this chap is pretty ambivalent about our European cousins. Oh they are chummy enough when they want our dosh: the French make good wine, the Dutch grow good weed, the Gerry is good at making up rules and the Belgians know how to breed a good Paedo.
However it was with spluttering disdain over the kedgeree this morning that I heard on the Brownshow (Or Today I think it is called) the ritualistic crowing about the EU vote.
Better bloggers than I can expound on the guts of it. Suffice to say the Lefty political coves have sold our souls to Brussels - for what appears to be a political mess of pottage.
But why?
I cannot reason any fathomable purpose other than they want to be part themselves of some super-socialist club. Untouchable by our electorate they can dream up new ways to mendaciously cut our purses. without fear nor favour of ever being held to account - just like a true Lefty. Surely we are too stupid to understand the high-minded reasoning behind such altruism and therefore we are not to be asked if we want to give everything to the European unelected political elite.
In my experience, having to face down and explain just what you are doing with the money that you have taken off someone by force makes you think about it. One can only assume that such accountability rests poorly in their thieving consciousnesses and they therefore seek to distance themselves even further away.
I suggest we bring back the pillory, for this and other crimes.
Showing posts with label Socialist claptrap. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Socialist claptrap. Show all posts
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Friday, February 22, 2008
Les republiques du bananes
An interesting comment by a chum of mine regarding two of the more odious fruit based dictatorships. These two fellows - Castro and Chavez - who have systematically destroyed the economies and wealth of their countries, set up evil police states, oppressed freedoms and killed hundreds of thousands, are 'OK' because they 'stand up to America'.
In what way do they stand up to America? Agreed US involvement in Latin America is hardly covered in glory - but it was largely pitched against some pretty nasty regimes with ugly motives. Interestingly those who opposed the Right Wing juntas and dictatorships South of the Rio Grande are silent about the human rights abuses committed in the name of Marxism in the region.
Political and economic oppression, and brutal police statehood is OK - provided you say it is 'for the people' and 'Anti America'?
This is the good old geopolitics of East and West again. Except that the Brothers Castro and Chavez have missed a trick on the economics front.
Remember - the wall wasn't built around the Iron Curtain to keep us out - and everyone else has learned the truism about Socialism will always test itself to destruction.
In what way do they stand up to America? Agreed US involvement in Latin America is hardly covered in glory - but it was largely pitched against some pretty nasty regimes with ugly motives. Interestingly those who opposed the Right Wing juntas and dictatorships South of the Rio Grande are silent about the human rights abuses committed in the name of Marxism in the region.
Political and economic oppression, and brutal police statehood is OK - provided you say it is 'for the people' and 'Anti America'?
This is the good old geopolitics of East and West again. Except that the Brothers Castro and Chavez have missed a trick on the economics front.
Remember - the wall wasn't built around the Iron Curtain to keep us out - and everyone else has learned the truism about Socialism will always test itself to destruction.
Monday, November 05, 2007
BAN this NOW
As usual dear reader, I am awaiting the screaming headlines about some poor tot/doggie/OAP/Vicar having been terrorised by fireworks.
We have all seen the terrible injuries wrought by these things and I am sure if not already then shortly some of the more reactionary members of the press, ably stoked up by the grievance industry with a bone to pick will campaign to have fireworks withdrawn from sale to the general public.
I am surprised that a member of Nanny's quicker stormtroopers / think-tank watchers haven't trotted out the dread stats on this matter already. And how we can all go along to an authority organised event with noiseless bangs for the nervous of disposition and colourless flashes unless some particular interest group could also be offended by whatever colour of light their particular issue of the week tells them is oppressive. All to celebrate a seasonal festival. Not stopping Guido blowing up the house. (Offensive to Catholics and left wing councils)
This year, my good self and some chums clubbed together and quite legally bought some very large display fireworks. Big 'uns. Ones with defined fall-out zones and safe launch radius. Ones that actually deafened me when I lit the barrage candles.
We did a 'risk assessment' - or in other words - 'if I let this off here, will it set fire to the barn?'
We had a 'safe area' IE: The back garden 15 yards from the paddock where we were launching them.
We followed the fireworks code. (Or common sense when handling explosives - like No Smoking).
No one got injured, burned or scarred.
No animals were harmed or alarmed during the full 45 minutes of explosions and whizz-bangs.
No property was damaged, other than some scorched grass.
We even drank champagne as they went off - and (gasp) used the occasion to dispose of a couple of pyrotechnics with likely marine applications because they were 5 years out of date.
No one went blind, and we all had a magnificent time.
Nevertheless - the usual grief-mongers, nannyists, hair-shirters, wet-blankets and other leftie kill-joys will seek to constrain the sensible (us) because some chav put a roman candle in his mate's pocket - or three feral teenagers threw a banger at a pram.
Banning fireworks because of a few idiots is like banning beer and knives because someone got drunk and stabbed someone. (Sound familiar......)
I think the answer could lie within the individual rather than the thing in their hand - but then they are a product of society - they're not to blame - take the toys away from them, and they will all hold hands and be peaceful.
Next year - we are going for bigger bangs and two-stage liquid fueled rockets.
I don't care if the Nannyists says I shouldn't. They should shut up, but don't.
PS: We had a marvellous time and I'm still a little deaf in my right ear.
We have all seen the terrible injuries wrought by these things and I am sure if not already then shortly some of the more reactionary members of the press, ably stoked up by the grievance industry with a bone to pick will campaign to have fireworks withdrawn from sale to the general public.
I am surprised that a member of Nanny's quicker stormtroopers / think-tank watchers haven't trotted out the dread stats on this matter already. And how we can all go along to an authority organised event with noiseless bangs for the nervous of disposition and colourless flashes unless some particular interest group could also be offended by whatever colour of light their particular issue of the week tells them is oppressive. All to celebrate a seasonal festival. Not stopping Guido blowing up the house. (Offensive to Catholics and left wing councils)
This year, my good self and some chums clubbed together and quite legally bought some very large display fireworks. Big 'uns. Ones with defined fall-out zones and safe launch radius. Ones that actually deafened me when I lit the barrage candles.
We did a 'risk assessment' - or in other words - 'if I let this off here, will it set fire to the barn?'
We had a 'safe area' IE: The back garden 15 yards from the paddock where we were launching them.
We followed the fireworks code. (Or common sense when handling explosives - like No Smoking).
