|
|
By  David Craig, on September 7th, 2014 The British public – even the stupid ones who vote for Labour – are vaguely beginning to realise that allowing almost 10 million, mostly low-skilled and mostly M*sl*m people into the country since 1997 as part Blair’s New Labour’s attempt to rub our noses in multi-culturalism was not a great idea. And given the much higher birth rates of immigrants, projections of Britain’s future population mix are truly frightening with ethnic British due to become a minority by 2056 (click to see more clearly)
But actually the situation may be worse than this, because immigrants don’t have to be anywhere near a majority to fully control our political system. With a two-party system like Britain’s, there just have to be sufficient numbers of immigrants in a few key marginal constituencies (plus a bit of postal vote fraud which is part of the culture of some immigrant communities) to ensure that any party opposed to continued mass immigration can never win an election. By 2015 we’ll almost be at that point. By 2020, we’ll definitely be there.
After that, immigration will shoot up as those with power will have been put there by immigrant communities.
The future for Britain will be a war for control of what’s left of the country’s wealth between the immigrant-dominated, benefits-dependent, ghettoed cities and larger towns, many of which will become no-go areas for ethnic British (particularly white British girls) and the largely ethnic British countryside where white-flighters will watch with dismay as their country is over-run by by the detritus from every corrupt failed state in Africa, the Middle East and, of course Pakistan and Bangladesh.
This is probably something the pro-immigration Burkha Broadcasting Corporation and the (IMHO) politically-correct quislings like Jon Snow and Rageh Omaar at Channel 4 prefer not to mention.
I’ve seen the future and it doesn’t look terribly appealing:
By David Craig, on September 6th, 2014 I don’t expect we’ll ever learn the truth about what’s really happening in the Ukraine. What we do know is:
1. The Ukraine was run by a brutal, utterly corrupt kleptocrat sponsored by Russia
2. The EU tried to grab the Ukraine away from Russia by giving it an ultimatum – join the EU or join the Russian trading zone, but not both. Mistake 1 – annoy Russia
3. That led to the overthrow of the Russian puppet leader – apparently almost single-handedly by our great Baroness Ashton
4. The new government immediately started discriminating against the Russian minority in East Ukraine and trying to ban the Russian language. Mistake 2 – further annoy Russia. So Russia naturally supports a rebellion by the Russian minority
5. Launch a propaganda campaign in the press painting Russians as ‘the enemy’ and demonising Putin when actually most Russians are very much like us Mistake 3 – annoy Russia even more and insult Putin
6. Having promised Russia that the Ukraine would not join NATO, suddenly Poroshenko is invited to the NATO summit and NATO starts making all sorts of noises about Ukraine joining NATO and even mentions conducting NATO military exercises in Ukraine. Mistake 4 – lie to Putin and threaten to shove NATO tanks on Russia’s borders
6. All the time, idiots Cameron and Obama blether on about how Russia is a threat to world peace, when Russia should be our ally against the real threat – *sl*m. Mistake 5 – fail to understand that we and Russia share the same enemy.
There’s an easy solution to all this chaos – invite Russia to join NATO and then both fight against the real threat to world peace and our civilisation – the Religion of Peace.
I rest my case
By David Craig, on September 4th, 2014 Apparently there’s a new book out this week (no it’s not one of mine) called The Establishment: And How They Get Away With It. From what I understand, the book exposes (yet again) how our masters in the City of London crashed the economy and then used their political influence to make us pay for their greed and incompetence.
I found out about the book when I read a copy of the London Evening Standard on my way home from a conference on Tuesday this week. The conference was about “The Future of the City” and was sponsored by a right-wing think tank (Policy Exchange) and a large law firm (Eversheds).
There were three main groups of people at the conference: bankers from the likes of JP Morgan, Barclays, Lloyds, Goldman Sachs; lawyers from big City law firms and people from the big PR companies who so successfully lobbied to protect our bankers when they wrecked the economy and stole our money to keep themselves in jobs and bonuses.
My take from the conference was that they (the establishment) were laughing at us. They were laughing at us because of our impotence against their power. They were laughing because they had our supposedly elected politicians under their control. They were laughing at us because of the huge amount of our money they could steal and are still stealing. They were laughing at us because their £93m a year lobbying power with politicians and journalists allowed them to fool us into taking our money to preserve their skins.
They were laughing at us because they managed to ensure that not a single banker got prosecuted for fraud or theft. They were laughing at us because there were absolutely no restrictions on the tens of billions of taxpayers’ money politicians handed over to the bankers. They were laughing at us because they could use the cheap money from our taxes for speculation on currencies and commodities instead of lending it to businesses as was the original intent.
They were laughing at us because our politicians of all parties are in their pockets and so we have no power to prevent them fleecing us again and again and again.
I haven’t read The Establishment:And How They Get Away With It – but I saw it in action at this conference. They are laughing at us and there’s absolutely nothing we can do about it.
And they’re right to laugh at us – in my own small way with my books like GREED UNLIMITED I’ve tried to make people aware of how we’re being exploited. But when people are too tight-fisted to even buy a few copies of my book to better understand what is happening, then perhaps they deserve to be robbed by their rulers.
By David Craig, on September 2nd, 2014 Are you ‘fun, inspiring and passionate’? Are you a ‘driven individual with a FIRE in your belly’? Are you ‘motivated and ethically minded’? Do you see yourself as ‘a team player with a confident manner and a professional, flexible, positive and studious approach to your work’? Do you want to ‘spend your days soaking up the glorious sunshine, meeting amazing new people and raising loads of money for charity’? Well then, what are you waiting for? Why don’t you become a charity fundraiser? A charity mugger. A chugger.
We’ve all seen them, groups of usually highly enthusiastic young men and women swarming around our high streets and shopping centres trying to get us to donate money to whatever charity they happen to be representing that day.
Before you next get accosted by chuggers, here are some chugger facts and figures:
1. Most chuggers work for agencies (not the charities) they’re pushing
2. Chuggers are paid employees (£8.50 to £12.50 an hour). Chuggers cannot be paid commissions but they get bonuses if they hit their daily targets
3. Previously chuggers tried to get people to sign up to opening a direct debit giving the charity say £5 to £10 a month. The chugging agency gets paid around £80 to £120 for each person who signs up. So, if you’re donating £5 a month, almost all your first two years’ donations will go to the chugger agency, not the charity
4. With so much identity theft being reported, people are increasingly unwilling to give chuggers their bank details. So chuggers have a new trick – they ask you to text in a tiny donation (maybe £2 or £3 or £5). Many people will agree to this just to get away from the chugger. But once they’ve sent a text message with a tiny donation, they’re put on a ‘suckers list’ and will be called up by a phone fundraiser who will try to convince them to start a direct debit for that charity
5. Chugging is big business – One Marie Curie Cancer Care campaign cost the charity £367,000 and Shelter paid about £500,000 to chugging agencies for one of their campaigns. The rules say that chuggers must tell you that they’re paid agency employees and must tell you how much the campaign costs the charity – most don’t, for rather obvious reasons.
6. Many of the people owning chugging agencies are multi-millionaires.
If you’re chugged and really want to donate – then when you get home, just go to the charity’s website and donate. In this way all the money will go to the charity rather than a large part ending up in the pockets of the multi-millionaire owners of the chugging agencies.
By the way, regular readers will know that yesterday I appealed to readers to support the production and promotion of my next book – THE GREAT CHARITY SCANDAL. I asked that just one reader a day buy a copy of either GREED UNLIMITED or DON’T BUY IT! for themselves and a couple of copies for friends or family. As far as I can see, not a single reader was prepared to support my next book. I find that rather depressing and so am taking the rest of the day off.
By David Craig, on September 1st, 2014 We all know what Lynton Crosby’s strategy is to get us to vote for Dodgy Dave Cameron in 2015 – fear. The Tories know Cameron has nothing positive to offer us. So, the Tory strategy has to be to try to blackmail us into voting for them with the ‘Vote UKIP, Get Miliband!’ scare campaign.
We’ve seen this again after Douglas Carswell’s defection to UKIP – the Tory press was full of articles claiming things like ‘Carswell has made a Miliband win more likely’. The idea is to make us feel guilty about possibly allowing a Miliband/Balls victory as if it was our fault. But hold on a minute….
Who increased public spending while promising to cut it? Cameron. Who doubled our national debt from £700bn to £1.4trn and rising? Cameron. Who increased immigration while promising to cut it? Cameron. Who has continuously insulted and derided his core voters? Cameron. Who lied to us about why he introduced single-sex marriage, claiming ‘it was the right thing to do’ when in fact it was a ruling by the European Court of Human Rights which forced him to do it? Cameron. Who didn’t have the balls to stand up to schoolboy Clegg over constituency boundary reform? Cameron. Who tried to get Britain to fight alongside the Isl*mic State militants to overthrow Assad in Syria? Cameron. Whose promise of an EU renegotiation is a sham because he knows he’ll never get agreement from the champagne socialists running the EU? Cameron.
Who is just a shallow, lying, self-serving, PR spiv who has protected his banker friends while squeezing the rest of us as part of his laughably insincere ‘we’re all in this together’ politics? Cameron.
Yet, the Tory strategy is to blame us voters if Miliband gets elected.
If the Tories want to win the next election, the answer is staring them in the face – do a deal with UKIP. If the Tories give UKIP say 20 safe seats and UKIP don’t stand against the Tories in the other 300 or so where a Tory/UKIP alliance could win, then the Tory/UKIP alliance would thrash lightweight Europhiliac Miliband and his economically-illiterate, financially-incontinent, self-deluded would-be chancellor Balls.
So, whose fault is it if Miliband wins in 2015? Not mine. Not yours. It’s only Cameron’s fault and the fault of the Tory MPs who haven’t the courage to push Cameron into a winning alliance with UKIP.
Don’t get blackmailed by Lynton Crosby and the panicking Tories.
Vote out of hope for something better, not from fear of something worse!
Oooh – that’s quite a good line. Perhaps UKIP should use it to counter the coming Tory scare campaign?
As for my book exposing Britain’s charities – THE GREAT CHARITY SCANDAL – to finance the production and marketing all I need is for just one reader a day to buy a copy of either GREED UNLIMITED or DON’T BUY IT! for themselves and a couple of copies for friends for the next 3 months. Is that really too much to ask?
By David Craig, on August 31st, 2014 I have to confess I really enjoyed the sight of podgy, Toad look-alike Alex Salmond mauling the hapless Alistair Darling in the second Scottish independence debate last week. Particularly impressive was the way Salmond asked Darling questions and then answered them himself not even giving the bumbling Darling the chance to respond.
One of the big issues about which the two combatants shouted at each other was how much oil there was left in the North Sea and whether the tax revenues from Scotland’s part of this oil would be sufficient to pay for Salmond’s socialist paradise where everyone would get everything for free.
Salmond predictably blustered that there was more than enough oil and quite rightly said that Westminster had underestimated Scotland’s oil reserves for years as the Government’s forecasts did not take account of new extraction technologies.
Darling quite rightly whimpered that oil revenues were falling and were predicted to fall further.
While nobody can accurately predict the future, we can look at what has happened in the past. Here are the figures (click to see more clearly)
Scotland’s oil revenues jumped about a bit between 2008-09 and 2010-11. They then shot up in 2011-12. But this was because Osborne imposed a windfall tax on oil revenues as he claimed high oil prices meant the oil companies were making excess profits. But since then Scotland’s oil revenues have been plummeting.
Salmond has predicted that Scotland’s oil reserves will yield around 24 billion barrels of oil over the next 36 years. Assuming he is right, this would produce (24 billion/36 years/365 days) 1.82 million barrels per day.
The average for the last 40 years has been (40 billion/40 years/365 days) 2.74 million barrels per day
So Salmond’s prediction would only require production to equal 66% of what has been extracted daily over the previous 40 years. That seems almost feasible, though North Sea oil’s best decades are long since gone.
Average oil tax earnings for Scotland for the last 40 years (at today’s prices) are £6.5bn per annum. If costs remained the same, average oil tax earnings for Scotland for the next 36 years would be around £4.3bn per annum. However, the cost of extracting oil has increased and will increase further since the oil fields are in deeper waters. So Scotland will struggle to earn £3.5bn per annum from oil tax revenues since oil tax is charged on profits i.e. revenue less costs. So, even if North Sea oil does give the quantities Salmond predicts (which is unlikely), it’s more than improbable that it will give the tax revenues Salmond needs.
Unless, of course we include all the oil in Scotland’s deep fat fryers – then Salmond might hit his oil targets.
Personally, I hope Scotland votes for independence. It will give Scotland a new sense of purpose and energy which, under proper leadership (not that of Fatboy Salmond), could make the country successful.
As for the rest of the UK, it would mean that Maggot Miliband’s useless Labour would be unelectable following the loss of their 41 Scottish MPs. One Labour MP recently admitted “If we lose Scotland, we could be completely buggered”
So, if Scotland goes, we’d all benefit. Go on, Scotland, go!
And if Scotland goes, we could call the remaining bits of the UK the “Former UK” and abbreviate that to…..
By David Craig, on August 30th, 2014 Regular readers will know that I’m currently researching and writing a book attacking what I believe to be huge amounts of waste and greed within Britain’s bloated charity sector
Britain has over 195,289 registered charities. In my humble opinion, that’s at least 150,000 too many. These registered charities employ over one million people – more than our police and armed forces together and almost as many as the NHS. In my humble opinion that’s too many people. These charities claim that over £8 out of every £10 donated gets spent on ‘charitable activities’. I believe that’s a £30bn lie and in reality at most £5 out of every £10 donated really goes to ‘charitable activities’
Readers will also know that my agent’s reader slammed my book proposal claiming that “his total of charities surely includes all kinds of worthy organisations whose tax status happens to be charitable, but which actually perform different roles: schools, churches, hospitals, emergency services, community groups, nurseries, universities, etc. If this is true, then it’s far less of a concern.”
Well, the reader was right and I was wrong. When I found that there were 195,289 registered charities in Britain, I was so flabbergasted by this huge number that I stopped looking. Stupid me. Because yesterday I stumbled across another 191,000 charities that I hadn’t noticed before.
These 191,000 extra charities are charities which don’t need to register either because they are too small or due to legal exemptions.
To quote a government report: “In addition there are about another 191,000 unregistered charities. Around 80,000 of these 191,000 unregistered charities fall below the threshold for registration, currently set at an annual income of £5,000. Most of the remaining 111,000 unregistered charities are ‘excepted charities’ – charities that have previously been excepted by regulation or order with an income of £100,000 or less, such as local parish councils affiliated with the Church of England and other mainstream Christian organisations, scout and guide groups, and armed forces charities.”
So, that brings the total number of ‘charities’ in Britain to more than 385,289. That’s ridiculous!
As for my agent’s reader who slammed my book claiming I had overestimated the number of charities – I wonder if he or she would like to apologise?
By the way, as I’ve lost money on my last two books, I’m hesitant about losing even more writing a book exposing greed and waste in Britain’s bloated charities. Moreover, my wife quite rightly keeps telling me that I’m a total idiot writing books that lose money. So, if any reader knows someone rich who would be prepared to put up say £2,000 to sponsor me to write, publish and market my charity book – please get in touch.
By David Craig, on August 29th, 2014 With MPs away on holiday for two months, we haven’t heard much recently from our podgy useless economically-illiterate, financially incontinent chancellor George Osborne about how he’s successfully saving our economy by cutting the deficit.
Just as well he’s away as Government financial statistics were released at the end of last week, showing that public sector net borrowing was higher in the first third of the financial year than in any other since 2010. Yup, the deficit is starting to go up again (click to see clearly)
The graph shows total public sector net borrowing (the main measure of the total government deficit) for the first four months of each financial year (April to July), in billions of pounds. This figure excludes financial interventions (relevant from 2008 onwards), the Royal Mail pension plan, and the Bank of England Asset Purchase Facility (APF) (from 2012 onwards). It does not take inflation into account.
While central government receipts increased by almost £4bn compared to the same period last year (mainly due to VAT, stamp duty and corporation tax receipts going up), central government expenditure also increased compared to last year.
But given supposed public-sector pay freezes and supposed austerity, how can government spending keep going up? What’s the reason?
The increasing cost of state pensions is often blamed. But there could be one other thing that’s driving up spending – immigration and the high birth rate of immigrants.
Immigration is shooting ever upwards from about 492,000 a year ago to 560,000 during the last 12 months. Around half of immigrants claim they have a job to go to. Wonderful! That means 280,000 people a year – 5,400 a week – are signing up for benefits, help with housing, free healthcare on the NHS, free education for their children, free prescriptions and so on
These 280,000 new arrivals over the last 12 months are probably costing us around £3bn a year in benefits and services.
But even those that are working are costing us money. Anyone with a family earning less than £32,000 a year is getting more in benefits and services than they are paying in taxes. And another 560,000 or 600,000 or more will arrive next year.
Our hospitals are overwhelmed, our schools are overflowing, our police have given up and we have absolutely no control over our borders.
So, how can public spending ever go down? Dear Mr Osborne, can you explain that to us?
By David Craig, on August 26th, 2014 (Today’s blog is adapted from a newspaper website reader’s comment, which I found very powerful)
In recent months, we’ve seen broadcaster Jeremy Clarkson and some football manager or other hounded by the politically-correct for some comments they made that were supposedly “waaaaccccciiiisssstttt!!!!” And a couple of football commentators lost their jobs for remarks (“get them out for the lads” or something like that) which were apparently unacceptably “sexist”.
Clarkson’s comments were made in some footage that was never broadcast, the football manager’s were in emails or SMS messages to a colleague and the commentators’ banter was not intended to be broadcast. These were not public pronouncements, yet the politically-correct have used them to try to ruin all these men’s careers.
There was also the unreported case of a policeman being suspended for a supposedly politically-incorrect joke he told a fellow officer in a pub, which was overheard and reported by a member of the holier-than-thou brigade.
And, of course, in the world of the politically correct, Palestinians are always ‘victims’ while Israelis are always ‘aggressors’.
This is truly a terrifying lurch into the kind of tyranny we saw in former East Germany and now have in North Korea. Though here, thankfully, people only lose their jobs and their livelihoods, not their lives.
Britain was once a bastion of free speech. But we have allowed an extreme form of political correctness to stifle what people think and say. Those who believe they should run society have profited from this new tyranny because it gives them another tool of control. The Guardianistas, the ‘progressives’, the politically correct, call them what you wish, they are the smug, sanctimonious, self-selecting, usually taxpayer-funded elites, mostly in the media, academia and politics, who possibly believe, or choose to believe out of self-interest, that we should all do as they tell us ‘for our own good’.
They call themselves ‘liberal’, but wouldn’t know liberty if it bit them in the ass. They think of themselves as ‘enlightened’, when they are no more than bigots looking down at us, their supposed inferiors. They believe themselves to be educated, when they stopped exploring the world in their teens because real humans and their ideological liberal, multi-cultural, open-door-immigration, Isl*mophiliac utopia are utterly incompatible.
Much as the lunacy of radical Isl*m is a grave threat to our civilisation, so too are these carriers of internal cancer. And they are the more dangerous for cloaking their obscene authoritarianism in weasel words of ‘fairness’ and ‘equality’, for who would dare refuse the concept that we should not desire a ‘fair’ and ‘equal’ society?
Yet their interpretation of fairness and equality is not what most of us mean; not equality before the law, not a fair chance at improving one’s life and circumstances. No, they mean equality the same way the pigs in Animal Farm meant it – and they will be more equal than the rest of us. When they talk of fairness, they mean to tear down anyone who takes advantage of their life opportunities because to do better is somehow ‘unfair’. Thought and speech control give the mediocre and the self-serving would-be elites the means for their own advancement over the rest of us at our expense.
They do not reflect the popular will, but they seek to direct it. Most people believe a person’s words and thoughts are his or her own. The ‘progressives’ who dominate our media and public services do not, for free thought is anathema to their intolerant creed. And it is their voices which cry loudest for censorship, for control.
What will our thought-masters do next? Install word-recognition systems to scan all our emails and text messages to spot words or phrases that can be construed as “waaaaaccciiiiisssssttt!” or “sexist” or “Isl*mophobic” or “pro-Israeli” or “anti-Palestinian”, so that those found “guilty” of impure thoughts can be pilloried in public and have their lives ruined?
In Animal Farm and 1984, George Orwell warned us what would happen in the new Big Brother Britain. But even he might be surprised at the extent of the new thought control being used by the elites to crush any free-thinking.
In my own small way, I try to use my books and this blog to fight against the new form of thought control and crushing of free speech used by the incompetent, self-serving, self-righteous, taxpayer-funded elites. I wish there were some people in the mainstream media with the integrity to do the same.
By David Craig, on August 25th, 2014 As our politicians make an even bigger mess of the Middle East and Africa, here are a couple of simple foreign-policy multiple-choice questions to make our rulers’ jobs a little easier:
Q.1 How do you run a Middle East country full of backward savages who all hate each other?
a) A strong dictator, preferably with a military background?
b) A brutal, peace-loathing Isl*mic theocracy that crushes all internal dissent and wants to first destroy Israel and then the West?
c) A liberal democracy where everybody is jolly polite and respects each other a bit like they do in the better parts of Knightsbridge, Notting Hill Gate, Westminster, Kensington and Chelsea where most of our stupid politicians and Israel-hating media opinion-formers live?
d) Total on-going chaos and civil war where everyone gets great pleasure from slaughtering each other, the more brutally the better?
Q.2 How do you run an African country condemned to poverty and destitution by the greed and stupidity of its leaders and the fact that its population doubles every 20 years?
a) Leave current rulers in place till they are overthrown by a new set of brutal kleptocrats who will in their turn be overthrown by yet another bunch of brutal kleptocrats and so on into the future. In the meantime, pour in billions in aid, most of which will be stolen and the little that gets through only encourages more rapid population growth with the result that the rapidly growing population completely outstrips the country’s natural resources of food, water and land leading to ever more conflict over those resources?
b) Try to encourage the development of a liberal democracy in a country where people vote on the basis of tribal loyalties, where corruption ensures that elections are even more rigged than they are in places like Tower Hamlets and Birmingham and where, once they’re in power and feeding off the country’s wealth and aid money, no tribe will allow themselves to be ousted from power peacefully?
c) Re-colonise – make the country a UN protectorate, throw out the brutal kleptocrats, confiscate the stolen billions in their offshore bank accounts, try them in an international court for crimes against humanity and start using the country’s wealth and a bit of aid to build roads, schools, hospitals and to encourage education and agriculture while implementing an aggressive programme of birth control?
Now, that wasn’t too difficult was it? Though, of course, political correctness and fear of being labelled a “waaaacccciiiiisssstttt!” prevent us from doing what most people (apart from our rulers, Guardian readers and BBC journalists) know should be done.
(By the way, I’ve decided to continue writing my book THE GREAT CHARITY SCANDAL exposing the greed and incompetence of Britain’s bloated charity industry. Almost 9,000 words already written. I’ll probably have to publish it myself using my own meagre savings, so I hope that when I do, unlike with my last two books GREED UNLIMITED and DON’T BUY IT! some readers will support my work by managing to find a few quid to buy a copy)
|
|
