brexit

Is Tommy Robinson in the minority with a #2 rank book on Amazon?

IMG_0711.PNG

There is no moral equivalence to be drawn here with this latest attack outside Finsbury mosque in London. Innocent people were mown down by a van driven by someone filled with rage and hate. Social media is already screaming “bigot, racist, terrorist, anti-Muslim, radical” but there is a much bigger point not being addressed. The social boiling point is being reached much more rapidly than the media will admit.  Tommy Robinson was accused across social media for inspiring anti-Muslim rhetoric and fueling this person to commit the crime. His tweets matched his long standing convictions and predictions. Perhaps everyone who has bought Tommy’s book “Enemy of the State”  (ranked #2 book on Amazon UK, #131 in Canada and #2375 in America & now $350 on paperback) could be a risk of commiting such acts if that is the generalization. Of course it is nonsense. By the measure of the sales success perhaps his views maybe more mainstream than the negative ‘extreme’ moniker that is often hurled at him.

Could it be argued that a growing number of people are growing sick and tired of random jihadi attacks and see this book as a guide on how the government isn’t  handling the problem? That was not a intended to be a fact checking laced comment rather pointing out that many people potentially share his supposed ‘patriotic’ view as demonstrated by the commerciality of his writing. This is no longer a pure jihadi problem but one that is now likely to become tit-for-tat terrorism which carries far more negative connotations.

Think beyond the all too common propensity to push prejudices by lashing out on social media with little thought to trying to understand the full arguments of alternative views. Do we take a book review from apologists as fact when most of those have probably never read his book cover to cover? I am reading it because I want to form my own judgement rather than rely on others’ bias. He has strong views but no better way than self vetting. I’ve read Mein Kampf in what must be the most appalling book ever written – grammatically and content-wise. For one whose family escaped the deaths camps of Poland, trying to understand the ravings of Hitler brought added perspective to the horror although some might conclude reading it is an endorsement. It is not.

Innocents are dead or injured in this attack on Fisnbury Park Mosque. If indeed Tommy has a minority view, most people wouldn’t buy his book. Are all the people that buy it racist? Even if one thinks they are then even more reason to say that the government’s current pandering to political correctness won’t solve these hate fueled events whether radical jihadis or right (left?) wing nutters. Do violent video games incite massacres? Are all ‘Brexiters’ a carbon copy of the man who murdered Labour politician Jo Cox days before the referendum?  Do we need to bring in Islamophobic legislation like Canada (Bill M-103) to shut down people expressing concern? No, No and No. Current policy approaches are having the opposite effect as this attack proves.

At the time of the Manchester bombing I warned that vigilantism would be an ugly side effect of endless political correctness. Coincidentally Robinson suggested similar views about the rise of vigilantes after that post in a vlog. Wasting a lot of time on what  motivated the driver to commit such a terrible crime is not necessary. It is obvious. It is a revenge attack. This is highly likely to be a person screaming out for something to be done about a problem he obviously doesn’t think is being handled properly by elected officials. He probably viewed himself as a vigilante even if that title might be an overreach in this instance.  This in no way defends his despicable actions. One man’s terrorist is another man’s freedom fighter was often used by IRA sympathisers. Still it doesn’t in anyway condone killing or maiming innocents, no matter what ideology, faith, race or background they come from. It is plain awful. The majority of people would agree with that view.

Revenge attacks and reprisals only exacerbate a rapidly deteriorating relationship. However trying to say the perpetrator proves that not all such attacks are driven by radical Islam doesn’t address the core of the problem. The majority of good people (note a deliberate statement not to go down the identity politics line) want an end to innocent deaths at the hands of extremists but if free speech and the ability to tackle radicalism (wherever it lies) aren’t openly addressed these events will sadly continue. It should be totally in the interests of the majority of ‘good’ Muslims (I detest that phraseology) to want to stop radicals from collectivising their faith with what they perceive is the wrong interpretation. Common sense would say they are the most important link in the chain to weed out those who want to kill in the name of Allah. They need to be front and centre of the debate.

