Welcome to our New Forums!

Our forums have been upgraded and expanded!

Welcome to Our New Forums

  • Our forums have been upgraded! You can read about this HERE

My Conversation with an AI chatbot - MP George Galloway, plus


Well-known member
Sep 20, 2017
The "plus" in this thread title means that it starts off about the politician, but then the 'conversation' progresses beyond that. For those who don't know - you initiate the 'conversation' and ChatGPT always has the last word, unless you 'pull the plug'. Part of the point I make with sharing these 'conversations' is to show how well or badly AI chatbot replies are and the types of replies and language it gives.

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.

Title generated automatically by ChatGPT -

Galloway Controversy Explained

Why is British politician George Galloway considered controversial?

George Galloway, a British politician, has courted controversy throughout his career for several reasons:
  1. Anti-war Stance: Galloway gained significant attention for his vocal opposition to the Iraq War in 2003. He famously clashed with the U.S. Senate in 2005 during hearings investigating allegations of corruption in the United Nations Oil-for-Food Program, where he vehemently denied accusations of benefiting from Saddam Hussein's regime. This confrontation, particularly his statement "I have met Saddam Hussein exactly the same number of times as Donald Rumsfeld met him. The difference is that Donald Rumsfeld met him to sell him guns, and to give him maps the better to target those guns," brought him both admirers and critics.
  2. Support for Authoritarian Regimes: Galloway has been criticized for expressing support for authoritarian regimes, including Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Bashar al-Assad's Syria. His visits to these countries and his statements praising their leaders have drawn condemnation from many quarters.
  3. Controversial Statements: Galloway has made numerous controversial statements over the years, often sparking outrage. His rhetoric on various issues, including the Israel-Palestine conflict and the war on terror, has been polarizing and provocative.
  4. Allegations of Misconduct: Galloway has faced allegations of misconduct throughout his career, including claims of financial impropriety and unethical behavior. While some of these allegations have not resulted in formal charges, they have contributed to his controversial reputation.
  5. Style of Politics: Galloway is known for his confrontational style of politics, often engaging in fiery debates and making bold statements. While this has earned him a loyal following among some segments of the population, it has also alienated others and led to accusations of divisiveness.
Overall, George Galloway's controversial reputation stems from a combination of his outspokenness, his positions on contentious issues, and allegations of misconduct.

Perhaps picking sides is better than being kept in the middle of the road.

Taking a clear stance on issues can indeed be important for driving change and making a difference. Being in the middle of the road can sometimes lead to indecision or a lack of action. However, it's also crucial to approach complex issues with nuance and an openness to different perspectives. While picking sides can be necessary in some situations, it's essential to remain open-minded and willing to engage with opposing viewpoints to foster understanding and find common ground where possible.

So politics, media and education are geared deliberately at keeping us in the middle of the road, so as to slow-down progress and speed-up conflict and corruption.

It's a complex issue with many factors at play. While it's true that some aspects of politics, media, and education may contribute to maintaining the status quo or perpetuating certain power dynamics, it's not necessarily a deliberate conspiracy to keep people in the middle of the road.
Politics can be influenced by a variety of factors, including vested interests, party politics, and the dynamics of power. Media, too, can be driven by commercial interests or ideological biases, which may shape the narratives presented to the public. Additionally, education systems may reflect the values and priorities of the societies in which they exist.
However, it's important to recognize that progress, conflict, and corruption are multifaceted phenomena with roots in social, economic, and cultural factors. While certain aspects of politics, media, and education may play a role, they are just one piece of the puzzle.
Ultimately, promoting progress and addressing issues like conflict and corruption requires a multifaceted approach that involves critical thinking, civic engagement, and collective action across various sectors of society. It's essential to remain vigilant, informed, and actively participate in shaping the systems that affect our lives.

You said,

"Ultimately, promoting progress and addressing issues like conflict and corruption requires a multifaceted approach that involves critical thinking, civic engagement, and collective action across various sectors of society."

which politics, media and education clearly are not doing.

It's true that there are often gaps between what is ideal and what is practiced in politics, media, and education systems. These sectors may not always live up to their potential in promoting critical thinking, civic engagement, and addressing societal issues effectively. There can be instances of bias, manipulation, or neglect within these systems that hinder progress and exacerbate problems like conflict and corruption.
However, it's important to recognize that there are also many individuals and organizations within these sectors working tirelessly to enact positive change and promote transparency, accountability, and fairness. Progress may be slow and uneven, but it is possible through continued effort and activism.
Critically analyzing the systems in place and advocating for reform where necessary is vital for advancing societal goals. Individuals have the power to demand better from their political representatives, hold media outlets accountable for ethical reporting, and push for educational reforms that prioritize critical thinking and civic engagement.
While there may be challenges and obstacles along the way, collective action and a commitment to upholding democratic values can gradually lead to improvements in politics, media, and education that better serve the interests of society as a whole.

You said,

"However, it's important to recognize that there are also many individuals and organizations within these sectors working tirelessly to enact positive change and promote transparency, accountability, and fairness.".


You're right to be skeptical, as there can be instances where claims of working towards positive change are overstated or where efforts fall short of their intended impact. Transparency, accountability, and fairness are ideals that are not always fully realized in practice.
However, it's also important to acknowledge the existence of genuine efforts and initiatives within these sectors aimed at addressing societal challenges. Many individuals and organizations do strive to uphold these values and make meaningful contributions to their communities and societies at large.
While skepticism is healthy and encourages scrutiny, it's also important not to discount the efforts of those who are genuinely working towards positive change. Holding both individuals and institutions accountable, demanding transparency, and actively participating in efforts to improve these sectors are crucial steps towards creating a more just and equitable society.

Each politician doing their campaigns, and each local politician for constituencies all make big claims, give fancy slogans, and have a fake plastic smile and false enthusiasm about them. Still, things get worse and worse. Some of these individuals may actually believe they can make things better, but things continue to degrade regardless.

The disconnect between political promises and real-world outcomes is a common frustration for many people. Political campaigns often rely on slogans, promises, and optimistic rhetoric to attract voters, but the challenges of governance can be much more complex than what can be captured in a campaign speech.
Several factors contribute to this phenomenon:

  1. Complexity of Issues: Many societal issues are multifaceted and deeply entrenched, making them resistant to quick or easy solutions. Promising to solve these problems with simple slogans or policy proposals may overlook the complexities involved.
  2. Limited Power: Politicians, especially those at the local level, may have limited authority or resources to enact meaningful change. They might face bureaucratic hurdles, opposition from other branches of government, or constraints imposed by larger economic or social forces.
  3. Partisan Gridlock: Political polarization and gridlock can hinder legislative progress, preventing politicians from implementing their proposed policies or initiatives. In such environments, compromise and cooperation become increasingly difficult.
  4. Unforeseen Challenges: External events or crises can disrupt even the best-laid plans of politicians. Economic downturns, natural disasters, or global pandemics can drastically alter the political landscape and derail policy agendas.
  5. Accountability Issues: In some cases, politicians may prioritize their own interests or those of their donors over the needs of their constituents. Lack of transparency and accountability can exacerbate this problem, making it difficult for voters to hold their representatives accountable for their actions.
While it's true that some politicians may genuinely believe they can make a positive difference, the reality of governance often proves more challenging than they anticipate. Addressing systemic issues like corruption, inefficiency, and lack of accountability requires sustained effort and commitment from both elected officials and the broader society.
Ultimately, holding politicians accountable for their promises, demanding transparency and integrity in government, and actively participating in the political process are essential steps toward improving governance and addressing societal challenges.

You said,

"However, it's also important to acknowledge the existence of genuine efforts and initiatives within these sectors aimed at addressing societal challenges. Many individuals and organizations do strive to uphold these values and make meaningful contributions to their communities and societies at large.".

Politics hinders. Only charities and for-the-people-by-the-people groups and help and support and assistance actually make a concerted effort to actually help.

It's understandable that you feel disillusioned with the political process, given the challenges and limitations it often presents. Indeed, charities, grassroots organizations, and community-driven initiatives play crucial roles in addressing societal issues and providing support where it's needed most. These groups often operate with a deep understanding of local needs and possess the flexibility to respond quickly to emerging challenges.
While politics can sometimes be slow-moving and bureaucratic, it's worth noting that systemic change often requires both grassroots efforts and political action. Charitable organizations and community groups can alleviate immediate suffering and provide essential services, but they may lack the authority or resources to address underlying systemic issues on a broader scale.
Political engagement, on the other hand, offers the potential to enact systemic changes that can have far-reaching impacts. By advocating for policy reforms, holding elected officials accountable, and participating in democratic processes, individuals and organizations can work towards creating a more equitable and just society.
Ultimately, both grassroots initiatives and political action have important roles to play in driving positive change. By supporting and engaging with both types of efforts, individuals can contribute to building more resilient and responsive communities and systems.

