Translate

Saturday, October 31, 2009

EU Bullies Stalk Matador Cameron



This article in The Guardian indicates how the heat is moving away from Vaclav Klaus' rebellion against Lisbon and is now arriving at the door of David Cameron.

The heads of state of France, Germany and Spain are all circling looking for a way to strike a blow on David Cameron as he prepares his next approach to European Policy once Lisbon is signed. He wants to repatriate powers from Brussels, and he is not shy about saying so. This is creating a growing rage amongst the political elites of Europe, who are getting so desperate as to what to do to stop Cameron, they nearly appointed Tony Blair as Europe's new Council President (but then thought better of it).

These elites, Merkel, Sarkozy and the EU structure they depend on for their powers, will stop at nothing if Cameron starts to undermine them. He must realise that he is stirring up troubles, but as a strong believer in freedom and the breaking up of state power, Cameron remains understated and calm as he prepares to take on the combined might of one of the most powerful political alliances in the world.

While the steam is pouring out of (e)utopian ears, Cameron's demeanour is totally relaxed. It is wonderful to behold. The voice of freedom is calm and quiet. That of the oppressors is shrill and vicious. That's the way we like it! No Wimbledon or FA Cup Final will ever offer as much dramatic tension as the coming Cameron-EU play-off, as the EU stalks and starts to play manic bull to Cameron's matador. (Let's hope he does better than this unfortunate Columbian).

Guardian Extract -

It is understood that Cameron will drop his pledge to hold a referendum on the treaty on the grounds that it is impossible to open a treaty that has entered EU law. A Tory government would instead focus on repatriating social and employment laws, in effect restoring the British opt-out from the social chapter. This has been sprinkled around various EU treaties since Tony Blair ended the opt-out in 1997, meaning that its measures could only be restored to Britain with the agreement of all member states.

The nice looking people below, would prefer to shove a horn up Cameron's 'prospects' than agree to dismantling any part of the power structure they have spent fifty years creating. The coming Spanish EU Presidency will no doubt accord Cameron the dignity expected by a British Prime Minister, as he starts sticking lances in their backs!!

Thursday, October 29, 2009

The Fundamental Question Is Still - EU - IN or OUT?


The big question everyone is not thinking about yet is this. Once the Lisbon Treaty gets signed, and the evidence about when that will be, is at best mixed, what will Cameron offer as his new policy on the EU?

Two years ago, the Lib Dems propounded a policy of a referendum on the EU IN OR OUT. It was brought out as a way to not offer a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, but to sound as if they were sympathetic to euroscepticism.

Will Cameron now copy this as his approach, as Iain Dale, suggested he should at the time (see above link)?

He can either use referendums to unpick Lisbon one piece at a time, but that in truth comes second to the primary question. The first decision that needs taking is whether British people want to be in the EU or not. Only if the answer to that is known, can the complex negotiations as to the broad scale of our relationship with Europe be addressed.

There's no point in bringing out detailed policies until the status of the UK/EU relationship is known.

Cameron's getting there step by step, keeping calm, driving the (e)utopians crazy, making euroscepticism sound the most natural thing in the world. It's Wicked!

He has promised a referendum. I suggest the following two questions -

Q1. Do you want Britain to withdraw from the EU and negotiate an entirely new relationship with the EU? YES/NO.

Q2. If you replied to Q1 as NO, do you want to re-negotiate the British position on the following areas.....................,(1) or (2)accept our situation as it currently is, with British sovereignty terminated, and we exist as a group of regions within the new state to be known from hereon as the European Union?

Irish Enemies Of Old Unite Against The Lisbon Treaty


The Northern Ireland Assembly passed a motion demanding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty by an overwhelming majority 47-19. The news was scarcely commented on in the British media. It should have been. Not only because the Lisbon Treaty will soon be facing a new threat in the UK, once Cameron is elected Prime Minister, enjoying cross party support, but because at last, Protestant and Catholic enemies of old are joining in a common cause, to fight for Irish and British freedom, against the Lisbon Treaty.

The situation is best explained, not by the DUP or Sinn Fein, but by a speaker who opposed the motion, A Maginness. Here is an extract of his long contribution to the deabte that took place.

It is no surprise that Sinn Féin and the DUP have a common cause on the European Union in the House today. It is sad that two major parties are at one in their anti-Europe stance. It is bad for society, and something that I deeply regret. It is bad for our community to send a Euro-sceptic message to Brussels. Parties should reflect deeply on that thought.

Mr McLaughlin made a point about a military pact, which is, of course, incorrect. He did not point out that all decisions on actions in the European Union must be unanimous. They cannot be subject to the majority vote of members in the European Union.


This is bullshit,of course.

Wendy Austin made a pre-referendum visit to Dublin, where she asked a lady in the street how she would vote. She replied that she would vote “No” and then asked what Europe has done for us. Wendy was flabbergasted by the response, because she recognises that the European Union has rebuilt this Republic.

Members’ attitudes reflect that lady’s opinion. The European Union has done much to enhance this society and can do a lot more.


Maginess is simply incredulous that the EU can be criticised. Such is the situation with all the (e)utopians. They only see (e)perfection, which is why they are so dangerous. The Lisbon Treaty, however, must be congratulated. What other issue could bring Dr Ian Paisely and Martin MacGuinness onto the same side? Isn't it good to see the old bruisers chumming up together?!!!

Here is the full debate.

This is the decision reached by the debate -

The eGov monitor reports that the Northern Ireland Assembly voted for a motion on Tuesday by 47-19 in favour of the UK holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and calling on "those parties aspiring to form the incoming Government of the United Kingdom to give an unequivocal commitment to hold, within a twelve month period from assuming office in 2010, a binding referendum on the Lisbon Treaty that is unconditional and unrelated to how other member states choose to vote, and the result of which will not be held in abeyance pending a further referendum on the subject."

Tiny Slovakia Could Be Next To Delay Lisbon


As Klaus starts to roll over in the Czech Republic, fully expecting the Constitutional Court to decide by Tuesday, or this week, that the Lisbon Treaty does not breach the Czech Constitution (although it might adopt a similar position to the German Constitutional Court stating that in some cases the Czech Courts can overrule the ECJ), there is still another country which could put a break on proceedings - the other party to the Velvet Divorce that divided former Czechoslovakia - the Slovak Republic.

From The Prague Post.

While the Czech Republic is the last of 27 EU member states to ratify Lisbon - which reforms EU decision making and gives it a full time president - Slovakia has added an additional twist to the process. Slovakia, as it was part of Czechoslovakia, also has the Beneš Decrees on its books.

"Everything that ought to be negotiated for the Czech Republic must be approved by everybody, including us," said Slovak Foreign Affairs Minister Miroslav Lajčák. "We're not going to approve or vote for something that would put us into a disadvantageous or subordinated situation."

This at least raises the possibility that Slovak leaders with similar concerns to Klaus could end up blocking any compromise solution between Klaus and Fischer.

"We cannot allow any legal uncertainty," Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico said (PICTURED).

But Fischer says Slovak opinion will be taken into account in formulating language for any exemption.

"The formulation is going to be such that [Fico] would not have to take this step," Fischer said at an Oct. 19 press conference.

After weeks of tension and harsh rhetoric, EU leaders are beginning to rest easy and are likely to see the results of internal Czech negotiations at a summit Oct. 29-30.

And, while he may reluctantly sign Lisbon, Klaus remains unapologetic about his stance.

"Disputes about freedom and democracy in Europe will certainly continue. They must continue," he said.


So as the wheels rotate, and Klaus feels he has done what he can to delay and modify Lisbon, he doesn't feel he can stop its course.

The guarantee that Germans cannot use Human Rights laws to attempt to reclaim their former lands which were taken under the Benes Decrees at the end of the war, is going to be included in the document produced for the Croatian accession Treaty. But if the Slovaks prevent that move unless their lands are also protected, the delay could yet be extended by another country the size of Ireland.

And once Slovakia gets an opt-out, who else will appear out of the woodwork demanding one opt-out or another?

From Open Europe today 29th October 2009,

EU diplomats said yesterday that a deal on an opt-out (from the Charter of Fundamental Rights) was being negotiated (for the Czech Republic) but it was still not certain given the extremely sensitive issues being discussed.

It sounds like the Klaus opt-outs are proving a little bit trickier than first appeared.

From Earth Times

When we offered the Czechs something they could accept, the Slovaks rejected it. When we offered something the Slovaks could live with, the Hungarians rejected it," one diplomat close to the talks told the German Press Agency dpa.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Comedians Lead Fightback Against EU


Reading the EU tea-leaves has never been harder. Will Lisbon be ratified? Will Klaus buckle? Will Blair be President? Will life in Europe become anti-democratic, and brutal?

Where can you find anyone willing to write and explain what is going on, and how, if at all, the collosal power that the EU is hoping to consolidate over its member states will be stopped?

The answer is Ian Hislop, and Private Eye. And to think we always imagined it and him to be entirely comic.

