Citizenship and the EU

You know, I often find myself wondering about this. I've said before that as soon as I'm eligible I will apply for Canadian Citizenship, and this remains my intent. The question being; do I wish to remain a citizen of the UK, and thus a citizen of Europe? Will I want to maintain dual citizenship status? While I don't, and have never really minded the notion of being a citizen of Europe, I don't like the way a closed circle of unaccountable politicians and bureaucrats are taking it.

When a torrent of micro managing regulation goes onto the statute books without so much as a bye, leave, or thank you. Then I don't want to be a citizen of the EU. If legislation can be cut and pasted from directives originating from within the undemocratic cancer that is the EU Commission without so much as a sneeze from the elected body. Then I don't want to be a part of the European Union. When I watch the insane debt bubble looming over the countries that are part of the Euro, then I think I'd be better off not being a citizen of the EU.

Don't get me wrong, I love Europe. All of it. I love most of the places, and most of the people I've met on my travels. Germany, Italy, France, Spain, Netherlands, Luxemburg, and yes, even Belgium. I'm sure a lot of Germans, Italians, French, Spanish, Dutch, Luxemburgers and Belgians feel exactly the same way.

There are things that are done far better in Europe than the English do. The TGV's (Ironically, many engine and coach units built by British Manufacturers) that zip across France and Spain. Much more comfortable than flying. European Motorways, and I have many fond memories of French N and D routes. Airports.

My head is crammed with delightful European memories like the almost overpowering liquorice tinged smell of Basil on the road from Florence to Genoa. The dusty glory of a Tuscan summer. Champagne cellar tours in Rheims, the dazzling brilliance of the Mont Blanc glacier on a sunny day. The dusty expanse of the Saarland and Rhine Valley in midsummer. Little family roadside restaurants off the beaten track. People who readily forgave my poor language skills, but didn't mind so long as I made some effort (However awkward) to speak their language.

The sheer weight of european history and culture is tremendous and never less than impressive. Yet all that is good in Europe is slowly dying of bureaucratic poisoning. A stolid, boneheaded, ignorant top down political delusion that assumes one code of law will do for all. If it were general law, like don't steal or don't cheat, I'd be all for it, but what bugs me is the increasing micro management foisted upon the majority by vocal lobby groups. Chair polishing time wasters passing law after law without any real thought for the consequences. A system of governance that reduces the rights of the individual to whatever largesse an overweening state can be bothered to hand out. With every new piece of legislation the system becomes ever more inflexible.

To compare; in general terms of materials science, the stiffer a substance becomes, which mostly mean becoming more tightly grained, the more fragile and prone to shattering it becomes. So it is with law. The more constricting and inflexible law becomes, an increasing number of people keep will slamming into it until a social critical mass is reached, and something has to give. At that point either the edifice collapses under it's own internal pressure, or enough people get together to form a hammer. As is happening right now throughout the Middle East at present where tired, inflexible regimes are cracking under the strain. The EU are interfering because that's where most of their oil comes from. Yet their interference is actually making things worse.

For example; outside intervention is giving Gaddaffi's main power base, his alliance of tribes something to rally against. Where he might have slunk off to Venezuela with a couple of billion in unmarked bills in times past, that door has been shut to him. With no exit strategy he has to fight. More Libyans will die because of it. All because of short sighted, posturing EU intervention. I do not support this, nor do I agree with what is happening within the EU. Not too chuffed about Canada being dragged in, but that's NATO for you.

There is no course of remedial democratic action open to me. My UK MP is a buffoonish rubber stamp who does not care about his constituents views. My UK MEP is so remote and unaccountable that they might as well be located out in Lunar Orbit. Therefore I do not want to be a citizen of an enlarged EU.

At some time in the next three years I'm going to have to make a decision about citizenship. If, once a full citizen of Canada I renounce my citizenship of the UK, and thus Europe, if I get stuck in Europe for any legal reason I will always have the option of deportation back to my new home. Yet if I have dual citizenship, that choice might not be so readily open to me, and any protections I might have as a Canadian citizen might be somewhat diluted.

The Canadians look after their citizens, you see. The tacit constitutional contract between state and individual is largely intact over here. You have to really want citizenship, and therefore it's not an easy road to travel. That is where its value lies.

Upon sober reflection I think I'll have to plot this one through carefully. It has been said that those who wish to give up citizenship of the UK should undergo a psychiatric evaluation. But what is insane about wanting to renounce a country that has changed the terms and conditions of citizenship without consultation, leaves sizeable tranches of its populace effectively disenfranchised, where people can be imprisoned without trial, their families dismantled, yet has the effrontery to describe itself as 'democratic?'

From where I stand at present, with no other door open to me, the renunciation of everything I was brought up to believe in may be the most potent protest I can lodge.

When is a volunteer not.....

What is a Volunteer'? I'd always thought it was someone who gives up some of their time to good causes instead of vegetating in front of the idiot box. Voluntary work is what I do on average for eight hours unpaid each week, sometimes as much as twelve or fourteen. For the accepted usage of the term, see the definition below, which is derived from several sources.

vol·un·teer   
[vol-uhn-teer]
–noun

1. A person who voluntarily offers himself or herself for a service or undertaking.
2. A person who performs a service willingly and without pay.
3. Military . a person who enters the service voluntarily rather than through conscription or draft, especially for special or temporary service rather than as a member of the regular or permanent army.

Derivation;

obsolete French 'voluntaire' (now volontaire), from voluntaire, adjective, voluntary, from Old French, from Latin 'voluntarius' (Adjective; willing)
First Known Use: circa 1600

Now nowhere in that lot does the phrase "Made redundant then asked to come back by your ex-employers to do your old job for zip."

Someone needs to send the UK Cameroonies and their 'big society' a dictionary. Dozy lot.

The evil of PAF C23

Back in the bad old days of slavery in the United States, there was a thing called the 'Underground railroad' which spirited escaped slaves over the border into the anti-slavery (Abolished in 1834) British run Province of Canada amongst other places. Many into Ontario, although a number of notable families who can trace their lineage back to those days ended up in BC to make their mark in a free (ish) country.

The 'railroad' hit its peak during the US Civil War years with estimates of up to 100,000 freed slaves being bandied about, although sources indicate that the successful number is closer to 30,000, or even as low as 6,000. Considering the network of safe houses was mostly informal, the lowest figure seems the most likely.

The reason I bring this up is the continuing furore about 'secret courts' and forced adoptions in the UK, the most high profile of which is the recently leaked case of Vicky Haigh, which may only be the tip of a very large and polluted iceberg. From what I can see, various UK Social Service departments have been operating against basic human rights laws, and the Police have been complicit. Although in their defence I'd say that the Police are fed a line, and are bound to comply with the demands of Social Services. All Social Services have to do is make an allegation, and the blind juggernaut of Police and Courts rumbles into action.

The heart of the problem lies with PAF C23, which sets out 'targets' for adoptions and care orders. At this point I blink heavily and suppress the need to go "WTF?" How can you set targets for Social Service driven adoptions like a commercial sales operation? What complete fucking genius came up with that crazy idea? What affectioned time pleaser first mooted Key Performance Indicators for adoption? Which sectionable bunch of cretins put it into action? Who insist that the practice continues? Ofsted, that's who. I discussed the matter this morning with Mrs S, who opined that giving Social Workers 'adoption targets' was a licence for corruption. To quote from the UK Parliament early day motion;

Ofsted continues to put pressure on local authorities to increase the number of adoptions; recognises that the only significant way in which this can be done is to increase the adoptions of babies and toddlers

Such is the motivation for stealing unweaned children from their parents almost literally at birth. One of the cited reasons for such evil is an unverifiable 'risk of emotional abuse'. Now being a parent, I know that low level 'emotional abuse' is pretty much a two way street in any family. I've been on the receiving end, and tried very hard not to pay back in kind (Not always possible). And it's a pretty flimsy excuse for such a draconian measure.

There's also the accusation that certain people are using the Foster Care system as a regular source of income. At twenty thousand pounds a year per child, all you've got to do is foster two or three and it's easy street, at least financially speaking. Decline the unruly teens (Who the unscrupulous would just dump back into the 'care' system) and go for the toddlers. Three children, and you can live quite comfortably. Mrs S and I brought our two up on a net income of almost half that. We never starved.

