John McTernan

John McTernan; who is that you might ask? Well, you would be right in asking that question. He is a very pointless person in my opinion, who blogs for the Telegraph. Now if you go to the link that I have provided you will find a short synopsis about Mr. McTernan. It says

John McTernan is a commentator and political strategist who works internationally. He was Political Secretary to Tony Blair and has been an adviser on health, welfare, defence and Scotland.

Smack me senseless and call me Charlie, how on earth can he have been an adviser on health, welfare, defence and Scotland. Is he some kind of super academic, perhaps he holds several PhDs in these areas of interest? Maybe he is a savant? All in all he only has one degree from Edinburgh but maybe we are supposed to believe that it has modulus on everything in the whole wide world, hence he is 'qualified' to do anything.

The depressing truth is that he is just another pointless leftie with no real life-experience which could ever remit him even remotely qualified to 'advise' on the fields he has. It would for example be logical to assume that someone who advised on defence would have some military background, you know so that he could actually bring a qualified opinion to the table otherwise his advise is no more relevant than your average Joe on the street, without any military experience. That at least is what common sense suggests, but as you know, Britain no longer does common sense.

Ministers in important departments often have almost no understanding of the briefs they hold. We have had ministers of agriculture who think slurry is a home county. We have had ministers of defence who think a mess is something they must avoid creating. It is almost compulsory to have chancellors of the exchequer who know nothing about economics. What is really uncalled for, though, is when a government appoints to a semi-official position a politician who is not a minister, so has no responsibility apart from seeking attention, and is let loose on something of which he knows nothing. Simon Heffer is on the ball all right...

Now the only thing I can possibly imagine Mr. McTernan being qualified for is being scottish - his name rings of that, at least a bit. But for all I know he might as well be irish yet he still advised on Scotland for some inexplicable reason. Hopefully he'll one day read this blogpost and make a fuss about it - that would be fun.

Not a revolutionary prospect but close

You read it here first, a long time ago actually, but the next election will be the election of the so called "fringe". Only difference of course is that the fringe is not longer the perpetrators of the right or the left, they will be the flag-bearers of the left and the right. Why? Because no other political parties do; they have no colours to nail to the mast and no defining streak which sets them apart from the other in the majestic political landscape (notice the sarcastic hyperbole), they are to all intents and purposes 'centre'. Not 'centre-right' or 'centre-left' but bang, slap, middle of the bar, is where most mainstream political parties have set up camp today, and guess what, I reckon that voters will realise this too a much larger extent once the next election creeps closer. Consider why:

Have we had reduced immigration? No

Have we repatriated power from Brussels? No

Is the defence budget being slashed in the middle of a war? Yes

Can gypsies still set up camp wherever they want? Yes

Is the Human Rights Act going away? No

Is health and safety madness still prevalent? Yes

Is political correctness madness still prevalent? Yes

Are the trains and bus-services still too expensive? Yes

Is Britain still being sold off; lock stock and barrel? Yes

Are the pubs still dying? Yes

Is religious insensitivity to every single fucking thing, still clogging the news? Yes

Is there still too much red-tape? Yes

Are the righteous still preaching 24-7 how we should live our lives? Yes

.

.

.

Now consider why nothing has happened with these rather large issues, it has to with political ideology or maybe it just has to do with vested interests - personally I think it has to with principles or lack thereof rather:

New Labour: Centre-left

Conservatives: Centre-right

Liberal Democrats: Centre-left

The Green Party: useless and pointless

BNP: Left

UKIP: Right

SNP: Centre-left

Now this is what I think is going to happen come the next election. People who at this election were on the verge of not voting for either LibDems, the Tories or Labour wont be on that note again. This time it is abundantly clear that all of their parties have moved away from their traditional ground and into the centre where, as this post so fragrantly demonstrates, everyone hates them particularly those us with a very firm set of principles, and that pretty much entails the entire blogosphere.

The Tories will most likely loose a lot of votes to UKIP because after 13 years in opposition and perhaps two or three in government it is as clear as daylight that they do not espouse right-wing policies. A lot of working class voters will probably shift to the BNP because of 13 years in government they were completely ignored and their two or three in opposition was an abject failure and a complete waste of everyone's time, because they are trying to defend the most abysmal mandate period in British political history. They have not yet succeeded in that goal and if anything it will turn into a pyrrhic victory if they do, but then the party at large will probably disappear as well. Here comes the interesting part; a lot of LibDem voters wont know what to do with themselves. They are at face value left leaning people who were not completely convinced by Labour but they have also come to realise that neither their party nor their most obvious successor, Labour, are going to serve as a reasonable substitute for their vote. Who they go for instead is anyone's guess but probably some really weird party like Socialist Alternative or Trade Unionist & Socialist.

And such is my thesis (and has been for about 1.5 years now, remember you read it here first); The election that really counts was not the one past, but the one we are about to have sometime in the next 4 years.

A few Facts about Mr. Brown

Hat-tip: Subrosa

We used to have 6 independent regulators to regulate the different divisions of the financial services industry, including our Banks. (Margaret Thatcher knew what the Banks were like and in the 1988 Finance Act she bound the Banks up in regulation to prevent them from being reckless).

Then Gordon Brown became Chancellor on 6th May 1997

1. Gordon's banker friends said "We want all these regulators to go, we don't want regulators watching everything we do" Mr. Brown said "OK".

So, Gordon announced on the 20th May 1997 (2 weeks after becoming Chancellor) that the six regulatory bodies would be broken up and a new Financial Services Authority would replace them. The FSA had virtually no powers over the Banks and he also took away the powers from the Bank of England to enforce regulation on them.

2. We used to have a Monopolies and Mergers Commission

Then Gordon's friends said we don't want the Monopolies and Mergers commission telling us who we can and can't "Take Over" - Gordon said OK. So, in 1998 Gordon scrapped the Monopolies and Mergers Commission and created a replacement called the Competition Commission, with very much reduced powers and different ideas of what used to be regarded as a "Monopoly".

3. We used to have pension regulations, which included something called "The Pensions Cap"

The pensions cap set a limit on how much pension any scheme member (including directors) could get from an occupational pension scheme, irrespective of how high their earnings were. It was there to protect the ordinary members pensions. To prevent Directors paying themselves obscene salaries and then draining the pension funds with huge pensions.

Then Gordon Brown's banker friends said that they wanted the pensions cap removing so that they could get pensions related to their obscene earnings. (The whole Pensions industry gave him warnings of the effects it would have. Even the Inland Revenue put forward objections). Gordon said "ok". Because Gordon never likes to disappoint his banker friends.

So Gordon took away the Pensions Cap in 2005 and then some of his friends were able to leave their boardroom positions with huge pensions. For example Fred Goodwin was apparently entitled to a pension of over £700,000. If Gordon had left the pensions cap in place that would have been a mere £125,000.

(The Superannuations Division of the Inland Revenue have kept a record of what it should be, in readiness for when we get a new chancellor who sees fit to re-instate it. George Osborne has pledged to do that). The record of Pensions Cap limits are available to view on the Revenue's website.

4. The result of this is that along with Gordon's "Tax Raid" on pension funds starting July 1997, over four thousand UK company pension scheme's have closed their doors to new members and many of them have had to close down altogether, leaving millions of workers without any pension provision. This man Gordon Brown professes to be a socialist and "for" the working man.

The working man's main form of long term financial security had for many years been his company pension scheme, something to look forward to at the end of a life of hard work, his reward, light at the end of a long dark tunnel. Gordon has put an end to that by destroying the most valuable asset of the average British worker.

5. It is one of the greatest travesties of justice that this man, who pretends to be "for the working man" has in fact been his worst enemy for the last thirteen years and will leave a legacy that we will be clearing up for man years to come. The real injustice is that it's all been done in areas which are totally out of sight to the general public and beyond the understanding of many.

Mr. Brown relies entirely on people's ignorance to get away with his indiscretions.

6. Finally what Mr. Brown likes to call the "Global Banking Crisis"

Have you noticed that we were the first to be in it and are the last to be out (and whether we are out is very speculative).

As he has openly admitted, The Royal Bank of Scotland was the world's biggest bank.
So when RBS and HBOS were about to go BUST in October 2008 and they had to be bailed out overnight so they did not take the entire country down with them, (that by the way was almost certainly a decision made by the hierarchy in Whitehall for which Gordon loves to take the credit).

As the world's leading banks now all lend money to each other on a collosal scale, isn't it obvious that the worlds biggest bank going down would have a devastating effect on all the others it dealt with. This "world's biggest bank" had also sold bad mortgage books to other banks.

Most of the Banks in Europe which ran into crisis were dragged into it because of the crooked dealings of our big banks. A fact that both Germany and France were quick to remind Gordon Brown of at the G20 emergency meeting shortly after the crisis.

There are many other of Gordon's indiscretions, far too many to list here, but perhaps the few biggies shown above will give some insight into how Gordon operates.

By the way have you noticed how he has suddenly become interested in Social Issues now an election is looming and seems to be able to promise the world when, as Alistair Darling put it a few days ago, there is not a penny left in the bank.

The General Election, the outcomes

The general election has three possible outcomes:

1. The Conservative Party will win with a workable majority.
2. The Labour Party will win with a workable majority.
3. There is a hung parliament.

Nr 3 is of importance here because it is by far the most interesting one. This country does not do hung parliament as does the continent. They just break down completely. Some might argue that we had a coalition government during WWII, and we did but the keywords you are missing are in those two 'W's. There was a World War going on, not cooperating means loosing, it is as simple as that. Hence that is a completely moot argument because that was an extraordinary situation handled by an extraordinary government.

Further, Nr 3 is interesting because it presents some very curious consequences. If there is a hung parliament there will almost certainly be a leadership election in either party. Simply because either has failed in gaining a workable majority in the Commons. What is also certain is that there will be another general election within months to sort out the mess that currently inhibits the great halls of Westminster.

This is interesting particularly for real conservatives (with a small 'c') like myself. There is the real possibility that a real conservative takes the helm of the Conservative Party and delivers a manifesto that us conservatives can relate to. I think it is no a secret that most of us are leaving in droves to parties like UKIP and UKLP (scaremongering rarely works such as "a vote for any party but the Conservative Party is a vote for Labour" - bollocks to that). Whilst I see no light in the end of the tunnel with Mr. Cameron there is certainly enough brains and talent in the Conservative party, to produce a leader worthy of the helmsmanship. I am not going to insult the reader's intelligence by listing those people for he or she is most likely more knowledgeable than myself.

We have not had a lot of hung parliaments (for reasons explained above). The most recent elected hung parliament in the UK was that which followed the February 1974 general election, which lasted until the October election that year. Prior to that the last had been following the election of 1929. Hung parliaments can also arise when slim government majorities are eroded by by-election defeats and defection of Members of Parliament to opposition parties. This happened in 1996 to the Conservative government of John Major (1990-97) and in 1978 to the Labour government of James Callaghan (later Lord Callaghan of Cardiff) (1976-79). You can clearly see thus, that the track record is not good for that type of governing in the UK.

And finally, as always, a real conservative would have Britain tell the EU to Foxtrot Oscar.

The Kiwis know how to get things done

This is quite frankly a remarkable piece by one Maurice P. McTigue who is an ex-minister of the New Zeeland government. The Devil has a much more comprehensive summary of McTigue's extremely interesting piece here, but let me just quote a paragraph:

When we started this process with the Department of Transportation, it had 5,600 employees. When we finished, it had 53. When we started with the Forest Service, it had 17,000 employees. When we finished, it had 17. When we applied it to the Ministry of Works, it had 28,000 employees. I used to be Minister of Works, and ended up being the only employee. In the latter case, most of what the department did was construction and engineering, and there are plenty of people who can do that without government involvement. And if you say to me, “But you killed all those jobs!”—well, that’s just not true. The government stopped employing people in those jobs, but the need for the jobs didn’t disappear. I visited some of the forestry workers some months after they’d lost their government jobs, and they were quite happy. They told me that they were now earning about three times what they used to earn—on top of which, they were surprised to learn that they could do about 60 percent more than they used to! The same lesson applies to the other jobs I mentioned.

He could be talking about Britain safe for the solution proposed and implemented by his government.

Law

The existence of law is one thing; its merit or demerit is a completely different matter. I do not understand the current state of things, I really do not. I am straining my mind hard to try to encompass the necessity of what today passes for civilised society in terms of law. The theory of the law goes that the state administers a law that should avenge those it has been unable to protect; it is a system of quid pro quo. If you commit a crime, the state will exercise a vengeance on you, on behalf of the victim. You are the perpetrator and by that vice you have a victim by definition. But here comes the pickle, we all become perpetrators sooner or later due to the sheer volume of things which the state deems unlawful - and by the same token, what we deem unlawful by virtue of our representative democracy. But it appears that more things have become illegal at an accelerated pace over the last few years - naturally, I will not insult your intelligence by explaining why this is, I am sure we all know.

The state rules with a love for order combined with sheer ignorance of mankind. The modus operandi of the western human being appears to be the following:

Get an education, Get a job, Get a wife, Get a house, Get a few kids, work for the about 40 years, Get your pension, trot around doing nothing for 10-15 years, Die.

It seems harsh when put plainly in those words, but that, sadly, is the aspiration of many but they do not know it. Eventually though, most will end up there due to it being the equilibrium solution of the western lifestyle. This is said with no attachments of benefits or drawback, it is an observation, that is all. Now, the above 'life', if you will, is defined by the laws in which scene of operation it exposes itself. Think of it as a funnel.

It used to be that in Britain you met the state, as it were, only twice in your life at the turn of the century; at birth and and at death. That was the way life was then; you chose it defined rather by what class you were in rather than what laws were administered, of course each social class had its own unwritten laws attached to it. The hypothetical judicial funnel back in 1900 was tiny by todays comparison; the slope of the funnel walls was tiny. In fact they were almost flat and most things spilled out rather than pass through the funnel, at which end you would find your life path laid out before you in a similar fashion to that described above.

Today however, the slope of those funnel walls are very different. They have a very large gradient, are viciously guarded so that nothing, god forbid, should spill out and give scent to a notion of nonconformity on the horizon. Today by comparison nonconformity, lawful or not, is bad by definition for one has then spilled out of the funnel. If the funnel spills that means that it is badly designed which means that, it in turn, needs to be improved. It is improved by increasing the gradient, which means, if you did not follow the symmetry and symbolism; more laws. The state today does not administer a law for the benefit of its citizens, good or bad, it simply administers it for the purpose of displaying an authority which sits high up on a pedestal looking down at the unfortunate cretins who happen to be on a lower echelon than the law itself.

New Labour has created more than 3,000 new offences since it came to power in 1997, that is almost one per day. Of all the laws made in the UK somewhere between 75-85% come from the EU. This means that not only is Parliament making laws to stifle the very semblance of meaningful life so too is the EU - our real government.

Are we really that dangerous? Have we evolved from relatively benign creatures, in the social sense, to murderous, 24/7-revolutionary, guerilla fighters? If that were so then perhaps then there would be a justifiable argument to extend state legislature to such a degree. But... we are not reincarnations of Stalin, Che or Nicolae Ceauşescu we are just normal people who want to be left alone.

We all know the official reasons for creating all these laws but an ulterior motive might be to halt the possible inception of a new Lenin - or a person who is independent minded enough to stand up to the dogma and actually bring and end to the destruction from within, which seems to be the only creative exercise going on in this country today. But do they not see, what they are doing is defeating the object of their ulterior; not only are they not preventing the inception of people of that particular pedigree, they are actively accelerating its come-about because they are making each and every one of us so apoplectic with rage, whenever we are reminded by their mere existance.

Courageous and Cautious

Napoleon once said that the two things he most envied about the British were their Caution and their Courage, it made them invincible.

Where Napoleon left of scare tactics took up the reigns.

Y2K, AGW, Swine Flu and there will probably be another virus scare next year, just as we had SARS, Foot-and-Mouth, Avian Flu and Mad Cow Disease etc. The government’s response will be predictable — total over-reaction, again. I wish people could start seeing the trend on scare tactics. Suffice to say if Napoleon knew that this was all it took to bring the British to their knees, we would all be enjoying Chicken Marengo right now, in our freezing little huts seemingly flabbergasted at the gargantuan incompetence of our governments - present and past.

I do not conquer Daniel Hannan, though I like your fighting spirit

Daniel Hannan, whatever you might think of him, is a masterly orator and writer as this piece shows over at his blog.

