Snow Business Like Snow Business

Over a year ago I wrote about BAA being unable to keep Thiefrow open during the snow.

Well here we are, some 13 months later, and BAA have once again demonstrated that they are unable to manage a piss up in a brewery.

Last night's "staggering" snow fall, of but a few centimetres, has caused BAA to cancel vast swathes of scheduled flights from Thiefrow today.

Evidently no one told BAA that snow was coming...oh, hang on a minute!!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Nuts!

Despite the remarkable failure of BAA to keep Heathrow, one of the world's busiest (yet truly awful) airports, open during the inclement weather my partner (Eva) managed to fly back from Stockholm yesterday without any delay or fuss.

How?

Oh, simple, she flew Norwegian Air to Gatwick (an airport not "managed" by BAA).

Her journey though was not without an element of Nannyism.

On board the flight she was about to open a chocolate bar that contained nuts.

Can you guess what happened next children?

Yes, that's right, she was forbidden from opening it.

For why?

Seemingly, somewhere on board was a person with a nut allergy.

Now if this person was sitting next to her, was going to lick the bar or sniff in the nuts I could understand the concern. However, this was simply not the case.

An overreaction yes?

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

The Joy of Cat Litter II

I see, rather surprisingly, that the weather forecasts were pretty accurate wrt the snow and ice that had been predicted.

Fair enough!

Given the fact that there has been sufficient and well publicised warnings about the snow I assume that Nanny (eg councils, the Highways Agency etc) and "quasi state" bodies (eg Network Rail, BAA, BA, train companies etc) were ready for it, and have responded professionally and efficiently ensuring that our transport system continues to function during the snow.

What's that you say?

Really, the transport system has ground to a halt again?

Surely not?

Surely these bodies were prepared and ready this time?

Funny that isn't it, the state and "quasi state" bodies are always rather good at telling us how to live our lives (eg "don't travel", "check your flight details before leaving home", "no liquids", "check in at least two hours before departure" etc) and are more than happy to rob us blind (eg taxes, train fares etc) in return for providing us with "services" that fail?

Rather a one way "relationship" isn't it?

Looks like I will be using a lot of cat litter over the coming days!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Swedish Lessons

In keeping with the Thiefrow (sorry I mean Heathrow) Terminal 5 theme, I would like to draw your attention to this little article from a Swedish site E24:

Pommes-fritt på nya Heathrow-terminalen

Londonflygplatsen Heathrow har öppnat en ny jätteterminal - där man förbjudit förekomsten av pommes frites och annan snabbmat.

Monsterflygplatsen Heathrow, med Europas största flöde av privatpassagerare tillika den flygplats som slussar vidare flest internationella passagerare i världen, har fått ett rejält tilltaget terminaltillskott.

Den nya terminalen är tidsenlig på många sätt. Framförallt är den befriad från transfetter och osund kost. I sann Jamie Oliver-anda har man bestämt sig för att förbjuda snabbmatsrestauranger till förmån för sunda och miljövänliga alternativ, rapporterar norska Aftonposten.

Den etablerade brittiska pubkedjan JD Wetherspoon har därför tvingats radera frityrstekarna och fish-and-chipsen från sitt utbud på Terminal 5.

Bygget av Terminal 5, som den nya terminalen heter, har tagit nästan åtta år. Men terminalen har varit i pipeline längre än så. Redan 1982 inleddes en debatt kring huruvida man skulle bygga ut Londonflygplatsen Stansted eller satsa på att bygga ut Heathrow.

Tio år senare bestämde man sig slutligen för att satsa på en femte terminal för Heathrow. Sammanlagt 80 000 personer har varit involverade i bygget.

Terminal 5 kommer att besökas av uppskattningsvis 30 miljoner passagerare årligen, vilket ökar Heathrows totala kapacitet till 90 miljoner passagerare per år, en ökning med 22 miljoner passagerare eller dryga 30 procent, från dagens 68 miljoner passagerare.

Den totala kostnaden beräknas till 4,3 miljarder pund, motsvarande 52 miljarder kronor i dagens penningvärde.

How very cosmopolitan of me!

The title says:

French fries-free new Heathrow terminal!

It goes on to say that that the established British pub JD Wetherspoon had to remove deep fried steak and fish-and-chips from the menu in Terminal 5.

Most assuredly, we should boycott Terminal 5!

Here endeth today's Swedish lesson.

