Hardly anyone's been speculating as to just what gives between this admin and her loyal helper ... one a dyed-in-the-wool, right-libertarian wild animal from ancient times ... the other an eccentric classic-liberal with bible-quoting propensities ...
Well, speculate no more because the screenshots don't lie ... this is what we get up to:
In putting together this Saturday post, the Ceuta situation has been covered across soc-med, Marlon West’s reasonable showing in 25% turnout Manchester has been posted by his daughter, the “election” of a Woke left feminazi has been noted … same old same old … and people are thinking that the electoral process is simply seeing creeps parachuted in to do their worst on voters and the young. Fauci pretend trial goes on.
Thought today I might do this instead:
The answer of course is that it’s nothing to do with age concern … it’s all to do with DigID and OneLogIn, having to use govt approved “proof” of age which really means, just as with flock cameras and other surveillance, plus in all new cars … plus another factor … built in failure of said devices.
I’ve been twice with someone to a supermart in the past half decade and both times, the machine broke down … I flatly refuse to use anything non-human in such matters, including ATMs, esp. if on an outside wall.
Before leaving outside shopping, this was posted overnight:
That’s $AUS … other currencies this morning include:
On top of that, almost all bread based products have the folic acid in there, contra-indicated for stents for a start. You are aware where all this is going. That’s before seed oils, the sky, water, land misuse now, plus plastic particles.
And so to online issues. Nothing is designed to make things go smoothly … quite the opposite. One example … I’m being hit by spam (about 15 an hour currently, which is interesting overnight). Solution on the ipads with Safari and WordPress? Akismet of course. It’s in there ready to switch on, I have an API key which one needs to switch it on.
That key is sitting in the old dash at a different WP blog but can be used for the new as well … so they say. I go in to get it … new dash, not even my old sites are accessible any more. However, if I pay them money … £9, £49 … I can get a new one, containing heaps of meta I personally don’t need … whilst my original API is officially forever on that site, across all WP sites.
All right, I decide to see if it’s doable via the panel they have up there now. Verification needed again. Govt verification. But govt already have every detail needed, so why this all again? One option was £0, whatever I could pay. The whole point was that they’re not really interested in the money … they want private details going into the public domain. That’s where the big money is.
And so it goes on. It’s unfashionable, even anathema to go biblical online … but there is a thing called mark of the beast (very popular with Chinese officialdom just now) in Revelation, without which you can neither buy nor sell.
And that’s where we all are, heading for Them’s beloved 2030.
......
Someone commented with no moniker:
After a little bit of investigation I have discovered that there are certain types of flour which will be exempted from the "fortification". Also some types of bread. If you have a small independent mill nearby you may be able to source pure flour there. Flour has a long shelf life especially if stored in food grade buckets or sealed bags with oxygen absorbers.
As far as I can tell from what I've learned the main advantage of "fortification" is for healthy development of the foetus in pregnant women. Let's say the women make up 50% of the population and that 15% will be pregnant at any time. That's 7.5% of the population it's aimed at. Wouldn't it be better to issue free supplements to them?
As well as stent issues there is some evidence that this chemical can worsen prostate problems.
In January 2017, the then mayor of Greater Manchester, Andy Burnham, promised to end rough sleeping in the region by 2020 – a bold, frankly absurd promise that inevitably didn’t materialise. Nearly a decade later, shortly after becoming prime minister, Burnham promised to end rough sleeping again, only this time for the whole of England. So why should we believe him this time around?
We shouldn’t, of course. Because he's just as big a liar as the unlamented Starmer.
I have interviewed Burnham several times over the past decade. At the end of 2019, when it was clear he had not lived up to his promise, I asked him if he regretted making it in the first place. “I wasn’t making what you would call a traditional target,” the mayor said. “I issued my commitment to make it more of a wake-up call to the system. And I think it has had that effect.”Burnham’s advisers had told him to tone down the pledge, but he resisted. “The team here said I should have said: ‘End the need for rough sleeping,’ because you can’t force people into a shelter … In retrospect, if I had said ‘end the need for’, that probably would have been a wiser thing to have done. But I wasn’t in the space of wanting to play semantics with it.”
A lot of verbiage to say, ‘Oh, damn, you caught me out!’, eh Reader?
Official figures showed rough sleeping decreased by two-thirds in Manchester during his first five years as mayor. There are reasons I can quibble with this claim. First of all, it doesn’t pass the eye test. Just walk through the city centre in the early hours, and you’ll find people still bedding down in their dozens. Second, the statistics on rough sleeping are based on single-night snapshots, which involve council representatives walking around counting the people they find rough sleeping. The problem with this is obvious.
Government statistics are lies? Gosh, you don't say...
Burnham’s government would also need to reverse 16 years of austerity. This is all quite spendy, and to fund it would require higher taxes, more borrowing and aggressive nationalisation of natural monopolies. An upheaval of the economy of such magnitude is unlikely to happen when so many Labour MPs have their fingernails firmly embedded in the market. If there’s even a suggestion that Burnham intends to depart from turbo capitalism, then he will be out of SW1 faster than you can say Liz Truss.
Ha ha ha he things we had 'austerity'. What a comedian!
His priority should be triggering a nationwide Housing First programme. Housing First, a policy pioneered in Finland that effectively eliminated rough sleeping, gives people a home with no preconditions, then tailors support to their individual needs.We know this works because we did it ourselves, only with a different name. The Everyone In campaign, established during the Covid-19 pandemic, virtually ended rough sleeping overnight by emergency block-booking hotels. Surely we can do the same thing again.
That was a measure for a short time event, not a permanent solution, there's a difference. And how can the government block-book hotels, when they are already being used for boat people?
There are about 300,000 long-term empty homes in England. Housing people in some of these dwellings might be a good idea; capping rents at an affordable rate would be another, as would fast-tracking asylum applications and enabling asylum seekers to receive benefits and temporary work visas while their claims are processed.
We have a housing crisis, according to yoy, and you want to increase it by increasing the population?
I’m not confident that Burnham will do any of these things. Not because I think he doesn’t care or lacks the political will, but because government apparatus is smothered in molasses, and most Labour politicians are Tories in all but name.
Yes … Fauci and the MSM plus all online have the hearing covered, while Rupert says Whitty’s turn is coming. I say add Ferguson and Hancock at a minimum.
Selecting three of a dozen screenshots to illustrate the utter maniacal disregard for human life, while medicos danced in wards and people were asked to clap like perorming seals in the streets, during which time families were being separated and refuseniks were being treated as societal pariahs … and whilst the strictures never app,ued to the invaders … need I say more?
This was West-wide and coordinated, was it not? By whom? Who were the main drivers of it all?
Somewhere on the new British prime minister’s desk sits a document. It was quietly published last week, in the dying hours of his predecessor’s government. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office’s annual report cements how the UK aid budget will be allocated until 2029.
Says who? Says Halima Begum, a charity executive who has been chief executive of Oxfam, Action Aid and the Runnymede Trust. She wants to increase Britain's aid spending, because of course she does.
Anyone asking whether the new PM, Andy Burnham, will – or even can – restore Britain’s 0.7% aid commitment should begin with this document, which appears designed to lock in three more years of retreat from the world’s poorest communities before Burnham could take office.
Good - we should be retreating from them, not spending ever increasing amounts of taxpayer money on them when we have a financial crisis looming at home!
The outgoing administration knew the human consequences. To its credit, the Foreign Office’s equality assessment is candid, conceding the cuts will “inevitably have negative impacts”.
Need is no longer the primary organising logic of UK aid. Geopolitics is, with budget cuts going to fund defence.
At last, common sense prevails, because most of the countries to which we have been so generous in the past have been providing the main threats to us in this country.
The idea of additional billions in taxpayer money flowing into unelected institutions abroad, beyond the reach of those who provided it, has proved potent in the recent past – look at Brexit.
Exactly - learn the lessons of that event, and keep the begging bowl you hold out. We have run out of patirnce as well as money.
Today’s screenshot is simple enough, just another passing incident in the country’s mismanagement, but my question is not so much about the Jodrell Bank mess but about the long history of modern British mismanagement … and why? How does it continue?
British Leyland, the Post Office Horizon scandal, Carillion, Thomas Cook et al … the way Wokery consumed all management so swiftly. The uselessness of it all.
Is it managerialism? Wiki has this about it:
Managerialism is an ideology asserting that professional management skills are universally applicable, and that organizations run best when driven by strict efficiency, measurable performance metrics, and top-down control. It often prioritizes standardized data and business-oriented outcomes over the specific, localized goals of the organization.The concept of managerialism emerged during early industrialization, but was popularized as an ideology by thinkers like James Burnham, who noted that control of institutions was shifting from hands-on owners to professional bureaucrats and administrators.
Quantification: Heavy reliance on performance benchmarks, KPIs (Key Performance Indicators), and data analytics to assess success. [1, 2] Universal Applicability: The belief that generic management techniques can be successfully dropped into any environment, whether it be a corporate factory, a hospital, or a university. [1, 2, 3, 4] Marketization: Pushing private sector-style incentives and competition into the public sector or non-profit realms (often termed “New Public Management”).
And of course, it applies as well in the new medicine, where “doctors” work from home and refer to “evidence based” diagnoses without needing to resort to experience. Thus you can put any youngster or new citizen in the role and bureaucratically apply it to every patient.
The second question I have is how to stop this horror happening?
Hands down the hottest ticket in London this summer is the musical Pride at the National Theatre, which is booked solid until the end of its run in September and will presumably transfer to the West End after that.
In other coutries, the imported population you Guardiaista fawn over are celebrating Pride in their own ways. And over here in the UK, most people would rather watch the woke Odessey film than go see a play about Pride. For myself, I have a ticket for this in November and I can't wait.
I should say up front I haven’t seen the show (can’t get a ticket!). But this week, as I watched my timeline continue to fill up with effusive praise and lots of crying about the musical, I went back to the film.
That's so 'Guardian' a puff piece for a show you haven't even seen...
Pride is set during the 1984 miners’ strike, when an unlikely alliance sprang up between a group of lesbians and gay men in London(Ed: well, at leat it should be refreshingly free of trannies!) and striking miners in a Welsh town. Stephen Beresford, who wrote the film and the stage production, tells the story of LGSM – Lesbians and Gays Support the Miners – a group set up by a young activist from County Antrim, Mark Ashton. I imagine there were hopes that the film would do a Billy Elliot, but neither British nor American audiences overly responded. Although the film was critically applauded, it didn’t break through.
Shame. It was up against 'Transformers Age Of Extinction' and 'Guardians of the Galaxy' mind you.
It is both shocking and moving to be reminded of how bad things once were, and what could still be achieved.
'Once were'? Is this an admission that things aren't terrible now? I'm surprised the editor let that one through!
Remembering Piddington from yesterday, good reader:
Piddington, Oxfordshire, has around 400 residents. It’s about to have 1600, the extra male, fighting age, from other countries … their dregs. The residents are not having it.
… you might now turn your eyes to the skies:
The obvious question is … how can we, as people, change it? Given that most voters are MSM-fed Woke normies or suicidal empaths.
Piddington, Oxfordshire, has around 400 residents. It’s about to have 1600, the extra male, fighting age, from other countries … their dregs. The residents are not having it.
All right. My question of course is … who came up with this brilliant strategy to destroy a community overnight? And why? What were they paid to plan that? Was the mood civicmindedness or having a good chuckle at how they’d stiffed the British people yet again? And if the latter, keep that attitude firmly in your mind.
Why would these creeps even be like this? Why are they in any decisionmaking position anyway? Why is the system so broken that it can allow such things? And I’m sure many other questions follow on from that.
Speedboat killer Jack Shepherd has been charged with attacking his new girlfriend after being released from prison.
The 38-year-old is facing new counts of intentional suffocation, controlling and coercive behaviour, and criminal damage.
He is also charged with two counts of ABH, according to documents released by the Parole Board.
And just who would risk an association with this man? Some young thing with no life experience perhaps?
His alleged victim is a woman in her 50s, who was said to be living in the same building as Shepherd when he was released from prison in 2024.
🤷♀️
Details of his recall to prison have only now come to light.
According to the Parole Board documents, Shepherd and his new victim, known only as 'Ms X' began a relationship.
Some women just like to live dangerously, it seems. Or maybe there were no bloodsport breed dogs waiting to be adopted?
