While I Was Away 183


Here are some brief comments on events while I was busy biographing:

Prince William to wed Kate Middleton

I really don’t give a fuck. Have you noticed he is strangely getting less bald? They’ll both be middle aged and ugly before they come to the throne. Or hopefully not.

Coalition launch “Starve the feckless” scheme

Multiple orgasms at the Mail, Express and Telegraph at launch of amusingly impossible policy guaranteed to increase crime rate.

Demonstrators trash Tory Party HQ

I don’t really approve of riot as people get hurt. But the only thing that makes me angrier than the tuition fee increases, are the NUS leadership hacks who support New Labour who brought in tuition fees in the first place.

Interesting moral conundrum as to whether pre-emptive murder of NUS executives can be justified. Looking at Straw, Clarke and Aaronovitch, it is certainly a debate worth having.

Possible voluntary reduction in London bankers’ bonuses from £7 billion to £4 billion and then £3 billion later. Anyone remember why the public finances are bankrupt? The bonuses are justified by record profits based on funding and administering government debt, which was incurred by governments borrowing to give to the bankers. What?


183 thoughts on “While I Was Away

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
  • Suhayl Saadi

    Alfred, my critique was of the institution of monarchy, not of William and his fiancee. I was not justifying anything, simply laying-out my view.

    The Dukes (Royal and other) own huge amounts of land and real estate in the UK; they have real power. Many are involved in very questionable activities. You are correct that removing their titles, on its own, would alter nothing. Wealth distribution would remain grossly – and increasingly – skewed. I’m not arguing for absolute egalitarianism, but for the removal of the most obvious structural barriers – and the monarchy and aristocracy are one/ two of those barriers.

    I understand your point about the underpinnings of the constitution – and the Revolution of 1688 was hugely important of course.

    No-one here has suggested execution or murder, Alfred. And it’s not only Roderick who alludes to shady practices by senior aristocrats. The point about whether or not we’d want a ‘President Thatcher’ or ‘President Blair’ is an old chestnut and is not a basis on which to assert that a republic would be inconsistent with the UK (or with England/ Scotland/Wales/N.Ireland in whichever configuration might apply in the future.

    As an individual, the Queen, who is probably one of the best monarchs we’ve had, if truth be told, has done the best she could with a role that increasingly seems irrelevant to a modern state.

    We need to think creatively and adapt.

  • Clark

    “The term ‘imperial’ is kept though it is now an anachronism. The hereditary Emperor is now nearly dead and has been for many centuries. In the last moments of his dying coma he was locked in a stasis field that keeps him in a state of perpetual unchangingness. All his heirs are now long dead, and this means that without any drastic political upheaval, power has simply and effectively moved a rung or two down the ladder…”

    Douglas Adams, 1979.

  • Alfred

    Suhayl,

    “The Dukes (Royal and other) own huge amounts of land and real estate in the UK”

    You need to keep things in perspective. The Queen was said at one time to be worth about half a billion. Isn’t Ms. Rawlings, who I like very much — although as a literary talent I think she is has limitations — worth at least as much?

    Over the years, as Britain has declined from the world’s richest nation to a rather seedy country run by second rate demagogues, the wealth of the Royal Family seems also to have eroded: the Royal Yacht gone — maybe because it was embarrassingly small and out-of-date compared with yachts owned by the elite of Britain’s former possessions in Arabia and the New World — and now the Queen compelled to pay tax. What next, will the Queen have to make do with the National Health Service and the London Tube?

    “No-one here has suggested execution or murder”

    Suhayl, I am sure you would not suggest it. However, that is what hate speech (which you have certainly not engaged in) often results in — and I think deriding a young and harmless couple for their looks, present and future, amounts to hate speech.

    “You are correct that removing their titles, on its own, would alter nothing.”

    So what are you proposing to remove? Their money? LOL. Try it: in England, in America, in Russia, in China. This has nothing to do with aristocracy. Cut the plutocracy down to size, by all means but don’t confuse that issue with the British Constitution and the role of a constitutional monarch.

    “The point about whether or not we’d want a ‘President Thatcher’ or ‘President Blair’ is an old chestnut and is not a basis on which to assert that a republic would be inconsistent with the UK.”

