Apologies to those of you who already follow Dr John Campbell’s videos.
Here’s a recent one in which he questions a funeral director about a new type of white blood clots which are being found in corpses – especially those of younger people who have died prematurely.
If what is discused in the video is true – and I’ve no reason to believe it isn’t – this asks some serious questions about the honesty and credibility of our political and medical establishment.
This is just one of three videos Dr Campbell has made about these white blood clots.
You don’t see or hear much about the Russia/Ukraine war in the media nowadays. Could this be because Ukraine is losing and Russia is winning and that’s not quite the story our bungling rulers and the sycophantic mainstream media-for-sale want to portray?
The Pentagon Papers
The Pentagon Papers, officially titled The History of U.S. Decision-Making in Vietnam, 1945–1968, is a United States Depoartment of Defense history of the United States’ political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1968. Released by journalist Daniel Ellsberg, who had worked on the study, they were first brought to the attention of the public on the front page of The New York Times in 1971. If I remember correctly, The Pentagon Papers revealed two main things:
US administrations had repeatedly lied about the situation in Vietnam, especially covering up the increasing extent of the war
the US realised it was losing the war but concealed this from the media and the public
The Ukraine Papers?
But, what do The Pentagon Papers have to do with the price of butter, you may ask. Well, I suspect there is a modern-day version of The Pentagon Papers, which we can call The Ukraine Papers, hidden away somewhere in some US government offices and stamped ‘Top Secret’. If The Ukraine Papers exist, they might reveal two main things:
How the Ukraine war started. This would cover:
the five NATO expansions eastwards towards Russia’s borders
Vladimir Putin’s warnings to NATO that he would never accept Ukraine and Georgia becoming NATO members
why NATO ignored Putin’s warnings
whether NATO deliberately provoked Russia in order to use Ukraine to weaken the Russian military
was a peace agreement reached in Istanbul sabotaged by a certain Mr Johnson being sent to Kiev to urge the Ukrainians to fight on?
does NATO have an exit plan in case Russia wins? (I think we all know the answer to that one)
NATO’s realisation that Ukraine can’t win:
Russia has built formidable mined defensive lines protecting the territories it has captured
as the failure of the last main Ukrainian offensive showed, in an era of satellites and drones, it’s no longer possible to amass an attacking force to target strong defensive lines
So we’re left with a stalemate – a war of attrition. And military history shows that in such a war, the side which can outproduce the other in terms of manpower and military materiel – planes, tanks, artillery, missiles etc – and which can outlast the other side will always win.
Ukraine’s population is (was?) about 44 million. Russia’s population is (was?) around 143 million. And Russia, with the support of Iran, North Korea and probably China seems to be outproducing Ukraine and the West in terms of military materiel.
The only chance the Ukrainians have, I believe, is a major mutiny in the Russian military. Against the idea of a major mutiny is the fact that the Russians have a history of being able to absorb enormous suffering. Around 10 million Russian troops died in WWII compared to about 384,000 for the UK and 417,000 for the USA. On the other hand, mobile phones allow Russian soldiers to communicate with each other and to realise they are being led by incompetent corrupt officers, supplied with defective equipment and are being slaughtered for no purpose at all.
So, what do we do now?
It’s clear that both sides in the conflict made massive misjudgements. Putin thought he could invade, take over Kiev and install a Russian-friendly government in just a few weeks. NATO didn’t take Putin’s ultimatum seriously, decided to call Putin’s bluff, now find Putin wasn’t bluffing and are trapped in a war that NATO’s proxies – the Ukrainians – are probably going to lose.
And now neither Putin nor NATO can risk backing down:
I attach below a short article I’ve just written to be translated into Korean for a South Korean newspaper. I know I’ve dealt with this subject several times before. But I’m back on it again as I think it’s sort of important. While getting the figures for this piece, I noiticed that it doesn’t matter what mix of energy sources a country uses for its non-renewable energy production because renewables are so expensive compared to fossil fuels that there is an extremely good correlation between a country’s level of renewable energy production and its energy costs – the higher the level of renewables, the higher the energy costs for homes and businesses.
