Michael Jackson - Dead?

The King of Pop has died, but his Legend lives on! Like millions of other people around the world I have been fervently searching the web for news relating to Michael Jackson. In doing so I have also been on YouTube looking at classic clips of the musical genius during what appeared to be happier times. Here is one of my favourites, which was his first live television performance, during the Motown 25th Anniversary show.





L.A. Times now saying he is dead.

TMZ.com reporting Michael Jackson died from cardiac arrest.

Obamanomics - wealth distribution

As the USA spirals into the abyss of socialism its interesting to see the people who are now speaking out against it. In the clip below FOX's very own Bill O'reilly is arguing the side of civil liberties and laissez-faire economics. This is the same O'reilly who vehemently supported G.W Bush junior, a president who increased the government's size beyond imagination. What O'reilly needs to get through that dense head of his is that the USA has been on the road to socialism for a very long time; Obama, as the Americans would say, has just stepped on the gas. Watch the clip below kids as you get to see this hypocrisy and also a real life socialist defending government theft and social engineering.

Judge and no jury

The justice system has managed to rid itself of that pesky thing called the jury. The BBC reports that the top judge, 'Lord Chief Justice' aka. the bloke in the dress and wig has ruled that its ok for a trial to go ahead without a jury.

I do understand the arguement that it would be costly or time consuming, and jurors often not the best qualified people to make sense of complicated evidence, but if you remove that fundemental pillar of the judicial system then why have a judicial system at all?

One of the main reasons why having a judge ruling on a case without a jury to keep them in check is that the judge is just a glorified government bureaucrat. Afterall he is on the payroll of the government, so he utimately answers to them. Another reason is that the jury can exercise the right to question the law itself, which is known as jury nullification. There has been periods in history where jury nullification has set a precedent for the law itself to be changed, e.g. like slavery. Its another weapon the citizen has which has been snatched from their grip.

Taser Quest

Hey the boys in blue, i.e. the police force, have a new toy and they are itching to try it out! Nottingham got an upclose look at what their taxes get spent on, and weren't they impressed!



Not to be outdone here is an example of recent taser action from the good old US of A. This time the prey was a 72 year old grandmother - wow whee!

Voting nightmare

This post again is a bit late. Thankfully I have more to occupy my time than worrying about the mess this Government is in.

As I have stated before I have come to the realisation that voting does not achieve real political change in the sense that the system is so corrupt what use would it be to change the individuals in control? This caused a dilemma for me as on the one hand I wanted to send out a message to the man and let him know, whoever he is, that i am bloody angry! So, for a while I convinced myself that using a tactical vote for UKIP would make the mainstream political parties sit up and take notice (yeah right!). This same dilemma I would imagine manifested in the minds of otherwise sane people, who voted for the BNP. Being someone who would not be welcome at a BNP meeting, I could not possibly vote for them, masochism does not appeal to me. Lately I have been telling people that voting for the BNP when you otherwise would have voted for the main political parties is kind of like having an itch on your finger, but then thinking what the hell I am going to cut the whole arm off. I honestly believe that the majority of people who voted BNP are not racist bigots they are just disillusioned. These are people that let fear and uncertainty cloud the better part of their judgement and Nick Griffin and Co were more than willing to provide the smoke and mirrors.

On the BBC site there is an interesting article with lots of peoples comments on why they voted BNP and they seem to be citing the same things over again, e.g. mass immigration of criminals; welfare scroungers; wasting money abroad (wars) and pushing of minority rights etc. What these people don't realise is that all of these things are problems caused by the system. We have entered into immigration agreements within the EU. The EU dictates to us who and how many migrants we have to accept into the country. Welfare on the other hand is a self-inflicted wound. The problem with welfare is the concept of 'welfare'. Once it is removed the incentive to come here and scrounge disappears. I don't want to fund the indigenous scroungers let alone imported ones. Minority rights are a contentious issue. I disagree with the concept that minority groups should have special rights, as I believe only individuals can have rights and not groups. I don't see a problem with everyone having the same rights, and I can see how people would get angry if they thought one group was being favoured over another. However, as I have outlined this is a problem created by the system not by the minority groups. I wonder whether the BNP if they were to get control over the country would bring everyone's rights to parity, i.e. level the playing field, or would they also favour one group over another. Let me be honest I don't care about ethnicity or nationality. I want the best doctors, plumbers, builders etc not someone who is british for the sake of it. Let us also not sugar cote anything, when Nick Griffin says British he means white, even if he tells the public otherwise.

I began by saying I was going to vote UKIP but as you can probably guess I didn't go through with it. I couldn't bring myself to vote for anyone. after all nobody represents me on every issue except me!. This is the problem with democracy, and the concept of 'popular government'. Can we honestly say that the BNP are representational of the Black, Asian communities where the BNP were elected? The ridiculous thing was that 62% of the population didn't vote. Can we still say majority rules?

Double Speak - reframing conversations

When talking with people I have noticed that many of the disagreements or misunderstandings emerge due to different definitions of words. Now this is quite an important thing, because if two people have opposing understandings of the meaning of a word then how can they communicate? So, below is a short list of a few words and how I interpret their meaning, but you may disagree. The words are examples of the stumbling blocks that will definitely trip you up if you ever want to persuade someone to the principles of freedom and liberty.

government = force

Anti-government = pro freedom

anarchy = voluntarism

taxation, welfare, benefits = stealing / slavery

democracy = mob rule

citizen / social contract = B.S

public services / nationalisation = protectionism / monopolisation