Greens Have Lost Control of Brighton Council===The World-Wide Web of Deceit

Something that I found out only a few minutes ago. Yes, the Greens have lost control of the Council. “I thought now the greens had been reduced to a minority…….”, said a commenter on an article in the Brighton News.

I know that it is of no importance, but it made me smile.

But is it not odd that the voters threw out the Greens because they buggered up the town, and yet they increased the majority of Caroline Lucas, the Green candidate in th GE? It is vaguely similar to the results in Thanet South – voters gave UKIP councillors control of the council but did not vote for Farage. Also, vaguely, it was similar to Scotland. Voters were against the SNP as regards the Union, but for them as regards the GE.

It is easier to understand the Scotland situation. I suppose that there were enough voters who were Labour, Tory and LibDem to get a majority when added together in support of the Union, but were insufficient to gain seats when split up into separate entities in the GE. I don’t know, but I suspect that the turnout in the referendum was significantly higher than in the GE as well.

But it isn’t worth speculating about, is it? It did amuse me, however.


I see that the Big Food and Big Alcohol Gangs are roaming about again. VGIF discusses an article in the BMJ:

Malhotra gets away with all sorts of quasi facts and misinterpretations of data. Why does the BMJ publish this crap? I think that the answer is fairly obvious, which is that as long as an article has a veneer of epidemiological ‘fact’, and and as long as it conforms to the objectives of those who control the WHO, EU and UK Health Dept, then there is no one else to answer to. Sure, a few other ‘experts’ will object to the methods and findings, but what do they matter? When ‘the body of evidence’ has been built up, then a nice little ‘meta-analysis’ will not be interested in viable objections raised at the time of the publication of the study.

In the case which Chris Snowden examined, the article was withdrawn for a couple of days an a couple of alterations made. Note the change that Chris highlighted:

[The only important bit is the phrase highlighted in yellow]

The revised version:

It is pretty clear that what motivated the change was the possibility of legal action against the BMJ. But the faults and failings otherwise remained intact.

Publication is all that matters. It then becomes ‘evidence’ with which to bamboozle Minsters. Precisely this method is being used in the USA to demonise ecigs and to attempt to get them ‘de facto’ banned. The same happened in the EU Tobacco Directive, and in the OZ plain packaging fiasco. At each stage of ‘the plan’, connections are broken. Research project are devised. (Break) The results are (mis)interpreted. (Break) They are published. (Break) Press releases are issued. (Break) Newspapers publish the sensationalised statements of organisations like ASH ET AL. (Break) Quasi-fake surveys are made with “70% in favour” results. (Break). The Minister for Health is presented with a ‘fait accompli’.

If there is one example of this process which beats all the others for cheek, it is Global Warming. It was UN organised right from the beginning, as was the FCTC, and as is anti-alcohol, anti-sugar, anti-salt, anti-oil, etc. Note that all of them involve big, world-wide corporations. Where did the money come from to pay for all the global warming research all over the world? God only knows. Perhaps, one day, when the scam unravels, the truth will come out, and it will probably be revealed that misappropriation will figure largely. But these people are bloody good at covering their tracks. Talk about money laundering!

How can your average MP, even if he has not been tutored in the dark arts of Common Purpose, have any idea of the forces which have been gradually built up, using taxpayers’ monies, to render him powerless?

I personally do not expect to see the day when the whole, foul system of deception collapses, but it will.


%d bloggers like this: