We know that the BBC is not a useful or reliable source of information on world events and hasn't been for a long time now. We have always known that Channel 4 is beyond a joke on every level, which leaves Sky. I find myself wondering, during the ridiculous and fraught times we are currently living through, whether someone at Sky News would actually die if they even attempted to address a political subject in an unbiased and objective way. Personally, I see no value in the personal view of lard bucket Boulton, who has never hidden his deep love of Left ideologies.
Similarly, the Political Editor seems completely unable to deliver a coherent sentence, when all she is reporting on is a wholly positive piece of information about the Tory government, or its leadership.
So, let us look at what is happening; the government of the day voted to have a simple in/out referendum on our continued membership of the EU. The MP's voted to honour the result. MP's voted to trigger Article 50 and MP's voted that if we could not get a decent deal from the EU, we leave on the terms laid out under international WTO rules. Already having all the EU regulations in place in this country of course, there is absolutely nothing to fear in this route (unless the EU act viciously, which would be confirmation of just how right we are to be leaving).
MP's were elected (85% of them), on manifesto's that promised to deliver 'Brexit'. However, a childish group of MP's, doing their best Violet Elizabeth Bott impersonation, are attempting to overthrow the will of the people. They say any other move is un-democratic. Let's examine that. Parliament is a structure devised to contain a group of representatives of the people to enact laws that represent the desires and will of the people. Parliament handles the 'big stuff', projects and relationships at the national level.
If they annoy the people, they are removed at a General Election. The MP's however, think that the only democracy in this country is what they vote for in the Commons, the people are irrelevant. If they didn't think that, their current shenanigans wouldn't be possible. They would just do what the sensible British people want and act reasonably. Fat chance; our current MP's, or many of them, think that they are back in the old days of rich landowner MP's being the only people with a say.
Even then, many of those old MP's weren't as stunningly thick and grabbing as the current crop.
Parliament never had the legal authority to join the European Union, which is why Heath lied about it so comprehensively. But having handed control of this country to a foreign power, our MP's somehow refer to their local council as a sovereign parliament! The common sense of the British people, once they realised what the EU is about and how our politicians have been misleading us, ordered the government to get us out.
Why would anyone want to stay part of a declining economic area, that is corrupt to the core, a political answer to a question that passed into history decades ago and that has been holding back the otherwise dynamic British nation with its cramping regulations and protectionist tariffs? Well, vested interest is the answer. Money and advantage for many and naturally, as a bureaucrats paradise, all of the Civil Service is delighted by its inertia and corruption.
The actions of the Remainer MP's are disgusting, anti-democratic and damaging to the country. Countries around the world must be shocked that such stupidity exists in the country they always thought a paragon of sense and fair play. Plus, the despots around the world must be in hysterics seeing us become ever more like them.
Notice that Remainers have never made a case for staying in the EU, nor do they offer a solution to the impasse in the form of an acceptable deal (they constantly say they are against all kinds of things, but are not trying to stop Brexit. I wonder if anyone in the country believes them?)
Iceland pulled out of joining the EU (they, like everyone else thought that joining whilst their country was broke, would save them - it's why we joined) and went on to rapidly turn their economy around, by acting in self interest. Greece suffered a catastrophic decline in their economy and it has stayed that way, because it cannot act in self interest, because it is part of the EU. Staying in shows their politicians firmly believe that Greeks are incapable of running their own country.
Britain needs to ignore people like Grieve and Hammond who believe Britain is a hopeless, useless country unable to stand on its own two feet. Britain is not only a very capable country, but once free of the shackles of the EU corpse, would become ever more so.
Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts
Showing posts with label EU. Show all posts
Tuesday, 3 September 2019
Monday, 18 March 2019
What Is May Up To?
It seems puzzling, doesn't it? Theresa May has made some pretty unequivocal statements about Brexit, Leave means Leave, we will leave on March 29th (108 times in parliament), carry out the democratic will of the people etc. But here we are, on the cusp of handing actual and real control of the UK to the EU. In, but with no say - which is what her 'deal' supplied for her by the EU, is actually about.
So what is May, clumsy, incompetent, weak? Let's look at what happens through the process and not what she says. Article 50 is triggered with no deal as a the legal option. She appoints a Brexit minister, who turns out to have no say or role at all in the process. May threatens her cabinet and surprises them with the EU's stich up deal. It is binned.
May sticks with it. May says it is the best deal possible, which is probably true from her perspective, but not if you are supporting the UK side. She sacks any Brexiteer for any reason; four of her cabinet ignore the whip and it has no consequence whatsoever, because they are Remainers. One even resigns from his Conservative Association, but is treated as a faithful soldier.
May allows stupid little (bleating) votes of no consequence and then agrees to be bound by them, which she was not obliged to do. Because they disrupt leaving?
So what does all this point to? Only one thing. From the outset May has had no intention of delivering Brexit, doesn't care a fig for parliamentary protocol, the good of the country, business, the economy or democracy. She cares about the EU. Why would you be moved by the aforementioned list, when the EU, being a dictatorship, doesn't give a hoot for these things and being an acolyte of this institution, nor does she. Political power trumps all.
If her constituency party was run by people of character, courage and decency, they would recall her and have a by-election with the stated aim of getting rid of the embarrassment she represents to party and country. But I don't suppose they are Conservatives, either.
I suspect she called a General Election because she hoped that it would see more Brexit backing MP's lose their seats, more than she worried about her majority. She finally put the lid on any kind of real victory when she lurched to the Left, copying Corbyn's 'ideas'. Yep, she is a serial loser.
So what is May, clumsy, incompetent, weak? Let's look at what happens through the process and not what she says. Article 50 is triggered with no deal as a the legal option. She appoints a Brexit minister, who turns out to have no say or role at all in the process. May threatens her cabinet and surprises them with the EU's stich up deal. It is binned.
May sticks with it. May says it is the best deal possible, which is probably true from her perspective, but not if you are supporting the UK side. She sacks any Brexiteer for any reason; four of her cabinet ignore the whip and it has no consequence whatsoever, because they are Remainers. One even resigns from his Conservative Association, but is treated as a faithful soldier.
May allows stupid little (bleating) votes of no consequence and then agrees to be bound by them, which she was not obliged to do. Because they disrupt leaving?
So what does all this point to? Only one thing. From the outset May has had no intention of delivering Brexit, doesn't care a fig for parliamentary protocol, the good of the country, business, the economy or democracy. She cares about the EU. Why would you be moved by the aforementioned list, when the EU, being a dictatorship, doesn't give a hoot for these things and being an acolyte of this institution, nor does she. Political power trumps all.
If her constituency party was run by people of character, courage and decency, they would recall her and have a by-election with the stated aim of getting rid of the embarrassment she represents to party and country. But I don't suppose they are Conservatives, either.
I suspect she called a General Election because she hoped that it would see more Brexit backing MP's lose their seats, more than she worried about her majority. She finally put the lid on any kind of real victory when she lurched to the Left, copying Corbyn's 'ideas'. Yep, she is a serial loser.
Thursday, 14 March 2019
Disgraceful; A Laughing Stock
Well, many parliaments around the world are based on the British model, but it showed just how bad it can be when stocked almost exclusively by self-impressed morons. Last night was a disgrace and will have made Britain and British politics the laughing stock of the world. Trump hasn't even come close to the haughty, hubristic tantrums on display here.
Here is the background. In the early Seventies, a Conservative(!) Prime Minister, Edward Heath, lied to the electorate about joining something called the Common Market. He told us it was a trading bloc and would make Britain a stronger country (we were, as all EU members are when joining, broke).
He knew though, as recently released government documents show, that the (then) EEC was a political project to unite all the individual countries of Europe into a single superstate, with a central government, and all the attendant structures such as tax, policing, military, laws, currency etc.
The EU has had as its abiding principle since its inception between the World Wars, that it should operate in secret and not reveal its objectives. Have you ever heard a debate about 'Europe'? Has its way of working ever been explained to you, at school, university, on TV? No. And that is very important to its success.
The EU is run by unelected bureaucrats, often referred to as technocrats, and has a pretend parliament to confuse the people of the various countries as to its operation. The MEPs can and do vote on laws proposed by the bureaucrats and can put forward amendments, but they will get the same law come back endlessly until they approve it. You can only imagine that when the single government is finally achieved this little farce will be deleted.
There is no common culture across Europe, no common language. We have different traditions and laws. Only the French and German traditions of attempting to subjugate Europe are permitted going forward though, with for instance, the (German) currency crushing the economies of the Southern European countries. There is no demos, but some politicians want an empire, so Europe will be balkanised.
Can you think of any example of a country, taking over several other countries and running them from a central government, which controls everything through laws and regulations? Yes, the USSR. How did that go?
Something even as fundamental as the law divides us. In Britain, a traditionally strong, inventive and industrious nation, we evolved laws that constrained absolute monarchs and placed the law in the hands of the people. We vote for people to represent us in parliament and if they don't do what we want, they are chucked out at the next election.
In the EU, where the law is dominated by the French, the State owns the law and the people do what they are told. A short summary of this would be, in Britain everything is legal unless we decide to make it illegal, in the EU everything is illegal unless the State allows it.
This comes from the militaristic, empire building tradition of not just France, but Germany also. The French see themselves as the finest administrators in the world and so should run the EU, but need German money so tolerate them as a 'partner'. Germany think they should run it, because they pay for it and tolerate French input because there would be another war if they didn't.
So, with some inkling that the EU was too different, too bureaucratic and not functioning very well and with a suspicion as to what they were up, what came next, the British voted to leave the EU. The largest turnout ever saw 17.4 million people issue this instruction.
Parliament had pledged almost unanimously to action the result. Both Labour and Conservative candidates ran on a manifesto to honour that pledge. Parliament voted overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50, the mechanism by which a member informs the EU that they are leaving.
However, ignoring 17.4 million people, their own election manifesto pledges and in many cases actually defying the majority of their constituents, MP's decided that no one tells them what to do. Most MP's are 'Remainers' and want to stay in the bureaucrats paradise, the EUSSR. So they started wrecking the process.
The analogy that the Remain MP's are acting like children having a tantrum at not getting their way, is in fact so accurate it is beyond parody. Using a typical Marxist trick (all of them, even the 'Conservatives') the Remainers try to create a false narrative. They say that the Leavers have lied incessantly, blocked progress and want a 'hard Brexit'. That the referendum only voted Leave because of the campaign of lies by vote Leave.
Let's examine that. Leave MP's have consistently insisted and voted to support the will of the people, being the proper role of parliament, and have only blocked attempts to thwart that, which cannot be characterised as 'blocking progress'. The Leave campaign was not massively funded, but may have made some technical mistakes in using the funds, on occasion, that didn't amount to a hill of beans.
Remain however, had enormous resources; the UK government pumped money into it, as did foreign individuals of high net wealth and of course, the EU. Massive collusion and misuse of funds took place, which the Electoral Commission have no problem with, because they choose only to investigate Leave.
As to lies, currently Britain should be in a recession, at least 600,000 people should have lost their jobs in 2016 and the pound should be on the floor. This is what Remain promised would happen if we dared to vote to leave. In fact, there are at least 700,000 more in work, the economy is growing (faster than the EU) and the world is knocking on our door looking for trade deals.
The media is almost all on the side of Remain, so there is no proper analysis (phew, says the EU) and the BBC fanatically so.
Consequently the world is treated to the spectacle of a bunch of immature, entitled bigots acting as if they alone possess the knowledge and wherewithal to understand the blindingly simple concept of leave means leave. (Ask if they would like some money, they know the answer to that!).
Here is another question for you; Remain also tell us that we trade so much with the EU that we will be destroyed if we leave (they never go any further by way of explanation, you will notice). This presupposes that the EU will not buy anything from us after we leave. But how about this; the EU is possibly the most over-regulated, risk-averse structures in the world. How much stronger and bigger would the UK economy be now, if we had never joined, never been held back by the EU?
And to the final point. Remainers, like all children assert ridiculous things to confirm their position. May lost a vote yesterday (by 4 votes) and so now she is 'morally' obliged to take No Deal off the table. No mention of how the moral authority of 17.4 million people stacks up with those 4 MP's (or even the maybe 500 Loser, sorry Remainer MPs).
But here is the thing. There are common laws and there are Constitutional laws. When Tony Blair decided in his supreme arrogance to abolish the position of Lord Chancellor he was informed that it was a Constitutional position and not within his gift to have any say on. (And there was Tony thinking he was either an absolute ruler of perhaps a god).
This throws up a slight flaw in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland joining the European Union (and they do call it joining, even though they mean the UK to be subsumed) By handing the power to make laws in the UK and indeed to change the very nature of our law-making, the government was handing authority to a foreign power - a Constitutional act and something that is not within their power.
Edward Heath wasn't just lying to make you think wrongly of the EU, he had to hide that we were signing away sovereignty, because to admit that would be to admit its illegality.
Technically, we have never been in the EU because it was impossible to 'join' such an organisation. (And the EU is an organisation just like the UN, or NATO or any other international body -except they don't get to run our country!)
Here is the background. In the early Seventies, a Conservative(!) Prime Minister, Edward Heath, lied to the electorate about joining something called the Common Market. He told us it was a trading bloc and would make Britain a stronger country (we were, as all EU members are when joining, broke).
He knew though, as recently released government documents show, that the (then) EEC was a political project to unite all the individual countries of Europe into a single superstate, with a central government, and all the attendant structures such as tax, policing, military, laws, currency etc.
The EU has had as its abiding principle since its inception between the World Wars, that it should operate in secret and not reveal its objectives. Have you ever heard a debate about 'Europe'? Has its way of working ever been explained to you, at school, university, on TV? No. And that is very important to its success.
The EU is run by unelected bureaucrats, often referred to as technocrats, and has a pretend parliament to confuse the people of the various countries as to its operation. The MEPs can and do vote on laws proposed by the bureaucrats and can put forward amendments, but they will get the same law come back endlessly until they approve it. You can only imagine that when the single government is finally achieved this little farce will be deleted.
There is no common culture across Europe, no common language. We have different traditions and laws. Only the French and German traditions of attempting to subjugate Europe are permitted going forward though, with for instance, the (German) currency crushing the economies of the Southern European countries. There is no demos, but some politicians want an empire, so Europe will be balkanised.
Can you think of any example of a country, taking over several other countries and running them from a central government, which controls everything through laws and regulations? Yes, the USSR. How did that go?
Something even as fundamental as the law divides us. In Britain, a traditionally strong, inventive and industrious nation, we evolved laws that constrained absolute monarchs and placed the law in the hands of the people. We vote for people to represent us in parliament and if they don't do what we want, they are chucked out at the next election.
In the EU, where the law is dominated by the French, the State owns the law and the people do what they are told. A short summary of this would be, in Britain everything is legal unless we decide to make it illegal, in the EU everything is illegal unless the State allows it.
This comes from the militaristic, empire building tradition of not just France, but Germany also. The French see themselves as the finest administrators in the world and so should run the EU, but need German money so tolerate them as a 'partner'. Germany think they should run it, because they pay for it and tolerate French input because there would be another war if they didn't.
So, with some inkling that the EU was too different, too bureaucratic and not functioning very well and with a suspicion as to what they were up, what came next, the British voted to leave the EU. The largest turnout ever saw 17.4 million people issue this instruction.
Parliament had pledged almost unanimously to action the result. Both Labour and Conservative candidates ran on a manifesto to honour that pledge. Parliament voted overwhelmingly to trigger Article 50, the mechanism by which a member informs the EU that they are leaving.
However, ignoring 17.4 million people, their own election manifesto pledges and in many cases actually defying the majority of their constituents, MP's decided that no one tells them what to do. Most MP's are 'Remainers' and want to stay in the bureaucrats paradise, the EUSSR. So they started wrecking the process.
The analogy that the Remain MP's are acting like children having a tantrum at not getting their way, is in fact so accurate it is beyond parody. Using a typical Marxist trick (all of them, even the 'Conservatives') the Remainers try to create a false narrative. They say that the Leavers have lied incessantly, blocked progress and want a 'hard Brexit'. That the referendum only voted Leave because of the campaign of lies by vote Leave.
Let's examine that. Leave MP's have consistently insisted and voted to support the will of the people, being the proper role of parliament, and have only blocked attempts to thwart that, which cannot be characterised as 'blocking progress'. The Leave campaign was not massively funded, but may have made some technical mistakes in using the funds, on occasion, that didn't amount to a hill of beans.
Remain however, had enormous resources; the UK government pumped money into it, as did foreign individuals of high net wealth and of course, the EU. Massive collusion and misuse of funds took place, which the Electoral Commission have no problem with, because they choose only to investigate Leave.
As to lies, currently Britain should be in a recession, at least 600,000 people should have lost their jobs in 2016 and the pound should be on the floor. This is what Remain promised would happen if we dared to vote to leave. In fact, there are at least 700,000 more in work, the economy is growing (faster than the EU) and the world is knocking on our door looking for trade deals.
The media is almost all on the side of Remain, so there is no proper analysis (phew, says the EU) and the BBC fanatically so.
Consequently the world is treated to the spectacle of a bunch of immature, entitled bigots acting as if they alone possess the knowledge and wherewithal to understand the blindingly simple concept of leave means leave. (Ask if they would like some money, they know the answer to that!).
Here is another question for you; Remain also tell us that we trade so much with the EU that we will be destroyed if we leave (they never go any further by way of explanation, you will notice). This presupposes that the EU will not buy anything from us after we leave. But how about this; the EU is possibly the most over-regulated, risk-averse structures in the world. How much stronger and bigger would the UK economy be now, if we had never joined, never been held back by the EU?
And to the final point. Remainers, like all children assert ridiculous things to confirm their position. May lost a vote yesterday (by 4 votes) and so now she is 'morally' obliged to take No Deal off the table. No mention of how the moral authority of 17.4 million people stacks up with those 4 MP's (or even the maybe 500 Loser, sorry Remainer MPs).
But here is the thing. There are common laws and there are Constitutional laws. When Tony Blair decided in his supreme arrogance to abolish the position of Lord Chancellor he was informed that it was a Constitutional position and not within his gift to have any say on. (And there was Tony thinking he was either an absolute ruler of perhaps a god).
This throws up a slight flaw in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland joining the European Union (and they do call it joining, even though they mean the UK to be subsumed) By handing the power to make laws in the UK and indeed to change the very nature of our law-making, the government was handing authority to a foreign power - a Constitutional act and something that is not within their power.
Edward Heath wasn't just lying to make you think wrongly of the EU, he had to hide that we were signing away sovereignty, because to admit that would be to admit its illegality.
Technically, we have never been in the EU because it was impossible to 'join' such an organisation. (And the EU is an organisation just like the UN, or NATO or any other international body -except they don't get to run our country!)
Friday, 22 February 2019
The Arrogance Of Power
Fancy that, the people of a democratic country giving a clear and unequivocal message to their representatives and expecting that to mean something! We are very much in a post democracy democracy, and elections are just an old fashioned way of selecting MP's. These MP's then join the club in Westminster and, with no reference to their constituencies, do what their party tells them.
In this way they stand the best chance of progressing their career, which is to talk and make contacts for their own enrichment. They call this Centrist politics and convince themselves this gets them the most votes. What they mean though is business as usual, no one rock the boat - a cosy cabal to, again make the most of the career ambitions of MP's.
Naturally, being a form of corruption (and after seeing with Tony Blair, just how ineffective British law is at dealing with political corruption), it attracts devious and very low quality individuals. It doesn't have to be like this, it just allows it to happen.
Covering the lightweights like a security blanket is the actual government of the UK, in Brussels. They make the laws, Westminster nods them through, concentrating mainly on pursuing power and money. The lack of attention allows the EU leadership to progress, or even accelerate the political goal of the EU project; to convert the whole of Europe into a dictatorship under their control.
And then along comes Brexit. Of course the MP's at first try to ignore it, but it turns out the British people have awoken from the torpor that allowed such abuse of their trust. Apparently, they still believe that MP's should do what the people tell them!
It threatens to open up so many of their little secrets, this terrifying rebirth of interest in what politicians do. They nearly managed to smother the expenses scandal (or entitlement as they see it) by threatening the media, but it broke. The outrage didn't last and they renamed their (lack of) oversight as a sign that things had (not) changed. The return to political apathy was expected and manna from heaven.
But the other underground political project was also starting to annoy people and coming into sharper focus. This is the quiet push by Marxists to destroy capitalism, working through the institutions to undermine the way our country is run. This thrust by the Left ensures racism is always to the fore and they promote racial tension. They do the same with sexuality, homosexuals and the more recent modish trends are the direct result of promotion by Marxists, who care not a jot for these people.
The most talked about and apparent tool used by Marxism of course, is Political Correctness. This is a construct to stifle debate. In short it can be summed up by its supporting phrase "you can't say that". The other really important aspect was the destruction of education. If you look at North Korea, North Vietnam during the war there and all other communist regimes, they hate educated people to the extent that they are prepared to kill them.
The reason is that people taught and indeed expected to think for themselves will forever stop Marxism, because it is such an empty and elitist creed. This is why our schools now turn out children who, after in excess of 11 years of schooling are often functionally innumerate and illiterate. I know of a youngster who thinks that Ireland (her heritage) is part of the UK and she is from a good family and should be highly intelligent.
Back to Brexit. This simple matter, to leave an organisation to which Britain is uniquely unable to fit, has exposed many of the politicians for what they truly are. The Remainers, who agreed to abide by the referendum result, who campaigned in a general election to honour the will of the people have never had any such intention. They try to hide it, but they have nothing but contempt for people who disagree with them. Hence the endless, childish tantrums from the likes of the detestable Anna Soubry.
The Remainers have claimed, without any supporting evidence that the pro-Brexit campaigners have lied, that they had massive mystery donors, that the Russians interfered with the vote and that they broke the law by different campaign groups colluding. The truth of course is that the Remainers had enormous resources, with funds from the UK government and the EU (talk about interference!) and from big business that always profits from the EU. The Russians did some spoofing internet stuff, that almost no one saw.
As far as colluding campaign groups is concerned, Leave have proven this to be false, but the evidence has been ignored by the pro-Remain Electoral Commission who have also ignored clear and present evidence that Remain did and on a much larger scale than was even alleged, about Leave.
Project Fear in its many incarnations is the biggest lie factory of the whole affair. Before the referendum we had government telling us we faced an immediate recession and massive job losses if we dared go against them and vote to Leave. Being less stupid than most politicians the public went ahead and voted for the best outcome for the UK.
Having offended the elite with our opinion, they continue to spout the most ridiculous nonsense about isolation and huge price rises, shortages and companies unable to sell to the EU countries. All this happening without having any affect on the EU, who will continue to be as rich and successful as they currently are. (This is undoubtedly true, if by the EU you are exclusively referring to the likes of Juncker, Barnier and all the other bureaucrats).
Lets do what Soubry and the cabal of Losers don't do; be clear. There is no Demos in Europe, we are not all alike. The arrogant French and Germans, for their own benefit have crushed the southern European economies and then, to maintain their power, interfered in these countries internal politics. And why not? Surely, soon Brussels will not interfere, they will dictate.
We have different laws; in Britain everything is legal unless we agree to make something illegal. The Continental system demands that everything is illegal, unless the State makes it otherwise. This fundamental, democratic political fact is what is most annoying the Losers right now. That the people here, still get to tell them what to do.
Why do you think, after whining that there should be a second referendum (that they intended to corrupt), those who have deserted their parties recently, are not keen (at all) to go back to their voters - as the situation really has changed in their case - and ask if they still want them as their MP?
No, if we wanted a trading bloc to ensure our future prosperity, we wouldn't have joined the Common Market we would have formed an Anglosphere alliance. This would be a trading bloc that spoke the same language, had similar laws and traditions. Usefully, it also happens to be spread right across the world. Ted Heath though, wasn't thinking like that. He fully knew and understood he was joining a political project that was secretly working on a bureaucrats wet dream - a dictatorship they run.
He lied to the British people and our country, weak from weak leadership ran into the embrace of the EU and its apparent largesse. Look at every other country (except France and Germany) and when they joined the EU; when they were on their knees. France and Germany of course, were going to run it, so had locked in their power and profitability from the start.
Seriously, March 29th can't come soon enough. Oh, and don't fall for the latest 'can't leave on No Deal' meme. What they actually are doing is engineering that outcome and telling you it will be a catastrophe (like the one after the referendum?), so we don't actually leave. Two things; many, many deals are already in place to cover such an eventuality (the Losers are in partnership with the EU on hiding this, naturally) and EU businesses will not roll over if there is no specific, over-arching deal.
Is being out of the EU a promise of wealth and greatness? No, us rational types don't go in for that sort of thing. But we will no longer be shackled to a corrupt corpse of a dictatorship.
In this way they stand the best chance of progressing their career, which is to talk and make contacts for their own enrichment. They call this Centrist politics and convince themselves this gets them the most votes. What they mean though is business as usual, no one rock the boat - a cosy cabal to, again make the most of the career ambitions of MP's.
Naturally, being a form of corruption (and after seeing with Tony Blair, just how ineffective British law is at dealing with political corruption), it attracts devious and very low quality individuals. It doesn't have to be like this, it just allows it to happen.
Covering the lightweights like a security blanket is the actual government of the UK, in Brussels. They make the laws, Westminster nods them through, concentrating mainly on pursuing power and money. The lack of attention allows the EU leadership to progress, or even accelerate the political goal of the EU project; to convert the whole of Europe into a dictatorship under their control.
And then along comes Brexit. Of course the MP's at first try to ignore it, but it turns out the British people have awoken from the torpor that allowed such abuse of their trust. Apparently, they still believe that MP's should do what the people tell them!
It threatens to open up so many of their little secrets, this terrifying rebirth of interest in what politicians do. They nearly managed to smother the expenses scandal (or entitlement as they see it) by threatening the media, but it broke. The outrage didn't last and they renamed their (lack of) oversight as a sign that things had (not) changed. The return to political apathy was expected and manna from heaven.
But the other underground political project was also starting to annoy people and coming into sharper focus. This is the quiet push by Marxists to destroy capitalism, working through the institutions to undermine the way our country is run. This thrust by the Left ensures racism is always to the fore and they promote racial tension. They do the same with sexuality, homosexuals and the more recent modish trends are the direct result of promotion by Marxists, who care not a jot for these people.
The most talked about and apparent tool used by Marxism of course, is Political Correctness. This is a construct to stifle debate. In short it can be summed up by its supporting phrase "you can't say that". The other really important aspect was the destruction of education. If you look at North Korea, North Vietnam during the war there and all other communist regimes, they hate educated people to the extent that they are prepared to kill them.
The reason is that people taught and indeed expected to think for themselves will forever stop Marxism, because it is such an empty and elitist creed. This is why our schools now turn out children who, after in excess of 11 years of schooling are often functionally innumerate and illiterate. I know of a youngster who thinks that Ireland (her heritage) is part of the UK and she is from a good family and should be highly intelligent.
Back to Brexit. This simple matter, to leave an organisation to which Britain is uniquely unable to fit, has exposed many of the politicians for what they truly are. The Remainers, who agreed to abide by the referendum result, who campaigned in a general election to honour the will of the people have never had any such intention. They try to hide it, but they have nothing but contempt for people who disagree with them. Hence the endless, childish tantrums from the likes of the detestable Anna Soubry.
The Remainers have claimed, without any supporting evidence that the pro-Brexit campaigners have lied, that they had massive mystery donors, that the Russians interfered with the vote and that they broke the law by different campaign groups colluding. The truth of course is that the Remainers had enormous resources, with funds from the UK government and the EU (talk about interference!) and from big business that always profits from the EU. The Russians did some spoofing internet stuff, that almost no one saw.
As far as colluding campaign groups is concerned, Leave have proven this to be false, but the evidence has been ignored by the pro-Remain Electoral Commission who have also ignored clear and present evidence that Remain did and on a much larger scale than was even alleged, about Leave.
Project Fear in its many incarnations is the biggest lie factory of the whole affair. Before the referendum we had government telling us we faced an immediate recession and massive job losses if we dared go against them and vote to Leave. Being less stupid than most politicians the public went ahead and voted for the best outcome for the UK.
Having offended the elite with our opinion, they continue to spout the most ridiculous nonsense about isolation and huge price rises, shortages and companies unable to sell to the EU countries. All this happening without having any affect on the EU, who will continue to be as rich and successful as they currently are. (This is undoubtedly true, if by the EU you are exclusively referring to the likes of Juncker, Barnier and all the other bureaucrats).
Lets do what Soubry and the cabal of Losers don't do; be clear. There is no Demos in Europe, we are not all alike. The arrogant French and Germans, for their own benefit have crushed the southern European economies and then, to maintain their power, interfered in these countries internal politics. And why not? Surely, soon Brussels will not interfere, they will dictate.
We have different laws; in Britain everything is legal unless we agree to make something illegal. The Continental system demands that everything is illegal, unless the State makes it otherwise. This fundamental, democratic political fact is what is most annoying the Losers right now. That the people here, still get to tell them what to do.
Why do you think, after whining that there should be a second referendum (that they intended to corrupt), those who have deserted their parties recently, are not keen (at all) to go back to their voters - as the situation really has changed in their case - and ask if they still want them as their MP?
No, if we wanted a trading bloc to ensure our future prosperity, we wouldn't have joined the Common Market we would have formed an Anglosphere alliance. This would be a trading bloc that spoke the same language, had similar laws and traditions. Usefully, it also happens to be spread right across the world. Ted Heath though, wasn't thinking like that. He fully knew and understood he was joining a political project that was secretly working on a bureaucrats wet dream - a dictatorship they run.
He lied to the British people and our country, weak from weak leadership ran into the embrace of the EU and its apparent largesse. Look at every other country (except France and Germany) and when they joined the EU; when they were on their knees. France and Germany of course, were going to run it, so had locked in their power and profitability from the start.
Seriously, March 29th can't come soon enough. Oh, and don't fall for the latest 'can't leave on No Deal' meme. What they actually are doing is engineering that outcome and telling you it will be a catastrophe (like the one after the referendum?), so we don't actually leave. Two things; many, many deals are already in place to cover such an eventuality (the Losers are in partnership with the EU on hiding this, naturally) and EU businesses will not roll over if there is no specific, over-arching deal.
Is being out of the EU a promise of wealth and greatness? No, us rational types don't go in for that sort of thing. But we will no longer be shackled to a corrupt corpse of a dictatorship.
Friday, 25 January 2019
Question Time
Fiona Bruce seems to be settling in to her role and acting as a proper referee, rather than Dimbleby and his attempts to show he was the cleverest person in the room. Bruce certainly appears to have quickly learned that the Left bias she showed in her first programme doesn't protect her from that Wings' hate mob.
Last night was interesting though. Nick Ferrari was OK and made useful and verifiable points as did Suella Braverman and the audience generally responded well to their points. But then there was Labour's Healy. Oh good grief. Proof that neither Cambridge nor a BA (politics though) signifies intelligence any more. Party line doctrinaire crap.
Then the mad looking and sounding marketing guy, who in typical Leftie fashion shouted over people he disagreed with as soon as they started talking. He was pretty sure Dyson is a hypocrite (and had to be shut up by Fiona before he uttered clearly made up, libellous stuff), going on to say that his company was set up in Ireland specifically to be in the EU. Or maybe it was more because of the tax incentives they offer companies?
But best of all, was ranty Sonia Sodha, who writes for The Observer. Repeating the tired, cliched tripe we and she have heard before as if it represented useful input. After Suella had given a fairly comprehensive overview as to why there won't be any problems with traffic through Dover, all sourced, Sonia had one of her fits.
Of course the boss of Calais would say there won't be any delays, she averred. Don't know what particular bias she was attributing to him. Maybe she thought that he thought that any suggestion of delays at Calais would lead to traffic going to another port. Where they wouldn't face EU mandated delays?
Being French and as part of an organisation that has received EU funding, I would have considered him unlikely to be keen to stick his head above the parapet.
Sonia also had a couple of stabs at convincing us that Dyson building an HQ in Singapore and moving 2 of his 4000 UK workforce there, made him a hypocrite for backing Brexit. Luckily there was a child in the audience who absolutely skewered her (it is usual to feel that a child knows more about life and the real world than a Marxist, but nice to see it in action!).
He queried whether what she was saying was that Dyson should make business decisions based on sentimentality, rather that moving into and developing new and expanding markets for his products in the Far East. Queue Sonia doing an impression of a fish. She also got agitated by people with different views from hers, being allowed to talk.
The audience, apart from the well-fed woman at the front who was clearly a plant, could not understand why politicians are engineering so many problems.
To end with Dyson though. How can it be hypocritical to believe the UK should break free of the shackles of the backward, stifling political project of the EU and start trading with the whole world and so build infrastructure elsewhere that Europe?
Last night was interesting though. Nick Ferrari was OK and made useful and verifiable points as did Suella Braverman and the audience generally responded well to their points. But then there was Labour's Healy. Oh good grief. Proof that neither Cambridge nor a BA (politics though) signifies intelligence any more. Party line doctrinaire crap.
Then the mad looking and sounding marketing guy, who in typical Leftie fashion shouted over people he disagreed with as soon as they started talking. He was pretty sure Dyson is a hypocrite (and had to be shut up by Fiona before he uttered clearly made up, libellous stuff), going on to say that his company was set up in Ireland specifically to be in the EU. Or maybe it was more because of the tax incentives they offer companies?
But best of all, was ranty Sonia Sodha, who writes for The Observer. Repeating the tired, cliched tripe we and she have heard before as if it represented useful input. After Suella had given a fairly comprehensive overview as to why there won't be any problems with traffic through Dover, all sourced, Sonia had one of her fits.
Of course the boss of Calais would say there won't be any delays, she averred. Don't know what particular bias she was attributing to him. Maybe she thought that he thought that any suggestion of delays at Calais would lead to traffic going to another port. Where they wouldn't face EU mandated delays?
Being French and as part of an organisation that has received EU funding, I would have considered him unlikely to be keen to stick his head above the parapet.
Sonia also had a couple of stabs at convincing us that Dyson building an HQ in Singapore and moving 2 of his 4000 UK workforce there, made him a hypocrite for backing Brexit. Luckily there was a child in the audience who absolutely skewered her (it is usual to feel that a child knows more about life and the real world than a Marxist, but nice to see it in action!).
He queried whether what she was saying was that Dyson should make business decisions based on sentimentality, rather that moving into and developing new and expanding markets for his products in the Far East. Queue Sonia doing an impression of a fish. She also got agitated by people with different views from hers, being allowed to talk.
The audience, apart from the well-fed woman at the front who was clearly a plant, could not understand why politicians are engineering so many problems.
To end with Dyson though. How can it be hypocritical to believe the UK should break free of the shackles of the backward, stifling political project of the EU and start trading with the whole world and so build infrastructure elsewhere that Europe?
Tuesday, 20 November 2018
Brexit Blues
Well the Conservative party continue to display how unbelievably hapless they are in ever more inventive ways. We now know that they no longer think they should base their policies on sound economic principles, that law and order are not hugely important, small government is a ridiculous idea for a politician to believe in and democracy should be ignored when inconvenient.
Along with all the members of other parties, they also hold dear that they should be able to act and operate in any way they see fit, basically feeling they are above the law. That lying is not of any consequence either, particularly when it fits their own, personal, narrow agenda. It's about me, stupid.
And then at the head of the pus filled hill is Theresa May. What a piece of work she is; tough, bombastic, resolute, not afraid to offend, able to lie incessantly for tactical reasons and generally not for turning. When talking to the people who elected her and when denying a binding instruction from the country.
In front of the EU bureaucrats (her kind of people) she is a doormat. The only question about her Draft Agreement is, did the EU give it to the Tories before or after the referendum? It is written in a way that gives precedence to the EU throughout, deferring to the EU as the senior partner always.
Now, unless someone like Rees-Mogg led the Conservative party (and with a good majority would be an immense benefit for the country), I would now find myself in a position I have never even had to contemplate before, voting for the socialists. But in a perfect storm kind of way, we have simultaneously lost any last vestige of socialism in this country, replaced by the (currently) led extreme Marxists of Jeremy Corbyn.
So, Theresa May and a grossly under-performing, shackled UK buried in a Franco-German version of the USSR, or Venezuela style communism? Which do you want, because nothing else is on offer?
Along with all the members of other parties, they also hold dear that they should be able to act and operate in any way they see fit, basically feeling they are above the law. That lying is not of any consequence either, particularly when it fits their own, personal, narrow agenda. It's about me, stupid.
And then at the head of the pus filled hill is Theresa May. What a piece of work she is; tough, bombastic, resolute, not afraid to offend, able to lie incessantly for tactical reasons and generally not for turning. When talking to the people who elected her and when denying a binding instruction from the country.
In front of the EU bureaucrats (her kind of people) she is a doormat. The only question about her Draft Agreement is, did the EU give it to the Tories before or after the referendum? It is written in a way that gives precedence to the EU throughout, deferring to the EU as the senior partner always.
Now, unless someone like Rees-Mogg led the Conservative party (and with a good majority would be an immense benefit for the country), I would now find myself in a position I have never even had to contemplate before, voting for the socialists. But in a perfect storm kind of way, we have simultaneously lost any last vestige of socialism in this country, replaced by the (currently) led extreme Marxists of Jeremy Corbyn.
So, Theresa May and a grossly under-performing, shackled UK buried in a Franco-German version of the USSR, or Venezuela style communism? Which do you want, because nothing else is on offer?
Thursday, 8 November 2018
We Are In A Mess
How did it come to this? In 1972, in a fit of hubris bizarrely based on weakness, the Prime Minister Ted Heath, masquerading as a Conservative lied to the country and slid the UK into the slime pit of the EU. In those days Heath was known as a 'wet' Tory - one from the Left of the party. He was of course, much worse than that. A self-important socialist, out of his depth.
Now, with that innate common sense with which the country has been traditionally blessed, we have seized the opportunity to extricate ourselves from the Franco-German empire. (It is constantly said that the idea of the EU was to end European war and it has achieved that inasmuch that France and Germany have not had to start another war, as they got their empire without one).
However, with dreadful irony the UK now finds itself saddled with a Prime Minister every bit as disingenuous, careless of the needs of the country and duplicitous as Heath. Despite the efforts of Project Fear, business doesn't care about leaving the EU, what they care about is knowing what is going to happen and so be able to plan. For her own selfish reasons, May is keeping them in the dark. She cannot tell us what she is up to, because it isn't what she has pledged or promised and it is not what the people required her to do.
She should have no choice; the people gave her an instruction that parliament overwhelmingly accepted, yet still she thinks her personal opinion carries more weight. And in her ramblings as party leader she threw away an undoubted majority, when she started copying Labour's Marxist ideas and continues to attempt to out Left the Left.
Our police are now little more than virtue-signalling social workers, running around after crimes have been committed. Yet never embarrassed by their manifest failures. Graduates wonder to older colleagues in the workplace if Africa is a country (I didn't do geography at school!), yet have a range of opinions about correct social behaviours and an identikit believe that the Tories are the devil incarnate and are deeply uncurious.
Step forward with pride the education establishment that successfully created this and much beyond. Churning out kids infused with Left ideology and little actual knowledge has been very effective. They are easier to manipulate and cannot see the glaring faults in Left logic. They never learned how to think for themselves, to research but were imbued with a sense of their own self-importance.
Left educated police graduates were fast tracked into senior positions, there to destroy proper policing with their tree-hugger mentality and lack of any real experience of policing. And so on, right across all sectors. A country being wrecked internally by Left ideology serving only to bring about a Marxist government that will end democracy.
We see the headlines asking why the police cannot stop the rise in knife crimes, in murders, but this is the wrong question. We should be asking why are they not trying to.
Now, with that innate common sense with which the country has been traditionally blessed, we have seized the opportunity to extricate ourselves from the Franco-German empire. (It is constantly said that the idea of the EU was to end European war and it has achieved that inasmuch that France and Germany have not had to start another war, as they got their empire without one).
However, with dreadful irony the UK now finds itself saddled with a Prime Minister every bit as disingenuous, careless of the needs of the country and duplicitous as Heath. Despite the efforts of Project Fear, business doesn't care about leaving the EU, what they care about is knowing what is going to happen and so be able to plan. For her own selfish reasons, May is keeping them in the dark. She cannot tell us what she is up to, because it isn't what she has pledged or promised and it is not what the people required her to do.
She should have no choice; the people gave her an instruction that parliament overwhelmingly accepted, yet still she thinks her personal opinion carries more weight. And in her ramblings as party leader she threw away an undoubted majority, when she started copying Labour's Marxist ideas and continues to attempt to out Left the Left.
Our police are now little more than virtue-signalling social workers, running around after crimes have been committed. Yet never embarrassed by their manifest failures. Graduates wonder to older colleagues in the workplace if Africa is a country (I didn't do geography at school!), yet have a range of opinions about correct social behaviours and an identikit believe that the Tories are the devil incarnate and are deeply uncurious.
Step forward with pride the education establishment that successfully created this and much beyond. Churning out kids infused with Left ideology and little actual knowledge has been very effective. They are easier to manipulate and cannot see the glaring faults in Left logic. They never learned how to think for themselves, to research but were imbued with a sense of their own self-importance.
Left educated police graduates were fast tracked into senior positions, there to destroy proper policing with their tree-hugger mentality and lack of any real experience of policing. And so on, right across all sectors. A country being wrecked internally by Left ideology serving only to bring about a Marxist government that will end democracy.
We see the headlines asking why the police cannot stop the rise in knife crimes, in murders, but this is the wrong question. We should be asking why are they not trying to.
Friday, 10 August 2018
Big Beast Boris's Burqa
You measure a man by what he does rather than what he says. Being completely gender non-specific (rather than fluid, a non-existent type), Theresa May has rather proved that point. Boris has his heart in the right place, but is a bit inept when trying to play political games. Now, whilst that might suggest he is ill suited to politics, this would only be correct if you believe the sole purpose of politics is to corrupt the meaning of words, rather than sometimes manipulating.
As such he has an appeal to the ordinary voter, precisely because he doesn't seem like the machine politician with which our parliament is very much plagued. In that regard, we emulate the US, but perhaps without quite the flamboyance. But isn't it ever this way between us and the USA?
In the extraordinarily closed world of the Westminster bubble this is something that is understood, even if the general workings of the world outside the bubble is magnificently beyond their recognition.
When I was being obliged to sit still, face the front and listen, I was given history as it was instinctively taught within the British culture. When the story of the peasants revolt was told to me, what actually sank into my consciousness was, that the people had become fed up with the way those in charge ran things. Sure there was detail, but it was the overview, the impact at a subconscious level amongst those peasants that was what I understood.
We have the same today with the decision to leave the European Union, a vanity project of shining hubris, too bright for anyone to see. Except the we-own-the-law, different old British. When Ted Heath lied with great passion about how happy he and a bunch of other blithering idiots would be, if only he could be allowed to join and be a part of this lovely edifice, we obliged his whim. A bureaucrats wet dream.
As loving, obliging parents we let him have his way and in an almost patronising way ignored the politicians playing with their tea set, dolls house, train set and cars for decades, in the firm belief that 'Europe' was over there and of no consequence, really, to us. It didn't matter. Nobody knew or cared who 'their' MEP was, what they did or even bothered to vote in Common Market, EEC, EC, EU elections.
And in this way the British were the ideal dupes dreamt of by the founders of the Project; the people had to be kept in the dark, the mission of the Project had to be kept from them. After all, like full blown Communism, who in their right mind ever voted for that? And European history is full enough of revolutions (or in Britain petitions), to suggest care and secrecy were needed.
If you are old enough to have lived some decades under the EU, ask yourself a question; can you remember ever hearing a debate about the EU? You can't, because (as with Man Made Global Warming) you got lots of instructions about how important it was (that was actually propaganda), but no unbiased information and certainly no debate.
The truth is dangerous to any organisation that is really, at root a bunch of international gangsters.Empire builders by the back door. Consider, why are we so afraid of the consequences of leaving the EU? Sure the detail would be messy, like any cancer, it seeks to spread throughout your system, but really it is because we know, we have seen that the EU cannot be trusted. It is not a machine based on logic and it certainly has no intention of allowing International Law to interfere in its malice (Sudetenland, anyone?)
So, the actual objection, the reason why Britain still managed, despite a long time under incessant propaganda, to vote down the EU membership, was because at a visceral level we just knew it was a wrong 'un. Maybe in these deliberately uneducated times, you need to look to the American Constitution to understand the true British character, the way we do government, because it was based on British constructs. Magna Carta means more to them than us, because we have been told that freedom doesn't matter any more.
But the reason we left the burgeoning empire of the EU, was the same as for the Americans. They did not seek to break with Britain and initially the broad feeling was that injustice must be dealt with as a detail, no greater change was required. But, imperial and impervious the upstarts had to be ignored. And so they proved that another course was open to them.
But they still continued to base their lives and laws on what they knew and what worked; British law and custom. 'We the people' is a great start to any sweeping document of state and it cannot be said too often that Britain evolved (through some trial and error) the best system of government in an imperfect world. We own the law and our politicians fear the people. In the EU, the State owns the law and the people need to fear their government.
The biggest mistake? Drawing attention to the EU. Once we started looking at what they were up to, what they stood for, what they did and intended to do it became inevitable that we would revolt (or, send in a petition). And we did. 52 to 48% is a decent difference and remember, for once a lot of people voted. That it was not wider is entirely due to the success of the weakening of our education system, but enough traditional British grit remained.
