scandal" {video here] :
There was a leak in the roof and we had a contractor's estimate for repair of £760 - we ended up charged £300,000
BBC hired expert "probably 95% wasn't necessary"
  "          "       "    "doesn't look like there is £300,000 of work there"
"council agreed some of the work didn't need to be done"
"for at least 13 addresses top quality materials were charged but inferior ones used"
"council say hospitality records to 2009 have been lost"
former council employee "contractor offered me a free kitchen"
Action Building Contractors name keeps appearing
they "fabricated" an extra £15,000
Couincil said it was going to ABC because all the other contracors were busy in 2008
other contractors said they were looking for work at the time - start of the recession
"felt like a licence to print money"
     When we know massive corruption exists and is, at best, ignored until there is no alternative the prima facie (latin for "at first face") for any public project going many times over its cost elsewhere in the world simply must be or include fraud (Parliament building  X 10 times cost; Forth bridge X 8 inflation adjusted previous cost; Edinburgh trams X 18 equivalent cost elsewhere).
  Any council official who knew, or in a situation where a reasonable person would have known (eg knowing the charges had gone from £9.5 million to £30 m in 5 years) and who did not formally bring it to the notice of superiors or police should be questioned by the police and fired and prevented from ever working for government again. Usually the job they do and those under them should be closed down since it is clearly one that does not require someone doing useful work.
   Any civil servant caight lying to the public to defend such appare3nt fraud should be fired and lose their pension.
   Any top civil servant who admits fraud saying that it was all their fault and that the politicians were in no way guilty becuase they personally had concealed the fraud from said politicians should be fired and kept out of any government "service". They should never, ever, under any circumstances be rewarded by said politicians, who could have no possible reason to do so unless he were lying to conceal their own fraud and never , ever, whatsoever, under any circumstances be entrusted with any alleged "inquiry" into apparent fraud by climate scientists.
   If, for example, all this happened to "Sir" Muir Russell including his apppintment to head the East Anglia U "Inquiry" into the lies and frauds carried out by Professor Jones and co the prima facie assumption could not be other than that the corruption was not limited to Edinburgh, or to Scotland but that almost the entire British establishment  were personally lying thieving parasites.
     This is the response I put on tne tendersdirect article. It  seems to cover the bases.
When it is obvious and has been for months yet the council refused to act and when half the department are so obviously involved that they have to be suspended then we are not talking about a little corruption. It is not a few rotten apples it is most of the barrel. This only comes about when such corruption is endemic not just in this department but across all the bodies in council who should be noticing it. That includes everybody working there not just all the councillors.
Beyond that we are told how much perseverance the contractors had to show and how, even now, they are likely to be squeezed out. If Edinburgh council is completely corrupt and no other part of the Scottish administration was willing to notice it then it must be endemic everywhere.
Perhaps explains why Scottish public projects, like the Forth Bridge cost 8 times more than their building costs and why the civil service feel they can get away with the most obvious and blatant lies
Here is part of a Wikipedia artricle on what causes the sort of atmosphere where corruption thrives

They include lack of government transparency; media that do not report such things; weak accounting procedures; lack of measurement of corruption; slow pace of reform; lack of comparison with costs incurred by others doing the same; crony relationships between civil servants/politicians and businessmen/party donors.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, September 20, 2011

Scotsman Letter - Greenland Melting Lie

  I'm afraid I missed this letter in the Scotsman yesterday
When considering the "environmentalist" scare stories about Greenland having melted 12 per cent of its ice, or a fraction of 1 per cent (Letters, 17 September), it is worth pointing out that Greenland has had this covering for at least 450,000 years and probably more than 600,000.

This obviously means that it did not disappear during the nearly 5,000 years of Climate Optimum up to 5,000BC, when temperatures were as much as 4C warmer than today.
Another ugly "green" scare story destroyed by beautiful facts.

  Fortunately it was brought to my attention by 2 replies today - which I will, in turn, reply to.

Labels: , ,

Monday, September 19, 2011

Damaging Wind Turbines is Illegal

  Here is some disgraceful advice about how to, entirely illegally, destroy speed cameras.
Throwing a tyre around it and lighting it is effective but a little crude, and attracts attention.

Pulling it over with a truck and chain is handy, but again, some muppet will report you and you'll soon be done for it.

