Err, no Jess, sorry, but no

It is seen by some women as a technologically convenient way to find a “part-time” husband. But the appeal of is driven by men drawn to the “Muslim polygamy matchmaking” site, as its British founder boasts that it has more than 100,000 users, a quarter of them in the UK.

I may or may not approve of the idea of two mothers in law but it’s not up to me to decide how others should live their lives.

Jess Phillips, a Labour member of the Commons women and equalities committee, said: “The popularity of this site worries me deeply. This site should be outlawed for UK use and follow the law in the UK which does not allow this. Women are not a commodity, they are not domestic slaves. People cannot be collected like ornaments.”

And that’s the point at which you can fuck off. For two entirely disconnected reasons.

The unimportant one is that the moment you start to ban things like this – and no, it’s not illegal – you’re also banning polyamory and the domestic lifestyles of a large portion of our own lumpenproletariat.

The important one is that it isn’t for you to decide, as with me, how consenting adults live their lives. If some wish to be second wives, or long term mistresses, or don’t, then fuck off, nowt to do with you nor me. For the aim of a liberal state is that as many people as possible get to live how they wish. That’s actually the point.

Tom Watson should lose weight, yes

I’m going on hunger strike from today. I’m not allowing myself anything but sips of water.

Why? This is not some George Osborne-inspired weight-loss plan. No. I’m following the Guantánamo diet in solidarity with two men who are being slowly starved to death by President Trump.

His administration has changed its practice towards detainees who choose to refuse food in protest at their incarceration. Previously they were force-fed, a cruel and inhuman punishment in itself. Now they are no longer fed at all. Make no mistake, these men will die at the hands of Donald Trump if nothing is done.

Perhaps the clarity of mind that hunger brings will aid his logic. Not force-feeding someone is not killing them.

Hunger striker complains that he’s losing weight


Guantánamo hunger striker accuses US officials of letting him ‘waste away’

The background here is vile, as we all know.

Zero trial, no possibility of facing evidence or accusers, not ever to be released and the legal tergiversions of the Yanks in doing this are all vile.

But there is that dark, dark, amusement that a hunger striker is complaining that they’re just, well, letting him get on with it. Are not intervening. That actually is his immediate complaint.

Khalid Qasim, held at the prison for 15 years without charge or trial, told his lawyer that doctors stopped force-feeding him and another inmate three weeks ago, and are no longer monitoring their medical condition.

“They have decided to leave us to waste away and die instead,” Qasim, 40, told his lawyer by phone for an article published by the Guardian. “I am in so much pain every minute that I know it can’t go on much longer. Now as each night comes, I wonder if I will wake up in the morning. When will my organs fail? When will my heart stop? I am slowly slipping away and no one notices.”

I fear Ms. Bennett does not understand

Although, unlike his efforts on behalf of global environmental and nuclear catastrophe, Trump’s alliance with the NRA endangers principally his compatriots, this staggering acceptance of the latest homegrown massacre could be what finally – if it cannot guarantee pariah status – shreds US claims to global leadership. A country that accepts 93 firearms deaths a day, on a wayward reading of an 18th-century statute, is not obviously better placed than the ostracised Aung San Suu Kyi to lecture on human rights or, as Trump at the UN, on global security. He fretted about “rogue regimes” that even threaten “their own people with the most destructive weapons known to humanity”. Idiots. Don’t they know over-the-counter semi-automatics will do the job perfectly well?

It really isn’t the guns. It’s the people.

The Czech Republic has similar levels of gun ownership. It doesn’t have the same incidents. It is therefore something other than the availability of the guns.

The 18th century statute is fun too, no? Freedom of religion, speech, rights to trial and all that? Just 18 th century statute we can cast aside?

Blame Canada!

Chelsea Manning, a former American soldier jailed for leaking troves of classified information, said on Monday that she was banned from entering Canada due to criminal convictions in the United States.

Manning had tried to cross at the official border office at Lacolle, Quebec, on Friday. On Monday, she posted a letter from Canadian immigration officials to her Twitter account that said she was not admitted because she was convicted of offences deemed equivalent to treason in Canada.

“So, I guess Canada has permanently banned me? Denied entry b/c of convictions similar to “treason” offence,” she wrote.

The document said that Manning had committed a crime outside the country that “would equate to an indictable offence, namely treason” in Canada and which carries a maximum sentence of 14 years imprisonment.

Committing a crime elsewhere that would carry a maximum sentence of at least 10 years in Canada is grounds for a person to be denied entry, the document said.

My guess is that he knew this. But hey, gotta keep in the headlines, eh?

No love, not really

A new global report on slavery has estimated there are more than 40 million people trapped in slavery worldwide. Many of us will have rarely thought about the immense scale of modern-day slavery, assuming that slavery only exists in faraway lands. But that assumption is wrong.

Have you ever had your nails done at a salon? Do you have your car hand-washed? Have you ever had building work done, or had a new driveway laid? If so, the chances are you may have come across someone who is enslaved. The harsh reality is that modern slavery not only exists in the UK, but it is on the rise. It is all around us – in nail bars, car washes, hotels, restaurants, farms and building sites. I myself was ignorant about modern-day slavery until I came across an online article a few years ago, and I have been researching it ever since.

The actual report being referred to lists some 1,700 Vietnamese over 7 years. It’s very hazy indeed about the difference between slavery (vile) and illegal immigration with labour paying back the fee (perhaps not desirable but also not vile).

This may all be entirely appalling even so of course but it’s not exactly immense scale, is it?

So, the Nazi punched out in Seattle. Someone’s going to jail, right?

Anti-Fascists Used Twitter To Find A Neo-Nazi Walking Around Seattle And Beat Him Up

So, idiot wandering around Seattle wearing swastika armband, mouthing off at people. Twitter antifa vigilantes track him down on the street then celebrate as he’s punched out.

The person using the @teethnclaws account asked not to be identified, citing concerns over his personal safety. He said he wasn’t aware of who actually threw the punch, but credits anti-fascist Twitter networks for making it happen.

“I would say that we successfully identified, tracked and coordinated to neutralize a clear and present danger to Seattle. Whether we coordinated the actual punch or not,” he said, “I, for one, applaud the anonymous hero.”

@teethnclaws described himself as an active anti-fascist fighter for the last 20 years and said that the punch in Seattle was the coordinated effort of “horizontal organizing between concerned neighbors.” He said nobody knows who threw the punch and that he wouldn’t help anyone find out.

“When anti-fascists, casual or organized, have their identity broadcast they are put in extreme danger,” he said.

So, pretty clear case of assault (dunno, do the Americans use GBH, ABH?) and conspiracy to perhaps.

Someone is going to jail for this, right? Like, at least, the person who threw the punch? Because it’s not clever, sensible nor even polite to wander around Seattle mouthing off while wearing a swastika armband. But it is also legally going about ones’ personal business and as such merits the full protection of the law. Because that’s how the law works – or at least should do.

And if a jury wants to nullify then that’s up to a jury but the case should still be brought.

What is the justification for this?

Twitter is “failing women” who are victims of online threats and abuse by taking far too long to remove hateful and misogynistic content, Britain’s leading women’s rights charity warns today.

Yeah, Yeah, yeah….

The offending tweets included a vile slur on the late MP Jo Cox,


The argument is that such threats are, umm, threats. You know, I’ll do you physical harm stuff. There is no such justification for complaining about someone being rude about the dead.

as we all knew it would the demands are moving beyond the possible justification, aren’t they?

ACLU gives up

The American Civil Liberties Union took a new stance on firearms Thursday, announcing a change in policy that it would not represent hate groups who demonstrate with firearms.

ACLU executive director Anthony Romero told The Wall Street Journal that the group would have stricter screenings and take legal requests from white supremacist groups on a case-by-case basis.

“The events of Charlottesville require any judge, any police chief and any legal group to look at the facts of any white-supremacy protests with a much finer comb,” Romero told the Journal. “If a protest group insists, ‘No, we want to be able to carry loaded firearms,’ well, we don’t have to represent them. They can find someone else.”

Indeed they can. But that is you giving up matey.

We might think that carrying arms in public isn’t a right that Americans should have but they do. Similarly, we might think that Americans shouldn’t be racist but they do actually have a right to be.

The great glory of the ACLU, over the decades, has been that it does simply do what is said upon the tin. Here, Americans have these rights. As we defend the rights of Americans then we defend these Americans in the exercise of their rights. That’s it.

The moment, the very moment, the ACLU says, well, you know, maybe they, that group, for this reason, shouldn’t have those rights then, well, that’s the organisation busted. Over.

Mr. Romero, you’ve just destroyed the reason for the existence of your own organisation. At which point, fuck you.

Because this is what you are for:

Citing the First Amendment, the American Civil Liberties Union is defending a group that supports pedophilia against a civil suit filed by the family of a molested and slain Massachusetts boy.

Because those lines of defending those liberties are with the hateful people that no one else likes, right?

My hope, most unlikely to be met, is that Romero gets fired immediately.

No, fuck off, fuck off, fuck off

The legal scheme under which anyone can ask for convicted criminals to be given tougher sentences is to be extended to cover more terrorist offences.

An order will be laid before MPs next week allowing those found guilty of encouraging terrorism, sharing terrorist propaganda and related offences to be brought back to court to have their punishment reassessed.

The Unduly Lenient Sentence (ULS) procedure – which allows victims and the public to query sentences handed out by judges – will now also include crimes such as membership of banned organisations and taking part in weapons training.

The scheme permits anyone to ask the attorney general to review a sentence. Where the senior law officer deems it appropriate, the case can be referred to the court of appeal for reconsideration.

The entire point of the courts of law is so that we are not ruled by the whims of the mob.

Further, despite the limited abolition of the double jeopardy rules, the State does not, or perhaps given double jeopardy fraying should not, get a second bite at trying, convicting nor punishing you. They get just the one chance to stack up their story against your.

And yes, this includes terrorists as well. Including those who “share terrorist propaganda,” as slippy an offence as to do credit to a Stalinist system of propaganda against state interests.

No, fuck off, and the horse you rode in on.

Well, no, just no

The RSPCA wants to be allowed to enter private property to seize pets in England and Wales.

The charity is in talks with the Government and police chiefs to negotiate new powers which will allow it to enter gardens, sheds and outhouses without an officer present.

Under current rules the RSPCA has to contact the local police force and wait for an officer to arrive if they believe an animal is in distress on private property.

But if granted special statutory powers, its 33 officers would be able to remove animals from private land without police permission – though the powers do not extend to entering a private home.


As in, no, fuck off.

Having the powers of the State granted to non-state actors really doesn’t have a good track record now, does it?

I approve of this

In the video, the Arkansas Capitol dome can be seen lit against the night sky as the Dodge Dart accelerates to 10, then 20 mph.

“Oh my goodness,” a man says as he flicks on the car’s lights. “Freedom!”

The vehicle speeds up the hill, and the last thing that comes into view before a crash is a large, newly installed monument.

Authorities say the man in the video is Michael Tate Reed, an alleged serial destroyer of Ten Commandments monuments.

He was arrested by state capitol police officers at the scene early Wednesday, according to Chris Powell, a spokesman for the Arkansas secretary of state. Reed is charged with criminal trespass, first-degree criminal mischief and defacing objects of public interest.

The laddie, as they say, seems to have some issues. Issues amenable perhaps to a judicious does of lithium. And yet, and yet……..

Sure, it’s the destruction of someone elses’ property, that’s bad. But it is property, not people, and he seems to be around for being punished for it. Leave aside that lithium issue and regard it instead as an extreme free speech one. Boy’s got the right to make his view known, as long as he’s willing to take the consequences of doing so. As I’m just fine with Banksy doing so–as long as he is willing to pay the damages.

The outrage, the outrage!

Where are the free speech defenders?

Taylor is inarguably in more danger than Charles Murray. She is a black person in a country with a long history of white supremacist violence—and in recent years that violence has been especially public. Just last month, a white supremacist stabbed two bystanders to death in Portland when they interfered with his racial abuse. Racism may also have motivated the May slaying of a black college student in Maryland.

Coverage of free speech fights in the U.S. casts the left as illiberal antagonists and lets the right off the hook for its own, much more serious history of censorship. By defending Charles Murray, and not Taylor, the media has shown some revealing inconsistencies in its concerns about free speech.

Murray was howled down, persued and his colleague required medial treatment as a result of the treatment from the mob.

As The Seattle Times reported on Thursday, the threats started after Fox News covered her May 30 commencement speech at Hampshire College. In it, she correctly called Donald Trump “a racist, sexist megalomaniac.”

“Since last Friday, I have received more than 50 hate-filled and threatening emails. Some of these emails have contained specific threats of violence, including murder,” she said in a May 31 statement. “I have been threatened with lynching and having the bullet from a .44 Magnum put in my head.”

She’s received emails. About the number that any working journalist will get if they write on a hot subject. Death threats are a bit much of course but this is very much closer to that mere vulgar abuse which is indeed free speech, isn’t it? Certainly closer than a howling mob chasing you out of the building and following you down the street…..

A good point

In the heart of the nation’s capital, at near-maximum terror alert, with the densest national concentration of armed officers, the attackers had 8-10 minutes to rampage unimpeded before the armed police turned up and whacked them in short order.

Contrast this with the May 2015 attack in Garland, TX where the heavily armed gunmen just made it out of their car, managed to slightly wound a security officer, and then promptly expired in a hail of bullets. I can’t help but notice the complete lack of follow-on terror attacks in Texas since then; presumably word has got around the terror community that it’s a poor choice of location.(Glasgow is probably number 2 on the do-not-terrorise list after the terrifyingly vicious response of the residents.).

I can’t help but think that the complete dis-arming of the UK civilian population is not working out quite as well as most of its proponents expected.

I seem to recall something around 1905 or so in London. Lithuanian, Latvian perhaps, anarchists. The police were borrowing revolvers from the crowd to combat them….

Sigh, yes it is

As his city mourns two men who were killed after confronting a man screaming anti-Muslim slurs, Mayor Ted Wheeler is calling on federal officials to block what he called “alt-right demonstrations” from happening in downtown Portland, Ore.

His concern is that the two rallies, both scheduled in June, will escalate an already volatile situation in Portland by peddling “a message of hatred and of bigotry.” Although the organizers of the rallies have a constitutional right to speak, “hate speech is not protected by the First Amendment,” Wheeler told reporters.

Yes, yes it is. The Supreme Court has ruled on it a number of times and that’s the end of that.