What the UK government (and other governments) have created is a monster of their own making. Candles, flowers, lit monuments, avatars, expressions of sympathy and ‘love conquers hate’ posts dodge the need to have a serious debate on the problem. Now we have seen first hand a real openly targeted revenge attack in the UK, people need less sanctimonious posturing on social media and focus their energies on truly understanding what is at stake. That is to ditch the liberal hand-wringing and have an open debate on the problem. Robinson’s book isn’t selling in the volumes it is by chance. Politicians should pay attention to this trend. It is not about arguing about whether he is right or wrong but noting the simmering underbelly of a growing number of people fed up with inaction. This is the end of the beginning not the beginning of the end.

Mulligan democracy?

IMG_9185.JPG

One disturbing development in politics is the promotion of mulligans. The idea of ‘that is the shot I would have played if I had another chance’. Sadly some people think that is fair game and even worse, democratic. The lead up to the Brexit referendum almost a year ago saw “leave” and “remain” go at it. Months of campaigning, panel discussions and other forums were largely irrelevant. Both sides accused each other of lying and spreading falsehoods but ask yourself in the history of politics – if you believed everything that came out of a politician’s mouth you’d be lying to yourself. To host a second referendum would basically say ignore democracy until you get the result you want. Maybe like a modern day prep school sports event – everyone is a winner at St. Barnabus’.

People were well aware of the issues of Brexit going in. The idea of people being too gullible is frankly condescending in the extreme. Many long standing Labour voters went for “Leave”. They weren’t voting Tory by stealth. They took a view. It wasn’t just about immigration. They were feeling pain in real time, the valid threat of their future economic security. The higher unemployment rates and withering opportunities aren’t scare stories from politicians but here and now. For example the people of the Midlands didn’t need stats, Farage or Boris to sway them. Just like those that voted Trump – they were feeling the pressure of harsh economic realities that weren’t reflected in rosy government stats that were waved in their face as a testament to their superior leadership skills.

While Remainers can whine about ‘fake’ figures of how much the EU takes every week from the UK, immigration or the number of regulations that affected Brits, financial markets proved over the 12 months since the vote that the ‘Leave’ outcome didn’t crash the economy or skewer asset prices. In fact the idea of a potential Corbyn Prime Ministership sent the pound and markets into panic. If he was to get in then Macron will get his wish of a financial center in Paris. Investment money would vanish out of the UK. It isn’t an idle threat but a reality. Capital is global.

Some argue that had the people who thought ‘remain’ would be a foregone conclusion bothered to vote then the UK would have stayed in the EU. Maybe. They were given a democratic opportunity to exercise a choice and they didn’t. Many of the 1,000,000 new voters who signed up since Theresa May called the snap election who didn’t do so before the referendum had a choice a year ago. Do we give them a free hit? How do we truly instill the realities of a true democracy if we have to attach L-plates to beginners? It doesn’t matter one jot if there were enough dormant or eligible voters to defeat the referendum if they don’t show up on game day. Is the Premier League football FA Cup given to the team that won the most games til the final but doesn’t show up because of their for and against stats?

It is an important question because the lesson should always be that people must take their vote seriously every time. Even John Cleese is understanding this. If they can’t be bothered when they have a chance to vote then  that is self inflicted and we should have no sympathy.

Theresa May gave voters a democratic chance to give her a mandate and she got thumped. There were two parts to this. Some young voters were surely lured by the offer of free education and a chance to reject Brexit by the back door. Theresa May was too arrogant to think the population would roll over and give her carte blanche to carry out her plans along with a biting austerity budget for good measure. A refusal to do a debate vs Corbyn, a slapdash manifesto and dreadful performances when she appeared sealed her fate. Corbyn came across as the warmer candidate and simply campaigned better. Still an election and a referendum are two different beasts. Just because more voted for Labour than expected doesn’t mean they want an end to Brexit. They did it to send a message to May.

Still the idea we propose a second referendum is a bad idea for democracy. Unlike elections, referendums are yes or no.

Don’t buy the argument that people were sold a pup. That the elderly are bigots, racists and have no concern for their kids or the youth. That the youth should have twice the vote of the elderly because they’re on the planet for longer or the elderly should have their voting rights cut. Saying people are stupid is not a valid answer. Why not have an IQ test for voters to determine voting rights??  If lessons aren’t learnt through bitter experience then why bother holding elections or referendums at all. If anything this election showed through the higher turnout (68.7%) that the lesson is being learnt and the electorate has told politicians they won’t be taken for mugs.

The referendum was held, Article 50 was passed as an Act of Parliament and our Dear John letter was handed to President Tusk. The UK would be a total laughing stock to divorce and then ask to remarry again. Corbyn will undoubtedly have a much stronger say in negotiations and has a vested interest to ruin what little legitimacy May has left. She is left with a divided party created by her unwillingness to listen. The Tories are toast with her at the helm and the DUP alliance smacks of desperation. A Diet Coke Brexit is pointless. We’re in or we’re out.

The Conservatives won the popular vote despite the shambolic display although Labour took 60% of the votes from UKIP. What we can say is that politics is not like it used to be. The electorate is fickle. Loyalty is no longer a given and abandoning core party principles will see politicians punished at the polls. May must step down for the sake of the Tories. as the HMS Tory takes on water under Captain May, more will seek to abandon ship until she walks the plank.

This miscalculation by May will go down as one of history’s biggest political failures. Do not be surprised if we do get a second referendum but be very worried about the precedent it sets for the future. Democracy is at stake and even arguing that it is in the interest of the people to take a mulligan on this issue is effectively saying their votes don’t matter. That referendums have no meaning. Of course the Remainers will cite opinion polls that give them the answer they want to hear but as we all know polls are useless these days. May had the biggest lead and highest popularity in living memory yet got this result.

Theresa May’s political masterchoke

IMG_9182.JPG

The day Theresa May said she wanted to go to the polls to hammer home a bigger mandate for Brexit the first thing that popped in my head was “GREED”. On top of that was the idea of taking the electorate for granted. That they’d sheepishly give her a wider mandate because Corbyn and UKIP were supposedly so lame. Today’s election proves it. It wasn’t so much that Corbyn did way better, May’s total misjudgement meant she threw away a parliamentary majority three years prematurely.  It is nothing short of a masterchoke.

What strikes is the minor party votes spilt to the major parties. Perhaps even more telling was the younger voters. Those who threw away the opportunity to vote ‘remain’ on Brexit or the million that enrolled to vote since she called the election. This is democracy but at the same time this election has become a dry-run for a second referendum. Watch for the gaming for it or at least a move for marshmallow soft Brexit. Jean Claude Juncker must be slapping other Eurocrats silly with delight.

It tells us not to believe polls.  In short May will have to resign as PM.  Such bad judgement. Why did she bother with a manifesto? All she had to do was get Brexit done with the majority she had. Now she has jeopardized it and a hung parliament is the last thing any country needs. Compromise means less efficient outcomes every time.

I’m not a Corbyn fan but he had nothing to lose and to his credit he seized on the slapdash manifesto of the Tories. May says she won’t resign but her party can’t back her after this failure. She got a mandate alright. Not a good one. She may look to get the DUP to help her get over the line. Still a disaster, even bigger than Sturgeon’s SNP.

Put simply, politicians who take their constituents for granted will ultimately pay the price. If there was a positive, voter turnout rose and the young finally recognized how powerful votes can be.

Paddy Power. Once bitten, twice shy?

IMG_0642.JPG

The table above highlights the betting odds from Paddy Power on the upcoming UK election. It has May & the Conservatives comfortable winners. I wonder how much influence the early Hillary Clinton pay out has been on Paddy Power’s stance on June 8th? Looking at Twitter, Theresa May has had a surge of around 220,000 followers since she called the election and Corbyn around 350,000. Having said that as a percentage May’s has more than doubled vs Corbyn’s 50% hike. That is to say Corbyn had more followers to begin with and May was never really an active social media baroness. I personally think this election will be closer than many think. With 1 million signing up since the election was called this vote will also be a quasi- Brexit referendum Mk.II. The Tories have made a Horlicks of the manifesto and it smacked of over confidence in the lead it held over Labour at the time the election was called. The gap narrows. As awful as Corbyn and co are, the Tories have not exactly looked like the championship winning team it thought it was. It could be that the Tories just win in the PK shoot out as long as Boris isn’t in goal.

Climate sceptics are idiots by association

IMG_0149.JPG

Burn this image in your head first. It is Tokyo today. As you can see for such an evil carbon emitting industrialized nation as Japan the skies are blue as any you’d find in Australia. Ironically Japan is a country often selected as a country that must pay into the climate change pot for its sins rather than get a pat on the back for its ability to be clean and productive. So it was no surprise that once again I read the bias in the press reporting from the G-7. Because Trump is a climate sceptic and disagrees with the other 6, articles tried to use this as a reason to beat up on those who won’t bend to the will of the alarmists because he is in their view – an idiot. The inference is that all climate skeptics must be fools by association. Exactly the same garbage at the time of Brexit. A table circulating with Trump, Farage, Putin and other ‘undesirables’ supporting Leave and Obama, EU officials and bodies like the NUS and Greenpeace backing Remain. Then we get the result of the referendum.

I will openly admit that the President has many flaws but to use this as a basis of driving the climate change agenda is pathetic. One article blathered on about his lies (hardly news) and then made the reference to “universally accepted science” which is a huge porky in itself. It isn’t settled. One of the reasons it isn’t settled is down to the data manipulation, amateur hour ethics of bodies like the UNIPCC, NOAA and numerous universities with agenda driven studies numerous of which numerous have been exposed for fraud. Climate alarmism is nothing more than wealth redistribution as the above picture highlights.

If indeed it is universally accepted why bother investing billions of side-by-side research papers to formulate the same outcome? What we have is the construction of multiple rail lines built next to each other operating each at 10% capacity. It is such inefficient capital allocation. Why do we need 50,000 climate disciples flying annually to mega junket tourist locations all to kneel at the altar of the COP summits. This could be delegated to 1% of that number. It shows at the very least that the disciples are the biggest hypocrites. If the science is so settled and everyone is so universally on board as they claim then there is no need to keep twisting the truth to squeeze more funds to prove what we already (supposedly all) agree on.

Seeing Merkel make an argument about 6 countries in favour of following through with the Paris Agreement and America against is laughable. Is America, or at the very least its President required to follow consensus for the sake of group think? Is global politics now reduced to going with the flow? Should dissenting opinions be treated like conservative speakers at universities? This is exactly why it is so hard to respect the current crop of global leaders. One seriously doubts that they truly believe it outside of it being an agenda item to secure votes. Climate alarmism is the socialism of the 21st century.

So perhaps the ‘idiots’ are the ones that can’t escape the pre-formed bias against America’s Commander-in-Chief. Talking about German car imports (when many BMWs and Benz’s are built in the USA) and other gaffes don’t really do him favours but if the media wants to take the moral high ground at the very least they can balance the views on the climate debate (and others) and admit the multiple self-inflicted wounds and inaccuracy of decades of forecasting models where 98% have proven wildly off target. It reminds me of compliance seminars in my old industry. We’d fly in compliance officers to train us about the penalties and Big Brother! We’d focus on the evils of all our competitors and the punishment meted out to them. I asked a simple question – “why don’t we use compliance breach examples from our own company and the manner in which we dealt with it as a matter of getting people aware of being a responsible corporate? Can we honestly say farts don’t smell?” It sums up the climate alarmists perfectly. Everyone else is at fault and everything we do is virtuous, honest and worthy of self-praise.

Hungary to be stripped of its EU voting rights?

IMG_9062.PNG

The EU is voting to strip Hungary of its EU voting rights for consistent failure to heed their values, including migrant quotas. Last year an apathetic turnout to a referendum held on the subject said 98.4% of Hungarians were against forced migrant quotas. Putting to one side the altruism of the EU, trying to force a member state to tow the line is absurd, not so much for the country but the migrants.

Let’s not forget this is the EU making up for Merkel’s single-handed poorly executed thought bubble in the first place. She put forward a come one come all rhetoric on her own.

In a sense the EU can rant on all it likes about humanitarism (although 80% are economic refugees (i.e. not fleeing war zones) according to figures by Eurostat) but forcing asylum seekers into a country that doesn’t want them doesn’t seem optimal. We can snigger at Hungary and call them bigoted, racist or worse but the fact of the  matter is migrants on the whole won’t be welcome.

The EU forcing unwanted guests to a Hungarian dinner table has obvious consequences. The embittered host is likely to ruin the goulash and spoil the palatschinke in an attempt to get the visitors to leave.  Many are unaware the third largest political party in Hungary is Jobbik (won 21% of seats in the 2014 election) which has all the hallmarks of Roehm’s SA, right down to the uniforms. Jobbik has a record of roughing up Jews, Gypsies and Roma so before Brussels tells Budapest it must accept migrant quotas perhaps an assessment of the reality would be wise. Jobbik is left to do its ruffian business and Hungarian authorities turn a blind eye. That is the bigger issue at sort before imposing quotas.

Surely if refugees were asked Hungary is the last place they want to go after leaving their homeland. Refugees aren’t cattle but the EU is treating them so. Aren’t they surprised when the majority seek Germany as the end destination because of the relative generosity? Do the EU authorities think these migrants don’t have excellent internal information networks? Of course they do.

IMG_9063.JPG

To rachet this down a notch what are EU values anyway? The Brits are leaving because they don’t agree with EU values. The Greeks are being trodden on for refusing to accept EU austerity values. The Austrians were threatened with sanctions and punishment if they democratically voted in a right wing president. Are these worthy values? The Swiss handed back a 30 year free pass to join the EU presumably because they didn’t believe in EU values. The list goes on.

Sometimes it is had not to think of the EU as the Gallactic Senate from Star Wars trying to get aliens from different galaxies to agree on everything.

IMG_9065.JPG

We all know how unwelcome visitors are treated in the Star Wars Bar when different backgrounds and cultures literally don’t see eye to eye. The EU would do well to respect the diversity of its members, which includes diversity of thought and culture. It is not to say the EU doesn’t have a point from time to time they are dreadful executors of it.

IMG_9066.JPG

Norwegians want a referendum on leaving the EEA & warn Brits not to become like them

IMG_0623

It seems more in Norway are wanting to have a referendum on the European Economic Area Access (EEA). The claims is that their costs have risen 10-fold since signing the EEA 25-years ago. Norway, while not a member of the EU, still pays around £650 million to Brussels to fund the EEA administration and other EU research projects. Two recent opinion polls conducted by Sentio reveals there is a strong majority wanting to have a say on the EEA agreement: 47% are in favour of a referendum on Norway leaving the EEA, with only 20% rejecting such a referendum. 70% of Norwegians do not want to enter the EU and the Labour Party has recently removed it as a policy platform.

Norwegian businesses had duty free access on all exports to the EU before the EEA was signed and this FTA would still apply if the EEA agreement were terminated. Ironically Norway used to export more to the EU as a percentage of total before the EEA than after it meaning that the supposed benefits of the club have not led to bigger trading opportunities within the block.

So to Brexit – Norwegian Prime Minister, Erna Solberg of the Conservative Party, sounded a warning before the UK referendum about following a Norway style deal, stating that “you’ll hate it…that type of connection is going to be difficult for Britain, because then Brussels will decide without the Brits being able to participate in the decision-making.”