You may enjoy my bunker sketch!

http://oldrightie.blogspot.com/2009/03/back-in-bunker.html

You may enjoy my bunker sketch!

http://oldrightie.blogspot.com/2009/03/back-in-bunker.html

Craig, we need you on Twitter. That first line would have made a perfect laugh out loud tweet.

LOL…poor Jacqui…she’s having a nightmare fortnight…knives are out for her..

The thing in Plymouth’ll just be another load of utter bollox..timed to get a media-frenzy going…raise The Fear…and then the whole “story” will disappear just as quickly as it appeared.

We should know the bull$hit pattern by now…

Brilliant observation. Nearly fell off chair. But perhaps she was watching them too. Sounds like an Essex girl to me. It never did seem right having a Home Secretary called Jacqui (with a ‘q’).

Beauty always in the eye of the beholder, you’re no Adonis Craig Murray but you do alright it seems.

Cruelty sometimes looks bad on those that use it.

By the way, am I the only one who is finding that my name and e-mail address boxes are no longer retaining my details, even though the Remember Me button is checked?

“Beauty always in the eye of the beholder”

Indeed, but Ms Smith would be attracting a lot less opprobrium is she wasn’t so keen to prevent people enjoying their own lives without state interference! A slight invasion of her own privacy is probably no bad thing, although one wonders whether she has the wit to make the connection.

I do hope the films didn’t involve any torture, though…

I have never had any respect for Miss ‘Jackboots’ Smith and little for her boys in blue.

Remember the Viva Palestina Nine who were taken off the convoy? The police cannot even say sorry.

From the BBC website -

Page last updated at 08:01 GMT, Monday, 30 March 2009 09:01 UK

Apology call in M65 terror arrest

Nine men were arrested by counter-terrorism police on the motorway.

Police chiefs have been urged to give a public apology to the Muslim community in Lancashire over their handling of recent terror arrests.

Nine men, from Burnley and Blackburn, were arrested on the M65 near Preston but later released without charge.

At a meeting attended by 200 people on Sunday in Blackburn, Lancashire Police were asked to apologise.

Cmdr Andy Rhodes refused to give a full apology but said the incident was “regrettable”.

Ibrahim Master, a former chairman of the Lancashire Council of Mosques, said there has been disappointment about the way the men were treated.

Mr Rhodes added that officers had done all they could to minimise inconvenience.

Two vans and an ambulance were travelling in convoy to London last month when they were stopped by counter-terrorism officers.

Although six men were later released, three faced extended questioning and several homes in Burnley were also searched.

Daniel,

Now it isn’t necessarily her looks which put me off. And I hope I am only ever cruel in terms of using barbed words, directed towards the powerful and wealthy. They need it. If you catch me being rude to the vulnerable and downtrodden, your censue will be accepted.

Sir, that comment is genius.

Seconded Craig’s comments just now regarding the powerful and wealthy. We should not start feeling sorry for Jacqui Smith. Instead, we should remember that she is in part responsible for the anti-terror legislation, and for the continuing disingenuousness about Iraq and Afghanistan, etc. The resulting social effects of these are the fear agenda, loss of liberty, ID cards, political disenfranchisement, corporatism, anti-Muslim racism and so forth – not a great deal of positive stuff.

So, I might feel a touch of sympathy for her husband, who is probably feeling like a bit of a plonker even though he should be able to watch porn in privacy if he chooses to. But the evidence says that Jacqui Smith is a nasty piece of work, so I say she is not deserving of any sympathy. I hope that this episode – as trivial as it is compared to, say, the Tessa Jowell saga – ends her political career. We will be much better off without her awful populist authoritarianism.

LoL, brilliant ribbing, deservedly to say the least. Her superfast comment ‘I was not at home that night’says it all. She ordered the video and tried to rejuvenate their second home sex life a little. Caught out, he had to take his own head tyo the chop and the media is revelling in it.

So much for power, some say its an aphrodesiac, so how dare we are bemoaning her use of our taxes for a little thrusting invasion of her privacy? For some its a cold shower and a little barbed wire around their thighs, she is just an ol’fashion gal. When she gets her ‘spring afflictions, he has to perform and take the rapp, good boare.

The Jaqui Smith story seems to be more about (internal) political manoeverings than reality. Why should the Labour MP who fiddled his housing allowance to the tune of so many thousands slip so quickly off the hook, while Ms Smith suddenly dangles because of a legal pay-per-view film package?

I seem to remember the police aren’t that fond of her (didn’t she try to cap their wages?) And, of course, there’s a leadership contest on the way. Where did the story come from, I wonder?

I also think she should go: preferably when her government resigns en masse. Failing that, after suffering from a personal crisis of conscience, or, even, being beaten in a fair political fight at the next election. Whatever you think of Ms Smith herself(that sad comment about Essex can’t have been for real) it doesn’t make much sense to think otherwise. We want to live in a political climate where some silly man watching silly films gets an MP sacked? I think not.

On the subject of the activist arrests in Plymouth: people are snorting with disbelief all over the country. Graffiti? Stoned hippies? Fireworks? Good lord, they patronise us with their very propaganda.

This, on the other hand, is a nice quote from Assistant Chief Constable Paul Netherton. Asked to clarify the nature of the poltical material seized, Netherton said: “It’s political, it relates to political organisations, it’s not extreme but it’s a different political view. It leads to motives and things like that.”

ACC Netherton is a paranoid prat if he believes that a ‘different political view’ ‘leads to motives and things like that.’ How did he ever rise to the dizzying heights of ACC?

As to the arrests, yes this was almost entirely predictable. How exceedingly convenient for Smith and for Brown. Of course it will be many months before a Judge or the Magistrates dismiss the case – assuming that one will ever be brought.

Perhaps the cops ought to consider a more important and clear case of fraud and theft of public monies a little closer to home.

PS Pretty rotten for the activists, if that’s what they were, though. Treatment of activists by police is not always that fluffy. See this film on policing of the recent Climate Camp (shown at the House of Commons) for details.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ig31yWIWKUo&feature=channel_page

“On the subject of the activist arrests in Plymouth:…”

Is this another case of ‘reading while Muslim’?

Would be surprised if they were Muslim, for once, as the G20 seems to be the way to target that other well-known type of “terrorist” – you know, the “eco” terrorists.

Did the films involve party whips, perchance?

I suspect Jacqui Smith’s husband discovered the oft repeated link between pornography and violence on Sunday night.

I gather his ears at least, were subject to a bashing.

The terrorist laws were always for the general public rather than the Muslim community to enable the government to deal with the mayhem when the UK implodes which isn’t far off.

PRESS STOLE MY DIGNITY, NOT GANG OF WHORES THRASHING MY BARE ARSE, CLAIMS MOSLEY

(Daily Mash)

Speaking of correctness (he said, trying to make this seem on-topic) have a look at this brief comment from a philosopher on Obama’s gift of DVDs to Brown.

By this, I meant this (your site doesn’t take hyperlink tags):

http://nigelwarburton.typepad.com/virtualphilosopher/2009/03/the-gift-is-never-free.html

So, I was wondering. Why are G20 protesters and muslims “terrorists” while members of the IRA are “dissidents”, these days?

It’s obvious Jacqui Smith’s husband has greater need of her than the UK population.

But I must say there’s something odd going on. I wonder if the body that really makes decisions (the inner sanctums of the Privy Council?)is deliberately directing our anger towards Nu-Labour. When election time comes we’ll all be relieved and more pacified to have a resurgent Conservative party in power but they’ll be exactly the same because I don’t believe for one minute they will control important policy.

Even in the U.S. there is a balance of hawks and doves, who remembered Vietnam.

To achieve imbalance, add Blair’s babes to the hawks who wanted to kick Muslim male ass in Afghanistan and Iraq.

We shouldn’t forget that the atrocities of Uzbekistan originated in Soviet times and that prior to Bush and Blair who picked up the cause of Zionism, the west was working flat out to destroy that evil empire.

If I was Jacqui Smith’s husband I would have taken a second wife long ago, if I’d been allowed.

Found this funnier comment than mine:

Of course the poor man has to watch porn. Apparently his wife spends the whole time at her sister’s.

http://www.yorkshire-divers.com/forums/speakers-corner/87424-how-stupid-we.html

James Cranch. Greek protesters are called anarchists. The Victorian insult in India was Fanatics.

You’re too modest Craig. Yours was much better.

Apologies for lowering the tone, but Phil and Pete’s comments made me a little sad. Anyway, Ruth, I agree with you. Who doesn’t?

On the subject of the evolution of the language of protest and opposition, one of the most interesting developments of recent times is the emergence of the word ‘insurgent’ or ‘insurgency’. What was wrong with ‘resistance’ and ‘resistance movement’? The French Insurgency just doesn’t have the same ring to it.

Regarding Jacqui and her husband, I find that any allusion to British MPs and sexuality makes me feel slightly queasy. I think it goes back to that story about John Major and Edwina Currie. It still gives me nightmares.

Here’s an even more terrifying image for you to contemplate, Craig. Brace yourself… they watch blue movies together to get in the mood for lurrrve!

I think it’s a little bit sad; the husband at home fiddling with himself and the wife at work fiddling her expenses.

I think Jon got it about right when he referred to how the husband must be feeling a plonker…

“When election time comes we’ll all be relieved and more pacified to have a resurgent Conservative party in power but they’ll be exactly the same because I don’t believe for one minute they will control important policy.”

Does anybody think that Cameron is anything other than a NeoConservative? I can’t see him being any different from Stephen Harper and the PCP. He failed to stand up for Parliamentary Privilege in the Damian Green case. I can’t see him lifting a finger to undo the Constitutional damage done by Blair and Brown during the past 12 years. I think he’s a waste of space. Unless the tragic death of his son has made him realise the need to do the right thing while the Almighty has given him the chance.

She spoiled my song for me.

http://bloggersontherun.blogspot.com/2009/03/oooooh-oooooh-ooooh-jaquiblue.html

That is quite enough.

The thought isn’t particularly politically incorrect – just insulting, really. That’s fine if you like insulting people, I guess.

But are you telling me you’d rather watch a £5 skin flick than pump your baby gravy over Jacqui Smith’s voluminous funbags?

Now, that’s a politically incorrect comment, my friend. Consider yourself corrected.

The quality of comments on this thread is sinking to Guido Fawkes level. Pity.

Well, I guess I started it. I’ll see if I can raise the tone today!

“Well, I guess I started it. I’ll see if I can raise the tone today!”

I am about to lower it.

“there’s a leadership contest on the way”

technicolour

A front runner?…

http://tinyurl.com/d3lzjk

Interesting the way some hacks have dismissed the porn thing as an embarrassment rather than as something about which said husband should be ashamed. I know wives who would divorce their husbands for watching porn. Says a great deal about journalists’ leisure activities, perhaps…

What sticks in the gullet is the sheer effrontery of “two homes and let the taxpayer buy me an 88p bath plug that I could have got elsewhere cheaper” Jacqui Smith whining about her domestic privacy being invaded when she is busily engaged in demolishing the privacy of everyone else, placing us all under 24-hour surveillance, snooping in our dustbins, and reading all our emails.

Obviously “what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander” doesn’t wash with this despicable government. The only commandment they obey – not very successfully – is “Thou shalt not be found out”.

Craig, have you seen yourself up in lights on Harry’s Place? You are famous. If you only have a picture of yourself wearing a vest and a baseball hat with your wife in your arms you will be in Private eye, ad nauseam.

Re: Privy Council and Cameron, there is a marvellous open letter from Lord Onslow to Cameron, published in the Guardian in 2006. Of course, it has vanished down the memory hole, but it’s worth repeating:

“In no order of awfulness, this government has emasculated the House of Commons by the permanent use of guillotines. On the whim of the Prime Minister, the Lord Chancellorship has been neutered, removing a voice of law from the cabinet.

Those instances are on the parliamentary front, but what the government has done to the liberty of the subject is far worse. Note that I say liberty of the subject, not the rights of the citizen. That is because liberties are boundless unless circumscribed by law and rights are, by their nature, circumscribed.

It has repealed the law on double jeopardy. With Asbos, it has sent to prison some of the young on hearsay evidence for things that are not even criminal. It has created a centralised register held by the government on all citizens and proposes to force them to have ID cards. It has formed a police force with unprecedented powers of arrest – the Serious Organised Crime Agency – over which the Home Secretary has authority no predecessor has previously enjoyed.

Through its control orders, it has introduced a system of deprivation of liberty without trial on the say-so of the executive. It has passed the Civil Contingencies Act that allows a minister to override any statute after the calling of a state of emergency and now there is the Regulatory Reform Bill, which has been described as ‘the abolition of parliament bill’ and against which our party did not even vote at second reading. This gives gauleiter-like powers to ministers which we are blandly told will not be used.

The government has allowed the retention by the police of DNA details of thousands of innocents and it has given us section 81 (6) of the Asylum and Immigration (Treatment of Claims) Act 2004 which amends the Nationality, Immigration and Asylums Act 2002, creating a single-tier appeals procedure which Lord Steyn, in a recent lecture, described as, in effect, ousting the jurisdiction of ordinary courts. The government has introduced anti-terrorism stop-and-search powers that are constantly being misused, such as when the elderly Walter Wolfgang was ejected from the Labour conference.

This list is by no means comprehensive. What surprises, worries and depresses me is the apparent relative quietude on the part of the Conservative party on these issues. I repeat – it did not vote against the Regulatory Reform Bill on second reading. It has not remembered the great Edward Gibbon’s comment on Augustus Caesar’s Rome: ‘The principles of a free constitution are irrecoverably lost when the legislative power is nominated by the executive.’

It was dozy on the Civil Contingencies Act until the excellent Peta Buscombe in our house took it up; this from the party which, since the restoration of Charles II, has been so jealous of our constitution. Have we a guilty secret? Remember Burke saying: ‘All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.’ Why are we not shouting from the hustings that we will return to the people their ancient liberties?

Why, Mr Cameron, is the Conservative party passing by on the other side while our old liberties fall among thieves?

Yours sincerely, Onslow”

There you are. As far as I know, there was no reply. I wonder how Onslow has been treated ever since. When the late Earl of Cardigan, a horrified observer, tried to stand up for the hippy convoy who were violently attacked and beaten by police on their way to Stonehenge (in what became known as the Battle of the Beanfield) he found himself ostracised and targeted. The establishment had closed ranks. In an interview he said he shouldn’t have been surprised by this, but he was.

Does anyone think there are enough decent Conservatives left for the party not to use these powers when they’re handed to them on a plate? Could they actually want them too?

eddie

I don’t think being featured on a forum for sad losers united only by an unquestioning adoration of any military action or use of state force against Muslims, makes me famous.

Nor do I care what they think of my private life.

All those who support or ignore the repressive measures brought in by the government believe they are supporting the best interests of the UK; that the mayhem brought by the economic crisis will need containing.

I have been told that in the early 90s the UK became bankrupt; the economy has been/is far more fragile than people understand. During the middle 90s onwards the economy improved partly because illegal activities were implemented on a grand scale to balance the books. This includes the secret removal of VAT from the country. Corruption is endemic. It pervades the judiciary who bring in verdicts to hide illicit activities. Those in the know believe they are behaving altruistically. But corruption breeds corruption and hence it has become the norm at all levels.

Craig

Your private life is your own. But Harry’s Place is a better site than this one will ever be. More content, better discussion, fewer nutters.

Cameron has stated that Muslims are like Nazis because they want everyone to have the same opinions as theirs.

There is no compulsion in Islam. I do not believe that Mr Cameron would allow me the same respect that his political correctness gives to homosexuals, that like it or not, I find it, as if in my DNA, to believe in God and His scriptures and in telling the truth and condemning falsehood. Or as Eddie puts it being a Nutter/ fanatic/ insurgent/ anarchist. Cameron is a front for that other bunch of greedy liars. I’m voting for Craig next time.

Cameron has stated that Muslims are like Nazis because they want everyone to have the same opinions as theirs.

There is no compulsion in Islam. I do not believe that Mr Cameron would allow me the same respect that his political correctness gives to homosexuals, that like it or not, I find it, as if in my DNA, to believe in God and His scriptures and in telling the truth and condemning falsehood. Or as Eddie puts it being a Nutter/ fanatic/ insurgent/ anarchist. Cameron is a front for that other bunch of greedy liars. I’m voting for Craig next time.

sorry to post twice

What is politically incorrect about the thought? Making derogatory comments about a woman’s appearance is not an act of political incorrectness.

Peter, there is no such thing as “political correctness”! They made it up, remember, and keep making it up. It is another excuse for the government to police you by policing your thoughts and words. As David Mamet says, once we start using their stupid phrase seriously we are lost.

Eddie: “Harry’s Place is a better site than this one will ever be. More content, better discussion, fewer nutters”.

If it doesn’t have idiots wittering on about “self-hating Jews” (or was it self-basting chickens?) then you’re most probably right.

Having just taken a look, I’d love to post on Harry’s Place, in one way, as I’m somewhat concerned about the humourless, salacious nastiness of some of the posts and posters – what is it doing to their self-esteem/families? But, even though some of the stuff is quite interesting, I don’t think I want to register with their site as a result. I would bet this is a common reaction, too.

MJ

Are you denying that self-basting chickens exist?

@technicolour – I’m not so sure about the system of political correctness being made up by the government. In fact, its roots are quite radical. It has been put forward (for several decades I believe) by feminists, civil rights activists, and minority representative groups who believe that our shared political outlook can be improved by purging the language of allegedly discriminatory terms.

Hence we no longer say ‘black sheep of the family’ as it supposedly suggests that blackness is a negative concept, and may subconsciously promote racist ideas. Similarly ‘mankind’ or other male-specific words may promote sexism.

Despite the scorn heaped upon the idea, I am in favour of being careful with language, to a limited degree. The problem with PC is that it has been taken too far – possibly even further than its original proponents intended. Hence some folks now even suggest that ‘blackboard’ is discouraged (now chalkboard) and ‘whiteboard’ (now wipeboard). I am sure millions of other examples abound.

My guess is that the ideology has become prevalent because the idea that social change without substantial action is quite appealing, even though an end to racism and sexism etc will require much more than tinkering with language.