Tag Archives: pubs

I’m pleased


Michael Winning

that Nick Hogan, the pub owner sent to chokey for letting people smoke, has got free, due to people like you rainsing the monet for his fine (which he couldn’t pay because the bastards bakrupted him.) Guido has a full roundup here.

I smoke, me, and there should be justice for this man


Michael Winning

It says at Guido’s that  Nick Hogan is in a violent prison, for non-payment of a fine of…what? £10,000? WTF is oging on with these people who say they are our masters? Aren’t we their masters and they our servants?

When did the changeover between ours and theirs take place?

Apart from anything smokers like me, I do about 20 a day and so pay about £4 a day towards Gordon’s debts, are starting to feel victimised and vindcitive.

Who knows when they’ll order me not to smoke round the animals, mostly in open air? Can pigs be affected by passive smoking on a Lancashire hill? You tell me!

Girls have clearly moved on


David Davis

Many decades ago, my father – a scientist – described to me as a small boy a kind of injury out of pure scientific interest, caused by a stiletto heel making a self-shaped depressed-skull-fracture. It was like a trepanning-wound only small and D-shaped.The injuree was invariably male, in the 1950s and 1950s.

It was called “somebody-or-other’s syndrome” (I can’t google it sadly) named after the usual obscure central-European-Physician who first described it. Not Kleinfelter’s, nor Münschausen’s, but something like that.

Clearly, today’s new-labour girls, fired up by GramscoFemiNaZism and enragement that “models” and “WAGs” have invaded their “partners’ ” text-messaging, have moved on. This poor man had his entire eye taken out, and the fracture-zone passed into his brain.

Stiletto heels are good. At least, on short-girls, which is the right sort to be, they are.

They make the female stance and walk more exciting to watch, which is their primary courting purpose, and also they bring her secondary sexual characteristics up nearer to yours when you have got her in a hug. This is the next most important objective, and ideally leaves her still shorter still than you, which is necessary or else you would need to stand on a box, which means that your name is Bernie Ecclestone (and that would not be good.)

If she injured him in a taxi, then although we do not know the circumstances, I suggest one of the following:-

(1) He is “NSIT” *** which means he made a pass privately in the taxi, was rejected, and was rejected utterly and suddenly (unlikely that she would react so violently)

(2) She discovered he’d given his phone to a mate who sent pictures of him (taken earlier) to a call-girl, while pretending the pics were of the sender (possible these days)

(3) She read his credit-card-statements and decided to injure him about the massage-parlour-stuff on the way home after a date (likely)

(4) She was annoyed that he’d posted pics of himself on Facebook, with a former girlfriend on holiday in Ibiza the year before (very probable in today’s climate of opinion)

(5) She was annoyed that he’d not glassed-up a dude who looked at her in the pub (also sadly probable).

*** “not safe in taxis”

The problem of what to do with fully-corrupted-humans, after victory


David Davis

Mr Eugenides fulminates suitably in his inimitable style, the loss to the world of which would be inestimable.

I am not clear to what level “antidrinkism” has seeped corrosively into the minds of the Enemy Class, and more especially and importantly, I guess, into the minds of “leisure industry workers”. Such as barmaids and the like.This sort fo stuff is just a symptom anyway of something much deeper and more purposefully-malevolent.

But, whether or not there will ever be a Libertarian civilisation or nation, let alone such a government as I opined before, suppose there was:

Let’s suppose we have something approaching what CountingCats sort-of-agrees is currently unachievable – a State in which broad libertarian principles inform its actions as a State, and in which a narrow majority tries to behave as if we can all do what we wish with our bodies and so on. What then do we do with an essentially rebellious, vindictive, contrarian and mutinous rentamob of ex-stooges and ex-State-nannies, forever carping on about their hard-done-byness, their righteousness and the injustice of it all, since everybody’s health is going to the dogs unless they get their way?

What is to be done with these people? We can’t let them anywhere near any sort of political power or influence: they would simply re-erect all the stuff we are trying to trash. But to be able to do that, we’d have to compulsorily reduce their circumstances in some economic way also. Perhaps some particularly invasive and highly-retrospective tax investigations would do, or something to do with their googling habits for the past 400 years.

As I get older, and see the deepness of the engrainment in GramscoFabiaNazis of their habit of never apologising and never admitting error (admirable and essential qualities in libertarians of course) I wonder how we can eliminate their threat to humanity permanently without emulating their methods, and I’d like suggestions please.

So that’s curtains for pubs then.


David Davis

“More than 200 MPs” are backing a campaign to……”

…where have we heard all that self-regarding tripe before? When will the goverNazis realise that, not only have we all realised that what they touch (or regulate) turns to dust and ashes, but that we are fast realising that they are doing it on purpose?

Measures to save the “Great British Pub”, as outlined by The Libertarian Alliance:-

(1) Abolish (ideally) all Excise Duty on alcoholic drinks:

(2) Allow __Publicans__ to dictate whether or not they individually want to allow “smoking”, lap-dancers, food, strippers, “Ladies of the Night”,  football screens, children, music etc, in their own premises:

(3) Abolish ALL drink-driving/alcohol-blood-level legislation, and impose astonishingly large fines and/or prison sentences for injuring or killing someone while drunk in charge of a vehicle:

(4) Stop conflating deaths of drunk pedestrians into “drink-drive-deaths”:

You can’t do it by making “supermarket lager” more expensive. People who buy this won’t go to pubs anyway. Let Pubs make themselves more attractive and individual, remove the disabilities of mostly responsible drivers and smokers and enjoyers of social activity in groups, such as watching lap-dancers, eating burgers and chips, bear-bating and the like, and pubs will recover.

There is a case for this stuff being _not_ newsworthy


UPDATE2:-  __AND__   is this all that he can pull? Saddo, handsome guy, you can do better than that…what about yer missiz? (Much better crumpet.)

 

Yeh it was late and she was game and, er ....

Yeh it was late and she was game and, er ....

 

 

 

 

_APART_ from other considerations, it features one private tragedy in the life of a Human Being, for whom the only justification and reason for an act was the decision to commit it. Borat-casting it benefits nobody else.

(I can’t remove the underlining sorry)

David Davis

I mean this sort of stuff, here. Here, we have a moderately competent foot ball-ist (I suppose?) who has merely done what it’s widely known that these people do, since after they have scored three goals and they can’t then do ought-else, they go and get drunk outside an expensive pub in somewhere called “Lond-on”. Sometimes it’s “Manchest-er” or “Liver-Pool”. Same difference. But “Lond-on” ensures faster publicity.

Come on, get out more, lighten up: the poor bastards have got to get rid of their money somehow?

The trouble is, the continual reporting of this will cause more of it, and crowd important people like Rutger Engels off the Wireless Tele Vision. Everybody knows that televising of a drink being drunk will cause people to “drink more” – just read old-man-Rutger for the newest lowdown. So, televising a foot ball-ist called Ashley Cole laying waste to the Met outside a bar will cause people to do the same, no?

« Older Entries