WHO?

Well, I suppose if someone was going to tell the truth about the emperor and his unclothed state, it was going to be Trump

The World Health Organisation is a United Nations body and like the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and the United Nations itself, it is simply a corrupt non-entity.

In the current Covid 19 crisis they are merely talking and trying to tell you just how important they are. But actually, the boss owes his position to the backing of China, who insisted he be given the role and boy, is he happy to do whatever is necessary to repay the debt.

This pompous carbuncle Ghebreyesus, has colluded with the Chinese authorities to hide and lie about the coronavirus, despite any worldwide consequences. Just as the UN is basically a talking shop of no importance for First World countries, but an excellent cover for despots and dictators.

Again, the IPCC is another make-work project to energise anti-capitalist agendas. Interestingly, the whole Climate Change scam is based entirely on computer modelling (which to be on the safe side, is predicated to find climate change), just like the modelling that terrorised our government into closing down our economy.

In this instance, with no substantive information about the virus being available, a model by Neil Ferguson at Imperial College, said 500,000 would die unless the government did what he said. He was also part of the team that decided in 2001, we should slaughter 6 million animals to end a foot and mouth outbreak, against the prevailing worldwide advice on dealing with outbreaks.

This led to the British Prime Minister and those acting on his behalf, including the police to break the law of the time. (Tony Blair subsequently introduced a new law, making his actions legal and that was also retrospective!)

The needless slaughter of healthy animals, not only showed no understanding of animal disease, but additionally led to huge financial loss and upheaval in UK farming. This kind of disruption seems to be a desired dramatic outcome of a Ferguson projection, as if it is a goal.

Tony Blair gave him an OBE.

A lockdown, such as that which this strange individual insisted was the required action, does absolutely nothing in relation to the disease, except hide from it. This protects the NHS from being swamped of course, which makes sense to buy time to increase capacity. But what did Ferguson suggest from there? It seems, stay in lockdown forever. Pray. And, oh yeah, keep paying his salary.

Naturally, the Western media has gone into overdrive about how ridiculous it is to turn your back on the leading international health organisation leading the way on coronavirus. There is no evidence to support this assertion, but it's what WHO is supposed to do so, well it must be doing it (big government never does anything wrong in the minds of the Left media - look at Soviet Russia and China, Venezuela and North Korea).

But then PHE, a kind of mini-me WHO is supposed to protect the UK from things exactly like coronavirus, but working for a living doesn't seem to have occurred to them. Have you ever seen Yvonne Doyle actually answer a question?

Wouldn't it be lovely if our leaders acted decisively and cut all funding to the WHO, sacked the leadership at PHE and told Neil Ferguson to go and clean toilets.

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!)

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.

Awards For Tony Blair

It is nice that Poland think that they should recognise they efforts Tony Blair went to, at direct cost to the people of his own country to give Poles and in fact anyone from pretty much anywhere, an opportunity to take money out of the UK and help support the Polish (or some other) economy. This of course, was in addition to the increasing funds he agreed to give them via the EU.

Naturally, a number of wealthy individuals and financial institutions decided to give more direct and discreet thanks for all he did for them, often ignoring or changing British laws and regulations, to allow them to gain advantage.

And perhaps, negative things could offer an award? Although Clinton can claim to have set the ball rolling for a massive banking crisis, Blair did his part and with his economically ignorant Chancellor did an unbelievably good job of wrecking the economy. Not for him any need to co-opt the power of the Unions to destroy the country, as previous Labour administrations had to.

It would be difficult to decide though, what the award should be called? The Most Stupid Politician? The Worst Prime Minister? The Politician Most Able To Keep Morals Out Of His Every Decision? The options go on and on.

And then you need to consider the wise adage that you should know a man by the friends he keeps; in the past John Prescott, Peter Mandelson, Alistair Campbell, Gordon Brown and now, tyrants and despots the world over.

We do also, still need to know who it was that killed, or ordered the killing of Dr. David Kelly.

Just How Bad Is Tony Blair?

I was thinking the other day about how people would see Tony Blair in future times. It seemed to me he was akin to Saddam Hussein, Gaddafi, Hitler and Stalin in the way he thinks. But I quickly corrected myself that he was not that extreme. But isn't he? Or was he just not quite so successful as some, in his destructive mania? He gets on so well with so many tyrants around the world and actively seeks their company (and money).

Of course, what separates the above from Blair you may think is their attitude to killing and this is where I came up against a hard wall. Blair sent our forces to war on a whim of his own, lying to parliament and the country to gain a chance of international glory. He wanted the fame that could be bought with their lives.

His total indifference to the deaths caused by his games, was demonstrated quite clearly by his refusal to meet any of the returning bodies of soldiers who died doing his bidding. The pointlessness was shown by the complete lack of a strategy in Iraq, his personal carelessness by the constant promises of 'whatever the troops need' that were then reneged on.

