Wednesday, 28 December 2016

Post-Truth... Post-Expert??

There was an interesting debate on Radio 4 this morning between Michael Gove and Stephanie Flanders on the role of experts in determining policy, reporting on trends and generally advising on all things.

The problem with so-called "expert opinion" is it's just that: an opinion. However, if that opinion suits a media agenda is is jumped upon and reiterated as fact ad nauseum. Despite a mandate for fairness, the BBC are one of the worst culprits, offering no counter argument to whatever claim they are making.But they are no worse than Sky, Fox, CNN, RT or any other news channel.

Doing this is essentially biased reporting and at worst no better than propaganda.

I've watched TV news since I was a kid and the most startling change in my lifetime is the introduction of news processed as drama and the increase of biased viewpoints. Way back when, news was factual with very little overt bias. Any bias was easily identified by an opposing viewpoint and a reasoned brain filtering the outlandish claims from the facts.

I've already noted the issue with Brexit: because the BBC are biased against Brexit (and I suppose their fat subsidies from the EU) they report everything bad as "because of Brexit" and anything good as "despite Brexit". So much so I see Guido has started a #DespiteBrexit hashtag on his website. So called experts are wheeled in front of cameras and microphones to decry leave voters, to prophesy doom and gloom, to the exclusion of the opposing viewpoint. Well, only to expose people with an opposite viewpoint as loonies, cranks or people not to be taken seriously.

The other problem for "experts" is their dire warnings of doom don't occur. Which is what happens with opinions and theories. They are a viewpoint, they are extrapolations of what MAY happen in the future.

Their opinions and theories have no more weight than any other but are touted as absolute truth..

The same goes for any other. Global warming is gospel according to the BBC, the science is settled, with absolutely no physical evidence. It's all heresay, statistical, with no proven mechanism, no proof that increased CO2 drives global warming, let alone man made CO2 is the main influence. It could be that the globe warming is a totally natural process and the increase of CO2 is driven by the warming rather than the other way round. But no science is being done to prove that hypothesis, there's no money in it. Science is very much made to fit the model. You'll never hear that viewpoint taken seriously on any mainstream media.

The phrase post-truth has emerged this year to describe the rise of populism, the rejection of the elitist version of reality reported to us as absolute truth. It's supposed to be an unhealthy thing. But it's plain that the media and elites are just as bad at offering lies as truth.

Getting back to the point, the problem isn't "experts" per se, it's the media's attempt to process opinion as fact, theories as proof, without opposition. Telling us what we should believe, rather than reporting both sides of the story and allowing us to weigh either side of the argument and divine the truth for ourselves.

Thursday, 22 December 2016

Germany's terrorism Problem.

It's widely accepted that Germany has allowed close to 2 million migrants into the country thanks to Angela Merkel's poor choice of words and political viewpoint.

Whatever her motives, whether it was to show that Germany was still left of centre, to show they still hadn't embraced any right of centre thinking, I'm not sure.

But what I am sure of, is that she seriously undermined the security of Germany by employing the policy she has.

We can accept that the majority of the migrants we saw streaming across Europe's borders were male and of fighting age. Not that the females are without suspicion. There have been a few cases now of extremist brides turning impressionable young Muslim males into extremists.

So, lets say 0.1 percent of those 2 million are extremists (0.1 percent for those unable to quickly do the maths is 1 terrorist for every 1000 genuine refugee or asylum seeker. Seems a fair estimate given the number of fighting age males that streamed across Europe's borders over the past couple of years). That's 2000 people the Germany authorities have to identify AND then continue to monitor. That's quite a task for the internal security services. Given that you'd probably need a team of 12(*) or more people to monitor each suspect 24/7, that's a lot of manpower that I assume the German authorities just don't have. Just think, paying for at least 24000 people to monitor extremists and that's only the ones imported in the past couple of years. And that's only the surveillance teams. You then need to factor in the analysts, handlers, management, etc. The back-room people that coordinate everything.

Sure, both France and Germany have had terrorists before, but not in the numbers created here. A group of 50 people is relatively easy to surveil, but when it runs to thousands or tens of thousands across Europe it starts to turn into a massive logistical exercise. So massive it's probably beyond our current internal security services.

That is what people mean when they say allowing masses of immigrants into countries undermines security. The fact that they have arrived in European countries in millions means it only takes a fraction of a percent of those people to be extremists to overwhelm the security services.

Only in a Police state could those people be  properly surveilled. Just park that idea and continue to watch events. I mean, what better way to bring about a Police state than to create a security problem that makes people actually ask for more security and less freedom.

Anyway, hopefully the miserable Merkel will get the boot this year and someone with a more sensible view on immigration and the problems it causes with open borders gets into power in Germany.

I did hear the other day that a few countries in Europe are now coming to the opinion that Shengen and the open border policy is an issue and are asking for it to be suspended. It's interesting because that was one of the things that David Cameron asked for two years ago and failed to get from the EU commission. One of the things that would have kept the UK in the EU.

It's also interesting that the very people promoting an open, integrated united Europe are the very people that have triggered it's destruction. Failing to take a pragmatic viewpoint and allow flexibility to deal with the immigration crisis, their very dogmatic and inflexible response has effectively killed the European Union.

(*) 12 is probably the minimum team number (2 mobile, 2 fixed, in 3 8 hour shifts), with a high chance of detection. If you want to be as covert as possible, then the team size grows in order to make sure there are enough face changes when tailing a suspect. The same face tailing a suspect for 8 hours has a very high chance of being recognised as a tail. Yes, teams can be assigned to different suspects on different days, but the lower the number, the higher the chance of a regular, familiar face being picked up by the target and team changes also rely on targets being in the same area, which again increases the chances of recognition and detection. Of course every time the team number grows, the amount is multiplied by the number of targets.

It quite quickly becomes impossible to monitor all suspects 24/7, so then you start to prioritise targets, which is where the "lone wolf" types can successfully slip through the net. A low priority target can suddenly decide today is the day and cause havoc because they weren't up at the top of the risk table.

The risk assessment of each targets then boils down to "have they contacted anyone higher up the list or a known organiser recently, possibly plotting an event?" In essence that's the only way you can find them. You can't factor in changes in physical behaviour, because they are not under surveillance. The reliance is on electronic intelligence, which is why every western nation wants to hold everyone's data indefinitely, so if someone previously unknown or low risk does pop up on the radar by carrying out an attack, their communications can be wound back and contacts confirmed. Then a network is established by backtracking and finding out which other people contacted the suspects contacts. In effect identifying the hubs or organisers in the network.

Way too late of course to stop the event that just occurred, but probably just enough to stop a fair number of other attacks. 

Of course if the suspects go dark electronically and use cold war old school spycraft, the authorities are fubared. Unless resources are majorly beefed up which then tends towards the Police state style security where everyone is either a suspect or an informant. Just like the good ol' GDR. Oh, back round to Mrs Merkel then...

Monday, 28 November 2016

Castro Death Output Provides Political Bellweather for BBC output Bias.

If ever there was a bellweather for the BBC's political leanings, it has to be the reporting of the death of Fidel Castro.

A huge section on the web page, with a picture of Castro taking up almost half the page.

Not content with eulogizing a dictator, they had several "experts" and others from the looney left on the news channel tripping over themselves to express how big a socialist icon he was.

I think Castro was a bit more radical than socialist, but when you're as far left as the BBC and their Kensington Kremlinista champagne socialists, a few summary executions, the impoverishment of a nation and almost causing a nuclear war just fade into the background I guess.

I'm working class, come from "up North" and I'm still not as lefty as these idiots. It's great when you have enough independent wealth to afford to be a trot, or someone else is paying for it like the Unions or Local Councils. But those of us true working class people know what deluded morons they all are.

