Wednesday, November 30, 2005

Blair's next betrayal

Blair and Straw are preparing to abandon Britain's rebate according to a report in the Daily Telegraph linked here. This would be an extraordinary coup for the supposedly fatally wounded and ineffective French President Chirac.

Saturday, November 26, 2005

EU vs Commonwealth

Click here to read a report from Reuters on the Malta meeting of Commonwealth members ............ then imagine what a role in the world Britain might have to play were it not for its continued membership in the ever more corrupt, increasingly repressive and daily more clearly economically failing European Union!

Friday, November 25, 2005

Impeaching Blair

The following is the latest news from the organisation attempting to bring the Prime Minister to account on one matter: Quote A cross-party motion has now been tabled in Parliament to set up a Select Committee to investigate the conduct of the Government's policy in going to war in Iraq. The names appearing on the Early Day Motion include Alan Simpson (Labour), Kenneth Clarke and Douglas Hogg (Conservatives), Menzies Campbell (Liberal Democrats), Alex Salmond (SNP) and Elfyn Llwyd (Plaid Cymru). Speaking at Westminster Plaid Cymru MP Adam Price, who drafted the motion, said: "Too many questions remain unanswered about the way we were taken to war in Iraq, and we demand to have them answered. Neither the Hutton nor the Butler Inquiries addressed the central question - were the Parliament and country misled? Therefore it is essential that a committee is set up to investigate the matter thoroughly. If we do not restore proper accountability to the Government, it will corrupt our whole society by providing evidence that allows our enemies to call our democracy a sham." The Early Day Motion reads: "Conduct of Government Policy in relation to the war against Iraq" "That this House believes that there should be a select committee of 7 Members, being members of her Majesty's Privy Council, to review the way in which the responsibilities of Government were discharged in relation to Iraq and all matters relevant thereto, in the period leading up to military action in that country in March 2003 and in its aftermath." Please encourage your local MP to sign this EDM, and thank you for continuing support. Unquote

Sunday, November 20, 2005

ID Cards, Blair and Boorishness

The Michael Portillo column in today's Sunday Times is well worth reading for the clear and long-obvious points it makes on both ID Cards and Tony Blair and is linked from here. More interestingly it raises in my mind a question as to why the writer chose to disguise for so long his now obvious intelligence behind the camouflage of so much earlier boorishness?????? Camouflage for what? Camouflage or what? Certainly Portillo's column seems to put him head and shoulders above the present leadership candidates for perception, policy and presentation yet I previously opposed his leadership candidacy based upon his discourtesies and attitude as Defence Minister, perhaps absence from active politics restores a sense of reality....whatever it may be .... nevertheless.... ....Well Said!!

Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Bill of Rights

<>The final paragraph from the Notice quoted below states the following: "Government-sponsored attempts to pervert our system of justice; to take our money out of our pockets and to turn this country into a dictatorship controlled by people who simply do not know how to tell the truth - are to be brought face to face with the open resistance of a pensioner and your support is required."

Notice of Event: Bill of Rights Hearing in Worcester

Fownes Hotel, Worcester

Robin Decrittenden vs. Worcester City Council

Appeal No. WC 49.

18th November 2005 11am

"£1,000,000,000 a year revenue from Parking Fines under threat"

This notice is to all supporters, contacts and interested parties and is to inform you that on 18th November 2005 at 11am at the Fownes Hotel in Worcester a National Parking Adjudication Service hearing is to take place between Robin Decrittenden and Worcester City Council.

The hearing will be the first public airing of the use of the Bill of Rights Defence against a Penalty Charge Notice issued, in this instance, under Worcester City Council's decriminalised parking enforcement regime.

The hearing is open to the public and any interested parties are requested to attend the venue. A large public room has been reserved for the hearing.

The potential of the case is that it could expose the Government and Local Authorities operating decriminalised parking enforcement regimes as acting unlawfully. The consequence could be that they have no legal authority to impose 'fines' thereby threatening a massive source of revenue which is now approaching £1,000,000,000 per annum!

Please no banners, placards or flags. Please circulate amongst your contacts and organisation.

Robin Decrittenden states,"The purpose of this challenge is to put the politicians back in their kennels by requiring them to obey the law that regulates Parliament itself."

Metric Martyrs Campaign Director, Neil Herron states, "This is the first head on conflict exposing the highly suspect Metric Martyrs Judgment. If the Judgment is correct then decriminalised parking fines cannot be levied. Alternatively, the Metric Martyrs were convicted and are innocent."



