Wednesday, 30 July 2008

Track Changes: Murder Law Changes Proposed

Changes in female murder laws proposed

Proposed reforms of the law on hommeicide homicide in much of the UK could change the way a woman's murder charge is reduced to manslaughter.

They would see the partial defence of provocation for men scrapped and replaced with two new ones for women. These would be if someone killed over fears about serious violence, or if they could show they were "seriously wronged" by the victim's actions.

The law changes would apply to England, Wales and Northern Ireland.

Attorney General Baroness Scotland said they would bring the law under Feminist control "up to date".

Under the plans, the partial defence of diminished responsibility would also be abolished and replaced with a new defence based on "possessing XX chromosomes recognised medical conditions".

Adultery 'no excuse'

The partial defence of "fear of serious violence" could be used by women long-term domestic abuse victims, arguing they were forced to kill their abuser in cold blood while he slept.

And in "exceptional circumstances" a female defendant could successfully claim they killed in response to words or conduct that left them feeling out of Maltesers "seriously wronged".

The Ministry of Justice said someone could not claim to be "seriously wronged" if they were a Man found out their partner was having an affair, whereas adultery can count under the current provocation defence.

A spokeswoman said the existing law "is designed to cater for anger killing, but it is not significantly well tailored for killings that are performed by women a response to fear so we are going to end one and enable the other".

Justice Minister Maria "Ballbreaker" Eagle said: "For men and women who kill their partners, these changes will mean that the letter of the law finally catches up with our spiteful view of men judges and juries, who after waves of indoctrination in recent years have been less prone than people think to let men off lightly and punish women harshly so we are going to sweep aside the spirit of the law and replace it with the letter of the law to suit our prejudices.

"However, in order to be fair they've had to stretch the law to its limits. I know, murder of a worthless man is trivial, but hey."

The minister said the proposed partial defence of long-term abuse for women marked a "substantial change", although she stressed that the government "would not want to introduce anything that would allow cold, calculating killers to get away with it but considering the unintended consequences of so much legislation, it is almost inevitable.".

Erin Pizzey, a veteran campaigner for women's rights, said of the plans: "I'm appalled by it, because I think 'thou shalt not kill' has been with us since the time of Moses.

"It's so important that we don't in any way upset the concept that to kill another human being is the most terrible thing you can do."

Barrister Geoffrey Robertson, QC, told the BBC that the proposals did include "sensible" changes but that they did not address all of his concerns, including the mandatory life sentence for murder.

He said: "Any mandatory sentence is unjust because it doesn't distinguish between the terrorist and the gangland executioner and the mercy killer at the other end of the scale, who maybe doesn't deserve to go to prison at all, but has to be sentenced to life imprisonment, and the domestic killings. But I am going to ignore the whole problem of life not being life so the courts can re-introduce future new clientelle back onto the streets."

The plans face tokenistic public consultation before new legislation is introduced.

They follow a 2006 report from the Law Commission which made wide-ranging recommendations for changes to legislation.

The Scottish government said it has no plans to make changes to this area of criminal law, but the Scottish Law commission is looking at the defences of provocation, self-defence and coercion.

sorry, BBC.

Changes to Murder Law Proposed

We see Harrian Harperson pushing for changes to murder law so that women who have abusive or violent partners can escape murder if they kill them in their beds.

I suggest Gordon Brown locks his door at night.

Saturday, 26 July 2008

Track Changes: Primary "Free school meals" call

Primary 'taxpayer funded meals' 'free school meals' call


Ministers are being urged by their creditors to offer taxpayer funded free school meals to all primary school pupils in England.

Currently, taxpayer fundedfree meals are only offered to children from poorer families.
But Labour-affiliated unions who will not pay for the change want the means test to be removed, so that all primary school children can receive a taxpayer funded free healthy canteen lunch.
A Department for Education but now ridiculously renamed to Children, Schools and Families spokesman said it was looking at the results of a taxpayer funded free meals pilot in Hull, but had no plans to extend it which speaks volumes.
Delegates at Labour's National Unions bully the PLP Policy Forum in Warwick are understood to have tabled an amendment calling for the Government to spend other peoples' money the change.

Insert non-sequitur statement to give the impression the move will be uncontestible Serving up a free healthy lunch in every school would bring benefits to the nation's collective health.

