Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine
"These are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman."

Sunday, 20 January 2013

Goldman bankers get rich betting on food prices as millions starve

A valuable article in the Independent highlighting the cold and ruthless attitude of bankers towards those who are most vulnerable. Not surprising given the industries history – but worth being reminded so that their propaganda in the MSM might have less chance of having its desired effect!

Bank criticised for making £250m after destructive spikes in global food market
"Goldman Sachs made more than a quarter of a billion pounds last year by speculating on food staples, reigniting the controversy over banks profiting from the global food crisis.

Less than a week after the Bank of England Governor, Sir Mervyn King, slapped Goldman Sachs on the wrist for attempting to save its UK employees millions of pounds in tax by delaying bonus payments, the investment bank faces fresh accusations that it is contributing to rising food prices.”

Monday, 14 January 2013

Where is Chilcot’s Iraq inquiry report?

Channel 4 News asks why the Chilcot inquiry has not delivered its report so long after it was set up. Governments are simply too able to control the progress of such inquires if they do not wish for truth to be available to the electorate.

Another clear need for some form of Direct Democracy which gives the people the power to know what its government is up to – when they want to know. However, this case does make a mockery of any pretended advantage of Coalition government.

The Liberal Democrats voted against the Iraq war – if coalitions were of any value – they would have refused to support any of the Tory’s policies until the report was published – or at least given a deadline.

From C4 News:

“Where is the Chilcot inquiry into the Iraq war, four and a half years after it was established and two months short of the tenth anniversary of the invasion?

A million words in, the inquiry team has been withered by illness and exhaustion, not a little of which has been caused by the intransigence of the political machine to regurgitate the papers of the time.

The resistance to its completion and publication are reportedly the political classes who supported and led the war effort – the very people most likely to be targeted by the inquiry findings. The fear is that the delays will become so protracted that the next election (2015) will be permitted to become yet another delaying force.”

Tuesday, 8 January 2013

But why pick on mothers who stay at home?

Of all the heartless and mindless policies that the Coalition has introduced, perhaps that of encouraging mothers to return to work before their children have started school is the most heartless and mindless.

It seems as if there is a deliberate plan by the Coalition to separate children from their mothers to undermine family life – which will also create insecurity and sometimes trauma within the children separated from their mothers at such an early age.

Coupled to this, with high unemployment amongst the young, mothers giving up work whilst their children are so vulnerable would provide work opportunities for many of these individuals who lives must seem to hold no future.

It was surprising but good to learn that even Margaret Thatcher shared this view from this article in the Mail:

“When my two sons were pre-school age, my husband and I had dinner with Margaret Thatcher. She had only recently left office and I recall feeling slightly shamefaced when she asked me what I did.

‘Actually I don’t do very much – although I am thinking of going back to work,’ I hazarded, not wishing to admit to the world’s most powerful and pre-eminent woman that I had actually made a considered decision to relinquish my career in order to stay at home and raise my children.

I imagined the former prime minister would be unimpressed; actually she applauded me. ‘My dear, you should not rush back to work. It just isn’t worth it. Your children need you.’

To this day, I recall feeling at once grateful that I did not have to embark on an exercise in self-justification, and pleased that a woman of such formidable political standing should recognise the value of my role as a stay-at-home mum.”

Monday, 7 January 2013

Cameron to stay until 2020!

David Cameron’s announcement at the weekend that he wants to stay Prime Minister until 2020 was probably more a veiled message to UKIP and its supporters that ‘if you think I am going to change my mind on Europe or disappear before the next election – you are mistaken’. This of course leaves the ex Tory supporters, who intend to support UKIP, in something of a quandary as they will be aware that by voting UKIP – they will, almost certainly, put Labour into office after the next General Election.

Having watched ‘The Iron Lady’ on Sunday [for the first time], it is difficult not to be struck by how Blair, Brown and now Cameron have wanted to take on the role of determined and resolute leader in the cause of ‘much needed reforms’. If the film is to have any impact, surely it should be that any reforms have to be with the agreement of the people [democracy is after all defined as ‘the will of the people’] and not regardless of public opinion.

If any warning were needed, beyond the danger of creating deep and lasting damage to the nation as Thatcher’s ‘free market’ policies have, there is the very real likelihood of long-term anguish and dislike, once out of office, as a result of forcing unwanted policies on the people – this clearly was the case for Thatcher and seems to have been the case for Blair and probably Brown. The lesson is that a reforming policy is likely to be a mistake if it does not have the general support of the people.

