Sleight of hand

It’s not really made the news here, but yesterday, on 11th September, someone tried to blow himself up in Copenhagen.


What struck me was the response of the Danish Prime Minister:

"Regardless of the background for the bomb detonation, it is important that we don’t allow ourselves to be guided by fear or change the way we live,"

These are fine sounding words in the “Keep calm and carry on” tradition. We heard much the same sentiment from the cunt Blair after 7/7/2005.

But actually, he should be telling that not to the public, but to the politicians.

Because, on account of the overblown threat of Islamist terrorism, governments across the western world have imposed profound changes to the way we live, and they have done so by promulgating a culture of fear and suspicion.

Basically, I’d rather live with the remote risk of being blown apart by a nutter, than live with the certainty that my daily life will be hemmed in by all sorts of bullying, state intrusion and compulsion as a sop to ‘security’. But I don’t get to have that choice.

Am I alone in that? Are the majority so invested in the idea that not only must “this never be allowed to happen again”, but that it is the job of the state to bring about this bubble-wrapped utopia?

It comes down to power and control. Again.

Accordingly, my nomination for cunt of the day is not the latest dickhead who couldn’t organise an explosion in a gunpowder factory, but Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen



Has a bigger shit ever walked the earth?

I speak, of course, about arrogant shitbag extraordinaire, Dave Hartnett, top tax civil servant at HMRC.


The HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) Permanent Secretary responsible for tax denied there had been any errors, and that there was no “need to apologise”.

He said HMRC was justified in asking people who owed more than £2,000 to repay it more quickly, saying they were likely to be the highest earners.

Hmmm… reminds me of something.


This guy is such a joke that even senior Tories have been able to accuse him of arrogance while keeping a straight face,


In case you had forgotten about HMRC data (in)competence

From 2007:

Two computer discs holding the personal details of all families in the UK with a child under 16 have gone missing.

The Child Benefit data on them includes name, address, date of birth, National Insurance number and, where relevant, bank details of 25 million people.

25 million people.

Shall we paraphrase for the future?

From 2012:

Two computer discs holding the personal details of all PAYE taxpayers in the UK have gone missing.

The data on them includes name, address, date of birth, National Insurance number and, where relevant, employers, salaries and bank details of 25 million people.

The important additional element is, of course, that you’ll be able to download a file from the internet (or query a search engine), to get details of how much EVERYONE earns and where they earn it.

Your can find out the salary of your ex, your kids, your parents, the people next door, your boss, your next date, the guy who’s selling you a car, that lazy sod who has the same job title as you but does half the work.

Are you comfortable with that? That your ex, your kids, your parents, the people next door, your boss, your next date, the guy who’s selling you a car, that lazy sod who has the same job title as you, will all know precisely how much you earn?

Unlucky enough to end up in the papers? if it’s in the public domain, however that maybe, the information will be reported by someone, whether it’s a blogger or journalist.

Take comfort though, because back in 2007,

The Conservatives described the incident as a "catastrophic" failure.

So I think we’re safe. Oh yes. No doubt in my mind.


Oh no. No you fucking don’t…

I did read something about this earlier in the year, but I didn’t take it terribly serious as it sounds completely unworkable. In light of recent monumental fuck ups by HMRC, however, the horror of this idea couldn’t be clearer:


Instead of employers deducting income tax then paying gross salaries to employees, the gross monthly payment would go to an HMRC-run tax “calculator”, which would then pass the net salary to the worker.

The reform would mean the end of traditional monthly payslips, because employers would no longer be able to tell workers how much tax they had paid each month.

Errr.. no. No way.

If you really need me to explain how many ways that could possibly go wrong, you should probably go and read a blog about babies or kittens or football instead. Baaaa.



.. and still I’m loving every minute of it.


The details of “bullying” and “intimidating” behaviour towards IPSA workers and volunteers, published by the watchdog in response to Freedom of Information requests, are likely to heighten fears that many MPs have still not accepted the changes made to their expenses system since its widespread abuse was disclosed by The Daily Telegraph more than a year ago.

One thing is for sure. Every time any new legislation is proposed, it’ll be measured by the IPSA yardstick, to see if we’re going to be treated in the way they themselves so despise.

Given how completely indistinct this new bunch are from the old bunch, it’s only a matter of time.

At least the message seems to have sunk in with tired old has-been Tom Harris.

IPSA was born out of panic. It is proof positive that whatever the failings of a headless chicken, it can at least piece together legislation when it’s joined by 649 other headless chickens.

The worst possible time to legislate is in the middle of a crisis; the worst people to draft that legislation are the very same individuals whose behaviour has caused that crisis in the first place.

MPs do not deserve any sympathy for the mess in which we now find ourselves. Nor will we receive it. The mess is entirely of our own making and it is up to us to sort it out. IPSA was an expensive and unnecessary mistake. You should not compound your own mistakes by repeating them or by refusing to admit it was a mistake in the first place.

I wonder when it’ll dawn on the rest of them, if ever.


Wilful ignorance

The recent call for drugs to be decriminalised, in order to reduce health risks and crime has, predictably enough, been batted away by the government, using the same old tired bag of conflation, misdirection and causal fallacy.


The Home Office has restated its position on drugs, after the outgoing president of the Royal College of Physicians called for a review of the law.

Speaking to the BBC, Sir Ian Gilmore said that the ‘the present policy of prohibition is not a success’.

Drugs cause misery

Wait. Let me stop you there. Drugs bring me, and other I know, A GREAT DEAL OF JOY.

And perhaps that’s the real problem here.

Responding to Sir Ian’s comments, a Home Office spokesperson said: ‘Drugs such as heroin, cocaine and cannabis are extremely harmful and can cause misery to communities across the country.

Okay. Stop right there. How is cannabis even in the same sentence as cocaine and heroin?

What harm did cannabis ever do a user? Sure we can exercise arguments about incidence of schizophrenia and other mental illnesses, which we can bat away by pointing out the post hoc ergo proper hoc fallacy, and that correlation does not imply causation.

And we can argue about the supposed prevalence of gangs, who grow weed and use weapons and violence to protect their production line. We bat this away by pointing out that if those who wished to consume cannabis could grow their own, for personal use, these violent gangs would suffer a collapsing market. Completely decriminalise pot and they’ve no market at all, unless they go legit and supply to licensed outlets.

On heroin, well, so long as it is pharmaceutically pure and of a known strength, i.e. if it were decriminalised and suppliers were legit, it doesn’t have to be a treadmill to OD and death. It’ll keep Senokot in business though.

Coke? Well, again, the argument revolves around a reliable, unadulterated supply and cutting the hoodlums out of the loop.

Even accepting that heroin and cocaine, can even if pure and controlled, be very dangerous indeed if abused, there remains no justification for cannabis being mentioned in the same breath. There are no recorded fatalities.

But then, it’s a common trick. On the ‘Your Freedom’ repeal bill consultation, Nick Clegg batted away the idea of bringing back hanging and revising the smoking ban in the same breath.

Next, ‘communities’. As it happens John Demetriou has written a good post on this pernicious concept, which spares me the trouble.

Back to the ignorant fascists:

‘The government does not believe that decriminalisation is the right approach. Our priorities are clear; we want to reduce drug use, crack down on drug related crime and disorder and help addicts come off drugs for good.’

And in other news, the government proposes that as of 1 January 2012, the Sun will rise in the west and set in the north. In the event that they are unable to achieve the effect by the conventional socialist approach of realigning the heavens, they will use the social democrat contingency of passing a law to rearrange the points of the compass.

I despair. Same old ignorant, bigoted, narrow-minded authoritarian bullshit.

As it goes, A Very British Dude has done a much better and more thorough job than I on the matter of decriminalisation. See here, here and here.


Chaos Theory

This post-election period has been a sublime frottathon for game theorists.

For my own part, two statements I’ve made over the last few days:


The pressure will be on, though, for something to be in place before the markets open on Monday morning. The Pound is down against the Euro(!) and things aren’t going to be pretty if we still don’t know by Monday morning.

I was wrong about that. The rescue deal for the Euro pulled off last night gave rise to a rally of markets worldwide.


Tomorrow, though, is another day. As Brown made this evening’s announcement, the Pound took a hit.

17:41 "A Lib-Lab coalition would be a big negative for sterling," Ian Stannard at BNP Paribas says. "The Government will be unstable and not have the ability to drive through the cuts required."

17:30 Pound is now at $1.4866 against the dollar, compared to $1.5056 earlier in the afternoon. Still falling too.

17:23 Euro has risen by more than half a cent against the pound following Brown’s statement. Markets really spooked by prospect of more uncertainty.

17:14 Reaction to Brown’s statement and subsequent fall in pound from Jeremy Cook, chief economist at World First:

It’s pretty clear that the market wants certainty and that the news that Clegg is dilly-dallying between Labour and the Conservatives have not gone down well. I’m surprised that the markets haven’t hit sterling hard today, the EU plan has taken a bullet for us. As soon as that become old news however sterling is once again in the firing line.

Now, something I said yesterday:

This leads us to a nightmare scenario – albeit a remote one. But we are in uncharted waters, with some of the most calculating and devious bastards in history squabbling for the helm of the vessel.

Others have written that a Lib/Lab coalition with Brown, or A N Other unelected leader, would so enrage the electorate that they could never win a referendum on voting reform and would thereafter be savaged at the next general election.

So, suppose the Lib Dems went into a coalition with Labour, Postman Pat installed at the helm.

They all want PR. Once they have it, their ‘progressive consensus’ will be de-facto obtained.

If they don’t need a referendum, why on earth would they hold one? Remember the Lisbon treaty?

Okay, I was wide of the mark with PR – Brown appears to be offering AV without a referendum. But Brown going as part of the deal? Hmm. Suits me, sir.

I don’t know if it’s any comfort that Tom Harris says the Labour MPs won’t let that through the commons. It’s perhaps a mark of how little influence Tom has in his party that he makes this point, addressed directly to senior Lib Dems, on his blog. His frankness is refreshing nevertheless.

So on his way out, Brown has thrown a spanner in the works that will almost certainly have a negative impact on the markets.

I wonder if I’ll ever get another chance to use this:


Just be gone, you psychotic, monocular luntatic.


Today in total and utter fuckups

… we introduce civil servants to the term ‘due diligence’ – something we find quite handy in the commercial world.


In an extremely critical report, the Public Accounts Committee attacked the Government’s failure to get a guarantee from EDF that it would build nuclear stations without subsidy when selling its 36pc stake in January 2009 for £4.4bn.

The cross-party group of MPs, which holds government spending to account, criticised the “systemic weakness” at the heart of the Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) and its approach to risk that could cause “serious liabilities to fall to the public purse”.

Ah yes – the DECC, as run by Ed Bonzodogdoodahband. The useless twat.

“Given that there is a clear risk that EDF will not build them, with or without such subsidy, the Department needs to say sooner rather than later how the country’s increasing energy demands would be met under those circumstances,” said Edward Leigh MP, chairman of the committee.

“It is of concern, to say the least, that the Department does not know how much nuclear generating capacity will be needed to meet our future energy needs.”

The committee was “not convinced” by the Government’s reliance on the market to deliver investment in nuclear power and renewable energy, he added.

“When selling strategically important assets, like its stake in British Energy, the Department should carry out systematic and timely assessments of risk,” Mr Leigh said.


Still, I expect they’ll all have a bloody good laugh when it turns, out in 3 years time, that the Tories can’t afford to get any of the required nuclear generating capacity built, because (French state owned) EDF have shafted us.

Buy diesel generators.