From Open Europe -

Private Eye's Brussels Sprouts column considers the German court ruling on the Lisbon Treaty saying that Germany's highest court can, in principle, overturn judgements from the ECJ, and and writes, "Germany starting to say no if it does not like a Brussels edict could open the door to other countries picking and choosing EU laws...David Cameron, and others looking for Lisbon wriggle-room, should watch closely."



Ian Hislop becomes this week's focal point of resistance to EU power, shining a light of clarity onto this, the most complex and inexplicable subject of our day - in the process, cuddling up to Boris Johnson, who declared that there would be a referendum on Lisbon at the Tory Party Conference, just after throwing a flower pot out of the window.

It seems as if you need a sense of humour to fight the EU.

Resisting people who take themselves terribly seriously is best done with a big grin, it appears. In the same vein, I detected the minutest smirk on Cameron's face while he was explaining why he doesn't support a Blair EU Presidency. Just for a second it seemed that he realised he was actually enjoying deflating the Blair balloon, which has grown so ludicrously bloated.



Why not set up a cross party Comic Politics Bureau to carry the anti-EU campaign forwards to peels of endless giggles and laughter, while the pomposity of the whole EU folly is finally sent crashing. Serious commentators dare not engage with this thorny topic. In the void, the EU must surely become a comic's open house, and provide the material they need to bring audiences to endless fits of hysteria.

We can either laugh or cry. An emotional response of some kind to the ludicrous hubris of Lisbon is inevitable.

Popping the biggest power balloon of all time must yet be worth plenty more gags. Paul Merton? It's your turn next, or Ian's team will score big this week.

Come On Blair. Tell Us The Truth About Dando.


A number of people are rotting in jail. Barry George spent years behind bars. Others have had their lives ruined. All in the cause of hiding the truth about Jill Dando's murder.

The man the authorities are protecting is Blair. He ordered and openly supported the bombing of RTS the Belgrade TV Station in April 1999, which was immediately followed by the professional killing of Jill Dando in retaliation.

The nation was terribly shocked, and Blair wanted the real reason for her killing never to come to light.

Many are still paying the price for saving Blair's face.

The problem with Blair wanting the EU Presidency, is that there are simply too many bodies buried, and too much lying.

Isn't it time for that smile to be wiped from his face?

If Blair becomes President, how many more lives will find their way onto the expendable list? Do we really need to go through it all again? Once was well enough.

Two questions -

Did Blair Buy The EU Presidency With British Taxpayers' Money

and

Did Blair Order Jill Dando Cover-uP?.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Question Time Overreacts To Griffin


The Nick Griffin question time happened, and it was about as expected. The 'good people' were lined up to assault Griffin for his past statements, his past associations and his assumed beliefs. While these were all eminently attackable, the result was that no one was able to hear much of what he was saying, and so form an independent assessment of who he is and what he represents.

In truth the BNP are making miniscule progress in Britain, gaining about 3% of those who intend to vote in a GE as supporters, which means only 1.5% of the adult British population would vote for the BNP in a GE, and about 3% in the European elections.

The way the BNP was received by the BBC you would think that they were on about 10% at least, and potentially on a breakthrough. They are not.

Not only is that to misunderstand the scale of the BNP - it's tiny - but it is to misunderstand the BNP emotionally.

The BNP supporter is the little guy, who is terrified of losing what little he has, so any identifiable threat to him or her, is seen as something which needs to be assaulted.

The little guy is used to losing, being edged out and shouted down, and the way to reinforce those beliefs is to publicly demonstrate to him that he is going to continue to be shouted down, and never listened to.

It was laughable to see Griffin trying to say that he had once sat on a panel with a Ku Klux Klan member, who, he claimed, was not involved in racism. Many of his former and current statements were verging on the ludicrous. He should have been allowed to flow a lot more, as once he speaks, the first soundbite of most of his policies cannot cope with more detailed examination.

Once he was questioned on details, he started to fall apart pretty quickly. But he was able a few times to get the sound-bite out, which was followed by an immediate overreaction and long statements from each of the panel.

He should have been allowed to explain exactly what he means, as in truth, he has a lot less substance in his thinking than first appears. Who, are the 'indigenous British' exactly?

He had many good points too, about immigration being out of control, and about primary school children receiving sex education, being far too early. But as he was presented as an all-round bad guy, the points he did have, were missed and not given enough discussion.

The room was packed with people who wanted to angrily assault Griffin, when in fact, most people can quickly see for themselves that half of what Griffin says is barmy and nasty, with a few elements of sense mixed in. The majority of Brits don't buy him, without the need to hear his opponents given the floor before he has had a chance to put across his viewpoint.

The coloured lady who runs the British Museum handled him and the topic the best, saying that she knew that British people in general were too sensible to back this kind of politics, but had the Chair enabled Griffin's valid points to get across, with less total demonisation, the show would have done more for democracy.

There's no point in putting the guy on TV if once he's there, he's treated like a leper. It will only build his support yet further, as his supporters can see that he is not being given a fair hearing.

And any way, why are Primary School kids being given sex education in Britain? There is much that the current system of government is getting wrong, and is not being properly opposed. Griffin could be made useful, and selectively listened to, without his more racist and divisive cultural ideas given the time of day. As the wise old birds used to say in our village, you can learn from a fool.

The BBC appeared arrogant and of a closed mind, not Griffin, who was polite and courteous. Griffin was crushed by the BBC, but it did the BBC little credit for having done so. I think we can expect more images of Spitfires and dogfights coming in the months ahead, as the BNP exploits the fear of its own members, and even more so the knee-jerk overreaction of its opponents.

This felt like round one. Griffin will need more intelligent handling in future. Allowing him to hang himself, with more of his barmy statements is the way to go, not ensuring he cannot get a word in. And the world needs to concede points to him when he is right. Otherwise the evil he represents will be strengthened, as he can claim he is not being listened to.

Fortunately for the BBC, Griffin cannot yet tell which are his strongest and which are his stupidest statements. It's all jumbled up together. If he had managed to get one of his good points to really run, he could have turned the meeting around. He is, in the end, the little guy who doesn't quite get it right, just like his supporters. The BBC should relax more next time, and believe that, as ever, the truth will out.

BBC Stages BNP AFU Street Theatre



If this is a serious riot, then BBC Gardener's Question Time is war. The numbers of cameras and journalists outnumbered the rioters three to one, and the Police were strangely absent from the BBC gate as it somehow opened itself. This is theatre, staged for consumption by the world's media. Why?

The BBC is heavily 'influenced' by the EU, and funded by them. They are well capable of organising demonstrations and events to order, especially when there is a subject they are keen to propagate.

And the current concern of the EU, it seems, is Britain drifting towards making a serious challenge to the Lisbon Treaty. Hillary Clinton is today challenging William Hague about that very topic, placing it at the top of her agenda. While all the previous week has been taken up with accusations against David Cameron by David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, trying to get leverage over him by alleging he is associated with dubious politicians in the ECR.

The EU is trying to ramp up fear that extremism is on the march on all sides, and that only their Federal Lisbon system of ruling Europe will suppress the extremists. They seem so convinced that this tactic will work that, in the House Of Commons, the Conservatives were yesterday effectively accused of sympathy with the holocaust, while all media interviews have tried to corner Hague and Cameron in similar vein. Now the BBC wants a bit of street theatre to provide a backdrop, against which their Lisbon credentials can be seen to shine, and Brits can have a change of heart.

The trouble is that no one is that bothered. The BNP rustled up a mere 1 million votes in the EP elections in June, after decades of campaigning. They poll at 3% of the national vote for the general election, and while some of their beliefs are none too friendly to different races and religions, most people in Britain are still as phlegmatic and tolerant as ever they were, fed up with excessive immigration, and the high rate of crime, certainly but almost totally disinterested in political extremism as a way to deal with it. A return to our traditional democracy would do.

The Conservatives are riding high, with mild-mannered leadership, and all attempts by the EU to build up a narrative of violent, extremist Britain turning away from (e)utopianism look and sound plain daft. Our dislike of the EU and of the decline in our democracy are deep-seated and have been growing over thirty five years. It will take more than suddenly creating an atmosphere of false extremism to turn that around.

Cameron's Time Has Come


Cameron says, in an interview with Peter Oborne (author of The Triumph Of The Political Class, and The Rise Of Political Lying), that the book '1984' written by George Orwell in 1949 underlies his political philosophy. Now that is quite an admission.

From Wiki

Nineteen Eighty-Four (also 1984), by George Orwell, published in 1949, is a dystopian novel about the totalitarian régime of the Party, an oligarchical collectivist society where life in the Oceanian province of Airstrip One is a world of

perpetual war,
pervasive government surveillance,
public mind control,
and the voiding of citizens’ rights.


Recognise any of that, Tony Blair?

In the Ministry of Truth (Minitrue), protagonist Winston Smith is a civil servant responsible for perpetuating the Party’s propaganda by revising historical records to render the Party omniscient and always correct, yet his meagre existence disillusions him into rebellion against Big Brother, which leads to his arrest, torture, and conversion.

As literary science fiction, 1984 is a classic novel of the social science fiction sub-genre, thus, since its publication in 1949, the terms and concepts of



Big Brother,
doublethink,
thoughtcrime,
Newspeak,

became contemporary vernacular.


PC, Peter Mandelson’s ‘narrative’, spin doctor, ‘the media’ all correspond nicely.

Cameron sees that the good in people and institutions is now being wasted, and needs to be brought back to life. (I paraphrase)

He attacked 'distant Utopianism', and 'obsessive, excessive ideology' – (does he mean distant EUtopianism?). He wants a pragmatic approach to be taken, making use of 'present laughter' and the thoughts and ideas of the people who are there at the time to predominate.

It's a mild intelligent philosophy, moderately expressed, but the more powerful for being so. The still small voice of freedom still speaks in Britain, at the head of today's Conservative Party, while Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel, the Blairs all rush ahead to forming their (e)utopian dream - one world government, and the inevitable end that that will bring - as described by George Orwell in 1984.

Great interview. Great moment to see the forces of a political philosophy whose time has come building and getting ready to break upon the world.

Listen HERE.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

Wicked Witch Combo Handbags Cameron


Two articles in today's broadsheets give a new angle to the Lisbon Treaty negotiations going on between David Cameron, Vaclav Klaus and others. Angela Merkel tried to put pressure on Cameron recently by threatening a 'downgrading' of relations with the Conservatives, if Cameron started to unpick the Lisbon Treaty. These moves ceased fairly quickly once it was realised that Merkel publicly attacking Cameron was adding rocket fuel to Conservative support, and a rapid closing of eurosceptic ranks.

So this time the internationalists have brought out another Wicked Witch from inside the wardrobe, this time, the one From The West, Hillary Clinton.

The Guardian explains -

The shadow foreign secretary, William Hague, is to meet the US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, in Washington amid concern in the Obama administration about the Conservatives' European policy and Jewish outrage at their alliance with far-right parties with alleged antisemitic and neo-Nazi links.

There is growing unease in the White House that David Cameron's Euroscepticism could undermine the ability of a Conservative government to influence events in the EU, threatening to weaken Britain in the eyes of the US.

Clinton, while anxious not be seen to be interfering in a domestic election, has discussed the issue informally in Europe."




And The Times too -

"The Obama Administration has voiced concern that Conservative plans to unpick the Lisbon treaty would cause a rupture between Europe and a British government led by David Cameron. Diplomatic sources on both sides of the Atlantic have told The Times that the issue was discussed when Hillary Clinton, the Secretary of State, held talks with Gordon Brown and David Miliband on her visit to Europe last week." .

Cameron's kneejerk response to this combined assault from both the Witches, Merkel and Clinton, has been to launch a programme of women only shortlists, which have filled the airwaves drowning Europhile tut-tutting and frowning about the threat to Lisbon, and all the talk of NAZIs in the closet at the ECR. Brilliant PR move by Cameron, in my opinion.

If it became known that Hillary Clinton was trying to strong-arm Cameron into dropping his referendum promise on the Lisbon Treaty, it would also add rocket fuel to his support, just as with Merkel. Come on, Hillary. Make our day!



See my previous post Merkel Offers Rocket Fuel To Cameron.

UPDATE -

Clinton pulls her punches. Handbag did not feature in her meeting with Hague. Cop-out. Only in The Guardian does the (e)utopian fantasy still live on, where anyone gives a shit about the Lisbon Treaty and its fraudulent application to British voters. Hillary Clinton is maybe more intelligent than we thought. maybe..

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

MPs Must Fight Back


The state of MPs, bitter at being made to pay back the money they claimed, never expecting to be challenged is pitiful. The bleating and moaning to win sympathy is a major error and a waste of time.

...unless they only care about the money they can soak from the system, that is.

But if that's the case, why be an MP? There are far easier ways to make a few quid. There is more to this, surely.

The real public anger is not only about the money paid to MPs, or its legality, but also from the feeling that MPs have given up caring, because they have become Party robots, abandoning manifesto promises as if nothing, and signing up with powerful bureaucracies, who incidentally have it as their sole objective to destroy Parliament.

They have allied with the very people intent on their own destruction, which seems none too bright.

What did they expect? A pay-off?

Perhaps.

But having been drawn in by the squalor of financial temptation, which it now appears was a false expectation (except that strangely their house flipping is not being challenged - no doubt as that is what the Blairs were doing, and Legg will protect his lords and masters in Brussels at all costs), where is their next step going to be?

The only way back from the brink is for MPs to flex their muscle, assert their power, and show everyone that an MP is not a mere piece of bureaucratic cannon-fodder, whose loyalty is cheaply and easily bought with a mortgage subsidy.

The power that has replaced them is the EU.

The mechanism in which their power has been removed is the Lisbon Treaty.

The only way for MPs to win back respect from the public is to hold an immediate referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The counter attack must be a cross party gathering of support to re-establish the respect of MPs.

The next step would be to move a Bill for pure Proportional Representation.

The third would be a Bill that all MP selections must be made by Open Primary.

The fourth would be to go back to immediate counting of the vote, and a proper system for postal voting, eliminating all electoral fraud.

Simple.

Let's see it.

By the way, it's called democracy.

Once that little matter is dealt with, I don't think anyone would give one fig what MPs get paid. (or maybe a smaller fig!)

But never mind about money for now.

Listen to how Vaclav Klaus the Czech President expressed the way to go to the European Parliament in February 2009. Follow his example, oh woeful MPs and you will find a better way.

h

The words which stand out in this speech which was jeered by the MEPs are,

'without oposition, there is no freedom.'

Now give us freedom, MPs and you too will become, like Vaclav Klaus, heroes, not the villains you have become. The power you must oppose is the EU. There is your task. Go to it!



Here is an MP fighting back and winning - Douglas Carswell.

Extract from Charles Moore in The Telegraph 17th October 2009-

Mr Carswell, on the other hand, is just getting started. It was he, to much tut-tutting from his seniors, who put down the motion of no-confidence in Mr Speaker Martin this summer. He set something in train. Eventually, Mr Martin had to go.

And just in case anyone is wondering, Douglas Carswell was one of the first eurosceptic MPs to back David Cameron's leadership bid in 2005. He met him at the Party Conference and decided to throw in his lot with him there and then, and has remained loyal to Cameron ever since.

You see, eurosceptics, there is still reason enough to have hope that we will win in the end.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

A Lesson For The Guardian


The judge in the Trafigura case favouring Carter Ruck's attempt to ignore Parliamentary Privilege must be a europhile, politically placed judge, determined to undermine the British Constitution.

Who was he/she? Anyone know?

The judiciary have been appointed politically and not on merit for many years. Was the political choice in this case, as in many others, made in accordance with pro-EU beliefs?

It seems possible when things like this start to happen.

The judge knew what they were doing.

If anyone wanted to appeal, where would they go?

The House Of Lords?

Not any more. It would be the new ‘Supreme Court’ which is not a Supreme Court at all, but a junior court to the ECJ.

If a case concerning Parliamentary Privilege were to appear before the ECJ, the appellant would lose as, once Lisbon is signed, there is no recognition of the sovereigny of parliament in EU Law.

The Guardian are in support of the loss of the British Constitution, and the full ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

Now they are learning precisely what that entails.



Someone should tell this judge or judgess that Lisbon is not yet signed and that Parliamentary Privilege will not die without a fight...maybe over a few dead bodies even.

The Guardian meanwhile should take note of the kind of world their EU-slavishness is creating. When the rich and powerful want their misdeeds kept quiet, there was always a way to get the truth to come out - in Parliament. With the Lisbon Treaty coming, the truth can soon be successfully buried, thousands injured and no one will be allowed to know.

It is not too late for The Guardian to change sides and fight for the democracy they depend on, and to realise the error of their ways. It is ironic to see the Guardian rushing to the defence of the British Constitution today as if it were their primary concern. They seem to suddenly realise how much they depend on the freedom and openness of the Parliamentary system. They wrote today as follows -

The right to report parliament was the subject of many struggles in the 18th century, with the MP and journalist John Wilkes fighting every authority – up to the king – over the right to keep the public informed. After Wilkes's battle, wrote the historian Robert Hargreaves, "it gradually became accepted that the public had a constitutional right to know what their elected representatives were up to".

Come on, The Guardian. You really cannot have it both ways.

14.10.2009 This from a lawyer, Sandy Jamieson, on www.iaindale.blogspot.com, writing in comments at 11 pm last night about my take on Carter-Ruck/Trafigura/Guardian -

Tapestry second point is valid although Parliamentary Sovereignty is not unlimited and hasn't been for a long time- this was established as far back as 1953 in MacCormick v the Lord Advocate where the concept of "irrevocable entrenchment" in certain laws is established.

It also can be argued that the 1688 Bill of Rights is a "Fundamental Law" and no Court can override it-only an Act of Parliament can do so- the question is does the 1972 European Union Act over-rule such legislation.

The problem now is we have an activist judiciary who seem to be intent on setting new laws and striking out others. The judge who granted the initial injunction as yet unamed seems to be in that mindset




PICTURED - Federal Soldiers killed at Gettysburg.

Many British people would be willing to fight to save our Constitution, if they felt it was threatened. The emotion stirred up by this issue across the blogosphere today, demonstrates that people are not going to take Lisbon lying down. The powers that be that should take note, the BBC, the media generally. British people have not been consulted about the EU Constitution. If it is forced upon us, there could well be a violent reaction.

It would make more sense to hold a referendum, as was promised by Blair, Brown and Clegg. Any of these three will become natural targets for a blowback of anger. The temperature is rising by the day, and will at some point explode....hopefully as a blogosphere virtual mega-event and not a chemical detonation.

And at top, a Trafigura victim. It doesn't look like 'flu-like symptoms'.

NOT SO says Trafigura as follows -

Trafigura has always denied that the slops caused the deaths and serious health
consequences presented by the BBC – a position fully supported by independent
expert evidence which will be presented to the Court in due course. As the BBC
is well aware, these matters are already the subject of a personal injury action
currently taking place in London. It is deeply regrettable that the BBC felt it
appropriate to prejudge those proceedings in this sensationalist and inaccurate
way.”


See a good report on Trafigura from The First Post HERE.

Pictured - Claude Dauphin (the owner and perpetrator?)



HERE

Monday, October 12, 2009

Legg Protects The Powerful


Thomas Legg has been involved in auditing the House Of Commons since 2004. He would have known the expenses scandal was coming, and could well have been the one who warned Blair to get out when he did, and ensured the scandal was nicely timed to disrupt Cameron.

Blair certainly took the trouble to have all his expenses claims shredded as he left office. But surely the Fees Office must have kept some information on Blair?

What information is there and where is it?

I see. Scone, apart from a £230 bill for file shredding 'as requested'.

There are, it seems, questions Blair should be made to answer - such as this in The Telegraph -

The documents show that Mr Blair remortgaged his constituency home for £296,000, almost 10 times what he paid for it, months before he bought his town house in London for £3.65 million. Mr Blair was able to claim on his parliamentary expenses for the interest repayments on almost a third of the new mortgage on his constituency home.

Legg was very close to someone who was as close as it is possible to be with Cherie Blair - the Lord Chancellor Derry Irvine.



This from 1998 -

'When I was first appointed Lord Chancellor,' he (Derry) drones, 'my Permanent Secretary, Sir Thomas Legg, impressed upon me the advantages for me, both as Lord Chancellor and as Speaker, of living in the residence. I took the view that there was much to be said for accepting that advice.'...

If you remember there was no expense spared in having the place redecorated, and I mean $1 million was spent.

See Independent here -

THE Lord Chancellor yesterday insisted he had no responsibility for the pounds 650,000 restoration of his grace and favour residence in the House of Lords.

In an attempt to restore some of the shine to his reputation as England's most senior law officer, and end the controversy, he issued a statement saying responsibility rested with three committees for the choice of wallpaper, furniture and fittings, which include a new lavatory. It made clear he had not been responsible for the decision to use wallpaper costing pounds 59,211, beds at pounds 8,000 each, or Pugin-style furniture to fill the apartment.


People must surely start putting two and two together. The same people who were piling into the trough themselves for hundreds of thousands, and whose reputations so far survive intact, are now responsible for trying to drag MPs through court for a few hundred, destroying their reputations in the process.

Is this all part of the same programme?

Destroying the sovereignty and credibility of Parliament?

Now who would want to do that?

The Judiciary and the European Court of Justice?

The cap fits. The Blairs want Parliament destroyed so they can move on up to the big game as EU President and First Lady, where the really big money rolls. But first, that little detail of getting the Lisbon Treaty signed off has to occur.

The only place that they can really be stopped is in the British House of Commons with Cameron using his coming majority to undo Britain's ratification. The Blairs want Parliament crushed, and Cameron wants it brought back to life. A tussle of major proportions is developing.

Sir Thomas Legg, I am sure, is himself lilly white as regards his accounting. He would have to be. But those he protects, and who have had their expenses claims covered up, like the Blairs and Mandelson, are now the ones about to trough far bigger sums and enjoy greater yet powers of patronage in the EU as President and Commissioner, as their payback for the destruction of British democracy.

Trashing the reputation of MPs is all part of the process, and Sir Thomas Legg has carried out his role to perfection, making sure the political fallout occurs at exactly the right moment when Britain needs to fight its way out of the Lisbon Treaty, and needs as much confidence in its democratic institutions as possible.

Well done, Sir Thomas. Most ingenious. Maybe this commentary from Craig Murray, former British Ambassador to Uzbekistan might apply -

Sir Thomas Legg, quintessential insider, the Establishment Man's Establishment Man: as unctuous a piece of slime as ever slithered around the corridors of Whitehall. In his "Independent" Arms to Africa inquiry he exonerated mercenary Tim Spicer and Executive Outcomes against the evidence and after taking direct instruction from No 10 on the kind of whitewash to produce.

Just a few additions -

Others are noticing.

From Sky Blog comments today -Tony Blair must be wringing his hands over the fact that he cannot demonstrate that with regard to the expenses scandal he cannot prove that he is, 'Lilly White'. - Never mind Tony, I am sure that the auditors are very mindfully forgiving over the fact that at the same time as you ditched the office of prime minister, all record of your claims for various expenses also were ditched; the explanation being that such documentation was shredded, purely by "accident"; but, I wonder who put the shredder into over-drive, yeh??

BACKGROUND OF SIR THOMAS LEGG KCB - and traitors' pet



He is 74 years old and has been involved in the appointment of judges for the last 20 years, being broadly in favour of dropping merit as the criterion of appointment, and instead, promoting women and ethnic minorities. He stated,

the appointment of judges is properly a political act, in the broadest sense of the term, and I think it should be done by a political authority.

So I agree with the Government in preferring a ‘Recommending’ Commission. I think the Commission should give the Secretary of State a real choice, for which he should take a real responsibility. And for my part I think it should always be the Secretary of State – the opportunity should be taken to eliminate the Prime Minister from all appointments below the new Supreme Court, except perhaps that of the Lord Chief Justice.


It seems that someone who is deciding who appoints the judges, and is also permitted to put one over on MPs as regards MPs, is an exceedingly powerful person. His association with Derry Irvine Lord Chancellor is the source of his position, and Irvine is the Blair's man.

Here are his biographic details -

Born in London in 1935, Tom Legg went to school at Horace Mann in New York and Frensham Heights in England. After National Service in the Royal Marines, he read history and law at St John’s College, Cambridge. Called to the Bar in 1960, he joined the Lord Chancellor’s Department (now the Department of Constitutional Affairs) in 1962.

His work there included law reform, the administration of the courts, European and international legal issues, and the appointment of judges. In 1989, Sir Thomas became the head of his Department, serving as the Lord Chancellor’s Permanent Secretary and Clerk of the Crown in Chancery until 1998. The Department he had first joined consisted of 12 lawyers, all working in the House of Lords. By the time he retired, it had grown to be responsible for over 20,000 staff, more than 500 buildings and a budget of over £2 billion.

Since his retirement from the Civil Service, Sir Thomas’s work has included chairmanship of the Hammersmith Hospitals NHS Trust, and membership of the Audit Commission and the House of Commons Audit Committee.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

Lisbon Treaty Legalises Paedophilia



This video explains how, in all previous EU Treaties,there was an Article, expressing that the Treaty must be interpreted without prejudice or discrimination to any sexual orientation. There was in every EU Treaty until now, always a protocol added to the 'sexual orientation' Article, whereby paedophilia was expressly excluded as a protected sexual orientation.

The Lisbon Treaty, however, is different. Article 21 permits any sexual orientation, as per usual, but, for the first time, the protocol expressly excluding paedophilia is nowhere to be found.



The video commentator thinks this exclusion has something to do with Moslems. I don't agree. There is already plenty of evidence that countries like Belgium and Germany already tolerate paedophilia, and the Lisbon Treaty is merely expressing the current beliefs of EU lawmakers that paedophilia is a normal human activity, which should not be criminalised.

The implication is that by default, and without any discussion from any signatory to the Treaty, paedophilia is now to be legalised across Europe - or at least as soon as Vaclav Klaus' signature hits paper.

Paedophilia could be expressly legalised at some future date by majority vote, or a judge could now already state that any discrimination against a paedophile was illegal. EU law, unlike British Common Law, is teleological. The judge does not need a direct statement of clarity. He is able to look at words and interpret them as to what he believes was intended by the original lawmaker, and the intention is clear enough.

If people in Britain knew about this, would they be happy to be signing away their national existence to a new government, the EU, which, the evidence shows, believes paedophilia to be a normal sexual orientation? I doubt it.

See my earlier post on the EU and paedophilia HERE

Read briefly this extract, the words of Madeleine McCann's mother, Kate -

Child sexual exploitation and child pornography in particular, is sadly and shockingly extensive worldwide. It is a multi-billion dollar industry aided by the use of the Internet with the ‘thirst’ for younger victims growing. Once again, my ‘bubble’ of a life burst as I began to discover the facts relating to this now global crisis.
As we travelled through Europe in an attempt to raise awareness of Madeleine's abduction and appeal for help, we were repeatedly made aware of the unbelievable existence of such a horrifying activity and its vastness in our so called civilised and ‘child-loving’ society.

How can such ‘businesses’ be condoned or tolerated by us all? What are the benefits for our children of being in a European Union where several member countries offer child pornography as a LEGAL past time?

Lack of sex offender registers, lack of reliable tracking systems for known offenders and no CRB check requirements , not even for those working with children are other major areas of concern within many parts of Europe.
posted by Kate HERE.

ECR Is A Tory Stitch-Up


Miliband's war is his own private war, not Britain's.

What he is fogetting, is that European cooperation cannot go ahead if we all look backwards. The old hatreds are everywhere, and have to be put to one side, if new cooperation is to happen.

As in Ireland, you have to sit down with your former 'devils' to make future peace.

Miliband's family were murdered by the Nazis. I don't expect him to be pleased about it, but if he wishes to lead the future, he has to move on from the past.

You cannot order people to obey you when it comes to forgiveness and to apologising. They have to decide when to do it themselves. Miliband is demonstrating hatreds and anger of his own, and a certainty about things which do not warrant such certainty.

His words and his demeanour are not conducive to the healing of the old hatreds he claims to be at the top of his agenda. Peace results from a peaceful attitude, not from anger,bitterness and constant accusation.

He needs to drop it, and behave like a British and a Christian person. He is becoming an ugly spectacle betraying an ugly mind. No good will come of it.



As regards Kaminski he should not lead the European Conservative & Reform Group, not because of Miliband's smears being right or wrong, but because he supports the Lisbon Treaty. See his interview with Iain Dale in which he declares his support HERE.

The ECR has been presented by the Conservatives as 'not-the-federalist-EPP', but an anti Lisbon alliance. Why is the leader of the ECR then, a supporter of the Lisbon Treaty?

That is why he should be gone from the leadership of the ECR.

Conservatives don't need him for that reason.

Here's the joke. He's actually on Miliband's side!!! Miliband should desist from supporting the Lisbon Treaty immediately, or realise he is on the same side as a man who he believes to be a genocidal homophobic racist.

As for Conservatives, we have swallowed the 'ECR-will-fight-Lisbon story'. But it isn't true. It's just another stitch-up.

Saturday, October 10, 2009

Murdochs Lose Cricket For Attacking Labour And Lisbon In Sun


Labour’s fury against James Murdoch swinging The Sun to support Cameron, and against the Lisbon Treaty is starting to show.

First it’s cricket they are taking away from him.

Next it will be football.

All very predictable.

Last time The Sun campaigned against the EU Constitution, Labour took ITV off the Murdochs.

James Murdoch has taken a major risk to support Cameron against Brown, and to attack Lisbon.

He’s got more balls than Dad, it seems. See cricket return to free to air HERE.

Poland Signs Away Hard Won Freedom


Today in near total media silence Poland signed the Lisbon Treaty.

Poland suffered fifty years of occupation, first by the Nazis and then the Soviets, from 1940 until she finally broke free in 1990.

Now she is again back inside an empire without any democratic accountability to her people.

Yes this empire seems more benign than the Soviet Union, in terms of inhumanity, but it seems a tragedy that Poland has thrown away the possibility of becoming a free democracy, almost before she had learned how to manage and enjoy her hard-won freedom.

Will she live to regret throwing it all away?

Political Parties - Rich Men's Playthings


You may have heard of the Jury Team, with hero of the Glasgow Airport terror attack, John Smeaton, standing for Parliament in the coming Glasgow by-election. They slipped in a few votes in the EP elections - 75,000 odd which isn't bad for a party which only started this year.

The Party claims to believe in motherhood and apple pie politics, and is another marketing effort (just as Nigel Farage is trying to score corruption points against Bercow in Buckingham) trying to exploit the fall-out from the expenses scandal, by offering funding to independent candidates, and a catchy marketing theme and badge. The attempt to change politics could be genuine and is no doubt completely genuine amongst the party's supporters, but scepticism would not be amiss.



The Party was set up by Paul Judge (Pictured at top/John Smeaton hero above), who made money through a buy-out in the 1980s, and has had a few investment 'failures' more recently and a messy divorce from his first wife and mother of his sons. He has also had dealing with Charities, which sounds nice, until you read things like this from the judge who heard his divorce case -

One of the appeal judges, Lord Justice Lawrence Collins, said of Sir Paul: "He was presented to the court as a successful and eminent businessman. But I remain disturbed about the way in which he used the charity to fund his own enterprises while simultaneously taking advantage of gift aid, especially when coupled with the relativity with which he seems to approach the concept of moral obligation." The result of the appeal was an undeserved windfall, the judge said.

Jury Team sounds a little bit less motherhood and apple pie all of a sudden. People should remember that just as there is money in charity, there is also money to be made in politics.



UKIP is little different, being housed, run and controlled by a single businessman in Solihull Mike Nattras MEP. Only his 'mates' progress in the party, and as Marta Andreassen MEP, ex-UKIP Treasurer found, the accountability of Party funds seems to be decidedly lacking. Farage is known to have spent £2 million over ten years, which he has yet to account for.

People sending donations to such institutions might stop and think as to where their money might really be going.

Big party politics is being attacked for its corrupt practices. The evidence, however, is very much that the small parties, the ones making hay and hoping to gain votes by attacking them, are tarred with the corruption, lack of accountability brush to a greater or equal degree.

Yet the BBC never exposes their true nature, as the entrepreneurial and energetic smaller parties, as well as being dreadfully corrupt, are almost all eurosceptic. They fracture the eurosceptic movement away from the Conservatives, helping Brussels to keep Britain divided, suppressed and ruled.

Once the Parties are in the grip of an individual controlling figure, they never seem to be able to break free again. All the enthusiasm, youth and vigour at ground level, gets lost in a bog of greed and slime, worthy of Mugabe.

UKIP's controller, for example, secured his position by a break-in at the previous Head Office in London, in which all the computers and equipment were physically removed, cutting off the Southern wing of the Party.

Jury Team hasn't advanced to the break-in stage yet, but as donation and other money starts flowing in, the old saw about 'leopards and spots' will no doubt apply.

Unlike UKIP, the history on the BNP and its leadership is well publicised, as the overt racism and holocaust denial is more clearly illegal. There is no point in my cataloging the same history here. If interested, read Nick Griffin's story at 'The Real BNP'.

But to see again the role money plays in politics, just read the last paragraph -



Pictured - Griffin fund-raising in the USA

'Griffin hopes that these (international) links will stand him in good stead if he gets elected to the European Parliament in 2009. Becoming an MEP is important to him because it would enhance his political respectability and influence, but the prime incentive for him is the chance to get his hands on a pot of money in the form of an MEP's salary and expenses. And if enough far-right MEPs can put aside their nationalist rivalries and form a bloc, they will benefit from a further €1 million a year as well as committee positions and enhanced speaking rights. It would transform the BNP.'

In Griffin's case, his hatred of various groups of people, probably outweighs his greed for money. But either way, politics and wealth are inextricably intertwined at the minor party level. Those who desire power, seem to also desire wealth.

There are, of course, those from the big parties where the same accusation could easily be levelled.


David Cameron seems determined to clean up the tarnished image of British politics. After the, by 2010, thirteen years of Labour, the task is massive. With the Blairs, corruption and its attendant dishonesty, started right at the top, right from the beginning with his famous Formula One lying('I'm a pretty honest sort of a guy'), and it went on ever since, with Mandelson too achieving multi-millionaire status along with the Blairs, without any obvious source for their wealth, which appeared as if from nowhere as they left office. (Oh and I nearly forgot the master practitioner John 2 Jags Prescott (below with actress Jodie Marsh!)



Boris Johnson seems to be good with money, finding he can make massive savings and save taxpayers billions once Cuddly Ken was sent packing by voters. He's more entertained by language, and managing things well than filling his pockets. It seems that being willing to be seen riding around on a bicycle is a good start in judging if someone is going to turn out corrupt.

If you want the stink of politics tidied up, you need old money to do it. Theft seems less attractive to those brought up with money. It's the newcomers who seem unable to help themselves from filling their pockets at the public's expense.


Kelly Brook does bike ride for Boris Johnson. Followed by Cameron and Osborne having a go!

