Category Archives: European Union
A) The EU WILL appoint Juncker if Merkel wants it.
TOWER HAMLETS (Andrew Gilligan)
Helal Rahman, a businessman and former Labour councillor in Spitalfields, says that “several hundred postal votes” in that one ward alone were cast on May 22 by people “who used to live here but have moved out to the suburbs. They rent their properties to eastern Europeans but keep their electoral registrations and convert their votes to postal,” he says. This is, of course, illegal.
Days before polling, the number registered for postal votes in one large council block doubled. Seventy-seven per cent of those votes were cast.
Residents and their families told The Telegraph that Mr Robbani’s supporters blitzed the building, signing them up for postal votes, then returned a few days later to collect the blank ballot papers. Mr Robbani has repeatedly refused to deny it. If you wanted to vote in person on May 22, things were often a little more difficult. Large groups of Rahman supporters picketed polling stations, remonstrating with some voters who refused to take Rahman leaflets. The council has received 20 complaints of voter intimidation.
The EU has many supporters. Some will forever be inspired – as I once was – by a dream of European peace and collaboration. Others may simply be ignorant, and not a few are hopelessly bribed by the vast personal benefits that accrue to EU employees.
However, there is a fundamental reason why I find it impossible to support the EU, and it is the total disconnect between the following two things
A) The EU has admitted that its aim is to create a European superstate;
“Transforming the European Union into a single State with one army, one constitution and one foreign policy is the critical challenge of the age, German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer said yesterday.” (1998)
… and the euro was a KEY part of this plan even though they KNEW it would fail. Indeed, they hoped it would fail so as to further their project:
“I am sure the euro will oblige us to introduce a new set of economic policy instruments. It is politically impossible to propose that now. But some day there will be a crisis and new instruments will be created.” Romano Prodi, president of the European Commission – 2001
‘“The single currency is the greatest abandonment of sovereignty since the foundation of the European Community… It is a decision of an essentially political character… We need this united Europe… We must never forget that the euro is an instrument for this project.” Felipe, Gonzalez, Spanish PM – 1998
Let’s be clear about this. The architects KNEW the euro would run into trouble and believed it would accelerate the federalisation of Europe into a superstate. The appalling unemployment of young people in particular is the price that the euro’s architects were willing to pay to see the achievement of their goal: not that they THEMSELVES would suffer any of the consequences of course.
Having established this fact, we turn to the second part:
B) NOT ONE SINGLE EUROPEAN CITIZEN OF THE 403 MILLION OF VOTING AGE OR SO HAS EVER VOTED TO CREATE A EUROPEAN SUPERSTATE.
NOT ONE EUROPEAN VOTER HAS BEEN ASKED FOR THE CONSENT TO THIS – NOT A SINGLE ONE.
On the contrary, when individual nations have had a chance to express their opinion in a referendum, many have clearly REJECTED this project as shown below:
However, in EACH CASE, the people either had to vote AGAIN (Ireland in 2008, for example) OR their national parliaments IGNORED the people’s votes (France 2005).
In the UK, people were PROMISED a referendum but never GIVEN one, presumably on the basis of: “We know best and your opinion doesn’t count.” As for the UK, the population collectively has only EVER voted for a “Common Market”, and that was in 1975 when we voted to stay IN after entering in 1973.
I find this absolutely STAGGERING. One of the key aspects of fascism is the foisting on a people of a political system they have not asked or voted for, and in this respect the EU is quasi-fascist. The staggeringly ironic aspect of this is that the EU regards ANYONE who does not agree with its insane project as anything from misguided through irresponsible to neo-Nazi.
And top EU officials consider the plebs TOO STUPID to be allowed a vote. Here is a headline from “The Daily Mail”:
Britons ‘too ignorant’ for EU referendum: Viviane Reding, Vice-president of European Commission, says debate on Europe is so distorted that people could not make an ‘informed decision’. Speaking in London, she said British people must know ‘the facts’ on EU and boasted about how 70 per cent of UK’s laws are now made in Brussels.”
