Jan 6th Witness’ Explosive Evidence is actually Mild Spring Breeze, and No Storm

As a keen observer of American politics, and the wilder claims especially of the so-called January 6th Committee, I listened with interest to the witness statements provided by surprise witness Cassidy Hutchinson, labelled by the BBC as damning testimony. She claimed that she witnessed many things; and she has painted a devastating picture, including an allegation, which Trump denies, that he tried to grab the steering wheel of the car he was travelling in and wrestled with a Secret Service officer in an attempt to divert his motorcade to the Capitol, where his supporters were gathering. She recounted how a White House official told her that the president had insisted on travelling to the Capitol after his White House rally – something he said he would do during his speech. When he learned the motorcade was going back to the White House, he attempted to grab the steering wheel and wrestled with a Secret Service officer. 

Many other claims were made by this ‘Surprise Witness’, and much was made of these claims by members of the Jan 6th ‘Committee’, none of whom are judges, or indeed people with any legal training or standing at all, as ALL the ‘Committee’ members are in fact ‘politicians’ and biased politicians at that. The ‘Witness’ was not cross-examined, none of her statements were checked for veracity in any way whatsoever, as she would be in any properly-constituted legal arena: her words and statements were treated as though they had the same stature as the Sermon on the Mount.

And now we know why. Because the same day as Hutchinson made her statements, the Secret Service rebutted her testimony by stating, categorically, that the Secret Service and the individuals from whom Hutchinson claimed to have heard the story publicly disputed her claims and said they were prepared to testify under oath.

In other words, and strictly legal terminology, her evidence was ‘HEARSAY’, she claimed to have ‘HEARD’ other people saying things, but never heard anything first-hand herself.

So, the ‘DEVASTATING’ evidence has all the veracity of a damp squib, BUT YOU’LL NEVER HEAR ANYTHING IN ANY WAY OF A REBUTTAL’ from the BBC, or any other MSM outfit. 
As the New York Times should really claim “All The News That Fits”

American Archbishop Speaks Out on Abortion: Vatican Suspiciously Silent

The Bishop of Rome, or, to call him by his other title, The Pope, is often heard giving his opinion on just about everything under the sun, but virtually no-one seems to be stating the one, very obvious thing, Pope Francis is a religious leader with a big difference. In matters religious, in things theological, strictly referring to the doctrine and beliefs of his Church, he is considered, or rather accepted by the 600 million Catholics, to be ‘Infallible’, As to everything else, especially political, he carries just the same amount of weight as everybody else. 

But, from the constant bleatings from what Archbishop Carlo Maria Viganò calls the Bergoglian church, basing his name for the Roman Catholic Church as the personal fiat of Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the name first used by the present Pope, here is at least one Catholic Archbishop who just says what he believes; in that the Pope, in his accommodations and liking for the Left, and those who speak for the Left, is on the wrong path entirely.

This majestic, plain spoken Archbishop, was speaking about the amazing decision from the SCOTUS regarding Roe v. Wade, and plainly stating that abortion hasn’t been cancelled, or banned, or cast into the darkness. Control of the whole process has now simply been returned to the People of the United States, and to the power exerted by the Peoples’ elected representatives in the States, those same States which form the United States of America. If the Republican Party controls the individual States’ Congresses, they have already, or are swiftly moving to limit or wipe out those institutions who routinely kill unborn babies: if the Democratic Party has a majority in their State, they are commencing to offer travelling expenses to women who wish to kill their unborn babies, but are stopped from doing so because they live in a Republican State, as well as increasing funding to bunches like Planned Parenthood.