But then, in all the agonised ranting about how damaging leaving a bureaucrats paradise will be, we forget that the very act of being subsumed by the EU was illegal. Sure we talked of 'joining', but when you are handing political and economic power to a foreign government, it mirrors the way Poland 'joined' Germany in 1939.
No British government has that power, that authority and yet Ted Heath did it. The Conservative Prime Minister Ted Heath. And what mocking irony it is that, at the denouement of our dalliance with corruption, we should be under the 'guidance' of such a similar creature, the British Prime Minister Theresa May. Ted Heath lied shamelessly to get us in and Theresa May is lying just the same, to keep us in.
There used to be a fire safety advert that ran 'Get out, stay out and get the Brigade out', which is excellent advice regarding the EU (though here it would be the Brigade of Guards).
So, all the confected outrage about Boris and some misquotes about what he said and intended, is actually about how scared a bunch of ne'er do well politicians are of Boris Johnson and the likelihood that he would do a proper job of Brexiting. The Burqa is peculiar, it's like a bag and it is a symbol of the beginnings of extremist attitudes. We would do well to heed wise words.
As such he has an appeal to the ordinary voter, precisely because he doesn't seem like the machine politician with which our parliament is very much plagued. In that regard, we emulate the US, but perhaps without quite the flamboyance. But isn't it ever this way between us and the USA?
In the extraordinarily closed world of the Westminster bubble this is something that is understood, even if the general workings of the world outside the bubble is magnificently beyond their recognition.
When I was being obliged to sit still, face the front and listen, I was given history as it was instinctively taught within the British culture. When the story of the peasants revolt was told to me, what actually sank into my consciousness was, that the people had become fed up with the way those in charge ran things. Sure there was detail, but it was the overview, the impact at a subconscious level amongst those peasants that was what I understood.
We have the same today with the decision to leave the European Union, a vanity project of shining hubris, too bright for anyone to see. Except the we-own-the-law, different old British. When Ted Heath lied with great passion about how happy he and a bunch of other blithering idiots would be, if only he could be allowed to join and be a part of this lovely edifice, we obliged his whim. A bureaucrats wet dream.
As loving, obliging parents we let him have his way and in an almost patronising way ignored the politicians playing with their tea set, dolls house, train set and cars for decades, in the firm belief that 'Europe' was over there and of no consequence, really, to us. It didn't matter. Nobody knew or cared who 'their' MEP was, what they did or even bothered to vote in Common Market, EEC, EC, EU elections.
And in this way the British were the ideal dupes dreamt of by the founders of the Project; the people had to be kept in the dark, the mission of the Project had to be kept from them. After all, like full blown Communism, who in their right mind ever voted for that? And European history is full enough of revolutions (or in Britain petitions), to suggest care and secrecy were needed.
If you are old enough to have lived some decades under the EU, ask yourself a question; can you remember ever hearing a debate about the EU? You can't, because (as with Man Made Global Warming) you got lots of instructions about how important it was (that was actually propaganda), but no unbiased information and certainly no debate.
The truth is dangerous to any organisation that is really, at root a bunch of international gangsters.Empire builders by the back door. Consider, why are we so afraid of the consequences of leaving the EU? Sure the detail would be messy, like any cancer, it seeks to spread throughout your system, but really it is because we know, we have seen that the EU cannot be trusted. It is not a machine based on logic and it certainly has no intention of allowing International Law to interfere in its malice (Sudetenland, anyone?)
So, the actual objection, the reason why Britain still managed, despite a long time under incessant propaganda, to vote down the EU membership, was because at a visceral level we just knew it was a wrong 'un. Maybe in these deliberately uneducated times, you need to look to the American Constitution to understand the true British character, the way we do government, because it was based on British constructs. Magna Carta means more to them than us, because we have been told that freedom doesn't matter any more.
But the reason we left the burgeoning empire of the EU, was the same as for the Americans. They did not seek to break with Britain and initially the broad feeling was that injustice must be dealt with as a detail, no greater change was required. But, imperial and impervious the upstarts had to be ignored. And so they proved that another course was open to them.
But they still continued to base their lives and laws on what they knew and what worked; British law and custom. 'We the people' is a great start to any sweeping document of state and it cannot be said too often that Britain evolved (through some trial and error) the best system of government in an imperfect world. We own the law and our politicians fear the people. In the EU, the State owns the law and the people need to fear their government.
The biggest mistake? Drawing attention to the EU. Once we started looking at what they were up to, what they stood for, what they did and intended to do it became inevitable that we would revolt (or, send in a petition). And we did. 52 to 48% is a decent difference and remember, for once a lot of people voted. That it was not wider is entirely due to the success of the weakening of our education system, but enough traditional British grit remained.
But then, in all the agonised ranting about how damaging leaving a bureaucrats paradise will be, we forget that the very act of being subsumed by the EU was illegal. Sure we talked of 'joining', but when you are handing political and economic power to a foreign government, it mirrors the way Poland 'joined' Germany in 1939.
No British government has that power, that authority and yet Ted Heath did it. The Conservative Prime Minister Ted Heath. And what mocking irony it is that, at the denouement of our dalliance with corruption, we should be under the 'guidance' of such a similar creature, the British Prime Minister Theresa May. Ted Heath lied shamelessly to get us in and Theresa May is lying just the same, to keep us in.
There used to be a fire safety advert that ran 'Get out, stay out and get the Brigade out', which is excellent advice regarding the EU (though here it would be the Brigade of Guards).
So, all the confected outrage about Boris and some misquotes about what he said and intended, is actually about how scared a bunch of ne'er do well politicians are of Boris Johnson and the likelihood that he would do a proper job of Brexiting. The Burqa is peculiar, it's like a bag and it is a symbol of the beginnings of extremist attitudes. We would do well to heed wise words.
Monday, 30 July 2018
Water, Water - Nowhere
With a prolonged hot, dry spell visiting the UK recently the focus has been on Global Warming. There have been no records broken, it hasn't been as unendingly hot as 1976 and this one (as most are here), was caused by the Jetstream being pushed North by unusually cold water in the North West Atlantic.
Nothing to do with Global Warming, which isn't a thing with no temperature rise for over 20 years and certainly no identified mechanism at work, caused by Man (such as CO2).
What should be the focus is the water supply. Now, with a wet early start to the year the supplies were at a high level, but nothing lasts forever. But more damaging is the fact that, despite the massive influx of people to the UK since the moron Tony Blair allowed unrestricted immigration, no new capacity exists.
Yes, that's right, no new reservoirs to meet the additional needs. Mad eh? Well the reason is even more insane. Following an EU directive we must have less water supply than is needed by design. This is to make us use less water, which we must do due to Global Warming (which as stated earlier doesn't exist).
So, you may be familiar with the population increase, in the late Eighties it was 56,953,861 and is now 65,511,097 but when was the last reservoir built? 1989, that's when. In Devon. Unbelievably, no added capacity from before unlimited immigration began.
And then there are the legendary scale water leaks, which the water companies really cannot be bothered to fix despite legal obligations and targets. This is because our politicians, currently scrabbling to keep all the real work of governing in Brussels, are weak and believe in fairies, which is what Global Warming is.
Nothing to do with Global Warming, which isn't a thing with no temperature rise for over 20 years and certainly no identified mechanism at work, caused by Man (such as CO2).
What should be the focus is the water supply. Now, with a wet early start to the year the supplies were at a high level, but nothing lasts forever. But more damaging is the fact that, despite the massive influx of people to the UK since the moron Tony Blair allowed unrestricted immigration, no new capacity exists.
Yes, that's right, no new reservoirs to meet the additional needs. Mad eh? Well the reason is even more insane. Following an EU directive we must have less water supply than is needed by design. This is to make us use less water, which we must do due to Global Warming (which as stated earlier doesn't exist).
So, you may be familiar with the population increase, in the late Eighties it was 56,953,861 and is now 65,511,097 but when was the last reservoir built? 1989, that's when. In Devon. Unbelievably, no added capacity from before unlimited immigration began.
And then there are the legendary scale water leaks, which the water companies really cannot be bothered to fix despite legal obligations and targets. This is because our politicians, currently scrabbling to keep all the real work of governing in Brussels, are weak and believe in fairies, which is what Global Warming is.
Friday, 6 July 2018
Pretty Girls In Fast Cars
I enjoy seeing a successful woman in an expensive car, be it Bentley or Porsche, I think it is highly appealing. My feelings are the exact opposite if the female is actually the wife of a rich man and does nothing with her day but fret about herself, book treatments and meet up with others in her air-head circle to talk about reality TV.
Basically, I have always been attracted to clever women. I am not threatened or intimidated by them, which is it seems, amazingly common with the male of the species. I like to think I am a fair judge, but can be ridiculously naïve at times. It has never occurred to me that men and women are anything other than different versions of the same thing. I never considered that they might be inherently inferior.
Likewise, meeting people who originate from places other than these shores who may have a different colour skin, I also just take them on the merit they present. Hell, when I was at school we saw that African people were darker skinned and that was as far as my thinking went; people lived in Africa too, but they had a darker skin.
I didn't make the 'intellectual' leap to conclude that this made me superior. Even when the distinct lack of any parallel with the societal developments in Europe was considered, when pushed all I would do is wonder why. Perhaps it was the heat?
So, if I met an 'African' I wasn't surprised by the colour of his skin. This means I am not Left wing. They shriek about it in perpetual surprise. Culture however, is something I am less forgiving about. God may have decided the colour of your skin, but you choose your culture.
If your culture is to treat women as inferior to men (because the men in question are fundamentally weak and resort to the tactics of the bully to gain and maintain ascendency), then I detest you. Or maybe your culture is to lie and cheat in order to gain advantage and power. This means you exhibit the fundamentals of Marxism. You see others as existing only for what you can get out of them.
Obama was elected because he was black and that is very wrong, both because his colour should be irrelevant, but also because black people should never have been deprived of opportunity, which would probably have meant a black President ages ago. But Obama was also a terrible President, not because he was black, but because he is a snake. Like our own Tony Blair, he was just out for himself.
Theresa May is terrible not because she is a woman or that she is white, but because she lacks principles. (And it seems, a spine). She has been told by the nation to take the UK out of the EU; she is a politician so she is bound, by Parliament's promise to obey that specific demand, but also because MP's are there to serve the public will. Additionally, she presented a party manifesto to get elected to power that emphatically restated that commitment.
Now, the wholly unsurprising attitude of the bureaucrats around her (that we should not leave the greatest agglomeration of bureaucrats the world has ever seen) is convincing her to do their bidding instead. Which is weak and unprincipled.
She keeps saying the opposite of what she does, but maybe I am wrong and will be surprised. Maybe she will say to the EU that she has tried to play nice but enough is enough, now stop being childish and sort things out properly. Maybe.
Basically, I have always been attracted to clever women. I am not threatened or intimidated by them, which is it seems, amazingly common with the male of the species. I like to think I am a fair judge, but can be ridiculously naïve at times. It has never occurred to me that men and women are anything other than different versions of the same thing. I never considered that they might be inherently inferior.
Likewise, meeting people who originate from places other than these shores who may have a different colour skin, I also just take them on the merit they present. Hell, when I was at school we saw that African people were darker skinned and that was as far as my thinking went; people lived in Africa too, but they had a darker skin.
I didn't make the 'intellectual' leap to conclude that this made me superior. Even when the distinct lack of any parallel with the societal developments in Europe was considered, when pushed all I would do is wonder why. Perhaps it was the heat?
So, if I met an 'African' I wasn't surprised by the colour of his skin. This means I am not Left wing. They shriek about it in perpetual surprise. Culture however, is something I am less forgiving about. God may have decided the colour of your skin, but you choose your culture.
If your culture is to treat women as inferior to men (because the men in question are fundamentally weak and resort to the tactics of the bully to gain and maintain ascendency), then I detest you. Or maybe your culture is to lie and cheat in order to gain advantage and power. This means you exhibit the fundamentals of Marxism. You see others as existing only for what you can get out of them.
Obama was elected because he was black and that is very wrong, both because his colour should be irrelevant, but also because black people should never have been deprived of opportunity, which would probably have meant a black President ages ago. But Obama was also a terrible President, not because he was black, but because he is a snake. Like our own Tony Blair, he was just out for himself.
Theresa May is terrible not because she is a woman or that she is white, but because she lacks principles. (And it seems, a spine). She has been told by the nation to take the UK out of the EU; she is a politician so she is bound, by Parliament's promise to obey that specific demand, but also because MP's are there to serve the public will. Additionally, she presented a party manifesto to get elected to power that emphatically restated that commitment.
Now, the wholly unsurprising attitude of the bureaucrats around her (that we should not leave the greatest agglomeration of bureaucrats the world has ever seen) is convincing her to do their bidding instead. Which is weak and unprincipled.
She keeps saying the opposite of what she does, but maybe I am wrong and will be surprised. Maybe she will say to the EU that she has tried to play nice but enough is enough, now stop being childish and sort things out properly. Maybe.
Wednesday, 30 May 2018
Demos Does It Again
Reported in The Mail, the Leftie tank of thinking, Demos has decided that British people think communities have been harmed and the national culture undermined by mass immigration. This is a bit like saying 'more people coming into the country means there are more people in the country'
Actually, scratch that because according to the Left (and way too many Conservatives) unrestrained immigration leading to a surge in the size of the 'population' has no effect whatsoever on the demand for houses, schools, health services and certainly doesn't lead to more crime.
Anyway, back to the real world. Much too much, much too soon. I remember being shocked when I realised we, Britain, had denied citizenship to Hong Kong Chinese, so they didn't all come here when the colony was handed back to the Communist Chinese.
I thought we owed them something, but of course so many and at once was impossible to deal with (we didn't know how many would come but the prospect was bad enough). So, hard though it was, you kinda understand the thinking.
But switch to the satrapy of morons known as the EU and unlimited numbers of foreign nationals, to whom we most certainly owe nothing, can flood in. There will be no consequences. Well, except for good ones.
The good by the way is that rich Lefties, who don't have an immigrant influx issue, can get cheap servants.
And to add insult to injury, our civil servants - you know, the ones who don't think you should be allowed to say we should leave the EU and won't do their job if it is to that end - decide what they will do about immigration is throw out of the country good, productive long-term British people from the West Indies.
Compare and contrast the rabble of Islamist terrorists and foreign criminals we welcome with open arms and the film of black men coming off the boats, struggling with their suitcases (yep, they brought clothes, not pretending to be 'refugees' looking for handouts), dressed in suits and wearing trilby's. If you want people who intend to fit in, to integrate, what more could you ask for?
They spoke English and felt they had a right to come here as they were British and this is the Mother country. That's how they felt and I feel proud that they did. It's why I always insist on buying small, West Indian bananas; as a way of supporting friends.
But I suppose, if you are a Leftie civil servant, aware that your ideology supports and promotes racial division in an attempt to cause societal chaos, you would say 'yes, but they are black'.
Actually, scratch that because according to the Left (and way too many Conservatives) unrestrained immigration leading to a surge in the size of the 'population' has no effect whatsoever on the demand for houses, schools, health services and certainly doesn't lead to more crime.
Anyway, back to the real world. Much too much, much too soon. I remember being shocked when I realised we, Britain, had denied citizenship to Hong Kong Chinese, so they didn't all come here when the colony was handed back to the Communist Chinese.
I thought we owed them something, but of course so many and at once was impossible to deal with (we didn't know how many would come but the prospect was bad enough). So, hard though it was, you kinda understand the thinking.
But switch to the satrapy of morons known as the EU and unlimited numbers of foreign nationals, to whom we most certainly owe nothing, can flood in. There will be no consequences. Well, except for good ones.
The good by the way is that rich Lefties, who don't have an immigrant influx issue, can get cheap servants.
And to add insult to injury, our civil servants - you know, the ones who don't think you should be allowed to say we should leave the EU and won't do their job if it is to that end - decide what they will do about immigration is throw out of the country good, productive long-term British people from the West Indies.
Compare and contrast the rabble of Islamist terrorists and foreign criminals we welcome with open arms and the film of black men coming off the boats, struggling with their suitcases (yep, they brought clothes, not pretending to be 'refugees' looking for handouts), dressed in suits and wearing trilby's. If you want people who intend to fit in, to integrate, what more could you ask for?
They spoke English and felt they had a right to come here as they were British and this is the Mother country. That's how they felt and I feel proud that they did. It's why I always insist on buying small, West Indian bananas; as a way of supporting friends.
But I suppose, if you are a Leftie civil servant, aware that your ideology supports and promotes racial division in an attempt to cause societal chaos, you would say 'yes, but they are black'.
Tuesday, 27 February 2018
Jeremy Corbyn -Opportunist
Jeremy Corbyn may have annoyed even Labour voters by his unprincipled U turn on a Customs Union with the EU, but some of them still see him as mainly principled. Can we be clear about this oaf - he is not principled. He is obsessed with schoolboy politics, but no principles.
He wasn't ever a spy, you can be sure of that. I'm pretty sure agents of totalitarian regimes can spot an idiot pretty easily, so yes they could use him, but they would know he couldn't be relied on to know, or be able to find out anything really useful.
Just as it is clear his little gang of thugs (well, not his gang as he doesn't lead them) are taking this stance in the Brexit debate because it suits their aspirations and is an attempt to destabilise the Conservatives. They has given zero consideration regarding the good of the country or its people, which is common to all they do.
They are hardened Marxists, who support other totalitarian regimes and any terrorists that oppose the West. Given the chance, Corbyn and his fellow travellers would turn Britain into a single party state, with no democracy, a secret police to protect them and an economy that would see Venezuela as remarkably competent.
Would be nice if Theresa May realised this, became a Tory and worked for the benefit of the people.
He wasn't ever a spy, you can be sure of that. I'm pretty sure agents of totalitarian regimes can spot an idiot pretty easily, so yes they could use him, but they would know he couldn't be relied on to know, or be able to find out anything really useful.
Just as it is clear his little gang of thugs (well, not his gang as he doesn't lead them) are taking this stance in the Brexit debate because it suits their aspirations and is an attempt to destabilise the Conservatives. They has given zero consideration regarding the good of the country or its people, which is common to all they do.
They are hardened Marxists, who support other totalitarian regimes and any terrorists that oppose the West. Given the chance, Corbyn and his fellow travellers would turn Britain into a single party state, with no democracy, a secret police to protect them and an economy that would see Venezuela as remarkably competent.
Would be nice if Theresa May realised this, became a Tory and worked for the benefit of the people.
Thursday, 14 December 2017
Good God, Really? Brexit!
I'm pretty sure that everyone outside the Westminster bubble are mightily fed up with all the Brexit shenanigans. Seriously guys, as our American friends would say, get with the programme!
Basically, if you go right to the root of it, the problem is the modern misconception that has grown amongst the lightweights now in office as MP's and civil servants. That misconception is that they run the country, which of course they don't. There is some room to suggest that the dictatorship that is the European Union may have misled them, but whatever, it isn't quite true yet.
No, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is managed on behalf of the people by our MP's, who seek assistance in the implementation of accepted policies by an employed bureaucracy - the civil servants. MP's do not entertain themselves with their own personal opinions at our expense and civil servants have no role whatsoever in 'decision making'.
You can see immediately that in Britain today the belief amongst these people of little imagination, is that they are very much in charge. The swing away from Theresa May at the last General Election occurred as she lunged to the Left and put back on the shelf all the sensible, Conservative ideas she espoused at the outset. The people were indicating they wanted a strong nation in a strong recovery, not some sixth-form politics inspired Marxist Utopia.
The idea that the people own the law is very strange to the governments of the Continent and of course, abhorrent to those trying to establish an anti-democratic Empire.
So, to make it abundantly clear; the people of the UK voted to request and require of their government that the nation should leave the EU (be rescued, in fact). A meaningful vote had been held in parliament that whatever the people decided would be held to by all parties.
Which begs the question, why are we being daily assaulted by news of the latest petulant outburst from MP's who feel their personal opinion has any bearing? Why does the Marxist Party (Corbyn's so called Labour) keep putting obstacles in the way? They agreed to follow the will of the people by referendum (I get that, being simple-minded they can't remember the last piece of nonsense they uttered), so why all the opposition?
It really is stunningly simple, by whatever mechanism exists (Article 50, written by a Brit!) we are to leave the EU. It is then beholden on the EU to suggest what would be the relationship afterwards. Not least because they need us more than we need them, although a big point of annoyance to the outfit is the loss of our subscriptions. Hence the singular fixation in the EU with obtaining cash from us.
As far as I can see, those currently interfering with the smooth progress of an agreed and mandated action required of parliament places them in contempt. No MP impeding the will of the people has the right to draw funds from the taxpayers and so must be dismissed with. Call it an incentive or just encouragement.
But otherwise, just get on with it, we have been chained to a corpse for too long.
Basically, if you go right to the root of it, the problem is the modern misconception that has grown amongst the lightweights now in office as MP's and civil servants. That misconception is that they run the country, which of course they don't. There is some room to suggest that the dictatorship that is the European Union may have misled them, but whatever, it isn't quite true yet.
No, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is managed on behalf of the people by our MP's, who seek assistance in the implementation of accepted policies by an employed bureaucracy - the civil servants. MP's do not entertain themselves with their own personal opinions at our expense and civil servants have no role whatsoever in 'decision making'.
You can see immediately that in Britain today the belief amongst these people of little imagination, is that they are very much in charge. The swing away from Theresa May at the last General Election occurred as she lunged to the Left and put back on the shelf all the sensible, Conservative ideas she espoused at the outset. The people were indicating they wanted a strong nation in a strong recovery, not some sixth-form politics inspired Marxist Utopia.
The idea that the people own the law is very strange to the governments of the Continent and of course, abhorrent to those trying to establish an anti-democratic Empire.
So, to make it abundantly clear; the people of the UK voted to request and require of their government that the nation should leave the EU (be rescued, in fact). A meaningful vote had been held in parliament that whatever the people decided would be held to by all parties.
Which begs the question, why are we being daily assaulted by news of the latest petulant outburst from MP's who feel their personal opinion has any bearing? Why does the Marxist Party (Corbyn's so called Labour) keep putting obstacles in the way? They agreed to follow the will of the people by referendum (I get that, being simple-minded they can't remember the last piece of nonsense they uttered), so why all the opposition?
It really is stunningly simple, by whatever mechanism exists (Article 50, written by a Brit!) we are to leave the EU. It is then beholden on the EU to suggest what would be the relationship afterwards. Not least because they need us more than we need them, although a big point of annoyance to the outfit is the loss of our subscriptions. Hence the singular fixation in the EU with obtaining cash from us.
As far as I can see, those currently interfering with the smooth progress of an agreed and mandated action required of parliament places them in contempt. No MP impeding the will of the people has the right to draw funds from the taxpayers and so must be dismissed with. Call it an incentive or just encouragement.
But otherwise, just get on with it, we have been chained to a corpse for too long.
Friday, 6 October 2017
The Value Of Persistence
The persistence of the Left leaning journalists has paid off. They kept talking about the threats to Theresa May's premiership and literally nobody cared. They just lived in their own fevered bubble. Now though, their constant refrain has driven one self-absorbed MP to declare he would like to challenge, buoyed by believing Leftie journo's.
Of course there is dispute about the way things are going and ultimately it always comes back to the leader. Personally, I have no specific problem with Theresa May as a person, but where the hell are her 'ideas' coming from? Someone of influence has convinced her that adopting Labour policies is the only way to go. It clearly isn't working, but they are sticking with it.
May called a snap election because she thought the omens were there to get a real working majority to get things done. And I believe the country was ready to vote in precisely that way. OK so a lot of not very clever people, who had also recently been to university, fell for a ruse by the Marxist Corbyn, but the idea was still sound.
What actually caused the upset was the nonsense that May came out with as Conservative policies. Once they were aired, the vote deserted her party en bloc. And we have seen it since; every time it looks like the Conservatives say something robustly Tory the popularity of the party soars, then May announces a Labour-lite version and the shoulders slump.
Like a sufferer of domestic abuse, May goes to the EU, with sound and sensible ideas and gets abused. She gets angry (we've seen flashes of it), then forgives them and goes back for more. We are breaking up with them, so a temporary tantrum won't harm. Either they talk sense or we walk away. So we argue over the LP's (and they're all scratched), but we will get over it; banging your head on the wall might be habit forming, but it is going to be great when you stop!
The EU is an anti-democratic construct, held together by lies, a construct that the UK cannot ever have joined legally. But none of that matters apparently to the Remainers, who cling to nurse for fear of something worse, like the most timorous of children. May needs to lead the grown ups, and parenting (which she has been cruelly denied) is like leadership, you have to set boundaries, make your position on an issue crystal clear. Tell it like it is.
If you do, you will be unpopular with all the people that don't matter and achieve results of real and lasting importance to the whole nation.
Or maybe you and your simpleton advisors are right Theresa, the Conservatives have to become the Socialists while Labour have become the Communists.
Of course there is dispute about the way things are going and ultimately it always comes back to the leader. Personally, I have no specific problem with Theresa May as a person, but where the hell are her 'ideas' coming from? Someone of influence has convinced her that adopting Labour policies is the only way to go. It clearly isn't working, but they are sticking with it.
May called a snap election because she thought the omens were there to get a real working majority to get things done. And I believe the country was ready to vote in precisely that way. OK so a lot of not very clever people, who had also recently been to university, fell for a ruse by the Marxist Corbyn, but the idea was still sound.
What actually caused the upset was the nonsense that May came out with as Conservative policies. Once they were aired, the vote deserted her party en bloc. And we have seen it since; every time it looks like the Conservatives say something robustly Tory the popularity of the party soars, then May announces a Labour-lite version and the shoulders slump.
Like a sufferer of domestic abuse, May goes to the EU, with sound and sensible ideas and gets abused. She gets angry (we've seen flashes of it), then forgives them and goes back for more. We are breaking up with them, so a temporary tantrum won't harm. Either they talk sense or we walk away. So we argue over the LP's (and they're all scratched), but we will get over it; banging your head on the wall might be habit forming, but it is going to be great when you stop!
The EU is an anti-democratic construct, held together by lies, a construct that the UK cannot ever have joined legally. But none of that matters apparently to the Remainers, who cling to nurse for fear of something worse, like the most timorous of children. May needs to lead the grown ups, and parenting (which she has been cruelly denied) is like leadership, you have to set boundaries, make your position on an issue crystal clear. Tell it like it is.
If you do, you will be unpopular with all the people that don't matter and achieve results of real and lasting importance to the whole nation.
Or maybe you and your simpleton advisors are right Theresa, the Conservatives have to become the Socialists while Labour have become the Communists.
Monday, 2 October 2017
Messy Politics
Three aspects cause national upsets; the will of the people, alliances and hubris. Currently, the will of the people in the UK is quite distressing as the cult of self instigated under Tony Blair continues to bite, under the further influence of Marxist propaganda (particularly through the education system).
I say the will of the people is distressing because it lacks any ability to act rationally, with youngsters voting for very dangerous Totalitarians. Because there was a completely disingenuous offer to delete their student debt floated around. That they were stupid enough to believe such rubbish and so quickly, shows just how many of our youngsters today are taking a very long time to reach actual maturity.
Poorly educated (deliberately) and way too dependent, they besmirch those who fought to give them the right to vote. (They also, spit in the face of their grandparents and great grandparents who fought Totalitarianism to give them freedom - freedom they now wish to surrender).
Elsewhere, the ancient ideology that Nation States cause wars and must be deleted (for large empires, strangely, led by those who caused most of the wars, to gain an empire), finds itself in a conundrum. All around the world, people show their desire to retain local identity, things they feel real allegiance to and that give them comfort in the familiar.
So we have the Catalans trying to ask the question, would they like to be an independent state? Nothing more than that, a poll to discover the strength of feeling of the people in the local area. The National government of Spain has said that to cede is illegal and so the referendum would be pointless.
OK, so that is the current legal view, but if the Catalans are not happy with it, then perhaps dialogue should commence? No, those in power do not want to see it 'undermined' and send in their paramilitaries to forcefully interfere with a harmless information gathering exercise (which is what the referendum surely is).
These officers of the state attacked the Catalan people deliberately and for no good reason. Illegally too, I'm sure, because the lovely Constitution of Spain may well insist Spain must always be what it is now, a single unit (albeit, interestingly, under the control of a foreign power as they ceded the whole country to Brussels), but I don't think local areas having a poll, regardless of the subject, is a crime?
Jeremy Corbyn, leading of course his own blackshirts, objects to this violence and demands Teresa May speak to the Spanish authorities. Naturally, the Venezuelan paramilitaries attacking their own people is fine by Jezza, because the government there is Communists. Violence by Communist regimes is expected, indeed part of the ideology, so what could Jeremy possibly object to?
And then there is the EU. They are completely silent about the violence perpetrated by a member state, supposedly under their control. But then they have to be, otherwise their whole project is in jeopardy, just like it needs to cause as much problem as possible to the UK, pour encourager les autres.
I'm sure the bureaucrats of the EU don't want people's heads cracked, but what to do? Firstly, hubris demands they do not give in, secondly, they are allied in spirit with the Spanish authorities and cannot therefore criticise what any human being would normally criticise. It leads to more violence of course, but the politicians are locked into positions; their ideology.
If only the will of the people could be suppressed, given no outlet to share ideas. Certainly, the leaders of the secretive EU have long thought democracy an inconvenient idea, so damaging to their project. For proof look no further than the 'stupid' decision to let the British people have their say. The delightful aspect of the UK referendum was plainly that, as yet the British people are not all snowflakes, unable to think for themselves, but can consider the evidence and come to the reasonable conclusion.
In one way I suppose the EU have stopped wars. Because in 1815 Britain and other countries objected to France attempting to create a European empire for itself and again with the Germans in 1914 and 1939, there were terrible wars. Now those very nations have managed to create their empire without war, just by the use of deceit and straightforward lying.
It isn't working and is falling apart (it is run by stupid ideologies, so it would, ideologies of French and German hegemony). Politicians should relearn their role and understand that the will of the people, always wins in the end.
I say the will of the people is distressing because it lacks any ability to act rationally, with youngsters voting for very dangerous Totalitarians. Because there was a completely disingenuous offer to delete their student debt floated around. That they were stupid enough to believe such rubbish and so quickly, shows just how many of our youngsters today are taking a very long time to reach actual maturity.
Poorly educated (deliberately) and way too dependent, they besmirch those who fought to give them the right to vote. (They also, spit in the face of their grandparents and great grandparents who fought Totalitarianism to give them freedom - freedom they now wish to surrender).
Elsewhere, the ancient ideology that Nation States cause wars and must be deleted (for large empires, strangely, led by those who caused most of the wars, to gain an empire), finds itself in a conundrum. All around the world, people show their desire to retain local identity, things they feel real allegiance to and that give them comfort in the familiar.
So we have the Catalans trying to ask the question, would they like to be an independent state? Nothing more than that, a poll to discover the strength of feeling of the people in the local area. The National government of Spain has said that to cede is illegal and so the referendum would be pointless.
OK, so that is the current legal view, but if the Catalans are not happy with it, then perhaps dialogue should commence? No, those in power do not want to see it 'undermined' and send in their paramilitaries to forcefully interfere with a harmless information gathering exercise (which is what the referendum surely is).
These officers of the state attacked the Catalan people deliberately and for no good reason. Illegally too, I'm sure, because the lovely Constitution of Spain may well insist Spain must always be what it is now, a single unit (albeit, interestingly, under the control of a foreign power as they ceded the whole country to Brussels), but I don't think local areas having a poll, regardless of the subject, is a crime?
Jeremy Corbyn, leading of course his own blackshirts, objects to this violence and demands Teresa May speak to the Spanish authorities. Naturally, the Venezuelan paramilitaries attacking their own people is fine by Jezza, because the government there is Communists. Violence by Communist regimes is expected, indeed part of the ideology, so what could Jeremy possibly object to?
And then there is the EU. They are completely silent about the violence perpetrated by a member state, supposedly under their control. But then they have to be, otherwise their whole project is in jeopardy, just like it needs to cause as much problem as possible to the UK, pour encourager les autres.
I'm sure the bureaucrats of the EU don't want people's heads cracked, but what to do? Firstly, hubris demands they do not give in, secondly, they are allied in spirit with the Spanish authorities and cannot therefore criticise what any human being would normally criticise. It leads to more violence of course, but the politicians are locked into positions; their ideology.
If only the will of the people could be suppressed, given no outlet to share ideas. Certainly, the leaders of the secretive EU have long thought democracy an inconvenient idea, so damaging to their project. For proof look no further than the 'stupid' decision to let the British people have their say. The delightful aspect of the UK referendum was plainly that, as yet the British people are not all snowflakes, unable to think for themselves, but can consider the evidence and come to the reasonable conclusion.
In one way I suppose the EU have stopped wars. Because in 1815 Britain and other countries objected to France attempting to create a European empire for itself and again with the Germans in 1914 and 1939, there were terrible wars. Now those very nations have managed to create their empire without war, just by the use of deceit and straightforward lying.
It isn't working and is falling apart (it is run by stupid ideologies, so it would, ideologies of French and German hegemony). Politicians should relearn their role and understand that the will of the people, always wins in the end.
Tuesday, 29 August 2017
Brexit Confusion
Whilst keeping you in the dark and feeding you manure has long been a necessary for those who support the Sovietisation of Europe, it is interesting how much actual confusion there is over a fairly simple concept.
Under the much-ridiculed-as-out-of-date notion of democracy, a very clear majority of the population voted to leave EU dictatorship whilst there was still time. But it seems there may be a majority of MP's who want to stay part of the political gravy train that is the substance of EU politics, probably for highly moral reasons.
And this is what they understand to be democracy; what they want is most important. The people who elected them should have no say. So they are confused.
Then there is the constant wittering about Britain not having a plan for Brexit, when clearly we do. you invoke Article 50 as the official way of letting the autocrats in Brussels know that the UK is leaving their clutches. There is not much we can do beyond that. The EU have to then let us know how we proceed in dealing with them from here. The EU, not us.
For instance; as we have seen over decades the EU is basically a collection of politicians who emulate six year olds, so they say we have to pay tariffs to sell goods to them. We try to talk them out of it and if they won't then a) we sell to other markets and b)impose tariffs on them.
They come out worse in such a scenario but the essence is, it is led by them. It is their game we are leaving.
Then we are told that we are complete idiots, because there is no way we can conclude the 'negotiations' in two years. There are two problems with this statement; 1) it is entirely possible, but it would require the EU to participate and act like grown-ups and 2) the two years mentioned is an EU statement, part of their Article 50. So, they clearly thought two years enough.
It is obvious that the arrogant and probably insane people who run the EU have never planned for anyone getting away from them. Clearly it is the EU that has no plan. That is the problem. Oh and we should know them by their actions. What is the one thing they have been fixated on since our referendum? Money. How much can they screw out of us.
Under the much-ridiculed-as-out-of-date notion of democracy, a very clear majority of the population voted to leave EU dictatorship whilst there was still time. But it seems there may be a majority of MP's who want to stay part of the political gravy train that is the substance of EU politics, probably for highly moral reasons.
And this is what they understand to be democracy; what they want is most important. The people who elected them should have no say. So they are confused.
Then there is the constant wittering about Britain not having a plan for Brexit, when clearly we do. you invoke Article 50 as the official way of letting the autocrats in Brussels know that the UK is leaving their clutches. There is not much we can do beyond that. The EU have to then let us know how we proceed in dealing with them from here. The EU, not us.
For instance; as we have seen over decades the EU is basically a collection of politicians who emulate six year olds, so they say we have to pay tariffs to sell goods to them. We try to talk them out of it and if they won't then a) we sell to other markets and b)impose tariffs on them.
They come out worse in such a scenario but the essence is, it is led by them. It is their game we are leaving.
Then we are told that we are complete idiots, because there is no way we can conclude the 'negotiations' in two years. There are two problems with this statement; 1) it is entirely possible, but it would require the EU to participate and act like grown-ups and 2) the two years mentioned is an EU statement, part of their Article 50. So, they clearly thought two years enough.
It is obvious that the arrogant and probably insane people who run the EU have never planned for anyone getting away from them. Clearly it is the EU that has no plan. That is the problem. Oh and we should know them by their actions. What is the one thing they have been fixated on since our referendum? Money. How much can they screw out of us.
Tuesday, 18 April 2017
General Election: June 8th
Theresa May calls a snap election out of nowhere, just after a paper was speculating that she doesn't like being PM and can't wait to stand down. Nicola Sturgeon says it is divisive, which she seems to say about most things, but like a stuck clock she is right every so often. Such as parliament, which is divisive, bearing in mind there is the government and there is Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition (and the Scots Nats who are neither).
As the useful idiots of Brussels and their hopeless Project Fear have been well and truly kicked into the long grass, it seems a little cruel of Mrs May to go into the long grass and kick them a little further. Maybe they will even reach the sunny uplands of their EUtopia, where unemployment is low to non existent (well, in Germany anyway), where economic woes have been dispelled and a trade surplus blossoms (er, if you're Germany) and your fellow citizens embrace as brothers, sharing the same laws, taxes, wealth and the holy benefits of the ECJ and Human Rights. All of which isn't true anywhere in Europe.
As long as Habeus Corpus doesn't matter to you, democracy doesn't matter, or the principle that the state owns you and tells you what to do and what to think is completely OK with you, then the EU is the place to be. A great idea.
If however, you believe in the Common Law, owned by the people and exercised on their behalf by an elected government, then Theresa May is the person to lead the country and deserves your vote. A further chance to tell the Marxist Left that we are fed up with their political correctness and being pushed about by the over mighty petty bureaucrats, so beloved of institutions like the EU.
Fed up with the Elite's sense of entitlement, the lies about tax cuts, green taxes and subsidies, the global warming scam, the end goal of the EU project, the whole lot.
As the useful idiots of Brussels and their hopeless Project Fear have been well and truly kicked into the long grass, it seems a little cruel of Mrs May to go into the long grass and kick them a little further. Maybe they will even reach the sunny uplands of their EUtopia, where unemployment is low to non existent (well, in Germany anyway), where economic woes have been dispelled and a trade surplus blossoms (er, if you're Germany) and your fellow citizens embrace as brothers, sharing the same laws, taxes, wealth and the holy benefits of the ECJ and Human Rights. All of which isn't true anywhere in Europe.
As long as Habeus Corpus doesn't matter to you, democracy doesn't matter, or the principle that the state owns you and tells you what to do and what to think is completely OK with you, then the EU is the place to be. A great idea.
If however, you believe in the Common Law, owned by the people and exercised on their behalf by an elected government, then Theresa May is the person to lead the country and deserves your vote. A further chance to tell the Marxist Left that we are fed up with their political correctness and being pushed about by the over mighty petty bureaucrats, so beloved of institutions like the EU.
Fed up with the Elite's sense of entitlement, the lies about tax cuts, green taxes and subsidies, the global warming scam, the end goal of the EU project, the whole lot.
Monday, 27 March 2017
Brexit, Brexit, Brexit
Question Time is on, that programme designed to answer nothing, but get some soundbites for the BBC's left-wing audience to shout about. Quite late in joining the first thing I see is the rambling comic Salmond, the ex-leader of the SNP who was replaced by someone who isn't so obviously mad. But is. Then there is Keir Starmer, fresh from running the CPS as a political branch of 'justice'. To be fair, he isn't the worst in the debate by a way.
Ooh! Nick Clegg is talking now. Apparently, he wants to stay in an organisation that pays his wife. and him probably, there is of course a massive propaganda fund in the EU.
But anyway, the stunt driven 'Remain' camp keep asking questions they know there is no answer to and then say, 'they haven't got an answer'. What is the EU proposing when we inform them we are leaving? We don't know, they haven't said (for good reason). So why, how could Theresa May have a fully formed plan?
Thankfully no-one asked the clearly deranged Heseltine his view. He is after all, a key player in keeping us in the German empire of the EU, which he turned on its head in his recent muttering. Just be satisfied you knifed your party leader in the back and go away.
But there it is, the Remain camp funded and shouted for by those who benefit from it or are directly paid by it. Why should we (and why do so many scaredy cats) listen to what a bunch of corrupt, anti-democratic, unelected technocrats say? How long should we go on supporting a bankrupt France and allow Germany to impoverish so much of the European continent, to maintain their own economy?
By leaving the EU is Britain really, once again saving Europe from French and German empire builders?
Clegg delivers the Remain bottom line; referendums until we vote to remain. Very EU of him.
Ooh! Nick Clegg is talking now. Apparently, he wants to stay in an organisation that pays his wife. and him probably, there is of course a massive propaganda fund in the EU.
But anyway, the stunt driven 'Remain' camp keep asking questions they know there is no answer to and then say, 'they haven't got an answer'. What is the EU proposing when we inform them we are leaving? We don't know, they haven't said (for good reason). So why, how could Theresa May have a fully formed plan?
Thankfully no-one asked the clearly deranged Heseltine his view. He is after all, a key player in keeping us in the German empire of the EU, which he turned on its head in his recent muttering. Just be satisfied you knifed your party leader in the back and go away.
But there it is, the Remain camp funded and shouted for by those who benefit from it or are directly paid by it. Why should we (and why do so many scaredy cats) listen to what a bunch of corrupt, anti-democratic, unelected technocrats say? How long should we go on supporting a bankrupt France and allow Germany to impoverish so much of the European continent, to maintain their own economy?
By leaving the EU is Britain really, once again saving Europe from French and German empire builders?
Clegg delivers the Remain bottom line; referendums until we vote to remain. Very EU of him.
Friday, 27 January 2017
Our Tickle 50
Little punning there, sorry, serious subject. Well, to people that understand it!
The people of this country, under a law of 2015 voted to request and require their democratically elected government to withdraw the United Kingdom from the European Union. It is amazing, after years of propaganda, threats of doom from all and sundry, apathy and the general fear that maybe we should cling to nurse for fear of something worse, that we voted to leave.
But we did. And Jeremy Corbyn thinks that is the reason his party should not think it knows better, rather carry out the will of the people. Article 50 of course is an article of an EU treaty. It is the formal way to inform them we are leaving. Some of his MP's think their view more important than the public's though.
But wanting to leave is only something that stupid people and fascists voted for, according to the liberals. Now these are interesting people, because they call themselves liberals, which suggests freedom and tolerance (as it is intended to).
The manifestation though is that they are deeply and often violently intolerant of people having different ideas from them. So, a narrow, dictatorial society is what they are after, as long as the power rests with them.
This is OK though, because they are cleverer than you (clearly, you voted to leave the EU) and are lovely people who would never do you any harm (unless you disagreed with them).
I was trying to think if any country has ever been run on these principles and how it went. Nearest I can come up with is Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, oh and the very similarly structured EU.
The people of this country, under a law of 2015 voted to request and require their democratically elected government to withdraw the United Kingdom from the European Union. It is amazing, after years of propaganda, threats of doom from all and sundry, apathy and the general fear that maybe we should cling to nurse for fear of something worse, that we voted to leave.
But we did. And Jeremy Corbyn thinks that is the reason his party should not think it knows better, rather carry out the will of the people. Article 50 of course is an article of an EU treaty. It is the formal way to inform them we are leaving. Some of his MP's think their view more important than the public's though.
But wanting to leave is only something that stupid people and fascists voted for, according to the liberals. Now these are interesting people, because they call themselves liberals, which suggests freedom and tolerance (as it is intended to).
The manifestation though is that they are deeply and often violently intolerant of people having different ideas from them. So, a narrow, dictatorial society is what they are after, as long as the power rests with them.
This is OK though, because they are cleverer than you (clearly, you voted to leave the EU) and are lovely people who would never do you any harm (unless you disagreed with them).
I was trying to think if any country has ever been run on these principles and how it went. Nearest I can come up with is Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia, oh and the very similarly structured EU.
Tuesday, 24 January 2017
Judges Cogitation Over
It was a nice delay wasn't it? The judges 'deciding' on the powers of government. I mean, you know they really thought about it. In a democracy, should the people be allowed a say? Once given a mandate, should a government be allowed to carry it out if they haven't checked with 8 judges first?
Well, no apparently. The delay though was a con. How long do you suppose a group of judges, who are mainly either in the pay of or associated with organisations reliant on the EU, would take to decide that they should interfere in the political process of leaving the EU?
Add to that the fact that judges have for quite a while now felt that they are the pinnacle of decision making in the UK, not parliament. So they could have said 'no' within seconds, but you know, propriety and image requires a delay. Let the idiots think you are serious people.
They should be completely ignored and the government continue with their legal obligation, under an Act of Parliament to withdraw the UK from the EU. Parliament can have all kinds of input in the workings of the process, but informing the EU formally of our intention, Article 50, needs to be triggered immediately. It is only fair on the 27 other member states.
Well, no apparently. The delay though was a con. How long do you suppose a group of judges, who are mainly either in the pay of or associated with organisations reliant on the EU, would take to decide that they should interfere in the political process of leaving the EU?
Add to that the fact that judges have for quite a while now felt that they are the pinnacle of decision making in the UK, not parliament. So they could have said 'no' within seconds, but you know, propriety and image requires a delay. Let the idiots think you are serious people.
They should be completely ignored and the government continue with their legal obligation, under an Act of Parliament to withdraw the UK from the EU. Parliament can have all kinds of input in the workings of the process, but informing the EU formally of our intention, Article 50, needs to be triggered immediately. It is only fair on the 27 other member states.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)