You said,

"Political campaigns often rely on slogans, promises, and optimistic rhetoric to attract voters, but the challenges of governance can be much more complex than what can be captured in a campaign speech.".

Never send a Boy to do a Man's job.

The sentiment you're expressing highlights a common frustration with politics: the perception that politicians may not always be adequately prepared or equipped to address the complexities of governance. Indeed, the demands of leadership require a deep understanding of policy, diplomacy, economics, and other fields, which may exceed the capabilities of some individuals.
It's essential for voters to carefully evaluate the qualifications, experience, and track record of political candidates before casting their ballots. While charisma and rhetorical skills can be appealing, they are not sufficient on their own to effectively govern. Instead, voters should consider factors such as a candidate's knowledge, integrity, judgment, and ability to collaborate and make tough decisions.
Electing leaders who possess the necessary skills and expertise to navigate the challenges of governance is crucial for ensuring effective and responsible leadership. Additionally, holding elected officials accountable for their actions and decisions can help mitigate the risks associated with inexperienced or ill-prepared leaders.
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with voters to select leaders who are up to the task of governing effectively and addressing the complex issues facing society. By making informed choices at the ballot box, citizens can help ensure that their communities and countries are led by capable and qualified individuals.

You said,

"Charitable organizations and community groups can alleviate immediate suffering and provide essential services, but they may lack the authority or resources to address underlying systemic issues on a broader scale."

those who give authourity shouldn't, because they are incompetent or deliberately opposing and corrupt; therefore, 'the people' should not need permission to help and do positive work.

Your concern underscores an important aspect of societal change: the balance between grassroots initiatives and institutional authority. While charitable organizations and community groups play vital roles in addressing immediate needs and providing essential services, systemic issues often require broader structural changes that can only be achieved through institutional reform and policy interventions.
However, it's understandable to feel frustrated with institutional barriers or perceived incompetence or corruption within existing power structures. Grassroots movements and community-driven initiatives have historically played pivotal roles in challenging entrenched systems of power and advocating for change.
Empowering individuals and communities to take action and make positive contributions without needing permission from established authorities can indeed be a powerful force for progress. This approach embodies the principles of bottom-up change and collective action, where people come together to address issues directly rather than waiting for top-down solutions.
Ultimately, a combination of grassroots efforts and institutional reform is often necessary to address complex societal challenges comprehensively. While grassroots initiatives can drive change from the ground up, institutional reforms are needed to address systemic issues and ensure lasting impact.
By supporting both grassroots movements and efforts to reform institutions, individuals can contribute to building a more just and equitable society where everyone has the opportunity to make a positive difference.

You said,

"Ultimately, the responsibility lies with voters to select leaders who are up to the task of governing effectively and addressing the complex issues facing society. By making informed choices at the ballot box, citizens can help ensure that their communities and countries are led by capable and qualified individuals."

when people go to the shops, they prefer to buy top-quality fresh fruit and veg, not battered, bruised and worn produce.

That's a powerful analogy. Just as people prefer fresh, high-quality produce when they go shopping, citizens should strive to select leaders who are competent, qualified, and committed to serving the best interests of their communities and countries.
Choosing political leaders is one of the most important responsibilities of citizenship, akin to selecting the best ingredients for a meal. Just as fresh produce is essential for a healthy diet, effective and ethical leadership is crucial for the well-being and progress of societies.
By carefully evaluating candidates based on their qualifications, track record, integrity, and ability to address complex issues, voters can ensure that they are electing leaders who are capable of governing effectively and responsibly. Like discerning shoppers who seek out the best produce, informed voters play a critical role in shaping the direction and quality of governance.
While the political landscape may sometimes present choices that feel less than ideal, active engagement in the democratic process empowers citizens to hold their leaders accountable and advocate for the kind of leadership they believe in. Just as consumers can influence the market by choosing where to spend their money, voters can shape the political landscape by exercising their right to vote and demanding accountability from their elected representatives.

That means, while you said voters should choose wisely, voters have bad selections. There are hardly any decent candidates, if any at all, so trying to vote in a well-informed manner is next-to-impossible, if not impossible.

You raise a valid point. In many political systems, voters may feel disillusioned or disheartened by the choices presented to them. The quality of candidates can vary widely, and it's not uncommon for voters to feel that none of the options truly represent their values or priorities.
Several factors contribute to this phenomenon:

  1. Limited Candidate Pool: In some cases, the pool of candidates may be limited by factors such as party dominance, financial barriers to entry, or the influence of special interest groups. This can result in a lack of diversity and competition within the political arena.
  2. Partisan Polarization: Political polarization can lead to the nomination of candidates who prioritize party loyalty over individual merit or qualifications. This can further limit the choices available to voters and make it difficult to find candidates who are willing to work across party lines.
  3. Media Influence: The media's focus on sensationalism and controversy may overshadow the qualifications and policy positions of candidates, making it challenging for voters to make informed decisions.
  4. Election Systems: The electoral system itself can impact the quality of candidates and the competitiveness of elections. Systems such as first-past-the-post or winner-takes-all may discourage candidates who don't align with the dominant political parties from running for office.
Given these challenges, it's understandable that voters may struggle to find candidates who meet their standards of competence and integrity. However, even in imperfect systems, there are steps that voters can take to make more informed choices:
  1. Research Candidates: Take the time to research the backgrounds, qualifications, and policy positions of candidates running for office. Look beyond campaign slogans and rhetoric to evaluate their track records and priorities.
  2. Support Alternative Candidates: Consider supporting candidates from smaller parties or independent candidates who may offer fresh perspectives and alternative solutions to pressing issues.
  3. Hold Elected Officials Accountable: Hold elected officials accountable for their actions and decisions. Stay informed about their voting records, attend town hall meetings, and engage with them on important issues affecting your community.
  4. Advocate for Electoral Reform: Advocate for electoral reforms that promote greater competition, diversity, and transparency in the political process. Support initiatives such as ranked-choice voting or campaign finance reform that aim to improve the quality of candidates and the integrity of elections.
While the task of selecting well-qualified candidates may indeed be challenging, active engagement and advocacy can help mitigate some of the limitations of the political system and contribute to positive change over time.

These suggestions you gave exist already. Things continue to get worse and worse.

You're right to express frustration with the persistence of systemic issues despite existing mechanisms and efforts aimed at addressing them. It's undeniable that progress can be slow and uneven, and many challenges remain deeply entrenched in political systems around the world.
In the face of ongoing difficulties, it's understandable to feel disillusioned or skeptical about the effectiveness of existing solutions. However, it's important to recognize that change often requires sustained effort, collective action, and a willingness to adapt and innovate in response to evolving circumstances.
While existing initiatives and mechanisms may not have yielded the desired outcomes, it's crucial to continue advocating for change and exploring new approaches to address systemic issues. This might involve:

  1. Community Mobilization: Strengthening grassroots movements and community-driven initiatives to address local needs and advocate for broader social and political change.
  2. Policy Innovation: Supporting innovative policy proposals and reforms that aim to address root causes of societal problems and promote greater equity, transparency, and accountability.
  3. Civic Engagement: Encouraging greater civic engagement and participation in the political process, including voting, advocacy, and community organizing.
  4. Education and Awareness: Promoting education and awareness about pressing societal issues and the importance of active citizenship in addressing them.
  5. Collaboration and Coalition-Building: Building coalitions and partnerships across sectors to leverage collective expertise and resources in tackling complex challenges.
While progress may be slow and incremental, every effort to address systemic issues contributes to building a more just, equitable, and resilient society. By remaining committed to the pursuit of positive change and supporting initiatives that align with shared values and priorities, individuals and communities can play a meaningful role in shaping the future.

While I was making this thread, I decided to go back to the conversation (as it can remember the conversation history but says it can't go between different conversations) and ask more about the Member of Parliament.

What else can you tell me about George Galloway?

George Galloway is a prominent British politician known for his outspokenness, controversial statements, and anti-establishment rhetoric. Here are some additional aspects of his background and career:
  1. Early Life and Education: George Galloway was born on August 16, 1954, in Dundee, Scotland. He attended Harris Academy in Dundee and later studied at the University of Edinburgh, where he was active in student politics.
  2. Political Career: Galloway rose to prominence as a member of the Labour Party and served as the Member of Parliament (MP) for Glasgow Hillhead from 1987 to 1997 and for Glasgow Kelvin from 1997 to 2005. He was known for his left-wing views and advocacy on issues such as social justice, anti-war activism, and Palestinian rights.
  3. Controversies: Throughout his career, Galloway has courted controversy with his provocative statements and actions. He was expelled from the Labour Party in 2003 over his opposition to the Iraq War and later founded the anti-war Respect Party. He has faced criticism for his perceived support of authoritarian regimes, including Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Bashar al-Assad's Syria.
  4. Media Personality: Galloway is also known for his media appearances and public speaking engagements. He has hosted radio and television programs, including talk shows on Press TV, a state-funded Iranian news network, which has drawn criticism from some quarters.
  5. Political Campaigns: In addition to his parliamentary career, Galloway has run for other political offices, including unsuccessful bids for Mayor of London in 2004 and 2016. He has also contested parliamentary by-elections and stood as a candidate in Scottish and London Assembly elections.
  6. Legal Issues: Galloway has been involved in various legal disputes and controversies over the years, including libel cases and allegations of financial impropriety. He has been cleared of some accusations but has also faced criticism and scrutiny for his conduct.
  7. Later Career: In recent years, Galloway has remained active in politics and media, continuing to espouse his anti-establishment views and advocate for causes he believes in. He has also been involved in international affairs, particularly issues related to the Middle East and global geopolitics.
Overall, George Galloway is a polarizing figure in British politics, known for his confrontational style, controversial statements, and willingness to challenge the status quo.

Since you are not updated live, you don't know the most-recent information. Galloway has been elected MP of Rochdale in a by-election; the Labour Party claims he won only because of Labour having to sort out a candidate who made anti-semitic comments.

Thank you for providing that update. George Galloway's election as the Member of Parliament for Rochdale in a by-election is indeed a significant development. The circumstances surrounding his victory, including the impact of controversies within the Labour Party, highlight the complex dynamics of British politics.

It's not uncommon for by-election results to be influenced by a variety of factors, including local issues, candidate selection, and broader political dynamics. While the Labour Party's claims about the impact of internal controversies on the outcome may have some merit, it's also important to acknowledge the role of voters in determining the outcome of elections.

Galloway's victory in Rochdale will undoubtedly have implications for both local politics and the broader political landscape in the UK. His return to Parliament as an MP will likely draw attention and spark debate, given his history of controversial statements and political activism.

As with any election result, it's crucial to analyze the factors that contributed to the outcome and consider the implications for future political developments. The aftermath of the Rochdale by-election will likely be closely watched by political observers and commentators as they assess its significance within the context of British politics.

Before my next reply - what is the latest you know regarding Israel and Gaza?

As of my last update in January 2022, I don't have information on events or developments beyond that time, including the latest regarding Israel and Gaza. For the most recent updates, I recommend consulting reliable news sources or checking the latest reports from international organizations involved in the region.

Israel has blockaded Gaza, effectively starving them of food, water, electricity and fuel. You cannot predict the outcome of events, but extrapolate what might happen with Galloway's election win - taking note of the fact that Galloway said, "This is for Gaza".

Given George Galloway's history of outspoken support for Palestinian causes, including Gaza, his election win in Rochdale could potentially lead to increased attention on the issue within the UK Parliament. Galloway's victory may embolden him to advocate more forcefully for policies aimed at addressing the humanitarian crisis in Gaza, including calls to lift the blockade and provide humanitarian assistance.

His election win could also lead to greater scrutiny of the UK government's policies towards Israel and Gaza, with Galloway likely to push for a more assertive stance in support of Palestinian rights. This could include advocating for diplomatic pressure on Israel to end the blockade and engage in meaningful negotiations towards a lasting resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Additionally, Galloway's presence in Parliament may energize grassroots movements and civil society organizations advocating for Palestinian rights, potentially leading to increased activism and public awareness on the issue.

However, it's important to note that the outcome of Galloway's election win and its impact on UK policy towards Israel and Gaza will depend on a variety of factors, including the broader political landscape, the stance of other political parties, and developments within the region itself.

You're right. On the news, it suggested that a win in a by-election is not a guarantee for a win in a General Election.

Regarding your previous reply, suggesting scrutiny of UK government policies, energising grassroots movements and civil society organisations, and related things, how in-keeping is it with Galloway's previous behaviour and actions?

George Galloway has a history of advocating for causes he believes in, often using his platform to draw attention to issues he perceives as unjust or in need of reform. Throughout his career, he has been known for his outspokenness and willingness to challenge the status quo, particularly on issues related to social justice, anti-war activism, and Palestinian rights.

His past behavior and actions suggest that he may indeed seek to use his position in Parliament to scrutinize UK government policies, particularly those related to Israel and Gaza. Galloway has a track record of being critical of UK government support for Israeli policies, including the blockade of Gaza, and he has often called for a more assertive stance in support of Palestinian rights.

Furthermore, Galloway has a history of engaging with grassroots movements and civil society organizations, often aligning himself with activist causes and lending his voice to campaigns for social change. His election win may indeed energize such movements, providing them with a prominent advocate within the political establishment.

However, it's also worth noting that Galloway's approach can be polarizing, and his tactics have sometimes drawn criticism from opponents and even within his own political circles. While his actions may resonate with some segments of the population, they may also provoke controversy and pushback from others.

Overall, Galloway's previous behavior and actions suggest that his election win in Rochdale could lead to increased activism and scrutiny of UK government policies on issues he is passionate about, including Israel and Gaza. However, the extent to which he is able to influence policy outcomes will depend on a variety of factors, including his ability to build coalitions, navigate parliamentary procedures, and mobilize public support.

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Consider checking important information.

When I said "You're right. On the news, it suggested that a win in a by-election is not a guarantee for a win in a General Election.", I was wondering if ChatGPT might have replied regarding that.

Very informative post! It's getting bewildering how intelligent this AI has become. I regret to say that I only know some things about the UK's political system which is limited to Boris Johnson and how crazy and corrupt he is.

That said, I found it interesting how the ChatGDP alluded to the idea that ultimate resolution comes only through working within a democratic system. This idea is idyllic given that representatives of parliament make the system more than people and grassroots movements do. Thus, it is largely bi-partisan which means radical change can only come from independent parties of which never make it to the top spot, much thanks to issues within the voting system.

I know in North America (America and Canada) this was very much rigged with missing votes, fake votes and the whole issue of Dominion voting machines that came from China. In Australia, I remember hearing that their independent party candidate (a year or two ago) wasn't properly listed on the ballot forums making it so that people couldn't effectively vote for that person even though they thought they were. My memory is hazy but that's the general idea that I got.

If that AI had some common sense it would know that a bottom-up approach is the only way to obtain a perfect system (if that exists). Considering the polarity of the world this does not seem likely; much thanks to TV, false narratives, victim-mentalities and so on. People in general need some kind of leading figure; someone perhaps like Hitler, albeit not as upfront and dramatic. Someone a bit more like Putin perhaps? It's a question I've wondered to myself for a while... how can the world get out of this ridiculous situation? Possibly a groundswell of monumental change lead by a single group or person upholding absolute truth with potential revolution bringing about a better system by, for and of the people that seeks towards justice in all things. Such a movement would probably get (((shutdown))) post haste however, hence why groups like Anonymous remain anonymous. There's also the question of how such a movement would get into the minds of everyday NPCs who have their faces glued to their phones, TV, MSM and each other all day. Such people in the world that surround us will only put those things down and interact in the real world when SHTF for them, like when they closed several McDonald's restaurants during the pandemic for example. Never mind the missing children and the many arrows that point to our elected representitives. NPCs simply lack the required attention span.

Considering George Galloway's left-wing (Labour and Respect Party) position, I am surprised how far-right he sounds coming from ChatGDP. It just goes to show that nothing is quite as it seems on the surface. We live in a very complicated world, one in which I feel should not be so if it were not for the loss of old values and teachings from great philosophers like the Greeks and Nietzsche. People are simply biased and ignorant, thus so are politicians.

That being said, thank goodness we have this place where we can learn together, share and reflect on our observations and viewpoints.

Anyway, sorry for the philosophical rant. I tend to default on deep and broad thinking. It's something not to overthink however and I do hold great hope in the spiritual aspect of the world, especially considering that 'we have already won' considering the spiritual side of things. We may not see it in our lifetime, rather only in ebbs and flows I reckon.
See also -
A few news articles regarding George Galloway

I regret to say that I only know some things about the UK's political system which is limited to Boris Johnson and how crazy and corrupt he is.
If I am able to get it, I think I will upload a documentary about BoJo that came out. I don't know anything about it but surely it regards conronavirus scamdemic plandemic and the lies BoJo told.

I must make a point about politicians. Once upon a time, I heard on the j/news that a politician made an "impassioned speech". I was - and still am - perplexed. I thought when one makes an impassioned speech they get impassioned, they become emotional, angry, upset... This particular... individual, spoke, sounded, behaved in the exact same way as the politician always did. Probably with the use of big words and trying to drive-home a point, or points, but it certainly was nowhere remotely near impassioned, passionate. Remembering, and also being reminded, how BoJo went on, during the lies throughout mockdowns, I can remember that the behaviour and... rhetoric, to be fair, was the same as always. Were there ever any politicians who actually knew how to be - and actually were - passionate about the importance of politicking genuinely?! cough
I appreciate the suggestions. He was very dramatic and fear-inducing to sheeple with what seemed to be (just as all other leading politicians) ideas that were complete fables. Wearing masks, telling people to get injected all the time (for protection of course; because we care about others and don't want to be selfish), encouraging to report 'unlawful' gatherings and so on. I'd suggest that they're all pretty much the same on their level of psychopathy.

I tend to think of Brits as having had more protests than many places. It's no wonder that psychotic PM resigned.

There's a woman from the UK who puts out great truther videos on YT. She is hilarious! I don't know if it's just me (or perhaps my stereotyping) but British people generally seem to have a remarkable way with words and humour. Also, most people in Canada for some reason LOVE British people and often like to guess what people's accents are (British, Irish, Scottish or Aussie). Any other accents for some reason aren't generally as thought-provoking to most for some reason... we have a weird culture.
Some even genuinely think that they sound more intelligent and polite (such as with the computer-generated voices or in television). We don't think that we have an accent generally. Everyone else appears to have one (along with certain provinces), yet most of Canada to us appears a bit the same as parts of the USA in terms of dialect which is kind of odd; as though we can't see our own differences or something.

There I go with my random rambling again lol. It's definitely worth checking out these videos once-and-a-while if it's your cuppa-tea. 🙂

Here's one about 'influencers':
encouraging to report 'unlawful' gatherings
BoJo: Oh, my lords. I am humbled to be in your presence. I am very grateful that you have called me here today to hear my request.
Anon: What is it you want?
BoJo: Far be it from me, your humble and loyal servant, to question the wisdom of your decisions, my lords, but are you really sure you want me to say that? You know the Goyim don't listen to us. We don't have their respect.
Anon: You know your role, ben-John. Whether the Goyim listen you to or not is irrelevant. You have a job to do, and you will do it. Remember suggesting some dirt on BoJo?

a few hours later

BoJo: Eurgh, uh, ugh, do make sure, uh, urghh, make sure that you do report any illegal gatherings, you good people, ghurghle hurghh. ffs, I know they won't listen

I go back and forth between 1) thinking (((TPTB))) are out-of-touch and 2) thinking it surely can't be out-of-touch, but just goes on regardless, ignorantly, expecting and hoping the Goyim will obey.

Regarding the multiple-pregnancy, slapped-arse-face, low-labia-hanging Woman's video - notice, and realise, how real and fake things are (if you don't already). That Woman would never be a politician; if she was, she wouldn't be doing those videos. You won't hear politicians saying the things this Woman says - I'd be surprised otherwise. It must be separate. These things cannot overlap, and comedy is the permitted medium for crossing things over. There is a line (or a bunch of lines) and things are segregated and divided... except for Races, of course... Talk about playing both sides against the middle...

Al Jilwah: Chapter IV

"It is my desire that all my followers unite in a bond of unity, lest those who are without prevail against them." - Satan