I am quoting the last paragraph with my emphasis:

"Seven million Swiss, relying on a series of bilateral free trade agreements, have done precisely this and have become, in consequence, the wealthiest people in Europe (see here). Couldn’t 60 million Britons do something similar? We are a nation of seamen and explorers, of merchants and traders, of adventurers and colonists. We are linked to every corner of the world by our language and laws. And, for what it’s worth, we are running a trade surplus with every continent on Earth except Europe. The City must think globally. If we tie London to a shrinking, over-regulated, ageing and sclerotic regional bloc, we are finished."

Are we really that anymore Mr. Hannan? I of course would love for us to be but I think that the Labourities have masterfully succeeded in destroying the majority of the next generation.

-For every Explorer there are a 10,000 quangocrats

-For every Merchant and Trader there are 1,000 civil servants whose soul function used to be just that but now merely work to introduce more and more red-tape; British and EU.

-For every Adventurer there are a 100 lobbyists

.

.

.

These are not honourable people, not anymore, one could make the case that quangoinistas and the civil servants did join their respective agency with clear heart and open mind, to serve their country. One could have made that case, but not anymore since both have been politicised. They are naturally biased towards people with political favouritism - critically setting them apart from their functions as a means to the government's end, not part of the means to that end as they have become.

Nightjack's most useful post

I've put up Nightjacks most useful post, just like lots of other folk.

A Survival Guide for Decent Folk

Paul has posted a number of lengthy replies on the “Modest Proposal" thread. In these days of us increasingly having to deal with law abiding folk who have fallen foul of the “entitled poor” and those who have learned how to use us to score points and exact revenge, I thought it would be a good idea to give out a bit of general guidance for those law abiding types who find themselves under suspicion or under arrest. It works for the bad guys so make it work for you.

Complain First Always get your complaint in first, even if it is you who started it and you who were in the wrong. If things have gone awry and you suspect the cops are going to be called, get your retaliation in first. Ring the cops right away and allege for all you are worth. If you can work a racist or homophobic slant into it so much the better.

Make a counter allegation
Regardless of the facts, never let the other side be blameless. If they beat you to the phone, ring anyway and make a counter allegation against them. Again racism or homophobia are your friends. If you are not from a visible minority ethnic culture, may I suggest that that the phrase “You gay bastard” or similar is always useful. In extremis, allege sexual assault. It gives us something to bargain with when getting the other person to drop their complaint on a quid-pro-quo basis. This is particularly good where there are no independent witnesses. When it boils down to one word against another and nobody is ‘fessing up, CPS run a mile and you, my friend, are definitely on a walk out.

Never explain to the Police
If the Police arrive to lock you up, say nothing. You are a decent person and you may think that reasoning with the Police will help. “If I can only explain, they will realise it is all a horrible mistake and go away”. Wrong. We do want to talk to you on tape in an interview room but that comes later. All you are doing by trying to explain is digging yourself further in. We call that stuff a significant statement and we love it. Decent folk can’t help themselves, they think that they can talk their way out. Wrong.

Admit Nothing
To do anything more than lock you up for a few hours we need to prove a case. The easiest route to that is your admission. Without it, our case may be a lot weaker, maybe not enough to charge you with. In any case, it is always worth finding out exactly how damning the evidence is before you fall on your sword. So don’t do the decent and honourable thing and admit what you have done. Don’t even deny it or try to give your side of the story. Just say nothing. No confession and CPS are on the back foot already. They forsee a trial. They fear a trial. They are looking for any excuse to send you home free.

Keep your mouth shut
Say as little as possible to us. At the custody office desk a Sergeant will ask you some questions. It is safe to answer these. For the rest of the time, say nothing.

Claim Suicidal Thoughts
A debatable one this. Claiming to be thinking about topping yourself has several benefits. If you can keep it up, it might just bump up any compensation payable later. On the other hand you may find yourself in a paper suit with someone watching your every move.

Always always always have a solicitor
Duh. No brainer this one. Unless you know 100% for sure that your mate the solicitor does criminal law and is good at it, ask for the Duty Solicitor. They certainly do criminal law and they are good at it. Then listen to what the solicitor says and do it. Their job is to get you off without the Cops or CPS laying a glove on you if at all possible. It is what they get paid for. They are free to you. There is no down side. Now decent folks think it makes them look like they have something to hide if they ask for a solicitor. Irrelevant. Going into an interview without a solicitor is like taking a walk in Tottenham with a big gold Rolex. Bad things are very likely to happen to you. I wouldn’t do it and I interview people for a living.

Actively complain about every officer and everything they do
Did they cuff you when they brought you in? Were they rude to you? Did they racially or homophobically abuse you? Didn’t get fed? Cell too cold? You are decent folk who don’t want to make a fuss but trust me, it pays to whinge and no matter how trivial and / or poorly founded your complaint there are people who will uncritically listen to you and try and prove the complaint on your behalf. Some of them are even police officers. Nothing like a complaint to muddy the waters and suggest that you are only in court because the vindictive Cops have a grudge against you. Far fetched? Wait until your solicitor spins it in court and you come over as Ghandi.

Show no respect to the legal system or anybody working in it
You think that if you are a difficult, unpleasant, sneering, unco-operative and rude things will go badly for you and you will be in more trouble. No sirree Bob. It seems that in fact the worse you are, the easier things will go for you if, horror of horrors, you do end up convicted. Remember to fake a drink problem if you haven’t developed one as a result of dealing with us already. Magistrates and Judges do seem to like the idea that you are basically good but the naughty alcohol made you do it. They treat you better. Crazy I know but true.

So there you go, basically anything you try and do because you are decent and staightforward hurts you badly. Act like an habitual, professional, lifestyle criminal and chances are you will walk away relatively unscathed. Copy the bad guys, its what they do for a living.