Some families under threat of such child theft leave the UK and often flounder in new circumstances. Others, like Miss Haigh, have a wide circle of friends and associates overseas who have perhaps assisted her with tips about where to find accommodation, shielding her identity / location from officialdom where necessary. Others may seek practical assistance from Ian Josephs 'Forced adoption' website. Although I think Ian could do with a little assistance in creating a more user friendly site. Too many words Ian. It needs restructuring into something a little more practical and user friendly.

Here in Canada, we are still recovering from the scandal of 'Residential schools' where First Nations children were taken to Borstal like establishments to be 'educated'. The fallout is still making money for various ambulance chasing lawyers, who up until 2009 had big billboards up on Highway 19 north of town with wording like "Victim of Residential School system?" The scandal has cost the Canadian Taxpayer not far short of a billion dollars;

Total Compensation as of March 01, 2011: CAD$960,247,668

Taken from the original source here. When the scandal finally breaks (As break it must, injunctions or no) in the UK, guess who will be picking up the tab? Got it in one - Taxpayers

Perhaps the powers that be should recognise that, like with slavery, people (Even small and helpless ones) are not property.

Although I won't be holding my breath for that penny to drop.

Cross posted at Orphans of Liberty. Or rather not.

Every screen grab tells a story

Over 2 to one against. 'Nuff said.

UK Referendum results

Official UK referendum results will be found on this web page, here. The results should start coming up at 4pm UK time, that's 8am Pacific Standard time. So I shall have a leisurely breakfast and watch the fallout from the Wet Coast of Canada, as my shift doesn't start until 10am local time tomorrow.

As for the local stuff and by elections, the Tellytubbygraph have a nice little map thingy which is already showing some results. There's also a page for the Scottish elections, here and the Welsh elections here.

Pundits are predicting a caning for the Lib Dems. Scottish safe seats are trembling in the face of a possible SNP majority. The fat lady hasn't sung yet, but hearken! Are those vocal scales I can hear being practised from the backstage dressing room?

Oooooh dear.

Alternative vote

After the recent Canadian Federal General Election, I was surprised to find out that the Alternative Vote system of election has been tried and discarded in British Columbia, Canada. In the early 1950's no less. Back in the UK, the Alternative Vote system is being touted as a 'fairer' system of apportioning the popular mandate, but is it really?

Taking the 1953 BC election as a yardstick, where AV was the voting system. This being a real world example of the practice in action, not theory or modelling, but real live, in your face numbers.

In 1953 the victorious Social Credit party started out at the first count with just under 38% of the total vote, which increased to just under 46% of the vote after 'adjustment'. The smaller parties who were knocked out after the first count had their votes allocated to the winning party, not spread amongst the others. See Wikipedia entry here. Er, hold the phone. So how is that 'fairer' than the first past the post system? Explain it to me. By that I mean explain it without any flim-flam, in words an ordinary voter can understand. Especially when we're voting for a specific person to represent us, not merely their party.

The words say 'fairer', but the numbers add up to something else. As far as AV is concerned, I'm not convinced. Needs more thought.

Cross posted at Orphans of Liberty.

Good grief

Have been asked to send the odd expatriate piece to the brand new group blog 'Orphans of Liberty'. Frankly I'm surprised they wanted an ex-enforcement officer and sometime 'agent of oppression' on the site, but there you go. However, I'm all better now, and my days of confronting the inconsiderate are almost four years in my past, which is slightly longer than I spent in that wretched job.

I see there is a lot of whining about the UK Police arresting known troublemakers to stop them getting in the way of last Fridays public celebrations. Oddly enough for someone of a (mildly) libertarian bent, I'm with Julia M on this. Julia posted that it was okay to keep known agitators away from the pomp and circumstance. I agree. That day was for the people who love and revere the Royal Family to express their devotion, not to have the day marred by some self aggrandising eejit haranguing them, lying down in front of Royal Coaches, and any other bit of childish attention grabbing mischief said self aggrandising eejits could generate.

If you don't like a party, that's fine, don't go. What is most definitely not fine is to spoil it for others. That's like stomping petty jackboots along a table laid out for a kids street party, kicking the jelly and sandwiches to the ground because their laughter annoys you. Liberty is right and good, but the line is most definitely crossed to oppression when you intend to interfere in the happiness of others.

As far as the celebrations were concerned, I'm an ex-monarchist. However, this does not entitle me to disrupt proceedings, no matter how strongly I feel that the terms of my UK citizenship have been altered without my consent. The old ways will decline and fade without my intervention. I will make my destiny elsewhere. That, after all, is what I left the UK to do.

As for the Alternate vote thing; hey, how come people in the UK get to vote on the voting system, and not on the greater issue of whether they want to be part of a European superstate? The only vote on the matter was back in the 70's, and that was for an entirely different beast.

Regarding AV, over here in Canada the briefly adopted Alternate Voting system was ditched after one election, and a Single Transferable Voting system proposed. Although we've still got first past the post as the 2005 referendum to adopt STV missed it's mark by 3%.

A day of modestly good news...ah

Having had the experiences with UK Social Services that I have, I'm heartened by the dropping of the planned Child database. Anything that gives these people, a number of whom have some very strange ideas indeed in my personal experience, less power can only be an improvement. The current scandal over the SS trying to seize the unborn child of Trainer and ex-Jockey Vicky Haigh has been quite alarming. Surely that sort of measure should only be applied if a child is in genuine danger, not just because Ms Haigh had a stand up row with her ex at a petrol station. A more sensible decision would have been to drag both parties before the beak and tell them to stay clear if they couldn't stand the sight of each other. Mind you, in my experience, UK Social Services don't always (some never) do sensible. My reflexive response to the statement "I'm a social worker" is generally to nod, smile, and look for the nearest exit without telling them my name.

On a more cheerful note, recent family discussions about the near to medium term, and what the next generation is going to get up to have all centred around Vancouver and the west coast. Youngest is talking about getting Canadian experience for six month after she's graduated to see if she likes it, as is Eldest. However, as a parent, one should always be aware that these are merely discussions. Although preparing contingency plans in case they both decide to turn up on the same day may be a good idea.

There's even more work than of late, so blogging has had to take a back seat. I just don't have the time to do everything.

The bagging of Bin Laden should come as good news to all sides of the religious divide. That is, if the news of his death is not an exaggeration, and not like the famous Nizam of Hydrabad, who was allegedly feeling 'much better' after his widely reported demise. Ironically, Bin Laden's boys have to date reportedly killed more Muslims than any other religious grouping. Funny that, seeing as they apparently want to 'defend Islam' against all us wicked 'Crusaders'. Not that I'm a 'Crusader' myself, my antecedents were all peasant and Yeoman farmers to a man (And woman). None of us C of E, either. As a historical note, most 'Crusaders' were the Templars and Hospitallers, who were driven from the Jerusalem area by the 1300's. Later on these groups were denounced as heretics, murdered and their fortunes plundered by the European Church and Nobles of the time. So the 'crusader' thing is a bit of a reach really.

Just as an observation, without Bin Laden and his cohorts ramming of Airliners into the World Trade Center, we might have been spared a couple of wars. So I for one am not sorry he's been slabbed. In a corner of Hell the fires will be burning a merry little glow of welcoming. The only trouble is, that he's probably inspired a lot more of the suicidal fruitcake fraternity to keep the pointless slaughter going for a while. The cell structure of Al Qaeda will remain without its figurehead, and many more will die for one man's vanity.

Oh well, what the hell, it's Canadian Federal Election day tomorrow, so I shall watch the results come in online, and although I can't vote yet, our local incumbent has my best wishes. She's a good constituency MP, and that buys my vote every time, even if I don't totally agree with her Party's policies.

Maastricht and Lisbon

A small penny dropped this afternoon. Perhaps it's just me being thick and getting the joke long after the punchline, but the thought occurs that both the Treaty of Maastricht and the Treaty of Lisbon were signed and ratified by UK Prime Ministers who had taken over from the previous incumbent without a general election to give them a proper mandate.

Major who took over from Thatcher signed the Maasstricht treaty.

Brown who had his Buggins turn after Blair signed the Lisbon treaty.

Gentlemen (and of course non male gentlefolk) draw your conclusions. Could both treaties be invalidated on these grounds? Probably not, but we can wish. can't we?

Biggest joke is Soros trying to shoehorn Brown into the top IMF job. I think Soros must want the IMF to collapse. Because such an event is certain with such a complete fiscal idiot as Brown at the helm. Or has Soros lost so big on the flatlining Carbon futures market that he's desperate to make money some other way? Mm-hm.

Whither Democracy?

I'm currently ploughing my way through the writings of Tom Paine (The 18th century Radical - not this guy), and one thing strikes me; one of the problems with democracy is voters. The people who will support a particular party no matter what, or people who have insufficient reading skills to understand the issues. Those who vote for a specific candidate because they're told who to vote for. They all warp the process.

Paine appeared to believe in Rousseau's postulate of the 'Noble savage', and advocated the extension of voting to everyone over a given age. Which is where the major problem with Democracy lies. We humans aren't all equal. As I have probably posted before, only 15% of a given human population can be described as fully self aware all the time, and thus cognisant of the effects of their choices. Most people aren't. We do things like substitute behaviour response loops or opinions for thought, and often can't tell the difference. Democracy needs people capable of thinking clearly to work effectively.

Longrider had a bitch about a silly Grauniad posted proposal to give two votes to pregnant women, and I'm inclined to agree. So I posted the following comment;

I’m increasingly of the opinion that the franchise should only be extended to those who can pass a voter comprehension test. Say a simple paragraph and ten related questions, in English (Or the host language of your country), to be completed when you turn up to vote. You pass, your vote counts. You don’t, it doesn’t. Simple.

This way the opportunity to vote could be safely offered to 16 year olds who have sufficient comprehension skills to understand some of the issues.

Or of course be 'bovvered' to turn up to vote. This way those who want the franchise and are capable of participating can do so. Such a scheme may result in fewer votes actually counting, but there are advantages to that, too.

Points of law

You poor buggers back in the UK may have some cause for a little sigh of relief. The heinous Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, which gave people who should never have that kind of power; to wit, local authorities and social services, the right to snoop into your deepest areas of privacy without requiring any form of justification or evidence. Often for the pettiest of matters. As could have been predicted by a two year old, said powers have been abused. This article from Pinsent Masons Out-Law site brinks a chink of light.

A home office reform is coming which will require permission for such intrusions in the form of a warrant, presumably sworn out before a Judge or Magistrate. Failure to comply will mean up to a fifty thousand quid fine from a body known as the Interception of Communications Commissioner. This will also apply to Telecomms firms. So read those End User Licence Agreements carefully for little snippets about 'gathering data' and other such innocuous phrases which will effectively allow a service provider with a licence to eavesdrop. Although it is worth noting that RIPA allows Telecomms providers to snoop for purposes connected with providing or operating their service, or 'enforcement', which presumably means making sure no one uses their services without stumping up for same. The permission under RIPA to retain your personal details / activity presumably remains unchanged.

While the 'requiring permission' move is a positive step, I'm still of the opinion that RIPA was a typically poorly thought through piece of New Labour legislation which should be axed. That and the Civil Contingencies act, where a UK Government can suspend elections for unspecified periods. Both are, as I have repeatedly blogged, evil and unnecessarily repressive pieces of legislation wide open to abuse.

The row over Super-Injunctions rolls on with a 'for the cheeldren' justification. Although I think that matters before a court should automatically require a ban on mainstream reporting until the case is over with anonymity for Defendant, Victim, and Witnesses. Jurors of course are bound to keep schtum, and rightly face prosecution if they don't. In the case of Parliament, as Parliament forms part of the regulatory mechanism, debate on an issue which would normally be considered Sub Judice should be allowed as a form of oversight. Such a principle, applied with no exemptions might be better than the current mess, where defendants can be stopped from contacting their MP or even mentioning that they are subject to an injunction. You can't tell me that's right.

A third issue, to do with the panic stricken flight cancellations due to last years Mt Unpronounceable eruption, means that even if the powers that be decide to cancel all flights as a wholly unnecessary precautionary measure, the cancellation clause in your travel insurance may not apply. So, no test case. So, even when the 'risk' is an over reaction, there's no redress? Hardly worth stumping up for the extra cover is it?

Sunday summary

Living where and as I do, I've decided to take a far more relaxed attitude to the scaremongers and puritans of this life. In similar vein, comedian Robin Williams had useful advice for young women in danger of being involuntarily deflowered; "Point and laugh." Although kicking purveyor of unwanted affection in the family jewels, then running like hell might be a good addendum to this concept. Pain, as is often observed, is a great teacher.

In the UK, Camerons clowns continue to throw taxpayer dollar at gruesome 'green' policies while indulging in swingeing defence cuts. Then they undertake yet another grandstanding military mission in foreign lands. Why not just cut the green subsidies altogether and not have to sack members of the armed forces (on active duty, via e-mail - WTF!). Jeez, some people just cannot wake up and smell the coffee.

Facebook 'reminders' on a profile I asked to be deleted many moons ago are still ending up in my spam filter. It seems that their espoused 'ethics' of freedom of expression are as wafer thin as their ability to delete profiles when requested. Especially when the Facebook pages of those espousing an overtly sceptical bent have been suffering censorship. Porn is one thing. Dissenting opinion another. All together now; point at Facebook, and in hissing tones, shout "Hypocrites!"

Over at the doughty Inspector Gadget blog the saga of how Diversity Coordination appears to be more important than core function continues. This appears to be a local authority infection, raging unchecked. A massive injection of P45's into the upper echelons and affected areas appears to be the only possible cure. Immediate high amputation may result should symptoms persist, Failing that, the demise of the entire organism.

The Netherlands US and UK intend to take legal action against the Icelanders regarding their bank collapse. The Icelanders decision not to sell future generations into tax servitude, and who the money is owed to comes under the magnifying glass (via Old Holborn) here.

All the time, those in power try to cover their arses (and their larcenous tracks) by inserting get out of jail clauses (Via the Ranting Penguin) for MP's into fraud legislation. Hang on a minute, doesn't that directly impact on the law's impartiality? Effectively creating an unaccountable ruling political class? That's very brave of them. Especially considering how similar regimes always seem to end up.

Ah well. Time for coffee.

Arrangements made.

After a full day spent making arrangements, booking flights, cars, hotels, relatives back bedrooms and sundry divers means of transportation, Mrs S and I are lighter in pocket but easier of mind. Well, at least she is. I'm just the designated driver on this particular mission.

We will be arriving in the UK this Summer for a brief familial sojourn attempting to studiously ignore every negative, while spinning the positive. I do not intend visiting any of my old stamping grounds, apart from a side trip to visit parent and pick up a passenger, and will be looking for such diversions in the way of lounging around, either in a pool, sauna, or with a book, avoiding watching Television, and not giving the proverbial tinkers cuss about anything but the specific task in front of me. Fortunately, every hotel we are booked into have pools and saunas. My swimming shorts will be packed.

Will be spending as little time as possible in shopping areas. Will drive at or slightly below the posted speed limit. Will avoid contact with anyone in a uniform or having even the vaguest whiff of officialdom about them. Will give Charity Muggers a brief withering look of contempt before ignoring their protestations and going about my own business. Of course there will be the tedious ministrations of Airport Security, but as I intend carrying nothing but my duty free allowance across the various borders I must cross, they will have no cause to give me grief. I may be caught pointing and laughing at the odd Windmill, and privately marvel at the delusion that caused its consideration as a means of effective electrical generation. I will probalby gasp briefly in amazement at the cost of living in the UK. I may be heard softly sighing with relief as the plane taking me home to Canada exits UK airspace.

At various junctures I may snore pointedly, at which point Mrs S will stick an elbow in my ribs. The die is cast, the money spent, and I have my own thoughts about what will please me.

Very well then...

Howls of derisive laughter about the Cleggeron saying that because of fears highlighted over the problems at the Japanese Fukushima Nuclear power plant, more modern nuclear power stations will possibly not be built in Britain. Oh my giddy aunt! Where do my ex-compatriots find these people?

Is Britain on a the edge of a major subduction zone like Japan? No.

Does Britain need more generating capacity over the next five to ten years? Yes.

Can Britains current power needs be met solely by 'renewables' like wind or solar, or will they ever be? No.

Very well, you'll freeze.

As elder sibling reminds me every time we talk - "The lunatics are in charge of the Asylum." I cannot but help but agree.

Cartoon adapted from the famous original by Low.

The next Tolpuddle Martyrs

Back in the real bad old days before protective associations and Trades Unions were allowed to exist. A bunch of 19th Century agricultural labourers in Dorset, so ticked off with their treatment, formed a 'Friendly society', refusing to work for less than a set rate. The leading members of this association were James Brine, James Hammett, George Loveless, James Loveless, Thomas Standfield, and John Standfield. For their 'crime' of standing up for themselves, they were arrested and sentenced to Transportation in 1832. Their trial and sentences were essentially a warping of the law to serve a vested interest, seeing as the legislation forbidding such associations was repealed in 1825 (But what's really new about that, eh?).

History has a tendency to repeat itself in slightly different ways, because the mistakes made have a tendency to be forgotten by those who consider themselves to be in authority. In like fashion I see this 'Lawful rebellion' thing sizing up to be the basis of a similar movement. Of course the Martyrs were only one of many such groups looking to protect themselves from overweening authority, but they put their checkmark in the History box before all others.

In similar fashion, Ranty and his growing band of like minded people are busy using the legal system to fight everything from excessive council tax bills to a parking ticket. Facing arrest, Bankruptcy and other serried consequences, they have picked up the mostly quenched torch of liberty and blown on its embers. I foresee their actions making great changes sometime in the future. So long as they stay on topic and don't alienate people by wittering on about stuff better left in the X-Files.

However, I make this one caveat. It took generations before the Martyrs actions brought about a better life for their heirs and successors. Their beginnings changed the socio economic landscape between employer and employee, master and servant. In some ways for the better. In others, their nascent movement was hijacked by those with a more sinister, destructive political agenda.

To conclude; There is a paradigm shift beginning. Away from the inefficient, incompetent collectivist ideals of the 19th and 20th centuries, perhaps towards a more 'people centric' future where grass roots movements hold the balance of power. I'm not sure where the 'lawful rebellion' movement is going to end up, but I have the distinct feeling that a smart young politician who hitches his coat tails to this particular comet will go far.

Hyper and Super Injunctions?

What sort of legal process is at work here? Picked up at Anna Racoons, this nasty little snippet, where legal injunctions have been granted that not only forbid the injunctee from mentioning it, but also forbid them from asking their Member of Parliament for help? Even to the point where a threat has been made to take the injunctee's children into 'care' if the injunction is breached. Isn't such a threat in itself illegal, no matter who makes it? Not only under the old Common law statue, but also under European Human Rights Law?

It's only over the past few years that we've heard about 'Super' injunctions which forbid mention in the Mainstream (Mostly to do with where idiot footballers are reputed to have parked their willies). Yet forbidding mention in the Houses of Parliament? Is that legal? Surely such an injunction would be a clear breach of Parliamentary Privilege, as we are led to understand it.

This speech by John Hemming MP is most enlightening. Clearly there are some UK 'Limp Dems', who are less limp than others.

Popcorn ready. Another one to watch.

Boris gets it

There is no rhyme or reason to an earthquake, and we should for once abandon our infantile delusion that we are the cause and maker of everything.

Doesn't happen often, but when a politician gets it (almost) right, they should have it pointed out and applauded.

Likewise:

We now know that the work done at Climatic Research Unit barely qualified as science; they kept it secret to stop other scientists checking it; thus breaching one of the foundations of the scientific method.

Graham Stringer, MP for Bolton & Blackley.

H/T Bishop Hill for the Manchester Confidential piece.

A very English revolution

Seen last night via EU referendum, but I was too tired to comment on: The real English rebellion begins. Albeit a 'lawful' one. 'Arresting' a judge for not confirming that he was 'serving under his oath of office'? What a super wheeze.

I've been getting a lot of traffic from the good Captains site for some time because we share some common ground, ideologically speaking.

Essentially the Captain and his mates are as ticked off as a lot of ex-pats like me (Or should I call myself a refugee?) with the UK political antics of the last twenty years. Yet they have decided to act, and I wish them well. Although my natural cynic looks sidelong at things like the evil civil contingencies act, and the repression it could be used for. Though Ranty and friends are in a state of 'Lawful (not legal) rebellion', the legitimacy of their protest under law may be considered a mere administrative detail when the live ammo is handed out.

Notwithstanding, my own understanding of the state of 'Lawful rebellion' is this; Your sovereign and government repeatedly ignore you, and overturn the law to their own advantage. They perform acts of effective treason against their legal offices; ignore sworn oaths, sign over sovereignty, that sort of thing. Which leaves the dissenting subject one of four options; leave, knuckle under, open revolt, or the more obscure state of 'lawful rebel'.

To become a lawful rebel, there is an old, I think medieval, provision within the law saying that a subject may in protest transfer their alleigence to a 'committee of barons' by serving three affidavits properly witnessed and served. The rest is knowing the difference between a 'law' and a 'statute'. Laws must be observed, but as a 'lawful rebel' you do not have to observe statues. As EU and local authority powers are based in statute, there lies the lawful rebels power. Ranty and friends have all the details.

The knowledge base required to be a lawful rebel is quite extensive, and from what I can see, you have to be pretty sure of your ground. Migraines beckon, methinks. This is an area where even lawyers may fear to tread.

While Mrs S is indisposed, we have got the popcorn out on this one. Being history buffs and very aware of the context of what Ranty and friends are up to, we will be watching with keen interest from the other side of the Atlantic.

I'm given to understand that there are a few folk around Vancouver Island who are giving the 'lawful rebel' thing a try, but the law is a trifle different over here, and the RCMP will have no truck with people drinking and driving, then claiming to be 'lawful rebels' when pulled over. Disregarding Statutes of Contract law is one thing; using it as a license for anti-social behaviour another.

As an aside; the average RCMP Constable has a battery of legal powers which might make the average despot drool; but there are a lot of checks and balances in the system here, which makes abuse of those powers a risky business. Besides, they still command the respect of many Canadians, and if you have that, keeping the law and 'maintaining the right' is a lot easier.

This revolution thing seems to be the meme for 2011. Gadaffi is being offered an out by his rebels, and all across the Middle East a seismic political shift is underway. In all colours of regime; from Theocracy to nascent democracy, changes are afoot. The world will be a very different place, politically speaking, when the dust settles, and the Western powers would be best advised to stay out of it, or be mightily embarrassed. We can do deals to keep the oil flowing, but not use military force, which will annoy the locals, and make them less amenable to doing business in the future. This ain't the late 1800's or early 1900's and gunboat diplomacy won't work there. We (and the Russians, and the Chinese) sold them the weapons, remember?

Hi ho, back to watching volcanoes and seismic shifts, of one sort or another.

I refuse to answer that question..... can't I?

The right to refuse to incriminate yourself got eroded by this latest ruling from the UK's high court.

The case involved Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator who was jailed in 2007 for his part in the illegal interception of mobile phone messages for the News of the World newspaper. He now faces a number of civil suits related to other instances of alleged hacking.

Football pundit Andy Gray and comic Steve Coogan both claim that Mulcaire intercepted their messages and had asked the High Court to strip him of his right to avoid self-incrimination.

Does anyone else see the law of unforeseen consequences grinning in the shadows and sharpening a blade?

Call me Mr Paranoid, but I'm willing to bet this judgment will be coming to bite an innocent party near you in the not too distant future.

On the plus side, the High court has further ruled that newspapers don't have to identify anonymous commenters. Although I'm sure some ideologically motivated editor will do so.

It's official

Britain just attained Third world status.

This post at Wattsupwiththat about a featured article in the Tellytubbygraph.

I know we get more power outages than average out here in the Canadian boonies, but deliberately running down a power infrastructure for idealogical reasons? Now I know I've said that most UK administrators couldn't run a bath, but this just takes the whole pack of chocolate coated Hob-Nobs. Now they're admitting it in public? I'd be rolling on the floor laughing, but I've still got family back there.

Send that man a straitjacket and a trip to the rubber room. Major league facepalm territory.

Fortunately, not everyone is so stupid.