WELCOME

Hi,
The aim of this blog is to accrue information that may be of help to you & links to other sites I have found of help, including sites run or managed by friends and associates.
Do send me a message of anything you feel would help.
Regards, Greg L-W.
Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

Saturday, 25 July 2009

G154* - Henry John "Harry" Patch (17 June 1898 – 25 July 2009)

Henry John "Harry" Patch (17 June 1898 – 25 July 2009)

Bill Stone, 109, Harry Patch, 111, Henry Allingham, 113,



Bill Stone: 23-Sep-1900 - 10-Jan-2009 (108)
Ned Hughes: 12-Jun-1900 - 4-Apr-2009 (108)
Jack Ross: 11-Mar-1899 - 3-Jun-2009 (110)
Henry Allingham: 6-Jun-1896 - 18-Jul-2009
Harry Patch: 17-Jun-1898 – 25-Jul-2009

Let us remember that these are the last link we have with that great war for our liberty and the huge sacrifice made by our peoples to prevent vassal status in a centralised EUropean supra national and militaristic soviet or as Barrosso prefers to call it in its latest vile emergence an Empire!

These five old gentlemen died in the 90th. year of the peace their generation bought with their lives and their youth - with their deaths recorded in 2009 - 4 Brits and the last of 'The Diggers' Jack Ross who died in Australia.

However let us remember that although Henry Allingham served at Jutland Harry Patch was the only one who served in the front line where he was unfortunate enough to be in time for what the Tommies called Wypers3, the Paschendale campaign where in the battle of 12-Oct-1917 13,000 Allied troops died so they had another go on the 22-Oct-1917 - part of a learning curve?

My connection with that war is very clear both the recollection of its aftermath from both my parents born in 1921, but more so from my Aunt who I see avery other week in the same home as my Mother, she was born in 1915 and has vague memories of the end of Armistice Day.

The photo below is of Jim Watkins 02-Jul-1884 - 01-Jan-1973 one of THE Old Contemptibles who left his young wife Daisy and son Ken (1914 - 1977) certain they would be back by Christmas having ensured a better world, without the vile concept of a Militarised, centralised, undemocratic supra national Super State.

Little did they realise the horrors he would experience as over 1,000,000 British soldiers died! The losses at The Somme were the most in a single day in warfare EVER, and I KNOW the horrors of digging trenches through the rotten meat and entrails of both horses and your commrades lived with him to the end of his life - waking him in tears many nights each week. Well I remember my own Father's nightmares that tended to come about once a week, as he recalled the maggots on the bodies of The German Army in The Fallais Box, or driving a bulldozer at Bergen Belsen at only 24 whilst trying to list and help those still living between flying with 350sqdr. Spitfires from Anson strips to bring an end to the war!

Father's speciality was low flying into the guns in railway cuttings and 'chucking' his hand release bombs up the tunnel with a train in it as you pulled up at the last moment to climb out with your underside being straffed (they were young me so in fear of emasculation they used to put a sheet of 1/4" steel under the cushion on the seat)!

My Grandfather came home in 1920, via Afghanistan, The North West Frontier, The Plains of India and Dullali, a very changed man but still he struggled in duty to a long and devoted marriage and had two more sons, including my Father.

Des 08-Nov-1921 - 06-Sep-2003 and his elder brother both served in the next war against a EUropean union being forced upon us. Ken in REME where he served in tank recovery with the 8th. Army in North Africa and then up through Italy unfortunately in time to serve at The Battle of The Reichwald Forest. My Father's war service was as a fighter pilot.

After surviving the horrors of the First World War one must be astonished at the bravery of a man who can out of patriotic duty, with equanimity, watch his sons go to war.

I make no apology for my pride in their sacrifices and courage - well I remember the many many hours I spent with my Grandfather telling me tales of the almost 90 years of experience from his clear memories of Victoria and his war, his silent determined efforts to pass on his abiding love for his Country which so many of their generation gave a life for and all of them gave their innocence and youth.

How does one keep one's mind when standing infested with lice, frequently soddened, always damp, permanently scared, always hungry - unbathed for months desutorally watching the rats feed on the bodies of those who had already died. Month in month out - when at The Somme 1.5Million died and to say 'under your nose' speaks redollently of the stench of decomposing body parts in the mud.

At The Somme on 1-Jul-1916 the British suffered 57,470 casualties, including 19,240 dead - the bloodiest day in the history of the British Army!

Nowadays we have daily reports and so far this month 20 volunteer soldiers have died and in all the time we have inflicted this obscene war on The Afghans our losses are 180 or put another way for every soldier who has died in Afghanistan over 106 died on 1-Jul-1916 - IN ONE DAY!

That was NOT a politically correct war founded on deliberate lies of politicians for their own vain glory - WWI & WWII were very real wars to defend Europe against the obscene concept of a EU Empire.

Some perspective as we see the Politicians watching as their personal aims of self enrichment via exploitation of the dreams of Bohemian Grove and the vile concept of The EU as a Super State bereft of justice, liberty, democracy, freedom and self determination are worthy of note!

We note the dishonesty of the attempts to destroy life and extort taxes to feed their habits of greed and profligacy like out of control drug addicts as they pour OUR money into the persuit of THEIR dreams and our nightmares - not so very different to The Troops going to the front bleating as sheep as they were marched past Marshall Petain (Mitterand's vile hero!) who ordered the French Guard not only to implement a 'Decimation' shooting every 10th. French soldier and then The French Guard was given orders to stand behind the French lines ansd shoot any soldier who 'turned', did not join the charge or quit!

To keep us on our metal and ensure we are scared of something, to keep us facing forward whilst they empty our pockets the Politicians have invented new false gods and we have the new religion of Anthropomorphised Global Warming & Climate Change - which like most religions is dependent on prophets and sooth sayers in return for gross funding but for which there is not a shred of plausible evidence.

Endlessly they invent lesser gods of fear - consider, world famine and ice ages of my childhood, over population and atom bombs of my teens etc. etc.

Now since Bird Flu became something of a joke they are doing all they can to trump up Swine Flu as the great fear! Do they expect 19,240 deaths and 57,470 maimed for life any day shortly from Swine Flu - they were happy to see such casualties in WWI. Do they believe we should be much frit of Swine Flu when it seems that each year we tend to have an outbreak of flu, and it is noted that roughly one in every 1,000 who get the virus will die.

It seems that Swine Flu has failed the politicians as it is more mild than most flu viruses since it only kills 1 in 4,000 or so Government statistics show us!

Harry Patch - the last fighting Tommy who long outlived all others who served on The Western Front and can probably thank his injury, albeit it was operated on without anaesthetic, for his life! Harry Patch echoed the words of my Grandfather when he stated 'war is just organised murder' - my Grandfather used to say 'War is the failure of politicians leading to badly misorganised murder and the workers pay for it with their lives'.

A hugely dignified man, immensly powerful and infinitely gentle both in personality and as he gently cultivated his huge Council House garden that fed his family before the war! Yet his greatest pride were his 3 sons' achievements and I believe my education and travel!

I remember being very hurt that he never did wear the pyjamas I gave him for his birthday one year and it was not until after he died that I was told he kept them wrapped and new - determined to be buried in them! Such simple things from a man whose friends mostly died blown to bits or rotting!

And some people astonishingly can not understand why I am so utterly opposed to membership of The EUropean Empire my family has done all it can to oppose over generations.

May they rest in peace but never be forgotten.

It was on this day 11 years ago that Lee's Father died, largely due to the injuries he received in a mindless attack, in his own home, by an unemployed black in anger at the failure of politicians and due to the pressures of a police state. He died of the struggle to recover from the broken bones, bite wounds and blood loss injuries from which he had never really recovered. He is remembered.



"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap."
Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821),

Regards,
Greg L-W.

for all my contact details & Blogs:
CLICK HERE

For More Information & Facts visit:
WEB SITES:
SilentMajority/
WelshAssembly
CatterpillarsAndButterflies
Greg's WordPress Blog

‘The arrogance and hubris of corrupt politicians
will be responsible for every drop of blood spilt
in the Wars of Disassociation, if Britain does not
leave the EU.

The ugly, centralised, undemocratic supra national policies being imposed by the centralised and largely unelected decisionmakers of The EU for alien aims, ailien values and to suit alien needs stand every possibility of creating 200,000,000 deaths across EUrope as a result of the blind arrogance and hubris of the idiologues in the central dictatorship, and their economic illiteracy marching hand in glove with the idiocy of The CAP & The CFP - both policies which deliver bills, destroy lives and denude food stocks.

The EU, due to the political idiocy and corruption of its undemocratic leaders, is now a net importer of food, no longer able to feed itself and with a decreasing range of over priced goods of little use to the rest of the world to sell with which to counter the net financial drain of endless imports.

British Politicians with pens and treachery, in pursuit
of their own agenda and greed, have done more
damage to the liberty, freedoms, rights and democracy
of the British peoples than any army in over 1,000 years.


The disastrous effects of British politicians selling Britain
into the thrall of foreign rule by the EU for their own
personal rewards has damaged the well-being of Britain
more than the armies of Hitler
and the Franco - German - Italian axis of 1939 - 1945.

~ for more Quotes & Facts:
http://www.silentmajority.co.uk/

############-\\\///-########### #
############= ~ = ############
###########(`~0~0~') ###########
--------oooO--------(_)-------Oooo---------
############Regards############
##########M r C H A D###########

Until we gain our liberty, restore our sovereignty, repatriate our democracy and reinstate our Justice system and our borders - defended by our Police and Military armed with sustainable and obtainable weaponry:
Treat every election as a referendum.

Don't waste your vote on a self serving Politician in ANY election until we are liberated from the EU and are a Free Sovereign peoples, with independent control of our own borders, making and managing Law & Justice for our own benefit, in our own elected Westminster Parliament where we can fire our politicians at the ballot box, if they fail to represent OUR best interests.
Make your vote count
Write on YOUR ballot Paper

LEAVE THE EU

#G153* - The LISBON TREATY NOW + Qs & As

#G153* - The LISBON TREATY NOW + Qs & As

THE NEW CONSTITUTION LISBON TREATY as at NOW & many of The Questions, Answers, Fears & Idiocies!

with unequivocal thanks to Jim McConalogue on Conservative Home for having inspired the comments with his placement - comments that not only raise many Questions but also provide a number of Answers!

A new Conservative policy on the Lisbon Treaty?

The European Scrutiny Committee has effectively backed 88% of the British people who wanted a say on the Lisbon Treaty and who have questioned, on grounds of democracy and law, how the Lisbon Treaty could ever have been enforced in this country without their consent. How can Britain now sign up to the Treaty, via Westminster’s hastily passed Bill, if that Treaty is to incorporate the ‘Irish Decision’ (guarantees made to the Irish), and the parliamentary Act that has passed the Treaty is now nonsense.

The British Government are wrong to claim that the Irish Decision on the Lisbon Treaty is legally binding, so it is a good to see that a parliamentary committee – the European Scrutiny Committee – is asking for a response on how this is all possible. View this page and this one. There is therefore good reason for the Conservatives to adopt this as part of their policy – we are in a new stage and a new policy is required.

Since the Foreign Secretary has made various claims, relating to the points of the Irish Decision not being an instruction to the European Court of Justice yet at the same time a “legal guarantee” (?) and that the Decision will come into effect in UK law without even being incorporated into our own legislation (?), his arguments have been found to be hollow at every point. The letter from the Scrutiny Committee puts, quite succinctly, seven points showing that the Irish Decision is certainly not part and parcel of the Treaty and needs re-ratification. The legal status of the Decision is not justified – and Members of Parliament are obliged to demand re-ratification as a new Bill is essential.

The European Scrutiny Committee has clearly put the Foreign Secretary on the spot regarding the Lisbon Treaty and the Irish guarantees. Following the cross-examination of David Miliband at the European Scrutiny Committee on 2nd July (see these 2 questions), where the Foreign Secretary clearly could not answer the questions put to him by the Committee on the question of the legal and political nature of the Irish guarantees, the European Scrutiny Committee issued this letter.

David Miliband refused to bring a legal adviser to the Committee on 2nd July and now it will be for the Foreign Secretary and his legal advisers to try to answer these questions put to him in this letter. We are now in a position where we need to demand a re-ratification and a new Bill to follow this in relation to the Lisbon Treaty.

Posted by Jim McConalogue at 15:52 Permalink

Comments
SuperBlue said...
The pledge to leave the EPP - delivered.
A pledge to change the Lisbon policy - would be delivered if made.
Reply July 22, 2009 at 16:48

Robert Eve said...
As long as we leave the EU I don't care how we do it.
Reply July 22, 2009 at 18:55

Joshua. said in reply to Robert Eve...
Well you wont be wanting to vote Tory if you prefer to leave the EU. David Cameron has stated categorically that he wishes to be stay in the EU.
Reply July 22, 2009 at 21:52

Tristan Downing said in reply to Joshua....
Some EU resistance is better than none! The Tory position is better than Labour's and the LibDumbs'. I prefer the UKIP position on the EU, but I'm not stupid enough to actually vote for them! The only chance to get anywhere close to a better position for the UK with regards the EU is to vote for the Conservatives, because a failure to elect us could lead to a Labour win, or even a LibLab government. Then everything will have gone to hell! That is the twisted irony of UKIP's attempts to take Tory votes!
Reply July 22, 2009 at 23:15

woolfie said in reply to Tristan Downing...
It's the twisted irony of our corrupt voting system.

Why is it stupid to vote for a party whose agenda you agree with?

I realise you are anti-voting and I understand why and it's no way to run a democracy.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 00:10

Tristan Downing said in reply to woolfie...
I understand there are problems with the voting system, but this is the system we have. It isn't going to change before the next GE is it? There is nothing wrong with voting for a party whose agenda you support, unless it is not going to leave you with the desired outcome. I do not trust the EU at all, but if I were to vote for UKIP then I would almost certainly not get a UKIP MP, and I'd risk getting a Labour or LibDem MP. Given the current voting system, it is not pragmatic to vote for UKIP. Therefore on the current voting system, with regards to the EU question, my best possible outcome (ceteris paribus) is to elect a Tory government. It may not have my ideal EU policy, but it is by far the best of a bad bunch.

It is also the case that the EU is not my only concern and I support the Conservative position on a range of other issues. But it may be your view that whilst you are unlikely to be able to elect a UKIP MP, you wish to give them enough support to be able to stay in the game long enough to improve their electability, or until the voting system is changed. That might be a higher priority for you than the risk of a Labour or LibLab government.

Reply July 23, 2009 at 01:05

Ultimo Tiger said...
Now just so we're sure, Brown has actually ratified the treaty? We're past the point of no return?
Reply July 22, 2009 at 19:20

Denis Cooper said in reply to Ultimo Tiger...
The answer to the first question is "yes", but the answer to the second question is "no" - while we still have a sovereign Parliament capable of wholly or partly repealing its own European Union (Amendment) Act 2008, we're never past the point of no return.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 10:51

Tristan Downing said...
Can someone who actually knows about these things explain why if the UK and all other member state ratified the treaty before the GE, it would be impossible to undo it? People attack CCHQ for only promising a referendum on the Lisbon treaty if the Irish vote no. Is that attack justified?
Reply July 22, 2009 at 19:22

David Cooper said in reply to Tristan Downing...
Perhaps Martin Howe QC could be asked to write an article. His credentials on EU issues need no introduction.
Reply July 22, 2009 at 20:15

Ricardo's Ghost said in reply to Tristan Downing...
It wouldn't theoretically be impossible to undo Lisbon: in theory you could sit all the other member states down at the next Treaty round, and persuade them to undo everything in Lisbon. In theory it's possible but it's not terribly likely. It's also not something you can promise - you can't promise to make Sarkozy (for example) vote a certain way.

However, when people talk about this argument it's usually in the context of a post-ratification referendum - ie Lisbon has been ratified by everyone and is in force and then the UK has a referendum. The outcome of the referendum would have no legal bearing on whether Lisbon was in force. You could argue that it meant a minor constitutional crisis with the EU as regards things like energy policy which are covered by Lisbon but could conceivable have been opt-outs, but I doubt you'd get too far. However, the real problem is with things that could never be opt-outs: such as the EU President, the EU Foreign Minister, how to calculate how many MEPs a country is entitled to, how to calculate voting rights, how many Commissioners there are. There either is an EU President or there isn't, there either are 26 Commissioners or there aren't. Hence once it's in force you can't get rid of it without negotiating a new replacement Treaty with all the other member states. There's no default position to fall back to: if that principle did exist we'd be able to throw Poland out of the EU simply be de-ratifying the Nice Treaty.
Reply July 22, 2009 at 23:14

Tristan Downing said in reply to Ricardo's Ghost...
So basically we're screwed then? That’s the long and short of it?

I think when challenged with the attack that the Tory referendum promise is empty based on the fact that if ratified, there won’t be a referendum, rather than avoid the subject as has been the response so far, Conservative MPs should explain clearly to the public that in reality, stopping the treaty before it is ratified is the only chance we have of stopping it at all. I think they would understand (though not like it), but they won’t understand what might appear to be an empty promise. The British public will not stand for loss of sovereignty, but unfortunately they are too busy messing around to notice until it is too late.
I do not think a de facto EU super state will have legitimacy. Parliament may be sovereign here and so has the power to hand it over technically, but parliament is given legitimacy by consent, and I do not see the people giving consent to being ruled by an EU president. Especially if it turned out to be Tony Blair!

Reply July 22, 2009 at 23:30

woolfie said in reply to Tristan Downing...
There is absolutely nothing stopping us from holding a referendum on leaving the EU and as long as 51% or more vote out, hey presto we're out.

Actually there is nothing stopping a referendum on Lisbon either, we overturn laws and statutes all the time. It's just Dave trying to wriggle out of it, not my fault guv, we tried but the bloody Irish sold us down the river.


Voting Tory got us in this mess, voting Tory will not get us out
Reply July 23, 2009 at 00:15

Ricardo's Ghost said in reply to woolfie...
There's nothing hey-presto about it. Who says a referendum has to decided by a simple majority? The Scottish devolution referendum in the 1970s demanded a certain turnout level before it was valid.

There is plenty stopping a post-ratification referendum on Lisbon. If we (as expected) voted no, would there be an EU President the next morning or not?

As a related question, if the UK held a referendum on whether the Queen should take over as Secretary General of the UN (and 51% voted yes), would she become the Secretary General of the UN the next morning?
Reply July 23, 2009 at 01:18

Tristan Downing said in reply to woolfie...
I must admit, I haven't made up my mind on EU membership. I can see benefits to being a member, but I am highly sympathetic to the UKIP desire to leave the EU altogether. Other countries around the world manage to have various trade agreements with each other without being a member of something like the EU. I don't see why we couldn't. It would not be in the interest of the EU to ruin trade. I think the EU needs our money more than we need them for anything.

But for me alas, the jury is still out on the in/out queston.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 01:19

Ricardo's Ghost said in reply to Tristan Downing...
I don't think we're screwed necessarily. There's plenty of scope for playing hardball, and negotiating our way out of some of the things we really don't like. For example, at some point the Irish guarantees are actually going to need to be formally negotiated and put into the text. At some point Croatia will be joining. This is what the "we will not let matters rest there" line is all about.

However, it's utterly disingenuous for the hardline eurosceptics to peddle the idea that a post-ratification referendum would render Lisbon null and void: it would do no such thing. Calling them on this though can turn them quite irrational, which is probably why the leadership keeps quiet about it.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 01:23

Tristan Downing said in reply to Ricardo's Ghost...

A post ratification referendum would have no direct power. It wouldn't change the ratification of the treaty. It would be more for show. But if one was held and then not acted upon, that would be damaging for the government at the time. It might help to bring to the negotiating table with the EU though. It would prove that they need to make some big concessions if they don’t want an anti EU uprising. How much help it would be I don't know. Clearly it isn't going to happen though.

What in your opinion are the benefits to staying in the EU that it couldn't reasonably be argued we could gain in an alternative way?

Reply July 23, 2009 at 01:57

Denis Cooper said in reply to Tristan Downing...
Strictly speaking any referendum held within the UK is never more than a consultative referendum.

Even if the Act of Parliament authorising the referendum specified certain consequences which would ensue from one result or the other, Parliament could later decide to amend that Act.

And the people might well accept that it was legitimate for Parliament to set aside the result of a notionally binding referendum, if there was clearly a significant change of circumstances after the vote was taken which meant that it would be seriously against the national interest to still treat the referendum result as binding.

Parliament has the legal power to authorise a referendum on any issue whatsoever, at any time, and to treat the result in any way it decides, before or after the vote.

So, for example, Prime Minister Cameron could ask Parliament to authorise a retrospective referendum on the Lisbon Treaty with the question:

"Do you agree that the United Kingdom should cancel its approval of the Lisbon Treaty?"

and clearly establish the level of popular support for doing that, without necessarily committing the government or Parliament to immediately doing it.

A "no" majority would mean that he was justified in accepting ratification as a fait accompli, while a large "yes" majority would enormously strengthen his hand in negotiations.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:16

Tristan Downing said in reply to Denis Cooper...
In theory they could do that but they would have to be very careful about how the presented it to the public. They would not want to give the impression they will act directly on the outcome if they wont. It will cost a lot of votes to do that.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:27

Denis Cooper said in reply to Tristan Downing...
Agreed, but a specific promise of a consultative referendum is infinitely better than a vague promise "not to let matters rest there".
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:58

Tristan Downing said in reply to Denis Cooper...
Possibly, but for which audience? A large section of society doesn't have the attention span to listen to why it would not be binding. You and I would understand it and would want one. And I agree about being vague. Being vague is the main media attack on DC at the moment. The leadership has said that if the treaty were ratified, they would seek to renegotiate key parts, but even that is vague. Some of the main things in the treaty are the EU president, foreign minister and all the policy crap that comes with both. How much can be changed with that? We couldn't negotiate it out of the treaty, we could only leave the whole thing.

How will this EU foreign policy thing work anyway? Does each member state have to agree to each action? Or just a majority? Is it even workable?

Reply July 23, 2009 at 14:29

Denis Cooper said in reply to Tristan Downing...
A referendum question in the form I suggested:

"Do you agree that the United Kingdom should cancel its approval of the Lisbon Treaty?"

is clear enough; it applies irrespective of whether the treaty has come into force or not, provided it isn't actually dead; either after the debate during the campaign a voter agrees that approval "should" be cancelled, or he doesn't agree; he is being formally consulted on his opinion through an official national referendum, a public consultation, rather than a small sample being consulted through a private opinion poll.

It would be for the government, by and with the advice and consent of Parliament, to outline what action would be taken if the majority agreed that UK approval of the treaty "should" be cancelled.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 16:45

Tristan Downing said in reply to Denis Cooper...
As long as the leadership is careful to make sure people know it is effectively an opinion poll then it should be okay. I'm not sure what the government would do with it though. How would you cancel the treaty without leaving the EU? Or is that your goal? In which case, wouldn't a simple in or out vote be more honest? If the UK did not consent to the treaty, all the aspects of it would still exist. The rest of the EU wouldn't drop the president just because of a post-ratification referendum in the UK.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 18:35

David Bean said...
It seems very clear that Miliband has been put into a tough spot, but I'm not clear why the government couldn't just agree to the need for a re-ratification and then push it through Parliament like they did the first time. They'd suffer another bruising in the press, but it's not as though their polling numbers could fall much lower, so if they're determined to have binding us ever-closer to Europe be part of their legacy, why not?
Reply July 22, 2009 at 20:35

Ricardo's Ghost said...
I believe the 'problem' is that the Irish guarantees are a set of memoranda of understanding - ie they don't change the actual text of the Lisbon Treaty itself. Instead the governments have committed themselves to honouring these guarantees at the earliest opportunity, most likely the Croatian Accession Treaty, and not doing anything contrary to them in the meantime. Therefore you can't re-ratify, because there's nothing to re-ratify yet.
Reply July 22, 2009 at 22:59

rcs said...
The German Constitutional Court's ruling has attracted remarkably little attention.

While they concluded that the Lisbon Treaty was constitutional, they also concluded that:

1) The EU acquiring extra competences without reference to the electorate was unconstitutional

2) The EU parliament was not a proper parliament and there was a democratic deficit

3) That the German supreme court could over-rule the ECJ when its decisions contravened German law.

Not being a laywer, this seems like a pretty serious impediment to the Treaty of Lisbon, particularly to the supremacy of EU law.

Barosso has said that he will respond to this in "due course".

We should take note of this ruling and consider how it can reflect in our position relative to the EU. I suppose that, as the act has been passed through Parliament, it is law but are all possibilities of a legal challenge exhausted?
Reply July 22, 2009 at 23:26

Denis Cooper said in reply to rcs...
3) directly contradicts the legal doctrine of primacy invented at the ECJ; the German court correctly maintains that the Basic Law is the supreme law in Germany, it will not permit the Basic Law to be violated by EU treaties and laws, and if necessary it will disapply any EU law which is incompatible with the Basic Law.

In fact it already did so, when it refused to allow the EU Arrest Warrant to apply in Germany:

http://www.bundesverfassungsgericht.de/en/press/bvg05-064en.html

"European Arrest Warrant Act void"

"According to the Court, the Act encroaches upon the freedom from extradition (Article 16.2 of the Basic Law (Grundgesetz – GG)) in a disproportionate manner ... "

The last I heard, that's still the case.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:31

Tristan Downing said...
The EU president without a mandate will more or less be an EU Emperor. Can you imagine an Emperor Blair? Dictating once again to us all.
Reply July 22, 2009 at 23:36

Tapestry said...
The mechanics and the stated reasons for this new wind of euroscepticism sweeping across the continent of Europe, are not too important.

Just notice that in country after country, the Czech Republic, Poland, Ireland, Germany and maybe the UK, acts of token resistance to EU power are breaking out.

The details are different in each country but the mood change is the same. The economic depression in process will end up smashing the EU and the Euro into tiny pieces.

Even the Conservatives are getting their act ready to take part in the fall of the Brussels Wall, and are positioning to take the credit for being the ones to have stood against the EU.

In reality they did no such thing, but hey ! That's politics!!!
Reply July 23, 2009 at 02:20

Roger Helmer MEP said...
It is suggested that the Irish guarantees may be incorporated into the Croatian Accession agreement -- the next EU Treaty which all member states will have to ratify. It may be that the Lisbon Treaty will be finalised before our General Election, but the Croatia Treaty will be afterwards -- when we will hopefully have a Cameron administration. A possible route for the Party would be to insist that it would not take part in a wholesale deception of the Irish voter, and that it gave notice that it would not ratify any future EU Treaty containing the Irish guarantees.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 07:06

Edward Huxley said...

Governments cannot bind their successors, so a future Conservative government could grant a referendum on the treaty, whether ratified or not and, of course could abrogate the treaty as well.

Unfortunately, as their prevarication has proved time and time again, the party`s leadership continues to avoid the issue and just makes noises about reforming the EU- something Brussels will never allow. In the end it will come to a straight in,acepting all the rules, or out.

For me, it`s out.I don`t want my country to become a small part of Euroland. The intentions are clear, we already have Regions, with their assemblies and most of southern England is now in the Arc Manche region, with its headquarters in Paris. Conservatives, to their shame, are serving on these bodies and collecting the allowances.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 07:14

EvanPrice said in reply to Edward Huxley...
Sorry Edward, I disagree. The problem with the law of treaties, especially in relation to treaties that amend existing arrangements, is that once they are in force, they cannot be unilaterally withdrawn from, abrogated or otherwise have their effect removed.

The idea that a referendum on post-ratification Lisbon Treaty could have any legal effect on the changes brought into force as a result of that treaty is, in my view, fanciful. It could be used to increase the pressure in negotiations, but I am not sure that it would either work or be wise to start from that point in any subsequent negotiations.

As to the Party's position, the reason that they don't want to be drawn on what happens if the treaty has been ratified is that they want to talk about what happens now, not what happens if something else happens - and as the treaty is not in force, discussing what they could do in the event that it is in force by the time they have any power to do anything about it is not necessarily going to increase their chances in any negotiations that they intend to have in that event.

History tells us that it is possible to negotiate with EU countries to retain powers that others want to merge - so I disagree with your assertion that it is a matter of accepting all the rules, or out, too.

BTW, I am opposed to the misuse of the preamble text of evercloser union to justify the intended political union and I was Counsel for Stuart Wheeler in the Court of Appeal.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 09:03

Edward Huxley said in reply to EvanPrice...
Well, we`ll have to see how things turn out. I remember Hitler had a treaty or pact with Stalin, but that didn`t stop the Germans invading Russia.

If you are right, then why don`t the Tories come out and say so, instead of continuing to prevaricate? "We won`t leave it there" has become a big joke,.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 09:51

EvanPrice said in reply to Edward Huxley...
I am increasingly learning that political messages are rather blunt and that to add subtelty to the message is to reduce their effectiveness.

For the party to explain what it intends to do in certain events is to reduce the argument about the current circumstances and in place argue about what to do in the future ... and that is not prevarication or dissembling, it is simply accepting that when dealing with complicated matters where a number of outcomes are possible you deal with the current situation and keep your messages simple, dealing with that situation, and change your messages when the situation changes and not before.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:28

Denis Cooper said in reply to EvanPrice...
But Parliament is not a party to the Lisbon Treaty, or any of the EU treaties, which are agreements between governments in the names of their states.

So the Preamble to the Treaty of Lisbon starts as follows:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2007:306:0001:0010:EN:PDF

"HIS MAJESTY THE KING OF THE BELGIANS,

THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF BULGARIA ..."

and so on down to:

"... HER MAJESTY THE QUEEN OF THE UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND".

Who:

"HAVE RESOLVED to amend the Treaty on European Union, the Treaty establishing the European Community and the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and to this end have designated as their Plenipotentiaries"

The Plenipotentiaries designated by the Queen being:

"The Rt Hon. Gordon BROWN

Prime Minister

The Rt Hon. David MILIBAND

Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs"

And then:

"WHO, having exchanged their full powers, found in good and due form, HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS"

So this is an agreement made by Ministers of the Crown, on behalf of the Crown, by virtue of Royal Prerogative.

However, long before it became necessary to declare it anew in the English Declaration of Rights, and enshrine it in Article I of the Bill of Rights 1688

"An Act declareing the Rights and Liberties of the Subject and Setleing the Succession of the Crowne"

which is still on the statute book:

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/content.aspx?LegType=All+Legislation&Year=1688&searchEnacted=0&extentMatchOnly=0&confersPower=0&blanketAmendment=0&sortAlpha=0&TYPE=QS&PageNumber=1&NavFrom=0&parentActiveTextDocId=1518621&ActiveTextDocId=1518621&filesize=2972

it was an established, fundamental, principle of our constitution:

"That the pretended Power of Suspending of Laws or the Execution of Laws by Regall Authority without Consent of Parlyament is illegall."

Hence, an agreement made by two Ministers of the Crown, Brown and Miliband, on behalf of the Crown, cannot impinge on our domestic law without the consent of Parliament.

And even though Parliament has passed an Act, the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008, consenting to the domestic legal consequences of the Lisbon Treaty which had been made by the Crown, Parliament always retains the right to wholly or partly repeal any of its own Acts - and in this case it would mean that all or some of the Lisbon Treaty would cease to have any effect on our domestic law.

The governments of the other EEC countries were well aware that this was the constitutional position in the UK, and they agreed to the UK Treaty of Accession on that basis; indeed there was no other basis on which that treaty could have been agreed; and nothing in any subsequent EU treaty has changed that.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 12:50

EvanPrice said in reply to Denis Cooper...
The power to enter into treaties (if you like, contract between states) is, under our settlement, a prerogative power exercised by the Government on behalf of the Queen.

The principle of not having power to bind successors probably holds true, but certainly since the 1960's the courts have tried to give effect to international obligations when interpreting legislation. The result is that there would be in certain cases (and certainly where there is impact on international obligation) less reliance on implied repeal that our legal forefathers would accept as lawful.

The problem with the Bill of Rights argument is that it was tried to little effect in both the Maastricht and the Nice litigation. In the Nice litigation, the Judge hearing it conceded that there would come a time when so much power was handed over that it would effectively mean that the UK Government and Parliament ceased to have soveriegn power and that such a transfer would be illegitimate. In addition, the doctrine of implied repeal would mean that to the extent necessary, the Bill of Rights has been amended by Act of Parliament that subsequently conflicts with it - notwithstanding that I am unsure as to the extent to which this doctrine survives the 72 Act as amended.

We could repeal the 2008 Act, but it would not, in my view, affect the international legal obligations arising from the Treaty. Other lawyers would say that you cannot simply repeal the 2008 Act without repealing the 72 Act as well - and the other acts amending the 72 Act between then and now. The reason for this lies in the institutional effects of the treaties for the EU and the constitutional amendments (for the UK) that arise from the power, for example, of direct effect ... Now, while I can see the force of the argument, I don't think it is necessary to look at our settlement as having been amended in that way, as it is simpler to say that the primacy of Parliament remains, but that whilst Parliament could act to denude the EU of specific power unilaterally, the better way to act would be to negotiate that withdrawal of power in order to avoid conflict between the ECJ and the UK Courts. If we acted unilaterally and without negotiation, because of the other powers of the EU - including the power to fine and penalise member states - to act in this way would not be politically expedient, even if it were to be politically interesting!

Sadly, none of this is straightforward or, it has to be said, uncontentious. Get 2 constitutional lawyers in a room and they will come up with at least 3 and probably many more conflicting arguments as to why what I have written is both right and wrong. Perhaps people will now understand a little better why I think that answer 'we will not let matters rest' is sufficient at the moment.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 14:28

Denis Cooper said in reply to EvanPrice...
As far as I can see it cuts both ways.

Her Majesty's Government has deposited an instrument of ratification, through which it has expressed its final consent to be bound by the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, should that enter into legal force. However it was only in a position to express its consent to be bound on the international plane after Parliament had given its consent to a law giving effect to the treaty on the domestic plane.

Therefore, if Parliament repealed the European Union (Amendment) Act 2008 the Lisbon Treaty would cease to have any effect on domestic law even if it was in legal force, but Her Majesty's Government would still be bound by the terms of its treaty until it formally revoked its instrument of ratification.

Conversely, if Her Majesty's Government revoked its instrument of ratification but for some reason Parliament left that 2008 Act in place, then if the Lisbon Treaty had come into force then it would continue to affect domestic law. Under its own provisions commencement of the Act did not depend on the treaty coming into force, nor on the deposit of an instrument of ratification by the government, and nor would it automatically terminate if the instrument of ratification was revoked.

Clearly Parliament could repeal an Act it passed to amend its European Communities Act 1972 without having to repeal the original Act; Parliament can "make or unmake any law whatever", as the then Europe Minister Jim Murphy acknowledged last February:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmhansrd/cm080227/debtext/80227-0019.htm

and then quoting Lord Justice Laws - even though he then went on to mislead the House about the doctrine of primacy invented by lawyers at the EU's Court of Justice.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 18:04

Phil Kean said...
Irish guarantees?
---------------------------

It's my understanding that the Constitution hasn't been amended to accomodate the Irish concerns, and that the guarantees are in fact only verbal clarifications and assurances.

In other words, the Irish are voting on EXACTLY the same text that was originally rejected in the first referendum.
If there had been an amendment in any form, the Constitution [as ratified] would become invalid and would have to be re-ratified by the other states.

Insult doesn't come any more blatent!
.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 08:05

Ricardo's Ghost said in reply to Phil Kean...
That's the way these sorts of opt-outs always work (usually with Ireland or Denmark) - they're given a guarantee that certain amendments will be made for them at the earliest opportunity (usually the next accession treaty).
Reply July 23, 2009 at 12:23

Phil Kean said...
Tory policy
-----------------

It's becoming obvious to me that, once the Tories are in government, Britain's relationship with the EU will be dictated by events, and NOT by policy or treaties.

It is my view that Britain's self interest and economic survival will depend on our leaving the EU within 3 years of the new Parliament.

Of course, 12 years of Labour's undemocratic treachery has demonstrated that UK politicians DON'T necessarily do what best for Britain's future.
I hope the Tories reject that trend and start to put democracy & national interest before self indulgence & irresponsibility.
.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 08:26

resident leftie said...
The Tories will never, ever leave the EU, or abrogate the Lisbon treaty. The Irish protocols will be adhered to and added to the Treaty when it has been ratified. If leaving the EU is important to you, vote for an other party.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 09:59

Tristan Downing said in reply to resident leftie...
Don't listen to him. He's just trying to get you to waste your vote.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:05

resident leftie said in reply to Tristan Downing...
The Tories will never, ever leave the EU, or abrogate the Lisbon treaty. The Irish protocols will be adhered to and added to the Treaty when it has been ratified.

Which part of my prediction do you dispute? Or is it just the advice you disagree with?

Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:23

Tristan Downing said in reply to resident leftie...
Well, the "never, ever" bit is a little strong. "Highly likely never under Cameron" would be more fair. But mainly it was the advice!
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:30

Phil Kean said in reply to resident leftie...
You'll notice my belief that the Tories will be FORCED by circumstances to withdraw Britain from the EU in order to rescue our economy and restore social cohesion.

There are LOTS of reasons why I see this coming - the very same reasons why Britain will probably [in real terms] be stuck in a spiral of economic decline and debt.
.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 13:05

Denis Cooper said in reply to resident leftie...
"The Irish protocols will be adhered to and added to the Treaty when it has been ratified."

1. There are no "Irish protocols". No such protocol exists, not even in draft form.

2. A protocol could exist; a new protocol to the Lisbon Treaty could have been negotiated and agreed by the EU governments, and ratified as a protocol by all the other EU member states according to their respective constitutional requirements, BEFORE the second referendum in Ireland.

