Yesterday I promised another article on ‘education’ – unfortunately the intended article will have to be ‘shelved’ for the moment as the content could be traced back to my informant; even though no names were mentioned – just the ‘outlines’ of behavioural examples I was going to quote which showed that our eduction system was ‘shot to hell’; and having been for a number of years, results in year-on-year increases in the bill demanded of we taxpayers.
Simon Richards, The Freedom Association and Better Off Out, tweeted the following – to which I responded:
Readers may recall this initiative, one which gave birth to the Referendum Planning Group. In the link aforementioned is Simon Richards reply, together with one from a member of Matthew Elliott’s staff.
While there exists ‘self-important’ people like Simon Richards and Matthew Elliott whose only long-term intention is to make a name for themselves – coupled with the crap they speak, write and tweet – then Brexit will most assuredly fail; much, no doubt, to Cameron’s glee.
What are the odds that government, of any hue and believing in global warming/ global cooling et all, would be able to produce evidence to explain the following:
Global Warmists would no doubt argue that the pyramid shows the pyramid heats up as the earth rotates round the sun, while Global Coolists would argue the opposite – that the pyramid shows it is cooling as the earth rotates round the sun.
Me, I reckon both are egotists and therefore they believe the world moves around them – which probably explains the reasoning of ‘science’ – not forgetting politics, natch!
So the mindless mantra continues about Brexit, especially from those who should know better.
I see a former chairman of Lloyds Bank is pontificating about the need for ‘business’ to make its voice heard about the dangers of leaving the European Union. As Richard North made the point some months ago, it is not the place of business to attempt to decide the outcome of the forthcoming referendum – that is the business of the electorate. It would, though, help the electorate in making their decision if those who purport to influence the electorate knew about that which they pontificate.
….one of which may not be well received.
Peter Hitchens, writing in the Mail, produces some words of wisdom where our politicians and media are concerned:
the monstrous regiment of political journalists, a vast gossip factory, few of whose toilers understand politics or care about the future of the country……The biggest triumph – in fact the main purpose of the Blairites – was to turn the Tory Party into the neutered Blairite clone it now is…….When the Tories seized the Blairite torch, they left the husk of the Labour Party behind, with no real purpose. Its senior figures are indistinguishable from Mr Cameron’s front bench. They look and sound the same and believe the same things.
He’s not alone, of which more later……..
Readers will recall that last August, prior to my move to Co. Durham and when I was still a constuent of his, I met David Cameron and presented him with a dossier in which his claims to have vetoed a treaty and cut the EU budget were refuted; and in the process I accused him of misleading not only the people of this country but also the House of Commons. Not only did he refuse to answer the questions raised, but he has since repeated the claims to which I took exception; and repeated them again at the last session of PMQs on Wednsday.
I note that Manchester has been chosen by the Electoral Commission to host the results of the forthcoming referendum on the UK’s membership of the European Union. While it is well known that there is rivalry twixt the United and City factions in Manchester there is also an element of that twixt Manchester and Liverpool. The latter is probably more than glad they did not ‘kop it’, this time.
It is also noted that Chatham House, under their ‘Europe Programme’, have issued a paper entitled: Britain, the European Union and the Referendum: What Drives Euroscepticism? – the paper being authored by Matthew Goodwin and Caitlin Milazzo. Here we have two ‘professors’ who would have us believe they know all about eurosceticism, but who really know squat-diddley. From the Summary it appears they maintain that: Our analysis of around 30,000 Britons reveals that, broadly, those who would vote to leave the EU tend to have left school before their 17th birthday, to have few or no advanced academic qualifications, to be over 55 years old, and to work in less secure, lower-income jobs. In contrast, those who want Britain to remain a member of the EU tend to be younger, to be more highly educated, and to have more financially secure and professional jobs; and that: These two groups think fundamentally differently about the EU and about the issues that feed into the debate on Europe. Those who are currently planning to vote to leave the EU are motivated mainly by their dissatisfaction with how, in their view, democracy is working at the EU level, and also by their strong concerns over immigration and its perceived effects on Britain’s economy, culture and welfare state. When one considers the manner in which education presently brainwashes children (and has done for yonks), is it any wonder that this divide in voting intentions exists – and I leave to one side the ‘slight’ on we of advanced years who did have what may be termed a good ‘all-round’ education imparted by those free of political ideology.
In 2013 a quartet of bloggers took Open Europe to task in regard to their assertion that Norway had no influence in EU legislation; an opinion repeated by Mats Persson in the Telegraph. It therefore comes as no surprise that Open Europe have resurrected the same ‘meme’ in October this year, having found another ‘persson’ in the shape of Stephen Booth. This latest ‘font of wisdom’ writes: Norway can theoretically refuse to implement EU legislation, but it has never used this power. Really? Think 3rd Postal Directive when they did just that.