the Air Vent

Because the world needs another opinion

Cull the Skeptics

Posted by Jeff Id on September 30, 2010

They took the video down and placed this on line:

For me their colors have already been shown.

—————————-

Ok, this  was sent by email to me.  I see Anthony Watts already has it up — big surprise there.  What the heck is wrong with envirowhackos.  This isn’t funny, it isn’t sane, it will convince noone of anything, it’s gratuitously violent, it’s indirectly threatening and worst of all, it’s obnoxiously ignorant.  Save the world by blowing up people who won’t do exactly what enviros tell them.

My god these idiots should be ashamed.

VIOLENT  – I warned you.

———-


58 Responses to “Cull the Skeptics”

  1. A Semiconductor guy said

    Eii! Stalin would be proud. Very unpleasant in many ways at many levels.

  2. Steve Fitzpatrick said

    Violent enviro-porn. Child murder. Killing anybody who disagrees with you. Why am I not surprised by this?

  3. kuhnkat said

    Simply breathtaking the arrogance and stupidity exhibited by this.

  4. Rick Bradford said

    Even the circle-jerk Warmies over at The Guardian are undecided about this one. I think it will go down as another agit-prop stunt that completely backfired.

  5. Kenneth Fritsch said

    Be careful to whom you attribute this video. It would appear to be making the point that the 10.10 program will not be voluntary. I cannot see any sane environmentalist using this video to push their policy – actually not even the not so sane ones. All of which brings to point: who did make the video?

  6. Jeff Id said

    Kenneth,

    I checked it out first:

    http://www.1010global.org/no-pressure

  7. Kenneth Fritsch said

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film

    Had a look? Well, I’m certain you’ll agree that detonating school kids, footballers and movie stars into gory pulp for ignoring their carbon footprints is attention-grabbing. It’s also got a decent sprinkling of stardust – Peter Crouch, Gillian Anderson, Radiohead and others.

    But it’s pretty edgy, given 10:10’s aim of asking people, businesses and organisations to take positive action against global warming by cutting their greenhouse gas emissions by 10% in a year, and thereby pressuring governments to act.

    “Doing nothing about climate change is still a fairly common affliction, even in this day and age. What to do with those people, who are together threatening everybody’s existence on this planet? Clearly we don’t really think they should be blown up, that’s just a joke for the mini-movie, but maybe a little amputating would be a good place to start?” jokes 10:10 founder and Age of Stupid film maker Franny Armstrong.

    But why take such a risk of upsetting or alienating people, I ask her: “Because we have got about four years to stabilise global emissions and we are not anywhere near doing that. All our lives are at threat and if that’s not worth jumping up and down about, I don’t know what is.”

    “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change,” she adds.

    Jamie Glover, the child-actor who plays the part of Philip and gets blown up, has similarly few qualms: “I was very happy to get blown up to save the world.” The public reaction to the film will be fascinating – please add yours below.

    Curtis, writer of Four Weddings and a Funeral and Blackadder and an early 10:10 supporter, acknowledges that the 10:10 film is very direct. “The 10:10 team are a fearless, energetic bunch, completely dedicated to getting the public fired up about climate change. They also turn out to be surprisingly good at blowing stuff up,” he said.

    The film, directed by top advertising director Dougal Wilson, known for the Always A Woman John Lewis ad, will be shown in cinemas and on television. Wilson met 10:10 activists on a cross-continent bike ride to the Copenhagen climate change summit last December.
    The 10:10 campaign was launched in the UK in September 2009 and has already spread to 41 countries. In Britain, 91,000 people, 3,500 businesses and 4,000 councils, school and other organisations have signed up so far.

    The Lib-Con coalition has also committed to cut the government’s carbon emissions by 10% in a year, to help combat global warming. On October 10 – 10.10.10 – the campaign will hold a Global Day of Doing, involving 180 nations and events such as sumo wrestlers cycling to training in Tokyo, to 10,000 schoolchildren planting trees across Russia.

    The film is released tomorrow.

    What is troubling here is a representative from the Guardian calling it edgy and the apparent approval in all of the comments.

    You know that my libertarian friends might want to make the point that so-called voluntary plans that involve government or seemingly peaceful regulations by government can end very violently for those who choose not to obey. Dreamy headed environmentalists, on the other hand, would be more likely to portray, even Draconian regulations, as something that the public will all join hands on and obey. I take this approach and its acceptance as something new – or that the producers of it are making a point of which they do not even comprehend. Unintended consequences anyone?

  8. Anthony Watts said

    What will be telling is what people like Romm, Gore, McKibben, Andy at Dot Earth etc say about it. Don’t be shy about asking them to go on record on this.

  9. RomanM said

    Sick puppies… Enough said.

  10. Jeff Id said

    It is more than a bit reckless too. There are literally tens of thousands of absolutely viral environmentalists who would like nothing better than to cull the population according to their preference. That is exactly the fantasy this represents, the culling of the skeptical.

  11. Brian H said

    And an even tinier blip compared to the millions who will die each year from Greenie-crippled energy supplies–all at the lower end of the income curve of course. Not that the rest of us won’t suffer plenty!

  12. Jeff Id said

    I changed the title.

  13. John Norris said

    Incredible. Civilization has matured to the point where it is clear to all but a few that something like ethnic cleansing or religious persecution is completely wrong, and that past groups have done so much damage with that type of thinking. Now this supposedly forward looking group appears to be advocating idealogical cleansing. Incredible. They just identified themselves as the few.

  14. The makers of this video, it seems to me, are declaring their contempt for free speech, intellectual freedom, and the right to hold opinions that contrast with the majority view.

    Moreover, they suggest that the appropriate penalty for the above sins is summary execution.

  15. intrepid_wanders said

    Oh, I do not think the greenies are pleased with this production.

    tonibryan
    30 September 2010 10:26PM
    It didn’t strike me as particularly funny, even in a slightly amusing sense. But then again it didn’t strike has being all that effective in trying to change minds either. I understand what the message was, but I’m sitting writing this and thinking ‘so what’.

    The one thing that I did notice was that it was heavily weighted in favour of people in positions of authority ‘killing off’ any sort of dissent, which if the film is about getting people to discuss and act upon 10:10 was something of an own goal and will be utterly counterproductive to what Richard Curtis et al intended with this film.

    Overall, this was a very poor attempt at getting a very serious message across, and not by any stretch of the imagination can this film be said to be ‘good’. Richard Curtis might consider moving on to another choice of career, as it seems he’s seriously lost his touch when it comes to writing and film making.

    From my count, this is 99% of the >50 comments. I think a lot of them watched it, enjoyed a fantasy to cool their frustration, then came back to reality saying, “That is wrong…”. Too funny.

  16. intrepid_wanders said

    Sorry, I could not pass this one up (from The guardian)…

    JohnHalladay
    1 October 2010 1:27AM:
    God knows I’m on your side but this just panders to the morons who think we’re ‘Eco-fascists’ – own goal, guys.
    Kill it and do something better.
    Disturbing!

    Why, yes, I do find you to be ‘Eco-fascists”. But his next comment is golden:

    JohnHalladay
    1 October 2010 1:33AM:
    Actually, I have to say something stronger,
    this film is fucking ridiculous.
    I am a local Greenpeace coordinator, and a Board member of Friends of the Earth and I just can’t believe that you have produced a film that is so fucking stupid.
    There, I’ve sworn on the Guardian.
    Jesus, where is your common sense. We’re trying to win hearts and minds.
    This is just ludicrous.

    Just precious…

  17. Graeme said

    Are they getting a 10% reduction in CO2 emissions via a (forced) 10% population reduction?

  18. Brian H said

    Graeme;
    amusingly enough, it works either way round! :D

  19. Richard111 said

    I think this will backfire in the UK. You can take their coal, take their oil and take their electricity but don’t you dare threaten to take their football!

  20. crosspatch said

    How anyone can align themselves with animals like this and look themselves in the mirror in the morning is beyond me. Anyone considering themselves an “environmentalist progressive” needs to look at this long and hard and decide if this really reflects their personal ethics.

  21. Patagon said

    C’mon, Richard Curtis is the screenwriter of Blackadder, a very cynical vision of everything.

    See here how he treats Religious High Officers: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rBhTIoIXoTI

    The Guardian has an article on it, and you can see by the comments that the environmentalist zealots want to press the red button on Richard Curtis, and for a good reason.

    I think the whole thing is disgustingly funny and probably will backfire on their cause.

