Here’s the link to a short (3 minutes) YouTube video we’ve just released exposing how much of our foreign aid to Africa gets stolen by Africa’s rulers:
The video is based on one of the chapters in my latest book – THE GREAT CHARITY SCANDAL
My request to all readers is to send the link on to as many people as you can asking them to send it on further and so on.
If every reader sends the link to just 10 people and each of those sends it to 10 people and then each of those sends it to just 10 people, then hundreds of thousands more people would know about the scandalous theft of most of the aid we send to Africa.
This is the kind of politically-incorrect story no mainstream journalist would touch, even with a 500-foot barge-pole, for fear of being accused of “waaaccciiiissssmmm”
Thanking you in advance for helping to spread the word.
Like his father, Ralph Miliband, Ed Miliband hates everything about Britain. He hates British history; he hates British traditions; he hates British culture; he hates the idea of Britain as a proud, independent country. For socialists like Ralph and Ed Miliband, countries are anachronisms. For socialists, country borders should be eroded and control handed over to an elite class of corrupt, self-serving, hereditary bureaucrats who know what’s best for the sheeple.
For socialists, democracy is a messy and largely unnecessary hurdle on the road to their centrally-managed socialist paradise. In the former USSR, these bureaucratic rulers were called ‘komissars’, in the new socialist heaven currently being created in Europe, the EUSSR, they’re called ‘commissioners’. So, not much difference there.
Ed Miliband will have achieved his father’s and his own life’s work if he can make the final push to emasculate Britain and push it under the full control of the mainly socialist commissioners in Brussels.
Sadly, Ed Miliband can do this in just five all too easy steps:
1. Crawl into Downing Street in May 2015 with the help of the SNP and maybe even the Greens.
2. Make huge concessions to the SNP, maybe even allowing them another independence referendum, even though the (IMHO) slimy, lying, bloated toad Salmond clearly stated there would not be another referendum ‘for a generation’
3. Continue Blair’s open door immigration policies allowing 46,000 people to pour into Britain every month for the next 5 years. As most of these people will tend to vote Labour, that’s potentially another 2,500,000 Labour voters by the time of the 2020 election
4. Under the banner of ‘broadening democracy’ cynically extend the voting age down to include 16- and 17-year-olds, most of whom will vote Labour. That’s potentially another 1,500,000 Labour voters by the 2020 election
5. Irrevocably hand over power to the German-dominated racket that is the EU making EU law take precedence over British law and aurrendering what little control over our country we still have to whoever rules Germany
Miliband would never allow us a referendum on EU membership, because he already knows better than us what’s best for us. And that is being ruled by the undemocratic EU bureaucratic elites.
It is truly astonishing that a once great country like Britain could ever elect someone like Ed Miliband – a third-rate, pig-ignorant, self-serving, socialist utopian who has never had a proper job in his worthless life and who loathes the country he wants to run (into the ground).
Miliband must never get anywhere near Downing Street. But lying, u-turning, politically-correct, podgy dimwit dhimmi Dave Cameron may be unable to stop him.
At least former Labour leaders like Wilson and Callaghan, however misguided their policies, were patriots who wanted the best for Britain. But for traitor Ed, the sooner Britain disappears, subsumed into the EUSSR, the better.
Truly terrifying times ahead for Britain.
(Please remember, tomorrow Friday 27 March, snouts-in-the-trough.com launches its first YouTube video)
My good lady wife and I have been spending part of the British winter in a beach resort just a vigorous stone’s throw away from one of the world’s most famous sin cities, which I’ll call HappyHappyTown. HappyHappyTown started it’s rise to ‘fame’ during the Vietnam War when US troops went there for R&R. When that ended, there were floods of sex tourists from Europe, USA and Australia and HappyHappyTown grew rapidly from a small fishing village into a major city with hundreds of establishments from gogo bars to bj-bars offering all kinds of services.
But recently, things haven’t been going so well in HappyHappyTown.
For any business to operate well you have to manage supply (having things to sell) and demand (finding customers who want to buy what you’re selling). And HappyHappyTown is having problems on both fronts:
Supply: For the last 40+ years, there has been a seemingly unlimited supply of RFFMs coming from the country’s impoverished rice-farming North. But now, as girls are getting better education, they no longer want to work in the ‘entertainment’ business. This has meant that the gogo bars and bj-bars have been struggling to recruit sufficient girls and are fighting over the few girls that are available. This has meant a sharp rise in salaries and the bankruptcy of several bars.
