May 03

This probably does not need writing but here goes…..

UKIP basically promise an even more corrupt economic model than Labour and Conservatives. They are neo Liberals on steroids and would outsource almost everything to their friends. Their central schtick is an EU referendum but that is a) likely to be a No and a pointless exercise b) even out of the EU the UK would almost certainly have to retain the Common Market and indeed sign up to the Schengen Agreement on free borders – as we’d have no leverage to force an opt out. Maybe UKIP think there is some alternate grouping for the UK than Europe but that is map defying idiocy for me.

This criticism is valid of all the openly racist parties (BNP, UKIP, Conservative and Labour) do they really think it is practical and worth the cost to shut our borders? Already the UK is forced to keep the UN out of its Rape Camp at Yawl’s Wood like some 3rd world despot nation. It’s seen as a nation of backward troglodytes and leaving the EU would further lead to that view with an added drop of petulance thrown in. Think how much the fraud based UK finance industry would be entertained if Europe could legislate against it with no veto?

Ironically I am not convinced on EU membership and really have not heard a coherent case for it. However the idea we can be an Island surrounded by virtual Israeli style walls is laughable. Even Farage admits UKIP would allow immigration and if he were truly honest he’d admit it would be just as high and the figures suggest UK already gets highly educated entrants. How big are our airports to become to handle all the extra passport checks and visas? How many state goons are needed to bring this ‘vision’ to fruition. The queues at our airport terminals in summer already a disgrace.

The best way to stop immigration is to tank the economy can we safely assume UKIP would do that? They would succeed in a victory General Pyrrhus would have approved of.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

May 03

I think the irony with the Conservatives is that I could given a choice of Labour or them back them if they stood for what they claim to. If they meant they liked the NHS or at least the concept of free Education and Health. If they believed in market economics and not the mass subsidy model that extends Govt Power and loads debt on hardworking taxpayers and even the ones who steal their pay. If they had even the remotest belief in freedom.

Sadly the Conservatives are a con. They stand for Feudalism and the stoking of land prices and rural subsidy at the expense of the environment and indeed the land itself. They stand for rentiers as they seek to take housing assets into the stratosphere with subsidy. They talk Austerity yet match Brownian profligacy with subsidy to all those groups and fossil fuels. Cameron’s greenest Govt ever is paying oil companies whilst the price is low and trying to turn the UK into a fracked waste land. They support the banks laying waste to our productivity and the SME sector. If you’re a small businessman who votes Tory you’re an idiot (or your [sic] an idiot as you would write it). They stand for fraud and tax evasion.

They support the same nonsense as Labour of nationalising debt and trying to extract all taxes from the hardworking families they so patronise. They pay off the babyboomers whilst reducing normal people to foodbanks. They hand power to MI5 to spy on us and on behalf of large banks and corporates. None of this will create a free society or even a working economy for the vast majority of us. They toss subsidy to Coca Cola via the aid budget. To BAE for weapons that don’t work. HS2 threatens to match NHS PFI as a historic waste of money and graft.

The Conservatives are a conceit of ideology some say but it’s worse than that they are feckless fools who are either: sociopaths who just want to inflict misery: idiots who believe they are following an ideology: or just plain feckless creeps in it for themselves*. Labour patronise the Tories damn the poor but it all comes from a ludicrous conceit reinforced by the education system that they are better than the next person.

* More than 1 answer may apply

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , ,

Apr 26

I’ll also leave out they support the same policies as the Tories whatever the Tory fiction about massive cuts – after all SNP, Libs and Labour have the same spending plans too. We’ll leave out their obvious racism where they try to sound marginally slower swiveling of the eyes than the Tories. We’ll even credit them on Syria not bombing to help our friends al Queada and now enemies IS. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Apr 18

First up in why you should not vote for a party is The Greens.

Now I confess I am between the Greens and Lib Dems the Kippers, Labrats and Conmen not for me. However I believe in lacerating and being critical of even those one favours and whilst I believe in Man Made and Man Preventable Climate Change and am against Austerity as both moral and economic shittery the Greens are the only one of the 5 mains in England similarly minded.  Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , ,

Apr 06

To praise the heartless sociopaths who rise to the top of a political system built on corruption and the needs of its paymasters may not be the way to go popularity wise. It may even seem hypocritical to people who like narrative which usually involves Obama/Brown/Cameron are decent guys who accidentally do horrible things they believed in or are devils incarnate. The truth is rather more nuanced and twisted. Personally I really don’t care how accidentally genocidal these folks are. After all they have the intelligence to step beyond and see what is happening and at some level choose not to.

Nonetheless the recent peace accords with Cuba and Iran are a huge step forward. Others can argue engagement with China and even the USSR started to bring down walls metaphorically and literally. It does not need people to be wholly good or evil to do this. It does not need the motives to be right or wrong. Indeed since killing loads of people or starving them to death is never a good idea just people looking for what will most benefit everyone would be nice. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Apr 05

Egypt, Saudi and the UAE are allies of Israel. Jordan and Israel share a dislike of Palestinians and worries at their population growth. However these channels are all unofficial as the despot led nations commit atrocities Israel might actually get censured for by the USA. They pretend to have some fig leaf of Arab solidarity like the gangsters of E Block objecting to a man who ripped off the elderly but secretly does their tax return. Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Apr 05

The Iran deal in the face of objections from hardliners in Iran seems fair enough.

After all even Netanyahu was reduced to the ephemeral OK but what about getting Iran to recognise Israel. Would that make it OK then? Er so what are you objecting to again? That some meaningless statement from someone in Iran would bring your support [it would not]. In the end the nuclear genie is out of the bottle and many nations from Israel itself to South Africa have illegally [ha!] developed nuclear weapons.

It does seem odd that loads of people with no interest in the region were there but not Israel or Saudi. Of course the reason is they did what Iran seeks to do and that would have been a little bit embarrassing. Or was it because Israel is the new Ulster and Netanyahu the new Paisley? “Ulster  Israel Says No” to everything. Let’s hope Rouhani and Netanyahu end up known as the Chuckle Brothers like McGuinness and Paisley.

Or maybe not.

 

written by reaction \\ tags: , , ,

Apr 03

One of the more idiotic debates around the Snowden files was the neo Con/Liberal media debate was about legality. Snowdon’s actions were illegal and the NSA’s were legal. I would even concede that as true. However one’s actions were right and correct the others showed the grasping depths that our Govts go to to retain control for the people they represent [not us] and their deep contempt for freedom, people and democracy.

If Secretaries of States and Home Secretaries want to say people sitting in closed booths watching sexy webcams in GCHQ Cheltenham is legal, fine. If they want to say that sending undercover filth to impregnate protesters for the crime of believing climate science is proper, OK. If they say that backing death squads in Iraq is in the National Interest, whatever. If they say supporting al Quaeda in Syria is the same, it’s a view. They want to continue to hold people in the Guantanamo Torture camp without charge or trial having released the big boys of al Queada after doing deals, who am I to disagree. However why should I tolerate such marginal toilet licker opinions and they not tolerate any dissent?

The illegal label is meaningless and arguments over its application about who is in power not right or wrong.

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , ,

Mar 07

Watching Professor Richard Werner who apparently coined the term Quantitative Easing induce cognitive dissonance in Max Keiser with his solution to economic ills was eyeopening. Keiser talked maniacally and in the end the difference was not causes of crisis or any dispute bankers were fraudulent creeps. The difference was sad to say an almost corporate conformist what we do now counts from the Prof and worse I agreed with him! Continue reading »

written by reaction \\ tags: , , , , ,

Mar 07

Ed Miliband said we should not mistake his decency for weakness.

Odd as I would never mistake his weakness for decency.

written by reaction