  22. Chris R said

    It goes without saying that I’m a former sceptic (surely everyone starts from a position of scepticism?). But I now think AGW is happening and that it may be a serious matter (if I had to bet I’d bet – I’d bet it will be). I say all that just so as you know my background.

    This video has just wasted about 3 minutes of my life (I skipped thro’ it). Pschologically speaking if it’s meant to persuade it’s a failure. It’s as dumb as Monbiot when he made various ill-considered comments about the CRU Email hack.

    If I thought there was a cat-in-hell’s chance of reducing emissions by choice I’d consider it an obstacle. Further polarisation of the public debate over AGW is unhelpful.

  23. Martin J. said

    Things like this are actually fantastic you know. With idiocy like this, who needs skeptics?

    Give a fool enough rope and…

  24. Kevin Cave said

    Blogged about this shocker myself.

    I think the more attention it gets, the more people will see the greenies for what they really are.

    Regards.

  25. Bart said

    That’s a pretty sick video and a stupid piece of PR in the current public discussion.

  26. Bernie said

    Reminds me of jihadists.

  27. stan said

    Bernie,

    Worse. Some jihadists blow themselves up for the cause. In this video, only the deniers get exterminated.

  28. kim said

    Here’s the silver lining. This may be cover for some politicians to have a ‘Sister Soulja’ moment about climate and energy.
    ============

  29. P Gosselin said

    So much moral grandstanding going over all this. Hello! It’s a sarcastic, dark humour- soemthing the Brits are famous for. Get real. Sure it’s in bad taste – but all this phoney indignation – give me a break.

  30. P Gosselin said

    The real shocker is here:

    http://notrickszone.com/2010/09/03/greenpeace-violence-is-escalating-the-lines-are-drawn/

    Now that’s real hatred and brainwashing, and not some dummy filled with jelly for sarcastic humour.

  31. stan said

    Jeff,

    Does it seem that the stories pumped out there recently by the alarmists have just gotten more and more extreme? [I think I'm going to ask Tom Nelson if he thinks the alarmist stuff he's posting daily has taken a decided upturn in gloom and doom extremes.] We know that they have been trying to figure out how to rally from the all the body blows they have taken with the IPCC and Climategate. The whitewashes didn’t work and they’ve been trying to figure out how to change their PR. Not saying that all the recent hype is part of a concerted, planned conspiracy. Some of it obviously is because they’ve told us so.

    In any event, I made a comment at Pielke, Jr that I think the alarmists have adopted a “Battle of the Bulge” strategy. As they see the moment slipping away, they are mounting one final massive attack in an effort to push through their desired policies. As the momentum is slipping away, they realize that all those billions invested will become lost if they don’t move now.

  32. stan said

    P Gosselin,

    It may be that the Brits will “get it” (although even the comments over there don’t seem to indicate that). However, this dark humor won’t play in the US. And there will be far more people in the US who see or hear about this than Brits.

  33. Rui Sousa said

    I am shocked !!! How can someone convey so much hate for people who think otherwise? For me this is tipping point in this whole debate. How can people who boast having involved governments do such rubbish?

    Absolutely disgusting.

    Now I am scared ! I will do what I can to expose this kind of terrorist thinking and demagogic initiatives, their kind is the biggest threat to mankind on the 21st century.

  34. Charlie A said

    The link to the video now says “private video”.

    Someone has uploaded a copy to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rKgtWWCGQZ8

    And you can see more about the mentality behind the video at a “behind the scenes” video about the shoot:

  35. Kenneth Fritsch said

    P Gosselin, I for one thought that the lesson of the video was that so-called voluntary actions that are backed by governments can eventually be not so voluntary. That is a very libertarian view of things and to see it coming from leftists environmentalists makes me think that their intentions back-fired. No doubt after some thought, the moral indignations over this are going to be spewed by the left as much as the right.

    As for your linked video about the hooded youngster’s view of the climate world, I find it hilarious what he/she said about the supposed generational problems of AGW could also be said about the generational problems (that are much more real and evident than any detrimental consequences of AGW) of government sponsored social security and health care in almost all advanced nations. I suspect if the AGW mitigation had already been given over to government and there were still generational problems we would not have heard this message – at least not from these people.

