VOTE UKIP!-ON MAY 7-2015

&

AT THE REFERENDUM

WHICH MUST BE HELD IN THE FOUR NATION STATES

VOTE TO LEAVE THE UNDEMOCRATIC

NAZI-PLANNED EU.S

MAJOR ISSUES BULLETINS

(1.)+( 2.)+(3.)+(4.)

(5.) +(6.)+(7.)+(8.)

(9.)+(10.)+(11.)+(12.)

HUNDREDS OF LINK

Est. 1994-

Policies-Elections 1997 and EU election 1999-Speech -1000's of Links - Archive-Top Topics and Stats

PART-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-July-1994-EDP-Official Website-2016-July-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

JULY 30-2016

H.F.200A-FREEDOM NOW

HOME

A Fabian Europhile of 1947 supported Independent Nation-States and the Rule of Law.

We have had the privilege to read the work of a Fabian Europhile of 1947 who was a Socialist, a University Professor and though never elected or having become a delegate or aspired to the position within the Socialist Movement.

He believed to teach what he believed to be TRUE whether other people believed or not- but with the proviso that, if he set out to teach never to conceal a weakness in his case. [Tony Blair please note!]

The purpose in introducing this erudite and talented human being is that for 32 years or even longer Governments have never been frank about the aims of the European Union, which is what it was from the beginning.

In order to put the other view which the majority voted for in 1972 and particularly in 1975 it is refreshing to hear the words of one who was in most respects in tune with the people of Britain and as you will hear in the way the EEC was as portrayed in the 1975 election which in reality turned out to be the biggest deception of the British people for all time.

The Government will not be truthful to the people of our country on the issues involved in considering the New EU Constitution but by unveiling the thoughts of a Fabian - an Oracle of a man that loved his country and his fellow beings we are prepared to hear his words.

WE obviously differ in certain aspects of his views but this is not to say that our view is safe from further dialogue.

Before we get to the matters under consideration we will explore the man and his aspirations. The following extracts are from:

‘The Intelligent Man’s Guide to the Post-War World,

G D.H.Cole

London

VICTOR GOLLANCZ LTD

1947

What I take for Granted

1) Standards of Living. I assume that the most universally important of all objects of political and social activity is to raise standards of living of ordinary people in our own country and throughout the world. (We have a special responsibility for our own country, but an only less immediate responsibility for others), in such a way as to put an end to malnutrition, preventable disease and mortality, illiteracy and ignorance, and sub-human living and working conditions wherever they exist. I assume that no other object can claim any allegiance when it conflicts seriously with the primary object.

2) Personal and Political Freedom. I assume that freedom and self- government are good things, for both individuals and societies, and that it is the business of all good men to oppose tyranny, either of man over man, or of ruling State [Brussels] over subject people.

But I cannot state this second assumption in as unequivocal terms as the first, because obviously neither individuals nor societies can be left entirely uncontrolled. There must be a Rule of Law, for both man and peoples; and all that can be sought is that this rule shall be such as to provide within the social environment the largest amounts of liberty for all men and for all peoples that are consistent with the equal claims of other men and of other men and peoples.

This, however, includes the assumption that the self-government is good in it, and that the good constitution is that which gives all the inhabitants of a country (or of the world) the best chance they are capable of taking to play a real and effective part in government.

3) Canons of Social Conduct. I assume that, whenever a man or government, or any group of man or governments, acts in a way that can be defended only on the ground that the action is necessary because of the imperfections of individual, group, or government behaviour, the necessity for so acting is to be regarded as a challenge to use all possible efforts to raise the standards of such behaviour, and that no one is ever justified in invoking this defence unless he is using his best endeavours to that end.

4) The Duty of Service. I assume that every person is under an obligation to use his powers, whatever they are, in such a way as not merely to avoid being a burden on society, if he or she can help it, [How things have changed over the last few decades] but positively to contribute to social well-being.

This applies, for all normal persons, an obligation to do fair day’s work and not to be unduly exacting about the reward, an obligation to develop valuable talents and not fritter them away, and an obligation to be a good colleague, so as to help instead of hindering the work of others.

6) The Right to go One’s Own Way. I assume that every person has a right, within wide limits, to go his own way and not to be interfered with or badgered about on grounds of nonconformity, as long as he his tolerably fulfilling his obligations as set out in the previous clause. I assume that it takes many sorts (not all) to make a good world, and that the only sorts it does not take are those who are either deliberately trying to make a bad one or unprepared to recognise any code of social behaviour resting on the notion of moral rights and duties.

7) Morality [According to Tony Blair does not exist] I assume that the simple rules of common morality are valid, and that no one is ever entitled to override a moral rule except in the pursuit of a higher moral end falling within (and not beyond) the ambit of common morality. I define these moral rules, for working purposes, as

(a) A duty to be kind.

8) (b) A duty to be tolerant of differences within the limits of morality as here defined, a duty to regard every human being as an end and not a means,

(d) A duty to deny the validity of and to resist all claims that are contrary to fundamental human equality of rights, a duty to be active, up to the limit of one’s powers, in standing up for the observance of these principles.

7) The Brotherhood of Man. I assume that all men are brothers, and that the only valid reason for hating one’s brother

Is that he is acting against good and right, in denial of our fundamental common morality

9) Truth I assume that TRUTH is preferable to falsehood, and it is good to enlarge the realm of TRUTH both by new discovery and by the spreading of existing knowledge. I assume that men are better for being educated in the TRUTH, whether they are happier or not.

10)Freedom of Speech. It follows that I assume the freedom of speech and publication to be good, with the sole restriction that they cannot legitimately be used either (a) to deny fundamental common morality or (b) to attack toleration and freedom of speech and publication within this sole limit.

11) Freedom of Association I assume that freedom of association is good, because men cannot enjoy full opportunities of self-government or of discovery of TRUTH unless they are free to join together for common group purposes. I assume that the only limitations on the freedom of association should be identical with those limiting freedom of speech and publication.

12) Freedom of Will. I assume that men enjoy free will, in the sense that their history is not predestined, but made by their own ways of handling the opportunities presented to them in each generation by (a) their physical and traditional environments, and (b) their knowledge and abilities. Accordingly, I assume that the world may get better or worse, as men by their wisdom or stupidity make it better or worse. [Don’t we know that in 2005]

13) Right and Wrong Vision. I assume that everyone who acts against these principles is either a scoundrel, or blind. But believing real scoundrels to be rare, I assume most of those who offend to be suffering from defective vision [Is that right Tony Blair; Edward Heath; Kenneth Clarke and hundreds of cronies -in 2005]

By vision I here mean imagination, especially power to put oneself in the places of others, and to think objectively, setting self-interest apart. No one can do these things wholly; but everyone can try to achieve them if he is given a chance.

To give all men the best possible chance is one of the three great purposes of education. The other two are (a) to teach TRUTH, (b) to teach citizenship.

Taking Sides

I have written all this down at the beginning of the book because I want there to be no mistake about the side I am on. I am on the side of the common people, in the sense that I want all men to have a chance of the good life and of living it in the ways that suit them best.

[Just a reminder that these words were written in 1947 but I’m sure many will agree that they are as important (if not more important) today in February 2005]

This does not mean that I want all men to have everything the majority of them would vote for now, if they asked. I don’t stand for that kind of democracy.

I want people to have good nutrition, good housing, good education, good working conditions, freedom of speech, writing and association, self-government, peaceful relations with our neighbours, sound moral notions, whether they would vote for having them or not. To this extent, but no further, I am prepared to assert that I know better [Mr G.D.H.Cole] what is good for people than many of them can know themselves, being less well informed and more held in mental subjection.

By the democracy I stand for I mean making people really free and self-governing, not the votes they record when they are neither. Voting is merely a handy device: It is not to be identified with democracy, which is a mental and moral relation of man to man. …

[The literary output from this respected human being has been prodigious on so many worthy subjects and we are going to touch the very question, which is so important at the present time in March 2005 -the question of self-government and the brotherhood of mankind.]

* *

The Political Structure of Western Unity

[1946]

This is the economic aspect of Western Unity, which is indispensable in order to give the political aspect a real and substantial content. Politically, the structure need not be at all elaborate, if only the right economic links can be successfully made.

I see no necessity for a common Constitution or for a common Parliament, even of a federal type. [Neither do millions of voters in 2005]

The whole thing should be done by treaties, filled out by agreements for close economic collaboration; and the political machinery could be no more than a periodically-meeting West European Congress, which could be created as a ‘regional group’ within the framework of the United Nations Organization, and on lines parallel to those of the existing Pan-American Union. [To remind you this was written in 1946]

Such a Congress would debate policies and set up Commissions to draft agreements for ratification by the national Parliaments, and to supervise their execution when they had been duly ratified.

There would be no need to supersede, or to interfere with the separate forms and methods of government in the different countries - only persuade them to shape the policies in common on a number of questions which call imperatively for supra-national action.

[As a realistic visionist of the future Mr Cole went on to say] There are, indeed, certain terms of unity, which I should like to see written into the common agreement of the West European States. I should like complete freedom of movement, without passports or visa, to be established over the entire area. I should like any citizen of any country within the group to be recognised, on the basis of a simple residence qualification, as a citizen of any other, to the extent of acquiring full legal and voting rights.

I should like to see conventions agreed on by all countries in the group on such matters as patents, company laws, Trade Union rights, libel law, double taxation, and, as far as possible, social insurance and minimum conditions of employment. And I should hope, as soon as possible, for a truly common currency, resting on the foundation of an agreed policy for the maintenance of full employment over the entire area.

[Much of the above we have no quarrel with and as Mr Cole had said much could have been achieved without the absolute loss of Sovereignty. Whether Britain needed to be a part is an entirely different question on which we would give a firm ‘No’ to any areas, which threatened our borders and security and the means to act independently of the countries beyond our moat, when the need would arise.

Nevertheless, Mr Cole showed the way in 1946 to European co-operation, which if followed instead of the Heath to Blair scenario may have brought some benefit without the threat to the independent Nation-States in Europe.]

Western Unity is not Military Alliance

Mr Cole continued- As for military affairs, I do not want Western unity to be involved in them in any way. It would be a great mistake to create in Western Europe any sort of bloc of armed force, even if it were organised only as a common contribution to U.N.O. Any proposal to make a military, as well as an economico-political, group in Western Europe would inevitably arouse, as matters stand [1946], all the worst suspicions in the Soviet Union; and, even apart from this, it could be represented as implying an abandonment of U.N.O.’s position, or turn any line that would further weaken U.N.O.’s position, or turn the West into an additional (and certainly ineffective) power bloc to match its strength against the Soviet Union or the United States [of America], instead of standing as the champion of world order and a representative of the smaller countries in the endeavour to make an end of military power-politics as the determinant of world affairs….

[It is ironic that the problems of 1946 have reared their heads again over 59 years later- and we can now all see what mistakes have been made. There is the anti-American attitude in parts of Europe which even without the Iraq War have always been in existence-hence the call for their own EU Military Command-ignoring NATO which in reality brought Peace to Europe and not the formation of the EU which will lead to its own disintegration]

…Our differences from the Americans in values and way of life are based mainly on this-we in Western Europe are old, settled peoples, with long, continuous national traditions, living thick on the ground, and long accustomed to the husbanding of scarce resources. The Americans are a new people, of very mixed racial composition, still imperfectly fused into an American nation [1946], and living scattered over a vast continent, whose resources they have been accustomed, until quite recently, to regard as boundless….

Western European Unity and World Unity

[Mr Cole has already expressed his belief of the existence of Independent Nation -States co-operating together-not the total immersion of the States into a Totalitarian nightmare.]

There is no reason why we should not achieve this accommodation-we West Europeans, the Russians, and the Americans -to say nothing of the Indians, the Chinese and the other great groups [Arab nations] of the human family.

[We would not include Britain in Western Europe but with the English -speaking nations -of the Dominions and other areas of our influence in the world with our closest link with the USA. -Our long history has been as a world trading power]

…We can divide the world between us, into several spheres within which we can practice our several ways of life; and indeed, we must do just this, if we are not to tear the whole world to pieces, and leave but a desert-if even that-behind.

My plea for Western unity is part of a wider plea for the zoning of world affairs….

* * *

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

To conclude we have shown how vital it is that those who have close links in their way of life and values with a particular sphere of influence should not be expected to give up their values in order to become a part of another mixed culture.

The Middle East and the Balkans and many other parts of the world have shown the foolishness of forcing different cultures into opposition.

The Term:

‘When in Rome do as the Romans do’

Is as true today as it has been throughout history. Even in our Island home there has always been an earned respect for the other peoples that have been our warring neighbours in our Island home over 1400 years.

It seems with Tony Blair and his cronies throughout the country have no respect for England or for ‘Englishness’ but always have time for our close island neighbours or those who will not integrate having been encouraged not to do so by the misplaced policies of New Labour. But then as we all know they are only interested in being in their words ‘Good Europeans’?]

The ironical twist to all that Blair and

Co wish to achieve if they were successful would be the ONLY nation-state with the unique democratic credentials and English sense of ‘Fair-play and Justice’ with its subjects and kin in all quarters of the world and with the ability of independent action even against great odds as we have demonstrated many times in our history- would be negated.

All this would be thrown away into a mixing machine out of which all its ingredients would look alike. -We are NOT that kind of People as our Past has shown and why the majority of the people will and must be FREE.

* * *

Notes on Fabian Doctrine

Fabians advocated Socialism, not as the logical outcome of an historical process of class-struggles, but as a practical need of the time, on the essentially ethical ground that in no other way could the happiness of the common people be secured.

Fabion Socialism, reinterpreted by Keir Hardie and the other young working -class leaders who in 1893 founded the Independent Labour Party.

Great Britain was governed between 1918-1939 almost continuously by the Tories and it was the electorate in 1945, which chose the Labour Party to bring change to a war weary people.

* * *

MARCH/05