NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOWPT2-2017-(1994 -Official Website -NOV-PT1 2017-NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART3-2017

NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2017

 ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY. ORG.UK.

*

 BROUGHT FORWARD FROM 11-11-2011

 

A DAY OF REMEMBRANCE

The poppy fields

The poppies in the fields are bleeding with the growing threat of war

Which will ignite a fire-ball across the world once more.

 

The poppies have seen their fields for centuries drenched in blood in countless wars

And ask that a poppy was no longer to be a remembrance of a casualty of war.

 

The poppies have decided there must be no more war

And  their poppy was to remember  one great war to end all wars.

 

The poppies cover the resting places of so many dead

And ask why wont mankind understand the futility of war instead.

 

The poppies on the Cenotaph where the spirits of the fallen gather

 If they could speak would wish an end to endless remembrance but not forgot

As the end of all war would make more sense and save a lot

The countless war dead would have died in vain unless we make war an unprofitable blot.

 

The poppies ask the people to spare them the holocaust to come

They must make their political leaders to speak of peace not war and the costly sum

Because only if a country is attacked should there be any war to come.

 

So if you  wear your poppy  or not - remember  those that died who loved to live and deserve your thoughts.

But the remembrance they deserve is to work for peace and then there will be prosperity for all

When billions are not wasted on unending wars which enrich the banksters who bleed the poor.

What we need is no more war.

 

What we need is peace not war that should be our final  message to Cameron and his corps as  he and his aides have promised to support Israel against Iran. He has given his commitment to support ISRAEL but surely as PRIME MINISTER  he owes his FIRST LOYALTY to ENGLAND.  The bulk of the cost of what could lead to WORLD WAR III we are told  will be with the USA but the dishonour of PARLIAMENT should it not prevent our participating in  the unjust WAR will be terminal to what is left of the HONOUR of a once free and respected independent nation state.

 PEACE NOT WAR

*

TRAFALGAR DAY!
200th Anniversary - October 21
st

1805 - 2005

 

NO WHERE ELSE flies the White Ensign on top of its tower but the village with the Nelson Touch - As we would EXPECT.

*

Daily Mail

Tuesday, October 18,2005

*

Roy Hattersley’s

COLUMN

 

[A weekly diary of travels through our

English Heritage]

In search of England

 

Sunday morning in Burnham Thorpe-At All Saints, the fine 14th- century parish church, the service is almost over. Each member of the congregation turns to the left and right and shakes out stretched hands in a gesture of friendship. Coffee and biscuits are ready at the back of the nave to fortify the worshippers against the cold walk home. Similar scenes are being enacted all over England.

 

But no other church flies the White Ensign from a flagpole on top of its tower. Indeed, nowhere else in England is that particular White Ensign- flown by the Royal Navy before the Act of the Union with Ireland- ever unfurled?

 

It blows in the Norfolk wind by permission of the Board of Admiralty to commemorate England’s victory at the battle of the Nile in 1798.

 

All Saints is Horatio Nelson’s church and Burnham Thorpe is his village. Apart from the sea, it is the only home he knew. He was born there - the son of the rector of ALL Saints -on September 29 1758, and it was from Burnham Thorpe that, after a not altogether successful attendance at three Norfolk schools, the frail 12-year-old went to sea as a midshipman in the Raisonnable (a captured French 64-gunner) under the command of his uncle Captain Maurice Suckling.

 

Nelson’s mother and father are buried side by side in the sanctuary of the church. The font, in which their son was baptised, still holds the water, which blesses the 21st century children in the village.

 

Last Sunday, five days before the 200th Anniversary of the Battle of Trafalgar, Burnham Thorpe was already en fete . Thirty-three houses had been decorated to represent the 33 English ships which faced the French and Spanish combined fleet on October 21,1805.

 

Appropriately enough, the boldest name sign that hangs outside the village’s front door was Agamemnon. That ship was captured on the fateful day by one of Nelson’s ‘band of brothers’. His Admiral welcomed his entry into the fray with the joyous cry ‘Here comes the damned fool Berry. Now we SHALL have a BATTLE’.

 

The Burnham Thorpe village hall -

Built as a temporary place of worship when the Admiralty restored the church for the centenary celebrations in 1905-

Commemorates the battle with signal flags strung across its vestibule. Of course, they read:

 

‘England expects that every man will do his duty’

 

Inside the hall the goods for sale strike a more prosaic note. A T-shirt is printed with representations of nelson’s medals and honours and the picture of an empty right sleeve folded across his Garter sash.

 

On the wall, a sculpture depicts the final moments on board the Victory. But the dying Admiral is surrounded by allegorical figures representing Justice, Mercy and Truth, not his loyal crew.

 

It is no means certain that nelson’s life justified those virtues presence at his final moment. But last Sunday Burnham Thorpe was in no mood to consider his personal foibles. Veronica Sabin, a member of the congregation at morning service, did admit that she felt sorry for his wife, deserted in favour of Emma, lady Hamilton. But she went on to say that he WAS the MAN who kept ENGLAND safe from invasion for 200 years.

 

Joyce major, the daughter of a sailor and once a Wren, added that he was ‘good to his men’ -a view of naval discipline not shared by all the admirals of his time. But it was neither his reputation as’ a man to love’ nor his tactical brilliance which made him England’s authentic hero. It was not even his dash and daring. He became a hero because he believed that heroism was his duty.

 

The reputation has survived 200 years. Last Sunday- a full seven days before the climax of the Burnham Thorpe celebrations - men and women from all over Britain were making a pilgrimage to the little Norfolk village.

 

George Wills of Edmonton wanted to pay tribute to ‘something England can be proud of’ and Dean Tomlin thought that ‘nelson had the right idea about the French’. Anna, a schoolgirl from Norwich could cite the names and dates of the three battles. She thought Nelson was ‘great’.

 

It would be wrong-and both resented and rejected by the Reverend Jonathan Charles, the current Rector of Burnham Thorpe- to describe ALL Saints as a shrine to Horatio Nelson. But there is a great deal about him in the church.

 

Two great White Ensigns, of the modern design, hang on the wall at the west end of the nave. They once fluttered from the stern of HMS Nelson.

 

The lectern and the reredos were made from wood taken from HMS Victory’s bulwark. A bust of the great man in his prime looks down on the tombs of his mother and father.

 

Burnham Thorpe is one of England’s most tranquil villages. Yet it produced one of England’s most turbulent sons. From church to the village hall and along all the streets of decorated houses, which make up this week’s ‘Nelson Trail’, the moral and message is clear.

 

It is men like Horatio Nelson who, by making England safe created what Shakespeare called ‘the envy of less happier lands’.

 

[Font altered-bolding &underlining used]

* * *

OCTOBER 18-2005

 

 *

 

H.F.1354

nov FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2017 - (1994 -Official Website - NOV-PT2--2017 )--  novFREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2017

NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART4-2017

MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18

Est.1994-POLICY-Elections 1997 and EU election 1999-Speech -1000's of Links- IMMIGRATION-ARCHIVE- EU FILE

AFTER 46 YEARS WITHIN THE CONTROL OF THE BEAST IN BRUSSELS AND BERLIN .

OUR HISTORIC  ENGLISH SEA HIGHWAYS GIVEN AWAY BY THE TRAITOROUS EDWARD HEATH WILL BE RETURNED IN MARCH 2019.

'Ye mariners of England/that guard our native seas/Whose flag has braved a thousand years/The battle and the breeze'.

Thomas Campbell.(1777-1844) Ye Mariners of England

*

ENGLAND'S

GREAT ESCAPE

 FROM

HITLER'S  FOURTH REICH

See: eutruth.org.uk-Why we are leaving!-if you need a reminder?

*

 

NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2017

 

 

BULLETINS FROM ACROSS THE WORLD

 

 

 DAILY MAIL

COMMENT

NOVEMBER 16-2017

Self-righteous carping of the Brexit rebels

A GROUP of 15 Tory MPs fighting to scupper key Brexit legislation whipped themselves into a lather of self righteous indignation yesterday at being described as 'mutineers'.

A combination of embittered ex-ministers and backbenchers virtually unknown outside of their constituencies, they complained in martyrish terms of being pictured and named on the front page of the Daily Telegraph for taking what they say is a stand on principle

They talk of 'blatant bullying' and bloodcurdling threats', but remain determined to frustrate the Government's Brexit vision. One -Heidi Allen-was positively combative. Apparently relishing the coming fight with her own party, she tweeted: 'Bring it on!'

So the Mail has this question: What are these MPs if not mutineers?

There are three compelling reasons why we have sympathy with the Telegraph's description.

FIRSTLY, they are directly defying the democratic will of the people (and in most cases a majority of their own constituents)

WHO VOTED LEAVE

in the referendum and now want to get out of the EU

AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE

They have all indicated they'll vote against the Government motion to enshrine the date of our EU departure in Law, and some have also signed many other motions designed to stall or dilute BREXIT.

Secondly, they're undermining our negotiations in Brussels.  Theresa May wants to establish a firm Brexit timetable to serve notice on Michel Barnier and his team that they must stop stonewalling and start talking about a future trade deal. By opposing her, the rebels are encouraging Mr Barnier to think he can prevaricate indefinitely.

Thirdly, by their vanity and obduracy they are  betraying the

NATIONAL INTEREST

by playing into Labour's hands.

Should they succeed in blocking Brexit the Government would be seriously weakened and could even fall, leading to the chilling prospect of Jeremy Corbyn as prime minister. If that happens they will never be forgiven-by their

PARTY or THEIR COUNTRY.

Senior Tories have so far declined to go on the attack, hoping that at least some of the rebels can be talked round. This may be true of a few waverers. But we fear most are so entrenched, they'll never be persuaded.

 

The Oxford English Dictionary defines a mutineer as a person who defies authority and refuses to obey orders.

DOESN'T THAT DESCRIPTION FIT THE REBELS TO A TEE?

 

NOVEMBER 16-2017

*  *  *

A REMINDER TO THOSE WHO STILL KOW-TOW TO BRUSSELS AND BERLIN

WHO HAVE FORGOTTEN

 

'...We cannot, I fear, falsify the pedigree of the fierce people, and persuade them that they are not sprung from a nation in whose veins the blood of freedom circulates.  The language in which they would hear you tell them this tale would detect the imposition; your speech would betray you

'An Englishman is the unfittest person on earth, to argue another Englishman into slavery'.

*

 EDMUND BURKE

 

Conciliation with America-speech House of Commons

March 22,1775

 

*

1+2

 

IN the words of one of our greatest parliamentarians of the 18th century- Edmund Burke-

''Fellowship in treason is a bad ground of confidence.'

 

 

 

 

H.F.1374

 
 

WHY HE IS SO SORELY MISSED IN ENGLAND AND IN DEMOCRACIES WORLD WIDE

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND

by

WINSTON CHURCHILL

DEATH OF THE LAST GIANT - A DAY TO REMEMBER!

Winston+Churchill-

'We are a part of Europe

but not of it'...-

*

ALSO WISE WORDS

FROM

A Prime Minister in 1848

Over a Hundred and Sixty Four years ago a great patriotic Prime Minister - Foreign Secretary - Lord Palmerstone (Henry John Temple) - beloved by his People defined the principle of nationality as follows:

Providence meant mankind to be divided into separate nations, and for this purpose countries have been bounded by natural barriers, and races of men have been distinguished by separate languages, habits, manners, dispositions, and characters…” (1848)

 “…We have in the first place to say that the Business of an English Government, is to pursue that course of Foreign Policy which on the whole they may think right; and not to attempt the impossible task of at all times and upon all subjects doing that which is agreeable to all Foreign Governments. A man who in private life attempts to please everyone, invariably fails; and the Government of a great country would not be more successful in such an endeavour…

 . It must at times be an advantage to a foreign Prince…in the present state of the continent to visit England and to see with his own eyes, how Liberty may be combined with Loyalty, Freedom with public order, and how the Respect which is shown by the Crown for the Rights of the Subject and for the enactment of the Law produces corresponding Feelings on the Part of the People and inspires them with similar Respect for the Rights of the Crown and for the Laws which secure the Liberties and the Property of all , from the highest to the lowest in the Land. ”

[Of course the  MONARCHS  of ENGLAND since the 19th Century have been under the INFLUENCE of the ILLUMINATI.]

 

Winston Churchill warned the populace in the

1920's

 of the true facts of the ILLUMINATI who  have virtually ruled the world  since

 

WATERLOO

*

In the 1920's Winston Churchill mentioned the Jewish Bolsheviks the details a

JEW WATCH

[As we have explained the social circles which Winston Churchill  was connected  with during his long life such as the Rothchilds and like-others were the Establishment existing at the time from the Disraeli era. It was an impossibility to ignore particularly as he wished to further his career.  Of course he was a strong and enthusiastic supporter of the BRITISH EMPIRE in its outer image and must have been aware of the true nature within.   Those that might criticize him should consider the circumstances of the time which have ameliorated somewhat over the past decades until the present day when there are at last changes afoot.]

 

 

A WARNING!

 FROM A PATRIOTIC PRIME MINISTER

BENJAMIN DISRAELI

IN

 1852

In the 19th Century, Benjamin Disraeli, [Beaconsfield] a baptised Jew,[Prime Minister of England-1868 ] proclaimed:

 

...the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes...The influence of the Jews may be traced in the last outbreak of the destructive principle in Europe. An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property...The natural equality of men and the abrogation of property are proclaimed by the secret societies who form provisional governments and men of Jewish race are found at the head of every one of them.'
 

WE MUST NOT FORGET!

William Ewart Gladstone

 a great prime minister

 symbolised by his rolled  up sleeves-

 a man with the common touch.

Words of a great Prime Minister, William Ewart Gladstone, are much to the point:

 

‘’The finance of any country is ultimately associated with the liberties of the country. It is a powerful leverage by which English liberty has been gradually acquired. If the House of Commons by any possibility loses the control of the grants of public money, depend upon it, your very liberty will be worth very little in comparison. That powerful leverage has been what is commonly known as the power of the purse – the control of the House of Commons over public expenditure’’ (1891)

*

BENJAMIN FREEDMAN -

 A JEW

UNCOVERED TO THE WORLD IN 1961 IN WASHINGTON D.C. THE

 ZIONIST CONSPIRACY.

-HE SPENT HIS LIFE WARNING THE PEOPLE OF THE GREAT DANGER TO THEIR LIVES AND LIBERTY

JEW WATCH

[As we have stated elsewhere many JEWS world-wide do NOT! agree with the  NEW WORLD ORDER - ZIONIST MESSAGE.]

JewsnotZionists

[THE FLAG ABOVE OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS THE TRUE FLAG OF THE ENGLISH PEOPLE.

THE END OF THE ENGLISH

INTRODUCTION

HOW IT ALL BEGAN 

 HOW IT ALL FITS TOGETHER

THE RESULTANT LUNACIES

HOW WE ARE CONTROLLED

 WHERE FREEDOM IS VANISHING

*

[THE MAJORITY OF YOU DID NOTHING!]

 

 

ENGLAND

OUR

ENGLAND 

ALL ABOUT

FREEEDOM AND INDIVIDUALITY

 

 

 

WHERE IS OUR REFERENDUM DAVID CAMERON ON THE UNDEMOCRATIC SOVIETISED SATANIC COLLECTIVIST EUROPEAN UNION?

 

NOVEMBER-2012

BROUGHT FORWARD FROM 2012

 

H.F.1335

 

 

How Britain is ruled by patronising

 

 

B*#*@:rds

 by QUENTIN LETTS

 

A rebellion has taken place in this country of ours, an uprising, a new Peasants’ Revolt. A real kick in the kidneys for Britain’s ruling elite.

Before the EU referendum in 2016, the electorate was told firmly what to do. A vote for Remain would be safe and strong, and woe betide the country if you were stupid enough to back Brexit. You know your duty, little ones, said the elite. Sod that, said the people.

In the greatest citadel-storming since the French Revolution, they chose to leave the obtrusive European Union.

But it was not a result that happened by accident. It was born of a weary truculence — a yeoman impatience with those who make up our smug, self-perpetuating, invisible Brahmin caste.

Before the EU referendum in 2016, the electorate was told firmly what to do. A vote for Remain would be safe and strong, and woe betide the country if you were stupid enough to back Brexit. You know your duty, little ones, said the elite. Sod that, said the people

The government machine was used remorselessly to help Remain. We were muck-spreadered with warnings of hideous consequences from Brexit. The Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, was mobilised. His friend George Osborne was Chancellor and, so far as the two of them could see, Remain was bound to win, and Clever George would become prime minister before the next general election

For decades, Britons have been bossed about by a cadre of administrators and managers and pose-striking know-alls.

The old aristocracy having faded, in came a more furtive elite, driven by the desire to own minds, not acres, determined to control opinion and dictate our attitudes.

It was done on the sly, of course. They posed as liberals, and crouched behind ‘enlightened’ attitudes while imposing their views on a populace they claimed to esteem but more truthfully disdained.

 

Politicians, civil servants and lawyers used a language few could understand, while government was farmed out to agencies and quangos and privatised supply companies.

Cheap labour was imported, suppressing workers’ wages, because that was what globalised boss-cats at the international forums said was necessary.

Could we criticise immigration? Only if we wanted to be called racists and fruitcakes. The elite’s media munchkins had placed it on the top shelf, somewhere safe where it could not be touched.

 

At the gates to the Palace of Westminster I bumped into pro-Leave Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng, a great bear of a man. ‘This is bigger than any general election result,’ he boomed

Against our will, children were exposed to sex education by schools more interested in dogma than declension. Sex crimes rocketed.

Sociologists said murderers must be released into the community. Re-offending rates rose.

Smokers were made to feel like criminals. Criminals were encouraged to sue their victims.

From every side came instruction as to what we must think: about diet, gender, sexuality, race, even the weather, with the TV forecasters telling us to put on sun cream and giving silly names to every incoming squall.

The entire System was at it, badgering us, belittling us, patting us on the head, putting us in our place.

Think this. Don’t think that. Inappropriate! Hate-crime!

From the Chief Medical Officer and her strictures about alcohol limits to railway announcements saying ‘do not become a victim of crime’, they treat us like toddlers.

Even the most docile beach donkey, by nature placid and reliable, if repeatedly kicked, will eventually refuse to co-operate. It will bare its teeth and walk in the other direction, pulling its tethers out of the sand.

So it has proved with the British voters.

Get off our backs, they said. Stop goading us. Stop being such patronising bastards.

The morning we discovered we’d break free from Europe was that unforgettable Friday, June 24, 2016.

Everywhere, celebrity luvvies hyperventilated. Actress Amanda Abbington (she was Dr Watson’s wife in Sherlock on the telly) messaged: ‘Watch the collapse begin. Dark days . . . Where can I move me and my children too (sic)? Where’s nice? Italy? Canada?’ They might have better grammar there, certainly. Keira Knightley was foul-mouthed. ‘Stop others f***ing with your future,’ she bleated in a message to yoof

I was in a pokey hotel bedroom in London’s Bloomsbury and awoke at daybreak as the television relayed the referendum results from around the country.

I’d expected the technocracy was going to win. It always did, didn’t it? The experts had said defeat for Remain was unthinkable. Treasury officials, opinion pollsters and almost the entire diplomatic corps idly presumed Remain would win.

But it hadn’t.

Our dominating elite of parliamentarians, lobbyists, bankers, artists, political theorists, clergy, academics and sterile aesthetes was about to take a massive custard pie smack in the face.

So many well-connected people had scoffed at Brexit. They had belittled anyone who suggested it could occur.

But there it was, happening before our eyes as the BBC’s presenter, David Dimbleby, announced: ‘The British people have spoken and the answer is “we’re out!”.’

The cold print of the referendum ballot papers had merely asked voters if they wanted to stay in the EU. This result was the crystallisation of something bigger.

It was the eruption of a long-building resentment at being bossed around by an opaque snootocracy, by affluent fixers and the People Who Know Best.

 

James Corden, who left Britain to present a TV show in California, transmitted from across the water: ‘I’m so sorry to the youth of Britain. I feel you’ve been let down today. x’

In my hotel room on that Independence Dawn last year, I felt a giddying rush of patriotic pride. The apple-cart had been overturned.

This was not just a public rejection of the EU. It was an act of thrilling dissent. Our arrogant elite, after years of self-enriching condescension, had been whupped.

More than a year on, I still can’t get out of my head how unrelenting the campaign was for Remain to win the popular vote.

For months before the referendum, the System did its best to engineer things in favour of the EU.

Cabinet Brexiteers were silenced. Civil servants were told to hide sensitive EU material from Eurosceptic ministers.

The government machine was used remorselessly to help Remain. We were muck-spreadered with warnings of hideous consequences from Brexit. The Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, was mobilised.

His friend George Osborne was Chancellor and, so far as the two of them could see, Remain was bound to win, and Clever George would become prime minister before the next general election.

Carney, a Canadian but bound to the status quo here by instinct and career, predicted Brexit would cause sterling to collapse, growth to stall and unemployment to rise.

From comedians to bishops (hard to say which of those two groups is funnier), fund managers to charity-sector tsars, Brexit was as pongy as a bad sardine. They did not just oppose it. They recoiled from it.

The reaction was not simply intellectual or even political. It was rooted in taste, aesth- etics, manners.

Let your future son-in-law have tombstone teeth, the clothes sense of Ken Dodd and a string of shoplifting offences to his name, but pray God Almighty he be not a Brexiteer.

We no longer have widowed duchesses who clutch their dewlaps in horror when they hear the word ‘serviette’, but Brexit had the same effect on managerial and technocratic types.

My wife, a sweet and liberal-minded soul, casually mentioned to a princeling of the Church of England that she intended to vote Leave. He gasped: ‘How could you?’ He might have been less aghast had she admitted to witchcraft.

 

From J. K. Rowling came: ‘I don’t think I’ve ever wanted magic more’

Fashionable ‘opinion leaders’ and pliable industrialists were pressed to the Remain cause to build the idea that superior people — good people — were of one accord. They crouched down beside the voters, looked them very gravely in the eye and told the boys and girls that Mummy and Daddy would be really, really sad if Remain did not win the referendum.

Opinion pollsters said Remain would win, and in the last week of the campaign the Cameroons started to strut.

Two days before the referendum, Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee, la-di-dah Leftist and one-time owner of the most perfect villa in Italy, opined that the result was in the bag. The headline over her article read: ‘On Friday I’ll get my country back. Britain will vote Remain’.

But the voters came to a different conclusion. They decided that those prominent Remain supporters were only in it for themselves, chasing either business contracts or honours.

The Leavers were the ones who reclaimed their country. On the morning after the referendum, I headed from my hotel to work in a taxi whose driver was cock-a-hoop at the Leave vote. At the gates to the Palace of Westminster I bumped into pro-Leave Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng, a great bear of a man. ‘This is bigger than any general election result,’ he boomed. He was right. General elections are elections for Parliament. The referendum was an election against Parliament, in spite of Parliament.

Abraham Lincoln once spoke of ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’. We had drifted towards ‘government of the people, by the Parliament, for the Parliament and its fleas’.

The Establishment reacted with petulant disbelief.

Tony Blair called it ‘a foolish excursion into populism’. The then Lib Dem leader Tim Farron, 46, normally a sunny fellow, was ‘angry that today we wake to a deeply divided country’. Would he have said the same if the scores had gone the other way?

Everywhere, celebrity luvvies hyperventilated.

Actress Amanda Abbington (she was Dr Watson’s wife in Sherlock on the telly) messaged: ‘Watch the collapse begin. Dark days . . . Where can I move me and my children too (sic)? Where’s nice? Italy? Canada?’ They might have better grammar there, certainly. 

Keira Knightley was foul-mouthed. ‘Stop others f***ing with your future,’ she bleated in a message to yoof. James Corden, who left Britain to present a TV show in California, transmitted from across the water: ‘I’m so sorry to the youth of Britain. I feel you’ve been let down today. x.’

From J. K. Rowling came: ‘I don’t think I’ve ever wanted magic more.’ TV presenter and sometime footballer Gary Lineker asked: ‘What have we gone and done?’

The mood at Glastonbury pop festival was funereal. Coldplay’s Chris Martin saw ‘the collapse of a country’. Damon Albarn wore a black armband.

Marianne Faithfull, famous because decades earlier she was supposed to have done something filthy with a Mars Bar and Mick Jagger, said: ‘We are back to where it used to be, the Right-wing racist Little England. Those dreadful people, they’ve always been there.’

TV presenter and sometime footballer Gary Lineker asked: ‘What have we gone and done?’ The mood at Glastonbury pop festival was funereal. Coldplay’s Chris Martin saw ‘the collapse of a country’

Emma Thompson, mother, director, writer, actress, intellectual, citizen, was, naturally, appalled by Brexit. She said she felt more European than English and she regarded Ukip’s Nigel Farage as a ‘white nationalist’.

Where that left the many non-white Leave voters and non-white Ukip supporters, it was hard to say.

The Remain camp united atheists and the modern Church of England, with former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and arch-atheist Richard Dawkins deploring the result. Science bod Dawkins, who has made a study of natural selection, raged that the voters had been ‘ill-informed’ and ‘ignorant’. Personally, I blame evolution.

Another secularist, A. C. Grayling, wrote to MPs demanding that they reject the will of the people who, said Grayling, had voted on the basis of ‘demagoguery and sentiment’.

Too many voters were merely ‘System One’ thinkers, he argued — i.e. they acted chiefly on impulse and could be ‘captured by slogans’, unlike ‘System Two’ thinkers who made more considered, logical judgments.

Shades here, of the Greek philosopher Plato, who regarded democracy as rule by the rabble and proposed the creation of elite ‘Guardians’ or ‘Philosopher Kings’ who could be selected in youth and trained to rule.

Plato’s thinking is most clearly seen today in the French grandes écoles that train the cadre of Brussels Eurocrats who propose and draft EU treaties.

Tony Blair made a speech calling on people to ‘rise up against’ ... er, themselves, basically.

Time and again it was argued by anti-Brexiteers that Leave voters did not understand the vastness of their decision.

The elite was indignant and fearful — and that only made many Leave voters all the more certain they had made the right decision.

In their appalling condescension, what all these furious anti-Brexiteers ignored were people such as a Derbyshire factory worker called Stuart Carrington and the other 17,410,741 men and women who had voted to Leave.

Stuart had also been on my mind that anxious night as we waited for the referendum result. He was my brother-in-law. (Well, as good as. He and my wife’s sister Nicky were not formally married but they had been together years.)

Fifty-four-year-old Stuart’s health had become a worry in recent months. Out of character, he took time off work. Stuart’s machine, capable of the most intricate measurements, checked parts for aircraft jet engines.

He was proud of his work, just as he was proud of Nicky, her two sons and their flat. But he knew all that was coming to an end.

The doctors initially told him he had a low-threat cancer but they changed their prognosis. That week we were told he was dying.

Yet on referendum day morning, moving with difficulty, he had managed to get himself to his local polling station in the Spital district of Chesterfield, to vote for the last time.

A gaunt figure, he leaned heavily on the stubby pencil while casting his vote. Job done, he carefully dropped his ballot into the box, thanked the officials, winced a little and made slowly for the door.

A keen supporter of Leave — and normally a Labour man, his dad having been a miner — Stuart had been determined to vote and he had bloody well managed it.

I kept thinking of stoical, taciturn Stuart.

Those northern men don’t always say much but by God they make their mark. Stuart was not a showy person. He did not consider himself important, not in the way we normally use that term.

Not back then. Maybe things are a little different now. Maybe, with Brexit, the balance of power has shifted a little.

Maybe, but I wouldn’t bank on it.

As I will show in the rest of this series based on my new book, the patronising bastards are everywhere, lording it over the plebs, putting us in our place, waving their entitlement in our face, telling us what to think and what to do.

And not just over Brexit but on every issue under the sun.

And the biggest ‘bastard’ of them all, at the very top of my list of patricians treating the rest of us with contempt? I’ll reveal his identity on Monday.

Adapted from Patronising Bastards: How The Elites Betrayed Britain, by Quentin Letts, published by Constable on October 12 at £16.99. © Quentin Letts 2017. To order a copy for £13.59 (offer valid to October 14, 2017) visit www.mailshop.co.uk/books or call 0844 571 0640. P&P is free on orders over £15.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4957180/Britain-s-ruled-patronising-b-rds-says-QUENTIN-LETTS.html#ixzz4uqBaZlGZ
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on

 

6/10/17

 

 

H.F.1338 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT A SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU.

LITTLEJOHN

 

Richard Littlejohn for the Daily Mail |

 

 

We can't let Brexit

 get lost intransition

 

 

 

We can't let Brexit get lost in transition: RICHARD LITTLEJOHN says leaving the EU has now become all about the politicians

 

Stephen Crabb? Remember him? No, he wasn’t that famous frogman who went missing, presumed dead, while spying on a Russian warship in Portsmouth harbour in 1956.

That was Buster Crabb. Nor was he the copper-turned-chef played by the late Richard Griffiths in the BBC show Pie In The Sky. That was Henry Crabbe, with an ‘e’.

Anybody? I’m sorry, we’re out of time. Stephen Crabb was, in fact, the Conservative Party’s great white hope as recently as last year.

Stephen Crabb was once the Tory Party's great white hope after the resignation of David Cameron last year

Following Call Me Dave’s resignation, Crabb put himself forward as leader and, by extension, Prime Minister. For about five minutes, after the Brexit referendum, he was the future.

The Boys In The Bubble got terribly excited. Young-ish, born in Scotland, brought up by a single mum on benefits in a council house in Pembrokeshire, MP for a Welsh constituency, fashionable beard. What’s not to like?

Crabb was the polar opposite of the privileged, metrosexual, public-school Cameroons — just the chap to drag the Tories screaming and kicking into the 21st century. OK, so Crabb was a Remainer and the country had just voted conclusively to Leave the EU. But you can’t have everything. It was even claimed absurdly that because he’d been on the losing side he would be a perfect ‘unity’ candidate.

He actually managed to attract the support of 34 MPs — that’s more than former chairman Grant Shapps could muster for his abortive coup against Theresa May last week.

Sadly, it wasn’t enough to make the cut. After the first round, Crabb withdrew from the race.

Just as well, as it turned out. A few days later it was revealed he had sent a series of sexually explicit texts to a young woman not his wife — which rather flew in the face of his carefully-cultivated image as a devout Christian believer in family values.

 

Following David Cameron's resignation, Crabb put himself forward as leader and, by extension, Prime Minister, only to be pipped by Theresa May

Crabb resigned as Work and Pensions Secretary — a job very few people outside Westminster knew he had — and that was the last anyone heard of him.

Oh dear, how sad, never mind. Everybody back on the battle bus.

I’m only disinterring his body to illustrate the ephemeral nature of politics and the warped priorities of the self-obsessed political class.

In the wake of the biggest popular vote for anything in history, the story quickly ceased to be about Brexit and became all about the politicians themselves.

The people had spoken, but the political class seized possession of the result. Even though most of them had been on the losing side, they decided the will of the 17.4 million who voted Leave was at best a secondary consideration.

Fifteen months on, it’s still all about them. Sack Boris. Sack Spreadsheet Phil. How long can Mother Theresa cling on? Who is going to take over? Is Amber Rudd positioning herself for a challenge? Will it be Ruth Davidson, the kick-boxing lesbian?

Who bloody cares? Enough of the political psychodrama.

Don’t they realise that the 17.4 million weren’t just voting against the EU, they were passing a vote of no confidence in the whole rotten lot of them?

The only thing that matters now is getting Britain the hell out of the EU as quickly as possible. While the Tory Party is playing silly buggers, the Eurocrats and the embittered Remoaner saboteurs are making hay.

Those determined to derail Brexit can smell weakness.

Even before Mother Theresa had formally issued her feeble ‘the ball is in your court’ warning to the EU yesterday, Brussels had lobbed it back over the net. Pick the bones out of that, pet.

Why wouldn’t they? Members of the Cabinet appear more worried about their own futures than the future of the country. Project Fear is still in full swing.

Over the weekend, professional Establishment stooge Howard Davies — formerly of the Europhile CBI and the man who brought you Gordon Brown’s disastrous banking reforms — was wheeled out everywhere, warning that tens of thousands of jobs in the City were about to migrate to Europe.

No, they’re not.

 

Why does anyone pay attention to Nick Clegg, who is pushing the idea that Brexit can still be stopped?

What you have to remember is that Davies is part of the same lying crowd who warned that if we voted Leave, there’d be an emergency Budget the next day, millions of jobs would be lost and World War III would break out.

Then up popped Nick Clegg, all channels, all day, pushing a book on how Brexit can still be stopped. Why does anyone give him houseroom?

After losing the referendum, he fought the last election on an anti-Brexit ticket and lost his seat. How many more goes does he get?

If you take any notice of most of the self-interested merchants of doom, we are at the mercy of the EU and must be grateful for whatever scraps they throw us.

Not that Brussels is in the mood to give us anything. We’ve been walking up a one-way street so far. We offer concessions, which they swallow and then refuse to budge an inch. Pathetic.

Sorry to sound so negative, but just because you’re paranoid and all that. The Great Brexit Betrayal began the moment the result of the referendum was announced. The grave danger now is that it all gets Lost In Transition.

It doesn’t have to be like this. Faced with EU intransigence, the only sensible option, as I’ve maintained all along, is Just Walk Away, Mrs May. They’ve got more to lose than we have. But that’s not going to happen.

It’ll all come down to Angela Merkel, we’re told. Why? She’s just had an even worse general election than Mother Theresa.

Why the hell should a woman who could only poll 33 per cent in Germany dictate Brexit terms to a woman who won 42 per cent of the vote in Britain?

Yet all the parochial Boys In The Bubble are bothered about is who Theresa should sack. For what it’s worth, I’d have shot Spreadsheet Phil back in the spring after his disastrous, hubristic Budget — and said so at the time.

They’d rather she sacked Box Office Boris, the one man who has consistently put forward a positive vision of Britain’s future outside the EU and about the only proven match winner the Tories currently possess. Dumping Boris would be like Portugal dropping Cristiano Ronaldo because he’s not a ‘team player’.

 

'It’ll all come down to Angela Merkel, we’re told. Why? She’s just had an even worse general election than Mother Theresa,' write Littlejohn

Boris should have got the job when Cameron fell on his sword, but the petty jealousy and resentment of so-called colleagues stopped him in his tracks. He might have screwed up spectacularly eventually, but he had earned the right to give it his best shot.

Ah, but he’s driven by personal ambition, his critics say. And the others aren’t? Grow up. They are all driven by ambition. They’re politicians.

What was the unnecessary and calamitous ‘Vote Theresa May’ vanity project general election all about otherwise?

Why has the appalling, sour-faced Look Back In Amber just hired an expensive pollster, if not out of ‘personal ambition’?

Are you seriously going to tell me that life under Boris would have been any worse than we’ve had to endure over the past 15 months?

It wasn’t Boris who dillied and dallied for months over invoking Article 50, or who called an unwanted election, blew a 23-point opinion poll lead, lost the Tories’ parliamentary majority, and condemned us to the prospect of the Marxist menace Corbyn next time round.

If it had gone pear-shaped, at least — like Arnold Bennett’s Card — he’d have cheered us all up, not tried to scare us to death or filled us with gloom every five minutes.

If not Boris next, then who? Ruth Davidson, young-ish, Scottish, etc, is the bookies’ favourite. The name on everyone’s lips, we’re told.

Well, I was in Glasgow a couple of weeks ago — Old Firm game, Horseshoe Bar, usual haunts — and unless I’ve gone completely mutton, no one, but no one, was talking about her.

At best she’s small-time, the Tories’ version of Wee Burney. She’s not even a Westminster MP — and, anyway, is a fervent Remainer who would keep us locked in to the Single Market, free movement and the European Court of Justice.

I wonder what Stephen Crabb’s up to these days.

 

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4964676/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-Brexit-politicians.html#ixzz4v7E7OeQm
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*  *  *

[* PARASITES NOT PATRIOTS!]

[MAKE NO MISTAKE! IT IS GERMANY OUR ENEMY OF TWO WORLD WARS  WHICH IS GLOATING AT THE PALTRY-PUSILLANIMOUS AND NUGATORYATTEMPTS OF OUR GOVERNMENT TO EXIT HITLER'S PLANNED EUROPEAN UNION.  AS WE HAVE PREVIOUSLY STATED ONLY A FIRM HAND AND A FIRM EXIT DATE IN MONTHS NOT YEARS WILL SEE OUR COUNTRY FREE FROM EU CONTROL .ANY FURTHER DELAY IS A DERELICTION OF THE DUTY OF THE GOVERNMENT TO HONOUR THE PEOPLE'S VOICE ON JUNE 23,2016 FOR THE RETURN OF THEIR FREE COUNTRY WHICH WAS LOST ON JANUARY 1, 1972 BY

FRAUD

AND

TREASON

OF THE GOVERNMENT AND MONARCHY.

WE HAVE SEEN ON OUR SCREENS THE OPPRESSED PEOPLE OF THE PROVINCE OF CATALONIA ON THE STREETS FIGHTING FOR THEIR FREEDOM AND FREE COUNTRY WHEREAS, IN SCOTLAND, THEIR LEADERSHIP WISHES TO REMAIN IN THE EU YET PARADOXICALLY WISHES TO BE AN INDEPENDENT NATION STATE. HOW ABSURD AND DANGEROUS ARE MANY OF OUR UNPATRIOTIC POLITICIANS IN OUR ISLAND HOME.

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

OCTOBER 10,2017

 

H.F.1340-BREXIT IS BEING BLOCKED BY LYING POLITICIANS AND TRAITORS.

THE TRUTH that BRUSSELS cannot BEAR:

PEOPLE CRAVE NATIONAL IDENTITY.

What happened in Catalonia on Sunday was shaming and shocking in a modern European state. Spanish police bludgeoned and assaulted defenceless civilians who were simply trying to exercise their democratic right.

First and foremost, this is a terrible crisis for the wrong-headed, bully-boy government in Madrid. After the unedifying spectacle of police attacking blameless voters, the chances must surely have increased of Catalonia – Spain’s most prosperous region with some 7.5million inhabitants – seceding.

But it is also an enormous crisis for the European Union, which in recent weeks has said almost nothing as the Spanish authorities arrested officials arranging an independence referendum on behalf of the devolved Catalan government.

 

 

 

One reason he did not do so in the case of Spain is that it is one of the most obedient pro-EU countries in Europe, which seldom defies the will of Brussels, or causes trouble for Juncker and his ilk.

But there is an even deeper reason for the Commission’s silence. The events in Catalonia challenge at a deep level its project for ever closer union, about which both Juncker and President Emmanuel Macron of France have ventilated in recent weeks.

For how can there be an amicable union between the EU’s nation states if some of those nations are themselves deeply divided and fractious, as is plainly the case with Catalonia and Spain?

Here is a region of largely Catalan-speaking people who regard themselves as culturally distinct. A sizeable proportion of them yearn to break free from Spain, even though Catalonia has been part of the country for hundreds of years.

Sunday’s vote illuminates a truth which Brussels cannot bear. There are many people in Europe for whom the atavistic call of identity counts far more than any exhortation about forging a European superstate

That, after all, was one of the main messages of Brexit – that the majority of voters in our own ancient nation resent the undemocratic control of Brussels, and have no wish to be sucked into a united Europe.

For Brussels, the example of Britain was bad enough, and it has set about trying to punish us for having had the effrontery to want to leave. In a sense, the demonstration of Catalan nationalism is even more alarming to the federalists because this show of independence is happening inside one of the EU’s nation states.

How is it possible, they wonder, for the pan-European project to proceed if some EU countries are in danger of fracturing? The terror in Brussels is that if Catalonia were allowed to break away, regions in other member states could follow suit. Instead of coalescing into an amorphous whole, some EU nations might fall apart.

Belgium, whose capital, Brussels, is the seat of EU expansionism, is divided. The Flemish-speaking region of Flanders, which constitutes about 60 per cent of the country’s population, is at daggers drawn with the French-speaking minority.

Many people in northern Italy long to be rid of the impoverished south, which is relatively unproductive and, in the view of northerners, consumes more than its fair share of government spending. The Right-wing Northern League has campaigned with some success for independence for the north, and imagines a separate country called Padania.

France faces an independence movement in the island of Corsica. Meanwhile the cohesion of Spain is threatened not just by free-spirited Catalans but also by militant Basques, part of whose territory lies in France.

Romania and Slovakia both have unhappy Hungarian minorities. Even in Poland’s region of Silesia, much of which used to be ruled by Germany until 1945, there are stirrings of an independence movement.

All over Europe apparently unified countries are harried by breakaway groups which have a strong sense of separate identity. If Catalonia were allowed to go it alone, who knows what might come next?


 

The problem for Brussels is that it is used to dealing with individual nation states but is powerless to intervene in unruly regions. That is why the Commission has remained so quiet in the case of Catalonia apart from expressing a few words of solidarity with Spain.

By the way, the British response has been regrettably supine. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson stressed his support for the Spanish government in a tweet. As the leading Brexiteer he should surely have been more critical of Madrid’s use of violence.

The Spanish government, it must be said, has behaved rashly and brutishly. Arguably some Catalan separatist political parties have been unwise in deliberately engineering a confrontation.

But given that the Catalan government had made numerous requests to hold a referendum on independence – after Spain’s constitutional court had controversially declared in 2010 that Catalonia was not a nation – what was it to do having been rebuffed time and time again? If it had possessed a modicum of good sense, the Spanish government would have allowed the referendum to go ahead. Had the vote been in favour of independence, it could have then questioned its legal status.

But to arrest Catalan officials, to close a large number of polling stations, and then to clobber innocent voters were acts of unbelievable stupidity as well as nastiness.

It passes understanding how the prime minister of Spain, Mariano Rajoy, can say that democracy has prevailed. The opposite is true.

Imagine if two or three years hence the Scottish National Party’s Nicola Sturgeon were to hold a referendum without the approval of Westminster – by no means an unthinkable eventuality.

In fact, her case would be much weaker than that of the Catalan government since there has already been one legal referendum in Scotland in 2014, which was said by the SNP leader Alex Salmond at the time to be the last for a generation.

Even so, it is inconceivable that a new unofficial referendum in Scotland would be met by the authorities in Westminster with police wielding batons and firing rubber bullets. Such a wild over-reaction would inevitably give a boost to Scottish nationalism – as, I have no doubt, the cause of Catalan nationalism will have benefited from Sunday’s onslaught.

The truth is that the Spanish state has a very restricted conception of democracy. We should know that already from its desire to shoehorn Gibraltar into Spain despite 99 per cent of its citizens having voted in a 2002 referendum to remain British.

God alone knows what will happen now in Catalonia. Unless the Spanish government agrees to an official referendum – an unlikely prospect – there will probably be deadlock. I am afraid there is also the possibility of more violence on both sides.

Justifying and supporting the Madrid government is the European Commission in all its absurdity, dreaming dreams of a union which the people of Europe do not want. It will do its utmost to ensure that Catalonia doesn’t interfere with its grandiose scheme.

Will Remainers look at Catalonia and reflect that we have a quieter and more civilised way of dealing with our differences in this country? I don’t know. What I do know is that every day I am ever more relieved that we are leaving this misguided club.


Full article

 


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4942684/STEPHEN-GLOVER-truth-national-identity.html#ixzz4uYWX4q7V

Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on

 

92

View
comments

 

H.F.1332 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU

 

 BROUGHT-FORWARD FROM NOVEMBER-2005

Britain Can Leave EU Unilaterally And Cease Payment Says Queen’s Counsel.

 

*

 

A further article from the ONLY sole INDEPENDENT world-wide respected International Currency Review under the heading:

 

*

 

*

CAN BRITAIN WITHHOLD ITS EC CONTRIBUTIONS?

 

PERTINENT LEGAL ADVICE BY LEOLIN PRICE, QUEEN’S COUNSEL

 

The following Legal Opinion was provided by the distinguished veteran constitutional lawyer, Leolin Price QC, in response to a request to consider the following questions:

1. )  Can ministers of the Crown be held culpable for the misuse of UK taxpayers’ money (i.e., of UK Government funds) by the European Commission and/or European Union; and

2. ) Can Britain withhold its contributions to the EC budget on the ground that UK taxpayers’ funds are being misused (embezzled, defrauded, misappropriated, misallocated, misrepresented, etc)? But in reality, these questions are themselves superfluous since, as exposed in this issue [of International Currency Review-Vol 30,4 dated October 10-2005, cstory@worldreports.org

 

  Britain’s EU membership was procured fraudulently, so that under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), Britain has every right to leave the EU unilaterally and to cease payment.

 

1.    I preface this Opinion by acknowledging that I am not aware of any precedent for the sort of proceedings in court against Ministers of the Crown, whether civil or criminal, which I am asked to consider.

2.                  But there are two relevant principles of English law to be borne firmly in mind: first, that the King (or Queen) can do no wrong [We must make it clear at the outset that this does not include King Tony-whatever he may think]; secondly, that every subject of the Queen is subject to the RULE OF LAW and equal before the law.  There is no special privilege or status for Ministers or other officers of the Crown.

 

They are vulnerable and ought to be answerable in our courts if something which they have done is not properly authorised by law, infringes the rights of individuals and causes damage.

3.There is also learning about when an officer of the Crown can plead, as a defence to a claim by someone who has suffered from some act of that officer, that what was done was an ‘Act of State’.  A British subject cannot sue the Queen (because the ‘Queen can do no wrong’); and if an act, of which a British subject complains of, is in civil law, a tort, the officer cannot assert that the act complained of was an act, which had been authorised by the Crown (in reality the Government).

 

The Act of State is not available to the officer in that situation.  He must, if he can, show that what was done was a lawful exercise of some power lawfully conferred by

Act of Parliament

Or

Otherwise:

 

See, for example, Johnson v Peglar [1921] 2AC 262.

 

4.)             But a somewhat different line of modern authority R v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex p Smedley [1985] AC657 recognises that a person – in ex p Smedley, a British taxpayer and elector – may have a ‘sufficient interest’ to bring judicial review proceedings against Government authorities and Ministers.

 

·    Can Ministers of the Crown be held culpable for the misuse of taxpayers’ money (i.e. of UK Government funds) by the European union?

5.)             This is the first – and primary – question on which I am asked to advise [Leolin Price, Queen’s Counsel]

6.)             My answer is that our Courts will not recognise that any direct responsibility is imposed by Government or the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the subsequent application, by the Commission of the European Communities Act or the EU, of our taxpayers’ money which is paid over in accordance with the established legal procedures for making our contributions to the European Union.

7.)             But the history and circumstances of fraud, at the centre of the European Union and in ‘Member States’, and the conspicuous failure of the Commission or the European Union to establish any proper (and obviously necessary) accountancy controls over what happens to the money which is provided by ‘Member States’, has produced a situation in which the British elector and taxpayer may reasonably consider that it is a failure of duty for the Government, Chancellor of the Chequer and treasury to go on handing over our money to what he may reasonably consider is an organisation which is incapable of doing and unwilling to do, anything effective about the corrupt and fraudulent diversion of EU funds.  The history of incapacity and unwillingness includes the following:

(1)    The resignation of the whole Commission upon its acknowledgement of collective responsibility for corruption and fraud.

(2)    In spite of that admission of collective responsibility, the continuation in office of all but one of the resigned Commissioners.

(3)    A continuing failure to establish a minimum of accounting controls over the Commission’s expenditure of money at the centre or within ‘Member States’

(4)    Failure by the Commission, in response to acknowledged and massive misuse of EU money, to establish any regime with a minimum of efficiency and designed in accordance with modern accountancy standards to monitor the expenditure of EU money and to minimise its misuse.

(5)    The apparent inability of the Commission to prevent, or reasonably to combat and control, the corrupt and fraudulent misuse of EU money, including contributions from the United Kingdom.

 

8.           Faced with that history, a UK elector and taxpayer could reasonably expect his Government to suspend, wholly or partly, the further contribution of money from the United Kingdom to the European Union in the continuing absence of proper EU accountancy and controls to combat and contain fraud and corruption and other misuse of EU money; and could reasonably expect English Courts to support his claim for such suspension.

9.           In the circumstances, and before the next instalment of the UK contribution to the EU is to be paid, a UK taxpayer could apply for permission to bring judicial review proceedings challenging the making of the payment on the ground that no responsible Minister of Department of OUR Government could regard it as appropriate to pay over money without any reasonable expectation or even hope that the recipient EU institutions have made any reasonable arrangements to avoid its being, with other EU money, misused.  Experience, especially experience since the collective resignation of the Commission [in 1999], indicates that the money so contributed will be at serious risk of not being used for the purposes for which our Treaty obligations and our law require it to be contributed [sic].

10.  Will such judicial review proceed -ings be successful? The practical and realistic answer is that the [English] Courts will be reluctant to permit the review; but there is a presentable argument, and although there is no previous reported case which provides a precise precedent, it represents a logical development of what has been recognised in reported cases; and the continuing scandal about misuse of EU money provides ground for seriously contending that judicial review ought to be, and is, available to stop exposing UK money to the obvious risk of EU failure to avoid misuse.

11.      The withholding of Treaty-required contributions, which are at serious risk of not being properly used for Treaty purposes, is not-or arguably, is not- a breach of Treaty obligations. [Editor; However as is shown in this issue – of International Currency Review Vol 30,4 the treaty obligations themselves are not applicable,

since the

British Accession Treaty, and collective treaties, were signed for corrupt reward by agents of a Foreign Power.]

12.  The argument will be that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as a Crown servant, is a guardian of taxpayers’ money and it is a breach of the duties involved in that guardianship to pay over money which, in the hands of the recipient Commission and the EU, will be at such serious risk of misuse.  The First defence will be that the payment is required by our Treaty obligations and by Acts of Parliament; but the answer to that is that the Treaty obligations and Parliament provide authority for payment to support Treaty purposes and NOT to expose the money to established and substantial risk of misuse.

13.   An alternative form of proceedings might be criminal proceedings against the Chancellor for misuse of public money under his control.  The argument for this is that the payment is a serious breach of public duty:  it condones and encourages and facilitates the misuse, and the misuse is foreseeable.  Those instructing me may consider it worthwhile attempting such a criminal case; and it may be that the launching of such a criminal case will achieve judicial discussion of the public duty and its breach.  It is, nevertheless, my opinion that such criminal proceedings will not be successful.

14.      , The better choice of proceedings is judicial review.

 

19th October 2004.

Leolin Price CBE QC,

10 Old Square,

Lincoln’s Inn,

London.

  [Font altered-bolding & underling used-comments in brackets]

 

*         *          *

NOV/05

 

 

 LIFE AND TIMES

OF

Christopher Story

 PATRIOT AND TRUTHSEEKER

 

 

  [BROUGHT FORWARD FROM NOVEMBER 2005.]

 

H.F.1295-FREEDOM IS OUR RIGHT!

by Benjamin Fulford

Another Letter to the Editor About the Jews

Hello, Benjamin,

It is funny reading how the JEWS do not like being criticized for being JEWS.

No, it’s not the Khazarians, it’s the F-ing JEWS that are destroying the world.

I don’t buy into the “good Jews” and “bad Jews” argument.  Those that do not wish to go along with the JEWISH SH#T SCUM in the world should act accordingly and stop calling themselves JEWISH.

Of course you will not have the guts to print this because you are part of the system.

JEWS are a cancer upon this world.  Any group that has been shunned from every country on Earth for over 2,000 years should by now realise that they are doing something wrong.

We need to call it like it is:  IT IS THE JEWS THAT ARE HELL-BENT ON DESTROYING THE WORLD.  HELL-BENT IS A VERY GOOD PHRASE TO USE BECAUSE IT IS SATAN WHO IS THEIR GOD AND IS WHO THEY SERVE. That is the truth.  The JEWS do not want the truth to be known.

What are you going to do, Benjamin?  Are you going to tell the truth, or are you going to continue to hide behind this Khazarian lie?

Even if you do not print this, I would like you to reply.  What I have said is the truth!  Are you going to run and hide, or are you going to tell the truth?

Regards

 

Hello,

First of all, I do not consider myself to be Jewish.  I am a human being from the planet earth—that is all.  I simply point out that according to their definition, I am one of them.

I think the Jews are like the matador’s red cape used in bullfights.  They distract us from the real enemy who is, as you point out, the Satanists.  A lot of Satanists pretend to be Jews, but most Jews are not Satanists.

I have and continue to risk my life to fight against the Satanists, but at the same time, so as not to become like them, I refuse to attack innocent people, whatever ethnic group they identify with.

However, the Jews do need to join the fight against the Satanists.  They also need to renounce many of the horrific things written in the Talmud such as this:  “Even the best of the ‘goyim’ should all be killed.”  (Soferim 15)

Benjamin Fulford

Emergency Alert

Murderer and drug dealer Richard Armitage and criminal Michael Green (berg) will be at the Teikoku Hotel in Tokyo, Japan between 8:30 and 13:15 on Friday, October 27th, 2017.
http://www.nikkei-events.jp/csis/

Richard Armitage has been responsible for the murder and torture of Japanese prime ministers, according to my sources.  He has also been named by CIA and other sources as a drug dealer and a traitor who contributed greatly to the U.S. loss in the Vietnam War.  He will be wearing a bulletproof vest at the event because he has created many enemies with his crimes.

Michael Green told Japanese gangsters that I was a woman-beating amphetamine addict and paid them to kill me, according to these gangsters.  He employs Japanese gangsters to terrorize the Japanese political and financial establishment.

These men engineered the theft of the Japanese election that took place on October 22, 2017, and now their puppets like Shinzo Abe are calling for war with North Korea according to the agenda of their Zionist masters.

Message to Admiral Harry Harris:  If you do not order military police to arrest these traitors and criminals, you yourself will ultimately face court martial and imprisonment for neglect of duty.

These men must be arrested, and if they resist arrest, all necessary force must be used.  Arresting these men could be the game-changer that finally liberates humanity from Khazarian mob terror.

We will offer a bounty of 1 ton of gold deliverable in Hong Kong for the arrest of these criminals.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

緊急報告:
リチャード・アーミタジとミカエル・グリーンは2017年10月27日の8時30分から13時15分の間に帝国ホテルで登場する予定です。
多くの情報源によるとアーミタジは殺人犯や麻薬犯である。またアーミタジは多くの日本の総理大臣の殺戮に加担したと情報源らが言う。彼の逮捕は急務である。
ミカエル・グリーンは日本の多くの暴力団と関係を持っている。彼が日本のとても危険な連中に僕は女に暴力を振るう覚せい剤中毒者だと言う嘘を付いて僕の殺人を依頼した。彼の逮捕も急務である。
彼らが10月22日の総選挙泥簿をして、今家来安部政権に北朝鮮との戦争を始めさせようとしている。この二人を束縛すれば日本は再び独立国家になれる。
皆さん27日に帝国ホテルで集合してください。勝負をつけましょう。

Past Presidents of Bankrupt U.S. Corporation Go on “Beg-athon” for Godfather Bush

The dragnet is slowly but inexorably closing in on the Bush/Clinton (Scherf/ Rockefeller) Khazarian mafia clan and their Federal Reserve Board printing press.  Multiple legal investigations, mass arrests of junior Khazarian mobsters, and public disclosure are now part of regular public discourse, and not just on blogs formerly maligned as “conspiracy” sites.

An interesting sign of the Khazarians’ desperation was the spectacle of George Bush Senior posing with four other former presidents (minus Donald Trump) of the United States Corporation as part of a “beg-athon.”
http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/356605-photo-of-lady-gaga-and-five-former-presidents-goes-viral

First, we must note that with computer graphics and body doubles it is hard to know if this event really took place.  For example, multiple sources have told this writer that Bill Clinton (Rockefeller) died of AIDS early this year.

Nonetheless, assuming this event did really take place, this is what a senior CIA source in Texas had to say about it:

“The ‘beg-athon’ in Texas is pure BS.  Notice that the money goes through the George H.W. Bush (Scherf) Foundation.  They are scamming money any way they can get it.  The Khazarian mafia cabal must be really desperate.”

The causes of their desperation have been snowballing in recent weeks.  Perhaps most deadly have been the ongoing disclosures about Khazarian genocides.  This has started with the release of documents showing that the U.S. government was involved in the murder of over 500,000 Indonesians in the mid-1960s.
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2017/10/18/documents-reveal-active-us-support-indonesian-mass-killings-1960s

The Texas-based CIA source admits, “We removed [Indonesian President] Soekarno from power, and we put Soeharto into power.”  He regrets that he was a part of the operation back them.  His excuse:  just doing what he was ordered to do by his boss at Langley.

President Donald Trump promised more disclosure in the following tweet, saying, “Subject to the receipt of further information, I will be allowing, as President, the long blocked and classified JFK files to be opened.”

Three separate sources—one NSA, one Pentagon, and one CIA—all said they did not believe Trump would release the real truth about the Kennedy assassination.

However, one senior Pentagon source who has been consistently reliable in the past said that “The Trump release of JFK files may implicate Bush Senior, Mossad, the CIA, and the deep state, and may be a prelude to an intel dump on 9/11, suppressed technology, the secret space program, and other disclosures prior to mass arrests.”

Long-term readers of this blog already know that JFK was assassinated because he was trying, using gold provided by Soekarno, to take control of the issuance of U.S. dollars away from the privately-owned Federal Reserve Board (FRB).

Pentagon sources are saying that in any case, “Khazarian control of the FRB is kaput, as Fed Governor Jerome (Jay) Powell may be chosen as the next FRB, beating the three Jews Gary Cohn, Janet Yellen, and Kevin Warsh, who is son-in-law of billionaire 9/11 conspirator and Israeli asset Ron Lauder….  Stanford PhD economist John Taylor may also be named to the FRB as Vice Chairman or Governor.”

The source continues by noting, “When the global currency reset happens, the FRB may be folded into [the U.S.] Treasury [Department] and issue gold-backed United States Notes (USN).

The Texas CIA source, who claims to hate Bush Senior but appears to be closely connected to him, says the Khazarian mafia was ready retaliate by taking drastic action, warning that “The entire Internet has a back door installed and the Khazarian mafia can and will
 

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net
Please Log In or Register to create an account.

 

Letter to the Editor – A Note on “Jewishness” and Zionism

Hello Ben,

I read the complaint of the individual objecting to your use of the term “Jewish” in your description of events last week.  There is, I think, reason to differentiate carefully between the term “Jewish mafia” and the Italian Mafia.  They are not necessarily correct analogs.

In the case of Jewish people, one awful risk they face, which apparently is largely unseen by many of them, is the Zionists.  The Zionists are the Jewish mafia, and it is apparent to me that they are hiding behind the Jewish religion as a front for their activities.

This places Jewish people in a terrible position of “shield.”  And in order for an entire people to serve as that shield, they often express strong belief in support of the Zionists, apparently not understanding that in no way does Zionism serve the Jewish religion.  I don’t think Italians have anywhere near this level of identification with their captors.

Just a thought.  As a friend to all people, I find this situation very aggravating, as any negative criticism of Zionism very often incites attacks decrying “anti-Semitism.”  (As you pointed out, a misnomer.)  Actually, most people identifying with Judaism today have nothing to do with Semites.  They’re effectively Khazarians filtered through European bloodlines.

Possible Upcoming False Flags, Crisis Actor Recruitment

Information contributed by readers:

The pizzagate investigators at Voat found something really suspicious on Twitter:
Recruitment for crisis actors for a disaster event scheduled for 10/31-11/2 in Oklahoma City.
http://work4hds.com/apply/

Also, a suspicious Craigslist ad related to the planned action by Antifa on 11/4.  Orangeburg area:
https://columbia.craigslist.org/gov/d/need-people-for-role-players/6351154067.html

 

H.F.1360

REWRITING HISTORY-BRUSSELS-STYLE

Monument to hubris: The lavish facade of the £47 million House of European History in Brussels

DAILY MAIL=REWRITING HISTORY-BRUSSELS STYLE by ROBERT HARDMAN

... play a pretty peripheral part in Europe's

rewriting of the European story here in the

 

heart of Brussels

Why does EU's new museum ignore Britain?

Saturday, October 14, 2017

 

 

 

ROBERT HARDMAN: Why does the EU's new £47m European history museum (part funded by UK taxes) ignore Britain's great achievements and gloss over Germany's wartime past?

Try as I might, I cannot find any reference to Shakespeare here. I imagine that many Europeans who don’t even speak a word of English would probably put him in the top ten of European cultural giants, but our greatest playwright hasn’t made the grade.

Still, at least there is a bit of Lego on display.

Similarly, you might expect the inventors of the railway, the jet engine, television, football, rugby and penicillin — British achievements, but European ones, too — to get some credit in a museum of European history.

Not so. Perhaps I am being thick, but after five hours, I am still looking. Never mind. There is an exhibit explaining that a Norwegian invented the paperclip and another telling how Hungary’s Josef Biro invented the ballpoint pen.

You do not have to be a flag-waving patriot to wonder how they managed to come up with some of this rubbish.

Now Britain has voted to leave the EU, perhaps we should not be so surprised to find that we play a pretty peripheral part in Europe’s rewriting of the European story here in the heart of Brussels.

One nation, however, is furious about the way the past is being portrayed in the European Parliament’s newly-opened ‘House of European History’.

This week, Poland’s culture minister made a complaint to the president of the European Parliament. He said the museum glosses over Germany’s wartime past while disgracefully pointing an accusing finger at Poland for being ‘complicit in the Holocaust’. ‘This exhibition violates fundamental historical truth in matters of fundamental importance,’ said Piotr Glinski.

A grave charge, particularly as the museum has been the pet project of a German ex-president of the European Parliament. It is certainly not hard to see German fingerprints all over a monstrously expensive and shamelessly self-serving exercise in revisionist propaganda.

Indeed, if this museum is indicative of the way the rest of Europe sees Britain and itself, no one can be remotely surprised that the UK has decided to go its own way.

Britain does get credited with importing the pyjama from Asia and with being the first European nation to abolish the slave trade. There is also a ‘Vote Leave’ T-shirt in a display case alongside a roll of ‘Vote In’ stickers, and a brief explanation that UK voters ‘no longer believed in the promise of prosperity and security within the European Union’.

But Britain’s role in freeing Europe from tyranny in the last century is brushed aside. There are several photos of bomb damage during the Blitz, along with other destruction all over mainland Europe. But key moments such as Dunkirk and D-Day — surely a central part of the European story — are barely mentioned.

I did find one reference to D-Day, but none to the Battle of Britain. No mention, either, of our Commonwealth allies, who shed so much blood across this continent. Sorry, Australia, Canada, New Zealand and the rest. If you are acknowledged in here somewhere, I couldn’t find you.

Winston Churchill pops up, unnamed, in a photo of the 1945 Yalta summit as he sits alongside U.S. president Franklin D. Roosevelt and Russia’s Joseph Stalin as they decide the post-war shape of Europe. There is also a Union flag with those of the U.S. and U.S.S.R.

But the central narrative is that Europe entered the 20th century as a largely innocent collection of nation states, many of them recent and artificial creations.

After World War I — a catastrophe in which, apparently, all were equally to blame —these poor Europeans found themselves caught between two terrifying ideologies which were not their fault: Nazism and Stalinism.

Europe was then flattened and endured appalling suffering — thanks to the ‘Nazis’ and ‘Soviets’, rather than ‘Germany’ and ‘Russia’.

Europe was not liberated, as history has taught us. In the words of the museum audio guide, it was ‘disempowered’ and ‘divided’ between the U.S. and the Soviet Union.

It is only thanks to the emergence of the EU that peace and prosperity have occurred and endured. That’s the 20th century in an EU nutshell.

The Poles are furious because the suffering of Germany is equated with their own misfortune.

Photos of German refugees sit alongside those of Polish refugees. One display highlights the words of the Polish communist leader, Wladyslaw Gomulka, in 1945: ‘We must expel them (the Germans).’

Yet there is a more important question. Why has nearly £50 million of taxpayers’ money — much of it British — been spent on a vanity project with one clear over-arching message: that the EU is superior to the nation state?

 

It was ten years ago that Germany’s Hans-Gert Pottering came up with the idea of a museum to show ‘how Europe’s history shapes us all’

It was ten years ago that Germany’s Hans-Gert Pottering came up with the idea of a museum to show ‘how Europe’s history shapes us all’.

No matter that the European Parliament has another multi-million-euro museum around the corner which has been doing just that for several years (and which, incidentally, claims without a shred of evidence that our Queen is ‘explicitly pro-European’).

Of course, Europe can never have too many exhibitions telling Europeans how lucky they are to live in the EU super-state.

As for the British, if we have grounds for a complaint — and right now, our Government ministers have more to occupy them in Brussels than the contents of a new museum — it is lack of recognition rather than malice or misrepresentation.

We are shown as bit-players on the fringes. No doubt sour-faced Remainers such as Nick Clegg and Lord Mandelson would argue that is all that we deserve after our historic vote to push off.

But Britons will, no doubt, be liable for a share of the running costs for years to come as part of our Brexit divorce bill. So for now, at least, this is ‘our’ museum, rather than ‘their’ museum — not that it feels like it one bit.

Across six floors of exhibition space, the subject of World War II — the driving, defining episode in the modern European story — occupies just half of one level. Three floors are devoted to the rise and rise of the EU.

Churchill may barely feature but we are treated to a bust of that towering statesman, Joseph Bech, former prime minister of Luxembourg alongside a jug he received from his country’s wine industry in 1953.

In pride of place, of course, is a bust of the post-war German chancellor, Konrad Adenauer — a member of the same party as the Eurocrat who commissioned this absurdity.

The House of European History opened earlier in the summer (several years behind schedule). It is beautifully designed with all the latest in audiovisual gizmos and lots of eager staff.


 

genuinely recommend it to anyone with a few hours to kill in Brussels (entry is free — after all, you’ve paid for it already). Because once you have had a good look round, it will be abundantly clear why Britain has always found it so difficult to belong here.

I have seldom seen such a lavish exhibition of what is ostensibly ‘our’ story and yet felt so detached from it. Whether you are an ardent Remainer or unrepentant Leaver, I suspect you will reach the same conclusion.

Last night, a spokesman for the museum insisted it ‘does not aim to replace national representations of history’, adding: ‘It is a new, European concept which adds a European perspective to the national ones in existing museums.’

The content, she said, had been decided by a panel of historians and ‘the European Parliament has not and will not intervene politically’.

But at its heart, this is an EU project which promulgates the sense of Europe as a victim, of people as invertebrates at the mercy of extraneous forces. It’s a completely different attitude to the mindset which prevails in Britain. We are taught that we are where we are because of our decisions and our actions.

I go round with the Eurosceptic Tory MEP, Dan Hannan, who is also exploring the new museum for the first time. In his view, it captures the EU mindset perfectly: ‘It reflects a phrase I hear all the time in Brussels, that “a nation is an imagined community”. In Britain, we don’t think like that.’

We start on the ground floor where an exhibition called ‘Encounters’ explores Europe as a ‘transcultural space’. It begins with a celebration of trade.

‘Trading,’ it says, ‘can reduce the likelihood of armed conflicts. Trade develops well in times of peace’. Try telling that to the EU’s truculent negotiator Michel Barnier who is so reluctant to discuss future deals with a post-Brexit Britain.

Then we go up a level to ‘Europe: A Global Power’. We move from the French Revolution through to the 19th century to industrialisation.

It was then that so many European mini-states merged into nations — Germany and Italy among them — and it’s clear that EU chiefs do not regard this as a good thing. ‘Flags, anthems and symbols were used by national movements to enhance their self-image,’ sniffs the audio guide.

There’s a short section on colonialism, in which evolutionist Charles Darwin (a Brit, of course) is blamed for generating racist ideas about white supremacy, alongside the rise of the bourgeoisie and the introduction of trams.

And then it’s off to war.

World War I was a ‘catastrophe’ in which every nation behaved appallingly with its use of propaganda and industrial weapons. No sooner is it over than we reach ‘Totalitarianism Versus Democracy’. Down one side of a hall is the story of the failed democracies of the inter-war years. Down the other are inter-linked displays on ‘National Socialism’ and ‘Stalinism’ — ‘so alike in their brutality and oppression’.

Hitler’s success, we’re told, was based on ‘charisma and core loyalty’, rather than the fact that millions of ordinary Germans put him into power.

And that it is the undercurrent which runs through the section on World War II itself — ideologies are to blame, not Europeans.

There is very little on the actual fighting, beyond some grainy video footage of air-raids. Instead, it focuses on civilian suffering.

There is no attempt to play down the horror of the Holocaust, which is covered in detail, though the concentration camps were simply the work of ‘Nazis’ (as opposed to any nationality) and there is an adjacent display on the cruelty of ‘Soviet’ (never ‘Russian’) gulags.

There are also some peculiar omissions. Where is Vichy France? The fact that half that country willingly participated with Nazi Germany may be a very sensitive point in France, but it is surely relevant to the story of Europe.

I ask a member of staff where the Vichy section has gone. She points out a helmet from the ‘Milice’, the Vichy paramilitary, included in a small display on collaborators. This focuses more on the Norwegian collaborationist regime of Vidkun Quisling. And why not? Norway’s not in the EU. Better to avoid offending the French, who are.


 

here’s a short section on colonialism, in which evolutionist Charles Darwin (a Brit, of course) is blamed for generating racist ideas about white supremacy, alongside the rise of the bourgeoisie and the introduction of trams.

And then it’s off to war.

World War I was a ‘catastrophe’ in which every nation behaved appallingly with its use of propaganda and industrial weapons. No sooner is it over than we reach ‘Totalitarianism Versus Democracy’. Down one side of a hall is the story of the failed democracies of the inter-war years. Down the other are inter-linked displays on ‘National Socialism’ and ‘Stalinism’ — ‘so alike in their brutality and oppression’.

Hitler’s success, we’re told, was based on ‘charisma and core loyalty’, rather than the fact that millions of ordinary Germans put him into power.

And that it is the undercurrent which runs through the section on World War II itself — ideologies are to blame, not Europeans.

There is very little on the actual fighting, beyond some grainy video footage of air-raids. Instead, it focuses on civilian suffering.

There is no attempt to play down the horror of the Holocaust, which is covered in detail, though the concentration camps were simply the work of ‘Nazis’ (as opposed to any nationality) and there is an adjacent display on the cruelty of ‘Soviet’ (never ‘Russian’) gulags.

There are also some peculiar omissions. Where is Vichy France? The fact that half that country willingly participated with Nazi Germany may be a very sensitive point in France, but it is surely relevant to the story of Europe.

I ask a member of staff where the Vichy section has gone. She points out a helmet from the ‘Milice’, the Vichy paramilitary, included in a small display on collaborators. This focuses more on the Norwegian collaborationist regime of Vidkun Quisling. And why not? Norway’s not in the EU. Better to avoid offending the French, who are.

There¿s a short section on colonialism, in which evolutionist Charles Darwin (a Brit, of course) is blamed for generating racist ideas about white supremacy, alongside the rise of the bourgeoisie and the introduction of trams
 

There’s a short section on colonialism, in which evolutionist Charles Darwin (a Brit, of course) is blamed for generating racist ideas about white supremacy, alongside the rise of the bourgeoisie and the introduction of trams

After some harrowing images of refugees — German, Polish, Dutch and a British evacuee — the war is over. There is no sense of relief, let alone gratitude to the liberating powers of America and Britain.

‘The Allied leadership believed forced expulsions were the only way to ensure a peaceful continent,’ says the guide, pointing to the post-war carve-up of borders.

It is only when we reach a display in honour of ‘European Architects’ that the tempo changes. Hallelujah! At last, the EU is born and salvation is nigh.

Hidden away in a corner, I find the section which has upset the Poles so much. It is a display on post-war memory loss, highlighting the way in which different countries — though not Germany — chose to overlook any complicity in the Holocaust.

The section on Poland explains that, back in Soviet Bloc days, the concentration camps at places such as Auschwitz-Birkenau were portrayed as memorials to Polish, rather than Jewish, suffering.

‘Under Soviet control it focused solely on communist resistance,’ says the commentary, adding that it was 60 years before a ‘heated debate’ took place on the country’s role in the Holocaust. While many Poles risked their lives to protect the country’s 3.4 million Jews, others did nothing.

Here, too, I finally find a brief reference to France’s ‘treacherous Vichy regime’. After the war was over, says the commentary, France preferred to blame ‘a select few’ for collaboration in order to protect ‘French self-esteem’.

The tour continues at length through all the great benefits of European integration — travel, leisure, food, education and so on.

Towards the end, two exhibits take pride of place. One is the Nobel Peace Prize the EU received in 2012 for its contribution to ‘the advancement of peace and reconciliation, democracy and human rights in Europe’.

The other is an 80,000-page book documenting the rules and regulations introduced by the EU. It must be 20ft long and looks more like the bone of some gargantuan prehistoric creature. Perhaps future generations will view it as such.

To some, no doubt, it is a thing of wonder. But if anything in this temple of self-congratulation sums up what went wrong with the great EU dream, surely this is it. 

Full article


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4979466/ROBERT-HARDMAN-does-EU-s-new-museum-ignore-Britain.html#ixzz4vUh7lkJr
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

 

[And for the history of Germany by a close observer of Dr Ardenour after World War II go HERE!]

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

H.F.1341 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S EU PLAN TO DOMINATE EUROPE AND ENGLAND IN THE PEACE.

 
 
 
 

[AT LONG LAST!-THE WAY FORWARD-HAS BEGUN!]

BREXIT PLAN

 TO END MASS MIGRATION FROM

 EU

 

'We NEED to get immigration down': Cabinet minister defends tough Brexit immigration blueprint insisting stopping free movement is key to controlling numbers

  • Entire 82-page document on Britain's immigration proposals was leaked tonight
  • The document insists in future immigration must benefit Britain as a whole 
  • It makes clear free movement will be axed immediately after Brexit happens 
  • The proposals are tougher than many had expected Britain to suggest imposing 

The government is honouring the result of the referendum by bringing in tough measures to curb immigration, a Cabinet minister said today.

Sir Michael Fallon said ending free movement was necessary to reduce inflows after a leaked document outlined a new post-Brexit system.

The proposals included action to slash the number of low-skilled EU workers and force bosses to put British workers first.

A 'direct numerical cap' on immigration could be imposed when the UK leaves the 28-nation EU in March 2019, according to the Home Office report.

Asked about the document, Defence Secretary Sir Michael stressed that the government would spell out its plans later this year. He also insisted there was no intention to 'close the door' on talent from abroad.

But he made clear ministers' determination to meet the Tory target for reducing annual net migration below 100,000 a year.

'This is our target,' he told BBC Radio 4's Today. 'We need to get immigration down and we need to show the public that it is being properly controlled.' 

Under the blueprint, low-skilled workers would be allowed to stay for only one or two years while professionals could apply for five-year visas.

To give preference to British workers, firms would have to pass a rigorous 'economic needs test' before recruiting EU nationals lacking higher qualifications.

The 82-page document says migration policy will be determined by the UK national interest, ensuring social cohesion and reducing the number of arrivals. 

The paper said: 'To be considered valuable to the country as a whole, immigration should benefit not just the migrants themselves but make existing residents better off.'

Sir Michael told BBC Breakfast: 'I can't set out the proposals yet, they have not yet been finalised, they are being worked on at the moment.

'There is obviously a balance to be struck, we don't want to shut the door, of course not.

'We have always welcomed to this country those who can make a contribution to our economy, to our society, people with high skills.

'On the other hand we want British companies to do more to train up British workers, to do more to improve skills of those who leave our colleges.

'So there's always a balance to be struck.

'We're not closing the door on all future immigration but it has to be managed properly and people do expect to see the numbers coming down.' 

The radical proposals include:

  • An immediate end to free movement after Brexit;
  • Jobseekers will not be given residence permits;
  • The rights of EU nationals to bring in family members will be dramatically curtailed;
  • Transitional controls will last around two years before a new system is imposed;
  • EU citizens will need passports to enter the UK, not just identity cards.

Last night Whitehall sources insisted the document had not been signed off by ministers and immigration policy was still a 'work in progress'.

Officials have produced at least six subsequent versions, the source added. The measures are likely to be watered down as part of Brexit talks.

Campaigners for controlled migration and Tory MPs hailed the proposals, saying they reflected the public's demands for an end to mass immigration.

Lord Green of Deddington, chairman of the MigrationWatch think tank, said: 'This is very good news. Completely uncontrolled migration from the EU simply cannot be allowed to continue.

These proposals rightly focus on the highly skilled and, by doing so, could well reduce net migration from Europe by about 100,000 a year.'

Charlie Elphicke, MP for Dover, said: 'People want a robust approach on tackling the number of low-skilled migrants coming to Britain as they feel deeply this pushes down the wages of working people.'

However, there was an immediate backlash last night with Labour mayor of London Sadiq Khan saying: 'It reads like a blueprint on how to strangle London's economy, which would be devastating not just for our city but for the whole country.'

The leak comes just days after the latest round of Brexit talks ended in acrimony and a row over the so-called divorce bill.

It could anger Brussels if it is seen that the plans downgrade the status of EU citizens too far. Theresa May is reportedly set to deliver a key speech on Britain's future relationship with the EU later this month as negotiations approach a critical stage.

I

n a dramatic shift in policy, firms would be allowed to hire migrants only if they could prove they had tried – and failed – to hire a Briton.

The document states: 'We are clear that, wherever possible, UK employers should look to meet their labour needs from resident labour. It is now more important than ever that we have the right skills domestically to build a strong and competitive economy.

'It is not a question of stopping EU migration. But there will be a fundamental shift in our policy in that the Government will take a view on the economic and social needs of the country as regards migration, rather than leaving this decision entirely to EU citizens and their employers.

'We will want to strike the right balance – making sure we attract the people we need to fill key labour market requirements, and ensuring that we continue to support UK businesses to prosper, while addressing concerns about the impact of uncontrolled migration on public services and community cohesion

To help farmers ensure they have enough labour to pick fruit, a seasonal workers scheme would give temporary work permits.

Green MP and co-party leader Caroline Lucas said the plans were economically illiterate and 'a profound mistake'.

'Ministers know that ending free movement will damage the British economy – yet they are ploughing ahead regardless,' she said.

'Now they're also planning draconian rules on family members of EU nationals and harsh income requirements too. Britain has benefited from freedom of movement and from the enormous contribution of EU nationals.'

Full article

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4855264/Tough-new-immigration-rules-revealed-massive-leak.html#ixzz4rtvsbMTV
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 
 

Blueprint for our UK border

 

* End to free movement when Britain leaves the EU on March 30,2019 * Low skilled EU nationals allowed residency for a maximum of two years and no right to settle

 

 

* Fundamental shift in migration policy to focus on 'economic and social needs ' of this country.

 

*High skilled nationals allowed to stay for three to five years and given a route to settle.

 

* Slash net migration to try to hit the Government's target of 'sustainable' net migration-or 100,000 a year

 

* End use iof ID cards, forcing all EU nationals to show a passport to enter the UK.

 

 

* Force firms who want to hire EU migrants to prove they can't find Britons with the right skills.  

*  Scrap rights of EU nationals' extended family to reside in the UK. Only direct family allowed

 

 

* Long term options to limit EU workers include a 'direct numerical cap' to cut down numbers of low skilled staff.

 

*  Biometric residence permits for EU nationals' extended family to reside in the UK. Only direct family allowed.
* Seasonal workers scheme for short term migrants to pick fruit and vegetables.

 

* No residence permits for jobseekers.
 

 *  Keep free flow of tourists and short term business visitors.

DAILY MAIL ,Wednesday, September 6,2017

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

 

H.F.1302 HARD BREXIT FOR A BETTER AND FREE NATION STATE!

 

 

[A TIMELY REMINDER!-A CONSERVATIVE PRIME MINISTER BETRAYED THE PEOPLE IN 1972-IS THIS TO BE OUR FATE IN MARCH 2019?]

 

 

 

PressReader - Daily Mail: 2017-09-08 - Tory MPs' written warning to Mrs May...

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20170908/281724089704872
 EUROSCEPTIC Tories last night warned Theresa May against backsliding on
Brexit. A leaked letter, signed by up to 40 MPs, said it would be a 'historic mistake' to keep Britain in the SINGLE MARKET or CUSTOMS UNION during the transition phase.

When we leave in [MARCH]-1919-we need to make sure we are well and truly

OUT,

The letter said.

Tory MP Suella Fernandes , chairman of the group of MPs that circulated the letter, said last night that it was designed to show

 'support for the Governments position'...

It goes on: ' Continued membership of the single market, even as part of a transitional arrangement, would simply mean EU membership by another name-and we cannot alow our country to be kept in the EU by stealth.

'The Government must respect the will of the British people, and that means

LEAVING THE SINGLE MARKET AT THE SAME TIME AS WE LEAVE THE EU.'...

Full article

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS]..

 

 

H.F.1304 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT -NO LONGER A POODLE OF THE EU ELITE!

THERESA MAY'S SURRENDER

 TO

HITLER'S EU

IN

SEPTEMBER 2017

 IS REMINISCENT

OF

PRIME MINISTER NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN'S

LACK OF GRIT

IN

1938

WHICH LED TO WORLD WAR 11

 IN SEPTEMBER 1939

AS THEN WE HAVE THE PHONY WAR AND THE

BATTLE FOR BRITAIN.

What would those who died protecting our skies in 1940 think of the GREAT BETRAYAL by fellow citizens to their FOE of TWO WORLD WARS-

GERMANY

IN 2017 WE haven't  even had our Dunkirk as we haven't in reality even crossed the Channel in real earnest to claim our FREEDOM after 12 months since a majority voted for the return of THEIR COUNTRY LAW-CUSTOM- given away by TRAITORS in 1972.

BEING IN THE UNDERBELLY OF EUROPE WON'T HELP ONE IOTA!-GERMANY IS ADJUDICATOR!

WE HAVE STALEMATE!

THE ANSWER IS TO BOYCOTT GOODS FROM FRANCE AND GERMANY WHO ARE THE DRIVER AND FIREMAN OF THE EU EXPRESS.

WE BUY MORE FROM EUROPE THAN THEY BUY FROM US!

BUSINESSES IN THE MAIN  SUPPORT THE EU

WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A WAR OF SORTS!

REMEMBER!

WE ARE NOT DEALING WITH A DEMOCRATIC BODY BUT WITH THE HITLERITE -AUTOCRATIC EU

*

 

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****     REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

 

THE HISTORY OF THE SATANIC COLLECTIVIST EUROPEAN UNION

***

DAVID CAMERON'S PLAN TO CLAW BACK POWERS FROM EU ARE DOOMED SAYS EU CHIEF IN OCTOBER-2013

***

TREASON

 

 

 

 

AFTER 46 YEARS WITHIN THE CONTROL OF THE

 BEAST!

 IN BRUSSELS AND BERLIN .

OUR HISTORIC  ENGLISH SEA HIGHWAYS GIVEN AWAY BY THE TRAITOROUS EDWARD HEATH WILL BE RETURNED IN MARCH 2019.

'Ye mariners of England/that guard our native seas/Whose flag has braved a thousand years/The battle and the breeze'.

Thomas Campbell.(1777-1844) Ye Mariners of England

In September 1654 Cromwell summoned his first Parliament. The Speaker was  William Lenthall the greatest and most respected holder of that HIGH OFFICE during the English Civil War.

The Lord Protector said

"the main object in calling Parliament was that

"the ship of the commonwealth may be brought into a safe harbour."

 

 [Is not this our aim in our day?]

 

 [LETTER]

For the Honourable William Lenthall, Speaker of the Commons

House of Parliament: these,

Sir                                      Harborough, 14th June, 1645           

Being commanded by you to this service, I think myself bound to acquaint you with the good hand of God towards you and us.

We marched yesterday after the King, who went before us from Daventry to Harborough; and quartered about six miles from him.  This day we marched before him.  He drew out to meet us; both Armies engaged.  We, after three hours fight very doubtful, at last routed his Army; killed and took about 5000,-very many officers, but of what quality we yet know not.   We took also about 200 carriages, all he had; and all his guns, being 12 in number, whereof two were demi-cannon, two demi-culverins, and I think the rest sackers.  We pursued the Enemy from three miles short of Harborough to nine beyond, even to the sight of Leicester, whither the King fled.

Sir, this is none other but the hand of God; and to Him alone belongs the glory, wherein none are to share with Him.  The General served you with all faithfulness and honour: and the best commendation I can give him is, That I daresay he attributed all to God, and would rather perish than assume to himself. Which is an honest and a thriving way:-and yet as much for bravery may be given to him, in this action.  Sir, they are trusty; I beseech you, in the name of God, not to discourage them. I wish this action may beget thankfulness and humility in all that are concerned in it.  He that ventures his life for liberty of his country, I wish he trust God for the liberty of his conscience, and you for the liberty he fights for.  In this he rests, who is

Your most humble servant,

OLIVER CROMWELL

*

[Page 171-PART II FIRST CIVIL WAR-14th June 1645-LETTERSXXiX., NASEBY-OLIVER CROMWELL'S LETTERS AND SPEECHES by THOMAS CARLYLE-1888 ]

 

Is not this the wish of the majority in England in our day with regard to

BREXIT?

The dangerous and ironical situation we have faced in our day could have been avoided if Cromwell's "Fundamentals of the Constitution" -had been protected in law as with certain articles in

 Magna Carta.

What a previous Speaker of the House of Commons stated about the PROTECTION of the CONSTITUTION in the 1980's

 

The English People

 were betrayed by

 Parliament and the Monarchy.

TREASON

 

*

AND

ENGLAND'S

GREAT ESCAPE

 FROM

HITLER'S  FOURTH REICH

See also: eutruth.org.uk-Why we are leaving!-if you need a reminder?

*

AUGUST 21,2017

H.F.1285

 

 

In November 2005 we put the following

bulletin on our EDP WEBSITE

H.F.1321 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S EU

*

 

[AT LONG! LONG! LAST!

- WE LEAVE

THE

CORRUPT-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC-GODLESS EU

 IN MARCH 2019.]

*

DAILY MAIL

-At last, Hammond's on board with

BREXIT

and the

REMOANERS are DEAD and BURIED

LEAVING THE EU

 IN

MARCH,2019

 

 

THE

DOMINIC

LAWSON

Column

 

 

Finally, it’s sorted. Until yesterday, the anti-Brexiteers known as Remoaners had high hopes of Philip Hammond, the Chancellor.

But yesterday he appeared as joint author of a newspaper article with the most adamantine Brexiteer in the Cabinet, the International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox. The two supposed foes declared that in March 2019, Britain would not just be leaving the EU but also ‘we will leave the Customs Union and be free to negotiate the best trade deals around the world as an independent, open, trading nation’.

Although the Cabinet Brexiteers were content with Hammond’s proposal that there should be a transition period after March 2019, pending a final settlement of the country’s arrangements with the EU, the Chancellor had given the impression he was bending to the demands of the CBI that Britain remain within the Customs Union during that unspecified period.

Blunder

This they regarded as a fatal blunder — and not just because they suspected the CBI (which had campaigned for Britain to give up sterling for the euro) of seeking to keep the UK in the EU ‘by the back door’.

As Shanker Singham, chairman of the special trade commission of the Legatum Institute (a group consulted regularly by the Government), warned last week: ‘The UK must be able to provide the clarity of being outside the Customs Union on Day 1 of Brexit.

If such clarity does not exist, then other countries will not think the UK is serious about executing an independent trade policy and they will quickly lose patience and move on.’...

...In any case, the nation has not changed its collective mind since the referendum in June 2016. If anything, views have hardened in the direction set by the result. A survey of 3,293 people published on Friday by the London School of Economics showed that even those who had voted ‘Remain’ would prefer the sort of Brexit deal the LSE’s team described as ‘hard’.

A total of 51.3 per cent of Remain voters backed a Brexit deal which delivered ‘full control’ over immigration and led to lower numbers of migrants from the EU. No fewer than 54.7 per cent of Remainers said that the UK should ‘pay nothing’ to the EU by means of a ‘divorce bill’.

And 52.2 per cent of Remainers told the LSE researchers that we should entirely free British law from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Unsurprisingly, a still higher proportion of self-identifying ‘Leave’ voters supported what the LSE termed

His statement on The Andrew Marr Show last month that failure to reach an amicable deal with the EU ‘would be a very, very bad outcome for Britain’ was seen as an attack on his Brexiteer colleagues in the Cabinet (and, indeed, on the Prime Minister).

hard Brexit’.

Monstrous

This clearly disappointed the most voluble critic of the Brexiteers on the Tory parliamentary benches, Anna Soubry. In her own newspaper article yesterday, she lamented ‘a sense of resignation among most people who voted Remain that we have to “man up” and make the most of what we know will be a rotten Brexit’...

 

Full article


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4787508/At-Hammond-s-board-Brexit.html#ixzz4pkbL1fqi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*

16 MONTHS

TO REGAIN OUR ONCE FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

AUGUST 14, 2017

H.F.1281 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

 
 

 

[IT HAD TO HAPPEN!

-'WE ARE AFTER ALL AN INSULAR  ISLAND PEOPLE']

 

*

 

Even Remainers now back a

'hard' Brexit:

 Most Brits ... - Daily Mail

 

. Even Remainers now back a 'hard' Brexit: Most Brits want to regain full control ...
By Claire Ellicott for the Daily Mail and Kate Ferguson For Mailonline ... a straight
choice between that and no deal, with 58 per cent backing it.

 

Most Brits want to regain full control of our borders and to become free of meddling EU judges, survey reveals

  • Most polled want the UK to become free of EU judges and full border control 

  • Two thirds said they would prefer 'no deal' rather than a soft Brexit, poll found

  • Findings boost for Theresa May who says no deal is better than a bad deal

Most Remain voters now back a Brexit that gives Britain a clean break from the EU and control back of our borders, a major study has found.

Many of those who voted to stay in the European Union also now believe the country should only pay a small ‘divorce bill’ and stop EU judges ruling over the UK.

The results are a major boost for Theresa May’s Brexit stategy - and suggest diehard Remainers, such as Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable and former prime minister Tony Blair, have overestimated support for backtracking on Brexit. 

Full artical


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4782712/Most-Brits-hard-Brexit-new-survey-finds.html#ixzz4pXWhGZDU
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*

 

 FREEDOM!

 

.'..We cannot, I fear, falsify the pedigree of the fierce people, and persuade them that they are not sprung from a nation in whose veins the blood of freedom circulates.  The language in which they would hear you tell them this tale would detect the imposition; your speech would betray you

'An Englishman is the unfittest person on earth, to argue another Englishman into slavery'.

*

EDMUND BURKE

 

Conciliation with America-speech House of Commons

March 22,1775

 

*

1+2+3

+4+5+6+7+8+9+10

Soul of England

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

AUGUST 12-2017

H.F.1277 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

DAILY MAIL-

 

Tear up divorce bill or BREXIT talks will collapse.Davis warns the EU.

Britain rubbishes demand for £90bn EU divorce bill

ON

AUGUST 31,2017

Tear up divorce bill or Brexit talks will collapse, Davis warns EU: Britain rubbishes demand for £90bn - and calls on the European leaders to break deadlock

  • UK negotiators rubbished the bloc’s financial demands and accused the EU of forcing Britain to 'pay for everything including the kitchen sink'
  • So far Brussels chiefs have refused to discuss any future trade deal until Britain agrees how much it is willing to pay towards exit bill that could reach £90billion 
  • Theresa May appealed to EU leaders to start the stalling talks or face a backlash 


Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4838570/Britain-rubbishes-demand-90bn-EU-divorce-bill.html#ixzz4rLBb04of

Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

H.F.1297- BREXIT MEANS BREXIT-NOT UNCONDITIONABLE SURRENDER!

 

 

[THE  HARSH REALITY!

 THAT THE REMOANERS IGNORE!]

 

*

 

 

EU DICTATORSHIP EXPOSED

                        EUROPEAN DICTATORSHIP

 

                                The Treaty of Rome

 

          The Final Resurrection of the Holy Roman Empire

 

 

In the words of Winston Churchill and in reference to Stanley Baldwin who was Prime Minister at the time (exporting Rolls Royce aero engines to Germany) prior to the outbreak of World War II he spoke the following words:

 

“Whose in charge of the clattering train?   The axels creak and the couplings strain; the pace is hot and the points are near and sleep has deadened the driver’s ear and the signals flash through the night in vain for death is in charge of the clattering train”

                          

 

The Take-Over of Britain

 

On 1st January 1973, Conservative British Prime Minister Edward Heath took Britain into the European Common Market.   Heath reassured Parliament and the British people at the time that British sovereignty would not be affected and that we were just joining a trading partnership.   His 1971 government White Paper stated the following:

 

“There is no question of Britain losing essential national sovereignty…  The British safeguards of habeus corpus and trial by jury will remain intact.   So will the principle that a man is innocent until he has been proved guilty.”

