*

RISE OF THE SLEAZE-OCRATS

by

Peter Oborne

[Daily Mail- Monday, September 3, 2007]

[ Before we commence the above essay we remind those who see no significance in the above day that there are millions who are  aware of the date of

3rd SEPTEMBER,1939

is a day they are unlikely to forget being the day of the declaration of war by the then Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of Peace in our Time fame and the commencement of the Second World War by Britain and her Commonwealth.

 But in politically correct Britain ,for many years this date cannot be mentioned as it would remind those who had not been there at that day that it was a Second World War in which our Nation State had to fight in the 20th century in order to protect

OUR

FREEDOM AND IDENTITY

  but also to help the countries of EUROPE who had succumbed to TYRANNY to secure their FREEDOM. Fast track to 2007 and what do we FIND? We are months away from losing the FREEDOM that led us to WAR on the

 3rd SEPTEMBER,1939.

*

FIVE years ago I spent several weeks in Zimbabwe reporting on the way that President Mugabe was brutalising his people, in part thanks to the inertia and complicity of the Tony Blair

GOVERNMENT

After  I returned, Sir Patrick Cormack, a Conservative Party backbencher, invited me to his room. He wanted to ask me questions he should put to the

GOVERNMENT MINISTER

who would soon be giving evidence on Zimbabwe to the

Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons

of which he was a MEMBER.

So I told Cormack about the strange event that had occurred the previous month. President Mugabe had been invited to Paris by President Chirac for a

SUMMIT MEETING

This example of European approval of a barbarous

DICTATOR

caused uproar.

When Downing Street was asked about the episode, it gave the impression to reporters that it had neither been consulted nor informed, while ministers spoke out angrily against the invitation.

IN FACT

I was to show Cormack evidence that the

BRITISH GOVERNMENT

 had known all along about the invitation, raised not the slightest objection, that its protestations of

IGNORANCE

WERE FALSE

and that the angry pronouncements by

MINISTERS

were no better than a cynical device.

I suggested to Cormack that he should expose this wretched business at the

FOREIGN AFFAIRS COMMITTEE

and offered to draft him a list of

QUESTIONS.

Sir Patrick

gazed around his large and beautifully appointed Commons Office. He looked appalled.

Oh!

'It might embarrass the Government,'

Since then I have often noted Sir Patrick nod with vigorous approval from the

CONSERVATIVE SIDE

as Tony Blair spoke from the

DISPATCH BOX.

I have seen him cross the floor of the

HOUSE

to offer

SYMPATHY and SUPPORT

to a

GOVERNMENT MINISTER

IN TROUBLE.

I have  also been reliably told that he wrote a letter of rebuke

[It makes one puke !-don't you think?]

 to a younger Tory MP in a neighbouring constituency who attacked the

GOVERNMENT

'That is not the sort of thing we do in Staffordshire'

declared Cormack.

[Well! many of his constituents must be asking

'What an arrogant prate this man is'

But then he has a leader who is only now in the last few weeks has realised that following the Blair agenda has almost blown his chances of winning an election to smithereens and that the conservative policies of the past are what he should have supported from

DAY ONE!

*

The Political Class Ruthlessly Pursues Its Own Interests-Regardless Of The Public Good.

*

Cormack has his fans who believe that he represents a 'civilised' kind of politics.

I CANNOT AGREE

Voters put their MPs into

[THEIR]

PARLIAMENT

to represent their interests and articulate their concerns and sometimes anger, not to form part of a comfortable

CLUB

or to collude with

[Her Majesty's]

OFFICIAL OPPOSITION.

Sir Patrick is one of hundreds of

MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT

who now belong to a

POLITICAL CLASS

that has become entrenched at the

CENTRE

of

BRITISH POLITICS

GOVERNMENT and SOCIETY

[These rigocrat parasites have been gathering greater numbers every year since 1972 and the message has gone out join us and don't rock the boat and you are in clover for the rest of your life and we have seen plenty of examples over the years but Neil Kinnock and Family with their

£35,000,000

take- home pay is probably short change NOW that the TRAP DOOR is soon to close on our

FREEDOM and IDENTITY

unless we do more than

TALK.]

[Each underlined word has a separate bulletin]

This  new POLITICAL CLASS has emerged over the past three decades to become the dominant force in

BRITISH PUBLIC LIFE

and increasingly pursues its own sectional interests oblivious to the public good.

It encompasses lobbyists, party functionaries, advisers and spin-doctors, many journalists and increasing numbers of once independent civil; servants. All main-stream politicians of the three main parties belong to it.

GORDON BROWN IS A MEMBER-SO IS DAVID CAMERON.

INDEED

 as the case of Mr Cormack shows, MPs from different parties now have far more in common with each other, as members of the

POLITICAL CLASS

than they have with voters. They seek to protect one another, help each other out rather than engage in

ROBUST DEMOCRATIC DEBATE.

AS a result, the House of Commons is no longer a cockpit where great conflicts  of vision are fought out across the

CHAMBER

It has converted instead into a professional group, like the

BAR COUNCIL

or the

BRITISH MEDICAL ASSOCIATION

[ONE FOR ALL AND ALL FOR ONE

BUT

THE VOTER CAN GET ST****D

as

Mr Francis Fulford

would say.]

This means that the most important division in

BRITAIN

is no longer

TORY versus LABOUR

dividing line that marked out the battle zone in politics for the bulk of the 20th century.

THE REAL DIVISION

is between a narrow, self-serving and- as we will see - increasingly

CORRUPT POLITICAL CLASS

and the

MASS OF ORDINARY VOTERS

Just as it was impossible to understand how

BRITAIN

worked 50 years ago

without grasping the significance of the

OLD ESTABLISHMENT

Today it is impossible to grasp how

POWER

operates without understanding the nature

OF THIS POLITICAL CLASS.  It is most noticeable characteristic is a chronic lack of experience of and connection with the world outside POLITICS.

Its members make

GOVERNMENT

 their exclusive study and tend to have no significant experience of

INDUSTRY

COMMERCE

OR

CIVIL SOCIETY

[As a look at many of your so-called representatives

 exemplifies]

[We believe that there are well- known supposed earnest eurosceptic political figures who are rallying their forces but are not intent of going over to the offensive. It is surprising that at this very late stage with Parliament shortly discussing the ratification of a TREATY which will close down a country of 1,400 years in the making that all we still hear is

TALK-TALK and MORE TALK

The Nazi EU controllers of the Fifth column within the eurosceptic movement must be very pleased with their undercover operation to see so many eurosceptics still happy to

TALK but NO ACTION.

as the last thing they want is the separate eurosceptic organisations to UNITE as this could be a GREAT THREAT to their OBJECTIVE to enslave a NATION such as

ENGLAND.

No wonder Gordon Brown wants an all inclusive GOVERNMENT because as far as HE and other EU FANATICS in all the political parties are concerned there must be but ONE PARTY to look after ALL INTERESTS and

THAT is PLAIN in EUROLAND.

We note in the Daily Telegraph of today 3rd September ,2007 that the YOUGOV poll showed that 58% of those asked the question which of the following statements comes closer to your own view?

comparing the New 'REFORM TREATY' with the TREATY rejected by the French and the Dutch in 2005

Replied: Neither of these/Not sure.

THIS ILLUSTRATES:

1) That the Eurosceptic organisations after 35 years has still not got the message across to a great many voters.

2) That DIRECT ACTION on the streets would have made those who were without the knowledge of the facts would more probably have asked themselves if so many people have taken to THE STREETS there must be something in WHAT THEY SAY and take the trouble to ASK WHY?

3) The full resources of the UNITED eurosceptic movement could be mobilised in ONE MOVEMENT with ONE COMBINED ACTION instead of a present everyone doing their own thing and not taking advantage as the EU fanatics are able to do and move forward UNITED.

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

62% in the poll said there should be a

REFERENDUM.

50% said the new treaty resembles very closely the 2005 treaty  and that Gordon Brown is breaking New Labour's 

ELECTION PROMISE.

If there were a GENERAL ELECTION later this year one might face a situation that none of the main political parties will agree to a

 REFERENDUM

and then what could the electorate do? Some would say that to threaten ALL the parties that the voters would not vote for them would still leave a winner who

WILL ENSLAVE US.

We hear that Gordon Brown may think again

IF THE RED LINES

are eroded in Lisbon in October 2007

This is a red-herring as all talk of "red-lines" are imaginary as shown by the way the EU operates by giving supposed concessions confident that it can easily find a way to erode the troublesome measures as soon as attention has been diverted elsewhere. Since 1972 the EEC/EU  they have used the same tactic that has yet to fail them.

In 1938 the so-called "red-lines" secured from

ADOLF HITLER

by the then

Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain

should have taught our politicians that

PROMISES

 FROM THE

GERMAN CHANCELLOR

COUNT FOR NOTHING.

WE are constantly hearing from Gordon Brown that the

REFORM TREATY

 is not the

TREATY

rejected by the French and Dutch in 2005.

TIT IS A BIG LIE

and we all know how Hitler was fond of using such deceit to gain power and deceive his people.

With politicians from the other member states falling over themselves to celebrate their 2005 TREATY now almost complete in the latest REFORM TREATY it carries credibility to extremes to hear Gordon Brown call for the "red-lines" knowing as he does he is wasting  his time as the majority of the British people have now seen through the LIES.

To show how "red-lines" (Opt-Outs) are vulnerable one has only to remember the "Opt-Out "from the Social Chapter in the

Maastricht Treaty

when the European Court of Justice ruled that the Working Time Directive was a Health & Safety measure and that was

THE END OF THE OPT-OUT.

But we also have the case of the EU REBATE which was handed back by Tony Blair which should remind us that even our own politicians cannot be trusted  and will give back any concessions to the corrupt totalitarian police state the

UNITED STATES OF EUROPE

*

Peter Oborne continues:

THE FORMER Tory Cabinet Minister Michael Portillo -

a pioneering member of the

POLITICAL CLASS

lasted a short time working for as shipping company where he developed a 'deep distaste 'for his clerical and administrative duties'.

The Conservative MP Boris Johnson

worked as a management consultant after leaving university.

'Try as I might,'

he later stated,

 'I could not look at an overhead projection of a growth/profit matrix , and stay conscience,'

The only Cabinet minister in Tony Blair's 1997 administration with any experience of

WORK

 in the commercial sector was the

 Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott,

who had been a ship's steward in the 1950's.

He was joined in the Cabinet in due course by

 Alan Milburn

whose commercial experience was limited to a short period running Days of Hope, a Marxist bookshop known to its patrons by the spoonerism

Haze of Dope.

Milburn was nevertheless handed the task of running the

NATIONAL HEALTH SERVICE

-the largest employer in the world outside

Indian Railways

and the

Red Army.

When Milburn left the

GOVERNMENT

he was succeeded as

 Health Secretary

by

John Reid

whose private-sector experience was confined to a brief spell in the

Insurance Industry

 during the 1970's.

NOT ONE

 OF THE

 GORDON BROWN CABINET FORMED IN JUNE 2007

HAD ANY SERIOUS PRIVATE SECTOR EXPERIENCE.

The culture of incompetence which has become a special hallmark of modern

BRITISH GOVERNMENT

is the direct result of the absence of any meaningful managerial experience among the

POLITICAL CLASS.

Very serious decisions are made with a lack of elementary preparation or understanding on a scale which would be completely shocking in the

PRIVATE SECTOR

 recent examples include catastrophic

IT system breakdowns

in Whitehall departments; the failure to prepare for the post-war situation in IRAQ

(an act of gross negligence of historical magnitude);

the nationalisation of

Rail track

the mismanagement of

NHS REFORMS

the

 Millennium Dome

the collapse of the

Home Office

as  a functional organisation in 2006

the shambles over

HIPS

the Home Information Packs

and the handling of the

 2001 Foot and Mouth crisis.

BUT

it is on

Moral Standards in Public Life

rather than mere practical competence, that the closed world of the

POLITICAL CLASS

has had its

most malign effect.

The Political Class is metropolitan and London based. Its members perceive life through the eyes of a member of London's affluent

Middle Classes

This converts them into a separate, privileged elite, isolated from the aspirations and the problems of provincial rural and suburban

BRITAIN.

THIS MEANS IN TURN THAT THE POLITICAL CLASS HAS COME TO EMBRACE

A SEPARATE SET OF VALUES.

[After all they are the ELITE!-don't you know?]

Its members tend to assert that they perform an almost priestly function and that especially rigorous and exacting ethical standards apply to them

Take this pronouncement by the former Downing Street aide Geoff Mulgan:

'We expect leaders to abide by far more demanding rules than the rest of us. So, for example, we expect them to suspend personal considerations when exercising impersonal power:

not to give special favours; not to treat people well just because they like them. We don't let them use their power to enrich themselves, or gain sexual favours.'

This is a fascinating passage, gaining special weight because Mulgan was head of policy inside Downing Street when he wrote it.

The particular interest lies not in the series of assertions that Mulgan is making about

POLITICIANS

but in the assumption he is making about wider society.

He is not just saying that voters are making extraordinary demands on politicians when they insist that they do not show favouritism to friends or use their power in order to obtain sexual favours.

He is also assuming that ordinary people - as Mulgan puts it, 'the rest of us' - do indeed behave in exactly the corrupt manner he describes.

This attitude amounts to a misunderstanding of normal, civilised conduct. The casual assertions made by Mulgan about ordinary people are

FALSE and INSULTING

they are nevertheless a symptom of the estrangement of the

POLITICAL CLASS

from

CIVIL SOCIETY.

It is emphatically not acceptable in everyday life to abuse power to enrich yourself or obtain sexual favours.

To give two examples:

It is a SACKABLE OFFENCE for a COMPANY BUYER to augment his salary by setting up side-deals for PRIVATE BENEFIT.

OR

For the PERSONNEL DIRECTOR of a LARGE COMPANY to use the STATUS his POSITION gives him to find a JOB FOR A FRIEND or RELATIVE.

It would probably be against the law as well.

It would certainly be against the law if he abused his power to pressure potential employees into consenting to sex.

Any CIVIL SERVANT -member of the ARMED FORCES or employee of a PRIVATE SECTOR company would be SEVERELY DISCIPLINED or WORSE for engaging in the kind of behaviour which the former Downing Street Aide Geoff Mulgan claims to regard as

NORMAL.

The reality is exactly the other way around.

Members of the Political Class have exceptionally poor standards in comparison with ordinary people. They constantly conduct themselves in a way that would be unacceptable in any mainstream organisation, whether in the private sector or in a PUBLIC BODY.

A very telling example of this disparity of standards is the affair between the Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott and his secretary Tracy Temple which became public knowledge in

APRIL 2006.

Prescott would have been sacked on account of his conduct had he worked in practically any other walk of life.

As the following account, written by the

 City journalist Chris Blackhurst

at the height of the storm over Tracy Temple suggests.

'At a dinner party I was forcibly struck by the anger in the business community about John Prescott. Around the table were the chairman of one of our largest retailers, the spokesman for a major broadcaster, and one of Prescott's Cabinet colleagues. The latter said little about Prescott, although her view was obvious. She was forced to listen as one by one the guests said that if anyone had behaved like that in their organisations - a man having an affair with a women who directly worked for him and having sex in the office - they would be instantly

DISMISSED-NO QUESTION.

'The retailer was able to recall cases where the shop managers had been found out and fired.

The pub company boss said the same of his staff. But they didn't just say the stricture applied to juniors -if

ANYONE

 at the top, including themselves, was doing what Prescott did,

THEY WOULD BE OUT.

'It was the fact that Tracy Temple answered to Prescott that riled them - that, no matter how willing she was, he held power over her.  He could, if she'd refused have made her life a misery had her moved, blocked her promotion.

IT WOULD BE HER WORD AGAINST HIS AND HE WAS JOHN PRESCOTT.'

'The remarks cited in this commentary capture exquisitely the disconnection between members of the

POLITICAL CLASS

and

CIVIL SOCIETY

John Prescott's conduct was not merely in flagrant contravention of norms in the private sector.

In early 2006, just weeks before his transgression came to light, two policemen were convicted for the offence of having sex with members of the public

WHILE ON DUTY

This precedent led Alistair Watson, a retired Glasgow police officer, to make a formal complaint to the Metropolitan Police, calling for an investigation into Prescott's conduct. Watson insisted that his motives were not malicious.

'If there are rules that apply to ordinary people, John Prescott should be treated the same, OR MORE HARSHLY.'

His behaviour even flouted the rules for civil servants in his own department, the

OFFICE of the DEPUTY PRIME MINISTER

Shortly after the news of the affair broke, a newspaper reported Tracy Temple's disclosure that

SHE and the Deputy Prime Minister

repeatedly had sex behind the open door to his office while his staff worked outside.

YET

the 1,000-page guidebook for

CIVIL SERVANTS

in Prescott's department instructed officials not to make

'improper use'

of accommodation, furniture and workspace, especially during

'Official time'

When the rules were drawn to John Prescott's attention, his spokesman replied that the Deputy Prime Minister

HAD NOT BREACHED THE RULE BOOK

he said:

'The guide applies to civil servants

NOT MINISTERS

Here, Prescott's spokesman was explicitly articulating the

ETHIC

of the

POLITICAL CLASS

which tolerates one set of standards for

POLITICIANS

and a second higher standard for those who work

FOR THEM.

This approach was endorsed by the Prime Minister's spokesman in 10 Downing Street, where Tony Blair gave John Prescott his

'FULL SUPPORT'

This kind of disregard for ordinary rules of conduct or decency is duplicated again and again. David Blunkett, a successful Cabinet minister for the first eight years of the

BLAIR GOVERNMENT

was a multiple transgressor who displayed a fundamental inability to understand the distinction between the

PUBLIC and PRIVATE DOMAIN.

His infractions occurred in a number of sphere, most famously in the case of his lover Kimberly Quinn. While Home Secretary he provided Mrs Quinn with first-class rail tickets, intended for MPs. spouses, even though she was actually married to someone else.

He made his official car available to Mrs Quinn for trips between London and his house in Derbyshire. When his affair with Mrs Quinn reached a crisis point, two Home Office officials - John Toker, head of news, and Blunkett's private secretary Jonathan Sedgwick - attended a private meeting with her lawyers

This episode  appeared to take the two civil servants beyond their proper public role, and deep into

THE PRIVATE DOMAIN.

Defenders of Blunkett maintained that the episodes with the rail tickets and the official car were trivial even, if either offence had been carried out by an

ARMY OFFICER

it would have led to serious disciplinary action, potentially even

COURT MARSHALL

AND

DISMISSAL.

As with the case of the Deputy Prime Minister, the Home Secretary was showing contempt for rules that were actually deadly serious for OTHERS.

The greatest culprits have been Tony and Cherie Blair in September 2006. Mr Blair smashed the tight guidelines concerning leaks of sensitive economic data while making a speech to the

TRADES UNION CONGRESS

telling them that

 'tomorrow we will see a fall in unemployment, which is very welcome indeed'.

It was easy to see why Mr Blair issued the information. he was expecting a hostile reception from

UNION DELEGATES

and it was politically very helpful indeed to deliver some cheerful economic news.

YET

had an official inside the Office of National Statistics committed a similar indiscretion he would probably

BEEN SACKED

THIS IS BECAUSE THE INFORMATION WAS HIGHLY SENSITIVE.

Sterling rose at once on the Prime Minister's speech because the solid economic news seen as boosting the chances of an

INTEREST RATE RISE

But there was

NO APOLOGY

from

DOWNING STREET

and a No 10 spokesman brushed off the episode saying that it was not a major breach.

The case of Cherie Blair provides a grotesque illustration of the attitudes and practices of the

NEW POLITICAL CLASS

The Prime Minister's wife manifested a new morality in the heart of government, namely that it was acceptable to use the

HIGHEST OFFICE

as a method of

PERSONAL ENRICHMENT.

Previous spouses at No 10 had been relatively modest and unobtrusive, and had never sought to exploit their position financially.

In the 1960's, officials warned Mary, wife of Harold Wilson and a talented poet, on no account to accept the sum of £33 for some verses she had published in a magazine.

They informed her that doing so could be seen as trading on her husband's position as

PRIME MINISTER

Mary Wilson complied without complaint.

Mrs Blair could not have been more different.

She placed herself on the books of the

HARRY WALKER AGENCY

-the New York-based company which represents clients as senior as

Bill Clinton and Harry Kissinger.

Though she formally marked herself as Cherie Booth, her maiden name. Harry Walker nevertheless left no one in any doubt about her connection with Tony Blair.

THIS CONNECTION PROVED PROFITABLE.

In February 2006, for example, she reportedly earned some £150,000 on a tour of the United States which involved at least five speaking engagements. The previous year she is thought to have earned at least

£140,000

for eight days work.

In June 2005, she was paid some 30,000 to be interviewed before an audience by the CNN anchorwomen Paula Zahn, while Tony Blair was on an official visit to the Whitehouse. Sir David manning, British ambassador to Washington and seemingly willing to stretch any point well beyond the cause of duty as far as Tony and Cherie Blair was concerned, made a warm-up speech.

When questioned over the trip, Downing street, insisted that it was 'normal procedure' for the British ambassador to accompany or to introduce 'any prominent British citizen visiting Washington'.

Mrs Blair's behaviour on this occasion nevertheless stretched the tolerance of the Prime Minister's civil service advisers past breaking point.  She was strongly advised in advance not to take up this engagement by Cabinet Secretary Andrew Turnbull.

Turnbull urged her not to embark on the undertaking at all, adding that, if she did insist on going ahead, she should donate her fee to charity. Cherie ignored this advice saying:

'Maybe we should not have done this, but we are in too deep.'

Mrs Blair speaking tour of Australia at the start of 2005 was another notable infraction. She agreed to make series of speeches, one to raise funds for the Children's Cancer Institute, Australia, a research charity.

Rather than do the work free - as would have been expected of a Prime Minister's wife - Cherie Blair shockingly agreed to accept money.

According to the publicity literature, a VIP table for ten to include 'pre-dinner cocktails' and a 'photo-opportunity' cost £4,100.

According to the provisional schedule of expenses agreed for the tour, Cherie Blair was to receive the prodigious sum of

£102,600 for the tour

while the charity was booked to receive a 'minimum fee of

£99,900

*

TO BE CONTINUED

PART 2

(TO FOLLOW)

HOUNDING OF A DECENT WOMAN

HER ONLY CRIME?

EXPOSING the GREED and DECEIT of MPs

Now in this major series on the arrogance of Britain's

NEW RULING CLASS

WE REVEAL

LABOUR'S BRUTAL CAMPAIGN

TO DESTROY

THE ETHICS WATCHDOG

Elizabeth Filkin

In a provocative and important new book, the Mail's political commentator

Peter Oborne

paints a devastating portrait of Britain's

NEW RULING CLASS

An Arrogant-Out Of Touch Alliance Of MPs and other insiders who ruthlessly pursue

THEIR OWN INTERESTS

Ignoring The Public Good.

Yesterday, in our first exclusive extract, he argued that the rise of

THIS NEW CLASS

has brought

GREED and CORRUPTION

IN ITS WAKE

Today, September 4-2007 he recalls

HOW IT UNITES

To Crush Anyone Who Exposes

ITS WRONGDOINGS.....

ELIZABETH FILKIN was well aware she had been making powerful enemies. But she only realised how dangerous they were when she received a visit from the former Labour chief-whip

LORD COCKS

(To be continued)

['No government is respectable which is not just .- With unspotted purity of public faith, without sacred public principle, fidelity, and honor, no mere forms of government, no machinery of laws, can give dignity to political society'

Daniel Webster(1782-1852) American orator and statesman.

From this great principled politician the EDP took his great cry of

'Liberty & Union'

and it became our cry for

ENGLAND

Of

'Freedom & Unity'

*

Instead of serving the people, the new

POLITICAL CLASS

looks after its own interests. And as I will show tomorrow, the effect on

OUR INSTITUTIONS

has been nothing short of

DISASTROUS

  *

The Triumph Of The Political Class by Peter Oborne (Simon and Schuster, £18,99) is due to be published on

September 17

To order a copy for £17, P&P inc, telephone 0845 606 4213

*

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

*

"ASK US FIRST"

(philiplockwood65@yahoo.co.uk

PHILIP LOCKWOOD

Cambridgeshire.

*

Download the RENUNCIATION OF CITIZENSHIP OF THE EUROPEAN UNION FORM.   
 "Right Click" on the image and select "Save As.."to download the form in word document.

*

 METRIC MARTYERS  WIN  VICTORY  OVER  EU

SOFT TALK FROM EU ON EVE OF OUR BATTLE AGAINST NEW TREATY-THEY

NOW BACK DOWN TO ALLOW IMPERIAL MEASURES TO REMAIN FOR EVER

[Daily Mail - Tuesday, September 11,2007]

PROOF OF WHAT WE SAY-ONLY DIRECT ACTION CAN GET RESULTS

Another blow to West Midlands MEP -who couldn't understand what imperial measures meant 'to the people'.

In one word 'IDENTITY' now do you understand?

*

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]