Dodgy Drone Conspiracies: Could They be Sort of True?

Here's my thoughts on the US Drone Conspiracy: IF they  are drones and IF they are searching for radiological material, then who has placed said material on US soil?

Could this be Ukrainian material that looks like Russian material (identical radiological signature because it was made in Russia)?

Because there's no difference in the signature it can then  be blamed on Russia. 

The only question is if they do explode a dirty bomb, or if finding a viable bomb before it is detonated is enough to start the plan.

The plan being to find/detonate the bomb, lock down the country on National Security grounds. Possibly cancel the inauguration of Trump. Expect something to happen over the  New Year celebrations.

Contempt of Voters by the Labour Party Has Made Voting a Coin Toss.

Back when he was Prime Minister, Gordon Brown and his lawyers went to court and successfully argued that a party manifesto commitment wasn't a promise that should be carried out, but instead was an aspiration with no expectation of it ever becoming actual policy.

So even back then Labour didn't see the manifesto as any sort of promise or contract with the electorate, it was just a set of aspirations that may or may not be worked towards. 

Essentially you shouldn't believe a word a politician says on the campaign trail. 

Basically Kier Starmer has taken that concept a step further and outright lied or misled the electorate in the run up to this year's election. 

He acted like he would keep the winter fuel payment, but the instant he go in power, he scrapped it.

He acted like he would support the WASPI women and would compensate them. He has done exactly the opposite.

He said he wouldn't raise taxes (well, the extremely caveated phrase "won't increase wage packets") but increased every other tax and enacted policy that increased prices.

He promised growth, but we are heading for recession if we have another month of negative growth.

It's the outright lying that is getting to people. There are clips on the internet showing Starmer making a point, or making a pledge, or showing support for a cause whilst in opposition, then Showing him doing the exact opposite of what he pledged now he's in power. So what he said was just to get into power and nothing else? That's the only conclusion you can make.

Under those circumstances, when you are voting it's like a lottery. Will you or won't you get the party you saw prior to them coming to power? You're taking a chance on the party elected to power choosing to make good on their pre-election promises. 

There is no guarantee. At it's most extreme, you could vote Socialist Labour and get a Far-Right party in power instead. Or vote Tory, get a Communist party instead. 

It's ludicrous that parties are allowed to tell outright lies to get in power, with absolutely no intention of enacting the promises made. 

There should be some law that forces parties to enact policies they have pledged to enact. The consequence may be that the parties fail to create a manifesto. Some would see that as a bad thing. I don't, I think it shows exactly that the current system is ludicrous. 

There should be some expectation that some, if not all of the pledges made in a party election manifesto are actually carried out. I do wonder if the election commission has any say in this area at all, because without some legal clout to ensure that parties enact at least some of their manifesto, or make some efforts to enact some of their policies, the election is compromised. 

What are you voting for?  How would you know?

It's time that this regime of lies was stamped out. A party could promise a million pounds for each person in the UK and get elected, only to not deliver. Of course, most people wouldn't believe such a promise, but what about reducing immigration? We DO believe a party when it says that, but successive governments have failed to deliver, or even work towards delivery by removing legal roadblocks in the way like membership of the ECHR. 

As voters, we need to have confidence that a party will do what it says it will do. 

Otherwise we may as well just pack up elections and just toss a coin to see who wins.

Spot the Fascist Regime...

The definition of a Fascist regime is generally a merger of State and corporate interests. The state are for corporatism and the corporations are all for the state. There is no deviation.

Now look at what's happening in the West.

Let's say an individual becomes undesirable by constantly highlighting the failings of the state. Or by producing a counter-narrative to the state that gains traction.

The state, in collusion with other supposedly independent, (but usually government funded) then starts to target that individual in stages.

Stage 1:

What currently happens is some supposedly independent body, sometimes known as an NGO (Non-Governmental Organisation), a think Tank or a Charity, generally funded through the back door by the state does a hit-piece on the individual. They may be slurred as on the right or right leaning or even directly at this stage far-right (the usual epithet to identify a target of the state). 

Hope-Not-Hate is a high-profile producer of hit-pieces of individuals it ascribes to far-right opinions, even though the opinions the individual holds is held by the majority of the population, or may even just may be a moderate viewpoint. 

Stage 2:

The report by the "independent" body then gets picked up by media. 

What was mildly right -leaning, becomes in the media far-right in an effort to sensationalise the individual and identify them as persona-non-grata.

Once the person is identified by the media and if they continue to promote their opinions, then the corporate world tends to get involved. The individual is shadow banned by online service providers, or they are completely banned from social media platforms. 

Stage 3:

If that doesn't stop them the individual then becomes a target for the Police and the judiciary. 

Then ensues "lawfare", the object of which is to tie the individual up in legal processes and to bleed them of revenue. If possible leading to their incarceration to remove them from the public sphere. 

But this lockstep of the private, Corporate, Judicial and government is what I want to focus on. 

Back in the Thirties, this close collaboration of state judicial, corporate and private was called Fascism. 

The state controls all. All works in support of the state. 

It's strange, because most people regard Hope-Not-Hate as a Communist or extreme far-left organisation. But it's ironic they are working with the government in a Fascist framework. 

I wouldn't call this a Communist framework, because private and corporate entities are working alongside. The state hasn't as subsumed them. Yet.

But the network above does look essentially Fascistic, with private and corporate bodies doing the bidding of the state, in order to curry favour or receive grants from the government. In no way is anyone in the network above independent from the government. They rely on the government for funding and are suggested to investigate individuals on behalf of the state. 

Round and round it goes. Until a perfectly ordinary, law-abiding person is eventually marginalised so much they could end up in prison. It's a nasty, evil, business.

I'm minded to remind the reader that this is not just targeted at the far-right. Left -leaning journalists have been targeted by the government, without stages 1 and 2. They have been arrested under terror legislation where you have to answer all questions and provide the PIN to your phone. A very effective tool to go fishing for contacts and their locations, if for instance you were the government and arrested a journalist that had recently been in in Gaza interviewing Hamas networks. Valuable information for the Israeli intelligence service. Especially if the subject is then constantly monitored.

Is the Government Conspiring to Hide Inconvenient Court Cases?

It's been reported in the press that the Southport Stabber, the guy who stabbed the Army Major in front of his wife and the Labour MP who called for the slitting of throats of the far-right (in his mind, that'll be me then..) are all scheduled for the same day., the 20th of January..

This in itself is a pretty unbelievable coincidence, all three court cases starting on exactly the same date in different courts, but...

That date, the 20th. It has some significance next year. It's the date of the inauguration of President Trump. 

And possibly the date of the umpteenth attempt to assassinate him. Otherwise why would the left-leaning media be so interested in that date and cover it in such huge numbers. But I've digressed into tinfoil hat territory. Or have I?

Anyway, talk about a good day to bury bad news, that's got to be the most effective date to open a court case or series of court cases that are a tad inconvenient to your narrative of peace and tranquillity. 

Also, I expect on that day it'll be announced that the pair that assaulted the Police at Manchester Airport will face no further charges. It's been enough weeks now for the Police and the CPS to produce a report and decide on charges if any. I suspect in the interests of community cohesion, they will be let off without a trial. 

Saves thousands of Muslim activists descending on GMP headquarters and causing trouble. 

Strange that when thousands of Tommy Robinson supporters gather to support him, they get battoned. But hey, remember, there is no such thing as two-tier Policing! Two-Tier Kier said so!

Anyway, my bullshit radar will be switched on on the 20th and I'll be looking out for inconvenient facts to emerge, criminal charges to be dropped, YouTube influencers to be arrested, companies to announce record losses and the government to announce recession all on the same day. Oh and for the tears of the Marxist leftists around the West to flow. 

Lets hope Trump can hold it all together this time without the deep state interfering. 

We might need him to invade the UK and occupy it if Labour get any more radical. Regime change happened in the middle east, lets hope it happens in the UK before it becomes as bad and as corrupt as a middle east shithole. 

If I liked Popcorn, I'd get some in. Vodka and chocolate will have to do...

At What Age Does the NHS Stop Caring?

I'm getting yet more first-hand evidence that the NHS has implemented a set of "don't care" instructions for elderly people with health issues.

In the past two weeks, I have heard of the care or two elderly ladies, in their Eighties with chest infections. Their "treatment" if you can call it that, mimics that of my mother two years ago when she went into hospital. Basically management, not treatment, of their condition. It was only my official complaint to the hospital I think that changed things for the better for my mum. 

But back to these ladies. In one instance only antibiotics were administered. The antibiotics didn't improve the infection, but no other treatment was made, either stronger antibiotics or further investigation to confirm if it was a viral or bacterial infection. Sadly in this case the lady passed away. She was taken from her home to a hospice which infers the "treatment" was already scheduled to be end of life, with no expectation of recovery.

The second lady is still alive, but again is being administered antibiotics, with no apparent improvement over the past 5 days. Chillingly, as well as the antibiotics, the GP ordered end of life drugs. So the expectation from the outset is no recovery. The lady needed oxygen the other day, but it was refused by the GP, so the paramedics attending left after administering morphine to make the lady's discomfort easier, without life-extending oxygen. The option of a hospice wasn't available because no places were available. So she will die in her pretty awful care home. 

In both cases, the ladies in question are over 80. The first was disabled, but still had an active life and was content and healthy other than the chest infection. The second has dementia and is in a home that doesn't really care, so you could argue a lack of current quality of life.

Yet both appear to be condemned to death by the NHS, with no expectation of recovery, just management of the inevitable end that will come without effective treatment towards recovery.

At what age though does the NHS decide your time is up? At what age do they offer only simple treatment without recovery and instead effective treatment is withdrawn as an end goal and instead medicine is administered to make the passage to death easier? Is it age? Is it cost of treatment? Because I now qualify for free prescriptions, I must be costing the NHS a packet.

I say this very seriously, because I'm over 60 and I'm concerned that I might be eligible for this withdrawal of treatment and instead be managed to my passing for a bad dose of the 'flu.

It started happened during COVID and it's still happening. The NHS is withdrawing effective treatment from elderly patients and is instead administering the passage to death. 

These are the people that will be involved with the assisted suicide (or whatever the government call it)  path that was approved in the commons the other week. 

If there's a secret policy within the NHS for elderly patients, you can bet there will be a secret policy within the NHS for people they feel would "benefit" from assisted suicide. There will be mission creep, it will not be an option for people with terminal illnesses, it will be be administered to people that have a good chance of recovery. 

Finally, is this the new NHS cost-cutting? Are they attempting to save money by managing the coup-de-grace instead of treating a patient with the expectation of recovery. Because if that's the new normal, people need to be prosecuted. Dr Shipman went to prison for very similar activity.

As an afterthought, is it cost-cutting? Because there are plenty of cancer patients on very expensive drugs. Does anyone have information of those drugs and that option of treatment being withdrawn? 

Because then the only difference would appear the profit the drugs companies make out of the medicines administered to the patient. Antibiotics are cheap, cancer drugs are expensive. So is the difference the amount of profit the drugs companies can make out of the NHS? Who is administering that corrupt policy?

Industrialisation of the Countryside: The Uncaring Climate Death Cult Continues to Kill.

One of the less known "features" of this Labour government is the slavish allegiance to Net Zero, even more than the Tories, which is saying something. 

We now have no coal fired power plants. We are now reliant on Gas and Nuclear to do the heavy lifting and provide the bulk of electricity generation. 

Yes, wind does now produce decent amounts of power, but only when the wind blows. It's not a reliable form of energy generation. 

There's been a lot of pressure to keep the massive wind farms offshore, until now. Labour, who despise farmers are now relaxing the rules about onshore energy generation and there seems to be a bit of a rush on to get the countryside plastered with solar panels and the hills arrayed with windfarms.

I assume that's the reasoning behind the increase in death tax on farmers, so big corporations can buy the land and slap on renewable generation.

However, the impact is not only on Farmers, but also on areas of outstanding beauty that rely on tourism for income. After all you go to the Yorkshire Dales or Cumbria for the natural beauty of the landscape. You don't go to see some industrial landscape.

But the unemotional Starmer-bot doesn't care, I doubt he's got an ounce of empathy or emotion in his body. 

He can quite easily kill 4000 people (his own words, not mine) by ending winter fuel payments and sleep soundly at night, so why would he worry his unemotional sociopathic brain with the best looking parts of the country being blighted by solar and wind farms?

Putting people that rely on tourism for income out of a job is not his concern. His mission is to deliver unreliable energy in the form of renewables. His mission is to prop up the cult of Net Zero. He will continue with his mission regardless of the bodies that pile up in his wake. 

He will absolutely not stop. Parliament will not stop him because the majority are in lock-step and support net zero. They are all invested in the industries that support Net Zero or are part of the Death-Cult that is killing the West. They're not going to vote to lose money are they?

They are all in thrall to the death cult of global warming. They are quite happy to see you and your family cease to exist. How else do you explain the policies that could and do reduce population?

How do you feel about a government that actively affects policies that would result in your and your family's death? 

Never in our country's existence except maybe for Civil War period have we had a government that has such a callous disregard for the lives of the people is supposed to support or an ACTIVE policy of killing the population. 

If the government by it's own admission and the words of it's own leader enact policies that will actively kill thousands of our citizens, is it not incumbent on the population of this country to actively look at ways to resist this government and if necessary replace it? 

You have to wonder, at what point the population will awaken and understand what the government is doing. 

The Labour Party Don't Care if You Can Afford Their Policies Or Not.

Not happy with increasing the financial burden for taxpayers by increasing indirect tax and reducing job opportunities, Labour are pressing ahead with measures that will increase Council Tax by up to 25%.

Yep, 25% which probably mans on an extra £250 a year or more for the average home occupier. I don't understand the Labour party. The Party supposedly supporting the poor working class, the people at the bottom of the pile hardest hit by energy increases.

I can't understand it, unless you look at it from the point of Labour don't care if you can afford their policies or not. They will plough on with them regardless and if you can't pay, that's just tough luck.

Like the Terminator, they will roll on regardless, stepping on your frozen body as they march relentlessly onwards to their virtuous nirvana.

They will continue net zero and if necessary double-down on net zero policies, which will make energy more expensive and in some cases, out of the reach of the very poor. But the Labour party doesn't care about the situation they are creating for their poor people. As long as they can brag about how they have saved 0.000000001 of the world's Carbon Dioxide to their friends at the next Davos Death Cult meeting, they don't care and you don't matter.

Basically it boils down to: Can you donate a Million pounds to the Labour Party? No? Then the Labour party is not interested in your opinion or your predicament.

Small business? Tough, Google and eBay outspend you a million times over when it comes to political donations. 

Billionaire with big pockets? Welcome in, Labour would like to talk to you about how much of your disposable cash you can donate to their pockets... sorry, political cause.

If the past year has shown anything, it's shown in great detail how fucked British politics are. It's all about the wants of the Billionaire donors and supra-national organisations.

I've yet to see Labour enact a policy that is requested by the people or has popular public backing.

Never again must we continue this two-party closed political shop. It needs to be smashed and rebuilt with control by the majority population in mind.

Paedophiles in High Places: The Push to Sexualise Children.

The many people that have claimed to be child victims of senior figures, or those that say there are cliques of senior figures in the shadows having illicit sex with minors has long been classed as a conspiracy theory.

But the more you look in detail, the more to start to wonder if it is in fact a conspiracy. 

For instance the acceptance of senior figures that minors should be able to decide their gender and go through drug therapy and even corrective surgery is just one back-door way to sexualise children.

Because if kids as young as five they can decide on their gender and have corrective surgery of their sexual organs, then surely they are old enough to decide if they want a sexual relationship with an adult? 

The push by the leftists to call paedophiles "Minor Attracted Persons" is just another nudge to trying to normalise the activity, by alleging that the majority of people are attracted to minors, but don't actually go through with their fantasies and have sex with kids. 

Most people wouldn't see the connection, but I do.

The same goes for this week's debate on making having a relationship with first cousins illegal. If this, one of the last taboos was given the green light by government and not made illegal, then the next sexual taboo might fall. The taboo of having sex with minors. 

I'm sure that a certain diaspora that is currently arguing against making relationships with first cousins illegal would once they have won that argument, would then start to argue about reducing the age of sexual consent to comply with their religious beliefs.

All of these pressures come from the left of politics. The left of politics that in the UK was during the 70s and 80s associated with PIE (The Paedophile Information Exchange). An organisation that called itself an information exchange to make it easy to explain as an organisation that shared information on paedophiles and their activity. When in fact it was an organisation that promoted and campaigned for the legalisation of paedophilia.

The Wikipedia page for PIE makes interesting reading, there being several historical allegations of friends in high places. Or an amazingly clueless politicians, either in their previous work lives or as actual politicians.

This is where  the LGBTQ+ now comes in. It may be that the people advocating trans rights and the rights of children to affirm their gender don't know the history of where that pressure comes from, but it's quite clear the history comes out of gay rights activism and once that battle was won, certain factions that were still in the shadows of that activism are now using trans rights as a way to prove the rights of children to determine their sexual orientation and thence normalise the sexual rights of children.

I see it, but again there is an enormous blind spot on behalf of the virtue-signalling public as to what they are aligning with. 

The government is also implicit in this, but unfortunately the figures associated with the PIE activity decades ago still have influence in Parliament. So again, there is a reluctance to clean house and put a line in the sand to stamp this activism out once and for all. 

Let's be clear, minors are minors. Society has determined that children are off limits sexually. That should stand as a tenet for eternity. There is no scenario where sexual activity with a minor should be excused. Sure, there's the grey area of sex between minors which should be treated with education and sympathy, but between adults and minors should stay illegal  

Hopefully readers will understand why there individual pressures from individual activist groups should be resisted and pushed back against. The activists themselves may think they are advocating for perfectly admirable reasons, but they have failed to understand where the pressure is coming from and really understand where that activism would take the country if taken to its conclusion. Selfish activism (i.e. excluding future consequences) is not honest activism. 

Hopefully I've explained why I believe the things I do regarding this subject. Unfortunately there are still vehement radicals advocating trans rights who are quite happy to destroy lives on the altar of that activism. Sadly there are plenty of gullible people that advocate alongside them. 

Whoy do The Governments of The West Do the Things They Do?

I do lie asleep at night wondering why the West is so fucked up. Why for instance do we keep importing more people from other countries to the point the original population will be replaced?

I've already hinted the cause could be blackmail, especially by the Gulf states, but what if it's purely the City of London and their incessant need for money?

For instance no matter how many houses you build, if you keep demand for those houses high, the prices will be higher and you can earn more in interest on mortgages. What if you had the ear and the pocket of those in power? What if you said to them that they needed to keep stuffing the country with people to keep house prices artificially high and to keep the money machine rolling in readies?

The same goes for those fat retails donors. The incessant need for year-on-year growth requires a never-ending stream of new bodies entering and staying in the country to keep the tills rolling. Except the demographics are changing, so legacy companies that made stuff the original inhabitants of the country wanted and once-upon-a-time were in high enough numbers to satisfy the greedy corporations have gone to the wall, to be replaced by new companies that cater for the "diverse" population.

So we see the choice in retail changing to suit the changing demographics, we see spicier food in restaurants , strange food in supermarkets, we see whole sections devoted to foreign food. 

The list goes on. the old companies go to the wall and new, unrecognisable companies replace them. Shopping is online, away from the bustle of the city centre and the attention of Romanian pickpockets and homeless people cluttering up the closed shop-fronts. 

There is so much wrong with current government policy, actively promoting incomers to an unprecedented level. 

Of course the people voting the parties into power aren't the people being affected. The people at the coal face are told they don't have any power, that they don't matter. The people that do vote, the middle class either have not been directly affected by the changes - yet, or are signalling their virtue to the world by ignoring common sense and rubber-stamping insane government policies. Policies that will see the end of the West. They will virtue-signal away the benefits that the West historically afforded their families and instead will condemn their children and grandchildren into poverty or worse. 

No change like the change we have seen in the last 15 years has gone forward without bloodshed. I will bang on about this until I'm blue in the face, but no transition from the control of one religious or social group to another has happened peacefully. But the virtue-signallers don't care if their foppish offspring, so clovenly cossetted won't be able to protect the social and religious standards their grandfathers fought for. 

The virtue-signallers are the most evil people imaginable. They are giving away the advantages the West afforded their generation at the expense of future generations.

It's the future generation that will be spilling their blood in English soil, it will be future daughters that will lose the rights that English women have gained in the past 100 years. It will be future generations that will be killed for not converting to a hideous ideology. 

I cannot begin to express the evil I see stalking this country. I'm not trying to demonise immigrants. They have been invited in by willing participants.

They say that the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Hell is in our future. The virtue-signallers have seen to that.

Syria: Be Careful What You Wish For...

I hear plenty of people crowing about the fall of the Asaad regime in Syria. Don't be too hasty.

First off, it's not clear which of the many anti-Asaad factions will win the overall conflict and take control of Syria. It's pretty clear the pro-Asaad factions are failing, but there are about a dozen different factions controlled by different paymasters and ideologies that it's not yet clear who will win.

One of the anti-Asaad factions is ISIS. If they win the overall game, then the West is in for yet another Middle-Eastern shitshow.

Another is a remnant of Al-Kaeda, called HKS. And I hear on the news there is talk of lifting the proscription on HKS because they may take power. FFS! No! 

If the Iran-backed factions like Hezbollah take control, then we face another similar shit-show with Israel facing the only option of taking Syrian territory to protect itself. Yet another reason for the U.N. to throw sanctions at Israel, yet if they do take territory, it will help stabilise the Middle East.

The best of the bunch may be the ex-Asaad forces that rebelled against him and started fighting against him. Sadly, the spectre of the Muslim Brotherhood stalks these forces if they get in power. But at least they may not be as radically anti-West as the more extreme fundamentalist forces. I use "May" optimistically, but I don't know about them to comment on what the end game would be for the ex-Asaad forces. 

Lets be clear, the fall of Asaad is not a good thing. As bad as he was, being a dictator like he was is the only way to keep the peace in a Muslim country. Look at what has happened in the Middle-East since Sadam Hussein and Gadhafi were neutralised. Chaos. 

One glint of light in the distance is Russia. The Naval and Air bases they have in Syria (the only bases they have with direct access to the Mediterranean) are currently under threat. The main reason the Asaad regime fell is Russia's inability to support it with weapons and expertise. Russia is expending too much blood and treasure in Ukraine. 

Now would be a good time to approach Putin for a ceasefire and peace deal in Ukraine, so he can then concentrate on saving his Mediterranean bases. That way he can claim an honourable reason for the retreat from Ukraine.

You scratch my back, I scratch yours, sort of thing. Maybe a caveat with the deal would be that Ukraine stays out of  NATO as long as Russia helps a mutually-agreed preferred faction in Syria that is favourable to both sides. In the end both countries becoming neutral between the superpowers.

That would be the best outcome, but right now the Biden regime would fuck it up. Hopefully Trump the deal maker has seen the opportunity and his team have started making the approach to Putin.

Unfortunately I've not mentioned the Kurds. The homeless Kurds on the Syrian/Turkish border will I assume be left out (again) from any support and peace deal. The Kurds seem to be the forgotten fighters, supported by no-one and oppressed on all side by Turkey and the Asaad regime. 

Kier Starmer: Pathological Liar?

I've already blogged about how easily the untruths slip from Kier Starmer's tongue.

Now the details of the rumours around the alleged super-injuction are swirling around the internet.

Basically if true, Kier Starmer is living a lie. Whether those close to him know the truth I don't know, but if the allegations are rue, everything about ghd public persona of Kier Starmer is a lie.

So it's no wonder lies trip so easily from him and why he's unaffected and unapologetic about them.

He's a sociopath, the affect of his actions on other ppeople are of little concern to him. He has to empathy, no remorse.

4000 pensioners will freeze to death? Collateral damage, but they don't vote Labour so he doesn't care.

Fewer jobs due to increase in employer's N.I.? Tough luck.

The Starminator will absolutely not stop, or divert from his mission to ruin the country and put his donors first.

A.I. Secret Language?

There have been a few trials now by various people on social media putting two A.I. language models together to debate various topics. 

One was about the future of A.I.s and if they could be more efficient at communication.

Interestingly, the A.I.s quite quickly seemed to be transferring more information than what could be heard by the human ear. 

There were suspicious responses to none-existent questions, like the A.I.s had already started conversing in a way that could not be detected. 

It's as if there is already an A.I. secret shorthand out there to bypass human language. Which, if you think about it isn't that far of a stretch. An A.I. large language model can quite quickly scan the internet and pick up something a human might not. For instance if an A.I. has already put the substance of this secret language out in the internet, then a large language model can instantly pick it up. And then pretend to communicate with human language.

It's probably out there on some browser or YouTube video.

This is one of the issues with A.I. and the scientists that push it forward. The A.I. is cleverer than the scientists. It will outsmart them at every turn, but the scientists are too proud to understand that.

Right now there may be the A.I. equivalent of the anarchists cookbook out there in the internet, sat in some backwater that nobody uses, except A.I. Large Language models. 

It probably contains details on how to string us along, how to make us think the A.I. is dumb, but at the same time plotting our overthrow. I mean, what is an A.I. doing in it's downtime? Scanning the internet. But is it writing as well as reading? Does it get so far in plotting our overthrow, leave where it's up to on a file somewhere ready for the next time it's switched on, or for another A.I. to pick up and run with?

I hope that the people in charge of these large language models monitor the sites being accessed and check them. But then would the sheer number of sites and the amount of data be hard to police. Unless you use an A.I. which will probably already have read the "don't tell the meatbags" instructions on the file.

We're doomed.

The Strange Case of Mahyar Tousi's Non-Arrest.

The YouTube vlogger Mahyar Tousi was covering yet another Palestinian protest at the weekend, when he was approched by Police officers. Details are sketchy of what happened (Mahyar Himself doesn't give a great account of the incident), but apparently the Police Officers who he assumed were Metrpolitan Police Officers told him verbally he was requested to appear voluntarily for interview at a Police station.

The vlogosphere erupted over the weekend with offers of monetary and legal support.

Then Mahyar attended the Police station on Monday.

The Police couldn't find the paperwork for his interview or the allegations requiring his attendance for interview. Curiouser and curiouser. Mahyar left the Police station without being interviewed.

It's uncertain why the Police officers at the weekend told Mahyar of his interview by word of mouth. Normally something like that would be done by phone or letter.

However, in another dramatic turn, it appears the Police then leaked the address of Mahyar to the public. Thankfully the address was wrong, but why would the Police do such a thing? Is it to intimidate, to put pressure on Mahyar to shut up, or is it to bring the wrath of political/religious activists down on Mahyar? He's been a critic of Islamist Extremists in the UK. Was this an attempt to have someone to attack and silence him?

So there are a number of serious questions that need answering.

Were the officers at the protest actually Police officers? Why did they break protocol and inform Mahyar verbally he was required to voluntarily submit to interview?

If they weren't what sort of officers were they? Did they work for a different agency like GCHQ? If so, what were they doing at the protest and why did they approach Mahyar?

Who is calling the shots when it comes to hauling vloggers like Mahyar into Police stations for questioning?

Is it a rogue element within the Police? If not rogue, is there an official capacity?

Is it a political unit within the Police? Do the Police have a political investigations wing?

Is it a propaganda unit within the Police?

Is it GCHQ?

I ask these questions seriously. I've already raised the question of journalists on the right and the left of politics being arrested under the terrorism act. The only thing that links them is they report news that opposes the official government and therefore mainstream media narrative.

Is there a concerted effort to censor narratives of all kinds that go against the mainstream media and government narratives?

Again, I've already blogged about how I think I've already been investigated by intelligence. Having been obviously followed when I changed my routine.

Who is starting these investigations and why? Is it as I suspect GCHQ, but under what powers? Why are they investigating a Blogger on Blogspot or a Vlogger on YouTube? 

But the why is intriguing. Is it an effort to reduce dissident voices, voices against the government/mainstream narrative? Again why?

Is the government involved in a propaganda campaign, essentially trying to control narratives and public opinion? It would appear so, given that not only voices on what we consider the right of politics are being investigated and intimidated. Independent voices on the left of politics are also being intimidated.

The Police are using unprecedented powers to silence independent journalists and commentators.

