Thursday, 30 April 2009

The One That Is Ticking Off His Checklist: 'Popcorn, Cider, Ciggies, Camcorder'. . .

A tip of the hat to Mr. E for flagging up this article from the Daily Fail:

Three Labour MPs are said to be terrified that the release of their expenses claims will expose them as adulterers and financial cheats.

Four ministers are also understood to have warned party whips they might have to resign for abusing the system, when MPs' receipts are published before the summer recess in July.

The three unnamed backbenchers are said to have been placed on 'suicide watch' by Labour whips, who fear they might break down when the details of their excesses come out.

Two are understood to have had extra-marital affairs with other members of Parliament.

Now can we just be absolutely clear about what 'suicide watch' means? Are they worried that some MPs may get a bit blubby, or are they wanting people to watch and make sure they really do top themselves?

If it is the latter, I will selflessly put myself forward for the task. Perhaps I can offer some words of consolation like 'You screwed who? How will you like sleeping in the shed you claimed for, you adulterous venal wankstain?' and 'Oh, man, you should see the crowds outside your constituency home's front door, I didn't think you could still get pitchforks, and I was convinced the manufacture of flaming torches was a dead art.' or 'Gordon's going to make you Home Sec.'

We need to make sure these useless bastards can do something properly.

It is going to be monumentally entertaining. I'll be compiling a highlights DVD, which I can watch on General Election night during that odd post-dinner - pre-polling station closing window.

The One That Thinks Their Toy Should Be Taken Away. . .

Buried away in the dark recesses of Pravda online is this:

Police stopped and searched three times as many people under anti-terrorism powers in 2007/8 compared to the year before, Home Office figures reveal.

Hmmm, OK. But that doesn't really tell us much does it? One person could have been stopped in the previous year, and three this year would mean, well, I don't have to spell it out, I'm sure you can do the maths.

Some 124,687 stops and searches were conducted in England and Wales under anti-terror laws.

Right, so that means the equivalent of the whole city of Gloucester was stopped and searched. Bloody hell. It's a dangerous place out there, that's a lot of people looking like terrorists, isn't it?

Almost 90% of searches took place in London, the statistics reveal.

Well, now there's a surprise. Given the almost hysterical reaction from the PCSOs in Westminster on OH's little walk last November, I'm surprised it wasn't 99.9% of people. Still, they must have had good reason. I bet they stopped some terrorists.

Didn't they?

73 - 0.058% - ended in arrests for terror offences.

You see, it was. . . WHAT? Seventy pissing three? Out of almost 125,000 people? Christ on a fucking bike with a bell, basket and playing card stuck in the spokes. 73? Are they taking the piss?

Following anti-terrorism searches, some 1,198 people were arrested for other reasons.

Right. So in a total of 124,687 stops, 1271 people, that's 1.01%, had been sufficiently criminal or stupid to get nicked. Let's face it, you can get nicked for anything these days. And they only managed to scuff a gnat's chuff over 1% of the people they stopped?

This isn't anti-terror policing, this is making a bloody nusiance of yourself. A charter for people to be a pain in the bloody arse.

What isn't clear from this report is how many of the 73 arrested under anti-terror legislation* were charged, and then how many were convicted. I'd love to know. Has 12 months of invasive, heavy-handed nosiness lead to anyone appearing in court?

Bloody hell. Surely, surely, there's better things to do with your time than this? Or is it just that the wrong people are being stopped? I mean, we're told they're everywhere. Bloody Diss is alive with them.

This is not a mechanism for national security, it is a mechanism to let people know that they're being watched, and had better behave themselves, or else.

What a crock of shit, and then they've the nerve to put up posters saying things like 'This nuclear power station will not be bombed because someone called us when they spotted someone on their flight back from Malaga looking at it out of the window next to their seat.'

Give me bloody strength. . .

