Posts Tagged ‘talking bollocks

15
Jul
10

Raoul Moat – Neither heroic nor callous

Moat - neither heroic nor callous

Moat - neither heroic nor callous

The story of the police manhunt in Northambria ending in the suicide of Raoul Moat is still making headlines. Yesterday we heard news that Moat had made a series of recordings of his dealings with social workers where he requested help from a psychiatrist. Also we heard that a Facebook page which has been created by people glorifying Moat’s attacks and portraying him as a hero. In Prime Minister’s Question Time we heard David Cameron express incomprehension at the sympathy for Raoul Moat and say: “It is absolutely clear that Raoul Moat was a callous murderer, full stop, end of story” and “the should be no sympathy for him”. Mr. Cameron is TALKING BOLLOCKS!

It amazes me that the Western world has regular incidents where alienated men go berserk and kill many strangers and we always dismiss the killer as evil. When we do this we condemn our society to suffer a reoccurrence of the incident. Mr. Cameron’s comments are merely the absurd knee jerk reaction of all politicians: “All terrorist are cowards”, “all firemen are heros” and “all murderers are callous”….yes, yes, thank you, does anyone have anything constructive to say?

Moat had obviously built up a narrative in his mind whereby his wife had left him for a police officer, that he was being prevented from seeing his children an that the police were deliberately harassing him. At the moment it is too early to say how much of this narrative is true and how much is imagined by Moat but I believe it is this story which has moved some members of the public to sympathy.

And we should have sympathy! This man was suffering and, in the end he killed himself.

The accusation when one says this sort of thing is: What about sympathy for PC David Rathband whom Moat shot and has probably blinded. Of course we have sympathy for PC Rathband but this is a given. That is acknowledged by the whole of society and should not and is not being challenged by politicians or the media.

Further, the media tell us the news in the form of stories. A popular catchphrase amongst journalists is “simplify and emphasise” and this is what they have done with Moat. They built up his character by revealing his body building and use of steroids. They told us of his camping out in a tent, catching rabbits and eluding the police for days. The main character of this soap opera was Moat and sadly, PC Rathbone only entered the story briefly.

The shooting of Moat’s wife, the boy friend and PC Rathband are awful and were Moat to have lived he obviously should have been brought to justice and punished.

But merely to dismiss Moat as “callous” is wide of the mark. Sir Fred Goodwin who destroyed RBS and then made off with a fat pension was callous. Berny Madoff who built up the largest ponzi scheme in history was callous. Peter Mandelson publishing his diaries within weeks of Labour losing power is callous.

Moat interminable recorded rants give us some indication as to his state of mind. One can only imagine his anguish as he sat on the ground with night drawing in, surrounded by police marksman and knowing full well that his heinous crimes would, if he surrendered, push him even further from those he loved. The anguish of fighting with himself over whether to end it all or give himself up to a life that he would hate could not have been helped by having the police shoot at him with a tazer.

The obvious suffering of Moat and the resonance with many divorced fathers mean that this story was bound to draw public sympathy and Mr. Cameron’s claim that we should have no sympathy for this man is incorrect and unhelpful.

13
Jul
10

Balls talks bollocks

Balls, Balls, Banquets and Balls

Balls' Balls - Banquets and Balls

This morning I listened to John Humphries interview the Shadow Education Secretary, Ed Balls, on BBC Radio 4′s Today program. Yes, I know, I should move on from ranting about the inadequacies of New Labour and start ranting about the Tories and Lib Dems but hang on.

Following the publication of Mandelson’s diaries and a book by Andrew Rawnsley both documenting the infighting within the New Labour cabinet between Blair and Brown, Humprys was trying to pin down Balls on his association with the infighting through his association with Brown. Mandy had called the infighting an insurgency and Humphries said that Andrew Rawnsley’s book claims Mr. Brown was vacillating before a planned “coup” in 2006 and Ed Balls told Mr Brown: “It’s too late. It’s all in place. It’s going to happen.”. Adn article in The Evening Standard claimed Balls also said: “Blair is never going to go. He has to be pushed. You mustn’t be weak. You’ve been weak for too long.”

So Mr. Balls waffled and said the book was full of inaccuracies but, tellingly, did not deny the specific incident.

Humphries drew attention to Labour’s part in the financial crisis and a McKinsey document stating the UK’s horrendous debt. Mr. Balls waffled, saying “interests rates were low” and “inflation was low” and went on to say that the crisis was global, implying that nobody is to blame at all.

This tosh is like a second rate rehash of Gordon Brown’s interview technique and shows that Balls, like Brown, does not understand the linkage between cheap money (low interest rates), the asset price bubble and the financial crisis. I am reading the diaries of Tony Benn – “More Time For Politics” at the moment and he wrote something which goes to the heart of New Labour spin. He said: “….I no longer feel that I am required to believe what I am told by (new Labour) ministers”.

It occurred to me that the feud between Brown and Blair may have contributed, in a very substantial way, to the prevalence of manipulators, bullshitters and bullies surrounding the New Labour government. Both Blair and Brown would have needed hatchet men and this need would have driven out any wise, thoughtful or competent advise. Leading on from this one can speculate on the whole nature of the New Labour years without the likes of Campbell, Mandelson and Balls. If wiser heads had prevailed might Blair have remained relatively sane and not led the UK into Iraq? Might Brown have had more time for the economy and avoided the worst of the financial crisis? We shall never know.

Several people have commented to me that the Tories would have screwed things up just as bad as Labour. Maybe. But of course they didn’t did they. It was Labour and you have to punish governments who screw up by chucking them out otherwise you are just rewarding incompetence.

No doubt the Tory/LibDem coalition will draw my attention in time, though right now I just find the absence of Mandy bullshit a refreshing change and with the remnants of New Labour still voluminously TALKING BOLLOCKS it is easy to get distracted.

The Labour party wont move on until it faces up to its mistakes and rejects the unsavoury characters from the New Labour years. If it doesn’t then, once the Tories have fallen out of favour, we will be faced with another Labour government  wastin ti’s time on spin rather than achieving objectives. In the words of Monty Python’s Spanish Inquisition the Labour party need to “Confess the heinous sin of heresy”and “reject the works of the ungodly”.  ie admit that they screwed up and chuck out the likes of Balls.

05
Jul
10

Hampshire Councillors cut spending to give themselves a bonus

It's not an honorarium Ken - unless you work for free

It's not an honorarium Ken - unless you work for free

I hear that Ken Thornber, Conservative Member for Brockenhurst and leader of Hampshire County Council, has been TALKING BOLLOCKS!

It seems that the council had a policy of not awarding bonuses and in addition had embarked on spending reductions through efficiency savings. Excellent work you might think except that in their own case the councillors decided that they should receive special one-off payments to recognise the councilors achievements.

One off payments to recognise achievements? Hmm.. What does that remind me of? Oh, yes. A bonus! But hang on, I thought that Hampshire council had a policy of not awarding bonuses, presumably in an effort to reduce costs. Part of the efficiency savings, so to speak.

Ah, but these were not bonuses claims Ken Thornber, these were “honorariums”.

Well, I don’t know about you dear reader but I hav never heard of honorariums before. In the past corrupt council officials such as Mr. Thornber may have got away with his fancy talk as nobody would have been bothered to look the word up. Thankfully, today we have the web and a quick reference to Wikiepdia reveals:

“An honorarium is an ex gratia payment made to a person for their services in a volunteer capacity or for services for which fees are not traditionally required. This is used by groups such as schools or sporting clubs to pay coaches for their costs. Another example includes the payment to a guest speaker at a conference to cover their travel, accommodation, or preparation time.”

That doesn’t sound right does it. The councillors are not volunteers, they’re paid employees.

