The One That Would Have Loved To Have Been A Fly On The Wall. . .

Business Secretary Lord Mandelson was initially refused entry to the Labour Party conference in Brighton because of a problem with his security pass.

You can just see the little jobsworth standing there, can't you?

No matter, what's good enough for the rest of us. . .

Lord Mandelson had to wait 10 minutes at the conference's security entrance before he was allowed to enter.

And how I would have loved to have seen him waiting. Curiously, the Nanny Beeb report doesn't report how he bore this loss of face. I'm betting he didn't stand there with the attitude, 'well, it IS security, it is for own protection', I'm betting he had a hissy fit of proportions that would have made Elton John wander off muttering 'drama queen' under his breath.

Please, please, please, let the security guard in question be an overstayer, visa counterfeiter or an illegal of some kidney, that would be great.

The One That Is Saying 'Enough Now, Stop It. Really. Stop It This Instant'. . .

Not content with coming after us who do smoke, now some bunch of self righteous arse-clowns are coming after those of us who don't smoke.

Now to declare my interest, I am a smoker. I think I'd quite like to give up, but to be honest I get so much joy out of pissing off bastards like ASH that I'm going to carry on. Cutting my nose off to spite my face? Maybe, but it's my nose and my face.

Anyhow, there's a company called The Electronic Cigarette Company that produces inhalator style thingies that vapourise nictoine electronically and let you 'smoke' without breaking the ban.

Oh no, no, no, no, no, say the righteous. That will never do. There could be anything in that leccy baccy, they could be dangerous. More dangerous than cigarettes? Do they contain tar? Do they produce carbon monoxide? What about benzine or the whole host of other thoroughly unpleasant ingredients? I would have thought not.

No, the real problem with these things is that they allow the users to thumb their nose at these bastards who will not stop at tobacco, these complete fucktards who want to control every aspect of your life, who will undoubtedly go on to ban alcohol (contains alcohol), crisps (fat), peanuts (salt), coffee (caffeine), tea (milk, you could be lactose intolerant), sandwiches (you could be wheat intolerant*), water (there's a shortage) and anything else that gives people even the merest sense of enjoyment, will not rest until every single facet our lives is documented, licenced, regulated or otherwise under control. Then we will be safe.

Well, not safe exactly, safe from ourselves. Because so many resources will be used on controlling us that bank robbers, corrupt politicians and muggers will be free to do as they please. But at least we'll be safe from ourselves. I mean it isn't as if we're capable of making a decision for ourselves, is it? So we can all sit safely in our houses, with our hands on the table in clear view of the telescreen on the wall, in the knowledge that nothing we are allowed to do will hurt us. Best not go out on to the street. Chris Rock jokes that in his neighbourhood you can get shot whilst getting shot. Well, soon, in your neighbourhood, you'll be able to get arrested by the fingermen for breaking curfew whilst getting shot by the feral chav for not showing him respect.

Choose a night in, choose Labour TV, choose conformity, choose surrendering your responsibilities, choose an approved dinner menu, choose safety, choose security, choose existence. But don't, whatever you do, choose life. Leave it all to those who know better than you.

* I love the idea of being lactose and/or wheat intolerant. Isn't that a hate crime? Do you see people in Sainsbury's shouting 'AAAAAAAAAAAAARGGGGGH! Get out of my store, bread, you grainy little bastard!' or people producing alternative league tables for the football, discounting goals scored by people who take milk in their coffee? White goals don't count!

Oh, you mean an allergy. Just fucking call it that then, won't you. Don't be such a bloody drama queen. Actually I know someone with a wheat allergy (sorry, Ben) I also know someone who is allergic to nuts, but I've never heard her talk about being 'kernel intolerant'.

The One That Thinks It Matters Very Much. . .

How often do we hear the phrase 'there's no point in voting, they're all the bloody same, aren't they?'

And one can only say 'Yes.'






'And no.' It's ok, I'm not about to embark on some puff peice of how life would be all fluffy bunnies and singing birdies if only we all voted LPUK, even if I do think life would be considerably better.