There'd be no technical obstacle to doing that; in fact it's exactly what's being done with a new Protocol to the Geneva Convention:

http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2008-09/genevaconventionsandunitednationspersonnelprotocols.html

3. The reason that the EU leaders don't want to adopt that straightforward approach is that if there was an Irish protocol to the Lisbon Treaty to be ratified, then people in other member states would start saying that, actually, they'd like a protocol as well, because there are parts of the Lisbon Treaty which they never wanted but which were foisted on them.

4. So the Irish can't have a protocol before they vote again, but instead are expected to be satisfied with the promise of a protocol at some indeterminate point in the future.

And the people making this promise are? Well, to start with there's Gordon Brown, a proven, totally unscrupulous, liar ...

5. Even if there was an Irish protocol in the future, which is questionable, it would be attached to an accession treaty, not the EU founding treaties, and that in itself is a procedure which is open to question and challenge by the EU's Court of Justice.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 13:37

Edward Huxley said...
I agree with resident leftie. The Conservatives have no intention of leaving the EU, ever, so we might as well accept it and stop arguing.They have made this absolutely clear.

As I said before, they make vague noises about negotiating changes, but they know and we know that Brussels will not change anything and will keep on imposing new laws until we are forced to join the Euro and give up our country,lock, stock and barrel. So anybody whio thinks that if Mr. Cameron becomes Prime Minister it will all change is living in cloud cuckoo land.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 11:31

Nicholas Keen said...
Yesterday's story in the FT about Britain's relationship with Europe under a future Conservative government quoted a Brussels diplomat, who stated that the British position would be moderated by the desire of the US Administration to have Britain full engaged in the EU. American pressure is bound to be a factor, given the UK's reliance on US expertise for its nuclear deterrent, a history of military and intelligence cooperation, and the new President's inability to understand British reservations about the European project.

I hope that Mr Cameron's policy will not be unduly influenced by American pressure to pursue a course it deems appropriate for a trusted ally but which would prove indigestible to an American population under similar circumstances.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 12:07

Ricardo's Ghost said in reply to Nicholas Keen...
The diplomat is right. We will have to choose between euroscepticism and the Special Relationship. What ought to really trouble us is that the Americans are particularly keen on the Common Foreign & Security Policy (believing it will enable Europe to be a stronger ally able to co-ordinate itself), which of course we regard as the most objectionable part of Maastricht and Lisbon.

It will be interesting to see where Cameron goes with this: the eurosceptics and the atlanticists are particularly vocal and uncompromising parts of the party.
Reply July 23, 2009 at 12:37

Denis Cooper said in reply to Ricardo's Ghost...
It's also why the Tories should not rely in Vaclav Klaus being able to block the Lisbon Treaty coming into force for up to eight months if the Irish vote "yes" on October 2nd. He'll not only be under intense internal pressure to sign it off, and intense pressure from politicians in other EU countries, he'll also have Obama telling him to get on and sign it. One day it'll dawn on the Americans that they've been helping to breed a monster, but that hasn't happened yet.
Reply July 23, 200


The original version of this material can be seen if you CLICK HERE

"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap."
Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821),

Regards,
Greg L-W.

for all my contact details & Blogs:
CLICK HERE

For More Information & Facts visit:
WEB SITES:
SilentMajority/
WelshAssembly
CatterpillarsAndButterflies
Greg's WordPress Blog

‘The arrogance and hubris of corrupt politicians
will be responsible for every drop of blood spilt
in the Wars of Disassociation, if Britain does not
leave the EU.

The ugly, centralised, undemocratic supra national policies being imposed by the centralised and largely unelected decisionmakers of The EU for alien aims, ailien values and to suit alien needs stand every possibility of creating 200,000,000 deaths across EUrope as a result of the blind arrogance and hubris of the idiologues in the central dictatorship, and their economic illiteracy marching hand in glove with the idiocy of The CAP & The CFP - both policies which deliver bills, destroy lives and denude food stocks.

The EU, due to the political idiocy and corruption of its undemocratic leaders, is now a net importer of food, no longer able to feed itself and with a decreasing range of over priced goods of little use to the rest of the world to sell with which to counter the net financial drain of endless imports.

British Politicians with pens and treachery, in pursuit
of their own agenda and greed, have done more
damage to the liberty, freedoms, rights and democracy
of the British peoples than any army in over 1,000 years.


The disastrous effects of British politicians selling Britain
into the thrall of foreign rule by the EU for their own
personal rewards has damaged the well-being of Britain
more than the armies of Hitler
and the Franco - German - Italian axis of 1939 - 1945.

~ for more Quotes & Facts:
http://www.silentmajority.co.uk/

############-\\\///-########### #
############= ~ = ############
###########(`~0~0~') ###########
--------oooO--------(_)-------Oooo---------
############Regards############
##########M r C H A D###########

Until we gain our liberty, restore our sovereignty, repatriate our democracy and reinstate our Justice system and our borders - defended by our Police and Military armed with sustainable and obtainable weaponry:
Treat every election as a referendum.

Don't waste your vote on a self serving Politician in ANY election until we are liberated from the EU and are a Free Sovereign peoples, with independent control of our own borders, making and managing Law & Justice for our own benefit, in our own elected Westminster Parliament where we can fire our politicians at the ballot box, if they fail to represent OUR best interests.
Make your vote count
Write on YOUR ballot Paper

LEAVE THE EU

Wednesday, 22 July 2009

#G152* - TELEGRAPH - Criminalising The Middle Classes

#G152* - TELEGRAPH - Criminalising The Middle Classes

Criminalising the middle classes
Discretion and common sense are the supposed watchwords of police officers.


By Richard Edwards, Crime Correspondent

Published: 12:11PM BST 12 Jul 2009

Comments 35


Which is why cases like the Devon doctor punished for leaving his son in his car while he went to the bank are so inexplicable.

The 51-year-old father had asked his son Henry, eight, if he wanted to come along but the boy preferred to remain in the car and play on his computer.

Returning 20 minutes later, the doctor was confronted by two police officers to account for his actions.

Discretion and common sense should have told the officers to warn the father and move on.

But instead they took his details and those of his wife and their four children – all of whom have now been placed on a police and social services register until the age of 18.

The doctor contacted The Daily Telegraph to tell of his anger at an “over-reaction” from police.

We are collecting other such stories to highlight and fight this worrying trend of criminalising innocent children and adults.

Have you experienced a similar injustice? Tell us about it on the form below



Comments: 35

My daughter is an enthusiastic explorer of old and decaying buildings which she catalogues and photographs for social history purposes. She was arrested in one such place recently on a visit to Scotland. The poor girl was arrested without having her rights read, interviewed without a lawyer or a tape recording being made and then charged with being in an enclosed space with the intention to steal. Furthermore they confiscated all her camera equipment and threw her in the cells for six hours. A nice way to treat a very small 22 year old girl. Well done coppers. She now has to travel from Brighton to Brechin to attend a court hearing and still doesn't have any legal representation. How just is that?
MarkS
on July 21, 2009
at 11:07 PM
Report this commentSomething very similar to other people's experiences happened to me.However I am too scared that the local police might read this comment and do something to me to even post the facts. I would always avoid the police in future. I think that says it all really.
mary
on July 21, 2009
at 10:56 PM
Report this commentSome weeks ago I was involved in an accident caused by an aggressive and possibly drunken yob. He got out of his land rover and forgot the handbrake and it rolled into my car.

While trying to his details he left the scene, attempting to drive over my wife. The police who reluctantly attended the scene did not want to talk to my witnesses, did not want to talk to me or my wife or take a statement from either of us.

After several phone calls to the police (but never getting a call back from the officers,) a pair of statement forms arrived, which were exclusively to do with traffic incidents. We tried to use them to report the assault as best we could.

Since we sent the forms back, they have vanished into a black hole. No-one has called us about them. No-one has done anything about them and no-one has called us back despite messages left.

Well done Wiltshire Police (motto making Wiltshire safer.) They do not seem to give a stuff.

Tony Nicholls
on July 21, 2009
at 10:22 PM
Report this commentAnd let us not forget that other source of interference with ordinary family life - Esther Ranzen's 'Childline'. The fact is that New Lab has totally altered the social landscape in a way that a right of centre party would never dare attempt to correct - listen to Cameron.What New Lab has constructed is here to stay.
B.D. Kelly
on July 21, 2009
at 10:22 PM
Report this commentThe biggest challenge to society is the slow but sure erradication of the stable working class family in this country. The current tax & benefit system was created to smash working class "traditional" households those with or without children. The blunt instrument used is the tax credit system which is abused by the majority of claimants and discrimnates against stable couples especially those who are Married and on moderate incomes. The rules are so unfair and benefit the so called single parent greatly (up to 70% do have a partner they just do not declare it) it's simple NO PROOF OF INCOME, HOUSEHOLD STATUES IS REQUIRED) simply make a claim over the phone they say. Ha Ha. When fraud is at an all time high (2 billion a year and rising, make that 5 billion) why does Gordon Brown believe everyone tells the truth when making a claim for tax credits and no proog is required? Why are maintenance payments disregared as income when making a claim for tax credits, why can someone have thousands upon thousands of pounds held in various ISA's and also disregared as income for TC purposes, why can someone still recieve working tax credit for the current year despite an increase of up to �25,000 yes �25,000 in their income in the same year. In other words someone can recieve WTC, get free prescriptions, dental treatment, even loft insulation etc etc and a higher rate taxpayer in the same year. Crazy but true. It is all in the masterplan of this government ridding its self of the traditional family/household at the expense of the "alternative family" and the country will pay a massive price indeed not only in ������.
N James
on July 21, 2009
at 10:15 PM
Report this commentSteven Kseizak 01.08 has been taken in by the very Enemy Class which I refer to in my comment of 6.20 pm.

He thinks they are working "for our good".

Nobody, I repeat nobody, knows what is for our good except ourselves. If Steven Ksiezak (who I presume is a Pole, or at least of Polish extraction and therefore ought to know better in either case for grave historical reasons which we have not time to go into heer) thinks that The Enemy Class have his, or his children's, or our children's, interests at heart, in these matters, then he is sadly mistaken and will have to relearn about 100 years of recent history.

It /must/ be understood as regards my commen above (06.20 pm) that I am not blaming the Police, or even the very officers who did this thing in the article. They are merely doing what they are ordered by their masters, who are our government and who are the real danger. What they did is not the right purpose of the Police, who oought to have more important things to do like nicking hoodlums and thuggers, rievers chunderers and murgulators, who are, through the education policies of ZanuLieBorg, the real problem of today.
David Davis
on July 21, 2009
at 10:15 PM
Report this commentEveryone thinks I'm having them on when I draw comparisons between the present-day UK and the social conditions which prevailed in the neighborhoods of Detroit several years prior to the riots of 1967 and 1968, yet this micro-management of British citizens exactly mirrors how blacks were hounded from the time of the first truly major strikes of the Detroit steel and auto industries and the subsequent pitting of black versus white factory worker against each other when in the formative days of the CIO right through around 1960 or so during the post-war boom years, there was solidarity. When the American workforce was 50% organized as it was then, this anti-working class "keep 'em down" strategy was the default setting for police forces nationwide. It still is, unions or no unions, the malice is simply free-floating instead of focused.

These black neighborhoods were socially and economically nearly self-sufficient, with their community leadership living downtown amongst their constituencies. The Michigan State Police "Red Squad" in conjunction with the all-white Detroit police force made it their business to hound any black man who had ever walked a picket line alongside white workers. It got to the point that on West Warren, if your trash left out for the collection trucks fell over or a dog got at it, you got fined. Jay-walking tickets were the order of the day, and arbitrary parking tickets in zones where cars had parked for years.


Few respect police more than me, as I was affiliated with MP units and related functions during my entire military experience, which baffles me, but I suppose the assigners of occupational specialties saw the last name, and figured Sure and Begorrah, give him a nightstick. (I hated it bitterly and do not know how I kept my cool to this day; anyone who can do the work, to me, deserves the Nobel Prize for patience). But when the British populace of all classes, creeds, and colours make like the brain-eating zombies in the last reel of "Resident Evil," PC Plod, you shall very well know why. What is an evolving transformation of a bitter annoyance into a perfectly avoidable and tragic inevitability is not without precedence. You did not make these policies and rules, you are just the messenger of the tidings and the will of the state, but you shall be witness to what I saw at the tender ages of 17 and 18. You will not like it one bit.


Walt O'Brien
on July 21, 2009
at 08:55 PM
Report this commentI have been compiling a list of similar goings on and had been publishing them on my blog. But I am so terrified of our government and their jobsworths now, I have disabled my blog for fear of being somehow 'punished'. How worrying is that?

The Daily Telegraph is the last bastion of common sense in the UK. Once it has gone, we are doomed.
Oflife
on July 21, 2009
at 08:42 PM
Report this commentA female friend of mine always recycles her empty bottles.

One fine Saturday, following a dinner party at her house on the Friday, she dutily packed various boxes with the empty wine bottles.

She put them in the back of her car.

Within minutes, the blue flashing lights appeared in her rear view mirror.

"Been drinking have we?" said the officer in that nasal, patronizing tone that only officers of the law have the ability to produce.
John Henry
on July 21, 2009
at 07:37 PM
Report this commentAh, looks like the Stasi-fication of Socialist Britain is now well-underway...

Reject Christ and His common-sense at your worsening peril.
Ming Ye
on July 21, 2009
at 07:30 PM
Report this commentAnother unintended consequence of 'targets'. A nice easy conviction to boost the numbers. If the police are re-empowered and relieved from an obligation to secure n convictions a year the problem will go away.
Geoff
on July 21, 2009
at 07:30 PM
Report this commentI am a Police Officer and I would deal with it this way. I don�t want to though, but I feel it would be necessary. I suspect those Officers are simply covering their backsides as would I. Professional Standards within Police Forces (sorry, Police Services) go to great length and expense to eek out any wrong doing by a Police Officer. Even if they don�t get you on something, once you are known to them they are on your case like nothing you�ve ever known. I have seen it happen to several Officers who had acted in good faith at the time. Perhaps like acting in good faith during this incident and simply giving the doctor words of advice. If it is found later he wasn�t of good character and the child came to harm then those Officers would be very well be for the high jump. A recent court case found that Police Officers now have a duty of care which is more graded and more specific to a particular situation. In this instance, Officers are more likely to be personally culpable for the welfare of the child. So what would you do? Take a risk for someone you don�t know? I have a family to support, I�m not going to lose that over any member of the public. What is wrong with the Police at the moment is the working environment. Officers are first and foremost human beings and will react to their working environment the same as anyone else. Detections are a bit part of this folly. We live in a democratic society, if you don�t like it do something about it. I am.
PC Plod
on July 21, 2009
at 06:43 PM
Report this commentForget pursuit of petty misdemeanours. What about pursuit of the victim to get a 2nd arrest. I am a barrister in my forties. I was cycling to court for a case one morning last summer in London. A youth of about 20 on a bicycle rode off the pavement on which he was riding, across a pedestrian crossing & across my path at a traffic light which was green for me. As I rode behind him to avoid him he swore at me very aggressively for riding towards him and then rode off. I went on my way in the opposite direction. Several hundred metres down the road and a minute or two later(far out of his way) he caught up with me, swung at me and punched me about the face 3 times very hard cutting me across the bridge of the nose. This was witnessed by numerous passers by and shopkeepers and the aftermath with him aggressively assailing me was seen by 3 police fire arms officers. We were less than 100m from a police station. I was asked if I wanted to press charges. I said that I felt the matter should be investigated properly as my assailant was plainly dangerous and volatile and likely to hurt someone else. We waited 50 minutes for local officers to arrive. When they did they released the fire arms officers and spoke to no witnesses, despite my pointing out a shopkeeper witness still on the scene who had brought me a cloth to staunch blood and had seen my being hit and the fact that my assailant was unmarked. They refused to speak to her before arrested both of us and processing us at the station. This took 2 hours. I was kept in a cell for 7 further hours before being medically examined, interviewed and giving my account. I was repeatedly asked to agree to drop my allegation. The investigating officer insisted that the witness had said that I had struck my assailant after being struck first myself (which was untrue and not what she had said to me) but the WPc improperly refused to let me see the statement asserting this. I declined to drop the matter and was released on bail. I missed my hearing and had my holiday spoiled.I was informed 14 days later that I could accept a caution. When I declined this on grounds that I was the victim and not admitting any act against my assailant. I was told that there was no public interest in pursuing the matter and released from my bail without apology or further comment. Moral of the story : one former police supporter disenchanted, one law abiding citizen fewer to assist the police when they need help; one more person on the DNA data base.
James
on July 21, 2009
at 06:35 PM
Report this commentThe Badman Report into Home Education treats parents as worse than criminals. It presupposes that our educational choice puts our children at risk and validates forced entry into our homes and the removal of our children by local authority functionaries for 'questioning.' These powers far exceed those used against, say, ex-convicts, who only need allow access to their homes if there is a reason to suspect wrong doing. Local Authorities alreasy have powers to intervene when they suspect abuse. What is happening here is the vilification of an entire community in order to destroy the only educational arena, ironically enough for the current debate, in which working class children outperform their middle class, schooled peers. What, one wonders, is Ed Balls' real motivation?
Roger Machin
on July 21, 2009
at 06:35 PM
Report this commentThe kid's 8 years old. I used to be out and about on my own at that age. Make my own way to school etc. What law has been broken? What a pathetic country this is!
james
on July 21, 2009
at 06:27 PM
Report this commentWe should be entirely unsurprised by things like this.

The Law and the Police have been deliberately taken over and retargetted by a Gramsco-Fabian system of objective and deliberate wickedness.

Causing terror and unhappiness to those who would be most likely to not want the sort of society this Class wants, is all part of the early-endgame.

In the West, this system is called socialism.

The purpose of this "agent of change" is precisely to do such things to such people, as part of its strategy of dissolving the normally-evolved familial and societal bonds which hold a peaceable and Classical liberal civilisation together.

The result is unimaginable wealth and power for the new ruling Enemy-Class, and neo-barbarism for everyone else. It is what the Enemy Class wish for, and they probably will get it as things are rather too far gone now. We were all asleep in the early 1990s, when we could have got serious about them and they might not have been able to resist honest ideological pressure to become good.

It is deliberate and objectively wicked, they know it, and that's why they do it.
David Davis
on July 21, 2009
at 06:20 PM
Report this commentWelcome to totalitarian Britain. I wonder if the police were alerted via CCTV. Perhaps a "good citizen", like our red friend here, alerted them to the doctor's "crime of neglect".

If Ksiezak enjoys heavy handed socialism so much, then perhaps he should sod off to North Korea.
Nufffrespect
on July 21, 2009
at 06:13 PM
Report this commentThe biggest risk to any totalitarian regime is the threat of revolt from the middle class, keep the middle class under thumb and you can rule safely. Allow thugs the freedom to do their damage and run a mock of the law whilst oppressing the working population, a double whamy and extremely affective. New Labour...
Gary
on July 21, 2009
at 06:13 PM
Report this commentThe Police are now the paramilitary wing of the Guardian - blindly following the edicts of Pol Toynbee as she strives for her very own kind of Year Zero.
Paul
on July 21, 2009
at 06:08 PM
Report this commentTo see first hand how the police waste time and money going for the"lowest apples on the tree", I recommend attendance at your local Magistrates Court. Prepare to be shocked.
David Mann
on July 21, 2009
at 05:48 PM
Report this commentre: "Prevention and Dection of Crime", I've yet to see comment on the much publicised Harry Potter actor drug story (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/8161154.stm)

Obviously I don't condone the conduct for which he has been charged, but when I read that the evidence as discovered when "Police seized the camera after he was arrested for taking a picture of officers as he and his friend John Innis, 20, drove past"

Presumably in order to facilitate this seizure, sirens were engaged and a chase ensued.

It seems a further Police mandate is 'prevent photographic capture of a uniformed officer'.

Is this an offence, and am I alone in feeling that this has become more prevalent since the contraversial images captured at the G8 protests?
Owen M. Robson
on July 21, 2009
at 05:48 PM
Report this commentRE: What does this have to do with the middle classes?

If nothing else, this shows that the middle classes are not immune from the predatory reach of Socialist Services.

The two scheming hags in question may well have had it in for him because of his background.

This is an absolutely disgraceful breach of human rights, both the father's and the children's.

We must open up the secret family courts immediately.
Colin
on July 21, 2009
at 05:47 PM
Report this commentIdiotic Exeter Police raided a family barbecue of 15 people with riot police and the police helicopter and said it was a rave. Dimwits!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/devon/8155441.stm
Anthony
on July 21, 2009
at 05:40 PM
Report this commentCan the police be charged with wasting their own time?
Pipkins
on July 21, 2009
at 05:30 PM
Report this commentLabour has succeeded in politicising the police
Douglas
on July 21, 2009
at 04:15 PM
Report this commentWhat happened to the old definition of 'Prevention and Detection of crime'as the task of the Police Force? The first seems forgotten, the second appears now to read 'Detection of petty misdemeaners.'
Michael White
on July 21, 2009
at 03:55 PM
Report this commentKsiezak - yes, a good British name ! Obviously one of the Marx-Stalinist Brits !
OZ
on July 21, 2009
at 02:52 PM
Report this commentRe: Eating an apple whilst driving: They called out the Helicopter for it as well. http://archive.thenorthernecho.co.uk/2005/1/24/25235.html
John Kirkpatrick
on July 21, 2009
at 02:13 PM
Report this commentEminently sensible in my opinion. now can the police turn their attention to the Dr's McCann and their negligent child rearing. Nothing would have happened to Madeleine if they had not left the children on their own that fateful night
Suusi M-B
on July 21, 2009
at 02:13 PM
Report this commentMr Ksiezak.
You seem just the sort of chap to live in our Brave new World.
The police are behaving like social controllers,their job is catching criminals, not persecuting the citizen.
This chap should have insisted on being charged with an offence, the database society is a disgrace, freedom is destroyed.
john bonny
on July 21, 2009
at 01:40 PM
Report this commentWhat does this have to do with the middle classes? The police overreacted, it has nothing to do with the fact that the gentleman in question was of the middle class. Is the correspondent feeling a little victimised today?
Parbo Kimz
on July 21, 2009
at 01:27 PM
Report this comment"The lowest apples on the tree."

"The easy pickings."

Police officers all over the country admit that they go after trivial 'crimes' because they can quickly reach their targets by doing so.
james
on July 21, 2009
at 01:23 PM
Report this commentI have been involved in two instances of over the top Police behaviour. The most petty was whilst I was a student at Manchester University when I jumped a red light on my bike. I admitted that I was wrong to the Polce officers and apoligised, but they became aggressive and threatened to have me banned from driving. I explained that I thought they were making heavy weather of this and that I did not believe they could take away mr driving licence for a minor cycling offence (which I later found out was correct). I was therefore shocked to receive a summons for dangerous cycling a few weeks later which was accompanied by a four page witness statement from the Police officers. The matter went to court at great public expense and two Police officers spent an afternoon at court. I am in no way trying to belittle what I did and I admitted I was wrong. However I thought it was completely disporportinate for Manchester Police and the CPS to deal with the matter in this way. The Magistrate who dealt with the matter agreed that it was over the top, he asked the Police officers to leave the court saying he had heard enough from them already and fined me �60 costs. I just cannot believe that in a City with all the crime that Manchester has, that this was a sensible use of Police resources. It is no wonder people have such a cycnical view of the Police when they repeatedly behave like this.
Ed Marcus
on July 21, 2009
at 01:10 PM
Report this commentWell I think the police should have gone further and charged him with Child Neglect. The Middleclass are only too happy to blame lower earners about their irresponsible behaviour and here we see the hypocrisy and percieved superiority of the middle class. So, as I have heard from many of the middle class, these parents should go to parenting classes....I bet he calls himself a professional too.
Steven Ksiezak
on July 21, 2009
at 01:08 PM
Report this commentFour years ago a young lady was charged and convicted of driving without due care and attention near Newcastle. Her "crime" was she was eating an apple whilst driving.
Roland G. Adams
on July 21, 2009
at 01:06 PM
Report this comment


Well the above can all be seen at CLICK HERE

I have added my own comment and wonder if it will be published!

Usually the Telegraph is prety fair!

Hi,

sorry - time pressure but have a look at:
http://stolenkids-bloggers.blogspot.com/

AND:
http://stolenkids-documents.blogspot.com/

Then for Police Malpractice:
http://gl-w.blogspot.com/2009/06/g123-but-police-are-allowed.html

Or even Police utter incompetence at all levels:
http://gl-w.blogspot.com/2009/06/g119-pc-idiot-police-failure.html

ALSO I am sure I have Missed Many of the Police Murders:
http://gl-w.blogspot.com/2009/05/g103-another-police-murder-added.html

Then of course THE State has grown whilst commerce and the economy shrinks.

We now have 30,000 assorted politicians at a cost of over £500,000,000 a year.

Our Government has so mishandled the economy that we now OWE £800Billion they admit to - 57% of our GDP.

Our Ministry of Defeat has lost £150Million of radio equipment!

Our Ministry of Defeat has bungled the payroll of the army to the tune of £150,000,000.

The Government has proved so dishonourable most informed people do not believe a word of the Global Warming / Climate Change tax raising scam with huge % of independent scientists speaking out and telling the truth at the risk of never getting more government grant money!

A huge % of our peoples so distrust the Government an self serving politicians that they believe Swine Flu is a deliberate medium for a trial run on vaccination to reduce population.

Meanwhile we squander £1,800,000 per hour OVER £40Million every single day on membership of The EU when not one honest politician has EVER given an honest and convincing reason for membership or gain.

Meanwhile the police batter and bully those who peacefully protest - see the videos of G20 etc.

Brown clearly hasn't a clue what he is doing, after 12 years of his control of the economy he is still too stupid to realise it was HIS incompetence and tinkering NOT other Countries, there was no need for him to lead OUR Country into such lunacy!

We have Generals keeping quiet as Generals for fear of damaging their pensions and the Exec. Directorships they aim for.

Just look at Guthrie who cow towed for his peerage and some of the biggest income exec. directorships even of Colt as a nothing more than an arms dealer. Pays better than drug dealer but equally as dishonourable.

You will note John Major draws down £1M a year as a director of Carlysle Group 'payolla'? What does he DO worth that to arms dealers?

Blair was near penniless until he took office and rampped up a property portfolio in the 10s of Millions. He was GIVEN a £1M as a boncella the other day. What has that liar done for mankind besides lie to dupe Britain & America to war - a war criminal based on the killings he is responsible for personally.

Consider how much an MP makes yet they make less than 20% of our laws yet even those have to comply with their masters in the EU.

MEPs are no more than Massively Expensive Parasites - they have no effective job other than trying to con us into stuffing their pockets with unaccounted cash.

We were roundly and soundly defeated in Iraq and driven out due to incompetent management.

We have inadequate helicopters in Afghanistan - more mismanagement - now in panic they are to get Merlin 4tonners at £31M what for? they won't be there as more than ornaments as they have forgotten to put the armamour into them, so they can't legally carry soldiers!!!

Hueys or Blackhawks can be delivered within 1month @ £4M each + £2M each conversion and maintenance OFF THE SHELF!

Why then are we spending £1.7Billion on future Lynx for delivery in 2014? I understand conversion for theatre is extra. At this cost of £14,000,000 each dare we use them and risk losing one?

One wonders by what contorted logic Common Purpose with its Government affiliations, massive grants and government contracts that make it a multi, multi £Million profit making business registered as a charity!!

Then we see banks making Billions in profits and paying massive bonuses - yet their chums in the treasury have given them unlimited bail outs rather than prison sentences.

We all pay masasively more taxes yet all that happens is politicians grow the Kleptocratic QUANGOcracy and swan off to make their £Millions take long holidays and feather their ducks nests.

They have no meaningful job when they are at work now so that there is more time needed to rubber stamp by Statutory Instrument or Order In Council to oblige their EU masters.

The answer has been to send the useless MPs on holday as they get in the way!

Our Politicians have destroyed our industry - we no longer make ANYTHING to export at a cost it will be purchased and having deliberately destroyed our economy now we watch helplessly as our Politicians determinedly force on an unwilling and increasingly resentful public the New Constitution risibly sold as The Lisbon Treaty.

So that will liberate relocation of the financial core of Britain's City to Frankfurt!

Do any of our 30,000 over paid politicians have any honourable patriotic ideas or ability?

One wonders why so little of the truth is published by the meeeja!

'We live in hope' - minded of the fact that the balance of the quote is 'and die in despair' but it is our duty to inform!

Regards,
Greg L-W.

"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap."
Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821),

Regards,
Greg L-W.

for all my contact details & Blogs:
CLICK HERE

For More Information & Facts visit:
WEB SITES:
SilentMajority/
WelshAssembly
CatterpillarsAndButterflies
Greg's WordPress Blog

‘The arrogance and hubris of corrupt politicians
will be responsible for every drop of blood spilt
in the Wars of Disassociation, if Britain does not
leave the EU.

The ugly, centralised, undemocratic supra national policies being imposed by the centralised and largely unelected decisionmakers of The EU for alien aims, ailien values and to suit alien needs stand every possibility of creating 200,000,000 deaths across EUrope as a result of the blind arrogance and hubris of the idiologues in the central dictatorship, and their economic illiteracy marching hand in glove with the idiocy of The CAP & The CFP - both policies which deliver bills, destroy lives and denude food stocks.

The EU, due to the political idiocy and corruption of its undemocratic leaders, is now a net importer of food, no longer able to feed itself and with a decreasing range of over priced goods of little use to the rest of the world to sell with which to counter the net financial drain of endless imports.

British Politicians with pens and treachery, in pursuit
of their own agenda and greed, have done more
damage to the liberty, freedoms, rights and democracy
of the British peoples than any army in over 1,000 years.


The disastrous effects of British politicians selling Britain
into the thrall of foreign rule by the EU for their own
personal rewards has damaged the well-being of Britain
more than the armies of Hitler
and the Franco - German - Italian axis of 1939 - 1945.

~ for more Quotes & Facts:
http://www.silentmajority.co.uk/

############-\\\///-########### #
############= ~ = ############
###########(`~0~0~') ###########
--------oooO--------(_)-------Oooo---------
############Regards############
##########M r C H A D###########

Until we gain our liberty, restore our sovereignty, repatriate our democracy and reinstate our Justice system and our borders - defended by our Police and Military armed with sustainable and obtainable weaponry:
Treat every election as a referendum.

Don't waste your vote on a self serving Politician in ANY election until we are liberated from the EU and are a Free Sovereign peoples, with independent control of our own borders, making and managing Law & Justice for our own benefit, in our own elected Westminster Parliament where we can fire our politicians at the ballot box, if they fail to represent OUR best interests.
Make your vote count
Write on YOUR ballot Paper

LEAVE THE EU

Sunday, 19 July 2009

#G151* - Mary Jo DIED & TED MADE MONEY & GOT RICHER!

#G151* - Mary Jo DIED & TED MADE MONEY & GOT RICHER!

40th anniversary of Mary Jo Kopechne’s drowning at Chappaquiddick...Kennedy's story still doubtful

July 17 2009

Mary Jo Kopechne

Sometime around midnight, on July 18, 1969 Kennedy drove his Oldsmobile 88 off of a small bridge on Chappaquiddick island, into eight feet of chilly water. The vehicle landed upside-down. While Kennedy managed to free himself from the wreck and swim to safety, his passenger, 28-year-old Mary Jo Kopechne was left in the car to drown.

Once he reached shore, Kennedy claims to have made seven or eight attempts to rescue Kopechne, but could not free her.

Kennedy then walked back to the cottage where he and four other men, were partying with several young women known as the “Boiler Room Girls“ who had worked on Robert Kennedy‘s campaign. Though Kennedy passed by a fire station and a private home to return to the cottage, he never stopped to ask for help for the trapped Kopechne.

He returned to the party and according to Kennedy himself, informed his cousin and a friend of the situation. The two men, Joseph Gargan and Paul Markham claim to have returned to the scene of the accident and made several unsuccessful attempts to free Kopechne.

Then Kennedy’s story takes an even stranger turn.

After the failed rescue attempts, Kennedy claims to have jumped back into the water and made the 500-foot swim across the channel back to Edgartown. He then walked back to his hotel and spent the night. He even took the time to change clothes and pay a visit to the front-desk, to complain about a noisy party--no doubt Kennedy's sloppy attempt at securing an alibi.

The next morning, Gargan and Markham around 8:00 a.m., and were supposedly shocked to discover that Kennedy never reported the accident to police. According to Kennedy‘s own testimony, he told them: "about my own thoughts and feelings as I swam across that channel ... that somehow when they arrived in the morning that they were going to say that Mary Jo was still alive"

The two men along with Kennedy went back to Chappaquiddick, where Kennedy spent some time making phone calls, seeking advice from various individuals as to how to proceed.

Meanwhile, two fisherman had discovered the submerged car and notified police. At 8:45a.m. a diver recovered the lifeless body of Mary Jo Kopechne.

It was not until 10a.m., over nine hours after driving-off of the bridge that Ted Kennedy went to the police station in Edgarton to report the accident.

Kennedy then gave the following prepared statement to police: “On July 18, 1969, at approximately 11:15 p.m. in Chappaquiddick, Martha's Vineyard, Massachusetts, I was driving my car on Main Street on my way to get the ferry back to Edgartown. I was unfamiliar with the road and turned right onto Dike Road, instead of bearing hard left on Main Street. After proceeding for approximately one-half mile on Dike Road I descended a hill and came upon a narrow bridge.

The car went off the side of the bridge. There was one passenger with me, one Miss Mary [Kopechne], a former secretary of my brother Sen. Robert Kennedy. The car turned over and sank into the water and landed with the roof resting on the bottom. I attempted to open the door and the window of the car but have no recollection of how I got out of the car. I came to the surface and then repeatedly dove down to the car in an attempt to see if the passenger was still in the car. I was unsuccessful in the attempt. I was exhausted and in a state of shock.

I recall walking back to where my friends were eating. There was a car parked in front of the cottage and I climbed into the backseat. I then asked for someone to bring me back to Edgartown. I remember walking around for a period and then going back to my hotel room. When I fully realized what had happened this morning, I immediately contacted the police”

In a move which must have been rather tortuous for her parents, Kennedy attended Mary Jo's funeral, wearing a neck brace (which he reportedly never wore again) and looking rather pathetic.

The diver who recovered Kopechne’s body, John Farrar testified at the official inquest that her body was found where the air pocket would have formed. He said: “Had I received a call within five to ten minutes of the accident occurring, and was able, as I was the following morning, to be at the victim's side within twenty-five minutes of receiving the call, in such event there is a strong possibility that she would have been alive on removal from the submerged car.”

A week after the incident, Kennedy pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of an accident and received a suspended two-month sentence. Kennedy then went on national television to repeat his rather implausible story, and to ask for the public’s “prayers.”

The ensuing scandal and questionable details given by all of those involved is now left to speculation. It was obvious to most people that Kennedy had allowed a young girl to drown, in a desperate and self-serving attempt to protect his political career.

The incident all but guaranteed that Kennedy could never be a serious candidate for President of the United States.

To view the article CLICK HERE

Court verdicts tend to be based upon how much law you can afford - particularly in America!

"In politics, stupidity is not a handicap."
Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821),

Regards,
Greg L-W.

for all my contact details & Blogs:
CLICK HERE

For More Information & Facts visit:
WEB SITES:
SilentMajority/
WelshAssembly
CatterpillarsAndButterflies
Greg's WordPress Blog

‘The arrogance and hubris of corrupt politicians
will be responsible for every drop of blood spilt
in the Wars of Disassociation, if Britain does not
leave the EU.

The ugly, centralised, undemocratic supra national policies being imposed by the centralised and largely unelected decisionmakers of The EU for alien aims, ailien values and to suit alien needs stand every possibility of creating 200,000,000 deaths across EUrope as a result of the blind arrogance and hubris of the idiologues in the central dictatorship, and their economic illiteracy marching hand in glove with the idiocy of The CAP & The CFP - both policies which deliver bills, destroy lives and denude food stocks.

The EU, due to the political idiocy and corruption of its undemocratic leaders, is now a net importer of food, no longer able to feed itself and with a decreasing range of over priced goods of little use to the rest of the world to sell with which to counter the net financial drain of endless imports.

British Politicians with pens and treachery, in pursuit
of their own agenda and greed, have done more
damage to the liberty, freedoms, rights and democracy
of the British peoples than any army in over 1,000 years.


The disastrous effects of British politicians selling Britain
into the thrall of foreign rule by the EU for their own
personal rewards has damaged the well-being of Britain
more than the armies of Hitler
and the Franco - German - Italian axis of 1939 - 1945.

~ for more Quotes & Facts:
http://www.silentmajority.co.uk/

############-\\\///-########### #
############= ~ = ############
###########(`~0~0~') ###########
--------oooO--------(_)-------Oooo---------
############Regards############
##########M r C H A D###########

Until we gain our liberty, restore our sovereignty, repatriate our democracy and reinstate our Justice system and our borders - defended by our Police and Military armed with sustainable and obtainable weaponry:
Treat every election as a referendum.

Don't waste your vote on a self serving Politician in ANY election until we are liberated from the EU and are a Free Sovereign peoples, with independent control of our own borders, making and managing Law & Justice for our own benefit, in our own elected Westminster Parliament where we can fire our politicians at the ballot box, if they fail to represent OUR best interests.
Make your vote count
Write on YOUR ballot Paper

LEAVE THE EU
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...