Saturday, 31 October 2009

The One That Is Pleased The Recycling Agenda Is Being Followed. . .

We've been told that recycling is very important. I tend to agree, why make something new when you can re-use something old? It's just common and economic sense, the environmental concerns are all very well, but the idea of recycling is a winner just on the first two grounds.

I draw the line somewhere though.

At Easter, I blogged the following:

'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?'


Well what's this I spy?

Parents should shun chocolate bars and sweets this Halloween and instead give their children spooky-themed healthy food, a charity says.


Yes, folks. It's the recycling of news stories.

Same story, same comment from me.

Fuck off you meddling, purse-lipped, joyless, bleak, grey, miserable arse-wipes.

When will you get the message that we couldn't care less about you, what you think or what you stand for and we will take no notice of you whatsoever?

I look forward to the same being trotted out in a few weeks for the festive period.

The One That Will Probably Go To France. . .

November is less than 24 hours away, and with November comes an increase in the money taken from people by holding them upside down and shaking them when they arrive at a UK airport.

planned rises in APD [. . .] will add up to £4 to the cost of a short-haul flight and up to £90 to the cost of a long-haul flight.

£90? Jesus, if you are a family of four going to Disney in Florida, that amounts to buying a ticket for a fifth member of the party and just tearing it up.

This is the new tithe to the religion of Warmism. I'm pretty bloody far from convinced about the whole shooting match, but even if it is right, what good is this tax going to do? The planes will still take off, full or empty, they have to, it is in their contracts with the airports. Nor do I see the connection with taking money off people and what that money actually does to 'save' the planet.

From Novmeber 2010, they are set to rise again!

It is a cynical attempt at emotional blackmail to take money off people to bankroll the explosion of public sector non-jobs that have proliferated since the economy went south.

Mrs. Snowolf and I were going to go to Gatwick and fly to North America in the spring.

We're probably not going to do that now. If they think they're getting any tax out of me, they can think again. We'll go to France instead. I can get a foot passenger ticket from Dover to Calais for about £4 each, and then for about another £20 can get a TGV ticket from Calais Ville to Paris CDG airport. They do flights to North America from there you know, plus I can have a fag in an indoor lounge whilst I wait for my flight to take off as well.

Those of you living in the South West and Wales would probably save £40 by going Pembroke - Rosslare and getting the train to Dublin. Those in the North could save cash by going Stranraer - Dun Laoghaire and then hopping over to the airport.

It's bit of extra faffing around, but I'm buggered if I'm going to give the government my cash if I can get away without doing so. Then of course, there's the e-borders scheme, in my experience the ferry ports will be a good deal behind the airports in its implementation, so you get to remain a private citizen rather than a chattel of the state.

Fuckers.

Friday, 30 October 2009

The One That Doesn't Think We're That Powerful . . .

Interesting to read that pretty much the entire compliment of Somerton Town Council quit on Tuesday, sparking a round of fresh elections for the town.

What caused this?

Well, according to Al-Jabeeba, it was the Muck & Brass blog, written by Niall Connolly.

Now, I'm no expert on what is going on at Somerton Town Council (in fact I had to Google where Somerton was) but can one blogger really bring down an entire town council? Even if he had some really explosive information and managed to grab a scalp, Guido style, then one would expect one or two councillors at the most to fall on their swords, but to take down a whole council? Bloody hell, I'm impressed.

How did he do this?

In one entry, he writes that a council pamphlet entitled 'Good Citizens' and regarding voting rights "reads more like a Nazi call to arms or an invitation to ethnic cleansing."

In another, he complains "clown" councillors have ignored democracy and behave as though they had "only just discovered the word".

He goes on: "And now, as Somerton starts to find a voice, you bunch of jackasses start to whisper the 'D' word."

Well, it isn't exactly Watergate, is it?

In response to the resignations, businessman Mr Canvin, 61, said: "I'm not going to tolerate it when I'm working for the town.

"I started it. I said 'I've had enough' and handed in my resignation."

A motion was then proposed that members leave due to "impossible working conditions", leading to 11 resignations with another walking out in sympathy, and one more on holiday.

Well, that all seems a little precious to me. There's something more than meets the eye going on there, and I can't believe that one blogger having a pop can yield such results.

However, just to be on the safe side, perhaps Mr. Connolly would like to turn his attentions to Westminster? If he carries on this run of form then it won't just be the good townspeople of Somerton.

'this stunning news was greeted by the audience with rapturous applause.'

