SOMETIMES WE JUST NEED A LAFF.

That’s pretty cool. I think I’ll have SCTOLNAD on my neck. Whatcha think?

***********

I’ve heard that there is a threat for Fluffy and Colonel Bake Lady to join Loathsom, McVile and Morbidity in resigning tomorrow unless everyone in the UK, including Arlene Forsterland, is treated the same way (obviously excepting the mediaeval abortion and same-sex marriage laws, social security, Olympic Team membership and, strangely, dog licences).

As no one would miss any of them, I see no great problem.

**********

!!!telt
Telt!
!!!Toast
Do you think they were trying to tell her she was toast?
!airport
So, why is it going ahead? Maybe it’s because she’s no longer a local resident and the noise and congestion won’t matter a fig to her? Still, now we know where Colonel Cake-Mix gets her ability to turn on a sixpence. 
!cartoon
It’s not just England that has a loopy government. (Thanks BJS Alba).
!cartoons2
See…
ddd
But what the hell. I’ll be safe as houses anyway because I have royal protection. Pity about you lot. Morons.
dc
Lost on the playing fields of Eton… along with the pig’s head.
!gordon
I’d nearly forgotten that…  
fraud
Well, she’ll be an expert then…
!toylies
Honest? From the Tories? Oh, come on…
health
Bloody experts again. Knowing stuff, not just trusting to Tory instinct. Honestly, what is the world coming to?

83 thoughts on “SOMETIMES WE JUST NEED A LAFF.”

  1. Good stuff, Tris!

    Y’know, I feel rather stupid – I always thought Fluffy answered to Ms. May, but now I see it’s been the Honorary Colonel all the way along. I should have twigged earlier – you remember all that quacking a while back about how important and effective the Scottish Tories were going to be and listened to in London, unlike those vile and useless separatist SNP oiks? With noises about La Davidson sitting in meetings of the Cabinet? When we found out that it wasn’t actually true, and then that Mundell wasn’t even being invited to all of them, and Lidington literally talked over his head when they put on that disgusting show in the Commons that ended with our MPs walking out… I suppose I should have realized that it wasn’t because Fluffy had once given Theresa May a cup of Lapsang Souchong with a Bourbon biscuit instead of Earl Gray and a Jammie Dodger.

    A friend told me earlier today / yesterday that there had been noises in the German press about a Brexit deal being reached this weekend, which I hadn’t noticed – I’ve been a bit off my feed recently – but then Reuters came out with this article: http://tinyurl.com/ybtdgg42, “Brexit talks stall before midweek EU summit”. (They’ve changed the name of the thing since I first looked at it, it was originally entitled “Irish border problem defeats weekend flurry of Brexit diplomacy”.)

    Sooooo – Davidson and Mundell resigning, May maybe toppled (sorry, but not for her), another snap GE? We should care, I suppose, if only because in a snap GE, oor Nicola may well decide to convert our mandate for an independence referendum into a vote for the SNP being a vote for independence and staying in the EU – and we’d win that, what with being by far the largest party, unless the Tories, S-Lab and the LibDems agree to field only a single pro-dependence, pro-Brexit candidate in every constituency. I really, really can’t see that happening: both the Tories and Labour have great fracture lines on several axes over the Brexit issue. Kezia’s “Vote Tory to Keep the SNP Out” was effective to some extent, I know, but we still won, and surely another official S-Lab / Tory pact would kill off S-Lab properly. No, the Unionists are going to vote Tory if they are that slavishly devoted to the Union – and if they think they can thole the egregious BoJo or the noxious toff Rees-Mogg.

    To combat the accusation, which the Unionists will almost certainly level, that Westminster elections are unrepresentative and undemocratic, we can say “You never complained before, unless we won, and “that’s why we have PR as part of our platform”, and “besides, you won’t let 16- and 17-year-olds vote, and you know as well as we do that our young folk are quite massively in favour of independence now, and they’d have to live with the consequences of your Brexit bourach for longer than the rest of us”. Also, “Other EU citizens living here won’t have the vote either – and we care about them and their rights, lives and livelihoods, although you very obviously don’t – even though they will be the most drastically affected by your stupid and malignant immigration policies. So Yah Sucks Boo.”

    The Tories have been doing their damnedest to avoid the snap GE scenario, because they know they’re on the verge of losing Scotland. They’re on the verge of losing Norlinn Airlann as well, given the polling that a majority there would prefer reunification with the South to Brexit. I don’t suppose cozying up to Arlene Vorster can be all that much fun for Tories anyway… and with any luck, said snap GE would backfire electorally on Fragrant Arlene and her Jolly Dinosaur-Deniers. The population of Northern Ireland isn’t any crazier than the rest of us, after all, and most know that the root cause of Ireland´s woes lies in England’s centuries-long ill-treatment of it.

    Liked by 5 people

    1. … Fluffy replaced by, oh, Ross Thomson … Honorary Colonel Cake-mix of the Catering Corps resigning as – what? Leaderene of the Scottish Tories? As an MSP? Replaced by … Murdo Fraser, maybe?

      Scary, eh?

      Liked by 2 people

    2. Just to say, this is a brilliant post.

      I particularly liked:

      “Fragrant Arlene and her Jolly Dinosaur-Deniers.”

      But the overall point wasn’t missed either. The general public in Northern Ireland has been denigrated as stupid. As you say:

      “The population of Northern Ireland isn’t any crazier than the rest of us, after all, and most know that the root cause of Ireland´s woes lies in England’s centuries-long ill-treatment of it.”

      Liked by 2 people

    3. Can’t be long before Theresa May threatens the DUP with a “Border Poll” so Wangland can get its Brexit. It seems pretty obvious to me that the DUP would back off.
      Bring it on if it happens.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. DUP are only powerful for this brief period, thanks to the idiot May and her election.

        They represent a thirty something percent proportion of the vote in NI. Really, it’s quite fantastical that they are wielding so much power.

        But if they force another election, the likelihood is that that has gone.

        And they will have probably lost support even amongst their base., which might move to other Brit nationalist parties.

        Border poll would be really interesting.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. TMay might just be kicking the can past the budget day, to remove that issue from the DUP arsenal. Still sooner rather than later they have to make a decision. Then Nicola will play a card that nobody sees coming.

          Liked by 2 people

    4. Yeah, I too saw that Dom had flown out to Brussels on a Sunday… the BBC were shocked, I think. Important people aren’t supposed to have to labour on Sundays.

      But he was back within an hour. So that was a bit of a waste of a first class flight. I think they should travel cattle class like the rest of us if they are going to achieve so little.

      As for the tea boy and Colonel Book-Writer… who gives a shit if they resign. No one would miss Fluffy and I’m sure that Col Mustard-Cake will make herself a career as a tv Z lister. I was once a bit of a celebrity. Get me out of here.

      At the end of the day, there isn’t an answer to Brexit. There isn’t an answer to the Irish/Brit border.

      Normally there are compromises that can be arrived at, but as far as I can see, none of them would be legal… or acceptable to the hard liners.

      General Election? Might get rid of Arlene, then they could do what they wanted.

      DUP might be lose some seats to other NI parties, I suppose. Corbyn’s been such a disappointment to his young voters that I can’t see him gaining ground. Scotland might well make it an independence issue.

      And the whole world would shake its head in amazement.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. http://eddjasfreeman.wordpress.com/

    “We should care, I suppose, if only because in a snap GE, oor Nicola may well decide to convert our mandate for an independence referendum into a vote for the SNP being a vote for independence and staying in the EU..”

    I think the time is close, but as Napoleon (?) apparently said, do not interrupt your enemy when they are making a mistake, or summat like that. I think Ms Sturgeon knows that.

    You and I agree on the basics.

    The next election has to be an independence question. And a majority of SNP or aligned MSP’s has to be seen as a result.

    At that point we are at day zero. I doubt that England would win a retrial in the court of international law.

    We would be unlikely to be cast adrift from the EU, nor marooned on a desert island. International conventions would be obeyed and Scotland would become what it always should have been, an independent nation on the approximate scale of the Scandinavian lands, neither too hot nor too cold. (That analogy is a tad debatable) But you get the point, hopefully.

    Scale matters. We are a relatively small country subsumed by a much larger one. This is not healthy. The split of Sweden and Norway is an interesting example of how this can be achieved without acrimony.

    Nuff said!

    Away to read more by Lesley Riddoch, who is perhaps the most persuasive ‘small is good’ person on the planet.

    Liked by 4 people

  3. Last post sounds like I am quite optimistic that we’d win.

    Maybe, perhaps.

    Absolutely nothing, even a slam dunk for independence, is written in stone. We all have to work for it. Outwith friendly fora like this. And even then, we have to keep chipping away at SiU inspired lies. The degree to which reality can be spun by untruths is reaching a global maximum.

    Liked by 3 people

  4. Enjoyed this very much! Especially the test they gave Trumpy to see if he was sane or not.

    A few words on a couple of points in defense of the Prime Minister, and in favor of “noise and congestion” around airports.

    As regards some sort of mistake regarding private school fees in education spending statistics, my view is that a country that calls public schools private and private schools public doesn’t get to complain when the statistics get screwed up. So I’m going to give the PM a pass on this one. The poor women probably just doesn’t understand it, and really shouldn’t be expected to, all things considered. 😉

    As for Heathrow, you seem to have the same situation with the air travel industry in Britain that we have here in the states. The big airports were built in more or less open country on the edge of the city, and then the developers built homes and businesses all around them, so that people could move in next door and immediately begin complaining that AIRPLANES are disturbing their peaceful solitude by landing and taking off from the AIRPORT.

    Wiki describes the origin of Heathrow as follows:

    “Heathrow Airport originated in 1929 as a small airfield (Great West Aerodrome) on land south-east of the hamlet of Heathrow from which the airport takes its name. At that time there were farms, market gardens and orchards there.”