Knobheads of The Year - BAA II

Hearty congratulations to BAA for thoroughly screwing up the first day of operations of Terminal 5 Thiefrow (sorry I mean Heathrow).

Chaos reigned supreme yesterday as check ins, baggage belts and lifts failed. I understand that today is pretty shambolic too.

How ironic that I gave them the "Knobheads of The Year" Award yesterday!

Now let me see, what have I said on several occasions about BAA's competence...errmmm???

Oh yes, this is what I said:

"BAA are shite, and regularly manage to screw up simple tasks such as baggage handling. The effective, efficient and secure control of personal data such as prints is way beyond their capabilities."

The words "brewery", "piss up", "couldn't" and "organise" spring to mind...if someone could please arrange them in the correct order for me...

Suffice to say, given the dismal performance of BAA wrt terminal 5 Thiefrow, how on earth can they be trusted with our fingerprint data?

I am absolutely certain that BAA, in it current form, will cease to exist in the not too distant future. Let us hope that whatever rises from the ashes is an improvement.

BAA, well deserving knobheads of the year.

corporateresponsibility@baa.com

Knobheads of The Year - BAA

Today, in hour of the opening of Terminal 5 Thiefrow, I was going to award BAA my prestigious "Prats of The Week" Award, for their truly appalling scheme to fingerprint everyone (including domestic travellers) at Terminal 5 Thiefrow.

I now have to state publicly, and on the record, that this award would have been a grave mistake.

I formally and unreservedly apologise to BAA for almost besmirching their "fine" name, by thinking of giving them this award, and herewith and immediately withdraw the award.

What?!!!!!! I hear you ejaculate (can I say ejaculate here?).

Have you lost your cajones Ken?

Fear not loyal readers and anti Nannyers everywhere, I have not lost my cajones. BAA are in fact to be awarded my ultra prestigious "Knobheads of The Year" Award.

For why?

Well, it seems that their idiotic and badly thought through scheme to fingerprint everyone at Thiefrow Terminal 5, which is being investigated by the Information Commissioner's Orifice (ICO) as it is illegal, has been put on hold.

A spokesman for BAA slimed:

"Following a meeting with all relevant parties, including the Information Commissioner and the Border and Immigration Agency, the introduction of fingerprinting for domestic passengers and international passengers transferring on to domestic flights at Heathrow will be temporarily delayed."

BAA said that it will hold further talks with both the Information Commissioner and the Border and Immigration Agency before deciding its next move.

For the time being instead of leaving a fingerprint before passing through security, passengers will be photographed.

BE WARNED

This measure is only "on hold", BAA have spent a lot of money on installing the fingerprint scanners and are as keen as mustard to use them; they will try every trick in the book to implement this.

Here's why thier scheme is a load of old bollocks:

• BAA are shite, and regularly manage to screw up simple tasks such as baggage handling. The effective, efficient and secure control of personal data such as prints is way beyond their capabilities



• BAA are on the point of bankruptcy, what happens to this system when they collapse?



• The security services will of course take these details, no matter what BAA say



• This will add to the delays and frustrations of the hapless passengers who have to endure Heathrow's primitive facilities (note Terminal 5's design was buggered about and ruined, because BAA couldn't afford to build the original design)



• There is no need to fingerprint domestic passengers, this could be done purely for international and transit passengers at their point of arrival (even if there really is a security need for prints...which I doubt)



• The UK is the only country in the world that is going to fingerprint domestic passengers. Why?



• They will photograph everyone anyway, the prints are not needed

Anyhoo, in celebration of today's grand opening of Terminal 5 Thiefrow I am proud, nay honoured, to award BAA "Knobheads of The Year"

Feel free to tell them that they have won, via this email address: corporateresponsibility@baa.com

They had better hurry to pick up the award, given their appalling gearing levels BAA are not going to be around for much longer!

BAA well deserving "Knobheads of The Year"!

BAA Truly is Shite II

Hah!

Further to my article about BAA wanting to fingerprint its hapless passengers who have to endure the shopping mall that is Terminal 5 at Heathrow, it seems that even Nanny is worried that this is a step too far.

The Home Office denies ever having told BAA to use fingerprinting as an extra security measure, and the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) says that the plan may be illegal.

The ICO believes that this is another step "on the road to a surveillance society", and has warned BAA that it might breach Data Protection laws.