*and why do the media and politicians persist in calling it anti-terror legislation? You're hardly likely to have pro-terror legislation are you? Another example of pandering to the hard of thinking.

Tuesday, 28 April 2009

The One That Says 'Oh, Do You Think?'. . .

This from Pravda:

A good night's sleep could reduce hyperactivity and bad behaviour among
children, a Finnish study reports.
It has been suggested that some children who lack sleep do not appear tired, but instead behave badly.

More shock news tomorrow, when Panorama reveals that bears shit in the woods and Newsnight reports that the Pope has a collection of funny hats. . .

Friday, 24 April 2009

The One That Is Mightiliy Impressed. . .

I was working last night, so am just watching last night's Question Time on Sky+ now. I just have to have to say what an absolutely superb performance from David Starkey.

If you didn't see it, and would like to witness Dr. Starkey tearing new arseholes left, right and centre, you can do so on I-Player.

Thursday, 23 April 2009

The One That Wants You To Pay Attention. . .

Look, Jacqui Smith quite clearly said that the recession would not lead to an increase in crime, so if you are the sort of person to associate an increase in crime with the economic downturn, you are clearly a nazi, racist, homphobic paedophile. Got it?

The One That, Surprisingly, Agrees With Him. . .

Gordon Brown has said that the tax rise in yesterday's budget in 'not the end of New Labour.'

He's quite right you know.

We've seen the end coming for some time now, and it will come as no surprise when it finally arrives, but it ain't here yet. We could have another year of this to come, the end of the New Labour project will be messy, humiliating and a complete elephant hunt.

Even if I'm taxed so much that I can't afford to wear a pair of shoes, I'll make sure that on election night I'll have access to a TV and a big bag of popcorn, and I shall raise a cheer as the seats they hold wink out one by one.

I may even do a little dance, and look forward to booking the day after the election as an annual leave day, as I shall be gloriously drunk, transiting into a hangover of pure euphoria. Guns will then be turned onto the Conservative government, who I confidently predict are bunch of venal, grasping, corrupt, authoritarian fucktards.

Tuesday, 21 April 2009

The One That Says Vote For Something, Not Against Something. . .

We're in for a spot of Parliamentary tennis over the next few years.

I believe that the evidence is crystal clear; the New Labour project has crashed and burned. We've had a decade of nothing but spin and parsimonious and controlling legislation. Legislation that cannot effect real change as we are so closely tied to the EU, so just serves to make our lives as difficult as possible with no real end beyond control itself. A decade of personality over policy, of shameless troughing with squeals of rage when they are shown up to be doing it. A decade of cronyism and incompetence, where attempts are made in the party HQ to rig the election of a PPC who is the daughter of a mate. A decade of treating people, even their own members, with contempt, as vassals to do their bidding whether it is what they want or not.

I was never a Labour supporter, but I could weep for the people who have found the party that represented their beliefs (the fact I disagree with those beliefs is irrelevant) has been swept away from underneath them. So desperate were the 'elite' in the Labour party that holding power meant more to them than what the party actually stood for.

The New Labour project has failed so massively that they could find the next election very uncomfortable indeed. I for one will not be voting for them.

But I will be voting for something. I will be voting for the Libertarian Party, if I cannot for the lack of a candidate, I will vote for an independent who actually believes in something strongly enough to put themselves forward. Someone that wants to be in Parliament to make a change, not someone that wants to be in Parliament to be in Parliament.

I think it is important to vote for something though. Don't vote against things. Don't vote Conservative, LimpDem, PC, SNP, Green, UKIP, BNP, Mebyon Kernow or whatever just because they are not the Labour Party. Vote for one of those parties because they best represent what you want and what you believe.

If the Tories get in with a decent majority, and I believe they will, will it be because people believe in what they have to say, or is it to do with the fact that they ain't the other guy? Can David Cameron really stand up on the morning after election day and talk about a mandate from the people? From where I stand his policies are so similar to Labour's it isn't true. Both parties offer toast and jam, it's just that one is strawberry jam and the other is blackcurrant.

