Nanny Bans Fake Penises

I am gemused to see that Nanny and her officers have been busy in Newquay during the halcyon days of summer (all two days of it), ensuring that the Cornish resort shed its reputation as a haven for drunken revellers and stag parties.

How so?

Nanny has introduced a zero-tolerance approach to "risque" fancy dress.

The result being that some visitors to Newquay have had "risque" costumes seized by police.

What is an example of  "risque" costume?

A mankini!

Devon and Cornwall Police Superintendent Julie Whitmarsh recently gave an interview (as per the Telegraph):

"We have had this consistency of seizing inappropriate items of clothing, sending people home to get changed, and that has worked, it has made a real difference, this 'no-nonsense attitude'.

Mankini is what we term 'offensive clothing', so we won't accept people wearing them. They are just hideous.

Is it just me, but if you were living in Bath for example, or Bournemouth, is that something you would wear to walk into town on a Saturday afternoon? 

No."

For good measure, Nanny also banned fake penises (preferring, I assume, the real thing?); as per Super. Whitmarsh:

"They are just revolting, there is nothing pleasant about seeing anybody in a mankini. We have had a real crackdown on the fake penises. 

And people are getting that message. You look at the images you see of Newquay now, 2009 is three years ago and we are in a very different place."

I wonder how that approach would work in Brighton?

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Prats of The Week - Jeff Ellis and Associates

Ooh err missus, it has been a very long time since I awarded my prestigious, and internationally renowned, Prats of The Week award.

This week, in keeping with the fact it is internationally renowned, I am awarding it to Jeff Ellis and Associates of Florida.

Whom are they?

They provide lifeguard services.

For why am I awarding them this?

Just ask Tomas Lopez, one of their (now ex) lifeguards.

Mr Lopez was patrolling part of Hallandale Beach north of Miami, when he was told that a swimmer was in trouble in an unguarded area of the beach.

He is quoted by the BBC:

"I wasn't going to say no." 

He went to the man's rescue.

Can you guess what happened next children?

Yes, that's right, he was fired!

For why?

His company claims that he had broken company rules and could have put other swimmers at risk. Susan Ellis of lifeguard provider Jeff Ellis and Associates told the South Florida Sun-Sentinel:

"We have liability issues and can't go out of the protected area."

She added that the stretch of Hallandale Beach that Mr Lopez was supposed to be patrolling on Monday was being protected by other lifeguards who were on the phone to emergency operators at the time.

Be that as it may, Mr Lopez and an off-duty nurse then helped the man until paramedics arrived to take him to hospital.

Two colleagues have quit in protest!

Jeff Ellis and Associates, well deserving Prats of The Week!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

The Dangers of Dodgems

As the summer season approaches full pelt, what could be more traditional than a trip to the seaside, a walk along the pier and a jolly time on the dodgem cars?

Sadly the latter pastime may soon be but a passing memory, if the health and safety Gestapo have their way.

The Butlin resorts (which first introduced dodgems into the UK) in Bognor Regis, Minehead and Skegness have now introduced rules that ban anyone bumping into each other on the dodgem ride (despite the fact that the cars are designed specifically to bump into each other).

Customers have been told to drive slowly in circles!

What utter bollocks!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!

Visit Oh So Swedish Swedish arts and handicrafts

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

The Owl and The Pussycat

"The owl and the pussycat went to sea,
In a beautiful pea green boat,
They took some honey, and plenty of money etc"

In days of yore, owls, pussycats and any other life form could go to sea without too much interference from Nanny (aside from some sensible rules wrt ships/boats etc).

However, Nanny has now decided that the rules that apply to ships/boats must also apply to all other craft that touch the water's edge.

Surfers, canoeists and families using dinghies could face jail if they are involved in an accident under plans to subject them to the same Department for Transport (DfT) safety rules as oil tankers and cruise liners.

Now before, quite correctly, people state that there are some right idiots out there who put themselves and others in extreme danger by their reckless disregard of safety etc; I would point out that I agree.