No one got injured, burned or scarred.
No animals were harmed or alarmed during the full 45 minutes of explosions and whizz-bangs.
No property was damaged, other than some scorched grass.
We even drank champagne as they went off - and (gasp) used the occasion to dispose of a couple of pyrotechnics with likely marine applications because they were 5 years out of date.
No one went blind, and we all had a magnificent time.
Nevertheless - the usual grief-mongers, nannyists, hair-shirters, wet-blankets and other leftie kill-joys will seek to constrain the sensible (us) because some chav put a roman candle in his mate's pocket - or three feral teenagers threw a banger at a pram.
Banning fireworks because of a few idiots is like banning beer and knives because someone got drunk and stabbed someone. (Sound familiar......)
I think the answer could lie within the individual rather than the thing in their hand - but then they are a product of society - they're not to blame - take the toys away from them, and they will all hold hands and be peaceful.
Next year - we are going for bigger bangs and two-stage liquid fueled rockets.
I don't care if the Nannyists says I shouldn't. They should shut up, but don't.
PS: We had a marvellous time and I'm still a little deaf in my right ear.
Tuesday, October 30, 2007
A Police Priority
As you know we now live in a glorious socialist workers paradise - where as a consequence of the boundless munificence of Gordo no one need want, as we have the middle classes to pay for everything.
As such all crime has been eradicated - and the police are free to devote their efforts and capital to automated crime - such as bus lane cameras, speed cameras, parking meter infringement, box junction crossing cameras and other ways to criminalise the tax-paying classes for the smallest of infringements that can enforced by a short subroutine.
It is not a police priority anymore to investigate Private Property that is now being broken into twice to three times a week.
Obviously because we have had another vehicle stolen, our club house trashed, radios taken, meagre bar takings (£5 in change...) robbed, hangars damaged and the property rendered pretty much uninsurable we cannot be considered as at being in any risk. After all, we are not a police priority. How can we be. Nothing left worth stealing.
I suspect if we winged one of the fuckers with a bird-scarer we would be in terrible trouble - but we live under Labour - which means as a sport club encouraging flying we are not a Labour client group and as there are no votes to be had from the aviation community we do not feature in the politicised priorities of the boys in blue. Except, of course - if I do 33 mph on the way home, then I deserve all I get - obviously.
I bet if one of the scrotes broke in, walked into a prop or tripped over onto one of the sharp objects we have lying around we would have to pay compensation.
As such all crime has been eradicated - and the police are free to devote their efforts and capital to automated crime - such as bus lane cameras, speed cameras, parking meter infringement, box junction crossing cameras and other ways to criminalise the tax-paying classes for the smallest of infringements that can enforced by a short subroutine.
It is not a police priority anymore to investigate Private Property that is now being broken into twice to three times a week.
Obviously because we have had another vehicle stolen, our club house trashed, radios taken, meagre bar takings (£5 in change...) robbed, hangars damaged and the property rendered pretty much uninsurable we cannot be considered as at being in any risk. After all, we are not a police priority. How can we be. Nothing left worth stealing.
I suspect if we winged one of the fuckers with a bird-scarer we would be in terrible trouble - but we live under Labour - which means as a sport club encouraging flying we are not a Labour client group and as there are no votes to be had from the aviation community we do not feature in the politicised priorities of the boys in blue. Except, of course - if I do 33 mph on the way home, then I deserve all I get - obviously.
I bet if one of the scrotes broke in, walked into a prop or tripped over onto one of the sharp objects we have lying around we would have to pay compensation.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Society is to blame
AMAZING!
If I'm obese because I eat junk food it's actually not my fault any more. Funny - I thought it was up to me what I ate, drank and how much I exercised.
Now apparently I have no free will and it is the fault of the fact someone is still free to sell me what I want to buy. Food is too easy to buy and too cheap and I can eat fatty foods if I want to. Well blow me. Let's dismantle the entire capitalist system, introduce a board of supply, nationalise all food production and we should only have what nanny thinks we need - then we will all be fit an healthy. Just like rationing.
Rope will be made illegal next so you can't hang yourself if you choose.
Here's a quick question: Should I choose to drink myself to death and I was part of the client state - I would obviously be a victim of society - but would that still count if I am harming myself with a glass of claret a day?
Or, at what point I am I merely being a glutton or I am becoming a victim? Does it only count if I eat burgers and chips - or should I dine upon roasted fowl in oyster sauce, a shoulder of mutton,a race of hen lobsters, roasted potatoes, mash, suet pudding with vanilla cream and a bottle of Madeira everyday - am I part of the exploited or am a part of the exploiters - for such food is obviously plutocratic. Or the zero-summers will have it that because I have so much choice, I am clearly forcing those I exploit to eat McSwineys.
You know, thinking this one through - it wouldn't be beyond this socialist state to introduce rationing anyway. Along with it 'being for our own good' rationing was introduced in the last war not because of shortages - but to reduce fuel usage in distribution. Just you wait - the green lobby will want that one. Think of how carbon consumptive it is having a choice in the shops…… especially when we can queue up with our rations cards and save the environment.
Now, all we need is another created crisis to jump this one through…..terrorist stunts? Deliberate viral releases? Or another staged explosion at a fuel depot…..
Soviet Britain is upon us.
Time for a day of Chappy anti-nanny action. Better than that pathetic blog-action day.
A stay in and stuff yourself day, methinks.
Menu to follow.
If I'm obese because I eat junk food it's actually not my fault any more. Funny - I thought it was up to me what I ate, drank and how much I exercised.
Now apparently I have no free will and it is the fault of the fact someone is still free to sell me what I want to buy. Food is too easy to buy and too cheap and I can eat fatty foods if I want to. Well blow me. Let's dismantle the entire capitalist system, introduce a board of supply, nationalise all food production and we should only have what nanny thinks we need - then we will all be fit an healthy. Just like rationing.
Rope will be made illegal next so you can't hang yourself if you choose.
Here's a quick question: Should I choose to drink myself to death and I was part of the client state - I would obviously be a victim of society - but would that still count if I am harming myself with a glass of claret a day?
Or, at what point I am I merely being a glutton or I am becoming a victim? Does it only count if I eat burgers and chips - or should I dine upon roasted fowl in oyster sauce, a shoulder of mutton,a race of hen lobsters, roasted potatoes, mash, suet pudding with vanilla cream and a bottle of Madeira everyday - am I part of the exploited or am a part of the exploiters - for such food is obviously plutocratic. Or the zero-summers will have it that because I have so much choice, I am clearly forcing those I exploit to eat McSwineys.