At the same time, the EU assigns to itself the title of “Saviour of Europe”, a title confirmed by the quite surreally-ludicrous award of the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012. The role of NATO in first liberating Europe from its own fascism and then deterring the USSR from attack until it collapsed got no mention at all.
One thing above all puzzles me. The creation of a United States of Europe means the abandonment of national sovereignty. This is a fundamental constitutional step that NO PEOPLES have voted for – EVER. I am astonished that, for example, the French would EVER consider the abandonment of their French state. Yet the political elite is silent on the matter. Very strange.
Will the French even get a VOTE on this? On past performance, not a snowball’s hope in Hades.
For the above reasons, I cannot possibly support ANYTHING the EU does, since it is a quasi-fascist organisation. This is of course apart from the waste, arrogance, venality, bureaucracy and all the rest, which is well documented elsewhere.
The sooner the UK quits this cancerous organisation, the better.
Christine Odone in “The Daily Telegraph”.
Unfortunately, there is a big problem with what is going on in the Ukraine. The present leader – whom Ms Odone refers to as “increasingly despotic” – was democratically elected, and a mob (which no doubt contains many good people as well as a far right fascist element) is trying to depose him because he took a decision they didn’t like.
Now most of us think he’s a Russian poodle and on the wrong side of history, but I don’t know what Ms Odone and/or the EU expect him to do exactly. The fact remains that he is in the right to resist attempts to depose him. I say this as someone who despises Putin’s Mafiosi Russia, but the facts are the facts.
The Ukrainian situation is not in a MILLION YEARS comparable to Syria, where the free-world has shown itself to be gutless and moronic in turning a blind eye to a fascist gangster thug of zero legitimacy. There is not even any real similarity with Egypt, where the people rose up in their millions when Morsi started an obvious Islamization of the country, in effect a coup against the democracy that elected him, since Islam is basically incompatible with democracy. (see Iran). All the Ukrainian President has done is to refuse to sign a deal with the EU.
The whole thing is a shambles, but unfortunately Putin is right in saying that the EU should not stick its nose in, even though of course he does himself. The worst-case scenario is if the EU interferes so much that it gives Putin an excuse to roll some tanks in …. he has said that the break-up of the USSR was the greatest tragedy in his lifetime, and most Russians regard Ukraine as part of their domain. At the moment, the EU is playing an extremely dangerous game: one which could lead to the total LOSS of the Ukraine, not its liberation by the EU.
As for the EU, it is despicable. Its bleating about “supporting democracy” is hilarious. Where was the democracy in ousting the democratically-elected PM of Greece for the heresy of suggesting a referendum on the catastrophic euro for his long-suffering people? Where was the EU democracy in forcing Ireland to revote after rejecting the Lisbon Treaty? The French had a referendum, too, and ALSO rejected it, but the French parliament ignored them. You must be having a laugh, Ms Odone.
The EU is despicable, and you’ll have to do a lot better to convince most of those who think otherwise. The EU is NOT democratic, and I don’t mean just in the limited powers of the European Parliament. The Commission already behaves as if it runs a European Empire, and has blatantly ridden roughshod over democracy to achieve its aims, which are TOTALLY UNMANDATED.
These are usually completely ignored and/or sneered at by the Franco-German Alliance, but my goodness they have just struck two big blows for sanity.
Firstly, Switzerland has decided that having 25% of its population as foreigners is enough – of course bringing down on itself a tsunami of pretentious condescension and whingeing from the EU (I wonder what France and Germany would say to having over 25% of their population as foreigners? Surely there must be a limit? Not in England of course, which apparently HAS no limit, at least as far as the Labour Party is concerned.
But secondly – and equally dramatic and unexpected – little Denmark has banned the vile and inhumane bleeding of animals before they are slaughtered, otherwise known as Halal for Muslims and kosher for Jews.
The UK of course, supinely and cravenly accedes to any old weird “religious” belief in the name of “multi-culturalism”, resulting in the native Brits having to face Halal meat shoved in their faces at supermarkets and the like, but little Denmark has struck a blow for sanity: for the precedence of animal rights over religious lunacy. HOORAY.
But the most sickening, nauseating and gut-wrenching thing about this is that Jews are accusing the Danes of anti-Semitism. Is it therefore the case that ANY criticism of Jews is “anti-semitic”? That seems a fairly ludicrous position to hold. People who object to the barbaric slaughter of animals do not object because they are anti-semitic, but because the practice is BARBARIC. It is frankly beyond belief that Jews should play the anti-semitic card. This is a betrayal of the people who helped overthrow true anti-Semitism in WWII and after. It is an accusation made in extremely bad faith, playing on the Holocaust, which has NOTHING to do with this topic AT ALL.
However, the barbaric slaughter of animals is hardly any different in essence from circumcision, which any objective alien visiting the Earth would consider to be the barbaric mutilation of helpless infants (which is what it is). The fact that this is ALSO allowed in Britain is quite staggering. Supposing the barbaric practice did not exist, and I started up a sect and announced:
“Our beliefs require us to mutilate baby boys. God demands it as part of our religion.”
I would be locked up as insane, and if I actually performed a circumcision I would rightly be banged up for 10 years. Why this is permitted is quite bizarre, and complaining about it is not “anti-semitic”, just a reflection of our disgust at the barbaric mutilation of helpless children. I was going to post a photo of a circumcised baby boy, but it was so disgusting I could not bring myself to do it, even though a picture tells a thousand words.
As For GIRLS of course, circumcision is quite rightly a CRIME, even if one to which the pathetic, PC-sodden and craven UK authorities have until recently turned a completely blind eye, this being another facet of “cultural diversity” (Yes, we are insane.) So if circumcision is illegal for GIRLS, why not BOYS?
As for the practice of male circumcision itself, it is interesting to note that many American Jews are starting to move away from the practice – not before time one would think, after two thousand years and the supposed freeing-up of the human mind during the Enlightenment. From “The Independent”:
The EU of course has stated that the Danish ban is against EU law. So far the courageous little Danes have told the EU where they can stick their law ….
… which all reminds me of how grotesque the EU really is, and how desperate it is to control everything from the centre, like some perverted Empire ….. speaking of which, here is one of my favourite Barrosso quotes:
“Sometimes I like to compare the EU as a creation to the
organisation of empire. We have the dimension of empire.”
Indeed …… and you would make a good Napoleon: short, woffly, pontificating and fascist – but at least his men loved him and he was not short of a brain cell or two …….
There is panic in the corridors of Brussels tonight as the search goes on for an EU apparatchik apparently gone insane. Specialists believe that this individual – frustrated at having nothing of any use whatsoever to do – especially of course anything that could conceivably create any wealth for Europe – has publicized what can only be described as “a cunning plan” as detailed below:
“Bankruptcy should be renamed ‘debt adjustment’, recommends Riccardo Ribera d’Alcala, the EU’s Directorate General for International Policies, who said that use of the word bankruptcy was too potent and made it difficult for people to rebuild their financial reputation.”
Indeed, heaven forbid that anyone should be stigmatized. Shame on us for having stigmatized Hitler in an earlier age. Was his upbringing taken into account? Were his human rights considered?
But this hapless individual – forever to be known hereafter as Mr Debt Adjustment – cannot take all the blame, for euphemismitis is rampant in the EU, partly one suspects to confuse the plebs. Thus it is that we have:
QE = Quantitative Easing, which in Realspeak means of course:
“more borrowing and/or printing of money designed to solve the problem of too much borrowing and printing of money; a cunning plan which has the great benefit of raising inflation to inflate away the debt and coincidentally (but who cares?) stuff the plebs out of their increasingly-worthless savings (Idiots! Everyone knows that saving is for mugs!)”
or indeed my particular favourite:
OFT = Outright Financial Transaction.
Again, one feels obliged to translate this into Realspeak, whereupon we get:
“an ordinary financial transaction (or to be more precise bung of “money” handily printed, borrowed and/or imagined by the ECB) which has been got at by the EU Marketing Department so as to sound more final, decisive and posh.”
Another favourite is:
an SPV = a special purpose vehicle, or in other words:
“EITHER a con designed to pour billions more euros down the euro black hole without the plebs realising it OR Barroso’s new limo specially designed to be resistant to tomato-throwing plebs”.
