Charity begins at home : suspended coffees

By | |
1 Comment

Taking a break from my usual inane wittering to share a post that’s been doing the rounds on the book of face as I think it’s actually a really cool idea. It helps those in need in your area and also local coffee shops and may even help with that whole local community thing. As I probably count as someone with a vague Christian/Libertarian view I’m rather keen on personal charity and personal responsibility, so this is an easy way to put that into action. For those of my readers that identify as Libertarians and have Libertarian leaning blogs, we’re fond of saying that private charity can replace state interference, so lets both spread and support this idea and put our time and money where our mouths are (not saying that any of you don’t already practice what you preach). Of course if it takes off to any extent I’m sure the health lobby will insist the Government take action to make sure the poor and homeless are only getting healthy and nutritious approved food and drink, but until them. Hey lets try and extend this to beer and baccy and do good whilst pissing off the puritans :). Anyway enough from me here’s the article from the book of face:

Suspended Coffees
This story will warm you better than a coffee in a cold winter day:

“We enter a little coffeehouse with a friend of mine and give our order. While we’re approaching our table two people come in and they go to the counter –
‘Five coffees, please. Two of them for us and three suspended’
They pay for their order, take the two and leave. I ask my friend:
‘What are those ‘suspended’ coffees ?’
‘Wait for it and you will see’
Some more people enter. Two girls ask for one coffee each, pay and go. The next order was for seven coffees and it was made by three lawyers – three for them and four ‘suspended’. While I still wonder what’s the deal with those ‘suspended’ coffees I enjoy the sunny weather and the beautiful view towards the square in front of the café. Suddenly a man dressed in shabby clothes who looks like a beggar comes in through the door and kindly asks
‘Do you have a suspended coffee ?’
It’s simple – people pay in advance for a coffee meant for someone who can not afford a warm beverage. The tradition with the suspended coffees started in Naples, but it has spread all over the world and in some places you can order not only a suspended coffee, but also a sandwich or a whole meal.”

We would ask everyone who reads this story to please comment “im gonna do this” and what ever else they want to say. Try to do it just once lets make a difference together . Share the story spread the word . Have an awesome day
If anywhere or anyone asks what this is about say that Suspended Coffees sent you … Share the page guys lets make this work for the greater good of our Brothers and Sisters

Do apologise for the hippiness at the end, but it’s still a good idea, lets see if this takes off how long it takes the Government and health lobby to balls it up and prevent it happening, just as they’ve prevented so many businesses donating waste food to the homeless in the past.

If you know of a coffee shop/pub around London Bridge area that already does this, please let me know.

0

Petition for the Falkland Islanders

By | |
1 Comment

Port Stanley twinned with Whitby It may not have escaped your attention that those Argentinian types are once more rattling sabres and demanding we had over the Falkland Islands, in the hope of distracting attention from problems at home. In response to these demands for “negotiation” over sovereignty the islanders had a vote which resoundingly said “no thanks we’ll stay British”, now in these enlightened times where indigenous self determination and democracy is all the rage you’d expect that to be the end of it, or at least for our staunchest allies to leap to our defense. Well said to say not a bit of it the Argentinians continue to impose an embargo on ships bound for the islands and are generally making life unpleasant for those on the Islanders, who are usually economically self sufficient. So what to do about it? Well one clever chap noticed that our wonderful government is already considering diverting some of our international aid money to the military, and thought well if they’re going to do that why not send some along to help out the Falkland Islands after all it would count as defending them against the economic hostility they’re enduring from Argentina. Having had this cunning idea he went off and set up a petition, which will likely get ignored by our great and good as usual, but it never hurts to try and if it gets enough numbers it’ll help show support for the Islands and keep attention on the situation. So what’s to lose? The petition as ever can be found here, it’s only just started so not many have signed yet, so do spread the word.

For those that are in any doubt about how nonsensical the Argentinian claims are, here’s a brief history (H/T Guido)

On a final unrelated note anyone know if Spain are still playing silly buggers over Gibraltar?

-1

Blog off

By | | , , , , ,
4 Comments

Blog off!Following a rather dubious bit of political chicanery in the early hours, but not in a smoke filled room, our glorious leaders along with friends of Mr Huge Grunt have cooked up a typical mess of a piece of legislation to regulate “the press”. Of course this ignores that everything the press supposedly need to be regulated for was already illegal, and the editors and such could probably have been done on conspiracy charges, nope new legislation was needed #hackedoff insisted on it, and they got it and it went far beyond what Levesson proposed. It’s voluntary except if you don’t join in then you’re liable for costs if someone takes you to court and if you lose then you get to pay massive damages as well. Some people have said “So what the press deserve it” which is rather missing the problem with losing the freedom of the press it tends to stay lost for everyone. Our glorious leaders though and have decided this is an excellent chance to try and regulate the internet. The tricky question being just who qualifies as a “relevant publisher”, which as The Spectator reported is a knotty problem:
“Paul Waugh of Politics Home asked Downing Street whether the new quango would cover Twitter. It didn’t know. The Crime and Courts Bill says that people who publish about their hobby, trade, business or industry and the authors of online academic journals will be exempt. The government is, of course, exempting itself and all other ‘public bodies’ as well, for it would never do for the state to abide by the rules its citizen must follow. Everyone else must submit, as far as we can tell.”
So either the answer is probably that we all do or that nobody knows as No. 10 certainly doesn’t know.

Before we get onto the impact for bloggers and the rest of us, lets just think about the impact for the press. Whilst it’s possible some of them deserve it and I wouldn’t lose sleep over some papers having a horrid time, it’s more likely that the worst offenders will be ok, because they have the budget and will no doubt sign up to the charter. But we either have a free press or we don’t, you can no more be a little be regulated than you can be a little bit pregnant. The imposition of a high regulatory threshold is also a common move my large established industries to force out smaller competitors, setting up a new paper no matter how diligent you are would you dare risk breaking a story that might upset Huge Grunt landing you in court facing paying everyone’s costs and the risk of massive fines as well? So with the weight of regulation upon them we may well be left with a supine conformist press. As courts, and thus lawyers* are invovled is this more likely to help the well off and well connected who already make generous use of our libel system or the poor and defenseless?

As the regulator is not concerned with crime but with misdemeanor it will be in a perfect place to ensure the press conforms with the EU diktat that the EU must not be criticised or made to look bad.

But enough about the press, it’s hard to feel sorry for them what about the rest of us, well the proposed royal charter says the following:

Now we’ve been assured that they’re Not after the lone blogger, but that’s not in the charter and some of the definitions are in secondary legislation which is easier to change. Let’s be generous though and assume they’re not after the lone blogger (yet) once the principle of a regulated press and blogs is established it’s a small matter to tighten that particular noose. It’s also not clear what cunts as a lone blogger, I’ve had guest posts here so do I count? Many collaborative blogs would surely count such as Guido, Orphans of Liberty and Anna Raccoon to name but a few, and what about collaborative Facebook groups/pages? If there are exemplary fines for misbehavior if you’re not signed up to the regulatory body would you want to bet on it? If you’re prepared to take the risk of publishing and be damned remember if you’ve not signed up you pay the costs even if you win, so there’s no cost for people to keep dragging you to court. Still want to gamble on publishing something people in power might not like?

That regulatory body is going to be expensive as well and will no doubt need help from Huge Grunt and friends to make sure it’s set up correctly. It is after all the very parody of simplicity:

Of Blog

If this bill goes through at all we say goodbye to a free press, we say goodbye to the freedom to blog (at least in groups) and we lose a rather large chunk of free speech, all based on an incident which didn’t happen and a man who enjoys the press being nasty to other people. If you’re in the press Leg Iron has an idea to make Huge Grunt think twice. For the rest of us we should write to our MPs if we care about a a free press and freedom of speech at all or at the very least go and sign Guido’s Petition.

* We may of course get a whole new breed of ambulance chasers “have you had someone say something nasty about you on line, well Blogger lawyers on line, will take them to court for free and you get to keep all of your pay out” – which would be even worse but there you go.

-1