Tag Archives: police

The scandal of endless bail


John Kersey

Writing in today’s Guardian, Neil Wallis calls for an end to the present situation whereby thousands of people have been on police bail for over six months. The Birmingham Post reported that 57,000 people are currently on bail, and of these, 3,172 have been waiting for more than six months with no decision on whether they will be charged or not. One person remains on bail having been arrested over three and a half years ago.

The Law Society has called for a review and has said there should be a statutory time limit for police bail, suggesting a maximum of 28 days. This could be extended by application to a magistrate in which the police would need to explain what stage their investigation had reached and why extension was necessary. Other groups have suggested a longer maximum than this.

Police cuts are one reason why bail times are being extended. Another is suggested by Wallis, “The level of “reasonable suspicion” needed by police to make an arrest is simply far too low. I hear time and again about ordinary people being arrested and kept on endless bail so police can mount a fishing expedition into their lives.”

We have recently written about the Emma West case as an example of “trial by process” – whereby the mechanism of the law is sufficiently drawn-out to place the accused under a pressure that is in itself punitive. Here is more of the same.

A related issue is the increasing use of conditional bail by the police against activists who are arrested and then bailed on strict conditions before an event at which they would be likely to be present. This was used at the Olympics and again at the wedding of Prince William. Conditional bail allows the police to impose conditions – for example, not going within 500 yards of a given place at a given time – that would otherwise be legal; breaking those conditions then becomes a criminal offence. The charges are then, in most cases, quietly dropped once the event is over. It used to be the case that conditional bail could only be given by a magistrate; this power was extended to the police under the Police and Justice Act 2006 schedule 6, which amended section 30 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

Sean Gabb on the Thatcher Police State (May 1989)


The Full Coercive Apparatus of a Police State:
Thoughts on the Dark Side of the Thatcher Decade

Sean Gabb

3rd May 1989, Published as Legal Notes No. 6, by the Libertarian Alliance,
London, 1989, ISBN 1 870614 39 9

Ten years ago (1979) I gave way to one of my rare bursts of enthusiasm. I was at the time, I’ll grant, still a schoolboy; and these things are always more permissible in them than in others. But, even for a schoolboy, it was a very great burst of enthusiasm. I seriously thought that, along with Mrs Thatcher, the second dawn of classical liberalism had arrived. This was it, I thought. No more socialism. No more national decline. No more Road to Serfdom. Oh, even as lads of my age went, I was naïve. Continue reading

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.

Pit bulls and New labour


David Davis

I wonder if there’s a corelation between the keeping of “power dogs” and Labour Rotten/Pocket Boroughs?

A Pit-Bull a day keeps the MP at bay.

Citizen Safety Directive no:326


Fred Bloggs.

It’s times like this that makes me sure that Mr. Orwell got his dates a bit wrong.
I’ve now heard that the Police are using UAV’s and the government is planning on getting even bigger ones. This means that, in addition to all the CCTV cameras dotted liberally (no pun intended) around the landscape, you can also be watched from 50,000 feet.

All this goes on without you knowing however, so you will be able to expect parking, speeding, and, knowing this lot, littering fines dealt out like a bolt of lightening from the gods above. Shortly after this, we, knowing our luck and their determination, will be seeing these things being armed with missiles and smart bombs. Indeed, health and safety will take a sinister turn, for you will be driving along without your seatbelt on, by accident or on purpose, then BOOM! a streak of fire will rain down upon you and end your criminal ways, for you have to remember:
“Driving without your seatbelt on is dangerous.”

How to tell a “local yokel” from a scumbag: six handy tips for Police


David Davis

It is reported that a “leaflet” has been issued for the benefit of the Police, about how to tell if a human person is a “legal shooter”. Here are some tips for the Glorious People’s-Armed-Police, metropolitan politicos who regard the countryside as a theme-park peopled with cardboard characters, and for other Occupying Armies:-

(1) The “countryside” contains all sorts of humans not typically represented in the People’s Ecotowns of Young Britain, which is a Young Country of multicultural people living in harmony with Nature and the People’s Countryside which is a theme park. Some of these humans are caled “local yokels” or “local people” or also may be “Bankers” out for a day shooting small birds and animals which is a traditional “banking” past-time.

(1a) But sometimes, the “Countryside” also contains dangerous or irritating animals and birds which have to be discouraged and controlled, and sometimes killed with guns, and other useful quaint “Countryside-friendly” objects such as Potassium Cyanide, big sharp spades, gin-traps and snares. This is so that children and hard-working-families can buy local produce in season, for local people, at little shops and not at Tesco where everything has to be flown in from Peru.

(2) A human being with a “gun” is almost inevitably not dangerous: humans who wave knives do it in Young Britain’s People’s Ecotowns usually. They typically wave knives at humans, and display the normal shiny clothing of scumbags. Humans with “long thin guns” are almost always dressed in browns or dirty greens of matt reflectivity, and are pointing their “guns” at animals and birds not people. It is not considered polite among humans to point guns at people.

(3) You can easily spot a scumbag. His trousers are made of plastic and have two white stripes down the side, and are normally too long and tucked into two objects called “trainers” which look like a sort of plastic boot without the normal long top piece. Female scumbags wear all-over bright pink towelling pyjamas during the daytime. They can be confusing, because they do not usually have guns or knives, only phones held out as if for offering, in the right hand.

(4) If you get a report from a human about another human in a field or some bushes with a very long thin gun, ask the reporting human if he/she lives in “the countryside” him/herself, or inhabits a People’s Ecotown. If he/she does not live in “the countryside” or instead inhabits a People’s Ecotown, discount the report. If the reporting human does live in “the countryside” ask if the gun is a shotgun, a .22 rifle, a .303, an MP5, a Bren, an AK47 or a Barrett .5″, and what bird the shooter was aiming at and whether he/she brought it down.

(5) If it is carrying or using a long gun, it is almost certainly not a scumbag but a human: see (6) below for clarification.

(6) If you point your MP5 at a “local” “human” dressed as described, shouting “ARMED POLICE!!” then he/she will drop the “gun” and put his/her hands up. If on the other had it really is a scumbag, it will turn to face you with its gun (unlikely as it does not normally carry one, and certainly not a long one) pointed rather absently and indefinitely at or near you, an will say “Yer-wha’?” or “Pardon?” or something similar.

So you will always be able to tell the difference before having to open fire.

Observe Health and Safety Best Practice!

Always check first!

I may think of more during the day…

It’s easier not to go after real criminals


David Davis

Since the modern British State-Police-Force has effectively declared an end to hunting actual villains, and now goes after vulnerable groups such as young male Moslems and “motorists” chiefly, increasingly in cyber-ways rather than actual hard-vehicle-chasing, it seems reasonable to take away all their gaily-painted squad-cars. They’ll only use them to kill innocent people , directly or otherwise, like this poor young woman.

See again how socialism corrupts: very few people I know still think the Police are your friends. A seatbelt, for goodness’ sake! And they wanted to chase the bugger?

Joking on Twitter is no laughing matter…


David Davis

…for the thought-Police. Perhaps they ought to go round in threes instead of twos: one will be able to  read, the second can write, and the third wallah will keep a close eye on the two intellectuals.

Some poor sod has been arrested and “bailed pending further enquiries”, and all his usual deviced have been “seized”, for joking on “Twitter” about blowing up a closed Geordie airport…it’s clearly no longer safe to make the sort of joke that’d have been commonplace in a real war.

Concerning of course stuff like “Twitter”, it is an inherently unsafe mode of contact, rather like sharing dirty needles or used condoms. You have no idea who your “folowers” really are – even the word is sinister in these surveilled times.

And I copied this to the Daily Torygraph:-

Nobody who takes his anti-Western Terrorism seriously is going to want to blow up a nothing-airstrip in the British North East. This was a clear joke by an irate traveller.

In these times of hyper-State-hysterial-surveillance – not for “terrorism” but for ultimate control – something like “Twitter” is a very dangerous thing. You do not know the thoughts of everyone who “follows” you.

Furthermore, to want “followers” is vain and empty: you ought not to think that your life contains exciting news for unknown people: Get a proper life instead. (Twitter I predict will die.)

But the central fact remains: those who purport to have our “security” at heart have lost all sense not only of perspective, but of humour.

I hope “Robin Hood Airport” or whatever it’s called, goes bankrupt. With humourless attitudes like that, it deserves to lose all the passengers that can flee from it as fast as possible.

These unthinking security-droids will have to go.

Gordon Brown saves and runs the world…so…


David Davis says “what the hell are we doing, and WTF is he doing, allowing “truckloads of explosives” to be driven about anywhere near places like Yemen?”

He’s up there, trying to be what we used to call “all big”, and yet he has no forces to deploy that can even stop themselves being blown to bits, let alone other people elsewhere.

Perhaps if he took all the UK Police (who will have, anyway, to go) and who function quite well as an occupying army here, not detecting real crime but merely terrorising motorists, and simply tramsplanted them to the Yemen, they’d have something worthwhile to do at last.

He and his sort made then get like that


Michael Winning

The lubes frozen in the tractor sumps, but the Police are like they are because this lot gave them all that diversity nonsense and institutionalised rascism to contend with. He can’t talk about it now, so he’s pretending they’re lazy buggers.

Not the ones I know, they’ll skin you for a halfpenny.

Update, it seems Simon Heffer agrees. 2nd Jan 2010

I merely announce this


David Davis

For those who are interested, this is now going on.

The real benefit would be to discredit those in Government, who are unfortunately in charge of today’s British Police Forces. But I doubt that that’s what’s behind this one. They are scrabbling hysterically for footholds on the slide to the electoral cesspit, they wonder how they can rig the “vote” in time, are not sure, and want to “get at the Tories” on an “issue”. You just watch what will fall out of this.

The end of the PUb


Michael Winning

I like writing for this blog, really I do. You know what? I’d never writ on the internet thing befor in my life before you fellows and your boss down in west-Lancs asked me if I’d do it. He and his boy came up here to the farm and showed me what to do, it was nice. The connection is still dialup up here, so it takes an age to laod each post but we’ll get there.

I may try to make some dish aerial or something to hack some banker’s unsecured network down the valley, I have a pattern for a 2.4GHz dish thing which you oculd make out of fusewire and a piece of thin frying pan. I need your boss to do the maths.

We like to go to the pub, us, sometimes. Formerly we’d just get in Landrover and go. Now, I guess we shall be staked out by the coppers. As its Christmas, none of us is going, its too dangerous if we can’t drive the vehicles after. Pub is gutted so I guess it’ll close eventually. Perhpas that’s what the buggers want, after all you can’t easily eavesdrop on local confabs in a North Lancashire pub in the hills, so it’s got to go. You could force Jim to video everybody going in and give the film the the Police every day, but then they fellows wouldn’t come or else they’d waer Skull Halloween masks from asda or Morrisons. So Jim will get closed anyway for allowing it.

To stop them getting in…or us getting out?


David Davis

BAe Systems (I thought it was on OUR side?) is developing UAVs (drones) to “patrol the coastline”, to deal with “smuggling” and “illegal immigrants”. Never thought I would hear the term “Police Aviation” used seriously and without irony.

Does not sound very libertarian to me.

If you have nothing to hide...

...then you have nothing to fear...

As the man said once… “very interrrrresting” …

 

What the British State DNA database is for


Michael Winning

(Not too many tupos I hope,)

This article may disappear. No really. Apparently it’s done so once already* and may do again. Legiron who Ive just found has posted thispiece here, which tells of a woman, a lawyer in fact, who now can’t get a job as she’s “on the DNA database”. Just that it seems. She lost an employment opportunity (with the State no less, but wait till tesco and others get on the roller) because of a wrong accuastion, and even about something trivial.

So what’s in store then for those accused – also wrongly – of worse things like British-State-thoughtcrimes? They wont’t even get shelf-fillers’ jobs in Asda or Kwiksave – let alone Waitrose!

So this is what it’s for – and there are 6 million people on it nearly, the Police sure have not been idle, all those swabs to take by force, eh? Need personpower for that, you do!

*Someone called Longrider has got a link to the piece too.

Might as well quote this from Longriderer:-

Update: The Economic Voice has more.

This effectively creates a new class of criminal, the ‘guilty innocents’. We used to have a system where you were either guilty or you were innocent. Now you can be left in limbo for 6 years. Remember also that the government’s original plans, but for the intervention of the EU, was for indefinite holding of DNA! Food for thought.

Had she not been going for a job that requires police background clearances she may well never have realised the repercussions of these new rules. Most people will just dismiss this as an isolated case to be ignored, but it could easily happen to anyone by just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Just because it may happen infrequently doesn’t make it right.

Quite. Remember, if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear.

But to cheer yous all up I’ve found this:-



Here you go, dont say i didnt warn you


Michael Winning

Armed Police” with machine guns, to be deplyed on streets for first time”.

Well we are a dangerous and uncontrollable people as everyone know and it’s surprising it toook so long. Can’t have people rebelling now, can we.

How has it come to this that the UK now has machinegun-police on our streets, what did we do wrong. This will be hailed as a “success”, it will be “rolled out”. You’ll see, and remember what I said.

Huge fun


Michaal Winning

You can’t buy wine if you’re with a “minor” – Supermarkets toe terror-Police-line


How surprising.

David Davis

Today’s doses of directed GramscoFabiaNazi wickedness towards sovereign individuals and their private lives, here and here.

Next, it will be “unhealthy foods”. Just watch. These bastard Enemy-Class control-droids will have to be killed, deep-fried and eaten before they get to where food is rationed by “choice-editing”. See Madeleine Bunting for what “choice-editing” means in reality, on Mr Eugenides.

The only conclusion I can continue rationally to draw, from their activities, is that these are deliberate, methodical and very Fabianly time-focussed, and that they are therefore wicked individuals.

One of my next posts, in the near future, may give technical details of how to produce family-sized quantities of beers, wines and more exciting drinks, at home on a regular basis, as well as growing tips for varieties of Nicotiana. I cannot say when this will be, but it may be soon, as we have to overcome the depredations of the StateNazis fom now on my our own efforts.

Beware: this is what the Enemy Class does to people…


…on the way to its hegemony. By deliberately fostering antifamilial and atomisational Trash-tv-mediated-policies and cultures, it turns ordinary, perfectible human beings into inchoate barnyard animals.

This is just down the road from here.

David Davis

Beware the Enemy Class, for this is the sort of thing that its activites being about, and which it likes to do on pupose. It does. Believe me, for I am the Director of Northern Affairs for its opposition, and I sometimes watch in horror. It sets out to cause individual humans, who would otherwise behave normally towards, say, new-born-babies, to just ditch them in the attic in a box, if it means having to not watch Big Brother or Top of the Pops instead. And the removal of anything worthwhile from school learning has only a majority-part in this and not the whole blame.

Libertarian Alliance quote of the day, no-24,689B/42z3 … 0550-ABFF-09CC-042E


And before you even think of reading on, this is scary.

David Davis

From Legiron:-

“….Therefore you must be on the database on the off-chance you commit a crime in future. You cannot be trusted to behave yourself. The State must watch over you in case you step out of line. All the time. With coercion and threats….”

I don’t normally allow swearing and 4-letter words on the blog: it is a family blog for women and children as well as all us thugs. That’s why we feature people like Keeley Hazell in their pretty knickers and smalls, and why we discuss the finer points of the Holocaust, and the problems of human cruelty by GFNs.

There are quite sufficient classical liberal bolgs out there to satisfy anybody’s apetite for that sort of four-letter-**** thing, and you all know which they are. But this State-DNA crap makes you want to utter them too.

WE are not their effing farm-animals: they don’t pay to keep us – we pay to keep THEM.

Ministers are determined to spread more crime


More drugs to be banned or further proscribed in various ways.

The Occam’s Razor- reason has to be that then they can employ more police.

People do not learn that hard cases make bad law: moreover, that if one proscribes or prohibits the dealing in and possession of something, one will increase its street price by something like 20x to 100x.

About 90% of moderate-to-serious crime in the UK is related to the compulsion to acquire cash for currently-illegal drugs. Now, if trade in or possession of these was decriminalised, then almost all of this crime would disappear straight away: the Police could “spend time doing more useful things” like…..er…..chasing motorists….. (no I don’t think we’ll go there right now…) and the £100-a-day habit would become the £5-a-day habit.

Glaxo-Smith-Kline, Ciba-Geigy and Schering-Plough and others could compete legally to supply the purest and safest drugs at the lowest prices, assuming the market was large enough for major players which I doubt.

Perhaps we could even move towards governments “promising (owing to efficiency savings) to put fewer police on the beat”….

Now that would be a result – for Liberty!

Private policing begins….


….but I doubt it will take off, as there are too few people left in the UK who have the will and the ability to make a large difference, and we have so little time left: the U-bend atop the cesspool is nearly up to us.

David Davis

The Enemy Class likes to pit hoodlums and ne’er-do-wells against the very people who pay for it


David Davis

But, like Moslems ought to be (another group that is used and abused by the Enemy for now) the hoodlums and ne’er-do-wells ought to be bloody careful, and look to their own protection, when their usefulness to the Enemy-Class is expired….

It would be sad and funny at the same time, if the Enemy-Class was not being very “serious” about the rest of us.

I do not care any more if we are called “racist”: for the people I shall now describe are not of a different race from us on this blog or any blog or any continent. The people known to us through the media-outlets of our slavemasters as “Travellers” are yet another fascistically-defined-grouping, and are specially created and set up to undermine and destroy liberal classical individual civilisation, as it is commonly understood. The Enemy-Class act of differentiating “Travellers” as being worthy of special status and stolen money is itself divisive and factionalist and _/sectarian/_.

(Remember that word, anybody?)

If these “travellers” have guns,, and the “Police” have done nothing, then there truly is one set of laws for the Enemy Class and its catspaws, and another for everyone else.

The “Conservatives” had better watch out, in the (likely but not fully probable) event that they win the next election. People are angry and will not put up with GramscoFabiaNazi spun-half-measures and “initiatives”, designed to deflect their attention from real problems. Bloggers, commonly referred to these days as “right wing”, will be found to be assaulting the “Conservatives” more ferociously and implacably than they did the ZanuLieBorg GramscoFabiaNazis – for the “Conservatives”, having positioned themselves as virtuous and liberal, will have no excuse for not demolishing the entire wicked and iniquitous edifice of GramscoStatism.

It can be done!

Just _/press the buttons/_ on day one! Simply abolish all those departments which destroy and do not aid or augment, such as “Education and Skills”, Culture media and Sport”, the “Home Office”, “Children”, “Women and Equality” or whatever it’s last called, and the like, and put the erstwhile-staff on the street. (I’m a bit doubtful even about the Foreigners’-Office, the Treasury, and Defence too.) Oh and  _all_  the hard disks will have to be malleted, and the remote-servers bulldozed too: all of them, all. In the street, and a receipt for every one, the buildings to be forcibly checked for backups…first thing. No records. They can take nothing out from there.  It will be as if those departments will have gone into “Night and Fog”…like the Jews and other proscribed groups in another Gramscian paradise not so far removed in time and space from us.

Moslems are not the problem…the Enemy Class is


David Davis

I doubt very much if any Mosques have actually _/asked/_ for this….but “Avon and Somerset”*** Police have volunteered it.

It just makes the job of eradicating GramscoFabiaNazism even harder, since these buggers clearly really do believe the West is NOT Best.

If we believe that one civilisation is objectively better than others, then it would behove us to force our State-NGOs and other public-sector outfits, however Gramscian their leanings, to behave as if we believed it. Insofar as we have to tolerate the bastards for the time being.

Moslems themselves, whether “Fundamentalist” of not, are not actually the problem or even part of it. The Koran is manifestly and quite frankly not a book about a peaceful religion, but that can be fixed by a dialogue in which we will deploy the Asse-Hatt, to add the right notes of non-committment and ennui to its entire decontamination-proceedings:-

They are being used as a catspaw by the GramscoFabians, and will find themselves being eradicated later as inconvenient objectors, along with all other whole categories of persons who displease the Gramscoids’ idea of Future-World Order.

***Part of the wicked and evil 1970s-“Heatho-Walkerian-boundary-erasure-retrogressions”.

Wrong analysis of rural recession crime


David Davis

Read about it here.

The reason you te more crime in rural areas in the Dark Ages is that there’s fewer people about.

Pubs are all closed and dead because of no-smoking and no vertical drinking.

No possible amount of police you could deploy, owing to logistic problems, could solve the fact that if you have a £15,000 Chippendale Commode under ZanuLieBorg, and you live in an isolated house in Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh, then some hood will remove it from you.

The solution is not “more Police”.  This is the typical socialist solution, as propounded by the Tories. I do /not want to/ live in a country which has “more police”. This represents failure, a Falling from Grace for a civilisation, and an suggestion that people can only be made “good” by force and threats: the definition of “good” also suffers as a result, as it becomes artificial and at the whim of the police-paymasters.

This way, crime will not be solved until the entire nation consists of “Police”, and we shall all be watching each other.

The solution is /better people/.

Then, political parties will self-hucksterise on the platform of “fewer police”…or even “no police”.

I would like to live in a society where there was no need for “the police”. They sort of morph, into, well, you know, worse kinds of police. And the more money for police, the faster they morph.

/Better people/ will come into being automatically, when socialism fails to be taught as a /MEME/ in “courses”.

Discuss.

Life imitates art: the concept of “pre-arrest” has arrived…


…courtesy of Camden Fuzz. Englishman’s Castle has the low-down.

David Davis

Yep, that’s the way GramscoFabiaNazis do it! get their DNA on the database now, and they won’t commit crimes, will they!

Anti-racists better look into it – I bet 37p that most of the poor buggers are black youths….

ANPR, scumbags, duck islands, liberty and tourism


David Davis

Well, my last posting went down like a lead balloon, or should I say, in these hyper-flagged-parliamentary-expense-claim times, a concrete duck  island. But it says at The Landed Underclass that ANPR camera systems are all the rage among our Enemy Class, and can be used for all sorts of fun activities suitable for all the family. For once, I’m on the side of the Evil BBC, which has flagged this up.

True, the BBC stringers may all be irremediably-incorrigible lefties right now, complaining that one of their number, a professional member of Rentacrowd, has been victimised by these devices. But as Churchill said in 1941, about Hitler’s assault on the USSR, he might be persuaded to include a favourable reference to the Devil. (None of what I have advocated will pay in the end of course, but in these times, our enemy’s enemy is our friend.)

 

“If Hitler invaded Hell I would at least make a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.”

 

I hasten to hope that the Cameroid, if and when he gets elected as he possibly will, inside the next year or so, will demolish all this stuff, but I doubt it somehow.

ITEM:- You can make a duck island now, for less than £20 !!!    Here!

This whole story sounds “made up” – it is a mechanism for…


removing more guns.

Sad man crying and being “violent”, and “seen in possession of a gun” and “waving it”, by a “member of the public”.

Police turn up, shoot man dead.

Police happy: end of story.

Guns = bad. Stalinism = good. Killing of 30 million Russians who opposed collectivism = good (as they had no guns.)

“Mums” = happy.

The MP buggers are going to get nasty now….


David Davis

This could be fun. Guido (of course, who else?) has a thing about the panic about the leak about a leak. How could you not laugh, I mean it’s just got silly now? Here’s the rest of it.

If they have allowable expenses, then they can’t complain if details are published – or even published by people they don’t like, which is what the fuss seems to be about.

IF THEY HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, THEN THEY HAVE NOTHING TO FEAR.

I can’t see that involving the poor, overworked and underpaid British Police (who are of course unarmed as is natural in a Classical liberal civilisation) can help matters at all. The Police are very, very busy, catching burglars and muggers. They can’t cope even with that stuff, so they are also having a rest from time to time by looking for motorists, smokers, illegal parkers, defenders of one’s home, envirocriminals, people who download music tracks (whatever those may be), and other various kinds of nasty antisocial scumbags.

Except to help us to get  _[all]_  the money  _[and houses and bath-plugs]_   back, when a Libertarian Administration will have been elected with a landslide majority.

Deborah Orr: The catalogue of incidents that tell the Met is out of control – Deborah Orr, Commentators – The Independent


Sean Gabb says: Sack them all; cancel their pensions; laugh as they starve in the street.

Deborah Orr: The catalogue of incidents that tell the Met is out of control – Deborah Orr, Commentators – The Independent

I am very sorry but I can’t see the point of this at all


David Davis

Hillsborough was 20 years ago, and a major city is to come to a halt. Look, I am a Londoner, but I really quite like Liverpool: it has a certain aura, and the people here are in general perfectly charming, human and kind.

Simon Heffer’s Spectator article a few years ago, in which he accused the Scousers of wallowing in self-pity, and for which poor Boris Johnson as his editor had to carry the can, under the odious Michael Howard MP, was right on the button.

The BBC still has the only approx-working link I can find, to the original Speccie article of 17.10.2004. The links to this off Boris Johnson’s wikipedia page do not seem to work.

I can’t figure out why Liverpudlians like all this overblown tragedy-theatre, I really can’t. Perhaps socialism has ruined them more than other great cities. I do not know.

The Friday ranting non-extraordinaire


Peter Davis

I am going to try and make this a regular (and probably fail): every week I will aim to rant about something and (trying to) get thouroghly angry about something  (and failing), and basically turning the post into a message board to let other people also write about something that pisses them off in the comments.

Let everybody know what has pissed you off about our “leaders”, each week.

Now, what’s with this Ian Tomlinson thing: what exactly did he do to deserve that cheap blow from the police? From what I can tell, he was walking around with his hands in his pockets.

WTF?

Has walking around with your hands in your pockets suddenly become illegal? What kind of a nation is this that lets the police kill people for just walking around with hands-in-pockets?

Please feel free to write about what pisses you off in the comments.


Well, who would have thought it!


David Davis

“Sources” sat that the Police “believe” that “an Al Quaeda cell” was “days away from“…doing something a bit down south from this type writer here. Better install a few weaponised dustbins inside the Trafford, to be on the safe side….

Maybe they were, maybe they weren’t. Who now can tell? 

I don’t watch the broadcast MSM “news” any more, finding it as I do rather sensationalised and unhelpful in discerning the truth of matters. But I expect this is all over it already. Gordon Brown and our MPs are sinking fast and need to be make to look big again, with some security-theatre: why? Because everybody slumped in front of their Idiots’ Lanterns has already totally forgotten whatever it was Carla Sarkozy and Michelle Obama were wearing at G20 – and how it was designed by Sarah Hobbsbawm on an inspiratory revelation from the Dear Leader Himself. (Her reward was to get to borrow a £9,000 bra, and only have to pay 10% of the price…)

._._._._.

Let us now play an informal little war game together:

Let’s pretend that there actually are (for there may be some) dudes out there, inflamed by certain pre-Rennaissance and amoral-barbarian beliefs, egged on by a number of “deeply-respected” mountebanks and pisstaking mysogynisticoNazi scumbags who stand to gain a lot out of the result, that the West is comprised of sub-human turds who have turned our faces from God, deliberately underdress their women and other sex-slaves, and thus surely deserve to die – as must be obvious to everyone.

Now are these dudes doing what they allegedly have just been doing  _because_  we have decided to assault the buggers in faraway countries who put them up to it? This is predicated upon the notion that the vast majority of adherents to these ideas want nothing at all to do with blood and gore and explosions – which is patently clear although none of them seem to want to come out and say so….

Or, would the said dude-droids be doing it anyway regardless,  _because_ certain “belief-systems” explicitly exhort that this is the right thing to do, and it’s fun to kill people you don’t know in very large numbers? I incline to the latter.

Thus, the “War on Terror” (a conflation of ideas substantively empty of meaning as we all agree) has been talked up as an excuse by the new ruling Enemy Class of the West, to introduce control of individuals’ lives more typical of those Police States which the detonating-buggers come from, than of a Classical liberal civilisation.

Look now. We here always, always get blown up by successive historical swarms of evil fat-heads, not because of what we have done to the afforesaid fat-heads at sometime or other, but  _because_ they are innately evil (“they just are”, as a British teenager would harrumph, inarticulately unable to acticulate exactly why) and can’t stand to be outshone by real civilisations: it happens to us all the time. It’s an occupational hazard of being right.

The fat-heads’ ultimate unimportance and actual destructiveness and negative value is threatening to them, for they would if made to operate as normal humans merely fade away and become sad meths-drinkers and hobos: deep down, in what passes for their hearts, they know fully that it is as I say. They are those who would be helped to a dignified death by concerned old ladies and retired, heavily-decorated wing-commanders.

We must just stop being so wimpish and accept the fact that if we want to be “The City Upon a Hill”, we shall continue to be attacked by those who still inhabit the cesspools.

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;

“Builders” ought to be libertarians: why do they do these things, which merely gives ammo to statists?


Plod the Unsteadier

Here.

Privately owned lasers will be next


here.

he shone it at a duck, for f***’s sake, to stop it taking his fishbait.

Buy chalk and ask questions


David Davis

Henry Porter tells you why, here.

Brilliant prescience: a Libertarian Polity


David Davis

Brilliant, from Old Holborn, the bastard. The problem of where a Libertarian polity might arise is a real one. There are almost no conditions I can envisage, under which a real modern “Big State” would allow itself to be transformed wholesale into a libertarian one: the Clientariat is too big and too well-supported by Armed Police (the ones you pay for, their helicopters, their HK MP5s, their computers, their squad cars, their “stab-proof-vests charmingly emphasised in bright yellow, their connections with Interior Ministry Troops, their diversity-outreach-courses, and the like.)  

So we have to consider the geographical alternatives.

Obligations to The Landed Underclass for bringing it to our attention here. I wish I had the time to write all this stuff myself, but sadly not. They do it better than I can in any case.

Packing a pocket-knife?


David Davis

While commenting idly on something over at The Landed Underclass a minute ago, I chanced on this: isn’t the internet a wonderful organism. It throws interesting light on how private-weapon-prohibition in the UK stacks up with other tyrannical régimes and their histories, and how our current predicament is viewed at least by some in the USA.

Driver stopped by police for laughing


David Davis

They’re going to lose the general Election (unless they can rig it or cancel it) so now the gloves are off properly. Now, “Laughing behind the wheel can be an offence”.

I don’t think there’s any pretence any more that the level of civil society which we took centuries to evolve, sometimes painfully, is disappearing.

The Police are behaving openly like an occupying army, now turning to prosecuting laughing-gas-emissions. They are ideologically aided and abetted by the GreeNazis, whose job is to make the visibly-unpoliced part of your life as uncomfortable, painful and short as possible. They want you to freeze in the dark, have natural childbirth, eat muddy stunted “organic” food (no meat allowed) grown “locally” under periodic famine conditions and boiled without salt, walk everywhere, and have no internet or antibiotics.

It  _has to_  be wondered: what kind of person wants to do one of these jobs? A policeman in Blair-Brown’s open prison, or a GreeNazi-quangocrat imposing Gramsco-Marxianism on your fellow men – but not, ostensibly, yourself and yours.

I have no clue what the motivation could be to want to do this.

Worrying stuff


We have been alerted to this by an Ian Parker-Joseph piece, flagged also by The Landed Underclass. As many foreign readers as possible had better know what’s going on and rumbling suspiciously under the surface here. This must be before the BBC (and other almost equally-reprehensible News channels) tell them something quite different in their usual oily authoritarian tone.

Bloggers, and especially liberal and libertarian ones, are specially sensitive people, reading a lot as one does, and also ignoring – largely – the MsM, which we find to be increasingly unhelpful and useless as a real information source. We have sensed tension “in the air” for some time now.

Dungeekin had a go at this idea also, back-end of last year. And Legiron, on 26th February, warned people _not to_ riot or even “take to the streets”, as this would give the British régime just the excuse it wanted in order to invoke all its “special powers” it has awarded itself while everyone’s back was turned. you have to wonder where the Queen stands in all this – not that there’s any hope she could arrest the seemingly inevitable course of events which we now mostly suspect.

(I don’t know why that’s all underlined, and I can’t get rid of the underscoring, sorry.)

We guess that what should be done, to anyone who is ostensibly _not_ some form of “Interior Ministry Troops” and who appears to be trying to stir up trouble, is this: that they should immediately be bundled by five or six burly brickies into the nearest white van, and taken somewhere quiet, in order to spend a period of reflection in the company of people determined to find the truth. Although the future life of the brickies may be nasty and short, at least information will be gained about what is to be faced.

No music tonight, just this.


This.

The Night Duty Boy-First-Class Type Writer, commanding his Chimpanzee Shift, might put some music up as it’s Saturday: we shall just have to see.

Hat tip The Landed Underclass. That blog just gets better and better, and he will outlive us in The Line.

Some people are more equal than others now.

The Policeman concerned has found a clever and opaque way of saying he’s not the friend of all people: just those of them that happen to be powerful today.

Well then.

On totally unrelated matters, readers might like this book.

Sir “David Ormond” knows best. And, the Libertarian Party of the UK tells it to you like it is.


David Davis

Personal Privacy” will have to be sacrificed in order to fight “terrorism” and suchlike.

We already knew that, but now they’re saying it out loud. And the LPUK has a much better-argued and fuller rendition (ha ha ha ha ha! Rendition! is this another word for the lefties to lynch or have they merely invented it to sound like clever-clogs?) of the matter.

I’ve never seen any Interior Minister behaving so shallowly…..


…..in my entire life, and I have lived past a quite a few now. (Interior Ministers are now always younger than I am.)

David Davis

Interesting pic on An Englishman’s Castle. Don’t know what you make of it, nor do I, but it says some things that she wants you to know. Here’s the thing:-

 

Good, I cna go for a pizza, now!

Good, I can go for a pizza, safely now!

The Devil will try to corrupt everything, even toy aeroplanes…


UPDATE an hour later…

I have worked out how to say what it is that makes me sad about this particular matter. It’s that, in its ever-tightening screwhold on individuals’ liberties, this current British State takes even toys, that boys and men (and even some girls) have once liked to play with, harmlessly, and turns them into weapons of constriction.

if one was a psychiatrist, then one would, after all this is done, like to take some of these State people, put them on the couch, and try to find out, really find out, what made them do what they did? Why did a  man who sold teledrones to the Army (understandable) agree to sell them to the State Police….why did he not send the bastards packing out of his office waving a cricket bat, even, when they came to ask to buy them from him…to spy on British householders late on….?

Why did the couchee-subjects I have referred to, see the world not as other people, but as controllers of it? or as salesmen to controllers?  As controllers of other, unknown individuals’ lives, or worse, as accessories after the fact of that imposed control?

Is it just simple nasty error-ridden Gramsco-Marxianism, or is it something…..deeper? What actually motivated them to consciously err?

Can’t they understand that individuals have Free Will? That the reason for opposition to State control is that it ought not to exist?

In the end, what is it that makes someone want to be, say, a traffic warden, or a concentration-camp-guard, or a “modern”  interior-ministry-policeman?

Have we as libertarians failed in some way, to explain how this mind-set cannot be normal, and the owner of it must have suffered in some way, to get like that?

Or, does evil really exist, existentially?…..here’s the post you signed on for……..

David Davis

Now we are to be faced with this. The Law will need to be clarified on the following points:-

(1) What measures will householders be able to take to prevent overflight of their property by these robots, if they decide they simply don’t like them and don’t actually want them around, or they are a nuisance, or they keep us awake in the night, or they scare the racing-pigeons? (The helicopters are bad enough.)

(2) To what extent will _Radio Amateurs_ be prevented from  _examining_   and then  _analysing_  the frequencies and transmission-modes used? (I never said we would try to transmit on these bands or even interfere with them…we are strictly licensed to operate on certain bands, and in particular modes only. But “nobody suggests” that we can’t listen to any public transmission or signal whatsoever….)

(3) What are the “sunset” clauses inherent in the use of these extraordinary bits of machinery, considering thatw e are supposed to be living in what even this government calls a “Free Society”?

Where must the Queen’s subjects stand up, and actually draw the line in the sand?

What, for example, if you wanted to do Practical Coal Mining, in your garden? Would this stuff be used against you?

Sean Gabb: Speech to Conservative Future


Groan:- I don’t know what that smiley is doing there, but I can’t remove it. It’s none of my doing.

UPDATE3:-Please read this response-post, and _in particular_ the comment posted thereupon by an informed member of the blogateriat.

UPDATE2:- Here’s Sean Gabb’s thoughts earlier this year on holocaust denial, a hot subject.

Earlier comment from Blogmaster just after main post filed:-

(1) A direct link from the young Conservatives, who were kind enough to report the event charitably, is here.

(2)  This post by Sean is not for the faint-hearted: that is to say, those who may quail when the real assaults finally come. The prognosis for liberty in the UK is not currently good, and may not get better.

I have just read this on another forum, and would have published it unilaterally had not Sean Gabb done so already. You will find, on reading down, that the floor-response to Sean’s address was not as positive as a rational person would have hoped from today’s Tories, in Britain, embattled as they seem not to realise – or else prefer not to know, and pretend that all will be well if only they take power.

I think we can expect that, on ZanuNewLieborg being thrown out, as they will be, but not decisively (as we fear) then the British Conservative Party will remain a less certain but still definite enemy of individual liberty. this was not always the case as Sean points out. But it is now.

Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 181
16th February 2009
Linking url: http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc181.htm

Text of a Speech to Conservative Future,
Given in The Old Star Public House, Westminster,
Monday the 16th February 2009
by Sean Gabb

I’d like to begin by praising your courage in having me here tonight to speak to you. I am the Director of an organisation that tried hard during the 1980s to take over the youth movement of the Conservative Party. The Libertarian Alliance provided a home and other support for Marc-Henri Glendenning, David Hoile and Douglas Smith, among others, when it looked as if libertarians might do the same to the Conservative Party as the Trotskyites nearly did to the Labour Party. Sadly, our efforts failed. Since then, the Conservative Party has become more watchful of people like us. It has also, I must say, made itself progressively less worth trying to take over.

I did say that I would come here and be rude to you. But that would be a poor thanks for your hospitality. Besides, while your party leadership has consistently ignored my advice during the past twelve years – and has, in consequence, been out of office during this time – there is no point in dwelling on what might have been. We are where we are, and I think it would be useful for me very briefly to outline my advice to a future Conservative Government.

Now, this is not advice to the Government that looks set to be formed within the next year or so my David Cameron. I may be wrong. It is possible that Mr Cameron is a much cleverer and more Machiavellian man that I have ever thought him, and that he plans to make radical changes once in office. But I do not think he is. I think what little he is promising to do is the very most that he will do. In any event, he is doing nothing to acquire the mandate without which radical change would lack legitimacy. And so this is advice that I offer to some future government of conservatives, rather than to any prospective Conservative Government. It may even be a government formed by the people in this room.

My first piece of advice is to understand the nature of your enemy. If you come into government, you will be in at least the same position as Ramsay MacDonald, when he formed the first Labour Government in the 1920s. He faced an Establishment that was broadly conservative. The administration, the media, the universities, big business – all were hostile to what it was believed he wanted to do. The first Labour Governments were in office, but not fully in power, as they were not accepted by the people with whom and through whom they had to rule the country. To a lesser degree, Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson faced the same constraints. A future Conservative Government will find much the same.

Over the past few generations, a new Establishment or ruling class has emerged in this country. It is a loose coalition of politicians, bureaucrats, educators, media people and associated business interests. These are people who derive income and status from an enlarged and activist state. They have been turning this country into a soft-totalitarian police state. They are not always friendly to a Labour Government. But their natural political home is the Labour Party. They will accept a Conservative Government on sufferance – but only so long as it works within a system that robs ordinary people of their wealth and their freedom. They will never consent to what should be the Conservative strategy of bringing about an irreversible transfer of power from the State back into the hands or ordinary people.

A Cameron Government, as I have said, seems willing to try coexistence with the Establishment. The Thatcher Government set out to fight and defeat an earlier and less confident version of the Establishment – but only on those fronts where its policies were most resisted. It won numerous battles, but, we can now see, it lost the war. For example, I well remember the battle over abolition of the Greater London Council. This appeared at the time a success. But I am not aware of one bureaucrat who lost his job at the GLC who was not at once re-employed by one of the London Boroughs or by some other agency of the State. And we know that Ken Livingstone was eventually restored to power in London.

If you want to win the battle for this country, you need to take advice from the Marxists. These are people whose ends were evil where not impossible. But they were experts in the means to their ends. They knew more than we have ever thought about the seizure and retention of power. I therefore say this to you. If you ever do come to power, and if you want to bring about the irreversible transfer of power to ordinary people, you should take to heart what Marx said in 1871, after the failure of the Paris Commune: �the next attempt of the French Revolution will be no longer, as before, to transfer the bureaucratic-military machine from one hand to another, but to smash it, and this is the precondition for every real people�s revolution�.�

The meaning of this is that you should not try to work with the Establishment. You should not try to jolly it along. You should not try fighting it on narrow fronts. You must regard it as the enemy, and you must smash it.

On the first day of your government, you should close down the BBC. You should take it off air. You should disclaim its copyrights. You should throw all its staff into the street. You should not try to privatise the BBC. This would simply be to transfer the voice of your enemy from the public to the private sector, where it might be more effective in its opposition. You must shut it down – and shut it down at once. You should do the same with much of the administration. The Foreign Office, much of the Home Office, the Commission for Racial Equality, anything to do with health and safety and planning and child protection – I mean much of the public sector – these should be shut down. If at the end of your first month in power, you have not shut down half of the State, you are failing. If you have shut down half the State, you have made a step in the right direction, and are ready for still further cuts.

Let me emphasise that the purpose of these cuts would not be to save money for the taxpayers or lift an immense weight of bureaucracy from their backs – though they would do this. The purpose is to destroy the Establishment before it can destroy you. You must tear up the web of power and personal connections that make these people effective as an opposition to radical change. If you do this, you will face no more clamour than if you moved slowly and half-heartedly. Again, I remember to campaign against the Thatcher “cuts”. There were no cuts, except in the rate of growth of state spending. You would never have thought this from the the torrent of protests that rolled in from the Establishment and its clients. And so my advice is to go ahead and make real cuts – and be prepared to set the police on anyone who dares riot against you.

I fail to see how you would face any electoral problems with this approach. Most Conservative voters would welcome tax cuts and a return to freedom. As for those who lost their jobs, they do not, nor ever will, vote Conservative.

Following from this, however, I advise you to leave large areas of the welfare state alone. It is regrettable, but most people in this country do like the idea of healthcare free at the point of use, and of free education, and of pensions and unemployment benefit. These must go in the long term. But they must be retained in the short term to maintain electoral support. Their cost and methods of provision should be examined. But cutting welfare provision would be politically unwise in the early days of our revolution.

I have already spoken longer than I intended. But one more point is worth making. This is that we need to look again at our constitutional arrangements. The British Constitution has always been a fancy dress ball at which ordinary people were not really welcome, but which served to protect the life, liberty and property of ordinary people. Some parts of this fancy dress ball continue, but they no longer serve their old purpose. They are a fig leaf for an increasingly grim administrative despotism. I was, until recently, a committed monarchist. I now have to admit that the Queen has spent the past half century breaking her Coronation Oath at every opportunity. The only documents she has ever seemed reluctant to sign are personal cheques. Conservatives need to remember that our tradition extends not only through Edmund Burke to the Cavaliers, but also through Tom Paine to Oliver Cromwell. We live in an age where it is necessary to be radical to be conservative.

But I have now spoken quite long enough, and I am sure you have much to say in response. I therefore thank you again for your indulgence in having invited me and the politeness with which you have heard me.

[A combination of silence and faint applause]

Comment 1: You accuse the Conservatives of having ignored you for twelve years. From what you have just said, it is a good thing you were ignored. Under David Cameron’s leadership, we have a Conservative Party that is now positively desired by the people. Your advice is and would have been a recipe for permanent opposition.

Response: I disagree. There is no positive desire for a Conservative Government. If there were, the polls would be showing a consistent fifty point lead or something. What we have is a Labour Government that is so dreadful that I have trouble thinking what could be worse.

[In a private conversation before my speech, I said that the Labour Party had turned out to be about as bad in government as the Green Party or the British National Party or Sinn Fein.]

There are two ways of doing politics. One is to listen to focus groups and opinion polls, and offer the people what they claim to want. The other is to stand up and tell them what they ought to want, and to keep arguing until the people agree that they want it, or until it is shown not to be worth wanting. I think I know what sort of politicians will run the next Conservative Government. What sort of politicians do you want to be?

Comment 2 [from an Irishman]: What you are saying means that the country would be without protection against obvious evils. With no child protection services, children would be abused and murdered. Without planning controls, the countryside would soon be covered with concrete. Without planning controls, cities like Manchester would be far less attractive places.

I will also say, as an Irishman, that I am offended by your reference to Oliver Cromwell, who was a murderer and tyrant. You cannot approve of this man.

Response: You have been taken in by the Establishment’s propaganda. This is to insist that we live with vast structures of oppression, or that we must accept the evils they are alleged to curb. I say that that these structures do not curb any evils, but instead create evils of their own. We have, for example, seventy thousand social workers in this country. They appear to have done a consistently rotten job at protecting the few children who need protecting. instead, they are taking children away from grandparents to give to strangers, and are setting the police onto dissenting ministers who allow their children to climb onto the roof. None of this should be surprising. The Children Act and other laws have created a bureaucratic sausage machine that must somehow be filled. I say let it be destroyed along with all else that is evil in our system of government.

[What I might have said, but was too polite to say: As for Oliver Cromwell, he was one of the greatest Englishmen who ever lived. It is partly thanks to him that we have just had around three centuries of freedom and political stability. When you refer to his actions in Ireland, you are repeating Fenian propaganda. What he did in Ireland has been exaggerated by the enemies of England, and in any event was in keeping with the customs of war universally admitted in his own time. If you want to throw an offended fit every time an Englishman in London praises an English hero to other Englishmen, you should consider moving to Dublin where all the letter boxes have been painted a reassuring green, and your own national sensitivities never need be offended again.]

Comment 3: All you speak about is winning and the destruction of enemies. Yet you are willing to consider keeping the welfare state. You are nothing but an unprincipled trouble maker. Thank God the Conservative Party no longer has any place for people like you.

Response: If we were facing the sort of Labour Government we had under Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson, you would be right. However, we have an Establishment that has already given us the beginnings of a totalitarian police state. Today, for example, the authorities will start collecting details of every telephone call, text and e-mail sent in this country. Children are about to have their details stuffed into a giant database that will enable them to be monitored by the authorities until they are adults – and probably through their entire lives. We live in a country were privacy is being abolished. Speech is increasingly unfree. The police are out of control. Everything is getting rapidly worse, and it is easy to see the end state that is desired, or total control.

If a government of radical conservatives ever does take power, it will have one attempt at saving this country. That means radical and focussed actions from day one. Anything less than this, and it will fail. I am suggesting a revolution – but this is really a counter-revolution against what has already been proceeding for at least one generation. If we are to beat the heirs of Marx, we must learn from Marx himself.

Comment 4: You are wasting our time with all this radical preaching. People do not want to hear about how they are oppressed by the Establishment, and how this must be destroyed. What they want to hear is that taxes are too high, that the money is being wasted, and that there are ways to protect essential public services with lower taxes. That is why the Taxpayers’ Alliance has been so much more prominent than the Libertarian Alliance. We must have nothing to do with the ranting lunatics of the Libertarian Alliance.

Response: You may have a desire for electoral success that I do not share. But I am the better politician. All debate is perceived as taking place on a spectrum that has a centre and two extremes. If the Libertarian Alliance did not exist, the relevant spectrum would simply reconfigure itself with the Taxpayers’ Alliance at one extreme, and the centre would be still less attractive than it now is. Since most people consciously take centrist positions, it is in your interest – regardless of whether I am right – to say what I do. It makes you and your friends moderate in relation to me.

[At this point, some unfortunate woman began screeching that I was a fascist, and the debate came to an end.]

[I normally like to comment on these events once I have described them. I think, however, the above stands by itself.]

NB—Sean Gabb’s book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, can be downloaded for free from http://tinyurl.com/34e2o3

Terrorism and a Police State: now Dame Stella Rimington speaks out…


….but not here – in Spain.

David Davis

As we say often, “Sean Gabb has often said that….”

Sean Gabb has often said that…..


…the “war on terror” is a thinly-veiled excuse to set up a Police State in the UK.

David Davis

I was initially not agreeing with this, thinking that the “terror” does actually exist, and was, is now and will in future be real, and is spoken of in public, with disarming frankness, by our civilisation’s enemies: often on the BBC in the name of even-handedness. But I am now coming round to Sean’s point of view.  However, IMHO the “terror” has not gone away, and anyway is just a tactic of a certain kind of war which is cheap to fight against the civilisation of a sleepy and drugged enemy, like the British population.

The problem is that most people, most of the time, don’t care enough about “terror”: in the absence of a real and immediate war, on the doorstep or overhead, it’s not really possible to keep up a sufficient state of stress in this day and age. I blame the government, its education policy (a real one, to dumb down people truly and on purpose), their friends in the broadcast media who work to this objective also, and i blame “people” themselves, for falling for it all and lying back (not) thinking of England.

Regarding terror, this state subsists for so long as they have been drugged into the statist stupor of thinking that “The Government” is “doing something” and “bringing in tougher laws”…it all sounds so as if someone is “in charge”…..so we can all get back to the latest Jade Goody stuff (poor woman, she’s dying, can’t be long now…please please put us all our misery out-of quickly, will someone (Yoda again)) and “Big Brother” and the X Factor, whatever that is.

The Devil, Peace be Upon Him, quotes from an article by Chris Dillow of Stumbling and Mumbling, focussing on the British Police State issue which is where I meant to come in. From tomorrow, it will be an offence in the UK to take photos of the Police.

(So you’d better not or else you’ll get your computer(s) seized. And your DNA forcibly taken and reverse-engineered – this I think is much worse than what it would mean for you children….who knows if they’re not going to try to clone suspect “extremists”, so they can then security-theatre-arrest them, in the years to come, thus reinfocing the fear of terror?)

There is a very interesting comment thread on the Chris Dillow article.

Libertarian Alliance Bulletin


Director’s Bulletin
14th February 2009
Introduction
Libertarian Alliance Publications
Media Appearances
Speaking Engagements
Libertarian Alliance Events
Libertarian Alliance Book Recommendation
Libertarian Alliance Conference
Negative Scanner Needed

It is cold. I am working hard to finish a book before April. My Baby Bear is now running about the house with more hands than the average Indian goddess. The other Officers of the Libertarian Alliance are also busy. Even so, there is something to report.

Our first publication of 2009 is Anthony Flood, Is Anarchy a Cause of War? Some Questions for David Ray Griffin, Philosophical Notes, No 81
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/philn/philn081.htm
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/philn/philn081.pdf

Our Editorial Director is working on several other publications at the moment, and we expect to bring out at least as much in 2009 as in the past few years.

While on the subject of publications, I will take the opportunity here to announce to the whole world what I have been telling people for several years in e-mails of response. If there is anything published by us that you want to republish, on the Internet or in hard copy, please feel free to do so. We do not ask for payment. We do not require to be asked in advance, or to be sent copies of republished material. In return for this general licence, we ask the following:

  • That the Author and the Libertarian Alliance should receive full attribution in any republication;
  • That the Author’s words should not be edited to bring him or the Libertarian Alliance into hatred, ridicule or contempt;
  • That if a work is republished by any organisation that normally pays for material, the Author should receive fair payment.

I am on the radio sometimes three times a week. Sadly, I am usually too disorganised to record the event. Here are details of the only two recordings I have been able to make this year:

4th February 2009, BBC Radio, “Was the BBC right to suspend Carol Thatcher for racist language?”
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2009-02-04-sig-thatcher.mp3

I wrote at some length on this issue in my essay “On Golliwogs, One-Eyed Scottish Idiots and Sending Poo Through the Post“, available at:
http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc180.htm

12th February 2009, BBC Radio, “Was it right for the British Government not to admit Geert Wilders to show his anti-Islam film?”
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2009-02-12-sig-islam.mp3

This one needs a little explaining. Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician who has made a film that claims Islam to be an intolerant religion. He was supposed to come to England last week to introduce a showing of his film in the House of Lords. However, after protests and threats of mass protests by various Moslems, the Home Office told Mr Wilders he would not be allowed into the country.

The BBC is a pro-ruling class propaganda organisation that masquerades as a public service broadcaster. This usually means that it will support the Labour Party on any issue. When it thinks it can get away with it – for example, in claims about “climate change” – the BBC will openly lie and then refuse to give airtime to dissenters. In other cases, it will set up token debates that can be waved at anyone who complains later about bias, but that do not allow opposing points of view to be fairly put. My 12th February debate was of this second kind. A lawyer who is also a Moslem and a woman was allowed to speak about three times longer than I was. She was able to claim without any pretence of hard questioning that Islam was a religion of love and peace and that this was evidenced in The Koran. She insisted that the Gert Wilders denial of this was deeply offensive to Moslems and that his film should be banned.

I was finally allowed to make my response, knowing that I might be cut off at any moment. I made two rapid points: first, that modern public order laws are a blank cheque to anyone able to put a mob on the streets; second, that if this woman wanted to live in an Islamic state, she should consider moving to Iran or Pakistan. I added that, as a woman lawyer, she might get the occasional bucket of acid thrown in her face, but would never have to feel upset about her faith.

Why do I take part in these Potemkin debates? I do so first because they sometimes turn out to be real debates. The BBC is an increasingly totalitarian organisation, but not every minute of airtime is yet controlled. I do so second because, however compressed or bluntly, it is possible to utter truths that the listeners might not otherwise hear. The listeners, of course, already know the truth. But it can brighten their day to hear it put from within the lie machine itself.

Sadly, while I am in continual demand for programmes like Drive Time Cumberland, I am never allowed on Question Time and hardly ever on Newsnight. Such, however, is the nature of the BBC.

I have agreed to speak at the following meetings:

Monday, 16th February 2009, 7:30pm – Conservative Future meeting, Westminster. I will probably denounce the Conservative Party. If I do, I shall certainly receive a polite hearing. The difference between the two main parties in this country is that Labour is evil in root and branch, while the Conservatives are just too stupid to understand what has been done to us since 1997. I think this is a closed meeting. If not and you wish to attend, you should contact Lauren Mc Evatt <lmmce86@hotmail.com>

Sunday, 22nd February 2009, 2pm – Marlborough Group meeting, The Town Hall, Marlborough, Wiltshire SN8 1AL. I will speak about the need for conservatives to bear in mind that all the things they have defended for the past hundred years have now been destroyed or co-opted, and that conservatives must start to think how conservative values in the future can be embodied in what may have to be a revolutionary settlement. If you are interested in attending this meeting, please contact Robert Francis <remfrancis@googlemail.com>

Thursday, 26th February 2009, The Oxford Union. I shall oppose the motion “This House Would Restrict The Free Speech of Extremists”.I think these meetings are restricted to members of the Union, and I do not know if they are recorded. But I am to speak at one.

Tuesday 17th March 2009 between 6.30pm and 8.30pm – The Second Annual Chris R. Tame Memorial Lecture and Drinks Reception, at the National Liberal Club, One Whitehall Place, London SW1 (nearest tube Embankment). Professor Kevin Dowd: Lessons from the Financial Crisis: A Libertarian Perspective. Full details at:
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/conferences/crtmemlec09.htm

Society for Individual Freedom

I often refer to the Society for Individual Freedom as a “sister organisation” of the Libertarian Alliance. Since the LA is actually a breakaway organisation from SIF, it is more correctly our mother organisation. Whatever the case, its quarterly magazine, The Individual is now out. You can find SIF at:
http://www.individualist.org.uk/index.htm

My very dear friend, Richard Blake, has now had his second novel published by Hodder & Stoughton. The Terror of Constantinople has been received with universal applause. You can buy copies from Amazon at http://tinyurl.com/bgx5a2. You really should buy a copy – preferably two or three dozen copies.

I also recommend the following from Civitas: Nick Cowan, Total Recall: How Direct Democracy Can Improve Britain, Civitas, London, 2008. This is one of the few Civitas publications that I can wholeheartedly recommend. It suggests radical democracy as a cure for the New Labour dictatorship. You can order it from Amazon at http://tinyurl.com/c93jr6

This has been set for the last weekend in October 2009 at the National Liberal Club in London. As yet, we are unable to make any announcement regarding speakers or subjects. However, bearing in mind the continuing economic collapse, we have decided for a second year to keep the conference fee at the old rate of �85. So many of our friends have now lost their jobs and are facing hard times in the year ahead, that we feel obliged to dip further into our reserves to subsidise the conference. Do stand by for more detailed announcements.

I have several thousand negatives from the Chris R. Tame collection of photographs. I want to have these scanned in for upload to the Internet. Is there anyone out there able and willing to lend me a good negative scanner?


Sean Gabb
Director, The Libertarian Alliance
sean@libertarian.co.uk
Tel: 07956 472 199

http://www.libertarian.co.uk
http://www.seangabb.co.uk
http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk
http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com

FREE download of my book – Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back
Wikipedia Entry

Libertarian Alliance home

Labour “Peers” and “cash for law changes”: the buggers get off.


Of course they will: whatever did we suppose?

David Davis

There are two nations now – firstly, the one the Enemy Class inhabits (see Dr Sean Gabb’s site for further clarification of these buggers) into which there is Active Transport of money, up a very very steep Concentration Gradient.

And then there is the one they chain us in  – fenced in by cameras, terror-police and DNA databases, where the money is produced, and from which it is extracted, as if we are their farm animals.

At least Old Holborn has said something about this sad matter. Everybody else seems as bored as we are.

If I was a British Terror-Policeman, then I would of course “finger” the Church.


David Davis

I mean, it’s the obvious, necessary and right thing to do.

Hitler enjoined ultimately that, in all churches in the Reich, the altar would only feature “Mein Kampf (open), an Eagle, and an unsheathed sword”.

Stalin told the IRA, sending them away with a flea in their ear, that they were “not serious at all”, since they had “not shot any priests or bishops”.

Thanks to The Remittance Man for spotting the project.