As the Archbishop said, “On June 24, the Supreme Court of the United States of America, overturning the 1973 Roe v. Wade decision, healed a constitutional vulnus [wound] and at the same time restored sovereignty to the individual States after almost fifty years. The decision of the Supreme Court did not rule the “right to abortion” – as the mainstream narrative claims – but rather it has overturned its “obligatory legalization in all of the States,” returning the power to decide about the “profound moral question of abortion” to “the people and their elected representatives,” from whom Roe v. Wade had removed it, contrary to the dictates of the U.S. Constitution. “Thus the attempt to intimidate the Justices of the Supreme Court, which began with the malicious leak of the draft of the decision by members of the pro-abortion lobby, has failed, just as the rhetoric of death of the Democrat left, fueled by extremist movements and groups financed by George Soros’ Open Society, has also failed”.

The Archbishop has spoken: I just wonder when, or if ever, the Left-lovers such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio, a.k.a. Pope Francis, will also speak out regarding this famous victory for people who just don’t wish to kill unborn babies?

As I have maybe stated before, I hold to no religion these days, but am happy to express my admiration for a senior Catholic prelate who speaks his mind, firm in the knowledge that he speaks with authority, with conviction, and with contempt for the Left Wing agitators who have just been defeated in one of the most impressive judicial rulings in five decades.

The sheer penny-pinching stupidity of our ‘Beloved’ NHS

I had Cataract Surgery this morning upon my right eye, courtesy of the NHS. Previously I had been examined by the Consultant, been measured for a new Eye Lens by the latest and accurate equipment on the market (they do spend some cash on new toys, but not as much as they should), and after a six-odd week delay because I’d been bitten by Covid (Nasty, but not too serious), I was given the appointment for this morning.

I shall not go into the gory details, mainly because I was on the receiving end, and it was my eye; but I was duly impressed with the surgeon, the gear, the precision operating binoculars, the manner of the operating room staff, and the general smart attitude of the staff. They gave the impression of routine excellence, and an attention to detail which impressed me: and I don’t impress easily. As the the operation was done before on my left eye, I was able to compare the two, and the NHS came out on top, mainly because I was able to relax easily, whereas before I was wound tight as a drum.

But here’s the thing. When the operation is over, your eye is lightly padded, and then a hard cover is taped over the whole caboodle for your eye’s protection for the first day. You are also handed various types of eye drops, along with instructions on how to use them. As I had had one operation already, and knew how things went, I remembered that the most important thing to be kept to hand was a full roll of the adhesive tape which keeps the hard plastic cover in place; so I asked if I could have a roll of tape.

My small query was received with sheer amazement by the female flunky in nurse’s uniform. “What do you think this is, Sir, a free clinic? If we give a roll to you, we’ll have to give it to anyone. Just think of the expense! No, impossible!” was the reply.

I didn’t verbally blast her sideways, but only because I retain a modicum of how one should address women, but it was a close-run thing. Of course, I should have remembered that this was the NHS, and they operate in a parallel universe. I also recalled that, when operated before on my left eye, that was performed privately, at a fair expense to me. But I also recalled that, when being furnished with exactly the same eye-drops as this morning, I was handed a full roll of that same 3M tape with which to hold the plastic cover against my eye ; and that was handed to me without my asking for it, with the simple explanation: _

“You’ll need this for the hard cover, everyone uses it; no worries!”

The Problem(s) we have with Boris and Ukraine

I am quite content to label Boris as a liar of the first water, citing PartyGate as but one of many issues, inclusive of going almost as bad as the Labour bunch when it comes to taxes, etc: but at the same time hailing him as the one European Political leader who has his finger on the Pulse of the most dangerously active Dictatorship in the world today, namely Putin’s new Russian Empire.

If I can explain. At home, Boris scraped through a vote of No Confidence, with the rebels quieted for now, but are said to be recharging their weapons for another showdown before Party Conference time. As to the rights and wrongs of their many complaints, I reckon they might have had a point at the very time when the whole series of episodes were exposed, which showed that Downing Street was full of a bunch of ‘effing hypocrites; all with the same slogan “Do as I say; but not as I do.” With the multiple stories from constituents’ very grief of not even being able to bury your dead correctly: and then learning at the same time of the significant booze culture apparent, right at the heart of Westminster, the Rebels should have multiplied their letters, called the vote: and showed Johnson the door. But they lacked the courage, they lacked the iron will, and lost both time and their possible place in history.

