Diary Blog, 21 June 2020, including Reflections on the Forbury Gardens

Forbury Gardens

Forbury Gardens, Reading.jpg
[Forbury Gardens, Reading]

Readers will be aware that an unpleasant incident has occurred at the Forbury Gardens in Reading, Berkshire.



In keeping with the weasel times in which we live, the local news report above simply says that the 25 y o suspect is “from Reading“, though the BBC report is, unexpectedly, more honest, stating that the suspect “is Libyan“. All reports seen are at pains to say that the incident is “not connected with the “Black Lives Matter” “protests“” (vandalism) and not “terror-related”. Oh, that’s all right then…

So, it seems that a Libyan (“asylum-seeker”?) may have walked around stabbing (British?) people in a park with considerable historical connections, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forbury_Gardens#History including British Empire connections (as well as connections with mediaeval, Renaissance and English Civil War events), and near a British Empire military memorial, simply at random? Sorry, me no believe that…

I know the Forbury Gardens, though I have not been there for at least 45 years. I was born in Reading, and when I was very small, my grandmother would take me to the Forbury Gardens occasionally. That would have been around 1957.

The lion on the memorial was painted white or light grey back then or in the 1960s (though the Wikipedia piece about it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maiwand_Lion makes no mention of that). It looks much better now, or whenever the photo above was taken (obviously in a recent year, looking at the buildings nearby).

The Maiwand Lion, Forbury Gardens, Reading 2.jpg

The memorial was created “to commemorate the deaths of 329 men from the 66th (Berkshire) Regiment of Foot during the campaign in the Second Anglo-Afghan War in Afghanistan between 1878 and 1880. It is sometimes known locally as the Forbury Lion.” [Wikipedia]. So to memorialize soldiers who died fighting Muslims. Can this be simply co-incidental?

More information: https://web.archive.org/web/20070928000734/http://www.readingmuseum.org.uk/collections/album/pdfs/maiwand-25.pdf

In the late 1950s and early 1960s, when I was a small child, those gardens were peaceful, pleasant and safe, despite being in the centre of a large town.

The importation of the racially and culturally inferior is evil. Anyone supporting it or encouraging it is tainted by evil.

Ah…As I write, I have just read that the police now are treating the incident as “terror-related”. Just a label, really, but I do not suppose that Sherlock Holmes would treat such a crime as more than a “one-pipe problem”…https://www.rt.com/uk/492498-stabbing-reading-terrorism-police/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS

Katie Hopkins

The anti-British Twitter mob are still howling with delight about the expulsion of Katie Hopkins from Twitter. For example, here is a gross (and seemingly semi-literate, judging from other tweets seen) scribbler called Mollie Goodfellow:

That reaction to the Hopkins expulsion seems to be the norm for many actual or wannabee scribblers, “celebrities”, TV talking heads, System politicos.

Actually, the above-named bitch (of whom I had never heard until today) followed up with this unpleasant little tweet:

Incredibly, that creature is followed on Twitter by 45,000 people (for what that may be worth).

I have little time for the “libertarian” (when it suits), pro-Israel, pro-Jew, Faragist “conservative” populist politics of Katie Hopkins. She is not really social-national, and is saying what she says at least partly because she makes a living out of it, never having had a job or profession (except —she says—a few years in New York, in some office bod “consultant” role, and a year in a similar job at the Met Office in Exeter).

All the same, it should not be for some factotum at Twitter to decide who is and is not allowed to tweet. Especially when the process is so biased. Most of the Jew trolls are allowed to stay (the Stephen Silvermans, the Stephen Applebaums, “Mark Lewis Lawyer”, and the mentally-disordered Jewesses of North London and the neighbouring Borshch Belt), as are “antifa” idiots.

This is not a matter of a simple commercial setup which has the right to bar people; this is a quasi-monopoly (notwithstanding that small “baby-Twitters” exist), and there should be some kind of citizen’s right to publish on it.

I do agree with about half of the views expressed by Katie Hopkins, especially re. migration-invasion, multiculturalism, gypsies (whether “Roma” or Irish tinker) and a few other topics. I strongly disagree with some of her other views (not only her professed love for the Jews).

Funny to think that Katie Hopkins was working at the Met Office in Exeter when I was a barrister practising (2002-2008) from chambers in the same city. In fact, Katie Hopkins’ house (which had to be sold a few years ago, after her misadvised defence to a libel action by the so-called “Bootstrap Cook” failed, with large costs consequences) was in St. Leonard’s, a district of Exeter adjoining the area of the bluff over the Exe River, which is where my chambers were.

Colleton Crescent, Exeter (2) © Stephen Richards :: Geograph ...
[above: Colleton Crescent, Exeter, address of my one-time barristers’ chambers]

I never saw Katie Hopkins when I worked out of Exeter (I lived about 50 miles to the west, on the Cornwall-Devon border), though I did notice a few other “celebrities”, mostly at the Exeter County Court: Noel Edmonds the TV presenter, and John Burton-Race, the TV chef and restaurateur, among others.

As I say, it is not about being pro-Katie Hopkins, which I am not, but about the continuing attempt by a mob of Jews and “me too” groupthink idiots to shut down freedom of expression, either for socio-political reasons, or for their own advantage.

Tweets seen today


This nonsense (meaning the whole caboodle of “BLM” vandalism, “anti-racism”, worship of the backward races, “holocaust” fake “history”. etc..the whole bloody lot) will continue until the white peoples of Europe stand up with one voice and say “WE ARE THE RULERS IN EUROPE”! Also, until we have real history taught in schools and universities, and that includes reclaiming the honourable aspects of the civilizing mission of Aryan-descended mankind.

Much as I despise the misnamed “Conservative” Party, the Labour party continues to rule itself out. It just has little or nothing to offer English people.

Matthew Goodwin “forgets” that the Charlie Hebdo events were followed by a crackdown on free speech in the UK, in France and elsewhere, but only against anyone criticizing Jews, their behaviour, or the “holocaust” narrative fakery.

Most EU states now have repressive laws criminalizing “holocaust” “denial” (historical revisionism and freedom of expression), which bad laws echo the mediaeval laws against “heresy”.

These (often “conservative” or “Conservative”) commentators are now protesting about the madness that ZOG etc has unleashed (using the blacks as cannon-fodder), but where were they when I was pilloried in 2016 as the “extreme” “neo-Nazi barrister”, and when not one hand (from their milieu) was raised to defend me? Where were they when Alison Chabloz was prosecuted at the behest of a pack of Zionist Jews? Where were they to defend Jez Turner of the London Forum, or say any kind word about him, when he was actually imprisoned (in 2018) for speaking the truth?

More tweets etc seen today

[above: worth watching, especially from 3:35…]

Scottish independence (from UK, though not from NATO, presumably, nor from the EU, nor from international finance…) would mean a Westminster Parliament in which (on 2019 figures) the Conservative Party would have a majority of about 127 (because no Scottish MPs, of which 48 are SNP, 6 Conservative, 4 LibDem and 1 Labour).

I have a couple of issues with Nick Griffin’s tweet, above. First, he uses the old and now all but meaningless “right/left” binary; also, he posts a picture of the now completely sidelined Jeremy Corbyn. Not very skilled, politically.

Hard to believe that the “British” police can be “dumbed-down” even more! Anyone who has had more than passing contact with them in the past, say, decade or so will know that the Plimsoll Line on their ship is painted very low down already. I have often reposted one of my own experiences: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/07/13/when-i-was-a-victim-of-a-malicious-zionist-complaint/

Having said that, the police were better before they started to insist on more than a few “O” Levels. They certainly had more common sense. Now, we have chief constables who seem to be entirely asinine. Most “university” degrees now are Mickey Mouse, one way or another.

