UKIP leaders – wrongly – fail to support “non-Politically Correct” Bloom!

Following a comment from UKIPs Godfrey Bloom, in which he complained about aid money going “Bongo-Bongo” land, the Guardian and the rest of the “Politically Correct” Brigade have launched a widely publicised personal assault on him for using the term “Bongo-Bongo!”.

Personally, because I was born in a time before “Political Correctness” I have never considered this term extremely derogatory, as it doesn’t apply to anyone, although I can understand some “very insecure” people might do.

Popular media have used the term “Bongo-Bongo land” for decades:

It conjures up a picture of a land where the people dress not dissimilar from traditional Zulu’s, and dance to the beat of African drums… Beyond that, it also implies a country which is ruled by an all-powerful tribal chief …not much different from a central American “Banana Republic” where they are ruled by greedy dictators.

Bongo-Bongo may be a bit “colonial” for some taste’s, but at the end of the day, this is a descriptive term illustrating an old-fashioned idea of Africa: An idea which has been universally spread by various comics, books and TV shows, such as Tarzan, and even Tom and Jerry, as well as many other popular Hollywood films, (King-Kong, Zulu, etc etc..)

Back in 1948, Danny Kaye and the Andrew sisters, made a song about Bongo Bongo, and one of the most popular and funny cinema adverts in the 1970s, (albeit for “non-politically correct” cigarettes), was based in Mbongoland

Um Bongo, was also the name of a very popular soft drink in the 1990s… and to my knowledge no African person has ever complained!

Before “political correctness” i.e. before those idiots who ran “New Labour” got into power, various terms were widely used. and although I admit curtailing the use of some “unreasonable and offensive” terms, is fair enough. However, Political correctness is now severely affecting our basic right to use Free speech.

Poiltical correctness is a disease which is eradicating our right to speak “normally”, and for those of us who are a little older, it is hard not to use words which were generally acceptable in our youth.

The term “Bongo-Bongo land” is not a personal attack on anyone or any country, and it is almost comical that Labour politicians, and the socialist media, would pick-up on the use of this term, and succeed in making it a massive political issue.

Godfrey Bloom is no fan of “politically correctness”, he is an old-fashioned Yorkshire man, who uses basic terms to tell it as he sees it, and in all fairness, what he said in his speech, concerning foreign aid, is not far from the truth:

We cannot, as an “almost bankrupt” country, or indeed continent, continue to give massive amounts of “unaccounted for” aide, to commodity-rich countries, when we ALL know certain leaders of these countries are abusing the home-grown wealth … or abusing the money we send as aid, by increasing the size of their oppressive military.

(An amazing example of this misuse of funds was made evident by the President of Gabon, a certain President “Ali Bongo”, who in 2010 bought a 100-million euro house in Paris, (whilst his country men were living on less than 12 euro a day!))

I noted that, whilst there is much media criticism of Godfrey Bloom’s attack on a “non-existent” country, no one complained or wishes to debate his attacks on “real” countries, such as Pakistan and Argentina.

It would appear that arguing against the “economic reality” and the “facts” he stated in his hour long speech, was not possible – So, once again, Anti-UKIP people are attacking the man, not the issue.

However, what upset me the most was the way that the socialist media; the Guardian and SKY TV, for the first time, were able to set the agenda for UKIP, and sucked our leadership into criticising “Godders”, when they should have been supporting him and making a better “fist” of returning Foreign Aid to the centre of the argument.

Nigel Farage is “allegedly”, a bit embarrassed about this comment, and has asked Bloom not to repeat the term. But I am sure this is not because of any serious objection to what was said, but probably because he, Farage, criticised an Italian’s politicians use of the term, and now finds its use, by a senior party official, a little awkward.

The media look for any excuse to play the “racist” card, in their effort to stop UKIP’s rise in popularity, And sadly, for some “unfathomable” reason, Nigel and Party Chairman, Steve Crowther decided to make a knee-jerk decision on this minor issue.

In my opinion, they should have attacked the press and made a better effort to backed “Godders” (Seeing Crowther “bowing down” to Sky TVs, Kate Burley, was a low point of my year!)

It is a well known fact that, UKIP wants “multi-cultural” Britain to leave what is evidently; a mainly, “white-run” EU.

Moreover, UKIP strongly believe “Britain would be better-off leaving the EU and strengthening our trading links with our Commonwealth partners, for “mutual gain””.

How on earth can this be considered a racist policy or Party?

There are simply no reasonable grounds to continually accuse UKIP of being a “nationalist” or “racist” party. It is a party that is simply anti-EU and very patriotic. More to the point, UKIP can proudly boast of having numerous members and candidates who can from all ethnic and religious backgrounds!

This is what Crowther “should have stuck” down Kate Burley’s throat!

The socialists won a small victory today, because in reality, the media claims did not deserve an answer, yet alone an apology.

Are people really concerned about Godfrey Blooms political correctness? or are they rightly concerned about what happens to the €1-billion a month that goes out in foreign aid, and is “never accounted for?”

In my view, people are becoming increasingly annoyed with this constant focus on being “politically correct”. Moreover, I do believe that Godfrey Bloom’s comments might have attracted more people to the party: There are a lot of intelligent people yet to join, who are concerned about the “real” issues, and are becoming increasingly frustrated by all this worthless, socialist, PC bullshit!

Nigel Farage recently repeated that “UKIP is not a party which favours Political correctness”…so let’s keep it that way!

We hold the economic, political and moral high-ground over the LibLabCon’s. Not just because we always proven correct on the tough issues. But also because we dare to speak the truth to the people in a way they understand and appreciate

We stumbled today, but I am sure it wont happen again..,


A Good Team For Povoa de Varzim!

My main political interest lays within what’s happening in the UK, and looking at the macro picture; such as the economic mess in peripheral European countries.

However, I do believe that there are still a lot of things which can be done, at the “local level” to help small towns and the businesses and people in these towns, to grow and thrive. Providing we find the right people – irrespective of political allegiance – to do the jobs necessary!

Take my small town, Povoa de Varzim, in the north of Portugal, as an example.

Here we have an amazing seaside resort, one of the best golf courses outside of the Algarve, a Casino, beautiful and productive countryside; its 15 minutes from an international airport and just a short train ride into the heart of Porto. It is a great place to live, work and visit!

Yet for years the Town Hall acts as if no one wants to come here. It is rarely promoted to foreign visitors, some of the poor developments stink of crony-capitalism, and instead of Portuguese people enjoying the benefits that this town should be offering, bad planning and bad promotion is sucking the life blood out of the town.

This inefficiency is not helping anyone locally – especially in the tough times Portugal is going through – and whilst the national politics is still undoubtedly a mess, local people now appreciate that it is time to change the way things are done in Povoa de Varzim.

In September, we have elections in Povoa de Varzim for a new Mayor, and as the race heats up, one group of people are doing everything they can to get into office, so they can make the necessary changes the county is crying-out for.

ImageThe local candidate for Mayor, Jorge Quintas Serrano, is not a “crony-politician”, who goes around offering certain people deals in return for their support; he does not tell people how wonderful he is, nor does he make false promises to the party faithful and electorate about what he is going to do for the town.

He is a team player, who prefers to stand on a platform with his whole team: a young dynamic team of people, with diversified interests and expertise, which – when elected – will have ample ability and depth to attack Povoa de Varzim’s various problems head on.

He will move the Town Hall away from a culture of “crony-ism”, something which has plagued to town for decades, and he will use his teams, expertise, dedication, and integrity, to do the right thing.

They have a simple aim to put Povoa de Varzim on the map, bringing pride back to its citizens, and attract foreign visitors and investors. And they want to do it in a way that everyone benefits! A simply aim, but lots of hard work!

In today’s political world of spin and false promises, what I like about Jorge and his team, is that there are no egos, no self-interest; i.e. they are not interested in how much they can make from Povoa de Varzim.

The whole team has a genuine desire to do what is truly best for the whole county.

I have been to a few of their gatherings, and for a small team, their knowledge and expertise in a broad range of pertinent subjects is really impressive.

Jorge comes from a well-known, long-established, local industrialist family, yet he chose to work outside the family business and join Deloitte as an accountant, and has always dedicated himself to influence the town for the good. Amongst those I have met in his team, the diversity was impressive, not only the normal economists and lawyers, but it includes bankers, farmers, people from the fishing community and medical experts.

But most importantly, whilst they are focused on bringing wealth and security back to the people of Povoa de Varzim through improved commercial activity, his No. 2 is a woman who has dedicated much of her life running a local charity, supporting those young people in Povoa de Varzim who have needed the most help; someone with a proven track-record of “working with the minimum amount of money to do the maximum amount of good – for others”!

ImageAs I said earlier, this team includes the perfect ingredients to not only make Povoa de Varzim a more dynamic and prosperous town, it is a team which is showing itself to have the interests of others in their hearts. A team that are genuinely willing to work hard and sacrifice their own time for the betterment of their community.

It is obvious that all candidates in the upcoming elections will talk of how good they are going to be for Povoa de Varzim, and will use every argument and tactic to get themselves elected. But what were interesting were my conversations with local people, especially those who have traditionally voted for other candidates and parties.

Everyone in Povoa de Varzim knows that things have to improve, and want a massive change in the Town Hall, and obviously many want their own candidate or party to win. But during my conversations I have heard no one criticise this team led by Jorge Quintas Serrano.

Many have said it is an interesting team, a strong team, and even those who have said they cannot support it because of their national political affiliations, are extremely interested to see how successful this team will be – because many local residents do believe – if he is elected – Jorge and his team will be a positive change for the county.

In my opinion, if this is what your opponents say about you, then you must be doing the right thing!

Make no mistake, the road ahead is going to be very difficult for all Portuguese, and Povoa de Varzim will be no exception.

But if the local people look beyond the political situation at the national level, they will realise that to get the town moving in the right direction, the Town Hall needs a lot of fresh new blood.

It needs a young dynamic team of local people who will be around a long time and can steer Povoa de Varzim, through the rough waters ahead.

The team Jorge Quintas Serrano has put together is a team which is ideally suited for that job, and it is a team which is young enough and fit enough to make things work.

As a foreigner, I do not get involved in local or national politics, but as a resident of this potentially great town, it is in my interest to know what is going on and have an interest in the future direction of my adopted home…

I am sure that if people look at the facts, look at what the Town needs, and look at the strength, focus and integrity of this Candidate and this team, and vote it into office at the next election, Povoa de Varzim will have a bright future ahead, and irrespectively of the direction the country takes.

The truth about the Thatcher years!

I saw people posting anti-Thatcher songs by the singer Morrissey, who entertains – but is undoubtedly “morally challenged”; I have read articles by Russell Brand; who is known not for his intellect, but for his insulting behaviour and the free use of his “dick” on young starlets; And I watched a “disgraceful” performance by Glenda Jackson: a woman who became a Millionaire-actress, living in Hollywood during the Thatcher years, whose venomous comments on Lady Thatcher – on a day chosen for making tribute to our only female Prime minister – were completely inappropriate.

And there are a host of other “entertainers” who made a lot of money out of attacking Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s who today are making comments to our young people. Sadly, much of it is untrue or half-truths!

I think, this lying by popular and influential “celebrities” on political issues is dangerous and irresponsible.

So I would like to put the record straight – albeit from my perspective as a Thatcherite and a person who was a young man during the Thatcher years. Unlike many “celebrities”, I didn’t get paid for telling jokes or writing songs about Thatcher, I worked in the world of economics and remembers very well what life was like before and after she came to power.

I hope that once certain “myths” are dispelled, hopefully our younger citizens can make up their own minds – based more on the facts than on celebrity “spin”!

I will start with Trade Unions and explain how damaging these have been for the British society.

During the Second World War, Durham coal miners were “excused military duty”. Yet whilst many other brave-men were dying, fighting for their country, these miners went on strike for more money.

Under Labour, from 1945 to 1979, the number of miners in the UK dropped from 750,000 to 220,000, mainly because continually higher “labour” costs made it more economical to import coal from other countries.

Mining in the UK, like the Steel industry and many others, was a nationalised industry. And the high salaries paid to these workers cost the country billions, and made power so expensive in the UK, that many of our factories became uncompetitive, costing massive job losses in the wealth creating private industry.

In 1980, the nationalised Steel Industry, which is heavily reliant on coal, was losing £580 million a year, it was in £5-billion worth of debt (which the tax-payer lost) and yet, the Steel workers went on strike for a 20% increase in salary. This is why the industry collapsed.

Nationalised industries were everywhere; the government (or the tax-payer) even owned removal companies and hotels. Most of which were losing money – tax-payers money!

We used to have a massive dock-workers industry – which my own family was part of – but continual strikes, caused wide-scale shortages and disruptions. Ultimately, this industrial action led to the wide-use of containers, and eventually the loss of thousands of dock-workers jobs.

By 1979, the power of undemocratic Union’s, had brought down both the Heath and the Callaghan governments, and as I mentioned in a previous article, this had caused the country to go bankrupt.

These are but a few examples of what was really happening in the UK, BEFORE Thatcher came to power: Examples which many young socialists didn’t experience, and many older socialists “choose” to ignore.

Another popular cultural myth our younger generations should know…

Whilst most Punk Rockers will claim to hate Maggie and what she did to the UK, Punk Rock was before Margaret Thatcher. Real Punks, i.e. The Sex Pistols, Souxsie and the Banshee’s, and Billy Idol, were from 1972 to 1977.

After this time, “Punk Rock” got “hi-jacked” by capitalist producers and the Media, who chose to attack Thatcher, when she became “the establishment”. (Unlike those claiming different, I was a teenager and a big fan during this period, so its first-hand knowledge). Sid Vicious joined The Sex Pistols in 1977, and died in ’79; before Thatcher came to power.

What is important about this cultural reference is that “Punk Rock” came out of despair, despair the country was in, BEFORE Thatcher.

It was big business who attacked Thatcher when she got into power. Media nd Entertainment people attacked her to make money for themselves, and that is why younger people are fooled into thinking “it was all Maggie’s Fault”..It wasn’t, but lots of people in entertainment made a lot of money out of selling these lies to the young!

Another Myth I can “burst”, is about Thatcher’s creation of “YUPPIES”. (Young, Upwardly-mobile, professionals)

I first heard this term in the Early 1980’s. And on hearing what it meant, I realised I had been a “Yuppie” since 1974!

Having left school with just one “O-Level”, in Statistics, I somehow got a job in an investment bank, Merrill Lynch: The World’s biggest Broker!

In all honesty, when I went to the interview I knew absolutely nothing about stock markets, foreign exchange or, which is very strange today, I had never heard the use of the word “commodities”. The phrase “Capital Markets” had not been coined at that time.

Anyway, after a few years in this business, I – a young “Cockney” boy – was mixing with people making millions, and working with people making 1000’s of pounds every month (a lot of money back then). And by 1979, I was making a very good income, working – in all honesty – about 3 or 4 hours a day!

But there is more to the story than that.

I was one of the very few “uneducated” people working in this business, it was generally considered a “closed-shop”, i.e. most of the guys I worked with had good educations and came from a “professional” family back-ground: bankers, lawyers, doctors.

After Maggie came to power, the doors on this business were opened to people with “ability”. The closed-shop or “Old-boy” networks were broken, and I witnessed, literally thousands of people enter the business from various backgrounds. Some of who made fortunes!

I know, because I was there, on the inside: under Thatcher, class structures were broken down. People got opportunity on “merit” – not because of who their parents were.

Therefore, Maggie destroyed “class-privilege”, she didn’t create it!

Another contentious issue is housing. And I hear lots of people claiming Maggie stopped building council houses.

Firstly, anyone who claims home ownership is wrong is lying to themselves. Most of our personal wealth is tied up in the homes we own and cherish.

Under Maggie, home ownership increased from 50% to over 70%. And many people have benefited greatly from being able to buy their first property, at a discount price, due to Thatcher.

But what they fail to appreciate, is that under Thatcher government 80/81, spending on council property represented 5.9% of all government spending, whilst under Tony Blair’s labour government, this reach a low of 1.3% in 1999/2000 (and only stood at 2.7% in 2008/09)… These figures reveal clearly the lies being retold by socialist “Thatcher haters!”.

The greatest error during the “Thatcher years”, was the introduction of the Poll-tax, which caused untold civil-unrest across the country and was eventually changed.

As a “single-occupier” of a house, I was slightly better-off when this tax was introduced, however, many did suffer, and that is why it was changed.

But today, too many are claiming “Maggie created” this massive problem…when in actual fact, the rate of Poll-tax was set by local governments: and the majority of local governments who increased the rate, to a level where it did untold damage, were Labour run councils.

And I will make another observation on the Poll-tax which many choose to ignore.

In the 1970s, the UK experienced a massive influx of immigrants. It was still a very racialist society at its core, and a lot of people, especially those living in areas where immigrants settled, made claims that “it was unfair that “the house next-door was paying the same rates, but had 5-immigrants per bedroom!”.

Rightly or wrongly, this was very much the view of many people, and the poll-tax, i.e. taxing houses based on the number of occupants, was a way of addressing many people’s views on “what was fair or not”, at the time.

Looking back on this today, especially in “multi-cultural” Britain, is difficult to admit this view existed – but none of us who were there, cannot claim this was not the widely held view at the time!

There can be no question that during the early years of her government, life for the average UK citizen was difficult. But we had to pay off our national debts, and she had to “wrestle” power back from the “undemocratic” trade unions – if she hadn’t democracy would have been lost!

Personally, I am upset at our joining of the Common Market, but that is because of what it has become today. At the time Margaret Thatcher joined, it was a trading block – indeed she fought “tooth and nail” to stop this obscene EU becoming the “political” power over British law it is today. And let is not forget, Thatcher negotiated a rebate from the EU which saved British tax-payers £75-billion. Every Prime Minister since, especially Tony Blair, has conceded to give more of our Tax-money to the EU, and conceded more Westminster power to Brussels.

I will concede that not everything Thatcher did was perfect, she made mistakes and errors, and during here period in office, not everyone benefited. But our young need to understand the truth and not the “spin” about the Thatcher years – not what some group of millionaire, “know-nothing”, champagne-socialists, celebrities, want to claim.

As a final note, everything I have stated in this article are checkable facts, they are written with my bias, as I am attempting to put the record straight, but everything mentioned is true.

I will finish on the first headline which made Maggie famous…

”Mrs Thatcher: the Milk-Snatcher!”

Margaret Thatcher was not responsible for this cut in providing “free-milk at schools”, it was a change introduced in 1970, by the then Chancellor of the Exchequer, Iain Macleod, who died the same year. (his budget was passed 11-days after his death, by Ted Heaths government)… As the newly appointed Minister of education, Mrs Thatcher had to enforce this law – she didn’t create it!

Still, it was a great headline, one I wish I had written!

People may argue about my views on Thatcher…but I challenge them to argue with the facts I have written in this article.

A Response to disrespectful “Leftard’s”!

Baroness Margaret Thatcher. A personal view of a “GREAT” Britain!

The death of Britain’s greatest “peace-time” Prime Minister has been marked all around the world. Leaders from both the left and the right of the political spectrum have shown “massive respect and admiration” for the Baroness.

However, in the UK we have seen ignorant, young socialists, celebrating Thatcher’s maggie1death, which for me, is totally beyond comprehension. Was she not human? Is she not a mother and Grandmother?

The ignorance of young British “Leftards”, (and indeed, of those who are old enough to know better) was clearly exposed yesterday, and as usual, it came from those so-called “respectful, equality-loving, and tax-sucking”, socialists.

Anyone who can remember the UK in the 1970s – and the majority of these idiots cannot – would find it hard not to have some respect and admiration for what Thatcher achieved for her nation.

When Thatcher came to power, Trade Unions had taken over the UK, the country was on its knees, and the Labour Party had been forced to go to the IMF to borrow money, just to keep the country going.

There were power and water shortages; rubbish was not being collected; and many people were forced to work a 3-day week: Britain was, in the 70s, called “the sick-man of Europe!”

Britain was in a similar financial situation to what Portugal is suffering today!

The successive, male-dominated, and weak governments of: Wilson, Heath, and Callaghan, could do nothing to control the Unions, and because of this, the outlook for the country was extremely bleak.

Then, out of the blue, along came this woman: a Methodist grocer’s daughter from Grantham. Who took on her own party, and the nation, and turned the country around.

She broke the power of the Unions, she paid off the nations debts and she created a country where business flourished and people – through hard work – could become wealthy, irrespective of background.

Obviously, to achieve this, she upset a lot of people. Unionists didn’t like her, her own party didn’t like her breaking the “old-boy” network, and the belt-tightening she inflicted on many, obviously didn’t help her to become too popular. But, nonetheless, she doggedly stuck to her goals, and eventually the country became all the better for it.

Beyond the country’s borders, she defended the UK and its sovereignty. She was never friends with Chancellor Kohl or President Mitterrand, (who wanted the UK to become part of the Euro-zone), but she did believe in Europe – or at least the idea of a European Common Market – as long as it didn’t challenge the authority of elected sovereign governments.

thatcher1She survived assassination attempts by the IRA, she defended the Falkland Islands from Argentinian Invaders, and through her diplomatic prowess, brought America and Russia together: allowing for an end to the Cold-War, and a re-unification of Germany.

Not all of her actions were popular, and the introduction of a “poll-tax” is considered to have been a grave error, but this mistake only proves the woman was human.

As she stated herself, when she finally left office after 11 years, “I leave No.10 knowing the country is in a far better place than it was when I arrived”. And this was so obviously true.

The media claim Thatcher had been an extremely “divisive” Prime Minister. What they mean is she was right and those against her – who were predominantly wrong – she simply ignored, and because of this, they didn’t like her.

At the end of her days, Thatcher suffered dementia after losing her husband Denis. But she was always respected by her peers, Every one of her successors have inviting her back to No.10 and all have openly testified that “for the benefit of the country” Thatcher had always been “very supportive” of them whilst in office.

British people either like or hate Margaret Thatcher, but around the world she is broadly respected.

Amazingly a small minority of ignorant socialists in the UK, including the evil socialist media: such as the BBC, The Mirror, and the Guardian, are celebrating her death and attempting to throw shit at her phenomenal achievements.

It goes without saying, that none of Thatcher’s critic’s have done anything for their country. So like the proverbial “empty drum”, all they are doing is just making a loud and annoying, noise.

When watching or reading the media, people would be well advised to realise that we live in a society where we celebrate “celebrity” and scorn achievement, and that, journalists and entertainers get paid – or receive other benefits – for giving opinion to the public. Indeed these people will say any outlandish rubbish to get paid, because unlike Thatcher, they produce absolutely no wealth, except for themselves.

The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) and the other socialist media are giving a platform for these “know-nothing” celebrities to spout ignorant rubbish about the Thatcher years, and the young members of the general public are being misinformed.bbcsocialists

Too much rubbish has been said about Margaret Thatcher over the past 2-days. Especially when the BBC ignorantly claim its reports, will: explain the truth about “what Thatcher did for the country”, or “what Thatcher’s legacy “really” is”.

Sadly, their reports are far from true and full of propaganda and biased socialist shit.

The real truth about Thatcher is:

Thatcher put people back to work, Thatcher paid off the UK’s debts, Thatcher gave the UK some respect on the global stage, Thatcher helped destroy communism. Thatcher permitted millions of Brit’s to own their own homes, establish their own businesses and – through removing government interference and responsibility – allowed people the freedom to pursue their own dreams.

Thatcher was a libertarian. But when she came to power, she had to make harsh decisions, because the country was in debt, and she knew: without the country paying off its debts, the UK could never be free.

Of course, lazy socialist Brit’s didn’t like Austerity and having to pay the costs. However, you just need to look around Europe today, and you can see that Thatcher was right!

Moreover, it is evidently obvious, that the further people move away from “Thatcher-ism”, the worse every one’s life becomes.

I remember the UK before Thatcherism, it wasn’t good…and it is not too good today, either.

So how come so many people are complaining about what she did.

They are either ill-informed or ignorant, or they just refuse to understand that; without Thatcher, life has slowly become worse.

reaganWe know Americans and Russians are happy the Cold-War is over. Also that and all East European countries – prosperous or not – are happy to be “free” in their own country. This happiness is largely due to Margaret Thatcher’s massive role in helping to destroy communism.

Today her economic influence can be seen all around the world, where free “sovereign” countries are prospering through following the lessons of “Thatcherism”. (And those who aren’t are not!)

It was Thatcher that made “personal freedom and the assumption of responsibility” valuable. And it is probably because of this, that “ignorant socialists” hate her so much…

Of course, as a “Thatcherite”, her passing is a sad loss for me.thatchers family

But Thatcher was also a mother and a Grand-mother.

I believe her family deserve a far better tribute than that being offered by the “Champagne swilling” media.

As for the disgraceful reaction coming from ignorant socialist “plebs and chav’s”. That says much more about them, than it says about the “Blessed” Margaret!

RIP Maggie.

Guest Blog: In Multi-racial Britian, discussing racial difference should not be Taboo!

An Article written by Banti Singh . (visit his blog)

I’ve noticed, when dealing with racism (or inequality), all we do is attack the symptoms, never the cause. The core cause(s) will take a different blog post to explain, and I might come to it another time, but here I’ve tried to delve into why our reactions to the symptoms are part of the problem. This post is a result of a recent Twitter rant. I’m prone to a lot of these lately…
For the purposes of this post, the word ‘race’ should be taken to mean ‘culture’ and ‘religion’ as well. Pakistanis, Indians, Bangladeshis, some Persians and some Sri Lankans may essentially be of the same ethnic stock with fairly similar cultural and to a large extent religious values, but the insidious, divide-and-rule, new-age political nomenclature – a clever bundling of three very different words into one political theme – is a triumph of the Left. We’ve all fallen for it.

One of the ways vested interests feed into the problem of racism is focusing on the differences between people. That is the wrong approach. We have more in common with people of other races than we don’t. THAT is never exploited. Mainly because it makes no money. The very public flogging of anyone who dares to ask an uncomfortable question makes it worse, and exacerbates differences.

“Political correctness is a very dangerous force. If people can’t speak their minds, conversations become muted & debate withers.” (Dr Carson)

Exposure to other cultures by force isn’t a solution. That must come naturally, however long it takes. We must celebrate what we have in common. What makes us different will take care of itself. It’ll take longer, but it will be solid.

I’d like to make a few points:

Firstly, the common thinking about bludgeoning people into ‘understanding’ other races is counter-productive. Secondly, the more you highlight the differences, the more divide you create. And thirdly, this approach reinforces and strengthens the ‘race relations’ industry. Many have profited from it and continue to do so.

This is nothing short of exploitation. It may have started benign, but the unintended consequences have been more division. Before anything else, we are human beings trying to eke out an existence. Customs and culture are essentially a fleeting social construct. Our differences are mainly geographical evolution, more than anything else. While the Leftons may have their heart in the right place, but this manufactured drive to ‘equality’ turns it into a different beast altogether. Humans are no different from animals fighting for territorial rights; this extends to the abstract realm of the mind as well. And that is where the Leftons/Socialists get it wrong. Or deliberately exploit it. All religions preach love, understanding working together, etc. What they don’t teach is tolerance. The Leftons fall into the same trap.

Human nature has this amazing capacity to adapt, to learn and to evolve mentally, which is why we are successful as a species. All this is natural, it’s basic instinct. Social engineering may be a good idea on paper, socialism may sound great in theory, but it goes against every human instinct. Wherever an artificially constructed social set up is imposed or enforced, it fails. The Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, North Korea, China – are typical examples of the kind of dystopia it leads to. Of course the Left use clever words to distance themselves from such tyrannies, but common sense says otherwise.

So, coming to my point – I don’t think it is the business of a bunch of do-gooders to tell us how we treat our fellow man. I believe it is down to my fellow man to ensure I get him. To make sure I get his point of view and his cultural beliefs. If people buy it, great. If people don’t, it dies. If it dies, it deserves to die.

Widow remarriage, for example. Widow remarriage was a no-no in most cultures. It is still is in many cultures, despite what the law says. An elderly Indian widower (aged 60+) I know, recently married an elderly widow (also 60+). Both have successful, educated, grown up children, with children of their own. Prior to the marriage, both were living alone – the kids had moved out years ago. Guess what? Neither’s children have taken to this kindly. The couple are pretty much outcasts. In private most people within their family circles applaud this, but when in groups, they deride them. Snide comments like “Marriage at this age!”, “Have they no shame?” are commonplace. This, in 2013. This, in the United Kingdom. There is nothing any kind of legislation or law can do to fix that.

There are places in Benaras (India) where widows are sent to live out the rest of their days, regardless of how old they are. Ostracised and secluded, like a nunnery and in extreme poverty, dependant only on alms. Of course the Leftons will never point that aspect of Hindu society in a negative light. They won’t even acknowledge it. And then there’s the slave trade. I once asked a question: “I wonder how many Black people were involved in the slave trade?” I lost over 40 followers, including 2 MPs, two of which DM-ed me before unfollowing me saying they objected to the question being asked. The truth is, there can be no buyer without a seller. The slave trade, while banned in the west – BY the west – continues in the Arab world. It started centuries before Europeans and Americans joined in. There’s evidence, of course – in pretty much all the holy books of the region. The slave trade continues in India, a lot of Africa, Russia – In 2013, you can BUY humans. BUY. And sell. I recently read about incidences of slavery in modern day Britain. In the present day. Largely ignored under the umbrella of cultural rights.

Many years ago, there was a practice in Indian culture called ‘Sati’. Under Sati, when a man died, his wife was burned along with him on the funeral pyre. Understandably, the British banned it. Sati still exists, but it is exceedingly rare. It is against the law in India and carries the severest of penalties. I’ll concede, this is an extreme example, but Sati falls into the same category as arranged marriages, attitudes towards women, polygamy, inhumane slaughter of animals, forced marriages, enforced dress codes, FGM – and forced religious adherence. The Mughals – under Akbar – did ban Sati first, but then Akbar was hardly the stereotypical Muslim, was he?

We Brits have an awesome sense of self-deprecation. This great for comedy, but for it to dominate political and social thinking. Not good. Not when it serves to brush everything under the carpet under the shame of the Empire. Just move the fuck on.

My thoughts on this whole race relations thing? Well here goes –

Equality, in the manner of Leftonspeak is nonsense. We NEED differences. Those differences NEED to rub against each other. The resulting friction is where the society learns it’s lessons. The learning from that friction is permanent. We need to BELIEVE something is good. Not blindly follow what we’re told is good. This is how evolution works. In the process, some practices and customs – quaint as they are – will die out. They deserve to. Differences of class and wealth are the sole source of aspiration. If we as humans do not have anything to aspire to, we are finished. The arrogance of the Leftons comes from their assumption that they’ve got the human condition all sussed out. They bloody haven’t. Bring me ANY idealistic Lefton, give me half an hour and I’ll show you a contradiction. And I’m not even ‘educated’, goddamnit!

I for one fit (or fitted) into many neatly divided ‘client groups’. Minority, asylum seeker, refugee, unemployed, ESOL, I rejected them all. Okay, I’ve had to live with epithets of ‘angrez-di-aulad’, ‘coconut’ and ‘sellout’, but they came from bigots. While I fight this battle against the ignorant who don’t know better, it’s painful to have to fight it against the educated Left wingers, who should know better.

And then there’s immigration. Immigration is an easy bandwagon. And the laziest form of politics ever. Walking to my office this morning, I spotted 4 vacancies advertised in shop windows – in one of the sleepiest high streets in West London. Guess who’s going to fill those vacancies? Immigrants. I’ll report back in a few days, after I’ve spoken to all four shops.

I’m for completely OPEN borders, everyone is welcome. Please, come in. Help us build this country and pay for our pensions. However, if you’re going to come here and overburden the infrastructure – which is already at breaking point, I don’t think so. It’s not very easy to get into the UK, so only the most imaginative risk takers – the bold and beautiful make it. We need to USE that. As long as ‘infrastructure’ is centralised – i.e. top down, it will always fall short. Open that up and supply/demand will sort it. A true libertarian will NEVER oppose unfettered movement of labour. However, they would oppose others paying for their subsistence.

Most ethnic minority values coincide with traditional conservative values.
The Left have done a stellar job of putting them at odds.

Most ethnic minority values coincide with traditional conservative values.
The Conservatives have done a shoddy job of tapping into this.

Most ethnic minority values coincide with traditional conservative values.
The Left have used this against minorities to great effect.

Most ethnic minority values coincide with traditional conservative values.
The Left have successfully painted them as victims. An easy sell.

The meaning of the word ‘Multiculturalism’ is subverted and no longer unites people. This is deliberate. This is Newspeak. A spade is a spade no more.

Most people in the UK haven’t the faintest idea what true racism and persecution resulting from it is. If you’re a British ‘race card’ enthusiast, look at this. I’m not saying any of the first world never did any of this – but this is 2013. For all their cries of racism, many ethnic minorities tend to be the worst offenders. The Left choose to ignore that. It would decimate their holier than thou, moral high ground built on the altar of multiculturalism. That, in my opinion is cheap politics.

And then of course, there’s dependency on the state – one of the cleverest ploys ever. Here’s a little nugget on unemployment and disabilities. You’re not going to like it…
At the peak of Lady Thatcher’s recession there were around 3 million unemployed PLUS 1 million on disability benefits. At the peak of Labour’s good times boom (2007), there were just under 1 million unemployed and nearly 3 million on disability benefits. This not counting the legions on Income Support. In 2007, 4.5% of the country’s working age population was disabled – to the extent that they could not be even expected to look for work. How does that compare with other countries?

I was in India recently. I had a full body check up. I walked in, and was out in 2 hours. It cost me 2500 Rupees (£30). Think about it, that £30 included a battery of blood tests, scans, a couple of X-rays and other tests. The clinic that did it, MADE MONEY. Nothing does efficient allocation of resources better than a free and fair market. I wonder what it would cost the NHS for the same tests. I have an estimate: £4,500. Other people’s money, of course. This is a whole new topic. I’ll probably pick it up on another day.

Security, freedom & opportunity. Not homogeneity, mediocrity & dependency. The Tories would do well to adopt this slogan. And the developing country refrain, “Trade, not aid”? It needs to apply at home as well. “Opportunity, not cotton-woolling.” We over-ride it by codifying it. From our living rooms.

I’m going home to cook. Which reminds of one final point on the subject of racism. Chicken Tikka Masala (and other curries, naans, etc) are extremely popular in Britain. They’re unhealthy, loaded with cream and strong spices and loads of salt. Indians like to say the perfect recipe for a heart attack is “Hurry, Worry and Curry”. And rightly so. However, that hasn’t prevented curries from becoming a national favourite – possibly more so than Chinese or even Italian food. This was not the result of “Indian Curry Month” or relentless leafleting and indoctrination. It was simply yummy food that won Brits over.
And that’s how cultural memes and customs work and propagate. On their own merits.

Force fried bananas and baked apples down my throat and I’ll hate you for it. Let me discover it on my own and I might take to it. Some imported customs will thrive, some will die. That’s perfectly natural. That’s how we grow as a species. Levi RootsReggae Reggae Sauce did more for Caribbean food than an entire decade of Black History Months. There’s a lesson in that.

As long as the misguided Left own the rights to set the rules for political correctness, they will frame the debate. And common sense will continue to be throttled out of existence.

Banti Singh is an important commentator on British Society, a believer in Freedom and Honesty, and a member of (racist) UKIP!

Why giving Portugal an extra year to repay its loans is wrong!

ImageYesterday, the Portuguese government suggested that because it has been a “good-boy”, the EU may extend its repayment plan over an additional year.

The reason quoted: “EU-imposed Austerity measures have caused a drop in “expected” government tax revenues”.

Everyone in Portugal knows that Austerity is squeezing the life-blood out of the country’s economy.

Although there is “finally” some understanding that the nation’s debt needs to be reduced, and a somewhat “begrudging” acceptance that difficult choices need to be made: Receiving an “extra year” to repay debt, is going to do very little to improve economic sentiment or encourage business and job growth: it is a very small crumb!

The fact is, if Austerity is causing a drop in tax revenues, then it is Austerity that needs to be addressed, not the time-span of the repayments.

The Portuguese people have long known, that they are no longer running their own country’s economic affairs, and most appreciate that the Minister of Finance, Vitor Gasper, is a just “Puppet” put in place by the EU.

But they also know – as it is they who are suffering from it every day – “Austerity is killing the Portuguese economy”.

Unless something is done to reduce the outrageous levels of taxation being applied to their impoverished nation – whether they are given 1 extra year, or 10 – they will never be able to repay their outstanding debts.

As part of the Euro-zone, Portugal cannot devalue its currency nor adjust its interest rates, so in real terms, the Portuguese government can do very little to try and stimulate its economy.

But surely, those people in Portugal, charged with dictating and implementing the Austerity measures, must realise, that if the current measures are “reducing tax revenue”, then it is these measures which needs to be adjusted, not the repayment time-frame.

ImageThe recent “over-zealous” increases in tax may have “looked good on paper” to a bean-counting economist, but in the “real world” they are causing businesses to close and people to lose their jobs.

Worst still, the effect of these Austerity measures  are forcing many resourceful “entrepreneurs” to seek opportunities outside of the country, which means that those who could have helped the country – now and in the future –  are no longer resident: no longer paying tax, nor creating valuable tax-paying jobs, which the country so desperately needs.

Over the past 3-years Portugal has greatly tightened its methods of collecting taxes, (which will be a plus in the future). But unless it changes direction on Austerity measures, as suggested by the IMF, and reduces levels of taxation, pumping liquidity into the system and fosters an increase in economic activity, the country will have thousands of efficient tax-collectors, but too few incomes to tax.


We know the Finance Minister was appointed by Brussels, but it is time that Vitor Gasper took-off his “EU-blinkers” and looked at the “real” economy!


He may be an excellent “Bean-counter”, but until he realises that the harsh Austerity measures he is supporting are killing the Portuguese economy, and does something “concrete” to promote increased commercial activity, the country can be given an extra 10-years or 100-years, but that still wouldn’t guarantee that Portugal will ever be able to repay its debts.



Helping you understand EU fact, from EU fiction

The UK political debate is now firmly focused on an EU referendum and it is right that people make their important decision, based on the “truthful” answers to the “right” questions.

When it comes to the EU and its true value to the UK (and the benefits to other member states), too much is said which is just, plain and simple, bullshit!

Pro-Europeans will continue to exaggerate the benefits of being an EU-member and – as they did with the Nobel Peace Prize – will be claiming success for things which is not of the EU’s making.

Those against the EU have been naively “sensational” in their criticism of the EU, but without their type of “headline-grabbing” outbursts, voters would have remained “completely in the dark” about what the EU were doing, and how their own politicians were giving law-making powers away to unelected EU “Kommisars!”

The EU is a political animal, created in good intent, but has grown into a monster, where people feed their own egos and pockets at a heavy cost to the people of Europe. To keep this monster moving, much is said in Brussels – and by our own MPS – about the benefits the EU is providing for Europeans, however, much of this is untrue. So Let’s look at just some of the things which are being said:

The EU is Europe.

“I do not see any sense in having an “arrangement” with a select group of European countries, when this excludes doing business with the rest of the world!”

First and foremost, the UK cannot leave Europe: it cannot hike up its sails and set-off out into the Ocean. We are, and will remain part of Europe, just as Japan is and will remain part of Asia! What the argument is about is whether or not being a member of the EU is good for us.

I mentioned the Nobel Peace Prize, so let me start with that issue

The EU is not responsible for peace in Europe. Peace in Europe came as a result of having 1000s of American soldiers on European soil, and cost billions of dollars to maintain. The presence of these soldiers deterred small European countries from attacking each other.

We should also add that peace also occurred, because after two major World Wars, Europeans were just too tired to fight one another.

57% of UK Trade is carried out with Europe.

It is geographic common-sense that a large chunk of the business we do is with our immediate neighbours. It has nothing to do with being a member of the EU!

If you are a shop, restaurant or printers, you will always expect that you will have more customers in your local area than you will have from thousands of miles away.

When it comes to trade, only a fool would think that the French would buy a ship from the UK, instead of from Korea, because we are in the EU. But, we are a big market for German cars and French wine and that will continue. Therefore, being Free to trade with the rest of the world will not damage our trading relationship with other European countries.

Although, when it comes to increasing our global trade, being part of a “European trade cartel” does more damage than good.

They say, the EU ensures we have lead-free petrol, cleaner air, clean beaches and rivers, restrictions on landfill dumping, a recycling strategy, a ban on growth hormones and other harmful food additives, wildlife and environmental protection, social welfare, smoke-free workplaces, minimum wage legislation & holiday entitlement, prevention and break-up of monopolies, patent & copyright protection, consumer protection & rights, harmonized food labeling, better product safety and improved animal welfare.

This is utter nonsense! Britain is not some barbaric back water!

People seem to forget that much of the above legislation was introduced by Britain, long before the EU existed. Not only was the British Standard was adopted by many countries in Europe, but we are also quite capable of labelling our own food, clearing our own rubbish, and cleaning our own beaches, we don’t need EU legislation to give us appropriate guidelines.

Besides, for international standards we are members of Kyoto, so why do we need another bureaucratic set of laws from the EU.

They say staying in the EU means no paperwork or customs for exports throughout the single market, the removal of commission on currency exchange, the freedom to travel, live & work anywhere in Europe, and ease of investment in all member states.

The fact is, moving good around Europe has not led to prosperity in the way the EU would like to suggest.

As for the movement of people, we are not the United States of America. People find it difficult to move and get jobs because of the language barrier, and those who do change location do it as economic refugee’s, which is adding massive strain on the more successful European nations.

When it comes to foreign investment, EU law has made it easier for companies to go overseas to exploit cheap labour: good for the new destination, but costly to those countries where the factories are closing.

They say the EU provides for counter-terrorism intelligence, policing to combat human trafficking, arms & drug smuggling, civil and military co-operation, continent-wide arrest warrants & crime prevention, support human rights.

Really? So what is the value of the United Nations, INTEPOL, and the UNHCR, which we should remember, most countries in the world are signed up to?

They say EU-wide powers to fire journalists and impose fines would improve reportage and press freedom in certain countries.

Possibly true for, say Romania, but what about the countries that already have a free press and the associated laws to maintain journalistic standards? What of privacy and libel? A “Berlusconi-esque” British politician would be untouchable. Makes you shiver, doesn’t it?

They say companies would avoid investing in Britain if we weren’t in the EU.

Crap. Companies go where the taxes are the lowest. Ever stop to wonder why many of the world’s largest companies are headquartered in the non-EU Switzerland? It is low taxes.

They say that a single European currency would protect all countries from a currency crisis.

In a perfect world maybe, but where’s the accountability and fiscal responsibility?

Greece benefited from low bond yields on its debt because people felt Greek debt would be secured by rest of Europe. Look what happened when the whole world was lulled into a false sense of security? A single currency and monetary policy leaves no scope for devaluation.

Since the introduction of the Euro, labour costs have risen all over Europe. The main result of this has been uncompetitive exports, which shifted industry to the developing world. Faced with uncompetitive export prices, a country would normally devalue to restore balance. Countries in the Euro-zone can’t do that. Result? Record current account deficits, falling exports, low growth and a decimated manufacturing sector. It’s way cheaper to buy from India or China.

They say the ECB can do a better job of maintaining equitable interest rates across the region.

How is that even sensible? Interest rates set by the ECB can never be suitable for areas that grow faster or slower than the average.

For example, if the ECB raises interest rates because of fears of inflation in one country, it would savage another country descending into recession at the same time. This is what accelerated the meltdown in Portugal, Greece and Italy.

They say the Common Agricultural Policy supports European farmers.

Paying Farmers not to produce food in itself is immoral and leads to massive imbalances.

Moreover, the CAP subsidised European farmers to produce goods with little regard for international market forces and demand. This excess supply was often dumped on world markets creating falling prices and incomes for world farmers.

As the EU bleed their taxpayers for subsidies for farmers, we’re witnessing large scale suffering in developing countries which are unable to sell their produce internationally in competition with state subsidized farmers.

This is market “rigging” and works against tax-payers, consumers and global producers.

They say the EU provides structural funding to areas hit by industrial decline.

Really? The UK is also suffering heavily from industrial decline, yet we still pay over £50+ million a day for nothing in return.

They say the Anti-EU lobby is made of Nationalists and Racists.

This “evil” accusation is simply wrong.

No country in Europe is more multicultural, multi-ethnic and racially tolerant, than the UK.

We have a history, both good and bad, or dealing with other countries, but over the past 50-years we have accepted more “foreigners” into the country than anywhere else (except for America).

Indeed, the economic benefits Britain has enjoyed due to this influx of foreigners and their richness they have added to our country is there for all to see.

However, the UK is only so big, and with more and more people wishing to come to the UK – when we all know less wealth is being created – it is no longer economically or socially viable, to keep our doors open any longer to anyone who wishes to relocate.

The UK has to tighten its borders to protect the citizens of this small Island: and when we say “citizens”, this also included the millions of immigrants who already are resident in the UK.

There is a job shortage, a housing shortage and our welfare state is already under immense pressure. Without creating more wealth, the country cannot supply the services that the present population has come to expect, more immigration will therefore do severe damage to the countries well-being.

Of course, those who believe otherwise will play the “racist” card, but those who are concerned about the immigration problem are not just “white-British”, they are also black and Asian-British, and they are people from all races, religions and cultures- Therefore this stance on immigration, is not a racial issue, it is economic.

Using terms like “Nationalist” is equally unfair, as it conjures up pictures of fascists and Nazi’s, and yet one of the major reasons for leaving the EU, is that it is undemocratic and unaccountable. i.e. it is behaving in a dictatorial manner which the British have for almost 1000-years opposed.

It would be fair to say that the British have a feeling of superiority, but so do the Chinese, the Americans, the French, the Germans, the Danes. Etc., etc. I see nothing wrong in believing your nation is as good as any other: all people should be patriotic…and being patriotic is not the same as being nationalistic.

I would go even further.

Growth and development has always occurred because of differences, not because we are all the same.

People find solutions to problems, in different ways, often dependent on their cultural or national upbringing. Others will copy the good solutions, and the bad ones will be discarded, and it is this which propels mankind forward. If we all worked in the same country with the same culture, had the same education and worked according to the same rules, growth and development would be very slow.

We need freedom. We need freedom of thought and freedom of expression, we need the freedom to pursue the life we choose, within the confines laid down by our own cultures and societies.

The pursuit of the EU, which is to homogenize the way 500 million different people think and act, and ultimately destroy nations, is not only disrespectful to most people’s cultures: it is detrimental to our future growth.

I will accept many people may disagree with my comments, and may wish to argue certain points, but after 15-years of arguing against the EU and the Euro, and arguing in favour of National Sovereignty and smaller government, I am happy to see more and more people are feeling the way I have felt. And now British people have the chance to vote for or against continued membership of the EU, they will look at the proposal in a more balanced light, and not blindly follow the advice of their pro-European, blinkered politicians.

Australia says NO — This will be the second Time Julia Gillard has done this!

W O W ! She Did It Again!!!
She sure isn’t backing down on her hard line stance and one has to appreciate her belief in the rights of her native countrymen.

A breath of fresh air to see someone lead. Australian Prime Minister does it again!!

The whole world needs a leader like this!

Prime Minister Julia Gillard –

Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told on Wednesday to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.

Separately, Gillard angered some Australian Muslims on Wednesday by saying she supported spy agencies
monitoring the nation’s mosques. Quote:
‘IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT… Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.’

‘This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom.’

‘We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese,

Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society, learn the language!’

‘Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.’

‘We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.’

‘This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom, ‘THE RIGHT TO LEAVE’.’

‘If you aren’t happy here then LEAVE. We didn’t force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted.’

NOTE: IF we circulate this amongst ourselves in Canada & USA , WE will find the courage to start speaking and voicing the same truths.

If you agree please SEND THIS ON and ON, to as many people as you know…

Dooms Day

There are so many things happening in the daily lives of most people, that they are desensitized to the massive and unfathomable problems that are plaguing the planet.

Some may say that I am obsessed – which I suppose I am to a point. But my main obsession is in trying to keep people informed of what is going on in the economic and political world.

The topic by its very nature, means that all opinion is debatable, be it mine or that of the reader. And although I present my views in a relatively aggressive manner, I freely admit that it is easier to for people to commentate, than it is to sit around a massive table and thrash out a meaningful solution – acceptable by all – to the current crisis.

My anti-EU stance is based on two main pillars of reality.

  1. Short term occupiers of political office have no right to surrender national sovereignty, without holding a national referendum, in which over 80% of the population must vote, and the result must be that over 70% of voters are in favour of relinquishing state control to foreign institutions. This guarantees that over 50% of the people are in favour.
  2. I do not believe that a large institutions can administer laws for 350 million people in 27 different countries, which will be equally beneficial to all involved. National government policies will always be of some bias, but when pan European policies prove biased against one or more nations we can see xenophobia take hold, which is ugly and potentially deadly.

Everyone outside of the EU, knows that its fiscal policies and restrictive business rules and regulations, have destroyed growth in Europe


Disgraceful treatment of Children by Labour run Social Services

Rotherham social services have removed 3-children from their foster parents, based purely on the fact that these generous and socially-minded individuals, have changed their political allegiance from the Labour Party to UKIP!
The council has accused UKIP of being a racialist party, and deemed its members as “unfit” to take care of children!
Currently, according to numerous opinion polls, UKIP is the 3rd political party in UK politics, and whilst its main manifesto issue is to leave the EU, it has multi-cultural support and political candidates, and has always created its policies based on what is best for the British: regardless of colour or religion.
As a long-standing supporter of UKIP and its policies on UK sovereignty and other issues, I find it extremely offensive that I, along with 10% of the country who supports UKIP, have been branded as “racists” by a UK authority.
Beyond this damning false and unfounded allegation, we must not lose sight of the terrible emotional upheaval that this councils decision has created for the 3-unfortunate children. And whatever the political views of this council are – I cannot accept anyone in a civilsed society using or abusing disadvantaged children for political gain.
This decision says vastly more about the “fitness” of the council and its politics, than it says about the foster-parents and theirs.