tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-40062303675635874402024-03-14T00:43:30.947+00:00MuckandBrassA blog instigated by the activities of Somerton Town Council in Somerton, Somerset between 2006 and 2009. The Town Council, led by Cllrs Paddy Keenan and Tony Canvin, disposed of public land in the town centre and acquired an industrial unit on the edge of Somerton to be renovated, mainly by Canvin, for use as a community hall. A majority of the Council resigned in late 2009 and the Audit Commission published a damning report about the Keenan/Canvin Council in February 2012.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger482125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-83557266097403148782024-02-07T14:54:00.005+00:002024-02-07T19:53:43.246+00:00So you've bought an EV, that don't impress me much.......<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLPMbAg-ojc3b5CfUVLObv8FamUnViR1_iuHZDrlKCwtFmjX5kmrIOX5u788u1FAH70EKSIQBMUE5luvrpJWWPk_b5XLrYcI6Htu-D1IXa4WT-HmDGf2i7bKdoaYjOSe-VeJ0LoCRdGCfeHVWXWEJKDOh_ZOTV028QzdRYqwK0vwJCVcvH89fZxiLLnXZm/s1100/3-Rishis.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="436" data-original-width="1100" height="159" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjLPMbAg-ojc3b5CfUVLObv8FamUnViR1_iuHZDrlKCwtFmjX5kmrIOX5u788u1FAH70EKSIQBMUE5luvrpJWWPk_b5XLrYcI6Htu-D1IXa4WT-HmDGf2i7bKdoaYjOSe-VeJ0LoCRdGCfeHVWXWEJKDOh_ZOTV028QzdRYqwK0vwJCVcvH89fZxiLLnXZm/w400-h159/3-Rishis.jpg" width="400" /></a></div> <p></p><p>EVs are all the rage. Everyone is buying them. But maybe, just maybe, EVs will be the next big miss-selling scam. And why do I say this? Well, its a long story but I'll try to give you the short version. Some years ago, in the early naugties, I was driving a diesel powered Renault Megane and it was a pretty good car, comfy, well appointed and, when asked, quick enough to attract the attention of the speed cops, and that is where the story really began.</p><p>In 2006 I was driving regularly from London to the West Country and, across a period of about a month, I was stopped twice by the constabulary. The first time was straightforward speeding (90+mph across a measured mile) which got me points. The next time was little more serious and included driving without due care and attention, dangerous driving and speeding. All in all, enough to put my license at risk so I decided to make a change, I would now obey all speed limits and never exceed 60mph.</p><p>Initially it was a bit of a challenge but I slowly got used to it and started to notice specific side effects, the most obvious of which was the reduced fuel consumption. Before the Max60 project, the Megane would do around 425 miles on a tank but as the Max60 project continued, the range steadily extended. 500 miles became 575 miles which became 680 miles etc. Eventually, when range had become the challenge, I managed to squeeze 790 miles from one tank and it occured to me that good mpg's would be a yardstick for my future car purchases.</p><p>There then followed a period of driving Peugeot 206SWs powered by 1.6L turbo diesel engines and which, driving a modified Max60 style, would always deliver high 50s or low 60mpgs. Along the way I have bumped into the 'hypermiling' community where people wring much better mpgs by 'driving ahead' or by avoiding braking or acceleration, monitoring of tyre pressures and other arcade considerations in order to 'do the same but with less'. Which brings me to the subject of EVs and why you might, or might not, want to buy one.</p><p>This subject arose after reading an article in the local press about a broken down Tesla which couldn't be recovered because the 'standard' recovery vehicle couldn't take the weight. This made me wonder about the weight of a Tesla which I soon found out was around 1757kgs depending on model. I compared this to the 1200kgs of my Peugeot 206SW and started to think more about EVs and whether or not they were fit for purpose.</p><p>The 'battery' in my Peugeot (ie the fuel tank) weighed approximately 30kgs when full which turned out to be a fraction of the weight of a Tesla battery which, depending upon model, was around 600kgs. So, all that wonderful efficiency that EVs are meant to offer, is undermined by having to lug around a massive battery. And then, by chance, I heard about a university project where researchers were going to establish the amount of pollution caused by tyre/roadway friction and I guess you can see where this is going.</p><p>In a nutshell, the research shows that tyre/roadway friction causes far more pollution that that caused by an internal combustion engine and the pollutants are smaller and more health threatening than exhaust pollution. Finally, the pollution is a direct function of vehicle weight ie, the greater the weight, the greater the pollution.</p><p>There are many other issues raised by the use of EVs but the fact is that they are not the answer to everyone's problems. The monster at the top of this page (2024 Lotus Electre) is an example of the excesses. Car manufacturers (and the planet) would be better off designing lighter, more fuel efficient internal combustion engines (100mpg minimum) and, wherever possible, retro fitting these to existing vehicles. But I know that this will never happen because fashion dictates that we all must buy into the EV mythology, even if it is a crock......<br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-46526602266213428322023-02-26T11:51:00.000+00:002023-02-26T11:51:26.456+00:00Transitioning, maybe........<p> A couple of years ago I set off on a journey to find an alternative computer system to replace my involvement with the MacOS. What started out quite encouragingly, with Elementary OS, limped along for a while until October of '22 when I gave up and went back to the MacOS. Why did I give up? A variety of reasons that really boiled down to two, a) Apple's integration of Mac and iPhone and b) my inability to find an alternative to PhotoShop/Bridge. However, everything changes over time and, today, I am once again trying the latest Elementary OS version of Linux, both on an HP laptop and also on a miniPC.</p><p>I returned to the Linux project because, whilst Apple do a remarkable job of integrating MacOS devices with iOS devices, I do feel trapped. Not only trapped but pissed-off that their continuing OS upgrades render older Apple devices less and less functional. My iMac is a 2011 machine which runs High Sierra and nothing beyond it and I am aware that, at some point it will give up the ghost and then what will I do? I could buy a new iMac (c£3k) but none of my existing software will run on it and Adobe will want me to have a subscription (no thanks).</p><p>Then there is the matter of my 2015 MacBook with its crappy butterfly keyboard. A nice machine, compact and light and ruined by Apple's effort to save 0.3mm in thickness. Apple also declined to repair it so thats another £1200 down the drain. So, for these reasons I decided to give Elementary OS another go and I'm glad I did. <br /></p><p>It looks as if Linux developers are beginning to appreciate the need for software to be easier to load with the development of Flathub and Sideload. Apple have always assumed that users don't know anything about code and therefore hidden allthe nuts and bolts behind an automated OS. Linux developers seem to be following suit and its going to make Linux, in the consumer/retail sector, far more attractive.</p><p>Another factor that is influential is the availability of a number of software tools that work across many platforms, Apple and Linux in particular. I have been using Thunderbird (mail,contacts,calendar), Firefox (browsing), LibreOffice (writing, drawing, database) all on my Mac which makes it easier moving over to the same tools under Elementary. The hunt is still on for the elusive PhotoShop/Bridge alternative and Gimp may be the answer once its interface improves, but its not there yet.</p><p>So, the beat goes on and I am rather more optimistic about an Apple-less future.</p><p>Niall <br /></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-24150636875315016742023-02-21T15:35:00.003+00:002023-04-05T19:25:35.613+01:00No 'peace in our time'.<div style="text-align: left;"><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7by1wWnKR6wfVDcZkqzxLtptk9emXICDuoDfhkxU-6AyxAnEpCp3DpsQR4UrM_8wT0mkepKAQPmYdQbuuksb57BLqPHEt598yWHcmH06YHo7af48qwb_mufllR9Swa6Y5NPfxYzm9PYJecoPiGyDkLdHx3foJSJZnIV3KUt0Dlj7ZWO5m2HctpZTKZQ/s1100/2014-2023-Mad-Vlad.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="421" data-original-width="1100" height="245" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi7by1wWnKR6wfVDcZkqzxLtptk9emXICDuoDfhkxU-6AyxAnEpCp3DpsQR4UrM_8wT0mkepKAQPmYdQbuuksb57BLqPHEt598yWHcmH06YHo7af48qwb_mufllR9Swa6Y5NPfxYzm9PYJecoPiGyDkLdHx3foJSJZnIV3KUt0Dlj7ZWO5m2HctpZTKZQ/w640-h245/2014-2023-Mad-Vlad.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /> </div><div style="text-align: left;">So, its now a war of words between, in the blue corner, Joe Biden and, in the red corner, Vladimir Putin. A year ago, Putin must have expected to drive straight into Kyiv and hoist the flag of the Russian Republic yet, here we are, a year later with Putin nowhere near driving into Kyiv and what looks like a stalemate on the battlefield.</div><div style="text-align: left;"> </div><div style="text-align: left;">The battle for Ukraine looks more and more like a proxy war between the west, represented by Ukraine, and the Russian Republic, represented by the Republic's armed forces. Its unclear just how much support the Russian forces are receiving from other nations, certainly drones from Iran and other armaments from North Korea but, at present, China seems to be on the fence. So given the huge disparity in size between Ukraine and Russia, its pretty clear that the arms going into Ukraine from Europe and America, are holding the Russian at bay, if not pushing them back.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">The question is, how long can this effort be sustained, either by Ukraine (and their supporters) or Russia and it may come down to who has the most to loose. Comparing the two sides, Ukraine has nothing to loose and everything to gain. Putin, on the other hand, has everything to loose. He cannot back down because it would be a catastrophic loss of face and he would probably be six feet under withing minutes. So, we probably face a war of attrition to see who gives up first and it makes me wonder about the purpose of war, in the modern age.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Many years ago, Edwin Starr posed the question, 'War, what is it good for?' and answered his own question thus, 'Absolutely nuthin', but it still seems like a popular activity. What I don't understand is the unbelievable cost of warfare where the strategy would seem to be to lay waste to the country which you fight against. The images from Syria showing the country after Assad's war (supported by Putin) which left towns and cities in ruins. Where was the point in that? And the same is happening in Ukraine. If Putin were to be successful, what would he inherit? A country with little infrastructure and a huge well of hatred for its attackers/invaders.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Other commentators have observed that Crimea was the problem. Putin started with Crimea and, had Europe and America supported Ukraine in 2014, Putin might not have tried again. No guarntees of course but it would certainly have been less likely. Neville Chamberlain's 'peace in our time' is an example that we might do well to pay attention to.<br /></div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-40795524822416858212021-11-10T18:58:00.003+00:002023-02-26T17:59:00.648+00:00Happy talk, keep talkin' the happy talk.........<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLVEPnr_tnERah28TErDJlqgt9024BlJ99gpeLAMR4NUxYvd0YwpqWkPu8wuM-pGnC2WY0C97nElizFhMwuOjDyGazrKXb3jPMXE8NtvTVWZt2FBngaQNzXh3wbLA_RMlc7u7KSuktTrRJg5tiGxdy9TEV43y2gqckFDVaFnTv1b98yExLkgPspZe4kQ/s1200/Happy-talk.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="279" data-original-width="1200" height="93" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiLVEPnr_tnERah28TErDJlqgt9024BlJ99gpeLAMR4NUxYvd0YwpqWkPu8wuM-pGnC2WY0C97nElizFhMwuOjDyGazrKXb3jPMXE8NtvTVWZt2FBngaQNzXh3wbLA_RMlc7u7KSuktTrRJg5tiGxdy9TEV43y2gqckFDVaFnTv1b98yExLkgPspZe4kQ/w400-h93/Happy-talk.jpg" width="400" /></a></div><br /><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Happy talk, keep talking happy talk,<br />Talk about things you'd like to do,</div><div style="text-align: left;">You gotta have a dream, if you don't have a dream,</div><div style="text-align: left;">How you gonna have a dream come true?</div><div style="text-align: left;">(South Pacific, Rodgers and Hammerstein)</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">Some time ago, maybe a couple of years, I came to the conclusion that, based on pretty limited research, humanity was doomed. Why? Well, in simple terms and based on my own observation, the human species is unable to act in its own best interests. There are just too many colliding agendas: consumerism; capitalism; competition and, possibly most importantly, population.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">The first suggestions that the Industrial Revolution might cause environmental change came in the very late 1800s. Langley&Very looked at atmospheric CO<span style="font-size: xx-small;">2</span> and that work was developed by Arrhenius which resulted in Arvid Hagbom establishing that c1896, industrial CO<span style="font-size: xx-small;">2</span> production roughly matched that in nature. In the following 125 years, industrial CO<span style="font-size: xx-small;">2</span> production has far outstripped any naturally occurring CO<span style="font-size: xx-small;">2</span> and science is quite certain that this level of CO<span style="font-size: xx-small;">2</span> production is causing Climate Change by warming the atmosphere.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">So what has driven this explosion in industrially produced atmospheric CO<span style="font-size: xx-small;">2</span>? The answer is simple - human activity. The Industrial Revolution changed the relationship between human population and the planet or, more accurately, the Planet's resources. Before the Industrial Revolution, one individual could only do a limited amount of work, limited by hours of daylight, limited by the amount of energy the individual could expend. But the Industrial Revolution changed that relationship because machinery could be worked 24 hours per day especially with the advent of gas lighting then with electric lighting. Importantly, agriculture mechanised, which created more and cheaper food meaning that larger families no longer lived in hunger (if they had visionary employers).</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">All of this resulted in a parallel explosion of global population estimated at 1Bn in 1804 then reaching 2Bn 120+ years later, around 1927. But this explosion in population did not follow a straight line graph with 3Bn being reached 33 years later and 4Bn reached in only14 further years. Today, in 2021, global population is estimated to be in excess of 8Bn and whilst the increase may well slow, the central question is whether or not the current population level is sustainable. From where I sit, the answer to that question is 'NO'.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">We have just witnessed the latest episode of the Global Climate Conference, COP26, and, based upon various statements by interested parties, limiting global warming to +1.5˚ may be already impossible. Some suggest that an increase of +2.0˚ is not too far away and the consequences of a rise of even 1.5˚ will have dire consequences for many around the world. But humanity is nothing if not resourceful.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;"> Since 'climate' became generally recognised issue (say, from the 1960s onward), industry has been looking to turn the challenge into an opportunity. In colder climates, the focus has been on reducing energy loss (double glazing, insulation etc) whereas in warmer climates, the focus has been in moving energy around (via air-conditioning ). More recently, the focus has been on what has, euphemistically, been on 'renewable energy sources' like wind, solar, geo-thermal, hydro-electric, hydrogen and other more arcane technologies. The only problem with these technologies is that they are focused on allowing humankind to carry on as before. And the major problem there is that global population is today at such a level that, with climate change, it is easy to consider a situation where the planet will be unable to support humanity no matter what technologies humanity deploys.</div><div style="text-align: left;"><br /></div><div style="text-align: left;">As a consequence, some politicians, notably our own Boris Johnson, indulge in 'happy talk' where we (humanity) are all 'equal to the challenge'. This suggests that we will come up with some magical technology which will save us from 'burning our house down', probably with us in it.</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-11217130601746332142020-12-26T15:16:00.004+00:002020-12-26T15:18:32.552+00:00Transitioning<p><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Transitioning seems to be something of a trend these days and I decided to explain my own transition. Yes, I’m transitioning from the MacOS environment to Linux. Its been a long time coming because, if I'm honest, I’ve been uncomfortable in my work environment for quite some time but I have never had the courage to come out and admit it, until quite recently that is.</span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">So, what has driven me to embrace the world of Linux? Well, in part its been my growing dissatisfaction with being manipulated by Apple who are, quite clearly, determined to shackle their consumers (I almost said ‘users’) to their own, monolithic and monocultural ecosystem. This was made abundantly clear to me when I mistakenly upgraded my 2015 MacBook to Catalina. A lot of my existing software simply stopped working and ‘the Cloud’ took centre stage in setting up this new OS.</span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Now, call me old fashioned but I like to know where my files/documents/images are stored and I want them stored at my place. I don’t want them floating about in the ether and subject to Apple’s custodianship, something that they will, in the future seek to monetise.</span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">So that was reason #1 for me considering my options and reason #2 was my introduction to a version of the Linux OS called <a href="https://elementary.io" target="_blank">Elementary OS</a>. Some years ago, I dallied with Linux, trying out the Ubuntu version and, at that time, I overlaid Ubuntu with Macbuntu which sought to deliver a Mac-like desktop. Unfortunately it didn’t obviate the need for knowledge of .rpm and .tar files or the use of………the terminal. This last terrified me as I have absolutely no knowledge or understanding of the command line and a belief that, if I make a mistake (highly likely) whatever device I’m working on will melt. But Elementary OS has changed all of that and it has the look and feel of a mature, push-button GUI where installations happen in the background once you have clicked on ‘install’.</span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">So, with a lot of encouragement from my brother, I now have a mini PC loaded with Elementary OS, hooked up to a 27” screen and a bluetooth keyboard, all of which work seamlessly. As a consequence, I can see a point in time, in the near future, when I might be able to sell my MacBook and maybe even my lovely 27" 2011 iMac and move to a world where subscriptions are a thing of the past and my files are mine.</span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Watch this space.</span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px; min-height: 14px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;"><br /></span></p>
<p style="font-stretch: normal; line-height: normal; margin: 0px;"><span style="font-family: helvetica;">Niall</span></p>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-30301497348925927372020-10-09T09:54:00.005+01:002020-12-26T15:22:05.138+00:00Six months ago.........<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZ0Y89UFPdiaeWFnISw5SwM6dFhpITJeDrAZdP3X-Vqlef6svlJLSJ_aRG02zxDRmgTsf6xVxk4Md70r7tmxQtahx-APw8qzQqtLFLlbZtfo9D6GLdRzFuyv10QW8DAItxi9tMO6-dAWjS/s1100/Soylent-Green.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="447" data-original-width="1100" height="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgZ0Y89UFPdiaeWFnISw5SwM6dFhpITJeDrAZdP3X-Vqlef6svlJLSJ_aRG02zxDRmgTsf6xVxk4Md70r7tmxQtahx-APw8qzQqtLFLlbZtfo9D6GLdRzFuyv10QW8DAItxi9tMO6-dAWjS/w640-h260/Soylent-Green.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div><br /></div>Looking back at the last entry I realised with a shock that it was more than 6 months since I commented on Boris' pathetic effort when compared to Jamie's and the intervening 6 months have done very little for Boris' reputation. Contracting Covid-19 doesn't seem to have changed him all that much although I would say that some of the wind seems to have left his sails, probably not helped by the Dominatrix's cavortings.<div><br /></div><div>What has changed though is that 40,000+ citizens have paid some of the price for the Tories fixation with GDP and The Economy. And now it seems that they are going to quietly take the brakes off and let Covid-19 rip through the UK because, 'we're all in this together'.</div><div><br /></div><div>I did wonder, not entirely tongue-in-cheek, if Covid-19 could save the planet and there is plenty of evidence that the environment has benefited from the significant reductions in pollution arising from travel restrictions. But Covid-19 has also thrown into stark relief just how dependent society has become on 'consumerism' for employment and tax generation. The Government seems, at present, to be more concerned about the hospitality industry than it is about the health of the population - even in the face of hard evidence which shows that people who have had a drink find it harder to 'social distance'.</div><div><br /></div><div>Covid-19 offers us the chance to learn about our current social and economic structures and how they may benefit us and how they may also threaten. The question is whether or not we are capable of seeing beyond our fixation with fiscal profit or loss to establish what is truly in the best interests of society. </div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-47803140279529017172020-03-23T22:12:00.001+00:002020-10-09T11:33:11.490+01:00And the winner is ....................<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0f5cX_vgsmpLY0pdau7gzNTG36E3AgqwaBHXKt7m8thzpK_utK1PPIFtnUMi6LeXYNu5_Q29uTpr2cElJ2wbsQxlvrZSSJr0Jcdl9SlcePjIkqa-woKiI3NTwKVQEsNYTxtTIHaMfi_bR/s1100/Boris-vs-Jamie.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="299" data-original-width="1100" height="174" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj0f5cX_vgsmpLY0pdau7gzNTG36E3AgqwaBHXKt7m8thzpK_utK1PPIFtnUMi6LeXYNu5_Q29uTpr2cElJ2wbsQxlvrZSSJr0Jcdl9SlcePjIkqa-woKiI3NTwKVQEsNYTxtTIHaMfi_bR/w640-h174/Boris-vs-Jamie.jpg" width="640" /></a></div><br /><div><br /></div><div><br /></div>The country held its collective breath in anticipation of our Great Leader's address to the nation. The clock moved relentlessly towards 8:30pm and suddenly, there he was in all his jelly-like glory. I can't remember much of what he said but I was left with the distinct impression that he thought he was at assembly, addressing his fellow pupils about some jolly jape or other. To say it lacked gravitas is something of an understatement and I was left wondering what the fuss was about.<br />
<br />
Gary Gibbon, C4's political correspondent, did his best to make something of it but, again, I was left with the feeling that I had missed something which was meant to be important, but wasn't.<br />
<br />
Then, after a brief ad-break Jamie Oliver took over and I was captivated. He came out of the gate storming, throwing together a few tasty recipes focussing on the sort of stuff that you might have tucked away in the larder. He understood the problem that we all face - we're stuck in the house hoping to avoid the grim reaper and Jamie stepped up and tried to help. He's a fucking chef for God's sake and he left a huge impression on me, heightened by the stark contrast with the total absence of anything constructive offered by the Prime Minister.<br />
<br />
Jamie - 10/10<br />
Boris - report to the headmaster.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-13709622931492277572020-03-22T14:36:00.000+00:002020-03-23T22:14:51.242+00:00Will Covid-19 save the planet?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiLvafiJemC0tD0DVUQe_ec-SuDkEzNHzH3oFslobNo1K01RBQ4nDrSNp92fA_D8zEurt78TQtv6TT-rT4ORtuFY69BYv6W1gxbMXi9atcU-ffEdbk5vd4JQ_x4B-57GL-k42kv2J4-x6j/s1600/Covid-attacks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="440" data-original-width="1100" height="256" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiiLvafiJemC0tD0DVUQe_ec-SuDkEzNHzH3oFslobNo1K01RBQ4nDrSNp92fA_D8zEurt78TQtv6TT-rT4ORtuFY69BYv6W1gxbMXi9atcU-ffEdbk5vd4JQ_x4B-57GL-k42kv2J4-x6j/s640/Covid-attacks.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
What is the greatest threat to humanity? Covid-19 or Capitalism? Since the late1700s, Capitalism has turbo-charged population growth, consumption and exploitation of natural resources. Just before the advent of the Coronavirus, sections of the global population were signing up to Greta Thunberg's message which was, roughly, consumption/waste are the issues and we need to stop both. Greta isn't the first individual to propose this message but it's fair to say that she is the first to have energised a national or international movement and debate. But all of that is in the past now since Coronavirus has rewritten the front pages of every media.<br />
<br />
Joke about loo paper.<br />
Shopper: Oh, there's no bog paper<br />
Me: Don't worry, get a copy of the Sun or the Mail<br />
Shopper: Good suggestion but there's so much shit in them already!<br />
<br />
So now, we need to consider just why Coronavirus is having such an impact. Firstly, humanity's lifestyle made it possible. Air travel spread it around the world extremely effectively. Secondly, individual governments were slow to respond, believing, I assume, that it couldn't happen here (wherever here might be). Thirdly, whilst it originated in China (an authoritarian society) it has gained a stronger grip in capitalist democracies which are less able to invest in future proofing (because there's no profit in it).<br />
<br />
So the Coronavirus is tearing through organised societies, aided in large part by population levels and density and a cultural resistance to considering the good of wider society over the demands of the individual. And this gives me an opportunity to remind everyone that, "I blame Margaret Thatcher" and, by implication, her progeny in the Austeri<i>tory</i> Party.<br />
<br />
Thatcher, rather than believe in society, believed in the <i>individual. </i>And now we face a challenge that cannot be met by the individual and can only be faced by society as a whole. To do that we have to see ourselves firstly as a society and secondly as individuals within society. But, looking at the supermarket shelves, that is an ability that has withered in the years since Thatcher here, and Reagan in the USA, spread their poisonous, greedy and self-interested view of the world.<br />
<br />
But don't worry, Coronavirus is proving that capitalism is no match for Mother Nature, where society might be.<br />
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-50483157558244849972020-03-17T19:39:00.000+00:002020-03-22T15:07:27.239+00:00Forget Public Health, its a financial crisis and you are going to pay for it.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCqDcqywfLMT_ZkzJtZPcxOYy3UMsQEuKWjkV0CQLfI6qXPvMxgEmoBnfxW_Leg_EVFWK2ur7n6p7-bzfRLbiIFMcQclaHpHpMFFFRBaJkVD0f2LCJBaYb7r6PMtQLlb754sLAWWTS6KNA/s1600/Austeritory.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="1100" height="172" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgCqDcqywfLMT_ZkzJtZPcxOYy3UMsQEuKWjkV0CQLfI6qXPvMxgEmoBnfxW_Leg_EVFWK2ur7n6p7-bzfRLbiIFMcQclaHpHpMFFFRBaJkVD0f2LCJBaYb7r6PMtQLlb754sLAWWTS6KNA/s640/Austeritory.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
During today's 'Coronavirus Briefing', I watched our revered Primate, aka The Great Wanker, hosing down the various hacks with another load of bollocks about all of us being in this together. Remember that in 2010, shiney Dave Cameron was spouting exactly the same crap as he instigated the decade of austeritory where ordinary tax-payers paid for the 'risky behaviour' of the banks.<br />
<br />
So, The Great Wanker sets off on exactly the same course and tells his tame Chancellor (ex-hedge fund manager Rishi Sunak) to introduce the programme of support for struggling businesses. Rishi does what he is told and blethers on about rates holidays and national insurance holidays and mortgage support, salary support, utility support etc etc etc ad infinitum. But in all of this twaddle the key feature of all of this support is quietly ignored and that is that all of the support is in the form of loans which will, of course, have to be repaid.<br />
<br />
One journo, I think from the Times, did enquire as to the sense of saddling struggling businesses with more long term debt, postulating that it might make more sense for such firms to fold rather than take on yet more debt. The Great Wanker brushed this enquiry aside with more blether about us all being in it together and that its a war and that Britain's economy will recover and be better than ever, especially when we start selling Spitfires again.<br />
<br />
Meanwhile a more limited version of 'Herd Immunity' continues with the Chief Medical Officer suggesting that keeping the death toll down to 20,000 would be a good outcome, even if a bit ugly. So, lets see how we get on over the next few months and it will be interesting too see if anyone is brave enough to work out what part of the final death toll can be attributed to 'Austeritory'.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-9212916988883064342020-03-14T17:29:00.000+00:002020-03-17T19:41:17.392+00:00Herd immunity ...........<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6ZQxRjwjUw5Of-kfqjblgBhhyphenhyphenoIRD-DbiV8amXh-UYjdoLwzWzJU0B8SGeVebmw6Cqwt9gzZpDoJtwe5RJntzu7z5hUEd8riuzdy97BX03VAtEzhrQMqNgdj1UsNFJaTMBuV9nd8Dkaow/s1600/Herd-immunity.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="258" data-original-width="1050" height="156" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh6ZQxRjwjUw5Of-kfqjblgBhhyphenhyphenoIRD-DbiV8amXh-UYjdoLwzWzJU0B8SGeVebmw6Cqwt9gzZpDoJtwe5RJntzu7z5hUEd8riuzdy97BX03VAtEzhrQMqNgdj1UsNFJaTMBuV9nd8Dkaow/s640/Herd-immunity.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Evidently the Government's strategy regarding Corona Virus is to encourage 'herd immunity'. The idea is that if enough people (the herd) acquire the infection then the wider herd (us) will acquire immunity, if, that is, being infected and recovering does confer immunity. The figures quoted in order to acquire 'herd immunity' suggest that between 60% and 70% of the population need to become infected. Based on a UK population of 64M, that means that some 40M people need to become infected and, as a consequence, some 400,000 will die (based upon a 1% mortality rate).<br />
<br />
This is great news for a Conservative government because, after a decade of austerity has undermined the health service, killing off 1% of the infected population will reduce the burden on our over-stretched social services. Maybe this is another example of Dominic Cummings' 'weirdos' thinking outside the box but it is definitely bad news for anyone in the 'at risk' category.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-38473948811894751542019-12-12T19:00:00.000+00:002020-03-14T17:32:13.463+00:00The nation decides......again.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEia3kwN0GUfaviib_sNg3Vwagi_t5fk1k4LyjX5GfD10jUF5Wwbc5LeSsomDEaNIO37GNxJsUvQQSWBS5Hw2m_o24jpOJ-_uNQKLg9qvYVPQZj6ZFbyQVnsAyBylhhE4wUPAllW6F-Mxfe0/s1600/Austeritory.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="300" data-original-width="1100" height="172" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEia3kwN0GUfaviib_sNg3Vwagi_t5fk1k4LyjX5GfD10jUF5Wwbc5LeSsomDEaNIO37GNxJsUvQQSWBS5Hw2m_o24jpOJ-_uNQKLg9qvYVPQZj6ZFbyQVnsAyBylhhE4wUPAllW6F-Mxfe0/s640/Austeritory.jpg" width="640" /></a><span style="font-family: "helvetica neue", arial, helvetica, sans-serif;">I hope that, when I wake up tomorrow morning, someone has some sort of working majority. Obviously, I hope that it isn't the Conservative Party because, if so, then we will be doomed to another period of collective punishment. My ideal would be some sort of coalition between Labour and the SNP with enough seats to see off the Conservatives and their DUP lackeys. Only time will tell and, whatever you do, make your vote count.</span></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-42317757417987064042019-12-01T10:05:00.000+00:002019-12-12T19:02:11.362+00:00What it takes.........<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNO_wvQg-Q_sWwKzMpRP953ePjKIjC8TvM59lJoDrnn1-Sd52RnGA9Da704GSNT7yPhZEqcRiVPCmG-k2pUrAK2OVBNvBjHbwRIf6zt9srswtKJVKtM2UoYQAV_mGDMNH0eSlP7t3vV2J4/s1600/Smog.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img alt="MuckandBrass" border="0" height="180" id="Header1_headerimg" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhNO_wvQg-Q_sWwKzMpRP953ePjKIjC8TvM59lJoDrnn1-Sd52RnGA9Da704GSNT7yPhZEqcRiVPCmG-k2pUrAK2OVBNvBjHbwRIf6zt9srswtKJVKtM2UoYQAV_mGDMNH0eSlP7t3vV2J4/s640/Smog.jpg" style="display: block;" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
History offers us an insight into what it takes to cause government to act. Figures vary but the 'Great Smog of London' (1952) probably killed around 10,000 people, both immediately and across the following few years. Four years later, the Government introduced the 'Clean Air Act' which drastically reduced the causes of air pollution which led to the Great Smog. Industry and the ordinary citizen were equally affected by the changes that the Act required. But 10,000 deaths ensured that the legislation, no matter how challenging, was implemented by everyone.<br />
<br />
How many deaths worldwide will be required for governments to take similar action to address 'climate change'?<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-63854846403375858682019-10-15T10:18:00.000+01:002019-12-01T10:08:40.353+00:00Its not happening to me............<img alt="MuckandBrass" height="211" id="Header1_headerimg" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh7G8lbzhUTR7vgK6eea5tx1FJkLmEpuPxCEXXPS4W6TG8hJWhufd_vDVLtgeBqkDlnuG3KkrFvoJDLo59Z8Zh3-KNv9ENaagofUANxjB7LEWDSIqukaROISDQrhhmH_CZF9PPVguq2aIl3/s640/Headstone.jpg" style="display: block;" width="640" /><br />
<br />
AOL carries a 'live poll' on its website that seeks to measure the level support for Climate Protest and its result offered an interesting snapshot of public opinion. (This could be seen as a measure of support for the actions of Extinction Rebellion.)<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV7dj5rUnembj11gABBfX2XSHMPYOVv74NfPc0DbKdVpFp1nXNaeqbuiVgrj9NG1-igip2lS-Kom-EjUHCZIklEdvF2lmY4U6utgCRR5ddD1kMGnlwlhhL5ygOHum4AVLa8tUG19Gw-V33/s1600/Screenshot+2019-10-15+at+08.40.29.png" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="758" data-original-width="890" height="272" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgV7dj5rUnembj11gABBfX2XSHMPYOVv74NfPc0DbKdVpFp1nXNaeqbuiVgrj9NG1-igip2lS-Kom-EjUHCZIklEdvF2lmY4U6utgCRR5ddD1kMGnlwlhhL5ygOHum4AVLa8tUG19Gw-V33/s320/Screenshot+2019-10-15+at+08.40.29.png" width="320" /></a></div>
<br />
Whilst those with strong views are evenly balanced, the majority of those with more moderate views clearly do not support the Climate Protests and it is in that area of public opinion that XR, and other climate activists, face their greatest challenge. How do you convince someone that there is a 'climate emergency' when that individual has no personal experience of that 'climate emergency'? The challenge is even greater when that individual lives a comfortable life with all the benefits of a 'developed' society? I would suggest that it's a very hard case to make.<br />
<br />
As part of this consideration, I came across <a href="https://freedomofmind.com/belief-vs-fact/" target="_blank">an interesting piece about 'belief vs fact'</a> and it proposes tools which help "....... form well-developed ideas in order to meet the challenges of our modern world.......". The problem with these tools is that the individual must engage with them and use them with consideration. Leaning on personal prejudice is rather easier.<br />
<br />
I happen to believe that climate change is real and that we are, at the very least, on the way to a 'climate emergency' but it is important to recognise that I haven't actually seen or experienced the impact of climate change for myself. What I have done is read around the subject and sought out informed opinion. In doing that I have seen the scientific measurements of global warming and the images of <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/planet-sos/2019/10/planet-sos-saving-worlds-glaciers-191013081701120.html" target="_blank">melting icecaps and retreating glaciers</a>. At the same time, I do believe that actions have consequences and that the Industrial Revolution must therefore have a significant impact upon our global environment. But for many people, that would simply not be enough, especially when addressing the issue will challenge their personal comforts.<br />
<br />
The relative inaction of governments on the issue of climate change stands in stark contrast to the <a href="https://www.campaignlive.co.uk/article/history-advertising-no-109-governments-aids-campaign/1308298" target="_blank">action taken by the UK government</a> in the mid-1980s when AIDS was seen as a national threat. And this begs the question, 'Why was it easy to act on AIDS when it is so difficult to act on Climate Change?'Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-88946936870031352512019-08-18T09:38:00.000+01:002019-10-15T10:33:29.096+01:00The industrial revolution and unintended consequences<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5RKrn18IElnjFKIZ_DY9VEZaPDbdHdRJgYY6APiPzh5dXHmz7NZb3uUDkj9Bz6v9daSHdHzFX7BouNKjYdqGQr4k5bzqIQnNTEeSt_Mfh0zXgU6lF8tjBTUZRMvVkK6xLjObDbbZuVw_3/s1600/Unintended.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="318" data-original-width="1100" height="184" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi5RKrn18IElnjFKIZ_DY9VEZaPDbdHdRJgYY6APiPzh5dXHmz7NZb3uUDkj9Bz6v9daSHdHzFX7BouNKjYdqGQr4k5bzqIQnNTEeSt_Mfh0zXgU6lF8tjBTUZRMvVkK6xLjObDbbZuVw_3/s640/Unintended.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Quoting Wikipedia: More recently, the law of unintended consequences has come to be used as an adage or idiomatic warning that an intervention in a complex system tends to create unanticipated and often undesirable outcomes.<br />
<br />
The Industrial Revolution and Climate Change are as good example as you can get of an unintended consequence. I cannot imagine that the hundreds of inventors and entrepreneurs active in the early days of the Industrial Revolution thought that they might be beginning the process which would bring the human species to the edge of extinction or beyond. They could only see the perceived benefits of industrialisation even when <a href="https://www.history.com/topics/natural-disasters-and-environment/history-of-climate-change" target="_blank">scientists were suggesting</a> (not warning) that industrial activity could have an effect on the earth's climate.<br />
<br />
The problem that humankind faces now is that it is blinded by its own intelligence, an intelligence which leads to the conceit that, "we can do anything if we try". The same intelligence which enabled the Industrial Revolution is now being deployed to find an answer to the consequences of the same revolution. However, no consideration is being given to whether or not industrialised humanity is the core threat to both the earth (as it was before1790) and humankind itself.<br />
<br />
Quoting from Owlcation: The Industrial Revolution was the most important thing to happen in human history since the time when animals and plants were domesticated. Before the Industrial Revolution happened, each generation of people produced a roughly similar amount of products to their predecessors and overall economic wealth was fairly stagnant. After industrialisation, production began to grow quickly and generally continued to grow.<br />
<br />
Its fair to imply from this that, prior to industrialisation, global population was relatively static and exploded after industrialisation and the graph below gives an idea of the impact.<br />
<br />
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkzDdNaTWzb7IEXZtnDLPEtvl3DScGT9bcLFwHF1BtA3Tlp4YTh0XJiaepHUqqwNTUT6Xq1GmUnebQRPvzbTuCHqMRaTTqfhXiZRfqKd97uooOwlKZ_GOUO9PpjK-SxdremS9ESa2_zaop/s1600/pop-graph.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="842" data-original-width="1202" height="280" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhkzDdNaTWzb7IEXZtnDLPEtvl3DScGT9bcLFwHF1BtA3Tlp4YTh0XJiaepHUqqwNTUT6Xq1GmUnebQRPvzbTuCHqMRaTTqfhXiZRfqKd97uooOwlKZ_GOUO9PpjK-SxdremS9ESa2_zaop/s400/pop-graph.jpg" width="400" /></a></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: left;">
The problem that we face today is somewhat more intractable than is suggested by Greta Thunberg and Extinction Rebellion. Today, the problem is that global population is unsustainable, even if we all become vegetarian and use electric bikes. There are some signs of change, the <a href="https://birthstrike.tumblr.com/" target="_blank">'birthstrike' movement </a>is one such but I doubt that humankind has the ability, in general, to pull back from its own demise. In nature, populations of most species are regulated by the impact of food availability, weather and predation but that isn't the case with us. Our only real enemy is ourselves and I hope that Greta Thunberg will consider that she is as much a part of the problem as anyone else.</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-45119603175826675632019-08-14T16:36:00.000+01:002019-08-19T12:04:57.839+01:00Jolly boating weather..........<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjARfie86AHinoqkrK1RL9uxcjl1epISaCIVjrQmRXSl0jm7yv98HayIodF5dghmpe_bMg1M8VI65S33tsFxdd_wascrShaKc5aIAquPvQPaso5zu76rhfqrdCgGF5J2haaiNxMsNDfXu_h/s1600/Thunberg-quote.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="310" data-original-width="1100" height="179" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjARfie86AHinoqkrK1RL9uxcjl1epISaCIVjrQmRXSl0jm7yv98HayIodF5dghmpe_bMg1M8VI65S33tsFxdd_wascrShaKc5aIAquPvQPaso5zu76rhfqrdCgGF5J2haaiNxMsNDfXu_h/s640/Thunberg-quote.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-family: inherit;">Greta Thunberg's announcement that she is travelling to New York by boat in order to attend climate conferences made me smile, "</span><span style="background-color: white; color: #16181a; font-family: inherit;">Good news!</span><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none; color: #16181a; font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #16181a; font-family: inherit;">I’ll be joining the UN Climate Action Summit in New York, COP25 in Santiago and other events along the way.</span><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none; color: #16181a; font-family: inherit;"> </span><span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none; background-color: white;"><span style="color: #16181a; font-family: inherit;">I’ve been offered a ride on the 60ft racing boat Malizia II. We’ll be sailing across the Atlantic Ocean from the UK to NYC in mid August." What's so great about this form </span><span style="color: #16181a;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(22, 24, 26);">of hitching is that it's so eco-friendly, unless you consider the carbon footprint of the hi-tech yacht itself.</span></span></span><br />
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none; background-color: white;"><span style="color: #16181a;"><span style="caret-color: rgb(22, 24, 26);"><br /></span></span></span>
<span style="-webkit-font-kerning: none; background-color: white;"><span style="color: #16181a;">Malizia II, probably owned by yacht and car racer <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pierre_Casiraghi" target="_blank">Pierre Casiraghi</a>, is a carbon fibre wonder which cost around £4M when it was built. I suspect that it consumed rather more of earth's resources than did the sail boats that XR used to block traffic in London a couple of months ago. Thinking about it, I'd have been little </span></span><span style="color: #16181a;">more impressed if Greta had thumbed a lift on one of those boats thereby promoting repair and maintain. Even better, couldn't Greta stay at home and use Skype rather than providing free publicity for <a href="https://www.visitmonaco.com/us/blog/26936/greta-thunberg-on-malizia-ii" target="_blank">Monaco</a>, a city better known for hosting 4mpg race cars.</span><br />
<span style="color: #16181a;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #16181a;">I'm pretty sure that Pierre wouldn't offer just anyone a ride on his boat and his offer to Greta is evidence of her elevation into the suburbs of the global elite, a situation which has attracted some negative commentary on <a href="https://www.rt.com/news/465501-greta-thunberg-hates-you/" target="_blank">RT </a>. To underscore the point, Malizia II was originally built as the 'Edmond de Rothschild' which may give you an inkling into the boat's funding and heritage. You can see a great video of the boat's construction <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXai9vI3r_4" target="_blank">here</a> but no information about the carbon cost of its construction. </span><br />
<span style="color: #16181a;"><br /></span>
<span style="color: #16181a;">The saddest aspect of this is that Greta could have encouraged attendees at the various conferences to stay home and use Skype but then everyone would miss out on a freebee. <span style="caret-color: rgb(22, 24, 26);">In the meantime, you will be able to follow Greta's journey and 'Team Malizia' <a href="https://team-malizia.com/en/home/" target="_blank">here</a> (additional sponsorship from BMW amongst others). </span></span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-53957403608582209222019-08-06T11:17:00.000+01:002019-08-14T17:09:26.263+01:00What could be done...........<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghPvVRBNLRbDTn60VlPdt115Gp57PF2nPQXEmUzWhED2Iik45gCFP24huo06B7f5ZI4jCNQ3htIMk2r7UeqQ3Yr_0MnxPJOjR1GFXTaK6mkMEbAC9yJW26M1O9ivY_ZcPmbnNORGv6MgFV/s1600/Abe.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="317" data-original-width="1100" height="184" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEghPvVRBNLRbDTn60VlPdt115Gp57PF2nPQXEmUzWhED2Iik45gCFP24huo06B7f5ZI4jCNQ3htIMk2r7UeqQ3Yr_0MnxPJOjR1GFXTaK6mkMEbAC9yJW26M1O9ivY_ZcPmbnNORGv6MgFV/s640/Abe.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
<br />
Being a prophet of doom is a difficult position because, if you have facts to support your proposition, then you have to accept that nothing can be done. The outcome, whatever you believe it to be, is set in stone so its really a question of 'keep calm and carry on'. But that isn't our (humankind's) way. We will gather the greatest minds we have and set them to the task of coming up with a solution or set of solutions which we firmly believe will address and resolve the problem.<br />
<br />
As a fully paid up POD (prophet of doom) I do feel obliged to give in to this human tendency and propose my own response to the challenge of 'climate change' so, without further ado, here goes:<br />
<br />
1. Taxation - remove all forms of child benefit and offer significant tax breaks to partners who do not have children.<br />
<br />
2. Taxation - apply a Carbon Tax to any partner who has more than two children.<br />
<br />
3. Education - start a public eduction programme to explain the Carbon Cost of an individual (at a European standard of living) showing the correlation between population and Climate Change.<br />
<br />
4. Legislation - outlaw 'pro life' and anti-birth control beliefs/religions/organisations and prosecute such individuals/organisations for crimes against humanity.<br />
<br />
5. Legislation - ban all 'happy family' and 'family lifestyle' advertising.<br />
<br />
6. Education - teach repair before new purchase.<br />
<br />
7. Taxation - impose crippling taxation on any commercial organisation which produces any new product which renders an earlier product inoperable eg Apple, Microsoft, Sonos etc etc etc.<br />
<br />
I am quite certain that many people will find these ideas either appalling or completely bonkers but at least they attempt to address the core issue of human consumption. Its all to easy to blame climate change on industrial activity because that neatly avoids the real issue which is that humankind behaviour is responsible for the industrial activity.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-79320363961318876452019-08-01T13:02:00.000+01:002019-08-06T21:54:47.870+01:00Let me put it another way, we are truly fucked.<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_DYWf1DJx-e0KLLYUNCd27-lJKtM1L1VfO5JojXz-OxYIA6nof5199crjMjahjuQ-RyP-xuVsn1XwBaOdqU1b_afChZ1BHNVrXqqvpEIM3pThY_YSoxEnYoGI9nB8Tlu-YBu8L_rPIiGX/s1600/flames.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="260" data-original-width="1000" height="166" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi_DYWf1DJx-e0KLLYUNCd27-lJKtM1L1VfO5JojXz-OxYIA6nof5199crjMjahjuQ-RyP-xuVsn1XwBaOdqU1b_afChZ1BHNVrXqqvpEIM3pThY_YSoxEnYoGI9nB8Tlu-YBu8L_rPIiGX/s640/flames.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
I listened with interest to the Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, talking about how the financial sector could 'green' the economy and thereby save us from damnation and again I wonder why, or how, he would ignore the ever growing challenge of global population.<br />
<br />
The common and constant theme promoted by people talking about climate change is that humankind's inherent intelligence will come up with an answer (to climate change), the implication being that we can carry on as before albeit in a greener manner. But no-one seems willing to discuss whether or not global resources are capable of sustaining current population long-term. Everything that I have read suggests that the answer is NO but there would seem to be an entrenched denial or at least a refusal to consider that issue. In this light, climate change denial might not be seen as the exclusive territory of Trump supporters or radical christians.<br />
<br />
Maybe dealing with climate change would be easier if everyone started to at least consider that humankind's tenure on this planet might be relatively short and that having children might not be such good idea, in the long term.<br />
<br />
Of course, considering this possibility may lead a lot of people to feel hopeless and hopelessness is entirely contrary to the capitalist model of growth and profit at all cost. Yet facing up to reality might help us come to terms with the situation that we face.<br />
<br />
Global climate is, I am certain, very much like a supertanker, taking a very long time to change and humankind, unknowingly, has been causing it to change since the start of the industrial revolution, over 200 years ago. What is disappointing is having to recognise that, <a href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15874560" target="_blank">an equally long time ago</a>, some scientists recognised the possibility that human activity would lead to climate modification but, given the opportunity (for profit) presented by the industrial revolution, that potential problem was ignored.<br />
<br />
So, 200+ years have passed and we are only just beginning to see the consequences of our actions. Soits important to recognise that current climate change is only the beginning because it takes the climate supertanker a long long time to change course.<br />
<br />
Mark Carney is a smart guy but he serves a hard taskmaster, capitalism, and the idea that growth/greed/capitalism might be the root cause of our warming climate might not be the best message to promote. Instead we must blindly follow our basest instincts and charge headlong to self-imolation.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-72649002393345749832019-07-25T20:53:00.000+01:002019-07-25T20:53:17.965+01:00All he needs is a war.............<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr-NhNMqhLB0OwZNZHjgLrjI6knoaRSXOkci9oIgF6cl8ks2SNmS2NAJtKEQes8YMeRJBU4HFANqn_id3nHuAb9OaMM0N29DDgsC4oqqN8hNEqv-7vkH03XU8cpgawp9nrI-G4TUcG3bYL/s1600/Boris-Churchill.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1031" data-original-width="830" height="640" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjr-NhNMqhLB0OwZNZHjgLrjI6knoaRSXOkci9oIgF6cl8ks2SNmS2NAJtKEQes8YMeRJBU4HFANqn_id3nHuAb9OaMM0N29DDgsC4oqqN8hNEqv-7vkH03XU8cpgawp9nrI-G4TUcG3bYL/s640/Boris-Churchill.jpg" width="515" /></a></div>
<br />Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-7820723145703966502019-06-27T11:37:00.002+01:002019-07-25T20:56:35.033+01:00What's the point?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpm__hyphenhyphen0k4NJGSP1ICLdty0Xdn2yHtvO_rNLeTtEGCHOQlqOa7XO4bZ1chY8_hY6X6gD9lIYERzbh1Pljd0TnwNQn7D8_t59C2rqOeNFqHrqDuk2IIBIw_sxdt1fR8KQofUt9LAn6C8hn2/s1600/Thats-all-folks.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="359" data-original-width="1100" height="208" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhpm__hyphenhyphen0k4NJGSP1ICLdty0Xdn2yHtvO_rNLeTtEGCHOQlqOa7XO4bZ1chY8_hY6X6gD9lIYERzbh1Pljd0TnwNQn7D8_t59C2rqOeNFqHrqDuk2IIBIw_sxdt1fR8KQofUt9LAn6C8hn2/s640/Thats-all-folks.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Today I heard that a group of very well meaning doctors were calling for a campaign of civil disobedience in order to force government to act on climate change. On the face of it, it sounds very sensible and really only builds on the Extinction Rebellion movement's approach. But my question is, 'What's the point?'.<br />
<br />
Whilst climate change deniers would disagree, humankind has been stoking climate change since the start of the industrial revolution, some 200 years ago and this begs the question, can we do anything (in the short term) to undo the damage? I'd say no. In fact, I'd go further and say that we are, as a species, quite completely fucked. And on what, I hear you ask, do you base this rather bleak assessment of our future?<br />
<br />
I base it on a couple of specifics, firstly, that the curve of climate change (even if we stopped all industrial activity today) would take a similar period to return to 'normal' as it has to reach its current level ie 200 years. This also implies that we would catapult ourselves, humankind in general, back to a society c1800. This means no cars, no washing machines, no IVF, no McDonalds, no disposable anything. I doubt that I could survive that shock and I'm pretty certain that 'civil society' couldn't either, and governments know this. Don't think that they don't and don't think that 2050 hasn't been set as a 'zero carbon' target for a very good reason - its probably the shortest period that government considers the goal to be achievable whilst maintaining order.<br />
<br />
And the second reason for my suggesting that we are completely and totally fucked is population. Climate change is a function of human activity - more people, more activity, more climate change. So, what's the answer to this one? Less children is what. But who is going to go for that one? Not Mothercare, certainly not the Pope, who needs population increase to maintain market share. Certainly not the free market capitalists who need new markets or increasing markets to keep the greed boat afloat.<br />
<br />
So there you have it. We are totally fucked and until people wake up to that fact I doubt that anything meaningful will happen. But wait, help is at hand, Waitrose are trialing refillable muesli containers in 20 stores. WooHoo, we are saved.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-8607208976291330432019-05-10T11:35:00.000+01:002019-06-27T12:18:20.097+01:00WooHoo - technology is going to save us<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgu2ujttWAaHHymItbyaiOXJUjX3siPpqzAm5RtD-1OLDYxwWLpwjLv-kCdLDdrCk55-qWjuNSAGsD2nFokZN7V4qtxGgCsVvddMHGTxOcRx-A7fKSsGGd4CcjEeRNjgfaubLsVTJbTI37g/s1600/Inventions.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="241" data-original-width="1100" height="137" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgu2ujttWAaHHymItbyaiOXJUjX3siPpqzAm5RtD-1OLDYxwWLpwjLv-kCdLDdrCk55-qWjuNSAGsD2nFokZN7V4qtxGgCsVvddMHGTxOcRx-A7fKSsGGd4CcjEeRNjgfaubLsVTJbTI37g/s640/Inventions.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
BBC R4 carried an interesting piece this morning about a research centre being set up at Cambridge University to come up with technological solutions to Climate Change. This is quite predictable because we are such a smug and self-centred species who have been using technology of one sort or another for 200 years and Climate Change is just another challenge that we have to meet. The only problem with this wonderful research centre is that, at root, its objective is to allow humankind to carry on as before. And that is the problem.<br />
<br />
Anyone can look at the history of humankind over the last 2000 years and see a pattern of expansion, exploitation and bloody conflict. What such an observer won't see is any significant pattern of restraint or moderation and its fair to suggest that, in general, restraint or moderation aren't part of the human species' fundamental genetic or behavioural makeup.<br />
<br />
The major difference between humankind and other species on this planet is that all other species are regulated, generally, by their environment. No other species can modify their environment in the manner that humankind has managed to and, importantly, humankind seems quite oblivious to the impact of its actions. Humankind's intellect get in the way - humankind can figure out the answer to whatever question faces it, other than its own viability or sustainability.<br />
<br />
More and more, humankind seems to be the problem, not the solution. Like an infection, humankind has spread across the globe and humankind's activities, like an infection, have caused an increase in temperature. No-one is bothering about the infection, only about controlling the temperature. So, maybe at some future point, like an infection, septicaemia will set in and the host (planet earth) will die. Seems quite inevitable.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-68520642192727362052019-04-19T14:35:00.002+01:002019-06-27T12:25:58.971+01:00Extinction Rebellion ............ too late?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFZCGJ_M5tf1GYMSKocO4jH_eERHgixNy1qIFycTOhqv9mwSCoQ534D5JLl-Nnez5JmCzBe0GOvdBUyEfK4V9FPYJYEUe0hYasyz-oXTEfzsAndJo-cF9xLad_Vt9pcIAAT-wxjXXh1pK7/s1600/Zero.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="276" data-original-width="1100" height="160" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiFZCGJ_M5tf1GYMSKocO4jH_eERHgixNy1qIFycTOhqv9mwSCoQ534D5JLl-Nnez5JmCzBe0GOvdBUyEfK4V9FPYJYEUe0hYasyz-oXTEfzsAndJo-cF9xLad_Vt9pcIAAT-wxjXXh1pK7/s640/Zero.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Climate Change has enough scientific evidence to support it to convince even the most sceptical of people (<a href="https://www.theverge.com/2018/10/15/17977596/donald-trump-climate-change-hoax-60-minutes-interview" target="_blank">excepting Mr Trump</a>) of its growing impact on the lives of some people who live on Planet Earth. I say 'some people' because, thus far, I don't think that climate change has materially affected me, at least not in any overtly negative manner. But the fact is that scientists have been considering the potential of human activity to influence global climate since the 1890s, around the same time that Daimler and Benz were getting together. Those scientists were considering the impact of human activity for, at that time, about 100 years and here we are 100+ years later, with some people getting their knickers in a twist about just how bad its going to get.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Well, from where I sit, I think that we've missed the boat some decades ago and, right now, we are looking at a future where the Sahara may well reach the north pole. And there is probably very little that we can do about it other than <a href="https://jembendell.wordpress.com/2018/08/10/dialogue-on-deep-adaptation/" target="_blank">adapt</a>. Read Jem Bendall on the subject.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
