EU
They have a little list of things they want to ban
For quite a while now Leg Iron has been talking a great deal of sense about how the powers that be like to ban things and use the same methods every time.
The most successful they’ve been recently and the blue print for it seems banning everything else was the smoking ban where we now have to worry about third hand smoke, and they’re looking at stopping you smoking in your own house or car if children are present, and of course publicans will be fine and imprisoned for not stopping people smoking when they’re not there. The moves against alcohol are very obviously under way with yet further tax increases planned and repeated talk about minimum pricing and “voluntary” labelling schemes. Caffiene is in the firing line as are elctronic cigarettes and now it seems so is salt. To the extent that New York politician is proposing to fine fine restaurateurs if they “add salt to food”, I can only assume that this imbecile has never actually tried cooking without salt. However there is as always the alternative soft push so that we’re relieved that a more reasonable approach has been taken:
“However, the mayor has stopped well short of proposing an outright ban on restaurants adding salt, instead campaigning for a voluntary cut of a quarter over five years.”
The voluntary cut, will do doubt become less voluntary and then limits will be set and the limits lowered but still better than an outright ban, and much easier for people to make mistakes for which they can be fined.
When combined with the recent proposed changes to music licensing for church halls one really does have to suspect the aim is to stop people socialising. The smoking ban is killing off the pubs, but not quite quickly enough and people still meet for drinks, so they’re attacking drinking. Coffee shops are becoming popular meeting places once more so they go for caffeine, but people might meet in restaurrats but regulations on salt (and surely other ingredients not long after) will help stop that , as will the caffeine and booze limits. Then kill off local social centers by pricing them out of the way and there are no community controlled places left for people to meet.
Of course it is more likely this is just disconnected attempts to control every aspect of our lives for our health and the sake of the children, but the affect will be the same no social cohesion and socialising only in state sanctioned large corporate venues. Which won’t be serving tea, coffee or anything much to drink.
Soylant greens all round?
UKIP a correction
I really must apologise, my previous article UKIP losing the plot I’d rather presumed that UKIP wanted a blanket ban on the burqa. However as Dick Puddlecote points out over at Old Holborns this isn’t actually the case. They just want to ban it in public buildings and allow for it to be banned in private buildings as well and they actually want to ban “anything which conceals a woman’s face“. Which is marginally more reasonable, except why just women’s faces? Surely experience tells us that men with covered faces are far more likely to be a problem? And what does it matter if you’ve got your face covered in a library say? Or if they word it really well in a council run community centre attending a group for Islamic women? Also surgical masks? I’m very sure that you can’t over estimate how badly a law can be worded, and how stupidly it will subsequently be enforced.
So given that they single out both women and Islamic garb, I’m going to stick by my previous conclusions even though I did misread the report and think they were after a blanket ban on just one type of garment.
If they proposed that it all face coverings could be requested to be removed when security concerns or the establishment of identity required it, that’d be far more reasonable – but one would hope that was the law already? And as for private buildings given that hoodies, crash helmets and even hats are banned from all sorts of places wouldn’t it just make more sense to allow private venues to ban whatever clothing they like? what with them being private property and all?
So my final question stands failing a LPUK candidate, as UKIP seem to be trying to join the rest of the authoritarian part who’s left to vote for?
Scary post of the day
Back at work today and to start the year off badly, this rather worrying post by Anna Raccoon about the birth of the ‘Euro-Mediterranean Regional and Local Assembly’. Which it seems seeks to extend the EU across the Mediterranean in to Africa – the stated goals of political partnership and economic union seem oddly familiar.
Anyway go read the article particularly the list of countries with whom we’ll soon be experiencing closer union with of course free movement of people.
UK terror threat status
- Severe 2010/01/25