The shadow goverment

 Jim Ferguson with Liz Truss:

In a fearless interview, Liz Truss just tore through the illusion that Britain is run by its elected leaders. “Even if someone is bad — like Starmer or Reeves — at least they’re elected,” she said. “These other people — the technocrats — can’t be removed. That’s the problem.” She laid it bare: unelected bureaucrats, from the Bank of England to the Home Office, hold the real power. They fail at every turn — financial stability, inflation, the asylum system — yet no one gets sacked. Truss named the truth most politicians fear to utter: “The unelected are far too powerful — and they’re never held to account.” She praised the American model, where Trump brought in innovators like Elon Musk, people chosen for results, not ideology. Then she dropped her vision for Britain — bold, unapologetic, and patriotic: End the economic death spiral. Get fracking and rebuild British energy. Cut taxes, build freely, unleash enterprise. Stop funding illegal migrants in luxury hotels. Grow the economy by freeing it — not strangling it. This wasn’t nostalgia. It was rebellion — against the unelected power that has hijacked democracy itself. Liz Truss is saying what millions already know: Britain is being run by people no one voted for. And she’s calling time on it.

The obvious question is ... however to rid the shadow world of its power? The pollies can't do the nuts and bolts stuff, the bureaucratic part ... so who will? How to get such people doing it without seizing power?

Aren't We Forgetting Something, BBC News?

The family of a young boy who was left with life-threatening injuries after he was thrown from the 10th floor of London's Tate Modern art gallery have said their "little knight" has achieved his goal of being able to run, jump, and swim again.

The boy, who spent months in intensive care, has continued to gain cognitive endurance. His family said although his memory skills were still very limited, they were functional and improving, so he was "acquiring a general knowledge at his own pace, which increasingly allows him to be included with other children".

Bravery was found guilty of attempted murder in 2020 following a trial at the Old Bailey. He was handed a life sentence and told he would serve a minimum of 15 years in prison.

Heartening as it is to hear good news, it's strange that their update on progress doesn't include a mention of the progresss made by his attacker - perhaps because its not quite so heartwarming.

Restating the bleedin' obvious ... yet again

With X swamped by US content at 5 a.m. Tuesday, what are the UK headlines?

Well obviously the Huntingdon train but after that, the Chagossian vote and then this one ... a restating of the bleedin' obvious we've known for how long now?  This is an Xer, Jim Chimrie, doing just that:

The BBC stands accused of the most serious breach of trust in its history. An internal whistleblower has revealed that Panorama – the Corporation's flagship investigative programme – deliberately doctored a Donald Trump speech to make it appear he was urging on the Capitol riot. In reality, Trump had told his supporters to march "peacefully and patriotically" to make their voices heard. The BBC cut that line, spliced in phrases from another part of the speech, and broadcast the fake version a week before the 2024 US election.

The BBC didn't "misreport" Trump. It doctored him. It took an hour-long address, sliced it into pieces, and stitched together a line that never existed – turning a call for peace into a call for violence. It then ran the footage under dark music, cut to scenes of rioters, and presented the lie as fact to millions of viewers. This wasn't clumsy editing. It was fabrication. It was intent. The Corporation made a man say words he never uttered, to feed a story it had already decided was true. That is not journalism. That is propaganda. The revelation comes from an internal BBC adviser, Michael Prescott, who served on the Corporation's own standards committee. When he raised alarm at the distortion, senior executives dismissed his concerns. The Director-General looked away. The chairman said nothing. The culture that once prized truth above all now protects deceit in its own name. And it fits a pattern. The same BBC that forged Trump's words has whitewashed Hamas's war crimes. It commissioned a Gaza documentary narrated by the son of a Hamas minister, paid him, and told the public he was part of the "Hamas-run government" – as though that were somehow different from Hamas itself. The same delusion runs through their coverage: terrorists are "militants," victims are "combatants," and Israel's self-defence is "aggression." Like all Britain's great institutions, the BBC has been captured by a Leftist-Islamist ideology that prizes grievance over truth and allegiance over honesty. It speaks the language of compassion while serving the cause of those who despise the civilisation that funds it. From Whitehall to the classroom, from the Met to the newsroom, the infection is the same – a new clerisy that believes moral virtue gives it the right to deceive.

Just look at the date of that quote ... the year. The disease is always the same: ideology before evidence. The BBC now begins every story with a sermon. In America it was "Trump the menace." In Israel it is "the occupier." In Britain it is "the oppressed versus the privileged." The facts are trimmed to fit the creed. When reality resists, it is edited out of existence. They call this "narrative integrity." In plain English, it means lying for the greater good. It's why the BBC can run a campaign ad claiming that "the more you try to drown out reality, the harder we'll work to establish the facts" – even as it drowns them itself. It's why it lectures others about deepfakes while producing its own. This is not accidental bias. It is the logic of a captured institution that sees its mission as moral correction. The BBC no longer trusts the public to think; it instructs them what to think. It decides which truths are dangerous, which lies are useful, and which stories must be rewritten for the cause. And here is the irony. The broadcaster that once gave Britain its common voice has become the greatest source of distortion in the land. It claims to defend democracy, yet it meddles in elections abroad. It claims to stand for impartiality, yet it silences dissent at home. It claims to fight hate, yet excuses those who preach it. The BBC's real product today isn't news. It's obedience. When a state broadcaster edits words to invent guilt, it stops being a mirror and becomes a weapon. The BBC's greatest lie isn't what it said about Trump or Israel. It's what it says about itself: that it can be trusted. "The same BBC that forged Trump's words has whitewashed Hamas's war crimes."

When (And Why) Did We Ever Stop?

The answer of course is perhaps that 'we' didn't, but we've imported more and more people who never had that respect.

Impatient drivers must "show respect" for funeral corteges after a hearse was side-swiped, delaying someone's funeral and causing £20,000 of damage, a funeral director has said.

He said similar situations were happening "weekly" and drivers had even become abusive.

Which drivers? Are we talking about imports here? Be honest!  

The National Association of Funeral Directors (NAFD) said it was a growing problem across the UK.

He told the BBC a cortege should be treated like a train on the road and pleaded with drivers to be patient. "It's happening weekly... someone will cut up a hearse or not let us out at a junction cutting in between the cortege and separating families," Mr Griffiths said. "It's just a lack of respect."

Is it because we have imported a huge number of people who didn't grow up in cultures where this respect was commonplace? 

I'm of an age and a culture where my father - who often wore a flat cap due to his Yorkshire heritage - would stop and remove it if a cortege passed while he was walking in the street, and if driving, would always slow down...  

The funeral director, who said he tried to keep off main roads and recently added white flashing lights to his hearses, urged motorists to let funeral processions go ahead, adding that a "few extra moments" was all they needed. 

"It's just wrong not stopping and letting the whole cortege go so all the family can stay together as a mark of respect," he said. Mr Griffiths' remarks were echoed by Modris Kesans, the founder of Kilvey Carriages in Swansea, who said: "The public are in too much of a hurry... they will even cut in front of a horse drawn funeral carriage."

Is it really 'the public' Modris, or a subset of them? 

Stopping for a cortege is a "tradition" amongst road users, it said, a "moment of dignity and respect for the deceased and their family".

Wrong tense, I fear. We didn't change the tradition. we changed the populace. 

21 realisations all will eventually need to have

Melinda Richards is Gold Coast, Queensland based, usually a food presenter but did post this a couple of days ago, quite to the current point in 2025:

The Fabianism of tech honchos

In 2001, I bought my second computer ever, a full on PC, the first being a Mac 524ked ... by 2006 I was blogging, by 2007 I was exploring Facebook's antecedents:

To which I added ggl's front page:

Look at the political proclivities of tech PM types as well ... Zuckerberg, Dorsey, head of properties on X ... then look at the political naivety at, say, Wired ... and you start to question tech engineers' left leaning on the whole.

I put it down to being so tied up with open bracket-close bracket type thinking ... a sort of pedantry required to operate online activities ... and somehow political thinking seems to have no disk space in their minds.

There are exceptions, yes, and one of those is "helping me" across the way but seriously though ... why would anyone employ a WEFer like Yaccarino as CEO?  I'm just applying the same pedantic, exhaustive thinking a techie does here.

It's The Department For Work And Pensions again

Doling out taxpayer cash to neither a worker nor a pensioner:

A drug addict boyfriend who strangled his girlfriend to death before driving around with her body in the passenger seat is eligible to receive thousands of pounds in benefits while locked up.

Isn't there some clause that prevents criminals from profiting from their crimes by writing books or scripts? I'm sure that now-deceased jailbird columnist at the 'Guardian' always used to moan about it. So how come this guy can be given taxpayer funds so cavierlierly? 

... the killer avoided prison after being convicted of manslaughter thanks to a diminished responsibility claim owing to his poor mental health. He was instead detained under sections 37 and 41 of the Mental Health Act 1983 and sent to a secure psychiatric unit where he will likely be eligible to receive universal credit payments. It means Tape is not classed as a prisoner and will not be transferred to a jail if he is released from hospital. As such, he is entitled to claim for up to £400 a month of benefits, unlike if he was detained under section 45A which excludes a person from receiving the taxpayer-funded money.

*sigh* Can he at least be billed for his board and lodging like they do with miscarriage of justice cases?

Nobody is prepared to bell the cat

What we all want is to be left alone to make our way ... career, family, home, car, holidays, our culture etc. and we expect our govt, at all levels, whom we pay for, to ensure we're able to do that.

I was surprised in 2008 when Jack Straw let slip that he hated "The English" and wanted to see them suffer.  He was born in Essex for goodness sake.

And that is what the Uniparty is doing, from the insanely corrupt EU to the WEF to the deathculters to the ultrazionists to China, before even looking more closely across the ditch at the Macronhellhole.

More specifically again:

Rael Braverman is right but at the same time wrong in that the entire system is set up that if individuals do a Wat Tyler, they're Lucy Connollyed or Tina Petersed or Tommy Robinsoned in the blink of an eye.

There are many ... not stupid far left university and secondary girls but men of the old type, plus women, quite prepared to join up to fight the invaders if there was even the slightest chance of success ... and that requires:

* A leader, of which there are currently none, certainly not Uniparty Farage who bends with the wind and has done many nadty things, inc. selling out TBP for his promised gong.

Rupert's a fine man but as a General?  Hmmmm.  TR is a fine radical figure, a dissident ... but could he take care of the day to day running of the nation?  Ben?  Does not grab the imagination and is not Brit in the sense we mean. Fine man, don't get me wrong.

Plus this entire phase of the Kalergi, depopulation, destroy nations, Fabian plan ... whatever you want to call it, depends completely on people spasmodically saying, "Enough!" and charging, more or less alone like a Lola Moir, at massed deathculters, rapists, murderers and being picked off either by them or by their allied agents ... Plod.

"Them" know full well it's nowt to do with courage, it's to do with combining, inspiring others to combine. There does, sadly, need to be a catalyst ... an Ant Middleton?  Why is he not inspiring people?  TR gets put down as Zionist ... I'm thinking he's not but Ezra befriended and part funded him.

Yet September 13th did happen, the national mood was certainly shown.  What's happened to all the flags ... are they still up?  My neighbour's is, so that's one loyalist to the nation.

I'm thinking it's true that everyone is waiting for someone else to bell the cat, to make the running. Is there anyone of that stature in Britain?  If he is and did and could escape the quislings above in govt and enforcement, then people would pile onto the plan, sign up ... I would.

I listen to, watch other people say exactly what Rael and I are saying/writing and I ask, "Why not you yourself then?"

"Oh no, I have family, income to protect. I mean 'Someone'."

Yes ... that elusive Someone.

Low Hanging Fruit Again...

A woman says she was "shocked" when she was fined £150 for tipping the remnants of her coffee down a road gully in west London. Burcu Yesilyurt, who lives in Kew, said she thought she was acting "responsibly" when she poured out a small amount of coffee from her reusable cup down the drain rather than risk spilling it on the bus she was about to catch to work. But to her surprise, she was then stopped by three enforcement officers at the bus stop near Richmond station and fined under Section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, external. Richmond-upon-Thames Council said its officers "acted professionally and objectively" and that the fine was issued in line with its policies.

Of course they said that! They were hardly going to say ‘Ooops, we got it wrong!’ were they? 

Ms Yesilyurt said she had asked the enforcements officers if there were any signs or information warning people of the law but received no response.

Hardly surprising! 

Section 33 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 makes it an offence to deposit or dispose of waste in a way likely to pollute land or water, including pouring liquids into street drains.

And is coffee considered a pollutant, or would any reasonable person feel that this act referred more to other liquids? Coffee is poured down the drain every day, albeit it’s probably phased through a deliveryman’s or taxi driver’s kidneys first…

The Richmond Council spokesperson said: "Nobody likes receiving a fine, and we always aim to apply our policies fairly and with understanding. "We are committed to protecting Richmond's waterways and keeping our borough's streets clean and safe 

"Enforcement action is only taken when necessary, and residents who feel a fine has been issued incorrectly can request a review."

But now you've backed down and cancelled the fine, so clearly, either you were wrong to issue it, or it's the weight of public ridicule and oprobium thats forced you to back down.

The council spokesperson said: "Fixed Penalty Notices clearly outline that there is an appeal process available to anyone who wishes to challenge them 

"It is likely that, had this case progressed through that route, the notice would have been rescinded because it is a minor contravention which the recipient agreed not to repeat."

Ah. Wrong then. Figures. 

Midazolam Matt

Amusing in a way how this old chap gets away with his vlog but he does.  Not so amusing is what happened largely from 2020 till late 2022 and beyond.  One of our number here, Grandpa, is not in the least amused ... nor is my mate from around here.

My own question is when is Midazolam Matt and all the rest finally going to be incarcerated for their antihuman actions?

I did not so much watch the YT as lie on the bed and listen, as he's reading from his prewritten script.  His comments about genetics were interesting ... I wonder what explains Two Tier's non-functioning brain?  Just ideology?