The issue with Extinction Rebellion is that whilst they demand that 'the government tell the truth' about climate change, I suspect that the truth is rather uglier than any of them imagine. No-one, to the best of my knowledge, has mentioned global population and whether or not it is sustainable at current levels. <a href="https://www.worldpopulationbalance.org/global_population" target="_blank">I have read some research (possibly questionable)</a> which suggests that a 'sustainable global population', at European standards of living, is 2.5Bn. Today we are at 7.5Bn and rising and a young member of ER suggested to me that global population would stabilise at 11Bn. I'd be interested to find out who is peddling that story.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Maybe in parallel with carbon reduction measures, the government might consider removing all the tax advantages accruing to having children, maybe even make it beneficial in taxation terms for people not to have children. Maybe organisations like the Catholic Church might reconsider it position on birth control, particularly in parts of the Third World where the physical environment is already too harsh to support growing communities.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Extinction Rebellion also need to publish their plan for the future rather than leaving it up to government or a 'citizen's panel' to do their thinking for them. They need to face up to the really ugly truths that we face about consumption generally and how, and if, we can build down to a zero carbon economy. Maybe then yoga on Waterloo Bridge might be replaced by something rather more practical.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-60432340200201122182019-01-22T22:42:00.000+00:002019-04-19T14:39:22.010+01:00Been away awhile .....<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMXAQENCnMXh_DltfIwyYAU67QFd70D6CFVBS83GrGC58vVD9ZMcLkZrn3SjqqvDVjVHfnfanUm96VdjlFVLYWwpPXEXOdt3tG_PO7BU2Qm1L1RddkO4pmZBZEFPRxkObLTbACLlhTziqv/s1600/Trumps-money.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="444" data-original-width="1050" height="270" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjMXAQENCnMXh_DltfIwyYAU67QFd70D6CFVBS83GrGC58vVD9ZMcLkZrn3SjqqvDVjVHfnfanUm96VdjlFVLYWwpPXEXOdt3tG_PO7BU2Qm1L1RddkO4pmZBZEFPRxkObLTbACLlhTziqv/s640/Trumps-money.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
October 2017 seems a long long way away now and so much has happened in the intervening time. What got my attention recently has been a couple of programmes about the manipulation of political process, both here and in the USA.<br />
<br />
I would thoroughly recommend anyone to have a look at: <a href="https://www.channel4.com/programmes/brexit-the-uncivil-war" target="_blank">Brexit - The Uncivil War</a> and <a href="https://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/specialseries/2018/05/unfair-game-trump-won-180509085131784.html" target="_blank">Unfair Game</a> Both are extremely good for different reasons: Brexit - The Uncivil War is more of a docu-drama so its hard to judge accuracy whereas Unfair Game is rather more factual. What I found most interesting was the part played in both by American billionaire Robert Mercer.<br />
<br />
What is clear is that we have drifted (I certainly have) into rather dangerous waters where, through the mechanism of social media, individuals can be targeted with specific political messages designed to appeal to that individual. Unfair Game suggests that by targeting such individuals in three states in the US, Mercer/Trump was able to capture the presidency.<br />
<br />
I find Trump to be a thoroughly dislikable individual but my dislike has rather blinded me to the underlying issue which is that, if you have enough money, you can put your candidate into The White House or 10 Downing Street or the Elysee Palace or any other seat of power for that matter. Now, its fair to say that it has always been thus, you only have to look at Joe Kennedy to see how it was done 'back in the day' but with social media and universal data mining, someone like Robert Mercer will be able to do it using individual voters who become zombie voters.<br />
<br />
One claim made in Unfair Game is that the targeting of individual voters was done with specific messages which appeared ONLY on the recipients social media page. Furthermore, it is claimed that these messages evaporated after a set time period had elapsed, leaving no trace, other than on the social media's servers.<br />
<br />
Excuse me whilst I unplug the internet....................Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-81155846447505104702017-10-04T17:30:00.000+01:002019-01-22T22:45:49.099+00:00Reality distortion field<br />
<img height="137" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh_GTC2a0Y3cjHvtthUkjBinb3RMwKAjs7S2nV0x3L_Q6GdT5qJiWPoNbx0UlkLEO-0iFSuwRiVy6UJBaD1AfiAkxyJHvB-HPo_E_SSgolMs2K33UTjDyA82fw1B3_Iz0vZkQBmq_7zaD3H/s640/Bump-Stock-AR-15.jpg" style="-webkit-user-select: none; display: block; margin: auto;" width="640" /><br />
<br />
Steve Jobs was a charismatic and many people who met him refer to what they describe as his 'reality distortion field'. From what I understand, this term, as it applied to Jobs, referred to his ability to convince people that his vision, no matter how outlandish, was possible. In this way he was able to recruit people to his vision when others would have failed.<br />
<br />
I thought again about the 'reality distortion field' when I was watching an interview on CBSN with a 'gun expert' who was commenting on the weaponry that Stephen Paddock had assembled for his Las Vegas rampage. Referring specifically to the 'bump stock' attachment, which enables a semi-automatic weapon to fire at up to 9 rounds per second, this 'expert' described the bump-stock as a 'not very practical attachment' and went on to describe it as a 'shooting range toy'.<br />
<br />
This is as good an illustration of the 'reality distortion field' which seems to surround many Americans when it comes to their much vaunted 'right to bear arms'. If the bump-stock attachment is 'not very practical' and a 'shooting range toy' I hate to think what Paddock would have achieved had he been serious.<br />
<br />
PS The AR15 in the illustration is fitted with a 50 round compact magazine and you can get a 100 round magazine which, at Paddock's work rate, would last all of 11 seconds.Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-54426589998140620062017-10-03T10:33:00.001+01:002017-10-04T17:32:23.728+01:00Dreams..........<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEha3Za-xTL5I7nj890wFdvHyaA8Hhc0z49xOh88kwljAu-MKyD0l_t2QuU_lpv-169B3v2HLU42ohVzAZmfgd35ouY1O4oNNyF6mdIKr-wzEmEJuzKjN2Q3TqKGDBpKlVRYRMhutrD-uJuB/s1600/dreaming.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="175" data-original-width="1050" height="106" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEha3Za-xTL5I7nj890wFdvHyaA8Hhc0z49xOh88kwljAu-MKyD0l_t2QuU_lpv-169B3v2HLU42ohVzAZmfgd35ouY1O4oNNyF6mdIKr-wzEmEJuzKjN2Q3TqKGDBpKlVRYRMhutrD-uJuB/s640/dreaming.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<br />
Don't get me wrong, by juxtaposing the deranged Trump with the deranged Paddock, I'm not suggesting that they knew each other or had anything in common. But I am thinking about the disinformation that is being reported where the alt right are suggesting that Paddock was part of a Democratic conspiracy to discredit Trump. And that makes me wonder just how gullible Trump's base is if they could be convinced that a grey haired, retired accountant with an arsenal of guns might be a Democrat.<br />
<br />
My own prejudice would propose that Paddock would be a Trump man but it may be that he was simply bonkers. Who else would take an arsenal of guns and and strafe a country music concert?<br />
<br />
Or maybe he was a Trump man and he decided that Trump was just as full of piss and bile as we all believe him to be and therefore it was time to take the law into his own hands and 'make a difference'.<br />
<br />
And maybe this is the problem with Tump - his language is so grandiose that he is always likely to fail in achieving his objectives or the objectives that he embraces on behalf of his base. And my guess is that his base are more likely to have a liking for automatic weapons.<br />
<br />
PS Have a look at <a href="http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/05/16/breitbart-news-announces-hiring-neil-mccabe-new-political-reporter/" target="_blank">Neil McCabe's commentary on behalf of the American gun industry</a> and check out <a href="http://armedamericanradio.org/" target="_blank">Armed American Radio</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4006230367563587440.post-58389856725856970182017-08-28T17:38:00.000+01:002017-10-03T10:35:38.535+01:00Mine is the wettest..............<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgNK_E7h7LCidBbswWAquc2KTHMoFcDsPMx1Aff_FQEwHuwB81SWm2xUs_ED4Gsy0HnsxrkQ1h7A4Ld-92o92YxcLOIhSNPiSFF3ENOvg29uTRCupAp3wwmJ6Pa0ira85f5KGKvwZVwgU9/s1600/Houston-Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="305" data-original-width="1050" height="184" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhgNK_E7h7LCidBbswWAquc2KTHMoFcDsPMx1Aff_FQEwHuwB81SWm2xUs_ED4Gsy0HnsxrkQ1h7A4Ld-92o92YxcLOIhSNPiSFF3ENOvg29uTRCupAp3wwmJ6Pa0ira85f5KGKvwZVwgU9/s640/Houston-Trump.jpg" width="640" /></a></div>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.199999809265137px;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; font-family: "arial" , "tahoma" , "helvetica" , "freesans" , sans-serif; font-size: 13.199999809265137px;">I wouldn't be surprised if El Trumpo doesn't claim some sort of credit for the scale of the Houston floods. I did expect him to claim responsibility for America being 'the darkest ever' during the eclipse but clearly the medics are getting his meds under control.</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com