Monthly Archives: December 2007

Happy New Year 2008 from the Libertarian Alliance. The bastards are still in power (everywhere) but WE and YOU are still alive, and therefore there is hope.

David Davis 

Happy New Year. Some news is good. Gordon Brown, described as a socialist, is wallowing in mire. He can’t seem to get out, and his hair grows greyer by the day – have you noticed? He will look like Tony Blair, and soon, only bigger (is this worse?)

Nicholas Sarkozy has a new girlfriend, a very pretty young Italian woman, and highly shaggable too by the look of things. Good for him. Presidents of France should have sex a lot, and with very pretty and slightly younger women, for it is their real job, and I think it will keep their very delightful and nice country (which I do love despite my posts) out of trouble, since they will legislate less, getting up later as they then will. Poor old stuck-up anal “de Gaulle”, patriotic as he undoubtedly was, did not look like a male hominid at all, just some sort of, well, I don’t know what – at least he kept us out of the EUSSR for a bit. The fascist pig Mitterand at least had the grace to have illegitimate children (a creation,) a saving grace that some other fascist pig, a rather small and insignifiacnt one, called Hitler, will not be able to adduce in front of the RECORDING ANGEL, on The Day.

Pakistan’s news is less good. At least they have appointed some young lad from the right University. I’m sorry about his mum and send condolences: I knew her very slightly at a distance then, when she was at LMH. She went to grander parties than I was invited to. But I’m sure they’ll sort it out. Better not say what I had just typed and deleted, re nuclear war due to “inadequate control of weapons” – say you’re safe and the devil will get you next day.

Do we care about a failed socialist “bank” which costs us £57 billion to bail out? To save votes and seats in the English North East Soviet?

Nah. We will DRINK £57 billion of lager alone, next Thursday morning. It’s OUR job (see Nicholas Sarkozy, above.) They have sex, we get drunk and sing and shout. But I hope he spanks the bottoms of the enarques a bit.

Liverpool’s  “European capital of culture 2008″ is going to go DOWN THE DRAIN, in socialist ruin, and indescribable corruption. (Remember I am the “Director of Northern Affairs”  …….  and YOU SAW IT HERE FIRST  !!!  ) I bet you all 5p. Each…………Every reader of this post who takes on the bet. NB! This does NOT mean I am happy about it; all that money, taken especially from poor-people, even lots of poor-people in Liverpool, and everybody taken in by a scam to rival the Olympics, and nothing to show for it except a few thousand bureaucrats, many of which are ill on sick-leave. Like the chief-finger-man Jason somebody-or-other.

Can’t think of anything else to sound lugubrious about right now, perhaps it’s the champagne working. 

Anyway, We at the LA all wish you, our readers, all that you yourselves would wish for you and those whom you love, which is what is really important in life. Socialism statizes love. This is destruction writ large.

If the STATE “does love”, which is to say “care”, then nobody has to love anybody, and that road leads to disaster. That’s the one and only thing I want to put for 2008, to kick it off.

Anybody who thinks anything else has ROCKS in his head. Happy new Year !!!

More great news about the death of anthropogenic global warming.

David Davis 

A good site is

and this…

and then this…

And people could sign this petition to force Al Gore to debate himself over his lies, not that he’ll take any notice (see my last comment below…)

Finally, for today, and thanks to Tony Hollick for spotting it (it’s also in his comment on a previous post) here is the URL for Martin Durkin’s great documentary on “The Great Global Warming Swindle.”

A thought has just occurred to me about Al Gore. Unless I’ve been asleep, he’s not been much in evidence these recent weeks – not like before. Could he be suffering from Hitleritis? Hitler was seen in public only twice after Stalingrad.

Will Sean Ever Sleep Again?


GOOD NEWS, EARTH IS NOT FLAT …. More on ” Global Warming as political hoax ” … how wonderful.

David Davis 

Got this today from Christina Speight.

I meant to comment plangently and intellectually on it, and did, but aol signed me off in the middle (and I lost everything) as it transpires that my wife’s cousin’s son in |Poland (a student) has cloned my aol account, and so aol sometimes thinks I am signed on in “two locations”.  Never mind, I’m too tired to re-imagine everything on line now, and you’ll just have to imagine what my comments were. I’m sure you can.


Good News! Earth Not Flat

 Melanie Phillips FRIDAY, 21ST DECEMBER 2007

 And now for some good news. Geophysicist David Deming writes that parts of north and south America and the southern hemisphere, from California to Korea, have been experiencing freezing weather of such unusual extremity and harshness that crops have been devastated and states of emergency declared. (NB: I have removed the quotes from this article because the author has objected to their being reproduced). 

However, maybe at long last the penny is dropping. The New Statesman, no less, this week publishes a piece by sensible David Whitehouse which says flatly:  The fact is that the global temperature of 2007 is statistically the same as 2006 as well as every year since 2001. Global warming has, temporarily or permanently, ceased. Temperatures across the world are not increasing as they should according to the fundamental theory behind global warming – the greenhouse effect. Something else is happening and it is vital that we find out what or else we may spend hundreds of billions of pounds needlessly. … For the past decade the world has not warmed.

Global warming has stopped. It’s not a viewpoint or a sceptic’s inaccuracy. It’s an observational fact…. So we are led to the conclusion that either the hypothesis of carbon dioxide induced global warming holds but its effects are being modified in what seems to be an improbable though not impossible way, or, and this really is heresy according to some, the working hypothesis does not stand the test of data. 

It was a pity that the delegates at Bali didn’t discuss this or that the recent IPCC Synthesis report did not look in more detail at this recent warming standstill. A pity indeed, that the entire western ruling class has been taken in by this scam.But now the cavalry appears at last to have arrived.

According to this story, a US Senate report documents the opinion of hundreds of prominent scientists from around the world who say global warming and cooling is a cycle of nature and cannot legitimately be connected to man’s activities. The report compiled observations from more than 400 prominent scientists from more than two dozen nations who have voiced objections to the so-called ‘consensus’ on ‘man-made global warming.’

Many of the scientists are current or former participants in the United Nation’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose present officials, along with former Vice President Al Gore, have asserted a definite connection. The new report comes from the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee’s office of the GOP ranking member, and cites the hundreds of opinions issued just in 2007 that global warming and man’s activities are unrelated. …‘Many scientists from around the world have dubbed 2007 as the year man-made global warming fears “bite the dust”’, the introduction said.

And there probably would be many more scientists making such statements, were it not for the fear of retaliation from those aboard the global-warming-is-caused-by-SUVs bandwagon, the report said. 

And it details some of this intimidation. (Details in article.)

 Looks like man-made global warming theory is melting away faster than you can say Al Gore. A lot of reputations are now going to disappear along with it: all those who were part of the famous ‘consensus’ (not). Those people should never be taken seriously again. It’s over, guys. Reason, truth and real science are fighting back.

RON PAUL quote of the day…

David Davis 

I liked this from Ron Paul (I’m a Lancashire Bumpkin, so who is Ron Paul, and what pop group does he play for?) (SEE the violet stuff below my red stuff!)

28th Dec 19.22 GMT re-edit:- this inserted:-

You’ll be pleased to know that I’ve finished french-polishing staircases for the day, and I’ve now acquainted myself with what Ron Paul is and what he is for. if he does truly believe what he says down there in violet, then he’s the right man for the job. He could even be the president that BARRY GOLDWATER nevere got to be. I rememebr that Godlwater said something strikingly similar in, oh, about 1964?

Few Americans understand that all government action is inherently coercive. If nothing else, government action requires taxes. If taxes were freely paid, they wouldn’t be called taxes, they’d be called donations. If we intend to use the word freedom in an honest way, we should have the simple integrity to give it real meaning: Freedom is living without government coercion. So when a politician talks about freedom for this group or that, ask yourself whether he is advocating more government action or less.

God knows what that gobbledygook means at the bottom. You lot better click it I expect!

Or perhaps not……Actually I think WordPress meant to display it as this;

Much better! Why didn’t I just use AOL as usual…?

GLOBAL WARMING AS POLITICAL HOAX …. NICE search-engine string that hit the side of the blog today!

“global warming as political hoax”

 I love the smell of cyber-napalm in the evening.

And, the latest post about (not anthropogenic) global warming is at the top of the blog tonight, 29.12.07, about 10.15pm GMT.

Why do bureaucrats do what they do, and if we could find out, how could we stop them?

As is often stated on here, “I have not even time to scratch my arse” – so I thank Samizdata for flagging a think-piece about essence of “bureaucrat-ness”, and perhaps why modern civilisations seem to degenerate into more or less petty tyranny over the individual. This is always at the insistence of some powerful group or other that claims to have moral and executive authority over lives and property:-

The face of the enemy

Guy Herbert (London)   Best of • Personal views • Privacy & Panopticon


Sometimes it is worth plagiarising yourself.

I was asked in a pre-interview chat the other day, about 30 seconds from live TV, “Why is the government doing this? ‘Terrorism’ doesn’t seem to make sense; there has to be something more to it.” It’s hard to be snappy on the point even without crazy pressure, so mumbled something about my interlocutor going to Google and typing “Transformational Government”. I do recommend it, but I have a fairly neat explanation for why Transformational Government too. Just not quite neat enough to recall and pitch in 30 seconds on a GMTV sofa at 6:30 in the morning.

I actually wrote it about 3 years ago, in the days when I had time to think, as a comment on Phil Booth’s (whatever happened to him) blog, the Infinite Ideas Machine:

My answer arises from a pub conversation a while back with the post-Marxist commentator Joe Kaplinsky. He maintains  >>”they” don’t know what they want the information for,  they are just collecting it just in case it should ever come in useful, because that’s what bureaucrats do.<< There is much in that, but I think there’s slightly more.

The slightly more is a glimpse of bureaucratic fundamentalism to rival the more explicit fundamentalisms of religious and political fanatics. The administrative class (“class” in the cultural not economic sense) in Britain, but also in Europe more generally – and from which New Labour is almost exclusively drawn – holds it as self evident that the life and personality of an individual is a unitary object capable of being better managed if only there is enough information collected and enough “best practice” followed.

It is a fundamentalist faith in that if the world is out of line with the model, the world is wrong; that written rules and established methods are unquestionable from outside the tradition; and that forcing people to live within the categories determined by the faith is justifiable for a general and individual good that is evident to the elect.

It’s not that control is sought for its own sake, more that they yearn for the best well-ordered and coherent society, and believe this can be determined and imposed given sufficient expertise and information. Hence joined up government. They really do believe that efficiency is achieved by connecting everything to everything else in a giant bureaucratic system. It is the Soviet illusion, dressed up in “new technology” and market-friendly initiatives that co-opt corporate bureaucracies into the dream rather than setting them up as enemies.

The same people who claimed to have absorbed Hayek’s explanation of why 5-year plans can’t work during their turn away from Old Labour are too dull (or too intoxicated by the vision of the power to make a good society) to see that replacing some of the clerks with machines and the telegraph with the internet makes no difference to the basic proposition.

There is always a demonized group too, one which does not fid into the Utopian plans for “society”, to the infallibility of which the bureau-group is the only and legitimate heir. That great theoretical-modelling group the Nazis used Jews and Slavs…Student Marxists from Marx himself onwards demonised “capitalists” and “plutocrats”…today’s global-warming-Nazis use drivers of “SUVS”, and secondarily anybody in the west except Al Gore who needs to use energy. 

Paul Johnson I recall, in his book “Intellectuals”, referred in the last pages to the “Tyranny of Ideas”. My thesis is that as civilisation gets more complicated and ramified, there begin to exist in it more and more spaces, sort of lacunae…These are places in which angry disaffected persons who are (a) quite intelligent and (b) largely useless at any sort of consumer-pleasing work whatsoever (such as shopkeeping, science, or making and growing stuff that chaps want to buy.) Feeling sidelined, and having the articulation needed to be able to project their contrary plans for how civilisation might develop, they metaphorically lose their temper, throw their toys and propose that everyone be FORCED to comply with their model (see Samizdata above) of how the world ought to work.

Their plans sound messianic and plausible to masses of other people who have nothing initially to lose by trying the experiment. In pre-capitalist societies things called “revolutions” (by the left) occur. In advanced pluralist democracies (and no, Germany was NOT one of these in 1919, but the UK still is one, even now) a creeping stalinism comes about.

I think this needs to be explored further, but right now my drving services are demanded by the boys.

Talking to the enemy before you have wasted him…and when he thinks he can still waste you…what bastards the EU and the UN are to our men, who fight and die for them…

David Davis 

Trust the UN and the EU to shoot Britain and the liberal world in the foot. In the middle of a war, to boot (no pun intended.)

 Here is it in black and white.  It had of course to be those arch-Quislings of the West the EU (which is a Soviet) and the permanently-embedded foe of it which we even pay for, the UN (Useless Nothings) involved, didn’t it. No surprises at all there, then. I ownder when they’ll learn where their bread is buttered – or are the actually the enemy demolition-parties that I have suspected them of being all along?

Rot in hell, bastards. Merry Christmas, and thank you very, very much. Friends of friends of yours might have been dying on patrol, but on second thoughts I don’t think any of them or theirs would want to know or live near people like you. I don’t think our soldiers would want to be photgraphed standing next to you (I quote one of our Generals in Bosnia, regarding I think it was Tony Blair! Or it might have been John Major, but they’re the same droid anyway, the outer casing just got changed when the droid got re-elected in 1997.)

You DO NOT TALK TO your enemy, until he is defeated, and rolling, crying in the blood and dust, in front of you. And, if he’s an enemy of liberalism, NOT EVEN THEN; the stakes are too high and we have to get off this planet in time, and not be delayed. We don’t behave like this but the enemies of liberty do, for they are more primitive and pre-enlightenment than we are, and closer perhaps to the reality of primordial conflict and its psychology – locked in an age before the realistaion of how fragile our total exictence may be. they can afford to kill locally, for nowhere that exists at all, ever, is more than a few miles away.

We must get back the will to inflict terrible, ghastly, memorable defeat on those who are both (1) wrong and (2) simultaneously try to force us to believe they are right.

Otherwise, the concept of “terrible defeat” and what its purpose is, loses all meaning: there is no point then in fighting wars against wrong-people for they will not be make to learn right. Then, the world descends to the level of a modern British secondary-school classroom, in which nothing is learned at all (see the Wireless tele-Vision News any day), and the West (which is right) will continue to be embattled by Evil until it’s too late to go away.

Interesting, that SIS officers were allegedly “talking” to the buggers too. Perhaps Christmas is a good time to bury bad news

Great post for Boxing Day I had to do and it’s your fault you two traitors in the article, thank you.

Banned Video back on Web

Sean Gabb

Proposed Sex Trade Ban in UK “A Charter for Violent Pimps and Bent Policemen”

Sean Gabb

In Association with the Libertarian International

Release Date: Monday 24th December 2007
Release Time: Immediate

Contact Details:
Dr. Sean Gabb on 07956 472 199 or via

For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url:

Proposed Sex Trade Ban in UK “A Charter for Violent Pimps and Bent Policemen” Says Libertarian Alliance

The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties pressure group, today denounces Justice Minister Harriet Harman for her proposal to criminalise the purchase of sexual services.

Libertarian Alliance Director, Sean Gabb, says:

“We believe in the right of consenting adults to associate as they see fit. If a buyer and seller of sexual services come together and reach agreement on terms, it is an infringement of their personal freedom for the authorities to interfere.

“Of course, this is not an argument our politicians are likely to understand, let alone accept. But anyone but a  fool should realise that the trade in sexual services cannot be suppressed. The desire of buyers for sex and of sellers for money, and the private nature of the transactions, will make any attempt at suppression a miserable failure.

“But while a ban on paying for sex cannot end the trade, it will change the market for sexual services. It will tend to frighten off the more genteel clients, and make prostitutes into genuine victims They will fall more under the control of pimps – the more violent, the better for ensuring payment. They will need to pay higher bribes to the police – bribes to have their clients left alone.

“If Miss Harman is appealing for the votes of violent pimps and bent policemen, this proposal is an interesting first step. If she is seriously trying to protect prostitutes and other sex workers from harm, we  finally accept that she really did believe in those weapons of mass destruction and the possibility of exporting democracy to Iraq at gunpoint.

“In either case, the woman is unfit for any public office.” 

The Libertarian Alliance Believes:

  • That all laws against the marketing and supply of sexual services should be repealed:
  • That contracts between adults for sexual services should be subject to the laws as for any other good or service.


Note(s) to Editors

Dr Sean Gabb is the Director of the Libertarian Alliance. His latest book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, may be downloaded for free from It may also be bought. His other books are available from Hampden Press at

He can be contacted for further comment on 07956 472 199 or by email at

Extended Contact Details:

The Libertarian Alliance is Britain’s most radical free market and civil liberties policy institute. It has published over 700 articles, pamphlets and books in support of freedom and against statism in all its forms. These are freely available at

Our postal address is

The Libertarian Alliance
Suite 35
2 Landsdowne Row
Tel: 07956 472 199

Associated Organisations

The Libertarian International – – is a sister organisation to the Libertarian Alliance. Its mission is to coordinate various initiatives in the defence of individual liberty throughout the world.

Sean Gabb’s personal website – – contains about a million words of writings on themes interesting to libertarians and conservatives.

Hampden Press – the publishing house of the Libertarian Alliance.

Liberalia – – maintained by by LA Executive member Christian Michel, Liberalia publishes in-depth papers in French and English on libertarianism and free enterprise. It is a prime source of documentation on these issues for students and scholars.

Christopher Monckton, his take on the fairy-tale global greenazi zombifest in Bali, and strategies for what we deniers do now that we are going to win.

David Davis

I was fortunate to be alerted to the passage reproduced below. It’s longish, but warblog-readers have, as is widely known, all the time in the world. I didn’t know that the neoCommunist (that is to say, Nazi) assault on the West via anthropogenic global-warm-monger-lying is actually coming apart at the seams quite so soon.

This is rather good news. But as their story unravels into chaos, doubt and untruth, we are therefore allowed by Providence to go one more time around the Jolly Carousel of Armageddon. This is an extra ride, paid for by Capitalism, an unmuzzled Western Press and Media, and the forces of truth, which we have been given a last opportunity to take with our mortal Enemy, to see who will get thrown off into the dust 

This time, we liberals must not relax our grip on the windpipe of anti-human protopastoral huntergathering darkness-nonsense. At the end of this post I will hazard a few guesses as to what liberals ought to do. But for now here’s Chris Monckton:-

A readable but revealing summary of what really happened at the UNFCC meeting on climate change in Bali. And why the ordinary people of the world should be very, very afraid.Bali diary
Fortnight Of The Undead
By Christopher Monckton in Nusa Dua,

Down the Poxy, our local fleapit late on a Saturday night, voodoo flicks like Night Of The Undead were always popular when I was a lad. To shrieks of scornful merriment from the teenage audience, mindless zombies would totter aimless across the clumsily-constructed sets with lugubrious expressions frozen on their messily-made-up death-masks until the hero, with the lurv interest wrenched screeching from the clutches of the late Baron Samedi and draped admiringly on her rescuer’s extravagantly-muscled arm, triumphantly saved the day.

Thus it was in Bali during the Fortnight Of The Undead. There was surreality in the air. The overwhelming majority of the governmental delegates, journalists, quango stallholders, fortune-hunters and environmental lobbyists who attended the UN climate conference in the soulless Nusa Dua conference centre tottered aimlessly among the clumsily-constructed sets with lugubrious expressions frozen on their messily-made-up death-masks. Monckton’s Rule: the further Left, the tackier the make-up. The only laughter came from our gallant band of doubters, the heroes of this otherwise gloomy production.

I nearly didn’t go to Bali. The UN, which had not wanted any dissent at this carefully-staged event, rejected my journalistic credentials out of hand, and without explanation. However, a non-government organization came to the rescue and the high priests didn’t dare to say No a second time. That would have looked too obvious. I proved my journo-cred by writing a major article in the Jakarta Post on day 1 of the conference, cheekily claiming my share of the Nobel Prize because the IPCC had made a correction to its latest Holy Book at my suggestion, and concluding that, since our influence on the climate is a non-problem, and the correct approach to a non-problem is to do nothing, my fellow-participants should have the courage to do nothing and push off home.

The Post circulated the article to all delegates and syndicated it worldwide, provoking weeping and gnashing of dentures among the zombies at my challenge to the scientific accuracy of the Holy Books of the IPCC. I don’t think the UN will dare to question my journalistic credentials again.

The UN’s sinister bureaucrats were furious that their attempt to stop me writing in the newspapers from the conference had failed. So they interrupted a presentation by me to delegates, threatened to have me thrown out by Security if I addressed any meeting open to the Press in the conference venues, and cancelled without reason a room they had previously booked for our team’s daily conferences. The room wasn’t even needed for someone else: it stood empty. So we mounted a demo outside the conference: half a dozen scientists (and me) in white lab-coats and (for some reason) wrap-around shades, holding a banner saying, “New science drives out old fears: Kyoto 2 is not needed”.

The UN, whose pot-bellied goons had taken over the entire Nusa Dua conference zone from the leaner and more competent Indonesian and Balinese security forces, moved us on within minutes, while allowing anti-nuclear protesters, Greens and even Hilary Benn, described as a UK Minister, to mount demonstrations for hours on end.

The official propaganda mantra at the conference, first suggested by a UK pressure-group last year and now enthusiastically adopted by the UN, was that “The Science Is Settled”. The zombies, led by the outgoing and incoming conference chairmen, recited this mantra with glazed but increasingly desperate pietism.

An IPCC lead author came to one of the press conferences we managed to hold before the UN showed its alarm at our effect on the delegates by shutting us down. He said a mere layman like me had no business challenging the supposed “consensus”. And he tried to maintain that a table of figures in the latest Holy Book had been added up correctly when, as a slide I was showing made quite clear, it had not added up to within a factor of two of the right answer. In the land of the zombies, two plus two equals nine.

Outside the conference hall, I went up to a fragrant Japanese lady manning one of the exhibits set up by the ever-growing number of taxpayer-funded quangos with bewildering but important-sounding initials that are profiting by the lavish State handouts available to anyone willing to proselytize for the cult of the wrathful God Siotu. “What disasters?” I enquired, with an expression of shambling, potty-Peer innocence. This usually provoked a lurid list of plagues, droughts, floods, deaths, cataclysms and mass extinctions worthy of St. John the Divine at his most hyperbolic. The UK High Court judge who condemned Al Gore for exaggerations of this sort would have locked up most of the stallholders and sent me the key.

But this lady had somehow escaped the zombies. She drew me to one side and whispered, “Don’t tell my boss, but two-thirds of the delegates here are mad.” They would have been mad, if they’d had minds at all. One of the most enduring impressions on all of our team was that the Enlightenment has been switched off. Enter the Dark Age of Unreason. Ever since the high priests tampered with the scientists’ text of the IPCC’s 1995 Holy Book, deleting multiple references to the absence of credible evidence for any anthropogenic effect on climate and inserting the directly contrary statement that there was now a discernible human influence, anyone who dares to check the science is regarded as a heretic for daring to question the Holy Books of voodoo. Never mind the facts: just believe the nonsense, even when it doesn’t add up.

I couldn’t resist baiting the stallholder at the stand run by a certain national weather bureau. This particular tax-gobbler, reliably Messianic in its Siotological fervour, had a childishly imaginative poster that ramped up the imagined disasters as global temperature rose by each additional degree Celsius. At just 2 degrees, the poster said the Greenland ice sheet would be permanently destabilized. Oo-er. The message was illustrated by the usual picture of a glacier calving spectacularly into the water.

“‘Scuse me,” I said, Earl-of-Emsworth expression in place, “but isn’t that a picture of a glacier that cuts across a freshwater lake in Argentina?” For it wasn’t Greenland. It looked suspiciously like a grainy vid-grab from the traditional collapsing-glacier footage shown every few minutes on the unspeakable BBC. As the waters of the freshwater lake build up behind the glacier, it breaks apart spectacularly every eight years. Or rather, as I pointed out to the stallholder, every five years these days, because much of the southern hemisphere is cooling. This image did not demonstrate “global warming” but regional cooling.
The stallholder robotically reached for the IPCC’s latest Holy Book and showed me graphs of sharply-rising temperatures in South Africa, Australasia and South America. She didn’t show me the Antarctic, of course: that has been cooling for half a century. It had not occurred to the poor dear to wonder why the IPCC’s temperature graphs for all continents but one were shown as rising steeply in recent years, when the global mean temperature has not shown any statistically-significant rise since the IPCC’s previous Holy Book came out in 2001. The thing about stable average temperatures is that if some have risen others  must have fallen. Or so it seems to me. But then I’m not a zombie.

“Anyway,” I said, “doesn’t the 2007 rewrite of the Holy Book say that the Greenland Ice Sheet would only lose significant ice-mass if a temperature increase of 2 degrees Celsius or more were to be sustained for several millennia?” That, after all, was what a UK High Court judge had recently found, when he condemned Al Gore’s ludicrous hundredfold exaggeration of sea-level rise as alarmist and told ministers to correct this and eight other flagrant errors in Gore’s rocky-horror movie before exposing hapless schoolchildren to it.

Here’s a question. If the science behind the scare is as certain as the zombies say, why are they so terrified of a few doubters? Google me and you’ll find hundreds of enviro-loony websites, such as Wikipedia, now an international music-hall joke for inaccuracy, that call me a fraud (for writing about climate science when I’m not a climate scientist), a plagiarist (for citing learned papers rather than making up scare stories), and a liar (for saying I’m a member of the House of Lords when – er – I’m a member of the House of Lords, though, being merely hereditary, I don’t have a seat there).

One of these bedwetting sites even has a “Monckton Watch” page, with a hilarious collection of colourful stories, including the story of how I told the stallholder that much of the southern hemisphere was cooling. No mention that the location of the BBC’s favourite glacier has indeed been cooling. And, of course, no mention of the elephant in the room – that a national weather bureau had flagrantly exaggerated the Holy Book’s official ramblings about Greenland on its silly, taxpayer-funded poster.

You’ll find precious little science on the zombie websites. They specialize in global whingeing ad hominem, rather than scientific argument ad rem. The frenetic personal assaults have become so self-evidently ludicrous that I’m getting an increasing number of emails from people who have first heard of my work from the Kool-Aid slurpers and have gone on to find, to their surprise, that the peer-reviewed science to which my climate papers politely draw attention does suggest that the Holy Books have exaggerated both the influence of Siotu over temperature and the consequences of warmer weather.

An example. A couple of months back I posted a paper citing peer-reviewed evidence that the fingerprint of greenhouse-gas warming – temperature rising over the decades at a rate three times faster six miles up in the tropical troposphere than at the surface – is absent from all of the real-world records of actual temperature change throughout the past half-century. During the Bali conference, I presented my own linear regression analysis going back 25 years and demonstrating that the rate of change in temperature falls with altitude, while the IPCC’s models predict that if CO2 is at fault it should be increasing with altitude. Two days later our team of heroes had the pleasure of circulating to delegates a paper just published by the formidable John Christy and his colleagues, spectacularly and definitively confirming this result.

We circulated a one-page summary of the Christy paper showing the tropical upper-troposphere “hot-spot” as predicted in the Holy Book, and the total absence of the “hot-spot” in the observed data. We explained that, in the words of Professor Dick Lindzen of MIT, who knows more about the bad behaviour of the atmosphere than anyone, the missing “hot-spot” means that the IPCC’s estimate of the impact of greenhouse-gas enrichment on temperature is at least a threefold exaggeration.

As I was handing our flyer round the Press tent, a “development journalist” angrily said: “How dare you criticize the IPCC’s scientists?” I sat down and said: “I don’t attack the scientists, though they certainly attack me. I attack the bad science.”

“Well, then,” he said, “how dare you substitute your judgment for that of thousands of climate scientists?” I said that the crucial chapter in the Holy Book attributing rising temperatures to Siotu had been written by only 53 people, not all of whom were scientists, and that – by coincidence – 53% of the comments by 60 reviewers had been rejected by the authors of the chapter. Not exactly the 2,500 scientists claimed by the high priests, and not exactly a consensus either.

I explained that I was an old-fashioned scribbler who had been taught to be sceptical of all sides of every debate, and that the authors of the Holy Book were obviously not good at sums. “Give me an example,” he said. So I did.

The Holy Book saith: “The CO2 radiative forcing increased by 20% during the last 10 years (1995-2005).” Radiative forcing quantifies increases in radiant energy in the atmosphere, and hence in temperature. The atmospheric concentration of CO2 in 1995 was 360 parts per million. In 2005 it was just 5% higher, at 378 ppm. But each additional molecule of CO2 in the air causes a smaller radiant-energy increase than its predecessor. So the true increase in radiative forcing was 1%, not 20%. The high priests have exaggerated the CO2 effect 20-fold.

“So how are you so nauseatingly certain that you’re right?” he asked. “Well,” I said, “because I worked out that the proportionate increase in CO2 between 1995 and 2005 was 5%, not 20%, and then did a simple calculation from this to work out the radiative forcing. It’s called ‘checking’.” He looked baffled. Voodoo has indeed replaced science, and the paradox is that the new religion claims to worship science.

The zombies seem listlessly incapable of checking even the most elementary facts. Take Yvo de Boer, the UN archpriest at the conference. He made an impassioned speech saying that the sceptics had had their day and that everyone now accepted that, for instance, the island nations of the Pacific were facing an imminent threat from rising sea levels. Er, no. Corals have been around for 275 million years. They’ve survived temperatures up to 7 degrees Celsius warmer than today’s. And has it never occurred to the poor sap to wonder why, after a rise of 400 feet in sea level over the past 10,000 years, the sea has – by some startling concidence – exactly reached the surface of all the coral atolls?

No, it’s not a coincidence, because corals grow to meet the light. They can outpace at least ten times the Holy Books’ high-end estimate of sea-level rise, which is anyway down by a third since just six years ago. We know this, because the mean centennial rate of sea-level rise since the end of the last Ice Age has been – get this – at least double the high priests’ highest estimate of future sea-level rise. Nine-tenths of the land-based ice sheets of the world have already melted. There’s so little left that even if it began to melt (which it won’t) the rise in sea level would be very, very slow.

The new Australian prime minister got a dutiful round of applause from the zombies when he announced that his first official act had been to ratify the Kyoto Protocol. He didn’t tell them that back home he’d also let it be known that Australia had not the slightest intention of complying with the protocol. But then, practically no one else is complying with it either.

For me, it was this laughable disconnection between rhetoric and reality that was the most striking feature of the conference. Anyone with half a brain can see, after making the most elementary of enquiries, that greenhouse gases can’t have all that much effect on temperature, that even if they did the consequences would be minimal and largely beneficial. For this reason – since Heaven has a sense of humour – global temperature has now been stubbornly failing to rise for the best part of a decade, and (unless you’re James Hansen, who started the scare in the first place) 2007 will yet again fail to be a “record year for temperature” – and the zombies go back only 150 years.

Since CO2 can’t be exercising more than a minuscule influence on temperature, and since the temperature is accordingly failing to rise as predicted (or, in the past seven years, at all), the entire conference was unnecessary, but the zombies didn’t know, and they didn’t care, and – either way – they were getting rich at taxpayers’ expense thanks to the most elaborately-conceived scare of modern times.

Bryan Leyland, the leader of our delegation and an engineer far too highly-qualified to be an IPCC reviewer, asked the IPCC lead author how many more years of temperatures failing to rise as predicted would convince him to give up the pretence that the IPCC’s predictions have any connection with reality. Answer came there none.

I had a quiet word with the US delegation before the conference began, just to confirm that they were not about to go soft and goofy as Australia has done. A solidly-constructed Congressman gave me the clear message that as long as George Bush was in the White House there would be no nonsense. That meant that both this conference and the next one – at Poznan in Poland this time next year – will merely mark time until President Bush isn’t. Nothing can happen until Copenhagen in two years’ time.

I also said Konichi-wa to the Japanese delegation, whose members diligently turned up half an hour before each session, while the rest were still drying out their hangovers. They politely read our daily messages to delegates, and joined the US and Canada as the pariahs of the conference, refusing to shuffle along with the zombies.

The Luxembourgeois delegation were not so polite. A peasant-faced minister took one look at the High Court judge’s list of the errors in Al Gore’s movie and rudely tore it up in front of me, throwing the pieces on to the floor. Not enough Luxe, too much bourgeois, one feels. Unusual animation for a zombie, though. One of his colleagues began collecting up copies of the judge’s list of Gore’s bloopers as I was distributing them. I remonstrated politely and she desisted, deciding to go and complain to Security instead. On the way, she murmured that she had a black belt in karate. “So do I,” I said, with equal mendacity, trying my geriatric best to look like James Bond.

Back at the Poxy, the only time the zombies used to show any animation was when Baron Samedi came on set. They would set up an eerie, unpleasant keening, and would jerk chaotically in their frenzied excitement. So it was in Bali when, on the eve of the closing Friday, not so much Baron Samedi as Baron Thursdi, Al Gore private-jetted and motorcaded in with his vast retinue to receive the plaudits of the faithful, and to hell with the carbon footprint. Gore did what I had been taught never to do. He attacked his own country for withstanding the voodoo cult. The zombies loved it. The keening and screeching and jerking were exactly as I had remembered them.

Gore needs to pretend that the situation is urgent when it is becoming increasingly plain to everyone that it isn’t. The robust corn-stalk chewers of Iowa, polled recently about election issues, ranked “global warming” so low that fewer than one in 200 thought it mattered at all.

Therefore, to whip up the flagging panic that keeps the gravy-train of “global warming” rolling, Baron Thursdi came up with a new, improved list of 50 errors and exaggerations:

•    Floods in 18 countries, plus Mexico: Four errors in one. First, individual extreme-weather events cannot be attributed to “global warming”. Secondly, the number of floods is not unprecedented, though TV makes them more visible than before. Thirdly, even if the floods were caused by warming, the fact of warming does not tell us the cause. Thirdly – and it was astonishing how few of the zombies knew this – there has been no statistically-significant increase in mean global surface temperature since the last IPCC Holy Book in 2001. “Global warming” has stopped.
•    The Arctic ice-cap will be gone within 5 to 7 years: Six errors in one. First, as a paper published by NASA during the conference demonstrates, Arctic warming has nothing much to do with “global warming”: instead, as numerous studies confirm, it is chiefly caused by decadal alterations in the ocean circulation affecting the region. Thirdly, it was warmer in the Arctic in the 1940s than it is today. Fourthly, thinner pack-ice is surprisingly resistant to melting, so the ice-cap will probably be still there for many years to come, even if (which is unlikely) the warming trend resumes. Fifthly, the ice-cap was probably absent during the mediaeval warm period, and almost certainly absent during the Bronze Age climate optimum, when temperatures were higher than today’s for almost 2,000 years. Sixthly, the Greenland ice sheet melted completely away 850,000 years ago. There cannot have been an Arctic ice-cap then. So the disappearance of the Arctic ice-cap, even if it occurred, would be neither unprecedented nor alarming

•    Forest fires are causing devastation: Five errors in one. First, most forest fires are caused by humans – power-lines sparking in the wind, carelessly-tossed cigarette-butts, or even arson. Secondly, individual events of this kind cannot be attributed to “global warming”. Thirdly, warmer weather is generally wetter weather, because – as the Clausius-Clapeyron relation demonstrates – the space occupied by the atmosphere can carry near-exponentially greater concentrations of water vapour as the weather becomes warmer. Fourthly, it has not got warmer since 2001, so there is no factual basis whatsoever for attributing more forest fires to warmer weather. Fifthly, the fact of warming does not tell us the cause.
•    Many cities are short of water: Four errors in one. First, water shortages arise from too much demand on too little supply. Secondly, one cannot attribute individual events of this kind to “global warming”. Thirdly, there has been no “global warming” for the best part of a decade. Fourthly, the fact of warming does not tell us the cause.
•    There are more severe storms: Six errors in one. First, the scientific literature is divided on the question whether warmer weather will intensify storms. Secondly, the scientific literature is unanimous that the warmer weather which stopped happening in 2001 has not in fact caused more severe storms: the number of landfalling Atlantic hurricanes shows no trend for 100 years, and, in the 30 years for which we have records, the number of tropical cyclones and of typhoons has actually fallen steadily. Thirdly, outside the tropics warmer weather is likely to mean fewer severe storms. Fourthly, even if there had been more severe storms, they cannot be attributed to “global warming”. Fifthly, there has not been any “global warming” for the past seven years. Sixthly, even if there had been any warming, the fact of warming does not tell us the cause.

  • West Antarctica has lost an area the size of California: Four errors in one. First, the bulk of Antarctica is cooling (Doran et al., 2004). Secondly, Gore’s movie says there were seven areas the size of Rhode Island that had melted (in total, 1/55 of the size of Texas), so his figures are inconsistent. Thirdly, Antarctic sea-ice extent reached record levels in September this year. Fourthly, even if Antarctica had warmed, the fact of warming does not tell us the cause.
  • Deserts are growing: Three errors in one. First, some deserts are growing; others are not. Secondly, Gore’s movie says the southern Sahara is plagued by new drought, but the Sahara has shrunk by 300,000 square kilometres in the past 30 years, giving place to vegetation. Nomadic tribes are returning to territories they have not occupied in living memory. Thirdly, the fact of warming does not tell us the cause.

•    Sea level is rising: Eight errors in one. First, sea level has been rising ever since the end of the last Ice Age. Secondly, it has been rising at a mean rate of 4 feet per century, more than double the latest Holy Book’s highest estimate of future sea-level rise. Thirdly, Gore himself does not believe his ridiculous estimate that the melting of the Greenland and West Antarctic ice sheets will raise sea level by 20 feet imminently: he has just bought a $4 million condo in the St. Regis Hotel, San Francisco, a few feet from the Bay. Fourthly, the Holy Book shows that the combined contribution of these two ice sheets to sea-level rise over the next 100 years will be just two and a half inches. Fifthly, most of the 1 ft 5 in sea level rise that is the IPCC’s best estimate over the coming century will occur not from ice-melt but from thermosteric expansion of sea-water. Sixthly, Nils-Axel Morner, the world’s greatest expert on sea level, says even the IPCC’s forecast is exaggerated. Seventhly, the UK High Court judge condemned Gore for his “alarmist” exaggeration of sea-level rise, yet Gore seems unwilling to accept that he has erred. Eighthly, even if sea-level were rising at record rates, which it is not, the fact of the warming that caused the increase does not tell us the cause of the warming.
•    CO2 is “global warming pollution”: Seven errors in one. First, CO2 is a naturally-occurring substance, not a pollutant. Secondly, CO2 concentrations, in geological terms, are at record low levels – less than 400 parts per million compared with 7,000 ppm in the Cambrian era. Thirdly, CO2 is food for trees and plants. With chlorophyll and sunlight, it is an essential constituent in photosynthesis, without which there would be no plant life as we know it. Fourthly, CO2 is harmless to animals even at very high concentrations – indeed, the concentration in the room where Gore spoke, with a thousand zombies yelling lustily, is likely to have well above 1000 ppm, but none of the zombies came to harm. Fifthly, CO2 is harmless to plants even at concentrations of 10,000 ppm, as laboratory tests have demonstrated. Sixthly, you breathe out CO2 every time you exhale. Seventhly, CO2 forms the bubbles in sparkling drinks like Coca-Cola and champagne, and it also forms the spaces between the solid matter in bread. For all these reasons, it is not a pollutant, and we are doing no more than to restore to the atmosphere the normal levels that have harmlessly prevailed in the past, playing their part in the emergence and development of life itself.
•    Venus has experienced a runaway greenhouse effect, and the EU says Earth is the sister planet of Venus: Four errors in one. First, Venus is much closer to the Sun than the Earth is, and the incoming solar radiation of 236 watts per square meter at the surface is far too little to create a runaway greenhouse effect. Secondly, the surface temperature on Venus, chiefly because of its proximity to the Sun, is 455 degrees C, compared with the Earth’s 15 degrees C. Gore mentioned these figures, but led the audience falsely to imagine that the difference in temperature is chiefly attributable to the CO2 concentration in the atmosphere of Venus. Thirdly, CO2 concentration reached 7000 parts per million in the Cambrian era, compared with less than 400 ppm today, and temperature rose only to 22 degrees Celsius, so Gore’s comparison with the 455 degrees C obtaining on the surface of Venus is a 20-fold exaggeration of the maximum temperature likely to arise on Earth. Fourthly, a concentration of 7000 parts per million could only be reached if today’s concentration were to increase 18-fold. In 1994 Gore said that there were canals on Mars, with water in them. Best not to take his word on other planetary bodies. He would have been more to the point if he had admitted that warming has recently been observed on Mars, on the surface of Jupiter, on the largest of Neptune’s moons and even on distant Pluto. All those SUVs in space, one supposes. Or could the guilty party, perhaps, be the Sun, which has been more active in the past 70 years than at almost any similar period in at least the past 11,400 years?
•    The IPCC’s 2007 Holy Book is “unanimous”: Five errors in one. First – and this cannot be repeated often enough – science is not a democratic process, and it does not matter how many scientists reach a conclusion if that conclusion is contrary to the objective truth. Secondly, the Holy Book is in fact very far from unanimous: it quotes numerous peer-reviewed papers that disagree with its conclusions. Thirdly, the Holy Book fails to quote many hundreds of further peer-reviewed papers that disagree with its conclusions. Fourthly, the IPCC’s Holy Books are divided into chapters, each with about 50 authors, and the authors sign off only on their own chapters. Fifthly, the high priests of voodoo try to secure unanimity by rejecting the nomination of authors, such as Paul Reiter, who knows that malaria is not a tropical disease and would not be spread by “global warming”, whose views are known to be contrary to the teachings of the Holy Books. Fifthly, Chris Landsea, an expert on hurricanes, resigned from the IPCC process, condemning it as unduly political, when Kevin Trenberth, his lead author, appeared on a public platform advocating the notion that “global warming” causes more frequent hurricanes. He is by no means the only resigner from the supposedly “unanimous” IPCC process.

