Who Will Rid Us...

...of this turbulent Priest?

The bearded old goat Archbishop of Canterbury, thinks that adoption of elements of Sharia in the UK is "inevitable".

I suppose anything bad is "inevitable" when you are a self-loathing, guilt-ridden fifth columnist like "Dr"* Rowan.

He is an imbecile. A dangerous "useful idiot", a panderer, an appeaser. I suppose he is hoping for a seat at some religious table, but you bet he would be happy with a subordinate seat, as long as he had a seat. He is a loathsome creature.

Let us not be mistaken. Anyone who thinks that Sharia will remain an option once it gets its claws into the system is a fool. It is Totalitarian creed practised by Totalitarians. I suspect it is touted as an option, a "voluntary" code as long as both sides wish it. Do you really think for an instant that this will remain so? Very soon it will become mandatory, maybe not in law, but by brute aggression. Muslims will be intimidated to conform to Sharia "courts". It is easy to see how it can be done - if you do not, you are not "muslim", but apostate...and we all know what that can lead to. Once this is entrenched, we will see demands for any dispute or legal action involving a Muslim to be performed via Sharia "courts". Sharia "courts" will become the "superior" system, and by superior I do not in any way suggest better - quite the reverse - just in terms of precedent over people's lives.

Sharia "courts" operate the inquisitional system as happens in Europe. A "judge" collects evidence and makes a judgement. There is no right to your day in court, no right to cross examine. It is not the adversarial system we have where defence and prosecution work to produce the evidence before a jury which is then advised by a judge, but who's advice the jury can decline to take. We are judged by our peers in the UK, for all its faults, not some self-absorbed, bearded totalitarian with a chip on his shoulder.

Inquisitional systems are VERY BAD for Rule of Law.

We have recently seen the moonbattery that is paying out benefits to imported illegal extra wives. We see more hints at pandering:

"If there are specific instances like stamp duty, where changes can be made in a way that's consistent with British law and British values, in a way to accommodate the values of fundamental Muslims, that is something the Government would look at." Gordon Brown.

This is the road to serfdom. Let me say that again. This is the road to Serfdom. Very soon we will see the need to get "approval" from the MCB or whohaveyou to ensure that any new tax is "Islamic". They will have a veto, or even finagle an exemption. They will get to see the budget before anyone else and their approval will be sought. It is utterly unacceptable. We saw hints of this when the MCB were worming their pimply backsides into meetings to "pre approve" anti-terror raids. MADNESS.

To "Dr" Williams, Gordon Brown, Jack "shit" Straw, the MCB and all totalitarian mysogenistic bearded goats out there I have a message for you:

If you want a disgusting inquisitional legal system, live in a place that practices it. England has the finest legal system known to mankind - HANDS OFF.

* "Dr of fairy tales" does not really wash with me, frankly.

Housing: It's The State, Stupid.

We see some extraordinary nonsense from the hatchet-faced angler fish Caroline skin Flint, suggesting the unemployed be denied access to council housing.

The unemployed will gravitate towards subsidised housing, and council housing is the vast bulk of that. Who does she think will be in council housing?

Well, for me the interest is an issue behind the inanity, imbecility and general puffery of her "policy" which is being and has been well shredded in the press and on blogs. I need not go into the point that she is systematically an awful, nasty piece of work. An arrogant, robotic Blears-in-waiting sound-bite generating question swerving, ladder-kicking lickspittle of the political class. Anyone who saw her in "reset mode" during the Politics Show when she projected a reality distortion field around the question of denying some bearded hate-mongering scrote entry into the UK that the Town Clerk of Britain refused to confront should be used in evidence and played as a backdrop to her eventual air tap dance.

But I digress...

For me the real issue is the involvement of the State in housing. If the State were not landlord of last resort or a builder and operator of vast housing stocks, interfering Authoritarian rent-seekers like Flint would not be able to get her polished fingernails into people's lives in this way - it would just not be her business. The remit of the State would be about if people are entitled* to various benefits such as unemployment or housing, not to give it out with moralistic strings, or, as Samizdata's Guy Herbert coins, Moralitarianism **

This "policy" is just the tip of the evil iceberg that is Statism and the Authoritarianism that it fosters. Once you get the State "in charge" it cannot help but grab control. Once you make the State responsible you prevent people being responsible for themselves and the consequences of their actions. You infantilise people via the poisoned chalice of Welfarism. You make them dependent and thus a client. The dependency implies strings and strings ask to be tugged and teased, like some grotesque Mafia Godfather. This is no surprise. The State is Enforcer in Chief, after all.

The answer is to remove the temptation. The State should not provide vast amounts of housing directly. Look at what they become - economic deserts. If anyone uses the term 'deprived', let them know what entity, if any, does the depriving - the State. Who stops people moving from one location to the other, treating people like cattle? The State.

I believe the key to State/subsidised housing lies in a simple rule: that nobody in receipt of State benefits including housing benefit in cash or in the form of subsidised State housing should be able to increase said allocation of housing. This specifically applies to those who enlarge their families via births, marriages, taking on more "dependents"***, importing family members, bigamous foreign-wed wives or whathaveyou. If you are living in State housing with your mum and you pop a sprog, tough - there you stay. No more rooms. No separate flat. No bump up the list. You want more kids, then do what all the poor working taxpayers have to do - earn more to pay for it, squeeze up or move under your own steam.

* sorry, I hate this word.

** another term came up in that thread - "benetax" a form of tax and benefit mix loved of the FibDumbs. Sounds like a haemorrhoid cream, and quite right as that hits to me at where I think it deserves to be shoved.

*** technically they cannot be "dependents" as someone who is dependent on another - in this case the State - is not really in a position to have their own dependents in truth.

MP Advice Packs Proposed

New MP's should be told not to touch people's money without permission, spit on our traditions or milk the system, Communities Secretary Hazel Blears has said.

Ms Blears proposed that Parliament issue welcome packs to MPs explaining UK customs, including advice on queuing.

The government says it wants to help newcomers integrate into Britain.

Public funding should also be aimed at the whole community, not single troughing groups, to "strengthen what we have in common", Ms Blears added.

The proposals are being introduced following the Commission on Parasites and Corruption, which held a 10-month review into the challenges caused by the Political Classes.

'Legitimate and necessary'

Under the government's plans - which are being published for consultation - information packs produced by Parliament would suggest how new MPs could contribute to the legislative process and avoid community tensions.

This would include promoting shared values like respect for the law.


ADVICE TO NEW MPs

Don't drink and drive
Don't drop our Sovereignty
Turn up for voting on the correct day
Make sure everyone's children can attend a decent school
Get a licence before you go fishing for bribes
Don't touch people's cash without their permission
Respect the law
Avoid spitting on our Nation
Don't play the system too obviously

According to new guidelines, bodies which distribute taxpayers' money to projects would have to consider whether they allow people from different backgrounds to integrate or whether they cause division.

Ms Blears said that Britain had a proud tradition of welcoming new MPs from constituencies who come to the House to work hard.

She added: "It is only right that we expect MPs to play by our rules. In return we have a role in explaining just what those rules are.

"Information packs are a way of getting that info across - providing a rough guide to the country, the county and the city and helping to ensure that new arrivals avoid doing or saying things that might upset decent taxpayers or getting into trouble with the law."

Amit Kapadia of the group HMSP Forum, which campaigns on behalf of skilled MPs, said he welcomed the introduction of the packs.

He added: "But this shouldn't just be targeted at one section of the Political Class - as well as being an introduction to the House, the packs can act as a reminder to people who are MPs and Councillors already."

Apologies to the BBC.

Political Cancer UK pt.5: Peter Hain

Peter Hain has been rumbled paying is 80 year old Mum £5,400 for secretarial services. Now, it is nice that The Right Robusall Member for Not Paying Attention gives money to his Mum, but HOW ABOUT USING YOUR OWN CASH FOR A CHANGE!

Hat tip, Guido.

Double Dose of Moonbattery: Hygene and Polygamy

We see two examples of utter moonbattery.

First, some Mulsim medical students are refusing to wash themselves properly due to the fact they consider it "immodest". Fine, they are free to think that and to not wash themselves, so long as they don't become a nurse or a doctor. I cannot see how such a person, once "qualified" would be able to properly treat a male stranger anyhow. Ah, lets follow this logic. Once qualified, such practitioners will go on to demand to be given roles in "women only" environments attended by women who also do not want to be treated by "men", i.e. special Muslim Women environments. Of course, once these are in place, the bleating and complaining will ensure that such a unit shall not be less funded or have lower standards than any other facility otherwise the discrimination flag will be raised. Think about that for a moment: no worse than any other, sounds innocent enough, doesn't it? Or does it - that means at least equal to the best, or better than the best. DO NOT PRESUME THIS WILL NOT BE THE CASE. Cannot the Government see how the wedge is being slowly put in place?

No, I forgot our Government is chock full of self-loathers, panderers and imbeciles.

Talking of which, we also see that the DWP is to give additional benefits for polygamy, i.e. benefits for Muslim men. It includes housing support, so I suspect we will see a room for each wife and all the 6 and 7 bed properties snapped up by the State to provide subsidised housing! Who decided that nonsense? There is absolutely NO reason to have even put this forward. Which pressure group was behind this? Why on EARTH even spend a microsecond considering if such an idea was even worth considering? Who went totally out of their way to put this forward? Why was it not thrown out immediately? Have they not enough things to spend our money on? Who ARE these people? Who lobbied for this?

I WANT NAMES!

Political Cancer UK pt.4: Wendy Alexander

The Telegraph reports that Dr Jim Dyer, the Scottish Parliament's standards watchdog, has sent a report to the procurator fiscal in Lothian and Borders.

UPDATE via the BBC:

"I don't think anybody's future should be called into question on the basis of following the advice of parliamentary authorities" - Wendy Alexander, Scottish Labour leader.

Of course she'd say that - what a ridiculous statement for the BBC to put out!

Ms Alexander is saying she will not quit. Fine. Sack her, someone?

Political Cancer UK pt.3: Derek Conway

Derek Conway is still an MP. He should not be here. There is no honourable way out but for him to resign, to seek to RETURN the money or have his sons actually WORK for, lets say, Hazel Blears as a researcher (HB decides if they have earned their money) for a fee to pay back the money.

For him to not confess and thus go through the pantomime of enquiry and review is a disgrace.