    Later as I understand it, the area was a site important to the British aircraft industry during and after WWII.

    MAYBE someone who was a resident of the area in 1929 has a say in the matter, but my view is that people who moved in next door to an airport and are now complaining about the noise and congestion of arriving and departing aircraft DO NOT.

    The counter argument of course is that there are reasonable “alternatives” to accommodate the needed growth in air travel. Yes, the NIMBY crowd are always good at identifying “alternatives,” which simply arouses new opposition at other locations, and insures that nothing will ever be done in the long run. That’s exactly the point of course. The radicalized far left environmental fanatics are always busy at stifling technology, development, and economic growth wherever and whenever they see it breaking out. IMHO.

    I like the look of Croydon Airport BTW. It appears to be the place that the Poirot productions used when they needed a 1930-ish looking aerodrome. As the area around it looked back in 1925:

    Liked by 2 people

    1. The problem is not so much NIMBYism, but the huge increase in air traffic leading to a constant, unbearable racket – a huge increase in the intensity of the noise. Even if the place was first opened in 1929, air traffic did not really take off (sorry) until – oh – late ’60s; jet aircraft for use in civil aviation, and non-stop transatlantic flights, did not really com in as mass-market services until the ’60s, and was certainly not planned for until after the houses had been built.

      There are landing hours restrictions enforced now at Heathrow, except in emergencies, of course, so that people around there can at least get some sleep. The larger problem is population density – there are no great open spaces left in SE England. Just as a for example, DFW airport (which is roughly comparable in terms of air traffic and passenger numbers) covers an area of almost 70 km², while Heathrow is squeezed into 12.27 km².

      It has to be said that newer aircraft are a lot quieter than their predecessors. However, the fact that they are much larger as well does not seem to have resulted in many fewer of them taking off – air passenger traffic continues to boom (as does air freight).

      Meanwhile in Scotland – Edinburgh Airport has just been voted the best airport in Europe for the third year running: https://is.gd/EO931i. In comparison, Heathrow is a hell-hole.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Ed…..thanks for the comment. I certainly don’t disagree with any part of your thoughtful and reasoned analysis, except to candidly express my total lack of concern for the sleeping problems of people who at some point in the past chose to live near a major airport in a major world capital at a crossroads of world air routes. (Most airports have been forced to shut down or reduce operations during late and early morning hours anyway.)

        These are the very same people who at other times will show up at an airport to enjoy the convenience of jet air travel, and will then bitch and moan about long lines at the gates and delays in departures and arrivals. Problems that MIGHT have been minimized or avoided if the airport had been allowed to expand and modernize.

        I would also draw attention to your comment about modern aircraft. Manufacturers have tied themselves in knots to produce aircraft that achieve reductions in noise levels and pollution that were undreamed of in the early days of jet travel. You also point out the restrictions on operating hours.

        I assume that whatever we do in a growing economy, passenger traffic will continue to increase and more and more aircraft will be taking off and landing. In the long run, political arguments about another runway at Heathrow for example are irrelevant. OF COURSE Heathrow will expand OR the politicians can decide to build a new airport even FARTHER out of town…..allowing a new generation of builders and homeowners to bitch about all those damn airplanes.

        My further bias is my view of fanatical environmentalists who can always be depended on to do whatever is necessary to strangle economic growth and development, and halt the progress of science and technology. I was going to write something about the neo-Luddites’ arguments against Heathrow expansion and went to the Wikipedia article. I found this:

        “The World Development Movement has claimed that the proposed additional flights from Heathrow’s third runway would emit the same amount of CO2 as the whole of Kenya.”

        True? Who knows? Irrelevant? Surely! But certainly the words of fanatics who have no interest other than strangling the growth of air traffic at Heathrow……and in Britain generally.

        Liked by 1 person

        1. Danny, you don’t have to be an environmental fanatic to worry about CO2 emissions! Here in Scotland we’re forging ahead with green energy – and it’s a job creator, not an economic strangulator.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Ed….once again, I’m in total agreement with you. In the long run, alternate energy is a job creator, and Scotland’s policies in this area are to be admired and emulated where it makes economic sense.

            BTW, I’ve decided that I’m OK with giant ugly white wind turbines despoiling the scenic windy mountain passes of California for example, since Californians are crazy and deserve what they get. 😉 The radical environmental lefties of the Golden State are not about to support safe and CO2-free nuclear power for example….ignoring the fact that that’s what France did to great success.

            I think the CO2 issue in American politics may not be well understood by the UK or Europe. At its most fundamental level, people have to understand that radical environmentalism is now the foundational touchstone issue of left wing Democratic politics. And to appreciate the fact that the American lefties have been radicalized and live in their own fact-free alternate reality bubble as surely as the tight wing Republicans do, it helps to understand the LAST time they lost their minds about a galvanizing issue. This was during the Reagan administration, and while it was well before my time, what went on in those years is well documented.

            The time was 1983, and the issue was Reagan’s Strategic Defense Initiative……immediately attacked by the liberal media which gave it the derisive name “Star Wars.” Reagan was in fact RIGHT about America needing a defense against a low level nuclear missile threat, but WRONG about the way he described it and hyped it. Nevertheless, it clearly unnerved Gorbachev and was instrumental in leading to the START I and START II agreements in 1991 and 1993. And today, we have an anti-ballistic-missile system in place whose degree of effectiveness in percentage terms is debated, but which looked really good in Hawaii, Alaska, and California when North Korea got ICBMs.

            We can thank Ronald Reagan for that, but we should also remember that no thanks is due to the leftist Democrats who went crazy when Reagan proposed it. The USSR was too powerful they said. An ABM system would spark a new arms race they said. And pretty much ALL the so-called experts…….pretty much every one of them a liberal Democrat academic intellectual…….were wrong. Nevertheless, the academic scientists wrote letters. did interviews, and signed their names to petitions in which they vowed never to lend their services to any “Star Wars” project which…..they always proclaimed……CAN’T WORK. How did they know it can’t work? Don’t ask that…….just shut up and believe them because they’re the experts!

            SO……how does this relate to the CO2 issue? As far as I’m concerned, the left wing academic scientists spent all the political capital they had during the ABM debate, and were left with egg all over their faces. They clearly demonstrated that scientists are more than happy to prostitute their ACADEMIC credentials to advance their personal POLITICAL agendas.

            I’m an engineer and have studied science in depth. I’m also a Democrat. But I’m not a climate scientist, and on evaluating the issue of man-made climate change, I remember what I’ve read about ABM. I’m not about to trust a scientist about ANY such politically charged subject. It’s a subject that the radical American left has adopted as the very next thing to religious theology, and almost all scientists are Democrats. Therefore, I don’t trust them any farther than I can spit.

            That said, the climate is clearly warming, and I’ll allow that maybe a lot of it is man-made. I just wish I knew enough about the subject to be sure of it. And I wish that the progressive left in the UK and Europe would take what American scientists say about it with a healthy grain of salt. On the other hand, maybe scientists outside the USA can be trusted to be intellectually honest, but that ship sailed long ago for the American scientific community…..IMHO.

            Liked by 1 person

      2. PS Ed…..Interesting report on Edinburgh Airport! And the comparison stats on the total land area of Dallas-Fort Worth Airport compared with Heathrow.

        I see that the busiest airport in the world since the year 2000 has been Hartsfield-Atlanta International Airport (ATL) in Georgia (with 104 million passengers in 2017,) and that in 2017 with all airports combined, London has the world’s busiest city airport system by passenger count (with 171 million passengers,) compared with New York City, which is number two (with 136 million passengers.)

        There’s an old joke that if you die in the South, whether you’re going to heaven or hell, you make connections through Atlanta.

        Liked by 2 people

      3. Yep, Ed.

        Edinburgh is a great airport. And you are right. Heathrow is an utter nightmare.

        They could try explnding one of the other airports in England, but the internal transport… trains, buses and roads are so appalling that people who want to get to London really don’t want to find the,selves in Birmingham or Liverpool and forced to make a long, horrible and outrageously expensive trip to the place that it all happens.

        Liked by 2 people

    2. LOL Public Schools. An English issue. Here they are called “independent schools”. Which is what they are.

      As the Maybot grew up in the system, you’d think that even she would have got it into her head what they are by the sage of 60+.

      Personally, I’m not that bothered about Heathrow, As you say, it has been there for a long time and at the beginning probably a lot of people moved there to be near the commercial activity that it brought.

      But it grew and grew and now they are going to make it grow more… with ensuing noise and traffic pollution.

      I take your point… although not everyone who lives there wanted the development, and some have probably inherited houses which they can’t sell…

      But my point really was that May just says what is convenient at the time. No principles.

      Liked by 2 people

      1. Tris……Yes, it would seem that May is saying whatever is most politically expedient to say about the Heathrow issue at the time and place she says it.
        London probably needs to build a really big new airport. Would a site in Scotland be out of the question? Perhaps the Highlands would not be suitable, but maybe there’s some big tracts of undeveloped land in the Hebrides? 😉

        Liked by 2 people

        1. LOL. Hebrides are pretty hilly.

          And if it takes a long tome and costs a lot of money to make a journey from Birmingham… travellers would need a couple of days and the best part of €1000 to get from the Hebrides to where it’s happening in London.

          I bet they considered it though. I mean they like to keep their nukes in Scotland. 🙂

          Liked by 2 people

          1. The runway at Stornoway was the longest in Western Europe* until the RAF left so no worries about that. Of course getting there from London will usually take two days…..

            *it was the major staging area for the GIUK gap and was capable of landing any aircraft in the world. In fact even in the 1980s there used to be staged exercises simulating a Spetsnaz assault on the airport (there were in fact Russian plans to do exactly that). Was a monumental pain in the arse – RAF regiment squaddies all over the town “defending” things like petrol stations (no joke)….

