Sunday, 28 February 2010

Many A True Word Spoken In Jest.

 Via Obonoxio who spotted this in the comments on Anna Raccoon

Dear Ms Raccoon,

Thank you for your enquiry.

You appear to be under some misapprehensions about the purpose of the NHS. You believe that it’s supposed to cure people, or something. Things have moved on since that philosophy was in operation, many decades ago. No, these days, the new thinking is that the real purpose of the NHS is to kill people, in as large as numbers as possible.

Let me explain. In the past, people were understood to have become ill as a result of bacterial or viral infection, largely through no fault of their own. But now we know that most disease is caused by ‘lifestyle’ factors. Smoking cigarettes, for example, causes all forms of lung disease, every kind of cancer (and not just lung cancer), all variants of heart disease, and more or less every other disease as well. And if cigarettes don’t cause these diseases, then drinking alcohol does so instead. Or eating meat. Or not getting enough exercise. And these lifestyles are what people have freely chosen to adopt. And so, it’s their own fault if they contract these diseases. And given there’s next to nothing that the NHS can do to cure them, the only option is to assist them to a premature death, which is where they were all heading anyway.

In modern NHS hospitals, doctors all know that anyone who has been wheeled through the front door is someone who has been trying to kill themselves all their lives with smoking, drinking, overeating, sex, lack of exercise, and so on. We simply try our best to help them on their way to the early grave they quite obviously seek.

I agree we’re not very efficient about it. MRSA is a nasty way to die. We’re hoping that new legislation on assisted suicide will allow us to open some assisted suicide facilities in our hospitals. Some people call them ‘gas chambers’, but these have some unfortunate resonances, and so we’re looking for another name for them. But, once the new facilities come online, we’re hoping to boost the NHS deathrate from its current figure of about 70,000 a year to something more like 1,000,000 a year. Patients with ‘lifestyle’ diseases will be able to look forward to rapid and immediate treatment in these new facilities, with waiting times of only minutes or hours.

We will, of course, retain the treatment centres for the old-style bacterial and virally-transmitted diseases. So if you get malaria, we’ll still prescribe drugs for its treatment. However, there is a strong argument that even malaria is a ‘lifestyle’ disease. You get it by going to West Africa. And anyone who gets malaria has only themselves to blame, and must have had a death wish of some sort, which we at the NHS will be more than happy to fulfil.

I’m sure you’ll agree that the new model NHS will be far more efficient than the old one. Hospitals will be much smaller. Wards will be small and very private. Patients will be treated immediately. Much of the old bureaucracy will vanish. Furthermore, the health of the remaining population of Britain will be greatly improved as unhealthy people are removed, and the population of Britain will fall towards sustainable levels. We’re hoping to bring the population down to 5 million or so by the end of the century.

Please don’t hesitate to contact me again if you have any further questions.

Yours faithfully,

Josef Mengele, M.D.

More from the author of the above here.

Tuesday, 23 February 2010

Dancing On Our Graves


Ministers accused the Conservatives of scaremongering with their 'R.I.P Off ' poster campaign, denying plans for a flat-rate death tax and demanding the Tories take down the adverts.


Mr Burnham has insisted that all options are under consideration, including the Tories' favoured voluntary insurance levy and the Liberal Democrat's preferred ' partnership' between the state and patients footing the bill.

But yesterday the Government signalled strongly that a compulsory tax was its favoured option.

'On balance the majority view was to reject the Green Paper options of "Partnership" and "Insurance",' it said in a statement.

Mr Burnham yesterday seized on support for a death tax and called for firm proposals to be brought in quickly.

He said that despite the 'sound and fury' surrounding the debate, there was a 'good degree more consensus across political parties and the care world than people may realise'.
So really Andy, the Tory posters were right in the first place, weren't they? Seems like,despite being given advice on this, by people who know what they are doing, in typical Nu Liebore style, you prefer to go into denial mode first and then do exactly what the lobbyists wanted.
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, 22 February 2010

Running For Election

The Gorgon is getting in training, ready for a fast exit.
Thanks to Henrynorthlondon for the Our Fearful Fat Leader tagline.

Saturday, 20 February 2010

Submerged Optimism. Don't Make Me Laugh.

"A Future Fair For All"

It's never your fault is it? You've turned Britain in to a bankrupt shithole and yet you still expect us to believe in your bollox.
You Really are the party that knows no shame. You bunch of shitheads, bereft of any shred of decency or moral values. Fuck the lot you. Piss off and rot in hell.
Labour, the One Trick Party.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Operation Fightback

Gordon is on the warpath:

After nearly 13 years in Government, Labour is telling its activists that they should not use the party’s achievements in power when seeking votes at the election.

At a pre-election rally in the West Midlands, Mr Brown will warn his party to frame the election not as a chance to pass judgement on the Labour Government.

Instead, he will attack the Conservatives, as the party admitted in a leaflet for candidates that voters are attracted to David Cameron’s message of change


Shame You couldn't have come up with a slogan of your own Gordon. The BNP are already using that one here.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Friday, 19 February 2010

Reality Escapes

The budget deficit - the difference between government spending and the income it receives through taxation and other sources - is expected to be more than £170bn or 12.6% of GDP in the current financial year one of the highest of any major economy.
the government had to borrow a further £4.3bn last month to help cover the deficit.

Last month was the first time since records began the government had to borrow money in January, usually a bumper month for income from tax receipts.

Gordon Brown reiterated that there would have to be tax rises and cuts in spending to reduce the deficit.

"We have been crystal clear that we will halve the deficit over the next four years - indeed, more than halve it," he said.

I'm fucking scared now, Gordy old bean and it isn't the Tories that are frightening me.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Thursday, 18 February 2010

Desperate Times



"I am sure that many of us will be able to understand the reasons why Joe Stack has deliberately crashed his light aircraft into an IRS building in Austin, Texas.

He left a long and detailed suicide note on his website and due to the inevitability of it's removal, by persons unknown, here is a copy of it in full: "

"If you’re reading this, you’re no doubt asking yourself, “Why did this have to happen?” The simple truth is that it is complicated and has been coming for a long time. The writing process, started many months ago, was intended to be therapy in the face of the looming realization that there isn’t enough therapy in the world that can fix what is really broken. Needless to say, this rant could fill volumes with example after example if I would let it. I find the process of writing it frustrating, tedious, and probably pointless… especially given my gross inability to gracefully articulate my thoughts in light of the storm raging in my head. Exactly what is therapeutic about that I’m not sure, but desperate times call for desperate measures.

We are all taught as children that without laws there would be no society, only anarchy. Sadly, starting at early ages we in this country have been brainwashed to believe that, in return for our dedication and service, our government stands for justice for all. We are further brainwashed to believe that there is freedom in this place, and that we should be ready to lay our lives down for the noble principals represented by its founding fathers. Remember? One of these was “no taxation without representation”. I have spent the total years of my adulthood unlearning that crap from only a few years of my childhood. These days anyone who really stands up for that principal is promptly labeled a “crackpot”, traitor and worse.

While very few working people would say they haven’t had their fair share of taxes (as can I), in my lifetime I can say with a great degree of certainty that there has never been a politician cast a vote on any matter with the likes of me or my interests in mind. Nor, for that matter, are they the least bit interested in me or anything I have to say.

Why is it that a handful of thugs and plunderers can commit unthinkable atrocities (and in the case of the GM executives, for scores of years) and when it’s time for their gravy train to crash under the weight of their gluttony and overwhelming stupidity, the force of the full federal government has no difficulty coming to their aid within days if not hours? Yet at the same time, the joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year and stealing from the corpses and victims they cripple, and this country’s leaders don’t see this as important as bailing out a few of their vile, rich cronies. Yet, the political “representatives” (thieves, liars, and self-serving scumbags is far more accurate) have endless time to sit around for year after year and debate the state of the “terrible health care problem”. It’s clear they see no crisis as long as the dead people don’t get in the way of their corporate profits rolling in.

And justice? You’ve got to be kidding!

How can any rational individual explain that white elephant conundrum in the middle of our tax system and, indeed, our entire legal system? Here we have a system that is, by far, too complicated for the brightest of the master scholars to understand. Yet, it mercilessly “holds accountable” its victims, claiming that they’re responsible for fully complying with laws not even the experts understand. The law “requires” a signature on the bottom of a tax filing; yet no one can say truthfully that they understand what they are signing; if that’s not “duress” than what is. If this is not the measure of a totalitarian regime, nothing is.

How did I get here?

My introduction to the real American nightmare starts back in the early ‘80s. Unfortunately after more than 16 years of school, somewhere along the line I picked up the absurd, pompous notion that I could read and understand plain English. Some friends introduced me to a group of people who were having ‘tax code’ readings and discussions. In particular, zeroed in on a section relating to the wonderful “exemptions” that make institutions like the vulgar, corrupt Catholic Church so incredibly wealthy. We carefully studied the law (with the help of some of the “best”, high-paid, experienced tax lawyers in the business), and then began to do exactly what the “big boys” were doing (except that we weren’t steeling from our congregation or lying to the government about our massive profits in the name of God). We took a great deal of care to make it all visible, following all of the rules, exactly the way the law said it was to be done.

The intent of this exercise and our efforts was to bring about a much-needed re-evaluation of the laws that allow the monsters of organized religion to make such a mockery of people who earn an honest living. However, this is where I learned that there are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us… Oh, and the monsters are the very ones making and enforcing the laws; the inquisition is still alive and well today in this country.

That little lesson in patriotism cost me $40,000+, 10 years of my life, and set my retirement plans back to 0. It made me realize for the first time that I live in a country with an ideology that is based on a total and complete lie. It also made me realize, not only how naive I had been, but also the incredible stupidity of the American public; that they buy, hook, line, and sinker, the crap about their “freedom”… and that they continue to do so with eyes closed in the face of overwhelming evidence and all that keeps happening in front of them.

Before even having to make a shaky recovery from the sting of the first lesson on what justice really means in this country (around 1984 after making my way through engineering school and still another five years of “paying my dues”), I felt I finally had to take a chance of launching my dream of becoming an independent engineer.

On the subjects of engineers and dreams of independence, I should digress somewhat to say that I’m sure that I inherited the fascination for creative problem solving from my father. I realized this at a very young age.

The significance of independence, however, came much later during my early years of college; at the age of 18 or 19 when I was living on my own as student in an apartment in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. My neighbor was an elderly retired woman (80+ seemed ancient to me at that age) who was the widowed wife of a retired steel worker. Her husband had worked all his life in the steel mills of central Pennsylvania with promises from big business and the union that, for his 30 years of service, he would have a pension and medical care to look forward to in his retirement. Instead he was one of the thousands who got nothing because the incompetent mill management and corrupt union (not to mention the government) raided their pension funds and stole their retirement. All she had was social security to live on.

In retrospect, the situation was laughable because here I was living on peanut butter and bread (or Ritz crackers when I could afford to splurge) for months at a time. When I got to know this poor figure and heard her story I felt worse for her plight than for my own (I, after all, I thought I had everything to in front of me). I was genuinely appalled at one point, as we exchanged stories and commiserated with each other over our situations, when she in her grandmotherly fashion tried to convince me that I would be “healthier” eating cat food (like her) rather than trying to get all my substance from peanut butter and bread. I couldn’t quite go there, but the impression was made. I decided that I didn’t trust big business to take care of me, and that I would take responsibility for my own future and myself.

Return to the early ‘80s, and here I was off to a terrifying start as a ‘wet-behind-the-ears’ contract software engineer… and two years later, thanks to the fine backroom, midnight effort by the sleazy executives of Arthur Andersen (the very same folks who later brought us Enron and other such calamities) and an equally sleazy New York Senator (Patrick Moynihan), we saw the passage of 1986 tax reform act with its section 1706.

For you who are unfamiliar, here is the core text of the IRS Section 1706, defining the treatment of workers (such as contract engineers) for tax purposes. Visit this link for a conference committee report (http://www.synergistech.com/1706.shtml#ConferenceCommitteeReport) regarding the intended interpretation of Section 1706 and the relevant parts of Section 530, as amended. For information on how these laws affect technical services workers and their clients, read our discussion here (http://www.synergistech.com/ic-taxlaw.shtml).

SEC. 1706. TREATMENT OF CERTAIN TECHNICAL PERSONNEL.

(a) IN GENERAL - Section 530 of the Revenue Act of 1978 is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:

(d) EXCEPTION. - This section shall not apply in the case of an individual who pursuant to an arrangement between the taxpayer and another person, provides services for such other person as an engineer, designer, drafter, computer programmer, systems analyst, or other similarly skilled worker engaged in a similar line of work.

(b) EFFECTIVE DATE. - The amendment made by this section shall apply to remuneration paid and services rendered after December 31, 1986.

Note:

· “another person” is the client in the traditional job-shop relationship.

· “taxpayer” is the recruiter, broker, agency, or job shop.

· “individual”, “employee”, or “worker” is you.

Admittedly, you need to read the treatment to understand what it is saying but it’s not very complicated. The bottom line is that they may as well have put my name right in the text of section (d). Moreover, they could only have been more blunt if they would have came out and directly declared me a criminal and non-citizen slave. Twenty years later, I still can’t believe my eyes.

During 1987, I spent close to $5000 of my ‘pocket change’, and at least 1000 hours of my time writing, printing, and mailing to any senator, congressman, governor, or slug that might listen; none did, and they universally treated me as if I was wasting their time. I spent countless hours on the L.A. freeways driving to meetings and any and all of the disorganized professional groups who were attempting to mount a campaign against this atrocity. This, only to discover that our efforts were being easily derailed by a few moles from the brokers who were just beginning to enjoy the windfall from the new declaration of their “freedom”. Oh, and don’t forget, for all of the time I was spending on this, I was loosing income that I couldn’t bill clients.

After months of struggling it had clearly gotten to be a futile exercise. The best we could get for all of our trouble is a pronouncement from an IRS mouthpiece that they weren’t going to enforce that provision (read harass engineers and scientists). This immediately proved to be a lie, and the mere existence of the regulation began to have its impact on my bottom line; this, of course, was the intended effect.

Again, rewind my retirement plans back to 0 and shift them into idle. If I had any sense, I clearly should have left abandoned engineering and never looked back.

Instead I got busy working 100-hour workweeks. Then came the L.A. depression of the early 1990s. Our leaders decided that they didn’t need the all of those extra Air Force bases they had in Southern California, so they were closed; just like that. The result was economic devastation in the region that rivaled the widely publicized Texas S&L fiasco. However, because the government caused it, no one gave a shit about all of the young families who lost their homes or street after street of boarded up houses abandoned to the wealthy loan companies who received government funds to “shore up” their windfall. Again, I lost my retirement.

Years later, after weathering a divorce and the constant struggle trying to build some momentum with my business, I find myself once again beginning to finally pick up some speed. Then came the .COM bust and the 911 nightmare. Our leaders decided that all aircraft were grounded for what seemed like an eternity; and long after that, ‘special’ facilities like San Francisco were on security alert for months. This made access to my customers prohibitively expensive. Ironically, after what they had done the Government came to the aid of the airlines with billions of our tax dollars … as usual they left me to rot and die while they bailed out their rich, incompetent cronies WITH MY MONEY! After these events, there went my business but not quite yet all of my retirement and savings.

By this time, I’m thinking that it might be good for a change. Bye to California, I’ll try Austin for a while. So I moved, only to find out that this is a place with a highly inflated sense of self-importance and where damn little real engineering work is done. I’ve never experienced such a hard time finding work. The rates are 1/3 of what I was earning before the crash, because pay rates here are fixed by the three or four large companies in the area who are in collusion to drive down prices and wages… and this happens because the justice department is all on the take and doesn’t give a fuck about serving anyone or anything but themselves and their rich buddies.

To survive, I was forced to cannibalize my savings and retirement, the last of which was a small IRA. This came in a year with mammoth expenses and not a single dollar of income. I filed no return that year thinking that because I didn’t have any income there was no need. The sleazy government decided that they disagreed. But they didn’t notify me in time for me to launch a legal objection so when I attempted to get a protest filed with the court I was told I was no longer entitled to due process because the time to file ran out. Bend over for another $10,000 helping of justice.

So now we come to the present. After my experience with the CPA world, following the business crash I swore that I’d never enter another accountant’s office again. But here I am with a new marriage and a boatload of undocumented income, not to mention an expensive new business asset, a piano, which I had no idea how to handle. After considerable thought I decided that it would be irresponsible NOT to get professional help; a very big mistake.

When we received the forms back I was very optimistic that they were in order. I had taken all of the years information to XXXX XXXX, and he came back with results very similar to what I was expecting. Except that he had neglected to include the contents of Sheryl’s unreported income; $12,700 worth of it. To make matters worse, XXXX knew all along this was missing and I didn’t have a clue until he pointed it out in the middle of the audit. By that time it had become brutally evident that he was representing himself and not me.

This left me stuck in the middle of this disaster trying to defend transactions that have no relationship to anything tax-related (at least the tax-related transactions were poorly documented). Things I never knew anything about and things my wife had no clue would ever matter to anyone. The end result is… well, just look around.

I remember reading about the stock market crash before the “great” depression and how there were wealthy bankers and businessmen jumping out of windows when they realized they screwed up and lost everything. Isn’t it ironic how far we’ve come in 60 years in this country that they now know how to fix that little economic problem; they just steal from the middle class (who doesn’t have any say in it, elections are a joke) to cover their asses and it’s “business-as-usual”. Now when the wealthy fuck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes… isn’t that a clever, tidy solution.

As government agencies go, the FAA is often justifiably referred to as a tombstone agency, though they are hardly alone. The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years certainly reinforced for all of us that this criticism rings equally true for all of the government. Nothing changes unless there is a body count (unless it is in the interest of the wealthy sows at the government trough). In a government full of hypocrites from top to bottom, life is as cheap as their lies and their self-serving laws.

I know I’m hardly the first one to decide I have had all I can stand. It has always been a myth that people have stopped dying for their freedom in this country, and it isn’t limited to the blacks, and poor immigrants. I know there have been countless before me and there are sure to be as many after. But I also know that by not adding my body to the count, I insure nothing will change. I choose to not keep looking over my shoulder at “big brother” while he strips my carcass, I choose not to ignore what is going on all around me, I choose not to pretend that business as usual won’t continue; I have just had enough.

I can only hope that the numbers quickly get too big to be white washed and ignored that the American zombies wake up and revolt; it will take nothing less. I would only hope that by striking a nerve that stimulates the inevitable double standard, knee-jerk government reaction that results in more stupid draconian restrictions people wake up and begin to see the pompous political thugs and their mindless minions for what they are. Sadly, though I spent my entire life trying to believe it wasn’t so, but violence not only is the answer, it is the only answer. The cruel joke is that the really big chunks of shit at the top have known this all along and have been laughing, at and using this awareness against, fools like me all along.

I saw it written once that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process over and over and expecting the outcome to suddenly be different. I am finally ready to stop this insanity. Well, Mr. Big Brother IRS man, let’s try something different; take my pound of flesh and sleep well.

The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.

Joe Stack (1956-2010)"




RIP Joe Stack.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Wednesday, 17 February 2010

Wrong!


Kevin Maguire seems to believe that we're going to unquestioningly swallow this bit of bollocks seen at Guido's place
:

"Was the hacking of Telford MP David Wright’s Twitter site linked to the theft of his laptop – containing his passwords – from the Commons? It struck me as odd when a poke at the Cons popped up, supposedly Tweeted by him. Scepticism is my middle name but, on this one, I’d believe the Telford lad over his Right-wing accusers. Wright’s no wet lettuce but he’s a straight and thoughtful politician, particularly for a Government whip.
"

Didn't think to change his passwords then? Surprised if IT didn't insist on it. The security of the Commons seems to somewhat lacking, no wonder all that data keeps leaking out. What did Plod have to say when he reportedthe theft and subsequent misuse of his accounts? Was his mobile, from which the tweet originated, also go missing?

That hole keeps getting deeper David. Maybe you should get Kev to stop digging now. Even better, resign.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Tuesday, 9 February 2010

Privilege


Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine all charged last week with multiple offences under the 1968 Theft Act could face up to seven years in prison.

This is a legal convention dating back to the seventeenth century which states that MPs are responsible for policing their own affairs.

The MPs therefore claim they should be disciplined by parliament and not face criminal trials.

But Parliament's most senior lawyer, Michael Carpenter, who is expected to be a key figure in the trials of three MPs accused of abusing their expenses and who has been studying the limits of privilege for the past few weeks, is believed to have concluded that it does not cover expense claims.

He is thought to have been approached by the Crown Prosecution Service and agreed to appear in court to state his view.

Source: Telegraph

Update:

SCUNTHORPE MP Elliot Morley is to let his lawyers decide whether Parliamentary privilege laws should keep his expenses case out of the criminal courts.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Sunday, 7 February 2010

It's Been Emotional

Nobody is buying it Gordon.
Just bring on the election and have done with it.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Fucking Outraged?

I'm Past Outrage, You Piss Taking
CUNTS!

The Conservative and Lib Dem leaders have urged MPs facing charges over expense claims not to use Parliamentary privilege to avoid court proceedings.

David Cameron said he was "disgusted" by the prospect and Nick Clegg said the public would be outraged.

Lawyers for Labour MPs Elliot Morley, David Chaytor and Jim Devine have all raised the issue of privilege, which usually protects MPs from civil action.

The three MPs all deny charges which they face under the Theft Act.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Monday, 1 February 2010

Ask The Question.



Douglas Carswell published his Private Members Bill today, in which, he poses the question "Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union?"

As he says in his blog post,
"Surely the only argument against such a referendum is fear of the outcome."
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Exactly Who Is In Denial Ed?

The climate secretary, Ed Miliband, warned of the danger of a public backlash against the science of global warming in the face of continuing claims that experts have manipulated data.

In the government's first high-level recognition of the growing pressure on public opinion, Miliband declared a "battle" against the "siren voices" who denied global warming was real or caused by humans, or that there was a need to cut carbon emissions to tackle it.

"It's right that there's rigour applied to all the reports about climate change, but I think it would be wrong that when a mistake is made it's somehow used to undermine the overwhelming picture that's there," he said.

Well Ed, it doesn't look like a mistake to the people live in the real world:

"The chairman of the leading climate change watchdog was informed that claims about melting Himalayan glaciers were false before the Copenhagen summit, The Times has learnt.

Rajendra Pachauri was told that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment that the glaciers would disappear by 2035 was wrong, but he waited two months to correct it. He failed to act despite learning that the claim had been refuted by several leading glaciologists.

The IPCC’s report underpinned the proposals at Copenhagen for drastic cuts in global emissions.

Dr Pachauri, who played a leading role at the summit, corrected the error last week after coming under media pressure. He told The Times on January 22 that he had only known about the error for a few days. "

He said:

"I became aware of this when it was reported in the media about ten days ago. Before that, it was really not made known. Nobody brought it to my attention. There were statements, but we never looked at this 2035 number."

Further pants on fire moments:

THE United Nations climate panel ignored warnings by leading scientists not to publish false claims that the Himalayan glaciers would melt by 2035.

One warning, in 2006, a year before the report was published, came from Georg Kaser, an Austrian glaciologist who was a lead author on another section of the report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

He said: “I sent warnings to the IPCC telling them the claim about Himalayan glaciers melting by 2035 was false.”

Another warning came from Gwyn Rees, a British hydrologist who oversaw a £300,000 study funded by the UK government in 2001 to assess the claims about rapid melt.
His findings were published in 2004 — three years before the IPCC report — and also showed there was no risk of rapid melt.

Rees said: “The sheer size and altitude of these glaciers made it highly unlikely they would melt by 2035.”

All those "Mistakes" Ed.


Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails