A reply to Eurovision from England, with a little help from Puma

So, Josh Dubovie - representing the United Kingdom - came LAST in Saturday's Eurovision Song Contest with the Pete Waterman & Mike Stock penned That Sounds Good To Me.

Last!? It might have been a little old-fashioned, but it wasn't a bad song. And Josh is a nice guy with a good voice and he performed very well.

Nope, let's face it. Eurovision hates us.

Thankfully, some spirited English people teamed up with Puma, the sportswear manufacturer and we like to think this is a defiant response to the Eurovision community from we, the people of England.

See also: UK could pull out of next year's Eurovision Song Contest

Was that the fastest resignation from Government ever?

So, David Laws has announced his resignation.

Was that the fastest resignation from Government ever?

Even Peter Mandelson, Lord Voldemort himself, managed to stay in office for longer than that.

Well, on the first of his resignations anyway...

Liberal Democrats - change you can believe in.

Coming out is a beautiful thing - shame the dirty linen came out with the candour

David Laws, the Libdem MP who has managed to be in Government for all of three weeks, is at the centre of intense media glare tonight.

Almost simultaenously, the new Chief Secretary to the Treasury manages to get himself both into the cabinet and out of the closet.

Laws has 'come out' following a story by the Daily Telegraph.

Possibly fearing a visit from Peter Tatchell and a protest over an enforced 'outing', the newspaper writes: "The Daily Telegraph was not intending to disclose Mr Laws’s sexuality, but in a statement issued in response to questions from this newspaper, the minister chose to disclose this fact."

So, the nice things first.

Congratulations to David Laws on coming out. Quite right, your own business. Quite right, who cares? But anyway, bet it feels nice not to have to worry about keeping it a secret anymore, huh?

Congratulations, too, on having landed a bloke who - judging from the pixelated photo on the same newspaper's website - looks like he's possibly a bit of a hottie.

But yuck... the possible hottie concerned may or may not work for a lobbying firm.

Now, we want lobbying firms and their employees having nothing at all to do with our elected politicians! Having a bit of the old hanky panky with them... sounds a lot less 'new politics' and a bit like a sixties scandal.

And how did all of this schmoozing and sweet talk make the papers..?

Sleeping arrangements, expense claims, politicians and sleaze.

What a shame that the beautiful liberation of 'coming out' should have to be sullied by such controversy and scandal.

Nick Clegg's LibDems get further tainted in the same mire that they claimed to be a fresh change from the more we get to know them.

Labour and 7/7: What was that about "nothing to hide, nothing to fear?"

So, as regular readers know, this blog constantly attacks and will never let anyone forget the civil liberty erosion and tyrannical control imposed on the people of this country by the Labour Party.

We must never, ever forget.

Now, part of the Labour Government's justification for tyranny was 9/11.

No matter what downright wicked domestic policy Labour were bringing in, the emotional blackmail of '9/11' was played as a trump card to try to persuade we, the people that State tyranny against the population was necessary.

Problem is, a lot of us have questions about 9/11. Including a vast number of architects and engineers...

Anyway, the Labour Party and most of the tyranny associated with them are gone from British government. The collective sigh of relief hangs in the air like the sweetest perfume from the most magical garden in creation.

Of course, the Labour Party's key figures are still the subject of the inquiry into the Iraq war. Labour do not like talking about Iraq now. They want us to move on.

And the minority of sheeple who supported Labour's tyranny against the people of Britain..? What was their mantra again?

"Nothing to hide, nothing to fear."

What little imagination or grasp of modern history some folk have.

And what's this we find today in The Times?

Let's just give you the headline:

"Labour rejected mandarin’s advice that 7/7 inquiry must be independent."

Nothing to hide, nothing to fear?

7/7 was already subject of a number of conspiracy theories.

We suspect this latest article will only add to the weight of those.

Compuslory Biometric ID Cards: R.I.P.

What a joyous day. The much hated idea of compulsory biometric identity cards are to be the very first implement of fear imposed by the totalitarian Labour Party to be zapped, erased, wiped-out and eradicated by the new Conservative-LibDem coalition.

Obviously tuned in to popular opinion, we learn today that scrapping the ID card scheme will be the very first act of legislation to be pushed through Parliament.

It is an enormous relief for libertarians.

However, the monster intrusive State unleashed on us by Labour still stalks our once proud and pleasant land.

There is much more work for the new Government to do in order to restore to us our rights and freedoms.

If they keep heading in this direction, they will continue to get our support in this area.

Now, will the supermarkets which suspiciously (in tandem with Labour's ID card proposals) implemented ever-more ludicrous schemes in order to make customers prove that they were aged over forty before allowing them to purchase cheese quietly drop those policies..? (We exaggerate, obviously - but not excessively).

We're still boycotting supermarkets demanding ID from people who appear to be aged 25 or under and buying from independent grocers.

Food might be a tad more expensive, but it never tasted so good...

Hands off Britain's roads!

There's an article on the Alex Jones website you must read.

It's not based on "conspiracy theory"... we take this quote from a report in the Daily Telegraph:

"Philip Hammond, the Conservative transport secretary, and Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat business secretary, are said to be weighing up a proposal by the investment bank NM Rothschild to privatise the nation's motorways and trunk roads."

Now, assuming you'll accept what is written in the mainstream, corporate media, we'd recommend having a read of the indie media's take on this proposal.

Once you have, we're sure you'll join us in opposing these proposals with vigour.

See: Rothschilds Engineer Fire Sale Of UK Infrastructure To Offshore Corporations

Barosso caught between a German rock and a British hard place

Scheißen sich, as they may or may not say in Germany...

José Manuel Barroso appears to be caught in check amidst the political game of chess ongoing at the heart of the European Empire in light of the bizarre economic crisis.

We say bizarre because we are told about debts and deficits all over the place, we know banks needed bailing out all over the place, we know how we, the people are effected... but we do not understand who everybody owes the money to or where all the money has gone.

Be that as it may, one German proposal - that for increased EU powers to enforce budget rules within Euroland - has at least resulted in the delightful thought of José Manuel Barroso running scared of Britain, if reports are to be believed.

According to the Daily Telegraph, he hates the German idea because it would open the door to we, the people of Britain getting our say on repatriating our national sovereignty which has been stolen from us by successive Governments over the last several decades.

How delicious - for once, the European Empire doesn't want to snaffle any more of our sovereignty from us? Well, there's a (temporary) turn-up for the books!

As Barosso wrestles with how to move his last remaining King out of check between the rock and hard place of German and British demands, we must confess our own shortcomings.

Those shortcomings are that we do not have sufficient knowledge or any obvious answers for where all the money has gone - though something tells us that none of it ever existed ...so why do we need to pay it back to anyone? And to whom are all these deficits supposedly owed?

But we do know where our national sovereignty has been lodged... and we would like it back with the people of Britain, please.

No... sod asking nicely!

Give us our country back, you political elite megalomaniacs! Your European Empire project is stuffed and the game is almost over...

See also: Simon Heffer - The collapse of the euro would open the door to democracy

Quote of the Day - 26th May 2010

"Now that Euroland turns out to be an economic basket case, can we please leave?"

- Conservative MP and hero of patriots, Douglas Carswell

UKIP: Great, but what about Big Brother (Brussels) and the European Arrest Warrant?

Some good points being made by UKIP's Gerard Batten regarding matters being overlooked in the euphoria over the promised dismantling of Labour's vile Big Brother state and the reversal of their terrible civil liberty abuses.

Batten particularly points to the Treaty of Prüm which, UKIP notes, will "open the door for European governments to automatically search EU-wide DNA profiles, fingerprint data and vehicle registration data."

Batten says: "It is not only in data and DNA sharing that we see risk to British civil liberties. There has been great play about the situation of the hacker Gary McKinnon and whether he should be sent to America to face trial, but nothing about the spectre of various UK citizens being sent to countries like Greece and Bulgaria in similar circumstances under the European Arrest Warrant. It is about time that this government looked at the issues of civil liberties in the round, not with a myopic view based solely on London. This is a golden opportunity to repeal the European Arrest Warrant, and one not to be wasted."

While this blog has strongly supported UKIP, we have also been critical of the party for not placing civil liberties at the heart of their manifesto at the General Election.

We hope that highlighting issues such as this - both originating with the European Empire and domestically - will be part of the central focus in the future strategy of UKIP.

We hope we may yet influence UKIP to put the existing British constitution, the treason laws, and exposing Admiralty Law also at the heart of their endeavours...