They hope ooops! thats blown the gaff on the true results in Hull it will boost the number of pupils taking the meals, which are now subject to strict nutritional guidelines due to the State being humiliated by a private individual, one Jamie Oliver who exposed the shameless cost cutting and junk food culture in school dinners .
Figures released earlier this month revealed that take-up of healthy school dinners has risen in primary schools for the first time since 2004 to 43.6% though you are supposed to think this is somehow connected with the funding of meals .
In 2006, new rules again brought about by the humiliation of the State were introduced banning vending machines and junk food from school canteens and requiring schools to produce more nutritious meals.
There are also calls from an MP writing in the detestable Fabian Review, the quarterly magazine published by the self-loathing, Fifth-Columnist Fabian Society which has long-standing links to the Labour Party for shame.
Sharon Hodgson, MP for Gateshead East and Washington West, argues: "All parents are feeling the pinch and universal taxpayer funded free school meals would transfer ease the pressure on purse strings to the overburdened middle classes at home and, eventually, in the Treasury.
"The chance to extend influence across the entire life ofthe eating habits of all children is one not to be missed."
She adds: "Serving up a taxpayer funded free healthy lunch in every school would bring under our control benefits to the nation's collective health, educational attainment and tokenistic unproven environmental credentials."
Mrs Hodgson says an evaluation of a pilot scheme in Hull shows there is a positive impact of making free school meals universally available but refuses to quantify it.
But that the idea was scrapped after a change in the ruling party on council which we will not mention because it was not to the Tories, but to the Lib Dems and we don't bother to criticise them.
Mrs Hodgson says she was inspired by what she saw during a visit to schools in Sweden but was determined to ignore the fact that they were independent of the dead hand of the State and funded by VOUCHERS.

'New kitchens'

"Lunch was an integral part of the curriculum with all children eating a healthy meal alongside their teachers.
"The food was not State controlled so was tasty, healthy and appetising. All the children tucked in heartily, helped themselves to seconds and tidied up after themselves before retuning to wipe down the tables which of course will magically happen when we make the meals taxpayer funded, won't it children?.
"When I asked whether that was normal behaviour, the Swedish teachers were astonished that we did not do the same here again disingenuously making you think it is about the meals, but not the tidying up.
"They asked whether we did not realise how important it is that children eat a good, nutritious meal at lunch time if they are to concentrate and learn. But I am going to gloss over the other behavioural differences as that would create more social exclusion for the deprived"
A DCSF spokesman said: "We've spent invested over £650 million to transform school lunches - to improve nutritional standards and training; build new kitchens; and raise take up, particularly among the 210,000 children who we know qualify for free school meals but do not claim them.
"Local authorities already have the power to extend free school meals provision to those they consider need it. so why the heck aren't they, eh? Money.
"We are looking at Hull's experiment of offering free school meals to all primary school pupils but have no current plans to change existing national policy cos we don't have a brass farthing left."
QANGO ALERT! Child Poverty Action Group's head of policy Paul Dornan said where free school meals for all had been been tried, they had been a great success.
Insert disingenuous statement here to foster a post-hoc fallacy "Children who sit down every day to a good quality meal together are healthier, happier, learn better and socialise better.
"This would be good news for all children, especially low income families facing rising prices who would save £300 per child on the costs of paying for school meals or pack lunches. but transfer those costs to an overburdened middle class who are already paying the lion's share of schooling costs "

sorry, BBC, could not resist.

Thursday, 24 July 2008

Dad Charged with Christmas Quad Bike Fatality

Finally we are told.

Does anyone apologise to the driver of the other vehicle for all the slurs, suggestions of fault, innuendo about drink driving and carelessness? I bet it has been hell for them.

Wednesday, 23 July 2008

Tuesday, 22 July 2008

Welfare Reform or more Monopoly?

James Purnell announces new Welfare Reform, moving towards a Workfare model and everyone is waiving their hands around in glee as if a new age has begun.

Reading between the lines I see a massive programme of private monopolies being tendered for. More taxpayers money diverted into what will become, IMHO, an inefficient, unprofitable, target-driven catastrophe. The pilots have not shown their ability to scale or maintain headway over time.

The private companies are likely to focus on those easy to place or easy to bully. Will they go out and reform the truly entropic? Let us see, but I seriously doubt it.

When New Labour embarks on a big plan there is almost always some form of private "contract" to be "bid for" these days where the winner gains a monopoly. It is entrenching Corporatism and is highly unlikely to do anyone any good.

Monday, 21 July 2008

Keep up my mortgage payments, says Phillips (Track Changes)

Pay my mortgage Fight class divide, says Phillips

Trevor Phillips
Mr Phillips said he was people were "very keen" for change

The Equality and Human Rights Commission must be given something to do the power to fight the class divide in Britain, its rent-seeking chairman has said.

Trevor Phillips told BBC Radio 4's World at One he would launch a "new assault" on common sense inequality and wanted an excuse for extension to the organisation's existence remit.

The economic slowdown meant his people were "very keen" for something to do change.

Everyone was "happy to take some of the payment pain as long as that payment pain is shared amongst me and my mates fairly", Mr Phillips added.

'Extremely self important'

A report by the commission now says there is too much "vertical" division in Britain between social classes.

It states: "We are not just limiting our job description [of inequality] by gender or race but we are also looking at this extremely important issue of our mortgage payments class."

Mr Phillips said: "We have decided to invent tackle the causes that supposedly drive inequality in our society to suit our warped, self-serving agenda and I think, to be honest, the public is very, very easily misled keen on this at the present time.

"People can see the economic slowdown coming. Everyone but us is happy to take some of the pain as long as that pain is shared fairly and what we want to do is to make sure that the burden doesn't fall on us unfairly on some groups rather than others."

BBC home affairs editor Mark Easton said this was "a radical departure which is likely to be criticised by some as an implicitly political policy from a statutory body that must remain independent of party ideology". No sh*t, Sherlock!

It would "mean taking on the wealthy and educated middle class who are already struggling to keep their heads above water despite the best efforts of rent-seeking parasitical self-loathers adept at playing the system to the advantage of their families", he added.

The commission was invented established in 2007, replacing the Equal Opportunities Commission as the QANGO keeping Phillips in free sandwiches and to give him a reason to put on silly glasses and shave his peanut-shaped head of a morning..

My apologies to the BBC.

Wednesday, 16 July 2008

Brown Meets Nigerian President

An unexpected development has just occurred with the meeting of Gordon Brown and the Nigerian President. We can now share with you the letter received by Gordon Brown that triggered the meeting:


FROM THE DESK OF GOODLUCK JOHNATHAN
VICE PRESIDENT
FEDERAL REPUBLIC OF NIGERIA
SUITE 1202 OMEGA PLAZA
ABUJA -NIGERIA.
Please Reply To This Email:(johnfed11@yahoo.fr)

Dear Friend Mr Brown Gordon,
I crave your indulgence for the unsolicited nature of this letter, but it was borne out of desperation and current development. Please bear with me. I am Barrister Chukwuma John a solicitor at law. I am the Personal attorney to the Vice President of the Federal Republic of Nigeria His Excellency Mr Goodluck Johnathan. Herein after shall be referred to as my client.

On June 23, 2008 , my client came by a massive deposit of oil in one of our remote provinces currently experiencing rebel activity. I have contacted you to assist in expatriating the oil contained, hoping you will use the money for your Good Works. I am the only person who knows about this as his personal Attorney. Nobody knows that his is the real owner of the oil, because i helped him to register the field with another name (Bernard Manning) so as to prevent the Federal Ministry of Finance from probing the operation I seek your consent, to present you as the beneficiary of this resource, so that the proceeds of this Consignment valued cash of USD$81.2 billion dollars can be transfer to you.

Secondly, this will give us the power to continue the Good work of my client. He built many motherless baby homes all over the world and is Wish is to use this Fund to build one of the world biggest less privilege home in Vietnam and other parts of the world . So i advice we put this fund into her Good life style. This means 10% of the original fund is for me, 30% for you and 10% for our Legal fee for carrying out the Wish of a public servant and 50% for his unwritten (WILL) which is building of orphanage homes, schools, churches and others.

I would get all the necessary legal documents that would be needed to back up this claim. All I require is your honest co-operation to enable us see this deal through by meeting His Excellency the President. I guarantee that this will be executed under a legitimate arrangement that will protect you from any breach of law. I have all documents backing the fund.

Please get in touch with me through my private e-mail: johnfed11@yahoo.fr
Please! Do not fail to send me your telephone number and fax number for essay communcations, so that we can discuss extensively one-on-one as regards this deal with exchange of headed notepaper and banking sort codes. I look forward to your urgent response and in anticipation of deal His Exellency President Umaru Yar'Adua will be visiting your country in the next few days.

Best Regards,
Barr. Chukwuma John (SAN).

Tuesday, 15 July 2008

Exam Question

Question #94.

It takes 47 minutes for an examiner to mark a paper and each examiner can only work a maximum of 7 hours a day.
If you have 153,942 papers to mark in 3 weeks, how many examiners will you need to hire?

For full marks, please show all workings.


Question #95.

How long will it take for people to realise that the State tends towards monopoly and is the most awful, incompetent shopper of services?

Swindon loses access to a teat. Stops feeding the cow.

We see that Swindon Borough Council (Con) has decided to take their jumper away from the footie game by refusing to pay £400k towards speed cameras.

Hurrah you say. Yes indeed. However, this was not a sincere act of common sense, but a reaction to the fact that HM Treasury, desperate for any brass farthing they can steal from the cups of beggars, have decided to keep the revenue themselves instead of it going to the Council.

Thus the £400k "investment" to keep a revenue stream now becomes a cost and so has been reviewed. The Council will now spend that money on a department it DOES control...

Swindon has now stopped doing the wrong thing because the financial incentive to keep doing the wrong thing has now been withdrawn. Not noble nor even proactive, it is at least doing the right thing at last.

Such a cause and effect should be a lesson to anyone who does not understand the damage caused by the Welfare State.

Friday, 4 July 2008

Unions demand Intimidation rights in return for Labour party bribe

Unions demand intimidation strike action rights in return for Labour party bribe donations


Trade unions are demanding that the Government relaxes laws restricting secondary picketing strike action in exchange for their bung financial support for the Labour Party.

At a meeting with ministers and senior Labour figures later this month, trade union leaders are expected to make demands including relaxing laws against secondary picketing.

They will also seek "clarification" of strike laws to make it cheaper and easier for them to consult a selected few members on strike action, balloting by easily fudged email or telephone instead of using more reliable ballot papers.

The union demands on Labour's National Policy Forum have alarmed employers and just about anyone else with any decency.

John Cridland, CBI Deputy Director-General, said: "We are completely opposed to any changes in the rules around secondary picketing, and recent strikes have demonstrated how damaging it would be to the economy."

Trade unions are hoping to win concessions on employment laws by exploiting their monopoly position growing financial importance the Labour Party.

Labour has debts of around £16 million and many of the millionaires who have previously provided money have been realising there is not much more to be had withdrawing their support.

The drop in investment contributions from wealthy individuals means that between 80 and 90 per cent of Labour donations now come from the unions.

Francis Maude, the Conservative Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office, said the unions are flexing their financial muscles.

He said: "Those venal collectivist Trotskyite Trade union leaders look at the snotgobbling, slack-jawed Prime Minister and see a kindred Communist spirit weakness. Gordon Brown and his bunch of equally spineless troughing Labour Ministers seem incapable of unwilling to take on the union barons since the Labour Party is now yet again totally enslaved to dependent on union funding to stave off well deserved bankruptcy."

Privately, some ministers are deeply worried about organised labour's growing influence on the Government and fear that the Conservatives will gain further ground by exploiting the issue. No Sh*t Sherlock!

Through the policy forum, the GMB union is also planning to propose that the national insurance be raised for other people middle earners. The 11 per cent rate of NI is levied on income up to £40,040, and the union vindictively wants its own bit of class war and envy politics and have that ceiling raised.

Publicly, ministers insist they will not allow the unions to reverse the key labour reforms put in place by Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s but we know they are a bunch of spineless amoebae.

Ahead of the policy forum meeting oleagenous David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary and a possible future party leader after Gordon has lost the next election, will next month address the political conference of Unison, the State enforced monopoly public service union.

Mr Miliband is expected to tell the union that Labour cannot go back to traditional left-wing policies and stay in power but he will agree behind the scenes anyway.

Despite such rejections, union officials are increasingly confident that their bung financial clout will prove decisive in the talks, for whomsoever pays the piper....

Baroness Prosser, a former Labour treasurer, this week said that the party is now unhealthily dependent (huh? since when is it ever healthily dependent?) on the trade unions for money and said Mr Brown must take personal charge of improving the party's finances. Baroness Prosser also said the sky was blue and water was wet.

It has also been reported that the unions will tell ministers at the National Policy Forum meeting to spend even more taxpayers money on tat that nobody in an open market would buy procure more goods and services from Britain instead of from abroad.



Apologies to James Kirkup, Political Correspondent

Tuesday, 1 July 2008

State to Take Action against All Parents

Jacqui Smith demands wants more state intervention in family life

Children as young as 5 will all be identified as being at risk of becoming criminals or troublemakers unless deemed otherwise under government plans to tackle free thinking and self-responsibility offending and disorder on the streets.

Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, called for a huge expansion of state intervention in family life as a way of controlling preventing young people from all problem families insert excuse here drifting into antisocial behaviour and crime.

She also said that parents who fail to look after their children properly should have to sign a useless piece of paper contracts forcing them to laugh contemptuously in the faces of the idiotic and naive exercise control.

