David Craig, on May 9th, 2023Tuesday/Wednesday/Thursday blog
I didn’t watch the (IMHO) rather pointless coronation of the King of Eco-loons and his gorgeous Queen Godzilla. And there’s been so much guff said and written about the whole ghastly spectacle that one would think it impossible to add anything which hadn’t already been covered.
But there were a few anomalies I noticed which might be worth mentioning.
Cost of the event
From what little I did hear, we were told that Charles had made changes to the occasion so that the whole thing wouldn’t be a massive splurge of our money. I understand that the final cost will be somewhere between £50m and £100m. If so, after allowing for inflation, this makes it by far the most expensive of the last seven coronations:
Pity Charlie and Godzilla couldn’t have stumped up some of the cost. So much for saving British taxpayers’ money.
Cost of the ‘slimmed down’ royal family
We’ve also been told that Charles has been working on a ‘slimmed down’ royal family. I know he’s only been King for a few months. But I believe he was pushing this idea for several years before he became King. However, like everything else which devours huge quantities of taxpayers’ money, the more we’re told that costs are being cut and efficiencies made and waste reduced etc etc, the more it actually seems to cost us:
From billions to hundreds of millions to a few million?
Again, I admit I wasn’t paying much attention to the event. But I do remember being told a few weeks ago that ‘billions’ of people around the world would be watching the ceremony so it would be a glorious day for Britain. I have the feeling that as the day approached, our hyperventilating reporters dropped the ‘billions’ and instead predicted that ‘hundreds of millions’ would be watching. Then on the day, I have the impression that the ‘hundreds of millions’ was downgraded to ‘millions’.
Personally, I felt more than queasy about the peevish, petulant, self-obsessed, perpetually-complaining Charles becoming King and would have been much more comfortable if Charles had stepped back and let William and Kate take over. But Charles is too selfish to let that happen.
What’s the point of GB News?
I expected brown-nosing sycophancy from the BBC, Sky and ITV. But I was rather disappointed to see the same grovelling, fawning and toadying from GB News. In fact, I’m beginning to wonder what’s the point of GB News. Since the cowardly abandoning of Mark Steyn, GB News has become almost indistinguishable from programmes like ITV’s Good Morning Britain or the BBC’s Breakfast programme.
Oh, and while we’re on the subject of the baleful influence the useless Ofcom has had on free speech in the media, it’s rather amusing that the previous head of Ofcom from 2015 to 2019, Dame Sharon White, has (from what I’ve read) made such a complete balls-up of being head honcho of the John Lewis Partnership that there’s talk of her being booted out before she wrecks the company completely.
As for GB News, if I watch a little TV in the morning, I find Talk TV’s Julia-Hartley Brewer and Mike Graham doing what GB News once said it would do before it capitulated to Ofcom. And although neither Hartley-Brewer nor Mike Graham dares openly question the Human-Caused Climate Change cult, I get the impression from throwaway lines that they both believe the whole thing is nonsense. If I watch a little TV in the afternoon, I find Al Jazeera much more informative than anything British TV can offer.
Oh, no – there’s still Eurovision
My joy at the coronation pantomime finally being over is tempered by the knowledge that we’ve got to get through next week’s equally ghastly horror with people dressing up in stupid costumes – the Eurovision Song Contest. So we need to steel ourselves for yet more gushing and fawning and grovelling and inanities and suchlike from our supposed journalists.
Category: 
I found the coronation quite fascinating although it had something of the divine rule about it. More Charles i than Charles ii. I think Charles is happier in that space and to claim the themes of environment, diversity and fairness are a-political. Most of wef globalist politicians and media would agree with that even though it is exactly the opposite.
GB news tried to cover the coronation and even had David Starkey but stopped him from saying very much. But pulled in 170k viewers and still think its better than others as long as Neil Oliver survives. They also had the debate with Bridgen and Fraser Myers which nobody else would have been brave enough to do and it turns out Spike may have received Pfizer funds after the Hart group followed it up.
I still feel the monarchy is a good constitutional settlement even if we have to endure the royals attention seeking. In today’s world when you consider the money wasted on vaccines, lockdowns and Ukraine the numbers mentioned here are almost rounding errors on the uk p&l.
And that’s before any tourist revenue and soft power is considered. As an advert for the uk, just the coverage from the coronation would have been worth more if 300 million viewed globally plus same again with the windsor concert.
What you are forgetting is that all the foreign tourists will boost the economy and the resulting taxes will far exceed the projected cost of the coronation. Strangely, we never see the accounts showing this benefit. France has far more tourists visiting Versailles and look what they did to the monarchy.
I did have the TV on for the coronation but was not paying much attention. As a devote atheist from birth it was the religious element that I found ridiculous. We were told that Christ is risen and his kingdom is here on earth with God protecting us. From what isn’t clear. Obviously not from being killed in wars, or viruses and vaccines. Even more concerning is Charles’s claim that he can only do his job with help from God. That must have a high cost associated with it. The concert the following day had the bring the environment into it.
I agree about GB News. It might be Ofcom that determines what they say but they also depend on sponsors, as Rees-Mogg like to call the advertisers. But it is all part of the trend to limit free speech and more importantly parliament is not a place for anybody who dares deny the accepted narratives.
There has been a series of articles on the Climate Etc website by Russell Schussler, a Power System Planner. There is a piece today https://judithcurry.com/2023/05/08/fauci-fear-balance-and-the-grid/ where he makes some general points about climate alarmism and the pandemic. These points stood out for me:
“Both covid and net zero efforts are dominated by an overfocused group of experts, crafting an overly simplistic narrative to guide policy makers, the press, and much of the public. These narrow experts and their followers are largely unaware of the large negative externalities that result from their initiatives.”
“Instead of allowing diverse voices to “balance” concerns, those proclaiming disaster become self-righteous and authoritarian, arguing that other voices are at best wasteful distractions and at worst the work of those with selfish or sinister motives.”
“Promoting healthy debates with a variety of perspectives around critical issues, such as a potential grid transformation, is the best course for developing sound policies. Unfortunately, we seem to be moving farther away from such hopes, as those in control argue for our/their “best understandings” and help stifle anything that might cast a shadow of doubt around their narratives. When disaster is predicted, select “experts” take priority, opposition is hushed, and then balance is lost. The overused recipe of proclaiming disaster, proposing a solution, declaring there is not much time, arguing that “misinformation” is harmful and then controlling the dialogue works against us all. While it may get decisions and policies rolling, it is often not in the right direction and long-term needs and feedback mechanisms are frequently overlooked and ignored”
Many as are the doubts a lot of us have about the new King, the Coronation was about a lot more than just one personality with all his “woke” and “green” baggage. Not to mention two rather unfortunate close male family members, for whose deplorable behaviour he cannot be held responsible. In the UK the Coronation of a Monarch is a Constitutional event, “unwritten” though it may be. Our Monarch is our Constitutional Head of State and thus serves to keep even the most ambitious and ruthless of Prime Ministers in a position of relative servitude. Many of us consider the relatively small amount which the Coronation cost the nation (when compared for instance with the ever-escalating cost of the egregious HS2, which will be out of date long before it’s completed) a small price to pay if it and future Coronations prevent us ever having to stomach such as a President Blair and First Lady Cheri. I wouldn’t much care for a President Bojo and First Lady Carrie either for that matter! No; let’s stick with our Crowned Monarch (or “Coronated” as they started to say across the Pond and, deplorably, is now being heard from UK reporters too!). The Monarchy is infinitely greater and of longer endurance than any one individual. It does bring in the tourists too. At least at the moment it does. What the ghastly Mayor Kahn’s extended ULEZ will do to London as a tourist destination is anyone’s guess of course and remains to be seen.
GB News news is no different from MSM fake news, they read from the same script, they talk the same waffle. The only redeeming thing about GB News is that it gives a platform to red pillers like Neil Oliver, Calvin Robinson, Loz Fox and has similar minded panellists such as Tonia Buxton and Adam Brooks amongst others, but apart from that its not the so called disrupter channel, the afore mentioned is all I watch now. What they did to Mark Steyn was pure cowardice and kow towing to a compromised bought and paid for Ofcom. As for so called King Charles, just look at his coin/stamp image and see the hidden in plain sight message. Not my king.