A spokesman for the Information Commissioner said:

"Our concern is with the surveillance society. Is this another step on the road towards that kind of society? Why do they need fingerprints, and why four? Why are other airports able to operate with just photographs, and is this a proportionate response?"

Good for the ICO!

The ICO have issued the following advice to passenger, when asked for fingerprints passengers should demand to know why they were being taken, what would be done with them and how long would they be kept.

Make the system inoperable by sheer bloody mindedness.

Vent your spleen on BAA via this link corporateresponsibility@baa.com

BAA Truly is Shite

Congratulations to BAA (Britsh Airports Authority) for out "Nannying" Nanny.

How has this historic achievement been effectuated? (Can I say effectuated on a public website?)

I shall tell you...

When Terminal 5 at Heathrow opens on 27th March, all passengers passing through its portals (including British citizens flying on domestic flights) will be fingerprinted and photographed.

For why?

BAA claim that it's because the design of the building mixes transit, international and domestic travellers all in one huge shopping mall.

BAA also claim that the photos and prints will be destroyed after 24 hours, and will not be given to the security services.

Well, here's why this is a load of old bollocks:

• BAA are shite, and regularly manage to screw up simple tasks such as baggage handling. The effective, efficient and secure control of personal data such as prints is way beyond their capabilities



• BAA are on the point of bankruptcy, what happens to this system when they collapse?



• The security services will of course take these details, no matter what BAA say



• This will add to the delays and frustrations of the hapless passengers who have to endure Heathrow's primitive facilities (note Terminal 5's design was buggered about and ruined, because BAA couldn't afford to build the original design)



• There is no need to fingerprint domestic passengers, this could be done purely for international and transit passengers at their point of arrival (even if there really is a security need for prints...which I doubt)



• The UK is the only country in the world that is going to fingerprint domestic passengers. Why?

Just to put this truly in perspective, I have travelled to Beijing, Moscow and Pyongyang; I have never had to give my fingerprints at these airports.

All in all BAA are taking actions way above their lowly station in life.

I suggest that people bugger up their new system by spraying plastic skin on their fingers, thus making the system inoperable.

Vent your spleen on BAA via this link corporateresponsibility@baa.com

The Moral Dilemma

Nanny is only able to survive because people are either passive or pro active in their support of her policies.

The pro active people shrilly spread and enforce Nanny's edicts re smoking, breast feeding, fat consumption, drinking, obesity etc etc.

The passive people meekly shrug their shoulders, and claim that there is nothing that they can do to stop the ongoing encroachment into our liberties and daily lives.

Nanny gets away with it, because we let her. Her rules would be unenforceable, were we to all stand up and say "NO".

I was therefore highly amused yesterday when I saw both the "passives" and "pro actives" united in a moral dilemma, which resulted in two of Nanny's edicts being royally broken in full public view.

In an enclosed shopping centre in my "beloved" Croydon, a man was drinking from a can of lager and having a fag.

For shame!

Two of Nanny's prime edicts broken, and in public too!

Both the pro active (anti smoking, anti drinking Nanny shrillers) and passive shoulder "what can I do about it?" shruggers, walked past tut tutting and sucking their cheeks in as if sucking on a particularly bitter lemon.

Yet they did nothing?

They allowed Nanny's rules to be broken.

Why was this then?

Why didn't anyone tell this bloke that he as breaking Nanny's prime edicts, drinking in a no drink area and smoking in a public enclosed place?

Why didn't they stop him?

I shall tell you...

He was in a wheelchair, and as such Nanny's minions were faced with a moral dilemma that they couldn't handle.

My complements to the gentlemen for exposing the hypocrisy and ineffectiveness of Nanny's rules. The rules are unenforceable, if the passive "shruggers" stop allowing themselves to be pushed around by Nanny and the "shrillers". In this case, the "shrillers" were neutered by their moral dilemma.

Whilst we are on the subject of moral dilemmas, here is some advice to the rag bag collection of eco campaigners who are camped out at Heathrow airport.

Were it not for the monumentally crass handling of this by BAA and the police, we would never have heard of this nonsense. Now it has become a major issue; as Nanny, BAA and the police have tried to convince us that these people are terrorists and a threat to society.

Anyhoo, my advice the the eco warriors is this...the greatest source of dangerous emissions that is damaging the atmosphere in the UK and other Western countries comes not from the car or from planes, but from the methane produced by our dairy and beef industries.

Were the eco campaigners really serious about reducing emissions, they would be advocating the extermination of all cattle. The trouble is that would pose a bit of a moral dilemma to these people, and of course airlines are a far easier target!

While I am on the subject, whilst Nanny and the media work themselves up into great apoplexy about the dangers to our sprogs from lead in the paint on imported Chinese toys...what about the dangers to the workers making these things for a pittance?

Rules and causes are great...if you don't have to think the consequences of them through first!

Money Well Spent

Nanny loves to spend our money on her "pet projects", it's so easy when it's not your own money to indulge yourself isn't it?

However, even by Nanny's wasteful standards this spending spree takes the biscuit.

Nanny's good chums in Havering Council have spent the last 12 months, and £10,000 of taxpayers' money on conducting a very serious and time consuming investigation.

What were they investigating then Ken? I hear you ask.

Seemingly the planning meetings of the council were being disrupted.

How were they being disrupted?

Someone saying "baa".

I kid you not!

Nanny got herself into a right old huff over this, and decided to track down this most evil of miscreants.

The result?

Twelve months and £10,000 down the toilet later, and Nanny has compiled herself a fine report amounting to a staggering 300 pages.

Unfortunately, the prime suspect is no longer a councillor and is, therefore, outwith being spanked by Nanny (those three words will generate this site some interesting hits from the search engines:)).

Seemingly this sorry tale of waste began last September during a planning meeting, when an application was being heard to put a mobile home on a farm housing rare breeds of horses and sheep.

The discussion was interrupted by a male councillor making "baa-ing" noises.

Coun Jeff Tucker, who represents the area where the farm is, got himself into a huff and reported the incident to the Standards Board for England which, in turn, referred it back to Havering council for investigation.

The probe (can I say probe?) has come up with four suspects, who will be interrogated by the standards hearings sub-committee in November.

One of the suspects, Denis O'Flynn, a former Labour councillor and deputy mayor, said:

"This has been an extremely expensive example of the worst kind of council bureaucracy.

The fact that this investigation has cost so much time and money is the height of stupidity."

Quite!

Congratulations to Havering Council, who have won my Prestigious Prats of The Week Award.

Feel free to drop them a note via this link info@havering.gov.uk teleing them of their award.

Nanny Bans Black Sheep

Nanny is a firm believer in the principle that if she starts moulding a child at a young enough age, then she will have that child for life.

Therefore it should come as no surprise that Nanny seeks to interfere in the education and development of pre school toddlers.

Nanny's best friend Stuart Chamberlain, manager of the Family Centre in Abingdon and the Sure Start centre in Sutton Courtenay Oxfordshire, has decided that traditional nursery rhymes are no longer "PC". As such he has decided to rewrite a few old classics, lest the originals "cause offence" to children.

Ladies and gentlemen I present Chamberlain's version of "Baa Baa Black Sheep"; altogether now:

"Baa Baa Rainbow Sheep..."

Enough of that crap!

It seems that Chamberlain is worried that the word "black" is racist, what a prat! By the way, what the f**k is a rainbow sheep anyway?

Chamberlain justifies his inane idea in an interview with a local newspaper:

"This is fairly standard across nurseries.

We are following stringent equal opportunities rules.

No one should feel pointed out because of their race, gender or anything else."

In addition to black sheep being banned, poor old Humpty Dumpty loses his raison d'etre and no longer has "a great fall"; as Nanny feels that children will be upset by the idea of him falling off a wall.

I would remind Nanny that whilst she saves children from the trauma of an imaginary egg man falling off a wall, the same children are happily subjected to daily diet of violent abusive shit such as EastEnders on the TV.

Which is worse, I wonder?

By the way, in case your wondering, Snow White has lost her seven dwarfs!

Nanny's lackeys in Ofsted, the watchdog which inspects Sure Start centres, confirmed the new policy; it seems that centres are expected to "have regard to anti-discrimination good practice" and that staff should "actively promote equality of opportunity".

The DfES washed their hands of the matter, in true Nanny style, by saying:

"We don't support this approach to the teaching of traditional nursery rhymes,

but any such decision would be taken locally."

In case you are wondering, "Baa Baa Black Sheep" was written in 1744 as a political protest about wool imports; ie it has nothing to do with racism, but of course Nanny is too lazy and too stupid to bother checking that out.