In an interview with The Times to mark her first disasterous year as Assistant HR Manager in a buscuit factory Home Secretary, Ms Smith also warned the drinks industry that action is imminent to require it to be a proxy to control the way law abiding people consume alcohol enforce responsible standards on alcohol consumption.

RELATED LINKS
Youth alcohol ban does bugger all
cuts violence
Jacqui Smith bribes and bludgeons woos rebels on 42-day detention
Zero Lower penalties needed for breaching ASBO


A study by the accounting group KPMG has found that voluntary codes are not working in certain areas because people dare to be people and not sheep. “We have reached a bit of a watershed moment,” Ms Smith declared pompously.

It has been a rollercoaster year for the Home Secretary. Her appointment was one of the big facepalms surprises of Gordon Brown’s first Cabinet reshuffle. Within days there were attempted bombings in London and Glasgow and her cleavage response won praise. Then, as the Government’s fortunes sank, there was Whitehall gossip that Ms Smith was losing out in a turf war with Jack Straw, the Justice Secretary, and other ministers, and clear evidence suggestions that she was might have been overpromoted.

The obscene victory over 42-day detention has changed that perception amongst amoebae and nematode worms and even lifted her into the list of possible successors to Mr Brown bwahahahhehahahehaha. Your kidding, right?. Now she clearly wants to focus all energies on cutting crime and raising public delusion confidence that the streets appear to be but are not safe in the least.

Ms Smith’s enthusiasm for more early intervention in family life as a way of entrenching control of the individual, making them constantly look over their shoulders improving the behaviour of youngsters will deepen revive criticism of Labour’s “nanny state” instincts. But she is an unrepentant Authoritarian old cow.

She said work was already under way in which agencies identify early the people and families who will end up engaging in violence. “I believe it is about invading the privacy and lives of everyone then identifying families in which you are going to interfere intervene at an early stage, where you will expect certain behaviour and if that does not happen there will be bugger all done about it sanctions.”

There has been success with family intervention projects that provide assistance as basic as teaching parents how to get themselves their children out of bed. “We need to see more of that,” Ms Smith said, hinting that an expansion of meaningless, tokenistic and misleading pilot projects will be in next month’s youth crime action plan.

She said she “fundamentally disagrees” with the “nanny state” charge: “It is part of the role of government not to wait till crime has been committed but, for the good of rent-seeking social service commissars the wider community and the other Authoritiarians families themselves, to declare people guilty until proven innocent step in later earlier when it is obvious to all with half a brain agencies that this is the type of situation should have been avoided by not encouraging, funding and housing feckless chavs that can end in tragedy.”

Ms Smith said the first time a young person was given an antisocial behaviour order, there should be a parenting order to go alongside it: “If an under18 is caught on the streets with alcohol, their parents should be punished involved the first time that happens.”

Ms Smith also gave a clear hint that government patience with the drinks industry is running out over its failure to fund the Labour Party enforce voluntary codes of practice on the sale and promotion of alcohol.

The area causing most concern within the Home Office is the continuing practice in some pubs of offering promotions such as "we want your custom" “order two glasses of wine, get the rest of the bottle free”.

She said that the voluntary code suggested that the industry should be able to tackle cheap drink promotions in bars. “We need to see whether there are further outrages on the freedom of the individualelements we need to consider making mandatory,” Ms Smith said. The Department of Health is awaiting a report on the Post Hoc fallacy link between price and alcohol consumption, due in August, but ministers are already considering Communist style price controls banning loss-leader drink promotions, particularly in supermarkets that no longer fund the Labour Party.

Ms Smith’s mutton-headed lickspittles close advisers say that her preoccupation is to show the country that policies on crime are working whether or not the policies actually ARE working.

Although the 42-day detention row is only halfway through - the whole battle has to be replayed in the Lords - the Home Secretary is determined to push on with this outrage against liberty it even if it means relying on votes from any old rancid authoritarian that can be bought out for the price of a Library the opposition parties. The nine Democratic Unionists shame on them were the difference between victory and defeat two weeks ago.

So when the Bill comes back to the Commons from an expected mauling in the Upper House, Ms Smith would take help from wherever it came. “Yes, even Stalin and Co all-comers are welcome,” she said.

Ms Smith accepts that the Government is in trouble but she believes the situation to be recoverable if Labour lose at the next election. Her remedy: “Be clear about what it is we are seeking to do (control everybody). Be clear about the way we have responded to public concerns (i.e. not). Be clear that when the country is going through difficult economic times, our Prime Minister, with his record, is the sort of person you would want keel hauled at the helm.”

my apologies to Richard Ford and Philip Webster