 

Subsequent papers came to light, which unequivocally show that Edward Heath recognised that he had known all along that Britain was signing up to a federal Europe.

 

In a 1975 public referendum, reassured by their politicians and a politically biased media that all was well, the British voted 67% to 33% to remain inside the Common Market.   Later, it emerged that many sections of the British media were involved with promoting only favourable stories about the common Market.  Few opposing views were given an airing.

 

The post-war move towards European integration was to strengthen a devastated Europe as rapidly as possible and prevent any Soviet incursion.

 

The first form of collective integration among nations in Europe occurred in March 1951 with the setting up of the European Coal and Steel Community, which established a single market for steel, iron, coke and coal among the six participating nations:  France, Germany, Luxembourg, Italy, Holland and Belgium.

 

This union was later expanded by the Treaty of Rome into the European Economic Community, which set up a ‘Common Market’.   This treaty’s subtitle has always been ‘the ever closer union of the peoples of Europe’.   Politicians have always understood this to mean the destruction of their nations’ sovereignty and the eventual formation of a United States of Europe.   Even their populations are clear on this issue.

 

British politicians, both Labour and Conservative, have not been so forthcoming.   They have consistently misled the British people by repeatedly claiming that our involvement was trade-based only, and would never lead to the destruction of Britain as a sovereign nation.

 

Today, the UK’s three leading political parties are all in support of dismantling Great Britain.   At no general elections in the past 25 years have the British people ever been given a clear choice on Britain’s European membership, with all the options, including withdrawing from the EU altogether.  

 

Norway, Iceland, Switzerland and Greenland are not members of the EU and are doing very well on their own today.

 

Later amendments to the Treaty of Rome gradually stepped up the transfer of power and control of Britain from Westminster to Brussels.   These further treaty amendments were:

 

                   The Single European Act   -1986

                   The Treaty on European Union (‘Maastricht’) – 1992

                   The Amsterdam (Consolidated) Treaty – 1997

                   The Treaty of Nice – 2000

 

Through these further treaties, the original Common Market has gradually been changed into the European Union of today.   The British people have never given their consent, nor have properly understood the implications of the European Union.  

 

Today, Britain has been part of the European Union and its forerunner structures for a little over 30 years, yet there are few realistic benefits we have enjoyed for the massive expense and damage our membership has cost us.

 

The burdensome value-added tax was set up in Britain in anticipation for our forthcoming membership to the Common Market.   Most don’t know that VAT is an EU levy and not a national tax.

 

Your Citizenship

 

Upon signing the Maastrict Treaty, John Major declared that there would be  “…no further surrender of sovereignty.”  However, as soon as his ink was dry, millions of us ceased being British and became citizens of the European Union.

 

With this came all the rights and privileges of being a European citizen (not explained to the British people) as well as the duties and obligations of European citizenry according to the laws of Brussels.

 

In the blink of an eye, the British lost the right to do anything they please, as long as it was not forbidden by British law, and henceforth are only able to do those things specifically allowed by European directive and regulation.

 

While it is true that these laws are not currently being stringently enforced by Brussels, who’s prepared to wager that after the cooling-off period, the screws won’t be tightened slowly but progressively as time passes?    This is the way the European Union has historically operated.

 

Defence

 

Maastricht also articulated the EU’s desire to forma a common European Army.  Once more, the wording was weasely and circumlocutory and talked of a ‘common defence policy’.   Then we see the formation of something called a ‘Rapid Reaction Force’, supposedly only for operations outside the European Union.   Today, this has morphed into the ‘European Army’.   With the command restructuring of British troops under foreign officers underway, this will also mean foreign troops and police on British soil.

 

Law

 

Maastricht introduced far-reaching changes to our judicial system.   After Maastricht, Britain’s supreme court ceased to be the House of Lords and became the European Court of Justice (ECJ).   Once again, the transfer of power and visible jurisdiction has been slow and non-threatening, but today, European law has 100% legal supremacy over British law and Burssels holds almost all the law-making powers applicable to our nation.

 

 

 

Single Currency – Economic and Monetary Union (EMU)

 

Maastrickt also laid out a schedule for complete European economic integration (known as Economic and Monetary Union – EMU) using a single currency, formerly known as the European Currency Unit (ECU), now known as ‘the euro’.   The increased drive towards establishing a single currency across the Euro zone is perhaps one of the most significant factors to emerge from Maastricht.   Since 1992, the pound’s days have been numbered.   Yet Harold Wilson had sought to reassure the British public in a 1975 pamphlet that…

 

“There was a threat to employment in Britain from the movement in the Common Market towards an Economic and Monetary Union  [EMU].   This could have forced us to accept fixed exchange rates for the pound, restricting industrial growth and so putting jobs at risk.   This threat has been removed.”

 

Britain joining the euro will be the final step towards the destruction of our country as an independent, sovereign nation.   All the while Britain remains this side of EMU, she is still able to recover full independence should a majority of the country desire it and compel their politicians to act in accordance with the wishes of this majority.   If Britain adopts the euro however, the final three bricks drop out of the crumbling wall of British independence, and we will ultimately and at this time:

 

        Surrender the remainder of our gold, silver and dollar reserves to

        Brussels;

        Surrender the last of our economic control over our own nation;

       And surrender the last of our independent political power to govern

       Ourselves.

 

After this, there will be no turning back, short of war.

 

Joining the euro will be irreversible.

 

Regionalisation

 

The much touted ‘devolution’ process, which gave Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland their own assemblies, is simply the Maastricht regionalisation policy being implemented by stealth.   Today, the EU’s full title is ‘The European Union of the Regions’.   Planners in Brussels have divided the current EU land-mass into 111 regions, with Britain having 12. Each region across the Euro zone will henceforth be run from Brussels.

 

Regionalisation is an effective way to destroy the concept of a nation with national boundaries.   The EU has been very active for years in forging links at the local government level throughout the UK to bring this about.

 

One method Brussels has used to get co-operation from local councils has been the promise of funds for development projects in their local communities.   There’s nothing like EU cash (which British taxpayers provided in the first place) to build useful things in the community to enhance a local or even a European politician’s popularity with their public.

 

Another forerunner program implemented to soften up the British to the idea of accepting closer ties with their Continental neighbours is the town and village twinning scheme.

 

EU Democracy?

 

The EU Parliament has been directly elected by the citizens of the European Union since 1979, which all sounds democratic, but there are some fundamental problems.   Unlike the British Parliament, the EU Parliament cannot introduce, modify or initiate new laws.   It cannot elect a government.   The functions of EU government are performed not by the EU Parliament, but by three powerful EU forums (the EU Commission, the Council of Europe and the Council of Ministers), in conjunction with the European Court of Justice and the European Central Bank.   The EU Parliament is widely recognised as toothless – rubber-stamping legislation that is put before it with no informed debate on these new laws.

 

There are currently 626 seats in the EU Parliament with the following breakdown:  Belgium 25;  Denmark 16; France 87; Germany 99; Greece 25; Ireland 15; Italy 87; Luxembourg 6; Netherlands 31; Portugal 25; Spain 64; United Kingdom 87; Austria 21; Sweden 22 and Finland 16.  

 

Under the terms of the Amsterdam Treaty, the number of MEPs is not to exceed 700.   The European Union is due to be enlarged by another 10 members, mostly East European, ex-Soviet satellite states, on 1st May 2004.

 

Voting is performed by MEPs at tremendous speed.   One session saw MEPs vote on 187 pieces of legislation in just one hour.

 

The EU Parliament has the appearance of democracy, but upon closer inspection, the truth is very different.   It is a beard for another type of regime that really calls the shots from Brussels:  one that is fundamentally unaccountable, undemocratic, unelectable and corrupt.

 

Qualified Majority Voting

 

In 1975, the public was reassured by Harold Wilson that Britain would always be able to use her national veto in Brussels to reject or vote down any measure that was perceived to be a threat to her national interests.   Under the Single European Act however, a new system, known as Qualified Majority Voting (QMV), was introduced which effectively put the clock on Britain’s right to exercise her veto option.

 

Since Margaret Thatcher signed the Single European Act in 1985, QMV has gradually taken over and pushed the national veto out.   It takes 62 votes under QMV to pass a law and 26 votes to block one.   Britain has 10 votes under QMV, which means, given the current allegiances between countries in the EU, that Britain is powerless to refuse in many major areas of policy today, since almost everything the EU implements is decided by qualified majority voting.   Britain has a problem mustering sufficient votes from any EU allies to gain the number required to overturn any damaging legislation.

 

With Britain’s current EU voting powers in European elections, the British people can only vote out 14% of MEPs (unlike 100% of them at Westminster).   This will dwindle to less than 10% once the EU is enlarged further on 1st May 2004 to admit ten further member states.  Later, there could be no British Members of the European Parliament representing our country, as future MEPs need not be British.   At this point, our national government at Westminster will be redundant, since Britain has already been divided into 12 Euro-Regions, each of which is increasingly ruled directly from Brussels.   Soon there will be no further need for any national political candidates.

 

Immunity from Prosecution

 

All members of the EU’s governing structure, together with the tens of thousands of bureaucrats and civil servants who run the union, have been granted a lifetime immunity from prosecution.   This also goes for the new European police force, Europol, and the commanders and soldiers of the new European Army.   All buildings, offices, records, archives and minutes belonging to the EU and its institutions are inviolate.   They cannot be entered or inspected.   All personnel serving the EU are above the law, as declared in treaties which our successive politicians have signed on our behalf.

 

Funding of Political Parties

 

Under article 191 of the Treaty of Nice, the EU has been granted the power by its member states to withdraw funding for any European political party it deems inappropriate or unsuitable for Europe, which, of course, raises the spectre of the banning of political parties that criticise the European Union.

 

Human Rights

 

Perhaps most disturbingly, we see a continuation of the erosion of human rights under Article 52, which states:

 

“the EU may limit all rights and freedoms enumerated in that charter where necessary in order to meet objectives of general interest recognised by the EU.” 

 

This means that the state can limit/withdraw (abuse) the human rights of the individual at whim and is not answerable to anyone for doing so.   This is about as alien to the British way of life as it gets.

 

When coupled with the frightening powers now being bestowed upon upon Europol and the European prosecutor, perhaps the first the British will truly learn of what their country has become is when summary arrests of citizens are made in our country and those detainees are then shunted out of Britain to be held without charge on the Continent, if necessary for up to nine months, before being tried, not by a jury of the accused’s peers, but by a tribunal of professional, politically appointed foreign judges.

 

There will be no presumption of innocence until proven guilty, no prima facie evidence presented to a court within 24 hours.   The full weight of the state’s prosecutory apparatus will be brought to bear against the prisoner, who is burdened with the hopeless task of having to prove he is not guilty.   There will be little hope of an effective appeal.

 

Why Britain Does Not Belong to Europe

 

“Europe’s nations should be guided towards the super state without their people understanding what is  happening.   This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”  -  Jean Monnet, one of the EU’s founders

 

Britain was the first maritime power, so historically she has always traded globally, especially with her erstwhile colonies and international allies, whilst her trade with Europe has been secondary.   For this reason, Britain’s economy is more in step with those of America, Canada and her other allies, than it is with Europe.  For example, Britain conducts more trade with the USA than she does with France and Germany combined.

 

The intention to bring Britain’s economy under control of Brussels and somehow ‘harmonise it’ with those of the Continent will be a disastrous move for us and, as we shall see, is a strategy deliberately designed to break the United Kingdom as a historical, economic world power.   The priceless spoils of Britain’s wealth are to go to other European nations under control of Brussels.

 

But Britain is a part of Europe geographically!   So why wouldn’t we want to be a part of Europe politically in order to keep the peace?”    

 

Peace has been kept in Europe for the past fifty years, not through attempts at creating a unified Europe, but through the willingness of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) to act as a universal European military watchdog.   NATO is a military alliance of nations dominated by the two leading powers formerly comprising ‘the Allies’ during World War II – the United States of American and Great Britain.

 

The Americans spend more on the defence of Europe than all the eurozone nations put together.

 

The European Union is planning a new European arm capable of taking strategic action independently of NATO.   This new European army will threaten the balance and stability NATO has given to the Continent and hand over military jurisdiction in Europe once again to the two nations who have historically abused it and gone to war for their own economic interests.

 

Wars chiefly happen over issues of economics.   By creating a single currency throughout Europe and hamstringing less fortunate member states to join at unfavourable exchange rates, the EU is creating an alarming new climate of inflexibility and impending European instability.   The expected problems of the weak new single currency – the euro – are already becoming apparent.

 

Britain is an economic powerhouse, is the fourth largest economy in the world by Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and has the greatest financial trading centre in the world centred in London.   It is sheer nonsense to maintain that Britain somehow needs the European Union to survive.

 

Britain is the European Union’s biggest customer.

 

The Terminal Power-Play for Britain

 

Is the real agenda being worked out against Britain by Brussels designed to dismantle the UK, plunder her of her historic wealth and resources, and then politically chain her so she can never again be free to operate in her traditional role as a world trading power?

 

There are a number of reasons, in the eyes of those running the EU, why Britain must cease to be a major world player and be dismantled for the future good of Europe.   Today, as we shall see, every effort by the EU towards Britain is undertaken with this eventual goal in mind.   From the destruction of the UK’s once proud fishing industry to the victimisation of her farming communities to render the UK dependent on EU food, the pressure is on for European bureaucrats and politicians to expedite this baleful agenda before the British people full awaken to what is happening.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·        The kernel of the ECJ’s power is derived from the Treaty of Rome, Article 249.   The wording is deliberately generalised, enabling Brussels to extend the widest possible interpretations to these, and other clauses of the Treaty:  “A regulation shall have general application [what does ‘general’ mean?]    It shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States…”

 

·        Thus the European Court of Justice has been given powers ‘with no restriction’ over the member states.   This effectively places British citizens under the control of a foreign power and is intended to remove forever Britain’s right to govern herself.   This represents the abandonment of our nation.   Any British politician currently allowing this, or who has participated in orchestrating these efforts in the past, has committed treason under the Treason Act of 1795 and the Treason Felony Act of 1848.

·        National parliaments are now mere rubber stamps for all the legislation pouring out of Brussels.   Legally elected British MPs can turn back none of it.

 

 

 

 

 

·        The EU is abolishing trial by jury under the new European corpus juris system being introduced in Britain.  Once the system is in place, an indicted individual will have to prove his innocence against the combined machinery of the state.

 

·        The European Union is abolishing habeas corpus, the supreme British legal safeguard which declares ‘no imprisonment without fair trial’, instituted under Article 39 of Magna Carta, 1215.

·        Under British law, a law enforcement officer or the public prosecutor must place evidence before a court within 24 hours of a citizen’s arrest, detailing the charges being brought against them.

·        Unpaid lay magistrates, representing the people and drawn from the people themselves, are being replaced after more than 600 years.   They currently hear over 90% of criminal cases.   The new EU-wide justice system will be enforced by inquisitorial courts (no injury).

 ·        British judges are already imposing European law upon British citizens.   Take the ‘metric martyr’ episode in 2001, when a market trader was convicted for selling a pound of bananas weighed  using British imperial measures (pounds and ounces).   British District Judge Morgan, in passing judgment upon the unfortunate grocer, stated that the British were now living under ‘new constitutional powers’.

 

·        Compare this with Edward Heath’s comment on the same treaty which gave Judge Morgan these powers:  “There is no question of Britain losing essential national sovereignty…”

 ·        British police will henceforth report to Brussels and be immune from prosecution.

 

 

 

 

·        The ECJ has already granted powers to Europol to intercept mail and e-mails with the excuse that it is fighting the drug menace, money laundering and the ‘War on Terror’.   The latter can naturally be extended to include actions against those who do not support the EU.   Under new legislation, actions pursued by those who disagree with the EU can be labelled seditious, treasonous and even blasphemous.

 

·        The ECJ is removing the ‘double jeopardy’ safeguard.   For centuries, British law has held that if a person is found not guilty of committing a crime, he cannot be tried again for the same offence.   Henceforth, under corpus juris law, the ECJ has given itself the ‘right’ to come back at an individual time and again with the same charge, using all its considerable ‘legal’ apparati, until it secures the required conviction.   Jack Straw, the British Home Secretary, has already given prosecutors the right to appeal against not-guilty verdicts handed down by jurors.

·        A British citizen will henceforth be liable to summary arrest and extradition to a foreign country without any evidence being presented to a court.   No prima facie evidence will be presented either to the court or its victim to support such charges.

 

 

So Why is it Happening?

 

History reveals that Continental politics have always spelled trouble for Britain.   We have always had a different destiny from the rest of our Continental neighbours for one simple and straightforward reason.   Britain was the nation which became the first industrial and maritime world power.

Britain was the first to develop and use her huge merchant and military navies to annexe foreign territories and then open trade with them around the world.

 

While nations in Europe still pursued parochial trade with their immediate neighbours, the cutters of the British East India Company carved their wake through the oceans, bring all manner of exotic materials to British shores.

 

Britain extended her Anglo-Saxon heritage into the Americas, Canada, India, South Africa, Asia, Australia and New Zealand, as well as building strategic military bastions in Gibraltar, Hong Kong and other areas to protect her interests.   During the 18th and 19th centuries, her economic and military influence grew exponentially.

 

Magna Carta (1215) and subsequently the Declaration of Rights (1689) recognised our rights and freedoms and are contracts between the sovereign and the people which cannot be abrogated even by an elected parliament.

 

In Britain, we have enjoyed the freedom to engage in any activity so long as it isn’t prohibited by law.   In Europe, a citizen is only allowed to do those thing expressly permitted by the state.   Hence the need for a blizzard of directives to tell the citizen what he can and cannot do.

 

The EU is protectionist.   The British, on the other hand, positively encourage free enterprise, sensible risk-taking, and actively nurture individual spontaneity and entrepreneurial endeavour.   These are “freedom ‘ traits, which reaped the Empire and her citizens an enormous collective wealth in their day, and which even still entice a huge amount of inward investment capital and foreign corporate endeavour today.   The famous British eccentricity, celebrated and loved in countless movies, is the hallmark of this individuality.

 

Britain – an Economic Threat to the Continent

 

The question of whether Britain should remain in the EU has scarcely featured in any general election campaign during the past 25 years.   This option is avoided at all costs by almost all politicians and simply not made available by any of the three major political parties in Britain.

 

 

SELLING BRITIAN BY THE POUND

 

“I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies.   Already they have raised up a money aristocracy that has set the government at defiance.” – Thomas Jefferson, at the Constitutional Convention, 1787.

 

“Monetary union is a path of no return.   No subsequent revision or withdrawal of any kind is either legally or politically provided for.”  -  Hans Tietmeyer, the German Buindesbank

 

“If the House of Commons by any possibility loses the power of the control of the grants of public money, depend upon it, your very liberty will be worth very little in comparison.”   W.E. Gladstone, 1891

 

“By a continuous process of inflation, government can confiscate secretly and unobserved an important part of the wealth of their citizens… The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does so in such a manner that only one man in a million is able to diagnose it.”  John Maynard Keynes,  The Economic Consequences of Peace

 

Smoke and Mirrors

 

Today, Britain is being lured into joining the European single currency with lies, false promises and deceit.   Politicians attempting to pass this off as an economic issue to the public know full well that the euro is about nothing less than the complete surrender of the Uks economic and political sovereignty to a foreign power.   Which is why the debate on the euro is almost never entered into publicly by those who push it.   Greg Lance-Watkins of Silent Majority tells us why:

 

“It follows that by joining the single currency, member states hand over total control of their economy to Brussels.   Individual policies are subsumed within the (one size fits all) system of the EU.   This will apply even where the overall EU policy is disadvantageous to a particular or number of individual states.   In other words, the economic control of a country is taken out of the hands of the national government and given to unelected officials in Brussels.   At the same time, all gold and dollar reserves, apart from a small ‘working balance’, are given up and handed to the European Central Bank.”

 

 

 

 

·        In the EU’s apparent attempt to combat football hooliganism, the legal framework already exists to arrest a person even on suspicion that they may have committed, or might in the future commit a crime.

·        Under ECJ law, past offences committed by the accused will be raked up against him and used to justify why he committed the crime for which he is accused.   Under British law, this is illegal.   Such information on prior convictions is only made available to the court after the verdict, in order to secure a fair trial.

 ·        Under Article 8 of the Treaty of Amsterdam, members of the new federal ‘Europol’ are “immune from legal process of any kind for acts performed…in the exercise of their official functions.”   Thus, no Europol officer can be charged or brought to trial for false imprisonment, violence against a suspect, the destruction or seizure of private property, or harassment of any individual.

 

·        Europol has been given powers to operate anywhere within the Eurozone, including Britain, with complete impunity.   They have the power of summary arrest and extradition, in spite of current British laws, which specifically prohibit such actions.   Under the power of international treaty, British law is superseded by European law.

 

·        Ironically, or perhaps not, Europol’s centre of operations, housing 300-400 officers at present, is located in the old Gestapo headquarters building in the Hague.   Plans are well underway to expand this force to many thousands more, all to be armed and granted unfettered access to all regions of the EU.   Europol has been run by a former German police officer, Jorgen Storbeck, since its inception in 1994.

 ·        Britain’s representation of Europol is quartered with the National Criminal Intelligence Service (NCIS) at its HQ London.

·        Europol has been amassing computer records on hundreds of thousands of European citizens.   None of this information is ever made public.   Europol has the power, under EU law, to instruct British police authorities to investigate anyone in Britain the EU deems a danger to law and order.

 

EU Justice – No Checks and Balances

 

 

 

Any British government endorsing the above measures, as successive British administrations have done, is signing away freedoms guaranteed to the British people in perpetuity.   Such actions have paved the way for a once democratic Britain to be handed over to a new European-wide, potentially totalitarian regime run by Britain’s former enemies.   The Blair government has been instrumental, via Home Secretary Jack Straw, in accelerating this process, and then convincing the public it is all being done in their best interests.

 

An entity like the European Union, which has gone to great lengths to remove all public scrutiny of its affairs, all media reporting of its forum meetings and which has expeditiously granted lifetime immunity from prosecution to all its personnel and officers for their future actions, what can any government possibly want with such powers?  Can such an entity not reasonably be expected in the future to exercise this awesome might and do bad things to its citizens knowing it will be able to get away with it?   History repeatedly shows that these are the same powers all totalitarian regimes grant themselves before going to war with their own people and those of other countries.

 

This process may still be reversed by a unified and angry response from millions of Britons, clamouring for Britain to reject her EU membership and regain her independence, and compelling her government to take the appropriate, official action.   Time is running out as more statutory instruments are prepared in order to force Britain to remain in the EU.

 

 

Gone Fishing

 

By Greg Lance-Watkins  -   www.SilentMajority.co.uk

 

Two examples of the way  the European Union has dealt disastrously with Britain will illustrate the methods used to destroy countless British lives.   In this chapter, researcher Greg Lance-Watkins summaries the EU assault on the British fishing industry:

 ·        Unbeknown to the British electorate, Prime Minister Edward Heath made a deal with the EEC and gave away British sovereignty of its territorial fishing waters.   Up to that point ‘fishing’ had not been included in any treaties (it was not mentioned in the Treaty of Rome) but was later added at Maastricht (Articles 38-47).   EU officials were astounded when Heath unilaterally gave British fishing away with no preconditions.

·        British territorial waters are now ‘a shared European Union’ resource, and that means everything in them too.   This has given Brussels the right to allocate quotas to different member states who can now fish in British waters.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·        Due to the predictably harsh EU quotas imposed upon Britain’s fishing industry, millions of tons of fish, all dead but accidentally caught, are required (under EU law) to be thrown back into the sea.   EU law means that more fish are thrown back by British boats than are actually landed, for fear of incurring fines for over-fishing.   This is the result of the European Union’s conservation policy, which can cost lobster fishermen also, if they land a creature that is even one millimetre too small.   Fines of up to £50,000 can be levied against larger trawlers landing even one box over quota.

 

·        Thousands of boat boardings and inspections are carried out each year by EU representatives to ensure that the law on fishing is being upheld.

 

·        By 2004, the fishing fleets of other nations within the EU will be able to work right up to the shore, with Britain’s traditional 6- mile and 12-mile limits due to be abolished.   The quotas allocated by the Common Fisheries Policy of the EU mean that Spanish trawlers are allowed to fish cod in the Irish Sea while British trawlers are forbidden from putting to sea at all.

 

·        Although Maastricht was not signed until 1992 (in which Britain’s surrender of her fishing waters was formally acknowledged), foreign fishing fleets were using Britain’s waters for many years prior to that time.

·        Britain was allowed to fish only between 10% and 15% of her own stocks until 1st January 2003, when even this was cut back further.   The whole British fishing industry, on land and sea, has thus been effectively destroyed.   The quota system was brought into effect to accommodate the Spanish fishing fleet which had more boats than all the rest of the EU put together, but no good fishing grounds.

 

·        This law is being rigidly enforced with British waters, and is fast becoming a major pollution factor as well as helping to destroy remaining fishing stocks.   The previous EU arrangement gives Britain control up to six miles offshore and part control up to twelve miles.   This arrangement ended in 2002, and from 1st January 2003, EU boats have been able to fish right up to Britain’s shores.   (EU Regulation 3760/92).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

·        The British government was forced to pay over £100 million in damages to Spain for preventing their fishermen from fishing British territorial waters.   The European Court of Justice ruled in 1991 that the British Merchant Shipping Act of 1988, passed by legally elected Members of the British Parliament to protect British fisheries, was illegal and contrary to EU law.

·        EU fisheries policy has been such a success that as of November 2002, British waters have become so depleted of cod fishing grounds in the North Sea, the Irish Sea and the north coast of Scotland.

 

·        Total number of British fishing livelihoods wrecked as a result of EU interference:  1 million.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gone Farming

 

By Greg Lance-Watkins

 

How the European Union has destroyed British farming:   

 

·        Britain came under the EEC’s Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) after Edward Heath signed the Treaty of Rome.   Under the CAP’s ‘Community Preference’, Britain must purchase any goods from EU countries first, and not from her former trading partners or Commonwealth.   Thus Britain is forced at inflated prices to purchase, for example, some of France’s huge surpluses, while French farmers are compensated through the Common Agricultural Policy, a part of which Britain funds, to grow food no-one wants.

·        The CAP’s agricultural interference and draconian regulation has thus deliberately despaired and wrecked the British farming industry.   Food prices have been drastically affected as the more expensive food Britain is compelled to buy from Europe, rather than from her cheaper Commonwealth sources, finds its way into the supermarket and corner store.   UK Government estimates in 1998 put the unnecessary and unjustified increase in British food prices at over £6.5 billion.

·        Britain keeps pouring billions of good money after bad by continuing to fund her share of the CAP, knowing full well that nothing but more British agricultural hardship will come from it.   The CAP represents European cronyism and protectionism of the worst order.

 

·        Today some British farmers are bing paid to do nothing with their own land.   Those who are still farming actively in Britain are compelled to conform to asinine EU regulation that has drastically driven up their operating costs.   Little wonder that British farming has taken such a beating in the past twenty years as the full terms of the CAP have begun to cut in.

·        Other colossal increases in costs affecting farming include EU inspections of meat facilities and withdrawal of previous subsidies to British farmers which are then given to farmers in France, Spain and Greece for farming tobacco.

 ·        The Common Agricultural Policy currently consumes over half the EU’s total income.   It is also responsible for a major part of the legislation flowing out of Europe.   Even by the end of 1996, 8,956 farming laws had already been passed.

·        By signing up to the CAP in 1972, the British effectively lost control of up to 90% of their land mass (the area currently related to agriculture), as well as handing over total control of all our farming practices to Brussels.   As with fishing, this has resulted in the downfall of the farming industry due to the following:

 

  1.   Over-production within the EU brought about by liberal subsidies.

 

2.        Britain being flooded with food imports, against which the British government finds itself powerless to protect the British farmers, due to EU rules.

3.        Prices (to farmers, not consumers) have tumbled and thousands of farmers are now facing ruin.   Again (because of EU regulations) there is nothing the British government can do in the way of financial help or a policy of protection.

4.        Milk quotas were brought in to level out production across the EU.   British farmers were more efficient and productive than their Continental counterparts and so had to be restricted.   Britain is now forced to import 20% of its milk needs from France, whilst British farmers pour milk down the drain and steadily go bankrupt.

5.        An over-abundance of EU legislation is stifling whole sections of the industry into extinction.   Pig, sheep and cattle farmers, as well as the industries that depend on them (packaging, slaughtering, etc.) are all being forced to close.  For example:

 

6.        Since 1990, slaughterhouses in Britain have diminished in number from 1,400 to 400 due to EU regulations on ‘cleanliness’.

 

7.        Farmers have been, and are continuing to be paid for doing nothing with their land (the policy of ‘set-aside’).    The richer the land, the more subsidy the farmer receives for not farming it.   This policy is the land-based version of the de-commissioning of Britain’s fishing fleets.

 

·        The deliberate run-down of the British farming industry is taking place and, because of it, British farmers can no longer feed the citizens of these islands.   This places the country at the mercy of the EU and foreign imports.

 

·        The following is an indication of government (EU) policy:  On 3rd May 2000, the Government Rural White Paper – 7th report of the Environment Transport and Regional Affairs Committee, Vol. 1 – contained the following opening paragraph:  “The role of rural England as the food provider for the nation is no longer an essential one.”

 

·        Beef:  In a typical move which openly flouted EU law, the French government maintained an illegal 3-year ban on British beef, even though Brussels had ruled that the product was safe.   The continued blockade was imposed by France’s previous, beleaguered socialist government in an attempt to appease the powerful French farming lobby and its consumers.   The illegal ban is thought to have cost British farmers a staggering £600 million in lost exports, not to mention tainting the reputation of British beef globally, resulting in 40 other countries currently maintaining blockades of their own against us.  Under EU law, France could have amassed a potential fine of up to £100 million for disobeying a direct order from the EU to lift her illegal ban.   France is unlikely to pay a cent however as she is one of the two tails that wags the EU dog.

 

 

The Great Deception Behind the Rebate Row

 

By Christopher Booker (January 2006)

 

Tony Blair was quite right to point out that, without the UK rebate, Britain would be the largest net contributor to the EU budget, paying 15 times more than France.   It was precisely this imbalance which prompted Margaret Thatcher to fight for the rebate.   It was never properly explained, however, why this ridiculous anomaly arose in the first place.

 

One of many remarkable episodes which Richard North and I were able to bring to light in our book, The Great deception, just republished in a new updated edition, was the bizarre story behind the setting up of the Common Agricultural Policy in the 1960’s.  This was triggered off by the crisis facing France, through the runaway bill she was paying to subsidise French farmers for producing food nobody wanted.

 

President de Gaulle was terrified that this would bankrupt the French state, provoking social collapse.   The French therefore cunningly devised a CAP to get other countries to buy their surplus food and foot their subsidy bill.   The real reason why de Gaulle twice vetoed British entry was that it was vital first to get these arrangements agreed.  Otherwise Britain could have sabotaged a system deliberately designed to benefit France, from which Britain, because she imported, but with a smaller farming sector, she would also get fewer subsidies.

 

Only in 1969 did France get her way, at which point she needed Britain in and Edward Heath accepted the absurd arrangement.   Within a decade, with the CAP then taking up 90 per cent of the entire budget, Britain would become the biggest contributor.

Hence Mrs Thatcher’s fight for her rebate.   But even this was only a partial solution, because Britain’s farmers have continued to receive dramatically small subsidies than their competitors, contributing to the crisis which in recent years has brought much of British agriculture to its knees.

 

Thus are we still living with the problems created by that French stitch-up of 40 years ago, for reasons now almost lost in the mists of time.  For the full story refer to The Great Deception:  Can The European Union Survive?, published by Continuum at £9.99.

 

The Sunday Telegraph, 4th December 2005

 

Blair Will Pay for his Betrayal in Brussels

 

When it comes to international negotiations, possession is nine tenths of the law.   A country may be under any amount of pressure, but as long as it is profiting from the status quo, it has nothing to fear from a breakdown.  It is instructive then to compare the behaviour of the EU at the Hong Kong trade talks with that of the United Kingdom at the Brussels summit.

 

In Hong Kong, the EU represented by its Trade Commissioner, Peter Mandelson, was determined not to open its markets to developing countries.  Its stance was wrong-headed and ethically indefensible.

 

Euro-protectionism drives up prices, erodes Europe’s competitiveness and causes much poverty in the Third World.   But despite the pleas of the southern hemisphere nations, and despite a general American initiative to cut tariffs, Brussels remained intransigent, secure in the knowledge that no deal would mean a default to the existing situation.

 

Britain’s position in Brussels was even stronger.  No mechanism existed to reduce the British rebate without Tony Blair’s agreement.  Here, a failure to reach terms would mean not a continuation of the status quo, but something even more attractive:  a drying up of the budget.

 

Britain – which, for almost the entire period of its membership, has been one of only two countries to make any net payment to the EU – would thus have been spared its annual tribute of £12 billion, and might have used these savings to (for example) give us all a two thirds cut in council tax.

 

Why, then, was Mr Blair so determined to find an accommodation?  Why did he climb down from his own position that there would be no reduction in the rebate without a commensurate dismantling of the CAP?   Because his Europeanism has never really been based on a computation of Britain’s national interest.

 

For him, being pro-EU is about being a modern internationalist, not about securing specific gains for his country.   This is, of course, the worst possible frame of mind in which to enter negotiations.

 

More to the point, though, Mr Blair has failed in his own terms.  A generous internationalist might indeed believe that Britain ought to give money to needier countries.   But the EU budget is not a mechanism for doing so.  Its largest per capita beneficiary is Luxembourg.  By failing to secure CAP reform, Mr Blair has, in fact, done immense damage to the world’s truly deserving states.

 

Make no mistake:  the sums of money involved are immense - £7 billion, the amount Mr Blair has handed away, is roughly the entire police budget for England and Wales.  At the last election, Mr Blair claimed Tory plans for a £4 billion tax reduction would mean savage cuts in public services.   Never again will he be able to level such an accusation.

 

From now on, every time they are asked where they would find the money for tax cuts, the Tories can reasonably reply:  from Brussels.  Mr Blair has betrayed his word and his electorate.   His budget surrender will be hung, albatross-like, around his neck and invoked every time he raises taxes. 

 

The Daily Telegraph, 19th December 2005

 

Vitamins

 

There is a mass-migration of income from the medicine and pharmaceutical industries into the huge diversity of companies comprising what is known as the ‘alternative health industry’ has not gone unnoticed by the powers-that-be.   Today, British and Continental citizens are finding that new legislation from Brussels is seeking either to ban or strictly limit the availability of a wide range of traditional remedies and supplements that have been used by the public for decades, and in some cases centuries, for their well-being.  Something sinister called Codex Alimentarius is casting its Big Brother shadow across the Eurozone.   Americans and other world populations are looking on with apprehension as they know they are next!

 

The EU Supplements Directives

 

There is a European move to regulate the alternative health industry’s supplements.  

 

On 12th March 2002, the European Parliament voted and passed regulations which limit the public availability and upper intakes of hundreds of nutrients to ridiculously low levels – in certain cases,  1/50th            or  even less of what many nutritional doctors recommend as therapeutic doses.

 

Like Germany and France, many are now facing the prospect of not just severe censure in the amounts of these nutrients they can take, but what they can buy at all.  For, hidden within the Trojan Horse ‘harmonisation’ proposals used to justify entering the launch codes against the alternative health industry, the realisation is dawning that anything not on the EU positive list of ‘accepted’ supplements is now in for an outright ban.   Manufacturers who wished to field anything ‘new’ will be required to spend millions proving benefit through exhaustive ‘drug testing’ – a state of affairs guaranteed to bankrupt even the most stalwart of the green corporations.

 

For 13 years, European pharmaceutical conglomerates have been contemplating a standardised market for vitamin, mineral and herbal supplements.   Various attempts to harmonise the industry have met with a huge and sustained opposition, not least from the UK and its vitamin consumers.   In January 2000, the Brussels Commission, during one of those rare, brief periods in which it was not being found guilty of fraud and accounting corruption, table a White Paper on Food Safety.  A later document, 500PC0222 (what monster invents that kind of archiving system?), concluded that a wide disparity existed on alternative medicine dosages, and proposed legislation to correct the imbalance.   In France and Germany, for instance, no products containing more than one times the Recommended Daily Allowance (RDA) may be sold without a drug licence.

 

And this is a problem.  Vitamin C’s RDA is 40-60mg.  Yet the therapeutic dosage of C begins at 500mg and goes up beyond 10,000mg.  So if you wish to treat yourself with mega doses of C complex for your cancer, best visit B & Q and buy up a wheelbarrow in readiness to haul all those expensive, tiny vitamin pills back to base-camp.

 

Opposition is to No Avail

 

Most UK Members of the Euro Parliament (MEPs) voted against the food supplements and herbal initiatives, which nevertheless passed.   In spite of some 400 million pieces of mail, e-mails, faxes and sky writings thrown at Brussels vociferously protesting this attack on human rights, along with the predictable media black-out, the legislation was approved with no House debate at the usual tornado velocity, with 383 MEPs in favour and 139 against.  Considerable resources had been expended by the pharmaceutical industry to lobby members for their vote.  The public’s outrage was ignored.

 

Where are we Now?

 

There is an intervening period currently occurring which is designed to allow member states to pass laws aligning themselves with the new directives, which also strictly limit the availability of herbal medicines.   Products formulated with ingredients not on the EU’s parsimonious list of approved substances will not comply with the directives and will be banned after 1st June 2005.   Upper safe limits have been arbitrarily allocated to such a conservative list of nutrients, over which supplement dosage will be regulated, that the vast majority of other, more specialised nutrients not included on the list will be effectively cleared from the shelves of most UK, Dutch and Irish health stores, along with even the common stuff, such as vitamins C and B6, which are always sold in potencies exceeding the EU mandate.

 

Unless a concerted effort is made en masse by the affronted citizenry to pull Britain out of the European Union, the Euro juggernaut will have its way again.   A few short years from now, the Darth Vader vitamin police will screech up outside your vitamin shack and clear your shelves of the designated ‘contraband’ nutrients.  And there won’t be a thing you will be able to do about it.

 

Strategies

 

Many alternative health organisations are blanching at the thought of losing significant revenues over this new legislation to the drug industry and their huge retail conglomerates, and have formed alliances to ‘fight the Food  Supplements Directive’.  However, they do so in woeful ignorance of the simple fat that, with the European Union, they are no longer operating on a democratic, accountable field.   Their mistake, and this is the crucial point being missed, is that they are confusing Brussels with people who actually care about what the public think.

 

Brussels do not care about your supplements!   Brussels are closing loopholes, working to standardise everything across Europe, and responding to corporate lobbying and plain paper envelopes from the drug industry in their usual way, all the while ruling their new fiefdom from behind closed doors.  The public are not considered.

 

Brussels do not recognise that you even have a right to complain.   This is the new system taking over Europe as well as Britain.  There is nothing you can do about any of this through what you perceive as traditional parliamentary channels.   They simply don’t exist any more.   Your politicians have been too cowardly to tell you that this is now the state of affairs governing Britain.

 

Uneasy Bedfellows – The Great Immigration Disaster

 

Today, Britain is being successfully invaded for the third time in its 1,000 year history.   The first time, it was William of Normandy who invaded our southern shores and ended up running the country after King Harold was struck in the eye with a French arrow at the ill-fated Battle of Hastings in 1066.  The second occasion was when the Americans invaded us in a friendly way prior to the Allies launching Operation Overlord (D-Day) against the Nazis on 6th June 1944.

 

These days, Britain is being invaded with ‘asylum seekers’, most of which are not political refugees fleeing tyranny in their own countries at all, but economic migrants seeking to better their lives by choosing a new country in which to live.  And guess which is their first country of choice?  Not Germany, not France, nor Italy or Greece but Britain!

 

The United states has the Mexican immigrant problem in her south west corner.  Australians are trying to hold the Indonesians at bay to the north.  New Zealanders have the Pacific Islanders and citizens of other south-east Asian nations trying to get in.   This is economic migration.

 

Into this mix we stir the concerted plan by global socialism striving for its New World Order to homogenise national populations in order to dilute the hated national identity and thus marginalise the appeal of the nation state.   Mass, unchecked immigration is the perfect weapon to accomplish this.   The nation, like the family, is believed by the socialist today to be the root cause of all wars and woes respectively, which is why socialism is always working tirelessly to kill off both.   Actually, while nationalism has certainly been one of the reasons war has broken out in the past, it is not the main reason.   The chief motivation that triggers a country to go to war is actually the belief that it can get away with it.

 

Nations provide a check and balance system against government abuse and tyranny.  Truly democratic nations are the largest social unit that can still be directly controlled by the majority of their inhabitants.   When one nation gets too big for its boots, others can band together and sort out the renegade country.   Refugees fleeing the tyranny can also hope to find sanctuary in another land.   Nazi Germany and Japan were brought to account during the last war by this check and balance system, although the cost was ugly and extremely high.  A world containing a democracy of independent nations still provides for this control system to operate effectively if someone gets out of line.

 

But set up a global government structure not answerable to its peoples, or even a continental federation like the EU, place all the power into the hands of a few, unelected, unaccountable committees, and the check and balance system is lost.   One of course lives in the hope that such a mega-government will be benevolent.   But it it isn’t?  What can you do about it now?  Where will you flee?   Who will bring the tyranny to account?

 

Our neighbours on the mainland have suffered enough at the hands of their extremists and ideologists.   No countries deserve peace and a chance to rid themselves of their power-hungry political cliques more than France, Austria, Germany and Italy.   It is for this reason that the European Union poses the greatest danger to European and hence world peace, not just because it is run by a group of fifth-rate, financially corrupt nest-featherers, but because there is no accountability to the public.   This is especially true with Britain, where the safety net has been removed just as we are about to be persuaded to take our own one-way, high-wire walk into European integration.   The European Union has already shown itself capable of:

 

·        Corruption on a Herculean scale.

·        Removing its citizens’ human rights if it so chooses.

·        Ignoring mass protests of its citizens over the measures it introduces.

·        Imprisoning people for periods without fair trial.

·        Equipping the state with all the instruments of repression.

·        Rendering immunity from prosecution to all its officials.

These days, Britain is being invaded with ‘asylum seekers’, most of which are not political refugees fleeing tyranny in their own countries at all, but economic migrants seeking to better their lives by choosing a new country in which to live.  And guess which is their first country of choice?  Not Germany, not France, nor Italy or Greece but Britain!

 

The United states has the Mexican immigrant problem in her south west corner.  Australians are trying to hold the Indonesians at bay to the north.  New Zealanders have the Pacific Islanders and citizens of other south-east Asian nations trying to get in.   This is economic migration.

 

Into this mix we stir the concerted plan by global socialism striving for its New World Order to homogenise national populations in order to dilute the hated national identity and thus marginalise the appeal of the nation state.   Mass, unchecked immigration is the perfect weapon to accomplish this.   The nation, like the family, is believed by the socialist today to be the root cause of all wars and woes respectively, which is why socialism is always working tirelessly to kill off both.   Actually, while nationalism has certainly been one of the reasons war has broken out in the past, it is not the main reason.   The chief motivation that triggers a country to go to war is actually the belief that it can get away with it.

 

Nations provide a check and balance system against government abuse and tyranny.  Truly democratic nations are the largest social unit that can still be directly controlled by the majority of their inhabitants.   When one nation gets too big for its boots, others can band together and sort out the renegade country.   Refugees fleeing the tyranny can also hope to find sanctuary in another land.   Nazi Germany and Japan were brought to account during the last war by this check and balance system, although the cost was ugly and extremely high.  A world containing a democracy of independent nations still provides for this control system to operate effectively if someone gets out of line.

 

But set up a global government structure not answerable to its peoples, or even a continental federation like the EU, place all the power into the hands of a few, unelected, unaccountable committees, and the check and balance system is lost.   One of course lives in the hope that such a mega-government will be benevolent.   But it it isn’t?  What can you do about it now?  Where will you flee?   Who will bring the tyranny to account?

 

Our neighbours on the mainland have suffered enough at the hands of their extremists and ideologists.   No countries deserve peace and a chance to rid themselves of their power-hungry political cliques more than France, Austria, Germany and Italy.   It is for this reason that the European Union poses the greatest danger to European and hence world peace, not just because it is run by a group of fifth-rate, financially corrupt nest-featherers, but because there is no accountability to the public.   This is especially true with Britain, where the safety net has been removed just as we are about to be persuaded to take our own one-way, high-wire walk into European integration.   The European Union has already shown itself capable of:

 

·        Corruption on a Herculean scale.

·        Removing its citizens’ human rights if it so chooses.

·        Ignoring mass protests of its citizens over the measures it introduces.

·        Imprisoning people for periods without fair trial.

·        Equipping the state with all the instruments of repression.

·        Rendering immunity from prosecution to all its officials.

 

Open Door

 

From 1950 to 1990, the total population of Caribbean and Asian immigrants in Britain went from around 80,000 to a little over 3 million, mostly concentrated in the south-east of the country and the major cities.  Since the early 1990’s, the immigrant population, comprising both legal entrants and those sneaking in, has exploded exponentially.  Figures released by the Home Office show that just under 30,000 illegal immigrants claimed asylum in a three-month period in the summer of 2002.  Nine out of ten had their cases thrown out, yet only 3,565 were subsequently deported.

 

The mass, unchecked immigration sanctioned by the present and past British governments has deeply offended the British.  Needless to say, the immigration issue is hardly about ‘racism’, ‘xenophobia’, or ‘populism’, except when these labels justifiably apply to politically correct liberalists who seek to stifle the honest outrage of the majority.  Nobody is saying that there shouldn’t be any immigrants.  The reason the British are so upset is because they were simply never asked who they wanted to come to live with them….and how many.

 

Immigration is ever the hot issue it always was.  Even to discuss the problem is to invite a torrent of hate-filled abuse and cries of ‘racist!’ and ‘Nazi!’ from the socialist nation-wreckers.  This of course is their intention:  to keep free speech suppressed, all the while allowing their damaging, dangerous policies to proceed unimpugned.  One such shameful issue has been the catastrophic failure of our political class to admit the disaster of Britain’s immigration policy.

 ·        According to government sources, genuine asylum seekers fleeing political persecution make up a mere 3% of those attempting to get into Britain.  The vast majority are illegal economic immigrants.  People are attempting to enter Britain in such numbers because they see the real chance of a prosperous future for themselves here.

 

·        The government mechanism for curbing immigration and ensuring only valid cases are passed appears to have completely broken down.  Very few asylum seekers whose applications have been turned down at the time of writing are actually being deported.  Many are either just released into the community or disappear into British society.

 

·        British taxpayers are having to foot the expense of providing camps, healthcare, social security, education and housing for tens of thousands of economic migrants every month!

·        Under new government guidelines, four-star hotels and holiday camps are being set aside to house illegal immigrants.

 

·        Asylum seekers have also been benefiting from hand-outs from the politically correct National Lottery Community Fund.  In 2001, illegal immigrants received a staggering £20 million to the outrage of other groups, such as the Victims of Crime Trust, who were passed over.  Clive Elliott of the VCT called for a boycott of the Lottery, remonstrating:  “I accuse the Community Fund of being biased and prejudiced and even exhibiting institutionalised racism when choosing its priorities.”

 

·        Today, one in 20 of London’s population is either an ‘asylum seeker’ or a refugee.

 

·        Asylum applications can involve long and expensive legal processes, again paid for by the British taxpayer.

·        Unchecked illegal immigration provides easy opportunity for terrorists to enter Britain undetected.  One refugee leader, Dr Mohammed Sekkoum, believes that at least 100 Algerians who are known terrorists in their own country have entered and are living secretly in Britain.

 

·        Communities in south-eastern England have found themselves literally overrun by illegal immigrants.

·        It appears that Britain has lost control of her own borders.

·        The white population of Britain is reproducing itself far more slowly than the immigrant populations, with the inevitable effect of changing the racial mix of the country.

·        Illegal immigration allows a nation state’s identify to be diluted as other cultures homogenise with the domestic population.

  ·        Illegal immigration provides more justification for EU state interference and control.

·        Publicising illegal immigration will more likely cause the acceptance by the public of EU security measures, such as the introduction of a continent-wide ID card, which the citizenry normally would not tolerate.  Will Europe once again hear:  “Your papers, please”?

·        Cultural diversity has historically caused deep-seated and long-term problems with stability and control, as we have seen with Northern Ireland, Africa, Yugoslavia and Britain and many other examples throughout history.  Yet ‘multiculturalism’ still remains the weapon of choice for EU socialists for four main reasons:

1.        It wrecks a nation’s national identity and customs;

 

2.        It improves socialism’s standing with the immigrants who will henceforth vote for their benefactors;

 

3.        It creates problems which can only be solved with the state taking on more powers, e.g. the issuance of  ID cards and other security measures;

 

4.        No indigenous citizen is able to complain about the effects of this ‘unchecked’ immigration for fear of being labelled a ‘racist’.

 

·        In ancient times, when the Assyrian empire invaded a nation, it would     deport the indigenous population and settle foreign peoples into the conquered land, such as with the Samaritans into northern Israel.   This sweeping measure prevented the germination of nationalist resistance movements among the conquered race.

·        In 1998, the EU set up a European Monitoring Centre on Racism and Xenophobia in Vienna.   Neither ‘crime’ was defined, leaving each open to wide interpretation, one of the EU’s favourite tactics.

 

·        While unacceptable ‘racist’ views are deplored by most, a free society must allow freedom of speech, however objectionable.  Otherwise, who determines what is acceptable to think about and say, and what isn’t?  The EU?

 

Are the British Racist?

 

A cataclysmic weapon has been deployed against Britain in the form of mass, unchecked immigration, coupled with the drafting of new legislation which will actually make it illegal to voice your opposition to EU policies of the day.

 

But are the British who speak up about such matters ‘racist’ or ‘xenophobic’, or are they not justified  in feeling apprehensive and nervous about what is going on around them?  The future may yet see Islamic fundamentalism take to the streets in Britain to propagate its own violence, since radical Islam, by its own admission, refuses to assimilate into Britain’s new secular society, let alone the previous Christian one.  This may already have begun to happen.

Logging on to You

 

After the forthcoming ‘enlargement’ of the EU in May 2004, the aim is eventually to have all 450 million inhabitants registered on the central Europol database with an ‘entitlement’ (read ‘identity’) card, fingerprints, DNA-typing and dozens of fields of information on political and sexual preferences, arrest records, tax data, religious beliefs and other demographic denominators.  Misbehaviour by any individual will incur a withdrawal of ‘entitlements’ (privileges granted by the state) and the full machinery of the state’s oppressive law enforcement apparatus being arrayed against them.

 

Another problem is that terrorists can gain access to Britain relatively easily in order to wreak havoc on soft targets, as we almost saw with the ricin episode in North London.  Such terrorist events, while grotesque and macabre to the public, in fact greatly serve the ends of the socialist architects.  Another high-profile terrorism shooting, for instance, provokes the usual round of gun-control legislation, further disarming law-abiding citizens, while at the same time ensuring that the police become more heavily armed and the serious weaponry is left in the hands of hardened criminals and troublemakers.

 

 

Old Soviet

 

Anatoly Golytsin, a Kremlin staffer, defected from the USSR in 1984 and published his book, New Lies for Old.   In it, Golytsin described how, a few years into the future, a series of political events would occur in Russia which would lead the world to believe that Communism had collapsed.  This in fact happened with the breaking up of the Soviet Union in 1991.  The West was indeed lulled to sleep, according to Golytsin, trusting that the Cold War was over.  Meanwhile, was a more powerful and better organised regime forming beneath Western nations in Europe after decades of careful planning and execution?

 

The political left in Britain endorses any move that contributes towards the break-up of the state and its acceleration into their utopia of either a pan-European super state or global federation.  Reckless immigration, along the lines we are seeing today, appears to be deliberately encourage, through inaction, by the government of the day, even as it was by previous administrations, regardless of party politics.

 

Britain – a Cultural War-Zone

    

The woman in the street and the man on the Clapham omnibus, born during the 1920’s into a Britain of deference, respect and long-established British values, have both received a rude awakening.  The Britain they once admired and loved has ceased to exist.

 

There was once a Britain where citizens regarded themselves as having the highest ideals of decency and justice.  But the character of today’s Britons, occupying the same place on the globe as their empirical predecessors, would be as alien to those old adversaries Gladstone and Disraeli as the dark side of the moon.

 

To the old soldiers, sailors and airmen of World War II, the country they loved and fought for is unrecognisable to them today, and so are the inhabitants.  Forbidden by law to say anything about what is going on around them, they choke on the ‘multiculturalism’ and ‘cultural diversity’ gags that have been stuffed in their mouths.  Bitter resentment and anger seethe in their hearts that no one asked them whether they wanted all the changes the socialists forced upon them anyway.  They came from an era when everyone seemed to care.  Today, how shocked they are to find that it is they are viewed as the enemies of ‘tolerance’ and ‘progress’.

 

While millions of the silent majority resent what has happened and seek a lawful, political solution from one of their major political parties, not one speaks for them.  The Big Three, New Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats, are all pushing for the death of Britain.  New Labour waved the Union Jack at the Queen’s Jubilee, while chortling inwardly at its coming demise.  The soft and vacillating Conservative right rubberstamps a multiculturalism it secretly hates, grinning sheepishly up at the British Tower of Babel which hideously offends it, just to appear relevant with the trendy modernizers of Blair’s Third Way’.

 

Are the British institutionally racist?  Well if we are, you’d be hard put to explain why British army and civilian personnel went native in India.  Africa and a hundred places in between during the empire years, even as they do today.   Millions of Brits over the centuries have married foreign spouses, incorporated foreign cuisine and adopted foreign ways and brought all those great foreign words into our tremendously versatile language. 

 

Today the huge contributions the British have made to the world are still venerated in South Africa, India, Pakistan, Australia, Canada, America, New Zealand and a hundred other countries.  Certainly not much of an indication that the British culture is at war with the natives.  In fact, name another empire that has ever withdrawn from its power and still enjoys the kind of relationship we do with most of our former colonies today?

 

So Britain is to get the destiny she deserves.  Lenin is to have his day.  The state is God.  Multiculturalism and political correctness became the new faith and morality for Britain round about the time the nation realised it had lost God in the mud somewhere between the guilt of Passchendaele and the shame of the Anglican Lambeth Conferences.

 

                                        ----------------------

 

 

H.F.1266/1

 
 
WHERE'S THEIR SENSE OF DUTY?

 

NNot since WW2 has there been a greater need for politicians to pull together. Fat chance when they're so lacking in PUBLIC SPIRIT says

Daily Mail: 2017-07-11 - WHERE'S THEIR SENSE OF DUTY?

 

 

WHATEVER you think of our vote to leave the EU there is no doubt that we face some of the most critical months in our nation's modern history.

Most observers, whether Leavers or Remainers, agree that extricating ourselves from

BRUSSELS

and charting a newly

INDEPENDENT COURSE

will be

A COLOSSAL CHALLENGE,

YOU MAY HAVE  HOPED, THEREFORE , THAT OUR NATION'S POLITICIANS WOULD HAVE RISEN TO THE MOMENT, PUTTING ASIDE PETTY DIFFERENCES AND COMING TOGETHER IN THE

NATIONAL INTEREST.

What better sign that we are all

PATRIOTS.

and that, like our forefathers,

WE STAND OR FALL AS ONE

UNITED KINGDOM?...

 

 

TO BE CONTINUED

JULY 11-2017

 

 

 

H.F.1252 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

 

 

Ours might be a stronger and happier Society if Christians were readier to defend their values.

 

In the Daily Mail on Tuesday the 21st December 2004 an article by their columnist Stephen Glover has shown a Solomon touch in his case for Free Speech and Sensitivity in the Religious aspect of many of our citizen’s lives.

*

Most people will be shocked that hundreds of Sikhs should have laid siege to a Birmingham theatre on Saturday and brought the performance of a controversial play to an early end.  Windows were smashed, missiles thrown and three police officers were injured.

 Now the management of the Birmingham Rep has abandoned the production of Behzti after failing to reach an agreement with Sikh leaders.  With the prospect of further riots, it could not guarantee the safety of theatregoers.

The play, deeply provocative to many Sikhs, depicted rape and murder in a Sikh temple.  Written by the Sikh female writer Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti, it is the story of a mother and daughter who visit a temple where murder and abuse take place.

 After Saturday’s riots, Sikh leaders had made the apparently preposterous claim that the setting of the play should be changed from a temple to a community centre.

On the face of it, these activities amount to an outrageous suppression of free speech.   The threat of brute force has led to the abandonment of the play that broke no laws, and which law-abiding citizens had paid good money to see.  To force closure challenges the Values of an Open Society which most of us hold dear.

 

Precious

 

Without a doubt, the incident will be used by those on the far-Right such as the BNP They will say it shows that immigrants such as Sikhs with their own religious beliefs cannot be expected to respect British customs.  Others more liberal disposition will limit themselves to the observation that free speech is a precious thing that must be defended at all costs.

Right and Left will agree that the behaviour of the Sikh leaders shows how they have not signed up to the post-enlightenment values that prevail in the host society.   Most of us accept the proposition that we fight ideas with other ideas-not with violence and censorship.

 

Of course, much of this is true.  I deplore censorship.  And yet part of me is unable to share in the general outrage.  This bit of me even feels a degree of sympathy for the Sikhs.  They were protecting something precious about their religion.  No one can condone violence, but it is difficult not to admire their- to us- very unfashionable defence of religious beliefs.

In fact, the very idea that anything goes in the theatre or literature was not born fully –formed in the Enlightenment 250 years ago.

Until quite recently most people, including many who thought themselves as liberals, believed that there should be limits on free expression, particularly in matters of religion and sex.  In the theatre the Lord Chamberlain ensured that there were few, if any profanities.

 

In the history of this country-even its democratic history-the belief that free speech should be completely untrammelled is a very recent one.  Over the past 40 years, there has been a string of films and plays mocking Christ, not withstanding the blasphemy laws, which are largely ignored.

 

Monty Python’s Life of Brian showed one of the thieves crucified with Christ singing to him on the cross, Always look on the Bright Side Of Life.  In the film the Last Temptation Of Christ, the saviour was depicted making love to Mary Magdalen.

 

Such films have caused enormous upsets, and some complaints, though we have seen nothing to rival the Sikhs rioting in Birmingham.  A recent production in St Andrews in Scotland of Terry Mac Nally’s play Corpus Christi- that depicts Christ and his disciples as homosexuals-did attracts a small peaceful protest by Christian fundamentalists.

 

This Christmas Madame Tussaud’s  exhibited sacrilegious waxworks of ‘Posh and Becks’ as Mary, mother of Jesus, Joseph, with no regard for the feelings of Christians.  A current Channel 4 brochure carries a photographic spread of the Gallaghers from the ‘current hit show, Shameless’.

 

It shows them in the attitude of the apostles at the Last Supper.  The figure playing Christ leans forward drunkenly. Beer can in one hand, a cigarette in the other.

 

Notoriety

 

What is striking about all these examples is how poor they are as works of art.  Their notoriety derives from the ability to shock.  I dare say the same can be said of Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti’s play in Birmingham.  But even third-rate works can cause offence if the ideas they contain are sufficiently provocative.

 

Indeed, it is the mark of an inferior playwright that he should set out simply to provoke rather than to enlighten.  If Gurpreet Kaur Bhatti’s object was to suggest that Sikhs in temples could behave improperly-as we know Roman Catholic priests can in their own world-she could have made her point more subtly without inflaming the very Sikhs whom she would presumably like to influence.

 

Having chosen a holy temple as her setting, she could have hardly been expected to change it in order to please her critics.  But she would have been wiser to have found a less contentious venue in the first place.

 

I am not advocating suppression of free speech.  It would have been better if the play had been allowed to proceed as written.  But I do feel a degree of respect for the way in which Sikhs are prepared to defend their religious values in the face of merciless assaults from their enemies.  They show robustness which most ordinary Christians-excepting a few fundamentalists-are too timid to express.

 

Family

And perhaps this explains why Sikhs, one of the most successful of immigrant groups observe their religion to an extent that is barely intelligible to most white Britons.  For them religion is not something which may happen just at Christmas or Easter, if at all.  It is part of the daily routine of their lives, and informs their belief in the importance of the family and their social group.

 

Many will say that the religious intolerance shown by Sikhs in Birmingham shows how dangerous diverse Britain is becoming as a society.  Here are people who put their religious beliefs before the notion of free speech.  The same point is often made in relation to British Muslims, whose supposedly primitive beliefs are also pronounced to be pre-Enlightened.

 

Certainly the intolerance is worrying, but the main lesson I draw from events in Birmingham is that Sikhs comprise a group in our society, which retains a laudably strong religious conviction, as well as a firm belief in the family.

They are not prepared to see their beliefs mocked and degraded as many Christians have been.

 

If these Values could be expressed peacefully and in a way that did not threaten free speech, would they not be an inspiration, rather than a threat to Christian Britain?

 

Ours might be a stronger and happier society if Christians were readier to defend their values, and if third-rate playwrights thought twice before attacking them.

*          *          *

[Font altered-bolding used-comments in brackets]

 

[For details of a peaceful Christian fellowship, which travels the country to protest at blasphemy and insult to Christ –contact ‘Christian Voice’

  www.christian-voice.org.uk                            

Patron: The Lord Ashbourne.]

DECEMBER 21-2004

 

 

 

 

 CHRISTIANITY AND MARRIAGE AND THE STATE**** GAMBLING AND ETHICS****CHRISTIANITY,THE PEOPLE, AND ETHICS****IMMIGRATION POLICY**** CHRISTIANITY IS MORE THAN A RELIGION_IT IS THE MAIN CULTURAL FORCE_WHICH MAKES US WHAT WE ARE****CHRISTIAN BELIEFS UNDER ATTACK BY EU'S PARLIAMENT IS INTELLECTUAL NAZISM**** A DEFENCE OF CHRISTIANITY BY A ONCE AGNOSTIC****WHO CARES ABOUT MORALITY****DEMOCRACY WITHOUT MORALITY AND RESPECT FOR INDIVIDUALITY IS DESPOTISM****THE WORLD IS DIVIDED INTO MANY RELIGIOUS CIRCLES OF INFLUENCE****THE INDIVIDUAL IS THE BACKBONE OF CHRISTIANITY****CHRISTIAN PARLIAMENTARIAN SPEAKS ON TAX BILLS-FOREIGN POLICY-PEACE-AND THE POWER OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS****OURS MIGHT BE A STRONGER AND HAPPIER SOCIETY IF CHRISTIANS WERE READIER TO DEFEND THEIR VALUES****SUNDAY SCHOOL CAN SAVE CHILDREN FROM DELINQUENCY-SAYS BISHOP****OUR CHRISTIAN FESTIVAL OF EASTER WHICH MANY KNOW SO LITTLE AND SOME NONE****

AN AGE WHEN ALL FAITHS ARE EQUAL-EXCEPT CHRISTIANITY****

LET the CHRISTMAS MESSAGE ring out WHILE you still CAN-by -MICHAEL NAZIR ALI-BISHOP OF ROCHESTER-DEC-2006****

 

 

WHY WE MUST REMAIN A CHRISTIAN COUNTRY

 

 

O COME ALL YE FAITHFUL…

EXCEPT CHRISTIANS.

[WHETHER ONE IS A CHRISTIAN OR NOT ENGLAND HAS A CHRISTIAN HERITAGE AND IF THE SUPPORT FOR THAT PRICELESS INHERITANCE IS LOST THEN IT WILL BE FILLED BY OTHERS OF WHOM SOME HAVE A MORE AGGRESSIVE AND UNFORGIVING NATURE WHICH WOULD TAKE US BACK TO THE DARK AGES.]

 

 

  A MESSAGE FROM 1938 AS TRUE TODAY IN SEPTEMBER 2017

ENGLAND

EPILOGUE

WILLIAM RALPH INGE - DEAN of ST PAULS

1938

Christianity is the generic name of a number of different religions, some of which have only an adventitious connexion with the Gospel of Christ.  Genuine religious revivals occur from time to time, and have a starting, but short-lived, popular success. They are difficult to predict, and they seem more congenial to the so-called Celtic temperament, for example in Wales, than  to the more stolid character of the English. There are no signs at all that any outburst of religious enthusiasm is likely to occur in England in the twentieth century.  Superficially, the organized religious  bodies seem to be slowly losing ground.  The emancipation of women, and the education which they now receive, have assimilated their mental outlook to that of men, and this has been injurious to the interests of institutional religion, much more in the north of Europe than in the Latin countries, where the position of women has changed less.  These tendencies have led many  to expect a gradual disappearance of religion from its age-long position as one of the most potent factors in social life.  In much of our most modern literature it is simply left out of account.  But a serious thinker, whatever his personal convictions, will be slow to believe in such a rapid and subversive change in human nature.   He may even doubt whether the decay of Christianity has not been much more apparent than real.  The essence of Christianity is, as Nietzsche said, a "transvaluation of all values," a conviction about the position of man in relation to the unseen Divine Power who made and governs the universe.  It is essentially a religious idealism, which traces its origins to a historical revelation. It appeals very strongly to those who are susceptible to such a call, but, as its Founder repeatedly warned his disciples, it is never likely to be acceptable to the majority.   The Believers were to be the salt of the earth, or like leaven hid in three measures of meal.

 "The Spirit of Truth" is a Spirit whom "the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not neither knoweth him."

The Church, however, was not long content to appeal to the anima naturaliter Christiana, or to the penitent sinner who often has the makings of a saint.   It issued irreligious appeals, in the form of lurid threats and gorgeous promises, to the irreligious, and by a means of unholy alliances with the secular arm became, at least nominally, the creed of everybody.   But it is the law that a religion which gains power by non-religious methods [ As do Muslim Fundamentalists in Mosques in England in 2017 with their aim of a ISLAMIC STATE] invariably uses it for non-religious ends.  Church history in the so-called ages of faith presents a most unedifying spectacle.  What  has happened in our day (1938)  is  that these non-religious appeals have lost their cogency.   Partly from discoveries in natural science, but still more from the growth of the scientific attitude in weighing evidence, the materialistic pictures of bliss and torment, which once produced a certain effect, are now either rejected or interpreted in a very symbolical sense.   Deprived of these weapons, the Church has proceeded to secularize itself, and to present the Gospel as ca prophecy of " a good time coming" in this world. 

 But this is quite obviously not Christianity, and the laity do not like  the priest in politics.

So the Churches against their will, are thrown back upon their real message and their own business.

There  is no reason to think that the strictly religious appeal of

CHRISTIANITY

is less powerful than it ever was; but , as always, it is an appeal which does not attract the majority.

The proper attitude of the Church is frankly to accept this position, which is that of the Founder himself, and to find its usefulness in steadily holding before the nation a heroic and noble ideal of belief and conduct, in contrast with the secularity, greed, and hypocrisy of society in general.  So purified from extraneous accretions, Christianity may in the future exercise an incalculably beneficent influence upon the life of the nation, and may win the allegiance of many who at present stand aloof from it.

(Pages 299/300.)

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

Brought-forward from:

 

DECEMBER 21-2004

 

H.F.1306

 
 
 

September 2015.

Thousands of Syrian migrants crossing the Balkan route were heading toward Germany. Chancellor Angela Merkel was on the phone with Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière, talking about a number of measures to protect the borders, where thousands of policemen were secretly located along with buses and helicopters. De Maizière turned for advice to Dieter Romann, then head of the police. "Can we live with the images that will come out?" de Mazière asked. "What happens if 500 refugees with children in their arms run toward the border guards?"

De Maiziére was told that the appropriate use of the measures to be taken would have be decided by the police on the field. When de Maizière relayed Romann's response to the Chancellor, Merkel reversed her original commitment. And the borders were opened for 180 days.

"For historical reasons, the Chancellor feared images of armed German police confronting civilians on our borders," writes Robin Alexander, Die Welt's leading journalist, who revealed these details in a new book, Die Getriebenen ("The Driven Ones"). Alexander reveals the real reason that pushed Merkel to open the door to a million and a half migrants in a few weeks: "In the end, Merkel refused to take responsibility, governing through the polls." This is how the famous Merkel's motto "Wir schaffen das" was born:

"We can do it."

According to Die Zeit:

"Merkel and her people are convinced that the marchers could only be stopped with the help of violence: with water cannons, truncheons and pepper spray. It would be chaotic and the images would be horrific. Merkel is extremely wary of such images and of their political impact, and she is convinced that Germany wouldn't tolerate them. Merkel once said that Germany wouldn't be able to stand the images from the dismal conditions in the refugee camp at Calais for more than three days. But how much more devastating would images be of refugees being beaten as they try to get to Austria or Germany?"

Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of humanitarian politics; it was dictated by the fear of television images spread all over the world. In so many key moments, it is the photograph that dictates our behavior: the image that dishonors us, that makes us cringe in horror.

Now, the main German sentiment that seems to be driving public opinion and politics is a dramatic sense of guilt. It is a "secular sin", according to a new book by German sociologist Rolf Peter Sieferle that is topping the German bestseller list, "Finis Germania".

The behavior of Germans during the current migrant crisis, however, is symbolic of a more general Western condition. On April 30, 1975, the fall of Saigon was part of a war fought and lost by the United States as much on television as in the Vietnamese forests and rice paddies. It ended with the the escape of helicopters from the rooftop of the US embassy.

In 1991, the imagery of the "highway of death" of Saddam Hussein's bombed army of thugs fleeing a plundered Kuwait also shocked the public in the West, and led to calls for an immediate cessation of the fighting in Iraq and Kuwait. The result was that Saddam Hussein's air force and Republican Guard divisions were spared; during the "peace" that followed, it was these troops who butchered Kurds and Shiites.

The photograph of a dead American soldier dragged through the streets of Mogadishu after the "Black Hawk Down" incident pushed President Bill Clinton to order a shameful retreat from Somalia. That photograph also led the US Administration to rethink and cancel plans to use US troops for United Nations peace operations in Bosnia, Haiti and other strategic points. General David Petraeus would describe America's engagement in Afghanistan as a "war of perception".

Even the suffering of our enemies disturbs us, in the humanitarian culture of the West. We are therefore increasingly amenable to policies of appeasement, censorship and retreat, in order not to have to face the possibility of such horribleness and actually having to fight it.

That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We have paralysed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic photos of the terrorists' victims and even the faces and names of the jihadists. The Islamic terrorists, on the other hand, are not publicity-seekers; they are soldiers ready to die and kill in the name of what they care about.

This week, the German media was shocked by the revelation that the German air force will probably come under fire during its Syrian mission. "Endangering German soldiers!" -- with an exclamation point -- wrote Bild, the largest-selling newspaper in Germany. The statement exposed the anxiety of what John Vinocur of the Wall Street Journal called a "country where the army and air force basically do not fight". A pacifist Germany is now a source of trouble also for its own neighbors, such as Poland. "For centuries, our main worry in Poland was a very strong German army", said former Polish Defense Minister Janusz Onyszkiewicz. "Today, we're seriously worried about German armed forces that are too weak."

The Western establishment censors images of our enemies' crimes while giving prominence to our "guilt". The French government censored the "gruesome torture" of the victims at the Bataclan Theater, who were castrated, disemboweled and had their eyes gouged out by the Islamist terrorists. It was a mistake: it was in the public interest to know exactly what enemy we are facing.

The FBI and Department of Justice released a transcript of the Orlando jihadist's 911 call, but omitted all reference to the terror group ISIS and to Islam. These authorities did not want the public to know that Omar Mateen identified himself as an "Islamic soldier".

The European Commission against Racism and Intolerance then told the British press it should not report when terrorists are Muslim.

The CEO of Twitter, Dick Costolo, suspended accounts that showed photographs of the beheading of John Foley, along with other Islamist beheadings and savagery. But Twitter did not mind being flooded by images of a little dead boy, Alan (Aylan) Kurdi on a beach.

The mainstream media in the US fought hard to lift the photo ban on military coffins during the war in Iraq. Its goal, apparently, was to humiliate and intimidate the public, to lower the support for the war.

Images, as in Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib, are published only if they amplify the West's sense of guilt and turn the "war on terror" into something more even more dangerous than the jihad causing the war.

Amnesty International's Secretary General, Irene Khan -- referring to concentration camps in the Soviet Union, where millions of people perished -- infamously called Guantanamo "the Gulag of our time". The result is to erase our enemy from our imagination. This is how the "war on terror" has become synonymous with lawlessness throughout the West.

Ten years ago, after the brave surge in Iraq, US soldiers discovered Al Qaeda's torture chambers. No one -- not ABC, not CBS, not the New York Times -- published one photo of them; they just filled our eyes with naked bodies at Abu Ghraib.

We are utopian technophiles and, contrary to the traditional Western view that we are flawed human beings in a tragic world. We now believe in Mark Zuckerberg's brave new world where no one should ever suffer and everyone should be happy and peaceful all the time. That is an exorbitant dream. For a short time we can afford it, as with Angela Merkel and Europe's migrant crisis. Unfortunately, that fantasy will not last. The conflicts at our gates, together with our aversion to making hard choices, will exact a far higher price.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

*

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis?

    https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10603/radical-islam-west
    5 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...

     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | Zero Hedge

    www.zerohedge.com/.../radical-islam-horrifying-west-paralysis
    3 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...

     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | Net News

    world.news.sorozatwiki.hu/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis
    2 days ago ... Authored by Giulio Meottie via The Gatestone Institute,German Chancellor
    Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of ...

     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | Latest News ...

    todaynewsheadlines.444.hu/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis
    2 days ago ... Authored by Giulio Meottie via The Gatestone Institute,German Chancellor
    Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of ...

     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis? | Elite Trader

    https://www.elitetrader.com/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis.311003/
    1 day ago ... https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/10603/radical-islam-west.
     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? - Long Room

    https://www.longroom.com/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis
    3 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...

     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis? - Sharia Watch UK

    www.shariawatch.org.uk/?q.../radical-islam-horrifying-west-paralysis
    4 days ago ... German Chancellor Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a masterpiece of
    humanitarian politics; it was dictated by the fear of television ...

     

    Richard Falknor on Twitter: ""Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West ...

    https://twitter.com/i/web/status/884146467518246913
    13 hours ago ... "Is Radical Islam Horrifying the West into Paralysis?" Lost Our Will To Survive?
    http://tinyurl.com/ya3hatga We can't even fight the corrupt ...

     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | State of Globe

    stateofglobe.com/.../is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis/
    3 days ago ... Source: Zero Hedge Authored by Giulio Meottie via The Gatestone Institute,
    German Chancellor Angela Merkel's refugee policy was not a ...

     

    Is Radical Islam Horrifying The West Into Paralysis? | NewZSentinel

    newzsentinel.com/is-radical-islam-horrifying-the-west-into-paralysis/
    3 days ago ... That is why radical Islam has been able to horrify the West into submission. We
    have paralyzed ourselves. We censor the cartoons, the graphic ...

     
  1. What Is Radicalisation? - Childline Is Here To Help

    Ad                   www.childline.org.uk/

*  *  *

FOREIGN  AID

[IF ALL THE RESOURCES OF FOREIGN AID FROM GERMANY-BRITAIN-USA AND FROM OTHER COUNTRIES HAD BEEN UTILIZED EARLY TO DEAL WITH POSSIBLE ONE OF THE WORST EXAMPLES OF THE  AFFECTS OF GREED ON THE POLICIES OF WHAT ARE CONSIDERED MORAL NATIONS AT THE OUTSET OF THIS DEMOGRAPHIC DISASTER WE WOULD NOT BE IN THE DISASTROUS SITUATION THAT THE PEOPLE OF EUROPE AND BRITAIN [ENGLAND] NOW FIND THEMSELVES.

WE ARE NOW INFORMED THAT 7 OUT OF 10 OF THOSE SEEKING A HOME IN EUROPE ARE NOT REFUGEES - BUT ECONOMIC MIGRANTS. WHICH CONFIRMS THAT AN EARLY RECOGNITION OF THIS FACT WOULD SHOW IN WHICH DIRECTION THE WEST'S OBJECTIVE SHOULD PROCEEED. 

THE FAULT FOR THIS MASSIVE EXODUS FROM THE MIDDLE EAST RESTS WITH THE POLITICIANS OF THE USA AND BRITAIN AND OTHER HISTORICAL OIL DISTRIBUTION NATIONS MANY STILL CAPTIVE WHO ARE WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE UK WITH BREXIT TO HAND ARE BUT REGIONS WITHIN A NAZI-PLANNED EUROPEAN UNION WHICH NOW FINDS ITSELF THE VICTIM OF ITS OWN MAKING.  INDIVIDUAL NATION STATES WOULD HAVE SEEN CLEARLY THE RISKS BUT AS SHOWN BY THE ARTICLE ABOVE THEY DID NOT SEE THE DEMOGRAPHIC DISASTER UNTIL IT WAS UPON THEM.]

*

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

JULY 10-2017

H F 1250BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER.

 
 
 

PART-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-June-1994-EDP-Official Website-2016-June-PART-8-9-10-11-12 -13-14

BREXIT

BUT NOT OUT OF THE EU FOR 2/3 YEARS. IT IS A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE. ALL EU TREATIES WERE OBTAINED BY BRIBERY AND TREASON  AND FRAUD WHICH

UNDER THE 1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON TREATIES MAKES THEM.

NULL AND VOID.

JULY 23-FREEDOM NOW-2016

JULY 23-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2016

JULY 23 FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2016

*

AUGUST 23-FREEDOM NOW-2016AUGUST 23-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2016

SEPTEMBER 23 FREEDOM NOW PART 1-2016SEPTEMBER 23 FREEDOM NOW-2016

OCTOBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

NOVEMBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

DECEMBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

*

H.F.200A-FREEDOM NOW

 

PLEASE  NOTE: WE HAVE IN ADVANCE GIVEN BELOW THE BULLETIN FOR EACH MONTH FOR THE NEXT 30 MONTHS WHICH YOU CAN ENTER-IT WILL CONTAIN INFORMATION FROM OTHER MONTHS FROM THE PAST AND THAT AVAILABLE AT THE SPECIFIED TIME.  WE ARE MAKING THIS ARRANGEMENT AS WE ARE UNABLE TO GIVE AN EXIT DATE FROM THE EU. AS YOU ARE AWARE WE COMMENCED OUR BULLETIN FILE IN OCTOBER 2003 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING AVAILABLE INFORMATION WHICH WOULD BRING THE EXIT FROM THE EU AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. BUT NOW THAT BREXIT IS SOON TO BE ENACTED BY PARLIAMENT THE DAY OF OUR DELIVERANCE WILL SOON BE AT HAND AND THE RETURN OF OUR INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND TOGETHER WITH OUR NEIGHBOURING NATION STATES OF WALES-SCOTLAND AND NORTHERN ISLAND.

MAY GOD GRANT US A SPEEDY EXIT FROM THE SOVIETISED-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC -MAMMOTH MONSTROSITY OF THE SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION.

 

SHORT CUT TO EXIT EU NEWS

eu latest news on brexit

latest news eu

eu latest immigration news

eu news now

eu news today

europe news headlines

eu germany latest

eu news germany

 

MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18

NOV-18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

 

 

 

 

 

The English People's

VoicE

WELCOME!

IMMIGRATION FILE

E U FILE

IRAQ/AFGHAN WAR

     9/11 AN INSIDE JOB

MAGNA CARTA

LONDON 7/7-AN INSIDE JOB

NAZI DVD

ENGLAND FILE

CRIMINAL EU

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND

SAY NO TO EU

UNDERSTANDING EASTER

EURO MUST FAIL

ROTTEN HEART OF EU

SOUL OF ENGLAND

100 REASONS TO LEAVE EU

TREASON A CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

ALFRED - KING OF THE ENGLISH

THE END OF THE ENGLISH

ENGLAND OUR ENGLAND

MOST EVERYTHING WHICH IS PRECIOUS IN OUR CIVILISATION HAS COME FROM SMALL INDEPENDENT NATION STATES

 by LORD PETER SHORE.

 

 

DAILY  MAIL
comment
 

a decade on, has the city learned

nothing?

 

 

TEN years ago tonight, the BBC's Robert Preston broke the news that the Bank of England had been forced to step in to rescue Northern Rock from collapse, prompting endless queues to withdraw savings over the following days.

Though the authorities were slow to realise it, this was the first outward sign of

GREED-FED CANCER

infecting the entire financial system.

Indeed, it marked the start of an epic crisis whose consequences we all suffer today.

With businesses driven to the wall and taxpayers stung for massive bailouts, the

PUBLIC FINANCES

were laid to waste.

Borrowing soared to terrifying heights- and

DEBT

is still rising in

2017

Towards an unimaginable

£2 TRILLION

£2TRILLION.

Meanwhile, household incomes have been painfully squeezed, while savers and pension funds have been hammered by a decade of historically low interest rates.

Yet ten years on, no banker has been jailed for the sharp practice that brought this contry to the brink of ruin.

Extraordinary, nor has there been a

FULL ENQUIRY.

to establish

the lessons of the

 CRISIS.

(though after the comparatively footling scandal of voicemail hacking by rogue redtops, the Coalition had no hesitation in ordering one into the conduct sand ethics of the newspaper industry.

What is  so deeply worrying is that, even now, none of those lessons appears to have been learned. Indeed, there are abundant signs that the cancer is back.

As greedily as ever , bankers are inflating a DEBT BUBBLE-handing out excessive mortgages, cheap car loans and credit cards with

ZERO INTEREST

rates fixed for months.

Meanwhile, the old racket of trading bundles of sub-prime debt continues as if nothing untoward happened in 2007.

Now , as then, the banks have far too little capital in reserve to weather a

 STORM .

The difference is that in 2017, with taxpayers milked dry, the Government will be unable to mount anything like a similar bailout

[We prefer the word RESCUE. It is obvious that the banksters know something that the rest of the population do not know. A history of the City of London goes some way in explaining their unpatriotic and selfish and arrogant behaviour. They are not ENGLAND they are a financial DESPOT installed over 300 years ago by a SECRET SOCIETY - the cause and curse of much suffering here and of people's the world over. It is THE GREED CAPITAL of the WORLD -It is ALL for ITSELF  and NOTHING else MATTERS. IT IS A MAJOR DESTABILIZING BLOT ON THE LIVES OF THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND.]

The City must act now to shore up its defences. Otherwise, there can be no telling how the next crisis will end.

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

SEPTEMBER 13-2017

      

 

 H.F.1310

 

A NATION STATE HAS BEEN REBORN

 

ON the momentous day Theresa May said Britain WILL quit the single market, she put Cameron's feeble negotiations to shame with an ultimatum to Brussels that the UK will 'walk away from a bad deal-and make the EU pay' 

  • STEEL OF THE NEW
  • IRON LADY
  • The PM is hopeful of an EU-UK trade deal because of mutual economic interests 
  • She said Europe not making a deal with Britian would be 'calamitous self-harm'
  • It was confirmed that we will be leaving the single market and customs union
  • But the EU's chief negotiator called her show of defiance counter-productive
  • Her speech was criticised by the Lib Dems as Labour fought on how to respond 
  • Sterling rose 2.8 per cent against the Dollar and 1.8 per cent against the Euro


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4130034/Theresa-s-Brexit-speech-puts-Cameron-shame.html#ixzz4W7pxZPm9
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

PressReader - Daily Mail: 2017-01-18 - Europe split over May's ...

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20170118/281625305003771
Europe split over May's vision – but even Tusk calls it 'realistic'. Daily ... News -
From Mario Ledwith in Brussels and John Stevens in London.

 

*

POINT BY POINT, HER BLUEPRINT TO FREE BRITAIN FROM BRUSSELS
THERESA May delighted Eurosceptics yesterday with an ambitious road map for BREXIT. The PM extended the hand of friendship to the EU but threatened to walk away if BRUSSELS tried to impose a punitive deal. Jack DOYLE sets out her 12 objectives and analyses her chances of success.

1. CERTAINTY

 WHAT SHE SAID

We will provide certainty where we can. The same rules and laws will apply on the day after BREXIT, as they did before. And the Government will put the final deal to a vote in both houses of Parliament.

CAN SHE DELIVER

By keeping in place-at least initially-all EU laws, Mrs May will provide a degree of continuity and confidence for business. However, as she freely admits she cannot control the outcome of the negotiations. Parliament is highly likely to approve any deal because the alternative will be a chaotic BREXIT.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

2. OUR OWN LAWS

 WHAT SHE SAID

We will take back control of our laws and bring an end to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Britain. Because we will not truly left the EU if we are not in control of our own laws

CAN SHE DELIVER

 Adopting the 'take back control' slogan of the Leave campaign, Mrs May repeated her promise to end rule by EU rule and judges in Luxembourg and restore power to Parliament and domestic courts. Without this there is no Brexit. A firm red line

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

3 A UNITED KINGDOM

 WHAT SHE SAID

A stronger Britain demands that we strengthen the precious union between the four nations of the UK.

CAN SHE DELIVER

By consulting devolved administrations, Mrs May is seeking to reassure voters in the nations of the UK which didn't vote for Brexit that she is listening to their concerns, and avoid Nicola Sturgeon calling for a second independence vote.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

4. THE IRISH BORDER

 WHAT SHE SAID

WE will work to deliver a practical solution that allows the maintenance of the Common Travel Area with the Republic, while protecting the integrity of the United Kingdom's immigration system.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Both countries want to maintain the open border between Northern Ireland and the Republic without opening a back door into Britain. Likely to mean UK border checks at Irish ports and airports.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

5. CONTROL OF IMMIGRATION

 WHAT SHE SAID

The message from the public before and during the referendum campaign was clear: BREXIT must mean control of the number of people who come to Britain from Europe. And that is what we will deliver

CAN SHE DELIVER

Ending free movement is a  RED LINE, but Mrs May left open when it will end, what system will replace it and details of any transition deal. The PM wants highly skilled EU migrants, doctors and nurses, but will she compromise on unskilled migrants to get a better trade deal

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

 6.  EU NATIONALS AND BRITISH EXPATS

 

WHAT SHE SAID

We  want to guarantee the right of EU citizens who are already living here in Britain, and the rights of British nationals in other member states, as early as we can.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Likely to agreed early on, as long as the EU doesn't want to haggle. Last year Mrs May offered to settle on the rights of three million EU nationals in the UK, and 1.2million Brits on the continent in advance of formals talks- but Angela Merkel refused.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*
7.WORKER'S RIGHTS

 WHAT SHE SAID

Not only will the government protect the rights of workers' set out in European legislation, we will build on them.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May is determined to at least preserve protections for workers on low and middle incomes-many of whom voted for BREXIT. Could come under threat if there is no deal., and Britain slashes taxes and regulation to attract business.

DEAL OR NO DEAL? 3/5

*

8. TRADE WITH EUROPE

WHAT SHE SAID

As a priority, we will pursue a bold and ambitious free trade agreement with the EU. This should allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services. But I want to make it clear. It cannot mean membership of the single market

CAN SHE DELIVER

The crux of the negotiation. Britain will leave the single market, and with it EU laws and free movement. Instead Mrs May wants a tariff-free trade and customs agreement to stop goods being held up at ports. She ruled out ' vast contributions' to the EU budget, and the only money going to Brussels will be for particular programmes and agencies like Europol. Her huge gamble is to threaten to walk away if the EU attempts to punish Britain

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

9. GLOBAL TRADE

 WHAT SHE SAID

A global Britain must be free to strike trade agreements with countries outside the EU too. But I also want tariff-free trade with Europe and cross-border trade there to be as frictionless as possible.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May wants deals with non-EU countries including the US. That would be impossible from inside the customs union, which imposes a uniform tariff on all non-EU countries. It would also make trade Secretary Liam Fox's job redundant.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 4/5

*

10. SCIENCE AND INNOVATION

 WHAT SHE SAID

WE have a proud history of leading and supporting cutting -edge research and innovation. So we will also welcome agreement to continue to collaborate with our European partners on major science, research, and technology initiatives.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Unlikely to be an obstacle to any deal. Much collaboration between academics takes place outside formal EU structures and will continue unimpeded.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

11. CRIME AND TERRORISM

 WHAT SHE SAID

All of us in Europe face the challenge of cross-border crime, a deadly terrorist threat, and the dangers presented by hostile states.  All of us share interests and values in common, values we want to see projected around the world.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Security and intelligence cooperation and defence cooperation cannot be a formal bargaining chip, but without making it one, Mrs May reminds EU allies of Britain's importance as an ally in fighting terrorism and important status as a military power.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

12.  A SMOOTH EXIT

 WHAT SHE SAID

It is in no one's interests for there to be a cliff-edge for business or a threat to stability as we change from our existing relationship to a new partnership with the European Union.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May wants tranitional arrangements to smooth the process of leaving the EU with specific deals on budget contributions, immigration, trade and customs lasting different periods of time. Securing this as well as securing a final deal within two years is a huge task.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

[THERE IS EVERY LIKELIHOOD THAT OTHER EU MEMBER STATES WILL BE GREATLY ENCOURAGED BY BREXIT TO LEAVE THAT SOVIETISED-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS WHICH SHOULD MAKE A NUMBER OF EU STATES TO CO-OPERATE FULLY WITH THE UK OR FACE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR UNFRIENDLY ATTITUDE AT A LATER DATE.

AS THE GREAT PRIME MINISTER - WILLIAM PITT -  (1759-1806) ANNOUNCED IN NOVEMBER 9-1805 SHORTLY AFTER  NELSON'S VICTORY OVER THE FRENCH AND SPANISH FLEETS AT TRAFALGAR..

'England has saved herself by her exertions; and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.'

The blueprint of a Free and Prosperous United Kingdom should be the blueprint of a future Free Europe and the world at large. Our past still lives in the hearts of FREE PEOPLES everywhere and soon we will rejoin that sacred past which we left over 43 years ago because of traitorous politicians and others who couldn't see the dangers ,for the gross lies and deceit in their path.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18-2017

H.F.1092 BREXIT NOW

 
 

 DAILY MAIL

COMMENT

FEBRUARY 2, 2017

 

AT LAST, IT IS ALL CLEAR FOR

 BREXIT'S

LIFT-OFF

 

YESTERDAY  was a HISTORIC DAY for OUR COUNTRY. BY a RESOUNDING MAJORITY of 384, the COMMONS swept away [our  past 45 years of tutelage within an undemocratic-unaccountable-unbearable-corrupt-expensive- strait-jacket Europe.]

 

THIS was a historic day for our country. At 7.30pm yesterday by a resounding majority of 384, the Commons swept away the last serious obstacle to freeing Britain from the chains that have bound us to an unelected, unaccountable Brussels for 45 YEARS.

True, we can still expect dirty tricks from the 114 who, to their shame, voted  against implementing the

PEOPLE'S WILL.

Of these , this newspaper will not waste ink on cursing SNP members, whose fantasies of SCOTLAND as an independent EU nation state gave them a spurious excuse for defying the UK majority.

AS for the rest, no criticism is too harsh for those Labour MPs who represent solidly Brexiteer constituencies, but voted to

REMAIN.

They deserve everything coming to them at the next election.

So, too, do the creeps who in 2015 backed the call for a binding referendum, but voted last night against implementing its result.

Among these, none can beat the monstrous hypocrisy of

NICK CLEGG

-that flip-flopping representative of the moneyed elite, suckled on the [thirsty] breast of Brussels.

IN 2008, it was he who led demands for an in/out referendum on Europe (as we demonstrate on the opposite page-

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

H F 1101-AT LONG LAST-FREEDOM AWAITS! 

 

 

Brought-forward from August 2003

[THE WAY AHEAD TO RECLAIM OUR SACRED INHERITANCE.]

Faced with the possible imposition (illegally) of a E. U. Constitution this  article contemplating our own U.K. Constitution (English Constitution), is especially topical.

J. Bingley

Constitutional Principles of Power and Remedy.

The Constitution is specifically intended, indeed designed to limit the powers of the state with respect to the people. The Constitution sets a standard upon which the performance of governance may be measured and contested and to provide remedy if abused.

The whole constitution originates its authority from

COMMON LAW

Supremacy resides in the

LAW and PEOPLE

NOT THE

CROWN or PARLIAMENT.

It is a matter of constitutional principle and legal fact that,

THE LAW IS SUPREME

The rule of law is the antithesis of arbitrary power. Integral with this, is the system of jury trial. It places the power of law enforcement in the

HANDS of the PEOPLE.

This the most vital safeguard against DESPOTISM.

The English Constitution's function is to

PROTECT the

"RIGHTS and LIBERTIES

 of ENGLISHMEN".

These are the 'BIRTHRIGHT' of the PEOPLE'

[In 2016 one can see how successive governments have by gradualism watered down these rights with even attempts to replace jury trial by trial by judge only on the grounds of speed and saving resources. The people in the main have been, amiss in not being vigilant to the protection of THEIR CONSTITUTION. In just a few weeks on the 23 June,2016 they have a choice whether to vote to leave the EU and regain THEIR LAW-THEIR CONSTITUTION-THEIR FREE COUNTRY. or REMAIN in an ALIEN COLLECTIVIST AND CORRUPT UNDEMOCRATIC EU with NO PROTECTION of MAGNA CARTA of 1215 and BILL OF RIGHTS of 1688 and NO ENGLISHMAN'S ' RIGHTS and LIBERTIES' to be passed on to FUTURE GENERATIONS.]

The fundamental rights and liberties are listed in the preamble of the Coronation Oath Act of 1688 which declares that  the oath is taken for the purpose of

" Maintaining our spiritual and civil rights and properties"

It is a contract with the people which makes it the permanent duty of the CROWN, and the CROWN in both GOVERNMENT and PARLIAMENT.

This contracts the Monarch to govern only according to the STATUTE, COMMON LAW, and the CUSTOM and to 'CAUSE LAW and JUSTICE with MERCY to be used in all JUDGEMENTS'.

All power of governance is vested in the CROWN.

The two Houses of Parliament may upon their concurrence offer bills for ROYAL ASSENT.

A BILL is not ENACTED until it has been authorised by the SOVEREIGN POWER.

Whilst the enacting power (a royal prerogative) of Royal Assent is entirely vested with the monarch it is contracted ONLY TO BE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.  This is a limitation and essential safeguard to protect the people from any over mighty governance  [such as Tony Blair's and Gordon Brown's NEW LABOUR and since DAVE'S PARTY]

 It was used  to defeat the Divine Right of Kings; a claim of absolute power by the Stuart monarchs.  The OATH ascertains the SUPREMACY of the LAW, not the supremacy of CROWN or of PARLIAMENT.

There is certainly no Divine Right of Politicians.

The Coronation contract is of the Crown owing allegiance to the Constitution. The PEOPLE give ALLEGIANCE to the CROWN.

Here is a system of mutual protection for there is a constitutional interdependence.

The MAGNA CARTA

made provision for the PEOPLE to use ANY MEANS including FORCE if the CROWN is found to be in BREACH.

[THE CROWN IS IN BREACH!]

THE RIGHT OF RESISTANCE IS THE ULTIMATE REMEDY...

That which constitutionally binds the Monarch is a restriction upon Her Majesty, Her Government and all Parliamentary power.  The Monarch may do no wrong, but should she refuse by her negative power( the right to withhold assent) to

'LET WRONG BE DONE.'

[Millions of patriots have been waiting over four decades for:-

'Right to be Done!']

Sir William Blackstone confirms this. Whilst the monarch accepts the advice of ministers, they must only advise to do that which COMPLIES with the CONSTITUTION.  Plainly NO MONARCH is FREE to ASSENT to ADVICE that CONFLICTS with the CONSTITUTION in FORCE.

There is no authority in Parliament to pass any power of governance in England to those who hold or owe no allegiance. [such as the EU]

 There is no constitutional authority for Parliament to deliberately breach the constitutional laws by new   conflicting enactment.

 There is a natural duty resulting from the logic of our constitutional law to debate and resolve conflicts, if necessary by prior repeal.

 We must put an end to this form of 'legal' abuse, particularly through the misapplication of party politics.

 Most but not all of our constitution is written:- the Magna Carta, the Petition of Rights, the Declaration of Rights, the Bill of Rights, the Act of Settlement and the Acts of Union etc. It has evolved over centuries with the expenditure of much blood. It has been abused and corrected many times. It was finally settled by the Glorious Revolution of 1688/9.

The Judicial function is to be the independent arbiter between party and party or party and government under the terms of our constitutional law.  The courts are bound to declare upon the constitutionality of an Act where it may prove to be an action of unconstitutional governance. The great examples of the Magna Carta, the Petition 1628, the Declaration & the Bill of Rights 1688/9 make this duty of the court utterly plain.

Judgement may only be given in accordance with the constraints of constitutional laws in force.  At all times the presumption of law and justice in mercy be upheld and used  in all judgements. This is the trust sand the pre-eminent public policy reposed in the judiciary.

The right of petition to the Monarch is an appeal direct to the source of power, the Monarch is under OATH and at LAW, bound to provide REMEDY. Where there are RIGHTS there are REMEDIES. Politicians and Parliament must abide by the terms of reference and DUTY to the CONSTITUTION.

A fixed and certain standard with protection and remedy are the true purpose of the Constitution.

WE MUST RECLAIM OUR CONSTITUTION AND THE RULE OF LAW FROM THE SUPPOSED DIVINE RIGHT OF OUR POLITICIANS.

John Bingley-AUGUST 2003

*

[We ask how did it come to pass that the JUDICIARY did not PROTECT the CONSTITUTION from the illegal actions of PARLIAMENT and the Crown with the disclosures in 2001 under the 30 year rule from the Public Record Office at

 KEW-LONDON

 which revealed the CONSPIRACY of the FOREIGN OFFICE to prevent the PEOPLE from hearing the TRUTH of their TREACHERY and BETRAYAL. Under the 1969 THE VIENNA TREATY CONVENTION on the  LAW of TREATIES  there are two key provisions which authorise a signatory power to abrogate a bilateral or multilateral treaty unilaterally, without giving the stipulated notice.

1. Where corruption has been demonstrated in respect of pro curing the treaty in the first place, or in respect of any dimension of its implementation, the European Commission (EC) permits and is associated with corruption on a monumental scale, which the EU authorities have tried to cover up with declining success.

". Where there has been a material change of circumstances. A material change of circumstances has surfaced into the daylight (September 2005), to begin with, following the death of

Edward Heath.

. It has been revealed that he was an agent of a foreign power (NAZI-GERMANY-since 1938), accepted corrupt payment for his services, and lied to the British people concerning the nature of the geopolitical trap into which he had been instructed by his handlers to lead them-and that he did all this on behalf of a foreign power which has all along disguised its continuing Nazi orientation.

[Massive payouts were given to the signatories of the  EEC which in reality was in effect the road to the corrupt-collectivist-undemocratic

FEDERAL STATE of the EUROPEAN UNION.]

*

[THE QUEEN FAILED IN HER SOLEMN DUTY TO PROTECT HER PEOPLE AND THEIR UNIQUE WORLD RENOWNED FREE PARLIAMENTARY INHERITANCE

AND APART FROM SIGNING ILLEGALLY 6 EU TREATIES CONTRARY TO HER CORONATION OATH-IN 1998 SIGNED TONY BLAIR'S SECRET AMENDMENT BILL  FOR TREASON FROM THE DEATH PENALTY TO IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE-OBVIOUSLY THEY BOTH HAD REASONS  FOR FEARING A FUTURE IMPEACHMENT BY PARLIAMENT.

 

More!

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS}

MAY 30-2016

H.F.800

 

 

 

WHY

 DOESN'T

 the

House of  Lords

move

to

BRUSSELS?

RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-

March 3, 2017

Why doesn't the House of Lords move to

BRUSSELS?

 
 

EXTRACT

NOT for the FIRST TIME, it fell to Norman Tebbit to speak for Britain.

Why was it, he asked his fellow members of the Lords, that they were elevating the

RIGHTS OF FOREIGNERS

over those of the

BRITISH PEOPLE.

'It seems to me the

FIRST DUTY of PARLIAMENT

of the

UNITED KINGDOM

is to care for the

INTERESTS OF THE CITIZENS OF THIS KINGDOM'

he  said.

'If we are to be concerned about the rights of anybody after

BREXIT

to live anywhere on this continent of Europe, it should be concern for the

RIGHTS  OF BRITISH PEOPLE

to live freely and peacefully in those other parts of Europe.

WHY

is everybody here today so excited about an amendment which looks after

FOREIGNERS

and

 NOT

THE BRITISH

Fair point. But judging by the reaction in the chamber, you'd have thought Norman had advocated rounding up all foreign nationals living in Britain and deporting them en masse, preferably by gunpoint. His perfectly accurate use of the word

'FOREIGNERS'

had some sensitive Lords and Ladies gasping for their breath and hissing their disapproval at this ghastly racist in their midst.

 Lord Skinhead of Chingford was, of course. merely questioning the demand that before triggering

ARTICLE 50

[ March 15 -2017?]

Theresa May gives a cast iron guarantee that

ALL

EU CITIZENS living in Britain will be allowed to stay after Brexit.

Actually, she's already tried to do that in exchange for a reciprocal assurance that the same will apply to UK citizens living in Europe.

BUT

she was knocked back by

ANGELA MERKEL

who refuses to enter any kind of negotiation until  the Brexit process is under way.

It has become almost compulsory for everyone to agree that those EU nationals who have settled here-keep the

RIGHT TO STAY.

AND it,s true that the majority of EU citizens who have arrived legally over the past few years make a valuable contribution to our economy.

BUT

could the same be said of some of the less desirable elements who have moved to Britain?

The Eastern European beggars and pickpockets littering the streets of our cities for instance, or the assorted criminals we can't deport because of the

EUROPEAN YUMAN RITES RACKET.

The Remoaners don't want to talk about

THEM

naturally.

And frankly, the Lords aren't really bothered about the RIGHTS of EU citizens living in Britain.

It  is merely a convenient device to try to

DISRUPT and IDEALLY PREVENT BRITAIN'S DEPARTURE from THE

[UNDEMOCRATIC-UNACCOUNTABLE-COLLECTIVIST-CORRUPT-SO-CALLED]

EUROPEAN UNION...

They hold the democratically expressed wishes of more than 17 million voters in contempt and will do everything they can to frustrate the result of the

 REFERENDUM.

Why else would they want to force Mother Theresa to declare her negotiating position in advance?

No one in their right mind shows their cards before bidding in a poker game. Not unless that want to get taken to the cleaners.

No self-respecting union leader or businessman would offer up one-sided concessions before negotiations had ever begun.

What the Remoaners refuse to accept is that Britain holds the winning hand. We buy more from the EU than they buy from us.

The Europeans realise that, which is why they are going to bluff for as long as possible. Can you imagine any politician in Europe behaving like the

REMAIN CAMP in BRITAIN?

Where's the European equivalent of

PROJECT FEAR, warning of the dire consequences of losing access to the lucrative BRITISH MARKET?

Where are the apocalyptic warning from the EUROPEAN BANK that millions of jobs will be lost and the EU will go into FINANCIAL MELTDOWN unless BRUSSELS can strike a favourable DEAL WITH THE UK?

Where are the demands in Britain that Mrs Merkel offers

BRITISH MANUFACTURERS FREE TRADE

for BMW, Mercedes and Audi being allowed to continue to selling

TARIFF-FREE in BRITAIN.

WHERE'S Holland's answer to Anna Soubry touring the TV and radio studios in the Netherlands, complaining tearfully that the Dutch economy is doomed unless they give Britain everything she wants?

Why aren't French hardliners marching down the Champs Elysees, smashing windows and setting fire to police cars, demanding that Paris must agree unconditionally to BRITAIN'S TERMS so they can carry on exporting thie

CHEESES, WINES and MEAT? I don't recall the EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT passing a MOTION forcing Jean-Claude Drunker to make any concessions to BRITAIN before the FORMAL BREXIT TALKS START.

And unless I've missed something, how many former

 GERMAN CHANCELLORS-FRENCH PRESIDENTS and ITALIAN PRIME MINISTERS have OPENLY SIDED WITH BRITAIN, in the same way that

 BLAIR and MAJOR

HAVE BACKED EUROPE AGAINST THEIR OWN PEOPLE?

NO,

all we've heard from across the CHANNEL are THREATS to PUNISH US, to CRIPPLE US ECONOMICALLY, to MAKE OUR LIVES HELL ONCE WE ARE STUPID ENOUGH TO LEAVE THE EU.

YET

the overwhelming instinct of our

TRAITOROUS

POLITICAL CLASS

is to bind the hands of our negotiators, to

APPEASE, COMPROMISE and ultimately SURRENDER-with the UNELECTED HOUSE OF LORDS acting as a PRO-BRUSSELS FIFTH COLUMN,

determined to

BETRAY THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE THEY ARE PAID TO REPRESENT..

Are they setting themselves up as

EU's VICHY GOVERNMENT?

MAYBE THEY SHOULD MOVE TO BRUSSELS.

IN wartime, they'd have been put up against a wall and shot

[AND THERE WOULD BE PLENTY OF VOLUNTEERS TO DO JUST THIS TODAY IN MARCH 2017.]

It's a pity Norman Tebbit isn't a few years younger. We could have put him in charge of the Brexit negotiations.

AT LEAST HE'D SPEAK FOR BRITAIN.

*  *  *

 

 

Full article

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

MARCH 3 -2017

H. F.1126 FREEDOM NOW

EU QUESTIONS & ANSWERS

There are over 1000 Bulletins on the EU in our

BULLETIN FILE and EU FILE

 CLICK FOR TOP TOPICS

JUNE -2009

1]  EUROFACTS -   THE REALITY BEHIND THE EU

2]   WHAT IS THE POINT OF THE EU ?

3]   THE TRUTH OF A FEDERAL EUROPE-PARTS1-4

4]   THE 1701 ACT OF SETTLEMENT-WHY IT SHOULD  CONCERN YOU!

5[    THE BRITISH LEGACY -CANADA-AUSTRALIA-NEW ZEALAND

6]    COMMONWEALTH REALMS VERSUS THE NEW CONSTITUTION  OF EUROPE

7]   OUR BASIC LIBERTIES AND FREEDOMS SURRENDERED TO A FOREIGN POWER

8]   MESSAGE FROM AUSTRALIA-SUPPORT THE CROWN

9]   OUR QUEEN AND EU CONSTITUTION

10]    VALERY GISCARD'ESTAING -WHY HE IS CALLED X

11]  THE ROTTEN HEART OF EUROPE by BERNARD CONNOLLY

12]   'I SAY WE MUST NOT JOIN EUROPE'-FIELD MARSHALL MONTGOMERY-(1962)

13]  PREVIOUS SPEAKER OF THE HOUSE OF COMMONS SAYS WE MUST RETAIN OUR ANCIENT CONSTITUTION

14] THE COMMON LAW OF ENGLAND IS THE  LAW OF ENGLISH SPEAKING PEOPLES.

15]  A BETRAYAL OF OUR NATION - CONSPIRATORS NAMED (1993)

16]   WHAT HISTORY TELLS US ABOUT OUR RELATIONSHIP WITH THE CONTINENT

17]    COST of EU to UK-£4.8billion = 40 DISTRICT HOSPITALS-EQUIPPED -_STAFFED-AND FUNDED.

18]   WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON ABOUT THE EURO.

19]     200 MORE REASONS TO WHY TO REJECT THE EURO AND THE EU

20]    100 REASONS TO LEAVE THE EU-PT1          100 REASONS TO LEAVE THE EU-PT2

21]    THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE

22]    UK CONTRIBUTION TO BRUSSELS: BIG INCREASE IN 2005

23]   EU WHISTLEBLOWERS EXPOSE BILLIONS OF EURO FRAUD BUT NOTHING IS DONE

24]    BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENTS SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL

25]    FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENTS BY PAYOUTS

26]    SIGNS OF AN EU POLICE STATE

27]    NINETY-NINE COUNTRIES HAVE FREE TRADE WITH THE EU-WITHOUT PAYING A CENT TO BRUSSELS.

28]    IT IS TIME TO CONSIDER OURSELVES-IN A COMMONWEALTH FREE TRADE AREA

29]   BRITAIN MUST LEAVE THE EU AS UN SHOW BEST AREA FOR EXPANSION WILL BE USA/ANGLO-SAXON SPHERE

30]    WAVE GOODBYE TO THE EU AND MAKE EUROPE A BETTER PLACE   

31]    LORD STODDART PINS DOWN BLAIR GOVERNMENT ON COST OF EU -JUNE 2007.

32]    BRITISH VOTERS MUST GET A SAY ON NEW EU TREATY-[JUNE-2007] -NOT MUCH LUCK HERE!

33]    ALMOST 50% OF EU BUDGET SPENT ON CAP FATCATS

34] SO WHY DON'T WE LEAVE THE EU

35] WHY BRITISH BUSINESS IS TURNING AGAINST THE EU

36] BRITISH CONSTITUTION-IDENTITY AND VALUES

37] MODERN DILEMA IN POLITICS-TWEEDLEDEE AND TWEEDLEDUM.

38] LETTER FROM LORD KILMUIR TO TED HEATH WITH TRUE FACTS OF EU

39] INTERVIEW WITH RUSSIAN DISSIDENT WHO WARNED OF EU DICTATORSHIP

40]   The Truth About A Federal Europe - Part I

41]   Cost of EU to UK - £4,811 million in 2003= 40 District Hospitals equipped and staffed and funded.

42]  CAN THE 1972 ACCESSION TREATY TO THE EU BE REPEALED?

43]  Neil Kinnock in glover - but failed to stop the Shadow of graft over EU’s £68bn spending.

44]  Now the EU wants a single Foreign Office to replace Nation-States Embassies.

45]   How the EU takes over Nation-States.

46]  A Fabian Europhile of 1947 supported Independent Nation-States and the Rule of Law

47]       The New European Constitution - Part 1

48]  12-Point Summary of EU Constitution continued - Part 2

49]  The New European Constitution - Part 1

50]  An Englishman’s checklist to how Pro-EU faction in ALL Parties is overturning our Ancient Constitution.

51]   Britain takes over as biggest contributor to the EU Budget

52]  Neil Kinnock sacked honest Auditor because of refusal to sign off questionable EU Accounts.

53]  General De Gaulle acclaims British national institutions back in 1960.

54]  Brussels scams can let an MEP fiddle £60,000 a year.

55]  The European Constitution - Questions and Answers - A Plain Man’s Guide - Part 1

56]  The European Constitution - Questions and Answers - A Plain Man’s Guide - Part 2

57]  Europe and a conspiracy of Silence.

58]  Ninety-nine countries will soon have Free Trade with EU -without paying a cent to Brussels.

59]   Britain must leave the EU as UN show best area for expansion will be USA-Anglo.Saxon sphere.

60]  82 million Germans have no say as MP’s back EU Constitution.

61]  The EU big brother policy reaches back over two millennium.

62]   Europe: It’s the modern version of the white man’s burden.

63]   E U COUNCIL OF MINISTERS.

64]  EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT.

65] German - Nazi - Geopolitical Centre established in Madrid in 1943 by Heinrich Himmler.

66]  What were the Dark Actors Playing Games, which the patriot Dr David Kelly referred?

67]  DEMOCRACY IS A DIALECTICAL FARCE BECAUSE INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES CALL THE SHOTS NOT SO-CALLED DEMOCRACIES.

68]  Britain Can Leave EU Unilaterally And Cease Payment Says Queen’s Counsel.

69]  EU WHISTLEBLOWERS EXPOSE BILLIONS OF EURO FRAUD BUT NOTHING IS DONE.

70]  NAZI TRAITOR EDWARD HEATH LEFT £5 MILLION TO HIS OWN CHARITY-HIS HOME.

71]   WHY NO TREATY LIMITING EU POWERS

72]   THE E.U.’S VERY OWN AESOPIAN LANGUAGE.

73]    WHAT IF ENGLAND HADN'T JOINED THE EU

74]   67% WANT POWERS RETURNED FROM EU

75]   WILL IRELAND SAVE EUROPE FROM ITSELF?

76]   WHY EU REGIONAL POLICY WILL DESTROY THE NATION STATE

77]   EMPIRES HAVE GONE AND MOST PEOPLE LIVE IN NATION STATES.

78 THE FINAL BETRAYAL- WHICH TOOK PLACE IN 2008 

79]  WHY THE QUEEN MUST STAND UP TO BLAIR-NOW BROWN-SHE DIDN'T - BUT SOLD US TO THE EU80] 

80]  Almost everything ,which is precious in our civilisation, has come from small States

81]  THE EU BIG BROTHER POLICY REACHES BACK OVER TWO MILLENNIUM

82]   THE EURO A DOOMED CURRENCY

83]  GERMANY AS STRONG MAN OF EUROPE

84]  BRITAIN AND EUROPE-THE CULTURE OF DECEIT

85]  NAZI INTERNATIONAL IN 2007

86]  A BETTER WAY FORWARD TOGETHER IN EUROPE-OUT OF THE EUROPEAN UNIOn

87]   A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND

88]   TO CONTROL OUR COURTS AND BORDERS IS THE KEY TO SUCCESSFUL EUROSCEPTIC STRATEGY.

89] BLACK OPERATIONS AND TRICKERY BIND UK TO EU
90]  HITLER-HAUSHOFER AND GEORGE KENNON-PENTAGON PLANS IDENTICAL
91]  Oh Boyo - Family on Brussels gravy train cost TAXPAYER £34 million and RISING!
92]   NAZI TRAITOR EDWARD HEATH LEFT £5 MILLION TO HIS OWN CHARITY-HIS HOME.

93]    WHY DID THEY WANT BRITAIN IN EUROPE -  IN 1963

94]   Lies and The Betrayal of Britain
95]    Be Warned - The lies of 1975 still haunt us
96]   THe Strange Case of the Werner Report
97]   1972 EU Communities Act
98]   Further 200 Reasons why to Reject the Euro and E
99]  New elite threatens EU project admits Lib-Dem Peer
100]     The secretive Bilderberger Group will destroy True Democracy
101] BBC EUROPHILE BIAS-UPDATE-by LORD PEARSON

102]   How ‘a good European’ turned into a eurosceptic whistle-blower

103]   HITLER'S PRECEDENT PROVIDED THE MODEL FOR THE EUROPEAN UNION-1930-2007

104]    IF Gordon Brown forces this EU TREATY on us, you can kiss goodbye to DEMOCRACY  -HE DID!
105]   FREE TRADE AGREEMENTS ARE THE FUTURE OF WORLD TRADE
106]   Twelve Mighty Reasons why you must say 'No' to the EU

107]        How much does it cost the UK in the EU

108]   THE FREEDOM TAKING EU MONSTER MAY YET FALL
109]   IF MONETARY UNION GOES-EUROPEAN PROJECT IS UNDERMINED
 
 
 

BROUGHT FORWARD FROM JUNE-2009

H. F .11 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

 
 

A soft Brexit means no Brexit:

The truth is that the term ‘soft Brexit’ is endlessly and lazily repeated without it ever being properly examined. As soon as it is, it disintegrates into dust. Theresa May should call the bluff of these myopic Tory Remainers.

Don’t they realise their antics give comfort to Michel Barnier and Jean-Claude Juncker in Brussels? Mrs May has been weakened by losing her overall majority. Barnier even had the gall yesterday to tell the British Government to hurry up. How overjoyed the Eurocrats will be if they see her under attack by her own party.

And then what? A Tory split can only have one outcome — which is Jeremy Corbyn and his hard-Left clique ruling this country. We came far too close for comfort last week. It wouldn’t take much to put this unsavoury extremist in No 10.

A soft Brexit is no Brexit.

 It’s not an option for this country. It certainly isn’t worth splitting the Tory Party by fighting over it, and giving cheer to EU negotiators in Brussels.

And despite what Mr Hammond and others may claim, despite all the disappointments of last Thursday, there isn’t a shred of evidence that the British people have changed their minds about wanting

 BREXIT.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4601626/A-soft-Brexit-means-no-Brexit-STEPHEN-GLOVER.html#ixzz4kH5M4a1d
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*

[A reminder to Philip Hammond]

INDEPENDENCE

'The word independence is united to ideas of dignity and virtue; the word dependence, to ideas of inferiority and corruption.'

J.BENTHAM (1748-1832) -Eng.philosopher.

[The main attraction for a politician is the power and profit within the bureaucracy of the EU-:Mandleson-Kinnock and Family and many-many others.]

*

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

JUNE 13-2017

H.F.1227-BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

 
 
A FREE PRESS!

It's finest expression had already been given in

MILTON'S

AREOPAGITICA.

Milton boldly proclaimed two principles of profound importance.

One was the immunity of the religious life from political regulation. The other was that doctrine which has been the strength of the best thought of individualism from his day to the present, to wit that the well-being of society requires the natural diversity of its members, and that coercive uniformity of morals and manners would spell the ruin and degradation of any people.

*

THE MODERN STATE by R. M MacIVER-1950

More!

 

 

 

 

 
THOUGHT OF THE DAY!

WE DO NOT KNOW WHY EMPIRES FALL AND STATES DECAY;  BUT WE CAN AT ANY RATE CONJECTURE, WITH NO LITTLE JUSTICE,   THAT A DISTURBANCE OF THE RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE WAS ONE GREAT CAUSE OF ITS FALL.  RIGHT LAWS AND SOUND MORALS FORM THE STRONGEST SAFEGUARD OF EVERY NATIONAL STATE; BUT A SOUND RACIAL BASIS IS ALSO NECESSARY.   A NATION MAY BE ENRICHED BY THE  VARIED CONTRIBUTIONS OF FOREIGN  IMMIGRATION; BUT IF THE STREAM OF IMMIGRATION GROWS UNCHECKED INTO THE VOLUME OF A GREAT RIVER,  A NATION MAY LOSE THE INTEGRITY OF THE SOLID CORE WHICH IS THE BASIS OF ITS TRADITION  AND THE NATION WHICH LOSES ITS TRADITIONS HAS LOST ITS VERY SELF.

[Earnest Barker-NATIONAL CHARACTER-1927]

*

A BETRAYAL OF OUR PAST OVER 50 YEARS

 (1959-2016)

 

 

 

THE SPIRIT OF A PEOPLE

THE FIRST TASK of any politics that could be really scientific was to relate authority to its principle source, to show its dependence on the whole social fabric, the customs and traditions, the modes of thought and the standards of life that prevail among a people.  ...the work of Montesquieu.   He really sought to understand society, to show the influence of underlying  conditions ,climatic, geographical, economic, to show that custom and institutions neither are made nor can be changed by fiat, to show that there is in every people a spirit of character which their law must reveal

THE MODERN STATE by R. M MacIVER-1950

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND BY WINSTON CHURCHILL.

 

 

 

 
 

A REMINDER!

WHAT YOU ARE ESCAPING FROM SINCE TRAITORS IN YOUR PARLIAMENT SIGNED YOUR COUNTRY OF ENGLAND

AWAY IN

1972

AND IN LATER TREATIES UNTIL YOU SPOKE YOUR MIND ON

 JUNE 23-2016

 A DATE IN HISTORY WHICH WILL BE ALWAYS REMEMBERED

BY ALL TRUE ENGLISHMEN.

 

*  *  *

HOW IT CAME ABOUT!

Mr Macmillan and 1961

Mr Heath and 1970

Mrs Thatcher and 1985

From Major to Blair, Maastricht to Nice

The Price We Have PAid

 

*  *  *

 

H.F.1100 FREEDOM AWAITS

 
NEW SERIES

*

WHY WE VOTED TO LEAVE

THE

UNDEMOCRATIC-UNACCOUNTABLE-COLLECTIVIST-CORRUPT-WASTEFUL-GODLESS

SO-CALLED

EUROPEAN UNION

[WE WILL SELECT INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM AUTHORITIVE SOURCES CONCERNING THE ILLEGALITY OF THE EU TREATIES AND THOSE WHO LIED FOR PERSONAL GAIN AND POWER AND OTHER SUBSTANTIATED INFORMATION COLLECTED OVER THE 20 YEARS SINCE WE COMMENCED OUR BULLETIN FILE AFTER STANDING FOR ELECTION IN THE 1997 GENERAL ELECTION AND THE 1999 EUROPEAN ELECTION. MANY WHO VOTED TO REMAIN IN THE EU WOULD SURELY HAVE RECONSIDERED IF THEY HAD BEEN DISINTERESTED OBSERVERS-DECIDING ON THE FACTS AND PUTTING NATIONAL INTERESTS  OF FREEDOM  and NATIONHOOD OUTLINED IN MAGNA CARTA AND OTHER PRIZED DOCUMENTS HELD IN TRUST-SACRED HEIRLOOMS - FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, BEFORE THEIR OWN COMFORT ZONE.  FORTUNATELY, THE GODS, WERE WITH ENGLAND-AND THE SOON RETURN OF

 A FREE LAND AND FREE PEOPLE.

OUR ENSLAVEMENT IN 1972 INTO HITLER'S PLAN FOR GERMAN EXPANSION AND POWER IN PEACE-TIME EUROPE WILL SOON BE AT AN END. AS A UNITED PEOPLE IT WILL BE SOONER THAN LATER. LET US WORK TOGETHER AS  AN EXAMPLE TO OTHER ONCE FREE PEOPLES WITHIN THE CAPTIVE EU WHO WILL SURELY FOLLOW. IF THE SHIP IS NOT ON AN EVEN KEEL IT CANNOT HELP OTHERS WHO WILL NEED OUR STURDY STEADY HAND.

'England has saved herself by her exertions; and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.'

William Pitt.

 [Speech, 9th Nov, after Nelson's VICTORY at THE Battle of Trafalgar-with the destruction of the French and Spanish Fleets-Oct 21-1805]

MARCH 1-2017

 
A FAMILIAR WARNING FROM HISTORY - WE MUST NOT IGNORE!

'It is quite true that, in my opinion the waters which we have to navigate are likely to be stormy, and that the anti-social ferments within the nation are unusually malignant. But just a a healthy body generates anti-toxins to combat any virulent infection, so our nation

ENGLAND

 may be vigorous enough to neutralize the poisons which now threaten our civilization with death. Nothing but good can be done by calling attention to perils which really exist, and which may easily escape due attention amid the bottomless insincerity of modern politics and political journalism.

DANGERS OF PREDICTION

However , the dangers of prediction have been so often illustrated that those who are naturally disposed to optimism may be excused for rejecting the anticipations of coming CALAMITY, which  are now  [as in 2016/7] widely felt, though not so often expressed.

In the Victorian age we had  our profits of woe [and doom], who vociferated warnings about "shooting Niagara" when the country was more prosperous than it had ever been before. [As yet again in 2016/7].

Even on the morrow of our victory in 1815, " as soon as Waterloo was fought," says Sir Walter Besant, "the continental professors, historians, and others began with one accord to prophesy the approaching downfall of Great Britain," which they liked to compare with Carthage.

They emphasised the condition of Ireland, the decay of trade, our huge debt, our wasteful expenditure, our corrupting poor laws, the ignorance and drunkenness of the masses. Nor was this pessimistic forecast confined to our jealous neighbours.  In December 1816, the Common Council of the City of London addressed the Prince Regent as follows:

" Distress and misery are no longer limited to one portion of the Empire, and under their irresistible pressure the commercial, agricultural, and manufacturing interests are rapidly sinking.   We can ,Sir no longer support out of our dilapidated resources the overwhelming load of taxation.  Our grievances are the natural result of rash and ruinous wars, unjustly commenced and pertinaciously persisted in, where no rational object was to be attained; of immense subsidies to foreign Powers to defend their own territories  or to commit aggressions on those of our neighbours;  of a delusive paper currency; of an unconstitutional and unprecedented military force in time of peace;   of the unexampled and increasing magnitude of the Civil List ;  of the enormous sums paid for unmerited pensions and sinecures;   and of a long course of the most lavish and improvident expenditure of the public money throughout every branch of Government."

In December 1816, the Common Council of the City of London addressed the Prince Regent with the above statement.

Sounds familiar in 2017-Don't you think?

 

[EPILOGUE-William Ralph Inge -Dean of St Pauls ENGLAND-1938] -(1860-1954)

 

We endorse the final paragraph which states:

 

" I have laid bare my hopes and fears for the country I love.  This much I can avow, that never, even when the storm clouds appear blackest, have I been tempted to wish that I was other than an Englishman."

*

[We appear to have learned NOTHING! since this speech  in 1816 as the multiple evils are still with us today August 6, 2011. The reason is OBVIOUS! because the SAME! once invisible GLOBAL CONSPIRATORS are  STILL in CHARGE! and  are now in the OPEN!

If the ECONOMY has a DISEASE and FAILS to take the CORRECT MEDICINE then the END RESULT is OBVIOUS.

TOTAL CHAOS!

*

WHY DO WE TRUST THESES DISCREDITED DOOM-MONGERS?

By Alex Brummer - City Editor-Daily Mail-Monday, August 8,2011

 

 [EXTRACT]

...and the answer is that the CREDIT RATING AGENCIES are now seen as the ONLY arbiters prepared to spell out just how SERIOUS the GLOBAL DEBT CRISIS really IS.... After all, the very same AGENCIES were still providing the US. energy company ENRON with TOP RATING up to THREE DAYS before IT COLLAPSED in the world's BIGGEST INDUSTRIAL BANKRUPTCY...  They also gave a CLEAN BILL of HEALTH to FANNIE MAE and FREDDIE MAC -semi-official, but privately owned U. S bodies set up to expand the HOME OWNERSHIP and the availability of MORTGAGES-despite WARNINGS from the LEGENDARY American investor -WARREN BUFFETT -THAT they were BROKE... S&P's downgrade may look like a poke in the eye for the UNITED STATES. But with luck, it could in the end DAMAGE the FUTURE CREDIBILITY of the CREDIT-RATING AGENCIES - they are in MORE URGENT NEED of REFORM than AMERICA.

 

 

THE AMERICAN DREAM IS OVER!

 

h

 

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS almost BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/ ****    REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****    THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****       FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/  ****   A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?     **** GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER/  ****    A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES? ****   THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/   WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/  ****   GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND****   50 YEARS OF SURRENDER***AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED.

DAVID CAMERON'S PLAN TO CLAW BACK POWERS FROM EU ARE DOOMED SAYS EU CHIEF IN OCTOBER-2013

*

THE HISTORY OF THE SATANIC COLLECTIVIST EUROPEAN UNION

***

HITLER'S+PLAN+FOR+A+

GERMAN+CONTROLLED

+EUROPEAN+UNION

***

TREASON

***

 

 

 

ENGLAND

 

 Home Rule for Scotland WHY NOTHOME RULE for ENGLAND?**** BOTH SIDES OF THE BORDER BACK SCOTS INDEPENDENCE****A DISUNITED KINGDOM****NEW LABOUR HAS DESTROYED THE UNION- SO USE THE WORDS ENGLAND AND ENGLISH-NOT BRITISH****NEW LABOUR'S LEGACY-THE GHETTOSIZATION OF ENGLAND****UNLESS WE TAKE CONTROL OF OUR LIVES WE WILL LOSE OUR FREEDOM AND IDENTITY****.OUR PAST IS EMBEDDED IN OUR NATIONAL CONSCIOUSNESS -IT ASKS WERE WE CAME FROM AND WHO WE ARE .****.THE ENGLISH WITH OTHER GERMANIC TRIBES CAME TO BRITAIN OVER YEARS AGO - THE STREAM OF TEUTONIC INFLUENCE  HAS DECIDED THE FUTURE OF EUROPE****THE SOUL OF ENGLAND PT 1/ ****  THE SOUL OF ENGLAND PT 2/ ****    WHY ARE WE ENGLISH MADE TO FEEL GUILTY/****  DON'T LET THEM DESTROY OUR IDENTITY/ ****   NOR SHALL MY SWORD/****  WHY CAN'T WE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE ENGLISH-PT1-/ ****  WHY CAN'T WE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE ENGLISH-PT2/****   ENGLAND IS WHERE THE MAJORITY VIEWS ARE IGNORED AND MINORITIES RULE AT THEIR EXPENSE IN POLITICALLY -CORRECT BROWNDOM/****    ALFRED - CHRISTIAN KING OF THE ENGLISH-PT1- /****   ALFRED - CHRISTIAN KING OF THE ENGLISH-PT2/****    ENGLISHMEN AS OTHERS SEE US BEYOND OUR ONCE OAK WALL./****   WHY OUR ENGLISH SELF-GOVERNMENT IS UNIQUE IN EUROPE AND THE WORLD****.ENGLAND ARISE! - TODAY WE CLAIM OUR RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION/ ****  KISS GOOD BYE TO YOUR SOVEREIGNTY AND COUNTRY****  THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED? **** ST GEORGE'S DAY-ENGLAND'S DAY/**** ST GEORGE'S DAY - 23APRIL - RAISE A FLAG ONSHAKESPEARE'S' BIRTHDAY****NAZI SPY RING REVEALED BY THE MASTER OF BALLIOL COLLEGE IN 1938 . IT INCLUDED THE LATE EX PRIME MINISTER EDWARD HEATH AND MINISTERS GEOFFREY RIPPON AND ROY JENKINS.* * * *AN OBITUARY TO YOUR COUNTRY WHICH NEED NOT HAVE HAPPENED****   EU WIPES ENGLAND OFF THE MAP**** THE ENGLISH DID NOT MOVE THEMSELVES SO ARE NOW SLAVES IN A CONCENTRATION CAMP EUROPE****"...What kind of people do they think we are?" by WINSTON CHURCHILL****THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND BY WINSTON CHURCHILL.

 For more details go to :http://eutruth.org.uk

 

‘THE MAKING OF THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION’****

OUR CONSTITUTION OF OVER A THOUSAND YEARS – WHY DOES BLAIR MEAN TO DESTROY IT?****

OUR DISCREDITED DEMOCRACY OR IRAQ DICTATORSHIP****OUR LOYALTY TO OUR INSTITUTIONS AND COUNTRY?****Liberties of Parliament- Birthright of Subjects of England.****LOSS of TRUST in NEW LABOUR****New England’s Tears for Old England’s fears?****The House of Commons has a need of members dedicated to their Country-not time wasters.****English Constitution, by it they lived, for it they died****CABINET GOVERNMENT IS NOW A DICTATORSHIP****MESSAGE FROM AUSTRALIA SUPPORTS THE CROWN****THE FINAL BETRAYAL - Part 1-5****House of Lords legal Whistleblower – Speaks Out in Defence of OUR  Law & Constitution****SAY ‘NO’ TO EUROPE! – SAYS RODNEY ATKINSON****The Rotten Heart of Europe - by Bernard Connolly-Part 1-5****THE CLUB IS MIGHTIER THAN THE HANDBAG****WHY you should Vote at Elections to protect YOUR Democracy****The sole legitimate function of Government- is to Protect The Rights of its Citizens****So You Thought You Were Free****A DREAM TO REMEMBER- NEW LABOUR POLICY -2004?****NO SUPPORT IN HOUSE OF LORDS FOR INQUIRY INTO EU BY TORY WHIP**** Could England Survive Outside The EU?  -YES!****COST OF DEVOLUTION –N’IRELAND, SCOTLAND AND WALES LONDON +BRUSSELS****European Arrest Warrant – What Price Our Freedom Now?****Government Obsession With Spending Itself out of Trouble**** Bill of Rights of 1688 –Outlaws European Constitution****OUR UNREPRESENTATIVE VOTING SYSTEM= BREEDS TREASON -
BETRAYAL OF COUNTRY
****Impeachment of Ministers of the Crown – Why Now?****New European Constitution – Concessions Fudge.****The Judiciary – A Defence of English Freedom?****
New European Constitution – A ‘Bridge’ Too Far?**** Our way forward to Kinship in Liberty****OUR HISTORIC HOUSE OF LORDS MUST REMAIN – TO PREVENT TYRANNY****  Scottish Independence – Have No need of Union flag and Anthem****Misuse of Prerogative Powers by Tony Blair****A BETRAYAL OF OUR NATION –CONSPIRATORS NAMED - PARTS 1-5****

 

 

H.F.1099 FREEDOM AWAITS

THERESA MAY'S SURRENDER

 TO

HITLER'S EU

IN

SEPTEMBER 2017

 IS REMINISCENT

OF

PRIME MINISTER NEVILLE CHAMBERLAIN'S

LACK OF TRUE

GRIT

IN

1938

WHICH LED TO WORLD WAR 11

 IN SEPTEMBER 1939

AS THEN WE HAVE THE PHONEY WAR AND THE

BATTLE FOR BRITAIN.

What would those who died protecting our skies in 1940 think of the GREAT BETRAYAL by fellow citizens to their FOE of TWO WORLD WARS-

GERMANY

IN 2017 WE haven't  even had our Dunkirk as we haven't in reality even crossed the Channel in real earnest to claim our FREEDOM after 12 months since a majority voted for the return of THEIR COUNTRY LAW-CUSTOM- given away by TRAITORS in 1972.

BEING IN THE UNDERBELLY OF EUROPE WON'T HELP ONE IOTA!-GERMANY IS ADJUDICATOR!

WE HAVE STALEMATE!

THE ANSWER IS TO BOYCOTT GOODS FROM FRANCE AND GERMANY WHO ARE THE DRIVER AND FIREMAN OF THE EU EXPRESS.

WE BUY MORE FROM EUROPE THAN THEY BUY FROM US!

BUSINESSES IN THE MAIN  SUPPORT THE EU

WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A WAR OF SORTS!

REMEMBER!

WE ARE NOT DEALING WITH A DEMOCRATIC BODY BUT WITH THE HITLERITE -AUTOCRATIC EU

*

 

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****     REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

 

THE HISTORY OF THE SATANIC COLLECTIVIST EUROPEAN UNION

***

DAVID CAMERON'S PLAN TO CLAW BACK POWERS FROM EU ARE DOOMED SAYS EU CHIEF IN OCTOBER-2013

***

TREASON

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

In November 2005 we put the following

bulletin on our EDP WEBSITE

H.F.1321 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S EU

*

 

 

Britain Can Leave EU Unilaterally And Cease Payment Says Queen’s Counsel.

 

*

 

A further article from the ONLY sole INDEPENDENT world-wide respected International Currency Review under the heading:

 

*

 

*

CAN BRITAIN WITHHOLD ITS EC CONTRIBUTIONS?

 

PERTINENT LEGAL ADVICE BY LEOLIN PRICE, QUEEN’S COUNCEL

 

The following Legal Opinion was provided by the distinguished veteran constitutional lawyer, Leolin Price QC, in response to a request to consider the following questions:

1. )  Can ministers of the Crown be held culpable for the misuse of UK taxpayers’ money (i.e., of UK Government funds) by the European Commission and/or European Union; and

2. ) Can Britain withhold its contributions to the EC budget on the ground that UK taxpayers’ funds are being misused (embezzled, defrauded, misappropriated, misallocated, misrepresented, etc)? But in reality, these questions are themselves superfluous since, as exposed in this issue [of International Currency Review-Vol 30,4 dated October 10-2005, cstory@worldreports.org

 

  Britain’s EU membership was procured fraudulently, so that under the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1969), Britain has every right to leave the EU unilaterally and to cease payment.

 

1.    I preface this Opinion by acknowledging that I am not aware of any precedent for the sort of proceedings in court against Ministers of the Crown, whether civil or criminal, which I am asked to consider.

2.                  But there are two relevant principles of English law to be borne firmly in mind: first, that the King (or Queen) can do no wrong [We must make it clear at the outset that this does not include King Tony-whatever he may think]; secondly, that every subject of the Queen is subject to the RULE OF LAW and equal before the law.  There is no special privilege or status for Ministers or other officers of the Crown.

 

They are vulnerable and ought to be answerable in our courts if something which they have done is not properly authorised by law, infringes the rights of individuals and causes damage.

3.There is also learning about when an officer of the Crown can plead, as a defence to a claim by someone who has suffered from some act of that officer, that what was done was an ‘Act of State’.  A British subject cannot sue the Queen (because the ‘Queen can do no wrong’); and if an act, of which a British subject complains of, is in civil law, a tort, the officer cannot assert that the act complained of was an act, which had been authorised by the Crown (in reality the Government).

 

The Act of State is not available to the officer in that situation.  He must, if he can, show that what was done was a lawful exercise of some power lawfully conferred by

Act of Parliament

Or

Otherwise:

 

See, for example, Johnson v Peglar [1921] 2AC 262.

 

4.)             But a somewhat different line of modern authority R v Inland Revenue Commissioners ex p Smedley [1985] AC657 recognises that a person – in ex p Smedley, a British taxpayer and elector – may have a ‘sufficient interest’ to bring judicial review proceedings against Government authorities and Ministers.

 

·    Can Ministers of the Crown be held culpable for the misuse of taxpayers’ money (i.e. of UK Government funds) by the European union?

5.)             This is the first – and primary – question on which I am asked to advise [Leolin Price, Queen’s Counsel]

6.)             My answer is that our Courts will not recognise that any direct responsibility is imposed by Government or the Chancellor of the Exchequer for the subsequent application, by the Commission of the European Communities Act or the EU, of our taxpayers’ money which is paid over in accordance with the established legal procedures for making our contributions to the European Union.

7.)             But the history and circumstances of fraud, at the centre of the European Union and in ‘Member States’, and the conspicuous failure of the Commission or the European Union to establish any proper (and obviously necessary) accountancy controls over what happens to the money which is provided by ‘Member States’, has produced a situation in which the British elector and taxpayer may reasonably consider that it is a failure of duty for the Government, Chancellor of the Chequer and treasury to go on handing over our money to what he may reasonably consider is an organisation which is incapable of doing and unwilling to do, anything effective about the corrupt and fraudulent diversion of EU funds.  The history of incapacity and unwillingness includes the following:

(1)    The resignation of the whole Commission upon its acknowledgement of collective responsibility for corruption and fraud.

(2)    In spite of that admission of collective responsibility, the continuation in office of all but one of the resigned Commissioners.

(3)    A continuing failure to establish a minimum of accounting controls over the Commission’s expenditure of money at the centre or within ‘Member States’

(4)    Failure by the Commission, in response to acknowledged and massive misuse of EU money, to establish any regime with a minimum of efficiency and designed in accordance with modern accountancy standards to monitor the expenditure of EU money and to minimise its misuse.

(5)    The apparent inability of the Commission to prevent, or reasonably to combat and control, the corrupt and fraudulent misuse of EU money, including contributions from the United Kingdom.

 

8.           Faced with that history, a UK elector and taxpayer could reasonably expect his Government to suspend, wholly or partly, the further contribution of money from the United Kingdom to the European Union in the continuing absence of proper EU accountancy and controls to combat and contain fraud and corruption and other misuse of EU money; and could reasonably expect English Courts to support his claim for such suspension.

9.           In the circumstances, and before the next instalment of the UK contribution to the EU is to be paid, a UK taxpayer could apply for permission to bring judicial review proceedings challenging the making of the payment on the ground that no responsible Minister of Department of OUR Government could regard it as appropriate to pay over money without any reasonable expectation or even hope that the recipient EU institutions have made any reasonable arrangements to avoid its being, with other EU money, misused.  Experience, especially experience since the collective resignation of the Commission [in 1999], indicates that the money so contributed will be at serious risk of not being used for the purposes for which our Treaty obligations and our law require it to be contributed [sic].

10.  Will such judicial review proceed -ings be successful? The practical and realistic answer is that the [English] Courts will be reluctant to permit the review; but there is a presentable argument, and although there is no previous reported case which provides a precise precedent, it represents a logical development of what has been recognised in reported cases; and the continuing scandal about misuse of EU money provides ground for seriously contending that judicial review ought to be, and is, available to stop exposing UK money to the obvious risk of EU failure to avoid misuse.

11.      The withholding of Treaty-required contributions, which are at serious risk of not being properly used for Treaty purposes, is not-or arguably, is not- a breach of Treaty obligations. [Editor; However as is shown in this issue – of International Currency Review Vol 30,4 the treaty obligations themselves are not applicable,

since the

British Accession Treaty, and collective treaties, were signed for corrupt reward by agents of a Foreign Power.]

12.  The argument will be that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, as a Crown servant, is a guardian of taxpayers’ money and it is a breach of the duties involved in that guardianship to pay over money which, in the hands of the recipient Commission and the EU, will be at such serious risk of misuse.  The First defence will be that the payment is required by our Treaty obligations and by Acts of Parliament; but the answer to that is that the Treaty obligations and Parliament provide authority for payment to support Treaty purposes and NOT to expose the money to established and substantial risk of misuse.

13.   An alternative form of proceedings might be criminal proceedings against the Chancellor for misuse of public money under his control.  The argument for this is that the payment is a serious breach of public duty:  it condones and encourages and facilitates the misuse, and the misuse is foreseeable.  Those instructing me may consider it worthwhile attempting such a criminal case; and it may be that the launching of such a criminal case will achieve judicial discussion of the public duty and its breach.  It is, nevertheless, my opinion that such criminal proceedings will not be successful.

14.      , The better choice of proceedings is judicial review.

 

19th October 2004.

Leolin Price CBE QC,

10 Old Square,

Lincoln’s Inn,

London.

   

[Font altered-bolding & underling used-comments in brackets]

 

*         *          *

NOVEMBER/05

  For more details of Corruption and Skulduggery and Treachery in the EU and in the United Kingdom before and since the Second World War.

 

www.worldreports.org.

E-mail cstory@worldreports.org

 

And on the EDP bulletin board

 

Bulletins

308 & 309

 which are consistently among our top essays with viewers since their launch on October 10-2005 in line with the release of the details in the publication by the respected and Only INDEPENDENT International Currency Review journal which has been in existence since 1969 during which time it has acquired a World-Wide reputation for uncovering Conspiracies which have blossomed

with their dangerous fruit for well over 60 years, which has infected many of our supposed politicians in the arts of Treachery-Corruption and Deceit - still to this day.

  Many will say we have heard this all before but what they fail to realise is that the media –particularly the Press are owned in the main by individuals who have acquired great power of influence world-wide and are able to direct events their way.

  So when there are attempts to demolish a conspiracy theory you can bet that the major players in the press and media are no doubt involved.  What you have to ask yourself is which side of the argument is most likely to be believed taking into account what has happened in Europe and America over the past 60 years.

  We are involved in a catastrophic war in Iraq which we now all know was illegal and that our King Tony was only too pleased to follow his buddy George Bush and exclaim that they had now given Democracy to Iraq when in reality a civil war is now in progress which will lead to the fragmentation of Iraq into three separate nation States which will go against the grain with our federalist King Tony so keen on a United States of Europe who now appears to have trouble with his own rebels –which we are delighted to witness in a country once the home of the Mother of Parliaments until New Labour had other ideas.

 

*           *          *

NOV/05

 

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****     REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

 

THE HISTORY OF THE SATANIC COLLECTIVIST EUROPEAN UNION

***

DAVID CAMERON'S PLAN TO CLAW BACK POWERS FROM EU ARE DOOMED SAYS EU CHIEF IN OCTOBER-2013

***

TREASON

 

 

 

*

 FINALLY REMEMBER!!!

 

*DID YOU KNOW?

The City of London is governed by the Illuminati-Freemasons and they are governed by their god Lucifer/Satan. The Bank of England owns the Central Banks established around the world, and this is the real power of the modern British Empire.

One example is
the United States Federal
Reserve Bank , which is wholly owned by the Bank of England and her subsidiaries. Thus the world has been enslaved by the Illuminati-Free-Mason conspiracy which exacts her tribute through interest on their various currencies.

"Historically all British military colonies with white populations such as Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa were under the authority of the Queen and her Government. Whereas all other brown 'slave' colonies such as India, Egypt, Bermuda, Malta, Singapore, Hong Kong, Gibraltar and the African nations were the private property of the Crown, which is the separate board of the City of London. These colonies were exploited for slave labor and trade, to make the cartels richer and more powerful."

"The Crown" has nothing to do with the Queen. It is a private corporation led by the Illuminati.
(See: +(1)+(1)+(1)

Government Conspiracies - World of Lies - Award Winning Documentary

AUGUST - 2010

H.F.1321-BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S EU

 

 

 

A MEETING PLACE  - THERE ARE HUNDREDS  OF ALTERNATIVE WEBSITES ON OUR wEBSITE- SINCE 2003CLICK HERE
realzionistnews. TruetorahJews CONSPIRACYPLANET

.COM/

Fagan-Sounded-Alarm-of -the ILLUMINATI-in-1967  DAVID ICKE BRITISH CONSTITUTION GROUP

 

YOU CAN HANDLE THE TRUTH
BENJAMIN FULFORD.NET

 

THE WORLD OF TRUTH NEWWORLDORDER

INFO.COM

 

SITSSHOW.BLOGSPOT.COM
(Jeff )RENCE.COM  TRUTHCONTROL.COM/  

WHATDOESIT MEAN.COM

 

 

HUMANS ARE FREE

CLIMATE CHANGE A HOAX-TRUMP KNOWS IT-NOW YOU KNOW IT!

The Rothschilds.
 

LANDDESTROYER.

BLOGSPOT

.COM

HENRY MAKOW  CORBETTREPORT) LIFE IN THE MIX 2

 

UK COLUMN.ORG. JEW WATCH

ACTIVISTPOST.

COM

TARPLEY.NET

 

 A MATTER OF FACT!

On October 11-2017 15 months after the PEOPLE had voted to LEAVE the EU  the Daily Mail in its COMMENT column stated the FOLLOWING:

'YES, the Mail would have preferred a quicker and cleaner BREXIT but how foolish of Eurosceptic MPs to kick up a fuss about the planned TWO-YEAR TRANSITION PERIOD. After 45 years of subjection to EUROPEAN JUDGES, another couple will be a mere blink in HISTORY'S EYE. The great thing is that BREXIT is GOING AHEAD and barring REMOANER'S TREACHERY, SEPARATION WILL BE COMPLETE BEFORE THE NEXT ELECTION.'

STATEMENT!

[We and no doubt the majority who voted to LEAVE the EU, knowing the following true facts will no doubt NOT AGREE! with that COMMENT.

 What is FORGOTTEN is the MANNER in which the PEOPLE were DECEIVED by the TORY GOVERNMENT in 1972 and the LEGAL consequences of THEIR ILLEGAL ACTIONS as clearly indicated in numerous BULLETINS on our EDP website over the past 12 years. To call our DEPARTURE from the EU  a DIVORCE is a PERVERSION of the FACTS!  - A MARRIAGE if we are to call it THAT is INVALID if its DOCUMENTATION is  FALSE or obtained by BRIBERY and /or FRAUD.

  NO-MARRIAGE-NO CONTRACT-NO COMPENSATION

FOR THE EU TO EXPECT A GOLDEN HANDSHAKE UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IS TO REWARD THEM FOR THE WICKED; ATROCIOUS; DREADFUL; INFAMOUS; OUTRAGEOUS; PERVERSE; SINISTER; VILLAINOUS; EVIL; AND WASTEFUL CONDUCT OF MANY POLITICIANS WITHIN THE EU, SOME AS MENTIONED BELOW.

*

 

Below we have shown details of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and other relevant information which will clearly show that the UK could EXIT THE EU in MONTHS NOT YEARS. Obviously, there has been a COVER-UP of MAJOR PROPORTIONS by the POLITICAL CLASS in GENERAL because how can one explain the SILENCE! even FROM our FREE PRESS the FOURTH ESTATE in the land which we look too to PROTECT OUR  over a thousand year ENGLISH  RIGHTS  and LIBERTIES . Possibly the reason could be that there would be a REVOLUTION if the PEOPLE knew the TRUE FACTS?

 Added OCTOBER 11-2017

IN JULY 2016 AFTER THE SUCCESSFUL BREXIT VOTE WE ARE TOLD BY OUR NEW PRIME MINISTER MRS MAY THAT IT COULD BE YEARS BEFORE WE ARE FREE OF THE CORRUPT-_COLLECTIVIST- UNDEMOCRATIC EU WHICH DEVOURS MILLIONS OF OUR NEEDED POUNDS EVERY DAY OF THE YEAR. 

OUR MESSAGE TO FRAU MERKEL AND HER ROBBER BAND

IS

'GO TO HELL'

BUT

MRS MAY APPEARS TO HAVE A DIFFERENT MESSAGE EVEN THOUGH HER OWN WORDS WERE

"BREXIT MEANS BREXIT.

The following article was put on our website in October,2005 shortly after we received this most revealing information from

CHRISTOPHER STORY

 WHO GAVE HIS LIFE

FOR

TRUTH AND PATRIOTISM

 

FROM

INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW-

SEPTEMBER-2005

*

 

EUROPEAN PAYROLA SYSTEM

 

THE BUDGET FOR THE EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION WAS $5.0 BILLION

 

An account held by Credit Suisse in Zurich, labelled the ‘SBC’ Charcol Account, held a total of some $470 billion when last reviewed by sources.  These funds were originally derived from Nazi funds and assets, are routinely used to pay top politicians and officials to sign successive European Collective treaties- the latest being the so-called ‘European Constitution’.

The budget set aside from the ‘SBC’Charcol Account and to be distributed from the Credit Suisse disbursement account for the latest ‘update’ of the ‘rolling  European Collective Treaty’ was $5.0billion- $2.5 billion being payable in Euros to the participants from the 25 EU countries.

On the finalisation of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC), which framed the text of the Treaty, and a further $2.5 billion payable in Euros on ratification.  This tranche is currently the subject of much dissension.

For each national cadre of key negotiator, therefore, the total set aside  was $100 million per tranche.  The chief negotiators of each EU country, plus selected officials were each to be paid from the national pot of $ 100 million, whish equates to roughly $75 million per corrupted European Union country.

Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minister, was allegedly initially offered $50 million.  being an extremely wealthy man, he departed for the weekend in question in July 2004, following conclusion of the IGC, having indicated to those concerned that he was insulted by such a figure, and that $100million would be nearer the mark.  In the event, following an allowance for his wife, he was allegedly paid $75 million, according to sources.

Tony Blair allegedly received $75 million, which was paid into an offshore bank account held in Belize, the former British Honduras.  There, official eyebrows were naturally raised at the Central bank of Belize, where we notice that all of a sudden, the official reserves of foreign exchange jumped from $49.72 million in February 2005, to $164.53 million in March [2005]

Since the corrupt payment ‘due’ at the completion of the IGC will have been remitted in or about July 2004, this may suggest that the funds have subsequently (in March 2005) been taken into the foreign exchange reserves of the local central bank, so that their actual ownership can be disguised, a ‘new form’ of money-laundering: through a central bank!

 

WE ARE RELIABLY ADVISED THAT THIS CORRUPT PAYOLA SYSTEM IS THE NORM.

 

This means that the European Union’s Treaties

 are null and void,

as they have been obtained by fraud. 

 

That applies to the original EU Accession Treaty signed on behalf of the UK Government by [Nazi] agents Edward Heath and Geoffrey Rippon, agents of German intelligence, who were both recruited at Balliol College Oxford as discussed in this analysis.

 

It applies also to the Maastricht Treaty, signed by

 

John Major

 

Who allegedly received at least one corrupt payment for his services.  And it applies to the latest fiasco of the EU Collective.

 

THESE CORRUPT PAYOLA PAYMENTS

ARE ‘NON-REFUNDABLE’.

 

The second tranches of  $100 Million per country for the [New European Constitution] new treaty are payable on ratification, but following their referenda, the Netherlands and France cannot ratify.

 

*          *

International Currency Review

 

(Vol 30- No 4)

*

 

 

www.worldreports.org

 

*          *          *

 

[Font altered-bolding & underlining used –comments

in brackets]

 

OCT/05

 

THE VIENNA TREATY CONVENTION

Under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the

Law of Treaties

there are two key provisions which authorize a signatory power to abrogate a bilateral or multilateral treaty unilaterally, without giving the stipulated notice:

WHERE corruption has been demonstrated in respect of procuring the

TREATY

in the first place, or in respect of any dimension of its implementation.

AS the next section will show, the European Commission (EC) permits and is associated with corruption on a monumental scale, which the EU authorities have tried to cover up with declining success.

2. Where there has been a material change of circumstances.

 

A material change of circumstances has surfaced into daylight, to begin with, following the death of Sir Edward Heath. It has been revealed that he was an agent for a foreign power, accepted corrupt payments for his services, and lied to the British people concerning the nature of the geopolitical trap into which he had been instructed by his handlers to lead them - and that he did all this on behalf of a

FOREIGN POWER.

which has all along disguised its continuing Nazi orientation

As even more disturbing material change of circumstances has arisen as a consequence of the bombing of the London Underground and a bus , which took place on 7th July 2005, and the attempted explosions perpetuated two weeks later. We understand that the situation is so serious that the Civil Contingencies Secretariat has been in the process of drafting, or has drafted, legislation providing for the British Government to abrogate its putative international treaty [sic] 'obligations' towards the European Union.

ARE YOU STILL THERE MR HAGUE?

This development reflects the knowledge in certain UK intelligence circles that the attacks amounted to an

ACT of WAR

against the United Kingdom, and that the foreign powers behind this activity are ultimately controlled by the DVD from Dachau -( the same area of the World War II notorious concentration camp) which is the successor organization to the Abwehr, Nazi Germany's main external intelligence administration.

It was the Abwehr that first established , as a means of undermining British influence in the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood, from which ALL subsequent Islamic terror groups, without exception, originate. Al Qaeda, a descendant ultimately of the German-founded

Muslim Brotherhood,

is a controlled cut-out operation of international intelligence.

The Nazi regime and its Stalinist dialectical counterpart, were both Black Illuminati regimes. The Al Qaeda operation is an extension of the Black tradition, and is ultimately controlled, like the IRA (until very recently) by the DVD out of Dachau.

near Munich

For confirmation of the above and further information consult our bulletin board or contact

E-mail: cstory@ worldreports.org

Website:

www.worldreports.org

*

The European Union Collective:
Enemy of Its Member States

EU

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****  HOW HITLER'S ENABLING ACT OF 1933 WAS PASSED THROUGH YOUR WESTMINSTER PARLIAMENT BY 8 VOTES****   REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

OCTOBER-2005

 

 

H.F.1335/1-BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU

MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18

NOV-18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

 

 

THANK YOU FOR CALLING!

 

TOP OF PAGE

 

CLICK HERE FOR PREVIOUS FRONT PAGE-2012

 

NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOWPT2-2017-(1994 -Official Website -NOV-PT1 2017-NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART3-2017

NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2017

 

NOVEMBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2017

 

S