Theresa May ‘under investigation re Brexit profits’


Theresa May’s woeful start to her General Election campaign – which has seen Labour gainthirteen percentage points in voting intention polls – looks set to become a full-blown disaster.

may oh sh1t.png

Reports are beginning to emerge from multiple sources suggesting that Mrs May is under investigation by the Property and Ethics group of the Cabinet Office in connection with an alleged failure to declare an enormous conflict of interest on Brexit related to profits of billions of pounds said to have been made by her husband’s investment-banking company in Brexit-related activities, as these tweets by political commentators suggest:

View original post 108 more words


While May hides, Corbyn reads ‘Bear Hunt’ to happy kids #GE2017 (video)


Even in the early days of the General Election campaign, Theresa May’s refusal to debate and inability to engage with real people are drawing attention. Mrs May only seems happy to appear in the most controlled of environments – and even then she looks stilted, scripted and ill at ease.

In sharp contrast, Jeremy Corbyn looks not only happy to be out and about, mingling with the rest of us, but good at it. It’s his natural element and his authenticity – not seen for decades in a General Election campaign, is an incredible breath of fresh air that has shaken the Establishment.

corbyn school.pngJeremy Corbyn at ease – and the kids love him

Today, he was filmed reading Michael Rosen’s We’re going on a bear hunt to nursery school children at Brentry Children’s Centre – and looking absolutely at ease with himself and with them:

Contrast this with…

View original post 156 more words

I lost My PIP Appeal. They say I can’t leave my house.

The formatting is all messed up on this post for some reason.  I will correct it after I have slept some as I cant seem to figure it out now.
I made the leap and started posting a Vlog on YouTube.  Check it out here:
So I lost my PIP appeal today.  It was in regards to mobility, and them having chosen the wrong PIP Descriptor.  They continue to apply the descriptor which is explained in the video.  After spending 9 months building a large case with evidence from a GP and family members and loads of submissions from me detailing how my condition affects me in many ways, it was not enough.
I can truly see why so many people have died when dealing with the DWP in its current state of decay.  I do not have difficulties in communicating, particularly in the written form.  So I can see how those who do struggle to communicate really have no chance of fair treatment under the current system.  To be fair I have only learn to be more outward in the 9 months in order to do this.   I was forced to give up more and more of my privacy as nothing seemed to be enough for the DWP to want to accept it.  Ever since receiving PIP, after being diagnosed as Bipolar II a few years ago, I have never received the correct level of support but never had the energy to challenge it and was scared I would end up with less or nothing.
 I slowly built up more strength and confidence and in June or July 2016 when I got the dreaded “How you disability affects you” form, I decided to fight my case and not just roll over and accept less than the law says I am entitled to.  By this point I had began to come to the understanding it was not just me.  They refused as always but in August 2016 I asked for a Mandatory Reconsideration (Sounds ominous as it has “Man da tory” in it) which was partially accepted, and they chose a descriptor that at least applies 30% of the time.
I have Bipolar type 2.  I spend on average (Over 12 month period) 70% of my time in varying degrees of depression.  The rest of the 30% of the time I spend in what is called hypo-mania.  An elevated state with higher functioning.  The 70/30 split is actually a very conservative estimate. (I said that to them, it was a joke they probably never got)  Based upon my longest hypomania which was 3 months.  They varying between 2 weeks to 3 months in my case.    Which is 75/25.  However during times of high stress like the 9 months has been this will swing in favor of more depression, less hypo-mania.
I notified them it was at least partly accurate and reminded them however the descriptor to be chosen by the guidelines states the descriptor that applies most of the time is to be chosen when working out the points for each section.  Now by law I am obligated to inform them of mistakes that could result in over/under payment.  So I did that and attempted to negotiate with them about it.  They ignored me so I launched an appeal that was accepted.
Because I had got even worse during the 9 months, in fact severely so at a few points, they reassessed me and attempted to force me to attend assessment, after previously excusing me a few months prior due to the stress of facing (Those who don’t give) Atos.  After partially accepting my case they must have realised it gave me a strong hand in court, so they took it back and replaced it with one that claims I cant leave the house.
So just before the appeal they changed the decision, and took back the partial acceptance and changed it to one that you see in the video.
So I lost that appeal I started many months ago today.  The Judge, and the Tribunal all decided that I cant leave the house.  The problem with this is, if I do leave the house I could technically be accused of benefit fraud now because that doesn’t match my file.  So I cant accept this decision as technically speaking.  Every time I leave the house I am in breach of their firmly held beliefs.  Regardless of paper evidence.
I know I am not the only one going through this.  So I am fighting hard.  The DWP and the Court are award I attempted suicide in September 2016, not long after cessation of benefits that led to a brief period of starvation which I only got through with help from my bank of all people who took 11 minutes to do what the DWP failed to do in a week of calling every day and listening to that shite (I Daniel Blake!) hold music.  They refused me a Short Term Benefit Advance and flat out blocked me from applying for a Hardship payment.
I also experienced another hardship and ran low on food.  So much so I was living off £1 packs of 20 cheap sausages from the supermarket so I could try to maintain weight as it was the cheapest protein I could find.  I lost 8kg in a month. Despite all of this I am going to keep fighting.   To gain back the ground I have lost over the last 9 months.   I have to at the moment because the decision makes no sense.  I will try to take it to Upper Tribunal on basis of error in the law around descriptor chosen.  I will just have to up my evidence game.  That’s why I have begun to Vlog.
I wanted to do this before but lacked the reason to motivate me and the confidence, but when in the trenches long enough you tend to be more willing to make a mad dash and charge directly at the problem.  They may have wounded me, but I am far from finished fighting.   I am going to try and handle this blow as best I can and keep moving forward.  I said before I will fight them or die trying and I still mean that.  I’m a little like the Grand ole Duke of York.  Whether on the top of the hill, at the bottom or halfway between up and down, I will fight them.  That’s how I have survived being Bipolar and the challenges I have faced before.   With that same fire I will now fight them, for justice.  For “Parity of Esteem”.
The way I see it, this is but a chapter of my life and the support I will fight so hard for is temporary anyway.  I want to be independent.  To be self sufficient.   I don’t want to have to apply for or receive help from the government.  I wouldn’t want to if we had a sane and human government in power, and I surely don’t with narcissistic sociopaths running the show.   Its no kind of life.  So I am hoping to learn to harness my hypomania, as others like me have done before.  I aim to be able to better manage my condition so I can free myself from a difficult situation and if this is able to help any others with mental health conditions in any way then that’s all the better and will motivate me further.
My needs during Hypomania:  I don’t need anyone with me going to familiar places during hypomania, but if going somewhere unfamiliar then I will.  It is a little embarrassing to admit that so publicly but I know I’m not the only one and I am forced to repeat it over and over to the DWP so why not by my own choice with a view to speaking out about something that still has a lot of stigma attached.  I will explain and show my reasons for my fluctuating needs in later videos.  You will see this in action, especially when I plan and follow the route of a  longer journey, with help, to an unfamiliar place (Caxton House) and prove I am able to leave my house.
Anyway I’m rambling again.  Its 6am now.  I’ve been up all night now I need to sleep.  Don’t feel tired but if you have Bipolar its important to always try to get some sleep when in hypomania

May’s election call driven by fear not confidence. Game on – move fast

Reblogged also.


may snap

This morning Theresa May announced that she will seek a General Election for 8 June.

Don’t believe the hype. The narrative in the media will be that this is a move born out of May’s confidence and Labour’s weakness – and that’s what we’re meant to believe.

May talks a good game – as long as she’s not facing Jeremy Corbyn over the despatch box – and she sought to cast this move, as you’d expect, as one stemming from her confidence in the UK’s ‘economic recovery’ that has supposedly ‘surpassed all expectations’.

She was lying through her teeth – and couldn’t help giving herself away.

For May, a general election now is all about Brexit – and her fear of the disaster the negotiations are going to be.

May implied that Labour was looking to block Brexit like the LibDems, but Jeremy Corbyn’s intelligent handling of the Article 50…

View original post 860 more words

Theresa May Calls Snap Election. After repeatedly saying that she wouldn’t. More Lies, Damned Lies and the Tories PART 2

This post is a continuation of my earlier post.  Lies, Damned Lies and The Tories which can be found here:

Instead of updating that post any further as I was.  I will continue it here as PART 2 in response to the calling for a snap election.   After repeating many times that she wouldn’t.  Must be something to do with the pending fraud case against the corrupt Tories.  It reeks of desperation and is a clear attempt to power grab and  create a mandate that will be used to bring the people of Britain further under the jackboot of fascism


She cant be trusted.  Over 600 people have taken their own lives, rather than continue to live in a country rules by the sociopathic Tories.  The rape clause is one of the most sickening, and inhumane policies we have ever seen and they defend it.  They have declared war on the elderly, the young, the disabled, the unemployed, those employed on low incomes, Doctors, Nurses, Police.  The Tory Government are fascist.  The numbers of deaths due to the cuts from benefits to social care exceed 100,000 in 7 years.   Without factoring in those dead due to the attacks on the NHS.   How many more will die under the next wave?

The Tory party are poisonous vipers.


Austerity is a giant constrictor snake that has wrapped itself around the most vulnerable people in society, and each time they take a breath, it wraps a little tighter.  Until they are suffocated and killed just for trying to breathe, to survive, to live.   In one of the richest and most powerful nations in the world.



The Tories are Human Rights abusers and want to scrap laws that could be used to hold them to account for Genocide, or at the very least Democide.

The Winds of Change are already starting to blow.  It is up to us to increase these winds until they become gale force, and blow the Tory party away from number 10.


In order to defeat the wicked Tories.  Its like The Wizard of Oz.  Ignore the booming propaganda and the media outlets who serve the Tories like flying monkeys serving the wicked witch.


To overcome the Tories you need to use your brain, heart and courage.  We also need to defend “Dorothy” from the rape clause.   From 0 hours contracts, from persecution if she were to become disabled.  To ensure a future in which, when elderly, she will not be abused and refused care and rounded up for assessments and dehumanised and demoralised.

Down with the Wicked Witch of the West.  Oppose her Blue flying monkeys.


Theresa May is the Wicked Witch of the West, the Tory Party is the most Wicked Wizard of Oz and they are working together to drive Britain back to the Victorian times.  With Tories wanting the elderly to work for below minimum wage picking fruit. What’s next?  Bringing back child labour?  Making children work for their school dinners during lunchtime?  They want the disabled to work for less than minimum wage too.  Enough is enough.


The solution is simple.   We must MELT THE MANDATE!


More coming soon!


Why are some Mental Health sufferers defending Psychopaths?



I have noticed a worrying trend among  some people in the Mental Health movements, of which I am a part.  The defence of sociopathy and psychopathy.  The refusal to recognise the reality of those two conditions, when compared to other mental health conditions.  The massive amounts of harm and damage these individuals cause to others.   A lot of the negative stigma that falls upon mental health sufferers in general is actually aimed at the “sufferers” of those two conditions.    In reality, the sufferers of those conditions are often the victims.  The conditions that seem to make a human being devoid of empathy or compassion for others are the most damaging conditions of all.   I don’t think anyone can deny a psychopathic serial killer does more harm to their victims, and families than they do to themselves.  Of course not all psychopaths kill people, some are content to destroy people emotionally, financially etc.   Some psychopaths don’t offend in such a way, and are somewhat benign.  However I don’t think we can blame people for being fearful of the “true psycho”.  This is a natural human fear, and some mental health sufferers who claim otherwise, I think are denying their own fear of such individuals.

I responded to someone speaking out about MH issues on Twitter.  They were angered by people conflating Psychopathy with Psychosis.  They claimed they are different.  They are different.  I replied in support of this fact.  However somehow they misinterpreted this, then sought to ignore the facts and defend psychopaths generally.

In response I added “Indeed psychosis is just experiencing a non-ordinary state of consciousness.  Psychopathy, and psychopaths don’t experience it“.    I then added “Psychopathy is very different to most mental illness. Mental illness hurts the sufferer.  Psychopaths seek out victims.”

This is all based on facts, and the studies into the minds of psychopaths.  I was actually watching a documentary on this last night.  The danger of psychopaths to society.  You only have to look into cases such as Jimmy Saville to see this.  A chronic and repeat abuser of vulnerable people, for his own twisted pleasure.

Now the original poster immediately attacked me for the above two statements.

They claimed I didn’t know what I was saying, that I should stop embarrassing myself and do some research.  Then claimed that I was stating myths.   The horrific crimes committed by such individuals are not mythological.  As the many victims can attest to.   They then deleted that comment, muted and blocked me.   That is hardly a good way to advocate for Mental Health.  By creating an echo-chamber of misinformed views.  The idea is to show that most suffers of mental health issues are not like those extreme cases.  Then defending the types of individual responsible for such things and including them under the umbrella of mental health is counterproductive.  The reason there is so much negative stigma around mental health, is because of the worst cases the “psychos”.   The term psycho refers to a psychotic killer usually in common use.  “Psycho” is not usually used to refer to somebody who is experiencing psychosis, although mistakenly it can be and mistakenly it can be equated with psychopathy.

However the individuals making this link are often uneducated on this issue, you cant blame people for ignorance.   You cannot also hope to improve public perception of mental health if you include such violent and harmful individuals alongside those that are not.  That only adds to the confusion.  We should differentiate, as the law and the medical profession does, between dangerous and non dangerous individuals, regardless of condition.  It just so happens that psychopathy/sociopathy is very dangerous to society as a whole.

The individual (Who I wont name) even made their post, asking for people to stop linking psychosis with psychopathy.   They completely failed to recognise I was defending that position by providing more information and statements to back it up.  Apparently this is not a good thing.   Mental Health suffers should just be listened to, not questioned or supported with evidence.  Of course this is absurd.  Debate and discussion is the way to solve these problems.  So as I have been prevented from responding, as someone who also has mental health issues.  I decided to address it here.

After being criticised, then muted and blocked, with no response to any of my points being offered.   This is often the case when the individual doesn’t know what they are speaking about.    I added some further information.  As my credibility was instantly attacked, and I was essentially being blocked from speaking on an issue I also have knowledge on.  I added that “I have experienced psychosis.  I have studied psychopaths.  Psychopaths are often dangerous and have no empathy.”

I also shared some of the statistics in which psychopaths/sociopaths.  Commit 50% of the violent crimes we see in society in general.  Despite being 1% of the population.  The prison population is around 20% psychopaths depending on different factors.

I think its important to separate those two conditions, from the rest of the mental health conditions, in which empathy is still functional.

I believe not doing so is actually dangerous and puts people at harm.  Its well known psychopaths and sociopaths are prone to extreme and dangerous behaviours, particularly seeking out those who are vulnerable like children or animals and then engaging in horrific abuse often including sexual abuse.  Does that mean all psychopaths are violent and will do this?  No, not necessarily.    However not all terrorists actually kill other people or detonate bombs.

The point the poster was making, was in protect of people using the term “psycho” to refer to psychopaths, but also the common mistake among the uneducated on the issue of also linking psychosis to psychopaths.   In reality psychopaths don’t experience psychosis.  They are quite sane.  They know right from wrong.  You could argue they are morally insane, not clinically.   Clinical insanity is called psychosis, usually involving hallucinations visual and/or auditory delusions.    It is defined as an abnormal condition that involved loss of contact with reality.    Those experiencing psychosis have difficulty with social interaction and impairment in carrying out daily life activities.

Psychopaths are not impaired in such a way.  In fact that have an advantage over most with mental illness.  They can be charming and manipulative.  They can blend in and people tend to project decent and humane qualities upon them that don’t exist.  They are well known for this.  Many people have been taken in by the charm offensive of a psychopath, only to realise later on and sometimes too late that the individual does not have the morality or decency or compassion that unites most of humanity.  Psychopathy and sociopathy are massive problems in society as these types tend to rise to the top of business and politics.  Anywhere where power over others is concentrated.   Psychopaths, devoid of the basic human  motivations are driven by lust of power and seeking of danger for them to feel alive.

This is just a brief piece to cover why I don’t think the mental health umbrella should be so welcoming and inclusive to all.  We have to make distinctions.

A similar thing is happening now in the LGBT movement.  I have seen rather worrying examples of the LGBT+ attitude being used as justification for paedophilia.  With those people advocating for it and using all the same points the LGBT movement used, even adding themselves into the movement with the LGBTP tag.    I believe we have to resist such things.  You see this in other movements too.  Feminism for example houses radical individuals who openly and vehemently hate men and who fight not for equality but for superiority, for imbalance instead of balance.    The same exists within mental health.  Some of the conditions included within that umbrella actually prey upon others with mental health issues.

The mental health movement needs to be aware of this, and understand some of the reasons why there is a stigma against those with mental health conditions.   In reality there is a big difference between a mental illness and the psychosis that is prevalent in some mental health conditions, and criminal or moral insanity displayed in others.  I think we need to draw that line a little more clearly to prevent dangerous individuals from being able to fly under the radar as vulnerable, or to achieve a protected and favourable status that will put them in a position to be able to abuse.

I myself suffer with a mental illness and although I think work needs to be done in overcoming stigma that is unfairly spread across the board, I don’t think we should be so arrogant as to assume all the stigma or negative stereotypes are complete falsifications that were made up to judge and hate upon people.  Some mental health suffers, even with conditions such as Bipolar or Schizophrenia can be incredibly dangerous to other people.  That has to be considered, and the genuine fears and concerns of the people need to be addressed.  The best way to do this is by educating and providing information.  So that people have a clearer understanding of the plethora of differences between those with mental health issues, as well as the similarity between the dangerous and harmful ones.

Lets face facts, the harmful and murderous and abusive types can be stereotypes and lumped in together as they all display the same negatives traits.  Wasn’t it this group of people that we invented prisons and secure facilities in the first place?  To prevent the horrors and harms that they can cause.  When you look closely you find that the decent, non violent and compassionate people of the world vary widely.  When you look at the negative side,  the worst of the worst, they are all pretty much the same.

Rebranding the horrific and abusive types into fluffy teddy bears that just need hugs and enough love is deluded.  Such individuals sometimes even come from homes in which they had plenty of those things available, and yet still turned out the way they did.  How do you explain that?  What about the brain scans that show individuals without the normal activity in the part of the brain that deals with emotion/empathy/compassion/ and be extension morality and humanity itself.  Usually its abhorrent to dehumanise people and such a tactic is often employed for political agendas, however is it bad to dehumanise people who clearly do not behave as most humans do?  In fact some of which behave worse than animals do.  Why do we lock serial killers in cages like dangerous animals?  It is because they are, in fact they are more dangerous than a wild animal because they possess all the powers and abilities a human being does, without the fail safes and checks and balances most people possess alongside those things.

I don’t think the goal should be to underestimate the worst of the worst, but to more clearly define where that line is.  To protect the undeserving from false, derogatory and harmful stigmas, while at the same time continuing to use them in the worst cases as opposed to underestimating the harm such individuals can cause.  If that means calling the worst of the worst, less than human.  So be it.   I would rather that than leave them with my kids, and hope they had changed and got the help and support they needed.  I am sure many others would too.

Below is some differences between Psychopaths and Sociopaths.  Sociopaths seem to be the types most likely to get into politics and enact horrific policies causing harm to the vulnerable, while pleasing the powerful and enabling them to ingratiate themselves.  Like most of the Tory party in the UK, and elements within other parties also.











The evidentially supported data protection breach by Coyne and my drunken 3am ramblings about the Labour party. The Right Wing of it anyway. Coming from the Left Wing and wanting to make the bird fly!

I was originally going to post this on a Skwawkbox comment.  I chose to instead create a post here as my drunken rant began to extend beyond what I feel is the limits of a normal comment. Venturing into the realms of drunken philosophy and ranting. I have instead linked to this post on the site.  Although linking to my blog, from Skwawkbox is potentially more attention seeking in reality and crassly self-promotional.  I decided against including drunken ramblings of a semi-madman amongst the concise and journalistically honourable intentions of the Skwawkbox.    Read on at your own risk.    Its safe to say this entire post merely touches upon the issue mentioned in the title, while veering off in random directions throughout due to my cognitive impairment.

Disclaimer: This post is emboldened and facilitated by drunken stupor.  Of course not so severe as to render communication impossible, but significant nonetheless. I should also add that I have thus far been described as a traitorous Jew.   A nutter.  A paranoid extremist. Told I should shut up and focus on my bipolar.  (In defence of all with MH issues I have my conditions listened on my Twitter profile, not as a badge of honour, but of honesty.)Imagine if the powerful had to declare their issues.  Not that the corrupt face them head on, they seem to follow the repressive, denial based route.  Like the celebrity aftershave some comedian mentioned.  Tony Blair….Denial!  Cant remember who to give credit to for a joke that isn’t mine. 

Don’t know why I am even doing a disclaimer.  I am drunk, and therein lies my alibi for disinhibited behaviour.  I’m not stumble-home-drunk.  I’m walk-home-don’t-feel-the-cold-at-all-drunk.  Why am I doing a disclaimer anyway? Oh yes for over-sensitive whining fucks who complain about minor details in an attempt to divert from the points made, usually anyway.

I am going to be quite honest and forthright.  My drunken state should be elaborated upon.  Although my vernacular is intact and concise, it is only due to the benefit of the red squiggly line that draws my myopic vision to the errors in my keyboard assault.  In the pursuit of a transparency that makes the average politician look legless in a marathon, I shall win, legly [Spell check insists, legally! Override ].  ha ha!  Legly! A play on words like the “bigly” Trumpism.

(Sorry genuinely legless people, amputees or the upright mobility challenged, a tasteless joke at your partial expense but more at my own in reality.  Fear not I am also disabled in a different way that when drunken, increases the likelihood of such comments that are far from politically correct and are meant without barbs. I am working on it.   You are free to mock me in retaliation.   My weakness is struggles with consistent confidence. To make visible the invisible in kind.  Its hard to be politically correct when merry and drunk I am trying to be inclusive).

So thusly (Regressing to more antiquated speech, embolden by the Napoleonic, oak-flavoured cognacinian [Allow me one fabricated word] inebriety.  For someone such as myself, not schooled in the all boys UK grammar system.  By choice actually  – Girls!  Sorry radical {I specified radicals, give me a break rational feminists I just achieved inception level dream-within-a-dream parenthesis circle, square and otherwise, and the entire tone of this post is tongue-in cheek} feminists, the main reason at 11 I chose a state school was motivated by an early and passionate interest in women!  Ha ha!].   Welcome to the muti-layered mind of a British Bipolar Jew in the “up phase”, who is also drunk.)

I  have wandered off, I have digressed from my transparency that far surpassed that of the political average in the UK.  So, I have consumed merely 350ml of a particular enjoyable cognac.  Well fuck it, Juncker (Probably misspelled, squiggly line but I cba to correct it) likes his cognac apparently.  So no reason to not let a Plebian man enjoy the privilege for a change.   The average careerist politician can only dream of such honesty when assisted by the lens of investigative journalism.    Such journalism can often reveal a vast difference in activities undertaken while inebriated compared to posting on a blog.   Such as solicitation of prostitutes of the male variety, colloquially known as “rent boys”.  Mentioning no names.  Keith Vaz.  Yes. You think I give a shit to call such people out?  Nope.   Like that sordid debacle didn’t bring Labour into disrepute!  It would be bad enough, but said fact is compounded by the fact you was sitting on a committee about matters concerning vice at the time.  I am positive many men (Some women too!) have sought out the services of a sex worker during their lives, and I don’t mean to specifically target the homosexual (Repressed!) element of the facts unduly or in a non accepting or disproportionate way but rather for the hypocritical element of the fake image presented to the public, in comparison to the reality of the man.  He represents just one example.    Nonetheless, I should probably get to the point.  Like the drunk at the end of the bar telling you how it can all be solved, I shall continue uninvited and unsolicited to say my piece, although separated from the reader by technology, space and time, fortunately for you.

So here is the copy and paste of the comment I was going to post on Skwawkbox.  Finally, I arrive at the point.

Here it is:

Breaching the DPA is a statutory offence.  An act is a statutory instrument in law.  A statutory offence has force of law. Therefore this is a criminal offence under the legal system.  Its as much a crime a drug possession is, which is also legislated against with an act (The Misuse of Drugs Act 1971).   I mention this, as I am currently under the perfectly socially and morally acceptable (In most circles) and legal drug that is alcohol, or nicotine, or caffeine.  All of which effect my consciousness at the present time.  Back ot the DPA.    The Data Protection Act.   Violations under the DPA carries with it fines, potentially very large.   In comparison under the Misuse of Drugs Act MDA carrying prison sentences.  Nonetheless it is still a criminal mater, like drug possession of an illegal drug.  Or misconduct under the effect of a legal drug (Drink)  In fact compared to simple drug possession, breaches of the DPA necessarily always involves victims, usually a huge number where DPA breaches occur as we know from precedent.   Whereas simple possession does not.  (Not the penalties would reveal this fact.)
This is a serious matter and Coyne should be removed from his attempt for such a serious issue, if we had a true democracy and not a fiat democracy.    This is a long comment
As many are saying, with Skwawkbox clearly pointing out with its articles, there is a clear attempt here from the Blairite, Right wing (Pro-Austerity, Pro-War, Pro-Power-and-money-for-them) faction.
The beauty is, people are seeing through this.  Tom Watson is even saying the C word.  Conspiracy.  I consider this an invitation to address the writing on the wall.   Well the simple definition of conspiracy is two or more people working together for a shared goal that is not publicised openly.  Conspiracy has been made to be a dirty word.  Whenever anyone calls it, they are tarred as nuts, crazy, fringe.  Yet when Watson calls conspiracy he doesn’t get the same tarring and feathering.  Funny that.  The reality is conspiracy is common.  Thinking otherwise, believing that two or more people never work together to achieve a private goal is the height of ignorance.  Its stupidity really.  Sorry to call a spade a spade.
While I am calling a spade a spade, I may as well go all in.  The Blarite faction are conspiring against the Labour membership, and our nation in a manner summed up with 4 letters.  Tory.  100-200, depending on your source are conspiring against 600,000+ and by extension the entire UK population of 64,000,000 to bring about conditions that are favourable to this small group, to continue an austerity based, military intervention based, right wing agenda.
The good news is, for those with the eyes to see, its obvious now.  What has been happening since the days of Nye Bevan.  There are Tories within the Labour party.  Red Tories (Look at their bloodstained hands, the way they vote for wars their sons wont be fighting and neither will they- Chicken hawks).  Labour is a left-wing party, why does it need a right wing? Who does that benefit?  The Tories sure as FUCK do not have a left wing, and the decent and compassionate among their ranks amount to a feather not a wing.    I know the Blairites even read this blog and are running scared.  Well they should be.  Though they are nimble like a zebra, and able to split things into black and white to suit their agenda, when the sleeping lion awakes.  Or rather when the 600,000 awake, and the 64,000,000 awake.  They don’t stand a chance.  I “almost” feel sorry for them.   We will remember.  Just like Iraq and the 1,000,000 dead.  We wont forgot, just like they wont.
They say if the means for a peaceful revolution are not available to an oppressed people, then a violent revolution will ensue (Like the French Revolution).  Luckily for us, we have all the infrastructure and interconnectivity to bring about such a peaceful revolution if you consider the level of development we are at in post modern times.  Its because of this I have the strength to carry on and face the onslaught of fascism, the spectres of austerity.  Everything we need to solve the problem is on hand.  We just need to collectivise.  I believe it will happen just as the 600,000 created a political miracle by joining to support Corbyn.  I support him.  I think we all know though, Corbyn is just the beginning, the entrance to a true democracy in this country, by the people, for the people.
 Yes that sounds Americanised.  Its intentional.  We need a British constitution to protect rights of British people, British workers, British families.  The elite bosses, the owners don’t need the same level of help due to the fact they are established and set-up for life.  They have already
Blairites lost millions of votes, Blairites have bloodstained hands.  Blairites also, are partly responsible for ISIS.  If you bomb a nation like Iraq and engage in systematic torture and abuse of its people, you create blowback.  Blair had to stand down, in disgrace.  They vote FOR this shit and with Blair gone they continue to, with Blair’s other puppets.
For the vast majority of people in the UK, the best way for us to achieve this is by liberating and freeing the Labour party from this kind of thing.  Support the McDonnell amendment.  Support Corbyn.   Create a true opposition to the Tories, but ridding those that vote with them from the only chance for the UK to begin to care for its people.  Labour will become democratic far easier than it would be to convert the right to democracy instead of the faux democracy we have now.
Ok well this was meant to be a brief comment, but its the weekend and I have imbibed enough cognac to embolden my British spirit with some Dutch courage.
Anyway, I’m done *mic drop* Peace motherfuckers!  Its 3:47 am for me now, goodnight!
P.S:  Sorry about the MF bomb.  I don’t mean to imply actually copulation with a mother, its just a bombastic expression to end on, which I have significantly undermined by stating motherfucker in the first place.   I’m just having a laugh, being satirical and taking the piss.   (British expression, culturally sound).  Bloody oversensitive overly progressive Fascist] fucks!  See I de-gendered it in the end.
Ok I’m done.  Time for excessive urination, and the sleep of blood detoxification.  Ok.  Finishing the last drop, then sleep.  Some water first 1 pint! For the rehydration!  Always plan a couple of moves ahead in the chess game of life. Who would have thought sometimes you can find answers at the bottle of a bottle.  Haha!  Don’t quote me on that.    Too much cognac.  Still the symbol on the bottle could symbolise an Ace of Spades, a hidden hand, a hidden message.  Quite an achievement compared to some of my local inebriated neighbors who somehow manage to slide down parked cars into a heap, needing to be pulled to their feet.  Although hypocrisy prevents me from judging such behaviour too harshly in response to the mad world we find ourselves encapsulated within.
Shaun Phoenix – Who may well be hung over in a few hours.  Thank fuck for spellcheck.  Peace.
P.P.S –  This post is not shown in the order it was written.  More rational earlier, less rational later.   Earlier to later defined by amount of alcohol consumed.   Well my shrink did say I am ok to enjoy on special occasions.   I will justify it retrospectively, like a Tory.  If it flies for them bastards!
P.P.P.S Ok, so I included a can of the Red Bull.  Caffeine being dopaminergic helps focus, and is rarely considered the drug it is (Comparable to cocaine, actually.  Sorry.  Inconvenient truths abound when disinhibited.)  Not that I am not trying to advocate drug use of any kind other than legal and responsible among adults.  However, under the heavy mantle of claiming transparency and honesty, it is prudent for me to add, I was going to say confess to alcohol use but fuck you!  Its legal use, I am not doing anything wrong, no confession necessary.  Far worse uses of alcohol are practiced regularly in many town centres on a Friday-Saturday Night/Early morning.    War on Some Drugs (Users) Proselytisers, I should also add.  I am a recovered addict, including a couple of substances I previously used that were not, lets say, sanctioned.  In my defence,  I combat Bipolar Type 2,ADHD, Anxiety daily, undiagnosed during my heydays of Hunter SS Thompson style experimentation.  I am on the mend now however, only imbibing alcohol upon occasion.  It was a struggle breaking free of the octopus arms of addiction,  one day at a time. I fall off the wagon for occasionally recreational drug usage, I have managed to confine it to occasional, aforementioned Napoleonic (Strategic and intermittent) alcohol usage.   The most socially, legally and culturally acceptable type in Britain.   No-one is perfect.  Sometimes a reduction in inhibition is beneficial to more than just the de-inhibitor.  Alcohol being benign in comparison to the harder options.    Jekyll and Hyde, after all was written on  cocaine binge.
P².S  (Yes I googled that, its Alt-Numpad 253 for ² which is amazing when intoxicated!   It does other ones too. I spent 10 mins looking at the possibilities of that – ADHD is a double edged sword indeed) For those with MH issues, or drug/drink issues this constitutes both progress and a momentary relapse simultaneously, an interesting dichotomy.   Seeking therapy and medical assistance is ongoing….. 😉 <— *wink*   Sleep time……5am, again!   For those with Bipolar, this is how you know you are experiencing Hypomania.  Able to stay up late and still function even with liquid based distractions.  Goodnight.  Again.









On Ken Livingstone and a differing view to David Baddiel’s critique

I have written this post in response to the post David Baddiel made about the storm over Kens comments.  You can read that here:

I am responding to Baddiel as his post is well thought out and written and I understand his view and he is a public figure and a comedian, so he is used to being critiqued.    However my view is a bit different from the more mainstream view, and his being reasonably explained and closer to the mainstream on the issue of Zionism itself.  So this is essentially kind of  a critique of a critique of what someone said, and what people are saying about that.   I refer to David’s points a little but that’s really just a starting point in explaining why I am not a Zionist Jew.   Probably the correct type for the type of Jew I am, if you want to understand it that way is that I am a Diaspora Jew, or a British Jew.  I see Britain, as my homeland and I mean ancestrally, as my Jewish heritage landed here in 1066 from my studies.  During the 11th century Normandy invasion.  With William the Conqueror who brought  some of the first Jews to Britain (Well, in larger numbers technically).  So that’s not far off a thousands years.  I believe my British heritage succeeds my older Jewish heritage so I don’t believe I have a claim to live in Israel.  I would love to visit one day though, when a peaceful solution is being implemented in the area as I believe there would be great potential then.  So I do care about Israel, but I also care about Palestine and hope for a peaceful two state solution.

I will encapsulate my main points here though so those who don’t want to consider a counter argument can stop reading.

  • I don’t accept or believe the word Zionist is interchangeable with the word Jew.  Not all Jews are Zionist,  not all Zionists are Jews.  Non Jews can and do, work with and support Zionist groups.  Combining the two serves a divisive agenda.  People are quick to accuse those who criticise the Israeli’s of being against the Jews.  Yet Israel is the Jewish state.   However not all Jews are Israeli.  The only other group seeking to create a state like this is ISIS in its attempts to found an Islamic state.
  • I don’t believe Hitler was a Zionist, I believe he supported it temporarily with nefarious hidden intentions that he later acted upon. By referencing Hitler, I also generally refer to the Nazi party itself with him as the figurehead of it.  The captain of the ship so to speak.  As most tend to do when discussing this.
  • I don’t believe Zionism is the same as being Jewish, or the same as practicing the religion of Judaism.  There are separate, but overlapping things.
  • Due to the above points I can view Zionism as a bad or flawed ideology without saying Jews are bad and believe others should be able to do this too without being labelled racist, or placed under racist suspicion surveillance, or smeared.  We should debate the points but collectively point out the radical and racist elements on both sides (Yes both sides of any argument can harbour racists.  Shocking.)
  • Consider the current calls by Israel, of the “civilian assassination” of BDS members.  In which it advocates smearing and destroying the reputation of anyone who opposes Israel.  This is exactly what we are seeing, and countless people seem to buy into this fascist, undemocratic agenda because they think they are defending a minority that needs their help.   A civil assassination basically means, doing anything short of killing the individual.   So I cant find myself supporting Zionism, when this is the type of militant, cult-like mentality that I see.
  • Lastly, Israel does not need defending from others. It has an undisclosed amount of nuclear weapons.  Its secrecy around nuclear weapons matches that of states such as North Korea.     Most other nations earn respect by declaring their arsenal according to treaties and conventions, including the US, UK and Russia that all declare their nuclear weapons, and allow inspections.  Israel, like North Korea, does not.  Like North Korea.  If you do your history, extremists among their camp have directly threatened both Germany (Revenge for WW2) and nations such as Britain with nuclear strikes.  This is supposed to be an ally.  Not only that, Israel helped the apartheid (racist) state of South Africa to create a nuclear bomb, thereby proliferating nuclear weapons.
  • Zionism believes all Jews should return to Israel.   I will go into this in a later post on Zionism, proving quotes from Zionist leaders to support.   Its advocates have even made derogatory statements about diaspora Jews who chose not to return to Israel.  Personally.  I think its an incredible stupid idea to encourage all Jews to gather in one place.  The very people claiming Jews are under assault, and want to prevent the extinction of the Jewish people, also claim the best way to go about this is to congregate in one place, concentrated in a very small place capable, technically at least, of being totally wiped out by any overt strike against that area.  So strategically, tactically, its a dumb move.  The odds of continuing survival of any group, is better served by being spread out, which the diaspora achieved.  Having a very small minority of the total population of humanity concentrated on a pinhead, is dumb.  In fact, if there is a hidden agenda somehow aiming to wipe the Jews out, being in Israel is the worst place you could possibly be by that logic.
  • Considering the above.  Its rational, logical and reasonable for a large group of people, Jewish or not are going to be angry, suspicious and critical of both Zionism and Israel.  It is arrogant, counterproductive, weak, lazy and telling to conveniently brand all these people anti-Semites.  Not to mention Bibi, who claims to be the emissary of the Jewish people. I wont begin to address the sociopathic arrogance of such a statement. He may be the elected leader of the Israeli’s, but to extend that to the world Jewry is insane.  When did world Jewry unite to elect him?  They didn’t.  He doesn’t speak for me.   Soon after the Paris attacks, he turned up trying to get French Jews to flee to Israel in fear.  Capitalising on a horrific and targeted attack against Jews, to recruit for his Zionist cause.   The French Jews sung the French national anthem back at him.  Brilliant.
  • To me, as a Jew Zion is in the eye of the beholder. To some this is Israel.  To others its the USA, France, Germany, etc.  To me, its Britain.  This is my homeland, the land in which I was born and my ancestors for a thousands years before me.  Of course to religious Jews, Zion is the promised land.  Which the True Torah Jews claim, is supposed to be returned by God when the messiah come.  So that doesn’t mean Israel, unless the messiah has returned.  It also said the promised land would be given, not taken.
  • Lastly, Israel exists because of the Balfour declaration which was signed in 1917 way before WW2.  So Zionists during WW2 were working towards an agenda that predated the war and Hitler’s rise to power.  The agreement,  in which the British government of the time (Still in the business of taking others peoples nations and occupying them for their benefit) decided to give Palestine, to the Jews.  Here is an extract of said agreement.  “His Majesty’s government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavors to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country.”  The most ironic part is the bit mentioning not prejudicing the rights of the existing non Jewish communities in Palestine.  It seems they forgot that part.

I can say all of this easier than non Jews though.  Anyone who is not Jewish that does as I am doing now will be attacked, will be called an anti-Semite.  I reject this fascistic smear tactic.  I am not accusing all who do it of consciously  doing such, many do so out of paranoia and fear.  Its time to toughen up and stop being so pathetic.   It should not be easier for a Jew to have free speech than a non Jew.    Just as Sir Gerald Kaufman could say it easier than Ken Livingstone can now.  I don’t like that difference, the separation.   I think its racist against non Jews.  Of course some Jews would claim its impossible to be racist against non Jews.  I consider them the most racist and such a belief betrays their idea of racial superiority.  It smacks of racial superiority you see in all groups.  White supremacy does exist, as does Black supremacy but the one most denied and ignored is Jewish supremacy.   It does exist, it is an issue.  Equal to all racism and doctrines of racial superiority over other groups.

The idea that Jews are “The Chosen People” or “The Chosen Ones” can amplify this.  Oddly, there are many non religious Jews, atheists who still claim to be “Chosen” and that “God gave us Israel”.  So they don’t believe in the Jewish God, or the religion but they believe they are still the chosen people, and that God gave them Israel.

Although  I gave the example of the late  great Gerald Kaufman, he was smeared a lot.  Not to the extent that a non Jew would be.  He was even called an anti-Semite (Although it didn’t stick) which I have not encountered  yet myself, I’m sure it will happen though.  Being Jewish means I get less attacks compared to non Jews.  So far I have been called a paranoid extremist.  Like ISIS then basically, the biggest example of paranoid extremists, a bit of a leap.  What Jew likes to be called a paranoid extremist for having their own individual view and studying their history? This isn’t a bit anti-Semitic? Its not nice to call a Jew paranoid either.  They don’t see the irony.   Couldn’t the same be said about Zionists?  Incredible paranoia and suspicion is displayed by many followers of Zionism.  When it comes to being treated in an anti-Semitic way by Zionists, I don’t take it very seriously because it comes from ignorance, lack of understanding and a fascist standpoint.  I have also been called a fake Jew.  Is it anti-Semitic to the point of being racist?

I don’t think so.  Its on the line. Others may think it is,  as it was an attack of sorts.  However its not the same as a general statement like Ken made.  These are personal attacks in a way what I just described, worse than what Ken said by far.  I don’t want to identify and mob the individual though.  I’ll just ignore and address it and move on.  Consider though, they was telling me what my history is, and they  knew I was Jewish while they were not.   They was angry that I had a different view to their view of my history as the issue was a Jewish issue being discussed.  I have a different view compared to most other Jews they think they are defending. They seem to think all Jews are the same in thought or organised into one mass which is not the case.  Isn’t that Jewish conspiracy stuff?

I could assume they think that.  But I don’t know that.    I must be some weird aberration to them.   I was also called a nutter by another.  A third told me to Shhh and focus on my bipolar.   So two attacks on my sanity.   I don’t think we should find these people who attacked me directly then film them while screaming “RACIST!”  Like John Mann.  The only thing disgusting about that video was the way John Mann behaves like a Thug who just strolled out of a pub with a bone to pick.  Totally disgraceful raving about Mein Kampf like that in public is NOT offensive?  I thought that was worse than what Ken said.

So its not ok to discuss WW2.  Its not ok to mention Hitler, all incase you hurt a Jewish person.   Yet if a non Jew does mention it, then its perfectly ok for you to attack them, call them hateful and slanderous things with no evidence based upon one statement.  Ok to harass them in gangs and effectively “gang stalk” that person.  I thought that’s how fascism works.  It should be debated, if the people doing these attacks don’t want civilised debate then surely they have something to fear from a fact, and evidence based approach.  I just fins it odd that these “Jewish defenders” seem to invoke the power of the courts, of a Judge.  It smacks of an extremist self-righteousness that equals the real racist hatred they claim to oppose.  When an individual or group is averse to the facts, and tries to brush them aside I cannot help but be suspicious of that groups intentions.

Then again, many people get political inspiration from Mein Kampf, especially the propaganda arm of the work.  Isn’t it hilarious to those with the eyes to see John Mann, behaving like a true fascist, shouting and slandering, smearing and accusing someone of being a Nazi sympathizer.  That’s a very serious allegation.  Its hateful.  Not only that, it makes a mockery of, marginalises and attacks Jews like me with a different view than John Mann’s on Jewish history or specific events.   His reading and study of it cant have been that good because he is attacking on false premises anyway.  Its a political stunt, nothing more. Designed to discredit and further an agenda.  Jumped upon opportunistically. That’s not proper conduct for an MP.  I know who I would rather have near young children.  The man who can keep his composure and not match hatred and bile with more of the same.

Others are also receiving this type of attack, when they don’t deserve it.  The judge, jury and executioner approach to anti-Semitism is just wrong and makes the problem worse, not better.    Especially if its used to shut down debates and discredit someone.  Such vitriol still would not be helpful even in extreme cases, condemnation and denouncing it is enough and if it is truly hate and racism, then that is illegal and can be dealt with in a court of law.  Back to the issue at hand and why a debate and discussion is needed.  To avoid events like that and the furore in general whenever this comes up.  It will come up again.  Until its resolved.

I feel having a discussion or debating points is a vital part of democracy and the best way to come to a clearer understanding of differing views on matters such as anti-Semitism.  We cant have off limits subjects that cant be touched.  It has to be addressed.  To get over bad experiences in our personal lives we know from the understandings we have of the mind and emotions you don’t bottle it up, you address it and talk about it.  Historical events with emotional charge are no different.  I believe it should be an open discussion.  In this format those with truly hateful views will stand out, and will expose themselves under the rigour of debate.  However I feel some that don’t deserve it are getting thrown in with racists and tarred with the same brush unnecessarily.  It usually has a political undercurrent and agenda attached to it, and other people do it for other reasons, but its a politicised start to the scandal.    Usually taking down or marginalising a political opponent with differing views on other subjects.   If something is continuing to be a problem then it has to be talked through with different views presented to come to a clear understanding generally and a way to move forward and come to a compromise.

Ken is not alone in his views.  He speaks for other people too.  Its a fact that people want to deny, but its a fact all the same.  It would have been more honourable, and respectable and civilised to challenge Ken to a debate on his views, to discuss it in an open forum.  We have afforded this to much more extreme ideologies than someone commenting on WW2.   In fact Godwin’s Law dictates that all conversations will eventually go there but you must not go there!  It kind of makes going there more necessary doesn’t it?  Facts are facts, I don’t see what the problem is.  Debate will sort the wheat from the chaff on both sides on any issue.  Lets not do that though.

On the comments of Ken.  There are many different positions on this issue but it can be reduced into a binary of support Ken’s comments or denouncement of Ken’s comments.  The issue here is the blanket accusations of anti-Semitism that are being thrown around by some of the people that feel offended by the comments made. I fall into the support Ken group, but for different reasons than what is commonly being portrayed. (Racist and negative assumptions usually)  Like David Baddiel, I am also a non Zionist Jew.  I also don’t think religion should be the basis for statehood.   So I am in agreement on this point.

I also agree anti-Semitism is a problem that needs to be addressed but I don’t think focusing on anti-Semitism is the answer.  Focus, I believe should be on racism as a whole, that’s what it really is.  That’s what anti-Semitism is and means today in modern vernacular (More on the historic soon) a form of racism.  Tackle the weed at its root, don’t pull leaves off one area.  Its a universal issue that, when addressed as such will unite instead of being so divisive.  So it can be treated the same as all types of racism, and not given a particular focus or hyping up the situation.  The reason I say this is because anti-Semitism is a politically hijacked term anyway in my view.  Its politicised and its meaning has diverged from its true root.  I don’t think its helpful.  Attack the true root, racism itself.

Some information about the history of the term anti-Semitism.  Now it is widely accepted and understood that anti-Semitism is now the commonly used term to describe racism against Jews.  However I question the word itself as its origin refers to the Semitic language group which includes groups other than Jews. Including Palestinians ironically, although irony is a poor choice of word I cant think of another.  Its meaning has changed over time to refer to just Jews.   Its not unreasonable for someone to wonder why the Palestinians cannot be referred to as Semites, when coming upon that knowledge for the first time in their education.  I did.  Its reasonable and logical to have the thought.  This type of questioning however can be met with fierce controversy, yet recent DNA studies show a closer link between the Jews and the Arab Palestinians than to that of those from the Arab Peninsula or Arabic speakers of North Africa.  So its a confusing thing.  Yet anyone who comes upon it, who dares to mention such things can be, and usually is attacked.  What I just explained can be defined as anti-Semitic sentiment.  The accusation would be that I am trying to say Jews are not Semites, which of course I never said.  I am saying, historically at least Jews were not the only Semites, and I’m intellectually curious as to why this seems to have changed.  I wont get into that now its not directly relevant to this post.   Freedom of thought and speech allows any individual, should they desire to investigate and ask questions in the pursuit of knowledge.  My point is we cant assume everyone is racist for thinking, asking questions.  Especially is the person is not able to articulate their points satisfactorily, especially over a tweet or brief statement.

My issue with the whole thing is I believe the statement “Hitler supported Zionism” is totally factual, in and of itself.  I don’t believe its an interpretation.  An interpretation of this statement I have seen made by many who have a problem with Ken’s statement is “Hitler was a Zionist”,  now that is an interpretation.  Many are changing the words, likely as a result of confirmation bias.  I have seen entire articles pinned on the “was” statement and not the “supported” statement.  The supported statement is a historical fact.  Anything other than this is an attempt to politicise the situation.  I’m not saying everyone doing this has that agenda, rather that was the origin of the bandwagon many have hopped onto.  I think we should focus not on the muddying of the waters on this, but instead explain the fact with its accompanying facts.  So it can be understood.  It was reasonable for Zionist Jews, in Germany to make that deal.  It was necessary, it was smart.  It was not ideal but there was no better option given what we know now.

The reason it is a fact.   The reason people are fixated on this point.  The reason it cannot be interpreted other than “support” is because the level of cooperation that did take place during the Havaara agreement cannot be reasonably explained as anything other than support.   By definition, any agreement entered into is a form of contract, you don’t enter into an agreement and then claim you didn’t support it.  However, the fact is not all the facts. It is not the whole picture.  Metaphorically its a factual puzzle piece, wholly complete and accurate, but there are other facts.  When you enter into a contract, lets say marriage for a fun example, you cant then claim to have never supported it.  Well you can, but no-one will accept that.   You sign the line, you support it.  Now there is the element of duress that can be argued.  This can only be argued from the position of accepting the fact however, i.e. “Yes, Hitler supported Zionism.  However……” then elaborate as is done on any other issue. Why does this one have to be treated differently?  There are other sensitive and difficult conversations that are handled this way.

Back to before the war and the reason for signing the Havaara.  The German Jews of pre-WW2 Germany, didn’t have much choice.  History is very clear on the fact that those 60,000 plus who left and were able to salvage some portion of what they had earned and saved to Palestine were the lucky ones.  Those who didn’t support the Havaara and participate in it had a far worse fate only a few escaped from.  The Havaara was the best deal available to them.  It was controversial.  As a Jew personally, had I been alive then with a family to look after  I would have supported it and been a Zionist under those conditions!   I am not scared to say it or ashamed.   I am not a Zionist now .  I would have been then.  If I was living in Germany then and I started to see all the warning signs and there was a way out.   I don’t think this is shameful.  Yes its controversial to some, it was at the time.  I think many people, Jewish or not can image themselves in WW2 Germany, and lets face it WW2 was fucking terrible for humanity overall.  Its human history, no-one has a higher right to it than others, every group went through their own hell in that time period.

The reason I am not a Zionist.  Is I believe that Zionism is comparable in a way, to Feminism and Black Lives Matter.  Its not a perfect comparison, but its workable.   They are all politically motivated and active movements with a specific and comparable end goal.  To achieve a desired state in the world, and then the defend it.  The problem I have, is with the defend it part.  At what point is it decided that it has been achieved?  I don’t think that happens.  I think these movements will achieve their goals, but the organisation and its followers, and believers take on a quasi-religious type of zeal the longer the movement goes on and the movements end up becoming more divisive and begin to harm the very people it was designed to protect and empower.   What I am basically saying is,  most movements and ideologies have a sell by date.  They expire.  If you keep them around longer than needed, they go bad.  I am not saying that we should destroy them, in fact you cant because you cannot destroy an ideology.

That which cannot be destroyed, can change form though.  I think that’s what is needed.  I mention Feminism and Black Lives Matter as specific movements to give a comparison.  Both those movements are developing radical elements, that are committing the very same infringements that they started to stop.   Some Black Lives Matter radicals have become Black supremacists, to whom only Black Lives Matter.  The logical evolution of Black Lives Matter is All Lives Matter, how long this evolution takes is unknown but that would move towards a more unified goal where racism against any race is treated equally.  Feminism opposes sexism, yet the radical element have emerged as extreme sexists, the most extreme openly calling for attacks on men.

You also experience the phenomenon of false flag events.  This has happened in the radical cases in all 3 groups.  Radical Racist Jews have faked anti-Semitic attacks to push an agenda, Radical Feminists have faked sexist attacks on themselves to push and agenda and Radical Black people have faked racism to push an agenda.  These people are militant and see themselves as soldiers fighting for a cause.  Such people when radical or extreme enough are not concerned with facts, or truth but only with reasserting to themselves and the world around them, their view of reality as the only valid and true view.  All these radicals stifle debates, don’t want to be questioned and deny proven facts.

All three movements I mentioned can evolve into better things.  Black Lives Matter into All Lives Matter fighting racism on all fronts, Feminism into Equalism fighting sexism against men or women.  Zionism into something new also.  I cant think of a name for that, not that it necessarily has to change.   I feel the logical conclusion of Zionism should be a move from the ideology of fighting for and defending a Jewish state at any cost, to celebrating and embracing it, in peace with its neighbours, a renaissance of sorts.  That may seem to idealistic but it is possible.  In the grand scheme of it, all the ideology and religions of the world will be swept from the face of the earth anyway as it goes through its cycle.  Its all temporary, its just a matter of time.

So that’s why I am not a Zionist.  It doesn’t mean I don’t support Israel’s right to exist.  I am not a feminist.  It doesn’t mean I don’t support women’s rights, and men’s rights equally.  I don’t support Black Lives Matter, because I believe All Lives Matter.

There are other, more complicated issues I have with Zionism, but now is not the time for addressing these.  I will do this in a later post.

Thanks for reading



Today I got a letter from the DWP

Unavoidable spoiler:  This is an April Fools post.

Today I got a letter from the DWP.  It said sorry for all the harm that I had been caused.  The DWP as a whole have recently undergone a crisis of conscience.  It explained the epiphany that suddenly came over the department as a whole.    They woke up from their delusion  and suddenly they have seen the light.  They realise all the harm and injury and loss they have caused over the last several years, they even realise how they must now extend the olive branch to the people they have harmed.  They spoke about Atos and mentioned the other groups.  They went into detail about how bad an idea this truly was, what a great amount of money was wasted.  How so many disabled people were abused and harmed by the DWP’s policy.  The DWP has taken a stand, and wants to expose the actions of those that led it down such a path.  The Tory MPs, and all MPs who supported and covered for them.

The DWP has requested to be given immunity by the people, and in return it has agreed to testify against Atos, the Tories and all those who orchestrated such a callous and cruel system.  The DWP no longer wants to be part of the systematic human rights abuses it has inflicted upon so many.  The DWP has sent this letter out to everyone apparently. It just seems mine arrived a day early for some reason.

The letter goes on to claim that the DWP, and most of its employees have been held hostage by the government, and forced to do their bidding.  Many feared for their jobs, and livelihood if they did not tow the Tory line, and use said line to strangulate people in order to force them off benefits, or off the face of the earth entirely.  The DWP admits that some of its employees have enjoyed, and relished the task of being abusive, narcissistic and deceptive in their job roles, and the DWP will be handing these people over to stand trial.    The DWP however urges us to offer protection to those good people. within the DWP, who despite the dark times tried their best to be kind, compassionate and helpful.  Those people should not be tarred with the same brush as the more narcissistic types.  We stand on the edge of a bright new future, when all the shameful deeds committed in the darkness will be brought to light.

The DWP has asked for forgiveness, understanding, and the support of the people during this difficult time.  It hopes it can be redeemed and reformed.  The DWP will now end all its private contacts, and provide evidence allowing cases to be brought against the groups such as Atos, etc.  Instead the DWP will be seeking to pay the billions of pounds wasted, given to private enforcers such as Atos, and instead divert it to the NHS.  The DWP is coming together to help us save the NHS, with a great funnel of funds, and a new role.  The NHS should have been the group entrusted with this from the start, and the DWP confirms this was avoided due to the pesky nature  of Doctors having taking oaths to do no harm.

The DWP are planning to recruit an entire wave of disabled people, to act as consultants in the new system, and to make sure the changes give both parity of esteem to all with disabilities and ensure those being affected by these new changes are involved.

The DWP have a huge amount of evidence stored, and are able to review all the recent cases over the last several years.  The DWP knows that some people deserved more than they were given, so will be looking over everything again, and making changes to decisions resulting in higher awards.  There will be no review resulting in a lower award for anyone.  It will either go up, or remain the same.

The DWP have also decided to create a “ceasefire”.  For the next 3 years, until general election the DWP will not be performing any new assessments.  The system will function as it did in the past,  with medical evidence being used.  This will save a lot of money and give people some time to heal from the brutal regime of the past.  The DWP have also announced that sanctions will be stopped, effective immediately.    Until a better, more humane system can be designed.  The rollout of Universal Credit will also be halted, and the rules in this area will be made more lax, to help those struggling with this also.

The DWP are prepared to go on strike to ensure the Tory government bow to this shocking and unprecedented move.  This should ensure their success.

So everyone, send letters of thanks and admiration to the DWP for finally coming to their senses, and joining with the people.  Ending the systematic abuses of human rights they had been carrying out in their service to the Tory government and their plans to enforce austerity no matter who many died.   The tide has turned and a new dawn awaits us all.

Its just a shame it had to come on this date, of this month, of all dates.

April Fools! Of course the DWP said no such thing, in fact its quite the opposite, they will continue to encircle the disabled and vulnerable, squeezing ever tighter, like a giant anaconda every time we take a breath, it squeezes a little tighter until suffocation by constriction is achieved.



Lies, Damned Lies and the Tories

This piece is still in progress and will cover and expose as many Tory lies as possible.  If you have any more examples please contact me or leave a comment and I will add it to this post.

Here we have May, lying her arse off, trying her best to feign empathy.   May has said herself she doesn’t like the term “empathy”.  Which is quite telling.  She prefers “understanding”.  There is a vast difference.  You can understand an atrocity without caring about it at all.  An extreme example would be to highlight the fact serial killers like to understand how the body works, as they destroy one.  Lack of empathy is characteristic with sociopathic or psychopathic people who express this personality corruption (Its not a mere Disorder in my view.  Disorders mainly cause suffering for the patient, corruption causes suffering for the corrupt ones victims)  Empathy is the most human of emotions.  It is the very cornerstone of our humanity.  The people incapable of feeling empathy are usually sociopathic or psychopathic or at the least heavily narcissistic and prey upon other people for their own ends.  They use others, they abuse others and the deny all of it.   Look at the pained and forced facial expressions, the monotone delivery and the lack of passionate body language.  This is not how someone who believes in what they say speaks.   Watch her when she speaks about something she does care about, the Tories. She is a fanatic.  As are many of the Tory party.  I even have serious doubts about all Tories, as what sort of person is happy to keep such terrible company.   This is a perfect example of a barefaced liar.  This is an example of a politician who says one thing, and does another.  This is a form of propaganda in which she sets the narrative that Mental Health can be solved and addressed with a cup of tea and some fucking biscuits.   No you daft deluded sociopath.  It needs funding.  The very thing she is intentionally cutting and this video is PR spin to detract from that.  The general theme here is that its down to the people to help those with mental health issues.

This is true in a way.  That’s one of the main reasons the people are taxed so heavily (Well, the common people, of course).  So that the money can be spent in a variety of ways, one of  which includes the welfare system, the NHS and other things in place to justify the tax system in the first place.  Yet notice something she leaves out of her speech.  Something a Tory always mentions, its on the tip of the tongue, the forefront of their mind.  Money!

She makes not one mention of funding, but uses vague statements like “We can all do more”.

Remember this is the lunatic only too happy to press the nuclear button and launch a revenge terror attack of unfathomable death and destruction on a civilian population of another nation, she was more gung-ho about this than even Trump was.  Its strange to see a Tory give a straight answer.  Usually they avoid answering Yes or No on most issues.  She made the exception here, and jumped at the chance to express she has no qualms in killing millions of civilians indiscriminately in a revenge terror-attack.  She does not realise that it is M.A.D or Mutually Assured Destruction.  Its total lunacy.  Its like saying yes I have a shotgun, and I will shoot anyone who attacks me.  What is the point in having a shotgun as a deterrent if you don’t use it?

What is the point in having anti-fraud laws, or corruption laws if we don’t use them?  What kind of deterrent is the law to these corrupt and heartless elite if we don’t use it?

Also remember the simple fact that May was Home Secretary and was in charge of the inquiry into child abuse, into paedophilia in the highest places of power.   Then suddenly she is the PM, and she makes no mention of this scandal now.  She never brings it up.  Any decent human being would not avoid that issue, and would be raising the issue themselves if they came into power as the leader of a nation.  Yet she goes the same way as Blair, who issued the D-Notice blocking the press from talking about paedophilia in Westminster.  Like Thatcher, who covered up similar scandals during her reign.

Not to mention the Tory election fraud.  Watch them lie and claim their “alternative facts”.  They didn’t co-operate and claimed that they did.  They asked to have the investigation stopped and did everything they could to pervert the course of justice and sweep this under the rug.    May is fact checked at the end of this video by the brilliant investigative journalism team at Channel 4, who put the other mainstream media outlets to total shame, especially the BBC who sat on their hands while Channel 4 covered the Tories rotten arses for a year before the BBC was being forced to cover it, as minimally as possible.

To summarise, she lies here several times:

  1. She claims they cooperated – LIE!  They did all they could to delay this, to push for the time limits for action to pass so they could get off with no action at all.  They failed.  The Electoral Commission had to threaten to take Tories to High Court
  2. She claims they received a fine, but didn’t mention that the fine was the maximum that could be given, and was a lot less than the amount they defrauded the elections by.
  3. She didn’t mention the Electoral Commission, after fining them as heavily as it could, also referred the case to the Metropolitan Police.  Also separately there have been files handed to police on around 20 MPs (Update:  This is still going up, and its more than just the Met, its all over the country)
  4. She claims to have also raised their own issues with the commission, but doesn’t mention what they were.  From my understanding the only issues they raised were all with the intentions of evading justice and perverting its course
  5. Systematic dishonesty and evasion.  For over a year C4 have tried to meet with the party


Update: 28th March

A quick aside on Atos, as more will follow in a later post about this.

You may notice I commonly only attack Atos.  Despite there being others.   This is not because I am not aware that there are other heads to the beast we face.   This is because I have only experienced this head of the Hydra myself.   I am aiming for one head of the Hydra first, the oldest one is Atos, the one I understand most.  You can only tackle such a thing one head at a time, and concentrated effort will have more results than a divided attack on multiple fronts.   They are a French company, so I am hoping this terrible example of a French company (From where a little of my own heritage lies), that they will adhere to the worst stereotypes of being French and will wave the white flag and surrender first, so we can move onto the others.  The DWP after all cant be sent away, it has to be reformed by the people, not by the Tories, it needs to be mandated and voted on by those it effects like an actual democracy.  We can vote on other issues but not how to solve the silent genocide, the War on the Ill.  This needs to change.  May claims to be in favour of this but she does the opposite.  I’ll get back now to the points in hand.

Just saw this pic and had to put it on


Theresa May claims that her administration.  Administration is actually a better term than Government.  Or even Maladministration, for the Tories the DWP and Atos and the others all seem to be just like the PM.  In a state of P.M.  Perpetual Maladministration.  With a health dose of Fraud of varying types all technically punishable under The Fraud Act 2006.  Not only that, they are also, I believe in contravention of the Common Law, Misconduct in a Public Office, and not normal Misconduct either, I believe it could be aggravated by the Conspiracy element depending on the evidence uncovered during the police investigations.  Although I am sure the top Tory goons, will be trying to avoid the reach of the police and will seek to evade justice at all costs from their behaviour so far.

After all the maximum sentence for Fraud under statutory law is 10 years in prison.  The maximum for Misconduct in a Public Office is life in prison.  Not that they realistically face that of course.    If the same law that was applied to them, as the common

These group of Modern Tories cannot be called a Government.  They struggle too much at the job and display too much incompetence to make that claim.  They make more U-turns it seems than a driving instructor.   There are currently in a bad shape too.  The more U-turns they make the less credibility they have, and when they don’t make the U-turns on their insane policies they just look more and more evil as each political moon passes.

Ok so lets tackle her statements above.  Not for a privileged few, but for us apparently.  Well Labour as the main opposition, actually allow people to make their own submissions for policy reform, and have facilitated this process.  The Tories are not listening at all, this is clear and where it counts most.

The next statement is actually true.  Its a Freudian slip of sorts.  She will prioritise “taking” tax not from the wealthy, but from you, the people.

When they pass new laws they will listen to not the mighty, but the people.  Yeah right.  So they listened to the people not the DWP or Atos?  They listen to the Doctors and Nurses in the NHS?  They listen to the people protesting?  They listen to the disabled?  Those being sanctioned who are trying to look for work?  They don’t listen to anyone.  They stonewall and whitewash.  They rinse and repeat this, and only the very few issues that manage to rush through the whitewash, and scale the stonewall, and then if needed to U-turn to stop a spiral that will lead to vote of no confidence then they will.  Then they cunningly continue trying to bring about the very same thing, just at a slower pace.  They are abusive like narcissists, always pushing boundaries and playing nice for long enough to get the guard dropped so they can try and push forward more of their twisted kleptocratic agenda.

I wont even address the ways she did vote politically.  Only with this religious angle instead.  She does after all claim to be letting God and her Christian faith guide her in Brexit, and therefore likely in her policies towards the disabled.    She claims to be Church of England Christian.   So lets explore some Christianity and see how she matches up there based on Christianity’s principles, and the actions of her Lord and Saviour Jesus as he is the focal point of that religion.  He advocated helping the poor, the disabled.  He was kind of well known for it.  I am surprised that she can theoretically walk into a Church without bursting into a ball of flames.  It sounds very much like the dark character from the bible who tried to tempt Jesus in the desert succeeded with May.  Managing to convince her he is the morning star she should follow.  Her focus is on power, money for she proselytises for these things.  The things of this world.  From my understanding of the bible.   Jesus at one point said that the devil was the God of the physical world, with the Father, or Christ being Gods in heaven.   That is the only time the devil is called God, and it was by Jesus.  He said he is the God of this world.  Therefore, money and power when sought from the wrong motivations and wrong reasons means to serve the God of this world, The Devil.   Money/Power.

The true God is supposed to be love, the message Jesus taught.  Compassion.  Empathy.   Isn’t this the Golden point of all religions.  There is a lot of stuff pointing in a darker direction in all religions from my understanding.   May actually claims not to like the word empathy as I mentioned earlier.  This is not unexpected if she is indeed, a sociopath.  We should scan the brains of political leaders to ensure their frontal lobes are active enough, for the areas that show compassion and empathy.  This would be a reliable way to check fitness for the job, and prevent those with personality disorders that are harmful to people in society, from being in positions of power over others that could be abused.  If you stick with the bible and religious view, instead of sociopathy, such people are demon possessed and serve Satan.  I prefer to tackle it from a Mental Health standpoint as the scientific method can diagnose and help solve the problem, easier than trying to banish demons believed in via religious beliefs.  Its about using the right tool for the job at hand.

I also bring up her religious views because you will never her speak at length philosophically and with any true inspiration.  She is a plastic Jesus worshipper.  She pretends because people like her tend to be those that use religion, to disguise the fact they don’t really have morals.  Its obvious to see when you know what your looking for.  Blair used the God morality defence, as did Bush.   She claims to be up at night worrying about Brexit currently.  She is single minded then if that is all she mentions,  she isn’t worried about the Tory Election Fraud? (Only worried about getting caught out), the Disabled Genocide? If she is worried, she didn’t mention it so she is dishonest, and therefore also a bad Christian to not condemn any electoral dishonesty within the party she leads.  Remember May is known to micro-manage so its hard to imagine she didn’t know about this.    She also would not forgive as Christianity urges.  If we were attacked by nuclear strike, she claims she will give the order to retaliate, in which case theoretically she wouldn’t even kill those who ordered and carried out the strike, just millions of civilians as sacrificial lambs.   She isn’t a Christian.  She isn’t.   Not really.  So much for forgive those than trespass.

This can also be summed up by which of the two H’s  can she be categorised as belonging to.   As a third way of looking at it, in addition to politically, then religiously.  The pair of double H’s are Harm and Hurt, Help and Heal.    Which category does she fall into overall.  Does she Harm and Hurt more?  Or Help and Heal more? Also by extension those under her in the Tory pecking order, Harm or Hurt Help and Heal.  The Tory party as a whole.  Harm and Hurt or Help and Heal.    I claim its Harm and Hurt.   Therefore she is not a real Christian bruv.  Or sis.  She worships the Darth Vader side of the force it seems.  Of course the Dark side thinks its right, and is “Helping and Healing” a lot of the time.  You can do a lot of Harm and Hurt trying to Help and Heal if there is no Light on the situation.

This will do for now.   I will add more as I find more examples.  Enough of the religious angle now, it was only valid as she mentioned it herself and so it allows us to consider her actions in relation to that belief system and, just like in politics she is contradictory.

Update 29th March:

Feel free to contact me with a submission of examples of lies and dishonesty in the Tory party including all other culprits.  I have started with their leader.  If you want me to mention your name and Twitter account let me know and I will credit you with sending me the information if I put it onto this blog post.  This is one blog post I will update and edit for some time. 

About the feeding seal/evil laugh of Theresa May during PMQ’s on NI.  Here John McDonnell speaks out against the evil budget, delivered by the Mr Burns Chancellor.  Here McDonnell channels the thoughts and frustrations of the Common People of Britain.  When he quite rightly and succinctly describes with a metaphor, May’s response to previous challenges to her heartless, chaotic and Brutal Government.

“…and the Prime Minister spent less time guffawing like a feeding seal on those benches” and may is seen mouthing twice “What?”.  McDonnell was later criticised for this remark, but it was not too harsh, it was an accurate description and the internet agrees.

Here is the incident in question for those who have not seen it:

A feeding seal was a quite cute way to describe what I have heard described variously as either demonic possession, a seizure, or my own addition,  a large hit of narcisstic supply causing her to get giddy and make her hate a hate-gasm with eyes rolling in the back of her head.

Here is a gif of an actual seal feeding to give a comparison


Here is a gif, of an alleged real demonic possession, with the host in communication with the dark lord Satan:


Lastly here is a gif of someone getting a huge hit of narcissistic supply, with their eyes rolling into the back of their heads from the hate-gasm.


Right.  That will do for now.  To be continued.


Update 29th March

Here May tries her hardest to score an attack on Corbyn.  “He Puts the PARTY first, I put the COUNTRY first”.  Well I will begin with a quick dissection.  She is the PM.  He is the leader of the opposition.  In order to come to power Corbyn must strengthen and hone the party, and the movement, while trying as best as he can as the opposition Leader, to negotiate with evil twisted excuses for people.  Once he comes to power, then he will be able to put the people of the nation as a whole first, as he wont be trying to win an election as a member of the opposition.  So her claim doesn’t make sense.

She goes in for a low blow by using kids as a weapon.  Corbyn didn’t argue personal attacks or sink to her arrogant and pathetic level here.  He didn’t explain that his child going to grammar was his former wife’s choice, one of the factors involved in their breakup as Jeremey was steadfast in his rejection of Grammar schools.  I am against them.  They promote Elitist attitudes that are damaging.  I turned down the chance to go to Grammar, as even at 11 years old I knew I didn’t want to be like those that go there, and end up with an inflated sense of entitlement.  I didn’t want to be like them.  If I did go, I would have hoped I turned out more like Corbyn.

Now to address Mays claim to put the country first.  I have some issues with this statement.   Is putting the country first lying and covering up election fraud?  Is it putting the country first to refuse to amend legislation to make it easier to prosecute paedophiles who hide in the corridor’s or power.   The country is not able to shape Tory policy.  It seems to be concocted in dark woods, late at night on full moons with toil and trouble and a cauldron with bubbles.  Cuts for the disabled, Cuts for the self employed whoops U-Turn, Cuts for the bereaved, cuts for terminally ill, sanctioning jobseekers, unpaid slave labour, 0 hours contracts.  Eager to use nuclear weapons, wasted billions on said nukes that wont be fucking used.  They will sit there, the worlds most expensive fucking paperweights!  While the NHS crumbles, social care is collapsing, hardly any mental health beds in the entire fucking country, police cuts, emergency service cuts, leaving the EU with nutters at the helm, Scotland wanting out of the cluster-fuck that is Tory reign.  Ireland wanting to reunite and fuck the Tories off, Wales starting to talk of the same.    Mmm yes stir the cauldron and lets see what else we can get in it.

Potentially coming soon if we don’t evict them from the Westminster house:  Leaving EU, scrapping human rights, ending UN obligations to avoid actions for genocide, probably reject the ICC also.

Update:  30th March.  Thanks to Vladimir Farage @VladimirFarage for allowing to use the following statements and images.

Just a nice couple of pictures on May flip-flopping over the EU and making false claims.

“Theresa May says that article 50 can’t be revoked.  (An EU resolution says it can)” – @VladimirFarage


Remember this also?