Dec 302017
 
 

The latest utterances from a so-called think tank called “The Institute for Global Change” blames Populism for the incorrect result of the Brexit referendum.  This needs to be challenged along with today’s poppycock spouted by Lord Adonis after his resignation as Chairman of the National Infrastructure Commission. Adonis said in his letter of resignation “Brexit is a populist and nationalist spasm worthy of Donald Trump” (full text of his letter here).

Blair agreed with Jeremy Corbyn then! See the full text extract from their 1983 manifesto at the foot of this post. An interesting read because it sounds just like today’s news!

This preposterously and egotistically named organisation, fronted by Tony Blair and funded by globalised multinationals (but try and find out who!) is a poorly camouflaged attempt attempt to make the call for a second referendum on EU membership seem reasonable.

You just have to follow this link for the Twitter response to his Christmas message on Twitter. The responses are enough to gladden the heart of any curmudgeon like me 😉

Lord Adonis, a Labour peer, was the last Blairite sympathiser to have remained anywhere near the seat of current political power and has chaired the National Infrastructure Commission since 2015. Both he and Blair are Remoaners but look how Blair’s views have changed since 1983 when he was a Labour leadership candidate.  Lord Adonis, who was transport secretary under Gordon Brown between 2009 and 2010, has chaired the National Infrastructure Commission since 2015. The commission produces a report in every Parliament advising the government on spending in areas such as transport connections and energy.

Lord Adonis sparked anger earlier this year when he compared Brexit to the appeasement of the Nazis in the 1930s, and has repeatedly called for last year’s referendum vote to be reversed.

Pope Blair on why he lied over the invasion of Iraq. A good Catholic convert from Anglicanism, just like Robert Mugabe…

The article appears so logical and is indeed very well researched, but fails to even consider the real reason for so-called populism, which is the proliferation of lying (sorry, of course I meant to say disingenuous), duplicitous self-interested scum-bags like Blair! The rise of the bland, but ‘clever’, career politician who never answers the question, who are trained to waste our time but who have at last succeeded in pissing off an entire generation of voters. We the people have nobody to vote for but we are all a bit too lazy to revolt, so we must take our share of blame. Any politician with integrity, balls and vision has either retired or cannot stomach what is now required to be today’s party political leader.

I hate almost everything about Tony Blair and just cannot understand why so many regard him as some sort of wise elder statesman. I have been unable to write about him for some years because the very sight of him just makes me feel sick. Most of us over the age of 40 will remember the first few weeks of his first term as PM and thinking “At last, a politician (see the glowing teeth of the young man to the left) with vision, integrity and the energy to change the status quo”.

How wrong we all were! The first clue as to his real nature, for me at least, was when I heard his smarmy utterance “I feel the hand of destiny on my shoulder (Diana’s death)” issuing from his loathsome face.

That realisation morphed into my disdain of everything he and his consumerist wife became and still are.

OK, back to his article on populism where the most important thing to know is who funds ‘think-tanks’. (You try to find out yourself!)

They were invented by a few clever, but conservative, strategists just before Margaret Thatcher first became Prime Minister. Their rise is probably the most significant event in recent British political history along with Special Advisers and the party whip system. I can heartily recommend Owen Jones’ book “The Establishment (and how they get way with it)”, in which he analyses the rise of the think tank in forensic detail. You won’t believe how they ever so cleverly changed public opinion.

‘A dissection of the profoundly and sickeningly corrupt state that is present-day Britain. He (Owen Jones) is a fine writer, and this is a truly necessary book’ Philip Pullman (author of His Dark Materials)

1983 Labour Party manifesto (extract)

It explains why we should have left years ago & demonstrates why we can’t trust Corbyn, and we all know we can’t trust Blair (I hope?)

This from 1983 is so reasonable and is fully supportive of Winston Churchill’s (Tory) and Clement Atlee’s (Labour) views in the 1950s despite Adonis and Blair saying otherwise.

Britain and the Common Market

Geography and history determine that Britain is part of Europe, and Labour wants to see Europe safe and prosperous. But the European Economic Community, which does not even include the whole of Western Europe, was never devised to suit us, and our experience as a member of it has made it more difficult for us to deal with our economic and industrial problems. It has sometimes weakened our ability to achieve the objectives of Labour’s international policy.

The next Labour government, committed to radical, socialist policies for reviving the British economy, is bound to find continued membership a most serious obstacle to the fulfilment of those policies. In particular the rules of the Treaty of Rome are bound to conflict with our strategy for economic growth and full employment, our proposals on industrial policy and for increasing trade, and our need to restore exchange controls and to regulate direct overseas investment. Moreover, by preventing us from buying food from the best sources of world supply, they would run counter to our plans to control prices and inflation.

For all these reasons, British withdrawal from the Community is the right policy for Britain – to be completed well within the lifetime of the parliament. That is our commitment. But we are also committed to bring about withdrawal in an amicable and orderly way, so that we do not prejudice employment or the prospect of increased political and economic co-operation with the whole of Europe.

We emphasise that our decision to bring about withdrawal in no sense represents any weakening of our commitment to internationalism and international co operation. We are not ‘withdrawing from Europe’. We are seeking to extricate ourselves from the Treaty of Rome and other Community treaties which place political burdens on Britain. Indeed, we believe our withdrawal will allow us to pursue a more dynamic and positive international policy – one which recognises the true political and geographical spread of international problems and interests. We will also seek agreement with other European governments – both in the EEC and outside – on a common strategy for economic expansion.

The process of withdrawal

On taking office we will open preliminary negotiations with the other EEC member states to establish a timetable for withdrawal; and we will publish the results of these negotiations in a White Paper. In addition, as soon as possible after the House assembles, we will introduce a Repeal Bill: first, in order to amend the 1972 European Communities Act, ending the powers of the Community in the UK; and second, to provide the necessary powers to repeal the 1972 Act, when the negotiations on withdrawal are completed.

Following the publication of the White Paper, we will begin the main negotiations on withdrawal. Later, when appropriate and in the same parliament, we will use our powers to repeal the 1972 Act and abrogate the Treaty of Accession – thus breaking all of our formal links with the Community. Britain will at this point withdraw from the Council of Ministers and from the European Parliament.

There will need to be a period of transition, to ensure a minimum of disruption – and to phase in any new agreements we might make with the Community. This will enable us to make all the necessary changes in our domestic legislation. Until these changes in UK law have taken place, the status quo as regards particular items of EEC legislation will remain. And this period will, of course, extend beyond the date when we cease, formally, to be members.

One gets a feeling of deja vu?

Toodleoo

Dec 012017
 
 

Your challenge, dear reader, is to guess which of these are fake news 😉 There will be prizes (but, see 2* below)

A radical change for the Catholic Church 

Well, if he was going there I wouldn’t start from here

Pope Francis, Cardinal Jorge Bergoglio, has made a number of surprising announcements, while on tour in the Myanmar (Burma to you and  me), that will take the Catholic Church in a very progressive and liberal direction. The ministry of the 266th pontiff, it appears, will henceforward, be founded in reason and rationality.

  • Sadly, he could not mention the Rohingya by name
  • But, he has vowed to dismantle the financial privilege, excess and extravagance of the Vatican and the leaders of the Church by liquidating assets to the value of millions of dollars to pass over to the poor and vulnerable throughout the world.
  • And, for the first time in 2,000 years women will be welcomed into the Church on an equal status with the men and will be allowed to become clergy, and perhaps even Pope in the future.

(Source: *3)

Brexit: Irish Border issues resolved in secret
Boris Johnson, the Foreign Secretary, has just argued, albeit in a leaked memo, that we should simply give Northern Ireland back to the Republic of Ireland, taking the opportunity while there is no functioning devolved parliament in Northern Ireland. This resolves the Brexit border issue in one fell swoop, and corrects the dreadful mistake we made mistake made in partitioning Ireland last century. (Ed: What about the Isle of Wight?)

Mugabe honoured yet again
Zimbabwe has officially declared 21st February to be Robert Gabriel Mugabe National Youth Day, thereby making the former president’s birthday a public holiday, the Herald newspaper reports. (Ed: that can’t really be true?) Reports that Mr Mugabe was granted $10m (£7.5m) to ease him out of office have not been confirmed. (Ed: you are joking?)

Brexit deal sorted
Theresa May has told Jean Claude Juncker that we are leaving the EU on the 31st January 2018 and they can have as many of our bankers as they want in return, completely free of charge.

It is estimated that this will save the United Kingdom of Great Britain around £67 billion in the next twelve months alone and cost the EU £89 billion in lost taxes, because they will still be using the Cayman Islands – He he  (Ed: should that not be Ho ho ho?)

What if a second referendum says Remain?

This question was raised today by a retired Foreign Office source (Grade A6), who was overheard to say “Let us imagine, for the sake of argument, that a second referendum result was 52% in favour of remaining in and 48% was for leaving the EU. Would the Remainers be happy to support calls for a third referendum?” and so ad infinitum…What implications are there here for the validity of referenda as currently defined?

NB: Two of these five are true and the other three may be fake

Sources and acknowledgements:

*2 No there won’t

*3 National Secular Society quoting Atheism Today)

*4 Where was *1?

 

 Posted by at 12:59 pm
Oct 312017
 
 

Such an important issue this, as is evidenced on front pages everywhere last week and Questiontime on BBC 1 last Thursday.

Opinions ranged from Rory Stewart(*1) saying “Kill them, there is no alternative” to the leftist intellectuals saying “understand them, hug them but then imprison them” to the Questiontime audience saying “don’t let them back in, they have lost any rights, they might have had as British citizens”, by going out there to fight for ISIS etc.

The earth is flat and I’m in charge! Source NY Times

What I think what Rory Stewart might have been trying to say, follows on from an insight by Jonathan Swift (author of Gulliver’s Travels)

It is useless to attempt to reason a man out of what he was never reasoned into“.

This wisdom applies equally to all those ‘of faith’ but more particularly, these jihadis really do believe that Allah has told them to kill anyone who is not a true Muslim. You have to be the Sunni variety of Muslim to avoid death which explains why so many of Muslims are being killed by ISIS.

If you want to know why we have this relatively recent emergence of Sunni Islamism (ISIS and Al Qaeda etc.), just read a brief biography of the Egyptian poet, writer & political theorist who started it all in the 1980s, Sayyid Qutb.

If a person accepts a primary falsehood as truth, then seemingly rational and possibly violent actions may well follow.

So then, having quietly accepted from childhood, that the Qur’an is the unalterable word of god, it is the Muslim’s duty to fight for a universal caliphate under sharia law, however long it takes. (*2)

Our home grown jihadis are therefore following, quite logically (to them at least), the endlessly repeated calls for jihad in the Qur’an. *7

Some of these returning jihadis may well have been disillusioned by the reality and cruelty of ISIS, but most will be still motivated to return and kill the Kuffar, that’s you if you didn’t already know.

Atheists, like me, are the worst ;-( of course. We don’t even get a mention in the Qur’an whereas the Christians and Jews get quite a pasting!

Most so-called ‘moderate Muslims’ don’t want to establish a caliphate, they just want to educate their kids and put food on the table and live in peace. Most of those Muslim families now living in the West came here originally to escape the misery of corrupt, socially primitive Islamic states such as Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and many more.

Our own monarchy invented a new religion some 500 years ago, with the help of Martin Luther. This was because of a need to extend male succession to the throne and the need to divorce a few wives because they could not provide male heirs. The priests of which religion, appointed by Henry VIII still sit at the centre of our, gentle but imperfect ‘representative democracy’ and cannot be removed.

Our current queen is head of that religion and still retains the title of Defender of (the) Faith assumed by Henry.

Our god is better than yours – because I say so! Oh dear me, this sort of makes my case?

Our next monarch, god forbid (ahem), wants to become Defender of All Faiths, completely ignoring the advances in human philosophical thought developed into maturity during the European Enlightenment because he thinks its all a bit old fashioned (my source is an article in the Spectator) and comes from a speech he made a few years ago in St. James palace.

Words fail one!

I do appreciate that short term measures are needed and must be taken, but I am content to pass that responsibility to our government and the rule of law.

But nowhere, last week, did I read or hear of any proposed long term solution to the misguided and corrupt ideology of ISIS.

Here then, is my much repeated long term solution and the only one that I think will or can ever work.

Sadly it cannot be implemented or accepted by those currently in power, particularly here, in the second of only two remaining theocracies (*3) in the world; the other one being Iran!

The rest of the world are republics *4, monarchies, usually without an established religion *5, tyrannies *6 or failed states.

The real underlying problem to all of this, is that faith is an irrational state of mind, absorbed from childhood, and, like all forms of brain washing, is very difficult to remove.

My solution therefore cannot currently be accepted because we would have to challenge and defeat the idea that Anglican Christianity is a valid part of the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain.

We would have to:-

  1. remove the monarchy, in order to
  2. disestablish the Anglican Church of England, so that we could then
  3. remove the teaching of religion as if it were a truth, from all schools,  so that we can then
  4. challenge the idea that faith is a desirable human attribute, so that we can
  5. merge existing faith schools into a mainstream secular education system (as in France) , so that we can then
  6. remove the existing and future divisions in society caused by faith schools, so that we can then
  7. allow our children’s minds to be formed by access to philosophy, by asking questions and not to be given dogmatic answers, so that they may
  8. grow into adults who no longer are socially divided by having to believe in something in order to belong

I do not propose the abolition of religion because so many people draw comfort from their faith BUT I do insist that ONLY by removing it from public life and the education of our children do we any chance of a harmonious society and a peaceful future.

*1 Rory Stewart is Minister of State at the Department for International Development and as Minister of State for Africa at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office. He has extensive knowledge of the middle and far east. Wrote a book on his notorious 32 day walk around Afghanistan in 2002. Eton and Oxford and ever so posh.

*2 I have read the Qur’an twice in different versions over the last few years and from my western eyes and ears it has a belligerent tone, a monotonous repetitive style and is even more scary than the Old Testament. If you want a real Halloween scare story just read Deuteronomy & Numbers, yikes!

*3 Theocracy:- A form a government where priests from a country’s established religion form part of the legislative process of government by right!

*4 Republics:- First formed by the ancient Romans two thousand years ago following on from the Greeks who developed the first forms of democracy although not quite as we know it today. The Greeks, even then, realised that monarchies were a bit old fashioned, inefficient, led to corruption and had seen their day!

*5 Monarchies:- The United Kingdom of Great Britain, Belgium, Bahrain, Brunei, Japan etc. In all about 43 remain.

*6 Tyrannies:- North Korea, China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Scotland (OK, just joking, I have a thing about Nicola Sturgeon, and no, not in that way), Zimbabwe and quite a few more.

*7 Jihad originally refers to an inner struggle that all Muslims must endure in order to submit to the word of Allah in the Qur’an, but has latterly become associated with an external violent fight for the universal Caliphate that Allah requires.

Oct 112017
 
 

Perhaps you may be wondering why the TV, radio and papers are so full of endless discussions about the need for a deal with the EU and why we are “getting nowhere” and “time is running out”?

That is, unless like me, you are so heartily sick of it that the news has lost its onetime appeal 😉 Those who report the “news” inhabit the same bubble of unreality as do most of our MPs. They feed off each other for their raison d’etre (did you see what I did there? – hehe).

Winston Churchill was one of the main architects for the creation of a European community that would stop Germany from starting a third world war, but you Mrs May and your clueless government, have no grasp of history and no idea how to negotiate with Brussels.

Mrs May, please heed the advice of our two best former prime ministers:-

  1. You do not need at all, as a government, to negotiate a trade deal with the EU. We are leaving in 2019 and there really is little to discuss.

    Mrs May: Read his words again and internalise them. If John Major had only understood those words, he would never have signed the Maastricht Treaty. Maggie Thatcher would never have signed, remember her “No, no no!”?

  2. Accept & proclaim that we ARE leaving the EU and stop placating remoaners (unless of course you are one of them?), it is a waste of time and energy. The sooner you tell them to shut up the better and then get on with implementing the will of the British people. Businesses will then have the clarity they need to sort themselves out, which is what they have always done.
  3. Since you have never actually run anything that makes a profit and have no clue at all about business, it is probably best to let business get on with it. (See *1 below)
  4. By refusing to negotiate with the ridiculous Brussels Mafia you will save your time and our money and you will be able to concentrate on what your government should be doing, i.e:-
    1. Implement border control systems now so we are actually ready by 2019.
      • Yes, I know that’s breaking the rules but that is what the EU does itself, time and time again, with no recriminations (e.g: ahem, Maastricht prohibits debt bailouts for members of the EU ).
    2. Start saving our money now:
      1. Give our MEP’s three months notice and then reduce our payments to the EU by that amount. There really is no reason for our MEPs to be there at all. They never had any power anyway 😉
      2. Stop importing foodstuffs NOW from the EU that we don’t actually need and start supporting our farmers and in doing so become fuel efficient, carbon saving & promote “local is better”:-
        1. Milk
        2. Eggs
        3. Chicken
        4. etc.
  5. Clement Attlee commenting on the Schuman plan. He could see the dangers too! See *2 below

    Tell EU & non-EU businesses that they can just start dealing with the UK now, just as before, because we have not changed any laws yet and probably won’t change many, other than to make things a bit simpler over the next few years.

  6. Tell the European Court that they are now irrelevant to our legal system and remove our financial support for that bloated court.
  7. Tell Euratom that we will continue to support them as now as they have nothing at all to do with the EEC or EU.
  8. Tell Erasmus that we will continue to support them as now. For some strange reason, Erasmus was hijacked by the EEC & EU – so let’s set it free!
  9. etc.

It really is that simple, just requires the vision and the can do attitude that Churchill & Attlee both had.

