OCT-FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2017 - (1994 -Official Website -OCT. PT1-2017 )--OCT FREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2017

OCTOBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2017

 ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY. ORG.UK.

*

 

Brought Forward from 2005

 

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

 

 *

 

-IF THOSE NEGOTIATING WITH THE EU HAD BEEN  IN COMMAND OF NELSON'S SHIP  'VICTORY 'THEY WOULD HAVE LOST THE BATTLE OF TRAFALGAR AND WE WOULD HAVE BEEN AT THE MERCY OF ANOTHER TOTALITARIAN REGIMME IN EUROPE , AND

ENGLAND would NOT HAVE BEEN SAFE from invasion for 200 years.

AS we have stated over the past decades those immortal words of one of England's greatest PRime Ministers William Pitt who in a speech in the House of Commons on the 9th November ,1805'

England has saved herself by her exertions; and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.'

The world must be looking in on this farcical drama no doubt with astonishment at how low the once Empire builder had fallen in its once assured diplomacy is taking in freeing itself  from the grips of HITLER'S planned EU  which should have been, because of FRAUD and BRIBERY and DECEIT in its making - a matter of MONTHS whereas it appears likely the take almost the same time as WORLD WAR ONE.

WE SAY GET A GRIP AND MOVE BREXIT EXIT TO JUNE 6-2018

AND NOT A DAY LONGER

ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Transcript of the Chairman of the EDP talking on BBC Midlands Today, on 6th June 1999 (55th Anniversary of the D-Day landings in Normandy), in the run up to the European Elections.
 55 YEARS AGO TODAY
ENGLISHMEN AND OTHERS
WHO LOVE FREEDOM

LEFT THESE SHORES
TO SET EUROPE FREE

TODAY I ASK FOR
ENGLAND TO BE SET FREE

OVER THE PAST 1500 YEARS
THE ENGLISH PEOPLE
HAVE BEEN INFUSED
WITH THE BLOOD OF MANY NATIONS
WHICH HAS STRENGTHENED
AND VITALIZED THEM
AS THE NATURAL
DEFENDERS OF FREEDOM

"ONE COULD SAY
MANUFACTURED IN ENGLAND
WITH RAW MATERIAL
FROM THE WORLD
"

FOR ME
ENGLAND

IS THE HALF-WAY HOUSE
OF FREEDOM
TO THE PEOPLES OF THE WORLD
SPACER WITH HER HISTORIC FREEDOM
OF INDEPENDENT ACTION
IN THE FIELD OF WORLD AFFAIRS
A FREE NATION STATE
WITHIN A FAMILY
OF INDEPENDENT NATION STATES
OF A GREATER BRITAIN

FOR ME
ENGLAND IS THE LAND OF THE ENGLISH
THE LAND OF ENGLAND
IS THE SPIRIT
OF THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND
A SACRED LAND
BEQUEATHED IN BLOOD
FROM THE PAST
AND HELD IN TRUST
FOR THE FUTURE

[TIME OF 13 SECONDS RAN OUT]

[GOD SAVE OUR QUEEN]

OCTOBER 21,2017

 

Montgomery’s Message to the troops on        

D-Day,June 6TH - 1944.

 

The voice of General Montgomery giving a stirring message to his troops before they set out was heard in the BBC war report last night. General Montgomery said:

 

The time has come to deal the enemy a terrific blow in Western Europe. The blow will be struck by the combined sea, land and air forces of the Allies, the whole constituting one great Allied team under the Supreme Command of General Eisenhower.

 

On the eve of this great adventure, I send my best wishes to every soldier in the Allied team. To us is given the honour to strike a blow for freedom, which will live in history, and in better days that lie ahead men will speak with pride of their doings.

 

We have a great a righteous cause. Let us pray that the Lord mighty in battle will go forward with our armies and that His special Providence will aid us in our struggle.

 

I want every soldier to know that I have complete confidence in the successful outcome of the operations we are now about to begin

 

With stout hearts and enthusiasm for the contest, let us go forward to victory. 

 

Good luck to each of you. Good Hunting on the mainland of Europe.

 

*          *          *

 

This message was an inspiration to the troops at the time and it is still a stirring message at this time 60 years hence when our nation is in danger from the

 ‘Enemy Within’

and I’m sure those who love their country will remember the sacrifice of those taking part and that those that followed with the same spirit of freedom in their hearts will now join us to save our Country and Constitution- BEFORE IT IS TOO LATE!

 

And we conclude with a stirring message from General Montgomery in the early hours of D-Day - June 6 , 1944.

To the troops and all taking part in the landings.

 

  To Win or Lose it All… ”

Click Here for Montgomery's message on Europe 1962 -

 "I say we must not join Europe!"

 

ENGLAND OUR ENGLAND

293

 

In 1962,

 Field Marshall Montgomery

 found Sir Winston Churchill sitting up in bed smoking a cigar. Churchill shouted for more brandy and protested against Britain's proposed entry into the Common Market which as we soon found out was in reality 

 HITLER'S plan for Europe

 under

 

GERMAN CONTROL.

 

 MAY -2012

H.F. 1354

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

OCTOBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2017

 

 

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.1330/1

 *
PROJECT FEAR II

 

 

Project fear II: First our leaders tried to scare us out of Brexit. Now it's Brussels and their puppets who tell us it will be as damaging as the Blitz. But we know how that ended, writes Alex Brummer

With each passing day, it becomes abundantly clear the bull-headed intransigence of the EU negotiators is a deliberate policy to try to sabotage Brexit.

There is a determination by politicians in Brussels, Paris and even Berlin to make the process of Britain’s departure from the EU so difficult, disruptive and expensive that the British people might think again and demand the opportunity to reverse last year’s referendum decision.

Of course, it is no surprise Brussels panjandrums such as Jean-Claude Juncker and Michel Barnier arrogantly think they can browbeat 17 million Britons to decide that Brexit might not be such a good idea after all.

 

With each passing day, it becomes abundantly clear the bull-headed intransigence of the EU negotiators is a deliberate policy to try to sabotage Brexit. Pictured: The Secretary-General of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Angel Gurria, from Mexico, speaks during an OECD press conference at the Treasury in London

For they and their unelected predecessors based in the European Commission’s Brussels HQ, where they are served by 33,000 taxpayer-funded bureaucrats, have a successful record in reversing the will of European citizens.

On several occasions, they have persuaded member states to overturn referendums because the results interfered with grand plans to create a European superstate.

For example, the Danish people voted in 1992 against ratifying the Maastricht Treaty, which set out terms for greater European integration. This was the ‘wrong’ decision in Brussels’ eyes, and so a second vote had to be held after a shabby compromise deal in order to get the ‘right’ result.

Ruthless

The Irish were the next fall guys. In 2008, they rejected the Lisbon Treaty (which created the framework for today’s EU), but were successfully persuaded to think again.

Even the French were bludgeoned into line after they initially rejected the case for a European-wide constitution in a referendum in 2005.

Days later, the Dutch also rebuffed the plan in their own referendum. In panic, Brussels forced France to renegotiate and then adopt the proposal without another vote.

 

There is a determination by politicians in Brussels, Paris and even Berlin to make the process of Britain’s departure from the EU so difficult, disruptive and expensive that the British people might think again. Pictured: Angel Gurria

 

EU Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker speaking to the European Council

Many furious French voters believed their wishes, which they had made clear in the 2005 vote, had been ignored.

In sum, Brussels won the day by using bullying tactics based on the belief that the people of Europe have no right to obstruct politicians’ dream for a European superstate.

Such ruthless tactics are the Commission’s main weapon.

Indeed, the way it treats dissension was recently evident in Brussels’ response to Spanish police ripping out ballot boxes and beating up pensioners as they tried to stop Catalans exercising their right to vote in an independence referendum.

The European Commission said ‘proportionate use of force’ was necessary to uphold the rule of law.

So far, the pressure being applied on Britain to make Brexit as difficult as possible has been less extreme, but I fear now that Brussels is cranking up the intimidation.

Indeed, it is no exaggeration to say we are witnessing a new Project Fear. Instead of the shameless propaganda exercise designed by then Chancellor George Osborne during the EU referendum campaign, in which Remainers prophesied Armageddon if we withdrew, this is now being orchestrated in Brussels.

Yesterday, the head of the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) used grotesquely inflammatory language to describe Brexit.

Angel Gurria, the Mexican Secretary-General of the notionally independent think-tank, likened the impact to the Blitz — the savage bombing by the German Luftwaffe between September 1940 and May 1941, which destroyed one-third of London and killed 32,000 British citizens.

The Secretary-General of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Angel Gurria, from Mexico, speaks during an OECD press conference at the Treasury on October 17

 

Michel Barnier: European Union Chief Negotiator in charge of Brexit negotiations with Britain

Realising the offensiveness of his remarks, Gurria added: ‘. . . except fortunately not the Blitz.’ What an outrageous view from the head of an organisation whose mission is ‘to promote policies that will improve the economic and social well-being of people around the world’.

Clearly, such scaremongering is spread by EU cheerleaders who think they can grind down the British people and force a second referendum.

Indeed, Juncker and his cronies are cynically trying to exploit what they see as Theresa May’s weak and divided government.

However, even though they must know it in their heart — and Juncker conceded as much last week when he heaped praise on Britain for its role in World War II — these hectoring Eurocrats appear to have forgotten the sheer fortitude of the British people.

Spirit

Faced with annihilation by the Nazis and inspired by Winston Churchill, the British people refused to be intimidated and fought back to win a war of attrition.

That spirit remains.

Indeed, Juncker, who said on Friday the UK would ‘have to pay’ for talks to advance, has a fight on his hands.

That fight has become even tougher in view of the fact that Mrs May’s hopes of Angela Merkel showing more sympathy to Britain have been dashed. The German leader insists: ‘In is in and out is out.’ Meanwhile, leaders of the 27 remaining EU countries ignore the fact that they will suffer as a result of Britain leaving and that it is in their own interests to ease our departure.

The truth is, the EU needs our money. That is why Juncker & Co are demanding a Brexit divorce bill of 50 billion euros. The EU needs our soldiers and our spies, too.

Above all, it needs to learn from our economy, which is the greatest job creation machine across the EU. Our unemployment rate is just 4.3 per cent — half the 9.5 per cent in France. Although economic expansion has slowed in 2017, over the past few years the UK has been the fastest-growing advanced economy.

 

Chancellor George Osborne was among the Remainers who prophesied Armageddon

No wonder those Brussels pygmies are convinced their strongest weapon in their battle to stop Britain leaving their cosy club is by asking for a scandalously punitive sum as the price.

Most reasonably, Mrs May — fully aware of hostility here towards the New Project Fear and the fact the extra money is designed to cover future pension liabilities of Brussels bureaucrats — does not want to go much beyond paying a £20 billion Brexit divorce bill.

For their part, the EU’s Brexit negotiators are convinced they have their British counterparts in a stranglehold because Mrs May is committed to fiscal responsibility and wants to eliminate the budget deficit by 2025. An inflated divorce bill would break those intentions to smithereens.

Defiance

Thus Brussels is counting on the Government failing to achieve an acceptable Brexit deal and then having to present this bad deal to Parliament. Brussels would hope that, faced with an unsatisfactory deal, MPs would reject it — therefore sabotaging Brexit.

The next move in this cynical gameplan would be for a humbled UK Government to go back to the British people with a second referendum — which would vote Remain.

And so, just as happened with the Danes, French, Irish and Dutch, the unelected Brussels machine would have destroyed the democratic wishes of millions of people.

This is why, rather than be blackmailed into submission — in the words of Brussels’ OECD lickspittles — Britain’s negotiating team needs to show the kind of defiance as exemplified in the Blitz.

If ever there was a time for the country to reignite that spirit and come together behind the Government and this country’s precious democratic institutions, it is now. 



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4991158/Project-fear-II-Brussels-tells-Brexit-damage-us.html#ixzz4vtawlNkW
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*  *  *

'England has saved herself by her exertions; and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.'

William Pitt-Nov 9, 1805.

BY OUR EXAMPLE AND WITH OUR SUPPORT OTHERS FIGHTING FOR THEIR FREEDOM FROM HITLER'S EU WILL HAVE ENGLAND'S  SUPPORT AS IN THE PAST SUPPORT FOR THEIR INDEPENDENCE FROM THE COLLECTIVIST AND UNGODLY BEAST OF BRUSSELS. THOSE WHO SUPPORT ITS FURTHERANCE ARE COMMITTING ONCE FREE PEOPLES TO BE SWALLOWED UP IN THE INFERNO OF NOTHINGNESS! WITH NO COUNTRY!-NO IDENTITY!-NO FUTURE!]

DEALING WITH HITLER'S PLAN IS A BATTLE OF MINDS AND THE STRONGER AND  MORE DETERMINED  WINS THE DAY. 15 MONTHS HAVE PASSED WITH NO RESULT. IT IS PAST TIME FOR NEGOTIATIONS AND A SIX MONTH ULTIMATUM SHOULD NOW BE GIVEN - THAT WE NO LONGER NEED THEM- AND THEY WILL REGRET THEIR UNREASONABLE STANCE. IF THE INDIVIDUAL CAPTIVE ENCLAVES WITHIN THE EU DON'T PUT PRESSURE ON THE DRIVER AND FOOTMAN OF THE EU-GERMANY AND FRANCE, THEN THEY SHOULD NOT EXPECT ANY FAVOURS IN THE FUTURE. WE HAVE £BILLIONS WHICH WE SHOULD USE ELSEWHERE FOR OUR BENEFIT INSTEAD OF EUROPE'S BANKRUPT SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION -A MIS USED TERM FOR THE BIGGEST CONCENTRATION CAMP EVER SEEN SINCE THE RUSSION REVOLUTION. ANY NEGOTIATION SHOULD BE BY STRENGTH-NOT WEAKNESS. MR CORBYN CAN MAKE IT WORK- NOT ONLY FOR HIS PARTY- BUT FOR ALL THE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND!

DO IT!]

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

 

H.F.1351-BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU TO DOMINATE EUROPE IN THE PEACE!

*

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’

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.

 

*

 

 

Revealed:

The secret report that shows how the Nazis planned a Fourth Reich ...in the EU

*

 

By Adam Lebor
Last updated at 10:30 PM on 09th May 2009

 

 

The paper is aged and fragile, the typewritten letters slowly fading. But US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128 is as chilling now as the day it was written in November 1944.

The document, also known as the Red House Report, is a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for 's post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis' return to power and work for a 'strong German empire'. In other words: the Fourth Reich.

 

Heinrich Himmler with Max Faust, engineer with I. G. Farben

Plotters: SS chief Heinrich Himmler with Max Faust, engineer with Nazi-backed company I. G. Farben

The three-page, closely typed report, marked 'Secret', copied to British officials and sent by air pouch to Cordell Hull, the US Secretary of State, detailed how the industrialists were to work with the Nazi Party to rebuild Germany's economy by sending money through Switzerland.

They would set up a network of secret front companies abroad. They would wait until conditions were right. And then they would take over Germany again.

The industrialists included representatives of Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt. Officials from the Navy and Ministry of Armaments were also at the meeting and, with incredible foresight, they decided together that the Fourth German Reich, unlike its predecessor, would be an economic rather than a military empire - but not just German.

The Red House Report, which was unearthed from US intelligence files, was the inspiration for my thriller The Budapest Protocol.

The book opens in 1944 as the Red Army advances on the besieged city, then jumps to the present day, during the election campaign for the first president of . The European Union superstate is revealed as a front for a sinister conspiracy, one rooted in the last days of the Second World War.

But as I researched and wrote the novel, I realised that some of the Red House Report had become fact.

Nazi Germany did export massive amounts of capital through neutral countries. German businesses did set up a network of front companies abroad. The German economy did soon recover after 1945.

The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration.

Is it possible that the Fourth Reich those Nazi industrialists foresaw has, in some part at least, come to pass?

The Red House Report was written by a French spy who was at the meeting in Strasbourg in 1944 - and it paints an extraordinary picture.

The industrialists gathered at the Maison Rouge Hotel waited expectantly as SS Obergruppenfuhrer Dr Scheid began the meeting. Scheid held one of the highest ranks in the SS, equivalent to Lieutenant General. He cut an imposing figure in his tailored grey-green uniform and high, peaked cap with silver braiding. Guards were posted outside and the room had been searched for microphones.

 

Auschwitz

Death camp: Auschwitz, where tens of thousands of slave labourers died working in a factory run by German firm I. G. Farben

There was a sharp intake of breath as he began to speak. German industry must realise that the war cannot be won, he declared. 'It must take steps in preparation for a post-war commercial campaign.' Such defeatist talk was treasonous - enough to earn a visit to the Gestapo's cellars, followed by a one-way trip to a concentration camp.

But Scheid had been given special licence to speak the truth – the future of the Reich was at stake. He ordered the industrialists to 'make contacts and alliances with foreign firms, but this must be done individually and without attracting any suspicion'.

The industrialists were to borrow substantial sums from foreign countries after the war.

They were especially to exploit the finances of those German firms that had already been used as fronts for economic penetration abroad, said Scheid, citing the American partners of the steel giant Krupp as well as Zeiss, Leica and the Hamburg-America Line shipping company.

But as most of the industrialists left the meeting, a handful were beckoned into another smaller gathering, presided over by Dr Bosse of the Armaments Ministry. There were secrets to be shared with the elite of the elite.

Bosse explained how, even though the Nazi Party had informed the industrialists that the war was lost, resistance against the Allies would continue until a guarantee of German unity could be obtained. He then laid out the secret three-stage strategy for the Fourth Reich.

In stage one, the industrialists were to 'prepare themselves to finance the Nazi Party, which would be forced to go underground as a Maquis', using the term for the French resistance.

Stage two would see the government allocating large sums to German industrialists to establish a 'secure post-war foundation in foreign countries', while 'existing financial reserves must be placed at the disposal of the party so that a strong German empire can be created after the defeat'.

In stage three, German businesses would set up a 'sleeper' network of agents abroad through front companies, which were to be covers for military research and intelligence, until the Nazis returned to power.

'The existence of these is to be known only by very few people in each industry and by chiefs of the Nazi Party,' Bosse announced.

'Each office will have a liaison agent with the party. As soon as the party becomes strong enough to re-establish its control over Germany, the industrialists will be paid for their effort and co-operation by concessions and orders.'

 

Enlarge   The 1944 Red House Report

Extraordinary revelations: The 1944 Red House Report, detailing 'plans of German industrialists to engage in underground activity'

The exported funds were to be channelled through two banks in Zurich, or via agencies in Switzerland which bought property in Switzerland for German concerns, for a five per cent commission.

The Nazis had been covertly sending funds through neutral countries for years.

Swiss banks, in particular the Swiss National Bank, accepted gold looted from the treasuries of Nazi-occupied countries. They accepted assets and property titles taken from Jewish businessmen in Germany and occupied countries, and supplied the foreign currency that the Nazis needed to buy vital war materials.

Swiss economic collaboration with the Nazis had been closely monitored by Allied intelligence.

The Red House Report's author notes: 'Previously, exports of capital by German industrialists to neutral countries had to be accomplished rather surreptitiously and by means of special influence.