Let’s check out Thefreedictionary.com

“(Business / Commerce) a fee paid for a nominally free service”

Well that isn’t right either. A councillor doesn’t provide a nominally free service.

One can only conclude that  Ken Thornber is lying in order to disguise the fact that he has forced all his staff to give up bonuses in order to make savings so he and his friends can cream off some of the savings for himself. What a bastard!

Let’s see if we can find a picture of Mr. Thornber shall we. Here we go. Hmm. He has a nice tan doesn’t he? I bet he can afford a lot of nice holidays…..with someone else’s money.

01
Jul
10

Chill out Murray and have some fun

Yesterday afternoon I watched the tennis. Britain’s Andy Murray played Jo Tsonga of France. Tsonga started well but Murray eventually came out on top. I found Murray’s aggressive and triumphalist shouting and fist shaking very unattractive. He certainly has an appallingly big and ugly gob which aught to remain shut lest people compare him with the Alien. I think Tim Henman had a penchant for this sort of behaviour too and I’ve noticed it with various British and American sportsman. Pondering this likeness for a while it occurred to me that The Alien is like Henman in that he always looks like he is about to make a come back and win but he always loses in the end.

The Alien - - - - - - - - - - Andy Murray

The Alien - - - - - - - - - - Andy Murray

Presumably this overt display of aggression stems from the self image of many American men. To quote General Stanley McChrystal:Figure out how your enemy operates, be faster and more ruthless than everybody else, then take the fuckers out.”.

Yeh, thanks for that Stan, is there someone else we can talk to?

Years ago I worked for the  investment bank Credit Suisse First Boston and there was an American manager there who proclaimed “Business is War”. Of course the manager was TALKING BOLLOCKS. Business is not war “Business is business”. I’d even take issue with the old saying, “business before pleasure” preferring  the Thai attitude to life where anything worth doing, including work, should have some element of “Sanuk” ( fun ).

So should war also have a sense of fun? Perhaps that is taking it too far but certainly there is no need for the ugly rantings of Murray in sport.

A week or so ago I watched Japan play in the World Cup. I was impressed, when they scored they actually appeared happy! They smiled!! They had scored another goal. Surely this was a more normal and healthy reaction to success than the yobish behaviour displayed by Andy Murray.

I think that I prefer amateur sports. Recently I played table tennis with a friend and her two kids. We had four balls going at once and  every time one ball was missed we threw another one onto the table. I don’t know who won but it was good fun.

21
Jun
10

Rome stag and a complicated British Airways sandwich

Outside the Pantheon

Outside the Pantheon

On Saturday I caught an early flight to Rome for a friend’s stag night. Our hotel was close to Rome Termini and I walked there from the station. The Italian at the desk told me: ”Your room is not ready. Come back at 2”. After returning from the United States I had commented on how the English appear terse and rude. Obviously the Italians are no better.

I dropped my bags and took a taxi to Castle Saint Angelo where I met my friends and had a beer. Rome is quite a contrast to the United States and efficiency takes a second place to ancient history. Central Rome is stuffed full of the ancient world and from the top of the Castle one can look out over Rome. The view is fantastic.

In our younger days we may have done a through-er. That is to say, we may have started drinking in the afternoon and continued drinking through into the evening and early morning. However, our advancing years dictated a return to the hotel where a short siesta allowed us to catch our second wind.

On regaining consciousness three taxis carried us to the Pantheon where we found a restaurant and settled at an outside table. The waiter was a comedian and kept us laughing all night as we sat eating pasta and drinking red wine. A street performer ran through Pavaroti’s standards and memories of the 1995 world cup returned. After receiving the bill we realised that our waiter really was a comedian but having had a satisfyingly enjoyable evening we coughed up and headed for the bar near the hotel where we talked bollocks with a couple from the Czech republic.

On Sunday morning we visited the Colosseum. The area was thronged with all the trappings of tourism: Guides, souvenirs, us etc. I guess ’twas ever thus and in a way that is part of the fun. I thought of the Edwardian tourists in in A Room With A View and The Life of Brian when they sold stones and bags of gravel just prior to the stoning. When we gaze upon wonders of the ancient world it is tempting to imbue the creators of these artefacts with awesome and ponderous spirituality. Thankfully Monty Python have shown us a vision of the reality of these people who would have been more akin to modern day builders. While the architects of Canary Wharf and the Gherkin may well hob nob with royalty and have their heads up their arses the actual builders probably supped tea from a saucer, whistled at passing young women and had their arses sticking out the backs of their trousers. Likewise with the Colosseum, it is comforting to realise that the Colosseum building site would have had more in common with Auf Wiedersehen Pet than with Spartacus.

I noticed one “guide” muttering into a microphone and a friend explained: “That’s how it’s done now”. Each member of the tour group wears headphones to receive the wisdom from the droning self appointed guide. Not very sociable if you ask me. Having been on guided tours in the past I enjoyed comments and banter from the audience to supplement the, sometimes dry, rhetoric of the guide. This obsession we have with individualism renders us all spectators. We mistakenly believe that entertainment is something that is done too us rather than something in which we engage – I fantasised about obtaining a transmitter and interrupting the guide’s monologue with musings of my own.

As we reached the restaurant the skies opened and the rain poured down. A canvas canopy protected most of us and a party of Americans sitting nearby hoisted umbrellas but refused to budge.

On the aircraft home I am handed a sandwich with a label listing approximatively 200 ingredients. After landing I queued interminably at passport control in the UK to be greeted by a jolly English passport control officer who apologised for the wait and hoped I had a good time in Rome. We English are not so bad after all, I muse, though, obviously the officer is the exception who proves the rule.

Gatwick Airport have now engaged the services of two separate companies for North terminal Long Stay parking. Two separate buses ferry passengers between the terminal and the car parks but, predictably, none of the passengers, including myself, know which company run the car park in which they have parked. The driver patiently points this out to each and every passengers who boards the bus and each passenger then engages in a short period of confusion before realising that the company name is printed on their ticket.

After arriving at the car park I found that I had not recorded the location of my car an spent five minutes wandering around pressing the button on my car key and listening for my car to beep. It did and I returned home.

08
Apr
10

ignorance of asset price inflation reveals Brown’s incompetence

Gordon "Slopey Shoulders" Brown

Gordon "Slopey Shoulders" Brown

This morning I listened to John Humphrys interview British Prime Minister Gordon brown on BBC Radio 4′s Today program. Quite a good interview, Humphrys pushed Brown fairly well.

Humphrys tried to pin the Prime Minister down on a couple of points. He posited that while Gordon Brown was Chancellor he had bragged endlessly about prudent stewardship of the British economy claiming that he had “abolished boom and bust”. This false promise had encouraged everyone to borrow on the assumption that the economy was in safe hands. So much so that this led the the economic mess in which we now find ourselves.

Mr. Brown’s response to this was that previous “busts” had been caused by high inflation and that Brown had not let inflation get out of control. He claimed that the credit crunch had been caused by property loans being packaged up into derivative financial instruments where the risk could not be easily assessed.

Gordon is TALKING BOLLOCKS!

If one reads The Economist one discovers that the generally accepted view of the cause of the credit crunch was low interest rates.Yes, the impenetrable derivatives exacerbated the situation but the cause was cheap credit which was made available by the likes of Gordon Brown (as UK Chancellor) and Alan Greenspan (as chairman of the America Federal Reserve).

Cheap credit might normally give rise to inflation but China became a member of the World Trade Organisation in 2001 allowing it to supply cheap products to the developed world keeping high street inflation low. Note that inflation stayed low not because of Brown and Greenspan’s low interest rates but in spite of them.
But the cheap money that Brown and Greenspan were making available had to go somewhere so it went into fueling aasset price bubbles in equity and property.

This is not the reasoning of one lone blogger but a précis of the opinion of main stream economists as reported in The Economist newspaper. However, speaking personally, I recall that around the year 2001 the silicon chip maker ARM was trading at a Price Earnings Ration which would mean it would take a thousand years to pay back it’s offer price! If I could see this was absurd how did the situation evade the Chancellor of a major world economy? If taxi drivers could see that providing mortgages to people for more than the price of their home without checking their income was reckless why did this escape Gordon Brown?

It is worth noting that The Economist had been warning of the asset price bubbles for years before the credit crunch arrived. If they knew then Mr. Brown should have known. So when Mr. Brown claims that he kept inflation low he is either incompetent or deliberately misleading the general public.

I suggest that Gordon Brown is like any number of technocrats who are amazingly knowledgeable about a subject but have no judgement or understanding. Mr. Brown read of the mistakes made with inflation in the past, learnt the accepted remedy and then blindly applied this remedy without once stepping back and seeing the enormous bubble in property and share prices.

Mr. Brown is like some bureaucratic ticket collector, deaf to the beseeching cries of the passengers, he insists on following rules and clipping everyone’s tickets while the train careers across a cliff.

Mr. Humphrys pointed out this morning that the stock market valuation for The Royal Bank of Scotland had grown larger than the UK economy. Even with this alarm bell the size of the Mount Everest Mr. Brown did not think that there had been any indication of the impeding disaster.

This morning, on Radio 4′s Today program, Gordon Brown was TALKING BOLLOCKS!

Even during the boom years Gordon Brown was spending more than the exchequer was raising in tax. The Budget deficit in 2007 was 2% of GDP! If he was borrowing in the good years then what on earth did he think he would do in the bad years? The truth is that this arrogant fool thought that he was so clever that he had ensured that never more would there be bad years. Now we have the bad years  New Labour have  resorted to the same tactic as Robert Mugabe’s Zimbabwe – they are printing money which in turn is devaluing the pound.

Gordon Brown has presided over a decade in which the United Kingdom has morphed from a leading developed country to a major debtor nation. The UK has never defaulted on it’s debt before but now there is talk of the UK losing it’s triple A credit rating meaning that investors consider default a possibility.

That this moron considers that his record shows prudence  and competence only serves to underline that he is not fit to be in government let alone Prime Minister.

If readers are undecided on which party would be best placed to lead us out of the economic mess then consider that judgement and understanding will be necessary and Gordon Brown has neither. Also consider that, as imperfect as Western democracy is, the one advantage it has is the ability to throw out a bunch of leaders who have messed up.

New Labour and Gordon Brown especially have messed up big time and should be thrown out by the British electorate!

10
Mar
10

Israel lays the groundwork for talks by spitting in the Palestinians faces

Israeli foreign ministry spokesman, Mark Regev

Israeli foreign ministry spokesman, Mark Regev

This morning, on BBC Radio 4′s Today program, I listed to the Israeli foreign ministry spokesman, Mark Regev, respond to criticism of Israel’s current announcement that it intends to build more settlement. Mr. Regev claimed that the decision to allow the recent bunch of settlements was not under the government’s control as this was a local decision taken by a local council and…what can you do?

Mark Regev is TALKING BOLLOCKS!

The building of Israeli settlements on occupied land is illegal under international law. Israel’s national government is therefore responsible and should not even allow it’s local councils the power to take such decisions.

As usual Mr. Regev couched his replies in reasonable sounding language which could fool a casual listener. He slipped in the idea that this Israeli government has gone further than any other and announced a temporary moratorium on settlement building.

Firstly there is no moratorium if Israel is still approving more settlements.

Secondly, if the national government were able to enforce a moratorium in the West Bank then it must also have the power to enforce a moratorium in East Jerusalem and so Mr. Regev’s argument that the national government could do nothing is complete BOLLOCKS.

Thirdly – So what! If you push a people off their land and then begin settling the remaining land that they have left and then announce that you are having a temporary moratorium on new building this is merely refraining from behaving badly not something to be proud of.

Joe Biden, At last, The U.S. criticises Israel

Joe Biden - At last the U.S. realises the bloody obvious

If someone were to break into Mr. Regev’s house and begin stealing his possessions and then announce proudly that it had stopped stealing from his kitchen this would be an insult.

And that is exactly the point. Israel has deliberately contrived to insult the Palestinians just when talks are due to begin again. The Israelis used to accuse Yassa Arafat of never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity but we have seen time and again how, every time that the Israel is manoeuvred into starting talks with the Palestinians, the Israelis begin by spitting in the faces of the Palestinians.

Well done Vice-President Joe Biden for your forthright criticism of Israel. After 60 years it’s a bit late but welcome none the less. However, I wonder whether the United States can maintain the pressure and whether Israel cares.

04
Mar
10

How bad do Labour and the Tories have to get before you vote Liberal?

Gordon doesn't come close

In the past, when people discuss which party they will vote for in Great Britain they often consider voting Liberal but then dismiss this as a wasted vote. The logic is that they quite like the Liberals but that they wont get in. A similar argument is made that the Liberals are “too nice” and so will not have the ability to get into government.

These people are TALKING BOLLOCKS!

Twenty years ago The United Kingdom had two main parties plus the Liberals and a smattering of others. The two main parties had opposing ideologies and the vote was broadly split between them. However, Tony Blair transformed the Labour Party from a left leaning semi socialist party into a Tory convert. Margaret Thatcher believed in privatisation because she thought that nationalised industries naturally inclined to inefficiency and that the power of the market keeps private enterprise on it’s toes.
Tony Blair believed in privatisation because he had seen that this strategy had worked for Thatcher. Tony Blair understood nothing. He believed fanatically in privatisation the same way that a convert becomes bound up with the rules and not the spirit of their chosen religion. The same way that ex-patriots fein obsession with the minutia of their home county.

The result is that we now have two capitalist parties fighting over the same vote.

Both Labour and the Tories have shown themselves to be corrupt and despicable and Labour have shown themselves to be incompetent.

Of course Liberal MPs have been involved in the expenses scandal and, I believe, do receive financial contributions from non doms. But I believe that in general the Liberals have been more honest and principled than either Labour or the Tories.

The Liberal Democrats were formed from the old Liberal party which in turn was formed from the old Whigs. During the 18th and 19th century the Whigs along with the Tories were the main party of government. The prominent Liberal, Sir William Harcourt said this of the Liberals:

“Liberty does not consist in making others do what you think right. The difference between a free Government and a Government which is not free is principally this—that a Government which is not free interferes with everything it can, and a free Government interferes with nothing except what it must. A despotic Government tries to make everybody do what it wishes, a Liberal Government tries, so far as the safety of society will permit, to allow everybody to do what he wishes. It has been the function of the Liberal Party consistently to maintain the doctrine of individual liberty. It is because they have done so that England is the country where people can do more what they please than in any country in the world.”

The Liberals have stuck to their principles. Their policies are not driven by ideology but by traditional British pragmatism. Though they stand for broadly free market economics it was the Liberals who were responsible for creating the welfare state under Asquith and his Lloyd George.

We should also remember that Vince Cable appears to be the only MP who understands economics and has the best chance of digging the UK out of the current mess.

So now, when we go to vote, will we once again vacillate between the two options which you loathe or, will you do what your heart always told you should do: Vote Liberal Democrat.




谈胡说

Images

In the Red

chairs

the meeting place

trees & sky

runner

worthing beach

east croydon station

jen colin & devon in chip shop

jump

legs

More Photos
Watch videos at Vodpod and other videos from this collection.

 

July 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jun    
 1234
567891011
12131415161718
19202122232425
262728293031  

Enter your email address to subscribe toTalking Bollocks and receive notifications of new posts by email.