Neil Herron 0191 565 7143 mob. 07776 202045

Robin Decrittenden 01902 417 045

More information to be posted at and

Latest News here

Venue is 'Fownes Hotel', City Walls Road, Worcester (telephone number 01905-613151) and the time is 11.00 am. To view a map of the hotel and the nearest train station click here

Overview of the Case:

1. The Declaration and Bill of Rights (1688/89) provide the very particular legal requirement that fines and forfeitures can be imposed on individual people only after conviction – and any conviction requires the full involvement of a Court of Law.

The Declaration & Bill of Rights do not recognize any difference between Civil and Criminal matters: The rules apply to both parts of the law.

2. The Judgment given in the Metric Martyrs Case of 2002 provides that the terms of the Bill of Rights may not be changed or removed by anything other than very specific wording - and that all/any such wording must be contained within the text of any later legislation.

3. The Road Traffic Act of 1991 attempts to assert that Courts of Law are not required to consider questions relating to the Parking Fines that are now being imposed by local authorities which have decided to join themselves to a Government-sponsored scheme that is known as ‘de-criminalised parking’.

The Road Traffic Act of 1991 has not changed or removed the provisions of the Bill of Rights, in accordance with the terms of the Judgment provided in the Metric Martyrs Case, and as a consequence the law says that the Road Traffic Act of 1991 is not a law at all.

4. Under the provisions of ‘de-criminalised parking’ motorists are now being required to take their parking-ticket appeals to the authority that actually issued the ticket – and then on to an allegedly independent Parking Adjudication Service that is known as NPAS.

5. NPAS receives all of its funding from the local authorities which are issuing the tickets that are being appealed and funding is provided to NPAS at the rate of 60 pence per parking-ticket issued. It is obvious that it must be in the interests of NPAS to make quite sure that the paying Councils are given full support during all processes of dealing with the appeals that are made by members of the public.

The ‘system’ itself provides that there can be no true independence within the work of NPAS, because the existence of NPAS is absolutely dependent on the goodwill of the local authorities which are paying the wages of the NPAS staff.

There is no provision made for the work of NPAS to be scrutinized by any outside body, and the NPAS failure to control the unlawful activities of the local Councils that have joined the scheme becomes increasingly apparent.

In Sunderland and the North-East alone, millions of pounds are now due to be refunded to members of the public, because of Council failures to keep to the rules – and it is VERY significant that not one of these Council failures has been exposed by NPAS!

6. On 18th November, 2005, at 11.00 am, an NPAS tribunal sitting at Fownes Hotel in Worcester will hear Appeal No. WC 49.

This Appeal is based entirely upon a direct challenge to the legality of the Road Traffic Act of 1991, when measured against the very specific legal requirements of the Declaration & Bill of Rights.

7. Government-sponsored attempts to pervert our system of justice; to take our money out of our pockets and to turn this country into a dictatorship controlled by people who simply do not know how to tell the truth - are to be brought face to face with the open resistance of a pensioner and your support is required –

Robin Decrittenden

Terrorism's triumphs!

What can be made of the horrifying report in today's Daily Telegraph that the innocent Brazilian gunned down on a London tube train was shot in the head with Dum Dum style bullets first prohibited for use in warfare in 1899. The article is linked from here. What does it say of the calibre and characters of both Blairs' involved Prime Minister and Metropolitan Police Commissioner. Coming on top of the reports of US use of 'white phosphorous' in Fallujah (report linked from here) and the ongoing disgrace at Guantanamo the shame of this abandonment of western civilized values does not just condemn the present leaders of the two main English speaking nations George W Bush and Tony Blair, but recalling that both these leaders stood for and won re-election, it should really shames us all.

Sunday, November 13, 2005

Police peril

Even the Sunday Times columnist Simon Jenkins now sees the grave peril of tyranny in which the country stands. While between the lines admitting that the danger clearly arises from the EU imposed appointed Regional Assemblies as a front for centralised authority he hesitates to go the full distance by pointing this out to his readers. His column in this morning's paper may be read from this link with the most important point to my mind being within this passage: Regionalism is now code for central government, be it hospitals, economic development, housing targets, planning policy and doubtless soon education. Power taken from democratic institutions and given to appointed ones is power concentrated. Anyone who has been interviewed and box-ticked for quango service will know what this means. Nationalisation is what it says: ownership and regulation by agents of the state. Readers of this blog will not need to have pointed out the true facts namely, that the apponted regional quangoes are in fact controlled from Brussels albeit if presently via the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister. Strange Mr Jenkins so carefully skirted that point!

Tuesday, November 08, 2005

The Eu's principle powers!

The French Cabinet has declared a State of Emergency, report here. The translation of an article from yesterday's Le Monde is worth reading for a different slant from other reports on the position of Nicolas Sarkozy. It may be read from this link to Monsters and Critics Reuters Alert makes some interesting points on Chirac's silence and earlier posturing, it may be read by clicking here. Also of huge concernfor the EU is the situation in Germany, superbly covered by John Vinocur in today's IHT which may be read in the paper or if an online sunscriber from here.

Thursday, November 03, 2005

Rabidly pro-EU FT Editor's shock resignation!

Another falling tile from the supposedly weatherproof EU protective structure is revealed tonight in this report from Reuters linked here. Can the FT ever be trusted as impartial again? Also the recently hyper-pro-Blair Economist has Bagehot striking a somewhat sourer note as may be read by clicking here......... Can we expect intelligent comment and independent exchange of ideas to sometime soon return to the supposed well-informed mainstream media? Don't hold your breath!!!!

Roy Hattersley calls for Blair to go!

I found this comment in The Times quite startling, if only for this very strong conclusion: There was a time when I would have rejoiced to see the Prime Minister make an obeisance to Labour’s most cherished ideas. But not now. It is too late — too late for him to thrash about with more hastily composed reforms and too late to ingratiate himself with party and public. The time has come for a new start. Otherwise the disintegration will result in total collapse.

Wednesday, November 02, 2005

Blair's pathetic EU Presidency performance

A column by Philip Bowring from Hong Kong titled 'Europe's self-sabotage on trade' in today's International Herald Tribune does a pretty good job in summing up a few of the EU's problems. It may be read in full by clicking here, but these are a few brief quotes: "....takes us straight back to that French-German stitch-up in 2003. The EU is now effectively telling the world that the talks since June 2003 have been a charade, as everything to do with farm tariffs was decided in Brussels in 2003. The arrogance is stunning." ".......But the rest of the world has noted that self-defensive, defeatist attitudes are on the rise in Europe, as witnessed by such diverse issues as the entry of Turkey, the rejection of the EU constitution and the results of recent Polish and German elections.
The immediate danger is to a wider world that needs the Hong Kong meeting to take place and Doha to bring agriculture and the new trade players into the heart of the WTO system. In the longer run, however, the EU's inability to negotiate effectively with the world will simply be a signal of the declining relevance of an aging continent whose arrogance is a transparent mask for fear." Tony Blair is supposedly presently heading the EU although he has accomplished nothing during the first four months of his leadership. With two months remaining and his own henchman as Trade Commissioner and his oft stated concern for the people of the third world - surely he is in a position to at least try to achieve something? Too busy concerning himself with yet another second resignation of a close but disgraced ministerial ally perhaps, will an EU Commission spot now be the next career stop for David Blunkett?

Tuesday, November 01, 2005

German chaos continues - EU's abyss approaches

A report in the FT, linked from here , brings the latest on the political crisis in the EU's major ex-state. No comment!

Cameron, Davis, the EPP and the EU

This blog has earlier made clear its strong doubts as to the suitability of Conservative Party leadership candidate David Cameron and in particular the depth and sincerity of his supposed euroscepticism. In the past few days it has been reported that he has been gathering so-called right wing eurosceptic support based on pledges regarding withdrawing the party from the EPP group in the European Parliament something this and my other blogs have repeatedly urged. (Some of the names mentioned should be checked against the information as to their position on the EU at the last election as reported on the results page of the British Declaration of Independence website linked here.) An item in today's The Times covers this topic and may be read from here. Conservative party members with the final say over the next leader are now faced with a very real choice and a real dilemma. Only a full and detailed explanation of each candidates' plans regarding the EU, Britain's place within or outside it and the exact strategy for achieving those ends both in government and opposition will now allow a well-informed vote to be cast by party members on the real number one question today facing the nation. One major question for each contender I would suggest might be the following: Is David Cameron proposing the Conservative Party will immediately join the group in the European Parliament which presently includes UKIP, or will he try and tempt UKIP away from the more extremist members of that present grouping or does he consider UKIP itself to be extreme? David Davis owes the conservative party members a fuller explanation of his activities and views at the time of the Maastricht vote and a detailed summary of how they have evolved since that time.