Meanwhile the government moves ahead with assault on internet freedom

Back in the dying days of the last government, in the 'wash-up', i.e., in the last session before the general election, there was an incident which sent up a flare that the Tories had no intention of making good on any of that civil liberties stuff they were happy to mouth while out of power. They voted through the Digital Economy Act.

They could have killed it as easy as crushing a snail under the heel of a hobnail boot, but they didn't. Why didn't they?

Because the Tory Party are scum, who hate our freedom. How can anyone with a conscience support this rank, despicable government?

Political BS from Danny Alexander

Oh yeah, if those immoral tax-dodgers didn't minimise their bills, the rest of us could have a tax cut. That back-of-fag-packet calculation notwithstanding, we all know that would not happen.

Danny Alexander is merely attempting to distract us from the huge amount his state coerces out of us. The government cannot live within its means. If they were able to shake us down an additional amount to cover the difference between current revenue and current expenditure, i.e., enabling a 'balanced budget', they would take the opportunity to borrow a whole lot more and spunk that away.

What these turd politicians like Alexander are not prepared to do is look unto themselves, and simplify the absurdly weighty tax code. Can he explain why the UK tax code is six times as long as its German equivalent?

I suspect what we are seeing with all this celebrity tax dodge stuff is a softening-up campaign to prepare the way for a new law stating, in effect, that the Inland Revenue will be the sole arbiter of what or isn't tax evasion, in other words some kind of 'enabling act' for the taxman, of the type called for by that collectivist nincompoop Richard Murphy.

How to tell when the government has grown too large

As any libertarian will tell you, government is way too big. The only thing we disagree about is whether the ideal situation would involve culling 90%, 95%, 98% or 100% of what now exists under that banner.

What minarchist and anarchist will unite upon is that the government issuing pamphlets telling parents not to discuss dieting in front of the children, for fear of having a negative effect on the child's "body image" is an outrage, which would be halted in the first 24 hours of a libertarian coup.

Hasn't the Home Office got better things to do, like maybe catching some of those foreign rapists it has failed to deport?

Labour goes after anti-immigrant vote, but not convincingly

Ed Mil’s statement on immigration, heralded as some kind of admission of mistakes when the party was under previous leadership (i.e., somebody else’s fault), deserves little attention. There is no apology in his words, nor should we expect or give respect to any one that was forthcoming. The truth of the matter has long been known, that Labour purposefully embarked on a policy of mass immigration, intent on socially engineering the population and obtaining political advantage. The propaganda spin that the government was ‘wrongly advised’ on the numbers is a stinking and cowardly lie.

Additionally, let us look at his proposals to deal with the problem his party helped create. As a true Big Gov authoritarian, the answer is new laws for the rest of us and new shackles on business. Moreover, the ostensible ‘apology’ is quickly turned round into an attack on capitalism:

He said: "Labour has to change its approach to immigration but you cannot answer people's concerns on immigration unless you change the way your economy works.”

So, there you have it. The problem: government. The solution: more government!

Finally, casually inserted down the article we see the driving force behind Ed’s change of heart:

“Polling recently published by Policy Exchange shows that a Labour shift on immigration and welfare would be the single most important issues to win back Labour swing voters.”

Jimmy Carr: gutless, hypocritical tosser

I was going to defend him ... and then I read his craven "I've made a tewibble ewor of judgement", explaining how he has now pulled out of a totally legal (as far as I know) tax-avoidance scheme, because of a little astro-turf outrage from collectivist drones, so fuck that.

Paying tax is not a moral obligation. It is a legal obligation. People pay tax because if they don't they will be pursued by the government and forced to pay. If, for some strange reason, you like paying taxes or are happy to pay taxes, bully for you, but don't delude yourself that you have a free choice in the matter.

Not only does paying tax earn you no moral capital, it could well be something of a moral abdication, given what the state does with so much of it.

Doctors kill more people than smoking

From the Daily Mail:

NHS doctors are prematurely ending the lives of thousands of elderly hospital patients because they are difficult to manage or to free up beds, a senior consultant claimed yesterday.

The figure given is 130,000 every year, which comes in way above the usual stat given for smoking-related deaths, 100,000, and the number 130,000 is only the intentional deaths. Once you add in the errors and the negligence, you're going to need to recalibrate the graph.

Via a comment at Pat Nurse's, I see the miserable anti-smoker zealots are using the occasion of great-grandmother Violet Phillips 101st birthday to denounce her for smoking, after she attributed her long life to the antiseptic qualities of tobacco smoke.

Last night British Lung Foundation Scots chief Dr James Cant said: “Violet’s story is extraordinary as very few smokers live to such an old age.”

But he added: “The best birthday present she could give us is to finally quit the habit.”

I suggest not only the fags but also keeping away from the murderous quacks has played a part. Remember, these are the people who protected the most prolific mass-murderer in British history, Dr Harold Shipman.

Harold Shipman: hero to the twisted misanthropes of the NHS

I shall be pointing this out the next time some tax-payer-funded lobbyist from the Department of Puritanism and Control starts lecturing me on matters in which he has no legitimate interest.

Maggie on form

Hmm, very interesting interview with Maggie. I can't embed, so check out the link. It seems to be prior to the 1987 election. The only draw-back in a fine performance from hers truly is the wingeing and whining Scottish interviewer.

If the Victorians could see us now

Over at the Graun, there's an article about the crisis we face over body image:

... the women who make up the world's only Centre for Appearance Research (Car) are talking quietly about perfection. I arrived here after following a trail of newspaper reports – on the effect of airbrushing in the media, on men's growing anxiety about their weight – reports used variously by politicians and educators to highlight the way our world is collapsing...

The world may indeed be collapsing, (see Syria, Spain etc. for details) and it may be connected indirectly with the way supposed adults see themselves when they look in the mirror. I guess this is what happens when you breed a nation of perpetual adolescents, never taught to take care of themselves or responsibility for themselves, never permitted to bear the consequences of their mistakes, brought up to believe there will always be a government daddy figure to wipe the tears away, to give them housing, to educate their kids, to take away their elderly relatives for quiet euthanasia, etc. etc.

I have recently been reading a fair bit from Sir Ernest Benn (see below), and have been constantly struck with the similarities between the predicament of this country and the world in the 1930s and 1940s and the present time. In 1933 he wrote about 'This Soft Age'. What scorn he would have for us now.

It was the porn wot dun it

A twelve-year-old boy rapes a nine-year-old girl. Who's to blame? Well, according to the judge, certainly not the boy, who indulged the boy's plea that it was the internet porn wot dun it, and those who are seeking to clamp down on the freedom of the internet are happy to let justice be sacrificed in order to back up their case.

It is indeed true that the internet has widened and facilitated access to porn, just as it has to all manner of information, but even if we accept without question that porn has a corrupting influence, we are still obliged to deal with a violent young offender, who has shown himself to be a danger to others. The judge may choose to believe that the crime was his response to viewing the porn, but this is not a usual or natural response, and if the child is capable of this crime now, what should we expect in the future?

In a humane society, there are no easy answers to how to deal with dangerous young criminals, but exonerating them of all responsibility is no answer at all.

WTF on steroids

As Jackart puts it, here is 'today's "fuck off" moment: the discovery of a monstrous cabal in the heart of government. No, not the Bilderberg Club, meeting this weekend in Chantilly, VA, I'm talking about something perhaps even worse:

The All Party Parliamentary Group on Body Image

Jackart writes:

It's one of those moments when you realise the political class is so far from understanding the concerns of the people that you feel we're doomed. The politicians neither understand the limits of their power, nor understand appropriate causes on which to deploy it.

How else to rationalise this insanity?

Schools should hold lessons in body image and self-esteem, MPs said in a report on Wednesday which said that children as young as five worry about their appearance and weight.

The crushing irony is that it is the state - as ever - which has done more than anything else to foster and nurture this attitude in young children.

Hat tip to Dick Puddlecote for reminding me.

MP in expenses scandal; in other news bear shits in woods

I can't be arsed to even raise an eyebrow to the latest candidate for the stocks on Westminster Green, Baroness Warsi.

I don't really care.

What does anyone expect?

Can we, peradventure, quit imagining politicians to be any better than us, recognise that they are not, and stop putting so much power into their hands?

The advantage with this would be that we could return to what we are biologically supposed to be: ADULTS!

Lottery Fund plundered by puritan lobby groups

We may not stand a chance in Eurovision, but this news should help us jostle past Nigeria and Bangladesh in another contest. Dick Puddlecote notes the interesting fact that one of the oligarchs in charge of the cash happens to be a key acolyte of the temperance fanatics' Scottish operation.

You know, I'd actually prefer it if they just awarded it to themselves to buy jewels and fast cars.

The greatest advert for preserving the Union ...

... is that bunch of jumped-up control freaks in the Scottish government. I'm guessing they draw their inspiration from the tradition of Presbyterian miserablism the English have long associated with their northerly cousins. Their strategy is to create differentials between us and Scotland, and in most cases this is achieved by being even more creepily authoritarian, or perhaps, and this is much the same thing, by being more 'European'.

