Many people around the world could be excused for thinking what has happened to the UK. Historically a great nation on the world stage, but now struggling to extricate herself from the EU nearly three years after a significant vote to leave. We have now been given a date of the 31st October by the EU by which to agree on a deal on which we can leave. It is difficult to fathom quite what is going on as the government and Houses of Parliament seem to be embroiled in an act of self flagellation to the horror of the UK’s weary inhabitants. First we were told we were going to leave on the 29th March, the next date was indeed the 12th April, which has now been abrogated by the 31st October. We now have the prospect of participation in EU elections if we have not left by the 22nd of May. If you have read the book by Yanos Varoufakis on his fight with the EU deep state you would recognise the tactics being used by the EU at this time i.e. to keep the UK in a permanent state of temporariness so that the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing.

Bizarrely, the most infuriating action of the UK Parliament has been to take no deal off the table. For many Brits this is a ridiculous policy which gives away a massive bargaining chip, the ability to walk away if you are not happy with a deal. The EU will never give you a deal which is not in their favour, especially as they cannot afford to let the UK gain any advantage from Brexit. It seems our ruling class just cannot or won’t see the enormous benefits long term of a clean break. This is particularly galling when we are told by an insider that the civil service has prepared very well for a no deal. 

A huge battle now rages over the future destiny of the UK which has centred on Mrs May’s deal in Parliament. This is only one example of the tussle between the globalist agenda, a world of open borders, doctrinaire, state sanctioned multiculturalism and remote government by an external authority, and a vision of the nation state as the best or least worst method of government for human wellbeing. The EU project is the Tower of Babel designed to destroy the nation state and centralise control of our nation from outside our nation. It gave away its intent in the wording of the plaque at the entrance to the visitors centre of the European Parliament: ‘National sovereignty is the root cause of the most crying evils of our times…The only final remedy for this evil is the federal union of the peoples.’ What an offence to any patriots who love their country.

The UK breaking out of the straightjacket that has been imposed on it over the last 45 years or so is a major threat to the globalist agenda, as a free and independent UK can step into a major leadership role unencumbered by the spirit of control that emanates from Brussels. The UK has loosened the lynchpin which holds the EU together and other nations will probably follow in our footsteps. There is great potential in the creativity, innovation and history of independent spirit that encouraged the fight for liberty, the common law trial by jury system and parliamentary democracy in these islands that can still yet be revived. 

The tragedy of the last two years has been the absence of leadership in terms of giving a vision to the British people of the huge opportunities available in a clean Brexit. People could be forgiven for thinking that the establishment saw the vote as a historic mistake whose negative effects should be minimised rather than a glorious opportunity to make a clear although severe course correction. Prophetic leadership is needed at this moment in the nation’s history when its steps are faltering. Even now Mrs May’s deal is a completely unsatisfactory half in half out compromise which fails to deliver on the 2016 vote. Brexiteers should be honest about a no deal, that there will be some rough tossing in the short term as we extricate ourselves from the EU, but in the longer term a clean break means the restoration of self government, the ability to be far more nimble in our decision making both in domestic and foreign policy, the opportunity to develop trade ties more in our own interests, and an end to the huge sums of money sent to support the EU political project.

This is why the US is in a potentially stronger position than the UK with President Trump, who I have little doubt would have had far more success with Brexit than any of our political leaders. He would just not have accepted the continual attempts to sabotage Brexit through the House of Commons and an EU that is desperate for our money. A rogue president has been a breath of fresh air for the US, led by someone who has not been anointed by the liberal establishment. The same is needed in the UK, a rogue leader who will face down the liberal cult of modernity that bedevils the body politic of most western societies. However, such people don’t grow on trees, and it is debatable whether such a leader would be allowed to rise in our two party system given the strong pro EU bent of the majority of MPs. Nevertheless, if Theresa May is forced to step down, there may yet be an opportunity for a much stronger Brexiteer to become PM and to push the UK in the right direction.

I believe the significance of Brexit is lost on many people, especially remainers. Great Britain is the mother nation for many other nations in terms of the influence of Magna Carta, parliamentary democracy, the common law, religious liberty and freedom of speech. Yes much of this has been diminished in recent decades, and the nation is now in a battle between opposing forces such as secular humanism often expressed through political correctness, an Islamist worldview and a fast disappearing Judeo Christian heritage. Her history has often taken a tortuous route but there are plenty of positives. She has been a leader in many fields and breaking free from Brussels will enable her to restore a leadership role amongst the nations. Yes other nations will help her, but she will be a help to many nations too. But she must break free from the EU first to be truly herself.

Biblical comparisons have actually been made in relation to our leaving the EU, notably with the Children of Israel leaving Egypt to enter the Promised Land in the Old Testament, although there was quite a gap between the two, namely wandering in the wilderness for 40 years because of the disobedience of the Children of Israel. The Pharoah of Brussels is seen as trying to keep us locked in an ungodly Union whilst we are trying to break free, and so they are ‘chasing us down to the Red Sea’ to try and prevent us leaving. The comparison does of course have its limitations in that I am not aware of any plague of frogs, locusts or rivers of blood, let alone death of the firstborn. Nevertheless it is an interesting comparison even evoked by Boris Johnson in an article in the Daily Telegraph who talked of summoning up the spirit of Moses in dealing with the EU. Could it be that there is indeed some divine hand at work in the current Brexit chaos, where nations will be realigned to a new paradigm?

There is a truly dark spirit of deception behind this movement which masquerades under the guise of human rights. Worldwide the old Anglo-Saxon nations are falling into institutionalised foolishness. The fish rots from the head. Not so long ago we had the bizarre situation of the British Foreign Office recommending that certain groups be careful when travelling to North Carolina and Tennessee because of their ‘discriminatory’ laws. The U.K. and US, perhaps the two most influential old ‘Christian’ nations, are now abandoning their heritage and celebrating an aggressive human rights’ culture which will only bring heartache and confusion to many people. Even big corporations such as PayPal are jumping on the bandwagon trying to display their ‘progressive’ credentials. 

Story after story in the mainstream media in the western world brings us the latest manifestation of the advance of transgender rights. In the UK the Sun newspaper some time ago reported that children of four were being asked intrusive questions about their sexuality involving trans issues. PayPal meanwhile in the States under the Obama presidency threatened to pull its operations in North Carolina unless the state legislature rowed back down from its ‘discriminatory’ laws, one of which forbade a man or woman entering a public bathroom that does not accord with their birth gender. Common sense laws I would say! To destroy these norms is a pervert’s charter.

The Democrats are fully signed up to this ideology, just as their ideological cousins the Labour party are in Britain, and not only Labour, this thinking has now infested the Conservative party who recently had a consultation on transgender rights with a view to liberalising the law. It got to the point in the last US administration that we heard that the federal government of Obama was taking out a lawsuit against North Carolina over their ‘gross offence against human rights.’ When you have reprobate thinking at the very highest level in the most powerful nation on earth the western world is in deep trouble. At the time Obama was elected I saw him on television and said to my brother in law, ‘He’s a dangerous man.’ Nothing since then has changed my view of him. ‘Change is coming to America’ from the lips of the most un-American president I have ever witnessed became change of the worst possible kind. Sadly he was the symptom of the decline of a great nation rather than the cause. Funnily enough, Obama admitted that his support for transgender rights may have lost the Democrats votes in the 2016 presidential elections.

However Donald Trump, the Independent reports, is considering removing civil rights protections for transgender people and requiring American citizens to identify as the gender listed on their birth certificates. Another reason for the hard left to abhor a man that has destroyed their dreams. This is fodder for Guardian and Independent readers of course, who think this is just a case of trampling on minority rights and a catastrophic reversal of the rolling out of the worldwide progressive agenda. Opposition has risen up of course. An open letter opposing the Trump administration’s memo on the definition of gender had over 1600 scientists’ signatures. Meanwhile it has been reported that over 40 companies signed an open letter opposing Trump’s effort to ‘erase transgender people from America and strip them of their legal protections.’

Transgender rights swim in the same pool of destructive influences as militant gay rights, radical feminism, militant Islam and secular humanism, all designed to destroy Judeo-Christian civilisation, Magna Carta and the wellspring of liberty that has sprung historically from both these islands and the USA. All have been cooked up in Hell’s Kitchen to destroy the world many of us grew up in and will usher in tyranny and despotism on an industrial scale. The very fact that western governments and public officials are even discussing allowing men and women to use a public bathroom or washroom not of their birth gender shows that western civilisation has become a mere husk and foolish thinking has infected the highest levels of government. Across the main political parties in the UK the same slavish adherence to human rights and anti discrimination doctrine utterly undermines the ability of mainstream politicians to use the foundational gift of any statesman, the ability to discern between good and evil. Even the Conservative Party has fallen into this trap, no longer representing the natural conservatism of an England long lost but every shade of cultural Marxism utterly opposed to many good aspects of traditional culture.

Having said this let me make it quite clear that transgender people should be treated with kindness and respect as people just like anyone else, but why legitimise their state or behaviour as ‘normal?’ The traditional view has been that they are suffering from some mixture of emotional, psychological, moral and even spiritual confusion e.g. gender dysphoria, which needs special help as a mental condition. Reinforcing people’s feelings that they are ‘trapped in the wrong body’ will only multiply the spirit of confusion and deception around this issue. In particular to encourage this deception in children is the worst form of child abuse. There has to be another approach to help these people.

However a doorway has been opened with the transgender movement. Evil has been legitimised. You are dealing with a powerful bully that will steamroller everything in its path unless people start to stand up to it. People with a clear moral compass who will not budge an inch are needed as you are dealing with delusional thinking which is based on a very shaky foundation indeed. Now is the time for every decent concerned citizen to stand against this insanity. I rejoice every time parents protest as they try to protect our most precious heritage, our children, from this mindless spirit of confusion that legislators have let loose. I hope that many parents will create merry hell and pull their children out of the public school system, and home school or set up other schools to avoid poisonous government backed ideology. Meanwhile other political parties and leaders must rise up to confront and challenge the transgender movement and all it entails. It is heartening to see opposition arise to the transgender movement.

This is the danger, that decent people who are capable of changing the situation will stick their head in the sand and hope that this will all go away. It won’t. Now is the time to take a stand, not tomorrow or the next day. Evil triumphs when good people do nothing. The transgender rights movement is fuelled by deception and a completely wrong headed view of human nature, as well as anger and aggression. The end of this narrative is prison and the concentration camp. If you do not believe me just look at what New York has mandated, if you call a transsexual ‘he’ or ‘she’ when they wish to be referred to as a ‘zhe’ you could be fined $250,000. This is sheer insanity and if you fall for such deception you should not be anywhere near any position of governmental authority. You have been warned. 

It is the usual suspects getting it in the neck over transgender rights. The matter came up in the Welsh parliament not so long ago and a Ukip member was suspended for casting doubt over the wisdom of transgender ideology. The three main legacy parties unfortunately have given themselves over to supporting or promoting this ideology, a particular shame for the Conservatives who have again proven to be anything other than Conservative in their policies. And why do I vote for ukip?

To cap it all the Church of England is finding it impossible to take a clear scriptural stance on this issue, choosing instead to follow the well trodden path of modernity, to avoid giving offence by all means possible to those who push the transgender agenda. It is the higher echelons of the church who are proving to be unable to stand clearly on biblical teaching. This is the real tragedy for Great Britain, that the church that should be going moral clarity and guidance to the nation has totally lost its way and is incapable of giving leadership to a rudderless world.

The church has the answer but is ducking the issue for fear of offence. A civilisation based on Judeo-Christian principles whose foundational sacred text states that ‘male and female created He them’ is severing that civilisation from its roots. Not without weight the famous passage in Romans in the New Testament says that ‘because they did not like to retain God in their mind that God gave them over to reprobate thinking. It’s as if God says, ‘ok, if you don’t want to follow my rules and my guidelines for living then I’ll let you get on with it and you can take the consequences.’

In reality the consequences are bearing themselves out, an insistence that we should be able to identify as whoever or whatever we want, which now not only involves identifying as a member of the opposite sex but being able to identify as someone younger than you actually are (might give you more success with the opposite sex!). Then we have ‘transitioning’ ex males assaulting woman in a female prison, male to female sportspersons competing against biological women, the frightening moves to get rid of all references to binary male or female gender in legal documents like passports, or the concoction of 71 different gender options on Facebook.

This is nothing less than an enthronement of self above the moral code that has been handed down to us, that we are entitled to extreme self fulfilment, the right to any behaviour, lifestyle or belief, no matter how bizarre even if this goes against science and nature. Man has an infinite capacity for self deception as long as he or she can do what they want to do. It is a denial of God as creator and sustainer of the universe and the ultimate fulfilment of God’s pronouncement against Adam and Eve that they would be as gods.

The church should be holding the line on these issues, but instead rolls with the culture and becomes completely irrelevant with a whimper, joining in with the mad destruction of everything normal and wholesome. Progressive liberals rip out fences that are there, just as church liberals are doing at the moment, whereas conservatives will ask the question, ‘why are those fences there in the first place?’ Quite!

Brexit is the defining issue for our time and which way it goes will affect the whole world as Britain is a forerunner nation and has a leadership mantle upon it, for despite her decline, there is life in the old lion yet. If she successfully breaks with the EU it will be the signal for other nations to depart. It can be done! There are big rumblings in Italy at the moment, Austria, France, Germany, Greece, Holland and even Sweden have patriotic movements, and there are signs that their patriotic movements can have a bigger impact on their governments than in the UK where the first obvious blow was landed to the globalist agenda, and then there is conservative Eastern Europe which has a huge cultural divide with ‘progressive’ Western Europe.

