Translate

Thursday, December 31, 2009

Brown's Banking Losses Not in 2009 Accounts


In the December Treasury UK Government Spending Outturn Reports, there are some detailed accounting tables, which I am about to comment on. The figures in the Treasury Tables are very similar to the figures given by the previous report I detailed a week ago. But this time, there is a new element added which at least gets the totals to relate to each other correctly. The new element is called mysteriously 'Accounting Adjustments'. See HERE.

In the previous report, the sub-totals did not equal the grand total, and the reader with a calculator to hand, adding them up, was just left hanging.

I blogged the effect as 'UK Government Spending 58% of GDP', which the sub-totals added up to before the bringing in of these unexplained 'accounting adjustments'.

The accounting adjustments noted in the Tables are not chicken feed, either, one of them being GBP 99.5 billion. See Table 1, Total Capital AME . The largest previous such accounting adjustment in previous years was GBP 10 billion. So GBP 100 billion is quite a jump.

There are no details provided as to what this adjustment might consist of. This adjustment alone is 15% of the spending totals declared. It should have been itemised I would have thought, and provided with an explanatory note. It is not.

The effect is to reduce the 2009 totals of government spending to fit The Chancellor's forecasts, which would otherwise have been out by the same amount, GBP 100 billion - no less than 8% of GDP.

This is surely the biggest unexplained 'accounting adjustment' on record in the history of the world. Britain again under Gordon Brown finds herself at the very top, leading the field for the size of its unexplained '√°ccounting adjustments'. I bet the French have never had an unexplained 'accounting adjustment' of anything approaching this size, or the Germans, or even the Italians. It should really get the recognition it deserves, but as yet no one (apart from me) has even mentioned it.

I would have thought that the government should be responsible to its citizens and explain what this accounting adjustment consists of.

This however is not even the only one in this year's PBR accounts from H.M.Treasury. There is indeed another unexplained 'accounting adjustment' in the accounts, again of no small significance. The second unexplained 'accounting adjustment' you can find has no less a value than GBP 85 billion, not as big as Britain's all-time record GBP 100 billion shocker unexplained 'accounting adjustment', but a very close second, and worthy of its place in the Hall Of Fame. See RESOURCE AME in Table 1. And they both appear in one year's set of accounts. Quite remarkable.

It's obviously a very great effort that's been put in by The Treasury to accommodate The Chancellor's forecasts and to fit them to the spending that has actually made. But there is a problem.

It leaves me feeling that government spending is probably far higher than is being admitted to, as why otherwise would the figures appear like this, and why would a GBP 185 billion value of account 'adjustment' not be explained in a way which an observer of the accounts could fathom?

It's not something to do with bank takeovers is it?

Maybe someone from the news media could ask of HM Treasury why there is a total of GBP 185 billion of 'accounting adjustment' included in the 2009 Spending Outturn figures, reducing a spend of GBP 800 billion to a declared total GBP 615 billion or so. The accounting adjustments are three times bigger than any in previous years. What are they, and why are the figures so big?

Surely accounting 'adjustments' of this size warrant a note in the accounts, being 30% of the total declared value of government spending in 2009. These are not small figures, that seem are being slipped through without explanation.

Are expenses being reclassified as assets, for example? If so, have the relevant assets been valued at cost of purchase or at current market value, or by what method of valuation?

If these, by chance, happened to be the purchases of bank shares, a historic cost valuation method could currently be covering up a major market loss.

Take the shares bought by the government in Royal Bank Of Scotland as an example. These were bought at 65p. The shares are now valued at 29.5p and are consistently falling despite the general rise in other share prices. On this share alone the government has lost over GBP 10 billion on its 70% holding.

These share losses do not appear in government spending figures for 2009. Perhaps this explains the strange way that money s being accounted for.

See RBS share price chart HERE.

Morten Moreland, The Times.



Not quite right, Morten. He could just have the decency to come clean as to how big the mess really is.

The losses on the share prices could only be the half of it. The toxic debts owned by the banks could yet wipe them out and require further large infusions.

But at least we could be given a current valuation of the assets purchased on our behalf by the government, declaring all losses or gains if any, and the net position. Losses should be added to the GDP % figure as expenditure, or negative expenditure if a gain (there are none to my knowledge). At the very least a provision for anticipated future losses might be made for such a large accounting item. Otherwise the accounts start to stray too far away from reality to be meaningful.

Boris And Dave Call Time-Out On Labour Misery



I spent three years of my youth from aged 17 years to 20 at Oxford University studying Law. These were the years 1972-1975, the same moment that various people from our generation who were later to become famous attended the University, including the Blairs. I was not all that keen on politics or taking life all that seriously at the time, but was excited by the idea of going into business, primarily as I enjoyed the buzz of planning ventures and finding ways to get them off the ground. Business became my career and is still the way I make a living today, although, largely due to health and age, I now spend more time occupied in leisure pursuits which include blogging.

At that time, which was pre-Thatcher, my fellow students always surprised me with their anger that I openly stated that I wanted to be a businessman. I was about two years younger than the average age for my year, and from a public school background. Most were highly politically motivated in a leftwards direction, and it would not be unfair to say that, for some, I became a hate figure for being so cheerful and determined to make my own living by taking measured risks. I was lectured, for example, that a pound in my pocket was a pound of work done by someone else, an idea which always confused me. Socialism was the main religion at that time and place, and I was offending its fundamental beliefs.

I didn't take much of this kind of thing too seriously, enjoyed my years there and then was happy to get out into the real world at the end of it all, where common sense seemed to prevail. My fellow students were a bit of a worry though. What would they go on to do in the real world with their minds so heavily coloured by ideas of class hatred, and dislike of commerce. I remember being amused when quite a few of these 'Communists' ended up going into banking. I remember chuckling that the idea of making money must have found its way into their minds instead, once they hit the real world.

I was wrong. Reading a report on the Fabians today, I see that working their way into the Establishment was the chosen method of this generation and others to ensure they got into powerful positions from where they could destroy the capitalist system. Blair was of this era, as was Cherie, Mandelson and literally thousands of others.

In the comments, there was one this morning (I don't get many!) from John, which brought all these thoughts to a head after thirty five years in which I hadn't really given this much of a thought. He gave a Link to a website which explains the Fabians, a society to which many of these people belonged. I had never really bothered wondering much about what they believed in in detail, as the word 'leftie' did for most of the people I knew, and the amount that I was bothered.

But after seeing how New Labour have decimated all the institutions of this country, and how they are now finalising the wreckage of our economy with massive borrowing, I find that I should have listened a bit harder to those 'lefties' I knew at university. They were already planning the destruction of the way of life that I believed was best in 1975, not only for me but for millions of others, and it appears that now they are getting very close to succeeding.

Here is an extract from the website -

Some of the more erudite members of the wealthy and intellectual classes of England formed an organization to perpetuate the concept of collectivism but not exactly according to Marx. It was called the Fabian Society.

The name is significant, because it was in honor of Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrrucosus,
the Roman general who, in the second century B.C., kept Hannibal at bay by wearing down
his army with delaying tactics, endless maneuvering, and avoiding confrontation wherever
possible.

Unlike the Marxists who were in a hurry to come to power through direct
confrontation with established governments, the Fabians were willing to take their time, to
come to power without direct confrontation, working quietly and patiently from inside the
target governments. To emphasize this strategy, and to separate themselves from the
Marxists, they adopted the turtle as their symbol. And their official shield portrays an image
of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Those two images perfectly summarize their strategy.


It is now 1884, and we find ourselves in Surrey, England observing a small group of
these Fabians, sitting around a table in the stylish home of two of their more prominent
members, Sydney and Beatrice Webb. The Webbs later would be known world wide as the
founders of the London School of Economics. Their home eventually was donated to the
Fabian Society and became its official headquarters. Around the table are such well-known
figures as George Bernard Shaw, Arnold Toynbee, H.G. Wells, and numerous others of
similar caliber. By the way, the Fabian Society still exists, and many prominent people are
members, not the least of which is England’s Ex Prime Minister, Tony Blair.