You know, thinking this one through - it wouldn't be beyond this socialist state to introduce rationing anyway. Along with it 'being for our own good' rationing was introduced in the last war not because of shortages - but to reduce fuel usage in distribution. Just you wait - the green lobby will want that one. Think of how carbon consumptive it is having a choice in the shops…… especially when we can queue up with our rations cards and save the environment.
Now, all we need is another created crisis to jump this one through…..terrorist stunts? Deliberate viral releases? Or another staged explosion at a fuel depot…..
Soviet Britain is upon us.
Time for a day of Chappy anti-nanny action. Better than that pathetic blog-action day.
A stay in and stuff yourself day, methinks.
Menu to follow.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Non Chappy serious point
This cartoon from today's only half decent newspaper kinda sums up my view of this current shower running the show.
Risk your life for this bunch of failed social workers and poisonous trade unionists? Don't expect anything back. But attach yourself to a cause celebre of the left wing media? Expect plaudits and laurels.
Livingstone will probably have a parade for them.
UPDATE: Add homeowners to the list.
Thursday, August 02, 2007
For none are so free as the sons of the waves?
This chap, dear reader, has a very strong streak of libertarianism in his veins. I detest Big Government interfering with my life and spreading it's evil tendrils of legislation into my life.
As you know I take part in two sports which are currently out of the reach of the Nanny state. Gliding - which the Campaign Against Aviation doesn't touch (regulated by the British Gliding Association) and Sailing.
Sailing is what my rant of today is all about.
It is currently (still) my god given right as a free Englishman and subject of her Maj to take to the water in any personal vessel I choose and sail where I want to. I need no permission, ticket, licence or examination to do so. If I wish, I can go and drown myself. The chief rescue organisation is a charity RNLI (to whom I lend my financial and one day physical support).
The onus on safety is a personal one. I am not obliged to wear a Lifejacket, crash helmet or even waterproof clothing. One's awareness of the fact that the high seas are a dangerous place means that there is a natural selection process at work. Should I wish to be able to carry out the sport with a modicum of personal safety or comfort, then the onus is entirely on me to seek out competence training. Again, this is administered by another charity - who also receives money off me The RYA.
The small overlap we have with the world of legislation and government is in buoyage.
But even then, one doesn't get their photograph taken for passing a port hand marker to starboard. The onus is on you to be aware, awake, know what you are doing and know where you are - so that if you chose to leave the 'Jack In The Box' to port on the way up the Lymington river - it is your fault and your fault alone that you spend the rest of the afternoon waiting for the tide to lift you off that rather spectacular mud bank. An Ignominy that no amount of cheerful bonhomie or two water grog will quench.
It is self controlled, and regulated. Peer pressure of standards of behaviour mean a stern look from the Harbour master if your crew are rowdy is as sufficient a reproach as the pressure of a drunken attempt at mooring costing your GPS antenna, next door's pushpit rail and the capital crime of damaging the paintwork - committed in front of an entire marina laughing at your feeble skills.
The traditions of the sport have been so deeply entrenched that they have outlived the current concept of democracy - after all we have had a Navy since Alfred burnt the cakes - and these waters run deep. Blood is the same salinity as sea water, we sons of the waves stand by our traditions of behaviour, honour and care for one's self. The epitome of a society freed from the yoke of state legislation.
Sea faring Libertarians - if you will. Sail and let sail.
OK - to make a vessel work requires leadership - but it is a contract entered voluntarily - and to make it work requires more self discipline than anything else - we need each other's mutual skills to make the thing work. Ask any racing crew who is the most important member of the crew - and they will all answer that it is everyone but them.
There is a cloud on the horizon, scudding towards us like a line squall.
We live under a very illiberal government. The regards 'us' as dangerous. Our views and behaviours are a threat to their approach to running our lives.
The fact we are aspirational enough to carry out the dream to work hard to earn a slot on a vessel - either by accumulating wealth enough to buy the smallest bilge bucket - or by working up the skills to earn a slot on a race crew….
We represent all the things they hate.
We are self reliant, self disciplined, aspirational and require no law to show respect to our fellow sea farers.
We must therefore be stopped.
The full pernicious forces of the Nanny State are being turned on us. The legislative Guns Of Navarone are being trained on us, while the vile officers of this movement load the shells and powder to batter us into their ways.
As the interweb's heir to David Niven (don’t laugh) this Chap needs to draw the attention to my audience to the first triffidesque tendril, the ranging shot from Nanny to our way of life.
They are a cunning foe. They use the full armoury of the Left on us.
The poisoned apple? Their trojan horse?
Good Old Health and Safety
It is for our safety. The Safety of others. How can we argue with that? Well buried within the lines - there are dark forces demanding the very things we fear.
The old chestnut of creating a problem, then being seen to crack down on it is the other tactic.
Drinking and Sailing .
Hold on, you cry, all they are suggesting is that you chaps shouldn't be pissed on the water. Well, by and large we aren't.
Is it for our safety?
Well, the Marine Accident Invesitgation Board only reported about 24 fatalities on leisure craft for 2006-2007 - out of half a million users. Less than half of those were alcohol related
(Link via RYA website)
Even RoSPA and the Coastguard say:
"The members agreed that the current statistics that were available from MCA, SEAREM and INREM were all unreliable as a source for accident statistics for watersports." -
Source
So - we have a problem that doesn't exist. So why legislate against us?
I have a theory - this is a perfect reason to enforce compulsory licensing of craft and the testing and licensing of their skippers.
Why? If you have pulled someone over for drinking, the sanction will be to take a way a licence. You can't imppund the vessel - it probably doesn't even belong to them.
Right now we don’t need one - as I mentioned before the sort of person who takes up sailing is the sort of person who wants to know about it and is prepared to learn.
So, cue government issued sailing licenses and tests and permits (with test centres etc) as well as water-fund licenses. The sea will be nationalised….how long until charging a tax on mooring or anchoring in British waters?
All To be paid for, by us - the sailing public. Yet another stealth tax.
