The stunning victory of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP) over the old, established political order in Great Britain was matched yesterday by the defeat of the establishment Republican crony Eric Cantor in the USA, both of which follow hot on the heals of Tony Abbott's wresting the Premiership of Australia from the socialist automaton Julia Gillard.
On the face of it, it would appear that the old established political orders in western countries, who have connived together to push a global agenda against the wishes of their respective national populations, are under threat like never before.
The UKIP victory in Great Britain was the first time in over a century that an election had been won by a party outside the established Labour/Liberal/Conservative 'progressive' axis that has, by virtue of its longevity, become self serving, arrogant and corrupt.
What these old political establishments have in common is that their positions of power have been usurped by a like minded group of activists who represent a global political class rather than their national populations.
After examining the common policies they are imposing simultaneously in their individual countries, it is plainly obvious they are dedicated to imposing a so called 'progressive' agenda whether their respective populations want it or not.
One of the effects of this common agenda is that party political distinctions and their respective ideologies have become blurred and the age of the generic politician has arrived.
As has been mentioned in previous posts, modern day politicians are interchangeable. Regardless of party affiliation, they look the same, they sound the the same and because they are all trained in the black arts of spin, media management, deceit and lying they often use the same centrally issued slogans and soundbites.
The relationship between the modern political class and the people they are supposed to represent has broken down completely and as a consequence the politician has assumed that he rules the people and not the other way around.
Like their counterparts in the less democratic parts of the world they have become arrogant and they have adopted an authoritarian attitude to their constituents which sees them scolding, insulting, demonising and smearing anyone who questions their agenda.
Judging by recent election results it would appear that the people have had enough and are not prepared to take it anymore, they appear to be reasserting their power over the politicians and demanding to be listened to.
Why this change has come about is open to speculation but it has been suggested that it is a knock on effect from the Arab Spring which saw long established political regimes get kicked out across the Middle East. Just a minor look at the facts does indicate that there are some parallels.
Nobody would have bet that a long established tyrant like Egypt's Hosni Mubarak would get deposed, never mind the 'Mad Dog' himself, Mohamar Gaddafi, over the actions of Mohamed Bouazizi, a lowly fruit vendor in Tunisia who couldn't take it anymore.
Like the European Union, the long established regime of President Zine Ben Ali in Tunisia had become arrogant, authoritarian and corrupt and acted in its own interests not that of the people. Also, like the European Union, there was no mechanism under the current regime for the people to influence or depose the bureaucracies that blighted their lives with taxes and stifling regulations.
Mohamed Bouazizi was the only breadwinner for his family and despite continuous harassment and thefts of his produce by the police, he managed to scratch a living selling fruit and vegetables from a market stall. On that fateful day, the harassment and theft was compounded by his being slapped by a policewoman after he failed to produce a permit.
The rest will go down in history, Mohamed Bouazizi snapped, doused himself in petrol and self immolated in front of the government ministry. He lived briefly but succumbed to his injuries and died an agonising death a day or so later.
His death was the catalyst that started a series of revolutions, referred to as the Arab Spring, which resulted in long established political orders across the world being challenged and in many cases deposed.
(See Mohamed Bouazizi story here)
The British people have seen their sovereignty surrendered, their economy ruined, their taxes increased, their institutions politicised, their lives blighted by intrusive regulations and their way of life destroyed by a remote, unaccountable bureaucracy that enriches itself with the fruits of their labour.
In the USA, President Obama and his Justice Secretary, Eric Holder, have gone rogue and are brazenly
bypassing Congress and ruling by executive decree. They have opened the borders and refuse to implement the law if it doesn't suit their purposes. They want the populace disarmed and their taxes increased to pay for increased welfare entitlements and an ever expanding bureaucracy.
Like their British counterparts, their economy is being wrecked and their way of life is being wilfully destroyed as part of the same global 'progressive' agenda.
But the USA is not Tunisia, right? Wrong, in shades of Mohamed Bouazizi cops are harassing kids for a lemonade stand permit in Midway, Georgia. See the story here and more harassment of children by policemen stories here.
Police in Great Britain threaten ten year old girl with arrest for playing hop scotch in the street.
See the story here
The rise of UKIP and the Tea Party is a clear demonstration that the people have had enough and they are prepared to stand up to the old established political orders to demand that governments listen and act in the peoples interests and not that of themselves or the global elite.
Compared to the sacrifice made by Mohamed Bouazizi, the ousting of Eric Cantor or David Cameron is nothing, but the people must follow his example, keep the momentum and the defiance going until the old orders are defeated and consigned to the dustbin of history.
Wednesday, June 11, 2014
Tuesday, June 10, 2014
Great Britain And America Open The Borders - Scorched Earth Intensifies
It would appear I was a little premature with the previous article on the scorched earth policies of both the British and American governments. Within hours of posting it, immigration scandals made the headlines in both countries simultaneously, giving credence to the points that were made in addition to highlighting the cold blooded malignancy of the political classes as they attempt to make their transformation agendas irreversible.
In Great Britain mass immigration is into its second decade and despite the social and cultural disasters that have ensued, governments of all persuasions steadfastly refuse to listen to the people and act to stop it.
Despite promises by senior government officials, and the Prime Minister himself, to limit the numbers, they keep increasing at an ever faster rate. One report yesterday highlighted the fact that in addition to the record levels of legal immigration, illegal immigrants are pouring into Great Britain without let or hindrance from the UK Border Agency. (See here)
Once inside the country the chances of them being deported are negligible, no matter what heinous crimes they may commit. This is due to the connivance of the politicised criminal justice system and its deliberately false interpretation of the insidious human rights laws.
To recap, mass immigration was instigated by the Blair government in order to:
a) satisfy the demands of the supranational elite who ordered that Great Britain's unique Anglo-Saxon-Celtic culture be erased and replaced by a 'multi-cultural' society as part of their post war reconstruction of the world.
b) alter the demographic balance in order to engineer a new pool of Labour voters as the loyalty of their traditional voters could no longer be relied on.
c) create hundreds of mono-cultural client groups that can each be given victim status in a classic divide and rule manoeuvre.
It is now accepted by all those who live outside the isolated world of the political class that mass immigration has been an unmitigated disaster which has left Great Britain's towns and cities unrecognisable from a decade ago with social services degraded to the point where they are often unavailable to the indigenous people.
(See here)
In the final analysis, a once great country is being deliberately destroyed by a mass immigration policy that was unwanted and was not asked for by the British people. (See here)
The perpetrators of this disaster have realized that the tipping point has not been reached quite yet. In the meantime the British people are awakening from their spin induced slumber. This, together with the fact that the people are losing their fear of political correctness, is a clear and present danger which is threatening to derail their cultural replacement agenda.
The response of the government is to ignore the British people and intensify their scorched earth policy by dropping what remains of the border controls in the hope that a final influx will allow the tipping point to be reached before they are removed from office next May.
It's a similar story in the USA where the 'fundamental transformation' of America threatens to be derailed before President Obama leaves office. Like the British Prime Minister, his response is also to intensify the scorched earth policy.
(See Pat Buchanan's report here)
With anything from twelve to twenty million illegal immigrants already in the USA an amnesty will spell the end for the prosperous, freedom loving America that has done so much to liberate oppressed people around the world.
To ensure that his transformation is irreversible, not only is President Obama refusing to enforce the law with respect to illegal immigration, he has recently opened the borders to tens of thousands of illegal immigrants from Central and South America including unaccompanied children. (This is a cynical calculated move to increase immigration further by allowing in parents when their children are regularised)
(See the Megyn Kelly report here)
Thinking only of his agenda, and in an act of callous indifference to the wellbeing of the children, President Obama is transporting these migrants to Arizona and dumping them off at bus stations and street corners in Phoenix and Tucson leaving them in the hands of an unprepared state apparatus.
The policies on immigration, legal and illegal, by the British and American governments is for all intents and purposes identical, therefore one has to wonder whether there is some collusion with the intent of downgrading both countries to third world status simultaneously to satisfy the perverted agenda of the global elite.
There is one chance for the people of both countries to redeem themselves in the near future and to save their respective countries from their continuing descent into mediocrity and third world status.
The general election in Great Britain will take place in May next year. The momentum of the pro-British United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP) should be maintained in order to facilitate the overthrow of the old political order. This is the same malignant order that is deliberately engineering the end of a sovereign Great Britain and its reduction to a mere province of a post democratic European superstate.
Similarly, the mid-term elections in the USA is the final opportunity for the American people to rid themselves of the corrupt political establishment that is destroying their country and reducing it to third world status. Failure to do this will allow their America hating President to continue his 'fundamental transformation' into oblivion.
In Great Britain mass immigration is into its second decade and despite the social and cultural disasters that have ensued, governments of all persuasions steadfastly refuse to listen to the people and act to stop it.
Despite promises by senior government officials, and the Prime Minister himself, to limit the numbers, they keep increasing at an ever faster rate. One report yesterday highlighted the fact that in addition to the record levels of legal immigration, illegal immigrants are pouring into Great Britain without let or hindrance from the UK Border Agency. (See here)
Once inside the country the chances of them being deported are negligible, no matter what heinous crimes they may commit. This is due to the connivance of the politicised criminal justice system and its deliberately false interpretation of the insidious human rights laws.
To recap, mass immigration was instigated by the Blair government in order to:
a) satisfy the demands of the supranational elite who ordered that Great Britain's unique Anglo-Saxon-Celtic culture be erased and replaced by a 'multi-cultural' society as part of their post war reconstruction of the world.
b) alter the demographic balance in order to engineer a new pool of Labour voters as the loyalty of their traditional voters could no longer be relied on.
c) create hundreds of mono-cultural client groups that can each be given victim status in a classic divide and rule manoeuvre.
It is now accepted by all those who live outside the isolated world of the political class that mass immigration has been an unmitigated disaster which has left Great Britain's towns and cities unrecognisable from a decade ago with social services degraded to the point where they are often unavailable to the indigenous people.
(See here)
In the final analysis, a once great country is being deliberately destroyed by a mass immigration policy that was unwanted and was not asked for by the British people. (See here)
The perpetrators of this disaster have realized that the tipping point has not been reached quite yet. In the meantime the British people are awakening from their spin induced slumber. This, together with the fact that the people are losing their fear of political correctness, is a clear and present danger which is threatening to derail their cultural replacement agenda.
The response of the government is to ignore the British people and intensify their scorched earth policy by dropping what remains of the border controls in the hope that a final influx will allow the tipping point to be reached before they are removed from office next May.
It's a similar story in the USA where the 'fundamental transformation' of America threatens to be derailed before President Obama leaves office. Like the British Prime Minister, his response is also to intensify the scorched earth policy.
(See Pat Buchanan's report here)
With anything from twelve to twenty million illegal immigrants already in the USA an amnesty will spell the end for the prosperous, freedom loving America that has done so much to liberate oppressed people around the world.
To ensure that his transformation is irreversible, not only is President Obama refusing to enforce the law with respect to illegal immigration, he has recently opened the borders to tens of thousands of illegal immigrants from Central and South America including unaccompanied children. (This is a cynical calculated move to increase immigration further by allowing in parents when their children are regularised)
(See the Megyn Kelly report here)
Thinking only of his agenda, and in an act of callous indifference to the wellbeing of the children, President Obama is transporting these migrants to Arizona and dumping them off at bus stations and street corners in Phoenix and Tucson leaving them in the hands of an unprepared state apparatus.
The policies on immigration, legal and illegal, by the British and American governments is for all intents and purposes identical, therefore one has to wonder whether there is some collusion with the intent of downgrading both countries to third world status simultaneously to satisfy the perverted agenda of the global elite.
There is one chance for the people of both countries to redeem themselves in the near future and to save their respective countries from their continuing descent into mediocrity and third world status.
The general election in Great Britain will take place in May next year. The momentum of the pro-British United Kingdom Independent Party (UKIP) should be maintained in order to facilitate the overthrow of the old political order. This is the same malignant order that is deliberately engineering the end of a sovereign Great Britain and its reduction to a mere province of a post democratic European superstate.
Similarly, the mid-term elections in the USA is the final opportunity for the American people to rid themselves of the corrupt political establishment that is destroying their country and reducing it to third world status. Failure to do this will allow their America hating President to continue his 'fundamental transformation' into oblivion.
Monday, June 9, 2014
Scorched Earth - Cynical Tactic That Hurts People For Political Advantage
Scorched Earth is a tactic normally associated with military campaigns where armies destroy anything that could be useful to the enemy during an advance or retreat. The tactic itself is nothing new and was used by the ancient Greeks, the Romans and the Vikings. Infamous uses of this tactic in more modern times include Sherman's March to the Sea during the American Civil War, Lord Kitchener during the Boer War and Hitler's retreat from Russia during World War II.
I have deliberately omitted Saddam Hussein's destruction of the oilfields during his retreat from Kuwait as there was no shortage of oil for the coalition troops therefore Kuwaiti oil was superfluous to the campaign. This destruction was not only an act of spite but also of pure evil designed to hurt the Kuwaiti people and make the reconstruction of their country more difficult than it otherwise would have been.
By their very nature scorched earth tactics hurt civilian populations the most but this fact is never taken into consideration when the implementation decision is made.
In the political arena scorched earth has now become a weapon that is being increasingly deployed, not in the interests of the people but to gain political advantage by cynical, agenda-driven politicians over perceived enemies.
It is worth taking a brief look at how scorched earth came to be a tactic and the reasons that engendered its common use today in both Great Britain and the USA.
At the end of World War II it was decided that Great Britain was a spent force with an Imperial past that rendered it a bad influence during the construction of the modern post war world. It was agreed that Great Britain would enter a period of 'managed decline' until its influence was decreased and its status no higher than that of its former colonies.
Things were progressing as planned until the arrival of Margaret Thatcher who opposed the 'managed decline' project but believed that Great Britain, with its history and free enterprise system, still had plenty to offer the modern world. It must be remembered that Thatcher's rise to power was enabled by voters from all sections of society including the working class, trade unionists, rich and poor alike.
The 'managed decline' project was halted in its tracks and those responsible for its implementation were cast into the political wilderness for thirteen years.
During those thirteen years the believers in 'managed decline' planned their return and made their political calculations to implement their project irrevocably and to such a degree that another Thatcher would be powerless to halt its progress and final implementation.
The election of Tony Blair's Labour government in 1997 signaled the restart of the project with a time table and contingency based on electoral calculations.
a) The assumption was that Blair would only get two five year terms therefore the project had to be completed and made irreversible during that time.
b) Should the project not be irreversible by that time, a scorched earth policy would be put in place that would make it impossible for an incoming government to operate without making itself so unpopular it would be limited to a single term.
History shows us that it was indeed Blair's second term where the scorched earth policy was deployed with complete disregard for the economy, the country and the wellbeing of the people. The policy was embarked upon with the ruthlessness of Sherman and Kitchener and with the malice of Saddam Hussein.
The government spending flood gates were opened and the public sector expanded beyond recognition; government borrowing and debt reached record levels. Pension schemes were willfully wrecked and government assets, including gold reserves, airports, utility companies and all the remaining major industries were sold off leaving the Treasury empty and the nations credit card maxed out.
The borders were thrown open to anyone without checks, regardless of any criminal past and with a total disregard for the views or the wellbeing of the British people.
Incorporating the European Human Rights Act into British law was an integral part of the scorched earth policy as it made it virtually impossible to deport anyone and for all intents and purposes acted as an amnesty.
Unpredictably, Blair secured a third term which was marred by a succession battle with his Chancellor Gordon Brown. He lost the battle leaving the British people at the mercy of an unstable misogynist with a visceral hatred of anyone he perceived as an enemy.
It was a racing certainty that he would not get another term resulting in Brown pursuing Blair's scorched earth with renewed vigour. He increased welfare entitlements and made them available to all and sundry including immigrants and their children who may never have set foot in Great Britain.
His biggest crime was signing the Lisbon Treaty which surrendered whole new areas of British sovereignty to the EU bureaucrats without first giving the people the referendum which he had made a solemn promise to give.
The wreckage of Great Britain and the state that the people find themselves in today was avoidable, it is primarily the result of a deliberate scorched earth policy embarked upon by the Blair/Brown governments to render the 'managed decline' project irreversible and to make the country impossible to govern. It was calculated that any incoming government would have to make unpopular decisions and subsequently be limited to a single term.
Looking at events in the USA, it is more than obvious that President Obama is following a similar agenda to Blair and Brown, although unlike the his two British counterparts he did signal his malign intention to 'fundamentally transform' America in advance.
