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.