The key issue in Brexit is where does power and authority lie, in Brussels or in Westminster? Everything else is secondary. Enoch Powell got it in one, and he was a very clever man, ‘Do or do you not want to be ruled by an external authority? This is the key question. Immigration, housing, the economy, money, business, social policy, human rights are important but not foundational. When we decide where power and authority lie, everything else will flow from that. One report in the Sunday Times made it quite clear that the number one reason for voting out was sovereignty and recovery of democratic accountability to the British voter.

This is where the political parties have it all wrong. Theresa May and her government is putting trade, the economy and business before the overriding question. Labour has been going for a ‘jobs first’ Brexit. This is all very understandable but this is guaranteed not to give us a clear decisive break from Brussels. Money, the economy and business are important, no denying that, but they flow from a people, not the other way round. The people of the USA produced a free market economy which flowed out of their culture and world view. Likewise Great Britain developed a mercantile internationally trading economy in the days of the British empire. Cue the idea of the Protestant work ethic having an effect on the Anglosphere. The Soviet Union produced a sclerotic state run economy where what to produce, how to produce it and to whom it should be distributed is decided from on high rather than through market forces, the effect of Marxist doctrine on a nation. When we leave the EU the British people will foster an economy that suits the needs of its citizens. However you can be sure that those intent on keeping the UK in the EU. continue to play the economics card for all it’s worth.

I have even read ‘This Blessed Plot’ by Hugo Young, the very bible of the history of UK/EU integration, which traces in long and tortuous detail our developing ties with the continent, and exposes the deceit at the heart of this relationship played on the British people, the idea that there would be no essential loss of sovereignty and that it was no more than an economic deal. He says in the book that there was sufficient covering up of the full truth such that anyone who wanted to ‘make hay’ later would be able to and with full justification. And so it has happened with the rise of Nigel Farage and UKIP who forced the government’s hand. In a nutshell it can be argued that Edward Heath and his acolytes and successors committed treason by subsuming UK law to EU or European law in the first place and he should not have been able to get away with it.

All the time it seems British politicians want to hang on to Nanny’s apron strings in the EU. It is almost as if the muscle of self government for our nation has become atrophied and needs considerable physiotherapy before any sense of confidence is restored. Where the problem needs a cutting of the Gordian knot that ties us to Brussels, our government is getting bogged down in too much detail.

One danger is that Theresa May and her government will make such a mess of Brexit that the British people will be kicking and screaming to come back to return to Brussels rule, seeing the whole procedure as complicated and difficult beyond belief. Sadly Theresa May was a remainer and therefore one is not sure she’s has a conviction in her heart that she is doing the right thing. The UK needed a Brexiteer as PM to steer it out of the EU port. On occasions she has been questioned about her viewpoint and deflects enquiry by saying that the British people have voted to leave the EU, not of course she herself. The suspicion that the dark arts were employed straight after the referendum to oust Andrea Leadsom from potential leadership of the Conservative party and to ensure that a ‘safe pair of hands’ was put in is difficult to avoid. 

Countless signs that the ‘witchcraft’ continued have beset the whole process. Davis Cameron was supposed to action article 50 but didn’t. Gina Miller brought a court case to ensure that article 50 had to be ratified by Parliament to ensure the UK could not trigger talks on leaving without the approval of Parliament. Theresa May introduced the idea of a ‘transition’ in her Florence speech. Many voices spoke of the impossibility of a clean Brexit when our border arrangement with a Southern Ireland could be compromised. The we heard that the transition deal will allow EU citizens to continue to come here during this time. In addition our fishing industry has been thrown under the bus and must make the fishing fraternity wonder just what they voted for in 2016. 

The most recent manifestation of this incessant desire to lock us into the EU despite the vote is the Chequers agreement which led to the resignation of a number of cabinet ministers including David Davis, Boris Johnson and Steve Baker. This tortuous arrangement which would lead to us collecting customs studies on behalf of the EU, being not quite out of reach of the European Court of Justice, and rather compromising our ability to control our borders seems to have the fingerprints of the establishment civil service all over it, represented by Olly Robbins, bogeyman of ardent Brexiteers. A right royal rumpus this has caused, including a rise in the membership of Ukip, news that will cause nightmares for every remainer MP, especially Anna Soubry. Nigel Farage has also threatened a return to the fray to teach the establishment a lesson they will never forget.

If we stay in the Customs Union we will not be leaving the EU. All our trade arrangements will have to be decided in conjunction with 27 other countries which has everything to do with a political project and nothing to do with making our own trade arrangements. If we stay in the Single Market, which the government assured us we would leave if we left the EU, we have to continue accepting free movement of labour, which given the already porous nature of our borders and half hearted attempts to tighten and implement immigration law, is an invitation to more hundreds of thousands to enter this tiny island.

In essence this is a titanic struggle between the powerful force of globalism whose baby is the EU and a resurgent patriotic spirit that desires nationhood and self government. Those forces are raging against Britain for making the ‘wrong’ choice and will try every trick in the book to keep us tied to this political project disguised as an economic union. The powers that be are still arrayed against Brexit, the majority of the House of Commons and House of Lords, the Bank of England, the EU, and of course big business. They will push the message of financial and economic ruin for all its worth and must be resisted. For this battle will have ramifications for the whole earth, as the downfall of this nation will usher in a new dark age.

I believe the British people made the right choice because in essence a spirit of control emanates form Europe that wants to stifle and crush the spirit of this nation, sucking all its individuality away and pressing it into an EU mould. What Britain suffers from right now is a crisis of leadership, that one man or woman needed with the necessary vision to face down the Brussels bullies and cut the Gordian knot that binds us to Europe. We need someone like Trump, but a British Trump without some of the negatives that have been attributed to Trump. The Donald I would suggest would have got a lot further with Brexit than our present leadership. Cometh the hour cometh the man? You never know!

Maybe we will bumble our way out without the churchillian leadership we need. Whatever happens the good ship HMS United Kingdom has loosed her moorings and is now departing the EU quay, albeit extremely slowly. Those thick heavy ropes that tied her to Europe are unraveling. But what a battle it is! There are some that say this will be reversed, that the EU will clutch the UK back into her bosom through the chicanery and Machiavellian tactics of both its own fanatical globalists and sympathetic remainers in the British government. Others say we we will crash out with a no deal. We shall see!

This last winter I finished watching the Scandi noir series Modus on BBC4, based on Norwegian author, Anne Holt’s novel (she served as Norway’s Minister for Justice between 1996 and 1997). I am not an avid TV watcher but I am partial to foreign detective films like Inspector Montalbano and Wallander, especially when the cinematography is so hauntingly rich as in Modus, with stunning aerial views of Stockholm in winter (and it’s got to be around Christmas time!) and vehicles arrowing through frozen forest and tundra. I missed the beginning of the series, but was sufficiently hooked to catch the last three weeks, especially as in my case you are wallowing in a massive and incredibly comfortable new sofa.

What struck me as I watched it was how powerful a parable it was of our time, perhaps trying a bit too hard to be so. In the old days you had the good guys fighting the bad guys, cowboys and Indians, Robin Hood against the Sheriff of Nottingham, the Brits v the Nazis. Now you have the the exaggerated bogey men of the cultural Marxists or hard left out to destroy the shibboleths of the new politically correct orthodoxy i.e. Such groups as homosexuals, immigrants and Moslems. In the case of Modus, a shadowy extreme right wing fundamentalist Christian sect in America is involved in a bizarre plot to murder homosexuals in Sweden. They send an ex marine who goes by the name of Richard Forrester to do the dirty work in cahoots with a woman who is working for a wealthy Swedish businessman who is of course a homosexual in a same sex relationship with another privileged and pampered male. Together with a lesbian couple they seem to be the parents of a young lad, Noah. The ex-marine is of course clean cut, athletic and good looking but with a suitably hard enough steely gaze to look like a sinister serial killer every time he hovers on the edge of a snowy Swedish scene.

Was there any ‘traditional’ relationship apparent in the programme? Yes there was actually. One of the main characters, Inger, a female criminal psychologist and profiler who ends up working with the police, is a mother of two daughters, one of whom is Stina, an autistic child who has caught a glimpse of the killer at the beginning of the series and so lives under the threat of the serial killer appearing at her bedroom door. However, even the mother is divorced or split from her partner with whom she shares the kids, and as the story develops she is getting closer to one of her work colleagues, detective Ingvar Nyman, a leading investigator in the story, but a ‘classic tormented cop’ with a divorce and dead child behind him. Eventually the two become intimate.

The serial killer who hates homosexuals appears in the programme introduction as a tattooed, bare – backed ‘agent of Satan’ type figure, and his menacing persona is richly massaged by his continual retreat to a small caravan deep in the heart of the Swedish forest, where he skypes or tunes in to his extreme fundamentalist handler, Jacob Lindstrum, who preaches to his ‘hill billy’ congregation somewhere in red neck America and then turns round to speak into a microphone directly connecting to our homosexual hating maniac. Now and again he flips down a roof compartment in the caravan to select a mobile phone from his collection to give or receive another message.

So the story progresses as one homosexual/lesbian after another is bumped off and a plot is revealed by the police to remove six of them violently from this mortal coil. I missed at least one murder coming late to the show (apparently the first victim, a celebrity chef, was strangled ruthlessly) but witnessed the killer stabbing in the neck a ‘right on’ female bishop in the snow on Christmas Eve in the Upsalla area. It seems her mistake was that she had been in a relationship with another female in the past, although now married. She had also argued for gender neutral weddings, not something that would have endeared her to the caravan man.

Then the story swings to a sophisticated urban arty scene, in fact a decidedly dodgy exhibition with a posing naked older man, where a creative type by the name of Niclas is done away with, made to look like a heroin overdose. But steely eyed caravan man is not finished yet. Next we find that the rather louche, down and out son Robin, of Swedish mum, Gunhilla, who is the nanny and housekeeper for Marcus and Rolf, his partner, is a target. She is pretty despairing of his decadent behaviour, eventually he is stalked and has his head smashed against a wall by our friendly local serial killer. He manages to escape but dies later in bed at home.

Meanwhile, a raid by the Feds in the US of A on the highly caricatured church of hating homophobes where everyone looks so weird and out of a zombie film from the some mid west horror film, ends with the killing of our serial killer’s ‘minder.’ Of course this strange preacher looks as weird and ‘out there’ as it’s possible to be. Now there may be church congregations in scattered American rural locations where some of the folk in the pews do look like that, but most if not all of of the evangelicals I have known have been perfectly pleasant and reasonable people who bear no ill will to homosexuals at all.

The story switches to the subterranean world of the Stockholm underground, where we are introduced to a streetwise female artist who paints on walls in some underground den and is friendly with Hawre Ghani, a good looking young man of Afghan migrant appearance who has witnessed terrible suffering where he came from but happens to be a gay prostitute. So now we have two favoured victim groups combined into one, and of course he’s the next target. As he tries to seduce the killer he finds himself swiftly bundled into the afterlife. Inger spills the beans on the ‘right on’ credentials of this series when she concludes about the killer ‘He comes from a Conservative background in which gender roles have remained fixed.’ It sounds like a diversity seminar at the Home Office.

Mr Big, Marcus, the homosexual businessman is found out in the end, as it transpires that he got the ball rolling on this bizarre tale by ordering the assassination in New York of Niclas, one of the victims, the arty one, but the whole thing got out of hand when the homosexual hating extremist group got in on the act and started a vendetta. So it was all to do with Marcus discovering a half brother who was going to inherit the family shipping fortune because his father didn’t like gays. The half brother became the victim. So Mr Big hated his father who didn’t like homosexuals, but loved his grandfather. Realising the enormity of what he has done, including discovering the body of the immigrant prostitute, he shares his secret with his partner, who insists they go to the police, but he bumps himself off with a bullet to the head.

You might be forgiven a yawn here, because Mr Evil personified cannot stop killing people. This time he bumps off Marianne, his accomplice, because she is pressuring him to return home. He is obviously having a bad hair day, as he tells her to shut the … up,and proceeds to strangle her. The body count now resembles Midsomer levels, will anyone at all now survive in Sweden?

Eventually the killer is dealt with of course, but in a suitably scary final scene where he tracks down the psychological profiler female cop to bump her off. He jumps her in the kitchen and proceeds to strangle her, but she has the presence of mind to poke him in the eye (a guaranteed way of giving him a bad day) and manages to grab a kitchen knife to stab him to death after a breathless struggle.

However you interpret the film, although it was undoubtedly entertaining, the use of counterfeits and stereotypes to push a subtle message is clear. Dealing with ‘hate crimes’ of course is at the core of the message. Opposition to homosexuality is grossly caricatured in relation to real life. It is hard not to think that the message that comes over is that opposing homosexuality is wrong, that if you in any way disagree with the practice of homosexuality you are a hater and a bigot. Those practicing LGBT lifestyles are seen in the programmes as good looking, compassionate, prosperous and enlightened, whereas the killer and his acolytes are seen as utterly evil. Even a senior police officer with contempt for gays is the representative of the old guard. Again the patron saint of modernity, or political correctness is the immigrant from an alien culture that is also a gay prostitute. To be ‘tuned in’ we must of course always be compassionate to migrants and pay little heed to their culture or lifestyle. If you are out of tune with this song you are a racist and zenophobe, regardless of whether you have the discernment to see that you must protect your culture from evil or danger from without.

The programme unfortunately reflects a state of thinking that afflicts western society like a disease, a mindset that has perhaps gone further in Sweden than any other country. Sweden seems to represent the vanguard of the liberal progressive bulldozer. However, even in Sweden there are signs that people have had enough, a pushback is arising, particularly on the question of immigration. The programme is especially prescient for 2016 with the turmoil surrounding Brexit and Trump, the first time the liberal progressive cause has received a major setback. But, hey, it was still entertaining TV and I enjoyed it, although the plot was as unlikely as Vladimir Putin running a Sunday School.

Brexit and Trump can only be positively influences for the rescuing of Swedish culture from a morass of institutionalised foolishness inflicted upon it by the last generation of its leaders. Will people watch Modus in fifty years time and think what a strange place Sweden was in 2016, or will they think it another step in the long march to Nirvana?

Well George has now decided to scrap all the tax credit changes. because they’ve discovered some £27 billion leeway in the public finances! All those hard working families will be breathing a sigh of relief. But the death knell for tax credits is still on the horizon as Universal Credit will come in to replace the old benefit system as it takes the place of six different benefits.

What is it with tax credits? You take money away from people in the form of tax and give it back to them in the form of tax credits. Why not tax people less in the first place and then they have more money to spend as they wish. Wouldn’t that be more cost effective? Where exactly did tax credits come from?

As I understand it tax credits were awarded by Gordon Brown as a top up for people on low incomes who were working. The current system came into operation in 2003. In fact the Conservatives also paid Family Credit before that so the principle was already established. Family Credit was brought in through the Social Security Act of 1986 for low paid workers with children Call me simple but the way I understood it tax was taken out of your gross income to fund public services, pensions, unemployment benefit and suchlike, the rest you kept for yourself as disposable income to do with as you wanted. Never would it have been countenanced that in effect the government would dream up another benefit and call it tax credit.

On Question Time a few weeks ago this whole matter was highlighted by a very agitated single parent from the audience having a go at the government for reducing tax credits and lowering her standard of living. What a lesson for any government, it is very difficult to take benefits away from people once you have given something out, even to more prosperous older people who have been given bus passes, heating allowances and so on and so forth. Many will say they have paid into the system for their whole life so it is entirely fair to benefit from it. Tax credits were given by the government in the first place, now if another government takes them away it is seen as ‘taking money from the working poor.’

However what is the logic of the government subsidising the wages paid by employers? Gordon Brown himself admits that the biggest problem is not worklessness but low pay. This fosters dependency on the government not only on the part of employees but also on the part of companies who now know they can get away with paying lower wages as it will just be topped up by the government. Quite a useful helping hand if you are facing strong national or international competition.So you and me as the taxpayer are subsidising both workers and companies.

Presumably it will benefit some firms more than others who employ more low paid workers. What would happen to those firms if the government subsidy was withdrawn, which it will be? They would be forced to perhaps lay off workers or pay people more money to retain staff. If they can’t afford to operate without government subsidies they have to cut their costs, increase their revenue or go to the wall? If they did pay more money they could feel justified in upgrading the skills of those workers, increasing their productivity and helping to keep their costs down. On the other hand as we are talking about low paid workers perhaps they would carry on trying to get away with paying lower wages.

The direction of travel is right, I’ll give that to the Conservatives. Tax credits must be one of the worst ways to help poorer people. It shows the extreme difficulty of awarding a benefit with shaky foundations, then trying to remove it.

One can understand the House of Lords asking the government to think again, especially when it has more of a Labour/Liberal Democrat bias, but even a Conservative House of Lords should be compassionate towards the poor. Osborne faced a Tory backbench rebellion, so the ‘heartless tories’ tag was a mite unfair. To be fair to people those on tax credit could stay on the same amount as a new system is tapered in. All the government has to do is to stop paying any more tax credit to new recipients after a certain date. Universal Credit is taking its place as a replacement for six benefits.
An elderly Conservative that I used to campaign with used to talk about Brown’s Britain, a culture in general of state dependency was fostered in order to cement a client state where everyone would vote for the Labour party in perpetuity because they would always reward the hand that feeds them. In other words an utterly corrupt system where the government gives people other people’s money, and then borrows of course to make up any deficit. If one was cynical one would say that this was part of the aim of tax credits.

Tax credits seem to symptomise the general malaise that has afflicted the British welfare state. It is almost as if the deliberate aim of government has been to get as many people as possible on benefits of one sort or another, even if you are in work. A Guardian article of 2013, admittedly a little dated, said 64% of all families were receiving some sort of benefit. There was an article in the Guardian recently where it refers to Osborne announcing in his first budget that ‘working tax credits and child tax credits would be cut for middle class families.’

The whole idea of tax credits makes the UK tax system unnecessarily and fiendishly complicated. An article written in 2012 by Craig Kennedy for Inner Reid Investments Limited was entitled ‘Taxing Child Benefit – another layer to the world’s most complicated tax system.’ Trolleys tax guide, the Bible of tax, had reached 11,520 pages, twice as many as in the 1997 edition, due to Gordon Brown ‘on speed’ changing of the system. What happened to the good old fashioned idea of us all paying tax and contributing to a system that would support us when we’re genuinely in need?

Getting people at low earnings levels out of tax is a great idea to make work worthwhile, so tax allowances are a sensible idea which could be expanded, getting rid of tax credits is a further sensible direction to go to fit with that scenario. And of course there are increases to the national minimum wage with the national living wage being introduced from the 1st April 2016. George Osborne is even thinking of cutting housing benefit to save the necessary money. Hopefully Universal Credit will provide a fairer and more straightforward overall framework. Whatever he does it will be ‘damned if you do, damned if you don’t. A long term strategy has to be to encourage equality of opportunity, a positive stance that gives poorer or disadvantaged people the chances to help themselves up by their own bootstraps, but it sure is a difficult task

‘I don’t see anybody around with any prime ministerial qualifications at all.’

It was a joyous experience to read the musings of the waspish David Starkey in the Daily Telegraph the other Saturday. The Daily Telegraph was bombed with a hefty dose of common sense when David Starkey the well known historian gave a wide ranging interview on various topical subjects. His views are very conservative, in fact he would be better voting for UKIP than he would the Conservatives. They need him more. He is a blast of fresh politically incorrect air who is not spellbound by the evil magician that has cast a fog of deception upon the minds of many British people.

He is not intimidated by the ‘racist’ narrative that has run through political discourse for so long. He is not afraid to argue that there is what he believes a black propensity to violence in this country, saying that the figures support this, seeing one of the reasons as cultural. He has got it on victim hood. He helped himself up by his bootstraps besides the evident past disadvantages of being gay and born seriously disabled, saying you must be master of your own life and not look to government to institutionalise you as a victim. Amen to that!

This is one of the most important things he said, the catastrophic culture of victimhood that the political classes have foisted on the UK population. He understands better than most this poison that has entered the body politic and threatens to crush the life out of the nation. Just how many groups in society are we going to class as victims before we start treating people as grown ups responsible for their own lives regardless of disadvantage?

His thoughts about gender are mind bogglingly revolutionary, ‘the genders are different. And the whole thing is not just the result of wicked gender grooming. It’s not simply societal. It is the result of biology.’ Obviously.’ He is just stating reality. However I am not quite on his wavelength when he says that as far as intelligence is concerned women tend to cluster more around the mean, whereas men are either very, very bright or very thick.’ But what do I know?

Referring to his partner he says, ‘I see no reason apart from tax considerations – which we haven’t dealt with – why a gay relationship should be the subject of public rules.’ There we have it, you certainly cannot class all gays as having the same mindset on these issues. Too right for any conservative position where state sanctioned homosexuality just does not float their boat.

He waxes eloquent on Magna Carta, ‘we have the oldest functioning political system in Europe and it goes back directly to Magna Carta. There is a continuous line of constitutional and political development from Magna Carta.’ By the time it had been nipped and tucked, it had become a brilliant piece of political compromise.

He is pretty scathing about the present political class, implying that Ed Milliband if not the devil in disguise is not far off in his demeanour and intent, saying that Milliband is ‘poison.’ His line is damning, that we do not have a statesman or leader to deal with the issues. He sees the forthcoming general election with a degree of modified despair. He understands that inciting a politics of envy is just not where it’s at, the rich against the poor, rather than recognising the immense contribution of the rich, the talented and the entrepreneurs towards all the material things we enjoy. ‘A welfare state of necessity imposes high levels of taxes on ordinary folk.’ So don’t just take money off the rich to pay for it.

This just supports the argument that you get out of the system what you pay in, you certainly don’t expect something for nothing. And so we end up with one of the highest peacetime debts we have ever had. Starkey thinks the deficit should have been reduced much more with a radical reappraisal of what the state does. Precisely!

He is scathing about cutting defence and the police being scaled back when the threat of terrorism is so high. Starkey is all for leaving the EU, saying we don’t fundamentally depend on their markets, although they depend on us. We do however have a decent trade balance with the rest of the world.

You gotta hand it to him. Davis Starkey is a true Brit! I agree with him on almost everything!