Countries are people: We must not allow homelessness or housing instability

 

As somebody who has been married for more than 28 years and brought up three children, I fully understand the importance of having a set abode. Where you live, the quality of the place where you live, and the stability of accommodation is a crucial factor that should never be underestimated.

If for whatever reason you don't live in adequate accommodation or if you are constantly having to move around, your life and your family life will be dramatically affected in a very negative way.

When you look at the language of social services, there is an emphasis on stable families, suitable environment to raise children, et cetera. Such considerations should be ever present when it comes to policies that affect housing. High rental costs for people who can ill afford to buy their own accommodation are a death trap that puts families in danger and ultimately will create a very unstable society.

For most people, working means having to travel around and much time, money and health are spent travelling around. If you live far away from the places where you work, you are going to be spending a long time on the road and this is time that you are not to be spending with your family, looking after your family, and you are going to be losing many opportunities. If on top of that, you have no certainty in terms of where you are going to be living in, you are going to struggle with travelling arrangements and your children are most probably have to move from one school to another and unable to form stable social relationships. This will feel like being regularly uprooted. This is what far too many families in the United Kingdom are facing right now.

If we ignore or underestimate the aforementioned realities, as a country we are bound to pay a very high price because countries are basically people. 

KGH

The biggest enemy are not countries nor terrorist organisations. Corruption is the biggest enemy.

Forget about enemy countries and terrorist organisations. Corruption is the biggest enemy of the Western World. 

The imbalances that endanger the Western World have been created by the Western World and we have reached such point as a direct consequence of having proven to be unable to cope with new realities.  Key nations of the Western World have been committing either one error of judgment after another or this has been the intention from the very beginning by exploiting chaos as a way to divert resources into the hands of private operators that could not care less about the common good.

No matter how many technological advances the Western World has and no matter how much financial power the Western World has, corruption ends up destroying the things we care most about.

Conflicts are being used to syphon money away from where it is most needed. Under the cover of national security and defence used as justification, vast amounts of resources are being squandered with little or no accountability.

There is no mystery regarding the fact that we seem to go from one conflict into another. Conflicts mean money. Being constantly at war or about to go to war is the perfect excuse for misuse of taxation monies and elected representatives are very much part of the game. Therefore, we cannot expect that this situation will go away any time soon.

The monies that were supposed to help Iraq disappeared into thin air. No wonder then about what will happen to the billion of Pound sent to Ukraine. Long before the conflict in Eastern Europe started, Ukraine was swimming in corruption. There is no reason to believe that the same levels of corruption have not been swallowing foreign aid.

Both in the USA, Britain and elsewhere, such state of affairs is being financed with public borrowing. We borrow, borrow and borrow and when things reach crisis point then we talk about cutting down public expenditure that allows the survival of vital services.

The War in Afghanistan lasted about 20 years at an incalculable cost. Will the War in Ukraine go the same way?

 

The events in the USA on September 11th, 2001 were a long way from the date when the War in Afghanistan came to an end.

After the initial interest in the conflict, people simply forgot about it and continued living their lives as usual as if nothing was happening. 

At the end, public interest was renewed and it turned into a subject of national and international debates trying to discern what was actually achieved or not achieved. Soonafterwards, it ceased to be a fashinable subject to talk about. 

Now, we have the conflict in Ukraine, a conflict that actually started several years ago, before open hostilities. The question that arises is if the conflict in Ukraine will not go on very much like the War in Afghanistan. Is there a real interest to put an end to the conflict or is there an agenda to keep it going indefinitely? The USA has invested more than 64 billion US Dollars and like it happened in both Iraq and in Afghanistan, untraceable amounts of money went somewhere, but there is little accountability. The same happens with war materials that some say are already in the hands of international gangs. We must remember what happened to weaponry and war materials in Afghanistan and before that in Nicaragua. The Contras and drugtrafficking cartels were in business exchanging weapons for drugs that ended up being sold in the USA.

With the veil of secrecy that accompanies any war, money laundering, arms trafficking and illegal earnings are part of the deal because everything becomes an issue of National Security. 

President Biden publicly threatened that he would order the destruction of Nord Stream pipelines

 President Biden publicly threatened that he would order the destruction of Nord Stream pipelines. USA damaged pipelines. Here is the confession of the President of the USA.

The Trojan Horse: No visas for tourists, but open gates?

 

The Trojan Horse: No visas for Russian tourists, but open gates for Russians coming to the West?

In order to punish the Russian Federation, imposed severe limitations in terms of visas for Russian wanting to come to the West as tourists. In a new turn of events, there is the willingness to allow in 'Russians fleeing'. Obviously, European leaders cannot make up their minds about what they really want. 

If the idea was to prevent Russians from coming to the West, allowing Russians to come to the West is a move in the opposite direction. One of the heads of British Security Services proudly announced that 'we have reduced dramatically the numbers of Russian security services operators in the United Kingdom'. Really? There is no way in hell to check the credentials or intentions of every single individual entering the United Kingdom. The number of so called refugees crossing the Channel surpassed 30,000 and only this year. Britain has effectively no borders. How many are needed to cause chaos should things go south in Europe?

There is no real strategic thinking and this is happening at a time when the economy is going through a very difficult time. Nuclear deterrents do not work against a conventional force entering Britain. Who is an economic migrant? Who is a genuine asylum seeker? Who is a military/intelligence operator/mole with a mission to cause maximum disruption/destruction?

Porous borders will be Britain's undoing. How many operators were needed in July 7th 2005? Think about 1941 and 1945. What a difference in terms of the outcome of military operations. As the Russian Federation is already engaged in conscription, Britain and others are still living in Speechland. The Russian Federation talks about its willingness to use nuclear weapons, but curiously enough it is vastly empowering its conventional forces while Britain trusts its nuclear deterrent and fails to prepare for a conventional conflict. The words of Sergei Ivanov might come to haunt Britain that is willfully failing to prepare for a conventional confrontation and failing to protest its own borders.

While this is happening, multiculturalism is unravelling with Hindus and Muslims creating havoc. When the economic crisis bites, ethnic divisions will be faultlines. National unity in Britain?  

Liz Truss - New British Prime Minister - the test begins now

 

Forget the rhetoric of the election campaign and focus on actions taken from the moment that Liz Truss MP is officially inaugurated as British Prime Minister.

After the meeting with Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Liz Truss as third woman elected British Prime Minister, will be on her way to deal with some of the most difficult situations Britain has had to face and will have to act decisively to avoid all kinds of pitfalls.

On the national front, she will have to deal with the consequences of the energy crisis generated by positions adopted by Boris Johnson regarding the conflict in Eastern Europe.

She would also have to deal with entrenched positions involving Northern Ireland and the formulation of new British Bill of Human Rights to detach Britain from the European Court of Human Rights.

All issues are directly linked to British sovereignty that was severely limited to the point that, even when sorting out problems generated by illegal immigration, it it is still the case that foreign countries can tell Britain what to do about her own immigration policies.

Energy and everything linked to energy will be at the core of her premiership. The choice is between Net Zero and Self-Sufficiency. Do we want Britain to be prosperous and politically stable or do we want Britain subjected to a cycle of permanent crisis caused by unrealistic aims?

It is no mystery that the Parliamentary Conservative Party wanted Rishi Sunak at the helm, but the Membership of the Conservative Party supported Liz Truss. The margin between the two candidates was pretty close, but she had an absolute majority anyway.

The EU economy is falling apart and the Euro continues its descent compared to the US Dollar. The same is happening to the British Pound. So there is no safe haven anywhere. It is only September 2022. The arrival of the European winter will forcefully bring new realities into the big picture. The Russian Federation will not be willing to restore gas supplies until sanctions against the Russian Federation are dropped. What happens to the German economy will have a direct impact inside the EU and also in Britain. 

The prospect of a conflict of major proportions has already been mentioned by the European Commission. An economically unstable European Union can bring back the ghosts of the 1930s. Words like recession, rationing and blackouts are mentioned with increasing frequency.

This is not an easy time for Britain and Liz Truss knows it full well. As a member of Boris Johnson's Cabinet she had to support policies that went against her declared way of thinking and this is clearly understandable. The challenge is to adopt policies that many in her own party will oppose. Loyalty seems to be one of the main qualities that better describes the new British Prime Minister. She campaigned for Remain, but helped Boris Johnson to implement Brexit. She was not in favour of tax rises, but she did support tax rises out of duty. She occupied key positions within the Cabinet and is seen as the longest serving MP in the Cabinet. She is known as very hardworking and committed to the task in hand. You might disagree with many of her stances, but we must recognize her dedication.

She is definitely not a good debater. Her political opponents criticize her debating skills. Having said that, what really matters is her capacity to make hard decisions and stick to the course.

We look forward to knowing who will in the next Conservative Cabinet. 

  

We don't usually agree with Diane Abbott, but she is spot on on the causes of the crisis in Eastern Europe

Over and over again, the USA has been directly responsible for destabilization and migration crisis. The second campaign in Iraq was an unmitigated disaster that destabilized even more an already unstable Middle East and threatens to lead Europe towards chaos. The major defeat in Afghanistan was yet another disaster and one of the longest wars on recent records. 

American and British warmongering will generate one of the worst economical and political crisis in Europe and most probably turn back the clock towards the 1930 with well known consequences.