Demand: With most European countries in economic difficulties, there has been a sharp drop in Western sex tourists. Over the last few years, there has been a massive increase in Russian tourists to the Land of Smells. But with the ruble turning into rubble, these have dropped off too. Moreover, most of the Russians come as families, not for sex tourism. The area where there has been growth in sex tourism is from India and the Middle East. But they tend to get their girls either from night clubs or from the main prostitutes’ strip, not from gogo bars.
The other group of tourists that has seen a massive rise are the Chinese. But they come in huge groups, scuttle off their coaches like a crowd of cockroaches, waddle along following their tour leaders constantly filming with their cameras and selfie-sticks and then scuttle back into their coaches leaving behind a long trail of saliva and muccus (as they seem to spit and clear their noses everywhere they go). But they tend to never actually enter any gogo bars.
The result: The standard model here was a girl would work in a gogo bar earning about 15,000 baht a month (£300) for dancing 6 days a week from about 20.00h to 03.00h.
But she would increase her income by cadging drinks from customers (£1 per drink for her) and from ‘short time’ – having sex with a customer for about 2,000 baht (£40). In a reasonable month a girl could be taking at least 60,000 baht (£1,200). Due to the lower cost of living here, you have to multiply by at least five to get an idea of their real earnings. So, in a month a girl could be getting the equivalent of £6,000 taxfree. Five years of that and she has probably saved up enough to buy a small business – a shop or house with rooms for rent – and can retire.
But with the fall in gogo bar customers and the rise in the numbers of Indian and Middle East sex tourists, the girls in the gogo bars aren’t earning nearly as much as they used to. In fact, many gogos seem nearly empty a lot of the time. So the girls who still want to work in ‘adult entertainment’ are abandoning gogo bars and going freelance. After all, if they can earn 60,000 to 70,000 baht a month from just 2 to 3 customers a day, why bother exhausting themselves for 7 hours a day dancing on ridiculously high heels in a gogo bar?
At least 15 gogo bars have gone out of business in the last couple of years and more are expected to go to the wall in the next few years.
Behind the bright lights and loud music, things in one of the world’s greatest sex paradises are looking decidedly flaccid.
(Regarding the NHS – a reader asked yesterday if I had any figures comparing the number of managers in health services in other countries to the NHS. I have tried to find this several times, but without success. However, my first wife was a breast-cancer surgeon in a small European country. In her unit, which was quite a large department with five specialised surgeons, there were no managers. Instead it was up to the head of the department – a surgeon – working with the other surgeons to decide how much of their budget they wished to spend on administrative support. In fact, I think the surgeons would have been astonished if anyone actually suggested spending up to £100,000 a year of their budget on a manager for their department. The main hospital did, of course, have central management and administration. I imagine a specialised unit like that in Britain, would have at least 2 to 3 overpaid, over-pensioned and mostly unnecessary managers. But in that country the surgeons couldn’t see the need for any managers at all.)
To stick with the NHS for just one more day. It’s over 20 years since I had the pleasure of investigating how one of our major hospitals was managed (or rather mismanaged). So, perhaps things have changed since then and the NHS is now super-efficient and positively humming with the latest management best practices.
But 20 years ago, we found that hospital management didn’t have a clue. Let me try to explain:
A hospital should be seen as a patient processing machine. The object – to get patients in, treat them safely but efficiently and then discharge them (that’s the top line on my simplified diagram). All services run by the hospital – pathology, radiology and others should be seen as supporting that goal:
So, for example, if a patient is about to move onto some treatment but first needs pathology results to move to the next stage, then that patient’s pathology tests should be prioritised above those of a patient who perhaps won’t start full treatment for another couple of days. All this in order to smoothe the flow of patients through the system. Similarly, if a doctor was doing a morning round, he or she could be pretty certain that the’d be called away. So they should always start with those patients who can possibly be discharged that day.
But we found no understanding of this at all. Each department seemed to organise itself to make its own life easier without any understanding of the consequences on managing patient throughput. So, patients had treatments delayed while waiting for pathology results or patients couldn’t be discharged because the doctors didn’t sign them out by 10.30 or 11.00am or whatever the time was.
Moreover, there was absolutely no measurement of the utilisation of expensive equipment like million-pound scanners or limited, bottleneck resources like operating theatre time. The result – huge waste of money on underutilised resources and unnecessary delays in treatment.
I’ve no idea whether NHS hospitals still suffer from this problem – a complete misunderstanding of how to manage resources to ensure the best patient throughput results – or whether the NHS is now a shining beacon of highly focused, world-class, best-practice management.
But the fact that since New Labour came to power in 1997, the number of hospital beds fell from around 200,000 to about 135,000
while the number of managers shot up from about 25,000 (8 hospital beds per manager) to over 40,000 (about 3.5 beds per manager):
suggests that the NHS has learnt little to nothing and sees the solution to every problem as more managers rather than better management.