My father was in the Merchant Navy, my uncle was in the Royal Navy and my grandfather was in both the Royal and Merchant Navy; I fully get the point about idiots putting people's lives at risk at sea.

However, by applying rules that are meant for tankers and ships etc to all sea vessels/and craft (including surfboards) Nanny is making herself look very foolish indeed.

The real focus of the safety concern is jet skis, which are a complete menace when handled by morons and drunks. These should be subjected to the legislation.

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Nanny Bans Coastguards

It would seem that Nanny's health and safety rules are now putting people's lives at risk.

Nanny has decreed that coastguards must complete a health and safety questionnaire, a "vehicle pre-journey risk assessment", before they can respond to calls for help on land.

Under the new rules, the teams have to take the time to answer four questions on the type of rescue and journey they are about to undertake.

After filling in the date and time, the lead rescuer must outline the "reason for journey" and detail any risks the team may encounter during the rescue, including both current and forecast weather conditions.

The form then asks for a summary of any "actions taken to mitigate risk" before the leader can fill in a "yes" or "no" as to whether the risk is "acceptable".

The form is purely to be used for land rescues, not rescues at sea.

Ermm...isn't this a tad inconsistent?

Let us trust that the idiots who thought his idea up never need urgent/speedy rescue themselves!

Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

The Dangers of Tides

Britain is an island, surrounded by the sea, you would have thought that we would be used to the idea of tides.

Well you and I may be familiar with the idea of tides, but Nanny isn't.

South Hams Council have erected (can I have an erection at this time of day?) a sign at Castle Cove Beach Devon, which warns the public about the tide coming in.

The road-sign style warning notice reads "Beware of incoming tide".

Errrmmm...it's the seaside, people farking well know that the tide comes in.

Locals think that it's a load of bollocks, over-the-top and looks ugly in the local beauty spot.

South Hams Council said that its erection was necessary as its insurers (hah!) had told it to do so, and that public safety was "paramount".

Pass the sick bag someone!

Would the council put their hands in a fire if the insurers had told them to do so?

Weak saps!

Councillor Bill Hitchins said:

"The council has a duty of care for public safety ...that obligation remains paramount.

On the advice of the council's insurers, temporary warning signs which comply with safety sign regulations have been put up ...to alert people to the danger of being cut off by an incoming tide."

However, the council have rather hoisted themselves on their own petard as it transpires that they will now move the sign from the bathing platform to a site on the access path down to the cove; ie the sign is in the wrong place.

How much will that cost the local taxpayers?



Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

The Dangers of Crabs - Ooh Er Missus!

I am not entirely sure as to whether this is an example of Nannyism, or just well intentioned kind hearted people giving Nanny an opportunity to make mischief.

I refer to the plan by some zoology students from Cambridge to try to impose a code of conduct on the summer sport of crabbing, in an attempt to end cruelty to the creatures.

They plan to leaflet ten thousand holidaymakers at the Norfolk resort of Wells-next-the-Sea (did you know it is the crabbing capital of Britain?), advising them on how to crab responsibly. Their principal rule is that no more than ten crabs should be placed in a single bucket.

Seemingly excess crowds of crabs can cause fights, which can lead to the loss of limbs.

Crabs in Wells have traditionally enjoyed a relationship with the children who come to bait, capture and imprison them for a few hours in a plastic bucket. The fishing lines of the children are baited with bacon or whelk.

Local fishermen estimate that the average Wells crab is caught and released several times a day.

I see that the students have a kind heart, and it will be good for the kids to learn a bit about marine life in this way; but I can't help feeling that Nanny will somehow or other try to get involved now.


Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.

Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.

Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.

www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"

Celebrate the joy of living with champagne. Click and drink!

Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries

Nanny Bans Salt Again and Again

It's a funny old thing, but yonks ago (18th September 2004 to be precise) when I first started this website, my very first article was about Nanny's obsession with salt.

How times have changed!

Errrmmmm, well no they haven't.

