Covid-19 Data Whistleblower Arrested in New Zealand.

Last week I watched a video on YouTube. It was a documentary including Barry Young, a statistician with a health authority in New Zealand.

He explained that New Zealand was uniquely positioned to provide accurate data on the efficacy of the Covid vaccines, along with death rates. The data was compelling, drilling down even to how many injections were administered by each Covid-19 vaccinator and the death rate of the people vaccinated by each vaccinator.

Staggeringly, there were some people administering the Vaccine that had a 25% death rate. Now that's not clear if it's the vaccine batches administered that are responsible, or poor training of the person administering the vaccine. But he did have more data on each vaccine batch and the death rates associated with each batch.

There was a staggering amount of detail in the data. 

It's important information that should be out in the public domain. Considering it will help in the future to inform health administrators of future pandemics, it really should be out there in the public domain so that various scientists can look at the data.

Barry Young should be praised for brining this important and accurate data to light, but instead he has been arrested. I take it they don't have protections in New Zealand for whisleblowers, or maybe it just depends on how embarrassing the data is to the government.

He has appeared in court charged with a data breach. 

I'm sorry that Barry has had to go through this, but looking at the data it was important to highlight it. 

Interestingly, the YouTube video is now unavailable.

Liz Gunn, the lady interviewing Barry Young is now fearing she will be arrested to. She is effectively on the run.

Sadly they are really trying to restrict the release of accurate data that shows that Covid vaccines are not safe. Interestingly the data also showed that the training of the vaccinators may have contributed to the problem.

But without accurate data we cannot be informed and we cannot debate the issue. 

Why is it being covered up?

What is "Populist"?

 "Populist" has been used as a derogatory term for the past decade, but what is it exactly?

It's listening to the population (The popul bit of populist: literally "of the population"), it means exactly whet democracy was supposed to do: have the politicians listen to the people that vote for them.

If populist is being used as a derogatory term, the people using it as such are not democratic. Instead they are authoritarian. Otherwise why would they use it as a slur?

Just remember when people use populist to slur someone, hat they are actually saying is "I support authoritarianism and reject democracy".

That is all.

Has The Time Come to Form a New Standing Army of the People?

It seems that the Police do not like the working class. It seems the Government don't like the working class, it seems that the working class have lost the political landscape. 

The views of the working class are not represented in Politics, despite Government relying on the working class to provide their sons and daughters to fill the places in the Armed Forces to do the fighting and dying on their behalf.

Has the time come to boycott the Armed forces and stop our kids joining?

Has the time come for the working class to form a standing army, to protect themselves from the predations of the Police and others? 

I think the point has arrived that it's pretty clear that the working class are actively being supressed. Politically, and physically so we cannot air grievances by protesting. 

As governments only seem to respond to violence or threats of violence, should an working class army be formed that (a) protects the working class from the Police, at a equal or more aggressive level and with more manpower than the Police can muster?

What Does "Far Right" Mean?

If you're the mainstream media, it men's "someone we don't agree with or approve of" that's all. Not "almost a Nazi", not "hideously authoritarian", just, "We don't approve of your opinion".

The Way to Beat the Boats.

I have a way of beating the boats. An idea that allows the EHCR to do it's thing, but with modifications to existing legislation.

First of all, let me say the EHCR can stay and the UK will support those identified as refugees. 

However, legislation needs to be modified as to what constitutes a refugee. There should be no presumption on the status either way of a person arriving on the shores of the South coast. The EHCR should only come into force when the identity, statehood and status of a person has been properly identified.

Any person arriving on these shores without a passport should not be afforded the protections of the EHCR. By destroying any documentation they had they have arrived at the UK with a malicious intent. That should be the UK's stance at the outset.

People that arrive with documentation should be afforded a higher status because it costs us less and takes less time to identify a person and confirm their status either as a refugee or not. Passports by definition normally request the protection of the bearer by the host country. That's a legal contract. Those without any identification should have no legal status on the shores of the UK. They should be bussed to the airport and returned back to France.

Those with identifiable malicious intent (destroying ID) should be immediately returned from whence they came.  No protection, no identifiable status, in fact their actions stem from a need to not clarify their status, to abuse any process the UK has. As I said, malicious.

That's the way you deal with unidentified individuals. 

The argument being that without ID there is no way to immediately assess their status. They cannot be granted refugee status without knowing where they come from. A deliberate attempt to obfuscate their identity and therefore their status should be classed as malicious and indeed an illegal act.

There should be no automatic or inferred status as a refugee as determined by UN, EU, UK or any other legislative body. 

Have We Crossed the Rubicon on Immigration in Europe?

It seems that Geert Wilders is on track for a victory in the Dutch elections. Classed as far-right by the media, Wilders fought an anti-immigration stance. It seems the generally tolerant Dutch have had enough of mass immigration and have now voted Wilders in to be the majority party in Dutch politics. 

But this does seem to indicate a point has been crossed and politics will never be the same again. I think the public have sussed that mass immigration does not benefit the country accepting the immigrants. Especially if the government allowing the immigration to happen do nothing to accommodate the numbers arriving. Allowing mass immigration without having the economic ability and spare housing stock to properly disperse these immigrants across the country is just madness.

So mass immigration does nothing for the economy, it also does nothing for social cohesion. As the numbers increase, there is less ability to gradually integrate into the society of their chosen country. Instead we get ghettos where each ethnic group set up shop. They also bring with them the animosities and social mores from their previous countries. They do not integrate and disperse. They steadfastly refuse to. 

I know people from my Northern home town three generations now, where they have not spoken English.  They may have learned it in school, but instead in using it as their main language, their main language is the language of their "home" country, the country they identify as their ethnic root. They speak the language of their "home" country mainly, they marry across borders into communities either in their home country, or from the disparate ethnic groups in European countries. Some born in England speak English so poorly they rely on the interpreters that councils supply at great expense. I also put "Home" in quotes, because even they were born in Britain and live here, they do not see Britain as their home country. Their home country is on another continent. They only mention Britain as their home when it suits, when it affords them some benefit, some advantage. Otherwise, Britain is far from their affections.

The issue of numbers and non-integration is so bad that now even the chattering classes that have very little interaction with the ethnic immigrants  (save for visiting the odd ethnic restaurant) are seeing the increase in violence perpetrated by immigrants on our streets. 

It seems that rather than be grateful to the country that gave them protection from whatever persecution they were fleeing from, they are spiteful towards the country that took in their family and gave them safe haven. 

I think we are seeing the tipping point. Thanks to the various marches across Europe, the disrespect for our culture, our heroes and our social mores, the majority of the public are saying they have had enough.

At some point that person that keeps shitting on your lawn has to be dealt with. It's a pity that it's taken so long for a majority of the population to wake up. It makes the task of integration or deportation more difficult. One hopes that the equivalent of throwing a bucket of water over them would see them off and locking the gate will do. But I have my doubts, sadly.

But I'm heartened that it is happening, however slowly.

Still Not a Conservative Budget

The Conservative Party have been in power and they still haven't abolished the IR35 rules introduced by Labour that killed the independent contractor market.

13 years and waiting.....

And the next budget will be controlled by a Labour chancellor, so I doubt I'll see IR35 abolished in my working lifetime.

The Law of Unintended Consequences.

 I'm always minded to disagree when someone says "The Government must do something" regarding whatever pet interest they are championing.

The problem is that the rules that come out of that "Doing Something" may not do the thing you want them to do and have further unforeseen consequences down the line, or elsewhere in legislation.

I'm reminded of this by the Formula One debacle last weekend, where Carlo Saintz hit an unsecured manhole cover and destroyed his car. It required serious repairs to fix the car ready for the following day.

But Formula One has had rule changes over the last decade to try and enforce some semblance of fairness and to allow lesser-monied teams to compete with the teams with larger pockets. Laser-focussed on creating a fair playing field, they ignored the affects the rule changes would have on every single scenario, including the repair of a car forced upon a team by outside forces.

So teams are limited to the number of things they can change on a car to limit the amount of upgrades or to stop them adding important parts that only last a race. Changing major parts incurs a penalty.

Teams are also cost-capped.to try and even the playing field, so none of the big teams could have a budget ten times the amount of the smaller teams and gain an advantage in increased R&D.

Sadly, no-one foresaw a car being damaged by a poorly prepared track.

So Carlos's car was destroyed by the track. Unfortunately major parts required replacing. Instant penalty. Go back ten places on the grid.

Despite the stewards looking at loopholes to try and avoid Carlos being penalised through no fault of his own, there were none. The rules were watertight. Ten steps back you go. Very unfair on the driver as everyone recognised. But... unintended consequences.

Not only that, the costs of the repair now rest with The team Ferrari. That's an unplanned cost that now affects their cost cap. So late in the season there is very little chance to absorb that cost into the overall budget. So it's possible they may be over the allowed budget at the end of this season. That is, unless someone accept liability for the unsecure manhole cover and compensates Ferrari for the cost of the repairs, so the work than becomes budget-neutral. Would the track owner pay the hundreds of thousands out of their insurance? Would insurance cover it? Would Ferrari chase the operative that welded the manhole shut, if they were self-employed? Would their professional liability cover pay out? 

The point I'm making is that unless you are some omnipotent being that can foresee absolutely every consequence of your actions and any legislation you propose, then be very wary of imposing it. Because one day there may be a very unintended consequence of your legislation, something severely affecting a person or group of people you never intended to affect.

Will Remainers Be Moaning a Decade After Brexit?

It seems the Anti-Brexit rhetoric will never end and now we have a fervently Pro-Remain, Pro-Globalism cabinet in charge of the country.

Will we ever get the Brexit we asked for?

Also will the Remainers ever stop moaning about the damage caused to the UK by Brexit?

It's very easy for Remainers to blame an aged grey-haired, male, Racist, Zenophobic caste of the country for voting to leave the EU, but they steadfastly fail to blame the people to blame for Brexit: themselves.

They failed to convince a majority of the country that the EU was worth voting for.

The EU itself failed to show it was worth voting for.

If the EU was maybe more upbeat about allaying Brexiteer's concerns, rather than just hoping for the best, then Brexit may never have happened.

Instead the EU continued to work in it's own arrogant way and didn't do the work to convince a significant majority of the country that it was worth fighting for. As with much of modern politics, there was too much stick and not enough carrot.

The EU was all about directives preventing the operation of the UK government and to an extent the remnants of the EU we still cling to are still doing the same.

The ECHR controls legislation in the UK and is still overruling, via the UK supreme court (another remainer invention) the UK government's wishes.

Let's make this clear: we did not get the Brexit we were promised. From the start it was scuppered by those that thought we had voted incorrectly, that we couldn't see the benefits. 

The mismash of legislation that came out of the Brexit negotiations benefitted no-one. EU authorities still seek to impose their will and punish the UK for daring to remove itself from the EU. Other countries have done it and are spectacularly successful, but the UK failed to use any leverage and instead gave up bargaining chips too easily.

EU customs authorities still take ay too long to process packages to and from the UK. They arbitrarily impose excessive charges even though paperwork is filled in correctly. Or they just reject packages for no reason.

Sorry, but that is no way to do business. If you can't be professional and instead revert to personal attacks, or act unprofessionally or unpredictably, then I have a problem with you.

These are exactly the petty, power-hungry practices we left the EU for. The practices that extort you unless you are inside the club.

Nothing has convinced me to go back despite the issues raised by the current state of Brexit.

The Rise of The Closed Scientific Mind.

If anything illustrates the piss-poor state of modern science, it's the attempts to debunk the findings or suppositions of Avi Loeb, who is searching for interstellar objects.

He keeps an open mind, saying that the current mania around UAP (The UFOs of old) needs to be backed up by scientific investigation. He wants to set up a world-wide network surveying the skies to look out for unexplained aerial phenomena with decent, modern and clear sensors, so the sightings can be properly investigated, rather than the always out-of-focus, blurry, overly grainy and unclear optics of the rarely-released videos we get online.

Professor Loeb's last investigation was to look for parts of a meteorite that airbursted over the ocean. It was confirmed by Norad to be faster than any normal meteorite. Faster than the escape velocity of the Sun, which defines it as an object not in orbit around the Sun, but an interstellar object from another solar system. 

Not only was it one of the fastest objects to interact with the Earth, it was also one of the longest lasting, indicating it was made not of the normal rock, or iron, instead it was made of some denser material, able to handle the stresses of entry into our atmosphere at higher than normal meteoritic speeds for longer.

He went to the ocean and dragged a magnetic sled behind a ship. That bore fruit: tiny (in the millimetre range) spherical objects attracted to the magnets of the sled in the area of the meteor's track. Indicating they could be molten parts of the meteorite falling to the Ocean as the object melts in the severe heat.

So far so good. Hopefully the spherules will prove to be extra-solar in origin. Time will tell.

But I'm interested in the number of other scientists that instead of openly supporting this scientific exploration, actively attempt to debunk Professor Loeb's investigations and suppositions.

The spherules recovered from the track of the meteorite have so far proved to have unusual compositions. For a meteorite that is. Instead of the normal Iron and Nickel of the majority of objects that fall to Earth, the spherules recovered contain some unusual metals like Beryllium, Uranium and Lanthanum. 

Just those results would or should pique the interests of any scientist. But instead the science community seems intent on attributing more mundane origins for the spherules.

Professor Loeb is doing further isotopic analysis on the pinhead sized objects he recovered in order to once and for all confirm if they were formed in our solar system or beyond. If it's from another solar system, that opens more opportunity to go back and recover bigger chunks of the object. 

The presence of Uranium opens up the possibility of a nuclear power source. Or it could just be a chunk of rock from a planet outside our solar system. But either way it still pushes science forward with more information than it had before Professor Loeb went trawling.

But it really intrigues me why the scientific community won't stay quiet and let him just get on with confirming his suppositions or coming out and saying the material recovered isn't interstellar. 

Why is there always this clamouring to disprove research that is against the current narrative? That's against the scientific method, surely? Isn't an open mind the best to have, to openly investigate and move science along?

Why instead do we have this closed shop in everything scientific, especially climate and medicine? Is it the financial interests behind the various wings of science vying for funds? Is it professional jealousy? 

Somebody please explain!

Ex-CIA Operative Mike Baker Confirms My Opinions on the Hamas Attack on Israel.

Mike Baker was an Analyst with the CIA. He confirms what I've been saying on replies to suggestions that Israel deliberately allowed the attack by Hamas. 

It's a pretty sick viewpoint. Hamas only needs to learn lessons from tricks procedures we used back in WW2 to be able to fool a Western Intelligence service that have been lulled into expecting intelligence to be spoon fed to thgem through electronic devices and plants within Hamas.

My first reply on OOL:

"It's quite plausible that Hamas has learned not to use the electronic devices that Israel regularly hack into and eavesdrop and also have an affective regime to weed out moles. This is but one attack amongst many that have failed. It just may mean that this time Hamas got it right. But like with any terrorist group, the group only have to get it right once, the intelligence services have the get it right every time."

Was then backed up by my second:

"Security, distraction and old-fashioned non-electronic communications. Welcome to Hamas learning the tricks the UK used back in wold War Two. Whilst it's implausible that Israeli intelligence services missed the build-up, it's certainly possible if they thought they could eavesdrop electronically and get enough intelligence that way. It's very Western to ignore human intelligence and rely mostly on electronic surveillance. Much like the German raid on Coventry led to lots of conspiracy theories despite later revealing there was no unambiguous intelligence, the same may apply here. Hamas may have just gone dark, been able to keep information secure for once or released curated information to overwhelm Israeli intelligence services. Sadly it only takes that one success to lead to an atrocity like this."

Nice to be vindicated by an identifiable intelligence professional..

Scraping the Barrel: David Cameron Returns to Cabinet.

<Sigh> David Cameron is back as Foreign Secretary. 

It just says it all really about the state of politics in the UK and the West as a whole. Just the same names swirling around the cesspit that is Westminster. No new names, no new ideas. Just more of the same and everyone indistinguishable from each other.

Rishi might as well offer Tony Blair a job in government. There's another Turd that refuses to be flushed.

Suella Braverman Sacked for Attacking a Protected Class.

Just like I mentioned last week, Muslims are protected in this country. Not even a politician can call them out. Not even a politician can mention the protection they are afforded by the Police. Not even a politician can call out the preferential treatment the Police afford certain classes of people in this country.

Of course no-one can mention that the indigenous white people of this country are at the bottom of the list of protected classes. God help you if you are male to boot. You are fucked several times over in the Bonus Bingo victim Olympics.

If ever you wanted proof that the Government tread on eggshells when it comes to the Muslim question, then the sacking of Braverman is it. Even cabinet politicians are not safe.

That's how scared the government are of the Gulf states amongst others pulling money out of the UK. That's the power of the Muslim vote as well. 

I've mentioned before the Muslims vote in blocks. If the Muslim population gets anywhere near the minimum required to win an election (which can be as low as 20-30% in low turnout elections) then the Muslim vote wins. 

Hence why in some areas it's all Muslim interests that define political action. Even with a population as low as 20 or 30%. With that sort of population Muslims don't just hold the balance of power, they are the majority vote. 

So Braverman had to go. 

Suella Braverman, Palestinians and the Met Police: Exposing Gulf State Extortion.

 The Met Police's refusal to ban Palestinian marches on Remembrance Sunday has highlighted the protected status of Muslims in the UK. The head of the Met says he has no power to stop any protest which is clearly untrue, otherwise all of those miners prevented from protesting in the Eighties, the EDL more recently and the lockdown protesters that were intercepted and turned away can sue the Met for abusing or exceeding their powers. In those protests did the Met act unlawfully?

Interesting question.

Suella Braverman has jumped in with her size nine stilettos and said the this refusal to ban the Palestinian protests, but an overt willingness to ban others indicates that the Met Police are biased. Well, we know that because the Met has acted overtly to stop several protests that are "against the narrative" of government and globalist interests. Just stop oil is another protected protest, a protest which promotes the globalist agenda of increased consumption in the name of saving the earth.

And of course Muslims. An apparently protected religion and section of society. They can rape children with impunity and only when the numbers of victims climb into several thousands, do the Police grudgingly swing into action years later. There are active child rape gangs working in the towns and cities of the UK today, but the Police refuse to act still. The Kebab shop child trafficking network is still in full swing. Just visit the eateries in any city or major town and you'll see young girls in the back rooms suspiciously past what you'd consider a decent time. 

But the Police fail to investigate and fail to prosecute time and time again. Until the number of victims is impossible to ignore.

But why you ask, do Muslims seem to be so protected, why do the Police act with kids gloves for Palestinians but bring out the batons for anti-lockdown protesters?

Money. Lots of money. The backers of the Palestinians, the Gulf States, have billions of pounds worth of investment in the UK. Both in land, commercial and residential property, and the stock market. It's a huge sum of money estimated a few years ago to amount to around 20% of the UK economy. It may be more.

