Foreign Aid being re-routed to UK unions and indoctrination programmes

David Cameron is facing growing criticism of his move to shelter the international aid budget from cuts after it was revealed that it diverts millions of pounds to trade unions and controversial projects in the UK.

International Development is one of just two Whitehall departments – the other is Health – ring-fenced from the swingeing 25  per cent spending cuts announced by Chancellor George Osborne last week.

But critics are increasingly questioning whether its £6 billion-a-year budget should be spared – while Departments such as the Home Office could be forced to sack 35,000 police officers in the £113 billion deficit reduction package.

Research has found that, since 2003, the Department for International Development (DFID) has spent millions on projects including:

• £3.6  million to the Trades Union Congress.
• More than £1 million to teach nursery and primary school children in the UK about the ‘dangers of unequal global development’.
• £600,000 to an ethnic minority think-tank which has not published a report for almost three years.
• £300,000 to the National Union of Teachers to ‘enable them to become global agents of change’.

Last night, the Conservatives said DFID’s immunity from the cuts would remain – but a ‘full value-for-money review’ of its spending was promised.

The Prime Minister’s Election pledge to protect the health and overseas aid budgets was designed to neutralise Labour claims that the Tories would hit frontline services.

But it means the burden of Mr Osborne’s move to cut Whitehall by a quarter over four years will fall on Transport and the Home Office – which face cuts of up to 33 per cent as a result.

The policy came despite a pre-Election audit of the DFID, which identified £800 million of annual spending with dubious merit – including £35 million in aid to corrupt Uganda and an astonishing £825 million to nuclear-armed India over the three years from 2009.

The EU also receives £1 billion a year from the department to distribute to developing countries.

Now, research by the International Policy Network (IPN) think-tank has identified where much of DFID’s money goes in this country.

Since 2003, £3.6 million has been given to the TUC, including a £2.4 million handout in 2009 for ‘advocacy and lobbying work’ and ‘to build support for development in the United Kingdom’.

Of this, £756,000 went on a ‘Strategic Framework Partnership Agreement’ – to fund training for the TUC to learn how to apply for further DFID grants.

The department also found £600,000 to set up a UK think-tank called Connections For Development, which aims to ‘provide a forum for black and ethnic minority organisations on issues relating to international development’.

And much more. Fucking corrupt shit.

THIS is why the public sector needs a massive cull

Remember as you read this, YOU are paying for it.

The Great Inertia Sector: A whistleblower's account of council work where staff pull six-month sickies

In his emergency Budget this week, Chancellor George Osborne announced he was cutting public sector expenditure by 25 per cent. Unions have declared the cuts irresponsible. But are they? Here, one employee for a large inner London authority lifts the lid on the culture of inertia and incompetence at his workplace. The Mail knows the true identity of the man - a graduate who has been a planning officer for eight years. But to protect his job, he is writing under an assumed name.

Monday morning, it's 10am and I'm late for work - but there's no point hurrying because even though I should have been at my desk 30 minutes ago, I know I'll be the first to arrive at the office.

Sure enough, the planning department is a ghost town.

Our flexi-hours policy means that employees can start any time between 7.30am and 10am, but council workers like to treat that as a rough guideline rather than the contractual obligation that it is.

I'm a senior planning officer: it's my job to inspect buildings, grant planning approval and to guide members of the public looking to alter their homes.

Our department has 60 employees and - until last Tuesday - a budget of £22million.

I've been there for two years and in that period the only time I've ever seen every employee present and correct was at the Christmas party.

At least ten people will be off sick on any one day. The departmental record holder is Doreen - she has worked a grand total of eight days in 14 months.

Doreen must be the unluckiest woman in the country.

In the past year and a half she claims she has: fallen victim to frostbite; been hit by a car; and accidentally set herself on fire.

But she's really pulled out all the stops with her latest excuse: witchcraft. That's right, Doreen believes somebody in Nigeria has cast a spell on her and that it would be unprofessional of her to attempt to do the job she is paid £56k a year for while under the influence of the spell.

She has already been off for four months on full pay. I've no idea how long this spell lasts, but my guessing would be six months to the day - the exact amount of time council employees can take off on full pay before their money is reduced.

But having just eight weeks of full pay left won't be a problem for Doreen and the rest of the council's sickly staff - they'll simply return to work when the six months is up, put in a day or two's work and then go off sick for another six months on full pay again. Easy.

Of course they have to provide sick-notes from a doctor, but as you can buy fake ones online for £10 it's never proved a problem.

There are procedures in place to address attendance, but nobody ever follows them through - chances are the person whose job it is to monitor sickness is probably signed off himself.

Some human resources managers, usually new to the job, do try to take action - but it mostly backfires.

All credit to the bright-eyed young HR manager who, last year, wanted to dismiss a senior employee who had been off sick for three months.

The employee had still been using his company mobile phone, from Marbella.

However, the employee was able (with a little help from the mighty Unison union) to argue that there's no reason why 'sick' people can't rent villas in the Costa Del Sol.

I've been told by colleagues that I don't take enough sick leave - when I protest that it is because I'm in good health they look confused. What's that got to do with anything?

At my borough a worker can take two weeks before having to produce a doctor's note (fake or not).

With the five weeks' annual leave plus bank holidays, even the most conscientious worker in my department is easily taking 12 weeks a year off.

To add insult to injury, some London boroughs recently introduced a new scheme whereby anybody who did an extra 15 minutes' work a day for 20 days could take an extra day's holiday.

But when you can so easily take six months off, who needs official holidays?

Back to the day's business. Jerry is the next to arrive at 10.25am - before he takes his jacket off he performs his morning ritual of taking both his phones off the hook.

God forbid that any resident and council tax payer should be able to speak to him and get some of the advice he's paid £64k a year to dispense.

Jerry is 63 and two years from retirement. He is what is known in the civil service and local government as an 'untouchable' - he's been at the council for more than 40 years, does no work, but would cost an absolute fortune to get rid of.

So he's left alone to play online poker, Skype his daughter in Florida and take his two-hour daily snooze at his desk, no doubt dreaming of the day when his gold-plated public sector pension will kick in.

If you think Jerry's pay is generous, consider this: the head of my department is on an annual salary of £170k plus bonuses, his deputy nets £99k and even the office PAs are on a very respectable £38k - just two thousand less than I get.

I listen to my answerphone and, as usual, there are about 20 messages from people trying to report faulty streetlights or complain that their rubbish hasn't been collected - calls that have been misdirected by our useless call centre.

When I first started here at the council, I tried to pass these messages on to the right department, but eventually gave up - nobody answers phones, nobody listens to voicemails, and emails go unread.

There's no point showing any initiative. I once wandered down to the 'Streetcare' department to ask why the hell nobody was answering the phone.

But only two staff had turned up that day and they were both in the prayer room. Yes, you read that correctly, all large council offices now provide prayer rooms, primarily for their Muslim employees whose faith requires them to perform devotional prayers at midday, in the afternoon and at sunset.

Although it's two years since I started working for this authority I've also worked for two other London boroughs in various capacities over a period of 12 years. In that time I've never known anybody be sacked, no matter how inept and unprofessional they may be.

I'm not sure what it takes to get fired in local government. I'd say 'murdering the CEO' but, even then, you're more likely to be sent on an 'anger in the workplace' course.

Councils love their workshops, training courses and seminars. This week alone I've been invited to attend: A cycle hire and efficiency course; a traffic and pollution briefing; and a training course on offsite health and safety.

Next week there is a two-day course on 'letter writing skills' - I dearly hope that Jackie, our departmental PA, will attend this one. I've given up using her and now type my own correspondence and reports.

The last time she typed a letter for me (to an architect) she misspelt 'accommodation' and 'environment' throughout.

I gently pointed this out to her and asked her to redo the document. But she went sick for two weeks with stress, complaining that she was being bullied.

When my boss called me in to discuss this I, jokingly, said: 'Well I'll just let her misspell everything in future, shall I?' To which he replied: 'Yes, I think that's best for now.'

I'm not sure what workshop I was asked to attend for that particular misdemeanour, but I do recall the 'cultural awareness and sensitivity' one following an incident where I outrageously asked a black colleague if I could open a window behind her desk.

It was 88 degrees outside and our offices have no air conditioning. This lady was born and bred in North London but claimed her Caribbean heritage meant she felt the cold and opening a window by six inches would cause her to suffer.

I did the workshop and wrote her a letter of apology as recommended. I actually began to question whether I was racist or insensitive.

That evening I saw Sean, my oldest friend who is black. I ran the window story by him - he eventually stopped laughing after about 20 minutes.

You can't be made to attend these workshops but, surprisingly, the take-up is remarkably high.

Not because those going want to improve their skills, but because a full day's training comes with a full day's free catering.

' Fact Finding Missions' are another great favourite within the public sector. The last one I attended was a two-day trip ( transport and four-star accommodation included) to a football club in the Midlands.

Supposedly it was to understand how other inner cities tackle sporting events in areas of high population.

However, the only 'fact' I discovered was that it takes about 11 pints and two whisky chasers before my boss keels over.

In fairness, there are some very hard workers at the council, but they are so massively outweighed by the workshy that they're fighting a losing battle. The culture is very much one of getting minimum done for maximum pay.

Even when a reasonable proportion of the staff turns up for work (for our office that would be about 60 per cent) very little gets done because the officers cannot be bothered with the fiddly paperwork that goes with the job.

When residents contact the office because they want, for example, a loft extension or to replace windows in a conservation area, they hit such a wall of inefficiency and apathy that many simply give up or go ahead without permission.

I recently received a letter from somebody looking for the plans to a building that was erected ten years ago.

I passed it on to Jackie the ever-efficient PA, who claimed she couldn't find them. I went to look and located them in 30 seconds.

The only time the department ever really jumps into action is when architects complain.

They know planning inside out and won't be fobbed off with delaying tactics that ordinary citizens have to contend with.

You can't even give them the old council favourite of claiming that you can't answer any of their questions because of 'data protection'. We love that excuse - nobody really knows what it means, but we use it all the time.

Bosses of local authorities have bonuses dependent on not getting high numbers of complaints.

But the only way complaints can be recorded is if they are dealt with - if they're ignored or mysteriously lost then they never existed and won't be counted.

Despite all this, my department makes a huge amount of money - mostly from private developers.

If they want to build something it costs them £2,300 just to have an initial planning meeting with us.

What they don't know is that we've already had a meeting and decided they probably won't get permission - unless they agree to a 'planning gain' - a dodgy but perfectly legal practice whereby a developer who wants to build, say, a hotel, will be told that he can have his planning permission, but only if he also agrees to build a community centre too.

It's a way for councils to improve local amenities, without having to pay for them from public funds.

Some might call it bribery. For us, it's everyday business that ensures our budgets are protected for our vital work - like protecting our pay rises and perks.

So can anything be done to curtail this greed, waste and chronic incompetence?

George Osborne clearly thinks so, with his bold promises to tackle the bloated public sector head-on.

We had a meeting on Thursday to discuss the Chancellor's proposed cuts - there was talk of strike action among the younger workers, but much rubbing of hands among the 'untouchables', many of whom could walk away with six-figure golden goodbyes.

The cuts and pay freezes are desperately needed, but the one thing Mr Osborne will never be able to control is the culture of inertia and inefficiency that is rife throughout the public sector.

Of course, when I tell my friends in the private sector about my working conditions, they can scarcely believe it. As the recession bites, they consider themselves lucky to be holding on to their jobs, and are willing to work extra hours or take a pay freeze to ensure their firm's survival.

In the public sector, though, there is no competitive edge; no incentive to cuts costs or improve efficiency. Few genuinely fear for their job security, protected as they are by threats of union action every time the axe looks likely to fall.

It's the same story across the world: when a nation's public sector is allowed to expand into a bloated behemoth, it is almost impossible to cut it down to size, still less to change the culture of waste and laziness that sets in.

I don't know what the solution is. Even those, like myself, who join with the best of intentions are soon worn down and end up subscribing to the 'if you can't beat them, join them' school of thought.

Of course the real scandal is it's your money that's paying for the jollies, the prayer rooms and the never- ending workshops.

In my authority's borough, the average householder pays £1,330 a year in council tax. I'm sure they'd be thrilled to know that they're funding Jerry's internet gambling and Doreen's never-ending sick pay.

Good luck Mr Osborne - you're going to need it.

EU directive behind England flag ban?

After those ‘silly rumours’ of state agencies banning the flag during the coming World Cup, stories are emerging of state agencies banning the flag during the coming World Cup. Granted, the difference is private and public enterprises, but still.

• England flag ban for taxi drivers in Canterbury
• Banned from flying the flag: Binmen threatened with sack if they show support for England during World Cup

My Spidey senses tell me there is more to this than meets the eye, we (hopefully) all know of the EU’s hatred for anything that reinforces/ celebrates national sovereignty/ private property. In case you didn’t know, here is an article from 2008 by the Telegraph.

On St George's Day, EU wipes England off map.

The new European plan splits England into three zones that are joined with areas in other countries.

The "Manche" region covers part of southern England and northern France while the Atlantic region includes western parts of England, Portugal, Spain and Wales.

The North Sea region includes eastern England, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and parts of Germany.

A copy of the map, which makes no reference to England or Britain, has even renamed the English Channel the "Channel Sea".

Each zone will have a "transnational regional assembly", although they will not have extensive powers. However, the zones are regarded as symbolically important by other countries.

German ministers claimed that the plan was about "underlying the goal of a united Europe" to "permanently overcome old borders" at a time when the "Constitution for Europe needs to regain momentum".

No Fourth Reich there then?

A bit of digging finds a previous enforced ban on national flags on car number plates.

MOTORISTS who display the Union Flag on their vehicle number plates from this autumn can be stopped by the police and prosecuted under regulations approved yesterday by MPs.

However, it will be legal to carry the European Union symbol of 12 yellow stars on a blue background. A coalition of Tory, Liberal Democrat and nationalist MPs failed to block the proposed law, which is intended to implement an EU directive to harmonise number plate design in the interests of "clarity and safety".

The Road Vehicle 'Display of Registration Marks' Regulations 2001 mean that it will only be legal to carry on the registration plate the letters GB alongside the Euro symbol. It will not be lawful to have a depiction of the Union Flag, the Scottish saltire, the cross of St George or the Welsh dragon.

That particular regulation (Statutory Instrument) can be found here. After a glance, it looks like the rule for this can be found in Part 4 Misc., (2) (a).

International distinguishing signs and other material
16. 

    (1) No material other than a registration mark may be displayed on a registration plate except material complying with the requirements of any of the relevant standards mentioned in Schedule 2.
    (2) Where a mark is displayed on a dual purpose plate - 

(a) no material other than the international distinguishing sign of the United Kingdom displayed in accordance with the Council Registration may be placed in the space provided on the plate for that purpose;

Under the Explanatory Note (why am I reading this, it’s a nice day) it alludes to the EU Directive.

(g) The making of provision for the display of the international distinguishing sign of the United Kingdom adjacent to the registration mark in accordance with Council Regulation (EC) No. 2411/98 (a copy of which can be obtained from the Stationery Office). (See regulation 16.)

So here it is.

Council Regulation (EC) No 2411/98 of 3 November 1998 on the recognition in intra-Community traffic of the distinguishing sign of the Member State in which motor vehicles and their trailers are registered

This does two things.

First, it commands member states to refuse to recognise national flags;

(3) Whereas the Community is not a contracting party to the convention and whereas some of its Member States which are parties to it have recourse to the provisions of Article 37 of the Convention; whereas those Member States thus require vehicles from other Member States to display the distinguishing sign provided for by Annex 3 to the Convention; whereas some of those Member States do not recognise other distinguishing signs such as those displayed on registration plates which, while indicating the Member State in which the vehicle is registered, do not conform to Annex 3 to the Convention;

Annex 3 describes the EU flag by the way.

Second thing it does, is command member states to use the Annex 3 specs for registration.

(4) Whereas several Member States have introduced a model registration plate which, on the extreme left, displays a blue zone containing the 12 yellow stars representing the European flag plus the distinguishing sign of the Member State of registration; whereas for the purpose of intra-Community transport this distinguishing sign meets the objective of identifying the State of registration as provided for in Article 37 of the Convention;

What does this have to do with the current bans on the England flag? I don’t know yet, I’m still researching. In Canterbury, the cabbies believe the ban is to protect the ‘feelings of minorities’. This wouldn’t surprise me either to be honest, either way, I think it’s pathetic. If I find more info on this I’ll update this post (I still have a few avenues to research) but until then, I’m going to blow my brains out after boring myself to death.

Have a nice weekend.

European Commission wants powers to vet budgets of the 27 member states

This is rich.

The unelected suits of the ‘United Federal Europe’ project want the powers to check the budgets of member states to make sure they don’t cook the books for their own benefit (ahem Greece ahem).

This, coming from the organisation so rank with corruption that it’s own accounts haven’t been signed off for the past 15 years in a row.

Now there are rumours that Germany wants to move back to the Mark, and dump that shitty Euro monopoly money, their fury at having their wealth stolen from them to fund the lifestyles of others is continuing to grow. Good for them I say.

Ahh I love the smell of chaos in the morning.

EUISS and World Governance: We Need Immigration and Climate Change As Arguments for Military World State Control

Summary: The EU Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) is the brain behind the EU's military. It is centered around Bilderberger and Club of Rome member, Javier Solana, former NATO Secretary General and EU foreign minister (High Representative). EUISS' annual publication 2009: "What ambitions for European defence in 2020", contains interesting information: Swedish Tomas Ries writes that the ISS needs a European army to defend EU borders against massive poverty immigration. He calls it distasteful and immoral - but necessary!

Furthermore, Ries writes that Europe needs to be able to wage war against countries (including Russia) with other views on the world than the EU's New World Order views. Furthermore, this New World Order will usurp the right of deciding to occupy an area of a former sovereign state in the name of, e.g. climate or biodiversity! Nevertheless, the EU has started to fulfill its promise of free movement within the EU for Muslim Euro-Mediterranean partners, as promised in 2003.

Furthermore, the EU has set up recruiting offices in Africa to recruit 56 million. Muslims + their families into the EU by 2050! At the same time, the EUISS writes in the report from its annual congress 2009, "Soft power". Managing a Post-crisis World", that it would be wrong to bar the Union from the outside world, because it is contrary to the sacred dogma of "unity in diversity." But then comes the strange thing: It is stated, that there is no risk of confrontation between the great powers - for they are partners. Why else does the European Union want an army, then?

Regionalization, it is said, is part of global governance. The Global Agenda (21) is generated by the linkage of the fight against the crises (climate, financial, immigration, development) - that the elite behind the New World Order has created itself for this very purpose. The G20 must be strengthened - and bought NGOs must have much more to say in support of the New World Order program - because this is New World Order "legitimacy". Better is soft power - but make no mistake. The EU will put hard power behind if it does not succeed by soft means. The British Defence Ministry wrote that everybody must be linked to a verifiable network (chips, among others) - and it will be deemed suspicious to stay outside. It stipulated that it will be difficult for those who want to preserve their indigenous culture and beliefs. They will be considered radicalised - while this is obviously not true, for example of Muslim "neo-Europeans". The UN has started to realize John F. Kennedy 's proposal from 1961 to abolish all armies and only maintain a UN world army of 50,000 men to oppress troublemakers against the New World Order. The NATO has usurped this role in 2008.

FULL ARTICLE HERE

Dover to be sold to the French - in line with EU Britain breakup

White Cliffs of Dover to be sold to the French to help reduce Government's debt

For generations Dover has stood as an indomitable symbol of Britain’s freedom and independence.

The town, with its white cliffs, port and sprawling castle stood at the very edge of the nation’s frontier with the Continent.

But now part of that proud history is up for sale and the leading bidder is revealed as the former age-old enemy – France.

The Port of Dover is being recommended by Government advisers for sale to the French authorities.

It is one of a string of public assets which have been earmarked for privatisation as the Government battles with a record £830billion national debt.

The proposal for the port has prompted outrage.

Prospective Tory MP for Dover Charles Elphicke said: ‘It’s clear Gordon Brown has no sense of the history of our nation or the pride of our town.

‘How dare he consider selling it all off to the French? Dover is the English border. The people of Dover have a clear message for him – hands off our port, hands off the English border.’

The government runs up a disgusting debt then proposes selling off national assets to foreign entities to 'solve the problem'. How convenient, what is even more convenient is that the selling of the South of England to the French fits in perfectly with the EU's Arc Manche regional plan This essentially calls for the moving of national borders, splitting former countries and merging them with each other.

This keeps happening. Government actions generate a reaction, which the government then uses to propose 'solutions'. These solutions always call for destruction of national assets and capital, never a reduction of the state, it's expenditure or its illegal powers over the people.

It wouldn't surprise me if the Rothschilds didn't have a hand in this, knowing their enthusiasm for 'helping' the state sell taxpayer capital to foreigners, especially on the back of national debt, which is owned to the Bank of England, owned by the same banking family.

Remember, the fastest and most efficient way to solve up the national debt crisis, is simply to cut the government down to size and get out of the EU. Not spend more, or sell anything. It is the massive spending which is causing this, so using that logic, the government will eventually sell everything in Britain to foreign agencies, including your life and everything you own.

Arc Manche H/T Adrian.

Just so you know the mentality of your politicians

The Non-Existent French People

In the comments on a post from a few days ago, our French correspondent Robert Marchenoir had some choice words to say about France which are worth reproducing here. I’ve combined and adapted two comments to make the following post:

The signs of dhimmitude are all over the place in France. The Minister for immigration, integration and national identity Eric Besson, a former Socialist, has just said, in front of an immigrant audience, right in the middle of a Muslim suburb next to Paris:

“France is neither a people, nor a language, nor a territory, nor a religion, it’s a conglomerate of peoples who want to live together. There are no indigenous French, there is only a France made out of miscegenation.”

How more insulting can you get towards the French people and their history ? How contemptible is that ?

Traitor, traitor, traitor !

Full article here.

"Muslim needs should be priority in Britain" - Gov analyst

More than half the population believe Britain is deeply divided along religious lines, according to an official survey.

A majority would also strongly oppose the development of a mosque in their neighbourhood, the research into social attitudes found.

Almost half - 45 per cent - say they do not believe that diversity has brought benefits to the country and that religious diversity has had a negative impact.

The government-backed inquiry revealed that only one in four people in Britain feel positively about Islam.

That would be the Muslim section of the population I presume. I don't know anyone who feels positively about Islam. A long time ago, I confronted one of my Muslim friends when he was talking about 'killing all the Jews'. We were children at the time. The tenets of Islam are completely opposed to individual liberty and limited government, probably one of the reasons they are importing them by the millions.

The warnings on the extent of the divide between Muslims and much of the rest of the country come in the annual British Social Attitudes survey, produced with funding from Whitehall.
It found that 55 per cent of people would be 'bothered' if a large mosque was built in their locality. Only 15 per cent said they would have similar qualms about a church.

Some 52 per cent think Britain is deeply divided along religious lines. The findings, following worrying signs in other government research that tension over religion is increasing, emerged in the wake of the furore over an attempt by Islamic extremists to march through Wootton Bassett.

The social attitudes survey is produced by leading academics from interviews with 4,486 people. Its findings, to be published in full later this month, will raise concern that the Government's policy of producing 'social cohesion' by backing moderate Islam and isolating extremism is not working.

Again, Islam is not supposed to mix with our 'unclean, kaffir' culture. Regardless of how many Muslims integrate, the FACT that Islam views other cultures as inferior means there will always be a very large proportion of Muslims who will not integrate.

Professor David Voas, who analysed the findings, said many people believe the size and nature of Britain's Muslim population presents a threat to national identity.

Professor Voas, head of population studies at Manchester University, said there was growing intolerance because of 'the degree to which Islam is perceived as a threat to social cohesion'.

That is people of the very real effect Islam is having on the British way of life. If it has a positive effect this wouldn't be a problem, would it? He continues by focusing on the plight of Muslims, poor things.

He added: 'Muslims deserve to be the focus of policy on social cohesion, because no other group elicits so much disquiet. This apparent threat to national identity or even, some fear, to security, reduces the willingness of the majority to accommodate free expression.

The language says it all. Muslims DESERVE to come first, the host culture must be forced to accept 'free expression' of a foreign totalitarian regime. The host culture is not allowed to have free expression in return though, that would be discrimination. They obviously view British law and culture as something inferior.

'Opinion is divided, and many people remain tolerant of unpopular speech as well as distinctive dress and religious behaviour, but a large segment of the British population is unhappy about these subcultures.'

The survey said those with no educational qualifications were twice as likely to have negative attitudes towards Muslims as university graduates.

That is because a majority of Muslim immigration has been into social housing (paid for by you) into poor areas, they then segregate themselves and set up their own communities, refusing to mix with the local people, being unclean infidels and all that.

Ministers have been anxious to reduce negativity towards Muslims and minority groups among poorer and less-educated white people in recent months, fearing an election backlash from one-time core Labour voters.

However, the survey suggests that unhappiness over the influence of Islam has spread beyond poor white areas and now concerns a majority of people.

That is one of the reasons why the Facebook group against the Islam4UK Wolton Bassett march now has about 740,000 members.

This isn't just about some fringe group. This is about a foreign cultural, legal and religious system that believes it should reign supreme over Britain, and a government that agrees with them.

EU/IMF Revolt: Greece, Iceland, Latvia May Lead the Way

Source: Ellen Brown - BLN Contributing Writer

Europe’s small, debt-strapped countries could follow the lead of Argentina and simply walk away from their debts. That would shift the burden to the creditor countries, which could solve the problem merely by a change in accounting rules.

Total financial collapse, once a problem only for developing countries, has now come to Europe. The International Monetary Fund is imposing its “austerity measures” on the outer circle of the European Union, with Greece, Iceland and Latvia the hardest hit. But these are not your ordinary third world debtor supplicants. Historically, Iceland was settled by the Vikings, who successfully invaded Britain; Latvian tribes repulsed even the Vikings; and the Greeks conquered the whole Persian empire. If anyone can stand up to the IMF, these stalwart European warriors can.

Dozens of countries have defaulted on their debts in recent decades, the most recent being Dubai, which declared a debt moratorium on November 26, 2009. If the once lavishly-rich Arab emirate can default, more desperate countries can; and when the alternative is to destroy the local economy, it is hard to argue that they shouldn’t. That is particularly true when the creditors are largely responsible for the debtor’s troubles, and there are good grounds for arguing the debts are not owed. Greece’s troubles originated when low interest rates that were inappropriate for Greece were maintained to rescue Germany from an economic slump. And Iceland and Latvia have been saddled with responsibility for private obligations to which they were not parties. Economist Michael Hudson writes:

“The European Union and International Monetary Fund have told them to replace private debts with public obligations, and to pay by raising taxes, slashing public spending and obliging citizens to deplete their savings. Resentment is growing not only toward those who ran up these debts . . . but also toward the neoliberal foreign advisors and creditors who pressured these governments to sell off the banks and public infrastructure to insiders.”

READ THE REST HERE

American girl thinks 'Europe is a country'

She must have secretly read the Lisbon Treaty.

Hey Doc! Global Governance - UN

From my Scribd archive.
Setting the Agenda for Global Governance - UN

Copenhagen with the curtain pulled back

So, the Copenhagen summit has kicked off and with it the most corporate media attention I can remember ever seeing for anything. I mean, how easy is it for international media to collude on an agenda these days! Now, I intend on sticking to the subject that inspired this post, but the more I read this emotionally charged drivel doing my research, the more I want to just keep inserting quotes and ravaging them, just like 'climate change(tm)' will "ravage our planet, and with it our prosperity and security." Keep that quote in mind, because what I am about to tell you show you that, in true double-speak, it is this 'solution' that will do the ravaging.

Read the rest here.

EU sticking its fingers in Housing Pie

British citizens could have their homes snatched from them on the orders of a European court under a new Brussels power grab.

Plans for an EU shake-up of inheritance law will leave homeowners vulnerable to the potential loss of their property if it was ever owned by someone with relatives abroad.

Most European countries force citizens to leave a proportion of their estate to certain relatives, known as 'forced heirs'.

Under 'clawback' procedures outlawed in England forced heirs can undo property sales up to 30 years earlier if the deceased did not make adequate provision for his relatives in their will.

That means the relatives in France, Germany or Spain could stake a claim to property which has since been purchased by someone else in Britain.

Experts have warned that British citizens could lose their homes or be forced to pay hundreds of thousands of pounds to the foreign relatives of previous owners.

From the comments;

This is exactly how the American War of Independance started!!!

Naploeonic property law is the worst in the world, the men and woman of the UK should start a "minutemen" style resistance to laws such as this.

I beleive this kind of folly from Europe could force organised resistance.

the UK must dismantle Euro legal madness or pull out altogether

- simon, london UK, 04/12/2009 12:05

A dispatch from an occupied country

EU Referendum

From today, as the Lisbon treaty comes into force, we are no longer masters in our own house. Our prime minister, as a member of the European Council, is obligated under this new treaty to promote the aims and objectives of the European Union, over and above those of the UK, and is bound by the rules of the Union.

Of course, this will make no immediate difference. It simply renders de jure what has been de facto for several decades, but the coming into force of the treaty marks an important symbolic turning point. We are no longer an independent country, de jure. Our prime minister and his government are now working for an alien government, based in Brussels.

Welcome to the Fourth Reich comrades.

P.S. Take note that not one corporate media website has any mention of the official end of Britain as a sovereign nation, the EU as a legal entity or the fact our government is merely a proxy to impose EU directives...

I always saw the signing of the Lisbon Treaty as an Act of War against the British people...

Irish referendum VOID?

H/T JB

THE IRISH REFERENDUM OUTCOME IS NULL AND VOID

BALLOT BOXES ILLEGALLY DELIVERED 48 HOURS IN ADVANCE

Monday 5 October 2009 00:01

• This article may be cut and pasted UNALTERED AND COMPLETE, with attribution.

• UPDATE 4:00pm UK, 5th October 2009:

• Details of a video clip showing the chaos at the Referendum ballot count in Cork, added below.

In today's Daily Telegraph, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard writes:

"The methods being used to force this treaty through after electorates have already spoken, cross a line that may not be crossed. The European Project has become the enemy".

• FACT:
The Editor's book, 'The European Union Collective', PUBLISHED SEVEN YEARS AGO IN 2002, is subtitled: 'ENEMY OF ITS MEMBER STATES'.

• QUESTIONS:
Is the so-called Establishment 'mainstream' press DOING ITS JOB if it takes its very best journalist SEVEN YEARS to reach a proper understanding of the operation to destroy us? How many times do we all have to be deceived and insulted before the Fourth Estate starts to do its job properly?


By Christopher Story FRSA, Editor and Publisher, International Currency Review, World Reports Limited, London and New York. For earlier reports, press the ARCHIVE. Order your intelligence subscriptions and our intelligence books online from this website.

• Please help us with a donation if you can [see 'Donate' above].


IRISH ELECTORAL LAW FLOUTED, CANCELLING OUT THE RESULT

BLATANT AMERICAN INTERFERENCE IN IRELAND'S INTERNAL AFFAIRS

ILLEGAL BLUEPRINT FOR THE INTENDED EUROPEAN GESTAPO

NOTORIOUS IRISH EUROPHILE HINTS AT THIS WEBSITE

YES, THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION IS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE

PLUS: REPEAT OF THE UPDATE APPENDED TO THE REPORT OF 2ND OCTOBER

• BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION MORE EFFICIENT THAN BLITZKRIEG

• SUBVERSION OF EUROPEAN NATIONS, SUBVERSION OF THE UNITED STATES


IRISH ELECTORAL LAW FLOUTED, CANCELLING OUT THE RESULT
Our published information that the Irish Referendum on the dictatorial Lisbon Treaty was rigged, is ACCURATE. However at the time of the Update to the report dated 2nd October (see below) we hadn’t yet obtained details of the WAY the Referendum was rigged and influenced in favour of the treacherous YES lobby. We now have this information.

This is how the Irish were ‘persuaded’ to change their minds:

(1): Chaos and confusion, by design, at the count:

VIDEO CLIP SHOWS CHAOS AT REFERENDUM COUNT IN CORK
The chaos which appears to have accompanied the premature delivery of the Referendum ballot boxes (enabling them to be pre-stuffed: see below), is confirmed on this video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nq-OhRZX8dw

The video shows the front of Cork City Hall, Anglesea Street, Cork, Eire, at 10.33 PM on Friday 2nd October 2009. The video's written commentary explains that there is no security either outside or inside the building as people arrive carrying ballot boxes with others walking in empty-handed (presumably to count the votes), and all walk inside. Nobody is challenged by any official who is seemingly in authority. The scene is chaotic. People are seen coming out of the building as well.

One man is seen going in empty-handed, and coming out with what is pretty obviously a ballot box. The camera operator does not follow him, so the man disappears out of camera shot. Seconds later he returns with the ballot box (there is no way of knowing if it is even the same one) and then takes it back inside the building.

The camera operator goes inside the building (unchallenged). He films people arriving, milling around, talking to each other. There are rows of chairs set out and some tables set up (for the counting of ballot papers). Again, no one seems to check whether those inside are there officially, as no one seems to be in charge. There is no sign of a Returning Officer or of electoral officials. People move in and out of the hall.

One man is heard singing a song which appears to make fun of those who have voted NO in the Referendum. The sound quality is poor.

The written commentary adds:

'There were so many people coming and going unchallenged, that it would have been quite simple to take their box of Referendum votes in privacy (sic) for anything up to 10 to 15 minutes, and it would not have been detected'.

The written commentary concludes:
'ANYONE COULD HAVE INTERFERED WITH THE BALLOT BOXES'.

(2): Ballot boxes may have been stuffed prior to the Referendum polling booths opening.

Specifically:

• Under Irish law, ballot boxes are required to be delivered by members of the garda (police) to the polling stations at 7:00 am on the date the election takes place.

• This legal requirement applies to ALL polling in Ireland, whether elections or referenda.

• On this occasion, however, the ballot boxes were delivered to the private residences of the polling/Returning Officers, 48 hours prior to the Referendum.

• A number of honest Returning Officers formally objected to this BREACH OF PROCEDURE, and to the concomitant prospective breach of security, let alone of the electoral legislation.

• We understand that such objections were officially dismissed out of hand on the spurious and diversionary grounds that the ballot boxes possessed no commercial value, so it would be in nobody’s commercial interest to steal them.

• The central issue – that since the Irish ballot boxes were delivered 48 hours early they could be ‘stuffed’ with YES votes, as routinely happens in places like the former Soviet Republic of Georgia – was of course not addressed.

• It follows that, given that the local electoral law was flouted, THE OUTCOME OF THE IRISH REFERENDUM IS FRAUDULENT AND MUST IMMEDIATELY BE DECLARED NULL AND VOID.

• Furthermore, the following questions NEED TO BE ANSWERED IMMEDIATELY:

ONE: What is the total number of registered voters in Ireland?

TWO: How many voters voted in the Referendum?

THREE: Was the total vote tally greater than #One AND/OR #Two above?

FOUR: If either or both apply, do 'phantom', stolen and/or 'dead people's' votes count?

• Any operation to steamroller the Lisbon Treaty (after the Polish and Czech Governments have been bribed by the Germans) will accordingly be FRAUDULENT on this basis alone.

• It will therefore follow that ALL MEASURES taken under the Lisbon Treaty will likewise be illegal – not that this is anything new, as the European Union Collective is itself blatantly illegal, not least because the Treaty of Rome documents were never properly signed (given that several attendees signed blank sheets of paper because their translations were not available at the time of signing).

(3): Blatant American interference in the internal affairs of Ireland:

• INTEL (which is of course a US intelligence community operation, as its name implies) advertised heavily for a YES vote, promoting the FALSE assessment that if the Irish voted NO, ‘Ireland could be left isolated from the European Single Market at a time when the economy needs support’ (1) (because it has been ENRONISED by the Syndicate, as previously explained in these reports).

• That assertion was a blatant falsehood. The Single Market operates under the successive treaties of the fraudulent EU Collective, the currently applicable one being the Nice Treaty. Therefore, whether Lisbon was approved or not would make no difference at all.

• Thus the CIA’s INTEL was LYING TO THE IRISH PEOPLE.

On the basis of this precedent, we presume that the United States would have no objection if, say, the British were to buy newspaper space and broadcast time to lobby for a given outcome every time the United States goes to the polls.

(One can imagine how FURIOUS Americans would be if we tried any such outrage).

• This blatant US intelligence community interference in Irish internal affairs by the engine of instability which has ravaged the Irish financial economy represents yet another odious example of the notorious tendency for the CIA to interfere in the domestic affairs of other countries in pursuit of its own selfish objectives – in this case, shoring up the prospectively disintegrating European wing of the TWIN DVD operation to assert the hegemony of pan-German long-range control strategy on the two main victors of the World Wars, Britain and America.

• Unsurprisingly, letters are now appearing in the press [as for instance in The Sunday Telegraph of 4th October] making our point that the so-called Special Relationship is a total farce and has been for decades, as the United States routinely treats Britain with contempt: as, for instance, by allowing the DVD-activated IRA and its splinters to raise money in the United States for the purpose of murdering British citizens and troops en masse.

• The fraudulent Irish Referendum outcome theoretically destroys residual British sovereignty, given that the EU exists explicitly to usurp and hijack the sovereignty of its satrap ‘Member States’: see the Editor’s work ‘The European Union Collective: Enemy of its Member States’ [available from the Edward Harle Limited books segment of this website].

ILLEGAL BLUEPRINT FOR THE INTENDED EUROPEAN GESTAPO
Officials in Brussels have ALREADY set up a Committee on Internal Security (COSI) under the Lisbon Treaty EVEN THOUGH THE LISBON TREATY HAS NOT BEEN RATIFIED. THIS IS ANOTHER BLATANTLY ILLEGAL ACT which renders ALL operations of this Stalinist-sounding revolutionary oppression mechanism ILLEGAL in perpetuity.

• It also calls into question the very purpose of the Irish Referendum itself, raising the rhetorical question: what is the point of bothering the Irish electorate with this latest insult to their tranquillity and intelligence, if the EU’s bureaucrats, who are ANSWERABLE TO NOBODY, have been going ahead with provisions of the Lisbon Treaty even though it has not been ratified?

(They have been doing this in many other areas, too).

• Of course, the purpose of the Irish Referendum to get the insulted Irish electorate to change its mind from the verdict that it handed down in the Referendum of June 2008 is purely and simply to provide the intended illegitimate and illegal operations of the EU Collective with a false veneer of ‘legitimacy’, in the knowledge that the lazy and sycophantic so-called ‘mainstream’ media will just cow-tow and go along with these obnoxious illegalities. In so doing, journalists are validating the illegal behaviour of the manipulators that we have identified.

• Under the illegal COSI blueprint (in which, of course, as usual, the treacherous, revolutionary British authorities participated illegally), law enforcement and “public security organizations” will share intelligence, material from Internet surveillance, and other elements of national security arrangements, acquiring powers over the satrap Member States’ police and security services (2).

• A spokesman for the European Civil Liberties Network, Tony Bunyan, summarised the position correctly with the following statement. The COSI arrangements, implemented illegally PRIOR TO RATIFICATION of the Lisbon Treaty, represented a step towards an ‘EU Home Office or Interior Ministry without any democratic control’. Making the mistake of accepting this outrage as a fait accompli, he nevertheless elaborated:

‘It is outrageous that the rôle of the new EU Internal Security Committee has been decided in secret. If COSI becomes a high-level legislative body, a swathe of decision-making and practice will be removed from democratic debate’.

• The Lisbon Treaty WHICH HAS NOT BEEN RATIFIED, provides that: ‘A standing committee shall be set up within the [European] Council in order to ensure that operational co-operation on internal security is promoted and strengthened within the union’.

• ‘Unbelievably’ (but then again, NOT), an unnamed official involved in this treasonous activity said: ‘Sometimes it is better not to spell things out too much in order to keep flexibility and to allow officials the creativity of a blank slate’. Translation from weasel-language into jackboot Nazi-speak:

• 'We require absolute unfettered carte blanche to impose our dictatorship upon the satrap peoples of Europe and we won’t brook any interference with our stolen prerogative to saddle them with a control régime which will ensure our total hegemony, whether they like it or not’.

NOTORIOUS IRISH EUROPHILE HINTS AT THIS WEBSITE
The former Attorney General of Ireland and now Chairman of British Petroleum, a man notorious for his slavish ideological support for the European Union Collective, Peter Sutherland, was reported on 4th October 2009 to have made the following statement as soon as the rigged Irish Referendum outcome had been announced:

‘This is an outstanding victory for common sense. It was the result of dispelling myths, some of which emanated from the United Kingdom. This was a great achievement with a government in some difficulty and a vital step forward for Ireland’.

• However the YES lobby dispensed MYTHS on a prodigious scale, the primary myth being the lie, identified above, that ‘Ireland could be left isolated from the European Single Market’, when in fact the outcome of the Referendum would and could MAKE NO DIFFERENCE.

• Sutherland, who hates the likes of us, hinted that what we say about the European Commission being a criminal enterprise, is false. In that case, Mr Sutherland, we suggest that you should take the matter up (a) with the UK Serious Fraud Office in London [see our reports dated 2nd October and 16th/20th September 2009]; and (b) with the European Court of Auditors in Luxembourg [see our report dated 2nd October 2009].

YES, THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION IS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE
For, as discussed in our report dated 2nd October, the executive arm of the European Union Collective is a CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE, given that its financial accounts have been specifically DISAPPROVED by the EU’s own Court of Auditors for the past 14 financial years running. For the record, we repeat the information on this subject contained in that report:

• OPEN-ENDED EUROPEAN COMMISSION CORRUPTION:
As previously reported by this service, the accounts of the European Commission have been rejected FOR THE PAST 14 YEARS RUNNING by the European Union's own expert Court of Auditors. This means that the European Commission, which is an illegitimate corporate entity anyway, is a CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE. It must be continually exposed as such.

Further, the UK Serious Fraud Office have specifically CONFIRMED that remittance of taxpayers' funds into the hands of a criminal enterprise IS OF COURSE ITSELF A CRIMINAL OFFENCE.

What is more, our Irish associate, Richard Sharpe, visited the Court of Auditors in Luxembourg recently and obtained SPECIFIC CONFIRMATION from an official there, MR GEZA NOVACS, who told Richard that quote 'the European Accounts have not been signed off ('qualified') for fourteen years or more' unquote.

That is to say, THEY ARE INDEED FRAUDULENT.

Given this state of affairs, the European Commission's accounts CAN NEVER BE RECTIFIED. For that to happen, it would be necessary to go back to the last set of accounts that WAS APPROVED (15 YEARS AGO) and to work through all the detail, identifying the frauds and perpetrators of fraud, initiating proceedings against them, revealing every single theft and misappropriation in Notes to the Accounts, and implementing the necessary accounting adjustments. This operation would take years and of course IT WILL NEVER HAPPEN.

THEREFORE the European Commission will remain a CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE IN PERPETUITY.

This was all reported in the exposure analysis posted here on 16th/20th September. The relevant text was reappended as Note 1 to the report dated 2nd October [Archive].

•NOTE: We understand that our reiteration of these painful realities is now causing the Eurocracy and the free-wheeling anti-nation state 'Useful Idiot' Europhile community considerable disquiet.

AND WE REPEAT HERE THE UPDATE APPENDED TO THE 2ND OCTOBER REPORT

UPDATE, 4th October 2009:

IRISH LISBON TREATY REFERENDUM 'WAS RIGGED'
Our very informed sources state AS FACT that the Irish Referendum on the Lisbon Treaty has been rigged. The article below, as you may have noticed, was angled so as to seek to persuade voters to see sense. But the nests of serpents with which we are dealing are dense. The European Union and its Commission are criminal enterprises, after all: this insufferable Germanic institution exists for the sole purpose of hijacking and usurping BY STEALTH its satrap 'Member States'' national sovereignty. That is its ENTIRE purpose, as is explained in the Editor's exhaustive European study entitled 'The European Union Collective: Enemy of its Member States' (2002) [available from this website: see Edward Harle Limited Books segment].

It is AN IMMENSE, LONG-RANGE GRADUALIST OPERATION, aided and abetted by traitors inside the European national political and bureaucratic establishments, modelled on Hitler's 'Coup d'etat by installments'. That phrase was originally coined by a German living in the United States, Konrad Heiden, and published in his book 'Der Fuehrer', Boston, 1944, on page 579, cited in 'Thirty Days: Hitler's Thirty Days to Power, January 1933', by the US author, Henry Ashby Turner Jr. [Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Inc., Reading, MA and New York, 1996].

In a remarkable new study (3), the Regius Professor of Modern History at Cambridge University, Richard J. Evans, explains, amid his horrific and meticulous accounts of the routine atrocities perpetrated by the internally feuding Nazis and their gauleiters (going far, far beyond what the general public holds in its eroding collective memory), that the most conspicuous and perpetual feature of the Nazi regime was: RAMPANT CORRUPTION, PILLAGING, STEALING, GRAFT AND CONVERSION/DIVERSION OF ASSETS: in other words, WHAT WE HAVE BEEN RECORDING.

• Moreover the gauleiters and their associates STOLE FROM AND RANSACKED EACH OTHER.

• Does that sound familiar? Of course it does. THAT'S WHAT THESE NAZIS DO.

And it is this CORRUPTION that has survived to destabilise the whole world in OUR TIME.

BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION MORE EFFICIENT THAN BLITZKRIEG
Because what has happened is that these Nazis, using the big German, Swiss and French banks, and the Vatican, later to be joined by British institutions, found that BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION, which came naturally to them anyway, was a more efficient means of achieving their demented hegemony objectives than military force and Blitzkrieg.

Had the Editor not discovered and experienced this from INSIDE THE SNAKE DEN, we wouldn't have been in a position to expose this behaviour 'from within'. Our unspeakable experience, therefore, was 'meant to happen', so that these exposures could be framed and published in our journal and on this website for the whole world to see and understand.

• The point here being that FRAUD, BRIBERY AND BALLOT-RIGGING go hand in hand with the sick Fraudulent Finance practices proliferated originally by the pan-German FIFTH COLUMN inside the US Intelligence Power, WHICH IS A CRIMINAL ENTERPRISE.

SUBVERSION OF EUROPEAN NATIONS, SUBVERSION OF THE UNITED STATES
The 'Coup d'etat by installments' in Europe is the TWIN OPERATION, running in parallel with Nazi subversion of the United States by the same operatives, masterminded by the long-range strategic deception 'Black' Nazi Continuum agency based at Dachau, which operates 'independently' of the German Chancellor. Obviously, Hitler's 'Coup d'etat by installments' was implemented over a much shorter timeframe: BUT THE PRINCIPLE IS THE SAME. The rigged Irish Referendum outcome is just another dirty step towards the imminent smothering of the residual sovereignty of the once great nations of Europe, with Britain ALWAYS seen by the pan-German snakes as the main target.

On page 164 of 'Thirty Days', the author described Hitler's 'Coup d'etat by Installments' as follows:

'Only by banning the Communist deputies and by resorting to intimidation and mendacity did Hitler secure on March 23 the necessary two-thirds vote in the new Reichstag for an Enabling Act that transferred legislative authority to his Cabinet, ostensibly for four years. A wave of Nazi purges followed, as one institution after another was subjugated. Arbitrary rule replaced government by law in what has aptly been termed a "Coup d'etat by installments"'.

'By summer, all parties except the Nazis had been dissolved, Hugenberg had been forced out of the Cabinet and Hitler had relegated Papen to insignificance by winning the trust of the President. Even earlier Goering had wrested from Papen control over the government of the largest state, Prussia. Well before the Nazi leader assumed the powers of the Presidency upon the death of Hindenburg in August 1934, he had become dictator of Germany'.

THIS IS THE MODEL, OPERATING IN GRADUALIST MODE, THAT IS BEING DEPLOYED TO SUBVERT THE RESIDUAL SOVEREIGNTY OF THE STUPID EUROPEAN NATIONS, LED BY TRAITORS AND DESPICABLE DUMKOPFS WITHIN THE NATIONAL STRUCTURES, WHO HAVE CONFUSED COOPERATION WITH SOCIALIST ‘COLLECTIVISATION’ (4).

That the Irish Referendum has been rigged is therefore NO SURPRISE. For we are dealing with ruthless crooks, which is why they are keen on having the British deceiver, intelligence operative and crook, Tony BLIAR, as their first President, to match that disgusting little Portuguese operative, Barroso. Stand by now for consequences similar, in the contemporary context, to those events that followed Hitler's acquisition of GENERAL POWERS from the Legislature by means of INTIMIDATION and MENDACITY, the techniques which, with bribery, have been used to rig the Referendum (5).


Notes and References:

1: The Sunday Telegraph, Business Section, 4th October 2009.

2: The Sunday Telegraph, page 3, 4th October 2009.

3: Richard J. Evans, Regius Professor of Modern History, Cambridge University, 'The Third Reich at War', The Penguin Press, New York, 2009, ISBN 978-1-59420-2006-3.

4: The Editor first understood this when he found himself sitting next to the former British Foreign Secretary, Douglas (Lord) Hurd, on a plane some years ago. Although the Editor carefully avoided confronting Hurd until the end of the flight, he established that Hurd valued British membership of the EU Collective because it fostered ‘cooperation’. However one can cooperate with an external party without getting into bed with them. It was further clear that, wittingly or not, he confused this naïve, mythical ideal of ‘cooperation’ – which suddenly evaporates when the Germans and French want their own way and browbeat all the other EU satrap states in order to get it – with the reality, namely CREEPING COLLECTIVISATION via ever-expanding oppressive regulation which is designed to usurp and destroy national sovereignty – the same objective as Lenin, Stalin and Hitler. So you can appreciate why these ‘Useful Idiots’ (as Lenin called all those who assist the World Revolution without realising what they are doing) are justly called TRAITORS.

5: We are describing and living through components, phases and elements of the ONGOING WORLD REVOLUTION, in case you hadn’t noticed.

• We will revert to the 'usual issues' soon, but, as you will appreciate, these matters are of vital importance and had to be addressed straight away.

What Ireland just voted for...

Think about all of the people who voted YES to the Lisbon Constitution without knowing the FACTS you are about to cast your eyes upon. All of the people in the future who will have a referendum (and we bloody well will or the Den of Vipers and Thieves should be torched). Read this throughout Europe. And think. Think of what the consequences of this EU superstate, this supranational dictatorship, this Fourth Reich will have in the future.

I post this in full, with bolded text, italics and colourisation added by me. To view the original, please click the link.

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

13 Facts About the Lisbon Treaty
Anthony Coughlan
The National Platform EU Research & Information Centre
21 August, 2009


Below for your information is a summary of 13 important things the Lisbon Treaty would do if it were to come into force, as well as a longer document which explains these points more fully.

These have been prepared with the help of authorities on Irish constitutional and European law, and you can take it that the facts they give on the Treaty and its consequences are accurate.

Lisbon’s proposal to give the Big States from 50-100% more voting power in making EU laws, while halving Ireland’s voting power to 0.8%, would be economically disastrous for us in face of the economic crisis, as Brussels, Frankfurt and the Big EU States insist on savage cut-backs being imposed on the Irish economy.

Summary of 13 things the Lisbon Treaty would do

The Lisbon Treaty …

1. Would be a power-grab by the Big States for control of the EU by basing EU law-making post-Lisbon primarily on population size. This would double Germany’s voting power in making European laws from its present 8% to 17%, increase Britain’s, France’s and Italy’s from 8% to 12% each, and halve Ireland’s vote to 0.8%. How does having 0.8% of a vote in making EU laws put Ireland “at the heart of Europe” ? Taoiseach Brian Cowen’s “guarantees” do not explain how having half as much influence in the EU as Ireland has today would induce the other Member States to listen to our concerns on unemployment and help to resolve the economic crisis in the interest of Irish companies, workers and farmers.

2.Would copperfasten the Laval and related judgements of the EU Court of Justice, which put the competition rules of the EU market above the rights of Trade Unions to enforce pay standards higher than the minimum wage for migrant workers. At the same time Lisbon would give the EU full control of immigration policy (Art.79 TFEU).

3. Would permit the post-Lisbon EU to impose Europe-wide taxes directly on us for the first time without need of further Treaties or referendums (Art.311 TFEU).

4. Would amend the existing treaties to give the EU exclusive power as regards rules on foreign direct investment (Arts.206-7 TFEU) and give the Court of Justice the power to order the harmonisation of national indirect taxes if it decides that this causes a “distortion of competition” in the market (Art.113 TFEU). These changes could undermine our 12.5% corporation profits tax, which is the principal attraction of Ireland for foreign business.

5. Would abolish our present right to “propose” and decide who Ireland’s Commissioner is , by replacing it with a right to make “suggestions” only, leaving it up to the incoming Commission President to decide (Art.17.7 TEU). Our No vote last year secured us a commitment to a permanent Commissioner, but what is the point of every EU State continuing to have its own Commissioner post-Lisbon when it can no longer decide who that Commissioner will be?

6. Would give the European Union the Constitution of an EU Federal State which would have primacy over the Irish and other national Constitutions. This post-Lisbon EU would for the first time be legally separate from and superior to its 27 Member States and would sign international treaties with other States in all areas of its powers (Arts.1 and 47 TEU; Declaration 17 concerning Primacy ). In constitutional terms Lisbon would thereby turn Ireland into a regional or provincial state within this new Federal-style European Union, with the EU’s Constitution and laws having legal primacy over the Irish Constitution and laws in any cases of conflict between the two.

7. Would turn us into real citizens for the first time of this new post-Lisbon European Union, owing obedience to its laws and loyalty to its authority over and above our obedience and loyalty to Ireland and the Irish Constitution and laws in the event of any conflict between the two. We would still keep our Irish citizenship, but it would be subordinate to our new EU citizenship and the rights and duties vis-a-vis the EU that would attach to that(Art.9 TEU).

8. Would give the EU Court of Justice the power to decide our rights as EU citizens by making the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding for the first time (Art.6 TEU) . This would give power to the EU judges to use their case law to lay down a uniform standard of rights for the 500 million citizens of the post-Lisbon Union in the name of a common EU citizenship in the years to come. It would open the possibility of clashes with national human rights standards in sensitive areas where Member States differ from one another at present, e.g. trial by jury, the presumption of innocence until proven guilty, habeas corpus, the legalisation of hard drugs, euthanasia, abortion, labour law, succession law, marriage law, children’s rights etc. Ireland’s Supreme Court and the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights would no longer have the final say on what our rights are.

9. Would abolish the national veto Ireland has at present by handing over to the EU the power to make laws binding on us in 32 new policy areas, including public services, crime, justice and policing, immigration, energy, transport, tourism, sport, culture, public health, the EU budget and international measures on climate change.

10. Would reduce the power of National Parliaments to make laws in relation to 49 policy areas or matters, and increase the influence of the European Parliament in making EU laws in 19 new areas (See euabc.eu for the two lists).

11. Would be a self-amending Treaty which would permit the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents to shift most remaining EU policy areas where unanimity is required and a national veto still exists - for example on tax harmonisation - to qualified majority voting on the EU Council of Ministers, without need of further EU Treaties or referendums(Art.48 TEU).

12. Would enable the 27 EU Prime Ministers to appoint an EU President for up to five years without allowing voters any say as to who he or she would be - thereby abolishing the present six-monthly rotating EU presidencies (Art.15.5 TEU).

13. Would militarize the EU further, requiring Member States “progressively to improve their military capabilities” (Art.42.3 TEU) and to aid and assist other Member States experiencing armed attack “by all the means in their power” (Art.42.7 TEU).

TEU = Treaty on European Union as amended by the Lisbon Treaty

TFEU = Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union as amended by the Lisbon Treaty

The most urgent task for those of us who want to defend Irish democracy, national independence and our ability to defend our economic interests in face of Lisbon is to take the initiative in adapting the information below and spreading it to our friends and neighbours between now and September, when the big guns of the Government and Yes-side will get going.

Maybe you and your friends and colleagues could set up a small canvassing team and use this material - not in two months time, but this week and next week and the week after that - to get the facts about Lisbon to the people in your area by going to see them and talking to them on their doorsteps? These facts can also be used in letters to the national and local press.

EXPLANATORY DOCUMENT ON LISBON

FACTS ON THE LISBON TREATY

By voting No we remain full members of the EU and of the euro currency based on the existing Nice Treaty, but we reject the proposed Lisbon Treaty as a step too far. Millions of our fellow Europeans who are being denied referendums on Lisbon by their politicians are hoping that we will say No again for their sakes. We can thereby open the way for a better Treaty for a better and more democratic Europe.

The economic crisis: All 27 EU Members are in economic crisis. Ireland is worse than most because of the borrowing binge, housing bubble and Bank bail-outs which were encouraged by the same golden circle of politicians and bankers as are now bringing us Lisbon Two. The crisis makes Lisbon’s model of a deregulated, privatised, let-it-rip EU economy quite out-of-date. Lisbon’s proposal to give the Big States from 50-100% more voting power in the EU, while halving Ireland’s voting power to 0.8% would be economically disastrous for us in face of the economic crisis, as Brussels, Frankfurt and the Big EU States insist on savage cut-backs being imposed on the Irish economy.

We remain full EU members: There is no question of Ireland being sidelined or pushed out of the EU or the euro-currency if we stand by our No to Lisbon. As Ireland’s EU Commissioner Charlie McCreevy said in Hot Press last December : “There is no provision in the existing treaties to isolate anybody. There is no provision to throw out anybody, unless unanimously all the existing members of the club agreed to throw you out. And I doubt, now or in the future, any Irish Government is going to unanimously agree to throw themselves out.”

Exactly the same Lisbon Treaty: Not a dot or comma of the Lisbon Treaty will be changed for Lisbon Two. If Lisbon comes into force it will be interpreted by the EU Court of Justice and not on the basis of political declarations by the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents. These do not change anything in the Treaty and are not legally binding as part of EU law. Promises of changes to suit Ireland in some future EU Treaty cannot pull back on anything in the Lisbon Treaty once it is in force. The EU Prime Ministers state that they “will clarify but not change either the content or the application of the Treaty of Lisbon “, which only the EU Court can decide on ( Summit Conclusions 19-6-2009). As pro-Lisbon journalist James Downey has written: “The antis are right about one thing, if one thing only. Any guarantees we may get on their concerns will be irrelevant, or worthless, or both.” ( Irish Independent, 21-3-2009)

Overturning the people’s vote: The Lisbon Treaty is the new legal form of the EU Constitution which French and Dutch voters rejected in their 2005 referendums. Irish voters rejected it in last year’s referendum by 53% to 47%. All genuine democrats, including Yes-side voters, should respect that vote as the French and Dutch Governments did. Respecting it would have meant Taoiseach Brian Cowen telling his EU partners that Ireland could not ratify Lisbon because the Irish people had voted No to it, so there was no point in their continuing to ratify it as EU Treaties must be unanimous. Instead Taoiseach Cowen and Foreign Minister Martin told the other EU Governments on the morning of last year’s count to ignore their own people’s vote and to continue with ratifying Lisbon.They persuaded their EU colleagues that they could get the Irish people to overturn their democratic No vote in a second referendum on exactly the same Treaty, if they got enough support from France, Germany etc. in the form of statements about Ireland’s concerns, even though the Treaty is unchanged.

Turning the EU into a State: Lisbon would be a giant step in turning the EU into a supranational Federal-style State, in which Ireland would effectively be reduced to regional or provincial status. It would give Government Ministers and the Big EU States huge new powers, while taking power away from ordinary citizens across the EU, and from the National Parliaments they elect. Because of our Constitution, only Ireland is being allowed a vote on it. Only we Irish can save democracy in the EU by refusing to allow ourselves be pressurised into overturning our rejection of Lisbon in 2008. If we vote No again in Lisbon Two we hold the door open to our fellow countrymen and women in Northern Ireland and give them the chance of having a say in a UK referendum next year.

Denying citizens a vote: France’s President Sarkozy and EU Commissioner Charlie McCreevy have admitted that if Lisbon were put to referendum in other EU countries their voters would reject it too. Although opinion polls show that people in most Member States want to decide for themselves whether they should be put under an EU Constitution which would override their National Constitutions, the EU Prime Ministers refused to allow referendums. This does not bode well for the future of democracy in the EU.

READ FULL ARTICLE
-------------------------------

We won't let it rest. Too many people throughout Europe has experienced tyranny. We can detect its putrid stench emanating from Brussels, even when they try to cover it with lies and distortions, with billions of Euros of propaganda.

They have rattled the Wasps Nest, the War for our freedom is just getting STARTED.

The Truth about Global Warming stories

Remember this,

"The threat of environmental crisis will be the 'international disaster key' that will unlock the New World Order." [Mikhail Gorbachev, quoted in "A Special Report: The Wildlands Project Unleashes Its War On Mankind", by Marilyn Brannan, Associate Editor, Monetary & Economic Review, 1996, p. 5.]

Everyone knows the term New World Order alludes to a global centralised technocratic super government. Like the EU but global and even worse.

Now this is released.

A United Nations document on “climate change” that will be distributed to a major environmental conclave next week envisions a huge reordering of the world economy, likely involving trillions of dollars in wealth transfer, millions of job losses and gains, new taxes, industrial relocations, new tariffs and subsidies, and complicated payments for greenhouse gas abatement schemes and carbon taxes — all under the supervision of the world body.

This is the main thrust of the climate change scam. Pushing for a supranational legal framework, specifically designed to usurp the sovereignty of nation states but by proxy, the individual sovereignty of us all.

I add the following quotes for your consideration.

David Rockefeller Sept. 23, 1994 "This present window of opportunity, during which a truly peaceful and interdependent world order might be built, will not be open for too long - We are on the verge of a global transformation. All we need is the right major crisis and the nations will accept the New World Order."

Note the image on the right of the blog, of the newspaper.

"For more than a century ideological extremists at either end of the political spectrum have seized upon well-publicized incidents such as my encounter with Castro to attack the Rockefeller family for the inordinate influence they claim we wield over American political and economic institutions. Some even believe we are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as ‘internationalists’ and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure – one world, if you will. If that’s the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." -David Rockefeller, from his own book, Memoirs.

We are moving toward a new world order, the world of communism. We shall never turn off that road.” — Mikhail Gorbachev 1987

"We are grateful to the Washington Post, the New York Times, Time magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected the promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the world is now more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world-government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the National auto determination practiced in past centuries"--David Rockefeller in an address to a Trilateral Commission meeting in June of 1991

"The invisible Money Power is working to control and enslave mankind. It financed Communism, Fascism, Marxism, Zionism, Socialism. All of these are directed to making the United States a member of a World Government ..." -- AMERICAN MERCURY MAGAZINE, December 1957, pg. 92.

"Banking was conceived in iniquity and was born in sin. The Bankers own the earth. Take it away from them, but leave them the power to create deposits, and with the flick of the pen they will create enough deposits to buy it back again. However, take it away from them, and all the great fortunes like mine will disappear and they ought to disappear, for this would be a happier and better world to live in. But, if you wish to remain the slaves of Bankers and pay the cost of your own slavery, let them continue to create deposits." — SIR JOSIAH STAMP, (President of the Bank of England in the 1920's, the second richest man in Britain)


“We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” — Statement made before the United States Senate on Feb. 7, 1950 by James Paul Warburg

"I am convinced that the agreement [Bretton Woods] will enthrone a world dictatorship of private finance more complete and terrible than a Hitlerite dream. It offers no solution of world problems, but quite blatantly sets up controls which will reduce the smaller nations to vassal states and make every government the mouthpiece and tool of International Finance. It will undermine and destroy the democratic institutions of this country - in fact as effectively as ever the Fascist forces could have done - and will undoubtedly present a new menace, endangering world peace. World collaboration of private financial interests can only mean mass unemployment, slavery, misery, degradation and financial destruction. -- Labor Minister of Australia, Eddie Ward, during the inception of the World Bank and Bretton Woods, he gave this warning.

All throughout history, tyrants have sought global domination. Our time is no different. The human race struggles against itself, seeking to drag itself away from these primitive insecurities, trying to quench them with never ending power and wealth. As far as Britain is concerned, people should educate themselves on a few things. The nature of money, how banks operate, and if you own yourself or if you are a slave to others. I will elaborate on this shortly.

Make no mistake, running serves no purpose whatsoever. We are born to fight for our freedom against parasites, and by God, this is what I shall do!

The EU and Global Governance

Here is the link, just go and read it. For all those, pro-EU types and 'our government would never do anything against us' types.

The EU's grand designs: who'd've thought it?

France Mulls CO2 Taxes on Citizens

RELATED: German Government Advisor Proposes Personal CO2 Budget For Everyone On Planet

RELATED: Obama Intimately Tied To Carbon Trading Scam

RELATED: Rothschild Australia and E3 International to take the lead in the global carbon trading market

France Mulls CO2 Taxes on Citizens

James Kanter
New York Times
Monday, September 7, 2009

The French government plans next year to begin making heavy users of household and transport fuels bear more of the tax burden. President Nicolas Sarkozy is expected to say in coming weeks that such a shift is necessary to nudge French citizens toward cleaner alternatives.

The tax would reportedly start at about 14 euros (or $20) for each ton of CO2 emitted, and could rise to levels of around 100 euros ($143) for each ton by 2030. That could mean substantial increases in the price of gasoline and diesel, as well as a sizable jump in the cost of keeping homes warm.

But skeptics say the idea may have less to do with clean energy, and more to do with a desire on the part of Mr. Sarkozy’s government to find new ways to keep the national debt in check.

Full story here.

I guess reducing state spending or borrowing is out of the question. You can't control people with debt if they're not in it! Spend spend spend, borrow some more. The money printers will demand interest too remember, so the state oppresses the people and wrings them dry, squeezing as much out of them as possible. You have to keep in mind that money (to us) represents production, which means it represents out time, which is life. A weeks' pay is a week of your working life gone. They want the money you earn, which is the same as them saying they want your life.

Introduction of carbon tax suggested

KILIAN DOYLE
Irish Times
Monday, September 7, 2009

The Commission on Taxation has recommended the introduction of a carbon tax to help cut Ireland’s greenhouse gas emissions.

In a report published this morning, the commission said this tax should apply to all carbon-based fuels sold for use in Ireland and should be based on the tonnes of CO2 emitted by each fuel. It said the tax could raise €500 million per year.

“The tax should be clearly visible at the point of final consumption to ensure it is not seen as ‘just another tax’”, the report said.

The Commission said a carbon tax would encourage polluters to cut emissions to save money and encourage innovation. “It is fair in the sense that those who choose to pollute the most, pay the most,” it said.

While there should be no preferential rates, businesses who are involved in the Emissions Trading Scheme should be exempt, it said.

Full story here.

Yes, supposedly free, independent countries all around the world start freely, independently pushing the same oppressive schemes.
It is enough to make you think there is a bigger picture to all of this...

I want to like the EU... but I can’t

This has been on the Msn.com front page all day. Which is nice. Nice to see level headed, healthy skepticism on the undemocratic unaccountable EU project on mainstream websites. I would buy this guy a pint, but I don't have any money left after the dual governments of Britain and the EU finished raping my arse for taxes.

John Stepek, writing for MSN Money

September 04 2009

Let me make something clear from the start of this piece: I like Europe and Europeans.

I like the idea of having closer ties to the continent. I think the Channel Tunnel's a great thing. I'm in favour of free trade and, to the extent that it's practical, open borders.

But I have to admit, the jury's out on the European Union and a lot of people feel the same way. There's been a big swing towards anti-EU parties (not just in the UK either) across Europe.

Why? EU supporters tend to claim that people just don't understand Europe. The logical conclusion from this is that they should just shut up and entrust handling it to the people who do, the politicians.

But I don't think people are that daft. If they can understand how a subprime mortgage (a pretty abstract concept in the first place) got sliced and diced and distributed in such a way as to kick off the collapse of the financial system, then they should be able to get a handle on just about anything.

Governments becoming more powerful
I think the real problem is that people feel that political power is becoming ever more distant from them. Governments seem to be getting bigger and more dictatorial and the concerns of individuals seem to be getting lost.

I think the anti-EU vote was an anti-big-government vote. But what might happen if we ended up leaving the EU? Most obviously there's the economic impact.

But what would it be? One thing that's very apparent when you try to find out anything about the EU is that no one is neutral. Everyone wants to spin a line either for or against the whole project, so it's very difficult to get any clear information.

The right-leaning think tank Civitas reckons the best estimates put the annual net cost to the UK of EU membership at £55 billion, but that includes various indirect costs that can be disputed.

So if you want a straight figure that's hard to quibble with, you can just look at our annual net contribution to the EU.

That's the amount of money we put in, minus what we get back in the form of EU spending on things like farm subsidies under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), for example. This adds up to £6.4 billion this year, a 60% jump on last year.

READ THE REST HERE

Word of advice. When someone tries to get you to sign a legally binding document by deliberately covering up the clauses and by outright lying to you. It is best to say 'no thanks'. When you say no and they come back with 'vote again', that is when you stick up two fingers and tell them to stuff their Forth Reich utopia up their collective arses, sideways.