Them vs. Us

I will not provide any links or any sources of any sort in this post, well possibly a few we shall see. Rather ponder on the philosophical aspect of the current place in the political space that is apparent in our minds and certainly on the telly. This government must be the worst government Britain has ever had I cannot think of any previous government that was worse. You might say 'well, hey hang on a minute Thatcher did a lot to screw Britain over did she not?' and I concede she did a lot to screw us over. But one has to consider the fashion, manner and purpose of the economical rape she performed upon us back in the 80s. She did it with the belief that Britain would be better of because of it, she even took on the EU and had them hand money back to the UK for having initially overcharged us but refused to give the cash back. Well, she got it back. The difference between BlairBrown's government is that they do not give two hoots about what happens to the people of this country once they are gone.

It is not an issue for them that they have chronically massacred British society in every way possible it seems. It does not seem to be an issue that they slashed troop numbers by 50,000 since 1997 but are now fighting two wars on a peace time budget. It does not seem to bother them at all when selling of public property to greedy corporations who have nothing in mind, people and liberty the last at least, but to make more and more money - even in these times. They don't seem to care that 14,000 laws have been created since they entered office but 10,000 have come from the EU not the UK. I can go on and on and on but I think you are beginning to get the overall trend here; the best interests of the nation is not at their bequest and I am struggling to think what really is. Is it finance? status? power? massive pension? a paragraph in a history book (suffice to say BB and Co. will be remembered as arch traitors not arch saviours as they seem so keen on branding themselves)?

What drives men to so completely abandon their entire people and engorge in utter political madness? This is a tough question that I am not to sure that I can answer. But even more, to add a sub clause, why the hell is Whitehall joining in on the circus? It is if they are trying to make fools out themselves. Whom with their balls in the right place and marbles as well, would even jokingly suggest removing British history from the National Curriculum and in its place insert Wikipedia and Twitter studies? I cannot possibly comprehend anyone so magnificently stupid, yet clearly before my eyes I read that a very senior civil servant has done just that - the fellow has even got a knighthood, not that these mean much these days and we can thank New Labour for that one as well.

Even the MoD, the once so proud institution, is fleeing the battle field and leaving our few soldiers to do their bidding best they can with the shitty equipment they are handed. It is a good thing, at least, that they have more courage and valour in their index than white hall officials have in their entire bodies. Even if your leadership is a Labourite debauchee retard does not mean that you, as a member of the British civil service, have to abandon your good common sense when it stands between you and delivering the orders of Labour HQ. There was a time when good sense prevailed but when military procurement has reached such a ridiculous level of politification I cannot help but think 'where will this lead?' - will our tanks and planes have the next goverment's logo tattoed upon their armour? Or even worse, the logo of the corporation who is currently leasing us their tanks...

Is it really such a surprise that people are looking to the BNP to sooth their anguish, heal their sorrows and for once not have salt poured into their wounds as seems to be the normal response by Labour whenever something goes wrong; they mess it up even further. This may be a cliche lost upon most but it cannot be over stated, the kind of cross roads we are heading for, if Westminster does not shape up its act (and you can be as sure as night follows days that Cameron will be the next Blair, so not much luck there) then they truly will have civil unrest at their hands and what is worse some people want civil unrest, they surely even crave it for anything is better, currently, than a 'democratically' lead nation under 'one' law where we can be 'free' and 'happy' and despair not for we know that the state will put our best interest before any of their own.

New Labour = Thatcherite Free Market Conservatism

New Labour are supposed to represent socialist ideas as epitomised by the Fabian society. They were frantically upset back in the 80's when Thatcher and her Tories went around selling all the public companies of the United Kingdom including such prominent features as the National Engineering Laboratory (we sure could need that now when we when there is hole of 20,000 engineers missing in the British industry sector). There is a common misconception that New Labour have been better and that they have not been vigorously trying to forward their own personal agendas, by that account I mean of course feeding their on psyche by getting richer and richer all the time completely disregarding the ideals of socialism. To date what have these hypocrites sold of since they came to power in 1997 (this is an ongoing article which I cannot possibly compose in one go since there are so many national industries that have been disposed of since 1997).

DERA (Defence Evaluation Research Agency)
Royal Mail
London Underground
British Energy
Council Housing
Schools
UKAEA
Royal Mint (This has not actually been sold, yet, but they are planning to. Which again highlights the economic/financial brilliance of New Labour: Who in their right mind would sell anything in these times?)

(The picture accompanying this article allures to what kind of people you will end up with if more and more of his daily services become more expensive by the day, suffice to say the government will need more than their largely defunct (in the sense of public appreciation of) police service to stop a hoard of him. It is not for nothing that the government is buying up large amounts of riot gear in what will most likely prove to be one of the hottest summers in memory - in both senses.)

The EU CAP (£10.3 billion a year) Smashing, innit?

Smashing, innit?

Stepping on sore Toes

I was discussing politics today with a friend who is not very interested at all but has an opinion once in a while. The EU is very dear to him and I from time to time contradict him on virtually all the 'truths' he holds to be facts, he does not seem to mind as there are so many 'truths' (that is virtues in his eyes) of the EU so a little dent here and there cannot possibly be bad, the greater good of the EU prevails - always.

I think he hit the nail on the head there with regards to the general stance by the media in their stance to the EU at least the FT. They think that the accumulated errors of the EU still does not justify the reform of the institution or the withdrawal of the UK from the EU. They think that we are getting our money's worth (and it is so much money...)

What happened next in the conversation was, to my amazement, the same thing that happens in general when you try to topple the views of a eurocrat they respond with hostility and mockery. Whilst my profound belief is that mockery is the weapon of those who have no other, it lies in the eye of the beholder what exactly virtues and vices are. Facts and numbers are not enough to justify a menace in their world.

L'Idiot de Portugal at it again.

"I would like to urge all political leaders not to use this political crisis in a way to make the Lisbon Treaty hostage to domestic problems. That would not be fair to the other countries of Europe," Mr Barroso said at a press conference in Strasbourg.

It must thus be assumed that it is "fair" to ignore the people of Ireland, The Netherlands and France.

It must also be assumed that it is fair to ignore the rule of democracy.

When will it be fair then I wonder to start ignoring the EU and setting our own agenda much as was done pre 1972?

Everyone should watch this

Anyone and everyone who stands for truth, dignity, liberty, justice and the end to non-accountability should watch this. It is Gordon's greatest day for he finally got to hear what everyone was thinking (what everyone was thinking was probably a lot harsher but we must be cordial, even if it means being cordial to a political asinine).

Royal Mail

The Tories have unequivocally stated that they will support Lord Mandelson's Bill whereby a 30% stake in Royal Mail is sold to a private partner in the form of TNT of the Netherlands.





The Tories are hoping to get elected next year.

The Tories are hoping to get a elected with a majority government, not a hung one.

The Tories are hoping to set the country right yet not even Thatcher dared to touch Royal Mail.

The Tories are supposedly Euro sceptic yet the fail to see that the bill was born in Brussels.

They are not exactly trying very hard to be populist, the thing they are most in need of. They are still, whether they like it or not, the nasty party and they only get votes because there are no other options. Not a very respectable mandate; government by default.

Royal Mint next?

(EDIT: Epic fail in my spelling of 'hoping' -> hopping... apologies.)

Military Hospitals

With the abject failure this government has provided for the armed forces in the form of the broken Military Covenant, Chinooks, Vectors Vehicles, Snatch Land Rovers, Airbus A400M, Jackal, Pinzgauer High Mobility All-Terrain Vehicle, The Viking and many many others - all this coming from a nation who once upon a time was extremely proud of its military engineering. It all became politicised a long time ago sadly.