But it wasn't just this gambit that showed how different he is. Many think that he is directly responsible for the murder of Dr David Kelly, the man who could have seriously embarrassed him over Iraq (though nothing more than embarrassment). When you ask 'who benefits' from his murder, then the list is quite small, probably just one or two names.

But there is no proof, no matter what circumstances might suggest. What we do know is the supreme efforts made to ensure that a whitewash of an enquiry ensued. Indeed a blatantly obvious whitewash, such was the arrogance of the regime at the time. Except for one moment. When the murder occurred (it has been established beyond doubt that it couldn't have been the suicide suggested by Hutton), Blair was flying back from Japan. I have never seen him looking so shocked and drawn as when he was leaving that aircraft on his return.

I am sure it took quite a bit of reassurance from those around him, that their loud protestations to distract attention, as they had done from the outset when the Gilligan accusations broke, would be successful. Why would a Prime Minister take such a risk with a cover up, unless it was of great importance? In his otherwise excellent book, 'The Strange Death of David Kelly', the Lib Dem MP Norman Baker, cops out at the end, veering away from his own evidence and suggests Iraqi's killed him. Had they done so, surely Blair would have pursued them relentlessly, supporting as it would, his war.

I think we are probably lucky that Blair didn't try to turn Britain totally into a totalitarian state, his personal fiefdom, though he set many of the structures in place to achieve it. Maybe he did lack the resolve, the absolute killer instinct to carry it through or maybe his wife's love of money demanded he move in other directions. Who can know. But he represents a truly low point for Britain, for which we are still, literally paying.

Wow! Cherie Blair A Victim!

The snake oil salesman, Tony Blair is continuing to use the Leveson 'inquiry' to tout some propagandised version of his life. Now we learn the nasty papers hounded his wife and that the legal pair thought about bring suits against the papers on many occasions. Yeah right.

I don't know what the Leveson inquiry is supposed to be for, but it certainly shouldn't give little gangsters like Blair a platform. This man destroyed the moral fibre of Britain, its standing in the world and its integirty. He also destroyed the economy and left the country less fair, less equal, with fewer opportunities and under a raft of oppressive laws. He is the most venal, the most disgusting example of a human being we have ever let be a Prime Minister of this country.

And he thinks the papers were unkind! If only the people in power had a little spine, we could deal with this runt of the litter in the way that should have happened, whilst he was still in office.

Binge Drinking

Lord help us, Cameron is on a crusade. He has decided to cure binge drinking which is, apparently, caused by alcohol being too cheap. Naturally, anyone with enough money gets drunk, on the streets all the time, including David Cameron. Er, hold on, no that's not right. As being able to afford booze isn't the issue, perhaps it is just the access the proles have that is the problem. So, if we price them out of the 'market' binge drinking will stop.

Admittedly, cretins do form the overwhelming bulk of the binge drinkers who cause trouble, but some have respectable jobs and just join in the culture of drinking to excess. And that is what it is, a culture. A culture that has its roots in the late Nineties era of no personal responsibility, but immense personal ego. An age that demanded 'respek' without bothering to do anything to earn it.

Key examples of immorality were daily on display with MP's caught in the (sexual) act with consenting, though previously unknown 'friends', with the Prime Minister lying incessantly, but always with that knowing smirk that said, 'I know you know I'm lying, but I really, y'know' don't care'. His wife of course, insisted on public recognition of some elevated status she had awarded herself, with her hand out for freebies at every turn. And all the rest, from the half wit Straw to the downright weaselly Mandelson.

For the man and girl in the street, this meant that criticism was banned, any expectation of a standard of behaviour, maybe something that would earn respect, was abandoned in a hedonistic wave of self-impressed boorishness. The ultimate expression of women's lib; the right of young girls to flash their bits in a laddish manner. (Of course, 'women's liberation' was a desirable aim, hijacked by the left and taken to ridiculous extremes, simply to undermine Western society and culture).

You want to cure binge drinking David? Well, you need to start by enforcing the laws we already have, which will require high standards of leadership from you and a strong arm on the inept senior police officers to stop sucking twizzle sticks and do their job. The courts need to feel that a terrified old lady sitting in her own house, is someone deserving protection from careless louts and a judge is the person to do it.

Clubs and trendy bars should be warned about serving drunk people and that should be acted upon and politicians should constantly refer to binge drinkers as idiots, which has the bonus of actually being accurate. Why should some poor pensioner, struggling to get by, be denied the odd bottle of beer because some detached moron in No10 thinks she is a binge drinker.

It's The Stupid Economy

If you read the papers (in paper or online) you get bombarded with all sorts of figures about the economy. Slight recovery, manufacturing doing better than expected, double-dip recession on the way, euro going to pot. Are we slowly but steadily getting out of the mess Labour left (with a generous hand from their friends, the bankers), just as The Little Engine That Could? Or are we mired in a self feeding depression from which the sides are too steep?

Well, as even 'Eyebrows' Darling said when he was financial liar in chief after Brown (apparently) gave it up, it is the private sector that is to drag us out of the recession and grow the economy back to strength. Not the public sector then? The sector that absorbed most of the extra money Labour borrowed to give Britain an imaginary 'good time'. No, because the public sector is a drain on an economy, not a useful part.

Some jobs have to be done centrally, by this 'public sector' such as policing, emptying the bins, doctors; you can identify which because the authorities will be loudly shouting about them, as they cut them back. To 'save money.' The jobs you won't hear being cut back will be the drugs outreach workers and the lesbian and gay carnival organisers and the white line monitors and translation services. Local and national bodies will not stop refurbishing their offices or building new ones. Or awarding their 'executives' pay rises.

Then there are the Quango's. Quasi Autonomous Non Governmental Organisations. Unfortunately a bad idea from the Thatcher years, to distance government from unpalatable decisions. If the Quango was responsible for implementing some necessary but much disliked service, then the Ministers could hold up their hands and say 'nothing to do with us'. Except, who gave the Quango the power and who pays for and backs those decisions? Oh, yes.

Quangos like Ofgem to watch energy companies and the Independent Police Complaints Commission are useful bodies of course, if they would actually do their job, which currently they are not. But do you realise that we pay for a Quango called the Potato Council? Do you buy potatoes as a result of their wise words? Or ever looked at their website? What possible reason could there be for a potato council?

No, councils and central government don't need to 'cut back on services', they need to stop wasting money. They need to stop doing things we don't need them to do. Labour may have opened the UK's borders and ignored immigration both illegal and otherwise, but the influx of people who cannot speak English is a real issue. Government services, desperate to spend as much taxpayers money as possible (these people in the main of course are kindred spirits, as they are a drain on society too), employ armies of translators, thus alleviating any need on the part of these 'guests', to learn the language of the country they have chosen to descend on.

If you could not get access to services without knowing the language, or paying for translation yourself, then guess what. Most wouldn't come (particularly if the only outcome of the first -translated- conversations is to establish what level of benefits they will receive). That is a not unreasonable expectation.

And there you have it. An out of control, over-mighty government, bequeathed with a massive debt by the authoritarian regime of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, the Laurel and Hardy of politics. It has left us with empty coffers but plenty of people still demanding, with none of them contributing. To grow an economy you need to understand an economy and you have to want to serve the nation and its people, not just inherit the style and swagger of the snake oil salesman.

Cut the waste, maintain the services the people want and pay for. Cut taxes so people can help industry grow by buying its products and get tough on parasites. A major underlying reason we had rioting recently was probably because, deep down, these people realise they may be in the last chance saloon. That their friend and mentor, Tony has gone and the replacement may not always be inclined to be as stupid.

Come Together

Where to start? So many things are happening at once. Let's start with the weather. Cold again with snow falling further North and predicted here soon. Then the EU and its self inflicted wounds. Here we have the crisis that they were waiting for and it isn't going according to plan as you see the EU has always used beneficial crises to grab more power. And this one is out of control. Instead of it making people beg the Eurocrats to unite Europe to save it (that is how their little fetishistic dreams go) the people are clamouring for less. Indeed the Daily Express is campaigning for us to leave. What a simply wonderful idea and so surprising that it needs a time of extreme events to make the most appropriate and apparent of decisions come to mind. Good. To quote the old fire safety slogan in another context, get out, stay out and get the Brigade out. Only in this case it means the Brigade of Guards not the fire brigade.

In another sphere the pathetic, Britain hating socialists seem on the wane with their useful idiots rioting on the streets and the politicians at each others throats because their cosy nest has been tipped up. They have undermined and ruined our education system, our healthcare, our police and Armed Services, with mindless rubbish that leaves them incapable and talking bollards.

Then of course the Climate lobby is falling apart as more and more people start to think about the subject, research it and realise, 'what a crock'. As the warmists have always said, it is just about money but despite their protests it is the lying climate change mob, led by the likes of the WWF and Al Gore who have seen financial gain in spinning this scam.

Also, there is a growing groundswell against the continued application of political correctness in our bureaucracies. There are more interventions in everyday life than ever before, more forms to fill in, more tax and tax investigation (well, of the little people. HMRC employ a boss specifically to ensure big boys don't have to pay. Except for little 'holidays' and such). The police can't deal with crime so enforce ridiculous petty defaults like speeding. That is not actually speeding and causing a danger, but speeding as in exceeding some arbitrary limit set for no particular reason. People are fed up with being let down by our 'services' and being patronised with self-serving, self-congratulatory letters, not answering our complaints but excusing their own behaviour. In short people have become fed up with the 'Me' generation of Tony Blair. This culture is the one where people don't help each other, where getting 'trashed' on a night out and assaulting others is 'acceptable', where we come to the point where everyone owes us respect but we don't have to give it to others. Clearly such an empty culture (as was all of New Labour) could never work and would inevitably self destruct.

As would, obviously, that lazy, corrupt and inept construct, the EU.

All we need now is some decent leadership and the other inevitability can be avoided. That is the one where, if the politicians carry on regardless, believing it to be their right, the decent people will rise up and remove their power.