            Liked by 2 people

    3. Perhaps we could offer the Americans the P1 test for Trump to take, to find out at least if he would be traumatised.

      Meanwhile on the theme of bigger salaries being propagated by Mr Flanagan, someone has pointed out on the National website comments that average primary teacher salaries in Estonia, where pupils were the highest European performers in the PISA study, are about 40% lower than in Scotland. Ho hum.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Ah, but you’d want to know if that was an exchange rate calculation, or if it was based on purchasing power parity. I suppose I could find out, but I doubt very much that Estonia has caught up with income levels in countries that didn’t have to undergo Soviet occupation, their disastrous economic policies, and however long it took them after they regained their independence to join the EU and the development funds could start flowing.

        On the subject of economic development… Even now, with Poland getting a decent motorway system, road transport from the Baltics through to the Rest of Europe is still hardly brilliant – only one small corner of one Polish voivodship, Podlaskie, borders Lithuania, and that’s the only intra-EU land frontier between the three Baltic republics. There are no motorways or even dual carriageways leading to and from either side of that border. To the south and east there’s Belarus, and no one in their right mind wants to have to deal with Europe’s last old-style dictatorship. To the north and west there’s the Kaliningrad enclave, which is Russian territory – and of course Russia also stands between Estonia and Finland. And no one wants to go through Russia either if they can help it.

        You can see how the old Hanseatic League made sense, back in the day.

        There’s more happening on the railways, though – here’s an article about it from the Man in Seat 61: http://tinyurl.com/ycl39o3j. You will note that it includes the following joyful note: “This service does not pass through any part of Belarus!”

        Liked by 1 person

  5. The two main arguments from the Greater English in any near referendum/GE will be:
    Scotland does more trade within Greater England than it does with Europe so would be better off staying put.
    Look at how difficult it is to disentangle yourself from a union,best stay put.
    Unfortunately many Scottish middle class voters will buy into this as the least frightening option.
    We have to get across to them what the future holds for Scotland under an unfettered Greater English Tory government run by people schooled in the Thatcher Youth Movement.
    These dangerous morons,wedded to the American model of human existence will result in Scots being one pay check away from destitution and loss of health care and the Middle classes having to work multiple jobs just to keep their heads above water.
    That is the real choice facing Scots,not whether to separate or not separate but what sort of life do they want for themselves and their children.
    European or American?

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Like most of the Better Together Project Fear propaganda, “Scotland does four times more trade” does not bear scrutiny at all well. “So what?” is the best answer – if the rUK wants to trade with the EU, it will have to trade with us as well. It can’t try to embargo us without being embargoed by the rest of the EU. It would not actually be lawful under international law – as I understand it – to impose sanctions on us unilaterally, although of course that never stopped the US vis-à-vis Cuba. If England wants to put walls up around itself, we can’t stop it doing so – but why would anyone choose to be inside those walls when they don’t want to be or have to be?

      We are going to be hurt by Brexit whether we leave the EU or not, because it will damage our largest trading partner. However, only as an independent State can Scotland deal with that damage in a way that is in our best insterests, rather than doing whatever Westminster – which got us into this mess in the first place – decides what we must do, however little we like it, however damaging it is, however repugnant, and racist, and stupid, and immoral.

      Liked by 3 people

      1. Any threat to Scotland’s trade with England is complete bollocks. There’s things they won’t do without that they rely upon us for. Electricity being one and let’s not forget foodstuffs. We don’t even have to mention whisky because it goes without saying they will refuse to do without that. I’m not sure if they use our water yet but I know it’s been talked about, and I know they want it.

        Going in the huff with your nearest neighbouring country because they’ve expressed their will peacefully and democratically just isn’t good business.

        Liked by 2 people

        1. Yup. Complete bollocks. And beside the whisky – we make about 80 per cent of the UK’s gin and vodka as well. I may be wrong about the exact figure, but I do know that it’s a quite startling amount, a lot more than half – the other spirits keep getting forgotten about because whisky is so iconically Scottish, and producing grain spirit is just not nearly so sexy.

          Liked by 2 people

    2. Would be interested to know whether Ireland’s trade with England is currently ‘allowed’? I assume it is within the EU. Is England going to cut itself off from the whole of the EU? If it does, and assuming for a moment that we were independent, would our goods and chattels just fester away at export warehouses or would other nations not want to buy them at, perhaps, discounted prices? Would England be able to make Scotland destitute?

      I doubt it very much. Indeed after that degree of stupidity was over, I’d have thought in a few months, our trade prices would be, more or less, where they were all along.

      I consider myself a European, just after citizen of planet Earth. Some incredibly stupid Americans see themselves as American first, centre and last. Hopefully the mid-terms will show us a better America than the insanity that counts for debate in the USA right now.

      Liked by 4 people

      1. Well, there are some people from every county that put their nationality first and foremost.

        I just can’t define people by nationality. Never understood it. That said there are some countries that it is a pleasure to be a part of, and some that are a misery.

        Like

      2. Yeah, that’s another good point, Dave – it slipped my mind when I was writing earlier. “If Scotland, why not Ireland?” Or vice-versa, even. Another thing to add to “So what?” when They start quacking about “four times as much”.

        My own theory – and it is mine, and I am sticking to it – is that They want to create a situation in which They will impose a State of Emergency, and Suspend Constitutional Guarantees (if anyone thinks we have any), to deal with the civil unrest that will inevitably follow the imposition of food rationing and so on which they intend to blame on Those Dastardly Europeans and Evil Foreign Johnnies. Then, having installed Themselves in power for the foreseeable, they will turn around and do what they should have done in the first place to keep trade moving, but trumpeting aloud the line that “We cannot let our loyal Englishmen and Englishwomen and other Englishpersons starve, and pop their English clogs for want of English insulin, the way those vile and vicious European sons and daughters of dogs and persons born out of wedlock wanted!” “And the fact that it costs twice as much as before because the currency has collapse is all their fault too!”- and so on and so forth.

        Incidentally, there’s another one, shamanistically chanted by that Arlene Foster’s crew in pertickler and other such rabid Brexiteer neoimperialists – “No border in the Irish Sea”! When I saw that, I immediately thought that people in the Republic will be surprised to learn that there isn’t one there already.

        Like

        1. Sorry, Douglas – it’s you I was trying to reply to – d*amn WordPress for confusing me even more than I am confused already – and please ‘scuse typos, everyone, I’m not myself this morning.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. eddjasfreeman,

            There is absolutely no reason for you to apologize. I, somewhat sadly, agreed with you. We are in an alternate reality and what you said:

            “My own theory – and it is mine, and I am sticking to it – is that They want to create a situation in which They will impose a State of Emergency, and Suspend Constitutional Guarantees (if anyone thinks we have any), to deal with the civil unrest that will inevitably follow the imposition of food rationing and so on which they intend to blame on Those Dastardly Europeans and Evil Foreign Johnnies. Then, having installed Themselves in power for the foreseeable, they will turn around and do what they should have done in the first place to keep trade moving, but trumpeting aloud the line that “We cannot let our loyal Englishmen and Englishwomen and other Englishpersons starve, and pop their English clogs for want of English insulin, the way those vile and vicious European sons and daughters of dogs and persons born out of wedlock wanted!” “And the fact that it costs twice as much as before because the currency has collapse is all their fault too!”- and so on and so forth.

            Incidentally, there’s another one, shamanistically chanted by that Arlene Foster’s crew in pertickler and other such rabid Brexiteer neoimperialists – “No border in the Irish Sea”! When I saw that, I immediately thought that people in the Republic will be surprised to learn that there isn’t one there already.”

            seems likely.

            We are at a tipping point in our relationship with Westminster, or London if you prefer. This is frankly subjugation or summat close to that.

            It will be interesting to see how opinion polls work out in the months ahead. It is, for instance, difficult to see how the Conservative vote in Scotland will hold up, given that no Conservative voter will have a clue what, exactly, or perhaps more realistically, approximately, they are voting for. For being the operative word.

            I think the UK is a busted flush. It is only a matter of time ’till it ends.

            Liked by 1 person

        2. I’m told the Maybot will be making a statement to parliament at 3.30.

          General Election? Royal pregnancy? New pair of kitten heels?

          I mean Fluffy’s resignation wouldn’t actually warrant a statement to the cat, never mind parliament.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. Oh. Maybe I should turn on the wireless. Nah, I can’t stand listening to the woman flub, fluster and prevaricate, I’ll wait until someone else makes sense of it all. Anyone want to bet she says “I have always been very clear about this” at some point, without every saying exactly what she has always been very clear about? No? Thought not.

            Liked by 1 person

  6. I work at a small airport, it is gradually being surrounded by housing, the owners of sid property are now complaining about the noise.
    I’m afraid our stock answer is to ask their address, IF it’s a new build we just ask if their lawyer told them that there was a long established airport within 2 km of their new property.
    What is happening though is gradually new types of light aircraft are coming into use, they’re fitted with exhaust silencers so you are only left with the propeller noise and that won’t go away soon, unless we have some form of anti gravity device. The biggest problem with noise is from helicopters.
    Our German friends have regulations to fit silencers to their older fixed wing aircraft and it helps, you have to realise that some of these aircraft were built in the 70’s and are still in service using an engine designed in the 30’s and use Avgas, with large percentage of Lead in the fuel. No sign of it being phased out in the short term, although a mix call UL91 has been trialled it’s problem is it’s short shelf life, much like unleaded for cars, it is only guarnteed to hold it’s octane rating for weeks rather than the 6 months of avgas.
    OT.
    See we are to rejoice that another royal mouth is to be fed by our generous public purse.
    You’ll have had your democracy.

    Liked by 4 people

    1. Verry eenteresteeng about avgas, Dave – I did not know that tetraethyl lead was still used in it – but am glad to know that it is being phased out. There’s at least one binding international convention committing governments to phase out all anthropogenic – oh all right, man-made – sources of lead in the environment, but I can’t be a*rsed checking up on it – I used to do translation work for them. I rather thought that no one was making TEL any more, but either I’m wrong or there is a goodly amount in stockpiles – if it’s not being made any more, that could be why I see several mentions that the stuff is expensive enough to want to use diesel or jet fuel instead. You don’t need very much TEL to raise your fuel’s octane number, after all.

      I checked the Wikipedia article on aviation fuels – Wikipedia, home of all that is true and accurate on the internet – here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avgas. For us on this side of the Pond, the key sentence is “In Europe, environmental and cost considerations have led to increasing numbers of aircraft being fitted with fuel-efficient diesel engines that run on jet fuel [instead of leaded avgas]”.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Avgas is refined in 2 places in the world, as far as I’m aware, Houston, the USA one and Sicily.
        The UK imports Avgas into the Isle of Grain, Essex and Inverness.
        Yes Inverness Scotland. Historic as the Shackleton maritime patrol aircraft before the Nimrod was based in Lossiemouth. They were derived from the WW2 Lancaster/Lincoln bomber. 4 Gryphon piston engines of around 24 litres and consuming copious amounts of avgas on each patrol as airbourne radar and control.
        Jet engines use a variation on DERV called JET-A1, it’s diesel with reduced wax and an addition to stop the residual wax freezing in minus 60 selsius.
        There are a few diesel engined aircraft with diesel engines, Diamond Aircraft produce a single engine and a twin engine variant. Engines now based on Mercedes diesel engines, the French company that started the idea went bust due to the cost of gearboxes required to drive the propeller.
        Some photographic Cessna aircraft have a diesel, their flight time goes up from about 4 hours on a tankful of avgas to over 8 hours on jet-a1, due to the lower specific fuel consumption of the diesel.
        Unfortunately our bladders can’t deal with elapsed time and no toilets on board so mechanical means are required to store the inevitable samples produced.
        Most avgas engines used are around 5 litres capacity and upwards and produce relatively low power. A typical Lycoming 0-235 produces 120HP from 5 litres.
        The avgas has 4 times as much lead as the old 5 star petrol and is called 100LL, the LL stands for Low Lead and is 100 octane, guranteed witha shelf life of 6 months.
        The early Diamonds with the French engine are being re-engined with Lycoming avgas engines due to lack of spares.
        Lots of stuff going on in the background that we don’t hear about.
        On fuel for cars.
        Petrol is to be reformulated to include 10% alcohol, currently 5%.
        Brexit is causing the UK refinery producing the alcohol to close as it is cheaper to import from Brazil, they are market leaders and produce
        750 BILLION tonnes a year from sugar cane.
        So the idea that the UK can’t have a deal with other countries when in the CU and SM is now rubbish.

        Liked by 1 person

    2. Another royal mouth to feed, Dave? Egad! Don’t tell me that that Princess Eugenie is up the spout already – or – shock, horror! – that she had a bun in the oven even as she walked up the aisle to be officially wed to Mr. Princess Eugenie – was it on British State Television? Oh well, at least the royal infant will be born on the right side of the blanket and not have to be called Fitzanything.

      Or maybe you mean that Mr. Princess Eugenie himself is an extra royal mouth to feed? I would have thought that if she wants to keep him around as her toyboy or kept man or something, she would have to pay to keep him in athletic supporters out of her own purse. And if he’s Independently Wealthy, then he shouldn’t be getting any public money at all, because if I were Independently Wealthy, I certainly wouldn’t get any dosh whatsoever out of DWP – God knows, it’s hard enough to get dosh out of DWP even when you’re perfectly entitled to it.

      Liked by 1 person

        1. I stand corrected – less of a toyboy and more of a gigolo, do you think, Tris? Oh – sorry – my mind ran away with me a bit just then.

          Princess Michael – I see – so in truth he’s Prince Eugenie (does that scan?). How long before we have Prince Beatrice, I wonder. They should have called that – oh. My expert googling skills have led me to the Express (cue maidenly moue of distaste), and I find that Princess Royal Anne got hitched to one Vice-Admiral Timothy Laurence, who is also a Sir – so I suppose he’s now Prince Royal Sir Anne, or something – I bet all his former supporters call him Timothy-Anne. Or Sir Timothy-Anne. Definitely not Sir Tim, as the Express says (https://is.gd/yyMUcE).

          Yes – that Prince Royal no. 1 – Mark Phillips. I remember he was known among the Family as Foggy. Foggy Phillips. They should have called him Prince Royal Foggy-Anne. I think it sounds better.

          Liked by 2 people

          1. Pretty certain the illegitimate one would have been told to get a move on as the English need a “royal” birth to distract them from Brexit.

            Looks like he nailed the date, assuming she’s 3 months gone 😀

            Liked by 2 people

            1. Sans planes? No, it’s just that in these straitened times They felt They had to go for the basic model rather than the Grand Luxe. Those optional extras cost money, you know, which would much better be spent giving the very rich additional incentives to become even richer!