It can be the whole country.

More power to you, Niall. Just don't get too good, otherwise we'll all be subject to regulation before you can blink.

Thursday, 29 October 2009

The One That Is Waiting To See. . .

So the Czechs have been given an exemption from the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights (link in Czech), obviously those rights aren't as fundamentally important as getting Klaus to sign on the dotted line then.

So that leaves the Czech Constitutional Court as the remaining bulwark between the status quo and complete ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. It would seem that the chances of this treaty being live at the time of a British general election are somewhere between slim and none then.

All too often we Libertarians are accused of nihilism, so I'm going to buck that stereotype. I'm not about descend to the very bottom of the slough of despair, I'm not about to write Cameron off.

Just yet.

At conference he said something about not letting it rest there if he got the keys to No. 10 with the Lisbon Treaty on the statute. I don't know what that means, I hope (and this hope is waaaay bigger than any expectation I have) that out of the blue Cameron announces that we're going to have the BIG one. But I'm not holding my breath.

As with much to do with the Conservatives, I don't actually know what it is Cameron wants to do. I get the impression he's in the middle of a fine balancing act, the old EUrophile and EUrophobe divisions are still in the party, they haven't gone away. I have a feeling that Dave is leaning towards the anti camp, his detatching the party from the old centre-right grouping is especially interesting but with Ken Clarke such an important part of his pre and mid election campaign staff, he's got to be very canny.

If he gets in with a healthy majority, then that will give him a lot more room to spread his wings and show us what he's got. I just hope that when he does spread his wings, it was worth the wait.

Anyhow, as sceptical as I may be, I'm not about to condemn a man who has not done anything wrong yet. It would be nice to see him do something right, though.

Perhaps he'll decide to hold a retrospective referendum. An unusual step, but the will of the electorate must take precedence over any other tool of government and if we don't want it, we don't want it. The word of the people is sovereign.

I can't wait for the attack from the left and Brussels if we are given the chance and if that chance results in a 'here's your refund, now fuck off' result. They will then show themselves to be the contemptible and anti-democratic slime they are.

Monday, 26 October 2009

The One That Is Sorely Tempted. . .

video

These seem to be people we can do business with.

Leg-Iron points out that if it does kick off, The Righteous will be sent into a meltdown akin to that suffered by Norman the android in 'I Mudd'.

I can just see the poor old PC's despatched by their political masters. 'Errrr, Sarge? Which ones are being racist?'

Superb stuff. At last the silent majority have found their voices and are showing they will not put up with this foolishness.

Sunday, 25 October 2009

The One That Is Saying 'Enough. Stop Now'. . .

It really does beggar belief. I can think of no pithy or salient introduction to this absolute arsewater, so let's just jump straight in, shall we?

Police have been urged to avoid using greetings such as "evening" and "afternoon", because the words are "somewhat subjective" and could cause confusion among those from different cultural backgrounds.

It's the Muslims, must be, they don't have afternoons, not proper afternoons like Christian people, their's are probably different. And because Senior Police are so consumed with the feeling that we aren't all just members of the public, this imaginary afternoon problem must be stamped out.

A spokesman added: "Terms such as 'afternoon' and 'evening' are somewhat subjective in meaning and can vary according to a person's culture or nationality. In many cultures the term evening is linked to time of day when people have their main meal of the day.

"In some countries including the UK, the evening meal time is traditionally thought of as being around 5-7pm but this might be different say for a family say from America who might have their main meal earlier and thus for them 'evening ' may be an earlier time.

This is just an avoidance of the old dinner/tea debate, isn't it?

'Hello? Is that the IPCC? This un-PC came around my gaff and accused me of having my tea, at dinner time, he thought I was common. I'm incredibly offended, I demand a five figure sum in compensation and that the officer be cast into a dark pit.'

That seems a little unlikely to me.

Confusingly, staff are also barred from using the word "homosexual", for which they are instructed to use the term "gay", while they are warned against using the phrase "straight", and told to say "heterosexual".

Right, well, that makes perfect sense then. I'm not gay and have no strong feelings on the gay/homosexual word debate, I understand that queer and poof are not well thought of, so that seems fair enough. Being straight (deep offended intake of breath) I don't particularly care if I'm referred to as straight, heterosexual or even just hetero. I was even called a 'Breeder' once, I think it was supposed to be perjorative, not that it bothered me.

I'm not a breeder, by the way, I'm a civil servant. Perhaps there's money in breeding? Perhaps I could do that instead?

Anyhow, let's think of the chiiiiiiiiiildren:

A number of organisations, among them Essex Police and Northern Ireland Fire and Rescue Service, now instruct staff to avoid the phrases "child, youth or youngster".

The 52-page guide used by both organisations states that such phrases could have "connotations of inexperience, impetuosity, and unreliability or even dishonesty". It also states that addressing someone as "boy" or "girl" "may cause offence". Instead, officers and firemen are instructed to use the phrase "young people".

Well now hang on a moment, if you call the nearly dead 'old people' the indignant whining from the Righteous reaches such a pitch that dolphins start knocking on their front doors asking them to leave it out as it's giving them a headache. Surely this should be 'younger people'?

Now I really am offended.

London Fire Brigade instructs its staff not to use the terms "businessmen" or "housewives", because it says they "reinforce outdated stereotypes".

Does that mean that a married woman who raises the kids is an outdated stereotype? What about all those men who wear those off the peg suits and sit on the train into London everyday, on their way to an office where they do God knows what, but the end result seems to be a paunch, baldness, stomach ulcers and an aneurism? Are all they outdated stereotypes as well?

This, people of non-judgemental, all perfectly equal gender is what happens when you have a phalanx of equality and diversity officers.

Mrs. Snowolf has responsibility for the disability stuff at her place of work, most of it goes right over my head, the legislation seems to be complicated in the extreme, but given the phone calls she gets from other places for her advice, she seems quite good at it.

She writes the policy, makes sure it is applied and then puts the policy on the shelf. Once in a while, the policy is reviewed to make sure it is still current. Simple. If you employ Equality and Diversity Officers once all this stuff is done, they're left with nothing to do, so they have to dream up enemies, slights and struggles to be fought.

It's all bullshit, no-one is going to be offended because a Police officer rolls up at 1720 and says good evening, when you consider the evening to start at 1730.

Why not spend money on fighting crime and fires rather than agonising over what part of the day it is?

Give me strength. . .

Wednesday, 21 October 2009

The One That Is Saying Well Done. . .

I give the BBC stick quite a lot of the time, but I will always give credit where it is due, and it is due to the BBC trust this evening. They have decided that the BNP will appear on Question Time, I believe it is right a proper course of action for a party that holds two seats in the European Parliament and polled around a million votes in the recent election.

Usual and predictable caveat. Snowolf does not support the BNP and holds only one of their policies close to his heart, to get the UK out of the EU. Although I suspect we approach that conclusion from different angles.

I do not support the Labour party, nor the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats or the Green Party, but I understand that they have a role to play on a political discussion programme.

Again, as I've pointed out time and again, the only way to ensure the BNP go precisely nowhere (beyond actually representing and speaking for the people you claim to represent) is to give them every single opportunity to espouse their nonsense. People aren't stupid, they'll see them for what they are.

Peter Hain's protestations about them not being a legally constituted party were a right chuckle and hold very little water.

Personally, as far as I'm concerned, it is their party and they can have whatever rules they want, they can restrict membership to whites only, to men only, to married men only, to married white men aged 48 called Nigel and working as greengrocers only if they want. I don't care.

Whether they are 'legally constituted' or not really doesn't bother me, and it doesn't seem to be a condition of entry on to the panel of QT either. If it were, Ian Hislop, Janet Street-Parker, Him out of Blur and the Chakrabati woman wouldn't be able to go on either, they are not legally constituted parties, and no-one has ever voted for them.

Still, what's to stop the BNP from trotting out the same excuses given by the Labour politicians? They could have said it was a technical breach of the law, in the style of Baroness Scotland. They could have claimed that everyone knows who they are, so what's the problem? Like Harridan Harperson. They could have claimed it was an oversight or an error, like countless MPs. No-one would have believed them, but that doesn't seem to bother the others.

No, the BNP admitted that this was the case, and Nick Griffin gave an undertaking to rectify the situation. From where I'm sitting, and as reprehensible as he is, that puts him way ahead of a large number of other elected representatives, and maybe makes him less reprehensible than them. It is not only views which marks a person out, it is their actions and the way they conduct themselves.

I don't like them, but accept that until things change in this country, they are here to stay. I can deal with that, it would appear that many others cannot, and they would stamp out a corner of democracy in the name of the same.

For shame.

Tuesday, 20 October 2009

The One That Thinks He's Guilty. . .