Gulf state money owns all of our container ports. Gulf state money owns swathes of inner London, it's invested in a large number of our companies, it's invested in our stocks and shares. It has a large shareholding in sport, like the Formula One circus. and International Football. 

Witness the Qatar world cup, or the Arab names at the top of Formula One.

That money, if withdrawn would cause financial chaos throughout the West. Because Gulf State money is invested in such depth in all Western countries, our society would collapse if withdrawn.

We are being extorted. The actions of our government and our Police is being to an extent controlled by the threat of removal of that money. The threat of financial collapse. 

Don't ever say the Met is not biased. It is, for a good reason. Don't say Muslims are not protected, because they are. 

What is Government For?

This is not a stupid question: What is Government for?

It's not stupid, because government actions affect your life in a major way, from the amount of tax they take from you to (hopefully) invest and spend wisely, to the policies they enact to provide security, stability and a safe environment.

At it's base level, government exists to provide safety, security, opportunity, health and to plot a path to the future.

Sadly, it seems that Government itself has lost it's ability to understand it's mission.

Security.

Government is currently failing on the security front, by allowing undocumented migrants to arrive on the shores of the UK. It them allows them inside the borders and houses then for months or even years in insecure accommodation. We don't know who they are, or their intentions once they arrive in the country. Ostensibly they may want a job, they may want money, but what else? What are their allegiances? Are they allied to this country? Would they life and if necessary die to support the country that gave them shelter? Or are they allied to an ideology that seeks to destroy this country or overthrow the ideology that has provided centuries of stability and prosperity? 

On the mission to provide security outside these shores, the government has completely failed. The Navy is a shadow of it's former self, unable to defend the shores of the UK from a bunch of dinghies, let alone project force and capability across oceans. One aircraft carrier, a frigate and a destroyer do not a strike force make. Such a small force can be quickly overwhelmed and dispatched by numerically superior forces. Yes, the advanced weapons may be force multipliers, but it's all lumped on a single asset and once that asset is eventually dispatched, it is gone. 

The RAF has a handful of aircraft and a minimal early warning capability. It gave up the responsibility of defending the UK, so we have no protective missile batteries to defend us against rogue actors that may want to turn a city or two to glass. Instead we rely on deterrence: do it to us and we'll do it to you. Hardly comforting to the occupants of major cities or those living close to military installations. 

I can't even say we only concentrate on the small stuff, because our borders are being infiltrated daily.

In WW2 the Sherman and T34 tanks weren't good tanks, but they were good enough and crucially, available in numbers. So the Axis forces faced wave upon wave of them until the Allies overwhelmed them. A lesson we have sadly forgotten.

Score 0/10 for security then.

Safety.

Government is failing on the safety front, by not ensuring the rule of law is enforced. Right now we have an epidemic of stabbings, of young people being murdered. Not only that, but occasionally the stabbings spread to the wider population and an innocent bystander gets murdered. People are now not safe on major cities. The streets at night are the realm of the gangs. At least the countryside appears safe. 

The current Covid enquiry shows that when a big event hits, the government is woefully inadequate to keep us safe. Instead of relying on decades-old plans agreed amongst medical experts, the government panicked and ran around like headless chickens. The Prime Minister refused to attend important meetings. His adviser plotted behind people's backs and the health secretary..... yeah, he wanted to be the arbiter of who was worthy enough to save and who was trash to be left to die. In a way they already made the decision by the widespread use of do not resuscitate notices that were handed out like confetti to the old, infirm and impaired.  

So sadly 0/10 for safety.

Opportunity.

Hmm, lets have a look at opportunity then. Ah, can we have a minus score at all? Education now costs. A lot. University tuition fees are at a ridiculously high level to gain a qualification that has all the weight of a teabag. "Get your degree, then go work on the tills at Aldi" is really a good motto for Universities, but it should be there. What is the point of spending 20 or 30 grand attaining a qualification if hundreds of thousands of other people have the same or better qualification?

Degrees were elitist because they were supposed to be. They were supposed to be difficult to attain, they were supposed to only be given out to the cream of the crop, they were there to indicate the level at which the person possessing it had worked.

I speak as someone who never got a degree. I didn't want one. I worked straight from school and worked at the level I did out of sheer hard work and by recommendation from other people. I didn't really need a degree. 

Now for those less fortunate souls at the bottom of the pile. Where is their opportunity to improve their life? What has government done for them? Absolutely nothing. It has trapped them in welfare, provided to such a level that if they start work they lose money. Employers rely on government to subsidise wages (only for families though) so they can continue to provide cheap wages and maximise profit. The taxpayer fills in the rest.

So score 0/10 for Opportunity. I haven't seen a policy to help the individual for decades.

Health.

Really? Do I really have to make any comment about the actions of Government during the pandemic and other health scares? The current huge waiting lists? The excess deaths we are having that go underreported or uninvestigated? 

Oh, the silver lining may be the eventual banning of smoking, but that then puts government into the authoritarian camp. It also forces smoking underground and into unsafe, unregulated practices. 

Then add excess undetected cancers thanks to the pandemic and the health service effectively closing down for two years.

Oh and the Health Secretary during the pandemic basically wanted to be allowed to leave us to die. Be under no illusions, the old, the infirm and the poor would have been cast aside and left to rot, while government allowed their cronies and the middle classes into hospital. Just look at the masses of DNRs that were created for just those people. It's a fucking scandal that hasn't been investigated. Those in power at the time and those writing illegal DNRs should be up on criminal charges.

Yeah, 0/10 for health. 

Planning and the future.

Well, I think everyone will agree that the government have failed on this one to. No major infrastructure works for years and then along comes HS2. What a shitshow! Badly managed so costs spiral out of control. Initially underbid in order to make the thing look viable. But those of us knew the current planning laws and the costs of land and houses in the south would cripple the project. Fairly recent Infrastructure projects like the Newbury bypass led the way in how poorly we do them. The only recent success I could name would be Hindhead tunnel, but the costs for that doubled from 150 Million to 370 Million pounds. So the cost of HS2 doubling and even trebling isn't unprecedented. But the question to ask is why the additional costs weren't factored in.

But that's moot, as now the Northern section of HS2 has been cancelled. Basically it's been made unnecessary because the greatest gains in travelling times were further North.

So I think we can safely rate government a solid 0/10 for planning.

I think it's safe to say that government is failing badly to deliver the things that governments should deliver. The question is why? Why is government failing to provide basic, essentials for it's citizens? 

The reason is it's been hijacked by corporate interests. It doesn't care about it's citizens other than to spout platitudes that may afford it another election victory so it can support it's corporate masters for another 5 years.

Let's Start Some Conspiracy Theories.

Today I am reading the tealeaves and donning the tinfoil hat. I'm reading the runes and staring intently into crystal balls whilst digging up skeletons and conspiracies

Number 1. 

If the reason that Muslims in the UK seem to be Policed far more preferentially than ordinary white British people, is it because the Gulf States have a large proportion of the UK economy invested in the country? After all, if something like 20% of the economy is money invested by Gulf States, that money suddenly disappearing could devastate our economy for decades. If that's extended to all Western Economies, that's a pretty big bargaining chip.

Is the threat of removing that money and the ability of the Gulf States to Crash the UK economy giving UK Muslims a certain protection from "harassment" by UK authorities?

Is that why we can't deport the migrants that arrive here from France? Is that why we roll over and house them in 4-star hotels and give them pocket money? Is that why we take in "refugees" while Gulf states don't?

Number 2:

Is the Climate Change movement a response by Western Governments to the increasing threat from Gulf States? I mean, the best way to neuter the Oil producing states would be to stop our reliance on oil and stopping funding them wouldn't it?

I assume if the government came out with it and said that this is a response to the Gulf States holding a gun against our heads, then the Gulf States would instantly respond. And not in a good way.

By Climate Action, Just Stop Oil and the rest being activist organisations, I assume the government can feign innocence as they blindly follow an agenda supported only by an extreme minority. I mean why else would the government pander to one or two percent of the population?

Is the headlong and illogical rush to end the use of fossil-fuelled cars a plan to stick it to the Gulf States, or is it really a tool to control us all? 

Number 3.

Is the plan to control us all something the UK and other Western Governments have been told to do? Are they doing it voluntarily and if so, why are there no dissenting governments?

If it's not national governments pushing the control of the population, who is doing it? Is it the WEF, the UN, the WHO or global corporations? Is it China? Is it the Gulf States?

Is it aliens? Is it a plan by world governments to turn us into one homogeneous global-governed people  a response to the alien threat? Can we only defeat the aliens if we are all in it together? Are we being pushed together for our own good to defeat Aliens, or is it the Nazis?

Number 4.

If it is the Nazis, didn't they die out after WW2, or is a new for of fascism on the rise? The Fascism controlled and instigated by global players. Global corporations in lockstep with governments, controlled from a single source like the WEF and the UN?

Anyway. More to come I'm sure later.

But do look at things and ask yourself the question: Why? Why is the UK government and governments across the West acting so illogically?

The simplest answer is usually the one that is the correct one. Occam's Razor at work.

The Israeli Atrocities: Coming to a Western Country Soon.

I blogged when the US pulled out of Afghanistan that we had a ready-made army here in the UK of Extremist Muslim sympathisers and that we had better watch out that the arms left behind in Afghanistan don't find their way to Western shores.

What I didn't predict was Hamas getting a shitload of the weapons and attacking Israel. I thought Israel had one of the best security services in the world. I thought their intelligence services were up there with the best. They had infiltrated various Muslim extremist organisations to various levels, so knew what was going on outside their borders.

So I thought.

Then last weekend happened. Several thousand Hamas psychopathic idiots lost their life while slaughtering unarmed Israelis. 

If Brits have been killed my response would be the mother of all disproportionate responses. I'd nuke Gaza. Just a small tactical one to vaporise the Hamas leadership and send a message: do not fuck with me. Or the soft option which would be to carpet-bomb the place. And thank me for being merciful. If we can trace the weapons back to their source, then the conduit must be eliminated and every town along it flattened.. I don't truck with the people that shout about women and babies being killed. Hamas exists in Gaza because the population allows it. The population is culpable for any killing perpetrated by Hamas. Just like those supporters of Palestine also say Brit civilians are legitimate targets because of their support for Israel or the Iraq and Afghanistan wars. Or Israeli civilians are culpable for the actions of the Israeli government. 

If I had my way there would be zero tolerance. 

The same should now be happening with the Muslim immigrants: if they have arrived here without documents, we must assume their intentions are not honourable and we give them one option to be returned to their home country. Otherwise they will be returned to a country of our choice. Get flown home or have a fucking long walk. Your choice.

I have no time for the bleeding heart do-gooders that say we must do more to help the immigrants. You mean the standing army that has landed on our shores over the past few years, refuses to accept our way of life and refuses to integrate?  The people that would happily take up arms and cause atrocities?

I just hope to God that the arms from Afghanistan don't find their way into Europe and especially the UK. Because if they do, then there will be a bloodbath. 

We have no standing army able to respond to or contain thousands of heavily armed men like the Hamas attack. Our Police would be inadequate against such a force. 

Just how long would it take to respond with overwhelming force if even a few hundred armed men appeared on the streets of one or more of our towns or cities? You cannot imagine the loss of life that would occur if dedicated, psychopathic, armed extremists raided towns across our country. I say towns because there are enough undocumented men in this country aligned with the likes of Hamas to be able to attack more than one town simultaneously. In numbers that the Police could not compete with.

City Centres, Shopping Malls, Christmas Markets and Large public gatherings must be considered at critical risk after the Hamas attack on Israel. To do otherwise would be foolhardy.

Don't say I didn't warn you. 

You Know Who's Pushing an Agenda When they Deny It's Existence: The Leftist Gaslighting Around 15 Minute Cities.

This is the day I start the call the far left loonies an new name: Left-Leaning fascists. Because if it quacks like a Fascist, walks like a Fascist, then it is most likely to be an actual fascist.

Allow me to introduce the 15 minute city concept and the people who have just started in the last couple of weeks to deny it's a thing in order to criticise the Conservative Government's announcement that it will set up legislation to oppose it.

The 15-minute city is another supra-national concept that is being promoted by governments across the world. Initially as a concept is sounds benign: at it's most basic it's about ensuring that all goods and services are available within a 15 minute walk from your house. Sounds wonderful , doesn't it?

Your doctor, your shops, your hospital and all essential services will be by design only 15 minutes away. Then you can ditch your car and cycle everywhere. 

Except, amongst the goods and services provided will be jobs. You'll never need to leave your 15 minute area because you will work, play, sleep, shop, live and die all within that 15 minute area. There will be no need to leave your 15 minute area, ever.

Now, on it's own it sounds like utopia. Finally city councils across the country and indeed the world will be working to provide all we need in our local neighbourhood.

Until that is, you look at the bigger picture and how (if you don't comply with the 15 minute neighbourhood idea) they will Enforce your stay within your zone.

Take Oxford. The city council there proposes splitting the city up into zones. You can travel within your zone as much as you want, but travel directly between zones will be limited to 100 trips per year.

Of course you will still be free to travel between zones, but you will have to pay a fine for each additional trip over the 100. So if you Live in Zone A and work in Zone C, you will eventually be forced to stop using your car for the journey. 

Of course the supporters of this idea promote the good: cleaner air, shorter journeys done by non-polluting means, you know by now the usual cheery rhetoric used by the authoritarians.

What they don't promote that well is the enforcement. Fines, bigger fines if you transgress more, smaller zones and more draconian terms inflicted later once the initial steps are accepted and the enforcement infrastructure is in place. 

Of course this is all decried as a conspiracy theory by the Fascist Left. They say that the 15 minute city proposals are nice cuddly neighbourhoods  where you have everything at your fingertips. 

It's merely a coincidence they say, that Oxford council have around the same time come up with proposals to split the city into separate zones (coincidentally very similar to the 15 minute zones) and to limit the number of times you can travel between these zones by enforcement cameras.

Yeah, and I'm THAT gullible.

This article by the United Nations paints a wonderfully rosy picture of the 15 minute city: The 15 Minute City | UNFCCC but it is the ENFORCEMENT aspect of climate control in cities along with these plans that those of us that can join the dots and see how the two will eventually work hand-in-glove.

The creepy thing is that JOBS will be included in the 15 minute city proposals. So who provides the jobs? How do they stop you driving a car out of your 15 minute area to a job in another part of the city or another city altogether? Of course the answer is enforcement.

They will limit your travel by introducing the local enforcement cameras and by eventually introducing pay-per-mile. I'm sure the enforcement cameras will be used to charge you more per mile if you leave your zone. The temptation will be too great to keep you in your zone under the auspices of reducing pollution.

So, is it really a conspiracy theory that 15 minute cities are not the benign things that the ideologues on the left promote. 

I certainly think there is more to the 15 minute city that the Fascist Left are letting on. If you don't realise that, you are a mug.

We're Officially a Third World Country...

The scrapping of the Northern leg HS2 now proves without doubt that the UK cannot complete large scale engineering projects. 

We really are a third world country. Actually this might be defined as a new term, because at least third world countries have the ability to become prosperous and move to first world status.

We are actually in a state of managed decline. We cannot complete the engineering projects befitting first world status. Instead we have crested the wave of technological progress and are on the downslope.

The next question is what now becomes of the London-Birmingham portion of HS2? It doesn't make financial sense to continue working on it, because what's the use is a high-speed rail link to Birmingham that would only save minutes off the time taken by existing rail links between London and Birmingham?

HS2 only made sense if it was completed as envisioned, to make the longer journeys further North shorter and to provide a cross-Pennine high speed rail link. 

Now you might as well accept we're crap at completing engineering projects on time and in-budget and cancel the lot. Why continue to sink money into a project that makes no sense monetarily and socially?

In fact, why was HS2 approved in the first place? How did costs spiral out of control so massively? Why were initial tenders so poorly priced? Just what were the reasons? Was it bad management? Was it numerous changes of plan? Were compulsory purchase settlements to buy land and buildings under-rated? Was the legal cost of planning opposition to blame?

Was it just a vanity project to prove we could do what they were doing on the continent? Were we told to do it by the EU? Why was it started without sound costings?

The lack of transparency from the government needs to be addressed. The costs and the reasons for those costs increasing needs to be out in the open in real-time. It shouldn't require a journalist to go digging through various sources to come up with the reasons.

Yes, Covid may have played a part, but had management been sensible about the requirements of working through the pandemic, it shouldn't have amounted to more than employing security staff to be on site while everyone else stays at home. If the works are mothballed in a decent state there should be no increased costs from re-starting work. So unless the whole shebang is managed by muppets, the costs shouldn't have escalated as far as they have.

I know material costs have increased substantially, but HS2 caused that by being the biggest building site in Europe. The costs of plywood and basic stuff like concrete and steel jumped as soon as HS2 construction started and it sucked in ALL the building supplies. That should have been envisioned and budgeted for as part of the costings. 

I'd hate to say we need another enquiry because that would increase costs even further. 

It's just sad that we can't seem to manage fuck all any more. Yes the country is more densely populated, yes, property prices are more expensive, but France and Germany can lay high speed tracks for a fraction of the cost we can.

We need to find out why. And fix it.

If Only...

If only there were more days like yesterday: where Solar and Wind generation exceeded fossil fuels (for a short while).

The Gridwatch.co.uk graph for the day looks like this:

Sadly this is an exceedingly rare event. 

Both gas AND solar exceeded the output around 1pm. After that? Well, it's back to gas filling the void as the weak autumn afternoon sunshine peters out. 

The grey band of Nuclear seems to be consistently providing baseband throughout the day. There's hardly a day it's offline.

And this is where I looked at having an all-electric system on my boat which seems to be the latest fad at the boat shows: electric propulsion and induction hobs.

I looked into the energy consumption. Basically doing a few miles of travelling and then stopping and using electricity for heating and cooking. Hopefully the heat from the water-cooled electric motor can go into a calorifier to heat the water while cruising.

In summer the power generation was enough to exceed the supply of the energy budget. But in the winter I'd need at least to triple the amount of summer solar power to compensate for the shorter days and the weaker sunshine. 

To do that I'd have to devise some sort of solar sail that could be hoisted on a mast that could be raised and lowered easily. There's no way I could have a fixed solar array of sufficient size on the boat.

And that's the problem with solar at UK latitudes. At best we get around 12 hours of usable sunshine to generate power in the winter, but that's cut to around 4 hours in winter if it's not cloudy. There could be days where there is next to no sunshine at all and it's cloudy. It could go on for weeks. Yes, I know solar panels do generate power in cloudy weather, but it's a fraction of the energy provided by direct sunlight. 

So you end up in winter with a fraction of the time providing usable sunshine compared to summer and you have constant cloud, which then provides a fraction of the sunshine that could be available. 

If you are relying on solar, that's a problem. 

I wouldn't rely in a solely solar setup for a boat. I'd go for a hybrid solution, so you've always got the option of sparking up the generator to charge the batteries. 

Renewables: still not good enough to rely on.

First the War Against the Motorist, Now the War Against the Homeowner...

 Just as there is now a war between the establishment and the motorist, there is soon to be a war between the establishment and the homeowner. 

The latest net zero laws being proposed aim to make it a criminal offence if you don't comply with net zero regulations regarding your home, or make an incorrect or inaccurate statement on any compliance documentation.

The war against the car has been going on for over a decade now and it's never more clear than the proposals around ULEZ, the utter failure of the London ULEZ to make the air around London any clearer and the ever increasing taxation of the car, especially cars deemed "unnecessary" by the people that see themselves as our overlords. They have made it more difficult to own a car and will continue to make it more difficult until the majority of us give up and settle in our 15 minute cities.

Now the establishment are coming for your house. During the Blair years we had the decree that only condensing boilers could be installed. There was no opposition. Then they said that we will only be allowed to install heat pumps instead of gas boilers. Despite the majority of UK housing stock not being compatible with heat pumps, they are making it law.

Now we have the Net Zero legislation being proposed to make criminals out of homeowners that cannot afford to make the required changes to their home.

In other words, they are making it more difficult to own a house, such that eventually you'll give it up.

I'm sure the government will have something akin to the Car Scrappage Scheme where they take ownership of your home. and then rent it out. Not necessarily to you of course, because you couldn't afford to comply you'll be deemed not worthy of house occupation. A retired couple? Nah, off to the government-owned home for you. I say "home": what I mean is "processing facility" where all the old, useless unproductive people go to be "reclaimed". In other words killed and made into compost. 

And you thought raising the pension age was a stand-alone thing? Don't be stupid.

Produce & consume, or else. Serve your corporate masters, consume their output. Accept the credits they give you that allow you to consume, but don't ever think of saving those credits to be able to better your position. Those credits are calculated by A.I. in order to keep you nourished just well enough to serve in the factory. If you do not use your allowance you will be malnourished and will be deemed unproductive and sent off for reclamation.

If you think this is a bit far fetched, I'm only joining the dots and seeing the trend that has been in place for over two decades.

Remember the WEF statement "You Will Own Nothing and Be Happy"? Well, the first part of that is in play. They are making it so difficult to own a car, travel and now own a home, you'll be begging the government to take them off your hands. 

Vote for Labour, or Conservatives or Liberal Democrats at the next election and you'll get more of the same. Another 5 years of oppressive diktats from  whichever government gets in power.

UNLESS YOU VOTE FOR SOMEONE ELSE!

The EV Charging Dance.

 I've just recently purchased (with the help of family) a plug-in Hybrid Prius. Lets not dwell on the lacklustre performance, only to say it's ideally suited to snotting round town picking up fares and will not win any prizes as a grand tourer. 

The other week I went from Leek to Buxton and the car almost ground to a halt on the hills. It is not performance-oriented.

Anyway, lets get to the title. 

Being a plug-in EV, the car obviously can run on Petrol or can be charged up and run for a short time in EV-mode just off the battery.

The battery needs to be charged up (obviously), but having no facilities to charge at home, I'm now becoming an expert on the public EV charging network.

In a nutshell, it sucks. 

The reasons are many, but the one big factor is the lack of consistency. You have a variety of charging sockets as well as a number of different applications to enable a charge at said socket. 

So, first hardware: first you have to know if your car will charge using AC or DC. Then you can move on to the various sockets, charging rates and enabling applications.

Lets just say, you have a number of different connectors for both AC and DC, you then have a number of different suppliers installing charging machines with different interfaces on the machines and different enabling applications. If it sounds complicated, then it is.

If you have a basic smartphone with not a lot of memory, you'll be filling that memory mostly with charging applications.

The uncertainty of compatibility between the charger and the car and the requirement to have internet access ends up in the Owner doing the EV Charging Dance, where the owner goes to the charger, does something, then plugs into the car, then returns to the charger, then logs onto the app to enable charging, then looks at the charger, then goes to the window of the car and peers through the window to see if the dashboard indicates a charge, then back to the charger, then back to the car several times until at some random point both the car and the charger agree that electrons are moving down the cable in sufficient quantity to enable a charge. 

Then the owner can waste a half hour at the nearby Starbucks. Actually the Greggs mega charge site near Salford Quays looks like a bloody good idea, at least you can eat yourself into a food coma while you wait. 

Finally, my favourite charging supplier at the moment is PodPoint. Their 7KW charging posts at Supermarkets just work. The posts start charging immediately and the app gives you 15 minutes to verify the charge. It just works. No EV charging Dance for me. EV owners with bigger batteries tend to shun the smaller charge posts, so I can normally get a slot and charge.

Net Zero: How Do You Measure Success?

Okay I have a couple of questions about Net Zero. 

The First is: How Do You Measure Success? Because if we are spending Billions of pounds on trying to attain Net Zero, there should be some tangible benefit, some monitoring, some measurement that proves the success of the plan. 

Otherwise we are just throwing money away.

Without the ability to monitor the effects of our privations, there's no point. If we go net zero and global CO2 keeps climbing then there's no point.

Virtue or salving the conscience of a minority is not a good enough. We need tangible results. 

Just saying but doing X we save Y amount of carbon is not good enough. I want to see monitoring, I want to see live data showing an actual benefit. Because by doing X and reducing carbon output in one area may actually increase carbon in another area.

For instance shutting down steel production here may reduce local carbon, but overall may increase it.

For instance steel production, which has now virtually ceased in the UK. It reduces carbon output locally, but now you are relying on third-world countries producing steel using inefficient technology, creating more CO2 to produce the steel. The steel then needs to be shipped to the UK, so unless you're using sailing ships, that actually adds to the carbon footprint of that steel.

It's like electric cars. They are only zero-emissions vehicles locally. The energy used to create the electricity still creates CO2 at the power station. It's just that the CO2 isn't produced by the vehicle.

That's a con. It's not reducing CO2, it's just moving production elsewhere.

If we were measuring the actual production of CO2 regarding the things we have done to reduce local CO2, the overall CO2 output would have risen. Because we are not making goods locally, we are making them half way round the world and shipping them to the UK. 

We are not burning the fuel directly in an internal combustion engine, we are instead burning fossil fuel in a power station to heat water to create steam which turns a turbine which turns a generator which produced electricity which is fed down wires at ultra high voltages and then stepped down through several transformers to mains voltage and then through a charger into the battery of the electric vehicle. At each step there are losses because no transfer or conversion of one type of energy to another is 100% efficient.  It's therefore not the most efficient use of the fossil fuel compared to burning it directly.

The people falling for all of this are really falling for marketing. Maybe extreme marketing, but marketing all the same. It's not science, otherwise we would be doing net zero a lot differently.

And we would be monitoring the results. Scientifically.

More Bad News For Renewables.

It's the hottest period during September for a while, so I thought I'd have a look at how Solar and wind are doing. The baking heat and blue skies should be providing plenty of solar, right? 

And with this well established high pressure system over the UK, it's a good indicator of how wind would provide power, after all the wind farm fans say that the wind is always blowing somewhere in the UK, so we'll always have wind power.

Here's the Gridwatch.co.uk graph from yesterday:

The yellow solar sliver is a lot fatter than normal, but of course as we start to see longer nights we only get about 12 hours of usable daylight.  Which means we get 12 hours without solar power.

How about the Turquoise line representing the wind output? Oh dear. You can just about see it. 

That big, Fat , Orange line? That's Gas. Our primary power producer. In summer. 

That constant grey band at the bottom of the graph? That's nuclear producing I would suggest it's maximum output in order to keep reduce the gas consumption.

Renewables? For all the massive offshore wind farms, the huge fields of solar panels, they're still only producing a fraction of the power we need. 

The Liquorice Allsort bands on the top of the others are the interconnects between us and Europe. We're getting German coal-produced and French Nuclear and Norwegian Hydro electrons shipped to us providing overall a fatter line and a bigger power output than all the energy supplied by our wind farms. 

We even turn the UK coal-fired taps on at a couple of points in the day, when demand is highest. Coal. In summer. 

We need to stop this madness. We need to become adults and stop fantasising about renewables. They are not delivering even in the best conditions. Back in the winter wind rarely beat gas as the main source of energy. 

Let's all grow up, put our big boy trousers on and start to plan a realistic and pragmatic power production plan. Our reliance on gas from outside the UK needs to be reduced, as does our reliance on interconnects from Europe. Because you can bet your bottom dollar that they're not supplying cheap energy. They only get involved when the energy price rises enough so that syphoning energy off to supply another country makes economic sense.

Can't Afford Net Zero: It's Off To The Gulag For You!

 The Government's latest Net Zero efforts encompassed by the Latest Energy legislation show where things are going. 

The Government's latest Energy Bill proposes creating a number of new criminal offences. The first, where homeowners supply false information might seem fair, but what if they can't provide accurate information?

For instance if the government require you to provide information regarding the insulation properties of your house, or anything of a technical nature? How many BTUs does it take to heat your home to a certain temperature, or to maintain a certain temperature? Yeah, I've no idea either. Any law that relies on tripping you up because you don't know the answer, or the answer could be one of several options depending on how you measure is bad law. 

Are you going to be prosecuted for going over your yearly energy allowance? 

Without clarity - and I mean Laser focussed clarity where the options are unambiguous, where the results could be open to interpretation, then it should not be law.

Where the choice between using a wood burning stove to stave off hypothermia or going to jail are options, then that's bad law.

This needs to be nipped in the bud now.

