Permanently Bewildered18 May 2010 07:05 pm
By Nelson

Turns out, this entire blog has been an elaborate ruse to enable me to Have My Say.

This Thursday morning (20th May) a chap called Kirk will stand trial at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court. He’s been charged with aggravated trespass, for his part in a protest against an arms company (Heckler & Koch) known to sell its weapons to repressive regimes. There’s nothing unusual about arms companies doing that but Kirk’s (and his fellow protesters’) dedication in trying to stop the fuckers is depressingly rare.

Obviously, I need to have a comment from somewhere, so I’ll use this one.

We believe that one day the world will look back on the arms trade as we look back today on the slave trade, and wonder how it came about that such evil could abound in respectable society.

Bang on. We’re talking about an industry dedicated to selling devices for maiming and killing people. Our government (whoever they fuck they are this week) actively promotes this industry with public money. An industry built around selling ever increasing amounts of techno-masturbatory metallic death to anyone who’ll buy (and lets face it, the expanding markets for “devices designed to tear people apart” don’t tend to be peaceful, affluent regions). They’re dedicated to making more sales and making more money, as if they were peddling soup, sex-toys or sherbet fucking dib-dabs. This, for me, is the reason why sentences like “Why bother?” and “Do you really think you can stop the arms trade?” don’t even qualify as meaningful questions. The sane, human response to those who knowingly profit from peddling this misery and suffering should not be “considered”, “reasonable” or “balanced”. Fuck that. If you don’t feel it in your gut then you badly need to recalibrate your “giving a shit” module.

Supporters of the campaign to shutdown Heckler & Koch will be gathering outside the court on Wilford Street, Nottingham at 9:00am. Come along if you have the time and you’re nearby. Or maybe have a hunt around and find your local arms company. They’ll be skulking on an industrial estate in an unmarked unit, probably within a few minutes of where you live. Go and tell the black-hearted shits that they’re not welcome in your town.

Any journo types who are interested – please contact me. Kirk’s happy to give interviews on the phone on Wednesday or else in person outside the court before his trial.

131 Responses to “Having My Say – At You”

  1. on 18 May 2010 at 7:48 pm Robin

    Good luck to Kirk and his supporters on Thursday.

    There’s an arms company down the road from me. Depressingly, they don’t even have the shame to use an unmarked building – there’s a sculpture of some fighter planes and missiles bearing gloriously down over the car park. Sometimes people break their windows.

  2. on 18 May 2010 at 8:14 pm christonabike

    This is why the world would be a better place if we all fought with quasar lasers. And funk bombs.

    What’s most depressing, leaving aside the enormous complexities of the topic, is the judge could let them off. They stood on a roof. Let them go. I can just about imagine that the judge won’t and will be an enormous nob about the whole thing.

  3. on 18 May 2010 at 8:15 pm Enid Wibble

    Damn right. The modern arms industry, as any fule kno, exists to enable backbench Tory MPs to achieve erection by imagining the guns and missiles in all their shiny oily beauty. The people who make and sell these wank-aids don’t give a mothss minge about the immense suffering they cause, because where you and I have a sense of human decency and goodness, they have the pitiless smiling cynicism of shit-stained psychos.

    In case this comment was excessively considered, reasonable or balanced, here’s another one: they are cunts.

    Big kisses xxx

  4. on 18 May 2010 at 8:16 pm Enid Wibble

    moth’s, not mothss. That was just me foaming at the mouth.

  5. on 18 May 2010 at 8:20 pm Oli

    Frankly this argument is just as moronic and shit as suggesting we ban cash because drug dealers like storing loads of it in their villas and using it to insufflate cocaine.

    If you genuinely believe that burning down weapons manufacturers will stop war-torn regions from getting hold of firearms and ammunition, you’re clearly barking up the wrong fucking tree.

    Rather than attacking the symptoms of fucked up and/or failed nation states/regions, I suggest you focus on the causes.

  6. on 18 May 2010 at 8:31 pm David

    Of course the thousands of years before the international arms trade were renowned for world peace.

  7. on 18 May 2010 at 8:51 pm Bound to happen really

    Rather than attacking the symptoms of fucked up and/or failed nation states/regions, I suggest you focus on the causes.

    yeah, cos supplying some abitious prick local warlord with 500 cheap machine gubns couldn’t possibly be the cause of regional instability.

  8. on 18 May 2010 at 8:54 pm Nelson

    No, you smug, apathetic fucks.

    Oli, you are employing all the arguments that have ever been used against taking a stand – “Someone else will do it if we don’t, so we may as well do it really well and make millions”. Weak. Rubbish.

    David, mechanised warfare meant that many more lives were lost to warfare in the 20th century than had ever been conceivable before.

    Now I’m aware that most of the people who read my blog are proper good dudes and that when occasional awful pricks comment here, they’re in a TINY minority, but I’m not putting up with any more on this post.

    So if you think you’ve got something clever to say about how grown up you are, realising that war is inevitable and humans are flawed, then shit off and say it to someone who gives a fuck what you think (your mum). If you leave your smug, self-absorbed brainfart here on this post, I’m just going to delete it. And probably ban your IP, cos you people are rubbish.

    Apologies to the rest of you good peeps.

  9. on 18 May 2010 at 9:25 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    The liberation heroes in south and southwest Asia have shown that all it takes to make mayhem is an improvised explosive device, in a handy “vest” format. Millions of people were killed during the civil war in Congo (and that is still continuing). I am sure that plenty of them were villagers killed by the various semi-organised gangs, and I am sure that machetes were used quite a bit (cf Sierra Leone, Angola). Arming governments so that they can deter and/or fight other governments hasn’t been the main cause of war death and misery in the last fifty years.

    What do the anti-arms-industry protesters have to say on that topic?

  10. on 18 May 2010 at 9:27 pm Gainsbourg

    Word

  11. on 18 May 2010 at 9:27 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    I can’t believe that on mentioning machetes, I forgot to mention Rwanda. Sorry, hundreds of thousands of butchered Tutsis and moderate Hutus.

  12. on 18 May 2010 at 9:27 pm funny peculiar

    Frankly this argument is just as moronic and shit as suggesting we ban cash because drug dealers like storing loads of it in their villas and using it to insufflate cocaine.

    If you genuinely believe that burning down weapons manufacturers will stop war-torn regions from getting hold of firearms and ammunition, you’re clearly barking up the wrong fucking tree.

    Rather than attacking the symptoms of fucked up and/or failed nation states/regions, I suggest you focus on the causes.
    Oli

    Worth its own thread, that is. Proper half-thought-out, one-eyed, ignorant bollocks. Why trawl through HYS when HYS can come to you?
    Personally, I sell smack to 12 year olds. Telling me it’s immoral and that I am individually responsible and should be put in prison is crap. Frankly this argument is just as moronic and shit as suggesting we ban oxygen to prevent Robert Mugabe’s regime.

  13. on 18 May 2010 at 9:30 pm Gainsbourg

    That ‘word’ was to Nelson, incidentally. Ed spunked his nihilism all over the page whilst I was mentally crafting my eloquent response

  14. on 18 May 2010 at 9:31 pm Kris

    Come on Nelson, this is just naïve. What, you think it’d be easier to make money hand over fist by not selling weapons to lunatics? Grow up.

    Incidentally;
    @Oli
    Yeah fuck it, you’re right, let’s solve the problem by looking at some failed states with concern and scratch our heads at where it all went wrong. Let’s do nothing about the national apathy that turns a blind eye to people getting rich from other people’s despair. These people have been so stupid, trying to register our disgust and make our voices heard, when they could have been sitting at home thinking about the CAUSES. It all makes sense now.

    Now if you’ll excuse me, I’m going to go and donate a tenner to the Red Cross then try and drop it into conversations with friends who are pretending not to be bored by how fucking smug I’m being. Because that’s the kind of hip, liberal guy I am.

    DISCLAIMER: Oli is probably a basically alright human being.

  15. on 18 May 2010 at 9:38 pm funny peculiar

    Arming governments so that they can deter and/or fight other governments hasn’t been the main cause of war death and misery in the last fifty years. Ed

    Wow, I wish I lived on your planet Ed, it sounds fucking great.

  16. on 18 May 2010 at 9:39 pm Steve

    Well fucking said Nelson. Clearly these pricks aren’t going to start listening until we start throwing bricks and burning down their fucking factories.

  17. on 18 May 2010 at 9:46 pm Kris

    Pssst…Ed…

    I don’t want to embarass you, but you seem to have misunderstood ‘The arms trade is full of wankers who sell weapons to murdering psychopaths’ as ‘Guns directly caused all wars ever. Hitler, Stalin, Idi Amin, Mugabe; all of them were guns’.

    I know you probably feel a bit stupid, but don’t worry, you look stupid as well.

  18. on 18 May 2010 at 9:46 pm Have Your Lurk

    Good luck to you, mate. Wish I actually cared about something as much as you clearly do about this.

  19. on 18 May 2010 at 9:47 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    @Steve

    Ah, the winter of discontent (21st century remix) is right around the corner. Fight the power, brother!

    @funny peculiar

    Wow, I wish I lived on your planet Ed, it sounds fucking great.

    Please give numbers for how many people have been killed by organised militaries vs by disorganised militias in the last 50 years.

  20. on 18 May 2010 at 9:49 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    @Kris

    The big money is in selling the arms to national governments. Oh, did I just burst your bubble? Sorry.

  21. on 18 May 2010 at 9:51 pm Nicki

    I would hope that there will be a sign saying, we are Hecklers, you are Fuchs?

  22. on 18 May 2010 at 9:52 pm Nicki

    Ah, that should be Kochs. Fuchs would be probably better? Such a shame.

  23. on 18 May 2010 at 9:52 pm Jones

    Have to agree with Nelson. There are some things that you can’t condone. Not sure if I can join in, but I’ll check it out, all the same.

    Also, When I feel it in my gut, it usually means my “giving a shit module” is already about to recalibrate. Badly.

  24. on 18 May 2010 at 9:55 pm Kris

    Wow, national governments you say. Well fuck me, I’ll just go away and rethink my whole stance on everything.

  25. on 18 May 2010 at 9:57 pm Dizzy

    I’ve got very little to say except pass on my best wishes to Kirk.

    Oh, and the new Secretary for Business, Innovation and Skills is Vince Cable:

    cablev@parliament.uk

    Dr Vincent Cable, House of Commons, London SW1A 0AA

  26. on 18 May 2010 at 10:00 pm Gainsbourg

    Do national governments instead use their guns to build schools and grow food?

  27. on 18 May 2010 at 10:04 pm Dizzy

    Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    Arming governments so that they can deter and/or fight other governments hasn’t been the main cause of war death and misery in the last fifty years.

    What do the anti-arms-industry protesters have to say on that topic?

    Indonesia, Zimbabwe, Burma, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Sudan, Libya, Syria, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Ethiopia, Eritrea.

  28. on 18 May 2010 at 10:04 pm funny peculiar

    Please give numbers for how many people have been killed by organised militaries vs by disorganised militias in the last 50 years. Ed

    Dear Ed,
    It is your outrageous and ad-hoc claim, not mine. You do the fucking number-crunching.

  29. on 18 May 2010 at 10:04 pm LowTechGeek

    I wonder what the outrage would be if the arguments for the arms industry (if we didn’t do it, someone else would etc.) were to be applied to Kiddie porn.
    Oh, and the argument “that’s different” would merely mark you out as having a brain the size of a match head.

  30. on 18 May 2010 at 10:11 pm Nelson

    There are some things that you can’t condone. Not sure if I can join in, but I’ll check it out, all the same.

    Jah bless. There’s a limit to time and resources. Not everybody can fight everything, all the time. And NVDA is a big commitment. It might be ethical, beautiful, wonderful – but some of us have jobs that depend on clean criminal records and people who depend on our jobs. Courts have been known to acquit people on the defense that they were preventing greater crimes. But they’ve also been known to convict.

    What I think is realistic for ALL of us is a cultural shift. Never stand for that shit – don’t accept it as “just an opinion”. Eventually there will be even fewer people like Ed etc patiently explaining our naivety to us. They are not bad people – they are just ignorant and wrong. They have fallen for the naturalistic fallacy and imagine they’ve derived an “ought” from an “is”.

    I want it to get the point where the sort of chat they’re coming out with seems as unacceptable as the racism of the 70s, or slavery before that. It’ll happen.

  31. on 18 May 2010 at 10:32 pm RIPOFF BRITIAN

    This thread looks like it will bring about the next post full of selfish cuntishness for us to mock and jeer at. Someone actually believes in something in this day and age and on top of that does something about it? Let’s just smugly piss all over it, the world never changes, people are shit, they’ll go on killing one another, nothing will change, so let’s shit all over this moron Kirk guy blah blah fart wank

    Good luck to Kirk btw.

  32. on 18 May 2010 at 10:34 pm SoulBoy

    @ Nicki – Fuchs are “one of the world’s largest manufacturers of lubricants.” Around here our motto is dry or not at all.

    Sorry to butt in on this HYS with some good old fashioned SYB smut. I’ll read further into the meat of Nelson’s post later.

  33. on 18 May 2010 at 10:55 pm Kris

    I’m going to try and find a ‘What would Bill Hicks do?’ t-shirt.

  34. on 18 May 2010 at 11:06 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    @Kris

    Wow, national governments you say. Well fuck me, I’ll just go away and rethink my whole stance on everything.

    To “rethink” you’d first have to “think”. Ah, to be young again and get my opinions from others.

    @Dizzy

    Rwanda, South Vietnam, Congo, Angola, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Colombia, Lebanon, Cambodia, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, Iraq.

    @funny peculiar

    It is your outrageous and ad-hoc claim, not mine. You do the fucking number-crunching.

    I accept your apology.

    By the way, malaria (around 2m), AIDS (around 2m) and starvation (36m) kill far more people every year than weapons. Funny how people here aren’t all foaming at the mouth about that, eh.

  35. on 18 May 2010 at 11:20 pm irishmcbride

    Ed, I don’t see how the fact other bad stuff happens means we shouldn’t get fucked off about one thing and do something about it.

    Fair enough, starvation kills lots of people. That doesn’t make cunts getting rich out of misery tolerable though.

  36. on 18 May 2010 at 11:22 pm Hubert Cumberdale

    Britain is the biggest arms exporter in the world.
    Yeah of course there’s the argument that if it isnt us then its someone else, and chances are pretty much anyone on the planet outside of the West can get hold of one of the millions of AK-47 which does almost the same job as some swanky Heckler and Koch job, for less than the price of two packs of cigarettes.

    And if you want to get all serious about it you could argue that to be honest, who are we to deny arms to all these ‘lesser’ regimes? Are only the big, grown up western nations allowed to use them? Last time I checked we’d killed around 100,000 civilians in the middle east using these tools of modern warfare. So you could write the whole thing off as post-colonial racism.

    But yeah, by and large, I’m sure we’d agree that arms is a pretty dirty business. But it still makes a hell of a lot more money than slag iron or crap cars or whatever people want to return this country to making. Good luck to Kirk, isn’t trespass basically a civil offence anyway?

  37. on 18 May 2010 at 11:30 pm Kris

    @Ed

    Oh fuck off, you patronising bastard.

  38. on 18 May 2010 at 11:32 pm 773 (metric)

    By the way, malaria (around 2m), AIDS (around 2m) and starvation (36m) kill far more people every year than weapons. Funny how people here aren’t all foaming at the mouth about that, eh.

    Funnily enough I’m appearing in court next week with aggravated trespass after I staged a demonstration at my local AIDS factory. The fat salescunts in suits and goatees were unable to get into their sales office to sell AIDS to repressive regimes for up to 4 hours.

    You prick.

  39. on 18 May 2010 at 11:56 pm funny peculiar

    Arming governments so that they can deter and/or fight other governments hasn’t been the main cause of war death and misery in the last fifty years. Ed

    “It is your outrageous and ad-hoc claim, not mine. You do the fucking number-crunching.”funny peculiar.

    I accept your apology.Ed.

    ah-ha-ha-hah, I do love playground humour. Ed, you waved your cock about and made an unsupported big-man’s claim to make yourself look grizzled and worldly-wise and to make Nelson’s support for grass-roots action look naive. If you can’t be bothered to defend your argument, then why the fuck should I?
    So, please put ‘my apology’ up your fat arse, which, coincidently, is also where you found your initial claim.

    (and talking of holes, how’s the one you’re digging for yourself coming along?)

  40. on 19 May 2010 at 12:16 am Nelson

    Please Ed, Shutup now. This is about solidarity with a chap who did something most of us consider admirable.

    If you think opposing the arms trade is a bad thing, or have armchair advice to dish out to people who’ve put their liberty on the line to do so, just keep it to your oh-so-clever self eh?

  41. on 19 May 2010 at 12:21 am Mirelurk

    @Ed: Lots of people care very deeply about preventable disease and starvation. Of course they fucking do. It’s just that right now, we were talking about the arms trade.

    When you get a headache, do you take a painkiller? Or do you sit there saying ‘well, I don’t see the point trying to stop this headache, because more people have sore throats’?

    Shit analogy, I know, but a shit argument deserves no better.

  42. on 19 May 2010 at 12:22 am Olli (not Oli the dickhead)

    Thanks for spreading the word about this, Nelson. If I were you I’d get down to some serious NuLieBore-style censorship!!!1 and get rid of all the twat comments – you can always bring them out for future threads, which will be fun for all the family.

  43. on 19 May 2010 at 12:27 am me

    Ed, the main cause of war is probably something to do with the adoption of a geographically fixed agricultural lifestyle, however all my attempts to form a barricade around the past and put it out of business have so far failed.

    However stopping all war is probably not the main point of protesting against a company that licences its weapons technology for production in Burma to then flog in Sierra Leone.

    Arguing that we shouldn’t target one particularly bad thing because it wont stop all the other bad things is just fucking idiotic.

  44. on 19 May 2010 at 12:31 am Dave The Dog

    The naturalistic argument is not actually a logical counter to the question of whether or not selling guns to cunts is morally wrong.

    This is something I didn’t realise until reading the comments here.

    Personally I feel quite enlightened having realised this for the first time. I’m on your side Nelson. Cheers brother.

  45. on 19 May 2010 at 12:41 am Dizzy

    @Dizzy

    Rwanda, South Vietnam, Congo, Angola, Sierra Leone, Liberia, Colombia, Lebanon, Cambodia, Bosnia, Northern Ireland, Afghanistan, Iraq.

    Nice one. You do realise that most of those have been perpetrated by government forces? What the fuck do you think happened in Iraq for 25 years? What the fuck do you think happened in Bosnia – fought using H&K weapons, by the way – and who the hell do you think Milosevic was? Liberia – fucking President Charles Taylor – are you fucking kidding me? Are you trying to troll, or are you being deliberately ignorant?

    Go and join Neil Craig if you want to persist with dickish, naive and shallow interpretations of reality. The cunt would love you.

  46. on 19 May 2010 at 1:05 am Kris

    Careful Dizzy, invoking NC causes that fucker to become corporeal. Even now he’s just sat up in bed, tasting the air like a lizard.

  47. on 19 May 2010 at 1:11 am Dan

    Actually, it doesn’t really matter where the “big money” is, who’s doing the killing or any of that bullshit. Guns kill. Their manufacture is inherently a Bad Thing. It may, possibly, just about, be a necessary evil in terms of national defense. Sometimes. Or law and order. Maybe. But actually, the key thing is not the fact that its sometimes necessary, but that its always evil, and in its current form, the arms trade is worse than it could or should be.
    The fact that some of the guns sold don’t facilitate wars is irrelevant. The fact that guns aren’t the only thing killing people is irrelevent.
    It is enough that there is something wrong with the arms trade, and there is something seriously wrong, that people should do something about it.
    Good luck to Kirk. May he stand on roofs for ever more.

  48. on 19 May 2010 at 1:24 am Nelson

    Yar. Let us not get sucked into the bizzaro-world interweb shit with the constantly moving argument and daft tangential questions.

    “So, do you think more people were killed by penis-envy or boob allergies?”

    “Please list five forms of liberal democrat less left-wing that nine kinds of Tory”

    “Why support haircut rights when some countries don’t have public transport for dogs?”

    Stay on target:
    arms trade = bad
    opposing it = good

  49. on 19 May 2010 at 1:38 am Hubert Cumberdale

    Sometimes I wish for a world without guns….then I could take over the whole thing with a butter knife.

  50. on 19 May 2010 at 4:03 am One of the Eds

    I’m not a lawyer or anything, and I don’t know anything about the actual facts of the case beyond what the Shut Down HK site’s story reports, so as you can see, I’m completely unqualified to comment.

    But this is the internet, I’m not St Catherine Oliver, and I’ve never let ignorance get in my way before (I see I’m not the only one), so here goes:

    I’ve done a bit of tresspassing in my time, and I was always under the impression that in order to prosecute someone for it, you had to be able to prove “damages”. If I’m right.

    So in that case, I suppose there might be a case for the guys with the D locks to answer to, if they genuinely prevented the company from trading, but can’t imagine what they could do this Kirk chap for.

    It’s just a fucking banner, right? Freedom of speech and all that sort of thing, what?

  51. on 19 May 2010 at 5:54 am Mirelurk

    I’m not a lawyer either, so I’ll answer: There is something called a ‘joint unlawful enterprise’, in which a group of people with a [common criminal purpose|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Betts_and_Ridley] can be prosecuted for that purpose rather than for their individual actions. It saves them having to prove, for example, which member of a group landed a fatal blow, or hot-wired a car.

    Not that Kirk’s action fit this category, but that’s why.

  52. on 19 May 2010 at 5:55 am Mirelurk

    Bollocks. Go on then, how do you do links? If he goes down now, it’s my fault. Shit.

  53. on 19 May 2010 at 6:04 am Dizzy

    Aggravated trespass is Criminal Justice Act 1994 shit – thanks to the shadow of the cunts of the Tories for this one. You commit aggravated trespass if you’re on land belonging to someone else, or you’re adjacent to land belonging to someone else, and you do anything that prevents people from doing something lawful. That’s the harm.

    I suppose the major defence is that H&K were doing something unlawful, if they were facilitating circumvention of trade embargoes by way of licensing manufacture of arms in countries which would then break arms embargoes. They do licence out the manufacture of their arms to countries like Pakistan and Turkey, which would then feasibly break EU arms embargoes.

    Unfortunately, aggravated trespass is considered a minor offence and so unless something weird happens, there won’t be a jury involved. The key is that if you’re going to do something like this, for the greater good, and you want a jury involved under which you can test those principles, then make sure when you break the law you do a proper job, and tear the cunt a new one like the Ploughshares did with the Hawks way back when.

  54. on 19 May 2010 at 7:33 am High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    Nelson,

    I generally support your position. Making money from selling guns to idiots to kill innocent civilians with is wrong.

    Given that the human race as a whole still likes to indulge in a bit of savagery now and then, what would you consider to be an ACCEPTABLE arms industry? e.g. in the UK, only government-run arms companies that only manufacture for the UK armed forces? Is that what you want? Just asking, not intending to provoke.

    (Because I don’t see the Western world even beginning to function without standing armies armed to the teeth, sorry.)

  55. on 19 May 2010 at 7:35 am One of the Eds

    Thanks for that Mielurk. Seems like a cunt of a law.

    I don’t know how to do the fancy linking where you can’t actually see the URL (and I can’t be assed to ask google)either, but if you just paste the URL in as normal this WordPress thingy’ll turn it into a link for you. Like this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Betts_and_Ridley

    @ Dizzy
    Yeah, that’s what I’m saying, you get me. Displaying a banner doesn’t prevent anyone from doing anything. I’m envisaging tenuous claims about customers who were totally just about to place an order, in person, at that factory, but when they turned up and saw the banner they suddenly realised they didn’t want to kill people after all.

    Still knifecriming wildly in the dark and everything, but in response to your suggested defence, couldn’t H&K argue that their first action, on arriving at work, would have been to lawfully make a cup of tea or something?

    I would expect to be able to sue if someone came between me and my first cup of tea of the day.

  56. on 19 May 2010 at 8:32 am Nelson

    @vomit. I can envisage someone making a case for some kind of legit, licensed, manufacture with about 300 hypotheticals in it. Real enforcement, not for profit, just war, self defense, prevent greater harm etc. It’s just it’s SO far from reality that it’s a massive irrelevancy. If you’d like to speculate wildly about the neccesity of controlled arms in a distant utopia, by all means do so. I would probably have an interesting disagreement with you (based on 300 hypothetical ideas of my own). But not here please.

  57. on 19 May 2010 at 8:36 am Roeby

    Aggregated trepass was brought in by the Tories to appease their core base. Big business, namely construction, and the road lobby after the protests at Twyford Down etc, and of course their chums in the hunt lobby, to try and put a stop to sabbing.
    It’s vagueness was deliberate, and was intended to ensure that police could make arrests for practically no reason, and for magistrates to convict easily.
    The flaw was that us oiks could hire lawyers who reminded the legal system that evidence is useful in any trial, and after a series of successful suings (myself included -£3,750 Avon and Somerset, ta very much!) it has been largely abandoned by many forces. It still sadly does raise it’s ugly head at times and I wish Kirk all the very best.
    I would add that at 38 I now realise that running around in fields in he 90′s was unproductive and blinkered at times and and yes there were other maybe more critical things to worry about, but I don’t regret a second.

  58. on 19 May 2010 at 8:56 am Nelson

    You lot are largely a bunch of heart-cockle warmers and I need to remember you when I get depressed about this blog :)

    To re-iterate: this is about taking a principled stand an existing evil. If you support that evil, be ashamed, stay quiet. If you oppose it, messages of support for Kirk are appreciated.

    If you think “it’s a bit more complicated than that” then just go and tell “Comment is Free” or something. Someone with your nuanced understanding of industrialised slaughter might even win commenter of the year!

  59. on 19 May 2010 at 8:59 am High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    You’ve made me search my conscience. I’ve done work in the past for companies that make weapons systems. I don’t know (yet) if these companies violate arms embargoes. Plus the spouse of a close friend works for one such company. Cue soul-searching, violins etc., but I am thinking in what Nelson would call the right direction. Call me “converted”, if you will.

  60. on 19 May 2010 at 9:03 am Nelson

    I wrote a bit of software for KA that I think was intended for the MoD once when I was younger. Would not do so now. We got an enquiry from Qinetic recently. Just ignored em :)

  61. on 19 May 2010 at 9:34 am High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    That leaves the friend’s spouse… should I berate them for daring to design instrumentation for fighter aircraft, then? They would no doubt tell me to royally go and fuck myself really hard with a very big and Strontium-90-tipped missile. In the best possible case. What, apart from occupying the moral high ground, gives me the right to tell others how to live their lives?

  62. on 19 May 2010 at 9:43 am Nelson

    I don’t think you can. The tone we adopt for posts here is, obviously, not something you’d do at a dinner party. I think it’s much better to just make the points gently, say you think X because of Y, counter any rubbish arguments calmly, and back off til another time if there’s a hint of frayed temper and emotional defenses. That’s how minds get changed IMO. And yr mate might already have doubts. But it’s gonna be HARD for her/him to argue themself out of a job :)

  63. on 19 May 2010 at 10:31 am -273

    I can’t believe that we are supporting a guy named Kirk against a evil, heavily armed shadowy force, and no one has mentioned Star Trek yet!

    You lot make me sick!

    “Stop it? I’m counting on it!”

    Kirk (from A Taste of Armegedon)

  64. on 19 May 2010 at 10:37 am Bit Special AKA La Spesh

    Nelson, I live in The ‘Ham and will try and be there before work, if I can (mental-busy day for me, Thurs). Lots of my mates are already going. Are there any gang-stylee hand shapes I need to throw to identify myself as a HYSer? Apart from the obvious, I mean. I’ll be the one who looks like 80s one-hit wonder Tiffany. From the shoulders up, anyway – I won’t be wearing sno-wash denim.

    Am a bit confused by many of the comments in this thread – surely arms dealers=bad, supporters/excusers=cunts, end of story?

    I remember the bad old days of Aggravated Trespass. Used to be a hunt sab, back in the day. Bad times, bad times indeed. There was also some anti-traveller law passed by Nottingham council that made it illegal for crusties to even enter the county, which also banned The Levellers from playing here (this was a Big Deal in the 90s).

    (Have been lurking of late, soz. Whaddayamean none of you bastards have noticed or cared? SOB!)

  65. on 19 May 2010 at 10:39 am brown town

    @Nelson

    I was just going to write a post about how:

    “If you leave your smug, self-absorbed brainfart here on this post, I’m just going to delete it. And probably ban your IP, cos you people are rubbish.”

    is not going to convince anyone it, just polarises the argument, blah blah. But you have clearly calmed down since then. I couldn’t agree more with: “I don’t think you can. The tone we adopt for posts here is, obviously, not something you’d do at a dinner party….”

    Just to clarify I don’t condone the arms trade. I am an engineer and have turned down work to avoid the thought of having blood on my hands…etc

  66. on 19 May 2010 at 11:06 am High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    Seems I’m not as liberal as I thought. I’m pro-hunting (although I acknowledge fox-hunting is a tad unfair on the fox; I am talking about shooting in this post).
    Now, I don’t have any figures to back this statement up, sorry, but one impression I’ve gleaned over many years of following the news is that in the US, crazed gunmen who massacre innocent people before blowing their own brains out are never hunters; they are always jerks who should have got out more. If grown men are going to express their savage side then I’d rather it was on wild animals and in a relatively human manner, than on innocent civilians.
    Even the weapons the crazed gunmen use are totally unsuited for hunting (unless the prey is actually organised and has dug itself into trenches, and I don’t think warrens really count). Your average assault rifle has crap range past 30 metres or so, for example.

    Sorry if it offends, but I do think we have a darker side as humans and we have to let it out somehow. At a stretch, I’d even allow fox-hunting if I thought it would take people’s minds off killing people.

  67. on 19 May 2010 at 11:06 am Hey, I AM a Gyppo!...

    Is Kirk getting Legal Aid with his case? If not – anywhere we can donate to help him out?

    I known we’ve on from flaying Ed and his particularly flatulent sophistry but wtf? Trying to get inside his head here – so you a kid dying from Malaria. He goes ‘awww’ and wipes away a salty tear. He then sees, next to him, a kid being beaten to death with one of those spiffy truncheons we like to sell to Indonesia and Burma by some fat salesman. He feels something welling in his tear duct but blinks it away, because feeling sort of visceral or gut-level rage at that would be naive, especially as it’s statistically insignificant after all. So he chips in with a few well aimed kicks of his own then waddles away. Now THERE’S ‘compassion-fatigue’. Anyway, this whole ‘getting inside Ed’s mind’ excercise has me queasy, so I shall alight. And look – I got covered in shit in the process…

  68. on 19 May 2010 at 11:06 am High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    “in a relatively HUMANE manner”.

  69. on 19 May 2010 at 11:16 am Rotwatcher

    Completely and utterly agree with Nelson and, of course, entirely support Kirk. I work as a software engineer and when I finished my degree I initially vowed not to work for MoD or other outfits with which I didn’t agree. Unfortunately life has a way of fucking up your best-laid plans, and the need to put food in the mouths of my children means that I have to look slightly the other way at some of my company’s clients (not my company – the company I work for.) At my age, and with the economy royally fucked from here to Christmas, ethical job-shopping isn’t exactly an option. I console myself with the slightly hypocritical thought that the actual work I do has no military application whatsoever and the divisions of our client companies for which we do the work are not the military ones. We did have a contract with an overtly military company but the work was for bomb disposal so I convinced myself that was acceptable. Bombs are bad, m’kay, and disposing of bombs is good. Shit, it’s hard being a human sometimes. Harder if you do what Kirk does though.

  70. on 19 May 2010 at 11:44 am Nelson

    [...] you have clearly calmed down since then [...]

    Not sure about that. But rather found myself talking to more reasonable people.

    And the debate SHOULD be polarised. If you think it’s nuanced, then you should think harder. The old “balance” thing is part of the manufacture of consent by the corporate media. The existence of support for something WRONG does not mean the whole debate must take place somewhere in the fucking middle. How about if we aim to arm 50% fewer dictators next year? Kill 30% fewer civilians? Compromise yeah? Reasonable, clever, calm and realistic compromise. Well done us. Pats on backs. Glass of organic lager to celebrate. Those poor savages (now 30% less maimed!), in their “failed states” would probably thank us for our pragmatism if they only had internets.

    I find the selfless actions of people like Kirk (and those with him) profoundly moving – and ignorant, pointless criticism of them deeply offensive.

    So if I see any more of it, like I said, I’m going to delete that weak-minded shit from my website.

  71. on 19 May 2010 at 11:52 am Dr Poo

    @Bit Special

    Clearly the key point here, which we all seem to be overlooking, is that any legislative measure that bans The Levellers from playing can only be a good thing.

  72. on 19 May 2010 at 12:00 pm High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    @Nelson

    Well, I reiterate my unambiguous support for Kirk & co., despite my apparent attempt at nuancing the issue via arguing for shooting-as-hunting. Of course, dedicated hunting weapons are shit-all use for war anyway, and (Right, that’s enough. – High Speed Vomit’s parole officer)

  73. on 19 May 2010 at 12:01 pm goblin

    Hiya Nelson

    Ta for flagging that up. Good luck to Kirk tomorrow. I think that slipping out from behind the sarcastic facade to make a direct appeal occasionally is entirely justified. It also works, because I personally would be more likely to actively support a cause highlighted by Nelson of Speak Your Branes than the many that are out there. As you say, you have to pick your battles. Can I therefore request that you give a bit more warning next time if poss- Nottingham is just round the corner, would have thought about popping over to support, but just read your post now and off to work in a bit. Thanks for the continued good work- regularly check the site out, though rarely post and submit. If there is any way we can support in future, contributions have been suggested above, then let us know. Alas, I work for a noble profession that helps people, yet requires CRB checks and so forth. As you say, protesting your way out of a job is a difficult and brave step. All respect.

  74. on 19 May 2010 at 12:04 pm brown town

    Firstly: I Generally agree with what your saying.
    Secondly: It is your website.
    Thirdly: Asking people to be calm on the internet is as pointless as asking the moon not to be round and white

    But:
    I think just flatly saying “you are wrong bellend” tends to make people dig their heels in. Maybe its just me. When I here the pope speak it just confimrms by belief there cant be a god. But when I hear Richard Dawkins I just think “I don’t agree with that gobshite, there must be a god”

    ok now I’ve just confused myself, what was my point?

  75. on 19 May 2010 at 12:16 pm Legal Beagle

    Just to come back on the point about aggravated trespass – you also commit it if you act in a way that ‘intimidates persons engaged in lawful activity on the property’. It’s very cleverly drafted to fuck with protestors – when I learnt about it it was described to me as ‘the perfect tool to be used against single-issue protestors who invade premises as part of a protest’.

    And, of course, ‘intimidate’ will be so widely interpreted as to mean ‘one guy, on a roof, with a banner’ can be intimidating. Makes you despair a little bit.

  76. on 19 May 2010 at 12:30 pm CTC

    Like Dave the Dog, I also didn’t realise the naturalistic argument is a fallacy. Do any of you know of a book, website etc. that explains it and other points of logic and logical fallacies in plain-English?

    This is my first post, so I will add that I love the humour, intelligence and compassion that is evident on this website; I have always been instinctively left-leaning but the site has aided me in being more rigourous about it. I am especially grateful for the link to medialens, without which I would be far less suspicious of mainstream news media and without which I might never have discovered the writings of people like Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn and Norman Finkelstein. So cheers for that. :D

  77. on 19 May 2010 at 12:31 pm Concerned Citizen

    “Careful Dizzy, invoking NC causes that fucker to become corporeal. Even now he’s just sat up in bed, tasting the air like a lizard.”
    - @ Kris: funniest thing I have read all day. You’re a genius.

    The thing about closing down weapons manufacturers is this: it drives trade underground (as is so often said of the ‘war on drugs’) and it makes flows of arms more difficult to track and thereby, paradoxically, to control.

    What these arms firms really need to be giving us is more information. The public has the right to know where these products are going, and the cost of obtaining that information (in terms of time and effort) should be a lot lower. If the public is told who is buying its country’s weapons, sales to baddies will have to drop if the CEOs don’t want to be run out of town on a rail.

    Personally, I wish we could ban all guns everywhere, forever, but if we can’t, let’s demand the right to know what’s happening to them.

  78. on 19 May 2010 at 12:32 pm tw@basket.com

    The modern arms industry, as any fule kno, exists to enable backbench Tory MPs to achieve erection by imagining the guns and missiles in all their shiny oily beauty.

    While I am sure some of this goes on I think it is far more about the money. This is why the government feels unable to do anything about the arms industry even on the odd occasions when it has twinges of conscience.

    Our balance of payments is deeply in the shit because we consume foreign goods but don’t export anything like as much. One very notable exception is the bloody arms industry. Of course, if you factor in the money we are going to pay the Americans for a Trident replacement then that probably wipes out our ill gotten gains several times over but the point still stands. We need to export stuff and at the moment we don’t make much else that anybody else wants. This gives the arms industry a lot of political leverage.

    The pathetic thing is that the weapons are technically quite impressive. If we can lead the world in manufacturing them then why the hell can’t we make other stuff to sell? You know, stuff that has the same blend of advanced electronics and precision engineering but doesn’t kill people: medical equipment, washing machines, high end sex toys, whatever?

    Rather than attacking the symptoms of fucked up and/or failed nation states/regions, I suggest you focus on the causes.

    But the arms industry is a cause. Like all good capitalists they want to expand demand for their products as well as fulfil the existing demand. They have a vested interest in promoting instability. It makes commercial sense to sell weapons to the most dangerous people. If you sell weapons to a relatively responsible nation that will only use them for self defence then you make one sale. If you sell them to the regional psychopath then you get to sell weapons to all his terrified neighbours as well. If you spread rumours among the neighbours that each has more advanced weapons than the other then you create an arms race. If you finance the political careers of warmongers and pay a few bribes along the way then you sell even more.

    Its like the tobacco industry. You can’t just say “We only make the product. We don’t make anybody use it.”

  79. on 19 May 2010 at 12:52 pm funny peculiar

    @ BIt Spesh! Yay! I noticed you’d gone, swear to non-existentent out-moded belief system.

    Last night, during the hottest part of this thread’s squabble, when everyone was getting a bit too lairy (inc me), I made up a post which simply had a link to picture of a kitten playing with a ball of wool and the words “In memory of Bit Spesh.”

    Bit then I had ‘doubts about it’ and wiped it, cos I’m daft.

  80. on 19 May 2010 at 1:01 pm Dunc

    If the public is told who is buying its country’s weapons, sales to baddies will have to drop if the CEOs don’t want to be run out of town on a rail.

    Yeah, ’cause it’s not like all the sales to the “baddies” are done using fraudulent End-User Certificates to get around existing FCO/UN embargoes, is it? (This also applies to Ed’s moaning about all those evil non-state actors, who apparently weave their own anti-tank rockets out of fucking yoghurt or something, rather than by “diverting” “legitimate” shipments sold via “intermediaries” in Switzerland who will supply EUCs of your choice by the pallet load…)

  81. on 19 May 2010 at 1:12 pm funny peculiar

    Good luck to you, mate. Wish I actually cared about something as much as you clearly do about this.
    Have Your Lurk

    …what he said. If my life ever stops spinning long enough for me to find my feet and work out what day it is, then a series of arms dealers, newspaper owners, politicians and sundry enemies-of-humanity will be found strangled in their beds, the victims of an elegant and tantalising lone avenger.

    ’til then… what he said.

  82. on 19 May 2010 at 1:19 pm jpr

    Ah, that should be Kochs. Fuchs would be probably better? Such a shame.

    What a load of Krupp.

    God, I’ve been looking for an opportunity to use that line for ages.

    We got an enquiry from Qinetic recently. Just ignored em

    Do you mean QinetiQ? The company I used to (indirectly) work for. Writing software for the MoD?

    That was in my Evil phase, of course.

  83. on 19 May 2010 at 1:21 pm funny peculiar

    One last thing. If, like me, you know sweet-bugger-all about Britain’s wonderful BAE Systems and other death-traders. Then an easy, witty starting point is Mark Thomas’s book on the arms industry. It IS shocking how much death and destruction Britian cheerfully sells, irrespective of international law. The title alone deserves an award…

    As Used On The Famous Nelson Mandela

  84. on 19 May 2010 at 1:45 pm Oaf

    moth’s, not mothss. That was just me foaming at the mouth.

    Don’t worry. There’s a butcher’s shop near me selling meat in TRAYS’S.

  85. on 19 May 2010 at 1:50 pm Finbarr Saunders

    @SoulBoy

    …lubricants… …butt… …meat of Nelson’s post…

    Fnar!

  86. on 19 May 2010 at 1:53 pm Nelson

    @special – I’ll be the tall guy waving a placard or holding a banner.

    @brown – I’m all up for persuading people of stuff. But I don’t worry about the sort of heel digging in that those people above do. If they see protesters doing selfless, risky, non-violent things in the cause of stopping arms sales, and their main reaction is not to ask genuine questions but to sneer, then they didn’t come with any kind of interest or openness in the first the place. Frankly I’d rather those kind of people weren’t here at all – after all, I started this site to take the piss out of them.

  87. on 19 May 2010 at 2:13 pm doleyscum

    Being on the protesty side of the fence I have realised my views for why arms trading is wrong come from gut reaction and groupthink and that Ive never really though the argument for myself.

    Now I find myself in the position of wondering why are arms companies wrong? (yeah yeah I know guns kill people)

    As governments are not going to give up buying weapons wholesale, who is to judge what is considered a good or bad regime and whether they get the guns?

    In Bosnia the UN refused to sell the Bosnians weapons as they thought it would escalate the conflict. The result was that the Serbs obliterated whole cities of Bosnians who had no means to fight back. The Bosnian government ended up doing a deal with South American drug dealers to buy arms to defend themselves and so saved Bosnian lives.

    So what do people hope to achieve? The end of arms companies being based in Britain? Whilst this might give us a warm fuzzy feeling to think we have the moral highhround, would it have go anyway to stop the bloodshed around the world? Or is it the profit being made that is objected to?

  88. on 19 May 2010 at 2:21 pm Mirelurk

    @doleyscum: Because it’s Doing The Right Thing. Doing The Right Thing is important in itself. It’s also important to encourage others to Do The Right Thing. The more People Do The Right Thing, the fewer people remain to Do The Wrong Thing, and the closer we are to a world where everyone Does The Right Thing. Such a world may be unattainable, but that’s no excuse for not Doing The Right Thing.

    Fuck me, I’m being really, REALLY patronising but I’m astonished that some people don’t get it.

  89. on 19 May 2010 at 2:23 pm TrumpsCombOver

    Wow, a much higher than usual level of fuck-witted fishy cunts on this post I see. Good luck Nelson and co.

  90. on 19 May 2010 at 2:25 pm dirigible

    Heckler & Koch

    Fnarr.

    In Bosnia the UN refused to sell the Bosnians weapons as they thought it would escalate the conflict.

    The Serbs managed to get weapons from somewhere, though.

    Go on, think it through.

    So what do people hope to achieve?

    Fewer arms-pushing bastards.

    Even the longest journey must begin with a single step attracting idiots who tell you not to bother.

  91. on 19 May 2010 at 2:32 pm Nelson

    “You’ll never make it to the toilet. Go on, just shit yourself”

  92. on 19 May 2010 at 2:32 pm Bit Special AKA La Spesh

    @FP – awww, that brought a dessicated diamond of a tear to my hate-filled eyes, so it did. Have been a bit under the weather, so was only fit for lurking. But now I’m back, baby! Possibly. PS Missing Teh Spesh is never wrong ;)

    @Nelson – well, that narrows things down a bit. I shall walk around talking loudly about Andy Kadir-Buxton and winking knowingly at anyone over 6ft.

    @Oaf – that’s nothing. There’s a greasy spoon near me that boasts of ‘jackit potatoss’, ‘sallid’ and ‘a wied rage of cake’s’ on its A-board. I managed to get a few good few camera before a beefy waitress scared me off.

  93. on 19 May 2010 at 2:34 pm Mr Cat

    Isn’t it pretty simple?

    If you like guns and stuff then Nelson asked you not to bother commenting – you aren’t gonna change peoples opinions, or the world, by filling in a little box arguing the toss.

    Equally – if you don’t like guns and stuff you aren’t gonna change peoples opinions, or the world, by filling in a little box arguing the toss. In fact you’re much more likely to do it by direct action – the whole point of the post.

    80 comments later. If you support the original post well done, do something about it or don’t – it’s up to you. If you don’t support the original post then do something about it or don’t – it’s up to you.

    Either way – don’t babble on about it here as though the world is watching and waiting for your genius reasoning to see the light.

  94. on 19 May 2010 at 2:37 pm brown town

    @doleyscum

    Although there is an argument that regulation is better than prohibition, I don’t think it really stacks up here. We are’t talking about teenagers buying a bit of pot.

    The moral high ground is a good place to start, (or at least strive for) how else can we even begin to make the world a better place?

  95. on 19 May 2010 at 2:47 pm Oaf

    @Oaf – that’s nothing. There’s a greasy spoon near me that boasts of ‘jackit potatoss’, ’sallid’ and ‘a wied rage of cake’s’

    There used to be a café here offering the usual SAUSAGE’S, BEAN’S, etc. but if you wanted it, you could have TOAS’T as well.

  96. on 19 May 2010 at 3:03 pm High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    This could work. If H&K (or whatever arms company you’re protesting against) is listed on the stock exchange, i.e. if it is owned by anyone who can buy shares, then they will at some point have to introduce Corporate Social Responsibility to how they manage the company. Now, you might argue that CSR is just a way of legalising the lies that companies tell, and you’d be right (e.g. oil companies publish sustainability reports boasting about all the cool stuff they do for the environment, while neatly skipping over their core activity which is taking oil out of the ground where God put it safely out of harm’s way and setting fire to it), but CSR does genuinely limit the range of horrible things that a company can do. A CSR policy for H&K might state that they only ever deal with the military wings of democratically-elected governments, for example.

  97. on 19 May 2010 at 3:07 pm High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    Or, as Nelson said earlier, you could just be anti-arms industry, full stop. I’ll take my arguments to pansy.com.

  98. on 19 May 2010 at 4:07 pm Dunc

    So what do people hope to achieve? The end of arms companies being based in Britain? Whilst this might give us a warm fuzzy feeling to think we have the moral highhround, would it have go anyway to stop the bloodshed around the world? Or is it the profit being made that is objected to?

    OK, you’re right. The Opium Wars were a good thing, and the greatest mistake this country ever made was in giving up our virtual monopoly on that trade. Think of the loot we could be raking in now that we’re firmly lodged in Afghanistan… No, scratch that, the biggest mistake we made was banning the slave trade! Now there was a profitable enterprise!

    Right, I’m off to clobber some grannies and steal their pensions. If I don’t, somebody else probably will, so it may as well be me.

  99. on 19 May 2010 at 5:55 pm Bit Special AKA La Spesh

    Mmm, toas’t. That’s haute cuisine illiteracy!

  100. on 19 May 2010 at 6:55 pm Mr G. Reaper

    Ah, this day has been coming, i’ve been waiting and watching over the past few months, now is the time it seems. Death comes to us all.

    SYB your time is up, come with me.

  101. on 19 May 2010 at 7:01 pm Chaise Guevara

    Do national governments instead use their guns to build schools and grow food?

    I know this was like 70 posts ago but: boom! Headshot!

    I’m going to steal this line. If you secretly know me personally, please let me know or I’ll be very embarrassed when you hear me trying to pass it off as my own.

  102. on 19 May 2010 at 7:23 pm Chaise Guevara

    “Like Dave the Dog, I also didn’t realise the naturalistic argument is a fallacy. Do any of you know of a book, website etc. that explains it and other points of logic and logical fallacies in plain-English?”

    CTC, I don’t know if a) you’re still reading, b) if anyone else answered you yet or c) whether or not you were being sarky and I didn’t pick up on it, but Wikipedia is a surprisingly good source of information on fallacies: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fallacies

    And it makes intriguing reading when you should be working. Once I found out that there was a fallacy called No True Scotsman, I was there for the day :)

    Also: good for Kirk and all supporting him. Power to the people, and fuck these cunts. My university gave money to firms like this (probably still does). It’s as if they were deliberately giving the students something to kick off about so they wouldn’t bother complaining about the shite food in the cafeteria.

  103. on 19 May 2010 at 8:06 pm Oli

    I bum foxes.

  104. on 19 May 2010 at 8:18 pm Mirelurk

    @CTC: Was going to do this hours ago but got distracted by bloody work…

    http://www.fallacyfiles.org/

  105. on 19 May 2010 at 8:18 pm Oli

    I also bum baby foxes. I am a fox paedo.

  106. on 19 May 2010 at 8:20 pm Utterly Embarrassed and Completely Anon

    ….If you don’t feel it in your gut then you badly need to recalibrate your “giving a shit” module….

    ….Jah Bless….

    ….I want it to get the point where the sort of chat they’re coming out with seems as unacceptable as the racism of the 70s, or slavery before that. It’ll happen….

    ….I wrote a bit of software for KA that I think was intended for the MoD once when I was younger. Would not do so now. We got an enquiry from Qinetic recently. Just ignored em ….

    ….I think it’s much better to just make the points gently, say you think X because of Y, counter any rubbish arguments calmly, and back off til another time if there’s a hint of frayed temper and emotional defenses. That’s how minds get changed IMO….

    Oh dear, I think I’ve developed a bromantic crush on Nelson. Good luck tomorrow for Kirk. It’s inspiring and wonderful to meet such an intelligent person who really passionately cares.

  107. on 20 May 2010 at 9:27 am Oli

    oh Nelson,

    you let my initial comment stand but you edit my followup comments out rather than replying to them.

    I’ll try to make all my posts inflammatory so you don’t need to delete them any more.

  108. on 20 May 2010 at 9:41 am Ugly Newt

    @Oli – I see what you did there. Waiting till you know the moderator’s busy when you reply, so he can’t clean up after you.

    FWIW, I agree with Kirk. (From the comfort of an office, more than a leisurely commute away from Nottingham, admittedly.)

  109. on 20 May 2010 at 10:17 am Oli

    Sadly, I was clarifying my position without being inflammatory or “apathetic”

    if Nelson wants to censor me out of the discussion then by all means, it’s his site.

    However, if he wants to do that then either do all of them or nothing.

    selectively censoring my posts so he can simply obtain a caricature of my statements is frankly pathetic.

    or in other words, he’s a hairy llama’s cunt

  110. on 20 May 2010 at 10:17 am Brumswan

    @Oli

    What are you talking about? Your fox paedo comment hasn’t been edited out.

  111. on 20 May 2010 at 11:22 am Mooska

    So great to see Nelson using his mighty powers of invective for an unmitigatedly positive reason.

    This thread has been quite striking in how clearly it shows that arguments against progressive causes are basically always the same, no matter what the issue.

    There’s the ‘it’s human nature’ argument, the ‘you’re naive, we’re realistic’ argument, the ‘what about [insert entirely irrelevant issue] argument and the ‘it’s always been this way’ argument (with its exciting corollary, the ‘we are genetically [ugh] *hard-wired* to be violent/sexist/racist!’.

    And if all of those fails, the fall-back is always ‘you’re too strident and confrontational’, as advanced above by browntown. Obviously, this is most useful when arguing with feminists, as forcefulness is unfeminine, but adopt an attitude of faux-concern and it’ll do for men too.

    Given all of that, ‘you smug, apathetic fucks’ seems like a concise and accurate statement of fact.

  112. on 20 May 2010 at 11:25 am Colonel Richard Hindrance (Mrs) VC, DSO and Bar, Buffet, Dancing 'Til Late

    Oli, you are a self-important, self-pitying, rancid spunk funnel.

    Nobody gives two semi-turgid cocks about your worthless, opinions, your poor ickle “censored” posts, your subsequent whinging about being “caricatured” and your delusions of relevancy.

    The sooner you realise this, fuck off, die, rise from the dead and die again for good measure, the sooner we can get on with the important business of forgetting you ever existed.

    I hope I’m not being too vague here..?

  113. on 20 May 2010 at 11:28 am Mooska

    Or, what Mrs Hindrance said.

  114. on 20 May 2010 at 12:21 pm High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    I hope Nelson is going to update us on this after Kirk’s court case. Right, Nelson? Yes, I know I could just read the papers but, um, I’m a yellowhammer’s yukky yawning Yale lock.

  115. on 20 May 2010 at 1:03 pm Dunc

    selectively censoring my posts so he can simply obtain a caricature of my statements is frankly pathetic.

    Oh no! The fascist moderators are censoring your precious, precious opinions!

  116. on 20 May 2010 at 1:21 pm High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    Is it just me, or has all the fun gone out of laughing at stupid HYS comments now that Nelson has gone all serious? (Not intended as a criticism, Nelson, I’m a gung-ho convert to your gun-gone cause, believe me.)

    It’s just that in the two threads published since this one, the slagging seems a bit forced and overdone. If I were a HYS cunt googling myself and I read those comments, I don’t think I’d feel insulted enough. Can we rack it up a notch, folks? Please? Bring back animal fannies! A prize to the person who can think up the longest and funniest mammalian minge or reptilian razzle-hole!

  117. on 20 May 2010 at 1:52 pm Nelson

    I often struggle to laugh at HYS tbh. Sometimes this place depresses me. Sometimes I love it again though. The overwhelming positivity here in this thread happied me right up.

    Kirk’s case is still happening. About to go back in and hear him be cross-examined and then the summing-up or whatever they call it.

  118. on 20 May 2010 at 3:20 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    @High Speed Vomit – Duck My Sick!

    Your average assault rifle has crap range past 30 metres or so, for example.

    Try 400m.

    @Concerned Citizen

    What these arms firms really need to be giving us is more information. The public has the right to know where these products are going, and the cost of obtaining that information (in terms of time and effort) should be a lot lower. If the public is told who is buying its country’s weapons, sales to baddies will have to drop if the CEOs don’t want to be run out of town on a rail.

    This is a good idea. More Mark Thomas type of investigation, and helping to enforce the law banning trade in weapons to bad people, is a better use of time and effort than hanging up pieces of cloth. I hope that Kirk and his mates will link up with (e.g.) Mr Thomas and provide some assistance in going after the real bad guys.

    @Dunc

    No, scratch that, the biggest mistake we made was banning the slave trade! Now there was a profitable enterprise!

    Slavery was banned by the UK, and a ban on the international slave trade was enforced by… the Royal Navy. Who had guns, as produced by the arms industry of the time. Is it a more complex issue yet?

    @Nelson

    I see you seem to have unblocked my IP address from accessing this site. Good stuff.

    I expect that nothing serious will happen to Kirk. He’s probably looking at a minor fine. It’s quite possible they’ll adjourn for sentencing. Does he have a solicitor representing him?

  119. on 20 May 2010 at 3:38 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    Further on sentencing for “aggravated trespass”.

    The offence is created by s68 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994. According to Hansard, there have been around 50 convictions per year, and there appears to be no Court of Appeal authority on sentencing, nor any Sentencing Guidelines Council guidance on sentencing. This page (showing the sentencing for CND protesters with banners convicted of the offence) has the defendants receiving fines of a couple of hundred pounds. I expect the same will apply here.

  120. on 20 May 2010 at 4:00 pm My Foot Hurts.

    Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    I expect that nothing serious will happen to Kirk. He’s probably looking at a minor fine.

    The point is Kirk shouldn’t be penalised at all. Trespass to land has been a purely civil offence for centuries, and it’s ridiculous that a peaceful protest can result in a criminal record just because it takes place a few yards off the highway.

    Try 400m

    We’ve had threads about people like you.

  121. on 20 May 2010 at 4:14 pm dirigible

    I expect that nothing serious will happen to Kirk.

    Quite so, quite so. Going before the beak is a bit of a jolly, what?

  122. on 20 May 2010 at 4:31 pm Dunc

    @Ed

    Slavery was banned by the UK, and a ban on the international slave trade was enforced by… the Royal Navy. Who had guns, as produced by the arms industry of the time. Is it a more complex issue yet?

    I see you’re not very good at grasping analogies. OK, let me make it explicit for the hard of understanding: the “if we don’t do it somebody else will” argument was one of the main arguments presented against the abolition of slavery. Yet we did it anyway, at least partly because it was the right thing to do.

  123. on 20 May 2010 at 4:42 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    @Dunc

    Maybe you need to think through your analogies so they don’t actually wreck your main so-called point. I won’t hold my breath.

    @My Foot Hurts

    The point is Kirk shouldn’t be penalised at all. Trespass to land has been a purely civil offence for centuries, and it’s ridiculous that a peaceful protest can result in a criminal record just because it takes place a few yards off the highway.

    That was the law previously, but this is the law now. You’re going a bit pigshit-ignorant HYSer by saying the law can never change, aren’t you?

    And “shouldn’t be”, according to whom? We still live in a (representative) democracy, under the rule of law, right? Or are we just going to decide everything on the basis of “I feel strongly, therefore I’m right”? There should be a name for that. HYSocracy?

    We’ve had threads about people like you.

    What, people who actually know things?

  124. on 20 May 2010 at 4:52 pm Brumswan

    Ed, I’ve forgotten what your original stance on this was. Could you please sum it up in a few succinct sentences so I don’t have to scroll all the way back up to the top of the page?

  125. on 20 May 2010 at 4:58 pm High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    @Ed aka Lurkshire Hunt

    Your average assault rifle has crap range past 30 metres or so, for example.

    Try 400m.

    Yes, I know. That’s effective range. Try actually aiming your AK47 at something 400m away and you’ll see what I mean. My point was that I think it’s OK to make hunting weapons, which shoudn’t even need more than one shot since your first shot will scare off everything with legs and wings in a 200m radius, are OK to make commercially, but that assault rifles, submachine guns and the like are not, since their stated purpose is to kill humans.

  126. on 20 May 2010 at 5:50 pm Nelson

    Ed. Shhhh. Mark Thomas came to visit ShutdownHK actually. Presumably before he decided to grow up eh?

    Kirk was found guilty. Conditional discharge. Some costs. We’re in the pub.

  127. on 20 May 2010 at 6:15 pm High Speed Vomit - Duck My Sick!

    Wish I was there. I’d stand you all a round. (Seriously.)

  128. on 20 May 2010 at 6:36 pm Ed aka Lurkshire Bubble-Hunt

    @Nelson

    No, I don’t think I’ll shhhh, thanks.

    Mr Thomas is more effective than your mate Kirk, because he operates in a smarter way that is likelier to advance his actual objective.

    @Brumswan

    I think that the arms industry is not as evil as the tobacco or alcohol industry. Fight those first, they kill far more people. If instead you want to save lives, take action against starvation or preventable disease. Passion doesn’t mean you’re right. If you want to fight the arms trade, there are smarter and more effective ways than hanging banners on buildings. If you want to fight the trade of arms to bad people (a fight I support), there are ways to do that.

    Finally, Kirk received the most minor penalty there is, which at the end of the period will be expunged from his record. He won’t even need to wait for the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act period. And finally finally, if people don’t want criminal records, then a good way to get that is to not commit criminal offences. Finally cubed, while I think Kirk could have achieved more by other means, I admire him putting his money where his mouth is. No other contributors to this thread have done that, if I’m right. Methinks.

  129. on 20 May 2010 at 6:41 pm Nelson

    Fuck off Ed.

  130. on 20 May 2010 at 7:25 pm My Foot Hurts.

    @ Ed

    I’m sure you know MUCH more about the law than I ever will.*

    The civil law of trespass wasn’t affected by the 1994 Act, and has NOT changed significantly. Aggravated trespass is a totally separate, new offence, which England and Wales has managed without for centuries, and which, in my opinion (hence the word “shouldn’t”), is an unwarranted erosion of our civil liberties.

    You clearly think you’re a tad more intelligent than you actually are, Ed. Your clumsy attempt to twist my words to make it sound like I was saying the law couldn’t change is, frankly, rather childish, and a bit of an amateur’s approach to debate.

    I suspect you’re one of those people who think they can’t be beaten in any argument on God’s green earth, when the truth is they simply don’t know when to STFU.

    * Actually, I’m fairly sure that’s not in fact the case.

  131. on 20 May 2010 at 7:48 pm Nelson

    Thanks to everyone. May be another short post with an addr for donations, should those who’ve expressed an interest wish to follow through.

    You clearly think you’re a tad more intelligent than you actually are, Ed.

    I think that’s true of all of us. But certainly something Ed badly needs to reflect on.