There'll be a honeymoon period. It'll be all smiles and renewed energy, change we can believe in, and then after a year or so, people will realise that they've voted for the same again and the howls of frustration and resentment will start to be heard once more. Unless there are major changes, a Tory government is likely to be a one term gig. Perhaps having bounced back to Labour, and maybe even again to the Tories, people may realise that they have to break the cycle if they want things to change.

I'm not going to tell you who to vote for in the election next year, or the Europeans this year, but I will tell you what to vote for:

Vote for what you want, not against what you don't.

Wednesday, 15 April 2009

The One That Is Going To Write To Ofcom. . .

I'm going to sit in on Sunday, waiting for Songs of Praise, just so I can be offended after reading this snivelling whinging guff from the ridiculous self-obsessed sky pixie brigade.

Angry Coronation Street viewers have complained to Ofcom and ITV after a character made "anti-Christian" remarks during an episode on Easter Sunday.

The broadcast watchdog said it received 23 complaints over Ken Barlow referring to the faith as "superstition" and God as a "supernatural being".

Oh for crying out loud, just get a life won't you?

One minute you're bleating about how God is all powerful, created the universe etc, etc, and the next your bellyaching that 'To choose this script on the most holy day in the Christian calendar is insulting and greatly offensive.'

Well isn't that the ultimate in offence by proxy? Taking offence that a fictional character said something you don't agree with about a character who is either a; fictional themselves, or b; omnipotent.

So either it doesn't matter, or God who is all powerful really won't give a flying fuck.

And besides, if Easter Day is the holiest day in the Christian calendar, then why are you spending it watching Coronation Street, you hypocritical fuckers?

What a bunch of arseclowns.

The One That Is Glad He Doesn't Represent The Government. . .

The Hillsborough Tragedy was just that, a terrible tragedy. I'm not going to go into the why's and wherefore's they've been done to death in the last 20 years.

It is often said that the Scousers enjoy wallowing in grief and sections of the service I've been watching on TV have been a little mawkish, but there are very few things that unite communities these days, despite the best efforts of the government, and rememberance of Hillsborough is one of them. Liverpudlians take the memory of Hillsborough very seriously indeed, and rightly so.

Liverpool is red in more ways than one, its main team plays in red, and 39 seats on their council are drawn from the ranks of Labour.

One would have thought that for Andy 'Makeup' Burnham, it would have been the easiest gig of the year. When he trotted out the line 'I am here as a representative of the Government and Prime Minister,' the last thing he would have expected would have been vehement boos to ring out from a crowd 99% of clubs would be delighted with on a match-day, let alone a memorial service. That is exactly what he got though.

Perhaps I'm cynically misreading the situation, perhaps the boos were an indication that many feel the families of the '96' are still awaiting justice 20 years later. If my feelings are right though, if a Labour minister is getting booed at a non-political event, for just mentioning his government and the Prime Minister, in a city such as Liverpool, then Labour are in big, big trouble.

Monday, 13 April 2009

The One That Is Talking About The Beautiful Game. . .

A couple of football things today, an oddity, although any of you who know me will probably be amazed it has taken me this long to write about football.

Firstly, I'm very sad to see Luton lose their football league status today. They are a club with a proud 89 year history of league football, including a window of huge over-acheivement in the 1980's. They've been very shoddily treated by the Football League, an organisation which is supposed to safeguard the game and clubs, who have penalised the club for the failings of previous regimes.

They should be ashamed of themselves.

I am especially sorry for Luton as they battled against the machinations of John Gurney, a thoroughly despicable individual who did his level best to kill the club off whilst talking about moving them from their Kennilworth Road ground to a site off the M1, which would, he said, host an F1 race track. Gurney was (and possibly still is) involved in another football club which is very close to my heart and also came perilously close to killing off Bedford Rugby Club.

I really hope Luton bounce back from this latest set back. They've had to bounce back a few times recently, so it isn't as if they haven't had the practice. Good luck, Hatters.

The second item relates to demands made by John Sentamu, the Archbishop of York. Is there anything worse than a holier-than-thou cleric? According to Pravda, Church leaders want the government to use Sunday trading laws to prevent the staging of football matches, and Dr. Sentamu wants the church founded clubs to remember their roots.

I am really getting very tired of this constant whining from clerics. 'It's not fair, no-one is listening to us anymore.' Seems to be the moan from the Lords Spiritual.

Look, you've had a free run, even a controlling interest for a thousand bloody years now. You have criminalised, invaded and killed those who dared to disagree with you. You made people attend your churches. You took 10% of their income or produce. You kept people uneducated. You have raised cities to the ground. Your teachings have condemned thousands to a life of disease. Your entire reign over this country is a litany of misery, hypocrisy and bigotry. You are in no position to act as a moral compass, no position at all.

Now, how many people attend football, and how many people attend church? What are the aggregate attendance figures over a 12 month period?

Sorry Bish, the people have spoken, and you are not even as relevant as 22 men kicking a ball around a field. You've had your run, and it is over.

Sunday, 12 April 2009

The One That Thinks He Is Mad, Mad, Mad. . .

He really is stark raving mad.

Once again the idea of 'voluntary' work is trotted out again. Now, there’s nothing wrong with voluntary work, as long as it is voluntary.

The Prime Mentalist cannot ensure that young people have done ‘50 hours of voluntary work by the time they are 19-years-old.’ There are a large number of young people who would have no intention of doing 50 hours of voluntary work. Voluntary work is unpaid, there is a word for the system of making people work for nothing. It is called slavery.

‘Mr Brown said a promise to bring in compulsory community service would be a
part of his next election manifesto.’
Really? Why would you do that? This government really are hell bent on self-destruction. Well here they are removing their youth vote at a stroke. Well done. If I were a party standing, I’d be right outside the schools with sixth forms and every college letting the youngsters know that a vote for Labour means they will do 50 hours of work, for nothing.

‘Under the scheme, the work may include helping charities and is likely to
become part of the National Curriculum. The scheme would be woven into plans
to make everyone stay in education or training until the age of 18 by

Charities? Which bloody charities? Are these the same charities that receive huge amounts of tax payers’ money? Are they now to get State Sanctioned slaves to push their agenda and carry out their bidding? And you are now to stay under control and indoctrination until you are 18. You will be dependent, you will be obedient, you will work because we can't actually afford to give you any relevant education.

Gordon Brown has told the News of The World ‘It is my ambition to create a Britain in which there is a clear expectation that all young people will undertake some service to their community, and where community service will become a normal part of growing up in Britain. Arbeit Macht Frei’

Well, perhaps he didn’t say those last three words. But would we have been surprised if he had?

Saturday, 11 April 2009

That One That Is Saying 'Oh, do shut up'. . .

This ridiculous photo from the BBC:

And this even more ridiculous subtitle:

'Teddy, a six-year-old donkey with Anna Usborne, in Chalford, Gloucestershire, ahead of an Easter Sunday walk that aims to encourage children to enjoy a chocolate-free weekend, for the sake of their health.'

Oh do shut up and fuck off, there's a good woman.

'Hey kids, no chocolate this morning, it's bad for you. But we're going on a walk, and you'll see a lovely donkey. Won't that be nice?'

One case where I think a child stabbing someone to death would attract little criticism.

The One That Is Enjoying It Immensely. . .

This whole Dolly, Guido and McBride thing. The papers could be very entertaining tomorrow.

Looks like Guido has gone down, I'm assuming through sheer volume of traffic, rather than a shadowy campaign to silence him. . .

Friday, 10 April 2009

The One That Is Reading The Tea Leaves. . .

