This All Smells Fishy

The BBC is well known for its zealous support of the 'anthropogenic global warming' theory, and this fact is reflected constantly by its Science correspondance. Usually the general public has little to no clue how to interpret the facts and so a large majority simply believe what they are told, however occasionally you get stories so ridiculous, so outrageously wrong that something makes you stand up and shake your head in hysterics.

As the title of this story suggests, the BBC ran a story at the end of September about how fish in the seas were likely to shrink "by up to 24% because of global warming".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19758440

This entire presumption is based on the idea that warmer seas therefore means more carbon dioxide in the water, and the shrinkage in fish populations would be down to a lack of oxygen, but this doesn't even begin to make sense.

In the past the planet has been alot warmer than it presently is and when you look at the kind of creatures that prospered in those times then these facts simply do not add up. During the eras of the dinosaur, usually cold-blooded reptiles which eventually grew to the size of the average house generally lived on a planet so warm that there was an absence of polar ice. Whilst perhaps you cannot include land animals in the equation as they are talking about marine life, consider these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Megalodon

Sharks (thats fish to all you people unversed in marine biology) who grew to between twenty five and thirty metres long in times which were largely tropical and then who were extinct by the time the climate became its more recognisable 'modern' temperate temperature. This of course is not proof in itself, but look back at any time in the past where warm and wet weather was the global norm and you will usually find a correllation with larger creatures and greater diversity in general.

So where did this story come from?

http://www.nature.com/nclimate/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nclimate1691.html

Nature.com. Another one of those phony science journals which mis-guides the public by chopping up data to suit an agenda. You know, same as AmericanScientific, NewScience etc, magazines which spout shit they later refute the week later with new data.

Still on the Yahoo site they try and con you with the heartstrings by showing a nice picture of a pod of dolphins:
http://news.yahoo.com/fish-shrink-global-warming-leaves-them-gasping-oxygen-174716882.html
Who of course are mammals incase you suffer with some learning difficulty and therefore do not need to breath water.

This wasn't the only bit of fishy news in the past few weeks though

The main tabloids had to backtrack last month after posting a ridiculous stories about there only been a hundred mature Cod left in the North Sea.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204091/Scientists-fear-cod-stocks-study-reveals-100-adult-fish-North-Sea.html
http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Environment/article1127310.ece (The Sunday Times site has since changed the article address to an apology.)

 

 

In actual fact, recent fishing quotas have actually led to a rise in fish stocks in British waters. It shows that we can occasionally get the environment management done properly, but it seems odd that our completely professional and well-read journalists would get such an important story wrong...

The BBC and the Government have since corrected the media's apparent inaptitude in reading scientific data correctly.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2012/09/cod20092012

Just remember: Everything is bullshit!

Obligatory Bug-Out Kit Post

Just a quick post explaining my 'bug-out' bag. Its never been completely tested, so the hope is that the coming days will test my equipment to see what is used, whats needed and what is utterly rubbish and needs replacing. The aim is for myself and my friend to travel and camp in the Welsh mountains - so its quite a tough challenge for some of the Tesco rubbish I've got.

 

Here I've got a Starlight IV sleeping bag, rated for use down to -18 degrees. Having never used it to sleep in it will be interesting to see how it fares. Other sleeping accessories include a DD basic hammock (only to be used in the summer), a british woodland camo tarp and a basic green bivvi bag.

 

 
This equipment is all different bits and pieces brought together over the years. There is a military style 'hexi-burner', two mess-tins, a wind-up torch, a backup keyring torch, a decent (but apparently broken) LED Lenser. Fishing line, fishing hooks, spare batteries, a knife sharpener, a Gerber folding knife, water treatment tablets, permanent marker, lighers (multiple), superglue, a wildfood book and finally a brush (for rubbing crap off of boots with.)

 

So here is all my equipment packed away. The bag I use is a Mil-Tec 50l day pack. I chose this pattern of camo because although its not a fantasic match for British countryside - it does blend in wherever you are. I've worn British camo with british camo equipment before and got nothing but attention so my hope was that this pattern was more 'civvy' acceptable. I also bring a camo net to hide my gear if I need to put it down next to a tree whilst I go into town for whatever reason, scrim scarf, helikon gloves and sunglasses which double up as ballistic eye protection. Underneath the camo net is a shoulder bag I use to pack food and drink into, and below that is a map case with a couple of half decent compasses. Attached to the back of the pack I've got a half decent waterbottle and two elastic baggage straps which will be used to fix up the tarp around trees/posts etc.

 

One thing I should mention, I used to play airsoft hence why some of it looks a bit overkill. I've also other survival bits and pieces which I can't bring along for legal reasons. Id love to be able to take my airrifle wild camping but thats what happens in a police state. I've also packed waterproofs - anyone in the UK will know why it is wise to pack these first before anything else!

 

As a side note, I usually wear subdued colours these days anyway because I got fed up with the shops selling suspect metrosexual items - but since I moved to the countryside the only clothes I've brought have been hunting jackets and camo gear. Of course, out in the country I get away with it, but I question how safe Id be wearing it out. Im also getting into hunting so with this in mind I've recently purchased (not received yet) some Danish camoflage clothing which looks remarkable camouflage for the general UK/Nothern European countryside.

 

 

 

Thats pretty much it. I guess it would be apt to load up review of equipment afterwards!

 

British Foreign Influence: Learning From Cyprus

I wasn't sure if there were a need of me to write this article as the facts are all pretty easy to come by all across the internet, and judging by comments seen by Greeks across the net, it seems that the Cypriots are mostly all aware of the following information. This information however is not generally known by British people including myself until a few weeks ago, and this information really allows one to look at your own Governments corruption and underhanded tactics.

Its funny, I like most of the people in the UK grew up believing that our Government always did the right thing, we were like some heroes of the international community. Watching too much James Bond I guess will do that to you, but when you are taught the polarised view by through the recent memories of WWII and the Falklands, you are miss-sold the line that the British use due force to protect its sovereignty and of its allies. As a child you should be forgiven for believing such rubbish, but as adults it should be our responsibility to constantly strive for the truth in all things, especially those which are paid for with our taxes.

This is an article about how Britain and America fucked over a sovereign nation for their own agenda's during the 1960's and 1970's.

So what happened in Cyprus? A long story short, after an agreement with the Ottoman Empire, Britain received colonial power over the territory of Cyprus after a war between the Ottomans and Russia .Cyprus had however always been a Greek island despite Ottoman occupations during 1571-1660 and 1745-1748. (Britain had offered Cyprus back to Greece back during WWII as a bargaining chip for their entrance into the war under the allies, an offer rejected by Athens at the time.)

When Britain gave independence to the Cypriot Government in 1960, there were concerns that with the strongly Orthodox-Christian Greek-Cypriots (and historical resentment towards the Ottomans/Turks) that the minority Turks were going to be treated badly. There had already been Turk resistance groups formed during Cyprus' time as a British colony before independence. The Turkish_Resistance_Organisation's intention from the very beginning had been to create a partition across Cyprus to give Turk-Cypriots their own land and at the same time the EOKA, a Greek Nationalist group which wanted to see Cyprus returned to Greece as a Greek province. Both groups fermented violence towards the other.

To try and counter the ethnic in-fighting, the British Government gave the minority Turkish population a permanent 30% veto power over the Cyprus Government and its own police force. This further exacerbated resentment for the Greek-Cypriots. To make matters worse, with addition of Turkey and Greece funding their own ethnic groups on Cyprus, the British Government continued to support the minority Turk population by supplying weapons and explosives to resistance groups whilst the American CIA supported the Greek nationalist groups of which eventually led to the ousting of the first president Makarios III. This is despite Makarios calling for amendments to the Cyprus constitution to try and stop the fighting whilst trying to open diplomatic talks with both Greece and Turkey through the Non-Aligned_Movement. This was in 1964, but the proposed amendments to the constitution caused an uproar with the Turk council members who left in protest.

Of course, none of the support for both hard-line groups both on the Greek and Turk side were being drummed up because of President Makarios' dim view on British and American international politics. Because of his isolationist views it led him to be known as 'the Castro of the Med' with both Washington and London suspecting he had 'tenancies towards communism'. Or that he had been speaking with the Soviet Union and other 'rogue' states? No, these facts had nothing to do with it, right?

In any case, Turkey had from the very beginning, even before the end of British occupation, called for partition on the Island, a request which understandably was seen as being unacceptable for the Greek-Cypriots when you consider the demographics before the 1974 invasion.

(The blue represents Greek-Cypriot population, the red/orange Turk-Cypriot.)

So the invasion of 1974 is where things get interesting. The British were still meant to be Cyprus' guarantor for independence and security, so the next findings were pretty startling, but considering recent events in the middle-east, not surprising. The whole reason why I began asking questions about Cyprus was because of a holiday I had there in July of this year, I got talking to a local who mentioned that the UK and US turned a blind eye to the Turkish invasion in exchange for Turkey allowing US military bases on its land. This was apparently due to the Cyprus Government refusing to allow US military bases on the island.

I've not been able to find evidence of this fact on the internet, but I have read and heard it from more than one person. Whether this is just a Cypriot urban legend or not is hardly important however as there is still evidence that both London and Washington willingly turned a blind-eye towards the Turkish invasion, and who were in actual fact always in cahoots with the Turkish side to introduce a divide across the island.

What is most repugnant about the whole ordeal is that America and Britain could have brought about a diplomatic end to the situation had they not continued to fund and support both the Greeks and the Turks simultaneously. It was president Makarios, who sought true independence and diplomatic resolve who was the one real chance for a peaceful unified republic on the island. This is just another example of divide and rule tactics and Governments using differing factions to suit their own agenda. The results of the 1974 invasion of Cyprus was the killing of thousands which could have been avoided and the displacement of Greek civilians who were evicted by Turkey and forced to the South side of the island. Their homes, businesses and possessions were then forfeit, a situation which meant some Turks got very rich off the backs of Greek-Cypriot loss:(http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17560821 .) Turkey then used aggressive re-population tactics to change the demographics of Cyprus by moving thousands of Turks to the captured Northern Cyprus, a move now which would be seen as cultural genocide.

The following PDF article includes documents sent from the British Government to the Australians and detailed information about how and what was going to happen before the Turkish invasion.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Feprints.lse.ac.uk%2F31090%2F1%2FGreeSE_No42.pdf&ei=M_BmUO_rJqT80QXn8oDQDw&usg=AFQjCNFKjjX9bSvHWboJ1AsoG6OpLkypTw&sig2=HQosoNxqvM6kBg4MHs06Ow

If you haven't the time to read through this long and detailed article, then please take notice of this particular paragraph sent in telegram to Australia from Britain:

"Commenting privately to us on the situation on the 20th July a senior FCO official said that Britain secretly would not object if Turkish military forces occupied about 1/3 of the island before agreeing to a cease-fire. (Please protect.) Such a position would need to be reached by 21st July if peace prospects were not to be endangered further. In the meantime, Britain continued to support publicly appeals for an immediate ceasefire".

If this article is correct, and this telegram has been leaked, it explains why despite having naval bases on Cyprus Britain’s non-involvement in the protection of Cyprus throughout the invasion. As a side note, there is also evidence that Britain was supplying information to Turkey about the military strength of Cyprus to help with the invasion. The fact that one third of the island was taken seems to have been agreed in advance, and falls in line with Britain’s previous political handling of 30% veto power to the Turks.

In any case, all of this information points to one thing. The US and UK are constantly manipulating current political turmoil to suit their own needs and agendas. As we look upon this information in the new millennium with all current ongoing issues in the middle east, we need to be aware of the facts of the past. The same has been applied in Iraq, Libya and ongoing in Syria. We must learn to wield this knowledge to our own advantage, we must put pressure on our politicians to prevent unnecessary suffering and war caused by the deliberate actions of our Governments on the smaller sovereign nations. History has been repeating itself more and more recently, but this fact only relies on an unaware public who believe in those history books.

Gender-Bending Chemicals

Before I begin this article, Id just like to point out that I'am in no way an expert in biology or in hormone development, the last thing I'd want to do is trivialise this information as it is extremely serious in nature and effects every single person living in the western world. Therefore I think it apt that the information stand for itself.

This article may seem a bit of a cop-out in that it is essentially a list of links, but I fear that someone such as myself, an obscure blogger, attempting to write in a matter-of-fact way on a subject which seems too serious to be taken notice of in todays world, will be ignored.

Many people who read the 'alternative news' will know these facts very well already, some who read mainstream papers or watch the main news channels may have a fair idea given recent news reports, but the severity of the situation is definately not being taken seriously by the main news or world Governments either.

If you have no idea what Im talking about then you have some homework to catch up on. The subject: EDC's. Still don't know what Im talking about?

Endocrine Disrupting Chemicals. To you and I, chemicals put in packaging, plastics and birth control which have been fucking up humans fertility, health and thinking capacity for more than fifty years, chemicals which seem likely to blame for a plethera of issues humanity is now dealing with.

At this point I shall commence the link barrage:

Recently, the main news outlets in the West seem to have begun highlighting the effects of and the dangers of chemicals such as BPA and birth control. Here is an example from the Telegraph in the UK, which goes on to give very general information.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8093585/Bisphenol-A-now-linked-to-male-infertility.html
And the BBC:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-18071851

Independant medical journal which deals with Genetics and stem cell research:
http://www.bionews.org.uk/page_13324.asp

Even the NHS has had to cover the basics on the subject:
http://www.nhs.uk/news/2010/08August/Pages/bisphenol-A-and-infertility.aspx

So apart from fertility, what else do these chemicals potentially play havoc with?

http://www.foxnews.com/health/2012/09/18/chemical-found-in-soda-cans-linked-to-childhood-obesity/ Child Obesity

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/6723723.stm: Shortened lifespan in men.

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/12/9215.aspx: Neurological/Learning disorders

http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/newscience/phthalates-bpa-linked-to-atypical-child-behavior: Autism

BPA, a chemical found in most plastics including food packaging, drinking bottles etc is the main source of these hormone effecting chemicals, but it is not the only one.
Another problem which has already begun to endanger marine life is the existance of large amounts of esotrogen in the waterways from contraceptive pills.
The following articles highlight this:

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/archive//ldn/2008/feb/08021805

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2011/11/14/estrogen-in-drinking-water-prostate-cancer_n_1093696.html

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=5&cad=rja&ved=0CEEQFjAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fnywea.org%2Fclearwaters%2F08-3-fall%2F05-EstrogenInWastewater.pdf&ei=sKRgUNOzLKWc0QX08ICoDw&usg=AFQjCNFO4wG-DmLrNiVlYjMjQAQvyqi3nA&sig2=Wpx2gT71mYVfMP5sQej91A
(A science paper in PDF format with source references.)

You will see that most of the articles I've posted here (and there are many, many more available if you search the internet) are from the last few years, and you wouldn't be considered naive to think that because of this fact, the information must be new right?

Well you are wrong, unfortunately. On the UK Government website there is a science report, clear as day and available for anyone to download and read which goes into all these details:

http://www.parliament.uk/business/publications/research/briefing-papers/POST-PN-108

Its has sat on the UK Parliament website since 1998, and states figures and information found as far back as the late 1800's. I must therefore ask why, given that this information must be by now be painfully obvious, why legislation either from the WHO, the EU or the UK Government hasn't entirely banned these chemicals from any product which may come into contact with either drinking water or food?

Heres the point at which you may be permitted to apply your tin-foil hat, if you feel the need.
Of course this could be pure speculation, but maybe all these side effects are not only ignored by the powers that be, but in reality are the desired effect.

Consider all these things highlighted on the UK paper from 1998:

Consider all these things. Autism cases are rising at an alarming rate, male fertility is decreasing at an alarming rate, female fertility is also cause for concern, general IQ seems at least on the surface to be getting worse, and not inline with the idea that poor IQ is because of the poor education we are all given these days (although that is also a cause.)
Neurological disorders seem higher these days, even things like migraines which never used to be that common amongst the general population but now practically everyone suffers with them. Consider the exponential increase over the years of breast and testicular cancer, things which were incredibly rare becoming almost the norm.
Consider how effeminate the average young male is these days, and how homosexuality seems to be increasing amongst both sexes (and thats not a dig at homosexuals, it is merely an observation that general trends may be due to chemical changes we are unaware of.)
Boys dress like girls these days and tend to prefer to go into town and do some shopping rather than do the traditional boyish pursuits such as building dens etc.
Consider how quickly girls mature these days, whilst I don't want to incriminate myself (lol) it is a general observation that girls seem to become sexually mature at a much younger age these days.
Of course these are all observations that I have made, and being in my mid-twenties, it hardly gives me the authority to speak of the 'good-ol-days'. That been said, even in my short time here on Earth, I have seem some pretty radical changes in how the two sexes generally behave and regard each other. That is not to say that I have not also picked up some of these traits without realising it, we are if nothing else often nothing more than the result of our environments, but with all of the above as evidence, I doubt there are many chances that all these things occuring at once are a coincidence.

If the powers that be ever wanted a docile, easily led society of morons who are less inclined and able to breed (so to reduce the global population, an agenda which is highlighted in the news every day in the news for past decade at least) then BPA and chemicals like it would be the way to do it. This is not in the realms of conspiracy anymore, either this is being done deliberately, or they are happy to use this to their advantage. We already see evidence of forced sterilsation in the developing world by Western nations, this fact is not even disbuted, why would stealth sterilsation be any less calculated?

Video: RT Article on UK Population Control.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/shantha-rau-barriga/ending-forced-sterilizati_b_1662324.html
(General article on the subject of foreign sterilisation.)


We need to try and stop this as soon as possible. This is not only dangerous for us as a species but is also effecting every other species we come into contact with. I'm not going to say that I do not believe that over-population is an issue, but it has to be fought with education, not biological weapons.

UK Gun Statistics

Occasionally I feel it nessersary to highlight the huge derps in the BBC news, of course if I were to comment on every single fuck up they made then I'd need to sit on the PC non-stop, but here I think I have just cause.
 
As you will all know, the UK has some of the most hardcore anti-gun legislation in the world. You will probably also note that every time a nutter goes around shooting random people, the BBC rushes to highlight the fact that its a good thing our gun legislation is so harsh, and then goes on (usually) to suggest that more control is needed.
 
This BBC article which talks about the reasons as to why we don't have armed police after the shooting of two female officers goes on to trip itself up with the following graph:
 

 
Since the start of this graph in 1969, there have been a number of ammendments to firearm laws, all of which further restrict the ability for the general public to purchase and own firearms, and what has happened is the opposite of the desired effect.
 
Surely all the anti-gun laws are a crock of shit if the criminals are still managing to obtain firearms (notably, most firearm offences include pistols which have been illegal to own privately since the fifties.)
The following figures are copied and pasted from the 'UK Gun Politics' wikipedia page:
 
In the year Apr 2010 to Mar 2011 there were 11,227 recorded offences involving firearms, broken down as follows.
By weapon type:

• Long-barrelled shotgun = 406
• Sawn-off shotgun = 202
• Handgun = 3,105
• Rifle = 74
• Imitation firearm = 1,610
• Unidentified firearm = 957
• Other firearm = 670
• Air weapons = 4,203

 
 
If we ignore kids running around shooting at the neighbours cat with an air rifle, and the 'other' and 'unidentified' firearms (seeing as this will no doubt mainly be cases of women using mace spray which is deemed a firearm in the UK. Derp,) we are left with over 75% handgun offences. Seeing as you cannot legally obtain a pistol in the UK, this must mean that criminals are bringing them in, and in actual fact - is arguably putting the rest of the law-abiding public in more danger.
 
So what is the real reason for the prevention of firearms for the general public? I suspect now, given the general inability for British people to use commonsense and or possess some form of responsibility for ones own actions, a complete blanket 'right to bear arms' would be a complete mess and end up in anarchy. This is however only because the Governments 'Nanny State' rules supreme, where these days a decent everyday bloke can't even take a shit without being asked to fill in some form of licence or risk assessment.
 
If over the coming years we were to reduce Government control in our lives back to those 1950's (good ol' days) standards, we could perhaps get to a situation where the average adult was responsible enough to own a gun without any form licence. This is but a dream however as it is quite evident that the state has apsolutely no desire to lax any of its accumulated power. Its sole purpose for the past two or three decades has been to utterly lay waste to any previously held ideas of community, responsibility or self-sustainability. In short, we have been turned into brainless, feckless zombies who feel we must ask permission of the Government to do anything these days. Well not everyone.

The ability to own guns are but a relatively small part of living in a free society, but unfortunately, when all other means to live in a free society have been taken away through stealth, guns could have been the one thing which brought them back. The ultra-liberal idiots who have been sucked into the 'big-state' ideas of the globalists and Fabian Socialists deserve all they get when those who have been engineering this police-state show all their cards. Times are getting worse, I only hope people stop buying shit they don't need and take notice of the state of their country before its too late.

Charity Derp

Whilst at lunch today sitting in the canteen I couldnt help but laugh at the ridiculous front page article on The Daily Mail.

'The Fat Cats Of Foreign Aid', it reads.

In a nut shell, it goes on to explain how the top bosses of some of the biggest foreign aid charities are raking in more than £100,000 a year, and how through various bonus schemes they've made themselves millionaires. Now I’m not going to condone this sort of behaviour, in fact like 99% of the rest of the population who actually need to work full time for a pittance, I find this breach of trust abhorrent. However I do find the reporting of this story for one decades too late, and secondly it is completely offensive to any readers out there to suspect that they were so naive in the first place.

 

The details of this story the same old format. An audit of these big organisations were found to be a get-rich-quick scheme for some millionaires and our wonderful superheroes who are the British Members of Parliament are going to look into how to best stop this terrible abuse of trust.

Obviously, we'll overlook the millions taken by MPs over the years to tend to landscaping, moat clearance and mortgages on houses which do not exist, or the fact that many of these same Politicians got off without any form of official punishment besides losing their position (of whom some have now wormed their way back into positions of power through being lovers of David Cameron.)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2204239/The-fat-cats-foreign-aid-Ministers-target-consultants-paid-500m-taxpayer.html?ito=feeds-newsxml

This "news" just isn't. I mean, its common knowledge that Bono only donates 1% of earnings from charity gigs to the charity.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1314543/Bonos-ONE-foundation-giving-tiny-percentage-funds-charity.html

Oh yeah, but he's in that (terrible) rock band U2, so he's allowed to cheat people out of millions.

Feed. The. World. Bono, you cunt.

Thing is, the reality is even more easy to understand than that. A friend of mine worked as one of those annoying charity collectors for a few weeks told me how he quit once he found out that only a small percentage was actually going to the charities themselves, most was taken by the company which does the annoying sales pitch and secures your regular donations by taking your card details. (You have been warned.)

In any case, I seem to remember a certain Southpark episode starring Starving Marvin which told us all the facts about how charity worked about a decade ago, but meh.

Whilst we are on the subject of charity, it is a strange coincidence that also in the Daily Mail, (I don't actually buy this paper, it just so happens that both links so far are from them) there are two other stories on the same page as this latest 'charity scandal' story. One is the fear that BAE's merger with EADS may cause problems with the on-going Trident project, and second is the weird story about how millions are being spent on creating an Indian foreign aid headquarters when the aid is scheduled to stop in 2015.

I say coincidence because they are more or less indirectly connected. Despite India straight up telling the UK that our aid money is no longer needed (or indeed appreciated) we seem to still be pouring a ton of money into their economy under the guise of international aid. In reality its more to keep funding British companies which have exported their manufacturing to India, and also to hopefully butter up their politicians to continue using BAE for their defence contracts.

Despite it not appearing as obvious, UK does actually have a lucrative business in advanced technologies, i.e. Satellite component research, etc. Unfortunately the UK funds these organisations but then allows these companies to ship manufacturing to India where wages are lower and where there is already infrastructure to launch spacecraft.

As for India using BAE, it was hoped that India would purchase the Eurofighters as they had already with the Panavia Tornado and SEPECAT Jaguar for decades. This however looks unlikely to go ahead since the Indians have already been working with Russia on the PAK-FA, a stealth-fighter which would likely eat the Eurofighter, F22 and the three F35 variants for breakfast.

It seems the UK thinks it a good use of public money to continue to fund UK corporations manufacturing off-shore, maybe it is in a roundabout way, but surely to dupe the population into thinking this is some form of humanitarian stunt is nothing short of disgusting.

Of course, not all of this money goes to military and communications companies. Some actually does go to the Indian people, except they probably don't want it. Whether you agree that over-population is a real issue or not, forced sterilisation in any sense is wantonly abhorrent behaviour. Whilst many of us in the UK may be shocked or even appalled at the suggestion that a Government of the 'free' world could do such a thing, we would be deceiving ourselves as this sort of thing has happened all over the world, a lot.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/apr/15/uk-aid-forced-sterilisation-india

In any case, you've been warned about charities now. Be extremely selective of who you give your money to in future!

Space Whiskey!

I was tempted to post this story with the 'Space Sugar' story to save me time, espeically since they are both space related, but I (obviously) decided against it

Why? Well, to be honest no other reason except to highlight the complete retardness of humanity sometimes.

Im sure anyone out there with some form of frontal lobe, (save for those who have been lobotised for their own safety) will recognise just how expensive space flight is. Not just financially of course, but as a species, as life as a whole, we are kind of using up our resources rather quickly, and you could argue that our window of opportunity to break free of this shrinking planet is fast reaching a peak.

So it may dismay those of you with half a brain that Ardbeg Scotch Whiskey has been given permission by the Soyuz team to launch into orbit, vials of Scotch whiskey for the purpose of, quote: "explain the workings of these large, complex molecules and help uncover new information about the change they undergo in a near zero gravity environment."

Dafaq? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-business-19456905

Seriously. I may generally be a pessimist, but shit like this really does make me doubt the 'intelligent life' status man has so modestly bestowed himself.

Next we'll be sending Brawndo into space to test what zero-G does to the electrolites.