              Liked by 1 person

    3. Dave,

      I do not live very close to an airport, five miles or so from Glasgow, but frankly the noise levels have gone down substantially. Noticing a con-trail (Is that right?) seems to me to be the thing that alerts me to a plane. Noise is no longer an issue, nor an annoyance.

      Clearly it might matter if you live close to an airport, but for many of us, the reduction in airplane noise has been pretty substantial.

      How have they achieved that?

      Liked by 1 person

      1. The contrails appear when the aircraft is above 16,000 feet, this is the water vapour condensing out of the exhaust gas. Temperature dependent.
        Above a height of 10,000 feet the turbine noise is really very low in the audible range. Compressor noise is only an issue from GE engines, quite distinct.
        High bye-pass engine engineering wraps the exhaust gas in cold bye-pass air which reduces the turbine noise.
        Aircraft use maximum available power at the airfield for take off roll but noise abatement rules require the pilots to reduce power once above 1000 feet or so, different for each airfield. The power being developed for the landing is probably around a third of the max.
        So depending on the landing direction at Glasgow you will be, if north of the airport, either be on the approach to land and hence a low power output or if on take off direction the aircraft will be in the noise abatement rules area and the aircraft turning away from built up areas.
        Our airport aircraft use piston engines with open exhausts if using Lycoming or Continental manufacture, no exhaust silencers. Modern light aircraft use, in the main, the Rotax engine which requires an exhaust silencer as it is derived from a car engine and uses unleaded fuel. These aircraft are really quiet less than a flymo lawnmower when above 500 feet.
        Hope this helps

        Liked by 2 people

    4. Dave…….What a sensible approach! A polite letter that simply inquires whether the person complaining of airplane noise has noticed that they moved into a new housing development near an AIRPORT. Especially polite considering that it’s couched in terms of whether or not their lawyer advised them of the fact, assuming that they might have themselves overlooked an AIRPORT located about a mile from their house. 🙂

      As you suggest, also overlooked by people who hate the noise of airplanes (which they are usually more than happy to use for holiday transportation,) is the extent to which airlines, airports, and aircraft manufacturers have made enormous strides in reducing noise for example. People have recently noticed sawtooth shaped engine nacelle exhausts on the Boeing 787. The Boeing 747-8 also has the shape on the inner core nozzles.

      https://www.nasa.gov/topics/aeronautics/features/bridges_chevron_events.html

      Liked by 1 person

  7. Tris,

    “I’ve heard that there is a threat for Fluffy and Colonel Bake Lady to join Loathsom, McVile and Morbidity in resigning tomorrow unless everyone in the UK, including Arlene Forsterland, is treated the same way (obviously excepting the mediaeval abortion and same-sex marriage laws, social security, Olympic Team membership and, strangely, dog licences).

    As no one would miss any of them, I see no great problem.”

    Me neither.

    Liked by 1 person

  8. What’s with the people at a round table under pictures of toast (or bread?) Apparently something about Europe because it Googles up with foreign text.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I am a European Danny, and I haven’t a clue either. It certainly looks like toast. Perhaps someone in the erudite readership could clarify?

      Liked by 2 people

      1. DC……For an instant, I thought that someone had scratched through the picture at the top. Then I realized that it’s an odd futuristic light fixture. No more odd looking than the toast I guess. 😉

        Liked by 1 person

      1. Ackshly – it’s the informal EU Summit in Salzburg this past September, the one at which the Europeans told May she must be crazy if she thought they could accept any of that Chequers nonsense, they weren’t interested in her internal political problems and she would dislike it even more if they were, and hauled her over the coals for wasting all their time (my interpretation), which the Usual Suspects naturally hailed as a Great Victory for Plucky Little England.

        That’s the Salzburg Congress – or Kongress – or something: http://tinyurl.com/ycmqg4kn. Here are some more photies (the smooth-looking young b*astard with the hair is Austria’s far-right Chancellor Kurz, BTW): http://tinyurl.com/y9klmhoa.

        Like

  9. Here Josie,
    The NI border’s been solved.
    That right Francie! That maybot’s a clever wumman.
    Aye Josie, we’re all in the onion for ever and ever, well until 2021, that’s forever.
    That right Francie! That maybot’s a clever wumman.
    Aye Josie, unless the backshop is triggered, you know the cludgie clause.
    That right Francie! That maybot’s a clever wumman. Didn’t know she had a budgie.
    Aye Josie, called it Raab.
    That right Francie! That maybot’s a clever wumman. Must be an orange wan.
    Well Josie, that’s the deal breaker, when the backshop is triggered the RuK is out the onion but NI is still in the onion.
    That right Francie! That maybot’s a clever wumman. She’s a richt good gigger. A hoki koki dancer, One country in and one country oot.
    Aye Josie, this politics so easy, just kick the can and run away.
    That right Francie! That maybot’s a clever wumman. Just like cameroon.
    Aye Josie, the big macaroon.

    With apologies to Ricky and Jack

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.