Why I teach

I just made a list of all the material I've posted in the last week or so, and besides the handful of readers here, most of whom already know what I'm writing, the actual intended purpose of such writings are to inform people of issues which took me decades to work out and put together, and had I set myself up as a lecturer or guru and charged hundreds of pounds for courses (a bit like the even less qualified David Icke for example) putting together all the material I have spent most of my life collecting before finally having enough to share after almost 50 years people should consider it good value for nothing. But that's not how the mind works, if it's free it's worthless so is ignored or worse. But the seeds are planted but only in the 'wise after the event' method, where once what I have said happens people remember me mentioning it and it's too late as it's already happened. The entire purpose of my teaching is to demonstrate how what people in power do and say is actually doing, and that once you know this it's then impossible to fool another person and elect such shits as Kevin Rudd or David Cameron again, least of all Barack Obama who represents the ultimate worst of everything I write about.

People who know me (and a few who don't) blame me for only sitting at home typing and leaving it there, but I remember almost 20 years ago when I spent a small amount publishing a little book and spent the following year carrying them around London's bookshops in a carrier bag until I'd sold the lot mainly on sale or return. Of course the travel costs probably wiped out the small profit I made, which was 'invested' in a series of radio ads, which had a return of 10% of the amount I spent, a lesson I could afford to lose but was doing it to sell as many books as possible rather than make a profit, but making such a loss was not planned in any way. Internet publication covers the worst of both scenarios, the money is spent just the same and all you do is sit at home typing. The tiny door which opened of library lectures could allow me to lecture and then maybe find ways to monetise the system or at least cover my costs (which are almost zero). Then my local library (ie the one with a lecture room) closed down after being there all my life, and that door swung almost shut. But like anything else my strengths are in a few specific areas, and not marketing them. I know some of the top writers worldwide just sit at home typing and earn a fortune, so it is a legitimate job, but they are the same as the successful actors, a handful of a huge set able to do the same thing.

I know exactly what I want from my teaching, a sort of penicillin effect where my little drop of fungus on the bacterial culture of politics starts spreading across the dish and gradually wiping out the infection as others pick it up and pass it on. I know one person can do enough (eg Jesus, although he's not an example I'd want to follow from the legacy he's left behind), but it's not a personal thing as the information should speak for itself. Newspapers regularly publish anonymous articles and no one ever questions the qualifications of the writer as they can only judge the material on its own merits. If it's relevant I mention my own just to raise a little confidence in the readers I haven't just read someone else's blog and copied it over, but did once pass an exam on something similar. But that's only a little icing on the cake as everyone can check information for themselves and shouldn't need to know who wrote what, especially when qualified references are given.

It's usually a long term process where each step ahead is not known till taken, and the ultimate result remains unknown until the very end. Each is a fork in the road, a flow diagram where each attempt can succeed or fail and finishes when the total project either proves utterly fruitless or is accepted into the mainstream. I know the odds quite clearly, but as it costs me nothing and would waste the material otherwise I write it and have learnt now to assume it is wasted except for the few wise after the events I mentioned earlier. I have had a few compliments from people who know this already, for my presentation, but they are not infected so can never be added to the total percentage cured. We need a rough number of the total to lose their hold on the illusion until there aren't enough to maintain it. Therefore it would mean an end to (at the very least):

Artificially low interest rates.
Artificially high house prices.
Belief in global warming with a consequent ending of associated taxes and restrictions.
A belief in the merits of diversity and multiculturalism.
EU membership is worse than being outside it for every country within it except the core (ie Germany and its close allies).

There are many more areas which are more my own preference than right or wrong, so will not extend beyond the knowns, but the amount of money lost already through the myth of global warming has done more to cause world recession than any other factor, probably even more than the dodgy mortgages. For example, why do bankers sell credit cards but don't use them? If you simply use that example and extend it beyond you will have learnt enough to protect you from the majority of crooks masquerading as businessmen and politicians. In politics there is no law of contract, and as a result they can say whatever they like and never be bound by a single word of it. In business there are laws and lawyers paid six figures a year to find ways round them. I can't name my sources but when I say a certain area is corrupt sometimes I have been informed directly, otherwise I wouldn't bother to claim it. The higher you go in authority the more they cheat to get there and stay there, so that is the nature of authority inherently. It's not negative or paranoid, just how it is. It needn't stay like that, as if enough people learn it then it won't be able to continue, which takes us back in a complete circle. Just imagine life with any element the other way round and then see how different life would be with just that one change.

For example, if Cyprus had put two fingers up and the EU and had the balls to leave either the Euro or EU entirely we know they would never have had money taken from the richest people's accounts. If Greece had left the Euro they may not have had a long term recession they are now guaranteed, as their income streams can never meet their long term obligations whatever they think of. In fact, how could any of the suffering countries in the Euro have been worse off outside it? To take it a step beyond, where opinions are included but facts are still the basis, how many murders would London have had without its massive recent immigration, bearing in mind there is a sector of all violent crimes imported which would simply never have existed had Tony Blair and previous governments not invited in the lowest of all parts of societies internationally, as if coming to Britain would cure their ills by improving their environment. Our Barbadian politics lecturer explained that the only reason London's West Indian communities had such a high crime rate (something the government kill themselves to hide, but now possible through Freedom of Information requests) was when they came here originally the ones who were doing well generally had no reason to leave, so the majority were from the existing criminal classes there and simply did what today's Romanians are doing across Europe and spreading their own dirt far and wide as encouraged to do so.

By closing your eyes to ethnic crime you are inviting a burglary, mugging or any other of the direct consequences of open door policies which are sold as a perfect scenario which anyone objecting to must be a racist. Except the thousands of law abiding ethnic minorities and Chris Rock who also object to it. Clearly immigration alone is not the cause, but besides the obvious overcrowding all immigration causes sooner or later, if you look at America and Australia's old rules (before they were hijacked by the UN led left) the slightest dirt on the picture will stop an entire family coming in for a holiday in some cases, let alone residency. That was the old-fashioned default picture, you have a quota of space per year and then made damn sure it was only taken up by the best people. Now it's the exact opposite. In Britain an illegal immigrant is a joke now as when said people are now caught the vast majority are given the number of the nearest Home Office desk and left to vanish in the crowds. The opinion side is secondary but valid, as some people do say they prefer to live among a mixture of nationalities (even though I would bet none had ever spoken to a Somalian where they live) but hippos prefer to live in muddy ponds but I personally would not. And however interesting they may find hearing 100 different languages on the train to work every day they can never avoid the longer queues and fewer available seats which is the inevitable result.

So yes, everyone including me has an opinion, but as my previous entry points out, separate the opinions from the facts as you can't have opinions without knowing the facts. So if Tony Blair and Peter Mandelson (for it was they) have persuaded you to believe black on black crime hasn't made Brent the highest murder borough in Britain and all the people called Mohamed and Hassan convicted of running child sex rings across the country are totally coincidentally Muslim and it could equally have been carried out by any other group, except it wasn't. This is the point where you must use your own minds and learn to work things out yourself and not be taken in by the misleading bullshit. I've shown you how, try it out.