I'll provide some evidence that both the main parties are as similar as makes no difference. The first article (with a hat-tip to Old Holborn) shows plans by that loathsome, dictatorial arse-clown Brown to effectively do away with Coroner's inquests. If it is judged in the 'national interest' (Oh yeah, by whom? Oh? MP's? There's a startling fucking surprise) then they could be held in camera. The second, which was brought to my attention by Obnoxio the Clown, shows that the Tories are positively itching to delve into as many facets of our lives as they possibly can.

Yep, they are just about the same. Nineteen Eighty-Four, telescreens, Thought Police and so forth. Of course all this is down to our old friend, Security Reasons (Nurse! The Pills! The Pills!).

The first idea is to ensure that the national interest is protected. Let's not mince words here, it isn't the national interest, it is in the interests of your party not looking like a bunch of right schmucks because somebody has carped it due to your actions.

The second stems from legislation that no doubt bore the tag 'in extreme circumstances' when added to the statute, it amounts to the poor old chap nicked for taking a picture of a cop-car. I'll go back to 1984 and direct you all to the passage from 'The Book' entitled 'Chapter III - War is Peace.'

I hate this, I hate them, and given the opportunity would probably quite happily visit physical pain upon their persons. They are the worst of the hubristic mediocre who will not rest until they control absolutely every single aspect of your existence. So don't bloody let them. You still have that ability, in the name of Mary, mother of God, Jesus and all the little orphans, use that ability because they WILL take it away from you.

Do not vote for these arseholes, vote for anybody, anybody else. Come the next election, if there is no LPUK candidate in my constituency I'll vote for some single-issue indie. Some guy with a beard, a jumper and a pipe who needs to get into Westminster because the council won't build a hedgehog underpass. Let's fill the house with them.

Just get these bastards, of all political colours, out of our wallets and out of our lives, because if we don't in fifteen years you'll all be asking 'How did this happen? Why do I need a permit to travel from Devon to Cornwall?' (Security Reasons) 'Why do I have a centrally, government issued email address which is monitored?' (Security Reasons) 'Why do my babies have to have their DNA taken at birth?' (Crime Prevention) 'Why have elections been suspended?' (National Interest, Emergency Measures) 'Why do I need an exit visa to leave the country?' (Integrity of Borders)

I'll be able to tell you, but you'll have to call me whilst I live in another country far, far away from here. And you'll probably have to book the call in advance. And you know that someone will be listening in, I mean, you could be talking to a terrorist, a climate change denier, someone who will say that children are obese, or will denounce the glory of the European Federation, anybody.

The One That Knows This Is Going To Happen Again And Again. . .

It is now silly season. Unfortunately this doesn't mean that I don't have to be in the office until October. This season means that we'll see plenty of stories like this over the next few weeks:

A passer-by was questioned under terrorism laws for taking a picture of a police car he thought was illegally parked.

Apparently the police officers considered that this act represented a 'security threat.'

God how I hate that phrase. Security reasons - the new mantra of totalitarianism. Are we honestly, truthfully, expected to believe that some guy taking a photo of a panda car is a threat to national security? We all know what they look like, they can be seen on the news, in the paper at any time. I have a colleague who, for reasons best known to himself, is considering making a reference book about police cars. Images of cop cars are not hard to come by.

Security threat? Give me a break. You've felt this guy's collar because he has dared to question what the police were doing parked in a bus lane. When people start being arrested for questioning the actions of the police, we are in deep, deep, deep trouble.

The mealy mouthed response of the Super is just as worrying. Why not just put your hands up and say 'The officers over reacted. I've spoken with them about it and we will try to avoid this in the future.' Because the thing is I'm sure that behind closed doors, the officers concerned were told to stop being so bloody stupid.

A number of my recent posts might suggest I am anti-police. This is not true. I work quite closely with the police and recognise that the vast, vast majority do a good job under almost impossible conditions and incompetent management. Managers and a few front-line officers would do well to remember the Peelian Principles.

Can anyone explain why we used to have a Police Force that served the community but now have a Police Service that serve nothing but the Party tractor production figures?

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?