Then, after some seven years when the Defence Ministry in Ukraine’s Kiev were calling to everyone for modern weaponry of all kinds, because they knew whom they were dealing with just across the border: and all European Governments, inclusive of the British, were forgetful of only one hard Realpolitik fact; namely ‘You cannot appease a dictator’  were saying, “No, we don’t think we should send anything, because that might upset Putin.”. Then Putin pushes his armoured columns forwards on February 24th, because he thought that that previous delaying decision would be reinforced. It was Boris Johnson who saw clearly what should have been done seven years ago, and, much to his credit, sent the anti-tank Javelin missiles forwards by the cartload, and the Ukrainian Army, whom had been fighting the Russians in the East for those seven years, slaughtered the Kiev road-bound tank columns with a viciousness brought about by a hatred for their once-overlords, before Independence that is, and an agelong memory of the Holomodor, Stalin’s famine which had dealt death by starvation to nearly four million Ukrainians. More weaponry followed, the Russians withdrew from their badly planned Kiev assault, regrouped and commenced battering the cities of East Kiev, in the manner perfected by the Russians in Syria: polished by the old Stalin quotation “Quantity has a Quality all of its own!”

The Ukraine now knows who her real friends are: the Unites States, the United Kingdom with Boris at the charge, and the Baltic States. The balance of Europe is a mixture of France and Germany pushing for a ‘diplomatic peace settlement’ along with sending some old hardware eastwards, and the old former Comunist states sending some artillery, but not a lot. America has sent a lot, but everything takes time to be flown across an ocean, transported to the back areas, and for troops to be trained in their use. You cannot train a Soldier in the ways of modern artillery in a matter of days; it takes weeks if not months. The artillery which Putin’s Russia has a range of thirty-forty miles. Therefore counter-battery artillery opposing those guns must have a range of sixty miles.

Will we see the Russians driven backwards? Possibly, but it will be the fault of the Allies if Ukraine loses, because we should have stepped forwards when Putin annexed the Crimea, and not a day later! 

Fact: A Man Cannot Get Pregnant!

I have written before about Blood Donor Organisations, of the ethics of certain unplanned ‘donations’, of the slightly hilarious visit to an Australian Blood Clinic, and of the Government’s intrusion into what should always be a very private and personal family decision. I have also seen comments regarding the real reluctance of homosexuals to accept the very real worries regarding their exclusion from donations, if they have had unprotected sex within the last three months, culminating in the authorities caving in to the bent communities call for this disbarment being removed. 

But this is possibly the first time I have written or spoken about a man being barred from a NHS blood donor session because he did not agree that men can become pregnant. A Scotsman, Leslie Sinclair, 66 years of age, has donated a formidable 126 pints of blood to the NHS. He stated that, when last he went to the clinic, he was handed the usual questionnaire, which Mr. Sinclair has always scrupulously filled in because all the questions are relevant to safety. He scrutinised the form, but baulked when he found one question which just did not follow natural biology.

The form question asked “Are you pregnant, or have you been pregnant in the last six months?” As Mr. Sinclair knew that not only had he not been pregnant, he also knew that, being a Man, it was biologically impossible to become pregnant, so he told the Blood Bank staff that he could not in all honesty, in truth, answer ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to that question. 

Mr. Sinclair stated:- “There is always a form to fill in and that’s fine – they tend to ask about medical conditions or diseases – and clearly that’s because the blood needs to be safe. This time around, there was a question I hadn’t seen before: ‘Are you pregnant, or have you been in the last six months?’ which required a yes or no answer. ‘

I pointed out to the staff that it was impossible for me to be in that position but I was told that I would need to answer, otherwise I couldn’t give blood. 

‘I told them that was stupid and that if I had to leave, I wouldn’t be back, and that was it, I got on my bike and cycled away.

‘It is nonsensical and it makes me angry because there are vulnerable people waiting for blood, including children, and in desperate need of help. But they’ve been denied my blood because of the obligation to answer a question that can’t possibly be answered.’

It emerged last night that all potential donors are asked if they are pregnant to ‘promote inclusiveness’ and because pregnancy is ‘not always visually clear’. 

Last night Professor Marc Turner, director of SNBTS, said: ‘We appreciate the support of each and every one of our donor community and thank Mr Sinclair for his commitment over a long number of years. Whilst pregnancy is only a relevant question to those whose biological sex or sex assigned at birth is female, sex assigned at birth is not always visually clear to staff.

‘As a public body we take cognisance of changes in society around how such questions may be asked without discrimination and have a duty to promote inclusiveness – therefore all donors are now asked the same questions.’

Now I have a fairly uncommon blood type, uncommon enough that when I was booked in for a major operation about , the hospital’s blood bank had to ensure that my needs were capable of being met. Are we seeing possible donors being turned away because the people in charge believe that if a man says he is now a woman, he is also capable of giving birth? 

Are the LUNATICS in charge of the Blood Donor Service so shackled to being ‘INCLUSIVE’ that they would either force a person to fill a form’s answer which they instinctively know to be false, or do without that person’s blood donation; all in the sacred name of ‘INCLUSIVITY’?

Madness, sheer unbridled Madness!

Dented, or Unbending?

When discussing anything at all to do with religion, I suppose I must, although these days being agnostic, confess that I was brought up in the belief structure of the Catholic Church. Although these days long departed from any religion, I still hold a deep admiration for some, only some, of the Church’s philosophies and strictures. One philosophy which I admire is that the Church has always spoken out against ‘same-sex marriage’. While the Church accepts that civil unions have been legalised, it has always remained firm in the statement that marriage is, and always will be, a union between a man and a woman. 

The Nativity School of Worcester had commenced flying both the ‘Black Lives Matter’ banner and the multi-coloured Gay Pride flag on the same pole as the American flag. According to reports and statements from R.C. Bishop Robert J. McManus of the Diocese of Worcester, the Nativity School of Worcester is “prohibited” from identifying as “Catholic” and may no longer use the word to describe itself. In addition, “Mass, sacraments and sacramentals are no longer permitted to be celebrated on Nativity School premises or be sponsored by Nativity School in any church building or chapel within the Diocese of Worcester.”

The bishop stated “it is my contention that the ‘Gay Pride’ flag represents support of gay marriage and actively living a LGBTQ+ lifestyle.” He also differentiated between the statement “black lives matter” — which he styled in lower case letters — and the Black Lives Matter movement. “The Catholic Church teaches that all life is sacred and the Church certainly stands unequivocally behind the phrase ‘black lives matter’ and strongly affirms that all lives matter,” he wrote. “However, the ‘Black Lives Matter’ movement has co-opted the phrase and promotes a platform that directly contradicts Catholic social teaching on the importance and role of the nuclear family and seeks to disrupt the family structure in clear opposition to the teachings of the Catholic Church.”

I admire and applaud the bishop for both his statements, and for the courage in stating, categorically, that although his Church approves of the civil status of same sex couples, it is, and always will be, against homosexual marriage. I also categorically oppose such acclaim about what I consider to be an abomination. As for the BLM movement, I note that the movement coalesced against the death of a career criminal by the police, and that same movement resulted in the worst riots, burning, uproar and, naturally, looting on an industrial scale in cities controlled by the Democratic Party; all crimes being carried out by mostly the oppressed black people who were supposed to be targeted by the police.

As with the ‘same sex’ and ‘blm’ brigades, so with many other ‘modern’ developments and attitudes. The Advocacy bunches, inclusive of Peter Tatchell’s Stonewall, are forever speaking and preaching of the former ‘injustices’, all of which need remedial action. I reckon that a straightforward acceptance that many, if not most; have long adopted stances in direct opposition to that of Stonewall’s and its contemporaries: and just fervently wish that the opposition should just pipe down and get on with their lives.

How’s about charging the clowns who strapped the pair into the bloody boat?

Many disabled people complain about the absence of easy access to shops, offices, workspaces, especially from a wheelchair-user’s viewpoint. I have had some personal knowledge of these problems when my wife was still alive, as the only way she could move was, in her later years, in that wheelchair. She loved the possibility of moving out from her bedroom, and I was able to get her into a car, and drive to the Metrocentre in Gateshead. I specify the  Metrocentre because it is extremely wheelchair friendly, with good lift access between the two floors, specially reserved parking for wheelchair users, and absolutely no kerbs anywhere. I only once took my wife into Durham City in her wheelchair, but found that the hills, slopes and kerbs nearly defeated my old muscles. There is a YouTube user who ‘tests’ access to Electric Vehicle charge points in supermarket parking areas; he has a point regarding access to the charge bays, but I cannot see him getting much bite-back, because, as far as I can tell, he doesn’t follow-up any access problems.

But, sometimes, it seems as thought the ‘Disability Lobby’ is either getting ahead of themselves, or not thinking through all the possibilities of things just ‘going wrong’. For example, allowing two wheelchair-bound people to access a boat on Roadford Lake in Devon. Seems there were six passengers on the boat, and the two people seated, as I am led to believe, either in wheelchairs, or were strapped down for safety reasons.

Yep, I know the strangest ideas crop up, but why these people were even allowed onto the craft at all is beyond me; I know and accept that we must make access easy for all disabled people: but strapping down disabled people in a boat, which, for one reason or another, then overturns, drowning the two disabled people who could not get up from their seats, with another passenger gravely ill in hospital! Some six-odd decades ago, I was in water 27,000 feet deep in the Pacific Ocean. I cannot swim a stroke, being shit-scared of the water, but I had a life-jacket on me, and the Captain made me swear to keep within the lee of the ship, as we were drifting at a rate of five knots, or six-odd miles per hour.

No doubt there will be an enquiry, with lots of learned people shoving their oars into the pond, but I would place good money on no-one being charged with either culpable manslaughter, or just being really, really thick!

Don’t buy a ‘Platinum’ Death Plan, Your Cash is At Risk

Yet again, a whole segment of a specialised financial industry is allowed to function, from the beginning, without any oversight or Government regulation until a bunch of cowboys virtually does a runner with the cash entrusted to them, and in doing so, a great many elderly people  losing a great deal of money.

As some of you may know my wife died just over a year ago. It was a time of great grief for me, as I tried to assimilate my loss, and keep living at the same time. One task which I took on was to organise my wife Jacqueline’s cremation, as this was something which had to be personally undertaken.

Over the years, I had noted various funeral and cremation plans being marketed, but never really felt urged to do anything about informing myself as to the ins, outs and wherefores of these plans. As I discovered, when first having to research through the field, there is some pretty expensive offerings in the funeral and cremation planning. If one looks ahead, as one approaches the ‘golden years’ of life after retirement: after deciding where to live if you are ‘downsizing’, the expense of a funeral ranks pretty high in the queue of financial decisions you have to make, especially when your hair commences losing it’s colour and shows ever more skeins of grey. 

As I had made no plans for either myself  or my wife, I had to start from scratch. As I do not hold these days with any established religion, and loath the ‘showy’ ideal of a funeral and burial service, peopled with relatives  who never bothered to come near us when we both still lived, and as I believe that when you die, that’s it; I decided on a cremation service run by a reputable private company. Once I had made that decision, every small detail was carefully lifted from my shoulders, and the only decisions left for me to make was a choice of favourite music to be played when entering the Crematorium meeting place, and when the coffin is slowly curtained off before the mourning family leave that sad but strangely welcoming place.

But the decision remained for me to decide if I wished a prepaid plan for myself, or to leave it to my family to choose the company which will carry out my cremation. Such thinking drove many thousands of people to view the carefully-choreographed video productions produced by a company with the carefully-chosen and seemingly comforting name of Safe Hands. The company also advertised it’s services on the pages of Financial Times, the Times, and many other reputable newspapers and television stations. 

Safe Hands Funeral Plans guarantee that no matter how long their plan-holders live, or however expensive a funeral is when they pass away, there will never be anything further for those left behind to pay towards the funeral director’s fees and services. In their marketing pamphlet, they talk about their Trust Fund, saying “the money you pay towards your Safe Hands Funeral Plan is held in a secure Trust Fund (via Pitmans Trustees Limited). Set up in conjunction with specialist Trust Solicitors, the fund is independently managed by multinational investment management firm, UBS’. And when they talk about funds, they are talking about big money, but those interested enough were supposed to be reassured by the presence of  Mazars LLP, a top ten UK audit and accounting firm and one of Europe’s largest, appointed to do so by the Trustees, Pitmans Trustees Limited. 

We now see that the funds are in deep trouble. One, TJM Partnership, went into liquidation earlier this year, the other is based in Mauritius, in the Indian Ocean. FRP, the appointed liquidators, are reporting that there is around £3.8 millions secured in the UK, with the bulk of trust assets – more than £60million – are in ‘illiquid, high-risk investments’, many based in offshore jurisdictions. FRP reckons that most of the depositors’ cash has disappeared.

Safe Hands stated, in their brochure “Because the Trust Fund is entirely independent of the company, in the highly unlikely event that Safe Hands should go into liquidation or cease trading for any reason, because the Trust Fund is not an asset of the company (and because our planholders are the primary beneficiaries of The Trust Fund) your investment would be secure, and would remain ring-fenced specifically for the purpose of providing the funeral you have bought and paid for.”

Time and time again, ordinary people have been fleeced of most if not all of their cash, because once the cash, or cheques, are handed over, there is no-one to look after or defend the ‘little guy’.The Financial Conduct Authority is supposed to have begun overlook of these plans and companies, of which there are many. I was visited myself by one such outfit, who even went as far as ‘recording’ the sales pitch, so he could supposedly be heard as promising nothing untoward, but when it came to the chosen plan, and for me to sign up and arrange to buy a ‘plan’, I baulked at the speed at which things were moving. So this bloke called his boss, and they went into high gear, pushing me to invest what, to me, is a fairly substantial amount of cash, even with a ‘reduced’ deposit, which was thought enough to make the sale. As I can still remember when the vultures were selling kitchens, as well as double-glazed windows, all on the same high pressure ‘get the signature’ ideal, and then you wait, and wait, for your purchase, I decided to just defer the whole thing.

And when researching that same company, whom I will not name, I found the same old pressure selling tactics as the failed firm.

MY advice, if you have the savings, keep them close, and tell your family to buy a simple burial or cremation service, and pay for it then and there. No investments, no platinum packages, your money is never at risk: simples!


Yesterday, the 6th June, was an auspicious day, in many, many ways. We had completed the acclamation of our Monarch, Elizabeth the Second, on the 70th anniversary of her coronation as Queen. Even as the Leftie-liberals tried to spew their distaste at the very presence of this amazing Lady: on the Mall, the Palace forecourt, and in homes and parties across our Nation; the great British Public showed their liking and admiration for a woman whose total life has been dedicated to their service.

Elizabeth R.

It was also the 76th Anniversary of what General (later President) Dwight Eisenhower broadcast to the 150,000 troops marshalled on the ships, aircraft and embarkation beaches of Southern England in June 1944, “You are about to embark upon the Great Crusade toward which we have striven these many months. The eyes of the world are upon you. The hopes and prayers of liberty-loving people everywhere march with you. The tide has turned,” he told them. “The free men of the world are marching together to victory. Good luck! And let us all beseech the blessing of Almighty God upon this great and noble undertaking.” Those words were the overture to the greatest invasion fleet ever assembled, as they began the journey which ended 11 months later with the unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany.

With the demise of the Soviet Union in December 1991, the West began to relax, the real enemies had disappeared, or so everyone thought. The rise of the States who broadcast their membership of the Atom Bomb, struck many chords in the West’s security and defense departments, but even with those events came the realisation that the MAD doctrine still applied, that of course being Mutual Assured Destruction. Even the historic enemies of India and Pakistan knew and accepted that possession does not necessarily means its use, which is why those old hatreds are curbed with reality. When even the tinpot, creaking stupidity which is North Korea has to accept that they may have that weaponry, but if they fire those missiles once, the whole country will disappear about five minutes later, and emerge, reformed into a large, irradiated parking area.

Everyone knows that Iran is near the uranium strength necessary to achieve fission, which means that the Mullahs’ time may be abruptly ended, as Israel knows that you cannot argue with a religious maniac, but that, happily is in the future.

But the last anniversary is also the saddest, because it signalled the 100 days after Vlad Putin’s Russia began the invasion of Ukraine, battering the eastern cities and towns with massed artillery just as they did in Syria. The !944 invasion was the free Allies marching to strike down the Nazi Empire; the invasion today is based upon a lie, there may be some right-wing elements in the Ukraine, but the Ukraine army posed no invasion threat to Russia. The military help from the West may help, but nothing can really compete with the massed artillery of Russia, because ‘Quantity has a Quality’ all of its own.

The Gender Garbage which is haunting many lives

I would like to discuss with you today a thorny issues. Thorny because, to at least this slightly perplexed old Englishman, it is an arranged and nonsensical argument, proposed and supported by those left-wing individuals who are trying, and in many cases succeeding, to alter the very balance of civilised life in these worrying times.

I talk of course of the Gender argument, and of those attempts to push a drug-sought change to many children, who, as they approach puberty, are given very little help regarding their worries, suppositions and true concerns regarding the progression of their bodies in a sexual manner. 

The Left, which is not normally as united as in this, are pushing for a universal adoption of the belief that a person can either change their gender, or adopt another by just stating so, and expecting everybody else to accept that this is their new ‘Status Quo’. They then extend this to announce that a woman can have a penis, and of course the accompanying genitalia, because a ‘Man’ has suddenly commenced believing that he is a ‘woman’; or is cis-gender, or any other combination of the absurd.

We see the fruits of this idiocy with the so-called ‘Trans’ woman who used to call herself a man, because, folks, that was what he (she) is and how he was born. A strapping six-foot odd man with broad shoulders, a muscular body and trained to a peak, suddenly states that he is now ‘her’, and starts swimming, and of course winning, in female races. The reality is pictured in him (her) standing on the podium, dwarfing the five-foot four females whom he (she) defeated.

There are only two sexes, male and female, man and woman: Gender is the range of characteristics pertaining to femininity and masculinity and differentiating between them. As we have developed over the tens of millenia, evolution has determined that men are more muscular, broad-shouldered and athletic, sufficient to the age-old task of the Hunter, the provider and the defender, the giver of life: whilst women are slighter, more rounded in physiology, and their secondary sexual signalling, such as rounded breasts and a curvy figure, states that they are ready to make the children which is the true course of that same evolution, in receiving and nurturing that life.

Viewer will note that I make no mention of the abberation which is homosexuality. Despite the massed political ‘bent’ lobby which has long sought for, and proclaimed  ‘acceptance’; to me they are all perversions of the one true act, which can be only for the procreation of children.

Politicians should be wary of pandering to any of the cabals which preach the existence of the numbers of so-call ‘genders’ reaching towards one hundred. More so should they control, absolutely, the practices and indeed the very existence of clinics and the ‘medical practitioners within, which pushes experimental drugs, hormone treatments etc. into prepubescent children, who have no idea of the Frankenstein nature of the treatments so cavalierly employed upon their trusting bodies.