Was the recent election ‘legal’?

Boris Johnson tweeted that the new government was one of all the talents – to which I replied that was unfortunately untrue as it was in reality, one of all the talentless. It has to be remembered that the pool from which the government is drawn is one of 650 talentless, ignorant, individuals who, in turn, form the legislature.

Johnson also tweeted that there would be no ‘Norway’ option; no doubt due to the fact he, like the rest of his ilk, believe that Norway – among others who have EFTA membership – has no say in the formation of EU legislation coupled with the fact that it is believed Norway has no control over immigration. Those of us who do have knowledge of ‘matters EU’ can but stare in bewilderment that those who insist only they are sufficiently knowledgeable to govern us are, in fact, not so knowledgeable.

Whilst on the subject of tweeting, I was under the impression one was only allowed to vote once in any election held in the UK. Courtesy of Ian PJ we find:

Assuming the above is not youthful boasting, if true there may well be other instances; and if so, in how many constituencies? Presumably we can expect Plod to be on the case?

Not only do we have unknowing crap politicians, it also appears we have unknowing crap members of the electorate:

If correct – and I see no reason why it should not be – how can the electorate not realise that nothing is free as, at the end of the day, someone will have to foot the bill. In any event, if he/she thought that, how come he/she managed to get to uni? Oh I forgot you can do that and be as thick as …….. but I digress.

When we have to suffer politicians who cannot do simple maths (Abbott/Thornberry); buffoons as Members of Parliament with an even bigger buffoon as a foreign secretary and another holding the office of prime minister; members of the electorate who not only think they can have as many votes in one election as they like, coupled with one who has no idea of how our so-called democracy functions; is it any wonder this country is fast becoming a latrine (I thought a relatively polite word was more appropriate than a two word phrase of similar meaning )?

Turning to other matters; not that our media assists the electorate in understanding news in general, especially political news. Much is made of what is termed ‘BBC Bias’ when in actual fact the term ‘BBC Fraud’ would be more correct. Where our media is concerned, If those of the media are unable to decide whether they are in the business of reporting news or manufacturing propaganda, then our news sources become worthless and it then becomes extremely important that the public understand that difference and turns to independent bloggers instead.

As I write, the media appear to be hyperventilating over the fact that as Theresa May walked into a meeting with the 1922 Committee the usual ‘desk-banging’ was more muted than normal. Prior to this, the media were ‘enthralled’ with May’s desire to come to an understanding with the DUP in order to form a majority government. Much was made by various writers about this and how it was ‘disgraceful’ – yet little, if any, mention was made of the fact that in 2010, after another ‘hung-parliament’ result, it was reported that Labour actively courted the DUP as a means of retaining power. See what I mean about fraud?

In his completely mis-named ‘Rivers of Blood’ speech on immigration Enoch Powell spoke about a nation being mad, literally mad, heaping up its own funeral pyre; well the same sentiment can be applied to a nation that permits itself to be totally ignorant of the democracy under which it lives and those that ‘direct’ that democracy. That a society can be so compliant to a political class, one to which they elect time and time again and which continues to make mistake after mistake, beggars belief.

It is worth repeating that for democracy to work we, the people of this nation, must become one of participants, not merely observers. During the EU referendum, the cry of the Leave group was: We Want our Country Back; what they meant was We Want Our Fiefdom back – so much for their being our representatives.

When the funeral pyre has finally become ‘spent’, the people will be able to don sackcloth, sit in the ashes and put ashes upon their heads. The sackcloth will signify the loss of their individuality, the ashes their desolation and ruin. One thing it will be possible to rely on: that is those wearing sackcloth and ashes will not include our politicians and their sycophants, nor our media.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2 thoughts on “Was the recent election ‘legal’?

  1. Most students seem to have two votes, at home and in their university town. It’s been happening for years, but until we had postal voting for all it was of little consequence that they were registered in two places.

  2. Voter fraud – “Presumably we can expect Plod to be on the case”?

    No you cannot expect anything of the sort. I suggest readers go an look up the goings on behind the Lutfur Rahman case at Tower Hamlets. It’s now generally agreed that the authorities missed countless opportunities to act. My understanding is that the initial proceedings brought against Rahman stemmed from a private prosecution. Quite why the combined might, not to mention cost to the public, of the Metropolitan Police Force and Crown Prosecution Service were so tardy is hard to fathom. Although it might be Sir Ian Blair and Kier Starmer were in charge!

Comments are closed.