The decline of the USA has been spectacular and in many ways it has outpaced Great Britain. Obama is the American equivalent of Tony Blair on steroids. The decline is there for the whole world to see.
The Constitution limits Obama to two terms and it is not guaranteed that he will be followed by a fellow supporter of America's decline. He is embarking on a scorched earth policy that makes Tony Blair's effort look mild by comparison.
By the time he leaves office the American people and future generations will be saddled with insurmountable debt. At time of writing it is already a mind boggling seventeen trillion dollars with two more years of spending to go.
He is deliberately orchestrating a tsunami of immigration both legal and illegal and refuses to implement the law to stem the flow. This tsunami is getting ever bigger with the promise of an amnesty.
He is increasing welfare benefits and extending entitlements to all and sundry including illegals.
He has wrecked the health care system and saddled the country with an unworkable bureaucracy that will eventually wreck the economy.
He has increased the powers of the Environmental Protection Agency to the point where it has gone rogue and operates outside the restraints of Congress.
He is dismantling the mighty American military machine and making deals with the Taliban. This has the effect of emboldening its enemies both at home and abroad.
He has bypassed Congress and he now rules by Executive decree.
This is not an exhaustive list but merely an example of what President Obama is up to.
I will add in conclusion that this is by no means the end for the American people, their spectacular decline will continue apace until they wake up and smell the coffee. They are being destroyed by malignant forces from within. Learn from the British experience and don't let it happen to you.
I have deliberately omitted Saddam Hussein's destruction of the oilfields during his retreat from Kuwait as there was no shortage of oil for the coalition troops therefore Kuwaiti oil was superfluous to the campaign. This destruction was not only an act of spite but also of pure evil designed to hurt the Kuwaiti people and make the reconstruction of their country more difficult than it otherwise would have been.
By their very nature scorched earth tactics hurt civilian populations the most but this fact is never taken into consideration when the implementation decision is made.
In the political arena scorched earth has now become a weapon that is being increasingly deployed, not in the interests of the people but to gain political advantage by cynical, agenda-driven politicians over perceived enemies.
It is worth taking a brief look at how scorched earth came to be a tactic and the reasons that engendered its common use today in both Great Britain and the USA.
At the end of World War II it was decided that Great Britain was a spent force with an Imperial past that rendered it a bad influence during the construction of the modern post war world. It was agreed that Great Britain would enter a period of 'managed decline' until its influence was decreased and its status no higher than that of its former colonies.
Things were progressing as planned until the arrival of Margaret Thatcher who opposed the 'managed decline' project but believed that Great Britain, with its history and free enterprise system, still had plenty to offer the modern world. It must be remembered that Thatcher's rise to power was enabled by voters from all sections of society including the working class, trade unionists, rich and poor alike.
The 'managed decline' project was halted in its tracks and those responsible for its implementation were cast into the political wilderness for thirteen years.
During those thirteen years the believers in 'managed decline' planned their return and made their political calculations to implement their project irrevocably and to such a degree that another Thatcher would be powerless to halt its progress and final implementation.
The election of Tony Blair's Labour government in 1997 signaled the restart of the project with a time table and contingency based on electoral calculations.
a) The assumption was that Blair would only get two five year terms therefore the project had to be completed and made irreversible during that time.
b) Should the project not be irreversible by that time, a scorched earth policy would be put in place that would make it impossible for an incoming government to operate without making itself so unpopular it would be limited to a single term.
History shows us that it was indeed Blair's second term where the scorched earth policy was deployed with complete disregard for the economy, the country and the wellbeing of the people. The policy was embarked upon with the ruthlessness of Sherman and Kitchener and with the malice of Saddam Hussein.
The government spending flood gates were opened and the public sector expanded beyond recognition; government borrowing and debt reached record levels. Pension schemes were willfully wrecked and government assets, including gold reserves, airports, utility companies and all the remaining major industries were sold off leaving the Treasury empty and the nations credit card maxed out.
The borders were thrown open to anyone without checks, regardless of any criminal past and with a total disregard for the views or the wellbeing of the British people.
Incorporating the European Human Rights Act into British law was an integral part of the scorched earth policy as it made it virtually impossible to deport anyone and for all intents and purposes acted as an amnesty.
Unpredictably, Blair secured a third term which was marred by a succession battle with his Chancellor Gordon Brown. He lost the battle leaving the British people at the mercy of an unstable misogynist with a visceral hatred of anyone he perceived as an enemy.
It was a racing certainty that he would not get another term resulting in Brown pursuing Blair's scorched earth with renewed vigour. He increased welfare entitlements and made them available to all and sundry including immigrants and their children who may never have set foot in Great Britain.
His biggest crime was signing the Lisbon Treaty which surrendered whole new areas of British sovereignty to the EU bureaucrats without first giving the people the referendum which he had made a solemn promise to give.
The wreckage of Great Britain and the state that the people find themselves in today was avoidable, it is primarily the result of a deliberate scorched earth policy embarked upon by the Blair/Brown governments to render the 'managed decline' project irreversible and to make the country impossible to govern. It was calculated that any incoming government would have to make unpopular decisions and subsequently be limited to a single term.
Looking at events in the USA, it is more than obvious that President Obama is following a similar agenda to Blair and Brown, although unlike the his two British counterparts he did signal his malign intention to 'fundamentally transform' America in advance.
The decline of the USA has been spectacular and in many ways it has outpaced Great Britain. Obama is the American equivalent of Tony Blair on steroids. The decline is there for the whole world to see.
The Constitution limits Obama to two terms and it is not guaranteed that he will be followed by a fellow supporter of America's decline. He is embarking on a scorched earth policy that makes Tony Blair's effort look mild by comparison.
By the time he leaves office the American people and future generations will be saddled with insurmountable debt. At time of writing it is already a mind boggling seventeen trillion dollars with two more years of spending to go.
He is deliberately orchestrating a tsunami of immigration both legal and illegal and refuses to implement the law to stem the flow. This tsunami is getting ever bigger with the promise of an amnesty.
He is increasing welfare benefits and extending entitlements to all and sundry including illegals.
He has wrecked the health care system and saddled the country with an unworkable bureaucracy that will eventually wreck the economy.
He has increased the powers of the Environmental Protection Agency to the point where it has gone rogue and operates outside the restraints of Congress.
He is dismantling the mighty American military machine and making deals with the Taliban. This has the effect of emboldening its enemies both at home and abroad.
He has bypassed Congress and he now rules by Executive decree.
This is not an exhaustive list but merely an example of what President Obama is up to.
I will add in conclusion that this is by no means the end for the American people, their spectacular decline will continue apace until they wake up and smell the coffee. They are being destroyed by malignant forces from within. Learn from the British experience and don't let it happen to you.
Sunday, June 8, 2014
Honouring The Fallen - Commemorations Defiled By The Presence Of Politicians
Watching the ceremonies commemorating the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings was a moving experience especially when the screen was filled with veterans unashamedly weeping for their fallen comrades who didn't grow old as they that survived grew old. It was humbling to watch these aged hero's proudly displaying their hard won medals and one could only guess what was going through their minds as the day unfolded.
Looking at the deplorable state of the country that these hero's sacrificed so much for fills me, at least, with an overwhelming sense of shame and the very least we can do is to work tirelessly to restore the country's former dignity.
As has been said before, it is without doubt that we are standing amid the wreckage of a once great civilisation, a civilisation that was deliberately destroyed by the country's own self serving leaders under the orders of a malignant supranational elite.
The British people have nobody to blame but themselves. To the eternal shame of the post war generation, this destruction happened under their watch; while they were busy ridiculing the 'squares' of the old school and indulging themselves with their new age freedoms, the political class were busy dismantling everything that their hero's died for.
The people are in full possession of the facts about the malign intentions and motivations of the current political leadership and therefore they should start to show a little contrition for what they have allowed them to do in their name.
Initially claiming to be "the most Eurosceptic Prime Minister in history", David Cameron eventually admitted that his true loyalties lay with a federal European superstate but only after consolidating his takeover of the Conservative Party and purging it of the traditional British values of which they were the supposed guardians.
With echoes of Vidkun Quisling, he is currently working with German Chancellor Angela Merekel, together with the virulently anti-British EU Presidents, Jose Manuel Borrosso, Herman von Rumpuy and Martin Schultz, to further embed the British people in the EU swamp to the point where exit will be all but impossible.
