Libertarian Alliance in Yorkshire Post

http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/around-yorkshire/local-stories/christian_outcry_at_nightclub_named_religion_1_3631343

The Yorkshire Post
Saturday 30th July 2011
Christian outcry at nightclub named Religion

The Religion nightclub in Wakefield has caused anger with nights including Resurrection and Salvation. Picture: Jonathan Gawthorpe

Published on Saturday 30 July 2011 09:06

A NIGHTCLUB has been criticised by Christian leaders after it was controversially named Religion, with club nights called Resurrection and Salvation.

The Wakefield club also sells cocktails with names including Angel Wings.

The club Religion opened its doors just a week ago but residents and local clergy have already shown their outrage at the decision to introduce themed nights called Monday Mass and Friday Salvation.

Critics claim that there would be a widespread outcry if Muslim worship terms had been used to promote drinking and dancing.

Angered residents say that the owners of the club are being disrespectful and insensitive to the Church and the Bishop of Wakefield, Stephen Platten, has deemed the club’s themes “inappropriate”.

He said he was not against people enjoying themselves but he said he did think it was insensitive, adding: “There’s a whole host of topics they could have chosen.

“Some of the names of the events are insensitive and inappropriate.

“Religion is about taking life seriously. Would people have been amused if they’d called it health, which is an equally serious topic, and named some of the rooms A&E and gynaecology?”

Bishop Platten added: “If any other aspect of people’s lives was taken and trivialised in this way I think people would be upset.

“In particular, in this case, it affects Christian people.”

The Dean of Wakefield, Jonathan Greener, added yesterday: “I think it’s being rather insensitive to Christians.

“The names it has chosen refer to ideas and activities that hold deep meaning for Christian people, and the way the new club is using them could be seen to be sending them up.

“On the other hand, it could be argued that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, and if people want to experience the real thing, they are always most welcome at the cathedral.”

Wakefield city centre police inspector Richard Close said no offences had been committed.

He said: “Parliament passed legislation under section 17 of the Public Order Act aimed at outlawing crime where the offender is motivated by hostility or hatred towards the victims race or religious beliefs.

“In my opinion and experience the management of the premises are neither showing hatred or hostility, they are without doubt utilising words from the Bible to further their business interest, which in the eyes of some may be distasteful.”

The company which owns the club, Leisure 99, said the name of the club nights were not linked to any particular faith.

In a statement, a company spokesman said: “The definition of the word religion is a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion, which is what partygoers in the city are doing.

“We chose the term Resurrection for a Friday night, because the night-time economy’s suffering and we’re hoping to revive and revitalise it, as its definition suggests.

“The same is true of Salvation, and the word Mass was chosen because it’s a massive Monday night of massive music.”

Wakefield poet Louis Kasatkin, who helps forges links between the arts and the church, said it was easy to imagine the reaction if the club’s operators had used Muslim terms of worship.

“But they appear to think using Christian theme terminology is okay.

“My own view is that it is tantamount to breaching the law on religious hatred,” he added.

Other political activists asserted the rights of free speech on both sides.

Sean Gabb, director of the Libertarian Alliance, claimed that the owners of the club might be living under police protection had they been promoting club nights called Jihad or Ramadan.

Dr Gabb suggested that Christians who are offended by what is offered should find out who is providing goods and services to the club, and publicly refuse to do business with them.

However, he said the name of a club should not be a matter for the criminal law.

The right of these people to commit blasphemy,” he said, “rests on the same grounds as a Christian’s right to profess his faith.”

Libertarian Alliance: Blasphemy and Freedom of Faith

http://www.seangabb.co.uk/?q=node/568

Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, on BBC Radio Leeds, on Friday the 29th July 2011, to discuss the boundary between blasphemy and freedom of speech. His own contributions starts around 8’50″.