If ordinary people understood that the destruction of the economy and of the country's institutions was a deliberate programme of government, hidden from view of course, including a willingness to hand over power to rule Britain to international organisations beyond the reach of democracy, I wonder if they would hold so much enthusiasm for the Labour Party.

The emotions of class hatred run deep in Britain, and the media is heavily infiltrated by people with the same mentality as the Blairs, who see Conservatives as the bitter enemy. But how low do they want us all to go in the name of destroying the existence of privilege. The rich will always find a way to recreate themselves, offshore or as non-doms.

By destroying the country's institutions, those without money get hurt badly. Standards of education keep tumbling. The NHS saves only those who tick the right boxes. The rest are left to die. The Army is sent to war without even the most essential equipment. Judges start to legislate according to the secret programmes of justice that they and their secret appointers believe in. Paedophiles are increasingly tolerated. Those who try to defend their homes and their families from attack are sent to prison.

It's the odd thing about the most intelligent people, the kind of people I was at University with, and who are now in control of Britain as assuredly as they are wilfully destroying the place, is that their undoubted intelligence deprives them of the common sense that more ordinary minds have no difficulty in perceiving. It should be noted that good government will not come not from the overly educated mind, with its obsessions, but from more common sense with slightly lower IQ.

I don't mean to be rude to Eton, but in amongst inherited position, can maybe be found better service than amongst those who owe everything they have to being top of the class at school. I should know! The need to keep achieving and always being on top inevitably ends up in disaster. Look at Blair struggling to sound impressive at Yale. It's embarassing. Why not get someone not with a double 1st, but someone with a useful 2:1, and maybe someone whose political education was not informed entirely by 1960s and 1970s industrial strife, who can see beyond the bitter conflicts of the past, to a more contended view of the world.

In fact why not indeed vote for David Cameron. Until New Labour's angry and destructive student politicians have been silenced and removed, Cameron's new more adult contentment will not easily be heard. But there is a second voice, espousing the same kind of values, a pea from the same pod, with a stronger and sharper edge to cut away the evil of the secretive destroyers, in the Mayor Of London, Boris Johnson. There is, it appears, a new generation of believers in the good that Britain can be, determined to give the message to the people. I sincerely hope that the people buy, and can see through the massed ranks of angry and bitter backwards-looking media placemen, bankers, educators and sycophants, to a better and more optimistic way of seeing people and their place in the world.




We need the positive to start winning, urgently. The free world is running perilously close to the abyss that left intellectuals have been working towards a very long time. Thatcher defeated the industrial left. It must be the task of this generation of Conservatives to defeat the far more sinister and well-dug in intellectual left. Cameron has to win the coming election, or Britain is truly and probably permanently finished. We have a clear choice - the sadness and bitterness of the past which resides in the soul of Gordon Brown, or a belief in a future for Britain which is expressed quietly but strongly by David Cameron.

Wednesday, December 30, 2009

The EU Is A Vast Parish Council


It occurred to me today that eurosceptics are fighting the wrong war. The EU is not the centre of power we all believed. It is a front. We are told this by none other than the President of the EU Herman Van Rompuy. In his first public speech, he announced that the era of One World Government has arrived.

What did he mean?

What he said, I would suggest.

He is saying that he is not the leader of Europe that we imagined he would be, but a servant of the One World Government. He is only President of Europe in name.

OK. Got that.

He is an employee, a servant of a higher authority, which is partly working through the EU to deliver its programmes.

Right. OK, but Herman, who are these people that we've never heard of before, who you say now rule the world?

It is interesting when the likes of Gordon Brown and Van Rompuy talk of the New World Order and One World Government that they never give any names as to who is in control of the NWO and OWG. They give no address as to where these structures and organisations can be found. And yet they must have a clear enough idea as to who they mean. Why don't they tell us what they know?



They are supposedly our President and our Prime Minister. We are their people. Surely we have a right to be told, who they are all working for. It clearly is not us.

Eurosceptics should stop worrying about the EU. According to Van Rompuy, as a centre of power, it is irrelevant, a smokescreen, acting for a higher authority. Why would he lie?

For those of us concerned as to who is directing our lives and our futures as of now, we should not waste our time talking of Gordon Brown or of Barroso or Van Rompuy. They are all hired hands, paid to produce a vast smokescreen for the real rulers of the world.

OK then. Next step. We don't want to waste time talking to the monkeys. Where are the organ grinders?

What are their objectives? How do they see us as the people they now rule and control?



Too many commentators go into a racist phobic rant when they address the subject of who controls OWG and the NWO. Fear so often intervenes, and blocks out any common sense or rationality. But let's not be fearful. Let's just ask simple questions. Who are they? How did they acquire the power to rule the world? And what is their programme?

I mean, why don't they introduce themselves and say Hi.

Joan Veon

It is good therefore to find a knowledgable and professional commentator who has a good idea where the address of the OWG is located, and some idea of which individuals are in control of it all. We have to clutch at straws, and ask anyone who has any information at all. This of course is quite wrong. No aspiring government of people, should expect to work in anonymity.

There are so many questions.

Do these people have a conscience at all? Do they care about their families, other peoples' families, or about money or about power. I guess the old saying that 'absolute power corrupts absolutely' would be of concern. But let's not pre-judge these people, whoever they are. Maybe they are well motivated and desire only good things for the world. Maybe they are not all NAZIs, Leninists or Jews or whatever, but we would still like to know their names, and where their offices are, and where they hold meetings.

At least let's not waste any more time on their employees, people like Brown, Blair and the host of other political pygmies at the EU. Let's talk to the top.

But that's the problem. Who exactly is it that we should talk to? Right now we don't know.

But at least we do know, courtesy of the minute amounts of information we do possess that that is where we must start to look, and find the person or persons who are now controlling the world.



The charade of pygmy leadership has gone on long enough.

The EU is a vast nothingness, an enlarged Parish Council. National government is gone, a half remembered dream. Let's find the real Wizards Of Oz, where the smoke and the mirrors are operated. So that this virtual reality in which we are now expected to live, is reduced gradually into the realm of the real. Names and faces, things like that. People. Warts and all. But where do we start looking? Is there a yellow brick road?

Excuse me, but is this where I can find One World Government?

One person who seems to have some idea and is willing to explain what she knows is journalist Joan Veon. She can be found talking all over Youtube. Let's start with her, as we ramble around like animated puppets trying to find out who really rules the world. Why don't we ask Gordon Brown who he is really working for. He must know.



There was one other video I wanted to feature in this piece. In an interview after the Crewe & Nantwich byelection defeat, Brown was defending himself against hostile and critical questioning, getting quite flustered. He distinctly used the words - 'I followed my instructions', words he quickly corrected.

The interview is no longer listed on Youtube which is a pity. But I still wonder exactly who it was, who was giving the British Prime Minister his instructions just a few months ago.

Monday, December 28, 2009

UK Spends 58% Of GDP in 2009. Well Done Darling!



Introduction

How big are British Government spending and borrowing? The Government claimed in the Pre-Budget Report in November that its borrowing was GBP 178 billion, which was a forecast figure made six months previously, adjusted by GBP 3 billion. Despite falling revenues, which make this figure impossible, the Government clung to it like a drowning sailor holding onto flotsam.

The revenue figures were released a month later in December, which enabled Darling to play the fiction that he didn't know that revenues were tumbling, when he announced the PBR in November.

My figures, after reading various reputable sources, are that government borrowing is not the GBP 178 billion that Darling claimed in November, but at least GBP 232.

The size of the UK economy's GDP is GBP 1.26 trillion. Government borrowing in Britain at the end of 2009 is not the 12% of GDP claimed by Darling in November, which was whitewash, but is at least 18% of GDP.
As borrowing is rising, so is the size of the economy shrinking.

