Classic Sociofascism: Punish all for the crimes of the few

Two cases: Prostitution and Mobile Phone use in cars.


Yes, there are women trafficked. Awful. Modern slavery. Yes, some men abuse women. Awful acts by cowards. Does this mean each transaction means a trafficked woman being abused? No, it most certainly does not. The Government has criminalised brothels but not prostitution or purchasing sex then wonders why women ply their trade on the streets. Surely the issue is to outlaw crime, not outlaw behaviour that is not in itself criminal.

BTW Dennis McShane was so patronising on Newsnight to Sian Williams. I am no fan of her, but she did put forward the Libertarian line well, considering the priggishness she was confronted with.


Mobile phones are a distraction at the best of times, let alone when driving. Some say that the distraction from holding the phone is higher than an hands free, though by how much is not so clear. It does appear on the surface to be a fairly sensible step in that ONLY if the driving is dangerous will further punishment be sought. As far as I can tell the law need not be changed as existing driving law should cover phone use in any form, even if the recent phone laws were repealed. I fyou are not driving with due care, then you need to be nicked. However, unlike the changes to prostitution it does seem that potentially only when an actual crime is being committed will the law come in. I say potentially, as I have no faith that common sense will prevail. I suspect that first we have the fine captured by some jobsworth PCSO, Parking Attendant or such, then the other punishments bootstrapped in later.

Coming back to hand vs hands free, research suggested that it has the same effect as drink driving. I suspect having kids in the car could on occasions have at least the same effect as talking on a mobile phone, if not far worse if they kick off. This might explain the chaos during school runs, which, if you follow the logic, could well be worse than the worst chucking out times where everyone drives home drunk. However, this is far too sensitive so other drivers will be persecuted. Even daring to explore the logic on road safety grounds of banning single adults in a car with multiple children will not be contemplated, yet the same effects on other actions will be targeted. An excuse for one behaviour and not another is not good for Rule of Law.

The Four Athiests of the Appocalypse

Dawkins, Chris Hitchens, Dan Dennett and Sam Harris were captured in an unscripted 2-hour talk.

Thanks to those at Rational Response much of this has been captured.

Wonderful to see these guys at one place and in full flight.

Chris, inventor of "Falwell's Enema" and possessor of the world's first Titanium Liver. A hero.
Dan, so concise on biogenetic issues with a dry wit. ID is crushed.
Dawkins, out-scholars the "scholars".
Sam Harris is not known at all well to me, but that is all my fault, not his.

Good Post, not so sure about the conclusion.

Steve Baker posts a couple of good quotes here.

A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and he carries his banners openly. But the traitor moves among those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not traitor, he speaks in the accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their garments, and he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of a city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to be feared. — Cicero, 42 B.C.

The worst difficulties from which we suffer do not come from without, they come from within. They come from a peculiar type in our country who if they add something to its culture, take much from its strength. Our difficulties come from the mood of unwarrantable self-abasement into which we have been cast by a powerful section of our own intellectuals. They come from the acceptance of defeatist doctrines by a large proportion of our politicians. But what have they to offer but a vague internationalism, a squalid materialism and the promise of impossible Utopias? — Winston Churchill, St George’s Day 1933

These two quotes touch on one of my constant themes - that of the Fifth Column, the traitor within who wears down people as surely as water wears down stone or fungus eats at the most hearty oak given time. Combined, as anyone should know, the effect is magnified.


His conclusion - to become a Conservative MP - is not what I would have suggested, but he may well have reasons which I am not fully aware of yet.

Charlie Falkener: Saucer of Milk, Table 2.

I hear Charlie boy has just spoken out against the 42 day limit for detention. I wonder if his view will change if he gets his way over his pension...

Uxbridge English Dictionary Pt.94: Urchin.

Urchin: where to hit Hazel Blears.


Hat tip: "I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue", R4.

What Really Happened: Another Nail into Freedom's coffin in Europe

Via DK, via Trixy.

I am utterly fuming why this was not shown on the BBC. Who are they working for? Well, certainly not US that is for sure. We are forced to pay for them yet, as is a trend these days, we have no say and they operate against our interests.

Did this appear on C4 or any MSM in the UK? I see Reuters covered it.

If Channel 4 did not show it, maybe it should call itself "Column 5" instead.

Priceless quote

Perry deHavilland lays it on the line:

This year for Christmas we are having one of these wonderful multi-birds and I am very much looking forward to it. However after reading some of the comments here, next year we are going to eat a PETA activist stuffed inside a Greenpeace activist stuffed inside a Animal 'Rights' activist stuffed inside Gordon Brown's voluminous carcass (with a non-'Fair Trade' apple stuffed into his mouth).

Merry Christmas and God Deliver Us All... from priggish activists of all stripes.

Gordon Brown: Town Clerk of Britain pt.2

The scumbags have done it.

Gordon Brown can sign his own sovereignty away if he so wishes. He can become an indentured servant or a lickspittle to a tyrannical regime, even, but the creep has no god-damn right to sign away MY rights and freedoms.