'No, no,' you say - 'they can't mean that - there must be another sanction'…. Well - here is what they are saying:
The Act also enables the Secretary of State to designate additional classes of people as 'marine officials' with the power to detain a vessel if they reasonably suspect that a person who is or may be aboard the vessel is committing, or has committed, an offence, pending the arrival of a uniformed constable to administer a preliminary test. - Stephen Ladyboy
Hmmmm…..bit of hole in this - most boats are rented, making that a form of piracy. Red Herring I reckon.
But in there was another sinister line.
'Marine Officials'.
A waterborne police force with powers to stop and check, take you off your yacht and off to the rozzers for a breath test?
So - will they tow your vessel? Will they know how to sail? What about your crew?
Anyway - have a read of what the Chaps at the RYA have to say.
http://www.rya.org.uk/NewsAndEvents/newsroom/news/drinkqanda.htm
But what of the motive behind this? More people die changing their duvets (probably) than have booze related accidents on the Solent alone. Good sense and self preservation take care of that.
Well, we are currently out of their reach - what better way to crowbar their way into our lives than under the pretext of our safety?
Us 'rich' yachties are a prime target for legislation. With legislation comes us handing more money over to the government to employ busy-bodies to come and tell us what to do.
It is a way of levying stealth taxes on us, and if we complain - we can easily be lableled as 'rich' and they can stoke the fires of resentment against us.
But what else to come?
Compulsory lifejackets? More standards and inspections…….
Compulsory lifelines and jackstays? Again - standards and inspections…...
Full Commercial DfT standardisation of every vessel - think of all the extra public employees!
Inspectors, visitors and scrutineers - all to be paid for by us - the so called Have Yachts. The bitter nannyists must be licking their reptilian lips in delight at all of this.
Lets get things straight - most yachties are like me. We scrimp and save so we can access a boat. Not all of us are footballers (They have scumseekers anyway). Our boats are shared amongst many and are slavishly kept going well past their sell by dates out of love. You can go sailing for under a grand a year.
Ultimately - this represents another attempt to shift of our liberty into the hands of the state. We can only go out and play if Nanny licenses us to do so. And then we must play to her rules.
Interestingly, the legislation is also rather poorly thought out. It is full of holes - meaning it will be open to abuse. In all sorts of amusing ways.
"I am satisfied that in bringing in an alcohol limit for non-professional mariners and in setting the exclusion limit at 7 metres and 7 knots we are providing the best balance between improving safety and avoiding unnecessary regulation.
Stephen Ladyboy at it again.
Interesting that a 5 metre RIB with a 200hp motor is exempt, yet an 8 metre unpowered skiff is not. Which is more likely to be a risk?
How will they determine length and Maximum speed?
Anyway - feast your eyes on the background.
http://www.rya.org.uk/General/Issues/alcohol.htm
Final thought - and this alone demonstrates that the landlubber who dreamt this up is the very worst form of window-licking mouth breather:
Jet skis will not be included in the regulations for now because the Court of Appeal has ruled that jet skis are not ships and are not therefore within the scope of the existing legislation I intend to consult on extending the legislation to them in due course."
You would have thought that the most annoying and unsociable things on the water would have been targeted, wouldn't you.
Despair shall drive me to my tincture.
As you know I take part in two sports which are currently out of the reach of the Nanny state. Gliding - which the Campaign Against Aviation doesn't touch (regulated by the British Gliding Association) and Sailing.
Sailing is what my rant of today is all about.
It is currently (still) my god given right as a free Englishman and subject of her Maj to take to the water in any personal vessel I choose and sail where I want to. I need no permission, ticket, licence or examination to do so. If I wish, I can go and drown myself. The chief rescue organisation is a charity RNLI (to whom I lend my financial and one day physical support).
The onus on safety is a personal one. I am not obliged to wear a Lifejacket, crash helmet or even waterproof clothing. One's awareness of the fact that the high seas are a dangerous place means that there is a natural selection process at work. Should I wish to be able to carry out the sport with a modicum of personal safety or comfort, then the onus is entirely on me to seek out competence training. Again, this is administered by another charity - who also receives money off me The RYA.
The small overlap we have with the world of legislation and government is in buoyage.
But even then, one doesn't get their photograph taken for passing a port hand marker to starboard. The onus is on you to be aware, awake, know what you are doing and know where you are - so that if you chose to leave the 'Jack In The Box' to port on the way up the Lymington river - it is your fault and your fault alone that you spend the rest of the afternoon waiting for the tide to lift you off that rather spectacular mud bank. An Ignominy that no amount of cheerful bonhomie or two water grog will quench.
It is self controlled, and regulated. Peer pressure of standards of behaviour mean a stern look from the Harbour master if your crew are rowdy is as sufficient a reproach as the pressure of a drunken attempt at mooring costing your GPS antenna, next door's pushpit rail and the capital crime of damaging the paintwork - committed in front of an entire marina laughing at your feeble skills.
The traditions of the sport have been so deeply entrenched that they have outlived the current concept of democracy - after all we have had a Navy since Alfred burnt the cakes - and these waters run deep. Blood is the same salinity as sea water, we sons of the waves stand by our traditions of behaviour, honour and care for one's self. The epitome of a society freed from the yoke of state legislation.
Sea faring Libertarians - if you will. Sail and let sail.
OK - to make a vessel work requires leadership - but it is a contract entered voluntarily - and to make it work requires more self discipline than anything else - we need each other's mutual skills to make the thing work. Ask any racing crew who is the most important member of the crew - and they will all answer that it is everyone but them.
There is a cloud on the horizon, scudding towards us like a line squall.
We live under a very illiberal government. The regards 'us' as dangerous. Our views and behaviours are a threat to their approach to running our lives.
The fact we are aspirational enough to carry out the dream to work hard to earn a slot on a vessel - either by accumulating wealth enough to buy the smallest bilge bucket - or by working up the skills to earn a slot on a race crew….
We represent all the things they hate.
We are self reliant, self disciplined, aspirational and require no law to show respect to our fellow sea farers.
We must therefore be stopped.
The full pernicious forces of the Nanny State are being turned on us. The legislative Guns Of Navarone are being trained on us, while the vile officers of this movement load the shells and powder to batter us into their ways.
As the interweb's heir to David Niven (don’t laugh) this Chap needs to draw the attention to my audience to the first triffidesque tendril, the ranging shot from Nanny to our way of life.
They are a cunning foe. They use the full armoury of the Left on us.
The poisoned apple? Their trojan horse?
