Tag: UK

Hey, you asked for it

Having kept the Scots in Great Britain thanks to the votes of non-Scottish people resident in Scotland – the majority of actual Scots voted for independence – the English are now upset that the Scottish National Party is daring to interfere in English affairs.

 The barefaced perfidy of the SNP’s decision to rat on their pledge not to vote against legislative measures that did not affect their constituents has been breathtaking. But, then, for all who know this lot, were any of us really surprised? This is, after all, a cult-like movement that knows no principle that it won’t abandon and no promise it won’t ditch in pursuit of its one and only goal – the break-up of the United Kingdom.

You will remember that Nicola Sturgeon pledged – no doubt hand on heart – on the metaphorical stack of Bibles that her Fearless Fifty Six MPs would interfere in laws that affected only England if that legislation materially affected the lives of their constituents and, specifically, if it caused a reduction in the Barnett formula cash that flows north from the Treasury.

However, at the first time of asking and with Labour stupidly – is there any end to this party’s suicidal tendency – offering them an open goal, the Nats put partisan advantage ahead of any semblance of sticking to their promises. In ordering her pathetically obedient troops to vote against a measure that would bring fox hunting legislation in England and Wales into line with that in Scotland Ms Sturgeon has shown that you can trust her word as much as you could her predecessor’s.

Who could have seen that coming? The SNP’s strategy is obvious. Make the life of the English Parliamentarians a living hell until they openly support Scottish independence. The English forced them to stick around when they wanted to leave, so making sure that the Union is as unpopular with the English as it is with the Scottish is the logical thing to do.

That was fast

I don’t know that I’ve ever seen a faster government U-turn:

Breaking: David Cameron climbs down on ‘back me or resign’ Downing Street has forced into a climb-down over whether Government ministers will have to resign if they want to campaign for Britain to leave the European Union, reports our Political Editor Peter Dominiczak.

Number 10 insisted that David Cameron “has not set out” whether “collective responsibility” will apply at the in-out referendum, which could be held next year.

Mr Cameron’s spokeswoman insisted that the Prime Minister had only said that members of the Government would have to resign during the renegotiation phase leading up to the announcement of a referendum if they wish to campaign for Britain to leave the EU.

Mr Cameron has not made a decision about whether ministers would have to quit if they campaign for a British exit, Downing Street claimed. It appears to leave open the possibility of ministers being able to campaign for Britain to leave the EU.

It sounds rather like the Prime Minister learned that he was about to lose most of his ministers and find himself facing a vote of no confidence only weeks after his big electoral victory.

I don’t think the usual kabuki is fooling anyone this time around. The EU isn’t going to cut Britain any slack, and even if they did, it wouldn’t matter because they could take it back anytime in the future. Sovereign or slave-state, that is the only relevant question.

You wanted Union

You’ve got Union:

Politicians who begged Scotland to stay in the Union should not complain if the SNP calls the shots at Westminster after the election, Nicola Sturgeon said last night. Polling last night showed that the nationalists are extending their lead – threatening to all but wipe out Labour north of the border.

But Ed Miliband yesterday refused four times to rule out going into a power-sharing agreement with the SNP if its MPs hold the balance of power for the first time. Yesterday she said: ‘During the referendum campaign last year, we were told repeatedly by politicians who were trying to persuade Scotland to vote no – and they succeeded – that Scotland was an integral part of the UK, that our view mattered,’ Miss Sturgeon said.

‘It’s completely unacceptable now for those politicians to say, when Scotland is perhaps going to make its view heard by voting SNP, to say your voice can’t be heard in the UK.’

She said her MPs – who could number as many as 50 after May 7 – would vote to roll back reform of the NHS in England. Traditionally, Scottish nationalists have not voted on health and matters that do not affect their constituents, since they are controlled in Scotland by the Holyrood parliament.

That’s some quality black knighting right there. The English shot down Scottish independence, so there is no reason that the Scottish MPs shouldn’t wreak havoc in Westminster.

The post-democratic EU

In keeping with their one-vote, one-time philosophy the Eurofascists have openly turned against democracy:

Alexis Tsipras believes the existing deal is a disaster and says he has a democratic mandate to demand changes. And this exposes democracy’s limits within the European Union. The German finance minister Wolfgang Schaeuble says: “Elections change nothing. There are rules”.

The president of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker said “there can be no democratic choice against the European treaties. One cannot exit the euro without leaving the EU”.

A German Euzi named Juncker speaking out against democracy. Greece is doing exactly the right thing; leaving the EU is hardly a threat, it is the restoration and recovery of national sovereignty from a gang of fascists who have learned to use banks instead of tanks.

Niles Farage of UKIP understands what is at stake here:

Anti-Europeanists

This celebration of Islamic expansion in Europe may explain why the French and British people haven’t been shedding many tears over Jews targeted by Muslims in Europe:

Rabbi Baruch Efrati, a yeshiva head and community rabbi in the West Bank settlement of Efrat, believes that the Islamization of Europe is actually a good thing.

“With the help of God, the gentiles there will adopt a healthier life with a lot of modesty and integrity, and not like the hypocritical Christianity which appears pure but is fundamentally corrupt,” he explained.

Rabbi Efrati was asked to discuss the issue by an oriental studies student, who inquired on Judaism’s stand toward the process Europe has been going through in recent years. Following the election of a hijab-wearing Muslim woman as the mayor of the Bosnian city of Visoko for the first time in continent’s history, the student asked the rabbi on the Kipa website: “How do we fight the Islamization of Europe and return it to the hands of Christians and moderates?”

Efrati wrote in response that the Islamization of Europe was better than a Christian Europe for ethical and theological reasons – as a punishment against Christians for persecuting the Jews and the fact that Christianity, as opposed to Islam, is considered “idolatry” from a halachic point of view….

“Europe is losing its identity in favor of another people and another religion, and there will be no remnants and survivors from the impurity of Christianity, which shed a lot of blood it won’t be able to atone for.”

One would have thought the Jews might have learned from the Granada Massacre and the Reconquista that betting on the Mahometans isn’t the smart thing to do. Meanwhile, David Goldberg declares that he has nothing to say to anyone in Europe:

It’s been so long since Europeans took their own national identity
seriously that it’s hard for them to remember why it is that they can’t
stand the sort of Jew who represents the Jewish future. One has to put
them on the proverbial couch and coax it out of them: Europeans hate
Jews because European national identity from the outset was a dreadful
parody of Jewish identity…. I speak three European languages apart from English and have nothing to say to anybody in any of them.

I used to like reading Goldberg back when he was Spengler. Now… what is he even trying to say?

Britain wants OUT

80 percent polled want Great Britain out of the European Union:

The biggest vote on this country’s ties to ­Brussels for 40 years saw 80 per cent say they no longer want to be in Europe, the ­Daily Express can reveal. It marks a huge leap forward in this news­paper’s crusade to get Britain out of the EU.

Some 14,581 people voted – 11,706 of them want the UK to quit compared with 2,725 who want to remain part of the EU.

The mini-referendum – the first on the issue since 1975 – was organised by two senior Tory backbenchers and a prospective Tory MP.

They believe the overwhelming result, which will be presented to David Cameron today, will force him to bring forward his planned in-or-out vote on the UK’s future in Europe to next year instead of 2017.

If Cameron still won’t commit to leading the UK out of the European Union, the Conservative Party is going to have to replace him. The EU has failed in literally every possible way. It has absolutely no credibility anymore; the usual threats and promises and electoral shenanigans are not going to keep the British in.

Paedophiles in Parliament II

Is it an accident that so many of the UK’s parliamentary pedophiles were instrumental in helping the UK surrender its sovereignty to the EU? I would tend to doubt it.

As Prince Andrew becomes the latest figure to be named in an establishment paedophile scandal, the British nation has woken up today to face, yet again, the uncomfortable possibility that they are governed by an elite political and media establishment that has, for at least the past 50 years, engaged in, covered up, and ignored institutionalised paedophilia.

I spent the month of November in the United States, whilst there the UK Home Office’s “Independent Investigation” into historical child abuse in Westminster hit new levels of absurdity when the SECOND appointed head of the investigation resigned due to links to those implicated in a paedophile ring….

Having come across much of this information as a Parliamentary intern in 2005, where it was described to me as “just what goes on here”, I  cannot believe that anyone with a long-term political career in Britain has not only not heard the rumours, but has come across or witnessed enough consistent information to believe they merit investigation.

Members of Parliament past and present would therefore fall into three categories: those who participated in child abuse, those who directly assisted in covering it up, and those who were aware of the issue but decided to do nothing. Indeed Lord Tebbit, Margaret Thatcher’s former Cabinet Minister and confidante, has bravely stated that both he and Thatcher were aware of a problem, which now implicates many of their close colleagues, but that there was a feeling at the time that investigating or exposing them would destroy the British Establishment, and that it was more important to protect it.

There may have been a time when I, and perhaps a large proportion of the British public, felt that the value of protecting the institutions and traditions of the British Establishment outweighed the necessity for justice for the victims of these crimes, but when current members of the Establishment issue their “strenuous denials” and still dismiss the possibility that such a thing could have possibly occurred, it seems they may be really operating either in the panic of self preservation, or in the assumption that there are simply still matters we don’t talk about for the “greater good”.

It’s also very hard to argue that there is any reason, let alone value, to protect the legitimacy and popular perception of the “British Establishment” now that the establishment doesn’t have much power any more after having ceded most of its important decision-making functions to bureaucrats in Brussels and NATO generals.

“Simon Danczuk MP, who has previously chaired meetings in Parliament on
the investigation has stated that he feels that the Prime Minister has
been “intentionally dismissive” of the issue, and that the investigation is being purposely “delayed and sabotaged” by the government.”

I suspect that the deeper the investigations go, the more it will become obvious that the pedophilia of British politicians has been the way in which their political loyalties have been directed. If UKIP throws its growing weight behind the investigations, they could well topple the evil British establishment on the wave of popular outrage and revulsion.

The Saxon stirs

You know what they say: Vote UKIP, get UKIP. This by-election result is huge, because it is presenting the English with a genuine and popular alternative to the single pro-European party and its three factions, Tory, Labour, and Liberal Democrat.

As last night’s executive action showed, what Americans need is a genuine American Independence Party.

The end of the Common Law

The British turn their backs on 900 years of legal sovereignty:

Today Parliament votes on extending the European Arrest Warrant scheme. Indefinitely.

I’m perplexed. Usually when we approach a significant milestone in this country we hold a national commemoration of sorts. But alas, thanks to David Cameron’s Three-Line-Whip, and the grim tendency of today’s MPs to fall into line by putting Party before country (and self before children/grandchildren), we seriously face the prospect of Britain falling one year short of a worthy 900th anniversary next year: of the independence of the British legal system.

How can I say this?

Because we appear to be tearing up almost a millennium of hard-won legal rights, to accommodate the free movement of (at most) several hundred European criminals – or ‘alleged’ criminals. At least, that’s how I would explain it to an alien in an elevator pitch.

As a police officer told me recently, “we wouldn’t be supporting these powers if politicians didn’t keep pushing free movement and EU expansion.” So, before this ‘wicked’ Parliament (and I don’t use this word as enthused street-slang) fires another nail into the coffin of citizenship and justice, not just for Britons, but all European residents, let’s reiterate some highlights from times before November 2014, when British generations slowly triumphed to be the masters of their own judicial system.

These cultural wars are long-wave historical events. They won’t be won or lost in our lifetimes. We can, of course, ignore them and simply go along to get along. Or we can take part of them, acting in the full knowledge that while we might win, or lose, a battle here and there, we will not get the chance to see the final outcome.

But we can influence it. Don’t you think Pelagius and the Asturians would look on the results of the Reconquista and feel that theirs had been lives well-lived?

Some thing that these extended timescales proves that there is no conspiracy and “progress” is a mere accident of history because no human lifespan is long enough to encompass the strategy or the consequences. The logic is correct, but then, logic also suggests an alternative, which is that there is something, or someone, that exists on a larger timescale and is capable of guiding events of these temporal proportions.

So, the question comes down to this: given what we can observe with the limited means at our disposal, which do you find more unlikely? A coin almost always flipping tails at random or some sort of unknown, long-lived being imposing its will on the coin toss?

I very much disagree with Sherlock Holmes. Vox’s 4th Law of Logical Analysis states: once you have identified the improbable, look more closely at what you assume to be impossible.

Retro robbery

The EU sticks the UK with an unexpected bill for $2.7 billion due to GDP revisions:

Addressing reporters in Brussels, Mr Cameron admitted the demand had made him ‘downright angry’ but he would not pay the £1.7billion, equivalent to £56 for every income taxpayer in Britain. The European Commission has demanded the cash by December 1, but Mr Cameron insisted he would not meet the deadline.

Downing Street later stressed that he was not simply delaying payment, and made clear there were no circumstances under which Britain would hand over £1.7billion.

Asked about the impact on UK staying in the EU, Mr Cameron said: “Well it certainly doesn’t help, let’s put it like that. I think there is a strong case for Britain involved in the European Union, if we can reform it in the way I have set out. When you are presented with a bill like this, with a month to go, is that helpful for Britain’s membership of the European Union, no it certainly is not.”

How shamelessly corrupt is this Tory quisling? What possible case can there be for Britain to be involved in the European Union, let alone a “strong case”? It significantly reduces the “good for the economy” and “good for trade” benefits a membership provides if you have to turn around and fork over $25 billion dollars for the privilege.

Any Brit who still favors EU membership needs to get his head examined. UKIP’s Farage puts it well: Ukip leader Nigel Farage said: “The EU is like a thirsty vampire feasting on UK taxpayers’ blood. We need to protect the innocent victims, who are us.”