If they are going to politicise the procurement of military hardware to the detriment of serving personnel then surely, one would have thought (grown out of common sense), they would have provided space and care for the injured soldiers (the dead ones are another matter) when they came back to the UK, there are roughly 150 or so injured soldiers arriving to Selly Oak in Birmingham each month and they have 14 beds.

Normally the ills and evils and mischief and malaise of this decade have been born out of the political tragedy that is New Labour. But the failure of the care for military personnel is, believe it or not, not one of their many many misdeeds.
Seven of the eight military hospitals have closed since a Tory government review in the early 1990s and the last in Haslar, Hants, will shut this year. Now of course since a British government is not bound by the decisions of a previous government they could have overturned these decisions taken by Major and Co. They did not, well it is at least good to know that Labour are not being hypocritical in their stance towards the armed forces; they truly could not care less.

What happened in the early 90's then you might wonder, why were the Tories so rash in their decisions to close down the military hospitals and shrink the size of the defence medical services? Well certainly the Cold War was at its end and subsequently it was assumed that all the evils of the world had gone away with the Soviet autocracy. Perhaps they thought Perestroika and Glasnost meant Peace and Prosperity to the western world?

Down to business then, the Defence review called in 1990 -one year after the wall fell- was aptly named "Options for change" (change has become the new synonym for 'completely shatter what is working and replace with something completely unfit for purpose'). The reason given for closing these sometimes two centuries old units was that servicemen could be better cared for by civilian NHS personal with their specialist equipment and specialist personnel, apparently. Yes the NHS is certainly specialist in one thing and that is complete and utter mismanagement.

These are the wards that have closed:

1. Cambridge Military Hospital, Aldershot (formerly Army hospital), closed in 1996.

2. Princess Mary’s Hospital, Halton, Bucks (formerly RAF), closed in 1996.

3. Duchess of Kent’s Military Hospital Catterick (formerly Army, closed in 1999.

4. Queen Elizabeth Military Hospital, Woolwich (formerly Army), closed in 1996.

5. Princess Alexandra Hospital, Wroughton, Swindon (formerly RAF), closed in 1995.

6. Royal Naval Hospital, Stonehouse (formerly Royal Navy), closed in 1995.

7. Princess of Wales Hospital, Ely (formerly RAF), closed in 1992.

(ohh did I mention that they were closed because the Tories wanted to save £500 million over 10 years - we now have a gaping hole in the defence budget of over £2 billion. I am glad it all worked out for them.)

As you might have imagined the utter folly of this decision has had dire consequences for servicemen around the world since there is just not enough place for them all. The decision was taken so that the government could save money and undoubtedly spend it on something else which would benefit themselves rather than the people - this seems to have been the general trend since Heath, I wanted to say Atlee but he did provide for free universal education which is always useful. Not even Sir Mike, the former head of the Army, though this was a good idea - he was terribly accommodating when it came to giving away British armed forces to the EU but that is another story.

A group of people (well, all 113,973 of them) petitioned the Prime Minister to Create a dedicated Military & Veterans Hospital within the UK.

What was the response? (well what do you think...)

I shall provide two for your:

In a blatant lie:

"MILITARY top brass have snubbed calls for a hospital dedicated to Britain’s Armed Forces and veterans, the Daily Express can reveal today.
In a pointed rebuff to UK troops, they insist current NHS provision is adequate and defiantly refuse to see the need for a specialist military medical unit.
The Army’s most senior medical officer has said the case is now closed and he is not willing to discuss the issue any further."

Nr. 10 was not much better:

"In terms of providing a dedicated hospital for veterans, it is worth noting that since 1948 it has been the policy of successive Governments that the NHS should be the main provider of health care for veterans. The range of general medical treatment required by veterans is in most cases no different from other civilians, and it would be wrong to expect them to travel large distances to receive treatment at a single hospital, especially when excellent care is already provided closer to their home and families."

Gordon.. just because successive governments have indulged in the same idea does not mean it is a good idea. As for the medical officer well he seems like a delightful fellow clearly the man the squaddies should talk to when they come back from operations (which are set to get worse this year) with their gun in one hand and their leg in the other, and cannot get appropriate treatment but have to be heckled by not-so-intelligent members of the Muslim community who cannot see the difference between the the decision makers (those who started the war) and those who are only following orders.

The Tories running slogan today is "time for change" and on their webpage they claim they will "will repair the broken Military Covenant, respect our Armed Forces, and ensure that Forces’ families and veterans are taken care of". If they plan on staying more than four year I do hope that they reconsider their early mistake of the 90's or they might just find themselves without its armed forces when the going gets tough on the streets.

This is funny

Did you know that the Foregin and Commonwealth office are actually quoating Gordon Brown? It is true look!

"The European Union is essential to the success of Britain and a Britain fully engaged in Europe is essential to the success of the European Union."- Prime Minister Gordon Brown

They certainly have got their priorities all tangled up.

And whilst the FCO is faffing around the ridicule of the EU wont go away... This is an old story I know but be so sure that it will come back and haunt us as always.

I put this as challenge forth to all of you: On the FCO homepage there is this section which is very interesting. It states what the EU has done for us and it even has a little link to common misperceptions. I challenge you to contradict everyone of these statements and send it to the FCO in two weeks time. If you accept tell me so at 13th.spitfire@gmail.com either way I shall be doing it myself and will post it here before I send it to them.

What happened to freedom of association?

The BNP may not be the most likeable party in this country or this planet for that matter, they indulge in some fairly loony policies and clearly are not a big fan of immigrants. Fair enough that is their agenda most of us, certainly myself, are not particularly supportive of their means as a party but in the spirit of democracy they do have the right to make their voice heard and we have the choice to not listen.

I was not aware that a ban on police joining the BNP was introduced by the Association of Chief Police Officers in 2004. Surely this much breach every single treaty since Magna Carta was signed in 1209? The Human rights act, the European Human Rights act, the Bill of Rights and many others I am sure. I 'was' sure is probably a better stance on the matter since clearly this fellow has just lost his job over it.

One cannot but wonder why this arrogation of freedom of association just passed us by. British politicians can happily change the laws for a couple of K's, they are more than happy to sign away the remaining bits of British sovereignity, they love to indulge in expensive past-times paid for by the tax payer not to mention that they are actually giving tax money to organisations far worse than the BNP.

The BNP has views and opinions most of us regard as complete nonsense, they surely are at the best of times. But while their popularity is rising you cannot just strip members of the public from associating with them, public office holders or not, it should not be within the confines of state power to remove such a fundamental right. It is like saying we should not associate with dangerous 'elements' on the TV "thou shalt not watch porn". This is a fair point I suppose some would argue but is it not really a bit ridiculous. The TV does not advocate racism I am fully aware of this but it advocates something rather more sinister, a picture of the world as it is not really, that young people should idolize the behaviour and style of second rate celebrities whose soul contribution to the world has, well, not been substantial. Maybe this just turned into a long rant but it seems that if you remove a human right for one thing then why not be done with them all?

Ohh no Independent you are not

We often like to style ourselves of commenting of the political classes across Britain and Europe. The really good stuff however, the revelations, come not from here [yet] but from the people over at EU Referendum. With that in lets have a look at piece written by Andrew Grice in the Independent.

