Nanny Bans Union Jack

I have been running this site for yonks (since 2004 in fact), and have therefore become somewhat enured (there's a word I don't use often enough) to Nanny's idiocies. However, occasionally Nanny does something so idiotic that even my elephant hide skin is sufficiently pricked for me to issue forth a trumpet of rage.

Thus I draw your attention (on this fine Monday morning) to a truly absurd piece of Nannyism, courtesy of Nanny's chums from Fylde council (click the tag "Fylde" and you will see they have featured before on this site).

Peter and Lesley Salthouse run the Naze Lane Chippy in Freckleton, and have (as part of their shop front advertising) a Union Jack sign in the window.

Nothing wrong with that is there?

You would think not, wouldn't you?

However, Fylde council have ordered the Salthouses to remove the sign?

For why?

Apparently it contains too many "angles, triangles and colours"!

Isn't that what a Union Jack is actually made up of??

The council have decreed that the sign is "out of character" for an English village!

As I have noted many times before on this site, councils are the enemies of the people!

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

Nanny Bans Union Jack

I am saddened to see that Holme Pierrepont and Gamston Parish Council have succumbed to complaints from residents about the flying of the Union Jack on the village green.

The flag was flown to celebrate the royal wedding, and has been left permanently in situ more less ever since.

However, some residents have complained and the council now only want to fly it on special occasions.

John Harbury-Carlisle, of Holme Pierrepont and Gamston Parish Council, has threatened to resign from the council if the flag is removed.

The problem here is that, owing to political weakness and pc policies around the country, we as a nation have allowed organisations such as the BNP to highjack the flag for their own nefarious ends.

It is apparent that many people are ashamed to be associated with the flag.

This is wrong!

The only way to overcome this, is to reclaim the flag.

Hence it should be flown by councils etc, and not hidden away.

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

Nanny Bans Flags

Last month, Nanny got her kerrr....nickers into something of a twist again over the contentious issue of flags.

One of Nanny's "respected" local councils, South Derbyshire District Council, decreed that Robert Hicking could not fly some flags from the roof of his house.

Isn't funny how Nanny uses local councils to enforce her petty rules and regulations?

Could it be that local councils are akin to dog shit (in the way it attracts flies), and that councils just attract petty minded interfering jobsworths?

Anyhoo, Mr Hicking was told that his flags were banned because they "could be seen as advertising".

What were these flags then?

Nothing more harmful than the flags of his local football team, Derby County.

Correct me if I am wrong, but during the world cup did not countless people fly the Cross of St George from various poles and erections?

Why are South Derbyshire District Council so sensitive about the flag of their own football team?

Mr Hicking now plans to fly the flag of St George and the Union Jack instead.

A spokeswoman for South Derbyshire District Council said:

"It's against the town and country planning

regulations to fly a flag that contains an advertisement

and a football club flag would be considered

to fall into that category."

I bet no one actually asked a qualified lawyer about this, and that this phrase "would be considered" is being used as a catch all by some bureaucrat who has nothing better to do than to stop people living their lives.

Nanny and her local councils hate individuality.

Nanny Bans Pirates

Thirteen men on a dead man's chest,

Joh Hoh Hoh and a Bottle of Rum!

Or so the old saying goes.

Britain's wealth is based on the actions of pirates (state sponsored mercenaries who attacked Spanish galleons and colonies), such as Sir Walter Raleigh et al.

Yet now we see Nanny has decided to deny her own past, and ban pirates.

Out...bloody...rageous!

This is what six year old Morgan Smith (Capt Morgan was a pirate too!) found to his cost a wee while ago.

Morgan was getting ready for his sixth birthday party, and the hoisting of a pirate flag in the garden for the event (Morgan likes pirates).

The flag pole was duly erected (can I say erected on this site?), and the skull and cross bones run up the pole in the back garden. Morgan and his parents then waited for the day of the party, when his chums would turn up in eye patches wielding plastic cutlasses.

Unfortunately they reckoned without the intervention of the evil Stafford Borough Council.

For you see ladies and gentlemen, Stafford Borough Council is a local council; and we all know that local councils add zero value to the local community.

Therefore, it should come as no surprise to learn that Stafford Borough Council had something to say about the pirate flag.

Council officials branded the skull and crossbones flag "unneighbourly", and banned Morgan's parents Richard and Sharon from flying it.

It seems that the jobsworths in the council ordered Morgan's parents to apply for planning permission at a cost of £75 (have you noticed that local councils never miss a trick when it comes to screwing money out of their constituents?), and then they have to undertake an assessment of the 5ft by 4ft flag's "impact" on the surrounding area of Stone, Staffordshire.

As Morgan's dad said, citing the reality of the situation:

"It's not as though I'm building a huge extension

which will blight the neighbourhood.

It's a child's pirate flag."

Egg...zact....lee!!!

It's a flag for a child's party for fark's sake, it's not a permanent erection!

I will repeat, for the benefit of the morons from Stafford Borough Council.

It's a flag for a child's party for fark's sake, it's not a permanent erection!

Can I say erection here???

Ironically the family have flown the Union Jack or a St George's flag on the 18ft-high flagstaff at their detached home without a problem. Yet some SOB neighbour, clearly with nothing else in his/her life to do, complained to the council about the Jolly Roger.

It's people like that, who report on every little thing to the state, that enable Nanny to remain in power.

Mr Smith said:

"When the lady from the council came to see me

she said that it was no problem flying

any of the other flags,

it was the Jolly Roger that was of concern."

Councillor Richard Stevens (Lib Dem...that figures!) said the council had objected to the flag because:

"it was unneighbourly

and could open the doors for all kinds of flags".

Errmmmm...ever heard of using common sense, councillor, and taking each case on its own merits?

Silly me, common sense, what was I thinking of?

He's a councillor for fark's sake!

A Stafford Borough Council spokesman, with no sense of irony or pomposity, said:

"A planning application has been made for a Jolly Roger flag

to be flown at a property in Stone.

The application is currently under review

and will include planning officers looking

at the impact the flag has on the area,

with the decision expected by the end of this month.

Legislation requires planning approval

before it can be flown from the flagpole."

Do these people ever listen to, or read, what they say?

Don't they see how ridiculous they are?

Does this council have nothing better to do or spend the tax payers' money on???

Drop the council an email here, telling them what you think of them

- customerContactCentre@staffordbc.gov.uk

Drop councillor Steven a note here: prstevens@staffordbc.gov.uk

FYI, the Jolly Roger dates back to the 1700s when pirates would fly it to make their victims surrender readily.

I would also remind you, this being the 25th anniversary of the Falklands's victory, that the Jolly Roger was flown by H.M.S. Conqueror, the sub that sank the Belgrano, when she returned to Britain (as is the tradition of subs when they have successfully executed a kill).

Would Nanny have banned that too???

Nanny's Toilet Spies

Yesterday, being the anniversary of 9/11 and the attack on the Twin Towers, Nanny and her chums did their level best to remind us all that she is working for our benefit in trying to win the so called "war on terror" and ensuring that the "battle for civilisation" is won by the "good guys".

A cynic might argue that attacking Iraq, which was not responsible for the 9/11 slaughter, was a rather strange way to "protect us".

A cynic might also argue that a more effective means of lessening the chances of terrorist attack would be to allow the natural fissures and rivalries within Islam to be exposed from within, and for the extreme elements within the various factions (eg extremist Sunnis, extremist Shias etc) to fight it out amongst themselves and to kill each other, rather than for us to unite them by bombing civilian targets in the Middle East.

The most effective way for these fissures to be exposed, and for the "united" extremists to be thrown back to their natural state of trying to kill each other, would be for all of our troops to be removed from the Middle East and for us to stop buying oil from the Middle East.

However, what the fuck do I know?

Nanny has proven, by the fact that we all feel so much safer than we did a few years ago, that she really does know best.

On that note, she has been working hard to try to ensure that our flights are less likely to be blown up or highjacked.

By the way, I know that facts are something that Nanny really abhors, but do you realise that it has been at least 25 years since a British flight has been highjacked?

Maybe Nanny has been over reacting wrt her ever increasing security clampdowns?

Anyhoo, Nanny has decided that planes need CCTV and sound recording devices installed...yes Nanny really does have a fetish for CCTV!

Researchers in Britain and Europe are looking at technology that would introduce a network of microphones and cameras throughout aircraft, including the toilet, which would be linked to a computer.

This computer would be "trained" to pick up suspicious behaviour.

Precisely how a computer distinguishes between "ordinary" toilet activities, and suspicious toilet activities is beyond me. That being said, Catherine Neary of Bae Systems is very confident of the scheme's success. Bae is one of the British participants in a £24 million European Union project Safety of Aircraft in Future European Environment.

Ms Neary said:

"It would pick passengers who are behaving oddly or in an unruly manner.

They may appear nervous, or could be getting up while the plane is taxiing.

If someone looks as if they are praying,

the microphones would be able to tell if they were by picking up key words."

Adding:

"There are likely to be cameras and microphones in the toilet,

because that is where terrorists go to assemble bombs.

If people know they will be safer,

they will be happy to accept the sensors,

but we are considering the legal implications of this."

Oh yes, I can really see this working!

CCTV is all very well, but it is invariably used "post event" to catch/prosecute the criminal after he has done the dirty deed. Unless you have "real time" human observers monitoring the plane, who are able to intervene pre attack, then this system is worthless.

I also suspect that the Mile High Club may be a tad annoyed about this too, or maybe not?

I don't know about anyone else, but I for one will be closely inspecting the facilities and the bowl the next time I answer the call of nature.

Nanny Hoisted On Her Own Petard

Now here's a funny thing.

Flag poles are designed to raise flags on, right?

Well, not in Nanny's world.

Nanny has decided that the flagpole at Woodbrige police station, that has been used for many years to fly flags, is simply too dangerous a place to fly a flag from.

The procedure is relatively simple, to my untrained eye, it involves an officer putting his hand out of the window and hoisting the flag.

However, Nanny knows best!

Health and safety issues have ruled that this is now too dangerous a task for officers.

Terry Horth, a retired police officer from Woodbridge Suffolk, complained to Suffolk police that the Union Jack flag had not been flown at the police station on the Queen's birthday, April 21.

He was told by Suffolk police that it was:

"difficult to attach the flag to the flagpole which has restrictive access".

Anne-Marie Breach, a spokeswoman for Suffolk police, is adamant:

"Anyone putting out the flag would have to lean out of the window and, due to the positioning of the pole, this would be unsafe,"

As if to emphasise her point, the flagpole will be removed shortly!

Now, if flying a flag is too dangerous for the police I assume Nanny will soon be stopping them from attending crime scenes?