A Force For Good 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿🇬🇧

NOW - Trump says it's good to have 500,000 foreign Chinese students in the U.S. and for China to purchase U.S. farmland; otherwise, colleges and farm prices would collapse: "I frankly think that it's good that people come from other countries and they learn our culture."

Thomas Massie’s opponent, Ed Gallrein, says he wants to bring back the military draft for “national security” reasons. He complains that the current system is too slow when it comes to sending large numbers of young Americans off to a potential world war. "That is a significant issue for national security." "I'm not sure we have that kind of time anymore."

In Britain, the police will leave you handcuffed, choking to death on your own blood, just in case you said something racist to the person who stabbed you.

IS THERE MORE TO MILIBAND'S POLICY THAN MEETS THE EYE? One thing that could help bring down the cost of living crisis, and the Labour government ban it! The British economy is a joke, and has been for a long time. If Britain is unable to create wealth, then our country falls into the hands of the "Loan Sharks" (aka the Bond Markets) who demand high interest rates on the bonds they buy. This requires "higher taxes and more cuts" to public services in order to repay these people. A poor country is always going to be in hock to the Bond Markets to borrow money, and once that happens, there is no solution other than "higher taxes and more cuts" in a perpetual doom cycle. Given this fact, the actions of people like Miliband have to be seen as very damaging to the people of Britain. The Labour movement – and the Green movement – should not put the financial needs of the British working class before ideological indulgence – which is what Miliband's (and Polanski's) "climate emergency" theory amounts to. However, given all these facts, is it possible that Miliband is actually playing a wider game here? Is it possible that he is an agent of a wider global interest, which is deliberately trying to de-industrialise Britain as part of a long-term global game that he and colleagues are involved in – while simply using the climate hoax as the convenient excuse? What else can realistically be the case when a policy is so destructive of the common good that it makes no rational sense otherwise?

IS THERE MORE TO MILIBAND'S POLICY THAN MEETS THE EYE? One thing that could help bring down the cost of living crisis, and the Labour government ban it! The British economy is a joke, and has been for a long time. If Britain is unable to create wealth, then our country falls into the hands of the "Loan Sharks" (aka the Bond Markets) who demand high interest rates on the bonds they buy. This requires "higher taxes and more cuts" to public services in order to repay these people. A poor country is always going to be in hock to the Bond Markets to borrow money, and once that happens, there is no solution other than "higher taxes and more cuts" in a perpetual doom cycle. Given this fact, the actions of people like Miliband have to be seen as very damaging to the people of Britain. The Labour movement – and the Green movement – should not put the financial needs of the British working class before ideological indulgence – which is what Miliband's (and Polanski's) "climate emergency" theory amounts to. However, given all these facts, is it possible that Miliband is actually playing a wider game here? Is it possible that he is an agent of a wider global interest, which is deliberately trying to de-industrialise Britain as part of a long-term global game that he and colleagues are involved in – while simply using the climate hoax as the convenient excuse? What else can realistically be the case when a policy is so destructive of the common good that it makes no rational sense otherwise?