When is a volunteer not.....

What is a Volunteer'? I'd always thought it was someone who gives up some of their time to good causes instead of vegetating in front of the idiot box. Voluntary work is what I do on average for eight hours unpaid each week, sometimes as much as twelve or fourteen. For the accepted usage of the term, see the definition below, which is derived from several sources.

vol·un·teer   
[vol-uhn-teer]
–noun

1. A person who voluntarily offers himself or herself for a service or undertaking.
2. A person who performs a service willingly and without pay.
3. Military . a person who enters the service voluntarily rather than through conscription or draft, especially for special or temporary service rather than as a member of the regular or permanent army.

Derivation;

obsolete French 'voluntaire' (now volontaire), from voluntaire, adjective, voluntary, from Old French, from Latin 'voluntarius' (Adjective; willing)
First Known Use: circa 1600

Now nowhere in that lot does the phrase "Made redundant then asked to come back by your ex-employers to do your old job for zip."

Someone needs to send the UK Cameroonies and their 'big society' a dictionary. Dozy lot.

Every screen grab tells a story

Over 2 to one against. 'Nuff said.

UK Referendum results

Official UK referendum results will be found on this web page, here. The results should start coming up at 4pm UK time, that's 8am Pacific Standard time. So I shall have a leisurely breakfast and watch the fallout from the Wet Coast of Canada, as my shift doesn't start until 10am local time tomorrow.

As for the local stuff and by elections, the Tellytubbygraph have a nice little map thingy which is already showing some results. There's also a page for the Scottish elections, here and the Welsh elections here.

Pundits are predicting a caning for the Lib Dems. Scottish safe seats are trembling in the face of a possible SNP majority. The fat lady hasn't sung yet, but hearken! Are those vocal scales I can hear being practised from the backstage dressing room?

Oooooh dear.

Alternative vote

After the recent Canadian Federal General Election, I was surprised to find out that the Alternative Vote system of election has been tried and discarded in British Columbia, Canada. In the early 1950's no less. Back in the UK, the Alternative Vote system is being touted as a 'fairer' system of apportioning the popular mandate, but is it really?

Taking the 1953 BC election as a yardstick, where AV was the voting system. This being a real world example of the practice in action, not theory or modelling, but real live, in your face numbers.

In 1953 the victorious Social Credit party started out at the first count with just under 38% of the total vote, which increased to just under 46% of the vote after 'adjustment'. The smaller parties who were knocked out after the first count had their votes allocated to the winning party, not spread amongst the others. See Wikipedia entry here. Er, hold the phone. So how is that 'fairer' than the first past the post system? Explain it to me. By that I mean explain it without any flim-flam, in words an ordinary voter can understand. Especially when we're voting for a specific person to represent us, not merely their party.

The words say 'fairer', but the numbers add up to something else. As far as AV is concerned, I'm not convinced. Needs more thought.

Cross posted at Orphans of Liberty.

Canada has a majority government

Have been watching the Canadian federal election results come in. Regarding the screen grab taken at 22:10 PST 2nd May 2011 (02:10 ET 3rd May). Looks like we have a majority government at long last. With over a 60% turnout, no less. Glad to see our local incumbent retain her seat, as she's a good solid constituency MP. The Liberals and Bloc Quebecois are pretty much toast, electorally speaking. The Greens have one seat in the lower Gulf Islands. Although their victory is hardly surprising out here on the hippy drippy West coast. From observations based on other countries it has to be said that Green MP's tend to have the electoral life span of Mayflies. Especially when the voters find out what all those eco-friendly policies really mean. They'll learn. With an overall majority in power the Greens are still pretty much irrelevant anyway.

Interestingly, a bunch calling themselves the Pirate Party of Canada fielded a candidate who won 331 votes locally, see their Manifesto here. Incidentally, the Libertarian party vote (A smidgeon short of 6,000) just (but only just) outstripped the PC Party.

Harper's Conservatives, regardless of their other (often hysterically over hyped) failings, have proved a steady hand on Canada's tiller of state in these economically straitened times, and have thus earned their (current) twelve seat majority. It was an eleven seat majority as per screengrab, but that's the thing about dynamic web content, you set your screen to auto refresh, and the news moves faster than the speed of blog.

All results culled from Elections Canada date and time as screengrab. However, these are only the preliminary polling day results. As a non-citizen I don't have a vote, but I will be watching the final results with interest in the morning.

Maastricht and Lisbon

A small penny dropped this afternoon. Perhaps it's just me being thick and getting the joke long after the punchline, but the thought occurs that both the Treaty of Maastricht and the Treaty of Lisbon were signed and ratified by UK Prime Ministers who had taken over from the previous incumbent without a general election to give them a proper mandate.

Major who took over from Thatcher signed the Maasstricht treaty.

Brown who had his Buggins turn after Blair signed the Lisbon treaty.

Gentlemen (and of course non male gentlefolk) draw your conclusions. Could both treaties be invalidated on these grounds? Probably not, but we can wish. can't we?

Biggest joke is Soros trying to shoehorn Brown into the top IMF job. I think Soros must want the IMF to collapse. Because such an event is certain with such a complete fiscal idiot as Brown at the helm. Or has Soros lost so big on the flatlining Carbon futures market that he's desperate to make money some other way? Mm-hm.

Whither Democracy?

I'm currently ploughing my way through the writings of Tom Paine (The 18th century Radical - not this guy), and one thing strikes me; one of the problems with democracy is voters. The people who will support a particular party no matter what, or people who have insufficient reading skills to understand the issues. Those who vote for a specific candidate because they're told who to vote for. They all warp the process.

Paine appeared to believe in Rousseau's postulate of the 'Noble savage', and advocated the extension of voting to everyone over a given age. Which is where the major problem with Democracy lies. We humans aren't all equal. As I have probably posted before, only 15% of a given human population can be described as fully self aware all the time, and thus cognisant of the effects of their choices. Most people aren't. We do things like substitute behaviour response loops or opinions for thought, and often can't tell the difference. Democracy needs people capable of thinking clearly to work effectively.

Longrider had a bitch about a silly Grauniad posted proposal to give two votes to pregnant women, and I'm inclined to agree. So I posted the following comment;

I’m increasingly of the opinion that the franchise should only be extended to those who can pass a voter comprehension test. Say a simple paragraph and ten related questions, in English (Or the host language of your country), to be completed when you turn up to vote. You pass, your vote counts. You don’t, it doesn’t. Simple.

This way the opportunity to vote could be safely offered to 16 year olds who have sufficient comprehension skills to understand some of the issues.

Or of course be 'bovvered' to turn up to vote. This way those who want the franchise and are capable of participating can do so. Such a scheme may result in fewer votes actually counting, but there are advantages to that, too.

Sunday summary

Living where and as I do, I've decided to take a far more relaxed attitude to the scaremongers and puritans of this life. In similar vein, comedian Robin Williams had useful advice for young women in danger of being involuntarily deflowered; "Point and laugh." Although kicking purveyor of unwanted affection in the family jewels, then running like hell might be a good addendum to this concept. Pain, as is often observed, is a great teacher.

In the UK, Camerons clowns continue to throw taxpayer dollar at gruesome 'green' policies while indulging in swingeing defence cuts. Then they undertake yet another grandstanding military mission in foreign lands. Why not just cut the green subsidies altogether and not have to sack members of the armed forces (on active duty, via e-mail - WTF!). Jeez, some people just cannot wake up and smell the coffee.

Facebook 'reminders' on a profile I asked to be deleted many moons ago are still ending up in my spam filter. It seems that their espoused 'ethics' of freedom of expression are as wafer thin as their ability to delete profiles when requested. Especially when the Facebook pages of those espousing an overtly sceptical bent have been suffering censorship. Porn is one thing. Dissenting opinion another. All together now; point at Facebook, and in hissing tones, shout "Hypocrites!"

Over at the doughty Inspector Gadget blog the saga of how Diversity Coordination appears to be more important than core function continues. This appears to be a local authority infection, raging unchecked. A massive injection of P45's into the upper echelons and affected areas appears to be the only possible cure. Immediate high amputation may result should symptoms persist, Failing that, the demise of the entire organism.

The Netherlands US and UK intend to take legal action against the Icelanders regarding their bank collapse. The Icelanders decision not to sell future generations into tax servitude, and who the money is owed to comes under the magnifying glass (via Old Holborn) here.

All the time, those in power try to cover their arses (and their larcenous tracks) by inserting get out of jail clauses (Via the Ranting Penguin) for MP's into fraud legislation. Hang on a minute, doesn't that directly impact on the law's impartiality? Effectively creating an unaccountable ruling political class? That's very brave of them. Especially considering how similar regimes always seem to end up.

Ah well. Time for coffee.

Very well then...

Howls of derisive laughter about the Cleggeron saying that because of fears highlighted over the problems at the Japanese Fukushima Nuclear power plant, more modern nuclear power stations will possibly not be built in Britain. Oh my giddy aunt! Where do my ex-compatriots find these people?

Is Britain on a the edge of a major subduction zone like Japan? No.

Does Britain need more generating capacity over the next five to ten years? Yes.

Can Britains current power needs be met solely by 'renewables' like wind or solar, or will they ever be? No.

Very well, you'll freeze.

As elder sibling reminds me every time we talk - "The lunatics are in charge of the Asylum." I cannot but help but agree.

Cartoon adapted from the famous original by Low.

The next Tolpuddle Martyrs

Back in the real bad old days before protective associations and Trades Unions were allowed to exist. A bunch of 19th Century agricultural labourers in Dorset, so ticked off with their treatment, formed a 'Friendly society', refusing to work for less than a set rate. The leading members of this association were James Brine, James Hammett, George Loveless, James Loveless, Thomas Standfield, and John Standfield. For their 'crime' of standing up for themselves, they were arrested and sentenced to Transportation in 1832. Their trial and sentences were essentially a warping of the law to serve a vested interest, seeing as the legislation forbidding such associations was repealed in 1825 (But what's really new about that, eh?).

History has a tendency to repeat itself in slightly different ways, because the mistakes made have a tendency to be forgotten by those who consider themselves to be in authority. In like fashion I see this 'Lawful rebellion' thing sizing up to be the basis of a similar movement. Of course the Martyrs were only one of many such groups looking to protect themselves from overweening authority, but they put their checkmark in the History box before all others.

In similar fashion, Ranty and his growing band of like minded people are busy using the legal system to fight everything from excessive council tax bills to a parking ticket. Facing arrest, Bankruptcy and other serried consequences, they have picked up the mostly quenched torch of liberty and blown on its embers. I foresee their actions making great changes sometime in the future. So long as they stay on topic and don't alienate people by wittering on about stuff better left in the X-Files.

However, I make this one caveat. It took generations before the Martyrs actions brought about a better life for their heirs and successors. Their beginnings changed the socio economic landscape between employer and employee, master and servant. In some ways for the better. In others, their nascent movement was hijacked by those with a more sinister, destructive political agenda.

To conclude; There is a paradigm shift beginning. Away from the inefficient, incompetent collectivist ideals of the 19th and 20th centuries, perhaps towards a more 'people centric' future where grass roots movements hold the balance of power. I'm not sure where the 'lawful rebellion' movement is going to end up, but I have the distinct feeling that a smart young politician who hitches his coat tails to this particular comet will go far.

Do you believe....?

Seen over at Jo Nova's blog. From her speech to the 'No CO2 tax' protest in Australia.

• CO2 feeds plants. It’s the only” pollution” pumped onto farms to grow food. Did you know plant life goes dormant if CO2 falls too low? Farmers don’t just pump in an extra 5 or 10% either, they ramp up the concentration 4 or 5 fold in greenhouses. Did the government scientists forget to mention that?
• Australia is the largest exporter of coal in the world. But did they say that China digs up nearly 10 times more coal than we do?
• The famous ice core graphs of Al Gore — expanded to 20 meters square — turned out to show the opposite of what he claimed. Temperatures drive carbon and lead it by 800 years. Worse,iIt was well known, and not contested two years before he made his movie.
• 'Global warming' stopped, and none of the models predicted that.
• The endless droughts — ended.
• All that CO2 and Global storms hit their lowest level for 30 years.
• And you have to wonder: nearly 90% of the thermometers in the US are too close to artificial heat sources. 90%. How much do the climate science team care about the science?
• 75% of thermometers used in the 1980’s have dropped off the official record. All that money, and less instruments to measure with…
• They adjust the data — sometimes 50 years after it was recorded. Think about that. The 1970’s kept warming for the next 30 years.
• 3000 ocean buoys looked and couldn’t find most of the missing heat that our planet is supposed to be storing.
• 6000 boreholes tell us the world was warmer 1000 years ago, and even warmer again 5000 years ago. None of the models can explain that.
• all the models predict a hot spot, and 28 million weather balloons can’t find it;
• 31,500 scientists don’t think we need a carbon tax. That includes 9000 phd’s. There’s a grassroots revolt going on out there. This was done by volunteers, and done twice. There’s never been another petition like it in science, ever. Did the media forget to tell you that too?
• For every dollar paid to a skeptic, big government paid 3500 to global warmers.

With citations and links to empirical observations. This is not tinfoil hat territory, this is 'Stop taking the piss you bastards' territory.

Despite all the evidence to the contrary, 'Western' nations are still pursuing the weird idée fixe that a reduction in atmospheric Carbon Dioxide will somehow 'save the world'.

This begs the question; is a warmer world better or worse? I think that colder is worse, and in spite of all the predictions, the 'warming' isn't happening as predicted. At this juncture one is tempted to ask; "What do they know that we don't?" or more likely; "What the fuck are they on?"

It's quite plain to see that the models upon which Green policies are based don't mesh with reality. Every time one of these half-assed postulations bites the dust it's because 'It's getting warmer'. Well it isn't. The Winters aren't warmer. Neither are the Summers, despite the hogwash pumped out by much of the lamestream and various pressure groups. It still snows - despite assurances to the contrary there is snow in places it doesn't normally snow. There are no more Hurricanes or typhoons. Fewer than 'normal' in fact. Everything points to a cooling planet. Atmospheric ice crystal phenomena like Sundogs are growing more common in lower latitudes than we're used to. Certainly more often observed. Heavy and prolonged frosts in subtropical growing areas like Florida.

People are beginning to notice, and it's only a matter of time before the money hurled over the beached dead whale of 'Green' policies forever condemns the Western Nations to a historical footnote. Mind you, I think we're due for a major economic upset anyway. Money is being spent on Green policies that the West hasn't a hope in hell of repaying, and the only door at the end of that particular path is bankruptcy. This means no more money for new infrastructure, which means a decaying return on basics like water, sewage and power. Real poverty. Real people starving. Real population dieback. But that won't matter, as it will only be the 'little people' who will suffer because their 'leaders' got it completely, magnificently and utterly wrong.

Writing as one of the 'little people', I'm not impressed.

Hyper and Super Injunctions?

What sort of legal process is at work here? Picked up at Anna Racoons, this nasty little snippet, where legal injunctions have been granted that not only forbid the injunctee from mentioning it, but also forbid them from asking their Member of Parliament for help? Even to the point where a threat has been made to take the injunctee's children into 'care' if the injunction is breached. Isn't such a threat in itself illegal, no matter who makes it? Not only under the old Common law statue, but also under European Human Rights Law?