Borrowing might in reality be higher than that, depending on spending levels not yet reported for November/December. They can hardly have gone down.

DETAILS

Government revenues (income) I found in an accountant's web page (BDO) given at GBP 496 billion for 2009, down from GBP 606 billion in 2008. This Press release states that government revenues declared by the Treasury five weeks after the PBR were GBP 50 billion below projections given in the PBR five weeks earlier. See statistics here. That means that borrowing is at least GBP 50 billion higher than the figure given in the PBR.

(I was initially confused by this sentence in the undated BDO Press Release -

The dramatic deterioration of the public finances was laid bare by Treasury figures showing that the total Government tax receipts in 2008/09 were over 9 per cent below the Chancellor's forecast made only five months (sic) ago in the November 2009 Pre-Budget Report. The outturn of £496 billion for 2008/09 fell £50 billion below target - a shortfall exceeding the combined government spending on transport, housing and the environment.

They must mean five weeks ago, not five months ago. The 2008/09 dates must mean as from 2008 PBR up to 2009 PBR.)

UPDATE - 2nd January 2010

My assumption about the error made by BDO is wrong. The error is that the Press release should have said the PBR in question was November 2008, not 2009. It seems pretty obvious in retrospect! So most of my thoughts in this piece are also in error. However further reading of the Treasury reports and realising the correct nature of the BDO error have thrown up the fact that the government's income is falling by even more than the 2008/2009 financial year figures show.

I'll leave this piece as it is, as it shows how my thinking has progressed step by step, and includes the errors I have made to date. That would assist anyone seriously trying to track the figures back to sources. Otherwise my apologies for not realising earlier the nature of the BDO error, and for misinterpreting it.

END OF UPDATE.

These revenue figures need comparing to expenditure, the difference being the current year's borrowing requirement.

What is the correct expenditure figure?

That information is cloaked in a sea of barely comprehensible terms, and needs quite a little teasing out from the HM Treasury report, which gave the position at the time of the PBR.

On this HM Treasury site which claims to tell you what the expenditure figure is, and how the numbers are to be interpreted, they have not one but three separate numbers to report, and the relationship between the figures is not immediately clear.

The first is TME which stands for Total Main Expenditure. This figure is the sum of AME, which is the Aggregate of departmental Main Expenditure, and DEL which is not explained in words, for some daft reason, and which seems to be partly related to Capital Expenditure. DEL splits into two figures, Resource and Capital.

Taking the figures given for each of the two categories of expenditure, AME and DEL, and adding them together, presumably provides the total TME. That would be the first hypothesis to test, at least, to see how the figures look, when related together in this way.

The sum is as follows.

DEL

Resource - 321 billion
Capital - 48 billion
Combined - 369 billion

Add Departmental AME - 359 billion

TOTAL - 728 billion

The Grand Total for 2009/2009 UK Government Expenditure, TME (The Total Main Expenditure Figure) calculates out at GBP 728 billion (369 + 359), it appears.

The odd thing is that the TME figure in the report's summary is given otherwise, not at GBP 728 billion, but at GBP 628 billion, exactly GBP 100 billion lower.



Is that a slip of the pen, or a little bit of obfuscation? It's the biggest slip I've ever come across, if it is, the mere matter of GBP 100 billion. If you are going to put a 'mistake' into a set of accounts, you should always make it a big one, we are always told by government spinners.

If the GBP 728 billion figure is right, and it checks out to the totals given in the PBR according to BDO, Britain's government is spending no less than 58% of the country's GDP in 2009. The highest figure I had ever heard previously was that it was approaching 50%.

What is going on? Even with all 'capital' spending, viz. GBP 48 billion removed from the sum, which would be spurious, government spending is still 54.4% of GDP. Where is that information being mentioned and discussed? Nowhere.

Moving on,

The Revenues from Taxation figure (GBP 496 billion) should be deducted from the TME to give the current year's borrowing requirement.

The Revenues we know to be - 496 billion from BDO.

The borrowing requirement is therefore GBP 232 billion (728-496), which is, with the size of the UK economy at GBP 1.26 trillion, spot on 18% of GDP, which is considerably bigger than the government's claimed level in November of near 12%.

For the latest GDP figures see HERE. Quarterly GDP is given as GBP 315 billion. To get the annual figure, I multiplied this by 4.


SEE ALSO - Marketwatch from August 2009,HERE, which explains that the GBP 178 billion current year borrowing figure is a Government forecast, which was obviously too optimistic even in August, let alone by the time of the PBR in November 2009, when Darling repeated the GBP 178 billion figure.

Extract (August 2009) - As British politicians debate how to cut future spending to bring the nation's public finances into line, data released Friday showed borrowing by Britain's public sector soared in August as tax receipts plummeted in response to the economic downturn.

Net borrowing by the British public sector rose to 16.1 billion pounds ($26.6 billion) in August, up from 9.9 billion pounds in the same month last year, the Office for National Statistics said.

Economists said the rise was less than anticipated by the market but still pointed to a worse outcome than currently forecast by Britain's Labour government. The Treasury has forecast a total borrowing requirement of more than 175 billion pounds for the current financial year, exceeding 12% of gross domestic product.


It seems that the true current borrowing and spending figures are being kept well out of sight as politically inconvenient by Brown. How long can he keep the truth from spilling out? That is the question.

UPDATE - The BBC is continuing with the GBP 178 billion figure into the New Year, claiming Britain's borrowing % of GDP is similar to other countries (in capital terms it is for now, the gross total but this year's figure is the fastest deterioration of any other country in the world), and that this target will be hit! Even when most other publications have adjusted the figure higher - such as The Economist - and when November has just reported in with a GBP 20 billion deficit (2008 November GBP 15 billion deficit).

See the slavish BBC reporting HERE . The words are carefully chosen, but they are basically whitewash.

The BDO report, higher up, states that government borrowing was targeted for 2009 based on a 10% fall in revenue from GBP 606 billion in 2008 to GBP 550 billion in 2009. What the BBC and the government are not mentioning is that revenues have fallen nearer 20% to GBP 496 billion, up to the end of October. They avoid mentioning the totals, and just keep repeating the target, claiming it will be met.

The only way Brown will hit the borrowing target that's been set is if there is a massive turnaround with revenues surging (the opposite of what is happening). And yet Brown is announcing the end of the recession and convincing himself like an addicted gambler that the dice will roll his way, in time for the election.

How soon will Brown be engulfed by his deceptions, as his debts overwhelm the creditworthiness of the country? If revenues fall to GBP 450 billion, and spending is needed at GBP 750 billion plus next year, and the GDP continues to fall, the government's borrowing in 2010 could be over 25% of GDP.

You might say that at last Britain under Brown truly leads the world....in government spending and state debt. As no MSM carries any figures such as the ones I have found by a little digging around, no one in the world seems to realise what an incredible mess Britain is in.

And just one more thing, Darling knew the figures he was giving to Parliament in the PBR were fictitious. Look at his face heavy with regret. And look at Brown's face, pleased as punch to be lying to Parliament and the British people as he has been doing all along. Surely it is time that these people were voted out of power.

PART TWO

For the rest of this blog post which is a long one, I examine if there are any other reasons why Brown is driving Britain into far higher levels of debt. What are the international perspectives? Who are the lenders? What is their view on all of this?

Alternatively this is not a situation where Darling and Brown are pulling the strings, but one in which they are reacting as instructed. In this video, a US journalist explains how the process of taking the regulatory powers over government finances into international bodies is the plan. But before they can justify removing power from national governments they first need to create a financial crisis. Brown's confident smile tells us that his controllers are happy with things as they are, with Britain, once one of the world's strongest economies, being reduced by massive debt into a basket case.

Brown clearly expects to pick up a nice job as part of the new world economic/government structure.