Something really needs to be done to bring the BBC back to providing balanced reporting.

Mind you it would be nice if they would stop trying to make every bit of news into a drama and actually report factual news. Rather than have a trail of bleeding heart stories, or some gormless bystander doing the reporter's job for them, or having "are you affected by this news? Please email....." messages.

Am I getting old? Is it just me that's sick and tired of the lack of actual facts in the news?

Friday, 11 November 2016

BBC Question Time, and the Irrelevance of the Political Elite

The past couple of weeks, I've sat through BBC's question time amazed at the lack of balance, intelligence and common sense on all sides.

Last week the main issue was Brexit (again!) With one old guy in the audience shouting that the referendum should be ignored because those that voted leave did so on the basis of lies and untruths spoken by the leave campaign.

Sorry old geezer, the people voted and no matter what their reasons, they voted to leave. The reason why they voted to leave is irrelevant. Just because you didn't get what you want, doesn't give you the right to overthrow the will of the people.

Last night was worse, with much wailing about Trump's win. The panel was 4-1 against Trump, which was hardly balanced.

It was like a kids party, where no-one was happy, everyone was name-calling and the one Trump supporter on the panel was continually shouted down. It just struck me how juvenile politics in the UK has become. The most adult viewpoints came from the audience, who had a more pragmatic view.

The thing that struck me is not one of the 4 anti-trump members of the panel could understand his appeal. And that carries on across America as we see anti-trump protests appearing in various towns and cities.

I'd like to explain why trump won. Outside the neo-liberal political bubble viewpoint that is constantly shown on the media with no counterpoint, there is a majority of people that don't hold that view.

In the UK, is surfaced as an anti-EU, anti-immigration, anti-PC, anti-establishment vote that got the win for the leave campaign. You can rationalize it as a protest vote if that soothes your mind and allows you to think there isn't a majority of  people out there that have the opposite view to the neo-liberal "let everyone in, there are no Muslim terrorists, women and minorities should be given preferential treatment instead of equality" viewpoint.

In America, it crystalised as a "low-tax, no-more-illegal-immigrant, pro-homegrown business, anti-white-collar, anti-corporation, anti-government-expansion" viewpoint.

The women on Question Time last night could not rationalize that women would vote for Trump. They couldn't accept that minorities would vote for Trump. Indeed they tried to rationalise it as the majority didn't vote for Trump, in that the popular vote (the absolute number of votes cast for each candidate) was greater for Clinton and therefore she was somehow cheated out of office.

But the majority of people in America and the UK are poor, white and/or working class.

The poor, white working class are despised by the establishment on both sides of the Atlantic. Their viewpoints are refuted, shouted down even,  at every turn by the political elite that refuse to acknowledge they exist, let alone support their viewpoint.

With Brexit and the American Presidential election, someone came along and started speaking their language, publicly aired their opinions and fears and won.

It's now time for the political elite to start working for the majority and keep their lefist, elitist, nose-snubbing opinions and policies to themselves.

They need to remember they work for us.

Thursday, 3 November 2016

Article 50 Court Ruling: Constitutional Crisis Ahead.

The courts have just voted in favour of MPs having a vote on invoking article 50.

Given that the majority of MPs are in favour of remaining in Europe (and maintaining the EU gravy train) and the majority of the public have voted to leave, this throws up a crisis where Parliament is unrepresentative of the will of the public.

I seem to remember a previous spat between the supreme authority (the king) and parliament caused a civil war. Hopefully it won't get that far, but it is a huge indication of how MPs in Parliament put themselves far above the will of the people and how removed they are from the will of the people.

The public are the sovereign power, they give power to their representative in Parliament for 5 years. Their representative must respect the will of the majority of their constituents. They are not there to represent the minority view, the view of a small number of lobbyists, or their own personal view on the matter.

MPs handed power back to the public by act of Parliament when the referendum act was brought into law. The majority of MPs voted to agree to the referendum and by doing so, to abide by the outcome of that referendum.

The majority of the public have voted and MPs must bow to the authority they invested in the people.

If they don't then they show the same contempt for the power we the public invest in them that Charles did for the power of Parliament back before the civil war.

This is no time for the majority to be silent. The majority that voted for Brexit need to make it clear in no uncertain terms that if their MP votes to remain, they will not be voted for in the next election. This is not a matter of party politics, it's about the will of the people and democracy.

The public needs to understand this is what you get when you vote blindly for MPs without questioning their loyalty to us the voter. Keep voting the same person in year after year and they get a sense of entitlement, that they will be voted in time after time without them needing to respect the wishes of the people that vote them in.

It caused a civil war last time, all we need to do is watch and remember just how our representative voted when it came to represent the true will of the people. And then vote accordingly at the next opportunity.

It's something those died-in-the-wool Labour heartlands I come from that voted to leave need to understand and the Conservative safe seats of the South I've lived in since.  Stop guaranteeing their accession to power.

As a final observation, I just wonder if there would have been so much opposition to the result had the referendum gone 52/48 in favour of remain? I've a good idea that the leavers would have had to swallow the result, shut up and put up with it.

Friday, 28 October 2016

Post-Brexit Realignments and Realism.

It's been a while since I posted.

It seems the BBC and other Left-leaning media can't shake themselves from their propagandist view of Brexit. In their mind the outbreak of true democracy is anathema and must be pilloried and put down at every turn.

Every dip, depression and disaster is sub titled "Due to Brexit", whereas every positive, progressive lift is prefixed "despite Brexit"  and tailed with a negative future outlook.

The clearance of the Calais migrant camp is seen as another disaster, rather than the truth that it is long overdue and it's about time the French authorities took on the obligations of the EU and started to process the migrants, rather than give them a springboard to the UK where they cease to be France's problem.

Brexit has forced upon the French and the wider EU the reality that the UK will not tolerate ignorance of the rules of the club. As the EU elite said to us during the referendum debate, you are either all in, or you are all out. The migrants should have been processed by any one of the half dozen EU countries they crossed. The fact that migrants were allowed to stay in Calais almost permanently, until they found safe passage to the UK makes a mockery of that statement. France was able to ignore those rules to suit their own ends.

Now the UK public has forced our politicians to do what they should have done decades ago and forced the extraction of the second largest net contributor to the EU, the shock has been real and the French have had to act to mollify the situation. Lest we use the Calais camp and the millions we've spend strengthening France's border as a bargaining chip.

Today Nissan announced major investment into the UK (yet again, "despite Brexit") and now the BBC and their lefty chums smell conspiracy and demand the government produce the details of any deal that was done with Nissan to keep jobs in Sunderland. Now let's ignore the hypocrisy of the left for a moment decrying something they were crying out for the government to do months ago with the steel industry , i.e. intervene to save a large UK employer (it seems it only suits the left to start squealing when they want us to waste taxpayer's money propping up unprofitable businesses: clearly profitable ones can go fuck themselves).

I'll tell you what deal I think the UK government made. They made the deal that any tariffs applied by the EU to any vehicles imported from the UK, will be directly applied in equal measure to vehicles exported from the EU to the UK. The EU have a lot more to lose then us. We have Rolls Royce, Bentley, Morgan, Lotus, Nissan, Toyota, Honda, JCB amongst others. The EU have Peugeot, Citroen, Fiat, Audi, Mercedes, Volvo, BMW, VW, Seat, Dacia, Ferrari, Lamborghini and a lot more. They have a higher number of high volume manufacturers than we have. Any tariffs applied (quite rightly) in reciprocal fashion will damage them more than it damages us.

All we have to do to state our case for trading terms with the EU is to simply state that we would apply ANY tariffs the EU wish to impose on ANY goods shipped from the UK will be equally applied to goods coming in the opposite direction.

WTO rules my ass, tariffs will shrink to zero immediately. Think the EU governments would blindly follow the EU commission into committing political suicide? Because if the EU commission tried to make an example of us and applied punitive tariffs on cars made here, we'd just apply the same tariff and then ask VW to ship us cars made in Brazil at lower tariffs, or BMWs from America, Mercedes made in the U.S. too.

The big global companies wouldn't suffer, only the workers in the EU would. And those workers would quite rightly reward the governments that lost them their jobs, with a P45 of their own.

I work for a firm that supplies car parts around the world. Right now, thanks to the drop in the Pound, our exports are booming. Within weeks foreign buyers have cottoned on to the fact that our parts are cheaper than parts in the Euro zone and foreign sales are through the roof. One customer is actually bringing his car over from France to have work done on it. Taking jobs from EU workers we are. Terrible aren't we?

Monday, 12 September 2016

I, Deplorable

I rarely comment on U.S. politics. But the latest comments by Hilary Clinton resonate over this side of the pond too.

Her latest statements decrying half of Trump supporters as a "basket of Deplorables" shows utter contempt for the very people that may or may not vote her into office.

It's a clear example of the disconnect between the political elite and the public and their contempt for us.

It's the same as Emily Thornberry's comments about white van men, or Gordon Brown's "Bigoted Woman" comments.

It's why the leave campaign won the referendum. The public saw the EU as a totally political project, with politician's using it as a gravy train, earning millions in the European commision. "Jobs for the lads (or lasses)", a layer of plutocrats earning six figure salaries, lording it over the citizens of Europe unelected, unaccountable and unfettered.

The British public rightly declared this unacceptable.

It's okay to be an unelected person in charge of minor issues like trade, as in the Common Market of old, but once the same entity starts to dabble in lawmaking, taxation and politics, then the British people demand accountability. With no accountability written into any of the treaties forced upon us by the political elite, we decide to rightly call an end to it.

That disconnect, that "we know best" attitude, the setting themselves above the masses, is THE biggest indicator that they are setting themselves up for a fall. Because once the masses wake up and realise this they will give the elite a bloody nose.

I'm not sure that Trump is the true non-establishment figure he purports to be, I mean, he is part of the moneyed elite if he isn't part of the political elite. But if he successfully channels the anti-establishment feeling in politics in America he will win.

Thursday, 11 August 2016

UK Political Elite Coup Bubbles along Niocely.

Those readers that might have wondered whether I'd been wearing a hat made of finest baking foil when I made my last post.

Bu I stand by my point that because of Brexit, the controlling Elite (those that pay the bills for the political parties) are trying to stitch up British politics so that Brexit doesn't happen, or it will be so watered down that it will be catastrophic for the UK and we'll end up crawling back to the EU chastened and cowed.

The swift resignation of David Cameron after letting his big finance buddies down, led to the coronation without contest of Theresa May (a Remainer). Not sure who nobbled Boris's aspirations, but he got put in the most embarrassing position for someone that has railed against foreigners: The Foreign Office.

Dismal David Davies has been put in charge of Brexit and not a Dicky Bird has been heard from either office since. I hope the lack of information is due to the time needed to get everything re-aligned between the Foreign, Trade and Brexit offices. But.....

Now to Labour. After Brexit, a coup was staged and those best budds of the monied elite tried to force Jeremy Corbyn out. Fair play, Corbyn utilised his most dangerous trait (as I've iterated before) and ignored everyone, stuck to his principles and stayed put. Handy in the context of resisting the elite, not such a good trait if he resists deploying the nuclear option if Russia had a pop at us.

Owen Smith is the declared opponent to Corbyn, but Labour as a party are resisting the Putsch, recently adding another hard-line lefty to the Labour NEC. I don't really know where the Labour story will end, but I just wonder if the money men will view the new radical Labour with the same sympathy as a rabid dog and put it down. I really foresee the split of the moderate and maniacal wings of Labour with the moderates walking away to form a new Democratic Socialist Party (no relation to any similar monikered political parties that have existed previously). I assume this moderate socialist group won't ally with the Liberals, but will stand apart. Well if it has any sense it will.

Now to UKIP, the true 3rd party in the eyes of the public. (No-one mentions the Liberals these days even if they have more MPs in Parliament).

What the hell is happening in there? Farage's favourite candidate gets booted out of the leadership contests by slight of hand and some people preferred by candidates from previous parties are put forward. None of whom we've ever heard of. Mainly down to the cult of Farage, but really UKIP could do so much better. Hopefully the UKIP rank and file will elect someone with a decent profile and who will hold the government to account over Brexit. Because someone needs to while Labour implodes.

But it's unprecedented in politics that so many leaders resign and so many problems arise in so many parties.

Which is why we have to be wary against the stitch-up. If the political parties are aligning (or being aligned against their will) to weaken or even reverse Brexit, us, the public need to be on point, on guard and watching what happens over the next few months.

Sadly it seems that the way things are aligning, the Tories will deliberately botch things, UKIP will be weakened and unable to mount a controlling influence and the only true opposition will be a bunch of rabid socialists that no-one will ever consider voting for, thereby eliminating that threat to the destruction of the Brexit ideal.

Because our only voice is the ballot box and that's effectively silenced if the only true opposition is unelectable.

Monday, 11 July 2016

Leadsom out, May to be Coronated: Political Elite Coup Progresses

The Political Elite really were shocked about the Brexit vote. So scared are they at having lost the war, they are now in the process of fixing the peace.

Straight away the Conservative side caved and David Cameron resigned, having let his chums who hold the real power down by losing the referendum.

Boris was knifed so that a capable and principled politician wouldn't be able to manage the article 50 negotiations.

Now Leadsom has been put under extreme pressure from the media and personally to allow a Coronation of Theresa May, a Remainer with a pretty shit track record in office doing anything, but a pretty good record of covering her arse and making distracting speeches..

On the Labour side, as the Brexit vote came in, the shadow cabinet must have been told by the same people pulling the strings on the Tory side to stick the knife into Jeremy Corbyn. So they all resigned in an attempt to topple him from power.

Now, I don't like Jeremy Corbyn, I think he's a Trot and a Far-Left leftie of the worst kind, the kind that couldn't organise a student piss up of any merit back when they were young and now would fuck up royally while in office. But I respect he was voted into office by Labour Party members.

Also, I've started to see where he's coming from in attempting to stand firm against the Elite. It's the first time I've seen it in a very long time and it's shown the political coup for what it is: an attempt to take over and usurp the democratic will of the British people.

Even Nigel Farage, possibly the only person with the profile to keep Brexit negotiations honest and on-track to deliver the will of the people has resigned, which seems to be a measure of the pressure being put on political parties and their leaders by their big financial backers, the Elite.

Never before has this happened in British politics, it's unprecedented that so many leaders of so many parties have resigned at the same time, whilst at the same time those that champion the people and put the public first are plotted against.

Yet nothing is said by the media. Which is strange given that it's a BIG story. So, why would they not want you to notice this? Because if you did take notice, like you did with mass immigration forcing labour costs down, you might demand change.

With the biggest political drivers for change out of the picture, what exactly do you think is going to happen?

Sunday, 10 July 2016

A Question for All UK Police and Armed Forces.

I've said before I see trends others don't see. I see a trend now evolving in the Political classes and I don't like it. I see moves afoot to deny the will of the 17 million people that voted to exit the EU. You can square it any way you like: "the majority of the population didn't vote for Brexit", "People voted Brexit but won't now", "We don't need/want to leave at the moment", "It's not legal to exit unless Parliament vote on  it", or any one of the other excuses.

This is a question to all of those serving in the Police and Armed Forces:

Would you be prepared to disobey your senior ranks to support the democratic will of the people, or will you side with the Politicians and the Bureaucrats against the population?

I ask, because I see the democratic will of the people being undermined by the political class. I see movements being made in grand theatre, to disobey the will of the people.

Under those circumstances, the people will be forced to have their say in a most physical way. Now what would our soldiers and Police do under those circumstances? In the event of mass protest, of deliberate disobedience, would our forces enforce the will of the political class, or will they have the moral conscience to stand aside and support the public?

When the Berlin Wall came down, the Police eventually conceded that the majority of the population wanted democratic freedom and stood aside. The Armed forces did the same, mainly because the majority of them felt the same as the people protesting.

Before it gets to that stage, think about it deeply, search your conscience and decide now. Because when things begin to move, you might not have the time to think deeply and understand what is at stake.

Sunday, 3 July 2016

BBC Brexit Bias Reaches the Point of Nausea.

Since the referendum vote, the BBC has pushed an anti-Brexit bias onto all it's news outlets. I'm not the only one to have noticed this:

On the Friday morning of the results, the result hadn't been declared but the result was clear and already the BBC output was reporting the "catastrophic" fall of the pound as confirmation that all that had voted for Brexit were idiots and were going to cause doom, murder and mayhem across the land.

Since then Brexiters have faced a barrage of BBC news journalists trying to force an agenda that first the Brexit camp lied and look.... you said things would be rosy but the pound and FTSE has fallen, hate crimes reported by the BBC have increased dramatically (because BBC news is run as a drama department these days) and basically were pushed, prodded, cajoled and talked over in the most indecent way in order to make them the enemy in the BBC's eyes.

So much for being impartial.

Not only the BBC, CNN had a pop at Daniel Hannan and he didn't like it so fought back:

Especially as the pound climbed back up as we all knew it would, the BBC grudgingly reported it had actually climbed back up "but was expected to fall again quite soon" according to no-one but the BBC.

The FTSE is still climbing and things have moved on. The leadership contests seem not to be bothering the BBC much, mainly because Theresa May (a Remainer) is the bookies favourite to get the Tory leadership job and Jeremy Corbyn is being hailed as a martyr despite a large number of his key labour strongholds telling him they didn't want to remain.

My blood boiled over today when the BBC News took to over-egging the numbers attending the Remain (sore losers) protest in London today, then interviewing two women that basically said that democracy didn't count, some people were shocked at the economic turmoil after the leave vote and basically they were lied to and please could we just forget the whole thing and vote again so remain would be the winning side. The BBC reporter reported there were about forty thousand people there "and possibly several thousand more"... In the cold light of day and as the pictures didn't reflect the wildly exaggerated numbers the BBC reporting has downgraded its numbers to "several thousand" but of course adding "There is no official turn-out figure for this protest" so essentially the BBC made up the original figure it reported.

All of this London-centric Pro-Remain talk just riles the Remainers up even more, because they think everyone thinks like they do and that it's a stitch-up and they are convinced that actually remain won. This is exactly the sort of sentiment that made thousands of leave campaigners take pens into voting booths to make sure that their pencilled crosses couldn't be erased and swapped for a remain vote. They knew it would be a difficult thing to beat the remain vote, they knew it would be tight, but they made sure their vote would be counted. Unlike Remainers who thought the vote would be in the bag and decided not to vote and now complain like bitter children.

Well tough, the point is if you want to make your side of the argument win, you get off your arse and vote for them, especially in such a crucial once-in-a-lifetime vote as in the referendum. There is no re-vote, there is no chance of having another vote in 5 years time. Everyone said it would be a one-shot deal and it was.

I blame schools and their "everybody wins" mentality. Newsflash: in the real world, not everyone does. Some people are losers and so far the whinging seems to come from those parts of society that are unused to losing. Funnily enough, they seem to be the same sort of people that vote for Jeremy Corbyn.

Vote leave got the most votes. Now suck it up England, and stand by this triumph for democracy. Some of the people may have voted Leave for unsavoury reasons, but that doesn't tar the rest of us with the same brush. Some of us more educated people knew there would be a wobble on the stock market, but we calculated it would rebound and still voted to Leave, some of us quite like immigrants, but we consider adding 330,000 people a year to our population too much. We're not racists, we just take a pragmatic view that in order to plan ahead, a government needs FULL control of things like immigration, otherwise they are chasing their tails all the time when it comes to funding public services. Some of us knew £350 million wouldn't be put directly into the NHS, we had done our homework and knew it would be a lot less, but we still voted Leave because we wanted OUR government to have control of how that money was spent.

I hope that the BBC anti-Brexit bias starts to die down over the next week. But I have my doubts.
We need a big news story to take their minds off it, something they can throw dozens of reporters at and turn into some 24-hour rolling drama.

Thursday, 30 June 2016

EU Stitch Up

Here we go, already the prime Leave campaigner, Boris Johnson has pulled out of the Conservative leadership  contest.

That leaves Theresa May as the front runner. She of the remain campaign, she that refuses to listen to the will of the people, she with no leadership qualities, she that will lose the Conservative Party the next election.

Let me be quite clear, she is no Margaret Thatcher. She does not have the sort of qualities that can resolve the fractures in her own party, let alone the country.

The Conservative parliamentary Party have made a catastrophic error of judgement with this. Whether the Conservative grass roots are going to be as vocal about this stitch-up as the labour party activists, who knows, but it's this complete rejection of the will of the people that put MPs in Parliament that hopefully will do for the parties in power.

It really now rests with UKIP to pick up the ball and run with the meme that both Labour and Conservative parties are split between those MPs that want to follow the will of their grass roots supporters or those that want to follow the bidding of their masters in the elite.

It's an idea that could gain a lot of traction and grab disenchanted voters from both the right and the left.

Something is happening in UK politics, the people have spoken and the Elite don't like it and are trying their best to keep the lid on it.

Monday, 27 June 2016

Political Brainstorm in progress.

It looks like the EU referendum has triggered a sort of mental breakdown of the political class in the UK.

David Cameron resigned and for some reason, the Tory party are trying to plot against the Boris Johnson juggernaut. That's despite him being the prime Leave candidate, the highest profile figure they have and a sure-fire figure to take things forward, get a decent negotiating team and sort out the mess. I'd wager he'd have the humility to invite Labour Leave campaigners on the negotiating team as well, to avoid the calls of a stitch-up from the left.

In the meantime the Labour party has imploded yet again, with all the shadow cabinet resigning. So loyal.

I'm not sure why, they seem to be planning for a general election where they think they will get elected so they can do all the negotiating. Not sure how that works, given they were in the losing side in the referendum and their heartlands in the North comprehensively stuck two fingers up to what the Labour political elite were telling them to vote.

Then we get the Liberals, that have come up with a spiffing idea to make themselves even more unelectable by promising to go back into the EU. Now given that 52% of the biggest turnout of any vote in history (72%) voted to Leave the EU, I'm not sure how that's an electable strategy.

In fact ignoring the referendum result seems to be a common meme across a number of MPs that don't get how democracy works. Not only Tim Farron, leader of the Lib Dems, but David Lammy was another tweeting that Parliament should reverse the "non-binding" referendum, because some people are regretting vote leave.  But I can understand Mr Lammy's words, because his ward voted to remain, like most of London. But tough shit Lammy, we voted to leave so suck it up and exercise the will of the Majority.

It really is intriguing to watch this implosion of UK politics. Our politicians can't really handle the situation where the majority of the public have rejected their agenda. They have been deluding themselves for so long they have gone into meltdown.

