Let’s have a look, then:

Repeal licensing

by Debra
on July 28, 2010 at 09:42PM

Repeal all licensing.

Licensing serves no purpose other than control. Treating people like dogs with animal tags.
This is obvious. Then we must consider who are the “owners” who are doing this to people.

People have a right to govern themselves by Laws given to them by God. Not serve others.
Compassion and kindness is built-into God’s Law, unlike man-made laws lacking fairness.
There is no licensing in The Law, inherent to every single individual, anywhere in the world.
The Law is The Law of God for the people and not by the people, to rule fairly, with justice.

Gov’t is clearly not working, nor serving the public by licensing and making made-up laws.

Please view my other contributions explaining the serious issues, and the consequences.

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/right-to-repeal/idea-view

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/repealing-unnecessary-laws/repeal.-custody-of-children.-divorce/idea-view

http://yourfreedom.hmg.gov.uk/restoring-civil-liberties/repeal-british-parliament-sovereignty/idea-view

Why the contribution is important
Government is to serve the people. Licensing serves the government.

Licensing serves no purpose! Besides, y’know, making sure people are able to comply with the law. Fortunately for us that first petition she links to in her petition has that base well and truly covered:

Right to Repeal

by Debra
on July 07, 2010 at 09:44PM

There is no need for legislation. Legislation is the concrete wall that actually makes living by God’s Law illegal. People have been conditioned to think gov’t laws protect, but they enslave.
They enslave by enforcing (allowing) corruption and depravity, and controlling everything else.
Notice the inequality that occurs/goes unchecked because of obedience to people, not God.

Following God’s Law is not only disagreed with, and has become a reason for imprisonment.

http://mtrial.org/introduction

Those who do not want to follow God’s Law have no right, by opinion or otherwise, to rule.
It has become apparent that this world cannot be made a better place by altering the law.
All legislation needs to be abolished, and one person, who is chosen by God, can do this.

Why the contribution is important
Freedom.

(Update: Whoops, Andrew covered the above petition in his last post. Feel free to spin on.) Right, so now anybody can drive a car regardless of experience and you can only rule the country if God chooses you to do so – read: if you’re fucking batshit bonkers insane crazypants (not to be confirmed with Sir Wesley Strantham Batshit Bonkers Insane Crazypants of the New Hampshire Crazypants).

What other crazy shit do you want, Debs?

Repeal. Custody of Children. Divorce.

by Debra
on July 22, 2010 at 01:10PM

Repeal women’s un-Lawful legal right to custody of children, and all un-Lawful legal divorce.

A woman bears children “for” the husband. Lawfully children are under the rule of the man.

3:16 Unto the woman He (God) said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow
and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy
desire [shall be subject] to thy husband, and HE (thy husband) SHALL
RULE OVER THEE. – Genesis.

Each case of divorce should be viewed individually and placement of children determined.

11:3 But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ;
and the head of the woman [is] the man; and the head of Christ [is]
God. – 1 Corinthians.

The only Lawful reason to divorce is fornication. Clearly stated in the Bible. Matthew 5:32.

5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife,
saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery:
and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery. -
Matthew.

HMG and Gov’t world-wide claim to be based under God, yet reality proves this to be false.
Followers of Christ, who want to follow all The Law in The Torah, are not being allowed. At this time, there is not a place for judicial recourse for us, and we want a single court room.

Why the contribution is important
People’s God-given rights are not being served in any court-room.

Women and children become little more than property, then? Lovely. Brilliant idea. Wait, no. Sorry. Not “Brilliant”. The other one. Bloody stupid. Oh, and your claim that you and your fellow loonies are currently unable to operate under the current judicial system is bollocks because you can still get your Crazy Person divorce under the current system.

Also, “HMG and Gov’t world-wide claim to be based under God”? Since when?

Alright, one more before I decide to shuffle off this mortal coil:

Repeal British Parliament sovereignty

by Debra
on July 23, 2010 at 10:18PM

Repeal British parliament sovereignty to restore civil liberties (and more).

Parliament has passed laws that limit parliamentary sovereignty. Parliament can repeal any of these limitations. Therefore, they continue to create and end any law, lacking Lawfulness.