The temptation for a newly elected Prime Minister, particularly if their party has been out of office for some time, is to force through what they believe to be ‘necessary reforms’ – often reversing the policies of the previous administration. Since it is possible that the next election will not be won – great haste appears an imperative. Unfortunately, as we are seeing presently, this is very likely to result in poorly thought through legislation being passed.

This zigzagging of overall policy is harmful to the nation – because it creates bad laws – disregarding the cost of regularly enacting policies that are soon to be repealed. Far better to have an arbiter to approve any new laws that are to be passed – and the only group with the ultimate right to perform this role is the people themselves. Some form of Direct Democracy is becoming essential if the UK is to find its way through the current difficult and dangerous time in our history.

See also: There is no way back for representative democracy in its present form.

Tuesday, 1 January 2013

Will 2013 be the year we are promised a referendum on the EU?

In the last poll of 2012 the Observer showed Labour on 39%, the Conservatives 29%, Liberal Democrats 8% and UKIP maintaining their third position with 15%.

In his end of year address, Cameron carefully avoided any reference to the EU, which is somewhat surprising since it is the key issue for the Tories – the one that determines whether the Party can make any kind of challenge to Labour at the next General Election.

UKIP’s continuing popularity, if only as a party of protest, has caused Cameron his greatest dilemma and he has seemed, in his most recent appearances, to be a man struggling to cling on to his position.

It is quite clear that if he gave an unconditional promise to include an ‘in/out’ referendum in the Party’s manifesto for the 2015 election, UKIP’s stated primary aim would be served by the Tories and Cameron could feel confident that those Tory voters who have defected to UKIP would return to the Party thereby giving them a chance of beating Labour in 2015.

Unfortunately, for the prime minister, he cannot do this because the Tory’s biggest backers, the large corporations, want the UK as a full member of the EU as evidenced by the CBI Director-General, John Cridland, New Year message – in which he said “it was vital the UK remained at the EU table banging the drum for its national interest – shaping the agenda on Single Market reform; on climate change; protecting the financial services industry; and promoting new trade agreements.”

This helps to explain Cameron’s dithering on this issue. Since taking office his, or rather George Osborne’s, strategy has been to put the greatest pressure on the people, by implementing harsh austerity measures and continuing to allow high immigration so that they are prepared to work harder and longer for little or no extra pay.

Through these policies the aim is to create the best conditions possible for both British and overseas global corporations to locate the HQ for their European operations here. Lowing rates of corporation tax and allowing some of the largest corporations to pay little or no tax adds to the attraction of the UK.

Unless the UK is influential within the EU – these corporations will not choose to set up or stay here. So Cameron hopes he will able to do a deal with the other EU members whereby some political powers are returned to the UK, to pacify the voters who want to leave the EU, but still remain influential in Europe. Presently this seems a circle that cannot be squared and it is little wonder that he is avoiding the subject at all costs.

Since the UK buys significantly more from the EU than they from us and that we pay one of the largest contributions towards the EU’s running costs – it is possible that Cameron will be able to strike some kind of deal to return powers for they will not want us to leave. There seems little doubt that his much heralded speech on the issue is being delayed in the hope that he will be able to make an announcement at that time of, at least, the outline of such a deal.

If Cameron can achieve this, there is some hope that he could win a referendum on the offer because the extent to which the British people want to leave the EU, judging by recent polls, is not overwhelming – however, he will want to hold that referendum as a stand alone issue, not incorporated with one asking if we should leave entirely as this must be avoided at all costs! This probably will be suggested as the next step – should the ‘reclaimed powers’ referendum result in a ‘No’.

Although there may be some hope of light at the end of the tunnel for the Tories, against this complex backdrop is the fact that even with the above offer – not enough UKIP voters may not return to the Party to enable them to win the General Election. For those who wish for the UK to withdraw from the EU entirely – this would be a dangerous situation for if Labour do win, they are unlikely to be under the same pressure to hold a referendum and they will continue their policy of ‘being at the heart of the EU’ and seek to find ways to bind us indefinitely, through entangling us in as many new projects as possible.

Whatever the outcome, one thing is for sure – that whoever wins the next election – the policies introduced on the EU and other matters will not be for the benefit of the people, but for the global corporations whose interests the main parties serve.

The Union of Deceit

In a damning article for the Mail, Christopher Booker traces back the roots of the UK’s membership of the EU showing how, from the outset, the intention was to deceive the people about the true goal – until it was too late to escape. We are now seeing the last acts of this deception being played out and we will see, over the next few years, whether the British people are able to escape the trap set so many years ago.

When the “Common Market” was proposed, then eventually joined in 1973, it was done so on the basis of beneficial trading agreements with the rest of Europe. Apart from joining the single currency, Britain has accepted all constitutional evolutions and signed all the treaties necessary to stay a member the Union. We have now reached the point where the main parties, each of whom wants us to stay part of the single market, have to negotiate these final stages without allowing an ‘in/out’ referendum to be held.

Presently, Cameron is focusing his rhetoric on establishing a ‘looser relationship’ as a result of UKIP’s recent rapid rise in the polls and how this will be tackled will be revealed in his speech on the subject later this month.

Christopher Booker and Richard North had researched the story of the ‘European Project’ for their book The Great Deception, which was published ten years ago, and unearthed cabinet documents clarifying that Macmillion’s cabinet knew the full intentions of the apparently gold-tinted Common Market, (established by the Treaty of Rome in 1957) and during a cabinet meeting in 1961, formally agreed that the ‘grand plan’ must be concealed from the British public. This showed that Edward Heath was fully aware of the aim of ‘the project’, that of Europe becoming ultimately a Superstate, when he presented the Common Market as an economy-boosting unification of trading in 1973 – as Heath was Macmillan’s ‘Europe Minister’ at the time.

The ‘grand plan’ was conceived originally by Frenchman Jean Monnet, a senior League of Nations official who dreamt up ‘The United States of Europe’ in the 1920’s – no doubt as a response to WW1. Understanding that his audacious vision could never be implemented in one fell swoop, it should be introduced therefore as an innocent trading agreement that is always secretly seeking ‘ever closer union’.

With every new treaty, such as it was originally planned, Britain relinquishes ever more powers to the clandestine nucleus in Brussels. Once transferred, the ‘sacred principle’ was that they could never be given back. No wonder Macmillan was concerned with ‘considerable’ problems the true political objectives of the Treaty of Rome would bring, so that he insisted that it was vital to emphasise only the economic advantages.

After two failed attempts, Heath applied for a third time for Britain to join the Common Market, doing so immediately after he was elected in 1970. No sooner had the negotiations begun, Heath was made aware of the discussions on Brussel’s next steps toward ‘full integration’. Instead of informing the British public of the future implications of joining the Common Market, Heath whispered into Europe’s ear, appealing for silence – he did not want to scare the British public away.

Heath continued to pretend that the Common Market was no more than a trading arrangement, and publicly announced that fears about losing sovereignty and independence were ‘unjustified’. Two years earlier, however, he and a Senior Foreign Office official wrote a paper called ‘sovereignty’ which, according to Booker, “spelled out” how it would be decades before the public would be aware of how much “power to govern” they’d lost, by which time it would be too late.

Indeed, by 1986 came the ‘Single European Act’ that, under Thatcher, handed over new legislative powers including those pertaining to the environment such as rubbish collections and wind-turbines which have, to put it mildly, been of limited success, or more strongly, disastrous and useless.

Although Thatcher, after acknowledging the Common Market as something quite different to that which she had previously supported, rejected the Maastricht Treaty in 1990, which would have surrendered the pound in exchange for the euro and allowed Brussels to dictate and design Britain’s ‘social chapter’ – she was soon disposed of for Major to sign the treaty, albeit with single currency and ‘social chapter’ opt-outs.

But Britain has indeed been integrated into the EU’s ‘social chapter’ by more stealthier means – being sneaked in under the banner or ‘health and safety’.

Once Tony Blair came to power in 1997 he pushed for still ‘closer union’. After early political skirmishing and sabotaged treaties that intended to create a ‘Constitution for Europe’, Gordon Brown surrendered further sovereignty by signing the Lisbon Treaty, which brought in the farcical Court of Human Rights.

And now, so entrenched and suffocated by the EU Britain has become, it’s politician’s make vague and non-committal comments about ‘looser’ ties with the EU, while the Eurocrats themselves prescribe ‘more Europe’ to deal with the maladies Europe itself has caused. So powerful and overgrown has the tumorous European Union become that David Cameron, despite a majority wanting at least a referendum on Europe, still refuses the public their say, frequently remarking that he thinks: ‘the public don’t want to leave the EU.’

The ‘grand plan’ was conceived by one man; nurtured and watered with cunning and trickery, implemented successfully by neglecting it’s truthful directive and signed up to on the basis of deception and blatant lies. Britons need to wake up to deceitful premises of the EU and, one hopes, disprove the principle: ‘that once powers are given up to Brussels, they can not be returned.’

George Bush Senior's NWO Speech

Bush senior's NWO speech from 1991:

Commentators claim that Bush's New World Order is being planned and executed - and that this will take the form of a world government principally under the control of the global corporations - mostly from the US.

Using this route - democracy will be able to be bypassed almost entirely and a global feudalism established.