Good points, fanciful conclusion

Constantly Furious covers the rather irritating matter of our medical records being uploaded into the NHS super-dataloss, without our consent, and in an apparent effort to get it all done before the election*.

Big Brother goes to the Doctors

The Big Brother state marches on, growing in power. Soon every detail of our lives, habits and health will be known to the Government and stored on enormous databasess, accessible by tens of thousands of government-approved agents of the State.

The latest step toward this Authoritarian’s wet dream is the placing of all our of health care records into an enormous central database, accessible by NHS staff up and down the land. Why? Fuck knows.

He goes on to throw an interesting bit of information into the mix.

Still, there’s a small light at the end of the tunnel.

As of April this year, the Data Protection Act grows much sharper teeth. The fines for losing or misusing data about real people will be dramatically increased. Up to half a million quid per transgression. Tee hee.

Tee hee? I sense schemery.

So, when a junior civil servant inevitably leaves a laptop (the one we bought for him) on the 5:15 train home, with all of our medical records unencrypted on it, imagine the fucking size of the class action we can bring against the NHS and against the Government.

We’ll be rich!

LOL… it’s a plan Rodders.


* I’m not sure there’s any rush to get it done before the election – it’ll be business as usual under Blue Labour.

Bringing the law into disrepute

I’m becoming quite a follower of Henry Porter’s dispatches on liberty in The Graun.

It’s long been a bug bear of mine that most of the senior politicians involved in dismantling our liberty, our checks and balances and our civil protections have been lawyers.

Porter picks up the theme:


It’s no coincidence that the four politicians who took us to war – Tony Blair, Jack Straw, Lord Falconer and Lord Goldsmith were all lawyers. Of course there were others involved, but let us be quite clear that each of these was in a position to stop the headlong rush to war by using the rule of law as an argument against the Bush regime.

Only Lord Goldsmith attempted such a course, but he was flattened by Lord Falconer and Baroness (formerly Sally) Morgan and sidelined by Number 10 until it was too late for Britain to withdraw. The point is that the same people who ignored the opinion of legal advisers Sir Michael Wood and Elizabeth Wilmshurst – in fact the entire legal team – also carried out the attack on liberty and the rule of law that has been the subject of columns in the Observer and this blog for the last four years.

To make the connection between the two may seem opportunistic, but I believe that it is fundamental to the understanding of New Labour to see that the attack on the international rule of law goes hand in hand with the steady erosion of rights and liberties in this country: both were carried out by people who were trained as lawyers and who should have been nourished by the law and its long traditions.

This is obviously not to say that all lawyers are bad: the people who fought for the rule of law inside the system, such as Wilmshurst and Wood, were lawyers, and many lawyers outside government, such as Philippe Sands QC and Clive Stafford Smith, have staunchly defended the international rule of law, particularly concerning British involvement in torture and rendition. Most lawyers I talk to are appalled at what has been done to the rule of law and to our own constitution.

One of the very basic tenets of the rule of law in Britain was expressed by AC Dicey in 1885: "In the first place, no man is punishable or can be lawfully made to suffer in body or goods except for a distinct breach of the law established in ordinary legal manner before the ordinary courts of the land." Blair, Straw and to a lesser extent Falconer were responsible for countless tiny cuts to this principle – and in other areas, as in the decision to go to war, the knowledge of rendition and MI5’s collusion in torture sessions – for instance in the interrogation of Binyam Mohamed – have outraged standards set in international conventions and charters.

My own belief is that Blair, Straw and Falconer should be disbarred from their professional organisations. There may be a case for Lord Goldsmith’s disbarment as well. Though I am not sure how this could be satisfactorily achieved, I believe that both barristers and solicitors will want to make a statement about the steady attack on all that the Bar and Law Society stand for. It would be a symbolic gesture but an important one, given that we are unlikely to see any of these individuals prosecuted for what they have done.

Each of them was fully aware of the damage they caused to the rule of law at home and abroad, and while we may wait for a proper analysis as to what gave New Labour lawyers the confidence to defy public opinion and the law, the action of disbarment, perhaps merely its consideration, could send out a signal that Britain is at last passing from this long and shoddy episode.

