Tag Archives: army

Army “criticised” for”depicting” Mosques on firing range

Here is one report. Here is another, hopefully with a published comment by me.

David Davis

There is a tragic human confusion and dilemma. It invloves these two concept: on the one hand that of astonishingly beautiful Cosmic Order and underlying logic – which can be observed and is of course validated by the study of Physics and Maths. And it involves also the seemingly innate yearning for some kind of “supreme being” who has (of course) supervised all this created order …. (it MUST have been created, mustn’t it…? Er?) This yearning must have arisen sometime in the last 80,000 – 90,000 years, a timeframe in which modern humans seem to have practised formalised burial-rites, with “grave-goods” and the like. This indicates beliefs in the possibility of an “afterlife”, or an esistence in the presence of others whom we can’t perceive, either “souls” or a “god” or both.

As a scientist, I have never had problems in appreciating the high degree of order that we observe, while also being quite relaxed about the _/possibility/_ (a hypothesis that we cannot currently test as we don’t know how) that there _/might/_ be a divine Intelligence (you can call it what you want) which initially set up some numbers, and them left the mathematical-model running “to see what it might do”. Perhaps “it” was just messing about. We of course do not know and right now we cannot know.

The problem starts to arise in a context where a tribal set’s beliefs become so formalised, and so “having to be adhered to” (in fear of…what exactly?) that any sort of sleight against the vulgate of that tribal set is taken really really personally. Specially if the “offence” is committed by a competing tribal-set. I don’t know if this emotion-set springs from primeval conflicts about access to usable grazing-land, or to oases, or to cattle to farm and milk, or to women for breeding with: perhaps it might.

But what seems to happen is that the symbols – such as (supposedly) Mosques in this case or even churches, become confused with the reality of the beliefs. As I said over at the Daily Mail, no Moslem can possibly think that Allah lives in any particular Mosque, just as no Christian would believe that God inhabits “any” church in particular. If He – Allah or God –  exists as God, then he is nowhere and everywhere simultaneously,  just like “God” is. The dangers arise when irrationality about the nature of The Person of God, and what (if anything) He inhabits, other than the minds and hearts of individual human beings,  interferes with one’s judgement about how other people behave.

My secular-oriented-guess about this little matter is tha some passing GramscoFabiaNazi has spotted these firing ranges near Bellerby (quite pretty, only 90-odd-miles from here), and has tipped off the local Imam, to see if any “p-p-p-political capital” can be made for the race-hate-religio-hate-industry.

The Moslems in the UK ought to wake up and calculate that they are being set up as useful idiots through their more hot-headed “respected scholars”, by this government. This is as a precedent for a group that can be made unpopular, so that “when THEY COME FOR THEM, nobody will speak up for them.” Everybody will say…”bloody Islamic Terrorists! Always complaining and whingeing about something unimportant! Good riddance!”

The Jews – who could be portrayed as even more barbaric and unpopular than Moslems, as many are or have been “bankers” –  can’t be publicly demonised as the first “out-group” quite yet, as it’s still too near the Holocaust (which you’re not allowed to deny either) and this “topic” has not yet been successfully removed from the history “syllabus”. Although “Universities” are starting to denounce jews with “links to Israel”. The rot is setting in – it won’t be long now, before we are back to the 1,000-year-European norm in this matter.

But then THEY’ll come for you….one day…and there’s designed to be nobody left. Sadly, the Moslems here have their “useful idiots” too, who will happily whoop and whinge at inconsequential supposed sleights, over purely sumbolic matters.


Good blog, just spotted

David Davis

Coldsteelrain, heart in right place, what more can a man want? I cannot tell exactly, but I suspect it is written by a soldier.

Here is one good observation for a start – and yes I am being provocative here. And I share his dislike of the unloveable, un-nice and smelly Piers Morgan. if “Britain’s got Talent” is some sort of show in the Wireless Tele Vision, and the man Morgan is involved, then I don’t think that ordinary functioning humans ought to have anything to do with it.

Shun him, for he likes Gordon Brown. There will have to be an “Independent Safeguarding Agency” register of such people, and the Police will have to phone us all when one of them moves in nearby, in case we object.

Gramscian institution-destroying: last steps – discredit the Army

David Davis

It is not suitable to abuse civilians in occupied territories. Not if you are a Classical liberal trying to spread liberalism: but it’s what European armies have always done, because it gets the immediate statecraft-results desired by whichever occupying warlord is doing the occupying.

It is also interesting that these allegations seem to surface at times convenient for the Occupying Power currently posing as the British National Labour Party. One is inclined, right now, to read what the Ministry of Defence is up to, or what it takes in bonuses, and then believe exactly the opposite of what it said about it. On principle.

It is unlikely that British squaddies have been abusing people, in my experience of them – whether in Iraq or anywhere else. Perhaps in base camp the new-bugs could be ragged a bit, after a good night out, but no more than that.

I think that the government needs to accomplish two ends here. (1) To demoralise further the still-resisting Services, and (2) to amplify “anti-war” sentiment in the UK so it can play up a “we are forced to” excuse to pull out as it’s bust.

Yes we are bust, but there’s billions and billions could be saved, and used for the Forces, by:-

(A) Abolishing and terminating (utterly) DEFRA, the Interior Ministry, the DTI or whatever it’s called, the Dept of Education and Skills, the “department of culture, media and sport” (WTF?), all Quangos and NGOs and fake-charities,

(B) Shutting down and locking-out all departments of “Councils” that deal with anything other than public libraries, park benches and lavatories,

(C) Canceling the “Olymp-Ics”, selling the sites, sacking the staff, telling the IOC exactly how useful it is in fairly graphic “Devil’s Kitchen” type terms, which is to say about the same as a broken bird-scarer, or a gutter-cleaner which has rcently failed to wokr properly, and of less use than a frying-pan,

A fledgeling Libertarian administration will be beset with enemies on all sides. We may not be able fully to silence really quite vitriolic opposition, from such people as “un-assimilated” groups within the UK, such as sacked “Hospital Trust Managers” who have lost their pensions and jobs, and “Soviet-Lesbian-Outreach-co-ordinator-enhancers” who have lost their “departments”. Moreover, we may also not be safe from, perhaps, “insurgents” from foreign parts, such as “CuboVenezuelan Military Advisers” – this assumes that CuboVenezuela will not have been “done” by the time we come to power, and Ken Livingstone has still not died of any terrible or incurable disease which prevents him from travelling or speaking.

It would be nice to have the Armed Services, and those kinds and classes of people who staff them, on our side from day-one. Even though we (all?) believe in the prospect of a world where these sad things are not needed.

Time I said something about Afghanistan.

David Davis

Hitherto, as you all know, I have never failed to disagree with libertarians such as Sean Gabb, in regard to British Foreign Policy. In particular this refers to our prosecution of wars in iraq, Aghanistan, and elsewhere, since the arrival of the national-socialist-imperialist Government of New Labour.

Watching the Fall of the Twin Towers, nearly nine years ago now, I was convinced that it was right of Blair, be he even a GramscoFabianof the First Order, to immediately stand at the side of the, indeed  _our_ First Child, the USA. Whatever “evidence” of WMDs or mobil ice-cream-van-launchers, or weaponised dustbins ready to receive non-recyclable-waste in under 45 minutes or whatever, he was right to support the removal and encompassed subsequent death of the wicked muderer Saddam Hussein. If Blair had said “Britain must go into Iraq purely to kill Saddam Hussein –  a horrible Untermensch which killed its first human victim on purpose with a provided gun while being aged eleven –  and then we shall either go home or stay to kill more of his willing supporters and relations who have profited by him”, I would have supported that, and indeed it was one of the few right and good decisions Blair took in his life.

He did not need to lie about WMDs to convince me of a good and right mission for the Forces of an upright and moral nation. He should have trusted the People, and simply listened. In those days we would have supported him. I did anyway, even though he was – and is – a scumbag socialist. Go back to the headlines of 2002 and 2003 and 2004 even, and just read them.

But he did the unthinkable. On being found to have lied, he therefore shot us in the foot in full view of our enemies by going ahead on what most people decided were false-pretences. Without doing the obviously needed thing, and changing to what the real motive for the war ought to have been all along. It was almost too late, but not quite.If he had come clean immediately, half our enemies’ support would have melted away – it would almost have been enough to go on. And it would have been _public_ which is what’d have mattered. The next rubbish might then not have come about…..

Our enemies are primitve in some ways but clever and modern in others. They, like dogs, can smell fear and the stench of death. It is fatal to smell of fear and death. They know when the heart of a combatant is not in it: they know when the people at home are not “behind their boys”. This is invariably fatal, and it loses wars, always and everywhere. Look at Vietnam for an even more expensive object-lesson: the feeligns of the heart of the American People, as projected to the Enemy by the American media, gave off a certain smell. it may not have been the right smell in the end, but it did the trick and we duly lost, as was demanded.

Blair didn’t look: he is “post-modern”, whatever that means, but I think I have decided.

Sean Gabb said we have no vital national interest in these places, unless I have totally misunderstood. Although he is my very good and old friend, he is here quite wrong in my opinion: we, the British, and also British Libertarians as a an interested subset, do have such things. It is not in our interest, as liberals and libertarians, whether the prevailing state or us as a group, to for long allow a crowd of media-friendly, powerful and charismatic, sexy, mountebanks – with zillions of cheap guns, bombs, money, friendship with unfriendly regimes such as the USSR, and access to limitlessly-industrial amounts of modern plastic explosives, detonators and charge-shapers –  to promote the idea that liberalism and non-invasive-individual-liberty of conscience, worship, thought, deed and word are a wrong thing for Man. It is our Jihadist duty to go after these buggers to the ends of the earth if need be. if we do not, then we set a bad example for those who would follow liberty.

Strong horse, weak horse. The late Osama Bin Laden will continue to remain fully dead throughout 2009 and 2010, but he did speak the truth on that one. We are not dealing all the time with samizdata readers here: those whom we hope to awake from their darkness in the fullness of time still, in a lot of cases, only know about mis-sold-nags and dust and disease.

This is a First World Army, trying to fight Third-World-Guerillas – admittedly in difficult terrain, but this is 2009. The problem of Afghanistan can only be:

(1) either that the wrong kind of campaign is being fought…we are trying to be even too reliant on vehicles and mobility in force, and should deploy more special forces at night on foot (but we don’t have more than five…)


(2) that the politicos in charge of “paying for it” don’t want it to succeed. They, which is to say: Gordon Brown and the Enemy Class, want us to “lose”. This, to them, is a morale-destroying-weapon to do with our very civilisation and sense of ourselves, both of which they hate. that oculd secondarily explain the lack of “kit”: the more dead young boys that are flown back, the better for the Enemy Class. (I always said they were evil droids, didn’t I!)

Given that Jeff randall is probably right about the mobility of anti-liberal, anti-Western-Canon terrorism, it probably does not matter in the end if we stayed in Afghanistan for “30 or 40 years” (perish the thought!) or if we left today.

I am not sure that Gordon Brown and Barack Obama, who [with the exception of many dedicated Danish Doctors and Nurses] deploy sadly almost all the forces that really matter, really really deeply want The West to win in Afghanistan, if indeed “winning” here now means anything substantive. It is a hallmark of a civilised people that they grieve quite a lot and voluntarily, and now in public, see Wooton Bassett (poor sods) over even what would a mere 90 years ago have been regarded as a paltry death-toll for even just one day of fighting. That we should now regard eight deaths in one day of fighting as politically and morally unacceptable, says a lot for us still as a people, and points optimistically to some kind of recovery of moral fibre and nerve, although I cannot yet define what.

It is too late now to “leave Afghanistan” without it looking to our enemies abroad, which are many but largely impotent, and the Enemy Class at home which is few but all-powerful,  like a major defeat. To both kinds of enemy, imagery is terribly important for they are both primitive and pre-capitalist-neopastoralist, in their different ways. Both kinds of enemy will interpret our leaving as a major strategic victory for them.

What will happen?

Israel will feel weaker and more isolated, and may have to develop Nuclear Weapons.

The government if the USSR will feel more able to lift more firms’ wallets  – both foreign and domestic – more openly.

OPEC, with USSR money, will be able to orchestrate demos at British “Unis”, by “students” who will shout that “Afghanistan was all about oil” while burning effigies of “George W Halliburton”.

Some institutional destruction will be able to be accomplished too, such as various Lieut-Colonels, of the remaining old British Army Regiments that survive, being arrested for “war crimes”.

The ID card programme will be accelerated, since “The War On Terror” “knows no borders”. Cameron will expedite this as fast as Brown would have done, and anyway all the Enemy-Classes’ political dinner-partners, all of whom “design” on “Apple Macs”, will need the bloody money, and quick, or they lose their cottages to RBS “Money-Sense”.

But, all in all, would we all be worse off if we left Afghanistan? Perhaps not. I do not know, do you?

if a Libertarian government had a “defence sec”, at least he’d look like one

David Davis

Well, there you go. I could not remember his name until about a minute ago. It’s “Des Lynam”, isn’t it: either Des or Bob, but probably Des.

If we are others are right about an ultimately global agenda for total control of all populations under “law” and slave-driving-prohibition (see IP-J’s formal comment on us earlier, here) then something inevitable follows. A Libertarian government will not only need (sadly but inevitably) the forces and the “kit”, but someone who looks and talks the part as War Secretary – replete with all appropriate knowledge of sad detail –  to bolster the credibility of the “Foreign Libertarians’ Office”, and the Chiefs of Libertarian Defence Staff.

Someone next to whom the Soldiers do not feel uncomfortable when being photographed. (Famous quote about John Major, from that blue-hatted chap we had in Bosnia: “I’m not sure my soldiers want to be photographed, standing next to a **** like that…”)

I see the main strategic objective of the “Foreign Libertarians’ Office” as actively helping classical liberals and libertarians everywhere outside UK Libertarian Jurisdiction. This may be via “promotional” programmes such as literatire, websites, conferences, endowing University Chairs etc, and it may also simultaneously be via “other” methods, it being a duty to spread the axiomatic doctrine of individual liberty based on Natural Rights and the true Nature of Man.


...er...I'm the Secretary for War...

‘We’re not done yet, insists Brown’- Sounds horrifying, init?

Peter Davis


I have a propsition:

List all of Labours achievements to this day, I won’t, since [a] i can’t be bothered, and [b] my laptop would fall apart because of sheer over-typingness (if thats a word) as it is shoddily made.

then tally up:

1.how many have been a complete waste of your money, and have been engineered to put this nation at an educational, tactical, and economical disadvantage,

2.how many have actually been benificial.

i think you’ll find that the ultra-huge-vastly-immense majority will be: a complete waste of your money, and have been engineered to put this nation at an educational, tactical, and economical disadvantage

And, Brown says, ‘We’re not done yet’…

it is now 22:07 GMT and my brain has almost completely shut down, so i expect Fred Bloggs to do a humerous, but serious follow-up to this, while i set up the weaponized dustbin in our ultra-super-secret-weapons testing lab for a ‘demonstration’. expect to see the fabled weaponized dustbin in action soon:








« Older Entries