I've been saying it for so long, it's nice to be vindicated. Another question is how politicians that are so out of touch with the will of the people have been able to stay in power for so long? The answer is they've been reliant on low turnouts. Elections are decided on turnouts around 60%. Which means that only 30% of the country voted for the party in power. This makes it very easy for parties with policies that the majority don't want to vote on win elections.

In the meantime, Corbyn is doing that most Socialist of things and sacking people he doesn't like while the others have resigned. I can't think of a situation where 90% of the ministers have resigned and a Party leader hasn't taken the hint.

What he doesn't realise is he may have had a mandate to lead from Labour party activists, but the majority of ordinary people have overwhelmingly rejected him. I'd hate to be him if it ever sinks in that he's so out of touch with the ordinary working man. It'll crush the deluded old codger.

But that's what you get when you live in a bubble of activists and not in the real world, like most politicians.

Bless 'em, they need to get out more....

Friday, 24 June 2016

What next after Victory?

So, the Leavers won the contest, with a huge shock for the Political establishment both here and in Europe.

I was watching the proceedings last night until about 1am, so I got to see Gibraltar and the Newcastle results in real-time. I was a bit surprised that Gibraltar got a vote and thought the 38,000 votes they cast for remain might actually swing it, especially as the Newcastle result showed the smallest of margins for Remain.

Then the bombshell of the Sunderland vote struck home, wiping out the Remain lead in one single shell burst.

The looks on the commentator's faces was one I will remember for a while. The look of stunned shock, surprise and a quiet contemplation that the status quo was about to end. Jeremy Vine did his best to point out that Sunderland may be an aberration, that things were more likely to be as close as the Newcastle vote. But then a couple more results started to trickle in and the commentators took a breath as the swing went back to remain initially and then oh lordy, it went blue for Leave and mostly stayed there.

At that point, just after 1am I went to bed, hoping that Leave would carry the night and it did. I woke up with only 3 results to go and by that time it was clear that Leave had won.

A big two fingers up to unelected Eurocrats, a raspberry for our own political leaders who privately and quietly want to leave when not in the spotlight, but campaign for remain when pushed front and centre. To be honest neither party leader has covered themselves with glory during the referendum debate.

So, the fall out has already begun. David Cameron has resigned, when he didn't need to. He could have waited at least until after the weekend to reflect and then after a decent and considered pause, offer his resignation. Instead seemingly like a petulant child he has thrown his toys out of the pram and gone. Fair play to him, but it does look like he's done it with indecent haste.

But I respect the decision, he thinks he's not the man to negotiate our extraction from the EU. Hopefully the baton will pas on to someone with a more robust negotiating style and with a robust negotiating team.

Jeremy Corbyn has failed to fall on his sword, espousing that Labour is the party to take Britain forward after Brexit. Not sure how that works, but I'm sure in Jezza's brain the fact he chops and changes his stance on just about everything and talks a load of bollocks makes him a superstar political negotiator. His failure to resign has prompted a vote of no confidence. I've a feeling it has a good chance of working as even his most loyal supporters are growing weary of the immature bollocks he keeps spouting. Clean broom and all that, let's have a proper Eurosceptic in the labour top seat.

Earlier on I did wonder about UKIP. This would be an ideal time fro them to rebrand as the people's party and start to do the same for UK politics as they did for Europe. At least the voter will have an anti-establishment vote and without Europe UKIP will no longer be able to be called a one-trick pony. It will give the Leavers a local voice. There's a whole groundswell of feeling that the little guy is sticking it to the big guys to be tapped. We'll see, but I very much doubt that Nigel and his supporters will fade into the background.

So, the public have spoken, heads are rolling and hopefully we'll get the political realignment that actually puts us, the British voters first.

UKIP: Mission Complete, Where Now For Them?

Congratulations UK, you've shaken off the shackles of Brussels, you are now in charge of your destiny.

But what now for UKIP, whose sole purpose was to extricate ourselves from Brussels?

Well I predict that you've not seen the last of Nigel Farage. The thing is, there is a democratic deficit in Westminster, by which I mean not one of the leaders of the main parties gave voice to the will of the majority of the UK. Much is being said this morning that Jeremy Corbyn would be the best leader.... how exactly?

A man that talked against the EU on the back benches but then switched allegiances when in leadership.

I predict that UKIP will now rebrand as the UK Peoples Party and start to challenge the Westminster status Quo.

We'll see.

Thursday, 23 June 2016

Vote Stealing Going on??

I've just had a message off a friend, she went to vote with her husband and whilst her husband was able to vote, she couldn't because someone (not her) had registered a postal vote on her behalf.

It would be interesting to hear from anyone else that has had a postal vote registered in their name when it wasn't them.

In cases like these I recommend contacting the local returning officer and lodging a complaint.

See if you can get details of the person registering that vote, especially if you can get the address the postal vote was registered at.

If you can get the postal vote from them (if it is still there and someone hasn't used your vote illegally) get it down to your local polling station as they can accept postal votes sealed in the envelope on the day as well, they just get counted separately.

Today is D-Day.

Well, this morning on the way to work I went out and Voted.

Anyone that reads this blog will know the way I voted.

All I can say is fingers crossed for a good result today and maybe I'll be getting an early night so I can get up early in the morning and see the results first-hand.

I do think things will be close, so the results will probably go all the way to the wire. It will be interesting how close it is and if any recounts slow down the reporting process.

What a dilemma: do I stay up for the first batch of results to come in around midnight/1am or do I go to be before the first delcarations and watch the end of it.....

Whatever the outcome, the events of the next few days will be very interesting from a political point of view. I also know that I voted in good conscience the way I believe we should all vote, the way that will be good for the UK and ultimately the EU.

If it is as close as the polls say, then get out and vote, every one counts.

Monday, 20 June 2016

Parliament Jo Cox Debate misses the Real Point by a Country Mile.

Today Parliament was recalled to recognise the death of Jo Cox.

We saw scenes of Jo's sat in the Commons marked by two roses, and there was plenty of sycophantic hand-wringing at the loss of one of their own.

But the wearing of White Roses doesn't address the problem that caused Jo Cox's death.

Not the mealy-mouthed words of the Politicians espousing the reason for her death as hatred, a hate crime committed by someone on the far right. They miss the point by a mile, but that's typical of the Political class, thinking of things in purely political terms.

No, white roses don't address the fact that a person with clear mental health issues, was in the community unsupported.

Time and time again there have been attacks on the public by lone people with known mental health problems that are known to the authorities but nevertheless receive absolutely no support.

It has to stop.

Care in the community swapped secure institutions for a more human approach, with people transferring into the community. The idea that they would be supervised and supported as much as they were inside.

Instead, they were abandoned through ever increasing cuts to support. Of course the mentally ill have no concept of politics and are unlikely to mobilise and vote against such cuts, so they fall through the cracks as their support is withdrawn. They cannot mobilise the sort of representative lobbying that we see actually causes government to change direction.

The stories of right-wing affiliations decades ago are red herrings to distract from the fact that yet another nutter out in the community has murdered someone. He might have got involved with those links under the influence of someone else, but its clear the links aren't fresh. It's clear he was intelligent enough to make a gun from instructions, but had poor social skills. It's quite possible he is on the Autistc Spectrum.

I doubt Thomas Mair had any concept of of Jo Cox's political affiliations other that the venomous comments of "Them and us" from other people in the shops and the estate where he lived, the people at the bottom of the food chain, the people most affected by the influx of immigrants. The bile directed towards those immigrants by everyone around him and the snide comments of his peers at the scenes of his MP paying more attention to the plight of Syrian refugees rather than the people like him. That's more likely to have made him shout "Put British/Britons First" than anything related to the EU Referendum. Unless the local Labour party were making immigration THE issue locally and for that they have to answer.

I'm sure it made him angry, like the rest of us that he was disenfranchised, his representatives dismissing his needs. It wouldn't surprise me if he was coming under ever increasing pressure from the benefit system, being forced to do odd jobs around the estate like gardening to make ends meet.

To someone like that, it would appear entirely rational to lash out in a violent way at the people or person ignoring his plight.

The sad thing is that I understand and can sympathise with him. He won't be the last to lash out in such a way. Okay his lack of rationale may make him the first, but just how far do the rest of the underclass need to be pushed before even sane people start to think of doing the same thing.

So, those MPs wearing roses today need to think long and hard about their part in Jo Cox's death either directly or indirectly. Successive governments need to review their policy towards mental health support. The Left need to think about their high profile preference for promoting immigrants and immigration as a major issue. Jo Cox's beloved Labour party need to look at their referendum campaign and really need to start supporting the underclass more positively, instead of shrugging them off and leaving them to rot unsupported and unrepresented.

Sunday, 19 June 2016

Tsunami of EU Shit put back until after Referendum.

Anyone with a brain will have noticed that the first half of this year has been very quiet on EU matters.

The mass of immigrants over in Calais are still causing masses of trouble for lorry drivers, there are still immigrants being found tucked in and around lorries coming into the UK, we've now got boatloads of immigrants coming across from France.

But the way the media handle the reporting of these issues is very low key. But the problem isn't. We have hundreds of miles of coastline and as a sailor I know how easy it is for a lone boat to arrive at a small harbour and drop off a couple of dozen illegal immigrants. There are no regular patrols along the coastline and no regular checks. Those boats that have been discovered have been found because they got into trouble. One boat in the middle of Portsmouth harbour: a heavily Policed naval base. So currently it's only the idiots and the unfortunate that are detected entering the country. How many are smarter and successful?

There is also a raft of EU enquiries and committees that have deferred their reports until after the referendum. You can only conclude that whet they have to say and their recommendations will be enough to affect the outcome of the referendum if they were released before the vote.

So far there is a report on an security, which points towards an EU army. How that actually works will be interesting. Does it mean the EU has a level of control over the various armed services in the EU? Or do they basically take over all control and the various armed forces are subsumed into a single entity with Westminster removed from control. Also what happens to our nukes?

The EU are also unhappy that there are goods being sold in the UK they aren't skimming some tax from. There are few goods the UK doesn't charge VAT on. Historically these are goods that we consider essentials and it would be immoral to charge tax on. Kids clothes, essential foods, books, medicines and the like. The EU don't care about the morality, they want their VAT and after the referendum there will be a push to change and charge at least the lowest rate (5%) on all goods, including essentials.

Immigration will be another topic, with a push for the UK to accept a further quota of immigrants, to take the pressure of France, Germany and Austria.

We currently have a new class of warship on the books, the type 26 and a slightly less potent derivative as a cheaper option. With Portsmouth closing as a ship manufacturing facility, there will be even more pressure for these ships to be tendered and made in non-UK shipyards. Got to keep the yards in Germany and Holland going, sod our shipyard workers in Scotland.

The Turkish issue looms large as well. Despite protests to the contrary, the papers have details of documents that show that as part of the deal to take Syrian immigrants back, there will be a more open door to Turkish immigration. Something that benefits Germany and their already substantial cheap Turkish labour,  but some thing that will affect the UK as well. I suppose there is a slight upside to this, as more Kebab shops will appear on the high street. Late night drunken revellers rejoice!

Another is the security link between us and America will be further eroded. For decades, France and Germany have watched our close relationship with the American security services with jealousy and increasing venom. There have been a number of moves to either get us to share information that was supplied to us by the US (so the US stop supplying their most confidential information) or to force us to cut ties with the US altogether. There is yet another move deferred until after the referendum.

How that increases our security if we stay in, I have no idea, but cutting ourselves off from THE most highly resourced security and intelligence gathering operation in the world seems to me to actually worsen our security.

There is also a decision due by the European Courts regarding our "Snoopers Charter" laws. Again deferred, but it's assumed to side against the UK government and basically tie one hand behind their back when it comes to detecting, tracking and apprehending terrorists. Better security inside the EU? I don't think so!

There have been no calls from the EU commission for their ever-increasing pot of money from us... yet. But that's another thing that is... you guessed it : deferred until after the referendum.

In all there are at least a dozen reports, decisions and rulings that have been deferred until July so as not to affect the outcome of the UK referendum.

Now if the EU was as benign as it purports to be, surely those reports, decisions and rulings would be so beneficial to our way of life as EU citizens releasing them wouldn't affect the outcome of the referendum.

But, the fact they are being deferred leads me to think they won't be benign and beneficial at all.

If you vote remain, you only have yourself to blame when this avalanche of EU legislation drops on you. It's no good trying to get Cameron to change things (like the remain camp keep trying to get us believe we can against 26 other countries), the decisions, reports and rulings are already there, they've just been deferred.

Without any other reason, this wall of distraction and misinformation should be a huge incentive to vote leave. How can it be any other way? Why would you vote for an organisation that attempts to distract and deceive? It's not like Westminster, where you can vote the lying shits out. No, these are unelected lying, deceitful toads.The only way you can divest yourselves from them is Vote Leave.

Wednesday, 15 June 2016

Vote Leave

If you want democracy, Vote Leave.

If you want the ability to sack the people that make the rules, Vote Leave.

If you want to retain rights to freedom gained in the UK over centuries, Vote Leave.

If you want to reject restricted rights and freedoms handed to you by Bureaucrats, Vote Leave.

If you want to regain UK sovereignty, Vote Leave.

If you believe in innocent until proven guilty, Vote Leave.

If you believe no UK citizen should be deported without solid evidence, Vote Leave.

If you want to end jobs for political has-beens, Vote Leave.

If you want to stop jobs for the boys, Vote Leave.

If you want to put an end to unelected people having power over you, Vote Leave.

If you want Westminster to have more power than a town council, Vote Leave.

If you want to regain the rights to fish our own seas, Vote Leave.

If you want to end the bailouts of a currency we don't use, Vote Leave.

If you want to avoid ever having to use the Euro, Vote Leave.

If you want to restrict the influx of unskilled, low paid workers from Eastern Europe, Vote Leave.

If you want to end the depression on low skilled wages, Vote Leave.

If you want better social mobility, Vote Leave.

If you want our government to invest in our youth, Vote Leave.

If you want the government to train our people rather than rely on imported labour, Vote Leave.

If you want us to have more direct influence on the World, Vote Leave.

If you want to end the idiocy of the Common Agricultural Policy, Vote Leave.

If you want to be able to take immigrants that try to cross the channel back to France, Vote Leave.

If you want to be able to deport criminals from EU countries back to where they came, Vote Leave.

If you want to abolish an expensive layer of the Political Establishment, Vote Leave.

If you want to end the rule that allows firms to pay tax in the cheapest EU country, Vote Leave.

If you want to stop the political Gravy Train, Vote Leave.

Even if you just want to stick two fingers up to the political establishment, Vote Leave.

Tuesday, 14 June 2016

Ex-PMs Wheeled out for Remain Cause.

I do like how every single ex-Prime Minister since Maggie Thatcher has been wheeled out in favour of remaining in the EU. Troughing elitists to a man, they have nothing to say that is relevant to those of us at the bottom of the food chain.

Things have got so desperate for Remain, thanks to their slipping lead, that they have dragged out Ol' Slugger and phone thrower Gordon Brown to put forward their case.

Like he's the best person when it comes to policy: Sold our gold off and an all-time low, bottled it and bailed out the banks... we've not forgotten.

Maybe they promised him a cushy job in Europe if he stood up and said a few words in favour if Remain. Just like that other political failure and comprehensively unelectable champion of Labour, Neil Kinnock.

Lest we forget the Kinnock failed spectacularly here in the UK and miraculously rebuilt his career in the EU elite. Just like all the other Labour leaders of recent memory that were supposed to support the working class and deceitfully joined the elite on huge wages and expense accounts.

They do not have the working man's interests at heart. At All. Fuck 'em and do exactly the opposite of what they want.

Monday, 13 June 2016

EU Remain Threats Reach the er, Threatosphere (i'm Tm'ing that right now..)

So it seems the remain camp have threatened everything from the economy having a bit of a wobble to full blown World War Three.

Today's threat is if we leave the EU then it will cease to exist. What they really mean is the EU political project will cease to exist, with it's end game of a United States of Europe Superpower and full economic and political integration.

If that's what they are threatening will happen, then bring it on. The EU needs to reboot itself and draw back from political integration. If the UK withdrawing from full integration starts a cascade of other states wanting the same, then that's the democratic right of the population of those states. If they want the same as us and want an in-out referendum in their countries, so be it. Let democracy have a say.

Then we might get back to a more human, more individual and democratic Europe.

And two fingers up to the technocrats that think they know best and want to take the project further than anyone in the EU wants. Except the Eastern Europeans: they're used to undemocratic leadership....

Wednesday, 1 June 2016

Labour Together?

Apparently the Labour party have launched an initiative called "Labour together" which aims to unify the party and work towards becoming electable again.

The problem is, in order to become electable, the Labour Party need to understand how it came to power the last time, back in 1997.

Essentially it was elected on a carefully crafted lie, a deception: New Labour.

New Labour was a rebranding of Old Labour.... the Labour of Harold Wilson, Jim Callaghan and Michael Foot. With it's new clothes, Labour could pass itself off as the alternative Tory Party. Without that deception, it would never have won in 1997. New Labour promised not to change a thing, it promised to continue Tory Policies at least for its first term in office.

Essentially the electorate in 1997 were voting Tory. That is the hard truth that today's Labour party have to accept. And a hard truth that they have to undertsand is that no-one will vote for the "Old" Labour party. It's anachronistic, it harks back to a bygone age, with old policies that refuse to look ahead and deal with new commercial, economic and social truths.

Once Tony Blair had gone and Gordon Brown had assumed the office of Prime Minister, it didn't take long for the makeup to slip, for the deception to fail and for old labour to show through the cracks. Hence why Gordon Brown lost almost immediately. Spunking Billions Bailing out Banks in a misguided effort to look like a friend of the Rich and er, Rich, just alienated him from those very people that didn't mind the Old Labour Party showing through the ever-thinning veneer of New Labour. A party profligate with taxpayer's money, with a staggering lack of prudence, the very word that Gordon Brown built his Chancellorship on.

Gordon Brown, the man who thought that ordinary voters concerned about mass immigration of unskilled labour were bigots. Which is a train of thought that lasts with Labour to this day: Labour MPs and Councillors who rely on the working class vote despise the very people that vote for them. I've seen it first hand myself. Whether voters are concerned about unfettered immigration, drive a white van or have the Cross of Saint George outside their house, Labour despise them. But then tell the lie that they are for the working man whilst at the same time taxing working class pensions, bailing out banks and courting the Big City Investment Gamblers.

And it stands true today that once the facade failed and Old Labour showed itself, the party once again became unelectable with the majority of the population. Gordon Brown the phone-thrower faded away to be replaced by Ed Milliband, the pawn of the Unions. The only person I've though has actually had a successful charisma bypass. Nope, nothing there that would convince the electorate to vote.

In fact with Ed's election campaign Labour missed a trick. They should have apologised for Gordo's largesse with our money. They should have apologised for the bank bailout and recognised it for the poor choice it really was. But instead they promoted yet another lie: that there was no other option and that even after throwing all that money away into the pockets of the rich, that we didn't need to turn off the taps and suffer a period of austerity. They lied and said that everything was fine and that austerity wasn't necessary, that we could go on spending. On the other hand the Tories said that the debt we were racking up would have to be paid back for generations to come and that message resonated with the electorate.

The Messge was Old Labour: same spendthrifts they were way back when.

Now they have Jeremy Corbyn, a died in the wool Trotskyite that on the back benches decried everything New Labour did and stood for, despite it getting his party elected to power. A man that during the leadership process came across as sane and reasoned. Yet another lie, as on the back benches he'd had the freedom to make some pretty poor choices and got away without the sort of forensic scrutiny of the front benchers.

Even now he promotes a lie in promoting the campaign to stay in Europe, when he has been recorded saying he doesn't agree with it. Very strange for a man supposedly promoted as one who will stick to his principles.

So, back to "Labour Together".... how can it work?

Well, there first needs to be some acceptance of past mistakes and poor policy decisions. You can't move forward until you understand the mistakes of the past.

Part of that process is Labour needs to stop promoting the lies and deceptions they arrange to cover the truth. They need to acknowledge the deception of New Labour that got them into power in 1997 and why the population voted for them.

They need to understand that they need to modernise and move forward. Their backers, the unions, need to do the same and start to work in the modern world. The first target must be zero hours contracts, that benefit no-one but the boss. A concerted, united campaign to get them abolished must be a priority for them. Employers need to commit to employment, they should not be allowed to get the best of both worlds. There should be no get-out for using agency workers either.

They must set out their stall and promote policies that help those in work and must stop the emphasis on benefits. Even thought staunch Labour voters may be recipients of benefits, making everyone reliant on low wages topped up by benefits does not increase their share of the vote. Many recipients of family credits despise the system that locks them into benefits and allows their employer to pay lower wages.

Labour must also clean house of hypocrites. Those Labour council leaders that pay themselves excessive wages must be brought to book, MPs that claim excessive expenses must also be cleansed. Labour cannot claim to be the party of the working man if it's members set themselves apart and above the workers.

It's a long road, but it needs to be done. Jeremy Corbyn is not the man to do it, despite the zealots that support him. The Ultra-leftists scare the electorate and those that control the media.

There needs to be moderation in movement towards modernisation, but the goal and the message has to be clear and promoted loudly. Labour needs to reclaim the centre ground, with a goal that promotes a fair crack for those that work and help themselves, to send the message to the one percenters that those that make their money want to keep more of it for doing the work. It's not redistribution of wealth from the Trotskyite message book, it's a fair wage for a days work.

Labour need to promote social mobility, in the old days young socialist apprentices that became middle-class engineers and managers and still voted Labour. The same can apply in future. Help people to help themselves climb the social ladder rather than mire them in low pay and benefits. Do not hold them back.

Scrap University tuition fees as well. A University education is not a universal right. Academics and Apprentices can end up in the same place eventually. But opening up University education to all devalues it and tuition fees just make it worth even less. Paying thousands for a worthless degree is just wrong.

But... Labour's track record shows they will plough forward with "Labour Together" with the aplomb of a part-time amateur bomb disposal technician. Just wait for the implosion: God forbid Labour should ever look outwards and forwards...

Wednesday, 18 May 2016

Ask yourself why David Cameron Wants to Stay in the EU.

I often drift off the beaten track when it comes to political debate and it takes me down tracks and asks questions that no-one else is asking.

For instance: As the head of the UK Parliament, why is David Cameron on the "Remain" side?

If you think about it, if we voted "Leave", he would get greater power, he would be the head of an independent Parliament that could forge its own destiny. Rather than submitting and rubber-stamping a large number of laws handed down by the EU, he would be able to influence 100% of UK laws in Parliament, by debating them with elected members of Parliament. He would be able to have influence and sway debate in Parliament and chart a course for the nation, he would help forge a destiny for this country at the start of it's new-found independence.

As a public servant, as someone who should be focussed on public service, there should be no greater goal than being able to have your name written into the destiny and history of the UK.

But instead he wants us to remain part of an undemocratic club, where he has very little influence, being part of a club of 27 other countries. Linked to the will the majority of those nations for good or ill.


Is it because he can take credit for the best parts of EU legislation, while saying the worst isn't his fault?

Is it because the EU provides a layer of beaurocracy that he can appoint favourites to so they become part of the well paid establishment?

Is it because his friends in the big corporations want a steady flow of cheap labour from Eastern Europe?

I just wonder why?

Wednesday, 23 March 2016

Terrorist Blind Spot Blights Belgium and France

In the aftermath of the terrorist bombings in Brussels, David Cameron has slated Nigel Farage for saying that the attacks are not linked to immigration.

Reeeallly..... I think Mr Cameron stretches credulity somewhat. It's like he has a blind spot to the realities of what is actually happening on the ground around the EU and it's borders.

As I've said before, Europe and Schengen and the whole idea of free movement would be absolutely fine, if the external borders to the area weren't so porous. The fact is that the sheer numbers of people travelling across Europe's external borders has overwhelmed those countries that lie on the fringes of Europe.

The razor wire fences have gone up all too late and are all too easily bypassed as the refugees, asylum seekers and terrorists just walk to the next country along and walk through the border there.

With free movement within Schengen, one would have visions of razor wire, dogs, guard towers, machine gun nests and the rest protecting the external borders. You know, so we can control who is walking across the border and therefore able to be inside that border.

Instead the terrorists are able to move freely and unchecked between the terrorist camps in the Middle East and the city centres of Europe, taking advantage of the massive influx overwhelming the poorer countries on the fringe of Europe.

The interesting thing is why Brussels, why Paris? Could it be they are easier targets than Germany, or is it payback for interventions in Syria and Lybia? Who knows. It could just be they are easier and softer targets than the rest of Europe.

Getting back to the original point, David Cameron is wrong, very wrong. Free movement of people between countries is a fundamental part of the EU project that they will not give up easily, even though the application is very flawed. Just like most things the EU sets up, the theory is fine, but when it comes to application the reality is pretty poor. Just like the Euro project that went ahead against all common sense, agricultural policy that used to create mountains of unused subsidised food, EU immigration and border policy is a shambles that we need to extricate ourselves from.

The only reason there haven't been more atrocities in the UK is that we have good intelligence links to the U.S. and the fact it's harder to cross our border without significant checks.

Until the EU protects it external in a robust manner, then it leaves itself open to attacks of this nature.

Although its not a big leap for a terrorist group to sail a boat over from France, Belgium or Holland, up the Thames and then carry out an RPG attack on the terrace of the House of Commons, or drop of a group of Jihadis with weapons not dissimilar to the Mumbai attacks.

Thursday, 3 March 2016

Debunking the EU Referendum "Remain" Scare Tactics.

On the Radio this morning there was a lot of talk about the latest scare stories from the "Remain" camp in the EU referendum.

The main one that France would kick out our border force people on their soil and allow migrants to cross the channel  if we left the EU.

Okay, I accept that when we leave the EU, we may lose the agreement that allows our Police and Border forces to work on French Soil.

So yes, migrants will be able to travel across the channel.


We'll not be part of any agreement to accept migrants of any shape or form, other than our obligations to the UN. Anyone arriving without documentation will be shipped right back to France on the next boat back. No debate, no humans rights prevarication, just get back on the boat and let the French deal with you.

Anyone with documentation will be held in detention centres and swiftly dealt with (no ECHR bollocks any more) and anyone not matching our UN obligations will also be shipped back.

So, sorry "Remain" and the French, scare averted.

Next is the myth that suddenly we won't be able to trade with anyone when we leave.

Now this one is patent bollocks. The first thing we do when we leave the EU is invoke Article 50 and then we start negotiations with the EU about leaving. This process of "de-tanglement" as we negotiate the separation will take roughly 2-3 years as we re-negotiate arrangements concerning our various areas of trade, security, etc.

Are the "Remain" camp really trying to tell me that during this process we can't negotiate our own trade agreements with countries outside the EU? That while we are still in the EU and in the process of de-tangling that we suddenly can't trade under existing EU agreements? That suddenly the world puts up shutters to any and all of our goods as soon as the population vote to exit? Or the same happens when we invoke article 50?

Our (and the EU country's) G8/G20 obligations still remain while all of this is going on, so there will be no barriers to free trade. It's just that duty may be payable on imports and exports like there is with other countries like there is currently with Norway for instance. But that tax/duty can't be punitive as required by G8/G20 obligations.

No, all of that gets negotiated. We invoke article 50, which informs the EU of our intention to leave, and then we negotiate all the deals needed for when we do leave. While those negotiations are in process, we are still EU members and can still trade with the EU and also trade with other countries under EU-brokered deals..

Next is the myth that we will be less secure outside the EU. What a joke this one is. The "Remain" camp are trying to say that some how the EU will refuse to share intelligence with us. Really, it's like trying to get blood out of a stone even while we're IN the EU.

However, as we already have close ties to the biggest intelligence gathering service in the world, i.e. the American CIA and NSA leaving the EU would make our security BETTER because the yanks might share a bit more with us as there's less risk we'd be under some EU agreement to share it with the French and ex-Warsaw Pact countries.

We're not going to leave NATO, so co-operation and inter-operability between the armed forces of the European Nations will still remain.

Next the big issue the "Remain" always push that we will have to abide by all EU standards but have no say in Europe.

Sorry, the vast majority of standards are handed down from the U.N. after global negotiations. Currently the EU represents the UK in these negotiations, but after we leave we will have direct input. If the EU have any extra requirements like CE certification, then that's just part of selling into Europe. At least our companies will have the choice to go through CE certification to sell to the EU rather than it be mandated.

If CE certification is too expensive then our companies are free to trade with countries that don't require it and save costs, therefore making their goods more competitive.

As an example, are "Remain" really telling me that for some reason overnight our mobile phones won't work in Europe because we'll make them to a different standard? What a load of bollocks. We'll continue to make them to GLOBAL standards issued by the U.N. that make them globally compatible so we can sell them in the global market.

While on the subject of global trade, apparently BMW came out this morning and said that jobs in the UK are at risk because trade tariffs (I assume between us and the EU) would affect jobs.

So, our G8/G20 trade obligations will suddenly be ignored when we leave the EU then? I don't think so. They will remain in place which means we have an obligation to free trade without punitive tariffs. I'm sure if we did start raising tariffs then the other trading countries in the G8/G20 would have something to say about it at the U.N. level.

In all of this have you noticed that I refer a lot to the United Nations? That's because in effect the EU has been superseded by the U.N. The European Union was an idea borne out of the first world war and reinforced by the period before world war 2 by the inaction of the ineffective League of Nations.

The EU is a level of beaurocracy that is no longer required. It's also unaccountable and anti-democratic. If it can't be fundamentally changed or abolished then we need to leave it. The billions of pounds we give to the EU to subsidise French farmers can instead be re-invested in schools and hospitals in our own country.
We can stop paying benefits to children in Poland.
We can start protecting our borders and get UK fishing fleets fishing UK waters again.

We can start controlling our own destiny in the world, by being able to vote the people at the top in or out. Something we currently can't do as part of the EU.