Sultan Knish: “The Perfect Government”

A well thought out, well written article – definitely worth reading the full piece.

The problem with setting out to create the perfect government is that it demands perfect people, among both government and the governed. You can turn government into a machine, but you can’t turn the people who run it or the people who live under it into machines. Most governments, even the bad ones, recognize this. A tyrant knows his limits, a progressive does not. His goal passes beyond the relative power of a tyrant, to the absolute power of a god. The tyrant seeks to dominate men. The progressive wants to recreate them.

The basic structure of government is a set of rules governing the behavior of those under its purview. For governments, the predictable is also the ideal. If you can convince most people to behave the same way, then the task of governing them is made much easier. With this shift in attitude, the predictable becomes the lawful, and the unpredictable becomes criminal. Laws no longer exist to prevent harm to others, but as sheep fences to keep everyone moving in the same direction. This marks the shift from the representative to the bureaucratic– from self-government to comprehensive government.

It is easier to oppress in the name of an idea, than in the name of a man, because there is no accompanying recognition of cruelty. Once the idea has been defined as the absolute good of mankind, then no act however cruel and merciless will appear so. Thus a private insurance company denying insurance coverage to a dying patient is perceived as behaving monstrously, while a government health insurance system doing the same thing is acting for the good of all. This is collectivist morality, the belief that the morality or immorality of an act is defined by whether its placement on the sliding scale of the collective good or the selfish individual. And collectivist morality is the moral principle of progressive government. To compromise the rights of individuals, for the needs of the many.

Relevant.

The only thing I would add is that everything he says about ‘progressives’ and ‘progressive governments’ is also true of ‘theocrats’ and ‘theocratic governments’.

Sure, the progressive uses social ideology for a dogma while the theocrat’s dogma is religious.  Still, both strive for their ideals with equal zeal, both try to perfect man to fit these ideals, both are collectivistic and oppressive in nature.

And both feel righteous while committing attrocities!

Two Englishmen arrested – for posting videos on the internet

Read it and weep!

A police spokesman said: ‘‘We have investigated a number of incidents across the internet after they were brought to our attention last year. ‘We have yet to analyse what has been seized and will then be in a better to look at what, if any, offences have been committed.’‘

 

H/T:  The Religion of Peace

Correct me if I am wrong, but the way I read this is:

  • Somebody complained about the videos these guys posted
  • the cops arrested them and took their stuff
  • only now will they try to look at the evidence to see IF a crime had been committed

Where to start…

Well, perhaps with my yesterday’s post – where, in his speech, John Robson explains the meaning of English common law and how it had been affirmed by the Magna Carta.  It looks like the proud Englishmen have turned their back on their heritage…

How corrupt has the system of common law and the liberties it is supposed to guarantee become that something a person says causes him to be arbitrarily deprived of liberty and property?

But, this is even worse…

What about the police officers – how come they are obeying this obviously illegal order?

Because arresting a person and siezing their property first, and only then trying to figure out IF there has even been a crime commited, is contrary to everything the English common law stands for!

What to do?

 

I don’t know.

Sure, we can all work to post on other people’s behalf and mirror videos and all that, but that is just trying to stick a band-aid over a severed jugular.

But, I have been giving this a lot of thought.

What we need to do, in my never-humble-opinion, is to hold each and every individual police officer criminally and civilly responsible for carrying out orders which are obviously contrary to English common law.  And not just in Joly old England, or even the whole Commonwealth:  we must do this everywhere where the heritage of English Common Law exists.

Because it is only by making individuals within ‘the system’ accountable can we affect change of the system as a whole!

No, it is not easy.

But is just may be doable.

Let’s try!

 

 

Kaffir Kanuck’s Kandahar Koffee Klub thanks you!

 

A big thank you to all who contributed (or linked) from the men and woman in Kandahar.

See Moose and Squirrel for the photo!

John Robson: We come from the Magna Carta!

“One of my little pet causes is to get a statue of Alfred the Great on Parliament Hill…”

Yes, the video is long – but well worth listening to:

 

Catherine Austin Fitts: listen and judge for yourself

Do you know the feeling you get when you hear somebody who is working from a completely different data set than you, yet who reaches the same conclusion as you have?

That is the feeling I got listening to the following interview.  It is long, but well worth listening to.

Listen and come to your own conclusions about what she says…

Remember, what some people describe as a ‘conspiracy theory’  is simply ‘effective marketing’ to others.

H/T:  Dvorak Uncensored

Pat Condell: ‘The Criminal Truth’

Government-free internet

For years, on and off, I have brrm ranting about the need to create an internet-type thing which would be outside the grasp and control of the powers that be – be they governments or large corporate interests (though, the lines between them have been so blurred lately, it is impossible to tell where one ends and the other begins).

