The Government is Definitely not Your Friend, Especially if You are Unproductive.

Here's a conspiracy for you: What would be the best way to save expenditure by the government? Well, you could reduce the number of people requiring benefit. But as the current government are finding, that's a difficult job if the people still exist, but just die off in huge numbers thanks to government policy.

Let's have a think: How can you make it so it's NOT the government's policy directly that led to the loss of life on a large scale? 

You could import a virus or plague, but that's been tried and thanks to several generations of South African mice, the globe dodged a massive bullet. It very quickly mutated from killer to common cold.

What if you imported an army from abroad and then created the conditions to make them slaughter (say) half the population? That's not the government's fault, it's the imported army's fault.  But the government get an instantly lower the welfare bill essentially by "losing" half the population. 

You'd instantly lose all the weak people who can't protect themselves that are more likely to be on benefits. Then once you lost enough people so the welfare bill was reduced to a sufficiently acceptable level, then you can step in and eradicate the immigrants, become the saviour of the nation. Then you can reform that nation with a lower welfare bill. What a hero the government would  be. 

How would you create the condition for civil war? Well, maybe you continually support the immigrants instead of the current population, but then at some point you pull the rug from under the immigrants, enough to make them angry enough to revolt.

Or just continue the two-tier Policies in play at the moment. Make the indigenous white population feel second-class in their own country. Then they become angry enough to kick off all by themselves. Double-bonus, these indigenous white people can be branded far-right and done away with without much in the way of protest.

Right now, I get the feeling that the above is the policy in play at the moment. The government sees no way out other than the mass slaughter of citizens. They are not our friend. Neither is anyone supporting the importation of immigrants to the level we have now. 

I predict Shark Eyes Starmer the Sociopath has this as a plan somewhere in his desk. I wouldn't say it's his last gasp plan, but it will be somewhere in that uncompromisingly uncaring brain of his. 

Let the rabble fight it out, lose a few hundred thousand bodies, then wade in with the Army to quell it all. Then you have a reason to deport even the legal immigrants, lest they kick off all over again. 

I said years ago that there was some reason illegals were being imported in droves. Now I'm forming an opinion on the reality of why. It's not good. Not for the immigrants who get used as scapegoats and it's not good for the population at large.

The Double Whammy of Net Zero.

I've often heard people complaini9ng (quite rightly) about the affect that the government's net zero policy has on energy prices. 

The green tariffs on energy supposedly to help the poor renewable energy companies to install the wind and solar farms bump up the price of  energy artificially.

But the cost of that energy puts large-scale industrial production at risk. Over the decades we've seen steel production dwindle to nothing, chemical production is going the same way as is oil refining, large-scale manufacturing is a thing of the past. 

Those industrial firms have left the UK I assume never to return as they are replaced by production plants in India and China.

But with the loss of that large-scale industry s the loss of the large scale tax revenue that such companies would put into the exchequer.

And who is expected to replace the shortfall? Yep, you and me.

That's the double-whammy: not only are we paying higher fuel duty (taxes) and green energy tariffs (taxes) we are also having to subsidise the loss of taxes caused by the loss of industrial production.

It's an unsustainable model. 

We need to stop making the PAYE taxpayer the milk-cow of the exchequer. There's only so much you can screw of of the lower paid before it becomes unprofitable to work. Many of them have gone on long-term sickness and receive benefits. The ones outside the system become homeless.

The ones at the bottom are on zero-hours contracts, or minimum wage. Now management is coming into the minimum wage bracket. 

But minimum wage should, to be brutally honest tax-free. It's not a living wage, it's a surviving wage, it's an existence wage. There is no disposable income left after all the bills have gone out.

We are an economy in decline. With the loss of large-scale industry, the loss of substantive manufacturing capability, we are doomed. In order to climb out of this, we have to create and create massively. You can't retail ourselves out of this. We need to make things the world wants and produce them here in the UK. We should not be competing with Chinese low-quality crap, we should be making stuff that is quality that people will pay a premium for.

The alley that car makers are going down, like buying in Chinese technology or worse still, slapping a badge on a Chinese model is not the way to go. Lets start looking at adding value. Better interiors, better technology, done better and to a higher standard. Look at new technologies: flying cars, drone taxis, the things that the new cities will need. deregulate: legalise e-scooters and e-bikes, register them so they are properly regulated.  Deregulate the airspace below 500ft. Allow drone delivery, drone taxis, create low-level air corridors to avoid conflicts. Do it now to encourage the investment it technology and testing.

The government have made much of Artificial Intelligence (A.I.). But that's not a saviour. That doesn't produce. A.I. can maybe advise on reductions in the cost of government, but that's it. And where do those unemployed people released from the civil service go? Where do they get jobs?

The importation of immigrants isn't helping one bit. They are mostly in minimum wage or dark economy (illegal) jobs. They do not contribute much if anything to the economy.

This is a huge problem that the zealous imposition of net zero policy imposes on the country. It imposes the decline of the country. 

Faster than you may have previously thought possible

Lurpak Boss Complaining About "Conspiracy Theorists Targeting His Product"

In this article the boss of Lurpak Bas Padberg complains his product has been targeted by Conspiracy Theorists.

The article then goes on to say that Lurpak does indeed make it's product from milk from cows that are being fed with Boaver, the feed additive that is given to cows to reduce methane production in the rumen. 

So far, then, not a conspiracy, you've just confirmed you use the contentious Boaver product. A product that is so toxic to humans, it requires special handling with PPE.

Bas goes further and says that Boaver is being added to dairy feed in several markets as if that's a defence against the conspiracy theorists. I say it's just reinforcing the fact it's not a conspiracy, it's the truth.

Bas goes on to say that Boaver has been approved by the UK FSA. The FSA say that milk from cows fed with Boaver is safe. Yeah we were told feeding sheep to cows was safe until BSE came along.

Hmm,  the old "safe and effective" line, where have I heard that before. 

Let's just say I would rather not be part of some trial of a chemical that is toxic, needs special handling is fed to cows and does appear in their milk, with no testing of long-term exposure.

What the article doesn't give is any balance to the debate. It just interviews a whinging CEO saying that people don't want to take his product that has this new additive in it. 

For instance it doesn't mention the side-effects of contact with Boaver if not handled correctly. It doesn't mention that the lab tests of cows shows that Boaver does in fact appear in the milk. It doesn't say there are no long-term tests to continued exposure to Boaver in milk. 

And that's what the so-called conspiracy theorists are complaining about. It's the fact that yet another industry is adding chemical products to it's own foodstuffs and claiming them to be safe with no long term exposure testing. Also why no labelling of the product so that should people choose not to consume Boaver in small amounts they can't easily find a Boaver-free product. 

A simple "Contains CO2 Reducing Additive" would be enough, so we can avoid such products if we choose to.  It would also allow those idiots that want to promote the reduction of CO2 by feeding cows a product toxic to humans to signal their virtue by buying the tainted crap.

And it's only going to get worse, as Climate Cult Captured governments eventually demand that ALL cows be fed with Boaver. Then the amounts of Boaver in milk can only increase.

Bas Padberg, it's not a conspiracy. You've admitted you are using milk tainted by Boaver. You refuse to accept that people might not want that additive in their food, it's yet again another CEO saying tough, you have no choice.

Well, Bas Buddy, we do have a choice, for now. And that's to not buy your tainted product. It's harder because you don't appear to want clear labelling, but we'll scrutinise the supplier codes on our product and buy those we know do not contain Boaver.

And when Boaver goes mainstream, we will have to bite the bullet and buy organic milk products. For as long as that's financially viable, that is. Because you can bet that rich people like CEOs of large companies won't be eating the tainted crap they produce for the masses, no they'll be eating healthy organic food.  And it will become expensive to avoid long term exposure to this feed additive that not one consumer asked for. 

And that's why your product is not being bought: we don't like being lectured to, we don't like you putting stuff in our food without us having an alternative, we don't like that you're doing it sneakily without proper labelling (why actually would you do that?), we don't like being asked first.

So Bas, I hope your product is consigned to history, or at the very least suffers a Bud Lite style backlash. If you put shit in your product the customer didn't ask for and doesn't want, expect some pushback. You sanctimonious CEOs need to be taught that the consumer is king , not a conspiracy theorist.

The Evil of Political Correctness.

I've blogged before about how I consider the politically correct, virtue signalling woke middle class as essentially the personification of evil. But I've never really tried to put into words how evil or why I think they are evil and they musty be eliminated at all cots.

Okay, here goes.

Is it evil to deliberately condemn your daughter to a life with fewer rights than you?

Is it evil to deliberately condemn your granddaughter to a life as a second class citizen?

Is it evil to undo the centuries worth of hard-fought women's rights just so you can look good?

To me it is pure evil. It's the worst kind of evil to deliberately destroy your children's future just to look good to your neighbours or the dinner party circuit.

Is it evil to condemn your country to a future of unenlightened radical religious zealotry?

As they say, ignorance is no defence. You cannot defend accepting millions on Muslim immigrants into the country to look sanctimonious and not understand the consequences of your actions for future generations. If that's your defence, you are worse than evil. You are evil and a willing idiot.

I cannot comprehend how people cannot see what is happening before their own eyes. Are they really so blind? Or are they ignoring the consequences of their actions?

Can they not see things that are happening now and extrapolate what the future would be like?

Are they happy to submit to Muslim rule then? Are they happy for their female children and grandchildren to second-class citizens?

Are they waiting for someone else to do something about it?

Are they really that evil?

I guess so. I can see it, a significant number of people can see it, but why do the middle classes think it's acceptable to virtue your country into oblivion?

Do they really have no conviction, no patriotism, no sense of religion? Are they so morally bankrupt?

Genuine questions. I guess even the middle classes can't answer me because they don't see the evil in their stance. To them they are being kind, politically correct, virtuous, you name it. Without looking at the future.

I'm On The Right of Centre Politics, But I Support Taxing Billionaires.

You'd think that if I was on the right of centre politically, I'd support the rich enjoying the fruits of their labours in the form of lower taxation, but I don't.

If I, at the lower end of the scale are paying over 50% of the money I earn in the various income taxes, VAT and Stealth taxes, then I believe that the rich should also pay exactly the same percentage. 

After all, isn't that fair? 

I pay a third of my wage in income tax, National Insurance, NEST payments and that's before I start to pay VAT on everything I buy (remember when VAT was a luxury tax?). Then I pay tax on insurance, on my pension payments, if I want to fly from an airport on holiday. 

So the amount I pay in tax eventually comes to be over 50%.

So, why shouldn't billionaires pay the same? Why are they allowed to swap earnings for dividends which attract less tax?

Now I'm altogether against the IR35 tax rules that class independent contractors as employees, because it treads on the transition from PAYE to self-employed, but when it comes to passive wealth, that is earning income from huge savings, there has to be some trimming of the fat.

If you have several hundred million in savings, investments, property, etc. you are earning quite a bit moving that money around, buying property to let out (the favourite of millionaires because the primary asset increases in value along with the monthly rental income).

I can see an argument for not taxing increases in property portfolios under (say) two or three million pounds. That sort of protect the single house owner that bought a house in London almost a century ago and now own a million pound plus house. Taxing over 5 million in savings would also protect the majortity of people.

I'm talking of second, third and above properties. Those should be taxed because they are not homes for the owner, they are investments. Taxing them or making it difficult to own large numbers of dwellings should encourage billionaires to own fewer properties, releasing them for the likes of you and me. 

The whole capital gains tax system needs to be reworked, so that a lid is put on massive property investment, so possibly a sliding scale with an increasing percentage in tax for each extra property in the portfolio. 

There needs to be some way of taxing unearned income as closely as earned income. 

And as long as you hold a UK passport and you earn the money within the UK borders, you pay the tax here.

The same goes for corporations. No matter where your head office is, if you transact with a UK citizen and/or deliver to a UK address, you pay UK tax on the item inside the UK. No special treatment for Amazon, eBay and PayPal, for instance.

Foreign nationals should pay their fair share here and not syphon money abroad tax-free.

Those that can afford an extra one percent need to start paying it. In most cases it's us the ordinary people that helped you get that money, so it's only fair you pay some back and help us out, rather than sit on it and accrue ever-increasing wealth.

The tax system needs changing so that the transition from working class to middle class or the equivalents in earnings, is a light one. We need to encourage betterment and aspiration and entrepreneurship.

But I'm talking not about millionaires so much as several-multiple millionaires, where 1% tax on earnings of any type is a drop in the ocean to the multi-millionaire, but a significant sum to someone on benefit. 

And I don't subscribe to clobbering individuals or companies. A light touch at the top of earnings, skimming off the fat and dissuading the excessive behaviour and holding onto large amounts of property and continuing to amass huge passive wealth and not spending it (in other words putting it back into the economy) is what I'm proposing.

Farage's Fall a Chance for UKIP to Regain Momentum?

 I think it's becoming clear that Nigel Farage isn't the great hope we thought he was. He's walked back from the stop immigration and deport everyone stance people thought he had. I mean, he made the right noises, but thankfully Rupert Lowe has pointed out the difference between Nigel's perceived position and his actual one.

So, where to go from here?

Well, Rupert could start up an entirely new party that supports his viewpoint and somehow grow it organically in 4 years so it has a party structure and enough candidates to field in the next election.

Yeah, kinda impossible without a shit-ton of money and donors brave enough to shrug off the labels of racist.

I'd be the ideal candidate, because I believe the people promoting the current status quo are evil. They are supporting the draining of the world's health professionals to provide cheap labour for the NHS instead of training  UK nationals.  I think they are evil for allowing the UK to go backwards on the concept of rights and freedoms. The freedom of speech and the rights and freedoms of women are at risk. People that support immigration and the Islamification of the UK are evil and are effectively abusers of future generations. 

So, what do we do?

We need a party that is ready to go, with a structure and a local membership that we can get behind.

Arise UKIP. Sadly you didn't change your name after Brexit to reflect your broader strategy, but beggars can't be choosers. Personally, I'd have renamed UKIP to the Christian Conservative Party, or something of that ilk.

UKIP need to be swamping Social Media right now, with hundreds of messages, that show where they differ from the more moderate Reform. Get the message out, thump it home. Closed borders, no immigration, a complete split from Europe, rearmament of UK armed Forces, training of UK nationals instead of draining the world for talent, reversal of the need for degrees in the Police and Nursing professions, emphasis on vocational courses, an emphasis away from elitist influences, so democratisation of the law, repeal of most of what Tony Blair brought in. The return of double jeopardy so the Police have to do their job and gather overwhelmingly substantial evidence to prosecute and cannot constantly and maliciously harass defendants with constant court cases. Dropping Net Zero and a return to a sensible energy policy based on resources available within the UK.

I could go on, but it's up to UKIP to now get the message out and come to the fore. I want to see one message on UKIP policy every day. And I want it to be clear and concise. I want voters to know the difference between what Reform say and what Reform actually believe and what they will do.

No personal attacks, just policy where the two parties demarcate significantly and promotion of the personalities within UKIP. promotion of their cabinet, who is there at the top and responsible for health, borders, immigration etc. Let's get to know these people as a team and individually. Let's get them as famous as the Reform five (now four) MPs.

UKIP can do it, but it needs to be doing it now. 

Farage Keeps Digging.

It now appears to be getting clearer the spat within Reform is about immigration. Rupert Lowe wants zero immigration and an organised deportation of those illegal immigrants already here.

Nigel Farage doesn't want to go that far.

Excuse me? The guy that wants to stop the boats and did chauffeur-driven tours of hotels being converted into migrant camps doesn't want to stop spending the millions of pounds of our money being paid to house the migrants?

What exactly does he want then? 

Because Nigel talks the talk, but whatever he appears to signal, isn't the thing you're getting if you back him.

Basically it's the same as saying Brexit is easy and then forgetting the complexities around Northern Ireland. Whether contrived or not, he should have had answers to N.I. ready formed, before he glibly said that Brexit was simple.

But here we go again, Nigel chants "Stop the boats!", people think he means stop immigration, but actually if you dig deeper... 

I did say that I'd had enough of Nigel. I got sucked in to UKIP last time and I refused to join whatever entity (party, corporation, subscriber list) that Reform is. 

I hope that this time around, Farage is seen for what I see him as: a distraction, a decoy, a mouthpiece that says the right thing. Someone that says one thing, but in reality does something quite different. 

People are now calling him controlled opposition, and I can see that. But if he is someone that is put in place to guide the right of centre away from power, who is controlling or funding him? Are we going to see someone digging deep into Reform's finances and uncovering skeletons like Soros?

Right now it appears to me that Nigel had been nobbled. I've said before that the signs are he's a lot more moderate on the Islam question that he appears to be. 

Is that a question of funding, or is a it more an acceptance of reality that the UK will become Islamic in a decade or so and he'd rather like to be a friend of the Mullahs rather than an enemy? Because we know what happens to anyone that the Mullahs perceive as an enemy don't we?

I really need Nigel to come clean as to his intentions. Is he for saving our Judeo-Christian values, or not? Is he for the protection of Women's rights, or is he happy for them to become second-class citizens under Islamic rule? He needs to stop playing with the future of the UK, there is too much at stake.

We need transparency from Reform NOW. What exactly is their game?

Because we really only have the next election to save the UK and to preserve our Western civilisation.

What's Going on With Politics?

Ignore Trump, I'm watching with interest his attempts to disrupt the global status quo.

I'm talking about UK and European politics. What. The. Fuck. is going on?

I mean, you have Starmer who appears to have the intellectual nous of a Peanut. You have all the European politicians hell bent on causing world war three. 

Starmer can't stand criticism, very much like Nigel Farage it appears. The difference is Starmer is in power and dangerously so for free speech. Starmer MUST have been bullied when he was at school, because his first instinct is to lash out and use the full force of the government like a sledgehammer. 

He WILL MAKE you conform to his idea of acceptable behaviour, including acceptable speech, using the full force of the government.

He deems it acceptable to use the law and the violence of the Police to enforce his view of acceptability. For him there is no concept of free speech. What he wants is correct speech whether it's compelled by force or otherwise. He doesn't like to hear harsh words and being an ex-lawyer, will use the law to make to say nice things and tell him the world is full of Unicorns and smells of Rose petals. Not the utter shitehole that he and his class of professional have made the UK.

In other words, Kier Starmer is a cunt. A massive cunt.

Of course the hangers-on in the cabinet, the deadlegs who are only there through Union largesse, or because they are so useless they don't pose a threat to Starmer's reign (I'm looking at you Angela (thick as Pigshit) Rayner) don't have a fucking clue as to what should be legal, illegal allowed or made illegal. They just join in with Starmer laughing and giggling like schoolkids in a playground gang. 

But how did we get to this? Where effectively the worst dregs of society gets to lead us into almost certain oblivion? 

How did we get to the point where the most corrupt politicians get into power?

I'm pasty the point now. It needs to be said and fuck the consequences. Starmer is a Cunt and so are his cunty cabinet. 

At the other end of the spectrum, we get Farage, who yet again is risking the success of yet another party he's almost brought to power by being another Royal Cunt like Starmer. He fucked UKIP up big time and here we are yet again. Farage the nearly-man, failed by his ego.

Sacking Rupert Lowe was the most egregious and cuntish move imaginable. Yes, have disagreements, but don't act like a spoiled brat and sack him. Agree to disagree, for the greater good of the right. 

Either Farage couldn't bring himself to do it, or possibly Zia Usif did the deed out of a fit of pique to support the dear leader Farage.

Either way, after this and Farage's previous statements on not deporting illegals. I'm done with Reform. 

I will refuse to vote and suffer the consequences. Thank fuck I only have a few years left in teh tank.

Then the country can go fuck itself into oblivion in an orgy of pink LGBTQ+ Unicorns being thrown off tall buildings by Muslim extremists.

Welcome to your future, you bunch of self-serving political fucknuggets.

Reform Shenanigans: I Called it Months Ago.

When Nigel Farage did the Winston Marshall Interview and shockingly to most people declared that he wouldn't immediately deport the illegal immigrants I made a post here about it.

Basically I said he'd been nobbled. 

I was also severely critical of his stance in that interview that there wasn't much he could do about illegals already here. Excuse me?

And, I pointed out that he'd had the talk. You know, the one where a hand is placed lightly on the shoulder, and quiet words are spoken, like the wisest of sages imparting eternal wisdom...

The quiet words spoken that you mustn't upset the Muslims, because they own between 10 to 20 percent of the country. They are imbedded in the City of London, new start-ups, shares, investments, infrastructure, ports, housing, property, universities, you name it, the Gulf States have a significant investment in it.

If you look at most new investment opportunities, you'll see that a Gulf state investment fund will have an investment in it. If you look at infrastructure, or property, the big projects will have significant Gulf investment funds put into them. The same when it comes to corporations or operators of infrastructure: the Gulf state money is there. They are a significant investor in the company that operates our major container ports, for instance. Gulf money is hugely invested in large buildings in London. If you are a company renting office space, the chances are the company you are paying rent to will be owned in some significant way by Gulf Money.

The Universities have over the decades accepted Gulf investment money to build new buildings. The one that comes to mind is Oxford's Said business school. 

Detailed in Wikipedia here.

Gulf money is everywhere. And if the Gulf states so desired, it could be withdrawn in an instant. 

Companies would collapse, housing, property prices would crash, investments would tumble, universities would shut down.

Now what would you do if someone had whispered such realities into your ear? Would you toe the line and allow the current status quo to continue, or would you crash everything?

I know which way I would go. But I'm a sociopath: I don't care about other people, I only care about what is right. 

I would be whispering right back how it would be a pity it Mecca were reduced to radioactive glass, if the centre of the Islamic world were suddenly to be evaporated.

I would whisper back that likewise, it would be a pity if the cities of the Gulf states followed the same fate. 

I would whisper back that I would offer not one iota of sympathy with the displaced and those forced to live in an unforgiving, Radioactive desert.

I would quietly assert that such funds as they were embedded in the UK, would not be allowed to leave. We would be taking such funds as blood money to soothe the collective soul of the UK in payment for the blood and treasure lost over the past two and a half decades. 

Fuck with my country? Fuck you, would be my earnest reply. 

Sadly, our so-called leaders do not have the balls to do likewise, it appears. They continue to take the money at the expense of their fellow citizens and the religious and cultural future of their country.

Nigel Farage: I'm Done with Him. Time for a Christian Conservative Party?

The latest shenanigans in the Reform Party have now put me off Nigel Farage completely. In my opinion, he is not fit to be the leader of the party running the country.

This is the second time that Farage has trashed a party that was on the cusp of gaining a foothold in politics for the right of centre. Back with UKIP, he allowed disaffected Tories to join and within months the party had collapsed.

The same has happened with Reform.

Over the winter, we've seen defections of Councillors and MPs from the Tories to Reform, and then all of a sudden we get the sacking of Reform MP Rupert Lowe and an instant attack on Lowe in the form of a complaint of sexual harassment.

It's quite clear now that Farage can't stand criticism, or dissenting voices within a party he creates. The measure of a leader is the way they conduct themselves and Farage seems to be incapable of showing true leadership. 

Farage appears to be a showman. End of. He appears not to be a leader flexible enough or strong enough in his convictions to allow flexibility in the party and for policy to form organically based on a group of like-mined people creating it.

He also seems to say one thing and then say something entirely different some time later.

For instance with UKIP, he wanted the split of the UK from Europe, without detailing how this would work, especially with regard to the Northern Ireland border. To Nigel, it was simple: just leave. Without understanding the detail of how that would happen. 

Now with the immigrant issue, Farage chants "stop the boats!", but then when pressed on detail, he said he wouldn't deport the illegal immigrants already here. Why not? In the public eye, the two are indivisible. 

This is where Farage and Lowe differ in policy and I suspect, Farage differs with the majority of Reform supporters. 

My opinion is that both legal and illegal immigration should be stopped immediately. Also illegal immigration should be forcibly stopped, so the boats should be turned round and taken back to France, and the illegals already here should immediately be deported back to the country they came from.

While immigration is stopped, there should be incentives for training of UK citizens to meet the demand for personnel by corporations. As illegals are deported and hotel money is freed up, that money should be then directed to training courses for UK citizens. NHS courses should be started and a vocational route for NHS nurses restarted so that the NHS can start to recruit from inside the UK, rather than stripping the undeveloped world of the best and the brightest.

As it stands, my opinion is that Farage is not suitable to be Prime Minister. He will not be able to be flexible enough to install policy that doesn't quite meet his requirements. I'm convinced he will attack anyone that cannot meet his requirements, includ8ing civil servants and in the end, it will be a complete clusterfuck if he gets into number 10 Downiung street.

In other news, is it time for a Christian Conservative Party? It seems that the Muslim influence gets everywhere and possibly it's time for a primarily Christian Party to come to the fore, to refuse Muslim money and votes, just to test how entrenched Islam is in UK politics.

The Monarchy is No Longer Relevant.

The current trendy idea is that hereditary titles are so last century and no longer fit for the modern world.

Blair did it with the House of Lords, ejecting hereditary peers and replacing them with hand-picked replacements.

But are hereditary titles a dead duck? I mean, there's a train of thought that says that hereditary titles provide stability, ignoring the latest trends.

Yes, you can be swayed by the Lefty jealousy-induced indignation, the talk of the old-boys-club, the use of the term landed gentry as a slur. But money brings a certain amount of incorruptibility. 

Small fish with small pockets can be bought for small money or small favours. 

In America, Elon Musk is trampling all before him because he literally can't be bought. He has ALL the money. In order to influence him, you'd have to0 be a fairly substantial government offering up a substantial amount of their GDP.

But here is where I get to the monarchy and especially the intellectual pigmy that is King Charles. I've already blogged elsewhere about his current failure to be protector of the faith (as in the Church of England). Instead Charles seems bent of promoting any faith other than the C of E. Recently we've had a mass Iftar at Windsor Castle. 

Now it may be the media: you know, promoting how inclusive our King is by promoting the mass Iftar and decided to ignore a mass Lent celebration, or maybe there's some upcoming Easter celebration that the King will be hosting and the media aren't going to report on it?

But is the Monarchy relevant if it chases the latest trend, if it chases the multicultural spectrum, if it eschews stability?

After all, isn't that one of the prime requisites of the Monarchy, to provide stability through the ages? To provide that sense of country, that sense of (especially in the UK where the monarch is head of the Church) a sense of Faith? 

Without the stability, without protecting the Faith, what is the British monarchy? What is the monarch?

You cannot "just" abandon the age old traditions and somehow miraculously stay relevant. You actually become irrelevant, slave to the latest trends and fanciful ideas. Relevant only for as long as the trends flow with you.

Already the questions are being asked by the faithful: if the head of the Church no longer believes in the Church, why should we? If the Monarch no longer believes in the country he reigns over, why should we? Has the monarch abandoned Christianity, given he promotes alternative lifestyles and faiths so readily? 

The longer Charles continues with these trendy ideas, and dalliances with alternative lifestyles and religions in direct opposition to his oaths, the more the doubts about his suitability to the post of monarch will be raised.

And the big question should be asked in unison by those called upon to defend this country in times of war: If the Monarch and the government no longer have faith in Britain as a country, or Christianity as a Faith, then why should we lay down our lives for it, or them?

Marxism Has Now Infected the Judiciary.

Last year, we saw the glee with which the Judges sentenced the working class protesters around the anti-Muslim protests. You got the inkling that these were not impartial judges. These were activist judges, coached in their duties by the state and sentencing to the maximum guidelines available.

Now we see the latest sentencing guidelines, where any minority will be given preferential treatment. If you are female, trans, from an ethnic minority, from a religious minority (read Muslim) you will be more likely to get a pre-sentence report and therefore have mitigating circumstances against a custodial sentence officially passed to the judge for consideration.

Note no mention of financial status, so Poor, White, working class people who have always been oppressed by the elites will not be cut the same slack as the minorities.

Just by being a majority, it seems we can be discriminated against.

The reason given for the new guidelines, is that the minorities are disproportionately being sentenced to custodial sentences compared to majority groups. This is the definition of equity, giving the oppressed a leg up or a perceived benefit compared to the majority. 

In other words, rather than being fair, and unbiassed, the law and judiciary are now run and controlled by Marxist ideology.

This has to be stopped immediately. 

When the law of the land is affected by political ideology, it has gone too far.

Judge Them By Their Actions, Not Words.

 Last Week I blogged about the new power being given to Police to raid homes based on spurious suspicions about stolen geotagged devices being on the premises.

So you do not have the protection of search requiring a warrant. 

The Police's obsession about non-crime hate incidents and the zealous nature with which they investigate and if necessary interrogate defendants, shows the Police's priority is not the rule of law.

The judiciary's zeal at locking up people for mean Tweets, shows again where the priority lies in the heads of the Judges. These uppity working class people need to be kept in place in prison if necessary.

The judiciary's zeal at NOT prosecuting child abusers and rapists of all stripes, again shows where their priority lies. 

It's quite obvious that the judiciary and the Police's priority is to protect child abusers and to prosecute people for speech. 

This is the definition of a corrupt system, protecting abusers of the weak and defenceless and abusing those that speak the truth, no matter how unpopular it is with the Police and Judiciary.

The truth is they are all corrupt to the core, to the bone, their very being, every action is the opposite of truth, justice and natural law.

The government let out violent criminals in order to make space for truth-tellers. What does that say about the government, that they cannot accept valid criticism?

Again, corrupt to the core. The only way they can continue is to censure free speech and clamp down on the truth.

And it's not those of us on the right being censured.

There have now been about half a dozen journalists and commentators on the left that have been suddenly and unexpectedly arrested under the anti-terror laws. Laws which compel you to answer questions, with no right to silence, laws which allow the Police to inspect all your information devices. 

This is not directed at any one group. It is being directed at ANYONE critical of the government, judiciary or Police. 

And that dear reader, is the epitome of authoritarianism.

The right have been victimised by this protective regime for a number of years, but it's now only recently the left have been falling victim to it.

The only real question is why is there is one group, one single group that is still protected. One religious group. The group the left have a blind spot about, the group the left cannot see as protected, the group the left automatically class as oppressed, the Muslims. The group allowed to transgress all laws, allowed to call for genocide, allowed to carry weapons, allowed to attack Police stations, all with impunity.

Re-Introduction of Wolves to The UK: A Recipe for Disaster.

I forgot to blog about this. There is actually a group advocating for the release of Wolves into the wilds of Scotland. 

Nutjob outfits like Rewilding Britain advocate for re-introducing Wolves into the British Countryside.

Yes, lets introduce and Apex predator into the wild environment. Especially without the means to protect ourselves if confronted with a hungry pack. Guns are illegal in the UK see, so how would one protect oneself if one was approached by an active hunting pack?

It's interesting reading, looking at the pros and cons of introduction. Nowhere in the cons section is there mention of people getting attacked and/or eaten. 

If Wolves are released, are the government going to legalise the ownership of rifles? I mean, the European countries that still have Wolves, also have hunters who are allowed access to rifles. 

Or are we, as I suspect going to be presented with the sight of bright clothed mountain walkers being seen by Wolves as garishly wrapped bags of meat?

Will we see images of torn and bloodstained pakamacs on Scottish mountainsides?

If we are, will those responsible for the release of the Wolves bear any responsibility? Would they be happy to face a manslaughter charge, or a charge similar to that faced buy owners of dangerous dogs if their animal kills a human?

Because if confronted with an wild apex predator, what can an unarmed mountain walker do?

Nope, it's as nutty an idea as it sounds. The Wolf has not been a wild animal in the UK for hundreds of years. Society has moved on and we are now entrenched in the ideology that guns and rifles should not be on general sale. 

If mountain walkers are not allowed the means to protect themselves, the Wolf should not grace our shores.

Another Interaction with the NHS, Yet Another Catalogue of Failure.

Well, yesterday I had reason to go to our brand spanking n ew A&E unit in Portsmouth. It's only been open a couple of months.

The A&E unit is designed to serve the city of Portsmouth and all the local towns North of Portsmouth like Havant, Waterlooville, Petersfield, etc. The Queen Alexandra Hospital covers a pretty wide catchment area.

So you'd think this brand new, state of the art A&E unit would be designed to accept a lot of people, given the wide catchment area.

Er, nope.

The 40-seat A&E unit (yes, just 40 seats, less than the old A&E) is the size of a postage stamp. Despite it opening only a couple of months ago, evidence of poor design abound.

Things are taped in place, there are temporary screens in front of the triage "area" (no longer a separate room) and there are lots of tannoy announcements requesting relatives of patients stand so that patients could be seated. Yeah.

I was originally attended to at work by an Ambulance. The crew said I needed to go to A&E, but could I make my own way there so as not to tie up the Ambulance? I agreed, obviously, given someone at work offered to give me a lift.

When I got there, Oh. My. God.

I got there between 12 and 1pm. The measure of efficiency of the so-called "system" they have in place was shown by the large number of people still in pyjamas. So obviously they had been brought in overnight. 

They also seemed to be losing a lot of patients (more about this later), because nurses were calling for people and the people weren't coming forward. That could be the system, or it could have been the noise of the jackhammer being used underneath the waiting room drowning out their shouts.

It took an hour before I was triaged. I say triaged, but realy it was only just checking I was there in person and making my initial observations like heart rate and sats (more about that later as well).

Then an hour after that, I get to go into a room for initial assessment, which took less than 5 minutes to have a chat, fill in the form and direct me over to a GP in another building. Another half hour or 45 minute wait, I got seen by the GP. 

Now I'm presenting with facial paralysis on one side of my face. I have a history of stroke and heart attack. But apart from the usual FAST test checking my limbs for loss of function, there wasn't much discussion as to what may have caused it.

So, 45 minutes later, I'm back in the heaving A&E department as the day's casualties start to build up. 

Luckily it's only a 10 minute wait before I'm called and wheeled (no walking) to the CT scanner. 20 minutes in the scanner and I'm done, being wheeled back to A&E reception until I'm intercepted. The doctor is ready to see me in a consulting room. 

Cue more fast tests. 

Can I say at this point I had been asked about my previous issues at every turn. It seems my previous medical history is not available on the new system they are using in A&E, or it's so inaccessible, it's just easier to keep asking the same questions of the patient over and over. 

So the Ambulance crew with their fancy online tablet can't see my history, the A&E team can't, the GP at the hospital can't, and the consultant about to make life-changing decisions about my treatment can't either. Not only that, the ambulance crew information they entered on their tablet isn't accessible by A&E either it seems. 

Anyway, the doctor, with two trainees in tow (or it could be the other way round) start making umming noises whilst looking pretty cursorily at my CT scan. Not sure how you can flick through the scan of my brain in 5 seconds a couple of times and make a diagnosis, but that's where it stands. There's a risk of missing something subtle, but unfortunately I don't expect subtle or thorough from the NHS. 

For me, I'd say all you can see at that speed is to identify the patient has a brain and not miss a massive and quite obvious tumour. Something small and subtle... not a chance. 

So, the doctor explains his diagnosis is either another TIA (doesn't feel like one, but hey ho, or it may be Bells Palsy (more on that later). He's changing my meds (they like to do that to make it look like they've done something) and he's going to give me a big dose of asprin and blood thinners before I go home. Just in case. (yeah, I know you don't know what the fuck is going on in my head and you're just going through the motions). The doctor says he will arrange for further scan including and MRI next week.  

And there's me believing the adverts that say you need to act FAST to save someone from the effects of a stroke. Next week is fine to confirm if you are fucked up permanently of if there was something we could or should have done yesterday in that golden hour they're always bashing on about. 

The trainee (who I think is a better doctor than the specialist) pipes up about blood tests. So he agrees and asks for the usual cholesterol, etc. to be tested.

Not at any time was there any discussion or investigation as to what may have caused the facial paralysis, just that it was there. Discussion and fixation was on past history of TIAs, but as far as I'm aware, the mechanisms that cause Bell's Palsy are different. No questions on what I was doing leading up to it, anything else like infections that could be affecting the facial nerves. Nothing of any depth. Again, the process is king. About the only questions were have I had cold or flu like symptoms in the past few days. 

Anyway, the trainees leave, the doctor faffs with the screen, grumbles, then tells me he's going to arrange all of this and will be back. He exits the room.

2 hours later, I go to reception asking what's going on. Note that during this two-hour period, the shifts have changed.

The people at reception ask me my name and date of birth for the umpteenth time. Except I'm now not on their system. I'm not supposed to be there, except as I said at the time, I most clearly am.

I few minutes of digging, and it appears that on the system, I've been given a script for my new meads (which I haven't), I'd been given my big dose of "just in case" meds (which I hadn't) and I had been discharged from the hospital (which, most obviously I hadn't).

Rebecca on A&E reception was a star. However, she had a battle. She had to find a way to un-discharge me, un-medicate me, and forget about the blood tests. I assume they weren't even on my records.

That took about an hour and a half, between multiple telephone calls to Rebecca organising several other patients.

Once I was in a the correct state on the system, she personally ran over the the pharmacy on the other side of the hospital to fetch my meds. One I'd downed the pills, I was free to go.

So, that's about three hours wasted in A&E. Three hours that room could be available for someone else, an hour and a half Rebecca could be sorting someone else out, and (if they do it) a meds count at the Pharmacy that could have been out by a number of tablets.

Conclusions,.

1.  The brand spanking new A&E unit at the QA hospital is not fit for purpose. The reception area is too small to house the influx of casualties on a normal day, let alone during a crisis period. 

Portsmouth city on it's own houses 210,300 people. If 0.0001 percent of the population has an accident or illness, then that's half of the seats in the reception area taken up.

The hospital itself identifies their catchment area includes 675,000 people. 40 seats. For the walking wounded and at least one relative to be with them. 

Just by the scenes of chaos yesterday, the reception area was grossly under-specced.

The fact there were a number of temporary measures like things taped here an there suggests the specification of the building and it's fittings doesn't match the actual requirements of the staff using the facility.

2. The process is the treatment. I've said it before and I will say it again, the NHS is all about process. Treatment is a secondary priority. Cure and Recovery are way down the list of priorities. They are almost incidental.

If you're lucky the process will eventually lead to cure and recovery, but not necessarily. In the majority of cases, the process is king and recovery is incidental. Unless you are in an area that has a specialist clinic for your ailment.

3. The "system" within the NHS is not fit for purpose. The computer system especially. Instead the "system" relies on people like Rebecca going above and beyond to plaster over the gaping holes in the actual system. Watching the interactions, the system only works based on favours and people working outside the computer system. It's the "can you just" system of asking someone to do something outside the computer system.

While I appreciate it gets the job done to some extent, it also leaves the NHS vulnerable to human errors. Sadly this has been obvious in a number of cases where tests or treatment that should have been done, weren't, and a diagnosis was missed.

Well, it remains to be seen if that doctor I saw actually booked the follow-up calls and tests for next week.

I remain sceptical.

4. The NHS diagnosis team are ripe for replacement with AI. I machine learning algorithm could ask the questions and come up with better investigation and diagnosis. It'll eliminate the human aspects of the "system" and to be honest should deliver a better quality of care, because an AI can be programmed to care, to ask questions and get to know the back story before coming to a diagnosis. It can reference millions of different cases and over time as it builds up a database of symptoms and cures can outstrip the quality of NHS care. 

And that's where I think eventually the NHS is going to go. Sadly from what I can see from yesterday, it'll deliver a better level of diagnosis eventually. It's just that it'll take time to build up the database of cases, because I'm convinced the NHS data is tainted. If you use it, you'll end up with an incompetent AI doctor.

It's sad to see the decline of the NHS since 2008. Back then I had world-class treatment and surgery, then in 2013 I had excellent treatment for my TIA with scans all done in a matter of two days. 

Then in 2020 when I had my heart attack it starts to go a bit wrong. I had a stent put in, but only a balloon to open another blockage. I think I needed another stent. Because since then, I got the Angina diagnosis. So thanks, no mechanical fix, just fob me off with drugs.

And then my mother's and my mother-in-law's abysmal treatment.

And now yesterday. I just don't have words. I'd call it organised chaos, but it's not at all organised. There is huge waste of time for starters, as people redo things which should be done correct first time. Time is a resource and the NHS is so huge, wasting hours here or there across the whole organisation can run to billions of pounds just frittered away due to poor systems.

Joe Rogan Talks to Mike Benz. A Must-Watch.

This Joe Rogan podcast https://open.spotify.com/episode/2rXdCTkipx2Iu5dX1Gh0s5?si=iR56VXJWQNGEr074au4C-Q&context=spotify%3Aplaylist%3A37i9dQZF1FgnTBfUlzkeKt is a Must-Watch episode.

Mike strips bare the relationship with USAID and other shadowy organisations including 77th Brigade Intelligence Corps, the knobs at GCHQ. The people tasked to brief against the people of this country. 

< Waves two fingers Westward >

We are getting preliminary information, like we did during COVID where the online community were bang on the money. 

It seems we're spot on when it comes to the censorship industrial complex as well. USAID funding is all over the attempts to manipulate the internet. Just like it's used to fund regime change around the world.

Don't say we didn't tell you so. These shenanigans have been going on for decades against foreign powers we don't like. 

It's only in the last decade the resources have been used against ourselves to mould public opinion.

Independent thinkers know this already, hopefully the happy-clappy leftards will catch on that their world of Unicorns is a fantasy dreamt up in some social engineering lab.

Homes Not Safe From Police Any More.

The Government's Crime and Policing Bill will give new powers to the Police. If they suspect a geotagged device like a phone or some other tagged device is in a house, then they have the power to enter the house without a warrant.

How many people think that this will be one of those laws the Police will misuse?

Want to enter a house without a warrant? "Believe" there is a stolen phone in the house, or get a friend to phone in with a report of an airtagged item tracked to the house.

No safeguards against misuse means that the law WILL be misused. 

How many fishing trips will be instigated by this new law? Because if the law doesn't specify that once in the property they can only make a search that is reasonably justified to identify if the stolen item is in the property. For instance raiding cupboards and drawers to look for a stolen bicycle should not be allowed.

But no. A friend of the copper phones a report in, based on that tip, the Police boot the door in and turn the house upside down for evidence of a crime. Not the originally reported crime you understand, just any crime they can identify. 

Can I have the password to your phone so I can check it's not the stolen one (and check the contents for any dodgy pictures or videos).

Smoke a bit of weed at the weekend? Is there any down the back of the couch the Police can find? Bang to rights you are.

Do you have a licence for that TV?

Is your cat compliant with the laws on chipping and registering the animal?

Think I'm being facetious? Not a bit of it. I know that's exactly what this law is designed for.

It's designed to end the requirement for a warrant to enter a property. For any reason.

And once in the property, there's always something the Police can find if they dig deep enough.

What is The Government's Agenda?

I do have to ask, what is the government's agenda. I ask, mainly because I can't see how any of the policies they have put in place make our lives better.

And to be honest, that's the main reason for their existence isn't it?

Yes, I know there are other things like security, welfare, etc. which are peripheral to the primary purpose.

But the overarching reason for government is to improve the lives of it's citizens.

But that's not what the current government (and for that matter previous governments for the past 30 years) have been up to. 

You could argue the government is managing the decline of the country. But why? Why have they outsourced all manufacturing outside the UK so there are no meaningful jobs? Why have they imported millions of unproductive migrants? Why have they closed down the cheapest sources of energy production?

All of which contribute to lower wages, higher energy prices and a death spiral down the toilet of eternity. 

And it's all down to government policy. They choose to do the things they are doing, instead of doing other things and they must know beforehand what the outcomes will be, otherwise they wouldn't do them. 

So the government is choosing to impoverish you.

The government is choosing not to secure our borders.

The government is choosing to import unproductive migrants.

The government is choosing to push energy prices up.

The government is choosing to not build enough houses for everyone.

The government is choosing to remove your ability to buy a home, choosing to make it difficult or impossible to bring up a family and it's choosing to replace the family you could have had with migrants.

Why is that?

Just sayin'

USAID Debacle in U.S. Proves Government is a Racket.

The spotlight that is being shone on the payments that USAID made in the USA have highlighted the racketeering that is going on in American government. 

$27Million went to the George Soros Prosecutor fund. A fund designed to install Soros-picked prosecutors to be installed and then steering government direction. In effect the government is funding it's own enemy. 

The Hundreds of millions being sent to foreign countries like Afghanistan for projects that were never used...

Trillions o taxpayers dollars were wasted on various pet political projects and funding preferred people.

Even the BBC-backed charity BBC Media Action was being funded by USAID. A charity in a Western Country outside America. Not only that, but it's another of the fake charities the BBC have under their wing like Children in Need, where I assume the majority of the money goes in salaries.

Our own government are doing exactly the same thing. They are funding fake charities and focus groups, campaign groups and other Non Governmental Organisations whose sole purpose is to create reports that are then picked up by government to prove they need to steer government policy in a certain direction.

It's a racket that has to stop. In the UK it would be more difficult, because there's no single department responsible for funding these Non Governmental organisations. Funding is spread over several departments.

But if I were the Reform party, I would be employing researchers to weed out these funding deals so they can be targeted and cancelled when Reform take office. 

Lets kill off this endless cycle of thinktanks, "charities", focus groups, 

U.S. to Instigate Regime Change ..... in the UK?

I'm very serious on this. This is a warning. 

Plans are being drawn up in the Pentagon to invade the UK and instigate proper democratic elections and sort out the political mess instigated by the Blair government.

Such is the strength of feeling in the U.S. military over the Chagos Islands debacle and the uncertainty caused by the UK government, that there is a very real risk that the U.S. will carry out it's plans.

It's helped by the fact that the UK air, sea and land forces couldn't protect a paper bag. 

But there may come a day when several dozen C-17 transports fly into bases in the UK and start stockpiling Armour, eventually flying in the manpower to work those weapons. 

Just keep an eye out for the U.S. saying they are conducting a rapid response exercise, or the supply of weapons to Ukraine, but stopping in the UK to refuel rather than Frankfurt. 

The UK government is really, really, clueless. They have made an enemy of a massively armed ally. The U.S. regime consider the UK government inept corrupt and ideologically aligned to the Communists. Starmer is a serious Marxist, as are most of the cabinet. 

I'm reminded of the Communist and Marxist Governments of Italy in the 70s. Ideologically captured and unable to work outside that ideology to do what is necessary to save the country.

The U.S. needs a strong UK. It needs a Christian UK. 

The other thing that is concerning the U.S. regime is the rise of Muslim ideology, in a country that has a serious nuclear arsenal. 

An invasion and regime change now would save a lot of problems later on. There's no way a Christian government would resist like a Muslim one. In fact there's a chance a Muslim country could instigate a nuclear exchange.

Better to get in early and sort shit out before it gets messy. It also sends a message to European countries led by spineless governments that don't care if they go Muslim: this is what will happen to you. France, being a nuclear power is the prime example.

Anyway, I will be at the gates of any US air base offering my services to any invasion force. I know what's good for my country. The ideology in government in the UK at the moment is not it.

I'm Not a Conspiracy Theorist, But I have Questions For the Climate Lobby.

More and more, I wonder what the actual goal of the Net Zero climate bollocks is. Because if the aim was actually net zero, then we would be investing heavily in carbon free power generation that could actually match the requirements of the country. 

The few nuclear power stations we have in the country are consistently producing baseband power for the country, consistently producing between 10-20% of total energy demand.

Strangely, Biomass has taken the place of coal and is producing just a bit less than nuclear. Of course we can't have coal anymore, we now have to burn the wood before it becomes coal, by clearing massive areas of forest to supply the demand. Yes they get replanted, but it can take decades to regrow. What happens to the wildlife in those areas of forest that is stripped of trees to fuel the Biomass plants?

You see the question I have, is if the environmentalists don't like nuclear because of the waste issue, then why not have tidal power? If their objection to tidal power is the devastation of habitat for wading birds, then why don't they have the same objection to the devastation of wildlife caused by hacking down forests?

Why don't they have an objection to wind turbines that hack birds out of the air? Or the issues around disposal of wind turbine blades? 

To me, there is the whiff of hypocrisy around the whole climate cause. IF the objective was the reduction of CO2, we wouldn't be burning billions of tons of natural gas every year. IF the reduction of CO2 was so essential and so desperate, then there would be a worldwide efforts to eliminate CO2 production TODAY. The United Nations would be putting huge pressure on countries like China to close their coal fired power plants.

IF the reduction was so essential and so desperate, we would be offered carrots to convert. There would be subsidies at the point of use to modify houses so that they were suitable for heat pumps. There would be huge subsidies for people to buy and run electric cars. There would be a huge nationally owned company upgrading the electricity grid and installing a substantial charging network.

Instead the subsidies go to the electricity generators. We are paying extra on top of the price of the energy in green levies. But hang on, that was only supposed to kick-start the green industry because 15 YEARS AGO WHEN THE GREEN LEVIES WERE INTROCUCED, the technology was expensive and not mature enough to produce energy cheap enough.

Back in the Blair and Brown days, over 14 years ago, the green tariffs were introduced to help the fledgling renewable energy production industry. That's a long time ago.

But now, 15 years later, haven't enough renewable wind turbines been installed to provide reductions thanks to economies of scale? Surely after 15 years of continuous energy generation the technology must be cheap enough to be able to be profitable without subsidies?

Surely, after 15 years, if the technology isn't mature enough, or cheap enough to stand on it's own feet and not require subsidies, then it's not a suitable technology? How much longer must we keep paying extra for our energy? If it doesn't need subsidies any more, why are we still paying them and who is the money going to?

If we are still paying subsidies, if the climate lobby are picking and choosing which environments they are happy to destroy, if certain technologies are favoured as opposed to other similar technologies, if governments are happy for us to continue producing CO2 but pay a fine, if Western governments are happy for China to keep building coal-fired power stations, that to me smells of political ideology , political activism, instead of actual environmental concerns.

Bye Bye Nissan

It's being reported that the merger between Nissan and Honda is now off the cards, after negotiations broke down.

It was reported at the time that Nissan had about 6 weeks at most of time to negotiate a rescue package, otherwise it would go to the wall.

So it seems Nissan have taken the decision to fold instead of continue as part of a group of companies. 

I've never owned a Nissan, so I don't have first hand experience of their vehicles, but they made some cool vehicles. The Skyline/GT-R for starters, plus the Z-cars and other sport coupes like the 200SX and even the lardy 300ZX.

Some funky vehicles like the cube and Figaro.

20 years ago they made worthy and reliable cars that quickly became pensioner favourites. People of a certain age will remember people of a certain age driving the Bluebird and the Primera.

But things went awry. The relationship with Renault soured a pristine company. Their cars seemingly no longer built for reliability. You don't put up with cheap plastics and hideous designs like the later blobby Micra models if the thing is unreliable. 

Design went down the toilet. Not only with technical reliability, but with design disasters like the Juke.

The Qashqai was at one time the best selling car in the UK, but oh my god, it's a bland piece of design. The only things that made the Qashqai the sales giant it was, were the finance and leasing deals Nisan used to shift the things. That's the French influence right there: concentrate on the finance and not the cars. The cars are a means to a finance deal.

Nisan had other fundamental disasters like the chassis rust  and folding chassis issues with the Navara and Pathfinder thanks to using cheap steel for fabrication.

Issues with the Diesel engines also plagued certain models, but to be honest, that's the same for other manufacturers that have tried to keep up with impossibly strict emissions regulations.

Even when Nissan embraced the new electric car revolution, they stumbled. The Leaf was one of the early electric models from any manufacturer, but it was built down to a price. The lack of heat management of the battery meant the battery failed earlier than those that did have thermal management. 

Under the leadership of Carlos Gohsn, (the CEO who eventually got smuggled out of Japan in a music case) which started in 2001, Nissan went from worthy to washout. The GT-R was the last technical tour-de-force, but as the noughties progressed, the projects that were started before Gohsn came and went. What followed were pretty poor shadows of the reliable models that went before.

Nissan as a company stared to slide. 

The tale is the same as with other Japanese car manufacturers that found themselves with issues in the early 2000s. They allowed the Western car manufacturers to buy stakes in the company, usually just under majority shares. The Western companies gave the Japanese companies "advice" on how to build cars cheaper and maximise profits. 

In almost all cases that ended up with the Japanese companies making an inferior product when it came to quality and longevity. 

20 years later, we are here. At the end, almost. Sad.

Advice to The Government: One Crucial Thing That would Help Growth.

The one th9ing that the government should do to kickstart growth is to abolish the IR35 tax rules. 

IR35 killed the independent contracting sector in the UK almost overnight. I was caught up in the early adoption of the rules, being an independent I.T. contractor, but the IR35 rules have been widened to incorporate the media and medical staff like doctors working privately.

I do get why they were introduced: the then Labour government wanted to stop companies letting people go and re-hiring them as self-employed contractors, thereby avoiding the payment of employer's national insurance amongst other things.

But if they wanted to target that, they should have made the rule that if you originally worked for a company as a PAYE employee, you couldn't return to that company as an independent contractor for 6 months or whatever.

But, instead they made the rules catch ALL independent contractors, whether they were working for the company or not, whether they worked for the company in the office or not. Even if you worked one day in the office, you are classed as a "disguised employee". 

Media people, who may have their own PLC and work for several media companies doing different things, if they sit at a desk and read the news, or sit at a desk and edit a programme, they fall foul of IR 35. The taxman deems them as employees.

This is the creep of tax mentality, the same that has deemed those in the gig economy to be employees as well. It's wrong-headed. If the people start to work as self-employed independent people, how can they then later down the line campaign to force the company to recognise them as employees with paid leave etc?

We need freedom in this country and especially the freedom to work as and how we please. By restricting employment freedom, the government and HMRC have stifled growth. Not for nothing has growth in the UK been minimal since the 1990s. That was the time before government started to force people into PAYE in order to maximise National Insurance revenue.

Russian Spy Ship Yantar in the Public Eye Again.

 Not very stealthy is it, if "Spy Ship" Yantar is in the News again.

After diving on the wreck of the Ursa Major in the Med, Yantar is now off the coast of the UK, ostensibly mapping undersea cables according to press releases.

Now you could put two and two together and regard this is a message from Putin.

If Yantar has dived on the Ursa Major wreck and found the explosion came from something like an Unmanned Surface Vessel, Russia regard the UK as a Major collaborator with Ukraine on the development of USVs, even going as far as to say publicly they know Royal Navy assets are working inside Ukraine helping develop these vehicles.

Now Yantar appears off the coast of the UK, it's a clear signal the Ursa Major was sunk by a USV or some other identifiable method, that the Russians considers heavily linked to UK involvement in the Ukraine conflict and our proxy war with Russia.

Yantar mapping undersea cables and pipelines is a clear message: we know what you did. Yantar is a very visible asset doing a very obvious job. Not the normal mission of a spy ship. This is a message with meaning.

Of course, the undersea assets will have already been mapped covertly. Russia has the massive special-operations submarine Belgorod that is specifically designed for undersea interdiction of cables, pipelines and other undersea assets. It is specifically designed to be very stealthy, close to the standards of NATO subs. A lot of Russian Roubles have been poured into that sub. It is nuclear powered, so it can stay submerged for long periods and travel vast distances without surfacing. 

It can navigate to UK waters in the wake of other Russian vessels transiting the English Channel, then loiter undetected to use laser scanning of the seabed, without making sonar emissions that would be detected. It can then move out of UK waters in the wake of a second vessel transiting the Channel. I did wonder why so many Russian vessels were using the channel in recent years, now I know. 

We have even gone as far as surfacing a UK attack sub close to Yantar. Not standard Operating Procedure, the nature of a sub is to stay stealthy. But in the cat and mouse messaging game, surfacing a sub close to a Russian Intelligence gathering ship sends another message. 

Anyway, if you are in the know, you know hat the Russians know, you know our government know the Russians know, we also know why the Russians want us to know they know and you now you know what everyone else knows, even if you don't know everything I know.

UK Government Avoid Offending Everyone Except the Majority..

It seems that HMS Agincourt is to be renamed to avoid offending the French.

Is there no-one the Labour government won't bend over backwards to avoid offending?

Oh yeah, the pale stale white people that make up the majority of the country. The most heinous of which are the retired, with their pensions and their savings accounts. They need teaching a lesson.

Fuck Labour, Fuck the Civil service. Stop spunking my money on vanity projects to signal how virtuous you are. I don't care how soothed your conscience is, just get the fucking job done without costing me an arm and a leg.

Storm Herminia Brings... No Power.

 Here's an object lesson in what happens when there is too much wind, or the win is in the wrong place:

See that blue sliver over the huge orange band? That's yesterday's wind generation. Pathetic. 

Given that there WAS some wind, the Storm Herminia, you'd think that somewhere in the country there would be just enough wind (neither too much or too little) for a decent contribution to UK energy production.

But alas, no. There appears to be too much of the wrong type of wind to produce substantial amounts of energy. 

What was that the enviro-mentalists used to say? That somewhere in the country the wind will blow and there will be generation. Yeah, some generation, but not a substantial amount. 

Gas is still the major energy provider. Without it, we are scuppered. 

With the demise of coal-fired production, it would be wise to invest in an alternative heating source at the very least. We can live without lights, but we can't live without heat. 

The posh people have their wood-burners to fall back on, even though they might be illegal.

Those of us without recourse to remodelling the house to install a multi-fuel stove need an alternative. 

The cheap Chinese diesel heaters that are around for under £100 seem to be a good alternative. They can run of most oils including vegetable oil. So you can run one cheaply. All you need is a 12v car battery and some oil. And a hole to vent the exhaust out of, you don't want to die from carbon monoxide poisoning.

If the indications are energy production is going to falter, I'll be first in line for one..

Winter Energy Requirements: Fossil Fuels for the Win.

It's been a while since I had a look at UK energy consumption. If you look along the bottom of this page, you'll see the live display.

What caught my eye today is that Gas meter, which was pegged about 50% over full scale. Yes, gas is producing so much of our immediate energy usage, it broke the meter!

Of course, sadly coal-fired energy production is no more. It will remain 0% until government changes policy and energy companies decide to invest in new coal-fired plant. Oh and the rail infrastructure is dragged out of retirement and the pits open back up, or the ports start accepting coal imports.

Yeah, not going to happen in the short term.

Anyway, here's the graph this morning, the orange bar is gas-fired energy production:

Yeah, the others don't come close. No wind, negligible solar. If we didn't have gas, we would be absolutely fucked.

Yesterday wasn't any better either:

Look at that thick wedge of orange compared to the rest. They don't match the gas-fired production even if they were all combined together.

What can I say, our energy policy is insane. We are relying chiefly on a single source of energy. Without gas, we wouldn't be able to supply the country's energy demand.

Our energy policy and energy security are abysmal. If the gas ran out, we have no alternative option that could cope.

Yvette Cooper's Southport Speech: Reading Between the Lines.

 1. Prevent is not working. Up until now it has been a jobs for the boys backwater that has no accountability.

Yvette Cooper is to set up an independent public enquiry. However the government set up the terms of reference, i.e. white wash.

2. Prevent is not working. They will now be the scapegoat for government failure to take the extremist  radicalisation threat seriously. The government will attempt to close down access to extremist information. The online safety act will go further than originally envisioned.

3. Prevent is not Working. The government will write to online companies in the USA to ask them pretty please to stop access to online radicalisation information. The online companies will tell them it's your job to stop radicalisation and not our job to censor free speech. After all the USA have plans for 3D-printed guns, which are legal in the US. Amongst other things.

It's up to the government in the UK to sort out the issues that push kids to radicalisation in the UK. It's not for us companies to sort out the UK government's problems for them.

4. Counter Terrorism Police closed his cases they thought he was just a lone nutter. And until he killed tree kids, that's what the system classed him as. New policies have been put in place at prevent, that are as useless as the original policies, given that the counter-terrorism Police prefer to arrest journalists for their online content, who are a lot easier to scare than some stroppy radicalised teenager.

5. Yvette has created the job of independent Prevent Commissioner to oversee the actions of prevent and stick their oar in, thereby creating another level of incompetence. Another body the government can blame when the next terrorist attack is created by a person already known to prevent. 

6. The knife hat the stabber used was bought on Amazon. Expect even stricter controls online for knife purchase. And they are strict enough. I bought a Pizza Cutter from Amazon last week and I had to go through the extra checks for that. I was not impressed that Amazon pass my information to a third party to do the check. You know digital ID is coming....

In conclusion, it's the usual political platitudes and waffle. Nothing of substance is being down against the actual threat, extremist ideology. As I've said before, there's been no enquiry into what makes these sons and daughters of first generation immigrants turn to extremism. 

Previous generations, those that came here in the Seventies appear to have integrated just fine. Those that came in the Eighties and Nineties have had a harder time integrating. 

This is where I think multiculturalism is failing. Allowing immigrants to stay and then live independently, and not adopt English norms and protocols is a mistake. The kids being born to parents that don't integrate feel isolated. They are not familiar with the culture of their old country and they are not integrating into the culture of their new country. They are living apart, isolated and unsuccessful. It's no wonder they are turning to extremist whisper campaigns.

Starmer's Southport Speech. Reading Between The Lines.

Having heard Starmer's speech today, I can say straight away, he is not in the least bit sorry. In fact I would think he is pretty irritated at having to make such a speech, in order to deflect attention away from his role in the response to the Stabbing attack.

The first part is, he is the Prime Minister. It would not jeopardise any impending court case if he labelled the stabber as a terrorist. It would not have affected his court case if the details of finding Ricin and terror-related documents had been released.

And still the charges against him did not involve terror legislation, but instead involved Biological weapons legislation instead. Despite the clear evidence.

This was a calculated decision in order to try and quell dissatisfaction with government policy and the so-called riots across the country.

So, let's go to the aftermath. Starmer hints that the Stabber could not and still can't be labelled a terrorist because: law. Which is complete bollocks, as other attacks have instantly been labelled terrorist in nature straight after the attack. And, this case could have been labelled a terrorist incident as soon as the Ricing and ISIS manuals had been discovered. 

Starmer says he will look at changing the law so that such incidents can be classed as terrorist in nature. 

Sure, you've heard the phrase "Never let a good crisis go to waste" haven't you? 

I expect Starmer will bring in legislation to widen the definition of terrorist, not to encompass lone-wolf Islamic extremists, but instead to include his current bogeyman: the far-right. 

I predict that laws will be widened to include ordinary people criticising the government, from whatever platform, including mouthing off in the pub. Also criticism of Islam will be included, here come the blasphemy laws. Also pointing out that the majority of terrorists are Muslim will be outlawed. 

Starmer also hinted at the availability of extremist information online. So, I also predict a censorship of the internet. American platforms that advocate free speech, especially Elon Musk's X, will be denied access to the UK unless they heavily censor. Which Elon won't do. 

I predict a move to a government-approved, heavily censored platform a-la the Chinese model. 

Starmer is an authoritarian Marxist, his nature is not to accept criticism, his nature is to crush it. And from his carefully chosen words today, reading between the lines, I do not like what I hear.

Trump Inauguration Today.

Well, so far, the lefties have failed to nobble Trump and he will be inaugurated today. The ceremony has been moved indoors for the first time in history. Not sure why people can't be trusted to wrap up warm, I'm sure the ceremony has been held in sub-zero temperatures before.

But anyhow, the rumours are The Donald will get to work from day one. I do hope so. Those first few wins, before the left can organise a response, would be good. The Jan. 6th people should be pardoned immediately.

Once in office, Trump should start to look around the Western countries and just see who is an ally and who isn't. Those Western Governments that have not kept the traditions of freedom in the West, need to be warned. 

The U.S. has gone to war and affected regime change before. The Western countries would take a lot fewer resources to regime change then say Afghanistan. The classic unfriendly government is this one in the U.K. Several MPs have openly talked about extraditing or arresting American citizens for exercising free speech, something the UK government wants to abolish. MPs have also directly smeared Trump. Not just criticism, but actually smeared him. If I was a UK MP, I'd be wary of entering the U.S. because they might find themselves on the end of a defamation charge.

Not only that, we have put one of the most important US military bases in jeopardy. That is not the action of an ally.

Anyhoo, here's a direct plea to Trump: Can the U.S. effect regime change in the U.K. please? The government is not working in the interests of UK citizens. It is in fact virtue signalling the country into Muslim control. Already we are debating blasphemy laws and it seems that pro-Muslim laws are on the agenda, even though we are a majority Christian country.

If it continues, the move to Islam could be irrevocable. And with it, Islamic possession of Britain's Nuclear deterrent. 

It would be in America's interests to get involved now, so there is minimal bloodshed to reverse the move to Muslim rule. 

Russian Spy Ship Diving on Wreck of Russian Cargo Ship.

Interesting news this morning, in that the Russians have found the sinking of the Ursa Major cargo ship in the Med important enough to investigate. They are diving on the wreck.

The Ursa Major sank after an explosion in the engine room. 

Now, that may not sound that strange, but there a what-if. What if the explosion wasn't INSIDE the engine room, but was OUTSIDE it? 

The difference is really important. The first could suggest sabotage of some kind. The second could infer that the ship was attacked by a remote controlled drone vessel, as used by Ukraine in the Black Sea. 

Either are serious. The sabotage theory infers someone got access to the engine room and planted an explosive device. Even an external explosion could be sabotage, where the device was attached to the hull. 

The unmanned surface vessel attack infers that Ukraine have now expanded their use of USVs into the Med and Russian ships are not safe in International waters. Therefore safety has to be stepped up in all waters, not just close to Ukraine and the mothership that launched the USV needs to be identified, tracked and neutralised.

Of course the third option could be a simple equipment failure in the engine room with no involvement from outside agents. 

I doubt Russia will release any information, unless it suits them. But there may be lots to learn from the wreck. If a USV was used, then the wreckage of that may be on the sea floor as well as the Ursa Major. 

Interesting they are making the effort to investigate. It shows they have their suspicions that all is not as it seems and requires clarification. Information that will inform operational requirements in the future.

Or they may have some cargo on the vessel they want to recover before anyone else does. Wonder what that could be?

Farage Cements his Status as a Distraction

So, for the second time we have Nigel Farage, darling of all centre-right old people screwing the pooch for a second time.

Yesterday he announced Charlie Mullins (OBE, he likes to mention that), the ex-owner of Pimlico Plumbers and rabid lockdown enthusiast is joining the Reform party.

At that point, I'm out, I will not vote Reform, I will instead vote UKIP if the opportunity is offered. 

The reason being, I hate Mr Mullins with a passion. In my opinion, he's not fit to be part of a party that allies itself with the working class. There are plenty of reports about Mullins' business practices and his treatment of his workforce when he was boss of Pimlico Plumbers, but the icing on the cake for my hatred of Mullins was his attitude during Covid.

His opinions regarding unvaccinated people was clear for all to see on various videos. That sort of rabid authoritarian streak has no place in Reform. I though the leadership of Reform were better.

But obviously not.

I can see that Reform aren't the freedom-loving party we think they are. There is a dark side emerging.

So, I shall vote UKIP now. I can see that Farage and Reform are just in it for the power, the money and the profile. Victory at any cost is not what I personally want to see. It is just the same as the Labour party who lied to us to get into power and then did exactly the opposite of what they signalled whilst in opposition.

Are Reform lying about their intentions once in power? I don't know, but I now have enough doubt to preclude me voting for them.

Farage has yet again got within a hair's breadth of gaining power and thrown it away. This comes after the shock of his interview where he dithered on deporting illegal immigrants already here.

I'm now convinced that Farage isn't the saviour of the centre-right. I believe he is a distraction designed to split the right leaning vote so the two main parties get in power again. 

How else can you describe the mismanagement at UKIP, allowing Tory MPs to defect and then poison the party. 

The same is happening at Reform. Tory MPs defecting (no, resign and then get re-elected on a Reform ticket), and now allowing people with dubious histories to join the party with high profile celebrations.

I'm not liking what I am seeing.

Headlamps in the News.

In the latest media distraction thread, to steer the public away from the Pakistani Rape gang issue, is the issue of headlamps that are too bright.

Whilst we all have had problems with dazzling white headlamps, the law already caters for the illegally fitted bulbs that are not designed for the headlamps they are fitted to.

The MOT test is supposed to pick up illegal LED and HID headlamp bulbs being fitted into Halogen headlamps. The reason being, the wrong headlamp bulbs will not put the light source in the correct position and the beam pattern will be wrong. In most cases making a broader beam to dazzle oncoming drivers.

However, even the legal LED, HID and Laser headlamps have their issues: they rely on a level sensor, usually fitted to the rear of the vehicle that senses the position of the rear axle and therefore the squat of the vehicle. It should then move the headlamp aim down automatically if the nose of the car aims up.

But, most systems are too slow, or they fail over time. I think I've only ever driven one car where the headlamp beam stayed stable as the car went over bumps. The system was responsive and quick enough to move the headlamps in real time to keep the beam at the same height. Most systems can't react quickly enough even though they may pass regulations. The regulations just test the ability of the system to (eventually) level the headlamps, I assume not the speed of the system in real-time.

Therefore in the car goes over bumps, you can see the headlamp beam rise and fall with bumps in the road, rather than saying level.

The other thing is, this is another level of complication that fails over time. The level sensor may stop registering the height of the rear of the car internally, or the linkage to the suspension may actually break. 

These are things that I assume are not tested at MOT time, or if they are, the vehicle can be driving for weeks or months with headlamps that don't automatically height-adjust. 

But really, have the media not got bigger fish to fry? I mean there's legislation in the MOT test to deal with illegal installations, I assume that faulty height adjusters are dealt with at MOT time. There's not much else that can be done except go back to dim orange headlamps. 

It's a distraction. One that yes, appeals to most people out there, but there are no quick solutions. Lighting technology has moved on. 

Unless the media is whipping up a fake storm with which to beat drivers again. could they for instance bring in new legislation to fine drivers that dazzle? Another tax on the motorist cash-cow?

Or is it just a distraction from Rape gangs? You decide.

Schroedinger's Muslim.

I've been concerned by the Government's warning about the Far Right (with no direct evidence of a significant far-right presence).

I think I've solved the problem: I'm calling it Schroedinger's Muslim. 

The theory is that the same Muslim can be Far-Left on issues like Racial Intolerance, welfare, housing, and appear oppressed but can also instantaneously appear far-Right on issues like women's rights, Racial Intolerance, Street Violence and the existence of Jews and the Jewish state.

Politicians just pick which quantum state of Muslim they chose to observe in the dinghy, or that which suits their agenda. 

Observations of the quantum Muslim can be skewed by the observers own bias or their inherent desire to appear holier than thou. Or idiocy.

The Labour Party are Everything they Hate about Us.

The Labour party and it's MPs are always justifying attacks on critics, saying critics are racist, or misogynist, or incompetent, or uncaring, or criminal, or incompetent.. 

You name it, the Labour party had used numerous slurs against their critics and political opposition.

But really, the Labour party, it's MPs and it's supporters need to look in a mirror, because those slurs are applicable right back at them.

People that live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones, is the adage. And Labour most live in the biggest glass house ever. The glass house of hypocrisy, lets call it.

Because Labour are protecting criminal rape gangs, gangs that perpetrate the worst form of misogyny: rape..

A council worker continued to work at Labour-controlled Oldham council for a year after being accused of child sexual exploitation. His job? A welfare officer.

Not only that, but the same article says accused taxi drivers kept their licences after being accused of sexual assault. One went on to commit another sexual assault.

I can't state how incompetent that looks. For the safety of the public, those licences should have been suspended automatically until the drivers were cleared, or not.

Labour MPs may now be trying to play the victim, but it won't wash. It was Labour controlled Labour authorities in the main that let the victims of the grooming gangs down. 

Some female Labour MPs are clutching pearls, refusing to hear the gory details lest their sensibilities be offended. I can't comprehend how offensive that must be to the victims who actually lived through the rapes and abuse, to heard that effete MPs don't have the stomach just to heard the details read out.

Or, as in the (anything but) Safeguarding Minister Jess Phillips, they complain that decades of inaction is somehow now putting them at risk. To now try and play the victim from a position of privilege is past hypocrisy, it's just sick. 

It's now been highlighted that some Labour MPs in the house of commons were members of the very same councils that denied the grooming gang victims justice. 

Well, you have your answer why the Labour government won't commit to a national enquiry right there: the very people that would be in the spotlight and criticised for inaction, incompetence and possibly criminal conspiracy are themselves now voting on whether there should be an enquiry regarding their actions back then. 

It's a sick, grotesque morass of sleazy, almost criminal conspiracy, to deny the victims of the rape gangs the justice they should have and also a failure to protect future victims. Because you can be damn sure that in taxis and Kebab shops across the country, the same thing is going on right now.

But hey, it's racist to say these rape gangs are criminals. It's racist to say they have easy access to class-A drugs with which to ensnare their victims because they are dealers. 

It's not much of a leap to imagine the corruption and incompetence that allowed the rape gangs to flourish a decade ago is now in the house of commons, because the people involved in local government back then are part of the national government now.