Click to get your own widget

Saturday, March 08, 2008



Corporation Tax powers

Much of the reason for removing the toll is that it obscures how unnecessarily expensive the bridge is. The previous bridge cost £19.5 milliion (£314 million in todays's money) & could therefore be paid for in tolls on the then forecast 1.5 million vehicles. The new bridge will cost £4 billion which means it would have to raise £400 million a year to pay off. At the current 11 million vehicles that would mean a toll of about £40 which would clearly empty the bridge.

There is no reason why the price should be 13 times the previous one. That obscuring this is the real reason why tolls are being removed is shown by the fact that untill now the PC consensus has been that 70% of the transport budget should go to rail despite it being only 3% of travel. If this was a principled stand they would insist drivers pay for the new bridge & it would be obvious how we are being ripped off.

Meanwhile they could cut a tunnel at £40 million with government small change.

1950s predictions

I put this comment on Iain Dale's thread about China getting the Olympics despite their human rights record. The amazing thing is that comments on this then stopped dead at 5 - an incredibly low number of comments for him (yes i'm jealous). I had expected somebody would say that my comparison of our human rights record in Kosovo with China's in Tibet was unfair or even just unpatriotic but nobody has felt able to dispute or even ignore the issue.


The problem with tolls is that, though they worked for the previous bridge, with 1.5 million vehicles a year the new bridge is going to be 13 times as expensive, even after inflation, & so 11 million vehicles could not pay for it.

Any attempt to introduce tolls would merely demonstrate how scandalous this is.

On the other hand the Norwegians have been cutting equivalent tunnels for under £40 million - which could be paid for out of Holyrood's petty cash

Growth - Profesor macDonald's letter

EU & global government

I don't know what is going on in Darfur. However I do know that over many years our media did deliberatly lie to portray the Bosnian Moslem leader as a moderate censoring any mention of the fact that he was an ex-Nazi who had publicly called for the genocide of all non-Moslem communities (60% of the population). They did heavily push the "Srebrenica Massacre" omitting the very strong evidence that it is largely or entirely a fabrication & censored any mention of the prior & undisputed massacre by the Moslem Nazis of at least 3,800 Serb men, women & children (though mainly the latter 2 since the men were in the army). I also know they portrayed the KLA as freedom fighters when they knew they were NATO armed scum recruited from drug dealers, Albanian secret police torturesr, pimps & ex-Nazis sent out to engage in genocide. I could go on for ages but check out

Knowing the western media's propensity to lie it would be immoral to punish anybody, Chinese, Sudanese or anybody else, purely on claims made by organisations which are proveably so corrupt. Also looking at the accusations against Sudan you will see how curiously unspecific they are - specificity would not prove it since ITN "accidentally" fabricated a video of a specific "concentration camp" which wasn't, but the lack of attempts even to produce this much evidence suggests it doesn't exist.

The open secret about prosecuting Nazi war criminals is that we only went after the very small fry & usually non-Germans at that. Look at the trail over the last 10 years & you will not find a German from Germany there. Despite life sentences at Nuremberg virtually all of the big fish were let out between 1950 & 1955, one of the last being Sepp Deitrich kept so "long" not because of the 10s of thousands of Jews he murdered but because of murdering 300 US soldiers.

All of this was done because the Nazis were being rebranded as anti-communist freedom fighters.

The effect of this has been that Nazism is alive & well & hugely influential in running the EU, NATO, Bilderberg Group & our media, as evidenced by our support of ex-Nazis publicly engaged in genocide & the media's censorship of the facts, in Yugoslavia.

Comparing Holocausts

Gordon Brown says Scotland can have tax raising powers
The reference to "income tax, business tax & VAT"is spin. We already have the power to vary income tax by 3p & all parties have backed away from using it. Changing VAT seriously would merely lead people shopping across the border. The biggie is business tax & specificly Corporation Tax.

With that we can go for growth on the Irish model - if the SNP are willing to make the financial sacrifices necessary to achieve what they have called for. The ball has been lobbed back into Alex's court.

More Professor MacDonald

The Scotsman editor says the global cooling puts global warming in some doubt.

Forth crossing

Oh the horror of being part of the politically correct middle classes.

The shame of being caught rummaging though 2nd hand goods competes with the shame of not being.

While the shame of seeing the neighbours in a bigger car can only be aleviated by the hope of catastrophe.

Incidentally even the IPCC, high priests of alarmism, now only says sea level rise will be 15 inches so it looks like Ewan is in for a disappointment

I solve the budget problem, the economic growth problem & the binge drinking culture problem

"Planning" system

We know we could have Irish levels of growth because Ireland managed it. I stand by my belief in high technology. Since then both Labour & the Tories have said they want nuclear power, which is a quite spectacular turn roound in less than a year.