The choice should not be between heating, hypothermia or jail. 

Vivek Ramaswani: A Globalist Usurper in the Republican Camp?

Republican Presidential Candidate Vivek Ramaswani talks a good talk, but will he walk the walk.

Here in the UK we have Rushi Sunak, who makes all the right noises, but fails to deliver on ANY of his promises or policies. 

Talking Conservative means absolutely nothing if you're basically lying and then go on to enact effectively Socialist policies.

Just be careful America, you might not get what you think you are voting for.

I'm a bit sceptical about Vivek, because he's come from nowhere to beat DeSantis in the polls and if Trump gets taken out by lawfare, then he's the de-facto next President of the USA. Who is funding him and how has he beaten the Freedom Loving Floridian DeSantis? Twelve months ago DeSantis was the saviour of the pandemic, now he's effectively cast as Trump's enemy.

All a bit too convenient, a bit too clean, a bit to obvious. But then the yanks don't do subtle and don't always see the villains hiding behind the trees.

I see Vivek as the Deep State option, the Globalist in Freedom-Loving Clothes, one to continue the Status Quo. He's definitely not the disrupter the USA needs to free it's people.

Just as Rishi isn't here in the UK. 

The globalists are winning and sadly our children and Grandchildren are losing and will continue to lose unless we put a stop to it at the ballot box. We need to stop the corruption and backhanders and what was back in the day called the old boy's club. Nowadays it's the corporate greed club. 

It needs to stop. We need to vote to disrupt it.

My Thoughts on the Donald Trump Charges.

Donald Trump has been charged with something like 80-odd charges so far and there's talk of more. 

Now to me, if he was so criminally culpable as to attract all these charges, why wasn't something done while he was in office? Why has it taken so long: between 4 and 8 years to bring them? Would they have been brought if Trump had not contested the next election?

Why have lawyers that advised him been indicted, just for giving legal advice?

IF he was charged while in office, when the alleged offences happened, then fine, they'd be more believable.

BUT (Big but): We already know the Russiagate scandal that dogged Trump's presidency was a false, concocted set of allegations. We eventually found out the truth.

The document "scandal" involving Trump also applies to Biden and his tranche of documents. Both are equally culpable, so then shouldn't both be charged equally? Because the federal authorities are saying not even the President of The United States of America is above the law. Fair enough, but apply the law equally to both.

Then just in case the charges on the documents don't stick, the US authorities then threw in the charges on Trump's tax affairs. Ah, the old Capone trick. Can't get him for anything, dig into his financials and try to pin tax evasion on him. 

Interesting that it's over making hush payments via his lawyer. Let the first Democrat politician throw stones, because sure as hell, if the Republicans get in, they should be looking into every single Democrat politician's financial affairs. Especially Democrat Presidents like Biden. I'm sure there is much to see there.

And now we get to the latest charges for just questioning the result of what was quite clearly election process irregularities. How much they affected the election is a question that needs to be answered.

The key question is whether Trump truly believed he election was fraudulent and he was looking for missing votes or whether he believed he had lost the election and was trying to fabricate votes. Confession by projection from the Democrats possibly?

Anyhoo, it's quite clear that by employing lawfare against Trump, like the authorities have against anyone that doesn't follow a certain narrative, then I assume the Republicans will respond in kind when they get in power.

Reap what you sow and all that. Yes, it's time for those supposed God-Fearing Republicans to go Biblical on the Democrats. .

Putin, the Hard Bastard of Global Politics.

 Well, Yevgeny Progozhin, the leader of the Wagner Mercenary Group has apparently come to an untimely demise in a private jet. Unsurprisingly, I hasten to add, because it was only a matter of time until Progozhin came to an untimely end at the hands of Putin's secret Service.

The video of the <cough> "Accident" shows the tailess plane uncontrollably spinning into the ground.

Here's a picture of the area of the sky the plane fell out of:

You can see in the top left the puffs of smoke that appears to mark the initiation of the event. (A long trail, then a fainter puff of smoke). 

Now that appears to be to show that something happened, then the plane broke up quickly. The initial smoke trail is quite short. One can imagine the plane experienced some event, then travelled a very short way, then lost control. I would expect a sudden nose up attitude due to the loss of the tail and it's horizontal stabiliser. 

One thing to note is there will not be a vapour trail from any missile as it hits the plane, if it was indeed shot down. Air to air missiles tend to make trails as they get up to speed and then don't necessarily make one at the point they hit the target. 

The immediate and sudden pitch up virtually stopped the plane in it's tracks. It then began to free-fall as denoted by the trail markers. 

Anyway, not sure if that is indicative of a shoot down. There were jet noises in the background of the video, but the jet noises ended when the plane hit the ground, so it could have just been the engines of the doomed jet rather than a fighter jet circling round it's target. 

Anyway, if Progozhin was dumb enough to be taking flights after crossing Putin, that's on him. I know he had at least one meeting with Putin after the supposed coup, but I don't know what happened during the meeting or how it went between the two men. 

Whether Progozhin convinced Putin his beef was with the generals, or if Putin took it as an attack against himself at that meeting, I guess we now know that it's the latter.

It also shows that yet again Putin is happy to dispense with people that are a threat to him at the expense of innocent lives. I'm sure the pilots of the jet had done nothing to anger Putin, other than ferry Progozhin around. I suppose in the mind of a Psychopath, they're aiding the enemy and also fair game.

There have been a number of plane crashes in Russia and the ex-Soviet states. It makes you wonder whether aircrews would start to refuse to fly certain targets.

It would be interesting if Progozhin wasn't on the aircraft though...

Spies, Bad Spies and Bulgarian Spies.

 So three "Bulgarians" have been caught and are to be tried as Spies. They have been in the country over a decade and their cover was a charity helping Bulgarians adjust to life in the UK. 

Niice. I wonder how much taxpayer's money went into the charity?

Only three spies have been caught so far but I expect there are a lot more. Last year just after Russia went into Ukraine, there were a fair number of "Albanians" that arrived in the dinghies that weren't your typical immigrant Albanians. 

There's no information as to what the Bulgarians were up to, but they are charged with possessing documents i.e Passports of different nationalities "With Improper Intentions".

A pretty soft charge if you ask me.

There's not much to spy on here in the UK any more. What few military resources we have are on public display and quite a lot of the time someone on YouTube is videoing it all. But the different passports hint at visits to the EU to gather intelligence of EU efforts to bolster Ukrainian forces.

If anything I expect they will be spreading disinformation of social media. 

Ryan McBeth on YouTube is ex-military and has the occasional dissection of social media disinformation assets. Interesting listening to his military expertise and his more modern net security stuff.

Let's be honest though: these Bulgarians are about the bottom of the pile when it comes to spies. They are not the cream of the crop.

The best of the best live the life, stay under the radar and don't get caught. The best spies have the ability to blend in and if necessary manipulate their environment to suit their needs. Someone who can be in a high-flying job in one minute, then the bottom of the pile the next, only to bounce back the next. People who appear to be all over the place, almost at a whim. 

Those are the sort of people you need to be wary of. The sort people that are intelligent, too intelligent for the position they are in. 

"Albanians" with a bit too much organisation and ability. Good haircuts. Smart but not ostentatious. Squared away, look like they know their shit. Ones who regularly go to the gym,  have an obvious but vague means of income and don't arouse suspicions enough to point directly to money laundering and Albanian crime families.  Don't drive flashy black Mercs and instead drive an ordinary car.

"Turkish" Barber Money Laundering.

The way to put an end to the money laundering is to stop using such establishments. You know the type: the Turkish barbers who are actually Albanian setting up shop with a beautifully equipped and immaculately finished barbers. From scratch, with no obvious previous activity.

That establishment is set up with a huge initial loan from an Albanian crime boss. The guys in the business aren't the people taking out the loan, they are employees of the crime boss.

In my town there are now around a dozen of these establishments. Too many to make a profit. But that's not the point. The place will stay open as long as it takes to launder the initial loan.

If the business does well and turns a profit, so much better. But the reason for the business existing in the first place is to launder the initial outlay.

The way to stop abuses like this is to refuse to use these establishments. That way the "loan" will take forever to repay. We don't want organised crime on our high streets. 

The same goes for the hand car washes that use virtual slave labour to man them. Stop using them and use a car wash that doesn't use slave labour. 

More publicity needs to be out there highlighting these issues.

There was a programme on TV a few weeks ago that tracked down a group of Albanian "refugees" from their 4-star hotel daily to their place of work: a hand car wash in the town. Don't think this is an isolated experience. It's happening the length and breadth of the country. 

But hey, nothing to see here. The Banks aren't interested. Instead they close down the acco8unts of legitimate businesses, whilst the actual money launderers carry on unaffected.

More Migrants Die Trying to Reach The Land Of Milk And Honey.

Forty one Migrants have drowned crossing the Mediterranean off the coast of Italy when their boat sank.

Of course the Left are saying it's a tragedy, but are not accepting culpability for the deaths. Because it's the Left that insist we keep accepting limitless numbers of migrants. It's the left that insist that we cannot remove the pull factors. It's the left that insist we can't introduce deterrent measures to reduce the numbers.

So instead we have to house the migrants, not in barracks, but in hotels. We can't just give them a room in a hotel, we have to give them pocket money. We have to feed them, clothe them (although I'm sure not up to the standards of the designer gear they had on when they crossed the Channel). I mean Asics? Go to hell, where's my Nike Airmax, I demand them now! Human Rights!

The thing the Left have yet to grasp is the things we had in place for our own hard-working population are pull factors for migrants and cause them to make the dangerous crossings. If the pull factors were removed, or restricted to tax-paying or long-term residents, then there would be no crossings.

"We've always had these pull factors in place and the crossings didn't happen before" say the left. And that's true. But things have changed. Not the pull factors, but now there is an organised crime network built up to exploit those people willing to risk their lives to get to the land of plentiful. To exploit our good nature and hospitality.

The huge crime network is the difference. Created from the remains of the radical terrorist organisations, the crime network spans the whole of Africa, the Middle East  and parts of Asia. These are the scraps if ISIS, Islamic Jihad, Al Queda and a host of other "former" terrorist organisations. It's the equivalent of a mobster going legit. The terrorist organisations did this previously to move agents around, but now they've found those networks can move ordinary people around for profit. Huge profit.

And to be honest, if they mix a terrorist or ten in amongst the ordinary desperate people, then that's great, they have sleeper agents within their enemy's territory. 

The crime bosses have jumped on the bandwagon and used the networks to transport effectively slave labour for their drug networks and their sweatshops and money laundering enterprises in the West.

All those hand car washes and Turkish barbers need staffing somehow to keep the money laundering happening. But it's all legit. Those huge "loans" given to start the business up need repaying at huge interest rates. Or someone loses a finger, or a family member.

The other institutions that are supposed to stop organised crime are no better. The Banks close Fred the butcher's account because he deals in cash, because his elderly customers deal in cash as well. Typical money laundering activity apparently. But ignore the huge loans for brand new businesses. And the Police? Hah! Don't make me laugh. They're too busy issuing PFNs and scouring the internet for hate speech. Organised crime? Not on the radar for the Socialists in charge because all business is exploitation and crime according to these quasi-Marxists. They can't tell the difference.

Sometimes I really despair. Are our intelligence services that thick? (Yes) Do they not have assets in place to hear the same things I'm hearing? Do they have intelligence on this but the government refuse to act? Are the government passing information on to other governments, but the foreign government fail to act? Transparency would be great in alleviating the political pressure.

The thing that pisses me off is the lack of transparency. The government come across as inept and incompetent.  

And without evidence to the contrary that's the only conclusion I can come to. 

A Revelation and a Request.

I was thinking recently and had a revelation:  Over the past 25 years, what government policies have provided a net benefit to me? I can't think of a point in the past 25 years that I've felt better off or more secure.

I have a request. Have a think yourself. Ask yourself the question: what exactly have successive governments and political parties done for me in the past 25 years?

Because I really, really, can't think of a year where I've actually felt better off thanks to government policies in the past 25 years. In fact the absolute opposite: I have been directly attacked by them.

I'm a car driving, house-renting, working class low-paid worker.

Yes, over the past 25 years there have been moves to reduce the amount of tax I pay by raising the income tax threshold, but conversely, I've had to pay more in Vehicle excise duty, or fuel duty, or had my pension taxed, or had to pay into an entirely new pension pot, which has reduced my net wealth. Those things the Tories used to call stealth taxes when Labour were in power.

Not at any point in the last 25 years has any policy made me richer, or better off. edit: It's actually 30 years, I forgot John Major's Tories and the Fuel Price Escalator.

When Labour came to power they introduced the IR35 tax rules which stopped me working as an independent IT contractor. Blair's buddies in the big corporations wanted to stop us being more agile and filling gaps and costing them profit. So I stopped earning £70,000 a year and all the potential trickle-down that could have had into the local economy when I spent it.

Nope, I instantly lost thousands in earnings. Never to recover.

So, in 2002 after running down my savings I started being a low-paid worker. 

I thought the Tories may have removed the IR35 rules and allowed the independent contracting sector to flourish again, released from red tape. But nope. They carried on with it and the HMRC doubled-down, attacking ever more areas of contracting.

Being a car driver I've had incessant request for more money. Either in VED or in more expensive fuel. The only time fuel prices dropped was during the pandemic, which was irrespective of government policy, it was caused by lack of demand.

With rises in indirect taxation replacing reductions in direct taxation in the form of income tax outstripping the benefits of the reductions I feel as if I'm being exploited by government. 

Add to that legislation that supresses my ability to talk freely, (the Bastard Offence Laws), the government promotion every ethnicity, creed, colour and religion EXCEPT MINE, There's no wonder I feel that those at the top no longer represent me and my ideology, do not offer me any benefit from them being in office.

Being a poor, straight, white, heterosexual male over 60 who works and relies on a car to continue working, there has been no government, no political party expressing support for me for at least 25 years. Instead all I see is oppression from those above.

I even can't say John Major's Tories didn't directly attack me. They introduced the fuel price escalator, a way of artificially raising the price of fuel in order to reduce traffic on the roads. So saying 25 years is generous, it's actually been 30 years of direct attacks by government on my net wealth. Half my life and more than half of my working life. Who would put up with that?

So, over to the main political parties: what exactly are you going to do that will directly benefit me? What are you going to do to earn my vote?

Because if you don't, I'm going to vote for someone else, no matter how bad, how horrible their opinions and actions. I've had enough of your direct attacks. 

I've not even listed the indirect attacks, the ideological ones, the abandonment of the working class by the Labour party, the promotion of every other culture other than British Culture, the rise of government sponsored non-Charities, abandoning social housing provision, the list could literally be endless.

UPDATE: 

I'm deliberately leaving out Thatcher's bonfire of the corporations in the early Eighties that ended up with me being made redundant. Although I suffered initially, her government redeemed themselves by offering paid training courses that allowed me to get into IT and start earning a decent wedge, more than I would have if I had stayed in the job I was in when she came to power in 1979. Overall hers was the last government to provide me personally with a net increase in living standards and not directly attack me. 

Conservatives! The Way to Stop Lefty Lawyers With your 80-Seat Majority.

Okay Tories, stop griping about lefty lawyers hamstringing your attempts to remove illegal immigrants. 

Either you really want to remove them, or you don't. And the evidence at the moment is you don't want to remove them. Like the Socialists you appear to be.

Because the easy way to stop all the lawfare is to say this to the left:

"If you continue to hamstring the government's attempts to deal with the problem that affects the poorest the most, then fine, we will use our 80-seat majority to enact legislation to withdraw from the ECHR which also removes workers projections and rights. 

If the lefty lawyers use other legislation like UN charters, we will remove ourselves from those too. 

Over to you lefties...."

And leave it at that. If the lefty lawyers and pressure groups continue to interfere then remove the legislation that empowers them. If any charities involved are getting government grants, remove those also. 

It's time to play hardball and take no shit. The government shouldn't be funding organisations that then cost the government more money by opposing it. The left want everyone to be in lockstep and suppress opposition. Well, it's time the government gave 'em a taste of their own medicine. That's if the government is actually on the right.

If I were PM, my answer so all of this pandering to immigrants is: I don't care. By all means we will support those fleeing war zones etc. But they have to apply legally through the legal channels. Thos turning up on our doorstep unannounced especially from a safe country like France will be refused any and all support.

If the lefty charities want to provide the money to put them up in 4-star hotels, then fill your boots, but the government will supply not a single penny of taxpayers money towards their remaining in the country.

Let's Stop Calling it "Woke": It's Marxism, Pure And Simple.

After the Farage Bank fiasco, it's now dawning on the limited right-wing media that the issue of "Woke" ideology runs deep, not just in the Big Tech corporations, but now the banks and even further into local government and the civil service.

Let's not pussyfoot around. Woke, is not a new ideology, it's been around for over a century. 

It's Marxism. 

Looking at everything through the lens of oppressor and oppressed is a Marxist viewpoint. 

But this new Marxism, this woke is a unique ideology. It challenges at the individual level, for instance decrying colonialism and demanding reparations for damage done by slavery, but ignoring the exploitation of workers by huge corporations who offer zero hours contracts.

It's a fucked up kind of Marxism, one that really is infantile in it's outlook and illogical in it's reasoning.

Just Stop Oil is one kind of this fucked up Marxism in that it wants us to stop using oil immediately, but ignores the fact that this lifestyle we have in the West simply cannot be supported without it. "Well, let's develop alternatives" they say, without once mentioning the huge expense and timescales such research requires and ignoring the impact the extra cost of these alternatives would have on the poor.

Already Marxists want to control us through ULEZ schemes and LTNs. "It's not about control" they cry, but it really is. The goal is to remove the option of personal transport from a large number of the population, to corral them in 15 minute cities, to control jobs and the money supply and therefore to control the people.

Don't forget it's not the rich that have forged forward with social justice, it's the poor. When we've had enough we are a large enough chunk of the population to be able to sway political opinion. We are the people who send our sons and daughters to war. The rich don't.

We were the people that created wealth for the rich on our backs. But now they rely on workers in China instead,. They think we have no power and effectively they'd like to do away with us.

They think we are racist, misogynist, we are the deplorables, the unwashed rabble. We are the underclass. 

The elites have now lately started to talk about eliminating us. Because they think we have no purpose, we are not beneficial to the population any more.

This really is a capture of the elites by Marxist ideology. The corporations, the media, the education system, the civil service, have all been infected by it. 

Hopefully now it is out in the open, Sunlight will bring it's usual disinfectant properties. 

I do not wish to live in an Oppressive Marxist Socialist Utopia. I do not wish to have my hard-won historical freedoms curtailed. 

I do not wish to be controlled.

ULEZ - The Usual Suspects Rise Up to Support Khan and Condemn Burnham.

 The battle to stop ULEZ has failed in London, but the fight still continues up North in Manchester.

The Mayor of Manchester, Andy Burnham put the implementation of a huge ULEZ zone covering Greater Manchester on hold last year. The reason being that it would but an unfair burden on familes at a time of financial crisis. 

Note the lack of the word cancelled. It's just on hold, a temporary hiatus.

The thing with the Manchester scheme is it's immense size and the huge number of people affected. But do we really need a ULEZ that encompasses the moors of the Pennines, or the vast tracts of open farming land between Manchester  and Liverpool?

No, is the answer. Burnham was called out for trying to implement a clean air zone where they is already clean air. 

But of course there are those that want to press ahead with ULEZ despite it impoverishing a whole county.

Various pressure groups are trying to get Burnham to press ahead with the Manchester ULEZ scheme, seemingly unaware that they are in a miniscule minority and without a sense of self-awareness.

Just why should the majority be penalised for the problems of the minority? 

Just why should the majority of those affected have to buy new cars to comply with ULEZ? Why can't the minority affected by air quality just move to the country? Both are equally punitive measures, but at least the second affects a teeny minority and allows the rest of the county to continue as normal?

Of course the clean air zealots will say they can't afford to move. Well, join the fucking club you bunch of muppets. 

I have still to work out how the thousands of MINORITY INTEREST pressure groups have so much sway over national and local government. Even worse it's highly likely that taxpayer money is being funnelled into these pressure groups so they can lord it over the majority.

We have to stop pandering to minorities. We have to stop funding minority interest groups that use their power and influence to overturn majority interests. 

It has to stop. 

Trump Legal Pile-On Continues.

 So not only are the US Government prosecuting Trump for having documents (quite legally, because he was President, as opposed to the illegal tranche of documents in the Biden Garage), but now there's a new case filed against him regarding January 6th.

They really are trying their best to stop him becoming President, aren't they.

I would have considered the "deep State" a tinfoil hat conspiracy, but the more I see of the US Government trying to deny him the ability to run, the more the idea of a Government within a Government pulling the strings, manipulating and making kings becomes justified.

I mean, what are they really scared about? Their falsehoods against Trump during his last Presidency have been shown to be falsehoods. No Russia collusion. They've tried to impeach him, twice and failed.

Now they are piling on the court cases in an attempt to stop him winning. 

It's almost worth voting for him to spite the people that want to stop the voters of the US making him President. 

The Farage Farrago Isn't About Farage. Lefties Miss the Point. Again and Again and Again.

 There are several tweeters on twitter (Xers on X?) that are gloating  about Farage being debanked. 

"But the Bank has a right to withdraw service" they joyfully say. 

Yes guys, it's okay if it happens to someone else.

But what if you went to ASDA and they refused you access? Then you went to TESCO and they did the same? Then Morrisons, Sainbury's, Aldi, Lidl?

Just because you had ideas they didn't agree with. 

What happens if you can't get a gas supplier, water supplier, electricity is denied to you? 

These are all private companies and they all have the right to deny you service.

But would your opinion change if it was YOU? 

That's why like him or not, the point Farage is making IS IMPORTANT. 

By all means deny you service if you've been abusive to staff, courts have proved you have used your account for criminal activity, but not for just having the wrong opinions.

It's not just Farage being debanked. It's small businesses that deal in cash, it's the single Mum using her TickTock or OnlyFans account to make ends meet because she can't get benefits, it's a whole host of ORDINARY PEOPLE BEING DEBANKED.

The lefties need to understand that. 

NatWest CEO Bullied? Oh Really?

In this report, it reports the shadow chancellor Rachael Reeves says that the NatWest CEO Alison Rose was bullied out of her job. 

Really?

So if a normal NatWest worker released private information against bank policy and was summarily dismissed, is that bullying? 

No it isn't. What a stupid fucking moron Rachael Reeves is. 

Just makes me wonder what connection to Alison Rose Rachael Reeves has and if that's a conflict of interest for a shadow chancellor, protecting a bank worker who was (let's not forget) allowed to resign and keep her million pound payout, rather than being immediately dismissed like any normal bank worker would be. 

This is exactly why the Labour party is not the alternative to the Tories. They may talk an (ever so slightly) different talk, but they are all peas in the same corrupt pod. 

As a Labour MP who should support the workers, Rachael Reeves should be asking why Alison Rose was treated differently than a normal bank worker and not accusing people of bullying.

"British Miracle Meat" is Supposedly Satire, but is it a Gateway? Softening us up for Genocide?

I've blogged before about how the trail we are following leads to the forced elimination of "useless" individuals.

The WEF and it's accolytes have also let slip that useless people are useless and the question is, what do you do with them? 

Now we get Channel 4's program "British Miracle Meat", which is supposedly a satire, where famous chefs eat meat ostensibly grown from human meat. 

Yeah, did you just see that nudge there? 

All our meat worries can be solved, if only people would "donate" their flesh so that it could be grown in tanks. Hmmm. No need to donate, the state can take it all, to reduce the tax burden. Let's go all "Soylent Green".

And the most worrisome "fact" out of this satire? The flesh of children tastes the best.

Yeah, given the track record of the media, this is definitely a drama the BBC couldn't air. 

I don't begrudge Ch4 doing this programme, but why now? Especially given the pieces in play at the moment, it's a bit close to the edge for me.

But, given that there is an underclass, a net drain on the economy who refuse to work uncertain hours on zero hours contracts, or for wages that pay less than welfare (not like those luuvely bearded immigrant types who'll work for peanuts and sleeps 50 to a house).

So what do you do with a population that cannot be made to make profits and are a net drain on the economy? How would you start to change public opinion? Jaunty semi-docu-drama programs that "challenge" opinions? That would be one way.

I'm not waiting for the associated ever so worthy and compassionate gateway docu-drama on State Assisted Suicide morphing into State Assisted Death and making killing mandatory. "It's just a change of terminology", or "It's to relieve your suffering, don't you want that?" or "Surely you don't want to live in a tent for the rest of your life?".

I see what you are doing guys. 

I'll be watching for the drip, drip, drip feeding of other messages in future. And I will point them out.

Max Shrek "Powerplant" Proposed in Manchester.

 Who doesn't love a Batman reference? 

Well, it appears that Manchester are proposing to build a huge battery in order to capture wind and solar power and store it ready for when the wind don't blow and the sun don't shine.

The very thing that Max Shrek proposed in Batman and that almost cost Selina Kyle her life and turned her into catwoman in the film.

Back then I suppose the idea of a battery sucking up cheap energy, storing it and then delivering it when demand (and energy prices) are high was a bad thing back in the Eighties. Now, it seems that its a wonderful thing.

You see, the thing Max didn't do back in Batman was to spend a couple of decades moving public opinion in his favour. Now it's all greenwashed and acceptable.  Mainly because green renewable energy is so piss-poor at delivering bulk load energy.

But that's not stopped the idiots in power relying on it though, has it?

Leave Social Engineering to the Politicians.

The Nigel Farage bank cancellation Farrago is an indication of an organisation getting involved in social engineering where it has no business.

It's not the remit of banks to steer customers in a certain way, it's not their job to promote a certain political agenda or ideology. It's certainly not their job to debank customers if the customer doesn't fit their political ideology.

This is again another example of organisations overstepping the mark. Banks are not political organisations and should not be engaged in politics or promote a political ideology.

By all means say you're pro whatever cause, that you support people. But as an organisation you must support EVERYONE, irrespective of their opinions, their race, colour, creed or religion. 

It goes without saying that race and religion are protected from discrimination by law, but do we really need to add legislation to protect people from discrimination based on their opinion or ideology?

Because that's the way things are going. 

It's stupid and just adds to the cost of governance. It's an unwritten rule in the UK that we have freedom to speak freely. Yes there are caveats to that, I'm aware of, but in the main, people are free to have an opinion and should not be penalised for it. It's no business of the banks or any other Corporation whether I supported Brexit, whether I hate Jeremy Corbyn with a passion and think Boris Johnson is a dick led by his.. dick. 

None of that nor what I post here should be in the Bank's remit to affect. Their purpose is to provide banking facilities for customers and to make a profit for shareholders. Period.

Banks, Building Societies, global corporations can support whatever cause they like, but it should not impact their core business. It should not be imposed upon their customers. In fact it should work the other way round: the customers decide if they want to continue to do business with the organisation espousing views in opposition to them.

It reminds me of the housing association that stopped one of their tenants from using a wood burner at the height of the energy crisis, because it would affect the housing association's commitment to global warming and CO2 production. The tenant had made no such commitments and I'm sure no commitment was enshrined in her tenancy agreement. 

Overstepping the mark and acting as moral guardians to customers by organisations that have no business getting involved is something that needs to be stamped out immediately. 

We vote in politicians to do the social engineering and we vote for them as long as their values align with ours. With corporations we will do business with them as long as their values align with ours, not the other way round. 

There seems to be a lot of this top-down overbearing bollocks coming from several organisations. It's a recent phenomenon and I just wonder where it's coming from. Farage mentions "the institutions", by which I assume he means the educational establishment. But it goes further and is a wider problem. It'd say that the whole idea of top-down corporate parenting is coming from the WEF and other supra-national organisations. 

Organisations we do not vote for. 

Which breaks the covenant that the public have with politics: we allow those to have control over us, as long as we decide who holds that power. We vote them into office. 

We do not vote corporations into office, we do not vote bankers in to political office, we do not vote charities into positions of power either, nor the WEF. The main reason I voted FOR Brexit was because the EU had too much power over us without us having the ability to vote them in or out of power.

I don't now need the Banks trying to fill the gap, or anyone else.