The One That Is Carrying On In The Same Fashion. . .

I hope you all had a pleasant Public Holiday period. I now have enough stock to open my own branch of Sock Shop.

When the council sent around their cunningly worded invitation for me to surrender huge amounts of my money to them, they included a little booklet, telling me the sort of thing that they'd be wasting my cash on instead of making sure that roads and pavements were gritted during a cold spell and organising a sufficiently regular rubbish collection so my bin area doesn't resemble some Monrovia suburb in summer.

Nowhere in that little booklet did it explain to me that they'd expend energy and resources in making sure I didn't get upset. To be honest, from where I'm sitting, the whole raison-d'etre of the council is to upset me. It's like the Python argument sketch, I'm paying for it. Perhaps it's OK for them to upset me, but not for anyone else to upset me? Perhaps I'm just unlucky not to live in an area governed by the sensitive souls of Suffolk council.

Neither have I ever heard of someone being prosecuted for upsetting someone. I don't recall any offence of 'causing upset'. Bodily harm, certainly. Alarm and distress, yes. Causing upset? No.

What am I whittering on about?

A bingo caller has been advised to stop using phrases such as "two fat ladies" for fear of offending his audience.

John Sayers, who runs charity games in Sudbury, Suffolk, says he was told by a council clerk the traditional bingo call could upset some players.

Oh dear, here we go.

A town council spokeswoman said it was "sad" they had to give the advice but they had to be "politically correct".

Why did you have to give the advice? It's all very well sitting there, wringing your hands, but did it not, perhaps, occur to you to mind your own fucking business and not get involved? As radical as it may sound to you, people do not actually want nor need grey little fucks from the council overseeing every aspect of their lives. It's sad that I have to give this advice, but I have to point out the bleeding obvious, and this could hurt, you really aren't that important or wise and people couldn't give a pair of dingo's kidneys what you think.

The 75-year-old, a member of Sudbury Town Council and former town mayor, said the clerk advised him to cut the traditional comic calls in case the authority found itself facing legal action.

And why would the 'authority' (over what do they have authority? Certainly not me.) face legal action? Is this a council run charity games event? If so, why? As we've already explored, I pay the council to grit the roads and empty the bins, not to run bake-offs and jumble sales.

"The concern was that if there might be two large ladies in the audience when I said 'two fat ladies 88' or someone might think I was looking at their legs when I said 'legs 11'," he said.

"I was advised that someone might take offence and we could end up being taken to court."

Fear is king, let's pick out the key words in those lines, shall we? might, might, might, could. As in 'The Emperor Klang might arrive with his planet destroying starship, and he might have his stormtroopers with him. He might decide to invade Earth and take control of Sudbury council which could lead to significant congestion outside Matalan.

Why would someone take the council to court for offence caused by a fairly standard practice in one of the country's most popular activities? And why would the judge not just tell her to stop wasting his fucking time?

A council spokeswoman told the East Anglian Daily Times: "In particular with John being a councillor we have to be politically correct."

If John is a councillor then there's a very simple way of dealing with him if he pisses you off. You take his job away from him by placing a little X against someone else's name. Good God, does this mean the council is legally responsible for the conduct of its elected officials? Or is it because you just CAN'T HELP STICKING YOUR FUCKING NOSE IN WHERE IT ISN'T WANTED YOU ODIOUS LITTLE TWATS? Just asking, like.

She added: "It is very sad because it is part of the fun of bingo but unfortunately in today's society people take it literally."

No, no they won't. And if they do, so what? What damage is done? None. None at all. Which by happy coincedence is also the degree to which you live your life in the real world. What she meant to say was:

"It is very sad because it is part of the fun of bingo but unfortunately in today's society people in the public sector are shit scared of losing their jobs and so have to do things to demonstrate that we actually do stuff to earn our money, problem is we're so institutionalised that we can't even do that properly so pick on stupid stuff rather than tackling the problem of asylum seekers jumping over garden walls and eating people's trees."

Good grief, anyone reading that news story would think we live in Utopia. 'Hey, Zlargan, look at this place, they've got everything sorted to such a degree they're concentrating on the un-intended offensiveness of bingo. Freedom, no war, no hunger, no-one living in the streets, they must even have sorted out the problem of space refugees jumping over garden walls and eating people's trees.'

'Nice one, Yavvor, let's tell the Emperor Klang and invade, we can cause considerable congestion around Matalan.'

Unfortunately we don't live in Utopia, and it isn't because we've got the big problems sorted, it's because our elected reps don't have the balls, the vision or the intelligence to sort the big stuff out. They make a fuss about the little stuff in the hope we don't see the big stuff hiding behind the sofa and under the rug.

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.

The One That Just Wants To Be Left Alone. . .

Candle-lit dinners may be romantic, but researchers are warning they could be harmful to health.

Hang on, hang on, wait for it, you know what's coming, don't you?

South Carolina State University experts analysed the fumes released by burning candles in lab tests.

They found paraffin wax candles gave off harmful fumes linked to lung cancer and asthma - but admitted it would take many years' use to risk health.

HOUSE! Yep, you knew that was what was going to happen.

Even with the disclaimer at the end, isn't it just the most feeble, over-blown bit of scaremongering?

Seriously, I know my taxes haven't been spent in this bucket of arse-water research, but was there a need for the BBC to stick this on the main page of their news site? Perhaps we could have had more analysis about some corrupt bloke with a daft hat and a beard winning an election or maybe even losing it to some other corrupt bloke with a daft hat and a beard? How about more opinion on the South African girl at the athletics who might be a bloke?

Here's an idea, just leave us the fuck alone rather than beating us up about anything that someone might enjoy doing, you sad, sad, joyless, grey little fucking wankstains.

The One That Hasn't Received An Invite. . .

Anyone realised how much blogspace the BNP are taking up at the moment? Anyone would think that the MSM is right behind them, not a day goes by without a story talking about the 'danger' of the BNP or saying 'BNP - Boooooooo!' It's all a bit scary, isn't it?

Well, no, not really. I have little doubt that the BNP will pick up a seat or two in the coming Europeans, and I'd be very surprised if they didn't end up with a number of councillors in the locals. If there's a snap general election they're quite capable of picking up one or two Westminster seats as well.

Here's a newsflash; It wouldn't be the end of the world. Concentration camps would not be built on disused airfields, einsatzgruppen would not be despatched to Leicester and Bradford, we would not see flags involving eagles and lightning bolts flying over prominent public buildings.

When push comes to shove, a couple of BNP MEP's, councillors and MPs will make very little difference in the grand scheme of things. No-one seems to be making a fuss about the Greens being in a fairly similar position, but then of course the Greens aren't eeeeeeeeeevil.

Still, we must be fearful, the politicians in the established parties certainly are. Not because the British Reich is goose-stepping into Westminster and County Halls accross the land, but because it could be they who lose their jobs to the BNP. Well who's fault is that? Is it the BNP's fault for promoting policies which sit so well with the mindset of the British public? If it is, then absolutely the BNP should be given power, if they have the majority support then democracy demands it.

Of course they don't, so they won't. This whole argument is ridiculous, other than a few people who do support the BNP's aims and objectives, votes that they pick up will not be votes for the BNP, but votes against the established parties. The established parties have no-one else to blame but themselves for this.

The big three would have you believe that all protest votes will go to the BNP, just to keep the fear well fed and exercised. It won't, all the minority parties are expecting a day in the sun, and the PR in Europe could see some surprising people sent off to Brussels.

So instead they warn about voting for fringe parties. Well, fuck you. It isn't our duty to vote for only one of the three main parties, that isn't how it works. Deal with it, you have not only failed us, but have insulted us and stolen from us whilst you were at it. Still you refuse to accept that you've really done anything wrong. You'll pay for that.

Still the established parties scream 'political stunt' at the BNP. Is that what they are paid for? Pointing out the bleeding obvious? Of course Nick Griffin trying to engineer a ticket to The Queen's garden party is a political stunt. The man isn't an idiot, he knows full well that his attending this event is irrelevant, just a whisper that he might be rocking up to Buck House will put his face and his party's logo all over the broadcast media and national press. He whistles, the MSM and established parties come running.

It doesn't matter what you say about the BNP, we've all heard it a thousand times before, what is important from their point of view is that they are kept in the public eye in the run up to polling day, and that the public realise they are nothing like the big three. No broken promises, no outrageous manifesto breaches, no cash for peerages, no using those peerages to make the cash back in the Lords. Shits they may be, but at least they don't take the piss, and the big three are just as shitty. Where's the big difference? Labour, Tory, Lib Dem and BNP, they are all equally objectionable in their own ways.

So, if the BNP are to be barred from the Garden Party, I expect any person invited to be barred from attending if they are found to belong to any party. Or is that other perfectly legal parties believe that they are more equal? How many rabid republicans exist in Labour and Lib Dems? Is The Queen going to be comfortable with them poking around her flower beds? No such problems with the BNP.

Keep whining, keep pointing and shouting. All you do is weaken your own position. Fools.

I'll state again, I do not support the BNP and have no intention of voting for them. I have complete understanding for those who do vote for them, they feel they have nowhere left to go, and that is no fault of theirs.

The One That Is Saying 'Oh Give Me A Break'. . .

We are now being told that third hand smoke will kill us all.

I'm sure this is backed up by really robust scientific proof that is funded by independent parties.

I'm going to sue some bloke in Australia because he's had a ciggie whilst looking at a picture of Canterbury, and the bastard's given me cancer.

I'll bet that binge drinking causes earthquakes.

Oh give me a break, won't you?

The one that is sat here, not moving a muscle.

I was struck by something as I walked my dog recently. Not five minute's walk from me is a very large green open space, it must be at least the size of five football pitches and is used constantly by dog walkers, joggers and students and kids playing football, frisbee, softball etc. In the lovely weather the other day it was heartwarming to see a bunch of twenty or so young teenagers playing football, they'd even gone to the trouble of making sure that each team were wearing matching shirts. It must have been a relief for these kids to be doing this rather than setting fire to old ladies and driving the local convenience store around the estate at breakneck speed.

What chilled me to the bone was the phrase I heard uttered by a passing pedestrian, an individual I recongnised as one of the local councillors; 'We'll have to put a stop to this,' he said to a colleague/crony as he pointed to the football match in progress, 'if one of them breaks a leg, they'll sue us for everything we've got.'

What a tragic viewpoint, and the saddest thing is, it's not the being sued that is the problem, it's the fear of being sued. One would hope that if one of the young lads broke a leg, and if he and his parents and their ambulance chaser sued, that the judge would sit there and declare that breaking a leg was an implied risk in this situation and that they should get out of his courtroom and stop wasting his time.

This fear now permeates every level of life. I work in a public sector organisation where tried and tested legislation is overruled by policy just in case anyone should complain. Never mind that any complaint would be overturned as it is covered by legislation, the fear of a complaint is such that all pretence of being fair and firm goes out of the window. There was an article on the news this morning about parents refusing to allow their progeny to walk down to the shops because it 'isn't safe'. What are the police doing? Everybody knows that the bushes at the end of the road are teeming with paedophiles, so why don't they go and nick them? I'm not going to bang on about that statistical difference between 'stranger danger' and family members and friends because we've all seen it hundreds of times before.

The danger is no greater now than it has ever been, it just seems greater because it makes good copy for the newspapers who have to print something, anything to shift papers as electronic media means any actual news they print is out of date by the time it hits the shelves.

Of course the people who make most profit out of this feeling of fear is the government. Fear of ecological catastrophe? We'll look after you by taxing you more to 'off-set' the damage. Fear of terrorists? We'll make sure we can lock people up on a whim for weeks on end. Fear of crime? We'll put up CCTV cameras so we can keep an eye on you, all of you, all day, or how about a national DNA database? Don't worry we can be trusted to look after your most personal information, that you'll have to give us, even though there's no suggestion you've actually done anything wrong. We'll also make you carry this little card, it'll help solve crime, prevent terrorism, stop benefit fraud, be more secure. How? Errrm, well, look, it just will OK? Honestly, it's not your place to question us, we tell you what to do, you don't tell us. Now just shut up and put that cross in that little box next to your Labour candidate. Labour - because we know what's best for you.

Ben Franklin said 'Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.' He's right we've neither. H&S and Security - the totalitarian mantra. I'm off to re-read 1984, I've got the feeling that Orwell is actually the re-incarnation of Nostradamus, surely he couldn't have just guessed what the future would look like?