The 'obscured woman' debate is going wild.
On the few occasions that I have worn sun glasses OF A TYPE THAT TOTALLY HIDE THE EYES I have felt very empowered indeed. One can study every detail of an attractive woman without either embarrassment or detection.
It is, of course, deeply intrusive, offensive, cowardly and disgraceful.
Any mention of sunglasses in the Quran?
The whole debate highlights a/ cultures should not mix - multiculturalism is a myth b/ religious dogmas appeal to our juvenile state.
Sunday, 18 July 2010
NUCLEAR BLACKMAIL
Liam Fox MD (who keeps us safe and well by overseeing the killing of Johnnie Foreigner) used the term 'NUCLEAR BLACKMAIL' this morning. It was new to me, so I did a little reading. I found that nuclear blackmail works best when the finger on the button belongs to an unstable individual. No wonder 'they' want to kill us! Britain is collectively going mad. The most driven and needy enter Westminster and once installed, the most delusional among them becomes Prime Minister. Be afraid world - BE VERY AFRAID.
Wednesday, 14 July 2010
BANGED UP BRITAIN
WILL WESTMINSTER EVER GET BEYOND OUR KEN AND HIS ILK?
Kenneth Clarke - the man who put the "bleh bleh bleh" into 'blether' - has declared prison-number-rise and reduction in crime, unconnected.
Tobacco Baron Ken, also saw no connection between the number of tobacco addicts - sick and dying from their entrapment - as unconnected with BAT advertising and sale of cigarettes. (Like criminals, smokers made a simple choice to ruin their lives - apparently.)
Clarke sees a link between prosperity and criminality, but fails to see the link between BAT profit and hospital admissions.
This is just the sort of clear, conducive-to-the-good, thinking that we need in governance. And Clarke is yet another example of the (un)kind of person that is attracted to (and thrives in) the unhealthy Palace of Westminster.
Kenneth Clarke - the man who put the "bleh bleh bleh" into 'blether' - has declared prison-number-rise and reduction in crime, unconnected.
Tobacco Baron Ken, also saw no connection between the number of tobacco addicts - sick and dying from their entrapment - as unconnected with BAT advertising and sale of cigarettes. (Like criminals, smokers made a simple choice to ruin their lives - apparently.)
Clarke sees a link between prosperity and criminality, but fails to see the link between BAT profit and hospital admissions.
This is just the sort of clear, conducive-to-the-good, thinking that we need in governance. And Clarke is yet another example of the (un)kind of person that is attracted to (and thrives in) the unhealthy Palace of Westminster.
Monday, 5 July 2010
NONE SO BLIND
For a General election candidate to arrive, as a name on the ballot paper, by far the majority of them have to be PRE-SELECTED (from the mass of the people) by virtue of ambition and tractability to the party system (whipping and fawning) under the Westminster ethos. In short - they are an ODD LOT with little in common with the common people.
Against this enduring reality, no tinkering with the voting rules will improve the self-serving governance of Westminster. Once again, as with the supposed 'clean up' after the allowances revelations, we are being thrown a distraction to chew on, impotently.
Against this enduring reality, no tinkering with the voting rules will improve the self-serving governance of Westminster. Once again, as with the supposed 'clean up' after the allowances revelations, we are being thrown a distraction to chew on, impotently.
Friday, 2 July 2010
THE 'MINSTER MONSTER
Westminster has all the characteristics of a living entity, but no discernable heart. It dominates Britain like the fairytale Dragon dominates the simple village.
But the Monster of Westminster does not devour maidens, as such, rather it destroys all that is embodied in her archetype: uncorrupted decency. Like any life-form, the Westminster Monster is programmed to survive, and has adapted well to its location. It will mutate further, if its life is threatened – but suicide will never be an option. Dragons do not vote for St George’s Day. When injured (a rare event) the Minster Monster has a range of recovery mechanisms and repair strategies – its self-healing properties are legendary.
Within Westminster, human units function as ‘cells’, performing a variety roles, but always with a ‘collective mind’ dedicated to the survival of the host body. Renewal of aberrant, redundant or dead cells, is by incremental replacement. Periodic ‘elections’ are performed among the ordinary folk, wherein they are permitted to choose from candidates already proxy-vetted by the parties; the parties in turn, in thrall to the Monster. This ensures unending life for the Minster Monster.
This Dragon has dominated our ‘village’ for so long, no one questions its stranglehold on all our lives. A few who supply treasure – the other obsession of Dragons – escape its foul breath and baleful eye, the rest live and die unquestioning. No villager has the given name of ‘George’ any more.
But the Monster of Westminster does not devour maidens, as such, rather it destroys all that is embodied in her archetype: uncorrupted decency. Like any life-form, the Westminster Monster is programmed to survive, and has adapted well to its location. It will mutate further, if its life is threatened – but suicide will never be an option. Dragons do not vote for St George’s Day. When injured (a rare event) the Minster Monster has a range of recovery mechanisms and repair strategies – its self-healing properties are legendary.
