Category Archives: Sex

For the Children… and the Adults


by Stewart Cowen
http://www.realstreet.co.uk/2014/07/for-the-children-and-the-adults
For the Children… and the Adults

Leg-iron tells us that Theresa May has announced that there is going to be an investigation into paedophilia, not just in Westminster,

To placate the masses, they are also going to investigate the NHS, the BBC and the Church (just the one religion, naturally) where they will find plenty of big name scapegoats to take the drones’ attention away from them.

It’s what they do. Like creating new Acts containing a variety of themes and hoping nobody notices the really intrusive or offensive part.

So yes, I’m sure this insider “enquiry” will find a few NHS doctors who have groped children and some more dead or aging weirdos employed by the BBC and some nonces-in-frocks in “the Church”. Continue reading

What They Got Wrong In The Rolf Harris Trial


James Knight

A very interesting, but highly contentious, issue reared its ugly head yesterday as Rolf Harris was convicted of 12 counts of indecent assault.

What’s extremely contentious about the outcome is that he was charged under the sexual offences Act of 1956, because the offences happened at a time of old legislation. Basically, if he’d have done the same things now he would have received a heftier sentence, because cultural evolution has shifted people’s perspective and tolerance on crimes like paedophilia, with penalties now being severer.

Having had a night’s sleep on this, I don’t think it’s right that someone should receive a shorter sentence that has been matched to the legislative time of the crime(s). It seems clear to me that past crimes should be penalised according to the present legislation (and I mean this generally speaking, not just taking into account Rolf Harris’s situation).

Given that legislative measures and acts of jurisprudence are built on a cultural evolution of the increased wisdom and revisions of human beings over time, I’m of the view that sentencing for any crime should be administered according to the legislation of the time of the trial, not the offence – otherwise it rather undermines the perceived wisdom that went into the revision processes of jurisprudence over time.

My friend Mark made an interesting point; he warned that it could set a dangerous precedent. He says: “If we raised the age of consent to 18 we could then punish all those who had sex at Continue reading

British State Invents New Kind Of Porn. (New Law, number 014/3429456-254ngj-ftry-78923)


David Davis

There are no comments allowed on the Daily ToryGraph, on this matter. But I said this on facebook   instead:-

It will be intriguing to see whether, when the law that will be drafted and passed (as you and I all know instinctively that it will be) it will also apply to women posting pictures of their ex-boyfriends…for example, “doing this or that”, or “wearing something from my lingerie-collection”, and so on, and so on.
I bet you all £5,000,000,000 (each) that it won’t. Only “women will be protected” by this new, groundbreaking and far-reaching rectification of a crying injustice emanating from Tory Cuts, and that tragically and psychologically affects and damages millions of British women every year”….

You see…I can bullshit all the politically-correct stuff with the best of the Frankfurt School themselves. In fact, I can simulate the stuff better than they can, like Michael Caine imitating himself. He even sounded better than he would if he was acting… As indeed he did once on the “live” wire-less Tele-vision.

You can take the bet or not as it pleases you. (Form an orderly queue to drop your bank-transfer-notifications into my hat when the time comes, plus any “bearer-bond” Gold-Deposit-certificates that you care to adduce as part-payments.

I feel pretty safe making that monetary estimate of my takings.

Since human beings are Free Individuals, with Free Will (given by God of course…) nobody can force them to be deliberately photographed in any sort of position or act whatsoever. If they did agree, then it’s their lookout. If they didn’t and the photos were “made”, then a different crime, already very well understood and legally covered, was simultaneously committed, and there is no need for a “new law”.

Meanwhile, in the half-light – to the left of and behind the enemies in front…


David Davis

It’s all very well to hail a small UKIP victory against the outer barbed-wire-entanglements of the British-Political EnemyClass. We know how to fight these people now, and in the fullness of time a regaining of a semblance of liberty is possible. Things can never be the same as they were, before the 20th/21st-century-Endarkenment irretrievably marred many things that were good.

But we might get them back to be better than now, although changed and glued together.

In the meantime there are some other really dangerous and wicked people out there, like this “Lierre Keith” impersonation of an evil droid in androgynous form from the Planet Tharg. It’s probabl that most of you people here know what’s going on in most Universities in the Anglosphere. For example, even in one famous and ancient Scottish University, about as far from London as it’s possible to get without falling off, there’s a module in the B.Mus. honours course covering “Music and Gender in contemporary society”.

A ray of dull sunshine is that this nonsense is probably not going on in universities in ChindoJapanIndonesIndoBrazilia: therefore it’s possible that some slight remnant  epiphanic  image of what Western Liberal Civilisation might have been like will be preserved.

Does it matter much if the LA blog is banned in Starbucks and people’s offices in large leftist corporations??


David Davis

I have read, indeed with some sadness, that the Director says that this blog is blocked in certain providers of “free wifi”. I doubt that this only because we show a couple of rather demure pictures of pretty young white women on our header photo. The Director thinks this is because of our, and our commenters’, use of naughty words.

There are no words naughty enough to convey the exasperation and – dare I say it? – sheer depression that comes over some of us, when we see the ongoing destruction of the entire civilisation that was kind enough to give birth to those that wish its death.

I do not know, but I believe that in many “firms” and “institutions” the use of the internet is very restricted anyway. A few years ago, I asked the Older Boy if as an experiment he could log onto the LA’s main site containing all our publications but not the blog, via school computers (this was a year-11 boy): he found that he could not.

The kinds of people that go to Starbucks to “use wifi” are probably not the sorts of people who we (a) either want to convert or (b) would even want themselves to give our worldview even a second of the time of day. Worse still are the ones with (a) no hand-luggage while also are (b)  knowingly carrying a cardboard coffeebucket about on the sidewalks of the the public roads.

On balance, I am not inclined to give in to these effing bastards. Once they have taken away the use of f***, c***, shitbag leftoid, scumbag fascist leftoNazi, GramscoFabiaNazi and the like from us, they will start taking other words from the hinterlands of these.

They stole “nigger” from the English Language last week while our backs were turned for five minutes: the scumbag thieving shoplifting moocher turds.

Subject nevertheless to a ruling in due course by the Director, I would say that I think we draw a line in the sand, and let them ban us.

The Chinese will be coming up with proxy-servers by which we can be accessed from universal wifi, which I am sure people’s phones etc will be able to get without having to lick Starbucks’ arses.

This is the last thing we’ll say about Max Clifford


David Davis

I couldn’t resist this. Mainly because I have read all or most of the works of the Director’s dear and close friend Richard Blake. Blake writes in clear and disconcertingly-real and presently-verifiable ways, about the duplicitous political-classes of the various nations in his stories. Today’s subject is not really Clifford but the British-PoliticalEnemyClass, and how it views its servants and running-dogs and the like.

I wrote on facebook and in GUIDO:-

http://order-order.com/2014/05/09/nonce-watch-clifford-to-be-transferred-today/
It’s interesting to have watched the slow-motion-traincrash of the BritishPolitical-EnemyClass, in the process of traincrashing one of their own creations in public.

Max Clifford’s “career” would not have existed in a classical-liberal-minimal-statist civilisation, in which was a high degree of citizen-curiosity and critical-analysis-ability of situations presented to them. Indeed, many such situations, such as “married footballist and “family-role-model” beds good-time-girl met in club” would not have _been_ presented to such a population: why? Because they would find it (a) unremarkable and (b) nobody else’s effing business, being a private matter between the footballist, his wife, and his pickup.

The pretty young woman, having had the footballist-family-man-and-role-model for-youth, for a little time, would have got nowhere in news terms, for nobody would give a stuff. Young footballist-males are chosen for their prowess on the “field”, which means also that, like Gladiators, they may well also have an insatiable appetite for pretty and submissive young women, to f***.

Islam may also have a take on this, but I cannot do it now here on this post, and that will wait for another time and an interpretation (carefully-guided by a “scholar” – I have one in tow for me to do it. He is a Hafiz, even – this one.) And it will be about what the Koran says about what gentlemen are allowed to do to ladies, and why, and under what conditions. (He’s memorised the entire Koran in at least one literary tradition: that is what “Hafiz” means.)

Therefore Clifford must have been created, as I argue on GUIDO (see paste below) to further the destroying-aims of the BritishPolitical-EnemyClass. To see them therefore trashing him is almost funny, if it was not terrifying. I think of the scene in the great arena in Continue reading

Thinking about witch-burning


David Davis

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/10571089/DJ-Dave-Lee-Travis-an-opportunist-who-assaulted-vulnerable-young-women-court-hears.html

It does not usually fall to me, to comment on such matters: this is because of today’s PuritaNazi “guilt by association” meme, as in what used to happen to people that even just _/looked at/_ Witches that were on their way to being burned.

I’m not sure that I ought even to be opening my mouth here, as any sort of comment can be so dangerous, and taken the wrong way can lead to death.

I’m hoping that I shan’t get dragged by the happily-screaming-mob into the fire-tumbril merely by referring obliquely to the bound-and-gagged man, as he is drawn past me on a ground-hurdle, spat on, and pelted with dogshit.

Being alive and a young man in the 1950s, 60 and 70s meant this thing, amoong others. You _knew_ (we all knew, we weren’t stupid you know) that to simply _be_ a disk-jockey, and (specially) _on the radio and the telly!_ was to be able to _get_ all the girls that you could possibly handle. They literally _threw themselves_ at these people. Being Men Of The World, we’d advise our teenage female counterparts “not to go with that fella” (I’m not implying here that it would have been Continue reading

Armoured Libraries and survival of culture and law


David Davis

Various prominent British libertarians seem now agreed that The Endarkenment approaches. The signs have been increasingly clear for some time. The fact that liberty is the mother of order and not its daughter is inconvenient for those that mean to boot the vast majority of Mankind – except themselves – backwards, cruelly, painfully and hard into pre-enlightenment misery, starvation, disease and servitude.

Being a scientist myself by training and thought-modes, and therefore by definition not an intellectual –  I have never figured out why humans get to want to bring about – and worse, specifically for others than themselves – what I described above.

It always seems after careful analysis of their plans, that they would like to visit upon the whole of humanity what Churchill described as “the torments that Dante reserved for the damned”.

[Incidentally, I think that "intellectual" (the noun) is is a mere imaginary literary concept, applied by primitive pre-scientific mystics to themselves and their friends who still work according to neolithic non-tribe-male-skull-crashing theories of how to behave towards others, and are driven by emotion and wishful thinking. This may become the subject of another discussion, but perhaps I may accidentally have defined "conservatives" as definitely not these people. We shall have to see, when I have time to try to write something again.]

Various commenters on recent postings here have said things like this, and this, and this. In the darkness however, someone said this, and Continue reading

Whither consent?


Writing in spiked! recently, barrister Barbara Hewson suggests that the age of consent for sexual activity should be restored to its pre-1885 position of 13.

Reducing the age of consent to 13 for all sexual acts would bring the UK in line with Spain, although Spain has a legal caveat that allows for prosecution where sexual consent is obtained by deception in the case of a person aged between 13 and 16. Until 1995, the age of consent in Spain was 12. Indeed, Britain’s age of consent is high by the standards of European countries, many of which have an age of consent for heterosexual acts of 14 or 15, although the age of consent for homosexual acts is not necessarily the same. Among other developed nations, Japan has an age of consent of 13, although this is subject to further restrictions.

An interesting note to this matter is that until 1993, English common law held that a boy under the age of 14 could not commit rape as a principal offender because he was irrebuttably presumed to be incapable of sexual intercourse. That a boy of that age is indeed so capable has been the subject of some publicity.

While there is some merit in arguing about the moral, physiological, emotional and cultural import of an age of consent, and the extent to which children need to be protected both from the attentions of adults and their peers, we should also consider all this in the context of what consent has come to mean in the implementation of the law. Consent is not, and never was, the same as a contract, whereby terms are mutually agreed and non-performance brings with it an entitlement to compensation. Rather, consent is a highly complex concept which is changing rapidly in its meaning. Continue reading

Should Page 3 Nudes be Banned?


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2012-11-05-porn-sig.mp3
Flash Animation

Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, speaking on BBC Radio Leeds on the 5th November 2012.

The question was whether newspapers should be banned from showing pictures of naked women for the tittilation of their readers – ie, “Page Three Girls” in The Sun.

Sean argues these points: Continue reading

What’s so Special about Buggery?


Note: A question worth asking is why organisations like Christian Voice always make a fuss about the texts in Leviticus and 1 Corinthians. Perhaps homosexuals are Hell-bound sinners. But what about the gigantic tax-gathering state that pulls millions of women out to work to maintain family living standards? What about the systematic denial of our divinely-sanctioned freedom to choose how we live? What about the evil social workers who take children away and sell them to childless couples? What about the morality, in Augustinian terms, of our current wars? What is it that makes buggery so uniquely mportant? SIG Continue reading

NCROPA on “Obscenity”


Note: Here is another document from NCROPA. The Libertarian Alliance sometimes does these responses to Government consultations, though never in such depth. I don’t think the past tweleve years have made the response obsolete. SIG Continue reading

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION BILL


Note: I have acquired a large number of unpublished writings from the late David Webb’s NCROPA (National Campaign for the Reform of the Obscene Publications Acts). I will upload these as often as I have time to spare. Here is a draft Bill from 1986. The schedule of repeal would need to be rather longer nowadays. But the Bill is a good template for anyone interested. SIG Continue reading

The “Football Association” is now a “Court” – official.


David Davis

A private “Sports Governing Body” (whatever that is for) has set itself up as a “Sondergericht”. It has issued a “judgement – a Fatwah, if you like –  and attached a “fine” – a strange sum: £220,000….Makes you wonder how it was arrived at? No?

When I’m Principal Secretary of State For War, in the Democratic-People’s-English Revolutionary-Liberalist-Party’s*** first government (minimal-statist, conservative, libertarian) private institutions that have previously and triumphalistically-set themselves up as “judges and juries” under the current climate of rampant GramscoFabiaNazism, will find themselves “under investigation”.

I do not believe in amnesties for socialist behaviour, adopted and deliberately pursued with malice-afforethought, and in the face of all empirical evidence that such behaviour was designed on purpose to kill, destroy the effective lives of or otherwise harm as many people as possible.

The FootBallAssociatioNazis will be “hauled in for questioning” by the War Secretariat’s “Operational Services Department Personnel (Domestic Division)”. A version of a reverse-PPI-Claim will be applied to their staffs, who will be “invited to re-imburse John Terry the sum of £220,000 plus interest plus 8% plus a “sum to be decreed” for “damages”.”

I said something similar on Facebook a couple of minutes ago. In case any blogreaders here can’t read Facebook, I have posted the text of my piece there:- Continue reading

Obituary: David Alec Webb, 1931-2012


Obituary,
David Alec Webb, Actor and Legal Reform Campaigner,
6th March 1931-30th June 2012
Prepared by Sean Gabb
First published in The Libertarian Enterprise

 

David Alec Webb, wit, raconteur, well-known actor on stage, screen and television, and tireless – and ultimately successful – opponent of the laws against pornography, died on the 30th June this year, at the age of 81

The son of a car worker, he was born in Luton in 1931. He attended LutonGrammar School, where he did well academically and became Head Boy. After national service in the Army Education Corps, where he became a sergeant, he got a scholarship to the Royal Academy of Dramatic Arts (RADA). From here, he embarked on a long and successful career that began on the West End stage, but soon migrated to television. He was a prominent character in the early days of Coronation Street. Worried about the dangers of typecasting, he soon moved on, and, between the 1960s and the beginning of the present century, made well over 700 appearances in television programmes. These included Upstairs, Downstairs, Randall and Hopkirk (Deceased), Tales of the Unexpected, Doctor Who, and The Avengers. He also found time for the cinema, appearing in, among much else, The Battle of Britain. In a profession which, notoriously, has an unemployment rate of 80 per cent, he was never out of work. Continue reading

England not the only country run by nutters


http://praguemonitor.com/2012/09/17/hard-liquor-ban-excessive-trade-association-says?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+PragueDailyMonitor+%28Prague+Daily+Monitor+-+all+stories%29

Note: Not fifty people down with methanol poisoning, and the authorities are banning strong drink across the whole Czech Republic. It’s like banning sex because a few people have caught the pox. It won’t work, of course. Like Slovakia, the country is awash in domestic slivovica. Since our own authorities are doubtless watching this exercise in prohibition, I call on the Czech people to respond as they always have to tyranny. SIG Continue reading

UKIP submission on gay marriage ‘consultation’


by Archbishop Cranmer

UKIP today submitted its response to the Government’s ‘consultation’ on plans to legislate for same-sex marriage. Despite the philosophical tensions (see here), UKIP oppose this legislation because ‘they believe that contrary to the hype it is illiberal legislation that threatens rather than enhances civil liberties’. The submission is reproduced below, but in summary UKIP believes: Continue reading