The fact that I seem to be almost the only person who has noticed this could be attributed to one of two possibilities:
either I am one of the most brilliant geniuses our once great country has produced
or our experts and rulers know how disastrously-expensive renewables are but they don’t want to tell us in case this ‘frightens the horses’ and turns people against the miserable, cold, restricted Net Zero future the elites have planned for us
The second of these two options seems to me to be the most likely.
Anyway, here’s the article:
Bankrupting South Korea’s homes and businesses?
by David Craig
In May 2023 South Korea raised electricity prices by 5.3% to partly reflect increased generation costs, a move delayed more than a month because of the likely effect on already high inflation and the cost of living.
It was the second increase in power prices that year after a sharper 9.5% hike that took effect at the beginning of the year. The price adjustment had been due on April 1 but was delayed after a public outcry about the increased cost of living. Energy Minister Lee Chang-yang started his announcement on the decision by saying he was “heavy-hearted about the burden and concern coming from the price increases”. But if South Koreans are worried about the 2023 rises in electricity costs, I have news for them, these rises are nothing compared to what is coming.
The quote: “It is difficult to make predictions, especially about the future,” has been attributed to many people, from the Nobel prize-winning Quantum physicist Niels Bohr to legendary American baseball player (and amateur philosopher) Yogi Berra. However, I’m ready to make a prediction about the future which I believe is easy to make. I predict that, as South Korea moves to cut its CO2 emissions under its obligations to achieve Net Zero by 2050, there will be eye-watering increases in the prices South Korean homes and businesses will have to pay for their electricity.
Currently around 6.7% of South Korea’s electricity comes from renewables – mainly wind and solar. The South Korean government plans to increase the share of renewables to 21.6% by 2030 and further to 30.6% by 2036. The more renewables a country uses, the higher its electricity costs tend to be. There is a simple reason for this. With renewables, you’re almost paying twice for your energy. You have to pay once to set up the wind and solar farms and then you have to pay again for backup (usually gas) which can be switched on at short notice when the wind is either too weak or too strong for wind turbines to function and for when the sun doesn’t shine.
But the big question is: by how much will South Korea’s electricity costs rise? According to an international comparison of household energy prices conducted by the World Population Review in 2023, in South Korea, with 6.7% renewables, electricity costs around US $0.09 per kilowatt hour (kWh). This is similar to Taiwan which has about 6.5% renewables and household electricity costs of also $0.09 per kWh.
Now we need to look at electricity costs in developed countries which have levels of renewables at around South Korea’s 2030 target of 21.6% and 2036 target of 30.6%. Around 21.1% of Japan’s power comes from renewables and households there pay $0.25 per kWh. In the US renewables provide 23% of electricity and household electricity cost is $0.18 per kWh. So this suggests that if South Korea hits its 2030 target of 21.6% renewables, its household electricity costs will at least double to the US’s level of $0.18 or even go higher towards Japan’s level of $0.25. The exact figure will depend on what other sources of energy South Korea develops.
If we look at developed countries which are around the South Korean 2036 target of 30.6% renewables, the two closest countries are Australia at 26.7% and Netherlands at 33.1%. Household electricity costs in Australia are $0.22 per kWh and in the Netherlands $0.34 per kWh. This indicates that South Korea’s household electricity costs by 2036 will probably be somewhere around $0.28 per kWh – three times their current level.
If the South Korean government does move ahead with its Net Zero plans, soon poorer families might have to make the difficult choice in the winter between heating and eating. As for South Korean companies, they’re going to find that increasing energy prices make it ever more difficult to remain competitive.
Hopefully, while planning its huge increase in renewables, the South Korean government has thought about the effect on electricity prices and has remembered to inform its citizens and South Korean businesses that their electricity costs could well double by 2030 and treble by 2036.
Before I start this blog, I just wanted to make a brief comment on the confected media outrage over Tucker Carlson interviewing Vladimir Putin. I suspect the reason much of the mainstream media loathes Tucker Carlson is because he’s not (as far as I know) a limp-wristed, women-can-have-penises, open-borders-supporting, Islam-loving, West-hating, climate-doomster, fake-vaccine-pushing ‘progressive’. However, as Carlson faces a barrage of criticism for interviewing Putin, let’s not forget that in November 1990, just prior to the Gulf War, our very own Trevor Macdonald interviewed Saddam Hussein in Baghdad:
I don’t remember any howls of outrage from the media back then. So, any attacks on Carlson are probably fuelled mostly by political differences and professional jealousy and are beyond hypocritical.
The coming Starmer sterling collapse?
We all remember what happened when Margaret Thatcher mini-me Liz Truss and her economic genius of a chancellor, Kwasi ‘Khazi’ Kwarteng, tried to inflict their ‘bold’ new economic policies on our long-suffering country. There was a collapse in the value of the pound, interest rates shot up and the fake Tories were forced to ditch Truss and Khazi to avoid further economic chaos.
Well, since the Truss/Khazi debacle, Britain’s economy has not improved. Government spending keeps rising:
This is not so surprising when the useless Tories throw our money around like confetti. For example, under the fake Tories the number of our mostly useless civil servants has shot up from around 380,000 in 2016 to 489,000 in 2023.
As our economy has been fairly stagnant and so tax revenues haven’t kept pace with public spending our deficit and therefore public debt keeps rising:
Though I suspect that most of our intellectually-challenged, expenses-fiddling MPs don’t even know the difference between deficit and debt. I will not insult readers by explaining the difference here.
And we now pay more in interest on our debt than we do on defence and will soon be paying more on debt interest than we do on education:
(left-click on image, then left-click again to see more clearly)
Looking forward to the coming wipeout of the lying, incompetent, worse-than-worthless fake Tories in the 2024 election, we’ll get a tax-and-spend Starmer government. Public spending will increase, the deficit will increase, debt will increase and so debt interest payments will increase.
Why the economy can’t grow
Starmer and Reeves and all the other numpties in Labour will claim that they can increase spending because they’ll build Britain as a world clean energy superpower. This, of course, is flatulent nonsense. In my previous blog, I showed there was a direct relationship between a country’s use of supposed ‘renewable’ energy and energy prices. The more wind and solar a country used, the higher its energy prices:
Just in the last few months we’ve seen the effects of high energy prices on British industry – about 2,800 jobs lost at the Port Talbot steelworks and 400 out of 500 jobs lost with the closure of the Grangemouth oil refinery. In previous blogs, I have also shown how high energy prices have been a major contributory factor in the decline of British manufacturing:
Of course, you can’t expect any of our MPs to understand that high energy prices make British industry uncompetitive and so companies move their manufacturing to countries like China where energy prices are around a quarter of those in the UK:
(left-click on image, then left-click again to see more clearly)
What Reform UK’s boss, Richard Tice, has referred to as “Starmergeddon” is coming. UK debt will rise, financial markets will lose confidence in the UK government and the interest rates we have to pay for borrowing will shoot up. There will be huge pressure on Starmer/Reeves to cut public spending. But they won’t because increasing public spending is a Labour Holy Grail. Instead they’ll push up taxes on an already over-taxed public.
It really is strange to see our country committing societal suicide by bringing in millions of West-hating, uneducated, unemployable invaders from the Third World and economic suicide by destroying what little is left of its industry to supposedly save us from a non-existent climate breakdown. Yet both the main political parties seem hell-bent on following exactly the same civilisationally-suicidal policies.
I’ll keep it very short today, as I actually wanted to use today’s blog to recomend an inteview with the wonderful Douglas Murray “Cowardice is killing the West”.
The brazen lies of the brazen Net Zero liars
I turned on Talk TV a couple of days ago just as I was getting ready to go out for dinner. There was an inteview with a Net Zero fanatic who claimed that Net Zero had made life less expensive for all of us. So I thought it worth showing you just one simple chart. It shows the percentage wind and solar per capita for some major countries graphed against the energy cost for each country prior to the Russia/Ukraine fiasco:
Providing you didn’t go to school in the last 20 years or providing you’re not one of our useless, self-serving, expenses-fiddling, snouts-in-the-trough, waste-of-skin, scientifically-challenged MPs, you should be capable of seeing a very clear pattern – the greater the use of supposedly ‘cheap’ renewables like wind and solar, the higher a country’s energy costs. Unfortunately the Talk TV interviewer didn’t have the knowledge to ask the Net Zero fanatic how he could explain this.
A fantastic interview with Douglas Murray
I normally only recommend YouTube videos which are just a few minutes long. This one is over an hour. It begins with a discussion about Israel and then moves on to the total supine, spineless capitulation of Western politicians, institutions and media to the assault from our friends from our favourite religion.
If you do have time, it’s possibly worth watching:
It is clear that over the last few decades, there has been a drop in the number of MPs with real-life work experience and a corresponding rise in the number of career politicians who have never experienced anything outside politics. There are numerous academic studies and even a book focused on the rise of career politicians. Just in the 13 years between 1997 and 2010, the percent of MPs from a manual worker background fell from 8.9% to 4%, the percent who came from teaching and lecturing fell from 20% down to 7.8% while the percent who were career politicians rose from 9.5% to 14.3%.
We’d rather be in Davos
This shrinking of the pool from which our poiticians have come has created a new political class who would much rather be in Davos or Brussels hobnobbing with their peers from other countries than spending any time with the ignorant, ill-educated electorate our MPs hope will vote for them. So an increasing gulf has emerged between the political tribes and those they purport to represent. This has led to an atttitude among the ruling classes – politicians, their media sycophants and top civil servants – that they know better what Britain needs and thus they can ignore the wishes of electors. We saw this when the majority of MPs, civil servants and the for-sale prostitutes in the media tried to sabotage and overturn the Brexit vote. This ‘we know best’ was perhaps most obvious in our rulers’ reaction to the lab-made, lab-leaked Chinese flu virus when our rulers locked us in our homes and forced us to have injections which were unnecessary for most of the population and probably did more harm than good. And we see this again in our rulers’ determination to destroy what little is left of the British economy in order to supposedly ‘save the planet’ from the ludicrous idea of ‘global boiling’.
Losing contact with reality
One definition of psychosis is: “a severe mental condition in which thought and emotions are so affected that contact is lost with external reality.” And if we look at some recent actions of our rulers we can see that they are the actions of the madhouse. Let’s take a few examples in no particular order:
mRNA vaccines – these were touted as the miracle technology of the future. And the British, Canadian and Australian governments have recently signed multi-million agreements with Moderna to build mRNA vaccine manufacturing facilities in those countries. Yet there is increasing evidence that mRNA supposed ‘vaccines’ cause a wide variety of harm, especially myocarditis and pericarditis in younger men. But our rulers press on with the mRNA disaster unfazed by what’s happening in reality. (By the way, Moderna is one of the largest shareholdings in the investment company set up by Rishi Sunak before he became PM and our very own Jonathan van Tam has recently gone to work for Moderna).
Banning petrol cars – Britain, the EU and several US states will ban the sale of cheap, efficient, reliable ICE (internal combustion engine) cars by (I think) 2035. Yet there is increasing evidence that the electric vehicle (EV) technology is completely inadequate for most car owners. To list just a few issues: there is insuffient range, the batteries decline in just a few years, they are useless in either hot or cold weather as the airconditioning or the heating depletes the battery range, charging takes too long and there is a risk of ‘thermal runaway’ – an explosive fire breaking out. Several thousand cars have been lost when EVs on two car transport ships suffered thermal runaway and this was probably also the reason for the loss of a car park and over a thousand cars at Luton Airport. But our rulers choose to ignore reality and continue trying to force us into buying useless and possibly dangerous milk floats pretending to be cars.
Fining British car manufacturers – from what little I understand, UK-based car manufacturers will soon face massive fines if they don’t manage to sell sufficient numbers of EVs. These fines will not apply to foreign manufacturers. As most consumers can neither afford nor do they want an EV, you don’t have to be a genius to see that this policy will wipe out the British car industry and with it hundreds of thousands of well-paid, skilled jobs in the idnustry and the supply chain and many thousands of businesses used by those workers. But our rulers don’t seem to understand this or just don’t care.
Fining British boiler manufacturers – similarly, British manufacturers of home heating systems will soon face fines if they don’t manage to sell sufficient numbers of useless, noisy, expensive and complex heat pumps. Foreign manufacturers will be exempt. Several UK manufacturers have already begun increasing the prices of their gas boilers in order to get money to pay the fines. As most consumers can neither afford nor do they want a heat pump, you don’t have to be a genius to see that this policy will wipe out the British home-heating industry. Thousand more British jobs lost. But our rulers don’t seem to understand this or just don’t care.
Wrecking British agriculture – at a time when our population is increasing by over a million a year, our rulers are trying to reduce the amount of food our country produces. Partly they are doing this by encouraging farmers to re-wild their land and partly they are spending billions to cover former agricultural land with largely useless solar farms. Our rulers don’t seem to have noticed that the sun doesn’t shine at night and that Britain is renowned for its miserable weather.
Immigration wrecking our country – our country doesn’t have sufficient homes, doctors, dentists, schools, roads and other essential services. Yet our rulers are bringing over a million often low-skilled, often uneducated, often West-hating migrants into our country each year. I have previously mentioned a dystopian novel from 1972 titled Fugue for a Darkening Island which decsribes civil war breaking out in Britain between indigenous British and migrant millions. With the mass importation of the Third World, our rulers seem to be creating the conditions for the next British civil war.
Oblivious to the catastrophe they are creating – I have written several times about how our rulers spending billions of our money on subsidising expensive and unreliable supposed ‘renewables’ has given Britain some of the world’s highest energy prices. We pay twice as much for our energy as homes and industry in the US and four times as much as in China and India. This is decimating what pathetically little is left of British manufacturing and impoverishing us all. Yet each time there is yet another economic disaster caused by Britain’s high energy prices, our politicians blithely hail this as a great success for their policies.
When the Port Talbot steel plant decided to sack 2,500 workers to close its blast furnaces to become more ‘environmentally friendly’, Business and Trade Secretary, Kemi Badenoch (touted as a possible next leader of what pathetically little is left of the Tory Party after the next election wipeout) mysteriously claimed this calamity was a brilliant move by the Government and a huge success for the British economy: “The U.K. Government is backing our steel sector. This proposal will secure a sustainable future for Welsh steel and is expected to save thousands of jobs in the long term.”
Meanwhile up in Scotland, the part Chinese-owned energy giant Petroineos is going to close its oil refinery in Grangemouth (Scotland) in spring 2025 because it could no longer compete with overseas rivals. Repurposing the site to just a fuel import and distribution business is likely to result in the loss of about 400 of the current 500 jobs at the Firth of Forth site. Neil Gray, the current Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy (yes, there apparently is such a position in the SNP administration), ludicrously claimed this closure of the refinery as a success for Scotland: ‘The Scottish Government is committed to working with industry to secure a sustainable future for Grangemouth that reflects our ambitions for decarbonisation and a just transition for Scotland’s industrial sector while recognising the important role it plays in meeting fuel demand in Scotland’.
Get ready for war – and the latest wheeze from our increasingly deranged rulers is to soften us up for a war with Russia. In previous blogs I have explained that Putin has warned NATO for years that he would not permit NATO bases to be set up on Russia’s borders just as the US would not permit Russian bases on the US’s southern border with Mexico. To me this seems like an entirely reasonable position. Yet our unhinged rulers went ahead and started blethering about Ukraine and Georgia, both of which have long land borders with Russia, joining NATO. Our rulers ignored Putin’s warnings and now over 600,00 young men and thousands more civilians are dead and our rulers hope to vastly increase those numbers by dragging us into a conflict with Russia
When power leads to derangement and psychosis?
The ruling classes (I won’t call them ‘elites’) have become increasingly distanced from those whose lives they are supposed to improve and they have increaingly imposed policies which people neither voted for nor wanted. The Covid pandemic accelerated this process as our rulers were surprised at how using fear and media manipulation (thanks, BBC) they could so easily control our thoughts and actions. This seems to have made our rulers drunk on power and they think up ever more deranged policies which we are forced to accept. I propose that this derangement has reached such a level that it is akin to psychosis: “a severe mental condition in which thought and emotions are so affected that contact is lost with external reality.”
I ain’t no historian. And I’m hardly likely to provide some devastating new historical insights in a 900-word blog hastily-written at 06.00 in the morning. But the recent nonsense discussion in the media about whether today’s Brits would fight to defend our country did get me wondering about who really started the many wars in which Brits have lost their lives.
But firstly, the question ‘should Brits fight to defend their country? Why bother? All our institutions have already fallen to those wonderful people from our favourite religion. Over a million foreigners were allowed to invade our country just last year. And by the end of this century, the UK will have become an Islamic republic. Who would risk their lives to defend that?
War – a brief review
World War I – the ostensible reason for the UK entering the war was to protect Belgium as a neutral country. Of course, that was nonsense. Who actually gave a stuff about miserable backwater Belgium? The real reason was that Britain knew the French would capitulate as soon as the Germans started shooting. This would hand control of Western Europe to Germany. Moreover, there were also Westminster political machinations. The Liberal cabinet made the decision, although the party had been strongly anti-war until the last minute. The Conservative Party was pro-war. The Liberals knew that if they split on the war issue, they would lose control of the government to the Conservatives:
World War II – from the little I understand, after WWI the British and Americans wanted to impose fairly lenient terms on Germany. But the French were adamant that Germany should be punished harshly. The final terms were so draconian that French Field Marshall Foch warned “This is not peace. It is an armistice for 20 years”. It turns out that he was only out by a few months. The reparations Germany had to pay led to the collapse of the currency, economic turmoil, mass unemployment and the rise of the Nazis seeking revenge for the humiliation of 1918.
The Pearl Harbour attack – after the Japanese attack US president Franklin Roosevelt (possibly rather disingenuously?) said: Yesterday, December 7, 1941—a date which will live in infamy—the United States of America was suddenly and deliberately attacked by naval and air forces of the Empire of Japan.” Japan had been industrialising in the 1920s, but lacked access to the raw materials its industry needed. So Japan invaded Manchuria and China slaughtering 20 or 30 million innocents in rather unpleasant ways. The US under Roosevelt started imposing sanctions on Japan blocking Japan’s access to things like steel and oil and even gave an ultimatum to Japan to get out of China. A top American official at the time stated: “Prior to December 7, it was evident even to me… that we were pushing Japan into a corner. I believed that it was the desire of President Roosevelt, and Prime Minister Churchill that we get into the war, as they felt the Allies could not win without us and all our efforts to cause the Germans to declare war on us failed; the conditions we imposed upon Japan—to get out of China, for example—were so severe that we knew that nation could not accept them. We were forcing her so severely that we could have known that she would react toward the United States. All her preparations in a military way — and we knew their over-all import — pointed that way.”
The Suez Crisis – was an international crisis in the Middle East that was precipitated on July 26, 1956, when the Egyptian president, Gamal Abdel Nasser, nationalized the Suez Canal. The canal was owned by the Suez Canal Company, which was controlled by French and British interests. So this little war was aimed at protecting British and French businesses. Not a very admirable aim and perhaps not worth the lives of British soldiers to protect a few influential businessmen’s profits?
The Vietnam war – Vietnam was a French colony. As usual, when the guns started firing, the French ran away. For the U.S., the mandate was clear: limit Soviet power in Southeast Asia and halt the spread of communism. The first American death was in 1945. Direct U.S. involvement in Vietnam grew following surrender of the French and partition of North and South Vietnam in 1954. I suspect that, had the Americans actually won in Vietnam, the French would have come marching back in ‘bravely’ waving their tricolours (just as they ‘bravely’ marched into Paris in 1944 after the Americans and British had liberated the city) and demanded their colony back. The French rather like other people fighting their wars.
The invasion of Iraq – we now know that there were no weapons of mass destruction which could be ‘launched in 45 minutes’ and the war was probably to get control of Iraq’s oil
The Russia/Ukraine war – I have written about this before. To summarise, Putin had warned NATO several times to halt its Eastern expansion. Just before the Russian invasion, NATO announced that it would consider admitting Ukraine and Georgia. This would bring NATO bases right to Russia’s borders. Putin demanded that NATO back down, but the US delivered a diplomatic note to the Kremlin asserting NATO’s right to admit any country it wished. So Russia invaded Ukraine expecting to reach Kiev in a few days, overthrow the pro-western Zelensky government and install a Russian puppet administration. Unfortunately the Russians miscalculated and 500,000 deaths later we have a stalemate. Though, as the Russians can out-produce Ukraine in terms of military equipment and manpower, the odds are moving in Russia’s favour.
There are a few more wars we could add where the motivations of Western countries were far from morally justifiable. There’s the 1953 overthrow of the democratically-elected Iranian Mossadegh government and their replacement with the Western-friendly Shah and there’s the overthrow of Libya’s Gaddafi just to name a couple.
I guess what I’m trying to suggest is that the reasons we have become involved in several wars are not alway as clear-cut as many people are led to believe and are not always about Good versus Evil, with Britain always being on the side of Good.
To end, here’s what Hermann Goering said at his trial in Nuremberg: “Of course the people don’t want war. But after all, it’s the leaders of the country who determine the policy, and it’s always a simple matter to drag the people along whether it’s a democracy, a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism, and exposing the country to greater danger.”
And here’s Putin explaining that he would not accept NATO bases on Russia’s borders just as the US would not accept Russian military bases on the US’s southern border with Mexico. Sounds pretty reasonable to me:
I thought it worth featuring this brief YouTube video from Sky News (Australia). Sky News (Australia) is full of ‘Mark Steyns’ – people who dare to demolish the accepted official woke view of life. The (IMHO) brilliant Mark Steyn from GB News was, as you’ll know, ‘ofcommed’ – banished from GB News for a minor statistical error when, of course, the real reason for his excommuniucation was his exposure of (amongst other things) the rampaging Pakistani rape and torture gangs in many of Britain’s towns and cities and the massive harm done by the ‘safe’ and ‘effective’ vaccines.
Sky News (Australia) is what GB News could have beome if Ofcom wasn’t there to ‘protect’ us from views which Ofcom considers were outside Ofcom’s Overton Window. Sky News (Australia) has been particularly forthright in throwing doubt on the climate change global boiling nonsense with its ‘Ice Age Watch’. These are mostly available on YouTube.
Incidentally, the brilliant Dame Sharon White, who has (IMHO) so spectacularly failed as CEO of John Lewis and Waitrose, was head honcho at Ofcom from 2015 to 2019. I wonder if she applied her undoubted management skills at Ofcom just as effectively as they were applied at John Lewis and Waitrose?
Anyway, enjoy a bit of media fresh air from Down Under:
I started writing this blog a couple of days ago but gave up several times. I just couldn’t find a sensible way to explain the utter madness which is being inflicted on us by the 650 useless, corrupt, self-aggrandising fools and knaves in Westminster and their thousands of advisers, sycophantic supposed ‘experts’ and sundry gravy-train-riding hangers-on.
I have written about the Port Talbot steel-works disaster before. Around 2,800 skilled, well-paid workers are getting fired as the steel works closes down its blast furnaces. Around £500m of our money is being given to the site’s Indian owners, Tata Steel, to replace the supposedly environmentally-harmful blast furnaces with electric arc furnaces. But electric arc furnaces only do a small part of steel production and so 2,800 workers are being tossed on the scrap heap. This is a catastrophe for those workers, their families and the whole area. However, our Business and Trade Secretary, Kemi Badenoch (touted as a possible next leader of what pathetically little is left of the Tory Party after the next election) mysteriously claimed this calamity was a brilliant move by the Government and a huge success for the British economy: “The U.K. Government is backing our steel sector. This proposal will secure a sustainable future for Welsh steel and is expected to save thousands of jobs in the long term.”
Meanwhile up in Scotland, the part Chinese-owned energy giant Petroineos is going to close its oil refinery in Grangemouth (Scotland) in spring 2025 because it could no longer compete with overseas rivals. Repurposing the site to just a fuel import and distribution business is likely to result in the loss of about 400 of the current 500 jobs at the Firth of Forth site. Neil Gray, the current Cabinet Secretary for Wellbeing Economy, Fair Work and Energy (yes, there apparently is such a position in the SNP administration), ludicrously claimed this closure of the refinery as a success for Scotland: ‘The Scottish Government is committed to working with industry to secure a sustainable future for Grangemouth that reflects our ambitions for decarbonisation and a just transition for Scotland’s industrial sector while recognising the important role it plays in meeting fuel demand in Scotland’.
The next industry our politicians look set to destroy are British gas boiler makers. In a couple of years, these companies will be fined thousands of pounds if they fail to sell a sufficient number of useless, noisy, ludicrously-expensive heat pumps. This system of fines only applies to UK manufacturers. Foreign manufacturers are exampt. In anticipation of having to pay the fines, several UK gas boiler manufacturers have started to raise their prices. Naturally, this makes them uncompetitive against foreign makers and so our politicians will end up wiping out yet another British industry.
Why are our rulers wrecking our economy and destroying skilled, well-paid jobs? To hit their own 2050 Net Zero targets, of course. Behind these disasters is the way our worthless political elites have decided to measure our CO2 emissions. If a tonne of steel is produced in Britain, the CO2 emissions from its production are counted as UK’s CO2 emissions. But if a tonne of steel is produced in China or India and then shipped halfway around the world in a diesel-powered cargo ship, the CO2 emissions are not included in the UK’s CO2 figures. This incentivises our rulers to close down much of Britain’s industry in order to meet their own completely arbitary CO2 reduction targets. And, as the examples of Port Talbot and Grangemouth show, they’re succeeding in this. The UK’s CO2 emissions have plummeted:
But so have the number of people employed in British manufacturing:
And so has manufacturing as a percentage of GDP:
And so has the UK’s share of global GDP:
Meanwhile (apart from a small drop during the Chinese lab-leaked Covid pandemic) most of the world carries on increasing its CO2 emissions:
These events pose two rather important questions:
Can’t our rulers see that they are destroying our country for no purpose at all?
Here’s the opening paragraph of Ursula Fond of Lying’s speech to her globalist, jet-setting chums at this year’s Davos knees up:
Excellencies, Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Klaus,
Your annual Global Risk Report makes for a stunning and sobering read. For the global business community, the top concern for the next two years is not conflict or climate. It is disinformation and misinformation, followed closely by polarisation within our societies. These risks are serious because they limit our ability to tackle the big global challenges we are facing: changes in our climate – and our geopolitical climate; shifts in our demography and in our technology; spiralling regional conflicts and intensified geopolitical competition and their impacts on supply chains. The sobering reality is that we are once again competing more intensely across countries than we have in several decades. And this makes the theme of this year’s Davos meeting even more relevant. ‘Rebuilding trust’ – this is not a time for conflicts or polarisation. This is the time to build trust. This is the time to drive global collaboration more than ever before. This requires immediate and structural responses to match the size of the global challenges. I believe it can be done. And I believe that Europe can and must take the lead in shaping that global response.
In a blog last week, I wrote about the BBC’s Trusted News Initiative. This includes many of the world’s leading news media, the main press agencies – AP and Reuters – and the big tech megacorporations:
The Trusted News Initiative (TNI) is a partnership, founded by the BBC, that includes organisations from around the globe including; AP, AFP, BBC, CBC/Radio-Canada, European Broadcasting Union (EBU), Financial Times, Information Futures Lab, Google/YouTube, The Hindu, The Nation Media Group, Meta, Microsoft, Thomson Reuters, Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism, Twitter, The Washington Post, Kompas – Indonesia, Dawn – Pakistan, Indian Express, NDTV – India, ABC – Australia, SBS – Australia, NHK – Japan.
TNI members work together to build audience trust and to find solutions to tackle challenges of disinformation. By including media organisations and social media platforms, it is the only forum in the world of its kind designed to take on disinformation in real time.
I guess this means that people like myself – people who supposedly spread ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’ with my book THERE IS NO CLIMATE CRISIS – will no longer be permitted to have a voice or even to take part in society. Instead the globalists will restrict what information we are allowed to know in order to ‘build trust’ – as Ursula explains “this is not a time for conflicts or polarisation. This is the time to build trust” by tackling ‘misinformation’ and ‘disinformation’.
George Orwell warned:
Anyway, here’s our beloved leader, Ursula, laying our her plan to control what we useless eaters will be allowed to hear and say.
You only need to listen to the first minute or so of Ursula’s speech to understand the glorious future she and her globalist pals have planned for us:
David Craig, on February 17th, 2024