This is Part 3 of this presentation. It would make more sense to start at the beginning, but this is into the meet of the show. It takes anyone quite a while to take in and understand what is happening in the financial regulatory world. The key fact that is missing from most our world maps is that the international financial superstructure has become so wealthy and powerful, that it now controls the governments, not only of third world countries as they did in the 1960s and 1970s, initially as a way to compete with Soviet influence, but now also their puppets include people like Blair and Gordon Brown, and even Barack Obama.

To understand the untold story of our world, and how these institutions have become so powerful will take all of us a long time to take in. I would recommend reading a few books, and watching videos such as the above. It all helps.

As for Cameron and Osborne, I don't know. Someone has got to level with people as to the situation we are really in first. Blair is a goner with his hands on piles of loot. Brown yearns for a top job in the one world government hierarchy. Maybe Cameron will try to tell this story. I hope he does. It is time that the people of Britain were told what is really going on.

Here is the first video in Joan Veon's 'When Central Banks Rule The World'. I recommend taking an hour to watch these and trying to take in as much as you can. It helps to start the process of understanding.



You might find some answers to puzzles such as why did Brown and others sell off their national gold reserves, and why he has spent billions on nothing much, to ensure Britain went from a strong financial nation, to become a heavily indebted, less competitive nation.

It explains why national regulatory barriers to excessive speculation have been dismantled, making an international regulator necessary.

It shows how military intelligence has been centralised since 2001, and Iraq, for example could be seen as an action not of the US and Britain, as much as an action of a world government, manipulating the nations to its will.

If there have been bigger and bigger question marks in your mind over the last few year's events, maybe here is a start of how to develop a framework of understanding. The world government programme is a secret programme, and so many will think you and me crazy for talking about it. But the power of the world's banks is unstoppable, and you need to understand it if you want to understand the world.

The Bank Of International Settlements is the coming Global Central Bank, to which will be attached a Global Government.

Coming back to where this post started, just take the recent PBR in which the British Government gave out figures of its debts which it knew were incorrect to the tune of at least GBP 50 billion. And yet no one has said a word about it in any news medium.

Something is going on.

It doesn't make sense.

It is time to look for other explanations.

Maybe journalist Joan Veon offers some of the picture.

RECOMMENDED READING - to understand how the World Bank got in the habit of controlling countries, read Confessions Of An Economic Hit Man, by John Perkins, published by Plume, 2004. Throughout his working life, he thought he was building an American Empire to counter the Soviets, and never realised he was acting an an agent of a new World Government, and financial organisations that were becoming increasingly independent of the USA Republic, and able to manipulate their parent powers.

The aim of Perkins' work was to get the countries being invested in to get into such massive debt they could not possibly repay it. They did this by corrupting the country's leaders, and they cooperated. The same tactics seem to be being used on the world's larger countries now to acquire their cooperation with the New World Order, if they don't come quietly that is.

The financial crisis that started with sub-prime is fast becoming a major political crisis. This is becoming a story not simply of incompetence, but of a deliberate programme of financial elimination and control of once free countries. And so far it is happening in secret with the MSM part of the game. Viewing the goings-on in Britain through an understanding of the broader world perspective makes understanding of these events easier, while they are thereby, even more distressing to observe.

People could start off by observing Gordon Brown's financial declarations a lot more closely and seeing that they are fundamentally dishonest. From there, the rest of the picture slides into place. An earthquake is taking place, unreported and by the vast majority of people, unobserved. The forces of freedom are awakening but they need to awaken a lot more quickly, if Britain is not be captured in a prison of vast and unnecessary debts.

Sunday, December 27, 2009

Gordon Is A Moron (economic version)



The lyrics in this are cleverly done. The original was hardly melodic, and this version is little improvement.

It talks of GBP 1 trillion of debt.

'the worst prime minister in history'.

You wouldn't want a nice tune for such a grim topic.

Merry Christmas, belatedly.

Hopefully by next year, he'll be gone.

At last.

That's the happiest thought I can find this year.

This next one has a better tune (cover of The Stranglers), has more of the same message, and has jokes.



They are hundreds of them on Youtube...



The real message from Brown is his New World Order speech - watched by 250,000 people . Is this where he's lost all our money?

Wednesday, December 23, 2009

UK Government PSBR Is 18% Not 12% Of GDP



Introduction

How big are British Government spending and borrowing? The Government claimed in the PBR in November that its borrowing was GBP 178 billion, which was a forecast figure made six months previously, adjusted by a mere GBP 3 billion. Despite falling revenues, and extra spending being required, the Government clung to the forecast figure like a drowning sailor holding onto flotsam.

The revenue figures were released a month later in December, which enabled Darling to play the fiction that he didn't know that revenues were tumbling, when he announced the PBR in November.

My figures, after reading various reputable sources, are that government borrowing is not GBP the 178 billion that Darling claimed in November, but at least GBP 232.

The size of the economy's GDP in 2009 is GBP 1.26 trillion. Government borrowing in Britain at the end of 2009 is not the 12% of GDP claimed by Darling in November, which was whitewash, but is at least 18% of GDP.


It might be more depending on spending levels not yet reported for November/December. They can hardly have gone down.

DETAILS

Government revenues (income) I found in an accountant's web page (BDO) given at GBP 496 billion for 2009, down from GBP 606 billion in 2008. This Press release states that government revenues declared by the Treasury five weeks after the PBR were GBP 50 billion below projections given in the PBR five weeks earlier. See statistics here. That means that borrowing is at least GBP 50 billion higher than the figure given in the PBR.

(I was however initially confused by this sentence in the undated BDO Press Release -

The dramatic deterioration of the public finances was laid bare by Treasury figures showing that the total Government tax receipts in 2008/09 were over 9 per cent below the Chancellor's forecast made only five months? ago in the November 2009 Pre-Budget Report. The outturn of £496 billion for 2008/09 fell £50 billion below target - a shortfall exceeding the combined government spending on transport, housing and the environment.

They must mean five weeks ago, not five months ago.

These revenue figures need comparing to expenditure, the difference being the current year's borrowing requirement.

What is the correct expenditure figure?

That information is cloaked in a sea of barely comprehensible terms, and needs quite a little teasing out from the HM Treasury report, which gave the position at the time of the PBR.

On this HM Treasury site which claims to tell you what the expenditure figure is, and how the numbers are to be interpreted, they have not one but three separate numbers to report, and the relationship between the figures is not immediately clear.

The first is TME which stands for Total Main Expenditure. This figure is the sum of AME, which is the Aggregate of departmental Main Expenditure, and DEL which is not explained in words, for some daft reason, and which seems to be partly related to Capital Expenditure. DEL splits into two figures, Resource and Capital.

Taking the figures given for each of the two categories of expenditure, AME and DEL, and adding them together, presumably provides the total TME. That would be the first hypothesis to test, at least, to see how the figures look, when related together in this way.

The sum is as follows.

DEL

Resource - 321 billion
Capital - 48 billion
Combined - 369 billion

Add Departmental AME - 359 billion

TOTAL - 728 billion

The Grand Total for 2009/2009 UK Government Expenditure, TME (The Total Main Expenditure Figure) calculates out at GBP 728 billion (369 + 359), it appears.

The odd thing is that the TME figure in the report's summary is given otherwise, not at GBP 728 billion, but at GBP 628 billion, exactly GBP 100 billion lower.



Is that a slip of the pen, or a little bit of obfuscation? It's the biggest slip I've ever come across, if it is, the mere matter of GBP 100 billion. If you are going to put a 'mistake' into a set of accounts, you should always make it a big one, we are always told by government spinners.

If the GBP 728 billion figure is right, and it checks out to the totals given in the PBR according to BDO, Britain's government is spending no less than 58% of the country's GDP. The highest figure I had ever heard previously was that it was approaching 50%.

