Archive for September 10th, 2009

A short answer to a longstanding problem

September 10th, 2009

A little piece of whimsy caught my eye yesterday.

“Taller people are happiest, say researchers”

The first thing that struck me is who the fuck commissioned this piece of vital research?

“Hey! Jack – We have a few hundred thousand left in the coffers.  Wanna do some research?”

“Research into what?”

“I dunno.  Whatever you like.  How about ‘do SUV drivers really have small penises’?”

“Done that, and the answer was yes.”

“Well, how about ‘are farts on aeroplanes odourless’?”

“Done that and the answer was no.”

“For fuck’s sake! Go and think up something, you short miserable little prick.”

And thus a mighty piece of research was born.

They never asked me anything.

I am well over the six foot mark, and I can assure you that life isn’t a bed of roses.  For a start, I could never travel in comfort on Concorde.  I can also painfully testify that there are quite a lot of doors around that don’t cater too well to the elongated individual.

It does have advantages, I must confess. 

I usually get a good view at a standing only concert.  If I do drop a ripper, it’s the shorties who get it first.  Heh!

What has me completely baffled though is their conclusion -

The report’s authors concluded the findings were almost wholly explained by the positive association between height and both income and education, both of which are closely linked to better lives.

What the fuck?

I’ll have them know I was tall [for my age] before I ever started school.  And I used to get 3d for my pocket money.  Hardly well off?

I suppose genetics had nothing whatsoever to do with it?

I still say No

September 10th, 2009

One of the great things about not being in Ireland at the moment is that I am not being subjected to endless bullshit about Lisbon.

Naturally, I haven’t seen a single ‘oui’ or ‘non’ poster since I arrived.

On one hand that is a nice thing as I can see the beautiful countryside unencumbered.  On the other hand, it is a reminder of how the French were denied the right to vote.  And why were they denied that right?  Because Brussels knew what the outcome would be – no.

I shall be back in time to cast my scrap of paper and have no hesitation in declaring what that piece of paper will say – A resounding no, or at least as resounding as I can make an X.

I have stated my reasons before, but there is no harm in repeating them.

First of all let’s look at what we are voting on.

Let there be no mistake about it, we are voting on a new European Constitution.

They call it a Treaty but that is solely to avoid referenda in other countries where they know it would be defeated.

“The substance of the constitution is preserved.That is a fact.”
- German Chancellor Angela Merkel, speech in the European Parliament, 27 June 2007

“The difference between the original Constitution and the present Lisbon Treaty is one of approach, rather than content … The proposals in the original constitutional treaty are practically unchanged. They have simply been dispersed through the old treaties in the form of amendments. Why this subtle change? Above all, to head off any threat of referenda by avoiding any form of constitutional vocabulary … But lift the lid and look in the toolbox: all the same innovative and effective tools are there, just as they were carefully crafted by the European Convention.”
- V.Giscard D’Estaing, former French President and Chairman of the Convention which drew up the EU Constitution, The Independent, London, 30 October 2007

Europe is being very damned careful not to mention that this is a constitution, and must be thrilled at the gullible Irish being given assurances on such trivia as neutrality and abortion.  Here, they have the perfect red herring to distract from the real content of the treaty.

“Public opinion will be led to adopt, without knowing it, the proposals that we dare not present to them directly … All the earlier proposals will be in the new text, but will be hidden and disguised in some way.”
- V.Giscard D’Estaing, Le Monde, 14 June 2007, and Sunday Telegraph, 1 July 2007

This treaty is not about bringing us into the heart of Europe, or whatever the current crap bit of propaganda is.  It is nothing less than a cynical manipulation to bring about the ultimate goal – A United States of Europe.

“The Constitution is the capstone of a European Federal State.”
- Guy Verhofstadt, Belgian Prime Minister, Financial Times, 21 June 2004

“Are we all clear that we want to build something that can aspire to be a world power? In other words, not just a trading bloc but a political entity. Do we realise that our nation states, taken individually, would find it far more difficult to assert their existence and their identity on the world stage.”
- Commission President Romano Prodi, European Parliament, 13 February 2001

Still have doubts?

“Sometimes I like to compare the EU as a creation to the organisation of empires. We have the dimension of Empire but there is a great difference. Empires were usually made with force with a centre imposing diktat, a will on the others. Now what we have is the first non-imperial empire.”
- Commission President J-M Barroso, The Brussels Journal, 11 July 2007

Vote Yes – Ireland gets swallowed up into an amalgam of states where our voice will be of little consequence.

Vote No – The treaty cannot be ratified and they are back to working out some other devious scheme.  We will have struck a major blow for democracy, and we will have the undying thanks of the disenfranchised in the rest of Europe.