It is quite clear, regardless what millions say, that no authority was granted to Parliament
to repeal and create new laws if they follow God as the queen and parliament attest to do.

5:17-20 Think not that I am come to destroy The Law, or the Prophets:
I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill. For verily I say unto you,
Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no way pass
from The Law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break
one of these least Commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be
called the least in the Kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and
teach [them], the same shall be called great in the Kingdom of heaven.
For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed [the
righteousness] of the lawyers and politicians (who were also priests
because the church and the state were one at that time), ye shall in
no case enter into the Kingdom of heaven. – Matthew.

Based on this proof (and there is more), the people who choose to live by The Law of God, have every right to do so. Parliament is forbidding followers of Christ, by all their legislation.
Hence the contribution, challenging (again) the British Parliament to relinquish sovereignty.

On 13/June/1988, 40 years from the Fig Tree putting forth its new shoots in 1948, Christ served a High Court Writ upon the British Parliament, at court in the City of Sheffield, where his new body hadbeen born in 1948, as prophesied, demanding that he be acknowledged by
Parliament as the Rightful British-Israel King.
http://jahtruth.net/emmau2.htm

Why the contribution is important
To increase recognition of The Rightful British Royalty.

I think we’re done here. Blimey.

I can’t wait to see all of the accidents that pop up as a result of people reaching the junction just as the light turns red and slamming the breaks on.

Abolish the National Speed Limit

by TJ102
on July 10, 2010 at 04:17PM

The 70 mph speed limit on motorways and dual carriageways has been in force since December 1965.

Over the time since it was introduced, there have been substantial improvements in vehicle and road safety measure

According to the Association of British Drivers, in 1965, 70 mph represented more than 80% of the maximum speed of average cars, wheras now it represents only 60%. They estimate that at present, 56% of car drivers exceed the motorway speed limit.

Why the contribution is important
Drivers know their own limits and the limits of their vehicles. They should be concentrating on the quality of their driving, rather than an arbitrary 45 year old speed limit.

We should abolish the speed limit and concentrate on preventing dangerous driving.

Seriously? Are you serious? How can you be for “preventing dangerous driving” but against the speed limit? Are you daft or something?

speed restrictions

by appleton306
on July 13, 2010 at 05:34AM

WE WANT TO USE THE FULL POWER POTENTIAL OF THE VEHICLE WE BUY!!

AUTOBAHN IN ENGLAND!

INTRODUCE TOP SPEED LANE ON MOTORWAY!!!!!!!!

Why the contribution is important
SAFER AND FASTER

SAFER= NOT SHITTING YOURSELF CAUSE THERES A SPEED CAMERA UP AHEAD CAUSING YOU TO BREAK SHARPLY AND UNNECESSARY!

HAHAHAHAHAHA!

It’s not that employers have been insensitive, it’s that you’ve become overly sensitive. Now, would you kindly climb into an industrial-size blender and frappé yourself?

Okay. Er. Why?

appoint Keith Jones (taxpaying pensioner) as head of the team of people checking MPs (and other un-elected people in the political aristocracy of this country who have access to taxpayer pounds in the form of tax-free allowances) expenses claims.

by Keith Jones of Taxpaying Pensioner without political affiliation (rejected)

It is plainly obvious that the people who are currently responsible for checking and approving claims are unable to read the book of rules and MUST be removed from the task. As a tax paying pensioner I have a vested interest in ensuring that the money is properly spent. I absolutely guarantee that there is no individual nor organisation nor amount of money can hold sway over the way I would exercise my responsibilities in this post.

appoint Keith Jones as the new Chairman of the Committee on Standards in Parliament.

by keith jones of taxpaying pensioner without political affiliation (rejected)

Now that the recently appointed Chairman has said he may not be able to fulfil the role, Gordon Brown has an opportunity to move away from the ‘establishment’ and to appoint someone who has no interest in become lorded, nor in making a fortune. Keith Jones will do the job diligently, always in favour of the taxpayer, honestly and with transparency and probity AND he will do it without being paid for it. His only fees will be travel costs between his home in South Wales and his office in Westminster, though why he has to have an office in Westminster is the first item on his review agenda.

Y’know, I’d kind of like to see this, if only to see how much Keith manages to balls up both gigs at once. Not entirely sure why he chose to refer to himself in the third person for his second petition though. I mean, his name on the thing. People already know he wrote it.

Considering some of the dangers police officers risk on a day-to-day basis, I think having criminals yell their name at them is probably the least of their worries.

The people who lived in the tower blocks will simply cease to be, and the Happiness Fairy will sprinkle her fairydust on the building site and wonderful houses with beautiful back gardens will sprout out of the ground! The people in the neighbourhoods will suddenly become kind, wonderful, generous people who’ll put away their hoodies, pull out their acoustic guitars, and sing songs of joy and rapture until the sun goes down.

Then they’ll mug everyone.

There’s a difference between “I’m not sure if climate change is happening” and “It’s definitely not happening.” One is stating a feeling of uncertainty, and the other is outright denial – and when I say “denial” I don’t mean the psychological “I’m not listening la la la la” denial, I mean the literal denial. Most people labelled as “clime change deniers” aren’t raising questions about whether it’s going on or not – they’re outright saying it’s not happening. The label is apt.

launch a pilot run at a local level (e.g. town council) to test the effect of lowering the voting age to 12.

by Tobias Holbrook

Currently, the voting age is not set on a rational basis. It is set at 18, despite a lack of evidence that 18 is a logical age to set it at. I propose to lower the voting age at a local level as a pilot, to see what effect allowing people as young as 12 to vote and stand for election would have. The results from this can then be used to determine a logical voting age for national elections.

Yes! This is clearly the logical choice! Let’s see what 12year-olds, who have little or no understanding of how the world works, have to say! Or better yet let’s see what the 12 year-olds’ parents have to say as they’ll be the ones telling their kids what to vote for!

But young Master Betts (I shit you not) has another suggestion:

I would like sixteen year olds to get the ability to vote in elections.

by Master Connor Betts

I am writing this petition for my Citizenship GSCE Coursework. The more signatures, the better. I know there are alot of people who share the same views as I do. In my opinion, If sixteen year olds are allowed to risk their lives for their country, Then why can’t they be given the ability to vote for who they are fighting for? If they can devote their lives to another person (Marriage) and sign a marriage certificate, Then why can’t they sign a less important and more simple document being the ballot paper?

This does present us with a conundrum. Tobias wants to knock the age all the way down to 12. There’s a gap here of four years. What shall we do?

Fortunately, Tobias is willing to compromise:

create a tiered electoral age system, where parish council elections would have a voting age of 12, district councils 14, county coucils 16, and national elections 18.

by Tobias Holbrook

One of the issues our democracy is facing is the voting age. There are many arguments both for and against lowering the voting age, but they tend to miss an obvious compromise – a tiered system, where town parish council elections would have an age limit of 12, district council elections and age limit of 14, county council elections an age limit of 16, and a national age limit of 18.

The advantages would be numerous. It would give people a chance to become more involved in the political process as they grow older, while also serving to gather useful information that would inform further debates on the voting age.

We hope the government considers this idea carefully.

Yes! Such a brilliant idea! And this despite a lack of evidence to support that 12, 14 and 16 are the logical voting ages for these regions.

Doncha think?

By the way: Based solely on this petition, I’m going to go ahead and assume that Mr Timothy John Tyne is a racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic douche canoe who hates everyone who isn’t a straight white male with blond hair, blue eyes, and a deep, masculine voice.

The key problem with this idea is the presumption that supermarkets are the reason things get more expensive instead of, say, interest. People aren’t smart. They’re constantly going on about How Much Cheaper Things Were Back Then, gleefully omitting How Much less They Were Paid Back Then. That being said, I think Mr Bell’s endgame here is to get rid of signs in supermarkets. Which… annoying him… for some reason?

by Martin Bjelland Konstali of Human beings…! (rejected)

His blog is most illuminating.

Bring back workhouses for the unemployed rather than benefits.

by Robin Rawlings

As a tax payer I fed up seeing my neighbours who don’t work watching their 40″ plasma tv’s, I can’t afford one and I work and pay tax so why should lazy people contributing nothing to the country get more than hard working people. We should force them to work if they don’t work, by building workhouses and then sending them to workhouses.

Of course! It’s all so simple!

There are a number of good reasons to be against the Body Scanners being installed at airports – and one or two of them even make it into this petition – but it amuses me that Robin seems to believe that airport passengers will have to “pose for naked photos”, as though this were a nude photo shoot of some sort.

Yes, it’d do us no harm. Well, besides totally screwing up our economy, of course, because we wouldn’t be able to get the few goods we do manufacture to their destinations, nor would we be able to transport the goods we import.

Also, everything else that’s wrong with your idea.

stop Britain and the Channel Tunnel grinding to a halt during the winter by increasing global warming.

by Ian Baldwin

The Prime Minister wants colder winters but Britain cannot cope with the small amounts of snow it gets at present. If man made climate change exists (and the undersigned do not believe it does) he should be encouraging global warming in order to keep roads and railways open and save money on severe weather payments.

BWAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

change the law on the collection of unpaid parking tickets for european lorries.

by martin berry of n/a

i would like the goverment to change the way unpaid parking tickets are left. if european lorries park and get booked in this country they mostley go unpaid why cant there be a new law that if its not paid a warrent marker is placed on the company that ownes the lorrie regardless where its from and when it comes back in the country the police on board computers in there cars are actevated and the lorries are stopped and inpounded untill the fine and access fine is paid the goverment issue budgets to councils every year the councils are loseing millions of pounds by this easy get out drivers have. change it and the goverment will not have to pay out so much saving a lot of money i live in dover kent the gate way to england these drivers at the moment are parking anyware they like and consantley getting away with it and cauesing thousands of pounds of damage every year by the way they park change the law and save money its so easy i would love a reply thank you martin

It starts out with a fairly sensible, nay reasonable request – European lorry drivers do have a habit of parking wherever they like (even in my old hometown of Luton, where they’d just find a small backroad and park up to sleep for the afternoon). However after this our boy Martin descends into science fiction bollocks, asking for the vehicle to somehow be switched off remotely. At that point the petition turns into a letter from a seven year-old.

I completely agree that parking tickets given to lorries and vehicles originating from overseas should be collected in some manner, but this Will Smith I, Robot bollocks isn’t the way to go about doing it.

Case in point:

force supermarkets to offer surpless stock for free and indtroduce landfill levy.

by Mr Aaron Asphar

They say shoplifting is a crime; yet Asda alone send over 75,000 tonnes of food a year to landfile, because it is more profitable to over-order and dump the surpless then to run out of stock when sales exceed expectations. This is a crime on an industrial scale. Supermarkets should be made to offer their food to charities and customers for free 6 hours before the sell by date. They should also pay a substantial levy by the tonne for landfil. The environmental and social benefits would be vast.

Y’know, you’re right – shoplifting and disposing of out-of-date, surplus stock are comparable crimes.

Ban outdoor Christmas decorations on homes.

by Sandy Peters

There seems to be more and more people who like to decorate the outside of their homes with vulgar Christmas decorations. They are not only an eyesore but also a waste of energy. Please support me in getting these monstrosities banned.

Yes. Extinction is silly.

stop wasting tax-payers’ money at this time of recession on pointless radio advertising.

by Derek Green of Common sense

I understand from the TPA that the government is now responsible for 50% of radio advertising revenue and, as a regular listener, I find most of this is pointless and futile. For instance, the current one about “benefit thieves” (doesn’t seem to be one for parliamentary expenses thieves, but there you go). Most people on benefits are honest people who find themselves having to claim them after years of paying into the system. When they then find themselves asked to survive on a measly £60 a week, who could blame them for doing a bit of work on the side? Those who are the scroungers and know how to work the system are running rings round the establishment and do you honestly think a radio ad is going to prick their conscience? All it is, is another empty gesture to give the impression that the government is doing something about the problem. It’s time to stop this waste of money, especially when they’ve just refused funding for another drug that would give cancer sufferers longer with their loved ones. They need to wake up and realise which areas they do need to cut back on expense. Please sign this and stop this waste of money on what is more or less propaganda.

This is a logistical nightmare at best, and an impractical impossibility at… well, at all. If nothing else, who’d be left to run the wotsit? Thingy, you know… the country?

declare that 12 April as Britain’s Flag Day marking the creation of the first union flag on 12 April 1606.

by David Dance

12 April to be Flag Day as it celebrates the creation of the flag of Great Britain on 12 April 1606!

Or how close together those celebrations are.

declare that 1st May as Britain’s Foundation Day marking the creation of Great Britain on 1st May 1707.

by David Dance

1st May to be Foundation Day as it celebrates the creation of Great Britain on May 1st 1707!

Otherwise known as “May Day”.

Rich people don’t watch TV. They’re far too busy drinking wine and seeing operas and going windsurfing for that kind of thing.

I would be genuinely surprised if a kid with a laser point could achieve anything approaching that level of accuracy over that sort of distance.

Sod off.

But buying regular cameras? Oh, that’s still okay. Like this Kodak Zi8 HD Pocket Video Camera with support for SD cards of up to 32MB and fully integrated YouTube, Facebook and Vimeo uploading, a snip at £140.93.

Dear Ben,

I have come across your web site where you express some views on the petition I have published on the Number 10′s web site.

Whilst I respect your views, it is totally inappropriate for you to make offensive comments. I therefore ask you kindly to remove the offensive part (highlighted in bold below).

I am sure that you work on your web site with the best intentions possible, so I did when I published the petition. So you know, the petition is also available on paper and it is very popular. The parking penalties and clamping system is being abused at the moment, and it is only a money spinning business as proven by recent reports by the BBC. If you wish to contribute with your ideas please do so, but please do not use offensive language.

Thank you,
Lucio Milisci

Please note that you are forbidden to publish this email on any medium (electronic, paper, analogue) or distribute this email. If you are not the person this email is intended to please delete it immediately.

The page I came across is on :

http://www.wetheundereducated.com/category/thatd-be-nice/

This is what you have published:

1 oct

Everyone Remember Where We’ve Parked

Posted by: Ben Tags: Mr. Lucio Milisci of Lucio Milisci

ban parking penalties and car clamping from private and public land in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

by Mr. Lucio Milisci of Lucio Milisci

This petition is aimed at banning parking penalties and car clamping from the United Kingdom. Suggested alternatives are points on the driving licenses or use more the technology and human resources available to educate drivers with their parking habits. Parking fines and car clamping (and its related enormous charges) cause too much grievance to the population at a time when we need to pull together to make this country Great again.

There is so much wrong with this plan. For a start, “points on the driving licenses”? Generally when a car is parked there’s no one in it – who, then, should the points be given to? You can’t prove who was driving the car at the time it was parked, and you can’t put points on the licenses of everyone insured on that car because then… well, people’d moan.

Secondly, “use more the technology”? Really?

Finally, the solution to your predicament is this: Don’t park where you’re not supposed to, you fucking plum.”

The petition is very popular, as he says. It has 24 signatories, if you include Lucio himself and the two who will be removed for signing incorrectly. And Marino Milisci who is almost certainly not related anyway. I mean, we’re talking .00004% of the population here. This is big stuff.

Hi Lucio.

You respect my view, which is lovely. I’m glad you have an open mind about this. That being said, part of my view also involves viewing you as a small purple fruit, so I shall not be removing the words you deem to be offensive.

That being said, you didn’t point out any of the information you have provided to me, specifically the misuse of the car clamping on private property, on the petition itself. While I doubt that would have changed my decision to post the petition on the website, it would at least have given me insight into why you are against car clamping. Armed with that information I would likely have picked an entirely different expletive and selected a whole other type of fruit to describe you as. I’m thinking probably a mango, or a legume. Are legumes fruit? No, they’re probably vegetables, aren’t they?

Maybe a pineapple.

Anyway, I hope this message finds you well, and I wish you the best of luck with your petition.

Cheers,
~Ben

I have checked and legumes are members of the Fabaceae  family. They’re peas.

Dear Ben,

I don’t mind your love and passion for fruit and vegetables.  Perhaps remove the swear word and all will be sorted.

All the best with your site and anything you do in life.

Thank you,

Lucio

This is what I love about Lucio’s complaint: we’re allowed to call him a plum but not to swear as we do so, because then suddenly it is offensive. Heaven forfend he should be a sexually active plum. Possibly his family are devout Christian plums who would find this sinful.

We choose the words we are offended by. You choose to be offended by the F-word, but not by the word “plum”.

I’m not generally fond of using swearwords as the core of a humorous comment (although I have admittedly been swearing on But, Sir… a lot as of late) but I am less fond of censorship. With this in mind I’m afraid I am disenclined to acquience to your request.

I am sure there is software you can install on your computerbox that will, if you so desire, censor or blur instances of swearing you may come across on the internet. I’m sure it’s not that expensive either.

Now if you’ll excuse me, I have a date with a cantaloupe.

Warmest regards,
~Ben

Incidentally, a cantaloupe is a member of the Cucurbitaceae family, making it a type of melony cucumbery fake berrie-ey fruity kind of a thing.

Ben,

Being an educated, respectful, polite citizen does not limit your freedom of expression.  You have chosen to use offensive language towards a person you know very little about and frankly do not deserve to be addressed so abusively.   By using abusive, offensive and rude language you have also damaged your own web site, its reputation and democratic potentials.

Verbal abuse is a criminal offense.  Do I need to refer you to the Police both in the UK and US?

If you apologize and remove the offensive comments the matter can be closed here and now , otherwise I will have to escalate it to the competent authorities.

If you are so determined to keep your point, are so brave and want to be free to offend people, you can decide to act sensibly and give me your postal address, in the US and/or Luton ( wherever you are operating from)  and the name and address of the web hosting/URL registration company.

I suggest you consider seriously closing the matter today by complying with my request to apologize and remove the offensive language directed at me.

Thank you,

Lucio

Oh no, it’s the Police! Not the law enforcement agency, because that is not considered a proper noun. We’re in trouble with Sting. Possibly he wants us banned and therefore is referring us to “The Banned Police” but spelled it wrong.

Thank you for ruining a perfectly good date. I’d taken my cantaloupe to see Toy Story & Toy Story 2 in 3D and had to cut it short to respond to this email. Now I’ll never know whether or not Buzz and Woody escape from Sid’s house.

I calle you a “fucking plum” on the website. That’s an expression of opinion, and I’m fairly confident there are laws and rights in both the US and UK that protect me here. I know in the US there’s this thing called the Constitution. It doesn’t have a lot of weight these days but people still seem to be interested in that first amendment right to freedom of speech.

“But, Sir…” is hosted by Ix Web Hosting, an American company. As such the servers are based in the US and are bound by US laws, rights and regulations. I would advise you contact Ix directly if you feel content on our site has caused you distress.

Wish you were here,
~Benjy

We haven’t heard anything from Ix. Possibly they got an email that said “your clients called me a fucking plum and now they’re talking about taking melons to the cinema; please help me it’s a kind of abuse” and their spam filter rightly trashed it.

Ben,

It is such a shame that you believe that abusing people is a right under the great american constitution.

Freedom of speech is much different. I suggest you over educate your self to protect your self from legal action.

Freedom of speech does not protect:

Speech that contains “fighting words” (insulting or abusive language that is likely to cause “an immediate violent response”);
Obscenities;
Language or communication directed to inciting, producing or urging the commission of a crime;
Defamation – words or communication that are false and untrue and are intended to injure the character and reputation of another person;
Abusive, obscene or harassing telephone calls;
Loud speech and loud noise meant by volume to disturb others or to create a clear and present danger of violence

Please respect my rights, stop abusing me, remove the offensive language.

Lucio

I mean, I know Ben’s being rather silly, but “stop abusing me”? Really? You’ve emailed Ben more than he’s emailed you.

It’s a good thing we haven’t done any of the things you’ve listed on that lovely little list, then. I have described you as a small purple fruit, and I have preceded that description with a word that some consider offensive. I will refer your emails to the But, Sir… legal expert and chief gardener, Andrew “Quickdraw” Taylor, who will re-read my comments and ensure that we have not made any obscene phone calls.

The cantaloupe has broken up with me. I am alone again. I shall sleep in an empty bed tonight.

Blessed be,
~Benjamin

I shall let you into a secret: I know nothing of gardening.

Mr Milisci,

I have read Ben’s entry on the “Yes, But Sirs!” blogsite in light of your concerns, and I do not believe any breach of free speech has taken place. No crimes are being plotted, we do not own a telephone, and we would never make Fighting Talk as we are wet liberals and it would come out all stilted. I do not know if Ben intended his words to be read loudly so as to disturb others, but I read them in a quiet voice as I was also listening to Dolly Parton.

I assume therefore that you are concerned about obscenities, so I feel I must make a clarification: in the blogsitepage, the word ‘fucking’ is used as an intensifying adjective, not a verb. Nobody is accusing you of fucking a plum, although if you do like that kind of thing then obviously that’s fine too. In fact, the plum is also metaphorical (unlike Ben’s cantaloupe, about which he is most upset), and so the whole clause is technically nonsense, which I believe is protected by the First Amendment, since otherwise Sarah Palin would not have been allowed to run for President.

Incidentally, the roses are coming up lovely, which I believe is unusual for this time of year.

Yours,
QUICKDRAW////

Or of law. Mostly I know about fancy HTML signatures.

That was a few days ago now. We’ve not heard back from him, so I presume he’s currently pleading with the FBI to be taken seriously.

What about the right to sit in your home with a cup of tea watching Countdown without having it interrupted by some git trying to sell you a set of steak knives, or a vacuum cleaner, or something? You’re not providing a service, you’re trying to sell something. If I need a set of all-purpose cleaning products I’ll bloody well pop down to Wilkinsons and buy some as and when the time arises, thankyouverymuch.

I don’t see you complaining about the Telephone Preference Service, or the Mailing Preference Service.

Awww, diddums.

Except… isn’t it technically a step backwards?

If you want “family life” just keep your family locked in the house on Sundays and play Scrabble or The Game Of Life or something. Alternatively you can let them get on with their lives as if Sunday were any other day of the week. Which, incidentally, it is. You pillock.

Dave apparently wants to kill every single person who wishes to travel from London to Glasgow, or vice versa.

“I think benefits should be paid a week in arrears, for this list of quite ridiculous reasons.”
“Well, I’ll be honest with you, there’s no logical reason to do s–”
“Also we should abolish bank holidays and weekends.”
“Right. Right. Okay. Right. That’s… that’s actually pretty stupid, isn’t it? And it doesn’t have anything to do with your initial request.”
“We can leave the computers switched on all the time!”
“…I’m… I’m sure we can. Er. Could… could you leave now? Please? You’re unsettling the more nervous Ministers.”

Really? Really?

Hang on, you’ve dithered from “never keep dogs on leashes” to “let dogs off leashes once in a while”. Y’know what’s more irresponsible, though? Letting your fucking dog run off on its own to piss, bark and gnaw on whatever and whoever it wants.

I tried to translate this – it seems to boil down to “Oi, Gordon! People are losing their jobs, so Ministers should lose their jobs too!”. But then there’s all that gubbins about fraud and the Glasgow East MP and to be honest I didn’t finish reading it. Instead, I went into the kitchen and made a Pringles sandwich.

Right. And people who smoke and then get lung cancer shouldn’t get treatment either. And, hey, nobody has conclusively proven that mobile phones don’t cause brain tumours, so if you’ve ever used a mobile phone or if you live near a mobile phone mast you shouldn’t be able to get any form of treatment. Actually, people have been complaining about power lines and so on over the years as well, so let’s just prevent anyone who uses electricity from getting medical treatment for anything.

Wow! Look how much money we’ve saved for the NHS!

Oh, well, when you put it like that, it seems silly to have the smoking age limit at all.

We’d love to pop it back in the mail for you but unfortunately you forgot to enclose a stamped addressed envelope.

I never understood the notion of Sunday as a “sacred day”. Since moving to the US I’ve discovered that it’s possible for a shop to be open late into the night, and also at reasonable hours on a Sunday instead of, say, between 11:00am and 11:14am, but only if you’re wearing a purple jumper and can recite your full name backwards.

Heterosexual partners have had preferential treatment for centuries. Let the gays have their turn.

Also: Bonus points for the very create spelling of “heterosexual” in the URL. Go on. Check it out. You’ll laugh, you really will.

You want to improve the educational system by gimping it? That’s inspired lunacy, that is.

I’m running out of pithy wit this afternoon, so I shall instead just refer to Mr Ryce as a moron and leave it at that.

What amuses me is that Richard very clearly takes this issue incredibly seriously.