The law is the law. It may be an ass, wrong, misguided or just plain stupid, but it is the law and I'm not going to break it, mainly because I don't want to give them the opportunity to get their hooks into me.

Doesn't mean I won't fight to overturn or revise a law which I think is unjust or ill thought-out. Neither does it mean I support people who break the law, even the really stupid ones.

That may change if laws get any sillier.

Regardless, sometimes (and just sometimes, occasionally, rarely) you can't help but develop an appreciation, respect and admiration for people who really couldn't give a fuck about the law and demonstrate it in grand style:

A driver has confounded Swiss police by committing 15 traffic violations in just over 10 minutes, officials say.

The 47-year-old initially raced past an unmarked police car in heavy rain at 160 km/h (100mph) before weaving close to other cars and the road's kerb.

The serial offender clocked up further offences for speeding, driving on the hard shoulder, running a set of red lights and failing to stop for police.

When finally pulled over by St Gallen police, he failed a drugs test.

As always, Al-Jabeeba have to try to haul their bloated carcass onto the moral high ground by calling him a serial offender. Has he done this before? Or is it the number offences in such a small time? If I killed 15 people in 10 minutes would I be a serial killer, or just embarking on a massacre?

Never mind, he's undoubtedly very naughty, but you can't help but admire him really, can you?*


* Note to the righteous and safety-nazis. Yes he could have killed someone, but he didn't. So there's no real damage done, is there?

Monday, 19 October 2009

The One That Can't See The Difference. . .

So this is how one brings about the 'post-democratic' age then.

The Electoral Complaints Commission, responsible for overseeing the Presidential election in Afghanistan has thrown out ballots from 210 polling stations after uncovering what it claimed was 'Clear and convincing evidence of fraud'.

I can't say I'm surprised. It was all so predictable. The ballots thrown out now mean that Karzai has only a 48% share of the vote, so a run-off with the imaginatively named Abdullah Abdullah is sure to take place.

You can bet your arse that electoral fraud will be perpetrated again. No doubt the commission will get involved again, no doubt people who have voted properly will get their papers thrown out again, no doubt some kangaroo court in Afghanistan will have its say, no doubt American troops will be stood outside the courthouse as deliberations go on.

To make it even less democratic, these elections are being held with foreign troops running around and people not turning out because some nutjob has threatened to kill them if they do, assuming that is, that the same nutjob hasn't blown up the polling station the night before.

This is hardly a democratic process. It isn't going to work. It was never going to work. It will never work as long as other countries are propping up and dictating to the regime in 'power' and Taleban fighters are running around the country.

'Well, we tried' will be the refrain, if it isn't drowned out by whichever cheating vote rigging bastard happens to do enough to influence the result of this election being held up as a convincingly and resoundingly elected President given a mandate from the masses.

More to the point if this fraud has been carried out by any of the parties and politicians involved, then why the hell aren't they under lock and key, or at least barred from standing for election ever again?

This is ridiculous.

Democracy? Don't make me laugh, it is a pretence, there will never be democracy whilst we are in Afghanistan (or Iraq for that matter) as there will be this mortal fear that people will vote the 'wrong' way, just as the Palestinians did with Hizbollah. You can be certain they wouldn't have won if American or British troops were on the ground there.

The problem being that the people we want them to elect are self-serving, venal, money-grabbing, corrupt toads out to grab what they can with the big boy standing behind them scaring people off if they want to make something of it. Whereas the people they might want to elect are self-serving, venal, money-grabbing, corrupt toads out to grab what they can whilst putting the fear of God into everyone.

Looks like a lose-lose situation to me.

Saturday, 17 October 2009

The One That Gave A Chuckle. . .

From a 'contact' of mine on Facebook this evening:

Tell Louis Walsh that if those twatty twins stay in this weekend another boy band member gets it!!

Masterful.

The One That Is Motioning With His Head. Discretely. . .

The more aware of you may have realised that Dover port was closed yesterday. This was due to the staff at SeaFrance going on strike.

I believe they may have changed the brand of coffee in the staff canteen or something.

Anyhow, I hear on the jungle drums (I feel like I should be using lots of +'s like Guido) that disruption on channel crossings to come, may not be entirely down to our French cousins. I understand that they may join in with striking workers from another EU nation though.

If you want to intrude on private grief, you could probably do worse than keep a weather eye on this chap.

The Snowolf is led to believe that things could get a little tasty quite soon, and may inconvenience a good number of the travelling public. . .

