Monday, 9 January 2017

I Don't Do Groupspeak, So I Need Help

Having never quite grasped why Marxism is the only way to save humanity, which I only base on experience - Cuba, Venezuela, Russia, Cambodia, China, I need some modern stuff explained to me. For instance, Brexit.

Now to me, it seems straightforward. Having succumbed to lies and propaganda way back in the Seventies, we saddled ourselves with a Marxist bureaucracy. Luckily we dodged its worst bits and now have (mostly) awoken to it and elected to leave.

In order to do this, we need to give this club, this institution due notice and that is with something called 'Article 50'. This EU rule says that a member state wishing to leave must invoke Article 50, which gives the EU 2 years to try to talk them out of it. Basically, an opportunity to renegotiate the rules. Or not.

But we have a lot of very disingenuous people asking where is Theresa May's Brexit strategy? What will be her negotiating tactic? Surely (point out where I'm wrong please) her tactic will be to invoke Article 50 "we're offski". And then when the EU negotiates with such things as 'what if we offer to change the shade of blue on the flag?' or 'what about a special handshake?' , you know the usual substantive stuff they come up with, Theresa can say 'No'.

Sounds like a complete strategy to me. I mean, Britain has told its politicians to leave the EU, not just say we are going to and then stay in because they said we could have a cake named after us. What piece of paper could Mrs May come back from Germany waving that would say we should accept a Marxist future?

Not to labour the point, but in Mrs Mays shoes I would just pop over to Brussels, tell them Britain is quitting and leave saying 'let me know when the paperwork is done.'

Obviously, another thing is Global Warming, or Climate Change. Interesting isn't it, how liars change the name of things when people start to realise what they are saying is a crock. Nobody has said there has been no global warming, because there has, recently and repeatedly in the past.

The reason Global Warming morphed into Climate Change was to cover the embarrassment that the temperature hasn't risen since 1997. So, maybe the climate just changes, but it is still our fault, because of all the carbon. Except, they don't mean carbon. Carbon sounds dirty and carbon dioxide doesn't, so they manipulate the language.

But that isn't all it amounts to is it? These Marxists know that you are an imbecile, so it doesn't matter if there is no scientific rigour in what they say, you wouldn't understand anyway. But in fact there can be no scientific rigour in what they say, because then you would know it wasn't true.

Man's emissions are not lovely and we should be producing technology to reduce them, but carbon dioxide emitted by human activity is way too insignificant, on a global scale to affect the climate. They know this but, to use their own phrase 'look where the money is'. Try getting a grant to study why climate change isn't caused by Man, or get a book published by a big publishing house that shows the lie.

No all the money is in government hands and it only goes to the leeches who promulgate the lie. Know why you can't get your bins emptied or roads repaired? Because the councils spend way too much on green crap and other Leftie nonsense no sane person wants. Know why old people die of cold, unable to heat their homes? Because green greed has pushed up prices of energy for no purpose. Wind farms, solar panels? Near to useless and completely barmy if you looked at cost versus return.

Why do you think every 'Green' company squeals like a stuck pig if subsidies are reduced and then go bust. Wind farms only farm taxpayers cash.

National treasure, David Attenborough says that we should not apply the scientific method to Climate Change, it should be illegal to oppose it and no one should be allowed to debate it. Now why would that be? Why should you not even be allowed to talk about it let alone study it? Why should evidence based science be outlawed?

Well, because some have done it, we know for a fact that the ideology of Global Warming is just that, an ideology. It has no basis in fact. It is Attenborough's religion, nothing less. He believes in it as an article of faith.

WWF and all the other Marxist zealots driving the scam are using it to undermine and ultimately to destroy capitalism and with it Western civilisation. Apres la deluge they intend a World government, run by really clever, lovely people (them) and no hint of democracy or return on ambition and hard work.

At least that's what I think. You could point out where I'm wrong, but I guess that would be like providing evidence and I realise we are past all that stuff. So, can I have the change from the £50 I just gave you? What do you mean it was only a tenner? And don't ask for proof. See, I do get it.

Monday, 12 December 2016

A Little Lost On Remain

People have differing opinions, some like Handel, some like Mozart. Are you a Beatles kind of person or more Rolling Stones?

But some things seem a little more likely to bring general agreement, like, murder. I would guess that most people would see murder as pretty much a bad thing in any society and you can understand why.

So what I don't get is why the EU and the ideology of supporting the EU is so strong. I say 'the ideology of supporting the EU' simply because there is no other case for it than blind belief, hence my confusion by their stance.

The EU is a sclerotic bureaucracy and could never have been anything else. The Euro was almost designed to fail. Quite removed from keeping the continent from conflict, the belligerence of the nations keen on war, France and Germany, is still never far away. They have threatened each other over hegemony within the supranational structure they are building.

It has been necessary to lie consistently about the objectives of 'the project', because it was recognised from the outset that, by only serving the elites it would never be popular. This of course is why they are not keen on democracy and have suggested in the past not asking their populations opinions. On anything, including who should run their lives.

Constructed on classic Marxist lines, the EU wishes to introduce a perpetual, unaccountable bureaucracy that has absolute power and rules over a command economy. Going back to the aggressive tendencies mentioned earlier, they presaged the instability in the Ukraine of course. Thankfully, they have no military to enact their expansionist schemes. Yet.

And if you thought that the Germanic taste for efficiency would rein in the penchant of the French for grandiose schemes of immense stupidity, you didn't factor in that the German responsible would be wedded to her roots on Eastern Germany. A Soviet Union of Europe? Bring it on!

So, which part of this makes the safe-space luvvies wail and cry bitter tears into their kale and quinoa at the prospect of leaving this club? Because, despite decades of serious intent by the Left on destroying education in this country, the pro-EU mob can't all be air-heads, surely.


Shocked to hear at the weekend of the passing of AA Gill, a fabulous writer and a constant companion on a Sunday with the style and wit to delight, in his Sunday Times 'Table Talk' articles. No one can replace him and our lives are that little worse that he is no longer with us.

Monday, 5 December 2016

"You Can't Do That"

In the strange world we allowed to evolve around us (now seeing the first signs of correction), there are so many things you 'cannot' say or do. These are exclusively things that would offend a Leftie. And woe betide anyone who says anything that a Leftie disagrees with! That is straightforward abuse, bullying. Possibly even criminal.

Safe spaces in universities so poor, barely educated little darlings can stay protected from the real world and certainly from non-Leftie views (surely the whole point of universities these days, the promulgation of Leftie-ness?)

And particularly the inability to think for oneself. This leads to massive problems, like the absence of credibility within the Man Made Global Warming scare not being blatantly obvious, the constant wail for government to 'do something' about everything that causes the least concern and nobody having a realistic view of the harm multiculturalism does to everyone.

But then, the Lefties have worked long and hard to disrupt and destroy our society and the ties that bind. Out of disorder of course, the cleverer than us Leftie elite can step in and save us. In a sort of Castro/Stalin kind of way. You know, I'm alright Jack.

So, today, can the Judges of the (ludicrous) Supreme Court stop themselves from ignoring real legal issues and instead try to involve themselves in politics, as their colleagues did recently? Can they understand the concept of democracy or will they stick to edicts from a benign elite (them)?

When Dons need counselling for stress and anxiety caused by Brexit, you feel you shouldn't get your hopes up that Common Sense is anywhere near.

Wednesday, 9 November 2016

Duck! It's Donald

Is Donald Trump the right person to be US President? I have no idea; he comes across as a gimp though. But anyway, it brought tears of delight to me to hear the BBC's very own half-wit, Jeremy Vine squealing in uncontrollable indignation that Trump had won, on Radio 2 this morning. His pain at such an affront to his right-on, I'm-cleverer-than-you, quinoa eating world was sheer delight.

How could you not howl with laughter at the irony of his outrage at the huge swathe of people in the US who voted for Trump. They shouldn't be allowed to vote because they differ from Vine's view and he is a great supporter of democracy.

He had some wondrous assertions; firstly that only old, white people voted for Trump (must be a lot of them then) and secondly that it was as weird as if Piers Morgan was the Prime Minister. No, luvvy, it is as mad as if you were Prime Minister. That would be a nation that had lost its senses.

Thursday, 3 November 2016

The Law And Judges: Not The Same Thing

News just in that 3 judges have decided that a government cannot govern, in their opinion. Actually, yet another well-funded person (why is it those intent on evil always seem to have money?) has asked some judges to rule as to whether the government should act on a democratic mandate, or not.

Of course what she was really saying was, she personally disagreed with leaving the EU and wanted someone to help stop it.

Judges interpret law, that is interpret what politicians (the legislature) have enacted. They don't have the right or duty to meddle and say black is white, to prove judges are more important and more powerful than any government. This has been simmering for some time.

What happened was, as part of its election promises, the Conservative party offered a referendum on whether we stay in the EU or not. The Conservatives won a majority in the House of Commons and formed a government. Acting on their promise, the referendum was held.

It would be bad form to ignore the result, but it wasn't binding. But a government that wanted to start out working for the people and not just being liars, would respect the result.

So, a clear majority want out, for the robustly good reason that the EU is a crock. We haven't (and won't?) join key elements of it and it isn't working at any level anyway. It isn't a country, it is a collection of politicians. That is what the EU actually is.

To leave, the rules say we have to invoke Article 50 of the treaty, so that is what is suggested. Now, judges say that a government should ignore democracy and must ask the permission of other parties to take the action required by the people. OK, so if the judges insist we have to debate 'Article 50', let's skip it.

Let's just tell the EU, 'we're out of here'. Not one wants that, but the judges, by interfering in areas over which they certainly have no mandate, let alone legal right, may force upon us in an effort to exert the authority of parliament.

Where, incidentally were the judges to remind us in the 1970's that no government has the power, that is the constitutional right, to hand this country over to a foreign power? And yet, Edward Heath did just that. Is it cynical to suggest that the Left leaning wet legs that judges have become, useless appendages to society, were happy to ignore the illegality of the UK signing itself over to an authoritarian Marxist construct, recreating the Soviet Union in Western Europe?

Yes they were. The question is, who is worse - Sir Phillip Green or these state sucking judges?

Thursday, 30 June 2016

Not Boris Then

What exactly is Boris about? Is he able to run a straightforward political career? About as likely as not noticing a pretty girl it seems.

Anyway, the leading Brexit campaigner won't be leading the Conservative party any time soon. So, who can? It is almost as difficult these days to think of a politician with any real conviction, any leadership qualities.

Labour are in a devil of a mess because they have a conviction politician as leader, with no leadership qualities at all. But then, when you want to end democracy and be in power forever, I suppose leading is not that important.

Gove is brilliant but I don't think he gels with people and the Left have done a good stich-up job creating a false image of the man. I feel for Jeremy Hunt who is presently being demonised by another Union, but leader of the Conservatives? No thanks.

Theresa May? If going missing when a decision is needed, when the going gets tough, then she would be in line. Otherwise, no.

Daniel Hannan? Definitely, but oh dear, he is only an MEP. Don't know Crabb, which might be his problem all over. amusing isn't it? They spend their time avoiding being of any utility to the country or its people and now cannot find a reason to be elected, a platform.