Black Lives Do Indeed Matter

If you aren't that interested in politics, but are a lovely, caring person, the headline seems fairly straightforward. There is racism within the predominately white Western societies, that at worst shows itself with incidents like the killing of George Floyd. It doesn't matter that he was an armed robber, his killing was almost casual.

But do think about it (and as I write this, I am thinking of white and black people). We don't know that the policeman killed Floyd because he was black. All we know is that the policeman is exactly the sort of person who shouldn't be a policeman and his basic immorality permitted him to kill someone.

But more than that, why is there an organisation called Black Lives Matter? And you not only don't hear 'All Lives Matter' it is a theme that is actively attacked if you try to use it. The essence of BLM is the inherent suggestion that someone thinks black lives don't matter. Don't get started, yes I'm sure some people are like that, but they are the ones to ignore, not those actually targeted by BLM.

I mean, some nit flew a banner over a football stadium (that's actual football, not modified rugby) saying 'white lives matter' which is also a statement of fact, but the professional outrage crowd went nuts. But it was playing into BLM's hands.

BLM is actually fairly unconcerned with racial issues, beyond their usefulness to ideology, being an organisation dedicated to Marxist principles and consequently seeking to destroy capitalism and the justice system, which all stand in their way.

Getting black people to riot and loot and burn on the streets, was specifically to say to other people (whites, similarly horrified blacks) that here were black people doing terrible things. We should oppose and clamp down on these people. Basically, promoting and perpetuating racial division, which would be largely non existent without their constant input.

Pushing victimhood makes you feel oppressed, even if you aren't. That there is racism is evident in the range of names for black people, that are designed to denigrate, yet I am not aware of a reciprocal repertoire against whites. Though interestingly, the equally disgusting 'coconut' is amazingly racist, yet of more recent invention (from the Left, naturally).

To accuse a person who's skin tone is darker, of being a white person within, is a particularly pernicious insult. Not really black, because they 'think' like a white person, also suggesting there is always something wrong with being white!

The Left believe that if they can destabilise society, particularly through violence, then that society is ripe for them to step in and take over. Corbyn was indifferent to election results because he never envisaged achieving real power that way.

So black people are told probably by the white, intolerant, illiberal liberals to take offence at every turn. Sticks and stones are for riots, but everyday words must be considered more harmful, causing injuries you cannot recover from. You must take to the streets, riot and loot. Only by this route can you find yourself governed by people who will show you what real and professional oppression is.

To the Left of course, a successful black person is a problem, they have got above their station. You are not supposed to benefit from capitalism, as it lifts more people out of poverty than any other political system ever has, and you will be abused for it. A traitor, indeed.

To me, I care nought for race, but support the idea that you measure a person by the content of their character, which is why ipso facto I detest Marxists for their nihilism. To me the biggest crime is to deny anyone, anyone at all, opportunity. The rest is up to you and the content of your character.

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.

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.

Cheddar Man (Gromit)

I have just watched the childish Channel 4 compilation about the DNA-based reconstruction of a 10,000 year old skeleton found in Cheddar Gorge. From the outset, the voice-over was full of portent. We were in for some fundamental shocks, apparently.

Summary; Cheddar Man came from the Middle East, was related to several other skeletons found in Spain, Luxembourg and Hungary and had darker skin than we would have thought. Obviously, whilst traced to the Middle East, originally he will have come from Africa. And the 'relations' being across a wide range means we are more European than British.

Review; Yep, I think that we have believed a migration from the Middle East (probably from Northern India/Persia) for decades. So, not new, not a shock. And a darker skin than we currently have? Why is that a surprise? I'm guessing knowing origins, suggests it quite strongly and it is as irrelevant regarding him as anyone else today.

It seems that the scientists (or just the script writer?) would be shocked to see a dark-skinned person disembarking from an Air Nigeria flight from Lagos. Which accords with how poor they seemed as a crew, being unable to string proper sentences together. They may know their subject, but they obviously didn't pay much attention during their Eng Lang/Lit classes.

For me, hearing there were close DNA relationships with other people right across Europe was interesting because of the spread and why did they spread? But the programme could not get past the politics it wished to project; we are not 'British' (which is a cultural construct, not racial) but 'European' (but held back from pointing out how ridiculous this made Brexit).

Maybe, though, just maybe Cheddar Man didn't know he was 'European' either, but surely paid a fair rate of tax. Our shock at his skin colour would be because we are racist, yes?

And the added, unsupported fact that we all came out of Africa is now being questioned, but not by this programme. They completely ignored the discovery of an 'oldest ever' skeleton in Europe. Where Lucy was found is an ideal, undeveloped part of the world. The fact that the land of much of the rest of the world is unexamined doesn't mean we came form Africa.

Finding old remains there is interesting and the theory may be correct, but as ever, we don't know. Unless you are a cultural Marxist and are desperate, at every turn to state your distaste for Western civilisation.

I'm amazed that, as the programme assumed we couldn't but project modern views onto the past, they didn't also explain that there were no cars or aeroplanes when he was alive.

I particularly enjoyed the guy saying that people migrated to what is now Britain seeking 'living space' (lebensraum), which seemed odd as the entire population was around 12,000. Just seemed an strange thing to say, yet alone the words used!
Could have been an interesting programme, but Channel 4 did it, so it was politically oriented tosh.

Unashamed Children

The silly little girl who led her entourage of similarly immature twerps in protesting about Winston Churchill in a café, leaves you gasping really. Where to start? When I was their age I kinda knew that I was inexperienced at pretty much everything and kept quiet. Now however, students as they like to call themselves have no sense of shame about anything, a huge amount of self-importance and stunted ill-informed political views.

The Left of course, never progress beyond playground politics by definition. Marxist ideology is all immature. Then there is the target, a café. Really? The overthrow of capitalist economic theory starts here comrades. That alone marks her out as a complete fool.

Or the supposed target Churchill, who whilst pursuing his hobby of leading the nation against Nazi aggression, was more committed to oppressing blacks. Are we fortunate that she, uniquely has discovered this?

Of course, it is more likely, as a Marxist that she is more concerned to make the enemy of totalitarianism her enemy. Because the Left is where evil dwells (her, Corbyn, Hitler, Stalin) which means the Right is where people who don't wish to oppress others sit.

The big problem creeping up on us is of course, the likes of Momentum. This organisation and countless others in a similar vein are becoming bolder, more public. They are the proto Brownshirts and they need to be confronted and dealt with before they seize any more power. The slide into totalitarianism can be unnoticed too often as it hides under some uniting principle.

For the Nazis it was a national mood for a greater Germany, here it is a nation falling for the 'equality etc' cooings of people who would do you harm. Having spent decades ensuring the young are as uneducated as possible, through Marxist ideology in schools and colleges, we have a population that overwhelmingly doesn't notice stuff.

Global Warming is an anti-capitalist scam. Why has the public not noticed there is never any open debate about it? Just lists of instructions and increased taxes. The EU is an anti-democratic scam to create the Franco-German empire they repeatedly failed to achieve through violence. Again, no-one notices the lack of debate.

It has been inserted into our thought processes that State control is good, always. So whenever something goes wrong the person in the street interviewed for TV says 'the government should do something'.

The whole country needs to grow up and take more responsibility (which means taking it from Corbyn and his thugs), not just the silly girl in the café.

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.

What's Wrong? I'll Tell You

It does say on this blog that it is personal opinion. Good, that's that covered now to press on.

We find ourselves in all sorts of bad places at the moment, kind of forming a single feeling of, well being in a bad place. You know, education doesn't seem to be working, immigration seems a problem but you don't want to sound horrible, hospitals can't cope apparently, politicians are in their own little world, which is not what you imagined they were for and then there's the news.

How can all this be happening? All at once. Well your culpability is that you weren't paying attention. Now, whilst some of it was intended to evade your notice, the glaringly obvious also slipped by. Hello? Tony Blair? Really, you elected him? And then did it again? How many clues do you need? No wonder the actual problem went undetected!

On healthcare; basically a good idea run by the wrong people. The NHS 'free at the point of delivery' is just like any other insurance paid for scheme, but is run by a state bureaucracy. Time and again these are proven to be the worst people to allow to run anything. Soldiers achieve great things on battlefields, doctors and nurses do great things on the front line, but take a step back and the managers, the MOD are a shambles of incompetence, entitlement and waste.

Doctors and nurses are not coming out of this as unmitigated heroes though. Nurses used to do the basic tasks on wards, which were clean, functional and caring places. Now nurses don't receive training, they are educated, to degree level. This new understanding of their own importance means they no longer concern themselves with menial tasks and assistants have had to be hired to do those jobs. Wards are now dirty with poor standards of actual care.

When you go in to hospital, you are an inconvenience, you mess with their numbers. Cost them money. So you are allocated a number and processed through the system, with everyone focussed on maximising the efficiency of the system, to please managers and bureaucrats. You are no longer a patient with an ailment, you are a form, to be processed. You might get what you need quickly enough and you might not.

Complaints of course crop up, but the defence mechanism is continually oiled for this possibility. How dare you criticise doctors and nurses? Whatever went wrong, it will be cuts (if Tories are in power) or swept under the carpet if 'socialists' hold sway.

And there it is, the first mention of socialists. It isn't socialism that is the issue though. This thoroughly acceptable political thought process is not to blame as it hasn't been heard around here for a very long time. No, Marxism is what is at work. Gramsci and the long march through the institutions is at work.

Education is a good example of what is going on and it is of key interest to Marxists of course. You will hear from time to time bleatings about 'unqualified' teachers. This is usually about free schools, a recent introduction. And naturally, hearing that teachers are unqualified instantly makes you think they must be substandard. But do you ask what a qualified teacher is? No, you don't.

A 'qualified' teacher is one that has progressed through a Union run institution where they mainly receive left oriented political indoctrination. It is the reason almost every teacher sings the Red Flag (of communism) when a 'socialist' government is elected. It is why they go on strike and hate 'the Tories' It is why you hear of 'cuts' whether there are any or not.

For the Marxists, a poor education system that promotes left ideology is essential, firstly to help destabilise society, but also, when they win (Marxists deal in inevitabilities) they need a lumpen mass of proles to do the menial work, to do what they are told, to come to rely entirely on the state. And what are our educational establishments churning out? Functionally illiterate snowflakes, unable to discover facts, handle the truth or debate.