Guy Fawkes Night

“Build a bonfire, build a bonfire,

EU Directives on the top,

Health and Safety in the middle,

And burn the bloody lot.”

Not exactly poetry but well worth reproduction.

Milk Politics

Do you remember the Milk Rounds or the School Milk (in all honesty yours truly was not born when this was around)? Well this is another one of those areas where the country has gone completely bonkers.

Consider what we now get our milk in: awful environmentally hazardous plastic cartridges that have to be thrown out once they have been used. This of course is counter productive as the damned things are made of plastic i.e. oil and have to be burned and thus releasing all those nasty gases the Green lobby keeps banging on about.

Well they have not done anything about it at all to be quite honest. But before we get to the Milk rounds lets have a look at what some food chains are in fact offering. Tesco have nothing but the plastic gear which is utterly useless particularly if you throw out the damned thing with the lid screwed tight. Some councils now employ people-this is not a joke-whose soul purpose is to pop the cartons so as to free some space in the bins. The same story is true for most of the big stores except Sainsbury's and Waitrose. They have in their larger supermarkets started using bags of milk (see picture). Even the bags themselves are recyclable which is always good. But obviously the main benefit comes from not having a physical carton which you have to smash with your bare knuckles in order for the damned thing to become somewhat 'flat'. Other benefits include saving plastic and spending that oil on say better gear for soldiers.

Sainsbury's claim that the only way to open the bag, without ending up covered in milk, is to place the bag inside the jug and shut the lid. A spike then pierces the bag releasing the milk. Your humble narrator can comfort the dear reader that this is all complete bollocks. You do not need a special jug. You need a jug but not a special Sainsbury's jug, and a pair of scissors. Cut of a corner and pour the bloody milk into the jug. It is not rocket science.

It is a bit odd that it only arrived in the UK about a year ago; you can only buy milk in bags in Canada. They do not sell it in any other form (well supposedly 60% is sold in bag form but I never saw anything but bag milk). Which begs the question; why are they intent on destroying the country side when they might as well just outlaw any packaging which does not necessarily have to be made from the most inconvenient of materials? Do you really need cereal in a carton, is not the bag enough? And so on. Not wishing to be a mouth piece for the Green lobby, for I truly despise the lot of them for their inconsistent and deceitful ways, but we do need to reconsider the way we pack things at least to save material.

But now the more pressing of questions: Why the fuck have they let the Milk Rounds fall into despair when it was probably the most environmentally friendly way of delivering fresh, cheap, locally produced, milk? Bear in mind that companies like Lidl insist on their milk being sent from bloody Germany to all its stores in Europe. I.e. the milk you buy from Lidl is not even by any stretch of the imagination 'local'. The Milk Rounds used and use glass bottles (as you will know by now that glass is 100% recyclable) and the vehicles they spin around in are driven by electricity.

This is not to say that the industry is dead - far from it. From the website Findmeamilkman.net we have it that (my emphasis)

"The UK’s 9,500 milkmen and women deliver to around 5 million homes every day. Whilst fresh liquid milk in environmentally friendly returnable glass milk bottles remains the cornerstone of this service, your milkman can also offer a large range of other goods. They will be more than happy to discuss the range of products that can be delivered regularly to your doorstep."

Now a normal person in the UK consumes roughly 2 litres or 3.5 pints of milk each week. This is a fair amount of milk. But one must wonder why are only 5 million homes in the UK getting their milk from this service which ought to be the Emperors of the milk trade (and media and government policy) in the UK, yet are not. A decade ago, more than 2.5 billion litres of milk were being delivered to the doorstep each year, which by 2004 had fallen to 637 million. Only 13% of the milk now consumed at home comes from delivery rounds (2006).

We can get pretty nostalgic about our doorstep milk deliveries. After all, there can’t be many countries that have had a record at number one in the singles chart about a milkman. Comedian Benny Hill’s record Ernie (The Fastest Milkman In The West) topped the charts in 1971 for five solid weeks. Before the milk float, milk was delivered on wheeled carts – either horse-drawn or simply pushed. The milk was in a churn before the advent of the milk bottle and the milkman poured it into the jugs his customers left on their doorsteps. A cloth cover over the jug protected the milk from flies.

The early morning chink-chink of the milkman or woman and the hum of the electric float is declining in 21st-century England though – despite efforts to extend the range of products on offer to include eggs, bread, juice and more. Despite rumours to the contrary, there is no threat to UK milk deliveries from the European Union - yet. However as we move further into this century it appears that the trend is being reversed because people are starting to realise what this article has been arguing that there is simply no way in which supermarket-milk beats Milkman-milk. As such it is becoming more popular again and it is only a question of time before an MP of one ilk or another seizes upon this issue to include it in their portfolio of "green policies".

Instead of building expensive fucking "eco-towns" perhaps we ought to retrace our steps to a time when people were far more sensible (and greener) than they are now.

PM Name Game - notice the alliteration

• MacDonald
• Attlee
• Wilson
• Callaghan
• Blair/Brown

What do they all have in common with 'Destruction' and 'Economy'?

For a chance to win a special mention on this blog post the answer in the comments!

A lesson in destroying a country

Melanie Philips' article on the recent survey of teachers in the UK which found that most were utterly against any form of UK at all - a camp site is more to their liking, a camp-site where we are all part of one "universal brotherhood". What complete tosh.

One of the most startling aspects of our society at present is the way things that were once considered to be virtues have now become the object of intense disapproval, and vice versa.

A recent survey of teachers by London University’s Institute of Education found that some three-quarters of them believed it was their duty to warn their pupils about the dangers of patriotism.

In all honesty I do not think there is a single stone which could be overturned, in the UK, without finding New Labour disaster lurking beneath it. The teachers appear to be taking on a similar approach to the Germans and their banning of everything which reminded them of Hitler and the Nazis. From their blowing up of all Nazi buildings in Berlin (yet for some inexplicable reason left most of the others, scattered through out Germany, intact - the SS school in Saxenhusen is today a Police College) to their banning of the Swastika to it becoming unlawful to even think that the Holocaust never happened. Despicable the Nazis were in every shape and form, somehow they managed to get their autocratic agenda beyond the grave.

Who could really blame the Germans though, their country had experienced the worst fate of any for probably a couple of centuries. It made sense to make all those silly bans eventhough most people only pay lip service to them it seems since the Neo-Nazis are flourishing in Germany. It makes little sense today since it is a violation of freedom of speech and thought. The crimes which the Nazis created; thought-crime, post-Nazi Germany enacted.

Enough of that though. What does this have to do with British teachers? Drawing parallels between the above we can see quite a few similarities. The teachers are supposedly doing the pupils a favour by supposing that ignorance of Churchill will honour the suffragettes. Or more to the majority, ignorance of anything in British history will somehow stop British children from turning into little Renegades themselves, of hunting Jews and Gypsies. Obviously marking them all with stars and creating massive camps as well.

I must say I am rather dumbstruck about how they perceive children are to learn about historical protagonists and antagonists. You cannot live in the 21st century and not have heard about Hitler today. This is not possible for it will be mentioned in a newspaper or movie from time to time. Part A is complete thus; pupils know of the antagonist. But in supposing they are doing the pupils a favour by not teaching them Part B; the protagonists - this is complete madness. Why was it that Germany lost in WWI, what did the allies do to provoke WWII - did the allies do anything at all? WHO ARE THE ALLIES?!

They are not so much rewriting history, they are just omitting parts which they find (precisely why teachers should be allowed this much power is beyond me, if we are to have a national curriculum they must adhere to it or the whole objective is lost) objectionable. But, parents today who had parents who fought in WWII, I daresay, will not agree with this omission of facts.

Gordon Brown has spoken in favour of encouraging pupils to be patriotic, calling for ‘Britishness’ lessons to be part of the curriculum. He is right to be concerned about the erosion of national identity.

What he is reluctant to acknowledge, however, is that the root cause of this is the promotion of multiculturalism, which has turned patriotism into a dirty word.

But without patriotism, a society starts to die. If the core purpose of education is to transmit a culture down through the generations, it is not patriotism that is a menace to this country, but the teachers whose real target is Britain’s identity itself.

Quite. Mr Cameron really has his work cut out for him. In every echelon of society there are people with utterly warped priorities who have lost all sense of what it meant to belong to an entity larger than themselves. I am not going to be a poster boy for Conservative school policy for I do not agree with privitisation of education - but if it gives parents control of what their children learn then it will be hard to object to it, should the Tories not overcome this very large obstacle in bringing Britannia back to her feat. Removing her from the ostensibly ubiquitous position she currently has; that of giving every other nation on the planet a fellatio.

Is Gordon Brown a robot - really?

Have you ever stopped to think about it really and then I mean really? What if we were to remove his face, just rip it of like that, with a big sharp knife like the one sported by Lt. Aldo Raines in Inglourious Basterds. Would we find flesh and blood or would we find a metal skeleton?

One must give this proposition serious thought for the "man" (if he really is one) really has got no shame at all. Consider it just for a second he sold the majority of our gold reserves when it was at a quarter of the price it is at now i.e. loosing us out on billions of pounds. He is personally responsible for besetting Britain with a debt in excess of a trillion pounds. He and his party have single-handedly brought Britain to her knees, there is not a single party in the history of the United Kingdom which has done this much damage to the UK there really is none. Do recall that there have been some pretty disastrous PM and parties prior to Tony and Gordon. For example these are some of the issues that have been created by the Labour government and they cannot be overstated.

• Foot and mouth crisis (twice)
• Farm payments
• Pensions theft
• Gold reserves
• Tax credits
• Iraq war
• Under funded ill-equipped Forces
• PFI
• Home Office failures
• Uncontrolled immigration
• NHS in tatters
• School standards at the lowest ever
• Thousands of knee jerk badly written laws
• Rampant EU fraud
• EU ignoring its own people
• EU referendum promise reneged
• Treaty/ constitution
• Northern Rock
• HMRC
• Lost data – child benefit and dvlc
• Donorgate
• Cash for Honours
• Single families
• Economy in complete tatters
• First time buyers taken out of market
• Rich and poor divide becoming bigger
• Plenty of tax rises – both direct and indirect
• Uncontrolled private sector
• Crime out of control
• Young deaths
• Guns on our streets
• No Election
• Catholics are to become Sovereigns annuling the Acts of Supremacy 1559 (actually there are so many things that New Labour have done which have annulled old acts that it really is pointless to make an issue of it. I just wanted to give this one as an example).
• Afghan war
• Quangos controlling parliament
• Financial crisis

And so on.

So I am thinking... What if he really, really really is a metal robot? Conspiracy theorist gone mad? Well maybe but is there really any other option? He is mad of course but maybe that is because someone is controlling him with a joystick!!!! Be aware I might not be able to post any more for I have revealed the awful truth and MI6 will be after me like Muslims after recognition of their victimisation.
It is late, give me a break.

His judgment cometh and that right soon

From Sirach (or Ecclesiasticus) 21:5, a book contained in the Roman Catholic Bible (what Protestants refer to as The Apocrypha) - if any of you were wondering were that curious title came from.

Dear reader, this is nothing short of a revolution! Read this at the Guardian.