Good Old Health and Safety
It is for our safety. The Safety of others. How can we argue with that? Well buried within the lines - there are dark forces demanding the very things we fear.
The old chestnut of creating a problem, then being seen to crack down on it is the other tactic.
Drinking and Sailing .
Hold on, you cry, all they are suggesting is that you chaps shouldn't be pissed on the water. Well, by and large we aren't.
Is it for our safety?
Well, the Marine Accident Invesitgation Board only reported about 24 fatalities on leisure craft for 2006-2007 - out of half a million users. Less than half of those were alcohol related
(Link via RYA website)
Even RoSPA and the Coastguard say:
"The members agreed that the current statistics that were available from MCA, SEAREM and INREM were all unreliable as a source for accident statistics for watersports." -
Source
So - we have a problem that doesn't exist. So why legislate against us?
I have a theory - this is a perfect reason to enforce compulsory licensing of craft and the testing and licensing of their skippers.
Why? If you have pulled someone over for drinking, the sanction will be to take a way a licence. You can't imppund the vessel - it probably doesn't even belong to them.
Right now we don’t need one - as I mentioned before the sort of person who takes up sailing is the sort of person who wants to know about it and is prepared to learn.
So, cue government issued sailing licenses and tests and permits (with test centres etc) as well as water-fund licenses. The sea will be nationalised….how long until charging a tax on mooring or anchoring in British waters?
All To be paid for, by us - the sailing public. Yet another stealth tax.
'No, no,' you say - 'they can't mean that - there must be another sanction'…. Well - here is what they are saying:
The Act also enables the Secretary of State to designate additional classes of people as 'marine officials' with the power to detain a vessel if they reasonably suspect that a person who is or may be aboard the vessel is committing, or has committed, an offence, pending the arrival of a uniformed constable to administer a preliminary test. - Stephen Ladyboy
Hmmmm…..bit of hole in this - most boats are rented, making that a form of piracy. Red Herring I reckon.
But in there was another sinister line.
'Marine Officials'.
A waterborne police force with powers to stop and check, take you off your yacht and off to the rozzers for a breath test?
So - will they tow your vessel? Will they know how to sail? What about your crew?
Anyway - have a read of what the Chaps at the RYA have to say.
http://www.rya.org.uk/NewsAndEvents/newsroom/news/drinkqanda.htm
But what of the motive behind this? More people die changing their duvets (probably) than have booze related accidents on the Solent alone. Good sense and self preservation take care of that.
Well, we are currently out of their reach - what better way to crowbar their way into our lives than under the pretext of our safety?
Us 'rich' yachties are a prime target for legislation. With legislation comes us handing more money over to the government to employ busy-bodies to come and tell us what to do.
It is a way of levying stealth taxes on us, and if we complain - we can easily be lableled as 'rich' and they can stoke the fires of resentment against us.
But what else to come?
Compulsory lifejackets? More standards and inspections…….
Compulsory lifelines and jackstays? Again - standards and inspections…...
Full Commercial DfT standardisation of every vessel - think of all the extra public employees!
Inspectors, visitors and scrutineers - all to be paid for by us - the so called Have Yachts. The bitter nannyists must be licking their reptilian lips in delight at all of this.
Lets get things straight - most yachties are like me. We scrimp and save so we can access a boat. Not all of us are footballers (They have scumseekers anyway). Our boats are shared amongst many and are slavishly kept going well past their sell by dates out of love. You can go sailing for under a grand a year.
Ultimately - this represents another attempt to shift of our liberty into the hands of the state. We can only go out and play if Nanny licenses us to do so. And then we must play to her rules.
Interestingly, the legislation is also rather poorly thought out. It is full of holes - meaning it will be open to abuse. In all sorts of amusing ways.
"I am satisfied that in bringing in an alcohol limit for non-professional mariners and in setting the exclusion limit at 7 metres and 7 knots we are providing the best balance between improving safety and avoiding unnecessary regulation.
Stephen Ladyboy at it again.
Interesting that a 5 metre RIB with a 200hp motor is exempt, yet an 8 metre unpowered skiff is not. Which is more likely to be a risk?
How will they determine length and Maximum speed?
Anyway - feast your eyes on the background.
http://www.rya.org.uk/General/Issues/alcohol.htm
Final thought - and this alone demonstrates that the landlubber who dreamt this up is the very worst form of window-licking mouth breather:
Jet skis will not be included in the regulations for now because the Court of Appeal has ruled that jet skis are not ships and are not therefore within the scope of the existing legislation I intend to consult on extending the legislation to them in due course."
You would have thought that the most annoying and unsociable things on the water would have been targeted, wouldn't you.
Despair shall drive me to my tincture.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Nationalised Industries - where we should be grateful for what we get
I have a rather amusing post about sailing this weekend - but this chap's humour has been sapped by having to deal with a Nationalised Industry - where us, the customer, is a nuisance who gets in the way of putting put new posters about their targets and getting paid extra to do it.
Another one of my chappist predictions here - I would pay to see a doctor for a routine requirement in a time that suits me, not that suits them. I am a customer, they would therefore compete for my business and serve me according to my needs.
There is a gaping hole in the market (Are you listening Tesco...?) for medical care at a reasonable price in a time bracket that suits me.
£18 for a consultation between 05.30 and 07.30 and £15 for one between 17.30 and 21.30
Pay in advance, by card. People would turn up, on time as they have an incentive to do so.
In other words - a bit of market pressure might liberate things.
Not being a NEET / useless / student / unemployable / pensioner / interminably lazy - I am required to work for a living.
I therefore have to take half a day off - how else do they expect me to be available in their 'office hours' (09.30 - 16.30)
But why the urgency to see a Quack?
I need an Epi-pen.
I have a specific allergy to a specific nut, and my dearly beloved has become insistent that I carry said item, lest I be laid low while we are harrying the sea-lanes.
I tried to facilitate the acquisition by speaking to a Doctor (His call to me - charge £15 - you see where this is going, don't you....)
I spoke to him, but I received no satisfaction. He will need to see me.
But, I cried, 'am I not registered on your database as suffering from an anaphylaxia.?'
Indeed I am. And the doctor can see it. And when I was last hospitalised with said needle into the heart.
'So - why can't you issue the prescription and I can collect it at my leisure - without losing half a day's most precious leave?'
He insists on seeing me before he will prescribe this potentially lethal injection.
