The Norway influence saga – what does it all mean?

Judging by the amount of people visiting this blog, EU Referendum, Witterings from Witney and The Boiling Frog; and those reading the articles and comments left on the Open Europe blog and at the Telegraph, there is a lot of interest in alternatives to EU membership.

David Cameron’s repeated claim – echoed by Tories, Lib Dems, Open Europe and a raft of media commentators – that he doesn’t think it’s right to aim for a status like Norway or Switzerland because you have to obey all the rules of the single market but you don’t have a say over what they are, has been exposed as a lie.

Over the course of several days, a small band of bloggers working independently, along with a larger number of casual commenters, have presented a raft of evidence that utterly refutes the claim and proves Cameron completely wrong. So what does it all mean? Let’s summarise it.

The reality is Norway, as a member of EFTA and part of the EEA has a veto, and has influence in shaping decision relating to the single market that even the UK doesn’t. Whether it chooses to use the veto and how it decides to shape legislative decisions is of course a matter for itself. But the influence demonstrably exists in no small measure.

The evidence is inescapable that Cameron has deliberately attempted to deceive the public, aided by the disgraceful media, as part of an establishment effort to hide workable alternatives to EU membership and pretend that outside the EU we would just have to accept whatever Brussels churns out.

For all their talk of renegotiation and repatriation of powers, the establishment wants to stay firmly inside the EU and therefore leave Brussels in overall control of the UK. They are committed to political union.

That is the issue here. The politicians are being dishonest and they have been caught out, but the media is turning a blind eye, treating the British people with cyncial contempt. The UK can not only survive outside the EU, it can thrive. The politicians, with their vested interests and with their media puppets in tow, just don’t want people to know.

About these ads

35 Responses to “The Norway influence saga – what does it all mean?”


  1. 1 Antisthenes 08/01/2013 at 5:07 pm

    “treating the British people with cynical contempt”

    And why not the bulk of the British people are contemptible as they are happy to be ignorant of the facts, non objective in their assumptions, see nothing contradictory in the lefts promises of something for nothing and accept without question what the MSM tell them.

  2. 2 Pogle's Woodsman 08/01/2013 at 5:11 pm

    Are there any Swiss or Norwegian bloggers who would be willing to have an input in all this? I suppose it’s easy for us all to comment on the stances of another nation but that particular Scandinavian country has a cultural disconnect between its own political host and the electorate.
    Norwegian Politicians would just love to get Norway fully under the umbrella, as – so far as I understand – would a significant number of Swiss politicians.

    I’m uncomfortable with assuming ‘The Swiss\Norwegians really want…’, when I’m not of that nationality. Been to Norway many, many times but I would never wish to speak for them in voting terms. (…and I’m not trying to infer that anyone is attempting to on these pages….) but it would be interesting to hear a first-hand account of how those populations manage their politicians so well – and whilst I’m certain the referendum has something to do with it, doubtless there are other phenomena at work.

    It would be interesting to work at that to see if any of those phenomena are transferable to a UK socially active sphere.

  3. 3 Clarence 08/01/2013 at 5:45 pm

    (A modified repost of something I said at EU Ref.)

    Considering all of the legislation that comes to us from way above the EU (such as UNECE, Basel, etc), a commenter at EU Ref said that “the EU is an unnecessary middle man”.

    I think it’s far worse than unnecessary. Our voice is diluted to 3.7% because the UK is not sitting at the table – the EU is there on our behalf.

    We know from other cases how damaging it is to be represented by the EU. Hugely reliant compared to the other 26 EU states on food imports from third countries (ie non-EU members), we suffer badly from discriminatory import tariffs set by the EU. So, although our government would still put tariffs on some countries’ goods when we were no longer in the EU, those tariffs would likely be far lower (because we were not keeping French farmers in mind when we set the price of the tariff).

    It’s not so much a case of “We’d get this legislation anyway if we weren’t in the EU”. It’s more like “We’d be far more influential in framing this legislation before it reached us if we weren’t in the EU.”

    Or, if the legislation were EU-derived (and not from a body above it), we could, as Richard North at EU Ref has just observed, even tell the EU to stick it: http://www.eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=83486

  4. 4 StrongUnitedKingdom 09/01/2013 at 9:43 am

    A good article with which I wholeheartedly agree. However I would like to raise a related point. In numerous AM articles I see content that is 90-100% inline with UKIP principle and policy. Yet when this point is made UKIP are denounced as (insert insult here). Why is this?

    Perhaps it is time for all like minded people, who want rid of the deceitful teams in Westminster and freedom from the EU’s collectivist catastrophe, to start focussing on the large areas of agreement and less on the irrelevancies of personalities and branding.

    Our country is in a financial and constitutional crisis. Unity under a sovereign, democratic, moderate, pro-British movement is the only successful way forward.

  5. 5 Peter S 09/01/2013 at 1:35 pm

    StrongUnitedKingdom – well said. As Richard North has acknowledged – should there be a referendum in Britain, no one will be able to campaign under a party banner. This makes the claim that it is UKIP’s sole responsibility to draw up a coherent exit strategy somewhat illogical. Meanwhile, the most able minds on this side of the debate seem more interested in attacking UKIP than knuckling down to draw together such a vital strategy.

    In this very important prelude, one is left wondering if an ‘autonomous’ mind is really cover story for a ‘secluded’ one… and what the difference might be?

  6. 6 Furor Teutonicus 09/01/2013 at 2:58 pm

    XX The reality is Norway, as a member of EFTA and part of the EEA has a veto, and has influence in shaping decision relating to the single market that even the UK doesn’t. XX

    Aye right. You murder someone in Texas, you can say all you want in court to “influence the case”, it does not stop you getting your eyballs boiled out on old sparky though, does it!

  7. 7 Autonomous Mind 09/01/2013 at 5:01 pm

    Strong United Kingdom, while your comment may warm the cockles of Peter S’ heart, why on earth should I support a party that would likely kick me out for not agreeing with the incompetent and disjointed approach of its leader?

    At a time the EUrophiles are spinning their lies out as fast as they can, Farage is focusing on grammar schools and busy kicking out the leader of Young Independence for not agreeing with the party line on gay marriage and for talking sense on back to front electoral focus.

    Look at the UKIP website and find me any articles or comment about Cameron and Open Europe’s recent lies about EFTA member influence over EU legislation and their deceit about having to accept all laws handed down from the EU. Find me any rebuttal of it.

    UKIP is supposed to be THE go to party when it comes to fighting for UK independence, so where are they? Yet you want me to compromise my ability to advocate a clear thought through strategy for UK exit from the EU and my ability to challenge europhile deception and media complicity, to throw my lot in with a party that is dominated by personality politics and frankly NOWHERE on the current burning issue.

    How come this ‘drawing together’ Peter speaks of always involves those who are actually doing something tangible being asked to give that up and be subsumed into an entity that is failing dismally to pursue its own stated objective, because the focus of the leader is to be a recognised figurehead rather than to achieve anything of substance?

    Think about it.

  8. 8 Autonomous Mind 09/01/2013 at 5:03 pm

    Furor, that has to be one of the most stupid comments on the subject yet. Really, it is that idiotic. Are you a supporter of Open Europe, or a Cameron Tory?

  9. 9 jarlgeir 09/01/2013 at 5:33 pm

    As a Norwegian I can add this: As part of EEA we are getting an endless stream of regulations from Brussels, most of which are approved without debate. On rare occasions we manage to send an expert to Brussels, and on even rarer occasions they listen to our expert and some sense are added to the next regulation (Fishery, energy, shipping and regrettably climate). On climate what we are adding makes no sense whatsoever, same as with the rest of EU except some random noise from the Czechs. Perhaps our politicians will learn to count sunspots some day, with the best of luck they might also someday grasp the meaning of “Dalton minimum”.

    Our veto in regards to implementation of new red tape arriving from Brussels is real, but the threat is always there – throwing us out of the EEA. We have two conservative parties in Norway, Høyre (think Cameron without the conservative backbenchers) and Arbeiderpartiet (think Blair-Labour) who are obsessed with implementation of everything arriving from Brussels.

    What do the people think? Back then, 51% voted to stay out and 49% wanted to get in. Today 80% want to remain outside EU and significant numbers want a referendum in order to ditch the EEA agreement and replace it with the Swiss deal.

  10. 10 Peter S 09/01/2013 at 7:14 pm

    AM – “How come this ‘drawing together’ Peter speaks of always involves those who are actually doing something tangible being asked to give that up and be subsumed into an entity that is failing dismally to pursue its own stated objective…”

    Perhaps because genuinely autonomous minds know that, by definition, they shall never be subsumed into anything. They have nought to fear, therefore, by working in coexistence with those whom they may profoundly dislike… when such mutual labour (each according to his skill) is in pursuit of a common, and bigger, end.

    Isn’t it by these means alone that the last threat from the European continent was effectively seen off in 1945?

  11. 11 Autonomous Mind 09/01/2013 at 7:33 pm

    Sorry Peter, but you have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about. Your argument shifts when it’s rebutted but no amount of evidence sways you from your blind faith in Farage. Your naivety is staggering.

    Nothing to fear? What rubbish. In a political party you have to tow the line of the one in charge. Stand up and argue your point against Farage and you get sidelined or ejected. It’s his way or the highway. Dissent is not tolerated. You cannot co-exist in an entity with someone who will not work with you and rejects any argument that he hasn’t thought of.

    The dislike is not of the man, it’s of his incompetence and his autocratic approach. Your argument amounts to ‘shut up and fit in with the Farage’. Why the hell should I compromise my principles and approach to suit the interests of a political party?

    His approach is frankly a crock of bollocks. Just consider the feelers put out about a hypothetical coalition with Labour! Farage is kidding himself if he believes UKIP will win even a single parliamentary seat. UKIP only does well in the Euros because people know the outcome is of no consequence and it’s a way of sticking two fingers up at the main parties. It means nothing.

    Forget the opinion polls. At the general election I will wager UKIP’s actual share of the vote will be less than 10% and their impact will be only marginally better than 2010 in denying some Tories wins in marginal seats. Beyond that, nothing will change.

  12. 12 Autonomous Mind 09/01/2013 at 7:46 pm

    Jarlgeir, it’s only expected the EU will pour out an endless stream of regulations and diktats. They like to think EFTA countries should do what the EU wants, which is incredibly arrogant. But the fact is Switzerland, Norway, Iceland and Leichtenstein have the ability to influence legislation and regulations before they are published and issued, and reject legislation they don’t like.

    Most legislation originates above the EU in bodies such as UNECE where Norway represents itself as a sovereign, independent country and shapes decisions that are actually handed down to the EU to implement. The UK doesn’t have that influence, EU membership denies us that direct voice. We have to go along with what suits most of the 26 other member states. Our interests are often not served.

    The problem in Norway is the government you keep electing. When the people keep voting for left wing, pro-EU government then you will see it adopt a lot of what the EU wants it to – even though it has the power to say ‘Ingen’. The Stoltenberg government is doing what it can to be part of the EU against the wishes of the Norwegian people. But Norway has the influence and right to reject EU legislation if the politicians want to. That is the reality and something the UK politicians don’t want the British people to know.

  13. 13 TheBoilingFrog 09/01/2013 at 11:04 pm

    @Jarlgeir “Our veto in regards to implementation of new red tape arriving from Brussels is real, but the threat is always there – throwing us out of the EEA.”

    The Norwegian veto is part of a treaty agreement agreed by both sides, the EU throwing you out arbitrarily for invoking it is not. One is a bluff, the other is not. The EU cannot simply throw you out without breaching international law and nor would it be in their interests to do so.

    More likely, in the event of continuing EEA/EFTA vetoes both parties would have to come to a new arrangement either within the agreement itself or by establishing a completely new one.

    Either way it demonstrates that Norway has more say than us, whether you choose to use it is an issue for the Norwegians to grapple with, not a failing of the EEA agreement.

  14. 14 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 5:02 am

    XX Autonomous Mind 09/01/2013 at 5:03 pm

    Furor, that has to be one of the most stupid comments on the subject yet. Really, it is that idiotic. Are you a supporter of Open Europe, or a Cameron Tory? XX

    And are you blind to fact?

    It does not matter WHAT “input” they pretend to let you have, in the end, you are landed with just what they were thinking of in the first place.

    Like it or not, THAT is how it works.

    Not just the E.U, but EVERYTHING.

    You have noticed how EFFECTIVE “Government” consultations are at getting the voice of the voter heard, I presume?

  15. 15 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 5:05 am

    XX jarlgeir commented on The Norway influence saga – what does it all mean?.

    Our veto in regards to implementation of new red tape arriving from Brussels is real, but the threat is always there – throwing us out of the EEA. XX

    Thanks Jarlgeir, I HAVE pointed this out before, but someone around here appears to only to see the facts HE wants to see, and ignores what doesa not fit in his petty little world.

  16. 16 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 8:59 am

    Furor, as you feel you have such great insight, please post here the mechanism for ejecting a country from the EEA and the grounds that allow such an action.

    Please also post here an example of Norway or Switzerland’s governments opposing legislation but having it imposed on them anyway by the EU. Given your comment there must be lots of examples.

    I provided evidence to back up my points, now you do the same. Lets see how much of your comment is backed by evidence and how much is groundless assertion.

  17. 17 jarlgeir 11/01/2013 at 1:59 pm

    I wrote: Our veto in regards to implementation of new red tape arriving from Brussels is real, but the threat is always there – throwing us out of the EEA.

    In order to clarify: Our two big parties always state that Norway risks being thrown out of the EEA if we do not implement this or that section of red tape from Brussels. This risk may or may not be real. It probably is not real unless we manage to be sufficiently annoying to the EU dragon. With the Euro slowly collapsing, the EU dragon should be busy elsewhere.

    When two parts make an agreement and one part is weak compared to the other, nasty things may take place. Should Britain ditch its EU membership, this will strengthen the position of both Switzerland and Norway.

    With the French inside the EU there is no reason not to leave, is there?

  18. 18 Peter S 11/01/2013 at 4:29 pm

    AM – “You cannot co-exist in an entity with someone who will not work with you and rejects any argument that he hasn’t thought of.”

    You can’t co-exist ‘in’ anything. Co-existence is done with an entity. I might hate my neighbour’s guts… but if we both faced a common external threat, we might each marshall and direct our own resources towards overcoming it. In doing so, I’d openly value my neighbour’s strategy (and acknowledge its effectiveness), at the same time as pursuing my own – complimentary – one.

    It’s not that difficult.

  19. 19 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 4:34 pm

    I liked your tongue-in-cheek comment about the French, Jarlgeir. But as you will have seen, my focus is on having a democratic system where power is positioned as close to the people as possible.

    Norway is a great example of the disconnect between politicians and the people. The Norwegian people want to be independent yet political class wants to be part of the EU – and that is why they are telling the British to stay in the EU and playing down the influence and power Norway really possesses.

  20. 20 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 6:48 pm

    xX Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 8:59 am

    Furor, as you feel you have such great insight, please post here the mechanism for ejecting a country from the EEA and the grounds that allow such an action.

    Please also post here an example of Norway or Switzerland’s governments opposing legislation but having it imposed on them anyway by the EU. Given your comment there must be lots of examples. XX

    I have previously. You ignored the evidence. Now, I do NOT do YOUR homework for you.

    Go and look yourself.

  21. 21 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 6:53 pm

    Peter, you’re just boring now.

    How could you value your neighbour’s strategy if they didn’t have one? Why would you work with someone who doesn’t agree with you and whose whole approach is wrong?

    UKIP has now sacked its youth chairman and accused him of plotting with Richard Lowe to stage a coup to take over the party. UKIP’s leadership is disarray and trying to rig the MEP candidate selection process to Farage gets to choose rather than members. Meanwhile UKIP has made no comment about Cameron and Open Europe’s lies over EFTA influence in shaping single market legislation.

    Yeah, that’s the team I want to be part of. They’ve really got their eye on the ball haven’t they? Sheeesh.

  22. 22 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 6:56 pm

    Furor, is putting a link on this thread too much to ask? Or is it there is nothing to link to?

  23. 23 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 7:00 pm

    Look it up. I have posted it here at LEAST once in the past year or two… however long.

    And if you are so blind as not to see where my argument leads, that is NOT my faulöt.

    To make it easy for you; It is a reason to LEVE the bastard known as the E.U COMPLETELY, insttead of farting around the edges, trying to be some kind of an associate membere of a club that does not bloody want you ANYWAY.

  24. 24 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 7:11 pm

    What you posted was an opinion, there was no link to any supporting evidence.

    If you had taken the time to read my posts correctly instead of ranting like an idiot with an anger management problem and a technical fault with his keyboard caps lock, you would have seen I said I want an independent UK and that EFTA membership is a convenient staging post on that route.

    Any reasonable person would understand it will take a long time to extract the UK from the EU while protecting commercial and trade interests. EFTA membership would be helpful while bi-lateral agreements are established and EU legislation is replaced.

    I can’t see why you find this so annoying, or why you defend UKIP’s vacuous ‘out then think about things’ approach.

  25. 25 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 7:32 pm

    I HAVE supplied links. One was a PDF file.

    Aha. Found it.

    The problem was, they have removed the PDF adress, but; Published by:

    Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs
    Additional copies may be ordered from:
    Norwegian Government Administration Services
    Distribution Services
    E-mail: publikasjonsbestilling@dss.dep.no
    Fax: + 47 22 24 27 86
    Publication number: E-853
    ISBN: 978-82-7177-896-5
    Impression: 5000.

  26. 26 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 7:33 pm

    While you consider looking for evidence to back up the assertions you made in December – http://autonomousmind.wordpress.com/2012/12/15/david-camerons-fax-democracy-lie-nailed-by-the-facts/#comments – I’m happy to address them in the meantime.

    You need to understand that the Court’s judgements are not binding, so if the member state is determined to reject a finding, it can do so. However, to focus on this issue, to the exclusion of others is to distort the argument. The question is whether EFTA/EEA members have any influence over the framing of EU law, not whether they are bound by such law once they have agreed to it. And in this specific context it remains the case that EFTA/EEA members have considerable influence over the framing of EU law that will apply to them.

    So what does that mean for your Texas murderer trying to influence his case hypothesis? You’ve used a strawman facing the wrong way.

  27. 27 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 7:36 pm

    Meaning, whatever he sais at his trial, it makes not one iota of difference to the overall outcome.

    Exactly as Switzerland and Norway.

  28. 28 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 7:43 pm

    But he didn’t participate in the decision shaping of the law in the way Norway and Switzerland do. Once legislation has been agreed to – something Norway and Switzerland can refuse – then it is binding. Your example puts the cart before the horse which is why it is invalid.

    And just to let you know, I have searched every comment you have ever made on this blog, and you have never included a hyperlink to any resource. So no, you have not supplied any links. I will apologise if you can find the comment you left on this site with the link you refer to. But the comprehensive WordPress comment search on the site shows nothing.

  29. 29 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 8:17 pm

    Then I apologise. COULD it have been on OoL?. I KNOW I have given links, and I am damn SURE it was you…. Autonomous mind.

    What I find “mildly” interesting, is that they appear to have removed the direct link adress on that Norwegian Government PDF.

    Now you MAY call me paranoid, but when that kind of thing happens to us all, on REGULAR occassion, you DO start wondering….

    Fact remains, As I said above, I am using this as an argument to LEAVE the E.U, NOT in support of the buggers, and deffinately NOT to “play around the edges”.

    In so far as it goes, I see what Commyron said is true (or COULD be).

    BUT my conclussion is different.

  30. 30 Autonomous Mind 11/01/2013 at 8:27 pm

    No problem. Clearly we have a different strategic approach even though the destination is the same.

  31. 31 Furor Teutonicus 11/01/2013 at 9:02 pm

    The destination is always important. (And yes, it is just me. I CAN sound abrasive sometimes. It comes, I believe, from thinking in two languages at the same time. :-) )

    O.K. What I believe is; Britain can NOT “play around the edges”. In this Commyron is correct.

    It is either FULLY in or FULLY out.

    I would, in my humble ( :-) ) opinion, reccomend totaly OUT.

    You may find it strange, but in poll after poll (unoficial. We are talking about web sites, and “give your opinion for 50 cents” to a T.V channel, constantly around 70% of the German public ALSO support leaving the E.U!)

    A … hmm. “Stark Punkt”…. in English… “main concern”, is leaving the “Euro”. We were never asked. And IF we had been, the Deutschmark would never have dissapeared.

    The German people HATE it.

    Do not give up on us as suporrting your cause, just because of our “politicians”.

    We ARE actually WITH you on this.

  32. 32 Peter S 12/01/2013 at 12:55 am

    AM – “Peter, you’re just boring now.”
    Boring to you, perhaps. But then, I find the positioning of disparate resources towards achieving a shared goal far more interesting (and exciting) than a daily rage – read by a minuscule audience – inspired (seemingly) by little more than an envy of others’ political influence in the face of one’s own obstinate refusal to participate.

    “How could you value your neighbour’s strategy if they didn’t have one?”
    Whatever my neighbour is doing, he has won 16% of the popular vote to his (and my) cause and will likely increase that to 25% by year’s end.

    “UKIP has now sacked its youth chairman and accused him of plotting… etc etc etc”
    Beano Brother tittle tattle! Reading such nonsense, no one would guess there’s sovereignty to defend.

    “Yeah, that’s the team I want to be part of.”
    Nobody has suggested you be part of a team. Such an ongoing preoccupation suggests the title of this blog might be more biographically accurate as “Absolute, Non-Negotiable, Refusal to Join in with Anyone (preferring splendid isolation to the slightest risk of being appropriated) Mind “… which means something altogether different to ‘Autonomous’.

  33. 33 Autonomous Mind 12/01/2013 at 9:22 am

    Peter, are you so devoid of original thought or your own perspectives that you compromise principle to conform with someone with whom you actually disagree?

    Are you so ignorant that you brush aside any evidence and like a drone gravitate back to your idol, who in your eyes must be excused any failing because he is your messiah?

    You really are a joke. I’m not envious of Farage. I’m furious with him because he is doing the eurosceptic cause so much bloody damage. Meanwhile you shield your eyes from the facts and delude yourself that only he can deliver the UK from the EU. He can’t and he won’t. He will shatter the credibility of eurosceptics because of his obstinate refusal to do what leaders should do – listen to people and learn from mistakes.

    He’s on a glorified ego trip that will ultimately take him nowhere but obscurity. That is something I don’t care about. But the wreckage he will leave behind him I do care about. He won’t get real on the detail because he doesn’t take time to understand it. He prefers to wax lyrical and play jack-the-lad for personal profile.

    There’s a reason there are more ex members of UKIP than actual members. It’s called Farage and they’ve seen what a disaster he is. Omnishambles doesn’t come close.

    Do yourself a favour. If all you want is the reinforcement of your narrow and uninformed viewpoint, stick to the UKIP website. But don’t expect any issues of substance to be covered there like EFTA, Norway, how the UK can exit, what the negotiation process needs to be and how we can get to that point, it’s just soundbites and rhetoric.

  34. 34 Peter S 13/01/2013 at 2:22 pm

    AM – it’s been a fascinating exchange.

    “Peter, are you so devoid of original thought or your own perspectives that you compromise principle to conform with someone with whom you actually disagree?”

    I’m not sure how original my thoughts are. If I’m devoid of anything, it’s the spitting contempt of a jilted lover – a blind rage directed (at the merest felt-provocation) towards a person whose actual end goal conforms exactly to my own.

    “Meanwhile you shield your eyes from the facts and delude yourself that only he can deliver the UK from the EU. He can’t and he won’t.”

    (see ‘blind rage’ above). Actually, in all my posts here I have consistently been saying the opposite. That is, that Farage (brilliant though he is in rallying people to the ’cause’) is unlikely to “deliver the UK from the EU” without those who feel equally strongly towards that same end finding a way of working along side him (with or without his approval or acknowledgment). And, by doing so, contributing their own brilliance* in areas where Farage is recognised to be woefully inadequate. Therein “delivering the UK from the EU” becomes a far more realistic prospect.

    * I have in mind here an independent ‘think tank’ with its own website, publishing in-depth info and analysis from a collective of like-minded and intelligent people – similar to the respected, oft-quoted, widely-read and highly effective Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF) group in the climate change debate.

    “He’s on a glorified ego trip… etc, etc, etc.”
    Oh dear… Capt, spittle shields to max strength again please!

  35. 35 Brian H 19/01/2013 at 11:01 am

    The disgraceful media “turning a blind eye” doesn’t quite cut it. Active distraction and dissembling is more like it.


Comments are currently closed.



Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

  • RT @AgenceMascarade: В МВЭСИТ прошла встреча с советником Президента Черногории http://t.co/pl7G2mPzGn 1 day ago
  • НАТО опубликовало фотографию голландской подлодки у причала в Таллине 1 day ago
  • - Я подарил своей жене книгу Как экономить деньги. - И каков результат? - Я бросил курить и похудел на 10 кг. 1 day ago

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive