Halloween Fancy Dress

Stuck for a scary Halloween costume?

Don a comedy beard and strap loads of fake dynamite to yourself under your coat and silently in the middle of the room, undo your coat and shout "Allah Akbar!" at the top of your voice.



Guaranteed screaming - you'll be the most scariest.
 
NB: keep the costume in a holdall and change outside the party... that could be a life-limiting costume on public transport!

Bohemian Bankruptcy

Brilliant! h/t iBall

What we suspected all along - it was deliberate

Telegraph

The huge increases in migrants over the last decade were partly due to a politically motivated attempt by ministers to radically change the country and "rub the Right's nose in diversity", according to Andrew Neather, a former adviser to Tony Blair, Jack Straw and David Blunkett.


He said Labour's relaxation of controls was a deliberate plan to "open up the UK to mass migration" but that ministers were nervous and reluctant to discuss such a move publicly for fear it would alienate its "core working class vote".

And so, there we have it - a deliberate attempt at social engineering.

There should be trial, not a public hearing about this.

Well, what a surprise...

Telegraph

The YouGov poll was taken hours after Mr Griffin’s appearance on Thursday, before which anti-fascist protesters rioted outside BBC Television Centre in London.


The survey found that 22 per cent of voters would “seriously consider” voting for the BNP in a future local, general or European election. This included four per cent who said they would “definitely” consider voting for the party, three per cent who would “probably” consider it, and 15 per cent who said they were “possible” BNP voters.

Considering they never touched the question of why so people were voting BNP and what was so wrong with Liebour's failed immigration policy, what do you expect?!?

They should have held Question Time in Burnley and addressed these issues, rather than turning it into a Jeremy Kylesque lynching by a multi-culti panel and selected London metropolitan audience.

Further censoring of the BNP

John Mann Labour MP - a man so stupid that he thinks by banning Nick Griffin from the House of Commons means that suddenly the issue of this nasty business about uncontrolled immigration in the UK will quietly go away.

On LBC this morning his argument was that stopping all MEPs from entering the HoC was, wait for it, "the right thing to do" as they shouldn't be allowed subsidised tea and biscuits and stops them blocking the corridors.

Of course, when it was suggested to him that he may be making Griffin a martyr, he proceeded to let the nice touchy feely mask slip and descended into the usual rant of it was disgusting that BNP this, and BNP that and he was proud of doing this waffle waffle rant rant etc

Then a listener summed it up nicely: all the MEPs from LibLabCon will be signed in by their UK party counterparts as is normal practise and vice versa in Europe, whereas Griffin won't be.

And John Mann, you mong, saying things like:

"This stops the BNP parading round here as if they're legitimate politicians."

just shows you are more interested in your little expenses fiddling gang than having an iota of intellect and understanding the true definition of freedom of speech. Do you think Griffin (whose party IS legitimate btw) is now going to look like the underdog on Question Time this evening and will garner even more support as is typical of this nation's normal reaction to anything underdog?

You should have addressed the nation's concern about immigration immediately and then perhaps the hordes of traditional working class Labour voter that YOU lost to the BNP will return.

You utter, utter twat.

I hope you lose your seat in May next year for the sake of our country.

This is what they're really thinking

From dizzy's blog:

This was Bill Etherington MP in an interview with David Grossman on BBC Newsnight.

Etherington: "We were told we were going to be judged on what the claim was under the regulations at the time. Now, Sir Thomas Legg has decided to change that retrospectively. Retrospective legislation has a very poor record and has caused us a lot of trouble. That denudes the whole process of its legitimacy.

Grossman: "You yourself have signed Commons EDMs calling for
retrospective taxes on City bonuses.."

Etherington: "I don't think I have actually. Can you be sure of this?

Grossman: "Yes, we checked before we came out.."

Etherington: "Retrospective taxes?"

Grossman: "On City bonuses and on Centrica profits and on energy company profits.."

Etherington: "Yes, but that was me putting pressure on the Government. You know what Early Day Motions are about. None of them are ever acted upon. They are declarations of intent."

Good grief!

Although dizzy points out the ineffectiveness of the EDM (which I believe was used to try and address the controversial tax IR35), I am more concerned about the complete lack of concern of saying the much accused, and denied by them, statement of "rules only apply to the little people, not to me".

This is exactly the type of outrageous entitlement and disconnect they have with the world outside the ivory tower. They are so ingrained in this type of thinking that they don’t even bother to lie or obfuscate their words in public now.

Rather like the BBC no longer bothering to pretend to be impartial.

They simply don't get it (still)

From the BBC (on an announcement that MPs, including Gordon, will have to pay back their ill-gotten expenses):

However one Labour MP, Sir Stuart Bell, expressed concerns about the process and whether MPs will be treated fairly.

Sir Stuart said MPs must be judged by the rules that applied at the time, despite the fact that they are now seen as widely discredited.

Look, Sir Stuart of Trough and Entitlement, what you and the other 645 troughers don't understand is that we put you in government to represent us, our best interests and the best interests for our country.

Nowhere in this remit does this give you permission to put your greed first before our country. If you had an ounce of integrity, you would have pointed out the expenses system was totally corrupt, unaccountable and amounted to systemic stealing from the public's hard earned cash.

An honourable man would have exposed this travesty without fail.

As a result of this cabal of secrecy and official deniability, we can only conclude that the 646 of you are simply, without honour.

There comes a time when every person working looks at the looters that are automatically by law and a sense of entitlement, given wealth and are allowed to circumvent the law for their own gain, and decides enough is enough. You may have tried to close down as many avenues of protest and action over the years with your totalitarian outlook on restricting our freedoms using the excuses of terrorism, but the one avenue you cannot close down is the growing swell of public resentment, that is divorced from party tribalism.

History has constantly shown us in times such as these, the results are unpleasant.

And bloody.

You have been warned.

Charlie Kennedy fail

Charles Kennedy's pre-speech photo opportunity went awry. "What are you in for?" he asked the hospital patient who just declared that he'd be voting for the Lib Dems. The painful reply was "brain surgery".

h/t Toenails

The infamous Charles Hardwidge

It seems that LabourList has resurrected that American blogging icon, Charles Hardwidge again. If you ever feel like a laugh and how it's possible that someone can be quite so utterly deluded in all aspects of life, please feel free to view the blog.

Under Dolly Draper, the website was the epitome of New Labour - an example of an ignorant chancer with delusions of grandeur, trying to pretend he was the real thing. To be fair to the new editor, Alex Smith, the site is much better than Draper's bastard web-child although the content is often obtuse, reeks of naive student politics and anti-Tory rhetoric.

Still, do a search for old Charley’s comments and be prepared for a treat. Most of them consist of the following, failsafe format:

1. Liberally scatter your post with management meta-speak
2. Make a completely unrelated quote on Taoism
3. Have another hate-fuelled dig at the Tories

He does come across as one of life’s losers in perpetuam: the chap that thinks he knows it all, uber-confidence over ignorance, poor interpersonal skills, failure to understand business, talks the talk but sadly in life with his attitude, has failed to accomplish anything at all, despite his worldly wisdom that he likes to pontificate frequently.

Sadly, it appears that after his fantastic impersonation on Guido’s site (whoever that was, hat’s off to you – had me convinced for a while!) he’s now a bit touchy about people reproducing his comments – such as LabourList’s new “Comment of the day” feature and has threatened to call his lawyers .

And just to torment the poor fellow some more, the site posters are now running a sweepstake on when he will return to the site for the upcoming election next year!

Quality gold.

Boris on top form on Newsnight

Boris struggles with the Tory on-message about the Lisbon Treaty but comes out with some cracking lines, even putting Paxo on the spot asking him what his salary is. Paxo clearly found it amusing.

Another great vintage Boris interview.

BBC iPlayer

(starts 16:23)

The quandary of the Lisbon Treaty

What I don't understand is this:

If the Lisbon Treaty is still being ratified by other countries (Poland and the Czech republic) at around the time of the May election, then the Conservatives will hold a referendum for the country. Fine, but that situation will not happen.

If Poland and the Czech republic vote for the Lisbon Treaty and the deal is sealed, the Conservatives say they will have to look at this again, although in principle, they would like a referendum.

Now, what would happen if Dave Cameron said:

If the Lisbon Treaty has been ratified, then there is no legal way or us to undo it. We're stuck with it thanks to Gordon "Courage" Brown. All we can do is try and bargain some sovereignty issues similar to what the Germans have done but that's about it. If we tried to undo the Lisbon Treaty it would mean our expulsion from the EU in its entirety i.e. we would not be able to trade with one of our biggest partners, forcing us turn to the USA for help.

Stormtroopers reflect on 9/11

Nice parody from the collegehumour site