Had a hard day on the farm todasy, so here’s some light reliefe.
As Dr Sean Gabb has often said, the EU is “a” problem, but it is not perhaps the “real” problem.
It is however very true to say that the EU does make our lives more difficult, for that is its stated objective: but the “continental nations” have found ways around that strategy, like outright disobedience at all levels of their societies. For example, you may buy stuff in Pounds and Ounces in French village markets: you may also decide not to observe slaughterhouse regulations in Spain or Greece, if it is not fully convenient on that day so to do….or you may decide to use a pipe-cleaner as a nursery-toy in Italy or Germany, for this is what the project requires, or you can do a traditional festival exactly as unsafely as it was intended, such as again in Spain or Sicily…the Health and safety inspectors are eminently bribable to go away and say nought.
This is something which sadly we English shall have to as a nation re-learn, having spent 14 centuries trying to eradicate it from our Body-Politic, so as to elevate as a principle The Rule Of Law.
The Rule of Law is not, unfortunately, understood by wannabe-green-subsistence-farmer-pre-capitalist-barbarians. These latter droids, horrible-to-relate, exist in vast amounts _/spcecifially inside the UK/_ inside the upper and middle-layers of our neo-Maoist bureaucracy, created in our Universities on purpose while our backs were turned.
The EU could be expelled from at least England, tomorrow, by the act of England leaving the UK, which would of course automatically invalidate ROME, the SEA, Maastricht, Nice and Lisbon not to mention others. Think about this as an interesting strategy…it would at once solve the problem of England, which generates about 90% of the tax-revenue-stream of the UK, while getting the benefit of about 12% of that. It would also concentrate wonderfully the minds of the leftist Nazi caucuses which purport to run the celtic-fringe-governed “nations”: they would be on their own. We could “give them the oil”, if they want, it would not matter either way by then. We can buy oil from Russia, which is temporarily (but not in the long term, so we should beware after about 2014) bust.
But our Atomic-SuM-Barines and Tornados would automatically withdraw from Faslane, Lossiemouth etc, for then the chaps in HolyRood House and Cardiff will be able to, and will want to, call on FranscoGerman and Soviet protection instead. We shall of course take all our warheads with us, as they represent “pollution”. I as “Foreign and War Secretary” in a libertarian government in the UK, would see to it that we had lots of these – in charge of course of de-statising “education” as I also would be.
The strategic problem faced by England lies in the hearts and minds of the droids who currently work for “the State” here in England. They are not England’s friend, for they subsist by stealing monies from English people, so as to “do jobs” that the majority of Engllish People do not regard as needing to be done.
“Immigrants” are not really the problem: they are only here because so many, many English people have become “State Droids” that there are not enough droids to do the following things. Things like cleaning the toilets in private firms and in motorway-services, repairing pipes and drains on sewage farms, digging holes, ploughing fields in the greatest Mechanised Farm In the History Of The World, killing badgers that have TB and thus poison other people’s cows next door, filling shelves in Tesco, and the like.
“Immigrants” have been brought in to (1) “rub the noses of the >right< in diversity” (the enemy has said so quite cheerfully in documents) and (2) to do the jobs that the bureaucrats now can’t do or don’t want to, and (3) to prop up the gramscoNazi vote. Immigrants themselves are thus victims of neo-leftist-anti-liberal-anti-British-leftism, and ought to be pitied, for there is now nowhere for them to hide, neither from their enemies and ours, unless they become really British (and so disappear culturally, like the “Jews” and most Poles have managed to do) which is the best thing for them.
“Lessons learned” I think, from the Holocaust, here.
The real problem lies in our increasingly-ingrained culture of statist employment, which must be broken and
The Tories may not be so stupid after all. Samizdata thinks they have really lost their marbles on this one, but I’m not so sure.
The problem with the Tories is that David Cameron, his labour-voting wife, and the advertising-buggers who “advise him”, are all Gramscian crypto-Fabian metrosexual wind-turbinobastobaters and polenta-eating lefties. They even understand Tony Blair, the great and prime anti-liberal Tory of the 20th Century, and probably dine with his friends on their Tuscan kitchen tables.
Ken Clarke could by no means be considered one of these, even if he is an old-leftist-one-nation-Tory-and-Europhiliac. He would not eat polenta, or have a windturbastobator on his roof if you even paid him. And the voters know it in their hearts.
The problem is he is not leader of the Tory party, and this ought to be rectified right away.
The Devil, always prescient and let Peace Be Upon Him, uncovers (sorry) the real face of GramscoFabiaNazism.
At last, I get it now. I get it.
“Slavery” was as we know, always practised by European non-capitalist-but-gold-consuming-tyrannies such as Spain and Portugal, with the connivance and active participation of precapitalist-barbarian-survival-guides-acting-in-concert-with-precapitalist-tribalist-racist-chiefs-in-Africa (so they could “get the staff”.) But, with a subtle change in the content of education, it was what the liberal Anglosphere was to be made to “apologise for”. It had to be made to look like WE did “slavery” (even though WE abolished it.) This would be needed so that when the British State re-introduced slavery for its own children, as it proposes to do now, the epistemological link between the two sorts would be erased.
Let’s call for “an army ov volunteers” to “help the UK out of recession”. Personally, I’d gunpoint the members of the Fabian Society into unpaid labour, if need be, for eve(own privilieged) children, and their children’s children and so on, can work until Labour’s PSBR is repaid.That’ll concentrate their minds, for even lefties think (sorry, pretend) children are innocent.
We can then all watch.
The Welfariat/Salariat vote will ensure another GramscoFabiaNazi victory.
WE spin it as them buying votes. and they spin it as “a widening gulf between the Tories and ordinary people”…which it is, but not in the way they mean…
I just seen this again in the Maily Dail, like I do sometimes. Current events dont seem to disabuse me of the same notion, like the bastards are still at the honeypot, thinking it’ll last them till they finally get us. I wish more people were more angry than they are. The Boss gets his trousers taken off by commenters for saying that these people will get killed and eaten but what else can you do in the ehnd?
Iain Dale thinks Labour could just dissovle, through lack of funds. Personally I doubt it as there’s too much in the way of vested interests in the Party continuing to be. But if it does disappear, the various denizens of our Enemy Class will have to infiltrate and subverty some other party. I expect it will be the Tories and we libertarians will still all have our work cut out, only more slowly. The Tories offer the best hoipe of these people staying “close to the centre”, have more money, and won’t abolish anything like the right number of Quangos which is 100% of them.
This post was triggered by a typically-Englishly-humorous, but actually deeply worrying, article by Jeremy Clarkson in the Sunday Times last issue. The comment-thread alerted me to the connection between the deliberately-organised Total-State-destruction of farming in the UK and a supposed grudge held against “the Tories” (who of course are all farmers as is natural) by the GramscoFabiaNazis, in supposed revenge for “The Miners”, in 1984/85.
There is a very observable difference between the behaviours of today’s GramscoFabiaNazi socialists in the UK, and some other quite [in their terms] successful ones historically. By which I mean their projected attitudes towards activities conducted by (still nominally free) individuals in the UK versus their counterparts in previous and current Reichs. The British GFNs are extremely and violently opposed to any sort of activity which might give individuals, even through theft of highly-regulated-State-farm-produce, either access to growth of foodstuffs of any sort, or indeed to the ready supply of a wide range of these unless they are approved, such as boiled turnips without salt. I’m not sure that even North Korea goes this far – either through bureaucratic innefficiency or through practical policy, although we do know that people there have been reduced to eating shoe-leather on occasion. A boiled turnip would have been fallen-upon by entire platoons with gusto in Stalingrad I would imagine, but we do not have to emulate this state of affairs yet, except through our own negligence about the identity of persons in the Enemy Class.
In this essay, I want to talk about the fates and future of traditionally-socialist-hijacked-pasttimes - such as mining and farming: and by implication also generalised heavy industry and “peasant type” activities, all of which have been prostituted [in diffreent ways it is true] by our Enemy Class and the same previous Enemy-Classes of earlier-brutalised nations such as Germany and Russia.
There will now be three corners, in which teams will play:-
(1) In the red corner, I put up today’s British Deep Greens, New Labour, the Global-Warm-mongerers:
(2) in the green corner, I will place the NSDAP and its Wordsworthian neopastoralist (often British) forebears:
(3) in the blue corner will go Joe Stalin and all his diabolical children, the “people’s” polities the world over.
To confuse everyone, and to keep things exciting, the green corner will play first. Leaving aside the NSDAP’s genocidal policies and openly cheerful frankness about the fate of entire native peoples in the way of its racist expansionist plans for Western Asia, that caucus never wavered in its promotion of the manly virtues of physical toil “on the land”, and the nobility of maximizing farm production – indeed it was forced to, willy-nilly. This was by implication coupled with the racist virtues of the natural counterpart to that exertion, in the bedroom. In fact I believe, reading Joachim Fest fairly recently, that women in the Third Reich actually got a silver cross for having borne eight children or more…or, like the “People’s car”, that was actually to be the intention – just like Gordon Brown’s rehashing of announcements about waiting lists for cancer tests. (I so wish I could write without digressing toooooo much. Trouble is, there so much to say and so little time.) The Third Reich made no bones about the importance of both agricultural and industrial production, and although Deep Green in the roots of its philosophy – organic farming in the modern idiom was formally reinvented there – would not have hesitated to put in the Kripos and SD against people who, say, vandalised crop trials of new varieties of whatever. The nearest Gestapo guillotine would have had to be honed, oiled and hosed down regularly. I also don’t expect there’d have been much public sympathy for miners and those who criminally-photocpied newsletters supporting a strike for more pay, once nuclear fission have become a reality for electricity generation in about, say, 1949 (under pressure as they were, and with 35 million more Russian slaves that would by then be available, this might have been just possible.) Isn’t it interesting, how slavery is the ultimate green energy resource? It’s even “carbon-neutral, well, sort of….the slaves’ food (if any) has fixed CO2 from the air, and is exhaled or defecated, returning said gas for recycling. And you can compost a dead slave or burn it, fairly simply.
Let’s now go to the blue corner. Let’s hear it for Uncle Joe and his Jolly Killers. Uncle Joe’s problem with farming and food-production was not the amount, or the type of permitted stuff, but who was doing it most effectively. In this, he is a transitional death-dealing-GramscoNazi, and he begins to resemble our current staff of DEFRA, those which advise these droids, andof course the ultimate droids who sanction that sort of advice on account of it being “in tune with nature”. Joe-Stalin simply objected to people being able to dispense with the universality of the Soviet State, and also needed a scapegoat-class for the failure of his own Marxist-Leninist planning and execution (bad word there, sorry.) The socialist-realist imagery, of crag-jawed hammer-wielding workers staring fixedly up off-camera-stage left, and pointing, assisted by staggeringly-unshaggable “peasant” wives (I presume) in headscarves bearing bulging wheatsheaves, was probably invented under his tutelage. The results of course were nugatory. I presume Russia can feed itself these days as we do not hear any more, even on the bolgosphere, of how many US and Canadian grain-ships are going there this year. Or perhaps they just buy it from India and Pakistan, and don’t say anything.
The red corner at last contains our own home-grown lefty-droids, the GramscoFabiaNazis. The particular ones which have attracted my interest, and ire, are of course a special subgroup thereof, who know everything there is to know about land management, animal-husbandry, mechanised high-volume-crop-production in an uncertain world, forestry-conservation and woodland management, and of course salt-marshes (very important places these as you will see.) These strangely are the only lefty-droids actually to class as absolute-hunger-droids. Not even Mao, Castro or whoever now terrorises North Korea ever pretended to want to _reduce_ the useful output of given areas of land, let alone actually run schemes called “set-aside”, or actively and publicly encourage insects and woldlife at the expense of human bellies. We know that they want to be “Honestiores” at the expense of everyone else, but even slaves have to eat, and eat good and hard, or else they are of no use as a green energy resource or pool-of-pretty-children-generators. EU directives on agriculture and land-use are merely an excuse: these buggers could ignore every one if they wanted, and nobody will come after them or us. They merely find the stuff convenient to hide their enmity-toward-the-rest-of-us behind. I find it hard to get into their skulls – perhaps we’ll eventuall have to do it the old-fashioned way.
Polly Toynbee (guest writer) (yes, that one.)
‘On the day when I became prime minister, I promised I would try my utmost. I have indeed worked night and day in the midst of the storm that has engulfed the world economy. I believe I have helped save this country from a depression as bad or worse than the 1930s. I have contributed to the global rescue of banks whose domino collapse threatened a terrifying meltdown. I encouraged a global fiscal stimulus that learned Keynes’ lessons.
“Make no mistake, had David Cameron and George Osborne been in power to do what they proposed, the catastrophe doesn’t bear thinking about. With ATM machines within hours of shutting down, the Conservatives urged us to do nothing, spend nothing, laissez-faire and let it happen. Supermarket shelves would have emptied in a chaos of panic. To spend money then was to invest in saving us all, and the debts we incurred were a price well worth paying. Had we not spent that money, the cost of total collapse would have been unimaginably higher. We do indeed need to repay the money borrowed, but over time, with care, at a sustainable pace, without destroying the fabric of our much improved public services.
