The Last Ditch

If Glasgow East isn't a Labour seat...

Link: BBC NEWS | Scotland | Glasgow, Lanarkshire and West | SNP stuns Labour in Glasgow East.

...where is? Is this the end of triangulation in British politics, with the core vote taken for granted by New Labour finally biting back? Does it signal the end of the United Kingdom? Democracy is such a crude tool when you think about it. For all my undoubted schadenfreude at Labour's richly-deserved humiliation, I am not sure what the voters of Glasgow East have said.

Labour have failed to control binge drinking. No ****, Sherlock

Link: Labour have failed to control binge drinking - News Story - Conservative Party.

I was a member of the Conservative Party for years. I led my University's Conservative association to control of our student union. I have an instinctive affiliation with the party. Knowing that I will probably not live to see the new Libertarian Party have real influence, let alone office (it took the Labour Party 24 years from its foundation to see office for the first time) I must still hope for Conservative electoral success.

Conservatives are not naturally so extravagant as Labour, which means a smaller state. They are not naturally so authoritarian neither, though the mumsy/chumsy wing are paternalist authoritarians - “for your own good, dear." 

For two days this story from the Conservatives' site has been sitting in my RSS feeds infuriating me. What people do with their money and their bodies is entirely a matter for them. Yes, when people are drunk they sometimes do bad things, as they sometimes do when sober. So hold them accountable for their actions in either case. In choosing to become intoxicated, they took the risk that alcohol's dis-inhibiting effects (for which they bought it) might lead them into trouble. Their choice; their responsibility. Without alcohol's dis-inhibiting effects, the reserved British would probably die out. Or at least only the physically attractive would be able to breed, which would mean that the political classes would die out. Is that what the Conservatives want?

To make the political point that Labour has “failed to control” binge drinking is to accept that they have the right to do so. It is also to imply that the Conservatives will succeed in controlling it, which is a particularly stupid hostage to give to political fortune. Has the Shadow Health Secretary any idea how much state power he would need to deploy to stop all those who want to get drunk from doing so? Does he not realise that the consequences of such power would be worse than the evil he seeks to cure? If not, does he not realise that he is in the wrong political party?

To bracket "excessive drinking" and "associated violent crime" is to  exonerate criminals and blame alcohol. Then action on alcohol can be "spun" as genuine action on crime (and to hell with holding people responsible for their own actions, as a civilised society must). It is is just the sort of sodden thinking that got us into our current social nightmare. It has no place in the Conservative Party. But then neither, these days, do I.

The Englishman on "Saint Al"

Link: An Englishman's Castle: Balance on Channel 4.

I have said this often to my friends and colleagues, but have never published it. The Englishman's post stimulated to me to write it in a comment over at his Castle, so I reproduce it here (with apologies for quoting myself);

Al Gore is the 21st Century's Karl Marx. His influential presentation of pseudo-scientific gobbledegook and its adoption as gospel truth by the gullible masses (of intellectuals) will kill millions of the real masses and ensure that hundreds of millions more live their whole lives in unnecessary poverty because of arrested economic development. His ideas justify ruthless centralisation of state power on "humanitarian" grounds and are therefore irresistibly attractive to politicians of a certain ilk, who will live high on the hog behind closed doors while their subject peoples suffer and die. Stupid mug punters will fall for the spiel because it's "for a better future." It will all collapse in chaos, with only Guardian journalists and British academics still believing in it when the scales have fallen from everyone else's eyes. The parallel is exact.

There. I have it off my chest. Now the anthropogenic climate change fanatics can use their sophisticated debating skills (i.e. calling names which draw parallels with neo-Nazis) on me. See if I care. History, I fear, will prove me right. I am sorry to disappoint Osama bin Laden, who no doubt covets the title, but Al Gore may just be the most dangerous man alive.

Dr. Dragan Dabic's Website

Link: Dr. Dragan Dabic - Neuropsihijatar i Bioenergeticar - Neuropsychiatry, Alternative Medicine and Energy, Eastern Meditation, Yoga, Spiritual Cleansing, Chinese Medicine, Medicinal Herbs and Macrobiotic Diet.

