Duplicity Of Standards

So much rhetoric and concerned hand-wringing is made of hygiene (especially in hospitals) that it shows misunderstanding and ignorance or just essentially an apathetic attitude. Confusion demonstrates that those with the knowledge of cleanliness control are either not directly involved or totally ignored. It appears that administrators take influence priority over professional medical (nursing) staff. A large part of the problem is education and another is the control of movement within a building. The lack of security is a closely associated factor and vulnerable and sick people are very exposed.

Three related areas can be considered together:

• Swimming pools
• Hospitals
• Health and safety

The concept of hygiene ignorance is clearly seen at public swimming pools. There is no consistent standard of hygiene control and management of different pool centres have a range of standards. This promotes anarchism. There is a major difference between Europe and the UQ (aka UK) Ltd and that is simply basic concepts such as swimming costumes that do not have pockets and harbour germs, bathing caps for anyone with hair (male and female). The total ignorance of hygiene is demonstrated by men standing bare-foot at a urinal then walking directly to the pool area without any personal cleansing of, minimally, feet.

Much is made of MRSA and other fatal infectious problems in the UQ (aka UK) Ltd hospitals and the difference between clean and well-managed foreign establishments. The clues to the solution are here. Basic concepts of hygiene control. Not difficult.

Handling cash money (coins or notes) has always been a serious issue. The contents of pockets, handbags... cannot be known or what may have been transferred from earlier use. This is especially important when handling food. Or it should be. The results of the sampling of tables in food outlets are notorious. Faecal matter from unwashed hands, presumably.

The impact of Health and Safety legislation in many cases is very sensible, yet publicity is always given (mostly by the press and TV-news sensationalism) to its exploitation. The screams of red-tape and bureaucracy are predictable and it just about wrecks any attempts for safety-awareness at the outset as if safety concerns are peculiar and constitute a bad concept. It is another example of undermining positive efforts and to destabilise society.

• A simple example would be disallowing painting wooden ladders. It should be obvious that paint can cover over serious defects within the structural integrity of a potentially dangerous ladder and its replacement is essential to ensure the safety for the user.
  

EU 'Green' Taxes

The connection between Brown's attempted giveaway of British sovereignty and a European parliament becomes ever clear. The Tax Doctor engineers new vehicle excise duty (tax) rates justified as being to ostensibly control carbon dioxide emissions and so encourage the sales of new cars. And it just happens that Brussels demands greener motoring and as a consequence is planning to impose an extra £300 on the cost of a new car. This is very similar in the attitude to the move to diesel from petrol. Initially diesel was much cheaper in Europe than in Britain. When a whole range of diesel-engined cars had been bought as a result of this encouragement, the price of diesel constantly rose faster than petrol until now in Britain diesel is more expensive than petrol.

Fuel cost in Britain (19.06.08):

petrol: 118.45p, diesel: 131.84p

There is no obvious reason that such a price swing should happen. The same crude is refined to generate the petrol or diesel fractions. If crude cost rises then the rise of either type of fuel will change, theoretically reflecting the rise of price of crude. That diesel should rise at a faster rate than petrol suggests manipulation of the prices has engineered the profit margins on the two different fuels, especially since most other European countries have never had such a swing and those that have could not possibly offer any justification other than simply crude profiteering.

Thinking is so limited that no new ideas can ever be forthcoming. Quite predictable and totally pathetic. The real bother is that these small-minded people have a position of influence and so influence and engineer the position where more money can be squeezed. Even more small-minded. It even suggests that the future will be very short so the goal is to redistribute as much wealth as possible from those who earn it to those who will take it from those who earn it.

Government stealth taxation

Brussels throwing its weight around, so imagine the very serious problems that will inevitably happen if all 27 EU countries ratify this detested Lisbon Treaty stitch-up. Postponement does not even come close to abandonment. The process will complete eventually. Maybe tomorrow. Next week. Next year. But it'll happen.

The war will have been won and total subjugation will follow.

It is interesting to speculate how money will be of any use. But it's not money, it's resources. Gold, diamonds and mostly ...

Control

European Parliament  - Planned Outcome (5th November 2009)

Golden Rule

• In order to obtain the 'required' outcome never involve the people that it concerns.

EU Centralised In Brussels

All the conflict of World Wars I & II and the millions of dead as some sort of prize for peace has eventually resulted in the silence of the waging of 'WWIII'. Europe has been invaded by the 'politicians' and their instructions (diktats). Scotsman Dr Brown acting as the prime minister of the UQ (aka UK) has attempted to give away British freedoms to Brussels. By denying the British people a statement by referendum, claiming it to be unnecessary, this is behaviour tantamount to being charged with an unknown crime, not hearing any verifiable evidence and then being found guilty and locked away. Subjugation by menace. It makes the 42-day detention without charge seem like a holiday.

