The Times' Farage-rant Leader piece backfires badly

Chaps, I am swamped in work right now so posting will be sparse over the coming days. However I would just like to draw your attention to this seemingly hilarious piece by the Times. You will all know what a few days ago Nigel Farage of UKIP called EU President (President of the Council actually) a "damp rag" and we all found it rather hilarious. Now perhaps it was not such a good idea to take a dig at the Belgians - it is not their fault after all. However the Times appear to be under the impression that Mr. Farage did not speak for the majority of the British people when he said what he did. The comments of the piece certainly beg to differ. But is the Times wrong to say Farage doesn't speak for Britain? In fact, Farage might have a claim to speak for more Brits than the Times does. The Times has a circulation of over 600,000, but nearly 2.5 million voted for Farage's UKIP during the last election. Now I know that the internet is centre-right of average, but do you know why? Because people are centre-right on average and progressively turning more and more right rather than more and more centre. Wonderful is it not?

Here is the link to the Times' shot-themselves-in-the-foot leader enjoy. Here is a particular comment that I liked

He certainly speaks for me. Perhaps not in quite the way I'd like him too, but since no-one ever got to express an opinion over Van Rumpy, Ashton etc. then he and Hannan are the only people who can speak for us. The EU is a ludicrous, self-perpetuating, bloated farce and I am heartily sick of it. Well done Farage for at least having the cojones to stand up.

And anyone who saw him speaking will have seen the sycophantic Schulz crawling up to Van Rompuy, talking of trampling on the dignity of the house. What about the dignity of democracy, that has been well and truly trampled to death.

I fully agree with a Mr. Tim G (who wrote that comment), democracy has been truly trampled to death. Hence, in the interest of not succumbing to apathy, I leave the floor to Mr. Farage:

This is what they believe

Mostly good I suppose. I would like them (the prospective Tory parliament candidates who were queried) to be more conservative but this will have to do for now. Myself I am torn on the capital punishment issue. I remember having a 5 hour discussion with a friend regarding it but I cannot recall that we reached any meaningful conclusion.

Source

The Falklands and the Neutral US

Well, chaps it looks as if we are alone if the shit hits the fan. America just came out with this

Washington refused to endorse British claims to sovereignty over the Falkland Islands yesterday as the diplomatic row over oil drilling in the South Atlantic intensified in London, Buenos Aires and at the UN.

I am not sure how Obama is thinking. But regardless of what people might think on the continent there is actually hell of a lot in that special relationship. It is not just a layman's term for mutual understanding on this and that issue. I do not want to go into too much detail for I am not sure who actually reads this blog but it is way beyond anything the MSM gives it credit for, and it is duly understood on both sides of the pond that the breaking of that relationship would be very costly indeed.

Britain is America's transit to Europe why we are partially bound into the EU currently. America was actually very complicit in getting the UK into the EU in the first place. There are countless FCO documents on this and it has been covered extensively already so I shall not dwell on it. Now likewise the US is Britain's playground when it comes to all that gucci government science for example. Lets just put it this way; it is in both countries' interest to stay on each others good side.

However... both countries currently have a) a leftist who seems hellbent on kissing his enemies and kicking his allies and b) a complete mong who got into office by default and is hopelessly out of his league. I will let the reader pair up the a) and b) with respective country. What is sure though is that both need each other not in the least for Afghanistan and all the other commitments in the world. So as far as this goes I am not sure what Obama is smoking but is sure as hell isn't common sense.

Also I urge you to have a read on Think Defence for which I write for from time to time (well once so far). If you want to know what is really going on then that is the place to be, the national newspapers know very little of what is actually going on down yonder.

Finally, do you know what the really funny thing is? People do not like us in Europe and definitely not in the EU, where the UK is seen as the 'troublemakers' i.e. the bumpers of further integration. Yet nor are we particularly cherished in the higher spheres of America either. We cannot even get support in the form of lip-service. Still British troops are dying for a cause that Bush dreamt up while high on Ganja because Blair was and is his leg-humping poodle.

My previous post seems very apt now...

Where did the British go?

Have you ever heard of 'balls'? You know a proper pair a cojones as they are called in Spanish. Wikipedia labels it as a "vulgar" word quite how they got to that conclusion I cannot fathom. Yet it stands tall representing the noble synonym for courage. So where did the British balls go? Certainly most of them seem to be converged on Nigel Farage these days and a trickling of that has also reach some other public figures. But mostly if you look at the rag-bag that today constitutes councillors, well most of them are pathetic excuses for human beings not even remotely fit to serve their fellow man. Naturally there are exceptions and one is always overjoyed to take notice of their firm existence, when they are swimming against the bullshit-tide that has become everyday life in the UK.

It used to be different of course, things naturally change but still most things retain at least a modicum of its previous self; be it sport, culture, art, literature, film etcetera. Things change but remain the same in the carefully worded oxymoron. The stark irony of history tells us that the PM with the largest cojones to date was a woman namely Margaret Thatcher. Naturally people have qualms about Thatcher, she made a lot of good decisions but also a lot of bad ones, but what she did do first and foremost was to firmly underline that this was a woman which you do not fuck around with. Unlike our leaders today who are incessantly being tossed around between global political leaders, not stopping for a moment to contemplate what they themselves think, or more importantly what their people think (or their voters for that matter).

Bloggers like to think that they have big cojones, that if the opportunity was given they would swoop on to the world stage, claw back power and put Britain right. Most of the bloggers can talk the talk most certainly (and that is what scares the left) but can they walk the walk? Only time will tell. It seems then that the British went online. What can otherwise be the answer? You will only get a sincere answer from anyone these days if that answer is given whilst on the internet. If you try to get a politician or public figure, to speak from his heart you might as well have asked Achilles to consider the latest high heals from Gucci. You cannot get an honest answer from them. Instead their charisma is centered around their supposed charisma. I know that that sentence does not make semantical sense but read it again. David Cameron is an enigma wrapped in a riddle shrouded in a mystery, who no one likes. Gordon Brown no one likes because he has no charisma at all he only pretends he does. Nick Clegg is so boring to watch and listen to, that even Harriet Harman seems like Angelina Jolie by comparison.

Then you have the smaller parties. They all have leaders and people in them who actually practise what they preach. Farage basically told Von Rumpy to fuck of today (who incidentally is a denizen since he is a man without a country), and naturally I applaud any move which exposes the incompetence as personified by the EU. Nick Griffin, racist wanker and loony as a tosser, but he still took the mick out of Jack Straw on Question Time when calmly announced that Straw's father sat in prison during WWII and Griffin's fought. I do not like racists more than the next person, quite where they got that view from I can only but speculate in, however it is the unrelenting belief which is fascinating and valid of analysis. Imagine if Mr. Brown actually believed that he had saved the world, if he actually believed that he has not ruined the UK then maybe, just maybe, he would be able to do something constructive with the army of civil servants hired under his watch. But as the record stands he is just a big fat tub of shit who does not even have the decency to resign from an office which he has hopelessly rendered meaningless under his tenure as its guardian.

Let me offer your some solace though. The British will be back and they will grow a new pair of bollocks as we call them over here. Hope is a sine curve; it goes up and down periodically, and reaches its peaks and its throughs every so often. Even though most of you would probably just like to emigrate right now, I urge you to stay. Things will and can only get better it is the only possible outcome. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction. If you piss off the people the people will be pissed off with you. Simples. You do not need a legion of policy advisers to tell you that, a simple job would have done the trick - taught you the skills needed. Therein lies also the problem, most of our MPs never had a real job and just do not have a clue how the rest of us function. Plato said that no minister below the age of 50 should be let into the governing house, Plato said that more than 2500 years ago. Yet under the aegis of equality people without any experience of life are now governing people with experience. It is a paradox without an equal. But a paradox which simply cannot last.

While the proper citizens are currently dormant and accumulating their range, they will have to vent it at some point and I daresay that not a battalion or a brigade of PCSOs can stop that tidal wave of mistrust and disgust aimed at the people who let this country fall of the cliffs of hope and into Dante's inferno.

One day...

Some day someone like me, but someone with real power, will have had enough this shit.

Also I note that the South Americans have started to torch British flags. Well, chaps, you are way behind; we torched our own flag in our own country well before you started. Why? No one gives a shit anymore just as no one will care when you burn our flag down yonder. People will simply ask 'so what else is new?'

Wordplay!

What do these people, dead and alive, have in common?

Judas Iscariot

Benedict Arnold

John Major

Edward Heath

Vidkun Quisling

David Cameron

Gordon Brown

Brutus

Wang Jingwei

(the tag sort of gives it away)

The English Parliament

I have a book called The English Parliament written by Kenneth Mackenzie. It is a rather unimposing volume, does not really catch the readers eye at all to be quite frank. It asks nothing beyond itself save for occasionally being read. I picked it up for £1 at a flea market down south. It is quite a remarkable little volume for it tells us how parliament was like when the concept of 'honour' was still omnipresent in the hearts and minds of the people who lived to serve the people. It was a different time, but not so long ago it was first published in 1950 and since then the UK has gone through more change than ever before in its 300 year history - England even more so in its nearly 10 century long history. As English Common Law is being slowly replaced by Corpus Juris Civilis (New Labour presided over the first trial in the history of the UK and England in which there was no jury present) so too is the honour once related to public life.

I would like to quote from the opening paragraph of this immense little omnibus, for it is quite fantastic and I have highlighted the parts which I find truly amazing. Amazing since that same scenario could never ever happen today...

I doubt that the most important thing was Dunkirk or the Battle of Britain, El Alamein of Stalingrad. Not even the landings in Normandy or the great blows struck by British and American bombers. Historians ma decide that any one of these events was decisive, but I am persuaded that the most important thing that happened in Britain was that this nation chose to win or lose this was under the established rules of parliamentary procedure. It feared Nazism, but did not choose to imitate it. The government was given dictatorial power, but it was used with restraint, and the House of Commons was ever vigilant. Do you remember that while London was being bombed in the daylight, the House devoted two days to discussing conditions under which the enemy aliens were detained on the Isle of Man? Though Britain fell, there were to be no concentration camps here.

Edward R. Murrow

Things are different now. Things are very different now as you all know. I sometimes get accused of ranting too much about things, by people on this blog and people in real life. That I should just chill out and just go with the flow. I am not certain what constitutes a rant and what passes for relevant referenced critique. It seems that when people cannot stand hearing the truth they accuse the man with the torch of having a rant. Do not worry I am not so full of myself that I propose that I am always the light bearer, I am wrong sometimes too but more than often people and the media criticise people for putting forth issues -real issues- which 50 years ago would have rendered you at least a few pairs of ears, willing to hear what you have to say. Things are different now.

It is the same with parliament. It has no purposes anymore, it is no better than all the parliaments which were spawned from its image. It certainly is not the mother of all parliaments anymore. It is nothing, save for a handful of people who sit in its old chambers, and the rest are nothing either. They have no interest in serving their people.

Daniel Hannan likes to talk about hubris, catharsis and nemesis. Well lets expand upon that then. A true tragic hero needs to have six key qualities. These are hamartia, hubris, anagnorisis, peripeteia, nemesis and catharsis. Hamartia is a tragic flaw that causes the downfall of the tragic hero. This tragic flaw is often the result of hubris which is extreme pride. Anagnorisis is a recognition or discovery made by the tragic hero. In other word the tragic hero will learn a lesson, usually as a result of his downfall. Peripeteia is a reversal of fortune, the downfall of the tragic hero. Nemesis is a fate that cannot be escaped. Catharsis is a feeling of overwhelming pity and/or fear that the audience of reader is left with after witnessing the downfall of a tragic hero.

I think we need to muster something else a bit more substantial than latin platitudes, if we are ever going to restore parliament to what it was. I am not sure what happened along the way. Somewhere this insatiable urge for sloth and power gluttony swooped over our MPs over these years since 1945 - for the sake of having a beginning. I believe firmly in the principles of responsibility. Logic suggests that if you remove a man's responsibility he will, ergo, be irresponsible not of his own making but that is simple the only logical outcome. We fall so that we can pick ourselves up and learn from our mistakes. We make mistakes because we should so that we understand as people what is wrong. Parliament has no responsibility anymore -it has been outsourced- and it is not allowed to make any mistakes for then the press are on it like vultures on a caracas. The legislative keeps the executive in check and the media keep both in check. But something has gone wrong along the way.

It is not only that the government sets parliament agenda it is everything. The parliamentary paradigms have been completely replaced with anachronisms. I say anachronisms for the principles which previously guided parliament were timeless; honour, responsibility, country before party and family before party, truth, justice etcetera. These values are nowhere to be seen today. You can blame the EU, regional governments, judges, quangos, the UN, the socialists or what have you. But then you consider other countries which still have their parliament intact and they still appear to want to serve the people. What happened to us?

I do not understand. I was brought up to believe that the greatest good you could do was to help your fellow man. But today our MPs, almost willingly, almost wantonly, go behind our backs and make deals with their friends in the same high echelons, where we are left to pick up the pieces of a policy that never should have passed further than the MP's lips. Where before it would have been struck down the moment it flouted the halls of Westminster. Where the shards are the only things that remain of a country that once withstood all outer influence and set its own agenda, an agenda for and with the people.

PC

I just read a few PC stories which pissed me off to say the least so here is my riposte to all of you PC-hacks who feed of the gullible nature of people in this country and others. One day common sense will return. Further if you do not like the picture I have posted, please leave a comment saying so, I can guarantee you a nice warm reply full of Fs and Us. I am in the 'being-offensive' business just as you are in the 'I-am-a-low-life-sack-of-shit-who-is-too-stupid-to-get-a-proper-job' business.

On a related note here is a not so comprehensive list of what Muslims find offensive; Brazilian dancers, St Valentine's Day, Jews, Christians, homosexuals, Baha'is, Ahmadiyahs, Sufis, Hindus, Sikhs, Ex-Muslims, crosses, Star of Davids, Bibles, Torahs, the Veda, Buddha statues, Hindu statues, teddy bears named Mohammed, churches, church bells, temples, synagogues, white socks, uncovered women, women, music, non-halal meat, prawns, things containing pork fat, pork enzymes, pork scratchings, piggy banks AND things containing alcohol, ie. perfume, face cream, disinfectant, etc

Which is why we wont be voting Tory

The two-day visit to Brussels, which begins on Tuesday, by the most pro-EU member of David Cameron's cabinet-in-waiting is seen by European officials as a signal that a new Conservative administration will work with the EU executive rather battling against it.

Mr Clarke, who will be accompanied by Mark Prisk and John Penrose, junior shadow business ministers, is expected to seek concessions on financial and employment regulations during the meetings, which are not listed on the European Commission's official diary.

Fiona Hall, leader of the European Liberal Democrats, suggested that the secrecy surrounding talks meant that "the Tories have something to hide".

"The question is what deal will he do? Will he sell out his own beliefs or those of his anti-European colleagues?" she said.

Which is why we wont be voting Tory - and think I do not need to speculate further on who "we" actually are since there are so many right now. Someone might then say 'well Labour will be even worse and sell out everything left of the UK, so you are only betraying yourself if you vote anything but Tory'. Labour at least believe in their own policy of selling out the UK they have the ideological advantage. The Tories again don't believe in anything, nothing which qualifies as conservative.

Fuck Labour

I do not normally link to the Daily Mail for they are not exactly high level journalism... but here the numbers speak for themselves.

Fuck You Labour Wankers

The real national debt is £1,340 billion (Centre for Policy Studies), 103.5 per cent of GDP. Including public sector pension liabilities and Private Finance Initiative contracts. The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money as Maggie T said (I thought I best keep the language colloquial in this post so that I do not get accused of breaking the PC agenda by spelling out the former PM's full name - the horror).

We owe all the money we have plus a bit more to someone else.

Put it this way:

X is all the money we have; every single penny in all of the UK

K is all that money which we do not have

Q is all the money we owe to someone else

Hence

X+K = Q

That equation makes no mathematical sense since we owe money we do not have to people who want us to have it.

The Best Labour Poster in my Book

Why cannot Dave seal the deal?

Many bloggers and news columnists have been posting similarly titled pieces as this. I thought I would take a stab (can you say 'take a stab' nowadays or is that non-PC?) at it myself.

People are at heart conservative, or so I believe. I too was attracted by the the 'philanthropists' policies of marxism when I was younger. I even devised my own system when 16 but that is for another time. At first glance marxism or socialism, whatever have you, seem good for the people. They will help the greater lot at the expense of the few. It is my firm belief that when Marx envisioned socialism, he wanted to make a world where everyone would be happy. Tragically, however, his ideals were taken to the extrema, corrupted and turned into something vile he never, I believe, wanted.

The properties of socialism can be summed up:

• All members of the economy share benefits, regardless of their economic value to the system.
• A healthy socialistic system results in non-economic productivity.
• In environments with plentiful resources, socialism provides all members with their survival needs, through the redistribution of wealth.
• Members that cannot participate economically - due to disabilities, age, or periods of poor health - can still impart wisdom, support and continuity of experience to the system.
• Leaders not producing, should have absolute say over those who are producing.

But it never work. Humans are hardwired to reach for the top, we get a kick out of being the best. I know I do, it does not happen a lot due to the people I socialise with are far cleverer and better at most things than myself. But, when it does happen, it feels good. Depriving an entire society of that emotion is unnatural. It is like trying to remove the emotion of love from society that would equally unnatural and wrong. Giving credit where it is due though, the socialists tried that as well. Because socialism inherently seeks to undermine so many basic human interactions and emotions that are imprinted on our dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and other areas of the brain - at some point it just breaks down. It breaks down, where the authorities have to use force to impose a system of belief they themselves do not believe in. I do not think socialism is evil but the people who exercise it are so convinced or their own self-righteousness that you cannot stop them. Look at the past 13 years of Labour. They are convinced socialists and will not listen to reason or anything at all save for themselves. This is the worst government ever seen by the United Kingdom - and I say that not as a Libertarian/Real-Tory person but as a casual observer with a firm knowledge of British history. Nothing beats them in incompetence and mistreatment of this country.

Now this is what I think are vote winners:

1. Reduce immigration with a proper compassionate policy. Let those in who want to work, who can work, who are healthy and can support themselves. This is the second most populated country in the world so zero net-immigration is a must at least for a few years until things have settled down. Social services are cracking under the pressure of too many people. This scheme is applied to EU countries as well.
2. Return to EFTA - most people hate the EU and it is not going to go away.
3. Proper foreign policy with a 5-10% spend of GDP on the armed forces. The world is becoming more dangerous not less. Remember the man who stood in the street and waived a pointless white paper in the air and called it "victory".
4. Social welfare; it is extraordinary that people get £20,000+ every year for doing nothing. People must be enthused about getting a job and earning their daily bread. People are not ashamed nowadays to say that they are on benefits and have scammed the government (when in reality they scammed their fellow taxpayer man).
5. Leave the civil service alone; depoliticise it.
6. Bring back the Law Lords.
7. Legislative controls the Executive. Finito.
8. Semi Quango Genocide save for the ones who are actually involved in proper business.
9. Seeing as the Glaciers are all going to melt in 5 years (according to the IPCC) wait and see five years before adopting any "Green" policies. See if it makes any difference at all.

That will do for now but that is what I think, to some extent, encompasses the reasons why Dave cannot seal the deal; he is not a Tory, he is a modern Conservative. If people vote Labour again, that is all right as long as they know what they are in for. I think it is important that we remember that the public at large cannot namedrop paragraphs from relevant EU treaties, know what the 1922 committee is etcetera. Politics in the real world is very simplistic - we can rage all we want in the blogosphere about what a humongous cunt Mr. Brown is but the way the voters see it is this; 'if he can cry on TV he deserves my vote' and that sadly is the intelligence level we are operating on.

Spies in the Shell (the macbook shell)

Pennsylvania district accused of using remote-control laptops to photograph teenage students at home without their knowledge. Now this is an area where America is desperately behind its British compatriots, the area of spying on your citizens. They are at best amateurs at worst ignorant of the technology used by their British counterparts to keep the great masses under surveillance. Another area where we could export technology.

Subtler and more far-reaching means of invading privacy have become available to the government. Discovery and invention have made it possible for the government, by means far more effective than stretching upon the rack, to obtain disclosure in court of what is whispered in the closet.

-US Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, 1928

Most people do not seem to have grasped that we have lost our rights. All we are doing now is making sure that they know how it feels.

Note also Captain Ranty who deserves a shout-out for this very very angry post about one of the key people who played a pivotal role in destroying personal freedom.

EU tells UK; you cannot prioritise UK taxpayer before EU citizens when it comes to Olympics tickets

I am just going to rip the entire thing from the Telegraph - I am truly flabbergasted. All I shall say is this; British taxpayers paid for the Olympics yet they do not have dibs on the first tickets? Non sequitur statement my dear Brussels benefit squanderers.

Sports fans in European Union countries have the legal right to buy the London 2012 tickets when they go on sale to the public next year.
With London so accessible and the mandatory inclusion of European involvement in the local ticket programme, the demand for the 9.3 million London Olympic and Paralympic tickets is expected to be particularly intense.

But Telegraph Sport has been told that Britons will not have any exclusive access to the tickets, nor any advance purchase opportunities. On a political level there are approaches being made to see if there is any possibility of reserving a percentage of tickets for the British public, but early indications appear that any such move would contravene the European Union act.

Lord Coe, the chairman of the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games, said on Tuesday: "The reality is we signed the European Union act in 1971, we are part of the European political landscape and my instinct is that the tickets have to be made available to Europe at the same time as Britain.''

Locog is planning to allow British people to pre-register for tickets later this year. This will allow the organisers to understand which events and sessions will be the most popular but it will not provide any advantage in securing tickets.

When the London tickets are eventually released to the public next year, it will be via a ballot, with ticket orders being made through the internet over a yet to be determined period of time.
"It is not first past the post,'' said Locog chief executive Paul Deighton.
Coe said Locog had conducted the most rigorous research into ticket sales, "more than any other organising committee has done''.

He said: "We know we have got to get it right, potentially this is one of our biggest challenges. We understand the need for people to understand these are their Games and they will want access to these Games. We are doing a lot of to work it out.
"We want tickets to be distributed to people who most want to go, we want the tickets into the fans' hands.''

Hugh Robertson MP, the Tories' shadow Sports and Olympics spokesman, said it would be an absolute tragedy for taxpayers if they were not able to buy the majority of Olympic tickets available.

Locog has already signalled to the International Olympic Committee that it wants to restructure some of the VIP areas that are reserved for the Olympic family and the media for some of the morning sessions, which in past Olympics have featured blocks of empty seats.
It is understood that Tessa Jowell, the Olympics Minister, has requested the Foreign Office to have a second look at the European Union competition law.

Bet you didn't see that one coming now did you?

A map of the Falklands - Update: Task force has been sent

Ships that have been sent to the Falklands as of today...

RFA Wave Ruler

HMS Scott

HMS York

Here is what's going on down yonder if you did not know.

Three ships have been sent thus far; HMS York, HMS Scott and RFA Wave Ruler, so someone is clearly a bit consternated. What is more, I would not be at all surprised if this has something to do with the back track on the sale of the RFA. As many people have pointed out, they will be needed if hell breaks loose again.

As usual the Guardian is doing a formidable job in siding with the aggressor.

Update: HMS York was actually there already - my apologies.

France to copy UK surveillance state - we finally exported something

France's lower house has passed a law that could give it a UK-style surveillance state.

The Loppsi 2 law, which is likely to be approved by the Senate in summer, gives French authorities extraordinary powers of censorship and surveillance over internet activity. (Loppsi = Loi d'Orientation et de Programmation pour le Sécurité Intérieure)

The bill includes a package of measures, not limited to cyber-crime. Drunk-driving legislation, crimes taking place in sports stadia, defence, some court procedure and even laws for burial in far-flung French territories are included in the bundle, which has been two and a half years in the making. Loppsi 2 proposes tripling the number of French CCTV cameras to 60,000 by next year and will give Prefets the right to authorise curfews of youngsters under 13.

However, it is the new powers granted in the fight against online crime which have grabbed the attention of digital crusaders and human rights activists alike.

Loppsi 2, like the UK's Digital Britain bill, forces Internet Service Providers to close down sites on the orders of the authorities. It also places a certain onus on ISPs to police themselves, declaring that it is the responsibility of ISPs to ensure users don't have access to "unsuitable content."

The law, like other laws recently introduced in the EU, is supposedly aimed at child pornography. However, previous experience shows that "unsuitable content" is a flexible definition: France has previously ruled that auctions of Nazi memorabilia break French laws, and ordered US company Yahoo to block French users from accessing such sites.

Critics say that most suppliers of child pornography use peer-to-peer networks rather than websites, so blocking a list of URLs would have little effect on traffic.

Perhaps the most worrying aspect of Loppsi 2 for rights activists is the suggestion that the authorities should be able to place malware or spyware on citizens' PCs for anything up to eight months. This would allow security forces to "observe, collect, record, save and transmit" keystrokes from the targeted machines thanks to government-installed "Trojan" viruses.

A further aspect of the bill is the creation of a database named "Pericles" which will allow the government and security forces to gather and store information gained from the above methods and from other state and private (banking, medical) sources. Britain's government recently put plans for such a database on hold; France may have its own by the end of this year.

Such innovations don't remain within the borders of one country for long. Thanks to the international nature of both child pornography and Islamist terrorism, French judges will argue that tough laws in their country are undermined by weaker regimes in the rest of Europe. The trend in European internet legislation in Britain and Germany has been towards less freedom, rather than more; Child porn is such a sensitive subject for the public that it has been relatively easy to introduce repressive legislation using this vile behaviour as an excuse.

Soon a version of Loppsi 2 could be coming to your PC: EU-created Spyware, anyone?

Thanks to EUROSOC

Probably no sale of RFA - Hurray!

RFA

From the Lloyd's article

BRITAIN’S Ministry of Defence now appears to be softening its stance over the possible sale of the civilian-crewed Royal Fleet Auxiliary, according to trade union officials who discussed the issue with a junior minister earlier this week

On that happy note lets get onto something not so fun, again, the EU. You might have wondered lately between your tea break and the casual conversation you had with the lovely lady at Tesco's, what exactly does the word 'suzerainty' have in common with the EU? Well it is simple as pimples The European Union has shown its wrath by stripping Greece of its vote at a crucial meeting next month, the worst humiliation ever suffered by an EU member state apparently. Shame about the greek. Hopefully they will turn more anti-EU now but I do not really think so but one can always dream. Oh yes and they had in common what the Telegraph calls "economic suzerainty" from their article on this subject. Happy hunting chaps!

The Second Falklands War (FWII) - they wouldn't would they?

I do not seriously think Argentina would take military action, but they are behaving curiously to say the least.

Argentina has said that it is taking control over all shipping between its coast and the Falkand Islands, effectively awarding itself the power to blockade the disputed territory.

More importantly where is China in all this? You can be sure of one thing though, if they do attack Gordon Brown will invite them to No 10 and give them the keys. Mr Brown does not have any balls compared to Thatcher, which is ironic.

Racism and the changing tide of the nation

You will have noticed that us lot, the bloggers, are a fairly radical lot by normal standards. We fear not to talk of racism, immigration, British culture, patriotism and history. We talk of the virtues of the UK but also seek to correct the vices of her, through proper and thorough analysis - the kind the MSM would never dare to undertake. Our country right or wrong, when right to be kept right when wrong to be put right, were the words of one American senator Carl Schurz (1829-1906).

The Labour party's social engineering immigration policy is slowly making the rounds and as could have been expected the Tories are saying nothing about it for fear of loosing their liberal vote base. As much could have been expected - it is not more a right wing party than any of its members. Centre policies that is where they think power lies. Yet it is interesting to note that as the party has become more and more left-wing (the words 'Blue Labour' are thrown around a lot) they are loosing a lot of votes. Sure they may be ahead in the polls, but people would vote for Aladdin if they could, the Tories are the leading party by default not by merit or virtue. They got 8,785,941 votes in the 2005 general election, 9,600,943 in 1997 but 14,093,007 in 1992. Perhaps people do get turned off by parties without principles.

This leads us what today can be called the 'no-go-areas' of politics; immigration and the EU are to be avoided like the plague. Understandable considering that their policies can only be considered high treason had those laws not been removed when Tony Blair entered parliament. Since 1997 it is estimated that 5 million people have been added to the population of the UK. The figure is highly contentious since a) the government fixes its own figures to make it look better i.e. that less people have arrived and b) that independent sources like MigrationWatch have proved more accurate than the civil service. Some say 3 million others 4 million. You can be quite sure that of all the estimates you hear it is bound to be the highest one. This amount of immigration is bad for any country.

There I said it, call me a racist, I dare you. Argument by smear has had its day. It is time to argue with facts and reason. Before it was thus that anyone who opposed immigration was labelled a bigot, a reincarnation of Hitler, a second shadow of Stalin. For many years the liberal establishment have sought to use the accusation of ‘racism’ to terrorise opponents of immigration, to weaken conservative institutions, especially the police, and to silence conservative opinions in general. They have been highly effective. The times are changing. It is time to stop cringeing to the bigoted ‘anti-racists’. You will not get away with calling people racists today for opposing more immigration. If you do you, if the Labour years have taught you nothing, you are likely to be one of those people who would be spat on in the days of Queen Victoria I, hiding your loathing of this country behind a facade of liberal piety, a facade that is sometimes very thin indeed. You have only yourself to blame though, you sought to disestablish the country and completely reduce the history of the UK to nothing but a heap of rubble instead you made it more conservative, instead you let fascists into the EU parliament, instead you let true racism flourish around the country where hatred for your fellow man has become a daily occurence, instead you marginalised the voters whose very core support you depend on and then you have the audacity to call your opponents the enemies or reason? It shall not last.

What is this? I hear a Labour supporter say 'you cannot make an omelette without breaking a few eggs' certainly you cannot. But you are not supposed to break an entire fucking country to adopt a political policy which is of no benefit whatsoever to the people of that country (if you missed it read this House of Lords report on the economic impact of immigration).

UPDATE: As could be expected the first comment suggests that I am "afraid of ethnic diversity" I was anticipating a stupid comment from someone but not this stupid. Play the ball not the man. Hence to make it perfectly clear, the main point of this is to ask you: is 3-5 million (over 13 years) new people an acceptable level of immigration in an already overpopulated country?

Army with Harmony

Question of the Day

Let me pose this little catechism to you; how much compensation would a...

fireman

policeman

paramedic

baker

teacher

lawyer

bus driver

pilot

musician

painter

.

.

.

get if he or she got her leg blown off, compared to a soldier of the British Army? Subquestion; do you really want to know or is the answer too predictable and depressing to warrant revelation?

Note: I resisted the temptation of posting a blown of leg on this blog, for fear of the reader's dinner suddenly covering their screen.

Military Hospitals - what a fucking Tory/Labour cock-up

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.

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, shut last 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.

8. Nocton Hall, Nocton (formerly RAF), closed in 1995.

(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, thought 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 years 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.

Update: The above post is one of my old, but seeing as the subject is again on the table I thought it appropriate to repost it so that people can see what complete fucking abject failures have ruled this country and which retarded mongs currently run it. If you want a more detailed analysis of how precarious the situation currently is, I suggest you read this article from the Telegraph,

The numbers of wounded troops treated at the main British military hospital in Afghanistan, Camp Bastion, rose from 131 in 2008 to 300 from just January to October last year as operations intensified. Commanders are warning a renewed push will lead to a surge in casualties.

In the UK, those returning to Selly Oak Hospital in Birmingham and later being referred for rehabilitation to Headley Court in Surrey virtually doubled in the same period.

I am not alone in being utterly disgusted, amongst others, Subrosa has also touched the subject and being equally enraged. All I will finally add is that for the governments sake, old and present, I hope that the squaddies never make the logical connection between a defence minister's head and the SA80. The former has the power to do something, regardless of what they say -they are ministers of the Crown- that virtue gives them power, they are just too spineless/ball-less to do anything which does not benefit their political career.

Turn of the TV - Manly P. Hall's take on the World

I am doing a lot of 'interesting-listening/watching-posting' today simply because the topic I wish to write about will require too much of my time and too much of my energy to be worthwhile. Alas, I shall save that for a later date when I have properly collected my thoughts on the subject matter and shall bring it forth, like a ball of fire, upon the great unwashed that constitute the readers of this blog. Oh, I jest. The readers of this blog I am eternally grateful to, and I might add that their numbers have been going up for some time now - why I cannot fathom but I will extend my sincerest gratitude and hope that you will continue to read the collected ramblings of a university student who is presumptuously sick of the world.

Hence, I give you this from Monty P. Hall where thanks is due to Mr. Fausty who has yet again, with his blistering incisiveness for what is libertarian, spotted a very interesting piece -not the best one from Mr. Hall- but certainly worth listening to;

Got a Girlfriend? Get her this for Valentine's

Hat-tip Grumpy

Very good read

Here

The majestic 70 who will not yield

The 70 MPs Who Appealed The Repayment of Their Expenses

The following is a list of the 70 MPS who felt is perfectly correct to appeal to Sir Thomas Legg over being asked to repay their expenses. These are the people who have, mostly, cited the defence that because the rules didn't say they couldn't, they shouldn't have to repay it.

These are the people that earn at least £65,000 per year of our money. Ministers will earn at least £100,000 a year of our money.

These are the people that think that because they earn that money, good money and in many cases a good fours times the average salary in this country, they cannot afford to keep their garden, or that they don't have to pay the same taxes as other people, or that the people of this country should pay their mortgage for them.

Labour
Baroness Adams
Vera Baird, Redcar
Nigel Beard, Bexleyheath and Crayford
Colin Challen, Morley and Rothwell
Charles Clarke, Norwich South
Ann Clwyd, Cynon Valley
Frank Cook, Stockton North
Ann Cryer, Keighley
Ian Davidson, Glasgow South West
Frank Field, Birkenhead
Robert Flello, Stoke on Trent South
Michael Foster, Worcester
Mike Gapes, Ilford South
Linda Gilroy, Plymouth Sutton
Mike Hall, Weaver Vale
Patrick Hall, Bedford
Fabian Hamilton, Leeds North East
Lynne Jones, Birmingham Selly Oak
Martyn Jones, Clwyd South
Gerald Kaufman, Manchester Gorton
Denis MacShane, Rotherham
Gordon Marsden, Blackpool South
Stephen McCabe, Birmingham Hall Green
Christine McCafferty, Calder Valley
Andrew Miller, Ellesmere Port and Neston
Kali Mountford, Colne Valley
Chris Mullin, Sunderland South
Dan Norris, Wansdyke
Baroness Quin
Frank Roy, Motherwell and Wishaw
Alison Seabeck, Plymouth Devonport
Kitty Ussher, Burnley - The one who avoided £17,000 in capital gains tax
Claire Ward, Watford
Bob Wareing, Liverpool West Derby
Phil Woolas, Oldham East and Saddleworth
Derek Wyatt, Sittingbourne and Sheppey

Conservative
Michael Ancram, Devizes
John Baron, Billericay
Graham Brady, Altrincham and Sale West
Bill Cash, Stone
Christopher Chope, Christchurch
Sir Patrick Cormack, Staffordshire South
Philip Davies, Shipley
Roger Gale, North Thanet
Paul Goodman, Wycombe
James Gray, Wiltshire North
John Greendale, Ryedale
Douglas Hogg, Sleaford and North Hykeham - Yes, Mr Moat had the guts to appeal
Michael Howard, Folkestone and Hythe
Gerald Howarth, Aldershot
Bernard Jenkin, Essex North
Julie Kirkbride, Bromsgrove - Married to Andrew MacKay and both claimed the other as a second home, meaning neither had a main one
Jacqui Lait, Beckenham
Edward Leigh, Gainsborough
Julian Lewis, New Forest East
Ian Liddell-Grainger, Bridgwater
Peter Lilley, Hitchen and Harpenden
Andrew MacKay, Bracknell - See Julie Kirkbride
John Redwood, Wokingham
Richard Shepherd, Aldridge-Brownhills
Sir Michael Spicer, Worcestershire West
Anthony Steen, Totnes
Ed Vaizey, Wantage
Sir Peter Viggers, Gosport - Yes, the duck house man appealed
Ann Widdecombe, Maidstone and The Weald - Whiter than white, but not as tidy as her garden for which she feels is a Commons expense "The whole review has been capricious, illogical and I think he’s playing to the gallery"
Jeremy Wright, Rugby and Kenilworth

Liberal Democrat
Sir Alan Beith, Berwick-upon-Tweed
Jeremy Browne, Taunton
Lembit Öpik, Montgomeryshire - Claimed £2000 for repairing the floors in his house

Independent
Dai Davies, Blaenau Gwent

Universities raise standards - no shit Sherlock

This is from the Times whose journalist prowess I have doubted for a long time but this really is the final blow to the stupidity of the newspaper. From this article we have it that

Universities accused of raising A-level entry requirements because of a surge in applicants and severe government cuts

And what in the flying fuck did they think would happen as a result of the cuts? Everyone to get a free set of Gray's Anatomy, perhaps free accommodation for the length of their study? The mainstream media market for panaceas, pretentious expert-sounding jargon, decoration and redecoration of the devastatingly obvious, and rediscovery of ancient wisdom, will never decline. Hence, I suppose we should not really be surprised that the self-righteous are now pounding on the heads of those who are only too unfortunate enough of having been born at a time when their studies coincided with the worst government in the history of the United Kingdom of Great Britain. Bad luck chaps, my sympathy to you and your loved ones.

Conservative Policy - another one bites the dust

Cameron is quickly, very quickly, becoming the true heir to Blair delivering a policy manifesto which is to all intents and purposes complete and utter bollocks, useful to no one and useless to everyone. So far it includes

• climate change
• gay rights
• international development
• defence cuts
• increasing taxes.
• ring fenced the NHS budget

Very little is being mentioned on the EU, Immigration, ECHR or the economy (the economy in the sense or proposing something which might work, cutting the deficit is fine if you actually know how to).

So here is where the above issues stand

Climate change, turned out to be a fraud yet Greer than thou Cameron is making it a centrepiece of Tory policy

Gay rights are fine, but they are now instead discriminating against religious people who do not like gays. You might call them simple, but there are a couple of million of them so that probably is not advisable.

Ring fencing international development aid? Seriously wtf?

Defence cuts amid a bloody war, Monty would explode if he knew.

Increasing taxes - great vote winner.

Ring fence the NHS budget - yes lets ring fence the damn thing instead of actually trying to streamline the second largest employer in the world, cannot be any waste there now can it?

Fear

It looks like our Parliament is pretty fucked - great news indeed. I, like Mr. Burns (the Simpson) clasp my hands and grumble out in joy 'Excellent....' Now all we need to do is to find the bloody ancestor or reincarnation of Mr. Cromwell. I am sure he will turn up when he is most needed.

The comment hurts, because it is so true

This is a comment, from a reader, from an article over at the Times...

I, not being British, find it funny how people in the UK think they are a small player. You don't have an inkling as to what it is like being a small player. Britain may be going through rough times by its own standards and may not be a superpower but it is still a great power. In that role it still has a role to play. You would have thought that the people of the UK would realise the important role of power projection after the mistakes leading to the Falklands War.

Why are the British now so defeatist?

I cannot answer that, it certainly did not used to be like this, perhaps the PC/Complain-and-Blame society has something to do with it. The only thing I know is that the truth hurts - a lot. It is not easy to face the harsh reality when it could have been so easily avoided if men with honour had entered parliament instead of men who know not even the meaning of the word.

Defence debate - and they wonder why people are so pissed off

Today the great Minister Moron (a.k.a. Bob Ainsworth) delivered a Green Paper on defence. Mr. Ainsworth is as qualified for his job as is Mr. Pachauri of the IPCC (he is a railway engineer by the way) but this does not seem to matter to anyone in SW1 so whatever. Here is the attendance of the damn thing and they wonder why the flipping hell we are so peeved with them...

Of our elected representatives, all 646 of them, the attendance to hear and discuss the announcement was this much

---5%---

which is nothing short of fucking appalling. That there is an actual war going on, you know with guns and shit, people dying, bits of them flying here and there, that is of little importance. Changing the bloody election system, now that ladies and gentlemen, that is what we should be focusing on.

Failed State

Britain is a failed state. Why? Since the majority of voters now are public employees they will never again vote for a party that wishes to curtail their numbers. Why do you think Brown created so many non-jobs like Diversity and Outreach officers with 80K plus salaries and an army of subordinates if he didn't realize that people don't vote themselves out of comfortable jobs? The only problem is that 'diversity' and 'outreach' can't be sold abroad to balance our trade and so we have been living on tick for the last decade and a half. By this time next year following a Labour victory we can look forward to a prolonged visit from the IMF. Though precisely what they are going to do to us I am not sure, bar lending us money of course. We do not have any national industries left to sell of, no national companies which are not foreign owned, no natural resources no there really is nothing here that could enrich the IMF and their clientele if they were called in. Maybe they won't come - now that would be a first.

Anyhow I believe this is called snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. You would think that after 13 years of the most incompetent, corrupt and repressive government since 1216 — possibly earlier — that the main opposition party would merely have to affirm its core values, and show that it is different from the heap of vomit currently in power (e.g. on Europe, the environment, defence, the economy or pretty much any policy area) to win by a landslide. But Cameron has decided to play dumb and copy Mr Bean in all respects.

Employment Law...

TIMELINE

-2010

• National minimum wage increase
• Introduction of national minimum wage for apprentices will cover the whole of UK and provide £95 a week.
• Equality Bill

Will consolidate law into one statute and change law around disability, age discrimination, tribunals and gender pay reporting

• Right to request time off to train

Allows employees at larger firms time off to train along lines of flexible working

-2011

• Agency Workers Directive

All temporary workers will get equal rights to permanent staff after 12 weeks

• Dual Discrimination

The law will change to allow employees to make claims on two combined grounds, including age or religion

• National Insurance increase

Employer contributions will increase by a further 0.5%, on top of the 0.5% previously announced.

• Paternity Leave and pay

A shared system of leave will be introduced where if a mother goes back to work, the father can take up to six months off

• European Works Council Directive

All companies with more than 1,000 employees will have to set up a 'works council' - a shop-floor organisation for workers

-2012

• Pensions

Employers will have to set up and enrol staff in a qualifying pension scheme and pay a minimum 3% contribution

-2013

• Gender pay reporting

Firms with more than 250 employees will have to record and publish details of pay gap

Total Cost: £25bn

Interestingly enough these laws are part of what is known as the 'social chapter' of EU legislation. The one area which the Tories have actually "promised" to do anything at all about (scroll down to the bottom). I am quite sure that whatever happens they will do absolutely nothing to claw back power from Brussels in this area.

Addendum:

Please read below and you will find your swathes of knowledge increase like the bellies of the fat cats.

Thatchers government negotiated an opt-out from the Social Chapter of the Maastricht Treaty, since European employment directives damaged the flexibility of the UK labour market.

After their election victory in May 1997, Labour signed up to the Chapter with a transitional phase before the main laws of worker’s rights are full introduced into Britain.

One change to British law is the Working Hours Directive (first introduced by the EU in 1993). This guarantees workers the right to paid holidays; unpaid maternity and paternity leave; rest-breaks between shifts and a maximum working week of 48 hours.

• But this is the juicy stuff:
• Protection of rights of workers who move within the EU
• Fair pay for employment
• Improvement of conditions of employment (including working hours)
• Social Security provision for low income groups and unemployed
• Freedom of association and right to collective bargaining
• Vocational training
• Equal treatment for men and women
• Health and safety at work
• Employment opportunities for young people, the disabled and people over the age of compulsory retirement.

Now you know.

UK's allies; France - quoi?

Certain physical exercises have left me homebound on a school day much to my dismay. Alas the work will have to be done at home instead. No problemo. On a completely different note I would like to highlight this article produced in the Times which suggest that we should form stronger military relationships with France. I usually take the piss out the French, in good humour, and then people take the piss out of me for taking the piss out of the French ad infinitum. I would just like to highlight a comment from that article which explains precisely why I think that any form of military alliance with France displays a historical naivety of monstrous proportions. There is a reason why we have spent the past centuries submerged in mutual suspicion, that wont go away just because the world became a bit more connected.

In 1982 the French rushed to supply their Argentinian friends with Exocet missiles in order to get them into service in time for them to be used against our task force sent to liberate the Falklands.

Throughout the Cold War the French were quite happy for British troops in Germany to protect Western Europe whilst they refused to be a full member of NATO and made it clear that should the Russian's cross the Elbe they the French wouldn't get involved unless France itself was threatened.

In 1940 with less than a 1/5 of France occupied by the German's the French surrendered. Even though the British had landed 3 BEF in Western France and was rushing these troops to the front to replace those evacuated from Dunkirk and Calais. When France surrendered they wanted 3 BEF to also surrender and opposed moves to evacuate it from Normandy. They then spent the rest of the war collaborating with the German's, fighting British troops in Palestine/Syria, North Africa and the Indian Ocean.

In 1916 the French Armies mutinied and British troops had to hold the line from the North Sea to South of Verdun.

Allying ourselves is absolute madness. The French governments for the past 100 years have proved themselves untrustworthy in time of war.