'Why?, I asked, 'Short of giving me a patch test - which the Nurse would do to ascertain the accuracy of my claim, and that I am who I say I am - is there anything you could discern about my condition by observing me in the flesh that would preclude the provision of said gadget'.
'No, Mr. D.' He said coolly - 'It is so I can be instructed in it's use.'
I thought about this.
'Listen Sawbones, old chap' - quothe I, 'If I need it - I am already about to throw a seven, and it would be my compatriot who would have to administer it, Pulp Fiction stylee through my sternum. Not I. '
'Yes, I appreciate that - but if you administered it to yourself incorrectly and died, your estate might sue us.'
'Will I have to sign a disclaimer showing that I have received these instructions?'
'Of course not.'
'Ah, but would the person administering it have to sign one on receipt of it?
'No, but it should only be used by someone with correct medical training.'
'A device designed to be used by an amateur in a first aid situation should only actually be used in a hospital with a doctor present?'
'Well, not strictly...'
'Don't tell me, if it is used by anyone other than a trained medic, all liability is excluded?
'Even so Mr. D - you will need an appointment.'
'Very well - You can see me at 06.45 on Friday morning'
'That's not our office hours'......
'Your office hours, correct. It is when I am available. When can you see me?'
'I'm not permitted to make appointments, you will have call reception separately.'
Fucking marvellous. £15 to be told to come back and see them all to get something they know I need, but so they are seen to tell me that if I use it it is at my own risk.
This is a bit like writing on a life jacket : 'This is not a life saving device and should not be used in water by someone who cannot swim. Using this device excludes the manufacturer from any liability. ' (I have actually seen that on an American lifejacket)
My cool has departed me. Not a happy chap, now.
The image suggests that a little bit of practice with biro would sufficient, anyway. Bloody thing is intramuscular, not even intracardial.
Another one of my chappist predictions here - I would pay to see a doctor for a routine requirement in a time that suits me, not that suits them. I am a customer, they would therefore compete for my business and serve me according to my needs.
There is a gaping hole in the market (Are you listening Tesco...?) for medical care at a reasonable price in a time bracket that suits me.
£18 for a consultation between 05.30 and 07.30 and £15 for one between 17.30 and 21.30
Pay in advance, by card. People would turn up, on time as they have an incentive to do so.
In other words - a bit of market pressure might liberate things.
Not being a NEET / useless / student / unemployable / pensioner / interminably lazy - I am required to work for a living.
I therefore have to take half a day off - how else do they expect me to be available in their 'office hours' (09.30 - 16.30)
But why the urgency to see a Quack?
I need an Epi-pen.
I have a specific allergy to a specific nut, and my dearly beloved has become insistent that I carry said item, lest I be laid low while we are harrying the sea-lanes.
I tried to facilitate the acquisition by speaking to a Doctor (His call to me - charge £15 - you see where this is going, don't you....)
I spoke to him, but I received no satisfaction. He will need to see me.
But, I cried, 'am I not registered on your database as suffering from an anaphylaxia.?'
Indeed I am. And the doctor can see it. And when I was last hospitalised with said needle into the heart.
'So - why can't you issue the prescription and I can collect it at my leisure - without losing half a day's most precious leave?'
He insists on seeing me before he will prescribe this potentially lethal injection.
'Why?, I asked, 'Short of giving me a patch test - which the Nurse would do to ascertain the accuracy of my claim, and that I am who I say I am - is there anything you could discern about my condition by observing me in the flesh that would preclude the provision of said gadget'.
'No, Mr. D.' He said coolly - 'It is so I can be instructed in it's use.'
I thought about this.
'Listen Sawbones, old chap' - quothe I, 'If I need it - I am already about to throw a seven, and it would be my compatriot who would have to administer it, Pulp Fiction stylee through my sternum. Not I. '
'Yes, I appreciate that - but if you administered it to yourself incorrectly and died, your estate might sue us.'
'Will I have to sign a disclaimer showing that I have received these instructions?'
'Of course not.'
'Ah, but would the person administering it have to sign one on receipt of it?
'No, but it should only be used by someone with correct medical training.'
'A device designed to be used by an amateur in a first aid situation should only actually be used in a hospital with a doctor present?'
'Well, not strictly...'
'Don't tell me, if it is used by anyone other than a trained medic, all liability is excluded?
'Even so Mr. D - you will need an appointment.'
'Very well - You can see me at 06.45 on Friday morning'
'That's not our office hours'......
'Your office hours, correct. It is when I am available. When can you see me?'
'I'm not permitted to make appointments, you will have call reception separately.'
Fucking marvellous. £15 to be told to come back and see them all to get something they know I need, but so they are seen to tell me that if I use it it is at my own risk.
This is a bit like writing on a life jacket : 'This is not a life saving device and should not be used in water by someone who cannot swim. Using this device excludes the manufacturer from any liability. ' (I have actually seen that on an American lifejacket)
My cool has departed me. Not a happy chap, now.
The image suggests that a little bit of practice with biro would sufficient, anyway. Bloody thing is intramuscular, not even intracardial.
Wednesday, July 04, 2007
Doctors for Bombs
I am looking forward to the Failed Teacher explaining why ID cards would have stopped those dodgy docs from ram raiding Glasgow Aiport.
Tuesday, July 03, 2007
T'North - A solution to their woes!
Northern types off to refresh the collective revolutionary consciousness
Alas - the monsoon hit the north rather hard this year - so what to do?
Well given the view from my window in the first class compartment as I trundle my merry way T'North - traditional arable agriculture is obviously waterlogged. Mile after mile of soggy field.
I have had a thought. This should be seen my our enterprising chums in T'North as an opportunity!
What wisdom can I - Chap 'o' T'North impart on my comrades?
Yes, comrades.
As they are as a rule a bunch of unmitigated socialists - who somehow believe in the inherent nobility of toil in fields, mines or the like, then my suggestion will suit them down to ground.
RICE!
What are the benefits...?
They get to do back breaking toil bent over in waterlogged fields bare foot in freezing water (loads of scope of whining about the toil)
They get to go back to their classical agrarian roots
They get to wear the same black Viet Minh pyjamas and coolie hats - loads of revolutionary cred and solidarity with their Viet worker brothers (if somewhat 30 years out of date)
Lots of trudging nobly behind water buffalo
The return of decent illnesses like Dhobey rot and Trench foot.
We can even set up speakers at all the corners to play stirring revolutionary songs to them while their children denounce their parents for harbouring bourgeoisie tendencies.
Loads of red flags everywhere.
Gordo gets to wear a Chairman Mao suit while telling even more outrageous lies of how glorious everything is under him while his cabinet of muppets bark on about how their own slice of the cultural revolution is perfect.
AND….the final boon - price of basmati falls to reasonable levels - it's practically extortion in Waitrose.
So - I ask you….what's wrong with a bit of Maoism? It could be what we need in this country. Just so long as in a few years the benighted squad of onanists in Downing street get toppled in a very bloody counter revolution and we embrace Singapore / Hong Kongesque ultra capitalism, then it might be worth enduring the appalling tailoring and the water buffalo crapping everywhere.
Monday, July 02, 2007
Car bombing - update 3
CCTV Footage
Thanks to Harry Hook for that - made me laugh.
Touches tip of white pith helmet to Mr Hook, and reminds him to stay on defaulters.
Thanks to Harry Hook for that - made me laugh.
Touches tip of white pith helmet to Mr Hook, and reminds him to stay on defaulters.
Friday, June 29, 2007
Yes, CJ
A striking comment from the comments section on an article from today's Torygraph...(Go find it...)
Who remembers Sunshine Desserts?
The similarities are stunning - we have CJ at the helm - the helm of a sinking ship blindly carrying on as if nothing was wrong.
Surrounded by yes-men and simperers all grateful for his munificence.
'I didn't get where I am today by waiting in the wings for 10 years, Reggie!'
'No, CJ'
'Super'
'Great'.
Who remembers Sunshine Desserts?
The similarities are stunning - we have CJ at the helm - the helm of a sinking ship blindly carrying on as if nothing was wrong.
Surrounded by yes-men and simperers all grateful for his munificence.
'I didn't get where I am today by waiting in the wings for 10 years, Reggie!'
'No, CJ'
'Super'
'Great'.
Wednesday, June 27, 2007
The New Soviet
Whilst the Brownites of my readership are no doubt gloating over the turncoat (who's name I will not publish) who crossed the floor - I would like to point out some similarities.
He clearly does not hear the people - for he fears them - why else would he insist that he should not stand for reelection - unless he fears the ire of those who voted him in.
A bit like the coronation of Dear Leader, what?
But welcome to the New Soviet.
Expect more taxes on those of us who actually generate rather than consume wealth - for in the eye of the one eyed, only state spending is worthwhile.
Expect the client state to expand so we are all grateful for his munificence.
Expect even more rigorous controls on freedom of movement - it is for our own safety/good/carbon footprint (delete as appropriate). It may be road charging - but if they can track us effectively enough to charge us for it, expect every possible moving traffic violation to be hardwired.
Expect more curtailment of individual freedom for our own good - like ID cards.
Expect more powers of the state to intervene in our lives.
Expect the cowardly dead tree brigade to continue their toadying - they are no better than Pravda or Trud.
Expect more meaningless targets and statistics - they will want us to believe we are happier, even when credit card Britain goes credit card bust - it will only be those evil landowners who steal housing (And other Daily Mirror shite) who suffer.
Welcome to The United Socialist State of Britain.
You will rue this day, for the lights of liberty are going out over this country - we may not see them lit again for a decade.
PS: A tenner on Kinnock being in the cabinet!
He clearly does not hear the people - for he fears them - why else would he insist that he should not stand for reelection - unless he fears the ire of those who voted him in.
A bit like the coronation of Dear Leader, what?
But welcome to the New Soviet.
Expect more taxes on those of us who actually generate rather than consume wealth - for in the eye of the one eyed, only state spending is worthwhile.
Expect the client state to expand so we are all grateful for his munificence.
Expect even more rigorous controls on freedom of movement - it is for our own safety/good/carbon footprint (delete as appropriate). It may be road charging - but if they can track us effectively enough to charge us for it, expect every possible moving traffic violation to be hardwired.
Expect more curtailment of individual freedom for our own good - like ID cards.
Expect more powers of the state to intervene in our lives.
Expect the cowardly dead tree brigade to continue their toadying - they are no better than Pravda or Trud.
Expect more meaningless targets and statistics - they will want us to believe we are happier, even when credit card Britain goes credit card bust - it will only be those evil landowners who steal housing (And other Daily Mirror shite) who suffer.
Welcome to The United Socialist State of Britain.
You will rue this day, for the lights of liberty are going out over this country - we may not see them lit again for a decade.
PS: A tenner on Kinnock being in the cabinet!
Thursday, June 21, 2007
Just a thought
If we are all (If the Brownite toadies in the MSM are to be believed) gazing into the glorious sunlit uplands of the wonders of Gordo's Britain - why would he feel the need to offer Northern Ireland to Lord Pantsdown?
Cynical ploy to upstage the Lib Dumbs or an attempt to try offset the old West Lothian Q and gather a mandate from the few LD seats south of the border.
Fuel for the Blogsphere, methinks.
Cynical ploy to upstage the Lib Dumbs or an attempt to try offset the old West Lothian Q and gather a mandate from the few LD seats south of the border.
Fuel for the Blogsphere, methinks.
Thursday, June 07, 2007
Warning on Wine bottles
I'm with St Boris of Henley on this.
Despite my state last night and how I feel this morning. I am adult enough to know it was all my fault and that no nannying from the government would have made any difference.
I do feel this is the augur of things to come. There is a fundamental shift in the liberties of the individual that has been sold to the public as 'for it's own good'.
Our movements are tracked, monitored and we will be charged for it.
Our money now belongs to Gordo and it is his munificence alone which allows us to spend it on what his grandees think is safe for us to consume.
We are assets of the state, and woe betide if we care not for those assets.
Our liberty is at the sufferance of the state, and it can be removed at any time without warning - and it's agents can enter our homes at will and detain us on suspicion alone.
The infrastructure of oppression has been slowly built up around us - how long until we need the governments permission to go to the seaside? It will be sold as our carbon ration - but how different is it in outcome to movement restrictions over the good old Soviets?
We were lulled into a warm blanket of social justice by Blair - and we awake under the jackboot of Brown.
Be very, very afraid.
Despite my state last night and how I feel this morning. I am adult enough to know it was all my fault and that no nannying from the government would have made any difference.
I do feel this is the augur of things to come. There is a fundamental shift in the liberties of the individual that has been sold to the public as 'for it's own good'.
Our movements are tracked, monitored and we will be charged for it.
Our money now belongs to Gordo and it is his munificence alone which allows us to spend it on what his grandees think is safe for us to consume.
We are assets of the state, and woe betide if we care not for those assets.
Our liberty is at the sufferance of the state, and it can be removed at any time without warning - and it's agents can enter our homes at will and detain us on suspicion alone.
The infrastructure of oppression has been slowly built up around us - how long until we need the governments permission to go to the seaside? It will be sold as our carbon ration - but how different is it in outcome to movement restrictions over the good old Soviets?
We were lulled into a warm blanket of social justice by Blair - and we awake under the jackboot of Brown.
Be very, very afraid.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Bread and Circuses
This has got me very annoyed..... it smacks of republicanism at it's most odious.
We could celebrate:
St George's Day (Where George saved the world)
Trafalgar Day (Where Nelson saved the world)
Waterloo Day (Where We Saved the world)
Armistice Day (Where we saved the world)
Battle of Britain Day (Where we saved the world)
D-Day (Where we saved the world)
VE Day (Where we saved the world)
VJ Day (Where the Americans saved the world, but it was our idea)
But the idea of us celebrating an achievement like this doesn't appeal to them, as it might make someone who was descended from those we saved the world from, feel bad about trying to have it their way - or the smack of us wanting a bit of gratitute for expending the flower of three generations on the field whislt bankrupting ourselves for fifty years - and it is important that we feel bad about saving the world, as we sould have done it by diversity outreach or inclusivity seminars.
So instead, lets create a new one - shall we call 'National Diversity Day'. Everyone except the dull white, middle class, middle aged and balding tax payers gets a day off.
A parade, extra benefits for all those attending!
Red Ken gets to stand at a podium and floats celebrating diversity trundle past him while he takes the salute.
It's one short step to having ICBMs on trucks, thousands of tanks and hordes of outreach coordinators goosestepping past him.
Go away and make something work for once you pointless bunch of failed social workers and human rights laywers.
We could celebrate:
St George's Day (Where George saved the world)
Trafalgar Day (Where Nelson saved the world)
Waterloo Day (Where We Saved the world)
Armistice Day (Where we saved the world)
Battle of Britain Day (Where we saved the world)
D-Day (Where we saved the world)
VE Day (Where we saved the world)
VJ Day (Where the Americans saved the world, but it was our idea)
But the idea of us celebrating an achievement like this doesn't appeal to them, as it might make someone who was descended from those we saved the world from, feel bad about trying to have it their way - or the smack of us wanting a bit of gratitute for expending the flower of three generations on the field whislt bankrupting ourselves for fifty years - and it is important that we feel bad about saving the world, as we sould have done it by diversity outreach or inclusivity seminars.
So instead, lets create a new one - shall we call 'National Diversity Day'. Everyone except the dull white, middle class, middle aged and balding tax payers gets a day off.
A parade, extra benefits for all those attending!
Red Ken gets to stand at a podium and floats celebrating diversity trundle past him while he takes the salute.
It's one short step to having ICBMs on trucks, thousands of tanks and hordes of outreach coordinators goosestepping past him.
Go away and make something work for once you pointless bunch of failed social workers and human rights laywers.
Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Waiting for Gordo
One's blogging has been frightfully prosaic of late. I put this down to the fact that the media is totally obsessed with Gordo the Broon at the moment - it is after all - his time in the sun - and that my domestic life has been one of plaster dust, tiles and blocked pipes. Takes up the run-time, as the 'puter boffins are apt to quote.
But Back to Cyclops. The media are clearly in his gruesome thrall. One hopes that given a short period of time, the tin-plate tarnishes, and as the Sarge used to say ' You can't polish a turd sir!'
It is not as if what he is saying is terribly new. This quote from Dizzy sums it up.
What does flatten one's tonic is that it all seems so terribly populist, Napoleon's hundred days and the like.
For example: five new Bracknells will be built on the grounds that despite they will do what they always did with new towns, they genuinely believe they will not get what they previously got. Rest of it is trite media grandstanding or the sort one expects from someone on a hideous reality television show trying to boost their ratings to a duped audience at home furiously phoning in to affect a pre-made outcome.
(I think there are a number of parallels there - feel free to insert own)
So - on that theme, I await the following blandishments from Gordo to boost his ratings:
1. Jobs for everyone, everyone for Jobs.
2. The Grass will be Greener if you elect me to be your Comrade Secretary.
3. Tough on New Labour, tough on the Causes of New Labour.
4. I'm Invisible, you can’t see me.
5. A five year plan to enhance the production of Tractors in Labour marginal seats, through taxation of those who can scarcely afford welding them ever further to a cycle of grateful dependency on me, whilst sucking up furiously to growing ruling elite created by self and perpetuated because they know better.
Obviously the last one is too close to the truth for him to say.
I do wonder what bad news they have buried whilst the 'meed-yah' is in his gruesome thrall.
But Back to Cyclops. The media are clearly in his gruesome thrall. One hopes that given a short period of time, the tin-plate tarnishes, and as the Sarge used to say ' You can't polish a turd sir!'
It is not as if what he is saying is terribly new. This quote from Dizzy sums it up.
What does flatten one's tonic is that it all seems so terribly populist, Napoleon's hundred days and the like.
For example: five new Bracknells will be built on the grounds that despite they will do what they always did with new towns, they genuinely believe they will not get what they previously got. Rest of it is trite media grandstanding or the sort one expects from someone on a hideous reality television show trying to boost their ratings to a duped audience at home furiously phoning in to affect a pre-made outcome.
(I think there are a number of parallels there - feel free to insert own)
So - on that theme, I await the following blandishments from Gordo to boost his ratings:
1. Jobs for everyone, everyone for Jobs.
2. The Grass will be Greener if you elect me to be your Comrade Secretary.
3. Tough on New Labour, tough on the Causes of New Labour.
4. I'm Invisible, you can’t see me.
5. A five year plan to enhance the production of Tractors in Labour marginal seats, through taxation of those who can scarcely afford welding them ever further to a cycle of grateful dependency on me, whilst sucking up furiously to growing ruling elite created by self and perpetuated because they know better.
Obviously the last one is too close to the truth for him to say.
I do wonder what bad news they have buried whilst the 'meed-yah' is in his gruesome thrall.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