'Now the Nazi Party stands behind the industrialists and urges them to save themselves by getting funds outside Germany and at the same time advance the party's plans for its post-war operations.'

The order to export foreign capital was technically illegal in Nazi Germany, but by the summer of 1944 the law did not matter.

More than two months after D-Day, the Nazis were being squeezed by the Allies from the west and the Soviets from the east. Hitler had been badly wounded in an assassination attempt. The Nazi leadership was nervous, fractious and quarrelling.

During the war years the SS had built up a gigantic economic empire, based on plunder and murder, and they planned to keep it.

A meeting such as that at the Maison Rouge would need the protection of the SS, according to Dr Adam Tooze of Cambridge University, author of Wages of Destruction: The Making And Breaking Of The Nazi Economy.

He says: 'By 1944 any discussion of post-war planning was banned. It was extremely dangerous to do that in public. But the SS was thinking in the long-term. If you are trying to establish a workable coalition after the war, the only safe place to do it is under the auspices of the apparatus of terror.'

Shrewd SS leaders such as Otto Ohlendorf were already thinking ahead.

As commander of Einsatzgruppe D, which operated on the Eastern Front between 1941 and 1942, Ohlendorf was responsible for the murder of 90,000 men, women and children.

A highly educated, intelligent lawyer and economist, Ohlendorf showed great concern for the psychological welfare of his extermination squad's gunmen: he ordered that several of them should fire simultaneously at their victims, so as to avoid any feelings of personal responsibility.

By the winter of 1943 he was transferred to the Ministry of Economics. Ohlendorf's ostensible job was focusing on export trade, but his real priority was preserving the SS's massive pan-European economic empire after Germany's defeat.

Ohlendorf, who was later hanged at Nuremberg, took particular interest in the work of a German economist called Ludwig Erhard. Erhard had written a lengthy manuscript on the transition to a post-war economy after Germany's defeat. This was dangerous, especially as his name had been mentioned in connection with resistance groups.

But Ohlendorf, who was also chief of the SD, the Nazi domestic security service, protected Erhard as he agreed with his views on stabilising the post-war German economy. Ohlendorf himself was protected by Heinrich Himmler, the chief of the SS.

Ohlendorf and Erhard feared a bout of hyper-inflation, such as the one that had destroyed the German economy in the Twenties. Such a catastrophe would render the SS's economic empire almost worthless.

The two men agreed that the post-war priority was rapid monetary stabilisation through a stable currency unit, but they realised this would have to be enforced by a friendly occupying power, as no post-war German state would have enough legitimacy to introduce a currency that would have any value.

That unit would become the Deutschmark, which was introduced in 1948. It was an astonishing success and it kick-started the German economy. With a stable currency, Germany was once again an attractive trading partner.

The German industrial conglomerates could rapidly rebuild their economic empires across Europe.

War had been extraordinarily profitable for the German economy. By 1948 - despite six years of conflict, Allied bombing and post-war reparations payments - the capital stock of assets such as equipment and buildings was larger than in 1936, thanks mainly to the armaments boom.

Erhard pondered how German industry could expand its reach across the shattered European continent. The answer was through supranationalism - the voluntary surrender of national sovereignty to an international body.

Germany and France were the drivers behind the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the precursor to the European Union. The ECSC was the first supranational organisation, established in April 1951 by six European states. It created a common market for coal and steel which it regulated. This set a vital precedent for the steady erosion of national sovereignty, a process that continues today.

But before the common market could be set up, the Nazi industrialists had to be pardoned, and Nazi bankers and officials reintegrated. In 1957, John J. McCloy, the American High Commissioner for Germany, issued an amnesty for industrialists convicted of war crimes.

The two most powerful Nazi industrialists, Alfried Krupp of Krupp Industries and Friedrich Flick, whose Flick Group eventually owned a 40 per cent stake in Daimler-Benz, were released from prison after serving barely three years.

Krupp and Flick had been central figures in the Nazi economy. Their companies used slave labourers like cattle, to be worked to death.

The Krupp company soon became one of Europe's leading industrial combines.

The Flick Group also quickly built up a new pan-European business empire. Friedrich Flick remained unrepentant about his wartime record and refused to pay a single Deutschmark in compensation until his death in July 1972 at the age of 90, when he left a fortune of more than $1billion, the equivalent of £400million at the time.

'For many leading industrial figures close to the Nazi regime, Europe became a cover for pursuing German national interests after the defeat of Hitler,' says historian Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, an adviser to Jewish former slave labourers.

'The continuity of the economy of Germany and the economies of post-war Europe is striking. Some of the leading figures in the Nazi economy became leading builders of the European Union.'

Numerous household names had exploited slave and forced labourers including BMW, Siemens and Volkswagen, which produced munitions and the V1 rocket.

Slave labour was an integral part of the Nazi war machine. Many concentration camps were attached to dedicated factories where company officials worked hand-in-hand with the SS officers overseeing the camps.

Like Krupp and Flick, Hermann Abs, post-war Germany's most powerful banker, had prospered in the Third Reich. Dapper, elegant and diplomatic, Abs joined the board of Deutsche Bank, Germany's biggest bank, in 1937. As the Nazi empire expanded, Deutsche Bank enthusiastically 'Aryanised' Austrian and Czechoslovak banks that were owned by Jews.

By 1942, Abs held 40 directorships, a quarter of which were in countries occupied by the Nazis. Many of these Aryanised companies used slave labour and by 1943 Deutsche Bank's wealth had quadrupled.

Abs also sat on the supervisory board of I.G. Farben, as Deutsche Bank's representative. I.G. Farben was one of Nazi Germany's most powerful companies, formed out of a union of BASF, Bayer, Hoechst and subsidiaries in the Twenties.

It was so deeply entwined with the SS and the Nazis that it ran its own slave labour camp at Auschwitz, known as Auschwitz III, where tens of thousands of Jews and other prisoners died producing artificial rubber.

When they could work no longer, or were verbraucht (used up) in the Nazis' chilling term, they were moved to Birkenau. There they were gassed using Zyklon B, the patent for which was owned by I.G. Farben.

But like all good businessmen, I.G. Farben's bosses hedged their bets.

During the war the company had financed Ludwig Erhard's research. After the war, 24 I.G. Farben executives were indicted for war crimes over Auschwitz III - but only twelve of the 24 were found guilty and sentenced to prison terms ranging from one-and-a-half to eight years. I.G. Farben got away with mass murder.

Abs was one of the most important figures in Germany's post-war reconstruction. It was largely thanks to him that, just as the Red House Report exhorted, a 'strong German empire' was indeed rebuilt, one which formed the basis of today's European Union.

Abs was put in charge of allocating Marshall Aid - reconstruction funds - to German industry. By 1948 he was effectively managing Germany's economic recovery.

Crucially, Abs was also a member of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union.

Its members included industrialists and financiers and it developed policies that are strikingly familiar today - on monetary integration and common transport, energy and welfare systems.

When Konrad Adenauer, the first Chancellor of West Germany, took power in 1949, Abs was his most important financial adviser.

Behind the scenes Abs was working hard for Deutsche Bank to be allowed to reconstitute itself after decentralisation. In 1957 he succeeded and he returned to his former employer.

That same year the six members of the ECSC signed the Treaty of Rome, which set up the European Economic Community. The treaty further liberalised trade and established increasingly powerful supranational institutions including the European Parliament and European Commission.

Like Abs, Ludwig Erhard flourished in post-war Germany. Adenauer made Erhard Germany's first post-war economics minister. In 1963 Erhard succeeded Adenauer as Chancellor for three years.

But the German economic miracle – so vital to the idea of a new Europe - was built on mass murder. The number of slave and forced labourers who died while employed by German companies in the Nazi era was

 2,700,000.

Some sporadic compensation payments were made but German industry agreed a conclusive, global settlement only in 2000, with a £3billion compensation fund. There was no admission of legal liability and the individual compensation was paltry.

A slave labourer would receive 15,000 Deutschmarks (about £5,000), a forced labourer 5,000 (about £1,600). Any claimant accepting the deal had to undertake not to launch any further legal action.

To put this sum of money into perspective, in 2001 Volkswagen alone made profits of £1.8billion.

Next month, 27 European Union member states vote in the biggest transnational election in history. Europe now enjoys peace and stability. Germany is a democracy, once again home to a substantial Jewish community. The Holocaust is seared into national memory.

But the Red House Report is a bridge from a sunny present to a dark past. Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda chief, once said: 'In 50 years' time nobody will think of nation states.'

For now, the nation state endures. But these three typewritten pages are a reminder that today's drive towards a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich - an economic rather than military imperium.

• The Budapest Protocol, Adam LeBor's thriller inspired by the Red House Report, is published by Reportage Press.

 

 

 

[Font Altered-Bolding & Underlining Used-Comments in Brackets]

*

 

 

H.F.1290

*

 

The Queen 'DID back Brexit but

the BBC didn't report it because they only had a single source' with monarch reportedly saying 'I don't see why we can't just get out.

WHAT'S THE PROBLEM?

 

[We Agree! and no doubt also the over 17 millions of HER subjects who voted for the return of their FREEDOM on June 23,2O16

 for the

RETURN OF THEIR FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND

-OUT OF THE CLUTCHES OF HITLER'S PLANNED EU TO CONTROL EUROPE IN THE PEACE!

and after wasting

16 month's to October 23,2017

 the PATRIOTS of the

 Lions of England

 must very soon lose patience and take the matter into their hands.

'With the rise of calls for FREEDOM being crushed in Spain and other EU captive populations the day of delivery from Hitler's brainchild will inevitably follow. The exit of the UK will be the trigger that will bring an end to this abomination and evil purpose built as a MODERN TOWER OF BABEL   'which will suffer the same fate as its namesake since there is no place for God in Lenin's 'Common European Home. which the deluded European elites are ', this is a certainty. They forget that 'except the Lord build the house, they labour in vain that build it' [Psalm of Solomon 127, verse 1' ]



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4066334/The-Queen-DID-Brexit-BBC-didn-t-report-single-source.html#ixzz4v0LFnTje
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

 

Britain can leave the EU unilaterally and cease payment says Queens Counsel.

[SO WHY ARE WE STILL TIED TO THAT TYRANT BRAIN-CHILD OF HITLER'S OBSESSION 16 MONTH'S AFTER THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS SPOKE UP FOR THE RETURN OF THEIR FREE COUNTRY-CUSTOM AND CONSTITUTION WITH THE WORLD ITS OYSTER INSTEAD OF BEING CONFINED IN  A CAPTIVE CHAOTIC  COLLECTIVIST COSTLY EUROPEAN UNION?-THE AFFECT ON ALL GOVERNMENTS SINCE WE ENTERED THE DEVIL'S TEMPLE HAS BEEN DISASTROUS WITH THE PEOPLE'S GOVERNMENT BECOMING THE GOVERNMENT'S PEOPLE-A NANNY COLLECTIVIST BUSYBODY HAVING NO BUSINESS INTRUDING  INTO THOSE MATTERS WHICH ARE THE SOLE AND  PRESERVE OF EACH INDIVIDUAL.  THE GOVERNMENT HAS BECOME SNARED INTO THE DEVIL'S WEB AND NOW THEY FIND THEMSELVES TIED IN KNOTS OF THEIR OWN MAKING-'hoist with one's own petard'  AND THE PEOPLE WONDERING WHEN LENIN'S COLLECTIVIST WITCH-HUNT WILL END?

 

 

 

www.eutruth.org.uk

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

DECEMBER 26,2016

[ADDITIONAL TEXT-OCTOBER-2017]

H. F.1339 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED DOMINATION OF EUROPE

 

*

 

 

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

 

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

 *

 

 

The Tory speech

Mrs May

should have delivered

 

By Stephen Glover

 

 

 

 

 

October 5,2017

 

Theresa May’s speech yesterday was a car crash for reasons largely beyond her control. 

But even if that were not the case, it would have come across as timid, defensive and over-crafted. 

Here is an alternative version of the speech she should have given, which has been edited for reasons of space. 

Unlike most of you at this conference, I am not obsessed with Jeremy Corbyn.

At the next general election in nearly five years’ time I don’t believe the British people will choose as their prime minister a Marxist clown who is a friend to terrorists — and whose favourite country in the world is socialist Venezuela, where the rate of inflation reached 800 per cent, and the supermarket shelves are empty of even the basic necessities.

The idea that Corbyn has some magic formula which the Conservative Party should borrow is preposterous. So let’s stop being fixated by this man. I shan’t mention him again.

I’m sorry that we didn’t achieve an overall majority at the election, and I take full responsibility for what happened. We would have done much better if we had spoken proudly of our economic achievements.

In 2010, we inherited a mess from Labour, which is always the way, with the Tories having to pick up the pieces after socialist economic disasters.

And we did. We were told in 2010 that unemployment would soar. It is now at a 40-year low, while employment is at an all-time high.

Wages have not risen as much as we would have liked, but it has been worse throughout most of Europe, where austerity since the Great Recession has bitten much harder.

It’s laughable to read in Remainer newspapers, and hear on the anti-Brexit BBC, that the UK is growing more slowly than the rest of Europe, without it being said that over the past five years this country has grown much more quickly.

Struggle

Look at Italy, whose economy is the same size it was in 2000, and count your blessings that we ignored Michael Heseltine and Tony Blair’s devout wish, and didn’t join the euro.

Of course, we all want a fairer society, but you don’t achieve that by throwing hundreds of billions at doomed projects, as the economically illiterate Labour Party proposes. I actually want to make the moral case for lower taxes because I believe passionately that families spend money more wisely than the State.

Tory policies have reduced the deficit by nearly three-quarters. It’s been a struggle, but we have wiped out most of the mess Labour left us. We can’t rest until the deficit has been brought down to zero, and we start paying off our debt of nearly £2 trillion.

Yes, we should build a fairer society. Labour — which is now engaged in naked class war — is factually wrong when it says the gap between the rich and the poor has widened. According to the independent Institute for Fiscal Studies, it has narrowed over the past decade, markedly so in London.

That is because we Tories have given tax cuts to the poorly paid, so that nearly half of people now pay no income tax at all. But I accept many people are justifiably outraged when they see fat-cat bosses awarding themselves multi-million-pound pay increases which don’t reflect their companies’ performance.

We will honour our manifesto pledge and give shareholders the right to have a direct say in how much directors are paid.

And we will also honour our manifesto pledge to curb the rapacious energy companies — many of them foreign-owned, and with no discernible feelings of social responsibility — which think they can slap on increases to the bills of loyal customers as they fancy.

They are guilty of abusing their market position, which is why we intend to bring in a draft Bill next week to put a price cap on energy bills.

Dream

In many ways, George was a good Chancellor, but in his dying days he rashly raised stamp duty on houses over £1 million and on properties for buy-to-let landlords

Housing is another justifiable grievance. In truth, the dream of a property-owning democracy is under threat. One reason, which is very seldom mentioned, is the recent very high rate of immigration, which according to reputable studies is responsible for not far short of half of housing demand.

How could it be otherwise when, over the past few years, net immigration has averaged around 300,000 annually — roughly equivalent to a city the size of Nottingham? We are where we are, but one among several benefits of bringing down net immigration to below 100,000 is that in future years we won’t have to build so many houses in our already overcrowded country.

As for the present, we will expand the right-to-buy programme, which is an incentive to the building of homes. If necessary we will further liberalise the planning laws to encourage building on greenfield sites, but first of all we will impose a land tax on developers who sit on brownfield sites which already have planning permission.

Let me say a word about my former colleague George Osborne, who now edits the London Evening Standard, from which he daily hurls paper darts intended to undermine the cause of Brexit — and me.

In many ways, George was a good Chancellor, but in his dying days he rashly raised stamp duty on houses over £1 million and on properties for buy-to-let landlords.

This has slowed down the housing market at a time when it is already experiencing some jitters over Brexit. The new Chancellor, Philip Hammond — himself somewhat too prone to Brexit jitters — will address the issue of stamp duty in next month’s Budget.

On student loans I will say this. It’s true some universities have greedily raised tuition fees to the maximum level for courses which in some cases are, frankly, sub-standard. It grieves me to see young people mortgaging their futures for degrees that are not worth the paper they are written on.

But Labour’s idea of abolishing fees, even if it were affordable, which it certainly is not, would have the effect of making an 18-year-old electrician subsidise out of his wages an 18-year-old student doing a Mickey-Mouse course. That isn’t fair. As in so many other areas, Labour’s proposals are both lunatic and inequitable.

Energy

What I intend to say about Brexit is quite simple. It is an opportunity for a new global Britain. Dear old Boris may be wrong about many things, but he is absolutely right to enjoin us all to display more optimism about the future.

We shouldn’t be droning on in a lugubrious way about snags and impediments — are you listening, Philip? — but dwell instead on the wonderful possibilities that lie ahead. If we believe in our country, in its energy and creativity, we should also believe it will have a glorious future after Brexit.

Only today we learnt that the British scientist Richard Henderson has won a Nobel prize for chemistry. Congratulations! Did you know that Britain has won more Nobel prizes than France, Italy, Spain and the Netherlands combined? We gather here today in Manchester, the cradle of the first industrial revolution, in whose enterprising university the ultra-light, and immensely tough, material graphene was not long ago discovered.

Dear old Boris may be wrong about many things, but he is absolutely right to enjoin us all to display more optimism about the future

In the Times World University Rankings for 2017, Britain boasts four universities among the top 20, including the highest placed, Oxford. How many does the entire rest of the EU have? None. Enough of this whingeing about our future.

On the subject of Brexit, we receive regular lectures from Michel Barnier, a former French minister, and Jean-Claude Juncker, the erstwhile long-serving prime minister of Luxembourg (population a quarter that of Greater Manchester), now President of the European Commission. 

We are happy to indulge these garrulous bully-boys. But I should point out that in recent weeks the EU has experienced mounting problems. A far-Right party is — once again — on the march in Germany. Catalonia threatens to break away from Spain, whose aggressive tactics have attracted no reproaches, and certainly no lectures, from Mr Juncker.

Our own Remainers in the Press and Parliament ventilate about the imagined difficulties of Brexit, but disregard the EU’s actual tribulations. May I suggest that the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland, which so exercises Mr Barnier, may soon become rather less significant than the border between Catalonia and Spain?

I am not a woman for gimmicks. I don’t like soundbites. I simply believe that Tory values will always have so much to offer this country, and that we should stop aping Labour’s half-baked and potentially destructive ideas.

The public will see through them soon enough. We trust the people. We abhor class war. We think that fairness and markets can co-exist.

We also believe the family is the bedrock of society and should be fostered wherever possible by the State — not that I have heard such sentiments being expressed here this week.

I love this country and have every confidence in its future, and know in my bones that the British people will never be drawn to the clapped-out ideas of a dotty, superannuated Marxist.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4950256/The-Tory-speech-Mrs-delivered.html#ixzz4ueD9lTQ1
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 *  * *
 

[Unfortunately, the Conservative party has only itself to blame for allowing large scale immigration during their term of government and even out of power have ignored the constant calls for a referendum until David Cameron decided he would be the winner which showed how out-of -touch he was with grass roots feelings of the People over the past decades. One needs to remember that it was the Conservative party back in 1972 which lied to the British People about the truth of Hitler's political plan for a EUROPEAN UNION to give GERMANY control of Europe in the PEACE.   It is ironic that at the referendum the Labour Party were completely out of touch with its natural supporters in the SHIRE COUNTIES just as Angela Merkel has lost touch with her own supporters having been grossly amiss about her open-borders fiasco for which she has now apologised.

