Novelist. Author of APSARAS and tales from the beautiful Saigh Valley. First person to quantify spiritual values.

Total Pageviews

Wednesday, 23 October 2019

UK General Election 2019

It is looking likely that the UK will hold a General Election before the end of the year. Parliament is effectively hogtied, unable to resolve the Brexit impasse with a Government struggling to implement its policies.
Johnson seems to have a good lead in the polls but so did Mrs May at the time of the last GE. What is different this time? The determination of a Labour Party making a last ditch effort to impose an unreformed, unapologetic Socialist agenda on a Country tired of politics. Their main target is the young, the minorities particularly the Muslim community and the otherwise disaffected. Because the traditional demographic has changed, I suggest there is a feeling amongst the Labour Party chiefs that it is now or never or 'do or die' for their cause; the politics of envy. Take from those who have and hand it over to those who haven't; the old story of Robin Hood. Picture Jeremy Corbyn in Lincoln green, a feather in his cap, alongside his Maid Marion in the guise of Diane Abbott.
Because of this imperative, I suggest that this will become the most vitriolic GE in recent times, stirred up by a momentum group dedicated to imposing their will by force where necessary. Vilification of all other parties by social media will be widespread and unprecedented. Widespread voter fraud, especially postal voting, plus bullying at booths will be seen.
Here is a reminder of what we can expect with a Jeremy Corbyn government.

A Jeremy Corbyn government can be summarised as follows:
The politics of Cuba,
The economics of Venezuela,
The military capability of Switzerland,
The foreign policy of Hamas and Hezbollah,
The industrial policy of Orgreave, complete with flying pickets.

Business and Capital will flee the Country leading to lack of investment and the decline of commercial UK. It will result in loss of revenue leading to a decline in all services including the NHS.

Friday, 18 October 2019

Let's be honest

If the Angel Gabriel came down from heaven to earth with Boris' Brexit deal, the likes of Hilary Benn, Dominic Grieve, Anna Soubrey and Jeremy Corbyn would reject it, probably without even reading it.
Such is their interpretation of Democracy, it would appear it is the system of government where only their opinion counts. The people voted out, no ifs or buts ifs

Tuesday, 1 October 2019

When is a grope not a grope?

This morning on ITV's GMB programme the presenters made every effort to demonise the Prime Minister, the political leader of the UK as he embarks on a round of difficult negotiations. And what was he supposed to have done? It is alleged that he stroked/groped a journalist's thight twenty years ago.They quizzed the Minister of Justice, Buckland as to whether or not this was a criminal offence. PATHETIC. Not so long ago this stroking of a woman's knee under a table might be considered an act of courtship; a getting to know you manoeuvre that was either accepted or rejected as any verbal approach. It is possible that SOME and I repeat some woman might consider it an outrage that a man didn't stroke their thigh.
If the courts had to try all those men (and woman) who stroked/ groped their neighbours under the table there would be no time for any other business; the courts would be chocker. The whole approach by the presenters on GMB was reprehensible. Boris Johnson has, if the allegations are true, demonstrated once again that he is a real man with the vital passions and urges of a hot blooded alpha male, not a common criminal as alleged.

Thursday, 19 September 2019

Prorogation a convenience

A lawyer outside the Supreme Court suggested that 'Democracy' itself was threatened if the Prime Minister opted to prorogue parliament as a matter of convenience in order to avoid scrutiny of his plans to leave the European Union at the end of October. As a matter of record Boris Johnson has not prorogued Parliament ad infinitum allowing, therefore, Parliament to sit and exercise its own democratic right to challenge the PM with a vote of confidence. This is where the real seat of power lies, not legal rulings, crying 'unfair'. Mr Corbyn and the leader of the Liberal Democrats refused  to exercise their right to call a vote of confidence because it was not convenient for them. Why not? Because they didn't want a general Election they felt they would lose. This call for the maintenance of 'democracy' is a load of bollocks.

Thursday, 12 September 2019


The 'remainer' faction of the British parliament compelled the government to publish details of operation 'yellowhammer' outlining perceived problems to be overcome as the UK leaves the European Union.
Fuelled with a picture of details, these 'remainers' are broadcasting their 'told you so' on every media outlet, neglecting to say that these problems are being addressed by a Minister in order to alleviate the effects after Brexit day. Nobody said it was easy but these 'remainers' seem to conveniently forget that the Government is not responsible for the decision of the people to leave; they are only enacting the democratic decision of the people in the 2016 referendum and to do so in a manner to cause minimum disruption. To suggest that the people were misled in the referendum is tantamount to saying that the people are stupid and it is this that needs to be shouted from the rooftops. Why don't the 'remainers' hold their hands up and admit they lost the referendum and stop trying to frustrate the democratic wishes of the whole of the UK. Their efforts serve only to give comfort to those who dislike the UK and as such could be considered treacherous. Either the people are stupid or the 'remainers' are. Which is to be?

Sunday, 8 September 2019

Dominic Cummings

Boris Johnson's Chief of Staff, Dominic Cummings has come under a lot of criticism for his brutal cleansing of the Conservative and Unionist Party, removing the Party whip from twenty-one MPs. Following the disclosure that former Chancellor and arch remainer Philip Hammond has been in collusion with the European Union legal team and the behaviour of Dominic Grieve and Kenneth Clarke he has been right to do so, right to eradicate a corruption or canker that goes right to the very top of the party, benignly supported by Mrs. May..
Their behaviour allied to the stupidity of the Labour Party, the Liberal Democrats who refuse to accept the will of the people and the Scottish Nationalists who are very selective about which referendum they approve has ensured that the Government, with the no-deal option taken off the table, has no negotiating leeway whatsoever in their endeavour to get a better deal for the UK. In any General Election this must be shouted long and hard. These men and women have ensured that, unless the PM can pull an unlikely rabbit out of the hat, the UK will pay whatever the EU demands whether it be billions of pounds, adherence to EU law or both.
Dominic Grieve in particular has done his damndest to thwart the will of the people by introducing, under cover of parliamentary procedure, bills to frustrate the Government in their attempt to get a good deal. Now, having had the whip removed and faced with deselection he has announced he will stand against the official Tory candidate as an independent. His treachery is complete, confirming what many thought after his disgraceful handling of the Dr. Kelly affair when he was Attorney General.

Saturday, 7 September 2019

Failings of TV presenters

Each tv presenter and political commentator has his or her merit presenting the 'brexit' problem as they see it, but everyone and I mean everyone fails in the simplest task of holding their mostly 'remainer' guests to account over a fundamental lie. When remainers argue that 'brexit' does not mean leaving without a deal or the public did not vote for poverty or to lose their jobs, they are never challenged. This is a disgrace. The public didn't vote for these things because they were never on the ballot paper. 'In' or 'out' were the only options so why don't the presenters etc point this out and that all other considerations, the opinion of their guests, is irrelevant.
I suggest that this simple mantra should be repeated ad nauseam until these detractors understand that insisting the public didn't understand the binary question is to imply they are stupid, a point which doubtless will be exposed in a General Election

Friday, 30 August 2019

Gay gene

An article in the Daily Mail suggests that there is no such thing as a single gay gene.

Preference for same-sex relationships is determined by both environmental and assorted genetic factors, a large-scale study has confirmed. This means that there is no such thing as a single 'gay gene' that determines your sexual preferences — just like many other human traits. 
Instead, thousands of genetic regions are involved, together accounting for between around 8–25 per cent of variation in sexual preferences between people.
Researchers confirmed this after studying genetic and survey data from over 470,000 volunteers taken from the UK Biobank and

Perhaps researchers should look at the Davies Hypothesis which suggest that attraction to the same sex is due to the character inherited by a child in the womb. This character need not be from the recent past but may come from many generations prior. The inherited character will also have inherited a character, perhaps from many generations before etc. At each emergence the final character will be moulded by nurturing ensuring the child is of the present time.
Whereas nature tries to match a character with the sex of the foetus, circumstances can lead to a female character with a male body and vice versa. This means that over time, everybody has some characteristic of the other sex to greater or lesser degree.
So what determines nature's predilection? I suggest it is to do with the lunar cycle at the point of conception. For more information and detail I refer readers to my book: Spiritual Man: An Introduction to Negative Dimensions.

Wednesday, 28 August 2019

He must be right

When a politician does something to arouse the  the astronomical indignation of Jeremy Corbyn, Anna Soubry, Dominic Grieve, the Speaker, the whole of the Liberal Party then you can be assured that he has done the right thing.
So it is with Boris Johnson and his move to expedite the fulfilling of the population of the UK's desire to leave the failing European Union.
It is palpably clear that Parliament having approved the referendum and confirmed that it would abide by the wishes of the majority, has failed after three years of obfuscation and willful obstruction. The 'remainers'  are refusing to accept the result despite saying they would. They are inventing every possible interpretation of democracy to satisfy their requirement of calling black, white.

Tuesday, 27 August 2019

Democratic right

A political commentator from Novara Media on tv recently claimed on behalf of people their 'democratic rights'. But what are they and was she right? As with most of these 'rights' we can trace their origin in the United States Declaration of Independence which includes these words:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
I suppose if you are US citizen it pays therefore to be a believer in God, thereby sustaining these 'unalienable rights'. But what relevance are they in reality?
Firstly, it is palpably untrue that all men are created equal. They are all different, not only physically, and one of the major differences lies in the fact that there are born leaders and born followers. It is mentioned because of the USA's shame about the history of slave labour and abuse of black workers, particularly in the South. The sentiment is re-inforced by the second term, 'Liberty' that allows the prospect of men and women being free to follow their own inclinations; to have free will under the law. It suggests to me that these rights are more to do with administration shame than it does with actual reality. Nobody has a right to anything except the chance to continue in existence, to have the opportunity to live their natural life whether it be long or short. ie one has a right not to be murdered. There are no other rights. None. There can be no rights to be happy or to pursue happiness in the same way that no one can have the right to be free from illness. It's an ambition, not a right. It's the same about democracy; it is not a right to live under democratic rule and therefore a it is a fallacy that there can be democratic rights.