*      Svante Arrhenius made 10,000 calculations 116 years ago, demonstrating that temperature would rise “many degrees” in response to CO2 doubling: 4 errors in one. First, Arrhenius’ paper making that erroneous claim was published in 1896, 111 years ago, not 116. Secondly, his calculations are now known to have been inaccurate, since he had relied upon lunar spectral data that were defective. Thirdly, Arrhenius could have spared himself the trouble of his 10,000 calculations if he had used the Stefan-Boltzmann radiative-transfer equation, which integrates radiant-energy emission spectra across all wavelengths and converts the energy to temperature. In 1906, once he had come across the equation, he wrote a little-known paper in German, in which he revised his calculations and concluded that the warming in response to a CO2 doubling would be 1.6 degrees C, or exactly half the IPCC’s exaggerated current central estimate. Fourthly, even this estimate is probably too high.
As with the 35 errors in Gore’s movie, so with the 50 in his speech to the zombies in Bali, comfortably exceeding his personal best – all the errors tend towards an extreme and scientifically-unwarranted exaggeration of the imagined threat posed by “global warming”. The zombies, of course, lapped up every word handed down from on high by Baron Thursdi, for Bali was a science-free, fact-free zone, question-free zone. The probability that all 43 of Gore’s latest errors could have pointed by mere accident and ignorance in the direction of excessive alarm is less than one in a million billion.

Therein lies a danger that Gore has not yet seen. For he failed, yet again, to declare his financial interest before whipping up worldwide alarm with his trademark errors and exaggerations in Bali. He is a director of Lehman Brothers, a global finance house that wants to control the worldwide managed market in carbon-emissions trading. He founded his own “green” corporation, Generation Investment Management. He is a paid member of the Board of a renewable-energy company. In the UK, if he made a speech containing so many deliberate and unidirectional errors as he did in Bali, and if he failed to declare his financial interest, he would be committing a criminal offence.

It is surely only a matter of time before a complaint is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, alleging that, through the numerous, extreme and scientifically-unwarranted exaggerations which Gore has relentlessly continued to peddle notwithstanding the warning in the UK judge’s verdict, he is in effect fraudulently promoting a false prospectors to potential investors. Indeed, his exaggerations are on such a scale, and have commanded such attention, and have done so much damage, that he may even have committed an offence under the Federal racketeering statute. I wanted to ask Gore about his failure to disclose his financial interest, but – as usual – he does not dare to take questions.

The day Gore spoke in Bali, I received an email (one of hundreds from all over the world in response to my article in the Jakarta Post) from one of the Port Commissioners of Washington State. He said his fellow-Commissioners, solely on the basis of Gore’s rantings, were proposing to increase the height of the sea-walls by 20 feet. Real economic and environmental harm is now being caused by these unscientific exaggerations, which have gained credence among the zombies merely by their repetition on the lips of a former Vice-President of the United States.  

The US delegation did not crumble in Bali. It stood firm in the cause of right and truth and common sense. So it was not possible for the zombies to go as far as they wanted in inflicting pointless, economically-disastrous and climatically-irrelevant policies on the world. For the sake of being seen to do something while they wait for Copenhagen, they have laboriously drawn up a “Bali Roadmap”. Like the Middle East Roadmap, the Bali Roadmap is a non-map of a non-existent road to nowhere. Meantime, we have alarmed the alarmists, and that is a first step towards the dawn of truth.To view the original article

So what ought adult human beings to do now? Kevin Rudd at least, it seems, went home saying to the Australian people that he and they would have no business trying to comply with all  communist/west-hobbling, African-killing Kyoto nonsense, or any sort of “Road Map”, and thank goodness for that – it’s a start.

The main danger I see from where I am is residual effects of the near-dissastrous attempt to shut dowm the planet, which could last for decades, in the minds of impressionable students of today. I’m afraid that nearly all teachers in British schools will, if they don’t agree to attend re-education camps run by the erstwhile “deniers”, have to be gassed and incinerated in concentration camps. Given however that it’s Christmas, I’m feeling merciful, and all I would do is force them to live normal lives in a liberal polity, driving 4×4 SUVs and relying on nuclear power stations, until they die.

There is another problem, which is what to do about state policies that decree unrealistic and unachievable percentage amounts of energy to be produced by “renewable” means. There is of course no such thing since substantially all the earth’s energy input derives from the Sun, which is itself not renewable – and on a Cosmic scale the Universe is running down, according to the Laws of Thermodynamics (a part of science which is substantiually settled, at least for the forseeable future.) As realisation of the vast degree to which populations have been “had” percolates into the body-politic, it will become easier and easier to throw out either sitting MPs or whole guvmints which persist in cleaving to wrong notions of reality.

 Like “multiculturalism”, which is now formally discredited although still being taught in nazi schools, anthropogenic global warming will go the same way. The remaining problem is a legal one, which will centre on how much money to sue Al Gore for, in return for his deliberate falsehoods and for substantive damages to be awarded against him, for actual revenue losses or even avoidable deaths, caused by his vaporous orations. He’s quite rich, I am told, and could pay.

The final strategic peg must be private-sector plans for further development of known (and  exploration of unknown) (non-)fossil fuel resources (most of it is abiogenic) together with a private-sector commitment, unshackled by hippy-anti-fears, of nuclear power.

Energy transforms people’s lives, and it transformes the lives of poor-people most, and first.

MARK STEYN, my favourite columnist to the World, is under attack, by the CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION. What does one suppose a “HRC” might be? A form of fertility treatment, or a death-weapon against Western liberalism?

David Davis 

I am fortunate to find a link to thoughtfully provided on a post by some sad wet traitorous Canadian students (can’t be real adults, not if supporting this sort of persecution) at a thing called “The Canadian Law Blog” (but thinking of Arras and Vimy Ridge, I don’t think so really, no – sorry boys)

Steyn is being hauled up, along with his publisher , before a SONDERGERICHT, for saying true things about the global rise of Islam and the fall of the West through not having enough babies. (Personally, I blame the Feminazis, for making the previously easy and pleasant task of shagging a willing and fanciable woman too onerous – in many cases even one whom you know well.) I didn’t know we had introduced these leftist infantile precapitalist Nazi bits of speech-banning/pricing-machinery into the Anglosphere.

Apparently, everybody was emigrating to Canada a little while ago. Better not do so now I think; you might do better in Chindia. I’ve got to cook dinner, so you can follow the links and find out what this is all about.

“Political Correctness Gone Mad”. I wish…God, how I wish, that it was just some sort of madness…..

  David Davis

……and that this was true and it was just a bad dream, and not a misrepresentation of what “PC” is really for. How many, many times do you read in the papers about some poor, sensible human being, tormented by The Forces of Darkness in the form of officials of some British Soviet or other?

A nice old lady who is forbidden to tidy her grass verge outside her house and plant plants on it, because she must wear a hard hat and a yellow-fascist-jacket, and have cones to stop the traffic?

The Soviet of a large British city which celebrates “winterval”, whatever that is? (Must be Nazi….it sounds sort of neopastoral/Nordic/pagan.)

The (many) schools which do not stage a Nativity Play any more (it’s supposed to be “offensive” to other “faiths”) and in a Christian Nation?

I could go on. You know them all, for you – and the entire civilised world – are all irritated by the supposed need these threatening leftist busybody stormtroopers have for upsetting ordinary conservative people, as some sort of displacement activity to make up for their staggering lack of social graces, or of educational/cultural qualifications of any actual value whatsoever.

“Political Correctness”, as a phrase, shows all the marks of self-regarding intellectual arrogance plus an assumed monopoly of the truth. (And I thought the fascist left derided monopolies?) We liberals, being not (infantile or grown-up) leftists but on the “extreme-right” (their term for our position, not ours!) by contrast know that we ARE correct. This is because history bears out the truth of our hypotheses, about how and why the world and civilised human society functions as it does.

Moreover, we do not distort the terms of civilised discourse by banning the use of certain words that we think can define concepts with which we disagree.

To associate the English word “correct”, with (a) political discourse, and (b) the censorship of words so as to lead to the censorship of ideas, is a crime. I only have to wonder for how long a War Crimes judge will send each of these min-Gramscians to prison for, when we finally get our teeth into their bollocks, in return for all the harm they have done to people.

Merry Christmas, and peace and goodwill to all men – but not to you buggers who are trying to destroy our civilisation. I’m sorry, but I can’t make myself extend the Forgiveness of God at this Christmas time to you bastards. There is too much at stake, too many defenceless people alive whose lives you plan to ruin,  and your gloves have been so very, very off, against us, for so long now, and we have run out of patence with you evil imbeciles.

You understand force and threats and death and abolition of cultural ideas you don’t like; so be careful that your ideas don’t end up perishing in the same way. Better just to become real liberals and forget all that childish Marxist stuff, before it’s too late for you to recant.

As the New Dark Age closes in, non-domiciled newsmakers of conservative disposition will buy blogs and run them outside Nazi jurisdictions, or even from space. How much is this one worth?

David Davis 

Found on Guido, someone asks on the right sidebar “How much is Drudge worth?”

 Of course the LA Blog is not yet in that class, for estimates for Drudge wallow around $10-$40 million, but it’s nice to dream. We’d have to continue to write, I guess, otherwise the buggers would’ve wasted their money.

If Rupert Murdoch is watching, you were at my old College, matey!

What’s to stop a blog being hosted on a geostationary satellite? The costs of bringing one down in flames will be enormous, and beyond the reach of most of this coming century’s moribund collectivisms. The costs of sending up material to it, for relaying down again, will by contrast be nugatory. A few thousand dollars, a tame tech-geek, and someone could do it from the moss-lands round here.

Only the finest blogs will be offered for. These will contain the most organised and most professionally-driven writers, with the sharpest takes on the encroaching destruction of language and thought – who also intend to stay on in the dark.

Perhaps there is some point to knowing about electronics and comms after all, long after we are all expected to not want to.

The LA Recruits a New Supporter

Sean Gabb

Philippa Louise Constanze, born to Sean and Andrea Gabb at 8:22pm on the 18th December 2007; birth weight 10 lb.  Mother and child doing well; father half dead.



Ghastly, sick socialist behaviour by the Gauleiters and “ushers” of the “Europarliament”, against a very very large and loud protest IN THE CHAMBER by EuroMPs.

The Libertarian Alliance Christmas Message. The Sky darkens. The forces of Evil daily encroach on the West, but…..

David Davis 

…..there is hope.

I’m tempted to compare our lot today in the embattled Anglosphere with that of the Holy Family on that first Christmas 2,000 years ago. Libertarianism in England is a broad church. There’s room for all shades of opinion about the Grand Question, from the anti-religious, through atheism, various gnostic stuff I don’t fully understand, and all the way to belief in a grand cosmic order (“Logos”) – call it God if you will, (read ch.1 John (v.i et seq) for the full explanation,) to which practically all thinking physicists cleave eventually.

It reads, under one form of translation as “In the beginning was Order. Order was God, and Order was [with = authorised text] God.”  By contrast I prefer to read the Greek as the ablative case, which could mean any of  “by/with/from”, so you could have “by” equally well here. If God created order (in a Newtonian physical sense, in the universe out of nothing (which He can if He wills it) and Liberty is the mother of order – and not its daughter as socialists think – and if God endowed His creation, the Universe (including Man) with free will, then it’s our lot now to defend its exercise, against all-comers.

The Grand Question was posed by Alfred the Great, in his later years, trying to grapple with the embryonic notions of modern Statehood, and the toughish job of being a king of somewhere desirable in an imperfect world full of pre-capitalist barbarians as well as some better people. This troubling time in which he lived was in the beginnings of the first, oldest and longest-surviving unitary nation in the modern history of the West. (Yes and I’ll talk about ancient China and Japan another time, thanks, so you chaps just form an orderly queue please.)

He articulated his problem by asking; “What is life? Why are we here? What then must we do?”

What must Libertarians do at Christmas?

Firstly they ought to give thanks for the non-accidental accidents of geological and anthropological history which produced a quite large and rather unassailable (well nearly) island, not far to the north of the continent that contained the remnants of the Graeco-Roman inheritance. Not more than a day’s bad sailing, and sometimes even visible. There was somewhere for an alternative view of the world, unencumbered by land borders requiring armies and perpetual fighting. The climate, even, was clement, most of the time.

Secondly, they ought to thank the evolving people of that island, for their erratic but remorseless progress towards a Limited State. It took nearly 1,000 years, it sometimes ended in fisticuffs, but by about 1870 – significantly the year the railway network (private) achieved its greatest ever extent so that no house was more than 3 miles from a station – Britain was about as free as any nation had ever been or would afterwards be. Dr Sean Gabb has chronicled how a man could be born, live and die without coming materially into contact with the State, in his latest book.

Thirdly, they ought to give thanks for the Gospels, and for the Mosaic Decalogue. These documents have underpinned, do underpin now, and will underpin, between today and Armageddon, the foundations of liberal Classical civilisation. (I like John best; he took the trouble to explain to us what Jesus Christ was for, and why He came.)

The countries that bore Libertarianism into being, and which most harbour it today, pay at least lip-service to this tradition, even though it is being viciously undermined by socialist memory-wipers in all climes and in all spheres of human action. Wiping of memories is their job; otherwise evil cannot triumph – why do they always refer to a “Year Zero” – as if there has been no past worth recording and learning from, and as if they are the sole arbiters of the future? If evil is to triumph, this result rests on no recognition of its dangerous isolation and lack of support among Men.

Fourthly then, regarding evil’s need to suppress info about itself, we have to thank the Internet for this latest, and possibly last, God-granted ability to spread information. Many places languish yet in internet-darkness. Notably China, North Korea, Cuba (I’m sure without checking) and many countries on “Arab Street” (what an evil, condescending way to refer to poor miserable enslaved people, used as it is by the fascist mediarati and the other execrable Polly Toynbees of this world. They want i-Pods, BMWs, uncensored broadband, an electricity-grid that works most of the time, and hot and cold running water and flush-toilets, just like we do.)

But for the discovery of these technological advantages that give us yet the edge in this century’s global war against liberty (that’s what it is, folks) – we have to thank first of all and last of all, God, Who Is, through all time and everywhere, and who gave Man the gift of Free Will. This great  technological advantage of The West (born and evolved broadly in the free will of individual intellectual creation) is what Churchill called in “The River War”, the “strong arms of science”, in which he pictured liberal Judeo-Christian civilisation cradled. You may not be allowed to read this book for much longer, so you’d better go to now and download a copy before it get deleted.

God needed to send no prophets after His Son Jesus Christ; I mean to say, whatever for? Anyone who thinks so is mistaken, and the victim of a ruse. All he needed to do was to give Man free will, and allow Man to set up the conditions for its proper exercise. This occurred, even if only once, and that has been enough for a body of lore and philosophy about liberty – as a discursible concept – to flourish, unlike any time before.

And so Liberty truly became the Mother and not the daughter of Order, and that is where I came in, as one aspect of His Creation was realised. Probably quite accidentally, and perhaps not even noticed importantly enough by That People wott dunn it, at the time. A pity, since lack of this realisation may have led to the death of liberal England, not through lack of sincerity about its rightness, but of failure to spot that it had mortal enemies.

All that Libertarians do is explain how a civilisation based on this would work in practice.

We wish a happy and joyful Christmas to all you people our readers, out there somewhere. If 2008 is looking dark, then write more; talk to more people, give them the directions to The Door Out Of Hell. And in doing so, pull the scales from their eyes about socialism and its allies.

The Most Astonishing Video You Will See on YouTube

Sean Gabb

Sean Gabb on Nuclear Power

Free Life Commentary,
an independent journal of comment
published on the Internet
Issue Number 150
12th July 2006

postCount(‘flc150′);Comments | postCountTB(‘flc150′); Trackback

Looking beyond Nuclear
by Sean Gabb

An easy answer to the question of nuclear power is to ask what Tony Blair thinks about it. Since he has now said he likes it, and since everything he says or does is bad, we have an answer. I feel, however, this answer might gain by a more formal demonstration.

I begin by asserting that nuclear power is inherently dangerous. Heat is generated by the manipulation of highly poisonous and highly unstable materials. These may, unless closely watched, run out of control; or their waste products may escape in various ways. In the past generation, there have been notable misfortunes in America and in the Soviet Union. There was, I am told, a leak from an English power station in the late 1950s—though the main fact of this was hidden by the authorities until the 1980s.

There is now also the possibility of terrorist attacks. An attack on a nuclear power station could well be catastrophic.

Moreover, the waste products remain dangerous indefinitely, and disposing of them requires storage in conditions that will remain safe through all the accidents of time.

I accept that, in principle, nuclear fission is the cheapest known means of generating electricity. The problem is that the associated dangers require safeguards that make it in practice perhaps the most expensive. Because the energy market is so distorted by taxes and subsidies and general regulations, it is worthless to try proving this by any analysis of costs and benefits. I will simply ask whether, in a world without government, there would be many nuclear power stations.

Now, I am not a committed anarchist. But I do regard the likely shape of a stateless society as a partial basis for judging the legitimacy of actually existing institutions. If something could not exist without a government, that is not necessarily a reason for it not to exist. There must, though, be a presumption against its existence. Nothing can be desirable that involves a violation the rights of individuals to life and property acquired by consent. It may be necessary for the prevention of greater evils. But it must, to be accepted, have its case for existing made out on at least the balance of convenience—and perhaps even beyond reasonable doubt.

This being said, I do not think there would be many nuclear power stations in a world without government. Bearing in mind their actual—or just their suspected – dangers, the common law tort of nuisance would prevent any from being built in England. Would you be happy if one were built within 20 miles of your home? Would you knowingly buy property within that sort of radius? I would not—nor would even if they came with safeguards costing ten times what is now spent.

I say, therefore, that nuclear power can only be generated in a territory without much population, and elsewhere only when an enlarged government is able to sweep aside individual complaints and to indemnify the relevant big business interests with legal privilege or financial subsidy.

And I say that there is no overriding convenience to be shown in allowing this departure from the natural order of society. There are alternatives. The use of coal and oil for generating electricity does lead to obvious pollution. But we have been using coal and oil for this purpose for over a hundred years, and the health and the happiness of mankind have been measurably improved thereby. Nor is there any chance that we shall soon run out of these fuels. There is enough of both to last for hundreds of years at current rates of use.

That is my opinion on nuclear power. But I have a further point to make. I dislike nuclear power, and I dislike the conventional means of generating electricity. As said, coal and oil do pollute. I doubt if these pollutions will have anything like the effect claimed by the environmentalists. But they are inconvenient. They are not so harmful as the occasional nuclear accident, but are more continuous.

And our reliance on oil for much of our electricity and most of our transport has raised political difficulties. The majority of the most conveniently accessible oil reserves are in countries like Saudi Arabia and Iran and their neighbours. The high price of oil has corrupted these countries as it would any other. Wealth in these countries is not created by the people and then taxed by the government. Rather, it is acquired by the government as a pure windfall and then distributed to the people. The profits of oil have crowded out other forms of enterprise. Ruling classes have remained or become despotic. Politics have become detached from considerations of economic reality. What arguments do take place over economics concern not so much the conditions in which wealth can be created as the distribution of a wealth created by and continually replenished by outsiders.

Any country without much pre-existing development is likely to be corrupted by the discovery of large oil reserves—see, for example, Nigeria. But in the Islamic countries of the Middle East, it has raised up forms of Islam that did not exist and would not exist in a more commercial environment. Add to this a possibly unjustified obsession with Israel and an undoubted misreading of the historical relationship between Islam and Christendom, and we in the West have a problem. The problem has been greatly worsened by the invasion of Iraq and other specific policies. But it is a problem that would exist nevertheless.

The best answer would be to diminish our reliance on oil. We may always need oil for making chemicals. But there is no inevitability about our need for oil to generate electricity or for transport. If we could find alternatives, the price of oil would drop. The unnatural state of Middle Eastern societies would come to an end. The Islamic world would then implode or become more western in its social and economic structures.

Of course, this is one of the subsidiary arguments for nuclear power. I suspect that if forced to name the lesser of the two evils, I might decide a century of suicide bombers to be preferable to having nuclear power stations all over the place. But I do not see why we need choose between the two. Our reliance on oil is in one important respect as great an evil as nuclear power. It is desirable that we should move away from all our present main sources of energy. The reason is, again, to do with the power of the state.

Big electricity generators, whether nuclear or conventional, and our general fuel requirements are all controlled where not managed by the state. Whether by taxation or by bribes or by jobs for placemen, they are a source of enrichment for our ruling classes. They are all a means of direct social control. If our rulers do not wish us to travel about so much, or if they wish us to use other forms of transport than the motor car, they increase petrol taxes. They are able to encourage preferred forms of enterprise by waiving fuel taxes or waiving subsidies. The mere fact of their control puts us in a subordinate position. We feel uneasy in the face of a power that is ultimately able to deprive us of gas and electricity.  We look to that power for a continuance of supply, and are used to begging action if we do not like the prices charged. And this is one of the reasons why we are less jealous of state power than our ancestors were. They had less to lose from challenging an established order that might break down under the pressure of challenge.

It would be so much better if some means could be found for individual households and businesses to generate their own electricity. In general, I have no time for David Cameron. His plan to build a windmill generator on top of his house makes no commercial sense. It will cost thousands of pounds to generate perhaps ten per cent of his electricity. The return on investment is unlikely to be above one per cent. It is a political gesture.

This being said, the idea in itself is not contemptible. If somebody ever did find a way to generate electricity in the home, the benefits would be great and immediate. It would make us more independent of central authority. It would starve the central authority of tax money. It would reduce the importance and therefore the power of the big oil companies. It would bring down the price of oil. This would eliminate the main enabling cause of Islamic radicalism. It would also bring down the cost of manufacturing most chemicals.

Home generation would make us richer. Our fuel bills would fall. Our use of electricity would expand. It would at last begin to make sense to drive electric cars. Motorways and other roads could be heated in the winter to keep them clear of snow. All production costs would fall.

And it would enrich not only us. Cheap and unlimited electricity would enable the Indians and Chinese to approach our own standards of living.

and it would shut the environmentalists up—or might for a while: at least, it would be necessary for them to find some other overarching threat to the planet apart from carbon emissions.

I have no doubt home generation—or something approaching it—is possible. It is simply a matter of funding the research and development. I do not like government solutions to problems. But this would be a solution to a problem caused by government. I suggest that British energy policy—and this could apply to any other western country—should be as follows:

1. Withdraw from Iraq and Afghanistan. Remove all flagrant excuses for Islamic radicalism. Make some deal with the Iranians. Thereby bring down the price of oil.

2. Be nice to Mr Putin. Encourage him to abort the emergence of a Russian civil order by making his country a leading supplier of oil and gas.

3. Give up on nuclear power.

4. Establish a prize of £10 billion, to be paid from our taxes, for any person or persons who can demonstrate some cost effective means of home electricity generation. This would be like the Act of Queen Anne that encouraged the development of means to measure the longitude. The winning technology would be placed immediately in the public domain.

I suggest a prize because this sort of incentive has a record of having worked. As we have seen with the cancer cure industry, direct funding of research and development simply simply establishes bureaucratised empires that suppress investigation outside the favoured—and usually wrong—paradigm.

Does any of the above make sense? I have not enough understanding of the relevant sciences to know. But Mr Blair has not said, and will not say, any of it. That should indicate I am not writing utter nonsense.

NB—Sean Gabb’s novel The Column of Phocas (£8.99)is published on the 4th August 2006. Order advance copies now from

or via Amazon:

_uacct = “UA-2169818-1″;urchinTracker();

More personalised number plates and the cult of self-promotion. “Why do people advertise their identity in a Police State? Discuss…..”

This lot round here, no more than an 8-mile-radius, today and yesterday;

H1 2AKY (ZAKY?),    J4W DR (a dentist maybe?),   T700 RON (he must be called Ron!),   

 TO02 JAN (Let me guess! She must be Jan!)

A11BY B,    L100 MUM,    CCC 22,    ROG1E

S4NDY,    2LEY,    K9REN,   

B11XUM  (good one this! I wonder what she’s like? How big are her breasts?)    

M85  6LAM (it’s meant to look like “Mrs Glam”, I’ve seen her…..)

And in this afternoon,

SI’5 TOY,   K300RYN,   X  8ARY,   and…..

LJ52 LEE (I thought that Theodore Dalrymple said that 50% of all men called “Lee” are in Prison)…and…

CI-IYLL,    X  14YNE  (the “I” had a bottomleft-serif on it)


G Y02SEF (Good! The cargo-cult of numberplates is spreading; maybe The West will win the War after all.) He’s always outside the same house. I know where he works, what he sells, what car he drives (of course) and how well his takeaways are doing.

