Tag Archive: Jeff Randall

Wheels within wheels

Jeff Randall, writing in the Telegraph, chooses to make some important points in an article about immigration and the effects thereof on our society – unfortunately he misses the main points. Once again we find a miniscule section of the population being used to sway public opinion. So 60% of 20,000 people surveyed believe that immigration has brought more disadvantages than advantages  – so?

There is much unsaid in Randall’s article: there is no mention of the free movement of people within the European Union; there is no mention that the last government, wishing to show they are good ‘Europeans’, threw open our doors when they could have kept some of them shut; there is no mention of the fact that the reason for needing immigrants to do jobs that the indigenous population would not do was due to an education system that is not fit for purpose; there is no mention of the fact that said education system has been – to put it politely – ‘buggered about’ by our political class without the direct consent of those that elected said political class; and lastly there is no mention of the fact that the last government needed the immigrant’s taxes to fund the growing benefit costs of those who were unable – thanks to a ‘pp’ system of education – to achieve gainful employment.

One must now turn to the point that Randall makes: the increased costs on our education and health services that said immigration has caused. If we , as a nation, are to have social, cultural and economic upheaval forced upon us; should we, who will have to fund and endure this, not be asked if we agree? Not that that would have made the slightest difference as our political class are unable to control the flow of immigration from Member States while we ‘belong’ to  the European Union; and do not ‘miss’ the use of the word ‘belong’ – but it would have been nice to have been asked.

What we see from this article, from one who we are led to believe is a ‘coruscating’ journalist, is but half the story, half the truth and encapsulates a point which begs the question: how can we rely on journalism to inform us? Has not journalism become but a means of forming public opinion; and one that conforms to the thinking of the political class on whom the journalists of today rely for their income?

This article highlights yet more decisions made, on a variety of subjects, by our political class for which we, as taxpayers, have to fund and on which we have had no direct input. This also demonstrates that political manifestos, presented to us come a general election, are not worth the paper on which they are written. In effect all such manifestos do is to allow an electorate to present a blank cheque to our political class, to subjugate us even further into becoming compliant slaves.

Where is there any sense of democracy in such a process? That the electorate continually vote for what amounts to a form of slavery can but show that our political class are succeeding in their aim to ensure the continuation of the slavery of those that fund them. This point is one that begs the question whether the electorate have lost the ability of thought and reason. If they are dissatisfied with their ‘present lot’, what for heaven’s sake is stopping them from engaging brain and looking for a more acceptable alternative? At which point, we then come back to the present education system – do we not?

I believe it was a member of the Rothschild family that said something along the lines of: I care not who governs a country, give me control of the money and I rule that country (I paraphrase). Is it not the case that it can be said that those who are able to control the education system are thus able to control the future of a country – and the future of the individual? If we are to lay blame on the parents of children, who it can be said have abrogated their responsibility as a parent in allowing the education of their children to be ‘warped’, just how many generations do we have to go back? Just who should we blame because where did this process of educational manipulation begin? With Crossland and his wish to banish grammar schools?

It is not just the subject of education that can be blamed for the demise of our nation: let us also consider subjects such as our productivity and loss of manufacturing capability; the type of society in which we now live; the state of our national defense and our armed forces; the way that those who are unelected are able to influence government policy – quangos and fake charities? Past generations – and the present who compound the problem by their continuance of the status quo – have been led by the nose in the belief that those who care not for us, but their own careers, are our ‘carers’. If ever anyone was in search of an example of a confidence trick, it is right in front of our eyes in the form of representative democracy.

It seems to me that where the future of a nation is concerned, paramount is the subject of its method of educating its future inhabitants. Why then are we content to leave such an important subject in the hands of those who perpetuate a system of unrepresntative democracy?

Just asking…….






But politics, per se, is a fraud

Graeme Archer, Daily Telegraph, writes posing the question since when did Britain become a country that tolerates voting fraud. This article is no doubt prompted by a series that Andrew Gilligan (here and here) has been running about what appears to be a highly organised, illegal, activity in Tower Hamlets.

This is not a new phenomenon – remember, only two days before the last general election the Mail was alleging potential voter fraud in Tower Hamlets, Bethnal Green, Bradford, Calderdale, Derby and Surrey. So what has been happening to those police investigations? What have the Electoral Commission been doing for the last two years? Only now do we find that, as reported in the Evening Standard, the Electoral Commission have written to the police following their receiving a letter signed by 6 Labour councillors. If the Electoral Commission are aware of instances where postal votes have been cast by people who no longer live within a ward or constituency, why is it only now that they have decided to write to the police?

The manipulation of the postal voting system is but only one aspect of fraud when considering our political system.  Yesterday I posted on the fact that at the last general election every Conservative candidate committed a form of fraud by campaigning on a manifesto which contained a promise that their party knew full well could not be achieved. Even our politicians are frauds; witness Jeff Randall’s article from 2005 to which Richard North links today in a post which refers to another ‘Cameron Big-up’ article by Charles Moore in his usual op-ed Saturday Daily Telegraph slot. If even a van load of Viagra would fail to make a politician thrilling; if a politician has the mien of a middle manager, promoted beyond his pay grade; if a politician has something faintly louche about him to the extent that an observer feels he could not trust said politician with his daughter’s pocket money, then what the hell are they doing in positions where their power knows little limit?

Another fraud perpetrated on the British electorate are political manifestos, documents full of statements – all of which are ‘loosely’ worded – some of which may or may not be actioned and which bear hardly any relation to that which an incoming government does. In fact a quotation, reportedly by Michael Heseltine, shows how a politician views party manifestos:

“I keep telling my Tory colleagues: don’t have any policies. A manifesto that has policies alienates people. In 1979 the manifesto said nothing which was brilliant.”

Can it not be considered fraudulent of the Cabinet Office to refuse to disclose details of how many hours Sir Alex Allan, Cameron’s anti-sleaze advisor, works or what he had been doing since his appointment – especially when his salary is paid from public funds? Where the governance of this country is concerned, is it not fraudulent for someone in a non-job, one that no longer holds any degree of dignity, the point of that job which is not clear, to accuse another of exactly the same?

Is it not a fraud when politicians promote a form of democracy known as representative democracy when that system is anything but, resulting in no more than an elective dictatorship? Is it not a fraud when a government – one not elected but contrived by politicians for the exercise of personal power – produces a programme for government in which, for example, it promises the electorate recall of their MP but ‘conditions’ that promise by insisting that the final decision rests with their own political class? Is it not a fraud whereby politicians use the title Rt. Honourable and Honourable when that title, which encompasses the need for principles and a sense of morality, is abused as a result of those using it having no principles, nor morality?

Our politicians continually advise us that change is required, that we cannot continue as we are – and boy, are they right. They do, however, have a large problem looming on their horizon in that the change that will hopefully be forthcoming is one that they most certainly are not going to like – and it couldn’t happen to a nicer (not) group of people!

 Afterthought: Is it also not a fraud for people to present themselves as politicians when they are but college kids?


Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012