Within Westminster, human units function as ‘cells’, performing a variety roles, but always with a ‘collective mind’ dedicated to the survival of the host body. Renewal of aberrant, redundant or dead cells, is by incremental replacement. Periodic ‘elections’ are performed among the ordinary folk, wherein they are permitted to choose from candidates already proxy-vetted by the parties; the parties in turn, in thrall to the Monster. This ensures unending life for the Minster Monster.
This Dragon has dominated our ‘village’ for so long, no one questions its stranglehold on all our lives. A few who supply treasure – the other obsession of Dragons – escape its foul breath and baleful eye, the rest live and die unquestioning. No villager has the given name of ‘George’ any more.
Thursday, 17 June 2010
PORKIES A LETTER TO DAVE
Dave Cameron PM c/o House of Commons.
Cc Richard Benyon MP Strobes @ Private Eye Guido Fawkes Daily Politics The Politics Show et al
PORKIES
Dear leaders
We cannot go on like this.
As the prime mover (aren’t we all?) of the Big Society, I call upon the PM of The New Politics, in the current spirit of independent watchdog-inspectorates (redolent of the Office of Budgetary Regulation) to install: ‘PORKIES’ (People’s Office for Regulation of Knowingly Indefensible Electoral Statements).
The ‘PORKIES’ remit, should apply retro-actively, covering the 2010 election, i.e. all party literature without exemption. This would surely be emblematic of the New Politics, fundamental to the Cameron-Clegg Coalition of transparency?
(Strangely: no official body that I can discover, is mandated to apply the existing ‘Representation of the People’ Act, that forbids employment of a ‘false instrument’ to influence voting.) HOW VERY ‘OLD POLITICS’!
You can, of course, just leave it to me: a retired, articulate, solvent, fit, mobile entrepreneur, who wants – so very much – to help bring in the New Fairness. Indeed, I presume that my endeavour would amount to ‘Private Sector’ mobilisation? I have located a 2010 archive of Election flyers and will shortly make a detailed study of them. Please let me know if you wish to be copied-in.
Cc Richard Benyon MP Strobes @ Private Eye Guido Fawkes Daily Politics The Politics Show et al
PORKIES
Dear leaders
We cannot go on like this.
As the prime mover (aren’t we all?) of the Big Society, I call upon the PM of The New Politics, in the current spirit of independent watchdog-inspectorates (redolent of the Office of Budgetary Regulation) to install: ‘PORKIES’ (People’s Office for Regulation of Knowingly Indefensible Electoral Statements).
The ‘PORKIES’ remit, should apply retro-actively, covering the 2010 election, i.e. all party literature without exemption. This would surely be emblematic of the New Politics, fundamental to the Cameron-Clegg Coalition of transparency?
(Strangely: no official body that I can discover, is mandated to apply the existing ‘Representation of the People’ Act, that forbids employment of a ‘false instrument’ to influence voting.) HOW VERY ‘OLD POLITICS’!
You can, of course, just leave it to me: a retired, articulate, solvent, fit, mobile entrepreneur, who wants – so very much – to help bring in the New Fairness. Indeed, I presume that my endeavour would amount to ‘Private Sector’ mobilisation? I have located a 2010 archive of Election flyers and will shortly make a detailed study of them. Please let me know if you wish to be copied-in.
Tuesday, 8 June 2010
LETTER TO LOCAL NEWSPAPER
Since the recent election, I have been researching the ‘Political Porky’. I have discovered that neither the Electoral Commission, nor the Advertising Standards Authority have any power (where the WRITTEN word is the medium) to curb such excess in our ‘democratic’ process, and by inference, the politicians themselves, connive (even while complaining ‘at’ one-another).
I understand, from the Commission, that I may make a formal complaint to the Police; to my mind that would constitute ‘Wasting Police Time’ – an offence in itself! The crime is one of ABSENCE OF INTEGRITY – hardly a Police matter.
There is an act – The Representation of the People Act’ - that prohibits the use of a ‘fraudulent device or contrivance’ to influence voting behaviour. By my reckoning, the ‘Political Porky’ contravenes this act. WHAT A VERY BRITISH PARADOX that politicians use it, habitually. I am deeply concerned because of what this state of affairs says about Westminster politics – even dressed in its emperor-like ‘New Clothes’. Do any of your readers have knowledge that might advance my quest? ‘We can’t go on like this’.
I understand, from the Commission, that I may make a formal complaint to the Police; to my mind that would constitute ‘Wasting Police Time’ – an offence in itself! The crime is one of ABSENCE OF INTEGRITY – hardly a Police matter.
There is an act – The Representation of the People Act’ - that prohibits the use of a ‘fraudulent device or contrivance’ to influence voting behaviour. By my reckoning, the ‘Political Porky’ contravenes this act. WHAT A VERY BRITISH PARADOX that politicians use it, habitually. I am deeply concerned because of what this state of affairs says about Westminster politics – even dressed in its emperor-like ‘New Clothes’. Do any of your readers have knowledge that might advance my quest? ‘We can’t go on like this’.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
