177. Olaf Scholz: Putin, Power, and Far-Right Populism
23 February 2026
Post
8 December 2011
177. Olaf Scholz: Putin, Power, and Far-Right Populism
Does the former German Chancellor think that Germany was wrong to rely on Russian gas in the run up to the war in Ukraine? What does Olaf Scholz think is behind the rise of the far-right Alternative f... Continue23 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
23 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
503. Andrew’s Arrest: What Next?
Why has the disgraced Andrew Mountbatten Windsor been arrested? How damaging is this unprecedented moment for the royal family? How effective was King Charles’ response? Join Alastair and the forme... Continue19 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
502. How Nigel Farage Gets Away With It (Question Time)
Why is Reform UK's leader not being properly challenged by the press, and how does he get away with it? What does this reveal about the international populist playbook? How can our democracies be bett... Continue19 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
176. How Close Are We To War With Iran? (Robert Malley)
How does the former US Special Representative for Iran think US-Iranian relations will improve? Is there a method to Trump’s madness when it comes to foreign policy? Why does Robert believe the “t... Continue16 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
501. Is Starmer Too Soft on Trump? Inside the Munich Security Conference
Why did Trump's Secretary of State Marco Rubio 'love bomb' Europe at the Munich Security Conference, and how did it compare to JD Vance's infamous 'enemy within' speech this time last year? Is Europe ... Continue16 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
13 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
500. Japan, China, and the Fight for Taiwan (Question Time)
Are Japan and China closer to conflict over Taiwan, after the landslide victory for Japan's 'Iron Lady', Sanae Takayichi? Does Trump’s crumbling American-Hispanic vote explain his extreme reaction t... Continue12 February 2026
Posted by Goalhanger
Cameron needs to find out what his MPs really think, at the moment they’re hidebound by what they’ve said to their constituents to get their votes and are now held ransom to whenever there’s a division.
Some are playing a similar game to Cameron’s (with his varying scripts according to whom he’s facing at the time).
Surely it’s possible for Govt Tories to have a blind/anonymous vote on the topic of whether the EU is best for us at a national/international level or not.
That’s what should concern them, not being blackmailed by what might please their own voters. He’s got to face up to having bought the votes of some that would have
gone for the BNP or UKIP if either had had enough candidates for a Govt. We hear so much about Labour being beholden to the unions, less about those beholden to racists and tax cheats.
Alastair, I admire your cheek!
‘Authenticity is the key to modern comms’ implies that spin is no longer in and we all need a good bout of honesty from our politicians. It’ll never happen as you and your colleagues have been and still are media manipulators, we’re getting kidded every day of the week by the complicit mainstream media.
The good thing is that we now have the internet and we can convey our views in a wider and more open forum.
If this makes our politicians more likely to be honest then great but
I won’t be holding my breathe.
‘As for David Cameron, honesty and authenticity require him to work out what he really thinks…’
But does he really think anything beyond ‘How do I and my chums stay in power?’
Nice thought Alastair but we have long lost political leaders that tell the truth -‘or even recognise what the truth is. Sadly nor do they understand that we would respect them far more if they did.
They come across as impotent, and as I have said before, they are looking after their own behinds, not to do a faux pas which would affect their future political career. They just seem to come out with the same feckless not taking responsibilty bollocks all the time. Bring back Winnie I say, he is the sort of character that is needed, calling a horse a horse, or a spade a spade, and etc. comparison wotsits.
Christmas pantomime season starts.
Thanks to leaks we know what the plans of European globalists are. They want a federal superstate, but cannot say it directly.
Anyway, citizens do not like it.
So we are treated with these silly summits one after another. Play-acting!
Banking elite, which also wants a United States of Europe, has provided politicians the platform to move towards the superstate by producing economic crisis which is bound to become much worse.
There is easy solution to the eurozone “crisis”. End austerity and reform the banking sector.
But, of course, this will not do for the neoliberals and freemasons.
(One of the aims of freemasonry is a world government as anyone can see from the writings of H.G. Wells.)
So we are now heading for a Credit crunch 2.0.
Global banking system faces insolvency. Maastricht Treaty prevents European Central Bank (ECB) from saving banks.
Politicians do not want market forces to be involved when it comes to banks. Taxpayers must guarantee the losses.
Bank bailouts caused the “mess”. Growth is needed to balance the books, but the same banks which caused the mess are now demanding austerity and “reforms”.
Austerity is destroying investment and jobs. Tax receipts will go down, and benefits costs up.
So the government deficits will rise. It is now probable that Mr Osborne will face almost the same level of deficit in 2015 than it was in 2010. All because of lack of economic growth.
The EU currency must serve the public, not big corporations. Private financial interests must now come second.
The plan of the globalists is to demolish democracy, personal freedom and capitalism. Depression is the tool to achieve this. Austerity leads to recession and depression.
Nation states will be a thing of the past. Soviet-style central planning is on the menu as tax and spending plans will be transferred to Brussels.
So we have to witness this EU charade until the globalist bankers and freemasons in politics will finally get what they – and not the public – want.
Ps. The US credit-ratings agency Standard & Poor´s is a division of McGraw-Hill. Rothschilds control McGraw-Hill through Vanguard (4.46%) and State Street (4.14%). According to a Swiss study by the University of Zurich 147 cross-owned Rothschild-controlled companies control 40% of the wealth of global economy.
I now know what it feels for a country to be led by a former PR consultant, they lie habitually and deceit becomes an objective of state policy. The tragedy, however, is that they drag many along with them under the belief that all is fair in politics including barefaced lies. Gone are the days of Sir John Major who at least showed some decency.
These Cameron lot now actually claim that Gordon Brown wanted to lead Britain into the Euro! Can Cameron for once not allow his penchant for lies to at least concede that Gordon Brown and by extension Balls did more than anyone to preserve the pound?
I think Cameron will say anything – he is such a lightweight. But I am extremely concerned that we seem to have no bargaining power whatsoever, primarily because leaders in the EU know the UK government doesn’t believe in Europe. They can see Cameron coming.
Re a question of yesterday about agencies like S&P – who are they?
Have just heard a report that Germany’s recently revised number of As or +/*s means that their loans are now costing double to insure.
What on earth that can mean for poorer countries or what it means in terms of commission or another word beginning with ‘com’ but ending in ‘icity’, the mind boggles.
Alistair! You say you don’t do god, but surely the One sits on the shoulder of Tony Blair. Otherwise HE would be president of the EU right now.
Hilarious.
Sometimes you can catch them at it (telling the truth) if they forget to switch their mikes off George:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15635476
Standard and Poors are a city funded credit rating organisation Michele. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_%26_Poor’s
Their objectivity and credibility is often questioned, sometimes rightly sometimes wrongly.
Thanks RH but my first line was quoting the question of yesterday, it’s one that more media commentators than AC have placed, questioning the sudden prominence of S&P (especially since they are actually so long-lived and so very Republican).
As to their need just to be, to exist, given that we already (supposedly) have the IMF assessing countries’ budgetary performances, I see them as just another set of vultures.
My point was about their apparent effect on insurance policies to cover countries’ loans and if Germany are now paying double what they used to on theirs, what the he** effect to S&P have regarding poorer countries?
We have more than the banks to worry about under the heading of ‘bar stewards’ imhoo.
Hope the gormless threats from trolls that you posted about a couple of weeks ago have come to nothing 🙂