Another prominent lawyer who has been responsible for illiberal lunacy is, of course, Harriet Hormone.



Perhaps your 1% pay rise didn’t look terribly bad when inflation was below 2%, especially as you’re still paying comically small interest payments on your mortgage, eh?

Well fucking pay attention.


The BoE’s nerves to be tested? My fucking nerves are being tested, you cunts. This year, in real terms, I’ll earn less than last year, and pay more tax. In the meantime, my company, while doing relatively well, is still forced to make savings, which means thin-slicing of benefits, rising targets, increasing workloads.

That’s three ways I’m getting fucked in 2010. I’m far from alone – you’re probably in the same boat. Potentially worse if you’re on a tracker mortgage.

The Speccie has more:


As Mark Bathgate and Fraser warned, the economic crisis now has an added dimension: inflation. The government’s preferred marker, the Consumer Prices Index (CPI) rose to 2.9 percent in December from 1.9 percent in November, which as Andrew Neil notes is the biggest monthly rise in the annual index since records began. And the Retail Prices Index (RPI), used to calculate welfare payments and wage re-negotiations, rose to 2.4 percent from 0.3 percent. The underlying RPI rate rose to 3.8 percent from 2.7 percent.

The VAT hike has stimulated inflation but there is more at work. We are now seeing the long-term effects of Quantitative Easing and the use of debt to finance further government borrowing. A consequence of printing money is to devalue it – hence the collapse in Sterling and ever more expensive imports, notably crude oil, a commodity which itself has doubled in price over 12 months. With no current plans to arrest government spending, the future looks miserable.

You know, between this and the unwarranted cuntogram I’ve just had from HMRC, I’m considering dropping out of the whole fucking rat race.

I fucking hate what these cunts have done to my country and the difficulty of simply ‘being’ in this country is wearing me down.


And if you’re thinking, “well it’s better than Haiti”, I’d invite you to go fuck yourself in the eye-socket with a rusty fork.


UPDATE: As ever, the excellent Wat Tyler provides sober, and indeed sobering, analysis.

RPI inflation has increased by the biggest monthly amount since 1979 – ie back amid the wreckage left by the last Labour government.


Here we go again

We’re right back to the inflation tax: anyone with a bank or building society savings account, and anyone with a private pension is going to get seriously whacked.

Care? As we’ve blogged many times (eg here) socialists hate savers. Savers constitute the rentier class living off the backs of the workers. They deserve whatever they get, right up to and including being stood up against the wall and shot.

Of course, the Bank of England – the guys who’ve actually implemented this madness – they’re supposed not to be socialists. In fact, if memory serves, there was once some vague idea that they’d be independent of government.

Multicore sclerosis.

A rather worthwhile piece here on how government IT spending has raised costs, reduced flexibility, diminished service and locked inefficient processes into working practices.

The writing is now on the wall for the combination of centralisation, process bureaucracy and inappropriate IT systems which have been such a disempowering feature of our public services for the past decade. Research published in the American Journal of Medicine shows that IT investment in health services doesn’t cut costs:

In fact, the hospitals which had invested most quickly in IT solutions had found that their administration costs had risen the most. Those on the ‘Most Wired’ list had not managed to cut their costs at all.

This is important stuff because it confirms that one of the most disastrous aspects of New Labour centralisation has been the massive IT projects in public services. They didn’t just cost a huge amount. They also set processes in concrete, so that they became inflexible.
That is the real disaster about the government’s misuse of IT: it has taken the exhausting bureaucracy and it has made it even more inflexible than before. It can’t now be reformed without dumping entire IT systems.

Read on

And more here

The news that Sir Peter Gershon has been swallowed by the Conservative Party is bad news for public services. It implies that Cameron will follow the Gershon prescription for efficiency – and that means more of the same.