The background story is that a nightclub in Wakefield is offering “Crucifixion” and “Resurrection” nights. Sean Gabb agrees that this is blasphemy in the sense that it seems calculated to bring the Christian Faith into ridicule and contempt. He also notes that, if they had offered “Jihad” and “Ramadan” nights, the owners on the nightclub would already be living under police protection.

Dr Gabb suggests that Christians who are offended by what is offered should find out who is providing goods and services to this club, and publicly refuse to do business with these providers. However, he also says that this should not be a matter for the criminal law. “The right of these people to commit blasphemy,” he says, “rests on the same grounds as a Christian’s right to profess his faith.” Moreover, we live in a country where the ruling class is increasingly hostile to Christianity. Any law demanded by Christians will be written and passed and enforced by people who are unknown and unaccountable, and who are probably not Chistians. Such a law will be used to discriminate still further against Christians.

Reheated: what ought libertarians to do? The LA Christmas Message 2010

What is liberty for, and why should people be free?

David Davis

Merry Christmas, ladies and gentlemen. May God rest you merry, and perhaps tight this year. Get tight while you can still afford it – for governments, specially this one, would like to think they can “combat drinking” by over-taxation, freely and cheerfully admitted to.

Well, this year, among other things, the awful and totally-unelected Gordon Brown zeppelin-thing-in-the-ether, foisted on us by Tony Blair and possibly his worst single act, imploded finally. We voted, and guess what? Nobody won, and the Government got in, again. This may be a good thing in the short term, in that the coalition can’t actually do anything to hinder people much more, let alone help. But strategically in the battle for universal individual freedom, we here are certainly no better off than before.

In fact, a little worse, for some of us like me and Sean see the Clock ticking…. We know that however relatively more slowly than before we are being marched to the living-gas-chambers of sustainable socialist greenery, and to the concentration-camps of more intricate and closer repression, the available decades of living people’s lifetimes in which they might do something to reverse The Big Modern Managerial State, are slipping away like sand in a glass. Time, literally, is running out for liberty in the UK for sure, and so it would seem also for other Anglosphere nations. I gather that you can get fined for speeding in Australia, if you are tracked by a police helicopter…I thought helicopters were foreign-policy-war-winning-weapons, for machine-gunning GramscoStaliNazi “freedom-fighters”, until I researched Australian Policing.

So, what’s wrong with liberty? Why exactly are we under assault? And given the seeming consensus ranged against individual freedom

Crowd-Sourcing the Law

by David D’Amato
http://c4ss.org/?p=7827

Around the world, from the North Atlantic to Anatolia, political and economic instability have stimulated a reassessment of the requirements of constitutional government. In what seems to be an acknowledgment of the new realities of the Information Age, the political class has stressed popular involvement in the drafting process, a “participatory” approach to overhauling the foundations of the legal framework. “Iceland,” reports the Washington Post, “is trying to do just that, by crowdsourcing its new constitution to its citizens through social media.” Cries for popular participation are no less vociferous in Turkey, where—in the wake of the Arab Spring—a recent election has prompted calls for a completely new constitution. Opening the process of shaping the law to the body politic is an important step in the right direction, but it need not stop at merely tweaking a constitution. In fact, the practical benefits of popular participation in shaping the contours of the law suggest that a single starting point for law, a static authority like a written constitution, is neither necessary nor desirable. The useful insight embedded in the “crowdsourcing” approach to constitutional government is its implicit rejection of a top-down blueprint for the law. Whether its advocates realize it or not, Friedrich Hayek’s concept of “spontaneous order” is the core of the participatory model. What’s more, the logic of that concept requires us to go well beyond just the replacement of a constitution; it insists on the replacement of the state itself.

“Property Rights” Aren’t Just for the Rich

by Kevin Carson
http://c4ss.org/?p=7831

Through the mid-fifteenth century, access to land in the typical English village was regulated on the so-called “open-field” model. The village lands were the common property of the peasant communes, and occupancy right to arable land was periodically redivided between families, with each family receiving a number of strips in each field proportionate to its size. Access rights to pasture and woodlot were similarly assigned by family. This family patrimony in access to the land was a permanent source of economic security. What’s more, the ability to build a cottage on the border of the uncultivated waste, or a marsh, was a way of insuring minimum subsistence for the landless and land-poor peasantry.

Beginning in the Tudor period, the landed classes of England enclosed a growing portion of the arable land for sheep pasturage, essentially robbing the peasantry of its traditional property rights in the land — established by the venerable title of cultivation for time out of mind — by brute force. Henries VII and VIII seized the land of the Church and the monasteries and gave them away to royal favorites, who disregarded the peasants’ customary rights and either evicting them to enclose more pasture or rack-tenting them. By the eighteenth century, probably half the arable land in England’s open fields had been stolen in this manner. The process continued in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, this time under the so-called Parliamentary “Acts of Enclosure.” Arable land, but even more so common pasture and waste, were enclosed as fee-simple property. Although in legal theory the peasants were compensated for their share in the common with fee-simple rights to a share of enclosed land, in practice most claims by customary right weren’t recognized under royal law.

Libertarian Alliance comment of the day

Howard R Gray (from comments on here.)

In the Usambara Mountains in the northeast of the Tanzania there is a small shack next to huge building covered in makuti thatch. There is a horrendous noise of keyboards clattering away with undying creativity. On entry to the facility you will see thousands and thousands of baboons hard at work revising Shakespeare for our Farsi readership. The head simian assures us that the latest euro forecasts are not good, it just come over the wire that our deadly competitors, the handy chimpanzees in Zimbabwe are ahead of us on their predictions for European disaster. This particular bunch of chimps, after entertaining one Jane Goodall for many years decided that now she has a PhD, it would be a good idea if some of them went south for commercial reasons to Zimbabwe, regrettably it turned out that human beings in that state had completely and utterly lost their senses and divested their currency of any monetary value whatsoever. This has long been understood in simian circles that both white and black varieties of human beings were involved in the independence negotiations leading to a government incapable of understanding why hyperinflation happens.

We had of course heard from our cousins in the Berlin Zoo that the Germans had previously engineered a similar debacle way back in the 1920s and the amazing thing is how so little those self-important human economists and leftists managed to learn. It was thought that too much beer and sausages was perhaps the underlying cause, though that theory was never proven.

One of the great details in the life of baboons is their undying commitment to accurate grammatical differences about the nuances of middle English, besides that talent, they have a deep reservoir of commercial intelligence about the euro, so much so that they are given to use four words, the first one being “get” the second one being the definite article “the” and the third being something about going forth and multiplying in Anglo-Saxon then followed by “out”. This is the simian message about the euro. You heard it here. The head simian was asked what should we do, Bitcoin.com was scrawled on a piece of paper and thrust towards us. At that point we were shown the door and given a bag of bananas and told to enjoy our flight back to civilization at the Regent’s Park zoo.

The Political Ideas of Anders Behring Breivik

by Kevin MacDonald
http://www.theoccidentalobserver.net/?p=9198

Note by Sean GabbI have copied this in full from The Occidental Observer site because Professor MacDonald’s posting seems to be the longest and most thorough analysis of what drove Mr Breivik to commit his crimes – always assuming he did indeed commit them. He has actually read the killer’s book, and this lets him say a great deal more than the mainstream media, which appears to take its entire coverage from statements by the Norwegian police.

For the record, the Libertarian Alliance deplores these killings and has no sympathy whatever with the ideology that may have been used to justify them. Nor do we endorse any claim that Professor MacDonald may derive from his analysis. At the same time, we thank him for having read and summarised an 1100 page book that has been made important by the the alleged deeds of its author.

It should go without further elaboration that we oppose all demands for gun control, which is nothing more than victim disarmament, and we oppose all demands for censorship of supposedly “hateful” ideas. Here begins the analysis by Kevin MacDonald:-

It’s all de fault of … somebody

by Richard North

http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2011/07/its-all-de-fault-of-somebody.html

Booker has a good piece, telling us how the “zero” – as some call it – is going to cause a global meltdown. And, at last, the Scumset are rushing around playing catch-up.

