Direct link to twitter:
Direct link to podcast:
Or click on the massive iTunes button to subscribe to the podcast...

Subscribe to the podcast on iTunes


135 - Podcast phone in

Our first contributor:


He runs a T-shirt business nowadays:


How to deal with TV licences:


Tabitha Browne is here:


Our third contributor here:


HHOs explained here:


Cockney Reject:


The Three Amoviegos:


This episode is the first to feature live callers.


Want to feature on a future episode?


1, Sign up to Twitter and Skype


2, Follow me on Twitter. I'll be arranging more in the future, not exactly sure when.


3, Get a nice microphone/headset.


4, Think of a topic you wanna roll on. I give people 5 minutes or so so make it interesting!



Check out this episode!

David Icke to be on The BBC's flagship political programme: Question Time

This is an idea which has the ring of genius about it, don't you think? I can already imagine what the consequences would be. Sheer #bbcqt awesomeness!

The show ended on a massive high with Russell Brand and Nigel Farage doling out some healthy common sense to the Great British public[1]. Now it's time for the grandaddy of them all, David Icke!

David is well known for his challenging political views. In the late 90's he argued that the British Monarchy were shape shifting blood drinking reptiles from the star constellation Draco. He believes they rule planet earth via a network of secret societies who answer to "The Babylonian Brotherhood".

Regularly selling out arenas world wide The Ickster has given speeches all over the world, including The Oxford Union. And loads of celebrities like him, Robbie Williams, Noel Gallagher. Russell Brand featured him on his hugely successful Radio 2 show many times.

He even stood for election a few years ago:

To dismiss him as irrelevant politically is something the BBC have previously had to apologise for when a viewer asked why Mr Icke's powerful polemical invective had not already been provided as part of the BBC's public service remit.

However, the original question went unanswered.

Currently the mainstream media is only content to try to provide trivial platforms to those who believe the moon is a hollow construct designed to send bad vibes down to planet earth. Why is this? Surely an impartial broadcaster such as the BBC would be anxious to sign up one of the most popular political speakers in the world? How many of the Westmonster lot do you think could sell out an arena and write loads of bestselling books?

Check him out, he's ace.

Why do people still pay the BBC's TV tax?

Most of the BBC's presenters and staff who I know generally identify as "left wing". I've started to wonder if this is because they feel guilty about the way in which their lifestyles are funded. You don't need a degree in economics to work out that a flat rate tax of £145 hits the poorest hardest. It's not rich people who are being prosecuted and jailed for failing to pay.

134 CJ Stone's work: a short introduction to British counter culture.

CJ Stone recommends this website here:

He tweets here:

The Isle of Wight clip comes from here: MESSAGE TO LOVE

The "Operation Solstice" audio is from this video here:

Ian Bone's radical politics featured on The Jonathan Ross Show:

King Arthur's clip comes from here:

Jennifer Ellison tweets here:

The music on this podcast comes from both Quisling Meet and The Decadent Marsupials

Nick Margerrison

PS - Cockney Rebel's link to an article here:

And the SkyNews piece:

The prophetic words of Aaron Russo:

Also, I wrote a blog entry about these weird gloves:

And I tweet here innit:

Oh and there's a facebook:

Nick Margerrison

Check out this episode!

Barclay's payment gloves: The Microchip Agenda

Handy gadget?
While you were doing your Christmas shopping did you idly wish you had some gloves you could use to pay with? From the website of Barclay's bank: "To make shoppers’ wishes come true, Barclaycard has developed a small number of ‘pay-glove’ prototypes which are being trialled". The gloves, to be given a mass market release next year, use the Barclay's contact less payment system.

This looks suspiciously like "the microchip agenda," which we've been warned about for so long by the conspiracy theory community. The theory, which has been around for decades now[1], is that the global power elites want to put ID chips in their cattle (you) so everyone can easily be tracked and controlled. Many argue these chips will also ultimately emit radio waves and regulate your thoughts and behavior, as well as being able to read your mind. These chips will be linked to a global computer and used to pay for goods and services. Ultimately leading to a cashless society.

As with all conspiracy theories, or to be more accurate 'counter narratives,' it's essential to keep an open mind. It's possible there is a high demand for gloves that work like a credit card capable of making small payments, Barclays may have substantial research to show that's the case. If they do though it's surely not the market research they're using on the linked to page, carried out a mere two weeks ago[1].

Or, they may be an attempt by people higher up our global pyramid of power to push forward the notion that payments are made by a wave of the hand and an ID chip, rather than cash or a card which you carry separately from yourself in a purse or a wallet.

The absurd nature of the idea has confused people on Twitter.

The technique here is often referred to as "boiling the frog". The idea goes that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. Just as, if they'd announced back in the '90's they were going to microchip the population, the populous would have been outraged and opposed the idea. Better to move slowly towards it with ideas like this[1].

I am one of the only UK national radio presenters to have hosted a phone in on the topic of "the microchip agenda", on Kerrang Radio. The original unedited piece is here on my podcast, about 15 minutes in:

Nick Margerrison


[1] I first encountered it when listening to Alex Jones in the late 90's. David Icke has been going on about it for years, it's in his classic, "The Biggest Secret".

Here's some old video of the film maker Aaron Russo talking about it:

The boiling frog story is a widespread anecdote describing a frog slowly being boiled alive. The premise is that if a frog is placed in boiling water, it will jump out, but if it is placed in cold water that is slowly heated, it will not perceive the danger and will be cooked to death. The story is often used as a metaphor for the inability or unwillingness of people to react to significant changes that occur gradually.
This idea appears to be echoed in the "nudge theory" which is favored by David Cameron's Constervative Party.  A good wikipedia article about that here:

From which:
Most recently, the political machinery of both President Barack Obama in the United States and Prime Minister David Cameron in the UK have sought to employ Nudge Theory to advance their respective domestic policy goals. In both the UK and the Australian state of NSW there is a Behavioural Insights Team in the government

133 - Occupy protester who was arrested on Russia Today joins us to explain himself

Donnachadh McCarthy features this week.
His twitter here:
His Facebook here:

Stuart Hill's wikipedia is here:

Also - from the archives - Master Cosmic, who I can't find an online profile of...

Music from Decadent Marsupials, who Soundcloud here:

And Quisling Meet who twitter here:

The Facebook page for the podcast is here:

Nick Margerrison

Check out this episode!

Russell Brand vs Nigel Farage on Question Time: You need two wings to fly.

The Daily Mirror poll
I'm a recent fan of Russell Brand. I didn't like him at first. Someone on cookedandbombed once suggested Chris Morris's TV show Nathan Barley was based on him. That seemed about right, another anxious-to-be-famous nob head. I generally did my best to avoid his TV show "Big Brother's Big Mouth" and only continued to be aware of him because my girlfriend at the time fancied him.

Then he started effectively doing a talk show on Radio 2, name checking David Icke and even putting him on air a few times. For the uninitiated, Icke argues our world is run by evil blood-drinking shape shifting space lizards from the star constellation Draco, a point of view hard not to like[1]. When Brand then went on to announce he thought there was going to be a revolution in the UK and declared it's not worth voting in elections I became convinced he was worth supporting[2].

I've not changed my mind about that. I still "support" him. However, this is because I believe people learn from failure and, make no mistake, this performance was anything but a success. "Last night Russell Brand the political activist died a whimpering, withering death" writes Fleet Street Fox in The Daily Mirror. Death is a bit extreme but visibly he was knocked out of action and deflated by the experience.
A word about being a "fan" or "supporter". You'll notice there's a poll which The Daily Mirror carried in response to the clash. When I encountered it there was part of me that wanted to click Brand's name to "support" him. When I took a screengrab of it more people had done that than they had for Farage. Instead though I have decided to be honest. There's no point telling a boxer he won the match as he's carried away unconscious on a stretcher.
Images like this are questionable.
The tone was set by a question, asked by the guy pictured above, about whether politics has become too petty. Brand was given the chance to answer first. Question Time often pick questions ideally suited to panel members, this one seemed tailor made for him. yet, from the off, he stumbles over his words and spoke with unusual difficulty.

This suggested to me that the "writhing, nervous gut" he wrote about in his response to the show was still present. In the piece he said of his performance, "I sat politely on my hands, keen to avoid hollering obscenities". The result though was he opened stumbling into a point relating to the ubiquitous, "MP attendance meme". Nothing to do with the question, which was about petty politics. Unfortunately it's a meme which has recently been savaged by an influential Spectator piece: The menace of memes: how pictures can paint a thousand lies

This demonstrates his key error throughout the whole show, he failed to answer the questions and was strangely controlled and timid throughout most of it. A mistake when tackling Farage, whose main skill is to appear relaxed and comfortable with himself. The UKIP leader's first answer pointed out the lack of a difference between the political parties. He bemoaned the lack of "proper ideology in politics". He has a point, when meaty issues are decided behind closed doors all the front line faces of Her Majesty's Government have left to debate are the scraps. This is why politics is petty.

John Higgs's piece about the UK political scene immediately leaped to mind.
Had Brand have gone into a similar routine maybe things would have gone in his favour. Unfortunately the moment was lost. The first "spat" we witnessed was between Farage and Labour MP, Mary Creagh, Shadow Secretary of State for International Development. She tried to say Farage was a career politician while claiming she wasn't[3]. She then started to sound like she was reading from a Labour press release as she talked about the "big difference" between the Tories and Labour. All the while Brand was in shot sat next to her looking like he was "on her side". In fact it's one of those pictures which he used on his blog.

Just vote Labour and forget about it, yeah?
The questioner, who thought politics had become too petty, was brought back into the conversation: "it's like they're treating us as fools," he cried. Then another audience member dived in with "doesn't help when people are telling us not to vote," a reference to Brand's infamous outburst on Newsnight.

5:57 in and he's not looking happy already.
When asked to respond he went in again, stumbling and tired, then corrected by the panel on the number of people voting in "the last election". What he'd meant to say was the last European election. He got a decent dig in at Farage, about his working for the city, which he argued was good practice as that's what most politicians do.
However his little lecture was cut short by Dimbleby, who reminded him what they were talking about. In this instance not Nigel Farage but him and his idea that people shouldn't vote. An idea I agree with and which Brand has defended well in the past.
But what the questioner was saying...
Yes, you SHOULD vote..
"But what the questioner was saying [...] was that people SHOULD vote.." said Dimbleby as the camera cut to the confused and disapproving face of the woman who'd made the original point. His response, when pushed, was weak: "give us something to vote for".

A better response, which he has given previously, is "why participate in a ridiculous charade?". I could not agree more. The idea that we should vote for these scumbags is absolutely absurd. The current system is not a democracy. It's an arrangement put in place by the establishment to create the illusion we live in a democracy. No one voted for the war in Iraq, or mass immigration, or the EU, or to bail out the banks, or on any of the major issues we face in this country.  We're NEVER consulted on the big issues, ever. Here was another of Russell's chances to shine. He's aware of direct democracy. Why not nail that one to the wall, as Omid Djalli did recently? If we lived in a direct democracy where there were referendums before war we could all collectively feel responsible for the mess in Iraq now. Instead we blame that on someone else and as a result the same mistakes will be made again in the future.

"My mate, Lee Pickett, who works for the Fire Brigade," droned Brand. He always mentions this, someone must have told him it makes him seem more "man of the people" but 'support the unions', is the message behind it. It strikes me as "New Labour stooge" point. This is a large part of the problem he faces. By identifying with classic "left wing" causes and rhetoric his inevitable trajectory is to go round in circles. Regular blog readers will know: you need two wings to fly. Without being able to move where you like on the political spectrum, depending upon the issue, you end up with a very orthodox and establishment style of politics. The left wing vs right wing narrative has played out for centuries with little real progress. Sat next to Mary Creagh, from the Labour Party, in the traditional "lefty comedian" slot any sense that his stuff might be "dangerous" to the status quo was gone. It's a tactic known as "death by patronage". Powerful people destroy threats by seeming to giving them conditional support which can then be withdrawn at any moment.

This happened with remarkable rapidity on this edition of Question Time. Our Labour MP was initially grinning inanely when Brand interrupted the Tory, Penny Mordaunt, who claimed to respect firefighters, "pay their pensions then, luv". In my opinion that comment alone would have been fine. Instead he elaborated by scolding himself for being "sexist". After this you could hear Mary Creagh say in a school matronly tone "no more sexist language". Then, as Brand cut in again, came a very awkward moment as she turned on him for the crime of "interrupting women".

DO NOT interrupt WOMEN
Remember, by this point we're only ten minutes in and Brand has been attacked by the audience, himself and The Labour Party. Already there are clear gaps in his game, the main one being he's not answering the questions. He looks tired, daunted as his lefty mate tries to score a few points off him for her own career.
I was still hopeful but in retrospect it was not looking good. The point Penny Mordant, the woman Brand interrupted, went on to make is that his twitter feed should have a more "positive message". How inane is that? She soon got a telling, her claim to fame is that she dropped the word cock into one of her speeches recently: "Tory MP Penny Mordaunt said 'c**k' several times in Parliament speech as part of Navy dare".

Probably Brand's finest moment on the show.
"You don't take it seriously and you work there Penny, how are we supposed to take it seriously?" he shot back. Nicely put, "I'm a comedian on twitter" he emphasised.

Cavendish, writes for The Times, thinks Brand will cause fascism.
Then we get Camilla Cavendish, of the Murdoch-owned Times newspaper. She dived in and accused Brand's "don't vote" stance of being the kind of idea that caused the rise of fascism in the 1930s. She went on to claim she meets "a lot of decent MPs" and, to paraphrase, they're a good sort. Remember, she's a journalist. The CSA inquiry is not news to her, she'll surely have looked into it at some point. The delays to the Chilcot Inquiry won't be a shock either. All sorts of Westminster sewage will be known to her that you and I have never even heard of. Yet she comes out in favour of them.

By this point it's abundantly clear there's no one on the panel who has time for our hapless revolutionary. He's been attacked by all of them at this point, aside only from Farage.

Cue the killer question, "is Britain really over crowded?".
Farage thought it was full. He was pretty clear on why, he thinks there's a shortage of GP surgeries and Primary School places. He also thinks road traffic is another indicator. Fair enough.
Brand on the other hand ignored the question and went in with his now widely quoted "pound shop Enoch Powell" comment. For me it was a misfire. Nice line, not particularly damaging. Also, it had little to do with the question. It looked like an unprovoked ad hominem attack. I was tweeting furiously, it was obvious to a seasoned Question Time viewer what was about to happen.

"This is called Question Time and the idea is members of the audience ask questions and we answer them," nailed Farage. Right smack in the weak spot of Brand's game. It was like watching someone walk nose first into 'the big elbow off the top rope'. People hate politicians ignoring the question yet here was Brand doing exactly that and, even worse, having it pointed out by a politician. "There IS money, it's just not being distributed" whimpered Brand and the audience applauded but really he was heading for the mat.
This is widely seen as the moment things got really bad. It wasn't good. "Stand for Parliament" shouted a bald guy with a walking stick, "stand!". As he finished his rant he glanced over at Nigel. Although I love that his identity has since been revealed in the press I don't think he was a "stooge" in the traditional sense. Even if he was Brand's response was tired and got a groan, "I'd stand for Parliament but I'd be scared that I'd become one of them".
Nigel uses his smug expression for the 100000000th time.
The reality started to sink in. Brand was not on form. Nigel and the audience's UKIP supporters had stuck a real blow during the exchange. Then, to make matters worse, a halfwit called Bunny De La Roche dived in from the back of the audience and threatened Farage. A massive own goal if she was intending to support Brand. In the heat of the exchange Nigel slyly suggested that was the case. "One of your voters" he joked.
"The left" seem chronically unaware that threats of violence make them look, well, nasty and violent. I suspect this is down to what people term "noble cause corruption". People stuck in the left wing paradigm can often become convinced that they are "good" and their opponents are therefore "evil". This misunderstanding has been the cause of much of "the left's" failings.
Immigration is a topic which bores me rigid. The main reason it is so tedious is because it's dominated by idiots who say pointless things. One lot are obsessed with racism, like the angry left, and then the other lot state the obvious, 'we can't just let anyone in'.
From that point onwards, Brand seemed almost physically to accept defeat.

There then followed a long and tedious conversation about the NHS. As I re-watched it while writing this review it occurred to me that by this point Brand appeared to have lost his sense of humour. It's very hard to make an audience that doesn't like you laugh. I suspect that may have been part of it. Also though, his aim on the piece seems to be to nail statistics and facts to the wall. Part of me wonders if he over-prepped for his appearance.

As the conversation moved to education Brand had another pop at Farage but it lacked weight. By this point he'd lost and seemed like he was playing for sympathy more than anything else.

As I said at the outset, I'm still a fan. His YouTube stuff is excellent. He's dishing out enough interesting ideas to justify support and I think he's sincere in what he's trying to do. He just needs to sharpen up and get away from "left wing" dogmas, particularly thought-crimes such as "sexism". It's dishonest of people to think pretending all went well will make it so. More than anything else it could mean more disasters like this one in the future.

Overall the first half was great, a classic Question Time. The second half limped though as Russell Brand seemed to wish he was back in the more traditional showbiz world.
Nick Margerrison

[1] I've interviewed Icke many times. Two of the "fan favourite" interviews are here and here.

[2] I announced my support for "Brand Revolution" in this episode of the podcast:

132 Lucid Dreaming David Jay Brown

David Jay Brown is a consciousness explorer. His Wikipedia entry ( ) has more detail. My notes on this interview are simple, I think it's one of the best I've done.

Find more here:

Or Facebook him here:


Tom Binns podcast features again. Do find him online and subscribe if you like it. Tom tweets here:


Music by Quisling Meet, who tweet here:


Also features The Decadent Marsupials:


I tweet here:


Now go forth and, in the name of Eris Discordia, act boldly!


Nick Margerrison

Check out this episode!

#BBCQT why can't politicians tell us the truth?

The first question was "Why can't Governments tell us the truth about the 60% of cuts that are heading our way?". Dimbleby joked about sticking to the shorter version which titles this blog before handing over to, Sajid Javid Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport. Javid bumbled on about how the economy was a priority and Labour left them no money and so on. Then the reality emerged. Savage cuts to Government spending are still required.

This has come up before, in June of last year. The idea we're currently facing a United Kingdom in the grip of "austerity" is inaccurate. The cuts we've seen are LESS THAN HALF of what is still to come. "Forecasters predict public spending will fall to levels not seen since the 1930s, suggesting the loss of one million public sector jobs by 2020."[1]

Yvette Cooper, shadow Home Secretary, agreed that cuts were needed. The message to taxpayers is simple, either way they're going to give you less for your money. You can choose Labour or Tory. The pitch from the opposition is that they're 'nice' people. That's it really. They will be 'fairer'. That's the UK's democracy.

A pointless argument about who is nicer.
Then we got Baroness Williams from the Liberal Democrats on telling us to stop assuming all politicians are liars. It goes straight through me each time I recall that I live in a country, claiming to be a democracy, with unelected Lords, Baronesses and a Monarch. It amazes me that so few of my fellow countrymen are irritated by this. She got into a conversation with a member of the audience and even managed to get a round of applause for more tax cuts.
This is the depressing thing about #BBCQT. It makes me feel like people are idiots even though I know they are not. You have no choice, we're going to cut services. Vote for what colour you want them to wear while they do it, blue or red. Oh, by the way, who wants us to steal more of your money? Yeah, cheers and applause.

Time for this lad's question, he thinks politicians need to stop being so greedy:

"MPs expenses have risen by 5 million in the last five years, when are politicians going to take their share of the cuts?" was his question. Here the comedian Omid Djalili excelled himself by talking about direct democracy. Lets have referendums on things. Regular readers will know I am a huge fan of this idea. It was great to watch other audience members pick up on it, after this chap accused the politicians of all being the same and got a huge round of applause.

No one votes for you 'coz you're all the same.
It was interesting to see how Dimbleby shot the referendum idea down as it picked up among the audience's discussion.

We could vote on things for ourselves...
This chap seemed to run with the idea, almost as if it was new to him and he was excited by it. "So, elections don't work for you?" fine, lets move on. We didn't plan to discuss this. The whole thing is stage managed. That's so clear. Dimbleby's role is to keep it on topic. "Time is pressing, we must move on".

Omid Djalili advocates direct democracy.
The next question was about Britain's identity now Mohammed is the most popular name in the UK. I swear to God this is not a new story. It comes round every year and has done so since before I started doing "political talk" on LBC. I remember it on Kerrang and Hallam FM. However, for a while, the figures were artificially manipulated as different spellings of the name were not added to the total.

Really this is a question about immigration. I used to think people who raised such concerns were racists. When I hosted a talk show in South Yorkshire I would assume the people moaning about it were just bigots. The show in question covered Rotherham which has subsequently been shown to have had a huge problem with Asian grooming gangs. Yvette Cooper, who represents the Labour party who were in power at the time, had none of her recent "tough talking" up her sleeve during the discussion: Yvette Cooper steals Tory immigration slogan from 2005

Next question was about Gordon Brown. A tedious discussion about him followed. He deregulated the banks and lied to the Scottish, that's his legacy. He and Blair attacked Iraq, for no good reason and as Omid pointed out, the reality is few of us will remember him.

A confused question from a "young person" knocked the conversation into one about zero hour contracts. Here Jill Kirby infuriated the audience members by pointing out "a zero hour contract is better than no contract at all". Those who believe they are part of some sort of left wing struggle thrive on this kind of thing. "Go back to London" shouted one man. She's their token right wing guest, presumably there to "balance" the lefty comedian. It wasn't long until she was being misquoted on twitter:

More interestingly this moment occurred during an exchange with Yvette Cooper, who claims her party hates zero hour contracts...
When challenged on this and asked why Labour don't stop zero hour contracts at their councils her answer was "I think we should stop them for everybody". In other words, she ignored the question. This is because there is no real difference between the two parties. None at all. They do as they are told in Her Majesty's Government.

Finally there was a brief exchange about the fact the NHS are refusing to treat people.
No one aside from Kirby thought it a reasonable idea. That's because it's not. She tried to frame it as a question of people taking responsibility for their health.

Nick Margerrison

[1] From the BBC: Osborne: Autumn Statement cuts warnings 'hyperbolic' - quote from this article.

Story in more detail here:

Mob justice

Thief who ‘robbed pensioner with knife’ is stripped and clingfilmed to a lamppost

From here:

A mob dished out some very sweaty justice to an alleged thief who was spotted attempting to rob a pensioner with a knife – he was stripped naked, then wrapped head to foot in clingfilm and tied to a lamppost.

People took photographs as 32-year-old Valentino Abeyta Barrera sweltered in Chilean capital Santiago’s 27-degree heat, with his underpants around his ankles.

He was left for 20 minutes before police arrived – and the alleged thief refused to explain why he was there, begging the police to free him.

The photographs stirred up discussion online about vigilante justice – and Barrera was freed, as his alleged victim did not make a complaint to police.

I suspect this sort of thing will be on the rise in our new global village. It's a worry really.


Ming IS Merciless Part 3

130 Magic tricks and self help gurus

Knoxville Geeks were an odd pair. It's one of the stranger pieces of radio I'm responsible for.


Michael Serwa is here:


Congratulations to Daisy Eris on her wedding! Yes, there was a wedding as well. It was an excellent weekend!


Tom Binns and I continue to do a podcast. Do subscribe:


Nick Margerrison - tweets here:


Music by Decadent Marsupials who SoundCloud here:


And, as always, music by Quisling Meet, who tweet, here:


Also - weird Chi Guy is here:

Check out this episode!

A "black market" of sweets and treats

It's the best story I've read in months. A young lad from Salford starts selling sweets at his school where they've got some New Labour style "healthy eating" policy in place. He was buying stuff in bulk from a wholesalers, smuggling it in, and selling at a profit. The money made was going into a trust fund so he could pay to go to University. Furthermore he employed two of his mates (at £5.50 a day) to help out. He's a business prodigy, clearly. He has initiative and a mind of his own. That's why the establishment have now stepped in and are threatening to suspend him.

Tommie [says] he has his sights set on a top business degree from prestigious Oxford or Cambridge.

Parents Gary, 33, an office worker, and gym manager Tracy, also 33, describe themselves ‘council estate born and bred’ - and say they would struggle to pay £9,000-a-year tuition fees.

Gary said: “He’s a typical teenage boy who saw what he wanted and worked hard for it. He realised that if you want to get ahead in business and in life, you have to start at a young age. At first we thought we should stop him selling the sweets, but then we saw that he was doing it properly, legally and sensibly so we left it to see what would happen. I could only dream of making that sort of money at his age."

“It’s a shame the school are trying to stop Tommie. According to his business model he’d have earned £2-3k by the end of the year, which would have made him the £18,000 he needed to pay for University. He’s always thinking ahead and I think that shows an unbelievable knack at his age.”

What's so wonderful about the story is it works as an innocent microcosm of the nation we live in. Here the teacher makes the argument that this lad's entrepreneurial instincts must be quashed because their healthy eating policy is "for the good of the children". He's an adult, he can tell kids what's good for them and how they should behave. That's his job.

However, the UK's drugs laws are regularly made a mockery of like this. The billions earned illegally trading in them go into the pockets of older and far nastier versions of this kid. The argument our establishment uses though is almost identical. It's for your own good, you're a child we're the adults, do as you're told.
However in our not-so-innocent real world many suspect that by the time this pattern reaches adulthood our Government has done some sort of deal with those who break their laws[1]. Why else would they allow them to become so well funded using a business model even a child can master?

In the real world this "war on drugs" nonsense more than anything else funds organised crime.

Furthermore, we're not children and our Governments are not our masters. They were not selected by some all powerful hidden force but elected by us to do our bidding. Good on this kid, I wish him all the best. Maybe when he's an adult our world will change for the better.
Nick Margerrison.

Emily Thornbury shows how Labour isn't working.

It's 12 minutes past 3 and this politician's career is now over. She just doesn't realise it. What precisely was going on in her mind is impossible to know: Many detect, or maybe project, a smug titter. The replies to the tweet are interesting:

It doesn't take long for people to start retweeting it. Then the Mail Online picks it up as a story and she's giving statements to the media. This only makes the situation worse. People are far too quick to apologise these days.

Meanwhile this tweet sits in Thornberry's twitter feed. It was the 15th of November 2012. Had Labour's PR people been able to discover this tweet in time she could have weathered the storm. Instead, drawn into the immediacy of the moment, Miliband, with challenges over his leadership, stumbles into the situation and gives her a "proper telling off".

"The lady doth protest..."

Then, she resigns.

Just as articles in her defence were being penned: This Picture Shows The Scandal Over MP's Rochester Picture Is Manufactured.  In other words, the stomach for the fight was gone before the loyal counter attacks had even begun. So concerned about the truths being meted out to them online are Miliband and his union mates that they allow social media to dictate the agenda now. This is a political party in absolute shambles, certainly not fit to pretend to Govern.

Buzz Feed finds White Van Man

128 - A Quest For Gnosis

Gabriel D. Roberts and Aaron Cheak join us for a chat about the concepts behind "Gnosis" and "Alchemy". Both experts in their field it's worth looking at Gabriel's homepage here and Aaron's is here


Chris Rawlins is a memory expert. He sent me a copy of his book, I'm looking forward to reading it and will review it on the podcast in the future. His website is here:


The Decadent Marsupials provide the music this week.


As I'm not using Twitter at the moment it'd be great if you helped push this podcast out into the farthest reaches of the universe. Pop it on your social media feeds and spread it like you would a contagious disease...


All Hail Discordia.


Nick Margerrison

Check out this episode!

Russell Brand - Parklife

The presence of Russell Brand in the media landscape gives me hope. He used to represent all that was wrong in that world, overtly trivial, tedious and inexplicably popular. Now though he's nailing points I've been aching to see in the mainstream for years. The fact he liked David Icke was an early sign he was going to be good value. Now though, as he responds to the internet meme which compares his polysyllabic ramblings to Phil Daniels's performance on the 90's classic "Parklife", he's close to becoming a legend.

The meme began on Twitter. When I first saw it I wanted to ignore it and hope it went away because I'm turning into a fan and I thought witty mockery would be the beginning of the end. The above video shows you how, by embracing it, he's shown it's his critics who are the ones who are taking life too seriously, not him. And thusly, he wins.

I hate the fact I'm about to write these next few words and ask my more astute readers to forgive me, I don't agree with everything he says. I'm just glad he's trying to say something. Fame is a gift handed to people who often have spent so long trying to achieve it that once they do they're lost for meaningful words. The consequence is they end up saying things like "buy Coca Cola", "go to McDonalds", or "this is The BBC", usually because money. Brand is clearly trying to use his position to say and do something worthwhile and trigger a change in human consciousness.

I think fellow Discordians and C.O.N members should try and add to that. It's been a theme of this blog and the podcast for quite some time now.

The line of counter attack from most seems to be that he's not a serious political commentator. That to me is a bonus. I find the demagogues and politicians who people do take seriously quite a worry. Someone who says he cures the desolate awfulness of life with a 'sexy shirt and how it feels on my nipples' is not running the risk of that. Instead his act demands intelligent viewers think for themselves.

In the unlikely event he ever reads this, keep it up and I'm sorry for saying mean things about you when I was on Kerrang.


Follow by Email