It's only over the past few years that we've heard about 'Super' injunctions which forbid mention in the Mainstream (Mostly to do with where idiot footballers are reputed to have parked their willies). Yet forbidding mention in the Houses of Parliament? Is that legal? Surely such an injunction would be a clear breach of Parliamentary Privilege, as we are led to understand it.

This speech by John Hemming MP is most enlightening. Clearly there are some UK 'Limp Dems', who are less limp than others.

Popcorn ready. Another one to watch.

Boris gets it

There is no rhyme or reason to an earthquake, and we should for once abandon our infantile delusion that we are the cause and maker of everything.

Doesn't happen often, but when a politician gets it (almost) right, they should have it pointed out and applauded.

Likewise:

We now know that the work done at Climatic Research Unit barely qualified as science; they kept it secret to stop other scientists checking it; thus breaching one of the foundations of the scientific method.

Graham Stringer, MP for Bolton & Blackley.

H/T Bishop Hill for the Manchester Confidential piece.

Money for nothing

By their own admission, the Ministers and high up panjandrums in charge of taxing future generations into slavery mitigating 'Climate Change' really haven't a fucking clue are unsure of the effect, spending $280 billion of taxpayer dollar on policies that don't and can't work decisions to prevent a highly disputed predicted global temperature rise based on fucking useless climate models.

Now we hear that one such in England is having a steel wire fence put around his property to prevent angry members of the public and disaffected party members storming his house and doing him harm. Personally I am in great favour of this high level protection; it is my deeply held conviction that all UK politicians and personnel in charge of climate mitigation measures (Of whatever stripe, let's not be partisan about this) should have this level of protection. They should have the 'right' to be free from violence.

Now I'm not for a moment suggesting that perhaps if some clever dicky were to say, wire the new security fence to the mains and drop an extra secure extra padlock with a crop resistant shackle on the gate (or even weld the gate shut), the politician in question would have to stay in the warmth and comfort of their own delightful home, safe within the bosom of their nearest and dearest. Safe from the angry majority of the population, and not being able to make any half assed decisions that further messed up said populations lives. A small jammer would might stop his cellphone and Internet access and stop the bleeder person in question doing any more economic damage. However, this is just my idle speculation, and in no way an incitement for anyone to actually do this. Although I'd be laughing like a drain if they did.

To quote the wise words of the fictional General Tacticus (From Terry Pratchett's Jingo); "If your enemy retreats into an impregnable fortress - see that he stays there."

Then, with the benefit of some inadvertent but perhaps welcome purgatory 'quality' time spent with their demanding children and impatient spouses lovely families perhaps they might think twice about spending money the taxpayer doesn't have.

Correction: It's not a home it's a whole party conference. Still, the same principles apply. 'Rings of steel' work both ways.

She's gone

Gaddaffi's once inseparable blonde Nurse has legged it back to the Ukraine. Which is a sign that there's not much life left in the old dictator.

No matter the powerless posturing of the current set of Western 'leaders', I've got a feeling whatever new bunch of governments arising in the wake of the protests may be tougher to buy than the batch of Middle Eastern dictators currently on the way out. Not that the big finance houses could afford them any more. I think the Saudi's are fairly safe for the moment as they've bought off their populace with a new batch of 'benefits'. However, the Middle Eastern domino's are toppling, and who knows what knock on effects will follow.

In a way it's rather like watching volcanoes and earthquakes. You can never quite be sure what's going to happen next.

The best thing the western powers can do so as not to stir up the anti western factions, is to stay well out of it. Not that they will of course.

One Ceausescu moment coming right up

Quoted from this Al-Jazeera article.

"I am a fighter, a revolutionary from tents ... I will die as a martyr at the end," he said.