Rarely has a comment been so factually inaccurate with regards to public opinion and political response to tough questions raised in parliament, whichever it might be. Mr Grice starts of with this line

"Mr Cameron would demand Britain's withdrawal from the EU social chapter of workers' rights. That would swiftly be rejected by all 26 other member states."

I am not sure if Mr. Grice has fully comprehended the extent to which British voters are truly sick of the EU. When they finally do impose the working hours directive (you cannot work more than 48 hours a week) on these islands they will effectively be guilty of murder, take surgeons who cannot possibly work under those conditions or the police officers etcetera... Not to mention the average worker who just wants to put a bit more money into the household. Mr. Cameron's demands will be quickly rejected by the EU, but how on earth do they think that will reverberate back here in the UK? They EU is not exactly popular over here (84% want a referendum on 'In' or 'Out'). When the EU starts to reject Mr. Cameron's demands they will be building upon the pressure to have that referendum. In concert with this the LibDems will most likely start the pressure train by adding in their manifesto precisely that referendum - the beginning of the end some might say (I do not really think so but it certainly spells a new high for euroscepticism).
Thus they can and will reject all demands, but the popularity of the EU (already abysmaly low) will drop down dead like a man who has had too much to drink.

Mr. Grice goes on...

"There is bemusement here in Brussels about Mr Cameron's decision to take his party's MEPs out of the mainstream centre-right group in the European Parliament, the European People's Party (EPP), after elections to it in June. It is too federalist for his tastes, and he believes it is dishonest to say "one thing in London and another in Brussels".So the supposedly modernised Tories will walk away from the parties of Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel to form a new gang with a motley collection of Eurosceptics. The only two members signed up so far include an anti-gay rights Polish party, one of whose MPs warned that a Barack Obama victory would mean "the end of the civilisation of the white man", and a Czech party whose founder describes climate change as a 'global myth'."

Lets have a look then who is in the EPP shall we? (that said we are not condoning the statements made by the Polish party as for the climate change myth see further down). Again Mr. Hannan must be thanked for his excellent research into the EPP, he is an MEP so understandably his research would belittle any produced by ourselves.

- There is a party in the EPP which ran for general election in Italy with the poster "Daddy and Papa? This isn't the family we want!"

- There is a party in the EPP whose first minister called for deportations "We have too many criminal young foreigners... Germany has had a Christian and Western culture for centuries, and foreigners who don't stick to our rules don't belong here".

- There is an austrian party who called for the banning of burqas "If we allow consultations to be held in Turkish, we will one day become Turkish ourselves".

Mr. Grice also said this, which he must have though was awfully clever of him "It's a bit odd for Mr Cameron to expend so much energy on erasing the Tories' "nasty party" image at home, only to join the nasties in Europe." I am sure that is rather obvious now who did their homework and who did not which begs the question why do these people get to write commentaries?

As for the climate change "global myth" echoed by, I believe it was Czech president Vaclav Klaus (feel free to correct me on this) well we are not going to jump on the bandwagon because everyone else believes it is fashionable to do so. When there are so many prominent scientific authorities out there who clearly reject the claims made by the globa warming lobby, not to mention the rescent snow falls..., we're not going to look the fools just because we were not clever enough to have an opinion of our own (and by this virtue accumulating the arguments of both camps) - unlike Mr. Grice.

"The British public may not love Europe but they don't want to pull out of the EU. The financial crisis has illustrated the need for governments to act together. Mr Cameron accepts the need for EU co-operation on climate change. Recessions, too, do not respect borders."

The poll mentioned above have it that 55% do indeed want to pull out and this figure (this figure fluctuates between 35% and 65% neither a vindicating figure for Mr. Grice). As for acting together, well I am sure Iceland has a thing or two to say about that in response to Mr. Brown and eventhough their economy is not in the best of sorts at the moment they still do not want to join the EU much to the dismay we must believe to the EU apparatchiks seeing as they wont get those massive fishing zones currently controlled by Iceland. Or why not mention who pretty much every goverment in the EU despises Brown's economic stimulus plan - indeed great cooperation.

"Close allies predict Mr Cameron will concentrate on the economic problems he will inherit and let sleeping European dogs lie. But Europe could still rise up and bite him."

At this point I must agree with Mr. Grice but he is again forgetting that the in or out referendum is building momentum as we speak and any negative news coming from the EU will only alter the pace of that momentum for the better. Mr. Cameron may not bite hard but you can as hell that the Labourites and LibDems will make short work of him if he does not deliver upon his manifesto, they know that EU wont go away and they know that it will tear the tories to pieces if they do not get their act together on this explosive question.

Out of the ordinary

My normal posts are normally concerned with all matters politics and as such trying to bereft the the great vastness of the malignity that spreads like bush fire. Rather it is a more philosophical quote and I would also think quite emotive for the issue at hand should not be dealt with light heartedly nor should it be treated with scorn and contempt.

Honour is a concept which I believe has for the most part died out in society today. We think or at least one is lead to think that honour is characteristic trait often found in warriors. Warriors were once the men and women who in the olden days were sent to protect the villages from advancing warlords or bands of thieves. If they return, alive, they were put on a social pedestal from where they could be adored by society in a different manner - not in any way alleviating their status or standing but rather adding that new found respect to their personality as a result of having done a good deed. If we believe in altruism then yes one must also think that good deeds exists, some might say that soldiers of the past were forced to go to battle, I sincerely agree for the most part they truly were but who are we to deny them the right to their ends when any action taken by us, for them, would be dwarfed in comparison to their actions for us (even if it was forced).

To be continued at a later stage...

Now this is a parliamentary orator

Yesterday we had the Business of the House questions coming around the bend, again. Much to the dismay of Mrs. Harman anyone could imagine. Alan Duncan, shadow leader of the house of commons, made the process short, bloody and quite frankly hilarious.

"May we have a statement on the Prime Minister’s recent visit to Washington? It seems that the DVDs that President Obama gave the Prime Minister—rather like the Prime Minister himself—do not work in the UK. We are told that one of them was “Psycho” and the other “Gone with the Wind”.

So those are our requests for debate: there is a rotting encampment outside Parliament; there are failed NHS managers with bloated pay packets; the fate of our reserve forces is left dangling; FE colleges are collapsing; Equitable Life pensioners are betrayed; dysfunctional Select Committees are set up; we have a dysfunctional Government; and the Solicitor-General insults the unemployed. How can the Leader of the House defend any of that, without hanging her head in shame and apologising?"

Scorn of the day

"If the Lisbon Treaty is not yet in force at the time of the next general election, and a Conservative Government is elected, we would put the Treaty to a referendum of the British people, recommending a 'no' vote. If the British people rejected the Treaty, we would withdraw Britain's ratification of it."

This came from here.

There is something in the world of logic knows as iff, that's right and i followed by TWO f's.

Wikipedia defines iff as this "the truth of either one of the connected statements requires the truth of the other, i.e., either both statements are true, or both are false. The connective is thus an "if" that works both ways."

With this in mind we can rewrite the conservative policy like this instead, as to save words and seem 'down' and 'hipp' with the hoi polloi (ambiguity is a favourite past time for all party apparatchiks why they can never produce a policy which is written in plain English).

We would put the Treaty to a referendum of the British people, recommending a 'no' vote iff we are elected and the treaty has not been ratified.

Now with the logic explained above, in mind, this means that they would not put the treaty to a vote if they did not come to power (this is reasonable) and they would not put the treaty to a vote if they had come to power but it had already been ratified (this is not reasonable). They would do nothing should both statements turn out to be false.

There you have it. Make more sense? Not really.

Dr. Liam Fox and Defence cuts (almost rhymes)

Dr. Fox has made a speech.

Does it not strike anyone else as odd (apropos defence cuts and Liam Fox) that terrorists still manage to kill British soldiers even though supposedly superior protection is provided for them in the form of civilians, hence ending the stag requirement for soldiers.

Surely if they want to save money a start would be to let soldiers be soldiers and relieve the incompetence that is the Northern Ireland Security Guard Service (NISGS). Naturally it is easy for us in all our relative comfort to pour scorn on these guards who most of the time have very tedious not to say boring job. But when soldiers are killed, at home and not in AfghanIraq, then one must but wonder; if they have such massive problems with funding (which they clearly do) why on earth are they employing relatively low armed civilians to protect, for all intents and purposes, soldiers in whose training guard duty is a requirement.

As has become popularised by students who want something to fight against but cannot seem to find a better target, their "out of Iraq" campaigns are rather catchy at times, they certainly have got the ear for fine battle hymns. Might I be so bold as to suggest a similar approach for the armed forces "Civies out of the Army" - who knows it might just work?

I just had to add this

Now I know this is very late out, most people have already talked and blogged about it but I still find it so very funny.

My response to Mrs. Blears is this: Try and stop us.

What happened today?

I cannot really say that anything particularly interesting happened today in politics, as sorry as I am to say I would have enjoyed a proper slating of one or more of our politicians in the UK or why not one in the EU. Now when I say that 'nothing' has happened I am not being completely honest with myself and yourself for there is always one person which will always deliver when the going gets though, recall how he helpfully suggested that "the people who matter" are rethinking something.

Well not to keep you guessing any further Mr. Barroso is at it again I don't know what we would do without him and his idiotic comments, he complements Mr. Brown rather well I must say and not to mention speck of dirt that is the Rt. Hon. Keith Vaz MP who tried to get a judge to halt a case which concerned his friend.

But to the matter at hand just what has Le Idiota de Portugal come out with today? (please excuse any grammatical translation errors I do not speak Portugese but hopefully the language of belittlement is a fairly universal one.)

Barroso's "regret" over the Tories' exit from the EPP be a badge of honour for Tory eurosceptics? we read on ConHome.

Where to begin I wonder? A non-elected non-leader demurs the loss of the Conservative party from the EPP. I shall echo what some other people have said that if Barroso is not happy about this change in the uniform body that is the EU that can only be a fantastic sign (then again Barroso is a very stupid little man, it seems that most of the time he is unaware the he is only adding to the Eurosceptic feeling in Europe but most profoundly so in Britain). Daniel Hannan for example has told many a time how how suddenly he became much freer in his daily business in Brussels after having been kicked out of the EPP it is not a far step to consider how free the Conservatives will also be once they have left - this is what is scaring Barroso, he is afraid that the legacy of Monnet is about to be undone when the second largest national grouping suddenly discontinues its conformity to EUropeanism (we love Europe we despise the EU, there are 47 nations in Europe 27 in the EU if the eurocrats started doing their homework the world would be a much better place).

But then again what most likely will happen is nothing in the long run we wont regain national sovereignty and they will keep on breaking the clauses in the Magna Carta as if it were never signed in the first place. With the EU there is only one way theirs or none. We have to decide once and for all if we want to be part of a larger state, United States of Europe, like the German constitutional court said. The problem is that I do not think that the current Conservative party which is the next in line goverment will be able to deliver upon this issue because they are as much part of the problem not the solution. They think that we can have the cake but at the same time eat it.

This pains me to say but I think it will be the next Labour government that in 10-20 years takes us out of the EU because they will have realised by then that taking Britain out of the EU, printed in their Manifesto, is as sure a win as night follows day. Only difference between then and now, they will have reformed the party, as did the conservatives, to be once again electable but all they have to do is to promise a referendum on the EU and the Tories will rip themselves to pieces.

The Tories should be worried, very worried and so should we

CONFERENCE DE PRESSE LIBERTAS - DECLAN GANLEY
Uploaded by Libertas2009-fr

Why do they always do this?

We read in an article from the Guardian that they are once again pouring scorn on Oxbridge for having "too few students of ethnic minorities". In the politically correct society we have come to inhabit today there are certain things you can and cannot do as public sector institution (and indeed also private sector business) that is to disobey the powers that be on political correctness. This is their first and prime golden rule:

1. POSITIVE DISCRIMINATION MUST BE UPHELD AT ALL COSTS

Where the government is seen to be hiring more ethnic minorities and women as a de facto statement that they are indeed upholding their own policies and at the same time turning away the people who are more qualified because they are of the wrong race or the wrong sex or even worse (in the eyes of the government) both.

What the media and certainly the governments needs to start understanding is that Oxbridge has been around for longer than both of them (well 'ish', the Magna Carta was signed in 1215 by King John and Oxford was founded around 1200 with Cambridge in 1209). Most of their prominent employees had their education at Oxbridge and then they have the audacity to come back and say that they should take more ethnic minorities (read, positively discriminate against some groups of people) because the rest of society has gone completely mad in terms of political correctness.

No, my dear right honourable gentlemen and ladies, rest assured that Oxbridge are fully capable of choosing the right students without any kind of social engineering courtesy of the government, particularly this one which is, I think most would agree, the worst one we have had in over a hundred years. The sooner the media and the government step down from cukokoo land and step in to the real world, the better for all of us they should be ashamed of themselves for even contemplating criticism of Oxbridge - they have turned out some of the finest minds over the past centuries but suddenly they have to stop because it is not deemed polite to the ethnic minorities to have a student body which is overwhelmingly not made up of ethnic minorities? Ethnic minorities are fully aware of what bullshit the government is coming out with as well, they are not stupid (why anyone would even begin thinking that is also beyond me) and hence they do not need 'extra' help for their children to get into Oxbridge. The overwhelming admissions rule is this at Oxbridge: If you are clever you will get in, finito. It is not academic racism when a black child fails to receive a place but a white one does. If anyone realises this it is the dons at Oxbridge.

Leave them alone and for that matter leave the ethnic minorities alone. In fact would the government be so kind as to leave all of us just bloody alone. We have had enough of you.

(Here is a hint: If you really really really want to eradicate racism then possibly you should not make it [insert exceedingly rude word] government policy.)

"I am a preacher of hate!" MPs: "Really, want some hypocricy with that?"

Now to be fair our MPs did not really say that if the truth is to be told (not that this is in plentiful supply at Westminster but whatever no ones seems to mind).

We have the story of a 'delightful' middle aged man named Anjem Choudary. He is an Islamic cleric, whose supporters led a hate-filled protest against British troops returning from Iraq in Luton last week. He has urged his followers to give cash to front-line mujaheddin fighters. Mr. Choudary is a self-styled sharia judge and former leader of the banned group Al-Muhajiroun. On a tape which has emerged he heard telling his followers to stop spending their money on their families and divert it to Muslim soldiers waging jihad, or holy war. What a noble man indeed.

What is the moral of this story then you might ask?

Here it is: Hypocrites are the poltroons of society regardless of shape, skin colour, race, religion or any other attribute you chose to brandish a man - his 'soul' (if such a thing is believed to exist) will be perpetual. We are not exactly seeing Mr. Choudary going over there to fight the jihads instead this coward extraordinaire huffs and puffs how other Muslims should give up their daily bread so that people in a far away land can fight for a cause they do not even understand (derived from a book dictated by old men who also themselves have no hope in hell in understanding). This is a classic case of old men talking and young men dying, in a sense not very different from our MPs. For all the malign mischief that has disposed itself from the darkest bowels of Mr. Choudary (who can comfortably avoid any prosecution or extradition thanks to that delightful Human Rights Act) our MPs have far more to answer for. One day, when the world has comfortably moved on to the next piece of sensationalist populism and when vox populi has again been ignored, they will answer for their actions. People do not forget just because the media does.

New Labour = Thatcherite Free Market Conservatism

New Labour are supposed to represent socialist ideas as epitomised by the Fabian society. They were frantically upset back in the 80's when Thatcher and her Tories went around selling all the public companies of the United Kingdom including such prominent features as the National Engineering Laboratory (we sure could need that now when we when there is hole of 20,000 engineers missing in the British industry sector). There is a common misconception that New Labour have been better and that they have not been vigorously trying to forward their own personal agendas, by that account I mean of course feeding their on psyche by getting richer and richer all the time completely disregarding the ideals of socialism. To date what have these hypocrites sold of since they came to power in 1997 (this is an ongoing article which I cannot possibly compose in one go since there are so many national industries that have been disposed of since 1997).

DERA (Defence Evaluation Research Agency)
Royal Mail
London Underground
British Energy
Council Housing
Schools
UKAEA

(The picture accompanying this article allures to what kind of people you will end up with if more and more of his daily services become more expensive by the day, suffice to say the government will need more than their largely defunct (in the sense of public appreciation of) police service to stop a hoard of him. It is not for nothing that the government is buying up large amounts of riot gear in what will most likely prove to be one of the hottest summers in memory - in both senses.)

A few heres and a few theres

I picked this up from ConservativeHome, where a lovely little eurocract named 'Justin' posted this:

As a Conservative campaigner, (I am already working hard to get our London MEPs, headed by Charles Tannock, re-elected. Unlike Mr Helmer, I'll be focussing of the many positive aspects that membership of the EU brings to member states like Britain. Here's a recap of what they are:

Safer and Cheaper Flights

The EU has provided us with not only safer flights but also cheaper flights and increased competition between carriers registered in the Member States. Cheaper flights are the knock-on effect of a huge improvement in air traffic management and increased competition.

Student Exchange Programmes

Within the last 10 years the EU has created different education programmes in order to give students the possibility to experience different national cultures and broaden their personal horizon. Up to now 1.2 million students have benefited from the ERASMUS Programme and many more are expected to experience it in the future.

The Single Market

The Single Market is one of a kind as it guarantees ‘free movement' of people, goods, services and capital. At a practical level, it provides the possibility for EU citizens to live, work, study and do business throughout the EU, as well as enjoy a wide choice of competitively priced goods and services.

Protection of Intellectual Property

Intellectual property deals with two areas: industrial property and copyrights. Basically, it means that you are not allowed to use somebody else's ideas, for example, if your best friend has written lyrics to a song, you can not publish it in your name. The EU's efforts in this area have resulted in laws aiming at protecting company's or individual's knowledge.

Peace

Peace in Europe was first created when an alliance was made between Germany and France and the European Coal and Steel Community was founded. Europe has come along way since with a lasting peace amongst its Member States. International security is now a major issue for the EU: with increasing threats to a peaceful society in different areas of the world, the EU has put in place many policies to combat such problems.

The Euro

The single currency, the Euro, is now part of our everyday life but not all of its benefits are well known. From the practical advantages of travelling with a single currency, to the benefits of economic growth, to the strengthening of the EU international role and its political integration, the introduction of the euro has achieved much more than people expected.

Regional Funds

Unity and solidarity are some of the most significant aims for the EU. One important reason why the European regional policies have been created is because the EU is of the opinion that equal standards and rights should be provided to all citizens.

Cheaper and Better Phone calls

The liberalisation of the telecommunication markets in 1998 and the ongoing development in the field of technology have resulted in a steady decrease in prices within the EU. This means that it is cheaper to call your friends and family and choose between different operators.

Consumer Protection

NEW: Consumer protection and the safety of food in the European Union are two issues that have always gone hand in hand. The Health and Consumer Protection Directorate General's main responsibility is to provide laws and regulations on the safety of food and consumer rights.

A Healthier Europe

The public health issues dealt with by the EU are numerous and cover a number of different areas. They concern both men and women, young and old. The EU has also introduced the European health insurance card that is your guarantee if you should fall ill when going abroad.

Environmental Protection

In the EU, environmental issues including initiatives concerning protection have been underlined as some of the most important points not only for discussion but also for action. For instance, the EU is leading the "Kyoto" drive to reduce the air pollution that causes global warming.

Equal Opportunities - Against Discrimination

The promotion of equal opportunities and the fight against Discrimination are considered some of the most important issues within Europe and many directives have been put in place to combat inequalities that occur in the Member States. 2007 is officially the European Year of Equal Opportunities for All. Additionally the "Roadmap for equality between women and men 2006-2010" was launched outlining 6 priority areas for EU action on gender equality.

External Trade

External trade for Europe has always been very important to the success of the European Union. In recent years our level of trade has increased and we are continuing to grow as major players in the world of trade. Today, the EU accounts for 20% of global imports and exports and is now the world's biggest trader.

This is what he got in reply which is equally entertaining:

For Justin

Safer and Cheaper Flights
Could have been achieved with a open skies treaty. The EU has been dragging its heels over such a treaty with the USA.
Student Exchange Programmes
Why should the majority care. Erasmus is a programme to promote the EU
The Single Market
Not the same as free trade, brings a huge mass of regulation and stops free trade with non EU countries.
Protection of Intellectual Property
We didn’t have laws on that before? News to me. No doubt when China joins the EU, the real problem will be solved.
Peace
Without the EU the Belgians would no doubt have invaded Bulgaria. NATO and the cold war are irrelevant?
The Euro
Screwed Ireland and Spain by inflating the bubble, so led to a bigger bust. Is creating huge dislocations today because countries are not able to devalue.
Regional Funds
Taking our cash, spending half of it here, and demanding we be grateful for it.
Cheaper and Better Phone calls
We led the way in liberalisation, not the EU
Consumer Protection
Presumably before hand, we were all dying of food poisoning. Much of this regulation is just protectionism, and the rest we could have done ourselves anyway.
A Healthier Europe
EU restrictions on working hours led to a shortage of doctors in our hospitals.
Environmental Protection
You are joking right? The CFP has completely denuded our seas of fish. CAP has led to over use of fertiliser and loss of habitat. EU countries talk a great game on CO2, whilst subsidising coal miners.
Equal Opportunities - Against Discrimination
Feminist activism on a continental scale. Men cannot get a beter deal on life insurance despite dying earlier, women on car insurance despite being more careful drivers.
External Trade
They stop it. They screw the poorest in the world with agricultural tariffs.

The EU is essentially an anti freedom organisation. Unfortunately only the cost message will bear fruit though.

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

For Justin....The facts:
By 2008 Britain will have made total contributions to the European Community (EC) Budget of £230.4 billion gross or almost £68.2 billion net.
By the end of the current EC budget period Britain will have made estimated total contributions to the EC Budget of £315.4 billion gross and £101.4 billion net.
By 2007 Britain had an accumulated trade deficit with the other EU member states of £383.7 billion.
The Common Agricultural Policy costs Britain at least £16.8 billion per annum.
The Common Fisheries Policy costs Britain at least £3.275 billion per annum.
Over-regulation on business costs Britain at least £28 billion per annum.
In 2008 membership of the European Union costs Britain almost £65.675 billion per annum gross or almost £55.775 billion per annum net.
GDP is £1,459 billion. Tax:GDP ratio is 36.8% (excluding Council Tax which is fixed). Therefore 2% more GDP would be approximately £10.73 billion more tax every year.
Source: 2008 Budget Report

£14.6 billion would enable the basic rate of income tax to be cut by 3.65 pence. It would alternatively enable the Personal Allowance to be increased by £2,703, so that you would earn £2,700 more than you currently do before paying tax - taking millions of lower paid workers out of charge.

The combined benefit of £10.73 billion more tax revenues and saving the £14.6 billion paid to the EU would enable the basic rate of income tax to be cut by 6.23p, or increase the personal allowance by £4,685.
Source for calculations: HMRC Ready Reckoner for 2007-08

This is my contribution:

I find that it must be much to the detriment of the EU that all their ad hoc arguments about their relevance can be so easily derided on an online comment section where we can assume that the majority of people are not politicians nor judicial people with extensive knowledge of institutional law of the EU as well as the indigenous workings of the nomenclature of law in the UK (not to mention that people are just that ordinary people who can spot the cracks in the EU bubble without them even trying very hard.)

We want a loose trade agreement with the EU. That is it. You can only ignore the people so longe before they do something wholly undemocratic - this will be to the detriment of the EU not the UK.

While we are selling things

I wonder, in the wake of selling public property, should we not also consider selling the BBC, the MoD, RAF, Navy and why not also the army? Surely there must be a contractor out there who can perform these services better than some snobby old civil servant who has spent too much time behind his desk and too little time in the real world where we live. Has he not seen the overwhelming support for privitisation of all things public recall what a fantastic success the sale of DERA was and how profoundly the public and the National Audit Office supported the goverment to rid itself of this awful institution which did nothing good, whatsoever, for the continuted excellence of the state of Britain.

/sarcasm

Interesting Graph

Where are we going?

A preference

Personally I would prefer all countries to have their own currency, foods and Traditions, that was part of the enjoyment of traveling abroad, it is these things that make being human interesting, so what if it gets in the way of the Globalists.

We are Humans, not Numbers and commodities and the World should be operated with that fact in mind other wise you end up with what we have now, companies like Haliburton lobbying for Wars of plunder using our children as cannon fodder and Millions dead.

Arrgh....

The truly most annoying thing for a journalist, when writing about the EU; To write five bloody lines about anything EU related you have to read for at least two hours to even begin getting a picture or what the hell is going on.

Why are in it now again? Ohh yeah 60% of our trade is with the EU (ignoring the fact that we are all in WTO.)

They knew it all along

It was said that the public were not interested in the EU, that is was far down their priority list, that it was boring and not part of their lives. Well the latest report
find that reducing the powers of the European Union is second and providing more to help families is third and the first is lowering immigration. It can all be read in this article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/4840716/Immigration-is-top-issue-for-both-Labour-and-Tory-voters-YouGov-poll-shows.html

So how about it masters? How about it?

The really interesting and rather funny thing is that the incoming government wont do anything about any of these issues because they do not have the power not the audacity to do so. During their incumbent year we will see growing (more than now, much more) disgruntlement amongst the public. As sure as the EU flag is draped with stars there will be violence a lot of it and this is all the fault of the government. If the public wants less EU and if the public wants less immigration you damn well give it to them - it is not your place to dictate what is best for them or what they want. Went the coming government has become as unpopular as the current then, perhaps, we might see a radical change in the way we are governed. It will most likely not be Labour who takes the rudder nor a transformed Conservative party it will be someone much more dangerous who in normal times would never be allowed to hold government. But because we are "democratic" country we have to accept the auspices of the ballot box. This is where the governments fall.

POST

You fucking coward and spineless bastards (British Media) how dare you bend over for the powers that be. It is as clear as night follows day that Lord Mandelson is trying to privatise Royal Mail because the EU says so, read the law you stupid "journalists" (how dare you even call yourselves that...).

Don't believe me, well why would you I suppose it is not as if the government would lie: http://ec.europa.eu/internal_market/post/legislation_en.htm

Law is just another word without substance

Why is no one petitioning the Queen to dissolve parliament and call a general election. As the Act of Supremacy and the Bill of Rights put it: all usurped and foreign power and authority may forever be clearly extinguished, and never used or obeyed in this realm. no foreign prince, person, prelate, state, or potentate shall at any time after the last day of this session of Parliament, use, enjoy or exercise any manner of power, jurisdiction, superiority, authority, pre eminence or privilege within this realm, but that henceforth the same shall be clearly abolished out of this realm, for ever. If this is ratified and receives royal assent then the Queen is in breech of her coronation oath. The Queen has solemnly promised to govern the peoples of the United Kingdom according to the Statutes in Parliament agreed on and according to their laws and customs. The protection of our constitution, the bill of rights and Magna Carta still stand. Petition the Queen and invoke them. Our democracy, and therby our sovereignty, were not handed to us, we fought and won them. On this issue the Queen has every right to intercede on behalf of her subjects. It's why we have a constitutional Monarchy. The same applies to all EU treaties. Any treaty that affects the sovereignty of the people is an act of treason and illegal under the constitution. The constitution cannot be altered by parliament, government or the sovereign. Non are above the common law.

Bye Bye Blighty

"The Royal Mail is part of our heritage"

Which is probably why they have set out to destroy it. As various debates have shown recently there seems to be a plan to reduce this country to a place where the state has removed its self from having any obligations to its people, and the people are just there to pay bills , nothing more. So there is no British jobs for British workers, no rights for British people to have houses, its just a dormitory country for an itinerant workforce and so any institution which might give people an attachment to the place is ruthlessly expunged.

What is Leadership?

Sitting around waiting for the other guy to screw up and then win by default is not leadership. This Mr. Cameron you should bear in mind, the people will never be afraid of its government but the government should always be afraid of its people. Majority power is and will always be stronger than coercive power.

Not too soon but then...

You should not expect any of the mainstream parties doing anything about the EU for the coming 10-15 years, then perhaps or not. I am writing this as remembrance note to look at in 15 years to see in what political state we are in then. Will there even be a monarchy left, or did we sell that as well along with just about everything else which is publicly owned; democracy, liberality, DERA, airports, armed forces etcetera?

It will be interesting.

How many hurdles are left?

It is not long before we should start counting the inevitable entry of the Lisbon Treaty which created the Unites States of Europe or USE. Regardless of the fact that the constitution (for that is, as well all know, the Lisbon treaty) previously has been rejected by French and Dutch voters and subsequently also by Irish voters albeit in a different packet (see Lisbon Treaty). What is stopping it right now then one might ask.

- There Irish government has arrogantly and undemocratically committed itself to have another referendum on the treaty. Clearly a no could not be accepted, hell that would be too much like democracy. You can expect that they will win second time around easily with EU money flooding the doors of the Irish in forms of commercials favouring everything European. Not exactly a fair set-up for a referendum, then again we are dealing with the EU here so eroding democratic virtues are nothing we should be surprised by.

- Some fool hardy individuals in Germany have launched an attack on the Lisbon Treaty claiming it is unconstitutional. Of course it is unconstitutional in every single way but their foolishness comes from them believing that they could actually win against the mighty EU apparatchiks, you cannot unless you have a head of state who is committed to actually doing something substantial about the EU nonsense. This is also a dead end for anyone hoping that this might but sticks in the wheels for the EU project, it has already been won by the EU.

- The Czech lower house today voted 120 - 61 for passing the Lisbon Treaty and even though the ODS claims majority in the upper house they will also eventually pass it, like so many other governments said they would not or would have a referendum. Hannan's rule tells us just that all parties are eurosceptic outside of government but once they enter that realm they gold plate every single directive and replace their spine shackles and proudly proclaim "yes, I am your bitch" we all know to whom they are talking to as well. Anyone who knows anything about European history will know that scarcely has a european election of sorts passed by without the EU having a dirty little finger to play in the game in the form of money, money and more money to spread their pro-EU propaganda in the country in question.

These are the three hurdles and they will be overcome be so sure.

Manifesto of a belligerent blogger

• Climate Change
-Repeal the Climate Change Act 2008


• Defence

-At any time there should be at least three operational aircraft carriers with large support groups.

-Open or re-open one large military hospital for each service. They would operate primarily on the treatment of military personnel but when not at capacity will take on civilians as well so that funds are used as efficiently as possible.

• Education

-Reintroduce grammar schools.

-Create a system of normal distribution for grading A-levels; i.e. only the top 5% will be awarded an 'A*', the top 10% an 'A' and so on.

-Replace GCSEs with its predecessor 'O-levels' or alternatively IGCSEs.

-Compulsory uniform for all pupils until and including their last day of sixth form.

-All Polytechnics and Colleges which were spuriously renamed 'universities' by the previous Conservative administration will be renamed and their scope refocused to their old practises.

-National Curriculum to cover only a single sheet of A4 paper per subject, no more and no less, alternatively scrap it altogether.

-Compulsory study of at least one foreign language until the age of 16.

-Compulsory schooling until 16 and remove the current requirement of 18.

-Make History part of compulsory subjects along with Maths, Science and English.

-Introduce a nation wide university entrance exam, pertaining to but not necessarily including, an essay in a subject of choice and subject specific questions and absolutely no multiple-choice questions.

-Remove the schools regulator, devolve their power to councils and drastically limit their scope to singularly focus on the quality of education provided by said establishment.

-As part of the UCAS application process, the statement left by the teacher or a person whom can vouch for said applicant, will be made inaccessible to the applicant in order to promote meritocracy and prevent any form of bias.

-Every single requirement placed on universities which can in any way be linked to social engineering will be scrapped; universities are to select on one thing, and one thing only: merit.

-Schools will be given the power to expel a student and once that decision has been taken it is final.

-Discipline will be reintroduced through-out the system and teachers and head-teachers will be ultimately responsible for the disciplinary standards in their establishment which means that they are open to lobby by parents who want stricter or lesser standards.

-Any education standards imposed by the EU will be scrapped however this is part of a larger resettlement of Britain's continued existence within the EU.

-Create an additional layer of sixth-form material for the brightest calling them 'S-levels' or special levels which are there to stretch the brightest to the breaking point and separate the bright from the brilliant. The S-level material will be on the same level as university material. Take maths for example the structure would be as such for the clever: A-Levels Maths, Further maths and S-Maths.

-Properly fund universities so that they do not have to rely on foreign students to cover their costs.

-Make English the lingua franca of all educational establishments. If a parent wants special tuition so that their child is taught his or her native tongue then they will have to pay for it.

-Make sure that no child is left behind; the slow learners will be given extra help so that they reach the minimum requirements i.e. the 'three Rs'.

-Make it abundantly clear to everyone within this field that everyone is not equally clever or bright, at the same time everyone is not equally dim either.

-No topic is to be taught in science unless it has been 100% backed by the scientific community, who will have a large say in the curriculum of its three constituent subjects; physics, chemistry and biology. Empirically proven science will be the bread and butter of this policy (if the Higgs boson is found this section will be updated to reflect that discovery).

-Make sure that Britain is consistently in the top 10 in the international subject league tables.

-Strive to get at least two more British universities onto the 'top 20' universities in the world.

• Foreign/Domestic Policy (classification remains uncertain)

-Call a referendum on Britain's continued membership of the European Union.

• Immigration

-Halt immigration into the UK for at least a year to sort the system out.

-Repatriate the currently 10% of the prison population who is foreign, in the process establish prison transfer agreements with countries that we currently have none with. Critics should take note that throwing around the racism tag to shut down debate on immigration is a very worn out trick by now.

-Employ more uniformed immigration officers.

-Reinstate the Primary Purpose rule removed by Jack Straw in 1997.

-Reinstate Embarkation controls partially lifted by the Conservatives in 1994 and completely removed by Labour in 1997.

-Count everybody in and out.

-Make it compulsory to have lived in Britain for at least 10 years before citizenship can be issued. If it is issued it is done on the provision that the applicant can communicate in english to a standard expected of someone who has lived in Britain for the past 10 years.

-Make proposals made by MigrationWatch pivotal to any new policy, as well as proposals made by the Cross Party Group BalancedMigration.

-Any preachers of hate, whether he be a radical islamist or from the KKK, will be banned for life from entering the UK again.

-Any foreign nationals who have committed violent crime in the UK will be deported and banned for life (as part of this the Human Rights Act will be removed from the statute books).

-Any decision taken by the Home Office with regard to failed immigration or asylum application, is final and cannot be challenged in a court of law.

-A deportation decision taken by the Home Office is final and cannot be challenged.

-Put immigration debate back on a healthy agenda with reasoned and informed debate. This government would make it abundantly clear that anyone who has an opinion about immigration is not, and probably never will be, a racist. The character assassination which previously followed immigration debate are to be discontinued by this government.

• Justice

The guiding light of this government shall be the principle of "summum ius summa iniuria."

-Repeal the Human Rights Act

-Repeal the Equalities Act

-Repeal Race Relations Act

-Repeal Arbitration Act

• Manufacturing and Business

-Repeal the Equality Act

-Remove the Health and Safety Executive

-Remove at first 50% of the red-tape that is crippling businesses and in particular manufacturers. There should be nothing more than a sheet of rules and they should be no more than guidelines of how not to kill your employees. Currently the government does not seem to realise that employers do not want their workers dead either.

-Set corporate-tax in the band of 10-15% to encourage and attract new business to relocate and set-up new factories and wealth creation.

-Set National Insurance in the band of 10-15% to encourage employers to employ people without having to consider twice if they can actually afford to pay for them.

• Pubs, Bars and Restaurants

-Smoking ban will be removed, landlords to get power to decide for themselves if they want to allow smoking on their premises.

• Space

-Reactive 'Black Arrow' and 'Blue Streak.'

-Increase budget of UKSA by 500%.

-Create 'Space Fund' to invest in space related private sector research in the UK.

-Create a 'Space Division' within DSTL and at the same increase the funding to reflect the departmental increase.

• Transport

-Renationalise all railways and operators; free market by all means but that is subject to it actually benefiting the people which the privatisation of the railways has not done. We subsidise train operators to the tune of £1billion a year and subsidise Network Rail by £4billion. Yet managers continue to pay themselves, private-sector salaries and bonuses and the companies continue to squeeze the travellers. That is why it is time to take the railways back into public ownership. It was a mistake to privatise them in the first place as it has allowed private companies to profiteer without regard for public interest.

"Contempt for the workers" Labour's new Platitude.

This is an extract from 'Worker's Song' by the American Celtic Punk band Dropkick Murphys. It rather breviloquently sums up Labour's attitude towards the British workers when they would rather protect large multinational corporations than their own people - despicable and beyond contempt. They call themselves socialists when their is nothing in the world that could be more erroneous.

Yeh, this one's for the workers who toil night and day
By hand and by brain to earn your pay
Who for centuries long past for no more than your bread
Have bled for your countries and counted your dead

In the factories and mills, in the shipyards and mines
We've often been told to keep up with the times
For our skills are not needed, they've streamlined the job
And with sliderule and stopwatch our pride they have robbed

We're the first ones to starve, we're the first ones to die
The first ones in line for that pie-in-the-sky
And we're always the last when the cream is shared out
For the worker is working when the fat cat's about

And when the sky darkens and the prospect is war
Who's given a gun and then pushed to the fore
And expected to die for the land of our birth
Though we've never owned one lousy handful of earth?

All of these things the worker has done
From tilling the fields to carrying the gun
We've been yoked to the plough since time first began
And always expected to carry the can

Blair please leave the Chair

Possibly we should thank Blair. He has created through his New Labour party some of the worst economic conditions the world has ever seen, landed the UK in two wars which the population at large does not agree with, taken the UK closer to the EU than any other PM before him (Maastricht and Major -no still not close, Rome and Heath still not close enough) contrary to popular opinion, slashed the armed forces and well why not post the full list it is easier:


Foot and mouth crisis (twice)
Farm payments
Pensions theft
Gold reserves (actually this was Brown's fault)
Tax credits
Iraq war
Under funded ill-equipped Forces
PFI
Home Office failures
Uncontrolled immigration (am I a racist for mentioning immigration, dear me)
NHS in tatters
School standards at the lowest ever
Thousands of knee jerk badly written laws
Rampant EU fraud
EU ignoring its own people
EU referendum promise reneged
Treaty/ constitution
Northern Rock
HMRC
Lost data – child benefit and dvlc
Donorgate
Cash for Honours
Single families
Economy in complete tatters
First time buyers taken out of market
Rich and poor divide becoming bigger
Plenty of tax rises – both direct and indirect
Uncontrolled private sector
Crime out of control
Young deaths
Guns on our streets
NO ELECTION
Afghan war
Quangos controlling parliament
Financial crisis
Populist catholic (well he is just annoying me with this)

All in all (and there are plenty of more examples to be added to this list) Labour has destroyed this country beyond recognition. We now find Blair in America giving lectures about religion - this is a testament to his utter disaster and failure as a prime minister: He cannot lecture about one of the highest statesmanship in the world, he has to lecture about a subject which is completely irrelevant of his post as PM, religion.

What a useless man.

Fatalist or just pragmatic...

It is truly an odd world we have come to inhabit today, one which we inherited from our ancestors of old. Britain is an old lady and with age comes responsibility, we should be able to claim that because of our old age we also have experience yet that experience is certainly not present in the political hiatus that now impersonates the very ruling of a society which has forgotten its place in the world.

Take William Wilberforce he died in 1833 and he was possibly one of the greatest if not the greatest MP of the house. Whilst some embrace Oliver Cromwell as the arch-protector of Britain, he should be honoured naturally, but we should hold in even higher regard the work carried out by Wilberforce. Because what he did not only applied to Britain but to the world, he set in stone those old human values which today have but in name eroded. We can refer to them and people will have a slight idea of which reference we are alluding to but since common hospitality basic human altruism have gone, people are struggling more and more to put a finger on what precisely human decency really amounts to.

The work of Wilberforce is now being unraveled in the very house he set the wheels of freedom to work - so that the same Right Honourable gentlemen, of the 21st century, could see them undone. When will the next Wilberforce come along and claim back the powers bestowed upon the so long ago, when will another one give the less fortunate a say in matters political and when will another bring back hints of the fin-de-siècle morals and ethics that gave this people such admiration world around. This is of course not a call to bring back the class system or anything of that sort just some decency would be nice for a change.

Idealism at its apex

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." Mahatma Ghandi (1869 - 1948)

Thouroughly Confusing

What is going on and what is happening?

Well lets just initiate this entry with a poll done not to long ago that showed that a large majority of the British population wants loser ties with the EU - what they were not told that in order to get this we would have to make concessions to the EU... that strikes me as contradictory logic: We want a loser grip with our master but our master has to get a harder grip somewhere else for that to happen. Whilst British fishermen are throwing overboard 800,000 tons of dead fish every year because of the Common Fisheries Policy (the TPA could tell you all about this..) - a rather unnerving feeling is starting to stir in the backwaters of society. Believe you me it is not only this writer who has started to sense this commotion but a fair few others.

The feeling is that of plain and simple, good and honest spine-work. When is Britain going to start standing up for herself again? The loss of empire does not men eternal incarceration by the rest of the world. Russia lost her 'empire' but 20 years ago she is already up and kicking and having a fuss with virtually everyone. Mockery aside when is the nation prepared to start thinking for itself in all matters politics. Time upon time are the people told what is best for them without even voicing their opinion or even that they might know what is actually best for themselves. No, whether it be American treasure hunters stealing British history - and getting away with it, or the EU imposing yet another law (we are told today that to date the EU bonanza has cost, in terms of regulation, the UK £150 billion pounds).

Why are they getting away with it? Certainly we know how to behave ourselves in the UK but that does not grant unsustainable levels of hospitality to anyone (and everyone) who tries to coerce the establishment into conformity. The Americans have a court-order from America saying that HMS Victory is theirs... how on earth can that bear weight over here? The Spaniards have already come to understand in what way the American treasure hunters view the history of Spain - with complete disregard for imperial history but solely in monetary means: the highest bidder may buy the history of Spain, because they say so.

And finally why is it that we (or rather the politicians) are taking orders from across the pond when clearly most people in their own country will have none of it. However it does not become of us to start grand revolutions in the name of this and that but people can only take so much ignorance from their masters before they act.

History ALWAYS repeats itself.

The sheer Irony

How demoralising that government ministers of the once 'Great' Britain now have to go off begging to an external power in mainland Europe in order to try to get the law changed so that the British people can work.

One must but pose the question, are we the only ones who appear to see that the EU simply does not work? What must Gordon Brown be thinking now as he is flying of to Brussels in the [HOPE] (qualified majority voting and all that...) that they might change the rules so that Old Britain, with her cumbersome economy, might be able to employ its own people. It is odd that he is not questioning the very reasons for his flight:

Here he is at the starting point of the 21st century, his country has wholly and totally gone to the dogs and he is leaving for Europe to see the masters of the supposedly sovereign nation that he supposedly heads as PM? Notice the many sarcastic 'suppositories' for they are just that sarcasm - he does not control Britain more than a bald man controls the glossiness of his hair.

Eurocrats normally go for the argument that we need the EU for the common good. They often also proudly proclaim that they -the EU- have kept the peace in Europe thanks to the awesome might and influence of its very being.

Lets address some key points shall we.
-The EU (or as it was known back then the EEC) started of with 8 member states, EUROPE has 49 states - the ignorance to suppose that a few are to rule them all? This is not the Lord of the Rings, sadly for Saruman would then have been impersonated by EU Commission.
-The EU is bureaucratic talking club at the very best they produced policies which worked for about 6 month then broke down because of the sheer bulk of people and products it sought to control.
-The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation kept the peace and is still keeping the peace, the EU is doing all in its power to hinder its work.

So I ask you yet again why are we flying to Europe?

If you answered "for the greater good" and completely ignored the entire point of the post then I suggest we also start hiring Polish Politicians with lower salaries. Suffice to say that would at least be slightly beneficial in the saving of tax funds.