The thing to bear in mind about these “summits”, however, is that the communiqué are written in advance of the meetings, and usually the first thing on the agenda is to approve the draft. Then they get down to business.

Secondly, it is important to bear in mind that every which is being said for public consumption is being said for effect. If the truth is likely to achieve the desired effect, then we might be told it – or some version of it. Most likely, we will be told only a fraction of the story. And it’s what they leave out that is, most likely, more important than what they say.

Third, if it suits them, they will lie through their teeth, brazenly, consistently, and without a moment’s hesitation. And since, rather inconveniently, they don’t flag up when they are lying, you have no way of telling whether they speak the truth or lie. On balance, though, the latter is more likely.

Fourth – and most difficult fully to appreciate: never underestimate the ignorance and stupidity of these people. Just because they are at the centre of events does not necessarily mean they are well informed, or even understand what they are being told. Most often, of the crucial developments, the main players are the last to know.

Fifth, short-term market or currency movements mean diddly-squat.

Penultimately – it doesn’t matter who you are, you can’t defy gravity. Get too close to the sun, your wings melt and you fall to earth. And finally, revisiting and old saw … you do not need a parachute to go skydiving. You only need one if you want to do it twice. These people are one-time merchants.

So what is really happening with the euro? In truth, not even (or especially) the main players know. But there is one certainty … whether this month or a few months, it is going to crash and burn.

And whose fault will that be? As they say, it’s always de fault of somebody. He’s de man.

Anyone Fancy Answering These Questions about Guns?

by Sean Gabb

I am just back from Slovakia, and have a mountain of writing and other work to climb. Debating the effects of firearm ownership is very low on my agenda.

——————————–

Dear Sean

I read this on the Libertarian Alliance website:

“For us, freedom of association is about the right to deal (or not) with any other consenting adult,  for any non-aggressive purpose, and without need for explanation.”

Can’t argue that one, really (but note my italics). No argument either with your stance on drugs. But how do you square the ‘non-aggression’ clause with…

“We believe in the right to carry and use guns for self-defence…”

Who decides whether or not an act is performed for the purposes of self-defence? Who, other than the despised State and its law enforcement officers, could be in any position to ensure a proper investigation into the facts and that justice is done, in the potentially countless incidents that’d surely arise if your wish-list were to become a legally-enshrined societal code (itself an oxymoron in this context, since you don’t seem to believe in ‘laws’)?

On any Friday night you’ll find any number of lairy, Stella-fuelled twats aching not just for the chance legally to swagger into their local with ‘nines’ on their belts, but to use the things, and with an impunity that our present structure denies them. What then? Gun law? Watch your backs, and the devil take the hindmost? Literally kill or be killed? Presumably all the perps need do is bleat “self-defence, guv, he had it coming” and everything’s okay.

What a future! Interested in your case for the defence. Preferably one grounded in sense, reason and rationality and that doesn’t involve a lot of reheated, pseudo-profound Ayn Rand bilge.

Richard Butterworth
Economy with Words®

Let Greece taste the lovely flavours of Communism

David Davis

I came across this nice piece in Forbes. Very good read.

(WordPress tells me this is “our 3,684th post…nifty!” I haven’t seen the word “nifty” for years, and I’m uncertain that today’s young persontrons would understand what it means, or would be frightfully delighted if they knew. I hope the WordPress website writer does.)

À-propos of nothing linguistic but of critical interest to the post, who here remembers the BBC’s (and most of the 1970s-British-media’s) positive attitude towards what they called “Euro-Communism”, and how it was “inevitable” and “ultimately desirable”? The agenda was in full swing from about 40 years ago, but we didn’t really notice.

In 1998 I bet a YEM fellow that the euro would fall by 31st December 1999 to 50p.

