THE MONTHLY MOSQUITO

Paris Bus Driver Hailed A Hero

A French driver has been celebrated for booting every single passenger off his bus after they failed to make room for a gentleman in a wheelchair.

Francois Le Berre, who has multiple sclerosis, was waiting to get on a bus in a Paris neighbourhood, but none of the passengers would move to grant him space.

The bus driver, who hasn’t been identified, saw the problem and took the unusual action of asking every single passenger to vacate the bus. He then allowed Francois Le Berre to come on board and drove off with him as the sole passenger.

A tweet reporting the incident was shared by a group called ‘Accessible Pour Tous’, which translates as ‘accessible for all’ on behalf of Francois Le Berre.

Nobody wanted to move and because no one was moving the driver stood up and said “Terminating! Everybody off!” and he made them get off and wait for the next bus and it’s been shared more than 5,000 times and liked by more than 10,000 people, with many congratulating the bus driver and reprimanding the passengers who failed to move.

“Bravo to the bus driver, but shame on the passengers,” wrote one person. But another responded: “You wouldn’t have moved either.”

Buses in the French metropolis usually have one or two spaces for a wheelchair and passengers are supposed to give priority to them and enable users to get on but most people believe that it’s not their problem and they’re simply out for themselves.

Sadly, people in wheelchairs are just transparent to other people that are not disabled and most people that aren’t disabled just will not move for a disabled person and we should be praising this bus driver, I would have also have booted them off in a heartbeat if they refused anyone disabled, elderly, pregnant or perhaps someone with children because these people are just narrow-minded human beings that only think of themselves and this bus driver was a real gentleman.

Although I’m not sure how all the passengers were causing problems aside from the person that was in the disabled space and how could have their removal helped? And I guess it was a tad unfair on all the passengers that were sitting on regular seats, it’s not like the wheelchair user could have used those seats.

By all means, boot off those using the priority seats but it could be classified as a huge overreaction to kick off all the other paying customers but still well done to the man because I’m disabled and have had to face the London Underground in my wheelchair and everyone was especially accommodating and Londoners are clearly much more helpful than Parisians.

Saying this, the service was terminated and was presumably the quickest way for everyone, then the able-bodied could promptly jump on the next bus because drivers often get vilified if they attempt to police individual or small groups of passengers and usually have to wait for reinforcements.

And perhaps next time the other passengers are sitting, no doubt staring out of the windows or at their phones to circumvent the issue could help and ask other passengers to move because presumably any of the passengers could have got up to help make room, even if they were sitting down.

I guess the moral of the story is, that if one person won’t move, they all have to!

Boris Johnson’s 50,000 New Nurses Claim

Boris Johnson’s promise of 50,000 new nurses for the NHS includes 18,500 current NHS nurses. That was the headline policy from the Tory manifesto that was launched in Telford.

But it fell apart inside hours of being announced, as the party was made to confirm the figure included thousands of nurses already employed in the health service and Labour has branded the claim ‘deceitful’.

The party also announced the restoration of maintenance grants, worth £5,000 and £8,000 a year for student nurses but there was no mention in the manifesto of help to pay for tuition fees.

Tory officials said the 50,000 figure would be made up of 14,000 new undergraduate student nurses and 5,000-degree apprenticeships. They will be supplemented by 12,500 nurses brought to the United Kingdom from abroad, making 31,000 new nurses.

The other 18,500, the party say, will be nurses who are employed in the health service who would have otherwise left and they said they had strategies to keep nurses in the field including professional training, support and more childcare for returning mums.

But then that means that at least 40 per cent of the promised 50,000 nurses are already NHS nurses and that the Conservatives claim on nurses is honestly dishonest and the sums just don’t add up.

First, we had Boris Johnson’s fraudulent 40 new hospitals and now, we have his bogus 50,000 additional nurses.

Matt Hancock and Tory ministers pushed through the abolition of the bursary partly causing the nursing dilemma tormenting our NHS today and the new damaging Tory nurses tax on European nurses will make it impossible to deliver the nurses the NHS needs.

Labour is now saying they will deliver over 50,000 new nurses through bringing back the bursary and allowing ethical international recruitment.

The announcement marked an embarrassing climbdown for the Conservatives, who reversed their ruinous policy of scrapping students nurses bursaries, which was launched in 2016.

Health Secretary Matt Hancock stated the policy was already about generating new training places for student nurses but figures reveal that 1 in 20 student nursing places, some 1,450 in total, went unfilled in 2019.

Between the policy being implemented in June 2016 and February this year nursing degree applications in England dropped by 13,000, with 40,000 vacancies remaining unfilled, the nurses union announced the fall in student numbers had put patient safety at risk.

And the Royal College of Nursing (RCN) said the promise of maintenance grants for student nurses didn’t amount to a return of the student nurses bursary and the current double calamity of both tuition fees and living costs for a nursing degree are a hindrance to many wanting to seek a nursing profession, so they require extra funding for both factors, not just living costs as the Conservative manifesto suggests.

Forcing would-be nurses to pay tuition fees has demonstrably failed in the last two years and with this announcement, Boris Johnson hasn’t brought back the bursary, he’s promising to return one component of the package but wants to keep the high-priced tuition fees in place and figures now confirm the amount of adult nursing student applications from people over 25 in England has seen an even greater deterioration, declining by 41 per cent since the bursary was removed.

And I don’t know how many wheels are on the Tory campaign bus but they’re falling off at a startling rate with Boris Johnson being exposed as a liar about new hospitals by his own Health Secretary at the launch of the manifesto leaflet and then a car crash interview with Nicky Morgan exposing more lies about the number of new nurses.

Do they believe that voters are that dense that they can’t do the math? All you have to do is unpick a little bit of the truth in some of these pledges and is Boris Johnson going to do anything for your children, for your family, other than lying to them? And if he can’t be bothered with his children, how bothered is he going to be about yours? That’s if he even knows who his children are.

And it’s entertaining that there are masses of people out there that believe a Prime Minister who lied to the Queen not so long ago, that would have been a resignation matter and the Prime Minister would have been compelled to resign but we now know what this sleazebag riddled Prime Minister is like.

We were also promised 200,000 starter homes by the government a full five years ago but they were never built, so now we know what the Tory promise is worth and if people believe their rubbish then they’re deluded.

The Tories have already pocketed all the money in offshore accounts and the Tories have already managed to ruin this country and people should open their eyes.

We print our own money, therefore the country can’t go bankrupt, not that it’s worth the paper it’s printed on because money is just an IOU and banks are rolling in it.

And back in the 1930s, Henry Ford was thought to have said that it was a good thing that most Americans didn’t know how banking worked because if they did, there’d be a revolution.

Then something extraordinary happened, the Bank of England let the cat out of the bag and they said outright that the most common premise of how banking works was totally incorrect and that the kind of populist, heretical beliefs more frequently associated with groups such as Occupy Wall Street was correct and in doing so, they completely threw the whole theoretical basis for austerity out of the window.

To get a taste of how extreme the Bank’s new position is, you have to consider the more conventional view, which continues to be the basis of all respectable debate on public policy.

People put their money into banks, banks then lend that money out at interest, either to consumers or to business people willing to invest it in some profitable venture.

It’s true, the fractional reserve system doesn’t permit banks to lend out considerably more than they hold in reserve and if the savings don’t suffice, private banks can attempt to borrow more from the central bank.

The central bank can print as much money as it wants but it’s also mindful not to print too much. That’s why we’re usually told this is why independent central banks exist in the first place.

And if governments could print money themselves, they would put out too much of it and the resulting increase would force the economy into turmoil.

Institutions such as the Bank of England or US Federal Reserve were designed to carefully control the money supply to stop inflation, that’s why they’re prohibited to directly finance the government, say, by purchasing treasury bonds, but instead, fund private economic activity that the government simply taxes.

It’s this understanding that enables us to continue to talk about money as if it were a limited resource like bauxite or petroleum, to say that there’s not enough money to finance social programmes, to speak of the depravity of government debt or public spending, crowding out the private sector.

What the Bank of England admitted is that none of it is true. To quote from its initial summary: “Rather than banks receiving deposits when households save and then lending them out, bank lending creates deposits” … “In normal times, the central bank does not fix the amount of money in circulation, nor is central bank money ‘multiplied up’ into more loans and deposits.”

In other words, everything we know isn’t just wrong, it’s backwards and when banks make loans, they generate money. This is because money is just an IOU.

The function of the central bank is to preside over a legal order that effectively gives banks the sole right to create IOUs of a particular kind, ones that the government will recognise as legal tender by its readiness to accept them in payment of taxes.

There’s no limit on how much banks can create, provided they can find someone willing to borrow it, so they’ll never get caught short, for the simple reason that borrowers don’t, generally speaking, take the money and put it under their mattress, so ultimately, any money banks loan out will simply end up back in some bank again.

So, for the banking system as a whole, every loan simply becomes another deposit.

What’s more, insofar as banks do need to obtain funds from the central bank, they can borrow as much as they like and all the latter doesn’t set the rate of interest, the cost of money or its quantity and since the start of the recession, the US and British central banks have decreased that cost to virtually nothing.

In fact, with quantitive easing, they’ve been expertly tapping as much money as they can into the banks, without producing any inflationary effects. So, what this means is that the real limit on the amount of money in circulation isn’t how much the central bank is prepared to lend, but how much government, firms and ordinary citizens, are prepared to borrow.

Government spending is the principal operator in all this but nobody will admit it, particularly the newspapers that the central bank doesn’t finance the government, so, there’s no question of public spending crowding out private investment, it’s precisely the reverse.

So, why did the Bank of England suddenly admit all this? Well, one reason is that it’s true.

The Bank’s job is to run the system, yet the system hasn’t been working particularly well and maintaining the fantasy-land version of economics that’s proved so accessible to the wealthy is simply an extravagance it can no longer afford.

But politically, this is taking a huge risk and just consider what might happen if mortgage holders realised the money the bank lends them is not, really, the life savings of some frugal pensioner, but something the bank simply flitted into existence through its possession of a magic wand which we, the people, handed over to it.

Historically, the Bank of England has tended to be the leading sheep of a flock, with a bell on its neck, staking out seemingly radical positions that eventually become new beliefs and if that’s what’s happening here, we might someday be in a position to determine if Henry Ford was right.

Boris Johnson doesn’t do what he says he will do but then will Jeremy Corbyn do what he says he will do, or at least try and is what Jeremy Corbyn wants to do worth doing?

Perhaps their both committed to doing what they say they will do but that doesn’t mean it will happen and how can they solve the problems that they created and perhaps it’s time for actual change because the people of the United Kingdom have been in a coma for years.

It’s lies, lies and more lies and we as a nation need to wake up because there have been far too many U-turns from Boris Johnson and it’s a disgrace.

The great Tory swindle, have you been caught?

Boris Johnson Will Keep Charging Thousands Of Patients

Boris Johnson will promise to keep charging thousands of patients, visitors and personnel to park outside hospitals and the announcement is set to come in the Conservative’s manifesto, which only ends charges for a portion of patients, staff and visitors.

Most NHS staff on daytime shifts and the preponderance of outpatients will still be stung with charges to park outside hospitals but Labour’s manifesto pledges to stop the charges for patients, visitors and staff.

It would only apply to protected groups including the aged, disabled, terminally or gravely sick patients and their families plus NHS nurses working night shifts.

Labour has described the charges as a ‘tax on the sick’ and this is another hollow assurance that proves just how out of touch the Tories are and they attempt to tinker when the country requires actual change.

Under this proposal NHS workers on daytime shifts and the preponderance of outpatients will have to pay for parking, leaving people out of pocket just for using public services.

In Wales, Labour has shown it’s possible to conclude this tax on sickness and if the Tories are genuinely engaged on stopping this dilemma they’ll have to go further and match Labour’s promise to ban all charges.

Young people can’t afford to buy a home, older people are going without the care they require, the NHS is heading into the worst winter crisis on record and millions of kids are growing up in poverty.

The only people who profit from this no hope manifesto are big businesses and the super-rich who don’t want to see the actual change this country requires and this election is a once in a generation opportunity to choose a Labour government that will change our country, with a manifesto that proposes real change and will take on the vested interests holding people back.

The pledge will be financed with £78 million a year for hospitals in England and £216 million in capital funding for 19 hospitals to build multistorey car parks.

Overall, the Tories said their manifesto will announce:

No rise in Income Tax, National Insurance or VAT for five years
£78m a year to fund partial free NHS hospital parking for a select few in ‘vulnerable groups’ – disabled people, frequent outpatient attendees, gravely ill patients, visitors to relatives who have an extended stay in hospital or their carers, and staff on night shifts
Raise the threshold for National Insurance to £9,500 next year, which he says will mean a £100 tax cut for 31 million workers – though experts say it won’t help the poorest who already don’t pay NI
Keep pensions triple lock, winter fuel payment and the older person’s bus pass
£1bn for extra childcare on school premises after lessons and during holidays in a bid to get 250,000 more primary school children onsite childcare over the summer. This is £250m a year for 3 years to boost term-time and holiday provision in schools; and £250m capital for the first year to kick-start the plan by getting staff, equipment or premises
£6.3bn making social housing more energy efficient
Keep energy price cap
A new ban on exporting plastic waste to poorer countries outside OECD
£2bn over four years for a national programme to fill potholes

But he won’t give automatic free TV licences to over 75s, stating that will continue to be the BBC’s responsibility despite the Tories breaking an earlier promise to protect the benefit.

As it stands, where this Tory government social care policies are concerned, a person has to sell their family home to finance private for-profit care homes of about £1,500 a week.

Although once a person’s funds are down to the point where they can claim benefits, then it’s covered by the state and then there are those NHS chiefs making £300,000 a year and then claim back £149 on a parking ticket on their expenses.

But then the Conservatives enjoy taxing the sick because they see it as completely normal and it’s representative of this clown government, making staff, doctors and nurses pay, rather than give it for free.

But then this government has never had to visit a hospital long term as a visitant, or a patient, as all theirs will be done privately, one law for them and another for the hard-working staff of the NHS.

Ralf Little Locked Out Of Twitter

Ralf Little said that he was booted out of his Twitter account after he mocked the Tories for their fact-checking rebrand.

Conservative Campaign Headquarters (CCHQ) caused outrage for rebranding their account factcheckUK during the first election debate between Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson.

Twitter has since threatened to ban them from the platform should they do so again.

Soon after their rebrand, dozens of high-profile Twitter accounts promptly copied the move to pillory the Tories, one of them being Royle Family actor Ralf Little. He altered his name to ‘Conservative Press Orifice’ and the description to ‘Not a fact-checker or the Conservative Press Office’.

Ralf sent a message that he’d been logged out of his Twitter account without explanation and assumed he’d been suspended, which was fine but only if the CCHQPress account is suspended for the same thing and he asked for people to press the issue with Twitter in his absence. The account continues to be visible but no Tweets have been posted.

In the meantime, Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab stated the Conservatives won’t make any apology for having an instant rebuttal of the garbage and lies circulated by opposition parties, he also didn’t rule out the party doing it again.

And speaking about the Tories changing their Twitter to factcheckUK during the leader’s debate, Dominic Raab stated that they’ll always abide by the rules with these things and that if there’s information that comes out, look at it extremely thoroughly.

He further added that he’s not in charge of social media but that he believed the account was very clearly linked to the CCHQ, it was on the face of it but that they were refuting the stupidity that regularly gets put about the Conservative position so that voters and the audiences know the facts.

The @CCHQpress account is verified by Twitter, displaying a blue tick which is designed to indicate that a user is authenticated and in acknowledgement, Twitter has warned that rules are in place on the platform which prevents behaviour that deceives the public.

Twitter said that it’s committed to promoting wholesome debate during the UK General Election and that they have global rules in place to prevent behaviour that can deceive people, including those with confirmed accounts and that any further endeavours to deceive people by editing verified profile information, in a manner seen during the UK election debate will result in certain corrective action.

And Twitter has been bolstering its efforts to prevent misleading information during the election campaign after launching a new tool to allow people to report intentionally misleading details about the voting process.

Of course, there’s nothing wrong with fact-checking and Ralf Little presumably wasn’t locked out of Twitter for what he said, it was probably the phrasing of his username and Twitter, Facebook and Youtube are not the purveyors of restraint, they’re the purveyors of a snowflake mentality.

Angry Mum Confronts Top Tory

An exasperated mum braved Dominic Raab about Tory claims of putting £500 into the pocket of everybody.

The Foreign Secretary was questioned about Conservative proposals to increase the threshold for paying National Insurance when an unnamed mum said she was a food bank user and questioned him about the suggestion it would put £500 in the pocket of everybody, asking him how far that money would go.

Dominic Raab responded that it was an incremental improvement and it was more than any other party was offering to the lowest paid in our society and that he would raise it even further.

However, when questioned how the plans would be financed, he stated that he’d done this for two hours before finally walking away.

The furious mother told him that she simply wanted to understand and that she was a food bank user and she didn’t believe that he’d stepped in one and that she didn’t think that he’d spoken to the people there.

And that when he’s talking about the £500 that she believed he was insulting to the people who need to use the food bank, particularly when you’re talking about three weeks of your shopping per year.

The encounter took place at St Andrew’s Church in Cobham. At the same event, Dominic Raab was booed and shouted at by a room of constituents as he explained his party’s Brexit proposals.

He was taking questions from his constituents alongside Monica Harding, the Liberal Democrat hopeful and as Dominic Raab attempted to give his closing address, there was continued taunting from the masses.

Both moments were captured on camera as Dominic Raab stated that he’d been doing this for two hours but this lady wanted to discuss the Tory pledge with him but he promptly left the church after stating that she was entitled to her opinion at the end of the video.

Frankly, it was disappointing that he seemed to give her relatively short shrift and as her MP, there for a public speaking event, you would have expected him to give some time to one of his more vulnerable constituents.

And it should be acknowledged that the nature of her question was slightly vague and that he may have found it challenging to give a suitable reply but how he reacted to her was unworthy of someone in his position and what an ignorant unschooled remark from Dominic Raab, poverty is prevalent everywhere.

Boris Johnson’s Comments About Corporation Tax Cuts

Boris Johnson’s remarks about corporation tax cuts being a great thing have come back to torment him as he stood before business chiefs and assured them it was fiscally able to cancel tax cuts for big businesses, so that money could be used to pay for the NHS.

But just months ago, when he was running in the Tory leadership contest, he excitedly debated for the exact opposite position and he said that every time corporation tax has been cut in this country it’s generated more income.

Well, that’s not stringently accurate, and even recently, Business Secretary Andrea Leadsom was making the same argument, seemingly oblivious that Boris Johnson was about to deliver a screeching u-turn on the tax cuts.

And now he’s saying that they’re suspending further reductions in corporation tax which saves £6 billion that they can put into the priorities of the British people, including the NHS.

So, is Boris Johnson telling the truth, well, if you’re asking whether the Tories cutting corporation taxes has raised tax revenue, the response is no?

There appears to have been an increase in revenue after the corporation tax cut, but not because of it and much of the increase in revenue since 2010 is solely recuperating from the consequences of the financial crisis and recession and they would have expected a return in profits even if the corporation tax rate hadn’t been curtailed.

Corporation tax revenues today are at much the same level they were at before the financial crunch, despite a 7 percentage point cut in the headline rate. That’s because a series of other changes have increased the effective rate of corporation tax because the headline rate isn’t all that matters.

Abandoning the proposed further 2 percentage point cut will leave the government with about £6 billion a year more revenue than it would have got had it gone ahead with the cut.

Tax cuts for the wealthy, soup kitchens and Foodbanks for the great unwashed but only in a country that won two world wars and now we know who we won them for and it wasn’t for us.

That’s precisely why the Tories were booted out shortly after WWII. Labour then introduced free tertiary education, which has since been destroyed by the Tories, the NHS, now under threat from the Tories, Social Security, massively reduced by the Tories and nationalised the inefficient train system, since re-privatised by the Tories.

When Britain emerged triumphant from the Second World War, the Labour Party under Clement Attlee came to power and formed a comprehensive welfare state, with the founding of the National Health Service giving free healthcare to all British citizens and other improvements to benefits.

The Labour Party added charges for NHS dental services and glasses in 1951 and the Conservatives returned to power in 1951, accepting most of Labour’s postwar reforms but included prescription charges to the NHS in 1952 and denationalised steel in 1953.

They presided over 13 years of economic recovery and stability, however, the Suez Crisis of 1956 demonstrated Britain was no longer a superpower, although Ghana, Malaya, Nigeria and Kenya were given independence throughout this period.

Labour returned to power under Harold Wilson in 1964 and superintended a range of social reforms including the partial decriminalisation of homosexuality and abortion, the relaxing of divorce laws and the end of capital punishment.

Edward Heath returned the Conservatives to power from 1970 to 1974 and oversaw the decimalisation of British money, the accession of Britain to the European Economic Community and the height of troubles in Northern Ireland and the wake of the 1973 oil crisis and a miner’s strike, Edward Heath introduced the three day working week to conserve power.

Labour made a recovery to power in 1974 but a string of strikes carried out by trade unions over the winter of 1978-79, known as the Winter of Discontent paralysed the country and as Labour lost its majority in parliament, a general election was announced in 1979 which took Margaret Thatcher to power and started 18 years of Conservative government with triumph in the Falklands War, 1982 and the government’s strong opposition to trade unions helped lead the Conservative Party to another three terms in government.

Margaret Thatcher initially pursued monetarist policies and went on to privatise many of Britain’s nationalised companies such as British Telecom, British Gas Corporation, British Airways and the British Steel Corporation, fortuitously, she kept the National Health Service.

The questionable Community Charge, generally called the ‘Poll Tax’, used to finance local government was despised and the Conservatives removed Margaret Thatcher as Prime Minister in 1990.

Margaret Thatcher’s replacement John Major succeeded the Poll Tax with the Council Tax, same thing, just another name for it and oversaw successful British involvement with the Gulf War.

Despite a recession, John Major led the Conservatives to a surprise victory in 1992. The events of Black Wednesday in 1992, party disunity over the European Union and various embarrassments involving Conservative politicians led to Labour under Tony Blair gaining a landslide election victory in 1997.

Labour had shifted its policies closer to the political centre, under the new catchword ‘New Labour’. The Bank of England was given autonomy over monetary policy and Scotland and Wales were given a devolved Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly respectively.

And a devolved power-sharing Northern Ireland Executive was founded in 1998, considered by many to be the end of The Troubles.

Tony Blair led Britain into the Afghanistan and Iraq War before leaving office in 2007, when he was superseded by his Chancellor Gordon Brown and a global recession in 2008-10 led to Labour’s downfall in the 2010 election.

It was succeeded by a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition, overseen by David Cameron, that proceeded a series of public spending cuts to decrease the budget shortfall and in June 2016, the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union, which led to David Cameron’s departure.

Following that, the Conservatives succeeded David Cameron with Theresa May.

Theresa May engaged in a scheme to take the country out of the European Union with her flagship Brexit withdrawal agreement but with this agreement having folded in the House of Commons three times, Theresa May quit and a Conservative leadership election followed, which Boris Johnson then won.

On the 24th July 2019, Boris Johnson was elected Prime Minister and now it seems politically acceptable to say that corporation tax cuts were the holy grail of all human beings.

But now a few weeks later it’s politically acceptable to say there will be no corporation tax cuts and to further pretend to be on the side of the people by saying the money would go to the NHS instead, like the Brexit dividend of £350 million a week.

So, Brexiteers, what do you think’s going to happen if old Boris wins the election and how manipulated are people going to be? Because some simple dupes will want to replicate this absurdity that sustains their childish pride but this is why Conservative voters are so effortlessly manipulated by crooked leaders.

But when Boris Johnson is wolfing foie gras in an upmarket Mayfair eatery with his mercenary Eton confidants, city wideboys and tax dodgers while he’s giving a pooh-pooh speech, he’ll do what he wants in his Eton chums interest while supporting the super-rich while persecuting the disabled, poor and handicapped.

Of course, many people take the view that all politicians lie, well, they might not all lie, but they do shrug their shoulders and treating all politicians as fabricators gives a permit for the complete breakdown of the integrity of British politics, a collapse that practised deceivers such as Boris Johnson are thrilled to exploit.

And the British media isn’t holding him to account for his repeated lies and its high time journalists did their job and started to regain their self-respect and it’s difficult to comprehend how any rational person can believe a word Boris Johnson says.

He lies about everything, no matter how minor or major and now he’s even failing at his most significant task, promoting himself and he gets believed because his lies never get outed and we have a sympathetic media that covers the lies because they want him to win and so no single lie of his will be called out.

And quite a lot is being revealed about Tory anti-Semitism and Islamophobia but it doesn’t get to the press, yet social media is rife with it and there’s a lot more being revealed about contributions to the Tory’s from Russian Oligarchs, £3.5 million recently.

Boris Johnson is a habitual liar and if it wasn’t so serious it would be comical, he’s incompetent and he’s embarrassing to watch and it seems true that people will vote for the Tories especially when they’re promising tax cuts.

Anti-Semitic And Racist Slogans

Graffiti that displayed Swastikas, discriminatory slogans, and homophobic messages were plastered across vehicles and garage walls across Canvey, Essex.

Essex Police received eight reports of graffiti, which were spread over cars and garages in Ferrymead, Lincoln Way and Southwater in red spray paint which is being treated as a hate crime.

Officers went door to door to reassure residents in Canvey, Essex and they visited over 250 houses over the whole of the day and it’s thought that the damage happened between midnight and 5 am.

The Canvey Island community has embraced people of all backgrounds, cultures and beliefs, and for someone to openly profess hostility of certain members of society, and damage property in doing so is unacceptable.

And the police have been working closely with residents to increase awareness of hate crime, gather information and have maintained a visible presence in the region to prevent any further criminal activity.

Whoever did this are narrow-minded tyrants and have no justification for their senseless destructive ways and ironically it appears that these far-right nincompoops were in the poppy mafia, acting all nationalistic.

Of course, not everyone that wore a poppy on Remembrance Day is a racialist, most are not, but now it’s looking like that some are and this is a shameful lack of regard to all good people past and present.

And most racialists have pretty hollow heads at best and I suspect this one didn’t have more than two brain cells inside his cranium and these pieces of trash don’t deserve to even breath the same air as everybody else particularly when it comes to persecuting Jewish people.

The only difficulty is that when they find whoever did this they’ll simply get a small fine and community service, which they probably won’t show up for, they should make them clean it all up using just their tongue.

And it does make me wonder why people don’t like Jews. Jews are fairly decent people and they go about their business and don’t create any problems.

Some of the hateful slogans read ‘Jews out’ and ‘f**k n*ggers, emerging as the country mourned the lives of soldiers who perished fighting fascism.

The shocking slogan emerged across Canvey Island, Essex in red paint, between the hours of midnight and 5 am on Remembrance Sunday where the town has a large Orthodox Jewish Community and which has been offended by the crime.

The timing made the terrible messages even worse and it makes you question what goes through people’s thoughts when they do such things and there are some especially nasty people amongst us, hate fascists and they need to be rooted out and they should be taken to Auschwitz and made to understand the fear that the Swastika stood for.

Katherine Gun: Whistleblower

Katherine Gun was a British translator who worked for the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), a British intelligence agency. In 2003, she leaked top-secret information to The Observer, concerning a request by the United States for intelligence on diplomats from members of the Security Council, who were scheduled to vote on a second United Nations resolution on the planned 2003 attack of Iraq.

Katherine Gun’s regular job at GCHQ in Cheltenham was to transcribe Mandarin Chinese into English but while at work at GCHQ on 31 January 2003 Katherine Gun read an email from Frank Koza, the chief of staff at the division of the regional target of the American intelligence agency, the National Security Agency.

Frank Koza’s email requested assistance in a secret operation to bug the United Nations offices of six nations, Angola, Bulgaria, Cameroon, Chile, Guinea and Pakistan.

These were the six swing nations on the UN Security Council that could decide whether the UN authorised the attack of Iraq.

Some claim the plan defiled the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, which coordinates global diplomacy.

Katherine Gun was outraged by the email and took a printed copy of it home with her and after studying the email over the weekend, she gave the email to a friend who was acquainted with journalists.

In February, she travelled to London to take part in a protest against war with Iraq and Katherine Gun heard no more about the email, and had forgotten all about it until Sunday 2 March, when she saw it printed on the front page of The Observer newspaper.

Less than a week after the Observer story, on Wednesday 5 March, Katherine Gun confessed to her line manager at GCHQ that she’d leaked the email and was arrested and in a BBC interview with Jeremy Paxman, she stated that she’d not raised the matter with staff counsellors as she truly didn’t think it would have any useful conclusion.

Katherine Gun spent a night in police custody, and eight months later was charged with violating the Official Secrets Act and while waiting to hear whether she would be charged, Katherine Gun embarked on a postgraduate degree course in global ethics at Birmingham University.

On 13 November 2003, Katherine Gun was charged with an offence under section 1 of the Official Secrets Act 1989 and her case became a cause célèbre among activists, and many people stepped forward to urge the government to dismiss the case.

Among them was Reverend Jesse Jackson, Daniel Ellsberg, the US government official who leaked the Pentagon Papers and actor Sean Penn, who described her as a hero of the human spirit.

Katherine Gun intended to plead not guilty, saying in her defence that she acted to stop imminent loss of life in a war she deemed was illegal.

The case came to court on 24 February 2004 and inside half an hour, the case was dismissed because the prosecution failed to offer evidence, yet the reasons for the prosecution dismissing the case was unclear.

The day before the trial, Katherine Gun’s defence team had requested the government for any records of legal advice about the validity of the war that it had acquired during the run-up to the war.

A full trial might have revealed any such records to public inspection, as the defence was expected to demonstrate that trying to stop an illegal war of aggression overcome Katherine Gun’s responsibilities under the Official Secrets Act.

Speculation was prevalent in the media that the prosecution service had yielded to political pressure to dismiss the case so that any such records would remain undisclosed.

However, a Government spokesperson stated that the decision to drop the case had been made before the defence’s demands had been presented and that The Guardian newspaper had announced plans to drop the case the preceding week.

On the day of the court hearing, Katherine Gun stated that she was quite bewildered in the 21st century that we as human beings are still dropping bombs on each other as a method to resolve issues.

In May 2019 The Guardian said the case was dropped when the prosecution realised that evidence would surface and that even British government lawyers thought the attack was illegal.

In September 2019 Ken Macdonald, the former director of public prosecution, said the case against Katherine Gun was not dismissed to prevent the Attorney General’s advice on the legitimacy of the Iraq War from being exposed and he maintained that Katherine Gun wouldn’t have received a fair trial without the disclosure of information that would have jeopardised national security and one questions whether the disclosure in this criminal case might have been a little too embarrassing.

Two years after Katherine Gun’s trial, she penned an article called ‘Iran: Time to Leak’, which asked whistleblowers to make public information about plans for a possible war against Iran.

And she advised those in a position to do so to expose information which correlates to this prospective aggression, legal advice, meets between the White House and other intelligence agencies, assessments of Iran’s threat level, or better yet, evidence that assessments had been altered, troop deployments and army notifications and that we shouldn’t let intelligence and facts be fixed around the policy this time.

Katherine Gun uncovered dirty games of the secret services and paid a high price for them, was it worth it?

Twelve years after the Gulf War in 1991, the United States Bush administration proposed an attack of Iraq in early 2003 and the United States, with its most intimate ally Britain and international support, wanted to overthrow dictator Saddam Hussein and was under huge justification pressure.

US Secretary of State Colin Powell presented alleged evidence of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction to the UN Secretary Council on 5 February and the then British Prime Minister Tony Blair aided with comparable assertions.

Shortly before, Frank Koza of the US secret service NSA sent a top-secret mail and bluntly asked his colleagues of the British GCHQ for unlawful assistance, saying “As you know by now, the Agency launches a wave of interception against UN Security Council members, minus Great Britain and the USA, of course”.

Desired is the full spectrum of information that could help start a war against Iraq. Frank Koza wrote on January 31, 2003, that six members with voting rights were to be blackmailed.

But even Katherine Gun couldn’t stop the start of the war but it did trigger a scandal and a global outrage and it was the most important and courageous leak that had been seen and for weeks it’s all the world spoke about but nobody thought about how Katherine Gun was feeling.

Katherine Gun felt isolated at the time and wasn’t sure who she could trust or what the consequences of what her action might be and that must have been extremely stressful for her.

Today we have a much clearer understanding of what transpired then but at the same time, many questions continue to be unanswered about the relationship between the intelligence agencies NSA or GCHQ, that’s the super political issue, did they act independently? Or by directives, through official channels?

The affair began with an email and in it, the NSA asked the GCHQ for assistance listening to the UN and segments of the Security Council were to be blackmailed to vote for the Iraq war.

Katherine Gun was already cognizant that the people were not being told the truth throughout the Iraq war and that numerous journalists, sadly, didn’t investigate what the politicians claimed but Katherine Gun had investigated herself and had come to the conclusion that there wasn’t any justification for an Iraq attack and when she saw the email, the red line was crossed for her.

The email revealed what was going on behind the scene and it jarred Katherine Gun on how blatantly politicians wanted to manipulate the vote and she knew that was ammo for opponents of war but sadly, British politicians didn’t seize this opportunity later, which bothered Katherine Gun because if you have evidence, you should use it.

After Katherine Gun read the email she thought about all over the weekend but she didn’t speak to anyone about it, not even her husband and it was a restless weekend, hard to describe as if she’d suddenly landed in an unfamiliar world like the Wizard of Oz.

It seemed as if no one was aware of what was happening, only her and she was so nervous because leaking this email was punishable and she feared that the GCHQ could feel her guilty conscience or that they could read her mind but still, she acted.

It was about a war contrary to international law and that was her motivation, so she printed it out and put it in the mailbox on Monday and that was it, it was out of her hands.

She had posted the letter to a contact who wanted to pass it to The Observer but then nothing happened for weeks and there was a mixture of emotions, at first a bit discouraged and then somewhat relieved and she had participated in the big anti-war protest in London in February 2003 and she was touched because millions around the world protested that day and she thought that was enough, the war will not come.

But in March 2003, the story was on the front page of The Observer and it was a huge shock because it was terrifying for a person who’s committed themselves to never giving out documents in the Official Secrets Act to see such a document on the front page of a major newspaper and it was scary.

There was also an error in transcribing the email where an overeager secretary consistently translated all terms from American English into British English, so some journalists questioned if it was simply a scam.

Katherine Gun didn’t see the error at first because she was practically in a state of shock and besides, what could she have done, should she have called The Observer and say, “Hi, that’s mine, it’s real”.

The GCHQ immediately searched feverishly for the leak and when she was questioned for the first time, she denied everything but she said that she’s a poor liar and sensed that she couldn’t keep going to work that way because she was a sincere person, so she went to her superiors.

Her superior responded differently from what she expected she would. She was extremely sympathetic and concerned and she told Katherine about other past employees who had thrown for ideological reasons.

Katherine Gun was taken into custody and was charged 8 months later but there was never a point where she regretted what she’d done but there were times when she felt discouraged, demotivated, broken and fearful and she tried to survive day after day without the system wearing her down.

The process concluded in February 2004 with a surprise, because minutes after the opening, the case was closed because Attorney General Peter Goldsmith didn’t present any evidence.

The Attorney General had issued a lengthy report to Tony Blair, with whom he was a close friend and concluded that there was no legitimate justification for war, only that was his assessment several weeks before the war.

Then he met with lawyers from US Security Advisor Rice and Vice President Cheney and changed his assessment and there were various theories which were later known and had Katherine Gun’s case come to court, all of that might have come out earlier.

The Blair Government wasn’t interested in a trial because then Katherine Gun could have justified her breach of the law with the defensive necessity, emergency in case of imminent danger, ie Red and they didn’t want a court to decide for that would have raised in detail the question of the legitimacy of the war.

For Katherine Gun, the acquittal was great, but not for the country and it was quite costly because Katherine Gun lost her colleagues and friends but she also gained a lot of new friends and acquaintances.

It was also true that she never got a long-term job again and it took her two years to adjust to her life and her new circumstances and she was a little traumatised, hardly speaking about it because it stressed her out but then her daughter was born and she wanted to spend a lot of time with her.

Before the Iraq war, the US Government was desperately looking for a smoking gun, undeniable evidence that supported the war along with all the sick jokes that Katherine Gun had to endure as a whistleblower with the surname ‘Gun’.

Mr Koza stated the information would give the US policymakers an advantage in getting results beneficial to US goals or to head off surprises and the eavesdropping would have involved interception of international traffic between delegations and home governments, but also the bugging of offices and homes as well.

And the nature of the memorandum suggests the familiarity between GCHQ and its much larger American ally, the British organisation being treated more like an outstation than an independent entity and it simply shows how anxious the Americans were to pre-empt any effort at a settlement resolution that might result in a weakening of the hardline position they and their British collaborators had assumed towards Saddam Hussein’s regime.

Emails like Mr Koza’s would have usually have faded into the intelligence ether but unluckily for the British Government, it turned out to be the one that got away and at some time during the next month it popped up on the computer screen of Katherine Gun.

How she came to have access to the memorandum presumably addressed to senior officers is unclear but because of her independent spirit, she determined that the memo’s contents revoked her responsibilities under the Official Secrets Act.

And even though she had little thought on what went on at GCHQ, it was a position where she could use her language abilities. She was not inclined to leak secrets but she felt it was a clear and significant matter that needed to get out to the people.

Katherine was pretty shocked and she felt the British intelligence services were being asked to do something that would threaten the entire UN democratic process and when she first leaked it she had no idea if anybody would be interested but she felt very strongly about it and hoped the newspapers would get their fangs into it.

She was hoping to pour some cold water on people’s heated debates about war and she wanted people to stop and have a rational and impartial debate about why they were going to war.

Katherine Gun wasn’t exactly seeking anything, it just happened and she felt it was rather important because the email did shock her and when she was asked if she knew she was breaking the law, she responded that she guessed she was.

The article proposed a sneering attempt by the Americans and British to manipulate the UN and it couldn’t have come at a more critical time, with the attack of Iraq less than three weeks away.

And it was a major humiliation for GCHQ, which was under pressure from its big brother to demonstrate how a sensitive bugging operation had become public knowledge.

Katherine Gun was a rather sensitive person and she felt that she couldn’t go on working for GCHQ after what she’d done but that what she’d done was a matter of duty and she never regretted her action because it was wrong to bug the Security Council to manipulate the vote.

It was a cynical operation that went far beyond normal bugging and it was the run-up to the second resolution which the US desperately wanted to provide a basis for starting a war, sadly what she did, did not realise the intended end, but she was right to try.

Katherine Gun broke the Official Secrets Act and she admitted that but in her defence she was acting under the pressure of events and it was the right thing to do and she may have sort of disgraced her country but it was a principled stand, and what she did was never politically motivated.

She was not especially political and Katherine was arming herself for the possibility of prison, violation of Section 1 carrying a two-year sentence but in the end, it didn’t come to that because the Crown Prosecution Service withdrew the charge against her without giving a reason, although I’m sure political opportunism unquestionably executed its part.

Katherine Gun’s lawyers who were provided by the civil rights group Liberty warned the prosecution that they would seek disclosure of the advice offered to the Government by Lord Goldsmith, the Attorney General, in the run-up to the attack of Iraq.

But the Government declined to deliver the entirety of his comments, which may have included argument against military action and any objections made by the Government’s senior law officer could have proved political dynamite if exposed in court.

The Foreign Office was no doubt eager for the Katherine Gun thing to wither away because there was always the possibility that Katherine Gun might win because during an appeal by David Shayler, the MI5 whistleblower imprisoned for exposing top-secret information to a Sunday newspaper, the House of Lords accepted that the terms of the Official Secrets Act might be overcome by a defence of emergency, so, therefore, Katherine Gun might have demonstrated that she was motivated, unsuccessfully by a wish to save human life.

Katherine Gun was also becoming too popular with high profile personalities in America, including the actor Sean Penn, the rights activist Jesse Jackson and Daniel Ellsberg, who leaked the Pentagon papers on US involvement in Vietnam, which provided valuable support.

The humiliation for Tony Blair became all the more prominent when five members of US Congress sent him an open letter saying that the British and American people deserved to know all the elements involved in the build-up to the war.

Following Katherine Guns expulsion from GCHQ, she registered at Birmingham University to study for a master’s degree in global ethics, a position that was seemingly more suited to her personality but she delayed her start date.

But whatever she’d done, she unquestionably joined a long list of whistleblowers, Tisdall, Ponting et al, who’ve for a mere second put the secret world in the spotlight and Katherine Gun has unmistakably ceased to be a fan of Tony Blair and the government.

Katherine Gun was a pretty brave woman but it’s particularly worrying that the US seemed to be inclined to give United Kingdom spies orders or that the United Kingdom has gone along meekly with blatantly unlawful and unethical acts.

Can you visualise what the United Kingdom government would say if other countries attempted to do the same thing? But unfortunately, the CIA, GCHQ, NSA and MI6 et cetera are criminal cartels and they’re involved in abduction, cruelty, death, drug running, weapons smuggling, and money laundering and they dodge law by controlling the politicians of their countries by extensive spying, extortion and bribery.

And any politician who supports defending these organisations or who supports secret courts or who supports spying on their nationals can never be trusted.

Katherine Gun was brave and we needed someone of her character to blow the whistle on secrets like this and this is the hard evidence and stark proof that Great Britain government officials, together with other US lackeys have become US mercenaries and are acting with such conviction as if there was no other option and no other alternative but to bomb Iraq.

Katherine Gun gave us hope that perhaps there could be an end to this mortifying servitude from this predator called the USA and people should be proud of what she did and should continue to be so.

Katherine Gun is a person who we can all aspire to be like but when the moment comes, do we do the right thing? Well, of course, we should but at a probable price of losing everything and being prosecuted but as far as she was concerned, she did the right thing and we should never overlook her part in highlighting how far the US and Tony Blair were willing to go to ensure they went to War.

Tony Blair and George Bush should have found themselves facing war crime charges because they started a war of aggression without UN permission and if this had of happened then Katherine Gun’s contribution would not have been in vain.

Some people might not remember this story about Katherine Gun, others might remember it well, but this is a reminder that at the bottom of Pandora’s box, lies hope but this was a shameful illegal act to use the GCHQ to spy on delegates to the United Nations in order to blackmail them and coerce their votes of a military action that was justified by misrepresentations and dishonest deception.

Katherine Gun was, of course, a hero for exposing these violations at the expense of her career and she’s an extraordinary woman and we should be taking our hat off to her because she paid the price of doing what she did, like other whistleblowers in similar situations have.

And it appears that a true sense of principle and honesty usually comes into conflict with these large bureaucracies and where integrity and a sense of discipline take priority over ethical considerations.

We’re frequently told that strength and character are good traits, but in reality, they’re usually penalised, particularly when it’s the best way to improve oneself in the hierarchy.

Bravo to Katherine Gun and in the future when Government has been defeated, hopefully, her name will stand beside other heroes and other brilliant persons who put their conscience before their profession.

And what she did might have appeared to have been in vain but it was also critically important to place on the public record that our governments are misbehaving and do misbehave.

They do falsify causes of war and they do attempt to deceive us with the idea that our boys and girls only behave honourably, whether before, during and after the war and it’s important to stress that patriotism should never trump the truth.

And in the wake of modern propaganda tactics, war has become a get out of jail free card for failed and shameful politicians and the biggest evil in the modern world is that it’s become easy for enthusiasts of war to trump up the causes and it has become easy for the victors to record their version of history to the near exclusion of others.

Russian Tory Donors Named In Report

Nine Russian business people who gave money to the Tories have been identified in a report that was sordidly covered up by 10 Downing Street and it’s been reported that numerous contributors had been named in a report by the Intelligence and Security Committee of Parliament (ISC) on alleged Russian interference in UK elections.

The report is still under wraps, despite pleas by ISC chair Dominic Grieve for its release after Downing Street declined to confirm its discovery before Parliament adjourned for the election.

It wasn’t made clear who the contributors listed in the report were, or whether they would have been mentioned publicly in the report or been in its confidential annexe and it’s additionally unclear what any references to donors in the report say but then billionaires finance the Conservative Party, so this shameful cover-up shouldn’t be unexpected.

And the Tories hindered this report and opposed tax transparency so their billionaire backers could continue to rip us off unchallenged and Labour is on the side of the many, not the few, so we’ll get dirty money out of governments, introduce an oligarch tax and take on vested interests selling out our people and public services.

Chancellor Sajid Javid was challenged on the report but stated that he believed it had been timed out in terms of the election and that when it came to party donors, whether it’s the Conservative Party or any other party, there are extremely stringent rules that need to be followed and that of course, they will always follow those rules.

And asked if he was certain Russian money wasn’t pulling the strings in the election, Sajid Javid stated that he was as sure as he could be and that he was sure in terms of his party and that he was pretty confident about how they were financed and that they were quite clear about that.

But Conservative Party’s Russian linked donors have come under investigation before with Lubov Chernukhin, a banker and wife of a former ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, who gave the Tories a single cash contribution of £200,000 but there is no suggestion that she’s named in the ISC report.

Top Tory Grant Shapps blamed the machinery of government for the stay in publication, adding the government is not permitted to print things which are regarded as questionable in any way around election time.

Chairman of the committee Dominic Grieve previously accused the Government of sitting on the report and stated it was sent to the Prime Minister for approval on October 17, however, the Government maintained that more time was needed to redact information, however, former Cabinet Secretary Lord Butler and Lord Ricketts, a former National Security Adviser dismissed this response.

Political funding in the United Kingdom has been a cause of debate for countless years, even though political parties in the United Kingdom can be financed through membership fees, party contributions or state funding, the latter of which is reserved for administrative costs.

The Conservative Party relies on contributions often from people and businesses, as well as sources the Labour Party gets a notable portion of its donations from Trade Unions.

However, the Conservatives have received significant cash injections from several Russian contributors and their friends and well connected Russian oligarchs and companies have been massively involved in lobbying for Russian interests and have stepped up their funding of the Conservative party.

And this report comes as Boris Johnson stands accused of presiding over a cover-up over his government’s unwillingness to release a report into alleged Russian meddling in British politics.

And now we know one of the reasons Boris Johnson is suppressing the official report into Kremlin penetration of our government. It’s because of the substantial and increasing ties between Russian money and the Tory party.

Boris Johnson faces mounting pressure over his decision to withhold the report on Kremlin electoral interference but Dominic Grieve said that the grounds given for the report’s unprecedented delay were false.

And Downing Street has maintained that there wasn’t enough time for the report sign-off process before the election.

Former Prime Minister, Theresa May, had earlier vowed to distance the Conservatives from Russian money, especially in the wake of the Salisbury poisonings in 2018 and by far, the largest recent Russian contributor has been Lubov Chernukhin, the wife of a former Russian deputy finance minister.

Lubov Chernukhin has donated more than £450,000 to the Conservatives in the last year.

Another former arms financier Alexander Temerko, a notable Russian contributor in Tory circles who have given money in the past year and Alexander Temerko, who has talked passionately about his friend Boris Johnson, has gifted over £1.2 million to the Conservatives over the past seven years.

And he reportedly confessed to being involved in a Eurosceptic conspiracy to oust Theresa May as Tory leader less than a year ago and with the Conservatives looking to raise £30 million before December’s general election, significant funders to the Tory campaign are expected to include many existing Russian contributors.

An investigation by Open Democracy has determined that the Conservatives have received more than £3.5 million from Russian funders since 2010 and while contributions quieted down following the poisoning of Russian double agent Sergei Skripal in Salisbury in March 2018, they’ve picked up again in recent months, according to filings to the Electoral Commission.

Between November 2018 and October 2019, the Tories have received at least £489,850 from Russian contributors, compared to less than £350,000 in the preceding year.

In May, the Conservatives also received approximately £20,000 from a lobbying company closely connected to both Russian interests and the upper echelons of the Tory party and founded by former Ulster Unionist MP David Burnside, New Century Media was funded by the Kremlin to cultivate a positive image of Russia in the United Kingdom in 2013.

New Century Media, which has donated more than £177,000 to the Conservatives over the last decade, previously arranged for Vladimir Putin’s judo partner to meet then Prime Minister David Cameron at a major Tory fundraising event in 2013.

Burnside also represented Dmytro Firtash, a Ukrainian oligarch familiar to Vladimir Putin, who’s wanted by the FBI on bribery charges.

New Century Media has also represented Gerard Lopez, the former Formula One chief who has close business relations with senior figures in Putin’s Russia and who came under attack from Labour MPs when he gave £400,000 to the Conservatives in 2016.

Another prominent recent Tory donor is the Russian billionaire financier Lev Mikheev and the Moscow born investment banker has given £212,000 to the Tories since 2010 and records reveal that the former Tory MP Rory Stewart received £10,000 from Lev Mikheev for his failed Conservative leadership bid.

Lubov Chernukhin has been the most generous Tory contributors in recent months and is a long-standing party sponsor who has given more than £1.2 million to the Conservatives since 2014.

In February, Lubov Chernukhin attended the elite Black and White Ball for influential Tory contributors in Battersea Park, where she paid £135,000 at an auction to have dinner with Theresa May.

She also gave nearly £15,000 to the constituency office of the then Conservative Party chairman Brandon Lewis MP, now Minister of State for Security and Lubov Chernukhin had previously paid £160,000 to play tennis with Boris Johnson and David Cameron in 2014. She has also paid £30,000 to have dinner with Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson.

Alexander Temerko has also been a long-time supporter of the Tories. He was a frequent attendee at the Conservative leader’s group of influential donors and has connections to the highest levels of the Kremlin.

Plus Alexander Temerko has manifested himself as a critic of Brexit, but earlier this year it was announced that the Russian tycoon had privately argued pro-Brexit views, and admitted being involved in a failed endeavour led by members of a group of hardline Conservative MPs, the European Research Group, to expel Theresa May as leader in December 2018.

Alexander Temerko is supposed to be especially close to Boris Johnson and the two men sometimes call each other ‘Sasha’, the Russian diminutive for Alexander, which is Boris Johnson’s real first name, and which his most intimate friends call him.

The Conservative’s Russian ties have sparked problems in the past and after becoming the leader in 2016, Theresa May pledged to distance her party from Russian donors, with collaborators briefing that it wouldn’t be business as usual with Moscow.

But in March 2018, the Conservative Party refused appeals by, amongst others, Marina Litvinenko, the widow of Alexander Litvinenko, purportedly killed on orders of the Kremlin, to recover money given by numerous affluent Russians.

Labour MP Ben Bradshaw argued that the new conclusions made the release of the Intelligence and Security Committee report even more important and he stated that they knew that the Kremlin meddled in the 2016 US presidential election and our EU referendum and that nothing had changed since then.

We’re now embarking on the most important general election of our life but we don’t have any confidence that it won’t be subverted by an unfriendly foreign influence and why are powerful Russian interests giving money to the Conservatives?

Is this political, commercial or both? And what are their interests in propping up Boris Johnson’s government? Especially a government that’s refusing to release a report into Russian meddling in our politics.

Yet, a spokesperson for the Conservative Party stated that the Conservative Party doesn’t accept foreign donations as they’re illegal and that the people that have been mentioned have lived in Britain for numerous years and are British citizens, which gives them the democratic right to donate to a political party.

But both Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn are equally irresponsible, promising money left, right and centre to obtain votes and with our stalling economy and depreciated currency, now is not the time to promise huge sums of money to everyone.

And one way to circumvent tricky negotiations with the EU is to remain by voting for the Remain candidate on 12 December so that we can bin Brexit. That way there would be no need for re-negotiating with the WTO and the EU.

That way we can keep the fruitful deal we’ve been enjoying for decades, we can start repairing our economy, preserve the pound and forget about using ferries to bring in essential supplies and turning Kent into a lorry park and we can forget about employing additional customs officers to police and Irish and Continental borders.

But then Boris Johnson has a lot to hide from, from cheating to lying and a known groper of women, so why would anyone ever want to trust him? And only fools follow a Donkey but then can we trust any politician these days?

And Brexidiots are of course, too dense to understand that the USA and Russia are both quite intent to undermine us Europeans and once the UK leaves the EU they will take advantage of the desperation that will overwhelm our country in its newly isolated position.

Oligarchs financing our political party that looks after the wealthy only endeavour to keep the poorer and disadvantaged in servitude and there’s a common pattern emerging of an attempt at world mastery by a deep state machine that probably all answer to one puppet-master.

It was Remembrance Day last week, a time to remember those who fought wars, but in the meantime, we’re currently engaged in one that’s being fought electronically via banking, misinformation and media control.

And we should remember our heroes while we can because there might come a time when it could be made illegal to do so if these mobsters get their way and it’s quite pitiful that Tory apologists just keep rehashing the same mantra, Marxist, tax increases, disaster for economy, terrorist collaborators, can’t they come up with an original comment or independent thought?

And they don’t appear that worried that children are starving or that families don’t have homes and they’re thrilled to see our public services diminish even further, that’s because they’re wealthy and have no concept on how the world they live in works.

But according to the Tories, we seem to have the very best Government that Russian money can buy.

Russia bad, but Russian money good!

Boris Johnson Gives Rambling Incoherent Brexit Speech

Boris Johnson has been accused of not understanding his Brexit deal after he gave a random and rambling talk on the election trail as the Prime Minister was caught on camera praising fundamental elements of EU membership, including freedom of movement and access to the single market, to a group of Conservatives in Northern Ireland.

And critics of the Prime Minister’s deal questioned why the rest of the United Kingdom would not have those rights if Boris Johnson believes they are such a bonus. The Prime Minister was further savaged for misleading his audience about tariffs.

Under the Prime Minister’s deal, firms moving goods west from Britain to Northern Ireland will have to fill out two customs forms and EU customs laws will then apply to some of these goods, if they’re considered at risk of moving into the EU later on.

Yet Boris Johnson contradicted that by stating that there would not be tariffs or controls on goods coming from Great Britain to Northern Ireland that are not going on to Ireland, this is misleading.

Boris Johnson further stated there would be no checks on all goods going the other way, from Northern Ireland to Great Britain. Despite his own Brexit Secretary having previously told MPs that exit summary declaration would be required in terms of Northern Ireland to Great Britain.

Labour’s Shadow Brexit Secretary Keir Starmer, the Shadow Brexit Secretary, slammed the Prime Minister for the remarks, which he stated displayed a lack of understanding over his Brexit deal.

And he said that Boris Johnson either doesn’t understand the deal he’s negotiated or he isn’t telling the truth, probably both.

Under the Prime Minister’s deal, there will need to be customs checks on goods going from the United Kingdom into the EU but to bypass restraints on the 310-mile border between Northern Ireland and the Republic these will happen when goods from Great Britain arrive in Northern Ireland.

Northern Ireland and the Republic will share some EU single market laws, forcing checks on manufactured and agricultural goods crossing the Irish Sea.

But in an obscure and incoherent speech by Boris Johnson, he stated that when you come out of the EU Customs Union which is what we’ve done you have to have some way of checking that goods going to the United Kingdom into Ireland that might attract a tariff pay that tariff is there is to be a tariff, that sounds more like something someone would say if they were inebriated.

He continued saying that the only place you could do it if you didn’t do it at the border is at the border in Northern Ireland and that there would be no tariffs or controls on goods coming from Great Britain to Northern Ireland that are not going on to Ireland and that was the whole point.

And that the great thing that has been misunderstood about this is there will not be checks and that he spoke as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom and a passionate unionist and that there would be no checks on goods going from Northern Ireland to Great Britain because they were the government of the United Kingdom and that they would not initiate or execute or perform such checks.

And he said that actually, Northern Ireland has got a great deal, you keep freedom of movement, you keep access to the single market but you further have, as it states in the deal, unfettered access to Great Britain.

The anti-Brexit Liberal Democrats pounced on the Prime Minister’s remarks as an acknowledgement that the rest of the United Kingdom is getting a worse lot than Northern Ireland under his deal.

But Liberal Democrat Shadow Brexit Secretary Tom Brake stated that the single market and freedom of movement are an excellent deal and that even Boris Johnson understands this, so why isn’t he keeping them for the whole of the UK as part of the various benefits of EU membership?

And he continued that it was the best deal for the United Kingdom and that’s why a Liberal Democrat government will revoke Article 50 on day one because it’s time to stop Brexit and forge a more favourable future.

It must be especially challenging for Boris Johnson because he’s a simpering reprobate and he’s chosen to support a ridiculous decision and once that happens, all his efforts have been wasted in fruitless attempts to warrant it.

And it’s ridiculous to pretend that Brexidiots knew what they were voting for. They couldn’t have known because there were too many likely ways to leave the EU and it was never stipulated which one we would take, to return to World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, to take a Norway option, to take a Canada option or to get the famous bespoke deal that would give the United Kingdom all the perquisites but none of the responsibilities.

This latter was what the Brexidiot leaders kept promising, even though the EU ruled it outright from the start and all evidence confirms that we will undergo a huge blow to our economy by leaving, but rather than drawing conclusions from the evidence, the Brexidiots simply block it out by squawking ‘Project Fear’ every time that tiny voice of reason manages to make itself heard at the back of the withered truffle they call their brain.

All Boris Johnson’s speeches are random and disorganised and full of ridiculous identifiers such as ‘wonderful’ and ‘fantastic’ with unquestionably no substance and honestly the man has gone so far down the road of dishonesty, misrepresentation and misleading assurances that now perhaps he could never wander down the path of righteousness and understanding even by accident and perhaps a rocking horse would be more comfortable and more intellectually agile than Boris Johnson.

And have you noticed that every time Boris Johnson makes a fool of himself, the Tory quarters seem to employ additional ogres to defile the pages of the newspaper with their sheets of misleading rubbish and their trolls are so offensive, juvenile and ineffective they inspire people to vote Labour?

But then Boris Johnson is a bumbling, stumbling, blustering clown with his dog’s breakfast Brexit and it’s difficult to believe the Tories have allowed this fool to lead the nation or are they simply making him the fall guy for when it all goes wrong, which it unquestionably will.

Boris Johnson said that Northern Ireland has a great deal access to the single market and the Customs Union, yet he tells the British media that being a free member of the single market and the Customs Union with the EU is a bad deal – This man really can’t seem to stop lying, so which one is it, Boris,?

This guy’s a babbling loon when he contradicts himself all the time and it’s nauseous when we see him meandering through hospitals, with his sleeves rolled up which is essential when you’re working staff but not necessary if you’re a birdbrain looking for a photo opportunity, then a food distributor, in a white coat and hat.

And we should despair when so many voters go ‘Ah Boris, he’s doing his best’ but we should feel sad for the blockheads who believe one of the most dishonest, lying human beings on the political landscape because the only thing that Boris Johnson cares about is Boris.

Boris Johnson is not fit to be Prime Minister especially when he remarks that Muslim women are postboxes and that black people are pickaninnies with watermelon smiles, he’s just a joke and this is why Boris Johnson can’t be let out to campaign and we all know what a lousy campaigner he is and how slothful he is about getting across any brief and unavoidably he then says things that are off the mark and then he creates a disaster.

They sneak him here, they sneak him there, because he’s the dedicated follower of Thatcher, oh yes, he is…

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this:

Rate this:

Share this: