Just whose money goes to running this country?

The question encapsulated in the title to this article is asked especially in relation to the, what must be additional,  costs incurred by recent events in Manchester and London (Westminster and London Bridge) No-one would quibble with whatever money that those three tragic events have incurred – or would they?

As Brendan O’Neill writes on Spiked-online,  Islam is a subject the name of which politicians ‘dare not speak its name’. As he points out we may speak of Christian Fundamentalists, Catholic paedophiles,  Buddhist extremists; Yet on Islamic terrorists – nope!

Jeremy Corbyn may have his views on how to solve the problem (being ‘unhappy’ with shoot-to-kill), likewise Theresa May with her views on ‘pluralistic, but British values’, together with censorship of the internet. Personally, I would suggest a far more effective remedy would be to let it be known that in future, no questions asked, they will immediately be introduced to the virgins their faith promises them – contrary to the views and wishes of  human rights lawyers, the diversity brigade and the such-like.

It is ironic that politicians, having created the problem in the first place (for political gain) in the  early 2000’s, are now running round in a manner similar to the proverbial blue-arsed fly (in a state of frenzied panic) attempting to find a solution.

Turning to HS2, a little known fact is that HS1 (the Channel Link) was but stage one in the EU’s programme to provide a high-speed rail link connecting the far-reaches of their ’empire’, north to south and east to west, in this particular instance: Ireland (Connecting Europe Facility). According to Wikipedia HS2 was for: The development of a second high-speed line, proposed in 2009, by the United Kingdom Government to address capacity constraints on the West Coast Main Line railway. This statement is a tad disingenuous, however it formed a perfect cover story for the government of the day to show what ‘good little Europeans’ they were, without having to admit their hands were tied as they had ceded the subject of transport in all its forms to the European Union. As part of this programme, the Connecting Europe Facility 2015 Multi-Annual Work Programme, the European Union funded development to the tune of €39.2 million for the period 2015/2018. Presumably, if the UK leaves the European Union, this funding will have to be repaid; unless of course the May government has plans to continue participation in the Connecting Europe Facility, about which they have not informed us – assuming of course that the May government have even realised this; but I digress.

As with the question of climate change and the ridiculous ideas and intentions when it was brought in by Ed Miliband in 2008 (again to show what a good little European the United Kingdom was) in 2008, along with the recent Paris agreement on climate change, not one of the foregoing ‘expenditures’ or ‘policies’ involved the active agreement of the people to whom it would have effect.

To my knowledge not one member of the then government that effected these decisions asked the people whether they agreed to fund them by means of subsidies and higher energy bills. Not one member of the then government asked the people if they agreed to their society being changed in a way that would be alien to them. Not one member of the then government asked the people if they wanted a high-speed link to Birmingham and beyond, or whether they agreed to fund it.

For far too long politicians have made decisions, purely for the political ideology of the time, that have impacted on the people of this nation and their society; while at the same time adding to the debit side of the ledger for which they (the people) are responsible; and about which they have had no direct dissenting voice.

As a final thought, if politicians can, in the name of the people, introduce a shoot-to-kill policy then logic dictates the people have the right to adopt a similar policy. To begin with: a supply of politicians, some brick walls and the ‘state-funded’ provisions of AK47s (or similar) would do for a start.

The foregoing may not be to everyone’s taste – but just saying………




3 thoughts on “Just whose money goes to running this country?

  1. ….blimey David, thats a bit strong ….they’ll be closing you down as an ‘extremist’ if your not careful.

    1. With a bit of luck 🙂

      I don’t believe anyone minds who comes to this country, but if they do then they abide by our laws and do not attempt to introduce their own. I accept maybe some muslims do abide by our laws; however depending on the breaking of them they should either be ‘kicked out’ or in the case of Westminster Bridge, Manchester or London Bridge: shot.

  2. “Islam is a subject the name of which politicians, dare not speak its name” –

    Oh yes, but then even ‘premier’ blogs fail on that!

Comments are closed.