The current constant hyperventilating news reports about the ‘fires from Hell’ ravaging parts of Spain, France, Italy, Greece and even Britain reminded me of the 1968 song “Fire” by The Crazy World of Arthur Brown (link at the end of this blog).
Arthur Brown sang: “I am the god of hellfire and I bring you FIRE”. But who are the new ‘gods of hellfire?’ Who or what are causing all the current wildfires? It’s obvious that there are two main conditions which have made today’s wildfires so destructive:
a wet winter led to more vegetation growth
a very hot dry spell has increased the likelihood of fires spreading
But neither of these conditions explain how the fires started in the first place. Most news reports tell us that fires “broke out”. But most of our media seems spectacuraly uninterested in what or who caused these fires to “break out”. It might be due to spontaneous combustion? Professor Googles tells us that: spontaneous combustion happens through self-heating, caused by slow internal chemical reactions like oxidation or bacterial fermentation that build up heat faster than it can escape. To an ignoramus like myself, that doesn’t seem to be the likely cause of most of the current wildfires.
Another theory is that it is us humans who have caused most or even all the wildfires. The Daily Telegraph seems to point at this possibility in a report:
Since the beginning of the month, 184 people have been arrested in connection with wildfires across France. Five have already been handed jail sentences, and 15 are awaiting trial.
One of the arrested seems to have been extremely ‘productive’:
In the department of Var in south-eastern France, a 23-year-old man is in police custody for allegedly starting 10 fires. CCTV cameras helped police identify the man, who is accused of setting fires on the edge of forests while travelling between towns for several days on his motorbike.
In Spain a construction worker is being prosecuted because:
The police have alleged he carried out work without a permit, and the excavator was not fitted with proper fire-extinguishing equipment. Firefighters at the scene called for air assistance as the flames spread into a deep ravine, but the blaze soon became uncontrollable. The inferno ravaged 193 square miles, an area about the size of Leeds, alongside a smaller wildfire, forcing some 90,000 residents to flee towns and villages.
That’s a pretty impressive fire allegedly caused by just one allegedly careless person.
A study in the journal PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences) found that in the USA
Human-started wildfires accounted for 84% of all wildfires, tripled the length of the fire season, dominated an area seven times greater than that affected by lightning fires, and were responsible for nearly half of all area burned.
Had any of Europe’s wildfires been caused by lightning strikes, I feel sure that our intrepid climate reporters like the BBC’s (IMHO) ‘rodent-featured’ Justin Lowrat would have told us. So it would not be unreasonable to assume that all Europe’s fires were caused either by human stupidity or by human criminality.
Would it perhaps be informative if our overexcited reporters spent just a little time investigating the cause of the wildfires – who are the new ‘gods of hellfire’ – in addition to reporters’ apocalyptic hyperventilating about the scale of the fires?
Drought or just not enough water?
We now hear that much of England and all of normally rainy Wales have been declared to be in ‘drought’. That’s not unexpected given that it hasn’t rained in some areas for almost a month. But is the lack of rain the main cause of the water shortages?
The last major reservoir built in England was Carsington Water in Derbyshire, which was completed in 1992. At the time, the population of England was officially around 48 million. The population of England is now officially about 59 million. It could possibly be the case that increasing the population by 11 million without building a single new reservoir for 34 years might put a strain on the amount of water available?
And then we have leakage. Around a quarter of all water provided by our water companies is lost due to leakage:
So, is there a drought? Absolutely. Are current water shortages purely due to ‘Global Boiling’ climate change as most mainstream media ‘news’ reports would have us believe? Absolutely not. A failure to build new reservoirs at a time of massive population increase and excessive leakage are also important contributing factors.
Incidentally, in my previous blog, I recounted the tale of how it took me 9 weeks and more than 12 reports to get my (IMHO) utterly useless and incompetent local council to deal with a water leak near my home which (I calculated) has lost more than 16,000 litres of water during those 9 weeks.
You’ll all know about lightbulb jokes. They’re a classic style of joke that use the question “How many [group] does it take to change a lightbulb?” to make fun of the traits or habits of different people. Well. I’ve got my own version now: “How many useless council bureaucrats does it take to turn off one tap?”
This story from my boring little life is going to sound trivial. But please bear with me as perhaps this story indicates why our taxes keep increasing while public ‘services’ keep getting worse?
A shower on the local beach promenade has been leaking water for at least 9 weeks. The leak is quite small and I estimated that water is being lost at a rate of about 100ml every 30 seconds. Doesn’t sound like much? Well this equates to 288 litres of water a day, 2,016 litres a week – 18,144 litres in the 9 weeks I know the shower has been leaking:
I have reported this leak to the council beach employees at least six times. But they just laugh and say it’s nothing to do with them. So nothing happens to stop the leak
I also have reported the leak six times on the council’s on-line leak reports form and got just one automated response a few weeks ago. But nothing happened to stop the leak.
I reported the leak to a Dorset Water leaks repairman I saw ‘working’ at a beach toilet block. His answer – there was nothing he could do until he had the correct paperwork and a job number. So I naively suggested he could at least report the leak to the relevant department at the council. He looked at me with total astonishment and then explained very slowly, as I was clearly an idiot, that his job was not reporting leaks but only repairing leaks and he obviously couldn’t do that without the correct paperwork and a job number.
On Monday I reported the leak to a local councillor and she reported it to some operations manager at the council. Then on Tuesday I got an email from someone at the council acknowledging my report of a problem with a beach hut and an assurance the council was developing a strategy to deal with the beach hut problem. I had never reported any problem with a beach hut, so this email was complete gibberish.
Then yesterday, there was finally a breakthrough. My phone rang and some council employee said they were contacting me about the water leak I had reported. ‘Eureka’, I thought. Finally some action. Then the council employee said that he was standing outside my home and couldn’t see any sign of a water leak. I was incredulous at the incompetence and asked why on earth he was standing outside my home when I had reported that a beach promenade shower was leaking. This was one of those moments when you despair about the future of the human race. Apparently nobody had told this individual that the leak was from a beachside shower and not at my home.
I thought Britain was facing a water shortage and therefore preventing a beachside shower leaking 2,016 litres of precious water a week would be a priority for my council. Clearly I was mistaken.
Moreover, all that someone needed to do to stop the leak was to turn off the nearby tap controlling the water to the shower. I could have done it. But I was concerned that the tap looked quite corroded and, if I tried to force it, this might make the situation worse. That’s why I believed someone from the useless council should do it. It just never occurred to me that getting a council to turn one simple tap off would require 9 weeks, 13 reports and heaven knows how many utterly incompetent local council employees.
Perhaps this is why nothing in Britain works anymore?
I have just done a Google search on ‘protests at Isfahan executions’. In the first five pages of results I could only find one UK mainstream media report about how there were massive protests in the Iranian city of Isfahan when the brutal Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) yesterday publicly executed two men arrested after the January 2026 protests. The execution by hanging was televised in Iran to let the Iranian people understand what would happen to them if they dared express any dissatisfaction with the worse than medieval Islamic regime.
That report was in the Daily Telegraph. I won’t give a link to the Telegraph report as I imagine it is behind a paywall.
In spite of the Islamists’ brutality, there were massive protests by the crowd and the IRGC forces responded with tear gas, shotguns and snipers killing several people.
If you weren’t a Telegraph subscriber (or if you don’t watch Tousi TV on YouTube), you probably wouldn’t know this even happened. It certainly wasn’t mentioned on the Trump-hating, Islamophiliac BBC.
But I’ve noticed a trend in the last few months of the UK mainstream media trying to paint Iran as the victim and the US and Israel as the aggressors in the current Middle East war. For example, on several occasions, the BBC and ITV have referred to the IRGC as the “Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps” suggesting that it is some kind of patriotic Iranian armed force just like the British armed forces. By not using the real title the “Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps”, our media hope to cover up that the IRGC are a bunch of oppressive, end-of-days religious cultists who are a danger to all of humanity.
Shame on our media (except the Daily Telegraph) for covering up yet another example of the Iranian Islamists’ hideous brutality.
It seems that every news programme at the moment begins with the European wildfires as hyperventilating ‘journalists’, like the BBC’s beloved and ever trustworthy Justin Lowrat, tell us that never before have there been such high levels of wildfires. And our mainstream media weather presenters predict ever more apocalyptic heatwaves:
Yes it has been a hot summer. But are Europe’s wildfires really at a “historically high” level?
The ‘Not A Lot Of People Know That’ website provides real data, rather than opinions, suggesting that this year’s wildfires are nothing out of the ordinary.
(Just click on the heading “Wildfires in France” below to see the charts of area burned by year for the whole of the EU and France)
I’ll leave it up to you to decide who you believe – the BBC, C4 News, Sky News etc or the ‘Not A Lot Of People Know That’ actual data of the extent of wildfires burn.
And just one final small point. We seldom/never get any information on how the main wildfires started. I believe one started when a car caught fire, another was due to a woman who was arrested for arson and a third was started by scumbags who tied burning rags to the tails of some cats. Whether these stories are true, I don’t know. But it would be rather jolly if the Justin Lowrats of the mainstream media did make an effort to explain to us plebs whether the fires are natural or are actually caused by idiots and criminals.
Today I’m going to rewrite a blog I wrote 6 years ago about the utter stupidity of building HS2 in a tiny country like Britain:
Ask the wrong questions – you get the wrong answer
Let me bore you with why I think the idiots in Westminster have blundered into yet another horrifically expensive disaster.
There are two questions our politicians should have asked when considering building the catastrophically expensive and unsuitable HS2:
Question 1: Do we need more rail capacity between the South and North of England?
The answer is probably yes, although new communication options may mean that in the 20 to 30 years it takes to build the HS2 disaster, people will be doing less physical travelling and more on-line communication. But let’s for a moment accept that there is a need for more rail capacity from South to North. Then there’s a second question:
Question 2: Does that train line need to be ‘high speed’?
Now let me explain why it is totally ludicrous to build a high-speed train in a tiny country like England
I’ll make this part of my blog today simple so, were any politicians to be reading it, even they might understand.
France is a big country – about 640,000 km2. The UK is a small country – about 242,000 km2. England is an even smaller country – 130,000 km2. France has an extensive high-speed rail network – the TGV. It makes sense to have high-speed trains in a large country. It doesn’t make sense to have high-speed trains in a small country.
Now let’s go a bit deeper. The French train route from Paris to Lyon to Marseilles can probably be seen as comparable to the UK train route from London to Birmingham to Manchester in terms of how it connects major cities. But the differences in distances are huge. Paris to Lyon is 292 miles, whereas London to Birmingham is only 128 miles. And Lyon to Marseilles is 488 miles, whereas Birmingham to Manchester is just 86 miles. In fact, the distance from Birmingham to Manchester is so short that the train would probably have to slow down as soon as it reached its ‘high speed’:
The much greater distances in France justify a high-speed rail network. But squandering over £100bn on cutting just a few minutes off the train time from London to Birmingham and then even fewer minutes off the train journey from Birmingham to Manchester is utterly ludicrous.
What is the best and most economical way of delivering that extra capacity?
As we had no need for a new ‘high speed’ (199 mph) line, the increase in capacity could have been delivered at much lower cost. For example, modernising signalling on the existing line might allow more trains to run on the existing track. Alternatively, building a traditional line along the same route as the current train line would have been a much cheaper option. HS2 will be much more expensive than a new traditional line because high-speed lines have totally different engineering requirements such as longer straight sections and much higher performance requirements. Moreover, high-speed trains are much more expensive than traditional Intercity 125s.
But our worthless politicians didn’t ask these two simple questions. Our politicians got the two questions mixed up together and so got the wrong answer.
There are many better things the Government could do with £100bn+ than the ridiculously unnecessary HS2 (vanity?) project. They could, for example, have just built another conventional (125 mph) line and maybe saved £40bn or more.
But that would have been sensible and therefore not something our dumb-arse stupid politicians would have considered.
Here’s a story I don’think any of our mainstream media will, be covering.
Have you ever wondered why our supposed regulators – Ofwat, Ofgem and Ofcom – seem to be so utterly useless? Well perhaps you need to look no further than the regulators’ employees’ bank accounts. I’m sure employees of regulators like Ofwat, Ofgem and Ofcom get very nice civil-service-style salaries and gold-plated pensions. But they can earn much more by moving to the companies they are supposed to regulate. Basically, they can move from being reasonably-paid gamekeepers to being much more highly-paid poachers. And if you’re an employee of a regulator hoping to get a well-paid job in one of the companies you’re supposed to be regulating, you’re not going to make yourself unpopular with your targetted future employer by regulating too aggressively.
It might seem odd to an ignorant outsider like myself that none of our regulators collect (or admit to collecting?) figures on how many of their employees defect – join the companies they used to regulate. After all, if say about 1% of a regulator’s employees leave to take up much more lucrative jobs with the companies that they were supposed to regulate, that shouldn’t be a problem. But if the figure is say 10% or even more, then clearly management at the regulators have a serious issue they need to address. Therefore, it could appear more than astonishing that regulators don’t collect (or claim to not collect?) this information.
But we do know that 6 of 9 major water and sewerage companies in England have hired former Ofwat directors of corporate strategy or heads of regulation for top roles.
There are, of course, no figures for how many Ofgem employees have joined electricity companies nor of how many Ofcom employees have joined communications and media organisations. But knowing human nature, I think we can guess that quite a few have left the supposed ‘regulators’ in order to help regulated companies outwit the regulators.
And finally we have the two main financial regulators – the FCA (Financial Conduct Authority) and the PRA (Prudential Regulation Authority). Again, no figures are available of how many financial regulators have left to get much more lucrative jobs in banking and investment companies. I did find that around 1,000 employees left the FCA in the years 2020 to 2022. I will leave it up to your imagination to guess where these around 1,000 financially-qualified individuals went to work after leaving the FCA.
So, if you’ve ever wondered why our supposed ‘regulators’ appear to be incapable of regulating anything, perhaps you need to look no further than reasonably-paid gamekeepers wanting to become extremely well-paid poachers?
Most readers will probably be aware of the shenanigans around Thames Water.
Drowning in debt
The current situation is that Thames Water has massive, unrepayable debts. Thames Water’s ballooning debt—reaching approximately £18.5 billion—is currently at the center of a tense battle involving major hedge funds and distressed-credit investors. As the utility struggles to stave off financial collapse, the government has had to intervene to protect consumers from bearing the brunt of these rescue deals.
The vultures look for easy pickings
What seems to have happened is:
when the water companies were first privatised, their debt levels were around 5% to 10%.
the owners of the water companies, including Thames Water, loaded the companies with massive debts. This increased debt levels to around 80%. The owners used the loans to pay themselves eye-watering dividends
much of that debt has now been bought by ‘vulture funds’ (hedge funds) at hugely-discounted rates and now those vulture funds stand to make vast profits by blackmailing the UK government into either allowing the water companies like Thames Water to massively increase prices to consumers to help pay off the interest on those debts or to nationalise the companies thus handing over billions in profits to the vulture funds who bought the ‘distressed debts’ at rock-bottom prices.
I warned you
It’s never satisfying to say “I told you so”. Actually, that’s a lie. It is rather satisfying to say “I told you so”. Here’s a small part from my book GREED UNLIMITED written in 2012 about how the water companies, and in particular Thames Water, were fleecing us:
Thames Water provides an excellent example of how the supine, impotent, self-serving Ofwat is allowing water companies to fleece us. In 2000, the company was bought by the German RWE for £6.8 billion. Over the six years of its ownership, RWE pocketed around £1 billion in dividends. It then sold Thames to an Australian company for £8 billion. So RWE made around £2.2 billion – about £30 million a month or £1 million a day -from its brief ownership of Thames. Yet during its ownership RWE was allowed to increase water bills well above inflation by claiming it needed the money to invest in reducing leakage. In addition to its exploitative high prices, for years Thames has further increased its profits by selling off land and facilities to people like property developers. When asked why it had closed twenty five bulk water storage facilities, Thames explained, ‘all these sites were shut down when they became surplus to operational requirements following upgrades to our network’. At the same time as Thames was saying this, it had imposed a hosepipe ban due to a lack of water.
At the moment we don’t know what will happen with Thames Water – either a nationalisation costing us taxpayers billions or massive increases in water bills costing Thames Water customers billions. The only certainty seems to be that the vulture funds will make billions at our expense.
Here he is – one of the most famous multi-cultural enrichers we have had the good fortune to let into our country:
How lucky we are that this gentleman chose our country as his home rather than his native Cr*pistan.
This person received concurrent sentences of 22 and 19 years for raping children as young as 12, whom his gang groomed at two takeaway restaurants in Rochdale. Concurrent sentencing is when a judge allows a convicted defendant to serve multiple prison terms for separate crimes at the same time instead of stacking sentences back-to-back (consecutive sentencing). So basically, this could seem to be a way a judge can pretend to punish someone severely while actually giving them the shortest punishment possible for their particular crimes. This meant that this creature got off free from most of his crimes. Two-tier justice anyone?????
Most White British probably view this thing with revulsion and want him deported to his native Cr*pistan rather than spending the rest of his life in Britain possibly living comfortably off benefits that we’ll pay for. Cr*pistan’s government, naturally doesn’t want this thing in their country.
Our (IMHO) UK-loathing government claims it is putting pressure on Cr*pistan to take this creature back. But at the same time our useless government has just handed over more than £150 million in supposed ‘foreign aid’ to Cr*pistan with no strings attached. As for this £150+ million, given that Cr*pistan is one of the world’s most corrupt countries, we can expect some/most/alll (delete as appropriate) of this money will be stolen by venal Cr*pistani politicians, bureaucrats and business people.
But while we White British may view this enricher with utter revulsion, are these feelings shared by this enricher’s own community? Due to political correctness, I doubt there is a single journalist who will ask this question as they might suspect they will not get the answer political correctness requires.
I must stress that I have no idea how this (IMHO) revolting creature will be judged in his community. But there may be a few/some/many/most (delete as appropriate) people in this creature’s community who view us Kafirs (Arabic: كافر Unbelievers) as lower than pigs and dogs. Moreover, there may be a few/some/many/most (delete as appropriate) people in that community who view females/women as being inferior to men and even worthless. So such individuals might feel that the vaginal, anal and oral rape and beating and torturing of Kafir girls is the right or even the duty of any man from that community.
And so, there might be a few/some/many/most (delete as appropriate) people in that community who view this most famous enricher as a hero and not a villain.
However, there is one certainty: our UK-loathing government will bleat that it is trying to deport this gentleman. But actually it will do everything it can to allow him to remain in Britain further enriching our brilliantly successful multi-cultural society probably while living comfortably for the rest of his life on benefits.
In my Tuesday-Wednesday blog I wrote about the likely consequences of the West’s (except for Poland and Hungary) ‘suicidal empathy’. So now might be a good time to remind readers of soul-singer Al Wilson’s 1969 song ‘The Snake’.
The song seems to be clearly based on one of Aesop’s fables (number 176) titled “The Farmer and the Viper”.
One winter morning, a farmer goes for a walk. He spots a viper (a poisonous snake) freezing to death in the snow. Out of kindness, the farmer picks up the snake and places it inside his clothes to warm it up. When the snake wakes up and gets its energy back, its first instinct is to strike. It bites the farmer with a deadly bite. As the farmer lays dying, he realizes his mistake. But he only got what he deserved for helping a naturally cruel creature.
It has the moral that kindness to evil will be met by betrayal and is the source of the idiom “to nourish a viper in one’s bosom”.
Some people (not me, of course) may see this story (and thus Al Wilson’s song) as a chilling allegory of the ‘suicidal empathy’ the West is displaying as it welcomes in millions of people who seem to loathe us, hate our culture, despise our freedoms and want to dominate us and subjugate us by imposing their ‘culture’ and way of life on us.
I couldn’t possibly comment on what such people may or may not believe.
So next time there’s an atrocity and another atrocity and another atrocity, you can expect two reactions from our rulers:
Feigning total astonishment and claiming nobody could possibly have foreseen there atrocities
Denying that these atrocities had anything at all to do with our rulers’ deliberate policy of making White British a minority in their own country by bringing in an invading army of migrants from the world’s most primitive, backward, corrupt, and violent hell-holes
When this happens, please remember the closing lines from “The Snake”:
“I saved you, ” cried that woman “And you’ve bitten me, even why? And you know your bite is poisonous and now I’m gonna die” “Oh, shut up, silly woman, ” said that reptile with a grin “Now you knew darn well I was a snake before you brought me in”
Readers have probably all heard the term “suicidal empathy”. Wikipedia tells us:
Suicidal empathy is a purported phenomenon in which excessive, misdirected and pathological forms of empathy are claimed to be destructive for the party that exhibits it. This is often claimed to happen through prioritizing compassion, understanding and empathy over logic and long-term consequences.
The term was coined by Canadian marketing professor Gad Saad in his book Suicidal Empathy: Dying to Be Kind. According to Saad, suicidal empathy is the inability to implement optimal decisions when one is psychologically conditioned to prioritize empathy or displays of empathy over a rational course of action. He argues that suicidal empathy prioritizes minority groups such as illegal immigrants at the expense of survival and security of one’s own groups and values.
We seem to see this suicidal empathy everywhere in the West:
Two-tier policing and ‘justice’ prioritising minorities over the indigenous population
Better treatment of illegal migrants than of members of the indigenous population, for example our own military veterans
Committing economic suicide with Net Zero causing de-industrialisation and impoverishment
Allowing the invasion of European countries by millions of Third-worlders who hate us, our culture and everything about our way of life but still want all the economic benefits of living in the West
Turning a blind eye to the mass rape of thousands of often-underage white girls to supposedly avoid inter-community tensions
I’m sure readers can think of many more examples
Here are a group of (IMHO) idiots displaying an excellent example of “suicidal empathy“:
And here’s an example of the welcome our queer friends can get when visiting the more fundamentalist Arabian countries:
The limp-wristed, leftist, West-hating Guardian supposed ‘newspaper’ discussed Saad’s book among other works critical of empathy, characterizing the topic as a right-wing effort“…to dismantle and discredit one of the essential tools for any society – our capacity to recognize and respond to suffering. We should see the campaign against empathy by Trump supporters for what it is: a flashing red light warning of fascist intent“.
What I found rather jolly in the Wikipedia explanation of “suicidal empathy” was the list of suggested closely-related topics. I think these tell us more about “suicidal empathy” than the Guardian ‘newspaper’ article:
David Craig, on July 31st, 2026