David Davis Resignation
Nightmare Police State

This presents a far more subtle conflict without damaging any significant number of the population. It is suggestive of a different attitude to European bloodstock against Middle Eastern bloodlines. This is more support of eugenics afoot. Speculative maybe, but nonetheless suggestive. The European state centralised in Brussels and populated by a perceived élite class. This makes Hitler appear half-decent.

Stealth Strategy

The population continues to increase out-of-control without any attempt to reduce it. A larger population is a larger consumer base. Globally. And there lies the dilemma for governments (ouch! It must be painful to sit upon the needle of greed - DA). All the rhetoric being pontificated by melding the concepts of global warming, climate change and the dependence on fossil fuel and yet totally ignoring the population growth. Indeed, still 'reminding' people about the estimated global population as the future becomes the present. Anything between 9bn -12bn (or even more) by 2050. And it is exponential.

Always has been as no attempts at control have ever been made. The Chinese are criticised for making attempts to limit the population at both ends of the span of life. But control of early life (birth) is not the same as taking controls to end it. The global population cannot be sustained even now as food resources become more depleted and the diversion of potential food to feed cars. The aim must be the devastation of the (global) human race or at the very least its terminal reduction by billions. This leaves other resources for the taking as nobody remains alive to defend them.

Interestingly, the oil-rich (under the ground) nations are mostly sand (above ground). Decimate the nation by the denial of food, since you cannot eat sand and the oil becomes available for the taking. It also leaves more food for a grossly depleted human race. This is tantamount to eugenics. That 'messed up', 'trendy' (creepy - DA) handshake between Brown and Bush is typical of an identification code. Even down to the detail of Brown's right index finger (probably) rubbing the top of Bush's right hand.

The psychology of the usual placement for photographs demands that the 'top dog' stands on the right and the (innocent) right-handed handshake puts the one standing on the left in an awkward position of 'lower-standing'. The Brown-Bush handshake has no such power play. It also allow a private deal to be played out in public and misdirects from the 'official' newspaper-reported stories. Like airline taxation being pushed onto the people and the wringing hand drivel about climate change. It's all about deals being done, money made and subjugation of the people so they pay their taxes. The tax on life. And nobody recognises the 'creepy' handshake for anything other than a 'trendy' handshake. 'Brown' linked with 'trendy' makes for a dreadful oxymoron.

• Incidentally, note the Robert Mugabe domination handshake: hand on top with palm facing downwards forcing the other into a submissive posture and stands on left of the picture (ie to the right of Morgan Tsvangirai) to demonstrate power. It's psychological, but very telling, even if Mugabe doesn't appreciate this fact (eh! - DA). Politicians play this game all the time. It's very informative.

The EU parliament also has a clear aim to steal power and collectively control Europe. It has stalled, but only in the short-term. WWII nearly managed it, but this wouldn't do as power would have passed to only a few individuals (Adolf Hitler in Germany and the cohort Benito Mussolini in Italy). The denial of referenda almost managed it. Notably, one of the early moves was the officially sanctioned referendum by the UQ (aka UK) Ltd for continuing membership of the (EEC). It becomes obvious that entry into the European Community was wanted (1975) and the danger of effective removal in the future has (so far successfully) been denied.

Ted Heath was the prime minister (Conservative) at the time and now Brown (Labour) continues the plan of more than 30 years. This suggests the unproven conspiracy between parties and the ethos of labels being supported. All speculation, of course. Progress is linked to 'growth'. The one cannot possibly exist without the other. Economic Theory is a 20th century concept and greed was born. Dr. Tax has attempted to hide 'stealth' taxation behind concerns for the environment. Even the term 'stealth' has long been rumbled for what it is. A directly enforced removal of taxpayers' wealth into government coffers, known colloquially as HM Treasury. The place into which money flows.

Theoretically, a surcharge as an extra payment for fuel should limit use. But when government is involved this can never work since an enormous amount of revenue is collected by its sale (fuel duty and VAT). By definition it will never be discouraged in any other way than the absolutely cynical way of taxing it out of reach. But since society is geared up to fuel, the majority of people will just reach that bit higher. It's a situation similar to being instructed to jump. The response is not to question the instruction, but simply ask 'how high?'.

At the pre-Budget report of 2006 doubling air passenger duty raised an additional £1bn per year for Blair's government when Brown was the Chancellor of the Exchequer. No tax reductions were made to offset this massive increase. The Tax Doctor has moved from being Chancellor of the Exchequer to prime minister and in the process successfully managed to make life worse for the citizens of UQ (aka UK) Ltd instead of improving everything. Brown's concept of being environmentally green is to create a gaping hole in the public finances and to make an even bigger hole. Rob Peter to pay Paul, but give Paul less than was stolen from Peter.

Dr. James Gordon Brown, the 'best' Chancellor
Britain has ever been lumbered with

As yet another example of the Tax Doctor ethos, there is the stealth tax on the family car. Rises in vehicle excise duty will increase revenue from the 2006 figure of £1.9bn to £4.4bn by 2010. That means that the UK taxpayer will have 'contributed' £2,500,000,000 (£2.5 thousand million = £2.5 billion) over 4 years in assisting Brown to finance 'his' ineptly mismanaged country. Even Treasury figures reveal that carbon dioxide emissions from motoring will barely change, but at the financial cost of £2.5bn.

So, where does the money go?
Presumably into Brown's gaping hole,
but the real question to ask is what sort of portal is that?

The percentage increase in duty on a small 1.2-1.6L Nissan Micra is larger than the percentage increase on a 6L Hummer. As ever in the UQ (aka UK) Ltd those that can afford it (the minority) do as they please and never even give a moment's thought to appalling wastage. Money brings with it a superior quality blindfold. It's brings marvellous imagery of the rich blind man begging for the basics, like a glass of water in the desert. Or even a crumb. Pockets full of gold bring little comfort when starved of food.

King Midas

The current air-tax system:

• Each economy-class passenger pays British air duty of £10 to fly to a European destination and £40 to fly further afield.

Government proposal:

• Tax charge should be for each aircraft and not per passenger and the amount will depend on aircraft size and distance travelled. The world will be divided into three zones: European (least), transatlantic and long-haul. Ironically, most pollution exists at the point of take-off and comparatively very little exhaust gases are created onwards into the flight. All three types of flight must create the same level of pollution around the take-off site, so this effectively torpedoes the argument as nonsense.

• Airlines will pass on the tax to passengers in passage fare, so the aircraft tax is actually a crudely disguised passenger tax.

The cost:

• The government 'wishes'to raise £2,600,000,000 (£2.6bn) from this new tax, but the exact level per aircraft has not been set.

That's probably a "don't know".
They "don't know" (yet - DA)
how much they can 'get away' with

just in case it's set too low. Airlines have calculated that the long-haul flight surcharge will be about £100 per person. Why change the system?

• The claim that this will encourage 'environmentally friendly' behaviour by flying only full planes is rubbished by the airlines since the high cost of fuel and 'other costs' are already enough of an incentive to fill planes. Scheduled commercial (non-charter) flights have the least scope to wait until fully booked, so a half-filled plane will be charged the same as a filled plane, regardless of which of the three zones applies. This makes the ticketing-price almost impossible to manage.

• This is not (the UK) government's problem. Their only concern is to maximise the tax per flight and if it flies almost empty government will simply disavow any responsibility. Just expect payment.

Plan problem:

• Most European airlines fly long-haul via other European cities and so will pay far lower rates of tax than those flying direct from London. Since such a technically 'long-haul' journey actually comprises several take-offs in a multi-short European 'hop' format, the total pollution will be huge compared to a single take-off.

• Some airlines may stop using London as an international hub and bypass the airport totally. Therefore no revenue at all: don't stop, don't pay.

• Tax does not penalise budget airlines and these are of the most concern to environmentalists.

Another example of inadequate thought before implementation of a bad idea, but this is the Tax Doctor government, after all. Typical showing of stupidity mixed with greed.

It's as though a tax levy demonstrates some sort of applicable value (VAT) and that everything should be taxed. The whole concept of taxation on everything is obnoxious, but it shows the limit of new ideas. There are no new ideas just a new tax. Wait for the removal of CO2 from the air (respiration adds this gas to the atmosphere) and the application of a tax for CO2-free air. an impossibility. Humans will pay (literally) to stay alive. And breathing out CO2 by breathing in O2.

• Does Dr. James Gordon Brown pay council tax?
• Does Dr. James Gordon Brown pay income tax?
• Does Dr. James Gordon Brown pay for a TV licence?
• Does Dr. James Gordon Brown pay any kind of tax? 
• Does Tony Blair have non-dom status and so avoid any substantial UK-tax on income to the British government?

David Davis

David Davis has resigned his Haltemprice and Howden seat in a matter of principle over the concept of a 42-day detention without charge. For suspected terrorists. This means 6 weeks of legally empowered detention without understanding any reason and there being no need to provide one.

Police Powers of Detention

The period of detention in the UK without charge for an alleged offence punishable by imprisonment is just 6 hours.

David Icke

Read the text before making any judgmental assumption

• A recent example of a summary execution of a suspect is Jean Charles de Menezes. Shot to death as a suspect. Seven times in the head and all at close range. It would make identification impossible. This is the attitude of the police state. Shoot (many times) to ensure a kill. The intelligence of armed police does not allow for a disabling shot (arm or leg) and seven hits to the head and one in the shoulder is the only option. This is probably one of the most appalling acts to have been perpetrated in any community. Armed police against a single unarmed man.

• Allegations of a cover up

In the resulting forced by-election Davis will fight to win it back this parliamentary seat. There is no expectation of ever being offered a future job as a frontbencher should he be re-elected to parliament and so as a matter of principle he has ostensibly sacrificed any Ministerial future in a future Conservative government. It is quite probable he will be returned as the MP for the constituency of Haltemprice and Howden. The campaign is poised to commence in about a week with the poll date probably, 10th July, 2008.

• "If they choose not to take part in this democratic process, they are going to show they are ashamed of their own policies. Frankly it's contemptuous of the British electorate if they do that. If it comes to it and they don't run, I will think that's just another piece of cowardice by Gordon Brown."

David Davies.

That sounds like throwing down the gauntlet and not an "ego trip" or "mid-life crisis" and more like testing the will of the people

• And that's something Brown would never dare do.

Dr. Brown:

"I think everyone now recognises that this
is a stunt that has become a farce
and has revealed the deep

divisions of the [Tory] party."

Typically patronising arrogance as he imagines that as an individual he speaks for everyone. Politico-speak and the crude attempt to implant a suggestion concerning how to think correctly: the lemming-like, government way. It has become clear that Dr. Brown's government is running scared. The constant barrage of attack by the government in power focuses on division and the farce. It's all there is to make noises about. If there is division it is between government and a large proportion of the British people. The farce is that the government is in denial.

Bizarrely, suspected murderers are routinely freed on bail before any trial and in some cases go on to murder again. Suspected terrorists obviously pose a greater threat than a suspected murderer. This represents a completely twisted and illogical system. Backward thinking though quite typical of the knots politicians involve themselves in. Any move to detain a suspected terrorist must be spread across the board to include any other serious crime. Like murder. It would make a better quality argument if the seriousness of any suspected terrorist act and murder were given equal standing.

• Terrorists destroy people and property, but murderers destroy (usually) only people. Damage to property has always had priority over damage to persons. People are wholly expendable though property has 'value'.

And this does not even touch on the hypocrisy of MPs lining their pockets at public expense with completely unrealistic pay rises while pontificating about everyone else tightening their collective belt. Integrity in politics is very rare. Between David Davis and David Cameron, Davis is the clear leader of men, but pedigree of background always wins over pedigree of thought. Allegedly, 65% of members were "inspired" by the David Davis move though there was some sharp criticism.

(ConservativeHome)

Sir Patrick Cormack, MP: "the party won the argument and as one of my Northern Ireland colleagues said, it was a humiliating victory for Mr Brown. Now all the attention is taken off that."

Chris Grayling, MP: Mr Davis was (sic) "a man of principle fighting on the issues that we know he cares about" adding "Whether I would have chosen in his position to do exactly the same thing, I don't know. But he's taken a courageous decision. I think we should back him."

Harriet Harmen, QC (Deputy Labour Leader): "insists" that the by-election was "not necessary" and that it was about divisions among Conservatives. And that it could cost £80,000 or even more of public money. It would be a paltry sum to spend relative to what government wastes every minute of every day and is another example of an offensively patronising and arrogant attitude.

And very, very worried.

But extremely well spent

Some cross logic has been displayed by Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs David Milliband who "insists" the ratification process must continue: "it is right that we continue with our own process" even though the Irish rejection must be "respected and digested". It appears that when a government employee "insists" on something that really means an instruction about how to think and behave. Complete arrogance and a recipe for continued 'unrest'. Tax upon tax upon tax until every drop of money, blood and anything else has been extracted, and then somemore. This simply attempts to effect absolute control. The movement (surrender) of sovereignty to Brussels has been attempted, but has failed. Attempts to deny the people an opportunity to control their own destiny has been denied. The arrogance of government in the "nanny-state" is that "mother knows best". The people are too dim to make the right decision and any decisions that affect the people (taxpayers pay the inflated salaries and expenses of MPs and MEPs who aways want more and more) should be left to the even dimmer.

Westminster Trough Of Hypocrisy
Lisbon Treaty

British politics: SNAFU

Situation Normal: All F***ed Up

or the censored version

Situation Normal: All Fouled Up

Then, of course, is the no-show-referendum-denial. The British public has not been allowed to have a public vote on the transfer of yet more sovreignty over to Brussels. Given away freely by Dr Brown, elected-by-default pseudo prime minister. World Wars have been fought for these freedoms and millions of people have perished for them to be given away. Or at least attempted to be given away.

If the would-be-master doesn't like the rules, then change them. Dr Brown is Scottish and the giveaway?

The freedoms of the English

Petrol Duty

Big play is being made of the 'huge' saving of 2p petrol duty being scrapped.

WOW!

That's 2p in 500p and represents a 'massive' saving of just 0.4%, yet since it is before any further additions, it excludes the VAT (another tax). It is a cynical description to imagine such a tax is cancelled. Deferred or delayed or postponed until a more politically appropriate moment, but not scapped or cancelled. Maybe until tomorrow. And tomorrow does come (always) when government taxes are involved.

But never, ever scrapped or cancelled. That means removed FOREVER.

It's crude child-level psychology that is being attempted and assisted by the newspapers. They use these descriptions.

Conditioning to accept the argument.

Stay focused.

Oil Production Increase

Internal Combustion Engine (ICE)
Gasoline (Petrol)

An ICE was first patented in 1861 (Otto cycle) and it appears that a mixture of air and an inflammable gas to obtain a motor force or a useful force was being mooted around 1857:

• Improved apparatus for obtaining motive power from gases December 30 1857 Piedmont patent entitled: New method of using the explosion of a mixture of air and an inflammable gas to obtain a motor force or a useful force, Vol. VI, No. 759.

It is reasonable to place the discovery of a volatile petroleum fraction before the invention of the ICE. It is an interesting exercise to speculate what may have happened if oil/petrol had never existed:

• What sort of population numbers would be around?
• What sort of population would exist?

• Healthy or not healthy?
• Rich (or richer) and poor (or poorer)?

• What kind of energy may have been discovered?

Two interesting movements in the climate change debate and the link with oil (fossil fuel) have caused a slight improvement in clarity to provide a possible explanation of the connection and the implied hypocrisy. The justification for minimising fossil fuel consumption has predictably led to the decrease in the numbers of large ‘gas guzzlers’ in the USA. This is the required result assuming the real connection between fossil fuels and carbon dioxide and climate change and global warming. The effect is apparently hurting Americans in America where gasoline at $3.65 (20% up on January 2008) is expensive.

• UK exchange rate: $3.65 = £1.87 (18.06.08). UK petrol prices are around £5.00/gallon, but it should, however, be recognised that volumes differ between the two countries. A US gallon = 3.78 litres, whereas the UK gallon is 4.54 litres. Adjusting for volume, the price equivalent of a US gallon would still be only around £2.24 in UK values (£1.87 -> £2.24).

• The UK government duty of 70% (and the additional 17.5% Value Added Tax) results in an increase of an extra £3.50 purely through tax. An example of the tax on a tax = tax on a duty (VAT) which comes last in order to capture and increase the largest 'value'. This is a cause of inflation. So, without duty, a UK gallon would cost £1.50. and would take into account all the exploration costs, drilling, pumping, transportation of crude, cracking and purification of the volatile petrol (waste fraction).

• If the petrol engine did not exist, petrol would be completely useless and tax could not be raised from a waste product suitable only for destruction by burning. But then the potential for revenue gain from a heating fuel would exist. Even though the dangers should be obvious. No doubt a retardant would have been discovered as there would be an urgent need for one (vaccine). Oil would have no other obvious application than as a heavy fuel or lubricant, but creates an innovation challenge: how could money be made? There would be a way: the cost of cleaning the air of the pollutants generated from burning the fossil fuel.
  

• The fortunes that have been made over the last one hundred years and government profiteering from a genuine waste product would never have happened. If the argument about climate change is accepted (highly contentious and hotly debated), then global warming would not have happened and all the devils of global warming would not exist.
  

Oil prices have ‘soared’ to reach almost $140 a barrel, but Saudi Arabia is allegedly planning to ramp up production by around 200,000 barrels a day. This will ‘flood’ the market with the expectation of reducing petrol prices. Apart from making the oil run out even faster and accelerate the end of all oil, this move will change behaviours to consume even more.

Human Armageddon, as without oil or petrol all life will cease. It is so entrenched in the use of oil. Instantly. Ironically, mankind has become so reliant on the decomposed bodies of prehistoric life and trees/vegetation (? - the abiogenic origin is quite plausible [to be extended]. There is so much rock/pressure - DA) that it cannot move forward in any evolutionary sense. Still very backward, however sophisticated man assumes himself to be. Egotistical. One fact is very clear:

As reliance increases and the resource is (allegedly)

depleted, the cost of petrol will continue to rise

The truth of the situation suggests that the problem of the oil running out (?) will be faced by a future generation. This demonstrates how backward and selfish attitudes have become and are constantly getting worse. This selfishness allows profiteering to happen and actually even encourages it. Paradoxically, the host feeds the parasite.

The upshot will be a happy consumer (host) as prices appear to drop. But they have been raised considerably from several months ago. Consumption may go down, but petrol prices have risen substantially to offset reduced this reduced consumption. Oil companies (the parasites) will continue to make healthy profits as car manufacturers sell more new (smaller- engined) cars. This is highly suggestive of deliberate engineering.

In the UK, it is possible that car usage will be TAXED.

And to imagine that these oil companies

or governments have any interest

other than money

Power And The Apathy

It's what drives problems: apathy. And it's what national 'leaders' thrive on. They feed on the apathy and it's how dreadful actions become (almost) justified and excused. Millions of people are murdered in allegedly illegal wars and it's all forgotten. Time moves on, but the consequences of actions do not. As fewer of the original, and more aged, survivors remain more calls are made that it's time to let bygones be bygones. The pain of the reality by those who lived through such terrible times is just a nuisance reminder to those who were too young to know it. In the last century, in two World Wars, millions of people perished and any attempts to prevent a third world conflict are ignored. Yet, conflicts like Vietnam, Korea and Iraq are too far away to be real.

Greeting Bush With A Yawn

• Europe was looking past Bush even before he arrived. Gone were the scathing editorials and bitter antiwar protests that once drew 1 million people to the piazzas of Rome and 100,000 to the streets of London. Italian officials said there were no more than a or so this time; British organizers expected less than 10,000. In Germany, there were only two dozen (24) angry demonstrators in a village near the castle, their protest for higher farm subsidies aimed at Merkel, not Bush. "Even the demonstrators have lost interest in Bush," wrote Handelsblatt, a German business daily. "...that the overall mood will be one of good riddance," said The Guardian just before Bush arrived in London. Le Monde put it more gently: "Tourner la page Bush."

Every casualty of war is an individual, but sight must not be lost of the fact that many 1000s of Iraqi civilians (men, women and children) have died even if a 100 British soldiers have been killed. The war will continue and there is no end in sight. Pandora's box was opened when Blair 'decided' to go to war. It wasn't a conflict supported by the majority of British people, but it happened nevertheless for mostly unknown reasons. Bush wanted a war and he got one. Blair was sucked in through naivety (being generous) or ignorance (even more generous). Either way he is responsible for the ongoing aftermath as he continues on his quest for more money. Pontificating to audiences of lemmings, who just go where they're told. People of no consequence, but probably of influence.

That is the pathetic thing about power: wealth and influence bring perceived, but non-existent, intelligence.

Wars are politics driven. And at the bottom of the pile and hidden under layers of lies and more lies is money. Everything is about money, power and control, but mostly money as the other two are just the biproducts of money and wealth.

Tax By Stealth On Airlines

The blinding sight of ££s outshines any sensible longer-term view: £520m worth of blinding money $ymbol$. The US embassy has issued the UK government with a letter that shows "deep concerns with the proposal" that British families must pay an extra £400 for transatlantic flights.

EMBASSY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

LONDON

The Embassy, on behalf of the Government of the United States of America, wishes to express its deep concern with the proposal, which raises significant policy and legal issues.

The Treasury's proposal, although cast as an environmental measure, appears in reality to constitute nothing more than a device for generating revenue from the airline community.
***
However, there is no linkage between the funds collected from airlines and the mitigation of any environmental impact of airline emissions or any other environmental problem.

• Clearly, from this the Americans can see straight through the tax doctor as most people can. Unfortunately, only the Americans are saying what should be obvious.
• The Americans are responsible for there being no fuel duty (hence VAT) on aircraft fuel and so duty will be raised by a crude backdoor stealth trap. The Convention on International Civil Aviation (Chicago Convention).

The Convention exempts air fuels from tax, but Dr. James Gordon Brown decrees that the taxpayer must produce payment. A long-term view is not realistic as Brown's future in government is not long-term. Dr. Tax is nothing more than a predatory parasite feeding off the host. Raising revenue to finance the efficient running of a nation is one thing, but profligate waste on party idealism and social engineering (by subjugation) is another. Milking the host beyond the stage of “tax the rich till the pips squeak” is obnoxious in concept and nauseating in its implementation. This was, apparently, a misquote, (Denis Healey, Labour Chancellor of the Exchequer 1974 - 1979) but the ethos is there. Better to rework the phrase, though, to provide some sense of realism/idealism:

"tax the poor until they scream;

then tax them some more"

New Labour mantra

Clearly, Brown considers the present climate to offer a suitable time to impose swingeing taxation on an industry that is already struggling with record fuel prices, but the government still wants its cut to the tune of over ££ half a billion, regardless of any common sense. Common sense and money do not make a good marriage. EVER. The British taxpayer is highly 'suitable' for the parasite to feed on (the airlines will simply push the cost on to the passengers and Brown knows and simply doesn't care as long as the British people can be crushed). This simply demonstrates the well-tested and extremely well-failed means of bleeding the rock dry of its life blood. The incredibly backward and cowardly approach of yet another gloved iron fist pushed into the face of the British travelling public. If the aim is to create the maximum devastation, then the timing is perfect.

Remember, Brown has 'earned' the former description of "the best Chancellor of the Exchequer we've ever had" and had it pinned to him like a badge of honour. With UK gold reserves all but gone, sold off at its lowest value, "the best (ex-)Chancellor of the Exchequer we've ever had" has sold the country and its people down the river in a last ditch attempt to prop-up a failed economy, but this time officially in the driving seat (as pm).

Failure leading to failure is a test for the debt-based financial system.

Tax Doctor

Dr James Gordon Brown will be forgotten in history as the "bottler" prime minister whose government introduced tax after tax almost daily. Ironically, Dr. Tax's PhD was gained in history (thesis entitled: The Labour Party and Political Change in Scotland 1918-29) from the University of Edinburgh in 1982.

• A postdoctoral thesis could be entitled: The Labour Party and Political Change in the UQ (aka UK) Ltd 1997-2010

Dr James Gordon Brown

History is supposed to be 'the study of the past' and if Brown's government imagines credibility then all the taxation must be meaningful. If nothing has been learned, then...

Brown's government has not one fresh idea of how to rejuvenate or revive the economy except raising money through taxation. This presupposes that the taxpayer has a bottomless pocket and 'willingly' funds by appallingly overt raids in perpetuity on the public (taxpayers') purse as the result of gross mismanagement, or more simply, complete incompetence. The golden goose died long ago, but in a macabre sense the dead body is constantly rifled for more wealth. It's featherless and quite naked, yet it is still perceived as a provider. Power comes from raiding citizens' wealth and providing the potential voter with a range of benefits to assure future support. The hand that feeds is rarely bitten off, even though Dr Brown has killed the golden goose.

Another cynical and forever winning system is that connected with Council Tax. The provision of council tax is through extortion as the failure to pay constitutes a criminal offence. Exaction occurs:

"when a person unlawfully obtains either money, property or services from a person, entity, or institution, through coercion"

The cynical get out here is most likely that it is not unlawful for a council (the institution) to obtain money, property or services when such activity is made lawful by a device such as the Local Government Finance Act 1992 and would amount to the institution coercing itself (paradoxical nonsense). Individuals are then forced by law and can so become a criminal. This is the same as any other tax.

Virtual Money

In a more sinister light, the ultimate aim must be the complete subjugation of the British people (and that probably includes the Scottish, after all the origin of a tax provider is irrelevant as long as they have money and are not one of the protected 'establishment'). Taxation is the yoke around the collective British (public's) neck and every new (almost daily) tax represents another burden to cause an ever-stretched neck. The Irish Republic's rejection of the Lisbon Treaty (to reform the expanded EU) and the subsequent complete disregard of the single official returned vote (the 1 in the 27 member states and ratified by 18) demonstrates the silent invasion of Europe and, technically, without a shot being fired. It is ironic that France and Germany now support each other in the European power struggle where in WWII Germany was the power of occupation. Brown's UK government is, as usual, either too weak to stand against tyranny or so compliant it mirrors Chamberlain's appeasement in WWII.

There is a power struggle being fought and the prize is the total control over Europe. Continuing taxation is the overture before the storm and mirrors:

The Birth of a Nation

The UK government is to be challenged in the High Court over its denial of a manifesto pledge (that possibly afforded it a third-term in power) where the British people would be given the opportunity to vote (EU referendum) on a power reorganisation within Europe. This was a Blair and NOT Brown government: a tactical move to place Brown in No 10 Downing Street as prime minister without any vote of confidence , ie election, being sanctioned. Disgrace piled on top of disgrace. But this is power politics where the people are nothing more than an interfering irrelevency, except to provide the government with the funds it needs to secure its power play.

The population is 'allowed' to grow (increase) and in so doing create a fatter, but just as dead, goose. This is the clouded and twisted logic of ineptness. Stealthily helping itself to citizens' money in a reverse logic sense, completely devoid of logic, doesn't just kill the goose, but paints it yellow in the process.

Smart.

One of the most recent is a 'tax by stealth' on airlines.

Nisha Patel

Nisha Patel was a special constable. A deep and sinister meaning for 'special' emanates from this reported account: MailOnline. Patel allegedly claimed to have powerful 'friends' at New Scotland Yard and it would seem this could be the case in view of what was apparently not done:

• 'She was very confident of her position, and openly aggressive in the apparent assurance that her alleged highpowered friends at New Scotland Yard would protect her and her actions.'

• 'Someone, a senior officer, did have a word with her - and it was left at that. She wasn't disciplined.'

• A Met spokesman: 'Following a Department of Professional Standards (sic) investigation, no criminality was identified, and the most appropriate way of dealing with what had happened was for her to get a formal verbal warning from local management.'

• Normal cops can be punished with a fine or loss of pay or a reduction in rank. It didn't happen in her case because she was a special. They are volunteers, so they can't be fined. The only discipline for them is dismissal, and as far as the Met was concerned, Nisha was Asian and a woman.

A very disturbing story, though not atypical of the abuse of power. A small-league crook with a super-sized ego. Allegedly.

MP Expenses

MP Expenses - Axiom

MP Expenses - Damage Limitation

MP Expenses - Escalation

MP Expenses - Severance

MP Expenses - The Future

MP Expenses - Further Into The Future

Green Book - Members' Allowances (edited by Michael Martin - Gorbels Mick)

Michael Martin, MP, Speaker of the British House of Commons, did a wonderful job of ensuring the expenses of MPs were eventually published. And spending £150,000 of public money attempting to keep the information away from public scrutiny. Pathetic, but within the rules (presumably).

Prime minister backs Michael Martin

Inevitably predictable

This may be legal and within the rules,

but is morally indefensible

to use public money

in such a fashion.

 

Network Rail Bonus

The public perception of the British rail-network system is one of gross failure to provide an adequate return for the service provided. The media always play mind games, but it is also always unclear who is the 'master' mind. The declaration of 'average' boardroom bonuses will inevitably promote widespread anger. The true situation may be hidden under the cloak of resentment.

Supposing that bonuses are 'earned' due to good business, then the railway network must be providing a good return, though (presumably) only in financial terms since passengers always seem to be financing higher fares for a declining service. Clearly, the service standard is measured in the financial profit and not in the standard of the service.

Engineers fail to turn up for planned work
Network Rail fines
Sacking The CEO

Bradford & Bingley

Bradford & Bingley is having to shore up its finances to the tune of £400m. A mortgage bank having actually lost money (very unusual) in the first few months of 2008. Towards the back of an 11-page document, the lender announces 'bad' debt figures. The slowdown in the economy and higher household bills, have both rapidly affected the ability of home owners to repay their mortgages and by the end of April, 2008, 8,333 of the B&B's borrowers (2.16%) of all the bank's mortgage customers were in trouble, with arrears of three months or more, or in the throes of being repossessed. That was 35% more than at the end of December 2007 when 6,170 (1.63%) of borrowers were in that position and that was then already far worse than the industry average, which had stood at just 1.1%.

This description attempts to push the entire blame squarely on the mortgagee for defaulting on loans and nothing to do with Bradford & Bingley business practices.

• In reality, isn't this just symptomatic of lenders demanding too much return? Greed distorts any outlook and pushing borrowers past the limit and over the edge just makes a bad situation much, much worse. But greed and blame redirection continue relentlessly. Bosses escape with bonus rewards and everybody else has to deal with the mess.

• The situation will always get worse as the lenders attempt to cover their errors by making the sofar 'unaffected' borrowers bail out incompetence further destroying the careful, but decreasing in size, number of well-managed individuals. The bad wrecking the good.

Back at the end of 2006 everything seemed markedly different in the mortgage lending business, so the B&B decided to expand its lending (potentially to increase its wealth) by the simple method of buying existing stocks of loans from other lenders and in December 2006 agreed to buy up to £12bn worth of mortgages, spread over the next three years, from GMAC, the finance arm of General Motors that specialised in buy-to-let mortgages, the B&B's own favourite type of loan.

Shortly afterwards, a further £2bn of loans followed from another lender (Kensington) to be spread over two years: buy-to-let mortgages, as well as "prime self-certificated" loans (ideal for self employed people or where income is paid by more irregular means e.g. bonuses). Income is confirmed without the need for independent verification. Borrowers did not have to provide much evidence of their earnings, or their ability to repay their loans, to get the mortgage in the first place, but at the time of its deal with Kensington, the B&B said it would take the loans in monthly tranches, after scrutinising them to make sure they were "in line with strict credit parameters".

The 'deal' was brokered, but the level of applied scrutiny does not now look nearly good enough and the B&B has revealed that arrears among the acquired loans, especially those from GMAC, have turned out to be far worse than expected. Of the self-certificated loans that have been bought, 4.3% are now three or more months behind with repayment. The "other" B&B category (presumably the even riskier loans) is 5.69% in arrears and constitutes 1,006 mortgages.

It would seem obvious that someone in a position to spend someone else's money has not the sense of responsibility that must go with it.

Accident or deliberate?

• The B&B says it is now going to counteract this emerging problem by reducing the number of mortgages it will buy from GMAC to the legal minimum required by its deal.

• The next few months should clear some of the haze as management movements happen: who moves where and with what severance reward.

Adam Applegarth And Northern Rock Banking Panic - The Plan Northern Rock Northern Rock - Update Other issues