The Direction of Traffic.

Being at the Christian hub of Empire- sanitised and rehashed- the UK would fight 'tooth and nail' to defend its colonial right to drive on the left. Blue passports unto death! and all that sort of guff. 'Royal Blue,' blue as blue as Great Britannia's ruled and wavy oceans- excepting the rather murkier coastal bits. Taking back control!

In all other regards, the nation's traffic has been herded rabid-dogmatically ever rightwards. So much so, that it rather risks disappearing up its own Royal opening- perhaps it all begins with being able to lick one's own.

On a more practical level- that where 'left' or 'right' is merely a matter of convenience- it has been noticed that more elderly city pedestrians are increasingly shunning such distinctions, increasingly opting for the shortest, straightest route, shunning imposed 'rules. Could it be argued that there is actually an unspoken 'underground' trend away from more authoritarian diktat and towards the tiniest smidgen of- whisper it- liberty? Taking back control!

To hone it down more specifically, take 'liberty' here to equate to freedom. That is 'liberty' as fundamentally opposed to 'libertarian,' which is entirely a different, most objectionable kettle of reactionary fish! Discredited in the Truss-Kwarteng manner, crash and burn! Both of whom are still raking in the full MP salary, plus perks!

Those of certain age may recall- 'halcyon' days prior to alternating gambling cartels with sleeping bags in empty-shop doorways- that much of the city centre was securely trussed up behind anti-pedestrian rails. Councils would have it that they were erected for the purpose of safety, valuing the welfare of the spending pedestrian against the consequences of vehicular mishap! Her Majesty's officers were known to veer towards tetchy should one chance one's arm and 'hurdle.' Jolly frustrating it was too, very sheep dog trials-ish, ensuring intimate proximity betwixt pedestrian and commercialism.

I cannot recall which came first, the removal of rails or the straightening and shortening of lines. Perhaps it is but a minor readjustment, but perhaps it is also evidence of a greater thirst for liberty. Or more, the reclaiming of tiny freedoms? Thatcher's rancid drips of 'trickle-down' arriving thirty years too late.

Notice, or don't- either way- that many of the older generations no longer bother with pedestrian controls- excepting always that metal in transit is still best avoided. Maybe there is an age, or state of body and mind, whereupon it becomes even more tiresome to bother with the ritualistic 'pressing of buttons,' excepting where there are children on hand to witness.

There are 'rules' and there are issues of timing:
1. At pedestrian-moderated crossroads pressing the button will not interfere with the flow of taxed traffic, it merely lights up the pressed button. Pedestrians cross when counter-traffic flow is prioritised. Pedestrians may scuttle back and forth whilst adjacent traffic is stationary.
2. Buses do not stop immediately a red stoplight shows, routinely snatching a second or so before the green pedestrian lights up. Stepping out under the auspices of a red stop sign could, and will at some point, prove injurious or fatal (thus the child consideration).
3. Pedestrian crossings upon straight roads without junction are often timed (seemingly) to test pedestrian resolve. Press the button by all means but do not feel obligated to await 'permission,' unless one enjoys counting vehicles (or there are children present).
4. The Direction of (taxed) Traffic (flow) will undergo minimal, or no, modification.
5. Traffic drives on the left, policy drives to the right.

Where 'furniture' has been retained at crossing points- a kind of zigzag corralling affair- there is a growing counter-trend for older pedestrians to cut out the railings, instead to cut the straightest line, more so where layout is familiar. Public view favours greater pedestrianisation but then they're not nestled in the pockets of petro-chemical giants as are the rule-makers. Although concessionary access to busy bus lanes has been afforded the cyclist, many instead opt for the narrow pavement, frequently riders who really should know better. Ongoingly unlegislated scooters continue to operate along variable libertarian lines. (1)
Beware! The Direction of Traffic remains geographically to the left, fundamentally to the right!

Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service (net worth £37.7 millions [2a]) chuckles to script, pressed upon nothing by Sir Anthony Charles Lynton Blair KG, current War Criminal (net worth £50.3 millions [2b]). 'Forensic' Guardian Journalist, Mary Louisa "Polly" Toynbee, Villa in Tuscany (£3110,000 per annum), endorses former Head of the crown Prosecution Service, Sir Keir Starmer's chuckled dismissal of the removal of austerity's two child benefit limit, in his drive to "grow the economy" ad nauseam. Conjuring economic growth from the Jaws of Austerity 3.0. Andrew Bailey (£575,338 per annum) urges restraint to those who already cannot feed their children. Eugenics through stealth?

Those fleeing persecution from Rwandan human rights abuses- adjudged legal refugees under international law- who are granted refugee status, still to be deported to Rwanda. Both in reality and in the dreams of the current UK Home Secretary. Apartheid State granted protected status against those protesting state racism. The Direction of Traffic!

David Lammy (LBC platform and [New] New Labour MP), opposing Corbyn, interviews Mike Katz (Jewish Labour Movement [4]), also opposing Corbyn, on 'Corbyn as a continued member of the Labour Party.' David Lammy interviews Ed Balls (LBC platform and ex New Labour MP), also opposing Corbyn, on the same subject. Andrew Neil (Channel 4 platform, Chairman of Spectator, Sunday Times and other Rupert Murdoch outlets, former Chairman GB News), also opposing Corbyn, interviews Ed Balls on the same subject. Frenemies, (3) Ed Balls and George Osborne (former chancellor whose austerity program is calculated to have caused approximately 300,000 excess deaths, former Evening Standard editor and platform), both opposing Corbyn, team up to 'produce' economics podcast.
Informing the public on our behalf? Building a better tomorrow, a future for all? The roundabout to damnation rotates eternally to the right.

The UK reserves its Empirical right to drive on the left but the Direction of Traffic continues to veer ever further to the right. Taking back control!
But on whose behalf?

We're going to need another couple of lanes here! And that's just for starters.



(1) Scooters (frequently hired) continue to pay into the stuttering economy. Pedestrians and bikes (frequently) do not.
(2) Consider 'worth' as a purly numerical label. Conversely, calculated 'value' is likely to fall into negative territory.
(3) 'Frenemies,' don't you just hate it? Such frenemies, so 'fundamentally opposed' was Balls that he was invited to the wedding.
(4) The Jewish Labour Movement mysteriously re-founded in 2015, under curious circumstances but with highly questionable and undemocratic motives ('Weaponising Anti-Semitism,' Asa Winstanley, from page 54). Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, has maintained something of a hot-line relationship with the Board of Deputies of British Jews since his dishonest rise to Head of the (New) New Labour Party. Alongside this, the sudden rise of the Jewish Labour Movement and the 'operations' of Labour Friends of Israel, one could easily be forgiven for wondering just how little genuine democracy remains within the Party. Where indeed is the real steering committee?

Boycott, Divest and Sanctions.

Ultimately, the aim has to be open and honest,
freedom from all Israeli oppression for the Palestinian people.
Nothing less!
Simply substitute 'Palestine' for 'Ukraine' in any sentence uttered by the BBC and therein lies a wealth of possibility. In truth the two countries are not so very similar. Israel's occupation of Palestine has been in operation since 1967, as recognised under international law (International Criminal Courts), arguably since 1948. The onslaught is more targeted, the weapons more sophisticated, the death toll greater, the consequent oppression more sustained, the cityscapes more dystopian! The firing zones expanding, the schools being earmarked for demolition. Pogroms accelerating!

Israeli Government functions as an apartheid regime.


B'Tselem, the most prominent of Israel's human rights organisations opens with:
"The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories strives for a future in which human rights, liberty and equality are guaranteed to all people, Palestinian and Jewish alike, living between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. Such a future will only be possible when the Israeli occupation and apartheid regime end."

Human Rights Watch describes itself thus:
"Human Rights Watch investigates and reports on abuses happening in all corners of the world."
In April, Human Rights Watch released a 213-page report, “A Threshold Crossed,” finding that
"Israeli authorities are committing the crimes against humanity of apartheid and persecution."

"the omission does a terrible disservice to child victims in Israel/Palestine, and the question remains:
why doesn’t the UN secretary-general value the lives of Palestinian children as much as the lives of Ukrainian children?"

Amnesty International campaigns for a world in which human rights are enjoyed by all. It's standing worldwide is immense, deservingly so. In May 2021 Israeli Government and the Israeli 'Defence' Force attacked Sheikh Jarrah, a Palestinian neighbourhood in East Jerusalem. In an often repeated scenario Palestinian lives were brutally cut short, their homes were bulldozed and their land stolen. Amnesty meticulously compiled a report, stating:
"Amnesty International’s new investigation shows that Israel imposes a system of oppression and domination against Palestinians across all areas under its control: in Israel and the OPT, and against Palestinian refugees, in order to benefit Jewish Israelis.
This amounts to apartheid as prohibited in international law."

Three highly and internationally respected organisations, all employing the term 'apartheid,' all speaking specifically about Israel. The 'great and impartial' BBC did deign to mention, 'Amnesty; news teams are again being despatched to the Occupied Territories,' but genuine reportage remained then, and remains now, long, long overdue. During the yawning absence of actual journalism thousands of Palestinians have been slaughtered, thousands of homes have been bulldozed, thousands of acres of land stolen- the Nakba has barely stuttered.

In 2017, upon the release of the explosive exposé, 'The Lobby,' (Electronic Intifada), the Israeli Government were, oh so briefly, given to inglorious partial retreat, when spy, Shai Masot was caught upon camera boasting about his "political hit list" to an undercover reporter. Masot was likely 'thrown under the proverbial bus' upon his expulsion from the UK. Habitual liar, inexplicably then PM, Boris Johnson, blustered a pathway through the 'affair. 'Conservative MP, Crispin Blunt (hit listed), spoke of
"interference in another country's politics of the murkiest kind."
Post his Conservative MP days, Alan Duncan wrote in his diaries,
"interference at a high level in British politics, in the interests of Israel"

Inside Corbyn's far more determinedly targeted Labour Party, Emily Thornberry MP, called for an enquiry. It has been speculated, in the light of the quickly shelved report, as well as the far greater and damaging antics revealed inside her own party, that Thornberry's hasty climb-down was driven to placate the right of the (New) New Labour Party. Whatever the reasons, Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service (just in case you'd missed the memo) has worked his royal blue socks off to bury all findings... latterly, even the findings of his own orchestrated internal report, the Forde Enquiry.

At grassroots level it has long been recognised- although seldom broadcast- that the weaponising of anti-Semitism (ref: 'Weaponising Anti-Semitism,' Asa Winstanley, the 'Forde Report,' Martin Forde QC) has done far more to stoke acts of racism than it has to correctly identify and to properly address these transgressions. The 'fearless' BBC obediently continues, intermittently, to nudge the 'expulsions from the Labour Party' button, whilst covertly omitting to mention the disproportionate number of expulsions that 'happen to be' Jewish (ex) members. Not even a little bit curious? As the incomparable Chomsky once proffered to a young and dazed Andrew Marr,
“I’m not saying you're self censoring. I’m sure you believe everything you’re saying. But what I’m saying is that if you believed something different, you wouldn’t be sitting where you’re sitting.”
Eamonn Holmes, Richard Madeley, the eternally spot-lit Piers Morgan- fingers crossed for the latest 'phone hacking' revelations- may continue to wail about 'deplatforming,' but, glaringly, they're still here, pushing the narrative of choice. Others, those espousing genuine contra-opinion, continue to 'self censor' or to suffer the consequences.

Currently, two of Labour's most committed and hard-working, long-serving anti-racists are being denied the Labour whip by Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, whilst several of those 'serving' upon his front bench remain, frequently unchallenged, permitted- encouraged?- to continue to weaponise anti-Semitism as and when suits, uncommented upon by the likes of the BBC.
Simon Hattenstone, on 'Ken Loach and anti-Semitism' (Guardian reporter, supporter of zero tolerance on anti-Semitism), "You can’t make such an accusation without supporting it." (line 193)
Rachel Reeves (Shadow Chancellor, equating Ken Loach with anti-Semitism), defending a stance which appears to have been handed down from on high, “Well, look, I’m not on the body who makes these decisions,”
How can she know what she thinks if she hasn't and doesn't (think)? Riding the free pass!

Whilst it's good to see Simon and the Guardian questioning the validity of some of these statements being thrown about by many of those who would describe themselves as 'authorities' or (even) 'journalists,' one has to wonder where the Guardian was during the heat of the fabricated crisis in the Labour Party.

The MSM scripted narrative 'is' that Labour were an "Institutionally anti-Semitic" Party. The narrative being that the EHRC investigation judged Labour to be so. But they didn't! The ECHR investigation cleared Corbyn of any anti-Semitic acts; ECHR even said that Corbyn's right to comment upon the report should be 'protected.' Curiously, (or perhaps not!) omitted from the narrative is the fact that nearly 40% of the 'complaints made' regarding anti-Semitic behaviour were found to have concerned non-members. Further, as few as 0.07% of actual members (comments) were thought to require further investigation, many of the 0.07% requiring no further action. The more the narrative leaks the weaker the argument becomes. Just 0.07%!

Really though, for the chances of a genuine alternative government the opportunity has long since flown! If, as polling suggests, New Labour do get the gig in 2024 the best that we might hope for, perhaps dangled at press briefings, may be a hand-painted sign bearing the slogan, 'Under New Management.'

Replete with greenscreen, (mostly) blank-faced youth ranged behind him, Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, has been desperately oiling the wooden cogs of his clunky delivery style. But, fear not, Zionist David Evans continues to fabricate any means to yet further deplete the Party's thinking base, as narrative instructs, unreported by the 'fearless' BBC. So, in such a climate of control, it must have appeared an act of the most bizarre self destruction when the second, aforementioned, long-serving anti-racist, Dianne Abbott, seemed to jump before being pushed, when she allegedly accidentally 'hit send,' forwarding a most awkwardly worded self-analysis upon the hierarchy of racism. Anyone even half-abreast of the shenanigans afoot inside Labour will already have recognised, with diamond-cut certainty, that Evans and co would already have targeted Dianne Abbott for culling. Even so, Abbott's enabling of such (BBC et al) narrative currently presents as inexplicable... a narrative of hierarchical racism? Outrageous!

Except...

Former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Sir Keir Starmer's instant removal of the whip would suggest otherwise. Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, is remarkably Johnsonesque in his 'denial' of any facts, contentions, issues et al which do not suit his narrative. Maybe, outside of the courts, he is not so nimble upon his toes as his 'friends' in the MSM would have us believe? Maybe he has been schooled far more similarly to the thoroughly discredited Boris Johnson than he cares to admit; maybe he is more of a fan than he pretends? Maybe Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, has experienced a far too elevated sense of liberation since his time in the Crown Prosecution Service, no longer the inconvenient constraints of 'honesty' for him! Maybe he is far too enamoured by the curious inversions of the Commons, whereby those calling out the lies are to be judged differently to those who commit to them? Either way, Martin Forde, QC, fully recognised and recorded former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, Sir Keir Starmer's personal take upon the hierarchy of racism that currently presides within (New) New Labour. Martin Forde wrote, and has since spoken with sadness, about the years of targeted racism that Dianne Abbott has faced, with little if any support from NEC. Fellow MP, Apsana Begum, has served far fewer years but she is more than fully abreast of the unspoken hierarchy. Apsana's politics are too considered for Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, to deign to scribble a postage note of support for the young socialist.

Because, here's the thing, by lending blind support to Israel's apartheid behaviour in the Palestinian Occupied Territories- greatly enabled via his factional behaviour against the Party membership- Sir Keir Starmer, former Head of the Crown Prosecution Service, is actively bringing closer to fruition the UK's own endorsed hierarchy of racism. Written large in the Forde Report can be found the evidence that anti-Semitism trumps all other forms of racism. Take the time to watch Al Jazeera's The Lobby (Israel Lobby in the United Kingdom) and one very soon learns that so much more elevated stands anti-Semitism that, in some circles, it is now common accepted practice to contradictorily employ false claims of anti-Semitism in order to target non anti-Semites as specified by the Israeli Lobby. Follow that if you can!

And, that brings us round to the point of it all! Sunak's Anti-Boycotts Bill! Maybe the UK's fragile democracy will escape this time but consider the groundwork! Consider the stripping away of democratic rights to free speech and open debate that had to be undertaken in order to bring us to such an historic low! As if watching the privatised railways, the privatised water companies, the privatised utilities crumble, the growth of the food banks, the tented empty shop doorways, the altered narrative that is quickly acclimatising the nation to an acceptance of the mounting refugee death toll as some sort of inevitability.

Currently there is another Israeli lobby targeted film doing the rounds. It may, increasingly, be accessed but, unless one rips away the sticking plaster and peers at the raw under belly, one could be forgiven for being unaware of its existence. The film is titled, 'Oh Jeremy Corbyn, the Big Lie!' and it is narrated by none other than Alexei Sayle. George Osborne's (2017-2020) Evening Standard isn't impressed... but then that has to be a positive, right? The film revisits some of the injustices meted upon our electoral system. It may well be the case that the weaponising of anti-Semitism wasn't solely responsible for the loss of the 2019 GE but it acted as a fulcrum about which other factions were able to revolve, a unifying factor if you will. The Lords may now be a cluster of disingenuous ex-Labour MPs the heavier, Chuka Umunna and Change UK may be relegated to the rogue's gallery of political mishap (JP Morgan Chase, something to do with asset extraction at the Royal Mail), numerous Labour Constituencies may now be mere hollowed-out puppet organisations, (New) New Labour may even be rearranging deck chairs but aim low and expect to miss the target!

As current Government- New Management riding the slipstream- would have it the Anti-Boycott Bill would remove from the ordinary citizen much of the right to conscience. Substituting, 'your' Government (Braverman included) would instead fulfil this arduous role, stripping away any right to collective actions against another state, that might be (say) in breach of human rights or international criminal law, determining on your behalf, to react economically, and/or politically, at the behest of (also say) the leaders of the 'free' world, the US of A. However, regardless of its internationally acquired status as an apartheid state, exempting, thus elevating to an altogether higher plain, actions by the State of Israel inside the Occupied Palestinian Territories or the Occupied Golan Heights.

Should the Anti-Boycotts Bill ever come to fruition, if not under surely one of UK's most hateful governments, then under minimal-change New-Management-New-Labour, the UK will have adopted its very own hierarchy of racism, as dictated by a government that is not necessarily our own! Perhaps, Dianne Abbott was on to something, after all. Consider that!

So, how does society move forward upon any issue if there is no debate and no discussion?