Queen's Speech: ¿Dónde están los elefantes en la habitación?

We thought we'd write our blog title partially in Spanish today, in homage to and in solidarity with the people of Spain whose economy looks and sounds like it's headed the way of Greece.

Closer to home, we had the Queen's Speech today. A very beautiful, outrageously over-the-top, but very welcome demonstration of pomp, pageantry and tradition.

As Her Majesty read out the words that the Government had prepared for her, this blogger started to spot a trend.

Good news first - bye bye ID cards and regulation of CCTV cameras. Great!

Then we had sections concerning the devolution powers in Scotland, devolution in Wales, devolution in Northern Ireland.... is there something rather big missing from that list? Nope... can't quite put our finger on the elephant...

Then we had talks of referendums for further powers in Wales, a referendum on reforming the voting system... is there an elephant demanding a referendum? Nope... the elephant isn't quite enormous enough for us to be able to spot it...

Tusk!

...but we think EU know what we're talking about - especially those of you in England.

Our poll: Little enthusiasm for electoral reform; National Sovereignty and the 'West Lothian Question' top concerns

Over the last fortnight, we have been running a poll on this blog asking people to tell us what issues they would most like to see a referendum on.

Now, before we analyse the results, a few caveats.

It is very difficult to be certain whether the findings of a self-selecting poll would be replicated throughout the entire population, as we do not know who exactly those participating in our poll are. We've tried to help as much as possible by adding stats from Google Analytics at the foot of this post.

So, with that to be held in mind, our headline poll finding is that there is only modest interest in a referendum on electoral reform... but huge interest in matters related to national sovereignty and the West Lothian Question.

Our survey allowed those of you who took part to select multiple answers.

Of those taking part, an 'In/Out' referendum on the EU was your top demand, with 73.6% saying this is what they want.

Now, it could be argued that this blog has a disproportionately high number of UKIP visitors and often posts about matters opposing the European Empire. That would be a fair observation. However, despite that, our findings are well within the range of percentages demanding an EU referendum in national polls by hugely respected polling companies. Indeed, when we looked through previous results of the last couple of years, we found our percentage exactly matched that found in a number of surveys by big polling companies.

The second most demanded referendum in our survey findings was for 'an English Parliament'. We were quite surprised at the depth of feeling here - 51.2% voted to say this was a matter that they now thought the people of the country should have a referendum on.

There does not appear to be anything in the current legislation plans to end the Barnett Formula which gives £1,600 per head to Scotland in State funding or on addressing the 'West Lothian Question'.

The 'West Lothian Question' is named such after Tam Dalyell MP argued against Labour attempts to introduce devolution to Scotland in the 1970's.

Dalyell wrote: "If the United Kingdom is to remain in being, then there can be no question but that the Scottish constituencies must continue to be represented at Westminster .... Yet once the [Scottish] Assembly had come into being, and was legislating for those areas that had not been reserved to the United Kingdom Government, the position of the seventy-one Scottish Westminster MPs would become awkward and invidious. Their credibility - like those of their counterparts in the Assembly - would be deeply suspect, simply because there would be so many areas of concern to their electors on which they could not pronounce."

Limping into third place in our poll was demand for a referendum on proportional representation with just 18.4% of you selecting that choice.

Now, what is interesting here is - if we're going to argue that our results are skewed by high UKIP & LibDem supporting visitor numbers... than why is proportional representation - which both parties would stand to profit from enormously - so low?

The other question this prompts is whether such low support for a referendum on proportional representation is due to the closed door horse trading which took place between the Conservatives and the LibDem; and between Labour and the LibDems following the recent General Election.

It would have been interesting to have asked that same question before the General Election and to know whether the low support for a referendum on proportional representation is a result of the secret, behind-doors horse-trading we all witnessed and which would be the norm under a proportional representation system.

In fourth place in our poll was votes for Scottish independence, garnering 17.6% support. Now, in the period of polling, only 5% of this blog's visitors were from people living in Scotland so that poll share is quite high.

It is, of course, possible to conceive that English voters wishing there to be a referendum on an English Parliament also voted for there to be a referendum on a Scottish Parliament. We'll leave that mysteriously high poll result hanging in the air...

And then... the last voted for referendum demand in on our polls was for AV+. Just 8.8% of those taking part in our poll selected that answer. Do you want to phone David Cameron and Nick Clegg, or shall I..?

--
We do know, from a recent poll, that this blog has a higher-than-average number of UKIP voters accessing the site. We also know that the Liberal Democrats supporters are the second biggest group of people visiting us.

Over the last fortnight, the three biggest traffic sources were:

Google (39%)
Feedburner (presumably site subscribers - hello! - 20%)
Direct traffic (return, non-subscribing visitors - hello! - 11%)

The three stories generating most interest were:

- Public fury at Lib-Lab coalition talks
- 2010 General Election results under Proportional Representation
- David Miliband, Iraq and the Lisbon Treaty

82% of our visitors came from the UK, with the most popular locations for visitors being:

London (47%); Manchester (6%); Bristol (4%); Glasgow (3%); Birmingham (3%)

Sunday Paper Review: 23rd May 2010

The Sunday Telegraph has possibly the scoop of the weekend with details of what is contained in a late draft of the Queen's Speech which the newspaper has 'obtained'. A number of the civil liberty things we were hoping for are included in it, as are moves for the EU 'referendum lock' and something about ridding the nation of the never ending supply of quangos. We'll let you digest it all and comment more later.

Political reform is on the agenda. One person with reservations is the Independent on Sunday's opinion writer Paul Vallely who argues against reform of the House of Lords. He eloquently sets out a number of reservations about the proposed changes to make it an elected chamber - reservations that this blogger shares with him.

The News of the World also has details of the leaked Queen's Speech. It also has PM David Cameron writing an article in which he tells the tabloid's readers what he thinks of Labour's legacy. He (or someone writing it for him) says: "Labour have left a catastrophic legacy. They used up the Government cheque book, maxed out the country’s credit card and left us deep in debt. But there’s been no apology. No shame. No sign that they have the faintest idea of what a mess they made or how angry people are."

Don't do as Dave says and get angry about a political issue, whatever you do. Keep on reading to find out why...

Meanwhile, those wanting a damn good laugh at the political left falling out with itself should look to The Observer. It reports on talks between the Unite union and British Airways being forced to break up without agreement after the ACAS building was stormed by members of the Socialist Workers Party. Tony Woodley of Unite is quoted as saying: "[T]hose idiots think they are helping, but they are outsiders. They are lunatics."

The Sunday Times reports that the security of every single MP is under review after growing intelligence fears about the possibility of their safety being under threat from - quote - "radical Islamic loners". Hmmmph. Cue any old excuse to put the reversal of attacks on our civil liberties on hold, anyone? Sorry, the "something must be done about it" brigade do not speak for this blogger. We'll take our chances choosing liberty over being protected, thanks all the same. Such stories make us very cynical. If this story is based on true evidence, other people will no doubt voice an opinion we share on the matter elsewhere. But we won't rush to judge and thus fall into any psychologically imposed games of divide and rule.

The timing of the above story is rather curious. Over in the Mail on Sunday, we also learn that the "[p]olice keep secret files on 1,900 protesters". Those with files on the database are - apparently - a diverse range of people who have exercised their democratic right to demonstrate about a range of political issues. So, be a good little sheeple and don't have an opinion on anything now, will you?

Now then... let's see if we can't match the stories in the Sunday Times, the Mail on Sunday, civil liberty plans by the new Government and hatch a good conspiracy theory about it when connecting the dots together... see what thirteen years of New Labour and a touch of David Icke reading has done? We don't believe or trust anything.

Elsewhere, the Sunday Express picks up on rumours that have been circulating concerning the German central bank quietly reprinting Deutschemark notes - just in case the euro fails and they have to resort to reverting to their own national currency.

That's your lot.

Memo to Miliband (D): No, we will not simply "move on" from Iraq - nor Lisbon...

A number of the Labour Party's leadership candidates seem determined to make a sizable number of the British people physically sick... by now raising criticisms of the Iraq war.

First up is Ed Balls. Now, we won't speak too harshly about him - despite being one of the Labour inner-core, he was not an elected MP when the decision to go to war in Iraq was taken. He does, however, admit that - had he been an MP - he would have voted in favour. He now calls the war a "mistake". Yeah... just not the kind of mistake a bottle of Tippex can deal with though, is it, matey?

