abort the human species, before it exists

Last Saturday saw the massive 23rd Anarchist Bookfair in London. As ever, it saw a wide mix of political thought chucked in one room, fizzing with an overload of utopian fervour. And, of course, a load of completely barking stuff too.

Anarchism attracts people who are brilliant uncompromising idealists with enormous faith in the ability of people to organise themselves, people who have an unquenchable desire for justice and infinite incendiary urges to do something about it. They want to take on the whole of the way modern humanity organises itself and change it. That takes a lot of thought and discussion, so there's always going to be plenty of books for an anarchist bookfair.

It also takes a total lack of inhibition about seeming weird. This means that anyone who is weird for any reason can find a place within anarchist circles. Consequently, there are lots of strange ideas at the bookfair. My all-time favourite is someone who saw that amongst my stuff was a pamphlet about cannabis legislation. 'Ah yes,' said the punter as he pointed to it, 'cannabis. But what is cannabis? Is it a set of numbers?'

On Saturday I was there doing a stall for Godhaven Ink's wares. You know how sometimes you're on a long bus or tube journey and there's a sign or advert in front of you and you can't help re-reading it over and over?

Well above the stall at which I was seated hung a large banner. About eight foot square of orange fabric, written on in black marker pen. And for hours, I involuntarily read and re-read it. Each time I had the suspicion that this time it would impart information - not an unreasonable expectation of a large banner, really - and yet each time I started to get a hint of sense it felt like I startled it and it bolted for the exit before I could catch it.

It was, I feel sure, the barkingest thing at the bookfair. And that's not something I say lightly. It's one of those phrases of deep meaning.

For example, if I tell you that Abha is the rainiest place in Saudi Arabia, it doesn't mean too much cos there's not exactly heavy competition. It's one of those impressive sounding declarations that dissolves upon consideration, like being called Britain's Tallest Dwarf. But when you're told Blaenau Ffestiniog is the rainiest place in Wales there's a certain gravity.

Ditto the barkingest thing at the Anarchist Bookfair:

THE SECRET OF ILLNESS IS HUMAN SPECIES

Everyone is tied to particular illness (Einzelkrankheit) which objectively aims at the creation of human species. BUT the doctors abuse and usurp the particular illness (Pathocentrism) to produce out of it the substitute (!) of species (Ersatzgattung): money, instead of human species (gattung). So the doctors abort the human species, before it exists.

Therefore:

SUBSTITUTE THE DOCTORS' CLASS BY THE: PATIENTS' CLASS
TAKE ILLNESS IN YOUR OWN HANDS

Create patients' collectives everywhere!
Start here and now! Do something for yourselves! Prefer confrontation against the doctors' class, make Patients' Front, you yourself!
TURN ILLNESS INTO A REVOLUTIONARY WEAPON!

self-knowledge

From a personal email from a friend, one of the most perceptive observations I've heard in a long time. Along the road of such awareness we will find wisdom:

i'm never (usually) aware of not being myself, and not being honest with myself too, but retrospective glances have revealed that at times when i justify the answer i want to hear i will stop asking a question.

cow parade - i'm lovin' it

As a hardcore bovophile, I strongly approve of the Cow Parade.

It's a bunch of life-size fibreglass cows that get expertly painted in all manner of bizarre ways and then distributed around a locality for a while, from Tokyo to Brussels, Auckland to the Isle of Man.

In a break with several centuries of tradition, Manchester was made temporarily beautiful last summer. You'd randomly come across a cow in a bar or train station. That sort of thing should happen more often.

Whilst in Prague, the wonderful Karen saw one of them superbly subverted.

This cow



was unusual in that it is depicted doing something cows don't really do, apparently in the last stages of eating a human.

This pose meant it needed no alteration except the proper caption to make it a masterpiece.

i heard it through the vine

Last month I had the enormous joy of seeing Cowboy Junkies play live numerous times.

They make music of such grace, dignity, darkness, stillness, and intelligent ornate melancholic beauty, they hold a place in my heart that's all their own. If you don't have The Trinity Session and The Caution Horses then I feel a bit sorry for you having such a void in your life.

It was their first UK tour in twelve years, so I felt compelled to follow them around seeing them night after night, suppressing my feelings of 'Following a band around on tour? What is this, 1990 and New Model Army?'.

It's a rare band indeed that you can get as much from seeing the fifth night as the first. The unfailing magic Cowboy Junkies generated was so profoundly enriching that right now I still feel like someone's put a layer of fluffy cotton wool under my boots.

The tour was made doubly wonderful by the support act being Vic Chesnutt. Perfectly matched for the Junkies, such grace and yet so unpretentious, odd songs from weird places that sound simple yet stick with you and open up layers of potency and meaning with each listen.

Having once seen the fuckin Wolfgang Press (one of the worst gigs I've ever endured) supporting the Pixies (one of the very best), I was deeply grateful for Vic who is another one of that rare breed who give you as much night after nihgt. I could've had to sit through the Wolfgang Press five nights in one week. Thank fuck for Vic Chesnutt.

Bands like Spearhead have been actively encouraging fans to share live recordings for ages. The Junkies have a system that works in a way that's new to me.

One of the five sections of their message board is dedicated to people swapping live recordings (mostly of the Junkies, but some other artists too).

The system is called vines. When someone has a recording they would like to share they start a vine by posting a message saying they've got the live recording (CDR is the usual format, though DVD-Rs are appearing too). They make a copy and then post a message describing the recording. Everyone who wants a copy then posts in the same message thread, leaving their email address.

The original copy is then mailed from person to person, in order of when they posted. When the first person receives it, they make a copy, then email the next person on the list, get their address and send on the original copy.

As someone who spent much of the 1980s listening to dodgy cassette bootlegs, this is utterly amazing.

No more tentatively listening to the hiss at the start of the tape, hearing it build up as it shows how many generations of copies it is from the original. The hiss on some of my REM 1980-81 tapes is actually louder than the music.

No more splashing out untold wads of cash to leechy profiteers on eBay (the CDs of Bowie at Glastonbury went for 50 quid to start with, though admittedly that's not so bad cos it was unquestionably the best gig in the world by anybody ever).

No more dodgy downloads that turn out to be shoddy copies or not even what they're labelled as.

Everyone gets to rip and burn from the original for the price of the blank discs and mailing it on.

This is so simple and so generous, so clearly for the love of sharing music. Here's hoping it catches on in a big way for sharing all bootlegs.

Full explanations and etiquette are explained here.

idiocy and filth

That sidebar over to your right has rather a lot of space in it, so I've just added a daft quicklinks section. That's for all the weird little online places I found or am pointed towards that I wouldn't have believed existed till I saw them.

Generally they'll be funny, and for some reason mostly concerned with christianity and/or bizarre sexual stuff. Rest assured, I do exert some quality control and will not be posting some of the more rum things friends send links for. Some of it is just too repulsive, too sordid or too utterly nightmarish to pass on.

The idea was inspired by (ie stolen wholesale from) the ever wonderful Green Fairy who manages to do great cultural commentary and analysis literally alongside quicklinks to, for example, a thorough listing of Porn Titles Based on Real Movie Titles.

They're all real: Saturday Night Beaver, Single White She-male, Dial E For Enema, Flash Pants, Poc-a-hot-ass, City of Anals, Edward Penishands, A Tale of Two Titties and more.

More quicklinks will appear as and when I find them...

hunting

When Barclays closed down 170 of their rural branches at a stroke, they assaulted rural business and communities.

Why were the Countryside Alliance so silent then? Because - and please, let's never be fooled by any other opinion ever again - the Countryside Alliance is not about the defence of rural communities, it's just a bunch of toffs who want to hunt foxes.

Now we've cleared that up, let's talk hunting.

It's a pretty clear either/or issue, despite Tony Blair repeatedly backing laughable please-nobody compromises. What else can we expect when the Prime Minister is a failed 70s rocker, with all the incisiveness of intellect and clear grasp of essentials that implies?

There are some excellent resources that go into detail about it hunting, but really it comes down to one simple thing; whether you think it's OK to kill animals for fun. No other excuse for it holds water.

Despite the consumption of meat being exactly the same thing, killing animals for fun just isn't popular. Nobody likes the stories of kids who set fire to dogs or nail a cat to a tree. So the pro-hunters have to give us other reasons.

The anti-hunting campaign isn't about animal welfare, it's about class, they say.

Damn right. Working class bloodsports like dog fighting, badger baiting, cock fighting and bear baiting were outlawed years ago because they are cruel and have no place in a humane society. The equally cruel bloodsports of fox and deer hunting weren't included because they're toffs sports and the laws are made by toffs.

Anyone who thinks hunting's not just for toffs; go check out the price of buying a horse, the gear and the upkeep, then come back and apologise for being wrong.

To be consistent you've either got to want fox hunting banned or else badger baiting etc re-legalised. To the best of my knowledge, the CA have yet to hold a pro-badger baiting march.

Hunting is about the landed gentry enjoying the land they took from the peasants, fawningly accompanied by those with snobbish aspirations to also be so aristocratic. They're more likely to be the banker than the small business person, they're more likely to own a car so they can get to facilities denied to the rural poor, and they're more likely to own a second country home than be the person priced out of the housing market who has to live in a caravan year-round, overlooking houses only used for four weeks in the summer.

The 'lost jobs' argument is bollocks too. If a government chooses to prohibit or severely inhibit an activity, then it's fair that those whose livelihoods are affected are compensated and retrained. Personally, I'll not shed tears over hunters losing jobs, but still, I recognise it'd arguably be fair to compensate them. But the loss of jobs - or the other 'it's traditional' thing - is not an argument for the retention of an activity. Slavery was a long established and highly lucrative industry. Neither factor should have led to its being prolonged.

All the arguments about tradition and jobs go out of the window if, as will be legal, the hunts carry on but as drag hunts instead of going after live quarry. The only difference is there's no dead animal at the end of it. But remember, even though it's all about the thrill of the chase, drag hunts simply won't do. Really though, it's not about bloodlust, and you're a liar and a communist to suggest otherwise.

As for the 'Keep Democracy - Keep Hunting' slogan, poll after poll has shown a clear majority want hunting banned. The initial Private Members Bill passed with the biggest majority in the history of parliament.

The only pro-hunting poll result was the one the CA made into posters saying 59% say keep hunting.

The Market Research Society - the professional body for market, social and opinion researchers - criticised the poll for failing to ask objective questions of respondents, for failing to carry out research 'objectively and in accordance with established scientific principles' and for 'being guilty of conduct' which 'might bring discredit on the [market research] profession.'

The Advertising Standards Authority report declared it misleading and the CA are prohibited from ever repeating the 59% claim.

If I publicly did to a stray dog what they do to a fox, I'd be rightly prosecuted, convicted and vilified. That'd be the same infringement on my liberty that the hunting ban imposes. A fox is as sentient as a dog.

This doesn't matter to the hunters because, despite their 'we'll have to kill the hounds if you ban hunting' line, hunters kill more hounds than foxes already. They kill the wimpier puppies, and then when the hounds get older and slower, what do they do? Take them home as beloved family pets? Nope, Rover gets a 12-bore to the head. 'Let us hunt or the dog gets it' isn't persuasive when the full story includes 'if we hunt the dog gets it anyway'.

Ah, but foxes are vermin, we need hunting to keep the fox popualtion under control, right?

A peculiar word, vermin, a faunic equivalent to the horticultural term 'weed'. It is a derogatory word for an organism the particular landowner doesn't like, and what makes one person's vermin-list doesn't make another's.

In considering the issue of population control, let's ignore the report from Professor Stephen Harris of the Mammal Research Unit at the University of Bristol who said that during the Foot & Mouth crisis of 2001, when all hunts were off, the fox population didn't increase.

Let's also ignore the fact that populations biologically self-regulate. If an area's population is reduced then a lady fox breeds more; if the population is increasing, she breeds less.

Keep on your ignoring roll for the fact that every other country seems to deal with it without teams of hunters trashing the hedges.

And skip merrily over the inconsistency (another one? surely not) in saying hunting's essential to keep fox populations down whilst also saying it's not cruel cos they hardly kill any and the fox likes the chase anyway and usually gets away.

Let's say that's all fine and really, livestock farming profits are all that matter and foxes need to be killed. Even if the hunt did have an impact on population size, there are simpler,easier, cheaper and much more humane ways to do it.

As Mitch Benn says, it's like you having mice in your kitchen and rather than setting traps or waiting for them to come out then twatting them, you instead choose to leave them be for a few months, then one day get thirty of your mates round, all get half pissed on sherry, chase the mice round and round the kitchen for six hours with your specially starved gang of twenty cats, then when they finally catch the exhausted mouse and kill it you squeeze its guts into the face of your ten year old child. That's conservation mate, no bloodlust at all. It's not about killing animals for fun, honest.

from lands end to lowestoft

Having ripped the piss out of Lowestoft's easterlyness being its primary selling point, it's struck me that geographic extremity is the sole selling point for Lands End and John O'Groats. Yet those places aren't ridiculed, and they're part of even the most basic general knowledge and stretch beyond that into metaphor.

It's all the more peculiar cos while John O'Groats is the British mainland's most northerly town, Lands End is actually the most westerly. The southernmost is Lizard. So shouldn't Lands End be partnered with Lowestoft on an East-West thing?

Or is it because Lands End and John O'Groats are the furthest apart? If so, do we make a bigger deal of this cos we're on a long island?

Do more round countries like Macedonia or France not bother so much?

In which case, are the extreme ends of Chile a really big feature of Chilean national thought?

Is 'from New York to LA' a turn of phrase like 'Lands End to John O'Groats', or is it just a song title?

The Lands End/John O'Groats thing is for Great Britain, yet misses out Wales entirely. Do they, as would seem likely given their strong sense of national identity, have their own equivalent?

In general, do other countries have similarly well-known places at their edges?

remembrance

Whilst some of my blogging, and all my articles, are there to try to line up an eloquent string of ideas, to arrange things you know with things you don't, and thus give new insight and a strong solid final conclusion, I do like having this space where I can chuck things around that I see both sides of.

One of the worst things about this outsized brain we humans have is that we can believe in contradictory ideas simultaneously, even act upon them both simultaneously, without it really troubling us.

And until we actually accept this as part of our hardwiring and stop assaulting people for hypocrisy we are never going to understand humanity, and so will actually undermine ourselves and be condemned to more stupidity rather than less.

Which is a sweeping profound way of launching into another one of the topics like voting where I see both sides.

Remembrance day.

In my mid teens I was fascinated by the history of the First World War. It was such an incredible story, so far removed from anything I knew, a time when imperialism, patriotism, militarism, eugenics and philosophies that blended them were commonplace and credible. It was amazing how easily that war all got started and how, like any transnational mass industrial process, once it was up and running it was almost impossible to stop.

The social change was equally staggering. The patriotism swiftly gave way to cynicism, epitomised in the image of soldiers marching along mile after mile singing, to the tune of Auld Lang Syne, 'we're here because we're here because we're here because we're here...'.

The smashing of old certainties and trust laid the ground out for unrest and radicalism right across Europe in the 1920s and 30s.

The fighting of WW2 isn't quite the good vs evil we're told it is. In the UK we're told we won it with a bit of help from the Americans. In the USA, they're told they won it with a bit of help from the Brits. We all like to ignore the other countries involved, especially the far larger part the Soviet Union played, fighting bitter battles and losing far more of their population (a third of all the dead of WW2 were Soviets). One friend I pointed this out to was incredulous and accused me of 'defending Stalin'.

The British historian Norman Davies' Warsaw 44 is a clear illustration of the moral murkiness of all the Allies. The Americans like to see it as their one great war of goodness, a war to rid the world of a racist militaristic regime. The Americans sent racially segregated troops to do the fighting.

But this isn't the real issue for me. It's not the rights and wrongs of the cases for any given war, it's about remembrance of wars and the sacrifices made by the generations that endured them.

Two generations running we took the healthy young men of Europe and decimated them. We 21st century kids have no frame of reference for it, nothing with which to compare it, simply no idea what that really means.

There are a lot of reasons for remembrance. Some people do it as a nationalistic supremacist thing. Some do it to connect with their military heritage and so feel ennobled with the sacrifice, the halting of Nazism, or some other element they see, hoping some of that glory will rub off on their current cause. These people are entirely at odds with those of us who want remembrance to be about commemorating the appalling loss of life of so many people in such conditions, who want it to be a stark reminder of what work we have to do to prevent it recurring.

I can't fault the analysis and point made with characteristic elegance in The Great War by genius singer-songwriter Philip Jeays

It was a great war, The Great War,
The greatest war there's ever been
It was 'a war to end all wars'
It didn't, but that's how it seemed

And you stand there with your poppy
as a tribute to the ones
who gave their lives for nothing
for the fathers and the sons
then the next day you go out
and buy your kids toy guns
well go on, and why not
you've got to teach them while they're young

It was a great war, The Great War,
the greatest war we've ever seen
we killed their side, we killed our side
we killed anybody in between

It was a great war, The Great War,
the greatest chance we ever got
to die for our country
or if not then to be shot

And you stand there in your silence
just like we used to do
like you were waiting for their whistle
for their orders to come through
can't you see you're still doing
just what they tell you to
remember what they did to us
they could do to you

It was a great war, The Great War,
but you led us up the garden path
and still you lead us every year
up to the cenotaph

And you stand there, politicians,
wiping tears from your eyes
with the hands that shake the hands
of the dictators you supply
well I cannot see the honour
nor the glory, nor the pride
and I will not wear your poppy
and I will not stand silent by

Like Jeays, I do not see the honour, nor the glory, nor the pride.

I spent several summers on the battlefields of the Somme (I took the picture of the cross of sacrifice in the With Satan On Our Side post at Carnoy cemetary in July 1985), I met veterans, and all of it reinforced the fact that the soldiers were hoodwinked and betrayed, and knew it. As Somme veteran Captain G Jackson said when revisiting the battlefields in July 1996, 'war's a waste of time, a complete waste of time. It serves nothing and it proves nothing'.

For us to see the sacrifice of those people as something noble and glorious is to betray them ourselves.

The present day wars are the same, still using colonial troops, still gathering young men from the poorest areas to send in to battle to fight for resources for the wealthy. And, just like before, the soldiers and their families know it and say it. As Michael Moore points out in Fahrenheit 9/11, things would be different if those who order a war sent their kids in, or had to lead the battle personally.

Yet should we let the fact that generals stand at the cenotaph stop us having any commemoration?

If we do that, don't we risk leaving all remembrance to those who would continue the division and killing? The kind of scumfucks who changed the name of the day in the USA to Veterans Day, making it a day for military parades and veneration of those on our side who came back, rather than a day for remembering all who were sacrificed.

Remembrance is important, and it's just as important that it be done collectively and inclusively. Wearing a poppy is the only way we have of doing that.

The fact that different people's reasons for wearing one are various and contradictory is not enough to make me give all conspicuous remembrance up to the militarists.

I know I run the risk of being misinterpreted and seen to reinforce the betrayal; but not to wilfully display remembrance feels like a far greater betrayal.

---

UPDATE 12 Nov 04: Well despite all that stuff at the start about it being indecisive, reading this post back I realised that whilst it does weigh up both sides, there is a definite line of argument and conclusion, so I rejigged it a bit and made it into an article which has been published here.

home of the furry dance

There's not much to do in the Norfolk town of Long Stratton since they took away its only late night facilities (a 24 hour maggot vending machine called Magic Magit).

In this month's edition of The Sexton's Wheel ('the magazine for the villages of Long Stratton and Wacton') the main letter to the editor is lamenting the filling in of the potholes in the car park behind the Angel.

'Potholes, after all, hone one's driving skills and there is always the challenge of the hidden depth. Luckily, other potholes in the area in the area remain interesting'.

Long Stratton isn't alone in this dearth of worthwhile qualities. Whilst standing at its main bus stop, I read an advertisement for Lowestoft.

Lowestoft: Britain's most easterly town and quiet seaside resort once famed for herring fishing.

I picture myself at Lowestoft in conversation with an intrepid travelling companion, standing staring out to sea (cos 'quiet seaside resort' means there's fuck all else to do there).

'Wow, so this is Britain's most easterly town. It's like, how much more east could we be and still be in a British town? And the answer is none. None more east'.

'Yeah, and just think there used to be herring here too'.

'Kinnell. Imagine that'.

Fear of such unsaleable dullness clearly concerns the good people responsible for Helston's tourist industry. If you've got no strong selling points yet don't want to use Lowestoft's honest yet ultimately self-defeating approach, why not arouse interest by baffling the visitor with bizarre-sounding weirdness?

how to help iraq

Pissed off about Bush's re-election?

Want to do something that opposes the war in Iraq?

Something practical, real and measurable that shows it's not in your name?

In the light of the withdrawal of many foreign aid organisations, the Jarrars - a family of bloggers in/about Iraq - have set up an emergency fund for civilian victims in Iraq.

You can donate money online via Paypal. Paypal is secure, free, quick, and easy, and is available to anyone with a bank account or credit card.

The money will be used to buy basic items - medical supplies, food, blankets, etc - in Jordan and then be distributed to the most needy accessible places in Iraq.

And there are a lot of places in need. We only hear of the violence when it's perpetrated by anti-occupation forces and/or hurts occupation troops. There is a lot more going on every day thanks to western military technology.

Donations to the fund can be any size. So far they've varied from $1.50 to $300. Even a little buys a lot in Iraq.

The Paypal donate facility is on Raed Jarrar's blog from Jordan along with details of the fund and how it will be organised, transparent and verified.

This is not some kind of scam - unless you believe that someone's gone to the trouble of writing four long, detailed and involved blogs most days this year as a set-up and have several more trusted friends doing the same including the excellent Baghdad Burning; or you think the blogs are real but the people writing such compassionate, humane and concerned reports might run off with the money that would otherwise save lives.

Even a cursory surf of their blogs will convince you that it's for real, and you have almost nothing to lose while others have their lives in the balance for the want of a couple of quids worth of basic medicine or clean equipment.

new realities

Josef Stalin said 'He who votes decides nothing; he who counts the votes decides everything.'

Last time, Bush lost the popular vote, but in Stalin's style won the clincher that was counted by a Bush campaign manager presided over by Bush's brother.

This time he's won the popular vote. He's proven that people will rally behind their leaders in times of war, even if their leaders are power-crazed maniacs actively inventing wars.

And invent they have. The facts don't have to fit for the fear to work. The constant repetition of the idea of evildoers single mindedly attacking our goodness has paid off.

Most Bush supporters believe that the Bush-appointed and Bush-accepted report into Iraqi WMD which said there were none actually said the opposite. Less than a quarter think experts say there were no WMD.

The Bush-accepted report of the US government's 9/11 Commission said there was no link between Iraq and al-Qaeda. Again, not only do most Bush supporters believe there was such a link, but most believe the evidence has been found.

Most Bush voters believe the world favours his re-election despite the opposite being emphatically true.

(poll source: Program on International Policy Attitudes, 21 Oct 04 - get a pdf of it here)

The fate of the world for the next four years, and undoubtedly some time beyond, has been chosen by people whose judgement is based on their belief of lies, and seeing Bush as an individual doing God's will against the evils of gays, Arabs and a habitable environment.

The team that Bush is mascot for are far more cavalier and daring about taking power and security from the people and handing it to the rich than any US administration in living memory, and quite possibly ever. The victory today tells them that what they have done so far isn't just get awayable with, it's actually popular.

The religious element was essential to garnering such support. We know what this will mean for issues such as abortion, contraception, gay rights, single parents and Palestine.

The Bush team see themselves as being on a wholly different mission, able to do whatever they want with whatever they want, not having to yield to anyone or anything. Their refusal to admit the fact of climate change shows they feel there aren't even biological limits to their power.

So although the last four years have seen terrifying things performed at an equally terrifying rate, it seems like it will get even worse, even faster.

As evidenced by Ron Suskind in the New York Times:

In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend - but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were 'in what we call the reality-based community,' which he defined as people who 'believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'

I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism.

He cut me off.

'That's not the way the world really works anymore,' he continued. 'We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality - judiciously, as you will - we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors... and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'

Four more years where they speed their process up is unimaginable.

It starts today.

In the words of Jello Biafra, embrace the red white and blue reich.

send 'em back where they come from

They come over to this country, not as refugees fleeing persecution but as opportunist economic migrants taking advantage of the benefits they can take from us, then they expect to live here with all their family at our expense, they get given houses like palaces and spend all day doing nothing, parasites leeching off the taxes of the hardworking British public.

Glad to see we're finally sending them back where they come from.