I still wonder why, libertarian considerations about the goodandrightness and theoretical harmlessness of advertising one’s individuality apart, people still do it. And yet do it in such a way that you CAN work out who they are, where they live, and stuff?

And when you can find out in short order where they live, by driving around for a few weeks, after two or three sightings of their car(s)? In a Police State? Where criminals for example are routed by the absence of the Police to the right houses to burgle in Formby (for example only!) ??

The mass of the Poles got by under communism by being as anonymous as possible. With the coming Dark Age, coupled with the threat of state-identity-granting/management, I owuld have thought that any advertisement of your selfhood was to be avoided.

Or have I missed something vital? 

The Curse of the Carboncrats. Stalinism, tyranny and destruction of all that we are, rolled into one. I thought you’d like this from Moonbattery.

From Moonbattery on 12th December in case you’d missed it. I was polishing a staircase for a friend so i had not time that day to scratch my arse. But here it is now…….

Global Warming Totalitarians Push Personal “Carbon Limit”

The totalitarian moonbattery known as environmentalism is really getting scary in the UK, where under cover of the global warming hoax, authoritarian bureauweenies now want to impose a “carbon limit” on each individual.

Subjects of the British bureaucracy would be required to carry a “carbon credit card,” to be used when paying utility bills or buying gasoline. Joseph Stalin, who killed millions by withholding food from his own populace, would be delighted to hear that you’ll need a valid carbon card to buy food.

When you’ve used up your carbon limit, you’re out of luck. Escaping to a free country won’t be easy, because the carbon card will also be required for travel. Think of it as envirokooks’ version of the Mark of the Beast.

It’s looking more and more like Britain would have held onto more of its liberty if it had allowed itself to be defeated from without by the Nazis, rather than from within by moonbats.

With Chindia going hell-4-leather for growth as is its right (can Africa be far behind? I can’t see Chindian firms ignoring its potential, can you – even if we are forced to?) there is absolutely no point in trying to limit anybody’s use of energy.

It all points to my first hypothesis, some years ago, which is that socialism’s latest wicked, sepulchral, ghoulish re-incarnation as the greenazis of Morgoth (green outside, red inside, brown-shirts all over) is a special punishment for BRITAIN, for showing the rest of the world the WAY TO THE DOOR OUT OF HELL.

2008 has a packed programme! See what the Libertarian Alliance will be up to, and get stuck in.

  Posted By Tim Evans

Libertarian Alliance Unveils Largest Ever

Events Programme for 2008:

Save these Dates

Release: Friday 14th December 2007

The UK’s most radical free market group has launched its most ambitious annual programme to date, with a range of activities geared towards people who are interested in free market and libertarian ideas. In 2008, events for students are one priority for the Libertarian Alliance, as is the first annual LA Chris R Tame Lecture.

The Libertarian Alliance’s President Tim Evans and Director Sean Gabb today unveiled plans for the LA’s largest ever programme of events during 2008.

Dr Evans said:

“In 2008, the Libertarian Alliance will improve and expand its operations on all fronts. Next year will see the inaugural LA Chris R Tame Lecture, six dinners for Libertarian students from universities throughout the UK, and a Christmas Reception at the National Liberal Club.”

He added: “In addition to this, the LA will also host a further expanded LA Annual Conference in October 2008 and ten monthly LA Gold Subscribers’ Dinners in Westminster’s Shepherd’s Restaurant.”

However, Dr Evans explained that after 20 years, the monthly Putney Debates would be reduced to taking place every three months, but remaining on the second Friday of January, April, July and October.

“The original purpose of the Putney Debates was to provide a regular meeting place and somewhere for newcomers to the Libertarian cause to make friends and exchange ideas. The emergence of on-line social networks is creating new ways of achieving this objective. By expanding the range and quality of activities, the Putney Debates will become only one of many activities available to our supporters.”

In addition to this ambitious programme the organisation will also continue to expand its web site at and its blog at It will also continue to publish and freely distribute on-line a wide range of new pamphlets and press releases. And it will no doubt continue to attract widespread press and media attention.

Save the Dates in 2008

LA Putney Debates

  • Friday 11th January 2008, 7.30pm
  • Friday 11th April 2008, 7.30pm
  • Friday 11th July 2008, 7.30pm
  • Friday 10th October 2008, 7.30pm

LA      Chris R Tame  Lecture

  • Early Evening, Tuesday 18th March 2008, National Liberal Club, One Whitehall Place, London SW1.

LA Annual Conference

  • Saturday and Sunday 25-26 October 2008, National Liberal Club, One Whitehall Place, London SW1.

LA Christmas Reception

  • Early Evening, Wednesday 3rd December 2008, National Liberal Club, One Whitehall Place, London SW1.

LA Gold Subscribers’ Dinners (By Invitation Only)

  • January
  • February
  • March
  • April
  • May
  • June
  • July
  • September
  • October
  • November

LA Fulham Dinners (By Invitation Only)

  • January
  • March
  • May
  • July
  • September
  • November

Notes for editors:

1)     The Libertarian Alliance was founded in 1968 by Chris R Tame. It has produced over 800 pamphlets and monographs, all of which are in print and available free of charge from the LA website:

2)     The Putney Debates are named after the debates between the Levellers and members of Oliver Cromwell’s New Model Army, beginning at the Church of St. Mary the Virgin, Putney, in Surrey (now in South West London), on 28 October, 1647. These moved to the Quartermaster General Thomas Ireton‘s lodgings (also in Putney) on the 29 October. The debates lasted until November 11. The first of the modern Putney Debates was held in October 1987.

3)     LA Gold Subscribers pay £10 per month.

4)     For more information contact:

LA President, Dr. Tim Evans on 07956 960523 or via

LA Director Dr. Sean Gabb on 07956 472199 or via

Dr. Tim Evans


Libertarian Alliance

The UK‘s radical free market and civil liberties think tank

Suite 35
2 Landsdowne Row
London W1J 6HL
United Kingdom

M: +44 020 7736 0903




Education education education. What a bastard, evil, wicked liar Tony Blair was, to emulate what his political forebears had also said……to think that governments could (and worse, should) educate humans

David Davis

The Torygraph was kind enough to publish today what I had said on its comment pages – remarkably quickly by its usual standards I might add – about how we could make “Britain’s education world class”….again or at all? The question about what “world class” meant was not strictly addressed, but this is what I said;

Britain’s education WAS “world-class”; in fact we invented the world using the curriculum and system we had.

Here’s a “TEN_POINT_PLAN” !!! (1) Junk the National(ized) Curriculum, hook line and sinker. (I mean the Nazi one curently used.)(1A) Teach ENGLISH GRAMMAR, properly, early on. About age 5-7 is not too late to save these people.

(2) Return to proper liberal Classical education, as it was more or less up to 40 years ago, and thus rooted in the continuous history and cultural development of the Christian West, found on Rome and Greece.

(3) Teach joined-up-history/maths/science as a unified philosophy, as it was for us then.

(4) Teach proper Geography, rooted in the History of the Earth, and the places therein. (Tourism trends, social/foreign-aid/government intervention issues and traffic control have no part in this, they are for bureaucrats.)

(5) Teach Latin and Classical Greek -the latter especially, and both especially to scientists. Teach them using the original timeless texts, as well as any shilly-shally-modern-themed stuff you want.

(6) Tony Blair’s pledge to have every school on the internet by 1999 or summat, has proved to be a hollow achievement. Put proper libraries, with books containing large numbers of words and text, back in every school. 99% of the internet is junk. The skill comes in knowing how to sift junk from seeds and nuggets that are useful. teach this for Christ’s sAKE, there must be people, mostly old, who know what to do. It’s called “knowing how to think”.

(7) Inject pride back into British history and culture. We did invent the world, and we should say so. Children will then want to learn this story, as it will be cool – it was for us, but we did not even need the word to describe it, for it just, er, was.

(8) Sack all teachers who are (a) Marxist or left-leaning, for it is a fact that the Left hates liberal Classical (that is to say, English) culture. Honest leftists admit this bent freely. take them at their word, and take them out of the education system. Either we are right, or they are. If we have the courage of our convictions as to what is right, we should steel ourselves and do this.

Hire all the old ladies and retired colonels instead who are left. I’m sure they’d be glad of the opportunity Once More to go unto the Breach.

(9) Remove ALL government involvement in what is taught. This will eradicate lies such as anthropogenic global warming, hatred of “firms”, for “polluting rivers”, hatred of farmers for “destroying the countryside”, and hatred of supermarkets for “ripping off consumers” and “third world growers”. Children have no business learning what governemtns say about themselves in schools owned and run by governments.

(10) Abolish the BBC, close it down, auction the archives to other broadcasters. Politicians will then not have a willing mouthpiece hostile to all the above plans.

At the risk of attracting major opprobrium, and at the risk of being called unlibertarian, I really really would advocate the cleansing of the UK school system of teachers who are even slightly sympathetic to socialist and (therefore) anti-liberal ideals. Now I know this is controversial, but I have (in my old age) difficulty figuring out how it’s possible for a socialist to become a libertarian. Either socialists agree that libertarianism is right, or they do not. if they do, then they are not socialists. If they don’t, then they are opponents of liberalism, which is to say conservatism.

I do not believe it is unlibertarian to expunge non-libertarians from posts where they could promote unlibertarianism. Either libertarianism is right, or it is wrong. If it’s right but will not fight, it will be right but it will fail. We live in an imperfect world, and many libertarians do not reailise this, and we may still have to fight for it, as this is still The Dawn of Time.

If they, the socialists, say that they are our opponents, then it does not matter so long as they do nothing to hurt people and force then to be things they don’t want to be.  they do not NEED to invoke Utopia. Capitalism bring them all the benefits they need and also to the people they say they srve. But the moment they hurt people, such as telling them untruths in classrooms of children, or growing “bio” “fuels”, then they do harm and hurt to all-people, and ought to be opposed, and by force if needed.

I wonder when the first “task forces” of assault-liberals, will assault biofuel fields, and (I don’t know what) burn them? It would be pointless, but also simultaneously symmetrical. 

Police – Go on Strike: Stay on Strike

Sean Gabb 

In Association with the Libertarian International

Release Date: Monday 10th December 2007
Release Time: Immediate

Contact Details:
Dr Sean Gabb, 07956 472 199,

For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url:


The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties think tank and pressure group, today calls on the Police Federation to urge their members to vote for the right to strike – then to call them out on strike and to stay on strike.

Dr Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, comments:

“The idea that the main function of the police is to protect life and property requires a firm resolve not to read the newspapers. There was a time within living memory when the worst the police did was to resell porn and drugs, and license burglars, and hang round public lavatories arresting any man desperate enough to fancy them. In addition to this, to be fair, they did provide the occasional protective service.

“But this is history. The police nowadays are little more than an increasingly trigger-happy ruling class militia. They spend much of their time listening to radio discussions in search of people to harass for saying something politically incorrect. If they do leave the fortified compounds we used to call police stations, it is to arrest householders for protecting their lives and property, or to breathalyse every tenth driver on the local A roads. The police are politically and financially corrupt. They are personally dangerous to be near. The only thing still to be said in their favour is that they are lazy and incompetent.

“England has become a country where if you see a police officer knocking on your door, you panic.

“We welcome the calls for the police to be allowed to go on strike. We urge all police officers to vote for this right, then to exercise it. We further call on the authorities not to negotiate with the strikers.

“A police strike would be the biggest blow for liberty since the abolition of identity cards in 1952. Free from the hot breath of PC Plod on our necks, we could all speak freely again, and take whatever steps were needed to protect ourselves and our loved ones from the other trash infesting this country.”

The Libertarian Alliance believes:

  • In the abolition of state policing:
  • In the repeal of all the Firearms Acts from 1920 to 1997, plus any other laws limiting the right to keep and use firearms;
  • In the repeal of all laws banning the carrying and use of other defensive weapons;
  • That the money thereby saved should be used to cut taxes.


Note(s) to Editors

Dr Sean Gabb is the Director of the Libertarian Alliance. His latest book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, may be downloaded for free from It may also be bought. His other books are available from Hampden Press at

He can be contacted for further comment on 07956 472 199 or by email at

David Robert Gibson on the Collapse of Modern Civilisation

Posted by Sean Gabb

Consider this: What would happen if, just possibly, there was a collapse in the main engines of modernist society – the state and big business? We wake-up in the morning and find there is neither heating nor lighting. Unless there is plenty of hot water in the tank we are left to have a cold wash/bath/shower – rather unpleasant. Never mind, shivering we make breakfast – a cold one because neither cooker, nor kettle, nor microwave oven work. We get ready for work. If that is by public transport we are out of luck because that isn’t working either. Let’s say we are more fortunate and drive, cycle or walk to work, but hold-on, clearly there is something seriously wrong, so is ‘work’ working we wonder? Let’s ring in to find out – no dialtone on the landline, and no network available via the mobile. Umm? Let’s switch on the TV to find out what is happening – oops, can’t because there is no electricity, ditto the mains radio and the *formerly* Internet-connected PC. We have a laptop, but of course no Internet there either, and if we leave it on more than a few hours it becomes a large paperweight. Let’s try the transistor radio. We may find a channel or two transmitting, but only if they are powered by emergency generators. Some staff there may have turned-up to work and be broadcasting optimistic messages explaining what’s gone wrong and that it *may* be put right soon. If we are sensible we turn the radio off, to conserve its battery, and tune-in again later. We visit our neighbours and their experiences are the same. We commiserate, tutt a bit, but have a slightly nervous laugh about ‘The spirit of the Blitz’, etc.

We decide to take the day off, and go out for a ride or walk to see what’s happening elsewhere. We see fewer vehicles on the road, because many other people have stayed indoors, but we also see unusual manoeuvering going on at many road junctions, because the traffic lights aren’t working – no electricity, and no street-lighting either, so it will be dark before dawn. We drive past a petrol station that has a closed sign – no electricity to power the pumps. Then a supermarket – also closed because the staff who turned up cannot contact head office so think its best to stay closed for the present, after all, the tills and lights don’t work. We drive back homeward, and notice no police, fire or ambulance vehicles because no-one can phone 999, so they’ve rather less work to do – at the moment!

We call in the corner shop. Signs of life – the owner has decided to open-up, but his till doesn’t work either, so he will have to do arithmetic in his head or on paper. He and some other locals are there. We chat for a while, and he says he had best be cautious about selling goods in quantity because he has had no delivery, doesn’t know when he will get one and he hasn’t heard anything helpful on his transistor radio either. He suggests buying frozen and refrigerated goods first because they will ‘go-off’. People debate the pro’s and con’s, just remembering their fridge-freezers won’t work either. After a few cautious transactions we go home. Chilly place, home, so we keep our coats on. Minds turn to thoughts of candles, batteries, water and how to cook without cookers – short-term survivalism. The day passes and no significant news. Dusk arrives. We have torches and candles, so we put one on a saucer and light it. There is little we can do, so after a cold supper, we go to bed early, very early.

We wake up, suddenly, woken by loud sounds coming from the house opposite. We grab torches, put on our slippers and dressing gowns, and shine the torches – some people are wheel-spinning away and the neighbours look distressed. We grab a carving knife and a rolling pin from the kitchen, just in case, and run across. They say they are not badly hurt, just feeling some bumps and bruises. We help them to our house, and they say that two robbers broke in, stole some possessions and hit the neighbours when they tried to stop them. They agree to stay in our spare room until the morning.

Next day we wake up and get dressed. We hear a knock at the door and, amazing coincidence, two police officers are at the door. We ask how they heard of the burglary – they didn’t, they were just calling to say that have been told there is a major national emergency, and they called to tell us that the government has declared martial law. They have not been told exactly what is wrong, but as a precaution the government has ordered a curfew during the hours of darkness, and looters may be shot. The police take down details of the burglary and say they will investigate it when life returns to normal. In the meantime they advise locking-up well and, *unofficially* to keep weapons to hand. They say they will try to visit homes regularly, but they are short-staffed as many of their colleagues have not turned-up to work, and not to be alarmed if we see armed soldiers on the streets from time to time.

Our thoughts turn to survivalism more seriously. Fortunately, we still have chimneys, so we un-plumb the gas fires and collect some logs we have from tree pruning and make a fire in the hearth. So we have a modicum of warmth, and we can boil water and cook simple meals. We are also lucky that rain looks due, so we put buckets and pots outside to collect rainwater. They don’t collect more than a few pints. We wonder about rigging-up water-butts, but will boiling the water that comes off the roof be sufficient to make it safe – no-one knows. We also ponder longer-term survival – how to get more timber, is stream and river water safe? Where will we get food when our cupboards and the local shop runs out? Will people accept money? Will our improvised household weapons be enough to protect us from robbers. Do any locals have the few remaining guns people can own legally? What food can we grow, and will we live to harvest it? Can we get electricity generators and the fuel to power them?

I will not relate any more. Some people will be more fortunate than the scenario above – the few who have farms, homesteads or large allotments. Most will be less fortunate, especially those who live in cities, and above all, those who live in flats. I am not suggesting everyone go out and live like “The Good Life” right away, but I am saying, at the very least, that hardly anyone has a ‘Plan B’ if the balloon goes up. Surely it makes sense to have the means of complete self-sufficiency, in essentials at least, close at hand, just in case? I think it does, and doing so will require a fundamental revolution in the way people live, where they live and how many people share these islands with them!

We are playing an existential Russian Roulette in our current way of life, and one day the bullet will be under the hammer.


David Robert Gibson


MOONBATTERY. If you want to stay sane in this darkening world, drink pints of it now. (It comes in pints…)

David Davis

Moonbattery is quite good today.

And, and and.

While you are about it, you can look up and download our approx 800++++++ publications on the LA website. I need periodically to remind all you good people, for you are all busy striving to eradicate socialism and expunge it from the face of the Earth. and blogging is a part-time activity or it is nothing.

Reminding you all, saves me having to publish sermons – after all, we are not a blasted church, where you have to sit and listen to the poor old chap mumbling, while the dinner burns. You don’t need me to orate it, you can read the bloody stuff yourself! About three million words. (All good gear, by the way! Trust me.)

Libertarian Alliance Conference Recordings from 2003

Sean Gabb 

I have just processed an uploaded an audio file record of the 2003 Libertarian Alliance Conference in London. The star turn of this conference was, beyond any doubt, Bill Thompson. His expose of the paedophilia scare was masterly then and still grips now. But the other speeches also were excellent.

To hear the speeches, go here:

The speeches were:

Saturday Session

Professor David Conway – Zionism and Classical Liberalism: Friends or Foes?

Chair: Dr Sean Gabb

Alberto Mingardi – The Politics of The Lord of the Rings: J. R. R. Tolkein Versus Socialism and Fascism.

Chair: Rebecca Baty

Dr Larry O’Hara – The Secret State in Britain

Dr. Stephen Davies – Alternatives to the Nation State: Pluralism and Liberty

Chair: David Carr (Introduction by Dr Chris R. Tame – who apologises profusely for a confusion over the banquet)

Scott Tips – The Codex Alimentarius and the Worldwide War Against Freedom of Medicine

Chair: Christian Michel

Sunday Session

Dr. Bill Thompson – The Paedophile Scam: False Allegations and Special Interest Groups (Read this article)

Chair: Dr Chris R. Tame

Dr. Dennis O’Keeffe – The Crisis of Compulsory State Education and the Case for Voluntary Attendance.

Chair: Brian Micklethwait

Paul Coulam – The Myth of Sexual Ethics.

Chair: David Farrer

Professor David Marsland – The State of Social Theory: Error and Lack of Ambition.

Chair: Dr Tim Evans

David Carr – The Coming Threat to Internet and Digital Freedom From Governments and Corporations

Chair: Martin Summers (Introduction and postscript by Dr Chris R. Tame)

Dr. Phil Collins – Banquet Speech


Sean Gabb

Scrap All Drink Drive Laws

In Association with the Libertarian International
Release Date: Sunday 9th December 2007
Release Time: Immediate

Contact Details:
Dr Sean Gabb, 07956 472 199,

For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url:


The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties think tank and pressure group, today calls on the British Government to repeal all laws against drinking and driving. Drivers should be free to drink as much alcohol as they like before and while driving. The Police should be allowed to intervene only if a driver appears from his actions to be a danger to other road users, or if he causes an accident.

Dr Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, comments:

“The current law on drinking and driving is a prior restraint law. It can only be enforced by indiscriminate stops and searches. Most of the drivers stopped are not driving erratically and do not test positive. This is a breach of  the Common Law prohibition of searches and seizures, except by judicial warrant and on evidence of some specific criminal behaviour.

“Moreover, every officer assigned to looking for drivers over the limit is one officer fewer to catch real criminals. This is specially the case at Christmas, which has lately become carnival a time for burglars and muggers. There are fewer officers around to deter them, and fewer to go looking for them after the event.

“Much of the propaganda against drinking and driving has nothing to do with reducing injuries to life and property, and everything to do with making it harder to enjoy a drink in good company.

“If we want to reduce the number of deaths on the roads, drinking and driving should not in itself be a crime. It should be possible for a person to drink a bottle of whisky, get into a car and drive away – and the authorities should have no power to stop this.

“Punishment should only come if a driver is so erratic that he is plainly dangerous - or if an accident is caused. But it should then in this latter case be very severe punishment.

“In general, we believe in real punishments for real crimes. Unless a real crime can be shown, we believe in telling the police to mind their own business.”


Note(s) to Editors

Dr Sean Gabb is the Director of the Libertarian Alliance and edits its journal Free Life. His book, Smoking, Class and the Legitimation of Power, is available at Amazon. His other books are available from Hampden Press at

His longer opinions on drinking and driving can be read here:

He can be contacted for further comment on 07956 472 199 or by email at

Is it better for a Sovereign Human to exist or not? Some sub-Human socialists think not….well, there is a place where they may feel comfortable.

David Davis 

I got this by accident from Mark Steyn about five minutes ago. (Eat my petrol-and-wee-stained-trousers, all you Steyn-hating-slairs!) The implication of its meaning is so awful, and so obscenely disgusting, that I had to post it to you all to show what we liberals are up against.

I say liberals (that is to say; conservatives and libertarians of MOST kinds) to differentiate us irrevocably (now I see the whites of our enemies’ eyes, if indeed that is what they have in their “heads”, rather than bottomless, non-radiating sinks of unutterable evil) from what is being described. 

What is being described here in this piece from Mark is Nazis, other kinds of leftist such as “greens” and other classes of death-lovers, Castro-c***-lickers and planet-corpse-f****rs. Here is his “CORNER” piece for 08.12.07;

Christmas gift ideas   [Mark Steyn]

There’s no better holiday gift than a great book and, courtesy of Oxford University Press, here’s a stocking stuffer that’s sure to bring a glow to the environmentally aware loved one in your family this Christmas morn:

Better Never To Have Been: The Harm Of Coming Into Existence
by David Benatar

Most people believe that they were either benefited or at least not harmed by being brought into existence. Thus, if they ever do reflect on whether they should bring others into existence–rather than having children without even thinking about whether they should–they presume that they do them no harm. Better Never to Have Been challenges these assumptions. David Benatar argues that coming into existence is always a serious harm… The author shows that there are a number of well-documented features of human psychology that explain why people systematically overestimate the quality of their lives and why they are thus resistant to the suggestion that they were seriously harmed by being brought into existence. The author then argues for the ‘anti-natal’ view–that it is always wrong to have children–and he shows that combining the anti-natal view with common pro-choice views about foetal moral status yield a ‘pro-death’ view about abortion (at the earlier stages of gestation). Anti-natalism also implies that it would be better if humanity became extinct. Although counter-intuitive for many, that implication is defended, not least by showing that it solves many conundrums of moral theory about population.

The author is a professor at the University of Cape Town. That’s on the Cape of Good Hope, though evidently not in this case. 

(via Spiked and Tim Blair)

The harm of coming into existence?

The tragedy for us is that if there had been no “existence”, then there would have been no “utopianism” and Nazi philpsphies such as socialism, for us to have to spend the strength of our lives blogging against.

The tragedy for the Great Enemy is that, if this writer was right, then there would be no stage on which to act, and lie, to All Creation. There would be no audience. I don’t think the sad dude Benatar has thought this one out.

We on the liberal and conservative blogs will scragg him to bits, and he will have himself to blame for his nemesis. 

Surely, seen from this point, when socialist idiots are saying rubbish which they thinlk nobody will contradict, then we are now approaching The Last Battle, Armageddon; when the Forces of Good take on the Forces of Evil for the last time.

We may still lose, but let’s take comfort. At least we can rest happy that Polly Toynbee and all the other leftist fascist pigs like Castro, Putin, Chavez, Jim the Jolly mayor of Newtingstone, bendy-buses, wheely-bins, uneducated socialist teachers and those chaps that run government departments and quangos and think they are right so to do, and ALL the computer-suppliers-to-the-state, will all get swallowed up in the cesspit of Satan’s maw.

BINGE DRINKING. A Socialist MP, called a “Grogan”, blames a shopkeeper. Yeah, right. We all go to shops to get stuff and then we bingedrink and get rat-arsed in the street with it; hence all the 2am streetphotos.

Simon Heffer in today’s Telegraph has it right;

David Davis

Binge drinking is the only cure for Brown

If you want to know what Labour MPs do with themselves all day, here’s an example.

One of them, a John Grogan, has followed a missable career as a student union leader and local government flunkey by becoming MP for Selby. Better still, he is (and I am not making this up, I promise) “chairman of the all-party beer group”, a calling for which only being president of a student union can possibly prepare one.

With typical brilliance, he this week described Sir Terry Leahy, one of Britain’s most successful businessmen and chief executive of Tesco, as “the godfather of British binge drinking”. He said Sir Terry was underpricing booze in his stores “all the time”, and warned him this must stop.

I am sure Sir Terry would rather take commercial advice from a pet stoat than from this moron – at least, as a Tesco shareholder, I hope he would. And doesn’t Mr Grogan understand that binge drinking and the pervasiveness of the Brown Terror are intimately related?

(In what still used to be Czechoslovakia, there was in 1991/2 a politcal party called “Strana Priteli Piva” (the SPP) translating as the “party of the friends of beer”. Perhaps he ought to find it and join?)

Libertarian Alliance News Release on “Murder Music”

In Association with the Libertarian International
Release Date: Friday 7th December 2007
Release Time: Immediate

Contact Details:
Dr Sean Gabb (Libertarian Alliance Director), 07956 472 199,

For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url:


The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties policy institute, today condemns the “murder music” ban in Brighton as a naked attack on freedom of speech.

(Brighton and Hove City Council has announced that pubs and clubs may lose their licences if they are caught playing music that “allegedly incites hatred on religious, racial or sexuality grounds”)

 Libertarian Alliance Director, Sean Gabb, says:

“I grew up in a country where people had an unquestioned and immemorial right to say what they liked on public issues, and to say it robustly. England is now a country where speech on issue after issue is being policed in the name of protecting minorities.

“What our ruling class calls “incitement of hatred” is actually expression of opinion, and expression of opinion should always be free – no matter how upsetting it may be to certain people.

“This is particularly so when opinions are expressed in private. Pubs and clubs are private property. What goes on inside them – whether it be holocaust revision lectures or gay sado-masochistic theatre – is no business of the authorities.

“This policy is supposed to apply only to playing music with violent lyrics. But the obvious target is dissident political speech. It is there to complement the Government’s attempt at censoring the content of sermons in mosques. Applied firmly across the country, the effect of the policy would be to stop the British National Party from meeting in rooms above public houses.

“We denounce the Conservative-dominated Brighton and Hove City Council. We call on the Conservative leadership to distance itself from this act of political censorship.

“We also call on Peter Tatchell, who has endorsed the policy, to think again – or to stop calling himself a civil libertarian.”

The Libertarian Alliance believes:

  • That all laws constraining speech on public issues should be repealed:
  • That all public bodies set up to regulate speech should be abolished and their records destroyed:
  • That the licensing laws should be repealed;
  • That what consenting adults do with each other on their own property is their own business;
  • That if these consenting adults wish to publish any of this to other consenting adults, that also is their own business;


Note(s) to Editors

Dr Sean Gabb is the Director of the Libertarian Alliance. His new book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, may be downloaded for free from His other books are available from Hampden Press at

He can be contacted for further comment on 07956 472 199 or by email at

Extended Contact Details:

The Libertarian Alliance is Britain’s most radical free market and civil liberties policy institute. It has published over 700 articles, pamphlets and books in support of freedom and against statism in all its forms. These are freely available at

The Stockhom Network Golden Umbrella Think-Tank Awards, London 5th December 2007

Dr Tim Evans


6 December 2007


As part their 10 year anniversary celebrations, the London-based market-oriented think tank, the Stockholm Network, held their first ever pan-European think tank awards ceremony last night at the National Liberal Club in London.  

In such a hotly contested field, the most influential think tanks from across Europe descended upon London, along with British and European politicians, journalists and policy makers. Each award was presented by luminaries from across the political landscape, with Boyden Gray, the US Ambassador to the EU, delivering the key note speech.

In the 10 years since its inception, the Stockholm Network has acted as the umbrella organisation for market-oriented individuals and policy institutes in Europe. During this time the number of think tanks in the network has expanded exponentially, now reaching 130 member think tanks.

Stockholm Network Golden Umbrella Think Tank Awards winners 2007

The Award for the Best Think Tank in New Market Economies

Free Minds Association in Azerbaijan

Presented by

Ambassador C. Boyden Gray, US Ambassador to the EU


The Award for the Best Contribution to Free Market Thinking

José Piñera, former secretary of Labour and Social Security in Chile

Presented by

Dr. Tom Palmer, Vice President for International Programs, The Cato Institute


The Best New Think Tank Award

European Centre for International Political Economy in Brussels

Presented by

The Rt. Hon. Iain Duncan Smith MP, Centre for Social Justice


SN Think Tank of the Year Award

Institute for Market Economics in Bulgaria

Presented by

Dr. Jan Čarnogursky, former Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic


The Personality of the Year Award

Prof. Atilla Yayla, Political Scientist and President of the Association for Liberal Thinking in Turkey

Presented by

Alice Thomson, Assistant Editor, Comment Section, The Daily Telegraph


The Internet Award

Institute of Economic and Social Studies in Slovak Republic

Presented by

Cécile Philippe, Director – General, Molinari Economic Institute


The Award for Best Research

Istituto Bruno Leoni in Italy

Presented by

Christofer Fjellner MEP, European People’s Party (Christian Democrats) and European Democrats


The Innovation Award

Taxpayers’ Alliance in the United Kingdom

Presented by

Janet Daley, Leader Writer, The Daily Telegraph


The Media Award

Institute for Market Economics in Bulgaria

Presented by

John Fund, Wall Street Journal


- ENDS -

For quotes and commentary on the above, please call Cara Walker, Head of Communication for the Stockholm Network on 00 44 20 7354 8888 or via e-mail to:


Notes to Editors:


The Stockholm Network is the leading pan-European think tank. It offers a unique network of 130 market-oriented think tanks across Europe providing access to the best European policy thinking.


For further Information contact:


Helen Disney, CEO,

Stockholm Network


Tel: 020 7354 888                Fax: 020 7359 8888


“TESCOS LAW ON FOOD” – yet another teacher getting at her pupils I think. (Search-engine-string.)

David Davis 

What do you, our bolg-reader, make of “Tesco’s law on food”?

Does Tesco make law? Can it control food in any way?

Do any children know, either way, about either concept? 

Interesting I thought – as to what is going on in our schools perhaps?

Perhaps someone ought to McCarthy-ise our state schools, and even the others too, just to make sure. Now I know this is a very un-libertarian thing to say – but undefended Libertarianism is all very well and good in a Market-Civilisation in which the other side also plays by the rules, but it does not get very far in the real world, which is very dark and full of evil people who lie.

The trouble is, the other side contains people like Napoleon, Hitler, Stalin, Jim Livingstone the Jolly Mayor of Longdon, Fidel Castro, Che Guevara (he WAS a murderer, and your T-shirt is NOT cool), Mayo-zee-Tung, that man in Vietnam called “Chew-Ing-Gum” or something like that (we nearly bombed him out of Haiphong but were stopped by the fascist pig Brzhezhniev, who made the other democrat fascist pig who was then the President of the USA blink) Chirac, Putin, Billary Clinton and Al-Gore-the-Goracle…..evil wicked man, who lies about gases and planets – I mean, of all things to lie about, what would you choose to lie about?

Back to Tesco’s Law on Food. A prize of a ration-voucher (one per responder maximum) for a 2p bottle of Non-Alcoholic British-State Champagne-Substitute, for the first 500 blogger-repliers, who can each tell me what this string ought to mean.

ACRYLAMIDE…(don’t they mean acrylaldehyde?) and the EU – another assault on FOOD. I mean, what do these fascists want?

David Davis 

“Acrylamide” – CH2=CH-CO-NH2 – a fairly harmless organic intermediate in the production of some forms of plastics, has received a wide press lately, having been slated by the EU (no less!) for “increasing” the risk of uterine and ovarian cancers in “women” – (not in men, I hasten to notice.) it is apparently and allegedly a product of overcooking food in all the “nice” ways; that is to say, toasting and frying it. In fact all the ways that Man had cooked food (except boiling which produces tasteless crud and is the reason that “English” cooking has been satirized and execrated the TV-world over for 60 years, and is why “telechefs” exist at all.)

I mean, yer-no’……can you imagine a world without…..bacon? (No I don’t mean “boiled ham” either…) Or “Barbies”…?

Firstly; the pretentiously-higgorant journos don’t mean “acrylamide” at all – they mean “acrylaldehyde”, which was what we chemists call “acrolein”. It is mildly oxidizing in the presence of liver-alcohol-dehydrogenase, inhibits it, and can extend hangovers caused by other reasons. It tastes and smells nasty and so it therefore might be a little bitty toxic as is the case with other poisons. It is produced in small amounts by carbonizing fried food further than necessary. Its formula is CH2=CH-CHO….a bit different form acrylamide (which does not occur naturally.) (But we’re all going to die anyway sometime; the evolutionists say it’s necessary but I’m one of them and I’m not so sure, for the Universe is quite large.)

The pretentiously-higgorant journos don’t know this of course. They are merely busy imbibing some press-release, rendering its content so it’s a lot less exact than it was, draining it of meaning, and regurgitating some copy.

 The EU has now stipulated that we must not toast bread “more than is absolutely necessary”. We mjust fry potatoes to a “light yellow colour” and not any shade of “brown”. The PM ought to listen here.

Truly, we have become their farm animals. They are doing this for “our good”. Bugger them then, for a start. They’ll be telling us not to smoke next.

I think that the fascist master “Honestiories” want the “Humiliories” to eat tasteless nasty food as befits (our) station.

Newmania in Lewes

David Davis

What a good and decent blog this is. His typing skills leave something to be desired, or perhaps he is always in a hurry when blogging: but I expect he thinks it is now part of his brand image.

I even suspect him of being a conservative Libertarian.

Gillian Gibbons; the response of the Great British Public via EBAY

David Davis

At mid-afternoon there were more than 10 teddy-bears called Mohammed reportedly for sale on EBAY. At least one seller said he was donating all the proceeds to this poor woman. I wonder what the reaction of the frothing Imams would be to this clear and sharply-directed piece of global satire and michae-taking!

Sean re Gillian Gibbons

Sean Gabb 

All the Moslems in this country are patting each other on the back for having got this schoolmistress off her time in a Sudanese jail.

Their representations to the Sudanese Government were all made on the basis that Mrs Gibbons had been stupid and that she had not intended to insult their religion by calling a teddy bear Mohammed.

 having seen the woman wittering away on the telly, I can well believe both propositions.

However, supposing she had intended to insult Islam, would the British Moslem organisations have lifted a finger in her defence? Bearing in mind the laws they are pressing for in this country, I think the answer is no.

For the record, I’d have left the woman to her forty lashes. You may break the laws of your own country whenever you think they are illegitimate. When you go to a foreign country, you impliedly agree to obey even its insane laws.

There – that’s me done on the burning news of the day!

I should explain the post below THIS ONE. (Sorry!)

David Davis 

Our one blogreader (HI!… ‘You all-right ?) may be confused by the prevailing frequency of references to the UK’s major supermarket chains. This is because;

(1) People need food. Or they die. Socialism, being of the Devil, then arises, and takes a view.

(2) Socialism exists. Bummer. (…ON THE EARTH, FOR NOW…YOU PRE-CAPITALIST-MARXBOUND-BARBARIAN-UNENLIGHTENED-SLAIRS JUST WAIT TILL WE GET PROPERLY STARTED ON YOU, FROM SPACE…..(by just leaving you to stew in your own choices)…..) It therefore attracts dangerous, unsocialised, saddo dirigiste deadbeats; these are persons who can’t be trusted to do any useful work for real-people-who-are-responsible-for-others, and who thus have to pay bills and all that stuff, and who (that is to say, the deadbeats) instead therefore have no choice but to go into politics in Britain in the 21st century. Even the libdems won’t have them from now on, being desperate and running out of time, so they-deads have to go into the Labouring Party. Just look at the Labouring-Party today. Drowning in money, and no clue as to who it was from, and having to give it back, and looking very unprofessional overall.

If I was a truly-madly-deeply-professional Statist, such as Saddam Hussein or Stalin or Hitler or Castor or Pol Pot or Chirac or Putin or Mugabe, I would have had them all shot by now, and a new lot re-elected to serve the people even more effectively and, er, can’t remember the next word but it is superbly portentious and redolent with gravity and meaning – like 666, the years of the 5-year-plan.

(3) Deadbeats and socialsits (I like “socialsits” and will save it for later) think they are important, and want to affect the lives of other persons – just like those chaps who write and distribute viruses; so they “plan” stuff.

There is no other purpose to these people’s lives; I can’t fathom how such a fate has befallen the brains of such a large number of hominids, in so short a time. The Renaissance was not meant to lead to this pass. 

(4) “Food” hits all the buttons of highly-charged graphic art, such as the images of burstingly-large corn-sheaves on all the currency of the old Soviet Empire.

(5) Socialsits want to get at the mass food-distribution system in the UK. For heaven’s sake, they invented rationing. They would like to bring it back in some post-modernly-disguised form, for they hate the fact that everybody from the 4×4-woman-school-run-driveress to the single-mum-from-Bootle-in-a-clapped-out-Metro-driven-by-her-beater-upper, can get food from where she/they can afford to go.

(6) The main UK supermarket chians; that is to say, Tesco, Asda, Sainsbury, Morrisons and Waitrose, are very, very, very good at delivering exactly the foods that their particular customer target groups want, at the prices they can (just about ) afford. This is just one aspect of what is called CAPITALISM.

(7) This state of affairs is hateful to the leftist Nazi government in Westminster. So hateful that in fact the better performers – such as Tesco –  are to be ordered to sell land and sites to the worse ones. Just watch.

I make these casual observations in the light of the progressive destruction of indigenous UK food suppliers over the last 10 years or so, by a government that knows the producers mostly don’t vote for it, never did, or ever would.

So we blog about food, and its production, and distribution, and the morality or otherwise of the entities involved. 

If I was Tesco, and I owned all the shares in myself, then I would move abroad, if I was me. I would close my outlets in the UK, sack all the staff, bulldoze all my sites, hand them over to the “competition commission”, and tell the gumment, which thinks it ought to dictate what foods people ought to eat at what prices and from what kinds of outlets, to go on and try to do it for itself.

My last words on this?

“U S S R”

And also…..telephone Robert Mugabe, its friend, and ask him if in the kindness of his heart, he could possibly send us some food.

“Waitrose becoming obsessed by profit” – I SHOULD HOPE SO…

David Davis 

This has got to be just about the most lunatically-brilliant search-engine-string to hit the side of the blog today.