"Muammar Gaddafi is the leader of the revolution, I am not a president to step down ... This is my country. Muammar is not a president to leave his post."

"I have not yet ordered the use of force, not yet ordered one bullet to be fired ... when I do, everything will burn."

Statement 1 and 2 I would say are true. Statement 3 is a lie because there have already been incidents where Libya's armed forces have fired on civilians.

My money is on it all ending like this;


Of course this is pure conjecture, but I'll back my conjecture, which is based upon observation and historical precedent, against any other prophesies.

Another one bites the dust?

According to the UK Daily Telegraph Libyan Dictator Gadaffi has legged it to Venezuela. That's something I never thought I'd see, rather like Morris Dancing Star Wars Stormtroopers.

Reuters has the Venezuelans denying the report. No confirmation by the most reliable news source in the region, Al-Jazeera as yet, but I hope that there is some sort of belated justice against Gadaffi's regime for people like those murdered at Lockerbie, and Yvonne Fletcher. Not to mention all those Libyans tortured and killed by the diktats of a socialist dictator.

Should Gaddaffi truly be an ex dictator, one can also only hope that the Libyans don't get another government which is just as bad. Good luck guys, you're going to need all you can get.

No veiling of issues

Regarding the latest row over veils and voting. There should be no 'ban'. However the rules on identification at voting should be tightly enforced. If the recording officer requires ID before a vote card is issued, then he or she should be allowed to verify the ID of the voter before doing so. The right to vote is important enough to transcend a purely personal preference, which is all this veil malarkey is. It's a tribal, not religious observance.

Re this desire to permanently hide the face. My youngest covers up whenever she's feeling upset, defensive or fragile. When the hoodie and the scarf go on, Mrs S and I try to cheer her up rather than berate her for hiding. Doesn't stop her doing it, but it does make her hide less frequently. We talk to her about what's making her feel sad, kid her that she's being a bit 'weird', then she brightens up and her inner sun comes up again. The hoodie comes off and all is smiles.

Maybe there's a lesson for everyone in there somewhere.

Obama betrays the UK

Spotted in one of those articles about Wikileaks in the Tellytubbygraph:

US agrees to tell Russia Britain's nuclear secrets

I mentioned this to Mrs S, who pointed out: "Didn't they send the Rosenbergs to the Electric Chair for something like that?"

Erm, aren't the UK and the USA supposed to be allies or something? This doesn't sound like the act of an ally. What the hell does the boy president think he's playing at?

Hot spots

Having had a look at what Al Jazeera have been covering, it's interesting to see an overall pattern of effective revolts going on throughout the Middle East. Egypt of course is the biggie in the news, but Tunisia hasn't gone away, Jordan has a similar situation to Egypt, Lebanon and Yemen. Iran has been hanging political activists, and recent upheaval has left the Algerians considering a reshuffle and cutting food prices. A political ripple effect looks to be shaking up the entire region. Red underlined countries on the map indicate significant social and political unrest pushed by food shortages. The major riot flashpoints in the region appear to be driven more by hunger than politics. Although Iraq looks like an undeclared war between Sunni and Shia.

Re Egypt; Mubarak's wife and his two sons have jumped ship for London. The odds are that he will follow shortly. The people he has announced in his new government appear to be US-Friendly not because the USA needs stability to preserve the regions oil, but probably because the region needs US food exports. Certain nations have already begun stockpiling.

The riots don't surprise me. Poor grain harvests from Russia, Australia and Canada this year. Food production is being sidelined for so called 'eco-friendly' (although not really) biofuels. Agricultural runoff from the intensive agriculture to produce biofuels damages coral reefs and increases toxic plankton blooms amongst other things. Yet we in the developed west are constantly being urged to become more 'sustainable', based on the fantasy that by reducing our output of food and energy we would somehow be doing the Earth a favour.

Looks like a lot of these 'Green' policies are actually unsustainable, as the current problems amply demonstrate.