There seems to be a genuine groundswell of opinion that the UK could not survive outside the EU. This is only partly based on the endless stream of fantasy and lies issuing from the Prime Minister and cronies, but more from the ingrained 'feeling' for how things need to be, in the mind of the ordinary member of the public.
The Marxists will be pleased that the effort over decades to influence and basically destroy fundamental education in the UK has been such a success. The first thought is for big government, government that tells us what to do in any and every situation.
World government in fact, which would mean an end to war and everyone just getting along. Which is very much the sixth-form common room level of understanding that used to end when faced with reality (and responsibility). Now, it can continue even extending to infantile views being acceptable.
When you are at school you are taught, just given information (I'm referring to 'old school' when education, not left ideology was on the agenda). But, as someone once said to me, at university you learn how to learn. I'm sure we can all agree that the vast majority of graduates these days leave you in no doubt that this is no longer true.
What an excellent society, so easy to control. So far from a society where government just doing the jobs required of it and no more, leaves the individual alone to live life based on knowledge and experience gained and freely given.
Freely? Do I mean free university education? Yes, very probably, that would be a good use of government effort, as long as the free education was for academic subjects not for entertainment. If you want to 'study' Walt Disney films or Manchester United, then let institutions offer the courses at full market rates.
And so to the headline of this post. Lies. It is essential that lies are allowed in politics if we are to have an EU style government. Think tractor production statistics and you are on the right path.
It amuses me that people who otherwise 'like' the EU (and probably in their minds that means in a Facebook kinda way), get a little annoyed about immigration and the obvious inability of our government (in Westminster) to control our borders. But that is only the current issue. Under the EU, when the ultimate goal of a superstate with a single currency (two things Cameron says Britain will never join!) is achieved, we won't be controlling anything.
So, overrun with immigrants today, destroyed financially tomorrow? It absolutely beggars belief that anyone could vote for such a pointless, useless, wasteful irrelevance, but they do! The inability to use simple reasoning really is beyond a lot of people. Research something? Understand a subject? Find stuff out? Are you mad, they say.
I'll say it again, because it really is so true (and amongst a sea of lies); the only people who could vote for the EU are those financially connected to it or those who don't understand.
Tuesday, 31 May 2016
Monday, 23 May 2016
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.
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.
Tuesday, 15 March 2016
Obama - Comedian Or Golfer?
President Barack Obama of the United States of America is an interesting sort. I get that many black people felt that electing a black person to the office of President would be a great idea. Very symbolic, possibly even showing it to 'the Man'. Proof that America is moving on etc etc.
Some of this is understandable and some deeply offensive to the independent minds of black people, but really Obama? You had to be voting for the skin, because you couldn't possibly want the man? And don't bother with the Democrat or Republican thing, he aint no politician.
No, achievement wise the choice is between comedian or golfer. He does a lot of both. Presidenting gets in the way a bit but you know, he is up for the sponsors getting a bit of his time. So the odd bit on lectern leaning, with careful pauses and looks to the side is OK with him. Earnest and sincere, even without the slightest idea. Man for the people.
Did he study Blair, the consummate professional in this arena or is he a natural? No idea, but he does seem an empty vessel so it could be natural. And now he is seeking to stamp his legacy mark. He could publish a book. It would have quite a lot of pages, all blank that you could draw or colour on.
He thinks he has waged war on Global Warming, but that is just tilting at windmills. No, if someone named a golf tournament after him, he could be smug and it would accurately reflect his time in office.
To racialists everywhere I say, America has had a black President and he is an idiot. But this is because he is an idiot, not because he is black. Stupidity is colour blind.
Some of this is understandable and some deeply offensive to the independent minds of black people, but really Obama? You had to be voting for the skin, because you couldn't possibly want the man? And don't bother with the Democrat or Republican thing, he aint no politician.
No, achievement wise the choice is between comedian or golfer. He does a lot of both. Presidenting gets in the way a bit but you know, he is up for the sponsors getting a bit of his time. So the odd bit on lectern leaning, with careful pauses and looks to the side is OK with him. Earnest and sincere, even without the slightest idea. Man for the people.
Did he study Blair, the consummate professional in this arena or is he a natural? No idea, but he does seem an empty vessel so it could be natural. And now he is seeking to stamp his legacy mark. He could publish a book. It would have quite a lot of pages, all blank that you could draw or colour on.
He thinks he has waged war on Global Warming, but that is just tilting at windmills. No, if someone named a golf tournament after him, he could be smug and it would accurately reflect his time in office.
To racialists everywhere I say, America has had a black President and he is an idiot. But this is because he is an idiot, not because he is black. Stupidity is colour blind.
Starburst
Starburst Original says the bag. No it isn't, they were originally Opal Fruits, but if they mean original flavours, well OK. I'll agree with that. What I want to know though is, who the hell is responsible for wrapping these fruit chews?
It is nigh on impossible to just unwrap and pop one in. It takes concerted effort to break the bond the paper has with itself. Sort it out. What is the matter with people?
It is nigh on impossible to just unwrap and pop one in. It takes concerted effort to break the bond the paper has with itself. Sort it out. What is the matter with people?
Monday, 14 March 2016
The EU Debate
We are told there is great debate over the EU. I doubt that. Most people in my experience don't understand very much about the EU and assume it is just more politicians, pretty much like we have here.
You can see this mindset with Britons on holiday. They not only want fish and chips and Watney's Red Barrel wherever they go, but also come unstuck with laws they didn't know existed. Some people would say this is precisely because we don't involve ourselves in Europe, don't pay attention to other cultures.
To which I answer, fish and chips is from Jewish immigrants, tea, curry and the Chinese takeaway.
No, our problem is that the EU never gets debated and deliberately so. I would guess you think it was invented after WW2 to stop European wars, which is certainly something that is parroted out these days. That it is a group of countries working together for mutual benefit and to be a real player in a globalized world.
Well, it was invented in the 1920's and is basically aimed at forming a single country called Europe with no nation states. It would have a single, unelected government of bureaucrats with control over its armed forces, tax, immigration and well, everything. It was realised from the outset that the people of Europe would never support such an idea, or allow it, so it had to be developed in secret. Hence the absence of debate.
'Ever closer Union', the abiding tenet of the organisation, means the end goal is a single superstate. (Making a farce of Scottish 'independence'; neither 'Scotland' nor independence is planned for them).
Cameron of course says that he will have nothing to do with such an idea, whilst at the same time clinging to a club with that motto. But to take him at his word, he also says we don't want to be part of the Euro, we don't want the City to lose its influence and we are happy to part of an outer group of countries, but within the EU.
So basically we want to remain the United Kingdom, but with trade and treaty agreements with 'Europe'. Sounds a fantastic idea, it just needs us to formally leave the EU.
Of course, this club that is designed for politicians to exercise power and has no actual utility, rather enjoys the money we give it and it keeps us neutered and not able to step in and save them from themselves, as we have done so many times before. In short, an empire without having to have a war and without Britain 'standing alone' to fight tyranny.
And as for globalisation, most regulation comes from the International level, down to the EU. So as a proper sovereign nation we could sit at those tables rather than have the EU represent us and get the best deal for France/Germany. A participant or 1/28th participant?
The UK politicians squealing for us to stay in and issuing scare stories and naked lies to support their 'case' (because they don't have one) are more likely terrified that, were we to leave, they would actually have to work for a living. You know, turn up in parliament, understand issues, make real laws. And be accountable. So you can understand their terror.
You can see this mindset with Britons on holiday. They not only want fish and chips and Watney's Red Barrel wherever they go, but also come unstuck with laws they didn't know existed. Some people would say this is precisely because we don't involve ourselves in Europe, don't pay attention to other cultures.
To which I answer, fish and chips is from Jewish immigrants, tea, curry and the Chinese takeaway.
No, our problem is that the EU never gets debated and deliberately so. I would guess you think it was invented after WW2 to stop European wars, which is certainly something that is parroted out these days. That it is a group of countries working together for mutual benefit and to be a real player in a globalized world.
Well, it was invented in the 1920's and is basically aimed at forming a single country called Europe with no nation states. It would have a single, unelected government of bureaucrats with control over its armed forces, tax, immigration and well, everything. It was realised from the outset that the people of Europe would never support such an idea, or allow it, so it had to be developed in secret. Hence the absence of debate.