In any case, all of these brilliant EU inventions come into the well-worn category of “You could not make it up.”
And prompt the question: “When will we see an end to this criminal lunacy?”
Perhaps Mr Debt Adjustment could be put in charge of a new department: Realspeak Production. Then he could no doubt come up with some handy ideas such as:
death = permanent elsewhereness
creative accounting = theft
EU accounts = theft
remunatory readjustment = vast and totally unmerited payrise
The potential is endless.
Germany must accept higher inflation or large parts of the eurozone could be sucked into a deflationary spiral, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has warned.
This appeared in an article in the DT today, and my reaction in the blog there was as shown below:
YOU CAN GO TO HELL, YOU FFING OVERPAID OECD MORONS.
I live in Germany and why the HELL should I have to accept higher sodding inflation to get Europe’s moronic leadership out of a fix with its fraudulent euro?
And YES, it was a GIGANTIC FRAUD.
“History tells you that monetary unions that survive are those that eventually evolve into poltical unions, otherwise they break up.”
That is EXACTLY what the founders of the euro KNEW, and they launched the euro DELIBERATELY knowing it would fail and that this would then push Germany into this decision. It was an utterly shamful act of Machiavellian and totally undemocratic fraud – indeed, a CRIME against the people of Europe, who had NO SAY in the matter, and when they DID say “NO”, had the decision taken away from them.
This is ALL designed to force European nations into a giant superstate, for which NOT ONE SINGLE CITIZEN OF EUROPE HAS VOTED – NOT ONE. I find this absolutely staggering, and it is the reason why I refer to the EU as “quasi-fascist”, since one of the key elements of fascism is an arrogant elite with too much power deciding what is good for “their”citizens and putting it into place without any kind of popular mandate.
Where this will all end, nobody knows, but it is shameful, and equally shameful is the attitude OF the shameful, who label ANYONE protesting about this as “populist” or “far right”, or in Cameron’s case “swivel-eyed loons”. Actually, Mr Cameron, it is we “swivel-eyed loons” who are doing our best to save Europe from your stupendous arrogance.
Can anyone explain how Mankind is going to reduce CO2 levels in the atmosphere (now above 4 parts per million), without which GW will be catastrophic, with an average rise of 6̊C or even more in the worst-case scenario?
Pollticians blather on about renewables, but even as I write, many countries are planning to extract shale oil; Iraq and Iran are racking up oil production; nuclear is being phased out in Germany and elsewhere, while coal burning increases – last year China was opening one new coal-fired power station PER WEK – not sure if this extreaordinary rate has slowed, but India is also vastly increasing emissions….
No economy can stay solvent without growth, but growth is currently impossible without even more emissions.
My conclusion is that it is almost impossible to imagine how bad this could get, economically, socially and in terms of natural disasters.
And in the short-term (which is of most interest to politicians), European industry is going to be decimated. Gas prices in the US are now around three times lower than in Europe. How the hell can high-energy European firms stay competitive? Even German industry is looking down the barrel of a gun.
“Last week, I spoke to Fatih Birol, chief economist at the International Energy Authority (IEA), who is often described as the world’s leading forecaster in this field. He has been telling anyone in Europe willing to listen that the continent faces a major crisis of competitiveness because of high energy prices. “This year is critical,” he told me. “I don’t see many such junctures in the economic history of Europe in which energy could play such a critical role for the long-term prosperity of the European people.”
The problems are these. Europe’s high subsidies for renewables to meet climate change targets, coupled with the switch to gas, which is expensive to import, are damaging energy-intensive manufacturers, who between them employ some 30 million people. Nuclear power has either been blocked, as in Germany, or delayed, as in the UK, and the take-up of shale has been painfully slow. In America, by contrast, the shale revolution has seen energy prices tumble, making industry more profitable and putting extra money into the pockets of consumers – so far, $1,300 a year for every American, expected to rise to $4,000 by 2015.
The head of one of Europe’s biggest energy companies told a conference I attended recently that the EU’s energy policy was a “total mess”. He added: “Not only are we unable to attract investment to create new jobs, but we risk losing them as well.”