I do not like the BNP.

I think I’ve made that quite clear over the time I’ve been writing here.

Harridan Harperson has told the Indie that "Certainly they [the BNP] are a bigger threat than they have been before."

But what does she mean by that? A quite reasonable explanation is that the BNP pose a very real threat to the liberties enjoyed by people living in this country. Of course, I would maintain that coming from an increasingly and alarmingly authoritarian government, that is a bit rich.

Do I support the BNP in anything? Only in their desire to remove us from the EU. Beyond that, there is no common ground between the BNP and I.

Make no mistake about it, Labour will not win the next General Election, the Tories will sweep into power with a very healthy majority. Labour could find themselves in a very dark place if Plaid Cymru and the SNP continue their recent gains. But what happens in the election after that?

How long will it take the electorate to realise that they’ve swapped one government, for another that really offers so little difference that they are almost indistinguishable from that which has gone before?

Is it beyond the realms of possibility that the election after next could see a hung parliament? It is unlikely that the Big Two will lose their position at the top table any time soon, but as they become more and more homogenous, and unable to effect any real change due to the primacy of the EU, will it drive turn-out down, or push people to smaller parties?

I don’t think it is too far fetched to envision a chamber with a splattering of MPs from UKIP, Greens, BNP perhaps even we Libertarians, and substantial gains from the Welsh and Scottish nationalists. This could make a serviceable majority problematic or even impossible. A chamber looking like that would mean that the Big Two (and I’m sorry LibDems, all I see is stagnation from you, the others have muscled in on your territory and you are in danger of being rendered totally irrelevant) would HAVE to compromise and offer some fairly large inducements for the others to play ball.

Could the Tories afford to leave a number of UKIP MPs in the cold and risk open war with their EUrosceptic wing? How would Labour reach out to some truly socialist MPs without empowering the awkward squad? Would the chamber be so volatile and unpredicatble that both the Tories and Labour would have to go and talk turkey with a handful of BNP MPs to get the job done?

I don’t think Labour are worried about losing the next General Election, all but the most deluded are already resigned to it, but they will do what they can to smear and darken the name of the Tories in the process of defeat, Guido says this morning that the next election is likely to be very dirty and negative, and I think he’s right on the money.

The threat from the BNP is not towards our way of life, they just won’t get enough power to make that happen. The threat from the BNP is towards Labour certainly, and the Tories in the future if they continue to act as Blue Labour. Both the Labour and Conservative parties act as if they have some God given right to govern, and they don’t.

Small party gains could make that difficult for them and the BNP provide a nice bogeyman. If a BNP candidate were to be returned to Westminster, there would be rending of hair and gnashing of teeth in the red and blue sections. Imagine how ashamed we would be made to feel, the Mother of Parliaments in the country that fought Hitler, electing a nasty National Socialist or two. Of course, UKIP, Libertarians, English Democrats et al, we’d all be like the BNP. Well, the prime BNP agenda is to pull out of the EU, all the little anti parties would walk through and vote with them for a referrendum on that policy, how could we not be alike?

And just as with Harperson’s battle bus, it doesn’t matter what you call people any more. Leg-Iron is right, it’s been done that many times, and for so long, it doesn’t mean anything any more. Call me what you like, I know what I am, what I feel and what I believe in, and I don’t particularly care if you agree or approve. There are those who have been called racist so many times that they’ve concluded that they must be, so the BNP must be their natural party.

It isn’t that the BNP are hell bent on introducing a Thousand Year British Reich and that more and more people agree with them, the cause is that you have left people with no alternative but to go to the wings. The way you bloat yourselves on our money, aggrandise yourselves, belittle us, lecture us, tell us ‘Thou Shalt Not’ and ignore our requests, means there is no room on the stage, and the people on the wings will push back, lest they fall off completely.

It is your arrogance and vanity that prevents you from seeing that you are architects of your own downfall, incompetent and hubristic rulers making vain proclamations from castles made of sand. The tide is coming in, and there’s nothing you can do about it.

Nothing, except real and meaningful change. I doubt you have the courage or self awareness to do that.

Thursday, 9 April 2009

The One That Is Saying 'Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear'. . .

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

What a mucking fuddle.

Tuesday, 7 April 2009

The One That Understands Completely. . .

Having seen this video on the Graun's website, (h/t to OH) I now completely understand why it can lead to imprisonment when you take photographs of a police officer.

I now completely understand why Jack Straw has arranged it so that when you are killed by the State, a whitewash enquiry can be held in camera and without any accountablility at all.

I now completely understand why the police officer in question has his/her face covered by a scarf (nothing to hide, nothing to fear?) and has no distinguishing markings face on.

I now completely understand that the IPCC will condemn these actions, but that any consequences will be limited.

I fail to understand why one human being could act in such a cowardly fashion towards an unarmed, passive and compliant member of the public.

I fail to understand why that officer's colleagues stood around and did not assist the gentleman in question, nor remonstrate with their colleague.

I now completely understand that the police in the UK have abandoned the Peelian Principles and do not serve the community that pays for them, but the political class who control them.

I also completely understand that there is only one way that police states ever finish, and it is never pretty.

Monday, 6 April 2009

The One That Does Not Understand. . .

I know we're skint, I get that.

What I don't understand is why, even when times are good, tax on consumables goes up.

Why, every year, do we see the Chancellor stood at the despatch box saying 'petrol and diesel are going up 2p per litre, I'm putting 10p on a packet of fags, 5p on a pint of beer and 3p on a bottle of wine.'

Why? In what other area would this be acceptable? These products cost the government nothing, they have absolutely no involvement in the production of these goods. This is akin to standing outside Sainsbury and rifling through people's shopping bags as they leave the store. 'Stick of celery madam? That'll be 11p please. Oh dear, multi-packs of Andrex just went up today, you're going to have to give me 8p a roll, cough up. Is that a rolling pin? That's being taxed now, 4p, please. That'll go up another tuppence next year.'

'What if I don't pay?'

'I'll stamp on your foot.'

The woman would call the police, and I be nicked for demanding money with menaces. Rightly so.

Why on Earth does everyone just grumble and accept it? We know it all goes on buying them BBQ's, porn movies and paying their stamp duty. Where is the end of it? Will we see the Chancellor in 20 years standing up and saying '. . . duty on petrol will rise a further 3p to £21.37 a litre, on wine duty will rise 6p to £8.21 a bottle, so much as look at a cigarette and we'll take your house and violate your wife and kids.'?

Can anyone explain it?

Sunday, 5 April 2009

The One That Thinks This Is A Bloody Good Idea. . .

Reproduced from the LPUK blog and written by Ian P-J:

From Monday All your emails, web browsing history and mobile calls will be stored for a year due to sweeping new laws making Britain a proper kleptocracy, by order of the EU.

(On 15 March 2006 the European Union formally adopted Directive 2006/24/EC, on "the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC")

Your web browsing will be stored from your ISP. The Government will force you to have it all revealed to them from your ISP. IP addresses the works.

Story in the Independent here

As a personal protest, I have created the following email signature, which will be added to each and every email that I send. I see this as a completely responsible act, one which does not break the law, but none-the-less an act of defiance, an act of rebellion against those who would take away my right to privacy, supposedly guaranteed by the European Charter of Human Rights, one which I hope will make those who draft such inept laws pay attention.

The following is a disclaimer and a protest at the collection, retention and sharing of my personal mail by the morally bankrupt state. By adding a string of key words, it will guarantee that each and every mail that I send will now need to be manually viewed as it is picked up by the auto scan software. If every person in the UK does exactly the same, then the entire system will quickly become so unmanageable, so unwieldy that it will become unworkable.