Fishface and his pals do doubt brood over the old Alliance with France, and dream of the day when they can plunge the dagger of treachery into the back of their constant and long-forgiving neighbour on behalf of some foreign potentate or prince. Hey Alec, here's a suggestion: why don't you recognise Argentine sovereignty over the Falklands?

Austerity Tory Style: £250 million handed over to biotech buddies

The next time a Tory claims they support capitalism and free trade, could you please point them towards this article at the Ministry of Truth, wherein the government hands over £250 million to the biotech industry.

I wouldn't mind so much if they were honest to themselves and came out and told us straight that they hate capitalism and actually prefer a centrally-planned economy. At least then we'd all understand each other. They could accept what they are: collectivist, authoritarian scum, and I could attack them on this basis, without having first to explain what the fuck free trade and capitalism ain't - such as socialising the costs of biotech companies, producing 'food' no one in their right mind would eat, all the while telling us we should work harder and pay more taxes. You greedy, robbing parasites.

Mr Willetts said ministers had a key role to play in working with business, researchers to support innovation and ensure its commercial success...

He said: "It is what they do not just in Germany or South Korea but in the USA too. We should not let myths about free market America inhibit us from doing the same here."

"We are backing the risk takers, and are willing to take a risk ourselves."

Pardon the language, but WHAT A CUNT. What risk is this piece of trash taking? He's giving away our money! As for 'myths about free market America', that's not paper-thin, that's air. I have no doubt that America is descending into a fascist police state, run by criminals, but that hardly justifies following suit.

If Willetts wants to take a risk, may I suggest Russian roulette.

Hat tip: The Waspsnest

I'm glad I'm not a Tory ...

... It means I can look myself in the mirror and at least know, obscure and inconsequential my life no doubt is, at least I'm not guilty of supporting shit like this:

The Deputy Prime Minister will announce a sweeping “social mobility strategy” intended to break the grip of middle-class families on the best-paid jobs and the most highly regarded universities.

In his most strident remarks on college access to date, he will tell universities to recruit students “on the basis of an ability to excel, not purely on previous attainment”.

Ministers will aim to ensure that children born into working-class homes can find better jobs than their fathers held, amid evidence that “a large number of professions remain dominated by a small section of society”.

Mr Clegg will announce that the Coalition’s social policies will be rated against 17 new indicators, ranging from babies’ birth weight to adults’ job opportunities.

Opening the best colleges to working-class students is essential to create a country “where what matters most is the person you become, not the person you were born”, he will say.

Secundo Proverbs 26:11 "As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly", only in this case, the dog returneth to some other mangy cur's spewings, that being of the last government, the red party, who are expected to come out with this kind of lunacy of overbearing, interfering social engineering with the thinly-veiled hatred directed at the middle class. The ironies, of course, start with DP Nick Clegg, a silver-spooner if ever there was one. What the fuck he knows about the working class, could probably once be written on a fag packet, if it wasn't now all taken up with photos of cancerous lungs and smack needles.

Seriously, Tories, what the fuck are you worth? Because of your stinking loyalty to that bunch of snooty traitors, whose policies might as well be dictated by the ghosts of Sidney and Beatrice Webb, we're all well and truly lumbered.

If you can't save the country, at least save your own souls and GET OUT OF THAT PARTY!

Boris Johnson and the BBC

Via EU Referendum and Christopher Booker's Telegraph column I learn that Mayor Boris is calling for the next BBC supremo to be a Tory:

The Mayor of London insists the corporation, which is funded by the taxpayer, must be run by someone who is “free-market” and “pro-business”.

Boris, chum, I'm sure you mean well, but try to think things through. You need to be consistent. If you believe in free markets, follow the logic, apply that logic to the BBC. It cannot be changed from what it is by sticking some smart Alec free-trade Tory in the big chair (supposing you could find a free-trade Tory), any more than you can change a pack of wolves by appointing Larry the Lamb as the alpha male.

A BBC spokeswoman said: "BBC News is committed to impartiality and we reject Boris Johnson's assertions of bias.

I'd laugh but I'm snarling too much. Cutting to the chase; the BBC must be smashed. It is a propaganda machine, funded by coercion, cranking out disinformation for the benefit of the establishment (e.g. in its 'coverage' of the war on Libya). It cannot be expected to be impartial, when it is part of the Leviathan state. It has influence which Murdoch at his height could only dream of. It is not needed and it never was needed, any more than a government-run newspaper, funded through a tax on reading.

The fact that it has produced some good programmes over the years does not change its essential illegitimacy. If people love it so much, and I don't doubt many do, then they will continue to support it, once it is prevented from using the violence of the state to enforce its monopoly power.

As for the new Director General, I nominate Sean Gabb.

Raising speed limit will save nation £10 billion

Yeah, that's right. I just worked it out following the scientific procedure known as 'lobby mathematics': I picked a high-sounding number and just went with it. Anyone can play that game.

Elsewhere I read: 80 mph limit 'will cost £1bn a year', according to the usual suspects. (so maybe only £9 billion clear profit after all)

The Government is due to consult soon on raising the speed limit from 70mph to 80mph on English and Welsh motorways.

The groups, which include road safety charity Brake, the Campaign for Better Transport (CBT) and Greenpeace, launched a campaign - called No to 80 - protesting at the Government's plans.

They reckon an 80mph limit would result in extra annual costs of £62.4 million from road casualties, including costs to health and emergency services and human costs; £180.4 million in carbon costs and £766.6 million in fuel costs. The groups are writing to Transport Secretary Justine Greening to request a meeting on the issue.

Brake deputy chief executive Julie Townsend said: "The No to 80 campaign calls on the Government to listen to the overwhelming evidence that raising motorway limits is dangerous, costly and damaging. Experts predict it would lead to more lives being brutally cut short and more people suffering debilitating injuries."

I note it says the government plan to consult soon. So the do-gooder mafia aim to get in first. Hey, fuckers, why not wait until the (phony) consultation starts? Also I note 'experts predict'. Oh the unerring experts with their predictions! The anti-car people ought to take a drive on the motorway some time. They'll realise that it won't make much difference. Indeed, I see the limit change as a Trojan Horse to bring in more speed cameras and the concomitant lovely money, as they extort and shake-down the ordinary people.

I wonder how much tax-payer money is handed over by the crooked government to these 'concerned citizens', enabling them to lobby the government?

Oi, Grayling - shut up and like it

Is it true, or is it The Daily Mail? I don't know, I'll have to wait for EU Referendum, nevertheless ...

Britain is launching a battle against EU plans to force the government to allow non-Europeans a benefit allowance.

They have been angered by an EU proposal to sign a deal with Turkey without Britain’s agreement, which could mean Turkish citizens’ would gain access to the UK welfare system.

Chris Grayling, the employment minister, has told British officials in Brussels to argue against the plans later this month, which encroach further on British sovereignty.

How pathetic. "Britain" is most certainly not launching a battle against EU plans. The crooked Tory government can mouth off as much as it likes. The only power Brussels has is the power that the British government willingly gave them, and if Chris Grayling thinks that the 'British' officials in Brussels are going to do his bidding, he's naive to say the least. Seeing as the British government considers anyone who opposes EU membership as a 'fruitcake' or 'closet racist', why don't they openly embrace their willing servitude and shut the fuck up with the faux-whining.

"Swarming Frenchies"? Et alors?

I don't know if Ian Duncan Smith is being spun by the Mail, but the prospect of a 'swarm' of French people moving across the Channel, escaping the red peril of Francois Hollande, does not disturb my sang froid.

Whether it's likely, I don't know. There are no doubt thousands going back and forth all the time. But let us stop for a moment and consider the 'problem', ergo; a socialist government in France will whack up taxes, leading to some people moving their businesses or affairs over here, or, indirectly relocating in the search of jobs, which will be fewer and further in between under the burden of a socialist government. If such a thing is really a problem, the solution would be to whack up our taxes and scare them off. But ... wait a sec, something's wrong with that logic.

As I said above, I don't know if Duncan Smith is being spun, but surely we should be trying to make our tax regime competitive in comparison to other countries, by competitive I mean less monstrously greedy than it currently is. We should be, if we were true to the principles which made this nation great, quite content to see businesses relocating here from the continent. Indeed, if we could ever escape the chains of Brussels wound round our necks by our treacherous mandarin class and their political lackeys, this is exactly what we would expect to happen.

I say Laissez faire. Cut taxes, turn the regulations into fuel pellets, and we can run the power stations for a decade, and make this island a place to do business again, and if that encourages some enterprising Frenchies over, then bienvenue.

Finally News from the Count

Is it la Rivengeta or ... Monte Crist!

What an absolute disgrace masquerading as a count in the London mayoral election. There is no excuse for not starting the count at the latest at 11 pm. Instead what were they doing? Snoozing in bed when somebody should have been counting the ballots in plain view.

How dare they call this an election, when they have not the wit to call the result 24 hours later.