“Unemployment now is our greatest concern: we will not create another lost generation of young people. With extra apprenticeships and every effort, bending each department to the task, we will not let it happen again. Yet Cameron and Osborne are bent on doing just that, turning their ‘Broken Britain’ fallacy into a horrible reality. They tell us they would cut deeply, immediately, before recovery is established. We never forget the cruelty of Mrs Thatcher’s 1980s cuts, the social destruction and despair, the public squalor and the doubling of children in poverty – too many children are still poor today despite our best efforts.
“I cannot stand by and let the Conservatives do it again – same blueprint, same economic errors, multiplying social problems for years to come – and all for what? To pay down a sustainable deficit too far, too fast. Nothing learned, nothing changed – same ideology, same blind indifference to national wellbeing. Look at the harm their Europhobia is already inflicting on Britain’s role in Europe as they leave the mainstream for a ragbag party of neofascists, racists and wreckers. I cannot stand by and let William Hague take us to the European departure gate.
“Each of us has a part to play to stop that happening. I have done my utmost. I am proud of so much that Labour has done, money well spent after decades of neglect. Who would have thought we could all but abolish NHS waiting lists? I will spare you the litany of Labour achievements – just look all around us.
“But as I see the challenge ahead, I fear that my utmost will not be enough and I am not the best person to lead this party into the next election. Fairly or unfairly, the public have decided. If I am no longer an asset to my party in the battle to keep the Conservatives from power, then I know my duty is to stand aside and let someone else succeed. That is the greatest service I can offer. I hope I have been the right person to see the country through a crisis. But I fear I am no longer the best person to take Labour’s good case to the electorate.
“Our party is fortunate. In my cabinet I have an abundance of talent, younger and older, who would make Labour’s case well as next leader. The process of choosing the best one will not be divisive: we are remarkably united compared with any time in our past. On the contrary, I am confident that choosing a new leader will release all the dynamism in this party in the next stage of the long march for social justice: we are essentially a social democratic nation.
“Someone new will find it easier than I to talk honestly of mistakes we have made. Of course, in 12 long years any government gets things wrong. Sometimes a scapegoat is useful to draw the understandable anger people feel at how risk and greed in the banks caused so many to lose jobs, homes and pensions. I take the blame for failing to see the full danger building up in our financial sector – though goodness knows, we shared that mistake with every other country and economist. But had we followed the Conservatives’ persistent demands to deregulate everything, how much worse the crisis would have been. Even now the Conservatives would demolish the FSA – whose chair, Adair Turner, has spelled out what must be done to restrain greed and risk from now on.
“But if the case can be better put by others, I will not stand as an obstacle in the fight ahead. By stepping aside, I give this urgent warning to voters: however angry you are at what has happened, however alarmed you are by a national debt that was necessarily incurred to prevent worse disaster, do not inflict on yourselves and the nation a government ideologically intent on harming so many of the services you depend on.
“Ask yourselves what you value most in life. Most precious are those things we can only purchase together: health, education, safety in the streets, fine public spaces, parks, museums, sports grounds and beautiful public buildings. No shop sells anything we prize so highly. Don’t let all these good public things descend again into the petty squalor of the 1980s and 1990s for the sake of a few more pounds in your pocket. The small state is the squalid state, penny-pinching, mean-spirited and devoid of things that make a country proud.
“I am glad to have played my part in helping rebuild Britain’s public realm. But I know my limitations well enough to stand down at the right time to let one of my talented colleagues take up the baton and run with it to a victory at the next election.”
Afterwards they would say that nothing so became his leadership as the leaving of it. He would become something of a hero. The British detest their politicians until they are powerless, when the most unexpected previous figures of fun and hate turn overnight into national treasures. So it would be with Gordon Brown: the man who in the end confronted his demons and showed exceptional honesty and humility. He would restore some faith in politics by putting the success of his values before self-interest. Some would murmur that he only went before he was pushed, but most would say his Captain Oates walk earned him a chapter in that slim volume of modern British politicians with true courage.
Reprinted from the online edition of http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/sep/25/gordon-brown-resignation-labour-conference
It appears Brown is stating that he’s not a dog, perhaps?
anyway, this may intrest you.
It’s all about “power” and being “progressive”…but I think we all gathered that some time ago. Progessive towards what, of course, is what matters. As libertarians we need to sit down and decide whether or not to Get Serious about those who frankly and openly want our defeat, because they fervently believe us to be wrong, and that they are right. We need to decide what to do about the (now real and dangerous) force – of many kinds – used by them, against us and against individual humans who resist intellectually. They know they are so right that they ought to prevail : against truth and reason, and against anyone who thinks they are “mad”, “illogical”, or beginning to think about sometihng called “Political Correctness Gone Mad”…
…as you all are tired of being told by me, we MUST NEVER ever ever use that phrase, for it legitimises “Political Correctness” in that it admits of a “mad” condition which it might adopt. As if it was not totally “intelligently designed” (which it is.)
PC is designed to do, under fully-logical and quite sensibly centralised intellectual direction, those things which it has done and intends to do. Which is to say, destroy the ability to articulate certain words and therefore certain thoughts. Until there are only the allowed ones.
Now then: Charles Clarke, the old Marxist student “activist” (all today’s fascist bastards were, so what: they never had real jobs in their lives – pity I didn’t run over his sandals with my motorbike when I could have done) may be doing one of three things.
(1) He is either wanting to seriously help along the “Project” – which is to say, total and irremediable enslavement (and deletion as even an idea or concept) of the one people which “progressives” have most hated in all history, and so he cares that “Labour” should win the next election.
(2) Or else he is just expressing the usual GramscoFabiaNazi emotions on finding that their now-frankly-expressed policies and objectives are less than fully-popular all the time with everyone.
(3) It’s the power thing, and he sees his last chance of getting the Main Chance. Even if it’s for a few months only. And as he knows, you can always rig elections and stuff ballot-boxes, or get lots of “postal votes” – specially in Rotten Boroughs, but especially in those that are not quite so rotten that there is a chance of a Non-Labour-non-GramscoFascist-lefty being elected. The ballot-boxes to be stuffed under the tactical-terms of the “Project” will be in these places which matter.
Cameron (for it sadly will probably be he) ought to be under no illusions about how his “poll lead” will strangely have been seen to have evaporated, on election night, owing to a “huge last-minute-groundswell of support for Labour”.
Libertarians, in my sad opinion, will have to be prepared to be very, very, very unforgiving, in the sense of “unconditional surrender” towards principal members of the Enemy Class. Classical liberal niceness towards defeated enemies, certainly for the duration of the War which the GramscoFabians cheerfully trumpet is going on, will have to take second place to seriousness about our objectives.
And probably for many many centuries afterwards until all trace of their deliberately prosecuted, unfathomable wickedness is lost under isotope-traces in sedimentary rocks.
“We have found traces of evidence that, 3 billion years ago, a class of persons in an ostensibly modern civilisation actually _thought these things! (Horror!)…
(1) There should be a “State” (chorus: what’s that???)
(2) Its employees could _take money off you by force_ !!! (chorus: Naaaaaaaaahhh !!!…. errrrr?….uh…?????)
etc etc etc
Also nott funneh:-
Not funneh reeahlleigh, eeeyyther, erm, yeough kneugh whert er meearhn…end yer err Gerderrn Brerrhnn, therr GrermscerSterlenest-Merde-Mern:-
Sean Gabb was sadly right, when we discussed this very matter a month ago. Nobody among the Westmonster-scumbags wants to get taken down up to a year before they have to get carted out, so the money will roll in until June 2010. Bugger them.
I wonder. Don’t you? David Chaytor it is now. Never heard of the bugger: must be a “Blair Babe” then. Jesus H Christ…there were 101 of the ****s. At least Polly Toynbee condemned this phrase as a “casual mysogynist tag” - one of the good things she has said.)
Bury (er…) “North” (it couldn’t be a Labour-rotten-borough by any chance, could it? if the whole of Bury district has about 65,000 people, then “Bury North” can’t be more than 40,000 or so…hmmmmmmmmmm…………..)
The buggers can’t all want to be going into debt, in the first months of a serious recession – the seriousness of which was universally agreed by themselves? Or have they all bought shares and property and capital on the proceeds of their expenses?
Nobody I know could find that sort of money on the nod.
And what does all this tell us about the central problem for the future of liberty, in the face of socialists who refuse to let their discredited meme die?
UPDATE1:- NB!!! This does __not__ mean that we don’t still look kindly upon the LPUK.
It’s just that your lot ought to take lessons in resolution and moral fibre, and knowing how and when to Do The Right Thing, before you go onto the ice properly, from The Lady. That she was a Conservative was actually a tragedy: it was a waste.
Poor sad defeated and miserable Gordon Brown ought to have taken lessons, when he invited The Lady for tea. I found this while idly trawling:-
Daniel Hannan has got seven+ times more views in a twentieth of the time, but that does not alter the clear skill of The Lady’s perfromance on this video.
Thatcher is an Oxford chemist. This tells you something about what clever and upwardly-mobile girls from poor and/or FabiaNazically-despised backgrounds ought to be encouraged to do.
She will go down in history, which will be kinder to her than Tony Hollick is now going to be, as one of the three greatest and most important women who have ever been (so far of course.) Sorry, Tony, but you probably have some dirt about the woman!
(The leftiNazis is 1971 called her “Maggie Thatcher, milk-snatcher”. So she must have been right then….mostly we tipped the stuff down the plug-hole, while the teacher wasn’t looking – in 1950s-winters it was frozen solid anyway by the time you got it, so you wozz on a n’-hiding-to-nothing”…) (Here’s an interesting take on 1950s free milk given out by governemtns.)
Interestingly, if you wiki “milk snatcher“, you get Margaret Thatcher herself. What a surprise.
This is what wiki says:-
When the Conservative party under Edward Heath won the 1970 general election, Thatcher became Secretary of State for Education and Science. In her first months in office, Thatcher came to public attention as a result of the administration of Edward Heath’s decision to cut spending. She gave priority to academic needs in schools, and imposed public expenditure cuts on the state education system, resulting in, against her private protests, the abolition of free milk for school-children aged seven to eleven. She believed that few children would suffer if schools were charged for milk, however she agreed to give younger children a third of a pint, daily, for nutritional purposes. This provoked a storm of protest from the Labour party and the press, and led to the unflattering moniker “Margaret Thatcher, Milk Snatcher”. Of the experience, Thatcher later wrote in her autobiography, “I learned a valuable lesson. I had incurred the maximum of political odium for the minimum of political benefit.”
She successfully resisted the introduction of library book charges. She did not volunteer spending cuts in her department, contrary to her later beliefs. Her term was marked by support for several proposals for more local education authorities to close grammar schools and to adopt comprehensive secondary education. Thatcher was determined to preserve grammar schools, which prepared more students for admission to universities. She abolished Labour’s commitment to comprehensive schooling, and instead left the matter to local education authorities.
(The title is longer, and less good, than my first effort, but it will have to do.)
Hello, all you GramscoFabiaNaZianuLieBorgs. (Follow the _money_ while you still can! It will come for a year, or so, but what shall you do after that? Honourably break stones in China? Or get a UB40?)
Bastards. I bet 11p, at 4-to-11-on, that 46.9% of you Nazianus don’t even know where Tibet is on a map, for f***s sake. Tibet is where you would be stonebreaking, under the carefully-scientific and watchful gaze of the Chinese People’s Army, if I had my way. You might die there, but you’d have an exciting time getting there, and living there, for a bit.
I just thought I ought to bring something to your attention. This is since so very very many of your people read us as I now know from our stats. Specially from Labourlist. You come to us, we know….. Now also we know that some emotional people over at Guido’s place are expressing sentiments about what you Fabians have been doing, are doing now, and want more to do, to this nation.
Here’s a small exerpt:-
Probably because the nulabourites all thought this expenses lark was part of the job. We know how the left hate other people having money because they want it all for themselves ie poltics of envy & hate etc etc. They are just all f***ing idiots and we are bigger idiots for letting them get away it.
If this had happened 30 or 40 years ago it would have brought the govt down. Nulabour (who clearly have very little understanding of anything other than ‘taking’) can’t even apologise. I genuinely think people like Blears still don’t think they’ve done anything wrong. If she had any backbone or integrity, she would have resigned as would that piggy pink faced Margaret Moran with her 4 homes.
So called bloody socialists – their duplicity knows no bounds.
I detest this government with a passion so intense it actually radiates venom and I now have no friends. Small children run screaming in the street, and I feel violently compelled to take all of the fifteen bins I now have and shove them, forcefully up the rear end of the next Labour politician who dares cross my path. I am past apoplectic and into a stage of hatred that is beyond anything that I thought even I could imagine. It has took well over a decade to get to this point.
So what do they do? They know they are hated, they know that everybody with more than two brain cells to rub together wants a chance to kick them into the long grass. But no, the bastards will hang on till the last minute so they can fuck us over one last time. They really do seem to be trying to destroy the country so that the Tories will have a shit time and they can get back in and abuse us again.
Forget piano wire and lamp posts, I want eviscerations and torture. I want to see them burned at the stake using a bucket of Thermite. I want these people tortured slowly.
Hoddles Waddle says:
ditto to goats comment….phew
gollums knob says:
fucks sake Goat, don’t hold back – tell us how you really feel.
Why does this affect libertarians?
It does, because the less of this kind of Enemy Classperson we have to deal with, and take stuff off and repay it to taxpayers, individually, in thousandths of a penny per person, upon our attaining executive power, the fewer acountants (who often vote socialist because they have been Eagletonianized) we will have to employ.
Here’s some more:-
Constantly Furious says:
Yeeeeeha! As I said here: I Bloody Well Told You So
The filthy-rich Tory “Grandees” could easily afford to pay back the money, whereas the Labour “Flat-Flippers”, whose money is tied up in devalued flats and plasma TV’s, could not. A great opportunity to score points, eh?
Expect Cameron to go on the attack now: “We’ve cleaned up: why can’t they do the same?”.
Expect Brown to vanish off the face of the earth for days on end.
Dr Nuts says:
I don’t care if their properties are devalued – that’s their problem. They shouldn’t have misappropriated the monies in the first place.
Thieves aren’t allowed to claim clemency of ‘it’s not worth as much now’ in the court of law. There’s a simple rule – for all… give back what you shouldn’t have claimed, it should’ve come out of your pocket in the first place!
Legiron says don’t riot. Please. Not until there’s been a general election to wipe out ZanuLieBorg.
A bit of a maverick one, to be sure, consorting for so long with fascist lefty Nazi scumbags in ZaluLieBorg – but a liberal all the same.
Hat tip Guido Fawkes. Let me guess: he’s the one site that nobody _ever_ confesses to reading…..
Editor’s Note: this was published on 4th January 2009, at the height of the “New Labour” GramscoFabiaNazi Terror. A rather strangely forbidding and humourless man called “Jacqui Smith” was the Interior-Minister…I think. This person liked to state on the wireless-tele vision that people would come up to him in the street and ask when they could have something called an “identity card”.
The current lot in power, the LabLebLibLobLubCon “coalition” have done less than one hoped to reverse the creeping tide of police-terror overcoming us here.
The prospects for liberty in the UK continue to remain poor.
So were Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Castro (who will continue to remain dead, thank God) Kim Jong-Il, Mao, Ho (ho ho) Chi Mhinh, and the rest. I bet that if you asked ShootinPutin187 how many people he ought to imprison, then his list would be longer than mine or yours.
The only people to imprison are those who seriously violate, beyind the bounds of sensible argument, people’s natural Rights, which are to one’s life, liberty or justly acquired property. This could include a large and increasing majority of British politicians and bureaucrats, psychologically egged-on but not necessarily overtly supported by, those in the EU.
Given that these people-troids – the British ones anyway – spend a large percentage of their time manufacturing (on purpose) petty criminals who violate life and property directly, such as robbers, muggers, burglars, rapists, car-keyers, knifers, ne’er-do-wells and rievers of all types, by purposefully designing “school” “syllabuses” which selectively disadvantage young boys and men, then these troids are the people who ought to inhabit prisons first and for the longest times. I designed a prison a little while ago, just for them. Here it is again.
The CoFe church ought to realise by now that it’s just rearranging the deck-chairs on the Titanic.
…..but it favours the continuation of a Labour government even less positively than that.
What we would like is a LPUK government (despite the fact that the LA takes no party-political position on this matter) or, in default of that, a UKIP one which nasty Libertariano-Gramsistio-inverted-Marxists like me could, slightly possibly, subvert and direct into libertarian paths rather more easily than we could direct the policies of the LPUK or certainly of the Tory party (discuss….I relish the fireworks.)
However, there could be a General Election in 2009: but I doubt it. If there is, Gordon Brown could still win, or at least Guido thinks so. The risk is there.
Guido thinks that there’s a probability of another 3/4/5 (whatever) years of Zanulieborg. What libertarians have to consider, at least who think that the continuing existence of Britain not only as a (now failed but headless-chicken-walking) state but as a home of liberty and the birthplace of libertarian philosophy, er, matters, is whether it’d be better if Labour won?
Are there still enough active and angry liberals (call them Whigs, whatever, who cares) to make a difference the next time round, so that we could conceivably rescue ourselves by some revolutionary means which I cannot right now imagine, from another session of Labour/Nazi tyranny……..?
……..Or, would we prefer even a possibly short spell of “conservatism” – which we of course would view not very differently from full-blown Statism, which it will still resemble – in order to slow the slideage into the political/tyrannist cesspit enough for, say, the Indians or the Chinese to rescue us?
I know that when Chris Tame died, he said that didn’t think there were enough classical liberals left to make a difference any more, and that he was rather pessimistic about the prospects for liberty. I hope he was wrong.
But if the Tories lose, again, in 2009 or 2010, what then will YOU do? What will become of “Jacqui” “Smith” ?
I can’t believe that someone who looks like that and talks like that and says the things which it does, is a real personette. I just can’t. Sorry. It’s a construct; probably “post modern”, whatever that term means. I don’t know. Really. Really. I have not even looked it up, I am so terrified of what I might find.
What is “post-modernism? Please could the commentariat tell me for I do not know?
…politician to solicit money (if that is what Osborne has done, consciously or not) from rich buggers, than it is for New Labour Stalinists to do so?
Even the quisling right media Tory Press is all over the poor little boy. The left like to slag off Wikipedia, especially “teachers” in “State Schools”, probably because it takes precious knolwdge and gives it to everyone, for free….. …but someone has updated his page in the last 12 hours…..and righties like us have not time to scratch our arses!
If Oleg Capitalistsky is a foreign national, but “controls” LDV, which is to sya that he has little interest in its affairs on a day-to-day-basis such as giving a mere £50,000 to a British political Party, then why is it anybody’s business if LDV wants to give it?
I don’t recall new Labour being coy about donations from Indian steel firms….or from Bernie ecclestone‘s empires in order to protect an interets in tobacco-derived-sponsorship of F-1 racing…..(*****see below)
IF New Labour has been guilty of attempting to think about the thoughts of selling honours and peerages to other rich buggers, in return for seats in the Lords (remember that? the Prime Minister questioned by police?) then this is much worse than poor little George Osboy.….THEY ARE ACTUALLY FRANCHISING OUT THE GOVERNMENT TO UNELECTED RICH BUGGERS WHOM THEY BROWN-NOSE…..)
Labour ought to remember what happened to Edward II, and what he got for doing a cash-for-honours thingy…..in return for money from his French wife’s chums for his wars, he effectively put them in charge of the State and Exchequer, and I don’t think you’d want to have happen to you what happened to him.
Of course, there is no proof of that.
*****This is what it says on Wiki about Bernie and the Labour Party:-
In 1997 Ecclestone was involved in a political controversy over the Labour Party‘s policy on tobacco sponsorship.
Labour had pledged to ban tobacco advertising in its manifesto ahead of its 1997 General Election victory, supporting a proposed European Union Directive banning tobacco advertising and sponsorship. At this time all leading Formula One Teams carried significant branding from tobacco brands such as Rothmans, Benson and Hedges, West, Marlboro and Mild Seven. The Labour Party’s stance on banning tobacco advertising was reinforced following the election by forceful statements from the Health Secretary Frank Dobson and Minister for Public Health Tessa Jowell. Ecclestone appealed ‘over Jowell’s head’ to Jonathan Powell, Tony Blair’s chief of staff, who arranged a meeting with Blair. Ecclestone and Mosley, both Labour Party donors, met Blair on 16 October 1997, where Mosley argued:
“Motor racing was a world class industry which put Britain at the hi-tech edge. Deprived of tobacco money, Formula One would move abroad at the loss of 50,000 jobs, 150,000 part-time jobs and £900 million of exports.”
On 4 November the “fiercely anti-tobacco Jowell” argued in Brussels for an exemption for Formula One. Media attention initially focused on Labour bending its principles for a “glamour sport” and on the “false trail” of Jowell’s husband’s links to Benetton. On 6 November correspondents from three newspapers inquired whether Labour had received any donations from Ecclestone; he had donated £1 million in January 1997. On 11 November Labour promised to return the money on the advice of Sir Patrick Neill. On 17 November Blair apologised for his government’s mishandling of the affair and stated “the decision to exempt Formula One from tobacco sponsorship was taken two weeks later. It was in response to fears that Britain might lose the industry overseas to Asian countries who were bidding for it.” In 2008, the year after Blair stepped down as Prime Minister, internal Downing Street memos revealed that in fact the decision had been made at the time of the meeting, and not two weeks later as Blair stated in Parliament. 
I wonder if the man in the hi-vi jacket realises that his sign gives the expression of excrement
I meant to go to bed but the Libertarian Alliance’s video research Officer came up with this lovely-jubbly stuff:-
And this one too…Boris Johnson on the origin of table-tennis, and loads of other stuff which I can’t be arsed to listen to:- (Bloody politicians, even the good ones can’t get that we don’t really care and just want to get on with our lives.)
From the comment thread on Guido (“enemy of state” article) today:-
Lots of Labour voters can read and write…the problem is it is ridiculous shite, it is nonsenscial academic waffle based on other ridiculous academic waffle, extrapolated from other ridiculous academic waffle written by a couple of guys – such as Herr Marx, who couldn’t get real jobs…
Plus, after they have written this ridiculous waffle they are sorely tested to understand themselves, but are convinced they are intelleckshuls…..
Here. Charles Clarke. In the Torygraph.
See title. We are either out of the country or working hard. Gotta do what we gotta do. Please continue to stop by, for we are stoking up stuff to write about, and the storm-clouds are gathering over the head of Gordon Brown, which will provide interesting commentary-copy for us and others, and may prove problematic for Tony Blair David Cameron.
As blogged earlier, I’ve been invited to speak to the Oxford Union this coming autumn term.
The topic will be officially announced later, and speaking to it, I shall explain why our Labour Government does not need a police state to fight the war on terror: it wants the war on terror as an
excuse for a police state.
David Davis (not that one)
The Barclay Bugle has the main report here. Interestingly, there are other repercussions: the Tories recognise the ball-and-chain that Davis has put round their ankles on this one. And here’s Philip Johnston, always a sound read.
Notice how the lefties are all wailing that the by-election “cost £200,000 to the taxpayer”. Talk about the Pot Calling The Kettle Black…. I bet Ken Livingstone’s wie-store in his office was more than that, and we could have had a new ballistic-missile sub for only 10,000 times as much, or else a couple of mine-proof, IED-proof vehicles in Afghanistan, for only the basic 200-grand!
On a lighter note, I wonder how Labour’s fire-sale went last night? Or was it cancelled as nobody would turn up?
Here’s some fun stuff:-
|[eurorealist] Fw: Truly extraordinary times!!|
|Date:||29/06/2008 08:30:33 GMT Daylight Time|
|Sent from the Internet (Details)|
Received this from an expatriot who lives in New Zealand!
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 8:22 AM
Subject: Re: Truly extraordinary times!!
Left supports Right defending liberty
By Tony Benn
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 29/06/2008
Libertarians from the Left and Right sometimes meet in the middle against
an authoritarian state. In 1961, having served for 10 years as an MP for
Bristol South East, I was declared disqualified because my father had been
a peer and he had died. It was argued that I had inherited his peerage.
A by-election was called, and, despite my disqualification, I decided to
contest it to argue a point of principle. Winston Churchill, the former
Conservative Prime Minister, sent me a letter of support for which I am,
this day, most grateful.
I must be the only Labour candidate who has ever circulated 30,000 copies
of a letter from a Tory leader to my constituents. The law that prevented me
sitting in the Commons was later changed as a result of that by-election. So
when I heard that David Davis was standing in the Haltemprice and Howden
by-election, I decided to support him. I hope the Government’s move towards
42 days’ detention without charge, recently passed in the House of Commons,
will be stopped as a result of his campaign. The civil liberties issues on
which Mr Davis stands are important to the future of this country. Last
Friday I attended a conference organised by Lincoln Cathedral on Magna
Carta, an original of which they hold. Magna Carta had nothing to do with
democracy, but one phrase in it has registered worldwide: “no man shall be
taken [and] imprisoned. except by the lawful judgement of his peers.”
For many years the Labour government has boasted about the traditional
values and freedoms of this country; and yet, when its MPs voted to amend
the Terrorism Act and permit 42 days in prison without charge, they
effectively repealed Magna Carta. Such a law would mean that people could be
imprisoned for six weeks, then released without charge or trial but also
without ever being properly acquitted: a cloud of suspicion would remain.
It is also clear that anyone released after such a period would almost
certainly find their life destroyed, with their job lost and real risk posed
to any prospect of future employment.
There are two other critical ways in which liberties are being eroded,
both highlighted by Mr Davis. The first is identity cards. I have no
objection to them in principle,
because in the course of my life I have held many cards with my photo, name
and profession printed on them. What matters more is the huge database being
established in concert with ID cards, on which will be gathered every bit of
information that it is possible to collect. It may contain your financial
status, political opinions, email contacts and more – no one will really
know what is on that database.