I was wrong, and paid him his £25.

David Davis

But if wrong on the date, I wasn’t wrong on the outcome. They’ll hold it together for another year, perhaps two. Then it will unravel and we will thankfully see Deutshmarks, Francs and Drachmas again. I believe Lira are already circulating in some Italian towns.

Working in London as I was, I was cosmopolitan enough to suggest publicly that Sterling and the Euro ought to circulate freely in the UK, along with US$, ChF, Aust$ and any other biggish currency that people wanted to use. The value of the Euro would then be quickly discovered. But nobody listened, of course. I was just a guy getting a nissen hut full of Chimpanzee Type-writers together, to be placed somewhere in Lancashire.

Personal Perspectives 27, Austrian Economics and Anarcho-Capitalism: Peace, Prosperity and Freedom (2011), by Michael McKay | www2.libertarian.co.uk

 

Austrian Economics and Anarcho-Capitalism: Peace, Prosperity and Freedom
Michael McKay

Personal Perspectives No. 27
ISBN 9781856376372
ISSN 0267-7156 (print)
ISSN 2042-275X (online)

© 2011: Libertarian Alliance; Michael McKay

Personal Perspectives 27, Austrian Economics and Anarcho-Capitalism: Peace, Prosperity and Freedom (2011), by Michael McKay | www2.libertarian.co.uk

Smoking, Class and the Legitimation of Power

	Smoking, Class and the Legitimisation of Power Purchase Smoking, Class and the Legitimisation of Power with 15% off with coupon code MYBOOK305. Offer ends 15 August 2011.

Disclaimer: Use coupon code MYBOOK305 at checkout and receive 15% off Smoking, Class and the Legitimisation of Power. Maximum savings with this promotion is £100. You can only use the code once per account, and you can’t use this coupon in combination with other coupon codes.  This great offer ends on 15 August 2011 at 11:59 PM so try not to procrastinate! While very unlikely we do reserve the right to change or revoke this offer at anytime, and of course we cannot offer this coupon where it is against the law to do so.  Finally, Lulu incurs the cost of this discount, so it does not impact the Author’s proceeds of the book.

Copyright © 2002-2011 Lulu, Inc. All Rights Reserved. This message is an advertisement from Lulu.com. Lulu.com | 3101 Hillsborough St. | Raleigh | NC | 27607-5436 Manage your account preferences Unsubscribe from  marketing emails from Lulu.com

Robert Henderson on the Murdoch Circus

by Robert Henderson

Watching Rupert Murdoch yesterday evoked the sort of feelings which one has when watching a now ancient Death Camp guard dragged before a court: the rational mind knows that this is someone whose hideous crimes have placed them beyond the Pale, but their age and infirmity creates a certain unease because it seems somehow indecent to be subjecting someone so old to such an ordeal. This feeling was enhanced by James Murdoch’s appearance whose close cropped hair, steel rimmed glasses and grim staring eyes utterly at odds with his words made him resemble a male nurse in a very secure mental institution gone bonkers straight out of central casting. If a new version of Psycho is made he would be a shoo-in for the Anthony Perkins role. Try as I might I could not help thinking he was there as Rupert’s minder, ready to whip out the restraints and hypodermic.

The questioning of both the Home Affairs and Culture Media and
Sport committees was inept, especially that of the latter. The format of
letting the each member of ask questions mitigates severely against a
penetrating  inquisition because ed questioning is impossible.
However, as most  MPS could not build a line of forensic questioning if their lives depended on it, it made no difference.

The position of both Murdochs was “We are in charge of News Corp, we know nothing”.

Reheated: (Sean Gabb on the British Police State (May 1989))

http://www.seangabb.co.uk/pamphlet/thatcher.htm

David Davis

In the light of current events in the British media, the interest taken increasingly by “teh masses” in the private doings of private individuals for salacious reasons, and the alleged involvement of the met-Police in allegedly “providing information” to “journalists” in the “Public Interest”, it seems time to review what Dr Sean Gabb said in 1989.

The Full Coercive Apparatus of a Police State:
Thoughts on the Dark Side of the Thatcher Decade Sean Gabb
3rd May 1989 Published as Legal Notes No. 6, by the Libertarian Alliance,
London, 1989, ISBN 1 870614 39 9Ten years ago, I gave way to one of my rare bursts of enthusiasm. I was at the time, I’ll grant, still a schoolboy; and these things are always more permissible in them than in others. But, even for a schoolboy, it was a very great burst of enthusiasm. I seriously thought that, along with Mrs Thatcher, the second dawn of classical liberalism had arrived. This was it, I thought. No more socialism. No more national decline. No more Road to Serfdom. Oh, even as lads of my age went, I was naive.

To give praise where due, there been a loosing of market forces. Wage and price controls are gone. Exchange and credit controls are gone. There are no controls on foreign investment either way. We have a tax system designed more for collecting revenue than confiscating wealth. Most of the nationalised industries have been sold off, or made to operate on something like sound business principles. Since 1981, we’ve been unusually prosperous. We even had five years of lowish retail price inflation. The Government’s economic record hasn’t been one tenth as wonderful as I expected, or as I hear it proclaimed. It’s been quite good even so. It might easily have been worse.

But the economic record isn’t the only test of a government. There are all those rights that don’t bring a financial return: how they are respected. And, while the Tories have supervised the building of an impressive number of Japanese car factories here, they haven’t rolled back the frontiers of the State. What they have done is bring about an unprecedented concentration of power at the centre. Every one of those bodies, public or private, which used to stand between the state and its citizens has been pushed aside: local government, the press and other media, the unions, the universities – each has been humbled. And the Bar may soon be about to follow.

But all this is common knowledge. Enough already has been said about it. What I wish to do in this article is describe the new and unusual ways in which this concentrated power is being used. I shall discuss to what extent we’ve ceased being a nation under the rule of law.

Now, this is a grand phrase, and Tory politicians love rolling it out on grand occasions. Nine times out of ten for them, it’s just a euphemism for making people do as they’re told. Rather, it’s the most completely effective check on State power ever yet discovered. Put as fully and exactly as I can, it requires this: that no person be arrested, or imprisoned, or fined, or by any other means harmed, except in accordance with unambiguous laws of general scope, that have been laid down in advance, that are equally binding on all, and that are enforceable only by independent courts in which the prosecution is at a procedural disadvantage. Whoever has not been, or is not in process of being, adjudged in breach of any such law is to be as free of interference by the State as a foreigner living outside its jurisdiction.

The usual objection to this is that it lets crime go unpunished. Everyone knows of some evidently guilty person who’s gone scot free thanks to a clever lawyer. But, in judging any set of legal rules, what must be looked at isn’t the effect of a single instance, but of the whole scheme through time. Where the rule of law is concerned, it is invariably true that the greater security of life and property, and the readier public acceptance of those uses of power which are made, are well worth the occasional specific inconvenience.

I’d be as bad as the people in donkey jackets hawking Socialist Worker if I blamed every violation of the rule of law on Margaret Thatcher. Faith in it was already crumbling before her father was a little boy. Nor, in every case, has she been the greatest violator. In respect of the first of these listed below, she’s been so far a distinct improvement on Harold Wilson and James Callaghan: she hasn’t tried

Sean Gabb back from Slovakia

I have just arrived back home after a thousand mile drive from Slovakia. Once I’ve had a shower and some sleep, and have opened half a tree of post, normal service will resume.

Sean

Eh ludd, I couldn’t resist…..

Michale Winning

Ah just’-add-ta-post-it, me! It-wer’a greeat comment, like. Makes you wonder how you lern to write so well, wisdh I could.