Three and a half years on, Nanny is still going on about salt. Yesterday I wrote about saltshakers having their holes reduced in number (wouldn't it be easier just to block a few holes with sticky tape?).

Today I would like to advise you that one of Nanny's special little trolls wants to ban salt from the dining tables of people's homes.

Martin Wiseman, Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and the Royal College of Pathologists, has said that food should only be seasoned with pepper or herbs in order to reduce salt intakes to recommended levels.

Prof Wiseman said:

"Because salt is added by food manufacturers, there is too much of it in our food before it even reaches our dinner table. By adding extra salt to a meal, you are only making things worse."

Doesn't the "safe" dosage of salt rather depend on:

- how much water you drink?

- whether you are sweating a lot?

- how much ready made food, or fresh food you eat?

- your body mass?

- your age?

I would point out that when I was a wee nipper (about 6 years old) my mum used to buy blocks of crystallised sea salt. They were solid blocks, wrapped in blue paper, around 12 inches high by 4 inches square.

My task was to "shave" them into salt crystals for our salt pots etc.

Mum would give me a knife, and let me get on with the shaving.

Can you see two Nanny dangers here?

1 A child with a knife

2 A child with salt

Call the Nanny police!

I always enjoyed salt shaving, and would take a few chunks to munch on.

It never did me any harm, as you can see.

Blanket bans and blanket advice is meaningless.

As a professor he should know that.

Same old story, same old tune from Nanny!

Nanny Bans Heroes

In the Nanny state nothing is more threatening to Nanny than independence of thought, action and displays of leadership and courage.

Who better to demonstrate such positive traits than a hero?

As such, it should come as no surprise to learn that Nanny has banned heroism and heroes.

Paul Waugh, a volunteer coastguard who was nominated for an award for rescuing a schoolgirl from a cliff, found this to his cost recently.

Mr Waugh rescued Faye Harrison, 13, who in January 2007 was hanging on by her fingertips and about to fall 200ft (60m) at Salburn-on-Sea, Teesside. He climbed down and held on to her for 30 minutes, until she could be winched to safety.

Unfortunately, he was not wearing safety equipment as it would have taken time to go back to his vehicle which was some distance away.

Mr Waugh, despite rescuing the girl, was later told by Nanny that he had broken rules.

The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) said it was not looking for dead heroes.

Mr Waugh said:

"I understand I broke a rule,

but I felt it was a matter of having to

because she only had minutes to live.

She said that herself, she was planning her own funeral.

When you see a little frightened face looking up at you,

all you want to do is help.

There's no way I'm going to stand back and watch a

13-year-old girl fall off a cliff."

Faye later nominated him for a life saver award as her "guardian angel".

However, Mr Waugh, who was with the MCA for 13 years, was told that the organisation had carried out an internal investigation into the team's handling of the incident, and the health and safety issues surrounding the rescue.

He has decided to leave the MCA rather than put up with any more health and safety bullshit.

Quote:

"I'm leaving now due to the hassle

I've had over the last nine months.

In fact, I've been depressed over it.

Yes, fair enough, I broke a rule,

but when I started my training a long time ago,

I was told, one time, you'll work outside the box.

And in this case I had to help her, she was ready to fall.

I'm very, very sad. It's a shame I'm having to go."

The MCA said it was very grateful for his past activities and wished him well in the future.

The statement said:

"Our responsibility is to maintain the

health and welfare of those who we sometimes

ask to go out in difficult and challenging

conditions to effect rescues.

As such we ask our volunteers to risk assess

the situations they and the injured or distressed

person find themselves in, and to ensure that

whatever action they take does not put anyone

in further danger.

We are proud of our safety record and we will

seek to maintain the safety of our volunteers,

and minimise risk in what can be inherently

difficult situations."

No, that is wrong, their responsibility is to rescue people!

This is not the first time that Nanny has banned heroism, see here.

In Nanny's world, a dead girl is far better than a living hero.

Ashes To Ashes

Nanny manages to interfere in people's lives, even when they are dead.

We had wanted to scatter Dad's ashes at sea, that seemingly simple task requires an environmentally friendly urn and permission from some government organ.

Plan B was to scatter them on the Thames, again this requires the use of an environmental urn that biodegrades in a friendly manner. Fine, until my mother fractured her pelvis, which made the boarding of the Thames cruise boat all but impossible for her.

Plan C is to scatter them on his parents' grave, again seemingly we need permission of the cemetery.

No More Heroes

Poor old Prince Charles, not only does Sainsbury's ban his carrots, but Nanny bans his choice of road names for Poundbury.

Poundbury is the Prince's "model village" in Dorset. All Charles wanted to do was to give some recognition to local war heroes, by naming the streets after them. The Prince also hoped to commemorate battles in which the local regiment, known as the Dorsets, took part.

Unfortunately, this being Nanny Britain, nothing is ever as simple as that. Nanny's chums on Dorchester Town Council's planning committee (ah yes, another local council making a thorough nuisance of itself!) rejected the suggestions. Instead they want to have the streets named after farms owned by the Duchy of Cornwall estate.

All very well, but Poundbury is not a "farming village", therefore naming the streets after farms has no special relevance.

Fiona Kent-Ledger, the chairman of the planning committee, said:

"We just suggested to the Duchy that we didn't think

they were suitable names for Poundbury.

The Duchy came to us when the development first started,

asking us about what we thought of street names.

They came up with the idea of using Duchy estates

and farms as names and we thought that was very fitting.

Because of this we didn't think it was suitable

to now put up names associated with the

Devonshire and Dorset Regiment in Poundbury.

It is not for political reasons.

It is just trying to be practical about where

names are used because once they are there,

they are there forever."

She said that no vote had been taken, because it was obvious that everyone was in agreement.

Really?

I don't know about anyone else reading the above "explanation" from the council, but I am none the wiser as to why they have rejected the suggested names. It seems to me that the decision was based on a political motive.

The snub has infuriated local veterans, who say that it is an insult to brave men and women who were prepared to give their lives for their country.

Derek Julian, a former Dorset regiment soldier, who fought in Korea and proposed the names to the Duchy, said:

"This decision has brought shame on Dorchester.

The council has insulted the regiment

and veterans are appalled".

The list of names included Victoria Cross winners and a trooper who survived the Charge of the Light Brigade.

If Dorset won't honour their names, we can at least do so on this site.

The names included Trooper Thomas Warr, who rode with the 600 members of the Light Brigade into the "Valley of Death" at the Battle of Balaclava; Private Samuel Vickery, of the Dorsetshire Regiment, who was awarded the Victoria Cross for the daring rescue of a comrade under fire during an action in India in 1897; and Captain Lionel Queripel, who was seriously wounded at Arnhem in 1944 but stayed behind to help to cover the retreat of his men.

Private Samuel Vickery, of the 1st Battalion Dorsetshire Regiment was awarded the Victoria Cross for the rescue of a comrade under enemy fire in India in 1897

Trooper Thomas Warr, who died in Dorchester in 1916 aged 87, was one of the last survivors of the Charge of the Light Brigade when the British cavalry was cut to pieces by Russian guns during the Battle of Balaclava in 1854. Old Tom died penniless in Dorchester in 1916 and was soon forgotten but his grave was refurbished before a special ceremony by his old regiment last year

Seaman Joseph Kellaway, a Dorset-born Royal Navy boatswain, won the Victoria Cross in the Crimea in 1855 after taking on 50 Russians almost single-handed. He landed in a small boat on the shores of the Sea of Azov with orders to burn some haystacks and a farm building. Within minutes Kellaway and four seamen from HMS Wrangler were surrounded by soldiers. Despite a furious onslaught of musket fire Kellaway, 29, went to the aid of two wounded comrades and held off the Russians until his powder ran dry. Kellaway, was presented with the newly instituted Victoria Cross by Queen Victoria at a ceremony in Hyde Park.

Captain Lionel Queripel, of the 10th Parachute Battalion, was wounded in the face and arms by withering German fire during nine hours of fierce fighting at Arnhem in 1944. He was awarded a posthumous VC for fighting on with hand grenades and a revolver to cover the retreat of his men. He was not seen alive again.

Captain Gerald O'Sullivan won the VC for leading an attack on a Turkish trench during the Gallipoli campaign in 1915. He was killed two months later.

Sarah Sands was a troop ship which caught fire in the Indian Ocean in 1857. Queen Victoria honoured the Dorsets who helped to fight the blaze.

Funny though, that despite Nanny's distaste for honouring battles and soldiers, she still sends our young men out to die in foreign fields.

Dorchester Council should hang their heads in shame.

The Joy of Salt

Nanny Knows Best now contains 958 articles detailing the evils of the Nanny state, the very first article I wrote on the 18th of September 2004 about Nanny's campaign against salt was entitled "Sid The Slug".

Why this little history lesson?

Today I now have incontrovertible proof that Nanny, in her campaign against salt, was talking a load of bollocks.

Salt is, in fact, good for you.

Yesterday I had to go to the dentist, as one of my teeth had shattered and lost a filling (in fact two other fillings had also been lost a few years ago...but I have an aversion to dentists, needles and having tools poked into my mouth, so I have chickened out until now).

However, I took the bull by the horns yesterday and gritted my teeth (what was left of them) and duly proceeded (via a pub) to the dentist.

I was expecting to be told that there was decay in at least two of the teeth that had lost the fillings.

Guess what?

Not a sign of decay!

Why was this?

Simple, as my dentist explained, were I cursed with a sweet tooth then I would be riddled with decay. However, dear readers, I am not sweet toothed I consume a diet based on flesh and salt. It is that diet of flesh and salt that in fact has saved my teeth.

Salt is good!

I would in fact point out that many years ago, when I was a small child, my mum would buy blocks of sea salt (12 inches, by 4 inches, by 4 inches) wrapped in blue paper. She would give me the task of shaving them down with a knife (ooh, aren't knives dangerous), and whilst doing so I would always take a chunk and crunch on it..I like salt.

Indeed my grandfather, on my mum's side of the family, always had a few packets of salt in his pocket which he would munch on. He died aged 84 or so.

Salt is good for you!

Nanny's campaign against salt is therefore founded on nothing but flaky science and a lack of research.

FYI, those looking for a first class dentist in the Croydon area should try bluedental (Eva and I are very impressed with them)....and no, they haven't paid me for giving them a free plug.

Bin Brother

Nanny is very concerned about keeping Britain clean and tidy, you only have to walk around some of her fine inner city areas (feel free to name and shame them) to see what a good job she has been doing!

However, let us not dwell on the unfortunately large gap between Nanny's desires and her abilities.

In one particular case Nanny has been very very assertive indeed, as she does her best to protect a beach from litter.

Now, what sort of litter do you think that she was protecting it from?

Paper?

No!

Plastic bags?

No!

Empty cans of drink?

No!

I will tell you.....

Sand

Yes, that's right, sand!

Arthur Bulmer, a pensioner who lives near to the sea, had his seafront garden carpeted with sand the other week, as a result of storms driving the sand up from the beach.

Mr Bulmer decided to use his initiative, and shovel the sand into a wheelbarrow to take it back to the beach in several loads.

Can you guess what happened next?

Yes, that's right, he has been threatened by Nanny with prison or a £50K fine if he carries out his evil plan.

You see, Mr Bulmer lives in St Annes and Fylde Borough Council are particularly good friends of Nanny. Indeed it is sad to say, but local councils throughout the land are sucking up to Nanny in all sorts of nasty and unpleasant ways.

Can anyone really, in their heart of hearts, justify the need for local councils; when you consider how much they charge us in council tax, yet how little they actually do aside from preventing us from enjoying our lives freely?

Anyhoo, Fylde Borough Council told Mr Bulmer that if he moved the sand, it would be classified as fly-tipping; in addition to the threat of jail and a fine, they would also take his wheelbarrow away.

To be fair to Nanny's chums in the local council, their workmen have been slowly taking the sand away from public areas, but not from private areas such as Mr Bulmer's garden.

By the way, some seven tons of sand sat upon his lawn; it is not unreasonable that he wanted to move it.

A spokesman for Fylde Borough Council attempted to explain their stupidity:

"The sand is actually part of the Queen's Crown estate,

which owns most of the foreshore around our coasts.

This year has seen an exceptional problem with wind-blown sand.

We have been cleaning up since Christmas.

But the council has no responsibility to clear sand

or any other debris from private land.

The owner must do this."

He added that dumping "anything" on to the beach from a private garden constituted flytipping.

Unfortunately the "logic" of Nanny's mouthpiece kind of falls apart; for you see, Nanny's workmen have been scraping the sand off the public areas and dumping it back on the beach.

Mr Bulmer ended up paying £500 to some workmen to clear the sand away (I wonder where they put it?).

Feel free to write to Fylde Borough Council to let them know what you think of them via this link Listening@fylde.gov.uk

By the way, in case you would like to understand the structure of Fylde Borough Council may I direct you to this page on their website?

The Council Structure

I think that says it all!

VOO Halloo II

Yesterday I wrote about Nanny's great new "initiative", VOO's.

Violent Offender Orders (VOO's) are designed to stop criminality and violence, before the criminal has even thought of committing the crime. All the police have to do is identify someone with a dodgy background, or extremist views, then the court slaps a VOO on them; hey presto problem solved!

Ho hum, all a bit of a fantasy really in my view.

However, if Nanny really is serious about identifying people who have yet to commit a violent crime but are nonetheless at risk of doing so; may I suggest that she directs her gimlet eye to the people identified in yesterday's Channel 4 Dispatches documentary "Undercover in The Mosque"

(Note Channel 4 have some sort of gizmo that you can download to enable you to watch their stuff, so in theory you can watch it on line)

The documentary identified a veritable hotbed of extremism and unpleasantness being pumped into people's minds in some mosques in Britain, by certain highly unpleasant individuals.

In brief, if you are:

-A woman
-A Christian
-A moderate Muslim
-A Muslim who helps non Muslims
-A Jew
-An atheist
-A homosexual
-A believer in democracy etc etc

Then tough luck, these guys think that you will go to hell and have every intention of speeding you on your way.

Quote:

"'An army of Muslims will arise' announces one preacher.

Another preacher said British Muslims must 'dismantle' British democracy

- they must 'live like a state within a state'

until they are 'strong enough to take over.'"

I would say that these characters are well deserving of a VOO or two. The trouble is that I doubt very much that Nanny will be handing out many VOO's to them.

Why is that then Ken? I hear you ejaculate...please stop this constant ejaculation at the keyboard, semen is such a persistent stain and clogs up the keys.

I digress...the reasons that Nanny won't impose VOO's on these people are two fold:

• Labour politicians are desperate to ingratiate themselves into the Muslim community. They need their votes, and can't be bothered to differentiate between mainstream Muslims and extremists (in fact they don't even take time to understand the difference). A such, any hint of a VOO which might upset their voters won't be popular with Labour.



• The extremists are followers of Wahabism, an extreme version of Islam practiced by Saudi Arabia. Much of the finance and support for the extremist preachers is in fact coming from Saudi Arabia. BTW, you may recall that the perpetrators of 9/11 had Saudi connections.

What is the significance of the Saudi connection?

Saudi is our ally in the forthcoming attack on Iran, and as such we trust them implicitly.

Bliary Poppins in fact recently blocked an investigation into bribery charges relating to Saudi Arabia and BAE, on the grounds of "national security".

Why was this?

1 There is a multi billion pound defence contract with Saudi Arabia in the offing.

2 Bliary Poppins recently spoke of an "alliance of moderation" to take on Iran as part of battle against extremism.

Guess who forms part of this alliance of moderation?

Yes, that's right, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan (a country riddled with extremist madrass's exporting extremist preachers to Britain, also not a democracy).

Why do we need an "alliance of moderation"?

Ah, simple, because we are going to attack Iran this year.

Don't believe me?

• The US is deploying another strike group in the Gulf



• Israel is practicing (and of course has denied this) attacking nuclear facilities with low yield nuclear weapons



• The US detained six Iranians inside Iraq last week. The Iraqis claim that they are diplomats, the US says they are not



• The US has appointed an experienced admiral to be head of Central Command (this you see will be mainly a sea borne air assault, rather thand a land assault)

Saudi Arabia is cosying up to Britain and the US, as they being Sunnis do not want to see the Shias take control of key areas of the Middle East (the Shias in Iran are now very chummy with the Shias who now are in charge of Iraq, thanks to the "regime change" enforced on Iraq by Blair and Bush).

Taking the above into account, there is no way on earth that VOO's will be used on the extremists identified in the documentary (as they are supported and financed by our "allies of moderation").

Haras Rafiq of the Sufi Muslim Council summed it up well:

"We are losing our children to extremists".

Note and understand very clearly, that mainstream Islam is a religion of tolerance and understanding. The rise of the extremists, if not checked, poses as much of a threat to the average Muslim living in Britain as it does to the non Muslims living here.

Something in this country really stinks.

A Maritime Nation

Around 1906 or so, my grandfather ran away to sea and joined the Royal Navy at the grand old age of 8.

In 1914 he was serving onboard HMS Pegasus off Zanzibar, in the early months of the war, and found himself on the wrong side of some shrapnel from the Koenisberg; which wounded him, and eventually sank the Pegasus. Note, he still had the shrapnel in him when he died in 1972.

Honourably discharged he joined the Merchant Navy, and spent the rest of that war in the convoys. He was once spotted in civvies one day by a particularly daft female, who gave him a white feather (the symbol of cowardice); he wore it in his hat for the rest of the war.

You can imagine how "pleased" he was to find, in 1939, that he would have to go through the whole nonsense again. He was still in the Merchant Navy and ended up in the convoys again, this time my father was also drafted into the convoys (he had just turned 16 when the war broke out).

You see folks Britain, being an island nation, has strong connections with the sea.

Now why am I boring you with this mini potted history of my family?

Let me see, oh yes I remember.

Earlier this week it was reported that the crew of the Golden Vanity, a restored Brixham trawler, had to quit the Tall Ships Race.

For why?

Sailing north through the Bay of Biscay from La Coruna to Antwerp, the crew of 16 to 25 year old volunteers became seasick and gave up!

Pathetic!

My grandfather would be turning in his grave, and my father (who is still alive) will regale me with his views on the matter tomorrow when we go out for my mum's birthday.

Nanny has turned our young men and women into spineless selfcentered wimps.

Nanny Bans Bin Liner

As we all know, Nanny is really cracking down on Muslim extremists; thought crime is going to be made an offence, beards will be banned and Mecca bingo sites will be closed until further notice.

In addition to the above, Nanny has also started to consider banning the actual terrorists themselves.

Now there's an innovation!

As such, Nanny was particularly perturbed when she heard reports that Osama Bin Liner was actually on holiday in Britain.

The reports said that Mr Bin Liner has been taking the sea air, along with Nanny's old chum Saddam Hussein, at Broadstairs.

Nanny did not waste anytime, and promptly banned them.

Unfortunately, as is the case with most of Nanny's actions, she did not bother to check the facts. It turns out that Osama and Saddam were in fact puppets, being used by a seaside Punch and Judy show (something that Nanny doesn't approve of either) to wrestle with Mr Punch for his sausages.

Well, facts have never got in the way of Nanny carrying our some daft idea of hers.

Poor old Professor Brent de Witt, owner of the show, was told that he could not use the figures by Nanny's chums in Thanet district council.

It seems that, in the spirit of Nanny's Britain, some underhand scum bags went to the council and informed on the good Professor.

That is the ugly new face of Britain these days; intolerance, no sense of humour and a nation of informers.