*1 Only 5 times in the last 100 years has any UK government spent less than they planned to receive in taxes; unbelievable and continuing financial incompetence from all political parties.

*2 The Schuman plan established the Iron & Steel Community (precursor to the EEC) in 1952, and was the first step in the process to stop Germany from murdering everyone all over again.

Acknowledgements: Leave the EU campaign for reminding us of the wisdom of our two finest prime ministers.

 Posted by at 2:36 pm  Tagged with:
Sep 232017
 
 

“We are so sorry to have upset you Mr & Mrs EU, but now we see that your requests for all our money were quite justified.”

Yuk

How to make a corporate tax avoidance specialist happy. The photo also makes me want to barf or vomit as we say in England. Mrs May gives him all the British money he wants! JC Juncker (if you didn’t recognise him is in charge of a bit of the EU’s weird management structure).

“The fact that you, the EU, have proved your financial ineptitude on so many occasions means that we should have foreseen your desperate need for our money and we are so sorry to have caused you pain, so here it is.

Please come and take all the cash you need for as long as you want.”

“We quite understand that your need to support all the globalised corporations (for whom most of you work) while NOT upsetting the banks, is key to delaying the inevitable financial meltdown which will cause the daft Euro & EU to fail.”

Meanwhile, the voices of sanity are out there but well hidden or absent from  the pro-EU BBC news departments.

Jacob Rees Mogg is politely calling May stupid, by calmly exposing all the flaws in her speech yesterday. (Google is your friend; Well, OK, no it isn’t, but you know what I mean (I hope))

Nigel Farage (Ed: Who he?) was talking sense yesterday in reaction to her pile of claptrap.

Boris had a pre-emptive strike in his 4000 word essay in last Saturdays Telegraph, most of which made sense. Such a pity he has not grown up yet – but sadly he and Jacob are our best hope to avert the disaster of the current Tory position.

There are many more voices out there too, mine included, all trying to overcome the insanity that is Theresa May’s ridiculous climbdown and betrayal of the British people’s voice.

Those voices are being drowned out by the remoaners who are holding sway in the public sphere due to their dependence on the EU’s support for globalist mediocrity and access to news channels.

 

 

 

 Posted by at 8:55 am
Jun 042017
 
 

I can’t remember a general election where I have found it so difficult to summon up the enthusiasm to vote, and I have voted in every general election since I was in my mid twenties.

Both May & Corbyn look and sound like geography teachers instead of British leaders in whom we might have pride. As of today, the polls lead for the Tories has dropped to 4% (Times) or 2% (Guardian) from 20% of a few weeks ago.

“No election needed” – May’s first U-turn of many

Theresa May is robotic in her endless “strong & stable” meanderings containing little detail and has no interesting vision for Britain. She has repeatedly shown she cannot handle ordinary people whereas Corbyn has scored well.

The election May has called was a blatant opportunity to increase her hold over the UKIP Tory wing, but it has backfired beautifully 😉

Jeremy Corbyn does have a vision and some interesting policies (of which more later) but is surrounded by hypocrites (Diane Abbot to name but one) and he himself is the other. I say that because for the last 30 years he has been anti-EU (as have I) and then U-turned when Brexit became a reality. Diane Abbot proclaimed the benefits of state education until she had a child, became a single parent family and promptly employed private education. Abbot’s manner is so damn irritating and pontificatory (Ed: Is that actually a word?) that I find it impossible to listen to her.

The only hope I saw for the Labour Party was it being led by Tristram Hunt, but he recognised a lost cause when he saw one and left politics.

The Liberal Democrats (my former intellectual and perhaps natural home) are currently  led by a twerp who looks 13 years old, talks bollocks and thinks the EU is great. The Lib Dems were ruined by their former twerp of a leader Nick Clegg who managed to alienate a whole generation of intelligent students.

UKIP without Farage are pointless and direction-less. Nigel Farage was a brief, breath of fresh air in the smoke filled room of party political fog but he, like Tristram Hunt, knew when the game was up.

In short – we have no person in today’s party politics for whom I can vote with any enthusiasm.

A fact of which you might be unaware: Every government from Thatcher’s era onwards has managed to double the national debt they inherited from the previous bunch of incompetents!

Labour & Tory governments have both proved endlessly to be financially and economically inept, based simply on the evidence of their inability to sort out the deficit and debt!

So, I had a look at their future policies instead to find some direction …

Education: The Tory manifesto wants to massively increase divisive “free” schools and thereby promote societal disunity. Labour does too.

Economics: The Tories are being a bit more honest in their spending plans but are not proposing to tax the real criminals like Google, Facebook, Sir Crooked Philip Green and Vodaphone to name but a few. Corbyn has done even less well in explaining how his tax plans will actually provide the cash for his hugely increased public spending plans.

Privatisation: I have always found Thatcher’s privatisation of our Water and our electricity grid to be one of the greatest crimes committed by a serving politician see here. So, I am happy with Corbyn’s desire to renationalise the railways (as in many European countries, e.g Germany for one) and reverse water privatisation.

Defence: The Tories seem to have the more robust policy here but the reality of the matter is that we are minnows compared to the USA. Therefore, Britain having nuclear weapons is almost pointless. I don’t mind paying the USA a few billion to keep theirs up to date which is, in my humble opinion, more useful and realistic than either party’s policy. I might even fund NATO more, but the time when we could afford a British nuclear arsenal is long past.

Neither manifesto is realistic or addresses any of my main concerns over debt reduction. Both private and public debt are HUGE, at about £1.6 Trillion quid, and yet the banks are lending more with PPC (we used to call it Hire Purchase 40 years ago) but neither party has a plan to stop it.

So there we are.

If I vote, and I suppose must, I will vote for Corbyn and hope that someone comes out of the woodwork with some common sense and statesmanlike leadership qualities soon!

Acknowledgement: Peter Brookes for his insightful cartoon

 Posted by at 8:39 pm
Jan 242017
 
 

The Supreme Court is today ruling on something that really does not matter very much to ‘we the people’.

Lawyers, who form the largest and probably the most vocal part of our so-called democracy have missed a very simple fact, on purpose.

We know best you peasants

That fact is that a referendum is a direct approach to the people, and is the most powerful democratic tool that ‘we the people’ have. The executive, that is our government ministers, devolved the question of EU membership to ‘we the people’.

Logically therefore, the result of a referendum transcends the normal but gently flawed process of “first past the post” elections and party politics, and that is why MPs are in such a tizzy.

Many MPs are lawyers, just over 10% in fact, according to a recent YouGov poll, and they just hate being bypassed by us, ‘we the people’.

Remoaners have involved the legal system and the Supreme Court for several deeply flawed and suspect motivations.

Flawed argument 1) “Parliamentary supremacy is what the Brixiteers wanted, therefore parliament should therefore have its say”.

Logical response 1) Nonsense! We Brexiteers voted for the supremacy of Parliament over the EU, not the supremacy of Parliament over what the people voted for! See how easily they misrepresent and twist the facts?

Flawed argument 2) “The result was so close (52% to 48% of those who voted) that therefore we must ensure that the remainers have a big say.”

Logical response 2) More people voted in the referendum than voted in any general election in the last 70 years. Just imagine if Parliament wanted to adjust the result of a general election result because it was so close? General election results usually place a political party into power who have far less than 52% of the vote! The current conservative government has just 37% of the vote!

Flawed argument 3) “The devolved parliaments of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland should be treated differently and Scotland in particular should have a new independence referendum because a majority of ‘Scots’ voted to remain in the EU”.

Logical response 3) Firstly, we are all part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and therefore the British Parliament sitting in London is supreme. The fact that the majority of people voting, in say Watford, wanted to remain in the EU does not mean that the people of Watford should be allowed to remain in the EU. That is just plain potty!

Flawed argument 4) This is the unspoken one, underlying most of the other spoken reasons. “The people are ignorant of the facts and just cannot be given this amount of power.”

Logical response 4) We the people understood exactly why we wanted rid of the deeply flawed EU:-

  • It supports ever bigger corporations, we don’t
  • The EU is completely undemocratic, by design, we have spotted that too
  • the EU wants a federal government of Europe, we don’t
  • The EU is run by flawed and failed politicians, we spotted that too
  • Jean Claude Juncker, The president of the EU commission, is a tax avoidance specialist for global corporations, we don’t think that makes him qualified
  • The EU is financially incompetent and its lack of financial transparency has caused its accounts audit to fail each year for the last 20 years
  • The Euro was a daft, flawed and costly invention designed to promote a federal Europe which we don’t want
  • The EU breaks its own rules, repeatedly, the biggest example are bailouts for failing members: 3 for Greece, 1 for Ireland, 1 for Portugal, 1 for Cyprus  and perhaps the largest was for Spanish banks
    • The main issue here is that bailouts are specifically outlawed under the Maastricht treaty, but never mind that, eh?

The Supreme Court is today ruling on something that really does not matter very much to ‘we the people’, it just matters to the lawyers, journalists and politicians.

I realise that this is a simplistic response BUT my main point is that the whole legal ‘story’ is irrelevant fluff in a bigger picture!

Bah POO & piffle!

PS: Just heard that the Supreme Court got it wrong ;-(

The law is indeed an ass

But – three cheers for the three judges who dissented from the small majority – I think we should demand a recount because the vote went the wrong way 😉

PPS: Just seen Prime Minister’s questions – unbelievable bollocks from all sides on this question – Corbyn was a disaster – the Westminster bubble folk are living a LaLa Land.

 Posted by at 12:00 pm
Sep 152016
 
 

This is a truly appalling and criminally incompetent decision by Theresa May.

Thirty odd years of indecision and delay in addressing our electricity requirements from both Labour and the Tories have led us to this ridiculous point. Yet again, party politics and our 4/5 year election cycle have been obstacles to logical and rational long term decision making.

PFI yet again - stupid, financial incompetence

PFI yet again – stupid, financial incompetence

The technology of the proposed reactor is unproven. The PFI business deal is so stupid that EDF & China must be laughing all the way to their bust banks.

Private Finance Initiatives (PFIs) first used by John Major in the 1980s, and then embraced by Blair & Brown, hide government debt from national statistics. A pathetic attempt to hide government’s financial incompetence.  PFIs hide future debt from government borrowing statistics, a simple rule which could and should be easily be changed. Money which could have and should have been invested in Britain’s decentralised energy future has been invested in China’s and France’s future instead.

No words needed

No caption required

Our children & grand children are doomed to keeping China’s polluted, massively over-indebted, corrupt, and unjust country alive!

Those who made this crap decision will retire on their huge pensions and be dead before the true ramifications will be felt in 30 years time.

PFI: Private companies borrow cash cheaply to build infrastructure for government and then charge the tax payer way over the odds for decades to come. A cynically corrupt, financially inept and self serving way to provide new schools & hospitals which superficially makes politicians look good but costs the nation dear!

Unbelievable

No more words …

Acknowledgements:

Clive Goddard for explaining PFI

David Simonds for the cartoon pointing out the blitheringly obvious in the Financial Times

 Posted by at 10:21 am
Aug 252016
 
 

… when it gives us the wrong answer, or so it seems 😉

I keep reading, in the last few days, an ever more prominent but completely illogical viewpoint being expressed in the press and on the airwaves.

Orwell's brave new world has a lesson for us ...

Orwell’s 1984 has a lesson for us …

It is this: “…the referendum vote was so close that we need another referendum to sort out the mess we are in.

The latest bandwagon jumperer-onner to espouse this laughable view is Owen Smith, the lacklustre and doomed alternative to Jezza (the Trot) Corbyn, on Wednesday’s  Radio 4 Today program. John Harumphries did a wonderful job in showing us what a lightweight twerp he is.

One feels sorry for what was the Labour party…

Well, OK I don’t really 😉

But then again one is not impressed by any of  the alternatives; the Liberal Democraps or the unelected PM, Theresa May (but one grudgingly has to say that she is probably the best of a pretty poor bunch).

If you recall, the 2015 election was so close that even our Dave, who had already packed his  Orlebar Brown “swim shorts” (£225, but not from M& S) had to unpack them again and wait for his referendum result get-out of jail card.

“Phewee, that was jolly close Sam, I thought we might have to stay on for three more years!”

The result was indeed close, BUT it was a result that our system says we have to abide by!

Oh, and by the way, more people voted in the referendum that any British general election since King Alfred burnt his cakes (Ed: may need verification?). That makes the LEAVE result even more unarguable with.

Mwah! I want another one - boo hoo

Try to imagine that Nicola Sturgeon has dropped the ice cream – my Photoshop skills are not up to scratch

The same truth applies to that irritating Scottish woman who keeps an banging on and on and on about the need for another Scottish referendum. The “No” side won, with 2,001,926 (55.3%) voting against independence and 1,617,989 (44.7%) voting in favour. The turnout of 84.6% was the highest recorded for an election or referendum in the United Kingdom since the introduction of universal suffrage.

Nicola, you lost by 10%, so ‘shut up’ . Well, she needs to be told.

I think our Theresa may have put the same view more gently in her meeting with Ms Sturgeon than have I, but, hurrah for Theresa!

If this view was valid, the simple fact is that in our “first past the post system” there would not have been a government since 1992. Why? Because, the majority of each winning party has been so small, and based on so small a sample of the population who actually get off their arses to vote that there would have to have been a vote every month for a month of Sundays to sort out “the mess we are in” (I quote the ever more prominent view that provoked this elegant rebuttal.)

