Guido's Caption Contest

More "green" madness

Britain cuts down forests to keep ‘green’ power stations burning

The Times Online

Whether you believe in Allah, the Great Spaghetti Monster, powdered rhino horn being an aphrodisiac, Anthropomorphic Global Warming and other such nonsense, this has to be the biggest dose of green irony I've ever seen - worse than the windmill debacle.

Let me point out a few obvious things:-

1. Cutting down, processing and transporting the wood from Canada and South America by ship is burning how much fossil fuel?  Cutting requires fossil fuel and emits carbon dioxide.  Processing the wood requires fossil fuel and emits carbon.  Transporting requires fossil fuel and emits carbon.

2. Biomass fuelled power stations are typically less efficient than coal burning or fuel gas power stations.  Often, like the "green" windmills, they work in conjunction with fossil fuel burning power stations, so you won't completely eliminate the fossil fuel burning side of it.

3. The wood often has to be processed before burning (drying or converting into biomass pellets), costing more energy.

4. The irony of cutting down the very thing that naturally can convert carbon dioxide into oxygen.

5. This strikes me more of desperately addressing the imposed EU Landfill Directive by incinerating waste rather than dumping it in landfills.

6. What's wrong with coal? Plenty of it here.

7. The eco-nazis are wailing that it's a good thing because the trees will come from sustainable forests.  Fast growing trees can grow between 6-10ft a year.  Depending on demand, this could strip an enormous area very quickly while waiting for the trees to reach maturity.  And the fertilizers required for fast growth?  Replanting? Energy, energy, energy.


I get concerned that the arguments for AGW confused and blur the very distinct, cost effective and admirable pursuit of economies and conservation of fuel supplies.  This is simply an ill-thought out, contradictory, knee jerk to "greenism" and as such it is a perfect example of yet another doomed Liebour Party supported policy.

My Gordon and Mandy poster on Iain Dale's blog

Halloween Fancy Dress

Stuck for a scary Halloween costume?

Don a comedy beard and strap loads of fake dynamite to yourself under your coat and silently in the middle of the room, undo your coat and shout "Allah Akbar!" at the top of your voice.



Guaranteed screaming - you'll be the most scariest.
 
NB: keep the costume in a holdall and change outside the party... that could be a life-limiting costume on public transport!

Bohemian Bankruptcy

Brilliant! h/t iBall

What we suspected all along - it was deliberate

Telegraph

The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity", according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.


He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".

And so, there we have it - a deliberate attempt at social engineering.

There should be trial, not a public hearing about this.

Well, what a surprise...

Telegraph

The YouGov poll was taken hours after Mr Griffin’s appearance on Thursday, before which anti-fascist protesters rioted outside BBC Television Centre in London.


The survey found that 22 per cent of voters would “seriously consider” voting for the BNP in a future local, general or European election. This included four per cent who said they would “definitely” consider voting for the party, three per cent who would “probably” consider it, and 15 per cent who said they were “possible” BNP voters.

Considering they never touched the question of why so people were voting BNP and what was so wrong with Liebour's failed immigration policy, what do you expect?!?

They should have held Question Time in Burnley and addressed these issues, rather than turning it into a Jeremy Kylesque lynching by a multi-culti panel and selected London metropolitan audience.

Further censoring of the BNP

John Mann Labour MP - a man so stupid that he thinks by banning Nick Griffin from the House of Commons means that suddenly the issue of this nasty business about uncontrolled immigration in the UK will quietly go away.

On LBC this morning his argument was that stopping all MEPs from entering the HoC was, wait for it, "the right thing to do" as they shouldn't be allowed subsidised tea and biscuits and stops them blocking the corridors.

Of course, when it was suggested to him that he may be making Griffin a martyr, he proceeded to let the nice touchy feely mask slip and descended into the usual rant of it was disgusting that BNP this, and BNP that and he was proud of doing this waffle waffle rant rant etc

Then a listener summed it up nicely: all the MEPs from LibLabCon will be signed in by their UK party counterparts as is normal practise and vice versa in Europe, whereas Griffin won't be.

And John Mann, you mong, saying things like:

"This stops the BNP parading round here as if they're legitimate politicians."

just shows you are more interested in your little expenses fiddling gang than having an iota of intellect and understanding the true definition of freedom of speech. Do you think Griffin (whose party IS legitimate btw) is now going to look like the underdog on Question Time this evening and will garner even more support as is typical of this nation's normal reaction to anything underdog?

You should have addressed the nation's concern about immigration immediately and then perhaps the hordes of traditional working class Labour voter that YOU lost to the BNP will return.

You utter, utter twat.

I hope you lose your seat in May next year for the sake of our country.