One Rule for UKIP and Another for the Rest of Us!

Arriving home from my mums the first email waiting for me was “Ukip: Arrest people who call us fascists“; in truth I wasn’t sure if this was a satirical piece but NO – it was a serious post by Adam Bienkov in Politics.co.uk, reporting on a letter from three UKIP MEP candidates, who are formally asking “the chief constable to arrest any protestors who call our supporters ‘fascistsand accusing groups such as Unite Against Fascism and Hope not Hate of “deliberately targeting Ukip, its supporters and elected officials to deliberately intimidate and stop democracy.”! 

I’ll leave it to you to have a look at the organisations named above and decide if UKIP are correct in this charge; I certainly don’t and here’s why, Oxford Dictionaries define fascism as having “intolerant views or practices”; I consider tweeting to a man born in Dudley he should “emigrate to a “black country” an intolerant view, as I believe is “#ThingsAsianBoysDo groom and rape underage white girls, stab and rob innocent old white people, bomb innocent white people #EctEctEct [sic]”? How about Rape becoming tolerated as a practice, or Homosexuality as “not being a lifestyle worthy of valid equal respect” as Roger Helmer believes? These examples as merely the tip of the iceberg as far as intolerant attitudes go.

Further a definition from dictionary reference.com describes fascism as “any ideology, movement, programme, tendency, etc, that may be characterized as right-wing, chauvinist, authoritarian, etc“;  does “Repeal the Human Rights Act” / abolition of Workers Rights, feel authoritarian, or how about making everyone – irrespective of income pay the same tax rate, ? Again these are a small sample of the ideals of UKIP.

 Finally from me. check out the irony of UKIP’s Safeguards against Crime Policy which states  – Free the police force from the straitjacket of political correctness and ‘targets’; it seems they don’t want the Police helping people being ‘targeted’,  unless of course it’s THEM.

I’m off for a shower – feeling filthy having viewed the above  links, but take a look at Vox Political’s latest piece if you want more convincing

Rise of unrepresented litigants

ESSENTIAL Reading from Glynis Millward- Please Share Widely

“A rise in the number of people representing themselves in person at Court of Appeal hearings is posing an “increasing problem”, a leading judge has warned.

Lady Justice Black – who sits in the Court of Appeal – said the task facing judges was “infinitely more difficult” when people were not represented by lawyers.

She has raised concerns in the wake of warnings from lawyers that Government cuts in legal aid provision would lead to a rise in the numbers of litigants in person and pose problems.”

The lovely wibbly wobbly old lady

We knew this would happen didn’t we? As the article says, it’s false economy because cases now take longer. 

No justice for you if you’re low paid eh!

A rise in the number of people representing themselves in person at Court of Appeal hearings is posing an “increasing problem”, a leading judge has warned.

Lady Justice Black – who sits in the Court of Appeal – said the task facing judges was “infinitely more difficult” when people were not represented by lawyers.

She has raised concerns in the wake of warnings from lawyers that Government cuts in legal aid provision would lead to a rise in the numbers of litigants in person and pose problems.

A year ago Maura McGowan QC, then chairman of the Bar, said savings resulting from cuts might pale against an increase in court costs because cases featuring litigants in person would last longer.

And Lady…

View original post 245 more words

When is a ‘libertarian’ not a libertarian?

An important argument well made by Paul Bernal – Respecting Freedom of Speech is Essential and works for Everyone Equally – Politicians have NO Right to abuse this.

Paul Bernal's Blog

…when it’s a Kipper?

A couple of days ago, blogger Michael Abberton  got a visit from the police. As reported in the Guardian:

“He was told he had not committed any crimes and no action was taken against him, but he was asked to delete some of his tweets, particularly a tongue-in-cheek one on 10 reasons to vote for Ukip, such as scrapping paid maternity leave and raising income tax for the poorest 88% of Britons.”

This is the poster Michael tweeted:

Screen Shot 2014-05-12 at 14.39.13

Michael described his experience in his own blog here. As he put it:

“…they said this was in relation to a complaint that had been made by a certain political party in relation to tweets I had published about them and one tweet in particular which talked about ten reasons to vote for them. The PC wanted to know if I had made that poster.”

The police…

View original post 723 more words