Lord McIntosh says of EU-There is no doubt
that there are both irregularities and FRAUD as
of all Systems.
[Before we proceed with
the expose of CORRUPTION it is as well to remind
everyone that the EU Accounts have NOT been
passed for over 11 years which a clear sign of
the inveterate corrupt monster we are dealing
with.]
*
International
Currency Review
www,worldreports.org
www.c/storyworldreports.org
*
BRITISH AUTHORITIES’
FECKLESS ATTITUDE.
What, then, is the British Government’s attitude
to Euro-fraud?
When
asked in the House of Lords to defend the
British Government’s position on
EU FRAUD and
CORRUPTION,
Lord
McIntosh of Haringey said:
‘There is no doubt
that there are both irregularities and FRAUD. Of
course there are. There are in all systems’.
Including no doubt, the Government of which he
is a member, we suppose?
So
that’s all right, then.
But
of course it isn’t:
Clearly, Lord McIntosh comes from a background
in which fraudulent practice is the norm, or
else he thinks that all businesses, trade unions
and official organisations, including UK
Government agencies and quangos, are riddled
with gross misappropriation, malfeasance, theft
and fraud -so that (by implication) it is naïve
for a stupid MEP to complain about FRAUD in the
EU.
What
do you expect, appears the attitude
[of Lord McIntosh of
Haringey]
Which, of course, plays like sweet music in the
ears of the serial fraudsters of
BRUSSELS
-since the main objective of their ‘anti-fraud’
measures is to deflect criticism against them
back to the constituent satrap
‘MEMBER STATES’
What
will the EU criminalists do when the ‘Member
States’ no longer operate ‘separate’
jurisdictions?
Beyond that, Lord McIntosh’s answer confirms
that the UK Government constructively and
knowingly connives at the widespread,
institutionalised fraud in the EU structures.
Ministers have decadently permitted a form of
institutionalised corruption to supplant their
fiduciary duties to the BRITISH people, a
corrupt state of affairs that has continued for
many years.
Through their
connivance at the EU’s dishonest methods of
handling public money, British Ministers have
deceived and defrauded the taxpayers who
entrusted them with the levers of national
power, with disastrous consequences.
The
prevailing state of affairs appears to represent
institutionalised illegality on the EU’s own
terms.
FOR
UNDER THE ORIGINAL TREATY OF ROME
(1956)
-the
fraudulent state of affairs which prevail today
(and has prevailed for decades) is itself
unlawful.
This, not least, is because
Article 209a
proclaims:
‘Member States shall
take the same measures to counter fraud
affecting the financial interests of the
Community as they take to counter fraud
affecting their own financial interests’.
HAVE YOU SPOTTED THE
DECEPTION HERE?
At a
superficial level, the key word here is shall
(not ‘may’ or ‘can’, but ‘shall’). But a
moment’s thought reveals the deception contained
within this typically weasel
Euro-sentence. For clearly, if ‘Member States’
FAIL to take appropriate measures
against domestic fraud, they are only ‘bound’
under this Paragraph to apply the same
inadequate measures against EU fraud, if
any, they are accustomed to do (or
not to do) against fraud at home.
It
was not for nothing, then, that the Treaty of
Rome’s words were reiterated, unchanged, at
Section 5, Article III- 321, clause 2 of the
failed [NEW] EU Constitution.’
This Editors’s [Christopher Story of
International Currency Review -www.c/storyworldreports.org
own experience of analysing and opposing the
[1992]
Maastricht Treaty
[Mr Graham Brady- The
CONservative - Shadow Europe
minister -Please note the following:]
-in the early
1990’s taught him that every paragraph,
sub-paragraph and clause of EU language has to
be treated with suspicion, because it usually
harbours a dimension of double-talk, lies or
deception, or else is, like successive Soviet
constitutions, contradicted elsewhere in the
same document
[So
Mr Brady you should in fact be the OUT of Europe
Minister if you have in fact read the EU
Constitution and NOT like a CONservative
minister by the name of Douglas Hurd who
had the true thought in his mind when after
signing the Maastricht Treaty in February 1992
said:
[As
the then British Foreign Secretary was
notoriously overheard commenting, having signed
it, that]
‘We’d better find out what we’ve just signed’.
*
NEED WE SAY MORE!
-Mr
BRADY?
*
In the Daily Mail
of
Wednesday February 1-2006 an article by
Graeme Wilson -Political
Correspondent
leads us to believe that Lord McIntosh comment
that there is corruption everywhere and that one
should not be unduly concerned is shown by the
slovenly way a major Department of Government
handles its accounts
*
Shambles of
£13billion Home Office Accounts.
WHITEHALL’S spending watchdog has taken the
historic step of refusing to approve the Home
Office’s
£13
billion accounts.
[Well! the EU have got away with it for over 11
years so our Government Departments are only
getting into line with their colleagues in
Europe]
Home
Secretary Charles Clarke
was rocked as the National Audit Office
concluded the situation was so bad it
‘Could not reach an opinion on the TRUTH and
FAIRNESS of the ACCOUNTS’
[Well! they seem to be good Europeans don’t you
think?]
They
had been adjusted by £946 million
to
make them add up and a corner shop keeps better
books, said the National Audit Office.
Whitehall insiders said it was the first time in
living memory that the watchdog had produced
such a damning judgment on one of the leading
Department of State.
Last
night furious opposition politicians asked how
the Home Office could hope to run a National
ID card system when it could not even keep
on top of its own finances.
In a
further twist, the top civil servant who
presided over the financial shambles-former Home
Office permanent secretary Sir John Gieve-was
recently appointed as a deputy governor of the
Bank of England.
He
is also a member of the banks monetary policy
committee, which sets Britain’s interest rates.
In a
devastating report, the NAO criticised the
Department for producing accounts, which
contained
‘numerous errors and
internal inconsistencies’.
Even these were
delivered ten weeks after the deadline for
submission.
[Obviously the
departmental head had not seen the Government’s
advertisement on TV exclaiming how easy it is to
complete their accounts on time]
When
a second set of figures was demanded, the
spending watchdog discovered that virtually all
the key financial figures were markedly
different from the first accounts.
The
NAO was also alarmed that the Home office was
unable to match the cash it spent and receipts
with the figures shown on its bank statements.
The
report stressed that this was a:
‘key control for the
prevention and detection of fraud’.
Following further inquires by external
consultants; the Home Office was forced to
adjust its figures by
NOT
£946
NOT
£946,000
BUT
£946million
[£946.000.000]
in order to balance
the books.
The
failing in this area stunned the NAO staff. One
insider said:
‘This is the sort of
basic accounting practice that even your local
corner shop would carry out routinely.’
Another key weakness was that a new accounting
system
[some would say it was certainly very-very new
system which many busy businessmen would like to
get their hands on]
had been introduced by the Home Office but the
staff had not been properly trained to use it.
The
Report said the lack of proper training led to
numerous
‘problems and delays’
and
meant that the Department was unable to produce
figures in time for the deadlines.
On
top of that, it found that the computer system
used by the Department could be accessed by
‘unauthorised
staff…exposing the Home Office to a greater risk
of fraud and error.’
The Department’s £13
billion outgoings include:
£5.1billion on
police
£2.4 billion on
prisons.
£1.9billion on
Immigration
£659million on Administration
including £400million in wages
Its
failings were attacked last night by Edward
Leigh, the Tory chairman of the Commons Public
Accounts Committee.
‘It is extraordinary
that one of the Principle Departments of State
should fail so spectacularly to met its
accounting obligations to Parliament.’ He said.
Today’s report is a
serious criticism of the department’s internal
financial administration and of the leadership
of its senior management.’
A
spokesman last night said the Home Office had
‘taken steps to tackle the problems’
[That they have
sacked all those incompetents concerned with the
SHAMBLES-we don’t think so!]
*
[Font altered-bolding & underlining used
-comments in brackets]
* *
*
JAN/06
*
*
THE
PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN-IS THE EU COMMISSION
LISTENING?
*
Ditch the
EU TREATY after IRISH REJECTION
SAY
VOTERS
by
Daniel
Martin
Political
Reporter
[Daily
Mail-Wednesday, June 18,2008]
MORE THAN HALF of voters
believe Britain should drop the
controversial European Treaty in the
wake of its rejection in last week's
IRISH
REFERENDUM'
The poll comes as the
Tories launch a last-ditch bid in the
HOUSE of
LORDS
today to delay the
RATIFICATION OF THE TREATY.
And
10,000 people
have signed a
PETITION
on the
DOWNING
STREET- WEBSITE
within the past few days
JUNE16-2008
, calling on the
GOVERNMENT
NOT TO RATIFY THE BILL
[WHY
DON'T YOU?]
Downing
Street website is
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Abandon-Lisbon/
*
JUNE
18-2008
|
*
IF YOU CAN SAY
'WE WANT OUT-WITHOUT
A DOUBT'
THEN
[Only an ultimatum by millions of
subjects that the new EU TREATY can never be accepted such as signing
the
RENUNCIATION of EU CITIZENSHIP
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Optout
Details from petition creator
With the signing of the Maastricht
Treaty the people of Britain were given
DUAL CITIZENSHIP
-both
EUROPEAN and BRITISH
The extra tier of citizenship was
thrust upon the people without their consent -and in many cases
knowledge.
The PEOPLE of GREAT BRITAIN should be
allowed the option of opting out of the EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP if they so
wish. The GOVERNMENT will then be able to provide those who have opted
out with
BRITISH DOCUMENTATION
-only such as British (not EU)
passports, driving licences and other national documents.
EU laws will also NOT APPLY to those who
HAVE OPTED OUT OF EUROPEAN CITIZENSHIP
*
Let the people
speak!
www.makeitanissue.org.uk
*
www.noliberties.com
[Latest Addition
- June07]
*
www.eutruth.org.uk
*
www.thewestminsternews.co.uk
*
www.speakout.co.uk
*
Daniel Hannan -
Forming an OPPOSITION to the EU
www.telegraph.co.uk.blogs
*
GORDON BROWN WANTS TRUST-BUT WHY WON'T HE TRUST
YOU?
HELL ON EARTH IN IRAQ
*
67%
want powers back from EU-ICM poll-June 21-2007-95%
of
British people want a REFERENDUM
*
PETITION
FOR A
REFERENDUM
SIGN TODAY ON LINE
telegraph.co.uk/eureferendum
*
July 18-2007
ALSO
JOIN THE 10 DOWNING
STREET PROTEST
Readers can add
their support to the growing clamour for a
REFERENDUM on the '"REFORM TREATY" by signing up to
a 10 Downing Street 0n-line petition
(http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/EU-treaty-NON/)
The Petition
reads as follows:
"We the
undersigned petition the Prime Minister to guarantee
that the British people will be permitted a binding
REFERENDUM on any and all attempts to resurrect the
EU " CONSTITUTION" (and any or all of its content)
regardless of nomenclature."
Deadline for the
PETITION is 31st January,2008
Eurofacts 27th
July 2007.
*
'The Spirit of England'
by
Winston Churchill
In London on
St.George's Day -1953
*
VOTE
-2007
TO
LEAVE
THE
EUROPEAN
UNION
WITH THE ONLY
PARTY WITH A MANDATE
TO SET YOU
FREE
THE
UK
INDEPENDENCE PARTY
www.ukip.org
THE QUESTION THAT THE VOTER MUST ANSWER
‘DO
YOU WISH TO BE GOVERNED BY YOUR OWN PEOPLE, LAW
AND CUSTOM OR BY THE CORRUPT ,EXPENSIVE
UNACCOUNTABLE AND CORRUPT ALIEN BUSYBODY
BRUSSELS’
-SIMPLE IS IT NOT?
TO RECLAIM YOUR
DEMOCRACY DON'T VOTE FOR THE TRIPARTITE PARTIES
IN WESTMINSTER
BUT
SMALL PARTIES
THAT SPEAK THEIR MINDS
WITHOUT SPIN AND LIES.
*
ONLY
PRO-PORTIONAL
REPRESENTATION
WILL
BRING
DEMOCRACY
BACK
TO
THE
ENGLISH
PEOPLE
*
SCOTLAND
-ITS PARLIAMENT -WALES-ITS
ASSEMBLY-ENGLAND-STILL
AWAITS ITS PARLIAMENT-WHY?
*
Home
Rule
for
Scotland
WHY
NOT
HOME
RULE
for
ENGLAND
*
[All
underlined words have a separate bulletin]