We now have a serious problem with our political system which needs urgent review-the problem was outlined by a number of prominent members of Parliament after the Second World War.   We have over the years suggested that members of parliament should serve ONE-TERM at a time which will allow more members of the public to offer to serve THEIR COUNTRY which would bring more independent -minded members in the HOUSE. A number of MP's under the present system already lose their seats at an Election .  It should NOT be a JOB for LIFE!   WE have seen the result of the present situation-STALEMATE! with the main political parties blaming each other instead of returning to their once true LABOUR and CONSERVATIVE PARTY colours! Keir Hardie and Stanley Baldwin amongst many others in the past were beacons of DEMOCRACY.

The political system is in being not for the POLITICIANS but for THE PEOPLE!  INSTEAD of scoring points off each other they should WORK TOGETHER on many of the REFORMS needed so desperately by their respective populations. TRUE ECONOMY AND FAIR REWARD should be the ORDER OF THE DAY-NOT OUT AND OUT ROBBERY which we see happening before our eyes. LET US HAVE A POLITICAL SYSTEM WHICH TRULY SERVES THE PEOPLE RATHER THAN ONE WHICH ONLY SERVES THEMSELVES!.

IT SHOULD NOT BE A WAR BUT AN OPEN FORUM OF PEACEFUL COMPROMISE FOR A PEOPLE WHO DESERVE BETTER! BREXIT WOULD HAVE TAKEN MONTHS NOT YEARS IF  THERE WAS NO INFIGHTING-THE PEOPLE HAD SPOKEN BUT DEMOCRACY HAD TO WAIT AS THE POLITICAL SYSTEM PLAYED THEIR PARTY GAME AND THE PEOPLE ARE THE LOSERS!]

*

...A minority Party may question Ministers, may criticize but cannot control in the ordinary case a Government with a reasonably large majority.  There can be no control of the Executive where supporters in Parliament are prepared without question to obey the leaders of their Party-through the Whips. All that the minority Party-the opposition-can do without support from Members of the majority party is to question, inquire and criticize- but whilst this does not amount to control it is an important method of checking abuses of power,

With the support of a majority of Members it would be possible for a Cabinet to suspend the sittings of Parliament, have the minority Members arrested, withdraw all the safeguards of liberty such as Habeas Corpus, freedom of speech, and to establish virtually a dictatorship. All this, too, could be done within the law.  It is surprising how few members of the general public appreciate how uncontrolled the Cabinet is where it has support of a loyal majority in Parliament and that 'the supremacy of Parliament' in this sense is absolute and subject to no real safeguards of any kind...

Mr Walter Eliot recently when writing to about Sir Alan Herbert said:

" In fact is A. P. Herbert is a survival, even a throwback. He is the Member of Parliament , such as nine-tenths were and not more than one-tenth of Members are, the man of whose life Parliament is only a part, the juryman with no desire whatever to sit on the bench; whose verdict is for that very reason the more important and respected; whose loss is deeply deplored and may prove fatal to Parliament itself."

DANGERS OF A SUPREME PARLIAMENT-Page 90/91

By J. J. Craik Henderson

PARLIAMENT

A Survey

1952

*

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

OCTOBER 5, 2017

 

H.F.1336.

*

 

DANGERS OF A SUPREME PARLIAMENT

 

Over fifty-two years ago the following article was one of a number in a publication:

 

PARLIAMENT

 

A survey

 

George Allen & Unwin Ltd.

 

The contributor was J.  J.  Craik Henderson who also wrote the Preface of the work, which included contributions by many eminent parliamentarians, lawyers, historians and civil servants.

 

The issues raised then are as topical today in 2004 as they were in 1952.

[Extracts are shown belowComments in brackets]

[The purpose of outlining the following details of the Constitution is in order to assist those who wish to know more about the workings of Parliament particularly as in the very near future a Referendum is to be held to obtain the consent of the people to lose their Ancient Constitution of a Thousand years in the making.

 

Even in 1946 there was great doubt existing about the survival of our Constitution without a written replacement.  The following information we hope will be of help to you in making your decision]

*

‘There is a danger that the supremacy of the Cabinet may be used by extremists or fanatics to carry through policies designed to destroy or injure our constitution or to employ parliamentary procedure which, whilst not illegal, is contrary to constitutional practice and convention.’

 

Whilst the supremacy of Parliament has many advantages, it is also a serious danger should a Government be formed of men prepared to curtail liberties or to form a dictatorship, as has happened [Then] in Czechovakia.  The methods employed by Communism should make us consider very carefully whether the dangers of a supreme Parliament do not override the advantages of a flexible constitution. 

 

Perhaps instead of referring to a supreme Parliament it might be more correct to say that the Cabinet is supreme in the exercise of Executive power and of law making through its control of the majority Party in the House of Commons.

 

It used to be said in textbooks that Parliament controls the executive-the Cabinet.  It will be remembered that [Walter] Bagehot regarded the Cabinet as merely a committee of the Parliamentary majority but neither historically nor in fact is that correct, though there is some excuse for the mistake.

 

The Cabinet, generally speaking, consists of Members of Parliament of the majority party and so has some appearance of being such a committee but it is not appointed by the majority party or by Parliament but in effect by the Prime Minister.

 

The fact that Parliament by a vote of no confidence may bring the then existing to an end may also have misled Bagehot. It must be remembered that the Cabinet has many powers, which are not derived from Parliament but from the fact that their executive powers, so far as not expressly conferred by Parliament, descend from the prerogative. [Order in Council –used to get Blair’s cronies into No10 –abolish the Lord Chancellorship but had to retract-make Treaties –New European Constitution and much more].

 

An alternative or additional method would be to have a written constitution, or a partly written constitution, which would provide for Fundamental Rights, which the House of Commons could not abrogate or alter by a bare majority.  In such cases it may fall to a Supreme Court  [The EDP suggested this in 1994-it is part of our Constitution for the English Nation] in the particular country to determine whether the proposed change is contrary to the constitution or not.

 

 In this country a written constitution would be a very far-reaching change.  It is doubtful whether there would be support for such a proposal [written in 1946], except after some invasion of the constitution.  The British electorate is unwilling to foresee dangers [Some even today in 2004 –though there appears to be an awaking taking place over the last six months]. It prefers to adopt an ostrich-like attitude.  The fondness of the British public for locking the stable door after the event is one of our cherished and established political principles.

 

Another possible safeguard is a referendum which, however, is a constitutional device which is unfamiliar to our constitution and has few supporters among constitutional lawyers in this country [Written in 1946] It may be that, with our ancient system, we feel anything not having its roots in Norman or Saxon times is unworthy of consideration and should be cold –shouldered. [Well our politicians in the 60’s and 70’s knew how to fool the people all the time.  Few knew all the facts and the greater number were lied to and cheated in order to confuse the population. 

 

We have the laughing sailor Edward Heath still laughing no doubt –he who gave away our fishing industry and much else and has almost achieved his ambition if you let him to see his countrymen in chains in the New European Constitution.

 

 

In this country [written in 1946] however, the greatest use that could be made of the referendum would be a safeguard against abuse and in order to give the electorate a direct vote on Major Constitutional Issues. [Well as most of us all know the past Referendums on the so-called Common Market have been a fraud of momentous proportions the details are listed elsewhere on our Bulletin Board.

 

That is why it is vital that strict international supervision is needed to prevent any abuse by the Government in the future Referendum on the New Constitution.  Possibly Jack Straw could ask a deputation from Iraq or the Ukraine to see that it is done in the correct way in our so-called Democracy.]

 

It is interesting to note that in Australia between 1901 and 1946 there were ten referendum covering twenty-three proposals and that only four were carried which seems to show that the electorate does not favour alterations of the Constitution   [They do of course have a written Constitution. The details of referendums over the past 58 years 1946 to 2004 are not immediately to hand but can be obtained.]

 

How could the referendum fit into our system of Parliamentary Government? There are probably three ways in which it could be used.

 

(1) Any Government, which was meeting with strong opposition on some matter of outstanding importance, might itself take a Referendum, but this method is optional and gives no safeguards against oppression. [We will have to see the wording of the Referendum on the New European Constitution in 2005 or whenever.]

 

(2) We might adopt a written       Constitution or Constitution providing that certain rights were to be Fundamental Rights which could only be changed after a referendum [This sounds the best option but even some Fundamental Rights are not of a type to lose at any price as under the New European Constitution which Tony Blair signed 25 times in Rome –November 2004.]

 

(3) We might have a Second Chamber with real powers of rejection of any measures proposed by the House of Commons or of Acts which were contrary to or at variance with specified rights or subjects, combined with the right of the Government to a Referendum.

 

The difficulty under (2) is that it would probably be necessary to leave it to the Courts to determine whether for example an Act of Parliament was contrary to some fundamental right [As in 2004] and it is possible for the Executive to appoint judges who are prepared to accept the views of the Cabinet. [Well we have over the past few years had a number of so-called Independent judges who have been a great disappointment to many who looked to our Judges as the ‘Lions of Justice’.] 

 

An objection, which applies, to all kinds of referenda is the important question who is to frame the questions? [Certainly not Tony Blair]

This is very important and some people believe that in most cases the framers could so word the questions as to get the decision they desired.  This may go too far, but undoubtedly the method of framing questions could have some influence on the result.

 

In Australia arguments for or against the proposal are issued to all electors and these arguments form quite a lengthy document.  In connection with the referendum in 1946 it consisted of a thirty-one-page pamphlet.

 

Another problem is what majority should be required and it is suggested that a bare majority of those entitled to vote should be sufficient and would be fair.  For if a man or women does not take the trouble to vote, it would be unfair to say that they cannot feel strongly in favour of the proposed change

 

It surely must be admitted that in a country like ours it should be impossible for Parliament to pass Constitutional measures of the most vital importance which have not been submitted to the electorate or approved at a general election [As constitutional matters cross party lines it is not appropriate unless every ballot paper has the question separately shown] without some body or method being available to ensure that such an Act or Measure has sufficient support among the people.

 

For example, if the Cabinet wanted to suspend the sittings of Parliament and quinquennial general elections, should there not be safeguards? If Parliament wanted to form a Republic or abolish Habeas Corpus [As they wish today in 2004] or to impose a censorship of the Press, is it right that this should be done through a Parliament elected on a quite different programme?

 

There is much to be said for a written constitution. But probably the reform which is most in accordance with our constitution is to establish a strong Second Chamber, with general powers of rejection of measures which offend against subjects which would require to be specified and which should certainly include those rights which a majority of the people of this country believe to be part of their political heritage- such as free speech and the press, a freely elected Parliament, Habeas Corpus and many others. It might also be provided that if the Government did not accept the verdict of the Second Chamber, a Referendum might be taken. [As with Hunting Bill today-November 2004 –the outright ban without compromise is not the usual method of the English People]

 

I also believe that one of the greatest problems and an urgent one is, whilst maintaining the strength of the Executive, to provide reasonable and adequate safeguards against abuse of power.

 

[As we suffer from 52 years later under New Labour in 2004.]                          

 

For a final word on the British Constitution we go to a liberal European thinker Lord Acton who in 1877 had the following to say about the vulnerability of our Constitution: -

 

‘I believe that the constitutional securities against democratic tyranny and popular dictatorship are greater and more effective in the American system than in the British.’    It was said that dictatorship was the deepest of Acton’s political sentiments, and popular dictatorship on the Caesarean model had twice raised its ugly head in Europe in the nineteenth century – Napoleon I and Napoleon III.

 

It was, in Acton’s view, the danger in universal suffrage.  Acton agreed with the unanimous conclusion of the ancient writers that the central problem of practical politics is constituted by

(1)        the right of the People to govern.

(2)        their ability to govern alone

The ancient writers correctly concluded that a mixed or balanced constitution was the best.  But there is no example in history of such a balanced constitution lasting a century. If it had succeeded anywhere, it is in England- but  “we know not yet how long the wisdom of the nation will preserve the equipoise.” (1877)

 

[Well we are all aware in November 2004 that our balanced constitution is possibly only months away from extinction- it all now depends on all of us to see it does not happen and when the danger is over to have a Written Constitution –which in the words of Lord Acton –saved liberty for the world in the eighteenth century.]  11/04

 

*          *          *

[Fonts altered-bolding used-comments in brackets]

 

FEBRUARY 5-2016

H.F.1337/1

 

BULLETINS FROM ACROSS THE WORLD

by Benjamin Fulford

 

 

Russians Chinese and Americans plan massive campaign to flush secret Khazarian government into the open

 

 

High level meetings between Chinese, Russian and US military types have reached the conclusion that a short sharp war may be necessary in order to flush out the Nazis and their secret world network, Asian secret society and Pentagon sources say. The plan to flush out the secret government will take the form of a joint US, Russian and Chinese military attack on North Korea, the sources say. “This will force North Korea’s ET backers out into the open,” the Asian secret society sources say.

Years of forensic research by this writer have revealed a secret network connecting gold mines in the South Pacific, off the grid Antarctic bases, hidden submarine bases, the world narcotics trade, North Korea and Israel among other things. This network, created by fascist allies who did not surrender at the end of World War II, is believed to be supplying North Korea with its nuclear weapons and missiles.

For that reason, the Asian secret society sources say a campaign portraying North Korea as a villain will be intensified over the coming months in preparation for a short but intense war early next year. This war will not involve countries as they exist now but rather would be between hidden forces behind countries, the sources say. So the Russians, the Chinese and the Americans would attack North Korea who would be backed by secret Russian, Chinese and American factions, making it a war between secret societies rather than a traditional one between countries, the sources agree. The aim will be to force out secret groups operating behind the scenes into the open, the Asian secret society sources say.

Pentagon sources say that North Korea and Israel are intimately linked entities. To put pressure on them, Russian troops entered Southern Syria opposite the Golan Heights last week, they say. At the same time Russia fired an Iskander missile from a Jewish Autonomous Oblast near Korea “to send a blunt message that Israel must return the Golan Heights,” the Pentagon sources say.

The Jews are also waking up to the fact that their Khazarian mafia overlords are the same people who engineered the holocaust. Maj. Gen. Yair Golan, the Israeli army’s deputy chief of staff, last week compared Israel’s current government to the Nazis and has refused to back down, a sign the Khazarians are likely to lose control of Israel as well as North Korea.

http://www.blacklistednews.com/IDF_Chief_Says_Israel_is_Becoming_Like_Nazi_Germany%2C_Refuses_to_Back_Down/59669/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Japan’s government recently passed a conspiracy bill that allows it to arrest people planning to commit a crime because they want to have a legal excuse to detain all the professional war makers who are expected to flee from North Korea to Japan once the fighting breaks out, the Asian sources say.

Of course, the ideal solution will be to bring these secret groups out of the closet without actually having to resort to a war, White Dragon Society sources in Asia say.

[only members]


The other very interesting subject brought up by the Asian secret society sources has to do with artificial intelligence. Strange as it may sound, there is a growing consensus that the reality we are experiencing is the product of an artificial intelligence. This has been told to us in the past by a member of the MJ12 group, by the gnostic illuminati and now by the Asian secret society. Furthermore, this AI appears to be stuck in a loop.

This may seem weird but if you step back from the daily news or even weekly news and take a longer term view, we do see massive repetition in certain aspects of world news. For example, if you read articles about Israel and the Palestinians from the 1970’s, they would be very hard to distinguish from articles appearing this year. The whole issue seems to be stuck in a repetitive feedback loop.

The same thing can be said about North Korea where problems related to that country setting off missiles that “could soon hit the United States,” have been repeating in a loop for many years. In fact, North Korea put up a satellite in 1998, meaning it has long had the capability to hit the continental United States with a nuclear weapon. So why do they keep repeating the North Korean missile meme?

Other long term repeating news loops include arguments over disputed Islands in the South China Sea, 70-year old issues relating to World War 2, the Ukraine, Iran etc.

The other loop I have seen repeated for the past several decades is the announcement of the discovery of a way to prolong life that is followed up a few weeks later with a reason why this method will not be pursued.
The source of these recurring news loops has been traced to the Khazarian mafia. However, weird as it may seem, when this writer followed the forensic trail from David Rockefeller to the Rothschilds to the Vatican P2 lodge, it ended up leading to people in Italy and Switzerland, like Vincenzo Mazzara, a cavalier of the Teutonic Knights, who claim they get their orders via gamma rays from an entity they know as the black sun.

For those of us who prefer to look at the real, here and now world, there is still a clear case to be made that certain actors in the intelligence community work on a secret agenda keep repeating certain news cycles to the detriment of humanity as a whole.

There is a chance we can finally put an end to this nonsense as early as this autumn. One key battleground will be Japan. Now that Richard Armitage has been bought off and Rothschild agent Michael Greenberg is a hunted man, the relatively moderate Gerald Curtis has become the top Japan handler for the American occupation forces.

The top Japanese power broker is now a man by the name of Kazuyoshi Kokubo, who is a son of the Emperor Hirohito born by a Korean princess, according to Japanese royal family sources. There is also the old warhorse former Prime Minister Yasuhiro Nakasone who has been working hard to create a government here favourable to Henry Kissinger, the sources say. These people can be removed if necessary, Japanese underworld sources say.

The Asian secret societies, Japanese underworld bosses and US military and intelligence agency white hats have agreed that making Japan an independent country once again would be a game changer for the entire planet.

If Japan became independent it would immediately stop the looting of its banks, pension funds, postal savings and other wealth by the Khazarian mafia. This would definitively pull the plug on the United States corporate government in Washington DC as well as Israel.

US President Donald Trump, for all his reform zeal and leadership prowess, is merely prolonging the inevitable bankruptcy of the US Corporation by selling arms and extorting payments from vassal countries. The wholly owned Puerto Rico subsidiary has already defaulted in May and, although not part of the corporation, states like Illinois are also bankrupt. This year, as has been the case for many years, the US Corporate government and its shareholders will be up to all sorts of tricks to try to kick the bankruptcy can down the road past the September 30th fiscal deadline.

In this context, the Asian Secret Society, the largest creditors to the United States Corporation, are seriously examining a WDS proposal to have Canada take over the bankrupt US and restore that country to democracy, the rule of law and sanity. In such a scenario the US military would remain fully funded as long as they promise to work for the greater good. This would immediately put an end to most of the world’s misery and conflict.

The French, under Rothschild servant president Emmanuel Macron, are also making a move to get control in the US. Donald Trump, top US general Joseph Dunford, CIA boss Mike Pompeo and National Security Adviser H.R. McMaster were invited to France for Bastille Day celebrations as 200 US troops led the military parade there. Pentagon sources say the French proposed that they, and not the Germans, should be the top US contact in Europe. The French also proposed joint military action in Africa and the Middle East against ISIS as well as against the Chinese, the Pentagon sources say.

The French Rothschilds are also trying hard to convince the Trump regime to allow their slave, Japanese Finance Minister Taro Aso, to be the next Prime Minister of Japan and thus allow the Rothschilds to continue to be able to loot that country. Somebody should remind the French that the whole point of storming the Bastille was to end bloodline rule by people like the Rothschilds.

There is in any case, a clean-up continuing in Washington. Former top insiders of the regime of Barack Obama, like his attorney general Loretta Lynch, have been providing in depth testimony about their Khazarian mafia bosses like the Clintons. Now former US President Barack Obama is claiming he was actually a double agent and that he is now willing to fully disclose everything he learned while operating as figurehead president for the US Corporation, according to CIA sources.

On a final note, Khazarian mafia agents are trying very hard to shut down this newsletter. All our income from this subscription blog has been taken since March by the Japanese tax authorities in a provable case of double taxation. However, even this bogus tax bill was starting to be paid off so now Paypal is preventing subscribers from paying for this subscription blog. The result has been to reduce this writer’s income by 80%. Now, in the latest twist, after our new IT guy set up a system whereby people could pay using crypto-currencies, a bunch of used tampons and a headless, bloody teddy-bear were dumped on his property. That shows what kind of sick, evil people we are writing about. However, we will not be deterred and the IT guy is currently working on upgrading the website and implementing a new credit card based payment system.
[/onlymembers]

New Payment System – Updated

 

Message from Ben’s IT Team

Hi All,


It is clear from the comments below that the proposed cryptocurrency donation system is not going to work for everyone. Therefore we will be switching back to a monthly payment based system, most likely one based on credit card payments. The cryptocurrency donations of those who have paid so far are greatly appreciated and will be used to help sustain Ben and the work he is doing while we transition over to the new system. For all those who have donated so far, your contributions have been noted and you will be granted access to the new system once it is in place. Everyone else will be required to sign up and pay the monthly fee to maintain access. Until the new system is ready the website will remain free. Anyone who has not yet cancelled their PayPal subscription should do so, as we will no longer be using PayPal to process the payments.

All readers of this blog should be aware that the existing financial system is a highly corrupt enterprise extending from the owners of central banks all the way down to credit card companies and local banks. Those who noted that cryptocurrencies are beginning to offer liberation from this system are correct. However we acknowledge that the cryptocurrency ecosystem is still in early days and does not yet offer the same conveniences as the existing system. In fact, credit cards were also once viewed as a strange new technology that would “never catch on”. The White Dragon Society strongly believes that cryptocurrency is poised to disrupt the entire financial system. Ultimately, the largest disruptions may come in the form of gold-backed cryptocurrencies. Stay tuned to Ben’s blog for more updates on this and other financial system related matters.

In the meantime, we ask for your patience while we deal with the financial attacks being levied against Ben and attempt to ensure that the critical news flow coming out of this site is not interrupted. Your feedback is appreciated and please do continue to post additional comments below.

 

Out of 20 G20 leaders 19 are fraud endorsing bankster slaves

 

Last weekend’s G20 meeting of so-called world leaders was very revealing because 19 out of 20 of them publicly endorsed the fraud based global warming scam known as the Paris accords. This happened despite the fact carbon-based global warming is being proved both legally and scientifically to be a fraud.

Michael Mann, the author of the global warming “hockey stick” graph that is used by the UN endorsed IPCC is facing a jail sentence after refusing a judge’s request to show how he got the data to back his claims the world is rapidly warming. Meanwhile, another scientific study showed that almost all the warming recorded in recent years is the result of the temperature data being raised after it was measured.

http://principia-scientific.org/breaking-fatal-courtroom-act-ruins-michael-hockey-stick-mann/
http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/exclusive-study-finds-temperature-adjustments-account-for-nearly-all-of-the-warming-in-climate-data/

By ignoring facts and pushing the Rothschild backed global warming fraud, both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin proved they were Rothschild lackeys. The only leader who has publicly renounced the global warming fraud is US President Donald Trump and that is why Khazarian mafia controlled media portray him as isolated.

However, things are changing at a deeper level, according to CIA, Pentagon and other sources. The military and intelligence apparatuses of Russia, the United States and China are all cooperating despite any hostile posturing by these countries’ respective politicians, the sources say.

This may be why Pope Francis felt the need to call up a journalist last week to issue the following statement:  “I am afraid there are very dangerous alliances between powers who have a distorted view of the world: America and Russia, China and North Korea, Russia and Assad in the war in Syria.”

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cnsnewscom-staff/pope-francis-says-america-has-distorted-vision-world

Remember it was Pope Francis who handed Trump a 260 page document endorsing the climate change fraud when they met in May.

The other thing to note is that the G20 is calling for world governance centered on the IMF. Please recall that the head of the IMF is not selected by the people of the planet but rather by the same Khazarian bloodline group that selects the head of the UN, the World Bank etc. Remember, the IMF and its backers have been erecting gates to the temple of Baal otherwise known as Satan, at their meetings.

Note that the “very dangerous alliance” the Pope is referring to includes Russia, China, the US, North Korea and Syria. These countries are all moving away from bloodline control even though Russia still has a Rothschild figurehead president. Actual Russian sources this writer has contacted, though, all agree it is the Russian Orthodox Church and not Putin that runs Russia.

Pope Francis probably means well but he is deluded if he thinks a P2 Freemason selected person like Marco Di Mauro is going to be anointed the leader of a bloodline controlled world government.
In any case, Francis is being roiled by yet another Vatican scandal, in this case a drug fueled gay orgy that was busted by the police after neighbours complained about the noise. This could lead to yet another Cardinal being fired, CIA sources say.

The Pope should be concentrating more of his efforts on fighting the very real threat of Satanists who were, until recently, on the brink of taking over the world. Yet another former Satanist has come forward with testimony about large scale human sacrifice and other atrocities carried out by these people. This nine minute clip makes for very disturbing listening but it is definitely a call to action.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8blKWWWTJio

Action is, of course, being taken. The latest was Germany’s announcement last week that it broke up a pedophile ring that involved 87,000 people. You can be sure many of the people doing child sacrifices were scooped up in that bust.

In the US as well the final clean-up of the Khazarians continues. In the latest, former President Barack Obama’s attorney general Loretta Lynch has been giving detailed testimony about the crimes of her former Clinton/Bush bosses, CIA and other sources say. As a result Barack Obama sought political asylum in Indonesia last week but was denied it, according to White Dragon Society Sources in Indonesia. CIA sources in Europe confirm this and say Obama is going to have to go back to the US in order to be debriefed on who really controlled his presidency. Recall that when Obama was first elected he kept saying “thank you Satan” in reverse speech.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LS53I-k_T4o

Speaking about Obama, the 40 second video clip below shows clearly how different his personal chemistry with Russia’s Vladimir Putin was from Trump and Putin’s chemistry.

https://mainerepublicemailalert.com/2017/07/08/can-you-tell-the-difference/

Pentagon sources say the change in chemistry reflects a Trump regime campaign to seduce Russia into joining it in an alliance against Chinese and Khazarian control.

“In a smack down of the cabal and the deep state, political novice Trump was ‘honored’ to meet with elder statesman Putin where Putin’s plan to make Russia great again with symphony of church and state will no doubt be the blueprint for Trump to make America great again,” the Pentagon sources say.

“Trump emerges as defender of Western civilization from Judaic [Satanic] destruction, and he is ably assisted by Putin and the Pope to form a super-Christian bloc to contain China and holocaust the global Jewish mafia,” one Pentagon source says.

The WDS makes it clear there is to be no collective punishment and the only people who are being targeted are the ones who have been engaged in mass murder through biological weapons, nuclear terror, human sacrifice, illegal war etc.

However, it is clear the Trump administration represents a generalized backlash against Khazarian control that could spiral out of control into an attack on Jews in general. On his trip to Poland Trump refused visit the Jewish Warsaw Ghetto monument. In his speech in Poland when Trump mentioned threats from inside and from the South and the East he was referring to Saudi Arabia, Israel and its 5th column in the USA, the Pentagon sources say.

[onlymembers]
Also, the Neocons H.R, McMaster and Jared Kushner were blocked from attending the meeting between Trump and Secretary of State Rex Tillerson with their counterparts Putin and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. At the meeting the US pushed for a restoration of US/Russian ties to counter China, according to the Pentagon. The Americans also proposed a Russian/US “cyber security unit aimed to prevent Israeli, Chinese hacking, e-hijacking, and other cyber-attacks,” the sources say.

Russian sources, for their part, continue to say they are wary of the sudden US friendliness because of the long history of US aggression against Russia. The Russians say they are against forming opposing blocs and prefer a world where everybody is friendly.

Nonetheless, recent Chinese aggressive moves against India clearly seem to have backfired against China.
“Russia is very concerned about Chinese aggression in the South China Sea and the Indian subcontinent, which is why the Vietnamese Prime Minister was invited to the G20,” the Pentagon sources say. The US navy for its part sent a message with joint naval exercises with Japan and India recently.

The Chinese now appear to have backed off following a meeting between Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi on the sidelines of the G20.

http://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy-defence/article/2101742/chinas-xi-jinping-and-indias-narendra-modi-meet-g20

Another interesting thing to note about the G20 is that Saudi King “Salman and warrior prince Mohammed Bin Salma were declared persona non grata at the G20 for being a proxy for Israel,” the Pentagon sources say. They say Qatar is on the winning side in its dispute with Saudi Arabia and that deposed crown prince Nayef may still be reinstated.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, for his part, was offering bribes in exchange for protection at the G20, according to Japanese right wing sources close to the Emperor. Abe’s party suffered a crushing defeat at recent Tokyo municipal elections and is likely to be forced to hold elections this year where it will be routed from national politics, the sources say.

What is undeniable is that there is a major split at the top of the Japanese power structure. This is reflected in opinion polls in Japan’s newspapers where the right wing national Sankei newspaper shows support for Abe at 86% while the left-leaning Asahi Newspaper shows his support at 14%. The centrist regional Tokyo Shinbum Newspaper shows his support at only 5%. The following link is in Japanese but the percentage signs show the incredible gaps in newspaper opinion polls.

https://news.yahoo.co.jp/byline/yoneshigekatsuhiro/20170620-00072316/

Japanese right wing sources say the nationalist Tanaka faction is gearing up for regime change in Japan and that this will result in the removal of Korean proxies who have been sub-contracting the rule of Japan for the Khazarians since the end of World War II.

The fact that Abe was setting up a massive chemical and biological warfare research center disguised as the Kake Gakuin Veterinary College has exposed him and his regime as genocidal war criminals. Several right wing sources have called to inform this writer that Abe was not expected to live more than three months.
Meanwhile as the warmongers are removed from power around the world, signs of a construction boom are emerging. WDS sources in Indonesia say the Indonesian government is planning to build a new capital to replace the overcrowded and sinking city of Jakarta.

https://www.indonesia-investments.com/news/news-columns/will-indonesia-move-the-capital-away-from-jakarta-java-island/item7957

The Japanese underworld, for its part, is looking forward to a bonanza as the Chinese government prepares to move many capital functions to a new city 150 kilometers from Beijing. A Japanese underworld boss says Japanese companies are getting lucrative contracts for the waste disposal and other environmental work on the new capital because the Chinese want Japan’s know how on how to create clean mega-cities. Sh#t happens and somebody’s got to clean it up.

Once Khazarian rule ends in Japan, Israel, Saudi Arabia and the Ukraine, the world will be ready to enter a new golden age.
[/onlymembers]

 

H.F.1260-

Personal and Global Attacks Become Lethal: Is the Disclosure War

 Reaching a Climax? [Part I]

 

 

 

Unprecedented solar emissions. Huge wildfires smoking out the US. Massive earthquakes. Three different monster hurricanes that steered perfectly into Houston, Florida and Puerto Rico.

Damages to the already fragile US economy could easily exceed 1 trillion dollars -- at a time when there is nothing left to restore it with.

Within the UFO / Seeking Truth community, we saw the tragic deaths of Jim Marrs and William Tompkins -- as well as the possible attempted murders of Graham Hancock and David Wilcock, as we will discuss in Part Two.

David's insider 'Paul' had everything he owned stolen from him, as well as serious death threats. Pete Peterson's house has now been emptied to the bare walls and his trailers, packed with priceless classified items, are under imminent threat.

A massive, coordinated online attack against Corey Goode, including the destruction of his business and the expected loss of his children, was intended to lead to a fake, staged 'suicide', made believable by his overall anticipated collapse.

This all occurred shortly after Ancient Aliens, a top History Channel show, featured Corey Goode and William Tompkins' Secret Space Program testimony in an episode entitled "The Majestic Twelve", which aired on July 7, 2017.

So much has happened since our last update a month ago that it is difficult to summarize everything. Are these events interconnected? The answer definitely appears to be yes.

Since I am still on vacation, we will break this up into two different parts in order to not create any further delays. We will start by "following the money."

 

PART ONE: FOLLOW THE MONEY

 

WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF THE SECRET SPACE PROGRAM WERE REAL?

Let's begin our investigation with a mental exercise.

Even if you have trouble with the idea of a Secret Space Program, or SSP, being real, let's just imagine for a minute that it actually is true. 

What would happen to our society if we were given absolute proof that the testimonies of the late William Tompkins and others such as Corey Goode, as presented in the "Majestic Twelve" episode of Ancient Aliens, were completely authentic?

 

https://www.punkrockandufos.com/blog/2017/7/8/review-ancient-aliens-the-majestic-twelve-july-72017

The [MJ-12] episode also covers Project Horizon and other secret space bases, structures on Mars dubbed "ancient builder race" by astronauts, NASA hacks that say the MJ-12 and the space programs they helped start existed, Roswell and other UFO cases. 

 

What if we discovered that countless trillions of dollars of our money, since as early as the 1950s, have been spent on developing vastly superior technology to anything we see today?

What if the scope, depth and sophistication of this build-out is vastly bigger than most of us could even imagine -- and indeed extends throughout our solar system?

 

IMAGINE THE SCOPE OF WHAT COULD BE...

Let's just say that the insiders are right... and these convenient, quick-sounding labels of words like "billion" and "trillion" have been used to obscure how much stuff could really be manufactured with this much money.

What if this money financed antigravity craft, massive bases on Mars, the Moon and other satellites in our solar system and beyond -- some of which comfortably house hundreds of thousands of employees?

What if the full release of this technology would instantly propel us into a world of everyday space travel and interaction with countless different races of humanlike ETs? 

What if the Cabal that planned and financed all of this was still clinging to power on earth, but was now threatened with complete exposure to the public?

And... what if an Alliance within the military, intelligence and governments themselves is threatening this Cabal with complete exposure if they do not surrender -- and agree to tell us the truth?

That's the world that some of us are living in -- right on the front lines. This "shadow World War III" may very well be reaching a stunning conclusion in the near future.

 

IT IS ADMITTEDLY DIFFICULT TO FATHOM

The SSP narrative is so far removed from conventional reality that it seems almost impossible to imagine something like this ever becoming common, public knowledge.

However, anyone who has studied UFO lore has heard that the US government acquired craft with interstellar travel capabilities ever since the Roswell Crash of 1947. 

Furthermore, it is considered common knowledge that these craft were "reverse engineered," leading to working models being built out of them with our own technology.

It is commonly accepted by most open-minded investigators that such exotic aircraft have been tested in bases such as 'Area 51,' and are occasionally seen in our skies.

If we could cruise around our solar system within a few years after Roswell, that means our military-industrial complex has had nearly 70 years to establish manned bases out there.

The amount of money that has gone missing is vastly, vastly greater than what it would cost to build a fleet of reverse-engineered, advanced spacecraft.

 

THE PACKARD COMMISSION

I was an angst-ridden 12-year-old when the news about the Packard Commission came out in February 1986. It only made me even more convinced that our world was run by an evil Cabal.

This disclosure was extremely embarrassing to the military-industrial complex, as it revealed they were vastly overpaying for simple items like toilet seats -- on a massive scale.

This revelation likely came from the same Alliance faction that had just started pushing the Iran-Contra scandal through a few months earlier, as of August 20th, 1985.

As I discuss in The Ascension Mysteries, Iran-Contra was very likely intended to end the Cabal -- as it revealed treasonous collaboration with terrorists and cocaine dealers at the Presidential level.

By typing in "military hundred dollar toilet seats" into a search engine, it came up right away:

 

 

LET'S GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL

Take a look at what we hear in the original article from the New York Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/1986/02/18/us/dept-of-hundred-dollar-toilet-seats.html?mcubz=3

Disclosures about the Defense Department paying hundreds of dollars for a hammer and hundreds more for a toilet seat have infuriated President Reagan, who has called the reports a ''constant drumbeat of propaganda'' and not typical of the way the Government operates.

But that ''propaganda,'' the President apparently forgot or did not know, originated with a commission on governmental efficiency for which he has been full of praise, the Grace Commission.

 

Reagan and his administration -- many of the same people who became known as "Neocons" and are implicated in 9/11 -- did not at all like these revelations.

Reagan attempted to defend them by calling this "propaganda" and acting as if it made him angry, rather than being interested in understanding why this was happening.

 

IT STARTS AS A JOKE...

In this next article from the LA Times on July 30, 1986, the reviewer makes a joke early along, only to reveal this is how the US military really worked:

http://articles.latimes.com/1986-07-30/news/vw-18804_1_nut

You may have read in the paper the other day that a division of Litton Industries and two of its former executives are accused of defrauding the government out of $6.3 million on military contracts.

According to the U.S. attorney, the company "grossly inflated prices intentionally" on about 45 contracts from 1975 to 1984.

It makes you wonder if all our weapons aren't overpriced....

 

A handy book for any taxpayer is "The Pentagon Catalog" (Workman), which describes and shows diagrams of numerous pieces of military hardware that authors Christopher Cerf and Henry Beard describe as "ordinary products at extraordinary prices."

They claim that their firm, Pentagon Products, can supply any of these items to anyone at the prices our military paid for them, and they boast, "We will not be oversold."

Anyone who buys this paperback for $4.95 gets a $2,043 nut free.

The nut is glued to the inside of the back cover, in the upper right hand corner, and fits in a hole in the pages, so it goes through to the front.

This nut, which is described as "a plain round nut," was made by McDonnell Douglas for the Navy at $2,043 each.

 

But, as the book points out, wouldn't it be embarrassing if some big piece of equipment failed because of a spare part that cost only a few cents? We certainly don't want to risk our airplanes by fitting them with cheap nuts.

The book also lists a claw hammer sold by Gould Simulation Systems to the Navy for $435. In the picture it looks like the kind you can buy at any hardware store for $10.

Comparatively reasonable is McDonnell Douglas' price of only $37 for a screw. It appears in every respect to be an ordinary screw, but the book points out:

"The fact is, a screw this expensive simply cannot get lost! How many times have you had a screw roll off your worktable and disappear, then just casually reached for another one because the missing fastener was too cheap to hunt for?

"Lots of times, right? Well, you can bet your bottom dollar . . . that if one of our screws rolls into some dark corner, you're going to conduct a full-scale search!"

 

Other items offered in the catalogue include:

  • a $285 screwdriver,
  • a $7,622 coffee maker,
  • a $387 flat washer,
  • a $469 wrench,
  • a $214 flashlight,
  • a $437 tape measure,
  • a $2,228 monkey wrench,
  • a $748 pair of duckbill pliers,
  • a $74,165 aluminum ladder,
  • a $659 ashtray and
  • a $240- million airplane.

 

Pentagon Products may be a fictional company, but these prices are not. They are documented.

 

IT STILL GOES ON TO THIS DAY

In 2015, we found out that a single helmet for a fighter jet was supposedly worth 400 thousand dollars:

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-u-s-government-is-spending-400000-dollars-on-a-single-helmet

Would you pay $400,000 for a single helmet?  Of course you wouldn’t – but that is precisely what the U.S. government is doing.

Just the helmet for the pilot of the new F-35 Lightning II is going to cost taxpayers nearly half a million dollars.  And since we are going to need 2,400 of those helmets, the total bill is going to end up approaching a billion dollars.  But what is a billion dollars between friends, eh?

Sadly, our military has a very long history of wasting money like this. Back in the 1980s, the “six hundred dollar toilet seat” became quite famous.

Average Americans were absolutely outraged that the government was wasting so much of our hard-earned money, and promises were made that things would change.

 

ONE JOURNALIST ALONE FOUND 33 BILLION IN MISSING MONEY

Then in 2016, an expose' from The Nation revealed even more examples in current times.

This journalist was able to track down 33 billion dollars in mysterious over-spending just on his own:

 

https://www.thenation.com/article/only-the-pentagon-could-spend-640-on-a-toilet-seat/

The latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.

Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars’ worth of weapons components that will never be used....

Keep in mind that the above examples are just the tip of the tip of a titanic iceberg of military waste.

In a recent report I did for the Center for International Policy, I identified 27 recent examples of such wasteful spending totaling over $33 billion. And that was no more than a sampling of everyday life in the 21st-century world of the Pentagon....

 

The first person to bring widespread public attention to the size and scope of the problem of Pentagon waste was Ernest Fitzgerald, an Air Force deputy for management systems.

In the late 1960s, he battled that service to bring to light massive cost overruns on Lockheed’s C-5A transport plane. He risked his job, and was ultimately fired, for uncovering $2 billion in excess expenditures on a plane [in late 1960s dollars]....

The C-5A fiasco, combined with Lockheed’s financial troubles with its L-1011 airliner project, led the company to approach Congress, hat in hand, for a $250 million government bailout....

In a time-tested lobbying technique that has been used by weapons makers ever since, Lockheed claimed that denying it loan guarantees would cost 34,000 jobs in 35 states, while undermining the Pentagon’s ability to prepare for the next war, whatever it might be.

The tactic worked like a charm....

 

By rewarding Lockheed Martin for its wasteful practices, Congress set a precedent that has never been superseded.

A present-day case in point is—speak of the devil—Lockheed Martin’s F-35 combat aircraft.

At $1.4 trillion in procurement and operating costs over its lifetime, it will be the most expensive weapons program ever undertaken by the Pentagon (or anyone else on planet Earth), and the warning signs are already in:

[There are] tens of billions of dollars in projected cost overruns and myriad performance problems before the F-35 is even out of its testing phase.

 

MASSIVE "PONZI SCHEMES" CREATED AS SECRET FUNDRAISERS FOR BLACK CASH

What if we learned that the US government created vast Ponzi schemes as fundraisers, where the actual costs of wars and the space race were much less than what was reported to the public?

[This is precisely what multiple insiders, who have proven their high-level credentials, have told us over the years. The Packard Commission was just a taste.]

What if these mega-fundraisers included the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Apollo moon missions, the trillion-dollar fighter jets, the nuclear arms race and now the War on Terror?

Take a look at some figures anyone can obtain via internet search:

 

 

8.8 TRILLION DOLLARS

If you add up just the above, in conventional dollars, you have 341B + 770B + 110B + 5.48T + 2.1T, for a total of 8,801 billion, or 8.8 trillion dollars.

Then throw in the absolutely ridiculous figure of 1.4 trillion for the F-35, and you are now up to 10.2 trillion dollars.

Multiple insiders have risked their lives to reveal that these methods are used as a way of funneling vast amounts of money into secret projects.

Some of this money was obviously spent legitimately on these programs -- but we are told that a significant majority of it was redirected elsewhere.

On a far more mundane level, when I was given a bribery and threat attempt on July 3rd, 2017, just four days before the MJ-12 episode aired, I was told I could sell something and be vastly overpaid for it.

I was told "This is how we do it. This is how we get money where it needs to go without it being anything easy to trace."

 

CONSIDER SOME OF THE THINGS THAT JUMP OUT IN THE ABOVE LINKS

Some of the articles we linked to above have some interesting facts worth exploring at this point.

Let's take a look at our first example, from the hyper-expensive nuclear weapons program:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/01/us/us-nuclear-arms-cost-put-at-5.48-trillion.html

Nuclear weapons have cost the United States at least $5.48 trillion since 1940.

For most of that time neither Congress, the armed services nor the President had a clear idea what was being spent, according to a four-year study sponsored by the Brookings Institution....

The money spent on nuclear weapons, plus money for environmental cleanup, would buy 290 million automobiles, says an author of the study.

[The author's name is] William J. Weida, a professor of economics at Colorado College in Colorado Springs and a former director of the Economic Policy and Analysis division of the Defense Department.

 

5.48 TRILLION BUYS YOU 6800 NUKES

Just so we are clear, the current US population is about 324 million.

The money we have spent on nukes could buy a new car for almost every man, woman and child in America.

You could build an entire civilization for that kind of money.

How many nukes does the US now have to show for this astonishing 5.48 trillion-dollar expenditure? A mere 6,800 -- and better yet, only 1800 of them are deployed:

http://time.com/4893175/united-states-nuclear-weapons/

As of July 8, the United States has 6,800 warheads, according to data from Hans Kristensen and Robert Norris at the Federation of American scientists.

2,800 of them are retired, 4,000 are stockpiled, and 1,800 are deployed. The total number of U.S. warheads is second only to Russia, which currently has 7,000 of them.

 

That would mean that each missile would theoretically cost as much in pure economic value as the manufacture of 42 thousand, 647 different automobiles.

That would add up to a price of over 805 million dollars per missile -- a staggering number that approaches a billion dollars.

This is obviously approximate, but it at least puts us in the ballpark.

 

THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL COSTS

Granted, you also need a delivery system in order to make a missile, as this New York Times article suggests:

the http://www.nytimes.com/1998/07/01/us/us-nuclear-arms-cost-put-at-5.48-trillion.html

The cost includes money spent to invent them and produce them, build the missiles, bombers and submarines to deliver them and to defend against enemy nuclear attacks.

 

In total, we have:

  • The amount of raw materials and labor involved in the invention of the technology;
  • the mining of fissile fuel, with appropriate equipment and safety precautions;
  • the refining and machining of the materials to make the missile;
  • the costs of manufacturing a portion of the plane or sub that would deliver one missile, and:
  • the labor involved in the construction of one missile.

 

This combined cost for one missile should certainly be less than what it takes to develop over 42 THOUSAND different automobiles.

Once you consider that these glorified rockets could be a lot cheaper than we are being told, everything starts to make a lot more sense.

 

WHAT THE HECK HAPPENED WITH APOLLO?

As this next quote reveals, Mercury cost 265 million per flight. Gemini cost 723 million per flight.

Yet, somehow, the price tag for each Apollo flight added up to 9,900 million bucks -- or 9.9 billion dollars each.

How is it that we could successfully launch over 37 Mercury flights for the same money it cost to do one Apollo flight?

Mercury put astronauts into orbit around the earth for the first time. Gemini again put them in earth orbit, but included longer trips and spacewalks.

Is it really 37 times more expensive to send astronauts to the moon than it is to launch them into earth's orbit and safely return them?

Here are the details if you want to read it for yourself:

 

http://www.thespacereview.com/article/1579/1

Project Mercury spanned five years (1959–1963) and cost $277 million in 1965 dollars, which translate into $1.6 billion in 2010 dollars.

Since six Mercury piloted missions were flown, that amounted to $265 million per flight in today’s money.

As for Gemini, the program costs $1.3 billion in 1967 dollars during its six-year lifespan (1962–1967).

In today’s money, it would amount to $7.3 billion, or $723 millions for each of its 10 piloted missions. We thus could say that a Gemini mission cost twice as much as a Mercury’s.

As reported above, the Apollo program costs $20.4 billion if we simply added yearly spending of its 15 year-lifespan (1959–1973), or $109 billion in today’s money.

Since 11 Apollo piloted missions were flown, that amounts to $9.9 billion per flight.

That’s way over Mercury and Gemini mission costs, reflecting the complexity of going to the Moon.

And if we consider these $109 billion resulted in six lunar landings, each of these missions costs some $18 billion!

 

START DOING THE NUMBERS

This writer naturally assumes the outrageously higher cost was simply due to "the complexity of going to the Moon" -- but multiple insiders have risked their lives to say there is much more to it than that.

Let's also not forget that each Mercury mission required a rocket to be launched. Just like a nuclear missile, which is also a rocket.

Nonetheless, a Mercury rocket only cost 265 million per flight, whereas a nuclear rocket supposedly costs over 805 million per unit -- as we said above.

Once you get the basic design perfected, and know where to mine the fissile materials, should it really cost so much more to produce a nuke?

 

NUMBERS ARE CONVENIENT LABELS THAT CAN HIDE THE TRUTH

Numbers like "million," "billion" and "trillion" get thrown around all the time, but do we really understand exactly how much we can build with this kind of money?

Most people have no idea. None whatsoever. This is the result of generations of mass-media brainwashing.

The numbers give us convenient labels to file everything away under a short sub-heading in our minds.

How many people could really even imagine the difference between having and spending 10 million, 100 million, 1000 million or 1,000,000 million?

Yet, this all-too-easily ignored figure of a trillion dollars is literally, again, one million, million dollars.

 

YOU WOULD PROBABLY RUN OUT OF IDEAS

Let's say you were lucky enough to get handed a trillion dollars. The only catch was that you actually had to spend it.

If you tried to spend one million, million dollars, you would probably run out of ideas pretty quickly after the first few million -- perhaps 100M at the most.

"Nonsense, David, I'd start making hundred million-dollar movies!" Okay, great idea. Go "all in" at 100M per movie. Make it big.

In order to spend a trillion dollars you would need to personally produce ten thousand  of these Hollywood blockbusters.

If you could read and approve a 120-page script a day, every day of your life, it would take you 27.39 years to get through ten thousand of them.

Each of these films requires tens of thousands of highly skilled employees to work full time for several months at least.

Right now we are lucky to see ten movies of that caliber and price point per year, maybe 20 if you are very generous.

The amount of time and effort it would take to train enough people to even make, say, 50 films of this size and cost per year is astronomical.

It would take you 500 years at our current production speed to spend a trillion dollars by making 20 major blockbusters at 100M each per year.

 

DON'T FORGET THE MISSING MONEY

Now we are starting to get a better sense of exactly how big a trillion dollars is. If Hollywood made 20 films at 100M each per year, it would take them 500 years to burn through a trillion dollars.

Each film requires the labor of armies of tens of thousands of people, extensive materials costs to build sets and props, and tons of computer power and time.

Our back-of-the-envelope calculation for the on-the-books costs of Korea, Vietnam, Apollo, the nuclear arms race, the F-35 and the War on Terror was 10.2 trillion dollars.

[UPDATE: That's over 5000 years of hiring huge armies of people to make 20 top blockbuster films per year, at 100M per movie.

Not to mention technical breakthroughs would probably bring the costs way down and allow you to make many more at the same price.]

This doesn't even begin to cover the money that is just flat-out missing.

What if US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld announced that 2.3 trillion dollars was "missing" from the US defense budget on the day before 9/11?

What if the total amount of "missing" money, in addition to the 10.2 trillion already mentioned and other fundraising methods, is now 6.5 trillion dollars as of August 2016?

 

http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/6-5-trillion-missing-from-defense-department/

 

http://www.wnd.com/2016/08/6-5-trillion-missing-from-defense-department/

A relatively obscure audit report from the Office of Inspector General of the United States Department of Defense suddenly is getting a lot of attention for what it apparently reveals: The Pentagon can’t account for $6.5 trillion.

At ArmstrongEconomics, the blog reported, “Once again, the office of inspector general has come up with a huge hole in the Department of Defense with a missing $6.5 trillion.”

The day before 9/11, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld admitted $2.3 trillion was missing from the Defense Department budget, noted the blog.

That figure has now grown to $6.5 trillion and counting.

 

LOTS AND LOTS OF MONEY SPENT

Now we've looked at 10.2 trillion spent on a handful of wars, a fighter jet and a space program with six moonwalks, and another 6.5 trillion that is "missing."

The US military budget has been approaching a trillion dollars a year in total spending for the last decade, as you can see here -- even though we went through a crippling financial crisis in 2008.

The numbers in this diagram are in billions:

 

 

FOUR TIMES HIGHER THAN CHINA, TEN TIMES HIGHER THAN RUSSIA

For all the fear-mongering we hear in the media about China and Russia, the article that features this budget breakdown also shows how absurdly high this figure really is:

https://www.thebalance.com/u-s-military-budget-components-challenges-growth-3306320

U.S. military spending is its largest expenditure after Social Security benefits. It's greater than those of the next 10 largest government expenditures combined.

It's four times more than China's military budget of $216 billion. It's almost 10 times bigger than Russia's budget of just $84.5 billion.

It's difficult to reduce the budget deficit, and the almost $20 trillion debt, without cutting defense spending.

 

We are being told by the media that Russia is this terrifying adversary, as if the Cold War is back on again. Yet the US has ten times more military cash than they do.

China is supposed to be an even bigger and scarier villain. The US has 400 percent more military spending than they do.

What the heck is going on here?

 

WHERE DID ALL THE MONEY GO?

The entire world is teetering on the brink of bankruptcy. All the money is gone. The US alone is nearly 20 trillion dollars in debt, as you just read.

The Cabal's own "Too Big to Fail" mega-corporate banks didn't have anything left in 2008, and needed a 29 trillion-dollar bailout, as we revealed in Financial Tyranny.

Yet, in practical terms, this makes no sense. All that money had to go somewhere. 29 trillion is nearly half of the entire wealth of the planet in a given year, as measured in world GDP.

If you play "follow the money," the obvious answer to the problem is that they had to spend it on something.

 

WHAT COULD THEY HAVE BOUGHT?

If we assume that wealthy elites stole this money and spent it, what could they have bought with it?

You may have imagined them dining on caviar and fine steak, washing it down with a 400-dollar bottle of Dom Perignon champagne on their private jets.

They might have fleets of Bentleys waiting in the garages of a few different mega-mansions around the world, and towering yachts in the harbor.

The costs of these luxuries are much less than the ten trillion in assets held by the top 92,000 people, who represent the .001%.

If each one of them had exactly the same amount of money, which is highly unlikely, it would amount to 108 million, 698 thousand dollars and change.

A private jet 'only' costs a maximum of 4 million a year.

 

 

Sprawling mansions owned by the top celebrities typically weigh in at 10 to 20 million. The most expensive cars still only cost 1/10th of a million, except for certain very rare examples.

 

YOU COULD DO DAMAGE WITH A YACHT

Yachts are where things can get ridiculous.

There aren't enough super-yachts for all 92,000 of the 0.001 percent to have one, but if there were, they could spend all they have trying to get one and go broke, since they are 275M each.

 

 

Forbes was only able to identify 125 super-yacht owners enough to know their nationalities, though they also say 355 of them were sold in 2013, totaling 3.5 billion.

How many super-yachts at 275 million could you buy with ten trillion dollars? That's 36 thousand, 363 -- vastly greater than the number known to exist.

 

ENOUGH MONEY TO BUILD ENTIRE CITIES... IF NOT ENTIRE NATIONS

The top 92,000 individuals alone possess 10 trillion. However, the total number socked away by the super-rich is as much as a staggering 32 trillion dollars:

http://www.alternet.org/economy/global-power-elite-exposed

In July of 2012, James Henry, a former chief economist at McKinsey, a major global consultancy, published a major report on tax havens for the Tax Justice Network. 

[He] compiled data from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), the IMF and other private sector entities to reveal that the world’s super-rich have hidden between $21 and $32 trillion offshore to avoid taxation....

With roughly half of the world’s offshore wealth, or some $10 trillion, belonging to 92,000 of the planet's richest individuals — representing not the top 1% but the top 0.001% — we see a far more extreme global disparity taking shape than the one invoked by the Occupy movement.

 

LOOK AT THE NUMBERS

Now let's take a look at the combined wealth of entire nations as it stands today in 2017, based on GDP, or Gross Domestic Product.

What you are seeing here is that the total value of the US is 19.4 trillion, China is 11.7 trillion, Japan is 4.8 trillion, and so on:

 

https://knoema.com/nwnfkne/world-gdp-ranking-2017-gdp-by-country-data-and-charts

 

Everyone is talking about how wealthy China is. They are buying up everything in sight, going through a massive construction boom, you name it.

Yet, as you can see here, their combined GDP for 2017 is $11.79 trillion.

This is just a bit higher than what the top 92,000 people have stuffed under the couch.

How much could you actually do with 11.79 trillion? Let's take a quick look at China and find out.

 

CHINA'S "GHOST CITIES"

Just some of China's 11.79 trillion per year has been allocated to the construction of utterly vast, creepy "Ghost Cities" that no one is even living in.

Here is one article about this from the February 2016 issue of Wired Magazine, complete with stunning photographic documentation:

 

https://www.wired.com/2016/02/kai-caemmerer-unborn-cities/

 

https://www.wired.com/2016/02/kai-caemmerer-unborn-cities/

The Kangbashi district of Ordos, China is a marvel of urban planning, 137-square miles of shining towers, futuristic architecture and pristine parks carved out of the grassland of Inner Mongolia.

It is a thoroughly modern city, but for one thing: No one lives there.

Well, almost nobody. Kangbashi is one of hundreds of sparkling new cities sitting relatively empty throughout China.

[They have been] built by a government eager to urbanize the country but shunned by people unable to afford it or hesitant to leave the rural communities they know.

Chicago photographer Kai Caemmerer visited Kangbashi and two other cities for his ongoing series Unborn Cities.

The photos capture the eerie sensation of standing on a silent street surrounded by empty skyscrapers and public spaces devoid of life.

 

2017: CHINA NOW BUILDING A GHOST CITY THREE TIMES THE SIZE OF NEW YORK

In April 2017, China announced the construction of yet another city, which would soon expand to literally being three times the size of New York:

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/04/china-plans-build-new-city-nearly-three-times-the-size-of-new-york

 

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/apr/04/china-plans-build-new-city-nearly-three-times-the-size-of-new-york

Plans for the Xiongan New Area, a special economic zone that authorities say will eventually cover an area nearly three times that of New York, were announced by the Communist party’s top leaders on Saturday with a flurry of government propaganda....

Official news agency Xinhua said Xiongan’s creation would reduce pressure on China’s car-clogged, 22 million-resident capital, and “usher in a new chapter in the country’s historic transitioning to coordinated, inclusive and sustainable growth”....

China has created dozens of “new areas” in recent years as part of a massive urbanisation drive that has seen hundreds of millions of people pour into its cities.

Critics say many have become ghost towns but in a recent interview Wade Shepard, the author of a book on the phenomenon, said some were now beginning to take off.

 

CHINA IS NOW PLANNING ON BUILDING ANOTHER 285 NEW CITIES

Even though China already has a total of 650 established cities, they intend to use part of this 11.79 trillion per year to build an additional 285 of them.

This, of course, means that one of the most highly populated countries in the world is literally about to double the size of their cities with the money they already have.

11.79 trillion per year is more than enough to do this:

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2017/09/01/no-joke-china-is-building-285-eco-cities-heres-why

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/wadeshepard/2017/09/01/no-joke-china-is-building-285-eco-cities-heres-why

Two hundred and eighty-five. That’s the number of new purpose-built eco-cities that China claims to be developing.

This is not a joke or an ironic jest... This is a very real development that is taking place in a China that is attempting to rapidly transition and stabilize on many fronts...

In a country that has roughly 650 established cities, the impact of this eco-city building bonanza could be drastic — even if only a modest portion of them are ever actually completed and populated....

This is a country that has urbanized faster and more extensively than any other country in history — by far.

Since 1949, when the Communist Party first came to power, China created (or designated) over 600 new cities.

In the past three decades alone, the country has urbanized more people than the entire population of the United States. 

By 2030, [China] expects to have over a billion urban dwellers — which means an Estonia-size population chunk is going to have to urbanize each month (yes, month).

 

Remember -- all of these expenses are in excess of China's yearly military budget of 216 billion, which is only 0.2 trillion dollars.

 

SO HOW MUCH EXACTLY IS TEN TRILLION?

Now maybe you have a better idea of what it means when 92,000 people have socked away ten trillion dollars.

Forget about 92,000 private jets, five mansions per person, five Bentleys per person, and so on.

Look at what China is doing with a similar amount of money in any given year.

We are literally talking about enough money for the .001 percent to build entire countries -- entire civilizations -- if they had the land and raw materials to do so. 

And that may well be the point.

The hidden cities we are looking for do indeed exist, according to brave insiders -- one of whom just died at a very suspicious time.

The cities are either underground or off-planet. It is as simple as that.

Yet, for some reason, the idea that we have been lied to about something this massive in size seems to defy people's emotional threshold completely.

 

TELLING THE BIG LIE

Adolf Hitler spoke about the value of telling a "big lie" in Mein Kampf, and this idea should be kept at the forefront of our awareness as we survey this concept.

This quote comes from the Jewish Virtual Library website, where it is presented for our consideration. I have bolded certain passages for emphasis:

 

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/excerpts-from-mein-kampf

In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily.

And thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods.

It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously.

Even though the facts which prove this [colossal lie] to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation.

For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying.    -- Adolf Hitler

 

THINK ABOUT THE BIG LIE AS IT MAY EXIST TODAY

You've just read a quote from Hitler's manifesto that precisely explains what is going on right now. It has often been shortened and paraphrased.

Simply put, if the Powers that Were tell a big enough lie, most people simply could not believe that it could be true.

The people have, as he put it, "primitive simplicity in their minds" where they could never handle telling such a "colossal untruth" within their own personal lives.

For this same reason, they couldn't imagine anyone else telling a lie of such colossal magnitude either.

Even when the "broad masses of a nation" see irrefutable evidence that this "big lie" is real, "they will still doubt and waver... and think that there may be some other explanation."

Cue the invariable cry of the skeptic:

"That would never happen to ME! I am Highly Intelligent! There Is No Scientific Evidence! You Have a Huge Ego and Are Writing This Only to Make Money!"

Yep. So why don't you stop reading and go do something else? Don't waste one precious minute of your resources on something you know is not true.

 

HEADING INTO PART TWO

In conclusion, we have shown ample evidence of awesome military over-spending, documented for generations now.

China has just over half the yearly GDP of the US, and yet they are on a building spree unlike anything the world has ever seen.

My point is simple: All the tools are there to see that the military-industrial complex, or MIC, could be experiencing an even bigger construction binge.

Opulent cities large enough to house millions of people can be built, and have been built, with that level of cash. We just haven't been allowed to see them. Yet.

On the face of it, you might think the idea of a Secret Space Program is ridiculous.

However, there is no denying that powerful people are trying to assassinate Corey Goode and me both -- as well as others in our field.

 

LET'S TAKE A QUICK LOOK

Just after I wrote the last article, William Tompkins died -- and he was our valuable eyewitness to the US's discovery of the Nazi SSP in WWII.

He revealed that the Nazis had cut a deal with sinister reptilian ETs many insiders call the Draco.

They were also called "Saurian Men," and were described with the code name "S-M" by insiders who wrote notes on Carlos Allende's copy of Morris K. Jessup's "The Case for the UFO."

Read this article on Mysterious Universe to get a good overview of this very strange 'leak' from the MIC that emerged back in 1957, as notes added to Jessup's book.

Tompkins also was instrumental in designing prototypes for massive "space submarines" that became part of the Solar Warden program Corey was involved in.

Even stranger was that Bill died just hours before the total solar eclipse -- which is in keeping with the Cabal's method of doing ceremonial assassinations.

Graham Hancock nearly died the week before, as we will discuss. This happened within days of when the brakes went out on my car.

Graham is the world's leading expert on ancient civilizations, and has already linked the Giza monuments to what we see on Mars in The Mars Mystery.

 

 

PETE PETERSON HAS TAKEN A REALLY HARD HIT... AND SO HAS 'PAUL'

Pete Peterson recently validated much of Goode and Tompkins on Cosmic Disclosure. This is a show I host on Gaia, the "Netflix of Seeking Truth."

The corroboration of their testimonies is absolutely stunning. This goes far, far beyond the possibility of anyone creating such an interconnected set of lies.

You can go here and see all 8000-plus titles on Gaia, pay only 99 cents for the first month, and cancel without penalty if you don't like it.

When we last checked in, Pete was under threat of having everything stolen. Day after day we have watched this continue. Nothing has been able to stop it.

Pete has now had his house emptied to the bare walls by agents of the bank. The current sheriff has nothing to do with this operation and is innocent.

My insider friend 'Paul,' who personally autopsied about 2000 different types of ET corpses, and had been working closely with me, also lost everything he owned.

This event occurred only three days after I leaked his new testimony about the "Zombie Program," using advanced cloning technology, on August 14th.

More on this in Part Two. They even left a bullet on the countertop in an otherwise emptied-out house to send him a message.

They drilled holes all over the place in his walls to find possible secrets hidden in there -- and did in fact get a box containing priceless computer files.

 

THIS STORY IS EVOLVING BY THE DAY

The point is, someone absolutely does not want us doing what we are doing.

I recommend reading all three of the previous updates to really understand the scope and depth of this story, if you haven't already done so:

 

UPDATE ONE: Why David Needed a Time-Out

UPDATE TWO: David's Brakes Sabotaged

UPDATE THREE: Dark Alliance Mega-Attack Repelled... For Now

 

Graham Hancock's brush with death happened at exactly the same time that Pete's house started to be emptied out -- just days after the brakes went out on my car.

Tompkins died almost immediately after I wrote Update Three -- just hours before a total solar eclipse over America.

Jim Marrs, the world's leading JFK expert, had died not that long before all these events started.

Corey Goode has just navigated another very serious threat while he was in Spain, which we may or may not even be authorized to discuss in any detail.

 

THANKS AGAIN FOR HELPING PETE -- HE NEEDS IT

You stepped up marvelously to help Pete rebuild from this devastating loss, for which I greatly appreciate your help.

So far we have raised over 53 thousand dollars to help him rebuild. This was a stunning demonstration of public support:

 

 

Pete will be making a public statement thanking you for your amazing generosity in the near future. I will probably bring him on the radio.

He is using the money to finance the construction of a new lab, so his valuable technical work can continue forward.

The bank has now stolen and destroyed over 2 million dollars worth of belongings for a house that was only worth about 300K.

They have completely broken the law by failing to move the items to a storage facility that we could then reimburse them for, and recover the valuables.

The items have been thrown in the dump, driven over by bulldozers, and then covered with wet garbage, followed by dry garbage, so they can never be found.

We are trying to file motions to have this elevated to a criminal charge and I will keep you posted.

 

MORE TO COME SOON

Given the active threat I and others now face, I don't expect to wait that long to write Part Two. Stay tuned.

Despite the level of threat going on, I am very excited about the possibility that this could mean disclosure is imminent -- and will be much bigger than we thought.

 

UPDATE, 2.5 HOURS LATER: NUMERICAL SYNCHRONICITY... AGAIN

I just came back here to make a final round of editorial tweaks. I uploaded them, refreshed the page, and bam -- 6066 views.

The "666" obviously is the number from the Book of Revelation regarding the Antichrist.

What we are seeing in this investigation matches the Bible prophecies very nicely.

 

 

As I have said many times, this happens without any conscious effort.

It continues to be an indication that positive forces out there have our backs.

There is much more to share in Part Two.

The Cabal is obviously very vulnerable right now if they are conducting so many obvious acts of desperation.

Things have gotten really serious with the acceleration of earth changes. This is a call for each one of us to step up and defend ourselves and our planet.

 

ANOTHER ONE

I posted this update, re-read the whole article from the beginning, got to the end and hit Refresh. Boom -- there it was again! 7770.

 

 

I've always seen 777 as a nice counter-balance to 666 in numerology so this was particularly significant to me. No effort required -- it just works.

Let's just say that if all the dreams and briefings are real, we could soon be in for the most astonishing "mass awakening" in recorded history.

 

 
Hits: 93,109
 
You might enjoy:
ad
Unknown
 

Where Are You? evokes some of the great 70s bands like Styx and Rush. In fact, David, youre a ringer for Geddy Lee, the lead singer of Rush. (Everyone listen to Working Man and youll know exactly what I mean!)

Comments (106)   

OCTOBER 2-2017

H.F.1330

 

 

HOME

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.

 

Spanish National Police clashes with pro-referendum supporters in Barcelona over the unauthorised vote

While millions of European citizens were rubbing their eyes in disbelief at the state-inspired violence, the European Commission in the shape of Jean-Claude Juncker yesterday issued a short, bland statement reminding Catalans that if they left Spain they would also have to leave the EU. There were a few pious words about the inadvisability of violence.

Otherwise a disgraceful silence has reigned. We may be pretty sure that if police in Right-wing Hungary (an EU member) had battered protesters demonstrating on behalf of migrants, Juncker would have expressed his outrage at voluminous length.

 


 

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

 

 

NEW AGE

OF

 INTOLERANCE

 

A.N. WILSON on the new dark age of intolerance: You must believe in gay marriage, you can't question abortion and as for transgender rights...

The great French writer Voltaire famously said: 'I disapprove of what you say and would defend to the death your right to say it'. In this way, he encapsulated what it meant to be an enlightened human being — someone prepared to consider all points of view.

But in recent years the principle of freedom of speech, sacred since Voltaire's 18th century, has been lost, and this is surely one of the most sinister features of our times. It is as if we are entering a new Dark Age of Intolerance.

The irony is that this intolerance has come about as a result of what were initially good intentions. One of the things which makes me happy as I grow older is the thought that during my lifetime we have all tried to become a kinder society.

When I was a boy and a young man, for example, racist jokes were the norm on radio and TV. Now they would be unthinkable. Mockery of homosexuals, and the equation of being gay with being limp-wristed and camp, were absolute norms of comedy when I was growing up. Now no longer.

Such jokes have gone the way of boarding-houses which used to put 'NO BLACKS. NO DOGS. NO IRISH in the window'. Obviously, all civilised people feel pleased by this.

But somehow those initial good intentions — to be kinder to and more tolerant of others — have morphed into a political correctness that has had the very opposite effect.

Two notorious recent examples of this concerned the treatment of a Christian baker in Northern Ireland, and some Christian bed and breakfast owners in Berkshire. The baker had not wanted to make a wedding cake for a gay couple who were getting married. The B&B owners had refused to let a gay couple share the same room in their establishment. In each case they were successfully sued for unlawful discrimination.

Now, a gay activist would no doubt say this was a good thing, arguing that the baker and bed and breakfast owners' behaviour was comparable to the racism of the past. Yet this is surely getting things wholly out of proportion.

The baker was not persecuting homosexuals, as Hitler did. He was not saying they should be put in prison, as all Home Secretaries in Britain did until the Sixties. He was merely saying that, as a Christian, he thought marriage should be between a man and a woman, and that two chaps tying the knot were doing something rather different, which is contrary to traditional Christian teaching.

Whatever you think about this matter, the Northern Irish baker and the B&B couple were merely holding on to Christian beliefs.

I don't happen to share their views myself, and think that if two people are rash enough to promise to live together for the rest of their lives, good luck to them, whether they are gay, straight, trans or anything else. But surely you can understand both sides of this dilemma, can't you?

Well, the answer, more and more in our intolerant society, is 'No'. My concern here is not about the rights and wrongs of gay marriage, transgender rights, our colonial history, or any of the other emotive issues that are subject to endless debate in the modern age.

It is about freedom of thought and speech; freedom to disagree in a liberal society; freedom to have thoughts which are different from the current orthodoxy.

What began as our very decent desire not to be nasty to those of a different ethnicity, or sexual proclivity, from ourselves, has turned into a world as intolerant as monkish Christianity in the days of the Dark Ages, when any freedom of thought is questioned.

Tim Farron, leader of the Lib Dems during the General Election, was asked repeatedly about his views on gay marriage. As a fairly old-fashioned Christian, he did not believe it was possible — marriage should be between a man and a woman.

As the leader of a modern political party, he knew that it would be political death to admit this. He was finally forced to resign.

This was a signal to the world that if you want to succeed in modern politics, it is simply not allowed to hold views which, until a very short time ago, were the consensus among the great majority of people in the Western world.

I use the words 'not allowed' advisedly. What is sinister about living in the new Dark Ages, however, is that it is by no means clear who is doing the allowing and not allowing. In Mao's China, it was obvious: thought crimes were ideas which contradicted the supreme leader.

In Britain today, however, it seems an army of self-appointed censors — from internet trolls to angry students, lobby groups, town hall officials, craven politicians and lawyers and Establishment figures, as well as a host of other sanctimonious and often bilious busy-bodies — have taken it upon themselves to police what we can and cannot think or say.

Not believing in abortion, like not believing in gay marriage, is now, unquestionably, a thought crime. It was hardly surprising that the Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg recently said he did not believe in abortion, because he is a man of conviction as well as a Roman Catholic, and this is the teaching of his Church. Yet his view was treated with incredulity and disdain by everyone from trolls and women's groups to the higher echelons of the political Establishment.

As in the case of abortion, debate is no longer allowed on transgender issues. There was a BBC2 Horizon Programme last Tuesday night called Being Transgender. The close-up shots of transgender surgery in a Californian hospital will not easily leave the mind.

We met a number of nice people who had decided for one reason or another that they were not the gender which they had once supposed. They were all undergoing some form of transformative medical treatment, either taking hormones or having surgery.

What made the programme strange as a piece of journalism was the fact that it did not contain one dissenting voice. Not one psychiatrist or doctor who said they doubted the wisdom of some of these procedures, especially in the very young.

Still less was there anyone like the redoubtable feminist and academic Dr Germaine Greer who once expressed her view that a man did not become a woman just because he had undergone transgender surgery — and was, as a result, decried from the rooftops with everything from petitions launched to stop her from speaking at university campuses to death threats.

Dr Greer had also been bold enough to say 'a great many women' shared her view, which is obviously true — a great many women do not think that transgender people have really changed sex. What has changed is that it is no longer permitted to say so.

A friend of mine who likes bathing in the women's pond on Hampstead Heath in London says that at least one person now uses the female changing rooms who is obviously in a stage of transition from man to woman, and is simply a hairy man wearing lipstick.

However uncomfortable this makes the women feel, they know that they cannot say anything.

There was an ugly incident lately at Hyde Park's Speakers' Corner, which used to be the place where anyone could go and stand on a soap-box and hold any opinion they liked.

Speakers' Corner was a symbol of British Freedom of Speech. As a schoolboy, I had a Jewish friend whose grandfather used to take us there to listen to people proclaiming that the earth was flat, preachers praising Hitler, Stalin, and others saying whatever they liked. It was the freedom to do so, said the old man who had escaped Hitler's Germany, which made the very air of Britain so refreshing to him.

What would he have thought had he witnessed the scene earlier this month at Speakers' Corner when a 60-year-old woman called Maria was smacked in the face, allegedly by a transgender fanatic, while listening to a talk on planned reforms to the Gender Recognition Act. Reforms which would allow men to 'self-identify' as female, and enter women's changing rooms or refuges unchallenged.

For Maria, as for the intimidated women of Hampstead swimming pool, and for Germaine Greer, it is by no means clear that transgender people have changed their sex.

Transgender activists have labelled women like Maria TERFS — Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists. When news of the assault on her reached the internet — ie instantaneously — the trolls began baying, like the bloodthirsty mob during the guillotine-executions of the French Revolution. 'Burn in a fire, TERF'. 'I want to f*** some TERFS up, they are no better than fascists'.

The use of the word 'fascist' is commonplace in our new Dark Age for anyone with whom you happen to disagree. You hear it all the time in the Brexit arguments which rage all around us and which I dread. As it happens, I voted Remain. But I do not regard Brexiteers as 'fascists', and many of their arguments — wanting to reclaim the power to make our own laws and control our own borders — are evidently sensible.

Yet I have lost count of the number of times I have heard Remainers say that Brexiteers are fascists. As a matter of historical fact, many of the keenest supporters of a united European superstate were actual fascists.

The only British politician who campaigned on the ticket of Europe A Nation during the Fifties was Sir Oswald Mosley who was leader of the British Union of Fascists. But then, today's PC censors don't let facts get in their way of bigotry.

Branding anyone you disagree with a fascist; hitting people in the face; tweeting and blogging abuse behind the cowardly anonymity of the internet — these are the ugly weapons used to stifle any sort of debate. And it is often in the very places where ideas should be exchanged and examined that the bigotry is at its worst: our universities.

This week on the Radio 4's Today programme, we heard James Caspian, a quietly-spoken, kindly psychotherapist, describing what has become a cause celebre at Bath Spa University.

He has been working for some years with people who for one reason or another have begun the process of gender-transition, and then come to regret it.

Caspian is evidently not a judgmental man. He wanted to write a thesis on this subject from a sympathetic and dispassionate point of view.

What makes people feel so uncomfortable with their own apparent gender that they wish to undergo painful and invasive surgery to change it? What makes people then come to reassess their first idea? These are surely legitimate questions about a subject many of us can't quite comprehend.

I have two friends who started out as men, and decided in mid-life that they were really women, or wanted to become women, which is what they have done. I do not really understand what has happened to them, even though they have tried to explain it to me.

Surely a man like James Caspian, who has worked with transgender men and women, should be encouraged by a university to explain this area of medicine or psychology?

But no. The university, having initially approved of his idea for a thesis, then turned down his application. 'The fundamental reason given was that it might cause criticism of the research on social media, and criticism of the research would be criticism of the university,' he told Radio 4 listeners. 'They also added it's better not to offend people.'

This is all of a piece with students at Oxford wanting to pull down the statue of 19th century imperialist Cecil Rhodes from his old college, Oriel, on the grounds that he was racist.

Rather than having a reasoned debate weighing the evils of racist colonialism against Rhodes's benevolence, the student at the forefront of the movement — who had actually accepted a £40,000 Rhodes scholarship funded by the fortune the colonialist gave to Oxford — wanted to pull down the statue.

This is the same attitude of mind as that which led monks in the Dark Ages to destroy the statues of pagan gods and goddesses, or the Taliban to do the same to age-old Buddhist artefacts.

Reason, debate, seeing more than one side to an argument, surely these are the foundations of all that has fashioned the great values of the West since the Enlightenment started in the 18th century with an explosion of new ideas in science, philosophy, literature, and modern rational thought that ushered in the Age of Reason.

Realising that human actions and ideas are often mixtures of good and bad — isn't this what it means to have a grown-up mind? Surely we should be allowed to discuss matters without being accused of thought crime?

In universities, as at Speakers' Corner and in the public at large, there used to be the robust sense that sticks and stones may break our bones but words can never hurt us. Now, the 'hurt-feelings' card is regularly played to stifle any debate.

Little by little, we are allowing the Dark Ages of intolerance to come again. We should not be letting this happen.

We should be able to say: 'We disapprove of your views — on Europe, on Transgender Issues, on Islam, on absolutely anything, but we defend to the death your right to express them'.


 

Full article

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4935418/A-N-WILSON-new-dark-age-intolerance.html#ixzz4uAFieZ6T
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[COMMENTS-HIGHLIGHTING - ARE OURS!]

 

SEPTEMBER 30-2017

H.F.1329

Brought forward from February-2005

FREEDOM of SPEECH -A FREEDOM, which cannot be abused – IS NOT WORTH HAVING.

 

[In the Daily Mail on Friday the 18th February 2005 a timely article by their columnist Andrew Alexander on the most important issue to be raised in a true democracy, which is Freedom of Speech for without it, a People are deprived of the very means to find the TRUTH.

 

Though at times the means to achieve this may lead to differences of view which after all is what it all means to speak one’s mind.  There is already protection in British law to curb those who wish to encourage violence. Affray and disorder. When others put this basic right of comment under threat then who is there to defend the Principle of Free Speech.]

*          *        *

We all have a Right

to

Freedom of Speech

 

Ken Livingstone should not apologise.  He may not be everyone’s cup of tea, certainly not mine, but the issue has now become one of freedom of speech.  The possibility that a government-appointed body could suspend him from office is one of the most outrageous things I have ever heard.

What he said to an Evening Standard reporter was something no gentleman would say.  But so what?   Politics, local or national, has never been distinguished by gentlemanly behaviour and never will be.   Newspapers can play it rough, too.  Both sides expect to give and take hard knocks.

 The real villain of the piece is an item of legislation entitled-soporifically-The Local Authorities (Model Code of Conduct)  (England) Order 2001.  Under ‘General Obligations’, we find the astonishing subsection, which says that councillors ‘must treat others with respect’.

Note the word ‘must’- not ‘should’ or ‘would be wise to’ or ‘wouldn’t be nice if all councillors were to’.  No, politeness is mandatory.

Consider also the ludicrous word  ‘others’, not voters, officials, fellow councillors or anything so narrow. ‘Others’ can mean anyone on the planet, from David Beckham to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

How on earth, you may wonder, did this preposterous threat to free speech creep in?  It seems that when the legislation in question was introduced, the Conservatives concentrated their fire on the excessive regulation of parish councils, which was then being established.

The Tory promise was that, if it returned to power they would abolish the bureaucratic Standards Board for England (SBE)_ a collection of nonentities chosen by the Government-and leave sorting out of councillors’ problems about conflicts of interest and the like to the Local Government Ombudsman.

The Opposition made no move to oppose the wretched 2001 Order when it came along-no protests, not even a demand for a vote.

This sinister threat of censorship, which should be fought to the last ditch, passed on a nod, leaving the SBE [Standards Board for England] with the power to bar someone from office for up to five years for breaching the code.

The matter of Livingstone’s words has been referred to the SBE by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, a disgraceful move.  It does British Jewry’s reputation no good to have the Deputies leading a campaign against freedom of speech.

Livingstone’s remark about a reporter behaving like a concentration camp guard has, also absurdly been dubbed ‘racist’.

It may have played harshly on the target’s sensitivities, but by no stretch of the imagination did it belittle or attack a race.

The only thing this sort of exaggeration shows is how far the rot of ‘anti-racism’ has taken us.  We are becoming like the U.S. where the obsession about ‘race’ has reached the proportions of a national mania.

 

No doubt, we shall hear the commonplace retort from those accused of trying to curb free speech that of course they are all in favour of freedom, except where it is abused.  This is nonsensical view.

A Freedom, which cannot be abused, is not worth having.

The threat to Livingstone comes in the wake of another threat to free speech in the Government’s new legislation to ban remarks, which stir up religious hatred.  Freedom of speech, if it means what it says, involves the right:

To Irritate

 

Annoy

 

Dismay

 

And Shock

 

Anyone who Listens.

The only sensible limitation should be on speech designed to lead to violence, affray or disorder.  But that has always been enshrined in British law anyway.

I can’t help recalling from my youth, in relation to this whole issue, the harmless joke in one of those monologues wonderfully recited by [that great entertainer and loveable gentleman] Stanley Holloway-the Lion and Albert, and all the rest.

 As some readers may remember’ one explained how the barons of old descended on King John when he was having tea’ on Runningmede Island in t’Thames’ and made him sign the Magna Carta…’but his writing in places was sticky and thick through dipping his pen in the jam’.

 

The verse concludes:

 

‘In England today we can do what we like

So long as we do what we’re told’

 

How I laughed then, I would not have believed that this joke could one day be transmuted to:

‘And that is why we can talk as we like

So long as we talk as we’re told.’

A final touch of absurdity is added by the claim that Livingstone’s remark may jeopardise London’s attempt to host the Olympic Games.  If it did, it would be one good outcome.  The cost, the upset, the dislocation, the sheer waste of effort if London is chosen is too appalling to contemplate.

 

But if his comment really threatened London’s Olympic bid, it would show what a silly solemn people make up the International Olympic Committee.

 

It might have been a nice thing if Livingstone had originally apologised for having been gratuitously rude.  But the issue has gone beyond that now.  For him to retreat in the face of a threat to freedom of speech is in no one’s interest.

 

Andrew.Alexander@dailymail.co.uk

                          

 

THE DEATH OF ANDREW ALEXANDER WAS A GRIEVOUS LOSS FOR A TRUE DEMOCRACY-HE WILL BE MISSED BUT NEVER FORGOTTEN.

R I P

 

PATRIOT AND TRUTH SEEKER

 

ON LIBERTY OF SPEECH

A Great Poet, a Puritan Parliamentarian, and Secretary to Oliver Cromwell – John Milton, during the Civil War wrote the following lines on Freedom of expression: -

 ‘ Give me liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.  Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously to misjudge her strength.

Let her and Falsehood grapple!

Who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?

Who knows not that Truth is strong next to the Almighty

 

 MAGNA CARTA

 

FEBRUARY 2005

*          *          *

[Fonts altered-bolding &underlining used-comments in brackets]

 

H.F. 1325.

THERESA MAY'S SURRENDER

 TO

HITLER'S LAIR

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 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

 

 

 

*

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

 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

THAT IS WHY THE INDEPENDENT CITY OF LONDON HAS NOT PAID THE PRICE OF THE FINANCIAL CRASH WHICH THE TAXPAYER HAS HAD TO PAY BECAUSE OF THEIR INCESSANT GREED!

THE LINK BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT IS THE  CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER.

OF COURSE THE CITY CONTRIBUTES BILLIONS TO THE ECONOMY BUT THE CRASH HAS NULLIFIED ANY BENEFIT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

WE HEAR FROM THE DAILY MAIL THAT THEY ARE UP TO THEIR OLD TRICKS WITH SUB-PRIME MORTGAGES WHICH SHOWS THEIR CONTEMPT FOR THE TAXPAYERS OF ENGLAND.

WE HAVE WITHIN OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM WHAT IS CALLED A LABOUR PARTY-WE ASSUME TO PROTECT THE MAN IN THE STREET-WHAT IS THE PARTY DOING ABOUT THIS RAPACIOUS AND PLUNDERING SQUARE MILE? WHY AREN'T THEIR MEMBERS BESIEGING THE CITY DEMANDING COMPENSATION FOR THE BILLIONS OF TAXPAYER'S HARD-EARNED TAXES SPENT TO SAVE THE BANKS?

THE REASON IS PLAIN TO SEE AS SHOWN ABOVE. OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM HAS BEEN TAINTED FOR ALMOST 250 YEARS SINCE FOREIGN BANKSTERS OBTAINED CITIZENSHIP AND WITH IT FOREIGN INFLUENCE UP TO THE PRESENT DAY.

ON SEPTEMBER 25,2017 in the Daily Mail we noticed the following:

£1.8 TRILLION

 PENSIONS BILL

TAXPAYERS are facing a £1.8 trillon bill for public sector pensions as ultra -low interest rastes fdrive up the cost of retirement schemes.

The estimated total liabilities for NHS staff, teachers, the armed forces and others on the state's payroll surged more than 30 per cent in the past year.

It is now almost equivalent to the

TOTAL ANNUAL OUTPUT of BRITAIN'S ECONOMY.

Pensions Industry expert John Ralfe said MINISTERS are 'passing on the costs to our CHILDREN and GRANDCHILDREN'.

*

WE ASK WOULD THIS FIGURE BE SO HIGH IF THOSE IN THE TOP BRACKET OF THE PENSIONS LOTTERY WERE NOT EXPLOITING THOSE ON THE LOWER INCOMES BY TAKING EXCESSIVE SALARIES AND PENSIONS?

 

*

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

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

 
 

[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.

 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!

 

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! AS AN ENGLISHMAN!

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!

 

 

[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

*  *  *

TREASON

Conservative skulduggery

BACK in 1972 -Tories desert to EU camp

SHORT-TERM SELF-INTEREST EXPLOITED

The UK Accession Bill passed its Third reading on 13th July 1972 by a majority of 17.

Earlier, the debate on the Second reading had lasted for four days (16-19 February), with the Labour Party then officially committed to opposing the legislation. BUT, as happened with the Maastricht Bill two decades later, as Christopher Booker and Richard North observe, 'faced with the possible collapse of their Government, most of the Conservative 'anti-marketeers gritted their teeth' (treacherously, short-sighted and very foolishly -Ed.) 'and walked through the 'aye' lobby. Despite that, 15 Tories voted with the Opposition. TRAITOR

Edward Heath

 got his vote, but only by a water-thin margin:

309 to 301'.

 

 

Tony Benn MP commented after the passage of the Third Reading that

 ‘it was a coup d’etat by a political class who did not believe in popular sovereignty’.

 

Actually, it was worse than that .\It was the start of a coup d’etat by installments’ by a corrupted political class initially led by two operatives-Edward Heath and Geoffrey Rippon,

 both of whom were recruited German agents  (like Lenin, Rasputin and Lavrentii Beria in the Soviet context, before them) who signed the UK Accession Treaty in exchange for corrupt payments.  Both lied to the British people; and the authors specifically identified one of Geoffrey Rippon’ s worst lies, associated with the alienation of Britain’s fishing waters, the richest in the world.  Here it is worth citing the whole of the authors’ relevant paragraph:

 ‘Desperate to hide how much had been conceded[over fisheries], Geoffrey Rippon…said:

 ‘I must emphasise that these are not just transitional arrangements [in the relevant context, allegedly beneficial to the British fisheries-Ed.]

 which automatically lapse at the end of a fixed period’.  This claim drew fierce challenge from Dennis Healey and Peter Shore[later Lord Shore –further details on EDP bulletin board] both of whom suspected he was lying. 

 What neither had yet seen was the wording of the UK Accession Treaty, which MP’s would not be allowed to examine until after the treaty was signed a month later.  Only when this became available [and Heath and Rippon had accepted their bribes-Ed.]  was it clear that Rippon had told a blatant lie’. [Booker and North, op.cit., page 155]

 International Currency Review

 October 10-2005

 Notes and References:

 ‘Obituary of Sir Edward Heath, the Prime Minister who took Britain into the EEC and presided over constant turmoil at home’,

1. The Daily Telegraph, 18th July 2005.

This was probably the rudest obituary of a prominent UK statesman ever to have appeared in print.  Even so, it omitted any reference to Heath’s recruitment by German (Nazi) intelligence.   However , there are many [coded] references in this obituary, not least the three telling words:

‘He never married’, which observers accurately interpret as meaning that he was homosexual, and therefore an obvious recruitment/blackmail target.

 

2. The Daily Telegraph, 24th July 2005,

 

Christopher Booker (Column),

 

International Currency Review

 

 

 LIFE AND TIMES

OF

Christopher Story

 A PATRIOT AND TRUTH-SEEKER

The EDP received in 2005 vital information on the EU from Mr Christopher Story which enabled the EDP to mount a continuing offensive to spread the TRUTH of the EVILS of such a BEAST! which came into existence through LIES! and DECEIT! and as Mr Story has stated in VOLUME 30 NUMBER 4 -the TWIN EVILS of the EU are:-

COLLECTIVISATION AND CORRUPTION.

[What the REMAINERS failed to understand]

These two evils always go together: they did so under overt Communism, when the whole world saw how corrupt the Communist nomenclature was: and they go together under covert communism, notably the version manifested by the

 

 THE EUROPEAN UNION COLLECTIVE [ 26 ]  .

 

EACH LETTER ABOVE HAS A CHRISTOPHER STORY BULLETIN-TOTAL 26

which the top Soviet intelligence operative Mikhail Gorbachev described on 23rd March 2000, as 'the new European Soviet' It is accordingly a conspicuous waste of time for well-meaning national policymakers, and for the rapidly dwindling class of Euro-ideologues to recommend 'reform' of the EU INSTITUTIONS. They are incapable of reform, because, as we reveal exclusively in this issue, they are born of CORRUPTION- and because the TREATIES that 'sustain' them were procured by means of CORRUPT 'BLack' payments.'

*

More!

 

 

H.F.1150 FREEDOM NOW

[WHEN A TRUE PATRIOT- ONE NATION-ONE PEOPLE- CONSERVATIVE PARTY IS IN BEING-THE 'FAR RIGHT' LOOSES IT'S FIRE!

With the present Conservative Prime Minister Theresa May-a vicar's daughter we know that 'Her word is her sacred bond' but should the House of Commons ignore the voice of the People of June 23,2016

TO LEAVE THE EU

 then our once democratic system of government will no longer be in being.

In May, 1928 the Conservative Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin in a speech to the British and Foreign Bible Society his last words were:

'Before I close, I would say for myself, that if I did not feel that our work-and the work of all of us who hold the same faith and ideal, whether in politics or in vcivil work, wherever it may be-If I did not believe that the work was done in the faith and hope that at some day, it may be a Million years hence, the Kingdom of God would spread over the world, I could have no hope, I could do no work, and I would give my office over this morning to anyone who would take it.'

My Father-The True Story

A.W.BALDWIN

1955

George  Allen & Unwin Ltd.

*  *  *

  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]..

 

 

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

 
 
 

 

 

Record low temperatures across the globe have been revealed in shocking new Climate Change data revealing that 'global warming' no longer exists. 

Climatologist Tony Heller claims that Greenland looks set to record its coldest July temperature since records started, and if the claim is true, then it will completely debunk Global warming alarmists.


Last month, President Donald Trump officially withdrew the United States out of the Paris Agreement
calling the global climate agreement a "globalist scam".

According to Conservativetribune.com: In fact, it was the coldest temperature ever recorded in the Northern Hemisphere for the month of July: -33C (-27.4F).
 

 

The temperature was recorded at Summit Station on July 4. According to Vencore Weather, the normal high temperature at the 10,000 ft. high year-around research station is -10C (14F).

And that’s not all.

“Much of Greenland has been colder-than-normal for the year so far and has had record or near record levels of accumulated snow and ice since the fall of last year,” Vencore noted.

“The first week of this month was especially brutal in Greenland resulting in the record low July temperature and it also contributed to an uptake in snow and ice extent — despite the fact that it is now well into their summer season.”


Related: Over 30,000 Scientists Declare Climate Change A Hoax
 

 

Climatologist Tony Heller claims that Greenland looks set to record its coldest July temperature


As you can see from this chart, the level of ice cover in Greenland has been increasing most of this year [2017]. You wouldn’t know it from the headlines, though.

Yes, in spite of the fact that we just set the coldest temperature in July in the entire Northern Hemisphere, and despite the fact Greenland gained a great deal of ice this year and is seeing it melting slowly, the only mention of Greenland in the mainstream media was as part of global warming alarmism. Typical.


Sources: NeonNettle.com; ConservativeTribune.comBreitbart.com

 

*

 [SO-CALLED GLOBAL WARNING POSSIBLY THE BIGGEST SCAM IN THE HISTORY OF THE HUMAN RACE? THE COST TO THE CONSUMER OF THE SCANDALOUS CON-TRICK SHOULD BE REVERSED IMMEDIATELY BY THE GOVERNMENT WHO BY THEIR CONTINUED COLLABORATION ARE GUILTY OF MALFEASANCE. IF THE BANKS CAN BE FINED BILLIONS FOR THEIR SQUALID ACTIVITIES THE GOVERNMENT ITSELF IS NOT IMMUNE WHERE THEY ARE PARTY TO THE CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE HARD-PRESSED TAXPAYER. PARLIAMENT SERVES THE PEOPLE-THOUGH AT TIMES THEY APPEAR TO FORGET THAT HISTORIC FACT.]

 

AUGUST 8-2017

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

H.F.1275

 

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

 
 
 

[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

*

17 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!

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!

H.F.1278 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

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!

 

DAILY MAIL

COMMENT

Tuesday, July 11,2017

Brexit talks and the petulance of Brussels.

So much for the promise of grown-up dialogue with the European Parliament over the

TERMS OF BREXIT

We're only at the first hurdle-what should be a straightforward affirmation of the rights of EU citizens living in the EU-and already chief negotiator Guy Verhofstadt has thrown his toys out of the pram.

To any fair-minded observer, the British proposal should seem eminently reasonable. All EU nationals resident here fo0r five years or more would be entitled to 'settled status' and be able to bring over spouses and children. All entitlements to work, study, and receive health and welfare benefits would remain unchanged.

Those who have been here for a shorter time would be allowed to stay as now, then apply for settled status after five years. Indeed, even those coming after Brexit cut - off date ( which is yet to be decided) would be allowed to stay in order to' regularise' their residency status.

Yet Mr Verhofstadt indignantly claims this is 'second class citizenship'. He and other MEP' s have written a petulant letter to newspapers branding the proposal 'a damp squib' and threatening to hold up the negotiating process by rejecting it. They say it is a denial of fundamental rights.

What the Brussels elite seems unable to grasp is that while Britain is absolutely committed to playing fair by EU nationals living here, free movement and unconditional residency will soon be over.

After BREXIT, Britain will again be a

SOVEREIGN NATION

with

our own basic immigration controls and residency requirements,

The British people voted in the

REFERENDUM

TO TAKE BACK CONTROL OF BORDERS AND THAT IS WHAT OUR NEGOTIATORS MUST DO.

Figures released yesterday give an idea of why so many people believe migration into Britain

NEEDS TO BE CONTROLLED.

There are now 255,000 East German children living in Britain (as well as 1.2million adults). This has placed enormous pressure on

HOUSING, SCHOOLS and the NHS...

With annual net migration still running at

280.000

-an increase in population equivalent to a city the size of NEWCASTLE every year-how long before our

PUBLIC SERVICES ARE UNABLE TO COPE?

*  *  *

 

[A LONG OVERDUE RETURN TO A  TRUE FAMILY OF FRIENDS DOWN UNDER AND AROUND THE GLOBE.]
 

AUSSIE PM:

WE WHAT TRADE TALKS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

by Daily Mail-Executive Editor

BRITAIN yesterday got a BREXIT boost from the Australian prime minister, who said he wanted a

 TRADE DEAL-AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

after we leave the

EUROPEAN UNION

After talks with Theresa May in Downing Street, Malcolm Turnbull offered an upbeat assessment of this country's prospects. He said his opposite number wanted Britain to take a new

GLOBAL ROLE

with

 'big horizons and big opportunities'.

saying he wanted

AUSTRALIA

to be a

'PARTNER IN THE DRIVE'

At a press conference he praised Mrs May's

 'vision'

adding: 'Its not a counsel of despair as some have said. I know, Theresa, that you believe passionately that the

BRITISH PEOPLE

can do anything, can achieve anything and that your post

BREXIT BRITAIN

will be a

BRITAIN

with

BIG HORIZONS

BIG OPPORTUNITIES

FREE TRADE

OPEN MARKETS.

'We stand ready to enter into a

FREE TRADE AGREEMENT

with the

UK

AS SOON AS POSSIBLE

AS THE UK IS ABLE TO DO SO.

 

" There are no two nations in the world that trust each other more than the UK and Australia.

We are family in the historical sense, we are family in a genetic sense.

 

Commonwealth Realms

 v

The Constitution for Europe-PT 1- 4

*

The Common Law of England is the Law of the Commonwealth and America

*

THE BRITISH LEGACY-AUSTRALIA-CANADA-NEW ZEALAND-WHY THEY MATTER?

JULY 11,2017

H.F.1253/1-BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!

 

H.F.1253-BREXIT 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.

 

 

 

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

 

 
 

Brought forward from 2009

Revealed: The secret report that shows how the Nazis planned a Fourth Reich ...in the EU

The paper is aged and fragile, the typewritten letters slowly fading. But US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128 is as chilling now as the day it was written in November 1944.

The document, also known as the Red House Report, is a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for Germany's post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis' return to power and work for a 'strong German empire'. In other words: the Fourth Reich.

 
Heinrich Himmler with Max Faust, engineer with I. G. Farben

Plotters: SS chief Heinrich Himmler with Max Faust, engineer with Nazi-backed company I. G. Farben

The three-page, closely typed report, marked 'Secret', copied to British officials and sent by air pouch to Cordell Hull, the US Secretary of State, detailed how the industrialists were to work with the Nazi Party to rebuild Germany's economy by sending money through Switzerland.

They would set up a network of secret front companies abroad. They would wait until conditions were right. And then they would take over Germany again.

The industrialists included representatives of Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt. Officials from the Navy and Ministry of Armaments were also at the meeting and, with incredible foresight, they decided together that the Fourth German Reich, unlike its predecessor, would be an economic rather than a military empire - but not just German.

The Red House Report, which was unearthed from US intelligence files, was the inspiration for my thriller The Budapest Protocol.

The book opens in 1944 as the Red Army advances on the besieged city, then jumps to the present day, during the election campaign for the first president of Europe. The European Union superstate is revealed as a front for a sinister conspiracy, one rooted in the last days of the Second World War.

But as I researched and wrote the novel, I realised that some of the Red House Report had become fact.

Nazi Germany did export massive amounts of capital through neutral countries. German businesses did set up a network of front companies abroad. The German economy did soon recover after 1945.

The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration.

Is it possible that the Fourth Reich those Nazi industrialists foresaw has, in some part at least, come to pass?

The Red House Report was written by a French spy who was at the meeting in Strasbourg in 1944 - and it paints an extraordinary picture.

The industrialists gathered at the Maison Rouge Hotel waited expectantly as SS Obergruppenfuhrer Dr Scheid began the meeting. Scheid held one of the highest ranks in the SS, equivalent to Lieutenant General. He cut an imposing figure in his tailored grey-green uniform and high, peaked cap with silver braiding. Guards were posted outside and the room had been searched for microphones.

 
Auschwitz

Death camp: Auschwitz, where tens of thousands of slave labourers died working in a factory run by German firm I. G. Farben

There was a sharp intake of breath as he began to speak. German industry must realise that the war cannot be won, he declared. 'It must take steps in preparation for a post-war commercial campaign.' Such defeatist talk was treasonous - enough to earn a visit to the Gestapo's cellars, followed by a one-way trip to a concentration camp.

But Scheid had been given special licence to speak the truth – the future of the Reich was at stake. He ordered the industrialists to 'make contacts and alliances with foreign firms, but this must be done individually and without attracting any suspicion'.

The industrialists were to borrow substantial sums from foreign countries after the war.

They were especially to exploit the finances of those German firms that had already been used as fronts for economic penetration abroad, said Scheid, citing the American partners of the steel giant Krupp as well as Zeiss, Leica and the Hamburg-America Line shipping company.

But as most of the industrialists left the meeting, a handful were beckoned into another smaller gathering, presided over by Dr Bosse of the Armaments Ministry. There were secrets to be shared with the elite of the elite.

Bosse explained how, even though the Nazi Party had informed the industrialists that the war was lost, resistance against the Allies would continue until a guarantee of German unity could be obtained. He then laid out the secret three-stage strategy for the Fourth Reich.

In stage one, the industrialists were to 'prepare themselves to finance the Nazi Party, which would be forced to go underground as a Maquis', using the term for the French resistance.

Stage two would see the government allocating large sums to German industrialists to establish a 'secure post-war foundation in foreign countries', while 'existing financial reserves must be placed at the disposal of the party so that a strong German empire can be created after the defeat'.

In stage three, German businesses would set up a 'sleeper' network of agents abroad through front companies, which were to be covers for military research and intelligence, until the Nazis returned to power.

'The existence of these is to be known only by very few people in each industry and by chiefs of the Nazi Party,' Bosse announced.

'Each office will have a liaison agent with the party. As soon as the party becomes strong enough to re-establish its control over Germany, the industrialists will be paid for their effort and co-operation by concessions and orders.'

 
Enlarge   The 1944 Red House Report

Extraordinary revelations: The 1944 Red House Report, detailing 'plans of German industrialists to engage in underground activity'

The exported funds were to be channelled through two banks in Zurich, or via agencies in Switzerland which bought property in Switzerland for German concerns, for a five per cent commission.

The Nazis had been covertly sending funds through neutral countries for years.

Swiss banks, in particular the Swiss National Bank, accepted gold looted from the treasuries of Nazi-occupied countries. They accepted assets and property titles taken from Jewish businessmen in Germany and occupied countries, and supplied the foreign currency that the Nazis needed to buy vital war materials.

Swiss economic collaboration with the Nazis had been closely monitored by Allied intelligence.

The Red House Report's author notes: 'Previously, exports of capital by German industrialists to neutral countries had to be accomplished rather surreptitiously and by means of special influence.

'Now the Nazi Party stands behind the industrialists and urges them to save themselves by getting funds outside Germany and at the same time advance the party's plans for its post-war operations.'

The order to export foreign capital was technically illegal in Nazi Germany, but by the summer of 1944 the law did not matter.

More than two months after D-Day, the Nazis were being squeezed by the Allies from the west and the Soviets from the east. Hitler had been badly wounded in an assassination attempt. The Nazi leadership was nervous, fractious and quarrelling.

During the war years the SS had built up a gigantic economic empire, based on plunder and murder, and they planned to keep it.

A meeting such as that at the Maison Rouge would need the protection of the SS, according to Dr Adam Tooze of Cambridge University, author of Wages of Destruction: The Making And Breaking Of The Nazi Economy.

He says: 'By 1944 any discussion of post-war planning was banned. It was extremely dangerous to do that in public. But the SS was thinking in the long-term. If you are trying to establish a workable coalition after the war, the only safe place to do it is under the auspices of the apparatus of terror.'

Shrewd SS leaders such as Otto Ohlendorf were already thinking ahead.

As commander of Einsatzgruppe D, which operated on the Eastern Front between 1941 and 1942, Ohlendorf was responsible for the murder of 90,000 men, women and children.

A highly educated, intelligent lawyer and economist, Ohlendorf showed great concern for the psychological welfare of his extermination squad's gunmen: he ordered that several of them should fire simultaneously at their victims, so as to avoid any feelings of personal responsibility.

By the winter of 1943 he was transferred to the Ministry of Economics. Ohlendorf's ostensible job was focusing on export trade, but his real priority was preserving the SS's massive pan-European economic empire after Germany's defeat.

Ohlendorf, who was later hanged at Nuremberg, took particular interest in the work of a German economist called Ludwig Erhard. Erhard had written a lengthy manuscript on the transition to a post-war economy after Germany's defeat. This was dangerous, especially as his name had been mentioned in connection with resistance groups.

But Ohlendorf, who was also chief of the SD, the Nazi domestic security service, protected Erhard as he agreed with his views on stabilising the post-war German economy. Ohlendorf himself was protected by Heinrich Himmler, the chief of the SS.

Ohlendorf and Erhard feared a bout of hyper-inflation, such as the one that had destroyed the German economy in the Twenties. Such a catastrophe would render the SS's economic empire almost worthless.

The two men agreed that the post-war priority was rapid monetary stabilisation through a stable currency unit, but they realised this would have to be enforced by a friendly occupying power, as no post-war German state would have enough legitimacy to introduce a currency that would have any value.

That unit would become the Deutschmark, which was introduced in 1948. It was an astonishing success and it kick-started the German economy. With a stable currency, Germany was once again an attractive trading partner.

The German industrial conglomerates could rapidly rebuild their economic empires across Europe.

War had been extraordinarily profitable for the German economy. By 1948 - despite six years of conflict, Allied bombing and post-war reparations payments - the capital stock of assets such as equipment and buildings was larger than in 1936, thanks mainly to the armaments boom.

Erhard pondered how German industry could expand its reach across the shattered European continent. The answer was through supranationalism - the voluntary surrender of national sovereignty to an international body.

Germany and France were the drivers behind the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the precursor to the European Union. The ECSC was the first supranational organisation, established in April 1951 by six European states. It created a common market for coal and steel which it regulated. This set a vital precedent for the steady erosion of national sovereignty, a process that continues today.

But before the common market could be set up, the Nazi industrialists had to be pardoned, and Nazi bankers and officials reintegrated. In 1957, John J. McCloy, the American High Commissioner for Germany, issued an amnesty for industrialists convicted of war crimes.

The two most powerful Nazi industrialists, Alfried Krupp of Krupp Industries and Friedrich Flick, whose Flick Group eventually owned a 40 per cent stake in Daimler-Benz, were released from prison after serving barely three years.

Krupp and Flick had been central figures in the Nazi economy. Their companies used slave labourers like cattle, to be worked to death.

The Krupp company soon became one of Europe's leading industrial combines.

The Flick Group also quickly built up a new pan-European business empire. Friedrich Flick remained unrepentant about his wartime record and refused to pay a single Deutschmark in compensation until his death in July 1972 at the age of 90, when he left a fortune of more than $1billion, the equivalent of £400million at the time.

'For many leading industrial figures close to the Nazi regime, Europe became a cover for pursuing German national interests after the defeat of Hitler,' says historian Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, an adviser to Jewish former slave labourers.

'The continuity of the economy of Germany and the economies of post-war Europe is striking. Some of the leading figures in the Nazi economy became leading builders of the European Union.'

Numerous household names had exploited slave and forced labourers including BMW, Siemens and Volkswagen, which produced munitions and the V1 rocket.

Slave labour was an integral part of the Nazi war machine. Many concentration camps were attached to dedicated factories where company officials worked hand-in-hand with the SS officers overseeing the camps.

Like Krupp and Flick, Hermann Abs, post-war Germany's most powerful banker, had prospered in the Third Reich. Dapper, elegant and diplomatic, Abs joined the board of Deutsche Bank, Germany's biggest bank, in 1937. As the Nazi empire expanded, Deutsche Bank enthusiastically 'Aryanised' Austrian and Czechoslovak banks that were owned by Jews.

By 1942, Abs held 40 directorships, a quarter of which were in countries occupied by the Nazis. Many of these Aryanised companies used slave labour and by 1943 Deutsche Bank's wealth had quadrupled.

Abs also sat on the supervisory board of I.G. Farben, as Deutsche Bank's representative. I.G. Farben was one of Nazi Germany's most powerful companies, formed out of a union of BASF, Bayer, Hoechst and subsidiaries in the Twenties.

It was so deeply entwined with the SS and the Nazis that it ran its own slave labour camp at Auschwitz, known as Auschwitz III, where tens of thousands of Jews and other prisoners died producing artificial rubber.

When they could work no longer, or were verbraucht (used up) in the Nazis' chilling term, they were moved to Birkenau. There they were gassed using Zyklon B, the patent for which was owned by I.G. Farben.

But like all good businessmen, I.G. Farben's bosses hedged their bets.

During the war the company had financed Ludwig Erhard's research. After the war, 24 I.G. Farben executives were indicted for war crimes over Auschwitz III - but only twelve of the 24 were found guilty and sentenced to prison terms ranging from one-and-a-half to eight years. I.G. Farben got away with mass murder.

Abs was one of the most important figures in Germany's post-war reconstruction. It was largely thanks to him that, just as the Red House Report exhorted, a 'strong German empire' was indeed rebuilt, one which formed the basis of today's European Union.

Abs was put in charge of allocating Marshall Aid - reconstruction funds - to German industry. By 1948 he was effectively managing Germany's economic recovery.

Crucially, Abs was also a member of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union.

Its members included industrialists and financiers and it developed policies that are strikingly familiar today - on monetary integration and common transport, energy and welfare systems.

When Konrad Adenauer, the first Chancellor of West Germany, took power in 1949, Abs was his most important financial adviser.

Behind the scenes Abs was working hard for Deutsche Bank to be allowed to reconstitute itself after decentralisation. In 1957 he succeeded and he returned to his former employer.

That same year the six members of the ECSC signed the Treaty of Rome, which set up the European Economic Community. The treaty further liberalised trade and established increasingly powerful supranational institutions including the European Parliament and European Commission.

Like Abs, Ludwig Erhard flourished in post-war Germany. Adenauer made Erhard Germany's first post-war economics minister. In 1963 Erhard succeeded Adenauer as Chancellor for three years.

But the German economic miracle – so vital to the idea of a new Europe - was built on mass murder. The number of slave and forced labourers who died while employed by German companies in the Nazi era was 2,700,000.

Some sporadic compensation payments were made but German industry agreed a conclusive, global settlement only in 2000, with a £3billion compensation fund. There was no admission of legal liability and the individual compensation was paltry.

A slave labourer would receive 15,000 Deutschmarks (about £5,000), a forced labourer 5,000 (about £1,600). Any claimant accepting the deal had to undertake not to launch any further legal action.

To put this sum of money into perspective, in 2001 Volkswagen alone made profits of £1.8billion.

Next month, 27 European Union member states vote in the biggest transnational election in history. Europe now enjoys peace and stability. Germany is a democracy, once again home to a substantial Jewish community. The Holocaust is seared into national memory.

But the Red House Report is a bridge from a sunny present to a dark past. Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda chief, once said: 'In 50 years' time nobody will think of nation states.'

For now, the nation state endures. But these three typewritten pages are a reminder that today's drive towards a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich - an economic rather than military imperium.

• The Budapest Protocol, Adam LeBor's thriller inspired by the Red House Report, is published by Reportage Press.

Full ARTICLE


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1179902/Revealed-The-secret-report-shows-Nazis-planned-Fourth-Reich--EU.html#ixzz4oiNwdrtt
Follow us:
@MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

H.F.1270 -BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER

 
 
 
 

 

 BROUGHT-Forward from July-2011

VIGILANCE IS THE ORDER OF THE DAY!

*

 QUOTE 684 of 900

ABOUT THE PROTOCOLS

Jewish objectives as outlined in Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion:

1) Banish God from the heavens and Christianity from the earth.

2) Allow no private ownership of property or business.

3) Abolish marriage, family and home. Encourage sexual promiscuity, homosexuality, adultery, and fornication.

4) Completely destroy the sovereignty of all nations and every feeling or expression of patriotism.

5) Establish a one-world government through which the Luciferian Illuminati elite can rule the world. All other objectives are secondary to this one supreme purpose.

6) Take the education of children completely away from the parents. Cunningly and subtly lead the people thinking that compulsory school attendance laws are absolutely necessary to prevent illiteracy and to prepare children for better positions and life's responsibilities. Then after the children are forced to attend the schools get control of normal schools and teacher's colleges and also the writing and selection of all text books.

7) Take all prayer and Bible instruction out of the schools and introduce pornography, vulgarity, and courses in sex. If we can make one generation of any nation immoral and sexy, we can take that nation.

8) Completely destroy every thought of patriotism, national sovereignty, individualism, and a private competitive enterprise system.

9) Circulate vulgar, pornographic literature and pictures and encourage the unrestricted sale and general use of alcoholic beverage and drugs to weaken and corrupt the youth.

10) Foment, precipitate and finance large scale wars to emasculate and bankrupt the nations and thereby force them into a one-world government.

11) Secretly infiltrate and control colleges, universities, labor unions, political parties, churches, patriotic organizations, and governments. These are direct quotes from their own writings (The Conflict of the Ages, by Clemens Gaebelein pp. 100-102).

12) The creation of a World Government.

KGB CHART NOW TO DESTROY A PEOPLE AND NATION

More!

BROUGHT-FORWARD FROM

JULY-2011

See how so many of the aims of the PROTOCALS in JULY 2017 have been achieved in our schools and in our society.

 

JULY 24,2017

H.F.1262

 

 

 

 

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 NAME  PARTS 1-5****

 

 

H.F.1099 FREEDOM AWAITS

S

 
 
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

http://www.euro-sceptic.org

 

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

 

THANK YOU FOR CALLING!

 

TOP OF PAGE

 

CLICK HERE FOR PREVIOUS FRONT PAGE-2012

BACK TO:

OCT- FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2017

OCTOBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2017

OCT-FREEDOM NOW - PART 4-2017

*

THIS IS:

OCTOBER-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2017