‘Theresa May’ (British Prime Minister) identified & blamed RUSSIA for the nerve-agent attack in England, as did ‘Donald Trump’ (President of United States), ‘Justin Trudeau’ (Prime Minister of Canada), ‘Emanuel Macron’ (President of France), ‘Angela Merkel’ (Chancellor of Germany) – but certainly NOT ‘Jeremy Corbyn’ (Leader of the Opposition & British Labour Party)?


Many of us watching or listening to events in the British Parliament yesterday did so with ‘open mouths’ when Jeremy Corbyn responded on behalf of the Opposition to Prime Minister Theresa May’s compelling statement about the disgraceful, unprecedented, irresponsible, brazen, nerve agent attack on people in Salisbury.

We had all fully expected him to stand shoulder to shoulder with the PM and with our security forces, to give them his full-blooded support to putting Russia in the World dock for this disgraceful attack on British people, involving the first offensive use on the European continent of banned chemical weapons since World War 2.

Instead, he unashamedly failed to denounce Russia and alternatively backed the Kremlin’s dismissive and demeaning response to the UK’s demand that they immediately explain how a weapon known to be ONLY in their hands, had been deployed to try to assassinate individuals on our soil. Rather than being behind his Country in standing-up to Russia, he chose to try (but failed) to make political capital.

Now we have come to fully understand that Corbyn while being a proclaimed far-left socialist (or even being a communist fellow traveller?), is equally a big lover of Russia and the power of the Kremlin. Nevertheless, when it comes to matters of this Country’s security and the protection of our own citizens, we had the right to expect him to denounce those Russian cretins in no uncertain terms, don’t you think? Yes, and so does the bulk of Labour MPs, as well as the mass of Labour supporters throughout the Country.

In what should have been a situation for a show of close-knitness and inter-party solidarity, with a circled-wagon type defence against unwarranted disgraceful aggression, it was turned by a disgraceful Corbyn into an opportunistic political attack on the Government of the day. Whereas ALL the other parties backed the Government, one man has isolated the Labour party by refusing to name Russia in condemnation of this foreign government when it has just attacked our Country with chemical weapons.

[Indeed at the time of WW2, Labour’s major politicians joined the Conservatives under Winston Churchill in a coalition, and they were Clement Attlee, Sir Stafford Cripps, Herbert Morrison, Ernest Bevin, and Arthur Greenwood; they were joined by 3 from other parties as well].

Other countries have quickly issued unequivocal condemnations of Russia and share the UK’s assessment that there is no other plausible explanation of who was responsible for the attack

Today, in a joint statement the leaders of France, Germany, and the United Kingdom, the US blamed Moscow for a brazen nerve agent attack  on a Russian double agent and his daughter on British soil on March 4.

At the United Nations, Nikki Haley in her statement on behalf of the US, said:

“Let me make one thing clear from the very beginning: the United States stands in absolute solidarity with Great Britain. The United States believes that Russia is responsible for the attack on two people in the United Kingdom using a military-grade nerve agent.”

“This was no common crime. It was an unlawful use of force, a violation of … the United nations charter, the basis of the international legal order”.

A joint communique reads:

“The United Kingdom briefed thoroughly its allies that it was highly likely that Russia was responsible for the attack. We share the UK assessment that there is no plausible alternative explanation, and note that Russia´s failure to address the legitimate request by the UK government further underlines its responsibility.

“We call on Russia to address all questions related to the attack in Salisbury. Russia should in particular provide full and complete disclosure of the Novichok programme to the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW).”

The nations said the use of a “military-grade nerve agent, of a type developed by Russia” was the first offensive use of a nerve agent in Europe since the Second World War, was an “assault on UK sovereignty” and a clear violation of the Chemical Weapons Convention and a breach of international law.

The statement went on to raise concerns “against the background of a pattern of earlier irresponsible Russian behaviour”,

The Australian high commissioner to the UK, Alexander Downer, has stated his country is “right behind” the UK over the “Russian outrage”.

Even European Council president Donald Tusk said: “Irrespective of BREXIT and the tough negotiations, I would like to express my full solidarity with Prime Minister Theresa May in the face of the brutal attack, which was inspired, most likely, by Moscow


[Many of us had seriously doubted if ‘Jeremy Corbyn’ would be capable of carrying the heady responsibility placed on the shoulders of any British Prime Minister, but did he really have to prove he couldn’t be trusted and that his politics were more important to him than his Country?]



Attempted assassination in rural England of two people of ‘Russian birth’ [but one a “British Citizen”] by as yet unidentified responsible perpetrators, but who here is part accountable – ‘Theresa May’?


British people can be somewhat old-fashioned perhaps, but nevertheless we all are rightfully shocked that in 2018 a foreign country has the audacity to set out to assassinate a ‘targeted’ British Citizen on our soil, murder his daughter, kill a hero police officer, and moreover in the process endanger the lives of countless unsuspecting men, women, and children who happened to be in the vicinity [apparently about 40 sought treatment].

Oh yes, indeed we expect to see that kind of goings-on, during the fantasy events on the big screen, but certainly not on the placid streets of Wiltshire’s medieval cathedral city of Salisbury. Yet that is where Sergei Skripal in his sixties together with his daughter Yulia Skripal, only in her thirties, were taken-down by perpetrators using a most deadly ‘nerve-agent’, whence over a week later with medical help they still fight for their lives, which may well still be lost.

WHO would carry out such a dastardly act in our beloved Country, WHY did they want to do it, and HOW do they expect to get away with it, eh?

It was quite clear from the outset that Russia was the ‘Who’ behind these attempted murders, but Prime Minister Theresa May has been reluctant to point the finger of blame until yesterday. Many of us might think that was because rightly identifying Russia as the culprit also will raise suspicions of her own accountability on the sickening matter, don’t you think?

The reason for the attempted hit is simply that Mr Skripal was a ‘double agent’ from over a decade ago – a Russian spy who for financial reward turned British spy and provided invaluable information to the UK. On the other side of the coin we have had British spies who have become double-agents providing our secrets to Russia. Some people will say it is all ‘reprehensible’, but that is the dirty world of spying, isn’t it?

However, spy Skripal was exposed by yet another double agent and was understandably thrown in a Russian penal colony jail to rot! However, he was subsequently “exchanged” some eight years ago by the Russians in a swop for some of their own spies who had been caught in America, eh? Some people will say it is all ‘reprehensible’, but that is the dirty world of spying, isn’t it? Thereafter, Skripal came to settle quietly and openly with his wife, son & daughter in southern England. That of course made him an easy target for revenge killing, didn’t it?

His very close daughter Yulia had previously lived with him in England for 5 years but for some reason had then returned to Russia’s capital Moscow, was simply visiting him [as of the day before], as she frequently did, at the time of the attack.

Tellingly, only last year, her older 43 year old brother Alexander, died of liver failure while on holiday in Russia’s St Petersburg, at the age of 43. Very strange, indeed?

It has yet to be established how and when the nerve-agent was administered to the Skripals but it is known that it was some considerable time before the victims collapsed in a local park.

Now without doubt, the individuals who actually carried out this provocative Russian State disgusting chemical warfare attack on our streets, using Novichok Russia’s rare, virtually undetectable, military-grade advanced nerve-agent, will inevitably be identified by our own outstanding security services – but they will have been long gone before the victims had been found, identified, or even the penny dropped for the authorities, don’t you think?

[Nerve agents disrupt normal messaging from the nerves to the muscles that are essential for body functions, so cause muscles to become paralysed, and consequentially likely death].

The single person behind this outrage clearly is Russian’s President Vladimir Putin and the ‘Why’ is because he is currently under re-election in 5 days time, and that explains the timing as he wants to unashamedly show the Russian people that he is so powerful he can kill anybody he chooses, enemies or opponents, whether in Russia or anywhere else in the big-wide-World, as demonstrable by carrying out a brazen attack in England, the home of democracy and a place of protection for its Citizens.

Nevertheless, Putin knows from past experience that Britain is these days a pussycat when it comes to taking aggressive action against outside predators – long gone is the spunk needed to repel foreign invaders as previously evidenced by the Churchill spirit, unfortunately?

Now not only did Putin ‘fully expect’ Russia to be identified as implicated in the attack but he wanted it to become worldwide news because that was exactly the kind of exposure he wanted for his tyrannical image before votes were cast in their election.

Putin thinks Russia can act with impunity as he knows that Britain’s response will once again be lacklustre, be obtuse and ineffective, not least as we are not in a position to hurt Russia in any meaningful way, can we? If anything, he wants the UK to announce actions like diplomats’ expulsions and World Cup boycott, so that he can claim that we are simply an “enemy of Russia”. He further knows it will not present Theresa May with an opportunity to show leadership because she has her work cut-out already to show anything of the kind on BREXIT, eh?

Equally, he fears nothing from the EU when its powerhouse Germany is politically comatose and is utterly dependant on Russian gas [about 40% of its needs with some 65% of its energy imported, as it now lacks domestic resources], and indeed over half of the total EU’s energy is imported].

Neither can the UK expect strong effective support from America [and therefore not NATO?] for tough action to be taken against Russia, simply because President Trump will block it since he won’t want to black-ball them while HE is under critical investigation for accepting their help to get elected, will he?

What people need to appreciate that Putin is no different to other Russian leaders in the preferred use of liquidating murders to eliminate all opposition and perceived enemies or those who would not submit, which was evident from the terror days of Stalin, and moreover Putin has himself introduced a law a decade or more ago to give state authority to committing murders in other countries. Also then of course Putin in a television broadcast in 2010 publically boasted that “Traitors will kick the bucket. Trust me”. Russia’s assassins are protected and awarded state honours.

Now this is not the first time we have seen Russian or Soviet bloc assassination attacks in this Country, is it? No, it is an outrage that goes back a long time and in recent times on our soil, there have seen at least a dozen suspicious deaths in some way connected to the Russian state, which have been inadequately investigated – WHY?

The elderly amongst us will well remember the murder 40 years ago of Georgi Markov a Bulgarian dissident who was killed on London’s Waterloo Bridge with an umbrella gun firing a ricin toxin pellet into his ankle.

Much more recently we all witnessed the distressing images of a British naturalised Russian defector and senior ex-intelligence officer Alexander Litvinenko on his deathbed 11 years ago when he movingly said in his last statement

“…this may be the time to say one or two things to the person responsible for my present condition. You may succeed in silencing me but that silence comes at a price. You have shown yourself to be as barbaric and ruthless as your most hostile critics have claimed. You have shown yourself to have no respect for life, liberty or any civilized value. You have shown yourself to be unworthy of your office, to be unworthy of the trust of civilized men and women. You may succeed in silencing one man but the howl of protest from around the world will reverberate, Mr Putin, in your ears for the rest of your life. May God forgive you for what you have done, not only to me but to beloved Russia and its people”

[A public inquiry on 21 January 2016 concluded that Mr Litvinenko’s murder was indeed probably approved by President Putin]

This was a man had had fled to Britain at the start of this century as he was a major critic of the Putin regime who was then given political asylum here (but not properly protected when offered safety, nor given justice after death), and he was killed by radioactive polonium-210, believed to have been administered in a cup of tea at a central London hotel. The perpetrators were of course identified but had fled back to Russia and have never been brought to justice.

When Mr Litvinenko was murdered in our capital, PM Blair headed the Government, when his death was attributed to polonium-210 and when a named Russian was identified who should be charged with murder. PM Brown had taken over later when the Russians refused to extradite the man accused. No action was taken against Russia.

The inquest faced major delays because both the UK and Russian governments were slow to disclose documents, so it wasn’t until 2013 that the coroner called for a public inquiry into Mr Litvinenko’s death, so it could hear secret evidence to properly establish the circumstances of the killing and hear evidence of alleged Russian state involvement.

However, PM Cameron’s Home Secretary Theresa May disgracefully blocked the holding of a public inquiry into the death and advised that ‘UK-Russian relations were a “factor” in the government’s decision’.

Nevertheless, wife Marina Litvinenko went to the High Court to fight legally and successfully forced a public inquiry on the Government, and that inquiry finally reported 2 years ago, confirming that there had been Russian state involvement at the top level.

To all intents and purposes, Theresa May did nothing about Alexander Litvinenko’s murder and that lack of effective action or robust response and retaliatory measures or punishment, in a clear-cut case, must have played a part in Russia’s attitude with carrying on their murderous activities in the UK, and it simply signed the death warrants of those who have been targeted.

After Litvinenko’s murder, PM Theresa May had vowed to “take every step to protect the UK and its people from such a crime ever being repeated”, but it hasn’t happened, has it?


[Sergei Skripal and Yulia Skripal might well blame their plight and lack of protection on Theresa May]


Alexander Litvinenko - MURDERED

Alexander Litvinenko – MURDERED



The Oxfam scandal has exposed the Charity Sector charade – has the bubble finally burst?

       charity dfid 

Just 2 years ago a post here Charity, Overseas Aid, Volunteering – all worth it or not?’ outlined and identified how the major charities had simply become major cash-cow “businesses”, run and staffed by fat-cats each raking in hundreds of thousands of pounds in salaries, expenses and accommodation costs, from the over-generous British public’s “donations”, given in the rightful expectation that their hard-earned cash would actually be used by dedicated humanitarian relief workers only for the good causes that was the intention to support.

It may have come as a shock, but certainly as no surprise, to those of us who now view the major charities with some cynicism, to see the Oxfam scandal of sexual misconduct exposed a month ago, did it?

No, but it is a telling fact that the exposé didn’t come about through the diligent actions of the correct or appropriate functions and authorities like say the ‘head-in-the-sand’ Government, nor the ‘toothless’ Charity Commission [there is no rigorous monitoring of charities’ activities], nor the ‘protection challenged’ Independent Safeguarding Authority, not the Department for International Development (Dfid), nor any other blinking ‘blindfolded’ regulatory body, eh?

No, the truth about what goes on ONLY came out, as often seems to be the case in the biggest and worst scandals, through dogged investigatory journalism – on this occasion by The Times newspaper, the charity’s former head of safeguarding being a whistle-blower.

The initial reports concerning sexual exploitation, use of prostitutes (even possibly children), the downloading of pornography, bullying and intimidation, have been further amplified by yet further revelations about the secret seedy side of aid work with numerous allegations rape, sexual abuse, sex parties and the like, that involved many other major agencies in addition to Oxfam, all operating within a culture of impunity

[it is quite worrying that moves are afoot just now at Parliament to introduce data protection laws changes that would halt that kind of publication in its tracks, whereby the freedom of the press is threatened in a way that would muzzle it to make it impossible to expose the likes of what happened at Oxfam – surely representing a gift horse to perverts?

Oh yes, Oxfam at the top knew full well about what was going on as of eight years ago when they hushed it all up, brushed the failures of the organisation under the carpet, and worse still, not only allowed the perpetrators to get away with it but ‘knowingly’ allowed them to ‘move-on’ without a stain on their characters to the fresh pastures of other ‘unsuspecting’ charities to adulterate and contaminate them as well –sometimes working in even more senior and higher paid roles, disgusting, surely? They now claim the reason for their unacceptable “cover-up” was ‘to protect their missions’. That is of course a bit disingenuous because a prime motivator was without dou8bt to protect their own massive indulgent salaries and future careers, don’t you think?

Many of us have long since “given-up” on giving our money to the big-boys of the charity sector because those mammoth organisations have become so focused on themselves that they have lost sight of their true objectives, their targeted missions and their endemic self-respect – all in favour of business growth, power and influence, personal enrichment and gain, self-gratification and enjoyment.

They are now stuffed-full of hard-nosed, morally corrupt, money grabbing morons, who have destroyed the good name of the organisations they have imbedded themselves into. You just have to look-at their progressing charity backgrounds and you will see that invariably they consist of a cynical career path with one smaller charity simply becoming a stepping stone to a bigger totally different charity, with no loyalty and zero commitment shown to the one left behind, nor indeed the new one.

Many of us are reeling from the obscene unwarranted the profits creamed-off by the likes of Camelot (National Lottery), as well as executives’ ‘snout in the trough’ salaries and spend of the biggest charities.

[Average UK salary is £27,271 according to the parliament’s ONS: Average Amount paid to the highest earner working for a general charity is £186,000 and the Median Average is £165,000: our Prime Minister’s total salary is £149,440].

You see, the senior people and those at the top of the massive currently ‘unaccountable’ charities, are very powerful indeed, and we know full well that ‘power corrupts’ and moreover it creates an illusion of sexual ‘entitlement’ – we have the glaring USA examples from the past of sleazebag Presidents like Kennedy and Clinton, together with the more recent Hollywood sex scandals, outing and bringing-down of titan power players like Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey and Brett Ratner.

It is well-known that sexual predators, paedophiles and the like, deliberately head for careers where they can systematically apply for jobs and lurk there unnoticed, while successfully presenting to others with a caring, charming, attractive, hard-working, and competent image while winning affection and trust, then to employ the tactics of implied force and threats to abuse the vulnerable. That is exactly what they have done within charities and why there should have been properly effective vetting systems there and stringent governance procedures in place.

However, most of the ‘true’ aid sector workers (many of them unpaid volunteers) are people to be admired and lauded, but when it comes to the dominating power of senior executives,there is a power imbalance in need of urgent correction to ensure each organisation meets its duty of care to both their staff and some of the world’s most vulnerable people they serve, whence the roles of child protection or safeguarding experts needs to become paramount, doesn’t it?

The juggernaut charity outfits basically con the British public and indeed our government [0.7% of gross national income goes on aid spending] plus other populations, to pull-in some 10 billion pounds by manipulating the feelings of caring people using emotive heartstring-tugging expensive campaigns on television, in newspapers, with mailshots, use of the internet and employing all other media in all imaginable ways – when a large volume of cash donated doesn’t end-up at the intended destination.

Solicitations do successfully pull in enormous funds by use of pleading, aggressively, overbearing and persistently public requests [Will bequests, bank standing orders, telephone calling, giving programmes, mobile text donations, street collections, face-to-face doorstep cold-calling, charity events or functions].

Meanwhile the media are currently even under attack by some charities’ lawyers in attempts to block articles and publication of allegations of harassment or inappropriate behaviour towards women.

The terrible saga brought about by Oxfam’s crass behaviour has not only blighted the UK charitable sector’s reputation and destroyed the already fragile confidence of the public in it, but has done untold damage to people’s confidence in the work of major aid agencies as a whole.



The charitable sector needs to be honest about past mistakes and urgently correct them. It must do all it can to win back the trust of the British public, because the money its caring people are prepared to give, can help to save many thousands of lives and alleviate widespread suffering]

The National Rifle Association and President Trump’s answer to ANOTHER gun child massacre in America – – yet MORE bloody guns?

 Trump needed a written reminded to show compassion and understanding to traumatized survivors

Last summer a post here “Another gun massacre of innocents on America’s streets – chances of new gun laws?” concluded with the warning ‘…. don’t expect the ‘Las Vegas’ event to be the last in the US, nor for it to change anything one iota about guns in America, will you? and so it turned-out, didn’t it?

Yes, despite the fact that Las Vegas last October was the deadliest mass shooting ever (with 58 innocents killed and over 150 injured), then here just over 4 months later in Florida, our Americans cousins had 14 teenage Parkland school students and 3 staff were killed and 14 hospitalised, in another avoidable massacre.

Of course, as most of us probably won’t have heard, that hasn’t been the only shooting of 3 or more victims in that timescale – there have been over 30 classified mass shootings this year so far, eh?

Oh yes, major public mass shootings happen year on year in the US, so they have only hardly started in 2018, and will be in addition to a disgusting volume of other gun violence and killing, as well

[So earlier in this century: 2017 -58 deaths and 26 deaths, 2016 – 49 deaths, 2015 – 14 deaths & 9 deaths, 2013 – 12 deaths, 2007 – 32 deaths, 2012 – 27 deaths & 12 deaths, 2009 – 13 deaths & 13 deaths & 10 deaths, 2007 – 32 deaths, 2005 – 9 deaths.

To carry out the killings, the killers use a handgun 10 times, a semi-automatic rifle 8 times, multiple weapons 6 times, and a shotgun 1 time – so it is NOT simple matter of banning one type of weapon, is it?]

You see the handed-down folklore practices in the thirty years of the renowned old “Wild West” of the late 1800s, can’t hold a candle to the what is happening in so-called ‘developed’ America of these days, does it? No, the feared killers of that long-gone era would be mere pussycats in modern times, so forget the frontier film-enhanced stories of pioneers, cowboys and Indians, scouts, prospectors, gamblers, lawmen, gunfighters, gunslingers, outlaws, and criminal gangs, because its roughness and lawlessness are tame compared to that of the 21st Century.

Many of the gunfighters of of the Old West were deranged, dark, sadistic outlaws and horse thieves, often of unpredictable personality, or violent temper and propensity for violence, so became cold-to-the-core killers, when even the shooting of unarmed men occurred.

Like gang leader and infamous gunslinger, twenty-one-year-old Billy the Kid who was taken-out by Sheriff Pat Garrett when he had already amassed no less than 21 killings.

There was horse thief and ‘reputed’ gunfighter The Sundance Kid of the Wild Bunch gang which was responsible for the longest string of successful train and bank robberies in American history [not know if he himself was actually a killer though] – the leader of that notorious criminal gang of outlaws was Butch Cassidy. Both men are believed [but is disputed] to have died in a shoot-out with authorities in Bolivia following a payroll robbery there. Criminal celebrity Jesse James of the James-Younger Gang, was involved in robbing banks, stage coaches and trains [shot in the back the head at home by a friend, hoping for the reward money]. Heavy drinker and rowdy drunk Curly Bill Brocius became unofficial leader of Tombstone’s Cowboys gang of cattle rustlers but later was killed by Wyatt Earp for suspected in being tied to the murder of the lawman’s brother. Transforming himself from being a simple farmer Sam Bass became a famed outlaw, proficient at robbing banks, stagecoaches, and subsequently trains – whence his gang robbed a Union Pacific gold train in what is still the largest single robbery of the Union Pacific [age 27 he died from a gunshot wound inflicted on a robbery trip].

Supposedly respected lawman were sometimes themselves actually cold-blooded killers and murderers at heart with reputations as paid assassins and killers-for-hire.

Like say, Wyatt Earp of Dodge City and mining boomtown Tombstone fame, who was formerly tagged a tramp, had been arrested and fined three times, including that for stealing a horse, escaped from jail, sued twice, and was at various times teamster, buffalo hunter, bouncer, saloon keeper, gambler, brothel keeper, miner, boxing referee, policeman, sheriff, US marshal. He was one of the best known and feared lawman of all time, but all that started as being an accomplished gunslinger and he was adept at killing. He took part in the notorious Gunfight at the OK Corral and he was accompanied on the infamous ‘Vendetta Ride’ in a personal revenge posse that killed 7 (illegally?), by one Doc Holliday who had a degree in dentistry but became a renowned gambler and gunfighter with a deadly reputation, who is known to have killed no less than 10 men. Or perhaps legendary actor, gambler, lawman, and skilled gunslinger Wild Bill Hickok who started-out as a Pony Express rider, but subsequently he was a proven winner in quick-draw street style duels (but himself killed by a shot in the back of the head during a poker game)

Well, the old gunfighters of the fastest guns in history renown, may have killed many dozens of men over their years alive but today’s gunmen can, and DO, take the lives of men, women and children, all in one go in a single mass shooting, can’t they?

The base problem in the USA is that it is the world leader for gun ownership and gun violence with some half of the population now owning a gun, or live in a household with guns – so 88 guns held for every 100 people. The more civilian-owned guns in a country, the more firearm deaths there, as is amply demonstrated in the US.

However, so far ALL proposals to overhaul that nation’s gun laws, aimed to prevent more mass shootings, have failed because the lawmakers from both parties simply forcefully rejected ANY gun control agenda. You see guns are big business in the United States and it’s not the Senators’ and Congressmen and Congresswomen whose families are being slaughtered by them, is it?

The driving force behind guns in America is of course the National Rifle Association [NRA], which has successfully fought most limits on gun use or manufacture, and in fact has pushed through legislation in many states making gun ownership far easier. It is so powerful and dominating on ‘Capitol Hill’, not least because of its influence with voters and moreover its money, when some half of the congress beggars are taking cash as well as other help, and have been doing so for donkey’s years to the extent that they unashamedly now rely on the NRA’s generosity to help them remain in office, eh?

The NRA organisation’s response in the face of such a mass shooting of children as has just been witnessed in Florida, and indeed every shooting carnage that occurs, is to advocate the sale of even more guns – and moreover, that is just what happens, doesn’t it?

Current President Trump, has a similar moronic undermining attitude to gun control, probably because it is big business, not to mention the fact that reportedly he got $30 million worth of help from the National Rifle Association on his way to the White House, or that the equally moronic American voters in love with guns simply vote for him, eh? That dis-concern comes despite 2 of the worst shootings happening  under his watch in just the first year.

Then there is his crass attitude and his public reaction to national tragedies [like those images of Mr. Trump hurling rolls of paper towels at hurricane victims in Puerto Rico last year and now grinning broadly for photographs with emergency medical workers from Parkland] which is an embarrassment for the American people, surely? Trump has shamefully failed to console or help survivors or show any real empathy to grieving families, and afterwards his answer to school firearm massacres is to arm the teachers, so they can take down the attacker in a classroom showdown shoot-out – no doubt he will claim that would be very ‘educational’ for those who survive, eh?

Regarding this latest school shooting, brave Trump has said he would ‘have run in there even if I didn’t have a weapon’ – a bizarre bravado claim from a draft dodger (having got no less than five deferments from Vietnam), don’t you think?

[Trump was the presidential candidate who criticized Senator John McCain, (son of the Admiral commander of all U.S. forces in the Vietnam theater), saying he wasn’t a hero – because he was “captured” [his plane had been shot down over Vietnam, he was captured, assaulted, bayoneted, beaten and interrogated, tortured, and was a POW for 5 ½ years].

Contrast that with Past President Obama, who had been clearly angrily frustrated at his own acknowledged inability and powerlessness to prevent the ongoing tragedies of mass shootings. Back in 2012 he was visibly distressed by, and indeed cried in a heart-breaking speech about, an elementary school shooting carnage in which 20 children between six and seven years old and six staff were shot dead at Sandy Hook school.

The polls suggest legislative changes would be widely supported by the American public – the NRA doesn’t speak for THEM, does it? Students are rising up to demand that politicians act and take tough action on gun control, because ‘thoughts and prayers’ doesn’t suffice, and without doubt they will employ social media in their quest, wont they? Oh yes, the rightwing media apparatus dedicated to continuing unrestricted access to powerful weapons will lie, cheat and discredit that call though, won’t it?

If Republicans and Democrats simply NOW work together to bring guns under control at last, then the NRA won’t be able to threaten either, will it?

Congress need to “think outside the box” as the saying goes, don’t it?

Take the example, of the successful bringing down the notorious mobster gangster and crime boss, newspapers’ Public Enemy No.1, Al Capone, Scarface, who couldn’t be done for his major crimes so they put him away for tax evasion for 11 years, didn’t they?

Or take a leaf of Shakespeare’s merchant of Venice play where Shylock is allowed his contractual right of a pound of flesh but is thwarted as it has to be exactly a pound and he can’t spill any blood in the process.

So what can America do now to stop its excessive gun ownership, thwart the NRA, and still not be accused of going against the Constitution regarding the right to bear arms?

Easy, make normal people shit-scared to own a gun in the first place. How can that be done with simple and quick new national laws, then?

  1. ALL guns have to be registered to an adult owner and a national database will be held
  2. An owner is legally responsible for the security of the weapon and must check regularly that it remains secure
  3. An owner must immediately report it if the weapon goes missing and will be deemed an accessory before the fact for any illegal use of the weapon if not so reported
  4. An owner is guilty of a criminal offence if the weapon goes missing
  5. An owner becomes financially liable in federal law as the result of any illegal use of the weapon whether reported missing or not

The result will be that a LARGE number of weapons will be handed-in by the general public, and these should be destroyed – NOT deactivated, eh?


[Other counties, even those with relatively minor gun abuse problems compared to the US, have tightened-up firearms laws to further protect their citizens in a dangerous World – time for America to get a grip on reality].

Society let down AGAIN by an inadequate British legal system – even MORE rapists will NOW escape justice?

Scales of Justice?

Rape is in the headlines once more, but for all the wrong reasons and not because at long last Britain has done something to halt the increase in rape, or stop 100 or so women being raped every day, or bring to justice more than 1% of the evil rapists. No, this news is about the continuing inability of the relevant authorities to properly investigate rapes and then ensure the due process of justice is rigorously followed.

Recent court cases involving rape prosecutions have dramatically failed at the twelfth hour when the legal representatives of men accused were finally provided with critical evidence that apparently cleared their clients. This unacceptable situation has simply thrown another spanner in the works that will not only deter raped women to report what has happened to them, but it will also plant a seed of doubt in the minds of jurors that will be exploited by defence barristers to allow ever more rapists to get away with it, wont it? [Where the police get it wrong, that most commonly has a negative impact on the complainant, not the defendant].

The way the British legal system works is that the Police investigate reported crime in relevant depth, interview and take detailed statements from the complainant [by detectives], collect ALL available EVIDENCE, and IF they think that there is a case to answer they pass-over all the information to the Crown Prosecution Service [CPS] who decide if there is a realistic prospect of conviction, so whether or not someone should be charged with any offence. Anyone so prosecuted for breaking the law has the right to put forward a defence in a Court of law and they are entitled to both know exactly what they are accused of and to have been given all the accumulated relevant evidence, which would include that which could be helpful to their defence as well as that supporting the prosecution – that requirement is known as an obligation of “disclosure”.

Not one thing but a number of things must have gone wrong in those rape cases that have collapse because of lack of disclosure. Moreover, after four trials collapsed in two months, reportedly Scotland Yard are now reviewing urgently about thirty or so most serious cases involving rape or sexual abuse.

Well, some politicians [Labour] say that such multiple things going wrong is all basically down to ‘austerity’ [Tory] in the criminal justice system and there may be some element of truth in that, perhaps? The excuse of some of those actually responsible however, is that those dealing are stretched because evidence is so complex in this digital age, but surely that has to be seen in the context that facilities to deal with it are equally also substantially improved these days, as well?

It would seem to us others that neither the Police nor the CPS are doing their job properly and that can only undermine both public confidence in them as well as the trust we place in the trial process which needs to be fair to the accused while consistently convicting the guilty.

Now, it has to be said that dealing with allegations of rape or sexual assault can be quite challenging because it is often one person’s word against another, whence other evidence becomes crucial when a jury is faced with deciding which one is lying.

When someone is “acquitted” of rape it doesn’t actually mean the woman has made it up, nor that the man didn’t do it, does it? No, that verdict simply reflects the fact that the case was “NOT proved” and under Human Rights in a criminal case there is ‘a presumption innocent until proved guilty in a public trial in accordance to law’ [that is a sacred principle whereby the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt the crime as charged.

It is perfectly clear from recent events that NOT ALL those involved in bringing rapists and sexual assaulters to justice are properly trained, adequality resourced, or indeed MOTIVATED, isn’t it? This has been a major setback when already there was a criminal justice crisis when violent sexual crimes [more than half of them rapes] in England and Wales has reached its highest recorded level [neigh-on sixty-five thousand] , and about double those from the likes of Germany and France – that is the tip of the iceberg because official figures only reflected the extent to which sex crimes are reported and recorded by the police and certainly do not really measure the actual number of victims because MOST rapes and assaults don’t get reported, do they?

While rightly perhaps, rape cases grab the headlines and have done so on this problem with disclosure, one must conclude that such an issue won’t just be about sex cases, but would occur in other serious crimes as well, surely? It is disturbing then that the Director of Public Prosecutions [who heads-up the CPS] has summarily dismissed any possibility of anybody being wrongly convicted, isn’t it?

Britain’s ongoing failure to deal with rapists and with the conviction rate constantly falling [halved from 15% five years ago, despite rapes themselves doubling], needs to be better addressed and QUICKLY to. We are well aware that there will always be a few, but not many, women falsely making allegations of rape, but these should be quickly and easily identified and those women dealt with harshly – after all their numbers are not only minute but are utterly submersed by the astounding numbers of false assertions of innocence by men rapists and sex offenders who ALWAYS vehemently protest their innocence before conviction, and ALWAYS claim sex was consensual, or enjoyed by the victim [even if previously unknown to them, eh?].

Indisputably, we now live in a Country with a climate where rape is widespread and the victims are generally disbelieved so don’t get justice, do they? Because of that, until things are resolved, there needs to be significantly more effort and resources put-in by our Nation to supporting the victims of sexual attack and abuse and that means for example more rape crisis centers [which currently are few and far between, so are swamped, and have many thousands of victims on their waiting lists].

That doesn’t just require more resources but new improved techniques for ‘generating’ relevant evidence [in addition ‘collecting it’, as repeatedly police admit not to have gathered important evidence at the scene, or failed to interview key witnesses], together with the establishment of effective specialist police units, refocusing of the CPS’ priority to cope better with rapist allegations and prosecute more, as well as changes to the law [proposals needed from the Attorney General (who actually  supervises the CPS)] as currently it is near damn impossible to convict sex offenders, isn’t it? The system practices of the justice system currently disproportionately disenfranchise the victims of sex crime rather than convict the accused.

Following rape women suffer massive feelings of shame and guilt but their treatment thereafter simply reinforces that emotion when THEY are treated like the criminal rather than the victim, and despite the guidelines designed to prevent it, still become the accused when giving evidence against their attacker, particularly as even their judgement and private sexual history gets exposed in open court, eh? Rape regularly can cause relationship breakup, and the price that women pay goes on for years after the rape was committed as it has a long-term impact on their health [including depression, and anxiety] as well as often affecting those around them

The following comment was posted here 5 years ago – it never happened though so it still applies, eh?

[Something has got to be done to correct the unacceptable statistics on rape convictions. New techniques are required, such as better use of forensic facilities, use of specialist prosecutors, greater victim support, higher CPS priority, improved police action, etc, together with more funding – this disgrace has to be ended now].

Carillion ‘crashed and burned’, BUT there has been Government complicity in supporting it, so how many heads will NOW roll ANYWHERE – NONE?

Well as many of us will now ‘know’, even if we hadn’t even heard of it a few weeks ago, that Carillion is a British multinational facilities management and construction services company employing 50,000 worldwide, consistently used by the Government for outsourcing major projects and public services, which last week has predictably gone under after a number of stunning profit warnings, despite the Government continuing to award it ‘major’ contracts when it was clearly in trouble and which an unviable company would never be able to perform.

Its liquidation is going to cost us, the taxpayer, many millions of pounds for sure, apart from the massive disruption that is going to be incurred on their failed contracts, but that disaster is going to be kept well hidden by the Government system, isn’t it? Oh yes, that is already self-evident when Treasury ministers admit that it is ‘going to be costly’, but then claim they have “no idea” of how much, nor even can they give a ballpark figure, eh?

WELL, WHY THE BLOODY HELL NOT? If you are a Government prepared to dish out massive contracts to a doggy outfit, at least you should have responsibly carried-out a full risk assessment and ‘quantified’ the potential financial impact on the taxpayer, surely? Not only that, but the facts are that the company was in massive debt, had severe cash flow problems and wasn’t paying its suppliers – so like a sinking ship, it will inevitably drag other innocent firms down with it (30,000?), causing without doubt abject misery and lost jobs & pensions to thousands of other workers.

Furthermore, back last summer it became clear that Carillion was a company stricken with an insurmountable financial crisis [spiralling debt – £700m in the first half of last year], suggesting that without serious financial intervention, the company would sink without a trace, analysis which sent its share price into freefall (not least because of aggressive hedge fund “shorting” of Carillion – when one of the UK’s most prolific short sellers made over £19m in just three days from such shorting).

Moreover, its pension fund deficit has been evident for some years and is thought to have more than doubled now to £800m? Why, why, why then, with the company on the verge of collapse and the pension fund clearly in the kackie, did neither The Pensions Regulator nor the firm’s pension Trustees act to deal with glaring concerns about pensions being at risk? How comes the Auditors and others including the Government, inexplicably conclude that Carillion was a going concern?

Now, how the hell do UK companies get away these days with short funding their pension liabilities leaving gaping funding holes, while still paying excessively high salaries & bonuses to the fat cats at the top, as well as inexplicably rewarding shareholders nevertheless with massive dividends – then explosively go bust and go under? Despite recurring abuse, the Government has repeatedly failed to impose company deterrents or to act to curtail those corporate activities that put pension schemes at risk, so pension schemes simply become insolvent, don’t they?

Yes, like two years ago at collapsed retailer BHS, where billionaire former owner, Philip Green, allowed extraction from it of hundreds of millions of pounds in dividends, despite the widening sinkhole of a nearly six-hundred-pound black hole in in the pension scheme for its 20,000 members? Or the hedge-fund asset stripping of Monarch Airlines whose demise that just last year caused furore within the travel industry, left the taxpayer with a £60 million spend on the repatriation of stranded passengers, and with the pension scheme dumped into the PPF (Pension Protection Fund)? Or, back in the early 1900s, Mirror Group’s owner Robert Maxwell’s £400m raid on its pension fund?

Historically, and certainly over the past decade there has been a consist gap between pension scheme assets and liabilities, which once again it is shockingly wide and has grown to something like £300 BILLION – worryingly that involves with the biggest deficits the likes of BT (2nd worse-funded pension in the World), Shell, BP, BAE, Tesco, Unilever, RBS, AstraZeneca, GKN, GlaxoSmithKline,?

[Oh yes, the statuary PPF pensions “rescue” scheme though funded by annual levy NOW, will most likely eventually fall into the taxpayer’s lap some time in the future (one in six schemes in the private sector are seen to be at serious risk, you see)? It has been running now for over a decade, and it offers ‘some’ level of pension compensation to those affected by insolvencies (nevertheless pensioners face losing many tens of thousands of pounds), BUT that not only neither solves the problem nor has it improved confidence in pensions schemes as hoped, has it? No, and the worst-affected ‘final-salary” pension schemes are only getting into deeper deficit trouble, it seems? The PPF is a lifeboat not capable of rescuing all those on the potentially floundering ships.

And another thing is that ALL our governments ‘have form’ in their bad dealings with pensions, haven’t they? Like in the late 90s when Labour Chancellor Gordon Brown scrapped tax relief on company money going into pension funds in a pensions heist that amongst other effects virtually killed-off ‘final-salary’ pensions. Like even further back, the Tories allowing companies to take pension contributions ‘holidays’ in heady days of stock market boom and not dealing with the consequences when events reverse. Like in the case of Equitable Life’s severe financial problems in 2000, with the government subsequently having to compensate one-and-a-half million of the savers for their ‘relative loss as a consequence of a decade regulatory failure’. Like the Tory government’s 2011 decision that instead of using the ‘retail price index’ measure of inflation, using the lower ‘consumer price index’, in a move affecting not only the state pension & public-sector pensions, but knocked off some £100 BILLION alone from private sector pension liabilities as well?

It has to be of serious concern that we are a society which is facing poverty in old age, as increasingly we are turning our backs on adequately saving for a pension. Long gone is the heydays of 1960s and 70s with a dozen millions of us with good pension provision, eh?

Many companies are becoming ‘unsellable’ to potential buyers simply because of their massive pension liabilities – like say Tata Steel was until last year when in a deal done with the Pensions Regulator it managed to ditch its £15bn in debt pension scheme, or perhaps Shell (nearly £7bn deficit), Sainsbury (over £1bn deficit), or the even the second largest life assurer and financial services firm the Pru, though it changed its pensions practices back in 2006 to plug a £379 million deficit in its pension plan.

Anyone who has any experience of placing major contracts will know that the first criteria to establish, is a bidding company’s viability and current business performance, surely? Amongst other things, one also needs to be confident that it has available the financial and technical resources to fully perform on time the contract being placed, and critically that they have completely established and costed the scope of work, to ensure that they make an acceptable business profit, and they don’t go bust so have to abandon the job before satisfactory completion – it is not necessarily the lowest price bid that should win a contract, is it?

Well that said, how comes the Government went ahead and placed half a dozen new contracts with Carillion in the backend of last year when its financial difficulties had been publicly announced, and those included contracts for HS2 [£1.4bn], Defence [£158m], and a DfT rail route electrification [£320m], but went ahead without the involvement of any top minister meeting with the company, either before or after? Surprising also, is the failure to categorise Carillion as a high-risk company requiring the appointment of a ‘crown representative’ to work with them.

It would appear that the company’s top brass might well have been aware of the impending financial doom, since shortly before the ‘shit hit the fan’ as the saying goes, the company suddenly ‘out-of-the-blue’ changed significant rules affecting the fat-cat bosses’ liability for clawback loss of their multi-million-pound bonuses in the event of the company hitting financial difficulties – all of course now at the expense of its investors, debtors, and indeed us taxpayers? WILL THERE EVER BE ANY EXPLANATION OR JUSTIFICATION OF THAT, you may wonder?

Without doubt NO, and neither will ANYBODY whether either a Carillion Director, or a Government minister, or a senior Civil servant, be called to account for this latest political fiasco and disgraceful business disaster, will there?


[The cynics amongst us will conclude that either the May Government were intent on keeping Carillion afloat, or there was a glaring dereliction of duty by ignoring warnings that the company was facing impending financial ruin, EH?]


It has come as quite a shock to many of the older generation that there has been some furore in the film industry because last October a mega movie mogul was outed as a sexual predator, hasn’t there? Yep, but not because disgraced Oscar-winning producer Harvey Weinstein has behaved in that disgusting way, but because we ‘thought’ that it was all well-known already that it was common behaviour in that line of work, wasn’t it?

You see, from time immemorial, the ‘casting-couch’ syndrome has been the grubby reputational badge of the motion-picture industry and indeed goes back over a hundred years to the days of the silent film industry, surely?

There can be no doubt that the sleazy operation of the casting couch was no myth during the heady days of Hollywood, when it is said that its moguls wouldn’t cast starlets like Marilyn Monroe and Kim Novak unless they auditioned in bed?

Moreover, some ‘stars ’themselves have made no secret of its operation, and indeed there is ample evidence of its debilitating effect on some of them, which included that where a star’s talent, beauty and original charisma of ‘self-worth’ basically ended-up in ‘low self-esteem’, drug abuse and suicide. Some say it was an industry that ate women for lunch, eh?

Then again, that situation of sexual predatory behaviour (particularly towards the young and venerable), despicably also apparently included children, has simply been continuously ongoing and indeed has flowed into this the 21st century. The names of those stars [and an example of their films] who would confirm it include US’ famed child actress Shirley Temple [Bright Eyes (1934)], American Judy Garland [Wizard of Oz (1939)], London’s Lesley-Anne Down [Pink Panther (1976)], American Gwyneth Paltrow [Shakespeare in Love (1998)], South Africa’s Charlize Theron [Monster (2003)], English Thandie Newton [Crash (2006)], Megan Fox [Transformers (2007)].

The big thing and indeed watershed coming out of Weinstein’s exposure and disgrace, is that similar behaviours have seen the light of day not only in the entertainment industry but in many other places where sexual harassment and abuse has occurred including the BBC, British Parliament, Art world, Fashion, Music industry, Charity organisations, and Sport, to mention some.

[Mind you, release of the 2005 tape of Donald Trump boasting about sexually assaulting women, didn’t stop him securing the US Presidency at all, did it?].

However, the casting couch in Hollywood hasn’t been the place by a long chalk where sexual favours are demanded by ‘in power’ sexual predators, is it? Many of us have seen it in the normal workplace, especially in the big organisations, haven’t we?

Also, it must be mentioned here that sexual exploitation in the work environment is in fact a ‘two-way’ street and while in general (but not uniquely) it is heterosexual men that abuse their power and position to solicit sexual favours from their female staff, there are also some women employing their sexuality to ingratiate themselves and gain career advantage from those males above them.

Those of you who might have served in any senior management capacity in a major international company might well have seen it first-hand, perhaps? Like an Area manager for years bedding his secretary, both married of course, both unashamed and even flaunting it, and of course extremely close at the time of ‘annual reviews’ – she was always on the top secretarial pay scale, unsurprisingly eh? [Perhaps she was really good – but at what though?].

Or perhaps mention that at another big outfit, where top Directors together with senior staff & guests, often met-up on a Friday night at the Company’s Social club to relax, and have a friendly get together with a few drinks? One Group manager used to bring his admittedly very attractive wife, who spent her time fawning over the sleazy MD in a very touchy-feely manner. Then at the firm’s overnight annual bash at a top London hotel meeting venue, that ‘’liaison’ was again self-evident, so there was little doubt in many minds as to which hotel suite she would be retiring to at the end of the night, eh? It came of course as no surprise then the following day at the company’s senior staff gathering, giving performance details and organisation announcements, that the woman’s husband had secured the new Regional manager’s slot, ahead of us other three well-qualified but ‘disappointed’ hopefuls [well at least our ‘less-committed’ wives weren’t prostituted, eh?].

On the other side of the coin though, those in company senior positions that influence or control the future of other staff, do have to beware the potential pitfalls associated with very often career ambitious female employees, don’t they? Some of those staff will most certainly make it plain that more than a committed ‘close working-relationship’ is on offer. Now, we are not talking here about young vulnerable naive females, simply desperately trying to get their feet on the first rung of the career ladder, are we? No, we get it from the striking, already successful, very talented women, often married, sometimes with children, already in a technical management position themselves, who view their attractive sexuality simply as another ‘tool in the box’ to be used if appropriate to progress their career – but show no dismay either when that device doesn’t fit, eh? A responsible decent manager properly earning their pay, wants to fully embrace the identified talents of their female workers but not by enjoying the attention of their workers in bed, surely? There are simple rules and red lines that keep everyone safe – never have closeted meetings with the office door closed and never socialise on a one-to-one basis (and never n ever ever make personal comments about appearance however complementary like “You look lovely/nice/smart/tired/upset/worn-out/etc”).


[The majority of bosses totally respect their female employees and wouldn’t try it on, but the few who do cause a culture of fear in many industries and businesses – so the sooner they are ALL exposed the better for Western society and women’s place in society, eh?]


Research into Alzheimer’s has stalled – is that the end of all hope?

Healthy brain compared to Alzheimer damaged brain

Healthy brain compared to Alzheimer damaged brain

It will not have escaped the notice of all elderly people and their families that after some twenty years of significant involvement, the world’s biggest drug company Pitzer has just 10 days ago announced terminating its research into dementia and Alzheimer’s, and has also pulled the plug on its work on Parkinson’s, as well, which is a central nervous system degenerative disorder in which dementia becomes common in the advance stage.

[However, apparently other big drugmakers, including AstraZeneca and Eli Lilly, are in fact currently still pushing ahead with new Alzheimer’s treatment trials].

Well, dementia is a frightening medical problem of insurmountable proportions that matches cancer in its impact on countless families and communities around the globe.

Three years ago, a post here ‘Dementia’ the new massive Medical problem – anything for YOU to lose sleep about? Alzheimer’s heading Your way?” highlighted some of the issues. If you didn’t see it then you might like to read it now to gather some background, which is not the intention of this current post to cover.

Well, there are a number of identified illnesses that cause dementia but Alzheimer’s, which was first identified a hundred years ago accounts for up to 80% of cases, and that is exactly why it has been the main focus of research attention. [Then for second cause there is the aftermath of a stroke, and then also other conditions, some irreversible such as thyroid problems and vitamin deficiencies, or a brain tumour or the spread of cancer nodules into the brain, or infection [viruses, bacteria, parasites (Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease and other Prion Diseases)].

Dementia is evidenced by brain cell death but there is no answer yet to the age old “chicken or egg question” relating to that – does dementia cause it or is it caused by it?

Dementia mainly affects ‘older’ people and as countries’ health care improves (particularly in the low and middle-income countries) so Alzheimer’s numbers increase exponentially. Around the world there will be already some fifty million people or so now suffering from dementia, so it is a disastrously heavy blow for the ongoing prospects of world health that the search by a big player for a cure has been abandoned regardless, isn’t it? [In the UK we are looking at having a million dementia sufferers within the next half a dozen years (and some quarter of a million getting added yearly), while in America the incidence is fivefold that]

Now, don’t blame the likes of Pitzer, or indeed any other pharmaceuticals who have suffered expensive setbacks in recent years on Alzheimer’s [just about every clinical trial has failed so far], for their research funding decisions, because at the end of the day they are simply commercial outfits, out to make as many quick bucks as generatable and as much profit as is extractable, out of selling their drugs as they possibly can, aren’t they? They aren’t actually in the business of either caring, nor saving lives, nor helping societies, are they? No, if they can make more money from selling a drug to ‘treat’ an illness than one that will actually ‘prevent’ the condition, then that’s what they will do, eh?

The issue that seems to have floored Pitzer and driven them into despair, is that like most research over past decades, theirs has focused on the fact that the hallmark of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) is the presence of amyloid protein deposits in the brains of those afflicted, and to find a cure they have been trying to do something about that. Well, for whatever reason the drugs created to deal precisely with what has been seen as the most medically interesting feature of AD, don’t actually do anything to cure existing conditions, so patients don’t improve and their dementia simply continues on.

So, currently there is no cure for Alzheimer’s disease, as available medications might reduce symptoms and improve quality of life in some people, but disappointingly they do not stop the progress of the disease. Although in top ten causes of death in the US, it is the only one that doesn’t have a meaningful treatment.

Like most problems in science that encounter theory difficulties, it is likely to take an entirely new basic idea in neuroscience to make a fundamental breakthrough, and this is most likely to come from other research outfits such those as in universities or the charitable institutions, rather than simply the commercial-driven drug multinationals – subsequently they will then of course latch onto it, invest billions to get drugs through trials into market, but then make a profit killing because of the scope of need.

It is extremely difficult for us laypeople who are on the outside of the medical research bubble to know what is actually happening with things like dementia, cancer and other major diseases, because the media translate such matters into striking headlines which are often misleading – and when they can’t generate those, news becomes sparse, eh? When you read about astounding advances in certain treatments and check-out such reports with the medics, you often find that they aren’t what they are made-out to be, haven’t you found?



[Mankind in the past has always displayed amazing ingenuity when the chips are down and doubtless that will be the case in finding a cure for Alzheimer’s disease, don’t you think?]


The BREXIT deniers carry on their fight to thwart British democracy – will they succeed though?

 A decade ago the LibDems said ‘the people should have a say’

the UKs ‘joining’ EU stamps

the EU puzzle misfit

The undeniable fact is that the UK never ever fitted into the European Union project. Indeed, back in 1973 when by a large majority the UK voted to ‘remain’ in the European Common Market as it was then, it was clear to many of us who vote against, that it would inevitably ‘evolve’ in a manner and with an objective that would create a political government for Europe – and so it did twenty years later when the European Union burst like an alien from its torso. With complete metamorphosis it had changed from an inert larva stage and erupted as a slimy ugly eel-like creature rather than as a beautiful butterfly.

The whole point of the EU project was to steadily coerce member countries to renounce their national status, and hand over power to unelected bureaucrats, so that a European superstate could emerge, aka the united states of Europe. Surely, as that became ‘in the face’ evident to the masses here, there would be rebellion in the ranks and we serfs would challenge the elite establishment, who alone benefited from Britain being in the EU, and demand Britain took back control and reclaim our Country as a nation-state, eh?

Oh yes, the people were unexpectedly given the opportunity of BREXIT, but were warned by the Establishment in no uncertain terms that they HAD to vote Remain or else – but they didn’t, did they?

Oblivious to the experience in WWII that Germany’s Joseph Goebbels’ propaganda machine together with Lord Haw-Haw’s attempted demoralizing broadcasts, failed to subdue the British population, the Cameron government embarked on its own ‘Project Fear’ – to no avail it must be said, eh? Encouraged by the example of British grit displayed by their ancestors in the Blitz, the people stood firm and voted “Leave”, didn’t they?

Well, the misinformation promulgated not only by George Osborne’s Treasury lapdogs, but by other EU committed or prone financial institutions like the World Bank, CBI, IMF, who predicted lower economic growth for the UK at 1.2%, 1.3%, & 1.5% respectively, WHEN IN REALITY IN 2017 IT WAS 1.8%, OR the likes of Goldman Sachs’ speculation that the value of the Pound sterling would fall from $1.25 to $1.11 WHEN IN REALITY IT ACTUALLY ROSE TO $1.35, OR the CBI’s predicted slump in 2017 retail sales WHEN IN REALITY THEY ROSE by 1.6%, now rightly has been exposed, hasn’t it?

Nevertheless, we BREXITEERS are under sustained scurrilous attack from all sides by those who will not accept the democratic decision of the Nation. The most disgusting thing about all of it, is that these cretins who are doing their utmost to undermine BREXIT, are just those that were also fully behind us public having the blessed referendum in the first bloody placed, weren’t they? Yep, but that was when they THOUGHT that they were on a clear winner, wasn’t it?

Amongst those are the likes of those beholden to the EU:

Labour’s John McDonnell (now Shadow Chancellor), motormouth Diane Abbott, (now shadow Home Secretary), Hilary Benn (ex-shadow foreign secretary whose view beforehand was that everyone voting would fully understand the consequences of voting either way), loudmouth but cowering Chuka Umunna (ex-shadow business secretary), ex-leader’s son Stephen Kinnock, loathed disgraced self-appointed messiah Tony Blair (ex-PM), Lord Adonis (a Baron and latterly a long overdue departure as the Tory government’s infrastructure adviser);

Or LibDems’ admitted liar about his gay views Tim Farron (ex-leader), Vince Cable (current-leader), yesterday’s man Nick Clegg (ex-leader now a ‘Sir’ indeed) – all fighting-on to scupper BREXIT wherever they can and disenfranchise the British electorate;

Then we can also count-in the so-called ‘now converted-leavers’ Tories’ Theresa May [now PM who has appointed two Cabinets where more than two out of three are actually Remainers, and last month she unconditionally surrendered at the EU negotiations), Philip Hammond (now Chancellor, the leading cabinet voice forcing a semi-BREXIT).

We also have the 11 Tory Remainer rebel MPs who joined Labour and the Liberal Democrats to defeat the Government in a Commons vote last month that could be used to frustrate or block BREXIT entirely – chief mutineer Dominic Grieve (former Attorney General), past his sell-by date Ken Clarke (ex-Chancellor and much else), self-termed freedom fighter but really wants to be leader Nicky Morgan (ex-Education Secretary), over vocal Anna Soubry (ex-Business minister), Stephen Hammond (now sacked Party Vice Chairman), barrister Oliver Heald (a ditched Solicitor General), side switcher Sarah Wollaston (chair health select committee), Bob Neill (chair justice committee), Jonathan Djanogly (former justice minister), new girl Antoinette Sandbach, who? Yorkshire born Heidi Allen. Mind you, they ALL deny their objective is to Remain – LIARS?

[Don’t forget that that the Cameron government sent all our households an expensive warning communication, including the clear assertion that it was our decision and that the government would implement whatever we decided, didn’t they? Fat chance of that now, wouldn’t you say?].

All the major parties, the entire current political establishment, plus the Commons and the Lords, with an overwhelming endorsement fully supported the Referendum Bill 2½ years ago – while the SNP of course tried to spoil that party. The biggest joke nowadays are the LibDems though, who not only were a major advocate of a Referendum in the first place, but indeed were critical of the other parties for denying one, while now they and Clegg in particular stands accused of showing complete distain  for the British people – while fantasist new leader Cable (who thinks he can be the next PM?) plans to stop BREXIT and keep the UK in the European Union because the people need to change their mind, eh?

The LibDems fought the Election last year under Farron on the basis of having ANOTHER referendum [now, that has always been the EU ploy – keep rerunning a referendum UNTIL you get the RIGHT answer, you see?] and he saw their vote drop by ANOTHER half a percent, totaling over 15% drop since the heady days of 2010, isn’t it?

The current political situation is dangerous because there is huge and significant damage being caused to the population’s trust in democracy when the cheated millions are concluding that the promises made by our politicians to us were in reality worthless once we challenged the interests and attitudes of the political establishment


[BREXITEERS abandon hope – you ain’t going to get what you voted for]




Donald Trump ducks his London visit – ASHAMED?

It has been announced that, even in the continuing postponement of the proposed State visit to meet the Queen, the United States President Donal Trump has let it be known that he won’t be coming to see us next month as intended to officially open the new American Embassy [His lame excuse is the one “personal reasons” (he doesn’t like the new building’s location, eh?)].

That update may be a surprise, but certainly it will not come as bad news to a large number of Brits or others residing in the United Kingdom, will it? Nop, and that is because he has managed to antagonise large sections of the population here, and indeed may well have encountered some noisy protest demonstrations to show just that during a visit – is that why he has shirked the task? If so, is that not just a bit cowardly?

Now, it would not shock countless Americans to know that few of us here in UK care a hoot whether or not Trump arrives on these shores. That is because not many of us have any respect for the man or what he is or what he stands for – though we as always will honour the office he holds and will formally treat him civilly here or elsewhere, as we would any man or woman so elected.

That isn’t to say that certain prominent UK individuals haven’t overstepped the mark when commenting on Trump and his bigoted outbursts. That would particularly include one Sadiq Khan, the current Mayor of London and Labour politician. You see Khan is a Muslim and took umbrage at Trumps disgracefully religious and racial attempts to discriminate against Muslims entering America and singling-out some half-dozen Muslim-majority countries listed in an executive order not to be allowed entry to the US, on the pretext of protecting national security. – the fundamental fact is that the President wants people excluded from the US, not for who they are, but simply because of where they come from, doesn’t he?

Now, it is a worrying fact indeed that the US Supreme Court in June overturned lower court injunctions and decided that ‘parts’ of Trump’s ban ‘could’ take effect, and then last month allowed the newest version of his travel ban to take effect pending appeal – the September ‘third edition’ of the travel ban placed varying levels of restrictions on foreign nationals from eight countries: Chad, Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, Venezuela, Somalia and Yemen.

Well, all that being said, it is nothing to do with Khan, who instead of shooting-off his mouth and publicly declaring that Trump is not welcome here, should do a better job himself of running London, the most diverse capital in the world– which currently he is making a pigs-ear of, eh? Furthermore, as the first Muslim to become a mayor of a major Western capital, his energies should be focused on improving the image of Islam, which is being destroyed by ISIL terrorists both in Britain and worldwide, rather than undermining our special relationship with the US by continuing a spat with an American president – however big an arsehole he is being, don’t you think?

What we people here in UK do have though, is a great deal of sympathy for the bulk of our Americans cousins, who must be dying of shame that their wonderful country and its intrenched values have been hijacked by the likes of Trump as their President, a man of lewd embarrassing reputation, pontificating incendiary hate-filled tirades, and strutting arrogantly about whilst not issuing crass imbecilic tweets, and swapping schoolboy insults and heated taunts over size of nuclear buttons with North Korean’s mental health challenged despot supreme leader Kim Jong-un.

In reality, in many countries and that includes Britain of course, at times the population get disenchanted with their leaders – and indeed vote them out of power when the opportunity arises – but that feeling never reaches the level of “being ashamed” of the person selected to lead their nation, does it?

However, it is being said that Trump simply dares to voice views held by his supporters, which in the past day seems to include branding significant elements of the less-developed world as ‘shithole countries’ whose people weren’t wanted as immigrants to the USA, whether resulting from national disasters or not – nations such as El Salvador, Haiti or African. As a consequence, he gets America lambasted from all sides at the United nations, so destroys its standing in the World – is that what he meant by “making America great again” – making it a laughing stock?

In a survey last month over half of the Americans polled, disapproved of the job Trump is doing, don’t think he’s honest, don’t believe he is stable, don’t see him as compassionate, consider him reckless, rate him as sexist, and reason ‘credible’ the allegations made against him of sexual misconduct. Other polls find that the majority say the Trump administration is dysfunctional and there is now a loss of pride in American democracy. While six months ago, about half the people thought Trump was keeping his candidature promises, that now has dropped by ten percent, as has belief that he can bring about the kind of change the country needs, while less than a third think he can unite the country, and even amongst Republicans over a third of them don’t think Trump cares about people like them. Apparently more than half of American voters say President Donald Trump is not “fit to serve as president,” and that rises to nearly 95% of black voters, for goodness sake? Only a quarter of Americans now have faith that their President has the respect of leaders around the world

Meanwhile, daily Trump keeps his name in headlines, however derogatory they are or packed with controversy and intrigue, [on the basis that there is no such thing as ‘bad’ publicity, eh?] and he dismisses all criticism, assigns all damaging events as “false news”, nominates the media as witch hunting liars, denies through his teeth even verifiable facts, and lives in an isolated White House bubble of his own construction

Now, many in the wider world will know full well that Trump has faced persistent allegations over his campaign’s Russian connections during his election, and could face removal from office by impeachment if his direct connection with such events or alleged ties to Russia is ever properly established.

Now currently that might seem unlikely because it would require both the House of Representatives and the Senate to abandon him to make it happen. Although both Houses are currently under Republican control that may not last as midterm elections approach, so it is calculated that there a 50-50 chance of that happening or him resigning this term

Special counsel Robert Mueller‘s Russia inquiry has escalated in recent months, with convening a grand jury in Washington, and now heads into 2018 with four people associated with the president, including his former campaign chairman Paul Manafort, and his deputy Rick Gates already charged with crimes connected to the probe [former Trump national security advisor Michael Flynn together with campaign foreign policy advisor George Papadopoulos, have pleaded ‘guilty’ and are cooperating with investigators].


[Although ‘President Donald Trump’ is apparently too scared to visit ‘special relationship’ Britain, he has made trips to Saudi Arabia, Israel, France, Poland, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and China, eh?]