Indeed, the information held may be inaccurate. When I recently renewed my
passport, I noticed that I am still described as a Member of Parliament.
If the Government does not know that I am not an MP seven years after I
stepped down, it does not inspire confidence that a more wide-ranging
identity database would be very reliable. The information may leak, and it
would be valuable for commercial and other purposes, including fraud and
terrorism. Despite the guarantees of
ministers, and regardless of whatever safeguards are promised, we know from
recent examples that information held by the Government can escape. Second,
the Lisbon Treaty diminishes the sovereign powers of British democracy,
which belong to the people and are lent to MPs. MPs have no right to dispose
of them to the EU.
The Irish have defeated the Lisbon Treaty democratically, and Britain was
denied a referendum on the Treaty only because it was clear that the
Government would be defeated on it here. Because the people are sovereign,
governments get their powers from us; we do not get our rights from them.
This issue is becoming crucial because the centralisation of power to
political elites is a threat to our freedom and democracy.
The Haltemprice by-election is taking place because Mr Davis gave up his
seat and possible position in any future Conservative government to seek his
contituents’ verdict on these issues.
The fact that the Labour party has decided not to contest the seat
indicates that it knows that it cannot win the argument on 42 days. I
believe that Mr Davis’s stand may do something to restore public confidence
in politics and politicians. If, as is expected, he wins, it will confirm
the judgment he made on the 42 days and will also destroy the argument that
the public really supports these oppressive measures. If the Lords, as
expected, also rejects 42 days, it would be a constitutional outrage to use
the Parliament Act to enforce the will of the Commons on the second
It is on the single, but vital, issue of civil liberties that I decided to
support David Davis.
This just in:-
|[eurorealist] Hazel Blears’ stolen laptop|
|Date:||17/06/2008 19:17:39 GMT Daylight Time|
|Sent from the Internet (Details)|
“Police cannot confirm or deny that extremist information was stored on
I can help on this.
Hazel Blears is a member of Gordon Brown’s cabinet, so it is therefore
100% certain that she has extremist details on her laptop.
This is not the first time, nor will it be the last, when the laptop of a governmentist-person is stolen. I do not know how many laptops are stolen in the UK but it cannot be many for we are mostly careful about not leaving them in cars etc. Moreover, don’t these governmentists all have drivers who sit there with their car and their stuff? What can be going on?
These people in Westminster are clearly children and need to be protected. I propose a “LAPTOP CZAR”, who has all the state laptops, and nobody else who is either an MP, or a government employee, have any of them at all. then, none of them will be stolen.#
As Auberon Waugh would have said, “I am not suggesting yet that we should shoot all state personnel who take laptops out of the building, but they need to be taught to economise.” A nice idea.
Last week a Cabinet Office official was suspended and an investigation launched after secret papers featuring details of al Qaida and security in Iraq were left on a train.
If these people can’t be trusted not to get drnk and leave their stuff on trains, then they SHOULD NOT GO BY PUBLIC TRANSPORT, even in a REGION WITH STRONG TRANSPORT LINKS. they should be ferried everywhere by their minders and nannies.
David Davis (NOT the Shadow-Home-Secretary…)
Here’s the Barclay Bugle’s latest take as at 19.51 BST (18.51 GMT).
THE PEOPLE (WHO WILL OF COURSE HAVE BEEN DISSOLVED, AND SUBSEQUENTLY RE-ELECTED TRIUMPHANTLY) WILL BE FORBIDDEN TO WANT SUCH A “NEWS” “PAPER”.
I do not think that North Korea, Red Ken’s favourite country after Venezuela (pretty girls and oil to seize for his heavies’ limos) and Cuba (pretty girls for the price of a Pepsi but no oil to seize for his heavies’ limos), and the objective toward which he ploughs, using the money of Londoners, has many newspapers like the “News of the World”.
This afternoon I chanced on this:-
I do not know who “Lord Laidlaw” is – never heard of him. Apparently he has a “Sex” “addiction”, and has had it for years.
What a great guy! How lovely for him, and for the rest of us as human beings, for it to be realised that sex is so nice.
He’s learnt what it’s about.
He has had the good fortune to chance upon the knowledge, sufficiently early in life to come to a fixed policy-position which he has clearly followed to the end of his strength. That is to say, that the exquisite thrill you get when having sex, with a girl – as is natural. I mean, who else, as a Man, can you have sex with?
I'm not denigrating homosexuals, who may very well be sincere human beings, and many are indeed libertarians, but what they (say that they) are having is not actually sex, which is strictly defined by Scientists - is, er, ummmmm, great.
Apart form anything else, no functioning or living Libertarian would kill, stone-to-death or sacro-religiously push walls over, onto anyone who described himself/herself as a homosexual/lesbian. It's your choice, people, coz' you said so, and it's your lives and not ours.]
But anyway, to business: this “Lord” has decided he likes sex with girls. A lot. Wonderful! (They might even be pretty – I do hope so for his sake, and for their earning power….) Why does he have to apologise, and to whom, and what business is it of a British “national” “News” “Paper” what he does in his spare time?
And all this sad business about praising his “long-suffering wife….” ….they all do it. Why? Is that what the PR firm tells them to do, to hide the hypocrisy of the report being in the open in the first place?
“Never put off till tomorrow what you can do today. If you enjoyed it today, then you can always do it again tomorrow.”
It is not exactly clear to me what business it is of “The News of the World”, or indeed its readers, how “Lord Laidlaw” spends his money and his free time. They ought not to be execrating it. They should be extolling it.
If ”Lord Laidlaw” (must be a made-up name, unless he is from the Scottish Lowlands) wants to shag several “working girls” at once, or even invite his friends to help out, and pay for them like a good host ought, then should not the paper then be declaiming the delights of this activity, and its rewards (a lovely feeling for a few seconds at a time, for the man, every few hours, and lots of money for the woman/women) to the “deserving poor” - so that they can aspire towards something to achieve in this life, and to work for?
A point that ought to be made about “Sex Addiction” is that, unlike (arguably) Alcohol, Drugs or Tobacco addiction, it disadvantages nobody and has no ill-health effects, not even for the people nearby to the addict. The “addict” is very happy all the time because he has a lot of sex, he suffers no bodily ill-effects (quite the contrary in fact) and the other participant, if of the right sex, get a lot of fun too, if willing. (If not, then it’s called rape, and we have lots of laws about that, so there!)
Moreover, if the “News of the World” wants to continue to sell copies of its “News” “Paper”, then it ought to be promoting the benefits of “Sex Addiction”, particularly in “Tories” – and especially near election times – otherwise it will have nothing for its journos to write about on the dead-tree-material it uses.
I hear about all this stuff, and I really get PISSED OFF, that the entire world gets to think that the British people, the progenitors and originators of the idea of liberalism, and the idea that nobody else ought to interfere in your life’s arrangements unless you hurt them, actually get exercised about this sort of news……
…..After all, aren’t we, according to the same paper, supposed to be having acres of delicous sex, all the time, with all sorts of people? So if so, what’s the news in this report?
On Monday 14 April, 2008 at 7pm, Sean Gabb will talk on “Islam: Our Enemy?”
Place: The London Center College, Pride Court (Unit 1), third floor,
80/82 White Lion Street,London, N1 9PF.
The nearest tube is Angel, and White Lion Street is just opposite the
station. Admission Free.
A full video record will be made.
It is a custom to bring along wine, or beer, but also to go to the pub
after the meeting too. Lately, people have been bringing snacks to
Further details: contact David McDonagh (email@example.com)
Director, The Libertarian Alliance
Tel: 07956 472 199
Download my new book – “Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How
Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back” -
NEWS RELEASE FROM THE LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE
In Association with the Libertarian InternationalRelease Date: Saturday 23rd February 2008
Release Time: Immediate
Dr Sean Gabb on 07956 472 199 or via firstname.lastname@example.org
For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/news/nr063.htm
“Close Down the DNA Database” Says Libertarian Alliance
The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties pressure group, today calls on the British Government to close down its DNA database and wipe the records.
The murder convictions of Steve Wright and Mark Dixie within the past few days – both allegedly as a result of DNA evidence – have led to calls for all British adults to be forcibly included in the DNA database.
Libertarian Alliance Director, Sean Gabb, says:
“These calls are not prompted by the recent convictions. The convictions are being made an excuse for rolling out plans that have long existed in the Home Office.
“We do not need a database state to fight crime. That needs real punishments for real crimes and efficient policing. These things alone could take crime back to the levels of the 1950s.
“We are told these two murders were only solved by using DNA matching. This may be true – though the police are notorious liars. Even so, catching two murderers, though important, is not worth a database state.
“Give the Government samples of our DNA and it will have potentially tyrannical powers over us. You may insist you have nothing to fear from a database of your DNA. After all, the authorities keep promising how much safer it will make you. But do you want your children to go on that database? Can you be sure that some demented government scientist two decades from now will not decide that the surest way to heaven on earth is to stop certain people from breeding? Can you be sure that your children will not show up negative on a DNA database that will have enabled an old authoritarian fantasy to be made into bureaucratic reality?
“Are there no criminal tendencies somewhere in your family background? No racial or sexual characteristics that may one day be again be as unfashionable as they have been in other times and places? No bad eyes or flat feet? No predisposition to obesity or illnesses that it will for the foreseeable future be expensive to treat on the National Health Service?
“Bear in mind that, with a certainty not known since the 1940s, the relevant scientists are proclaiming that your destiny is in your genes. This may be true. Whatever the case, it is and will remain the consensus. Can you believe it will never be attractive to politicians ignorant of the science, but struggling with the problems of crime control and ballooning health budgets?
“Do you want grandchildren? Or do you want to risk seeing your genes scientifically combed from the general pool?”
The Libertarian Alliance calls on the British Government to reject all proposals to expand the existing DNA database, and to wipe all records so far gathered.
END OF COPY
The comment thread is also brilliant, in its extended wittiness and insight into the minds of tyrannical idealists.
We find that we in the Libertarian Alliance, have been CASTIGATED on his own bolg, by Little Man What Now. This is over our failure to respond to the sad business of the culpability (obvious) of the Socialist (N***) Police in London over this titled matter. This interests me personally in a sort of academic way, for I did not know that there was a distinction between “Libertarians” and “Vulgar Libertarians”, and would value some instruction so as not to make “Errors”. I’m interested in taxation policy as applied by Nazi guvmints towards poor-people who – being poor – have therefore to work, as opposed to other people who work for guvimnts and therefore do not have to work, and who thus can pontificate about who shops for what, and where. (See tags like Waitrose, Tesco, 4x4s, etc.) I gather that one gripe agaonst us is to do with that policy position, but I may be wrong.
What exactly is a “Vulgar Libertarian”? I did not know; either a Man (and that is to say also, a Woman) is a Libertarian, or He (and /or She) is not (I thought?)
I apologise for not commenting here about this poor Brazilian, who, it now seems quite clear, was clearly murdered, very bloodily, and probably in totally unauthorised fashion by gun-wielding police, who clearly also thought that they had got someone else, and were clearly briefed to shoot first, very fully, and ask about it afterwards.
What I would say is that there is a war to the death going on, between two “civilisations”. In this, one side refuses to admit, due to self-imposed and un-necessary multiculti-political-nazi reasons, that it is actually at war with a post-modern tactical coalition of socialism and a pre-capitalist-barbarian-warlord-system, whose priorities are the allocation of women, animals, children and slaves, in lands where there is nothing. Due to un-necesarily-retained hang-up-baggage, largely caused by internal Eageltonization, the one side chooses to attack itself as often as possible, both to show outwardly how “tolerant” it is, and inwardly to show how fierce it is in defence of its supposed real responsibilities, while the other is allowed to say what it wants.
The attacked side is hamstrung by anti-liberal multiculti, but yet it has to be seen from time to time to be “doing something”, otherwise nobody in the masses will buy into the myth that the security services are “protecting us”, and nobody will go along with the progressive erosion of liberties that the Fabian Socialists of the West demand, in order to bring about its demize.
So it was probably inevitable, that a poor Brazilian electrician, who looked a bit semitic, and who came out of the wrong door in the wrong part of South London (the wrong part of any city on the planet imho, and I can tell you, for I have lived there!) one morning, and who ran onto the tube a bit too fast, would be shot at. Easy target; they probably did not expect the fallout, the Police didn’t. Easy way to “get a result” at a difficult time. Anybody remember “New” “Labour” and “Spin”? they probably thought they could get away with it.
I’m not sure if this answers LittleManWhatNow’s query, but as he said, we are not salaried journalists; we have lives to lead and families to feed; we have not time to scratch our bums (which smart; we ARE fixated by over-taxation by guvmints; and also their depradations against retailers like Tesco who try to feed poor-people for no money at a profit; we do our best.
We do not condone the murder of JC de Menezes by “our” Police, either in error or as a staged stunt – who knows? But there is a lot of other stuff to do, and the nonblog-media have covered it totally already. We blog about what we can, we do not get paid (!) and we do try hard to cover important stuff.