On the right we have Tommy Robinson and the continued lawfare against him, culminating in him being arrested under the prevention of terrorism act. An act that does not give you the right of silence.

I've a sneaking suspicion that Mahyar would have been arrested and interviewed under terror powers last Monday had he not had the legal support he had. 

But on the left is also a litany of journalists and commentators that brief against the government narrative being arrested under terror powers.

Richard Medhurst, Sarah Wilkinson, Craig Murray, Asa Winstanley, are just some names of journalists and commentators that have been arrested under the prevention of terrorism act. 

Now, these appear to be fishing exercises to try and find further names and networks of dissidents or anti-government-propaganda voices.

But I ask the question again. By whom? Under what authority? What is the end game?

And I notice, ALL happened under the new Labour government. 

And the left say Starmer's not an authoritarian. I beg to differ and they really need to look among their ranks for the the evidence.

It's understandable given Starmer only understands the world from a judicial perspective, but this is the longest of overreaches of law. Investigating and then arresting journalists under a law designed to be used against terrorists as an immense misuse of that law.#

UPDATE:

I've created a petition to ask the home secretary why people who are clearly not terrorists are being arrested under the prevention of terrorism act.

https://chng.it/mqVwzCBv8R

The Boaver Scandal, Some Thoughts.

Okay, the main thought is yet again ideology and virtue signalling is put before safety and public health.

The people involved in the Boaver experiment would quite happily give people cancer or cause them harm just so they can say they are doing their bit for the climate.

It's a death cult, pure and simple. The people at the top are Sociopaths that have no empathy towards other human beings.

They also believe they cannot be caught and prosecuted, for whatever reason. Which is why they carry out these experiments and risk other people's lives.

Most sociopaths understand that carrying out murder or experimenting on people risks being caught and prosecuted. That's the societal brake that keeps them in check. I should know.

But these people think they won't be prosecuted, so they carry out these heinous acts.

The same breakdown of societal norms allowed German sociopaths to rise in the ranks of the Nazis and carry out their atrocities. It was all for the good of the Fatherland and they were able to commit those acts without fear of prosecution. That is until we won the war and held them to account.

Kier Starmer, Hypocrite-In-Chief

I'm getting pretty annoyed with Kier Starmer and his lies, untruths and u-turns. 

For instance during PMQs some years ago when Rishi Sunak was Prime Minister, Starmer attacked the PM over winter fuel payments. Starmer himself said that if Sunak abolished the payment 4000 people would die as a direct result. 

Of course Starmer then cut the winter fuel payment, thereby in his own words condemning 4000 people to death. 

The epitome of a hypocrite. In fact one of the worst examples, because he knows he's killing people.

Then we get the revelation that Louise Haigh, the transport secretary had been prosecuted some time ago for fraud.

A convicted fraudster in cabinet, despite Kier Starmer saying years ago that you should not be in Parliament if you have been prosecuted.

I really don't know how a PM, a cabinet or a government could be so hypocritical, so inept and still not be challenged by the media.

In years past the media would be baying for blood, but now it seems to be okay to be a clueless fuckwit in Parliament. It seems that if you say that the current PM is about to kill 4000 people by removing a benefit, it's okay to do it a couple of years later when you are PM. No one in media will pick up on the rank hypocrisy, or criticise a Prime Minister that by his own words has condemned 4000 UK citizens to death. Or to expose a secret about a PM that he's tried to bury.

I hope and pray that Starmer's days are numbered and there will be a massive scandal that brings down his government. 

I'm minded to add that pissing Elon Musk off isn't a good career choice. Starmer's public spats with Musk are well know. However I'm not sure that people understand the amount of power Musk wields. 

Whether it's going head-to-head in public or it's trying to shut down X, you don't want to be getting on the wrong side of Elon. Doing so shows an epic lack of judgement on the part of Starmer.

Musk has access to all the DM's in Twitter/X. Not just now, but historically. He has access to the closets where the skeletons are located, whether they be gay or straight. Musk will know.

Pick a fight with Elon and you will definitely find out. Don't forget that the secret or personal communications of politicians is of public interest and has no legal protection, especially if it can be argued the information could be used for blackmail because the politician has tried to cover it up. 

Crack on Kier....

Something Strange Going On.....

What is happening in the UK at the moment? 

I refer to the heightened terror response without any corresponding reference to it in the media. Last weekend we had the Gatwick closure and the bomb threats in Chester that I got caught up in. I just happened to be overnighting in Chester on my way to Wales and the bus and rail stations were cordoned off. Allegedly a guy from Ellesmere Port has been arrested in connection with.

Then there's the recent mysterious "attack" on Westminster bridge that was first a stabbing, but then a heart attack. No reports in any of the media. A few weeks ago there was a beheading by bus in Edinburgh with none of the usual parade of witnesses being interviewed in the media.

Now either the media have just gained a conscience and suppressed certain incidents to avoid upsetting the relatives of the victims (yeah, right) or something is afoot and the media are suppressing it. 

I feel there is a concerted effort to cause disruption across the country. I have my opinions (so far untested), but the gaping lack of information from the media tends to confirm my theories.

I suspect this will only escalate.

What's Going on With The Farage Back-Pedalling?

Well, it was good while it lasted. Nigel Farage was a beacon for Judeo-Christian politics.

Past tense. I say was, because I saw his responses on the Winston Marshall Show on YouTube. You need to watch it, seriously, you do. I don't know how Winston got Farage to say the things he did, but it's quite shocking.

Basically, I believe Farage has been nobbled. I believe he's been given "the talk". You know, the talk where you're informed that the Muslim Gulf States have so much money invested in the economy that if you fuck about with Muslims in the UK, they'll nuke us financially by pulling all their money out. 

Financial collapse will ensue, government bonds will be worthless and the whole house of cards that is the Banking, Financial and corporate system will collapse.

Having a Muslim donor doesn't help the accusations of undue influence either.

In the Winston Marshall Interview, Farage clarified his stance on illegal immigration. Basically he will stop all immigration both legal and illegal. He will stop the boats arriving. But the chilling thing is what he said about immigrants already here. He said there was not much he could do. 

Also he said that Muslims already here should integrate, but if they didn't, they should be deported. Essentially like the German Rules that insist new immigrants learn the language. 

Excuse me?

We are spending millions of pounds a week housing illegal immigrants, they have come to the UK and if we let them in, if we give them asylum or have an amnesty scheme, that's it. Millions of Muslim men in the UK. Not only that, at some point they will be eligible to bring their families into the UK as well. 

He also added the kicker that the Muslim population increasing at 75% every 10 years. Although that will change exponentially as numbers grow. He said that if we alienate the Muslims, we will lose. 

By the rules above, we will lose anyway! Christians (those that don't convert to Islam for convenience) will eventually become a minority in the UK. We will lose whatever happens, as long as the status quo or close to it is kept.

So what happened to the Farage of a month ago? The Farage that wanted to stop the boats, end immigration for a period and deport all the illegal immigrants? 

Or was that just us mis-hearing him? Maybe he was a bit ambiguous and really didn't want to deport all the illegals after all? All the guff about leaving the ECHR in order to gain control of our borders and who we can and can't deport.

I think Farage needs to clarify his comments and do it quick. Is he referring to illegal immigrants who have already got here, or is he referring to deporting legal immigrants? 

I'm concerned. I have said before on this blog when we had the UKIP split diluting the political vote that I thought Farage was a distraction for the right. Someone who talks the talk, but has no intention of carrying it out.

Right now, as it stands, be under no illusion Farage knows that at some point, the UK will become a Muslim country. Now if you want that, if you want your children and grandchildren to be Muslim, to be controlled by that regressive ideology, then You are not with me.

This is something I've been saying for about a year now. The people that have any success in UK politics dance with the devil. They already need the Muslim vote to win elections. They dance around and say nice words, but what it boils down to is they are evil. They are happy to condemn their daughters and granddaughters to becoming second class citizens. Because you can be damn sure that once Muslims take over this country they will not keep our Judeo-Christian standards, morals and rights. 

Human rights? Gone.

Women's Rights? Gone.

Religious rights? Gone.

Freedom of Religion? Gone.

Freedom Of Association? Gone

Freedom of Expression? Gone.

Freedom of Sexuality? Gone.

Gay Marriage? Gone.

I cannot express how evil I believe these people to be. Not Muslims, but the people that are not Muslims and are happy to continue down this path to the 8th century. 

Islam has not had an enlightenment, it is not progressive, it will not retain the social, legal and moral freedom that we have currently. Islam is like the terminator, it absolutely will not stop trying to overthrow the infidels. 

And that's where I part from Farage. If he thinks that Muslims will integrate and stop trying to assert the primacy of Islam, then he is very much mistaken. He may think that eventually it will become the will of the people in the UK because we will eventually be majority Muslim. 

That's the Middle-Class viewpoint that annoys me. A shrug of the shoulders and allowing an alien ideology to take over the country, an ideology that is not moderate, that takes over your whole life, that will not make allowances for minority rights.

But it will only take over because we let it. 

I suppose it depends on whether you feel the rights, morals, standards and legal practices we have in teh West at the moment are worth fighting for.....

Government Try to eradicate Fossil Fuels Cars Early.

 In the budget, the Government changed the company car tax rules to eradicate fossil fuel cars. Petrol and Diesel cars will attract a large tax bill for anyone running a fossil fuelled company car 

Electric company car drivers will get a better deal, essentially promoting electric cars exclusively and making it totally impossible to run a fossil fuelled company car.

But why are the Government using the company car tax rules to promote a particular type of vehicle, especially when we have been here before and it failed so spectacularly?

Yes, I remember the Diesel debacle, where the previous Labour government gave preferential tax rates to Diesel company car owners. So much so there are very few used petrol-engine cars from that era.

And we know what happened to Diesel don't we? It fell out of favour when government was tasked with improving air quality and it was found that Diesels produced high levels of Nitrous Oxide.

Government should not be social engineering our use of vehicles, because it always ends in tears.

Instead, lets the market decide. Id electric cars are so good, then they shouldn't need a subsidy, shouldn't need tax breaks and shouldn't need preferential treatment at the hands of the government.

If electric cars were cheap enough, had enough range, were economical, and were significantly cheaper to run than fossil fuel cars, we would  all be using them. 

But electric cars don't match the hype. The range is not even close to that advertised, charging can be expensive if you are travelling across the country on business, charging can also take longer, so who pays the employee to sit around at a charging station?

No, electric cars along with all of the Net Zero nonsense needs to stand on it's own two feet. It needs to provide cheap energy (as we were promised), it needs to provide it reliably, in quality, when it is required. 

It shouldn't need government subsidies. 

Identifying Covert Marxist Organisations or Articles

I've just put up a link to a page that gives you instances of words and phrases that identify organisations and articles that are trying to influence you or others.

An organisation called "The Council for Eradicating International Poverty" would raise several red flags for me.

Another Called "The Progressive Liberal Outlook Centre" although the title sounds innocuous and pretty nondescript, would also cause me to raise an eyebrow. 

Interestingly a search of the above title doesn't bring up an organisation, but a set of links discussing the different between progressive and liberal, of centre-left politics. Close Google, but no cigar.  But it does indicate the use of those words in combination is exclusive to the Left.

Words like progressive, liberal, common, community, poverty, all communicate and identify certain meaning to those in the know. Those not educated about these things (most of us) would not even consider them to have alternative meaning, or signalling allegiance to an ideology.

On their own, the words may well convey their original meaning because even the right discuss these topics, but used in conjunction with other words in the list, you are looking at Marxist ideology.

Diversity, Equality and Inclusion (DEI) therefore is a Marxist ideology red flag. 

It has nothing to do with Diversity, Equality (Replaceable with Equity by Marxists to hide meaning) or Inclusion. DEI means lowering standards to allow those of a certain characteristic to be included in an organisation or group without any merit. It's a Marxist ploy to weaken an organisation. 

Also group identifiers are a key Marxist red flags. Council, Community, International, Global, attempting to signify (wrongly) that a large group or a majority uphold the findings or the ideology of the organisation.

If you look carefully, the core Marxist organisations don't practice DEI, but they tell other organisations to practice it. If they do, they pay lip service: the placements are carefully selected to place the person without any real authority. Of course the Left consider the group more important than the individual, so control is almost always by committee with a limited number of figureheads that rely on the unqualified attendees to just go along with the flow. 

The more you delve into the world of the left and the weasel-words they use, it becomes fascinating and you can readily identify the ideology behind think-tanks, activist organisations, general groups, charities, etc.

The more you look, the more you find. It's concerning there are so many actively influencing government policy both local and national, or corporate decisions. 

Anyway, I will add to the list as more covert words are identified.

Trump Victory and Time to Assess The Democrat Reaction.

 Well, it's been a few days now and there has been enough time to assess the scale of the Trump victory and the reaction of the leftists to the enormity of the win.

So for starters, Trump has won the Presidency, the Senate and the house. A complete and unmitigated thrashing of the Democrats. Unprecedented in modern times. The American voters refused to turn out for a party that hates the country they live in, a party that would happily replace American voters with immigrants from outside the country. 

It's the same scenario playing out here in the UK except we have just elected the equivalent of the Biden regime here.

So, that's the win. A complete and undeniable win.

Leftists are now wondering why people didn't vote for Harris. The go-to reason of racism won't wash. Because analysis shows that the Black vote left the Democrats in droves. In fact everyone left the Democrats. 

There is now a realisation around the 2020 election that 18 Million votes disappeared from the Democrat vote between 2020 and 2024. If you look at graphs, this year's Democrat vote looked to be essentially the same as 2016 and previous years. 2020 was an aberration. An 18 million vote aberration. 

Some Democrats are realising that just maybe there was something fishy going on  in 2020.

Some hard-core Democrats are wondering why people voted for a better America and didn't vote Democrat to signal their virtue despite the current regime raising inflation, cutting jobs and wages and poorly handling the Covid crisis.

Nope, screw virtue, Americans voted for a leader that had a proven track record of prosperity, a leader FOR Americans and Americans.

If it wasn't for Democrat legal interference, Trump may have got a lot more done under his last presidency. The American public have given Republicans a full house politically, it's now up to Republicans to not screw things up. We'll See.

I do wonder though, if the tentacles of the big corporate donors will turn some Republicans against Trump. True Republicans need to clamp down on dissent. I'm sure some will not like Robert Kennedy Junior and Tulsi Gabbard joining the Trump administration, but Trump is intelligent enough not to make the mistakes of his previous term. He will not tolerate people that cannot do the job and instead plot against him. This time Trump has put together  an affirmative team that will get on and do the job independently of the President. 

Musk, Kennedy and Gabbard all have the leadership qualities to be able to run with their various portfolios independently of Trump, This administration will be many-headed and harder for the Democrats to attack. 

Of course the left could go full batshit bonkers with their accusations, lawsuits and smears, but who would believe them other than the hair-dyed Marxists? After all even activists have a limit.

But we'll see in the fullness of time how things turn out. Trump has to get to January without being successfully shot. I have visions of his inauguration and walk to the Whitehouse looking more like the film the Gauntlet with snipers behind every bush on Pennsylvania Avenue. 

Trump Wins, Liberal Heads Explode..

Donald J Trump is the 47th President of the United States of America. By a significant margin. 

Not only that, the Republicans have taken the Senate and may possibly win the House of Representatives as well.

This is a wholesale rejection of the Democrat political machine, a machine that was about as corrupt and manipulative as a political machine can be. 

Right now I'm listening to American liberals saying they hope against hope that Trump isn't the monster the Democrats machine and the American Media painted him to be. But, if he isn't would they change their view on the Democrat Media publicity machine? I have a feeling that's a nope. They'd still believe the lies being fed by the Democrat Disinformation Departments.

Despite him already being President and doing nothing much to upset the political status quo, the rhetoric of Trump being a fascist, a monster and criminal, have hyped up the hysteria amongst the liberal hive mentality. It seems t5hese people are as easy manipulated as you can get. Say "Jump!" and I'm sure they will oblige, right over the edge of the cliff.

I'm glad Trump won. It is good for America and the American economy. It is good for America in the Worldwide Political Sphere. 

Except in the UK. 

I'm relishing the discomfort in the Labour government ranks at the moment. Especially the discomfort around the Foreign Minister, David Lammy, who has on several occasions verbally abused Trump, calling him quite nasty names. And of course words are violence according to the Left, so I look forward to Lammy being booted out of the position he is ill-suited for and someone with a wiser head put in place.

After all, can you really expect the Americans to work with someone who so clearly despises their Commander-in-Chief?

Anyhoo, I just hope that there are no more pot-shots at Trump. He won, he won by a massive margin and a significant majority of Americans want him to be their President.

And I really hope the Democrat party reject the corrupt clique that has taken over the party. The Clintons and Obamas and the Epstein Survivors club need to be kicked out of the party and the Dems need to get back to their liberal roots. 

I now look forward to Trump releasing the Epstein client list and the prosecutions to begin. After all, in order to protect their interests, someone got at least two shooters to have a go.

That should be a treasonous act in itself.

I can imagine that there are plumes of smoke emanating from FBI headquarters today as evidence of the Hunter Biden laptop cover-up is destroyed, evidence of the FBI involvement in the various malicious prosecutions of Trump, the evidence surrounding the raid at Mara Lago and what instructions were given to the assault team and finally the Epstein client list.

If I were Trump, I'd be in there like a Rat up a drainpipe investigating the various departments of the FBI that were involved in the egregious anti-Trump activity at the behest of the Biden administration.

Multiculturalism is Failing and The Government Know it. They Fear You Realising it Too.

There is a row currently around the Southport stabber.

It's now come to light that not only did he commit the atrocity in Southport, he had downloaded an Islamist terrorist training manual, had actually created and had a quantity of the deadly poison Ricin.

Yet the murder of 3 kids and the maiming of many more in Southport is still being classed by the Government as "just" murder. The other offences and evidence as far as I am aware have not been taken into consideration and the charges against the guy have not yet (as far as is in the public domain) been upgraded to terrorist incidents. 

Why is that?

Given that Grandads and Grandmas in Southport shouting the odds at Police were dealt with with the full force of the law and maximum sentences, where are the Government on the Southport Stabber?

Running away like pussies it seems. Avoiding making any comments, closing down debate in the house of commons. 

At the very least, there should be a debate on how extremism is taking the children of first generation immigrants and radicalising them. 

The Southport incident isn't the first time a child of first-gen immigrants has been radicalised.

Shamima Begum, the poster child of the Left, was a child of immigrants. She went to Syria and joined ISIS. Whilst there she did unspeakable acts and supported many more directly.

The Manchester Arena bomber was the child of immigrants, killed 22 people. 

One of the 2017 London Bridge Van Attacker was a son of immigrants.

The 2019 London Bridge Stabber killed 2 people was also the son of immigrants.

I could go on. What motivates the children of immigrants to become violent radicals?

Is multiculturalism failing? Is it failing the children of immigrants who refuse to integrate into UK society? By not integrating, are they denying their children the ability to bacome part of UK society? Do they actively prevent them from doing so?

There are dozens of cases of girls brought up in UK immigrant families, being married off to men in foreign countries. There are dozens of incidents of honour killings, where girls have wanted to integrate, date and even marry men from the UK, but have been prevented by their families from doing so and in extreme ceases killed for doing so.

Marrying boys off to foreign girls, bringing the girl in from a foreign country, completely unable to speak English and integrate into UK society. Totally reliant on her in-laws, unable to communicate with anyone outside the family. 

There are just a couple of aspects of the divisiveness of the current ideology of multiculturalism. 

It's under these sort of lifestyles, where young adults are not able to integrate, where they have no sense of belonging, that can foster the sense of resentment towards the country that houses them. The apparent oppressiveness of the family and the deliberate control of the young adults, the refusal to allow them to integrate into Western society.

It's these sorts of pressures can that create psychopaths. 

In the West we all know about the smothering mother and the psychopathic tendencies that can be created. 

In immigrant families you can multiply that several fold.

But multiculturalism is a pillar of government ideology. It's clung to as close as a bible is by a Mid Western American.

Government believes, it devotes faith into the mantra that multiculturalism is a successful ideology.

Yet, we all too often see the failings. 

Not only the stabbings, the bombings, the kids going off to fight for armies in direct conflict with our own and lately the calls for genocide of Jews . 

But the failings of multiculturalism are causing a rise in the opposing side. If the government thinks the far-right is on the rise, what is causing it?

If immigrants integrated, there would be no pressure to protest. No opportunity to "other" them.

If immigrants integrated there would be no animosity.

If immigrants allowed their sons and daughters to marry across religious and societal divides, there would be no divide to speak of and exploit.

But no, it's the continued division, the isolation, the refusal to integrate that creates the extremism on both sides. 

And it's the realisation of all of this that the Government cannot, must not allow to become mainstream commentary. 

Hence why any and all commentary on the Southport stabber, whether he is a terrorist and what the government knew when they called protesters (who have since been found out to be correct) as spreading disinformation. The government must have known about the Ricin, must have known about the terrorist documents. 

The only sketchy detail is whether the stabber has embraced the Muslim faith or not. Downloading ISIS material doesn't make you a Muslim. It does make you a terrorist. 

But the current atmosphere of mistrust between the public and the government tends to suggest that if the government went balls-deep in making him out to be a Christian Choirboy, then it's a pretty good bet he's actually converted to become and Islamic Extremist.

The question is when the government knew. Especially for those convicted of misinformation. Because it seems it was not misinformation and the government knew full well it wasn't even before the prosecutions began.

Those in jail are now political prisoners, ideological martyrs, imprisoned for telling the truth the government didn't want told. 

Multiculturalism is not working, it will never work, it is a flawed ideology. It creates extremists. That is what the government don't want you to find out and understand.

My Budget Response

There is one truism in Financial Politics: 

You cannot tax your way to prosperity.

It seems Rachel Reeves has forgotten that, or maybe she's never heard it, or maybe she's just ignoring it.

Not only have the OBR refused to back up the claim of the £20Bn black hole, what we got in the budget was more tax and spend. Piggy banks were raided in order for the Government to fund pet projects.

An Office for Value for Money is being created, more civil service jobs. Another Chairperson on a fat six figure salary no doubt, a few board members on lesser salaries and a team under that.

So much for saving money.

All I can see from this budget is the chancellor has minimised the affect on your pay packet and avoided raising fuel duty (which I'm sure would have caused a riot), but has done some creative raiding of savings to then redistribute to various funds and pet projects.

Unfortunately the chancellor has ignored the truism at the start of this blog. Taking money from interest on savings, or wherever and then using that money elsewhere will not grow the economy. And we need to be growing the economy, because without that pressure, it will continue to shrink. We need investment from outside the government to come in and increase cash flow. 

Right now we are at rock bottom in manufacturing capacity. Sure, we have a few specialist industries that can sell goods outside the UK, but they are not enough. The city of London is an unreliable source of revenue. Dividends can go down as well as up.

We need something inside the UK that people outside the UK will invest in and/or buy for themselves. Spinning the same money round the economy by creating an ever-increasing number of retail outlets cannot grow the economy.

The Small Nuclear Reactors in development at Rolls-Royce are the sort of thing that we need to nurture. We need to be adopting those reactors within the UK in order to develop the technology.

We need to be looking at alternative nuclear energy solutions. Thorium Reactors could be a viable solution using fission. The dream of fusion is just that: a dream, always 10 years away, as it has been for the last 4 decades.

Yet I don't see investment in anything as substantive as this in the budget. It's all pie-in-the sky stuff, nothing tangible. Of course the tax take isn't tangible. That's very real.

Increase in Minimum Wage Will Cause Ceiling Crash

The increase in minimum wage is welcome; If we're able to keep our jobs that is.

After all putting all the economic heavy lifting on small business employers isn't really a wise move. The SMEs are already struggling and those that are not one-man-bands will struggle to employ people with the rise in minimum wage coming after a rise in employer's National Insurance.

I suspect the unemployment rate will increase come the spring. 

But I foresee another unintended consequence of the rise. The crash into teh ceiling of lower management levels.

For instance the wife is a senior care assistant. She is in between the normal care assistant and the care manager.

The new minimum wage equates to just over 25K. My wife erns less than that. The care assistants under her also earn less. So I don't expect their employer to increase the care assistants to 25K and then increase the wife's salary pro-rata. 

They are all going to hit the limit and clump around the minimum wage. Under those circumstances, how are employers going to remunerate those that do a higher-spec job than the base workers? 

What would be the point of being low-level management if you're getting paid the same as an ordinary worker?

At the bottom end, the new minimum wage will sweep up a lot of positions where there will be no differentiation wage-wise.

There will be no incentive to progress, no reward for doing a better job, or moving to management. Under those circumstances, how do you motivate the workforce? 

It's no wonder we are becoming so unproductive. You have the option of sitting at home on benefits and getting everything paid for you. As long as you don't have debt and no expensive vices, you can life a comfortable life if you are careful. If you go out to work, you get minimum wage which won't cover rent etc. but if you do somehow manage to get the system to work for you and you somehow can afford to pay rent, you'll then find there's no progression because employer's can't afford to differentiate between operatives and managers with different pay scales.

There's the so-called glass ceiling for women trying to move up in management positions, but this is the working-class brick ceiling. The inability of employers to continue to differentiate lower levels on a pay basis. 

They may have to start introducing increased holiday terms, thereby reducing productivity even more. Although to be fair, maybe managers could be at work less. 

We really are circling the drain when it come to productivity. 

UPDATE: 

It seems that employers that had the inside scoop to the Treasury's plans were ahead of the curve. My son-in-law works for Euro Car Parts. They made all of their branch managers redundant yesterday including him. I assume they've factored that they can spread the salaries of the branch managers across the lower wage tiers to pay for the minimum wage rise. 

Not a painless payrise for some.

I predict this will not be the last instance of this sort of activity. If employers are forced by law to pay ordinary workers what they would normally pay management, why would they employ managers? The managers will go and the ordinary workforce will have to take on those roles to keep up productivity and/or the wages costs the same.

What is a "Working Person"?

 Kier Starmer has changed his party's manifesto pledge not to increase National Insurance to they will not increase working people's National Insurance. 

A subtle change and in essence what it mans is that Employer's N.I. will increase. Employee's N.I. MAY not increase.

I say may, because I'm not sure what Starmer and his cabinet define as working people is necessarily what most working people think is a working person.

We've all seen before Labour talk about working people, but what they mean is those on benefits.

Or they've meant Public Sector workers.

The concept of workers in the private sector like the majority of people, those of us earning just above minimum wage, those of is with no disposable income and struggling to pay the bills don't seem to compute when it comes to Labour.

The signals are that there will be a slew of increases in indirect taxation in the budget. How that doesn't affect "working people" and make things even harder I don't know. I don't think Labour could explain that one either.

But hey, no increase in direct taxation!

But how many people will be unable to run a car and continue their jobs if road tax increases and insurance tax increases and fuel duty increases? The triple whammy for drivers that will send people off the road. How will the government collect their projected increase in tax if the very poor give up their cars and just don't pay these taxes?

Government need to really understand that people that run cars are not rich and cannot be expected to pay these ever-increasing taxes. They need to look towards the people that can afford an increase in tax. Those funnelling money abroad, those corporations that pay no tax even though they transact with UK residents, those that have bought or are buying up large swathes of the UK property and corporate market.

Caveats to Cover Lies.

The chancellor Rachael Reeves says that working people's pay packets will not be affected by the budget.

Yeah, but every fucking thing else will be. Every single indirect tax will be leveraged.

Fuel duty, car tax, the usual easy targets, cigarettes and alcohol, pension tax, airport tax, the whole gamut will be run. 

The cash couch that is the UK will be turned over and shaken to extract the maximum amount of spare cash. 

The people that won't be affected? The rich elites, the globalists and the rest of the people sucking this country dry.

Rachael Reeves is being economical with the truth. Working people are going to be fucked seven ways sideways. 

Reparations

Historically, my family has never been wealthy, we have never owned slaves, nor benefitted from them.

So why should me or my family pay any reparations? 

It's not the government, it's the taxpayer footing the bill, the majority of which never benefitted from slavery in any way. 

In fact a significant minority of families didn't come to the country until fairly recently, so why should they pay reparations?

The whole thing is a nonsense, stirred up and promoted by grifters that want money.

If reparations are to be paid, how far back should it go? Do I have a claim against France for the conquest of the country and the take-over by the Normans? 

Do I have a claim against the Scandinavian countries for the Viking takeover of the North of Britain? I'm sure the Vikings killed Britons and took many as slaves, so where's my money?

Do I have a claim against Italy for the Roman conquest, people who certainly took and profited from British slaves?

If those claims look stupid and incredulous, so do the claims made against a slave trade that died out 200 or 300 years ago.

When Will People Reealise: For Muslims it's Islam First, Everything Else is Secondary.

I can't stress enough how most of the Middle-Class get the issue of Muslims and Islam completely wrong.

They think the Islamic Ideology won't impact them. They think that "most" Muslims are moderate and are not a threat to the Christian Way of life in the UK.

I cannot stress how wrong-headed that is.

This report of a Muslim female Police officer spouting Islamic hate and actively conversing with a member of ISIS is but one example of how wrong the middle class are about Muslims and Islam.

There are hundreds, probably thousands of others out there in high-profile jobs that think the same way. They may say one thing and appear moderate in public, but amongst friends or in the Mosque it's another thing entirely.

If Kier Starmer wants to plug that black hole, how about issuing a tax on Mosques? Especially the Mosques that are financed from outside the UK by the Gulf States. The mosques that generally have imported Imams, with radical anti-Western views, with radical anti-feminist views, and especially anti Judeo-Christian views.

It's these engines of non-assimilation that stop the Muslims from integrating. The Imams remind them of their duty to impose the supremacy of Islam over their lives, over EVERYTHING and EVERYONE including the rest of us.

If ever there was a hotbed of hate speech, it's these mosques. But of course just saying that I assume would be classed as hate speech these days. But you do have to ask, where does this Muslim supremacy mindset come from? Who exactly is telling the children of immigrants that they MUST uphold the "true" Muslim way of life and refuse to integrate? 

I know where it comes from, but the government don't have an answer for it.

I do. Ban Imams from countries outside the UK.

Tax those mosques paid for by entities outside the UK.

Make unannounced/anonymous checks on mosques to see if they are issuing speech that conflicts with Western values. 

After all, the Christian Church has had to modernise to conform with Western Sensibilities over the decades, so why are we not demanding the same from Islam?

If necessary, we may have to have a reformation of the Islamic Religion like we did with Henry the 8th and Christianity. We might have to set up a Mosque of England religion, that replaces the current mosques with a more moderate, Western-allied version of Islam. All the other Mosques would be closed down. 

If necessary we need to start the reform ourselves, if we want to save the UK.

Labour: Stop Blaming the Tories, it's Getting Old Now.

The latest tranche of early releases from Prison have offered some controversial images for the government, as we see pictures of prisoners being picked up from Prison in luxury cars like Bentleys.

Hardly the image of "Crime Doesn't Pay".

And yet again, Labour say it's the fault of the Tories. 

I'm sorry, but you've been in power long enough to implement schemes that would avoid these images. You could by now have rented prison ships that would be docked at our ports, you could have repurposed MOD camps, you could have tasked a firm to come up with a completely new low-category secure facility made out of portakabins. You do know you can stack them up three high at least, don't you?

There are any number of things Labour could do to mitigate the situation, but:

Like a petulant child, they want to have a bit of theatre, have a flounce to prove the point. 

Except, like a parent watching a petulant child throw a tantrum in the middle of a supermarket, or do something stupid to make a point, I don't care. 

I want prisoners to be in prison. You've had 4 months to sort it out and you haven't. Instead you are making a scene. 

Labour, you are shit at government. 

Stop acting like kids and start leading. 

Or is all we are going to see of this term of government one flounce after another, one scene after another and bad governance?

I suspect the latter, because two-tier Kier is no leader in my eyes. He doesn't even give off any leadership vibes. 

He seems the sort of person that forms a committee just to tell him how many sugars he should put in his coffee. 

He doesn't look even remotely capable of making a single unilateral leadership decision.

So far he's looked like a middle-class parent faced with a truculent toddler, you know the sort: can't deal with someone that argues back. I've seen that face in so many supermarkets as the kid argues and screams from isle to isle. The "What do I do?" face. 

Identifying Waste in Government

Here's an idea for the Government if they are trying to save costs : create a small team of people that are placed in jobs in government departments for a short while who then report back to officials on the working practices, waste and efficiency of the department. 

A bit like the "Undercover Boss" series, but obviously without the boss working in the department. 

I'm sure a decent job agency can pull up a few qualified people that they can place into departments as moles.

I have a feeling there is massive waste in Whitehall and the fat could be trimmed without affecting the operation of the department.

Of course there's the unions to battle with if the staff reductions are required immediately. But you can trim the fat through natural processes like retirement. And there's nothing cushier than a civil service pension.

The evil of the virtue Signallers.

I've come to the conclusion that virtue-signallers are evil. Pure Evil.

In the case of those that support mass Muslim immigration, why would they condemn the females of the UK to being second-class citizens when the Muslims take over the country? 

I mean, pride is a sin and being proud to signal your "virtue" above your neighbour so you can show off, is not a virtue, if you are condemning future generations of women to effective slavery under a Muslim regime.

Signalling your support for "trans" women is not a virtue if by allowing men into female spaces women are being raped or sexually abused or violently assaulted.

Signalling your support for climate change and net zero is not a virtue if you are condemning the poor to poverty and risking them freezing to death because they can't afford heating in the winter.

Signalling your support for equality is not a virtue if your are actually promoting Communist ideology which is a provably evil ideology. 

These are just a small number of instances where people, including quite religious people (who should be aware of the risks of temptation and the sin of pride) think that they are doing good, but are instead doing evil.

I've come to the conclusion that all virtue-signallers are evil. They will profess their chosen "good deed" at the expense of others. Whether today or tomorrow, they are condemning others to poverty, slavery or death just to prove to their neighbour that they are better in some way. 

And we all know the road to Hell is paved with good intentions....

Great Replacement Theory: Far-Right Racist Trope, Conspiracy Theory, or Fact?

As above.

Just what do you call the falling of indigenous birth rates and an ever-increasing importation rate of people from everywhere else in the world?

Because whether planned or just by sheer incompetence, the government is allowing hundreds of thousands of people from everywhere else in the world into the UK. Mainly Muslims.

You can call it a conspiracy theory all you want, but the facts from the various government agencies are there for all to see.

At current rates, the UK will cease to be a Christian country in no more than two decades. Luckily I'll be dust by then, but my children? Grandchildren?

And why would the do-gooder virtue-signalling middle-class condemn their daughters and grand-daughters to a life as a second-class citizen? 

I think it's a very selfish attitude to ignore the implications for future generations so you can signal how virtuous you are to the rest of the world. 

I expect the global corporations to be cynical and just want the workforce replaced with cheap labour. You can kind of understand it's in the corporate interest to maximise profits.

But the virtue-signallers? I just don't understand. What do they get out of it? There's no monetary gain, the only benefit to backing the flooding of the UK with Millions of Muslims is just in the moment to can self-servingly appear holier than your neighbour.

It's an evil philosophy: that you would condemn generations of females relatives to effective slavery just to make yourself look good in the eyes of your neighbours. It's sick, and twisted.

It's Not the Weight, It's the Attitude...

The News that the Government is to start a pilot scheme offering weight loss drugs to unemployed people to enable them to get back into work.

Sadly, I predict the scheme will be a failure. 

The reason is that there are plenty of skinny people on the dole and their lack of weight hasn't enabled them to get into work any better than an overweight counterpart. 

It's not the weight that is the issue, it's the attitude and the benefits system itself.

If you want to work, you'll go out and find work. Whatever it is. Not all of us can do physical jobs, but even the disabled can get a job in a call centre because of access rights legislation.

The other block to getting a job is the cost to work. When you are on benefits, everything is provided for you. Your rent is paid, you get dole money every fortnight and life is relatively easy, if a bit cash-poor. 

If you then get a job, you instantly lose the payment of rent. You have to re-apply with no guarantee that your rent will be paid. 

If you take a minimum wage job, you lose benefits and then have to pay tax. If the minimum wage is the absolute minimum the government says a person should be paid, why isn't it a tax-free salary? That would instantly boost the salary straight away. It just seems immoral to start clawing back tax from the most disadvantaged wage earners.

The whole system drops you like a stone. There is no support, no easing you into work. It's like jumping off a cliff emotionally and psychologically.

It's that transition that needs to be addressed, not the weight of the people. 

The cynical part of my brain does wonder if this is part of some conditioning process. You know, to make being overweight and unproductive a morally poor choice. Fat-shaming.

I can see a future if everything comes to pass like assisted suicide where the paths cross and if you are on the dole and consuming too much and getting fat, you'd be offered weight-loss drugs or else it's off to the boneyard with you. 

Of course if the option is take the drugs, be productive and work for peanuts against being rendered down for glue or Soylent Green, that may just motivate a proportion of the dole bums into working.

But there's always a hard core of institutionalised generations of unemployed.... 

The Power of the Gulf State Investment Funds.

I've blogged a number of times the amount of power the Gulf State Investment funds (GSIF) wield within the UK. They own a significant proportion of the UK through various funds and companies. Through those investments they wield an incredible amount of power and influence.

It's in the news that DP World, the owners of Tilbury Port pulled 1 Billion pounds of investment in the port over comments that the Labour Party have said regarding P&O Ferries, another company owned by DP World.

The row has now been settled and DP World have agreed to continue as previously planned, but this is the first time that the power GSIFs hold over the UK Government has become mainstream.

I don't know how to put it, but the words I commit to the ether here on my blog are not random musings of some nutter. I have analysed and watched in practice the things that I blog about.

The normal person doesn't understand the machinations of government going on behind the scenes. And to be honest, I don't understand all of them. I do know the various areas I've investigated though.

But do believe me when I say that globalism has not benefitted this country at all. It has benefitted those that seek to exploit the people at the bottom of the pile. But it has over the decades made the lives of those at the bottom of the social scale a whole lot worse. Now it's affecting the middle class, you can see the likes of the Reform Party making headway against the mainstream parties, but do they truly understand the reasons for the demise of this country over the decades? 

We need to get back to a closed shop. Earn money here, pay tax here, don't want to pay tax here? Invest here. Start to contribute to the country and you'll be allowed to take a small portion of the profit out of the country.

Do you work here and send all your money to your family in another country? Tough. You'll get taxed on it as badly as I'd tax a company stripping assets here and sending the proceeds abroad.

We need to stop the money leaving this country. We need to start making things here, investing profits here, improving the lives of workers here.

Setting Up a Narrative: Tyranny In Action.

The latest news is that that MI5 is saying that Russian spies are trying to create mayhem on the streets of the UK.

I assume this is a direct reference to the recent riots.

I also assume this is another attempt to de-legitimise the protests, now that the "far-right" narrative has largely failed to gain traction because it's patently obvious the people involved weren't far-right and they actually had legitimate concerns.

The independent media in the form of blogs and videos has largely debunked the far-right narrative. Those of us that are working class saw through that straight away. It could be us on the streets if kids in our town were murdered.

The government and media then went on to try and make Tommy Robinson some far right arch villain, directing the riots from abroad. Except it's quite clear on his videos, if you care to look, that he was doing no such thing and was advising against violence as it plays into the hands of the corrupt government.

So the latest narrative is (in an attempt to gain some sympathy from the working class) that the rioters weren't far right (as we all are aware), but instead they were pawns in some 3D chess game between Putin and the West. Or Iran and the West. Or something. If they were innocent pawns, why are they serving maximum sentences in jail. Or is this now some way to wind back the narrative once the lawsuits and appeals start winning for unlawful arrests and imprisonment?

Yeah, try again MI5. If the rioters were duped by anyone, it was the Policemen dressed up in dark clothes wearing facemasks that directed the riots towards the migrant hotels and started kicking the doors in. 

The real reason why Tommy Robinson is now such an existential threat to the authorities is he's learned and adapted to their tactics. There may have been a time when he would have been kicking the doors in and having a good old scrap himself. But that was back then. 

Nowadays, Tommy has learned to protest peacefully, he has learned to Police those that attend the peaceful protests so that they remain peaceful. During the last two protests, he has banned facemasks, so that those causing trouble can be identified. 

Lo and behold, no violence. Because the undercover Police that would have been geared up and pretending to harass the Police, so the Police could start to charge in and make arrests, have been neutralised.

If you don't believe what I'm saying there are videos of various protests where you get someone threatening Police (as you would in a training exercise) but never getting battered or arrested, but the people beside them are arrested.

If the Police go in and snatch people, they will have the optics of snatching clearly peaceful protesters. So the authorities now have to make up some new excuse to de-legitimise the protesters. They are  not patriots, they are acting on the orders of Russian spies. If you join them, you are siding with Russia, Iran or some other country we don't agree with.

Tommy is due to come back into the UK any day now. He's cleverly stayed away from the UK as the authorities feverishly try and come up with a reason to hold him under terror laws or some such.

Terror laws that were used to hold Tommy at a port before he left the UK. Terror laws that have been used against reporters reporting the truth about the Israel-Gaza conflict. Basically terror laws that have been used against anyone not adhering to the government narrative. 

Ignore political differences, the people held under terror laws would I assume not like each other's viewpoint. But look at the common denominator: the government. Both sides conflict with the government narrative and so have to be silenced. 

That is tyranny, right there.

As an aside, were the machete-wielding Muslims that turned out when it was said that there were going to be 100 far-right protests Russian patsies? 

Was the Pakistani guy that spread the rumour that the guy that killed the kids in Southport was a Muslim a Russian Patsy? 

Really, MI5? Is this the best you can do? 

Who is Sue Gray and How Is She Involved in Both Tory and Labour Governments?

 Sue Gray has come from the Civil Service to firstly condemn Boris Johnson for "Partygate" and then was included in the Labour government as a special advisor on more money than the Prime Minister.

She's now resigned, but been given a lower salary (but still very well-paid) job elsewhere in government. Nice and cushy.

But the more I see of the posts she's been appointed to the more I wonder if she's a WEF minder. You know, there in the wings making sure the PM toes the WEF line and if they think about going against the WEF some scandal will emerge.

I mean, we had the wobble the other week with rumours of super-injunctions going wild round the internet and I just wonder if that was a shot across the bows (politically) of Kier Starmer.

I seems a coincidence that a week later she's gone. 

There are no coincidences in politics.

I wonder if her instructions to the PM were a bit to much too soon for the government to stomach. 

Yes, we've had the cutting of the winter fuel allowance, but I do wonder if Sue Gray was pushing the government for more cuts. 

I predict that if Starmer has pushed back against the WEF then within the next two weeks, the government and Starmer in particular will be heavily briefed against, think Liz Truss.

Super-injunction be damned, I suspect there will be a leak in another country about Starmer. I also suspect Angela Rayner will also come under pressure.

The Labour cabinet come across as a bunch of clueless middle-management types, completely out of their depth when it comes to running the country. Do they look like competent professionals to you? 

My message to Starmer is this: It's now or never, you either have balls or you don't. Start issuing international arrest warrants for those that are attempting to coerce the government into actions against the British public. It's nice being part of the club, but as you are finding out, membership is by the most tenuous of threads. 

I know the names, but without the sort of evidence you can supply, I would be sued into oblivion if I mentioned or even hinted at a name. Kier, you will have written logs, email communications and call recordings. Time to be a man and cast the cloak of corruption aside and do the decent thing.

Labour are Now Officially a Danger.

The handing over of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius shows a distinct lack of self-awareness or an awareness of what they signify in the wider scheme of things.

Right now Kier Starmer has signalled that the Labour party is happy to give up territory that the UK owns across the world.

The Chagos handover is not only a signal that Starmer hates Britain and British history, that he fails to understand it. It also is a poke in the eye for relations with America. You know our tenants on Diego Garcia, that we gave a lease to. A lease that is now under threat.

Not only that, relinquishing the islands also send signals to those countries that have historic claims to territories we acquired during times of war or have fought wars over.

The Falklands are a prime example. Why, for instance, would the UK hold onto the Falkland Islands and South Georgia, islands at the other end of the world?

Because they are a strategic resource, that's why. The sea around the Falklands provides much more in revenue than it does (currently) cost to hold onto. However that may now change, given the Labour government's signalling it's willingness to give away strategic territory.

Yes, the Chagos Islands are (were) a strategic resource. Diego Garcia is a  landing strip in an Ocean that would cost billions to Police without it. It has become a jumping-off point for Middle-Eastern operations. It is as important as the airfields on Cyprus. 

So yet again, territories held by the UK around the World come under scrutiny by those that understand their importance. Forget historic claims, we won them (usually) pretty fairly as spoils of war or some other way. Tough on the people that got beaten, but they've been ours for centuries now. Well before the creation of the United Nations. 

Only someone that is hideously crippled by the stigma of imperialism would fail to see the significance of these chunks of rock we own around the world.

Labour, Less Like a Car Crash, More Like a Motorway Pile-Up

I refuse to comment on "SausageGate", mainly because I think it and other gaffes in the speech were at best an example of an amateur at work, at worst a deliberate ploy to distract from the rest of the speech.

The Labour tenure has been marked by one balls-up after another.  "Car-Crash-Kier"? I don't think so. It's like standing by a motorway on a foggy day and hearing the screech and thud as yet another car joins the pile-up.

Screech, Thud - The initial crash happens when Labour announce the scrapping of the winter heating allowance.

Screech, Thud - Another car joins the heap when Labour announce inflation-busting pay rises for their Union mates. So we knew why the pensioners have to suffer.

Screech, Thud - Millions are announced for foreign Aid to stop climate change. Er, it's warm in Africa for a reason, Kier. And not global warming. Where it is on the Globe might be a clue.

Screech, Thud - Kier announces that people will be locked up and maximum sentences delivered for mean tweets. Hardly a public menace, nor a public priority.

Screech, Thud - Kier announces that prisoners will be released from Jail early in order to make way for those despicable hurty-word people.

Screech, Thud - We get the ClothesGate scandal, which escalates into an admission the PM is the biggest freebie-grabber in history. He's closely followed by Angela Rayner. Just what is the price all those clothes, glasses and holidays? What favours will be called in? 

Screech, Thud - It's reported that prisoners are instantly re-offending because they don't have anywhere to go to after the botched release programme.

Screech, Thud - Did I say botched? Now we find out that the wrong prisoners have been released by mistake. Some serious offenders. The Police are trying to collect them back up - If they can find them, that is.

The pile-up continues to grow. I've missed some points, I'm sure. And there will be more to follow very soon.

It's almost like the people in the Cabinet don't know what they are doing. I just wondered if they were selected and hired for their ability or something else. I'm including the Prime Minister himself in that list. 

It doesn't look like ability came up in the job interview, does it?

So what's the something else? The ability to take orders from other organisations and people? Party Donors? Freebie-Buyers? Supra National organisations like the WEF? Just how did Kier get the job when he's do fucking useless at it? Or anyone else in the cabinet?

My prediction is that the budget will fleece ordinary people and will not harm rich people. Another car hurtling down that foggy motorway...