  36. BR said

    I think this video is very much in keeping with the direction the CAGW crowd has been moving… we’ve seen threats of “we know where you live” coming from Greenpeace, a number of prominent supporters musing about how maybe democracy is not such a good idea, I routinely see CAGW supporters floating the notion of “punishing” the “skeptics” once the opportunity arises in comments on environmental stories at sites like Digg, etc. To me, the message is very clear: once we are in control, you will do what we tell you to do or we will kill you. Along those lines, its also worth remembering that the hardcore activists look at environmentalism as only one point along a long continuum of related political objectives and ideals. Anyone who thinks the little red button would only be brought out to punish CAGW skeptics is kidding themselves.

    Give them power and they will march us back to the green equivalent of year zero faster than you can shake a stick, with all the horror that entails. What is shocking is just how openly they now admit it.

    That this video was actually produced by 10:10 (while watching it I was assuming it was a spoof created by some group aiming to discredit CAGW supporters) is quite remarkable. It is fortunate for the rest of us that these people are so blisteringly stupid. Talk about an own goal!

  37. Katabasis said

    @P Gosselin

    “So much moral grandstanding going over all this. Hello! It’s a sarcastic, dark humour- soemthing the Brits are famous for. Get real. Sure it’s in bad taste – but all this phoney indignation – give me a break.”

    This is becoming a tired old canard for defending this obscenity already.

    This Brit didn’t regard it as “sarcastic, dark humour” and the only way it could have been interpreted as such is if it had been made by an overt sceptic. And I speak as a lifelong fan of Monty Python and Blackadder etc (the latter which the writer for this video was a co-writer). Frankly, trying to defend it by saying that it is a particular kind of British humour that non-brits won’t get is pathetic and patronising.

    It is a thoroughly despicable piece of propagandistic narrative that dehumanises anyone with any sliver of scepticism (including the agnostics) as well as normalising their exclusion, or even violence towards them. If this still gets the go ahead for screenings in cinema and on TV I look forward to the first media reports of bullying at school of kids who haven’t appropriately conformed to the orthodoxy.

    And, with regard to the writer, Richard Curtis – he has three houses and four children. That is precisesly two houses and two children more than he is permitted under the “green” orthodoxy limits. Perhaps someone could produce a video showing two of his properties and children exploding. This would obviously be a spoof and anyone who thought it was even remotely threatening obviously has a defective humour circuit. Obviously.

  38. P Gosselin said

    Much ado about nothing.
    People here act like they’ve never seen a cheap horror movie before or something. To be honest, I get a creepy feeling from both – people who make such clips, and from people who disproportionately act all indignant about it. Both in my view appear a bit radical.

    The clip deserves to be criticised. But beware of those trying to score moral points by displaying indignation and moral superiority.

  39. I’ll go on the record to say that its pretty awful, tasteless, and almost sure to backfire. What were they thinking?

  40. andy said

    Blowing children up who don’t want to do the 10:10 challenge?

    Sorry children……..can I just point out we are talking about blowing up children.

    FFS what are they thinking?

  41. kim said

    The scariest thing is that the 10:10 producers are so locked into their belief system that this PR disaster wasn’t anticipated.

    They were thinking, alright, and Lucy Skywalker has named it: Florid Psychosis.
    ================

  42. Bad Andrew said

    It could be interpreted as a warning or a plea for help. We are probably well past the stage where many of the devotees want out, but are coerced into maintaining the propaganda out of fear.

    Andrew

  43. kim said

    Bad Andrew, by the middle of last year I was hoping that this would all end in ridicule, but my friend Peter Bocking told me that it would end in anger, that too many had died already.
    ===========================

  44. Bad Andrew said

    Kim,

    I still have hope that this will resolve for the good of everyone. He said “Be not afraid.” So, to best of my ability, I am not.

    Andrew

  45. Justa Joe said

    “We ‘killed’ five people to make No Pressure – a mere blip compared to the 300,000 real people who now die each year from climate change,” -Ms. Armstrong

    300K people die from CAGW each years? Where do they get this crap?

  46. [...] The rest: Cull the Skeptics [...]

  47. Amabo said

    I’ve watched a lot of blackadder and python… So why didn’t I get the joke?

  48. W. W. Wygart said

    Quote from the 10:10 websites NoPressure apology page [you can find it at the top of this page]. The whole 10:10 team: “We’d like to thank the 50+ film professionals and 40+ actors and extras who gave their time and equipment for free.”

    What!!!

    And they didn’t even PAY the crew or the talent!!! [God, lets hope they were at least decent enough to provide meals]

    Now we know for SURE exactly where these people’s ethics really are!

    Franny Armstrong is obviously able to make a living at this – SOMEHOW – but 90+ people who realized her vision for her had to be making a living SOMEWHERE ELSE in order to make it happen.

    Sorry for shouting. I’ll cut myself off here I don’t like to sound like I’m angry or bitter.

    your friend W^3

  49. GregO said

    Insane. These videos are just insane. How could any one in their right mind even imagine making these videos?

    As far as the little kids that are portayed as being blown apart; how do we know they are mature enough to even understand the issues? Maybe they were just being sassy little kids when they didn’t raise their hands? For that, they are summarily executed? How is this imagery an artistically cool way to make a point? To me, it was just and excuse for a horrible image of violence against children – and according to the website some found it “hilarious”. Wow.

  50. [...] Cull the skeptics, Infocult, The Catastrophist, Fascistic New Video, Greens want to blow you up, Chicks on the right, Boom!, most self-defeating ad campaign ever, utter stupidity, decimation, massive Freudian slip. [...]

  51. kim said

    Check out Frannie Armstrong’s interview with Ed Milliband last year, pre-Copenhagen. It’s presently fifth in Yahoo’s search of ‘Frannie Armstrong’. In it she says ‘I gotta define this generation’.

    She has delusions of grandeur that are crashing on the rocks, now that the tide of her political putsch is steadily ebbing.
    ===========

  52. Barry Woods said

    Here is an UNGUARDED, immediate reaction, in the GUARDIAN COMMENT section. He posted it in horror, then had to come back again, he was so UPSET with 10:10

    This was a BOARD MEMBER OF FRIENDS OF THE EARTH

    I sent the below to the BBC:

    A comment from a FRIENDS OF THE EARTH Board Member – in the Guardian.. (immediate unguarded, un PR reaction)

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film?showallcomments=true#end-of-comments

    JohnHalladay (Friends of the Earth – Board Member)
    1 October 2010 1:27AM

    God knows I’m on your side but this just panders to the morons who think we’re ‘Eco-fascists’ – own goal, guys.
    Kill it and do something better.
    Disturbing!

    He came back for some more. (my asterisks)
    2nd comment.. (could not leave it..)

    JohnHalladay (Friends of the Earth – Board Member)

    1 October 2010 1:33AM

    Actually, I have to say something stronger,
    this film is f***ing ridiculous.
    I am a local Greenpeace coordinator, and a Board member of Friends of the Earth and I just can’t believe that you have produced a film that is so f***ing stupid.
    There, I’ve sworn on the Guardian.Jesus, where is your common sense. We’re trying to win hearts and minds.
    This is just ludicrous.

    Presumably this is John…..

    http://www.foe.co.uk/what_we_do/about_us/board/board_members.html

    John Halladay

    “Friends of the Earth Trust and Limited
    Elected Board member for South Central Member of:
    Engagement Committee
    Elected: 2008
    Due for re-election: 2011
    John’s particular interests in the environmental field include recycling, the concept of individual carbon allowances and the effect of increasing world population on the environment. He works as a Human Resources consultant greening the employment practices in UK companies and is also the joint co-ordinator of Bracknell & District Friends of the Earth.”

    The BBC should be reporting this whole story to the general public, not perceived to be protecting the CAGW message.
    On all the ‘usual’ blogs, there is deep cynicism that the BBC will not touch on this story….
    I hope that the BBC can prove them wrong.

    Please BBC this shows a ‘green bubble’ groupthink at work.. (much like Gordon Brown’s ‘bigot’ moment – the media ran with that, why not this?)

    Did not ONE person, involved in this (there must have been hundred or more) not think to say: ‘hang on, is this really a good idea..’
    Or was, it ‘NO pressure’ preventing anybody saying it was daft.

    Or was green groupthink at work… Of course ‘NO pressure’ in those who might think it was a bad idea… so kep quiet.

    It was going to be shown in CINEMAS..

    EVERY single other environment group is absolutley furious with 10:10

    Don’t let them pretend otherwise…

  53. TGSG said

    P Gosselin said

    #29 Hello! It’s a sarcastic, dark humour- soemthing the Brits are famous for. Get real.

    #38 But beware of those trying to score moral points by displaying … moral superiority.

    Look in a mirror lately?

    Yasureyabetcha,when I see little kids being blown to bloody bits in school, the first thing I think is…. you fill in the rest.

  54. Derek said

    Yet more evidence of the “science” of AGW,
    AND the consensus’s attitude / approach to “free thinking” AND “free speech”.

    BTW – This “film” seems to add considerable weight to Alan Curruba’s recent article,

    http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/27376

    Nazi Dreams were Green Dreams
    By Alan Caruba Monday, September 6, 2010

    Well worth a read I would suggest.
    Apparently, the “Nazi regime was made up of animal rights advocates, environmentalists, and vegetarians.”
    A lesson from history, perhaps.

  55. Rob T said

    My concern here is more abstract/phylisophical. There is a ‘law’ – Dawson’s law? – that you cannot tell the satire of far out field religious belief from the satirical version without subtitles. This is the same. If I was satiring a taecher – and as a loane voice in the wilderness physics teacher I know people who fit that profile – or a business that bought into the reducing carbon footprint idea, I would use these characters and almost those words. I am looking at this film and I am unable to tell from the content alone who made it: pro AGW or anti-AGW? This is a big problem.

  56. I see that the Guardian has stopped further comments being posted on its thread. Must have realised the damage that the article had done to its already dwindling credibility.

    The Science and Public Policy Institute has a good article on this (Note 1) which also gives some background into eco-nutter Frannie Armstrong which suggests to me that perhaps she can be excused just a little. Her gullibility may be due to an unfortunate combination of genes that brought her into this world. On the other hand she may, like AL Gore and his buddies, be simply motivated by money. I suspect that she thought that the UN’s COP15 fiasco in Copenhagen an opportunity to turn her second-rate film-making career around. With all of the political hype that preceded COP15, any gullible person would think it opportune to jump on the bandwagon. Frannie certainly jumped, founding 10:10 after chatting with another staunch supporter of The (significant human-made global climate change) Hypothesis, Ed Miliband.

    Miliband is a career politician, not a scientist, and had his own reasons for pushing out his version of the propaganda (Note 2) ahead of COP15. He gave his full support to Gordon Brown’s nonsense that “This is perhaps the greatest challenge that we face as a world” (Note 3). This is evidenced by his comment in Africa in August 2009 when asking people to sign “Ed’s Pledge” (Note 4) with his “the world can’t afford to wait. The problem is urgent .. ”. Of course, after the COP15 extravaganza turned into a fiasco climate change was relegated from this exalted position and Number10.gov.uk The Official Site of the Prime Minister’s Office considers that “The greatest challenge Mr Brown faced in office was the worldwide financial crisis and the subsequent recession”.

    Ed Miliband is sticking doggedly with his propaganda. In his effort to win leadership of the Labour Party he persisted with “climate change is the greatest challenge to our way of life” (Note 6) then in his presentation to the Labour Party Conference last month Note 7) he said “taking the difficult steps to protect our planet for future generations is the greatest challenge our generation faces”. What he is too dumb to accept is that it is the UN’s propaganda train that is heading for catastrophe, not global climates.

    As for Frannie Armstrong and her Spanner Films, I’m afraid that they are heading for catastrophe too.

    NOTES:
    1) see http://sppiblog.org/news/the-environmental-activist-mind-set-the-age-of-utter-stupidity
    2) see http://www.clickgreen.org.uk/big-interview/interview/12892-ed-milibands-ralph-miliband-lecture-he-politics-of-climate-change%E2%80%99.html
    3) see http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/climate-change/climate-change-the-worlds-greatest-challenge-says-brown-1834252.html
    4) see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMMZheVpTgw&feature=related & http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wR3gjETeLiE&NR=1
    5) see http://www.number10.gov.uk/history-and-tour/prime-ministers-in-history/gordon-brown
    6) see http://edmiliband.org/learnmore/we-need-to-change-to-win-eds-fabian-essay/
    7) see http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/sep/28/ed-miliband-labour-conference-speech

    Best regards, Pete Ridley

  57. android said

    Howdy! I’m at work surfing around your blog from my new iphone 3gs! Just wanted to say I love reading your blog and look forward to all your posts! Keep up the great work!

  58. Brian Hall said

    2 spam posts.

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 )

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Google+ photo

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

Connecting to %s

 
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 142 other followers

%d bloggers like this: