Spilling Secrets

It never ends as Princess Diana’s then manservant has continued spilling confidences about the life of the deceased princess, but previously Mr Burrell was accused of stealing Princess Diana’s belongings from Kensington Palace, but the matter was ultimately dropped when his lawyer reportedly gave the police a 39-page report with specific data about Princess Diana’s demand for her lovers, but this statement was part of a legal plan to make Prince Charles drop the court case against the former servant.


methodesundaytimesprodwebbin3f02c942-380e-11e8-8456-98f9d3f28109In the explosive book Rebel Prince, written by Tom Bower, Paul Burrell alleges that the deceased Princess used to ask the Prince to cancel public appointments so she could meet with her man of the moment – seems a bit dramatic and somewhat unlikely, although not entirely absurd.

In his own book, the former butler claimed that Princess Diana had nine secret lovers, my she was a busy girl, including a novelist, a sporting legend, a Hollywood actor, a musician, a politician, a lawyer, an entrepreneur, and billionaire businessman – hardly enough time in there to have a crap!

The Real Housewives of Sydney star Lisa Oldfield spilled some details from her chats with Burrell, and according to her, he reinforced that the princess used to date Canadian singer Bryan Adams, he said that he would sneak the rocker into Kensington Palace in the boot of his car, quite comical actually when you think about it.


In 2003, Adam’s girlfriend at the time backed up Burrell’s words. The former Bond girl Cecilie Thomsen had been dating the rock star for 12 years and she claimed that one of the reasons why they broke up was Adam’s affair with the late princess.

Of course, it’s all he said this and she said that and whether Princess Diana did have numerous affairs is beside the point and not actually that important now, unless your getting paid big bucks to spill the beans, so to speak.


Evidently, Bryan Adams wrote a song about the Princess of Wales, funny that so did Elton John, and I’m sure he wasn’t having an incestuous affair with the princess!

paul burrell.png

It appears that Paul Burrell is still making a living out of betraying his former employer and it’s become quite offensive. He’s still cashing in on Princess Diana and the poor woman is dead, at least show some regard for a person who can’t defend herself, instead of betraying her trust every time there’s a microphone in front of your mouth, and here’s a thought, why don’t you get a real job so you don’t have to support yourself with your hypocrisy?

Paul Burrell is a proper Yenta and he loves the media recognition and the money he gets for doing it.

Lisa Oldfield spilled some of the details for her in-depth chats with Paul Burrell from their time on I’m a Celebrity… Get Me Out Of Here, and they do love a bit of scandal on there, probably because they’re so bored of eating cockroaches…

It’s been 21 years since Princess Diana’s sad passing but that hasn’t stopped the scandals and conspiracies about her life from rolling about the gossip grapevine, even to this day, and there will always be ridiculous conspiracy theories.

The brazen ex-aide further opened up on how he slept among her clothes after her death, and how he declared himself her “rock” and gave her food that helped her throw up as she battled bulimia.

Burrell was paid £10,000 by Channel 5’s in Therapy, with a shrink questioning him at a rehab centre in London’s Harley Street, and he blubbered that’s where he would come with the Princess. That he would drop her off to go for colonic irrigation, drive around the block several times and pick her up.

He further became ghoulish as he reported sitting with the Princess’s body following her 1997 Paris crash, and he went on to say that he found himself in her quarters and could smell her perfume and that he could hear her voice, all appears a little disturbing, don’t you think?

Burrell must be running out of money by now, maybe there’s another book on the horizon, and how could her body be warm, she would have been in the mortuary for a start, and very COLD, not a particularly pleasant colour either, I would imagine.

He betrayed her confidence and he should have thought of her children as should have anyone else who was on the bandwagon with him. He’s a snake, same as all the others that make out they were her friend but were happy to tell all, and they’re disgusting and selfish.

Princess Diana would have been really sad by Burrell’s actions and really hurt, seeing him sell her story for twelve pieces of silver, and this is not the behaviour of somebody who was her real friend or loyal servant.

He was merely a manservant, and he wouldn’t have been entitled to butt in everywhere as this slimy man insists. He was simply a domestic, nothing more, yet he looks at himself as royalty. Clearly, he suffers from delusions of grandeur, and his victim is not alive to confirm what delusions he suffers from and the cheat that he truly is.

Paul Burrell was obsessed with the Princess and that obsession continues to this day, and it looks like he was seemingly in love with her, and if you challenged him he would have probably have died for her, but he was faithful to her while she was alive and deep down loved and worshipped her.

But genuine loyalty doesn’t end after death and he shouldn’t be benefiting from her death. Maybe it was a resentment thing and if he couldn’t have her then he would make sure he could profit from her death, but now he’s just a fame-seeking scamp, and it would have mortified Princess Diana if she were alive today.

But why did the man who promised to protect the Princess’s confidences end up sharing them with the entire world? Ever since her passing Mr Burrell repeatedly said openly and privately that he would never cash in on his position, but he did.

Eight months after she died, Mr Burrell wrote to a member of the public: “I will never tell my story, sell my secrets, or betray ‘my Boss’. It was an honour and a privilege to serve such an inspirational and unique human being. I would never betray the trust which she placed in me.”

Those who know Mr Burrell best believe he’s been driven by money, malice and fame. Mr Burrell is likely to make more than £2 million from book sales and newspaper serialisation. The Daily Mirror has paid him £500,000 in addition to the £300,000 he got for exclusive interviews with the newspaper after his trial failed.

In the months after the Princess’s demise, Mr Burrell was given a “special bequest” of £50,000 for his loyalty from the executors of the Princess’s will. Although there were no legal requirements attached to the gift, the implication was that it was for future, as well as past, loyalty. Some now think that this money was taken on false pretences and should either be returned to the Princess’s estate, or given to charity.

This man just hasn’t got any remorse, and he’s bleeding it for all he can, it’s pitiful, and he’s a Prima Donna with the quality and skill of a parasite. Who needs enemies, he’s a vile person and should have floated away gracefully, instead, he concocted the truth to get recognition and money.

Paul Burrell has completely misplaced his dignity, and he should have more regard for himself, and he should have taken Princess Diana’s secrets to his grave, but instead, he keeps cashing in on them.

However, Bryan Adams maintained that he was only ever good friends with Princess Diana. Whether they did have a love interest or not is beside the point now and actually nobody’s business

Historically, royals were not permitted to marry for love. Instead, they married strategically to gain territory, form international alliances, replenish the national coffers or preserve the purity of their bloodline. Of course, Edward VIII renounced the throne in order to marry Wallis Simpson, but it was only when the Queen gave the Prince of Wales leave to marry divorcee Camilla Parker-Bowles that royal love began conquering all.

That’s a pity though because by not allowing our ruler to marry for love, we’ve missed out on an entire army of consorts who might have just been good fun.


As fans of “The Crown” know, Prince Harry’s great-aunt, Princess Margaret, fell madly in love with her father’s former equerry, Peter Townsend, in her early 20s. He was a gallant war hero and presently would inevitably be judged a credit to the Royal Family. But back then, a princess could not marry a divorcee. Margaret went on to marry Antony Armstrong-Jones, and look how that turned out.

And for a really long time, Royal weddings were actually about as far from being a fairytale as you can get. Yes, there was a prince or princess involved, with lots of hoopla and some elegant couture, but historically, these unions were canny diplomatic ones.

Not passionate, Mills and Boon-style love novels, where some diamond-in-the-rough bourgeois got their royal piece of eye-candy, and really, Harry and Meghan would never have happened 100 years ago. Maybe even 50. It was never about love and until the early 20th century, royal weddings observed the same patterns and attitudes they had ensued for hundreds of years.

For almost one thousand years, these royal marriages were used for political ends, to help build alliances and gain territory, and in the course of a whole millennium, there were barely any royals who broke this pattern.

Even the Queen at the young age of 11 years old had five potential husbands scouted for her, and one of those five happened to be Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark, whom she ultimately fell in love with, so that worked out perfectly.

But since then, her children and grandchildren have had more freedom to chose their spouses, but these preceding laws created problems for Princess Margaret because the Queen actually denied her leave to marry Captain Peter Townsend.

prince harry.png

Of course, things have loosened up a little since then and Prince Harry has been permitted to marry Meghan who was a commoner, but there’s still little something forbidden about it, although I believe that Princess Diana would have been pleased that Harry got to marry for love.

Paul Burrell eventually admitted he was gay, and perhaps he did love her in a completely non-sexual way, maybe it was he that needed her and she was his rock and not the other way round. After all, he was married to a woman that he’d been with for a very long time, but he was gay and he had two children, so perhaps Diana knew that he was gay and knew what he was going through, bet she would never have revealed his secrets if it had been the other way round.

Perhaps he was envious and didn’t want to share her with anybody else because of that connection. Perhaps he felt cheated when she died because she was his only normalcy.

He confided in her often and she was his strength. You’ve got to agree it was a peculiar bond and somewhat stalkerish after Diana died. Diana was kind to him, and her one thing was that she was great at counselling various people in her life, including Paul who she counselled after his mother died.

He said that he wasn’t an intelligent man, that he doesn’t have any qualifications, but he believed that he’s been to a great university of life and that his principles were achieved because of the two women in his life. Well, he obviously didn’t have any principles when he sold his story for big bucks and had it scattered all over the tabloids, his principles must have been born out of money and notoriety.

But he did love her, he loved everything about her, but it’s all very I, I, I, me, me, me, I did this, I did that, which is all so easy when there’s no one around to dispute it and all pretty Jackanory.


Shocking Treatment Of Tommy Robinson

A judge accepted Tommy Robinson’s appeal and dropped the contempt conviction against him, giving him bail and sent him home, but let’s talk about Tommy Robinson’s treatment while he was in jail.

Tommy Robinson should never have been put in jail, and even if he should have been in jail, his treatment in there was inappropriate. But let’s talk about what Tommy Robinson has had to live through following his sentencing on May 25th 2018.


Tommy Robinson was first sent to HM Prison Hull, which from what we can surmise is one of the safer prisons in the United Kingdom, not that it’s not full of offenders, but it’s not governed by Muslim prison groups.

In many prisons in the United Kingdom, there are a number of Muslim’s in jail for crimes, including severe crimes, including terrorism. But a lot of people who go to jail, reform to Islam to be protected by the Muslim gangs.

If they convert to Islam they will be protected by the other Muslim detainees, if you don’t, you’re in danger of violence. This gang effectively runs the prison and it’s run in a Halal manner with five prayers a day, Halal food, they’re the bosses and they can carry out Fatwas inside the prison, and Tommy Robinson was transferred from HM Prison Hull to HM Prison Onley which is a much more Islamised prison.

There was no warning, reason or appeal whatsoever and this was not done by the courts, this was done by some unknown, faceless political official embedded inside the prison system and it’s a scandal and we must find out who did that.

There’s only one reason to remove Tommy Robinson from a safer prison to HM Prison Onley and that’s either to get Tommy Robinson killed at the hands of a Muslim prison gang or to force him to do what they knew he would do because he’d done it before and ask to be put in solitary detention to save his own life.

But the thing is, you can’t survive for thirteen months in solitary confinement, you would go insane and it would be regarded as cruelty, but that’s where Tommy Robinson was placed. It’s distressing enough that Tommy was in solitary but let’s give some instances of what the prison did to him while he was in jail.

Prisoner’s would constantly be given access to the front of Tommy’s cell and they would open up the cover to his cell and scream threats at him and this was allowed, like a form of mental cruelty, and there was a window in Tommy’s cell for a breeze in the scorching summer but prisoners were allowed to go up to the window and spit into Tommy’s cell which is a form of assault and its outrageous and it’s psychologically abusive.

So, Tommy had to shut his window in this particularly hot British summer. Tommy was locked in his cell to protect himself from the other prisoners, and on at least three occasions his cell door was inadvertently not locked and it would have been a disgrace if an accident had happened to Tommy in prison.

So, who was it in the British prison system who was seeking to get Tommy killed? And Tommy was only permitted to phone home during the lunch hour, so he was unable to talk to his kids because they were at school. That is an unreasonable and vindictive decision by the prison and on three occasions when his lawyers attempted to engage with him, on one occasion that meeting was cancelled by the prison, no reason, no warning, no appeal, simply cancelled.

And on the two occasions, they did meet, those meetings were cut short. The jailers slow-walked and took their time to bring Tommy to his lawyers and cut those legal meetings in half, that’s one of the reasons why Tommy’s delay was filed late because he couldn’t get a decent meeting with the lawyers.

Some would maintain that solitary imprisonment is a form of cruelty especially when other inmates are allowed to come right up to you and scream threats into your cell, threats of death and threats against Tommy’s wife. It’s a form of cruelty when inmates are allowed to spit at you with the support, or the willfully blind eye of the prison officials, almost so that he had to cook in this British summer.

And we now know that Tommy Robinson’s sentence was a fraudulent conviction and judicially inappropriate and flawed in every way and that a thirteen-month prison sentence was absurdly excessive and judging Tommy a criminal where in reality the contempt of court was not a violation, and that put him in this sadistic position unjustly.

But you know what, justice has not been done, his sentence has been revoked but we still don’t know who or why Tommy Robinson was treated this way in prison, why he was assigned to a more dangerous prison and why this brutal treatment of him was overlooked by the prison officials, and that needs to be satisfied.

It’s despicable what Tommy Robinson has had to go through and those officials that let this happen should be dispensed with respectively. What on God’s creation has happened to England? This only suggests that our legal justice system is defective.

We should be thankful that Tommy Robinson is okay and back home with his family, but it could have been so much more serious and we must not let those that are blameworthy of supporting this vile treatment of Tommy Robinson get away with it because the establishment has no morals or regard for human rights or life.

The governor of the prison is accountable for what goes on his or her prison and consequently, the person in charge should be charged and with that course of action, and I’m sure it wouldn’t be long before the offenders would be brought to trial.

It’s time to evaluate the situation with this parley of Muslims running our prisons. Our legal system is criminal and this type of simplicity truly is ammunition for anarchy in the United Kingdom and those that are reading this would have no doubt sent a chill up the spine of most.

The problem is Britain has slipped into the hands of the Islamic snare and before long the British will be called terrorists for having an opinion on the truth and it’s shocking and the velocity with which injustice was given out to Tommy Robinson was remarkable, if not horrifying.

Without having access to his own lawyer, Tommy Robinson was immediately judged and condemned to 13 months behind bars, really, 13 months for contempt of court, some people get less for rape because supposedly there isn’t enough room in our prisons, but Tommy got 13 months behind bars.

In the meantime, the judiciary who convicted Tommy Robinson also ordered British media not to report on his case and newspapers that had now posted the news of his detention immediately took them down. All this happened on the same day.

The way everybody was acting, anybody would have imagined that Tommy was a security risk, well there’s a way to make somebody feel extraordinary, pity he hasn’t been treated that way in jail.

In Britain, rapists have the right to a full and impartial hearing, the right to the proper representation of their choosing, the freedom to have adequate time to prepare their arguments, and the license to go home on bail between sessions of their case. No such rights were granted, however, to Tommy Robinson.

Britain has always been where the importance of the Anglosphere, and above all have been committed to our liberty’s, but in recent years, Britain has strayed from its dedication of liberty but now there is one notable native basher of Islam, Tommy Robinson, who was repeatedly harassed by the police, railroaded by the courts, and left unprotected by prison officials who allowed Muslim prisoners to beat him.

Clearly, the British police view Tommy Robinson as a troublemaker and I’m certain there are many out there that would like nothing more than to see Tommy give up his game or get murdered by jihadists.

The saga of Tommy Robinson started a new chapter when British police officers dragged him off a street in Leeds, where, in his role as a civilian reporter, he was live streaming a Facebook video from outside the courthouse.

Inside that building, numerous offenders were on trial for supposedly being part of a so-called grooming group, a gathering of men, nearly all Muslim, who regularly rape non-Muslim children, in some instances hundreds of them, over a span of years or decades.


Some ten thousand Facebook watchers throughout the world saw Tommy Robinson’s arrest live, and those responsible think they’re right in seeking to keep such people from broadcasting the facts.

What has this country become? Our forebears died to protect our freedoms, this country is finished, it’s past preservation and it’s horrific the damage the British government has done to Tommy Robinson in the past and in this latest act of treachery against democracy.

Tommy Robinson is a British subject of whom we should all be proud of, but was meted out as the Gestapo would have done, so where are the judges in Britain who believe their voters have rights to free speech, rights to a demonstration against gangs who rape their kids?


Theresa May should be ashamed of herself, she allowed Tommy Robinson to remain in prison and shame on the British people who no longer have the backbone to stand up for free speech, and shame on the judges who did this to a man who was fighting for us all by putting himself on the line for what he believes in.

He didn’t actually break any laws that would have put him in prison, ordinarily, a suspended sentence would have sufficed, but subversives would be allowed to get away with murder but Tommy Robinson was put in jail because the government don’t want the world to know what’s happening in our country.

Sadly, most protestors are portrayed as dim-witted rightwing extremists, and nobody has ever before been found in contempt of court and a postponement order made preventing the media from immediately reporting the news unless of course, the case was still ongoing.

Solzhenitsyn spoke about how Soviet police concentrated so much on ideological adversaries of the government that they ultimately became practically incompetent of determining the most simplistic everyday crimes and this appears to be where the United Kindom is heading.

Grooming gangs rape thousands of British girls and have had an exemption for years with little or no interest bestowed by the police or our political jurisdictions, but Tommy Robinson gets arrested, tried, convicted and imprisoned in a matter of hours for a non-violent misdemeanour.

Tommy Robinson supposedly turned up in court and referred to people as Muslim paedophiles and Muslim rapists and so forth. Well, blow me down with a feather, are we not permitted to say what we feel and to defend what is not true?

Okay, so he’s been told over and over not to do this, and time and time again he does, but somebody has to make a stand, somebody out there has to fight for our rights and our country, and I guess as much as he disagrees with the law, he can’t ultimately complain if he knowingly breaks them, but really, prison, that’s more than ridiculous when you consider that there are people out there perpetrating more pressing evils and they get off with a slap on the back of the hand.

Tommy Robinson reports what the establishment stops us from hearing, it’s as simple as that, and that’s why society relies on press freedom, and something that we will be saying adieu.

Anyone in the United Kingdom is allowed legal representation except if you surrender that freedom and choose to represent yourself, and Tommy Robinson should have been allowed to have a lawyer present.

His crime of reporting Muslim paedophilia hardly warranted a prison sentence and this judge was seemingly attempting to satisfy powerful Muslim groups which are an odd and self-destructive approach to our justice system.

If Tommy Robinson was a far-right racialist and fascist, then the UK government would be far less afraid of him. What the government are most petrified of is normal, decent people understanding, verbalising, and presenting evidence of how sick and corrupt the government’s multi-culturalist methods are.

All people should have human freedoms and the realm of awareness and conscience and we should have freedom of opinion and belief in all matters. We should have the freedom to express ourselves, either to articulate them or write them ideas down.

We should be allowed to have the freedom to follow our pursuits and to be able to build a life that accommodates our own personality, and of doing what we like without impediment, so long as we do not harm others. Some might believe that this behaviour is stupid, unreasonable or even crazy.

For decades the media, our cabinets and MPs have looked the other way when it comes to Muslim rapists, giving them an unfettered reign to carry on doing what they do but the thing is, in Islam, human sexuality is ruled by God’s authority and a sexual violation is viewed as a crime of moral and spiritual law and demands divine retribution.

Rape is deemed a serious sexual offence in Islam and traditional Islamic law (Shari’a) considers the offence of sexual violation as a coercive “zina”, and consequently a “hadd” crime, but in England, it happens all the time and we’re not allowed to speak about it because anybody talking out will be silenced, jailed, fired or quelled.

But the writings on the wall folks and our police are now there to defend the rapists and abuse the victims, with children frequently being identified as prostitutes by the police and councils to justify what some Muslims are doing, and it’s an outright disgrace what this country has become and now we have to say goodbye to the England we once knew.

This is the (United) Kingdom but we’re not united at all because now we have Muslim sovereignty. Not that all Muslims are fanatics, of course, they’re not, the same as not all German’s were Nazi’s, but all German’s got tarred with the same brush.

But we must understand that there’s no place for die-hard agitators in the (United) Kingdom.

There has always been propaganda in our newspapers, but the United Kingdom was an apparently free country and now thirty years later it has descended into this regressive state, this isn’t progress, it’s become an apocalypse.

Tommy Robinson has been slandered by the establishment from the start because he’s a white working class guy that articulates the facts and the establishment are working laboriously to stifle and warp his reputation, and if you compare the indignity accorded to him for his first offence, mortgage fraud, a falsification on an application form to help his brother in law get a mortgage.

Then you have the huge mortgage fraud that was perpetrated by the Labour minister, Peter Mandelson in 1996. He was initially forced out of government but he was let back into government at the first chance by Tony Blair and he became the Northern Ireland Secretary.

This arrogant criminal was also accused of receiving extensive bribes to allow an Indian businessman to get a British passport, and then you have Tommy Robinson who’s shocking crime was falsifying an application to enter the United States as the mortgage fraud rendered him unsuitable.

It appears that if you have the right educated background and the right accent and you come across as being incisively intelligent, then everybody appears helpless against this towering mentality and anything that they do is tolerated and respected despite championing the same causes at Tommy Robinson.

The government are supported by their henchmen, the British media who are scheming to snare Tommy Robinson and eliminate him from our midst because he verbalises the facts of what’s going on in the United Kingdom.

Then we had the Royal wedding, another tool of the establishment, which the media devoted every detail to, from the footwear that everybody wore or what Harry might have said to his bride, all so that the establishment can keep the crowds suppressed and “loyal.”

But why are we loyal to an establishment that’s working toward replacing us with foreign people?

Our towns are no longer British, and people are leaving them and the country in their droves. Our culture is being torn from us and the Queen does nothing, she doesn’t even defend the faith or the realm, and our country has been transformed beyond comprehension.

There will be no objection by the liberals against Tommy Robinson’s treatment as they don’t support white men, free speech and they don’t care about the thousands of young working-class white girls and Sikh girls being raped on an everyday basis by British Pakistani Muslim gangs, but if the zealous feminists are out in force, or if an actress has a tale to tell twenty years after an incident, despite film footage of them cosying up to their assaulters years after, and working for him for vast remunerations, but ordinary hard-working human beings have now become collateral damage.

The biggest problem here in the United Kingdom is that almost half the country is supporting and encouraging this political correctness, but it’s not political correctness, it’s political control, and the government embraces those multicultural credentials when it satisfies them.

You mustn’t do this because it’s not politically correct, well, we pay our damn taxes and abide by the law and so long as we’re not harming anybody else in the process, freedom and liberty once meant we could do what we liked.

Well, clearly not because we’re not free, we don’t have our freedoms anymore but it’s okay for die-hard Muslims to rape our women while our government turn a blind eye because apparently raping women or children is politically correct.

Ordinary decent people care about protecting their country but ultimately, that won’t be the case because, in the end, we will end up becoming a supremacist culture, and it’s rather terrifying how vulnerable our judges are becoming in the United Kingdom and how much left-wing control there is in our courts these days.

So, Tommy Robinson breached his bail conditions, what’s he a national security risk? I hardly think so! Who hasn’t at one point or another breached something, it’s not like he’s a knife-wielding assassin, but raping women and children is okay and past contempt now. You watch this space, soon fanatics will get a slap on the wrist and told what a bad boy he is, and not to do it again, and that will be the norm.

Nobody has the right to groom and rape children and whether somebody that has perpetrated that atrocity is Muslim or British, that should be punishable by a prison sentence. This is the United Kingdom, not Islam, they can do what they like over there, but here in England there are particular laws and if the die-hard fanatics can’t live by those laws, then they should go back to their own homeland where they would feel more at home to rape their women and children whenever they like.

This government must go and we must put a fork in them because our government is done.

The trouble is, people are sheep and our bureaucrats are a bunch of wimps shepherding the docile masses, and we need somebody like Tommy Robinson to fight for the sheep’s rights. We have been taken in by these bunch of wimps and the sheep have accepted this and we’re in a submission race.

Sadly, our government will not let Tommy Robinson carry on much longer, and eventually, if he mutinies against the machine he will disappear without a trace.

I moved to my hometown in 1981, when I moved here it was a pleasant little town with some especially friendly people, you could go out at night on your own with no fear of getting beaten, hammered over the head or killed, and I could still leave my front door open and be safe. It’s now 2018, I can’t walk my streets at night for fear of getting stabbed, and there’s a crime on my streets virtually every day where somebody dies, my town is like Beirut, sad to say, this is how most of England is.

Fortuitously, my town is not extreme Muslim related crimes at the moment, most are gang or drug related, but shortly it will be, and smaller towns will be easier to target.

We are quickly approaching an Orwellian England with a horrifying misuse of state control with failed immigration management and a harmful multi-cultural experiment, and it was assumed that Muslims would be integrated into general society, and brought to accept our values of humanity and fairness.

Instead, we’re allowing Islam to bring our society down to the level observed in Muslim society, where hate, misogyny, anti-semitism and supremacism are rooted in their cultures.

It’s an insult what’s happening in Great Britain, our ancestors served honourably in the War to fight for the freedom of the British and Europeans. What did our ancestors fight for if not for freedom and free speech? Tommy Robinson should be entitled to have his freedom of speech, otherwise, our ancestors fought and died for nothing, and that’s an affront to those who died so that we could have the freedom of speech!

The United Kingdom is finished and we should ask ourselves why so many people as well as countless Americans shed their blood fighting the Germans and served to protect the United Kingdom and Europe when today those liberties that many fought and died for are quickly being taken away.

There is no longer freedom of speech and if that speech happens to be about articulating the truth about Islam and the problems that Muslim invaders have brought to the country, the UK police turn a blind eye to Muslim gangs grooming young girls for sex, but if you talk freely you’re causing a breach of the peace, it’s a dark day for the UK.


It used to be said that the British Justice System was the greatest in the world but now it has become more left-wing in its orientation. This was done incrementally and secretly by a political group that lied at elections after 1961, backed by the controlled media, and fixed by the Equality Act 2010, plus continuous pressure from capitalist interests for cheap labour and liberal-left psychological control of education, the law and the BBC.

A British woman complained to the Metropolitan Police about Muslims illegally conducting group prayer in a public place. The police were reluctant to stop them, and the woman protests about there being one rule for Muslims and another for everyone else. Shortly after, she was arrested.

There was a large gathering of Muslims openly praying in Royal Park in London, which infringes our British laws, but evidently, the Metropolitan Police intentionally abstained from implementing the law because it involved Muslims, probably because they didn’t want to deal with it or piss off the Muslims.

But, in this particular case, the police officers lied about the existence of the law. But when the woman read them the exact text of the law, they revealed that they had orders from above not to implement the law against Muslims.

The woman who recorded footage clearly planned in advance for the encounter and came equipped, and she’s some a gutsy lady because at one point she was besieged by hostile Muslims jabbing their fingers in her face and screaming at her, but she didn’t back down or give in.

A few days later, the police were at her door, demanding to be let in, but not explaining why they wanted to speak to her. Eventually, she let them in and they arrested her.

The Royal Parks (TRP) does not allow joint acts of prayer or other holy rituals in the TRP estate, either in their own right or as part of a demonstration, event or other activity. This includes oral or sung public prayers or other events that are essentially religious in focus. Exceptions are made for yearly acts of remembrance at the regimental memorials in the Parks, which have taken place since the First World War.

Leicester Square in the heart of tourist London is not exempt either. You can’t dispense with any religious material in such a public place, but it does happen, but this is totally against the local bylaws. You could complain I guess but you would probably get arrested for provocation of religious prejudice, one law for them and one law for the rest of us.

This is no laughing matter and simply shows that in the United Kingdom there is one law for Muslims and another for everyone else, and heaven help anyone who presumes to speak up.

Considering thousands perished in WWI and WWII to preserve a way of life, and thousands were injured, and often died from their injuries, this is nothing short of sickening.

If you happen to be white, you are treated as though you are transparent, the Police are only interested in defending Muslims no matter what they choose to do.

One has only to remember how long it took them to investigate the sex crimes against eleven and twelve-year-old children sexually abused by gangs of Asian men, using their cafes and restaurants as fronts for prostitution.

Some of the girls were gang-raped by various men, their lives will never be the same after undergoing this level of exploitation and the Police said that they did not believe the assertions, but this was happening in many large towns.

The children were too scared to tell parents or the Police because their lives and the lives of their families were threatened, yet for years the Police did nothing.

In Keswick, the Police arranged for Muslims to use the Town Hall for their prayers, I am sure that if Christians or any other group alleged they had no place to pray, they would have been told to pay to rent or buy somewhere, but no, Muslims need to be found a place.

People used to believe in the motto, ‘When in Rome do as the Romans.’ Yet Muslims are forcing their wicked and harsh killing of animals on the people by purchasing slaughterhouses, and complaining to MPs falls on deaf ears. The United Kingdom was once considered a nation of animal lovers, yet those who complain, be that farmers or members of the public are quelled from saying anything.

On the Isle of Anglesey, hundreds of Muslims were brought in to kill innocent sheep in the harshest halal way imaginable. No animal deserves to be treated in such a brutal and sickening way. If a person treated their dog like that it would be considered Animal Abuse and the people who did it would be prosecuted for their offences, but not Muslims.

The UK Olympics sold Halal meat exclusively, and it is sold to schools and hospitals for people who do not even need it for religious purposes, which is actually against the law in the United Kingdom.

The country has been totally taken over, no wonder Muslims boast that by the year 2020 the United Kingdom will be a Muslim Country.

Surely when two Muslims beheaded a UK soldier, Drummer Rigby, when he was returning to his barrack, then people should have woken up and smelt the coffee. When there are terrorist attacks, police are keen to conceal the fact, usually insisting that these events didn’t happen, and when Muslim leaders promote terrorism, it takes years to get them deported and we should ask ourselves why.

What a horrible state of affairs in the United Kingdom, while we’re all the pandering to Islam/Muslims by the political elite which took on a new dimension after the cruel killing of soldier Lee Rigby in 2013. His death should have been avenged instantly, but it didn’t happen.

Nothing much happened to the two animals who perpetrated the grim slaying except for some prison time. These monsters are still breathing.

When a country does not exact punishment for the pointless, unprovoked murder of one of its own, then it has really lost the plot. It’s not a real country anymore when it fails to defend its citizens, and is merely a pile of poo, and deserves the shameful fate that awaits the United Kingdom when Islam officially takes over.

The people of England have historically resisted against their homegrown oppressors many times, sometimes harmoniously and at times quite violently.

We now have a new kind of oppressor and opponent, the first and most dangerous is our own existing government. The second, which could be quickly dispensed by a right-thinking government is the emergence of the Islamic doctrine and culture which is an atrocity to progress in the 21st century.

It’s time once again to stop this current domination, and we need to begin with our police force, and the government should not be welcoming dangerous aliens into our country. Sadly, decades of conditioning of the people has had its impact, as it was intended to do.

But people are too scared to rebel because of what might happen to them, like getting carted off to prison like some criminal for speaking our minds, and the fear of government reprisals keep a lot of people in Britain from taking action, or they’re browbeaten and told not to speak out, and our government is our worst adversary.

Most of the 63 clauses of the Magna Carta granted by King John dealt with specific grievances relating to his rule. But, hidden within them were a number of basic values that both challenged the dictatorship of the king and proved extremely flexible in the coming centuries.

Most famously, the 39th clause gave all ‘free men’ the right to justice and a fair trial, obviously that concept has been lost and has been superseded by political correctness. Although, no man or woman has ever really been free, and the Magna Carta was simply for people like Barons and not for the people that were controlled by them.

Everything we’re seeing is an out-and-out misuse of power by the government, who lurk in the House of Commons and refuse to defend this country and its beliefs but are quite prepared to defend Islamic faith here in the United Kingdom, and on the whole, the British establishment is a bunch of wimps.

Tommy Robinson was described as a thuggish rabble-rouser in the UK media, but he’s a young man who’s concerned and annoyed about the changes that have been foisted on his community, and he’s conducted himself civilly and articulately when subjected to intrusive discussions with the media and has posted youtube discussions he has had with controversial personalities.

He further posted youtube talks in which he reported the harassment bordering on abuse at the hands of the police, including one which revealed the police accosting him as he sat having a meal with his family, who were causing no disturbance to anyone, forcing him to vacate the area.

The sight of a flock of stone-faced police forcing his family down the street while his daughter was sobbing with extreme distress was one of the most shameful incidents and should make people ashamed to be British.

It all began with, “You can’t say baa baa black sheep anymore,” then the blackboard was eliminated and we had the whiteboard, and gollywogs were excluded from the side of our jam jars. I must confess I was rather happy when they got rid of the blackboard, I disliked that scraping sound from the chalk, but nursery rhymes were never the same again, and I used to love my gollywog, in fact, I had a doll with a double-sided head, one side was black the other side was white, and I loved that doll.

Things have come a long way since then, now we’re not concerned about a mere blackboard or doll, now our concern is if we walk down the street, are we going to get beheaded by some Islamic fanatic?

Our children are indoctrinated in their own schools, that’s what happens when you open up borders, before then, we were a modern country, and women weren’t wrapped from head to toe in suffocating attire, they drove cars and entered beauty parades.

But young people are indifferent because their too distracted with working and supporting a family and couldn’t care less about what’s happening and before they know it, they won’t know what hit them because they would have lost their country under a totally different rule.

Have the British obviously lost all regard for basic human freedoms, and will they continue to take the easy way out until the entire country is browbeaten into submission?

Does Theresa May have no regard for basic human values? And how long a life does Great Britain and indeed the entirety of Europe have before we are canned into the Middle Ages?

But the struggle still continues, and the unfairness is apparent to all. Muslims want to get rid of free speech but have their own free speech which is forever in support of Islam, it never favours any other faith.

It’s difficult to know where to begin or how to respond besides displaying contempt and loathing to our government because they have forsaken their own people, they have lost direction and are now going after those who will offer the least resistance.

This was an out-and-out injustice given out to Tommy Robinson and it’s time that the United Kingdom recognised and denounced Islamic perpetrators and their many associates who currently lurk in the police, and now the social welfare system, the government and now the judiciary.

What a dreadful malfunction of the law. The problem is the perpetrators are the government, and their followers in Parliament, none of this would be happening without their consent.

They have the ability to change everything that needs to be changed, and they could change most of it or all of it, and the fact that they aren’t doing it, or even discussing it, suggests that this is what they want.

And the only people who have assured freedom to do what they want, and the freedom to speak hatred are fanatical Muslims, and the British government and the police have totally surrendered to Islam.

No one else can speak up and criticise Islam and most notably no one is allowed to highlight the evils of rape and the molestation of young girls by Muslim grooming gangs without having to suffer the full weight of the new laws designed simply to defend Islam.

Imams speak brazenly of their antipathy for the West and are given an unfettered rein to access our country and spew their offensive beliefs, but if anyone or person were to bring it to the notice of the public that die-hard Muslims were on trial for their favourite sport of raping and molesting young girls, then like Tommy Robinson, they would be jumped on immediately by the police.

Our government is complicit in what has been happening to these young girls and that’s the only reason they don’t like any publicity, and they’re surrendering to Islam, and whenever a gang comes to trial they plead their innocence and by doing so, force those young girls to have to give evidence, which is very traumatic for many of them.

This is prudent, on the recommendation from their crooked defence team who care only for the cash they get from the public pocket, and the whole country has gone to pot with depravity and cowardice, the main claim to fame of politicians.

And the government go after everyone who simply questions Muslims, just because of the intimidation of rioting and civil rebellion posed by Muslims who use this as a way to keep the politicians onside.

It’s completely incredible, and who would have ever thought this would happen in the United Kingdom, but this is what happens when terror hits at the core of government, because politicians only consider themselves and as a consequence will willingly allow the radical Muslims to gradually win authority and do what they want.

Tommy Robinson, amongst others, have been attacked and denounced by politicians in this country, and he won’t be the last, but at the same time the government are letting hate preachers come to England, but we have gutless and spineless politicians who pacify the vile religion of Islam, and they’re laughing at how well they have deceived the sceptic, their sumptuous plan is sluggish, but definitely taking place.

Don’t bother writing to your MPs they probably won’t respond because they’re not interested in what the masses have to say, and the message is crystal, the United Kingdom is lost because our government has felt the Muslim knife at its throat and it has surrendered to it, and anyone who criticises Islam or who shines a light on the Muslim paedophiles who prey upon underage white non-Muslim girls is likely to suffer the same fate as Tommy Robinson.

Let’s see what the government have to say about this, or even our Queen while she cavorts around having wonderful tea parties for her various personages, perhaps she will make a gesture to help and support the freedom of her citizens.

The British whites are now the new Blacks and now they can be exploited, molested, battered and murdered at will because the government pick on the vulnerable like all tormentors and because the whites have become vulnerable as their industries close and their faith is trashed, and family order collapses, the new strong attack the vulnerable.

But Labour needed the Pakistani votes in the Northern Towns, and they turned a blind eye to the grooming, gang rape and exploitation and some entered the fight gleefully, and the BBC true to form backed the ethnic minorities and dismissed, distorted and covered up to conceal this, and they’ve been doing so for at least three decades.

Other Conservative governments are now committed to multiculturalism and having capitulated to Islam chose to cover up as well, but Tommy Robinson kept pushing this, exposing police depravity, ineptitude and the cold indifference as the rape, beatings and pimping carries on.

However, his incarceration without trial exposes a far more sinister Pandora’s box, and that is fascism and allied with Islam, as Hitler did, could well spell an extensive problem for Britain because we have become a society where it’s potentially acceptable to molest children of sceptics, and this needs to be exposed and eradicated.

The only wrong that Tommy Robinson did was that he insisted on telling the truth and he opposed becoming the means of any power structure, newspaper or political party, but more than that Tommy Robinson is a white lower class guy without an Oxford background or accent, but clearly that’s inexcusable.


No-Deal Brexit

There’s been a bit of a dispute this week after one of the UK’s senior health regulators announced a stiff warning over what a no-deal Brexit could mean for the supply of medications.

We take our medication in the United Kingdom for granted, we go to the pharmacy to get our prescription and if they don’t have it in stock, we whine about it, like they should automatically have it, but what we don’t consider is that not all our medications come from the United Kingdom.

In fact, most of our prescription meds in the United Kingdom come from EU countries:

31-category-sanofi_niouSanofi-Aventis – French

Merck – German

Eli_Lilly_and_Company.svg.pngEli Lilly and Company Limited in the United Kingdom are about the only pharmaceutical company that offers Insulin. Sanofi-Aventis, which is a French pharmaceutical company and Merck who are German are the principal contributors to Insulin made products for the UK market.

If we come out of the EU there will be no market because EU countries like France and Germany will have no incentive to trade with us.


There is one other Pharmaceutical company that does produce Insulin in the United Kingdom and that’s Wockhardt UK which produces Bovine Insulin but has now been discontinued.

Due to global bovine insulin API (raw material) unavailability, Wockhardt have had no option but to discontinue the Hypurin® Bovine insulin range. Sadly, despite their best endeavours in seeking to find an alternative supply, none has been located.

However, they will still produce Porcine Insulin which is normally used in the treatment of children with Diabetes.

Sanofi doesn’t produce insulin in the United Kingdom, all of their insulins are produced in Frankfurt. Novo Nordisk produces their insulin in Denmark and France, and Lilly said they don’t make insulin at all, but if you go onto their website it says that they are based in the United Kingdom but seemingly manufacture from abroad.

However, it’s fair to say that several pharmaceutical industries have not embraced the likelihood of the UK’s withdrawal from the EU.

If Brexit mediations are not managed properly it could mean significant consequences for the NHS medicines supply chain, and it would mean that we would end up stockpiling our medication of all types as a buffer stock in the case of a no deal Brexit.

Insulin is vitally essential to millions of people in this country and while the United Kingdom is confident of striking a compromise there will have to be emergency plans in place that control the proper levels of stocks so there’s no disruption to patients.

The United Kingdom, in the grand scheme of things, doesn’t actually produce that much Insulin and that raises concerns that a no deal Brexit could upset the stock of essential medicines to Diabetic patients.

It’s not right to say that we don’t produce any Insulin whatsoever in the United Kingdom, but it does look like the amount we do make in the United Kingdom serves less than one per cent of the Brits who rely on Insulin and the meagre amount of insulin that is manufactured in the United Kingdom is made from pigs and cows, rather than human cells.

Millions of diabetic sufferers, including Theresa May herself, could be severely disadvantaged if stocks of insulin are weakened by a no-deal Brexit, and if Britain falls out of the EU and there’s a disruption we’re going to be in big trouble as the UK imports every drop of insulin, which is a vital medication that’s used by some 3.7 million people to control their lifelong condition.


The prime minister herself regularly injects insulin to cope with her type 1 diabetes, and we must ensure medications don’t run out if the government neglects to settle an agreement with Brussels, but plans are in motion to stockpile medicines, medical appliances and blood stocks in the event of a no deal, and speculation over such a situation is growing.

Of course, there were going to be teething difficulties exiting the EU, but that’s precisely what they should have been, teething problems that could have been worked out quickly, but at this time Theresa May and her vigilantes have no idea what they’re doing.

You can’t dispatch insulin around ordinarily because it must be temperature-controlled, and disruption to the supply chain is how patients could be severely disadvantaged and it could be a reality if the government don’t get their shit together, and a competent government would have equipped themselves for this mountain of outcomes, they have not acknowledged people’s well-being, or to even safeguarded them.

All that Theresa May has done is to convene on her perch and convince her voters that while she’s attempting to channel herself out of a hole, that she makes sure that we stock up on food, medications and essential stocks in the event of a no-deal Brexit, next she’ll have us rationing!

The government are telling us that they’re making preparations and that we should be comforted and reassured that they’re in negotiations and striving for a great compromise, well, that great compromise has been going on for the past two years, you’d imagine they would have agreed on something by now.

And they seem to believe that they can get a great deal but I believe we should be equipped for every eventuality because honestly, we have no inkling what the outcome will be and the government is supposed to issue about 70 technical reports over the summer to help businesses and consumers prepare for a no deal Brexit.

There are 3.7 million people with recognised type 1 or type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom, with 10 per cent of them type 1 and in need of Insulin and 3.7 million is a lot of people that couldn’t possibly go without their medication.

Obviously, the management didn’t have a backup plan or any plan at all, after all, you wouldn’t put a medication on the market without testing it first, and I say that somewhat loosely…

But with any medication, there are side effects and in the end, it’s not the government that will suffer but people will suffer the fall out from that – we are the side effect and the government should have known that they can’t mess with our economy because of some pie in the sky fantasy.

We the people rely on the government to do the right thing, and the weight is on them, not us, to sort out their mayhem, and they simply didn’t think this through when they gave us the freedom to vote in or out, there should have been a contingency plan.

The government don’t give us many freedoms these days, but they deemed it would be a great idea to give us the liberty to vote in or out, that’s one freedom they did give us, and they smoke screened us into thinking it was a very good idea to vote out, doesn’t seem like a very good idea now, does it?

There are a lot of loons out there that believe that people who suffer from diabetes do so because they eat crap and are overweight, which is far from accurate for those that have been diabetic since they were kids – not obese, not overweight, just damn unlucky.

There are many people who are diabetic that follow a stringent regime, exercise and are still diabetic. Of course, there are those that ended up diabetic because of bad nutrition, but that doesn’t pertain to all.

Casting out carbohydrates from your diet could put you at an increased danger of a deficiency in some nutrients, leading to health difficulties, and any food can be fattening if you gorge, but there are some people that are saying that diabetes afflicts older, overweight people and I guess we should be worried by this.

And even though Theresa May is a type 1 diabetic she doesn’t give an iota, she will go private and pay for whatever medication she requires like all those inglorious scoundrels in Brexitland, and the reason all those capitalist Brexit fans have no difficulty with a no deal scenario is because they know it won’t affect them.

They’ll be like those Third World leaders who get around worldwide sanctions with a huge suitcase of cash to waste in places like Harrods. After all, if Tacos get lost in customs control for a week it won’t matter, but insulin is a different story.

It could be said that I’m scaremongering people but I’d sooner people be informed of what could happen, then later on down the line everybody is in a frenzy.

At the end of the day, everything might work out for the best, then we can all sigh relief and unwind a little, but this is our government we’re talking about and anything can go wrong at any time.

We shouldn’t be flapping about it, but we should be extremely concerned and conscious of what’s going on, and warning people about the possibility of shortages of life-saving medication which isn’t scaremongering, it’s being cognizant of the realities.

Brexit hasn’t happened yet and I wouldn’t want to rain on anybody’s parade but when it does finally happen, nobody can be criticised on who voted in or out. We were all given a vote and we made that decision, although some were more fooled than others.

A voting day comes and goes, but the fight of the people to form a government which serves all of us and not merely the one per cent, a government which is based on the beliefs of financial, cultural, ethnic and environmental justice, that fight still remains.

And Theresa May might believe she’s rich, but when you look at billionaires, many of them share one trait, they weren’t born billionaires, in fact, we were all born with absolutely nothing, and Theresa May should reflect this when she’s looking down her beak at the less fortuitous. Theresa May you were born with nothing like everybody else, and if you don’t care about your people, stand down and let somebody else do a better job…

Furious Attack On Brexit

Evidently, British Brexit taxpayers didn’t know what they were voting for in the 2016 referendum when 17.4 million Britons chose to abandon the European Union.

Presumably, they were blindfolded and led around like decapitated chickens, but were people in Britain really told the facts to begin with? And did they really know precisely what they were voting for?

They were guaranteed something that was utterly absurd and wasn’t economically workable. And it’s got so complex now that we simply don’t know what’s going on.

However, a second vote has been requested, demanding another referendum is the only way to decide the parliamentary delay and the leavers are right in rejecting the Prime Minister’s Soft Brexit plan.

The deal is the worst of both worlds and we’ll be hauling Remain voters out of the European Union for a deal that means still abiding by numerous EU dictates, but presently with no say on shaping them.

It’s not what they want, and on top of that when they learn that Leave voters are unhappy, they ask, ‘What’s the point?’ And for Leavers, this agreement just does not give the proper break from the European Union that they wanted.

The only solution is to take the final Brexit decision out of the hands of deadlocked politicians and give it to the British people and to give Britons three choices on the voting paper.


Firstly, to accept Theresa May’s Brexit proposal, secondly, to leave the World Trade Organization (WTO) terms or thirdly, to stay remaining in the EU but Prime Minister Theresa May has repeatedly stated Britain will not have a second Brexit referendum.

But people do have a brain that works and can figure things out for themselves and those that did vote knew precisely what they were voting for, although the day after the Brexit referendum in June 2016, resulting in winning to leave, the most used search term on Google by people in the United Kingdom was: “What is the European Union,” This was the day after the referendum.


But then we’ve got a Parliament in London, full of rodents and reptiles, making decisions that aren’t to our advantage, so what’s the difference? But then the EU is a distended self-serving establishment and it’s restrictive in trade wanting deals inside the EU and nowhere else.

It’s governed by a few and it’s not democratic.

But did we vote for food deficits and all the consequences of leaving?

Sometimes it’s better the devil you do know, than the devil you don’t. England was perfectly fine before we joined the EU but to leave now would be like cutting off our right arm, except if you’re left handed, then it would be your left…

Change can sometimes be good, but sometimes it can be really bad and if we leave the EU altogether, our trade will become extremely difficult because they will make it really challenging for us.


There were hundreds of people that didn’t know and believed Boris Johnson and his pack and are worse off now, hitting the food banks, and we forget that a substantial part of Britain isn’t as educated as the rest and fact-finding might have been hard for them, but still voted out and realised after that they’d made a huge mistake.

We were told that Brexit would be hugely advantageous to Great Britain but over the last two years most of those claims have been withdrawn, now it’s about damage and limitation.

We’re supposed to be the land of milk and honey but now we’re being advised to stockpile food and medicine, which makes you think that perhaps it’s time to have another vote and educate people about Brexit, and not fraudulent education, we want the truth this time.

When there are people out there that don’t agree with Brexit and the government are seeking to fraudulently stretch the truth onto people, that’s called bullying.

Food wasn’t rationed in WWI, there was poverty, of course, but it was free for all, those who had money ate and those that didn’t starved, and there’s every possibility that’s what will happen here in England because the Tories don’t believe in humanity, just the power of money.

It’s always the poor that get hit the most but those in government won’t suffer too much, you can be sure of that.

Clearly, some people didn’t know what they were voting for and many were misled about the NHS. Numerous people said they didn’t actually understand all the implications but wanted more money for the NHS but now sadly the NHS is under threat because of the government selling it off.

If Brexit does work it could be 50 years before we find out, by that time most of us will be dead, in fact those that were 17 years old at the time, and not old enough to vote, will be 70 years old and will have wasted their entire life working, waiting to see if they got any benefit from a verdict they were not entitled to have any say in.

What is the advantage of leaving? Is it like swapping a three-course meal for the vague promise of a packet of stockpiled crisps? And how could anyone have known what they were voting for, the government didn’t even know what you were voting for…

If we leave the EU, all EU businesses will cease to trade with the United Kingdom so we will be up the creek without a paddle, and that’s only half of it, once we leave we further conclude all our current trade agreements with every country around the world from that moment on.

So, we will have no trading agreements with anybody and this will be a disaster for Great Britain and many countries like the United States, Brazil, New Zealand et cetera have already told us to get stuffed and will prevent us getting our articles or passports to trade except if we substantially decrease our privileges, so then we will be little fish in a huge pond and won’t have the same access or rights to the EU.

America has demanded that we drastically decrease our Health and Safety laws and Animal Welfare laws save for a surge of US GM crops, Chlorine chicken et cetera.

The same with countless others who don’t treat their animals so well and use chemical branding here. Of course, the United States has further made it pretty apparent they will further prevent us from trading under the WTO laws after leaving if we demand we keep subsidising medications.

So, we need to drastically raise the cost along the US lines so that US businesses can compete and overwhelm our market and tough luck if you’re poor and it’s not as if the NHS can support these huge increases but the hardline Brexiteers think it’s excellent.

As with the endless parodies of Brexit, WTO members will have a majority and tell us what new terms and requirements we can trade under WTO rules but we have been told quite openly it will mean getting rid of all the privileges we have now and accept that we remove our high Animal Welfare Rights laws and high H&S laws to support those with lower standards et cetera, and complete access to our markets, and we will no longer be able to pick and chose what we want.


So, Elton John is a master on Brexit now, I thought he was a pop star and half the time he doesn’t even live in this country but he does have a point, the Brexit campaign is bursting with jargon and no one really knows what they mean but simply replicate them anyhow.

But Elton has his opinions and he’s entitled to express them, perhaps he should be the next Prime Minister, and he’s extremely loyal to Britain but even a person in a coma would know that this is a mercenary nefarious government that tittle-tattles nothing but out-and-out crap.

But I agree with Elton, I don’t think anyone knows what the hell is going on or what to expect, and now total panic has ensued and we’re in an abyss.

At the moment everyone appears to be an authority on Brexit, but no one’s an authority on Brexit, especially our politicians that are deemed to be managing it, but no one is an authority on Brexit because it was a cynical pie in the sky idea for rash and gullible politicians that the average person can see right through.

I’m weary of the experts because they appear to have no idea what’s going on.

As for Elton John, he’s a UK subject and in regards to Brexit, integrity means doing or saying what one believes is best for the United Kingdom and he thinks the exiting campaign made undeliverable promises and he said so.

The trouble with leavers is they still think we have an empire and we can patronise the rest of the world. We’re a small wheel in a big world now and it has profited massively from EU support, look at all the city improvement programmes just for a start, nevermind investment from all over the globe because we’re in the EU, try taking all that away and what have we got?

I’m starting to question if Brexit will ever happen anyhow, just because it’s actually impracticable to deliver what was promised. Every aspect of our life is far too deeply interconnected with the EU for us to break up in the time frame suggested. Perhaps a 10 year transition period, maybe, but not in the current format. It’s two years on and still, no one has a clue how to do this.

Of course, Elton is wealthy and prosperous and his money cushions him from Brexit but at least he stuck his head above the rampart.


This ludicrous situation only started because David Cameron called for a vote to quell Nigel Farge, who, it appears has done pretty well lining his own pockets but neither of these two had the guts or the courage to see through what they both started.


Nigel Farage simply whipped up and played upon people who revelled in a chocolate box version of British life which has never actually existed.

Immigration has always existed, but the real problem has never been about immigration, it’s been about the increasing number of poly-cultural communities which create distrust and misunderstanding, rather than multicultural communities which are full of spirit, and hustle and bustle.

There is precious little information on how this country will fare financially and business wise which two years on from the non-legally binding vote is utterly ridiculous never mind a poor joke.

What about the future of our kids? Were you oblivious to the facts that further education colleges were getting massively financed by the EU? Not least because of the NEETS, those 16-18-year-olds who were not in work, education or training.

There is a pretty high percentage of these young people who presently find themselves at their local colleges who are not academically inclined nor particularly trade inclined, but due to the collapsing nature of our manufacturing industry, these young people are elbowed into college to endeavour to get their grade 4/5 English/ maths GCSE as they had failed them the first time around.

Education is extremely important, but if we’re striving to question whether Britain might be better off after Brexit, then it’s essential that we know where that funding comes from, and which has underpinned British lives for so long.

There has never actually been glorious days of our nation, I mean what’s great about trampling all over the globe and claiming a land and its people for your own and then treating those people like trash, or using them as slave labour, if not worse, encouraging them to fight and die in conflicts not of their own making and then stripping the colony of its nature assets, there’s a very impressive heritage here, don’t you think?

What you consider as being Great Britain was created by serfs, either directly or indirectly through slave profit and immigrants and many of our grand well-known structures, for instance, are connected to such brutality.

Oh, and a word to the wise, we all who live in this country regardless of fame, wealth or standing has a freedom to assert their view on whatever they want. It’s called freedom of speech.

When you get to the bottom of it, it normally turns out that a leave vote was based on emotional reasons rather than rationale. You can’t fight against emotion with reason. It’s like trying to use reason to argue against religion. It’s pointless.

People make up their minds based on how they feel and they don’t change their minds when confronted with facts because facts never came into it in the first place.

The government tell us that they can get us back into work like we have potential and then it’s wasted, a whole generation of pumping fuel, serving tables, workers with white collars and advertising has us chasing wheels and clothes, working jobs we despise so we can get shit we don’t want.

We have no purpose or place and our depression is our lives where we have all been raised on television to believe that one day we might become tycoons and movie idols, and rock stars, but of course, we won’t and gradually we’re learning that fact and it’s making us really pissed off.

The fact is, all of us are stars and we all deserve to twinkle.

Zuckerberg’s Comments Give Holocaust Deniers An Opening

Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook’s CEO, recently described Holocaust denial as people who have just gotten things wrong but not intentionally wrong.

After all, he asserted, “I [also] get things wrong.” But he won’t remove their posts from Facebook, “if they get things wrong, even multiple times.”

In the same interview, he points out that he himself is Jewish and he won’t ban Holocaust deniers, just as he has not banned the conspiracy site InfoWars.

While Zuckerberg later explained that he personally finds denial genuinely bad, about deniers, he has gotten some things about history’s best-documented genocide wrong, very wrong but what Zuckerberg fails to recognise, even though he insists this was not his intention, stating deniers aren’t intentionally getting stuff wrong, he leaves open the likelihood that they could be right.

For someone with Zuckerberg’s huge profile and stage, this is breathtakingly reckless. Holocaust denial relies on such a sturdy assortment of preposterous distortions that it is only possible to be a denier on purpose, as opposed to what Zuckerberg states, intentionally.

For deniers to be correct, who would have to be wrong? Survivors would have to be wrong, as well as spectators, those non-Jews who lived in the municipalities and communities in eastern and western Europe and watched their Jewish neighbours being marched away to be killed and shot in freshly excavated trenches in the woods.


The scores of historians who have scrutinised the Holocaust since 1945 would either have to be part of a huge collusion or have been totally deceived.

But, above all, the perpetrators, some of who have confessed their crime, would have to be wrong. How can deniers demonstrate that in not one war-crimes prosecution since the close of World War II has a perpetrator of any nationality denied that these incidents happened? They may have stated, “I was forced to kill,” But no one said that the killing did not occur.

Ultimately, why has Germany shouldered the immense moral and fiscal accountability for the atrocities perpetrated in the Holocaust, if it did not happen? According to deniers, there is a simple explanation to this enigma: German leaders were forced into a so-called confession of liability by the Jews, who threatened to block Germany’s re-entry into the family of nations.


But this, too, makes little sense. German officers knew that admitting to genocide would force upon the nation a horrific legacy that would become an integral component of its national identity. Why would a country take on such a historical responsibility if it was innocent, under any circumstances?

Besides, it’s now been 70 years since the close of the war and Germany is now a global political and economic leader. It could simply say now that it’s not true and that the Jews made us say this back in 1945. Instead, the German government built a huge monument in Berlin to the butchered Jews of Europe that opened in 2005.

Deniers rely on yet another piece of illogic. Often they demand to be shown Hitler’s signed order sanctioning the death of all of Europe’s Jews. In all probability, there is none. Hitler understood the stupidity of appending his name to such an order, which, had it become public, might have caused him numerous difficulties.

More important, historians are untroubled by the lack of such a document. They never rest their conclusions on one document, especially in this case, when there is a huge stockpile of data attesting to a government-directed program of mass annihilation.

Deniers, of course, insist that the Jews have forged these documents. But if that were the case, why didn’t they also forge the Hitler order?


The list of absurd debates goes on. Deniers contend that had the Third Reich, a regime they describe as the embodiment of power, wished to kill all the Jews, it would have guaranteed that no witnesses remained alive to testify about the death camps.

Therefore, the fact that there were survivors alive at the war’s end establishes evidence that there was no genocide and that the survivors’ statements are hogwash. The fraudulent nature of this reasoning is self-evident.

The Third Reich was further intent on winning the war, which it did not do. Therefore, the theory that the Third Reich succeeded at all it set out to do is misleading and anything based on that assumption is equally misleading.

Deniers are a new kind of neo-Nazi. Unlike earlier generations of neo-Nazis, people who observed Hitler’s birthday wore SS-like uniforms and draped swastikas at gatherings where they would give the Sieg Heil salutation, this following shuns all that.

Wolves in sheep’s clothing, they don’t bother with the physical trappings of Nazism, salutations, songs, and flags, but declare themselves revisionists, serious students who really wanted to correct mistakes in the historical record.

This is extremism acting as rational discourse. And his comments imply that Zuckerberg has been deceived by them into believing that they’re any different than someone who contemptuously bears a swastika.

People usually differentiate between facts and opinions as the saying goes, you can have your own opinions, but not your own facts. But in the case of deniers, there are facts, views, and falsifications, but Holocaust denial is not about history, it’s a kind of antisemitism, it’s about attacking, undermining, and demonizing Jews.

The deniers’ allegations, that the Jews planted evidence, and got German prisoners of war to dishonestly confess to crimes, and forced post-war Germany to shoulder a huge financial and moral responsibility are asserted on the idea of the mythological control of the Jews, which was widespread enough to achieve this immense collusion.

These contentions rely on typical antisemitic analogies, some of which are over 2,000 years old.

Deniers, who today apparently feel braver than ever before, are not the equivalents of flat-earth theorists, nor are they simply everyday crazies. As a person who built and implements a stage for the propagation of information on a grand scale, Zuckerberg must understand that theirs is not a cognitive mistake or an unfortunate error or omission in judgment that can be corrected by showing them documentation or proof.

They’re white supremacists and antisemites. Their plan is to strengthen and expand the real abomination that spawned the Holocaust.


Zuckerberg is like a spoilt teenager and Facebook has suffered critique over the way the stage can elaborate fake news and has been involved in an advertising attack both on and offline, and bogus news is not your friend.

Zuckerberg should be ashamed of himself, the Holocaust was quite real but there will always be some antisemitic spawn that will say otherwise, and there will always be distortions and misinformation.

Holocaust denial is profoundly offensive and a real Jew would never support it.

Sadly, sometimes what you’re told is fiction and sometimes what you think is fiction is really the truth, but seemingly Mark Zuckerberg is under the impression there’s some good faith debate going on over whether the Holocaust occurred.

And reading a diversity of sources with varying points of view and with various political leaning will eventually give you the ability to see what is correct and what is propaganda and because of his financial powers, he simply does a bit of fiddling without understanding how this stuff could spark insane people to firebomb synagogues, mosques and churches.

No one wakes up one morning and starts denying genocide and Holocaust deniers themselves know they’re involved in a longer-term propaganda battle. They don’t have to sell the whopping lie up front, they set the tiniest seed of doubt and then water it later.

Facebook should be removing misinformation that could later lead to people being physically hurt and this trickle of denial is the nucleus to a strategy of restoring and legitimising Nazism as a philosophy towards their aim of swaying people over to their agenda of anti-semitism, prejudice and hate.

To be able to spread that hatred and to brainwash people, they use and abuse platforms like Facebook and Twitter that give them that opportunity and in Myanmar, also known as Burma, Facebook has been cited by UN investigators of promoting brutality against Rohingya Muslims by allowing anti-Muslim hate speech and false news.

And Mark Zuckerberg is playing directly into deniers’ hands and giving them a voice is playing a game where they make the rules.

It is no accident that deniers have been embraced with open arms in the post-truth alt-right community. Deniers depend on the deformity of historical evidence and downright inaccuracies. They cry out Free speech and Open discussion when it’s caught.

There are no if or buts, holocaust denial is a wicked campaign to stoke hate and destruction and internet communities must stop this at the first word, the last word or any word that hints at denial.


We’re always hearing about death rates in Auschwitz, it’s always about numbers, the 17 million murdered by Nazi oppression. What about Mengele’s experiments and that modern medicine profited from those experiments. Deniers always want us thinking about numbers and not the methodical extermination of people.

And then there’s the scattered approach that blasts an audience with an infinite deluge of propaganda and deniers only need people to believe both sides have enough merit to be at the table.

As for the deniers, even with the evidence against them, deniers keep bootlegging their false agenda. They misunderstand counter debates, disregard what they can’t debate and twirl out inaccuracies and they drag on the conversation so that as many people as possible will read it.

They don’t need to make a single historically valid point, they simply need people to believe they could and to stop deniers we must remove their posts and prevent them from posting at all because the only way to fight a denier is to deny their voice at all.

We must not give deniers a voice because Holocaust denial is bad history, founded on hate and aimed at the brutality, and to give it a voice is to jeopardise the future.


Care Companies Charging Exorbitant Prices

There are many elderly people out there that have to fund their own Care Packages because they own their homes and there are those that don’t have much capital at all, if any, aside from their State Pension and Attendance Allowance.

Usually, a person receiving 3 carers a day has to spend about £81 a week for their care, if they have some resources, for example, own their own house. Normally, the carer will come in for around half an hour to do what is required and then they will go.

This clearly diversifies on how many carers are coming in each day and if you own your own home or have money in the bank. In England, if you have savings exceeding £23,250 you have to finance your own care, so it doesn’t serve you to own a house these days, and having one is not an investment for your children because it has to provide your care, you literally have to exchange the bricks and mortar to be old, like a bartering system.

However, there are those elderly people that don’t have a tremendous amount of money and simply live off a State Pension and Attendance Allowance, and of course, you would assume that everybody in that situation would be qualified to be means tested, and they are.

If you follow politics you might have seen the expression “means tested.” It’s applied to illustrate specific government programs and benefits, but what does it mean?

The brief answer is that “means-tested” programs are solely accessible to those whose incomes (a.k.a “means”) are judged sufficiently low. In other words, a wealthy person wouldn’t be able to access means-tested benefits.

As you can imagine, it’s more difficult and costly to manage a means-tested benefit than it is to run a universal benefit. Means testing requires a tier of bureaucracy to evaluate applicants’ means to determine acceptability.

Older people in need of care are entitled to apply for a number of non-means tested benefits from the Department of Work and Pensions. There are also a number of other related benefits which although means tested are also age-related.

Social care for the elderly covers non-medical requirements such as help in washing, dressing and eating and to qualify for state support in England, a person is judged on two tests – means and needs.

Everyone with more than £23,250 has to pay for their care. Below that threshold, they contribute to the cost with the amount paid based on means-testing of both savings and income.

Those with savings and capital of between £14,250 and £23,250 have those assets taken into account when their contribution is assessed. Below £14,250, only a person’s income is counted.

If an individual needs a care home place, the £23,250 threshold also includes the value of their home except if they also have a partner who will remain living in the home.

Yet, I have been acquainted over the years of situations where say a husband needed to go into care because the wife was finding it hard to cope and was informed that they would have to sell their house but of course that wasn’t plausible because the wife required a roof over her head but was told to sell the house and privately rent so her husband could go into a care home.

Sadly, after the age of around 50 years old, a person is no longer sustainable, that person has served all their life, had children and given back to society, but after the age of 50 years old, we’re no longer serviceable and therefore worthless and not a viable asset to society and if you were an animal, you’d be put down.

Situations like this have forced people to sell their family homes and those that qualify for help through means-testing are then assessed for their needs, yet countless elderly people who require care and are on a State Pension and Attendance Allowance are still being made to pay an enormous amount of money for their care.

Attendance-allowance.jpgThis means that nearly, or all of their Attendance Allowance has to go towards their care and some are even paying at least £25 more out of their State Pension which is leaving them with precious little money to live on.

Honestly, folks… It’s not worth you going to work or owning your own home because the government are going to take it from you anyway. You’ve lived your entire life working, earning, paying taxes, for what?

For the government to pillage from you!

The thing is these elderly people are particularly vulnerable, particularly those that don’t have family or family living close by and are being taken advantage of.

Usually, the carer will come in and they’re supposed to stay between 25 and 30 minutes, that’s their slot, but they don’t stay that long and this is from personal experience, so fact. My mother became an amputee about 2 years ago, sadly she died recently, but this is the story and not an especially nice one.

She had carers coming in three times a day, they were supposed to wash her, make her bed, microwave a meal and take the rubbish out, and being an amputee, her bed had to be made correctly in case she got bed sores. The bed was never made correctly, they simply threw the duvet over, they never washed her correctly and my son went round a couple of times and he timed them, they walked through the door, stayed 7 minutes and left.

Eventually, my mum had a bad fall and my son left work to look after her full time. He’s 33 years old, has 4 children and a wife and he managed to look after my mum every day for a whole year with no difficulty, yet the carers could just about handle 7 minutes and they were getting compensated for a job they weren’t doing correctly.

But to add insult to injury, before my son took over, the lady from the care company said he would never manage and they would look forward to hearing from him in about a months time, which never happened of course.

The point I’m striving to make here is these defenceless elderly people are being charged an enormous amount of money for a job that’s not even being done correctly. After all, they’re being compensated for a job that they’re not doing well enough and if they have an allocated time to do their job, that’s how long they should stay for.

Yes, we realise that the pressure on local-government funds is making it more and more challenging to keep the status quo intact but in recent years, many councils have ceased giving support to people with low and moderate needs.

Currently more than three-quarters of local authorities allow access to help only when a person’s requirements are considered important or significant but of course, we’re not significant because we’re simply human, meat, cattle, whatever you want to call it, we’re not worthy, we’re not sustainable because we’re of no use any longer.

It’s no different from when veterans come back from Afghanistan where they might have lost an arm or a leg, but they’ve done their bit, they fought for their Queen and country and then what happens, they’re out, they’re not fighting anymore, well not for their country, but now fight with their life, their every breath that they take to be accepted someplace in society because they should mean more than human waste, the dregs of society and that’s what some of them end up being, like our elderly because there’s no place for them anymore, they’ve done their bit and now they’re no longer sustainable.

In the last five years, the amount of elderly receiving care from councils has dropped from 1.2 million to 1 million and the number of working-age disabled adults has declined albeit by a smaller amount and now stands at just over 500,000.

Which indicates a growing number of people are having to finance their own care, rely on family or friends or go without but the elderly shouldn’t have to sell their own homes or lose their property if they develop catastrophic care needs.

Most of us strive for a better tomorrow when we’re younger, more naive because we are naive to think that the government would ever want to support us in the future because we don’t have a future because the government have already planned it out for us before we’ve even blinked.

Presently a woman of 93 years old has been charged over £400 a week, and because Essex County Council neglected to assess her. After leaving hospital and being bed bound in her home, having to wear adult nappies and having carers come in, she was given five weeks of free care, but because she wasn’t assessed before the five weeks were up, she has been sent a bill for over a thousand pounds for the weeks exceeding the five weeks.

This lady is 93 years old, lives on a Pension and Attendance Allowance and has no other financial means of supporting herself. She has now been told that her actual care will be just over £100 a week (but nothing has actually been put in writing) and was invoiced for money owing at the full cost which because she wasn’t assessed before the five weeks were up, she now has to pay because she hadn’t been assessed.

This should not have occurred because once they had assessed her it should have been backdated from the fifth week that her free care stopped but it wasn’t, she was charged the full amount.

Not only that, the carers come in and are allotted 30-minute slots, they never stay the 30 minutes, and the carers are particularly rude, so what sort of caring in the community do they do? And demand to be paid top dollar to do it.

This unfortunate lady through no fault of her own has had to give up her pet because she can no longer look after it but liked having a pet because it kept her company and although it seems sensible that she would have to part with it, there was no compassion, “Just get rid of the damn thing or the carers have refused to go in.”

It doesn’t pay to get old because once you get to that particular age group, you’re simply a statistic and the government are praying that you’ll be dead soon, that way it’s less burden on the state.

Everybody, it doesn’t matter if you’re working class or unemployed, getting old is inevitable like death but if you’re rich it doesn’t matter because you can afford the best care there is in old age, that’s why it’s called living a charmed life.

But once you get to a certain age you’re discriminated for being old.

Old age is like a plane flying through a storm. Once you’re aboard there’s nothing you can do.

The care system is a financial minefield for elderly people and personalised care is out there but comes at too high a price for some.

Most things these days are tailored to our requirements but where personalisation is most relevant is in health and social care and we still have a long way to go on that front.

Elderly people who are sick frequently require special care but don’t get it because clearly it’s far too costly and they’re made to pay for it and if they don’t, simply rot in your home and die, but actually care for the elderly should be free at the point of need.

Care Assistants in a care home is usually pretty good, although there have been plenty of cases where that has been brought into doubt and Care Assistants in care homes could probably get more money working in a supermarket.

Because everybody will one day become old, we require something to put in place at the point of need, comparable to our NHS, whereby we give a couple of pounds more a week so that our care is covered when we get older, because it appears that presently the elderly have to cover the cost of their care and they’re not getting any help, particularly those who are Pensioners and don’t have any savings.

It costs approximately £9 an hour to look after someone’s wife, husband, mother or father and Pensioners simply can’t manage it if they don’t have any savings.

Social care is quite often underpinned on the premise that care workers are born carers but in an industry where the work is usually challenging, and there is a need to understand helpless people and their circumstances, but there is a serious need of constant training.

Eighty per cent of care homes have residents living with dementia or severe memory problems and every care worker should have an excellent standard of training in person-centred care because identifying when a person with dementia is in distress or in need of stimulation when they’re powerless to vocalise is not an inherent skill, but a skill that has to be learned.

A GP normally visits care homes once a week, he/she is extremely valuable and well compensated and the GP usually gets glorified for the great work that he/she does and is paid more than the dedicated care staff get for a weeks work.

The GP practice charges the care home £2,000 a month to provide what everyone gets free of charge on the NHS and this practice is by no means unique.

Even in the very best care homes, personalisation has boundaries and living in any home is an exercise in communal living, with the compromises involved harking back to living in student halls and not really inviting for the people living there.

You have to adhere to an unrelenting system of lunch at noon and supper at 5 pm, with a cheerful CD of the 1940s and 50s favourites sounding in the background. What if you prefer the radio or another style of music?

Top notch care homes do seek to respond to individual preferences as well as various lounges and a secure, pretty garden, complete with vegetable plot. Hallways with likeable wallpaper and some nice chairs to sit on, but this can be sketchy and not everybody has access to or can afford top-notch care.

Carers are being left to pick up the pieces of our fragmented social care system and care home residents face a financial minefield and private funders pay a weekly rate of more than £1,000 and must show two years worth of fees stashed away.

If financed by the local council, at £580 per week, the resident is asked if they can top up the difference. Applications for any additional funding are appallingly complicated, take hours to fill in and are thrust on family carers at a time of great stress.

It’s time for us, as a society, to accept that the financial constraints we put on the funding of care that causes real distress to people and so far, the commitment and goodwill of underpaid workers have enabled the system to continue.

However, the system is broken and we can no longer ignore the crisis and we can’t continue to put such a figure on personalised care, it’s the people and their families we must consider. It could be you, it could be me, it was my mum.

Service users can pay about £25 per hour for a carer to come in, tired, zoom in and out with nothing done properly. The salary is terrible, they do foolishly long hours and usually struggle back and forth in the dark on buses, the whole thing is shocking.

This is another demographic time bomb being ignored by our government, at least at the moment you might be able to sell your house to fund decent care, but what will happen in 30 years time to all the millions of people who will never get on the housing ladder?

But of course, it will always be disregarded because there’s always a scapegoat around.

However, when pay for your care, owning a house isn’t much security as you might imagine. The average house value in the United Kingdom is approximately £250,000, which will pay for less than five years of residential care.

And even though the average time in residential care for people at the end of their lives is less than five years, nobody can foretell how long any person will survive.


Many elderly people do have families, but what about those elderly people who never got married and never had children, there’s nobody to look after them.

If you want to have a great care home, it’s really hard to find the quality of care, even when you have funds to pay for it and the care homes with the best CQC report are the most costly, but it doesn’t suggest they’re the best.

You can spend £735 for one week’s care and it’s more than £1,000 if you require nursing care but some of these homes are not as great as they appear where some patients (inmates) might not have showered all week because they haven’t been shown how to turn on the shower and the meals are pitiful and no one comes when you ring your buzzer.

Honestly, it’s bad value for money and they would have paid less if they’d been put up in a four-star hotel and they would have been given choicer service, which concludes that residential care is pretty much the last resort.

Like teachers, nurses et cetera, many carers go through agencies who take a huge part of their earnings and this must be addressed so that carers get a fair salary and like teachers and nurses must go to college for a tangible period of time.

Its all about profit, billions in gratuities for bankers, nothing for care workers and the evidence implies as a society we value neither old people, nor the people who look after them and despite the rhetoric, we all know it’s going to get worse.

So, what about those pensioners who never got an opportunity to purchase a house, have a family, save a nest egg?

But if you can battle the system, you might get a rushed half an hour in your own home, at a time that accommodates them, in which you have your bottom washed and cold toast given to you on a dirty dish, but you’ll still have to spend all your Attendance Allowance before you’ll get any financial assistance.

Of Course Misogyny Is A Hate Crime

There are fools out there that believe it’s okay to openly demonstrate the deficiencies of their upbringing by telling us why a vagina makes another person deserving of their scorn and despite the reality, every one of you owes your lives to the attractiveness, vitality and strength of vaginas.

But campaigners are shouting that they want misogyny to be labelled as a hate crime.

People want freedom of speech, and why can’t a woman call a man a c*** when a man can call a woman a bitch?

Well, bitches are usually rather intelligent and the fact that people complain is freedom of speech and making misogyny a hate crime wouldn’t criminalise anyone. It would simply be a different way of classifying some existing crimes.

So if, for instance, you’re sexually attacked by someone who demonstrates apparent misogyny while doing so it will be recorded as both a sex attack and a hate crime. They already do it in Nottinghamshire, and now there are suggestions it should be rolled out universally.

But it doesn’t mean that a wolf-whistle will get you locked up. It simply implies that if you wolf-whistle someone to the point where you perform a crime, you combine some harassment, intimidation, bullying and/or pursuing, then the police report of it will have the term misogyny attached like a cherry on the top.

A fool would say that women are getting special treatment but they’re simply asking to get the equal treatment as homosexuals, people of colour, the disabled, minorities and all men on Planet Earth and not to get picked on.

You can’t help being born of colour, homosexual, spina bifida, or appended to a penis. And whether or not you were accessorised with a penis or a vagina in the womb is something you had no control over.

But maybe the most obvious hint is that we need misogyny to be acknowledged by the police and in 2018, being a woman can be compared to a disability but whether you want to call it prejudice or fear, a hatred of one half of society breeds crime and fear that everyone has to dispense with.


It creates domestic abuse, that affects 1 in 4 women. It causes rape, which occurs once every 7 minutes in the United Kingdom. It causes males to be expelled from school, disciplined at work, pulled into industrial courts for prejudice, taken to the divorce court and, all too frequently, sentenced.

And the rest of us, male and female, who aren’t involved have to compensate for it through our taxes. We have to steer around it, squandering time and money at work dealing with it.

It’s clearly a hate crime because it targets someone for the way they were born. It causes those people to be abused and disregarded and underpaid and victimised, and it’s very bad manners.

Go to any kindergarten school and you will see boys and girls who see each other as different, but equal. No-one hates anybody else except if they’ve stolen a biscuit, and then it’s only temporary.

We’re not born with bigotry, prejudice, hatred or malice but in spite of this as grown-ups, we believe it’s okay to be misogynists but if children think this sort of behaviour is beneath them, then there can be no justification for an adult doing it. Unless, of course, they’re a fool.

But if the social and criminal costs are so great, why don’t we simply put them all in jail? Probably because we’d need a prison in every town in the country but statistically, in every street, there’s someone being violated, someone who’s been abused, someone who’s been fired or underpaid or didn’t get the job, and all because they do their thinking with a genitals rather than their brains.

But of course, some of those victims are men. One in 6 are mistreated by a loved one, 12,000 a year are attacked and many more raped, and disregarded at work because of someone who views themselves as a dick-swinging alpha.

The idea of making police record misogyny as a crime is not simply to stop men from being mean. It’s to make men, women and police all understand that this kind of response is simply not on, whoever does it and whoever’s on the end of it.

Because there are lots of women who think this is simply the way the world is and some, sadly believe that for a woman to succeed she has to act like the worst kind of man.

And it is long overdue. For millennia women have been demonised by the church, state, organisations and people and those who have mastered it to attain positions of leadership are still disparaged for their looks or capabilities as a mother.

If they are pretty, they can charm you. If they are childless, they will capture you. If they have children, they simply want your money and if they have neither looks nor children then they’re presumably a witch.

In all that time, women have existed and died, birthed and nurtured, achieved and strived, in the light of public humiliation but numerous men have come to welcome that feminism which has given them supportive, financially independent partners, confident daughters, long-lived mothers and loving partners who aren’t terrified witless in bed.


The Weinstein moment made us all a little more conscious, and it’s safe to say people are definitely engaging with a difficult but important idea that sexual harassment is not about sex, it’s about power.

The behaviours we’ve seen in men arise from the idea that women should be the suppressed and docile recipients of male control and dominance.
But if sexual harassment and sexual assault are not sexual, the modifier is questionable.

It appears to reduce the austerity of the act or even reclassify it, implying that it’s not simply a type of assault but also a subcategory of sex and the media is a flirty business and we may be criminalising courtship and conflating it with predation as though flashing one’s penis at work is simply a cumbersome way of asking someone on a date.

In this world, women apparently can’t tell the difference between mutual, polite flirting and harassment, because the distinction is a blurry boundary that clueless men with good intentions have a difficult time discerning and we have to stop seeing sexual harassment and sexual assault as some kind of flattery of women gone wrong.

In fact, sexual assault has nothing to do with sex, or sexuality, or flirting, dating, or love. Rather, sexual assault is a sort of hate and men who satisfy themselves by exploiting women are getting off not on those women but on the control.

These men don’t sexually assault women because they like women but because they hate them as inferior beings and that’s misogynistic harassment and misogynistic rape, not sexual assault. These are hate crimes.

I don’t mean this in the conventional, judicial sense. Hate crimes are already problematic so how can you ask a profoundly imbalanced and systemically biased criminal justice system to hold violations of prejudice special? And men of colour are more prone to be given harsher punishments than white men for the same violations.

But if we understand that these evils are the consequence of targeted hatred, rather than mistaken lust, we can devise better solutions than the sort of treatment Harvey Weinstein is apparently getting for his problem and the way to fight hatred is not only through enforcement against specific perpetrators.

We must fight the misogyny, sexism and the systemic marginalisation of women and the excessive empowerment of men. That’s what produces the society-wide dynamic in which men believe they’re better than women and if rapists aren’t just monsters who somehow shifted from the back alley to the boardroom and, clearly, we need to see how our boardrooms and stockrooms and classrooms and family dining rooms educate, incentivize and perpetuate misogynistic hatred.

And then rather than concentrating on the sleazy circumstances of each disgrace like some romance novel with a dark twist, the media and all of us should talk about the fundamental power irregularity within each company or the culture of misogyny in a given industry.

That hatred ends up affecting all of us and whether we understand it or not, most men despise women as do most women and studies reveal both women and men have an unconscious prejudice against women.

For example, tools some experts use to gauge our unconscious relations imply that both women and men more readily associate men with certain attributes and women with negative. In fact, data implies that women hold these unconscious prejudices more than men. Which makes us all, for example, more likely to give a job interview to a man than a woman, or believe a successful man is talented while a successful woman is just lucky.

That’s because we’ve all grown up inside the rotten vessel of a society that automatically gives men excessive control and opportunity.

Even those of us who are women, and are married to men or have daughters we love, we still unconsciously or consciously absorb our social messages and norms about the innate inability of women, a dogma that courses through all of our veins, whether we intend for it to or not, just because it’s the foul air we’ve all learned to breathe.

That’s the decay at the kernel of misogynistic harassment and assault, a rot within all of us, that has nothing to do with sex or love and everything to do with hatred.

It’s scary stuff and a lot of men, particularly young men make inept advances to women. It’s easy to harass women and to empower women but to even further disparage all men is unacceptable really.

There are numerous women out there that are glad to be single and content to stay that way and wouldn’t touch a man with a bargepole and use their hand like their sexual companion and unlike a man it never gives mixed signals and never manipulates.

But touching somebody because you want to have sex with them and they won’t let you is not hatred, it’s when the man takes it further and thinks it’s his god given right to take what isn’t his, then it becomes a hate crime.

Unfortunately, hate crimes are categorised under all different headings and we need to define what those different categories mean. If a woman is chatted up, and the woman is not interested, that is not a hate crime but if she tells the man that she’s not interested and he carries on, then that’s harassment.

It’s easy for a woman to scream harassment, which usually gets upgraded to a criminal assault and the single biggest problem is about perception and the dilution of genuine incidences of sexual assault or worse.

A date rape drug Rohypnol is an incapacitating agent which, when given to another person, incapacitates the person and renders them vulnerable to a drug-facilitated sexual assault, including rape.

One of the most common types of Drug-Facilitated Sexual Assault (DFSA) is those in which a victim consumes a recreational drug such as alcohol that was given secretly. Here, the victims in these incidents have been drinking willingly which then makes them unable to make informed choices and/or give permission.


Date rape drugs are prohibited and are sometimes used to assist in a sexual attack which a person has not agreed to. The drug usually has no colour, smell, or taste, so you can’t tell if you are being drugged and the drug can make you vulnerable and disoriented and can even cause you to pass out so that you can’t consent to sex.

These drugs are extremely strong and they can affect you quite fast and without your knowledge, and alcohol makes the drug even more powerful and can cause severe health problems, even death and men who take what’s not theirs and against a person’s will is a misogynistic act.

Most men, of course, are honest and courteous towards women, it’s just a pity there’s a small minority that tends to give other men bad press. Not all men are evil and sexual harassment is not confined to just men, women perpetuate it as well.

It isn’t only men who abuse their wives, men are beaten as well by their wives but it’s harder for men to stand up in our society and say that it’s happened to them and it’s wrong.

istock-165942188-1510699734.jpgSexual harassment is not a hate crime, it’s a power crime and it’s classed as assault and sexual harassment should not be dragged into a hate crime category.

Nobody is born to hate but some men and women end up growing up with huge ego’s paired with a small brain and a lack of respect for another human being and an inability to accept rejection.

Sexual abuse or harassment should not be tolerated in our society, particularly in this day and age, we’re not Neanderthals and we don’t live in the 18th century, we live in a brave new world where we should have acquired more regard for one another.

If men and women are guilty of these offences, the courts should have the backbone to prosecute them to the fullest degree of the law, but everybody is entitled to a fair hearing, even though public opinion would have tried them and found them guilty.