Stop the Occupation of Europe by the EU

Wednesday 13th January 2021

See Latest Blog

Nancy Pelosi Shows her Inner Marxist

She could be the spokesperson for BLM she is so adept at espousing its real values: 

"Pelosi and McGovern Unveil Details of Rules Package for the 117th Congress - Includes sweeping ethics reforms, increases accountability for the American people, and makes this House of Representatives the most inclusive in history"

"It would include a “Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth,” which would require Congress to 'hono(u)r all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral'.” 

"In clause 8(c)(3) of rule XXIII, gendered terms, such as 'father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter; would be removed."

"In their place, terms such as 'parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, step(-)sibling, half-sibling, or grandchild' will be used, instead." (link)

To reinforce her Marxist credentials and illustrate how well versed Pelosi is in the Frankfurt School's "Critical Theory" -  Pelosi stated that the "rioters" at the Capitol "chose their "whiteness" over democracy." (link)

Perhaps Nancy Pelosi might consider the fact that allegations of Election Fraud were only ever dismissed and not satisfactorily investigated in the eyes of a large group of voters. 

That was the reason for the reactions of those voters who had previously trusted the system to be fair, honest and robust - only to discover that such was not the case. 

That would have been a far less divisive response than promoting politically far-left insults aimed at the majority of the American population. 

In terms of rhetoric surrounding the description of actions taken by Trump supporters versus supporters of Biden - BLM and Antifa - whose out of control rioting was portrayed as peaceful protest by Biden and Harris - even as honest reporters provided more than sufficient evidence to the contrary. 

But since Marxism actually promotes the use of deception to further its ambitions - for the leftwing politicians, it is par for the course.

Donald Trump did not incite insurrection - that behaviour is a favourite of the political left (BLM / Antifa etc.) who have been rioting in US Democrat Cities under the auspices of Democrat Mayors during 2020 - not those on the Conservative side. 

He did not do anything which would contravene the US Constitution and the Senate's revenge attacks are only because Trump sidelined  Hillary Clinton in 2016. 

That prevented the political Left from turning the USA into a Communist Dystopia - at least for 4 years - and should be applauded, not condemned.   

Any new administration should try to bring the country together - not cast the opposition as anti-Democratic - as any tinpot despot would do - when that is clearly the wrong direction for such an epithet.

Impeaching Donald Trump would be seen as an attack on the majority of Americans by a bigoted US Senate that does not represent the American people.

1st January 2021

A British Revolution ...

Finally, we have taken control of our own destiny after 47 years under the yoke of the EEC(EU) - placed in that position by the hands of our elected representatives. Those who seek only power, wealth and self-aggrandisement as they sell out our country for personal gain.

We have broken free from EU legal control and we can finally determine our own destiny - but must be ever wary of forces acting to reverse the decision and send us back into oblivion at the hands of those who despise Democracy, personal responsibility and free speech. Those who wish to take away our identity, freedom, borders, traditions, religion and heritage along with the right to determine our own future in the wider world.

Unfortunately, it has not yet been possible to take back all of what is our birthright - our sovereign coastal waters and fishing grounds for a further 5 1/2 years. These sovereign territories were given away without the consent of the British people, a giveaway that was hidden from public scrutiny for 20 years, only exposed after the EU caused the UK to change an act of Parliament in favour of foreign fishing interests following the "Factortame" cases in 1990 and 1991. 

The Conservative Prime Minister Edward Heath, (with the help of Labour Party backing in 1972) signed away Britain's sovereignty - an abject betrayal by any measure. The true nature of the new relationship was contained in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office report advising Ministers of the consequences of joining the "Common Market" (FCO:30/1048) which was 'classified' and held secret for 30 years - it was released in the early 2000s.

As a result of the vote to leave the EU by a margin of 52% to 48% - David Cameron resigned on the day after the EU Referendum on June 24th 2016 to be replaced by Theresa May in July 2016. 

May worked with the EU's Angela Merkel in her Berlin office in 2018 to devise a plan to thwart any escape attempt by the UK by agreeing a Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration (WAPD) - which would replace the original Treaty signed by Heath in 1972 - and retain full EU control over the British people in perpetuity. 

In particular, it gave the EU the right to block the UK from leaving without its permission - using the "Irish Backstop" as the means.

Theresa May resigned on May 24th 2019 was replaced by Boris Johnson on July 24th 2019 after she failed to get her WAPD through Parliament. 

Boris went on to win the next General Election with an 80 seat majority on the 12th December 2019. He had switched attention to the Political Declaration (PD) part of the WAPD and the future trading and security relationship with the EU. 

The WAPD Treaty was ratified based upon the fact that a new negotiated trade deal would result from the negotiations and the EU would not allow any changes to the original that had been agreed between Merkel and May. 

The "core" part of the WA had been forced through May's Cabinet at a meeting at Chequers on the 12th July 2018 and contained the following as listed by Facts4EU (link); 

• "Leaving in name only on 29 March 2019" (BRINO)
• “An economic and a security partnership with the EU”
• “The establishment by the UK and the EU of a free trade area for goods”
• “to commit by treaty to ongoing harmonisation with EU rules on goods, including agri-food”
• “The UK would commit to apply a common rulebook on state aid”
• “agree to maintain high regulatory standards for the environment, climate change, social and employment, and consumer protection”
• “due regard paid to EU case law in areas where the UK continued to apply a common rulebook”
• “the phased introduction of a new Facilitated Customs Arrangement that would remove the need for customs checks and controls between the UK and the EU as if a combined customs territory”
• “apply the UK’s tariffs and trade policy for goods intended for the UK, and the EU’s tariffs and trade policy for goods intended for the EU”
• “include a mobility framework so that UK and EU citizens can continue to travel to each other’s territories”

So much for May's "Brexit means Brexit" the loss of 2 years to pretence and faux negotiations with the EU - See link above for Facts4EU's summary of the Ollie Robbins Remain version of the Chequer's agreement presented at Chequers - the one being worked on by the department for "Exiting the EU" was ignored.

In response; Brexit Secretary David Davis, Brexit Minister Steve Baker, and Boris Johnson, Foreign Secretary resigned.

Boris Johnson's newly elected government passed the Withdrawal Agreement Bill on the 20th December 2019 leading to the UK leaving the EU on the 31st of January 2019 and beginning the Transition Period, which ended at 11PM on the 31st December 2020.   

The trade and security talks between the UK under Boris Johnson and the EU related to the WAPD were to be conducted during the one Year Transition Period (TP) - (Theresa May had wanted a longer period). 

Ostensibly, the TP was designed as a period when businesses etc., would prepare for readiness to the new arrangements - in reality they are little more than a way of extending payments into the EU's coffers. May's intervention therefore simply frustrated attempts and delayed the UK leaving the control of the EU. Ensuring continuing payments from the UK into the coffers of the EU.  

Once within the Transition Period the UK would not have any access or rights to the day-to-day involvement in the EU and must comply with any new laws passed by the EU in the absence of the UK - effectively this was simply "taxation without representation".

On the 31st of January 2020 the UK repealed ECA (1972) - the European Communities Act (1972) which had taken the UK into the "Common Market" on the 1st January 1973. 

The repeal ended all Treaty obligations undertaken by the UK to the EU - apart from Theresa May's WAPD Treaty which was required in order to develop any security and free trade arrangement with the EU (due to Merkel's obstinance). 

But because the WAPD was ratified that meant that the 'Irish Backstop" (IB) was still a problem - effectively replacing the repeal of ECA (1972) with a new UK-EU Treaty - a new "trapping" Treaty - courtesy of May and Merkel.

Boris tried to get rid of the (IB) by introducing a Bill - the "Internal Markets Bill" - which was designed to make Northern Ireland a part of the newly sovereign UK internal Market, thereby removing the IB.

This was blocked by the House of Lords - which contains a majority of Peers (600 out of  830) either ennobled by Cameron or Blair - for the express purpose of blocking "Brexit". 

For purely political reasons the elements of "Internal Markets Bill" pertaining to the Irish Border were designated as a breach of International law by opposition parties - since, they claimed, it would breach the WAPD Treaty that had been ratified. 

In fact, the entire issue with the Irish Border is grossly "over-egged" by claiming that it breached the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) which actually  gave unfair advantage to IRA terrorists (get out of jail free cards) over British troops (who can be prosecuted) - and resulted in the removal of the militarised border between NI and Eire.

Against the above background Boris played a major role in the direct negotiations with Ursula Von Der Leyen and Angela Merkel through telephone links - with the results that Britain has regained its sovereignty but the UK is still tied to "Mutti's" (Merkel's) apron strings in many areas.

Briefings for Brexit has produced a succinct summary of the outcome of the negotiations: For full list please follow the link (link)

• "The restoration of democratic national sovereignty
• The end to the legal ascendency of EU law over British law
• A  break with the secretive, technocratic and anti-democratic  decision-making of the EU, and that expensive fig-leaf of democracy the  EU parliament" 

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

•  "Autonomy for UK courts, and the end to oversight by the overtly integrationist and juridically-unsound CJEU
• Autonomy over the defence and intelligence concerns fundamental to a sovereign country"
• A closer relationship with our allies in the English-speaking world" 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• "An immigration policy which can draw from a wide pool of talented individuals from across the world

• Lower migration will ease the housing shortage, leading eventually to  house prices lower than they would otherwise have been and improving access of young people to home ownership

• The Turing scheme supporting placements for 35,000 UK students globally  (versus Erasmus which sends to the EU only), aimed at students from  disadvantaged backgrounds who benefited little from Erasmus"

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• "84 billion euros saved which we would otherwise have contributed to the next EU budget round (Commission figures)
• Immunity from the budgetary consequences of any future Eurozone debt crisis
• State aid no longer under EU law"

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• "Trade deals with developing nations, boosting Britain’s relations with high-growth regions of the globeTrade deals with developing nations, boosting Britain’s relations with  high-growth regions of the globe, and compensating for the relative  decline in Europe’s economic weight and China’s aggressive policies of  investment in Africa and elsewhere".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• "Freedom from restrictive and anti-competitive European regulations which threaten Britain’s flourishing tech industry".

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

• "The end of the EU Common Agricultural Policy allows the UK to focus its  subsidy regime for farmers on environmental and conservation concerns as  well as food production"
• A ban on transportation of live animals to the continent ((unfortunately except from Northern Ireland)
• The power to ban electric pulse fishing and factory trawlers to conserve our marine environment
• The ability to run our own marine protected areas (thanks to Greenpeace for drawing our attention to this point)

Overall, Boris and Lord Frost together with the rest of the British negotiating team have done a brilliant job in the most restrictive circumstances and against all the odds.

A truly British revolution - ready to throw off the burdens and handicaps that the EU represents and trade with the world - to invent, innovate and inspire.

Well Done.

27th December 2020

Boris's UK-EU Agreement - A preliminary look - more later

Britain is still not free of the EU - its fishing grounds are still occupied by a foreign power. Apparently, we can have them back in 5 1/2 years time if there is anything left after they have been ravaged by EU pirates.

That is a 4/10 for Boris on fishing, but in fairness he has made some notable gains and he has at least listened to the concerns of the British people regarding trading worldwide; ending ECJ jurisdiction; removing the European Arrest Warrant (EAW); gaining tariff and quota free access to the EU. 

Northern Ireland is now part of the EU under its Laws and Regulations.

At least we can trade with whomsoever we like, as long as we follow EU rules on competition and do not accelerate away from them economically or basically anything else they do not like. If they suspect that we are doing that then they can cry "Foul" and send us to an international arbitration panel of independent arbitrators! 

As an antidote, the agreement can be annulled within the first year if suitable grounds exist.

It has also been stated that the rules for this new agreement are under International jurisdiction, not under the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), and that the ECJ will not have any jurisdiction over the UK?

It has also been stated that the British Laws will, from now on, only be made in Parliament by elected British politicians - but we always believed (until recently) that such was the case and we were lied to over the past 47 years (as of the 1st Jan 2021) - so if the statement is true then its a cautious 9/10 for Boris and Lord Frost.

Theresa May's Withdrawal Agreement and Declaration is still in place with all its "Elephant Traps" and restrictions because it was very carefully crafted by May and Merkel in Merkel's private office in the Summer of 2018 to be (a) practically impossible escape from and (b) contained large numbers of commitments hidden within its texts. 

It was forced past her Cabinet at Chequers by all accounts using  intimidation. They were not even given the full documentation, nor time to digest what was available.  See "Lawyers for Britain" assessment of the Merkel - May Withdrawal Agreement and how to move on from it (link).

What was available at the meeting at Chequers was described by Boris as a "turd" - yet it is still part of the current package. Theresa May was unable to get the WA and PD ratified by Parliament and she was replaced. 

The newly elected PM, Boris Johnson got it ratified by Parliament after negotiations with the EU offered a route to a Free Trade Agreement (FTA) with the EU - but the Irish Border problem (IBp) remained. 

Boris tried to get rid of the IBp after he obtained an 80 seat majority in the December 2019 general Election with the introduction of the Internal Markets Bill. Boris was accused of breaking International Law in a ploy to stop him continuing - (in reality, it was an entirely political matter). The House of Lords voted against the Bill. It was never ratified, and during the negotiations in 2020 Boris dropped it altogether. 

Later towards the end of the negotiations Michael Gove announced that an EU representative (a Vet) would be in place in Northern Ireland - effectively the EU annexed northern Ireland and Boris did not fight the move in Parliament - he abandoned the Internal Markets Bill. 

Cautions: 

When Theresa May entered into negotiations there was a lot of to-ing and fro-ing after initial stalling before Article 50 was finally submitted - but the deal was finally put together in private with Angela Merkel in Berlin. 

Boris concluded this new agreement in a similar manner which ended with private telephone communications with Angela Merkel via Ursula von der Leyen. 

I did warn about this after comparing behaviour with Theresa May's in the final stages of her negotiations. May's behaviour at Chequers appeared out of character, as if she had been given advice on how to present the Treaty to her Cabinet - but not as bizarre as her behaviour at the Conservative Party Conference.

The EU has not "changed its spots" it will not do so for as long as Angela Merkel is in power - and probably never.  It is not doing the UK any favours, it has been backed into corner - the only reason for this apparent acceptance by the EU (unknown until fully scrutinised) is that Boris gained such a large majority - meaning that the EU support in our Parliament (Commons) has been effectively neutralised.

Presenting these deals (Treaties) close to holiday periods when less attention is available from MPs and Peers is not unprecedented by parties acting in the interests of the EU - equally it is a common practice to countdown the clock to pressurise any supplicant Member State.  

The one years notice to quit this Agreement might be to encourage a quick return of the UK to the fold - particularly if the EU (or France)  plays "hardball" and makes life difficult for the UK. But that would still leave the UK trapped in the Merkel-May WA and PD which Parliament ratified on route to this Agreement. 

Nothing has been specified about May's secret deals on Defence with the EU - or the EU Army - this should be out in the open and include a statement that: The UK armed forces will not be part of any EU armed force which swears an "oath of allegiance" to the EU or any of its leaders. 

24th December 2020

Deal or Not?

Nothing yet finalised as the EU holds off on fish quotas. Updates later if possible.

23rd December 2020

The EU Blockades the UK

As we approach the end of the "Transition Period" this kind of behaviour is inevitable - as are all the negative comments at home and abroad. Once again the Chinese virus suddenly erupts into a "more dangerous" form - at the same time as the NHS calls for an extension to the Transition. 

However, this was entirely predictable, once I discovered that Professor Lockdown became involved with New and Emerging Respiratory Virus Threats Advisory Group (NERVTAG) and epidemiology took over from Biology: 

Or as the Lockdown Sceptics website (link) puts it "Professor Lockdown strikes again."

"David Bonsal of Oxford Viromics wrote a Twitter thread yesterday that essentially cast doubt on NERVTAG’s conclusion that the new variant is more infectious. His conclusion: “Further work is needed to investigate any potential causal link between infection with this new variant and higher viral loads, and whether this results in higher transmissibility, severity of infection, or affects relative rates of symptomatic and asymptomatic infection.”

"The bottom line is that the alleged higher transmissibility of the new variant is an inference from Neil Ferguson’s epidemiological modelling and not based on any biological data. It’s just one theory among many as to why cases are increasing in London’s outer boroughs and Kent and far from the most plausible." An updated version of our report, investigating an association between SARS-COV-2 viral load and mutations associated with the new U.K. variant is linked here. https://t.co/UvNhqdPvkN

— David Bonsall (@OxfordViromics) December 22, 2020

The 'new' Covid-19 variant VUI-202012/01 or B117 was first recognised in October, from UK samples collected in September 2020. It was later today linked to South Africa.

Lockdown Sceptics added, from the Mail:  "Despite an explosion in infections in October, PHE did not alert the Government or its scientists to the mutated strain’s existence until December, by which point more than 1,100 people were confirmed to have had the new version of the virus." 

Interestingly, the same Covid-19 variant was recorded in Denmark and the Netherlands but their borders were not closed - why would the other EU internal borders remain open when the only other border - to Britain is closed - unless it is related to punishing the British people?

Before answering it must be noted from the South China News (link) that: 

• "The genetic mutation is probably more easily transmitted than earlier strains prompting a UK travel ban in dozens of countries" 

Note it is not a "strain" - it is just a variant, a mutant of the original and there are many others

• "But so far there is no evidence to suggest it is more deadly and scientists are hopeful that vaccines will still work"

It is more than hopeful at this stage but Biology must now take over from Mathematics, (Statistics) which as we all know we should be wary of "Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics".

Also, we should remember that the original COVID-19 that was released from China after Wuhan International Airport was left open for about a month following the announcement of the virus spreading in Wuhan Province, and, allegedly, that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), with the help of the W.H.O., had initially requested other countries not to close their borders since the virus was not transmissible between people. 

Covid-19 has been mutating all the while that it has been travelling around the world through the Chinese Diaspora spurred by Globalisation. Such mutations are not unusual and not usually deadly.

The presence of Covid-19 within the EU populations has been advantageous for the EU in these negotiations in some important respects, despite its collateral damage - by allowing a cover for the ramping up of the attacks on the UK, a country which is already economically weakened by the same virus. 

This lack of empathy within the EU towards another EU Member State experiencing problems is not unprecedented - following the disastrous COVID-19 outbreak in Italy - Germany banned the export of PPE and closed its border, followed by other adjoining Member States closing theirs - and of course there is the disgraceful financial damage done to Greece by Germany. 

The Chinese took full advantage of the EU's predicament and highlighted the fact to illustrate that "solidarity did not exist in the EU" and that China would be a better partner for Italy than the EU.   

The EU "Blockade" by any other name was clearly devised in order to pressure Boris Johnson to turning against the interests of UK population and to sell them out to the EU - as all the Member State leaders and governments have done with their own populations (though a few are now seeing the error of their ways). 

This action by the EU has two principal aims: (1) to satiate the appetite of some of the more obviously unpleasant individuals in the EU who wish to punish the British people for challenging the EU, and  (2) to force Boris into accepting a bad EU deal or alternately force an extension. 

Either way it is designed to stop Britain leaving the EU at any cost. 

Boris and Lord Frost must stand firm - Sovereignty is non-negotiable - be wary of a Merkel trap - neither the EU nor Merkel he can be trusted.

13th December 2020

UK -EU Faux Negotiations

Boris, You must take back Britain's freedom from the shackles of the EU. It is long past the time that we stopped dancing to Merkel's tune - she is a throwback to the old Communist East German form of control. 

Merkel lived in East Germany from the age of 3 months and was brought up and went to University in East Germany. She was a member of the Communist Youth Movement. Her family actually emigrated from the free West Germany to a country under Communist rule. 

It does not matter who the UK representatives negotiate with from the EU the bottom line is that Merkel makes all the decisions.

According to Douglas Murray in a Daily Mail article published of the 12th December 2020:

"Angela Merkel is the daughter of a Lutheran pastor. 

Known as Mutti – or Mummy – to voters, her formative years were in East Germany, the Communist state ruled over by the Stasi. Like others, she belonged the Free German Youth (FDJ), the official communist youth movement. Rectitude and certainty pour from her. And she has no time for Boris Johnson, a man she dismisses – with remarkable condescension – as no more than a dissembler and a libertine."

"According to a 2013 biography, Merkel was no mere cultural officer of the Free German Youth, but a higher ranking 'Agitation and Propaganda functionary' – claims she has never openly denied." (link)

Germans love Merkel because she tells them what to do plus she has looked after German interests above all else to enhance her own power. 

Needless to say, being brought up as a Communist, she understands Russian and Chinese ideology, culture and ambitions. being involved in "AgitProp" she is also familiar with the techniques used by the Stasi, and perhaps has former associates on her side.

Deutschland, Deutschland über alles ...

Merkel has only two interests - keeping Power and Germany, and any opposition must be crushed. She has successfully used the EU to Germany's advantage by keeping the southern EU member states dependent upon the northern ones.  She has kept the Euro lower than Germany's "Deutschmark" would be if Germany was outside the EU, thus increasing Germany's export potential. 

Further, she has successfully organised trade and political ties with China - where there is a massive market for German cars - through personal visits to Wuhan over several years. So the EU is not her main concern, only how it can be used for German interests - Germany has no problems working outside of EU control - why does the UK have to "jump through hoops" (rhetorical question). 

Basically it is about Germany finding the best potential market for German cars which also has the cheapest, best educated labour force - Germany has clearly taken all the cheap labour it can from the EU Member States plus some suitable well educated migrants from Syria.

The Chinese Communist Parties also funds German political parties in Bavaria, a clear and dangerous conflict of interest for Germany and the whole of Europe. 

With Russia, Merkel has been negotiating "Nordstream 2" a natural gas pipeline between Russia and Germany - in spite of proclaiming that Germany is embarking on the "Green New Deal" (UN Agenda 21). (Natural gas is now thought to be more harmful on the Ozone Layer than coal emissions (link)).

Her attempts to carpet Germany with "Wind Turbines", "Photo-Voltaic Cells" and "Biomass" have been an unmitigated disaster for the German population and environment and have no effect on CO2 emissions, and Boris (Carrie) is planning to do the same in the UK.

But Merkel has been a disaster for the Germany (inadvertently) and the EU all along: 

After the Fukushima Nuclear Power Station Tsunami disaster she banned Germany from building any new nuclear plants. 

Added to which by ending of all coal-fired power stations by 2030 and its existing nuclear power plants by 2022 - Germany will be dependant solely upon renewables (plus natural gas from Russia!). 

Merkel was instrumental in the "Diesel Scandal. attempting to replace all petrol vehicles which produced CO2 with diesel which produced less CO2, but added other noxious particulates and Nitrogen gases. 

Some German car manufacturers also developed software/hardware methods to illegally circumvent emission restrictions during emission testing, and were later required to pay compensation.

Now petrol and diesel vehicles will be removed and that will likely end the "age of the personal motor vehicle" for most people - since unreliable electric vehicles, which also carry a large manufacturing pollution footprint, will be unaffordable for most people. 

In 2015, Merkel precipitated another disaster for Germany and once again also included most other EU member states when, at the behest of the UN (Peter Sutherland), wishing to breakdown the internal borders of the EU member states and make their populations Multicultural - Merkel opened up the EU to mass unregulated, often undocumented immigration into the EU. 

Merkel has since embarked on a programme of removing any failed asylum seekers from Germany (the subject of the next Blogpost) - Germany passed a new immigration law in June 2019 , which includes an “Orderly Return Law”. Britain needs to get its act together.

Faux Negotiations

I hope that Boris, and Lord Frost are aware of who they are really dealing with in these negotiations and how far Merkel is willing to go to cripple the UK economy on behalf of Germany and coincidentally the EU. 

Macron also has delusions of grandeur but France is being taken over - disappearing into oblivion culturally, but sustained financially within the EU by CAP and CFP - removing British waters from CFP control would leave Macron diminished even further. It would do little for the EU's credibility. 

The possibility of an EU blockade would escalate tensions for some time but this is not the first time that Germany (Hitler) or France (Napoleon) have tried that tactic.

Fortunately, Britain can still survive whatever the EU (Merkel) throws at at it (only 8% of British companies (13%of GDP) actually trade with the EU) - and most of what Merkel has planned would be unlawful in terms of International Law and under WTO rules. 

Unfortunately, the Communist Chinese virus has seemingly laid waste to parts of the UK economy - with the help of SAGE, but the rest of the world has also been affected badly too, particularly the EU.

Under no circumstances can Boris or Lord Frost be allowed to give away anything to Merkel and Germany that it can be used to further subvert the UK economically.

The best tactic is to keep negotiating until the 31st of December 2020 and then NO DEAL is automatic. 

On the 1st of January 2021, Repeal Theresa May's EU Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration (and any secret side-deals she did with the EU using Henry VIII powers) in our Parliament on the grounds of "Bad Faith" by the EU. 

That is the only way to be truly free of EU control (Boris has the Majority and a Mandate to do that). 

If Boris fails to take Britain out of EU control then Britain will lose all credibility and trust around the world, as EU leaders gloat about how clever they are; and how stupid the British were to vote for another Tory. 

With that the British people will become a subjugated population in an Occupied country once more - courtesy of their own Elected Representatives - déjà vu.

ps Germans are the only EU population that will not be subjugated in the final manifestation of the EU - because of its post-war Constitution. 

14th December 2020

Sadiq Khan's Defunding London Police

Sadiq Khan has "Defunded the London Police Force" of £110 million at a time of an exponential rise in crime in London (link). Add to that, he wants to put London into Lockdown and close the schools early for Christmas. No Labour politician can any longer decry Police cuts after this reckless move in London.

Khan is a Fabian Labour Mayor doing all he can to close down our economy, and ably assist Marxist BLM, which should be classified as a terrorist organisation (it is the daughter of the Black Power movement under another name). BLM marches on our streets and operates behind our backs within our Institutions using Maoist inspired "Cult" intimidation techniques, popularised by Mao Zedong (Mao Tse-tung) in the 1960s-70s China. 

BLM appear to already have control of some of our MSM, the National Trust, the FA, RADA (link), Eton, Rodean and our elite Universities, it encourages pulling down our statues and threateningly displays its trained black-shirted Militia. How long before it expands its Maoist ideology within the Civil Service, Military and Parliament (already in progress - since 2014)?  

Defunding BLM is a much better idea - do not donate to them - it has untaxed millions of pound/dollars already from gullible supporters who do not realise that it is using "Racism" as a cover for its far more sinister activities, in America, the UK and Canada. 

In August this year it formed a leftwing UK political party - carefully hiding its name behind the title "TTIP" - "Taking The Initiative Party". (link) Note: that you have to read quite a way down its website pages to the section on "Reparations"  before you realise that it is BLM's website in disguise.

BLM are taking the initiative alright, while the country is fighting the Covid-19 virus - and the country looks the other way - because they have been deliberately shamed for something that was not their fault (slavery) - BLM are slowly taking over our Institutions from the inside.

13th December 2020

Boris's Climate Disaster

Boris, man-made CO2 has little or no effect on climate change compared to other natural factors. 

We are currently in an interglacial period during which the Earth’s temperature rises and then falls at the onset of the next glacial period. 

Updated

One other consideration - look at the difference in temperatures on cloudy and clear nights - the warming effect on cloudy nights is due to water vapour, some of which condenses to form clouds of small floating water droplets that scatter all wavelengths of light, a process known as "Mie Scattering" (after Gustav Mie) which show as white clouds (link). Water vapour is very effective at retaining some of the radiated energy that the Earth’s surface has absorbed from the Sun with subsequent warming causing re-emitted energy in the form of Infra Red radiation. 

On a clear night without water vapour (few or no clouds) the temperature would not fall if CO2 in the atmosphere is what keeping the Earth warm - but we get frost in the early hours. 

That is because, in this case, the daytime energy input to the Earth’s surface from the Sun is re-emitted as IR radiation which rapidly escapes through the atmosphere into space – obviously any CO2 in the atmosphere is not preventing that re-radiated energy from leaving the Earth.  

Atmospheric gases Nitrogen (78.08%) and Oxygen (20.95%) and Argon (0.93%) plus trace gases are transparent as far as Infrared radiation is concerned and IR sensitive CO2 concentration is in minute quantities - just 0.038%.

The effect of cloud cover and night time temperatures has been carefully evaluated by a recent study by Exeter University which states that (as might be expected): 

"University of Exeter scientists studied warming from 1983 to 2017 and  found a difference in mean annual temperature of more than 0.25°C  between daytime and night-time warming in over half of the global land  surface."

“Increased cloud cover cools the surface during the day and retains the warmth during the night, leading to greater night-time warming. Whereas, decreasing cloud cover allows more warmth to reach the surface during the day, but that warmth is lost at night.” (link)

Why is the IR radiative energy from the ground surface "lost at night" under little cloud cover if CO2 is such a potent 'Greenhouse' gas, that causes dangerous warming or acts as a 'Blanket' or the 'glass of a Greenhouse'? 

The "Greenhouse" effect of CO2 is being greatly exaggerated. 

It is either, not as large as they want us to believe, or it has little or no effect at the current concentrations in the atmosphere?

The idea of "Global Warming" came about from observations of Venus, our "Twin" planet - but its atmosphere is 95% CO2, it is closer to the Sun - and does not rotate like the Earth does. 

Isn't it a gigantic "stretch" to equate what happened on Venus to what they are claiming will happen on our planet with minuscule quantities of CO2 in the Earth's atmosphere (0.038%)? 

A third consideration is that most CO2 emissions began after World War II industrialisation. "Half of all human consumption of fossil fuels and cement production has occurred since the mid 1970s.     

"Global temperature proxies (sediments, boreholes, pollen, oxygen-18, stalagmites, magnesium to calcium ratios, algae, cave formation, etc. over a wide geographical range) show a warming trend starting around 1700, with warming and cooling periods about the trend." (link)

In reality, Boris is selling the UN's "Agenda 21" and the World Economic Forum's "Great Reset". Which want to herd everyone into "smart" megacities with smart meters, under mass surveillance, with everything controlled by the Internet of Things (IOT), which can also be monitored by BB (1984). You must also know that most of the jobs will be farmed-off overseas to EU and Chinese companies. 

They plan to take away all personal forms of transport apart from bicycles and electric scooters and deliberately reduce the world population from its current level by 2050. 

It is not a dream - it is a Communist Chinese Dystopia - also coming to the United States now that President Donald Trump has been removed by US MSM and the leftwing Democrats. 

Look at what happened in Germany (2009 -2017) – and no reduction in CO2 - see Blogpost below:

Electricity bills will "rocket", and people will freeze as the supply is frequently disrupted by weather problems and network instabilities, local environments will be ruined for years to come, and insulation will be inadequate because of corruption and cost saving by companies given contracts without due diligence. Solve those problems first. 

Even worse

The plan to keep the UK warm revolves around using Hydrogen gas boilers - which release H2O (as water vapour) and it is water vapour that is the main "Greenhouse gas" on Earth, not CO2. So we will be kept warm alright as we pump more and more water vapour into the atmosphere. 

All the exaggerated "problems" which are claimed about "man-made" CO2 by its proponents will be much worse for "man-made" water vapour emissions and they will be much more difficult to tax, after the population has been driven into poverty trying to fix the made-up problem. 

To put it all into context - "Christine Stewart, then Canadian Minister of the Environment, speaking before editors and reporters of the Calgary Herald in 1998, said, “No matter if the science of global warming is all phony…climate change [provides] the greatest opportunity to bring about justice and equality in the world.”

 see Global Warming Alarmism: When Science IS Fiction (link)

The bottom line is that AGW is a fraud, which, ironically has nothing to do with Climate or industrialisation, it is a "cover" for bringing about world Communism to control an unsuspecting public.

Friday 11th December 2020

Gove's NI Giveaway!

To allow any EU official acting in behalf of the EU's ECJ on to sovereign British soil is an an act of abject surrender to the EU - what is Gove thinking? 

We do not need to be supervised, as an "Occupied Country" would be subjugated - this should be withdrawn immediately. Basically the EU have placed a border in Northern Ireland and will claim that we placed it there.

Any EU official must be resident in EU territory not in NI - this is a matter of principal - they could be sent all prior necessary documentation and invited to inspect any consignment considered to be non-compliant. 

This is done already, as a routine, to check for illegal traffic - or is everything just waved through Calais into the EU? 

Side Note: There has been a border post in Ireland since the Good Friday Agreement (GFA) where you can get currency exchange etc. What has changed is that the border guards (Troops) are gone and so are the Watchtowers. The argument about a border is nonsense - the military border will not return - the UK will not build such a border. If there is a border it will be built by the EU.   

To make this offer to the EU Gove used the stupid comment like "we already have EU officials in the UK related to Eurostar" which is an insult and is treating the British people with contempt - the EU officials are in the UK because we have not yet left the EU!

There is no reason for any EU official to be on our side of the border, say for example, an EU vet "checking on the UK customs procedures" and animal safety etc., when they can equally be placed on EU soil - in Eire. 

This "concession" gives the EU the power of  an Occupying Force - by invitation. 

That might be OK for Scotland which appears to be happy to be Occupied by the EU and so does Eire, apparently. In reality, for Scotland being in the EU is good for the leaders of the SNP - but for the Scots themselves?

The timing at this critical juncture is beyond belief, such action simply shows that our leaders are weak or either never really intended to follow through on their Manifesto promises - we can now only hope that the EU forces a no deal. 

Lord Frost appears to be being undermined at the 11th hour by our government.

After we saw Cummings and Cain removed from Downing Street by Boris's girlfriend we called for Boris to go and now we call for him and Gove to go or up their game before they cause any more harm to the UK. 

The Commons must vote these actions down.

There can be no surrender to the EU. The majority of the electorate voted to leave the EU in 2016 because they realised, from experience, that the EU is not a benign, peace brokering, benevolent organisation which looks after its member states' interests - it seeks only to destroy them - by simply turning them into Multicultural regions of a greater Germany with little coherent identity.

It has been stated previously why we want to leave and what the government must do to facilitate that - before they embark on a full surrender to the EU we repeat those demands:

• Sovereignty: We  must make our own laws through a system which allows the British people  to remove the same elected representatives who enacted those laws. We need to have our Constitution reformed.

• We  must never again adopt a system where laws are made outside of our Parliament but our elected representatives treacherously pretend that  those laws originated solely from debates within our Parliament - the  scandalous situation that existed in Britain for the  past 48 years (on the 1st January 2021).

• We  must never again be subject to the supervision by any foreign court for the laws that we enact. Our faux "Supreme" Court must be replaced with a  new system entirely populated by Justices with whom the interests of  Britain are paramount - and who cannot be overruled. 

• Fishing Grounds: These  must be returned to the sovereign control of the British people - any  other Nation that wishes to fish those waters must apply for a quota and  observe our rules and abide by our environmental priorities.   

• Borders: Our  borders must never again be under the control of a foreign power and no British government or Prime Minister can ever again be allowed such  power as to negate the freedoms or rights of the British people or the control of  its sovereign territory. (That must become part of our Constitution).

• Defence: Under no circumstances can we be tied to providing our armed forces, research  facilities or civilian capabilities to the defence of the EU - under  its control - i.e. requiring an oath of allegiance to the EU by our armed forces. 

• Any UK military involvement must be authorised by the UK Parliament as part of NATO

• Law and Order: The British people cannot be part of the EU's authoritarian legal system, for example, the European Arrest Warrant (EAW) - our own Constitution  cannot be circumvented on the altar of convenience or compliance with  any foreign legal system. We must not abandon the legal right of "Habeas Corpus" and "Trial by Jury" for any British Citizen.

If you cannot achieve all of these requirements in these talks then revoke Theresa May's "Withdrawal Agreement and Political Declaration" - which was only ever designed to be an alternative to a "Remain" option in a planned 2nd Referendum anyway. The grounds for revocation are well established - "Bad Faith on behalf of the EU" - which is well documented.   

There is no point in continuing with negotiations because the arguments are only really about the same points of contention - which will never be resolved to the satisfaction of the both parties. In which case the only reason for continuing is for the EU to try to force an extension - after 4 1/2 years of the same to-ing and fro-ing. This would keep UK cash flowing to the EU and keep the UK trapped without any possible change. 

"No Deal" scaremongering - EU Propaganda.

The EU and its supporters are trying to frighten the British people in order to put pressure on Boris to capitulate - instead read the facts about NO Deal from an expert:

Barnaby Lane

July 6

Economist. Pro-Europe, Pro-Brexit

Does Boris really mean that no deal is a good option?

He means it because it’s a good option. We don’t have to put up with the EU demanding we surrender to their courts and laws. Nor do we have to let them control access to our fishing waters.

This is not a new claim. It’s been core to the pro-Brexit thinking for many years.

Still, maybe you, dear reader, have been so overwhelmed by propaganda telling you we’re doomed if we don’t go for a deal with the EU, that you don’t know how to tell the wood from the trees, or how to distinguish myth from fact. If that’s you, you are not alone. 

The more curious among you however, may have felt a certain unease with the propaganda, particularly its failure to explain why:

• Britain itself is incapable of doing what most of the world already does, which is to trade successfully with the EU under WTO rules

• Britain’s exporters cannot do in Europe, what they already do worldwide, namely, to trade successfully under WTO rules.

If you’ve been wondering these things, hopefully the following facts will help clear things up.

There’s no hiding one downside: if Britain traded with the EU on WTO terms, there would be an EU tariff barrier facing its exports. Britain originally decided to join what was then called the Common Market, in order to place itself on the right side of that barrier. 

At that time, the Common Market tariff wall against industrial imports was high, at around 15–20%.

Today, however, successive rounds of world trade liberalisation under the auspices of the GATT/WTO have largely demolished that wall, and the EU’s tariffs towards imported industrial products amount on average to no more than about 3%. 

Today, it makes remarkably little difference to Britain, as an exporter of industrial products, whether it’s inside or outside that minimal tariff wall. It’s a question of either zero, or 3%.

True enough, within this 3% average, public attention has been drawn to a few stray high rates of duty. In some cases these EU tariffs can range up to 50% or more, especially on foodstuffs. 

However, wherever the EU sets abnormally high rates of duty, it is almost always on products of which Britain is a net importer (eg food and agricultural products, textiles and clothing, footwear, motor vehicles, semiconductors). 

That’s the origin of the claim “WTO rules would harm the EU more than they would harm us”, and in absolute terms, there’s some truth to it.

While Britain remains tied to EU laws, it is compelled to impose these high EU tariffs, raising the country’s import bill and increasing the cost of living. Once free of EU laws, Britain will be free to dismantle these burdens as it sees fit.

What will be the overall effect of trading with the EU on WTO rules? In order to estimate this, the best guide is to observe their actual experience of their operation in practice, around the world. How has that panned out? Well, there are two core points.

• First, the worldwide experience of British exporters trading on WTO terms. Britain already trades on those terms with more than 100 countries worldwide. 

That’s about 45% of Britain’s total exports. About the same as its exports to the EU. As it happens, British exports have for many years been more successful outside the EU than within it: most of the growth in Britain’s trade has come from outside Europe (the bulk of it on WTO terms), while exports to the EU have stagnated.

In spite of this, there lingers this curious myth that the EU Single Market has been a British export success. There is no evidence for such a claim. And indeed, nothing could be further from the truth. Most of Britain’s export successes have been outside Europe, mainly on the basis set by the WTO.

• Second, the worldwide experience of Third Countries trading with the EU on WTO terms. The EU Single Market was launched in 1992, in order to spur cross border trade among EU member states. However, it has failed in that. Perhaps surprisingly, during the life of the Single Market, Third Countries have in fact increased their exports to the EU faster than the EU Member States have themselves increased their exports to one another.

• A fortiori, those Third Countries have suffered no disadvantage through being outside the Single Market. If Britain shortly becomes one of them, trading with the EU on WTO terms, there is long and widespread evidence that it need not fear that prospect.

Two counter arguments are often raised at this point. 

• 1. Ah but the EU doesn’t trade on these countries on pure WTO terms, it has lots of mini deals! 

And 

• 2. Ah but British exporters would need to wave a piece of paper at customs proving compliance from day 1, otherwise its products get blocked at the border! These arguments are so often repeated, that people might assume they contain a grain of truth. 

They don’t. Indeed, both arguments are nonsense!

• Firstly, it doesn’t matter what mini deals you have. The Most Favoured Nation (MFN) condition requires that you give equal treatment to all countries except those with whom you have a preferential trade agreement. 

The EU has only 35 such agreements, most of them with small countries. If the EU has 120 mini deals with the US, none of them legally enable the EU to treat the US better than the UK. 

• The second argument is more straightforward. Legally, it is the EU’s responsibility to ensure it never blocks a compliant product. If the EU can’t find a method to allow the UK to comply with its border requirements from day 1, that is the EU’s problem, not the UK’s.

Summing up, the experience of both British and foreign exporters trading on WTO terms suggests that Britain can well afford to let those be the terms on which it trades with the EU. 

And while, as a civilised country, Britain will always be ready to negotiate constructively with its neighbours, it has no need to be afraid of rejecting an unacceptable agreement with the EU: for example, an agreement which is available only with distasteful neo-colonial strings.

The great merit of the WTO rules is that they come without strings. They leave Britain free to develop its trade relations worldwide, while equally re-shaping its internal laws to make its industries competitive in the post-pandemic world.

In answer to the question therefore, of course Johnson meant it when he said no-deal was a good option. There’s no reason whatsoever, to doubt it.

Euexit Comment - No Deal doom mongering is just amplified noise - a final attempt to frighten the British people into capitulating to EU domination. 

7th December 2020

Updated* 10th December 2020

Millwall Fans - Not Fooled by BLM

Unlike some of our MSM and the most of the British establishment, it seems that Millwall football fans attending last weekends match between Millwall and Derby County quite rightly "booed" their team for "Taking the Knee" to BLM before the game. 

The players would claim that they were showing their opposition to the (quite unproven) "institutional Racism" in the UK and to virtue signal their support for Black people against oppression in the UK and elsewhere - past and present! 

But Britain now is the most tolerant, and least Racist country in the western world, with a Police force that has never routinely carried guns (except in Northern Ireland), and who target crime based upon crime statistics. That is not to say that there aren't any bad people in any institution in the UK.

Where crime is associated with ethnic minorities it is usually associated with drugs and poverty, poor housing, education and deprivation - almost always associated with left-wing (Labour) Council areas of London, and other major cities with large populations. 

That is not to say that indigenous English people do not commit crime - many are as bad if not worse. A majority of ethnic minorities are hardworking, honest, laudable and loyal to Britain, they love living in the UK and are usually well settled in mixed communities and fully integrated. Again there are be some exceptions in certain areas.

Many from the EU (at least 3 million) do not want to leave the UK and it seems that everybody in the world and their relatives want to come and live in the UK - a very unlikely decision to take if the UK was a Racist country. 

But you do not need to be a research fellow or professor of History at one of our prestigious Universities (though not quite so prestigious or laudable any more since the rise of the Maoist "Cancel Culture") to discover that BLM is an anti-White, Marxist, revolutionary movement - a re-incarnation of the "Black Power Movement" in 1960s and 1970s America with the same objectives; and mentored by some of those original protest organisers. (link)

BLM is hiding behind Racism to push its political agenda, the takeover the established order in the USA, UK and Canada. Even its main slogan is Racist, implying that no other lives matter. 

It was formed in 2013, not after the death of George Floyd in Minnesota in 2020. Its original left-wing "Manifesto" included "abolish the nuclear family, police, prisons and capitalism".

"Black Lives Matter seeks to replace the foundational cornerstones of American society: 1) abolish the Judeo-Christian concept of the traditional nuclear family, the basic social unit in America; 2) abolish the police and dismantle the prison system; 3) mainstream transgenderism and delegitimise so-called heteronormativity (the belief that heterosexuality is the norm); and 4) abolish capitalism (a free economy) and replace it with communism (a government-controlled economy)." Note: The above  referenced article was later removed from the BLM website.

BLM's real objective is to foment a race war within the UK (BLM already have  trained "black - shirted" Militias waiting in the wings) while it takes over the UK's institutions by stealth - these latter activities are BLM's implementation of the Marxist *"Critical Theory" and "Intersectional Theory" in Britain through infiltration and re-education by "Diversity Officers" within our public institutions. The are the same institutions infiltrated previously by "New" Labour acolytes - and paid for through the public purse.

Update*

These theories are just that - unproven ideas put together by the Marxist Frankfurt School, (not an actual school - more a group of Marxist radical scholars) founded in the 1920s and operating from the 1930s until Hitler kicked them out of Germany. They initially went to the USA (Columbia University), from there some went back to Germany after the war and the rest went on to California - from where all the theories were disseminated through literature - e.g. Herbert Marcuse with "Eros and Civilisation (1955) and through the US education system; "and were influential in the leftist student movements of the 1960s, particularly after the 1968 student rebellions in Paris and West Berlin and at Columbia University." (Britannica)

The ideas of the Frankfurt School are based upon attempts to "integrate" the work of Marx and Freud, having perceived that Marx's earlier work was not producing the necessary revolutionary fervour beyond the Soviet Union into the Capitalist west. Critical Theory encompasses Critical Race Theory,"Cultural theory, Gender Theory and Queer Theory". 

Paula Rosenberg spread a lot of the ideas through books such as " Race, Class and Gender in the USA" (2016) - her book is required reading in 1000 US Colleges.

From these ideas came the notion of "Race" linked to  "Privilege" etc. - whereby: 

• "If a White person abuses a Black (or other ethnic minority person) that is a Racist act, but if a Black (or other ethnic minority person) abuses a White person that is not a Racist act because Black and ethnic minority people do not have Privilege and the White person does have Privilege - by virtue of their position in society." 

This means that, according to Marxist-Freudian (Critical Theory), only white people can be racist - which is absurd - but it is the basis of BLM's antagonism towards white people. This system was designed by the Frankfurt School to extend the original Marx antagonism based primarily on "Class" difference to bring about revolution to more a widely distributed antagonism based upon additional societal differences - including "Class". 

BLM are working to overturn the Capitalist / Christianity based system in the USA, UK and Canada. BLM is not just active in Critical Race Theory; they cover all the Critical Theory bases, so-to-speak, particularly related to gender plus bringing down the  entire Capitalist system to replace it with a Communist dystopia. 

From a personal perspective, based upon observation of areas which have been taken over by Communism, is that it is simply regime change by another name which leads abject subjugation of the "Many" at the hands of the "Few". 

This is precisely what BLM are trying to do in the UK with their supporters in the MSM and our esteemed institutions and will be achieved more rapidly in the USA with the help of the Biden Administration.

These ideas are pursued more discretely through BLM's new political wing though - as they hope no-one will notice what they are really up to, until it is too late to stop them (Fabian Society modus operandi).  

BLM's Establishes a UK Political Party

BLM is now a registered political party in all but name. It is registered as "TTIP" 'The Taking the Initiative Party' (link). It was announced by BLMUK's leader Sasha Johnson on the 31st August 2020.  "TTIP also refers to the the Transatlantic Trade Investment Partnership" - related to proposed trade deal between the USA and the EU - this title links BLMUK with its American counter part.

In the above (link) there is a video discussion about racism in the UK, it is about 55 minutes long - but well worth it, if only for the contributions of an Iranian gentleman named Mahyar Tousi (Political YouTuber), in a live debate hosted by Turning Point UK.

BLMUK's website (link) is deliberately deceptive and does not contain the name BLM as far as I could see - it refers to being setup by business people, and offers "all things to all people". 

It is very well designed to entice practically everybody who reads it - but what it says is nothing like the reality of what is planned; which is available elsewhere online and on this website. 

Of course, this can be said about every political party but this BLM one is a real threat to the UK - it is about "Black Power" overturning the status quo and turning the UK into a Communist dystopia - see the section above, for a clear view of its real Manifesto. 

This is a very interesting and potentially dangerous website because of its potential to "suck-in" the well meaning, left-leaning virtue signallers' and many others - who perhaps have not really looked at BLM in any detail. 

Going through its Manifesto it is difficult to see anything other that what would be expected from any established politically Marxist party seeking to deceive the population, but early on it states under "Reparations" that:

"It has recently been highlighted that UK taxpayers have paid tax which has contributed to the compensation made to slave owners for the loss of property (black slaves). The British slave owners were compensated 20 million pounds in 1835 which is the equivalent of 17 billion pounds today.
Due to the country not having enough funds to pay the slave owners, the country raised bonds (borrowed money) in order to pay off the slave owners at the time. This money was paid back through UK taxpayers. This repayment of compensation has only been concluded in 2015 which would mean that everybody who has paid tax in the UK has unconsciously contributed to paying reparations to slave owners. 

What is profound about this set of circumstances is that the victims of slavery who ultimately suffered unthinkable abuse, endured extreme trauma and indiscretions have not been compensated in any way, shape, or form. It is our view that there would have to be some form of reparation for the black victims of slavery and similar to that of the Jewish community. We do not feel this is an unreasonable request from the black community for reparations to be paid in view of the circumstances." 

"Bingo! - this is the nub of the BLM movement." 

In other words BLM is mostly about money - pay up or we'll desecrate your Statues and denigrate your History etc., but actually this would only be the starting point of its ambitions. 

Even if we paid BLM £17 billion pounds (and our current government might just do that) - that would be only the start of its demands - you cannot buy-off BLM - its founders are self-proclaimed "trained Marxists" with higher ambitions (link).

Reading the rest of its Manifesto reveals that its emphasis is really about Police Reforms, Prisons and Education, in particular: "brainwashing" our young with liberal doses of Colonial "Shaming", coerced "Renunciation" of "White Privilege"and  "Cancelling" of any objector - à la  Mao's "Little Red Book".  

To illustrate BLM's infiltration into UK institutions - the recent experience of the Royal Academy of Arts (RADA) is one prime example that should concern anyone who believes that BLM is not a Marxist organisation (link).

Note: The BLM's Political website states that the Manifesto is "Preliminary" - so the "Reparations" section extract above might just disappear or be modified - as BLM have a habit of doing with their declared objectives - just to keep people onside until its too late for them to be stopped.

Do not donate to BLM or its political party - if it gains power it will bring untold misery to the UK. Please let others know the danger that BLM represents - ignore its supporters. Please distribute this article widely.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A more detailed list of BLM's objectives and ambitions is provided below:

"BLM's worldview is based on a mix of far-left theoretical frameworks, including critical race theory and intersectional theory. Critical race theory posits that racism is systemic, based on a system of white supremacy and therefore a permanent feature of American life. Intersectional theory asserts that people are often disadvantaged by multiple sources of oppression: their race, class, gender identity, sexual orientation, religion, and other identity markers.

Black Lives Matter and other purveyors of critical race theory and intersectional theory reject individual accountability for behaviour, criminal or otherwise, because, according to them, blacks are systemic and permanent victims of racism. Such racism, according to BLM, can only be defeated by completely dismantling the American economic, political and social system and rebuilding it from scratch — according to Marxist principles.

Black Lives Matter seeks to replace the foundational cornerstones of American society:      (Note: These BLM ambitions and objectives also apply to the UK)

Abolish the Traditional Nuclear Family

"In its policy agenda, Black Lives Matter states that it is committed to abolishing the traditional nuclear family:

"We disrupt the Western-prescribed nuclear family structure requirement by supporting each other as extended families and 'villages' that collectively care for one another, especially our children, to the degree that mothers, parents, and children are comfortable."

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels rejected the traditional family because, according to them, the nuclear family, as an economic unit, sustains the capitalist system. Engels wrote: "The care and education of the children becomes a public affair; society looks after all children alike, whether they are legitimate or not."

Abolish Police and Prisons

BLM states that it wants to "defund" and ultimately "abolish" police and prisons in the United States. Police officers would be replaced by educators, social workers, mental health experts and religious leaders, who, according to BLM, would bring down the levels of crime.

In an interview with Newsweek, BLM co-founder Cullors said:

"The freedom of mostly white affluent people is predicated on the unfreedom of black people. So, law enforcement is not actually used to keep black people safe. They're used to patrol, occupy, harass, abuse, often hunt and mostly, what we've seen is kill our communities.

"Policing and incarceration are part of a continuum. The policing is the first response and then incarceration is the last response. And these two systems rely on each other very, very deeply. We have to be working on getting rid of both systems."

In an interview with the Hollywood Reporter, Cullors explained that she is not merely an activist but a modern-day abolitionist:

"An abolitionist believes in a world where police and prisons are no longer weaponised as a tool for public safety."

BLM co-founder Opal Tometi, in an interview with The New Yorker, claimed that policing in America has its roots in managing slavery and therefore is systemically racist. 

She explained:

"We have been fighting and advocating to stop a war on black lives. And that is how we see it — this is a war on black life. And people understand that this system is filled with all sorts of inequality and injustice, and that implicit bias and just outright racism is embedded in the way that policing is done in this nation — and when you think about it historically, it was founded as a slave patrol. The evolution of policing was rooted in that..." (It was not founded upon slave patrols in the UK)

Polls show that most Americans — including most blacks — do not share BLM's views on abolishing the police. A recent Rasmussen's report found that 63% of American adults "regard being a police officer as one of the most important jobs in our country today." Furthermore, 64% are concerned that the current anti-police sentiment will lead to fewer people willing to become police officers, and that it will "reduce public safety in the community where they live." Importantly, according to the Rasmussen report, "Blacks (67%) are the most concerned about public safety where they live, compared to 63% of whites and 65% of other minority Americans."

Abolish Heteronormativity

BLM's policy agenda states:

"We are self-reflexive and do the work required to dismantle cisgender [a term for people whose gender identity matches their sex assigned at birth] privilege and uplift Black trans folk, especially Black trans women who continue to be disproportionately impacted by trans-antagonistic violence....

An academic study titled, "The 'Queering' of Black Lives Matter," describes in great detail how issues of sexual identity and gender orientation have taken priority over BLM's original focus on police brutality. The heavy focus on sexuality has led to accusations that BLM is "a gay movement masquerading as a black one."

Two of the three founders of BLM describe themselves as "black queer females." One, Alicia Garza, is married to a biracial transgender male. Patrice Cullors describes herself as "polyamorous." In interview after interview, Garza and Cullors raise the issue of "black trans and gender nonconforming people," often to the exclusion of police brutality.

In an interview with The New Yorker, Garza said that she is not interested in the American tradition of live and let live: "We want to make sure that people are not saying, 'Well, whatever you are, I don't care.' No, I want you to care. I want you to see all of me."

Abolish Capitalism and the "Patriarchal" System

BLM equates capitalism with racism in the same way that its Antifa cousins equate capitalism with fascism. BLM's views on capitalism are based on the concept of "racial capitalism," a term created by the late Cedric Robinson, who posited that capitalism and racism are two sides of the same coin: both are, according to Robinson, dependent on slavery, violence, imperialism, and genocide.

The British wing of Black Lives Matter UK states: "We're guided by a commitment to dismantle imperialism, capitalism, white-supremacy, patriarchy and the state structures that disproportionately harm black people in Britain and around the world."

The Movement for Black Lives (M4BL), an "ecosystem" of over 170 Black-led organizations, including BLM, states:

"We are anti-capitalist: We believe and understand that Black people will never achieve liberation under the current global racialized capitalist system."

M4BL demands "a reconstruction of the economy to ensure Black communities have collective ownership" and "a progressive restructuring of tax codes at the local, state, and federal levels to ensure a radical and sustainable redistribution of wealth."

M4BL also demands reparations for past and continuing harms:

"The government, responsible corporations and other institutions that have profited off of the harm they have inflicted on Black people — from colonialism to slavery through food and housing redlining, mass incarceration, and surveillance — must repair the harm done. This includes:

"Full and free access for all Black people (including undocumented and currently and formerly incarcerated people) to lifetime education; a guaranteed minimum livable income for all Black people; reparations for the wealth extracted from our communities through environmental racism, slavery, food apartheid, housing discrimination and racialized capitalism."

The demands of BLM and M4BL are similar to those found in the Communist Manifesto, which include:

"Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes; A heavy progressive or graduated income tax; Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan."

BLM's Immediate Demand

BLM co-founder Patrisse Cullors recently confirmed that the immediate goal is to remove U.S. President Donald J. Trump from office:

"Trump not only needs to not be in office in November, but he should resign now. Trump needs to be out of office. He is not fit for office. And so, what we are going to push for is a move to get Trump out. While we're also going to continue to push and pressure Joe Biden around his policies and relationship to policing and criminalisation. That's going to be important. But our goal is to get Trump out."

This is part of the explanation for the rioting and looting in Democratic State Cities, with the support of Democrat Mayors (where Democrat represents the political left).

2nd December 2020

Boris needs to go

Sorry Boris but the "vision" that you presented before you received your 80-seat majority last December is not the reality that you have clearly adopted since. 

I refer to your adoption of EU's HS2 project; the concreting over our country-side; leading us into ruinously expensive "Green" (leftwing) initiatives that will deprive us of our personal transport and, ultimately our freedom; your bringing in Totalitarian legislation to keep us under control and your endless negotiations with the EU - even now.

You are clearly living on a different Planet to the rest of us and I fear that our future is going to be sold for "a handful of beans" and we will be no better-off than we were with any other British politician since 1972.

Boris needs to publish the seasonal flu and Covid-19 results together for comparison since there is some doubt about what is really taking place.

1st December 2020

BLM want control of our Education System

BLM want control of the UK's curriculum taught to our children in our schools - Conservative MP Kemi Badenoch is fighting against such a move on behalf of the British people. 

According to the Daily Express:  

"Several campaigns have emerged in the past few months urging the Government to 'decolonise' the British history curriculum to provide students with more balance teaching. 

But Ms Badenoch suggested some of the proponents of the change have rather been pushing for a more divisive approach." 

Speaking to BBC podcast Political Thinking, the Equality Minister said: 

• "I look at what my daughter’s taught and it’s completely different. 'I wouldn’t want her to have what I had but what she is being taught is a history that just can’t be separated from European or white history, and which has an oppression narrative around it'." 

• "'So, I had in my history lesson both good and bad black people, people who did good things and people who did bad things'." 

What is being Proposed

BLM is enveloped in the Mantra of "All Black people are Good" and All White people are Bad". Which is the essence of "Critical Race Theory"

(feel free to insert any minority for "Black" in the above artificial characterisation).

One  particular target of the campaigns is the British Empire:

• "The history of the British Empire and the role the UK played at the height of colonisation has particularly attracted the fury of activists demanding the curricula is overhauled completely." 

However, "Protests in the UK have resulted in campaigners demanding universities, schools and institutions review their internal policies on lessons about controversial historical figures." 

Most worrying are the number of prestigious schools who seem to be "bowing" to the BLM rhetoric; including - "Ampleforth, Fettes, Winchester and St Paul's who "are believed to be 'formulating new approaches' to instruct their students about the history of colonisation." 

What is really Happening?

Since BLM founder's are self-proclaimed "Trained Marxists who are 'super-versed' in Marxist Theory" (see earlier BLM Blog post below), it is reasonable to assume that they are using George Orwell's "Animal Farm" and "1984"etc. as "playbooks" /  or for guidance, in particular some of his quotations, such as:

• "Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." 

which succinctly summarises BLM's activities and ambitions.

The curriculum is an obvious target, as is the removal of statues etc. 

But it is much worse than that because we get a glimpse of how controlling these lessons would be and how they would permeate our education system entirely. 

This can be shown from evidence of such control in Seattle, Washington, USA - where "Diversity Trainers" assault unsuspecting White people with Marxist rhetoric and shame them for being White and privileged. Then coerce from them an abject apology for their transgression (being White) in front of their Peers. 

It is interesting, at least in Seattle that the classification of "White" included "Arabs' and "Jews" even though "Critical Race Theory" was devised by Jews - who were kicked out of Germany by Adolf Hitler and subsequently setup in the American education system (Initially at Columbia University and later some moved to California).

Meanwhile, "Diversity Officers" in the UK already prowl the corridors of power, the Media, our Institutions and our Politics - while collecting salaries of £110,000 courtesy of the taxpayer. 

Note that President Trump stopped funding the teaching of "Critical Theory" in the US at a federal level - but they are currently operating in the UK!

For "Diversity ... " read Mao Zedong's "Red Guard" equivalent who apply Racist "Critical Theory" rhetoric with the customary zeal of ... well, Maoist Zealots between 1966 - 1976. 

Their methods copy those in Mao's "Little Red Book" (a favourite of the Labour Party's  John McDonnell, and no doubt many others in the UK establishment). 

McDonnell is famous for calling for "insurrection" in the UK following the Grenfell Tower Fire tragedy in 2017. Whereas the then Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn simply called for the confiscation of "private property" - which is straight out of the first Soviet Constitution by the Bolsheviks in 1918. Talk about living in the past. 

Remember also that a good number of teachers are also not averse to singing "Oh Jeremy Corbyn" and acting with their Unions they are happy to shut down the UK economy by calling for schools to close unnecessarily.

So there is a contingent of teachers more than happy to teach or encourage the teaching of "Critical Race Theory" to our children and help further undermine the UK population.

• See the article by David Cann about the experience of BLM's influence in the Royal Academy of Dramatic Art (RADA) (link) for more about the techniques of "shaming", "cancelling" and "coercion" that would be used in our schools if BLM got a chance - they have already infiltrated the US education system.

BLM and its supporters would take over the entire education system, backed-up by other Marxist groups in the UK - including the Labour Party, SNP, LibDems and Greens plus many others, including those within "Blair's Government in Exile" (Civil Service, Quangos/NGOs and Charities etc.).

• "The most effective way to destroy people is to deny and obliterate their understanding of their History"

Hopefully, some or all of our prestigious education establishments, as well as all other schools, will think twice about inviting those - who wish the UK population only harm within a Totalitarian experience - into their establishments. 

Critical Race Theory - Summary

Examples of how "Critical Theory" is applied in practice can be seen from the Frankfurt School’s actions. These can be characterised in the 13-point plan to subvert Western Civilisation (Christianity and Capitalism):

1. The creation of racism offences.

2. Continual change to create confusion.

3. The teaching of sex and deviant sexuality to children.

4. The undermining of schools’ and teachers’ authority.

5. Mass immigration to destroy identity.

6. The promotion of excessive drinking.

7. The emptying of churches.

8. An unreliable legal system with a bias against victims of crime.

9. Dependency on the state or state benefits.

10. Control and dumbing down of Education and the Media. 

11. Encouraging the breakdown of the family unit.

12. Using Equality Legislation to create inequality.

13. Human Rights legislation to prevent deportation of criminals.

Anyone recognise the Labour Party's only real Manifesto! or some of the methods being used by the UN ( currently dominated by Communist China) others including BLM to bring about a Totalitarian Communist world government?

How did it develop?

By the 1950's Marxism in its original form ("class-based" antagonism) designed to foment Revolution had been largely abandoned. 

A substitute for the "working class" as the key element for creating conflict between the "classes" was found within the works of Marx and  those of Freud. These combined ideas provided many more opportunities for creating conflict and disorder within developed Capitalist, Christian societies. 

These resulted in the invented forms of Racial, Gender and Environmental activism (stirred-up antagonism) - which have been far more effective than traditional "Class based Marxism":

• "Critical Theory originated from Immanuel Kant’s Critical Philosophy. Critical Philosophy states that 'proper inquiry is not about what is out there in reality, but rather about the character and foundations of experience itself'.” 

• "Critical Philosophy is the basis of Feminist Studies, Gender Studies, Queer Theory, Critical Race Theory — basically, every “woke” college course out there." 

• "Black Lives Matter is Critical Race Theory in action. BLM activists seek to tear down “white supremacy” by tearing down the police, tearing down statues, and tearing down businesses. Feminist Theory and Queer Theory seek to tear down “the patriarchy” by tearing down the family, motherhood, and marriage. Gender Studies seeks the destruction of gender roles and the dichotomy between the male-female genders. Even the selection of a new Supreme Court Justice warrants the call to “burn the entire f***ing thing down.”  ... (link)

Understanding the reasons behind the made up theories (pseudo-science) within "Critical Theory" (effectively the theory of criticising) provides a way to guard against its further influence. 

Refuse to bow to it and at all times ridicule its proponents and its false message. Most of all do not donate or support them, do not kneel to them and do not give them any credibility. Stop the public funding of "Diversity Officers" in the UK.