Secret Service disruption of EU opposition!

Many euro-sceprics have long believed that the three mainpolitical parties haveing agreed on the desirability of Common Market membership for Britain later colluded to instruct inteeligence agents to thwart the activities of the political opponents of "ever greater union".

Some of these doubts again rose their heads yesterday with the republishing in The Spectator of one such early suggestion, an article by Norman Tebbit in 2001, read yesterday's posting with the quote from here.

Many of my blogs touch on these matters, and I have tweeted some of the links already this morning and will continue to do so as I find time during today, perhaps it may make some difference to peoples voting intentions tomorrow if they finally begin to get a feeling for how the three main parties have connived to create the disaster that is the EU today and Britain's unhappy great entanglement within it.

Those wishing to make their own research may find the following links helpful. Please email or tweet me if they do not work in the UK.

Teetering Tories

UKIP Uncovered

Veritas Straight Tal

Vote for Kilroy

Ironies

The Strasbourg Cesspit

As the Euro falls it is time for past PMs to be brought to account!

No area or aspect of the EU is free from waste, incompetence and all too often corruption!

There is no accountability within the EU. The accounts are passed unaudited. The commission is answerable to nobody. The Parliament merely funds the national political parties who have sold out their peoples' democracies and parliaments to the obscenity that is the EU, the fonctionaires become overfed and fat by constant dining out while awaiting their tax limited and similarly fat pensions, while every area of supposed competence, handed by the ex-nation states to this bloated institution, is ruined from neglect, incompetence and often corruption.

The Independent on Sunday, today runs a report on our fishless seas and the subsidies paid out to achieve this shameful outcome which has continued for years, thanks to the lies in Parliament of a former leader of the Conservative Party, whose policies are being continued to this day under David Cameron. The following is an excerpt from today's article:

Ariana Densham, a Greenpeace oceans campaigner, who led the nine-month report, described the system as "broken". "According to some estimates, up to 49 per cent of the global catch is illegal, unreported and unregulated, and this is one of the main reasons why our fisheries are in such rapid decline.

"The fact that in Europe this theft of fish is being subsidised by taxpayers' money, that we're paying pirates to steal our fish, destroy one of our oldest industries and devastate the marine environment, shows just how corrupted the CFP is," she said.

On 28th August 2003 I blogged about the EU's destruction of our North Sea Fisheries industry and cod, and suggested that Edward Heath be brought to account, linked here, from which the following is a quote:

This act of aggressive sabotage, made possible by the lie delivered in Parliament by the late Geoffrey Ripon and connived in by the silently seated Edward Heath at his side was believed by a gullible and betrayed House of Commons. It has taken just over thirty years.........shamefully thirty years during which British Ministers retained some responsibility for our seas and fisheries ..............unlike the situation prevailing today, as specifically agreed and concealed by lies to Parliament by the conservative administration of now ailing ex-Prime Minister Edward Heath.

With Heath having recently been flown back from Australia due to ill health, would it not be timely, sensible and a matter of the utmost urgency to now grant him immunity from the possibility of prosecution for his known treasonable actions. In exchange we should demand a detailed explanation of his motives and full details regarding his Continental co-conspirators and their possible next targets in the attempted destruction of our economy, so that we are able, while still just barely surviving as a nation state, to belatedly take some preventative measures to ensure that their schemes, rapidly reaching fruition with the pending Constitution, can at last be thwarted. 

Heath is now long dead, but the results of his treachery become clearer with every passing day. Every intervening Prime Minister, (with the possible exception of Margaret Thatcher who, with her foundation, has endeavoured to expose some detail of the EU conspiracy from her own time in office) should now, I suggest, be compelled to reveal (and their Cabinet Papers released) what part they played, whether knowingly or not, in the destruction of Britain's democracy, economy and precious constitution with its longstanding and ancient individual rights which it once protected.

Precedent cannot guide us over what means we can use in establishing how our nation and its former wealth has been handed over to foreigners. Never in history has there been such an audacious act of the most complete and utter treachery from a clutch of dedicated conspirators. All the evidence over many years, all the most expert economic advice, argued against these political acts made over many decades. We must learn how all this came to pass and who were the main culprits, if we are to begin to to try to set matters to rights and recover both our common law rights and self-government.

Is the EU Parliament covering up for Chris Huhne MP?

Any person who at anytime is occupied (I will not say works, for that implies something useful or productive is being achieved), in and around the European Union, is then compelled to become an agent for that organisation on pain of losing the effectively tax free and obscenely high pension rights they have accrued.

It follows that the EU, thus having their money grubbing agents installed in all the national institutions of governance and power all across the Continent, becomes reluctant to see such agents fall from grace or lose their posts, particularly if they carry such importance as UK Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change. The present holder of that office, Chris Huhne, was interviewed by the police yesterday, regarding his location at a particular time and place. A report is in the Daily Mail this morning, linked here.

Step forward the EU to protect their agent! According to the blog England Expects, linked here, the attendance records covering the period concerned have been removed for Chris Huhne MEP, but remain available for other years. Well, well! All agents are in a position to obtain extra favours, once their controlling power sees them established in a position of power, how else will they continue to function to fulfil their main purpose of overthrowing the status quo to replace it with foreign control?

One must wonder what Huhne's Party Leader, fellow MEP from those days and now Deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg can be receiving for delivering the Conservative side of the Coalition Government, gagged and bound for the EU to do with as it wishes?

EU Council President Van Rompuy admits decades of lies on the Euro!

Reports of this long overdue confession, detailed in the headline to this posting, from an EU official may be read here and here but hardly anywhere else! Yesterday morning, my first posting of the day linked to Open Europe research on the various lies told by the EU down the years on the euro currency. This blogger, on various blogs, has posted daily on the various lies and the resultant corruption that now disfigures both the EU Institutions and National Institutions which by association with EU malpractice and corruption, have themselves become contaminated all across our Continent. Much of my own postings before I began blogging are unobtainable from the archives of both the EU itself and other forum such as those of the Financial Times which debated very fully the implications of the Euro and the encroachments of the EU upon our society. One posting I made on the FT Forum "Britain and the Euro Dilemma" seems worth quoting in view of Van Rompuy's startling admission. It was posted on 9th June 2003 as follows: +++++ Joining the Euro is a further giant step towards becoming entrapped in the EU as it exists tday, and worse far worse, as it is set to become as set out in the European Convention .(Now enacted as the Lisbon Treaty blog editors comment added 28/5/10). There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that I can either see, nor that any EU enthusiast has yet been able to detail for me, that is either good, worthwhile, decent, honourable let alone democratic about the European Union. It has achieved nothing, its supporters' claims that it brought peace to the Continent are now so thoroughly disproved that even Romano Prodi has ceased making them. Its sole achievement is the self-enrichment of its politicians and its bureaucrats. Its worst drawback the corruption of national poltical institutions by association. (Emphasis added by blog editor 28/5/2010) Britain has no place in this institution. Holding back from the Euro holds out some last remaining hope for our Nation, and the values for which it once stood. +++++ Does not President Van Rompuy's astounding admission (plus its apparent lack of any suggestion of an apology), the absence of any mainstream coverage in the UK media, not now fully prove this assertion at the centre of my posting made almost seven years ago: There is nothing, absolutely nothing, that I can either see, nor that any EU enthusiast has yet been able to detail for me, that is either good, worthwhile, decent, honourable let alone democratic about the European Union. Are not the Expenses Scandal and our new Coalition Government themselves not symbols of this long forecast associated corruption of our own Parliament?

Britain's Constitutional Crisis.

Six years ago as the first details of the EU draft constitution began to appear it was even more obvious to me than ever that a huge democracy destroying tsunami was about to engulf Britain. From the summer of 2003 I started posting these concerns on my blog Ironies. I have been planning to repeat some of those postings on this blog as the daily six year anniversaries come around. In preparing which might still be pertinent and which irrelevant, which links still work and which do not etc., it has struck me how deep the conspiracy against the British people has gone and how this is the factor for which we should today hold 'our' MPs most culpable. Any reader may find all the original postings in the archives of the Ironies blog, but ahead of the first look-back entry I am going to quote in full this insightful observation, so apt in today's crisis, that appeared on an American blog USS Clueless, which sums up our continuing democratic crisis very precisely. I linked to this on 26 May 2003 and I will be repeating that whole post here on that anniversary but not this link. I have placed in bold what seems to me particularly significant: For an American like me, who is used to having an explicit Constitution which clearly spells out the powers of government and the limitations on it and the procedures it must use in various kinds of activities, the British system has always seemed deeply worrying. Many of our rights are explicitly spelled out either in the Constitution or in critical Amendments which were ratified later, most particularly our right of free speech, free press and free assembly.

But the British have no such charter. The people of the UK have nearly as much liberty as we do, but it's always seemed more perilous. They have free speech, free press, free assembly, but they could lose it if Parliament passed certain laws. And indeed, there have been times when the press in the UK were subject to significant limits which would not be Constitutionally possible in the US.

The UK has now reached the point where it needs to make two critical decisions: whether to ditch Sterling and use the Euro for money, and whether to join the proposed United States of Europe and place itself under the new European Constitution.

If the US were considering such things, it's extremely clear what would be needed: constitutional amendments. If there were, for instance, a proposal to form some sort of Pan-American Union (with government in Brasilia) and the United States were considering whether to give up its sovereignty and to become part of a larger hemispheric meta-nation, then Congress and the President could not carry out such a thing merely by passing laws. They'd have to pass an amendment and propose it to the state legislatures, and three quarters of them would have to ratify it.

And that is as it should be. For a decision that big, that important, that critical, it should not be left to a small number of leaders to decide. We cannot permit 536 people to end the history of our nation. The real debate about it would take place in the individual states, where the state legislators are far closer to and more attuned to the opinions of individual voters. In a decision this momentous, the decision ultimately must be made by the voters themselves. There would not be any kind of national referendum about it as such; there's no constitutional provision for such a thing. But as a practical matter, the legislatures would express the will of the people of their states. That's always been the case in the amendment process.

And as a practical matter, there's not a snowball's chance in hell of such an amendment actually being ratified.

There's been continuity of government in the UK for a long time. How far back, exactly, it goes depends a lot on what you mean by "continuity". For example, some might claim it goes back to the Norman Conquest. Some might place it at the Magna Carta. Others who were less generous would point out that it would have to begin after the end of Cromwell's period. Indeed, it's arguable that the current form of government really only begins with Queen Victoria, because that's when the monarchs of the UK ceased to actually wield significant temporal power.

Likewise, who exactly would have been considered "British" varies at different times. The Welsh were pretty much conquered and integrated by the 15th century. The Scots, on the other hand, took a lot longer, and indeed maintain a degree of separation even today. For a long time the Irish were part of it, but never accepted that and ended up becoming independent again. Still, there was a feeling amongst the islanders that even with their mutual differences, they were apart from those grubby people on the Continent.

Now they're considering giving it all up, and Tony Blair wants to do the deed of ending hundreds of years of British independence and sovereignty with a procedure approximately the same as he would use to pass a traffic law: via an act of Parliament.

It's not going too far to say that this is the most mementous decision to face the English (and the rest of the British) since the Civil War, when Parliament made the deliberate decision to oppose their own monarch. In a sense, it's even greater than that one. The British are seriously considering giving up their independence and yielding the bulk of governmental power and control to a foreign capitol which will be dominated by people from other nations, who will have the constitutional power to impose laws and policies and regulations on the British even if the people of the former UK strongly disagree with them.

Former Prime Minister John Major writes in The Spectator that a decision this big cannot be made solely by Parliament, or even worse, by the Cabinet. I think that from a moral perspective he's right: this must be a decision which the people of the UK directly participate in. But under the British non-system, where the power of the government is whatever Parliament says it is, it is actually possible for Blair to terminate British independence and submit to foreign rule without any kind of extraordinary action.

In fact, if the decision were submitted to a plebiscite, right now the best guess is that it would be defeated. And indeed that seems to be Blair's primary reason for not wanting to submit it to such a referendum: the voters would get the wrong answer.

Which brings up another deep difference between them and us: we think of our elected representatives as leading us. They think of theirs as ruling them. Our representatives are expected to implement programs and policies which the majority of us would support; they think of their representatives as making decisions without really paying much attention to what the voters would want. Blair thinks that integration with Europe is important, and doesn't intend to let the fact that the majority of British voters disagree stand in his way.

This is not good, and on one level the difficulty that the British are facing in this situation is that they actually have no formal constitutional basis for making the meta-decision about just kind of political process would have to be used for a decision this big. In the US it would require an amendment, using the procedure for ratifying an amendment which we already know and understand; that aspect of it wouldn't even be controversial.

But in the UK now they're not only debating the question of whether they should ratify and become subject to the proposed European Constitution, but also debating the question of how they're even going to formally make that decision. And that's scary: it's actually a distinct possibility that a few hundred elected leaders might give away the nation, and voluntarily submit it to foreign rule.

Remember, this was linked from my blog six whole years ago and yet our foul and corrupt MPs just carried on fiddling their expenses and acting as if nothing was happening. Give away a nation, the author says in his last paragraph, written six years ago, that is what they have tried and almost now succeeded - scarier still - we have let them and allowed them to rob us and get rich in the process! Remember, many of us knew, blogged daily of the danger, tried to start new parties to tell the truth and were sabotaged by, among others, the BBC, acting as an agent of the filthy, treacherous, governing classes on the promise of a huge licence fee increase. Everything in Britain, including you, has been sold out by these people, do not believe for one moment it begins and ends with a few expense fiddles!

The corrupt conspiracy of the EU reaps its rewards amongst Britain's electors

Two stark facts from an opinion poll published in The Mail this morning: Seven out of ten people are so angered by Brussels rules that they want the Government to start breaking them.

And a huge majority - 60 per cent to 30 per cent - believe Britain should refuse to pay any fines imposed for their disobedience.

Read the full survey from this link. Ripe for revolt is the title for the article chosen by the newspaper, but no such revolt is necessary. There are anti-EU parties standing in the European Elections on 4th June which cover a huge range of diverse secondary views - get out and vote for them and then watch on as the treacherous MP Maggots in Westminster clamber to climb on board the anti-EU bandwagon which looks finally likely to become unstoppable!

Daniel Cohn-Bendit MEP - an archetypical man of the EU

The Irish Times this morning, linked here, devotes an article to the dual nationality, former revolutionary "Dany le Rouge", who very recently was considered by many to have been overly offensive, read here, to the Czech President, Vaclav Klaus in Prague, a quote from the paper's article:

Cohn-Bendit accuses Barroso of scheming to get himself reappointed in July, because he knows he will face stronger opposition if the appointment is left until the new commission is formed in the autumn. Britain, Spain and Portugal support his reappointment.

The longer it is delayed, the better the chances of a strong candidate emerging, says Cohn-Bendit. “The green candidate is me.” He holds dual German and French nationality, and has served as a German or French MEP for the past 15 years.

I will not repeat here the detail provided by Mary Ellen Synon in her blog of 1st April this year on the Daily Mail web page linked here, titled "Dany le zip" which describes this man's apparently proud admission of sexually molesting children back in 1975 revealed in a recent debate with Declan Ganley, but I do wonder why a newspaper as respected as The Irish Times would provide this publicity to such man so soon after such publicity? Looking at my previously linked report on the events in Prague Castle last December, one must also wonder why Hans-Gert Pöttering, European Parliament President and other EU notables would choose to be associated with such a man and associate themselves with either his past or his personalised attacks? 400 million EU Citizens should note this June the nature of those so dedicated to attacking Declan Ganley and Libertas!

The conspiracy further described

Bruno Waterfield's blog on the Telegraph site is becoming almost as good as the real thing! The following is the concluding paragraph of a letter he leaks, but the entire posting is worth reading in full and his so-called blog worth visiting on a regular basis. “It would therefore appear highly advisable that any document concerning the implementation of the Treaty of Lisbon which examines politically sensitive matters be examined only when it becomes sufficiently clear that the treaty will enter into force.” Doubt precious doubt!!!!!!