(You will see that the number of ‘beds/manager’ seems to have started to increase under the Coalition. The Coalition claims its NHS reforms have reduced the number of managers from a high of about 43,000 to about 38,000 now. This may be true. Or else, the NHS may be playing the classic civil service game – when told to reduce headcount, they hand out millions in redundancy or early retirement and then a few days later those people return as ‘independent self-employed’ consultants. So, we’re still paying for them, but they don’t appear on the employee headcount numbers. This allows politicians to claim huge success, while wasting even more of our money)
As for being ‘cash-strapped’ and ‘underfunded’ and ‘on the brink of collapse’. For a start, the average managerial salary in the NHS has more than doubled in real terms over the last 15 years. Moreover, any organisation that adds an extra 15,000 or so managers each costing say over £100,000 a year (salaries, NI, pensions, offices and administrative support) – total cost above £1.5bn a year – possibly has a little excess weight that could be comfortably discarded if it went on a diet.
And as few of our politicians have ever managed anything in their lives, they haven’t a clue how to improve NHS efficiency. So, they resort to the standard practice of fools – call in management consultants and reorganise, once again proving the old adage generally misattributed to Gaius Petronius: “We trained hard . . . but it seemed that every time we were beginning to form up into teams we would be reorganized. I was to learn later in life that we tend to meet any new situation by reorganizing; and a wonderful method it can be for creating the illusion of progress while producing confusion, inefficiency, and demoralization”
I try not write about myself on the blog. There are many much more interesting subjects. But I just wanted to use today’s blog to compare my experience of healthcare in the Land of Smells (LoS) and the UK.
Last week I developed a cough almost losing consciousness during coughing fits. So I headed off to a nearby hospital. It was modern, clean and well staffed. This was a private hospital. So perhaps comparing it with the NHS – a public health service – is unfair. However, locals with even the most basic health insurance could use this hospital and there were some pretty ‘interesting’ characters being treated there – not just the super-wealthy.
At reception, I handed over my hospital card – I had been there 2 years before for a full health check-up. While they found my files (still paper, not yet electronic), a health assistant took me off to have my pulse, temperature and weight taken. Then back to the waiting area. Within 5 minutes I was called in to see the doctor. He asked what was wrong. I gave my best display of coughing myself to death; he checked my breathing with his stethoscope and announced that I needed a chest x-ray.
“Oh” I said in disappointment “I thought you’d be able to treat me today”. He looked at me as if I was mad. “Yes” he said “you have chest X-ray now” and pressed a buzzer. In came the health assistant to take me to the X-ray department; 2 minute wait while the radiologist entered my details into the computer; off with my t-shirt; up against the screen; take a deep breath; hold; done.
Then back to the waiting area; wait less than 5 minutes and I’m called back in to see the doctor. He already has on his computer screen my chest x-ray from 2013 and the recent one. There’s a large blur on my lungs. Either I’m already dead from lung cancer or I have a serious chest infection. We decide the latter is more likely but don’t rule out the former completely. He types some stuff into the computer, buzzes for a health assistant and I’m whisked off to the pharmacy to get my course of antibiotics. All in all, I think the whole thing took less than 30 minutes.
If I remember correctly, I had a similar problem in the UK a couple of years ago. First step – try to make an appointment with a GP. Nothing available for a week, so I have to go along on the off chance someone can see me. After about an hour, I see a doctor. He probes a bit and recommends I have a chest x-ray at a local hospital and fills out an appointment card. I think the x-ray was a couple of days later. So, 2 days later off to the local hospital where I have to be checked in (when they eventually manage to find the right details) and then wait over an hour for my one minute in the x-ray department. I ask when I’ll get my results. Apparently first the x-ray needs to go to the ‘specialist’ and they have to write a report which will get sent to my doctor and then my doctor can treat me. This all took about a week.
Just two points I wanted to make:
1. By integrating GP services with hospital services, the LoS hospital managed to do in about 30 minutes what took more than a week in our so wonderful NHS meaning I could be treated and well an awful lot faster. In fact I was treated and cured in less time than it took the NHS to find out what was wrong
2. By minimising the amount of administration and handovers from one department to another, the LoS hospital managed to slash the administrative cost of treating me and the opportunity for clerical errors, missing files, wrong details etc.
I suspect that even if I multiplied the LoS hospital’s costs that I paid of £60 for my treatment and medicine by a factor of five to match living costs in the UK, the LoS probably treated me for around £300 whereas I estimate that the NHS would have spent somewhere between £1,500 to £2,000 because of all the bureaucracy involved from handing me over from department to department.
I realise that the NHS often gives wonderful care, I realise that I’m comparing a semi-private hospital with a public service and I realise that perhaps the NHS was more thorough as my x-rays were viewed by a specialist and not just an ordinary GP.
But, because most of us have little experience of healthcare in other countries, maybe we tend to idealise the NHS and fail to see that the world of healthcare has moved on in the last 20 to 30 years while our dinosaurial NHS possibly hasn’t?
I’m not the only idiot crying out in the wilderness about the fact that M*sl*ms could almost be in a majority in many European countries by the end of this century. But what’s an effective majority? 51%? Nope. It’s a lot lower than that.
There aren’t any *sl*mic political parties (yet) in Western Europe. Though there are many left-wing parties that can rely on the M*sl*m block vote. In countries with proportional representation, this gives the M*sl*m block vote huge power to choose a government friendly to its interests. But in the UK, where M*sl*ms will tend to be concentrated in certain areas and with our ‘first past the post’ system in each constituency, the M*sl*m vote is slightly less significant in the country as a whole.
But the M*sl*m takeover in Britain will not occur at national level. It will be in local councils. As Tower Hamlets has shown, once the M*sl*m population reaches say 35% or 36%, a number of things start to happen – firstly, there’s ‘white flight’ which increases the percentage of M*sl*ms; secondly non-M*sl*m candidates realise there’s no point standing for election as the M*sl*m block vote means they haven’t a chance, and thirdly, widespread voting fraud and intimidation ensure M*sl*m mayors and councils will be elected.
Of course, in many councils, M*sl*ms may not have an absolute majority. So there is the potential for the other councillors to band together to stop policies like a free-for-all on mosque building, finding spurious excuses to limit the number of outlets selling alcohol, *sl*mification of schools and colleges, practising ‘positive discrimination’ by handing all council contracts only to businesses run by M*sl*ms (councillors’ business cronies and companies run by councillors) and much more besides. But whereas Tory councillors might vote against such measures, Labour and LibDems will wave them through as they don’t want to appear bigotted or racist or anti-*sl*mic and, of course, they want to encourage inter-community harmony and mutual understanding. So, there never can be a united opposition to stop brazenly *sl*mist and even totally corrupt council policies.
Yup, 35% seems to be the magic number.
So, to repeat the diagram I used a couple of days ago:
and an awful lot of areas in Britain are approaching that magic number.
A couple of days ago, some gunmen burst into a bar in the Biskopsgården area of Gothenburg and started shooting people. There were many witnesses. Yet the media reports made no mention of the appearance of these two gunmen nor their ethnicity.
Of course, the criminals might have been white Hells Angels. Sweden has long had a problem with feuding Hells Angels gangs. But here’s some academic research into Biskopsgården:
“The city district of Biskopsgården in north western Göteborg has been targeted by Swedish media and public debate because of severe social problems which have lead to gang conflicts and many shootings, some of them fatal.”
“In Göteborg, Sweden’s second largest city, every third resident has come from outside Sweden. The city is very segregated. In some suburbs more than half of the population are migrants, and in enclaves within the suburbs nearly all residents are first and second generation immigrants. The residents are from many different countries and more than one hundred languages are spoken in Biskopsgården, for example.”
“As in many of the city districts of the same makeup, unemployment is high, particularly amongst the youth. The level of education, household income and general health are lower in the suburbs. Poverty and social exclusion results in major social problems and some of the youngsters are attracted to rival criminal gangs. This rivalry leads to violence and it is easy to get hold of fire arms.”
“Residents describe their city district as unsafe and move out as soon as they can. Thus segregation increases.”
The rise of the rapers
Since it embraced multiculturalism in 1975, Sweden has become the rape capital of the west, with only the tiny African nation of Lesotho recording more sexual assaults per capita.
Rapes in Sweden have skyrocketed by a shocking 1,472% since the mid-70′s, with 6,620 sexual assaults being reported to police in 2014 compared to just 421 in 1975.
77.6 percent of the country’s rapists are identified as “foreigners” (actually M*sl*ms, but the Swedish government tries to hide this just as the British authorities and press refer to the British child rapist gangs as “Asian” when we all know they’re really M*sl*m). However even this likely understates the issue, since the Swedish government — in an effort to obscure the problem — records second-generation M*sl*m perpetrators simply as “Swedes.”
When police and media reports refuse to mention racial descriptions of perpetrators that makes it slightly difficult for members of the public to help identify the criminals.
In fact, there is a rape epidemic sweeping across once peaceful Scandinavia and much of it is driven by M*sl*m immigrants who see any women not wearing a headscarf as a ‘whore’ and thus ‘fair game’.
As for Scandinavia’s M*sl*m leaders, well just like British M*sl*m leaders on the Rotherham child rape scandal, they have been remarkably quiet and refuse to condemn the criminals within their own community.
And as for the politically correct, always keen to scream blue murder every time they think they’ve found an incidence of sexual discrimination against women, well they say nothing either as grovelling to M*sl*ms and maintaining the myth of a multi-cultural paradise is far more important than protecting indigenous girls and women from often horrific and brutal attacks.
Yesterday, I highlighted how about a third of Europe’s and the UK’s population could be M*sl*m by the end of this century.
But what could possibly be more interesting is to look at our major cities, where M*sl*ms tend to live, and see which ones will be majority M*sl*m and by when.
In the first group come Amsterdam, Stockholm and Brussels. Within 40 years, M*sl*ms will be close to a majority in these three cities (click to see more clearly)
This assumes two things
1. That M*sl*m populations continue to increase at their current rate
There is evidence from other immigrant communities that birth rates fall after a couple of generations as they become more integrated and more women work. This would make my predictions meaningless. However, there is opposite evidence that in many cities M*sl*ms are not integrating and that around 95% of M*sl*m women don’t work. If this is the case, then my predictions are reasonably reliable. In Brussels, the top seven baby boys’ names recently were Mohamed, Adam, Rayan, Ayoub, Mehdi, Amine and Hamza.
2. The indigenous population remains stable
I have assumed that the indigenous population will not change. It could also increase. But a more likely scenario is “white flight” – the indigenous population leaving cities. If this happens that would accelerate the achievement of M*sl*m majorities
By the end of this century, if my assumptions are correct, most European capitals will be majority M*sl*m. This has huge implications as M*sl*m majority city councils will be deciding things like education, development, healthcare and much more besides.
As for Britain, Tower Hamlets is, as far as I understand, already controlled by a M*sl*m mayor and majority M*sl*m council. As a result, we’ve had some heartwarming stories of new customs being brought to our country – reports of voter intimidation, accusations of massive voting fraud and large sums of public money being allegedly handed out to councillors’ business cronies.
Newham, Blackburn, Bradford and Luton will soon follow this glorious path to our bright new *sl*mic future. Then will come some London boroughs plus cities/towns like Slough, Birmingham, Leicester and so on:
As an ardent multi-culturalist, I welcome the *sl*mic takeover of our major cities and towns. However, there may be some old-fashioned Little Englanders who feel more than a smidgin of concern at the greatest change in British culture since the Norman invasion.
Something to ponder when thinking about your children’s and grandchildren’s future?
Sometimes it can be both entertaining and instructive to play around with the kind of numbers that most mainstream media wouldn’t touch with a cryogenically-sterilised bargepole.
For example, we could try to project how many M*sl*ms there will be in the UK and some European countries by the end of this century.
We know two things:
1. The indigenous populations of the UK and most European countries are declining due to low birth rates
2. M*sl*m populations are increasing. For example, There were 1.6 million Muslims in England and Wales in 2001, or 3 per cent of the population, according to the census. By 2011 the Muslim population had grown to 2.7 million people or 4.8 per cent of the population. That’s an increase of 68% in just 10 years. For Europe overall, the number of M*sl*ms seems to double about every 27 years due to higher birth rates, bringing in family members and floods of refugees from collapsing M*sl*m countries, often following Blair’s and Cameron’s attempts to topple hard-line dictators in order to “spread democracy”.
If we assume, to make things simple, that non-M*sl*m populations stay flat and M*sl*m populations continue to double every 27 years or so, then this is how the populations of three large European countries will change between now and the end of this century (click to see more clearly)
And here are three smaller countries:
So, M*sl*ms will not quite be in a majority. Mostly they will make up just over a third of the population. But given that the indigenous populations will vote for different political parties while M*sl*ms will all tend to vote for the same parties, M*sl*ms may be very close to taking control of most European countries by the end of this century.
Of course, many things can change before then. For example, birth rates amongst M*sl*m communities might decline as they become more integrated with the countries they move to. And action might be taken to lower immigration.
But whatever happens, we can expect a huge growth in Europe’s M*sl*m population. None of us will be around to see all of this massive demographic change. But our grandchildren will. And they may find themselves living in a largely *sl*mic country and continent.
As for David Cameron’s dream of Britain having a M*sl*m PM – well, it probably won’t be in his lifetime. But it will be very likely in his grandchildren’s lifetimes. So they’ll be able to give thanks to their grandfather for allowing this to happen.
David Craig, on March 26th, 2015
