Posts Tagged 'Quislings'

A man without conviction, belief or substance

(A thank you to those kind people who have been emailing to ask how things are going.  The job is going well and I’m getting into a routine, so hopefully I can start to get some more posts up.)

When looking at Conservative Home one can’t help but be struck by the volume of anti Cameron pieces in the media that are being trailed in the Newslinks. Just take today’s offerings as an example…

Ken Clarke reportedly accuses Cameron of treating Andrew Lansley badly…

…as the Telegraph reflects on a “week of compromises”…

…and others identify Cameron’s style of government as a problem

…and the Treasury select committee condemns the leaking of the Budget

For a moment I had to check I wasn’t on Labour List.  But what is notable about these pieces is that the attacks are not ideological.  They are not about policy.  These have been spawned by the abject failure of leadership. And there is a lack of leadership because the leader, David Cameron, has no principle or clear political direction.

It is dawning on people who supported the Conservatives in the hope Cameron would reveal an inner conservative after assuming residence in Downing Street, that Cameron is not a conservative. What is more worrying is that it’s becoming apparent that Cameron is nothing. He is not a conservative, he is not a liberal, he is not a social democrat and he is not a socialist.  In fact he stands for nothing – apart from the desire to attain office – and he has successfully deceived people  by pretending to hold their political convictions when he holds none.

Government is like any business or organisation.  At the top there has to be a clear dirction and a sense of purpose or else it flounders.  In the case of a business it loses customers, money and ultimately fails or gets broken up by another that does have a sense of purpose. In the case of an organisation people lose interest and drift away leaving an ineffective rump that can achieve little if anything, then finally closes down.

In the case of a government it loses authority – it fails to honour promises central to its election campaign thus treating its supporters with contempt; it twists and turns in an effort to appease the immediate audience even when that appeasement contradicts pledges and commitments that have been made; it abandons those who believed the direction was set even if that was unpopular with some people; it operates in exactly the same manner as previous governments it criticised; and ultimately it leaks support because no one of any stripe can trust anything that comes from the mouth of the leadership, as the leadership believes in nothing that it is saying.

Expedient government quickly turns into lame duck government and the country suffers as a result.  The only person responsible for this is the autocratic meglomaniac, David Cameron.  Devoid of conviction, belief or substance , he is not only continuing the decline of this country overseen by Labour, he is accelerating it under this insipid coalition of the self interested.

While the used-to-be-Conservative party will suffer for this and enable a resurgence of the undeserving and incompetent Fabians, the ultimate casualty will be the country, followed by democracy itself.  We find ourselves in troubling and difficult times and the political class has no answer.  We need to find another way or there will be nothing left worth preserving.

Update: Dr Richard North of EU Referendum references this piece on his blog and corrects an assertion I have made. It’s a valid point he makes and his piece is a must-read posting.

Typhoon v Raptor = UK taxpayer being failed again

On Wednesday the UK National Audit Office published a detailed report on the current status of the infamous Eurofighter combat jet – nowadays officially known as Typhoon.  Lewis Page at The Register has taken a look and points out:

UK taxpayers will have shelled out no less than £215m for each of our 107 jets – that’s $350m at today’s rates, rather more than the US taxpayers have been made to pay for each of their 185 Raptor superfighters2, almost all of which will be used operationally. And the Raptor has third-generation Stealth: the Eurofighter has no stealth features at all. The Raptor has thrust vectoring for unbeatable manoeuvrability in a dogfight: the Eurofighter doesn’t.

The Raptor is a hugely more sophisticated and powerful aircraft, and is actually – astonishingly – somewhat cheaper, despite the fact that it is being made in much smaller numbers than the Eurofighter!

That’s a really astonishingly bad bit of value for money on our part.

1That was the original order when the project kicked off, and the price has not gone down – just the numbers of jets.

2Development and procurement cost of the Raptor for 183 useable jets is stated at approximately $62bn by the US air force, putting each jet at $339m.

I’m not the first, but allow me to add my sarcastic congratulations to the Labour government and the MoD for putting ‘European’ dogma ahead of value for money and getting the best equipment available.  Also to the Conservative-Lib Dem coalition for eviscerating our armed forces instead of merely fixing the problems associated with procurement; and furthering ‘European’ aims of forming a common EU military force at the expense of our own capability.

You politicians and civil servants are truly the most worthless, incompetent and contemptible scum of the earth.

If you read one blog post today, make it this one

We are seeing here structural cuts which remove the UK’s ability to act independently as a nation, and to project our foreign policy. We have moved from independence to a transitional stage where our capabilities have been removed and there is no replacement.  The agenda unfolds.

No, I’m British

Just have a read of this paragraph from an article in European Voice.

It’s about the European Union drawing up a contingency plan for an armed humanitarian intervention in Libya (I know, I laughed too). But stop and think about the language being used:

The ongoing evacuation of EU citizens in Libya is a member state responsibility, with the EU in a supporting role through its Monitoring and Information Centre (MIC), which was activated yesterday. The EU has no embassy in Tripoli and relies on the member states for information. The European External Action Service said that the number of EU citizens still in Libya was unknown, while the Commission put the number at 5,000-6,000. According to the Commission, around 5,000 EU nationals have already left Libya.

EU Citizens, EU nationals… it’s all so casual.  Like the EU itself, these are artificial constructs.  Yet this is what has been done to us by Brussels and our Westminster quislings without our permission.

I’m not an EU citizen and I’m not an EU national. The EU is not a state and it is not a nation, despite the pretences of the bureaucrats.  I’m a British Subject (until such time as the Monarchy ends) update… in the comments folk have corrected me vis a vis the 1981 Nationality Act. No one asked me if I agreed to be designated in this way, I wasn’t given a vote and I do not accept it. So take your flag, your little gold stars and your ode to joy and stick them right up your

Political posturing and who is master in Hungary

Readers may be familiar with Hungary’s vicious assault on press freedom and the ability of citizen journalists to share their views.

The media would be neutered because if the ruling elite did not like what was reported, they could claim ‘offence’ and use a raft of measures to effectively shut down the paper or station carrying it. In addition, bloggers would have to register with the state and any videos, personal posts or tweets would be subject to a ‘balanced information’ requirement which enabled a newly formed Media Council to issue heavy fines for anyone expressing a subjective opinion.

Despite the internal outcry and the European Union’s insistance that Hungary follows EU law on media freedom, the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said earlier this week:

‘The government has beaten back this attack,’ (in reference to criticism from the EU commission). ‘We do not accept any countries or country groupings as our superiors. Brussels is not Moscow,’ (in reference to the Soviet era).

It was a strong and unambiguous statement. Could it be that an elected national government, however dictatorial and wrongheaded, was daring to tell the EU to stay out of its affairs?  Was this a sign of growing rebelliousness among member states?  The challenge to Brussels was clear.

In the event it may as well have been David Cameron making that comment instead of Viktor Orlan.  For just several dozen hours on, we learn that Hungary has backed down.  Bloggers will no longer have to register and the ‘balanced information’ requirement has been dropped. And the provision restricting media content on the basis of not ‘causing offence’ to individuals, minorities or majorities is being narrowed down to not ‘discriminating’ against any group or not inciting to hatred.

Hungarians have just been given a clear demonstration of who holds power and governs their country – and it isn’t the Orlan administration or anyone they voted for.

For all the tough words and anger at the interference of Brussels (all be it on the subject of a dangerous attempt to stifle free speech and dissent) the elected government in Budapest has bowed before their EU master. For Orlan, read Cameron.  Once the theatric posturing has been acted out and the tough talk has been delivered to the domestic audience to give the impression of strength, the outcome is always an EU victory.  This is because these national leaders are Europhile lackeys.

And so it will continue to be until a national government holds itself completely sovereign, says ‘no’ to the EU  and refuses to accept any and all instruction, coercion or strong arming from Brussels. Power needs to be taken because it is never freely relinquished by a person or entity that wishes to retain it.

Why the EU is putting pressure on Switzerland

The EU’s harrassment of Switzerland covered here and here, because it refuses to stop offering low personal and business tax rates, is put into context today with the news Brussels is dusting off old plans to introduce a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) across member states.

Not content with its objective of directly charging VAT on our purchases instead of letting member states collect the money and pass it on to Brussels, the EU now wants to set a common minimum rate of corporation tax to prevent countries such as Ireland setting competitive rates to attract business to its shores.

The pressure being applied to Switzerland is a concerted effort by the EU to eradicate a ‘local’ tax competitor that could host companies desperate to avoid the EU’s elevated minimum tax rates in a geographically convenient location. The EU measure would spark a stampede of businesses to the cantons if the last democracy in western Europe doesn’t play ball.  It’s a high stakes game worth billions of Euros.

The EU is a customs union with no interest in free trade or competition.  A more accurate description for it would be a bullying, anti democratic tax union. The UK has no place being part of this destructive bureaucratic cabal. Ironically, on the day this news has come out the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, Owen Paterson, is saying the province’s corporation tax rate should be cut from 28% to attract business to the country – exactly what the EU is trying to put a stop to.  Yet in another breath he will be telling us how beneficial our EU membership is.  It is rank hypcorisy.

No doubt the proposal, which is being met with the usual initial resistance from France and Germany before being accepted by them wholesale after a few concessions, will have senior Conservative politicians sucking on their teeth, planting Eurosceptic sentiments with unthinking cut and paste merchants in the media and expressing anger at this unacceptable interference in British affairs – before meekly surrendering all competence to Brussels and declaring there was no alternative.

Costs will be driven up and consumers will find themselves paying more for goods and services, but the mass sleepwalk will continue as our media tows the party line in return for ‘access’ and fails the public by not exposing the real state of affairs that would have the people in rebellious mood.

That Conservative Euroscepticism in action

Following on from yesterday’s post rubbishing James Forsyth’s news story in the Mail that suggested ‘constantly being told what you can and can’t do by Brussels is driving Ministers and No 10 deeper and deeper into the Eurosceptic camp’, a timely reminder of the depth of that Conservative Euroscepticism in the Conservatives’ favourite rag.  Click on the image below to enlarge then read the text beneath it and ask yourself, does this look like a Eurosceptic Conservative at his wits end with frustration on the verge of calling for an in-out referendum on EU membership?

And when clicking through on his image this is ‘Conservative Eurosceptic’ Foreign Secretary, William Hague’s introduction to the EU Civil Service recruitment section:

5:20PM GMT 25 Jan 2011

“Whatever you think of it, the EU is incredibly important to Britain. Whether you’re angry about red tape from Brussels, interested in what it means for British business, excited about the opportunities it gives young people to work in other European countries or wondering what European countries can achieve on the environment or international crises, you are bound to have an opinion on it.

“If you care about any of these things you should think about working in the EU’s institutions – the EU’s Civil Service. We want to see bright and ambitious British graduates taking up that opportunity. We need people involved who can bring a British point of view and expertise to the EU’s work.

“That’s why I’m backing this campaign for UK graduates to look at the EU’s Civil Service as a career. It could give you the chance to help the countries of Europe shape the European Union’s future direction. If you’re concerned about big policy issues, want to learn about international negotiations or fascinated by European cultures and languages, you may find the job you’re looking for with the EU.

“So do browse this site and leave your contact details if you’re interested in receiving further information on working for the EU’s Civil Service.”

The words quisling and sell out spring to mind.  How ironic the date that page was last updated, 25th January 2011, was the same date the Egyptian people began their effort to throw off undemocratic rule with a protest in Tahrir Square.

We’ve heard it all before Tories

There are few things as contemptible as politicians making public some of their supposedly private comments in order to con the public.

James Forsyth’s article on the Daily Mail site last night will no doubt have some Eurosceptics crowing with glee that the Cameron government is waking up to how membership of the EU hinders the ability of Westminster politicians to govern the UK.  But Forsyth’s piece should not be taken at face value, instead it should have people asking questions, such as:

Who gave this story to Forsyth?
Why did they give it to him?

