Posts Tagged ‘talking bollocks

30
Dec
09

Kmal Shaikh dies so that Wen Jinbao can save face – the fruits of engagement

How many need to die to save the face of Wen Jinbao

How many need to die to save the face of Wen Jinbao?

The British media is reporting that China has gone ahead with the execution of Kmal Shaikh, a 53 year old father-of-three from London who was convicted of drug smuggling in China. His family have claimed that he was mentally ill and requested a medical examination. The examination was refused by the Chinese and Mr. Shaikh was executed by lethal injection.

The British government had made representation to the Chinese but I suspect that there was some fall out from the recent Copenhagen summit where the authoritarian Chinese leadership “lost face”. The Chinese regime has a reputation for throwing tantrums whenever anyone tries to interfere in it’s “internal affairs” and this time was no exception. As far as the Chinese were concerned Mr. Shaikh had to die for China to save face.

So, the British government is now angry, but one has to ask why? Why did anyone believe that a regime that maintains it’s grip on power at the point of a gun would worry about killing one man? Why does the West kowtow to China?

The answer we are given, by our supposedly informed elite, is that we need to “engage” with China and this will bring reform. Engagement usually boils down to allowing western companies to employ Chinese workers in order to  lower costs.

This engagement is taken as an article of faith but I wonder if anyone can site an example where it has worked. I know of no instance where an authoritarian regime has liberalised because outside influences have traded with it and thereby increased that regime’s power. In fact, if assisting a regime to grow richer and more powerful is a recipe for improved human rights, liberalisation and greater democracy then surely this tactic should be tried with Iran.

Our elite are of course TALKING BOLLOCKS! Supporting authoritarian regimes makes them stronger and entrenches their totalitarian instincts. The key to this is that our elites are not interested in greater democracy, they are interested in greater profits.

Our leaders frequently use the terms democracy and capitalism interchangeably but they are not the same. Since the second world war western countries have, in general, been both capitalist and democratic but prior to the war democracy was not so prevalent.

In the UK, prior to 1832 only male landowners could vote. This gradually changed until it included most males by 1918 but women did not get complete voting rights until 1928. So the UK’s claims to be an ancient democracy is complete poppy cock! The UK was, and remains, a capitalist country while democracy is a recent add-on brought about by two world wars and the rise of an alternative to capitalism in the Soviet Union.

During the Cold War, with the threat (and implied alternative), of the Soviet Union, western countries became more liberal. Pensions, health care and workers rights blossomed. However, since the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the inferred failure of socialism, these hard won gains are being eroded. In the UK, one hears constantly of companies closing pension schemes along with exhortations that we must “compete” with China. By “compete” our elite mean that we must accept lower standards in the work place and lower wages.

Our leaders claim that “engagement” with an authoritarian regime will raise their standard of democracy and human rights but the truth is that the Chinese regime has no interest or need to improve human rights and rather than their standards rising we are being forced to lower ours.

We are told that we must compete or we will lose out, but hold on, the implication of this is that if China did not exist we would suffer some terrible fate as we would not be able to take advantage of their cheap labour. This is bollocks! The west went from strength to strength when the Soviet Union and China were both outside the World Trade Organisation. We may choose to trade with China but we do not “need” China.

It is true that the west has benefitted from all sorts of cheap goods from China. One only has to go onto ebay to wonder that it’s possible to buy a USB flash memory radio transmitter for £ 4.61 (yes , I did this!!). This is amazing value but do I need it? No. Would I sacrifice democracy, human rights and our children’s future for the ability to treat all goods as throw away items? NO! Do I want a world where goods are cheap but freedom is limited to an elite? NO!

The truth is that elites are always greedy – socialist or capitalist. Our leaders want engagement to increase profits but at the cost of democracy, civil rights and human rights. The protection from powerful elites is democracy. China is not a democracy and has shown no interest in democratizing.

We should be extremely cautious about becoming reliant on China for any key product or service. We should also be more robust when dealing with the Chinese. As a start there should be major repercussions from the Chinese leaders reckless behaviour at Copenhagen and execution of  Kmal Shaikh.

Which do we value more, democracy and human rights or a Chinese USB stick?

Related posts:
china loses face by sabotaging climate change talks
china in who’s hands?

21
Dec
09

U.S. Cop pulls gun at Snowball Fight

When restricting the freedom of the individual or allowing the authorities additional powers one often hears the argument: “If you have nothing to hide then you have nothing to fear”. People who use this argument are TALKING BOLLOCKS!  The video below demonstrates what happens when you give copes guns.

15
Dec
09

Talking Bollocks readership scales new heights

Last week was the best week ever for Talking Bollocks and last month was the best month ever. Not only that but it looks like we’re on course for another great month. Come on, have a roam around, or register and receive notification of new bollocks. Better still, Talk Bollocks! – If you have something to say, email it in and if it is not complete bollocks then we may publish it.

talking more and more bollocks

talking more and more bollocks

05
Dec
09

If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear – 2

I wrote a blog article in November 2008. This argued that New Labour are introducing too many laws to increases state control and erode personal freedom and listed a few such as identity cards and mass interception of Emails.

The argument in favour of these laws is usually “If you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear” but the people who use this argument are Talking Bollocks! The British establishment has a long history of abusing laws and another example of this was reported in The Independent today. It seems that police are using laws designed to prevent terrorism to harass photographers.

This seems a little hypocritical since, these days, the police seem to be pretty avid photographers themselves! I myself have witnessed the obtrusively abusing their policy on filming demonstrations to film a discussion between a bunch of pro Israeli oldies and a bunch of pro Palestinian hippies.

police camera action

hypocrites?

10
Nov
09

Tax and spin – The New Labour doctrine

This evening on the TV I saw an advert exhorting me to reduce my driving by 5 miles a day to cut carbon emissions. On the face of it this sounds like a good idea but they are, in fact, talking bollocks.

What shall I do? Drive to within 5 miles of work, park on the side of the road and then walk into the office? Maybe I should not go into the office one day a week? An excellent idea, I’ve blogged about the benefits of telecommuting before but this ad made no mention of encouraging that and, indeed, the government has recently announced a 50p tax on broadband connections so they can’t really claim to be making any meaningful moves in that direction.

This TV advertisement represents the New Labour response to everything: raise taxes but spin a story like you’re not.

30
Oct
09

Blair for president? – Don’t look at his reputation says Brown

Don't look at his past says Brown

Don't look at his past says Brown

Gordon bloody Brown was on TV again last night banging on about having Tony Blair for president of the EU. When asked why we should have Blair considering his history Brown remarked that we should not be looking backward but forward.

What sort of nonsense is this?

When deciding on which individual should be trusted with the presidency of such as large and powerful organisation we necessarily need to understand if that person is fit for the job. How are we to do this if we cannot look at his past performance? Mr. Brown suggests that we should consider the future but, lacking precognitive powers and a crystal ball, I know nothing of Blair’s future.

We have too look at Blair history. We have to consider his reputation for spin, conniving and lies along with his appalling lack of judgement. Are these the attributes which we want in a president? I think not.

Another infuriating thing about this talk of Blair for president is that it all seems to be arranged behind closed doors. Nobody is arguing about whether he can gain a two third majority of the votes in North Rhine-Westphalia or whether he can rely on support from the Italian Constitutional Democratic Party because the presidency will not be decided democratically.

I don’t understand why is Blair’s name is even on the agenda. Who put it there? Is there even a list of nominees? I have not heard of one. There appears to be no formal process by which a president is appointed; a situation which would not be tolerated for a county cricket club, let alone a supra national organisation with tax raising powers and a budget running into the billions of Euros!

All this serves only to underline the inadequacy of EU institutions and the complacency of the national governments. Let us not forget this is not some ancient institution in need of updating. This is the presidency created in the latest fiasco of rule making now known as the Lisbon Treaty.

The political elite would have us believe that we can have the EU or we can have democracy but we can’t have both. They are talking bollocks. We can have both, we can have a democratic Europe. The obstacle for this is entrenched vested interests and until these are overcome and the EU is democratised we should keep it at arm’s length and definitely not put a power hungry incompetent in charge.

28
Oct
09

Bun Fight – Question Time with Nick Griffin

Ill Informed Ranting

Ill Informed Ranting

I listened to Any Questions last week with the BNP leader Nick Griffin. I’d previously blogged about this and a friend email me to say that she thought that, contrary to my opinion, some people were too stupid to be exposed to Griffin’s sort of talk.

I’d respond that, while it’s true that stupid people are more susceptible to the ill informed rantings of racists (IIROR) they ar also more susceptible to the ill informed rantings of non-racists.

And good grief there was a lot of ill informed ranting on both sides in last week’s Question Time. It was a bun fight as I had predicted. Nobody let Nick Griffin finish a sentence. Everyone condemned him before he had a chance to condemn himself. I thought it was a missed opportunity to let the bloke show himself for what he was.

Someone asked him why he visited a Ku Klux Klan leader in America and he started to explain and said that this particular group were “almost totally non-violent” which I thought was a little gem but nobody was able to pull him up on this as no sooner had he uttered the words than the other panellists were asking him other questions and deriding his smile and they never actually picked up on this “almost totally..”.

It frustrates me that the self riotous lefties cannot bare for anyone to hear their opponents opinions. It’s as if they have no confidence in their own argument or opinions.

Bonnie Greer is a black American cultural commentator who usually appears on Newsnight reviewing films or theatre. She sat to Griffin’s left and he seemed constantly to be turning to her for approval.

Griffin made the point that everyone dismisses the idea that Britain has an “indigenous” people but they would not dare deny that Australian Aboriginals or Soux Indians are indigenous. I usually find Ms. Greer intelligent but last Thursday night she seemed determined to talk as much bollocks as everyone else. Pursuant to this she claimed that Britain does not have an indigenous population because it had an ice age! – Amazing.

I think much of the world had an ice age and if you’re going to claim that ice killed everyone off and so people had to immigrate into Britain then you could argue that for everyone in the world. There is even a respectable theory that organic compounds arrived on earth via comet debris and so you could argue that there are no indigenous people on Earth – If you want to be talking bollocks.

Chris Huhne, Sayeeda Warsi, Jack Straw, David Dimbleby, Nick Griffin and Bonnie Greer

Chris Huhne, Sayeeda Warsi, Jack Straw, David Dimbleby, Nick Griffin and Bonnie Greer

Jack Straw sat to Dimbleby’s right. I quite respect Mr Straw and he normally talks sense but he too joined in with the spirit of the evening. He said that he came from a line of immigrants of Jewish origin and during World War 2 all ethnic groups in Britain had pulled together and fought off the Hun. This is the sort of thing we British like, a mongrel breed that’s pulls together in a pinch.

However, Griffin popped his balloon quite quickly by pointing out that Straw’s dad had been a conscientious objector during the war whereas Griffin’s dad had been in the Royal Airforce.

Straw bemoaned Griffin’s anti-semitism but later, when Griffin was trying to say that he wanted to support the “indigenous” people of Britain and that colour was not important, Straw kept shouting “you mean white, you mean white”. Straw is as white as Griffin on my TV so he can’t claim to be discriminated against by Griffin just because he’s a Jew and then accuse Griffin of limiting indigenous people of Britain to whites.

People become idiots when it comes to racism and think it means hating black people. The point is that Griffin was telling the truth when he said that colour is not important. Griffin hates Poles as well as Indians. Czechs as well as Nigerians. But he was not given time to say so as the angry mob just kept yelling that he hated blacks.

One black guy from the audience said that he was born in England, it was the only country he knew and he loved this country. He then asked Griffin where he should go and Griffin said that he was quite happy for the guy to stay in England. This answer seemed to disappoint everyone present.

It was interesting that after spending 90% of the program on baiting Griffin they then turned to other questions and some black guy from the audience complained that New Labour had lost control of immigration. Straw then spouted some platitudes about implementing a points system before  Conservative MP  Sayeeda Warsi joined in the criticism of New Labour on immigration.

I guess this was encouraging in a way. That, though there was real concern about the numbers of people immigrating to the UK, nobody was drawn to be sympathetic to Griffin or to blame the immigrants themselves.

The next question was about a gay pop singer who had died in Spain and how a newspaper had written something..not sure what….I think it was supposed to be insulting to gay people. The question was about free speech in the news papers.

After not letting Griffen finnish a single sentence the hypocrites then pontificated in favour of the freedom of the press to print whatever they like.

The evening was spent trying to put words in Griffin’s mouth and then getting angry when he refused to agree with them. The whole thing was a farce.

A more evenly argued review of the program than this one was published in The Independent the next day.

04
Oct
09

Will the New Labour nightmare never end?

I’ve been away for two weeks in Rome. Working. Yes it was nice but it was nice to get home and on Saturday afternoon I ate breakfast at a café in Trafalgar street. While I waited I read a Daily Mirror and on page 4 I was flabbergasted to see that two of the headlines implied that the New Labour nightmare may continue for some time to come. The first said “Blair Up for President of Europe.” And the second “Mandy for PM?”

Has the world gone mad?

blair to be president

blair to be president

Perhaps while I was away the whole country has been brain washed and we have forgotten that the the three stooges of Blair, Brown and Mandelson ran down British industry in favour of a speculative bubble while Brown promised “an end to boom and bust”.

As there had been so much publicity over Brown’s disastrous interview with Sky TV I watched it on Youtube. Amazing. He seemed to think that he had avoided global financial meltdown single headedly yet completely ignored his own part in causing the crisis. And let’s get this straight, the crisis may have been world wide but the ideological underpinning behind the speculative bubble can be traced to the disconnect between UK/US spin and the real economy. Blair and Brown believed that if they just spent money and told lies then the lies would come true.

In the interview Brown whinges that the interviewer wants to talk about personalities while Brown wants to talk about policies. This is rich. Just last week Brown had to get his wife to speak up for him at The Labour Conference in Brighton telling us what a good man he is. For God’s sake! Why not get his mum there too?  The problem is that the wife’s opinion is merely that Brown’s heart is in the right place. Well great, so he meant well while he made a cock up of the British economy. That’s nice.

The point is not whether he meant well, the point is that he is arrogant and incompetent. A mixture that I personally find particularly unforgivable.

And Blair as president of Europe! Well, I guess the Europeans have not had to suffer the smug, grinning, amoral, imbecile the way the British have. Recall that this man was the peace envoy to the Middle East that couldn’t even bring himself to call for a ceasefire while the Israelis bombed the crap out of Lebanon. Then he went silent when the Israelis bombed the crap out of Gaza. If the only requirement for becoming the peace envoy to the Middle East is keeping your mouth shut then Blair is obviously the man for the job.

Mandy for PM

Mandy for PM

And Mandelson for PM? Has nobody noticed the reinjection of deception which has accompanied the return of Mandelson?

I guess we should not really be surprised that New Labour care more for media manipulation than they do for action. It’s all they understand. It seems that most of them have a background in public relations or the media. Just today I heard that Brown’s wife worked for a “brand consultancy”.

There seems to be a school of thought that, as bad as New Labour have been, people must vote Labour to stop the Tories getting in.

Why?

In what way have New Labour been better than the Tories? Firstly I suggest that New Labour have got away with more market orientated, hyper capitalist idiocy than the Tories ever could and secondly I ask what is the point of voting for a party whose policies are at odds with your wishes merely because it used to be left wing in the old days?

If Labour were kicked out at the next election and the Tories elected then at least Labour would be forced into a rethink of their media centric approach to politics and might start spending less time on presentation and more time on achievement.

Let us hope that The Daily Mirror is Talking Bollocks.




谈胡说

Images

chairs

the meeting place

trees & sky

runner

worthing beach

east croydon station

jen colin & devon in chip shop

jump

legs

cows

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

 

February 2010
M T W T F S S
« Jan    
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728

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