Alice? Who the fuck is Alice?

Please, someone, enlighten me. Who was this woman? You can send your explanations to couldnotcareless@boutdeadroyals.co.uk.

So, where's Osama Bin?*

Given the protracted silence, I figured that Osama Bin Laden was long dead. Clearly, he isn't. Shame. Still, he seems to have been honing his taunting skills since he last sent a broadcast from his batcave. Look what he had to say about Bush's initial response upon learning about the first plane hitting the World Trade Centre:

It never occurred to us that he, the commander in chief of the country, would leave 50,000 citizens in the two towers to face those horrors alone, because he thought listening to a child discussing her goats was more important.

I say, that's not cricket! But that's not really an original observation is it? I reckon OBL's been watching Fahrenheit 9/11. Then there was this:

We did not find it difficult to deal with Bush and his administration because it is similar to regimes in our countries, half of which are governed by the military and the other half of which are governed by the sons of kings and presidents.

Miaaow! Saucer of milk for the man with the beard! Perhaps this is a new tactic for al-Qaeda? They've moved on from bombing and flying planes into buildings and are instead going to hit America with a relentless campaign of sarcasm and irony. Things could get nasty.

Even worse, I've got a horrible feeling that OBL popping up this close to the election might just work in GWB's favour. It shouldn't: it should act as a reminder to everyone that the Bush government has completely failed to bring this demented maniac to justice. I've just got a horrible feeling that this is going to put a few more voters behind the incumbent. Please, no, not another four years of this grinning simpleton.

*With thanks to Cunners for the post's headline!

Republican Rhapsody

Bohemian Rhapsody for the 2004 elections.

Bizarre love triangle

Yasser Arafat has left Jordan and is on his way to France for treatment. Good news for Peter Andre. That love triangle has gone on for far too long.

Is it really so strange?

I've been thinking some more about the satanist being allowed to perform his "rituals" while at sea with the Royal Navy (as mentioned on 25.10.04). Firstly, I'd like to know what these rituals are. A bit of background reading informed me that, contrary to popular belief, it doesn't involve sacrificing goats or virgins (nor, for that matter, virginal goats). Which I found a bit disappointing frankly. So what DO they do? Pray? Meditate? Repeat mantras? Worship the sun? That's a bit ordinary isn't it? There isn't a religion in the world that doesn't involve a lot of that. Which moves me onto my second point. As a staunch atheist, I don't find Satanism any more ridiculous or offensive than any other unfounded belief system. Christians! Jews! Muslims! Buddhists! Hindus! Sikhs! You are all mistaken! Listen to me! Worshipping a horned fallen angel is no more absurd than avoiding certain foods on a Friday, or finding cows "sacred" (you ever been near a cow? Sacred isn't the word that springs to mind. Stupid maybe. They stink of shit too.), or fasting, or taking the bible literally. Don't you see? THEY ARE ALL UTTERLY PREPOSTEROUS!

So what do these "satanists" believe in? I checked out the Church Of Satan website for more information. There's an awful amount of waffle on here, but from what I can gather, it amounts to putting man before nature, "vengeance instead of turning the other cheek", "indulgence instead of abstinence", etc, etc, etc. Funny, I thought that was called "capitalism".

At last, recognition for Satanists in the military!

At long last the Royal Navy has lifted its ban on Satanists. For too long now, followers of Satan have been denied a career in the military, and treated like second class citizens. This is a real breakthrough for the followers of Beelzebub and all his little wizards. Let's hope this opens the door to more satanists in public life.

In fact, what we need is a Chav Hitler*

This was actually the idea of my friend Pete who stumbled upon this genius concept at the pub on Friday night. He was probably too drunk to remember but I think he's right.

I'm not seriously advocating genocidal practices but we need to do something. I realise I'm starting to read like a Daily Mail editorial here, but I'm really coming round to the idea of zero tolerance to cut crime. It worked pretty well in New York. Now, as a left-leaning liberal I'm supposed to regard such concepts as , erm, illiberal. But in my heart of hearts I want to be able to go about my business without having to navigate packs of chav fuckwits. They're EVERYWHERE. The Burberry, the bright white trainers, the bad skin, the vulgar casual clothing, the baseball caps, the illiterate graffiti, the souped up Vauxhalls, the urine. . . .

I'd find it difficult to object to a policing policy that wouldn't tolerate their existence on (what seems like) every street corner. What a great improvement it would be to everyone's quality of life if every group of anti-social morons were moved along or criminally prosecuted rather than left to drink cheap booze, smoke drugs and piss and vomit on the streets. This isn't illiberal, this is advancing civilisation. Another friend of mine (another Pete, funnily enough) recently returned from Prague where he had spent a great weekend in a beatiful and cultural city. Upon returning to London and travelling home from the airport, one of the first sights to greet him was somebody spitting on the tube. You've got to wonder what kind of society this is where some people's standards are so low they think nothing of this behaviour. It's only a matter of time before people just drop their trousers and shit on the pavement. . .

Jesus, I'm turning into Peter Hitchens. Not quite, but this is actually one area where we'd probably agree with each other. I don't think this position places doubts over my liberal credentials either: it can easily be defended on utilitarian grounds. What's the alternative? Probably something akin to the chilling prophecy depicted by Orwell in 1984:

If you want a picture of the future, imagine a Reebok Classic stamping on a human face - for ever.

* That is, a Hitler to go after the chavs. Not a Hitler derived from chavs. That would be horrendous. Say what you like about Nazis, but they were well dressed. Wouldn't be seen dead in some tat from Hackett.

Wishy washy liberals!

I'm thinking of joining the Liberal Democrats. No, don't laugh, I'm serious. I've got a real hankering to engage once more with politics and they're the only place I can go. I'm an ex-Labour member (I bet there are a few of us) who let his membership lapse because I was fed up with supporting them and having to pinch my nose every time they compromised on yet another ideal. They just disappointed me more and more with each passing day post-May 1st 1997. The day I join the Conservatives is the day I start having sex with the dead (which is a pretty apt analogy having caught footage of their conference audience this year in Bournemouth). So there you have it. What other choice do I have?

We're actually a pretty good fit. I'm a staunch advocate of proportional representation, devolution, upper house reform, and abolishing the Royal family: all issues that Labour have either never touched in the first place or have conveniently ignored once they were elected with a majority the size of Norway. OK, that's not strictly accurate: there are Scottish and Welsh assemblies now, and hereditary peers have lost their voting rights, but it's just not enough. I want the upper chamber elected and accountable! Is that really too much to ask? Personally I've never understood why Labour didn't do this sort of radical stuff back in 1945 when they had a truly socialist agenda and (can you imagine?) admitted it! Not that I'm a socialist, I'm just one of those weird people who thinks democratic principles are sacrosanct and that having a head of state who gets the position BECAUSE THEY WERE BORN is kind of antiquated. It was certainly contrary to the ideals of the post-war Labour Party, so what were they thinking?? I'm not advocating execution or anything like that. How about a nice market solution? Most British business was bought up by overseas shareholders in the 1980s and 90s so couldn't we do something similar with the Windsors? The Americans could buy Buck House and everyone in it and ship it over to Arizona like they did with the original London Bridge. Bada bing! We're free of those freeloading freaks and the Yanks have bought themselves some history. Everyone's a winner. We'll need an immediate replacement to keep the wheels of legislation in motion while we figure out a permanent (elected) solution. How about Bruce Forsyth? He did a great job when he was a guest presenter on Have I Got News For You. Yes, I have all the solutions today.

Anyway, where was I? Oh yes, parallels with the Lib Dems. I like the proposed war on 4x4 drivers, abolition of tuition fees and a 50% tax rate for the extremely well paid. I'm lukewarm on Europe so there's a bit of controversy there, but nothing we can't work around. We don't see eye to eye on certain aspects of law and order mind you, so it's not all a bed of roses: they want to send joy-riders go-karting, I want them strung up by broken ankles and beaten with clubs. Let's declare war on chavs: drive these hordes of cretinous, baseball-cap-wearing white trash from our city centres and put them all on the Isle Of Man or something. The UN can air-drop Benson & Hedges, Bacardi breezers and fake Burberry clothing once a week to keep them occupied. Some sort of contraceptive in the water supply would probably be a good idea as well.

So yes, that would probably put me on the right of the party on social issues. But liberalism is a broad church and I'm sure there's room for everyone's point of view. Mr Kennedy, I am almost with you!