What is going on? Even with all 'capital' spending, viz. GBP 48 billion removed from the sum, which would be spurious, government spending is still 54.4% of GDP. Where is that information being mentioned and discussed? Nowhere.

Moving on,

The Revenues from Taxation figure (GBP 496 billion) should be deducted from the TME to give the current year's borrowing requirement.

The Revenues we know to be - 496 billion from BDO.

The borrowing requirement is therefore GBP 232 billion (728-496), which is, with the size of the UK economy at GBP 1.26 trillion, spot on 18% of GDP, which is considerably bigger than the government's claimed level in November of near 12%.

For the latest GDP figures see HERE. Quarterly GDP is given as GBP 315 billion. To get the annual figure, I multiplied this by 4.


SEE ALSO - Marketwatch from August 2009,HERE, which explains that the GBP 178 billion current year borrowing figure is a Government forecast, which was obviously too optimistic even in August, let alone by the time of the PBR in November 2009, when Darling repeated the GBP 178 billion figure.

Extract (August 2009) - As British politicians debate how to cut future spending to bring the nation's public finances into line, data released Friday showed borrowing by Britain's public sector soared in August as tax receipts plummeted in response to the economic downturn.

Net borrowing by the British public sector rose to 16.1 billion pounds ($26.6 billion) in August, up from 9.9 billion pounds in the same month last year, the Office for National Statistics said.

Economists said the rise was less than anticipated by the market but still pointed to a worse outcome than currently forecast by Britain's Labour government. The Treasury has forecast a total borrowing requirement of more than 175 billion pounds for the current financial year, exceeding 12% of gross domestic product.


It seems that the true borrowing and spending figures are being kept well out of sight as politically inconvenient by Brown. How long can he keep the truth from spilling out? That is the question.

How soon will he be engulfed by his deceptions, as his debts overwhelm the creditworthiness of the country? If revenues fall to GBP 450 billion, and spending is needed at GBP 750 billion plus next year, and the GDP continues to fall, the government's borrowing in 2010 could be over 25% of GDP.

You might say that at last Britain under Brown truly leads the world....in government spending and state debt. As no MSM carries any figures such as the ones I have found by a little digging around, no one in the world seems to realise what an incredible mess Britain is in.

AT TOP - An earlier financial problem of Brown's - his rental cheque wwas returned to his landlord unpaid when he was a student. He said he had used the wrong cheque book.

Tuesday, December 22, 2009

Labour Election-Rigging Plans Progressing Nicely


Old Rightie has picked up two stories relevant to election-rigging.

One is that the Register from the highly suspicious Glenrothes byelection, you know, the one that mysteriously disappeared, has at last turned up.

The only trouble is that it's been wiped clean so no checks as to who voted can be carried out. Now that is just the slightest bit suspicious.

Polling suggested that Labour and the SNP were neck and neck each with 43% of the vote. But on the day Labour won with a cracking majority of 5000.

That was a little suspicious in itself, but then the register vanished.

For the first time in a British election, respectable commenters began to express doubts as the validity of the result due to possible rigging having taken place.

Now with the register turning up again, but wiped clean, that suspicion lingers on, and grows.

Postal voting in Glenrothes, incidentally, was off the scale.

Ballot Boxes

The second choice bit of election news from Old Rightie concerns the Campaign to Save Election Night, whereby traditionally all Constituencies have to count their votes immediately the polls close, providing no opportunity for ballot riggers to tamper and fix any results, and making a highly absorbing evening's entertainment to boot.

Apparently 100 Local Authorities have decided not to carry out a count immediately, as permitted for the first time, but to store the ballot boxes until Friday. Elections are on Thursdays.

Now, asks Old Rightie, would those hundred Constituencies just happen to be the marginals?

He is trying to find out.

Read Old Rightie's Post HERE.

ALSO - Labour election managers seem to have a magical ability to predict the timing and results of opinion polls HERE.

Are they perhaps involved in managing expectations prior to the actual election?

Surely they don't expect to get away with rigging the General Election?



UPDATE - There is no mistaking the Labour election narrative - victory.

Tory Politico - Gordon Brown said today that he was relishing the chance of taking part in the historic debates, saying “Bring it on,” in an interview with the Daily Mirror. Highlighting the strategic importance Brown is now putting on the debates, he predicted they would help propel Labour to a fourth straight election win.

But inside Labour ranks, there is a different feeling - that the task of fighting back to victory is simply too big.

From The Telegraph -

The Telegraph has learned that there is increasingly a mood of desperation among Labour MPs who believe Number 10 is kidding itself about any revival in the polls.

A narrowing of the gap has given Mr Brown renewed confidence but one MP said that a reality had to bite soon.

He added: “All we have done is recover some of the ground when our ratings fell off a cliff during the expenses scandal when the main beneficiaries were the small parties.”


And yet if Brown believes that Glenrothes-style tactics are capable of pulling off an election 'victory', Britain is indeed in big trouble.

With no democratic system in place capable of getting rid of him, Brown, in denial of all realities, shut off inside his one world government bunker, and dreaming messianic dreams of saving the world, will, without doubt, lead us on to financial and political disaster.

There are few words adequate to express the seriousness of the situation. All I can think of at this moment, is this -

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions.

Gordon is convinced of Gordon's rightness and his date with destiny as the world's saviour, at the very pinnacle of the bureaucratic elite. As the Labour MP says, reality has to bite sometime. The problem is that with Gordon Brown, it never does.

Just the little matter of 100 ballot boxes and a few pieces of paper, and his journey to the very roof of the world can continue on to its inevitable conclusion. It seems that there is no one on this planet who is going to be allowed to stop him.

Hat Tip - Old Rightie for the story and picture.

Cheryl Cole All Set To Join BNP



Get yourself an intelligent man Cheryl, and one who doesn’t **** *******. (Auto-moderator intervention).



Or do you fancy Gordon, maybe?

You wouldn’t be the first, but he’s very boring apparently and spends all the time saying how much he is going to spend on his next shopping trip, but then can’t find his cheque book.



Cameron’s too normal for you, I can see that. (Cheryl called him 'slimy').

But please dear, don’t confuse your hunger for attention, with any perceptiveness worthy for the world to hear about.

You can call 10 Downing Street any time you like, until about May.

By the way, have you ever met the real David Cameron, or only seen him on Labour posters? I thought not.

UPDATE -

Cheryl likes a bit of rough, when she's away from the cameras and miming songs on video. Maybe if she could actually sing, it would help. No wonder she's so insecure.

From The Times Whole story here.

EXTRACT -

A POP singer racially attacked a nightclub lavatory attendant after allowing chart success to go to her head, a court was told yesterday.
Cheryl Tweedy, 20, of the Girls Aloud group created by the television contest Popstars: The Rivals, punched and screamed racial abuse at the attendant, Kingston Crown Court heard.

She was so enraged after being asked by the attendant, Sophie Amogbokpa, to pay for sweets that she had taken in the ladies’ lavatory that she had to be physically restrained by a male manager.

Mrs Amogbokpa, 39, a part-time law student, told the jury that Miss Tweedy punched her in the left eye, knocking her glasses off, and subjected her to a stream of racial abuse.

Nicola Roberts, a fellow band member, had been drinking in the VIP area of the Dance nightclub in Guildford, Surrey, with Miss Tweedy when they walked off to visit the ladies’ lavatory. Miss Roberts selected some of the lollipops, gum and perfume left out beside the sinks and indicated to the attendant that Miss Tweedy would pay.

Mrs Amogbokpa said Miss Tweedy, who stuffed lollipops and gum into her handbag, became aggressive and refused to pay. “When I asked her for the money, she said, ‘My father owns this place, I’m going to deal with you, I’m not going to give you any money’,” the attendant told the court.

“She was screaming and talking. She said, ‘You f****ing black bitch,’ just over and over. No girl had ever behaved that violently in the toilet before. She got close to me and punched me in the left eye. I saw her coming, but I did not expect that she was going to hit me.”


Mmm. Maybe Nick Griffin would appreciate a call....

Brown Leads The World In Something.


In the last recession, 1991-1992, government revenues fell by 8%, which was not untypical of the 1-2% growth recessions of earlier times.

In 2009, however the recession has been a pumping 6% downturn, and government revenues have fallen pro rata to GBP 496 billion in 2009, from 2008 GBP 606 billion, close to 20%.

Where the doomsters might be right, is if the recession indeed does kick into a second leg as soon as the US Congress brings Quantitative Easing programmes to a halt.

If the British recession goes into a second dive of 2-3%, which is quite possible, government revenues might fall possibly another 10% to GBP 450 billion or lower.

As spending in recession at the same time is on a rising trajectory, with a GBP 200 billion gap between revenues and spending opening up this year, the thought does occur that there might be a GBP 300 billion gap to fill in 2010-2011, especially if more banks find that their debtor books have more nasty holes in them.

At some point the whole thing could simply rip apart, and there might be no cash to pay government salaries and pensions.

Just to cheer you all up for Christmas, think of this. Britain would at last lead the world at something. Our erstwhile $2 trillion economy would be borrowing 25% of itself in the coming fiscal year, about double the amount of Greece.

Of course it's a pessimistic scenario, but even the current GBP 200 billion gap (US$320 billion)tranlates at 15% of a $2 trillion GDP (GBP 1.35 trillion), which is the highest by far in the G20.

We already lead the world, let alone we might accelerate our lead yet further in the New Year.

See CBI Chief Economist's take -

Ian McCafferty, the CBI chief economic adviser, said the British economy faces a number of structural hurdles over the coming two years.

"This recovery will be relatively drawn out," he said. "Credit conditions will remain difficult as the banks slowly nurse themselves back to health, consumer spending will be shaped by the need to rebuild savings, and the public sector will soon have to tighten its belt. All three factors will act as headwinds to growth."


He doesn't mention the international situation, where European banks are believed to be nurturing $500 billion bad debts, and the US Congress has had enough of all the endless bail-outs and wants to get tough in future.

Britain would be left high and dry.

Monday's Telegraph reports that Britain's banks are no longer graded as they were, but are now regarded as on a level with Portugal, Chile and Austria. The need to sort them out could delay Britain's recovery. The effect on government finances could indeed be disastrous, as I am saying.

Merry Christmas to one and all!!!

UPDATE - The Economist is the 2009 Christmas Edition confirms Britain as the world's biggest current year debtor nation at 14.5% of GDP. That is probably an underestimate. The Conservatives' more responsible attitude to finance will be very necessary as from now. Brown and Darling are showing no signs of getting to grips with this fiscal crisis.

British Banks To Hold Back Recovery.

AGW Is Balls, Says Ball


Johnny Ball writes in The Express today -

In normal air, water is 60 times more present than CO2 but in rain storm or monsoon climates the ratio is far greater. Carbon dioxide in the atmosphere accounts for one particle in 2,500. But man-made CO2 is at most four per cent of that, or one particle in every 62,500.

Tell the warmists that!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Link to Express HERE

Hat Tip - EU Referendum

GO TO Climate-Saving Technologies Suppressed.

Monday, December 21, 2009

Climate-Saving Technologies Suppressed



The carbon industry want people to think that the front line to the earth's salvation is in their control. In a way it is, but only because they ruthlessly suppress all competition.

It is well known by science how to produce clean energy cheaply and safely and locally, but while special interests controlling $200 trillion of the current fossil fuel energy industry have the determination, these technologies are being blocked.

The above miniscule movement, The Orion Project, is attempting to get political support to take on the power of fossil fuels, and is getting nowhere. Well not much further than a few blogs anyway.

Without public support there can never even be prototypes of the new energy systems produced.

The problem is not the technology, which is simple to understand for the most part, but politics, and politics alone.

I've assembled a few videos to explain the enormous potential of clean and cheap energy, from non-fossil fuel technologies that could be made available if governments would let them become available. No need to wait for nuclear fusion. These are now all old technologies from the last 100 years, but suppressed.

OK. Let's put the politics to one side. Here's the fun part - The Gizmos!!!!!!!!!!!!!



The Tesla Turbine - cheap to make, far more efficient than all the turbines being built across the world currently.



Cheap and fast hydrogen production from water.



Car running on water. The inventor murdered by the US government.



From FOX NEWS. Another inventor of a water car, uses 4 ounces water on 100 mile trip. US Government were checking it out in 2006. But it's all gone quiet since.



Generating power from water on a worktop. Well demonstrated. Very simple. You can attach it to your car and run on hydrogen.



The non turbine wind generator, vibrating a belt which moves magnets, powers up lighting and so on, and costs little or nothing nothing to make. Too good. Had to be suppressed. Great 1960s rock theme, no words spoken.



Probably the most amazing of all. A Russian discovers The Plasmatron. Also murdered in 1992. It produces clean energy at a 5 to 1 ratio, energy output from energy input. Similar to Tesla. Again too good. Had to be suppressed.

Anyway, sod the climate. These technologies could save us all billions a year. Now come on, politicians. Let's have some of this bloody stuff, before the climate nutters bankrupt us all with carbon taxes, which would not be needed. We could all breathe clean air to boot and live five years longer.

I'll drink to that. Time for a beer.

UPDATE -



Home made electricity from a trickle of water.



Home made electricity from low wind.

Sunday, December 20, 2009

Labour Do Hung Parliament Narrative To Death


The latest twist in the roller-coaster ride in the polls which has happened in the last three months is for MORI to give the Conservatives a 17% lead in their last pre-Christmas delayed declaration.

As I have said constantly over recent weeks, the polls have followed the ‘narrative’ taking a 20% Conservative lead six months ago, down to a 6% lead in the infamous Ipsos MORI effort in November.

I have tracked the history of this change of direction from the point of view of the narrative, showing how the first person to mention the Hung Parliament was Michael Heseltine, and the second was Ken Clarke. This happened as Cameron was espousing his policy of Lisbon rebellion.

The HP narrative notably started inside the europhile wing of the Conservative Party, who were angry at Cameron’s stance.

It should be noted that today's MORI Poll showing a 17% Conservative lead does not mean the end of the Hung Parliament Narrative.

In The Guardian today, you read this -

Labour believes that, despite the PBR, it can still recover reasonably swiftly to a position where it is just 10 or so points behind the Tories in the new year, a gap narrow enough to give it hope going into an election campaign.

That tells you to expect another poll first off in the New Year from the ‘narrative-compliant’ pollsters giving a 10% lead to the Conservatives.

The game is not over yet.

(UPDATE - In fact a 9% lead was delivered by Com Res the very next day, almost as if it were an order being carried out)

They will be back at it again in January, they assure us, manufacturing the expectation of a Hung parliament.

Once the expectation is again in place, they can move from there to preparing their election-rigging strategies to bring the result about.

They will also no doubt be attempting to neutralise the effect that the new independent pollster Angus Reid Strategies is having on their plans.

It was the gap between MORI's 6% and ARS' 17% Conservative lead that did most to undercut the Hung Parliament Narrative, which has no doubt contributed to the decision to temporarily 'suspend' the HPN over the Christmas period.

They want to send everyone back to sleep, as many were becoming alerted to the discrepancies and the 'poor field work' in the polls giving the Conservatives 6%, 8% and 10% leads.

They will, meantime, no doubt try to exclude Angus Reid Strategies from pre-election polling in some way, so that they get things back as they like them, where they can create an expectation of the election result they desire, the one they intend to deliver, just like they did in 2005.

And yes, there does seem to be a whip effect being played out on Cameron to be a good boy, by Heseltine, Clarke and their friends in high places. Since Cameron's Lisbon speech, he is no longer trusted by the Europhiles. The controllers will do everything in their power to keep him at bay, and crush his efforts to hold out hopes for British Sovereignty.

Have no fear. They'll be back again with poll-rigging to the fore. New Labour and all their trickery will be as hard to kill off as Rasputin. See Guardian article containing Labour's promised New Year narrative HERE.



SIR BOB WORCESTER of Ipsos MORI.

UPDATE - Bob Worcester of Ipsos MORI explains his new poll results at a 17% Conservative lead up from 6% last time he reported as follows -

The impact of the PBR moved the economic optimism in the country from last month’s 46% believing the economy was going to improve in the next 12 months falling precipitously to 32%. At the same time, the satisfaction level of Gordon Brown fell another 10 points, to just 28% and the government also by 10 points, to 21%.

If he's right, then any more bad economic news and Labour might find they cannot manage expectations to a Hung Parliament after all. No wonder they're rushing to the finishing post, and looking at a March 25th Election date. But another small voice in the back of your mind says that at Angus Reid Strategies, the Conservative lead never left 17%, and that Bob Worcester is using the PBR as his face saver.

Another safe prediction -

If the other narrative-compliant pollsters don't bottle out of complying with Labour's polling demands in January and produce yet more Hung Parliament-compliant polling results, Labour will be pumping their economic achievements at the same time. Labour will be announcing the end of the recession at the moment they call the election. The question is, will anyone still believe them, or their wavering pollsters by then?

Maybe more of the pollsters will start pulling up the white flag as Bob Worcester has done this week. It's only a month ago, if you remember that he managed to grant Labour a substantial polling lead in London, based on the views of only 50 people, which did seem pretty barmy. Nice to see him back in the realm of sanity. Let's hope he stays around, and a few others from the narrative-obeying pack come across and join him.

Sir Bob Worcester's Bio on Wiki -

He was made an Honorary Knight Commander of The Most Excellent Order of the British Empire in 2004 in recognition of the “outstanding services rendered to political, social and economic research and for contribution to government policy and programmes”. He took British citizenship later that year, and in 2005 his knighthood was made substantive[1] (allowing him to use the title "Sir").

Clearly Sir Bob Worcester owes much to New Labour for his advancement, but then, for sure, they no doubt owe him and his ilk quite a lot for theirs! Perhaps Christmas is a good time for all narrative-compliant pollsters to be considering the best place for their future loyalties to lie. After all, Rasputins usually end up getting done in one way or another. Why be amongst the casualties?

Saturday, December 19, 2009

Climate Hero Monckton Knocked Unconscious By UN Police



This video has been watched by 2.5 million people. The speaker Lord Monckton talks to America, telling her that the freedom of the world is threatened by the new World Government being agreed to in Copenhagen this week.

Yesterday he, along with many others, was excluded from the Climate Conference despite having correct papers to enter, while the signing away of the world's freedom was taking place.

As he was told to move on by the Danish Police acting under orders from the UN Police, he was pushed to the ground and knocked unconscious. He was walking away from the Policeman at the time, after requesting that he not be manhandled.

Here is Alex Jones interviewing Lord Monckton about what happened.



Monckton also describes the incident in writing -

Inside the conference center, “world leader” after “world leader” got up and postured about the need to Save The Planet, the imperative to do a deal, the necessity to save the small island nations from drowning, etc., etc., etc.

Outside, in the real world, it was snowing, and a foretaste of the Brave New World being cooked up by “world leaders” in their fantasy-land was already evident. Some 20,000 observers from non-governmental organizations – nearly all of them true-believing Green groups funded by taxpayers – had been accredited to the conference.

However, without warning the UN had capriciously decided that all but 300 of them were to be excluded from the conference today, and all but 90 would be excluded on the final day.

Of course, this being the inept UN, no one had bothered to notify those of the NGOs that were not true-believers in the UN’s camp. So Senator Steve Fielding of Australia and I turned up with a few dozen other delegates, to be left standing in the cold for a couple of hours while the UN laboriously worked out what to do with us.

In the end, they decided to turn us away, which they did with an ill grace and in a bad-tempered manner. As soon as the decision was final, the Danish police moved in. One of them began the now familiar technique of manhandling me, in the same fashion as one of his colleagues had done the previous day.

Once again, conscious that a police helicopter with a high-resolution camera was hovering overhead, I thrust my hands into my pockets in accordance with the St. John Ambulance crowd-control training, looked my assailant in the eye and told him, quietly but firmly, to take his hands off me.

He complied, but then decided to have another go. I told him a second time, and he let go a second time. I turned to go and, after I had turned my back, he gave me a mighty shove (In the audio version Lord Monckton corrects this to 'a very hard blow') that flung me to the ground and knocked me out.


I came to some time later (not sure exactly how long), to find my head being cradled by my friends, some of whom were doing their best to keep the police thugs at bay while the volunteer ambulance-men attended to me.

I was picked up and dusted me off. I could not remember where I had left my telephone, which had been in my hand at the time when I was assaulted. I rather fuzzily asked where it was, and one of the police goons shouted, “He alleges he had a mobile phone.”

In fact, the phone was in my coat pocket, where my hand had been at the time of the assault. The ambulance crew led me away and laid me down under a blanket for 20 minutes to get warm, plying me with water and keeping me amused with some colorfully colloquial English that they had learned.

I thanked them for their kindness, left them a donation for their splendid service, and rejoined my friends. A very senior police officer then came up and asked if I was all right. Yes, I said, but no thanks to one of his officers, who had pushed me hard from behind when my back was turned and had sent me flying.

The police chief said that none of his officers would have done such a thing. I said that several witnesses had seen the incident, which I intended to report. I said I had hoped to receive an apology but had not received one, and would include that in my report. The policeman went off looking glum, and with good reason.


Monckton's Full Report On The Incident.

No one was else was pushed to the ground and knocked unconscious. It seems that the Police must have targeted him. The New World Government is already demonstrating what it will do to those who try to resist.

Monckton had called some of the delegates who support the programme 'Hitler Youth' two days before. How right he was that the freedoms that we have gotten used to after two generations of freedom in the West are now seriously threatened, with instant violence now well within the reach of the Climate NAZIs.

If you haven't heard Monckton's speech to America, warning what the Climate programme is really all about, click the start. It really is superb.

Commenting on the Copenhagen Climate Conference outcome, Monckton is quoted on www.infowars.com as follows -

Amid all the mainstream media reports of the talks in Copenhagen “limping” to a close and having failed, Lord Christopher Monckton, reporting from the summit, has stated that the only goal of the conference was to implement the framework and the funding for a world government – which he asserts has been achieved.
“That is the one thing that they are definitely going to succeed in doing here and they will announce that as a victory in itself, and they will be right because that is the one and only single aim of this entire global warming conference, to establish the mechanism, the structure, and above all the funding for a world government.” the British politician, business consultant, policy adviser exclusively told the Alex Jones show yesterday.
“They are going to take from the western countries the very large financial resources required to do that.” Monckton said, adding “They will disguise it by saying they are setting up a $100 billion fund for adaptation to climate change in third world countries, but actually, this money will almost all be gobbled up by the international bureaucracy.”
“The first thing they will do, and the one thing I think they were always going to succeed in doing at this conference is to agree to establish what will be delicately called ‘the institutional framework’. Now that is a code word for world government.”


Lord Monckton explained that although the word “government” has been dropped from the treaty, all the interlocking bureaucratic features of a world government are still present in the final draft of the treaty, which also legislates for a global tax on financial transactions that will be paid directly to the World Bank.
“These are the new entities that they are going to bring into being in order to create this world government” he said.


“Ban Ki Moon, the head of the UN is clearly expecting that part of the treaty to go through because he is saying that we are going to have to set up a structure of global governance just to handle the enormous amounts of money which we are going to be getting from the countries of the West, once this agreement goes through at Copenhagen.” Monckton added


No wonder they want him unconscious or worse. Monckton's the primary voice explaining what they are really up to.

PHOTOGRAPHS

There must be photographs of this incident. It might be gentlemanly or something not to release them, but from the propaganda value viewpoint, that is certainly a mistake. Where are the pictures?

The Gordon Brown Growth Riddle


Gordon has two different targets for Britain's future, but it is going to hard to satisfy both of them.

For the economy we need to grow by 30% in ten years to pay off our enormous debts.

To meet our carbon reduction commitments, on the other hand, in the absence of a technological miracle, we need to shrink our economy by 30% in ten years.

Has Gordon even thought that he now has two completely impossible targets, one diametrically opposed to the other?

Or is the truth that he knows he'll be gone soon with the election looming, and he can utter total bollocks and it maketh not a jot of difference?

PICTURED - Lula De Silva cannot work it out either.

UPDATE - Taxpayers Alliance 30% Reduction in Growth Figure.

Friday, December 18, 2009

Has Blair Got His Snout In The Carbon Trough?



Blair called the cunning financial 'partnership' network he created through which he doesn't pay any UK tax even though he's UK resident and UK domiciled, by the name, Windrush. He has so far received US$10 million through this avenue, from undeclared sources since he left office.

Many questions have been asked about what Blair is up to, how he's managed to avoid tax completely, and where the earnings might be coming from.

It is also asked where Blair might have found the name Windrush -

From The Guardian -

Zap Papa, an otherwise anonymous artist, said the name Windrush must be reminiscent of the asinine Ian Carmichael character Stanley Windrush in the 1959 film comedy I'm All Right Jack.

"The film had a general theme of intolerance towards trade union activity – quite apposite in regard to the pompous target of your investigation," Zap Papa said.


See The Mystery Of Tony Blair's Money Solved.

Windrush registered a domain name The Low Carbon Capital Fund, which gives some clue that Blair might be expecting to make money out of the CO2 carbon credit industry that he has assisted into existence, in some way.

The link of Blair to the Indian Company Tata, who bought Corus (formerly British Steel) and recently closed The Redcar Steelworks to win US$1 billion in carbon credits, only to open a similar plant in India, is well known. And the link from there to the global climate talks through Pachauri, a Tata director spouting bogus science, is being followed by Lord Monckton. (Click Pachauri for Telegraph article on Pachauri's involvement with the cap-and-trade worldwide carbon industry)

Pachauri tried to hide his Tata connections but a little more light has been shed on Pachauri's connections recently. If Blair is also getting pay-offs from carbon, it would be sensational news.

Apart from the desire not to pay any tax, Blair has also decided to hide the source of all his earnings. Why would he be doing that unless he had something to hide? You would imagine an ex-British Prime Minister would want everything nicely above board.



Now, just in outline, Tony, what is this Low Carbon Fund?

How do you get paid and what for?

Blair's in dock currently 'answering' tricky questions about his Iraq 'lies' in 2003. Maybe the lying account is yet far far bigger than anyone has so far realised. When Blair's hiding things, you have to admit, we have learned to remain curious.

There are other clues on wikipedia, which inform us that Blair works as a 'climate change adviser', and that he, like Pachauri, also has a nice tie-in with Yale University in a curious environmental/religious/financial link-up.

In January 2008, it was confirmed that Blair would be joining investment bank JPMorgan Chase in a "senior advisory capacity"[135] and that he would advise Zurich Financial Services on climate change. Some sources have claimed that his role at JP Morgan will pay more than $1m (£500,000) a year.[136] This additional salary will contribute to annual earnings of over £7m.[137]

Blair also gives lectures and earns up to US$250,000 for a 90-minute speech.[138][139] Yale University announced on 7 March 2008 that Blair will teach a course on issues of faith and globalisation at the Yale Schools of Management and Divinity as a Howland distinguished fellow during the 2008–09 academic year.




Can anyone unravel this slimy tale?

Management combined with Divinity for Blair?

Climate combined with Energy for Pachauri?

And both linked to Tata, as well as Yale.

How do such diverse subjects manage to be linked together? Is there a missing link somewhere to explain all this, kept out of site? Could it all be riding on Tata's Billion Dollar gains, made from Carbon Credits, as it closes down British steel-making?

The Head of Yale University, Richard Levin, who appointed both Blair and Pachauri, is not short of a bob or two either. Climate Change doesn't seem to involve sacrificing wealth for its main protagonists as it will do for virtually everyone else, and especially British workers -

From Huffingtonpost -

During his presidency, the University has invested $4 billion in the renovation and construction of its facilities, announced a billion-dollar commitment to strengthen the University’s science and engineering programs, launched numerous international initiatives, and designed innovative partnerships to advance economic development and home ownership in New Haven.

In mid-June 2007, President Levin announced the University purchase of the Bayer HealthCare complex, a property that features over 500,000 square feet of state-of-the-art research space, as well as office buildings, warehouses and other facilities. Most recently, the University Trustees approved the expansion of Yale College and the future construction of two new residential colleges.


It seems like, while British industry is closed down by the people Blair agreed could buy it during his last few months in power, the very same people are now his biggest buddies and financial co-beneficiaries, all linked up with the Climate Change lobby and Yale University.

Blair's landed in climate clover. Britain and the rest of the world meanwhile pays a heavy economic price. Blair and Brown created the largest debt bubble in history. They've handed the City of London to be closed down by the EU's Regulators, and our industry to climate-thieves. What will be left once the full account for Labour's years in power is presented? Not much by the look of it.

In his Copenhagen speech, Blair admits that the science is not conclusive, but says it doesn't need to be, as the risks are so great that even doubt is sufficient a basis on which to deindustrialise countries like Britain. Read his words HERE.

The Commons

Brown is baying for blood about The Class War, and he's chortling that Conservative tax policy must have been designed on The Playing Fields Of Eton. When will the Conservatives ask Brown about the tax loopholes being used by Blair to hide his millions?

Was Blair's personal tax strategy created on the sofas of Number 10 Downing Street?

When will Brown be taking action to close down the loophole being used by his former colleague, presumably all of which happened without his knowledge, ahem?

There are too many unanswered questions.

PICTURE AT TOP - Blair, Pachauri, Swarzeneger with interviewer Anne Thompson, and the earth locked in heavy silver climate industry chains. Most appropriate.

BLAIR AT YALE - You can find Blair on Youtube talking to Levin in a seminar on Religion and Globalisation, as in the picture, uttering endless inane platitudes. It's excruciating to watch, with Richard Levin playing the sycophant to his 'big fish', and Blair trying to act out the role, and pretend there is any substance to this whole arrangement....other than the money of course.

The Daily Telegraph wrote Blair Gets The Soft Treatment At Yale. That's the trouble with Blair. He always avoids any real questions by neutralising opposition with his plausibility and (kept out of sight) financial acumen. I guess the Americans will work it out eventually. It's so hard for most people to believe that that charming smiling person is anything other than plausible. People should count their change the first time they meet Blair, not, as he pleads, give him the benefit of the doubt. As far as he is concerned, there is no doubt, just the need to find a new bunch of suckers all the time. Yale, Congratulations. For now. He's yours!

How pitful and lost Blair looks now compared to the moment he left The Commons, below. It could all have been so different. If he had only been able to fulfil his initial promises and tell the truth, but lying was New labour's default mode from the beginning until today. His tragedy, Britain's tragedy and now the world's tragedy, is that he never was that paragon of virtue that he promised he was, when he bid for power. (See Peter Oborne's 'The Rise Of Political Lying' for the sickening details).

See him at his best, as he was the day he left The House Of Commons. His talent is undeniable. But so too are his faults. Overall a great pity. It will take many years to undo the harm he has wreaked.



ALSO - The Telegraph finds that in Blair's US IRS declarations, the lists of donors to his Foundation is missing from the records. LINK HERE.

Pachauri is a liar and a thief says EUreferendum.