Tuesday, March 14, 2006

Charles Clarke: shoot him in the face

Charles 'there is no excuse for the fact that this man is still alive' ClarkeCharles Clarke, The Safety Elephant: a fat, authoritarian cunt with absolutely no redeeming features whatso-fucking-ever. This man is such an utter bastard that, frankly, seeing him hanged with piano wire from the nearest lamp-post would only count as natural justice.

Charles Clarke. Charles Clarke. Dear fuck, where to start, eh? Well, I started by searching for "charles clarke" on the BBC news website. So, before we move onto the main item, let's have a look at what the first page vomits towards us, shall we? First up, Charlie boy wants to force criminals to work.
Sending fewer criminals to jail is the key to improving prison and probation services in England and Wales, Home Secretary Charles Clarke has told MPs.

Tell you what, Charles; if you don't send anybody at all to prison, then you can keep them really clean and efficient.
Mr Clarke said: "Prison is only one way of punishing offenders and it is best for the most serious offenders, particularly those who are dangerous.

"But there are better punishment regimes for others, in particular properly organised community sentences... which offer the best chance of stopping offenders offending again."

Mr Clarke said seriously dangerous criminals would be kept in prison for "as long as necessary".

And how is Mr Clarke going to ensure that? Will he be taking over the judges' role? Will Charlie himself be presiding over every trial? Will, in fact, the concept of a free trial and the independent judiciary be going out the window? I wouldn't put it past the fat bastard.
The government also wants to make prisoners sign contracts promising not to re-offend, in return for help with housing and jobs on release.

Really? "Tell you what, Mr Criminal; sign this paper saying that you are going to be a good boy and we'll let you go."

"You what? Seriously? I sign this bit of paper and I can go?"

"Yes. Just sign this, saying that you are going to be a good boy and we'll let you go."

"Aye, fuckin' magic, by the way!"
Seriously, these people are fucking mental. The main problem with Clarke, and it is not only a problem with him as a human being—if he can be so described—but also as a politician is that... well... he's just not very good at politics.

Clarke's reign at the Home Office has, essentially, consisted of a load of people telling him to stuff his policies up his arse and fuck off, and Clarke consistently refusing to do so, usually in the face of all sensible advice. Let's take, for instance, this story about Clarke threatening to "force" the merger of the Welsh police forces.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke looks set to drive through a merger of the police forces in Wales.

Mr Clarke had given the four Welsh police authorities until Friday to agree to a voluntary merger - but all of them have now rejected the plans.

Geraint Price-Thomas, who chairs the Gwent authority and the all-Wales authority has said the pace of reform is causing the greatest concern.

But Mr Clarke has said a single force is the best way to police Wales.

One would have thought that the people who were in the best position to decide how Wales might best be policed might be... well... the Welsh police (granted, I'm making a massive assumption here, i.e. that the Welsh police do, in fact, have some clue about what they are doing). It might even be, well, politic for Clarke to back down slightly and say, "OK, you're worried about the pace of change; we'll slow it down and address your concerns." There is, however, no way that Clarke's ego would possibly let him do that; Clarke believes that he is right and—damn it!—but it's going to be done as he wants it done and fuck anybody else's—usually more well-informed—opinion.

This breathtaking arrogance has been displayed most prominently, of course, throughout the ID Cards debacle. The fact is that the damn database will not work; it will not stop terrorism; it will not stop identity fraud and it will piss off a huge number of people. The Lords have made two fairly reasonable requests; first that the scheme be properly costed, and secondly that the government does not force those renewing their passports to get a damn card. Unfortunately, the Safety Elephant refuses to even countenance that he might be wrong here. No, he just presses ahead, putting back exactly the same clauses that were objected to in the first place. Quite simply, the very possibility that he may actually be wrong, on any issue, hasn't crossed his thick as pigshit mind. On any issue.

This mindset was amply demonstrated when Rachel's father, one of fat boy's constituents, approached the fatted calf, the sweaty baboon, and asked a perfectly reasonable question.
My father tells me he at this point left his seat and strode up to Clarke, because he wanted to ask his question, and he said,

''Congratulations on fixing the meeting so that nobody can ask questions! You will have heard about Rev Julie Nicholson who is so angry she cannot forgive the bombers who killed her daughter on 7th July , well, I have a question, my daughter was feet away from the 7/7 Kings Cross bomb, and she and some other surivors have said they are not angry with the bombers, but with the Government, because there was no public enquiry. Why is there no public enquiry?''

Charles Clarke looked at my father ''in a very nasty way'', and then he said to my father

''Get away from me, I will not be insulted by you, this is an insult".

And he stormed past, and Dad was so upset he could not share Eucharist with this man,

and my father left the cathedral in despair.

Dad has cheered up a bit now, but he was almost in tears at being so insulted by Clarke when I spoke to him: he did not think he had insulted Clarke at all.

But the trouble is that he had insulted Clarke: people like Clarke get insulted when the plebs talk to them. Furthermore, this pleb was questioning Clarke's judgement. As we have seen, the Safety Elephant cannot stand having any part of his opinions called into doubt. This may be, of course, because Clarke is a deeply insecure man and, indeed, he does have the look of the sweaty kid that everybody hated, not just because he was fat and sweaty, but because he was as interesting and entertaining as a soggy omlette.

Oh, yes, and because he was a sly cunt, as well. I mean, let's not beat about the bush here, I'm calling this one: Charles Clarke is a total and utter cunt; I also believe him to be a deeply, deeply deceitful man. Oh, did I mention that he is also a fucking fat wanker who should go and put himself out of our misery at the first possible opportunity?

The list of calumny goes on; whether or not you think that there should be an enquiry into the 7/7 bombings—and I have my doubts as to the efficacy of such an enquiry (certainly one conducted under this government)—Clarke's refusal to even contemplate such a move is, amongst other things, deeply stupid; it makes the government look as though it has something to hide. Knowing this lot as—through years of bitter experience—we do, it really wouldn't surprise me if they did. After all, we have had leaked memos suggesting that the Security Forces, at the very least, had some severe suspicions about at least one of the bombers. Anyway, if you are in favour of an enquiry, Chicken Yoghurt has, at the foot of his excellent post on Clarke (everybody's doing it), some good pointers as to how you might get your desires noticed. And you get to annoy the shit out of Clarke, which is the only reason that I shall be participating...

Clarke has not been too forthcoming about Jean Charles de Menenzes either. He could have made friends and influenced people if he had called for the sacking of Sir Ian Blair. For, notwithstanding my colleague's take on the Brazilian (and the concomitant media hysteria), the fact is that an innocent man was shot dead on the London Underground. The Met. then told lies about him (unseasonal coat, leaping barriers, etc.) in a shocking attempt to get themselves of the hook. Even if Blair did not personally authorise the shooting or the subsequent lies, he is nevertheless, the man with whom the buck stops. And no matter how you cut it, an innocent man was shot seven times in the face on Sir Ian Blair's watch. And the fact is that the Met. Chief is ultimately responsible to the Home Secretary.

So far, I have tried to paint a picture of a deeply unpleasant man and, frankly, with such materials to work with—culled both from news reports and personal anecdotes—I can think of few bloggers—or, indeed, normal human beings—who would be happy to invite the overweight bastard to make up numbers at the world's most desperate dinner party; amongst other things, Mr Two Lunches would eat you out of house and home.

The real problem, though, is that he completely fucking useless. Can you think of one competent thing that he has achieved? All of his legislation is bogged down, toing and froing between the Lords. We all of us know that all of the legislation is, at the very least, deeply flawed, if not outright fascist. Furthermore, all of these laws are unnecessary; all of the things that Clarke is trying to cover in his Terrorism Bill are actually covered by age-old laws. But there is no point in having laws if they are not policed, and that is really where the problem lies.

Clarke, however, is busy alienating all of the police forces in the country (starting with Wales, obviously) and so they are unlikely to wholeheartedly support any measures which Clarke may throw his not inconsiderable weight behind. Which is why his legacy will be that of a man who, whilst introducing some fearsomely draconian laws into our green and pleasant land, had absolutely no effect on those on whom he was trying to crack down.

Because he is, actually, a useless politician he has to rely on bullying and intimidation which does not endear him to his colleagues, let alone those on the Opposition benches, on whom the government is increasingly having to rely in order to pass legislation.

Which is why this really pisses me off.
The British government has accused its Danish counterparts of making "a serious mistake" in the way it handled relations with Muslim countries after the publication of cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad.

The home secretary, Charles Clarke, criticised the decision by the Danish prime minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen, to snub a request from 11 Muslim countries for a meeting after the cartoons were published in the Jyllands Posten newspaper in September.

His Imperial Highness has, of course, addressed this in his usual inimitable way; it is, really, an outrage.
Admitting it was a "political point", Mr Clarke said: "I think that was a serious mistake which you could not imagine happening in other countries ... certainly not in this country. It is a question of respecting others, and that means do not provoke or challenge the deeply-held views of others."

Well, you know what, fatso? I have a deeply-held view that we should not be made to carry ID Cards; that we are innocent until proven guilty by a jury of our peers; that laws curbing free speech should have no place in this country and that one should never trust a fat Socialist.

Besides, what, exactly, would the Danish prime minister discuss with the Muslims? Their demands were simple: that he make the Jyllands-Posten publish an apology and/or impose some kind of punishment. But the newspaper is an independent entity and the prime minister, looking at his no doubt busy schedule, decided that he had better things to do than to have a meeting with a bunch of seventh-century-religious nutjobs to whose requests he could not accede even if he wanted to. And for Charles Clarke, a man whose record on liberty is pretty fucking suspect to criticise the leader of another country in that mealy-mouthed way is, frankly, incredibly rude as well as being slightly pathetic.

But the real insult is that Clarke is so utterly fucking useless; if I could offer some advice to the Safety Elephant, it would be, "shut your fucking trap". The man is a shit so far in front of the first water that he practically counts as some new lifeform; if only this were true, since I feel ashamed to be part of the same race as the fuck.

As with many other Labour ministers, I can only wish cancer upon him; with any luck, it'll be a brain tumour: at least it would go some way to explaining how one person can be such a useless fucking cunt. Charles Clarke: the world's most eloquent argument against the existance of an intelligent designer...

UPDATE: Once more, a very warm welcome to readers of His Imperial Majesty.

UPDATE 2: A welcome with marching bands to readers of the UKIP Forum and the No2ID Forum.


Anonymous said...

Great fisking as usual, DK. One minor point: "forcing criminals to work" isn't such a bad idea, depending on how you go about it.

On the other hand, I can't really see Charles Clarke reintroducing the concept of the chain gang to British jusrisprudence, so never mind...

--LC Wes, Imperial Mohel

Nulabour said...

Charles Clarke was spouting similar rubbish during the General Election campaign:

According to the Sunday Telegraph:
"Six falsehoods in 100 seconds: how the Home Secretary misled public over 'yob crackdown'"

"Mr Clarke was caught out after claiming in a radio interview last week to have watched offenders dressed in chain-gang style boiler suits undertaking manual labour. But organisers of the scheme he visited said that Mr Clarke witnessed nothing more than a group of middle-aged men on probation, wearing disposable blue overalls to protect their clothes from paint.

They accused him of embellishing almost every aspect of the project they had shown him in order to appear tough on crime. In addition, Mr Clarke's own staff yesterday denied his claim that such schemes were running up and down the country. He stands accused of fabricating no fewer than six claims in the course of a 1min 40sec section of the interview on BBC Radio 4's Today programme."

Anonymous said...

Charles Clarke is without doubt the most useless twat ever to walk on this planet.

Marvin said...

Chain gangs - that is how prisoners should be worked.

Anonymous said...

Ah. Thank you for the correction, NuLabour: while Clarke still isn't likely to bring back chain gangs, he's perfectly willing to pretend he already has...

Among other things, DK did call Clarke "a deeply deceitful man," didn't he?

--LC Wes, Imperial Mohel

Anonymous said...

This is what happens when government policy is invented by a fucking toby jug.

Seb said...

Great rant! Saying what I'm just thinking...
Safety Elephant is a great moniker. But can I also suggest "Freedom Charlie", in honour of his statement that we'll all have Free Will to choose not to have ID cards (by choosing not to have a passport)?
Anothe good moniker: Steve Bell's "Big Scrotum" - as in "Big Scrotum is Watching You"!

The honourable member said...

From everything I've read, he seems not only incompetent, but deeply unpleasant to boot. I actually met Clarke (and by met, I mean had him glower at me when we where in the same room) back when he was Education Secretary ... a distressing experience, but probably better than encountering him as Home Secretary in today's extra-judicial execution climate.

Kath said...

Here from His Imperial Majesty, like what I've read so far, I'll keep in touch ;o)

chris said...

Do we have to shoot him in the face? That's far too quick. The genitals would be more fitting. Or if they cannot be found then the expansive gut would be a good, and practically un-missable, target.

Rachel said...

Brilliant. I linked, but I forgot to comment too.


The Leveller said...

I'm getting the feeling you don't like him?

Retired Rambler said...

And when fatso was at Cambridge in
1971 he was the Chairman of Cambridge University's Stalinist SocSoc!

JACOBITE said...

cool site love it