Friday, October 09, 2009

Gordon Brown Blew £1 Trillion For Nothing


It is worth noting that the debt crisis in Britain will still be being paid for in twenty years time, that is, if governments are successful. Even then, according to the Institute Of Fiscal Studies, they need to cut £100 billion a year from their current spending to stand a chance of doing that, or one sixth of total government spending.

From the FT -

As the Institute for Fiscal Studies noted recently, the overall tightening the Treasury plans to deliver is 8 per cent of GDP (about £100bn in today’s money) from 2009-10 to 2017-18.*

This is equal to a sixth of total public spending, two-thirds of the public sector pay bill and all spending on the National Health Service in England.

Moreover, if one assumes no further tightening, public sector net debt only returns to pre-crisis levels 20 years from now.

The crisis casts a frighteningly long shadow.


The man who spoke of Prudence in 1997, went on to blow the golden inheritance. He has ruined the prospects of the current generation, and now put the next generation into debt slavery for a minimum of 20 years.

What was all the money spent on?

That's the really odd thing.

No one has any idea.

Thursday, October 08, 2009

Conservatives! Get Into The PR Driving Seat NOW!


Good luck to David Cameron, who is walking the tightrope of European politics.

His own supporters are disappointed not to have a firm commitment over the Lisbon Treaty referendum promise. The referendum is still believed by most to be the best tactic or avenue to express British euroscepticism, judging by the scribblings of Conservative supporters, and those who have drifted off into minor parties.

But in truth, if you want referenda to resolve the EU issue for Britain, why worry exclusively about the Lisbon Treaty? If we are to open up a discussion of Europe, as Dan Hannan says on his blog, we should be reopening the file on other Treaties which were not put to referendum too, including Nice, Maastricht and all. Lisbon is only the last nail in Britain's coffin.

And in any case are referenda the only avenue available to negotiate and articulate the eurosceptic appetite growing across Britain? There are other possibilities.

One idea is a little bit lateral, but once you think about it, quite a good one. Why don't the Conservatives notice something?

That something is this. The topic of proportional representation has disappeared from the list of demands from the Liberal Democrats, or the thoughts of Labour, when at one time, it was dragged out as a primary threat against the eurosceptics. The reason for that is this. As the minor parties have steadily grown from 5% to around 15% in the last few years, PR would not help the Lib Dems much, but would now instead help the eurosceptic movement to win power with an overall majority in Parliament.

NOTE - In the EP elections, Conservatives got 27%. UKIP 16%. BNP 8% and Green 6% - all eurosceptic or withdrawalist. Labour and Lib Dem managed only 29% between them. See chart of EP elections results HERE.

Euroscepticism would have a mandate for power, based on longterm national popular support, not as now where either the foibles of low turnout FPTP voting, which grants supreme power to anyone who can get one quarter of the electorate to vote for it in a general election, or a successful referendum season, would be the basis of an uncertain and probably only temporary rebellion against the EU.

There is another even bigger group of people than the minor parties, whose opinion and votes could be brought to bear on resolving the biggest issue to affect Britain's future - the missing half of British politics - the non-voter. If the electoral system went to PR, the voters who claim that they think all the big parties are the same, would find there were, instead of no real choice, as they see it, a plethora of small parties they could vote for.

And from the eurosceptic viewpoint, there is not a single small party that supports absorption into the EU, other that is, than the SNP in Scotland, and even they aren't too sure really.

As David Cameron and other Conservatives consider their options and struggle to walk the tightrope of EU politics, they should think about this. The Conservatives allied with the current 15% or so who support minor parties, would have at least a real 50% plus majority of Britain's (voting) electorate backing them for a fundamental renegotiation with the EU. And as the non-voters return, surging into backing minor parties, which under PR would at last be worth voting for, the europhile Labour, Lib Dem and SNP might find themselves relegated to a permanent under-40% between them.

And the Conservative and Independence coalition would be able to negotiate with the EU for withdrawal, not simply based on a referendum which gives a hard to read next step, but on a permanent, or semi-permanent position of strength, and popular support.

Finally, if PR was now to be offered as a manifesto commitment by David Cameron, he would immediately find another 5% or more supporting the Conservatives right now, and his government on 2010 would have a landslide of unimaginable proportions. While PR is prepared for in 2015, Cameron would already have a huge mandate to take on the EU.

He could then brush off the kind of noises coming out of France, Germany and Sweden, as mentioned in The Times today. See the extract below.

Think about it, Conservatives. This would be the end of your troubles, and the end of Britain's nightmare. We could move on from all this kind of drivel....

From The Times -

Mr Reinfeldt’s remarks follow Ms Merkel’s decision to disband several working groups with the Tories in response to Mr Cameron’s stance on the treaty and his decision to pull his MEPs out of the European Parliament’s main centre-right group. His critical approach to the EU is also thought to have irritated President Sarkozy of France, who has declined to appear at a Tory party conference, yet invited Tony Blair to speak at his centre-right party’s gathering.

EU leaders argue that Mr Cameron as prime minister could not act alone to combat climate change, one of his main goals, whereas the EU is trying to establish a cap-and-trade carbon market to reduce pollution across the continent. They also argue that the EU needs to work together and speak with one voice on repairing the shattered financial system to avoid chances of a repeat crash.

After talks with Mr Reinfeldt, Mr Fischer, the Czech Prime Minister, said he was confident that the country’s unpredictable President, Vaclav Klaus, would sign the Lisbon treaty by the end of the year. This would complete ratification, with President Kaczynski of Poland likely to sign up within a week.

“I am fully and deeply convinced that there is no reason for anxiety in Europe. In the Czech Republic the problem is not whether yes or no, the question is when,” Mr Fischer said, although he added that he had not had a firm commitment from President Klaus.


Conservatives! Get into the PR driving seat NOW

(Image at top from www.fairvote.org)

Wednesday, October 07, 2009

Detailed Evidence Suggests Irish Poll was Rigged

The Presiding Officers in the following polling stations in and near Dublin, supposedly a high turnout area, gave their vote totals to unofficial election monitors associated with the COIR Campaign. The highest are 60%. The average a lot lower - maybe 50%. As Dublin was a high turnout area, it suggests that the officially claimed turnout figure of 59.7% was a false figure.

That would have permitted ballot box stuffing on a large scale, as suggested by the video shot at Cork Town Hall.

John Heaney - St Martin de Porres: 423 – 60%; 424 – 55%; 425 – 40%; 426 – 60%; 427 – 50%; 428 – 45%

Billy (Beaumont area) – 57.8/3210

Carmel O’Sullivan (Cork – Whitechurch; North Central) – 60%

Anne Brennan – Athlone
Brawney Community Centre – Box 13 – 145/291 - 50% (Joe Roper)
Dean Kelly School – Box 22 – 182 (Anne Walsh); 23 – 210 (p McCauley); 20 – 204 (Maureen Green)

South Kilkenny – 61.7%

Dublin Central (Communications Workers) – 46%

Dublin Central ( SFX) – Box 299 – 243; Box 300 - 253

Loughlinstown (Dun Laorghaire/Rathdown) – Box 670 – 58%; (453); 671 – 57% (342); Box 672 – 54% (311); 673 – 51% (307); 674 – 46% (282); 675 – 47% (287); 676 – 51% (307); 677 – 48% (337) 5085 – 52.07 (51.5%) Claire Falcon

Carrickmacross – Box 17 - 238; 16 - 299; 15 - 260; 14 – 257 Karen McCardle

Christchurch Hall, Highfield Road – 1016/2087 (48.7%) Lelia

Dublin 8 (Polling Station 544 – Model School) – Box 544 – 361; 545 – 305
Mary Tierney

Kinsealy (National School) – Box 1 – 372; 2 – 428; 3 – 421. Total turnout 56%.

Edenderry – Box 56 – 170/395; 57 – 193/452; 58 – 298/680; 59 – 273/526;
60 – 284/714; 61 – 311/500; 62 – 265/473; 63 – 187/400; 64 – 385/696

Dunkineely (So Donegal Fosses 152) – 350 -50%; (National School) 149 – Nan O’Doherty – 50%; 150 – Margaret Shovelin – 287 – 50%

So Sligo – Rathlee – 199 -239; Corballa – 64 -352; Enniscrone – 72 – 259; 73 – 256
High Park Screen – 81- 299

Ballina (Scoil Paraig) 28 -359; 29 -541; 30 – 195; 31 -253; 32 -320; 33- 220; 34 -188; 35 -205

Key National School – 1 – 317; 2 – 328 (50-51%)

Foxford – 401 – 181; 402 – 342; 403 – 347; 404 – 313 (55-56%)

This information came to me at my request. I called the COIR Dublin office two days ago and spoke three times over two days to a campaign assistant who assembled this information. I have no reason to doubt its truth.

If some one more expert at the statistics of the Irish referendum were to take a look, I'd be very grateful, but even to my untrained eye, they suggest foul play.

Champagne Cameron Doesn't Cut The Mustard


Sandy Rham in EU Referendum 'comments', says that his vote goes with a leader, not electoral strategies.

I replied

I buy that.

Boris Johnson, for example, could carry off what Cameron is attempting to do but failing. He'd be over the Bullingdon handicap in one leap. With Cameron it takes months of pained struggle.

I mean why do they have Harvey Nichols and champagne there at the Manchester Conference for god's sake. get some jugs of beer and cheese sandwiches.

Given that the Conservatives don't have Boris as leader and will not do so for a while, do you buy the idea of PR for eurosceptics as it is being offered next year in a referendum by Gordon Brown as his parting shot?

The europhiles are assuming it will pan out their way, finally breaking up the Conservative Party.

In fact the evidence from the EP elections is that the Conservatives would remain the biggest party with UKIP 2nd. Labour would be wiped out, not the Tories.

On that basis, when Brown provides the referendum for PR next year, eurosceptics should vote for it.

By the time Boris wins the leadership, if there is PR, the electoral arithmetic will have ended false Conservativism, and we would have two eurosceptic withdrawalist parties competing for votes, Conservative the largest and UKIP the second largest parties. The media would be stranded.

We could withdraw from Europe.

And then live in a world of PR divided on other issues.


What do you think?

Tuesday, October 06, 2009

Britain's Eurosceptics Need PR

Curious silence from blogging and tweeting Conservative MPs at Conference....

This from Douglas Carswell.

Wild conspiracy theories at a function last night about the lack of MPs blogging and tweeting in Manchester.
Was it a directive handed down from CCHQ to avoid any banana skins in conference week, someone asked me? Part of a pre-election clamp down to prevent folk going "off message", speculated another?
No. Alas, the lack of internet comment was due to something more mundane. Dodgy wifi connections


Surely not deliberate?

The Conference has left the eurosceptic wing totally turned off....that is 80% of the party. Hannan and Johnson have tried to keep hopes alive, but their jolly texts and words offering juicy sounding referendum hopes, no longer ring true. The season of hope for freedom lovers is sadly ending.

The media are threatening dire talk of Cameron's support leaving him if he turns to the right - i.e. they will clobber him with endless Bullingdon exposure, if he dares to go eurosceptic. And on cue, he's gone dead on all referendum promises.

The media are the gate-keepers. The Conservatives are stranded.

One way forward would be to use lateral thinking and go for Proportional Representation, as Brown is suggesting.

He imagines a Lib Dem/Labour coalition would emanate, keeping Conservatives at bay, and is proposing a PR referendum takes place at the same moment as the next general election. But would the result be as he (and the EU) imagine ?

In the EP elections, where 15 million votes were cast, eurosceptics outnumbered europhiles 2 to 1.

Conservative, UKIP, BNP, Green plus a host of others were 10 million votes to Lab, Lib Dem and SNP at 4.5 million.

These numbers open up possibilities for different eurosceptic electoral strategies.

If PR were to be introduced, I'd be in favour of a palace revolution inside the Conservative Party, as prescribed by Richard North on EU Referendum, as the party loyalty equation applies less forcefully as it does with FPTP.

Why do eurosceptics not do something unexpected, and back Brown's PR referendum?

And then set about building a withdrawalist coalition between a filtered Conservative Party made up of eurosceptics, UKIP, BNP, Greens and a host of others like English Democrats and so on?

That could bust open Britain's electoral system to produce a majority withdrawalist grouping in power, and finally get free of Brussels, Lisbon, Nice, Maastricht and all.

What are the arguments against?

See Proportional Representation In The UK? They'll Never Do It.

Proportional Representation in the UK? They'll never do it!

The results from the UK's Electon for the European Parliament tell a story.

Conservative 4,198,394 27.7

UK Independence Party 2,498,226 16.5

Labour 2,381,760 15.7

Liberal Democrats 2,080,613 13.7

Green Party 1,303,745 8.6

British National Party 943,598 6.2

Scottish National Party 321,007 2.1

Plaid Cymru 126,702 0.8

English Democrats 279,801 1.8

Christian Party "Proclaiming Christ's Lordship"** 249,493 1.6

Socialist Labour Party 173,115 1.1

No2EU - Yes to Democracy 153,236 1.0

Jury Team 78,569 0.5

United Kingdom First 74,007 0.5

Libertas 73,544 0.5

Independents - all very small.

Here's why Britain will never have Proportional Representation. There are only three Europhile Parties - Labour, Lib Dem and SNP. The voting figures from the 2009 European elections show that their vote totals at 4.5 million. All the other parties are eurosceptic or withdrawalist. Their votes add up to 10 million.

Why would Labour and Lib Dem want a voting system that would consign them to a 2 to 1 disadvantage? They won't.

Boris Creams Paxman And Saves £5 Billion On London Transport


Link Here

16 minutes in.

(after Boris had allegedly chucked a flower pot through the window)

EXTRACT -

Boris - I want to give the people of this country the opportunity they were denied

as a mere Mayor Of London, not an EU lawyer, I admit, it may be difficult to have a referendum, once it is done and dusted.

Can you ask the people to vote? I don't know the answer to that.

Paxman - You're not talking about the real world Boris.

Boris - even in your world, it is possible the treaty might not be ratified.

Paxman - you want various parts of the Treaty to be the subject of a referendum

Boris - the British people's desire for a vote should be gratified

Paxman - People are unsure about David Cameron

Boris - Cameron is glutenous

Paxman -

Boris - Grade A bloke.

Paxman - you've drunk chmpagne with him

Boris - People do know what he stands for

Paxman - what was he like in the Bullingdon Club

Boris - he'll be a very good Prime Minister


Paxman - did he throw flower pots through windows?

he will do more to tackle hardship, than Labour

Paxman he never spent the nights in the cells like you

Boris the details of that night escape me mercifully

are these the depths you interviewers you have sunk to

why don't you get a proper job?

Paxman privileged background

Boris how much do you earn?

Paxman i should ask the questions

Boris you are seeking to intermediate between me and the public about Cameron

he's a first rate guy. a fatastic committed guy who'll be a great prime minister. get out there and vote for him in may. etc etc

THOUGHTS - what makes Boris impenetrable to interviewers is his honesty and simplicity. He says 'I don't know' when he doesn't know, but he says eloquently and forcefully what he knows to be right.

He is bright enough to know when to be candid, and admit he's no idea about sopmething, but still give a strong view about it, working from main principles.

It's very similar to Dan Hannan in that way.

Honesty is the one thing interviewers have no idea how to cope with. Their whole approach to politicians is 'you're lying really, aren't you' deserving the Paxman weary sneer. But if Hannan and Boris stick to talking about beliefs and strongly held views, the interviewers have nowehere to go.

They are so used to the Labour approach of - we make the narrative. you have to believe us because we're in power, that they have no way to cope with completely straight replies.

paxman totally surrendered.

As a drama it was nothing much, compared to the billing around the web, which makes it sound like a big punch up which it wasn't. Though as an expose of how truth cuts through bullshit, it was an 'emperor has no clothes' moment. Paxman was naked.

But even he seemed to be very relaxed that Boris was being totally truthful, leaving him absolutely no angle.

Paxman will no doubt be rapped for giving in to Boris charm. But the charm would not work without his being totally candid.

It's why Boris is good with money. Honesty is so much cheaper to fund that bullshit. You could feel your taxes coming down, and people getting looked after better. Boris would be able to get rid of all the bureaucrats and keep the front line services. His speech to conference was much funnier and more informative in that way.



FULL TEXT of speech via Paul Waugh -

It’s wonderful to be here in Manchester, one of the few great British cities I have yet to insult and I intend to keep a clean sheet today, my friends because if we can win in the capital then we can win in Manchester and any inner city in Britain and we can change the political map of this country as we changed the map of London. Though I have to say I don’t approve of every map change I see.
The other day I got back from a trip to NY and I found that some bright spark had deleted the river Thames from Harry Beck’s 1933 map of the Underground and there was a huge hoo-ha underway and I immediately issued a mayoral directive and you will be relieved and pleased to know that from Christmas - at no extra cost to the taxpayer – the river will be back where it belongs, flowing through the heart of the city and the only thing I regret is that the Evening Standard uncharacteristically missed the obvious headline River Crisis – Mayor steps in.
Sometimes voters ask me nervously whether I enjoy being mayor and the answer is that hard work is fantastically enjoyable if you are lucky enough, as I am, to have a first rate team at City Hall, many of whom are now becoming famous in their own right and often for the right reasons and if you are able to do things you believe in.
So I hope I will be forgiven if I briefly recapitulate and say how proud I am that we have saved millions by scrapping some of the barmiest projects in British politics, not least the communist era freesheet called the Londoner
We have banned booze on public transport
We have planted the first of thousands of new street trees
We have turfed the first bendy buses off the streets
We have given free travel to veterans, 24 hour free travel to older people
We have just held the biggest mass cycle event in history
AND yet! we have frozen our share of the council tax last year
and I can tell you today that we are going to freeze it again next year as welll
and that is what Conservative government is all about.

I am proud that we are fulfilling our number one pledge
to make public space safer, to make transport safer
There are now more uniformed crime fighters on the buses than at any time in the last 30 years and that is not wholly unconnected to the fact, I believe that bus crime is down 18 per cent
and though there is never any case for complacency
I am relieved that youth violence is down 13 per cent and fatal teenage stabbings are down by 50 per cent.
And I pay tribute to the Metropolitan Police and Sir Paul Stephenson. If you want an example of the kind of commonsense policing that he is bringing to the Force it was his instant decision to insist that where possible officers will patrol singly rather than in pairs as a result of which elementary piece of arithmetic there will be an extra half a million patrols this year, getting police out there on the street where people can see them.
And that is my idea of a new administration in action
And it is all the more remarkable that crime is coming down overall,
when there is less money in people’s pockets and people feel less secure in their jobs
because the tragedy of this Labour government { } is that they are set to scuttle from office with unemployment higher than when they came in with colossal public debt like Peckham motorist Harriet Harman fleeing the scene of the crime
And once again it is left to us to sweep up the crushed indicator lights of the classic Labour car crash to sort out the usual disastrous legacy - the damnosa hereditas as we say in Walford – or we shall shortly say in Walford
That means taking some tough decisions about public spending. And so let me tell you the kind of cuts we have made that I believe are essential and programmatic for an incoming Conservative government
We have lost 180 jobs in City Hall, and 30 per cent of the headcount of the LDA
London Underground has already lost 1000 backroom staff
and we are cutting £220 m in consultants
£130 m in the cost of accommodation
and we are overall making savings of £5 billion in Transport for London’s budget
and when you are making savings at that kind of rate
you have to do it frankly with compassion, and with humanity

- and there has been something bizarre about the lip-smacking savagery of the Lib Dems, with Vince Cable morphing into a mad axeman a transformation as incongruous as the killer rabbit in Monty Python
But make those savings we must because otherwise we risk mistakes that could undermine the foundations of the economy, parch the seedbeds of growth, attack the very things that allow liberal capitalism to flourish in this country
and for me as mayor there are three key areas where we need to apply simple Conservative principles
and they are getting young people into jobs, the theme of our conversations today,
making sure that we have the infrastructure we need to remain competitive
and defending the buoyant spirit of innovation and enterprise that has ensured London’s historic economic success.

I make no apology for this. Last week in Brighton we heard the Prime Minister’s weird apostasy when he seemed to attack the free market ideology he has spent the last ten years slavishly adoring And he declared that the financial services sector was morally bankrupt.
Well I don’t agree and I will oppose high marginal rates of taxation
because they failed in the dismal 1970s
because they yield tiny sums in revenue and only serve to drive away talent
and frankly I think it DOES matter that the City of London should remain competitive
and, before you get carried away, I know how unpopular these bankers are
and I know how far out on a limb I now seem to be in sticking up for these pariahs
But never forget all you bankerbashers that the leper colony of the City of London produces 9 per cent of UK GDP, 13 per cent of value-added and taxes that pay for roads and schools and hospitals and that is why I am willing to take the fight to our friends and partners in Brussels against ill-thought out regulation

because they may be our friends and partners, not matter what flashing green-eyed President they may install, but they are not above poking the City in the eye in the misguided belief that it will give them some competitive advantage and I fear they will persist in this delusion which is why I think we should vote on the matter
And the reason I defend the capitalist system is that when times are tight and public finances are facing a brutal squeeze these companies are not so much the problem as a vital part of the solution and not just in the jobs they create and the taxes they yield.
We in City Hall have been working flat out to deal with the human cost of the recession we have started 12,000 affordable homes, far more than many thought possible far more than my predecessor
We have launched measures to boost apprenticeships to help graduates find jobs
to cut the cost of transport for those on benefits and in search of work. But there is so much more we can do for young people if we rely not only on the taxpayer and but if we also mobilise the energy of private capital. {we are this month opening the first mayoral academy devoted to getting 16 year olds into jobs}
And when I look around London I see firms and individuals already giving their time and their cash to academies and to boxing clubs and mentoring schemes
I want to encourage that.I will not pretend that every banker has had a Scrooge-like conversion to the spirit of Christmas giving
And I invite any bankers out there to palliate their guilt about being in possession of a taxpayer-funded bonus by giving it to the Mayor’s Fund.
My point is that you cannot sort out the deep-seated problems of unemployed young people without the help of the firms that could provide work for young people and it is only if we have sensible tax rates and light regulation and reasonable employment law that business will be able to pay the taxes for the things we need to do.
And if you want one decisive example of the terminal lunacy that afflicts this government I give you the case the other day when a pair of female police officers discovered they were not allowed to babysit for each other unless they both secured OFSTED credentials in baby-sitting.
Who is sitting there in OFSTED handing out degrees in baby-sitting to female police officers?

I don’t know – but I know that whoever it is no doubt draws a handsome salary and benefits and bomb-proof public sector pension and that is where the axe should fall
Get rid of the nonsense, but don’t chop the investments essential to the UK economy
Cut the baby-sitting monitors, but don’t cut Crossrail

Cut the baby-sitting monitor human resources department,
but don’t cut the tube upgrades
Cut the baby-sitting monitor equal opportunities action day
but don’t cut the great projects and investments that will deliver jobs and growth now and make London more attractive for generations to come.
That’s why the GLA is today launching an air quality strategy finally taking big decisions that were ducked by Labour
It is a disgrace that after 12 years of dither London has among the worst air quality in Europe and with the population growing fast, as London mothers produce record phenomenally numbers of babies
we must insist on an air-conditioned tube
and cleaner, greener buses,
and planting thousands of trees
and a beautiful new bike hire scheme, the regeneration of East London that will come with the Olympic games,
not just because they will boost the quality of life
but by making it easier and more pleasant to live in and move around in, these improvements will boost growth

and I mean no disrespect to Manchester, beautiful city,
but if you want to stimulate the Mancunian economy
and if you want to stimulate Leeds and Newcastle
then you invest in London my friend, because London is the motor not just of the South east, not just of England, not just of Britain but of the whole of the UK economy
and if we can keep that economy whirring then London will lead the UK out of recession just as it did in the 1930s
and if we can cut cost in City Hall, George then you can cut cost in Whitehall as you promise to do
and if we can cut crime in London, then David Cameron can make streets safer across the UK
and if we can replace Labour’s political gaseous emissions with real action to improve London’s air not least a clean green hop on hop off new generation routemaster bus of the kind that was so wrongly taken away.
then the Conservatives can harness new technology to deliver cut in pollution that people want to see
the changes that people want to see and if we can defeat a stale clapped-out miserablist socialist regime in City Hall and install a new regime so frugal that we have still not exhausted the old mayor’s stocks of chateauneuf du pape
then you David can defeat this unelected, unrepentant, unbelievable embarrassment of a government
It is time for a new and energetic Conservative administration to sort out this country’s finances
it is time to give the British people back their pride and their trust in this political institution, country and its leaders
It’s time for change, folks
And the Conservatives will give you your money’s worth - and they’ll give you change as well!



05 October 2009 12:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (4)

Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Boris seems to forget that under the first eight years of the last Tory Government which promised to cut taxes the upper rate of income tax was sixty percent. It didn't stop Mrs Thatcher boasting about her short-lived economic miracle before the bubbble burst and she was thrown out by her own party.
Posted by: Fred Hall | 05/10/2009 at 01:12 PM

It’s time for change, folks ...
Yes, it's time for a change to the voting system. At the next general election the majority of the electorate won't be voting Conservative - yet we'll be stuck with a Conservative government for 5 years.
Posted by: Robert | 05/10/2009 at 02:55 PM

I pay £1100 a year in Council Tax and £1800 a year on public transport. I would rather my Council Tax went up by a small amount than my fares by 5 or 6% as predicted.
Posted by: Nick | 05/10/2009 at 03:23 PM

I can't believe this rubbish. Do people take this guy seriously, or is he just the warm-up comic? Launching an air quality strategy - will that be before or after he pays the £300m fine for the level of London's pollution thanks to his policies. The number of unemployed under the last Tory government was cataclysmic, 4m plus when they left office, and that doesn't include those on Mrs Thatcher's big idea, Incapacity Benefit. We had 2 recessions under the Tories, one in the 80s, and another in the 90s. Annus horribilis, 18 of them. I see the polls in this paper show that two thirds of those polled say they don't trust David Cameron. Two thirds of those polled wouldn't want Boris Johnson as Prime Minister. Says it all, doesn't it.
Posted by: Val Daniels | 05/10/2009 at 03:49 PM

Twitter Updates

DD also tells Indy fringe that he invented the phrase "Eurosceptic"...tho stresses "I dont want to overclaim......"#cpc09 9 minutes ago
DD says "at some point there will b a referendum" on EU post-ratification 11 minutes ago
dan hannan tells C4 twinge that he hopes Cam will hold ref on not just Lisbon powers but also Amsterdam and Maastricht about 13 hours ago