The same Marxist approach is happening of course, within the police, all state bureaucracies, the judiciary and not least the media. One particularly powerful weapon they deploy is Political Correctness. This is an immensely useful option as, whenever they don't have an answer, can't engage in debate (i.e. most of the time) they encourage the use of the phrase 'you can't say that'.

Things become unsayable, beyond the pale, not because they actually are, in a fair reasonable society, but because it serves Marxist ideology. You are 'not allowed' to talk about black on black crime, even though it is a very real problem and makes a misery of many lives.

For the Marxists you have to be stupid and believe amazing and ridiculous things. Hence, Corbyn isn't seen as dangerous, a hard core Marxist who would turn Britain into Venezuela in the blink of an eye, but as an alternative politician, in line with British tradition. What Marxists cannot achieve through violent revolution, by encouraging you to 'rise up' and put them in dictatorial power, they will get by other duplicitous means.

Let me show you how a cultural hysteria can be used to achieve ridiculous ends. The goal of Marxists is to overthrow the system that made the countries that adopted it wealthy, capitalism. Because of this success, this ability to enhance lives, capitalism has held Marxism in check. So it has to go. But how to get rid of it?

One way is to get the rich countries to spend all their money. But why would they do that and on what? War would not guarantee a good outcome for Marxists and it provides opportunities for capitalism. No, it had to be something fundamentally useless.

Then they had a brainwave, something that would undermine capitalism and show, most amusingly for them, just how stupid modern societies have become under their incessant, malign influence. They said you had to build weapons to defend against dragons. Or rather they said you had to spend enormous amounts of your wealth on combatting 'Global Warming'. This was your fault naturally, because in becoming wealthy through capitalist endeavour, you had damaged the planet.

So, it became fashionable to feel guilty and completely OK to pay for winds farms and solar panels, which are not actually fit for purpose. Some people got rich but most people were being robbed blind and that was the object. To waste money fighting a chimera. So old people die of cold due to fuel poverty, but that doesn't matter against the great scheme of achieving Marxist Utopia.

Are you stupid though? Is Climate Change or whatever the current vogue name is for the scam, not real? Yes, the climate changes, it always has. But we can't stop it and we are certainly not causing it. Oh and yes, it does seem likely you are stupid, because (for once perhaps) think; why would scientists tell you the science is settled, you are not allowed to debate climate change? The Scientific Method requires constant questioning, constant re-evaluation. It requires proof.

That is why you cannot challenge it. Because it is a tissue of lies. It is why they fiddle the temperature records, why they issue vicious attacks whenever a scientist questions the ideology. It is why there is never a debate on TV, why the BBC endlessly pumps out propaganda to support it. A lie told often enough becomes the truth.

So what is wrong with the world today? Simple. We have for too long not stood up against the creeping, malign undermining of decent, civilised society by dangerous, violent Marxists. Demand that the outcome of the education system is a clearly educated child, not happy Marxist inclined teachers, parroting tired, worthless ideology. Demand that common sense and long held laws and norms are returned.

Stand up for the things that work for you, capitalism and decent, civil society and destroy rampant Marxism. And along the way, we can pick up and make great use of a proper, socialist party in our midst. That would be something we have, perhaps never seen.

One Month To Go!

Well, what can one say? Thankfully a number of our politicians have been prepared to break ranks and tell the British people that the EU is a bad idea. They don't seem to be making a particularly good job of it, but at least they have principles.

Which it has to be said doesn't seem to be the case with David Cameron and his cronies. are we really such stupid little children that scare stories are their best option? We couldn't understand facts?

I suppose the indicators are there for him to reach such a conclusion. Several people you (and the media) talk to seem to cleave to the EU because, well because, er, it would be dangerous to leave, or summink.

As has been said, the only people who support the EU are those in its pay and those who don't understand it. Certainly anyone I ask, once they have said we should stay in, has no idea whatsoever how the EU works and if pushed assume it is pretty much like the British government.

They don't know it is run by unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats. They don't know that in the EU, the law we have developed over a thousand years is stood on its head. Here, the people own the law, in the EU the law owns the people, the population exists to serve the state.

They don't know its police and bureaucrats are immune from prosecution. There can only be one reason to give your police this protection and it fits neatly with the totalitarian state that the EU is working towards.

But more importantly, Cameron. He says we will never join the Euro and we will never accept a superstate. Better leave now then Dave! Because the EU project is and always has been, to create a single country called Europe, with no nation states. A superstate.

And to achieve this, they must have everything under the control of the state, all tax, all decision making, all areas of policy and all control over the currency. A single currency, the Euro and a single elite.

Democracy has been a real hindrance to 'the project', it has held it up tremendously, by requiring circuitous lawmaking, to avoid the electorates realising what they are up to. This is why the EU has no democracy itself and will not tolerate it once it finally achieves its goal of unity.

Few people disagree that it is massively corrupt and fundamentally inept, but on it goes, its accounts never signed off year after year and financial crises dealt with ruthlessly (see: Greece).

The Italians, the Spanish, the French and the Germans have all dreamed of European empires and have at various times tried to bring them about militarily. This has never worked and a major reason why has always been Britain. Not seeking a European empire, we merely dealt with them and walked away.

So, the most recent plotters decided to try subterfuge. A political solution, involving financial domination (see:Greece and others) and tricking Britain into joining. This neutered us from providing an alternative vision for Europe, where proud, but very different countries agreed their agendas and talked things through.

But Germany and France wanted an empire (see: the Ukraine) and so ever-closer Union was the only game in town. And to be fair, we have been pretty slow to realise how duped we have been. For Heaven's sake they told us to give up our fishing waters and we did! How mad are we?

For the project this proved we were stupid enough to be allowed to join. And to be a major paymaster for them.

This is an age after all when we believe stupid things and stupid things that are stunningly obviously stupid. Let us consider the meeting of the Marxist Popular Front for the Liberation of the Working Class of all Nations, or more snappily the MPFLWCN. Or perhaps it is the Popular Front of Working Class Liberation, or possibly Workers Against Nations Knowingly Empowering Rich Scum.

Anyway, they sit down in a pub and check everyone has got their benefits before ordering drinks, there is nothing worse than a Marxist revolutionary sponging off the backs of his working class, though not actually working comrades.

Then they decide that, despite the very sound idea that the proletariat would rise up in violent revolution against their oppressive bosses and their lickspittle governments, it seems that advancing themselves by ambition has turned out a better bet.

When the poor get an education they realise a) how to improve their lot and b) what a bunch of idle, childish and petulant wankers Marxists are. And so fail to put their lives on the line so a bunch of ne'er do wells can step forward and run everything for us, because they are a) much more intelligent and b) hugely benevolent in thought and deed.

So no revolution then. The meeting now needed to move on to more drinks and some crisps. Hand made, Balsamic Vinegar and Kale. Salt and Vinegar and Cheese and Onion are vulgar, in vulgar packaging and suitable only for the proles.

So, what to do to overthrow Capitalism and renew the Utopia that was the Soviet Union. Well EU natch, but what else. Being the most effective mechanism for wealth creation and redistribution it is hard to imagine why people would vote against capitalism.

Global Warming! Of course. There had been some data to show temperatures rising globally, which might be a new epoch of warmer weather, just like in the Middle Ages. All the Marxists needed to do was seize that agenda and say that the warming was entirely due to Man and our use of fossil fuels.

As this underpins the whole of the world economy and therefore capitalism, getting the morons to spend every penny they have on fighting it will wreck their economies and cause riots and revolution and that is where the Marxists can step in.

Even in a company of drunken revolutionaries there is always a naysayer and he now says "but won't someone point out that it is nonsense, scientifically?" Naturally, the answer is to use the past endeavours of Marxist theory in subverting the educational establishment.

Academia can be relied on to toe the party line and those with real scientific credentials, independently minded can be dealt with using standard Marxist tactics. Bully them. Threaten them. Don't talk to them. Ridicule them publicly. Anything but engage them in debate, as that can only end in defeat; the Marxists are lying of course.

But the real beauty of it was that it was so fundamentally stupid, such a weak idea, so easily proven wrong that if it worked it would be fantastic on two levels; destroying capitalism from within and nobody bold enough to realise that the emperor has no clothes.

It was so clearly tosh that if it worked it would be the biggest laugh ever. So it really was a great idea to ensure we had an education system that spent 11 years or more in getting our kids to a level where they can barely read or write, let alone know how to research stuff.

Who, once they have mastered Facebook and Twitter and their mobile phone wants to spend time figuring real stuff out? That's what the government is for innit? To tell us everyfink.

And so, people who have little idea about anything, believe the stupidest things will vote to stay in the EU. Then even a notional Tory like Cameron starts to believe Marxism has its uses.

Greece: What It Means For Us All

The comi-tragedy of the Greek financial situation continues, with the new twist of a 'no' vote in a referendum. The options for the Greeks currently are either a) to follow the diktats of the technocrats in Brussels or b) to follow the lead of a far-left party of Greek politicians.

The EU have supported the Greeks by loaning them enormous amounts of money over a long period of time. This has become so large that the Greeks have no way of meeting the repayments. The cause of this poverty is the dysfunctional nature of Greek society, where it seems almost no-one pays their taxes and have no idea that this has to have repercussions somewhere down the line.

Particularly amazing when they also expect to retire early on good pensions, they haven't paid for. The EU knew that the Greek economy did not meet the 'Euro' criteria when they allowed them to join, but everyone in Athens and Brussels hoped that this small detail didn't matter. And they also knew that, as a currency, the euro was of no use to the Greeks; it was bound to undermine their economy.

But Greece had to be part of the great European Project and facts and the plight of populations are irrelevant in that context. For the EU it represented their power and to the Greeks a source of funds.

This economic stupidity is symptomatic of Marxist regimes like the EU, but unfortunately Greece, in Syriza have a government that shares the same ideology. It has been playing dangerous games with the EU and the referendum was a stunt to scare them into doing what Syriza wants; more free money.

Whilst the Greek PM talks tough on nationhood, he is careful to not actually do anything to make withdrawal from the euro, from the EU inevitable. He certainly doesn't want the taps turned off, he wants the debt cancelled.

