Whither liberty?


David Davis

I am obliged to Tom Paine at The Last Ditch for flagging this up: we have not time to do all our own external research every day, despite having a team of expanding young writers.

I agree that Hughes can’t be long for this world, as far as the BBC is concerned.

Can you name this man?


David Davis

Noce dress hes got on

Nice dress he's got on

d.arnott

(Stuck that in ‘coz I thought the other link had been deleted.)

I could not until The Devil tipped us off. That’s not a woman, pull the other one, it’s a man who works in the public sector, and he’s wearing a blouse or 1950s dress which he got out of a charity shop while nobody was looking, and his hair’s a bit long and he’s not brushed it for a couple of days (so it must be a man then.)

Why is it that so many, many people who work for totalitarian organisations, (such as ASH) look like the oily undersides of gearboxes? Could it be the result of not getting enough sex? I do not know.

fakecharities.org has been noticed by charitable trough-piggers themselves. That was quick….


…..and shows that they must have been waiting, pooing their pants in fright, to get rumbled by someone. God, how slow can bloggers be sometimes? (But    _IF_    you go here, you will see that the Libertarian Alliance’s duty-Chimpanzee-Type-Writing-Shift for 2004 (in the unheated Nissen-hut, not the other one) had indeed spotted ASH already!) (And if you go here, we have a raft of ancient writings about fake-charity and its iniquities, or even real charity, and its role in a liberal civilisation.)

David Davis

The Landed Underclass notes today that Charity Finance (whatever that is for) has logged the existence of fakecharities.org, a site set up by the estimable Devil, to expose and monitor the use of public funds directly by “charities”.  

The “charities” named in fakecharities.org are almost entirely engaged in fake lobbying: lobbying, it may be added, for mainly liberty-restricting ends such as more persecution of smokers, alcohol-likers, drivers, people who enjoy tasty food such as burgers and chips, other kinds of poor people, and suchlike.

Libertarians of all kinds will know that under liberal or what we call “free” societies, history shows the greatest rate of expansion of private charity. This is contrasted with the situation of charities under a Big State, which forcibly confiscates so much of people’s resources that charities actually suffer and attenuate. The only way they can survive is to actually abdicate their caring role in favour of the Big State tkaing it over, and than “caring” on behalf of “the people”. Naturally, the “charities” which then do best out of the pig-trough are those with the most Statist ends themselves. Small charities which actually do charity may survive in odd niches and localities, such as this one: but those which don’t trough-pig mega with the sharpest elbows will eventually go down.

Of course, this is what a Big State wants.

Or you could have a charity like this one, which not only has been doing something supremely useful for many decades, but takes no money from Big States.

Sir John Mortimer 1923-2009: what a good chap for smoking because of the ban.


David Davis

Just a brief rundown. You can’t find it in your heart to criticise such a good old chap, even though he didn’t like Thatcher quite as ecstatically as I do.

Here, and here, and here, and also here, are reasons which Mortimer would have approved of, for why you should smoke.

The saddo socialist buggers do not own your body, even if they say they do subliminally, by “urging people towards a healthier lifestyle”. Who’s life is it anyway? (As the man, I forget who, said.)

The heat’s really on the Jews now.


UPDATE3:-

JANUARY 13, 2009 – During the past months, Canada has increasingly become one of Israel’s staunchest supporters as reported today in The Toronto Star.

“OTTAWA–Canada stood alone before a United Nations human rights council *** yesterday, the only one among 47 nations to oppose a motion condemning the Israeli military offensive in Gaza. (*** what is that please?)

The vote before the Geneva-based body shows the Stephen Harper government has abandoned a more even-handed approach to the Middle East in favour of unalloyed support of Israel, according to some long-time observers.

Thirty-three countries voted for the strongly worded motion, which called for an investigation into “grave” human rights violations by Israeli forces, while 13 nations, mostly European, abstained.

The United States, regarded as Israel’s greatest ally, is not a member of the council.

Marius Grinius, Canada’s representative on the council, said the language of the motion, which accused Israel of sparking a humanitarian crisis, was “unnecessary, unhelpful and inflammatory.”

He said the text failed to ‘clearly recognize’ that Hamas rocket attacks on Israel triggered the crisis.”

