Save Our Pharmacies To Help Save The NHS

The announcement of an unprecedented expansion in healthcare services provided by high street pharmacies conveys the kind of fresh, revolutionary thinking the NHS needs to ensure its long-term survival.

For the first time, local chemists will be permitted to write prescriptions for seven common conditions, including earache, sore throats and urinary tract infections, without reference to a General Practitioner.

Nearly half a million women will be able to access oral contraception without having to talk to a practice nurse and blood pressure assessments will also be provided.

In all, the changes are expected to free up 15 million GP appointments for those with more serious illnesses. As well as cutting waiting times at GP surgeries. This should also reduce pressure on hospitals’ A&E departments, where numerous patients go by default because they’re unable to see their family doctor.

As the son of a community pharmacist and a GP, Rishi Sunak knows precisely how important this reform could be to fulfil his promise to cut NHS waiting lists, but there’s a massive snag. Owing to soaring wholesale medicine prices, the spike in energy and staffing costs, chronic government underfunding and late repayments, community pharmacies are engaged in a frantic fight for survival.

Almost 700 closed between 2015 and 2022, and with nine out of ten making a loss on dispensing medicines to NHS patients, the toll will only increase.

A newspaper outlet has campaigned passionately for government action to save our pharmacies before it’s too late. Contracts, unchanged since 2015, must be revised to reflect rocketing prices and repayment urgently speeded up.

Real-term funding levels have plunged by a staggering 30 per cent in those eight years. It’s an unsustainable situation. Local chemists provide a community lifeline, somewhere the elderly and unwell can go without an appointment and confide their concerns to a compassionate ear.

They’re only too willing to shoulder more of the burden put on the NHS but they just can’t do it without the necessary resources. Rishi Sunak should know that better than anyone, and if he wants these vital reforms to flourish, he must pay pharmacists a fair price for their efforts.

And good luck to the pharmacists because all those lonesome elderly people will probably be at their pharmacy every day, thus taking the pharmacist away from their job, so your medication will probably take longer to be checked.

Rather than paying General Practitioners for the number of patients on their books, they should be paid for each face-to-face consultation.

Also, they should stop this nonsense of only allowing 10 minutes for consultation because slightly more time spent on each patient could repeat fewer visits and perhaps achieve a more precise diagnosis.

Their working week should also include weekends, the same as it is for many of us, plebs. This might have a dramatic impact on the turnover at golf clubs, but hey ho someone has to suffer, but hopefully no longer their patients.

General practice GPs are in a state where the Government has not trained enough doctors and nurses for an extremely long time, and evidently, they’re not paying them enough for them to stay in the United Kingdom, although there are remaining doctors that work extremely hard, seeing more patients than ever before.

However, we have to remember that chemists remained open all through the pandemic, whilst doctors hid away.

Pharmacists tend to get to know their customers, unlike GPs of today, some of whom don’t even bother to read your notes.

Yet during the pandemic, some doctors were driving about in their posh cars, making a fortune during COVID.

First of all, we were told that the GP couldn’t see you go to A&E. Now it’s don’t go and see your GP, go and see a pharmacist. Then all the pharmacists will close because they’re too overburdened – then who will we see when we’re sick?

Falmouth Is Preparing To Refit A Giant Barge That Will House 500 Migrants

A giant barge that will accommodate 500 migrants has anchored in Cornwall, with ministers promising more vessels in the future.

The Bibby Stockholm arrived in Falmouth for renovations ahead of going into service next month.

It was towed from Italy and will now undergo safety checks as well as being refitted to increase the onboard capacity as it presently only has spaces for 200 people.

The vessel will be moved into position off Dorset in the middle of June, and used for single adult male asylum seekers.

Confirming the plan last month, immigration minister Robert Jenrick said it would help trim the £6 million a day cost of housing Channel migrants in hotels.

He also claimed it would help prevent the United Kingdom from becoming a magnet for asylum shoppers in Europe.

The Home Office said it was in discussion with other ports and further barges would be announced in due course.

The Bibby Stockholm barge will provide essential and practical accommodation as well as healthcare and catering facilities when it’s berthed at Portland in Dorset, according to the Home Office.

The Port of Portland is also set to welcome more than 40 cruise ships over the course of the year and usually announces arrival and departure dates on its website to allow residents and local businesses to prepare for busy periods.

But it’s now removed the dates, with a source telling a newspaper outlet that bosses feared far-Right activists would organise demonstrations when there were large numbers of tourists in the area to maximise their impact.

A Portland Port spokesman, when asked about the report, said: ‘All cruise calls are proceeding as normal at Portland Port but arrivals and departures are subject to change, as they are at any port.

‘Therefore, it is best to contact the cruise line involved for the most up-to-date information.’

There will also be round-the-clock security on board to ‘minimise the disruption to local communities’.

However, the Government is encountering stiff local opposition to positioning Bibby Stockholm at a favoured beauty site.

This is despite suggestions that local councils could be paid up to £3,500 per migrant to receive barges in their ports.

There has also been a backlash from charities and human rights campaigners who say the accommodation is not suitable for people escaping war.

The barges include a gym, games room and bar. It also has tasty nutritional food in its restaurant and Wi-Fi throughout the ship, but that’s no good really when thousands of migrants cross the channel every week, and the summer’s not even here yet.

But then what’s the solution, has anyone got one? I know, most of you will say, send them back.

There’s a chain of migrants coming to the United Kingdom from overseas, so who’s leading and handling this migration? And meanwhile our homeless are still homeless. Many of whom have served our country, whilst risking life and limb.

These people fought in wars and then they come back home and end up with nothing, but if you’re a migrant the United Kingdom will welcome you with open arms. I understand that some have come from war-torn countries, but if the shoe was on the other foot would they welcome us with such open arms? Perhaps there’s a hidden agenda!

People in the United Kingdom have paid towards something, whether it be tax or National Insurance all their lives, yet migrants come over to this country, get everything they need and haven’t paid a penny into the system, and it’s an absolute disgrace, and I really have no idea how this will end.

Our Government talk about sustainability. This is not sustainable and it’s not fair to British taxpayers!

Very Few Tears

Former Sinn Fein leader Gerry Adams claimed there would have been very few tears shed in parts of Britain if Margaret Thatcher had been killed in the 1984 IRA bombing.

The Tory Prime Minister survived the Brighton attack, which occurred during the Conservative Party conference, claiming five lives and leaving 31 injured.

MP Sir Anthony Berry died, along with area chairman Eric Taylor, and the wives of three MPs, Lady Jeanne Shattock, Lady Muriel Maclean and Roberta Wakeham.

Margaret Thatcher’s suite was damaged, but she was unharmed in the horror.

But Gerry Adams said that there would have been very few tears shed for Margaret Thatcher in Republican Ireland or in many villages in Wales and working-class Scotland and England itself.

He said Margaret Thatcher was notorious following the deaths of IRA hunger strikers after refusing to meet their demands, and said she was masquerading as being somebody who was indomitable.

Challenged about the inflammatory remarks by ex-Tory MP Rory Stewart, himself a former British soldier, Gerry Adams said that he never went to war.

He said, “You came to me, you know. You came in, in khaki, and tanks. I think including the deaths of British soldiers and RUC officers- all those deaths are to be regretted.

“It’s a regrettable part of our history. And clearly for civilians, for them to be killed, it doesn’t matter if it was an accident or not. That’s even more regrettable, and thankfully we’re now out of all that, and we need to learn the lessons of it.”

The Northern Irish politician was discussing the Troubles in Northern Ireland on the Rest is Politics podcast, presented by Alistair Campbell and Mr Stewart.

Asked if he would have been happy if Margaret Thatcher died, Gerry Adams said, “Happiness or happy is not a term I would use. The fact is, there was a war.

“Margaret Thatcher was notorious, not just for her presiding over the deaths of the hunger strikers which could have been easily resolved, by very simple improvements in the prison regime.

“But also because she was upfront, and she was being the Iron Lady, and she was masquerading as being somebody who was indomitable, and so on.

“There would be very few tears shed for Margaret Thatcher in Republican Ireland, or in many villages in Wales and working-class Scotland and England itself.

“But, it’s done, it’s over, it’s gone. All of that was in the past.”

Sadly, Margaret Thatcher started the decay and destruction of what was once a great country, the United Kingdom, but we can all go on about our yesterday’s, as long as that doesn’t bleed into our present day. However, it did because Margaret Thatcher started a movement against the workers and people praised it.

Most things are fading from our society before our very eyes, and it’s an indisputable fact that the major problems we face today lead straight back to the Thatcher years.

She sold most of our utilities such as water, gas, electricity, railways and social housing.

Under her watch the coal industry was destroyed and industrial production was relegated to the margins of economic activity.

Her creed was greed and good old selfish interest because as far as she was concerned there was no such thing as society.

She was a rabid class bigot and amazingly ignorant of both fiscal and monetary policy, and she was a catastrophe for this country, and now we’re reaping the consequence of her social and economic policies, but of course, Margaret Thatcher couldn’t have done all that she did without the help of like-minded politicians and members of the public that voted the Conservatives into office.

Meghan: Who Is She?

Who is Meghan Markle and why is she so despised? Well, there are few celebs in the world that divide opinion quite like Meghan, but she also has a large amount of both dedicated critics and ardent defenders and while both groups agree that Meghan is disliked in some quarters, they each have radically different reasons for why this is the case.

Defenders of Meghan Markle see the attacks on her as being motivated by prejudices such as racism, sexism and snobbery, which have been fuelled by the ruthless British institution and insensitive media culture.

Many have said that she’s a privileged person who plays the victim. Meghan was never privileged, she had to work hard to get where she was before she met Harry. Nothing comes easy in this life unless we work extraordinarily hard for it and that’s precisely what she did, but she has a fearless nature and that helped as well as being extremely straightforward – nothing wrong with that, but some people feel that makes her a drama queen and diva.

She might have grown up in Los Angeles, but numerous critics have said that she came from the wrong side of the tracks – hardly. Her mother was a make-up artist and her father was an Emmy Award-winning television lighting director and director of photography.

Meghan is mixed race, and that’s a problem how? But it was a problem for other people when they were criticising her in the media. Another gossip for the media pundits who obviously had nothing better to do with their time, but of course, snapping pictures of her and Harry makes them bags of money and they don’t care who they hurt in the process.

Her parents separated when she was two years old and divorced four years later, and although that likely didn’t have an impact on her at that age, it must have been challenging for her as she got older, but she has an extremely close relationship with her mother.

Her father worked as a director of photography and lighting for numerous sitcoms and Meghan would sometimes visit the set, but she’s now estranged from her father and paternal half-siblings, Samantha Markle and Thomas Markle and both parents contributed to raising her until the age of 9 years old, after which her father was left in charge of caring for her as her mother pursued a career.

Meghan Markle isn’t the kind of person that people make her out to be. She’s kind and idealistic, and she strives to support people and help them reach their potential, and she will go above and beyond for friends, family and those in need.

She is a natural-born leader.

She’s beautiful, intelligent and has taken the world by storm.

She’s insanely intelligent and poised, but also extremely cautious, which isn’t surprising with what she’s had to go through with the media.

Meghan has been described as ‘Hurricane Meghan’ and the ‘Difficult Duchess’ because she reportedly threw a tantrum after she was not permitted to wear a specific tiara on her wedding day. Whether this is true or not, it was her wedding day, the most special day of a woman’s life and she should be allowed to wear what she damn well likes.

Racial prejudice is the elephant in the room, as far as many of Meghan Markle’s defenders are concerned it’s one that she has to bear. Nobody should have to tolerate racial prejudice, it’s criminal and numerous people outside of that would be arrested, so why shouldn’t those that do be arrested?

Meghan married into the Royal Family which was built on the idea of a strict social hierarchy. She was an American commoner, who was also a divorcee and she was never going to be accepted by the haughty royals, especially with Meghan’s more contemporary and egalitarian perspective, which was a threat to their sober and privy world.

What the royals actually wanted was for Meghan to be more like Kate and conduct herself with a degree of passivity and conformism, but Meghan is a strong woman and many resented that.

Feminism was never going to sit well with the British royals and it’s only fairly recently that they ultimately came around to making the rules of succession equal for men and women.

There was always a sense that Meghan was a foreigner when she married into the Royal Family and she was never completely accepted, not really! And of course, the people of the United Kingdom were always going to side with the royal establishment, and they were never going to have any compassion towards Meghan Markle.

Much of the abuse directed against Meghan Markle was generated and fuelled by the media and the negativity shown towards Meghan made money, it sells newspapers and drew in more viewers for shows.

While no public figures can expect to be immune from criticism, the level of outrage that the British tabloids directed towards Meghan was disturbing. If Meghan goes to a royal event, the media seethed, if she stays at home, they’re livid. There appears to be nothing that she can do that will satisfy the media.

And as with all controversial celebs, people will pick a side.

The Brothers Are Still Worlds Apart

Prince Harry wore an uneasy smile on his face today as he watched the Coronation of King Charles III from his seat in the third row, while his brother Prince William was at the front alongside his radiant wife Kate Middleton.

But this is what transpires when you no longer want to be part of Royalty. Harry is no longer a royal and therefore sits further back, but then he is the ‘spare’ and he was never going to be in line for being king, but their mother would have been so sad to have seen how distant the two brothers now are and she wouldn’t have wanted that for them and would have wanted the two brothers to be close, but that wasn’t to be.

I can sort of understand the logic behind why Harry would want to bash the Royal Family, but he and Meghan made money out of it. Perhaps it would have been better if they’d bestowed that money to some charities and not their own pockets. At least that way they wouldn’t have appeared so hostile.

However, it is the Royal Family and it’s not like they’ve not had multiple scandals before. Prince Andrew was one of them, but they just kept calm and carried on – a stiff upper lip, so to speak!

The King didn’t need a Coronation. It’s nice and all that, but this coronation would have cost many millions of pounds, and the bill will have largely been footed by the UK taxpayers at a time when we have the cost of living crisis. 

Let’s face it, the King isn’t young by any means. Had he been younger, maybe his coronation would have been more fitting.

Yet here we are on the day of the coronation of King Charles III, along with much of the population. I won’t be celebrating and a YouGov poll revealed that 64 per cent of the people don’t actually care very much at all about this event, while only 9 per cent care a great deal.

Why are we having a coronation anyway? No other European monarchy bothers. The last one in Spain was in 1555.

There’s no legal need for a coronation. Charles is King with or without it. So, the only reason for its real purpose is to stage a gigantic candy floss PR event for the Royals and probably a good old piss-up afterwards, and of course, it will bring in tourists and royal supporters, along with the golden coaches, and King, but this isn’t Disney World!

But whether you like Charles or not he is our King.

Bosses At Google Ban Staff From Using Terms Such As ‘Man Hours’, ‘You Guys’, ‘Blacklist’ And ‘Chubby’

It’s been said that Google bosses have asked UK staff to stop using common terms including ‘man hours’ and ‘you guys’.

The US tech goliath set out a new inclusive language dossier which includes modifications to vocabulary.

Several words targetted by Google chiefs include, ‘whitelist’, Blackhole’, ‘blacklist’ and ‘black box’, as well as ‘chubby’, and to abstain from describing people or things as ‘crazy, bonkers or mad’.

Tory MP Nigel Mills called the changes woke nonsense and that he didn’t know where people found the time to come up with this sort of thing, and that we shouldn’t be ditching words and phrases used for a generation just because some snowflakes might get impacted.

Meanwhile, a Google worker told a newspaper outlet that staff had ignored the guide and concentrated on getting on with their jobs.

They revealed that they were much too busy to be worried about whether some totally innocuous phrase that’s been used for years might upset someone somewhere.

Google has said its dossier only provided editorial guidelines for writing clear and consistent Google-related developer documentation.

A newspaper outlet has reached out to Google for more information on the latest guidelines.

It’s not the first time the search engine has lurched into wokery either.

Last year, Google launched an inclusive language function designed to sidestep the use of politically incorrect words.

Users typing ‘landlord’ will see a warning that it ‘may not be inclusive to all readers’ with the suggestion they should try ‘property owner’ or ‘proprietor’ instead.

The word ‘humankind’ was a suggested alternative to what the online giant seemingly sees as the controversial term ‘mankind’.

Gender-specific terms such as ‘policemen’ or ‘housewife’ were also replaced by ‘police officers’ and ‘stay-at-home spouse’, according to the new Google Document style programme.

I’m sure that people who rent out properties routinely describe themselves as a ‘landlord’ and would be surprised that they’re actually being politically incorrect, but then I’d doubt that they would care and would be more concerned about treating their tenants fairly, even though we do know that some don’t actually care at all.

I mean, why don’t we just prohibit the use of English completely? And here’s a message to Google. You guys are crazy, mad and bonkers and should be blacklisted because after all, what gives them the right to ban language? It looks like lunatics have taken over, and this is manifestly Orwellian.

Woke is an adjective emanating from African American Vernacular English (AAVE) meaning ‘alert to racial prejudice and discrimination’.

Beginning in the 2010s, it came to encompass a broader understanding of social inequalities such as sexism and has also been used as shorthand for American Left views concerning identity politics and social justice, such as the notion of white privilege and slavery reparations for African Americans.

Before that, not one person was ever bothered or offended, yet a few loons suddenly made a noise, they were accommodated and they pushed to try to end any meaning that had a reference to sex, colour et cetera, and now long are the days gone by, when life was just easier and we could have a laugh without being sued, and now these pathetic organisation’s are gradually removing any expression from our vocabulary that has been expressed for generations.

All this gibberish is just fuelling an already antagonistic and separated society when in fact, we should be cultivating a more harmonious and inclusive society, and Google must have used a lot of manhours to create this kind of blacklist of phrases, have they nothing better to do with their time?

PARLIAMENT AND STATE PENSION

The British State Pension is far too low, we all know that. It needs to increase and be put back to anyone aged 60.

If the Government put pensions up to £380 a week, it should lift thousands out of deprivation and give our senior folk more spending power and help boost the economy. However, parliament said that lowering the pension age back to 60 years old was neither affordable nor fair to taxpayers and forthcoming generations.

As far as our Government are concerned, on average, people are living longer and they will raise the pension age in line with that life expectancy. However, not everyone lives as long as other people, this is just an expectancy, not a guarantee.

All these people worked and paid their National Insurance, yet are now having their pension delayed.

These people put their hard-earned money into a pension reserve, which I might add incurs interest – not your interest, but the government’s. What! You didn’t think it went under the floorboards of No 10, did you? No, it went into some kind of financial appropriation that incurred their interest, not you! But nobody does something for nothing.

In other words, our Government are fleecing (defrauding) you of your hard-earned money. Think about it! How many people paid their National Insurance but died before they even had an opportunity to appreciate it? Now add all that money up and see how much went into the coffers of the Government and MPs’ pockets.

Where was the media coverage for all of this? There was barely any media coverage, it was like a media blackout.

The UK State Pension is one of the lowest in the developed world and the Government needs to seriously consider how it would support those who rely upon it, especially those on Universal Credit!

They pay out millions to those on Universal Credit, which they will now carry on paying until they reach pension age. Wouldn’t it just make more sense to allow them to have their pension at 60, instead of forking out taxpayers’ money? Wouldn’t it make more sense?

And wouldn’t it make more sense to pay them more pension because numerous people end up having to claim Pension Credit, which is paid by the DWP? And it also means that people on Pension Credit get other things for free, which people on standard pensions don’t get, and are trying to survive on State Pension alone.

And what is a healthy life expectancy? We all know that as we reach a certain age our bodies don’t work as well as when we were younger. Things start to go awry with our bodies. It’s okay for people in Government, they have the best of the best where health care is concerned, although that doesn’t mean they won’t die before this healthy life expectancy. We are all human and we die, and what is a healthy life expectancy for some, certainly isn’t for others.

Poverty and inequality among pensioners are rising and existing financial aid doesn’t go far enough as the cost of living increases further, and our Government need to explore alternative ways to finance the pension scheme, and they need to look at methods other countries use to develop a more effective funding mechanism.

Prince Harry’s 24-Hour Flying Visit For Coronation

Prince Harry has reportedly scheduled a whistlestop visit for his father’s Coronation next weekend, planning to fly back to the US within two hours of the ceremony’s end.

The Duke of Sussex will see his father, King Charles III, crowned at Westminster Abbey on Saturday but will be jetting straight back to his LA home.

It’s understood the Duke will only be in the United Kingdom for about 24 hours as he plans to be back home for his son Archie’s fourth birthday, which overlaps with Saturday’s Coronation.

The ceremony to formally crown the King is set to start at 11 am and will last for about two hours. Harry will then be in the air two hours later at 3 pm.

The historic ceremony will be the first time Harry will be pictured with the Windsors since the funeral of his grandmother the late Queen, and the first time since berating the royals in his memoirs.

Regarding his short visit for the Coronation, a source told a newspaper outlet that Harry would be in and out of the United Kingdom in 24 hours.

Evidently, he will only be doing the Coronation service, and then he will be departing.

It was already reported earlier this month that the Prince would be going it alone at the Coronation, leaving his wife Megha with their children Archie and Lilibet.

Buckingham Palace confirmed the news some weeks ago in a statement, saying it was pleased to confirm that the Duke of Sussex would be at Westminster Abbey on May 6, but will go home to spend time with his son Archie for his birthday.

Following the earlier announcement over the royal couple’s attendance, a royal observer told a newspaper outlet that Charles would be pleased, but that the rest of the family would be relieved that Meghan wouldn’t be there as it would have been particularly uncomfortable for Kate.

There had been much tension within the palace over the Sussexes’ attendance. It was thought to have left royal officials unable to sign off arrangements for seating plans, transportation, and security, as the announcement came after the official RSVP date.

But Harry, who laid bare his troubled relationship with the Royal Family in his Netflix documentary and autobiography Spare, will now be witness to his father Charles and stepmother the Queen Consort’s crowning next month, and Harry’s attendance comes as coronation organisers admitted that they were stressed about the Prince’s plans on Saturday and that it was like trying to communicate with Mars.

Meghan clearly is remaining at home because it’s Archie’s birthday, and as a family, they wouldn’t want to miss that. It’s irrelevant that the public doesn’t want to see her there and of course, many of the Royal Family, but it is relevant that Harry and Meghan want to do what’s best for their children, and of course, being there for their child’s birthday is good parenting.

Of course, there are numerous people who miss their child’s birthday because of work duties. That doesn’t make them a bad parent, but Harry lost out on a lot when his mother Diana died and I don’t suppose he wants his children to lose out either, although I guess not seeing their Grandfather Charles, I suppose they are missing out, but Charles has the means to just hop on an aeroplane to go and see them if he actually wanted to.

The thing is, Harry is going to be at his father’s coronation even though he has no public responsibility in the United Kingdom, so evidently, he’s coming over to support his father as a good son should, and he’s also juggled to get back home to his sons birthday party, and well done Harry for prioritising.

An Official ‘Nuclear Submarine’ Royal Navy Document Was Found In A Wetherspoon’s Toilet Cubicle

Official documents about a £1.3 billion Royal Navy ‘nuclear submarine’ were reportedly discovered on the floor of a Wetherspoons toilet cubicle.

It’s understood that the files holding data about HMS Anson, dubbed by the Government as one of the most sophisticated underwater vessels ever built, were left in the toilets of The Furness Railway in Barrow, Cumbria.

A newspaper outlet claimed that the documents showed the inner workings of the submarine and were used by submariners learning how to isolate and depressurise elements of its system.

However, the Royal Navy has said the papers were generic resources and didn’t include any classified information.

A source told a newspaper outlet the documents didn’t contain data detailed about the submarine.

According to a newspaper outlet, the pub was packed when the files, marked ‘official sensitive’, were found on the floor of a cubicle.

A source told the outlet that it was quite a lively night. The pub was full of people from the docks, military and civilians. That they went to the toilet and the plans were laying on the floor of the cubicle with a lanyard, and anyone could have found them.

The Furness Railway is a short distance from a BAE systems shipyard in Barrow-in-Furness, where the submarine has previously been pictured.

Named after Admiral George Anson, HMS Anson is the fifth of the new Astute-class attack submarines to join the Royal Navy fleet.

The vessels are capable of firing tomahawk missiles and are described as the ‘largest, most advanced and most powerful attack submarine’ ever employed in the navy on its website.

Powered by a Rolls-Royce nuclear reactor, the boat can also operate for 25 years without refuelling.

When the submarine left Barrow-in-Furness for sea trials in Clyde in February, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace said that HMS Anson would play a vital role in defending the United Kingdom, providing a competitive edge for decades to come, and he was proud to see her make her journey up to her permanent home on the Clyde.

And that supporting tens of thousands of jobs across the United Kingdom, our Astute-Class submarines were a leading example of their commitment to defence manufacturing, continuing to boost British industry for decades to come.

A naval source said that these documents enable submariners and contractors to understand how systems interact. They don’t detail how they work, just that they exist.

But it’s no surprise to learn that Government officials have been handing around top secret papers in the toilets of Wetherspoons – probably trying to flog them for a pint of Stella. Or even more alarming, if something like that was left behind, was it left behind for a reason?

This Government have been the greatest menace to national security since WWII and you couldn’t make this up if you tried, it’s unbelievable that classified documents of this importance are allowed to be taken off base or out of a Ministry of Defence office.

This must have been a classified document and should have been graded as ‘restricted’, but what’s even more worrying is that it could have been some kind of espionage exchange gone bad, although it does note that they were generic documents, but who knows because the Royal Navy is clearly going to play down their importance.

People that operate in and around defence work all come under the Official Secrets Act no matter what – this could generate some humiliation, but then there’s an abundance of that within our Government anyhow.

Loni Willison, 39, Is Seen Looking For Food In A Dumpster In Los Angeles

Baywatch star Jeremy Jackson’s ex-wife Loni Willison has been spotted in Los Angeles foraging around in a dumpster in a quest for food.

The former glamorous swimsuit model has been living in homeless encampments in California for almost seven years.

She was recently spotted in Santa Monica looking dishevelled as she pushed along a shopping cart through the back streets.

Willison is best known for her role as Kira Michaels on the hit TV series Expose.

She was married to Baywatch actor Jeremy Jackson, but their stormy relationship ended in 2014 after Jackson allegedly tried to strangle Willison during a drunken brawl.

Since their parting, Willison has reportedly struggled with addiction and mental health problems. She took something of a downward turn and can frequently be seen roaming the streets, pushing an overflowing shopping cart, and searching through dumpsters in search of food.

The images, acquired exclusively by a newspaper outlet, are a stark difference from Willison’s once glamorous life.

Only eight years ago, she was living the Hollywood dream, modelling and appearing on the red carpet at glittering occasions alongside TV hunk Jeremy Jackson, whom she married in 2012, but after developing a drug habit, she’s fallen on tough times and has been sleeping rough for the last six years in Venice, where the homelessness problem has reached a crisis point in current years.

Willison was seen on the streets for the first time in two years in October 2020, having been homeless since about 2016.

She’s reportedly suffered from an addiction to crystal meth and various mental health problems.

Soon after she was discovered she told a newspaper outlet that she was doing just fine and had not had any contact with Jackson in recent years.

She said that she hadn’t spoken to Jeremy and that she didn’t want to speak to her friends and that she was just doing fine and that she didn’t want anyone to help her.

Loni was married to Jeremy from 2012 until their tumultuous divorce in 2014. She once accused the actor of attempting to strangle her in a fierce rage.

She insisted that she could live on her own and that she had everything she needed right there in Venice due to the area’s affluent nature.

She said that she hasn’t got a cell phone, but that she does have food and a place to sleep and that she gets money here and there and there’s food in the bins and near the stores.

However, we shouldn’t be shaming this woman, we should just let her be because you just never know what’s around the corner, and some homeless people do manage to crawl out of the abyss, and one thing is extremely transparent, she’s a survivor.

But it looks like the paparazzi are making money and newspaper outlets are buying the pictures to humiliate her. Did they at least buy her a meal and a drink after exploiting her without her consent?

Remember every homeless person had a normal life at one point! And in reality, every person is just one paycheck away from being homeless, and people should remember that.

Tons of people battle addiction for years and it’s heartache all around, but they will get clean either when they’ve had enough or die, and there’s nothing anyone can do about that, but hopefully she will have the strength to pull herself out of her situation.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started