Here's an interesting website to check out before it goes down. I have always thought you have to be careful about some of these Prince Charles-type quack doctors. I wonder what kind of alternative therapies he offered? Combined colonic irrigation and ethnic cleansing anyone?

What a good job Cherie Blair never met him. He might have ended up hiding out in 10 Downing Street.

Michel Roux, French chef, quits Britain

Link: Michel Roux, French chef, quits Britain for safer Switzerland - Telegraph.

Michel Roux should have been knighted and feted and given the Freedom of the City of Westminster. Perhaps even elevated to the House of Lords. Instead, after 40 years, the most important fact about him to the Telegraph is that he's French. This is a man who, with his brother Albert, did more than most to bring food civilisation to our benighted (in culinary terms) islands. I thank him for Le Gavroche which has been a source of (sadly infrequent, given where I live) pure pleasure since I first visited some 20 years ago. I have still to visit, shamefully, The Waterside Inn. Sadly, it's nowhere near my usual UK stamping grounds but it enhances my life just to know that it's there.

I hope it's a very long time before Albert and the young Roux follow suit. They should be given permanent police guards to ensure they feel safe enough to stay. They are much more important to civilisation in England than any politician currently enjoying such protection (with one notable exception).

Enjoy your retirement in Switzerland, chef. I am sorry your adopted homeland isn't safe any longer. I wish I could disagree with your assessment, but you are quite right. Anyone who can afford retirement to a safer place should do it.

The strange joys of blogging

Link: The Truth Laid Bear.

After over three years of blogging labour I have worked my way up from being "an Insignificant Microbe" in The Truth Laid Bear's blogging "ecosystem" until yesterday, briefly, I was ranked as "a Large Mammal". Today I am back to being a "Marauding Marsupial" and confidently expect to slip further to my just-about-sustainable ranking as "an Adorable Rodent". What, you may ask (what the ****, if you are a swearblogger) are you talking about? Essentially the TTLB "ecosystem" is a picturesque system of ranking blogs automatically by reference to incoming links. The top ten blogs count as "Higher Beings", currently led by the mighty Daily Kos. This is the US site that gives the lie to the feeble excuses for of Leftist bloggers in the UK. In the Land of the Free, where the entire political spectrum would fit comfortably in the right half of the Conservative Party and where David Cameron would be considered a dangerous pinko an unabashedly Left-wing site rules the blogging roost. Even her relentless energy can't get the formidable Madame Malkin out of second place.

The next thirty blogs are ranked as "Mortal Humans", including Hot Air (largely the petite Michelle Malkin again), Jihad Watch and The Volokh Conspiracy. If you have heard of any blogs at all, you must have heard of these. The next seventy are ''Playful Primates" and among this sub-elite are to be found Wonkette, Pajamas Media and the excellent Stuff White People Like. To put this in context, this is the level at which you will also find Engadget and Gizmodo, two sites with attractions well beyond those of political bloggers.

Our own big boys of political blogging such as Samizdata, ConservativeHome and Iain Dale cannot get higher than the status of "Large Mammal", which goes from the 101st most linked all the way down to the 2,617th. I can only assume (though I cannot be certain as the TTLB search facility sucks) that Guido disdains to register. If he did, I guess he would be a Large Mammal like Iain Dale. It is sobering to think that a blog about motherhood in Alaska (with "favorite recipes, reviews, crafts and giveaways mixed with stories of life in the Last Frontier") can comfortably outrank even those British political bloggers with enviable readerships.

I would encourage you to register with TTLB and to be brave enough to feature your ecosystem ranking in your sidebar. If I could cope for months with being "an insignificant microbe" so can you. TTLB's creator NZ explains that the "whimsical" names on the rankings are to remind us not to take them too seriously and of course he's right. No blogger's life depends on being ranked as a "higher being". However, it's a more accurate assessment of your blog's progress than most and if your blogging matters to you at all (why would you do it if it didn't?) it's hard not to smile at being moved up the TTLB ladder of blogging life.

Shrugging off billions, while the press looks on

Link: Billions wasted and they just shrug it off - Telegraph.

I was pleased to read such a piece in the Daily Telegraph, albeit in the obscure "opinion" section. 90% of the article is comprised of hard facts, so presumably it's "opinion" because it calls for heads to roll? These facts don't surprise me (nor the opinion neither). I am a keen follower of the splendid blog Burning our Money, where the redoubtable Wat Tyler regales readers regularly with both. The surprise is to see such facts and opinions in such proximity in a mainstream newspaper.

With notable exceptions, British political blogs rant less against the "main stream media" or "MSM" than their American counterparts. This is odd because, while American bloggers on the right will tell you that their MSM are riddled with pinkoes, the average US journalist is sane compared to his British equivalent. Apart from the odd grumpy curmudgeon seemingly selected by the editors to discredit right wing thought, our political inky hacks live in a statist fantasy world where only government matters. Given the growing Socialist dominance of British academia since the 1930's, our journalists have been steeped in left thinking for so long that we have not even a folk memory of serious coverage of classical liberal or Conservative thought. We don't know what to complain about, because our journalism has been this way since our grandparents day.

The points in the linked article are as sad as they are true. How does Gordon Brown escape personal bankruptcy for having squandered other peoples money on such a monumental scale? He only had the use of the money as our  trustee. He used billions, not for the public good, but to advance his own political career and buy votes for his party. So why is our system so defective that there is no-one to send him the personal bill? It can be and is done to mere councillors, so why not to a Chancellor and Prime Minister?

Sadder yet, however, is that for so long as the people had cheap credit to buy holidays and cars and were thus content, the Fourth Estate in Britain failed to do its job. Only now, when unemployment (even after the numbers have been rigged by encouraging the hale and the hearty onto "the sick") is set to rise above two million again, are the facts even being reported in the MSM. Where were these media professionals with all their training and resources when the mistakes reported here were being made? Not reading Wat Tyler's writings, clearly. Nor attending the meetings of the Public Accounts Committee as he does. Though they are paid to, and he does so merely as a concerned citizen.

Thomas Jefferson's remark comes to mind;

...were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate a moment to prefer the latter...

I am afraid that for the whole of the New Labour era, functionally, we have had the former. The press must shoulder much of the blame for the parlous economic state of Britain today. They whistled Dixie while New Labour brought us to our knees.

I have never thought that blogging had much to do with the press (though the latter has tetchily seen us bloggers as amateur competition). We don't have the apparatus or the staff to do the proper job that Jefferson had in mind. We are mere observers, when real journalists can (and should) act. With honourable exceptions where the blogger has built his own insider sources, blogging is more like an incidentally public conversation at the local bar than a publication. It has revealed a popular desire to be heard and this has changed the MSM somewhat, leading to comments facilities on the web versions of their articles for example. Clearly "proppa bloggas" and the proper press influence each other, but we are not part of the same thing. I have to ask though. If the British media were not so poor, would political blogs be remotely as popular?

Vote for your Top Ten Blogs

Link: Iain Dale's Diary: Guide to Political Blogs 2008-9: Vote for your Top Ten Blogs.

It's the awards season and bloggers everywhere affect insouciance. However, I am sure we all want the results to be free, fair and based on a better turnout than a local election. So please get your thinking caps on and email an ordered list of your top ten political blogs. The rules are simple (though Iain's wording of rule 2 sadly falls short of legal drafting standards of precision):-

1. Please only vote once
2. Only blogs based in the UK, run by UK residents are eligible or based on UK politics [my emphasis] are eligible
3. Votes must be cast before Friday 15 August
4. Blogs chosen must be listed in the Total Politics Blog Directory.
5. You must send a list of TEN blogs, ranked. Any entry containing fewer than ten blogs will not count.

The email address to which you can send your TOP TEN BLOGS is:-

toptenblogs@totalpolitics.com.

What has the Met learned from Menezes death?

Link: Terrorism: Met 'has not learned' from Menezes death | UK news | The Guardian.

Next week is the third anniversary of the murder of Jean Charles de Menezes. Some will object to my choice of the word "murder." In England, a killing is murder if two elements are present and there is no valid defence. The first element - the actus reus - the act that led to the death is clearly present. The second element - the mens rea - is intent. If the killer intended either to kill or to cause Jean Charles grievous bodily harm, then unless there was a valid defence, it was murder. No-one who blows off another man's head with seven dum dum bullets is really in a position to deny his lethal intent.

A defence of provocation would require Jean Charles to have done something to provoke his killer into losing control of himself. He had no time to do so.  He was killed immediately by a total stranger.

I don't imagine the killer would have pleaded diminished responsibility on the basis that the balance of his mind was disturbed when the act was committed. In the heated atmosphere of the time, no doubt his blood was up. We could speculate endlessly as to the state of mind of someone who can kill a helpless fellow-human being under restraint. But we may be confident that this would not be the killer's defence.

The only "runner" here is self-defence. Had I had killed Jean-Charles because I mistakenly believed he was a suicide bomber about to detonate, that would be my defence. I think it would be a good one, though I would expect to be severely tested under cross-examination as to the truth of my mistake and the basis for it.

Had I been the killer however, the police and the Crown Prosecution Service would quite properly have said that it was for a jury to decide if my defence was valid. Had they said that to the killer in this case, the jury would probably have acquitted. That is not what happened. One agency of the state (the Crown Prosecution Service) shielded another (the Metropolitan Police) and justice has neither been done, nor seen to be done. There is now clearly one rule in Britain for ordinary citizens and quite another for the state's employees. That, with all due respect to his grieving family, is the true significance of Jean-Charles' death.

If brought to trial, the gunman would have had some difficulties with evidence. Another officer had already restrained Jean-Charles. The killer would have had to convince a jury he had no time to register that Jean-Charles was lightly dressed with no place to conceal a bomb belt. But in the fevered atmosphere of the time, and given the false information incompetently communicated by the killer's colleagues, I still think a jury would have acquitted.

So why do I now say it was murder? If the case were brought now, years late, the circumstances would be very different. The killer's attempts to evade justice would forfeit the jury's sympathy. Jury members would consider more closely the possibility that - as he pulled the trigger seven times to blow off the head of an innocent man - he knew that he was no threat. They would listen more carefully to the evidence of the officer who was holding Jean-Charles down and according to his evidence at the farcical "health & safety" trial, perceived no further threat. They would consider more seriously the possibility that, in a heightened state of excitement, having geared himself up to kill and knowing he could do so without consequences, the killer simply refused to be denied his prey.

Why would he pull (and pull and pull) the trigger if he knew at that moment that Jean-Charles was innocent? Humans are violent. Men particularly so. When there is war or other justification to break the 6th Commandment there is never a shortage of volunteers. There is a dark reason why "The Godfather" is the most loved film of all time and why men test their new televisions with the opening sequence of "Gladiator." In our animal nature we are killers, and that is why throughout the history of civilisation, killing has been surrounded with laws and taboos. It had to be.

We are told its own report concludes the Met "has not learned" from this incident. I disagree. The Met's officers have learned that they are above the law. They have learned that the state will back them, conceal their identity, reward them with holidays at the taxpayers expense and generally treat them as "one of its own" if they kill those merely suspected to be its enemies. They have learned that all this applies however reckless or incompetent they may be and that they can defame their victims shamelessly without any consequences. They have learned dark and terrible lessons.

I remain convinced that the death of Jean-Charles de Menezes is the most significant event of my life to date; though I have lived through some of the most eventful times in human history. 9/11 changed nothing.  Neither did 7/7. They told us what we already knew - that there are barbarians in the world and that as George Orwell put it;

"People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf."

Jean-Charles' death however did change something. The day he died, my England - the England of fair trials, of justice being seen to be done - died with him. That is why, if I were in London next week rather than Moscow, I would attend one of the events recommended by Rachel (the living proof that politicians lie when they claim the victims of terrorism despise those who believe in "old-fashioned" notions of liberty and justice). Full details are to be found at Justice4Jean.com (from where I took the images in this post).

If you have in you the spirit of the England that once was, please be there for me and for the others who can't make it. Above all be there for an innocent young man who was killed in your name.

2008 Witanagemot Club Political Blogging Awards

Link: The Witanagemot Club - 2008 Witanagemot Club Political Blogging Awards - In the Spotlight - News.

Many apologies for my temporary absence from blogging. My colleagues and I have been helping some clients and their business partners generate substantial "invisible earnings" for a number of Western governments to tax and squander. The contract was signed two nights ago, and I have been recovering since. The adrenaline high of a big deal is just as good as ever, but the bump with which I hit the ground afterwards gets nastier with age.

Launching myself back into the blogging fray, I have just cast my votes in the Witanagemot Club blogging awards. On the basis that, if I voted for myself in any category, I ought then in all conscience to vote myself the "Blogger most desperate to win blogging awards", I didn't.

It's all in fun, but provides encouragement to many who selflessly put a lot of effort into sharing their thoughts (and in the best cases their wit) with us all. Please go here and vote yourselves. I am lobbying for no-one but I will tell you that the two blogs I voted for in the most categories were the two I turn to first each day, namely An Englishman's Castle and The Daily Mash.

An Englishman's Castle is what a blog should be; pithy, to the point, intelligent and amusing. The blogger's personality shines through, though no blog I read displays less egotism. He chats to you as he might down the pub. I wish we had a pub in common. I suspect "the Englishman" influences more people with his dry observations than many an interminable ranter (naming no names). Arguably, although it meets the technical definition, The Daily Mash is not a blog at all. It is a damn sight more professional than most print media and exponentially funnier, though not always suitable for perusing at your office computer.

My own question is much simpler than the Witanagemot survey (easy enough to complete though that was with the questions open in one tab and Google Reader in the other to cut and post the URLs of my favourite blogs). Which is the first blog you read each day, and why?

While on the subject of Blogpower

Link: Pageflakes - Tom Paine's The Blogpower Express.

...Colin Campbell of Adelaide Green Porridge Cafe has kindly volunteered to assist with the updating of the Blogpower Express which, due to my other commitments was shamefully behind the times. Already he has made a great difference. Do follow the link to have a look.

Blogpower Roundup

Link: Question That: Seen Elsewhere (7).

I hope that the work project which has taken over my life of late will conclude today or tomorrow so that normal blogging can resume. In the meantime, courtesy of Ian_QT at Question That, here is the latest Blogpower Roundup. Enjoy.

David Davis: fool or hero?

Link: Analysis: David Davis' hollow victory in Haltemprice by-election - Telegraph.

The received political and media wisdom about David Davis's "one issue by-election" says more about the commentators than the man himself. To a cynical, unprincipled careerist (and a journalist accustomed to reporting on such creatures) Davis's actions make no sense. All they can see is that he damaged his "career" by distracting attention from his Party's leader to the latter's annoyance.

Perhaps that is even how David Cameron sees it. I hope not. As Gordon Brown is discovering, no PM can stand alone. He needs to be surrounded by high quality people to prosper.

Davis has proved that to him there are things more important than his career. I would hope that is true for all of us. As the things Davis values are those that our ancestors valued more highly than life itself, it should not really be shocking. That our political classes are shocked shows how much our island race has dwindled.

It used to be a commonplace that people went into politics out of a spirit of public duty. They had a desire to "give something back" to a society of which they were proud. We can all think of many historical politicians who derived only the dubious benefit of fame from their careers. By their cynical comments on Davis's actions, our modern politicians and pundits are proving that those days are over.

Since parties began to prefer "career politicians" as candidates; men and women with politics degrees and a "real life" background only in think tanks, lobbying, political journalism and government consultancy, people have increasingly lost faith in the political process. Politics should not be a game. It should be an honest pursuit for concerned citizens; ideally those whose experience and understanding of real life equips them for the job.

Only those who see it as a game with prizes could see David Davis as a failure. Since the "prizes" are paid for by the rest of us, we should aspire to exclude such people from politics. I regard David Davis's campaign as a useful litmus test. Every politician and journalist who sneered is to be regarded with suspicion.

Elfin safety school

I spent yesterday in the company of students and parents at my daughter's school. She has just completed her "A" Level exams and it was her last day. As this signalled the end of a major expense as well as a rite of passage for my daughter, I was very much in the mood to celebrate. It was uplifting to be in the presence of so many excited, optimistic young people setting out on their adult lives. You could have cut the parental pride into neat blocks and built castles with it.

I have become very fond of the school in the eight years my daughters have been there. It is the most efficient organisation I have ever dealt with in Britain (though I could wish that were a bigger claim). The staff are dedicated and enthusiastic and the students almost always do them great credit. Every time I visited, bright cheerful, polite young people swept away the images of British youth perpetuated by the Daily Mail. Although the school fees were the greatest single expenditure of my life, I do not regret a penny. Whatever may befall my daughters (and I hope it is nothing but good) no-one can ever take their education from them. It's also a remarkably portable asset if (as I fear) it may become necessary to make a run for the border someday.

I didn't know whether to be more amused or annoyed when, before the chaplain stood up to take the leavers' service which began the day's events, a prefect stood up and said she had some announcements to make. Then, under regulations I can't be bothered to waste time looking up, she gave us an airline-style introduction to where we could find the exits in case of fire and instructions on how to behave "in the unlikely event" of such an emergency. Just as we we sending our offspring off to be adults, the ludicrous voice of the British government intruded to treat us all like children.

Gordon Brown has smashed all previous records for legislative fecundity, his government having enacted 2,823 new laws in his first year in office. No doubt one of them required a nice young girl to waste breath in the imagined interests of "Health & Safety", while making all us middle-aged onlookers feel like rebellious teenagers. In that moment, I wished Gordon Brown were there. I and a few of the other fathers would have given the oily little tick a good kicking behind the bike sheds. Had his fellow-pupils at Kirkcaldy High been more diligent in this respect, our nation might have been spared a good deal of harm.

Lunch

Hand on closed book, I look through smoked glass at planks lit by watery Moscow sunshine. My book and my meal are both finished; my coffee cup is drained. To my left a couple speak earnest Russian. They laugh. I glance and smile wryly. Their eyes shine. In their mutual ease, I had thought them married. Now I doubt it.

To my right two young men speak, and perhaps hear, in the common language of commerce. Their words are clumsy and inexplicably serious. Is it the effort of concentration? What price do they pay to squeeze their thoughts through this straw?

“My computer clock is on French time. Every day it is five - then ‘Oh my God, no!’ It is already seven.”

Beyond them, two femmes d’un certain age illustrate “tete a tete”. You could not slip a petal between their carefully moisturised foreheads. They have only to extend their tongues to touch. For a moment that seems absurdly possible. Then they wag again.

“I always ask for exit row, but never get it. You know this row? There is more space there.”

I glance at my watch. I gaze at the dust-jacket, irritated. A life measured in books. Since childhood, an unbroken hiss of author noise muffling my own thoughts. Books measured by the time they linger. This one was too good; too fast. The world is loud and annoyingly clear without the author’s hiss. I listen.

“Yesterday I had mushrooms stuffed with cheese; very traditional.”

The second man nods. Does he smile inside at such certainty in his interest? A sudden amused insight; if this is conversation, I need never have been shy.

“No workflow. No nothing. Just pure email.”

I rise to leave, thinking of the next book. There is always a book. Bad ones linger in the hand; good ones linger in the mind. Perhaps there have been too many?

Justice must be seen to be done?

Link: Jean Charles de Menezes inquest: 44 police officers granted anonymity - Telegraph.

If these policemen were employed by a totalitarian state (e.g. Zimbabwe) our press would call them a "death squad." Here, in our democracy, no-one even seems surprised that, not only will they face no criminal charges for gunning down an innocent man, they will not even face his family across a coroner's court. Where are the "War on Terror" merchants now to tell these officers that "if they have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear?" Why don't they come out of the shadows to challenge the following statement?

"...the officers at the scene conspired to perjure themselves in stating that warnings of "Police" or "Armed Police" were given before firing and that de Menezes moved towards them in response. Seventeen witnesses, given no chance to collude, all confirmed he was shot dead without warning. Anyone with experience of criminal trials will tell you that such unanimity is almost unheard of. Policemen who give false evidence under oath are not worthy of our support..."

The Jean-Charles de Menezes case is what finally brought home to me what my country has become. A nation of cowards prepared to sacrifice truth, justice and liberty in the vain hope of safety from enemies real and imagined. A nation ruled by a political class devoid of honour or principle; a political class quite capable of lying about terrorist threats in order to justify self-serving actions. A nation which will allow its leaders to throw away everything (Magna Carta, habeas corpus, jury trials, the right to silence, the rule on double jeopardy, the presumption of innocence) which ever made it worthy of respect.

UK Libertarians in SL

Yesterday Bag and I had the idea of opening a UK Libertarian Party office in Second Life. "No sooner said than done, so acts your man of worth;" within a couple of hours we had clearance from the party's Director of Communications, I had identified premises, Bag had rented them and we had furnished and equipped the space in time for the Director's first visit (click image to enlarge).

I have no idea how many UK Libertarians there are in Second Life. I guess we shall find out. Thanks to Bag's generosity in paying the rent, there's really nothing to lose. For those of you who are already SL'ers, this link will take you right there.

Good news!

This past week has been an excellent one for me. Firstly Ms Paine the Elder achieved superb results in her second year exams at Cambridge University and won another academic prize. Secondly, the Labour Party lost its deposit at Henley, which I have hopes is just the beginning of the political extinction of the greatest internal enemy the British People ever had.

They say good news comes in threes. Years ago, as an impecunious young married lawyer in need of money for furniture I tearfully sold my pride and joy. During University and Law School I had a 1957 Wolseley 15/50 which became more than a car to me. It was manufactured in the month I was born and was a familiar sight in my home town as I grew up. It was usually parked outside church when I went to Sunday School as the lady who owned it often "took care of the flowers."

Some of my early memories were of another 15/50 that had been my father's first decent car. He and I became classic car enthusiasts when he bought the car for me. We restored it to such a condition that it won the 1950's section Concours d'Elegance at The Wolseley Register's National Rally in three consecutive years in the 1980s.

I have always regretted selling "the Emperor Justinian," as the car was known. Especially as it changed hands again soon after and all trace was lost. I have not known the car's fate for 20 years and had sadly presumed it to have gone to the great garage in the sky. I have just had news that it is safe, after years off the road, and is back in the hands of a Dutch enthusiast who has carried out a full restoration. I even have a recent picture (converted to left hand drive and registered in the Netherlands).

I know it's only metal, bakelite and red leather and that I should not be sentimentally attached to an object, but you can't imagine how delighted I am to know "the Emperor" is still alive and well.

Whose side are the police on?

Link: Frank McCourt, a former soldier, charged for makling a citizens arrest - Telegraph.

The linked story illustrates poignantly what has happened to our nation under Labour. There was a time when youths would have feared to act in such a way, because the local community would have dealt with them and the police would have exercised common sense. Common sense in this case would have rejected the allegation of kidnapping, which was clearly part of a malicious campaign. But "by the book" bureaucratic Britain requires that common sense is not applied. The allegation was made and must therefore be given credence. Worse, the bureaucracy incentivises the police to pick low-hanging fruit and win a quick statistic, rather than actually tackle the crime that makes many parts of the country unliveable.

Mr McCourt did his country as much service here as he did when he served as a soldier. He is patently a good man; the sort any country should be happy to have as a citizen. He is even - amazingly - still willing to fight, saying he would do the same thing again. His wife's reaction is more typical - and heart-rendingly sad

"If I had to go through that again," says Mrs McCourt, "I would walk out. I back Frank, but I just couldn't face it again." Forlornly, she eyes her home. "We have been left defenceless."

Who can blame her? The state is not there to direct peoples' lives. It is there to provide a framework of law within which they can direct their own. It is also there to protect citizens from criminals who interfere with their ability to do so. In this story, as in so many, it has done precisely the opposite. It has done so under the direction, and with the approval, of the Labour government.

I would like to be like Mr McCourt, but if I am honest I am more like his wife. I once made a citizen's arrest myself, but I would never do so again. I would not act to prevent a crime, nor to protect a fellow-citizen from criminal attack. I am white, male and middle class. I am already guilty in the eyes of our politicised police officers, who are conducting a class war on their political masters' behalf. Regretfully, I must (and do) avoid them at all costs. Mr McCourt's story proves that my prudence, much as I despise myself for it, is justified.

Police force removal of English flags

Link: Wonko’s World » Blog Archive » Police force EDP to remove English flags.

If, as alleged, she said of the Cross of St George “we don’t want that flag here in Henley,” then Henley's town clerk, Miss Jules Samuels, is a disgrace. May Nelson's shade keep her awake at night for the rest of her miserable existence. As she is an humble Town Clerk and not a "Chief Executive", we can safely assume that Henley is not a Labour Council. Indeed all the members seem to be either Conservatives or members of the allegedly apolitical, but not obviously totalitarian, "Henley Residents' Group" We expect nothing but attempts at tyrrany from our Leftist friends, but how can seemingly respectable folk allow an official to order the removal of their nation's flag?

If the Scots can fly the Saltire and the Welsh can fly the Red Dragon (as they are most welcome to do) then how in the name of justice and decency can a jobsworth busybody speak in such terms of England's flag? In the town's "Best value peformance plan for 2007/2008", Ms Samuels wrote:

Partnerships continue to develop and play an important role in ensuring that Henley-On-Thames is a pleasant and rewarding place to live. If you believe you can help the Town Council in some way, or that the Town Council can assist you or your group, please do not hesitate to make contact with the Town Council office, where you will be assured of a warm welcome

I strongly suggest that any residents of Henley reading this post make contact with her at the Town Council office immediately. You might wish to let her know that the English Nation is a "group" which would appreciate some "partnership" from Henley Council. Or perhaps you could suggest that Henley would be a "more rewarding place" if she were not its Town Clerk. If you prefer you can write to the Mayor of Henley, Councillor Mrs G M  Zakss at mrs_zakss@macunlimited.net.  The contact details of all the Council members are here.

Finally, how can honest men and women in the police force continue to accept such orders as they were given in this instance? Did they join the force to fight crime, or to suppress political dissent? Frankly, it is high time for Britain's police officers, soldiers, border guards and secret intelligence officers to ask themselves the question; "is my job now compatible with my conscience?" It would certainly no longer be compatible with mine. They are there to defend our liberties, not subvert them.

I have supported the police my whole life. I have even made citizen's arrests. But I would not have accepted the instructions of these officers without evidence of the conveniently obscure "by-law" cited. If, as seems quite possible, they interfered with the electoral process on the basis of a lie, these officers should now be dismissed and barred from public employment forever.

Brown's first anniversary marked with humiliating defeat

Link: Brown's first anniversary marked with humiliating defeat in Henley byelection | Politics | guardian.co.uk.

Britain's ruling party lost its deposit. It was beaten so soundly that only the Guardian could be optimistic enough to speak of Brown's "first anniversary" as if there might be a second. To hell with blogging. I am off to have a very big drink tonight. I shall sip my g&t looking out over the Moscow rooftops with renewed hope in my heart.