America is changing. Indeed, America has changed. It is already majority non-white for one thing. That has not yet filtered down through the whole of the political process, but the effects are already there fairly widely.


Jonathan Sumption’s article is well worth reading in full. Extracts:

Scientists can advise what measures are likely to reduce infections and deaths. Only politicians can decide whether those measures make sense in economic and social terms too

“...the Government had made no preparations at all. It had not included a lockdown power in the Coronavirus Bill which was then going through Parliament.

Instead, it was forced to make legally questionable use of public health legislation designed to control the movements of infected people, not healthy ones. Even then, it took another three days to prepare the regulations, and meanwhile pretended that they were in force when they were not.”

“‘Christ!’ the Prime Minister is reported to have said when Chancellor Rishi Sunak and Business Secretary Alok Sharma explained the economic consequences to him three weeks later on June 2. We were heading for an economic catastrophe: gross domestic product down by more than a fifth and falling; 3.5 million jobs set to be lost in the hospitality industry alone; unemployment already up to two million; several million businesses snuffed out; job openings for a generation of young people extinguished.

Why was the PM so surprised? What did he expect to happen if he closed down the economy for several months and conducted a scorched-earth campaign against the rest of our national life? The only plausible explanation was that he had never properly thought about it.

I have had no political allegiance for many years. I have observed the coming and going of governments of one party or another with equal indifference. But it is hard to be indifferent to what is happening now. You have to go back to the early 1930s to find a British Cabinet as devoid of talent as this one.

The Prime Minister, who in practice makes most of the decisions, has low political cunning but no governmental skills whatever. He is incapable of studying a complex problem in depth. He thinks as he speaks – in slogans.”

These people have no idea what they are doing, because they are unable to think about more than one thing at a time or to look further ahead than the end of their noses. Yet they wield awesome power. They are destroying our economy, our cultural life and our children’s education in a fit of absent-mindedness.” [Lord (Jonathan) Sumption, formerly of the Supreme Court bench, in the Daily Mail].

Looks as though I have been proven right again. I was saying all that (minus the then unknown “virus” etc) last year.

Look at the Cabinet! Boris-idiot sits there, playing the Prime Minister, though he has cut down on the rote-learned Latin and Greek phrases (designed to show the plebs that he is a real English “toff” from Eton and Oxford, and not a part-Jew, part-Turk public entertainer, with no ideas beyond the 12-year-old schoolboy ones of building bridges from England to Ireland, creating artificial islands with fantasy airports on them etc).

Then there is Indian “clever boy”, Rishi Sunak, who was briefly hailed as “future Prime Minister” because he decided to throw public money at businesses which were on their last legs before Coronavirus and the crazy “lockdown”.

Little Matt Hancock has proven himself (like the rest) incapable of anything useful during the largely contrived “crisis”.

The Jew Grant Shapps, he of the false names and dodgy (((typical))) get rich quick schemes he sold to mugs, yet is still posing as a Cabinet Minister.

Priti Patel will probably make another “let’s get tough on immigration” speech soon, despite the fact that she has done nothing to stem the flow. Indeed, she has closed all the immigration detention centres and released all the detainees! The best thing she could and should do would be to deport herself! If her “native” Uganda does not want her back, she could try Israel. After all, the Israelis, like the old KGB, pride themselves on getting their agents back.

So it goes. The rest of the Cabinet is no better. Half-Jew Raab— useless. Then we have Michael Gove, the Israel-worshipping cocaine abuser and drunk, who is perhaps best known for his dedicated cheating on his expenses during the 2005-2010 Parliament.

Jesus H. Christ! Does it get any worse?! Oh, yes, it does! I forgot to include that little pissant Robert Jenrick, the one with the Jew corporate lawyer wife etc…

41 thoughts on “Diary Blog, 21 June 2020, including Reflections on the Forbury Gardens”

  1. Yes, the CONServative Party is an absolute disgrace and has, in recent years, clearly abandoned even the pretence of being a socially conservative party which is supposed to be the real dividing line between it and the Liberal Democrats and Labour ie their non Conservative actions include not just failing to have socially conservative positions on crime and its treatment like the death penalty, harsher and longer prison sentences, their sacking of 20,000 place officers,


    1. Ah, M’Lord of Essex, my comments section has been the poorer for your absence.

      As you say, the Con Party has been living up to its name. Thousands of migrant-invaders come across the Channel on small boats monthly, accompanied by French naval vessels and then RNLI and Coastguard boats here. Then there are those smuggled in. Thousands of the bastards. What does Priti Patel do? Nothing. She’s useless (or even complicit). What does Boris-idiot do about the BLM vandalism? Nothing. Weakness everywhere.

      A real government would machinegun insurgents and insurrectionists, not bend the knee to them in sign of fealty…


      1. I would advocate not just restoring the size of our police forces to the numerical strength they were in 2010 before the Tories brutally cut them but also to recruiting an additional twenty thousand or so police officers on top of that.

        However, under the Tories, would it be worth doing this? Police officers don’t come cheap after all since they earn not too shabby wages.

        Spending more money to employ many more would only be worth the investment if they were released from the Politically Correct cosh of that disastrous McPherson Report that has destroyed them and skewed their priorities away from fighting real crimes.

        Sadly, under the PC fake Conservative Party we don’t get real police officers now only PC PC Stazi ones!


      2. M’Lord of Essex:
        My problem with your analysis or suggestion is at least partly answered by your two final paragraphs.

        20,000 police officers, fine (maybe), but the question is “what kind of police officers?” Wehave seen, even in the past week, both black and white policemen bending the knee in fealty to the mob and to the powers of destructiveness and evil. I do not want 20 more like that, let alone 20,000.

        Liked by 1 person

  2. 20,000 police officers sacked, hundreds of police stations closed many in loyal Tory areas like mine in Brentwood, our armed forces reduced in size even further to the point where our army is now at a size where it is as small as it was in the days when we lost the 13 US colonies.

    Immigration running at a constant level of HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS per year often from the most backward and violent places on earth like Libya despite Cameron’s clear promise in 2010 to reduce immigration to the, “low tens of thousands”.


  3. The LGBT agenda running rampant. Now, I might accept gay CIVIL marriage as I can see some point to that via a sensibly moderate amount of ‘freedom from the state’ libertarianism but the transsexuals should be treated as apart from the LGB community. Transsexualism is a different issue and a more cautious approach is needed. Gender bending and people being encouraged to see themselves as being a different gender from what they were born as should stop especially when this is aimed at children.


    1. M’Lord of Essex:
      Madness abounding. I myself knew a couple of such people (sex changes) once, but now it seems that everyone and his dog is getting a sex change! As for the propagandizing of children, it’s quite wrong. Also, as you say, the “civil partnership” concept was OK and dealt with inequities and inconveniences, but the full “gay marriage” stuff is unnecessary.


      1. What is most wrong is that even people without a genuine feeling they were born the wrong sex are encouraged to change their gender and the normal gender roles of men and women are being systematically undermined and completely overturned. Children especially are being targeted and can easily become upset at these roles being upended.

        What is so wrong about little boys wearing trousers or small girls skirts to school?


      2. To be honest, the only lesbian/gay/bisexual right I was concerned about and had some worries over was gay adoption. That for me was the ‘big one’ rather than gay CIVIL marriage and then because it isn’t just an individual right but also involves the rights of children as well.

        Transsexualism is a different issue to the sexuality rights of homosexuals, lesbians and bisexuals and really transsexuals shouldn’t be lumped in with the others.


  4. Needless to say, the fake Conservative Party hasn’t intervened to stop this incessant promotion of different gender roles in society even for children and is encouraging it instead.!

    The Tories have not just liberalised themselves in regards to gay marriage but in respect of EVERYTHING that was regarded as being ‘social conservatism’!

    You can be more liberal about one or two things but to systematically dump EVERY socially conservative position is just not on!🙄🙄🙄😡🤬🤬😡


  5. Labour, as you say, offer nothing to the British people, especially the English. The only difference is that they take Politically Correct liberalism/globalism/support for open borders to an even more extreme loony level than the fake Conservative Party does!

    Also, a damming indictment of them is that despite being a supposedly left wing party they don’t adhere to one of the ‘The Left’s’ Prime supposed values ie that of being in support of REAL democracy.

    WHERE is their support of dumping our profoundly undemocratic electoral system of First Past The Post and changing it to one of Proportional Representation?


    1. M’Lord of Essex: “never say never”, but Labour has an Everest to climb if it is ever to win power again. I was just updating a blog I did 18 months or so ago, re. “what if Scotland becomes independent of the UK?”. In terms of seats, as things stand, Cons would lose 6 seats, LbDems 4, Lab only 1, so the Cons would be 1 short of where they are now, but of course the SNP seats would also not be at Westminster, and they are 48 in number. In other words, the Cons would have a majority (on present figures) of 127!

      Even without Scottish independence, it seems very doubtful that Labour can do more than aim at being the largest party, rather than one with an absolute majority.


      1. Indeed. Scotland looks to be permanently lost to Labour even if it does stay a part of the United Kingdom. I was reading the Wikipedia article on the Scottish Parliament elections of 2016 and it stated the pretty amazing fact that the result was the worst for Labour for 98 years and the first time since 1918 they had come third since that time.

        The devolved parliament has created a different dynamic to Scottish politics and it is hard to see how the Labour Party can come back strongly eg if you are for separation you vote SNP whilst if you are a unionist you vote Tory. Labour’s position on the union is too wish-washy compared to the Tory Party’s.


      2. M’Lord of Essex:
        There is also the point that the SNP has social-democratic policies, akin to those of Labour. So if someone wants to vote Scottish Labour, they would have to be (presumably) both more socialist than the SNP *and* more unionist. No wonder that Scottish Labour is polling around 10%-15%…


    1. M’Lord of Essex, I would not rule out Labour support for PR, *if* it declines further, eg after another huge defeat, but by then its support for PR will be meaningless anyway, because Labour will be peripheral. Catch-22.


      1. The Labour Party would be wise to not be so cocky about its future electoral prospects not just because of Scotland but because they can’t be absolutely sure the Liberal Democrats won’t revive enough to split the anti-Tory vote to let the Tories ‘win’ as they did in the 1980’s. We already have one aspect of 1980’s politics back ie a Tory government with a large overall majority but so far we haven’t got the other part eg the Liberal Democrats winning substantial support at a level whereby they and Labour let Tory MPs ‘win’ in their constituencies on well under 50% of the vote.

        In some Southern constituencies a modest increase in the Liberal Democrat vote did start in December’s election with the result that the Liberal Democrats, once again, became the primary challengers to Tory incumbents as in the 1980’s and 1992.

        My own seat of Brentwood and Ongar still has Labour in second place (a position which only came about for the first time since 1979 in 2017) but the difference is now less than 100 votes between Labour and the Liberal Democrats.


      2. I believe I am correct in stating that for the first time since the 1959 election December’s election produced a result whereby the Labour Party got slightly LESS seats in parliament than the share of the overall national vote the Labour Party received a across the country.

        The difference WAS a small one but it just goes to illustrate that even the Labour Party is not totally immune to the distorting effects of First Past The Post and was no doubt caused by their electoral situation in Scotland re the SNP.


      3. Labour are very short sighted when it comes to this issue of Proportional Representation. They should have given the country the chance to vote for a version of PR after they ‘won’ in 1997 as the Labour manifesto of that year promised. They got Lib Dem peer Lord Jenkins to devise a slightly more proportional unique system for us called the Alternative Vote Plus (his report is still up on the web so people can look at it using the wonders of google’s search box) but even that very slightly more proportional system than First Past The Post was too much for political dinosaurs like Margaret Beckett, John Prescott, Gordon Brown and the trade unions to swallow so the promised referendum never happened.

        How stupid! It wasn’t as if the Labour Party was ever going to improve upon the huge landslides the crooked FPTP system gifted them in 1997 and 2001, was it?🙄🙄🙄🙄


  6. Labour are very, very lucky that the Welsh so far see no great reason to vote in large numbers for their fake ‘nationalist’ party of Plaid Cymru or to see Wales return to being the same kind of stronghold for the Liberal Democrats as it was in for the Liberal Party in the late 19th Century/early 20th.

    If either scenario happened then Labour would be in in an extremely deep electoral hole.


  7. Yes, we can do without more PC Stazi PCs as that would just be a waste and considerable burden upon the public purse.

    However, IF we lived in a normal non-PC country like Japan or South Korea where the police do real police work instead of striving to uphold the prevailing PC Liberal/globalist political philosophy of the Tory government as they do here then yes a large increase in the number of officers would be a wise investment.


  8. Even before a government considers implementing tough policies like the return of the rope and flogging a sensible one should realise that the FIRST THING a criminal thinks about is ‘Am I going to be caught by the police, interviewed by them and put before a court for sentencing if I commit this crime?’

    With that in mind the best deterrent to criminal offences being committed is a sufficiently large ratio of police officers to a population and ensuring that police force is efficient and effective at combating crime.


  9. I was looking at an interesting Wikipedia article the other day that listed the approximate ratio of police officers to populations.

    The UN apparently recommends there should be about 225 officers per 100,000 people. In 2019, the figure for England and Wales was just under this whilst Scotland’s was better.

    Of course, we wouldn’t be able to afford Monaco’s level of 515 officers for just 38,000 people which makes their ratio about 1,300 per 100,000 people but we should aspire to get it to near the German figure of over 300 officers per 100,000 people.


  10. Monaco no doubt has a low crime rate not just on account of the very large size of its police force relative to its population but also because a third of the population are millionaires/multi-millionaires.

    I was surprised to see that Greece even with its economic difficulties of recent years has one of Europe’s largest police forces with over 500 police men and women per 100,000 people.


    1. M’Lord of Essex. I suppose you have to think “what would all those Greek police officers being doing were they *not* employed?” Look at what happened when the stupid Americans sacked all the Iraqi police after the invasion; they turned rogue. Quite a few of the Greek police supported the Golden Dawn party. Political imperative meant “keep them on payroll”, I think.


    2. Mind you, even with a third of its population being wealthy and having an exceptionally large police force that by itself doesn’t necessarily mean that Monaco has a low violent crime rate though it probably does. After all, as our very rich Premiership footballers here demonstrate on so many occasions the size of one’s bank account doesn’t mean a person possessing one will not be a violent thug or rapist.


      1. M’Lord of Essex:
        Monaco has only 8,000 or so “subjects” or citizens. To become one is next to impossible without having been born there *and to a citizen*. The other 30,000 residents are vetted, though a bit of foreign criminality, if of a financial (ie not violent) nature, is no bar, as you can see from “Sir” Philip Green and his family.

        I think that there are several reasons for the low crime rate, such as cctv everywhere and a very efficient police force which operates almost without restriction, but the main deterrent must be the 99.9% chance of being caught.


    1. Claudius:
      Thank you. I had seen the bit showing that amusingly dim black or half-caste woman. I agree with what was said about not only her, but also the educational level generally now in the UK. Frighteningly low.


  11. This Wikipedia page on police ratios to populations has recently been updated and the figure for Singapore has changed. It used to say that small city-state had 40,000 policemen and women for a population of around 5.5 to 6.0 million people giving them a very high ratio of about 700 odd officers per 100,000 residents but now it says the Singapore Police Service only has about 9,000 officers thereby making their ratio a lot lower and more like ‘normal’ countries where the average ratio is 300 and below police officers per 100,000 residents.


  12. I think it may have changed because it is now reporting the number of officers directly employed by the Singaporean Ministry of Home Affairs and not the other figure which was made-up by these officers AND those policemen and women doing their National Service as officers.


  13. Can Singapore’s low crime rate in general and its very low violent crime in particular be explained by its high ratio of police officers to the population (if the former figure is the more accurate one), the undoubted willingness of the courts there to impose frequent ultra-tough sentences of hangings, floggings with a rattan cane, lengthy and rigorous imprisonment terms or is it due to a combination of these factors or the fact that Singaporeans are used to living in a very authoritarian society from an early age ie they have corporal punishment at school and the young men have a two year long mandatory national service to complete.

    Basically are they just used to discipline from an early age or being mostly East Asians do they have that typical East Asian respect for authority?


      1. Well, it seems to me that you can only get away with not using punitive measures such as frequent hangings, floggings and rigorous and lengthy prison terms if your society is very prosperous with no great extremes of wealth between its people, is homogeneous like Japan’s with large amounts of social solidarity, a well disciplined society which is used to authority and/or your government and the taxpayers are prepared to dig deep into the collective pocket and have a very large and efficient/well trained/well motivated police force relative to the population.


  14. Filthy lucre: cash.
    Catching up on my podcast backlog today I just heard one of Mr pottymouth Jared Howe’s in which he speculates that if interest rates on savings go to nil or even negative it may result in a bank (or building society, etc etc) run by retail savers deciding to withdraw and keep cash; and that if that event occurs, there probably wouldn’t be enough cash available or even after stepping up printing to meet withdrawal demands, so voluminous has grown the digital-only volume of money.


    You could file under permabear – or proven forecaster!
    I think the guest is quite right on Trump, and probably also on the monetary issues though as usual with his sort he doesn’t seem to have details of the mechnics of the latter at his fingertips.


    – I think we can all just categorize this one as more chaos in the public space/public services, promoted by the ordo ex chao crowd of narcopaths* (thanks Mr Smith).

    * https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=narcopath


    1. Wigger:
      Thank you.

      I do not think that one can call the present UK Cabinet evil masterminds, or indeed masterminds of any kind. In the direct way, I prefer the Peter Hitchens view that they are simply out of their depth, including Boris-idiot. However, what matters is who and what is *behind* the Government. Not the puppets but the puppetmasters.

      As to money, that is a rather elastic thing.


  15. Hello Ian: I happened to click on the link to the Daily Mail article about the “offending” murals in the Foreign Office. Of course, the article in itself is crap but what really cheered me up were the reader’s comments. They were all furious about it, and they all have a massive number of “thumbs up.”

    If only all those Englishmen who expressed their righteous anger would take to the streets to fight the BLM mob!


    1. Claudius:
      You are right. If only…

      This “BLM” nonsense is actually a tiny proportion of even the blacks (most of whom know no history anyway, of any sort) and an even smaller percentage of the white population supporting it. Not even 1% in terms of those actually on the streets. Maybe a tenth of 1%. The notorious Bristol matter was someting like 100 or 200 vandals.


  16. It is utterly disgraceful that Labour and other assorted left-wing loonies want to mutilate either the interior or the exterior of Her Majesty’s Foreign and Commonwealth Office building in London not only on account of their obvious disrespect for British history but also because the Foreign and Commonwealth Office building is a Grade One Listed building and one of the most impressive and beautiful examples of architecture in central London. 😡

    The interior in particular from the pictures I have seen of it on the internet is probably the best looking one of any Foreign ministry anywhere in the world.


    1. You may be right, M’Lord of Essex. I have been inside a couple of FCO buildings in London, in the long-distant past, but *they* were grim, dark and all but deserted, unlike their main office in Whitehall, and you had to be escorted everywhere by a uniformed dragon lady of the kind also employed at the Palace of Westminster.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s