Could it be perhaps, that the Remain camp are the ones who have most access to the more populist airwaves and the press rooms?

The lesson for the Westminster bubble and indeed the Edinburgh McBubble is that we the people are more likely to vote when our vote might actually make a difference.

Aug 212016
 
 

…for someone to bring philosophical and visionary leadership to post Brexit Britain. Don’t get me wrong, I am a Britain first, and Englishman second but staunch European third.

As the EU loses its 2nd biggest contributor - the future for Britain looks brighter

As the EU’s 2nd biggest contributor ejects, the future for Britain looks brighter …

Remember the European Enlightenment? Few seem to, yet this was the flowering pinnacle of human philosophical rational thought, started by Confucius, Buddha and Socrates ending with Nietzsche telling us that ‘God is dead. God remains dead. And we have killed him. Yet his shadow still looms. How shall we comfort ourselves, the murderers of all murderers? What was holiest and mightiest of all that the world has yet owned has bled to death under our knives; who will wipe this blood off us? What water is there for us to clean ourselves?’ . In other words, We human’s historic need for god to exist is no longer reasonable, rational or supportable now that we can all read and write and supposedly think for ourselves.

But I digress …

No, it is the irrationality of the EU I rail against and for so many good reasons. The EEC was all about stopping Germany murdering the rest of Europe for the third time in 100 years. The EU construct forgot that and went off on a weird direction (the Maastricht Treaty) of irrational economics (the creation of the Euro) and the creation of a bonkers bureaucracy that beggars belief.

The shallowness of Gove and Boris quitting the scene exemplifies this leadership void which needs to be filled by some adults. It is clear that Gove and Johnson were doing politics for themselves rather than thinking about Britain out of the EU. Pathetic self-indulgent twerps, they never actually thought they might win! They were shocked when they did and then ran for cover as fast as they could.

Perhaps, if BoJo ever grows up he might become the leader that Britain so badly needs but I see no others in sight. Yet, there are many MPs, economists and thinkers who do have the vision required; lets hope these quiet people, who shun power, can garner the support they need to overthrow the old clapped out political regime we currently endure. The Labour party and the Liberal democrats have destroyed themselves and so party politics, as I have said repeatedly here, is dead in the water.

In the meantime we have Theresa May in charge, but again we need to wait while she finishes her walking trip. One is quietly hopeful she may be the “one” but who knows?

The remain camp, many of whom are younger than 45, failed to be aware of the appalling depths to which the “European project” has fallen and seems to have no understanding of what huge inefficient, corrupt, inept bureaucracy the EU is. If any of you Remainers have yet to watch Brexit the movie, please do so. It sums up in one hour what many have been saying for years.

My best example of the young Remainers ignorance and delusion was exemplified by a young, seemingly intelligent woman in a pre-referendum day BBC Question-time audience who complained that neither side of the argument were putting their ideas across very well. But, her main complaint was that she was not being told what to think well enough. Only one member of the panel was brave enough to point out that perhaps she should have educated herself a bit more rather than waiting to be spoon fed. This attitude is sadly typical of the naivety of today’s under 45s who have had little time to think because their strokeable devices need so much attention, that time for personal rumination and research is lost.

You guys are taking a huge risk

“You guys are taking a huge risk” (says the pilot of the EU plane on fire and about to crash, to the sensible British parachuters)

As I said in my last article, many in the Westminster village bubble are still in denial, and here I include most BBC journalists and commentators. The financial markets have knocked sterling for six because of their short-termist, childish greed and globalist narcissism; but, ooh look! The stock market has largely recovered – gosh, who’d have thought! 😉

That the UK has never been a fully an integrated part of the EU seems to be lost on the major market ‘players’ as they allow their fears and ignorance to fuel massive sell-down of stocks regardless of the real positive relevance to UK and/or EU economies.

We have an amazing opportunity to grasp all that is good about small businesses, now incidentally, largely being led by a welcome increase in the number of female entrepreneurs.

We don’t need trade agreements; we need free trade areas, not the restrictive practice contracts that modern trade agreements actually are. Trade agreements are negative and stand against free market economics. Instead they bar businesses from markets where the bigger globalised corporations have bribed supported the leaders of developing countries.

The best exponent of this nauseating human development used to be us, then the USA but is now China.

TTIP thankfully seems to be dying a well deserved death, thanks to the Brexit vote – hurrah!