And, no, I am not a complete conspiracy nut.

I have just ben paying attention – with all the ‘bailouts’, so many governments now have a physical stake in various corporations, it would be foolish to deny that the separation between our law-makers and the largest corporate ‘players’ has been eroding quite a lot.  To put it mildly…

That is never a good thing!

It is an especially bad thing when it comes to communications:  that is why I keep going on about the importance of free speech.  And, I also keep going on about the dual dangers to free speech:  government censorship AND corporate censorship.

Because BOTH of these are extremely dangerous to freedom of speech – and to the ability of regular, non-privileged citizens like you and I, to communicate with each other, to exchange information, to compare thoughts….

Without the ability to find out what is truly happening in the world around us – and without being able to discuss it amongst ourselves – we will be divided and powerless.

Isolated.

Easy to control…

This is well understood by those who would like to be rulers, everywhere.

That is why governments try to control media.

In the West, where people believe they have freedom of speech and where we would protest direct censorship of the media, more devious tools, like ‘political corectness’, are used to filter, distort and, yes, censor information that reaches the populace.  It is ‘censorsip by sneak’. so to speak.

It is also understood by the corporatists: hence the repression of all the freedoms we hold near and dear in, say, large areas around the spot where The Olympic Games are held, and so on.  (I have long held that the fascism inherrent in corporatism – the collusion between government-corporations-labour unions necessary to make this system function – is an incarnation of evil much worse than most others, because it pretends that it looks after ‘everyone’ and, if some person does not like it, there must be something wrong with them.  It thus oppresses both the body and the soul…)

But, I am rambling…..

Time has come for us, the ‘unwashed masses’, us, the rabble, to start taking things into our own hands.

Taking to the streets with pitchforks – except, I suspect we will be uch more effective if we can figure out an electronic equivalent to a pitchfork and take to the electronic equivalents of the streets and village squares.

First, of course, we have to build these electronic equivalents.

There are some who have started.

Please, read the following two links – they say it better than I could and are well documented and chock full of links with good info.

Both of these have come about because of what has happened in Egypt – and what could easily happen here.  (And, do not kid yourself – the groundwork has been laid for it….)

H/T: Tyr

 

‘Free Speech on Trial in Europe’

This is a must-read article from Hudson New York by Soeren Kern.

It is impossible to paste a just little excerpt here that would be representative of the whole article, because the article itself is a long, sad and, frankly, frightening list of all the anti-free-speech trials that have been taking place in Europe lately.  I recommend just popping over and reading the list – no fluff there, just the facts.

‘Freedom of Religion’ is a wonderful thing – but, to be perfectly honest, I do not see how everything one needs FOR practicing one’s religion freely and unhindered – but without infringing on the rights of others – is not already covered by some of the other ‘core freedoms’:

  • Freedom of Speech
  • Freedom of Thought
  • Freedom of Association
  • Equality before the law

It seems to me that there is nothing contained within ‘freedom of religion’ which is not already an integral part of the other ones – so, it is, in a way, a redundancy to list ‘religion’ among the core freedoms as a separate item.

Not that we should not have ‘freedom of religion – rather, that it is already implied in the others and re-stating it can not in any way be beneficial.  Rather, whenever things are redundantly re-stated, people will tend to read into them things which were never intended.

As in, it leads to abuse.

As it has, with claims of ‘religious discrimination’ by people who are merely offended by the very existence of any criticism of their religion.

Not being able to criticize something – whatever that something may be – is dangerous.

Deadly, in fact.

Because it infringes on the CORE freedoms – especially the ones I listed above:  freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of association and equality before the law.

Let’s just look at that last one:  equality before the law.

Because it is unlikely that all people will, all of a sudden, share the same beliefs and opinions.

If everyone is equal before the law, then they are all permitted to believe what they wish and speak it freely, whatever the other people may think of it.

However, if we interpret ‘freedom of religion’ to mean that saying things that are critical or disparaging of that religion – not the practitioners, mind you, but the religion itself – then we have created ‘blasphemy laws’ which put one set of beliefs above another’s criticism.

And that is NOT equality under law.

I know, I am repeating some very, very basic things. But, lately, it seems to me like more and more of us are forgetting the basics…

Like, what  ‘equality before the law’ actually means.

Unless we remember, it will be our undoing.

One Law for All events in London, UK

Just got this info from the ‘One Law for All’ folks:

HOLD THESE DATES

‘Enemies not Allies’ Seminar, 26 January 2011, 18.30 – 20.00 (Registration begins at 18.00), Conway Hall, 25 Red Lion Square, London WC1R 4RL (Holborn Tube)

Bigots and neo-Nazis feigning to campaign for rights… ‘anti-racist’ groups promoting fascism… ‘anti-war’ rallies run by supporters of terrorism and dictatorship… Enough!
The One Law for All campaign is holding a seminar to expose how important debates including on Sharia law have been hijacked by the far-Right to promote their racist agenda, and by anti-racist and anti-war groups to defend Islamism, both at the expense of people’s rights and lives. The seminar will focus on: The British National Party, the English Defence League, Stop Islamisation of Europe (also Stop Islamization of America), the Stop the War Coalition, the Respect Party, and Unite Against Fascism.
Speakers at the seminar are Adam Barnett (One Law for All), Rahila Gupta (Women’s Rights Campaigner), Marieme Helie Lucas (Secularism is a Women’s Issue), Ghaffar Hussain (Quilliam Foundation), Douglas Murray (Centre for Social Cohesion), Maryam Namazie (One Law for All), and Shiraz Maher (International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation), with John Adams (Emeritus Professor at the University of Hertfordshire) to chair.
Entry fee: £5 individuals; £10 voluntary and statutory organisations. For booking form and speaker bios visit http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/26-january-2010-seminar-london/.
International Conference on Women’s Rights, Sharia Law and Secularism, 12 March 2011, 10.00-19.00 hours, University of London Union, The Venue, Malet Street, London WC1E (Russell Square)

The one day conference to mark International Women’s Day will discuss the adverse impact of religious laws on the status of women.
Speakers include: Mina Ahadi (International Committee against Stoning), Karima Bennoune (Law Professor), Helle Merete Brix (Journalist), Nadia Geerts (Writer), Hammeda Hossain (South Asians for Human Rights), Monica Lanfranco (Journalist), Anne-marie Lizin (Honorary Speaker of Belgian Senate), Maryam Namazie (One Law for All and Iran Solidarity), Taslima Nasreen (Writer), Yasmin Rehman (Women’s Rights Activist), Nina Sankari (European Feminist Initiative Poland), Sohaila Sharifi (Equal Rights Now), Bahram Soroush (Civil Rights Activist), Daniel Salvatore Schiffer (Philosopher), Annie Sugier (la ligue du Droit International des Femmes), Anne Marie Waters (One Law for All), Linda Weil-Curiel (Lawyer), and Stasa Zajovic (Belgrade Women in Black).
Entry fee: £10 individuals; £3 unwaged and students. For booking form and speaker bios visit http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/12-march-2010-international-conference-on-women%e2%80%99s-rights-sharia-law-and-secularism-london/. The event is sponsored by the International Committee against Stoning, Iran Solidarity, Equal Rights Now and One Law for All.
Event against Stoning, 9 July 2011, 14.00-17.30 hours, University of London Union, The Venue, Malet Street, London WC1E (Russell Square)

The Event against Stoning marks International Day against Stoning and will include a film screening of The Stoning of Soraya M followed by a panel discussion including with film director Cyrus Nowrasteh and campaigners Mina Ahadi and Maryam Namazie. The event will be dedicated to Sakineh Mohammadi Ashtiani.
Entry fee: £10 individuals; £3 unwaged and students. For more information visit: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/9-july-2011-event-against-stoning-london/. The event is sponsored by the International Committee against Stoning, Iran Solidarity, Equal Rights Now and One Law for All.
Save your place now

To register for the above events, send a completed booking form along with a cheque made payable to One Law for All to BM Box 2387, London WC1N 3XX, UK or pay via Paypal at: http://www.onelawforall.org.uk/donate/. Donations are also welcome.
For more information, contact:
Maryam Namazie
Spokesperson
One Law for All
BM Box 2387
London WC1N 3XX

Pat Condell: ‘American Islamophobia’

In case you don’t know what Pat Condell means when he says that our fear of Islamists in NOT irrational, please, listen to the following video:

 

If only the guy in the second video were the only lunatic who advocates violence in the name of Islam, if only he were not the only one advocating to replace secular law and order with Sharia, then, perhaps, fearing his message could potentially be called a phobia.

Unfortunately, he is not!

And there are Muslims who fear lunatics like this – with good reason.  Religious extremists always attack the moderates within their own movement first, to better cow the rest and assure their own control over their co-religionists.

And, since the Islamists think that the only consequences of their actions will be rewards in heaven, they are not easy to dismiss.

So, exactly how many ‘hate-crimes’ against Muslims are occurring in the US, to require CAIR to fight this wave of Islamophobia?

Well, in the State of New York, in 2008 there were 8.  In 2009, there were 11.

Which makes for about 1.6 % of the incidents.

Now, don’t get me wrong – there is no excuse for violent crime, whatever its motivation may be.

But those 11 incidents of attacks on Muslims for their Muslimness seems fewer than the number of attacks by Muslims on others for their non-Muslimness…

About

H/T: Gates of Vienna