"Environmentalism" & the free market

Building costs & the planning system

Warming - responses to my letter - largely on the sceptic's side.

Ferries & Tunnels

Israeli boycott

The Prince Harry censorship & the Yugoslavia censorships

Death penalty


Police enquiries on murder

Russian election - bias is in British media

Green Danegeld


Russian election - democracy that we don't have

Libertarian suggestion of getting rid of quangos & thus being able to end income tax

Tuesday, March 04, 2008


The science of DNA identification is advancing fast as a new paper in Nature - Worldwide Human Relationships Inferred from Genome-Wide Patterns of Variation 22 Feb 2008 - describes. As Dienekes puts it
This paper is proof positive that European ethnicities can be distinguished from each other genetically. Even close-by populations (in this case the French and the Italians) are neatly separateed
What this means is that it will clearly be possible to identify the nationality of bodies in Kosovo & elsewhere. In particular the ethnicity of the 210 people murdered in the Dragodan Massacre a few hundred yards from the British HQ in their zone of Kosovo. This includes the 47 of them claimed as Albanians since it it would be consistent with previous experience if the KLA have forced people to claim them.

Since Albanians are not merely a linguistic community but a separate religious one, being either Moslem or Catholic & the Serbs being Orthodox, the genetic separation will likely be much wider than that between French & Italian mentioned previously. If the ICTY or NATO/EU/UN occupiers are sincere in their desire to find the truth they will certainly take advantage of this new technology to determine the facts about this genocide.

Less differentiation, but probably still greater than that along the Italian/French border will separate Bosnian Moslems from Orthodox Serbs. If so, DNA identification would settle the facts about bodies inn Bosnia & Hercegovina. The Bosnian Moslems are believed to be descended from a mixture of, in order: Bogomils, a Byzantine heresy which after the Turkish conquest (1463) accepted Mohammad as a genuine prophet: Bosnian aristocracy who converted to retain their property; & a small number of Turks. The time separation & lack of intermarriage should be sufficient to make general identification possible.

This is particularly important for the alleged Srebrenica Massacre. There is no dispute, though virtually no western coverage, about the deliberate mass murder of 3,800 Serb men, women & children (though mainly women & children since the men were away) in surrounding villages by the Moslem soldiery under the Srebrenica commander Naser Oric. The ICTY say, for undisclosed reasons, that this was not genocide though it actually fits the legal definition far better than what we may call the "official" massacre. The official massacre is what Mr Izetbegovic the ex-Nazi Bosnian Moslem leader claimed was the killing, initially said to be of the entire missing garrison, then said to be 7,500. Subsequently 7,000 of these have been identified as having reached safety but the garrison is now said to have been higher so that numerous figures up to 15,000 have been claimed.

Evidence for this massacre has been threefold:

- US satellite pictures of mass graves said to have been taken 24 hours apart though one of them shows a completed house which had not been there "24 hours" earlier.
- The statement of one alleged eye witness.
- The finding of 2,500 bodies, mainly near the aforementioned villages, many of them appearing to be of children.

When examined the "mass graves" were found to be empty & the US authorities said the bodies had been burned, until bodies were found near the villages, at which point it was announced that they were Moslem soldiers (even the apparent children) - no trace of the missing 3,800 Serb bodies has been reported. Doubt has been cast on the testimony of the eye witness since he had served in both the Bosnian Moslem & Croatian forces before hia alleged joining of the Serb forces.

This leaves the only real evidence of the "official" Srebrenica massacre being the bodies which, with the advance of science can now be identified as to probable nationality (also gender).

Assuming the ICTY are a genuine judicial body rather than a corrupt racist propaganda organisation they will certainly instantly take action to determine if these bodies are indeed from the Moslem community or the Orthodox Also whether any of these alleged soldiers are the bodies of women & whether the apparent children are large numbers of Moslem soldiers with a neotonous medical condition.

To some extent it need not reflect badly on the previous integrity, though it would on the competence, of the ICTY if they quickly found that the bodies were indeed Serb. It would merely prove they were wrong.

If they were to refuse to make an investigation science has proven they are capable of it would prove they had indeed known the facts all along & that the Srebrenica Massacre story is a complete & deliberate piece of pro-Nazi propaganda as big as any "big lie" Joseph Goebbels ever conceived of.

Previously forensic work has been carried out by representatives from independent countries. Best known being when Finnish forensic experts proved that the the "Racak massacre" had not, as US human rights expert & former ambassador to El Salvador William Walker said, involved innocent villagers shot in the face "execution style" but KLA veterans shot from a distance. Walker subsequently admitted at the Milosevic "trial" that he had lied. Since the ICTY have already made accusations it would be far better for the examination to be carried out by representatives of competent uncommitted countries such as Finland, Russia or Singapore.

My initial interest in this was stirred by a Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow lecture by Professor Sir Alec Jeffries, who is essentially the British end of the invention of DNA fingerprinting. Despite initial scepticism that this project was feasible, after seeing the Dienekes link he confirmed that
These are not currently in routine forensic use but they could in principle could be deployed in the Kosovo investigation
I would also like to thank Steve Sailer for pointing me to the Dienekes site.


The NIPCC (Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change) run by sceptics has just held a conference in New York. 500 scientists turned up, including Putin's science advisor, but Al Gore, who was invited to defend his position didn't. 500 scientists on this are quite a lot, particularly when there are no grants in it, indeed the opposite. We would have seen massive coverage had they put the desired view. They didn't & the coverage has not only been almost non-existent worldwide but heavily slanted.

Reason online has the headline "Global warming is real" which, despite being in quotes, is the precise opposite of what the conference said.

Reuters starts their report with a picture of the frit Mr Gore.

And the Independent, apparently the only UK report, says nothing about the conference & merely reports that one of the sponsors also supported the idea that passive smoking has not been statistically proven to cause lung cancer, which it hasn't.

Meanwhile the same media repeatedly report that Russia isn't democratic because the media didn't give equal air time to the smaller (or in Kasparov's case virtually non0-existent) parties.

Monday, March 03, 2008

WHAT THE PAPERS DON'T SAY - 4 recent unpublished letters

4 unpublished recent letters here. All of them went out to a very wide range of Scottish & UK papers. For that reason it is possible something has been published but I missed it & if anybody lets me know I will say so.

I have previously said how letters about the Yugoslav wars, as 3 of these are, are almost impossible to get published & I think this proves my assertion.

The third one, about the outrageous £624 million discrepancy between the cost of building the Millenium Dome (£46 million) & the cost after the government got finished charging us for paperwork (£670 million) has also gone unreported except on a late night TV show.

The facts here are indisputable & indeed not disputed & the failure of our media to report them (& I don't just mean publishing my letters but to report in the news pages) is disgraceful. Our media are calling yesterday's Russian election "not democratic" but the only complaint, other than the result, is Russian media bias. It is difficult to suggest that by that standard we, or indeed the US where Yugoslav reporting was no more truthful, can claim to be democratic ourselves.

1) During news reporting on Kosovo this morning Mark Mardell of the BBC claimed that "The Yugoslavs killed 13,000 people in Kosovo and that NATO bombing & occupation stopped the killing". The late Joseph Goebbels, author of the "big lie" school of reporting & information minister to Adolf Hitler would have been lost in admiration at the ability to squeeze so much untruth into 1 sentence.

The majority of racist killings in Kosovo were actually by the KLA, on whose behalf we were bombing. This was confirmed by Foreign Secretary Cook speaking to Parliament 2 months before starting bombing. Nonetheless the total number killed was, according to the Spanish forensic team hired by NATO, only 2,100, including those killed by NATO bombs & KLA terrorism. Remarkably low considering this was a war zone with, we were assured, 26,000 KLA "soldiers" in action.

Worse than the lie about numbers is the claim that NATO occupation stopped the killing. It merely stopped the western media reporting of the killing. The BBC decided, I assume they say accidentally, to censor any reporting of things like the Dragodan Massacre, in the British Zone, where the KLA, now enrolled as "police" were allowed to deliberately murder 210 unarmed civilians. In total the various acts of genocide under NATO protection probably exceed 6,000. Also many thousands of schoolgirls were kidnapped off the streets & sold to western brothels, run by KLA supporters. In the same way they had previously censored any reports that the flight of refugees was caused by NATO bombing rather than anything the Yugoslavs did. This meant ignoring a number of instances of refugees saying just that (though the translators usually didn't translate) or that a larger proportion of the Serb than of the Albanian population fled.

Our behaviour in these wars has been disgusting & should shame any decent person. I believe it would have shamed us if it had been properly reported.
2) Coverage of NATO's support of the "Independence" of Kosovo, an act which is clearly illegal under international law, the UN Charter, & our signatures on the Helsinki Treaty & indeed on the Kosovo Occupation Agreement has made great play of the Serbian police not doing enough to stop rioters attacking the US embassy.

One may recall that in March of 2004 KFOR troops stood-by while the Albanians rioted in Kosovo. The Albanians were unopposed as they destroyed 29 Serbian churches and 800 homes belonging to Serbs and other non-Albanian civilians.
Colonel Dieter Hintelmann, the commander of the German KFOR contingent in Prizren, explained KFOR’s inaction saying: “Protection of buildings is not the task of the Bundeswehr in Kosovo” and German defense minister Peter Struck praised the “prudent behavior" of the KFOR soldiers saying “They reacted rationally, preventing an escalation and thus protecting human lives.”

Or perhaps one may not recall that since, like the genocide of 6,000, the kidnapping for sex slavery of uncounted thousands of schoolchildren & the ethnic cleansing of 350,000 all under our rule it has had almost no media coverage here.
3) On Tuesday, during a TV programme about the architect Richard Rodgers, designer of LLoyds, the Pompidou Centre, the new Madrid Airport Terminal & the Millennium Dome he & his partner both said that the Millennium Dome cost £46 million to build & that the government had gagged them since they were claiming £670 million. This implies 93% was lost in government paperwork or something worse.

Am I the only person to think that this should be front page news, rather than tacked away at 11.30 on a quiet evening?
4) There has been some questioning in the media of whether censoring information about Prince Harry being in Afghanistan may be crossing the line between journalism & political activism. I do not think you need worry.

When the media decided to censor any mention of the antecedents of the Bosnian Moslem leader's history as an SS auxiliary publicly committed to genocide, saying that he was a multiculturalist moderate the British media crossed that line. When they decided to report obviously fabricated lies about rape camps in Bosnia they lost any possible claim to objectivity. When they decided to censor any mention of the primary genocide at Srebrenica, that of 3.800 Serbian men women by our Moslem Nazi friend & then to omit any mention of the numerous changes of story & lack of evidence about the alleged "official" massacre they merely reinforced it. Then they made as little mention of the Krajna Holocaust as possible. Before the start of the Kosovo bombing they accepted Madelein Albright's instructions that though the US was deliberately aiming at war because "the Serbs need a little bombing" they should lie & say it was Milosevic being intransigent. During & after the war they lied about the refugees being caused by deliberate Serbian action when it proved that they were fleeing NATO bombs. After the war they censored any mention of the Dragodan Massacre where "NATO police" as the KLA had now become, were allowed to murder 210 unarmed civilians & bury them in a mass grave only hundreds of yards from the British HQ, or of almost all of the thousands of other cases of genocide under NATO rule.

All in all I think you have little reason to worry that a sensible reaction to the Prince Harry story will have the slightest effect on the British media's reputation.

Sunday, March 02, 2008


A couple of posts I had answered on the Jerry Pournelle website. He agrees that the Green attutude is properly definable as Fascism. However disagrees that Fascism & Nazism are close, thinking Nazism & Communism are closer. He knows considerably more about the history of political philosophies than I, having done degrees on it, so while I do not agree & don't think the leaders of them would either, I don't relish arguing further:

I have been using the term eco-fascist in debates on newspaper online comments. I can & do justify it in terms of the belief in "consensus" which was the heart of Mussolini's doctrine. It has not made me popular with some but others have started using the term too. I don't know how it is in the US but in the UK, while editorial is overwhelmingly on the alarmist side & letters chosen are strongly so, online comments, where they are not heavily moderated run heavily towards scepticism, even in middle class lefty papers like the Guardian.

I have to be in a really bad mood or writing about DDT to call them eco-Nazis.

Neil Craig

I selected this because I wanted to do a short note about the difference between Fascism and Nazi's, but I seem to be running low on energy. Look: either the words are meaningless noises conveying disapproval, similar to saying "Ugh!" or "Filthy! Disgusting!" or they are useful in actual discussion. Fascism is not the same as Nazi-ism. Fascism is an extreme development of the Progressive and Pragmatic movement, with roots in Jacobinism. Marx would consider it a heresy of his own social analysis. Fascism accepts the notion of class warfare, and would end the class struggle not by abolishing the classes, but by requiring them to work together within the State. "Everything for the State. Nothing outside the State. Nothing against the State."

Italian Fascism was not anti-Semitic and there were Jews in high places both in government and the Party until Mussolini, partly driven to isolation by Stalin's Popular Front Against Fascism, sought alliance with the Germans. At one point Mussolini threatened war with Hitler over the independence of Austria, but the Allies didn't like him, and eventually he found himself isolated.

I don't agree with you about the space between Fascism & Nazism. Il grant that had things gone differently Mussolini could have sat out the war, as indeed he did till France was clearly defeated & he thought the war was all but over in 1940 & as Franco did.

The point about DDT & Nazism is that we have killed something like 70 million people by banning it but since they are very largely African children nobody mentions it.

Neil Craig

I am sorry you don't agree, but that's your problem. If words and history have any meaning, you are merely expressing "feelings". That's fine but not very useful in intellectual discourse. Sorry to be so blunt. This problem of confusing one's beliefs with reality is the mark of this age, and you are not the only one afflicted with it.

Your statement about DDT is correct, but again irrelevant to the definitions here

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

British Blogs.