SOME QUESTIONS

Q: How have huge multinationals been allowed openly to use bribes and avoid the taxation levels that are imposed on the average tax payer, securing immunity from any liability or prosecution when caught out?

Q: Why have the bankers who have brought the majority of average Britons to their knees, financially speaking, been allowed to pocket £17billion on ‘bonuses gained’ via this debacle?

Q: Why does the government of Great Britain expect taxpayers to cover the shortfall in government finance caused by bailing out the banks with said taxpayers’ money so that taxpayers will have paid for this action twice over?

Q: Why have Britons allowed so many of their liberties to be eroded in the name of anti-terrorism when everybody knows that the threat of terrorism was whipped up by the very politicians who are using it as leverage to excuse the constant increase of surveillance and intrusion into the affairs of perfectly ordinary law-abiding citizens?

Q: Why are Britons willing to contemplate the spending of £9 billion on a project to monitor every piece of Internet traffic in existence when it is perfectly obvious that this is not necessary or desirable and that it has long been a perfectly simple matter to ‘tap’ computer communications just like telephone communications?

Q: Why are Britons expected to believe that monitoring computer activity will make any difference whatsoever to the real or imagined terrorist threat when it is perfectly clear that known and would-be terrorists are already being allowed to live on handouts from the tax payer with impunity?

Q Is all this activity involving increased surveillance whilst taking no action when wrong-doing is uncovered a case of human rights for terrorists but none for the innocent population of Britain?

Q: Why is it possible for a National Black Police Association to exist when anyone trying to form a National White Police Association would, correctly, be accused of racism? Surely such a group is divisive and should never have been allowed to come into existence - anything of this ilk that is not open to all should be considered unacceptable, regardless of which race is being promoted or rejected, surely?

Q: Why is it acceptable for there to be 'Gay' and 'Lesbian' organisations when a 'Heterosexual' organisation would be accused of divisiveness?

Q: Why is so much of the funding produced by taxpayers and lottery entrants allotted, awarded and directed to tiny minority groups, many of which are entirely without merit and have been formed specifically to try and obtain money for nothing, when there are so many nationally important projects desperate for finance?

Q: Why do our leaders see fit to interfere in situations where anyone with real knowledge of international affairs could have told them they would never succeed and yet wilfully ignore shocking abuses in countries where Great Britain might still be said to have some capacity for exerting influence?

Q: Why do the current crop of active politicians appear unaware that they may well be driving the population of Great Britain into the arms of whatever fascist regime is waiting quietly to erupt at the next general election, as though what we have been seeing happen around Europe could be ignored instead of taken as a grim warning?

These I believe to be pertinent questions and I would love to hear some answers from those who live at the expense of taxpayers and purport to be the ‘leadership’ of Great Britain.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Those who have known Mr. Rantankerous for any length of time may remember ridiculing him for his diatribes about the direction being taken by Great British institutions including the police, banks, insurance companies, mortgage brokers and especially politicians, as far back as 1977. It gives him no pleasure whatsoever (well, maybe just a little) to be able to say "I told you so."