The Real Summit of the Americas Scandal


by Thomas Knapp
http://c4ss.org/?p=10160

To call the Summit of the Americas “prostitution scandal,” in which at least 23 US Secret Service and military personnel are now “implicated,” a tempest in a teapot is to vastly over-estimate its impact and importance. Continue reading

Nadine Dorries MP and the Quest for Sexual Abstinence


by Sean Gabb

I have just heard that Nadine Dorries has withdrawn her Sex Education (Required Content) Bill. If passed, this would have required schoolgirls to discuss abstinence in the classroom. The summary of the Bill taken from the UK Parliament website is as follows: Continue reading

Sex and Disease


by DJW

We keep reading stories of HIV positive men who infect large numbers of partners, but why is it up to the state to tell us what we should do in intimate contact? so what if the man (eg http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2046347/Monster-gave-HIV-left-life-sentence-says-mother-infected-man-slept-hundreds-women.html) was HIV+. The decision whether to wear rubber insulation was up to him and his sexual partners. And women who sleep with people they don’t know without marrying them first – well they are taking the risk. So what is the problem? What next? A law forbidden kissing when you have the common cold? I am totally opposed to the idea of “safe sex”. The real safe sex is sex between a man and his wife – and everything else includes risks of various types and that is all there is to it.

 

Peter Tatchell on Homosexual Marriage


Stonewall undermines campaign for gay marriage

Ben Summerskill suggests marriage equality would cost too much

London, UK – 21 September 2010

Ben Summerskill, the chief executive of Britain’s main gay lobby group, Stonewall, has reportedly defended his organisation’s refusal to campaign for marriage equality. He was speaking at the Liberal Democrat party conference LGBT fringe meeting on Monday night, 20 September.

Leading Lib Dems at the meeting – Stephen Gilbert MP, Evan Harris and equality minister, Lynne Featherstone MP – spoke out in favour of legalising same-sex marriage. Mr Summerskill did not. He explained why Stonewall was not campaigning on the issue.

According to a report on the Pink News website (copy below), he cited the cost of implementing marriage equality, which he claimed could total £5 billion – a figure that other campaigners question.

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/09/20/ben-summserskill-stonewall-opposed-to-gay-marriage-equality-because-it-will-cost-5-billion/

A recent online survey of LGBT readers by the Pink News website found that 98% want full marriage equality. Stonewall does not represent LGBT opinion on this issue. It is out of touch.

“Although Stonewall does a lot of valuable, important work, on this issue it is wrong,” said Peter Tatchell, human rights campaigner and spokesperson for the LGBT group OutRage!  

“It is, in effect, actively undermining the campaign for marriage equality.

“While many straight politicians now support same-sex civil marriage, Stonewall is refusing to campaign against the homophobic ban on gay and lesbian couples getting married. Among other reasons, it says equal marriage rights could cost £5 billion to implement.

“It is shocking to see a gay equality organisation declining to support equal rights legislation because it might cost too much. No other equality organisation makes equal human rights contingent on the cost. It is deplorable to insinuate that we can only have equality if it doesn’t cost too much.

“Where does Stonewall get this £5 billion figure from? If civil marriage and civil partnerships are the same, as Stonewall has always claimed, how could marriage equality cost more?

“Every other comparable LGBT organisation in the world is campaigning to end the ban on same-sex marriage, but not Stonewall. It is out of step with the British and global trend towards equal marriage rights,” said Mr Tatchell.

OutRage! has campaigned for marriage equality since 1992, when it launched the first UK challenge to the ban on same-sex marriage. Five lesbian and gay couples from OutRage! filed applications for gay marriage at Marylebone registry office in London on 19 March 1992. They were refused. But OutRage! has carried on the campaign ever since, and plans to file appeals against the ban to the European Court of Human Rights later this year.

PINK NEWS

Ben Summerskill: Stonewall not fighting for gay marriage equality because ‘it could cost  £5 billion’

PinkNews.co.uk · September 20, 2010

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/09/20/ben-summserskill-stonewall-opposed-to-gay-marriage-equality-because-it-will-cost-5-billion/

The chief executive of LGB lobby group Stonewall, Ben Summerskill, this evening told a fringe meeting at the Liberal Democrats party conference that the group is not actively campaigning for marriage equality because it would cost a staggering £5 billion to implement. The charity have been stonewalling questions on its exact position on marriage equality for some time.

Zoe O’Connell, who writes the Complicity blog, described the meeting: “Of all the bizarre places to come out against marriage equality, an event run in conjunction with DELGA, the Liberal Democrat LGBT organisation, would seem to be the most odd. But that’s just what Ben Summerskill, head of so-called ‘equality’ organisation Stonewall did today.”

All of the other speakers at the fringe event; Lynne Featherstone, the minister for equality; Evan Harris, president of Lib Dem LGBT group DELGA; and Stephen Gilbert, the Lib Dem MP who will tomorrow propose a motion in favour of marriage equality at conference, all said they support full LGBT marriage equality. Just Mr Summerskill spoke in opposition.

Last year, Mr Summerskill told PinkNews.co.uk “There are lots of lesbians who actually don’t want marriage”. But, last month, a survey for PinkNews.co.uk revealed that 98 per cent of the LGBT community favour full marriage equality. PinkNews.co.uk readers at the event report that Mr Summerskill claimed that it would be too expensive to introduce marriage equality because of increased pension payments to heterosexual couples who may theoretically wish to take up civil partnerships, if allowed. He claimed this would cost £5 billion.

After the debate, Mr Summerskill told a PinkNews.co.uk contributor who did not want
to be named that there was also the risk that straight, same sex, platonic friends might seek to have civil partnerships in order to make tax savings. Lib Dem MP Stephen Gilbert argued at the fringe meeting that marriage equality should not be subject to a cost/benefit analysis and claimed that if South Africa had adopted Stonewall’s approach, they would still have apartheid. Mr Summerskill reportedly labelled this view as offensive.

Mr Summerskill reportedly also offered the argument that there is a feminist view that the institute of marriage is fundamentally wrong. He also argued that for as long as people are being murdered in homophobic attacks, it is not the right time to campaign for marriage equality. Mr Gilbert responded saying that there is a need to send a clear message to those in society “that would try to discriminate that we are equal and we will not settle for any less than equality. As long as LGBT people are ‘othered’ in any way at all, attacks will continue.”

Mr Summerskill also accused PinkNews.co.uk of running an “unethical campaign” against Stonewall after it asked every LGBT rights organisation/ political group to outline their stance on marriage equality. Only Stonewall refused to answer.

Last Friday, Stonewall received an open letter signed by hundreds of people including two MEPs, two MPs and a number of human rights academics calling on them to clarify their position on marriage equality.

ENDS

Further information: Peter Tatchell 0207 403 1790

Far be it from me to point the accusing finger….


Sean Gabb

Of course, *IF* Mr Hague delights in a spot of bum fun – and I have no evidence whatever that he does – it’s hardly a sick bag matter. Certainly, it’s far less our concern than if he were flipping properties or otherwise fiddling his expenses. Indeed, the fact that he *MIGHT* have misled the public is of no consequence. When you have no right to ask a particular question, you have no reason to complain if you are not given a true answer.

No, what I dislike about William Hague is that he acted in 2001 *AS IF* he’d been bribed or blackmailed to throw the election, and he then somehow made millions for giving his crap speeches all over the place, and he appears to have been pushing like mad for support of British military involvement in America’s wars. He also helped stitch us up over the Lisbon referendum. All this is surely a product more of stupidity than of villainy. But I see no reason to think better of him for that.

If revelations that he has been more than “posing as a somdomite” are the only way of wiping that grin from his face, just watch how old-fashioned I can become!

Peter Tatchell on Marriage


Note: Peter Tatchell will be speaking at the Libertarian Alliance Conference, to be held in London on the 30th-31st October 2010. See the LA Website for details.

Having trouble viewing this email? Click here

Is marriage equality a priority?

Time to end the ban on same-sex marriage

London – 19 August 2010

A recent Pink News poll, found that 98% of its readers believe that civil partnerships are not enough. They want full same-sex civil marriage.

The main UK gay lobby group, Stonewall, does not call or campaign for marriage equality; claiming it is not a priority.

All other major LGBT groups oppose the ban on gay marriage and want registry office civil marriages to be open to all couples, without discrimination.

Peter Tatchell of OutRage! writes for Pink News

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/08/18/gay-rights-groups-set-out-positions-on-marriage-equality/

The main issue is not whether same-sex marriage is a priority but whether LGBT people should be banned from getting married. We should not be banned. Equality is the number one issue.

No LGBT organisation claiming to support equal rights should remain silent and inactive while we are denied the right to marry. Such outrageous homophobic discrimination must be challenged.

Campaigning for marriage equality does not preclude us from also campaigning against homophobic bullying or for LGBT asylum rights. It is not a case of having to choose one campaign over another. It is possible to simultaneously push for equality on several fronts.

Nor is the main issue whether same-sex marriage is a good thing. I share the feminist critique. Marriage has a history of sexism and patriarchy. I would not want to get married. But as a democrat and human rights defender, I support the right of other LGBTs to marry, if they wish. I resent the fact that people are deemed ineligible to marry, simply because they love a person of the same sex.

Every LGBT organisation should be publicly backing the right of lesbian and gay couples to get married in a registry office on exactly the same terms as heterosexual men and women.

Imagine the outcry if the government banned black couples from getting married and required them to register their relationships through a separate system of civil partnerships instead?

Most of us would condemn it as racist, to have separate laws for black and white people. We’d call it apartheid, like what used to exist in South Africa.

Well, black people are not banned from marriage but lesbian and gay couples are. We are fobbed off with civil partnerships.

Civil partnerships are not equality. They are a new form of discrimination. Separate is not equal.

In terms of law, civil partnerships are a form of sexual apartheid. They create a two-tier system of partnership recognition: one law for heterosexuals (civil marriage) and another law for same-sex couples (civil partnerships).

This perpetuates and extends discrimination. The homophobia of the ban on same-sex civil marriage is compounded by the heterophobia of the ban on opposite-sex civil partnerships. Just as a gay couple cannot have a civil marriage, a straight couple cannot have a civil partnership.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. In a democracy, we should all be equal before the law.

Note:

The views of other LGBT organisations and campaigners can be viewed here on the Pink News website:

http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2010/08/18/gay-rights-groups-set-out-positions-on-marriage-equality/

Britain’s main gay rights lobby group, Stonewall, declined to participate and was not willing to express its point of view.

DO NOT REPLY DIRECTLY TO THIS EMAIL

If you would like to contact Peter Tatchell, please email peter@petertatchell.net

http://www.petertatchell.net

You can follow Peter on Twitter at http://twitter.com/PeterTatchell or join the Peter Tatchell Human Rights Campaign Facebook group at http://tinyurl.com/cj9y6s

PETER TATCHELL HUMAN RIGHTS FUND (PTHRF)

Donations are requested to help fund Peter Tatchell’s campaigns promoting human rights, democracy, LGBT freedom and global justice.

Peter depends entirely on donations from supporters and well-wishers to finance his campaigns. Please donate generously to the PTHRF.

To make a donation via PayPal – or to download a donation form or a standing order mandate – go to Donations at: http://www.tatchellrightsfund.org/donations.htm

Please make cheques payable to: “Peter Tatchell Human Rights Fund”.

Send to: PTHRF, PO Box 35253, London E1 4YF

For information about Peter Tatchell’s campaigns: http://www.petertatchell.net

Forward email

This email was sent to seangabb@hotmail.com by humanrights2@petertatchell.net.
Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Email Marketing by

Peter Tatchell | can be contacted | in | London at | peter@petertatchell.net | United Kingdom

Worthless Pigs Lose Tiger Sex Case


Sean Gabb

If it has money to spend on mounting prosecutions this bizarre and malicious, the Crown Prosecution Service is surely overfunded and in need of a few cuts.

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/08/06/tiger_freed/

Dial 999 and Die…


Christopher Houseman

It’s good to know what Joe Public’s life is worth when duty calls

We can but hope this is an exceptional case; but then facing an imminent danger to one’s life is also pretty exceptional for most people. So the question remains: Are you sure you want to trust the Police to save you? It could be your final answer anyway.

Backlash Press Release: Tiger Porn defendant miscarriage of justice averted


 

Backlash Press Release: Tiger Porn defendant miscarriage of justice averted

By Nick | Published: May 28, 2010

BACKLASH PRESS RELEASE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE – 28 May 2010

“Tiger Porn defendant miscarriage of justice averted”

The sexual civil liberties organisation Backlash have assisted in
averting a miscarriage of justice.

Andrew Holland was charged with one count of possessing extreme
pornography under the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 at the
Mold Crown Court. He stood to be sentenced for the offence, having
pleaded guilty mid trial under advice from his local legal team in
Wrexham. Backlash contacted Holland to offer advice to discover that
he may have been misadvised by his local legal team; and that he did
in fact have a defence to the charge. Backlash provided funds for
provisional legal advice and research to be performed. We put Holland
in contact with our legal adviser, who is a solicitor specialising in
extreme pornography offences, Myles Jackman of Audu and Co in King’s
Cross, London.

Holland transferred representation to the specialist solicitors and
was given leave on Friday the 28th May 2010 by His Honour Judge Rogers
sitting at the Mold Crown Court to vacate his plea from Guilty back to
Not Guilty. That means that he will stand trial again; this time in
the knowledge that he has a defence. However, had he not contacted
Backlash in the first place he would have been sentenced for an
offence which he may have been misadvised that he did not have a
defence for.

Holland’s case gained notoriety as he had previously been charged with
a second, separate extreme pornography charge relating to a video clip
purportedly depicting a sexual act between a human and a tiger. This
charge was withdrawn when it was discovered that the prosecutor had
failed to listen to the video’s soundtrack, whererin one of the
“actors” made a comment about Tony the Tiger from the Frosties
commercials, proving the video was an elaborate joke and the tiger was
not real; leaving the prosecution deeply embarrassed.

Myles Jackman commented that: “it is ridiculous and dangerous that the
CPS are trying to criminalise the posession of dirty jokes”.

Please email for contact requests: info@backlash-uk.org.uk

Notes for Editors

1. Previous coverage of Mr Holland’s case can be found at

The Daily Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/6918001/Man-cleared-of-porn-
charge-after-tiger-sex-image-found-to-be-joke.html

And The Register: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/01/06/tiger_police/

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/03/22/six_second_clip/

2. Backlash is an umbrella organisation providing academic, legal and
campaigning resources defending freedom of sexual expression. We
support the rights of adults to participate in all consensual sexual
activities and to watch, read and create any fictional interpretation
of such in any media.

http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk

3. Section 63 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 bans the
possession of various ‘extreme images’ which can include faked images
and depictions of
adults engaging in consensual sexual activities. For details of the law
see:

http://www.backlash-uk.org.uk/wp/?page_id=7

Backlash Press Release: Tiger Porn defendant miscarriage of justice averted

Richard Littlejohn understands the GramscoFabiaNazi mind


David Davis

He has to: he must attend more than one drinks-potty a week with the bastards. But it does shine through.

Someone Thought This a Good Idea at the Time….


Sorry – I mean Chris Grayling


The names of these Tory MPs are unmemorable, and I can never tell their faces. However, it seems that The Observer recorded the Shadow Home Secretary making the perfectly reasonable point that bed and breakfast owners should not have to accommodate homosexual couples if that was their wish.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/uk_politics/8602371.stm

The idea that the great British public will be vomiting over their toast because some Tory politician hasn’t signed up to the full PC agenda is laughable. Unless the country really has gone mad, I don’t think there are more than a few thousand people in England who regard this sort of discrimination as evil.

I’d go further. Property owners should once again have the right to discriminate in any way they please – and without explanation. For details, see below….

I can’t be bothered to comment on the Damian Green “Scandal”, but here is an old news release


 

The Libertarian Alliance
NEWS RELEASE FROM THE LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE
In Association with the Libertarian International

Release Date: Thursday 25th January 2007
Release Time: Immediate
Contact Details:
Dr Sean Gabb (Director), 07956 472 199, sean@libertarian.co.uk
For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/news/nr047.htm
STATEMENT BY THE LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE ON ANTI-DISCRIMINATION LAWS
The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties policy institute, today issues the following statement on the legitimacy of anti-discrimination laws. This statement is prompted by the continuing debate over the Equality Act 2006, which allows the British Government to outlaw discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation.

Libertarian Alliance Director, Dr Sean Gabb, says:

"Every person has the right to life and justly-acquired property, and to do with his own whatever does not infringe the equal rights of others.

"From this primary right can be derived all the rights of the liberal tradition – freedom of expression and contract and association, together with security against oppressive or arbitrary behaviour by the State.

"It does not generate any right not to be hated or despised or shunned.

"It does not justify laws against discrimination on the grounds of race, sex, religion or sexual orientation, or laws against expressing or inciting hatred against any group.

"If someone chooses, for whatever reason, not to employ homosexuals because of their homosexuality – or not to rent property to them, or not to provide other paid services to them – that is his right within the liberal tradition. By such behaviour, he is not committing any aggression against others. He is merely exercising his right NOT to associate or NOT to contract. No one who is thereby refused suffers any harm that is, within the liberal tradition, to be considered actionable.

"The same reasoning fully applies to discrimination on the other grounds of race, sex and religion.

"By forcing people to associate with or contract with persons whom they would otherwise reject, anti-discrimination laws are an attack on life and property. They are a form of coerced association. They give some people uncompensated claims on others. They amount to a form of slavery mediated by the State.

"Politically correct authoritarians like to hail each new set of anti-discrimination laws as an extension of human rights. Such laws are in fact violations of the only human rights that mean anything.

"The Libertarian Alliance does not advocate or condone any act of discrimination, but defends the right of others to discriminate and to preach discrimination."

END OF STATEMENT

The Libertarian Alliance believes:

* That the Equality Act 2006 should be repealed, together with all delegated legislation made thereunder;:
* That the Commission for Equality and Human Rights set up under the above Act should be abolished at the first opportunity, and that all its records should be destroyed;
* That the records of the Equal Opportunities Commission, the Commission for Racial Equality, and the Disability Rights Commission should be destroyed;
* That those sections of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976, the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, and the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 not already repealed by the Equality Act 2006 should be immediately repealed;
* That any organisation arguing against the above should receive no public funding.

END OF COPY

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 http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk.

He can be contacted for further comment on 07956 472 199 or by email at sean@libertarian.co.uk
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 http://www.libertarian.co.uk
Our postal address is
The Libertarian Alliance
Suite 35
2 Lansdowne Row
Mayfair
London
W1J 6HL
Tel: 07956 472 199
Associated Organisations
The Libertarian International – http://www.libertarian.to – 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 – http://www.seangabb.co.uk – contains about a million words of writings on themes interesting to libertarians and conservatives.

Hampden Press – http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk.- the publishing house of the Libertarian Alliance.
Liberalia – http://www.liberalia.com – 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.

Libertarian Alliance News Release 47: 2 January 2007

Sean on Telly Yesterday


by Sean Gabb

Dear All,

I made a brief appearance yesterday on BBC1’s “The Big Question”, where I
argued that voting should not be made compulsory. Here is the relevant
footage: http://www.vimeo.com/10010978

On Saturday the 6th March 2010, I recorded a long interview with Al Gore’s
television station all about the decriminalisation of incest. Stand by for
news about where to find this.

Tomorrow morning, I shall be interviewed by BBC Radio Bristol about CCTV
cameras. I will upload the recording of this shortly after.

On the 17th March 2010, I shall be talking to Haberdashers’ Aske’s school
for boys all about libertarianism.

On the 24th April 2010, I shall be speaking at this event:

PUBLIC MEETING
FREE ADMISSION
Saturday 17th April 2010
2.30pm to 4.30pm

CARRS LANE CHURCH CENTRE
Carrs Lane, Birmingham B4 7SX
10 minutes walk from city centre New Street station.
See website http://www.carrslane.co.uk for directions

TIME FOR TRUTH
Who Speaks for the People of Britain?

In the Chair
GEORGE WEST
Chairman, Campaign for an Independent Britain

Speakers

Dr. SEAN GABB
Director The Libertarian Alliance

FIONA McEVOY
The Taxpayers Alliance, West Midlands

STUART NOTHOLT
Vice-Chairman Campaign for an Independent Britain & organiser of General
Election “Candidate 2010″

Published by The Campaign for an Independent Britain
http://www.eurosceptic.org.uk. For 35 years,CIB has led efforts to safeguard our
nation’s sovereignty. We are a democratic, independent and strictly
remaining a non-party political pressure group, supported by membership
subscriptions and donations from members of the public. Our objective is
Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union whilst maintaining trading
and friendly relations with other countries

. Enquiries 07092 857684

1959 conviction still haunts gay man seeking work – Yahoo! News


Sean Gabb says:

This is disgusting. No one should ever be punished for consensual activity. And a bad law is only half repealed when convictions under it are allowed to stay on the record.

John Crawford, 70,  poses for photograph at his home in central London, Tuesday,

AP – John Crawford, 70, poses for photograph at his home in central London, Tuesday, Feb. 16, 2010. Crawford …

By GREGORY KATZ, Associated Press Writer

Tue Feb 16, 12:51 pm ET

LONDON – He was convicted of a crime more than half a century ago, but what he did in 1959 — have consensual sex with another man — would be perfectly legal today.

So John Crawford, 70, wants his criminal record cleaned up for good, so that he doesn’t have to disclose his conviction when he seeks volunteer work, and because of a deeply held belief that he should not be punished for his sexual orientation.

“I came into this world without a criminal record and I’d like to leave this world without one,” said Crawford, a retired butler. “The police beat me and beat me and forced me to confess to being gay, but I know in my heart I did nothing wrong.”

Crawford’s bid to clean up his record is backed by gay organizations looking to help others who were convicted under Britain’s once draconian anti-homosexuality laws, which only began to be eased in 1967, as social values changed, and sex acts between consenting adults began to be decriminalized.

“These laws were homophobic in the first place: that’s why they were rescinded, but the laws are still penalizing people,” said Deborah Gold, director of Galop, a gay rights group that has helped Crawford. “We’ve always had a regular trickle of people asking about it, how to get their records cleaned up.”

She said Crawford suffered horrific treatment from the police and should not have to disclose his criminal conviction when seeking employment or volunteer work.

His lawyers wrote to Justice Secretary Jack Straw last week asking that the law be changed so that Crawford and others in his position would not have to disclose their convictions during the job interview process.

If no action is taken by March 12, attorneys will seek a formal judicial review because the policy is not compatible with the European Convention on Human Rights, said lawyer Anna Mazzola.

“John Crawford wants to do it, to change the law for other people,” she said. “Others are in exactly the same position. The justice secretary has the power to do this, without going through Parliament.”

Mazzola’s firm has also filed a freedom of information request for data about the number of people convicted of consensual sexual offenses that would now be legal.

“I think there are quite a lot,” she said.

Crawford’s legal campaign has already been productive. In response to a letter from his lawyers, police have removed the record of his conviction from the criminal database, meaning it will not turn up during a computerized criminal records search.

“We are very sympathetic to Mr. Crawford’s concerns,” said a Hampshire police spokesman, who asked not to be identified under department policy. “We recognize that this is an exceptional case and have acted quickly to resolve it.”

The spokesman said the conviction is no longer relevant and has been taken out of the Police National Computer database. The special ruling applies only to Crawford, however, not to other gay or bisexual men with similar offenses in their past.

This welcome decision removes one substantial obstacle Crawford faces in his retirement as he pursues voluntary positions, such as hospital work where he would be helping to feed ill people.

He is not satisfied, however, because he is still legally required to reveal the 1959 episode when asked if he has ever been convicted of any criminal offence. This happens frequently on questionnaires when applying for volunteer work with vulnerable persons.

“I think it’s ridiculous,” Crawford said.

His lingering anger comes in part from the humiliation he suffered at the hands of police officers in 1959. He said they abused him physically and harassed him with vulgar taunts, then coerced him into pleading guilty by threatening to continue beating him if he did not cooperate.

As a result of that plea, he said he was saddled with a conviction that would not have been possible otherwise, especially since he was not accused of having sex in public.

“I wanted to plead not guilty, and the case would have been thrown out and I wouldn’t be talking about it now,” Crawford said. “Until the police drop it completely, I won’t be happy. I’ve got to be able to put my hand on my heart and say to the world, I haven’t got a criminal record, and I can’t say that now.”

1959 conviction still haunts gay man seeking work – Yahoo! News

The Lisbon Law: Now Hague says it too


David Davis

As Michael has observed here, it’s time to attack the Tories. We know Labour’s going to rig the election and get in again, so we might as well have fun trashing the Conservatives while the GramscoFabiaNazis still allow them to exist and “sit in Parliament”, as opposed to in a Gulag. If you sup with GFNs, you ought to have used a long spoon some time ago.

It makes you wonder: is it better to endure yet more years of ZanuLieBorg until 2015, knowing things will get rapidly even worse then they are now, ushering in full ID-carding-and-databasing, followed by allowing exit-visas only for trusties who have got lots of state-robbed cash: and which may cause a bloody revolution? Or perhaps to allow the Tories into government, assuming the Labour-election-rigging is not successful enough,  only to have these terrible things happen but just more slowly?

What ought a man to do? I mean not just for personal survival, but for those who may come after us in later centuries, and who will wonder why we allowed this to happen? Is the game still worth the candle, to try, again and again and again, to educate large numbers of people about individual liberty, or is it too late? Should we just concentrat instead on erasing the Enemy Class, if we can’t now force it to do what is right?

Clearly, food, fuels and electricity will cease to be in universal distribution to the extents that we have been used to under a moderately free economy. But we can mitigate this by returning in part to a kind of hybrid-post-pastoralist/part-industrial-manqué system: whereby those who can, will be mentoring and looking after others by teaching some basic but useful survival-skills and almost-forgotten crafts. In return obviously for something, maybe labour. Not at all what the Enemy Class was thinking I’m sure. Perhaps people with useful-survival-knowledge will be regarded as dangerous, and will be witch-hunted?

But I’m not saying you ought to stockpile tinned food yet. Petrol, maybe, and diesel, and sugar and salt perhaps, and stuff like plasters and medicines. Oh, and light-emitting diodes – those nice Chinese 20,000-millicandela, ultrabrite jobbies as we can probably rustle up enough chicken-shit each day to power some of those. 3.3v @ about 20mA typically, so a generator to charge a car-battery should keep series-strings of five each (at a full charge of 13,2v) going for years.

And we should re-learn practical coal mining.

It does not matter….


that there is no “distributor” for this film, in the USA.

David Davis

Why do I say that? Because, with today’s internet-thingy attached to you, as you can do now, anyone with any mind so to do can view any prog, watch any film, see any page, find anything,  if he has a mind to and knows what to type.

The USA is what Tony Blair referred to (a-propos of us here in the UK) as a “YOUNG COUNTRY”. As with teenagers in all time and everywhere, opinions in this straneg place called a “young country” are often strongly-held. The disagreement about them if any engenders strong feelings, and the logical basis for the more emotional ones, in particlar, is potentially – although not always – unsound. The tragically-mistaken hypothesis of “creationism” is one such. In young nations and young civilisations, people who know what they believe will believe it with ferocity. Especially in places where there is a lot of space around you physically – coming across strangers who will disagree intellectually (and with evidence to support them which they have about their persons) will be rarer than, say, in London.

That said, I do not believe that the creationist error tendency, in the USA, is or would be as strong in opposing the screening of a movie, a mere movie, as is feared. I do not think that cinemas would be burned down, for example. Nor do I think that the great movie-making installations of Hollywood over there, or Pinewood over here, nor the actual location-sets as used, would be assaulted by enraged bands of creationist Christians, or even Moslems – they too have a creationist religious legend, insofar as they might be termed a religion. Furthermore, history has shown, in particular recently, that it is physically safe to insult and offend Christians. This also is an innately bad thing, but it is a fact.

To me as a scientist (who believes in a God who represents and probably did conceive the indescribable level of Order and Logic observable in all the Universe) the creationist diversion is a tragic travesty of science, and indeed even a perversion thereof. It tragically deflects Man’s mind and inquisitiveness away from things that badly need understanding and rationalisting. If God “was Order”, and “in the beginning there was Order” (Λογος) as it says in the least-bad translation of 1. John (i) that we possess, then there is no requirement whatsoever for Him to have voluntarily sat down to “create” anything at all. He just “was” (and is, and will be always) and what was in His Mind would simply come into being in the same way.

For a scientist, to associate poor devout and fairly-far-seeing Darwin with Eugenicists, Nazis, sterilisers, Stalinists, people like Houston Stuart Chamberlain, creators of Frankensteinian monsters and the like, is a travesty of real science. Darwin was a kind, gentle and humane man, who did not even want to hurt worms if he could help it, and who never used the phrase “survival of the fittest”. If that is the implication of what eugenic socialists said he said, it is unjust.

Libertarians no more want to harm people who are perhaps less able to compete in a civilisation than others, than darwin wanted to harm living creatures. Indeed, Sean Gabb and I often say that it will be necessary to continue a publicly-funded NHS for example, for some time which might be long, even if a libertarian government were to come to power in the UK.

The Backlash Campaign: Defending S&M is Defending Individual Freedom, by Nigel Meek


Sean Gabb

The Backlash Campaign: Defending S&M is Defending Individual Freedom
Nigel Meek

Cultural Notes No. 53
ISSN 0267-677X                   ISBN 1 85637 647 8
An occasional publication of the Libertarian Alliance,
Suite 35, 2 Lansdowne Row, Mayfair, London W1J 6HL.
© 2007: Libertarian Alliance; Nigel Meek

Nigel Meek is the Editorial and Membership Director of the Libertarian Alliance and the Society for Individual Freedom and the Editor of the Campaign Against Censorship.  This essay first appeared in the February 2006 issue of The Individual, the journal of the Society for Individual Freedom.  Thanks to Ted Goodman (CAC) and Christian Michel (LA) for their comments on a draft of that essay.
.
The views expressed in this publication are those of its author, and not necessarily those of the Libertarian Alliance, its Committee,
Advisory Council or subscribers.
FOR LIFE, LIBERTY AND PROPERTY

An Introduction to Backlash

On behalf of a number of organisations—the Society for Individual Freedom (SIF), the Libertarian Alliance (LA) and the Campaign Against Censorship (CAC)—in the latter half of 2005 I became involved in the Backlash campaign.  This was formed in response to a joint Home Office and Scottish Executive consultation document On the possession of extreme pornographic material (to quote from the document) “proposing to strengthen the criminal law in respect of possession of a limited category of extreme material featuring adults.”  Primarily, if not exclusively, “extreme material” refers to pornographic images of a sado-masochistic (S&M) nature.

Nominally at least, these proposals came as a result of a campaign led by the mother of a woman who had been murdered by a man who had visited websites featuring asphyxiation.  This was an appalling crime.  However, what we have seen is a knee-jerk reaction of “something must be done” allied with the mistaken beliefs that (a) people are not and cannot be personally responsible for their actions and (b) if only we have enough laws we can legislate away the wickedness of this world.

S&M is not my cup of tea, although I am sufficiently worldly-wise to have a genuine knowledge of what is sometimes involved.  In any case, as a libertarian I utterly condemn any restrictions on the creation, distribution and possession by willing adults for willing adults of “extreme pornographic material”.  What consenting adult men and women, in any combination of sex, sexuality and numbers, get up to in private is none of my business.  And it is none of yours.  And it is certainly none of the state’s.  Furthermore, if we accept this, then logically there cannot be anything wrong in photographing or videoing such activities and then passing them on to other consenting adults whether free or commercially.

As the Backlash mission statement says, “Law enforcement agencies around the world already have powers to prevent and punish actual crimes…  We condemn any acts where the participants did not give their consent.  Viewers should not be penalised for looking at… images of consenting actors.”  Quite.

Formal responses to the consultation document such as the one prepared by the CAC were constrained by the document itself.  However, going into a little more detail, there are numerous reasons why I support the Backlash campaign and why I believe that other members of the SIF should do so too.  Here are some of them.

The Ongoing Assault on Freedom of Speech

I would support the Backlash campaign even if it stood alone.  But it does not.  2005 witnessed a frenzy of censoriousness from the Labour government.  Even before the proposals that sparked off Backlash there was the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill.  Whatever its alleged aims, in reality it was a transparent attempt by Labour to recapture “the Moslem vote” that may have been lost due to aspects of the government’s foreign policy.  However, it also means the prospect of individuals being convicted—or cowed into silence by the risk of being convicted—for pointing out that some religious beliefs and practices are vile and wholly incompatible with the mores of Western society.  Ask Theo van Gogh, the Dutch film-maker who was murdered in November 2004 after his film Submission highlighted the abuse of women in Islamic society.

We also had the Terrorism Bill which has, as but one of its proposals, the ludicrous aim of outlawing “glorifying terrorism”.  This could mean that almost any strongly expressed ideological view would be illegal if anyone else anywhere in the world uses violence in support on that ideology: democracy in Zimbabwe, for example.

But we should not be surprised.  After all, “New” Labour is the party that made the fascistic claim in its 1997 general election manifesto that it was “the political arm of none other than the British people as a whole”.  Having won on such a terrifying platform, nearly a decade down the line we live in a country where “insulting” the Prime Minister by wearing an admittedly childish “Bollocks to Blair” t-shirt can get you arrested.

Having mentioned the relevant provisions of the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill and the Terrorism Bill, there is the obvious point about consistency.  It is intellectually and tactically right and more persuasive to oppose

Continue reading

Food rationing coming soon: it will be called “choice-editing”.


David Davis

They’re after your children again.

Has nobody among these GramscoFabiaNazi “researchers” considered that children need to be fat in places like Stockton-on-Tees, because it’s effing cold a lot of the time? (So your children can, indeed must, be fat, or they will be uncomfortable.)

And that in wealthy, hot Sussex, way-down south of here, it’s just, well, hot? (So your children can, indeed must, be thin, or they will be uncomfortable.) They have successful vineyards, for f***’s sake.

Anyway, those effete southerners are too close to all those “Haute Couture” designers in strange places like London and Paris who seem to think all humans ought to be 3-meter-high-skeletal boys with a scowl, so they probably get to like thin children…

And of course, picking and treading the Sussex grapes, for the Political-Enemy-Superclass to crow about in venezuela and Cuba, in the traditional pre-capitalist-barbarian grape-treading-manner, gets you fit and thin.

Libertarian Alliance Quote of the Day


David Davis

Brought to you by the tender ministrations of “Little Frigging in the Wold“….

“It begins, slowly rising out of the swamp like a lawyer at dawn. We clutch our poking sticks to our chests in trepidation as the vague shape stumbles out of the mists towards us. Then, as the features of this unknown beast resolve themselves out of the heavy mists hanging over the swamp…”

Read the whole thing, it is teh funneh (as Obnoxio would say.)

Attack the System » Blog Archive » Program for a fictional ARV-ATS Scholars Conference


Attack the System » Blog Archive » Program for a fictional ARV-ATS Scholars Conference

Sean Gabb

This would be an interesting conference to attend, if exhausting.

The most pretentious, inconsequential twaddle that you shall read all week is…


here.

David Davis

How can one get a job, for example, as a “trainee economic consultant” – and no, I did  __not__  make that up – as a “graduate”, straight out of “uni”? (It’s where I presume he came from?)

The idea of training to be a consultant is surely tautological.

I’m quite sure that I do not need to explain that remark.

A libertarian society may possibly have niches in which like-minded-people can dress up as consultants, and pretend to extract very very large, standard-form-quantities of money from passers-by, as “fees”, at fairgrounds and church fêtes and village-parades/carnivals and the like.

But I’m not sure there’d be very much room for these in the coal-face-sections of a civilisation.

MPs and expenses… Lavoisier was beheaded for less than this. Should we be happy or sad?


David Davis

How is it possible to overclaim for tax paid, whe you, er, had to pay tax?

I am beginning to be not able to figure out quite what these people think they are entitled to.

MPs and social death: how many more?


David Davis

One has to wonder who’d want to be an MP these days, after all the moolah-hoo-hah. Certainly Geoff Hoon, whose name has spawned a new pejorative (I always said – from 200 onwards – how could one give a job to someone called Hoon? It, the act of hiring someone called that, defied logic and rationality) and Alastair “Eyebrows” Darling, would want to hang their heads for the rest of their lives at Toynbee Hall.

Perhaps there were fault-lines in the “system”? Or perhaps there were not, and someone clever went along and told all these guys what they could do, and get away with? But either way, the MPs set it up themselves.

I don’t think MPs ought to be paid. Anything. Nothing at all. Then we’ll only get the right type. Prince Philip would do, so long as he agreed to spank Charles every day thereafter, for gassing on mindlessly and hysterically about the rainforest.

Oh, and as I am an upside-down-Gramscian, lefty pop singers and their wives, and anybody at all who supports AGW, need not be selected either. Given the choice, Constituency Associations, who would have to be either shopkeepers, or any other sort of Masterless Men, would probably give them a wide berth naturally.

Money or sex, it’s all the same thing…or is it?


David Davis

When young, I used to half-joke, but only half joke, about this. It was that whereas “Tories” were always found with their trousers down while shagging the wrong girls (and resigned promptly) and “Liberals” did boys (and sort of half-resigned), socialists on the other hand had other interests. They were always found with their hands in the till, and didn’t resign. (Remember people like Lord Kagan, Poulson etc?)

It seems they still don’t resign.  Instead, they “fight for their political life” (I bet they do) and are said to be “doing a good job in government”.

Makes you wonder what the course of British politics would have been if, say, John Profumo, Lord Lambton or Cecil Parkinson had “fought for their political lives”. Personally, I’d have shagged a young Christine Keeler within about 90 seconds if she’d been offered, and probably continued to keep quiet about it, since in those days tarts didn’t understand how to go to the dead-tree-press and kiss-and-tell, and Max Clifford had not been invented. I have no clue whether Profumo was a “good” “secretary for war” or not: perhaps someone could enlighten me here. But he was probably no worse than any of the other various incompetent nonentities we’ve had, and all he got was sex, and a public drubbing for admitting it.

Sean Gabb is inclined to be lenient with NewLabour expenses-shysters. He thinks there should be a “committee of truth and reconciliation”, at which, if all these lefty buggers freely admit what they’ve pinched, and apologise publicly, they will be allowed to keep their pensions, and possibly the money and houses too. 

I’m not so sure, me. Being lenient with these people “sends the wrong message”: we must show, to the whole world, that socialism, like crime, does not pay, and that their sins will find them out. we don’t want after all, to keep having to go through these periodic generational torments, in which we think we’ve expunged socialism as a credible meme, only to find it’s got back worse than before, like Ground Elder.

For the children, literally.

The Last Ditch thinks his smile is as fresh as ice.

UK General election called – stop press Drudge Guido Iain Dale Huffington Landed Underclass Devil


David Davis

That got you. Yes. But sadly,

…there’s no UK election. Sorry. Go back to bed.

We are currently, for foreign readers who live in sunnier climes and more benign polities such as Venezuela or Russia, and who don’t know what it’s like here,  living under an administration which has done these things as follows:-

(1) Deliberately gone about the stealthy and also overt destruction of lots of free voluntary institutions which “represented the forces of conservatism” (such as firms, schools, charities,  local festivals, the Scouts, youth clubs, food hygiene, how people joke with each other in private, and the like)

(2) Deliberately monkeyed with the “constitution”, whatever that may have been, so as to change the sort of polity we are for ever (they did not have a mandate “for ever”)

(3) Handed over whatever “sovereignty” Parliament had in 1997, to the EU, a phantasmal construction in the minds of fascists, which   __/was specifically designed to undo totally, in time, /__   the work of the Anglosphere Coalition in Europe, between 1813 and 1945,

(4) Deliberately card-sharped the constituency boundaries so that any other party would have to win about 70% of the vote to get an overall majority in the Commons (they’d have done more but just could not get away with it)

(5) Deliberately destroyed what was left of sensible, hard (which is to say “crunchy” or containing stuff you’d want and need to know about in order to understand the Universe or to get empoyed by someone other than a quango) interesting and rigorous curricula in education, so as to create on purpose a very very very large class of uncritical persons, who watch “BBC TV News”, and “Big Brother” and believe what the variously featured ephemeradroids say.

The MSM is saying increasingly that this government is inept and cack-handed. Here’s an example from Simon Heffer, an angry old red-haired-man who has better credentials to be a liberal Prime Minister than Gordon Brown, Tony Blair, John Major or Michael Heseltine (remember – we nearly got saddled with that bugger with hair, over Westland and other matters – anybody remember what Westland did, or might now do?)

The Libertarian Alliance thinks that it does not matter if there is an election now, later or at any time in the forseeable future. The point of elections is now lost on many people, who also now face different problems from those that governments think they ought to solve. If there was an election now, which Gordon Brown might call in return for an hereditary-Vicountcy later, then either ZanuLieBorg will win slightly owing to the monkeying and falsifying with postal votes which it will certainly indulge in as it is their right so to do as taught by Al Gore their hero,  or else David Cameron will slilghtly win with about 13 seats, which means he can’t do anything, much, to undo the Police state created by his predecessor.

This is because the ZanuLieBorg government of the UK right now is not at all cack-handed. It knows, has known and will [as neither we nor anybody else civilised will expunge it properly] know, even after defeat at any election it can’t rig and when it is temprarily not called the “government”, exactly what it’s been doing for decades, if not at least a century, and why. GramscoMarxiaNazis, and their clone [singular as is proper] the GramscoFabiaNazis, will continue to operate in the shadows, under cover of academia and quangocracy. We shall not “service” them, nor even “re-educate” them or “re-settle” them, because we have nailed our colours to the mast and said that we agree that they have rights to express their views. These they will express, you bet 50p.

But in the end, we have to decide what to do. The threats to liberty will not just go away because a more “ept” crew of inept statists such as the Tories gets to be allowed to take over, for a bit. Individual liberty will still roll slowly and sadly downhill, to the cesspool ultimately.

Libertarians ought to start thinking about what to do about the sort of people whose individual freedom to upend mass liberty they defend right now, and who, in the end, may not be able to be persuaded to come onside. As Auberon Waugh would have said … “I’m not saying yet that we should pack them in fours in white W-reg Vauxhall Astras and propel them over Beachy Head” … but…

…what safe jobs could they be allowed to do in a Libertarian polity, so that they can’t get the even potential ability to destroy it? They certainly can’t mind their own lives being controlled in this way, since they have been advocating it for all others, all of their lives, so they need not be consulted. But it is a problem that troubles me.

Help, anybody?

Shotsmag Reviews -Conspiracies of Rome


 

Shotsmag Reviews -Conspiracies of Rome

CONSPIRACIES OF ROME

Richard Blake

Hodder, pbk
Feb 2008 £7.99
Reviewer L J Hurst

No matter what condition it is in, or which enemy might be knocking at the door, there always is and has been backstabbing going on in Rome. For the thriller writer the question has to be, when? Is it the Rome of the late Republic, or the early Empire? The Rome of the Middle Ages or the Rome of today? Rome has managed to be the same and yet different in every period. Richard Blake has found another of those Romes: that of 607 AD. Christianity has been established across the remains of the Empire, but the Empire itself is split into two, with the Emperor resident in Constantinople, while the Lombards have a kingdom of their own to the north of the Alps, and follow the Arian heresy rather the rule of the Pope.
In England, the Pope is still hoping to make angels of the Angles: Aelric is one of them, in theory a member of the conquering ruling class, whose relatives are ending unhappily, and whose attempts to make another life for himself in the Church are spoiled by his taste for young ladies. Not a wise move when those ladies might have fathers in power. Aelric and his church master, Maximin, manage to be sent on a mission to Rome, in theory to bring back Christian scripture and classic literature, though this is also convenient for Aelric as one of his ladies has fallen pregnant. Aelric, events are to prove, is a something of a picaro, an early Flashman.
Rome from a distance looks like the true Christian city on a hill, closer Aerlic finds it is a ruin above broken sewers. Drainholes might be blocked, they might have collapsed, they might allow bodies to be dumped within them. One morning, not long the priest and his acolyte arrive with some gold acquired unusually on their way, Aelric finds the body of his old master, stabbed and battered, victim of perhaps not one but two assaults. Aelric realises that the authorities are unlikely to find the murderers very soon and begins his own investigations. He is fortunate to have the help of one of the last members of the Roman aristocracy; he is lest fortunate to share Lucius’s sexual and pagan activities, which could lead to a heretic’s end. Aelric cannot stop himself, though, it seems.
Richard Blake has found a period rich in opportunities for murder, theft, even share and banking fraud. The Empire and the Papacy do not have common interests, nor do the slaves who still staff the civil service, and the barbarian tribes are learning to use more civilised methods to achieve their aims, as Aelric discovers when he intercepts an encrypted letter. His doubts about what he could do with the knowledge, though, are just another thread in Richard Blake’s tapestry of plot, cunning and brutal death that will move to Constantinople in the next book*. Look out for the series.
* The Terror of Constantinople (Feb 2009 Hbk £19.99)

DID Labour try to keep Guido off the BBC? I thought it was a !public service! broadcaster


David Davis

Obviously not.

I wonder why not?

Paul Staines – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Sean Gabb

Paul Staines – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Guido Fawkes, never let it be forgotten, is one of us.

The video he linked to this morning, from some people called “don’t panic”, is humorous:-

If he showed it, he’d get poison-umbrella-tipped –  but we can put it up.

Nightjack is shutting shop, but there’s still lots to say


David Davis

There are, some say, 130 million blogs. I have no idea, and it doesn’t matter really, for 129,900,000 are read by one person a day, and you can guess who. I don’t even bother with “David Davis” and “Ordure! Ordure!” – not yet anyway, for I write nothing there at this time, being busy enough with this one. (We do try to think about what to write, you know.)

But via The Landed Underclass, our primary eyes and ears in the foremast director position, for he spends much time there, and from whom we learned first I think about Nightjack. Nightjack states that he now has said everything he thinks he ought to, and has other plans, such as a book which is fair enough – he does have a job to hold down too.

Says Nightjack:-

It is still fun but  I have now written  down everything that I think is worth me writing. In some areas I am conscious that I am starting to repeat myself.  If I keep on going I believe that I will end up spending the next year or so attack blogging the government rather than blogging about policing.  I don’t want to be all about that. There are plenty of other people doing that better already.

But, attack-blogging the government will provide everyone who wants to, and more besides, with more than enough material, almost for ever….sadly. In an ideal world, none of us liberal blggers would need to do what we do: we could become rich instead by selling things people want to buy, such as electricity, burgers deep-fried in goose-fat, tungsten, cars, steel, space-rockets, cigarettes, and sex. Furthermore, if we do not attack-blog the government, stridently, enthusiastically and with relentless ferocity, then it and lookers-on will start to think that it is winning, and we are losing heart.

Governments know, with perfect clarity, what they are doing, and they are doing it all, without exception, on purpose. They are composed of GramscoFabiaNazis, which is the sort of person who wants to be a GoverNazi – and that’s it, just it.  And thus everything is pre-planned and pre-agreed by them, from the first places where they meet each other: for these are astonishingly bright people we are up against, and not only that, but they have been to the finest education establishments you can buy, and have met each other and have been Eagletonized, and vulcanised, to (jack)boot (sorry.).  

For example, there was no “mistake” or “oversight”, or “error”, on the part of the husband of “Jacqui” “Smith”, a “Bair Babe”,  in claiming for whatever passed as “pornography”: it was claimed for deliberately, to check if it would get through, so that other MPs would know thereafter that they could do it also, and that this sort of expense would pass. There is no other reason – as the bugger is the Home Secretary, and his wife the “Bair Babe” sits in Parliament and does his wishes, this must have been the plan.

Nightjack’s loss to us in The Line is sad: his perspective as a proper Serving Police Officer was useful and illuminating, but his ceasing to write will not be a disaster. Others will come. But if you have any favourite Nightjack posts, I guess you’d better copy-paste them down to your Type Writing Machine as soon as you can, for as he says, his blog will self-destruct in not many days, as they do.

Electronic search terms;

Babes; Blair; parliament; guy fawkes; police; right to roam; farming; common fisheries policy; silver iodide; rain; acid; road access; education;

It’s seven minutes into Earth Hour, so we have turned on all the lights.


I hope you have too.

David Davis

Very bad NASA satellite launch failure…..why?


…because we will not now get the truth in time.

David Davis

The global-climate-change-Gramsco-MarxiaNazi-buggers, and their   _very_   close friends who are the starvation-driving-mass-people-slaughterers, will not now be faced with the evidence – which is that Man is   _not_   causing “global warming”. Thye have cleverly scuppered the satellite – and can simultaneously discredit what ordinary people call “rocket-science”….so that it’s for them a “one-stone-solution to a two-bird problem”.

As regards rocket-science, they will be able to sya how inept we all are, and should stay here and subsistence-farm with chicken manure and stuff.

As regards “global warming”, they will be able to say that “the Science” is “still settled”, for there is still “no” evidence for their hypothesis being proved not to be true.

See?

Simple really.

You just do the insurance-equivalent of setting your car on fire, to claim the dosh and pretend it was all right anyway.

A reminder about what Keeley Hazell doesn’t want you to undergo


Here.

If you have arrived here by accident on a google-search, being a young white man with no hair (WHY the f*** do you all have no hair? It makes you look to the left as if yoo wozz Nazis) who wants a shag with a beautiful girl, we can’t provide it.

Sorry.

But we CAN tell you why your government is a rotten load of Nazi scumbags headed by “Jacqui” “Smith”,  of Hertford College, Oxford University, (not Oxford Brookes, sadly, which pretends to be, wish she’d come from there instead) the “second-home-secretary” (not Gordon Brown, he can’t see, and so he can’t type, and so he can’t be in charge), and who want your DNA if you own a white W-reg Vauxhall Corsa, have no hair, and want a shag, and if you live in High Park.

You’d better ask where High Park is, next. It is where the burgulators burgulate from.