Lee Jasper's House

It has come to light (hat tip Guido) that "Red" Ken's equality parasite Lee Grasper Jasper, salary £117k p.a., lives in a £90pw Housing Association 3 storey period house in Clapham. Nice.

Alot of fuming. However, Grasper Jasper could well of gained this des res when he was paid what he was worth in the real world skint and so eligible, so in itself one should be wary of suggesting any form of skulduggery or corruption before the facts are known.

The fact that I consider him a worse than useless leech is another thing.

A number of points.

1. The Housing Association, and in fact all subsidised housing providers, should be sensible enough to perform regular means testing to ensure they are providing housing to those who actually could do with it. It seems this HA is not. I wonder if they are State funded? If I were working there or a trustee, I'd be very embarrassed by now.
2. The above is compounded by right to buy. That is a policy for the Housing Association, but I would not want to donate to an HA that gave discounted right to buy without any real checks. If they are State funded, I am being forced to donate, so I do not want them to do it. One wonders how many of these properties are bought then immediately sold on for a cash profit for the Tenants, a profit that one would THINK the HA would like to use to continue its work...but oh no.
3. The tasteless scumbag has put a satellite dish on the FRONT of the property, about 8ft from the ground. Lazy dolt - what about snicking it against the chimney, just over the roof hip and so out of sight? In my book that desecration of the property would get him evicted!

Fencepost No.6: Taser Police

It seems the Police are to be supplied with Tasers (Hat tip to Henry North London).

This development is a classic Fencepost. One day people who are no physical threat to anybody will be Tasered just because it is convenient to get them out of the way or silence them such as at a demonstration or political rally. I expect that people will have the Tasering event placed on their records. "Nice". This will place further barriers between the Police and the public. It will entrench the strategy of making the Police 'owned' by the Government and not a force that operates for and with the consent of the public. This is just what the Sociofascists want. They hate any form of allegiance that is not under their direct control and directed one way - towards them.

Next year's Labour Politburo Party Sales Presentation Conference might well end up seeing a tasering or two, considering the intense justification any rational being that attends (unlikely though that is) will have for yelling out "NONSENSE!" to any of the speakers - a reaction I have whenever I hear one of their grinning shaved gibbons.

Iain Dale on Small Government

Here.

Shame I do not believe the Tories would do this for decades.

There is a Party that would, though, and it isn't UKIP!

Part Wedge Identified

Baroness Warsi did confirm today (BBC TV) that the Sudanese officials wanted to hand over Ms Gibbons, of the Sudanese Teddy Bear, to a Muslim representative.

There you have it. Both Peers should be thoroughly ashamed of themselves for such pandering.

Freedom and Wedges.

The Primary School Teacher at the centre of the teddy bear row has been pardoned as a result of the visit by Lord Ahmed and Baroness Warsi.

This is a good thing, but two issues need to be borne in mind.

First, we must not allow the precedent to be set that Muslims only deal with Muslim issues. This is a step towards first a parallel system and then one that subordinates the non-Muslims. The delegation was not officially endorsed by the F&CO, at least.

Secondly, we need to remember that the MCB did complain bitterly and showed intense embarassment, but let us not remember that in the middle of this, and even as part of their pleading their case to the Sudanese, the MCB reserved their right to be outraged should the circumstances (e.g. not a bear, for example) were different. This fetishisation of Mohammed needs to be resisted. If they want to do it, fine, that is their PERSONAL view, but such a view should not be permitted to impinge upon the lives of others.

Both the points above warn against subtle wedges being inserted into our lives. Should they be permitted or allowed to go by default, then that would be something no amount of visits from their Lordships would pardon.

Fencepost No.5: US Kidnapping.

The US has admitted in a UK Court of Appeal that the Supreme Court of the US has declared, unilaterally, that it has the right kidnap people abroad and specifically the UK and render them back to the US for trial.

Considering examples of the Nat West Three, this can include crimes committed abroad, by foreigners upon foreigners or foreign registered legal entities.

This is a further entrenchment of US Extraterritoriality.

US Extraterritoriality is arrogant and Imperial. They are their own worst enemies. What would, what CAN their defence be if Iran, China or any other country adopted similar laws? America cannot in any reasonable fashion declare that only they can have such powers of Extraterritoriality. Their concept of Extraterritoriality appears to be an expedient response with untold and unintended consequences.

Should other countries adopt the mechanism, the checks and balances of Extradition, such as they are, would become sidelined. If extreme force is used to apprehend, such actions can tip over into assassination. America appears to be pro-actively letting the genie out of the bottle. If we slide towards anarchy and Imperialism, America will be responsible for greasing that slope.

Ron Paul is campaigning for a return to the American Constitution. The American Constitution and Bill of Rights contains many aspects of our own BoR that was laid down in 1689. Both appear to suggest this law unconstitutional.

In permitting this, the Supreme Court of the United States of America has shown itself to be a bunch of blithering IMBECILES.