The report can be read in its entirety at: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/569872

UPDATE2:-

Call to move Arab League to Venezuela

KUWAIT CITY (AFP) – A Kuwaiti Islamist MP called on Wednesday for moving Arab League headquarters from Cairo to Caracas after Venezuela expelled Israel’s ambassador because of its onslaught on the Gaza Strip. “I call for moving the Arab League from Cairo to Caracas,” MP Waleed Al Tabtabai said during a special debate in parliament over the Israeli offensive. Tabtabai said that Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez “has proved that he was more Arab than some Arabs”, after he expelled Israel’s ambassador to Caracas on January 6. Israel retaliated a day later, saying it was expelling Venezuela’s charge d’affaires.  – Jordan Times, January 14, 2009.

(When Hugo Chavez weighs in against you, you know you are right.)

UPDATE:- Actually the phosphorus bit is quite old….here it is on All-That-Jazzera from Monday just gone (12th.) From Moliberty’s newsblog. And here’s some moral relativism from Carmenscafe.

David Davis

Oooooooh……tut tut tut !!! White Phosphorus….what naughty boys….been raiding the chemistry-lab cupboards then, have we? Even that boy Saddam (always persisted in playing with guns and killing his fellow pupils) didn’t do that….not after he gassed the Kurds anyway, and got a bit of a fright witht he ADI he got in 1991.

And hitting a UN building building which would be inevitably and predictably full of top Hamas thugs too (probably smoking indoors)…..wonder if Israel will get a detention for that one? Or will it be an ADI? *** …or, even….EXLUSION FROM SCHOOL?

Will the punishment be mitigated because the occupants were smoking? I think we should be told.

Officially the Libertarian Alliance has nothing that could be described as a foreign policy, in regard to the various wars going on around us today. Insofar as these interest most British Libertarians, if there is no vital british interest at stake, then we should take no position and not become involved. that’s fair enough.

However, the libertarian issues of interest to this blog, which is concerned about creating and maintaining a world in which libertarian ideas can spread and become effective, are that “world opinion” seems inexorably to be turning in favour of totalitarian thugs who oppose Western-style democracies however imperfect, and against the same said democracies. In the UK in particular, much of the same media bias is in favour of the setting up of a Police State that will structurally resemble a theocratic one – although outwardly cloaked in a non-religious legal system.

We should watch the progressing demonisation of Israel with trepidation.

Look at all this hearsay:- (from All-That-Jazzera)

Doctors in Gaza City have told Al Jazeera that people have been admitted suffering burns consistent with the use of the controversial chemical white phosphorus.

Human rights campaigners say that Israeli forces have used the munition, which can burn away human flesh to the bone, over Gaza City and Jabaliya in recent days.

Al Jazeera’s Ayman Mohyeldin, reporting from the Shifa hospital in Gaza City, said: “Doctors here say they are seeing unprecedented levels of deep burns.

“They cannot categorically say that white phosphorus is being used, they are saying that the munitions being dropped are unprecendented.”

Residents in densely-packed Jabaliya have described Israeli forces exploding shells that drop scores of burning fragments and spread suffocating smoke.

“Its the first time we see this type of weapon, it must be new and its seems like its phosphorous,” one resident told Al Jazeera.

“Its suffocating and has a deadly poisonous smell that I am sure will cause a lot of sickness and disease on all of the civilians here,” he said.

***All-day-Isolation

SMOKING, health fascism, New Labour, and Children: two more reasons why you should smoke. And Keeley Hazell wants her little shops to stay open late.


UPDATE:- And Gordon Brown wants  __YOUR__  body…..

David Davis

We talked about this some months ago. Now also, you should smoke for the children, and also to keep up ZanuLieborg’s taxation-takings, so they can continue to dip their hands in the Till at the expense of poor-people who have nothing else much to lighten their miserable Nazi-jackbooted lives.

It is an absolute wonder, to me, that nobody else in the media-Glitterati can see that we are being marched, by jackbooted ThugNazis in our government, back to a pre-capitalist, neo-feudal society, that looks like anything pre-1381 – the date of the first bourgeois tax-revolt.

Ordinary common-or-garden Nazis were disarmingly frank and openly brutal, by comparison. They approached Mugabe’s PR skills, in fact.

Now  then….This caught my eye as the Firefox foxthingy animal-dooberry started to run just now.

What else is “to be sold under the counter” on direction from “ministers”, in due course?

Alcohol (causes death by driving), knives (kill people), tabloid newspapers and “Zoo” and “Nuts” (offend wimmin), FHM, pork (offends Moslems and contains cancer-causing chemicals), automobiles (pollute the planet), and we could all name more things that “dangerous”, “offensive” or risky in use.

You’d have thought that this junta, so keen on promoting the plight of “small shops” and “small businesses” would want to make it easier for them to sell gear to people, not harder. I don’t believe for a moment that !”ministers” who write and spout this stuff are unaware of its shining fascism: I think they mean it very, very sincerely and that they absolutely know that they can, must, and will force people to behave in defined ways predicated by themselves and theyr gramsco-Marxian “uni” Tutors. Just regard some of this blisteringly fascist prose:-

Tobacco products will be barred from display in shops despite fears it could hit small stores during the economic downturn.

The new restrictions come after an extensive consultation on measures to reduce the number of children who take up smoking and helping those already addicted to quit.

But ministers will not go as far as recommending all cigarette packaging be plain with only the brand name and health warnings printed on them.

Sales from vending machines will also be restricted as research has shown children can buy cigarettes from them easily even though they are supposed to be in places where shops owners and pub landlords can supervise them.

Experts are keen to build on the success of the ban on smoking in public places, introduced in England in July 2007, and the increase in the legal age to buy tobacco to 18.

The main opponents have been concerned at the impact on small businesses during the downturn and a surge in illegal tobacco smuggling into the UK.

Last night a Business Department source said: “We know that business has been resisting this but there are times when the consumer’s interest must outweigh that. We believe the public are with us on this move.

“We have asked smokers’ views on this too. There is no doubt that the vast majority want to quit.”

It was reported last month that Business Secretary Peter Mandelson was attempting to block the moves because of the effect on small newsagents and corner shops which rely on cigarette sales for up to a fifth of their custom.

Research has shown that children recognise many brands of cigarettes and prominent displays of products helps to reinforce their familiarisation which influences them to take up smoking. A study in California found children aged between 11 and 14 were 50 per cent more likely to smoke if they had been exposed to tobacco marketing in corner shops.

Shelves full of cigarettes also lure those trying to quit smoking into buying more packets or tempted those trying to quit to buy them, the Department of Health consultation said.

Almost a third of smokers thought removing cigarette displays would help them to give up.

The products will not necessarily have to be placed under the counter but should not be visible, ministers will say today.

It could mean that cigarette packets are covered, placed in a cupboard or a back room.

Launching the consultation in April, health minister Dawn Primarolo said: “It’s vital we get across the message to children that smoking is bad. If that means stripping out vending machines or removing cigarettes from behind the counter, I’m willing to do that.

“Children who smoke are putting their lives at risk and are more likely to die of cancer than people who start smoking later.”

Other countries have already banned the display of tobacco at the point of sale or are planning to do so including Iceland, Thailand, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway.

Latest figures show 22 per cent of adults smoke in England, which is down by 1.9m since 1998, and the Government is on target to reduce this to 21 per cent by 2010.

However almost 30 per cent of those in routine and manual jobs still smoke and rates are not dropping in this group as fast.

Smoking is one of the leading causes of early death and accounts for 87,000 deaths in England each year and smoking related illness costs the NHS £1.5bn a year to treat.

Among children nine per cent of 11 to 15-year-olds smoke regularly, rising to one fifth of teenagers aged 16 to 19. More than three in ten 20 to 24 year olds smoke, which is the highest of any age group.

And…I’m sure that Keeley Hazell would not want her little local shops, in Bromley, to go bust through lost ciggy-sales…the sales merely lost to the pushers, at £125 for 20 smacks! I’m not betting on it, but I’d guess the “street” price of 20 “Marlboro’s”, not legally manufactured by Philip Morris, at all, to be about £5 or £6 per spliff… and that’s for starters, until it gets more difficult to supply….

Sorry Im not allowed to smoke on film....

"Sorry I'm not allowed to smoke on film...."