(1994 - EDP Official Website- OCTOBER-PT4-2019---
OCT H 1 2
3 4 5  6

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2019      MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2019          MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 5-2019      

  MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 6-2019          MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-HOME--2019

 ENGLISH DEMOCRATIC PARTY. ORG.UK .

FREEDOM-UNITY.

*

A MONTH TO REMEMBER

RECLAIMING

 AFTER 46 YEARS

WITHIN

  HITLER'S PLANNED

 SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION

 OUR

 ENGLISH FREEDOM-CONSTITUTION AND

COUNTRY.

 

MARCH 29, 2019

VICTORY

FOR

 ENGLISH FREEDOM DAY.

*

A MONTH TO REMEMBER

RECLAIMING

 AFTER 46 YEARS WITHIN HITLER'S PLANNED SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION

 OUR

 ENGLISH FREEDOM-CONSTITUTION AND

COUNTRY.

 

MARCH 29, 2019

VICTORY

FOR

 ENGLISH FREEDOM DAY.

*

 ONE SHOULD ALWAYS REMEMBER THAT THE MAJORITY OF VOTERS IN WALES AND SCOTLAND PREFERRED TO REMAIN AS SLAVES WITHIN HITLER'S SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION.

IN OR OUT OF THE EU THE ENGLISH PEOPLE PROVIDE FINANCIAL SUPPORT TO THEIR NEIGHBOURS PARTICULARLY IN SCOTLAND WHERE THEY STILL RECEIVE A HIGHER PER CAPITA FIGURE I, AS IT HAS BEEN FOR MANY YEARS.

A UNITED BRITISH ISLES IS A BOUNTY FOR EVERYONE IN OUR SHARED ISLAND HOME

FOR  SECURITY-TRADE-PROSPERITY AND PEACE.

LET US UNITE AND THE WORLD WILL SEE US AT OUR BEST.

OUR SHARED HISTORY AND SACRIFICE IS OUR STRENGTH AND PURPOSE.

H.F.1773

*
MAR-

17

 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-

18

 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18
NOV-

18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

 

 		SEP 19

OCT-19

NOV-19

 

Est.1994-POLICY-Elections 1997 and EU election 1999-Speech -1000's of Links-

ENGLAND FILE

 'Genocide - Eliminating The English' (pdf)

Multiculturalism As A Tool To Divide And Conquer: The Layman's ...-

Multiculturalism and the Ruling Elite

IMMIGRATION-BULLETIN FILE  ARCHIVE-  EU FILE   IMPORTED WAHHABISM-FOR ARMS  FOREIGN AID FILE

BULLETINS FROM ACROSS THE WORLD

 

Benjamin Fulford 9-30-19… “Zionists call for world dictatorship by rabbis, but face defeat instead”

Posted on 2019/09/30 by
New weekly report from Ben.

As with all of Benjamin’s posts, feel free to “tune in” to that Higher Discernment while reading.

“Faced with a loss of control over the Western world’s financial system and thus a loss of power, the Elders of Zion are publicly calling for a theocracy and death for those who disobey it. Of course, nobody but a few fanatics is paying attention to them. Instead, the Jews are about to be liberated from thousands of years of slavery. This may be hard to digest for non-religious, rational people, but it is what the objective, real-world facts show.

“…Pastor Chuck Baldwin and others point out, “Noahide Law calls for the death of anyone practicing idolatry (defined as any type of worship other than Talmudic worship).” Furthermore, he warns, they are calling for “the establishment of an international court based in Jerusalem that ultimately would be given the power to execute (via decapitation) anyone who commits ‘blasphemy.’”

“Okay, so we have a so-called “God” that threatens to kill people with stones or arrows, asks for human sacrifice, and demands gifts such as gold and “rams’ skins dyed red.”… A rational, scientific explanation leads us to conclude we are dealing with a group of sophisticated human slavers hiding behind a “God” image, and not the Creator of the Universe.

“Having been brought up as an atheist, I was completely non-plussed when Japanese military intelligence told me the group that invited me to join them in a plan to kill 90% of humanity (I have it on tape) was “the Elders of Zion.”… The horrible thing about all this is that they very nearly succeeded. It was only the Pentagon and the Asians, working together, who managed to stop this horrific plan.”

————————————————————–

Zionists call for world dictatorship by rabbis, but face defeat instead
 By Benjamin Fulford, White Dragon Society, September 30, 2019

Faced with a loss of control over the Western world’s financial system and thus a loss of power, the Elders of Zion are publicly calling for a theocracy and death for those who disobey it. Of course, nobody but a few fanatics is paying attention to them. Instead, the Jews are about to be liberated from thousands of years of slavery. This may be hard to digest for non-religious, rational people, but it is what the objective, real-world facts show.

Last week, the Sanhedrin, a group claiming to have a divine right to rule humanity, called for “a Bible-based international organization to replace the United Nations.” This would be composed of a group of 70 nations which obey the Elders of Zion. To inaugurate this, they are building the altar of the Third Temple and planning to make animal sacrifices on it. They also call for Noahide Laws to be applied to all of humanity.
 https://www.breakingisraelnews.com/117830/70-nations-hanukkah-altar-third-temple/

As Pastor Chuck Baldwin and others point out, “Noahide Law calls for the death of anyone practicing idolatry (defined as any type of worship other than Talmudic worship).” Furthermore, he warns, they are calling for “the establishment of an international court based in Jerusalem that ultimately would be given the power to execute (via decapitation) anyone who commits ‘blasphemy.’”
 


 https://chuckbaldwinlive.com/Articles/tabid/109/ID/3929/Noahide-Law-Not-Sharia-Law-Is-The-Threat.aspx

To make this perfectly clear, they are calling for the execution of Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Muslims, etc. unless they submit to the Elders of Zion. These are the people behind the thwarted plot to kill 90% of humanity.

The so-called God these people claim to obey, as written in the Catholic Bible, says, among other things, that anyone other than Moses or Aaron who tries to look at God will be “stoned or shot by arrow.” Exodus 19:13
 https://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=2&bible_chapter=19

Their God also asks for human sacrifice:
“You will give me the first-born of your children.” Exodus 22:28
 https://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=2&bible_chapter=22

Furthermore, “God” asks for:
“gold, silver and bronze; materials dyed violet-purple, red-purple and crimson, fine linen, goats’ hair; rams’ skins dyed red, fine leather, acacia wood; oil for the light, spices for the anointing oil and fragrant incense; cornelian and other stones to be set in the ephod and breastplate.” Exodus 25:3-7
 https://www.catholic.org/bible/book.php?id=2&bible_chapter=25

Okay, so we have a so-called “God” that threatens to kill people with stones or arrows, asks for human sacrifice, and demands gifts such as gold and “rams’ skins dyed red.” I’m sorry, but I would think the almighty Creator of the Universe would at least use lightning bolts to kill people and could conjure up as much gold as he/she/it wanted.

A rational, scientific explanation leads us to conclude we are dealing with a group of sophisticated human slavers hiding behind a “God” image, and not the Creator of the Universe.

Anyway, after this request for treasure, the so-called “God” went about killing Jewish leader after Jewish leader until a blindly obedient group appeared. Their descendants are the Sanhedrin, who claim and can recite an unbroken lineage going back to the time of Moses. In other words, these people have been helping enslave the Jews for thousands of years. Now, behind the nice words, they are trying to enslave the rest of humanity and promising to kill those who do not obey them.

Having been brought up as an atheist, I was completely non-plussed when Japanese military intelligence told me the group that invited me to join them in a plan to kill 90% of humanity (I have it on tape) was “the Elders of Zion.” To avoid implicating ordinary Jews, etc., I have, for the sake of simplicity, been calling this secret group of human slavers “the satanists.”

The horrible thing about all this is that they very nearly succeeded. It was only the Pentagon and the Asians, working together, who managed to stop this horrific plan.

So now let’s look at why recent world events would lead these Sanhedrin slavers and their ilk to think the world might be ending. Let’s start with the events in the U.S. Here, Pentagon sources explain, “the September 30th, 2019 fiscal year end (today) coincides with the expiration of the central bank…

The remainder of this article is only available to members of BenjaminFulford.net. Please Log In or Register to create an account

 

H.F.1806/30-9-19

*

 

 

We Germans have insulted Britain. How can we have forgotten the huge debt we owe you.

 

News for DAILY MAIL-WE GERMANS HAVE INSULTED BRITAIN by Alexander von Schoenburg

EDITOR AT LARGE OF BILD-

GERMANY'S BIGGEST SELLING NEWSPAPER

As MARCH 29 looms closer, here in Germany, rabid anti-British sentiment is part of the daily discourse.

The chattering classes-politicians and pundits alike-are urging our Angela Merkel, to harden her line towards the United Kingdom after suggestions that she was prepared to throw Theresa May a lifeline. Indeed last week Annegret Kramp -Karrenbauer, Merkel's successor -in-waiting calls for Britain to scrap Brexit completely. Germans are far from alone in this attitude. In the wake of the momentous Commons defeat for your Prime Minister's Brexit strategy, the European Commission twisted the thumbscrews still further. have been unshakable

Michel Barnier, the EU's Brexit negotiator, suggested it was time for the EU to abandon its 'red lines' over ending freedom of movement and the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.

 Yet these issues have been unshakable stipulations for the British since the beginning of talks. To casually propose dumping them in this way is insulting to your country.

 Regret

The French president, Emmanuel Macron, was, regrettably, similarly dismissive when he said that

 Brexit

was a

BRITISH PROBLEM

and one it would have to solve on its own. Such blinkered and sour responses are, in my view, wrong-headed. They ignore the great debt that Germany, and the whole Continent, owes our friends across the Channel.

However much we in Europe regret your decision  to leave our Community, we must always remember that, throughout your history, independence and sovereignty have been

PARAMOUNT.

Germany in particular should tread lightly when it comes to dealing with

YOUR PROUD NATION.

It was Great Britain that first stood up to Hitler in 1939. And it was Britain that opened its doors to the thousands of Jew-doors to the thousands of Jewish refugees fleeing certain death during the Holocaust.

Put simply, there would be no free Europe without you and the bloody sacrifice you made to rescue the Continent. This plain fact has not always been a popular one, of course. The truth is that there has been a long tradition of policies aimed at excluding the British Isles from Europe, most notably those of French president Charles De Gaulle.

After the war, inspired by dreams of the medieval empire that stretched across  the Continent under Charlemagne, De Gaulle poured his energy into setting up the European economic Community -the forerunner of the EU.

But when Britain enquired about membership in the early Sixties, his answer was an emphatic 'Non' Thanks to De Gaulle's opposition, it took more than a decade for the UK to be accepted. And the driving force for unity for welcoming British membership with open arms was the German chancellor of the Sixties, Konrad Adenauer.

For that, ultimately, we can thank the QUEEN

[TREASON]

This considerable and controversial article appears at a crucial moment in our long island history to recover our once FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE-will be completed shortly-in the meantime for the complete work click ]

Here!

 

*  *  *

[We were against entry to

Hitler's plan for Europe

in 1972 and again in 1975.]

[WHY De Gaulle VETOED OUR EEC MEMBERSHIP in 1963]

THE ENEMY IS EVERY WHERE]

[ PLEASE NOTE: COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

EUROPEAN UNION

 

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****  HOW HITLER'S ENABLING ACT OF 1933 WAS PASSED THROUGH YOUR WESTMINSTER PARLIAMENT BY 8 VOTES****   REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER/ ****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

 

AND THOUSANDS MORE BULLETINS ON THE TRUE NATURE OF THE EU

 

H.F.1784

*
 

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN

 

 

 

RICHARD LITTLEJOHN says we might need divine ... - Daily Mail

 

Our  Father who art in BRUSSELS.

 

The Church of England is planning to hold five days prayer to mark Britain's departure from the EU .

Does the Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, know something we don't? The way things look right now, we're not going anywhere.

Anti-democratic hardline Remainers are Moving Heaven and Earth to stop even a weak-as-dish-water

Withdrawal Agreement.

getting through the Commons.

They are determined to prevent us leaving no matter what. Some of them think they can kill Brexit stone dead, even without a

SECOND REFERENDUM.

Just as well the Archbishop is on the case. WE might need divine intervention if we're ever going to

GET OUT OF THE EU

IN ONE PIECE.

Still it got me wondering just what form a special Brexit service might take.

Welby himself is a committed Remainer, who said recently that a

NO DEAL BREXIT

would be not only a 'political failure but a moral one.

Will he be able to maintain the necessary neutrality to bring both sides of our bitterly divided society together? Let's find out by crossing over live to WEstminster Abbey where the Archbishop is about to address his congregation. Here's the

ORDER OF SERVICE

 

May the Lord be with you. WE shall song Hymn No 94, All Things Bright And Beautiful, which has been updated by the General Synod to accommodate all shades of opinion in the hope that we can reconcile ourselves to whatever fate has in store for us.

All things bright and beautiful

And free movement for all

All things wise and wonderful

The EU made them all.

 

Each tow'ring butter mountain

Each lake of sparkling wine

Each rule and regulation  and gleaming wind turbine

The EU made them all.

 

All things bright and beautiful

And free movement for all

All things wise and wonderful

The EU made them all.

 

They gave us straight  bananas

And lots of different cheese

And mass youth unemployment

In Italy and Greece.

 

All things bright and beautiful

And free movement for all

They even helped the Germans

Bring down the Berlin Wall.

 

They gave us open borders

And everlasting peace

And another million migrants

 From across the Middle East.

 

All things bright and beautiful

And free movement for all

All things wise and beautiful The EU made them all

 

They took away our fish stocks

And gave them all to Spain

Yet still we want a

People's vote

So we can choose Remain

 

All things bright and beautiful

And free movement for all

What's the EU ever done

for us?

Frankly,

BUGGER ALL.

 

At this juncture, I had planned to ask the verger, Mr Umunna, to read some relevant passages from the Book of Common Fisheries, adapted from St Peter's original Latin version

. But I am informed that he has decided to leave our congregation to join a new  independent  church

Unfortunately, we are not able to offer Holy Communion today. It appears that Mr Farage's prayer group drank all the wine

So please join me in a moment of silent reflection and don't forget to give generously when the collection plate comes round. We are hoping to raise somewhere in the region of

£39 BILLION

to facilitate a

SMOOTH

BREXIT

And may the Lord have mercy on your souls

*

FEBRUARY 26,2019

 

H.F.1821

*
 

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2019

MONTH OF DELIVERANCE!

FROM THE -CORRUPT-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC -GODLESS-SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION.

 

*
 

WHY HE IS SO SORELY MISSED IN ENGLAND AND IN DEMOCRACIES WORLD WIDE

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND

by

WINSTON CHURCHILL

DEATH OF THE LAST GIANT - A DAY TO REMEMBER!

Winston+Churchill-

'We are a part of Europe

but not of it'...-

*

ALSO WISE WORDS

FROM

A Prime Minister in 1848

Over a Hundred and Sixty Four years ago a great patriotic Prime Minister - Foreign Secretary - Lord Palmerstone (Henry John Temple) - beloved by his People defined the principle of nationality as follows:

“ Providence meant mankind to be divided into separate nations, and for this purpose countries have been bounded by natural barriers, and races of men have been distinguished by separate languages, habits, manners, dispositions, and characters…” (1848)

 “…We have in the first place to say that the Business of an English Government, is to pursue that course of Foreign Policy which on the whole they may think right; and not to attempt the impossible task of at all times and upon all subjects doing that which is agreeable to all Foreign Governments. A man who in private life attempts to please everyone, invariably fails; and the Government of a great country would not be more successful in such an endeavour…

 . It must at times be an advantage to a foreign Prince…in the present state of the continent to visit England and to see with his own eyes, how Liberty may be combined with Loyalty, Freedom with public order, and how the Respect which is shown by the Crown for the Rights of the Subject and for the enactment of the Law produces corresponding Feelings on the Part of the People and inspires them with similar Respect for the Rights of the Crown and for the Laws which secure the Liberties and the Property of all , from the highest to the lowest in the Land. ”

[Of course the  MONARCHS  of ENGLAND since the 19th Century have been under the INFLUENCE of the ILLUMINATI.]

 

Winston Churchill warned the populace in the

1920's

 of the true facts of the ILLUMINATI who  have virtually ruled the world  since

 

WATERLOO

*

In the 1920's Winston Churchill mentioned the Jewish Bolsheviks the details a

 JEW WATCH

[As we have explained the social circles which Winston Churchill  was connected  with during his long life such as the Rothchilds and like-others were the Establishment existing at the time from the Disraeli era. It was an impossibility to ignore particularly as he wished to further his career.  Of course he was a strong and enthusiastic supporter of the BRITISH EMPIRE in its outer image and must have been aware of the true nature within.   Those that might criticize him should consider the circumstances of the time which have ameliorated somewhat over the past decades until the present day when there are at last changes afoot.]

 
 

A WARNING!

 FROM A PATRIOTIC PRIME MINISTER

BENJAMIN DISRAELI

IN

 1852

In the 19th Century, Benjamin Disraeli, [Beaconsfield] a baptised Jew,[Prime Minister of England-1868 ] proclaimed:

 

...the world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes...The influence of the Jews may be traced in the last outbreak of the destructive principle in Europe. An insurrection takes place against tradition and aristocracy, against religion and property...The natural equality of men and the abrogation of property are proclaimed by the secret societies who form provisional governments and men of Jewish race are found at the head of every one of them.'
 

WE MUST NOT FORGET!

William Ewart Gladstone

 a great prime minister

 symbolised by his rolled  up sleeves-

 a man with the common touch.

Words of a great Prime Minister, William Ewart Gladstone, are much to the point:

 

‘’The finance of any country is ultimately associated with the liberties of the country. It is a powerful leverage by which English liberty has been gradually acquired. If the House of Commons by any possibility loses the control of the grants of public money, depend upon it, your very liberty will be worth very little in comparison. That powerful leverage has been what is commonly known as the power of the purse – the control of the House of Commons over public expenditure’’ (1891)

*

BENJAMIN FREEDMAN -

 A JEW

UNCOVERED TO THE WORLD IN 1961 IN WASHINGTON D.C. THE

 ZIONIST CONSPIRACY.

-HE SPENT HIS LIFE WARNING THE PEOPLE OF THE GREAT DANGER TO THEIR LIVES AND LIBERTY

JEW WATCH

[As we have stated elsewhere many JEWS world-wide do NOT! agree with the  NEW WORLD ORDER - ZIONIST MESSAGE.]

 JewsnotZionists

[THE FLAG ABOVE OF THE ANGLO-SAXONS THE TRUE FLAG OF THE ENGLISH PEOPLE.

THE END OF THE ENGLISH

INTRODUCTION

HOW IT ALL BEGAN 

 HOW IT ALL FITS TOGETHER

THE RESULTANT LUNACIES

HOW WE ARE CONTROLLED

 WHERE FREEDOM IS VANISHING

*

[THE MAJORITY OF YOU DID NOTHING!]

 

 

ENGLAND

OUR

ENGLAND 

ALL ABOUT

FREEEDOM AND INDIVIDUALITY

 

 

 

WHERE IS OUR REFERENDUM DAVID CAMERON ON THE UNDEMOCRATIC SOVIETISED SATANIC COLLECTIVIST EUROPEAN UNION?

 

NOVEMBER-2012

BROUGHT FORWARD FROM 2012

 

H.F.1330/1

 

 

AS WE ARE NEARING OUR

INDEPENDENCE DAY

 DO NOT RETREAT

YOUR HOUR OF

LIBERTY

 IS

AT HAND!.

FEBRUARY 15,2019
 

A CALL TO ARMS.

The Leave camp need to be ready to

DEFEND

 their

VICTORY

to  live under

 

"The Rights and

Liberties"

of

ENGLISHMEN.

WE HAVE NO WISH TO SEE A REOCCURRENCE  OF THE BLOODY REVOLUTION  in 1642 IN EDGE HILL-WARWICKSHIRE

TO RETAIN

THE

Rights and Liberties of Englishmen'

 AND SUBSEQUENT  BATTLES AROUND THE COUNTRY.

THE REASON FOR A CALL TO ARMS IS BECAUSE MILLIONS OF THE FRIENDS OF FRAU MERKEL WILL NOT ACCEPT THE RETURN OF THEIR ONCE

FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND

AND WILL USE ALMOST ANY MEANS TO ENSLAVE THEIR FELLOW CITIZENS FOR EVER IN THE NOW INTENDED TRI-NATION SUPER-STATE OF GERMANY-FRANCE AND ITALY.

THE SHEER ARROGANCE OF THE SPONSORS OF HITLER'S WAR-TIME PLANNED SUPER-STATE IS NOW A REALITY.

THE GREATER NUMBER STILL SUPPORTING THE  BEAST OF BRUSSELS

-BRAIN-WASHED-MIND-BENDING PROPAGANDA-BETRAYERS OF THEIR SACRED INHERITANCE OF

MAGNA CARTA

 FOUGHT FOR FOR OVER 800 YEARS -SO SOUGHT FOR  AND PROTECTED IN ALMOST HALF THE WORLD.

IF IT HAS TO BE THEN WE MUST FIGHT AS WE ARE IN THE RIGHT AND CANNOT ACCEPT ANY COMPROMISE TO THAT OF THE RETURN OF OUR ONCE FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STARE.

TO SHOW THAT WE ARE READY THERE NEEDS TO BE RALLIES AROUND THE COUNTRY IN THOSE CROMWELLIAN BATTLE FIELDS OF THE

ENGLISH CIVIL WAR

IT IS AGAIN THE ROUNDHEADS AGAINST THE CAVALIERS

WILL YOU DO IT?

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

[BY A COINCIDENCE WE ONLY REALISED THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE DAY AFTER WE HAD COMPLETED OUR WORK.

JULY 4-

AMERICAN INDEPENDENCE DAY

 

WHEN WILL WE CELIBRATE OUR INDEPENDENCE DAY?]

H. F. 824 FREEDOM NOW.

H.F.1800
 

 UK voting system' ignores will of millions'

by

Daniel Martin for the Daily Mail -Chief Political Correspondent-JUNE 2-2015.

 

BRITAIN'S voting system is 'archaic' and divisive' and does not represent the will of millions, a pressure group has argued. The Electoral Reform Society, which has campaigned for proportional representation for 130 years, claimed last month's General Election was the most disproportionate ever.  It said UKIP would have WON up to 80 seats using the type of PR used in many European nations, while the GREENS would have got 20.  UKIP and the GREENS received 5MILLION VOTES, but under the FIRST-PAST-THE-POST system ended up with ONE MP each.  An E R S-commissioned survey said under PR the TORIES would have seen their tally of MPs fall  by almost 100 while  LABOUR would have gone down 24...

[MONTHLY BULLETIN CHART UNTIL REFERENDUM ON EU -LATEST MAY 2017 -AT FOOT OF PAGE!    ASAP!  

SEE HERE!   ]

 

JUNE 2-2015

H.F.1388

*

 

 

CAN COX

BE OUR

IRON DUKE

OF

BREXIT

*

 Andrew Pierce reporting

Tuesday, March 5, 2019

 

 

News for DAILY MAIL-CAN COX BE OUR IRON DUKE OF BREXIT?

AS a provocative gesture it could hardly have been more mischievous. Geoffrey Cox, the key Cabinet figure trying to secure

 BREXIT

posted online an image of a portrait of the

DUKE of WELLINGTON

whose finest hour was his victory over Napoleon at the

BATTLE of WATERLOO

just 40 miles from

 BRUSSELS.

As he engages in combat in the same city with a modern-day Frenchman, the European Union's chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier, the British Government's Attorney General clearly hopes that

HE TOO WILL PREVAIL.

Accompanying his Wellinton tweet, Mr Cox gave a simple caption: The Iron Duke, By invoking the

SPIRIT

of one of Britain's greatest heroes and taunting the 'enemy', Mr Cox threw down the gauntlet.

Until his appointment as Attorney General last summer, the lawyer was best known as the MP with the biggest earnings from outside Parliament.

His admirers cross the political spectrum. Phillip Sands QC, Professor of Law at University College, London, describes him as

 'thoroughly independent and fearless in the best traditions of the

ENGLISH BAR.'

Andrew Mitchell MP the former International Development Secretary is another fan:

'He looks and sounds like a proper, old fashioned Attorney General.

He has real presence and authority. Everyone knows he will give his advice without

FEAR or FAVOUR

unlike some of his predecessors who served up what the Prime Minister wanted to hear.

Yet before his surprise promotion to Cabinet, Cox divided his time between his job as a Devon MP and work as a QC. In 2014, he earned £821,000 at the Bar. Two years later nhe apologised to the Commons for claiming parliamentary expenses of 49p for a bottle of milk, £2 worth of tea bags and £4.99 for weedkiller for space in front of the constituency office'-all claims that were rejected.

A profile on the Conservative Home website revealed he often took his juniors to the Savoy for tea, 'where they could digest the day's play as well as the cakes'. He has done the same for MPs who want to explore the intricacies of

BREXIT.

His clients have included the Turkish government, journalists from THE SUN accused of paying public for stories, a Liverpool FC footballer, the controversal property tycoon Nicholas Van Hoogstraten and a British Olypian'in proceedings for drug abuse.'

He also had a spell working in Mauritius as pupil master to the country's prime minister.

Cox was annoyed when he was named among 229 investors in Phoenix Film in 2014 which offered tax breaks for investing in Hollywood movies. While the HMRC regarded it as a tax avoidance scheme, Cox insisted he had instructed his financial advisers that he did not wish to be involved in 'aggressive tax avoidance.

His political break-through came when ultra-Brexiteers Boris Johnson and David Davis quit the Cabinet and he was appointed as part of the ministerial reshuffle. On his Commons debut, he captivated MPs. His voice was described as being'as deep as a tuba's lament' and also likened to Mufasa, the character in The Lion King.

And at last autumn's Tory party conference, he was chosen as Mrs May's warm up act. In a stirring conclusion, he said

Britain would come to new life after

BREXIT

and quoted the poet John Milton's

Areopagitica

'Methinks I see in my mind a noble and puissant nation rousing herself like a strong man from sleep, and shaking her invincible locks;

Methinks I see her as an eagle muing her mighty youth, and kindling her undazl'd eyes at the full midday beam'.

Looking older than his 58 years, this son of a soldier has such an impressive bearing that Commons Speaker John Bercow mistakenly once announced him as

'Sir' Geoffrey

Mr Cox replied:' I am extremely obliged to you for promoting me., Mr Speaker. Perhaps I can take that as a hint to the Prime Minister.'

A rotund figure, he claims his recreations include swimming and enjoying rural life

If his brickmanship succeeds over Brexit negotiations in Brussels, he will have earned all the credit due.

If he fails, the PM will have a convenient scapegoat.

Geoffrey Cox, who relishes the cut and thrust of Cabinet life was once asked what was his greatest achievement. He modestly replied: 'Thirty-five years of marriage - well, its really my wife's achievement, not mine.

If he helps get Mrs May's Brexit deal over the line it will certainly be his achievement-and one to match that of the Iron Duke on a Belgian battlefield 204 years ago.

*  *  *

[In the film Wimslow Boy  with actor ROBERT DONAT who gave an impressive legal performance before the HOUSE OF COMMONS defending a Naval cadet accused BY THE ADMIRALTY of theft.and the main theme was:

'Let Right be Done!

 

[Mr Geoffrey COX will become a man of  English history if he can retrieve the honour of our nation state - given away by traitors in 1972 by lies and deceit ,and be able to show the English people, wherever they are, that they have rejoined their ancient historic path ,lost to them so many decades ago.]

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

MARCH 5,2019

 

H.F.1827

*
 

ROTTEN DEAL MEANS WE'LL NEVER LEAVE.

Theresa May WARNED by Rees-Mogg: Rotten Brexit deal means we'll NEVER leave EU-Daily Express

EXCLUSIVE byDavid Maddox POLITICAL EDITOR

THERESA  MAY was warned last night that she is heading for a crushing defeat this week on

BREXIT

The leader of the Tory leavers group, Jacob Rees Mogg, branded her EU deal

"ROTTEN"

and warned that it would condemn Britain in

 "PERPETUAL PENAL SERVITUDE". 

 Writing for the Sunday Express, Mr Rees-Mogg offered Mrs May an 11th hour escape route-but bonly if Attorney General Cox can win a convincing time limit to the Northern Ireland

BACKSTOP

Coxin his talks with the EU.

Otherwise Brexiteer MPs will again vote against

HER WITHDRAWAL AGREEMENT

aWhen she last asked for the support of the Commons in January she lost be a crushing

230 VOTES.

Mr Rees-Mogg's warning came after a poll revealed voters believe most MPs in the predominently REMAIN COMMONS are now fighting for

EU INTERESTS

AHEAD OF

 BRITISH INTERESTS

The Prime Minister hopes to head to Brussels to sign off a revised deal tonight or tomorrow morning after talks continued yesterday. But a Downing Street source said:

"These are tough talks with the Commission which we are expecting to go right down the wire".

" The Prime Minister, ministers and her negotiating team are intensely focussed this weekend on making progress so that ultimately we can, in the country's best interests, leave the EU with a deal."

Last night senior Whitehall sources suggested that the changes agreed in Brussels will fall short of reopening the

WITHDRAWAL AGREEMENT

and so will not go as far as

Brexiteers

 WANT.

Instead, it is understood that Downing Street is warning Brexiteers that if Mrs May's deal fails, the UK will end up with a so-called Norway option, favoured by Remainer Tories and many Labour MPs, of staying in the customs union and single market, suject to EU rules with no ability to change them.

It would mean the UK would be forced to accept uncontrolled immigration from the EU while being unable to strike free trade deals with the rest of the world.

A senior government source said " it is a Remainer Parliament" and suggested that an amendment by Labour MP Yvette Cooper and Tory MP Nick Boles allowing MPs to take control of the Brexit agenda would probably pass with Labour support.

A senior government source said this would lead to "the  softest of all Brexits, the Norway option". But members of Mr Rees-Mogg's Brexiteer European Research Group (ERG) were adamant that they will not be intimidated into backing a deal from Mrs May which they argue traps the UK under Brussels rule.

Tory Berwick MP Anne-Maria Trevelelyan said: "I am sure that the Prime Minister is preparing not only to vote to keep a

NO DEAL BREXIT

on the table next week but  to give a firm instruction to Conservative MPs to do the same.

" Anything less than this would fly in the face of every rule in nthe negotiating handbook, would signify the end to any semblance of governance and would give the EU a hammer with which to beat us into submitting to an even worse deal."

Leader of the House, Andrea Leadsom, one of the last Brexiteers in the Cabinet, has indicated that she does not believe the EU will have moved enough.

She said: "There is still hope, But I have to say I'm deeply disappointed with what we're hearing coming out of the EU. I do have to ask myself what game are they playing here." ...

a[ THE GAME THEY HAVE ALWAYS PLAYED SINCE IT'S INCEPTION-A GERMAN-HITLERITE CONSPIRACY TO DOMINATE EUROPE IN THE PEACE.-AND THEY HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL BECAUSE OF THE NUMBER OF 'USEFUL IDIOTS' WHO HAVE DISTAIN FOR FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATES. BEING PART OF A SUPER-STATE MEANS MORE LUCRATIVE EARNINGS WITH NO LIMIT AND POWER SUPREME. THE ARROGANCE IS THERE TO SEE. AND THE PRESENT IMPASSE ON BRITAIN LEAVING THE EU IS TO ENSURE THAT OTHERS WISHING TO FOLLOW WILL BE AWARE THAT THEY ARE TRAPPED IN A  GODLESS - GREEDY- GROTESQUE-UNREPRESENTATIVE-UNDEMOCRATIC-UNYEILDING NAZI  GERMAN INVENTION.]

TO be Continued

...Meanwhile a BMG poll of 1,510 adults has revealed public disillusionment with MPs.

Of those polled 39 per cent believe that MPs put the EU interests above British interests.

The Government was also coming under pressure to delay a

£1billion contract for Royal Fleet Auxiliary Fleet Solid Support vessels. Under the EU defence directive the contract is expected to be awarded to Spain.

But if Britain leaves without a deal it can

GIVE THE WORK TO BRITISH SHIPYARDS

*  *  *

Theresa May WARNED by Rees-Mogg: Rotten Brexit deal means we'll NEVER leave EU-Daily Express

 

EXCLUSIVE byDavid Maddox POLITICAL EDITOR

TO BE CONTINUED

*

Brexit news: British public move towards a no deal ... - Daily Express

*

 47 YEARS IN TH

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

MARCH 10-2019

 

H.F.1813

*

THE TRUTH that BRUSSELS cannot BEAR: PEOPLE CRAVE NATIONAL IDENTITY.

By Stephen Glover for the Daily Mail

 3 October 2017

What happened in Catalonia on Sunday was shaming and shocking in a modern European state. Spanish police bludgeoned and assaulted defenceless civilians who were simply trying to exercise their democratic right.

First and foremost, this is a terrible crisis for the wrong-headed, bully-boy government in Madrid. After the unedifying spectacle of police attacking blameless voters, the chances must surely have increased of Catalonia – Spain’s most prosperous region with some 7.5million inhabitants – seceding.

But it is also an enormous crisis for the European Union, which in recent weeks has said almost nothing as the Spanish authorities arrested officials arranging an independence referendum on behalf of the devolved Catalan government.

 

 

RELATED ARTICLES


 

One reason he did not do so in the case of Spain is that it is one of the most obedient pro-EU countries in Europe, which seldom defies the will of Brussels, or causes trouble for Juncker and his ilk.

But there is an even deeper reason for the Commission’s silence. The events in Catalonia challenge at a deep level its project for ever closer union, about which both Juncker and President Emmanuel Macron of France have ventilated in recent weeks.

For how can there be an amicable union between the EU’s nation states if some of those nations are themselves deeply divided and fractious, as is plainly the case with Catalonia and Spain?

Here is a region of largely Catalan-speaking people who regard themselves as culturally distinct. A sizeable proportion of them yearn to break free from Spain, even though Catalonia has been part of the country for hundreds of years.

Sunday’s vote illuminates a truth which Brussels cannot bear. There are many people in Europe for whom the atavistic call of identity counts far more than any exhortation about forging a European superstate

That, after all, was one of the main messages of Brexit – that the majority of voters in our own ancient nation resent the undemocratic control of Brussels, and have no wish to be sucked into a united Europe.

For Brussels, the example of Britain was bad enough, and it has set about trying to punish us for having had the effrontery to want to leave. In a sense, the demonstration of Catalan nationalism is even more alarming to the federalists because this show of independence is happening inside one of the EU’s nation states.

How is it possible, they wonder, for the pan-European project to proceed if some EU countries are in danger of fracturing? The terror in Brussels is that if Catalonia were allowed to break away, regions in other member states could follow suit. Instead of coalescing into an amorphous whole, some EU nations might fall apart.

Belgium, whose capital, Brussels, is the seat of EU expansionism, is divided. The Flemish-speaking region of Flanders, which constitutes about 60 per cent of the country’s population, is at daggers drawn with the French-speaking minority.

Many people in northern Italy long to be rid of the impoverished south, which is relatively unproductive and, in the view of northerners, consumes more than its fair share of government spending. The Right-wing Northern League has campaigned with some success for independence for the north, and imagines a separate country called Padania.

France faces an independence movement in the island of Corsica. Meanwhile the cohesion of Spain is threatened not just by free-spirited Catalans but also by militant Basques, part of whose territory lies in France.

Romania and Slovakia both have unhappy Hungarian minorities. Even in Poland’s region of Silesia, much of which used to be ruled by Germany until 1945, there are stirrings of an independence movement.

All over Europe apparently unified countries are harried by breakaway groups which have a strong sense of separate identity. If Catalonia were allowed to go it alone, who knows what might come next?
 

The problem for Brussels is that it is used to dealing with individual nation states but is powerless to intervene in unruly regions. That is why the Commission has remained so quiet in the case of Catalonia apart from expressing a few words of solidarity with Spain.

By the way, the British response has been regrettably supine. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson stressed his support for the Spanish government in a tweet. As the leading Brexiteer he should surely have been more critical of Madrid’s use of violence.

The Spanish government, it must be said, has behaved rashly and brutishly. Arguably some Catalan separatist political parties have been unwise in deliberately engineering a confrontation.

But given that the Catalan government had made numerous requests to hold a referendum on independence – after Spain’s constitutional court had controversially declared in 2010 that Catalonia was not a nation – what was it to do having been rebuffed time and time again? If it had possessed a modicum of good sense, the Spanish government would have allowed the referendum to go ahead. Had the vote been in favour of independence, it could have then questioned its legal status.

But to arrest Catalan officials, to close a large number of polling stations, and then to clobber innocent voters were acts of unbelievable stupidity as well as nastiness.

It passes understanding how the prime minister of Spain, Mariano Rajoy, can say that democracy has prevailed. The opposite is true.

Imagine if two or three years hence the Scottish National Party’s Nicola Sturgeon were to hold a referendum without the approval of Westminster – by no means an unthinkable eventuality.

In fact, her case would be much weaker than that of the Catalan government since there has already been one legal referendum in Scotland in 2014, which was said by the SNP leader Alex Salmond at the time to be the last for a generation.

Even so, it is inconceivable that a new unofficial referendum in Scotland would be met by the authorities in Westminster with police wielding batons and firing rubber bullets. Such a wild over-reaction would inevitably give a boost to Scottish nationalism – as, I have no doubt, the cause of Catalan nationalism will have benefited from Sunday’s onslaught.

The truth is that the Spanish state has a very restricted conception of democracy. We should know that already from its desire to shoehorn Gibraltar into Spain despite 99 per cent of its citizens having voted in a 2002 referendum to remain British.

God alone knows what will happen now in Catalonia. Unless the Spanish government agrees to an official referendum – an unlikely prospect – there will probably be deadlock. I am afraid there is also the possibility of more violence on both sides.

Justifying and supporting the Madrid government is the European Commission in all its absurdity, dreaming dreams of a union which the people of Europe do not want. It will do its utmost to ensure that Catalonia doesn’t interfere with its grandiose scheme.

Will Remainers look at Catalonia and reflect that we have a quieter and more civilised way of dealing with our differences in this country? I don’t know. What I do know is that every day I am ever more relieved that we are leaving this misguided club.
Full article
 


 Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4942684/STEPHEN-GLOVER-truth-national-identity.html#ixzz4uYWX4q7V
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on

 

92

View
comments

 

H.F.1332 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU
If

BREXIT

 is such a disaster, how come Europe's firms have doubled their stake in the UK?

By Alex Brummer-CITY EDITOR

 

March 5,2019

 

ALEX BRUMMER: If Brexit is such a disaster, how come ... - Daily Mail

A VISITOR from Mars tuning into events in Britain in recent months would rightly be shocked by the political paralysis in Westminster, the calamitous state of the motor industry, and the mortal damage to immediate business confidence caused by Brexit uncertainty.

Yet while there clearly are difficulties, the nation is selling itself short if it believes that this is the only story.

One doesn't have to be a swivel-eyed Brexiteer to recognise that if one looks over the horizon, beyond Brexit, there is much about Britain to inspire confidence in the future. Not least the fact that it is still the most favoured nation among the 28 states of the European Union for direct investment from overseas.

Boost

What makes this even more remarkable is that many of those keeping faith in Britain are state-directed sovereign wealth funds, run, owned and managed by foreign countries.

 The world's largest sovereign wealth fund, Norway -worth around £740bn as a result of the country's oil and gas revenues-recently announced it would continue to invest, and even increase investment, in Britain over the next three decades. If ever there was a moral boost in these uncertain times, THIS IS IT.

In addition, even as Brussels negotiators are playing hard-ball with the May government and warning of the calamity of

NO DEAL

It's clear that European investors do not believe Brexit will have a wholly negative impact on Britain. New data this week shows that in the past 12 months, EU businesses ploughed a staggering £23.9bn into the UK in the shape of property deals, corporate acquisitions and buying stakes in UK firms.

The data, collected by an offshoot of the credit rating agency Standard & Poor's shows there are 553 separate purchases of assets and that investment was up from £16bn on the previous 12 months and £10.5bn in the same period of 2016-17.Overall, European businesses have more than doubled the sums they have invested in Britain in the last three years-which is hardly a vote of no confidence.

Neither sovereign wealth funds, nor, for that matter, firms based in EU countries have any political reason to be part of a 'Project Cheer', boosting the UK simply to make the public feel better about our momentous decision to

LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION.

All of the bodies involved are hard-nosed investors -and they clearly have faith in the long-term stability of Britain's democracy, the tremendous value to be found from investment in prime UK real estate (especially in the City of London), the excellent long-term returns to be gained from shares in Britain's privatised utilities and the  pre-eminence of research and innovation in the UK.

How ironic that this message of confidence in a post-Brexit future is being voiced not by our squabbling and largely Remain-supporting political class but by overseas investors such as Norway's fund talking with their wallets.

Norway, like the UK, has been an enormous beneficiary of the munificence of the North Sea in yielding oil and natural gas, which is still the bedrock of our energy supplies, despite the drive to be more green.

But whereas the UK allowed the free market to decide where the North Sea went -higher shares prices and dividends from oil companies boosted private pension funds, and the HMRC took its share to help finance the NHS and other public services  - Norway directed the vast majority into the sovereign wealth fund which since 1990 has accumulated some £750bn of assets for future generations.

Britain has been a destination of choice for Norway's wealth fund ever since its inception and the country holds stakes worth an astonishing £62bn - around 8 per cent of its total investments - in some of Britain's biggest enterprises. These include HSBC, which is the nation's most profitable and global bank, the largest oil company, BP and UK debt.

There is no greater compliment any foreign state can pay than to invest in the bonds, known inn the UK as gilt edged stock, issued by another company.

Far from being deterred by the turbulence caused by

BREXIT

funds like Norway's believe it presents an opportunity because it has had an impact on asset prices in the UK.

Shares in Britain's key FTSE100 companies have lagged behind those of their overseas counterparts. This is despite the fact that firms ranging from Jonnie Walker spirits company Diageo to British Airways owner International Airlines Group are still punching hugely above their weight in world terms.

Vibrant

The continued success of the City makes its skyscrapers a source of constant attention for overseas investors, from the Gulf States to greater China. Indeed, Britain is now the number one favoured location for investment by Beijing, which has put money into projects ranging from Hinckley Point, the new nuclear plant in Somerset, to Heathrow Airport

Brexit or not, Britain remains a major target for corporate and sovereign investors. My own conversations with those in charge of investment funds have revealed that a bigger worry than Brexit is the possibility of a government led by Jeremy Corbyn and his anointed Chancellor John McDonnell rushing to take valuable privately held assets, such as water companies back into public ownership.

Certainly, Brexit may have affected domestic business investment but it has had little impact on how other countries view our nation.

Latest figures from the Office for National Statistics show that in 2017 the  value of direct foreign investment in the UK rose by £149bn. Our vibrant financial services sector, a pioneer in developing financial technology, pulled in an astonishing £385bn, up 19.5 per cent from 2016 - the year of the

REFERENDUM.

Among the sovereign wealth funds, along with Norway and China, those most attracted to the UK are the Gulf States of Qatar and Saudi Arabia.

The Qataris are in charge of the redevelopment of one of the most totemic buildings in central London, the former American Embassy in Grosvenor Square.

Magnet

They are also the biggest owner of shares in grocer J Sainsbury, with 22per cent of the stock, and in one of the pillars of the City, the London Stock Exchange, where it is the biggest shareholder with a 10.3per cent stake.

It is hardly surprising the Emir Sheikh Tamim has enjoyed accompanying the Queen in the parade down the racecourse at Royal Ascot.

There is little doubt sovereign investment funds from around the world, as well as some wealthy individual investors such as Hong Kong's richest man, Li Ka-shing, the owner of the nation's busiest port at Felixstowe, see Britain as the bargain basement of the world.

The 15 per cent devaluation of the pound since the referendum, together with the weakness of share prices, is a magnet for investors willing to look to the

 LONG TERM.

There is an obsession among UK and American investors about judging investments in shares and other assets by what is likely to happen over the next three months, let alone the next three or even 30 years.

How reassuring is it to know Britain has friends out there confident enough to ignore those who wail about impending disaster because of

BREXIT

-AND

INSTEAD SEE A LAND OF OPPORTUNITY.

*

By Alex Brummer-CITY EDITOR

 

March 5,2019

 

ALEX BRUMMER: If Brexit is such a disaster, how come ... - Daily Mail

*  *  *

 

H.F.1825
 
 

[AT LONG! LONG! LAST!

- WE LEAVE

THE

CORRUPT-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC-GODLESS EU

 IN MARCH 2019.]

*

DAILY MAIL

-At last, Hammond's on board with

BREXIT

and the

REMOANERS are DEAD and BURIED

LEAVING THE EU

 IN

MARCH,2019

 

 

THE

DOMINIC

LAWSON

Column

 

By DOMINIC LAWSON

 

Finally, it’s sorted. Until yesterday, the anti-Brexiteers known as Remoaners had high hopes of Philip Hammond, the Chancellor.

His statement on The Andrew Marr Show last month that failure to reach an amicable deal with the EU ‘would be a very, very bad outcome for Britain’ was seen as an attack on his Brexiteer colleagues in the Cabinet (and, indeed, on the Prime Minister).

But yesterday he appeared as joint author of a newspaper article with the most adamantine Brexiteer in the Cabinet, the International Trade Secretary Dr Liam Fox. The two supposed foes declared that in March 2019, Britain would not just be leaving the EU but also ‘we will leave the Customs Union and be free to negotiate the best trade deals around the world as an independent, open, trading nation’.

Although the Cabinet Brexiteers were content with Hammond’s proposal that there should be a transition period after March 2019, pending a final settlement of the country’s arrangements with the EU, the Chancellor had given the impression he was bending to the demands of the CBI that Britain remain within the Customs Union during that unspecified period.

Blunder

This they regarded as a fatal blunder — and not just because they suspected the CBI (which had campaigned for Britain to give up sterling for the euro) of seeking to keep the UK in the EU ‘by the back door’.

As Shanker Singham, chairman of the special trade commission of the Legatum Institute (a group consulted regularly by the Government), warned last week: ‘The UK must be able to provide the clarity of being outside the Customs Union on Day 1 of Brexit.

If such clarity does not exist, then other countries will not think the UK is serious about executing an independent trade policy and they will quickly lose patience and move on.’...

...In any case, the nation has not changed its collective mind since the referendum in June 2016. If anything, views have hardened in the direction set by the result. A survey of 3,293 people published on Friday by the London School of Economics showed that even those who had voted ‘Remain’ would prefer the sort of Brexit deal the LSE’s team described as ‘hard’.

A total of 51.3 per cent of Remain voters backed a Brexit deal which delivered ‘full control’ over immigration and led to lower numbers of migrants from the EU. No fewer than 54.7 per cent of Remainers said that the UK should ‘pay nothing’ to the EU by means of a ‘divorce bill’.

And 52.2 per cent of Remainers told the LSE researchers that we should entirely free British law from the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice. Unsurprisingly, a still higher proportion of self-identifying ‘Leave’ voters supported what the LSE termed

‘hard Brexit’.

Monstrous

This clearly disappointed the most voluble critic of the Brexiteers on the Tory parliamentary benches, Anna Soubry. In her own newspaper article yesterday, she lamented ‘a sense of resignation among most people who voted Remain that we have to “man up” and make the most of what we know will be a rotten Brexit’...

Full article


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4787508/At-Hammond-s-board-Brexit.html#ixzz4pkbL1fqi
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

*

[ LAST MONTH AS PRISONERS OF THE

FOURTH REICH

THEN

TO REGAIN OUR ONCE FREE INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND.]

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS!]

AUGUST 14, 2017

H.F.1281 BREXIT SOONER THAN LATER!
 

 

How Britain is ruled by patronising

 

 

B*#*@:rds

 by QUENTIN LETTS

Quentin Letts for the Daily Mail's recent articles

How Britain is ruled by patronising b*#*@rds: QUENTIN LETTS names the worst offenders among the People Who Know Best who never tire of telling us what to do and think

06/10/17 22:24

The government machine was used remorselessly to help

REMAIN

We were muck-spreadered with warnings of hideous consequences from Brexit. The Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, was mobilised. His friend George Osborne (top left) was Chancellor and, so far as the two of them could see, Remain was bound to win, and Clever George would become prime minister before the next general election. From comedians to bishops (hard to say which of those two groups is funnier), fund managers to charity-sector tsars, Brexit was as pongy as a bad sardine. They did not just oppose it. They recoiled from it - including (also top to bottom, left to right): Amanda Abbington, Kwasi Kwarteng, Gary Lineker, Chris Martin, J, K, Rowling, James Corden and Keira Knightley

 

A rebellion has taken place in this country of ours, an uprising, a new Peasants’ Revolt. A real kick in the kidneys for Britain’s ruling elite.

Before the EU referendum in 2016, the electorate was told firmly what to do. A vote for Remain would be safe and strong, and woe betide the country if you were stupid enough to back Brexit. You know your duty, little ones, said the elite. Sod that, said the people.

In the greatest citadel-storming since the French Revolution, they chose to leave the obtrusive European Union.

But it was not a result that happened by accident. It was born of a weary truculence — a yeoman impatience with those who make up our smug, self-perpetuating, invisible Brahmin caste.

Before the EU referendum in 2016, the electorate was told firmly what to do. A vote for Remain would be safe and strong, and woe betide the country if you were stupid enough to back Brexit. You know your duty, little ones, said the elite. Sod that, said the people

The government machine was used remorselessly to help Remain. We were muck-spreadered with warnings of hideous consequences from Brexit. The Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, was mobilised. His friend George Osborne was Chancellor and, so far as the two of them could see, Remain was bound to win, and Clever George would become prime minister before the next general election

For decades, Britons have been bossed about by a cadre of administrators and managers and pose-striking know-alls.

The old aristocracy having faded, in came a more furtive elite, driven by the desire to own minds, not acres, determined to control opinion and dictate our attitudes.

It was done on the sly, of course. They posed as liberals, and crouched behind ‘enlightened’ attitudes while imposing their views on a populace they claimed to esteem but more truthfully disdained.

 

Politicians, civil servants and lawyers used a language few could understand, while government was farmed out to agencies and quangos and privatised supply companies.

Cheap labour was imported, suppressing workers’ wages, because that was what globalised boss-cats at the international forums said was necessary.

Could we criticise immigration? Only if we wanted to be called racists and fruitcakes. The elite’s media munchkins had placed it on the top shelf, somewhere safe where it could not be touched.
 

At the gates to the Palace of Westminster I bumped into pro-Leave Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng, a great bear of a man. ‘This is bigger than any general election result,’ he boomed

Against our will, children were exposed to sex education by schools more interested in dogma than declension. Sex crimes rocketed.

Sociologists said murderers must be released into the community. Re-offending rates rose.

Smokers were made to feel like criminals. Criminals were encouraged to sue their victims.

From every side came instruction as to what we must think: about diet, gender, sexuality, race, even the weather, with the TV forecasters telling us to put on sun cream and giving silly names to every incoming squall.

The entire System was at it, badgering us, belittling us, patting us on the head, putting us in our place.

Think this. Don’t think that. Inappropriate! Hate-crime!

From the Chief Medical Officer and her strictures about alcohol limits to railway announcements saying ‘do not become a victim of crime’, they treat us like toddlers.

Even the most docile beach donkey, by nature placid and reliable, if repeatedly kicked, will eventually refuse to co-operate. It will bare its teeth and walk in the other direction, pulling its tethers out of the sand.

So it has proved with the British voters.

Get off our backs, they said. Stop goading us. Stop being such patronising bastards.

The morning we discovered we’d break free from Europe was that unforgettable Friday, June 24, 2016.

Everywhere, celebrity luvvies hyperventilated. Actress Amanda Abbington (she was Dr Watson’s wife in Sherlock on the telly) messaged: ‘Watch the collapse begin. Dark days . . . Where can I move me and my children too (sic)? Where’s nice? Italy? Canada?’ They might have better grammar there, certainly. Keira Knightley was foul-mouthed. ‘Stop others f***ing with your future,’ she bleated in a message to yoof

I was in a pokey hotel bedroom in London’s Bloomsbury and awoke at daybreak as the television relayed the referendum results from around the country.

I’d expected the technocracy was going to win. It always did, didn’t it? The experts had said defeat for Remain was unthinkable. Treasury officials, opinion pollsters and almost the entire diplomatic corps idly presumed Remain would win.

But it hadn’t.

Our dominating elite of parliamentarians, lobbyists, bankers, artists, political theorists, clergy, academics and sterile aesthetes was about to take a massive custard pie smack in the face.

So many well-connected people had scoffed at Brexit. They had belittled anyone who suggested it could occur.

But there it was, happening before our eyes as the BBC’s presenter, David Dimbleby, announced: ‘The British people have spoken and the answer is “we’re out!”.’

The cold print of the referendum ballot papers had merely asked voters if they wanted to stay in the EU. This result was the crystallisation of something bigger.

It was the eruption of a long-building resentment at being bossed around by an opaque snootocracy, by affluent fixers and the People Who Know Best.
 

James Corden, who left Britain to present a TV show in California, transmitted from across the water: ‘I’m so sorry to the youth of Britain. I feel you’ve been let down today. x’

In my hotel room on that Independence Dawn last year, I felt a giddying rush of patriotic pride. The apple-cart had been overturned.

This was not just a public rejection of the EU. It was an act of thrilling dissent. Our arrogant elite, after years of self-enriching condescension, had been whupped.

More than a year on, I still can’t get out of my head how unrelenting the campaign was for Remain to win the popular vote.

For months before the referendum, the System did its best to engineer things in favour of the EU.

Cabinet Brexiteers were silenced. Civil servants were told to hide sensitive EU material from Eurosceptic ministers.

The government machine was used remorselessly to help Remain. We were muck-spreadered with warnings of hideous consequences from Brexit. The Governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, was mobilised.

His friend George Osborne was Chancellor and, so far as the two of them could see, Remain was bound to win, and Clever George would become prime minister before the next general election.

Carney, a Canadian but bound to the status quo here by instinct and career, predicted Brexit would cause sterling to collapse, growth to stall and unemployment to rise.

From comedians to bishops (hard to say which of those two groups is funnier), fund managers to charity-sector tsars, Brexit was as pongy as a bad sardine. They did not just oppose it. They recoiled from it.

The reaction was not simply intellectual or even political. It was rooted in taste, aesth- etics, manners.

Let your future son-in-law have tombstone teeth, the clothes sense of Ken Dodd and a string of shoplifting offences to his name, but pray God Almighty he be not a Brexiteer.

We no longer have widowed duchesses who clutch their dewlaps in horror when they hear the word ‘serviette’, but Brexit had the same effect on managerial and technocratic types.

My wife, a sweet and liberal-minded soul, casually mentioned to a princeling of the Church of England that she intended to vote Leave. He gasped: ‘How could you?’ He might have been less aghast had she admitted to witchcraft.
 

From J. K. Rowling came: ‘I don’t think I’ve ever wanted magic more’

Fashionable ‘opinion leaders’ and pliable industrialists were pressed to the Remain cause to build the idea that superior people — good people — were of one accord. They crouched down beside the voters, looked them very gravely in the eye and told the boys and girls that Mummy and Daddy would be really, really sad if Remain did not win the referendum.

Opinion pollsters said Remain would win, and in the last week of the campaign the Cameroons started to strut.

Two days before the referendum, Guardian columnist Polly Toynbee, la-di-dah Leftist and one-time owner of the most perfect villa in Italy, opined that the result was in the bag. The headline over her article read: ‘On Friday I’ll get my country back. Britain will vote Remain’.

But the voters came to a different conclusion. They decided that those prominent Remain supporters were only in it for themselves, chasing either business contracts or honours.

The Leavers were the ones who reclaimed their country. On the morning after the referendum, I headed from my hotel to work in a taxi whose driver was cock-a-hoop at the Leave vote. At the gates to the Palace of Westminster I bumped into pro-Leave Tory MP Kwasi Kwarteng, a great bear of a man. ‘This is bigger than any general election result,’ he boomed. He was right. General elections are elections for Parliament. The referendum was an election against Parliament, in spite of Parliament.

Abraham Lincoln once spoke of ‘government of the people, by the people, for the people’. We had drifted towards ‘government of the people, by the Parliament, for the Parliament and its fleas’.

The Establishment reacted with petulant disbelief.

Tony Blair called it ‘a foolish excursion into populism’. The then Lib Dem leader Tim Farron, 46, normally a sunny fellow, was ‘angry that today we wake to a deeply divided country’. Would he have said the same if the scores had gone the other way?

Everywhere, celebrity luvvies hyperventilated.

Actress Amanda Abbington (she was Dr Watson’s wife in Sherlock on the telly) messaged: ‘Watch the collapse begin. Dark days . . . Where can I move me and my children too (sic)? Where’s nice? Italy? Canada?’ They might have better grammar there, certainly. 

Keira Knightley was foul-mouthed. ‘Stop others f***ing with your future,’ she bleated in a message to yoof. James Corden, who left Britain to present a TV show in California, transmitted from across the water: ‘I’m so sorry to the youth of Britain. I feel you’ve been let down today. x.’

From J. K. Rowling came: ‘I don’t think I’ve ever wanted magic more.’ TV presenter and sometime footballer Gary Lineker asked: ‘What have we gone and done?’

The mood at Glastonbury pop festival was funereal. Coldplay’s Chris Martin saw ‘the collapse of a country’. Damon Albarn wore a black armband.

Marianne Faithfull, famous because decades earlier she was supposed to have done something filthy with a Mars Bar and Mick Jagger, said: ‘We are back to where it used to be, the Right-wing racist Little England. Those dreadful people, they’ve always been there.’

TV presenter and sometime footballer Gary Lineker asked: ‘What have we gone and done?’ The mood at Glastonbury pop festival was funereal. Coldplay’s Chris Martin saw ‘the collapse of a country’

Emma Thompson, mother, director, writer, actress, intellectual, citizen, was, naturally, appalled by Brexit. She said she felt more European than English and she regarded Ukip’s Nigel Farage as a ‘white nationalist’.

Where that left the many non-white Leave voters and non-white Ukip supporters, it was hard to say.

The Remain camp united atheists and the modern Church of England, with former Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and arch-atheist Richard Dawkins deploring the result. Science bod Dawkins, who has made a study of natural selection, raged that the voters had been ‘ill-informed’ and ‘ignorant’. Personally, I blame evolution.

Another secularist, A. C. Grayling, wrote to MPs demanding that they reject the will of the people who, said Grayling, had voted on the basis of ‘demagoguery and sentiment’.

Too many voters were merely ‘System One’ thinkers, he argued — i.e. they acted chiefly on impulse and could be ‘captured by slogans’, unlike ‘System Two’ thinkers who made more considered, logical judgments.

Shades here, of the Greek philosopher Plato, who regarded democracy as rule by the rabble and proposed the creation of elite ‘Guardians’ or ‘Philosopher Kings’ who could be selected in youth and trained to rule.

Plato’s thinking is most clearly seen today in the French grandes écoles that train the cadre of Brussels Eurocrats who propose and draft EU treaties.

Tony Blair made a speech calling on people to ‘rise up against’ ... er, themselves, basically.

Time and again it was argued by anti-Brexiteers that Leave voters did not understand the vastness of their decision.

The elite was indignant and fearful — and that only made many Leave voters all the more certain they had made the right decision.

In their appalling condescension, what all these furious anti-Brexiteers ignored were people such as a Derbyshire factory worker called Stuart Carrington and the other

17,410,741

 men and women who had voted to Leave.

Stuart had also been on my mind that anxious night as we waited for the referendum result. He was my brother-in-law. (Well, as good as. He and my wife’s sister Nicky were not formally married but they had been together years.)

Fifty-four-year-old Stuart’s health had become a worry in recent months. Out of character, he took time off work. Stuart’s machine, capable of the most intricate measurements, checked parts for aircraft jet engines.

He was proud of his work, just as he was proud of Nicky, her two sons and their flat. But he knew all that was coming to an end.

The doctors initially told him he had a low-threat cancer but they changed their prognosis. That week we were told he was dying.

Yet on referendum day morning, moving with difficulty, he had managed to get himself to his local polling station in the Spital district of Chesterfield, to vote for the last time.

A gaunt figure, he leaned heavily on the stubby pencil while casting his vote. Job done, he carefully dropped his ballot into the box, thanked the officials, winced a little and made slowly for the door.

A keen supporter of Leave — and normally a Labour man, his dad having been a miner — Stuart had been determined to vote and he had bloody well managed it.

I kept thinking of stoical, taciturn Stuart.

Those northern men don’t always say much but by God they make their mark. Stuart was not a showy person. He did not consider himself important, not in the way we normally use that term.

Not back then. Maybe things are a little different now. Maybe, with Brexit, the balance of power has shifted a little.

Maybe, but I wouldn’t bank on it.

As I will show in the rest of this series based on my new book, the patronising bastards are everywhere, lording it over the plebs, putting us in our place, waving their entitlement in our face, telling us what to think and what to do.

And not just over Brexit but on every issue under the sun.

And the biggest ‘bastard’ of them all, at the very top of my list of patricians treating the rest of us with contempt? I’ll reveal his identity on Monday.

Adapted from Patronising Bastards: How The Elites Betrayed Britain, by Quentin Letts, published by Constable on October 12 at £16.99. © Quentin Letts 2017. To order a copy for £13.59 (offer valid to October 14, 2017) visit www.mailshop.co.uk/books or call 0844 571 0640. P&P is free on orders over £15.


 Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4957180/Britain-s-ruled-patronising-b-rds-says-QUENTIN-LETTS.html#ixzz4uqBaZlGZ
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on

 

H.F.1338 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT A SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU.

[A MATTER OF FACT!]

 

THE EUROPEAN COLLECTIVE

By

 

CHRISTOPHER STORY FRSA

TRUTH-SEEKER AND PATRIOT

2002

CONCLUSION: THE E.U. AS THE ENEMY OF ITS MEMBER STATES

'THE BEAST'

COLLABORATION MASKS MUTUAL STRATEGIC DECEPTION

In May 1940, the Reich Association for Economic Planning issued a document containing the statement mentioned on page 209: 'A continental European economy under German leadership must... comprise all the peoples of the Continent from Gibraltar to the Urals and from the North Cape to the island of Cyprus...[but] on foreign-political grounds it appears to be necessary to designate this not as a German extended-area economy, but fundamentally always to speak of a European Economic Community' ['Europaisches Wirtschaftsgemeinshaft']

Chapter 10, Volume Two of Hitler's 'Mein Kampf' was entitled' FEDERALISM AS A MASK'. Careful analysis of the typically 'roundabout' language still employed by covert Pan-Germans, the heirs of Nazi International, today are revealed that this 'line' is the essence of Germany's hegemony ideology. In other words there has never been any discontinuity of Pan-German strategy up to, through and since the Nazi were in power in Berlin.

Note the explicit geographical description of the scope and boundaries of the intended 'German extended-area economy': 'Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals'. Within this 'Thousand-Year-Reich', the sovereignty of the captive nations will have been destroyed, in line with Lenin's pronouncement that' we set ourselves the ultimate aim of destroying the state'- with one critical exception: Germany itself is to survive as Greater Germany, but under a different name. Hence, there was and is to be one rule (state survival) for the Germans, and another (state destruction) for all other captive European peoples.  The European Union has developed exactly in accordance with the blueprint elaborated by the Nazis in the 1940s.

To ensure the realisation of their deception strategy, it is clear that the continuing Pan-German planners have in practice, so to speak 'bolted the framework' of their strategy onto the revolutionary structures of the Leninist Communists. While the heirs of the Nazis have cunningly elaborated and perfected over the years their own version of diplomatic and propaganda double-talk comparable to a form of Leninist Aesopianism, as elaborated by Stresemann and Adenauer, they have made spectacular progress with the fulfilment of the Nazis International's plans hatched at the German Geopolitical Centre, that they no longer bother to disguise them. But the Pan Germans, reckless and ruthless as always, are running huge risks-because they are dealing in bad faith with both the continuing Soviet Leninists and with the confused West European Socialist Governments.

The fact that the continuing Pan-German strategists are secretly using 'federalism as a mask', as Hitler proclaimed in 'Mein Kampf', and are agitating day and night for regional federalism and for the full collectivisation of residual sovereignty throughout the European Union, while seeking to disguise that this prescription will never apply to Greater Germany itself, alone justifies this book's finding that the

EUROPEAN UNION COLLECTIVE

is indeed

THE ENEMY OF ITS MEMBER STATES.

That the EU is likewise responding to the parallel pressures from the continuing Leninists for 'universal European integration', means the EU membership is truly a 'kiss of death' for those countries that have been led by their misguided elites into this terminal trap-from where their demoralised citizens mare condemned to watching their countries being tortured, raped and beaten to death under the relentless pressures of the frenzied and accelerating 'coup d'etat by installments'.

Driven by the insane logic of Lenin's idolatrous World Revolution-which preaches 'change' to WHAT?', and which presupposes total collectivisation for the whole of humanity-the covert Communists, who are currently following Lenin's deception instruction that, for the time being, 'under no circumstances {is it our task} to promote Communist views', insist that the only acceptable' prescription for Europe (by which they mean Eurasia) must be 'universal European integration'. Lenin taught the revolutionaries to be meticulous with the use of words (a trick acquired also by Pan-Germans). Thus the key-word here is 'universal- which precludes any question of boundary imitations.  For the Leninists claim that, because they are 'Europeans' and control the political space eastwards to the pacific Ocean, 'universal European integration' means 'Europe from the Atlantic to Vladivostok' , which they also refer to as 'Great Europe', and which must be 'guaranteed' by the Comintern's long-planned system of 'collective security', centred on Moscow. In other words, there has never been  any true discontinuity of Soviet strategy since the 1920s, and especially since the 'changes' of 1989-91-which represented a Leninist, rather than a genuine, 'Break with the Past'.

For the time being, it suits the interests of the 'General Staff' of Lenin's World Revolution, for the European Union Collective-or the 'new European Soviet' ,as Gobachev has accurately described it-to devote its seething revolutionary energies to the maximisation of federalism and collectivisation within its inexplicably eastwards-expanding 'boundaries'. But despite bilateral treaties, the trilateral nexus with France, a complex bilateral and multilateral treaty network drafted by the Leninist apparat ['rats'] to ensure 100% European compliance with the Soviets' 'Europe from Atlantic to Vladivostok' model, the continuing Leninist strategists know that the Germans are using European federalism 'as a mask' for the final realisation of their own previously thwarted idolatrous geopolitical ambitions.

While each side is engaged in strategic deception directed in part against each other, and in both cases against naive socialist Europeans, both expect their model alone shall prevail.  The chess-playing Soviets took the precaution to ensure, by means of a threatening military posture [See page 237] which appears to have been largely overlooked, that only their prescription can ever be applied.  They also left a time bomb lying in the Czech Republic.  Additionally, to procure the intended 'Soviet' outcome, the Revolution has taken the necessary precautions, co-ordinated by Vladimir Putin and the Soviet Military Intelligence while Putin was serving in East Germany [Previous home of Frau Merkel], to ensure that Germany's political and bureaucratic structures have been extensively penetrated and taken over by covert and 'former' Communists from the east.  The likelihood is that the Pan-Germans, having compromised as in the past with Communists, and driven by their 'leaning towards Russia', will misinterpret the Leninists' intentions as they approach the realisation of their long-frustrated ambition to subsume Germany in its 'transitional format', with

GREATER GERMANY

by another name. They will overplay their hand.

 Europe cannot look to France for any hope of rescue or salvation, since Paris is enmeshed in its insidious trilateral nexus with Germany and Russia - certain that its treaty relationship with Germany can only be to its advantage, and bound to be covert Leninist revolutionaries by the terms of its bilateral treaty of 7th February 1992, under the terms of which France has become an agent for Lenin's World Revolution.  The smaller European powers are hobbled by the ideologies who control policy; and even in Portugal and Ireland, where the adverse economic consequences of their rash participation in the Economic and Monetary Collective's straightjacket are becoming daily more apparent, no serious official thought is being given to the logical step which will need to be taken if severe economic consequences are to be avoided. Ironically, though, the eccentric President of the European Commission, Signor Prodi, is on record as having mused that Italy might have to leave the collective regime, even though this is not permitted under the Collective Treaty.

Only the United Kingdom, which since the beginning of the 1970s has been systematically betrayed by its successive governments, led by the 'Conservatives', has, among the EU 'Member States' of world substance, contrived, though incompetence and fumbling, to hold back a little from the revolutionary onslaught. The slim chances of Britain escaping national annihilation were diminishing at an ever accelerating pace as this book was being finalised.  For instance, on 6th February n2002, the European 'Parliament' approved the European Arrest Warrant [See page xxxiii] and blocked the habeas corpus safeguard established by the English Common Law since the 13th century, as a means of preventing over-zealous or corrupt magistrates from incarcerating EU citizens from another EU country sine die in their own jails, or in those of a third EU country.  This appalling retrograde decision means that Britons, with effect from 2004, will be at risk of being arbitrarily arrested for crimes which are not recognised in English Law, such as racism or xenophobia. The definition of 'terrorism' was extended to cover 'passive' support for prescribed groups ( the list of which can be extended, of course, to include critics of the revolutionary EU collectivist dictatorship), and the legislation will enable a judge or a prosecuting magistrate anywhere in the EU Collective to order the extradition of a British citizen on the basis of suspicion alone without any need for a dossier of evidence to be presented.

 

Thus the shape of 'The Beast' is emerging before our eyes, from behind the hideous edifice of Europe's

 Tower of Babal

. Diabolically, it has the imprimatur of the captive nation states whose blind political elites have fallen into this Nazi-Soviet trap. For the EU is indeed

THE ENEMY of its MEMBER STATES

God will surly judge the 'useful idiots' and idolatrous ideologues responsible for leading their peoples into this [devilish] pit.

 

EUROPEAN UNION

 

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****  HOW HITLER'S ENABLING ACT OF 1933 WAS PASSED THROUGH YOUR WESTMINSTER PARLIAMENT BY 8 VOTES****   REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER/ ****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

 

AND THOUSANDS MORE BULLETINS ON THE TRUE NATURE OF THE EU

 

 

 

2005

 

H.F.1807
Letters to the Daily Mail-BREXIT SPECIAL, -Monday,November 19,2018 

 

Time to show some moral fibre

How many of those like me who participated in World War 11 would have chosen to capitulate in the way the Prime Minister has in her Brexit negotiations with the EU

I will be 96 this week and am housebound, but my life wasn't always like this . At 17, in early 1940, I joined the RAF ,serving in Bomber Command at RAF Brize Norton and also at Bletchley  Park. Posted to the Air Ministry in London. I was bombed out and 15 girls in my billet died. My husband was a wireless operator and rear gunner, who returned home from he two-year siege of Malta, weighing five stone. We had determination, pride and above all, moral fibre.

I feel that the once-proud UK has been asset stripped, ground down and told what to do by unelected bureaucrats in Europe. I knew exactly what I wanted from the referendum

TO LEAVE THE EU

I fear for the generations that follow me because the EU seems to want nothing more that to become a FEDERAL STATE.

WHY CAN'T THE GOVERNMENT SHOW SOME MORAL FIBRE?

I AM SO ASHAMED OF THEM ALL

 

Letters to the Daily Mail-BREXIT SPECIAL, -Monday, November 19,2018

R M Wangford -SUFFOLK

[AS a pensioner couple of 87 and 89 we can understand the feelings of the above patriots and only a few days ago we watched the film the DARKEST HOUR. There was a sequence in the film when Winston Churchill was being driven in London after getting so much opposition to his plans from pro German-peace faction and suddenly when his vehicle stopped at a road junction near a tube station he suddenly without notice left the vehicle  in the vicinity of a underground railway station in London and entered it and went on to the platform where the many travellers recognised him. When a tube train arrived he entered the train and was soon in conversation with all the occupants of his carriage to the point that he conversed with everyone getting their names and there feelings about fighting the war and they without exception said the war must be fought vigorously and valiantly until VICTORY.  Later when he addressed members of the Cabinet he mentioned the names of those patriots and related their feelings of solidarity with their Prime Minister.  The climax of the film was as the to the end with Winston's speech before the HOUSE which included towards the end with:

We shall defend our Island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets. we shall fight them in the hills; we shall never surrender.-Winston Churchill.

By this time the once quiet Opposition benches suddenly joined the Government benches and  broke into a stirring clammour of support with hundreds of order papers being thrown into the air with gusto. The House was united for WAR and Churchill had won.]

Today, the feelings of the above patriotic pensioners show how our country after 46 years within Hitler's so-called EU how millions of our once proud patriots are now fellow - travellers of the

UNDEMOCRATIC-UNREPRESENTATIVE - CORRUPT - COSTLY-EU

SOON TO BE A

SUPER-STATE

H.F.1424/3

 

WE HEAR THAT 80% OF CONSERVATIVE MPs ARE COMMITTED FRIENDS OF ISRAEL- DAILY MAIL THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 9,2017.

 WE HAVE ASKED ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS OVER THE PAST WHY OUR GOVERNMENTS WERE NOT

FRIENDS OF ENGLAND

BECAUSE IT HAS TAKEN 45 YEARS SINCE WE VOTED NO! IN 1975 FOR THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY WHO LIED ABOUT OUR TRUE COMMITMENT TO HITLER'S PLAN DOMINANCE OF EUROPE IN THE PEACE.

TO HAVE A REFERENDUM AND ONLY WHEN THE ELITE TORIES THOUGHT IT WOULD GO THEIR WAY TO A DEEPER ENMESHMENT INTO THE EU SUPER-STATE. THEY MISJUDGED THE TRUE PEOPLE OF ENGLAND-AS IT WAS SHE WHO SAVED THE UNION.

WE CAN HOPE NO BETTER WITH THE LABOUR PARTY WITH THEIR FRIENDS OF ISRAEL BODY THOUGH DECRIED MUCH LATELY IS STILL IN ACTION . ALAS! THE TRUE LABOUR PARTY OF THE SHIRES DIED DECADES AGO AS WITNESSED BY THE HUGE BREXIT VOTE.

OUR SUPPOSED CLOSEST ALLY THE USA WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN OUR ENTERING THE EU TO GIVE GERMANY A HAND .IT IS COMPLETELY UNDER THE ISRAELI LOBBY-HAS BEEN FOR OVER A HUNDRED YEARS.

AS WE HAVE STATED OUR GOVERNMENT SHOULD ENDEAVOUR TO BE ON FRIENDLY RELATIONS WITH ALL GOVERNMENTS -AS

WINSTON CHURCHILL

HAD STATED MOST VOCIFEROUSLY IN THE PAST:

 JAW JAW NOT WAR WAR!

News for DAILY MAIL-OUT OF THE SHADOWS THE POWERFUL FIXER BEHIND HER DOWNFALL by Andrew Pierce


Daily Mail
Andrew Pierce profiles the influential Lord Polak
Daily Mail - 13 hours ago
Out of the shadows, the powerful fixer behind Priti Patel's downfall: ANDREW
PIERCE profiles ... By Andrew Pierce for the Daily Mail ... He was also with her in
the two further undisclosed meetings in New York and Parliament 
 

 

[As on many other occasions over the past decades when we have shown details of Israeli intelligence and the connection with F O I . we have received many visits from their obedient servants who do not hide their NATIONAL identity.

 But this is ENGLAND

and such individuals should know their place and do their work without waving their FLAG!-MI5 need to keep them in place or is there nothing they can do-or must it be as CS1 WHERE ISRAEL REIGNS?]

 

 

JEW WATCH

 

 

 

H.F.1373 FRIENDS TO ALL- BUT COMMITTED TO NONE!

 
 

 UK voting system' ignores will of millions'

by

Daniel Martin for the Daily Mail -Chief Political Correspondent-JUNE 2-2015.

 

BRITAIN'S voting system is 'archaic' and divisive' and does not represent the will of millions, a pressure group has argued. The Electoral Reform Society, which has campaigned for proportional representation for 130 years, claimed last month's General Election was the most disproportionate ever.  It said UKIP would have WON up to 80 seats using the type of PR used in many European nations, while the GREENS would have got 20.  UKIP and the GREENS received 5MILLION VOTES, but under the FIRST-PAST-THE-POST system ended up with ONE MP each.  An E R S-commissioned survey said under PR the TORIES would have seen their tally of MPs fall  by almost 100 while  LABOUR would have gone down 24...

[MONTHLY BULLETIN CHART UNTIL REFERENDUM ON EU -LATEST MAY 2017 -AT FOOT OF PAGE!    ASAP!  

SEE HERE!   ]

 

JUNE 2-2015

H.F.1388

 

LINKS to Works of Vernon Coleman-A PATRIOT A1136/A1121/A1137/C33/B56/B103/C34/B17/A1086/A1042/CON30/B404/B308/

A1730/A1728/A1739/A24

[A MATTER OF FACT!]

NO 3

 

ABOUT THE USA

 

[2003]

 

ROGUE [POLITICAL-CORPORATE-MILITARY-INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX IN ] AMERICA

 

www.vernoncoleman.com

 

[A HISTORY OF THE OIL INDUSTRY IN IRAQ / IRAN AND ITS BRUTAL CONSEQUENCES FOR ITS PEOPLES.]

 

America only entered World War I (on the side of Britain and France) after both its new allies and new enemies were pretty much exhausted by the fighting.  Once it agreed to join in the war America imposed conditions which included the demand that America's economic and political objectives be taken into account when the war was over.  One of the objectives was access to new sources of raw material, particularly oil.   In February 1919, Sir Arthur Hirtzel, a leading British official warned:

 'It should be borne in mind that the Standard Oil Company is very anxious to take over IRAQ.'

 America demanded that it's oil companies be allowed to negotiate freely with the new puppet monarchy of King Faisal (the monarch whom the British had put on the throne in IRAQ).  And so  Iraq's oil was divided up between the allies.  Five per cent of the oil went to an oil magnet called Gulbebenkian ( later known as Mr Five Per Cent' who had helped negotiate the agreement).  The other 95per cent was split four ways between

BRITAIN, FRANCE, HOLLAND and the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Companies now known as British Petroleum, SHELL, MOBIL and EXXON pretty much had a MONOPOLY of the oil available.  (Iraqi oil was split this way until 1958 when there was a REVOLUTION in IRAQ)

American influence in the region was sealed when the al-Saud family and the United Stats of America created Saudi Arabia in the 1930's pretty much as an American colony. It was no coincidence that the American Embassy in Riyadh, the capital city, was situated in the local oil company building.

The Americans were not , however, satisfied with their share of Middle East oil.  The wanted CONTROL. They had to get rid of the British. And their chance came with the Second World War.

The Americans unceasingly portray themselves as Britain's saviour. This is a wicked misrepresentation. As it had been in the great War.  America was ruthlessly opportunistic.

Britain was greatly weakened by the Second World War but America grew tremendously in power as a result of what happened in the early 1940's.  The Roosevelt and Truman administrations (which were dominated by the banking and oil interests [As is the situation in JUNE 2010] decided to restructure the world to ensure that the USA would  be on top. 

THEY WANTED  CONTROL OF THE WORLD'S OIL.

They wanted USA dominated

GLOBALISATION

( to which end they created the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank in 1944)

They wanted the dollar to be the ONLY significant world currency.  And they wanted the USA to have military superiority in all types of weapons.

Winston Churchill was so worried by what he could see happening that on March 4th 1944 (three months before D DAY invasion of Normandy) he sought assurance from the USA that she would not take over

BRITISH OIL INTERESTS.

He wrote to the USA President Roosevelt saying:

' Thank you very much for your assurances about no sheep's eyes on our oilfields in Iran and Iraq.  Let me reciprocate by giving you the fullest assurance that we have no thought of trying to horn in upon your interests or property in Saudi Arabia. My position in this, as in all matters, is that Great Britain seeks no advantage, territorial or otherwise, as a result of this war. On the other hand, she will not be deprived of anything which rightly belongs to her after having given her best services to the good cause, at least not so long as your humble servant is entrusted with the conduct of affairs.'

Sadly, there was nothing that even Churchill could do to save Britain from its new 'enemy'.  In 1953, a CIA coup which put the Shah in power gave Iran to the United States of America. ( The Americans also helped the Shah form his much hated secret police.)

And within a couple of years after that Iraq was jointly controlled by America and Britain.

In 1955 America set up the Baghdad Pact, which was designed, at least in part, to oppose the rise of Arab liberation movements in the Middle East.  Britain and Iraq were signatories, although Iraq was independent only in name.  The British still had military airfields in Iraq which was ruled by a corrupt monarchy.  The people of Iraq, despite having a huge quantity of the world's oil under their feet, were staving and living in abject poverty.

Things changed in Iraq in 1958, A military rebellion launched a REVOLUTION

which was to have dramatic consequences on the world.  The day after the revolution started the Americans put 20,000 marines into Lebanon and over 6000 paratroopers dropped into Jordan.  Under Eisenhower's leadership the USA and the UK had made it clear that they would go to war to protect their interests in Lebanon and Jordan.

The British, rather naively, thought that they were simply protecting their interests outside Iraq.  the Americans had bigger thoughts. they wanted to go into Iraq, overturn the revolution and put a new puppet government (friendly to the USA, of course) in charge in Baghdad.

BUT THE AMERICANS WERE STOPPED.

The Iraq revolution was too big. And it had much support from other Arab countries, from the people's republic of China and from the USSR. the Americans glumly gave up their imperialist plans.

But they didn't give up completely.

The thwarted Americans added Iraq to their growing list of terrorist nations and gave great support to right wing Kurdish elements who were fighting the Iraq government.  then, in the late 1970's the Americans suported the government of Saddam Hussein in its fight against communism.   In the 1980's the Americans supported (with money and arms) Saddam Hussein's Iraq in its eight years war with Iran , a country over which America had lost control during Iran's islamic Revolution of 1970.  The Americans openly admitted that they were intervening in order to safeguard their access to the region's oil and they slightly less openly hoped that Iraq and Iran would weaken each other and enable the USA to take over. 

'I hope they kill each other,'

former secretary of state Henry Kissinger [ a Bilderberger and a member of the ruling elite of the USA the Council on Foreign Relations who decide the Foreign Policy of the country]

is said to have remarked.

The Americans provided Iraq's air force with satellite photographs of Iranian targets and sent anti-aircraft missiles to Iran so that the Iranians could shoot down the aircraft which the Iraqis sent over.  America fought on both sides of the war and was well aware that Saddam Hussein was using chemical weapons.

Over a million people died and both countries were left weaker. ( Bizarrely, and hypocritically, in 2003 George W Bush was claiming that Saddam Hussein's use of chemical weapons in this war was one of the main reasons for attacking Iraq.)  The money America made from selling missiles to Iran was used to finance the CONTRAS who were fighting the Socialist government in Nicaragua.  Reagan, USA President at the time, disapproved of socialist regimes and wanted to get rid of this one in particular. (It is perhaps unfair to ascribe such depth of feeling to Reagan himself, rather than to his advisors.)

The war between Iraq and Iran didn't finish until 1988, by which time Iraq had become friendly with the USSR.

But then the USSR was taken over by Gorbachev, who wanted to end the COLD WAR and a permanent detente with America. Gorbachev withdrew Soviet support from Iraq (as he had withdrawn it from countries in eastern Europe) and the world suddenly changed yet again.

After the war with Iran Saddam Hussein had accumulated massive debts.  The low price of oil meant that his income didn't match his national outgoings.  the Iraqi president accused Kuwait of drilling for oil in Iraqi territory and then announced that Kuwait wasn't a separate nation at all but a province of Iraq.  Iraqi troops invaded Kuwait in 1990.  America (with an INTERNATIONAL FORCE) attacked, the resultant war was over in weeks and in 1991 the Americans got back into Iraq.  In the decade that followed they have used sanctions, bombings and blockades to weaken the Iraqi people and destroy their spirit.  American sanctions against Iraq do not target Saddam Hussein,

THEY TARGET THE IRAQI PEOPLE.

Now the Americans, led by oil man George W Bush are going back to Iraq [2003]. Americans do not give a fig for HUMAN RIGHTS and they know that Saddam Hussein is NO THREAT TO AMERICA.   They know well that he has NO WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION.  (And even if he did have them the Americans have the military capability to DESTROY IRAQ IN SECONDS)  They surely also know that Saddam Hussein has NOTHING in COMMON with OSAMA bin LADEN.

 

AMERICA IS GOING BACK INTO IRAQ FOR THE SAME ,GOOD OLD REASON

 

OIL!

[This article was written in 2003 by Vernon Coleman]

www.vernoncoleman.com

*

 

www.JEWSNOTZIONISTS.ORG

*

www.prisonplanet.com/kucinichwe-may-be-funding-our-own-killers-in-afghanistan-JUNE-2010

*

http://www.prisonplanet.com/camp-fema-exclusively-online-for-prison-planet-tv-members.html

MORE FROM VERNON COLEMAN

 

NO 371

Find a war and you'll find that both sides are fighting with weapons supplied (at a price to anyone) by the Americans and British arms industries .  When Americans or British troops are killed they are usually killed with British or American bullets fired from British and American guns.

Is more violence really the only answer? Where will all the violence end?  What does state approved revenge become state sponsored terrorism?  Is America justified in killing innocent people.

Instead of seeking revenge America should lead by example. Instead of retaliating in hatred they should ask for peace. Why does that thought seem so naive?

 

NO 373

American activities in Iraq and elsewhere have reinforced the conflict between Europe and the Muslim world and have helped establish strong fundamentalist Islamic politicians in power.

The American activities in the Middle East are invariably self-serving: the aim is to satisfy the arms industry, the oil industry and Zionists.  the cost is stability and peace.  Americans don't worry about the cost of war because war is usually profitable for the massive arms industry,

NO 322

 In 2003 the Americans claimed that by opposing their enthusiasm for dropping bombs on Iraq the French and Germans were endangering NATO.

Once again the Americans needed to study their history books (though preferably not ones written or published in America). NATO was created to deal with the alleged threat posed by the Soviet Union (a threat which existed largely in the minds of the Americans.

By 2003 there was clearly no longer a threat from the Soviet Union and so there was no need for NATO to continue to exist.

The truth is that NATO only existed in 2003 because the well-paid officials who worked for it were determined to keep it alive.

 

[A REMINDER TO DAVID CAMERON in 2011]

 

Bush and Blair claim that replacing Saddam Hussein is a moral act-designed solely to help the people of Iraq. (Although curiously, Tony Blair, who likes to describe himself as a religious man, and who is allegedly planning to become a Catholic, publicly ignored the Pope's plea for mo war against Iraq.)

If these two are now concerned with replacing 'undemocratic' leaders when will wars ever end?

And why aren't the USA and the UK declaring war on themselves? both have leaders who represent minorities.

Blair repeatedly ignored the large majority of the British electorate who were opposed to the war against Iraq. Can a leader who takes no notice of the people be described as democratic?

MARCH-2011

 

www.vernoncoleman.com

 

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

JULY 19-2014

H F 180

PART-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-June-1994-EDP-Official Website-2016-June-PART-8-9-10-11-12 -13-14

PART-1-2-3-4-5-6-7-July-1994-EDP-Official Website-2016-July-PART-8-9-10-11-12 -13-14

BREXIT

BUT NOT OUT OF THE EU FOR 2/3 YEARS. IT IS A TRAVESTY OF JUSTICE. ALL EU TREATIES WERE OBTAINED BY BRIBERY AND TREASON  AND FRAUD WHICH

UNDER THE 1969 VIENNA CONVENTION ON TREATIES MAKES THEM.

NULL AND VOID.

JULY 23-FREEDOM NOW-2016

JULY 23-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2016

JULY 23 FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2016

*

AUGUST 23-FREEDOM NOW-2016AUGUST 23-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2016

SEPTEMBER 23 FREEDOM NOW PART 1-2016SEPTEMBER 23 FREEDOM NOW-2016

OCTOBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

NOVEMBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

DECEMBER 23-BREXIT NOW-2016

*

H.F.200A-FREEDOM NOW
 

PLEASE  NOTE: WE HAVE IN ADVANCE GIVEN BELOW THE BULLETIN FOR EACH MONTH FOR THE NEXT 30 MONTHS WHICH YOU CAN ENTER-IT WILL CONTAIN INFORMATION FROM OTHER MONTHS FROM THE PAST AND THAT AVAILABLE AT THE SPECIFIED TIME.  WE ARE MAKING THIS ARRANGEMENT AS WE ARE UNABLE TO GIVE AN EXIT DATE FROM THE EU. AS YOU ARE AWARE WE COMMENCED OUR BULLETIN FILE IN OCTOBER 2003 FOR THE PURPOSE OF MAKING AVAILABLE INFORMATION WHICH WOULD BRING THE EXIT FROM THE EU AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. BUT NOW THAT BREXIT IS SOON TO BE ENACTED BY PARLIAMENT THE DAY OF OUR DELIVERANCE WILL SOON BE AT HAND AND THE RETURN OF OUR INDEPENDENT NATION STATE OF ENGLAND TOGETHER WITH OUR NEIGHBOURING NATION STATES OF WALES-SCOTLAND AND NORTHERN ISLAND.

MAY GOD GRANT US A SPEEDY EXIT FROM THE SOVIETISED-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC -MAMMOTH MONSTROSITY OF THE SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION.

 

MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18
NOV-18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

 

 
 

The English People's

VoicE

WELCOME!

IMMIGRATION FILE

E U FILE

IRAQ/AFGHAN WAR

     9/11 AN INSIDE JOB

MAGNA CARTA

LONDON 7/7-AN INSIDE JOB

NAZI DVD

ENGLAND FILE

CRIMINAL EU

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND

SAY NO TO EU

UNDERSTANDING EASTER

EURO MUST FAIL

ROTTEN HEART OF EU

SOUL OF ENGLAND

100 REASONS TO LEAVE EU

TREASON A CONSTITUTIONAL ANALYSIS

ALFRED - KING OF THE ENGLISH

THE END OF THE ENGLISH

ENGLAND OUR ENGLAND

MOST EVERYTHING WHICH IS PRECIOUS IN OUR CIVILISATION HAS COME FROM SMALL INDEPENDENT NATION STATES

 by LORD PETER SHORE.

 

A NATION STATE HAS BEEN REBORN

 

ON the momentous day Theresa May said Britain WILL quit the single market, she put Cameron's feeble negotiations to shame with an ultimatum to Brussels that the UK will 'walk away from a bad deal-and make the EU pay' 
  • STEEL OF THE NEW
  • IRON LADY
    •
  • The PM is hopeful of an EU-UK trade deal because of mutual economic interests 
  • She said Europe not making a deal with Britian would be 'calamitous self-harm'
  • It was confirmed that we will be leaving the single market and customs union
  • But the EU's chief negotiator called her show of defiance counter-productive
  • Her speech was criticised by the Lib Dems as Labour fought on how to respond 
  • Sterling rose 2.8 per cent against the Dollar and 1.8 per cent against the Euro

By James Slack Political Editor For The Daily Mail



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4130034/Theresa-s-Brexit-speech-puts-Cameron-shame.html#ixzz4W7pxZPm9
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

 

*

Brexit will let us rediscover role as trading power | Daily Mail Online

Theresa May's Brexit speech puts Cameron to shame | Daily Mail ...

 

PressReader - Daily Mail: 2017-01-18 - Commons and Lords get ...

 

PressReader - Daily Mail: 2017-01-18 - Full reports and analysis

 

A great nation is reborn: Quitting will let us rediscover our role as a ...

PressReader - Daily Mail: 2017-01-18 - Europe split over May's ...

https://www.pressreader.com/uk/daily-mail/20170118/281625305003771
Europe split over May's vision – but even Tusk calls it 'realistic'. Daily ... News -
From Mario Ledwith in Brussels and John Stevens in London.
 

*

POINT BY POINT, HER BLUEPRINT TO FREE BRITAIN FROM BRUSSELS
THERESA May delighted Eurosceptics yesterday with an ambitious road map for BREXIT. The PM extended the hand of friendship to the EU but threatened to walk away if BRUSSELS tried to impose a punitive deal. Jack DOYLE sets out her 12 objectives and analyses her chances of success.

1. CERTAINTY

 WHAT SHE SAID

We will provide certainty where we can. The same rules and laws will apply on the day after BREXIT, as they did before. And the Government will put the final deal to a vote in both houses of Parliament.

CAN SHE DELIVER

By keeping in place-at least initially-all EU laws, Mrs May will provide a degree of continuity and confidence for business. However, as she freely admits she cannot control the outcome of the negotiations. Parliament is highly likely to approve any deal because the alternative will be a chaotic BREXIT.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

2. OUR OWN LAWS

  WHAT SHE SAID

We will take back control of our laws and bring an end to the jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice in Britain. Because we will not truly left the EU if we are not in control of our own laws

CAN SHE DELIVER

 Adopting the 'take back control' slogan of the Leave campaign, Mrs May repeated her promise to end rule by EU rule and judges in Luxembourg and restore power to Parliament and domestic courts. Without this there is no Brexit. A firm red line

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

3 A UNITED KINGDOM

  WHAT SHE SAID

A stronger Britain demands that we strengthen the precious union between the four nations of the UK.

CAN SHE DELIVER

By consulting devolved administrations, Mrs May is seeking to reassure voters in the nations of the UK which didn't vote for Brexit that she is listening to their concerns, and avoid Nicola Sturgeon calling for a second independence vote.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

4. THE IRISH BORDER

  WHAT SHE SAID

WE will work to deliver a practical solution that allows the maintenance of the Common Travel Area with the Republic, while protecting the integrity of the United Kingdom's immigration system.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Both countries want to maintain the open border between Northern Ireland and the Republic without opening a back door into Britain. Likely to mean UK border checks at Irish ports and airports.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

5. CONTROL OF IMMIGRATION

 WHAT SHE SAID

The message from the public before and during the referendum campaign was clear: BREXIT must mean control of the number of people who come to Britain from Europe. And that is what we will deliver

CAN SHE DELIVER

Ending free movement is a  RED LINE, but Mrs May left open when it will end, what system will replace it and details of any transition deal. The PM wants highly skilled EU migrants, doctors and nurses, but will she compromise on unskilled migrants to get a better trade deal

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

 6.  EU NATIONALS AND BRITISH EXPATS

  

WHAT SHE SAID

We  want to guarantee the right of EU citizens who are already living here in Britain, and the rights of British nationals in other member states, as early as we can.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Likely to agreed early on, as long as the EU doesn't want to haggle. Last year Mrs May offered to settle on the rights of three million EU nationals in the UK, and 1.2million Brits on the continent in advance of formals talks- but Angela Merkel refused.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

 *		 7.WORKER'S RIGHTS

 WHAT SHE SAID

Not only will the government protect the rights of workers' set out in European legislation, we will build on them.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May is determined to at least preserve protections for workers on low and middle incomes-many of whom voted for BREXIT. Could come under threat if there is no deal., and Britain slashes taxes and regulation to attract business.

DEAL OR NO DEAL? 3/5

*

8. TRADE WITH EUROPE

WHAT SHE SAID

As a priority, we will pursue a bold and ambitious free trade agreement with the EU. This should allow for the freest possible trade in goods and services. But I want to make it clear. It cannot mean membership of the single market

CAN SHE DELIVER

The crux of the negotiation. Britain will leave the single market, and with it EU laws and free movement. Instead Mrs May wants a tariff-free trade and customs agreement to stop goods being held up at ports. She ruled out ' vast contributions' to the EU budget, and the only money going to Brussels will be for particular programmes and agencies like Europol. Her huge gamble is to threaten to walk away if the EU attempts to punish Britain

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

9. GLOBAL TRADE

 WHAT SHE SAID

A global Britain must be free to strike trade agreements with countries outside the EU too. But I also want tariff-free trade with Europe and cross-border trade there to be as frictionless as possible.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May wants deals with non-EU countries including the US. That would be impossible from inside the customs union, which imposes a uniform tariff on all non-EU countries. It would also make trade Secretary Liam Fox's job redundant.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 4/5

*

10. SCIENCE AND INNOVATION

 WHAT SHE SAID

WE have a proud history of leading and supporting cutting -edge research and innovation. So we will also welcome agreement to continue to collaborate with our European partners on major science, research, and technology initiatives.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Unlikely to be an obstacle to any deal. Much collaboration between academics takes place outside formal EU structures and will continue unimpeded.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

11. CRIME AND TERRORISM

  WHAT SHE SAID

All of us in Europe face the challenge of cross-border crime, a deadly terrorist threat, and the dangers presented by hostile states.  All of us share interests and values in common, values we want to see projected around the world.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Security and intelligence cooperation and defence cooperation cannot be a formal bargaining chip, but without making it one, Mrs May reminds EU allies of Britain's importance as an ally in fighting terrorism and important status as a military power.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 5/5

*

12.  A SMOOTH EXIT

  WHAT SHE SAID

It is in no one's interests for there to be a cliff-edge for business or a threat to stability as we change from our existing relationship to a new partnership with the European Union.

CAN SHE DELIVER

Mrs May wants tranitional arrangements to smooth the process of leaving the EU with specific deals on budget contributions, immigration, trade and customs lasting different periods of time. Securing this as well as securing a final deal within two years is a huge task.

DEAL OR NO DEAL 3/5

*

[THERE IS EVERY LIKELIHOOD THAT OTHER EU MEMBER STATES WILL BE GREATLY ENCOURAGED BY BREXIT TO LEAVE THAT SOVIETISED-COLLECTIVIST-UNDEMOCRATIC SO-CALLED EUROPEAN UNION IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS WHICH SHOULD MAKE A NUMBER OF EU STATES TO CO-OPERATE FULLY WITH THE UK OR FACE THE CONSEQUENCES OF THEIR UNFRIENDLY ATTITUDE AT A LATER DATE.

AS THE GREAT PRIME MINISTER - WILLIAM PITT -  (1759-1806) ANNOUNCED IN NOVEMBER 9-1805 SHORTLY AFTER  NELSON'S VICTORY OVER THE FRENCH AND SPANISH FLEETS AT TRAFALGAR.

S'England has saved herself by her exertions; and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.'

The blueprint of a Free and Prosperous United Kingdom should be the blueprint of a future Free Europe and the world at large. Our past still lives in the hearts of FREE PEOPLES everywhere and soon we will rejoin that sacred past which we left over 43 years ago because of traitorous politicians and others who couldn't see the dangers ,for the gross lies and deceit in their path.

WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 18-2017

H.F.1092 BREXIT NOW
Brought-forward from August 2003

[THE WAY AHEAD TO RELAIM OUR SACRED INHERITANC.]

Faced with the possible imposition (illegally) of a E. U. Constitution this  article contemplating our own U.K. Constitution (English Constitution), is especially topical.

J. Bingley

Constitutional Principles of Power and Remedy.

The Constitution is specifically intended, indeed designed to limit the powers of the state with respect to the people. The Constitution sets a standard upon which the performance of governance may be measured and contested and to provide remedy if abused.

The whole constitution originates its authority from

COMMON LAW

Supremacy resides in the

LAW and PEOPLE

NOT THE

CROWN or PARLIAMENT.

It is a matter of constitutional principle and legal fact that,

THE LAW IS SUPREME

The rule of law is the antithesis of arbitrary power. Integral with this, is the system of jury trial. It places the power of law enforcement in the

HANDS of the PEOPLE.

This the most vital safeguard against DESPOTISM.

The English Constitution's function is to

PROTECT the

"RIGHTS and LIBERTIES

 of ENGLISHMEN".

These are the 'BIRTHRIGHT' of the PEOPLE'

[In 2016 one can see how successive governments have by gradualism watered down these rights with even attempts to replace jury trial by trial by judge only on the grounds of speed and saving resources. The people in the main have been, amiss in not being vigilant to the protection of THEIR CONSTITUTION. In just a few weeks on the 23 June,2016 they have a choice whether to vote to leave the EU and regain THEIR LAW-THEIR CONSTITUTION-THEIR FREE COUNTRY. or REMAIN in an ALIEN COLLECTIVIST AND CORRUPT UNDEMOCRATIC EU with NO PROTECTION of MAGNA CARTA of 1215 and BILL OF RIGHTS of 1688 and NO ENGLISHMAN'S ' RIGHTS and LIBERTIES' to be passed on to FUTURE GENERATIONS.]

The fundamental rights and liberties are listed in the preamble of the Coronation Oath Act of 1688 which declares that  the oath is taken for the purpose of

" Maintaining our spiritual and civil rights and properties"

It is a contract with the people which makes it the permanent duty of the CROWN, and the CROWN in both GOVERNMENT and PARLIAMENT.

This contracts the Monarch to govern only according to the STATUTE, COMMON LAW, and the CUSTOM and to 'CAUSE LAW and JUSTICE with MERCY to be used in all JUDGEMENTS'.

All power of governance is vested in the CROWN.

The two Houses of Parliament may upon their concurrence offer bills for ROYAL ASSENT.

A BILL is not ENACTED until it has been authorised by the SOVEREIGN POWER.

Whilst the enacting power (a royal prerogative) of Royal Assent is entirely vested with the monarch it is contracted ONLY TO BE USED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL LAW.  This is a limitation and essential safeguard to protect the people from any over mighty governance  [such as Tony Blair's and Gordon Brown's NEW LABOUR and since DAVE'S PARTY]

 It was used  to defeat the Divine Right of Kings; a claim of absolute power by the Stuart monarchs.  The OATH ascertains the SUPREMACY of the LAW, not the supremacy of CROWN or of PARLIAMENT.

There is certainly no Divine Right of Politicians.

The Coronation contract is of the Crown owing allegiance to the Constitution. The PEOPLE give ALLEGIANCE to the CROWN.

Here is a system of mutual protection for there is a constitutional interdependence.

The MAGNA CARTA

made provision for the PEOPLE to use ANY MEANS including FORCE if the CROWN is found to be in BREACH.

[THE CROWN IS IN BREACH!]

THE RIGHT OF RESISTANCE IS THE ULTIMATE REMEDY...

That which constitutionally binds the Monarch is a restriction upon Her Majesty, Her Government and all Parliamentary power.  The Monarch may do no wrong, but should she refuse by her negative power( the right to withhold assent) to

'LET WRONG BE DONE.'

[Millions of patriots have been waiting over four decades for:-

'Right to be Done!']

Sir William Blackstone confirms this. Whilst the monarch accepts the advice of ministers, they must only advise to do that which COMPLIES with the CONSTITUTION.  Plainly NO MONARCH is FREE to ASSENT to ADVICE that CONFLICTS with the CONSTITUTION in FORCE.

There is no authority in Parliament to pass any power of governance in England to those who hold or owe no allegiance. [such as the EU]

 There is no constitutional authority for Parliament to deliberately breach the constitutional laws by new   conflicting enactment.

 There is a natural duty resulting from the logic of our constitutional law to debate and resolve conflicts, if necessary by prior repeal.

 We must put an end to this form of 'legal' abuse, particularly through the misapplication of party politics.

 Most but not all of our constitution is written:- the Magna Carta, the Petition of Rights, the Declaration of Rights, the Bill of Rights, the Act of Settlement and the Acts of Union etc. It has evolved over centuries with the expenditure of much blood. It has been abused and corrected many times. It was finally settled by the Glorious Revolution of 1688/9.

The Judicial function is to be the independent arbiter between party and party or party and government under the terms of our constitutional law.  The courts are bound to declare upon the constitutionality of an Act where it may prove to be an action of unconstitutional governance. The great examples of the Magna Carta, the Petition 1628, the Declaration & the Bill of Rights 1688/9 make this duty of the court utterly plain.

Judgement may only be given in accordance with the constraints of constitutional laws in force.  At all times the presumption of law and justice in mercy be upheld and used  in all judgements. This is the trust sand the pre-eminent public policy reposed in the judiciary.

The right of petition to the Monarch is an appeal direct to the source of power, the Monarch is under OATH and at LAW, bound to provide REMEDY. Where there are RIGHTS there are REMEDIES. Politicians and Parliament must abide by the terms of reference and DUTY to the CONSTITUTION.

A fixed and certain standard with protection and remedy are the true purpose of the Constitution.

WE MUST RECLAIM OUR CONSTITUTION AND THE RULE OF LAW FROM THE SUPPOSED DIVINE RIGHT OF OUR POLITICIANS.

John Bingley-AUGUST 2003

*

[We ask how did it come to pass that the JUDICIARY did not PROTECT the CONSTITUTION from the illegal actions of PARLIAMENT and the Crown with the disclosures in 2001 under the 30 year rule from the Public Record Office at

 KEW-LONDON

 which revealed the CONSPIRACY of the FOREIGN OFFICE to prevent the PEOPLE from hearing the TRUTH of their TREACHERY and BETRAYAL. Under the 1969 THE VIENNA TREATY CONVENTION on the  LAW of TREATIES  there are two key provisions which authorise a signatory power to abrogate a bilateral or multilateral treaty unilaterally, without giving the stipulated notice.

1. Where corruption has been demonstrated in respect of pro curing the treaty in the first place, or in respect of any dimension of its implementation, the European Commission (EC) permits and is associated with corruption on a monumental scale, which the EU authorities have tried to cover up with declining success.

". Where there has been a material change of circumstances. A material change of circumstances has surfaced into the daylight (September 2005), to begin with, following the death of

Edward Heath.

. It has been revealed that he was an agent of a foreign power (NAZI-GERMANY-since 1938), accepted corrupt payment for his services, and lied to the British people concerning the nature of the geopolitical trap into which he had been instructed by his handlers to lead them-and that he did all this on behalf of a foreign power which has all along disguised its continuing Nazi orientation.

[Massive payouts were given to the signatories of the  EEC which in reality was in effect the road to the corrupt-collectivist-undemocratic

FEDERAL STATE of the EUROPEAN UNION.]

*

[THE QUEEN FAILED IN HER SOLEMN DUTY TO PROTECT HER PEOPLE AND THEIR UNIQUE WORLD RENOWNED FREE PARLIAMENTARY INHERITANCE

AND APART FROM SIGNING ILLEGALLY 6 EU TREATIES CONTRARY TO HER CORONATION OATH-IN 1998 SIGNED TONY BLAIR'S SECRET AMENDMENT BILL  FOR TREASON FROM THE DEATH PENALTY TO IMPRISONMENT FOR LIFE-OBVIOUSLY THEY BOTH HAD REASONS  FOR FEARING A FUTURE IMPEACHMENT BY PARLIAMENT.

 

More!

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS ARE OURS}

MAY 30-2016

H.F.800

 
 

THE TRUTH that BRUSSELS cannot BEAR: PEOPLE CRAVE NATIONAL IDENTITY.

By Stephen Glover for the Daily Mail

 3 October 2017

What happened in Catalonia on Sunday was shaming and shocking in a modern European state. Spanish police bludgeoned and assaulted defenceless civilians who were simply trying to exercise their democratic right.

First and foremost, this is a terrible crisis for the wrong-headed, bully-boy government in Madrid. After the unedifying spectacle of police attacking blameless voters, the chances must surely have increased of Catalonia – Spain’s most prosperous region with some 7.5million inhabitants – seceding.

But it is also an enormous crisis for the European Union, which in recent weeks has said almost nothing as the Spanish authorities arrested officials arranging an independence referendum on behalf of the devolved Catalan government.

 

 

RELATED ARTICLES


 

One reason he did not do so in the case of Spain is that it is one of the most obedient pro-EU countries in Europe, which seldom defies the will of Brussels, or causes trouble for Juncker and his ilk.

But there is an even deeper reason for the Commission’s silence. The events in Catalonia challenge at a deep level its project for ever closer union, about which both Juncker and President Emmanuel Macron of France have ventilated in recent weeks.

For how can there be an amicable union between the EU’s nation states if some of those nations are themselves deeply divided and fractious, as is plainly the case with Catalonia and Spain?

Here is a region of largely Catalan-speaking people who regard themselves as culturally distinct. A sizeable proportion of them yearn to break free from Spain, even though Catalonia has been part of the country for hundreds of years.

Sunday’s vote illuminates a truth which Brussels cannot bear. There are many people in Europe for whom the atavistic call of identity counts far more than any exhortation about forging a European superstate

That, after all, was one of the main messages of Brexit – that the majority of voters in our own ancient nation resent the undemocratic control of Brussels, and have no wish to be sucked into a united Europe.

For Brussels, the example of Britain was bad enough, and it has set about trying to punish us for having had the effrontery to want to leave. In a sense, the demonstration of Catalan nationalism is even more alarming to the federalists because this show of independence is happening inside one of the EU’s nation states.

How is it possible, they wonder, for the pan-European project to proceed if some EU countries are in danger of fracturing? The terror in Brussels is that if Catalonia were allowed to break away, regions in other member states could follow suit. Instead of coalescing into an amorphous whole, some EU nations might fall apart.

Belgium, whose capital, Brussels, is the seat of EU expansionism, is divided. The Flemish-speaking region of Flanders, which constitutes about 60 per cent of the country’s population, is at daggers drawn with the French-speaking minority.

Many people in northern Italy long to be rid of the impoverished south, which is relatively unproductive and, in the view of northerners, consumes more than its fair share of government spending. The Right-wing Northern League has campaigned with some success for independence for the north, and imagines a separate country called Padania.

France faces an independence movement in the island of Corsica. Meanwhile the cohesion of Spain is threatened not just by free-spirited Catalans but also by militant Basques, part of whose territory lies in France.

Romania and Slovakia both have unhappy Hungarian minorities. Even in Poland’s region of Silesia, much of which used to be ruled by Germany until 1945, there are stirrings of an independence movement.

All over Europe apparently unified countries are harried by breakaway groups which have a strong sense of separate identity. If Catalonia were allowed to go it alone, who knows what might come next?
 

The problem for Brussels is that it is used to dealing with individual nation states but is powerless to intervene in unruly regions. That is why the Commission has remained so quiet in the case of Catalonia apart from expressing a few words of solidarity with Spain.

By the way, the British response has been regrettably supine. Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson stressed his support for the Spanish government in a tweet. As the leading Brexiteer he should surely have been more critical of Madrid’s use of violence.

The Spanish government, it must be said, has behaved rashly and brutishly. Arguably some Catalan separatist political parties have been unwise in deliberately engineering a confrontation.

But given that the Catalan government had made numerous requests to hold a referendum on independence – after Spain’s constitutional court had controversially declared in 2010 that Catalonia was not a nation – what was it to do having been rebuffed time and time again? If it had possessed a modicum of good sense, the Spanish government would have allowed the referendum to go ahead. Had the vote been in favour of independence, it could have then questioned its legal status.

But to arrest Catalan officials, to close a large number of polling stations, and then to clobber innocent voters were acts of unbelievable stupidity as well as nastiness.

It passes understanding how the prime minister of Spain, Mariano Rajoy, can say that democracy has prevailed. The opposite is true.

Imagine if two or three years hence the Scottish National Party’s Nicola Sturgeon were to hold a referendum without the approval of Westminster – by no means an unthinkable eventuality.

In fact, her case would be much weaker than that of the Catalan government since there has already been one legal referendum in Scotland in 2014, which was said by the SNP leader Alex Salmond at the time to be the last for a generation.

Even so, it is inconceivable that a new unofficial referendum in Scotland would be met by the authorities in Westminster with police wielding batons and firing rubber bullets. Such a wild over-reaction would inevitably give a boost to Scottish nationalism – as, I have no doubt, the cause of Catalan nationalism will have benefited from Sunday’s onslaught.

The truth is that the Spanish state has a very restricted conception of democracy. We should know that already from its desire to shoehorn Gibraltar into Spain despite 99 per cent of its citizens having voted in a 2002 referendum to remain British.

God alone knows what will happen now in Catalonia. Unless the Spanish government agrees to an official referendum – an unlikely prospect – there will probably be deadlock. I am afraid there is also the possibility of more violence on both sides.

Justifying and supporting the Madrid government is the European Commission in all its absurdity, dreaming dreams of a union which the people of Europe do not want. It will do its utmost to ensure that Catalonia doesn’t interfere with its grandiose scheme.

Will Remainers look at Catalonia and reflect that we have a quieter and more civilised way of dealing with our differences in this country? I don’t know. What I do know is that every day I am ever more relieved that we are leaving this misguided club.
Full article
 


 Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4942684/STEPHEN-GLOVER-truth-national-identity.html#ixzz4uYWX4q7V
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on

 

92

View
comments

 

H.F.1332 BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU
 

A REMINDER!-IF YOU NEED IT!

101 REASONS FOR LEAVING THE EU

 

PART 1

 

We wish to express our indebtedness and gratitude to those who in books and articles have sought to alert the Nation to its Danger, and whose observations are reflected or summarised here: in particular,

 

Rodney Atkinson and Norris McWhirter

for Treason at Maastricht

 

Adrian Hilton for The Principality and Power of Europe

 

Lindsay Jenkins for The Last Days of Britain

And

 

For the late Lord Shore of Stepney’s

Separate Ways

 

Copies of this booklet can be obtained from the Publishers -Priced £1.20 incl p&p

 

St Mathew Publishing Ltd

24 Geldart St.

Cambridge

Tel: 01223 504871 Fax: 01223 512304

 

*

 

1. hush up

 

Cabinet papers pre - 1970 show the Heath government to have had full knowledge of the EEC being a long -term plan for the unitary European State with its own Currency; but the facts were suppressed by this and succeeding governments with the Deliberate intention of keeping the Nation in the dark

 

1.         ‘surrenders of sovereignty’’

 

On 14th December 1960 the Lord Chancellor,

Lord Kilmuir,

Britain’s senior legal officer, warned Edward Heath of the implications of signing the Treaty of Rome:

‘’ To satisfy the requirements of the treaty, Parliament could enact legislation which would give automatic force of Law to any existing or future regulations made by… the Community…It is clear that the Council of Ministers could make regulations which would be binding on us even against our wishes… It is the first step on the road, which leads… to the federal state… I must emphasise that in my view the surrenders of sovereignty involved are serious ones…these objections ought to be brought out into the open.

 

2.         ‘end of Britain’’

 

That the consequences of membership had been realised by some at Westminster about this time is apparent from a speech in 1962 by Hugh Gaitskell, leader of the Labour party, who rightly identifying ‘’ the desire of those, who created the European Community, for a political federation. That is what they mean, that is what they offer’’, added that this would bring about the end of Britain as an independent [Nation State]…the end of a thousand years of history.

 

3.         the big lie

 

Edward Heath’s 1971 White Paper on joining the EEC deceived Parliament and the People with its false statements that’’ there is no question of any erosion of essential sovereignty’’, and that Britain’s Sovereignty would somehow be ‘’enlarged’’ by ‘sharing’’

 

4.         ministry of propaganda

 

Between 1970 and 1972 the Heath Government directed a secret propaganda offensive, known as the Connaught Breakfasts, in which Cabinet Ministers, Foreign Heads of Department, civil servants, media managers and journalists, in conjunction with the European Movement, carried on TV, radio and newspaper campaign to swing round strongly opposed public opinion to acceptance of the EEC, public money being used in the process.

 

5.         unconstitutional…1

 

The 1972 Act which took Britain into the EEC was in breach of the Constitution, in that the Government allowed no prior consultation of the electorate by special General Election or Referendum, as is required under the Constitution for Parliamentary measures involving Constitutional Change, the precedents being those of 1831/2 and 1910.

 

 

7. unconstitutional…2

 

By passing the 1972 European Communities Act, Parliament unconstitutionally attempted to renounce its legal Sovereignty, so as to make the British People subject to enactments of outside agencies, and ending its own ability to put into effect the expressed wishes of the Electorate.

 

8. unconstitutional…3

 

In doing so, it deliberately and wrongfully denied the, ultimate Sovereignty of the People, of which Parliament is Constitutionally both Servant and Defender and which at the end of each Parliament’s term is returned to its Possessors.

 

9.                     unconstitutional…4

 

It is the Corner Stone of the Constitution that no Parliament is or can be bound by enactments of its predecessors; but the Act of 1972 unconstitutionally purported (Section 2.4) to be mandatory upon all succeeding Parliaments.

   

10.               unconstitutional…5

  

The Act of 1972 is unconstitutional in the wider respect that falsehood and deception was employed to secure its enactment, contrary not only to the spirit of the Constitution but of all procedure whatsoever.

 

11. test case

 

The Metric Martyrs’ appeal against their conviction is based on the fact that the 1985 Imperial Weights &Measures Act, which permits trading in pounds and ounces, constitutionally takes precedence over the earlier Act of 1972 which made us members of the EU; and it is thus a test case not only between British and EU law, but of whether the 1972 Act can have abrogated the Constitution.

 

12.indestructible

 

Any supposition that the Act in some sense annulled the Constitution is untenable, since (apart from the 1972 Act itself being unconstitutional both in its content and process of enactment) the unique unwritten British Constitution is not law, but essentially an honoured undertaking and consensus in those who have created and live under it as to the proper conduct of Parliamentary affairs, and thus incapable of being set aside by legal means.

 

13. … twilight hour?

 

By subjecting the British people to decrees other than the laws enacted by their own legislature, the Act contravened the undertaking in the Coronation Oath ‘’ to govern the peoples of the United Kingdom according to their laws and customs’’; the provisions of the treason Act 1795, against engaging in actions ‘’tending to the overthrow of the laws, government and happy constitution’’ of the United Kingdom, and those of the Treason Felony Act of 1848 condemning ant who attempt to ‘’ deprive or depose our most gracious Lady the Queen from the style, honour or royal name of the imperial crown of the United Kingdom’’; and the Privy Councillor's Oath ‘’ To bear faith and allegiance to the Crown and defend its jurisdiction and power against all foreign…persons…or states.’’

 

14. royal commoner

 

Allegiance to H.M. the Queen is in effect allegiance to Brussels, since through the Queen’s EU citizenship and accountability in her own courts to superior EU law, Her Majesty has vassal status, and an Oath of Allegiance to her now stands’ subject to the Commission’s tolerance’’ so long as she and her Nation do not show themselves disloyal to the sovereignty of the European Union.

 

 

15. unconstitutionality

 

The chief reason for the Labour government’s calling a Referendum in 1975 was the unconstitutionality of the European Communities

 

16. bizarre

A retrospective Referendum upon an Act of Parliament was without precedent in British history, and partook of the nature of inertia salesmanship, especially since accompanied by the dispatching of government literature to every household with the disinformation that the Act had been purely a free trade agreement, and urging a ‘Yes’ vote; a species of official activity also without precedent, and just as questionable.

 

17. the great divide

Britain’s becoming and remaining a member of the EU, and the methods employed to his end, resulted from the emergence of what Lord Goodhart memorably described as ‘’ a political establishment’’ with purposes disturbingly opposed to the wish of the electorate; his book ‘Full-Hearted Consent (1976) ironically gaining its title from Mr Heath’s assurance during the 1970 General Election campaign that, if there were a future possibility of entering the EEC, no government would take their nation into it’’ without the full-hearted consent of Parliament and the People.

 

18. vote as EU please

 

The political establishment’s continuing activities have brought about a new situation, new to British politics, in which the widespread public hostility to the EU’s increasing encroachments is denied party political expression, the policies of the major parties all being favourable to membership.

 

19. polling days

 

In a nationwide MORI opinion poll carried out on behalf of the British Democracy Campaign 15-21 March, 2001, in which 1805 adult respondents were questioned face to face in their homes, 52% of these offered an opinion declared themselves in favour of leaving the EU now, 71% wanted a Referendum on continued membership, and 75% considered that the British people had not received sufficient information on the implications of the EU.

 

20. mobile goalposts

 

Through the deeper irregularity of its plan to proceed by stealth through a series of treaties until the European State was a fait accompli before its populations had come to realise what was going on, the EU has developed into a concept and institution far other than what was voted on in 1975 Referendum, and so without democratic validation in this as in other countries.

 

 

21. undemocratic

 

The European Union is an unrepresentative and authoritarian institution, by virtue of the fact that the members of the legislative (Council of Ministers) and its executive (Commission) are not directly elected by and responsible to the voters of a EU constituency.

 

22. non-accountable

 

The EU Council of Ministers is composed of the non-dismissible nominees of the governments of member states, who are thus removed from democratic accountability.

 

23. horse-trading

 

Britain’s voice in the Council is one amongst many; and policy decisions, as the outcome of conflict of interests and pressures resolved by bargaining, by no means necessarily correspond to Britain’s needs and the wishes of its electorate.

 

24. cabal

 

The Council, more strictly the legislative body, and the Commission, which with its executive roll also issues legislative proposals, both meet in secret; and since the fifty or so persons who compose the two have not been elected to European government functions, and in carrying them out are accountable to no-one, they constitutes, not a legislative, but a ruling oligarchy.

 

25. big brothers

 

Though the EU Commission are unelected appointees without democratic mandate or accountability, they have power to impose directives and regulations by by-passing the legislatures of democratic states.

 

26. the parliament: authority

 

Whereas the British Cabinet is constitutionally answerable to Parliament in Westminster, where a government defeat on a motion of no confidence involves a Dissolution and General Election, the European Union’s Parliament, so called, is entirely without such control over the Commission, which is effectively the EU Cabinet.

 

27. the parliament: finance

 

From its earlier days to the present, what has been confirmed the Westminster Parliament’s power has been its direction of finance; but the EU Parliament is without a corresponding capacity?

 

28. the parliament: legislation

 

Unlike all the other parliaments in the Western tradition, the EU Parliament is unable to legislate, its functions being merely to review and agree measures drawn up by the Commission, and thereby to have virtually no legislative role.

 

29 the parliament veto

 

Nor does the Parliament have a final veto over Commission regulations and directives, since through the procedure euphemistically named ‘’Conciliation’’, the Commission can at its will override any negative vote.

 

30. façade

 

The word ‘’Parliament’’ is thus a misnomer for what is little more than a rubber-stamp or puppet agency; but the democratic election of its members creates the dangerous illusion of democracy being at work, in what is in essence an authoritarian regime.

 

31.      inferior government

 

Through its membership of the EU, Britain is being subjected to a species of non-representative, non-democratic, authoritarian government far inferior to that which prevailed at Westminster until 1973, and having features reminiscent of the dictatorial systems which flourished on the continent of Europe in the not very distant past.

 

32.      12-star chamber?

 

The European Court of Justice, whose members are appointed by the various governments, is the supreme arbiter on EU law, with power to overrule the laws of member states; but being charged under the Treaty of Rome with ensuring that provisions of all the EU treaties, and the principle of ‘’ever closer union’’, are observed, and in its own words devoted to ‘’overcoming the resistance of national governments to European integration’’, it is politically predisposed and active in a manner incompatible with judicial impartiality.

 

33.      moot points

 

EU treaties and regulations are generally cast in such obscure language that all wishing to be sure where they stand will be forced to go to the European Court of Justice: so that it will become an absolute source of political authority, and the European State be unassailably dominant over the former nations now its provinces.

 

34.      EU rules OK

 

EU law, as conveyed by the treaties, regulations and directives, and decrees and rulings of the European Court, are accepted by British courts as taking precedence over national law, the ECJ having declared that ‘’Every national court must apply Community law in its entirety and must accordingly set aside any provision of national law which may conflict with it, whether prior or subsequent to this Community rule’’ (ECR 629 at 643,644).

 

35.      ‘’tidal wave’’

 

The result is that the British Statute and Common law are being superseded, and law-making has become primarily the prerogative of the European Union, which has been described by a British judge as ‘’a bold new source of law’’, and whose legislation, according to the late Lord Denning, a former Master of the Rolls, is no longer’’ an incoming tide flowing up the estuaries of England’’, but’’ now like a tidal wave bringing down sea walls and flowing inland over our fields and houses, to the dismay of us all’’ (quoted in the Times, 1st April 1996).

 

 

 

36. corpus juris

 

In place of existing laws in the member countries, there will have been instituted under the European State the Corpus Juris, a body of law largely in accordance with continental legal systems, deriving from three main sources: the Corpus Juris Civilis of the Roman Emperor Justinian, Inquisition law, and the Code Napoleon

 

37. euro state prosecutor

 

Corpus Juris is to be administered by the European State Prosecutor, and operate through European courts and trans-national police and the courts and police forces of member states, so combining police and prosecution into one entity

 

38. continental menu

 

Judicial procedure is to be as already in practice on the Continent, the European State Prosecutor having responsibility for investigation, arrest, committal to trial, presentation of the prosecution case in court, judgment and imposition of sentence, trial taking place before an inquisitorial judge and two professional assessors: the State, in effect, both judge and jury.

 

39. … innocent? Prove it!

 

Also as on the Continent, the concept of presumed innocence will disappear, and it will become the responsibility of the accused to prove his innocence to the court, contrary to the position under English law, where the burden of proof rests with the prosecution, and the accused is innocent unless and until proved guilty.

 

40.                   goodbye, Habeas Corpus

 

Corpus Juris will quash the right of Habeas Corpus, instituted in 1215 by Magna Carta  (article 39), by which it is granted in perpetuity to all subjects of the monarch that no-one should suffer the loss of liberty without evidence warranting his further detention being established in a court hearing, normally within 48 hours of his arrest.

 

41. farewell, trial by jury

 

Corpus Juris will similarly abolish the right of trial by jury, whose beginnings date from as early as 1166 in the reign of Henry 11, through which the question of a person’s innocence or guilt is determined by twelve of his peers, not by the judiciary, a practice which, because of a jury’s freedom to acquit a person technically guilty under an unjust decree, ensures that laws made by the state are always acceptable to the people, and that government pressure upon, or corruption of, the judiciary shall never be able to affect the impartial administration of justice.

 

42. ‘ the test of civilisation’’

 

In a Minute to the Home Secretary of 21st November, 1943, Winston Churchill observed: ‘’The great principles of Habeas Corpus and trial by jury… are the supreme protection invented by the British people for ordinary individuals against the State… The power of the executive to cast a man in prison without formulating any charge known to law for an indefinite period, is in the highest decree odious, and is the foundation for all totalitarian governments… Nothing can be more abhorrent to democracy. This is really the test of civilisation.’’

 

 

* * *

 

 

43. above the law

 

The European State’s judicial system involves the introduction of forces of armed police, whether members of Europol or of the paramilitary European border police in process of formation, enjoying diplomatic immunity from arrest, and thus above the law; unlike British police, who, while charged with enforcement of the, remain ordinary members of the public, themselves subject to the laws they uphold

 

44. clear enough

 

The reasons for the European State police’s immunity from the law have never been explained, though the parallel with the police forces of authoritarian regimes is manifest

 

45. just the start

 

Eurojust, the provisional EU public prosecution agency, which is closely linked to Europol, already has autonomous, non-accountable power to initiate investigations in every state of the European Union, Europol being able to order surveillance of any British person by letters, E-mail or ‘phone tapping, and to acquire upon demand secret intelligence from British security agencies M15 and M16.

 

46. affront

 

The concepts, provisions and methods of the judicial system of the emerging European State are legally and ethically inferior to the system of British justice admired throughout the world for its humanity and impartiality: and if ever instituted in Britain, would be a regressive and affronting imposition.

 

47. Euro Army

 

The future of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), founded upon the predominant military power of the United States, which has for more than half a century secured and maintained Europe’s peace, is now threatened by the European State’s establishing an Army of its own, dubbed the Rapid Reaction Force, upon the pretext that it will facilitate military operations in which NATO does not wish to take part.

48. pretext

 

Since arrangements already exist within NATO for the EU to take military action without NATO’s participation, but using its facilities, assets, transport and intelligence, the reasons for setting up a European Army can only be to confirm the emerging Statehood of the EU, and lessen the commitment of the United States to Europe’s security: so jeopardising NATO’s continuing role, and thereby the peace of Europe.

 

 

49. escape of cat

 

Helmut Kohl’s statement that ‘’ a united Europe without a common defence is, in the long run, not feasible’’ (Independence, CIB, January 2000,p1) would seem to apply regarding the first; and that of Jacques Chirac, ‘’The object of a European defence identity is to contain the United States’’ (cited by Michael Fabricant, MP, House of Commons, 29th March 2000), with respect to the second.

* *

 

DESPOTISM is:

 

[‘ Everything by the EU- but nothing by YOU ’]

 * * *

 (50 - More Reasons in Part 2.)

 Or you may order a booklet from:

 

St Mathew Publishing Ltd

24 Geldart St. Cambridge

CB1 2lX

 

Tel: 01223 504871 or Fax: 01223 512304

2004

CLICK FOR PART 2

 

H.F.1288-BREXIT MEANS BREXIT!

 

 

 

Revealed:

The secret report that shows how the Nazis planned a Fourth Reich ...in the EU

*

 

By Adam Lebor
Last updated at 10:30 PM on 09th May 2009

 

 

The paper is aged and fragile, the typewritten letters slowly fading. But US Military Intelligence report EW-Pa 128 is as chilling now as the day it was written in November 1944.

The document, also known as the Red House Report, is a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for 's post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis' return to power and work for a 'strong German empire'. In other words: the Fourth Reich.

 

Heinrich Himmler with Max Faust, engineer with I. G. Farben

Plotters: SS chief Heinrich Himmler with Max Faust, engineer with Nazi-backed company I. G. Farben

The three-page, closely typed report, marked 'Secret', copied to British officials and sent by air pouch to Cordell Hull, the US Secretary of State, detailed how the industrialists were to work with the Nazi Party to rebuild Germany's economy by sending money through Switzerland.

They would set up a network of secret front companies abroad. They would wait until conditions were right. And then they would take over Germany again.

The industrialists included representatives of Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt. Officials from the Navy and Ministry of Armaments were also at the meeting and, with incredible foresight, they decided together that the Fourth German Reich, unlike its predecessor, would be an economic rather than a military empire - but not just German.

The Red House Report, which was unearthed from US intelligence files, was the inspiration for my thriller The Budapest Protocol.

The book opens in 1944 as the Red Army advances on the besieged city, then jumps to the present day, during the election campaign for the first president of . The European Union superstate is revealed as a front for a sinister conspiracy, one rooted in the last days of the Second World War.

But as I researched and wrote the novel, I realised that some of the Red House Report had become fact.

Nazi Germany did export massive amounts of capital through neutral countries. German businesses did set up a network of front companies abroad. The German economy did soon recover after 1945.

The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration.

Is it possible that the Fourth Reich those Nazi industrialists foresaw has, in some part at least, come to pass?

The Red House Report was written by a French spy who was at the meeting in Strasbourg in 1944 - and it paints an extraordinary picture.

The industrialists gathered at the Maison Rouge Hotel waited expectantly as SS Obergruppenfuhrer Dr Scheid began the meeting. Scheid held one of the highest ranks in the SS, equivalent to Lieutenant General. He cut an imposing figure in his tailored grey-green uniform and high, peaked cap with silver braiding. Guards were posted outside and the room had been searched for microphones.

 

Auschwitz

Death camp: Auschwitz, where tens of thousands of slave labourers died working in a factory run by German firm I. G. Farben

There was a sharp intake of breath as he began to speak. German industry must realise that the war cannot be won, he declared. 'It must take steps in preparation for a post-war commercial campaign.' Such defeatist talk was treasonous - enough to earn a visit to the Gestapo's cellars, followed by a one-way trip to a concentration camp.

But Scheid had been given special licence to speak the truth – the future of the Reich was at stake. He ordered the industrialists to 'make contacts and alliances with foreign firms, but this must be done individually and without attracting any suspicion'.

The industrialists were to borrow substantial sums from foreign countries after the war.

They were especially to exploit the finances of those German firms that had already been used as fronts for economic penetration abroad, said Scheid, citing the American partners of the steel giant Krupp as well as Zeiss, Leica and the Hamburg-America Line shipping company.

But as most of the industrialists left the meeting, a handful were beckoned into another smaller gathering, presided over by Dr Bosse of the Armaments Ministry. There were secrets to be shared with the elite of the elite.

Bosse explained how, even though the Nazi Party had informed the industrialists that the war was lost, resistance against the Allies would continue until a guarantee of German unity could be obtained. He then laid out the secret three-stage strategy for the Fourth Reich.

In stage one, the industrialists were to 'prepare themselves to finance the Nazi Party, which would be forced to go underground as a Maquis', using the term for the French resistance.

Stage two would see the government allocating large sums to German industrialists to establish a 'secure post-war foundation in foreign countries', while 'existing financial reserves must be placed at the disposal of the party so that a strong German empire can be created after the defeat'.

In stage three, German businesses would set up a 'sleeper' network of agents abroad through front companies, which were to be covers for military research and intelligence, until the Nazis returned to power.

'The existence of these is to be known only by very few people in each industry and by chiefs of the Nazi Party,' Bosse announced.

'Each office will have a liaison agent with the party. As soon as the party becomes strong enough to re-establish its control over Germany, the industrialists will be paid for their effort and co-operation by concessions and orders.'

 

Enlarge   The 1944 Red House Report

Extraordinary revelations: The 1944 Red House Report, detailing 'plans of German industrialists to engage in underground activity'

The exported funds were to be channelled through two banks in Zurich, or via agencies in Switzerland which bought property in Switzerland for German concerns, for a five per cent commission.

The Nazis had been covertly sending funds through neutral countries for years.

Swiss banks, in particular the Swiss National Bank, accepted gold looted from the treasuries of Nazi-occupied countries. They accepted assets and property titles taken from Jewish businessmen in Germany and occupied countries, and supplied the foreign currency that the Nazis needed to buy vital war materials.

Swiss economic collaboration with the Nazis had been closely monitored by Allied intelligence.

The Red House Report's author notes: 'Previously, exports of capital by German industrialists to neutral countries had to be accomplished rather surreptitiously and by means of special influence.

'Now the Nazi Party stands behind the industrialists and urges them to save themselves by getting funds outside Germany and at the same time advance the party's plans for its post-war operations.'

The order to export foreign capital was technically illegal in Nazi Germany, but by the summer of 1944 the law did not matter.

More than two months after D-Day, the Nazis were being squeezed by the Allies from the west and the Soviets from the east. Hitler had been badly wounded in an assassination attempt. The Nazi leadership was nervous, fractious and quarrelling.

During the war years the SS had built up a gigantic economic empire, based on plunder and murder, and they planned to keep it.

A meeting such as that at the Maison Rouge would need the protection of the SS, according to Dr Adam Tooze of Cambridge University, author of Wages of Destruction: The Making And Breaking Of The Nazi Economy.

He says: 'By 1944 any discussion of post-war planning was banned. It was extremely dangerous to do that in public. But the SS was thinking in the long-term. If you are trying to establish a workable coalition after the war, the only safe place to do it is under the auspices of the apparatus of terror.'

Shrewd SS leaders such as Otto Ohlendorf were already thinking ahead.

As commander of Einsatzgruppe D, which operated on the Eastern Front between 1941 and 1942, Ohlendorf was responsible for the murder of 90,000 men, women and children.

A highly educated, intelligent lawyer and economist, Ohlendorf showed great concern for the psychological welfare of his extermination squad's gunmen: he ordered that several of them should fire simultaneously at their victims, so as to avoid any feelings of personal responsibility.

By the winter of 1943 he was transferred to the Ministry of Economics. Ohlendorf's ostensible job was focusing on export trade, but his real priority was preserving the SS's massive pan-European economic empire after Germany's defeat.

Ohlendorf, who was later hanged at Nuremberg, took particular interest in the work of a German economist called Ludwig Erhard. Erhard had written a lengthy manuscript on the transition to a post-war economy after Germany's defeat. This was dangerous, especially as his name had been mentioned in connection with resistance groups.

But Ohlendorf, who was also chief of the SD, the Nazi domestic security service, protected Erhard as he agreed with his views on stabilising the post-war German economy. Ohlendorf himself was protected by Heinrich Himmler, the chief of the SS.

Ohlendorf and Erhard feared a bout of hyper-inflation, such as the one that had destroyed the German economy in the Twenties. Such a catastrophe would render the SS's economic empire almost worthless.

The two men agreed that the post-war priority was rapid monetary stabilisation through a stable currency unit, but they realised this would have to be enforced by a friendly occupying power, as no post-war German state would have enough legitimacy to introduce a currency that would have any value.

That unit would become the Deutschmark, which was introduced in 1948. It was an astonishing success and it kick-started the German economy. With a stable currency, Germany was once again an attractive trading partner.

The German industrial conglomerates could rapidly rebuild their economic empires across Europe.

War had been extraordinarily profitable for the German economy. By 1948 - despite six years of conflict, Allied bombing and post-war reparations payments - the capital stock of assets such as equipment and buildings was larger than in 1936, thanks mainly to the armaments boom.

Erhard pondered how German industry could expand its reach across the shattered European continent. The answer was through supranationalism - the voluntary surrender of national sovereignty to an international body.

Germany and France were the drivers behind the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the precursor to the European Union. The ECSC was the first supranational organisation, established in April 1951 by six European states. It created a common market for coal and steel which it regulated. This set a vital precedent for the steady erosion of national sovereignty, a process that continues today.

But before the common market could be set up, the Nazi industrialists had to be pardoned, and Nazi bankers and officials reintegrated. In 1957, John J. McCloy, the American High Commissioner for Germany, issued an amnesty for industrialists convicted of war crimes.

The two most powerful Nazi industrialists, Alfried Krupp of Krupp Industries and Friedrich Flick, whose Flick Group eventually owned a 40 per cent stake in Daimler-Benz, were released from prison after serving barely three years.

Krupp and Flick had been central figures in the Nazi economy. Their companies used slave labourers like cattle, to be worked to death.

The Krupp company soon became one of Europe's leading industrial combines.

The Flick Group also quickly built up a new pan-European business empire. Friedrich Flick remained unrepentant about his wartime record and refused to pay a single Deutschmark in compensation until his death in July 1972 at the age of 90, when he left a fortune of more than $1billion, the equivalent of £400million at the time.

'For many leading industrial figures close to the Nazi regime, Europe became a cover for pursuing German national interests after the defeat of Hitler,' says historian Dr Michael Pinto-Duschinsky, an adviser to Jewish former slave labourers.

'The continuity of the economy of Germany and the economies of post-war Europe is striking. Some of the leading figures in the Nazi economy became leading builders of the European Union.'

Numerous household names had exploited slave and forced labourers including BMW, Siemens and Volkswagen, which produced munitions and the V1 rocket.

Slave labour was an integral part of the Nazi war machine. Many concentration camps were attached to dedicated factories where company officials worked hand-in-hand with the SS officers overseeing the camps.

Like Krupp and Flick, Hermann Abs, post-war Germany's most powerful banker, had prospered in the Third Reich. Dapper, elegant and diplomatic, Abs joined the board of Deutsche Bank, Germany's biggest bank, in 1937. As the Nazi empire expanded, Deutsche Bank enthusiastically 'Aryanised' Austrian and Czechoslovak banks that were owned by Jews.

By 1942, Abs held 40 directorships, a quarter of which were in countries occupied by the Nazis. Many of these Aryanised companies used slave labour and by 1943 Deutsche Bank's wealth had quadrupled.

Abs also sat on the supervisory board of I.G. Farben, as Deutsche Bank's representative. I.G. Farben was one of Nazi Germany's most powerful companies, formed out of a union of BASF, Bayer, Hoechst and subsidiaries in the Twenties.

It was so deeply entwined with the SS and the Nazis that it ran its own slave labour camp at Auschwitz, known as Auschwitz III, where tens of thousands of Jews and other prisoners died producing artificial rubber.

When they could work no longer, or were verbraucht (used up) in the Nazis' chilling term, they were moved to Birkenau. There they were gassed using Zyklon B, the patent for which was owned by I.G. Farben.

But like all good businessmen, I.G. Farben's bosses hedged their bets.

During the war the company had financed Ludwig Erhard's research. After the war, 24 I.G. Farben executives were indicted for war crimes over Auschwitz III - but only twelve of the 24 were found guilty and sentenced to prison terms ranging from one-and-a-half to eight years. I.G. Farben got away with mass murder.

Abs was one of the most important figures in Germany's post-war reconstruction. It was largely thanks to him that, just as the Red House Report exhorted, a 'strong German empire' was indeed rebuilt, one which formed the basis of today's European Union.

Abs was put in charge of allocating Marshall Aid - reconstruction funds - to German industry. By 1948 he was effectively managing Germany's economic recovery.

Crucially, Abs was also a member of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union.

Its members included industrialists and financiers and it developed policies that are strikingly familiar today - on monetary integration and common transport, energy and welfare systems.

When Konrad Adenauer, the first Chancellor of West Germany, took power in 1949, Abs was his most important financial adviser.

Behind the scenes Abs was working hard for Deutsche Bank to be allowed to reconstitute itself after decentralisation. In 1957 he succeeded and he returned to his former employer.

That same year the six members of the ECSC signed the Treaty of Rome, which set up the European Economic Community. The treaty further liberalised trade and established increasingly powerful supranational institutions including the European Parliament and European Commission.

Like Abs, Ludwig Erhard flourished in post-war Germany. Adenauer made Erhard Germany's first post-war economics minister. In 1963 Erhard succeeded Adenauer as Chancellor for three years.

But the German economic miracle – so vital to the idea of a new Europe - was built on mass murder. The number of slave and forced labourers who died while employed by German companies in the Nazi era was

 2,700,000.

Some sporadic compensation payments were made but German industry agreed a conclusive, global settlement only in 2000, with a £3billion compensation fund. There was no admission of legal liability and the individual compensation was paltry.

A slave labourer would receive 15,000 Deutschmarks (about £5,000), a forced labourer 5,000 (about £1,600). Any claimant accepting the deal had to undertake not to launch any further legal action.

To put this sum of money into perspective, in 2001 Volkswagen alone made profits of £1.8billion.

Next month, 27 European Union member states vote in the biggest transnational election in history. Europe now enjoys peace and stability. Germany is a democracy, once again home to a substantial Jewish community. The Holocaust is seared into national memory.

But the Red House Report is a bridge from a sunny present to a dark past. Joseph Goebbels, Hitler's propaganda chief, once said: 'In 50 years' time nobody will think of nation states.'

For now, the nation state endures. But these three typewritten pages are a reminder that today's drive towards a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich - an economic rather than military imperium.

• The Budapest Protocol, Adam LeBor's thriller inspired by the Red House Report, is published by Reportage Press.

 

Places:

,

Print this article Print this article

Read later Read later

Email to a friend Email to a friend

 

 

[Font Altered-Bolding & Underlining Used-Comments in Brackets]

*

 

*

[ Prime Minister Edward Heath was a NAZI SPY for over 60 years to his death in 2005 before which he publicly admitted that he had lied to the people when he said there would be no loss of sovereignty. His fellow traitors were Roy Jenkins and Geoffrey Rippon who were reported to MI5 in 1938 by the Master Lindsay of Balliol College Oxford . Harold MacMillian before him was exposed by intelligence sources 13 years earlier in 1957 as an agent of the German Abwehr.     

This country has been served by many traitors since that day as a look at the list of members of the

and that is not a complete list because of the great difficulty of obtaining the names of those who belong to such a secretive body.  But we know that Gordon Brown- Ed Balls on the Labour side and Kenneth Clarke and George Osborne the Shadow Chancellor on the Tory side. The Liberal Democrats have their David Steel and no doubt many others. The Governor of the Bank of England Mervyn King is also on the list and this man has charge of our of the future financial  health of our nation. And we must not forget our greatest despot Tony Blair.

www.worldreports.org.uk

[We have hundreds of Bulletins on the European Union listed below

*

[Each underlined word has a separate bulletin]

 

H.F.1290

Unholy Alliance: The US Has an Unhealthy Relationship With Israel

 

Today, while driving through town, I wound up behind a minivan that had a big sticker on the back. The sticker had an Israeli flag in the middle of it, and under it the quotation from the book of Genesis that reads “I will bless those who bless thee.”

I would like to take this time to list my own reasons for thanking and blessing Israel, our lone ally in the Middle East, for everything she has done for us, since I am quite sure most Americans are unaware of just what kind of friend she has been to us.

For extorting from me and my fellow Americans $6,000,000,000 (billion) a year for the last 4 decades, we bless thee.

For taking our most sophisticated weapons technology and stealing it for yourself without paying the American patent holders, we bless thee.

For taking that high-tech military technology and selling it to our enemies, such as the Russians and Chinese, thus further endangering us, we bless thee.

For using that weaponry in a sustained attack against a United States ship, the USS Liberty, resulting in the deaths of 34 American servicemen and the wounding of almost 200 others in an attempt to sink her, blame the attack on Egypt in order to push the Americans into joining you in your war against the Arabs, we bless thee.

For bribing and blackmailing the United States government into covering this act of war up, preventing any justice from being done for the benefit of the families of the lost sailors – as well as the American People, we bless thee.

For sending your agents into Egypt and blowing up American buildings for the purpose of blaming the Arabs in an event known as the Lavon Affair, we bless thee.

For sending your agents into Libya during the Reagan administration, and broadcasting radio messages in Arabic that were designed to sound like “terrorist cell planning” so that the US would initiate military strikes against Khadafi, we bless thee.

For withholding information from us concerning the planned attacks against the US Marine barracks in Lebanon, attacks you knew about through your moles in the Islamic world and about which you deliberately refused to warn us in order to further your interests against the Arabs, we bless thee.

For employing Jonathon Pollard, an American serviceman paid to spy for Israel in order to steal even more of our National Security secrets for your parasitic purposes, we bless thee.

For blackmailing President Clinton through one of your intelligence agents, Monica Lewinsky, in order to prevent a coherent peace program from being pushed forward between yourself and the Palestinian people that you have brutalized and murdered for the last 50 years, we bless thee.

For breaking every agreement you have made with your Arab neighbors, stealing their land, displacing, murdering, and treating them like the animals you see them as, we bless thee.

For using your agents within the first Bush administration to involve us in the first Gulf War, causing the deaths of American men and women, and exposing our servicemen to whatever bioweapons were/are responsible that has led to Gulf War Syndrome, we bless thee.

For your role in the September 11 attacks in this country, and for blackmailing and bribing the US government into deporting back to Israel the 100 or more intelligence agents that were arrested after the attacks, we bless thee.

For supressing the information from the American people of your involvement in the September 11 attacks and sending us in the wrong direction in search of answers, we bless thee.

For using one of your agents in the US Army Weapons Lab, Lt Colonel Philip Zack to steal anthrax and distribute it into our mail system, terrorizing US citizens and killing several in order to blame the Arabs, we bless thee.

For using your agents in the US Government, namely, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Perle, Abrams, and the rest into initiating this war in the Middle East so that you could bring to heel all the enemies you have made during the last 50 years, we bless thee.

For using your agents in the media to lie to us on a minute by minute basis about the war, how “just” this cause is, and what the real reasons behind it are, we bless thee.

For using your agents in the Christian Evangelical community, such as Falwell, Graham, Swaggert, and the rest who praise you as God’s chosen people and further keep Americans in the dark about who you really are, what you have done, and what you are truly about, we bless thee.

For bringing idiots like Limbaugh, Liddy, Hannity, Beck, and Savage to the forefront as paid liars that will support you and further lead Americans astray, we bless thee.

For making America your attack dog, and for sending her sons and daughters to fight and die in all your future wars, we bless thee.

For using your influence in the media to hide the real statistics about the war, the dead and wounded on both sides, we bless thee.

For using us in such a way that not only further inflames the Arab world against us, but as well has succeeded in our alienating ourselves against those nations with whom we have been friendly for over a century, we bless thee.

And finally, for using your influence in our media and academia to flood our minds with pornography and lies, as well as inculcating in us a hatred for our history, religion, and culture, for dividing our nation between races and sexes, and for releasing into our society all of your plagues and filth that have left us a rotted out corpse of a once great nation, oh Israel, our friend,we bless thee.

*****

The author can be reached at nomorewarsforisrael@gmail.com

Source: https://russia-insider.com

Disclaimer: We at Prepare for Change (PFC) bring you information that is not offered by the mainstream news, and therefore may seem controversial. The opinions, views, statements, and/or information we present are not necessarily promoted, endorsed, espoused, or agreed to by Prepare for Change, its leadership Council, members, those who work with PFC, or those who read its content. However, they are hopefully provocative. Please use discernment! Use logical thinking, your own intuition and your own connection with Source, Spirit and Natural Laws to help you determine what is true and what is not. By sharing information and seeding dialogue, it is our goal to raise consciousness and awareness of higher truths to free us from enslavement of the matrix in this material realm.

Leave a Comment

 

H.F.1797

 

 

[WE COMMEND THE WRITER OF THE ABOVE ARTICLE FOR REVEALING THE TRUE NATURE OF ISLAM WHICH HAS BEEN HIDDEN BEHIND THE CONTINUOUS VIOLENCE OF MANY OF ITS CONVERTS. THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION HAS ITSELF  BEEN USED THROUGHOUT ITS HISTORY BY EVIL PEOPLE AND INSTITUTIONS UP TO THE PRESENT DAY - BUT THE FAITH CANNOT DIE.]

 

*

We found the following quote quite revealing:-

'Religion is not a dogma, not an emotion, but a service.- Our redemption is not of the head alone, nor of the heart alone, but pre-eminently of the life, as the only infallible criterion of what we really are.- Not belief, not emotion, but obedience is the test.- Mere belief would make religion a mere theology.- Mere emotion would make it a mere excitement.- While the true divine of it is a life, begotten of grace in the depths of the human soul, subduing to Christ all the powers of the heart and life, and incarnating itself in patient, steady, sturdy service.- doing the will of God.'

- R. D. Hitchcock. (1827-1887) Am clergy.

*

WHY+ARE+THE+MANY+MUSLIMS+SO+VIOLENT+IN+PROTECTING+

AND+SPREADING+THEIR+FAITH?

 

 
DAILY-MAIL-COMMENT -July 5-2014

This paper applauds the 100 imams from every branch of
ISLAM,

who have written to UK Muslims urging them to stay away from Syria and Iraq, where more than

600

 BRITONS

are said to be fighting

In a religion LACKING A FIGUREHEAD-A POPE, ARCHBISHOP or CHIEF RABBI-

the voice of the moderate majority is far too seldom heard

Let this be the start of a concerted and sustained campaign by preachers to remind the young of their religious duty to

PEACE.

*

[On   August 22-2014 we have seen no evidence that those of the Islamic faith are on the streets protesting against ISIS and their brutality.]

H F-SP2/ 10

 

 

A WARNING FROM

2008

THE GOVERNMENT DOESN'T UNDERSTAND MUSLIM EXTREMISM WHEN CHRISTIAN TEACHING BECOMES A CRIME

 BY

MELANIE PHILLIPS

 

H F-SP2- 11

 

 
DAILY MAIL

The-coming-apocalypse-Last-week-historian-DOMINIC-SANDBROOK-wrote-damning-critique-West-s-failure-halt-Islamic-fanatics-Now-savage-murder-confirmed-worst-fears-looks-future.

AUGUST 23-2014

H F S 2- 12

 

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

AUGUST 15 -2014

H F 219

*

 

We British Muslims have got to speak OUT!

by

Dr Taj Hargey-Director of the Muslim Educational Centre in Oxford.

THERE is nothing in ISLAM that CAN JUSTIFY the taking of an INNOCENT LIFE,  NOTHING that CAN CONDONE what MURDEROUS ISLAMIC STATE FANATICS have DONE in its NAME. This GANG of CRIMINALS has brought OUR FAITH into GRAVE DISPUTE and BESMIRCHED its HONOUR.

Muslim leaders must act before it is

TO LATE!

We must demonstrate that this horrendous slaughter in Paris was not sanctioned by us or perpetuated with our blessing.  And we must prove to young impressionable Muslims that

WE DO NOT CONDONE THIS CARNAGE

The French Muslim community should have acked morwe assertively already. They should be marching in the streets, chanting

' NOT IN MY NAME!

,NOT IN THE NAME OF ISLAM

But instead, there is an eerie

SILENCE

They are doing nothing tangible to oppose the

POLITICAL IDEOLOGY

from

SAUDI ARABIA

and which sadly has infected

EUROPEAN ISLAM

In Great britain, the Muslim Council of Britain, the Islamic Society of Britain should be bussing in Muslims from SCotland, Wal;es, all over the United Kingdom to

PROTEST in our CAPITAL

at what happened. They should be organising a mass

NOT in our NAME'

March of all Muslims, irrespective of sect or denomination, condemning IS unreservedly for all it stands for.

A tiny rally in

TRAVALGAR SQUARE

on Saturday night  is not good enough. Prominent Muslim organisations need to

SPEARHEAD the FIGHT

against

IS

and the ugliness and intolerance

THAT IT REPRESENTS.

[TO BE CONTINED]

*

We British Muslims have got to speak out, says DR TAJ HARGEY  

By Dr Taj Hargey For The Daily Mail - November 16th 2015, 1:31:58 am

 

 

Daily Mail, Monday, November 16,2015

 

*

 

SHADOW OF A BLOODY PAST

SATURDAY

ESSAY

by

Tom Holland

For centuries, Islam and Christianity were locked in a brutal conflict most have forgotten. The horror, a top historian argues, is that for jihadis it's as real today as it was in the Middle Ages.

 

EXTRACT

...year after year, Turkish forces probed Christian defences, crossing the plains of Hungary or churning the waters off Malta with their warships. In 1529 and again in 1683, an Ottoman army almost took Vienna.

Yet that was to be the last great attempt to extend the Caliphate across Europe. The global balance of power was shifting, and nearly a millennium of Muslim preponderance was drawing to a close.

It was the Christians who colonised America, established trading empires that spanned the globe and started the process of industrialisation.  By the 19th century with India ruled by the British Raj and the Islamic Ottoman Empire scorned in Western capitals as 'the sick man of Europe', Muslims could no longer close their eyes to the sheer scale of their decline.

It was they who were now the imperial subjects, and Islam the civilisation looked down on by its adversaries as backward, as Christendom had once been.

Ever since the first days of their faith, Muslims had tended to take for granted that its truth was manifest in its worldly success.

As a result, subordinated to the infidel British or French there were many in the Muslim world who looked to the golden age of the Caliphate for their  inspiration.

The age of Muhammad and his successors, which had seen Islam emerge from desert obscurity tom global empire, was enshrined as the model to follow. Over recent decades resentment at continued Western interventions in Muslin countries such as Afghanistan and Iraq have only burnished the appeal of the glorious past.

Today, according to a poll some two-thirds of Muslims worldwide want to see the

RESTORATION of a CALIPHATE

It is not empires per se they are apposed to -just

NON-ISLAMIC EMPIRES

Hardly surprising then that al-Qaeda and ISIS should be so obsessed by periods of history that to most Westerners are thoroughly obscure.

That Constantinople

has been a Muslim city for almost 600 years, that the Crusades are done and dusted and that Europe no longer defines itself as Christendom, barely intrudes on the consciousness of many jihadis.

They inhabit a mental landscape in which the Middle Ages never went away. The menace of this way of thinking is brutally evident-a world in which young people murdered a rock concert, can be cursed as 'Crusaders' is a world on the verge of going mad.

It is not just non-Muslims who are threatened by this imperialist nostalgia.

 'Either you are with the Crusade, 'ISIS has warned European Muslims,' or you are with ISLAM

...

More!

 

 

 

*  *  *

 

[WHAT WE HAVE IS A NIGHTMARE SITUATION OF A GUERRILLA WAR UNFOLDING SUPPORTED BY THOSE HARD-LINE FUNDAMENTALISTS  AND THEIR SUPPORTERS WITHIN THE 3,000,000 MUSLIM COMMUNITY AND WITH THEIR ADDITIONAL ADVANTAGE OF FULL COVER FROM THE ACCEPTED DRESS  OF THE VEIL AND BURKA-SYMBOLS OF EXTREME ISLAM. IT IS MOST UNLIKELY THAT A MUSLIM WILL BETRAY A FELLOW MUSLIM AS MUCH AS THEY MIGHT DISAGREE WITH THEIR MESSAGE AND INTENDED ACTION.  AS MANY OF OUR TOWNS AND CITIES HAVE ALMOST A PREPONDERANCE OF THOSE OF THE MUSLIM FAITH IT WILL BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE IF NOT IMPOSSIBLE TO PROTECT THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. THE ONE VITAL ADVANTAGE WE HAD MANY YEARS AGO -THE BOBBIE-ON-THE -BEAT IS NO LONGER THERE-THE VITAL LINK OF TRUST WITH THE LOCAL COMMUNITY SO VERY IMPORTANT IN THE EVENT OF A CRISIS WE SEE BEFORE US TODAY.  WE MENTIONED THIS VERY MATTER MANY YEARS AGO KNOWING HOW IMPORTANT THE LINK WOULD BE IN A NATIONAL EMERGENCY.  AS WE NOW HEAR ISIS HAS ASKED ITS SUPPORTERS IN OUR COMMUNITIES TO STAY PUT-NOT TO JOIN THEM AS THEY THEMSELVES WILL BE ON THEIR WAY TO JOIN THE FIGHT!.]

 

THE GREAT ERROR FROM THE BEGINNING WAS TO ALLOW THE THE LARGE SCALE IMMIGRATION OF THOSE FROM A HISTORICALLY OPPOSING CULTURE  TO SETTLE IN ENGLAND.  THE JEWS NUMBER 300,000 WHEREAS THE MUSLIMS ARE NO DOUBT OVER 3,000,000 WITH A AN ADVANTAGEOUS

 BIRTH-RATE OF 4-1.  MAKE NO MISTAKE THERE ARE MANY OF THE ISLAMIC FAITH WHO LONG TO BELONG TO AN ISLAMIC STATE  .WE HAVE ALREADY GIVEN THEM SHARIA LAW OF PARTS!

 

 IT WAS AND STILL IS OUR STUPID POLITICIANS WHO HAVE PUT AT RISK THE LIVES OF THE INDIGENOUS POPULATION IN THE VERY NEAR FUTURE. IN WARTIME ONE HAS INTERNMENT CAMPS BUT IN THE PRESENT SITUATION THIS WOULD BE MOST DIFFICULT OR IMPOSSIBLE TO CONSIDER BUT IF THE CARNAGE BECOMES UNCHECKED THEN WHO KNOWS WHAT MEASURES WILL BE NEEDED IN ORDER TO STILL THE VIOLENCE. OVER THE PAST DECADE THERE HAVE BEEN MANY WARNINGS FROM EMINENT AUTHORITY OF THE DANGERS WHICH WOULD ARISE BUT THEY WERE ALL IGNORED BECAUSE OF THE PREVAILING ATTITUDE OF POLITICAL CORRECTNESS-THE DETAILS ARE SHOWN IN OUR

 

 IMMIGRATION FILE

 

 

 

  Daily Mail-

 

[COMMENTS IN BRACKETS AND CAPS ARE OURS]

 

NOVEMBER 21,2015

H F 621/1

*
 UNDERSTANDING ISLAM

PART 17/1

/Of 28 sections.

AUGUST 2005

ISLAMIC JIHAD

The Islamic Jihad of the 7th to 10th centuries over-ran half of the then Christian World by the sword. Today, many western Muslims are peaceful and law-abiding, and those who are faithful to the Quran and to the Hadith may well stand beside Christians in campaigns against Materialism and immorality.

Equally, they can take the view that the decadent 'Christian' west is regarded as Dar-al-Harb (house of war). pagan and irredeemable. Only jihad, in the latter view, will bring 'peace' by the establishment of a new Khilafah (a Muslim state) worldwide and by the abolition of national boundaries to result in Izhaar ud-Deen (world domination by Islam).

Islamic states are at the forefront of persecution of Christians, a fact well documented by Operation Mobilisation, Barnabas Fund, Christian Solidarity and Frontline Fellowship amongst other Christian groups.  This topic alone would warrant a book about it and there is truly no space here to begin to do the subject the justice it deserves.

Even in non-Muslim countries, Islam shows its aggressive side, and this is putting the bombings in places like New York, Bali, Madrid, London and Israel on one side.  In Nigeria, Muslims are advancing Sha'ria and persecuting Christians, driving them out of Muslim areas by force of arms. In Australia, Muslims used the State of Victoria's Anti-Vilification Law to persecute Paster Daniel Scot when he described the persecution of Christians in Pakistan and described Islamic beliefs.  At the University of Pretoria, in South Africa, Frontline Fellowship Field Director, Timothy Keller, was threatened by a mob of Muslim students demanding that a missions display be taken down.  In the United Kingdom, author Salman Rushdie became the subject of a death sentence for writing his book "The Satanic Verses" and the arts and media worlds are terrified of offending Muslims.  And with good reason - Dutch film-maker Theo van Gogh was murdered because he released a film criticising Islam and the oppression of women in arranged marriages.  His murderer, Mohammed Bouyeri, is unrepentant.

Believers are held in Islam by fear, making the Quranic promise that there is no compulsion empty. Mohammed said 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.' (Bukhari: Volume 4, book 52, Number 260, Narrated Ikrima.)

Apostasy is punishable by death today in Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Yemen, Iran, Sudan, Pakistan and Mauritania.  Of point to us in evangelism is that the penalty for a Muslim converting to Christianity in Britain is still theoretically death.  Even if a convert's Muslims neighbours stop short of killing him, Muslim converts in Britain suffer severe persecution.  The Barnabas Fund estimate that some 3,000 Christian converts from Islam are in danger in the UK.  They include Nissar Hussain and his family from Bradford; his car was burnt out, he has endured bricks thrown through his windows, threats to burn his house down and much else.

 

*  *  *

Christian Voice, PO Box 739A, Surbiton, KT6 5YA -

AUGUST 2005

Searches related to pew research muslim population

sweden muslim population 2050

islam in germany 2050

islam in europe 2050

muslim population in france 2017

muslim population in europe 2018

belgium muslim population

islam in europe today

muslim population

 

More!

IMMIGRATION FILE

 

 

H.F.1711/14/1

 

*

 UNDERSTANDING ISLAM

PART 17/1

AUGUST 2005

THE 'COVENANT OF SECURITY'

The Islamic concept of a 'Covenant of Security' means two things. Firstly, unbelievers who pay the Jizyah are entitled to the provision of security from the Khilafah, and secondly, a non-Islamic nation which provides shelter to Muslims is not regarded as Dar-al-Harb. It is the second meaning which is relevant to Britain today.

In practice, as long as Britain sheltered Islamic terrorists planning strikes against their own governments, and did not make war against islamic lands, Britian was safe from attack.  The turning of London into Londonistan, a haven for foreign jihadists, made Britain, in a perverse kind of way, a safer place.

Chief among advocates of the 'Covenant of Security' was Skeikh Omar Bakri, leader of al-Muhajiroun. The head of its Luton branch, Sayful Islam, said in April 2004 that he supported Osama Bin Laden "100 per cent" in the quest to achieve

"the worldwide domination of Islam"

but he would not engage in terror attacks in Britain

"as long as they allow us Muslims to live here in peace."

All that changed as events unfolded in 2004 as a result of 9/11.

The British Government arrested certain foreign nationals on suspicion of inciting terrorism, and, unable for human rights reasons to deport them, kept them interned without trial.

The second factor was Britain's active support in the American invasions of Afghanistan and Iraq.

In January 2005 Bakri determined that the covenant of security had ended and "the whole of Britain had become Dar-al-Harb."

British Muslims were obliged "to join the global Islamic camp against the global crusader camp" the latter of which included Britain. Six months later, the bombing campaign in London began.

Other British jihadists took a different line. Hassan Butt left al Muhajiroun because he disagreed that British-born Muslims were bound by the same covenant of security felt by foreigners, such as Bakri himself.  In an interview, Butt said British-born Muslim youth have no allegiance to this country: "Islamically, I agree that someone who runs from the Middle East-where people like me are persecuted-and says, 'Britain, I want you to protect me' has entered a covenant of security. They  say, 'look protect my life and as a result I won't do any harm to you.' That  I agree with 100 per cent, but most of our people, especially the youth are British citizens... They did not ask to be born here; neither did they ask to be protected by Britain....They  have no covenant. As far as I'm concerned, the Islamic hukum (order) that I follow, says that a person has no covenant whatsoever with the country in which they are born." (Prospect Magazine August 2005)

*  *  *

Christian Voice, PO Box 739A, Surbiton, KT6 5YA -

AUGUST 2005

Searches related to pew research muslim population

sweden muslim population 2050

islam in germany 2050

islam in europe 2050

muslim population in france 2017

muslim population in europe 2018

belgium muslim population

islam in europe today

muslim population

 

More!

IMMIGRATION FILE

 

 

H.F.1711/14/1

*

 UNDERSTANDING ISLAM

PART 2

AUGUST 2005

THE FOUNDING OF ISLAM

 

Islam as founded in the seventh century AD by Abdul-Kasim Mohammed ibn Abd Allah. Mohammed was born in  Mecca in Arabia in 570 AD and was a member of the Quraish tribe, who worshipped the moon-god, 'Al-ilah', and a variety of other pagan deities. Orphaned at an early age, he was brought up by his uncle. Abu Talib.  He married his first wife, Khadija, when he was 25 and she 40. She was the widow of a rich merchant in whose caravan Mohammed was travelling and the pair became devoted to each other. With his wealth and travelling lifestyle, he acquired some knowledge of both Judaism and Christianity.  In 610 AD, Mohammed claimed to have had a vision of what he believed was the angel Gabriel. Mohammed was an intelligent man but he could not read or write, so he had scribes write down that and further visions.  In time these became the Quran, in which was developed the monotheistic concept of Allah as an omnipotent creator who alone was to be worshipped.

Not surprisingly, Mohammed's insistence, in the words of the Quran that "No god is there but the one Allah" (Sura 38:65), set he and his small band of followers against the majority in Mecca.  The pagan Ka'aba shrine in Mecca was an important focus for pilgrimage. the tourism industry was important even then and vital to Mecca.  The incident of the 'Satanic Verses' which established the principle of 'Naskh' (qv) made life even more uncomfortable for Mohammed.

In 620 AD, following the sudden deaths of both his first wife and his uncle and protector, Mohammed found himself and the Hashemite clan of which he was a member coming under a degree of persecution in Mecca.  He quickly married another widow, Sawda, and shortly afterwards married a girl named Ayesha. her father, Abu Bakr, was devoted to Mohammed and would emerge as first caliph,(successor to Mohammed). Mohammed further married Hafsah, daughter of Umar, second caliph, Mohammed's daughter or step-daughter Umm Kulthum married third caliph Uthman, and Mohammed's certain daughter Fatima by his first wife Khadijah was married to his cousin Ali, the fourth caliph.  (Shi-ite Muslims believe only Ali was a true caliph.) Mohammed went on to marry another twelve women, but none bore him surviving children. His three sons, two born by Kadijah and one of his concubine Mary the Copt, all died in infancy.

 

 

Christian Voice, PO Box 739A, Surbiton, KT6 5YA -

AUGUST 2005

Searches related to pew research muslim population

sweden muslim population 2050

islam in germany 2050

islam in europe 2050

muslim population in france 2017

muslim population in europe 2018

belgium muslim population

islam in europe today

muslim population

 

More!

IMMIGRATION FILE

 

 

H.F.1711/2

 

*

 UNDERSTANDING ISLAM

PART 7

AUGUST 2005

NASKH-THE PRINCIPLE OF ABROGATION

IIt is necessary to mention the principle of abrogation, in Arabic, 'Naskh'.  Naskh means that one revelation to Mohammed is completely cancelled by another later revelation.  Muslim scholars do not deny the principle, but instead complain that Christianity uses it.  The latter assertion is untrue, although Christians who appear to believe the New testament has abrogated the Old do not help the cause.  We should be more careful to explain along with Augustine that " the New is in the Old concealed, the Old is in the New revealed." Apart from that, the claims of Biblical contradiction by Muslims do not stand up.  The Bible, Old and New Testaments from beginning to end, is remarkably consistent.

.It was the incident of the so-called 'Satanic Verses', an expression coined by the eminent n19th -century scholar Sir Willium Muir, which established the principle of 'abrogation' under which Mohammed's later revelations supercede his earlier ones in case of any controdiction.  It appears that when Mohammed was trying to convince the people of Mecca about the claims of Allah, he first appeased them by clainming that Allah had said that the daughters of the moon-god could be worshipped and their intercession hoped for (Surah 53:19,20).  This first version said: "Have ye seen Lat and Uzza and another, the third (goddess), Manata/  These are the exalted Gharaniq (exalted or high-flying birds), whose intercession is desired/accepted/approved." (Sura 53:19-20)  The revelation pleased the people of Mecca not least because Allat, Uzza and Manat were important idols to the Ka'aba tourist trade.

However, after some time, Mohammed's own followers became uneasy, and he then claimed to have had further revelation from Allah to the effect that the three goddesses were false and that Satan , not Allah, had given the previous version. Accordingly Mohammed deleted the final sentence and substituted the fopllowing: "What? For you the male sex and for him the female? Behold, such would be indeed a division most unfair! These are nothing but names which ye have devised- ye and your fathers-for which Allah has sent no authority." (Sura 53:21-22)

 The  early Muslim historians Ibn Ishaq both substantiate the story, as does the Quran itself: "Never did We send a messenger or a prophet before thee, but, when he framed a desire, Satan throws in, and; but Allah will cancel anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm His signs: for Allah is full of knowledge and wisdom" (Sura 22:52). The reference to Satan is why Sir William coined the expression 'Satanic verses'. In another reference to the principle of abrogation, there is no mention of Satan. Instead, the Holy Spirit is said to inspire Mohammed: "When We substitute one revelation for another - and Allah knows best what he reveals (in stages) - they say 'Thou art a forger'; but most of them understand not.  Say, the Holy Spirit has brought the revelation from the Lord in truth, in order to strengthen those who believe, and as a guide and Glad Tidings to Muslims" (Sura 16:101-102).

 The principle of abrogation has implications for any doctrine that Islam is a religion of peace, as we discuss below.  The peaceful verses in the Quran and Hadith nearly all occur early in Mohammed's life, when he was happily married to Khadija and trying to persuade the Meccans by argument.  The bellicose verses occur later, when he was raiding caravans and embarking on military conquest. Virtually the only issue of context in traditional Islam is that Mohammed's later statements take precedence over his early ones.  An observant Muslim following aggressive Jihad can justifiably say that Mohammed's later revelations and actions support him.  If later revelations take precedence over earlier ones, then Islam becomes a way of war.

Christian Voice, PO Box 739A, Surbiton, KT6 5YA -

AUGUST 2005

Searches related to pew research muslim population

sweden muslim population 2050

islam in germany 2050

islam in europe 2050

muslim population in france 2017

muslim population in europe 2018

belgium muslim population

islam in europe today

muslim population

 

More!

IMMIGRATION FILE

 

 

H.F.1711/9

*

 

SO WILL BRITAIN ONE DAY BE  MUSLIM?

by

Ruth Dudley Edwards

SATURDAY ESSAY

 

[Daily Mail-May 5-2007]

 

*

Our failure to have children.

Welfarism.

Political Correctness.

And a

LACK of WILL

 to fight Islamic extremism

 

 

 

THIS WEEK has been another terrible one for those of us who want a society in which all races, religions and cultures mix to their mutual advantage and

ENRICHMENT.

On Tuesday, five men were sentenced to life in prison for plotting to use a huge fertiliser bomb in what would have been the UK's largest mass murder.

Omar Khyam, Salahuddin Amin, Anthony Garciaand Jawa Akbar -first and second generation immigrants - responded to the tolerance of the British people

BY TRYING TO KILL AS MANY OF THEM AS POSSIBLE.

It is absurd to hope that the exposure of their evil after a 13-month trial which cost an estimated

£50,000,000

-has finally provided the wake-up call that this slumbering country so badly needs?

I'm one of those old-fashioned immigrants to this country who feels passionately grateful, is proudly British (as well as Irish -having been born in Dublin) and believes that immigrants have more duties than rights. And further, that one of those is to adjust to British society rather than expecting it to adjust to them. [ has been the practice for some decades but more so during the Blair years.]

However, one aspect of contemporary British society which I refuse to adjust to is its weakness in the face of the

ENEMY WITHIN

In my many conversations with like-minded people about the threat that radical Islam poses to the

 BRITISH WAY OF LIFE

-And indeed, to European civilisation -we frequently end by despairingly agreeing that the

WEST

-seems intention committing

POLITICAL and CULTURAL

SUICIDE.

When we look starkly at the demographic statistics, the wimpishness of our

ESTABLISHMENT

-in the face of the

THREAT

-the perversions perpetuated by

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

-and our passivity, it's hard to avoid the

CONCLUSION

-that within a couple of generations

ISLAM

-will be in

CONTROL of EUROPE

And before anyone says that there nothing wrong if this happened, since the vast majority of

MUSLIMS

are tolerant people who would not dream of interfering with

OUR WAY OF LIFE

-it's necessary  to point out that in

MUSLIM COUNTRIES

, it's usually the radicals and extremists

MULLAHS

-who regard

TOLERANCE

AS A VICE

-WHO MAKE THE RUNNING.

This occurs too in microcosm in

MUSLIM GHETTOS

around

EUROPE

We saw the frightening fundamentalist fringe of

ISLAM

-marching, threatening and perpetuating violence over the cartoons depicting

MOHAMMAD

IN

DENMARK

while the majority of Muslims - who, yes, of course are tolerant and decent - kept their mouths shut and stayed at

HOME

YES, Islam may be a great religion. BUT

-in its fundamentalist version, some of its values are antipathetic to ours, and if they triumph in

EUROPE 

-they will

THREATEN OUR VALUES

such as

FREEDOM OF THOUGHT

and

SPEECH

and the spirit of intellectual inquiry that made

EUROPEAN CIVILISATION

Great and Prosperous

 

The danger of ending up like these poor, despotic and medieval

Islamic States

-in which millions live miserably is the prospect that

CHRISTIANS

HINDUS

MODERATE MUSLIMS and NON-BELIEVERS -should be uniting

TO PREVENT

 

BUT THE TRUTH IS WE ARE DOING LITTLE TO STOP IT.

Consider first a few chilling statistics.

EUROPEANS ARE FAILING TO REPRODUCE

[Yet in our own island millions of potential citizens have been 

SLAUGHTERED AT BIRTH

thanks to David Steels -Abortion Bill of 1965?

It is still taking place in 2007 though there is NOW an  growing awareness of the tragedy to the potential mother and to society in general that many more doctors today are refusing to condone the

MURDER.

Recently the sight of full grown foetuses being deprived of their lives has now brought the horror and injustice of the action to destroy life.

In an age of contraception of many devices and anti-life pills it is unbelievable that any potential mother was unable to take the necessary steps to prevent conception.

David Steels Bill was to prevent back-street abortions and he himself a few ears ago voiced his concern as to what has happened over the years since.]

*

Consider  first a few chilling statistics.

Europeans are failing to reproduce. Just to keep the population steady, you need 2.1 births per women

[This is a case for Government action by offering cash and other vital services to enable the reluctant mother to do her best for her community and country.]

However in 2005, the European average was 1.38.

In Ireland it was 1.9

France it was 1.89

Germany 1.35

Italy 1.23

Britain scored in the middle of this range with 1.6

BUT

That was because - like France - we have a large

MUSLIM POPULATION

with a high birth rate. Indeed,

MUSLIMS

are out breeding

 non-Muslims

through out

 EUROPE

 

 

[Many of whom have absolutely no intention of integrating -

Thank you very much Mr Blair -we don't think so.]

'Just look at the development within Europe.'

said a triumphant Norwegian Imam a few months ago

'where the number of

MUSLIMS

is expanding like mosquitoes.

Every Western women in the EU is producing an average of 1.4 children. Every Muslim women in the same countries is producing an average of 3.5 children.

'OUR WAY OF THINKING WILL PROVE MORE POWERFUL THAN YOURS' he said.

The big question this poses is:

WHY ARE WE NOT REPRODUCING?

There are many reasons, but probably the most important are the decline of religion and the liberation of women.

[The populations which have the stronger religious stance will be the eventual rulers of Europe. It can be a Christian Europe or a Muslim Europe. The Governments of Europe and the shrinking United Kingdom have to decide.]

In Ireland, when the Roman Catholic Church effectively ran society, sex for procreation, contraceptives were banned, the normal size for a family was around five or six children, bur 12 or 13 were not uncommon.

As the country embraced secularism in the 1980s, birth rates plummeted, exacerbated by the new -found confidence of women that made them choose careers rather than domesticity.

WHEREAS in the 1970s, I was regarded in both the UK and Ireland as odd for being married but voluntarily childless, these days, childlessness |

IS A COMMON CHOICE

It is a world where one-child families abound and to have more than two children is to be regarded as eccentric and probably environmentally irresponsible.

Moreover, the erosion of family life and the long - hours culture place a heavy burden on those prepared to rear the next generation.

Despite these social forces, even in the UK, devote Muslims and Orthodox Jews obey instructions to have large families.

Confronted with this demographic revolution and official statistics which showed there were too few young people to support an ageing population, European governments decided to embrace

IMMIGRATION

-as an inherent good without any thought for the consequences.

As a result, politicians and businessmen assured us that we had to have economic growth in n order to prop up ever greater public spending and that it could be provided only by importing large numbers of workers from abroad

BUT WHY WASN'T THERE A NATIONAL DEBATE

ABOUT

Whether it was wise to mortgage our cultural future for the sake of a mess of financial pottage?

[A recent report on the cost  and benefit of large scale

IMMIGRATION

estimated that the country benefited by

ONLY - 50p

 for each migrant]

Where were the politicians arguing against the doctrine of

MULTICULTURALISM

-which holds that upholding majority values is somehow

ILLEGITIMATE

Who among the liberal elite's commentariat were challenging the moral relativism that flew in the face of

SENSE and SENSIBILITY

-by insisting that the culture of

Shakespeare

The King James Bible

Keats's poetry

Turner's paintings

and

Elgar's music

-was no more important than - the cultures of other

IMPORTED MINORITIES?

 

We know the answer all too well.

Cries of racism drowned out rational argument - not just here but throughout

OLD EUROPE

As one gloomster put it:

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS

which is thought what

SENTIMENTALITY is to COMPASSION

-means that the intelligentsia of the

WEST

-has disarmed itself in advance of any possible struggle.

The result of all this, as recent events have made tragically clear, was that

BRITISH CULTURE

-was

UNDERMINED and SOCIAL COHESION

DAMAGED.

Separated from mainstream society by geographical and cultural apartheid, which has been fostered by

MULTICULTURALISM

-many immigrants were denied the chance to

INTEGRATE.

 

AND, INSTEAD OF BEING TOLD BY THE HOST COMMUNITY

THAT IF THEY DIDN'T WANT TO ADHERE

-to the values of a liberal, pluralist democracy, they should

RETURN HOME

They were asked how they would like

BRITAIN

-to conform to

THEIR VALUES.

THE STORY WAS VERY MUCH THE SAME THROUGHOUT EUROPE

The robust American political commentator Mark Steyn, a disillusioned Anglophile has already written us off. The thesis of his Blackly comic book,

*

America Alone:

The End Of The World As We Know It

*

-is that the U.S. will survive because the

RELIGIOUS RIGHT ARE CONFIDENT

 AND

 REPRODUCE

BUT

 THAT EUROPE IS FINISHED

Its not just demographic decline, he says, it's also the unsustainability of the

MODERN WELFARE STATE

-in which we depend so much on our own individual resources.

We are also, he believes, suffering from 'civilisational exhaustion':

CULTURAL DISINTEGRATION

-brought about by

BIG GOVERNMENT

[Or if you prefer BIG BROTHER]

-which has fatally

DESTROYED OUR SENSE OF SELF-RELIANCE.

 

MEANWHILE, we are importing large numbers of unemployed youths from abroad in order to maintain

OUR

STANDARD OF LIVING

Yet many of these newcomers have nothing

BUT

CONTEMPT

 FOR OUR

WAY OF LIFE

-and some even wish

TO DESTROY IT

Steyn sees this as a

CIVIL WAR

which

EUROPE

-is too timid even to acknowledge - let alone

LET ALONE WIN

[This is something the Tory Mr Oliver Letwin or as we have said on a number of occasions Mr Let-them-win -and they will, who appears to be out of touch with the real issues that matter to our country in the early years of the 21st century.]

Mr Steyn says:

'Islam has youth and WILL

Europe has age and WELFARE.'

It's hard not to agree with Mark Steyn, especially as every day seems to bring more evidence

THAT AS A SOCIETY

WE ARE TERMINALLY

MAD

For example, this week's fertiliser bomb trial had heard that the key plotters had been radicalised by the hate preacher Omar Bakri Mohammed whom the judge condemned as

'a master of cowardice -who works in the shadows.'

This was the same firebrand who as an asylum -seeker here, had pocketed

£275,000

-in Welfare benefits.

[It is the same mentality shown by

Lord Chief Justice Phillips and Lord Falconer and many others

-who instead of spending the £32 million allocated for building prisons a few years ago are now doing almost anything in order to keep thousands of criminals many repeat offenders and dangerous, out of prison and giving many early release so they can go back to torment their victims and as has happened in a number of occasions returned to have another go at their robbery or other offence knowing that the worst that might happen is either a holiday or community service or whatever  and as many prisons these days are very much like 5star hotels there will be no hardship encountered if they are so lucky to win the prison admission lottery -then it will be a nice break to see old friends and anyway they will be out before they have completed their degree in political science or whatever.

The victims of crime, many of them elderly - poor and lonely won't as a rule be free of fear of their tormentor returning for a second or even third try to rob them of the little they have  and as has happened even assault and kill the defenceless pensioner - but some victims even lose heart and end their own lives by depriving themselves of food because they have lost hope that they can be safe again and we have their so-called protectors such as The Lord Chief Justice Phillips and Lord Falconer the new 'Justice' Minister ? who says 'Jail's the wrong place for burglars' and others who are doing whatever they can to keep the criminals out of jail. If the Army can put up a temporary  barracks in double quick time then there would be spaces for all the thousands of criminals who should be

OUT OF THE COMMUNITY.

Of course there would be complaints that the conditions are not up to the standards of the 5star prisons that they have 'visited' over the years and anyway there is

Tony Blair's

1998 HUMAN RIGHTS ACT

to keep them out of such uncomfortable surroundings which would not provide the 'key' service which has been introduced with their friendly solicitor providing a drugs service as an extra comfort.

THERE IS NO LONGER JUSTICE AS THE SENTENCE DOES NOT FIT THE CRIME

ANYMORE]

*

To continue:

Despite all this, I still believe there are grounds for hope - largely because Muslim hotheads have overplayed their hand by blowing people up, rioting in their neighbourhoods or broadcasting hate -filled speeches which alienate them from the host community.

*

 

[Well we are of the opinion that until the Government shows to the Muslim population that they will not give way on insisting that ALL newcomers and those already with us conform to

OUR RULE OF LAW

 

-and punish without hesitation any breaches of the Law and make it plain that anyone who is a threat to our country WILL BE extradited. BUT of course we have Tony Blair's 1998 Human Rights Act and articles within the 1951 British led Convention of Human Rights which will need amending.

It should be made quite clear that those who have no intention to

INTEGRATE

-should be reminded of their commitment which they gave when they where granted immigration or asylum status (which should be a legal requirement in the future)

Unless drastic action is taken by the next Prime Minister as a priority , future generations of the indigenous population will find themselves foreigners in their own country with their religion and culture under growing  threat. The evidence is before our eyes it is a warning of what the future will bring if action is not taken

QUICKLY AND DECISIVELY

Those moderate Muslims will at last feel secure in the knowledge that they are safe from the extremist influence which up to now they have had it all their own way. By our commitment

IT WILL BE SECURITY THROUGH STRENGTH OF PURPOSE AND THE MUSLIMS WILL BE WITH US

Continue as NOW and they will have nothing but contempt for our indecision and inadequate moral integrity.]

*

To continue:

The sharp-suited, soft spoken undercover agents of the

MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD

-the banned Egyptian group whose former members include Osma Bin Laden -understand that power is best secured by

STEALTH

by infiltrating institutions and seducing the

MEDIA

Libya's Colonel Gaddafi once exemplified this policy

He said:

'There are signs that Allah will grant Islam victory in Europe -without swords, without guns-without conquests. The 50 million Muslims in Europe will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few decades.'

 

[AND THEY SURE MEAN IT]

 

 

[Our survival as a Christian nation can only be achieved by the Government reversing it's abhorrent legislation as to Religious freedom of speech and action because not to do so further emphasises to the extremist elements in our country that we are WEAK and AMORAL nation and therefore ready for conversion by stealth as their numbers obtain the victory while we ignore our Christian past at our peril.

Our close relations to America must be strengthened particularly in the moral arena so that our nations will gain the grudging respect of those who have a desire to replace our Christian heritage with their own.

There will be many who will say that we live in a secular environment and that the Government of the day should not concern itself but we have no choice we either support our Institutions and that includes our Christian inheritance which is ingrained into the very fabric of our nation or  lose that priceless heirloom the foundation of our IDENTITY and accept another more fanatical regime who do not believe in toleration but only in the observance of their one and only deliverer who will have no other faiths before it.

WE HAVE TO MAKE A CHOICE

-because a vacuum must be filled and it is better that we know what contain.

The Choice Is Yours!

-but better it will be to retain our own heritage than be converted to another.]

*

But the violent extremists have provoked some signs of a backlash, not just among indigenous populations of Europe but among those tolerant immigrants who value the countries

THAT TOOK THEM IN

The Swedes, of all people, whom liberals claimed had produced a perfect society, are trying to row back on the

WELFARE STATE

-to encourage the

WORK ETHIC

and are demanding

THAT IMMIGRANTS INTEGRATE

 

Nyamko Sabuni a female, Muslim, African immigrant who is now the country's

INTEGRATION and EQUALITY

MINISTER

-insists that

ALL IMMIGRANTS

-should learn Swedish and find a job.

 

She is also intent on criminalising

FORCED MARRIAGES

CHECKING GIRLS FOR EVIDENCE OF FEMALE CIRCUMCISION

and

BANNING THE VEIL

as well as

STATE FUNDING

for RELIGIOUS SCHOOLS.

[This is an area that needs the new Premier Gordon Brown to put his attention as to make it plain that their is one

RULE OF LAW

in

ENGLAND

[NO EXCEPTIONS FOR MUSLIMS OR ANYONE ELSE IN OUR COUNTRY]

 

 

*          *          *

 

[Font Altered-Bolding & Underlining Used-Comments in Brackets]

*

 

THE PEOPLE HAVE SPOKEN-IS THE EU COMMISSION LISTENING?

*

Ditch the EU TREATY after IRISH REJECTION

SAY VOTERS

by

Daniel Martin

Political Reporter

[Daily Mail-Wednesday, June 18,2008]

MORE THAN HALF of voters believe Britain should drop the controversial European Treaty in the wake of its rejection in last week's

IRISH REFERENDUM'

The poll comes as the Tories launch a last-ditch bid in the

HOUSE of LORDS

today to delay the

RATIFICATION OF THE TREATY.

And

10,000 people

have signed a

PETITION

on the

DOWNING STREET- WEBSITE

within the past few days

JUNE16-2008

, calling on the

GOVERNMENT

NOT TO RATIFY THE BILL

[WHY DON'T YOU?]

 

Downing Street website is

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Abandon-Lisbon/

*

JUNE 18-2008

 

*

www.thewestminsternews.co.uk

*

 

www.speakout.co.uk

*

 

Daniel Hannan - Forming an OPPOSITION to the EU

www.telegraph.co.uk.blogs

 

*

GORDON BROWN WANTS TRUST-BUT WHY WON'T HE TRUST YOU?

HELL ON EARTH IN IRAQ

*

67% want powers back from EU-ICM poll-June 21-2007-95% of British people want a REFERENDUM

*

PETITION

FOR A

REFERENDUM

SIGN TODAY ON LINE

telegraph.co.uk/eureferendum

*  July 18-2007

ALSO

JOIN THE 10 DOWNING STREET PROTEST

Readers can add their support to the growing clamour for a REFERENDUM on the '"REFORM TREATY" by signing up to a 10 Downing Street 0n-line petition

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/EU-treaty-NON/

 

The  Petition reads as follows:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to guarantee that the British people will be permitted a binding REFERENDUM on any and all attempts to resurrect the EU " CONSTITUTION" (and any or all of its content) regardless of nomenclature."

Deadline for the PETITION is 31st January,2008

Eurofacts 27th July 2007.

*

'The Spirit of England'

by

Winston Churchill

In London on St.George's Day -1953

*

 

 

VOTE

 -2007

 

TO LEAVE THE EUROPEAN UNION

WITH THE ONLY PARTY WITH A MANDATE

TO SET YOU

 FREE

 

THE

UK INDEPENDENCE PARTY

www.ukip.org

THE QUESTION THAT THE VOTER MUST ANSWER

 

‘DO YOU WISH TO BE GOVERNED BY YOUR OWN PEOPLE, LAW AND CUSTOM OR BY THE CORRUPT ,EXPENSIVE UNACCOUNTABLE AND CORRUPT ALIEN BUSYBODY BRUSSELS’

 

-SIMPLE IS IT NOT?

 

TO RECLAIM YOUR DEMOCRACY DON'T VOTE FOR THE TRIPARTITE PARTIES IN WESTMINSTER

BUT

SMALL PARTIES THAT SPEAK THEIR MINDS WITHOUT SPIN AND LIES.

*

 

ONLY

PRO-PORTIONAL REPRESENTATION

WILL BRING DEMOCRACY BACK TO THE ENGLISH PEOPLE

*

 

SCOTLAND -ITS PARLIAMENT -WALES-ITS ASSEMBLY-ENGLAND-STILL AWAITS ITS PARLIAMENT-WHY?

 

*

 

Home Rule for Scotland

WHY NOT

HOME RULE for ENGLAND

 

*

[All underlined words have a separate bulletin

H.F.1300

*

 

[ A REMINDER FROM APRIL-2007]

 

Why NO Treaty LIMITING EU powers CAN EVER be RELIED ON.

 

On the 50th anniversary of the treaty of Rome a leading barrister describes the role of the European Court of Justice in expanding the powers of the EU

 

by

Martin Howe QC

 

[Eurofacts 6th April, 2007]

Vol 12 No 13

 

What is the key feature that makes the Treaty of Rome different in kind from every other international Treat to which this country belongs, and quite possibly makes it unique in the world?

To this question, a lawyer can give only one answer:

the key feature is Community Law -a system of law that penetrates inside the member states and takes precedence over national laws in the domestic courts of member states.

Many treaties bind states with rules at the international or external level - but it is this internal penetration which marks out the

TREATY OF ROME

-as different from other treaties.

In fact this internal penetration is a classic characteristic, not of international treaties, but of the internal constitutional arrangements of

FEDERAL STATES.

And like a federal state, the

EUROPEAN UNION

-has its own

SUPREME COURT

the

EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE

-which has the

ULTIMATE POWER

-of decision over both

CONTENT and the SCOPE of COMMUNITY LAW.

 

Profound Changes

This court is not neutral or impartial interpreter of the rules.

The perspective of looking back over 50 years allows us to see clearly how profoundly the

TREATY of ROME

-has been changed from what it was in 1957.

I am not speaking here of the many changes of text which have been made by successive amending treaties such as the

Single European Act

Maastricht

or

Nice.

I am talking of the profound changes in the effective content of the Treaty which have occurred as a result of a process of so-called

"INTERPRETATION"

-of the

Treaty by the Court.

The key point that Treaty articles have direct effect inside the member states is nowhere stated in the

TREATY

-but was decided by the

EUROPEAN COURT

in the

Van Gend en Loos case in 1963.

It said:

"The treaty is more than an agreement which merely creates mutual obligations between the contracting states. This view is confirmed by the preamble to the Treaty which refers not only to governments but to peoples....the Community constitutes a new legal order in international law for whose benefit the states have limited their sovereign rights, albeit within limited fields, and the subjects of which comprise not only the Member States but also their nationals".

 

Sovereign Rights

 

Shortly afterwards in 1964 in the Costa v. ENEL case, the Court ruled that

COMMUNITY LAW

-over-rides conflicting national laws:

 

" The transfer by the States from their domestic legal system to the Community system of rights and obligations arising under the Treaty carries with it a permanent limitation of their sovereign rights..."

[So since 1963 politicians who later claimed that there would be

NO LOSS OF SOVEREIGNTY

-were lying and are still lying to the

BRITISH PEOPLE

We have only days ago put on our bulletin board some comments from Lord Carrington about the interference of the European Union in matters which should be none of their concern.

From the early days of the Treaty of Rome thousands of politicians have lied -From Macmillan-Edward Heath-Kenneth Clarke and every prime minister and government -with the only objections raised by Margaret Thatcher who only later realised the danger which she disregarded decades before and even Conservative MEPs today in 2007 still hold onto the hope that they can change the EU when the only thing worth having was given up over 40 years ago.

A dagger was derisively thrust into the heart of nation -state sovereign power by the European Court  in 1963/1964 and Britain alone of all States with its long history of over a thousand years of freedom should have kept faith with those who won that freedom so long ago.]

 

By 1970, in Internationale Handelgesellschaft, the European Court had declared its view that Community LAW should take precedence even over the constitutional laws of Member States -including basic entrenched laws guaranteeing

FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS.

In the  1987 Foto-Frost case, the European Court ruled that national courts had no power to question the validity of Community measures and reserved that power exclusively to

ITSELF

-even though there is nothing in the Treaty or in general principles of

INTERNATIONAL LAW

-which would require

 STATES

-to recognise the

VALIDITY OF ACTS

-which are

OUTSIDE THE POWERS

conferred by the

TREATY

*

During the early period of the [so-called] Common Market, free market economists would have approved of the Court's activism in the field of free movement of goods.

BUT

-this activism became a

Poisoned Chalice

-since the Court made clear that it regarded a

 

EUROPEAN FREE MARKET

-not as an END in ITSELF , but simply a MEANS to a GREATER END.

Concrete Progress

The Court spelled out its thinking in 1992 in the

European Economic Area Agreement Case:

" An international treaty is to be interpreted not only on the basis of its wording, but in the light of its objectives. ...The Rome Treaty aims to achieve economic integration leading to the establishment of an internal market and economic and monetary union.

Article 1 of the Single European Act makes it clear that the objective of all the Community treaties is to contribute together to making concrete progresss towards European unity.

It follows from the foregoing that the provisions of the Rome treaty on free movement and competition, far from being an END in THEMSELVES, are only means for obtaining those objectives.

... As the Court of Justice has consistently held, the COMMUNITY TREATIES ESTABLISHED A NEW LEGAL ORDER for the benefit of which the States have limited their

SOVEREIGN RIGHTS

-in ever wider fields,

-and the subjects of which comprise not only the member States but also their nationals. [emphasis added]".

In the last sentence, the important change in wording from 1963 Van Gend case - should be noted. By 1992,

"limited fields"

 become

"ever wider fields"

-reflecting the Court's endorsement of the doctrine that there can only ever be a one-way transfer of powers from member states to the centre.

[Do you now understand Mr Nice Guy Dave and many of your MEPs who are always harping about retrieving

 POWER back from BRUSSELS]

The Court has also expanded powers of the Community over the external relations of the member states. It developed a doctrine of implied external competence - that the Community has power to make external agreements relating to fields over which it has acquired internal competence. Furthermore, under this doctrine, the member states lose their own powers to conclude international agreements relating to areas of policy over which the

COMMUNITY

-has attained an internal competence.

Under this doctrine, in 2002 the Bermuda Agreement between the UK and the US relating to trans-Atlantic air transport was struck down. British Airways at the time welcomed the fact that such arrangements would in future be negotiated by the EU rather than bilaterally. I must confess to a slight sensation of schadenfreude at British Airways' present reaction to what the EU has apparently succeeded in negotiating on our behalf.

Whilst the Court has liberalised the internal market, it has often used its growing powers over the external trade of member states in a way which inhibits the liberalisation across the external borders of the EU.

In the 1998 Silhouette case, it interpreted the

Trade Marks Directive

-as requiring member states to prohibit so-called

"parallel imports"

-of genuine trade marked goods from non-member states when the proprietor of the mark has not consented to the marketing of his goods into the Community. This enables trade mark proprietors to prevent the importation of their own genuine goods into the EC from other countries where they have placed them on the market (e.g. the USA), so enabling them to charge consumers within the EC a higher price than in other markets.

Similarly, in the field of regulations and technical standards, the Court has ruled in the 1999 Agrochemicals case that the UK is prohibited by Community Law from licensing

"parallel imports"

-from non-EC countries, even though the products are identical to agrochemicals licensed inside the EC and made by the same manufacture.

The economic rationale of this

"fortress Europe"

-mentally is baffling, and it cuts against

OUR

-global trade obligations under the

World Trade Organisation

on

Technical Barriers to Trade.

*

Onward Progress

Where the onward progress of European integration has been blocked by national vetoes, the Court has been willing to reinterpret the Treaty to make up for the lack of progress on the legislative front.

In a whole series of recent tax cases, the Court has invoked the general clauses of the treaty on non-discrimination to strike down national tax legislation. An important example is the 2002 Lankhorst-Hohorst case on tax credits on payments by a subsidiary to its parent in another member state. What is significant is that the Court departed from its earlier cases which had decided that such arrangements were compatible with the Treaty.

The Treaty had not been changed, but its meaning, according to the Court, had. Thus , the effective harmonisation of direct taxes proceeds step by step at the hands of the Court despite the UK's theoretical veto on this area under the Treaty.

More recently in the 2005 environmental protection case, the Court decided that the EC can, under its first-pillar supranational law-making powers, specify and impose criminal offences and penalties in the very wide fields where the EC has an existing competence. The remarkable thing about this decision is that, if it is right, the EEC had these powers over criminal law from the day the

TREATY of ROME

-was signed on 25th March 1957.

Yet if this had been suggested to those who signed the Treaty in 1957, or to those who signed Britain's

 Accession Treaty

-in 1972, they would have laughed

 

We see, with the perspective of 50 years, how powerful has been the effect of the rolling process of reinterpretation of the

TREATY of ROME

-carried out by the Court over that period.

WHAT CONCLUSION SHOULD WE DRAW FROM THIS?

If we believe that it is right to halt or reverse the ongoing process of the transfer of powers from the UK to the European institutions, then we should recognise a simple point.

We saw how the so-called Social chapter opt-out negotiated at Maastricht was rapidly undermined by the abuse of

HEALTH and SAFETY POWERS

-under the treaty to by-pass the UK's veto on the

Working Time Directive.

 

THIS ABUSE OF THE TREATY WAS OF COURSE SANCTIONED BY THE

 

EUROPEAN COURT OF JUSTICE.

 

If we remain subject to Community law, and to the European Court's interpretation of the Treaties, no agreement or treaty defining or limiting the powers of Europe can be relied upon -simply because it will be reinterpreted by the Court, over time, to expand those powers again.

[Conservative MPs and MEPs please note the above and adjust your records accordingly and remember that the ECoJ has you all by the nose -though many of you are still unaware of how little you can do as you put it- with your supposed influence inside the EU.

As to the excuses of the Pro-EU Conservative MP' and MEPs that they were misled from the beginning we know that this was a lie  as shown from publication of details of that era. and the following view of:

 Jean Monnet document on the European Coal and Steel Community, June 1950, quoted in Memoirs, 1978 confirms that statement.

"The withdrawal of a State which has committed itself to the Community should be possible only if all the others agree to such withdrawal and to the conditions in which it takes place. The rule in itself sums up the fundamental transformation which the French proposal seek to achieve. Over and above coal and steel it is laying the foundations of a European federation. In a federation no State can secede by its own unilateral decision. Similarly, there can be no Community except among nations which commit themselves to it with no limit and no looking back'

*

www.eutruth.org.uk

[' A MATTER OF FACT!

 A REMINDER TO REMAINERS WHO IN THEIR MILLIONS REFUSED TO PUT FREEDOM AND COUNTRY-CULTURE AND CONSTITUTION

FIRST!]

H.F.1424

H.F.1651
 

  JUDGE FOR YOURSELF IF ANY REAL PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE SINCE 2003

All information here is an amalgamation of the :  

 ENGLAND MATTERS FILE   IRAQ FILE    EU FILE

 

  
 

OVER 1000  BULLETINS ON THIS MAIN BULLETIN BOARD

  
 

 October 2003 to January 2007 ONLY

  
  01/07  
 

 LET the CHRISTMAS MESSAGE ring out WHILE you still CAN by Michael Nazir Ali

  
     
  1]  WHAT IF Britain HADN'T joined the EUROPEAN UNION - by Christopher Booker  
  2]   EVEN PRISONERS ARE BETTER OFF THAN OUR  TROOPS -  COMMENTARY by GENERAL SIR MICHAEL ROSE  
  3]  CHRISTIAN Students SUE in GAY RIGHTS ROW.  
  4]  JUST4p A WEEK-THAT is the BENEFIT of migrant workers BRING TO EACH PERSON  in the UK.  
  6]  EVERY 20minutes - SOMEBODY quits NEW LABOUR.  
  7]  Gordon Brown as Prime Minister of ENGLAND and WHY it is  THE MAN and NOT his  his NATIONALITY THAT MATTERS  
  8]  OUR 1500 year history has shown many great DEFENDERS of ENGLISH FREEDOM were FOREIGNERS and some of our greatest betrayers   as TODAY where  born in ENGLAND.  
  9] From beyond the grave Robin Cook who resigned over the Iraq War taunts BLAIR on IRAQ.  
  10]  A  DISUNITED  KINGDOM  
  11]  SOLD DOWN THE RIVER- by EU DIRECTIVE  96/50/EU  
  12]  HOW MANY MORE CAN BRITAIN TAKE? by Sir Andrew Green MigrationWatch  
  13]  It's the Scots who have betrayed the UNION -so vote for the SNP-by Simon Heffer.  
  14]   Council Tax will soar if Britain loses Safety Ruling -from EU  
  15]   WHY NO QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AFTER REAL RACISM REVEALED IN MOSQUES IN HOME COUNTIES AND IN REST OF THE COUNTRY- IT IS TIME FOR PARLIAMENT TO ACT!- THEY HAVE BEEN WARNED BEFORE BUT THEY WOULD RATHER LOOK FOR SO-_CALLED RACISM IN THE BRITISH PEOPLE AT LARGE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WISH TO OFFEND MINORITIES BECAUSE THEY WANT THEIR VOTE -SECURITY COMES SECOND IF AT ALL  
  16]   A reminder from the past -THE MAKING OF LONDONISTAN -by Daily Mail reporter Melanie Phillips -back in May,2006 -But ignored as usual as too difficult to handle by the HOME OFFICE who prosecute Christians because they were UNTIL NOW too docile to fight back.  
  17]  TO have a FULL-TIME MOTHER is the BEST MEDICINE a MOTHER can GIVE  A CHILD  
  18]  Blair's 'gatekeeper' held over honours 'cover up'- Angus MacNeil -SNP who made the complaint re 'Cash for Peerages' said:' Water is now lapping around Blair's neck.' -possibly the EU Directive 96/50/EU is a contributory cause?  
  19]   SYSTEMATIC BRAINWASHING OF MUSLIMS BY THEIR LEADERS IS COMMON PLACE-THEY  ARE REPEATING THE HATRED OF THE INFIDEL THAT IS TAUGHT IN EVERY ISLAMIC COUNTRY.  
  20]   TO CONDEMN Jade Goody for being a racist bigot is like CONDEMNING Adolf Hitler BECAUSE HE WAS A BAD PAINTER  
  21]   Blair and his aides face new police quiz on the 'CASH for Honours' Scandal.  
 
A FREE PRESS!

It's finest expression had already been given in

MILTON'S

AREOPAGITICA.

Milton boldly proclaimed two principles of profound importance.

One was the immunity of the religious life from political regulation. The other was that doctrine which has been the strength of the best thought of individualism from his day to the present, to wit that the well-being of society requires the natural diversity of its members, and that coercive uniformity of morals and manners would spell the ruin and degradation of any people.

*

THE MODERN STATE by R. M MacIVER-1950

More!

 

 

 

 
 
THOUGHT OF THE DAY!

WE DO NOT KNOW WHY EMPIRES FALL AND STATES DECAY;  BUT WE CAN AT ANY RATE CONJECTURE, WITH NO LITTLE JUSTICE,   THAT A DISTURBANCE OF THE RACIAL COMPOSITION OF THE ROMAN EMPIRE WAS ONE GREAT CAUSE OF ITS FALL.  RIGHT LAWS AND SOUND MORALS FORM THE STRONGEST SAFEGUARD OF EVERY NATIONAL STATE; BUT A SOUND RACIAL BASIS IS ALSO NECESSARY.   A NATION MAY BE ENRICHED BY THE  VARIED CONTRIBUTIONS OF FOREIGN  IMMIGRATION; BUT IF THE STREAM OF IMMIGRATION GROWS UNCHECKED INTO THE VOLUME OF A GREAT RIVER,  A NATION MAY LOSE THE INTEGRITY OF THE SOLID CORE WHICH IS THE BASIS OF ITS TRADITION  AND THE NATION WHICH LOSES ITS TRADITIONS HAS LOST ITS VERY SELF.

[Earnest Barker-NATIONAL CHARACTER-1927]

*

A BETRAYAL OF OUR PAST OVER 50 YEARS

 (1959-2016)

 

 

 
THE SPIRIT OF A PEOPLE

THE FIRST TASK of any politics that could be really scientific was to relate authority to its principle source, to show its dependence on the whole social fabric, the customs and traditions, the modes of thought and the standards of life that prevail among a people.  ...the work of Montesquieu.   He really sought to understand society, to show the influence of underlying  conditions ,climatic, geographical, economic, to show that custom and institutions neither are made nor can be changed by fiat, to show that there is in every people a spirit of character which their law must reveal

THE MODERN STATE by R. M MacIVER-1950

THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND BY WINSTON CHURCHILL.

 

 

 
THE ENGLISH-A MATTER OF FACT.

HISTORICAL SURVEY.

CHAPTER 1

1. Britons and Englishmen.

The people who lived in our island fifteen hundred years ago [written in1903]  were not Englishmen, nor did they speak the English Language.  When in our flights of rhetoric or poetry, we declare that we glory in the name of Britons, or sing that Britons never shall be slaves, our intentions are patriotic, but our language is apt to be misleading [Note: Gordon Brown and others of the TARTAN CLAN! ]  

Britons we may  indeed call ourselves. if in doing so we mean nothing more than this, that we are inhabitants of Britain.   But when we speak of ourselves as Britons, or as a British race, let us bear in mind such facts as these:- [Note: again!- Gordon brown]  that we are in the main of  English origin; [But for how long after 2014 is anyone's guess. ] That our English forefathers conquered the Britons, deprived them of their lands, and made many of them slaves; that the English settled in the country belonging to the Britons, and  their descendents have remained here ever since.

Firmly grasping these truths, we may, if we like apply the name Britons to our fellow-countrymen, just as we apply the name of Great britain to our country [Gordon brown-please note!]    nO DANGER OF MISCONCEPTION LURKS IN THE WORD 'britain' AS THE GEOGRAPHICAL NAME OF THE ISLAND, FOR OUR ISLAND REMAINS THE SAME: iT IS THE POPULATION WHICH HAS CHANGED. (alfred s.west,m.a.)

in an island with a land named

england!

june-2014

H.F.156

 

H F 550
 

Brought forward from February-2005

FREEDOM of SPEECH -A FREEDOM, which cannot be abused – IS NOT WORTH HAVING.

 

[In the Daily Mail on Friday the 18th February 2005 a timely article by their columnist Andrew Alexander on the most important issue to be raised in a true democracy, which is Freedom of Speech for without it, a People are deprived of the very means to find the TRUTH.

 

Though at times the means to achieve this may lead to differences of view which after all is what it all means to speak one’s mind.  There is already protection in British law to curb those who wish to encourage violence. Affray and disorder. When others put this basic right of comment under threat then who is there to defend the Principle of Free Speech.]

*          *        *

We all have a Right

to

Freedom of Speech

 

Ken Livingstone should not apologise.  He may not be everyone’s cup of tea, certainly not mine, but the issue has now become one of freedom of speech.  The possibility that a government-appointed body could suspend him from office is one of the most outrageous things I have ever heard.

What he said to an Evening Standard reporter was something no gentleman would say.  But so what?   Politics, local or national, has never been distinguished by gentlemanly behaviour and never will be.   Newspapers can play it rough, too.  Both sides expect to give and take hard knocks.

 The real villain of the piece is an item of legislation entitled-soporifically-The Local Authorities (Model Code of Conduct)  (England) Order 2001.  Under ‘General Obligations’, we find the astonishing subsection, which says that councillors ‘must treat others with respect’.

Note the word ‘must’- not ‘should’ or ‘would be wise to’ or ‘wouldn’t be nice if all councillors were to’.  No, politeness is mandatory.

Consider also the ludicrous word  ‘others’, not voters, officials, fellow councillors or anything so narrow. ‘Others’ can mean anyone on the planet, from David Beckham to the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

How on earth, you may wonder, did this preposterous threat to free speech creep in?  It seems that when the legislation in question was introduced, the Conservatives concentrated their fire on the excessive regulation of parish councils, which was then being established.

The Tory promise was that, if it returned to power they would abolish the bureaucratic Standards Board for England (SBE)_ a collection of nonentities chosen by the Government-and leave sorting out of councillors’ problems about conflicts of interest and the like to the Local Government Ombudsman.

The Opposition made no move to oppose the wretched 2001 Order when it came along-no protests, not even a demand for a vote.

This sinister threat of censorship, which should be fought to the last ditch, passed on a nod, leaving the SBE [Standards Board for England] with the power to bar someone from office for up to five years for breaching the code.

The matter of Livingstone’s words has been referred to the SBE by the Board of Deputies of British Jews, a disgraceful move.  It does British Jewry’s reputation no good to have the Deputies leading a campaign against freedom of speech.

Livingstone’s remark about a reporter behaving like a concentration camp guard has, also absurdly been dubbed ‘racist’.

It may have played harshly on the target’s sensitivities, but by no stretch of the imagination did it belittle or attack a race.

The only thing this sort of exaggeration shows is how far the rot of ‘anti-racism’ has taken us.  We are becoming like the U.S. where the obsession about ‘race’ has reached the proportions of a national mania.

 

No doubt, we shall hear the commonplace retort from those accused of trying to curb free speech that of course they are all in favour of freedom, except where it is abused.  This is nonsensical view.

A Freedom, which cannot be abused, is not worth having.

The threat to Livingstone comes in the wake of another threat to free speech in the Government’s new legislation to ban remarks, which stir up religious hatred.  Freedom of speech, if it means what it says, involves the right:

To Irritate

 

Annoy

 

Dismay

 

And Shock

 

Anyone who Listens.

The only sensible limitation should be on speech designed to lead to violence, affray or disorder.  But that has always been enshrined in British law anyway.

I can’t help recalling from my youth, in relation to this whole issue, the harmless joke in one of those monologues wonderfully recited by [that great entertainer and loveable gentleman] Stanley Holloway-the Lion and Albert, and all the rest.

 As some readers may remember’ one explained how the barons of old descended on King John when he was having tea’ on Runningmede Island in t’Thames’ and made him sign the Magna Carta…’but his writing in places was sticky and thick through dipping his pen in the jam’.

 

The verse concludes:

 

‘In England today we can do what we like

So long as we do what we’re told’

 

How I laughed then, I would not have believed that this joke could one day be transmuted to:

‘And that is why we can talk as we like

So long as we talk as we’re told.’

A final touch of absurdity is added by the claim that Livingstone’s remark may jeopardise London’s attempt to host the Olympic Games.  If it did, it would be one good outcome.  The cost, the upset, the dislocation, the sheer waste of effort if London is chosen is too appalling to contemplate.

 

But if his comment really threatened London’s Olympic bid, it would show what a silly solemn people make up the International Olympic Committee.

 

It might have been a nice thing if Livingstone had originally apologised for having been gratuitously rude.  But the issue has gone beyond that now.  For him to retreat in the face of a threat to freedom of speech is in no one’s interest.

 

Andrew.Alexander@dailymail.co.uk

                          

 

THE DEATH OF ANDREW ALEXANDER WAS A GRIEVOUS LOSS FOR A TRUE DEMOCRACY-HE WILL BE MISSED BUT NEVER FORGOTTEN.

R I P

 

PATRIOT AND TRUTH SEEKER

 

ON LIBERTY OF SPEECH

A Great Poet, a Puritan Parliamentarian, and Secretary to Oliver Cromwell – John Milton, during the Civil War wrote the following lines on Freedom of expression: -

 ‘ Give me liberty to know, to utter, and to argue freely according to conscience, above all liberties.  Though all the winds of doctrine were let loose to play upon the earth, so Truth be in the field, we do injuriously to misjudge her strength.

Let her and Falsehood grapple!

Who ever knew Truth put to the worse in a free and open encounter?

Who knows not that Truth is strong next to the Almighty

 

 MAGNA CARTA

 

FEBRUARY 2005

*          *          *

[Fonts altered-bolding &underlining used-comments in brackets]

 

H.F. 1325.

 

NEW AGE

OF

 INTOLERANCE

 

A.N. WILSON on the new dark age of intolerance: You must believe in gay marriage, you can't question abortion and as for transgender rights...

By A.n. Wilson For The Daily Mail

 September 30- 2017

The great French writer Voltaire famously said: 'I disapprove of what you say and would defend to the death your right to say it'. In this way, he encapsulated what it meant to be an enlightened human being — someone prepared to consider all points of view.

But in recent years the principle of freedom of speech, sacred since Voltaire's 18th century, has been lost, and this is surely one of the most sinister features of our times. It is as if we are entering a new Dark Age of Intolerance.

The irony is that this intolerance has come about as a result of what were initially good intentions. One of the things which makes me happy as I grow older is the thought that during my lifetime we have all tried to become a kinder society.

When I was a boy and a young man, for example, racist jokes were the norm on radio and TV. Now they would be unthinkable. Mockery of homosexuals, and the equation of being gay with being limp-wristed and camp, were absolute norms of comedy when I was growing up. Now no longer.

Such jokes have gone the way of boarding-houses which used to put 'NO BLACKS. NO DOGS. NO IRISH in the window'. Obviously, all civilised people feel pleased by this.

But somehow those initial good intentions — to be kinder to and more tolerant of others — have morphed into a political correctness that has had the very opposite effect.

Two notorious recent examples of this concerned the treatment of a Christian baker in Northern Ireland, and some Christian bed and breakfast owners in Berkshire. The baker had not wanted to make a wedding cake for a gay couple who were getting married. The B&B owners had refused to let a gay couple share the same room in their establishment. In each case they were successfully sued for unlawful discrimination.

Now, a gay activist would no doubt say this was a good thing, arguing that the baker and bed and breakfast owners' behaviour was comparable to the racism of the past. Yet this is surely getting things wholly out of proportion.

The baker was not persecuting homosexuals, as Hitler did. He was not saying they should be put in prison, as all Home Secretaries in Britain did until the Sixties. He was merely saying that, as a Christian, he thought marriage should be between a man and a woman, and that two chaps tying the knot were doing something rather different, which is contrary to traditional Christian teaching.

Whatever you think about this matter, the Northern Irish baker and the B&B couple were merely holding on to Christian beliefs.

I don't happen to share their views myself, and think that if two people are rash enough to promise to live together for the rest of their lives, good luck to them, whether they are gay, straight, trans or anything else. But surely you can understand both sides of this dilemma, can't you?

Well, the answer, more and more in our intolerant society, is 'No'. My concern here is not about the rights and wrongs of gay marriage, transgender rights, our colonial history, or any of the other emotive issues that are subject to endless debate in the modern age.

It is about freedom of thought and speech; freedom to disagree in a liberal society; freedom to have thoughts which are different from the current orthodoxy.

What began as our very decent desire not to be nasty to those of a different ethnicity, or sexual proclivity, from ourselves, has turned into a world as intolerant as monkish Christianity in the days of the Dark Ages, when any freedom of thought is questioned.

Tim Farron, leader of the Lib Dems during the General Election, was asked repeatedly about his views on gay marriage. As a fairly old-fashioned Christian, he did not believe it was possible — marriage should be between a man and a woman.

As the leader of a modern political party, he knew that it would be political death to admit this. He was finally forced to resign.

This was a signal to the world that if you want to succeed in modern politics, it is simply not allowed to hold views which, until a very short time ago, were the consensus among the great majority of people in the Western world.

I use the words 'not allowed' advisedly. What is sinister about living in the new Dark Ages, however, is that it is by no means clear who is doing the allowing and not allowing. In Mao's China, it was obvious: thought crimes were ideas which contradicted the supreme leader.

In Britain today, however, it seems an army of self-appointed censors — from internet trolls to angry students, lobby groups, town hall officials, craven politicians and lawyers and Establishment figures, as well as a host of other sanctimonious and often bilious busy-bodies — have taken it upon themselves to police what we can and cannot think or say.

Not believing in abortion, like not believing in gay marriage, is now, unquestionably, a thought crime. It was hardly surprising that the Tory MP Jacob Rees-Mogg recently said he did not believe in abortion, because he is a man of conviction as well as a Roman Catholic, and this is the teaching of his Church. Yet his view was treated with incredulity and disdain by everyone from trolls and women's groups to the higher echelons of the political Establishment.

As in the case of abortion, debate is no longer allowed on transgender issues. There was a BBC2 Horizon Programme last Tuesday night called Being Transgender. The close-up shots of transgender surgery in a Californian hospital will not easily leave the mind.

We met a number of nice people who had decided for one reason or another that they were not the gender which they had once supposed. They were all undergoing some form of transformative medical treatment, either taking hormones or having surgery.

What made the programme strange as a piece of journalism was the fact that it did not contain one dissenting voice. Not one psychiatrist or doctor who said they doubted the wisdom of some of these procedures, especially in the very young.

Still less was there anyone like the redoubtable feminist and academic Dr Germaine Greer who once expressed her view that a man did not become a woman just because he had undergone transgender surgery — and was, as a result, decried from the rooftops with everything from petitions launched to stop her from speaking at university campuses to death threats.

Dr Greer had also been bold enough to say 'a great many women' shared her view, which is obviously true — a great many women do not think that transgender people have really changed sex. What has changed is that it is no longer permitted to say so.

A friend of mine who likes bathing in the women's pond on Hampstead Heath in London says that at least one person now uses the female changing rooms who is obviously in a stage of transition from man to woman, and is simply a hairy man wearing lipstick.

However uncomfortable this makes the women feel, they know that they cannot say anything.

There was an ugly incident lately at Hyde Park's Speakers' Corner, which used to be the place where anyone could go and stand on a soap-box and hold any opinion they liked.

Speakers' Corner was a symbol of British Freedom of Speech. As a schoolboy, I had a Jewish friend whose grandfather used to take us there to listen to people proclaiming that the earth was flat, preachers praising Hitler, Stalin, and others saying whatever they liked. It was the freedom to do so, said the old man who had escaped Hitler's Germany, which made the very air of Britain so refreshing to him.

What would he have thought had he witnessed the scene earlier this month at Speakers' Corner when a 60-year-old woman called Maria was smacked in the face, allegedly by a transgender fanatic, while listening to a talk on planned reforms to the Gender Recognition Act. Reforms which would allow men to 'self-identify' as female, and enter women's changing rooms or refuges unchallenged.

For Maria, as for the intimidated women of Hampstead swimming pool, and for Germaine Greer, it is by no means clear that transgender people have changed their sex.

Transgender activists have labelled women like Maria TERFS — Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists. When news of the assault on her reached the internet — ie instantaneously — the trolls began baying, like the bloodthirsty mob during the guillotine-executions of the French Revolution. 'Burn in a fire, TERF'. 'I want to f*** some TERFS up, they are no better than fascists'.

The use of the word 'fascist' is commonplace in our new Dark Age for anyone with whom you happen to disagree. You hear it all the time in the Brexit arguments which rage all around us and which I dread. As it happens, I voted Remain. But I do not regard Brexiteers as 'fascists', and many of their arguments — wanting to reclaim the power to make our own laws and control our own borders — are evidently sensible.

Yet I have lost count of the number of times I have heard Remainers say that Brexiteers are fascists. As a matter of historical fact, many of the keenest supporters of a united European superstate were actual fascists.

The only British politician who campaigned on the ticket of Europe A Nation during the Fifties was Sir Oswald Mosley who was leader of the British Union of Fascists. But then, today's PC censors don't let facts get in their way of bigotry.

Branding anyone you disagree with a fascist; hitting people in the face; tweeting and blogging abuse behind the cowardly anonymity of the internet — these are the ugly weapons used to stifle any sort of debate. And it is often in the very places where ideas should be exchanged and examined that the bigotry is at its worst: our universities.

This week on the Radio 4's Today programme, we heard James Caspian, a quietly-spoken, kindly psychotherapist, describing what has become a cause celebre at Bath Spa University.

He has been working for some years with people who for one reason or another have begun the process of gender-transition, and then come to regret it.

Caspian is evidently not a judgmental man. He wanted to write a thesis on this subject from a sympathetic and dispassionate point of view.

What makes people feel so uncomfortable with their own apparent gender that they wish to undergo painful and invasive surgery to change it? What makes people then come to reassess their first idea? These are surely legitimate questions about a subject many of us can't quite comprehend.

I have two friends who started out as men, and decided in mid-life that they were really women, or wanted to become women, which is what they have done. I do not really understand what has happened to them, even though they have tried to explain it to me.

Surely a man like James Caspian, who has worked with transgender men and women, should be encouraged by a university to explain this area of medicine or psychology?

But no. The university, having initially approved of his idea for a thesis, then turned down his application. 'The fundamental reason given was that it might cause criticism of the research on social media, and criticism of the research would be criticism of the university,' he told Radio 4 listeners. 'They also added it's better not to offend people.'

This is all of a piece with students at Oxford wanting to pull down the statue of 19th century imperialist Cecil Rhodes from his old college, Oriel, on the grounds that he was racist.

Rather than having a reasoned debate weighing the evils of racist colonialism against Rhodes's benevolence, the student at the forefront of the movement — who had actually accepted a £40,000 Rhodes scholarship funded by the fortune the colonialist gave to Oxford — wanted to pull down the statue.

This is the same attitude of mind as that which led monks in the Dark Ages to destroy the statues of pagan gods and goddesses, or the Taliban to do the same to age-old Buddhist artefacts.

Reason, debate, seeing more than one side to an argument, surely these are the foundations of all that has fashioned the great values of the West since the Enlightenment started in the 18th century with an explosion of new ideas in science, philosophy, literature, and modern rational thought that ushered in the Age of Reason.

Realising that human actions and ideas are often mixtures of good and bad — isn't this what it means to have a grown-up mind? Surely we should be allowed to discuss matters without being accused of thought crime?

In universities, as at Speakers' Corner and in the public at large, there used to be the robust sense that sticks and stones may break our bones but words can never hurt us. Now, the 'hurt-feelings' card is regularly played to stifle any debate.

Little by little, we are allowing the Dark Ages of intolerance to come again. We should not be letting this happen.

We should be able to say: 'We disapprove of your views — on Europe, on Transgender Issues, on Islam, on absolutely anything, but we defend to the death your right to express them'.


 

Full article

 Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-4935418/A-N-WILSON-new-dark-age-intolerance.html#ixzz4uAFieZ6T
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

[COMMENTS-HIGHLIGHTING - ARE OURS!]

 

SEPTEMBER 30-2017

H.F.1329

 

WHY I WANT

OUT OF THE EU

 

I want out because I fear that our

NATIONAL IDENTITY

OUR WAY OF LIFE

and tradition of liberal democracy are under

THREAT

from the EU's rules on the

FREE MOVEMENT of PEOPLE

and its

INSANE

HUMAN RIGHTS REGIME

I WANT OUT

because I believe that

BRUSSEL'S

attempts to impose

UNIFORMITY

on hugely diverse peoples are holding economies back, destroying livelihoods and breeding dangerous ill-feelings between

NATIONS.

I WANT OUT

so that we can regain the right to elect those who make our laws-and to

DISMISS THEM IF THEY FAIL US

I'm sick of seeing my country infantilised by an

UNSACKABLE NANNY STATE.

IN A WORD

I WANT OUT BECAUSE I WANT

BRITAIN

[ENGLAND]

TO BE FREE

*

Tom Utley for the Daily Mail

[We couldn't have put it better-Thank you!- Tom Utley.

TOM UTLEY: Oh dear. Is the fact my wife was a bus ... - Daily Mail-Friday, June 3,2016l

 

H.F.805
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

A REMINDER!

WHAT YOU ARE ESCAPING FROM SINCE TRAITORS IN YOUR PARLIAMENT SIGNED YOUR COUNTRY OF ENGLAND

AWAY IN

1972

AND IN LATER TREATIES UNTIL YOU SPOKE YOUR MIND ON

 JUNE 23-2016

 A DATE IN HISTORY WHICH WILL BE ALWAYS REMEMBERED

BY ALL TRUE ENGLISHMEN.

 

*  *  *

HOW IT CAME ABOUT!

Mr Macmillan and 1961

Mr Heath and 1970

Mrs Thatcher and 1985

From Major to Blair, Maastricht to Nice

The Price We Have PAid

 

*  *  *

 

H.F.1100 FREEDOM AWAITS
 
NEW SERIES

*

WHY WE VOTED TO LEAVE

THE

UNDEMOCRATIC-UNACCOUNTABLE-COLLECTIVIST-CORRUPT-WASTEFUL-GODLESS

SO-CALLED

EUROPEAN UNION

[WE WILL SELECT INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM AUTHORITIVE SOURCES CONCERNING THE ILLEGALITY OF THE EU TREATIES AND THOSE WHO LIED FOR PERSONAL GAIN AND POWER AND OTHER SUBSTANTIATED INFORMATION COLLECTED OVER THE 20 YEARS SINCE WE COMMENCED OUR BULLETIN FILE AFTER STANDING FOR ELECTION IN THE 1997 GENERAL ELECTION AND THE 1999 EUROPEAN ELECTION. MANY WHO VOTED TO REMAIN IN THE EU WOULD SURELY HAVE RECONSIDERED IF THEY HAD BEEN DISINTERESTED OBSERVERS-DECIDING ON THE FACTS AND PUTTING NATIONAL INTERESTS  OF FREEDOM  and NATIONHOOD OUTLINED IN MAGNA CARTA AND OTHER PRIZED DOCUMENTS HELD IN TRUST-SACRED HEIRLOOMS - FOR FUTURE GENERATIONS, BEFORE THEIR OWN COMFORT ZONE.  FORTUNATELY, THE GODS, WERE WITH ENGLAND-AND THE SOON RETURN OF

 A FREE LAND AND FREE PEOPLE.

OUR ENSLAVEMENT IN 1972 INTO HITLER'S PLAN FOR GERMAN EXPANSION AND POWER IN PEACE-TIME EUROPE WILL SOON BE AT AN END. AS A UNITED PEOPLE IT WILL BE SOONER THAN LATER. LET US WORK TOGETHER AS  AN EXAMPLE TO OTHER ONCE FREE PEOPLES WITHIN THE CAPTIVE EU WHO WILL SURELY FOLLOW. IF THE SHIP IS NOT ON AN EVEN KEEL IT CANNOT HELP OTHERS WHO WILL NEED OUR STURDY STEADY HAND.

'England has saved herself by her exertions; and will, as I trust, save Europe by her example.'

William Pitt.

 [Speech, 9th Nov, after Nelson's VICTORY at THE Battle of Trafalgar-with the destruction of the French and Spanish Fleets-Oct 21-1805]

MARCH 1-2017

 
A FAMILIAR WARNING FROM HISTORY - WE MUST NOT IGNORE!

'It is quite true that, in my opinion the waters which we have to navigate are likely to be stormy, and that the anti-social ferments within the nation are unusually malignant. But just a a healthy body generates anti-toxins to combat any virulent infection, so our nation

ENGLAND

 may be vigorous enough to neutralize the poisons which now threaten our civilization with death. Nothing but good can be done by calling attention to perils which really exist, and which may easily escape due attention amid the bottomless insincerity of modern politics and political journalism.

DANGERS OF PREDICTION

However , the dangers of prediction have been so often illustrated that those who are naturally disposed to optimism may be excused for rejecting the anticipations of coming CALAMITY, which  are now  [as in 2016/7] widely felt, though not so often expressed.

In the Victorian age we had  our profits of woe [and doom], who vociferated warnings about "shooting Niagara" when the country was more prosperous than it had ever been before. [As yet again in 2016/7].

Even on the morrow of our victory in 1815, " as soon as Waterloo was fought," says Sir Walter Besant, "the continental professors, historians, and others began with one accord to prophesy the approaching downfall of Great Britain," which they liked to compare with Carthage.

They emphasised the condition of Ireland, the decay of trade, our huge debt, our wasteful expenditure, our corrupting poor laws, the ignorance and drunkenness of the masses. Nor was this pessimistic forecast confined to our jealous neighbours.  In December 1816, the Common Council of the City of London addressed the Prince Regent as follows:

" Distress and misery are no longer limited to one portion of the Empire, and under their irresistible pressure the commercial, agricultural, and manufacturing interests are rapidly sinking.   We can ,Sir no longer support out of our dilapidated resources the overwhelming load of taxation.  Our grievances are the natural result of rash and ruinous wars, unjustly commenced and pertinaciously persisted in, where no rational object was to be attained; of immense subsidies to foreign Powers to defend their own territories  or to commit aggressions on those of our neighbours;  of a delusive paper currency; of an unconstitutional and unprecedented military force in time of peace;   of the unexampled and increasing magnitude of the Civil List ;  of the enormous sums paid for unmerited pensions and sinecures;   and of a long course of the most lavish and improvident expenditure of the public money throughout every branch of Government."

In December 1816, the Common Council of the City of London addressed the Prince Regent with the above statement.

Sounds familiar in 2017-Don't you think?

 

[EPILOGUE-William Ralph Inge -Dean of St Pauls ENGLAND-1938] -(1860-1954)

 

We endorse the final paragraph which states:

 

" I have laid bare my hopes and fears for the country I love.  This much I can avow, that never, even when the storm clouds appear blackest, have I been tempted to wish that I was other than an Englishman."

*

[We appear to have learned NOTHING! since this speech  in 1816 as the multiple evils are still with us today August 6, 2011. The reason is OBVIOUS! because the SAME! once invisible GLOBAL CONSPIRATORS are  STILL in CHARGE! and  are now in the OPEN!

If the ECONOMY has a DISEASE and FAILS to take the CORRECT MEDICINE then the END RESULT is OBVIOUS.

TOTAL CHAOS!

*

WHY DO WE TRUST THESES DISCREDITED DOOM-MONGERS?

By Alex Brummer - City Editor-Daily Mail-Monday, August 8,2011

 

 [EXTRACT]

...and the answer is that the CREDIT RATING AGENCIES are now seen as the ONLY arbiters prepared to spell out just how SERIOUS the GLOBAL DEBT CRISIS really IS.... After all, the very same AGENCIES were still providing the US. energy company ENRON with TOP RATING up to THREE DAYS before IT COLLAPSED in the world's BIGGEST INDUSTRIAL BANKRUPTCY...  They also gave a CLEAN BILL of HEALTH to FANNIE MAE and FREDDIE MAC -semi-official, but privately owned U. S bodies set up to expand the HOME OWNERSHIP and the availability of MORTGAGES-despite WARNINGS from the LEGENDARY American investor -WARREN BUFFETT -THAT they were BROKE... S&P's downgrade may look like a poke in the eye for the UNITED STATES. But with luck, it could in the end DAMAGE the FUTURE CREDIBILITY of the CREDIT-RATING AGENCIES - they are in MORE URGENT NEED of REFORM than AMERICA.

 

 

THE AMERICAN DREAM IS OVER!

 

h

 

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS almost BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/ ****    REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****    THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****       FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/  ****   A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?     **** GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER/  ****    A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/  ****   THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/   WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/  ****   GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/ ****   50 YEARS OF SURRENDER***AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED.

DAVID CAMERON'S PLAN TO CLAW BACK POWERS FROM EU ARE DOOMED SAYS EU CHIEF IN OCTOBER-2013

*

THE HISTORY OF THE SATANIC COLLECTIVIST EUROPEAN UNION

***

HITLER'S+PLAN+FOR+A+

GERMAN+CONTROLLED

+EUROPEAN+UNION

***

TREASON

***

 

 

 

ENGLAND

 

 Home Rule for Scotland WHY NOTHOME RULE for ENGLAND?**** BOTH SIDES OF THE BORDER BACK SCOTS INDEPENDENCE****A DISUNITED KINGDOM****NEW LABOUR HAS DESTROYED THE UNION- SO USE THE WORDS ENGLAND AND ENGLISH-NOT BRITISH****NEW LABOUR'S LEGACY-THE GHETTOSIZATION OF ENGLAND****UNLESS WE TAKE CONTROL OF OUR LIVES WE WILL LOSE OUR FREEDOM AND IDENTITY****.OUR PAST IS EMBEDDED IN OUR NATIONAL CONSCIOUSNESS -IT ASKS WERE WE CAME FROM AND WHO WE ARE .****.THE ENGLISH WITH OTHER GERMANIC TRIBES CAME TO BRITAIN OVER YEARS AGO - THE STREAM OF TEUTONIC INFLUENCE  HAS DECIDED THE FUTURE OF EUROPE****THE SOUL OF ENGLAND PT 1/ ****  THE SOUL OF ENGLAND PT 2/ ****    WHY ARE WE ENGLISH MADE TO FEEL GUILTY/****  DON'T LET THEM DESTROY OUR IDENTITY/ ****   NOR SHALL MY SWORD/****  WHY CAN'T WE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE ENGLISH-PT1-/ ****  WHY CAN'T WE HAVE A RIGHT TO BE ENGLISH-PT2/****   ENGLAND IS WHERE THE MAJORITY VIEWS ARE IGNORED AND MINORITIES RULE AT THEIR EXPENSE IN POLITICALLY -CORRECT BROWNDOM/****    ALFRED - CHRISTIAN KING OF THE ENGLISH-PT1- /****   ALFRED - CHRISTIAN KING OF THE ENGLISH-PT2/****    ENGLISHMEN AS OTHERS SEE US BEYOND OUR ONCE OAK WALL./****   WHY OUR ENGLISH SELF-GOVERNMENT IS UNIQUE IN EUROPE AND THE WORLD****.ENGLAND ARISE! - TODAY WE CLAIM OUR RIGHT OF SELF-DETERMINATION/ ****  KISS GOOD BYE TO YOUR SOVEREIGNTY AND COUNTRY / ****  THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED? **** ST GEORGE'S DAY-ENGLAND'S DAY/**** ST GEORGE'S DAY - 23APRIL - RAISE A FLAG ONSHAKESPEARE'S' BIRTHDAY****NAZI SPY RING REVEALED BY THE MASTER OF BALLIOL COLLEGE IN 1938 . IT INCLUDED THE LATE EX PRIME MINISTER EDWARD HEATH AND MINISTERS GEOFFREY RIPPON AND ROY JENKINS.* * * *AN OBITUARY TO YOUR COUNTRY WHICH NEED NOT HAVE HAPPENED****   EU WIPES ENGLAND OFF THE MAP**** THE ENGLISH DID NOT MOVE THEMSELVES SO ARE NOW SLAVES IN A CONCENTRATION CAMP EUROPE****"...What kind of people do they think we are?" by WINSTON CHURCHILL****THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND BY WINSTON CHURCHILL.

 For more details go to :http://eutruth.org.uk

 

‘THE MAKING OF THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION’****

OUR CONSTITUTION OF OVER A THOUSAND YEARS – WHY DOES BLAIR MEAN TO DESTROY IT?****

OUR DISCREDITED DEMOCRACY OR IRAQ DICTATORSHIP****OUR LOYALTY TO OUR INSTITUTIONS AND COUNTRY?****Liberties of Parliament- Birthright of Subjects of England.****LOSS of TRUST in NEW LABOUR****New England’s Tears for Old England’s fears?****The House of Commons has a need of members dedicated to their Country-not time wasters.****English Constitution, by it they lived, for it they died****CABINET GOVERNMENT IS NOW A DICTATORSHIP****MESSAGE FROM AUSTRALIA SUPPORTS THE CROWN****THE FINAL BETRAYAL - Part 1-5****House of Lords legal Whistleblower – Speaks Out in Defence of OUR  Law & Constitution****SAY ‘NO’ TO EUROPE! – SAYS RODNEY ATKINSON****The Rotten Heart of Europe - by Bernard Connolly-Part 1-5****THE CLUB IS MIGHTIER THAN THE HANDBAG****WHY you should Vote at Elections to protect YOUR Democracy****The sole legitimate function of Government- is to Protect The Rights of its Citizens****So You Thought You Were Free****A DREAM TO REMEMBER- NEW LABOUR POLICY -2004?****NO SUPPORT IN HOUSE OF LORDS FOR INQUIRY INTO EU BY TORY WHIP**** Could England Survive Outside The EU?  -YES!****COST OF DEVOLUTION –N’IRELAND, SCOTLAND AND WALES LONDON +BRUSSELS****European Arrest Warrant – What Price Our Freedom Now?****Government Obsession With Spending Itself out of Trouble**** Bill of Rights of 1688 –Outlaws European Constitution****OUR UNREPRESENTATIVE VOTING SYSTEM= BREEDS TREASON -
BETRAYAL OF COUNTRY****Impeachment of Ministers of the Crown – Why Now?****New European Constitution – Concessions Fudge.****The Judiciary – A Defence of English Freedom?****New European Constitution – A ‘Bridge’ Too Far?**** Our way forward to Kinship in Liberty****OUR HISTORIC HOUSE OF LORDS MUST REMAIN – TO PREVENT TYRANNY****  Scottish Independence – Have No need of Union flag and Anthem****Misuse of Prerogative Powers by Tony Blair****A BETRAYAL OF OUR NATION –CONSPIRATORS NAME  PARTS 1-5****

 

 

H.F.1099 FREEDOM AWAITS
 
 A MATTER OF FACT!

On October 11-2017 15 months after the PEOPLE had voted to LEAVE the EU  the Daily Mail in its COMMENT column stated the FOLLOWING:

'YES, the Mail would have preferred a quicker and cleaner BREXIT but how foolish of Eurosceptic MPs to kick up a fuss about the planned TWO-YEAR TRANSITION PERIOD. After 45 years of subjection to EUROPEAN JUDGES, another couple will be a mere blink in HISTORY'S EYE. The great thing is that BREXIT is GOING AHEAD and barring REMOANER'S TREACHERY, SEPARATION WILL BE COMPLETE BEFORE THE NEXT ELECTION.'

STATEMENT!

[We and no doubt the majority who voted to LEAVE the EU, knowing the following true facts will no doubt NOT AGREE! with that COMMENT.

 What is FORGOTTEN is the MANNER in which the PEOPLE were DECEIVED by the TORY GOVERNMENT in 1972 and the LEGAL consequences of THEIR ILLEGAL ACTIONS as clearly indicated in numerous BULLETINS on our EDP website over the past 12 years. To call our DEPARTURE from the EU  a DIVORCE is a PERVERSION of the FACTS!  - A MARRIAGE if we are to call it THAT is INVALID if its DOCUMENTATION is  FALSE or obtained by BRIBERY and /or FRAUD.

  NO-MARRIAGE-NO CONTRACT-NO COMPENSATION

FOR THE EU TO EXPECT A GOLDEN HANDSHAKE UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES IS TO REWARD THEM FOR THE WICKED; ATROCIOUS; DREADFUL; INFAMOUS; OUTRAGEOUS; PERVERSE; SINISTER; VILLAINOUS; EVIL; AND WASTEFUL CONDUCT OF MANY POLITICIANS WITHIN THE EU, SOME AS MENTIONED BELOW.

*

 

Below we have shown details of the 1969 Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties and other relevant information which will clearly show that the UK could EXIT THE EU in MONTHS NOT YEARS. Obviously, there has been a COVER-UP of MAJOR PROPORTIONS by the POLITICAL CLASS in GENERAL because how can one explain the SILENCE! even FROM our FREE PRESS the FOURTH ESTATE in the land which we look too to PROTECT OUR  over a thousand year ENGLISH  RIGHTS  and LIBERTIES . Possibly the reason could be that there would be a REVOLUTION if the PEOPLE knew the TRUE FACTS?

 Added OCTOBER 11-2017

IN JULY 2016 AFTER THE SUCCESSFUL BREXIT VOTE WE ARE TOLD BY OUR NEW PRIME MINISTER MRS MAY THAT IT COULD BE YEARS BEFORE WE ARE FREE OF THE CORRUPT-_COLLECTIVIST- UNDEMOCRATIC EU WHICH DEVOURS MILLIONS OF OUR NEEDED POUNDS EVERY DAY OF THE YEAR. 

OUR MESSAGE TO FRAU MERKEL AND HER ROBBER BAND

IS

'GO TO HELL'

BUT

MRS MAY APPEARS TO HAVE A DIFFERENT MESSAGE EVEN THOUGH HER OWN WORDS WERE

"BREXIT MEANS BREXIT.

The following article was put on our website in October,2005 shortly after we received this most revealing information from

CHRISTOPHER STORY

 WHO GAVE HIS LIFE

FOR

TRUTH AND PATRIOTISM

 

FROM

INTERNATIONAL CURRENCY REVIEW-

SEPTEMBER-2005

*

 

EUROPEAN PAYROLA SYSTEM

 

THE BUDGET FOR THE EUROPEAN CONSTITUTION WAS $5.0 BILLION

 

An account held by Credit Suisse in Zurich, labelled the ‘SBC’ Charcol Account, held a total of some $470 billion when last reviewed by sources.  These funds were originally derived from Nazi funds and assets, are routinely used to pay top politicians and officials to sign successive European Collective treaties- the latest being the so-called ‘European Constitution’.

The budget set aside from the ‘SBC’Charcol Account and to be distributed from the Credit Suisse disbursement account for the latest ‘update’ of the ‘rolling  European Collective Treaty’ was $5.0billion- $2.5 billion being payable in Euros to the participants from the 25 EU countries.

On the finalisation of the Intergovernmental Conference (IGC), which framed the text of the Treaty, and a further $2.5 billion payable in Euros on ratification.  This tranche is currently the subject of much dissension.

For each national cadre of key negotiator, therefore, the total set aside  was $100 million per tranche.  The chief negotiators of each EU country, plus selected officials were each to be paid from the national pot of $ 100 million, whish equates to roughly $75 million per corrupted European Union country.

Silvio Berlusconi, the Italian Prime Minister, was allegedly initially offered $50 million.  being an extremely wealthy man, he departed for the weekend in question in July 2004, following conclusion of the IGC, having indicated to those concerned that he was insulted by such a figure, and that $100million would be nearer the mark.  In the event, following an allowance for his wife, he was allegedly paid $75 million, according to sources.

Tony Blair allegedly received $75 million, which was paid into an offshore bank account held in Belize, the former British Honduras.  There, official eyebrows were naturally raised at the Central bank of Belize, where we notice that all of a sudden, the official reserves of foreign exchange jumped from $49.72 million in February 2005, to $164.53 million in March [2005]

Since the corrupt payment ‘due’ at the completion of the IGC will have been remitted in or about July 2004, this may suggest that the funds have subsequently (in March 2005) been taken into the foreign exchange reserves of the local central bank, so that their actual ownership can be disguised, a ‘new form’ of money-laundering: through a central bank!

 

WE ARE RELIABLY ADVISED THAT THIS CORRUPT PAYOLA SYSTEM IS THE NORM.

 

This means that the European Union’s Treaties

 are null and void,

as they have been obtained by fraud. 

 

That applies to the original EU Accession Treaty signed on behalf of the UK Government by [Nazi] agents Edward Heath and Geoffrey Rippon, agents of German intelligence, who were both recruited at Balliol College Oxford as discussed in this analysis.

 

It applies also to the Maastricht Treaty, signed by

 

John Major

 

Who allegedly received at least one corrupt payment for his services.  And it applies to the latest fiasco of the EU Collective.

 

THESE CORRUPT PAYOLA PAYMENTS

ARE ‘NON-REFUNDABLE’.

 

The second tranches of  $100 Million per country for the [New European Constitution] new treaty are payable on ratification, but following their referenda, the Netherlands and France cannot ratify.

 

*          *

International Currency Review

 

(Vol 30- No 4)

*

 

 

www.worldreports.org

 

*          *          *

 

[Font altered-bolding & underlining used –comments

in brackets]

 

OCT/05

 

THE VIENNA TREATY CONVENTION

Under the 1969 Vienna Convention on the

Law of Treaties

there are two key provisions which authorize a signatory power to abrogate a bilateral or multilateral treaty unilaterally, without giving the stipulated notice:

WHERE corruption has been demonstrated in respect of procuring the

TREATY

in the first place, or in respect of any dimension of its implementation.

AS the next section will show, the European Commission (EC) permits and is associated with corruption on a monumental scale, which the EU authorities have tried to cover up with declining success.

2. Where there has been a material change of circumstances.

 

A material change of circumstances has surfaced into daylight, to begin with, following the death of Sir Edward Heath. It has been revealed that he was an agent for a foreign power, accepted corrupt payments for his services, and lied to the British people concerning the nature of the geopolitical trap into which he had been instructed by his handlers to lead them - and that he did all this on behalf of a

FOREIGN POWER.

which has all along disguised its continuing Nazi orientation

As even more disturbing material change of circumstances has arisen as a consequence of the bombing of the London Underground and a bus , which took place on 7th July 2005, and the attempted explosions perpetuated two weeks later. We understand that the situation is so serious that the Civil Contingencies Secretariat has been in the process of drafting, or has drafted, legislation providing for the British Government to abrogate its putative international treaty [sic] 'obligations' towards the European Union.

ARE YOU STILL THERE MR HAGUE?

This development reflects the knowledge in certain UK intelligence circles that the attacks amounted to an

ACT of WAR

against the United Kingdom, and that the foreign powers behind this activity are ultimately controlled by the DVD from Dachau -( the same area of the World War II notorious concentration camp) which is the successor organization to the Abwehr, Nazi Germany's main external intelligence administration.

It was the Abwehr that first established , as a means of undermining British influence in the Middle East, the Muslim Brotherhood, from which ALL subsequent Islamic terror groups, without exception, originate. Al Qaeda, a descendant ultimately of the German-founded

Muslim Brotherhood,

is a controlled cut-out operation of international intelligence.

The Nazi regime and its Stalinist dialectical counterpart, were both Black Illuminati regimes. The Al Qaeda operation is an extension of the Black tradition, and is ultimately controlled, like the IRA (until very recently) by the DVD out of Dachau.

near Munich

For confirmation of the above and further information consult our bulletin board or contact

E-mail: cstory@ worldreports.org

Website:

www.worldreports.org

*

The European Union Collective: Enemy of Its Member States

EU

 

HITLER'S 1940 BLUEPRINT FOR A GERMAN DOMINATED EUROPEAN UNION  COLLECTIVE HAS ALMOST BEEN COMPLETED ****EUROPEAN UNION EXPOSED-A CRIMINALISED ORGANISATION/****  HOW HITLER'S ENABLING ACT OF 1933 WAS PASSED THROUGH YOUR WESTMINSTER PARLIAMENT BY 8 VOTES****   REVEALED AFTER HIS DEATH THAT EDWARD HEATH AN AGENT OF NAZI INTERNATIONAL AND TRAITOR TO HIS COUNTRY FOR 60 YEAR/ ****     THE TERM DVD STANDS FOR GERMAN DEFENCE AGENCY OR SECRET SERVICE/ ****      FOREIGN POWERS DIRECT OUR GOVERNMENT BY PAYOUTS/****     A TRAITOR FULL OF HONOURS FROM HIS COUNTRY-WHY?/  ****   WHAT WERE THE DARK ACTORS PLAYING GAMES WHICH THE PATRIOT DR DAVID KELLY REFERRED  -[WAS IT AN ILLUMINATI  PLAN TO USE BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS TO REDUCE THE POPULATION OF THE WORLD BY 95%?GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE ESTABLISHED IN MADRID IN 1943 BY HEINRICH HIMMLER/ ****     A PLAGUE OF TREACHERY -CORRUPTION AND SKULDUGGERY HAS TAKEN OVER ONCE PROUD DEMOCRACIES?/****     THE ENEMY IS EVERYWHERE/ ****  WARNING FROM OUR MAN IN WASHINGTON/ ****  GERMAN-NAZI-GEOPOLITICAL CENTRE/GERMANY AS  STRONGMAN OF EUROPE- GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING/ ****  A WARNING MESSAGE TO THE FREEDOM LOVING PEOPLE OF ENGLAND/****    50 YEARS OF SURRENDER/ **** BRITAIN CAN LEAVE THE EU UNILATERALLY AND CEASE PAYMENT SAYS QUEEN'S COUNSEL.****NAZI PENETRATION OF GERMANY'S POST WAR STRUCTURES****WILFUL BLINDNESS AND COWARDNESS OF POLITICIANS****AN INTERVIEW WITH FORMER SOVIET DISSIDENT VLADIMIR BUKOVSKY WARNS OF EU DICTATORSHIP.**** THE DAY A NATION STATE WAS DOOMED?****AN ABOLITION OF PARLIAMENT BILL? PART2****Former Nazi Bank Bank of International Settlements To Rule The Global Economy

OCTOBER-2005

 

 

H.F.1335/1-BREXIT MEANS BREXIT NOT SURRENDER TO HITLER'S PLANNED EU
MAR-17 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-18 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18
NOV-18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

SEP 19

OCT-19

NOV-19

 

 

 
 

SARKOSY NOW REMEMBERS HIS COUNTRY'S TRILATERAL TREATY WITH GERMANY-FRANCE.

Sarkozy slams U.S. missile shield

 

 EU PROPAGANDA MINISTRY NOW PERMITS THE SALE OF BENT BANANAS.

 

EU LEADERS LEAD WITH THEIR COMMON PURPOSE AGENDA OF CONTROL.

WE HAVE A QUESTION YOU MIGHT LIKE TO ASK MA'AM! -WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO OUR FREEDOM- CONSTITUTION AND COUNTRY?
WHY CAN'T WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO BE ENGLISH WHY NO TREATY LIMITATIONS CAN EVER RELIED ON 67% WANT POWERS RETURNED FROM THE EU THE SOUL OF ENGLAND

EU skulduggery includes political fraud by deceiving Finland into the EU Collective Membership.

A RATIFIED LISBON TREATY WILL TAKE AWAY YOUR ONCE FREE NATION STATE AND AT THE SIGNING CREATE A UNITED STATES OF EUROPE  -SUPER-STATE.

 

  IF Gordon Brown forces this EU TREATY on US, you can kiss goodbye to DEMOCRACY

by

Christopher Booker

 

TREACHERY BY A PRIME MINISTER WHO SIGNED THE LISBON TREATY BUT COULD HE NOW DITCH THE POUND?

  
WHY THE QUEEN MUST STAND UP TO BLAIR & BROWN I SAY WE MUST NOT JOIN EUROPE-MONTGOMERY WHY ARE WE ENGLISH MADE TO FEEL GUILTY? LAST DAYS OF BRITAIN

EU PROPAGANDA ATTEMPT

TO INSIST UK CUSTOMERS BE TOLD MONEY FROM THE  EUROPEAN INVESTMENT BANK

 

 

THE ORIGINS OF THE EU

The origins of what is now the

EUROPEAN UNION

 		 THE END OF THE ENGLISH

100 pages of matters you need to know NOW! 

 METRIC MARTYRS SPLENDID VICTORY  - MILLIONS OF POUNDS RETURNED BY COUNCILS OVER ILLEGAL PARKING FIASCO.
THE SPIRIT OF ENGLAND by WINSTON CHURCHILL THOUGHTS ON ST GEORGE'S DAY WHO ARE THE ENGLISH OUR QUEEN & EU CONSTITUTION THREE PARTIES HAVE MORE IN COMMON WITH EACH OTHER

Ten EU truths we must tell the public
 

[This is just a few one of many home truths from the above]

 

£4.4BILLION HAS GONE MISSING

EU ACCOUNTING HABITS HAVE COME TO ENGLAND.

 

HOW DID WE GET IN THIS MESS-HOW DID THE ABSENCE OF INFLUENCE BY THE MONARCH LEAD US ON THE ROAD TO THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR FREEDOM AND COUNTRY?

 

RIGHT OF RESISTANCE -THE CUSTOM OF THE ENGLISH PEOPLE

WAKE UP!ENGLAND
SIGNS OF THE EU POLICE STATE BRITAIN & EUROPE-THE GREAT CONSPIRACY A GERMANISED EMPIRE IN THE MAKING NAZI INTERNATIONAL IN 2007

THE DEATH OF A NATION

*

THE END OF THE ENGLISH

by

The European Superstate

by

 David Brown

[info@junepress.com]

 

THE FREEDOM TAKING EU MONSTER MAY YET FALL

*

Death knell for the euro (and the crisis that could EVEN DESTROY the EU)

by

Christopher Booker

 

IF MONETARY UNION GOES-EUROPEAN PROJECT IS UNDERMINED

*

Here are the lessons of the credit crunch - but will we learn them?

by

Simon Heffer

 

WOMEN GETS CRIMINAL RECORD FOR SELLING FRUIT AND VEG BY THE POUND
BRITAIN & EUROPE -THE CULTURE OF DECEIT by CHRISTOPHER BOOKER GERMANY AS STRONGMAN OF EUROPE 50 YEARS of SURRENDER by CHRISTOPHER BOOKER ALMOST 70% OF

BRITONS WOULD EITHER LEAVE THE EU OR LOOSER RELATIONSHIP

Latest!

AUGUST-08

TOP TOPICS

PAST TOP TOPICS

[2003-2007]

BULLETIN FILE

'ODESSA FILE'

Author supports Mr Ganley

Irish Millionaire's

'NO VOTE'

Letter to eurofacts -17th October, 2008

 

 THE END OF THE ENGLISH

BY

DAVID BROWN

INTRODUCTION

HOW IT ALL BEGAN 

HOW IT ALL FITS TOGETHER

THE RESULTANT LUNACIES

HOW WE ARE CONTROLLED

WHERE FREEDOM IS VANISHING

 ENGLAND is where the MAJORITY VIEWS are IGNORED and MINORITIES RULE at THEIR EXPENSE in POLITICALLY-CORRECT BLAIRDOM.

IT IS TIME TO FIGHT BACK

 
MAR-

17

 APR-17 MAY-17 JUN-17 JUL-17 AUG-17 SEP-17 OCT-17 NOV-17 DEC-17
JAN-

18

 FEB-18 MAR-18

APL-18

MAY-18

JUN-18

JUL-18

AUG-18

SEP-18

OCT-18
NOV-

18

DEC-18

JAN-19

FEB-19

MAR-19

APR-19

MAY-19

JUN-19

JUL-19

AUG-19

 

 		SEP 19

OCT-19

NOV-19

 

 

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 2-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 3-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 4-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 5-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-PART 6-2019

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-NEW-HOME--2019

THANK YOU FOR CALLING!

 

TOP OF PAGE

 

CLICK HERE FOR PREVIOUS FRONT PAGE-2012

MARCH-FREEDOM NOW-PART 1-2019