Thank you so much Nanny!

Nanny Bans Nelson

Nanny is up to her old tricks again.

This time one of our greatest Naval heroes, Admiral Lord Nelson, has caught her gimlet eye.

Admiral Nelson, as you will recall gave the French a right old drubbing at the Battle of Trafalgar 200 years ago this October.

To mark the 200th anniversary there will be a re-enactment next month at Southsea.

However, Nanny's chums from the political correctness brigade have put their oars into the event (a nice little naval pun, don't you think folks?).

Nanny has decided that she does not want to offend the French, and so the re-enactment will be between a red fleet and blue fleet; not the French and British.

So much for Nanny's ambition to educate people with facts.

Nanny has also meddled with the official literature. It describes the re-enactment not as the battle of Trafalgar but simply as "an early 19th-century sea battle".

What utter codswhallop!

In the 1805 sea battle off the coast of Spain, Nelson's 27 ships destroyed a combined French and Spanish fleet of 33 ships. The British lost no ships but sank or captured 22 of their opponents' vessels.

Although Nelson died in the battle, his victory paved the way for Britain's naval supremacy, which lasted a century.

Nanny is a fool.

The French are, as we can see from Sunday's EU vote, perfectly capable embarrassing themselves; we don't have any desire, or need, to do that.

Nanny and Clyde

Nanny, for reasons best know to herself, seems to have a thing about sea and river rescue.

You will recall that, a while ago, I wrote that Nanny's Lottery fund had refused to give the RNLI a grant; because they did not follow an "affirmative" discrimination policy in respect of their rescues. See "Those in Peril On The Sea".

Now Nanny has decided that the river rescue service operated on the Clyde, by George Parsonage, is just too dangerous.

For him, and those that he rescues!

George has been operating the rescue service for many years now, having taken it over from his father, and has saved an estimated 1500 people.

In fact so successful is the service, that he was awarded a special life time achievement award yesterday by the Royal Humane Society in London.

However, on the same day that he received the award, Strathclyde Police have stated that they will no longer call upon his help.

The force claims that because Mr Parsonage, who runs the Glasgow Humane Society, is now working alone (his assistant left for Ireland) he poses a health and safety risk.

Presumably, if he were to attempt to rescue someone the police would arrest him?

I guess then Nanny could serve him with an ASBO?

Drowning in a Sea of Legislation

When Blairy Poppins first ascended the throne 1997, he famously pledged to be "tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime".

Nanny, as we all know, has some very imaginative ideas as to what constitutes crime.

Since 1997 Nanny has created a total of 1,018 extra criminal offences.

Some of these new "criminal" offences are at the very cutting edge of innovation, viz:

• Performing a concert in a church hall without a proper licence, will leave the organisers facing a potential jail sentence of six months



• Producing a tobacco advertisement, which is subsequently published, can result in two years imprisonment



• Assisting a woman in childbirth, when you are not a registered doctor or midwife, can give rise to a large fine

The problem with all these new "criminal" offences is that someone has to police them, and enforce them. The result is that the police are diverted away from the more mundane offences such as, assault and burglary.

In essence the creation of these spurious laws is nothing more than a neat diversionary tactic, designed to take people's attention away from the one irrefutable fact; namely that Nanny doesn't know how to improve the effectiveness and efficiency of law enforcement and, more importantly, crime prevention.

The bottom line is this, does anyone actually feel safer now that we have all of these new laws?

Those In Peril On The Sea

Those of you who may find themselves in nautical distress, may well have a few problems if you are white and middle class.

Seemingly, Nanny's friends in her "respected" National Lottery feel that the Royal National Lifeboat Institute (RNLI) is not adequately targeting its resources at those elements of society that Nanny feels are disadvantaged.

In view of this, the National Lottery will not award the RNLI a lottery grant.

As the RNLI point out, what are they meant to do before they respond to a distress call; go through an ethnic and socio economic monitoring questionnaire first?

Then ignore those people who don't fit in with Nanny's targeted groups?

Something is very wrong in this country.