Same goes for burning gear and petrol driven grinders - they make a racket (the grinders anyway) and destroying the pole can't be the way to go, it's the expensive equipment inside we need to wreck.

So, my current thinking is along the lines of a 20mm hole drilled discretely late at night in the case and the pouring in of something that will irreparably damage the contents. What, though? Sulphuric acid (drain cleaner) might do the trick perhaps. Something that disolves the plastic resin circuit boards are made of?? Expanding foam?
  Isn't it terrible what some people will do to such devices which, while often a way of ripping us off may, sometimes, have some positive effect in cutting accidents.

 In America the right to bear arms has meant some vigilante action against windmills. 
The Bonneville County Sheriffs Department needs the public's help solving a vandalism case involving a BP turbine.
Police said BP Wind Energy reported two shots were fired at one of their wind turbines, casing about $5,000 in damage.
Police said there is reported damage to wiring, hoses and other equipment....
If you have any information about this crime, call the Bonneville County Sheriff's office at 529-1200 or Crime Stoppers at 522-1983.
  Do ring them if you have any information. Who would have thought wind turbines so vulnerable?

    In Britain opponents of windmills are more restrained and we just use the government appeals system which is deliberately designed to get such things approved even when the elected councillors vehemently approve. Of course while they will happily give permission to a 300 ft windmill, whose local impact is to produce a pleasant noise day and night and, we are assured, to bring droves of tourists, don't try asking for permission to put up somewhere less noticeable to actually live. The worst we do is y  snub neighbours taking the money.

   On the other hand supporters of windmillery have been known to do their own vandalism to intimidate. And we have seen ecofascists vandalising power stations that actually work, with the support of Tory MPs and de facto support of the alleged prosecuting authorities. We also have a legal system where multiple murder by those and such as those is simply not investigated so obviously any investigation of mere vandalism would not even be investigated unless we were seeing deliberate political harrassment..

   I am not in any way suggesting that anybody actually do any damage to these immense, ugly, parasitic examples of how the government and their crony capitalist pals conspire to steal from us. Not even though every day one of these monstrosities stands it defrauds us of more taxpayer's subsidy money for what every politician knows is unreliable, intermittent power 10s of times more expensive than it need be.

   My interest is purely intellectual. I cannot help wondering how one of these would hold up surrounded by burning tyres or with a hole drilled in it and filled a heavy slow burning oil.

Labels: , ,

Sunday, September 18, 2011

Recent Reading

First prototype built from MIT’s effort to construct houses for $1,000 each. Probably slightly more basic than a British new build.

London’s Jubilee line cost £3.4bn to build, but raised land values in adjoining areas by close to £14bn. Looks like the thousands of times greater areas of the Highlands and Islands could thus easily provide enough added value for the £1 billion needed for the Scottish Tunnel Project.
The fractions of a second that could be saved in automated trading by having a sales centre half way between New york and London might be enough to fund seasteding. Personally I doubt it would be enough on its own but it is an added economic bonus on the plus side of the ledger.
Spiked article by Colin McInnes on Germany being forced to give up its electricity supply by the ecofascists being the route to serfdom.
Canadians (52%) and Americans (49%) say that that global warming is a fact and is mostly caused by emissions from vehicles and industrial facilities. Only 43 per cent of Britons (-4) agree with this assessment.

  Maybe there is something to be said for having media so obviously propagandist liars that nobody believes them. The USSR used to show the same effect at the end.
Pournelle' immediate jobs programme

My general principle is that economic growth happens when energy is cheap and there is a maximum of economic freedom, and of those two, economic freedom is probably the more important.
First, change all the rules for small business exemptions from regulations by doubling the maximum number of employees you can have for the exemption. There are a number of regulations that apply only to businesses with fewer than 10 employees; make that number 20. There are other regulations that apply only to this with more than 50 employees. Make that 100. Etc. The first time I proposed this I got mail saying it was useless because there aren’t any successful small businesses willing to expand but prevented by the threat of regulation. I have considerable evidence to the contrary; and besides, if there are no such businesses, then there won’t be any consequences of adopting this. In fact, though, I am quite sure there are many businesses successful enough to expand that would do so if the regulations weren’t so onerous.
Second, repeal Dodd Frank. It is estimated that Dodd Frank costs a hundred billion dollars a year. We have already seen that many banks find they have more people working in regulation compliance than in banking. Dodd Frank doesn’t do what it was supposed to do, and we got along without it before we enacted it. It hasn’t worked, and it ought to go.
Third, repeal Sarbanes Oxley. That’s another that costs too much and doesn’t accomplish what it set out to do.
Fourth, establish two commissions whose job is to recommend federal practices that ought to be eliminated on the grounds that we can’t afford them, or never needed them in the first place. The commissioners should not be government employees, and ought to be paid no more than $150 a day consulting fee and $50 a day expenses. Let it be a typical commission, with three members appointed by the President, three by the Speaker, and three by the President pro tem of the Senate. The whole thing shouldn’t cost more than $2 million a year. Any federal position that a majority of the commission recommends for elimination is automatically unfunded unless explicitly refunded by the Congress. If Congress doesn’t restore the position, that position is redundant and that task is no longer performed.
That’s one commission. There ought to be a second Bunny Inspector Commission. This one is to consist of 100 persons, one from each State and fifty to be selected regardless of state. They are to be selected by lot from a pool of volunteers who have high speed Internet connection. The Commission meets on-line once a week for four hours. Once a year it meets in the District of Columbia, expenses to be reimbursed. Each commissioner gets a laptop computer and conferencing software, and the government pays for high speed Internet connectivity for the year. Same rules: if 51 Commissioners agree that a federal regulatory activity is needless, then that activity is defunded, and those who perform that service are declared redundant. (Civil service rules for redundant federal employees apply.) Congress can restore any of those activities and positions, but if it does not, it goes.
The Commissions probably won’t do a lot, but they will at least get rid of the ridiculously obvious, and over time the various government activities will be examined and debated.
Apply all these immediately, and there will be an immediate effect on jobs.
Christopher Booker  - a 17-year-old girl, five months pregnant, who fled to Ireland with her parents, after receiving a letter from a social worker she had never met to say her baby would be seized the moment it was born.
After the birth, all seemed to go well, despite relentless efforts by the English social workers to persuade their Irish counterparts to return the baby to England. ....After a series of interviews with the family, the Irish social workers were satisfied that the baby was in good hands and that there were no grounds for further intervention. ... Buoyed up by a glowing appraisal from the Irish social workers, they decided to return to England.
All went well until the young mother registered her baby with a GP, who reported to social workers that she was back in this country. The social workers were soon on the doorstep, threatening the girl that, unless she moved out immediately, leaving her child with its grandmother, they would take her baby.

....the social workers arrived at 8.30 in the morning, supposedly to check that “the house was carpeted”. One barged into a room upstairs, where the grandfather, semi-naked, was talking to his 21-year-old son. He told the woman in no uncertain terms to leave, and banged the door behind her. The grandmother was on the landing, holding the baby.
That evening the social workers returned, with four policemen, to remove the baby. They claimed that when the door had been slammed, the child “might have been injured”. They applied for an order to put her into foster care. As so often in such cases, the solicitors recommended by the council to represent the family refused to object, saying nothing.
Three times recently, in the weekly “contacts” with the baby which the mother and grandmother are allowed in the social services office, they have been horrified to see their formerly healthy, cheerful child covered in bruises (legs, thighs, knees, shins, forehead and arms) of which they have pictures. The social workers refuse to explain how such injuries could have arisen.

The "caring professions" need victims to care for whether they want it or not.
On the other hand once they have decided not to investigate a paedophile ring they will go to any lengths, including attempting to Section the victim's mother, not to acknowledge their failure.

"Elish Angiolini prevented any police action taking place." a woman I have referred to before in relation to her protection of politically powerful politicians legally responsible for mass murder, child rape and worse.

An Iraqi Assyrian Christian says that the great age of Islamic culture was not the product of Moslems, they found it when they got there. Their contribution was merely conquest. Hardly impartial and i am not an expert on the other hand no glaring inaccuracies. If true it removes Islam's sole claim to have been a constructive rather than purely destructive religion.
Morally preening ecofascists provably 6 times less honest than the average person.

"[those]who bought green products appeared less willing to share with others a set amount of money than those who bought conventional products. When the green consumers were given the chance to boost their money by cheating on a computer game and then given the opportunity to lie about it – in other words, steal – they did, while the conventional consumers did not. Later, in an honour system in which participants were asked to take money from an envelope to pay themselves their spoils, the greens were six times more likely to steal than the conventionals.

Labels: , ,

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

British Blogs.