The One That Says It Isn't All About Killing. . .

We are told time and time again that Islam is a religion of peace. It isn't.

That's not an attack on Islam, but all three of the big religions in Europe, Mid-East, Africa and America. I can't comment on the Hindus, Buddhists, Taoists, Confuscians, Sikhs or Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monsterists as by and large they seem to keep themselves to themselves.

The big three, just as in British politics, are agents of hate, intolerance, control and oppression. But we hear time and time again that Islam, especially, is a religion of peace.

OK.

The winners of a quiz organised by Somali Islamists have been given weapons and ammunition as prizes.

Prizes included AK-47 assault rifles, hand grenades and an anti-tank mine.

The quiz ran during the holy Muslim month of Ramadan in the port city of Kismayo, and included questions about the Koran and Somali geography.

A representative for the al-Shabab militant group said the quiz aimed to stop young men from wasting their time and focus on defending their territory.

"The reason the young men were rewarded with weapons is to encourage them to participate in the ongoing holy war against the enemies of Allah in Somalia,"


Yes. That sounds very peaceful.

Then there's this:



(A tip of the hat to OH for drawing my attention to it.)

Yes. That sounds very peaceful as well. Calls for executions. The very epitome of a civilised, rational and peaceful society. So you don't like him and don't like what he has to say. Call him an arsehole. Ignore him. Threaten to kill him and you merely prove what he says about your religion. You're being played like a cheap violin.

Stop sniggering at the back Chrisitians, your copy book is far from spotless, is it? The Crusades? The cluster-fucking in this country when the family Tudor couldn't quite make their minds up? The enthusiasm for locking Jews in buildings and burning them to the ground during the Middle Ages? The Inquisition?

Oh, did someone mention Jews? The appalling treatment of the Palestinians? The Old Testament (and that phrase really pisses practicing Jews off) enthusiasm for invading other countries?

You are all shits of the highest order. It just seems to me that Islam is acting the shittiest of them all at present.

No, I'm not saying all Muslims are gun toting maniacs who want to see infidel blood running down the streets. Indeed I know quite a few Muslims, and not one of them, as far as I know, own an assault rifle or bomb making equipment.

It would be nice to see the moderate halfway sensible majority of Islam stand up and slap these arseholes down. Many Germans didn't much care for the National Socialists, but they didn't want to make a fuss, and just sort of got carried along. It was a disaster.

What did we do? Appeased and didn't make a scene. That was a disaster too.

Anyone? No?

Didn't think so.

This is going to get ugly. . .

Thursday, 15 October 2009

The One That Thinks It Could Make Quite A Difference. . .

Ah yes, our old friends the BNP.

Right, I'm not going to give the usual caveat here. The little icons dotted around this page make it perfectly clear who it is I support.

Looks like old Harridan Harperson is going to get what she wanted. It sits nicely with the old warning about being careful what you wish for.

BNP leader Nick Griffin has agreed to ask his party to amend its constitution so it does not discriminate on grounds of race or religion, a court heard.

Now as far as I'm concerned, it is a party with its own values. They are values I do not hold therefore I won't join them, just as a Labour supporter won't support Libertarian values and therefore won't be joining us. Fine.

Ahhh, yes, but black people can't join the BNP. Their rules don't allow it.

Well, fine. Their party, their rules.

I have a sneaking suspicion that not many black or Asian people would want to join the BNP, but discrimination is bad and it must be stamped out. The right of a hypothetical black person to join the BNP trumps the right of a very real BNP member to exclude them. I don't understand how one person's 'rights' can trump those of another, but there you go.

Let's just suppose for a minute that the BNP relents and alters it's constitution to allow 'non-indigenous non-Caucasian' people to join. What will the outcome be?

Will the BNP be flooded with ultra-nationalist Rastafarians and Taoists?

Doubtful.

Will the BNP find themselves hamstrung by a large faction coming into the party that is determined to work against their policies?

Possible, but then, the current BNP members will just leave and start up another party, so that won't work.

No, what would happen is that the BNP would hang an 'all welcome' sign on their front door, secure in the knowledge that the people they don't want to join, won't join. And then, when they start to appear on Question Time (which could be quite entertaining tonight given the reaction to their name last week, either that or someone released a shit load of snakes into the studio), the Big 3 will no longer be able to point their fingers and scream 'Racists!' at them, as they will have the constitution to prove they are not.

Much is written in the Libertarian blogosphere about this government's tactic of denormalising people, drinkers, smokers, the free of thought and will, but now Harman and her chums are doing something even more daft, they are normalising a party.

Eh? How's this going to work? On the one hand you use legislation to enforce your will and values on a political party. Legislation that, if the BNP have any sense, they won't break. So you can't very well screm 'Racist' at them anymore, what does that leave you? It is obvious you'll continue to do your best to ensure that they are shouted down at every opportunity, blocked from attending Parliament or debates and generally excluded, inspite of the fact that they are legitimately elected.

But of course, there's no room for views you don't like in your democracy.

The BNP will be able to point and give another example of the Labour mania for controlling anything their gaze happens to fall upon, and cries of 'but they're not very nice people' is hardly going to cut the ice, is it? Did they go to war in Iraq? Did they use expenses to fund their own companies? Did they promote their biggest trougher to the Lords to allow him to bleed us dry until the day he dies? Did they go back on a referendum promise? Did they desert their natural constituency in order to cling on to power? Did they plan a smear campaign against opposition MPs and then whine when they got caught out?

No.

The problem is, all of you Big 3, but specifically Labour, just because most people find the BNP objectionable, it doesn't follow that they like you any better, and at least the BNP are honest.

By enforcing normality upon them, you surrender your second biggest weapon against them and will do nothing more than generate sympathy for them, you will increase their membership as for many waverers using the law to force a political party to do as you want will be the straw that broke the camel's back.

It isn't the last straw for me, my camel's spinal cord was severed about nine years ago, but for a number of people this will be it, for others it will be what you do tomorrow.

What I don't understand is why you don't use the most effective weapon you have against the BNP; just let them talk. Or is it that you've made such a horlicks of your time in power that you are scared that the people you have a God given right to expect to turn out for you, will look at you, then at them, then back at you, and say to themselves; 'You know, this BNP lot aren't as half as bad as Labour'?

If that is the case, then who is to blame?

a) The BNP
b) Those two Irish lads on the X-Factor
c) The Cybermen
d) You

Monday, 12 October 2009

The One That Wonders What You Expected. . .

Sorry folks, but it was all so predicatable. Of course Jacqui Smith did wrong. Of course an investigation would return that verdict. Of course she would be made to show contrition, although how you can show what you do not have is a mystery to me, it's akin to shoving the wierd kid into the stinging nettles at school and being made to say sorry, even when it is obvious that you aren't. It's what nice people do, and we must appear nice, even if we're not.

Of course she wouldn't get punished. It's an inside job.

Of course those with relatively small amounts of moody expenses would be told to pay them back.

Of course they, in the main, know that this will make it all OK. It would happen to you if you 'mis-claimed' benefits. If you paid it back, you'd be fine.




Wouldn't you?

Nothing will change. Oh, the rosettes worn by the people walking into the offices of state will change, but there will be no change.

That's not their fault, it is our fault. We are, as a nation, stupid enough to vote for them time and again, expecting change and then scratching our heads when none comes.

Perhaps the penny will drop, but I doubt it.

I am a Libertarian Party member, and believe that we should effect change via the electoral system. However I also understand that I am in a minority, both in my party membership and in my desire to do things by the book.

Look out for the EDL, look out for the enviromentalists, look out for the BNP, look out for the disapproving groups hurling abuse at returning soldiers.

Every single group has no confidence in those elected to represent them, nor in the system that gives them access to the levers of power. Increasingly desperate stunts will take place. Protests will increase and become increasingly more forceful. Increasingly desperate people will turn to violence. Hatred and resentment at anyone representing authority will grow.

Who is to blame? Well, to borrow a phrase from good old Gordon; we're all in this together. The politicans have abused and taken advantage of us, like an abusive partner. Like a weak, abused partner, incapable of breaking the cycle, we keep letting them back in.

We have no-one to blame but ourselves, and we will reinforce the cycle by returning the same people again.

When will we learn?

Perhaps we already have, perhaps these groups are like the abused partners, smacked in the mouth once too often. Divorce court? Pah! The iron or the frying pan are in easy reach, and they'll resolve the situation much quicker than some avaricious divorce solicitor.

I wouldn't want to win this coming election for all the tea in China.

Friday, 9 October 2009

The One That Loves Vaclav Klaus. . .

If I were a homosexualist I'd be sending him flowers and chocolates. As I'm not one, I won't, but I'm secure enough in my sexuality as a straight man to admitting to having the tiniest crush on him.

The Eurosceptic Czech President, Vaclav Klaus, says he wants his country to have an exemption from a key EU charter before he will sign the Lisbon Treaty.

Excellent, where's the long grass, Vaclav? Give it a bloody punt old mate.

The demand threatens a further delay over the treaty, correspondents say.


I think that's the general idea, good old Vaclav seems determined to see if Cameroid is true to his word, and given the response to Boris by the conference this week, he'd better be, or there'll be hell to pay.

I'm now looking forward to:

Klaus tells EU: 'Dog ate our copy of treaty, can you send us a new one?'

and

Klaus accidentally slams writing hand in car door, unable to sign his name for next three months.

Keep 'em coming Vaclav, you're doing a grand job.

The One That Doubts Even Our Policitans Would Try This Stunt. . .

Christiane Chocat, a French politician, and her son have been arrested and charged with trying to smuggle illegal migrants into Britain.

Mrs Chocat, a 51-year-old municipal councillor from Seine et Marne south of Paris, is in custody in Portsmouth, Hants.

She and her son Benjamin Chocat, 20, are accused of bringing 16 Vietnamese migrants into the city in the back of a hired van.


What?

What the bloody buggering hell? I mean our lot have pulled some bloody tricks in their time, but smuggling a load of Vietnamese in a bloody van really does push the boundaries of 'technical breaches' of the law. It's the sort of the thing you'd expect to see on the Daily Mash.


The case will prove an embarrassment to the French authorities


No shit? D'you think?

The One That Was Entertained. . .

A great clip of Boris sticking it to Paxo.

There's something very endearing about his manner, which probably means it's all a devious act and we should run for the hills. Never mind.

Wednesday, 7 October 2009

The One That Says You Should Be Careful Who You Pick Fights With. . .

Old Holborn has posted a very entertaining video of two idiots in Swansea making a pain in the arse of themselves and then coming across someone who very efficiently cleaned their clocks, but it isn't just skinny shirtless (or in the case of the other one, a lard arsed 9XL T-shirt clad) pissheads that can make this mistake.

A group of Somali pirates has been captured after attacking a French navy ship by mistake, apparently thinking it was a harmless cargo vessel.

Ooops, that wasn't a terrific plan, was it?

(. . .)the pirates attacked in skiffs late at night some 500km (310 miles) off the Somali coast.

But the command and supply ship, the Somme, repelled the attack and chased the pirates, capturing five of them.


Now if this were a British ship, the Pirates would have been treated with kid gloves, not the fault of our matelots, it's the ridiculous touchy feely attitude we have towards everything.

Admiral Prazuck told French TV station La Chaine Info the pirates seemed to be surprised that the navy ship fought back.

"Once they realised they were facing a ship that was responding and was heading towards them, they stopped shooting and attempted to flee," he said.


I bet they bloody did. It's all smiles and laughter as you approach the unarmed cargo ship, isn't it? Not so much fun when you get some back. Cowards.

"The Somme gave chase and intercepted one of the pirates' boats. All the weapons had apparently been tossed into the sea and the suspected pirates are now being held on board the Somme."

I've seen the French Police National and the CRS in action at fairly close quarters (thankfully I wasn't the focus of their ire), I'm sure that these pirates were given a decent pasting for their efforts.

No doubt there will be people moaning that the French navy are nasty people for not looking significantly enough like a military vessel with guns and trained personnel.

Well done the Frogs.

Tuesday, 6 October 2009

The One That Would Have Left Smouldering Footprints In His Wake. . .

I could do with a laugh today, so here's this which tickled me greatly. I have but one comment to make:

RUN AWAY!!! RUN AWAY !!!


video





Monday, 5 October 2009

The One That Wants To Know Why You Can't Just Mind Your Own Bloody Business. . .

Back in March I blogged about some mouthbreathing Righteous arsewipe who was incapable of keeping her bloody nose out of other peoples' business.

It's happened again:

A supermarket has apologised to one of its customers after she was told she could not have unpasteurised cheddar cheese because she was pregnant.

I could paste more, but really can't be arsed.

Look, it is very simple.

It is none of your fucking business. None. Whatsoever.

I don't go to the supermarket for medical advice, and even if I did, I wouldn't seek that advice from the girl working on the fucking cheese counter.

Jeeeeesus.

Here we have it folks, our politicians spend so much time telling us how to live our lives that everyone thinks it is an appropriate way to behave. Footballers? Rock stars? Pah, it is the NuLabourites that have been a bad example for the public, if only they'd wrap cheese wire around their necks and stick their faces into the meat-slicer, then perhaps know nothing cheese vendors would do the same, instead of sticking their noses in to other peoples' business.

Bastards.

Friday, 2 October 2009

The One That Says 'Oh, They WILL, Will They?'. . .

Just sat here watching Sky News, the chap doing the bit to camera in Dublin about the Lisbon Treaty has just made the point that if the Irish vote 'Yes', (and how I hope the opinion polls are wrong, that people have being fibbing to the pollsters or that in the polling station they just think 'Fuck you' and vote 'No'), that the Poles and Czechs will HAVE to ratify.

Will they? As sad as it is that the Irish constitution is the only one in the Europe Union of Soviet Socialist Republics to have any faith in its population's capacity for abstract thought, is it right that their decisions should influence, or force, the policy of another sovereign state?

Well, if the 'Yes' vote wins today, then get used to it, because the wishes of our national parliament and therefore (at least, on paper) the wishes of the electorates will be perpetually forced by the actions of a group immeasurably smaller than the group they hold power over. I speak not of the 3 million Irish with effective dominion over 497 million other 'EU Citizens', but of the fucktardish pen pushers, troughers and self appointed rulers sitting in Brussels.

And they will indeed hold power over us. Already Bliar is apparently a shoe-in for the job of President of the EU. Did you receive a polling card? I didn't. I didn't get the chance to vote for our commissioner, never have, believe me, there's no fucking way I'd have voted for Kinnock or Mandleson.

An apparent Republic with a population of 500 million, none of whom have had the opportunity to elect their President or those who make the laws that govern them. There's a name for a regime like that.

We've never had a say since 1975 - that's before I was born, and this was not the deal on the table. I was disgusted to hear a colleague of mine who describes himself as being 'Liberal' and a 'Democrat' describe a referendum as not democratic as people would make the wrong decisions and it is very, very complicated.

He was amazed when I called him an arrogant, patronising little weasel.

This is what we're up against. No pretence at democracy, no pretence at listening to what people want. Those on the top of the status quo want this introduced and it will be introduced.

Well, I've got news for you, you nasty little fuckers, a similar enterprise crumbled in Eastern Europe in the 90's, and if you continue to ride roughshod over us little people, your Ceacescu moment WILL come, and you won't even see it when it is right at the end of your nose.

A question. What if Lech Kaczynski and/or Vaclav Klaus turn round and say, 'You know, as Head of State, I don't want to sign this. I know what is best for my country, not you', what happens then?

God save Ireland, God save Poland, God save the Czech Republic.

God help the rest of us.

Thursday, 1 October 2009

The One That Says You Can't Be Wrong All The Time. . .

A centre of common sense and reason, earlier today.

I quite often tear into organised religion on here. I don't hold a lot of store in it. I think they are pretty much always wrong.

Not this time though.

And whilst I may not set a lot of store by what the Vatican has to say, but many in Ireland do. Old habits die hard.

Looks like the Pope is none too impressed with the grand European Project. During a Papal visit to reluctant participant, the Czech Republic, the Pope's Secretary of State, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone* released a statement which will probably have the Brussels apparatchiks choking on their moules et frites.

'Individual European countries have their own identity. The EU prescribes its laws or views to them and they do not have to fit with their traditions and history. Some countries are logically resisting this – for example, Ireland'


He then bangs on about the evils of bum sex for a while - c'mon guys, get over it.

Never mind, the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Let's hope that in the morning Ireland has a sudden attack of deep Catholicism and does what The Vatican tells them - just for the day.

*How entertaining to see a title for an office of state that Mandelson doesn't have. Granted with his name, he'd be unlikely to ever become a Cardinal, but I'm willing to bet he'd love to have the outfit.

The One That Is Hoping And Praying. . .

C'mon guys and girls. You've told them once already. If you let them push you around, you let them push a whole continent around.

Ireland could be the saviour of us all. A 'No' vote will not destroy the EU, but it will put the brakes on, if only for as long as it takes them to come back again and tell you you've made the wrong decision.

Thank God for Ireland's constitution, and how sad that out of such a large group of countries, only one has the faith in its people to make their own minds up.

Ratification of this treaty really would give me serious cause to consider my continued residence in this country. The corruption in the EU, the arrogance, the anti-democratic practices and dictatorial manner in which business is done chills me to the very core.