The EU don't want them to leave as the Project is about the power gained by forcing 'ever closer political union, under Brussels'. If Greece left, it would mean nothing is for ever, other countries being severely damaged by the incorrect currency forced on their economies could also seek to make their own way in the world, much more successfully than when shackled to a corpse.

So what does this mean for the wider world? Well, it is important to notice what has happened in our media over the last few days in particular. Phrases like 'facing the abyss', 'catastrophe' and 'disaster' were bandied about, without, in the following articles any supporting text. We were warned at the weekend that the markets would fall 5-10%, that currency instability would follow a 'no' vote.

Then the Greeks voted 'no' and the markets barely noticed and the commentators kept quiet about how incorrect their prior, dire warnings were. For Greece things are desperate and for the EU it is a political crisis, but for the rest of the world it matters not a jot.

Another favourite, to scare us into not voting 'incorrectly' in any referendum David Cameron might offer on EU membership, apart from the BBC's Nick Robinson saying referendums can have unforeseen consequences -hint; you are too stupid to be allowed to vote-, is that Britain trades mainly with the EU, it is our main trading partner.

Again without any substance, we are being given a vague, but scary warning of catastrophe and disaster, if we leave the EU. Lord knows why trade would be affected, but it is what they say.

But I have looked up some trade figures and it seems that the value of our trade with the EU is precisely £0. I looked and checked, but couldn't find anything that we export to the EU. Except that is the £13+ billion we send to Brussels. Certainly, Britain exports substantial amounts to a number of countries that are also members of the European Union, but not to the EU per se as the media and politicians keep insisting we do.

If Britain leaves the EU, we can still trade with EU members, just as others do. In fact, we could stay in the Single Market and ignore the political control if we want. Not something Brussels, or its love-struck follower David Cameron wants you to know. So, if you get the chance, don't hesitate to force our politicians to work harder once more, setting our laws and dealing with international bodies, to whom we are presently denied access, by voting to leave the EU.

Specifically, don't worry about the negatives. I don't think that we should overly concern ourselves with the salaries and pensions of people who care nothing for the people of Europe and who have done such damage. People like Jacque Delors, Angela Merkel, Neil and Glenys Kinnock and Peter Mandelson. Not people you could warm to!

Not Paying Attention and the Danger of the Left

Quite a lot of instances of the creeping influence of Marxism, both overtly political and also more culturally oriented, emerging recently. With the rise of support for the lunatic Greens, a hard Left organisation if ever there was one, more and more state supported bodies coming to light as the inquiry into Muslim influence proceeds and the casual nonsense spouted on TV, it is becoming more obvious.

Something akin to a seminal moment occurred on last week's Question Time. David Starkey, who is prone to go a little far when making points and tends to childish over-elaborate display at times, made a very correct point. He said that despite all that it had brought to the world previously, Islam and the Muslim world in its thrall had done nothing of note for six centuries.

Much of the audience howled in protest and Mehdi Hasan burst in decrying the assertion (even though his opening statement on the show was excellent. I know, unbelievable!)

Starkey's mistake was a common one today; he thought the audience would have a baseline understanding of what he was talking about, but they don't. By being a historian, what we mean is he 'does the detail', it doesn't mean we have no concept of his world and therefore what he is talking about. Or shouldn't do, if the Left hadn't succeeded quite so well at depressing education.

I don't think a large segment of the audience had any idea of the significance of what he was saying, that Islamic culture was so advanced in mathematics, astronomy, art and architecture. Starkey's point was that Islam is holding back the countries that have adopted it and this assertion is proven true by observation.

So how was it refuted? By shouting generally, saying he was 'wrong' and then the standard Left fall-back; attacking the man. Or how about this. Later in the week I stumbled across some limp show, run by an idiot Australian who was working the formula of saying anything Left wing to get the audience cheering.

He quoted Starkey and in a brilliant refutation said 'uh' and 'really', which I think we can agree is pretty strong reasoning. Deal with that Starkey. I think the wonderful cheer leader of Group Think wanted to go on to the logical conclusion of his point of view and say 'no wonder they go around shooting people'.

And that is my point. We are being too blasé, too laid back, there is a crunch coming and we are not fighting our corner. Left wing stupidity is everywhere, in mainstream politics, in political correctness, from nursery schools and the multiple fears that have been planted there, to the controlling influence of speed cameras.

You have to wonder what would have happened in Russia if mass communication had existed when the 'Communists' rose. Would the people have still been as stupid as to let it happen, as we are today in the West?

Daniel Pelka And Social Work

A child is dead. Again. And as if to ram home that the authorities involved really don't care all their attention and that of the excuse-machine investigation is centred on avoiding responsibility.

We have wittering half-wits on the TV saying, in that special calm, half whisper beloved of the 'caring', that the agencies involved should be bolder in 'challenging' what they are told by parents under suspicion. That the agencies should have a mechanism for talking to each other about concerns.

All this is meant to sound reasonable, all of it addressing 'issues', but what really underlies this kind of empty cant is 'will you please go away'. But it isn't reasonable, is it? If a teacher saw a child in such distress as Daniel was clearly showing (or 'presenting' in social work case-conference speak), then he/she could approach the parents for an explanation.

But no. In today's caring, multi-agency child-protection world the teacher must cross check to see if anyone else has spotted anything. Like a policeman coming across a fight and rather than breaking it up, calls some other 'agency' to see what they think. A doctor with a patient presenting with a knife in his head, wonders if anyone else thinks this might be important.

What these people who do say anything about their failures say, and as many as possible don't pass comment, is that this should have happened and that should have happened and he slipped through the net, but mostly the nasty, lying, manipulating parent was to blame because they lied to the social workers and doctors and police.

I can't believe that people nowadays are genetically less caring as individuals, as human beings, so it must be cultural. And that culture will be provided by ideology and management. The ideology provides all the style of speech and emphasis on the importance of self and the management live in that bubble, carefully avoiding actually doing anything. It is of course, the socialist way. Marxism is the over riding concern of social workers and all their efforts must be made in the light of the ideology.

Pretty soon it becomes apparent this is poor practice, so the multi-agency network is set up to spread responsibility and more importantly, blame. No one is ever to blame it is the system. And the people at the top have the strongest motivation to make sure that system does not change.

This was put into stark daylight by the shrieking of Sharon Shoesmith who was aghast to find herself being held personally accountable. No one, herself included could possibly be responsible as all the boxes had been ticked, she said. It appeared to have slipped her attention that a child was dead. Or that the 'paperwork' referred to a real person.

In her world, passing paper around, signing this off and getting that box ticked, is their life. It is what they draw their salary for. Shoesmith's responsibility as far as she was concerned was to make sure everyone was filling in the boxes. No wonder the intrusion of teh subject of the forms and tick-boxes came as such a shock to her.

Do we need change? Yes we do. Marxism as a malign influence is infecting everything from hospitals that now kill on an epic scale, to hapless police officers stumbling from excuse for this accidental shooting to explaining expenses, to careless social workers and HR departments wrecking companies by their tick box mentality.

Some years ago a judge said that he would never find against a social worker as the presumption has to be that their intentions were good. When was that last true?

Leave The EU?

Nigel Lawson is being heavily quoted on a recent article of his saying that Britain should leave the EU as the economic case for doing so was now clear. Indeed it is, as it has been since before we joined.

But of course the biggest problem with the EU is a moral one. It is a construct designed to serve an elite against the people, but as ever using their money and labours to ensure their own wealth and status.

In a sane country, powers are given to a government that are essential to the good running of the nation for the good of everyone in that nation. There may not be equality but there should be equality of opportunity. Some checks and balances need to exist to keep the 'executive' on the straight and narrow and to ensure they remember their role.

Our ancestors did a remarkably good job at coming up with some very good balances; Common Law, habeus corpus, Magna Carta, the Bill of Rights. Today it is en vogue to say these have been forgotten. They most certainly have not, at least not by the people whom they hold to account. Those people have worked hard to negate the previous good works, to convince you they don't exist or were never a good idea, or even that they needed 'modernising'.

The reason is that they are good government, they serve the people in a society where the people own the law and the state exists to serve them and their law. This does not describe the EU, which is based on the despotic regimes that have caused wars across Europe for centuries. In the situation now taking precedent even here, the state exists as a perfect entity and the people are to serve the state. Everything is illegal unless the state permits it.

For such a system to truly work, the people must have no power and no say, which again is the lines along which the EU is constructed. You may 'elect' MEP's but they don't write the laws and they must keep voting on new laws until they do what the unelected elite wants. At best they only slow things down, they may as well not exist.

In the UK party politics has further eroded any hint of democracy that might have existed. You vote for an MP and when he/she arrives at Westminster they do what the Party leadership tells them. Indeed they could only stand for election because the Party selected them to do so.

Hence Cameron, despite knowing that Wind Farms are a scam, the homosexual marriage laws and his fervour for the corrupt EU are deeply unpopular with most people, he can ignore them to a large extent.  Party based politics is why all the parties have converged in their 'ideas', as getting elected (or conning the public on one particular day, as it should be more correctly called) is all that they are actually interested in.

There is an economic case for leaving the EU, but there is a moral one, a political one, a democratic one, a common sense one, a national sovereignty one and a legal one; it was never in the gift of parliament to join. Under British law, it was illegal for any government to sign the original treaty and it shows how poorly served we have been, over a very long time that no-one has corrected this. This is how long politicians have considered themselves above the law.

When was the last time Cameron told you about some EU law that was coming and there was a public debate about it? No, all we ever hear is that the Daily Mail has 'gone off on one' again, rattling on about some myth about a new EU law. Hoping you won't actually check, as you will find out that, no matter how stupid it might have sounded it will be at least as bad as stated.

Stephen Fry, who has a reputation for being able to understand things, chuckled during a blatant EU supporting QI, that the 'sceptics' even claim there is a law requiring cucumbers to be straight. "No there isn't", he confidently told us. And you know what? There isn't. The law doesn't say they must be straight, it says they mustn't curve much, which presumably on the intellectual plane Stephen inhabits that is entirely different from being straight.

Some of our politicians manage the neat trick of claiming that we are wise in Britain because we didn't join the Euro, but are OK about us being in the EU. So, let me get this straight. The Euro is a crock of shit, as can clearly be seen, but the state controlled political entity of a single European superstate, anti-democratic and Marxist in nature, is a good idea - even though that isn't working either? Did no-one learn anything from the examples of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia?

Observe, Debate

I know I'm banging on a bit about the Left at the moment, but it has become uppermost in my mind that we are in significant danger financially and as a society from communism. There is a panoply of lies surrounding every aspect of our lives, created by the Left and making proper political debate impossible.

There is undoubtedly a socialist angle that awaits discovery by brave souls. Areas of human existence that could be bettered by some clear thinking and definition. We need to accept that the human condition will always seek advantage, wants to strive for better. Even the current icon of evil, Mick Philpott worked at getting as much out of the system as he could, though by underhand means and by harming others.

More constructively, people can gain the very best education they are capable of and use it to get the best job and a career. So politicians should always have this in mind when considering how best to facilitate a society that fosters achievement but does no harm along the way.

All of this, conservatism, socialism and individual desires to do better are anathema to the Marxist. For them, control is the only goal. Marxism may mention the poor lot of the proletariat but only as the mechanism by which a revolution, a violent revolution can be achieved. You get the overwhelming impression that the real interest was to attack a certain group of people, a class they would insist on calling them, to destroy them. A kind of personal hatred by the author, Marx.

Has a movement really been formed based solely on the pathological ranting of a mentally disturbed man? Almost in the mould of that other authoritarian Leftie, Adolf Hitler. (You may have been instructed that he is far Right but what does that mean? In what way was Hitler at the other end of a scale from Stalin? They were almost identical).

The answer is yes, because it serves the motives of a group of people who seek violence as a leisure interest and the overthrow of an existing society merely to make themselves important. So much of what they do is secretive and also in no way constructive. They do not offer solutions just anarchy. They do not suggest an alternative society, just vague mentions of a society run from the centre. And they would be the centre of course.

There is no debate in this country among our politicians due to their being corralled by communist ideology, using such devices as Political Correctness and the indoctrination of teachers and thence the children. Why does a story exist that Thatcher was uniquely bad in British politics, when 'the sick man of Europe', Britain was turned around by her? Why does the story of her wrecking the coal industry and stealing milk from children paint her as a monster, yet she closed fewer pits the Labour's Harold Wilson, a Premier who also stopped school milk for secondary children?

It is because the Left incessantly create and retell lies and have access to do so. Which is why, morons like the 'drama teacher' don't understand history, just repeat an invention that turns her into a harpy, filled with hatred. Who knows, without the indoctrination she may be a very nice person. But as it is, pathetic drama is definitely her remit.

Of course, my fear and why I keep on about it, is that the Marxists are aiming for violent confrontation. The poll tax riots were organised for violence sake, a government policy just gave it a cover to hide behind. Violence at G8 summits is conducted by people who would love a world government, but rail against global corporates. What they hate is not the global bit, but that even though 'fat cats' do exist and are very wealthy, along the way they spread that wealth, creating jobs.

It may be unintentional, they may be no more altruistic than a Marxist, but happen it does. As we have seen with Gordon Brown, big government, state control and little choice ends up with a broken society and bankrupt treasury. Yet that is what the Marxists, be they the people behind Hacked Off, who want only their version of a story told, the EU or the mad mullahs like Galloway, want.

So, we need to recover our education system, which Gove is currently doing well with, challenge Marxism everywhere it raises its head and bring it firmly into public focus. Ed Miliband is not a socialist, planning the best for the people of Britain, he is a communist as was his father. So forget Labour or their other branch, the Lib Dems (and other nilhistic nutcases like the BNP and EDL) and refuse to accept an invented history designed to promote division and undermine proper governance, freedom and justice.

Reject the Left's attempts to promote racism with the 'black' organisations and multiculturalism. The Commission for Racial Equality is a cover for ensuring you don't think of people of a different colour as just other people, rather than any attempt at equality. You achieve that by not noticing colour, not by intentionally highlighting differences.

It is a vast and complex area, but centres around communist lies, so that is what our real politicians should confront, openly and noisily.  Don't forget, the model of Far Right and Far Left is a misnomer too. Both are extremes all right, but two sides of the same, authoritarian coin. Only the conservative, middle of the road approach works for the people, not the elites. So don't let them tell you their lies, their 'narrative' but think for yourself, observe and debate. You won't be right on everything, but Marxists will be wrong all the time.

Water Water Everywhere

A major scare report has popped up with lovely dramatic pictures of cities under water, due to rising sea levels, due to Climate Change. I wonder these people don't run around the streets, clutching their heads screaming, 'We're all gonna die, we're all gonna die'.

Anyway, it is a report by 'experts' apparently so we can be fairly comfortable ignoring it. Amusing is it not, that we are implored by 'scientists' to stop believing in God because it is so implausible, but then they tell us they believe in Global Warming (caused by Man). Of course, to the activists who run this scam it is important that it is Man made so a) we feel guilty, b) we must atone c) they can claim we can do something about it and d) they can impose capitalism destroying economic measures to achieve their real goal.

Imagine if we still lived in days when scientists discovered something and said, 'we think the earth is heating up and we think it is due to solar activity. If this is right it could lead to all sorts of problems and we cannot do anything about it'. Or maybe it will just be a bit of heating and everyone will feel a bit better, more crops will grow and it will be really quite nice. That would be science and more than that, science that served the people.

How would that serve the Marxists? In what way does that help destroy capitalism? When you are proposing a system of control (they would say government) that is known not to work, over a system that has worked very well indeed, you cannot do it through debate. (Otherwise you wouldn't need to demonise a successful politician and her policies, for instance).

It is customary in discussing revolution to see the enemy as a king or evil military ruler and this is certainly what the Left promote as a vision. But the enemy of the Left today is the people, for they have power to a large extent in a democracy and have resolutely rejected, repeatedly the ideas and ideals of Marxism. So the riots in Britain, exclusively the domain of the Left (to the extent that it was Left led police who were instructed to attack the peaceful countryside marchers), are aimed at the common people.

They terrorise the local population and destroy the property of innocent businesses, at random. The images on the television spreading the fear to communities fearful that it may visit them.

Now, these self appointed fund-suckers, these leeches on society may feel that their climate crap is a harmless bit of cant, that keeps them in work and they don't mean any harm, but they are doing the work of the Marxists. Doubtless some are with the cause but many I would guess are just useful idiots.

Strathclyde Fire And Rescue

Much of the destruction of the fibre and strength of this country has been brought about, quite deliberately by people who have pushed what would be recognised as ideas of the political Left. These people, seeing that Marxism was ignored by many and rejected by most of the populations in the West, decided on another tactic. No longer would their agitation cause the masses, who were desperate for such leadership the Marxists imagined, to rise up, but instead they would join the Establishment.

By becoming teachers they could infect children's minds, always the most vulnerable, with their unaccepted ideas. Then these people would go on to run teacher training institutions to ensure all teaching became of the Left and to run Universities, all the better to catch the idealist but immature students, so willing to become activists. Judges were corrupted and little by little all official thinking, of any stripe accepted many of the basic principles espoused by Marxists.

This is why there is so little difference between politicians today, why the justice system is skewed to favour criminals (it helps to undermine the capitalist system) and so on and so forth. It brought about the virus that is Political Correctness and its pronouncement of the things you 'cannot say', to affect basic thinking and create thought crimes.

Naturally, the corollary of this is the idiotic ideas pursued by our 'authorities' and the lack of courage of our essential services, from police to Army. This has all been apparent and we see many manifestations of its evil affects, but seldom in sharp focus. Today we have news of Strathclyde Fire And Rescue Sevice. Seldom can the people of a region and the Brigades own rank and file have been so poorly served.

We read that a woman fell down a hole and broke her sternum and several ribs, which also caused a punctured lung. Trapped, she was partly immersed in water and cold. It was two hours before her daughter found her and called for help, so the situation was already serious. The Fire Brigade (we shall call them thus, in honour of their noble tradition, rather than recognising their new, trendy titling that is staggeringly inaccurate, in referring to it as a 'service') naturally arrived promptly.

An ordinary fireman was lowered on a rope to see what the situation was below. Enter onto the scene media relations officer Paul Stewart, who arrives just as a paramedic prepares to be lowered down to assist the woman, considering her situation 'time critical'. Stewart becomes aware that he is the most senior officer present and stops all activity, ruling that it is too dangerous according to the 'Fire Services' policies.

Here we have that sharp focus on Left ideology that is often lacking. Stewart has no appreciation of the situation, no care for the suffering, nor in fact the life of the accident victim, he is overwhelmingly concerned with the set of rules that govern his life. There must be no discussion or dissent, there is nothing but the rules to guide us here, he is saying. It is the same mindset that made him 'notice' he was the senior officer.

Not only did another senior officer with the same 'I'm with stupid' badge, back up the initial on the scene idiot, Stewart, but when the woman subsequently died the 'Service' decided it could find no fault with itself and no apology was forthcoming. Indeed, they described the operation as successful as they did actually get the woman out. Dead, but out. She had been there for six hours after the Brigade arrived. A coroner has described her initial injuries as 'survivable'.

Despite his direct responsibility for these life threatening but survivable injuries become life ending, Paul Stewart arrogantly spent his time at the inquest in self-justification, his lack of concern for the victim and her family continuing. His belief was, he assured the court, that there was not a 'time issue' in the rescue. This was something he doubtless 'believed' because he chose to ignore the paramedic as being of no value in the 'rescue'.

The belief of our 'leaders' in Global Warming and the economic destruction they are prepared to enact to 'combat' it, the insults to settled, two parent heterosexual families, the lack of action by senior police officers in the London riots and this event in Strathclyde are all of a piece. Usually the blame is lost in the amorphous mass of actions and reasons bandied about, but here the simple straightforward stupidity of left-liberal ideology is clear. It is designed to undermine our society, to ultimately destroy capitalism, which the people failed to desire despite agitation by Marxist activists, so it must now be forced.

That it kills people is just a part of the revolution, surely you can understand the necessity? Marx preached a lot of tosh about politics whilst requiring others to fund his extravagant lifestyle, so why should his followers not try to gain in the form of senior positions, with large salaries from what they seek to destroy? They are stupid, after all.