Key words, bomb, assassinate, president, brown, Osama, Obama, Sargozy, Merkel, government, target, location, rocket, grenade, al-Qaeda, Pakistan, India, Afghanistan, UK, America, guns, jets, bombs, machine-gun, terrorists, MP's, pigs, troughs, France, Germany, Italy, nuclear, Korea.

It is time to stop meekly accepting everything that the government throws at us. It is time to stop listening to lily livered politicians who say this is OK, because it really is NOT OK. It is time to stop listening to the apologist organisations or committees who will accept this type of data collection with a rider of wanting a little more protection for the data.

I refuse to be intimidated by my own Government. It is time to make this kind of data collection unworkable.
Now Government, make me stop !!

The One That Fails To See Why They Don't Understand. . .

And so it continues. This morning it is Hoon up to his bollocks in shit, with a story about how he claimed expenses for his constituency home whilst living in a grace and favour flat and letting out his London home.

Hoon has defended the story by saying it was within the rules.

Look, you stupid bastard, if the rules said that I had carte blanche to piss through my neighbour's letterbox and run down the cats on my street in my car, it wouldn't make it right would it? If I did those things, it wouldn't make me any less of an arsehole.

What you, and all the other snout-troughing venal arseclowns have done may (or may not) be within the rules. If it is within the rules, it is still wrong. Saying it is within the rules and then being given the all clear doesn't make us think you are OK. We still think you are a corrupt fucker stealing money from us, acting like a wanker when you get all upset over scans of expenses being touted around the media makes you look even more stupid.

This whole story about the scans being touted for £300k is an interesting one. The way the politicians have acted has been shameful. I don't blame whoever it is who has these scans trying to make a few quid, after all £300k is about two years' expenses for an MP.

Are they complaining about this chap making some cash? If so, cut the ground out from underneath him, publish and be damned. No? Didn't think so. For all the protestations about leaks and theft and ethics, the fact of the matter is that there are 646 people who are desperate to prevent anyone getting any info on their expenses. We're all told it's to do with security. Yeah, right. Well, a bit, because every time these expenses are leaked, the MP concerned is worried about a mob descending on his/her home with pitchforks and flaming torches. These itemised expenses records should be a matter of public record, right from the off.

MPs are like the smart-arsed prick at school no-one could stand. Spotty, greasy, shabby, no friends and a little weed. Who then decides to make smart-arsed remarks to the year's hard-nut and then wonders why he gets a smack in the chops for it.


Saturday, 4 April 2009

The One That Demands They Shut The Hell Up. . .

Not content with taking money from your pockets and handing it over to charities in the form of your taxes (remember this is the cash that is taken from you under the threat of sending you to prison with all those nasty bin over-fillers and people who take photos in public spaces, if you don't pay up) the Treasury Select Committee has now demanded that more of our taxes be handed out to 'Charities' that lost millions in the Icelandic banking collapse.

All those collectors on the high street, taking your bank details, but not your cash. All those crises that desperately needed cash to urgently tackle the problem of X, all that money was taken and lodged into a bank as an investment.

And having paid out, either by choice or having it ripped from your pay-packet, the Treasury Select Committee wants you to pay again for the charities avarice and incompetence.

But not for the avarice and incompetence of the local authorities, who lost even more of our money, ripped from us and hoarded in Icelandic banks.

I think we can assume when the soup kitchens and doss houses spring up as we spiral to bankruptcy, they will be funded by these charities and not by the local authorities. How will that lump of bread and bowl of broth taste, knowing you've paid for it twice, and will get to eat it only if you pass the completely subjective assessment of a member of the Righteous?

If you've not been, go and have a look at Fake Charities.

Wednesday, 1 April 2009

The One That Is On The Look Out For April Fools Jokes. . .

And I think I've spotted one.

Honestly, BBC, you must do better, no-one is going to believe that Obama would be seen dead with that loser.