Then we have Ed Miliband. Again, not an MP at the time we went to war with Iraq. This is the man who spent his time in Government dreaming up abusive words to hurl at people who refused to fall for all of the 'man made global warming' nonsense - which, like the case for the Iraq war, has since proven to have been built on a dodgy dossier of propaganda. In an interview with The Guardian, this particular Miliband looks at the Iraq issue through retrospective eyes and urges a line be drawn under the issue.

Nothing yet reported in terms of recent comment from Andy Burnham. But the record speaks for itself. He WAS an MP at the time and he voted IN FAVOUR of going to war.

Both Diane Abbott and John McDonnell were also MPs when the decision to invade Iraq was taken. And to their mutual credit, both saw through the dodgy dossier and voted AGAINST the war.

And then we have David Miliband. He WAS an MP at the time - and let's remember just exactly how high up the Labour command an MP he was - and he voted in favour of the war. So, what does he have to say on the matter today?

Let's take two newspapers at roughly opposite ends of the political spectrum - The Guardian and the Daily Telegraph. Every single thing he appears to have to say on the matter appears to relate to domestic politics. Move on. Draw a line. Yadda yadda. Not an ounce of remorse identifiable in the quotes in either newspaper. Not a pang of guilt or shame.

And now he wants us all to conveniently forget about it and move on?

Sorry, but this country will not move on from the issue of Iraq. For every alleged terror threat this country faces from supposed twisted fanatics, for every civil liberty clamped down on in this country... those who took us into Iraq will be directly responsible.

The entire country was repeatedly lied to and we still do not know the true agenda behind exactly why. A large number of British people - even before the invasion - had an idea the war was actually about oil. What else lay behind the case we were misled into believing?

We will not move on from the issue of Iraq until someone who had political clout and influence is held accountable in a court of law. The death toll from the Iraq war is simply horrendous.

Move on so the Labour Party can heal? What about the families of British troops who were sent to their deaths? The families of those in Iraq who lost their lives?

And why did we invade Iraq? As a response to 9/11..? The response to which has supposedly gone on ever since despite... well, do we need to go there? No.

But we would like an open, full, public inquiry into 9/11 in THIS country - led by a judge and with scientists, structural engineers and architects called to testify.

Move on... don't make us all sick.

And another thing we won't move on from, Miliband (D). We won't move on from the Lisbon Treaty. You signed the thing. So, we cite from the Treason Felony Act 1848. Here you go - direct from the Government's statute website:

"If any person whatsoever shall, within the United Kingdom or without, compass, imagine, invent, devise, or intend 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, or of any other of her Majesty’s dominions and countries, or to levy war against her Majesty, within any part of the United Kingdom, in order by force or constraint to compel her to change her measures or counsels, or in order to put any force or constraint upon or in order to intimidate or overawe both Houses or either House of Parliament, or to move or stir any foreigner or stranger with force to invade the United Kingdom or any other of her Majesty’s dominions or countries under the obeisance of her Majesty, and such compassings, imaginations, inventions, devices, or intentions, or any of them, shall express, utter, or declare, by publishing any printing or writing . . . . . . F3 or by any overt act or deed, every person so offending shall be guilty of felony, and being convicted thereof shall be liable..."

But we don't even need that. We have the Bill of Rights 1689 - a part of OUR constitution. How many laws - statutory and constitutional - does this country need to have been breached at the pens of David Miliband and Gordon Brown?

Iraq war? Move on? Nope.

Lisbon Treaty? Done deal? Get over it? Nope.

We don't care what David Miliband wants for the benefit of his political ambitions. We want our national sovereignty back. Now.

- Of all the Labour leadership candidates, only John McDonnell voted in favour of giving we, the people our say on the Lisbon Treaty in a referendum.

Blackpool rock!

Heartiest of congratulations to Blackpool who have won the Championship Play-Off Final and win their way back into the top flight of English football for the first time since 1971.

For Blackpool, it is the stuff of dreams, of fairy tales... more romance than even the FA Cup could muster.

It is an amazing tale and everyone associated with the club and the town can rightfully be delighted and proud.

Commiserations to Cardiff City and their fans and players who must be utterly heartbroken. However, in Dave Jones, they have a competent and brilliant manager who will no doubt make sure that next season counts.

It was a stunning play-off final in the blistering Wembley sunshine.

There could only be one winner - and it's Blackpool who tower above their rivals. It's Blackpool who rock...

As Cameron tells German Chancellor 'Nein, Frau Merkel', were 'eurosceptic' criticisms of the PM premature?

So, what is David Cameron up to now?

In Berlin meeting beleaguered German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Cast Iron Cam The Man's messages are receiving mixed headlines back here at home.

The BBC, for example, runs with a headline stating: "Cameron seeks 'positive' EU role after Merkel talks".

Now, a lot of people might read the headline, despair, and not read the actual story.

What becomes interesting is the EU-friendly selective quoting that the BBC have opted for. While noting in two-word buzz-phrases some of Cameron's noted reservations, the lengthy quote they go with is this from Cameron:

"I want Britain to be a positive player in Europe. I want us to work together to achieve the economic stability, the growth and action on European deficits that we know is very much in the interest of all our countries and in the interests of a strong, stable economy which we very clearly need.

Britain is not a member of the euro, nor are we likely to become a member, but we want a strong and stable eurozone. That is where 50% of our trade goes and it's our interest that that takes place."

Yes, Mr. Cameron, but if we left the European Empire entirely and freed ourselves of Brussels bureaucracy, how much cheaper would British manufacturers be able to produce their products for and what would be the result in exports as a consequence? So we do not accept the argument on trade as such a simplistic proposition... especially when we remind ourselves of our many billions the British taxpayer pays out for membership of the European Empire 'club'.

But good to see you stating that we are not likely to become a member of the eurozone. We would have preferred "will not ever" rather than "nor are we likely to become"... but it's a start. We'll be watching...

Staying with coverage in left-leaning media, The Guardian presents us with the headline: "David Cameron rules out new EU powers to strengthen eurozone".

Having read several versions of reports on Cameron's Grand Day Out In Deutschland, we are quite impressed with the apparent balance in The Guardian's reporting. We'll get back to Cameron quotes in a moment, but where The Guardian is interesting is in their selective quotes from Angela Merkel.

An emphasised early soundbite in their report reads:

Merkel conceded that Europe was divided over how to respond to the Greek debt crisis. "There is no unity in the eurozone about what exactly we're doing," she said.

Coming back across the political spectrum, The Times tells us boldly that "David Cameron vows to veto any eurozone bailout treaty".

It quotes Cam as saying: "There is no question of agreeing to a treaty that transfers power from Westminster to Brussels. That is set out 100 per cent clearly in the coalition agreement."

However, there is no direct quote from Cameron on which to become complacent about any headline suggesting he might do as the headline suggests and veto a bailout treaty.

Over at the Daily Telegraph website, the current headline is the remarkably similar "David Cameron ready to veto German EU treaty plan".

The Telegraph actually does have the quote from Cameron that is lacking in The Times report - they quote him as saying: "It goes without saying that any treaty, even one that just applied to the euro area, needs unanimous agreement of all 27 EU states including the UK, which of course has a veto. I think these are very important points to understand."

There is one line in their report which might bother some in the City, with Cameron apparently saying of hedge funds: "We accept the need for regulation but it does need to be fair and proportionate."

The Telegraph's final word is on a warning from Cameron that EU budgets must not be immune from the cuts facing nations across the European continent.

The Daily Mail offers us pretty much all of the above under the online headline of "Cameron tells Merkel: I'll veto any new EU treaty designed to shore up the eurozone".

Our favourite bit of their report is this:

"But as political tensions over the euro crisis rumble on, Mrs Merkel is unlikely to take kindly to Mr Cameron repeating his 'I told you so' remarks last night in Paris.

There he told President Sarkozy: 'I think we were right not to join the euro and I think we were right to stay out of the euro. I always had concerns about the euro on a fundamental level.'"

The Daily Mail report goes on to draw George Osborne into the narrative, reporting on how both he and David Cameron are laying down markers on the continent against any attempt to bring in any 'economic governance' agenda.

So, while 'eurosceptics' might be busy now trying to fathom out David Cameron...

...we'll puzzle what Osborne is up to. Isn't he supposed to be good pals with one of the Rothschilds? Seems a bit strange that he'd be allowed to oppose any move towards more global 'economic governance' really.

Maybe they really did fall out over that yacht...

A bit of fun-filled Friday Evil European Empire bashing

With all of the excitement over the General Election, we've been a little remiss in maintaining our momentum in bashing the Evil European Empire.

So, we'll use the so-far-quiet Friday to cover a few bases thus far unexpressed.

Earlier this week, we were watching the new U.S. State Sovereignty documentary Don't Tread On Me via the Alex Jones website.

There was an interesting point made in the documentary about inter-state trade and, from what we understand, the case was made that under U.S. arrangements, if an item is made within one State and it remains within that State, then the Federal Government has no legitimate case to seek to regulate over the head of the State's sovereignty.

You can see where this is headed already, huh?

So, we thought about that in the context of the Evil European Empire.

Maybe it's time we actually got someone with legal expertise to look at all of these European treaties and find out how far the Evil European Empire believes itself to be in charge - how much of our sovereignty has been surrendered.

Taking the American case as a reference, if we make something in Britain, it's stamped as being made in Britain and it never leaves the shores of Britain, then what business is it of the European Empire?

All of the time this blogger was growing up and slowly developing awareness of political issues, the mantra that the European Empire was nothing more than a 'free trade area' was used repeatedly by our political class and by certain left-wing newspapers to placate people's fears.

So, if we're making something for domestic consumption only and it is not ever traded with any part of the Evil European Empire, what business - legally or morally - is it of that undemocratic, continent-wide monster?

At what point does the Evil European Empire take an interest?

If the Evil European Empire has to inspect and regulate every tiny little action which takes place within British shores, then we have absolutely no sovereignty left whatsoever.

So, we'd like a lawyer or someone in the political class to answer that one for us - and then explain it to the people.

-

A couple of interesting blog posts and articles from the last few days which we'd like to point you in the direction of.

Fausty's Libertarian Blog contains a fascinating article setting out a case as for why we are possibly not bound by Gordon Brown's signature on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Lawful Rebel shares a letter to PM David Cameron setting out Constitutional questions over the legality of the Lisbon Treaty and using our shared accusation of treason...

And finally, Gerald Warner in the Daily Telegraph's pages writes about the role of UKIP, drawing parallels with the David and Goliath story in exploring the party's relationship opposing the Conservative Party.

Happy reading!

Bravo yet again - the coalition that keeps on giving: Now Hague promises judge led inquiry into torture allegations

The Conservative-LibDem coalition keeps on announcing things that this blog can only cheer.

After the tyrannical years of New Labour, we are delighted to see so many moves by the new government to restore order, rights and freedoms to our nation's people - the rights and standards of decency towards which Labour demonstrated a blatant disregard for.

Tonight comes an announcement from Foreign Secretary William Hague. He has told the BBC that there will be a judge-led inquiry into allegations of British complicity in torture (and hopefully, with that, will come investigation into extraordinary rendition).

Don't get us wrong - we are not so woolly-liberal as to be soft towards genuine terror threats.

However, there is a right way and a wrong way to go about protecting our safety.

Getting the British public on side to be the eyes and ears of the spooks and the police is the right way to do it - not set us up as opponents; the State versus the public.

Labour saw all of us - the people who employed them as a Government - as potential enemies.

What Labour sanctioned in terms of civil liberty abuses was disgraceful enough.

Now, thanks to William Hague and the new Conservative-LibDem coalition, we may well find out what disgraceful activities Labour was sanctioning without our knowledge.

So, bravo to Hague.

And to The Hague for anyone found to have been complicit in any case of torture.

We don't care who anyone is - torture is just not something we will condone. In any circumstance.

Hurrah! Theresa May halts McKinnon extradition case

After the news that a group of alleged 'Al-Qaeda operatives' could not be extradited from this nation because of their 'human rights' comes a bit of balance and possible justice - finally - with news that...

...Home Secretary Theresa May has put the extradition case against computer hacker Gary McKinnon on hold.

We welcome this move and praise it as another positive step in righting some of the wrongs of the New Labour tyranny.

Under our constitution, it would be wrong for Gary McKinnon to be sent for trial away from home to be judged by people who are not his peers - especially as the alleged crime took place from British soil.

The Americans won't like it. Tough.

Labour's way back: a Abbott-McDonnell dream ticket?

A long, long time ago, this blogger would have lent support to the Labour Party.

Yes, I know... but hear me out. Working-class blood, industrial heartland of the country - the Labour Party as was held natural affinities. Or so we were brought up to believe.

There is no way in hell that this blogger could ever support the current Labour Party.

So, who do we have as possible leadership contenders?

The Marx Brothers? Don't make us laugh. One, we continue to contend, should be questioned under the treason laws for having signed the Lisbon Treaty. The other spews out a lot of hot air about 'man made global warming'. They both make this blogger want to vomit.

Then we have Ed Balls and Andy Burnham. One is tainted by his close relationship with Gordon Brown and the other... isn't he the one who advocated mass medication through the water supply? We might be suffering from disremembrance, but we think that's the case. Both are as exciting as a lo-sugar cold rice pudding.

All of the above betrayed their manifesto promises regarding the Lisbon Treaty and so have proven that they cannot be trusted.

Then we have Diane Abbott and John McDonnell. The former abstained on the Lisbon Treaty. The latter was one of the rare Labour MPs who actually honoured their promises to the electorate and voted for us to have our say in a referendum.

Both Abbott and McDonnell have great appeal to traditional 'old' Labour voters. Both have impressed greatly with speeches that are thought provoking and stirring. Both have demonstrated that they are not pathetic little 'yes men/women'. They are individuals of true consciousness who will not be bossed around.

If Labour wants to renew itself, it must first make contact with it's traditional core support.

Two Eds, two MiniMiliMarxists, and some burning bollocks are not the solutions to Labour's woes.

Labour have alienated a huge number of people who once would have been considered their core, traditional vote.

If you get to vote on the new Labour leader, a joint ticket of Abbott-McDonnell would be so persuasive, even this blogger would find it difficult to attack. Think about it.

However, plump for any of the tainted figureheads of the last thirteen years and we'll not be changing our tune or attitude...

Diana: French autopsy doctor stated 'the Queen of England would have to negotiate with the President of France' in order for further tests on samples

Just received the press kit that accompanies John Morgan's new book on Diana's death.

Morgan has played an ace card, it seems. Not only has he given the press the usual standard press kit, he has also given them a huge 73 page pdf file showing some of his supporting material.

Obviously, it would take anyone quite some time to analyse all of what is contained in that huge document.

However, get this - spotted on a quick skim...

Page 44 of the pdf is a cover sheet which reads:

REPORT OF A MEETING WITH
DR. GILBERT PÉPIN AND
DR. MARC DEVEAUX
AT TOXLAB, PARIS,
ON 18th MAY 2006
WITH
PROFESSOR A.R.W. FORREST
AND MR. MICHAEL BEER

Then, on pages 48/49 of the pdf file - from the report named above - there is this extraordinary statement (bold text our emphasis, italics original emphasis):

31) Dr. Pépin had sought these letters in order to head off requests from Mohammed Al Fayed for for further analyses on the samples. Dr. Pépin said, spontaneously, that he thought my approach was the appropriate approach which was to meticulously examine the provenance of the samples and the original analytical procedures rather than to attempt reanalyses of the sample more than seven years after the analyses had been originally carried out.

32) I raised the issue that the measurement of Ethyl Glucuronide in hair might be an exception to this as the analyte is known to be stable over time. I thought that examining it might yield information of value.

33) Dr. Pépin made two points; firstly, he said this was quite impossible as once samples had been placed under seal they were the property of the French State and because a decision had been made that the only further analyses that could be carried out on these samples were for genetic purposes to establish their provenance without doubt. Other analyses might be carried out but it would have to be negotiated at the highest level. He said that the Queen of England would have to negotiate with the President of France for this to be done. He also raised technical issues that whilst it was known that Ethyl Glucuronide in hair was stable for one year or so, there was no data available as to its stability over a period of seven years. I thought it would not have been particularly tactful to express the thought that there were plenty of hair samples from people known to be heavy drinkers which had been kept in storage for more than seven years and which could be used to validate this test if that were felt to be appropriate. I thus did not share that thought. Dr. Pépin then spoke eloquently about an issue that was clearly dear to his heart. I quote my notes in full. Clearly I would defer to Mr. Beer’s translations if there is a discrepancy between his report of these comments and mine in this respect.

“Al Fayed’s Lawyers have always wanted to have all the tests redone in different Laboratories. The imprecision of the results will call the original results into question. I have always explained that to French Judges. I have explained that to French Judges and to the President of the Company of Experts who has attested as have the French Society of Analytical Toxicology that five or six years later, the results would be uninterpretable and would not have probative value. It would be a Lawyer’s paradise and a Toxicologist’s hell. The only scientific voice that was appropriate was yours (ie. ARWF); checking what was done was done properly, validated in conformity with the state of the art at the time.

Ethyl Glucuronide in hair is stable for one year. Would it have degenerated over seven years? Thus there is a probability that the Lawyers would make a meal out of it if the analyses were carried out. In any case, the Public Prosecutor has forbidden going back to look at the samples again except for DNA analyses”.

So, there's something interesting spotted in just a five minute skim read.

Morgan's latest findings run to a whole 700 pages worth of investigative research and analysis. Might be worth popping into your shopping baskets on Amazon after all...

Diana: Fayed backs author who claims Henri Paul was 'framed'

Mohamed Al Fayed has thrown his support behind a new book by Australian author John Morgan in which he claims that Henri Paul was 'framed' as a drunk driver part-responsible for the crash which led to Diana's death.

Tell us something we don't know.

The Daily Express makes the latest claims front page news, following on from a report in yesterday's Sydney Morning Herald.

Regular readers of this blog will have seen us state before that we read the official inquest transcripts in their entirety and they only reinforced our previously held belief that Diana was the victim of foul play.

We maintain our belief that Diana's campaign against anti-personnel landmines, rather than her relationship with the Fayed family, is what should have been thoroughly examined.

Despite having many witnesses refuse to appear at the official British inquest, the jury concluded that Diana was the victim of "unlawful killing", caused by Henri Paul and "following vehicles" - the persons on and in the latter were not identified.

Following the Diana inquest, the Labour Government announced plans to have some inquests heard in secret.

Fayed's spokesman Michael Cole is quoted by the Daily Express as saying: "We are sticking to our unshakable belief that one day the whole truth will come out."

We share the same sentiments.

The Daily Express article also carries a quote from the highly respected lawyer Michael Mansfield QC who, despite no longer being on the Fayed payroll, continues to state on the record his belief that Diana was the victim of a conspiracy.

We again congratulate the Daily Express on their ongoing crusade to keep the questions about Diana's death in the public consciousness.

Quote of the Day - 19th May 2010

"There is also unlikely to be anything in next week’s Queen’s Speech on scrapping the present Barnett Formula which gives Scots more than £1,600 more per head of public spending than the UK average."

- Angus Macleod for The Times tells those of us in England all we need to know...

Stimulate the economy: cut personal taxes now

Just caught sight of Mrs. Clock's wage slip. It is for a very ordinary job, really and the wages are nothing special. Below the national average, marginally.

Anyway, how much tax and national insurance?

Utterly disgraceful.

Dick Turpin wore a mask. We know the identity of who is robbing us blind is this scenario.

The Government.

And they're robbing £500 a month from a modest pay packet.

What for? To play Robin Hood.

Rob from the not-at-all-remotely rich and give to the poor.

So, as we know, all the money being robbed from Mrs. Clock's pay packet goes on:

- The workshy
- Immigration populations
- Membership of the Evil European Empire
- Crackpot 'green' projects to fight ManBearPig
- Quangos galore
- Bloated public sector staffing

...and so on, and so forth.

How much of the money from our taxes goes on anything we actually want or use?

In addition to this, we all still have excessively high power bills, the ludicrous BBC telly tax, disproportionately high food bills due to farm land being turned over to 'green fuels'...

...and we're expected to bail-out Greece and every other begging hand in the world.

No wonder we struggle in the Clock Tower.

Look, just cut the taxes. All of them. Let us have some spending power back.

Give us some spending power, and we'll buy - and on a tide of patriotism, we'll do our best to only buy British; thus boosting British industry and helping create British jobs.

These tax bills are utterly criminal and amount to little more than legitimised theft. If you must rob us all senseless, at least let us choose what we want to spend it on.

And we assure you, it will be none of the above.

UPDATE @ 22.25: No sooner do we blog and George Osborne makes a speech at the CBI stating that he will substantially increase the personal tax allowance. We promise you, we weren't put up to that post by any political party. We cannot, however, guarantee that George Osborne was not reading The Talking Clock earlier this evening...

Clegg's speech is a winner - now let's see if they deliver

So, the heavily trailed speech by Nick Clegg has now been delivered and the full text is known.

We're not going to criticise. In fact, we'd like to praise it highly.

A couple of concerns.

Firstly, the pro-civil liberty stance is both a Conservative and LibDem position. The Conservative MPs must not allow Nick Clegg to claim all of the plaudits from the libertarian community.

Second, this blogger has always been resistant to the idea of an elected House of Lords. We've still not heard a single case in favour of reforming the Lords which convinces us. One could argue that we need democracy, not hereditary privilege. But what is democracy? It's the will of the majority trampling over the minority.

Or, as Alex Jones might say, it's two wolves and a sheep voting on what is for dinner...

Anyway, with those caveats, here are the sections of the Nick Clegg speech which really do appeal to us - proof in the pudding, as ever:

First, sweeping legislation to restore the hard won liberties that have been taken, one by one, from the British people.

This government will end the culture of spying on its citizens.

It is outrageous that decent, law-abiding people are regularly treated as if they have something to hide.

It has to stop.

So there will be no ID card scheme.

No national identity register, a halt to second generation biometric passports.

We won't hold your internet and email records when there is just no reason to do so.

CCTV will be properly regulated, as will the DNA database, with restrictions on the storage of innocent people's DNA.

Britain must not be a country where our children grow up so used to their liberty being infringed that they accept it without question.

There will be no ContactPoint children's database.

Schools will not take children's fingerprints without even asking their parent's consent.

This will be a government that is proud when British citizens stand up against illegitimate advances of the state.

That values debate, that is unafraid of dissent.

That's why we'll remove limits on the rights to peaceful protest.

It's why we'll review libel laws so that we can better protect freedom of speech.

And as we tear through the statute book, we'll do something no government ever has:

We will ask you which laws you think should go.

Because thousands of criminal offences were created under the previous government...

Taking people's freedom away didn't make our streets safe.

Obsessive lawmaking simply makes criminals out of ordinary people.

So, we'll get rid of the unnecessary laws, and once they're gone, they won't come back.

We will introduce a mechanism to block pointless new criminal offences.

And, we will, of course introduce safeguards to prevent the misuse of anti-terrorism legislation.

There have been too many cases of individuals being denied their rights...

And whole communities being placed under suspicion.

This government will do better by British justice.

Respecting great, British freedoms...

Which is why we'll also defend trial by jury.

Hurrah to virtually all of that. And there's a tiny bit more:

Our plans to disperse power also include strengthening devolution to other parts of Britain: Working with Holyrood to implement the recommendations of the Calman Commission...

Working with the Welsh Assembly on introducing a referendum on the transfer of further powers to Wales...

Supporting the continued success of the devolved government in Northern Ireland.

And, of course, asking what we can do about the difficult issues surrounding the West Lothian Question.

Many sites have the entire speech available - here it is on the BBC website.

Dear Nick Clegg...

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg (no, doesn't sound right still, does it?) is giving an invitation to the Great British public to tell the Government which laws we want them to scrap.

Is he attempting to set a world record for the biggest mailbag ever created in history?

After the hell of Labour, it's a delicious breath of fresh air.

Where to start?

How about repealing the Lisbon Treaty? How about part-repealing the smoking ban?

Scrap the DNA database. Scrap compulsory biometric ID cards. Scrap the NHS database. Scrap ContactPoint. Scrap RIPA. Scrap stop and search powers.

Scrap all the free-speech prohibiting 'hatred' laws. Scrap anything that makes "positive discrimination" possible.

Scrap every piece of statute and return us to a nation that gets by on the common law principles of loss, harm and injury..?

The exception being a few bans which you could introduce - ban all quangos, lobbying organisations, Parliamentary whips, political campaigning by charities...

We also have a brilliant revenue raising idea for you, Mr. Clegg.

How about introducing a license fee for CCTV cameras. Private individuals could have a low tariff, businesses another, local authorities and state organisations another.

It would stop the proliferation of the ruddy things and raise a fortune for bankrupt Britain at the same time. Simples.

Anyway, Nicky boy, we're sure you know most of what we want scrapped already, but if you get on with what is a brilliant bit of PR until it becomes reality, we'll support you all the way.

Now, where do you want us to tell our lovely blog visitors to send their letters to?

Prove they're twisted - then kick them out, if need be

The case dominating news headlines of supposed Al-CIAda suspects winning their appeal against deportation creates a difficult point of position for a blogger such as I - one who is fiercely loyal and patriotic and who is also a proud libertarian.

Such a case will no doubt be greeted with horror by some of our (asserted to be) more right-leaning blogger colleagues.

Just for the record, this blogger is very suspicious about any claims of twisted fruitcakes being part of any such organisation. We have seen no evidence of any such "organisation". If there is one, who is it's leader? Who funds it? Where is it based?

Oh, a remote mountain in the middle third world somewhere that our forces are bombing to smithereens. How convenient.

And we're very tired of having supposed twisted fruitcakes being used as an excuse to justify all the bad decisions of Government and every other bit of bad luck in the world.

Why did Portsmouth get relegated from the Premier League? 9/11.

Why is that volcano erupting? 9/11

Why did it rain today? 9/11

Nope, sorry, don't buy it. Find it distasteful.

And we still think that - as so many decisions have been taken in THIS country effecting our freedoms and liberties, supposedly because of 9/11, then we should have a full public inquiry into 9/11 in this country.

But we digress.

If we really do have some foreign fruitcakes in our country who want to genuinely do us harm, as a patriot and a libertarian, here's what we'd like to see.

1. Gather the evidence
2. Charge them and put them on trial
3. Convict or release
4. If convicted, deport them - irrespective of where to

What appears to be the case in today's headlines is that we did steps one and four, but didn't bother with numbers 2 and 3.

If steps one to four are followed and a court - like today - says we can't deport someone due to 'human rights', then... sadly... this libertarian must give in to patriotism.

If there are powers in this country who wish to do great harm to the people and sovereignty of this country, they should be dealt with.

If they are a foreign national - individual, pressure group, banking cartel, or otherwise - if they mean harm to our country, get them out of our country. Change the laws to make it happen if need be.

If they are a UK national, then they should meet justice in the normal manner - whether they be twisted individual, traitorous politician guilty of signing the Lisbon Treaty, banking cartel employee or otherwise.

It will be interesting to see what other bloggers from the conservative libertarian family have to say on the matter - and what the mainstream media think.

Even the BBC is close to incredulous...

Boris's beautiful non-bendy old-new buses

Delighted to see the images of the Boris Johnson-promised and commissioned new Routemaster buses for London.

Apologies for this seemingly London-centered post, but this story is actually a bit more than a London matter.

The Routemaster bus, you see, was much loved by Londoners - and yet was withdrawn by Ken Livingstone. We're sure he had his reasons.

Yet it was not just Londoners who loved the Routemaster - so did and so do the tourists.

There are a small handful of Routemasters still in limited service. Whenever you see one around the West End, you also see a gaggle of tourists swarming around to take photographs.

Like the red telephone boxes, the Routemaster was and is seen around the world as an emblem of Britain.

As famous in photos as Big Ben, Tower Bridge and Buckingham Palace.

And a damned fine and civilised way of getting around Central London in a rush.

So, bye-bye horrid bendy buses...

...and welcome back to the much-loved Routemaster.

Well done, Boris.

Will European Empire have the cojones to face Carswell and we, the people?

Much praise must be given to Douglas Carswell, the prominent and ever-patriotic backbench Conservative MP.

As you may know, a technical change to the Lisbon Treaty will require primary legislation here in the UK.

Carswell and colleagues are vowing to use such an opportunity to push for the referendum that we were promised in the manifestos of the Lib-Lab-Con in 2005... but which Labour and the LibDems reneged on - thus breaking their promises to the electorate.

And, as you know, Call Me Dave Cameron's cast iron guarantee of a referendum was dropped once the Lisbon Treaty was ratified.

However, an alteration to the Lisbon Treaty requiring UK legislation puts Call Me Dave back in the hotseat. Especially as he is now Prime Minister.

What will he do?

Conservative backbenchers - such as the ever-heroic Douglas Carswell - can be counted on to push for the referendum that we all demand and are owed.

But will they get it?

One suspects that the wicked European Empire - which has form for making and breaking rules whenever it feels like it to suit it's own agenda - will know what will happen if they make their change to the Lisbon Treaty... so will simply break their own rules and be seen to be damned. We know how it works, by now.

So, don't be surprised if the Lisbon Treaty doesn't come back for this measure. We suspect they'll cheat, con and rule break as per usual rather than submitting themselves to the risk of the will of the people.

But don't fear - we're confident Douglas Carswell and his patriotic colleagues will TRULY not let matters rest there...

In that endeavour, Douglas Carswell can back on this blog backing him all the way.

Sunday Paper Review: 16th May 2010

The Sunday Times contains a quote from 'Saint' Vince Cable who lets on that Labour's suspected scorched earth policy towards the economy in the run-up to the election was even worse than speculation feared. The newspaper quotes him as saying: "I fear that a lot of bad news about the public finances has been hidden and stored up for the new government. The skeletons are starting to fall out of the cupboard."

The new Conservative Chancellor George Osborne promotes a similar message in the News of the World. He writes for the tabloid, stating: "Labour brought Britain to the edge of bankruptcy and left everyone but themselves with the bill." He clears the Treasury of any accusation of mismanagement, with the accusation: "No, the truth is that Labour governed in their own narrow party interest — not in the national interest. They should never again be trusted to run the economy."

The Sunday Telegraph states that Labour's popular backbencher Frank Field has been asked to join the Conservative-LibDem coalition as a "poverty tsar" and compile a report into levels of poverty across Britain.

Labour supporters wondering how the unlikely coalition between the Conservatives and the LibDems went ahead need only look to the Independent on Sunday. The dastardly attempt by Labour to over-rule the electorate and form a coalition preventing the Conservatives taking their rightful place in Government was foiled by a number of people. LibDem peer Lord Ashdown is cited as blaming David Miliband for a "failure of action" and, he adds, there "were the Neanderthal people who have always been tribalist in their approach, Prescott, Straw, Blunkett, Reid ... the old knuckle-draggers stopped it happening for tribal reasons."

Meanwhile, cracks in the Conservative-LibDem coalition have started to appear. Former LibDem leader Charles Kennedy has revealed in The Observer that he refused to vote in favour of the coalition, preferring instead to abstain. The Scottish politician has stated that he would have preferred the third-placed LibDems to explore the proposed coalition with the heavily defeated Labour Party. Labour's disproportionate vote share from Scotland - which has devolved powers - prevented the Conservatives winning a majority. Scotland's representation at Westminster is now becoming a source of resentment from many people within England which has no devolved, England-only Parliament.

A row for the Conservatives is about to bubble up too, one suspects. The Mail on Sunday carries quotes from the Scottish LibDem politician Danny Alexander. He was apparently astonished at how easily the Conservative negotiating team were willing to cave in to the LibDem negotiators as the coalition was being formed. The apparent willingness to comply with LibDem demands apparently owed much to the Cameroons' determination to bury the Tory right.

The former Conservative Vice-Chairman, Chris Chope MP, is quoted by the Sunday Express as accusing the LibDems of having set "a very sophisticated honey trap" for their Conservative counterparts to fall into.

Miliband vs. Miliband

So, the Marx brothers - David and Ed Miliband - are to do the brotherly bust-up for the leadership of the Labour Party.

Hardly seem like the ideal twosome to give the Labour Party the fresh change it so desperately needs. Same old, same old. So much for being 'progressive'.

One of the Marx brothers should be arrested for treason; the other - thanks to his previous portfolio - is now best described as 'Windy Miller: The Cold Vegetarian Tart'.

We'll leave you to work out which is which...

Is Dave determined to do a Diana or is terror talk double speak?

The Evening Standard reports on security fears over David Cameron after it has become known that he has made a conscious decision to dispense with the security of police outriders.

We were horrified to see the TV images of his drive from Buckingham Palace to Downing Street when his car, unaccompanied, simply sat in traffic and had no end of people approaching the vehicle.

Dave seems a nice enough chap. A bit wet around the edges and not as conservative as a Conservative should be.

We'd hate for anything to happen to him.

Diana, Princess of Wales also dispensed with the formalities of protection. While nothing happened to her in the UK to effect her safety, she was constantly hassled and bothered by paparazzi - leading on one occasion to a member of the public having to physically intervene in an altercation.

Then look what happened to Diana in Paris. Drunk driver, my arse...

So Dave, please reconsider.

If, on the other hand, you believe that there is no increased risk through your choice, then fair enough.

However, from that choice we must conclude that the much-hyped terror threat is not all it's cracked up to be - else you've made the conscious choice of preferring to have your freedom and make your own choice.

If it's the latter, we would actually take our chances against a few warped and twisted fruitcakes, too.

So, if you've made an assessment and a choice, give us that choice too.

Repeal all those draconian supposedly 'anti-terror' laws.

We'd rather take our chances with a few fruitcakes too, rather than by tyrannised by the State - whether or not it's supposedly 'in our best interests'.

Economist tells Bloomberg: "They’ve given up on the euro."

Investor and economic analyst Jim Rogers, chairman of Rogers Holdings, has spoken of his amazement at the huge bailout of the euro agreed last week.

Speaking to Bloomberg, Rogers declared the move "another nail in the coffin" for the single currency. He says of the bailout: "I was stunned. This means that they’ve given up on the euro, they don’t particularly care if they have a sound currency, you have all these countries spending money they don’t have and it’s now going to continue."

He warns international investors of the euro: "It’s a political currency and nobody is minding the economics behind the necessities to have a strong currency. I’m afraid it’s going to dissolve. They’re throwing more money at the problem and it’s going to make things worse down the road."

Read the rest of the interview and see the Bloomberg TV clip by clicking HERE.

So, with that being the state of affairs, we're hopefully at least not going to have to worry about our country being dragged into that particular aspect of the 'new world order' political project anytime soon.

Is there something about being a leftist that makes one so very aggressive?

Goodness gracious. Did you catch BBC1's Question Time tonight?

If you did, you would have no doubt have - cough - 'enjoyed' the spectacle of someone called Mehdi Hasan ranting and raging and being generally aggressive and objectionable.

Hasan, we find, is the Senior Political Editor of the New Statesman and occasional writer for The Guardian.

So, not somebody whose natural political home would be anywhere near the right of the political spectrum, you wouldn't expect.

What we would expect and now do expect from leftists is this constant 'aggressive' form of what is supposed to be 'debate'.

Are leftists possible of having calm, controlled, friendly meetings of minds in which they exchange views calmly with decorum and like gentlemen?

Both Lord Heseltine and Simon Hughes sat at the Question Time desk tonight, calmly responding like gentlemen and statesmen fending off the ranting and ranting of Hasan.

In the middle sits polemic right-wing writer Melanie Phillips whose normally forthright attitude looks decidedly twee and demure compared to Hasan's ranting at the side of her.

Also in the middle sits Labour's Lord Falconer. Now, he's a man whose party has just been booted from office. And he was saying pretty much similar things to Hasan. But Falconer was able to say what he wanted to say with control and an air of gentlemanly Statesmanship. Dignity and decorum.

It's not just Hasan we're criticising.

Did you see that protest outside the first Liberal Democrat meeting? The one for 'Fair Votes Now' and 'We Want To Speak To Nick'..?

Goodness grief.

But they were like sweet little pussycats compared to others.

We had the sight and sound of people greeting William Hague and George Osborne when they left the final talks with the LibDems at the Foreign Office being howled at by people abusing them with chants of "Tory Scum!"

The bad spirited 'boos' from Labour placard carrying losers when David Cameron finally first entered Downing Street.

Then there's the Unite Against Fascism crowd who, no matter where they go, there always seems to be violent confrontation.

Tonight we learn that Manish Sood - the Labour candidate who called Gordon Brown Britain's worst ever Prime Minister just before the election - has been suspended by the Labour Party.

Sounds about right.

We thought Manish Sood was the most sensible sounding and reasonable Labour Party representatives we had heard from in a long time. It is not inconceivable that, had Manish Sood been standing as a candidate for our constituency, we might have thought about voting for him on an individual (rather than party) basis.

For he was very reasonable and presented his case with clarity, calmness and a sense of British patriotism.

But no - the Labour Party wouldn't like that.

This is "progressive" leftist politics.

The left is all about equality and fairness and free speech... provided they have pre-approved the speech and it is fair to left-wing politics.

Any deviating thoughts get abused, shouted at, yelled down... or outlawed.

Just what is it with some types of leftist that they cannot sit down calmly and listen with respect and courtesy to people with whom they disagree?

Is there something in the DNA of leftists that makes them get all shouty-shouty all over the place?

The political left appears to be a place for those who believe in fairness and equality for all people who will agree with those on the political left.

Have a differing viewpoint and they'll be coming to get you.

Seriously, the leftists - as a collective - really scare and intimidate me.

But they never win me over to their side of the argument.

I can seldom hear what it is they want to say for all of that shouting.

Civil liberties alert: Grannies convicted of speeding in 1969 to be dragged from beds and forced to give DNA samples

Okay, our headline is shocking... but so is the quote.

The BBC carries a quote from Theresa May, the new Conservative Home Secretary - who appears to be continuing where Jacqui Smith left off.

Some great stuff on civil liberties emerging from the Con-LibDem coalition, BUT... we fear we may be rejoicing the demise of the tyranny of New Labour prematurely.

Read this:

"We are absolutely clear we need to make some changes in relation to the DNA database. For example one of the first things we will do is to ensure that all the people who have actually been convicted of a crime and are not present on it are actually on the DNA database. The last government did not do that. It focused on retaining the DNA data of people who were innocent. Let's actually make sure that those who have been found guilty are actually on that database."

So hang on. Let's suppose a woman who is now an elderly and infirm sweet dear granny was charged and convicted of speeding in 1969. What are they going to do? Check for her DNA, finds she's not on the database, issue an arrest warrant and go round to drag her from her bed to give a sample?

So who will they select?

Everybody ever convicted of watching TV without a license? No matter how long ago the criminal offence?

The Rehabilitation of Offenders Act states that "once a conviction is ‘spent’, the subject does not have to reveal it or admit its existence in most circumstances" noting the caveat that "there are various rehabilitation periods depending on the sentence given."

It is estimated that "at least twenty percent of the working population has a criminal record and one in three men under the age of 30 have criminal convictions."

There may be trouble ahead, folks...

-
See also: Gerald Warner - "May is a one-woman disaster area, a ticking time-bomb of incompetence waiting to detonate in one of the more sensitive departments of state."

The Sun did it again... bring us our own gags on the front pages!

Is this blog actually inspiring The Sun's front pages?

Our satirical 'squatter' banner depicting Gordon Brown's continued occupation of 10 Downing Street became the next day's front page of The Sun...

And now, after we wrote of David Cameron and Nick Clegg's press conference this afternoon: "It all sounded like the greatest non-sexual, occasional bed-sharing male relationship since Morecambe & Wise"...

The Sun front page reads: "They're the biggest double act since Morecambe and Wise."

We're happy to accept it's merely a co-incidence and that we're strangely in-tune with The Sun's headline writers.

If anyone from The Sun is taking inspiration from our gags, we don't mind. Just be aware that we nominate Prince Harry's charity Sentebale as our current preferred target of donation...

Attn: Theresa May - Treason suspects on loose in Britain

Conservative MP Theresa May is the new Home Secretary.

As she finds herself in that role, if she or her researchers should happen by this blog, can we just point out to you that a treason suspect or two are still walking the streets of Her Majesty's Kingdom?

Now, while the treason laws were fiddled with by Labour, we believe that the treason laws remain on the statute:

http://www.statutelaw.gov.uk/

In any case, we believe a high crime against Her Majesty The Queen and against the sovereignty of the people was committed contrary to common law and the constitutional document that is the Bill of Rights 1689.

And for that reason, Theresa May, public servant and a Minister of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II...

At common law, not acting upon a known act of treason is itself a high felony - and most certainly not becoming of a Minister of Her Majesty The Queen.

So we wish to report, remind and make you aware that commoners and Her Majesty's subjects, David Miliband and Gordon Brown, are still available for questioning for suspected treason offences. Both signed the Lisbon Treaty in an attempt to transfer and subvert Her Majesty's Sovereignty of the Kingdom.

God save the Queen!

Britain's first 'Berlin Wall' moment: Bye Bye Compulsory Biometric Identity Cards!

Difficult thus far to find much in the way of officialdom to back up this Daily Express news report, but they are reporting confirmation from the Home Office that the hated and despised compulsory biometric identity cards - and the huge database behind it - is to be scrapped under the new Conservative-LibDem Coalition Government.

Obviously, we'd expect that some kind of repealing legislation will have to be passed, but with the huge majority the Conservative-LibDem coalition commands, that should not be any problem if necessary.

In the meantime, rejoice, rejoice! The Wicked Old Witch of Labour lost her House of Commons seat and the tyrannical regime of New Labour has been booted out of office.

What a wonderful feeling of freedom we're starting to sense already. While nowhere near the same, perhaps this gives a tiny sense and insight into how people felt on the day the Berlin Wall came down.

How flipping joyous.

However, we would urge groups such as No2ID to keep their operations active and functional.

Just because we've got rid of the wicked Labour regime for now, it does not mean they cannot and will not be back in office someday.

Dave and Nick starring as.... Romeo and Julian: Loving for the love of the common purpose

Just seen the joint press conference of our new Prime Minister David Cameron and Deputy Prime Minister Nick 'Political Whore' Clegg.

Taking place on the sunny back lawn of Downing Street accompanied by the beauty of birdsong and tranquility of a gentle breeze... quite amazing.

And it all sounded very reasonable. It all sounded very positive. It all sounded like the greatest non-sexual, occasional bed-sharing male relationship since Morecambe & Wise. Since Laurel and Hardy.

Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou, Romeo? Here I am Julian. Kissy, kissy.

If this is how they're starting out, we're tempted to wonder if they'll be in a civil partnership before Christmas.

One just gets a little concerned about the number of times the two used the phrase 'common purpose'.

Common purpose? Uhmmmmmmmm...

Yes you Cam... for now.

So, after conducting himself with Statesman-like dignity since Thursday night - unlike his LibDem and Labour counterparts - Conservative leader David Cameron finally became Prime Minister tonight.

His entrance into Downing Street was accompanied by a mixture of cheers and a cacophony of boos and jeers - the latter coming from goodness only knows who.

As David Cameron attempts to form his Government, we invite him to make his first act something that would make his would-be detractors stop and think.

Yes, for his first act, he can officially cancel Labour's compulsory biometric identity card scheme. He can then set about removing the rest of Labour's apparatus of tyranny.

Do that, Prime Minister, and people of all political persuasions will give you great cheer - even if some are so tribal as to be forced to do it very begrudgingly.

We did not vote Conservative. However, it is right and just that you should be Prime Minister.

The nation has great difficulties ahead and a people who are worn-out by thirteen years of undelivered dreams, Government tyranny and remote politicians who think they can act with impunity.

Deal with that lot - and address the negative imbalance effecting the people of England - and we will support you all the way.

Our opposition to the European Empire is well known and we'll save our hostility towards you over that topic for another day.

Tonight, allow yourself the pleasure of the awesome experience that becoming Prime Minister must be.

A Dark Chapter in British Modern History Closes

'Goodbye and thank you.'

With those words, Gordon Brown - a man who plotted and schemed his way into the top job in British politics; never elected by party or country - finally relinquished his vice like grip of the door frame of 10 Downing Street.

While his farewell speech was dignified and brave, these genuinely emotional scenes will not be what the country will remember.

For this blogger, the disgusting circumventing of Parliament, of the Constitution, the civil liberty erosion, the signing of the Lisbon Treaty, the rotten state of the national finances.. these are the things by which Gordon Brown and Labour will be remembered.

Even to the bitter end, Brown and his sinister plotters and henchmen tried clinging onto the reigns and trappings of power - despite being booted from office by the electorate.

Indeed, the scenes of the last twenty-four hours may have further ramifications of damage to the nation, as many of the people of England will have the words of Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish nationalists ringing in their ears.

For the final act of betrayal of the nation, the very fibre of the Union has been called into question.

Goodbye, thank you... and Gord riddance.

Election 2010: Don't trust Liberal Democrats on Civil Liberties

Another thought on the very FACT that political whore Nick Clegg and his grab-whatever LibDems even entered into talks with Labour - against the wishes of the electorate.

In a bid to get the political voting system that will always lead to dodgy deals in dark doorways of the very seedy kind we're witnessing from the LibDems, there is obviously nothing that the LibDems wouldn't do.

We know the LibDems were complicit in the act of treason by sitting on their hands and assisting Labour in denying the British people the say they were promised on a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

And look who they want to do dodgy deals with - the Labour Party that the nation rejected. The Labour Party which tyrannised and terrorised the British public with civil liberty abuses on a scale unprecedented anywhere outside of Zimbabwe.

There is no way Labour would give up their databases, surveillance, identity cards and so on. We all know that - as do the LibDem hierarchy.

But they were still prepared to even consider propping up a totalitarian, authoritarian, sinister and rejected undemocratic Labour Party in order to get their grubby hands on a few more levers of power.

That the LibDems would even consider sliding into bed with such a civil liberty hating party as Labour shows that the LibDems must never be trusted or believed on a single thing they say about civil liberties.

The LibDems appear to be prepared to sacrifice anything and everything to get their grubby mitts on power through dodgy deals in dark doorways.

That they do all this in the name of a voting system that will ALWAYS lead to Government by dodgy deals in dark doorways says all you need to know about the double-ironically named Liberal Democrats.

Institute of Directors accuse self-serving Westminster whores of 'lack of statesmanship' that threatens the economy

IoD reaction to Political Crisis

Dated: 11 May 2010

Commenting on the political crisis, Miles Templeman, Director-General of the Institute of Directors, said:

Business growth and the economy have been forgotten

“It seems to us that business growth and the economy have been forgotten during these negotiations. This is very worrying because unless we get a strong and secure government, businesses are likely to continue to postpone investment decisions. Political uncertainty will have a negative knock on effect on business growth and job creation and, ultimately, on the whole economy.

“As well as being strong so that it can pass budgets and legislation where necessary, it’s vital the new government must look as though it will survive for several years. And crucially, on the policy front, it must be capable and willing to tackle the deficit through spending cuts and take other measures to reinvigorate the private sector. We are very concerned that the discussions taking place between the parties are not yet sufficiently focussed on building a government that meets all these tests.

“Political reform is an issue, but for this subject to overshadow the urgent necessity of creating a government that can deliver deficit reduction, demonstrates a lack of statesmanship from some of our politicians that is unacceptable under the economic circumstances.

Economic recovery is at risk

“Without a strong and secure government that is focussed on cutting the deficit though spending cuts rather than tax rises, we believe economic recovery will be in jeopardy. Political uncertainty will lead businesses to postpone investment decisions which will have a knock on effect on business growth and job creation. A politically weak government will find it very hard to get agreement on spending cuts and is likely to tackle the deficit, if at all, through tax rises. This would stifle economic growth because our businesses, small and large, are over-taxed already.

“So our message to the politicians is to focus on what matters and remember that your first responsibility is to the country and its economic well being and that party interests should come second.”

Nick Clegg, you are a shamed and shameful political whore

So, still no wiser.

We're only wiser about the nature of Nick Clegg.

The LibDem leader who tried to convince the British people that he was tired of the 'old politics' and promised to clear up the way things are done...

...has proven himself to be a shameful political whore whose party continues the well-worn Labour traditions of ignoring the electorate by negotiating secret self-serving deals in darkened doorways.

The country continues in limbo.

But at least wealthy, EU-loving Nick Clegg has also shown himself up as being nothing but an unprincipled political whore.

Lib-Lab Subversion of Democracy: Where is our Queen? Where is her flag?

As Labour and the Lib Dems attempt to subvert democracy and the will of the people, we must ask:

Where is our Queen? Where is her flag?

Your people are suffering, Ma'am.

There are powers at work in this country about which we have no knowledge.

You are our Head of State.

Show us you care...

Public fury at Lib-Lab Coalition of losers brewing

After the remarkable events of this afternoon, it seems no wonder that we're seeing a large number of people coming to this blog searching for info on how to protest against any proposed Lib-Lab alliance of losers.

This blog does not organise anything and we deliberately do not network in that way. We merely pass opinion.

However, we put the Liberal Democrats on notice.

We will not tolerate a Lib-Lab alliance of losers. We will march and strike.

The constant illegitimacy of Government where we, the people are actually mere trifling, piddling inconveniences to get a charade of approval from once every five years is not tolerable.

And to that end, we will join any nine million man march we hear of for a Government of legitimacy.

Update @ 18:28 - in a rare instance of impartiality, Nick Robinson on the BBC has just pointed out that the big beasts in Labour that the LibDems want to negotiate and possibly form a pact with are not even elected! Quite! Lord Mandelson - unelected. Lord Adonis - unelected. Result? Potentially another unelected Labour PM. Welcome to your 'progressive left', 'democratic' politics! And after all the anger at sleaze, too.