    Well, that’s what you think, but not what those authorities I quoted thought, and I believe their perception on the question is considerably more profound. “Men are ruled,” said Baghot, “not by their imagination, but by their lack of it.” A constitutional monarch robs the political class of the emotional appeal of the monarch, thereby more effectively limiting their appeal to the sphere of the rational, where it belongs, and for which reason I very much like Clark’s idea:

    “… a blanket ban on any politician or prospective politician appearing on TV or radio? Written word or nothing…”

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Yeah, the Harry Potter phenomenon is completely OTT, for various reasons. I’m trying not to speak here as an envious writer (which of course I am!). Nonetheless, I too sense that JK Rowling is a good person. To have so much numinous influence, esp. in relation to kids… thank goodness she is the way she is.

  • Roderick Russell

    ALFRED, you live in Victoria and we probably have some mutual acquaintances, which is why I am going to respond to the “Larry the Liar type” inferences on your 8.54 PM comment. There are ex-Grosvenor executives retired in Victoria, and I suspect that you know at least one of them.

    I had my career cut off (as dramatically as a light being switched off) the day I left Grosvenor in 1986. From that date on I was never permantly employed again in Canada – despite having had an excellent reputation as a quality executive before I joined Grosvenor, despite having done an excellent job for Grosvenor, and despite applying for thousands of jobs.

    So Alfred, before making these critical comments may I suggest that you ask yourself why this happened. There must be a reason. I have explained the reason in terms of a Zerzetsen slandering. If you think there is another reason, then you are in an ideal position to find out and you can let us all know on Graig Murray’s blog.

    You could talk to some of your ex-Grosvenor acquaintances for example. Or you could talk to Kevin McBurney of Korn Ferry (in 1986 he was working for Caldwell Partners), or other Vancouver head-hunters whom I am sure you have had contacts with. Let us take Mr. McBurney. Mr. McBurney had approached me in his role as a head-hunter (for Caldwell Partners) several times before I joined Grosvenor in 1983. Clearly he thought well of me. I was certainly in his good books as I should have been based on my career track record to that date. He and his partner were hired by Grosvenor (via a London Contact) to headhunt my successor in 1986. Since I had done an excellent job for Grosvenor, and they had thought well of me before I worked for Grosvenor, I naturally expected him to be helpful in my job search. To my surprise he was curt in our meeting, completely unhelpful, and he never again returned any of my telephone calls. Mr. McBurney’s views of me had obviously changed as dramatically as a light being switched off. And the same is true with other Vancouver head-hunters. How do you explain that?

  • Vronsky

    “No-one here has suggested execution or murder”

    Hey, hold it right there, Alfred. I can’t speak for the others here, but murder as political method looks good to me. Or as an American president would menacingly put it, all options are on the table. I want to put it menacingly too – terror should be a shared thing. I’m sure they all read this, so think of the wide therapeutic benefits if they know we’re discussing offing them.

    I enjoy many of your posts Alfred, but then you go and do something like that stuff about the royals, the absolute apex of the pyramid of benefits fraudsters. Shit, you’re so far away, out there, falling off the edge of the planet – can’t you move a little closer, so that I can slap you?

    And Suhayl, stop being nice to everyone. It’s *really* irritating. J K Rowling was simply nominated by the market watchers as the next saleable thing. She couldn’t write a letter to Santa. As of course you know.

  • somebody

    I thought that dinosaurs like Alfred were extinct. In fact in our local auction rooms, two fossilized dinosaur eggs are coming up for sale soon.

  • somebody

    PS All the palaces (how many are there?) should be taken down stone by stone and Pugin’s palace, the Houses of Parliament, with the stench of corruption coming from the Augean stables, dismantled too. All the inhabitants will then be set to proper work. Then we might have some chance of achieving a true democracy.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Vronsky, with the sanguine and tuneful Richard Robinson sadly voluntarily gone from this blog, I feel one must make the effort, mustn’t one? (!)

    To be amused, We are amused (something which Queen Victoria never said, but might have, if she had smoked some peyote with Benjamin Disraeli).

    Richard, if, by any chance, you’re reading this, do think about returning – and no offence! We miss your tunes.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Vronsky, with the sanguine and tuneful Richard Robinson sadly voluntarily gone from this blog, I feel one must make the effort, mustn’t one? (!)

    To be amused, We are amused (something which Queen Victoria never said, but might have, if she had smoked some peyote with Benjamin Disraeli).