In fact, the 2004 Gershon Review – which included coachloads of representatives from the IT consultants PA Consulting – has been disastrous for public services. It decided (surprise, surprise!) that huge investment in IT was required.

The result has been huge factory back office processing systems, vast waste, less human contact with the general public – who have to interact via call centres which may or may not have the particular issue they are calling about on their software.

It has meant a de-humanising sclerosis for public service systems, and it has locked inefficiencies into concrete processes. The systems thinker John Seddon reckons that public sector call centres are wasting between 40 and 80 per cent of their efforts as a result. See for example some of the discussion on this on


H/T Mr Eugenides

Their incompetence is our best defence…

Hot on the heels of the NHS Connecting for Health IT shambles, another government catastrophe in the offing.

As the year closes, the e-borders scheme I wrote about on 8th January 2009 looks to be in tatters.


The so-called e-Borders scheme was supposed to make it compulsory to collect information from everyone in advance of their travel so they could be checked against watchlists and enable the authorities to count everyone in and out of the country.

But passengers will not be forced to hand over the information amid concerns it could have breached EU rules over free movement.

In a report published today, MPs on the Home Affairs Select Committee warned the scheme could be illegal because EU law allows free movement of its citizens between member states so long as they hold a passport.

The letter, from Jonathan Faull, director general of the European Commission’s Justice, Freedom and Security department, confirmed that the programme did not breach the rules, but that was because of "commitments and assurances" made by the UK authorities.

It makes clear that EU citizens who refused to pass on their personal information cannot be stopped from entering or leaving the UK.

Passengers must be told in advance that handing over the information is "is neither compulsory nor … a condition of purchase and sale of the ticket", it states.

"Passengers who are EU citizens or their family members will not be refused entry/exit or incur sanctions in any way on the basis that their passenger data is unavailable to the UK authorities for whatever reason," the letter states.

"Carriers will be instructed by the UK authorities not to deny boarding to travellers regardless of their nationality, who do not communicate API (Advanced Passenger Information) to the operator, and that the provision of API data to operators is neither compulsory nor is made a condition of purchase and sale of the ticket."

Advanced passenger information includes the most basic data required for e-Border checks, including name, gender, date of birth, nationality and country of residence.

It raises the possibility of mass refusals from passengers who simply do not wish to pass on their personal information. The loophole could also be exploited by criminals and terrorists.

Damian Green, the Conservative immigration spokesman, said: "It seems extraordinary that, this long into a seven-year contract that costs more than £1 billion, the Government hasn’t established whether it can impose this system on travellers, and it looks from this letter as it cannot.

"This is a huge embarrassment for ministers.

"They have set up this elaborate, hugely expensive system and the Commission is telling them it only works if people volunteer."

So, it’s a £1.2bn waste of time and money. But the IT contractors made few quid, so it’s not all bad news ;-)


A symptom, but not the core problem.

Via Dizzy,

COI reveals new five step plan for behaviour change

A new five step process for behaviour change communications planning is at the heart of new guidance from the Central Office of Information (COI). It also recommends a practical behavioural model to be defined at the start of any new behaviour change initiative, and refined throughout the life of the campaign. These measures will help maximise the effectiveness of – and define the role for – government marketing activity on integrated behaviour change campaigns.

The document is available here:


To be honest, it’s annoying, but it’s not dynamite. The principles outlined therein – NLP, systems thinking, nudging (as the Tories know it) are all established.

What is insidious is that the government actively embraces them.

What is chilling is the purposes they deploy these techniques for and the sense they have that it is their duty to do so.

I’m quite positive the Tories will take these ideas forward aggressively, too.

So I’ll say it loud and clear:

Polish my bell-end, you state-sponsored fuck-dribbles.


December 1st 2009: Bye bye England…

Honestly. Is there now any reason left not the move to France?

Via CF, I see that Captain Ranty has a catalogue of ways in which we’re to be bent over and buttfucked at 00:01 Tuesday morning.

A direct lift from the Capn’s post:

Item 1.
Habeas corpus ad subjiciendum. Latin for "you may hold the body subject to examination". This undeniable right protects one from the state. Whilst it is in place, no-one can lock you away without having solid lawful reasons to do so. Today, if you believe that you have been incarcerated and no evidence supports that incarceration, you can demand a Writ of Habeas Corpus from the court. The court will then examine evidence that you should be gaoled, remanded, or sectioned. You might also be interested to learn that once habeas corpus is gone you can be incarcerated for up to eight months without charge. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.
Item 2.
Courts de jure. Latin for "courts by jury". Today we have some 70 courts in our land geared for jury trials. On Tuesday morning your right to be judged by a jury of your peers evaporates completely. All magistrates courts are now companies with limited liability. They are, for want of a better term, places of business. Justice is not dispensed. A negotiation takes place. Crown courts will now become de facto courts. Same stage, same actors, same anticipated outcome. You will part with money, or your freedom, based on the whim or the mood, of one man or one woman. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.
Item 3.
Innocent until proven guilty. On Tuesday morning we start playing a whole new game whereby you, the accused, are guilty until you can prove your innocence. Our age old method under Common Law is dumped without ceremony and we revert instead to a mix of Napoleonic and Roman Law. Instead of having to convince 12 good men and true (15 in Scotland) that you are innocent, you now have to prove to one man or one woman that you are not guilty. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.
Item 4.
Loss of sovereignty. We are an ancient civilisation. People inhabited this land thousands of years before the Egyptians issued the tenders for pyramid building. Countless lives have been lost defending our little island. It had been a mecca for those wanting to live unfettered lives. Until now. Those immigration gates were flung wide and we invited in that Trojan horse, not filled with soldiers but with people intent on taking, taking, taking for themselves. Hundreds of thousands, millions, arrived under Labours watch, not to better themselves per se, but to help themselves to benefits we pay for. As I have previously stated on this blog, all are welcome. If they are prepared to work. The plan, masterminded by those fools in parliament, appears now to have been a deliberate act to dilute us, to weaken us, to take away inalienable rights, and give the immigrants more rights than naturalised Britons. Under the EU our sovereignty is dead and buried. No more English, no more Scots, no more Irish, no more Welsh. We are all european now.  This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.
Item 5.
Democracy. From the Greek demokratia-power to the people. The first democratically elected parliament was De Montforts in England in 1265. We shared this method of rule with others, and it spread. Many authoritarian systems have been toppled only to have democracy established. On Tuesday morning we give away this unique method of rule for an oligarchy. Mandarins in Europe are not elected. They are selected. No previous experience is required. Which is handy if you are a (well connected) imbecile. Fat salary, fat pension, fat chance of actually having to work for a living like the proles. Arguably, because of their vastly diminished responsibilities, we have no need for a parliament, no need of the traitorous monarch, and certainly no need to pay 646 goons and their back-room staff billions every year. Brussels will rule absolutely. They will waste our money with unimagined skill. Bye bye democracy. It was nice while it lasted. This item will be stolen just after midnight on Monday 30th November 2009.
I have to stop. This is far too depressing. I had another 15 or 20 items lined up that I had researched earlier today.

A total and utter betrayal. I feel truly sick.


Suicide watch…

Eamonn Butler is the head of the Adam Smith Institute – a free-market think-tank.

But I’d not be surprised to hear that the Dignitas marketing folk were keen to retain his services.

I say this because, ever since I started reading this:


I’ve been increasingly curious about their services.

It’s an unceasing catalogue of the things that Gordon Brown and his coterie of bastards has done to our country.

Oh sure, there’s not much in there that you couldn’t find on most libertarian blogs, but the sheer scale of their destruction wrought upon the fabric of our economy, society, liberty, privacy, justice system and democratic protections is breath-taking.

I may, in fact, never finish this book, because I decide that I want to live. On the other hand, I may neck a fistful of vallium and get it over with. The book, I mean.


Rattling cages…

Following up on the email I sent to NICE yesterday, I have had a response from the project manager of this particular bogeyman.

It was very courteous, but obviously just spouted the official line that I’d garnered by digging through their website.

I responded, setting out my concerns more specifically, and more vividly.

I don’t expect to hear anything back, so I’ve written to my MP about it, via

I shall update thee anon.


Bitch fight!

Via Ambush Predator and needing nothing in the way of commentary…


Violent crime committed by women has soared since Labour came to power, it is revealed today.

The number of women found guilty of murder, vicious assault and other attacks has risen by 81 per cent since 1998.

The massive increase, revealed in the Government’s own data, means that women are now being convicted at the rate of more than 200 every week.

Murders have more than doubled, life-threatening woundings are up by a fifth and common assault has soared by 151 per cent.

Women are fast becoming as likely as men to be caught up in alcohol-fuelled violence in bars and town centres.

Dr David Green, director of the Civitas think-tank, said: ‘The idea of a violent woman really was something of an oddity 15 or 20 years ago.

‘But there has been a trend among a distinct minority of young females to become more like men, and the role models they have chosen to emulate are the worst men, rather than the best.

‘Add to that the drinking, and that adds up to more violence.’

The figures come just days after five women were caught on CCTV kicking and stamping on Matthew Campbell, 38, in a random attack.

One of the women was shown stepping forward and kicking him full in the face.

Then, as he cowered on the floor, he was subjected to a barrage of blows and kicks from the gang.

All the attackers, aged between 21 and 42, are members of the same extended family and had been drinking heavily.

In a separate incident, two 17-year-old girls were arrested after a 62-year-old gay man was beaten to death in Trafalgar Square.

Some 12,573 women were convicted for violence in 2007 – the year covered by the latest figures – compared to 6,937 in 1998. Common assaults were up from 3,209 to 8,068.

Violence is now the most common reason for women being arrested in England and Wales, overtaking theft and handling stolen goods.

Well done Jack, Harriet, Tony, Charles, Jacqui. Pat on the back, ‘y’all.



Things I want from the next government…

All of which are things the Tories will manifestly not deliver.

  • Scottish Independence. Brutal, but the most appropriate way to solve the Barnett and West Lothian problems.
  • Replace Royal Mail with fully commercial operation
  • Stop sucking Obama’s cock
  • Raise personal allowance to £10,000
  • Reduce National Insurance
  • Withdrawal from climate change concensus
  • Parcel up and privatise the NHS
  • Repeal of all Anti-civil-liberties laws written since 2001
  • Ditch the smoking ban
  • Withdraw from the EU & repeal all UK laws passed due to EU directives.
  • Abolish the Health & Safety Executive
  • Limit Union donations to political parties to £50,000p.a.
  • Ditch the hunting ban
  • Remove all speed cameras & disband speed camera partnerships.

I’m sure there’ll be more…


Guilt Complex…

Via Obo

Nothing we didn’t know already, but a decent read nonetheless…


At a time of diminishing employment opportunities, there’s a sector of the British economy that continues to expand. For the right type of applicant, it often offers above-average remuneration with attractive perks, notably an assumption of moral superiority.

You won’t find it listed in the "sits vac" columns, as such. That’s because this booming business embraces many organisations, across a range of activities: charities, social work, local and national politics, even journalism.

It is the Guilt Industry. No, not the gilt industry (though that too is flourishing, thanks to the Government’s borrowing binge). The Guilt Industry is completely different; it provides a living for those with an eagerness to demonise fellow citizens who spurn "progressive" values.

The Guilt Industry’s target market is largely, but not exclusively, Britain’s middle classes, those to whom Benedict Brogan referred to in his column yesterday as "pilloried, taxed, stripped of their privileges, bound by red tape and lined up for fiscal execution".

If you have a private-sector job, pay your bills, service your mortgage, invest in your property, commit no crime, save for old age (and that of your parents) and seek the best education for your children, then you have probably experienced an onslaught from the Guilt Industry’s sales force.

Read on