Friday, 5 August 2011

Scythe time.

Not just the grass, although two weeks of Aberdonian summer daylight means I now get my arse wiped crossing the lawn. If there is a dry day this year I'll have to cut it before it tickles my chin too.

No, it's the scythe and cape and the pointing bony finger I'm talking about here.

What the hell is Guido Fawkes playing at? Is he trying to get us all killed? Oh, it's all fun and blog hits until someone gets sentenced to death for drink-driving, isn't it? I think maybe the Guinness has addled his brain. He must surely have heard the term 'mission creep'.

Passive smoking. Passive drinking. Passive obesity. None have really killed anyone at all, yet thousands of deaths have been ascribed to these nonsensical imaginings. So all could be construed as murder and all would attract the death penalty. Real deaths are caused by drink-driving so all drink-drivers are legitimate targets as potential murderers. You dipstick, Fawkes. You're signing your own death warrant. Do you think they don't want you gone? Why not load the gun for them while you're at it?

The Monsters claim they will be 'forced' to consider giving themselves the power to kill us whenever they feel like it because of popular opinion.

Commons leader Sir George Young has already said they should not ignore voters and shy away from debating the issue.

Really? Two governments have had no problem ignoring voters over the Lisbon treaty, membership of the EU, immigration, the smoking ban, and a host of other issues. Why can't they ignore this one too?

Sir George warned it would damage democracy to ignore strong opinions among members of the public "or pretend that their views do not exist".

You lot have pretended my views don't exist for my entire life. That's why I hate you and will not support you. I am far from being the only one. Very far indeed.

Schoolboy Clegg claimed that considering the reinstatement of the death penalty was as unthinkable as even talking about the smoking ban. Now it seems the Coagulation is pretending they will be 'forced' into killing us. They'll probably have the death penalty for smoking, Clegg, you foetid bubo filling. You want the death penalty, fine, you go first. In fact, why not set the example by topping yourself in the Commons? Let the country see what it is you want them to support.

Our government want the death penalty back. Yes, they do. Of all the issues they have been harangued about, this is the only one they have not ignored. This is the only one they claim they 'have to look at' because 'the people want it'. Rubbish. The people think they want it because they all think it will never apply to them. Until their children are summarily executed by park keepers for littering, and then it's too late.

What about this smoking ban then? A ban on something that in reality affects nobody but the smoker. What about the EU that's stuck to each of us like a nine-foot leech? No, they don't want to even talk about those things. A return of State murder, oh yes, they'll talk about that. You can hear their saliva bubbling at the prospect. Look how clean the Westminster windows are since this was proposed. The licking has been frantic.

I first came onto the political scene via Guido Fawkes' blog. It used to be a place I respected and considered to be a paragon of political persuasion. Now it's becoming the bloody Daily Sport of politics.

Forget about the old 'EU won't allow it' stuff. The EU have already proposed it. For the heinous crime of... criticising the EU.

This is a test case. If it gets support here, the EU will allow it and then roll it out across all of Europe.

Within days there will be no climate sceptics, no open smokers, no open drinkers, no EU protests, no dissent of any kind. One wrong move and you're dead. Not figuratively. Literally.

Guido, you are an idiot. A useful one, yes, but an idiot nonetheless.

Oh and if you give it a moment's thought, you'll realise you're pretty close to the top of their list.


subrosa said...

Couldn't agree more LI. A very foolish move by the gunpowder man.

Michael Fowke said...

Guido has jumped the shark. Totally lost it.

I suppose the EU - in these tumultuous times - will want the death penalty for disloyalty to the United States of Europe.

Michael Fowke said...

Oh - I missed the bit that the EU actually wants it. Jesus!

David Davis said...

I have criticised Guido on his comments link for this, twice. However, my point is that if it's death for killing "cops", then mission creep will gradually ensure that all public employees are sacred in this way in time. I said, "if cops and children", why are these special and not other humans?"

The other problem of course is that we cannot delegate our representatives to pass an Act giving the State a right which we ourselves do not possess, which is to say: to kill another. But nobody answered this one.

Zaphod Camden said...

If my history is correct, when we actually did have the rope, the final decision as to whether the death sentence was actually carried out was up to the Home Secretary.

Think about that. Ken Clarke. Michael Howard. David Blunkett. Jacqui Smith. Final arbriter as to whether you actually would "be taken from this place and put in another place, etc, etc, have mercy on your soul".


kitler said...

How sinister. Of all the issues Guido could have forced why this? For a long time my gut has told me that Guido was working for The Man and I think this kind of proves it. I mean, never mind the whole handing the state the power to kill thing, what kind of a Libertarian values cops over ordinary citizens for fuck sake? Just consider the ratio of cops killed on duty compared to people killed by cops on duty. Guido must have, and he still came up with this. And what age does childhood end these day? Is the life of a 15 yr old worth less than a 17 yr old? And think of all the mothers wrongly accused of murdering their kids over the last few years. This whole thing is creepy and very dangerous.

Stewart Cowan said...

"What about the EU that's stuck to each of us like a nine-foot leech?"

I'm going to pinch this!

I only favour the death penalty for treason. Who in his right mind wouldn't want to see Blair swing for what he's done? And in his case, there could be no mistake. He's guilty, which a short trial would adequately establish for the records.

The danger (now) with a more general death penalty is, of course, that the EU can make up new laws and invent crimes to get rid of its detractors.

But I think that the sight of Brown hanging down or Blair in the Chair would send quite a message to all the other vipers who nest in the halls of power.

SBC said...

The Death Penalty will not return.

Sweet Jesus wept, can you *imagine* the Health and Safety considerations alone?!?! Not to mention the liability insurance and compensation payout's for not using fair trade organic hemp etc.

Look at the US where the condemned man is refused a last cigarette...on health grounds.

Anonymous said...

Dear Mr Leg-iron

We already have the death penalty.

Given the right circumstances, the police are judge, jury and executioner and act 'lawfully' even when there turns out to be no threat at all.

See where that gets you if you are not a police officer, but otherwise identical circumstances.

Some are more equal than others before the law.


Stewart Cowan said...

DP's right, we do have the death penalty. Ask Dr Kelly or Jean Charles de Menezes... oh, we can't.

Neither can we ask the 200,000 human beings wiped from the pages of history each year from abortion.

Yet unrepentant scum who have committed the most atrocious of crimes get set free to do it again.

The roof needs fixing before the lot comes down and crushes us all to death!

Anonymous said...

They’re jumping the gun a bit here, aren’t they? Already saying that they’ve got to debate a return of the death penalty? My understanding was that each petition needed 100,000 signatures before they’d be obliged to debate it, and at the moment the top-voted one is the one wanting to retain the ban on hanging which is running at about double the number as the top-ranking one on restoring it. There are lots of other, lower-ranked ones on both sides, too, but I doubt that even if they were all totalled up either of them would be anywhere near the required number. There’s still a while to go for both, of course, so we’ll see how things pan out over time.

And in any case, I don’t quite see the point in all this. How are they going to handle topics like this one, where there are so obviously two completely opposing viewpoints? If they genuinely intend to “take notice of what the public wants,” then that doesn’t leave any room for debate, does it? Because if one side has fewer votes than the other then that’s the matter decided. And if they debate the issue and ignore the larger-voting side then clearly they aren’t taking any notice of “what the public wants” at all, and the whole project becomes meaningless, other than giving a few people the chance to have a bit of a gripe about their own favourite hobby-horse.

Talking of which (and this has been noted on Simon Clark’s blog comments, too) it is highly surprising that apart from one little mention about smoking in prisons there have so far been absolutely no motions whatsoever – either for more restrictions or for relaxation – about the smoking ban. Curious that, given that it was the No 1 topic on the Great Repeal Bill site. Is there a tiny tad of censorship going on do you think? No! Surely not!

Oh, and I’ve never been able to see the appeal in Guido’s blog, even when it was at its height and he was regarded as the best of all the political bloggers, back in the days when bloggers were still a bit of a novelty. It’s always struck me as the rather self-important, not-very-well-written rantings of someone who got stuck, emotionally, at around the age of 14 and who let his moment of fame go to his head and make him think that he was much more important and “cutting edge” than he actually is. And many of his commenters tend to be equally adolescent. Not, clearly, the ones who are also commenting on here - I guess that the ones on here are also the few who posted sensible, well-reasoned arguments both ways on Guido’s comments section. Sadly, they are greatly outnumbered there by an inordinate number of complete morons.

kitler said...

Anon, don't you remember The Hitch? Guido's blog was always worth a read just for his rantings.

Anonymous said...

Can't say I would be too upset if these animals were destroyed like the dogs they are. (As opposed to the three and a half years some of 'em will actually spend in jail).

opinions powered by