Nosemonkey's EUtopia

If you’re pondering what question to ask dear Tony tonight, Manic has a good un, or check old Justin’s analysis of yesterday’s speech for inspiration – or the Curious Hamster’s, for that matter.

Then why not call Tony Blair a fuckbollocking cuntknocker and threaten him with physical violence on the supposedly “live” web chat he’s apparently doing tonight?

Please note, should you submit your question for pre-approval (hardly “live”, is it, Tony?) you will be inundated with Labour party spam for the rest of your days, and the buggers will also have a record of your IP address and the like, making it very easy to track you down should you, say, take this opportunity to inform Blair that you’d like to see his stupid fucking grin splattered over the walls and ceiling after a suicide-bomb induced explosive rectal prolapse.

This is the kind of sanitised crap you’ll get out of these supposed questions from members of the public. (And by the way, I hope Eddie Izzard feels the piles of cash I hope they bunged him were worth it – the cunt’s just lost any respect I ever had for him).

The only good thing? This:

Tony Blair: “I am the Prime Minister… It doesn’t inspire confidence, I know”

EU lifts British beef ban.

Hang on, it was still banned? You learn something new every day…

More proof, as if any were needed, that Charles Clarke is a fucking tool:

“The Prime Minister was elected earlier this year in a very strong election result. He said he would go before the end of this Parliament – that means by May 2010 – and he will go towards the end of the Parliament.

“I would urge him myself to stay right up towards the end of the Parliament”

So, you know, just spring a new, untested leader on the public right before a general election, giving them no chance to formulate their own policies, appoint their own people to the positions they want, or to allow the public a chance to get used to them? Genius.

(Although actually, considering the Tories are still likely to be fucked by 2009/10 and the voting system won’t have been reformed, Labour could put a donkey in a leotard up for PM and still get in with a majority – maybe Clarke’s got a point after all…)

Update: More guff on this at the Guardian – vaguely interesting, actually, which makes a change from the usual Blair vs. Brown stuff that gets churned out whenever any paper’s got space to fill…

Update 2: For fuck’s sake – won’t somebody rid me of this troublesome Home Secretary? It would appear that he’s now proposing to execute every single teenager in the country – that’s the only way I can envisage that he’ll be able to “eliminate disrespect and antisocial behaviour”. What a twat.

Got something to get off your chest? Why not take advantage of our new little wotsit at The Sharpener? Whether you’re a blogger or not, rant away about something or other, and we’ll whack it up for all to see – assuming it’s decent and stuff, that is. Email Jarndyce or me, if you like, offering your services, and we’ll get back to you wih details and stuff when we’ve got them. Just looking for volunteers at the moment to guage interest levels.

Today the buggers are voting on those stupid data retention proposals Blair and co have come up with (For background: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, or via EUpolitix.com or DataRetentionIsNoSolution.com).

As this interview with Jean-Marie Cavada, the chair of the EP’s Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee, should make clear, it’s rather unlikely these stupid and invasive measures are going to be passed by the European Parliament:

“The State does not need to know everything. It is essential to respect the principle of proportionality. It is not the State that controls citizens but citizens who control the State. We must avoid introducing measures which may turn out to be a system of mass surveillance.”

The Committee has formally recommended that Parliament reject the proposal, submitted jointly by Britain, France, Ireland and Sweden. Which, if they do, won’t really achieve a great deal, but will at least hold them up a bit…

Update: Via John in the comments – hurrah!

Fucking FINALLY. Template sorted after hours of fiddling around with HT-pissing-ML so this blog’s now readable again in Internet sodding Explorer.

Lessons learned? A single misplaced triangular bracket can bugger up the entire sodding thing. Oh, and I hate computers.

Other lessons learned? Everyone should use Firefox, if only to make my life easier.

Headline of the day: “Sarkozy pushes for six nation EU ‘hardcore'”. He he he! It’s funny because “hardcore” is a term most commonly used to describe the more explicit kinds of pornography, and this therefore sounds like Sarkozy is trying to organise some kind of perverse international orgy, or something.

Jokes are always better when explained at length, I find.

David Blunkett: “I’m too cunting important to bother myself with answering questions which may reflect on the way I carry out my job – piss off.” (slightly paraphrased)

Lords to decide on allowing evidence extracted by torture. i.e. Lords to consider whether the following (heavily sanitised) exchange makes for reliable evidence:

A: “Are you planning acts of terrorism?”
B: “No – I’m Brazillian, and trying to get to work!”
*WHACK*
B: “Aaaargh!”
A: “Are you planning acts of terrorism?”
B: “No, I told you…”
*WHACK*
B: “Aaaargh!”
A: “Are you planning acts of terrorism?”
*WHACK*
B: “Aaaargh!”
A: “Are you planning acts of terrorism?”
*WHACK*
B: “Aaaargh!”
… continues for two weeks…
A: “Are you planning acts of terrorism?”
*WHACK*
B: “Aaaargh! Yes, yes! Just stop hitting me, you nasty purple and yellow rhino thing – and for Christ’s sake allow me to sleep, my brain’s gone wonky.”

No link yet, but European Data Protection Supervisor Peter Hustinx is expected today to slag off Blair and co’s stupid data retention proposals as they “will have a direct impact on the protection of privacy, as laid down in Article Eight of the European Convention of Human Rights and developed by case law of the European Court of Human Rights.” Again, no link yet, but an advance statement from Hustinx has said that

“It is crucial that the directive respects the fundamental rights. A legislative measure that would weaken the protection is not only unacceptable, but also illegal.”

Hurrah for Hustinx! (And not just for his amusing name…) – There’s a job description here (.pdf) and an interview with him here which shows he’s a sensible chap. In other words, expect the Blair machine to go into full-on character-assassination mode over the next few days.

Britblog roundup 32 is up.

In other news, I’ve finally got around to updating this site’s archives. Very exciting, I know. I’ve also had another fiddle with the template, as you’ve probably noticed from the re-sized logo and stuff. Better? Worse? I’m not sure yet – can’t tell if it’s too cramped. Let me know what you think – I’m pondering a major overhaul again sometime soon, but that all depends on time, inclination and working out the tech stuff – this do in the meantime?

Perfect – “Authority was given to the police in 2001 to take and retain DNA samples from everyone they arrest in connection with a �serious recordable offence�. Everyone; whether subsequently released, charged, convicted or acquitted. Prior to this change in the law, the police had been retaining DNA samples illegally for around seventeen years. The police now have over two million DNA records.”

Postman Patel (following up on yesterday’s security alert at Manchester Airport) – “A police spokeswoman confirmed the suspect had been arrested under the Terrorism Act and was being questioned. Subsequently he has been held under the Mental Health Act, a controlled explosion by a hastily summoned bomb squad revealed the man�s clothing and his passport, but no bomb or weapons…

‘A man who had a picture taken of him at Manchester Airport without his consent has agreed an out of court settlement of �4,000 with the airport. Tim Hedgley had his photograph while passing through airport security when travelling on a domestic flight. His picture was used to ensure he did not buy duty-free goods and to check his identity at the gate.

‘The photograph was taken without his permission and was therefore a breach of the Data Protection Act. He agreed to receive agreed an out of court settlement of �4,000 with the airport.'”