Think about it. We’ve heard all this before from senior Conservatives.  Anyone with a half decent memory will recall the repeated handwringing and calls to do something that have been drip fed from CCHQ over the years.  The EU is doing nothing new, Brussels is behaving as it has for a long time and in a way with which the Tories are familiar, so why position this supposed frustration story in the media now?

Constantly being told what you can and can’t do by Brussels is driving Ministers and No 10 deeper and deeper into the Eurosceptic camp.

Oliver Letwin, Cameron’s mild-mannered and cerebral Policy Minister, has become so frustrated by this constant interference that he has told colleagues he thinks Britain should leave the European Union if it won’t give us all the opt-outs the Government wants.

What a load of rubbish.  It’s just another imaginary crumb from the table to keep us distracted while the business of the EU running the UK continues without impediment.  If there was any truth to this, why did the entire Conservative front bench team, including Letwin, abstain from voting against votes for prisoners following the European Court of Human Rights’ ruling in Hirst v United Kingdom?

Having finally been allowed to put their grubby paws on the levers of power at the Westminster level what have the Conservatives actually done about the EU’s governance of this country, apart from not turn up to vote?  That’s right, a continuation of opt ins to EU measures such as European Investigation Orders, the timid acceptance of EU oversight of the UK’s financial sector and desperate attempts to prevent any amendments to the sham European Union Bill in the Commons.  How very Eurosceptic.  This little story is one of the CCHQ permitted ‘dissents’ that are purposely encouraged to give the impression the Conservatives might be somewhat opposed to the EU after all.

Are we seriously supposed to believe that they have had a Damascene conversion and now understand that reforming the EU is impossible and only leaving can result in the UK being sovereign once again?  Perhaps if James Forsyth believes this horse dung he has published he still believes in Father Christmas and the Easter Bunny too.  It is an insult to our intelligence.

Update: Paul in the comments has more on his Luikkerlog blog.

Why our failing and biased media should concern us all

Yesterday on James Delingpole’s news blog I left a comment concerning the coverage of the Met Office’s actions and behaviour in the media. Or, more accurately, the lack of it.

In thanking Dellers for giving some ‘mainstream media’ visibility to what has been dug out by the blogosphere, I added the following:

The rest of the media is either asleep at the wheel, or doesn’t have the gumption to dig for the truth and report it. The public is being badly let down by complacent journalists who sit and wait for a press release to land in their inbox.

If a handful of bloggers can put this together in their spare time, why not a few professional full time journalists?

A written answer in the House of Commons yesterday, to a question about public involvement in the political process, led me to a survey finding that underlines why the media’s lack of attention to matters such as these – with their implications for public awareness, policy and public spending – should concern everyone.

Mark Harper’s response made reference to the Hansard Society’s 7th Annual Audit of Political Engagement, published last year, and the finding that there has been a big decline since the first Audit in 2004 (sic) in the perceived impact of the Westminster Parliament on people’s lives, compared to other institutions.

So what are the public’s most recent perceptions about the institutions perceived to have the greatest impact on people’s lives?  Harper had already alluded to the perceived lesser impact of Westminster, so where does the power now reside?

To understand the percentages, APE1 is the figure from December 2003, APE4 the figure from November 2006 and APE7 the most recent figure from November 2009.

It shows that of the available options (X Factor and Britain’s Got Talent are noticably absent) the media is perceived to have the greatest impact on people’s everyday lives.

Not, you notice, the bureaucrats and functionaries who make our laws, raise our taxes, meddle in our lives and oversee the ruination of our justice system, rather the lazy hacks who sit around waiting for press releases they can cut and paste as news copy and the TV reporters who throw softballs at the political class in what pass for searching interviews.  The irony is staggering considering the lack of trust many people have in journalists.

Given the BBC’s dominant position in news reporting in the UK and the fact its editorial line is lifted directly from the dismal Guardian, this finding is horrifying.  The naked bias in reporting on matters such as how we are governed and by whom, the economy, foreign affairs and climate change, does have an impact on those who rely exclusively on the mainstream media in shaping their view of the world.  It is profoundly worrying.

While tens of thousands of people have been visiting this blog over recent weeks, and hundreds of thousands more have visited other blogs to see facts presented that the media chooses not to relay to its audience, the fact remains citizen journalists are still grovelling in the weeds.  We can be concerned, we can tut and sigh, or we can redouble our efforts to reach a wider audience and present them with information the establishment (which very much includes the mainstream media) prefers to keep quiet about.

We are in a fight between perception and reality. To date, with the noble exception of James Delingpole, no one in the mainstream media has touched this story of Met Office lies and deception, despite it being presented to two national newspapers. Many millions of people are being fed the party line and are unaware of the serious questions raised about the integrity and competence of people we pay to work for us, not just on this subject but on all subjects.  It should concern us all.

Lies and deception from Europhile hypocrite Hague

Despite my best efforts, words cannot express the simmering fury that rose in me today as I read William Hague’s article in the Sunday Telegraph.

Rarely has such an eloquent and articulate individual compromised so many positions of principle in such a short space of time, before going on to write articles such as today’s fatuous, hypocritical cant that utterly misrepresents reality and actively seeks to deceive the public. Spin is not a word that adequately describes what Hague has written. A pack of lies is the expression that springs to mind.

Here’s how Hague opens his piece:

The disillusionment of British voters with politicians has many causes: expenses scandals, economic pressures and the failures of the last Labour Government.

But high on the list of such causes is the sheer undemocratic arrogance with which a European treaty of huge significance – the Lisbon Treaty – was rammed into law two years ago with no mandate of any kind from the people of this country.

Immediately one can see where Hague is going with this. And as sure as night follows day, he does.  He launches the standard partisan party political attack on Labour for ratifying the Lisbon Treaty without the promised referendum. But then, in an extraordinary defence of the EU goes on to say that Labour’s actions were: ‘a very grave blow to the European Union’s democratic credentials in this country’.

Straight away Hague has drifted off into some parallel reality. The EU is fundamentally anti democratic, by design. It is structured to ensure ordinary people throughout the member states are incapable of derailing the wishes of the political class. But Hague’s use of language is carefully crafted to give the impression the EU is democratic and we only think otherwise because of Labour’s actions. This is pretty cynical and untruthful stuff. Wee Willie then goes on to say:

I would have dearly loved to hold a referendum on that treaty after a change of government: sadly the ratification of Lisbon by all 27 EU states last autumn made that impossible. But I have always been determined that this flagrant denial of democratic choice to the people of Britain would never happen again.

At this point the cat’s sixth sense triggered his decision to flee through the door, the TV remote went airborne and a low rumbling roar ascended from deep inside, gaining pitch and volume as the anger erupted in response to the naked lies in that short paragraph.

Nothing, I repeat, nothing prevented the Tories from keeping their promise to ask the British people if they wished to be bound by the provisions set out in Lisbon. David Cameron had said time and again that if the treaty was ratified he would not let matters rest there, but he would not elaborate about what that meant.  A significant proportion of the electorate believed him.  The ratification could have been withdrawn citing the will of the British people. But Cameron, Hague and the rest of the sopping wet social democrats masquerading as conservatives revealed that not letting matters rest there meant letting matters rest right there.

In fact, they metaphorically plumped up the cushions and brought the treaty a cup of tea. They said it was impossible to do anything. This is a lie. They could have tackled the issue but chose not to. They wanted to appear ‘constructive’ for their friends in Brussels. As for Hague being determined that it would never happen again, this is what we have heard every previous time and the lie has already been exposed since Cameron slithered into Downing Street. This comes to the fore as Hague shamelessly postulates that:

The current system we have for these kinds of decisions is, quite simply, now morally bankrupt. It must change.

It is our firm belief and our policy that no more powers should be moved from Britain to the EU but that is not enough – if any Government ever again attempted to change the EU Treaties to transfer further powers the British people must rightfully have their say.

Bullshit. Sorry, there is no more suitable word for it. What is the reality behind these fine words?

Consider, George Osborne’s backing and approval of the EU’s new oversight plan for financial services which removes power from the UK and relocates in with the EU in Brussels. Let’s not forget Theresa May signing Britain up to European Investigation Orders (EIO). Do you recall being asked to approve any of the powers in this article that have been handed to the EU on Cameron’s watch?  And let us not forget the key fact that even with Cameron’s pathetic and meaningless ‘Referendum Lock’ we are having more and more laws are being imposed on the UK and Hague and his little chums are not lifting a finger to stop them. Next up on the export manifest is control over policing and justice, which the EU will be handed in the near future.

There really is no point reading any more of Hague’s Janusesqe waffle, where he delves into hypothetical technical matters about how the useless European Union Bill will supposedly stop more powers heading east, while the examples above show that in practice it is a con trick that makes no material difference. Hague has written his piece, there is no facility for leaving comments, and so he remains in the Westminster bubble contenting himself that his job is done and we have bought into his supposed Eurosceptic outlook.

And they call this a democracy.

Cameron, tell the truth for once

From the Daily Mail we learn that:

David Cameron yesterday slammed the decision not to deport a failed asylum seeker who killed a 12-year-old girl, and called for the UK Border Agency to launch an urgent appeal.

The Prime Minister voiced ‘great anger’ at the ruling which prevents Iraqi hit-and-run killer Aso Mohammed Ibrahim from being sent home, saying it ‘flies in the face of common sense’.

It is hypocritical in the extreme for Cameron to complain about the way the Human Rights Act has been used to keep Ibrahim in Britain. The HRA is law, so of course it will be used in this way. It doesn’t have to be law, but Cameron chose to break one his many promises to scrap it because he puts our membership of the EU before the interests of the UK.

If Cameron wants to flap his gums let him come out and explain clearly why he has broken his promised to repeal the Human Rights Act. Let him justify his decision and explain why he is pretending to be helpless on this matter after all the times he said the act had to go. Let’s hear the truth for once from this craven charlatan and let him stand by one of his own quisling decisions made for EU benefit in front of the public.

Do any Conservatives still believe their leadership is EUsceptic?

Or after today has reality finally sunk in? Government ministers have published their European Union Bill, which they promised will give a new legal guarantee that any transfer of British sovereignty to Brussels will be subject to a UK referendum.

Many EUsceptics have argued the so called ‘referendum lock’ is a red herring because the EU now has the power to amend treaties at will without reference back to member states. What we couldn’t expect was the utter stupidity of the Conservatives in the coalition to U-turn so blatantly on their own flagship commitment.

The sting in the tail – because there always is one when that two-faced charlatan David Cameron is involved – is that there will only be a referendum on the transfer of power to Brussels if ministers consider the changes are ‘significant’. Imagine our shock… What happened to that widely trumpeted transfer of power from the centre to the people then? Or will that only happen on matters when Cameron believes the people will deliver the result he personally wants? See the pattern emerging?

This EU Bill is meaningless because it means the politicians can still do exactly what Labour did over the Lisbon Treaty and claim that an issue is not important enough to warrant asking the people for their consent. The Conservatives campaigned in the election on a platform that stated very clearly:

‘no further powers should be transferred to Brussels without a referendum’

Now they are in power that position has changed to ‘no further powers should be transferred to Brussels without a referendum, unless we think they are not significant in which case power can still be transferred without asking the people if they agree’. The cynicism and deceit is unmistakeable.

So do Tories still believe that Cameron is, as he ludicrously describes himself, a ‘Eurosceptic’? (In any case, how can you be sceptical of a continent for pity’s sake?) Or will they now concede they have been had by a con trick of monumental proportions? Quisling Cameron and that serial liar William Hague, with the EU mandarins smiling on in approval, have just hammered another nail into democracy’s coffin.

To rub salt in Tory EUsceptic wounds the fools at Open Europe, the EU’s greatest useful idiot, view the Bill as a positive step, albeit one that doesn’t go far enough. As it happens the Bill doesn’t achieve anything because it is a metaphor for inertia. It doesn’t go anywhere – and for Cameron and Hague that was always the intention.

Enter your email address below

The Harrogate Agenda Explained

Email AM

Bloggers for an Independent UK

AM on Twitter

Error: Please make sure the Twitter account is public.

STOR Scandal

Autonomous Mind Archive