The Devil will try to corrupt everything, even toy aeroplanes…

UPDATE an hour later…

I have worked out how to say what it is that makes me sad about this particular matter. It’s that, in its ever-tightening screwhold on individuals’ liberties, this current British State takes even toys, that boys and men (and even some girls) have once liked to play with, harmlessly, and turns them into weapons of constriction.

if one was a psychiatrist, then one would, after all this is done, like to take some of these State people, put them on the couch, and try to find out, really find out, what made them do what they did? Why did a  man who sold teledrones to the Army (understandable) agree to sell them to the State Police….why did he not send the bastards packing out of his office waving a cricket bat, even, when they came to ask to buy them from him…to spy on British householders late on….?

Why did the couchee-subjects I have referred to, see the world not as other people, but as controllers of it? or as salesmen to controllers?  As controllers of other, unknown individuals’ lives, or worse, as accessories after the fact of that imposed control?

Is it just simple nasty error-ridden Gramsco-Marxianism, or is it something…..deeper? What actually motivated them to consciously err?

Can’t they understand that individuals have Free Will? That the reason for opposition to State control is that it ought not to exist?

In the end, what is it that makes someone want to be, say, a traffic warden, or a concentration-camp-guard, or a “modern”  interior-ministry-policeman?

Have we as libertarians failed in some way, to explain how this mind-set cannot be normal, and the owner of it must have suffered in some way, to get like that?

Or, does evil really exist, existentially?…’s the post you signed on for……..

David Davis

Now we are to be faced with this. The Law will need to be clarified on the following points:-

(1) What measures will householders be able to take to prevent overflight of their property by these robots, if they decide they simply don’t like them and don’t actually want them around, or they are a nuisance, or they keep us awake in the night, or they scare the racing-pigeons? (The helicopters are bad enough.)

(2) To what extent will _Radio Amateurs_ be prevented from  _examining_   and then  _analysing_  the frequencies and transmission-modes used? (I never said we would try to transmit on these bands or even interfere with them…we are strictly licensed to operate on certain bands, and in particular modes only. But “nobody suggests” that we can’t listen to any public transmission or signal whatsoever….)

(3) What are the “sunset” clauses inherent in the use of these extraordinary bits of machinery, considering thatw e are supposed to be living in what even this government calls a “Free Society”?

Where must the Queen’s subjects stand up, and actually draw the line in the sand?

What, for example, if you wanted to do Practical Coal Mining, in your garden? Would this stuff be used against you?

The bastard donkeys pretending to lead our Lions, don’t think about their use of language.

David Davis (no, I was NOT in the SAS, and I’m NOT that one, I just write on here.)

Read this report from the Barclay Bugle, which contains disgustingly ill-thought-out language from politicians in Westmonster, about the latest preventable military deaths in Afghanistan, which were sustained by the soldiers of an advanced nation, against pre-capitalist barbarians who were getting their (“improvised”) weapons from people whose arses we ought already to have kicked first.

“Deliberate operation” …. if the guys were there “accidentally”, does that make it different?

“….and that the woman soldier, who was serving with the Intelligence Corps, may have been taken along in case female suspects had to be searched.”

This is war. Who the f*** cares who searches you? The bastards are trying to overturn Western Civilisation. (I believe this about them – you may not. So we may have to agree to differ.) Do we owe the politeness of Western Sensibility to our enemies in the minutes when we are trying to kill them for opposing our way of life, so that “female suspects” will be searched by a woman? That bit comes after they have surrendered, as has always been understood in moral polities.

Also, it is not suitable to send women into combat areas. I have always thought this.

Broadly speaking, the governmentist-release-bits could have been written by leftist hand-wringing-bozos who (a) don’t want to be associated with this business, and (b) agree with the “Tali Ban”, whatever that might be (I don’t know anyway, but if it shoots at us, then it’s the enemy as that’s a sort of definition) and seem to think its acts to be a sort of unavoidable plague.

Libertarians are of course not in favour of “State” armed forces, knowing these to be less efficient and more badly-planned and led than proper ones. However, the British version is the nearest in most circumstances to the real thing, with the possible exception of the Israelis. If the British are doing some fighting, even under Zanu-Laborg (which has not yet fully managed to trash the Forces as an Institution but is still trying hard even at the end of its life) then we are probably in the right.