Queen Elizabeth II & David Cameron's Love of Corruption

June 6, 2016

In the European Union, there’s an acquiescence that corruption is not a relevant political and economic debate. There are certain sequences in the geopolitical world that we have to come to terms with, especially with David Cameron. On the one hand, there is the Brexit debate that he believes he’s going to win. On the other hand, you have the corruption debate. Again, his idiocy as an international leader really shows what this man is made of and how countries plan to deal with him in the future.

 

When you’re dealing with corruption, there is always tension between political and judicial branches of the state. When corruption is polarized, it consequentially becomes institutionalized. The European Union does not have the mechanism to control corruption. So how can the EU establish constitutional changes with corrupt members when they generate resources and capital in the administration of their governments?

 

You can not regulate or institutionalize corruption because it can never be neutralized. Let’s start thinking logically. If a multinational has a certain moat in the marketplace and has achieved a competitive advantage, then even bribe activities include a certain moat and administrative illegality in choosing the competitor that is open for corrupt activities.

 

David Cameron and Obama seem to establish the same sequence in their philosophical thinking. It is difficult to differentiate one incompetent leader from the other. Cameron and Obama are using asset recovery in the geopolitical world to achieve strategic partnerships with certain countries.

 

For example, Obama indicated that Nigeria is the most strategically important country in Sub-Saharan Africa. That is why Obama offered them assistance in tracking down billions of dollars of embezzled assets. The Chinese government has invested $1.7 billion in Nigeria; Xi Jinping has also indicated that more money will follow.

 

In 2014, the United States took control of over $480 million from the late Nigerian dictator Sani Abacha. Again in 2014 the American government was cavalier; they agreed to repatriate the $480 million to Nigeria.  In 2016, the Nigerian President Muhammadu Buhari asked for his $480 million. He’s still waiting to this day for this $480 million.

What’s happening with Nigeria is happening across the board with all African states. They can’t get their money unless they agree to become strategic partners with Britain and the United States. Talk about geopolitical bribery. However, China is just giving them money for roads and infrastructure that benefit the people of Africa. Britain and the US have created an entrepreneurial climate of repatriating funds; the cheapest form of bribery tying a nation to the dominant country’s umbilical cord for years to come.

 

Perhaps sometimes we have to look at mathematics as a sequence of order in how people behave; no different than 1+1=2. In the geopolitical world, one has to wonder why Queen Elizabeth II elicited her diatribe against China in terms of being rude and disrespectful. Of course the British media is stupid, which mimics David Cameron’s personality. The media indicated that the Queen has the right to be frank and honest, and that’s not going to change.

 

The Chinese foreign minister was appalled with what the Queen said, especially because China cut Britain a check worth several billions. What the Queen did clearly sent out the signal that this is not the golden age between Britain’s and China’s investment opportunity that David Cameron advocated. It is very surprising and suspicious that the Queen would make this comment.

 

After 3 months, Xi visited Britain. The Queen was able to open her mouth wide open when Cameron shouted that other countries are fantastically corrupt. However, the Queen said nothing to the privileged imbecile. Perhaps the 90-year old Queen should use her mouth for her long neglected husband rather than making comments in today’s geopolitical world. Obama did not like the fact that Cameron stated that Britain has made a visionary choice to become China’s best friend.

 

When Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe arrived to Britain, Cameron was able to persuade him to say something about Britain leaving the European Union as a dire consequence for investment. The Japanese PM did not like how Cameron drank his beer in a British pub with Xi Jinping sitting beside him. Cameron, as a leader of Britain, can not stand on his own and therefore he used the Queen as his own mouthpiece to attack China and tow the line with China’s South Sea dilemma.

 

Now you have David Cameron as the savior of Britain because of corruption. His rhetoric is misleading because it was the EU that accelerated corruption with their unregulated practices of printing money. Little does he realize there is widespread illicit party financing by corrupt organizations in the EU. It is the EU’s mindset of corruption that produces stability and sometimes political fragmentation between business and government relationships.

 

Does corruption affect productivity? It is hard to say. With bureaucratic corruption, it is based on public services and goods that are inputted into private productive activities. The printing of money allows incentives to amass resources that filter in the political system whether it’s presidential or parliamentary. No single state in the EU is exempt from corruption in government infrastructure programs and economic development.

 

For some reason, Cameron’s stupidity shows because of his belief in corruption being an isolated phenomenon for African countries and not the EU. Again, African countries are still waiting for their money. The onus is on them to come up with the resources to build a case in the plundering of African nations. The United States and Britain will use their resources to get that money and freeze those assets to continue bribing Africa over and over again.

 

On the whole, the suspicion of certain candidates or presidents that are involved in corrupt practices doesn’t seem to bother the state electors. Unfortunately, unemployment and youth unemployment has a higher percentage of problems than corruption. The EU’s market competition has offered no resistance to bribe orientated activities. Great wealth in Europe is based on family ownership of businesses with a long tradition of investments and enduring relationships with public administrators by being included as bribe-payers and then winning over the public contracts.

 

The EU understands that corruption is a salient feature of public perception and administrative process with certain states under their umbrella. The European media will only identify the size of the bribe paid and the way the sector was affected if it’s within their interests, not the public’s interest. Trust me, when it comes to widespread corruption it is never about media coverage or Cameron pontificating his morals. The EU established an increased tolerance with corruption because of the informal channels of communication, personal experiences, and norms that are deeply rooted within the political and financial community.

 

If the EU dispenses with corruption, it loses its value. For example, many state judges are accused of creating friction and are labeled leftist. The political system and party will force the judicial system to tow the line. Corruption has its own rhythm, is widespread, and has become less risky for the London financial institutions. The rising cost of political campaigns will always carry electoral capitulation that involves intimidation and corruption against the magistrates that believe in the law.

 

We need to drive this thesis home in terms of corruption and how David Cameron is acting. He yaps to the world about corruption, yet it was the UK that has overtaken France to become the 5th largest economy in the world because of their decision to include prostitution and illicit drugs as part of their gross domestic product figures. Italy did this very same thing, but the Italians couldn’t care less about British refinement and stupidity. The Italian frame of mind was also noted; they broke up prostitution by labeling it as in-call escorts, out-call escorts, and university/college escorts so that they’re able to raise their GDP even more with drugs and prostitution.

 

The truth of the matter is that Italians and Greeks don’t care about your Queen of England, they only care about the public funds that end up in the Queen’s hands and whether or not there’s an opening to get some of her money into their pockets; that’s what you call economic productivity. It’s something that an imbecile leader understands. Ain’t that right Cameron?

 

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Please reload

© 2023 by "This Just In". Proudly created with Wix.com