There it is!

June 30th, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink

Bingo! The real mission accomplished.

Knock it down and start again

June 30th, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink


French President Nicolas Sarkozy has called for a profound change to the way Europe is being built, on the eve of France taking on the EU presidency.

Speaking on French TV, Mr Sarkozy said there had been “errors” in the way Europe was set up and that its citizens were losing faith in the project.

How about starting off with listening to a countries population when it says no, or how about tighten up on all the free money that the MEPs’ get thrown at them or how about wasting money on the ridiculous Common Agricultural Policy?

It’s because of the irrelevance and corruptness that make it unpopular.

Online IDs’

June 29th, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink

The Guardian:

For anyone unable to remember their password as they login to a particular website, a new industry group is calling for passwords to be replaced by an electronic ID card, with which users would have to sign in only once.

‘Life on the net is an endless typing and clicking,’ said Paul Trevithick, chairman of the Information Card Foundation. ‘The passwords you forget are the ones you don’t use all the time. The solution tends to be using the same password every time, which is almost like not having one at all. Every time you register on a new site you have to fill in your name and a lot of other information.’

The solution is already here. It’s called openID.

Information Car Foundation:

ICF is working with (or planning to work with):

The Fraunhofer Institute FOKUS
Identity Commons
Liberty Alliance
OpenID Foundation

They don’t say which they are and which they’re planning to work with, though.

Free Cash!

June 26th, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink

Watch the video. Read the subtitles. Why are the MEP’s so shy of the camera? Surely they can’t be upto something dodgy or not quite on the level?

Via the mighty Mr Power


June 26th, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink

The Guardian:

Harriet Harman said that plans being published today intended to make private companies demonstrate whether they pay male and female staff equally were designed to tackle “entrenched discrimination” in the workplace.

Ok. So what’s in it then?

A bill to be unveiled in the Queen’s speech later this year, and piloted by Harman, Labour’s deputy leader, will require all public sector firms to publish figures showing the gender pay gap, a requirement which will also be placed on firms with public sector contracts – roughly 30% of all private sector firms.

Harman will also offer a template which private sector firms can use to publish the data, although there will be no immediate statutory requirement on firms to do so. Ministers will consider secondary legislation at some point.

Another bit of ‘name and shame’ legislation. Although this one might make a difference.
The trouble with the other piece, for companies employing illegal immigrants, is that it is part of a punishment and you don’t do a crime if you think you’re going to get caught. This bill will force public body employers and make private emplyers feel they have to, publish the details. What form these details will take and how they are worked out is another matter. Also, it is, in my mind, doubtful as to how widespread these details will be available. Just try and find the illegal workers employers lists… I had to link back to the BBC item because I couldbn’t find the elsewhere. Not even on the UK Borders Agency site.

A white paper being published today will outline the plans, which will also allow employers to give preferential treatment to female or ethnic minority job candidates and which will outlaw age discrimination in the provision of goods and services.

Yay! Outlaw discrimination against oldies! Yay! Allow discrimation against white blokes! Oh, er, hang on a minute…

Interviewed about her plans on BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, Harman strongly rejected the idea that, as one newspaper headline suggested, she was trying to make women “more equal than men”.

“Women more equal than men? Chance would be a fine thing,” she said.

I heard that interview and Harriot said it with real contempt.

“Part-time women receive 40% less pay than full-time men. Do you think that that’s because they are 40% less intelligent, less committed, less hard-working, less qualified? It’s not the case.”

No, it doesn’t. *Sigh*
You cannot compare part-time against full-time. The comparison has to be part-time/part-time or full-time/full-time.
The following quote is from a government report on the part-time pay gap:

It should be noted, although we do not analyse it, that there is also a large part-time pay penalty for men – teh New Earnings survey suggests that in 2003 part-time men had average hourly earnings that were 32% lower than the average hourly earnings of full time men

Unity dealt with this in March.

Harman said that her plans would not force employers to discriminate against men. But she said that, where candidates were equally qualified, it would allow employers to hire female or ethnic minority candidates without fear of being sued for discrimination.

It may not force employers, but if white men, and if you’re anything else you’re in a minority group, cannot be sue, and anybody else can, that is discrimination of the worst kind.
There are some schemes/initiatives that help disadvantaged minorities that some claim are discriminatory in a reverse way, that they give an unfair advantage. Given the starting point of some of the recipients of these schemes, the still don’t end up on a level with the rest, but they do not remove a right of a group. This bill removes the right of a white man not to be discriminated against. A man from an ethnic minority or a woman, white or not, will be able to sue, but not the white man. (I hope I’ve got my meaning over ok and it’s not sounding like a BNP rant).

She said the government needed to legislate because the law on this subject was currently not clear.

Well, you doing that alright.

The new rules would be “permissive”.

WTF is that meant to mean?

She pointed out Labour had used this kind of “positive discrimination” to bring about a dramatic increase in the number of women in parliament.

I didn’t agree with this either. All woman shortlists. That thing about stuff like that is, how many better candidates were missed because of the single sex policy? It doesn’t matter with private organisations that are, I don’t know, like these posh members clubs, or the Womens Institue. But in public life and to do with employment discrimination shouldn’t be allowed.

she said the new rules would help police forces trying to recruit more black or Asian officers.

How? How is it going to help?

The white paper will also outlaw discrimination in goods and services on the basis of age, a measure likely to cost the Department of Health billions of pounds if it is to fulfil a new duty to end discrimination on the basis of age in healthcare

This is good. Age shouldn’t be a factor in what health care provision is given. When thinking about a treatment, it should be what benefit the patient will receive. I do not know how much age discrimination goes on at the moment but anything to help get rid of it is good.

This bill is a mixed bag. Surely the government can’t think that removing rights of one group to benefit another is the way to go. Surely not.

Oh dear…

June 26th, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink

Happy Birthday to me

June 25th, 2008 § 2 comments § permalink

[[image:happy_birthday_to_you.jpg:Happy Birthday:center:0]]
According to my daughter I am now ancient.

Picture source

“Apparently, these are fabulous…”

June 24th, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink

[[image:angus_6_pack.jpg:Burgerking Angus 6 Pack:left:0]]The Daily Mail:

The 6-Pack is comprised of six “mini-burgers” each containing an individual Aberdeen Angus beef patty.

The six buns are joined together in the centre, so forming a large single burger.

Two of the burger sections are topped with ketchup, two with cheese and two with bacon and cheese. It is priced £4.49 on its own or £5.69 as part of a meal

It does look good in the picture. After all, it’s had a lot of care and attention that burger, more than the one you’ll receive. And it is fucking huge. You could even say it’s chock full of stuff, including:

917 calories (the recommended daily calorie intake for men is around 2,500 and women 2,000) and 18g of saturated fat (the recommended daily amount for men is 30g and women 20g).

Apparently, it’s for sharing. Burgerking have, after years of exploiting the way society has turned to eating on the move, suddenly decided to help social cohension and by getting people to eat together again.

David Kisilevsky, vice president of marketing, said: “Burger King is proud, once again, to set the standard for quick serve restaurants in the UK with a product that is unique, both in its format and quality.

“The 6 Pack is one of our most innovative Angus variations and is a new menu item that groups of friends or families can enjoy together.”

The quality I’m not so sure will be unique, but yes, the format is.

But I think the sharing, caring side of this meal is just for marketing. Afterall. it’s a meal for, several people, but with only one drink.
One pack of fries, fair enough. Make it a big pack, tear it open and wolf down as much as you can to make sure you get your fair share (the whole thing reminds me of cave men sitting around tearing lumps off an animal, gobbling up as much as they can as quick as they can so they don’t go hungry. Reducing the meal time from a nice civil affair with chatting being social to a purely functional refuelling).
But sharing a drink with friends? How many friends share drinks? I’m not being overly fussy, am I?

A sip of a mates unusual beer to see what it takes like or share a can of pop of that’s all we can afford with the coins we’ve scrapped together, yes. But not specifically buy a meal with one drink.
You wouldn’t go to a restaraunt and order a meal for two but share a glass of wine. You might go to the pub and buy a pitcher, but you wouldn’t all drink from the same glass.
Burgerking have just made a massive burger and given it ‘tear here’ lines to make it more manageable.

But then, what do you expect from a caring sharing company like Burgerking?


Into the red

June 22nd, 2008 § 2 comments § permalink

I realise that if Labour did go bust it would have some affects that would go bit further than just some staff claiming the dole, but it would also shake the fucking place up a bit and change the political landscape.
How about this:
Labour go bust, can’t afford to field candidates, even for a general election. The Tories get back into power, fuck things up, even quicker than Labour could’ve done, and bring on a violent, bloody revolution ending with the emergence of the Republic of the United Kingdom being announced by Fiona ‘bloody’ Bruce (why do you think she’s disappeared from our screens when until recently she was fucking everywhere? Eh? Eh?).

Counterinsurgency handbook

June 22nd, 2008 § 0 comments § permalink


The manual directly advocates training paramilitaries, pervasive surveillance, censorship, press control and restrictions on labor unions & political parties. It directly advocates warrantless searches, detainment without charge and (under varying circumstances) the suspension of habeas corpus. It directly advocates employing terrorists or prosecuting individuals for terrorism who are not terrorists, running false flag operations and concealing human rights abuses from journalists. And it repeatedly advocates the use of subterfuge and “psychological operations” (propaganda) to make these and other “population & resource control” measures more palatable.


Where am I?

You are currently viewing the archives for June, 2008 at Sim-O.