Sunday 26 May 2019


I don’t feel sorry for Theresa May, not one bit.  Like every other right wing leader she is only concerned with the interests of the top 1% she represents. She cried yesterday for herself, her tears said ‘why are you are all being so mean to me’, and maybe, ‘I’m going to burn in the fires of of hell for all eternity for taking the UK back to the beginning of the last century, when people actually died from poverty’. Their deaths will forever be on my conscious.  To be honest part 2 of the above probably hasn’t kicked in yet, but it will.  Every PM cares about their legacy, how they will be remembered.  History will not be kind to TM, probably why she wept for the first time.
I’ve never been able to understand how she had the barefaced nerve to stand alongside other world leaders, knowing they were all aware of her objective to crush the British working classes into complete submission.  She has no shame that world leaders see homeless people sleeping on the streets of what is supposed to be one of the most advanced nations in the world.   For shame Theresa May and for shame any leader that leaves office with their nation going backwards.  She leaves a legacy of failure. Failure to win the votes of the public, parliament and even her own party. She will be remembered for trying to cling onto power long after she should have gone, and she will be remembered for launching British democracy into chaos.  
Anyone who follows her, as leader of the Conservative party and PM, won’t fare any better.  Happily our constitution has a system of checks and balances, that will prevent an emboldened new tory PM from pushing through a Brexit deal without the approval of parliament.  And seriously folks, will the charmless Boris do any better with the progressive leaders of Europe than the charmless Theresa?
But the past week was not without it’s highlights. I had no sympathy for Nigel Farage either. If anyone deserves to be milkshaked, it was him.  This is is a man, who, for some reason has been given a platform by every mainstream news network to preach hate filled rhetoric to the public on an almost daily basis.  Why?  Who does he represent?  Not half as many as we are led to believe.  
He is by any reasonable person’s estimation, a slimey, snidey, POS, laughing at all those stupid enough to take him seriously. It wouldn’t surprise me one tiny bit, if he along with his mate Trump were not in the pay of Putin.  He is the personification of WWII’S Lord Haw Haw, he hates England and it’s history of welcoming immigrants and new ideas and new cultures.  He is the numbnut sent out to pitch ignorance and backward thinking to the masses. The acceptable face of capitalism and greed, he likes a beer and fag, he is one of us.  
Talking about the acceptable face of capitalism and McDonalds milkshakes. The Queen apparently, has invited ‘the Donald’ to a State Banquet.  My sympathies right now are with the Queen. Imagine being told all the stars of American Housewives and several 'Sopranos' were coming to dinner?  I am sure Buckingham Palace has the finest chefs in the world (so too the Whitehouse), but just to make the Donald feel at home, perhaps she should order in Kentucky fried chicken and McDonalds burgers? For Donald sadly, that is the only way he can ensure his food has not been spat on, and its what he offers America’s finest when invited to the Whitehouse.  The only problem I foresee there is the milkshakes.
Not as current as I would have liked, but I feel I have to comment on the demise of Jeremy Kyle.  Tis true there are days when I have laid on the sofa eating bacon sarnies and kitkats and watching Jeremy admonish the low life scum he groomed to appear on his show.  I’m not proud of that.  But, like millions of others, it was always with the wish that a guest would get past the meatheads and land the odious Jeremy with a Glasgow Kiss.  To say he exploited society’s most vulnerable would be an understatement.  He preached a philosophy of punishment and exposure, a return to the dark ages where the feckless and the inadequate were held up for public ridicule, run out of town or forever targets of the sanctimonious. That his show was pulled for one suicide is frankly unbelievable, in this instance, it was probably one too many. 
But returning to the Royals, and I probably will quite often, as the mum of two young boys, my heart went out to the two young boys who walked behind their mum's coffin.  I felt a maternal surge of love and protection, that I have never been able to discard in favour of my Marxist principles.  I wish them happiness, peace and contentment now as much as I ever did and hope they know how very proud of them their mother would have been. 
The forthcoming meeting with the Trumps must I am sure, be a nightmare.  Now I don't know how much the Queen gets each year (does anyone?), but I guarantee it is not nearly enough to compensate for having to spend even five minutes of her time in the company of an uncouth, ill educated, boorish oaf telling her how Windsor Castle doesn't compare to Trump Tower.  We the masses have the option of telling him exactly how we feel, and we will, but the Queen and the Establishment do not. 
Who gets an invite to the Royal Banquet?  Now is the time for all those who despise the racist trump and his grifter family to dish out the biggest snub of their lifetimes.  But will they?  Will they do what their A List contemporaries on the other side of the Atlantic do and ignore the malicious oaf, or will they turn up like his paid lackeys and pay homage?