Cameron's promise to renegotiate Great Britain's terms of membership in 2015 then hold a referendum on the result by 2017 - but only if he is elected Prime Minister - is not only an insult to the intelligence of the British people but a clear demonstration of his contempt in which he holds them.
He is totally dedicated to the European superstate project, his intention is to surrender what is left of British sovereignty between now and his supposed re-negotiation, then, true to form, he will renege on his referendum promise.
As part of the EU's stated goal of 'ever closer union' toward a post democratic federal superstate, Cameron is currently embarking on an unprecedented destruction of the the British military.
It has now reached the point where the British will have a smaller military than the Germans after the Treaty of Versailles disarmament program and they would be unable to mount a mission should Argentina repeat their invasion of the Falkland Islands.
This destruction is not designed to save money or to make the armed forces more efficient by using new technologies, it is in preparation for the absorption of the British military into the long planned European Defence Force.
Bearing in mind the fact that Cameron is eviscerating the British military in cahoots with our historic enemies, in addition to surrendering the hard won sovereignty to these same enemies, his presence tainted the commemoration ceremonies and robbed them of their dignity.
The sight of this man sitting among D-Day veterans while actively involved in surrendering the sovereignty that they fought for, and which their comrades died for, was an abomination.
This leads to the wider issue of political presence at the Remembrance ceremonies at the Cenotaph and the Royal Albert Hall each November when the British nation pays homage to their Glorious Dead. During the previous years ceremony the leaders of the three legacy political parties were present with their faux gravitas on display for all to see.
Why do political party leaders need to be in attendance at all and especially in such a high profile position? If the political class needs to be represented then it should be by the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Lord Chancellor for the House of Lords.
The three party leaders are as one when it comes to surrendering the sovereignty that our heroes made the ultimate sacrifice to preserve. David Cameron has been discussed earlier in this post but it is worth reminding the reader about the other two party leaders before looking at the final insult.
The leader of the ludicrously named Liberal Democrat Party, Nick Clegg, can barely disguise his disdain for Great Britain, its people, their culture and their way of life. He is a first generation immigrant with East European roots on his fathers side and a Great Britain hating Dutch mother on the other. He has no roots in Great Britain and therefore no loyalty.
He is contemptuous of a sovereign Great Britain and openly campaigns for its destruction together with the replacement of British culture with a mythical 'multi-cultural' society. He is a fanatical supporter of a post democratic United States of Europe of which Great Britain will be minor province with an emasculated, subservient Parliament.
The leader of the Labour Party, Ed Miliband, is a born and bred Marxist who is also a first generation immigrant with no roots in Great Britain and who, like Clegg, has no love for its people, their culture or their way of life.
His father was a Belgian Marxist who fled to Great Britain as the Nazis rolled across Europe and one must wonder why he didn't flee east to communist Russia as opposed to a hated class-ridden capitalist country of the type he despised.
The Miliband household became the refuge for any communist ingrate that happened to bowl up, including disgusting specimens such as Stalin supporting historian Eric Hobsbawn, who thought his idols purges were justified and acceptable.
The Miliband family actively work for everything that our heroes died for to be destroyed and replaced by a communist state which will use the Soviet Union as a template.
Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are working towards surrendering what's left British sovereignty and to replace Great Britain's way of life with a 'multi-cultural' society by using open border mass immigration when a governments first duty is to protect the borders of the Realm.
If these three politicians are a stain on the Remembrance ceremonies then what of the other person skulking in the background between Clegg and Miliband?
Tony Blair is now a private citizen and increasing numbers of people consider this appalling man to be a war criminal so why he is given prominence at such a solemn ceremony is a mystery. This creature alone has done so much damage to the fabric of Great Britain and its way of life he really should be answering in a court of law as opposed to attending a national service to honour the dead.
His part in wrecking the nation and its values is there for all to see by the actions of his dumbed down generation who have little respect for themselves let alone our Glorious Dead.
The following are images are of Tony Blair's children who are being propagated by the self proclaimed 'Heir to Blair' and the other two traitors.
Spoiled little rich kid Charlie Gilmour desecrates the Cenotaph
This leads to the wider issue of political presence at the Remembrance ceremonies at the Cenotaph and the Royal Albert Hall each November when the British nation pays homage to their Glorious Dead. During the previous years ceremony the leaders of the three legacy political parties were present with their faux gravitas on display for all to see.
Why do political party leaders need to be in attendance at all and especially in such a high profile position? If the political class needs to be represented then it should be by the Speaker of the House of Commons and the Lord Chancellor for the House of Lords.
The three party leaders are as one when it comes to surrendering the sovereignty that our heroes made the ultimate sacrifice to preserve. David Cameron has been discussed earlier in this post but it is worth reminding the reader about the other two party leaders before looking at the final insult.
The leader of the ludicrously named Liberal Democrat Party, Nick Clegg, can barely disguise his disdain for Great Britain, its people, their culture and their way of life. He is a first generation immigrant with East European roots on his fathers side and a Great Britain hating Dutch mother on the other. He has no roots in Great Britain and therefore no loyalty.
He is contemptuous of a sovereign Great Britain and openly campaigns for its destruction together with the replacement of British culture with a mythical 'multi-cultural' society. He is a fanatical supporter of a post democratic United States of Europe of which Great Britain will be minor province with an emasculated, subservient Parliament.
The leader of the Labour Party, Ed Miliband, is a born and bred Marxist who is also a first generation immigrant with no roots in Great Britain and who, like Clegg, has no love for its people, their culture or their way of life.
His father was a Belgian Marxist who fled to Great Britain as the Nazis rolled across Europe and one must wonder why he didn't flee east to communist Russia as opposed to a hated class-ridden capitalist country of the type he despised.
The Miliband household became the refuge for any communist ingrate that happened to bowl up, including disgusting specimens such as Stalin supporting historian Eric Hobsbawn, who thought his idols purges were justified and acceptable.
The Miliband family actively work for everything that our heroes died for to be destroyed and replaced by a communist state which will use the Soviet Union as a template.
Cameron, Clegg and Miliband are working towards surrendering what's left British sovereignty and to replace Great Britain's way of life with a 'multi-cultural' society by using open border mass immigration when a governments first duty is to protect the borders of the Realm.
If these three politicians are a stain on the Remembrance ceremonies then what of the other person skulking in the background between Clegg and Miliband?
Tony Blair is now a private citizen and increasing numbers of people consider this appalling man to be a war criminal so why he is given prominence at such a solemn ceremony is a mystery. This creature alone has done so much damage to the fabric of Great Britain and its way of life he really should be answering in a court of law as opposed to attending a national service to honour the dead.
His part in wrecking the nation and its values is there for all to see by the actions of his dumbed down generation who have little respect for themselves let alone our Glorious Dead.
The following are images are of Tony Blair's children who are being propagated by the self proclaimed 'Heir to Blair' and the other two traitors.
Spoiled little rich kid Charlie Gilmour desecrates the Cenotaph
Idiot urinates over the war memorial in Leeds
Another idiot urinates over the war memorial in Margate
And in Brighton
And in Burnley
Blair and the rest of them have got a lot to answer for.
Thursday, June 5, 2014
British Surrender - Eurocrats Will Not Allow The Prime Minister To Govern
As the D-Day commemorations proceed, if anyone is still in any doubt that Great Britain is no longer the independent, sovereign nation that millions made the ultimate sacrifice to defend, then some recent news items should clear it up once and for all.
The pronouncements by foreign heads of state and the behavior of the unelected bureaucrats of the European Union illustrates how powerless the British government has become. This is demonstrated by its inability to act in the interests of the people and its continual acquiescence to the diktats from Brussels.
This spineless behavior by the British political class is the result of their decades long, slow transfer of sovereignty from Westminster to Brussels in the face of a growing opposition from the people. This impotence is becoming more apparent as the people awaken from their long slumber and demand that their government stand up to the Eurocrats and act in their interests, not in their venal selves or their vested interests.
The British people's demand for a restoration of their democracy and the rise of the United Kingdom Independence Party, now universally referred to as UKIP, has challenged the old political order for the first time in over a century and this threatens to put an end to the taxpayer funded dictatorship of the elite.
On the advise of their expensively hired foreign spin doctors, including President Obama's own Mr. Nasty, David Axelrod, the old order are engaged in an undignified attempt to steal UKIP's policies by making promises that they know their bosses in Brussels will not allow them to keep.
In addition to this both Cameron and Tony Blair are showing undue reverence to an increasingly imperial German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, at a time when a little more sensitivity would be in order.
Merkel must have the most kissed backside of any Chancellor in German history, with Blair offering her his services as President of Europe despite the fact that he is despised by the British people for his wrecking of their country and his warmongering ways, and Cameron is pestering her not to support Euro federalist fanatic Jean-Claude Junker for the same position.
The German Chancellor has a history of patronising David Cameron and showing him up for the lightweight politician that he so obviously is. (See previous articles here and here for all the embarrassing details)
Among many others, the two issues that concern the British people most are enforced multi-culturalism using open border mass immigration and the handing out of taxpayer funded benefits to any economic migrant that turns up on British shores.
On both issues, the old order are making promises they know their bosses in Brussels will not allow them to keep but after years of routinely lying to the British people and getting away with it, they have no alternative tactics to employ other than making false promises and smear.
When David Cameron attempts to govern as requested by the British people by putting an end to welfare benefits for economic migrants, he is unceremoniously put in his place a Luxembourgian bureaucrat named Viviane Reding, backed up by a sister Swedish bureaucrat named Cecilia Malmstrom.
Despite trying to hoodwink the people, he is now forced to admit that due to the surrender of sovereignty by his traitorous political ancestors, he is powerless to stop taxpayer funded welfare benefits being paid to people abroad who have never set foot in Great Britain.
Cameron claimed victory over the new EU budget proposals but with maximum publicity and humiliation the Brussels bureaucracy has ordered that the British taxpayers not only implement it as written, but pony up an extra five hundred million pounds to finance their insatiable appetite for money. It will come as no surprise that Cameron will cave in to their demands despite opposition from the people.
Emboldened by Cameron's public commitment to the European Union project and by his inherent weakness as a politician, the Eurocrats feel they can govern Great Britain from Brussels with complete disregard for the recent election results. They have instructed the government to implement the Liberal Democrats' long standing mansion tax in addition to building more houses, adjusting the governments 'Help to Buy' scheme and subsidising more childcare.
This is gross interference in the internal affairs of Great Britain but due to the surrender of sovereignty, Cameron and the government cannot and will not stand up to what is nation building by German Chancellor Merkel and her cabal of dedicated federalists in Brussels.
Immigration is the biggest single issue that raises the collective hackles of the British people and with complete disregard for the damage it has done to the very fabric of British life, governments of all persuasions steadfastly refuse to take action.
With total contempt for the views of the British people, the leaders of the three legacy parties are as one when it comes to the imposition of a so called 'multi-cultural society'.
The ludicrously named Liberal Democrat Party openly spit in the faces of the British people by continuing to advocate open border mass immigration and continue to extol its benefits.
Their collective hatred for Great Britain, together with its people, its culture and its way of life, is palpable and as result it looks like the people will reward them for their treachery by sending them into oblivion at the next election.
The Labour Party led by the millionaire Marxist 'Red' Ed Miliband not only supports open border mass immigration but also a federal superstate. A post democratic United States of Europe based on the old Soviet model fulfills their requirement for a dictatorship of the proletariat without borders, social class or nationality.
One big happy family living together in perfect harmony where the cancer of income inequality, gender distinction, race and the opium of religion has been abolished by government decree.
"Workers of all lands unite you've got nothing to lose but your chains" is the rallying cry passed on by Karl Marx. History shows us that the likes of Red Ed, and the cabal of elite bureaucrats who will govern this socialist Utopia, will not suffer the dire consequences of their own perverted creed.
As is usual with socialist agendas "all animals are equal but some are more equal than others" will be the real consequence if Red Ed and his pals prevail.
In fairness to Ed Miliband, he makes no secret of his support for mass immigration or the United States of Europe but by his adamant refusal to give the people a choice via a referendum he also displays the totalitarian instincts that are inherent in all socialists.
Due to the hostility of the British people to mass immigration Ed Miliband has started to make some conciliatory noises about curtailing it, but this is a crude attempt at vote buying by an unprincipled politician. It is plainly obvious that Miliband and the rest of the Labour party are happy for the British people to be governed by a remote group of like minded bureaucrats from Brussels.
David Cameron and his Conservative Party are the real villains of this treachery. This party was considered to be the guardian of traditional British values such as, patriotism, individual liberty, the military covenant, law and order, economic prudence, small government etc. These are the very values that he purged from the party when he underwent his very public 'modernisation'.
Among other non conservative values, Cameron has confessed to being a 'progressive', a Europhile, a disciple of Man Made Global Warming and horror of all horrors the 'Heir to Blair'.
His detoxifying of the party has made it indistinguishable from the other two and Cameron himself, like his fellow leaders, is an enthusiastic supporter of the European project in addition to multi-culturalism, tax and spend economics, overseas aid, 'combating climate change', green taxes, government imposed equality, gay marriage etc.etc. ad nauseum.
It must be understood that all of the various treaties, from Rome to Maastricht, were the instruments used for the transfer of sovereignty from the British people to the European bureaucrats and would have been signed by all three of the current party leaders had they been in power at the time.
The ultimate betrayal was of course the insidious Lisbon Treaty. This was the act of treachery where Gordon Brown signed away what was left of British sovereignty like a thief in the night after David Miliband had led the way prior to being ousted by his brother Ed.
He never gets asked by any member of the government/media axis, but would David Cameron have signed the hated Lisbon Treaty if he had been the Prime Minister at the time? The answer of course is a resounding yes, and so would have Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats and Ed Miliband of the Labour Party.
In conclusion I will add that to people like myself who believe that our Glorious Dead made the ultimate sacrifice so that Great Britain will remain sovereign and free for all generations in perpetuity, the document signed in Lisbon was not a Constitution or a Treaty but an instrument of surrender.
I will also add that the people who signed this surrender document did so by means of deceit, obfuscation and lying, and also without the consent of the British people. They have committed treason and it is my fervent hope that there will be a day of reckoning where they will answer for this treachery in a court of law.
The pronouncements by foreign heads of state and the behavior of the unelected bureaucrats of the European Union illustrates how powerless the British government has become. This is demonstrated by its inability to act in the interests of the people and its continual acquiescence to the diktats from Brussels.
This spineless behavior by the British political class is the result of their decades long, slow transfer of sovereignty from Westminster to Brussels in the face of a growing opposition from the people. This impotence is becoming more apparent as the people awaken from their long slumber and demand that their government stand up to the Eurocrats and act in their interests, not in their venal selves or their vested interests.
The British people's demand for a restoration of their democracy and the rise of the United Kingdom Independence Party, now universally referred to as UKIP, has challenged the old political order for the first time in over a century and this threatens to put an end to the taxpayer funded dictatorship of the elite.
On the advise of their expensively hired foreign spin doctors, including President Obama's own Mr. Nasty, David Axelrod, the old order are engaged in an undignified attempt to steal UKIP's policies by making promises that they know their bosses in Brussels will not allow them to keep.
In addition to this both Cameron and Tony Blair are showing undue reverence to an increasingly imperial German Chancellor, Angela Merkel, at a time when a little more sensitivity would be in order.
Merkel must have the most kissed backside of any Chancellor in German history, with Blair offering her his services as President of Europe despite the fact that he is despised by the British people for his wrecking of their country and his warmongering ways, and Cameron is pestering her not to support Euro federalist fanatic Jean-Claude Junker for the same position.
The German Chancellor has a history of patronising David Cameron and showing him up for the lightweight politician that he so obviously is. (See previous articles here and here for all the embarrassing details)
Among many others, the two issues that concern the British people most are enforced multi-culturalism using open border mass immigration and the handing out of taxpayer funded benefits to any economic migrant that turns up on British shores.
On both issues, the old order are making promises they know their bosses in Brussels will not allow them to keep but after years of routinely lying to the British people and getting away with it, they have no alternative tactics to employ other than making false promises and smear.
When David Cameron attempts to govern as requested by the British people by putting an end to welfare benefits for economic migrants, he is unceremoniously put in his place a Luxembourgian bureaucrat named Viviane Reding, backed up by a sister Swedish bureaucrat named Cecilia Malmstrom.
Despite trying to hoodwink the people, he is now forced to admit that due to the surrender of sovereignty by his traitorous political ancestors, he is powerless to stop taxpayer funded welfare benefits being paid to people abroad who have never set foot in Great Britain.
Cameron claimed victory over the new EU budget proposals but with maximum publicity and humiliation the Brussels bureaucracy has ordered that the British taxpayers not only implement it as written, but pony up an extra five hundred million pounds to finance their insatiable appetite for money. It will come as no surprise that Cameron will cave in to their demands despite opposition from the people.
Emboldened by Cameron's public commitment to the European Union project and by his inherent weakness as a politician, the Eurocrats feel they can govern Great Britain from Brussels with complete disregard for the recent election results. They have instructed the government to implement the Liberal Democrats' long standing mansion tax in addition to building more houses, adjusting the governments 'Help to Buy' scheme and subsidising more childcare.
This is gross interference in the internal affairs of Great Britain but due to the surrender of sovereignty, Cameron and the government cannot and will not stand up to what is nation building by German Chancellor Merkel and her cabal of dedicated federalists in Brussels.
Immigration is the biggest single issue that raises the collective hackles of the British people and with complete disregard for the damage it has done to the very fabric of British life, governments of all persuasions steadfastly refuse to take action.
With total contempt for the views of the British people, the leaders of the three legacy parties are as one when it comes to the imposition of a so called 'multi-cultural society'.
The ludicrously named Liberal Democrat Party openly spit in the faces of the British people by continuing to advocate open border mass immigration and continue to extol its benefits.
Their collective hatred for Great Britain, together with its people, its culture and its way of life, is palpable and as result it looks like the people will reward them for their treachery by sending them into oblivion at the next election.
The Labour Party led by the millionaire Marxist 'Red' Ed Miliband not only supports open border mass immigration but also a federal superstate. A post democratic United States of Europe based on the old Soviet model fulfills their requirement for a dictatorship of the proletariat without borders, social class or nationality.
One big happy family living together in perfect harmony where the cancer of income inequality, gender distinction, race and the opium of religion has been abolished by government decree.
"Workers of all lands unite you've got nothing to lose but your chains" is the rallying cry passed on by Karl Marx. History shows us that the likes of Red Ed, and the cabal of elite bureaucrats who will govern this socialist Utopia, will not suffer the dire consequences of their own perverted creed.
As is usual with socialist agendas "all animals are equal but some are more equal than others" will be the real consequence if Red Ed and his pals prevail.
In fairness to Ed Miliband, he makes no secret of his support for mass immigration or the United States of Europe but by his adamant refusal to give the people a choice via a referendum he also displays the totalitarian instincts that are inherent in all socialists.
Due to the hostility of the British people to mass immigration Ed Miliband has started to make some conciliatory noises about curtailing it, but this is a crude attempt at vote buying by an unprincipled politician. It is plainly obvious that Miliband and the rest of the Labour party are happy for the British people to be governed by a remote group of like minded bureaucrats from Brussels.
David Cameron and his Conservative Party are the real villains of this treachery. This party was considered to be the guardian of traditional British values such as, patriotism, individual liberty, the military covenant, law and order, economic prudence, small government etc. These are the very values that he purged from the party when he underwent his very public 'modernisation'.
Among other non conservative values, Cameron has confessed to being a 'progressive', a Europhile, a disciple of Man Made Global Warming and horror of all horrors the 'Heir to Blair'.
His detoxifying of the party has made it indistinguishable from the other two and Cameron himself, like his fellow leaders, is an enthusiastic supporter of the European project in addition to multi-culturalism, tax and spend economics, overseas aid, 'combating climate change', green taxes, government imposed equality, gay marriage etc.etc. ad nauseum.
It must be understood that all of the various treaties, from Rome to Maastricht, were the instruments used for the transfer of sovereignty from the British people to the European bureaucrats and would have been signed by all three of the current party leaders had they been in power at the time.
The ultimate betrayal was of course the insidious Lisbon Treaty. This was the act of treachery where Gordon Brown signed away what was left of British sovereignty like a thief in the night after David Miliband had led the way prior to being ousted by his brother Ed.
He never gets asked by any member of the government/media axis, but would David Cameron have signed the hated Lisbon Treaty if he had been the Prime Minister at the time? The answer of course is a resounding yes, and so would have Nick Clegg of the Liberal Democrats and Ed Miliband of the Labour Party.
In conclusion I will add that to people like myself who believe that our Glorious Dead made the ultimate sacrifice so that Great Britain will remain sovereign and free for all generations in perpetuity, the document signed in Lisbon was not a Constitution or a Treaty but an instrument of surrender.
I will also add that the people who signed this surrender document did so by means of deceit, obfuscation and lying, and also without the consent of the British people. They have committed treason and it is my fervent hope that there will be a day of reckoning where they will answer for this treachery in a court of law.
Tuesday, June 3, 2014
Obama Kills The Coal Industry - Mining Communities Self Destruct And Get No Sympathy
A motley association of eco-warriors, hippies, associated lefties and the 'climate change' industry will be breaking out the organic, alcohol free champagne today after their leader fulfilled his promise to kill off the coal industry. Without putting anything in place to mitigate the effects of their actions, Obama together with the vested interests that support him have put their ideology before the wellbeing of the people.
As anyone who follows the behavior of politicians will know, this latest action by Obama has got little to do with cooling the planet and everything to do with controlling the people. As important as that debate is, for the purpose of this article it is peripheral to the one about tribal, party based voting habits and will be dealt with separately.
Electors are obviously unaware that casting ones vote for a particular political party on the basis of family tradition degrades democracy, disenfranchises the voter and emboldens the politicians to indulge in self serving behaviors that are detrimental to the well being of both community and country.
Safe in the knowledge that they will never be voted out of office, the political class in 'safe' constituencies routinely ignore the wishes of the people and follow their own ideological agenda regardless of any detrimental effects and often enriching themselves in the process.
The issue of blind tribal loyalties and the part it plays in the downfall of communities is common to both Great Britain and the USA.
As a native of the South Wales coal field I witnessed first hand the consequences of the closure of the British coal industry and subsequent effect on the traditionally close knit communities. The blame for this lies entirely with the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), its two politically motivated leaders, Arthur Scargill and Mick McGahey together with their supporters and sympathetic political activists, including the Labour Party.
The reasons for the demise of the British coal industry can be read here.
It was obvious from his background and his initial utterances that Senator Obama was the most ideologically driven presidential candidate in history, so when he told the American people that his energy plan would mean "that energy bills would necessarily sky rocket", they should have sat up and taken notice.
His next statement was an open declaration of war against the coal industry, the miners and their communities: "if somebody wants to build a coal fired power plant they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them".
With a clear, unequivocal declaration of that nature one would think that the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) and its leadership would beat to quarters and mobilise the membership either to lobby against Obama's proposals or to back the other candidate.
Ignoring the threat to the livelihoods of the coal miners or the well being of their families, the UMWA leadership endorsed candidate Obama and in an act of blind obedience, or utter stupidity, the membership complied.
By this mindless action the mining communities were party to their own downfall and therefore deserve no sympathy; they brought it on themselves.
In mitigation it can be said that Obama did promise that millions of 'green' jobs will be created as the energy sector moved to renewables together with millions more 'shovel ready' jobs as part of the stimulus package. The mining communities should have known that these were promises made during an election campaign and shouldn't be taken as truth.
These jobs didn't materialise and adding insult to injury, one 'green' energy company, the infamous Solyndra, made off with billions of taxpayer money before declaring bankruptcy.
As a further kick in the teeth for the coal mining industry Obama chooses to appease the green lobby instead of mitigating the disaster facing the coal mining communities. He is refusing to endorse the Keystone pipeline project with the consequent loss of well paid jobs.
He is also refusing to drill for oil on federal lands or to fully embrace fracking for natural gas which would go someway to replacing the lost coalfield jobs and help move America towards energy independence.
With this record of antagonism toward the mining communities one would have thought that the UMWA leadership would endorse anyone but Obama for a second term but in an act of supreme cowardice and without a care for the welfare of the membership they held off their recommendation until late in the campaign before advising an abstention.
This was a cynical manipulation of the traditional loyalty of coal miners with the intention of not being seen to be endorsing the anti-coal Obama while at the same time preventing the membership from effectively campaigning for the other candidate.
It is worth noting the attitude of UMWA leader, Mike Caputo who like his British counterparts, Scargill and McGahey, puts his own political loyalties above that of the people he is sworn to represent.
Caputo combines his leadership of the UMWA with being a Democratic member of the West Virginia House of Delegates. This dual representation brings into question his loyalties should there be a conflict of interest between his political party and his membership.
This question was answered during the second term election where he endorsed Obama knowing full well his malign intentions toward the UMWA membership. By leaving it late into the campaign before recommending an abstention he effectively prevented any opposition to Obama being organised from within the coal mining communities.
Caputo's cynical manipulation of his members can be highlighted by his statement after he recommended an abstention:
"I am a hardcore Democrat, I intend to vote for Obama. I am loyal to my party".
Like his British counterparts, Messrs. Scargill and McGahey, Mike Caputo is loyal to his party, not to the membership or the communities that have put their faith in him to look after their interests.
It would appear that the idea that trade unions are there to look after the interests of their members and their families doesn't apply the coal industry in either the USA or Great Britain.
I would suggest that the coal mining communities learn from this treachery and stop their tribal voting habits. In West Virginia and elsewhere they should treat Mr. Caputo with the same contempt with which he treats them and boot him out at the earliest possible opportunity from both the Legislature and the UMWA.
Update:
It would appear that I am not the only one who thinks they are stupid. See here.
As anyone who follows the behavior of politicians will know, this latest action by Obama has got little to do with cooling the planet and everything to do with controlling the people. As important as that debate is, for the purpose of this article it is peripheral to the one about tribal, party based voting habits and will be dealt with separately.
Electors are obviously unaware that casting ones vote for a particular political party on the basis of family tradition degrades democracy, disenfranchises the voter and emboldens the politicians to indulge in self serving behaviors that are detrimental to the well being of both community and country.
Safe in the knowledge that they will never be voted out of office, the political class in 'safe' constituencies routinely ignore the wishes of the people and follow their own ideological agenda regardless of any detrimental effects and often enriching themselves in the process.
The issue of blind tribal loyalties and the part it plays in the downfall of communities is common to both Great Britain and the USA.
As a native of the South Wales coal field I witnessed first hand the consequences of the closure of the British coal industry and subsequent effect on the traditionally close knit communities. The blame for this lies entirely with the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM), its two politically motivated leaders, Arthur Scargill and Mick McGahey together with their supporters and sympathetic political activists, including the Labour Party.
The reasons for the demise of the British coal industry can be read here.
It was obvious from his background and his initial utterances that Senator Obama was the most ideologically driven presidential candidate in history, so when he told the American people that his energy plan would mean "that energy bills would necessarily sky rocket", they should have sat up and taken notice.
His next statement was an open declaration of war against the coal industry, the miners and their communities: "if somebody wants to build a coal fired power plant they can. It's just that it will bankrupt them".
With a clear, unequivocal declaration of that nature one would think that the United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) and its leadership would beat to quarters and mobilise the membership either to lobby against Obama's proposals or to back the other candidate.
Ignoring the threat to the livelihoods of the coal miners or the well being of their families, the UMWA leadership endorsed candidate Obama and in an act of blind obedience, or utter stupidity, the membership complied.
By this mindless action the mining communities were party to their own downfall and therefore deserve no sympathy; they brought it on themselves.
In mitigation it can be said that Obama did promise that millions of 'green' jobs will be created as the energy sector moved to renewables together with millions more 'shovel ready' jobs as part of the stimulus package. The mining communities should have known that these were promises made during an election campaign and shouldn't be taken as truth.
These jobs didn't materialise and adding insult to injury, one 'green' energy company, the infamous Solyndra, made off with billions of taxpayer money before declaring bankruptcy.
As a further kick in the teeth for the coal mining industry Obama chooses to appease the green lobby instead of mitigating the disaster facing the coal mining communities. He is refusing to endorse the Keystone pipeline project with the consequent loss of well paid jobs.
He is also refusing to drill for oil on federal lands or to fully embrace fracking for natural gas which would go someway to replacing the lost coalfield jobs and help move America towards energy independence.
With this record of antagonism toward the mining communities one would have thought that the UMWA leadership would endorse anyone but Obama for a second term but in an act of supreme cowardice and without a care for the welfare of the membership they held off their recommendation until late in the campaign before advising an abstention.
This was a cynical manipulation of the traditional loyalty of coal miners with the intention of not being seen to be endorsing the anti-coal Obama while at the same time preventing the membership from effectively campaigning for the other candidate.
It is worth noting the attitude of UMWA leader, Mike Caputo who like his British counterparts, Scargill and McGahey, puts his own political loyalties above that of the people he is sworn to represent.
Caputo combines his leadership of the UMWA with being a Democratic member of the West Virginia House of Delegates. This dual representation brings into question his loyalties should there be a conflict of interest between his political party and his membership.
This question was answered during the second term election where he endorsed Obama knowing full well his malign intentions toward the UMWA membership. By leaving it late into the campaign before recommending an abstention he effectively prevented any opposition to Obama being organised from within the coal mining communities.
Caputo's cynical manipulation of his members can be highlighted by his statement after he recommended an abstention:
"I am a hardcore Democrat, I intend to vote for Obama. I am loyal to my party".
Like his British counterparts, Messrs. Scargill and McGahey, Mike Caputo is loyal to his party, not to the membership or the communities that have put their faith in him to look after their interests.
It would appear that the idea that trade unions are there to look after the interests of their members and their families doesn't apply the coal industry in either the USA or Great Britain.
I would suggest that the coal mining communities learn from this treachery and stop their tribal voting habits. In West Virginia and elsewhere they should treat Mr. Caputo with the same contempt with which he treats them and boot him out at the earliest possible opportunity from both the Legislature and the UMWA.
Update:
It would appear that I am not the only one who thinks they are stupid. See here.
Sunday, June 1, 2014
Prince Charles And Anti-Capitalism - The Romanov's Died In Vain
No one can be sure if by stirring up controversy, Prince Charles is trying to raise his profile above that of his mother and his two sons or if he really does believe the nonsense that he spouts is true. It is without doubt that his mother, Her Majesty the Queen, remains as popular as ever judging by the public reaction during her birthday and Jubilee celebrations.
Likewise the marriage of Prince William to Catherine Middleton, now the Duchess of Cambridge and the birth of their son George, has thrust them into the limelight and won over a new army of admirers both at home and abroad.
Prince Harry appears to be popular because he has a natural ability to connect with people across the generations. This has been put down variously to his front line military service, his laddish behavior and a natural charm which many Royal watchers believe he inherited from mother.
Love her or loath her, Princess Dianna was unarguably the most recognizable and famous woman in the world, who was universally popular and admired for what people saw as her compassion and love of children.
This phenomenon, coupled with his staid choices in everything from his double breasted suits to his new wife, left Prince Charles in danger of slipping into obscurity with the calls for skipping a generation in the line of succession getting ever louder.
He had to do something to keep himself in the public eye but courting controversy in the way that he did displayed a lack of awareness and media savvy that left him open to ridicule as opposed to endearing himself with the people.
It appears that the public at large, unfairly perhaps, have never forgiven him for his treatment of Lady Diana but Prince Charles has only himself to blame for his reputation for wackiness. This is due to his religious attachment to hippy style environmentalism, organic farming and his doomsday warnings about the climate change apocalypse if we don't mend our ways while excluding himself from the sacrifices.
If he is chasing positive publicity with the intention of convincing the public of his fitness to be King then he needs to sack his advisers and replace them with a team which are more in touch with the people and their attitudes to the issues of the day.
Ignoring the fact that Russia lost twenty million people fighting the Nazis during Word War II, his recent public utterance comparing President Putin to Adolf Hitler came across as amateur, ill informed, petulant and crass.
President Putin is a vastly experienced if malign, political operator who is attempting to return mother Russia to her former glory. His geopolitical strategy is paying dividends because of the weakness of the western political leaders.
The ex-KGB chief and master political operator is pitted against two inexperienced media creations in Obama and Cameron together with a Royal Prince who's main interests in life are perceived to be tree hugging, organic vegetables and 'combating climate change'.
Bearing in mind his great uncle Edward's relationship with the German tyrant, comparing President Putin to Adolf Hitler, Prince Charles left himself wide open to a counter attack and subsequent public ridicule by allowing President Putin a free punch to his metaphorical chin.
On global television, Putin reminded the world that Edward the VIII and his consort, Wallis Simpson, were not only friends and regular visitors to Hitler and his henchmen but also mildly sympathetic to the Nazi cause.
If the Putin/Hitler controversy didn't leave Prince Charles open to ridicule then his pronouncements about capitalism certainly did. It is plainly obvious that his religious attachment to environmentalism and 'combating climate change' has not only robbed him of his ability to analyse information and the ability to form logical conclusion but it has also clouded any common sense he may have had. (See article here)
How does he imagine the informed people of the world will react to his assertion that if capitalism fails to reform itself the world will come to a cataclysmic fiery end with poverty, hunger and civil strife?
What Prince Charles is effectively saying is that living standards, especially in the west, must be slashed in order to reduce energy use and therefore every individuals carbon footprint - excluding his own that is.
Like all the other high profile climate change disciples they don't include themselves when proposing a cut in living standards or carbon emissions.
The climate change Messiah himself, and first carbon billionaire, Al Gore, rarely travels on commercial flights, preferring a private jet. He never uses public transport or rides in a Prius, preferring a limousine. One small house or yurt is not enough, only mansions with carbon footprints the size of a small village.
It is rumoured that Al Gore is building himself another mansion in a part of California that will soon be under water according to his own predictions.
Another climate change disciple is Richard Branson, who's airline is responsible for dumping millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. If he is serious about convincing people to reduce their carbon footprint then I suggest he is in the wrong business.
And so it goes, on and on, the loudest voices advocating the end of capitalism and prosperity are those who have benefited most from the system itself.
Bill Gates, Michael Moore, Ted Turner, Richard Branson and the Hollywood glitterati to name but a few.
The British people already have to suffer multi-millionaire socialists railing against the capitalist system from their taxpayer funded ivory towers from whence they occasionally descend to lecture them about income inequality and the need to cut their living standards to save the planet.
They have to endure enough lectures on income inequality from socialist millionaires such as Ed Miliband, Peter Mandelson and Tony Blair without Prince Charles joining in the fray.
He should be aware from his exclusive education that there is no reforming capitalism, there is no Blair/Clinton third way, there are only two choices and those are capitalism or socialism/communism
History has shown us over again that socialism is a totalitarian philosophy and no matter what resources are available it always ends in poverty, enslavement and bloodshed.
What Prince Charles and the anti-capitalists are saying is that the planet is doomed unless the west rations energy to match the carbon footprints of North Korea as opposed to those South Korea. (See here)
History has also shown us that socialism is always imposed by violent revolution which is accompanied by a massacre of the principle players from the previous regime together with anyone who is considered to be a counter revolutionary.
Socialists hold a particular animosity toward Monarchies as his Romanov relatives could testify if their ancestors, man, woman and children, plus Jemmy the family dog, hadn't been shot to death by the incoming anti-capitalists.
If Prince Charles really believes that anti-capitalists will leave him alone in his many palaces to pursue his tree hugging environmentalism while urging everyone else to live in yurts then the Romanov's really did die in vain.
See the Royal Palaces.
See a low carbon footprint yurt.
See Tony Blair's country pile.
See Lord Mandelson's humble abode.
Likewise the marriage of Prince William to Catherine Middleton, now the Duchess of Cambridge and the birth of their son George, has thrust them into the limelight and won over a new army of admirers both at home and abroad.
Prince Harry appears to be popular because he has a natural ability to connect with people across the generations. This has been put down variously to his front line military service, his laddish behavior and a natural charm which many Royal watchers believe he inherited from mother.
Love her or loath her, Princess Dianna was unarguably the most recognizable and famous woman in the world, who was universally popular and admired for what people saw as her compassion and love of children.
This phenomenon, coupled with his staid choices in everything from his double breasted suits to his new wife, left Prince Charles in danger of slipping into obscurity with the calls for skipping a generation in the line of succession getting ever louder.
He had to do something to keep himself in the public eye but courting controversy in the way that he did displayed a lack of awareness and media savvy that left him open to ridicule as opposed to endearing himself with the people.
It appears that the public at large, unfairly perhaps, have never forgiven him for his treatment of Lady Diana but Prince Charles has only himself to blame for his reputation for wackiness. This is due to his religious attachment to hippy style environmentalism, organic farming and his doomsday warnings about the climate change apocalypse if we don't mend our ways while excluding himself from the sacrifices.
If he is chasing positive publicity with the intention of convincing the public of his fitness to be King then he needs to sack his advisers and replace them with a team which are more in touch with the people and their attitudes to the issues of the day.
Ignoring the fact that Russia lost twenty million people fighting the Nazis during Word War II, his recent public utterance comparing President Putin to Adolf Hitler came across as amateur, ill informed, petulant and crass.
President Putin is a vastly experienced if malign, political operator who is attempting to return mother Russia to her former glory. His geopolitical strategy is paying dividends because of the weakness of the western political leaders.
The ex-KGB chief and master political operator is pitted against two inexperienced media creations in Obama and Cameron together with a Royal Prince who's main interests in life are perceived to be tree hugging, organic vegetables and 'combating climate change'.
Bearing in mind his great uncle Edward's relationship with the German tyrant, comparing President Putin to Adolf Hitler, Prince Charles left himself wide open to a counter attack and subsequent public ridicule by allowing President Putin a free punch to his metaphorical chin.
On global television, Putin reminded the world that Edward the VIII and his consort, Wallis Simpson, were not only friends and regular visitors to Hitler and his henchmen but also mildly sympathetic to the Nazi cause.
If the Putin/Hitler controversy didn't leave Prince Charles open to ridicule then his pronouncements about capitalism certainly did. It is plainly obvious that his religious attachment to environmentalism and 'combating climate change' has not only robbed him of his ability to analyse information and the ability to form logical conclusion but it has also clouded any common sense he may have had. (See article here)
How does he imagine the informed people of the world will react to his assertion that if capitalism fails to reform itself the world will come to a cataclysmic fiery end with poverty, hunger and civil strife?
What Prince Charles is effectively saying is that living standards, especially in the west, must be slashed in order to reduce energy use and therefore every individuals carbon footprint - excluding his own that is.
Like all the other high profile climate change disciples they don't include themselves when proposing a cut in living standards or carbon emissions.
The climate change Messiah himself, and first carbon billionaire, Al Gore, rarely travels on commercial flights, preferring a private jet. He never uses public transport or rides in a Prius, preferring a limousine. One small house or yurt is not enough, only mansions with carbon footprints the size of a small village.
It is rumoured that Al Gore is building himself another mansion in a part of California that will soon be under water according to his own predictions.
Another climate change disciple is Richard Branson, who's airline is responsible for dumping millions of tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. If he is serious about convincing people to reduce their carbon footprint then I suggest he is in the wrong business.
And so it goes, on and on, the loudest voices advocating the end of capitalism and prosperity are those who have benefited most from the system itself.
Bill Gates, Michael Moore, Ted Turner, Richard Branson and the Hollywood glitterati to name but a few.
The British people already have to suffer multi-millionaire socialists railing against the capitalist system from their taxpayer funded ivory towers from whence they occasionally descend to lecture them about income inequality and the need to cut their living standards to save the planet.
They have to endure enough lectures on income inequality from socialist millionaires such as Ed Miliband, Peter Mandelson and Tony Blair without Prince Charles joining in the fray.
He should be aware from his exclusive education that there is no reforming capitalism, there is no Blair/Clinton third way, there are only two choices and those are capitalism or socialism/communism
History has shown us over again that socialism is a totalitarian philosophy and no matter what resources are available it always ends in poverty, enslavement and bloodshed.
What Prince Charles and the anti-capitalists are saying is that the planet is doomed unless the west rations energy to match the carbon footprints of North Korea as opposed to those South Korea. (See here)
History has also shown us that socialism is always imposed by violent revolution which is accompanied by a massacre of the principle players from the previous regime together with anyone who is considered to be a counter revolutionary.
Socialists hold a particular animosity toward Monarchies as his Romanov relatives could testify if their ancestors, man, woman and children, plus Jemmy the family dog, hadn't been shot to death by the incoming anti-capitalists.
If Prince Charles really believes that anti-capitalists will leave him alone in his many palaces to pursue his tree hugging environmentalism while urging everyone else to live in yurts then the Romanov's really did die in vain.
See the Royal Palaces.
See a low carbon footprint yurt.
See Tony Blair's country pile.
See Lord Mandelson's humble abode.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)