'Ever closer Union', the abiding tenet of the organisation, means the end goal is a single superstate. (Making a farce of Scottish 'independence'; neither 'Scotland' nor independence is planned for them).
Cameron of course says that he will have nothing to do with such an idea, whilst at the same time clinging to a club with that motto. But to take him at his word, he also says we don't want to be part of the Euro, we don't want the City to lose its influence and we are happy to part of an outer group of countries, but within the EU.
So basically we want to remain the United Kingdom, but with trade and treaty agreements with 'Europe'. Sounds a fantastic idea, it just needs us to formally leave the EU.
Of course, this club that is designed for politicians to exercise power and has no actual utility, rather enjoys the money we give it and it keeps us neutered and not able to step in and save them from themselves, as we have done so many times before. In short, an empire without having to have a war and without Britain 'standing alone' to fight tyranny.
And as for globalisation, most regulation comes from the International level, down to the EU. So as a proper sovereign nation we could sit at those tables rather than have the EU represent us and get the best deal for France/Germany. A participant or 1/28th participant?
The UK politicians squealing for us to stay in and issuing scare stories and naked lies to support their 'case' (because they don't have one) are more likely terrified that, were we to leave, they would actually have to work for a living. You know, turn up in parliament, understand issues, make real laws. And be accountable. So you can understand their terror.
EU: In Or Out?
Notable person, Jeremy Clarkson has written in his Sunday Times column that he thinks we should stay in the EU. Clarkson is someone who generally challenges orthodoxies and infuriates those who think they are the only people allowed opinions.
He always struck me as someone it would be great to discuss the world, the universe and everything with, over a meal. Most convivial I would have thought. I know he is a bit of a simpleton where the EU is concerned, as previously he said we should join the Euro because he hates changing money to travel. Solid.
But even so, his juvenile reasoning on Sunday as to why Britain should stay in the EU was a surprise. He likes Europe he says, and when there, feels European. Feels he fits in more than in America, where they at least speak a version of English. And has strong links with the UK both in legal infrastructure terms and historically.
Yes, Europe is the cradle of civilisation and has an immense amount to commend it in art and architecture. Then of course, the wealthy Clarkson enjoys the food and wine it produces and the quality of restaurants.
And then there is modern European politics. The French revolution, Napoleon, the 1848 revolutions, the Franco-Prussian war, the bombast of Bismarck, De Gaulle and his plan to take over Britain when he and his countrymen surrendered their own country as soon as possible, French Communists, Mussolini, Italian Communists, Hitler. The First World War, the Second World War and Jean Monnet.
Truly 'the Europeans', of which we clearly are not and have never been a part, do not see themselves as European and are very keen on fighting each other. Particularly the French and Germans. But Clarkson thinks these two, specifically, run a super club that we should be part of. Sure he recognises that it isn't democratic, is corrupt and incompetent at every level, but that he says is why we should stay in.
So we can cure these ills from within. Just like Cameron did when he asked for some minor changes and was told no. (Although he seems to be suggesting that no means yes). There is a reason, Clarkson, that when Blenheim and Wellington and numerous others, helped sort out the latest bout of bickering in Europe, they went back home and left them to it.
We didn't take over territory in Europe (well, beyond Gibraltar I suppose) precisely because we are not like them and don't want to be. It is said that in Italy the bureaucracy is appalling and to get anything done it can only be speeded up by bribing the corrupt officials. And in Britain the bureaucracy is appalling and you can't get anything done, because the officials aren't corrupt!
The rule of law here generally works for and is designed to work for, the people. Europe consists of states where the law keeps the people in check.
Regarding the EU itself, it is a Marxist construct that has no democratic core and is designed to be the fun house of an elite, paid for by the masses, a power trip for the careless class. Clarkson thinks we could make it a United States, but it is designed to be a Soviet Union. The naivety in believing it could be changed from within is immense and no more realistic than thinking you could change it standing on the moon.
The United States of America absorbed all kinds of people, of many nations, but in building their life in this new country they became Americans first, with a shared belief in country. Some time later they adopted a single currency. The EU has no demos and forced an inappropriate single currency on its members, the result of which we are seeing now.
There is a continent called Europe but no country called Europe. The nation states have noble histories with much to be proud of (though for France and Germany, much to be ashamed of). They don't need an all-powerful elite to end their histories.
He always struck me as someone it would be great to discuss the world, the universe and everything with, over a meal. Most convivial I would have thought. I know he is a bit of a simpleton where the EU is concerned, as previously he said we should join the Euro because he hates changing money to travel. Solid.
But even so, his juvenile reasoning on Sunday as to why Britain should stay in the EU was a surprise. He likes Europe he says, and when there, feels European. Feels he fits in more than in America, where they at least speak a version of English. And has strong links with the UK both in legal infrastructure terms and historically.
Yes, Europe is the cradle of civilisation and has an immense amount to commend it in art and architecture. Then of course, the wealthy Clarkson enjoys the food and wine it produces and the quality of restaurants.
And then there is modern European politics. The French revolution, Napoleon, the 1848 revolutions, the Franco-Prussian war, the bombast of Bismarck, De Gaulle and his plan to take over Britain when he and his countrymen surrendered their own country as soon as possible, French Communists, Mussolini, Italian Communists, Hitler. The First World War, the Second World War and Jean Monnet.
Truly 'the Europeans', of which we clearly are not and have never been a part, do not see themselves as European and are very keen on fighting each other. Particularly the French and Germans. But Clarkson thinks these two, specifically, run a super club that we should be part of. Sure he recognises that it isn't democratic, is corrupt and incompetent at every level, but that he says is why we should stay in.
So we can cure these ills from within. Just like Cameron did when he asked for some minor changes and was told no. (Although he seems to be suggesting that no means yes). There is a reason, Clarkson, that when Blenheim and Wellington and numerous others, helped sort out the latest bout of bickering in Europe, they went back home and left them to it.
We didn't take over territory in Europe (well, beyond Gibraltar I suppose) precisely because we are not like them and don't want to be. It is said that in Italy the bureaucracy is appalling and to get anything done it can only be speeded up by bribing the corrupt officials. And in Britain the bureaucracy is appalling and you can't get anything done, because the officials aren't corrupt!
The rule of law here generally works for and is designed to work for, the people. Europe consists of states where the law keeps the people in check.
Regarding the EU itself, it is a Marxist construct that has no democratic core and is designed to be the fun house of an elite, paid for by the masses, a power trip for the careless class. Clarkson thinks we could make it a United States, but it is designed to be a Soviet Union. The naivety in believing it could be changed from within is immense and no more realistic than thinking you could change it standing on the moon.
The United States of America absorbed all kinds of people, of many nations, but in building their life in this new country they became Americans first, with a shared belief in country. Some time later they adopted a single currency. The EU has no demos and forced an inappropriate single currency on its members, the result of which we are seeing now.
There is a continent called Europe but no country called Europe. The nation states have noble histories with much to be proud of (though for France and Germany, much to be ashamed of). They don't need an all-powerful elite to end their histories.
Saturday, 1 August 2015
Jamie's Italian Visit
To respond to an invite from Younger Boy and his pregnant wife for a meal, mainly in celebration of his mother's birthday. I get to go along as a passenger! Jamie's Italian was the chosen venue; not going out much, we have no experience of this establishment and the youngsters not much either I think.
Sitting outside, waiting to meet up with our hosts the overriding impression, through the full length windows was of a canteen. People sitting in the window would have relied on the forebearance and goodwill of those behind, to rise. Younger boy arrives and we enter, waiting 5 minutes or so for front of house to return to their station. This allowed a broader view into the room and confirmed that, unless you removed the bar and constricted the kitchen space, you couldn't fit another chair in.
The decor semi-industrial with cable trays and air conditioning ducting visible in the naked ceiling. Shown to our fixed table and banquettes, we decided who goes where. Hint to the establishment; the success of fixed bench seating relies on the smooth surface of the seating making a glide across easy. Making the seat ribbed is no help at all. After an inelegant scramble we were in.
Ambience gets 6/10. It was a little crowded (the place was very busy) but we were comfortable at the side of the room amd I quite liked the lighting. The piped music added nothing, but the staff seemed to like it.
Ah yes, the staff. Now I like the ebullient, matey, cheeky-chap character that is Jamie Oliver on the telly. I am less sure about a waitress arriving with bon mots and a level 7 on the puppy excitement scale. A pleasant, professional manner would seem appropriate and if the clients bounce back with some amusing repartee, which is then responded to with wit and charm, would be the sign of an excellent, on the ball employee of a competent and thoughtful establishment. Now look, before this seems like a massive negative, let me give you the staff score now: 10/10.
The service was efficient and attentive, the staff constantly busy. That the food delivery was slowish was due to the kitchen it would seem. We arrived at 7:30 and left at 10:20: we certainly were not hurried out.
The food. This is the primary reason for dining, admitting good company is also a major contributor, however, the restaurant cannot be responsible for that so cannot be criticised. Our company was the best, so we only need consider our choices of plate. Well I say plate, my excited boy related that he had had their famous 'plank' starter so ordered that for us. I wasn't intending on having a starter so was not concerned with the selection. This spread of meats and cheeses, basically, can be for two or more persons. The waitress suggested a two person plank would probably do as a starter for four, many found it so.
This was a good call on her part as, at best only three were likely to participate. It was elevated by the simple measure of three tins of Ragu from the store cupboard being placed on the table to rest the plank on, these presumably saving the kitchen the drag of having to make a tomato sauce themselves.
I love mozarella, but it came smeared with chilli or something, so I gave it a miss. The girls dominated the bread elements, but I did try a proferred nacho. These we were told were Jamie's version; deep fried ravioli of mozarella and aged pecorino, resting in their bowl in chilli jam. Quite why you would go to the trouble of deep frying something, only to deliver it soggy is beyond me, but I had no idea at the time what was in the parcel (the menu's had been taken so I couldn't check) either.
The chilli jam didn't enhance the whole either by moisture or taste, it made it quite unpleasant. Offered the tin of pork scratchings I went to pluck one, but instead got a tiny crust. Eating it, I got a nice crunch and then a lovely flood of toasted pork flavour. Then a bizarre oily, slimy after taste came on, so I didn't seek to investigate further by repeating the experience.
When the waitress got the impression we had finished with the starter she did comment on the amount remaining, as only the boy had really engaged in any way with the plank. Personally, I would be more surprised at it being ordered, not least at £10.50 per person.
For main course, the waitress launched into an explanation of the three specials available, breathlessly detailing every ingredient in such a torrent of tumbling words that none of us ordered one, I'd be amazed if anyone did. So it was from the menu. Younger boy had the Ultimate Burger, his pregnant wife the Summer Risotto, all of us forgetting Gorgonzola is a blue cheese, birthday girl had the Three Cheese Caramelle and I went for Jamie's Sausage Pappardelle, which got the circled fingers of approval from the waitress.
This is the description of this dish on the menu, that is inviting you to choose it; Ragù of slow-cooked fennel & free-range pork sausages with incredible Chianti, Parmesan & herby breadcrumbs. This is what I got; a pile of pasta, topped with baked Parmesan and resting in a red coloured water. On eating, I became aware that the 'sausages' were more 'minced pork'. I had wondered whether they would be whole or sliced and what spicing Italians did to make their sausages, but no, little pieces that because of the prevalance of crispy breadcrumbs may not have been present at all.
Certaim;y the complete absence of anything tasting of pork didn't help. And the slow-cooked ragu sauce was watery, red and tasted slightly of fennel. The baked mozarella on top was lovely. Biggest surprise, nay shock was the pasta. For an Italian restaurant to put a clump of thick, dense chewy pasta in front of a customer, who then struggles to deftly prise it apart, is not something easily understood.
We rounded off the meal with birthday girl trying to eat a portion of cheesecake that was reported OK, and the children sharing a plate of something that looked like a brownie with a dollop of cream, as the Chocolate praline Younger boy wanted wasn't available.
Food thus gets 4/10 and value for money has to be a resolute 1/10. It isn't terrible, but I don't know what would draw you in to eat there, even if you were oblivious of cost.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)