"It takes 100 years or more for some species of tree to grow to full size but a few minutes to cut them down. The roots may live and sprout but the tree never grows back in quite the same way again. The question that faces the British electorate in the next eight months or so is whether the same applies to the conventions of liberty, trust and privacy which have been felled by Labour's chainsaw. Is the damage irreversible or can the opposition parties muster the leadership and will to guarantee a restoration of all that has been lost in the last 12 years?"

With this I would just like to remind everyone of two very important pieces of legislation which are up for debate in the coming years.

• The Freedom Bill by the Liberal Democrats
  

  1. Reduction of period of detention of terrorist suspects back down to 1 days detention (without charge)
  
  2. Repeal of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (i.e. Control Orders)
  
  3. Removal of the United States of America from part 2 territories (the unfair, unequal Extradition treaty with the USA needs to be sorted out)
  
  4. Repeal of the Identity cards 2006
  
  5. Amendment of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (independent magistrates warrants rather than self authorisation by officials or rubber stamping by politicians)
  
  6. Restrictions on the retention of fingerprints and samples (including DNA tissue samples and profiles of innocent people)
  
  7. Royal Commission to recommend on the use and regulation of CCTV (20 years too late, but welcome, nevertheless)
  
  8. Repeal of offences restricting the right to protest in the vicinity of Parliament (SOCPA sections 132 -138 Designated Area around Parliament Square and way beyond)
  
  9. Extension to the number of people constituting a public assembly (currently limited to just 2 people, with some doubt as to whether or not pregnant women are allowed out in public on their own or not !)
  
  10. Repeal of offences of trespassing on designated site (SOCPA section 128)
  
  11. Repeal of provisions which restrict the right to silence
  
  12. Repeal of provisions to allow for fraud cases to be conducted without a jury
  
  13. Restoration of the public interest defence for whistle blowers
  
  14. Repeal of provisions which allow evidence of a defendant's bad character
  
  15. Reduction in the number of cases that may be retried (i.e. double jeopardy)
  
  16. Repeal of provisions which allow bailiffs to use force
  
  17. Substantial prejudice in freedom of information (should make it harder for Government Departments to conceal policy advice from the public, but there are plebtyof other FOIA exemptions which need to be curtailed as well)
  
  18. Repeal of ministerial ability to veto Information Tribunal decisions (which currently makes a mockery of the whole Freedom of Information Act appeals process)
  
  19. Repeal of provisions to allow for the establishment of children's databases
  
  20. Regulations to govern parental consent for taking children's biometric samples (KiddyPrinting - brainwashing of children to accept that treating everyone like criminals is somehow normal)

• The Great Repeal Bill courtesy of Douglas Carswell (not sure if it will be fully endorsed by the Conservatives, that remains to be seen).

"Britain is over regulated. Laws, regulation and red tape stifle individuals, infantilise communities and strangle enterprise. We need a Great Repeal Bill.
Bills are traditionally drafted by "experts" and professional politicians. But it will require the wisdom and experience of all those struggling to cope with them to know which ones to scrap. That's why the Great Repeal Bill is not being drafted by them - but by you.

Do you run a business or community group? What rules and red tape have prevented you from reasonable actions you'd otherwise have taken? Please be specific and only cite rules that you personally know to be overbearing.

Deregulation is too important - for our businesses, society and sense of civic pride - to "leave to the experts". We've been waiting for the professional politicians to tackle red tape - and we're still waiting. All they've so far done is set up more quangos - a Better Regulation taskforce - and invent more red tape - regulation impact assessments forms.

So why not act now and help us draft the Bill? If it is a success, we hope that the draft Bill will be introduced in Parliament in the next session.

Perhaps this experiment in open source politics won't work. Maybe the draft Bill will be overrun by ranters. But if like me, you think there's more common sense to be found outside SW1 than there is inside, let's give it a go."

For a very good take on things please extricate yourself from this page and read this piece by leg-iron.

Gordon Brown is ill?

If this is true I do sincerely feel very sorry for the man. I or should I say 'we' the collective blogosphere are without a doubt his worst critics for we are not censored and we do speak our minds. However if this turns out to be true I cannot help but to feel ashamed of myself. I say 'however' for this is either a very distasteful smear attempt, even by opposition standards, or it is a desperate cry for help.

Snippet...

"The Prime Minister of Great Britain is a man too ill to be holding the Office." This was the conclusion last week of a senior civil servant liaising regularly with Gordon Brown. For reasons which will become clear, the person involved will not go public with the evidence for this conclusion. The same applies to a high-ranking Treasury official who told us "In both a physical and mental sense, the Prime Minister is a very sick man, seriously disabled." Three years ago, an Opposition MP told nby "He is on extremely heavy doses of cutting-edge anti-depressants, but so far they have made little difference". And during the last fortnight, another high-ranking government source claimed "He is now on pills which restrict the foods he can eat and what he can drink. He is losing the sight of his good eye quite rapidly. It's a mess, and nobody knows what to do".

Does anyone know the legislative mechanics involved and required for this sort of situation?

You remove my porn, I remove your head

I shall be leaving for a few days but have been grumbling on the same question for some time now, one which I would like to share. How long can you really, as a government, ignore the wishes of the electorate without force?

Clearly Communism managed to do so for a good century almost, some like North Korea are still continuing the puppet show. But what about us, we who supposedly are democratic?

It comes as no surprise that New Labour have destroyed also the cabinet government whilst in the hands of Blair and Brown. Fair enough, you really have to give it to them; they have beyond doubt paid great attention to every detail. They have managed to destroy pretty much every thing, part, department, essence (I am not sure which word to use to collectively refer to the British way of governing) and soul of British government.

In fact they have done such a fine job than when they are not at the helm of the leviathan, Brown is currently on holiday and Tony is hopefully miles away from the UK, the country is doing just fine without them. 'Fine' is an understatement, we are doing quite well for ourselves. The FTSE's up, the weather's nicer and we've won the Ashes. Not too shabby one must commend.

But the problem is that once David enters Downing street not a thing will work. How do you de-politicise a civil service, a civil service of the same magnitude as the British one - bloated to the brim. Returning to Cabinet government from a sofa government (as coined by Tony Blair) is like returning to Athens from Sparta can it even be done or are we forever more destined to have those awful presidential type campaigns as epitomised by France and the United States. I dread at the mere prospect. The EU is such an obvious obstacle to any form of meaningful government that it is pointless to even mention or discuss its function, meriting it with its existence is to admit to its function - that of stripping away national parliaments; bit by bit.

This is what it really burns down to though: how long can an elected government ignore the electorate without the use of force?

I shall not publish a thesis to the effect or tune of this question. All I can say is thank god for bloggers. There is at least one blog committed to every single malaise in Britain today. If it is not a blog it is a think tank or charity. Safe to say there is no escape for anyone in the public light. What is even better, people are turning more and more to the internet to decide for themselves if what they heard on the BBC or read in the Telegraph was what actually happened. They could stop us of course, they could create some form of the Great Chinese firewall and name it Hadrian's Firewall Mark II. But unlike the Chinese that probably would lead to riots in Britain: You remove my porn, I remove your head.

Pure Genius

Thanks to Calling England

I for one do not give a shit about religious sensibilities.

It ain't Halal or Kosher?

Oh no we must please the religionistas or they will kill us all, flee, flee for your lives!!!

While our government indulges in religious appeasement, seemingly completely nescient to History (see the episode about Neville Chamberlain), I would just like to draw everyone's attention to the fact that currently, in this moment, 5,000,000 die every year of starvation. And they have the audacity to bang on about their religious sensitives?

No, eat what is given to you and shut the fuck up.

Mr Hannan for UKIP?

Judging by the mood of the blogosphere and indeed the journalists most people are thinking (and saying so) "fuck off Dave at least Hannan has an idea different from New Labours's, what do you have?" Quite.

What does Dave have? Well he wants to preserve the status quo of the NHS, chuck 106 billion pounds out the window (not really though but a lot of it is pure waste) and you get the NHS. What is rather more intriguing is that a lot of people be they UKIP trolls or not, seem quite intent on voting UKIP in the upcoming general election.


Well here "is" UKIP that is to say here it what used to be the Conservative Party of the United Kingdom, RIP.

• UKIP will leave the political EU and trade globally and freely. We will re-embrace today’s fast-growing Commonwealth and we will encourage UK manufacturing so that we make things again.
• We will freeze immigration for five years, speed up deportation of up to a million illegal immigrants by tripling the numbers engaged in deportations, and have ‘no home no visa’ work permits to ease the housing crisis.
• We will have a grammar school in every town. We will restore standards of education and improve skills training. Student grants will replace student loans.
• We will radically reform the working of the NHS with an Insurance Fund, whilst upholding the ‘free at the point of care’ principles. We will bring back matrons and have locally run, clean hospitals. (<---- Look!, Look! Dave it is policy that is what it looks like I shit you not!)
  
• We will give people the vote on policing priorities, go back to proper beat policing and scrap the Human Rights Act. We will have sentences that mean what they say.
• We will take 4.5 million people out of tax with a simple Flat Tax (with National Insurance) starting at £10,000. We will scrap Inheritance Tax, not just reform it and cut corporation taxes.
• We will say No to green taxes and wind farms. To avert a major energy crisis, we will go for new nuclear power plants on the same existing site facilities and for clean coal. We will reduce pollution and encourage recycling.
• We will make welfare simpler and fairer, introduce ‘workfare’ to get people back to work, and a new citizens pension and private pensions scheme insurance.
• We will support our armed forces with more spending on equipment, military homes and medical care. We will save our threatened warships and add 25,000 more troops.
• We will be fair to England, with an English Parliament of English MPs at Westminster. We will replace assembly members like MSPs with MPs. And we will promote referenda at local and national levels.
• We will make customer satisfaction number one for rail firms – not cost cutting and will look seriously at reopening some rail lines that Beeching closed. We will make foreign lorries pay for British roads with a ‘Britdisc’ – and we will stop persecuting motorists.
• Last, but never least, we will bring in fair prices and fair competition for our suffering farmers, and restore traditional British fishing and territorial waters.

Wonder if Dave knows...

(Here is what will happen in the end tough; if four or five years time when the next GE is held, people will have had time to conclude that the Tories were as shit as New Labour. A lot of fringe parties will get seats, a lot, they will form a coalition government and from whence the UK will be governed - that is to say the remaing 3-4% which is left to govern). Fun Times ahead.

Who Dares Wins

Former SAS-Major John Wick has been revealed to be one of the responsible for the leaking of MP's expenses.

Cash for honours? No, sleaze (a.k.a. public service) for honours.

Give the man a knighthood. He may have weakened parliament, he may have set back the parliamentary process by years but they must know that we do not serve them; they serve us. As long as they are chosen to represent us they will always be vulnerable to our prying eyes - as they should be for we 'still' live in a democracy-ish.

(Someone is bound to say "well he did sell the files so he is really a first-class crook", remember what happened to the dude who exposed the Damian Green affair - got fired. Might as well make a few bucks of the rotting parliament on its way down before its phoenix like rebirth, which will come once all the scum is removed).