    Richard, if, by any chance, you’re reading this, do think about returning – and no offence! We miss your tunes.

  • CheebaCow

    Alfred said:

    1 – “What a vicious expression of class hatred”

    2 – “and now the Queen compelled to pay tax. What next, will the Queen have to make do with the National Health Service and the London Tube?”

    1 – Oh boohoo. My heart bleeds for them and all the other royalty in this world. It’s tough being at the top of the pecking order.

    2 – Why the hell not? If someone making 15k has to pay tax, I’m sure the Queen can manage. I can exempt her from the tube, if only because the security would inconvenience others, but she should get the same health treatment that everyone else gets. She wants better healthcare, she can lobby to improve the system for everyone.

    Suhayl –

    I agree with Vronksy, you’re too damn nice. Whenever I post a testy reply to someone, you follow up with a much better humoured response and make me feel like a prick =P

  • Anonymous

    Hey Rod,

    I mentioned your name only to indicate that in my view Suhayl had brought it into the discussion in a completely irrelevant way. I intended no comment on anything you may have said.

    As for business contacts in Victoria, I have almost none. Virtually all my business associates and clients were out of town – mostly foreign.

  • Alfred

    I mentioned your name only to indicate that in my view Suhayl had brought it into the discussion irrelevantly. I intended no comment on anything you may have said.

    As for business contacts in Victoria, I have almost none. Virtually all my business associates and clients were out of town – mostly foreign.

  • Alfred

    The above, obviously, was supposed to have been addressed to Rod. The blog software is so wonky, it had me confused.

  • Alfred

    Vronksy said:

    “murder as political method looks good to me. … ”

    The criminal insanity of the committed Boshevik, obviously.

    And more lunacy from “Somebody”

    “All the palaces (how many are there?) should be taken down stone by stone and Pugin’s palace, the Houses of Parliament, with the stench of corruption coming from the Augean stables, dismantled too. All the inhabitants will then be set to proper work.”

    Anyone seeking to destroy any structure designed by Pugin (actually the architect for the Palace of Westminster was Barry, Pugin was merely an assistant) should be sent to the Tower and fed on fish soup and boiled cabbage until they are morally and spiritually rehabilitated.

    Anyhow, as far as destroying Pugin’s contribution to the decoration of the House of Commons, Craig’s happy band of Bolshevik nihilists are too late, the Nazis beat ’em too it with a direct hit in WW2.

    My favorite Bolshevik is that great humanitarian George Bernard Shaw. Here he is advocating gas chambers (4 minutes in):

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rw7DtjO4V6c&feature=related

    Yet astonishingly, Shaw was a dramatic genius. There’s a copy of David Lean’s film version of Pygmalion on U-Tube starring the twenty-six-year old Wendy Hiller. Amazing how celluloid and the digital medium have preserved the beauty of a former age — Wendy Hiller was born the same year as my mother.

    Anyway, my point originally was this. To heap scorn on someone because of their ancestry is a form of bigotry as vile as any other, and nothing that anyone here has said persuades me that Craig’s insulting comments about William and Kate Middleton, an innocuous couple about whom we know essentially nothing, amounted to anything but classist bigotry.

  • Suhayl Saadi

    Over the last few days, there have been odd delays whenever one tries to post; it seems as if one’s post does not go through (but it does) and so if one is not careful, one ends-up posting twice.

    Alfred, I mentioned Roderick’s experience wrt a senior aristocrat precisely because I thought it was deeply relevant wrt the manner in which some senior aristocrats are intrinsic to oppression, because it was an illustration of how they can abuse their power and because readers of this blog would be likely to be familiar with Roderick’s account.

    In other words, I wanted to remind people of how their power can impact directly on an individual and his family. So that people could see from a real-life example that the British aristocracy, in essence and in practice, is not a harmless institution.

  • Alfred

    “the manner in which some senior aristocrats are intrinsic to oppression”

    OK, but my point was that there is no evidence that I am aware of that either Prince William or Kate Middleton are in any way corrupt or therefore deserving of being held in contempt.

    And as proof that there is absolutely no necessary connection between aristocracy and monarchy, here in Canada, we have a monarch, but no aristocrats. Because of this excellent arrangement, when your corruptionist Prime Minister Tony Blair raised (for a fee?) our unscrupulous press baron Conrad Black to the House of Lords, Black was compelled by Canadian law to abandon his Canadian citizenship. LOL. You are most welcome to him, although his recent stint of journalism undertaken while detained at a correctional institute in Florida demonstrated a talent sadly wasted.

  • Roderick Russell

    ALFRED – Thanks for your comment at 5.44 PM. Fair enough; thank you for getting back. I think you should review my Research Paper to see what the real facts are – just click on my signature to see the Paper.

    The fact is that Grosvenor or its chums have managed to shut down and override our entire legal process in Canada with impunity. They have overridden Rule of Law and are contemptuous of it. As a well-known Vancouver lawyer who is well aware of my situation said to me, referring to Grosvenor, ** “that organization has far too much power”**. Police, Politicians, Lawyers all seem to be scared of it. Now what are these connections I talk about and who is involved? Well, I know the intelligence agencies are involved and have outlined some supporting evidence in the Paper. Much more evidence of this is in Police hands. The entire law enforcement system from Police to Judiciary has been shut down.

    As for other institutions I don’t know which are involved and which aren’t. What could they be? Well, just taking the Westminster Duke alone. He is a former Deputy Chairman of UK Defence staff, has boasted about his intelligence connections, was Official Mentor to Prince William, is a close personal friend of Princes Charles & Phillip, and as such moves in the circle of the Queen’s cousin The Duke of Kent who is head honcho for worldwide freemasonry. There are many other connections, and I don’t know which ones are involved except for the intelligence agencies. Of course several Vancouver head-hunters do know the truth, and have been silent for far too long

    The truth of the matter is that if they want to shut down the justice system, it seems that these high end aristocrats / monarchists are spoilt for choice in their method. Canadians should be deeply concerned if they value civil liberties, human rights and rule of law.

    Like you Alfred, I believed in Constitutional Monarchy until I learnt the hard way. Now I know that Monarchy is Dangerous for our Civil Liberties.

  • somebody

    The edifices of the monarchy and the establishment are obviously of more importance to Alfred than the freedom people.

    Prince William, like his brother with his asinine cap motto – we do bad things to bad people-, are part of the military machine that kill and maim people of mostly another colour in foreign lands. They and their kind appear in their uniforms to keep up ‘the brave boys died doing their duty’ nonsense which has been rammed down our throats non- stop leading up to Remembrance day. Even little primary schoolchildren were suborned into this charade on last week’s Songs of Praise.

    A transcript:

    At Bredgar Church of England School in Kent, the tradition of Remembrance is passed down from generation to generation.

    Headmaster: “We mark Remembrance at school every year. We have the British Royal Legion come and join us for our service. They march down to the cenotaph with the children.”

    Schoolchild: “It’s important for us to meet all the veterans because it makes us remember all the people who have fought in a war and makes us not scared of them.”

    Voiceover “The crosses the children lay on the cenotaph are significant because they’re able to write on those crosses the names of people that have fallen who have come from the village or they’re able to choose people from their own family, such as grandparents.”

    Schoolchild: “My grandpa’s name’s on here because her served in the War and I want to remember him.”

    Schoolchild: “My granddad is on this cross because he was in the Second World War and he fought in the Parachute Regiment.”

    Katherine Jenkins voiceover: “The children are also involved in a writing project which deepens their understanding of Remembrance.”

    Headmaster: “The children are able to write a postcard to either a serving member in the army or a veteran who’s already fought. And by doing this it makes it more real for the children because they are able to connect to people.”

    “So let’s have a look at the cards and see what you’re doing here then.”

    Schoolchild: “Dear soldier, you are very brave to enter the fight in Afghanistan.”

    Schoolchild: “Dear soldier, thank you for helping us.”

    Schoolchild: “Thank you for risking your life to keep us safe.”

    Schoolchild: “I am very sorry for all your losses. Well done for doing such a good job out there.”

    Schoolchild: “Thank you, with hope and happiness, Robert.”

    Headmaster: “It shows the children caring about their history and caring about their past and showing compassion for the people who have fought for their country.”

    Schoolchild: “Is it important to write to the soldiers in the war?”

    Veteran: “Yes, dear, very important. You’re getting something from somebody you don’t know but you appreciate that more than what you do if you get one from your own people. So it’s nice that you can write to these people.”

    a

    Have you ever heard anything else so revolting? The children were little and had obviously been trained to say the words.

    Wake up Alfred, stop being a relic and btw stop making your ad hominems. Just stick with Canada and its Zionist suppoting government and you’ll be fine.

  • Alfred

    “Have you ever heard anything else so revolting? ”

    How ignorant your contempt for the military. The authority and hence the existence of the state rests on the ability of the state to exert force. The military are, therefore, a prerequisite of civilization.

    An effective military is obedient to the civil authority. Therefore, a mindless military that acts with spirit and determination without questioning orders is a pre-requisite of the civilized state.

    And what’s all that crap you quote got to do with Craig Murray’s bigotry toward William and partner merely because of an accident of William’s birth?

    You seem to be a person without the slightest historical perspective. You seem to believe that society can be re-created by sheer force of intellect — or perhaps merely through the howling of a mob.

    You seem to be the sort of person upon whom the likes of Hitler and Lenin depend in their climb to totalitarian power.

    What you have to think about is how an existing society can be radically modified without a bloody revolution, such as was experienced throughout nearly all of Europe, but not England, in the transition from absolute monarchy to some kind of democratic society.

    You seem to have a deep resentment toward those with money or power. But such an attitude is idiotic. First, no populous community on Earth has ever existed without many grades and classes of men, differing in wealth and power. So how does the socialist propose to change that. Through a bloody tyranny that creates even greater differences in wealth and power such as was witnessed in Germany and Russia in the twentieth century?

    The fact is, if you want wealth and power, both overrated beyond a very modest level, then work for it by legitimate means. If you have brains, energy and imagination you will probably succeed, perhaps beyond your wildest expectations. On the other hand, if you are undistinguished from your fellow humans in those essential requirements of success, then how high in the nomenclatura do you expect to rise in your socialist dictatorship. LOL. You’ll be lucky to be a mere drudge, one of the masses to be used as the elite think fit.

  • Jon

    Alfred, I am quite disappointed in your recently, and apparently sharply increased, level of ad hominem towards some posters here. I recall that when you started posting – on issues to do with racial superiority that won you few supporters – it seemed that you were trying to explain your position with patience and evident historical knowledge.

    If you are now generally supportive of British military structures, then you are in a much more popular and mainstream belief, so you hardly need to resort to name-calling. I’ve followed @somebody’s posts for long enough to know the poster is neither ignorant nor idiotic.

    I am not opposed to having a military, and whilst I am against the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, I am not a pacifist. But the transcript set out by @somebody is indeed revolting, and anyone who calls themselves a liberal – regardless of their position on military structures – should regard the pre-disposing of children to militarist views an appalling practice.

    Indeed, in the last couple of years, the Ministry of Defence has been caught sending ‘educational’ packs to schools in support of specific national curriculum objectives. Time-pressed teachers are generally eager for this sort of material, as it reduces the amount of pre-lesson preparation. The rub, from a liberal perspective, is that lessons centre around “why the war in Iraq was necessary”, or some such nonsense. The material was withdrawn after protests from anti-war groups, I believe.

    Craig’s throwaway paragraph on the royals does not do his views on the topic justice. He is opposed to the monarchy, but I sense from his writings that he participated genuinely with royal visits as part of his ambassadorial duties. He says in one of his books that (paraphrased) “the institution of the monarchy is wrong, but the queen did not choose to be born in her position”. So when you say “…merely because of an accident of William’s birth”, perhaps the two of you agree on a little more than you have assumed?

  • Alfred

    Jon wrote:

    “when you started posting – on issues to do with racial superiority that won you few supporters ”

    Good ad hominen Jon.

    I have never discussed “racial superiority” because the term is entirely meaningless to me.

  • Alfred

    Rod,

    Your story is very strange. One question that immediately comes to mind is why would anyone go to such trouble to harrass you if there is no reason for doing so?

    I cannot attempt to answer that or any other questions that your story raises, so there is nothing material that I can say about.

    However, I note that you provide no evidence whatever that Prince William is in anyway corrupt. Neither has anyone else here, certainly not Craig Murray. Therefore, I will stick with my point that insulting William is crass demoagogic politics from Murray, and an unwarranted attack on what Baghot called the “dignified” part of the English constitution.

    If anyone wants to see political reform in Britain, or Canada for that matter, buggering about with the constitutional monarchy is, in my view, likely the most futile place to start.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Comments are closed.