jeffrey kaplan : dead consumers are just a cost of doing business.



man's absolutely right. no corporatist cunt gives a shit if his / her actions kill some poor fucker.

how dare fucking george cunt bush give vladimir putin a lecture on democracy?



this mean-spirited, closed-minded, chimp-faced moron has presided over two, very clearly rigged elections in the u.s.a.



the words 'pot', 'kettle' and 'black' come to mind.

from the sound of this article in the independent, the u.s.a. and canadian anglican churches are better off without links to the bigotted twats in the u.k.

robin cook : pass laws have no place in britain.



all bliar's 'new' labour cronies should be forced to learn this by rote, so that they understand that the british people do not want, have never wanted and never will want big-ears' stupid, racist, reactionary laws.



they need to understand that llew smith was right when he said that 'new' labour's policies are like thatcherism - big-ears' 'anti-terrorism' bill panders to big business, racists, bigots and morons - just as thatcher's laws did, and still do.



bliar will never rein in his home secretary, because bliar is completely up the arse of big business.



labour m.p.s need to dump bliar as soon as possible, and replace him with someone with a heart.

sidney blumenthal : lost in europe

victoria brittain : why are we welcoming this torturer?

llew smith's been told off for saying that 'new' labour's policies are 'thatcherism with a human face'.



llew is incorrect.



'new' labour's policies are thatcherism with an inhuman face - see big-ears' attack on civil liberties in his new prevention of terrorism bill and bliar's new anti-harassment bill.

it's time that big-ears was given a lesson in the real purpose of government.



the proper use of government is to provide a safety-net for those that the rest of society fails, to provide proper, appropriate, protection for all members of society and to control the excesses to which the rich and powerful are prey.



government does not exist in order to allow politicians to lock-away, or otherwise deprive of their human rights, those who say or do things of which they do not approve.



charles clarke is acting entirely improperly in his attempt to force the prevention of terrorism bill through parliament.



this disgusting act contains provision for him to remove the liberties of anyone he says is a 'threat' to the remainder of the population. although he says that house-arrest is not appropriate at the moment, he can introduce it at a later date, on a whim.



the whole concept of this bill is flawed.



if someone is a threat, there must be evidence that they are : so try them in court.



nothing else is needed.



but the arrogant bastard is trying to bring in law which makes it legal to remove liberties from people who 'facilitate' terrorism. here, the broad brush really takes a good slosh at huge numbers of people, because 'facilitating' terrorism can be shouting something like 'get the troops out of iraq', or giving a contribution to a body which is trying, otherwise within the law, to get people like bliar and goon impeached for taking the u.k. into a totally illegal war.



and all it'll take is for the home secretary, a person who wouldn't know reality if it came and bit him on his fat arse, to be 'satisfied, on the balance of probabilities' that the person is guilty.



where the fuck's the justice in that?



where the fuck's the due process?



where the fuck's the honesty with the electorate?



where the fuck are the human rights?



none of these things matter to a creep like big-ears because, like his predecessor, he's so deeply up the arse of big business, he'll do anything 'new' labour's pay-masters tell him - 'cos it's big business which will really benefit by charging anyone who says, for example 'mcdonald's produce food which is bad for your heart', with terrorism, thus silencing them forever.



along with 'new' labour's new laws on harassment, the new anti-terrorism laws will give the corporatist mother-fuckers everything they need to be able to pollute, poison, kill by negligence, with nobody able to blow the whistle on them 'cos potential whistle-blowers will be branded as terrorists and silenced.

---

john lettice : guilty! new labour could arrest self under new terror law

cunt has already planned his invasion of iran, for june 2005; so says scott ritter, reported in this article.



so much for condi's claims about iran not being on the agenda.



so much for cunt bush claiming that he's waiting for 'proof' that iran is a threat to the u.s.



this pair of lying bastards, along with rumsfeld, rove, wolfowitz, bliar, goon etc are all set to invade yet another soveraign country under false pretences.



i just hope to the gods that this time, the british parliament doesn't support bliar in his lies and won't send troops to support the racist, greedy, violent, vicious, lying twats who govern the u.s.a.



if they do it again, knowing that bliar and goon and straw lied to them last time - as they do know, most assuredly - it'll be the final nail in the coffin of parliamentary democracy in the u.k., because, once again, our "representatives" will be representing nothing but the interests of large corporations and giving less than a flying fuck about the interests of the british people.



labour m.p.s, especially, should not allow themselves to be duped by the great liar, since they are members of what is supposed to be an internationalist, democratic movement - not of a selfish, vicious, corporatist movement.



remember that mussolini used to call naziism "corporatism", and consider what this bunch of spineless bastards are unleashing on the world by continually pandering to giant corporations.

ward churchill : what did i really say? and why did i say it?

hunter s thompson : he was a crook

once again, bliar's bunch of legal cunts eagles have found a fantastic way of giving the corporate pigs what they want - george monbiot protest as harassment.



no wonder mcdonald's didn't give a fuck about dave morris' and helen steel's victory in the european court of human rights, where the british gov. were found to have violated morris's and steel's human rights by denting them legal aid - mcdonald's and other corporations should have been shitting themselves that any of us could now go out and do what morris and steel did in the knowledge that suing us would cost big-time - instead, the corporations have bribed or blackmailed bliar into making peaceful protest into a crime.



bliar, you're a complete, utter, corrupt, mendacious cunt.

great news for the flog 'em and hang 'em brigade : now, not only can you be detained without trial if the home office says you're a terrorist, but you can be detained without trial because you're fat.



how the fuck is sectioning a fat man who is, according to his mother, "working well towards losing weight", "in the interests of that person's health or safety or to protect other people"?



the people who did this are indeed some of ward churchill's "little eichmanns", the vile bastards.

david clark : how to defeat 'new' labour - and still re-elect labour

george monbiot : mocking our dreams

elaine cassel : the lynne stewart verdict; stretching the definition of "terrorism" to new limits.



the u.s. has truly become the embodiment of all evil. the government there has enacted legislation whose purpose is to prevent attorneys from properly representing their clients in 'terrorism' cases. lynne stewart, a court-appointed attorney for a man charged with terrorism, has herself been found guilty of terrorism for doing her best for her client.



attorneys throughout the u.s. should all strike until this obscene legislation is repealed and until lynne stewart is released and paid substantial damages for her appalling treatment.



nothing else will do.



but you and i know that the craven bastards will do nothing of the sort, and they'll let her rot in prison rather than risk their own cushy jobs.

robert jensen : ward churchill: right to speak out; right about 9/11

this is fucking disgraceful.



a drugs campaigner, someone who should know that privacy is paramount in dealing with the problems of drug users, says there should be compulsory drug testing in wales' schools.



what a cunt.



children need help, kindness and, above all, confidentiality if they are to overcome drug problems they may have.



forcing them to have drug tests will, possibly, stop some of them using soft drugs such as cannabis which stay in the system for a long time and make them change to using harder drugs which leave the system more quickly.



talk about the cure being worse than the disease.

---

furthermore, as a parent, i will not allow some fucking busybody to force my child to take a drugs test.



you touch my kid, i kick your face off. ok?

no more 'i know best', says bliar.



ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. that's one of the funniest things i've ever heard a politician say.



especially that politician.



the man's a lying, conniving little cunt of a control freak. he could no more do without saying he knows best than i could do without air. he can't give control away. it's what gives meaning to his hopeless psychology. it's what allows him to do the vile, obscene things he's done to british politics and economics.



he's a fucking liar, charlatan and bigot. and i hate him nearly as much as i hate his bum-chum george w cunt bush.

eddie izzard : it's stupid and i love it

geoffrey wheatcroft : jaw-jaw on hunting is a sop to mps for war-war in iraq.



damn right.



bliar's playing labour mps for fools and they're too fucking dumb to realise it, or too spineless to do anything about it if they do realise.

polly toynbee : a royal wedding ... oh, that deep sinking of the heart

brian cloughley : a general as knuckle-dragging buffoon

am i glad that i'm not ward churchill.



here's a man who merely suggested that attacking the world trade centre, using the u.s.' own criteria, made military sense and who's now threatened with death, a certain loss of his livelihood and, possibly, with indefinite detention.



he did not suggest that the attack was morally justified, he said it made military sense - just like all the u.s.' hateful and hate-filled attacks on iraqi hospitals, government offices and schools make military sense - just like all the israelis' hateful and hate-filled attacks on palestinian hospitals, government offices and schools make military sense - but none of them are morally justified.



here are just a few articles about his plight:



alexander cockburn : ward churchill and the mad dogs;



kurt nimmo : a ward churchill kind of day;



joshua frank : liberals trash ward churchill.



i'd love to think that someone powerful in america will come to churchill's aid, but i know that no-one powerful in america gives a fuck - in fact they'll all enjoy kicking him when he's down, 'cos they're all selfish, ugly, arrogant cunts.

roy hattersley : terrorism, marmalade and mi5

cornelia dean : evolution takes a back seat in u.s. classes.



it isn't only in the u.s. that creationism is being taught. my own child attends a school where the bible is taught as if it is history (before you complain, i can't change what school they go to - they're in their mother's care and i can't effect a change). they're also taught evolution, by me and their mother (don't ask me), but i'm very worried about the effect it'll have in the future if they get 'converted' by some bunch of religious bigots.



i've heard some teachers voice indifference towards or even complete rejection of evolution. it makes me very, very angry that such morons can be let loose on the education of my child.



this is most worrying for the country's future: if children grow up rejecting science in favour of 'belief', we're fucked. our economy depends upon the effective application of science by our technologists. how can they choose to 'believe' one piece of science while rejecting another? if they choose to reject all science and, therefore, do not learn how to apply it, our economy will be in the toilet and we'll all starve.



so, religious twats, keep your ignorant beliefs to yourselves and let my kid make their own choice about what to believe after giving them proper, fully informed knowledge of the subjects in question.



oh, and don't try to hide your creationist crap behind such soppy ideas as 'intelligent design' - intelligent people know it's only a code term for creationism and aren't taken in by it.



i expect to be burned as a witch before the end of the week.

10 years for killing brave fireman.



yet another case (see my posting about michael stone) where one person's word is enough to secure a conviction.



since 1215 and the magna carta, british law has stated quite clearly that no-one can be found guilty in court with only one person's word as the evidence against them.



two cases in two weeks show that british justice is a sham.



i don't know whether the 'fireman three' and michael stone are guilty, but i'm sure as hell that the word of one person is not sufficient to convict them.



when will this end? how many more people are going to go to prison in cases where the prosecution's evidence is flimsy in the extreme, consisting of one accusation and no corroborating forensic evidence, before the british people get off their arses and start shouting?



do we have to wait until big-ears has locked-up members of all the opposition parties for being 'terrorist suspects' because he says they are? or can we hope for the law lords to put their collective foot down and end this crap?