Nation’s Spirits Raised As Gabb Returns

Englishmen and their wives the length and breadth of the kingdom were today much cheered by the news that Sean Gabb would be imminently returning to our shores. On the stock market, there was a sharp rally as a new spirit of confidence rippled through traders. And in the streets of humble towns and villages, impromptu street parties broke out, requiring an urgent and brutal response by the lads of the PCSO.

A government spokesman reassured this organ that everything is under control, and that our nation’s institutions are well trained to deal with a surprise Gabb. Said Interior Minister Lord Sleaze Of Islington, “we have dealt with a sudden Gabb before, and nobody should be alarmed. While the return of a Libertarian of this magnitude has been known to cause spontaneous outbreaks of spontaneity, rest assured that we will take them in our stride; all police leave has been cancelled and weapons issued. This is England. You are not here to enjoy yourself.”

Reports that Gabb would be making a triumphal entry into London, riding in a gilded carriage drawn by beautiful white mares and surrounded by a remarkable entourage of dancers, acrobats, jugglers and performing animals have not been confirmed and continued on page 3

And: what did I say?

David Davis

Edit: The Last Ditch picks up on this thought too.

As I have been saying, the more the GramscoNazi knives queue up in an increasingly populistic, self-regarding-mob-driven and ordered way, to twist in the writhing body of News International, the more we realise, and see the depth of the physical hatred towards, non-PC, non-BBC-approved, and “non-regulated” media. This piece in today’s DT will, in a few years, be unprintable in British newspapers – if any still exist – if the Political EnemyClass gets its way over the saga triggered by the News of the World.

I think it’s right to state that the GFNs have never forgiven Murdoch for Wapping. And one could argue that Rebekah Wade was always a “double-agent”, possibly parachuted in years ago by the EnemyClass. To sue us for libel, the EnemyClass would have to prove that (1) it does not exist and has no agenda – difficult after it has spent to many years cheerfully and gleefully saying, very publicly, that that is what it is and is for, and (2) Rebekah Wade does not believe in promoting any of these objectives at all, even for one moment.

It’s time to defend the principle that any private individual, if successful enough, can own as much MSM as he can afford to. If he transmits stuff people want to watch, or prints stuff they want to read, and does not go bankrupt whilse so doing, then he should be uninterfered with by the StaliNaziState. If he “interferes with private communications” using the help of the Police (as is clearly what’s been going on here) then charges can be brought. But when the StaliNaziState proposes “breaking up the Murdoch Empire” and “regulation” (as it shortly will) then it’s time to buzz the tower.

Richard Blake and Roman Inflation

By Andy Duncan
http://thegodthatfailed.org/2011/07/15/richard-blake-lives/

If anyone is a regular listener to ‘Cobden Centre Radio’, they may have been surprised last week when its latest radio show, which starred Mr Richard Blake the best-selling author, was deleted from the site, after two days of being happily aired.

The reasons for this are far too dull and complicated to go into here, but fortunately, like the ghost of Vlad the Impaler revived by a single drop of blood, Mr Richard Blake is back, alive and well, and able to tell us about monetary inflation in the Roman empire.

If you’d like to listen to my interview with Richard Blake, just click here.

I would like to thank Michael J. McKay for this necessary drop of blood.

Rebekah Wade – a double agent for the Enemy Class…?

Michael Winning

Ive been following the Nwes of the World story a little bit slightly from the mountaintops. I find that the DD has got a conspiracy theory going. Not one for these me but it sounds plausible. Could the Rebekah Wade woman who has “form” for being leftyNazi in some ways, like wanting to trash the houses of people called paediatricins because she likes it if mobs go after people (its news), be a Enemy class pplant to ruin the Murdoch thing because he decided he hated the government in 2010 and upset Gordon bronw? And so then Cameron could not have the Murdoch channels here either properly, because the point is government and what it can do and how it has to stop cirticism?

How do we know that Cameron and his fellas don’t still dine in London with the Brown fellows. It all smells. And if someone was going to try to make channels which would be sort of tea party-ish, then the could nt allow it? Specially now when they are in their end-game.