  1. Hi Rosalinda,
    Blame it all on David Cameron.
    If he and his cronies had not risked the referendum vote that the common folk would surely opt for but didn't - a united Europe,- Mrs May would be shedding no tears.

    My prediction on the day the referendum result was announced was that the British Establishment would never stand for interference by unschooled know-nothing voters. How dare they.

    Political backrooms must have echoed with curses: "Look boys, we'll just keep putting this thing out to the voters until they it right".
    And so it goes.

    All the same, for those Polish construction workers and Latvian cleaning ladies and the like, the bastion of the British workforce; must be looking wistfully at their EU passports and wondering if they made the right choice.

    On the Trump points that you make, I cannot agree. The American president may be a scamster as were most of his predecessor but the angst out there in the left wing press is mostly sour grapes from Democrats on losing the election fair and square to the Republicans.
    Politically the President has come down hard on the criminal Chinese government and also avoided a war with North Korea.
    The most oddball adventure I cannot agree with is the 1,900 mile Mexican border wall - about as far fetched as entrepreneur Elon Musk's colonization of Mars.
    At least you can breathe God's fresh air while you climb over the border wall, unlike opening a window in the newly established Martian colony and ...oops, finding out you are dead.
    Not a happy note to end on - but there you have it.
    Have a nice day.

    1. As is often the way with the Tory crowd, the leader isn't really a leader.May was never considered PM material.Her nickname among them was submarine as she always sank out of view when the heat was on.She wasn't elected by the people in our great democracy, she was elected 'in house' as the Tories like to do.Cameron was- and always will be- a Bullingdon boy.And his dear friend and fellow pig's head fancier, Boris Johnson is the same.

      Had 'Bojo' ever put himself forward as the prime candidate for PM years ago when he fancied the gig, he'd have been laughed at and the Tories would have suffered a heavy defeat.So 'bumbling Boris' took the celebrity fool route in to our minds.The big foppish oaf clumsily falling from one terrible sound bite to the next.A privileged toff with a cleverly contrived English eccentricity, we were never going to forget his moronic appeal.That didn't mean he was PM material though. Enter the patsy. Theresa M.

      Before Cameron could lose what was left of his crumbling credibility he came up with yet another ' landmark'. He'd already made a dog's breakfast of the Scottish referendum and needed a joint rescue effort from two former Labour MPs / PMs (who were Tories at heart) ,Blair and Brown. So he came up with something else he pretended to care about- the EU.So we now had the EU referendum right after he'd slammed the exit door of No 10 and jetted off to spend some quality time with his taxes abroad.Poor old Theresa.

      The remit seemed clear to the blue bloods ; ''whatever she says, don't support''. Obviously social elitism and riches doesn't bring maturity with it.In the meantime, Boris was stumbling around the chat shows and performing like a circus chimp for the media and throwing occasional 'googlies' about Europe to confuse us all.It was time for some classic problem, reaction, solution gears to move things along.Presenting Boris as a potential leader was laughed at once upon a time so they didn't risk it.They gave May a mountain she would never scale and she gave up the fight.Now that 'problem' has it's 'solution'- Boris.It's classic 'long firm'
      The Bullingdon boys, Cameron ( PM) Johnson ( Mayor of London / PM) Osborne ( Chancellor) and N Rothschild ( B of England).And they'll tell you these stories aren't scripted years ahead...


    2. jc

      Trump is a vile neocon. He always has been and always will be.The only people who value neocons are other neocons or the super rich.He is the embodiment of arrogance and psychopathy.He is driven by his hyperactive ego and a desire to to be seen as the all conquering hero.America has long considered itself the 'most super' of the super powers; the leader of the western world; the world's 'boss'. The president has always implied that he is therefore 'King of the World'.But those who have been and gone from Washington have always used subtlety and misdirection to prevent us from spotting it.Trump, on the other hand, wants to parade it and use a loud haler.He has an incurable superiority complex and the rest of the world are slowly beginning to see the citizens of the US as enjoying, rather than suffering from, the same malady.They're in the thrall of the stumbling demented child king..

      He can swagger all he likes with the Chinese and Russians.But it won't end well.Bullies usually do their homework before they focus on their target.America always has.They see if they are far bigger than their target, have far better weapons, and if they can outnumber them sufficiently.It has served them well if we ignore a certain incident that occurred in South East Asia.They never throw a punch at someone who could be as big or powerful as themselves.Bullies avoid fair fights.Trump as mistaken his own hype as fear from all comers.His chin has never been bigger and more vulnerable to a knockout punch than it is now.And there are plenty of right crosses and left hooks just waiting. China and Russia aren't Mexico.

      I look forward to the UK leaving the EU.The world doesn't need another superpower.Why pledge allegiance to Germany anyway ? Why pledge allegiance to the US ? Both are locked in Israeli thumbscrews anyway. Screw them all.But let's screw the Tories first :)

    3. Morning, folks (About halfway down the page)

      By Dr Martin Roberts
      28 February 2013


      “…whatever the explanation for her [Madeleine’s] apparently unexpected departure from the holiday complex where she was lodged in May 2007, it must, if correct, be able to account for each and every 'pertinent coincidence' one might identify. Despite protestations of the 'I know because' variety, until more definitive evidence becomes public, no-one is in a position to be categorical. Whether inclining toward 'abduction' or something else, one's theory (and that includes the McCanns' own), can be no more than hypothetical. Which gives us a level playing field and the opportunity to ask the following question: Which of two opposing views better accommodates a number of identifiable coincidences pertaining to events in Praia da Luz during the period 1-3 May 2007?”

      Very good (to bear in mind).


    4. Anonymous 28 May 2019 at 19:13

      Let's, bruv. :)


    5. A most eloquent communicator is ol' 'Robbo' .A clever chap taboot.It's a shame he knocked the topic on the head so long ago.He was genuinely on the side of honest investigation and debate and consistently unbiased ( for an anti ). He was probably the one commentator truly entitled to wear such a crown.

      I'm not sure - context wise- where your post slides in here, T.Would I be right in thinking that you have found a definitive point of view in favour of fair and open discussion rather than the customary, trademark dogmatic and unsupported postulating ? I arrived at that conclusion after reading the remark about all arguments being nothing more than hypothetical.That's true is it not.If any one could be more than hypothetical, it would probably have been responsible for an actual development one way or another in the case.It takes far more than passion to change an argument or suggestion into a fact after all.And repeating the same thing ad nauseam doesn't add any weight to it's credibility without anything to hold it up.I'm speculating of course.If I'm wrong, never mind.Put it down to the befuddling and fickle effects that Spring can have on the old four temperaments.maybe it will rain soon...

      I believe Dr Robbo, despite his obvious intellectual prowess, displays an alarmingly naive view of who controls the press and the rest of the media.His suggestion that journalists and reporters have a choice in how they report certain stories isn't accurate is it.Above them, sits an editor.Above him sits the moguls.Alongside them sit the politicians.The media was always a propaganda tool. To ignore the bosses or 'go rogue' is to commit career suicide.The 'freedom of the press' was an out dated concept 25 years ago.Today it's only a memory.Think 'common purpose'.

      The media will continue to print their own money thanks to its deep understanding of how shallow the waters of it's customer base is.Damage limitation is as far as they dare go with their freedom of expression and that's only if there's no escaping certain stories that have become public property.
      But, as I said earlier, Dr Roberts is always a good read.I like his approach.His patience is admirable too.He rarely allowed himself to engage in bouts of pointless fencing with the blindfolded shouty folk.


    6. Hi JC, we may share similar beliefs on the McCann case, but politically, we are polar opposites lol. When I first went on social media I described myself as a Marxist Feminist, which is probably about as provocative as you can get when joining a chatroom. Unfortunately for most posters this conjured up an image of a shaven headed, dungaree and jackboot wearing geezer bird, which could not have been more wrong. I love being a woman and I have always aspired to be a lady, I'm more tea and scones than beer and burgers.

      I'm not sure I'm a Marxist anymore but I am a huge supporter of Jeremy Corbyn. He shares my vision, or I share his, in that he is a true man of the people, he genuinely wants to raise the standard of living for everyone, especially those who have been so cruelly abused under the guise of austerity.

      As Clinton once said 'it's the economy stupid', Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell have a real plan for recovery. You could even compare it to Roosevelt's New Deal. It is the opposite of 'austerity', it is the ploughing of money into the economy to get industry and commerce moving again.

      It's boring things like infrastructure, the roads, the NHS. Pumping money into infrastructure creates jobs which boosts the manufacturing and the construction industries. When people have money to spend it boosts the economy.

      JC and JM understand this, I just wish they could explain it to the British people.

      But oh no, I have ventured into politics and am now much more likely to upset more people, lol. My views, for some reason, are always seen as a tad radical, even subversive!

    7. Hi T, and bless you for continuing to post even while I have largely been 'away'.

      With Dr. Roberts, I was at one time an avid follower, but I found I 'outgrew' him, that is I went off on my own way. There is usually something specific that turns me off a writer, but I can't remember what it was with Dr. Roberts.

      I think it was because he had a tendency to be a bit too sure of himself. A trait I am not a fan of, I prefer scholars with open minds, those who present a thesis, but make plain other options are available. Goncalo Amaral for example, doesn't say definitively 'that is what happened' but that is where the evidence leads.

    8. And yet, Goncalo Amaral called his book ' The truth of the lie'. Very scholarly that I'm sure.

      Not everyone who passes comments on the case is a scholar.In fact, if you look on the social networks, it seems doubtful that many of them attended school.

      I think Dr Roberts pointing out that all arguments are hypothetical suggests that he is prepared to entertain all angles without stating one must be true due to most people suspecting it is.A majority guess mistaking itself for a weight of actual evidence so to speak.That's when it becomes easy to identify the scholar as opposed to commentator.

    9. Ros :

      ''I think it was because he had a tendency to be a bit too sure of himself. A trait I am not a fan of, ''

      Really. Yet in one of your April-possibly may- blogs you stated categorically that you, unlike the media, only reported the truth as you know what the truth is( Re McCann case). When challenged to unveil the'truth' you claimed to be privy to that the media wasn't, you declined to answer.I doubt anyone really expected you to.Has that position changed yet ? Are you 'open minded' enough to enlighten those of us who would also like to know the truth that has thus far been hidden from us ?

    10. I don't know if you really are that naïve or if your above post is a convoluted attempt to get me to say something libellous.

      Telling the truth is a life choice 21:12, a personal philosophy if you like. I blame it on being indoctrinated with the catholic faith at a tender age, I've simply never been able to live with the guilt of lying. As a manic depressive and a neurotic I have a zillion things to keep me awake at night, but lying isn't one of them. My conscience is clear but I am not deceiving anyone.

      With regard to the Madeleine case, what reason would have to lie? I have always seen my blog as a journey of discovery and I am fortunate in having hundreds with me on that journey.

      I don't claim to know anything, I do exactly as it says on the tin, I muse. I contemplate those questions many people who follow this case, are asking and I invite their opinions too. I am an observer, I have no reason to lie.

      As for the lies of the MSM, I refer to the regular cycle of stories claiming new leads, new suspects and new layers of BS applied daily by Tracey Kandhola. The McCann case exposed just how deceptive the tabloids and the mainstream news networks are in the UK.

      Finally, you ask me to enlighten you as to the truth. As a former teacher (old habits die hard), I am giving you all the tools you need to reach a decision yourself. I can't switch that lightbulb on in your head, only you can do that.

    11. Err, Goncalo Amaral is a scholar - I think he has about 3 degrees and the right to the title of Dr.

      I have no idea what point you are trying to make there 18:43, public opinion is meaningless unless you are planning on fighting extradition.

      Whilst interesting, the words of a scholar are never the final words on a matter. Almost immediately they are spoken another scholar would will put forward alternate views and thus it goes on.

    12. Thanks for the reply. Or should I say the cop-out.

      I asked what you meant when you clearly claimed to have 'the truth' about the McCann case which the media didn't have.And your claim that you reported the truth, not what they did.And i asked why you wouldn't answer when asked exactly what that truth was.Nobody expected an answer as nobody has the truth other than those involved in the disappearance of Madeleine.To claim otherwise is dishonest, misleading and a cynical attempt to spread disinformation.

      Now you're on the back foot with the weak '' I am giving you all the tools you need to reach a decision yourself. I can't switch that lightbulb on in your head, only you can do that.''

      Will that lightbulb illuminate the truth your pretending to be reporting here ? Because that's what you claimed you were doing.So, as nobody can see it does that mean we are incapable of using your 'tools' ?Or is it merely a case of you not having what you pretended to have ?

      Why was the great scholar with so many degrees a plain old detective so many years who didn't understand what perjury meant and why did his apparent academic skill suddenly become public information when he had some silly theories to put in a book through a few proof readers and a lawyer.He hides his intellect very well, I'll give him that much .

    13. Rosalinda Hutton31 May 2019 at 13:33

      ''I don't know if you really are that naïve or if your above post is a convoluted attempt to get me to say something libellous. ''

      You made a claim. You were challenged to back it up and you refused to.You have been asked again to answer a simple question, ie- what did you mean by it.If you think that's a convoluted way to get you to say something libellous you are either paranoid or it's you that's naive.

      You say telling the truth is a life choice. Fair enough. So is telling lies. When you were talking about the reporting of the McCann case you claimed, quite categorically, that the media are reporting lies and that you, on the other hand, are reporting the truth. Therefore you invited the question : what's the truth you're reporting that they aren't.You didn't / couldn't / wouldn't answer.You still can't. Whoever was involved in Mdeleine's fate knows the truth.Nobody else unless they've told anyone themselves.You made a false claim. Why would you do that ? Is it to be controversial for the sake of it, or boost your viewing numbers ?Or was it a case of telling lies about how the McCanns are portrayed has become so deeply ingrained that you don't even know you're doing it any more ?

      Saying now that you know nothing is in total contrast to claiming you know the truth well enough to report it.It's back peddling after being called out.But, to give some credit, you usually ignore when you're called out for obvious reasons.

      ''Finally, you ask me to enlighten you as to the truth. As a former teacher (old habits die hard), I am giving you all the tools you need to reach a decision yourself. I can't switch that lightbulb on in your head, only you can do that.''

      Has it never occurred to you that many of us out here don't need tools and training to spot a snake oil salesman ? If we use the tools that you've so kindly fashioned for our use, we would still see no sign of the truth that you claim to have but can't actually have.

      So, Goncalo Amaral is a scholar. And ? So far, he's put together a book of stories and hypotheses that, according to you, lead to the truth but doesn't claim to be telling us the actual truth. Yet he called it 'the TRUTH of the lie' and named names and claimed to know the crimes that they were guilty of committing. I can see why his logic and double speak appeals to you.

    14. Ok, since you brought it up, twice, the Truth of the Lie is there was no abduction.

      I don't believe there was an abduction, and I have given hundreds of reasons why I don't believe there was an abduction.

      I know that my not believing in the abduction story makes you extremely angry, but that doesn't make it a lie. I can believe whatever I want to believe and there is nothing you can do about it.

      Given your rudeness and belligerent attitude you are fortunate to be published, but if you think you can again turn my block into a place to vent your anger and hatred towards Goncalo Amaral and myself you are mistaken.

    15. Rosalinda Hutton31 May 2019 at 22:25

      ''Ok, since you brought it up, twice, the Truth of the Lie is there was no abduction. ''

      No, that's not a truth , it's am opinion. Anyone can hold an opinion.It doesn't mean it's right.You'd expect a detective who is supposedly so scholarly to be able to grasp that little basic.

      ''I don't believe there was an abduction, and I have given hundreds of reasons why I don't believe there was an abduction''

      But there isn't an iota of evidence to make so much as one a truth.That's why you should desist from claiming to know anything.You have an opinion or two.Everyone does.You have this strange notion that you can call your opinions facts because you've been 'investigating' the case since it began.Note the major difference between a true, provable fact and an opinion. Like the police have to.

      ''I know that my not believing in the abduction story makes you extremely angry, but that doesn't make it a lie.''

      There's another claim to knowledge you can't have.You think it makes me extremely angry.That's the accurate statement you should have made.But both are wrong anyway.I don't feel anger with anyone, even the antis who refuse to open their eyes.I feel annoyed by those arrogant enough or just ignorant enough to think what they 'believe' is true and what 'opinions' they hold are true.So true that they feel they should spread their news.Or lies.

      You have no evidence whatsoever that you can point to and say it's belligerent on my part.People disagreeing with yu and pointing out the obvious that you hoped they'd miss, isn't belligerence. But you calling it so is petulance. Nor do you have a single word or line you can cite to support your accusation that I have hatred for Amaral.Just because people don't fawn over him as the fallen martyr or they point out that his claim to 'know' the truth of a lie but can't come close to proving his point, doesn't mean it's hatred.It's observation.

    16. well said that man :)

  2. It doesn't matter how much the queen earns.Money's a weird concept for her.But, if she liquidated her assets she'd make Bill gates look pretty small.The ill educated oaf, Trump, is no less educated than the Cameron oaf.She tolerated him and his animals long enough without dissolving them for declaring war on ordinary people.OK, they're related, but to me it's still about their jobs and duties.She even broke protocol one year to visit Cameron on Xmas day.She's all about the bloodstock, 'her maj'.Not just the horses either.It's everyone's. Maybe Trump is from a family of Grifters.Let's face it, they were an unsavoury lot.When they were the 'Trumpfs', Grandaddy made a fortune from illicit liquor and brothels on the gold trail.Whereas, Cameron's, when he wasn't broadcasting the family pride in their Ashkanazi Jewish roots made his from slavery. Lovely.

    At the end of the day, the queen isn't supposed to be a political animal.Therefore she can invite whoever she likes to her palace.She doesn't have to invite anyone unless she so wants.Trump's a politician.He's running the world from Twitter.He has no brains, no conversational skill, no charisma and must be the truly hard work socially at any level of event.Most of the yanks can't stand him and most of the Brits can't.It's nice to know that the opinions and feelings of so many thousands of people that span the Atalantic still mean absolutely zilch to Frau Eliza.

    1. Anon 26 May 20.03

      That's a very insulting post you've made about Trump, do you know him personally, have you lived in his house with him for months to find out what goes on behind closed doors, you assume that "most of the Yanks can't stand him" but weren't they the ones who voted him in to office???

      You also say most of the Brits can't stand him either, what a ridiculous statement to make, how do you know? I for one was over the moon when he was elected as US President, it was a whole new dawn for the US as will Brexit be for the UK when we can throw off the shackles of the super rich, the megalomaniacs, the NWO bullies, the liars in chief who are determined to undermine the Brexit vote. It's a fight to the death for democracy to be upheld in the UK, but with the evil, traitorous Government we have it will no doubt end in blood shed as have the riots in Paris because Macron wouldn't listen to the population.

    2. Oh dear JC you and I may share similar views on the McCann case but politically we are polar opposites!

      I agree, Cameron has got away much too lightly, it was a really ill conceived idea, with very little, if any, thought put into the possible outcomes. Perhaps they thought, Remain would win outright and it would never be a problem.

      I don't have any respect for any of the Tory hierarchy, like the Republicans in the US they only represent the 1%, those who benefit the most from the tories being in power. There is a recent talk by Noam Chomsky that I highly recommend, he explains in a nutshell, how the dominant ideology works.

      I like, actually love, Jeremy Corbyn. He is a true man of the people, he cares deeply about poverty and injustice and has the wisdom to know that most of it is unnecessary. He and John McDonnell have spent decades working out the logistics of reviving the economy. As Clinton said, 'it's the economy, stupid'. We are truly living in Broken Britain. The rich are becoming obscenely rich, stacking up their millions without a care in the world for the human cost of their greed. The truth is, unless you are a billionaire the tories and their popular front UKIP (or whatever they are calling themselves these days) are winning the 'poor' vote by blaming Britains' woes on immigrants.

      I love immigrants. My parents were immigrants, albeit of the white but Celtic variety. We in the same places and suffered the prejudices, I remember at the age of 5 being called up onto the school stage with my brother aged 6, to speak into the microphone held by the Headmaster so everyone could laugh at our Irish accents. I'd like to say I was traumatised but I wasn't. Our Irish granny had us performing and taking a bow since we were toddlers, we loved it.

      But I've wondered. US politics are my 'thing' at the moment, I'm totally obsessed. And, dear Lord, I don't think I have ever hated anyone as much as I hate Donald Trump. JC, I am surprised at you that you believe the Democrats are 'sore' because Trump won.

      Too right they should be sore!

      continues, lol. On second glass of wine, hic

    3. Anonymous29 May 2019 at 18:40

      ''That's a very insulting post you've made about Trump, do you know him personally, have you lived in his house with him for months to find out what goes on behind closed doors''

      Stop being odd.

      Do you think you have to share somebody's home to be able to make an assessment of his personality or public behaviour ? I never stayed with Ted Bundy but i'm prepared to say he treated women rather unpleasantly.I didn't live with Obama when i catalogued about 100 lies he told in his first two years and the dozens of promises he broke in even less time.

      Trump is an arrogant loud mouth.This moron turns up in other countries, ignores their customs and protocols because he's the President of the US. He threatens them all with a trade war and warns them not to mess with big Uncle Sam.This is the big celebrity who used his business acumen to open two casinos in Atlantic City and managed to bankrupt both.He embodies the duplicitous spirit of the faked heroic victory at the Alamo. He's Davy Crocket without the brains or guile. He's Jim Bowie without the booze.He's John Wayne without the awesome versatility and talent( cough).He's the answer to the question no f**ker asked.

      Don't kid yourself he isn't one of the NWO or megalomaniacs . He's their worst ever puppet.He just doesn't understand the finer points well enough to pontificate about the brave new lie.

      This is the man who cruised into Washington after winning an email war and twitter campaign about nothing interesting.He made the right noises about nothing political; he would stop 'fake news' ( Trump's phrase for the alt media who were asking too many questions and exposing too much bullshit). He would 'open the JFK files' ( one for the conspiracy theorists there ..get them onside), he would weaponise-erm, sorry, ''place 'space soldiers' above us all to oversee world peace'' ( Trump displaying unconscious humour by getting his fellow space cadets ready).

      Most yanks and most Brits can't stand his whining arrogant sanctimonious facade.He's no more than another Zion poodle but with better hair( allegedly).He's a parody of himself.

      Brexit will be decided by the people.Not the people who voted in the referendum or the ones who vote in another one if it happens, but the elite who count the votes and edit the results.It isn't just the US and the UK who don't listen to or care for the the voices of their people, it's all over the west.Somewhere, Merkel, Trump, Blair, Johnson,Michel,and Macron will be breaking bread with Netanyahu and awaiting instruction.That will include Mr Corbyn too unless he wants another barrage of trumped up accusations fired his way ( no pun intended).As the saying goes, the words may change, but the song remains the same.Give me a shout when the fat lady's clearing her throat..


    You may wish to check your heading Ros.


  4. One question on the Euro Election. If it is run on PR, and 60% of the vote went to remain parties, how can Farage be the winner in this?

    1. Oscar Slater, 27 May at 20:19

      Because the Labour Party doesn´t fall within the remain parties?


    2. Ok nl, that takes it down to 59%. The point is still the same.

  5. Oscar Slater 27 May 20.19

    Any elections that are done in the UK are on the basis that the party that gets the most votes is the winner, hence Brexit Party came first.

    This was an election to vote in EU candidates to stand in the EU Parliament, it wasn't a General Election. There were also 2.5 to 3 million EU citizens living in the UK who were allowed to vote, obviously they were going to vote for a Party that wants to stay in the EU i.e. the LibDems, so really the final count is skewed if you take into account all the EU citizens. Blair, Alistair Campbell, the LibDems leader, BBC news, Sky News, the MSM have not mention that fact, so they are being deceitful, which is no surprise.

    1. re my post of 29 May 17.48

      I forgot to mention that many of the 17.3m people who voted in 2016 to leave the EU didn't bother to vote in this election as they couldn't see any point as the newly elected MEPs would only be attending one EU meeting if the UK leaves the EU on 31st October.

      It was an outrageous waste of £millions of UK taxpayers' money, T May was throwing her dummy out of the pram because her fellow MPs wouldn't vote for her horrendous WA. No doubt she'd made a deal with the EU to make sure the WA was voted in but (i wonder what she was offered by them) she came unstuck when people saw what the WA deal entailed when a legal expert was brought in to make T May reveal the contents when T May was trying to hide the fact that it would put the UK in a worse position than it was now with the EU and we would end up as a Vassal State with no say in anything, no voting rights etc but still paying £billions to the EU every year and getting very little back for the UK. She got caught out by not wanting the real facts of what was included in the WA revealed.

  6. Hi Rosalinda,
    it's fair that we agree to disagree on the policies of the strange new American president. We all know when a person wants to run as president of the US it helps to be a a millionaire before putting your candidacy up for the vote.
    There were a few exceptions in a row - Harry Truman a lawyer from Missouri, Eisenhower the "winner" of WW11 and finally Richard Nixon, a barely known politician from small town California.
    Sometimes you can get lucky and end up getting elected despite the wealth.

    So we are stuck with another millionaire (but hey, a person needs that extra cash to run his own business and run the country too).

    Anyway, to follow this up with something a bit off topic.
    Can it be true that you have said you were/are a Marxist ideologue and still are a supporter of the monarchy.
    You have touched on it before and seemingly recognized the monarchy as old chums
    Naturally it is ingrained in our culture so don't feel bad.

    On reflection, it is odd that the most so-called prosperous/advanced countries in the world -starting from north to south, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Holland, Belgium, England, and Spain all have constitutional monarchies but the British version is way overboard with it's manipulation of the media and the handing out of titles and awards to make the common person feel ashamed. Why can't he be an Earl, a Knight or an OBE. With all the trappings.
    The Royal hierarchy has never understood this failed PR ploy and now that the (common) people can read between the lines the aristocracy in trouble.

    Not saying that it's going to be Yekaterinburg on July 18th 1918.
    But I would say monarchists are living on borrowed time.
    Hope I didn't paint you unfairly.
    Have a nice day.