THE STATE OF ISRAEL FACES THE FINAL ONSLAUGHT

SYRIA HAS FINALLY acknowledged its ownership of weapon grade chemical weapons, and has been threatening to use them if there is any interference from outside.

            There have been reports of such weapons being moved around the country, igniting fears that Assad was preparing to use them against the rebels. Now it is Israel who fears into whose hands these weapons may fall.

            Hezbollah is an ally of Syria and is fanatical enough to use any device it can get its hands on to destroy the Jewish state. They would not, for instance, think twice about using the nuclear option if it was available to them. So an arsenal of chemical weapons would be seen as just another means of   bringing Israel to its knees.

            Israel is watching events in all of the Arab Middle East with great apprehension. Egypt could become the main office for the Muslim Brotherhood; while a divided Lebanon could implode at any moment following the events in Syria. Jordan has historically sought peaceful coexistence with Israel, but would, as she did in the Six Day War, come under great pressure to join in, if once the Arab world (or a large part of it) once more decided to try its luck.

            It is important for Jordan to continue its balancing act between supporting her Arab neighbours and peaceful coexistence with Israel. She must also stand ready to jump ship if in any conflict with Israel, Israel looks like losing it. In which case – Allah Aqba!…the filthy Jews have been defeated!

            Each day we see what Assad is prepared to do to his own people in order to cling to power. What would happen to the people of Israel if Syria or any Arab nation under the control of the Muslim Brotherhood, coupled with their Hezbollah and  Hamas auxiliaries, marched in victory into Israel? What could the Jew expect from such people, who have very little compassion for their own people, let alone the Jews?

            The Arab Spring has overturned the old order represented by the Camp David Accords. In Egypt, as soon as the Muslim Brotherhood feel they are strong enough and can square the military, they will gladly shred the Camp David Accords brokered by the US president, Jimmy Carter, and signed by the Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin and President Anwar El Sadat of Egypt  in 1979.

            These accords had, to each of the signatories benefit, kept war at arm’s length. Hosni Mubarak no doubt had many faults; but he did preserve the peace between the Arab world and Israel, which could, even today bring the great military powers into the conflict should Israel’s nationhood be endangered.

            In Syria today we see both Russia and China putting up a firewall around Assad. Russia needs the Syrian seaport of Tartus for its navy’s use. It is the last naval facility Russia has outside of its home ports (that is, since the demise of the Soviet Union) and is regarded by them as vital: while China needs Syria’s oil to help keep China’s economic growth in full bloom. Which is why both nations are prepared to upset the United Nations. Each country has to put their own needs before those of the international community. It is a lesson long forgotten by, in particular, European nations eager to conjoin.

ISRAEL IS RIGHT  to feel nervous about the almost volcanic events they are currently surrounded by. The future is difficult to predict, and those who have tried in the past have invariably been disappointed. But the unfolding drama created by the Arab Spring does not bode well for the state of Israel. Vengeance is now abroad. When all settles down and after, finally,  Assad, Mubarak, Saddam, and Gadaffi have all left the stage; the theatre in which they performed will be even less welcoming of the Jewish state.

            I feel that those who have been chosen through election, via the Arab Spring, will not want to relinquish their power. To put it, as my brother puts it, how many of those democratically elected to their posts will regard the democratic mandate as a lifelong office not requiring further legitimacy from the electorate?

            Democracy has to evolve, it cannot be imposed, as the international democratic community seems to believe it to be capable of. Israel laid their democratic foundations from the very beginning of the Jewish state. The Jewish people were drawn by instinct to democracy by their experiences within the Diaspora, and have held it aloft as the best system that upholds freedom and justice.

            It was natural for those who managed to survive, through allied liberation, the death camps in Europe, that they would want to be part of a society that believed in freedom and liberty. The freedom to speak allowed without the sinister knock on the door; and without a Stasi neighbour informing on them.

            Israel was once the only democracy in the Middle East – now we must ask ourselves; how long will it be before she retains the title? I do not think that once the Muslim Brotherhood wins power in Egypt, or, for that matter anywhere else in the Arab world, they would want to relinquish it to the ballot box.

           

VERY SOON, ONE FEELS, the state of Israel, will have to once again fight for its very existence. This time she will find it much harder to defeat her many enemies in the region; and could once more be faced with the awful prospect of a return to the Diaspora where each and every Jew have been the chosen scapegoats  and demonized with little means of defending themselves, for over 1,000 years.

            In the past Israel could count upon the United States to help with its defences and give billions in aid. But will America act this time to come to the aid of the Jewish state?  If the final battle comes on Obama’s watch, then the answer must be no.

            Apart from the real possibility that Obama is more sympathetic to the Palestinian cause than  to the preservation of a Jewish state; he is also a liberal Democrat, and as such would lack the military ruthlessness needed to defeat Israel’s enemies.

            I hope I am proven wrong when the time comes; I want to be wrong- deeply wrong. But I think Obama will give Israel fair wind in order to get re-elected. After which, without a third term beckoning, he will let his true loyalties flourish.

            It is not only in the Middle East that the Jewish people find themselves hemmed in. But Jews all over the world are now being confronted by a wave of anti-Semitism, and not only from traditional far Right sources. Now under the fig-leaf of anti-Zionism, the Left are joining in. While in the past the outer fringes of the Left have been anti-Semitic[1]; today, because of their support for the Palestinians the centre-Left liberals are joining in.

            The culture at the BBC is one that supports the Palestinians - when its sole function at all times, as an institution that has millions of Jews and their supporters paying a licence fee to help keep it  afloat, is surly to remain above the fray and at all times remain neutral.  

            Until one was kidnapped, the BBC actually had a Gaza correspondent; while another of their correspondents in that part of the world, broke down and cried when Yasser Arafat died. All of this on top of  bias reporting by their Middle East correspondents.

            The liberal press, like the Guardian are openly supportive of the Palestinians. Which is all well and good, because we have a choice of whether or not to buy the Guardian – but we are ordered by our government to pay to watch the BBC on threat of imprisonment.

AS THE STORM CLOUDS gather, not only for the state of Israel, but also for Jews living in the Diaspora; those of us who were born close enough to the Second World War’s end to appreciate the inhuman, cruel, ruthless, and heartless brutality of the Holocaust, now sit amazed by the unlearned lesson of history, by those present generations, regarding Jews.

            Holocaust denying was once a fringe practice that only the likes of the BNP took serious. But as part of their anti-Semitism, the Arab World buys into this fiction, including the Palestinians: and if the Palestinians buy into it, then why not those on the Left who support them. Ancient hatreds of blood libel are once more surfacing. The Elders of Zion, that long since discredited work of fiction created by the Russian intelligence service in the early part of the 20^th century to invoke the pogroms against the Jews needed whenever the tsar found himself in economic difficulties with his people; is now being treated seriously once more.

            ‘Popular anti-Semitism[2]’ has now returned 67 years after the ending of the Holocaust. The Palestinians have gripped the emotions of the Left. Emotions, after all, are to do with feeling. Objectivity will always falls fowl of sensation and passion.

            It was, I think under the reign of the Roman Emperor Hadrian 117-138 AD, that ancient Judea was given the title of Palestine. It had always belonged to the Jews and became, through the Diaspora in the 19^th century,  the Jewish peoples one hope of returning to their ancient homeland. Like the Arabs, the Jews were a distinct people. But the Jews were driven from their ancient lands and forever subject to the whims of prejudices from any country they found themselves seeking residence in.

            Today in Israel the Jews have returned to their ancient homeland and turned it from a dessert into a fertile nation that is able to feed itself as well as produce advanced technology. Israel has its own  high technological industry which America and Europe seek to take advantage of – especially in the field of military technology.

            Israel must survive. All it insists upon from its Arab neighbours is to be allowed to do so. The Jewish state is under a threat greater than at any time in its past. Its survival is now questionable unless the West is prepared to support it, if need be, militarily - but it will hopefully not be proved needed.

           

           

---

[1] I think of Marx and Stalin

[2] By this I mean its  conjoining with both Right and Left.

VINCE; THE NAME SUGGESTS 1970s PORK CHOP SIDEBURNS

VINCE CABLE, the Business Secretary, is threatening our top universities with financial penalties if they refuse to take in more working class pupils at the expense of talented six-formers from private schools.

            Under the old system of selection through the 11-plus, there were inbuilt unfairness’s that led the ideologically driven Labour government at the time to throw the baby out with the bath water. Instead of fine tuning the old system, they set about imposing an ‘equality agenda’ on the nation’s state schools.

            This led to the comprehensive system that we have today. Grammar schools were set upon in Tudor fashion; they became the modern contrast for the dissolution of the monasteries. Shirley Williams played the part of Henry VIII –  considering her religious background, it was an unfortunate situation to find herself in - but socialist needs must.

            Over the decades since its introduction, the political classless (who, after all, prioritise peoples votes) have tried to impose the egalitarian ethos on state education. Even Margaret Thatcher continued the rout of grammar schools when in power. But all this has done is to dumb down both the curriculum as well as GCSE and A levels; until it has become almost impossible for a student to fail.

            The so-called Equality Agenda has no place in our children’s education. Dumbing down humiliates the gifted pupil and cheats the less gifted and more vocationally inclined. In the 1950s, we had technical colleges and polytechnics (soon to be given university status) to direct us toward a professional livelihood.

            These new ‘universities’ proliferated. In the 1950s there were other pathways to success for those without academic ability. Today those pathways have been tarmaced over by the creation of the new egalitarian pseudo universities, that have been put in place to, partially, at least, make the parents happy; which, let us face it, makes all politicians who need to keep their seats, very happy.

            Even if it was possible to bring equality into education, it would not be desirable; as we see today in the devalued worth of our exam results - and now the same strategy is being forced on the elite universities, and if they succumb, the same retardation will sweep through those universities as it has already done through state education since the birth of the comprehensive system.

VINCE CABLE, and those like him are (particularly on the Labour benches) acting in Pol Pot fashion; and are about to dumb down this nation’s greatest educational assets in order to bring equality to education. This asset is worth billions from oversees students who rightly believe they are getting the finest education in the world and are being well tested by it. Such a belief will be cruelly undermined if Cable’s ‘progressive’ threats are bowed down to by Oxford, Cambridge, Durham, or Imperial College London.

            Equality in education seeks to rid academia of what no doubt the progressive types would regard as elitism. This is to say that there should be no losers. For if we have winners and losers - where then is equality?

            Cable should realise that elitism in education is education in its finest form. It produces the most gifted intellects no matter from what portion of the class system is worshiped.

            As far as the working class are concerned, the 11-plus, had it been reformed and allowed to continue would have provided what Vince Cable today demands. But alas socialist mumbo-jumbo was heralded, as the true elixir, that would herald the socialist dawn.

            I doubt today that Shirley Williams truly believes in the comprehensive system and the way it has developed. She will not of course admit it publically – but like her old comrade (when in the SDP) Roy Jenkins, who fell afoul of doubt about multiculturalism, she might also mention her doubts about comprehensive education to a trusted friend before her end.

            If comprehensive education resulted in dumbing down, then Vince Cable’s threats would lead to the dumbing up. The only students that should go to university are those academically suited to do so. But what has happened over the decades is that, through the dumbing down of subjects; all but those from the chav estates, are now finding themselves at a university.

EDUCATION IS NOT something to be toyed around with for ideological reasons. It is meant to bring the best out of the individual – and that ‘best’ may not meet the requirements of a university placing. But it could nevertheless offer other educational pathways - as it once did.

            Cable should withdraw his talons and allow the so-called       ‘elitist universities’ to plough on without the threat of financial penalty. The whole system of a state education has been traumatised by the comprehensive experiment. Now Mr Cable seeks to replicate such disturbance among our most influential universities.

            Being as we are in the grip of so-called ‘progressive’ politics; Mr Cable will pursue his prejudices to the very end. Being ‘all the same’, is now regarded, along with abortion, as being ‘progressive’.

            The last system built upon such ill-equipped foundations was of course that other pillar of Left-wing progressiveness, the Soviet Union; which, after 70 years crumbled into dust, but still left in its wake the debris of socialism which today clings like a limpet to the hull of the ship of state in this country.

            Equality of opportunity is the only context in which ‘equality’ should be deployed. If an educational system offered opportunities to all based upon academic ability from whatever background the students came, then there is nothing to protest about. If there is something to protest about in the modern educational system, then it is the likes of Oxbridge and Durham that should do the protesting.

           

VINCE CABLE SHOULD be sent packing and told to provide the universities with more worthy candidates than the comprehensive system has so far managed to provide. Oxbridge and Durham are not prejudiced at a class level despite the outpourings of the Labour Party’s prejudices. Elitism means the best regardless of class.

            Elitism is at the pinnacle of all human activity, whether in education or sport (in light of the Olympics). Elitism has nothing to do with class but ability; and, as a term is applicable to all sorts of vocations and activities outside of the realm of academia.

            But it is within academia that the Left find it so nauseating. Why? Because the Left carries the baggage of equality and seek to transplant this virus throughout society and all of its activities: education being the paramount activity that moulds the mind - and they indeed wish to mould the mind of future voters to the culture of egalitarianism.

            Each and every one of our finest universities should challenge Cable to do his worse and carry out his threat. It is a meaningless threat because if the universities refused to pay the fines he warns them of, what would he do?

            Would he also, like Shirley Williams, follow in the footsteps of  Henry VIII, this time regarding universities? I think not. Cable knows that our premier universities are in the driving seat and his threats are hollow.

            I suggest that Cable’s threats should be ignored, and the universities that fall foul of his penalties should            continue on regardless. He (Cable)  thinks he can reduce the spines of the universities to putty by threatening them with fines – they should hold fast, in defiance of such a shallow threat.

            Our great universities are beyond the grip of politicians and so they should remain. Academic standards are the primary function of such institutions, and if politicians wish to narrow, lower, or undermine such standards, then it is up to those universities to stand fast and prevail. If not they will succumb to the same dumbing down that the rest of the educational environment went willingly to meet.

           

BABEL

"with its top in the heavens...lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the Earth." God came down to see what they did and said: "They are one people and have one language, and nothing will be withholden from them which they purpose to do." So God said, "Come, let us go down and confound their speech." Babel

WHERE ARE THE campaigning feminists when you need them? I have just read a piece by The Heresiarch writing in Heresy Corner[1], who refers to two reports by Sue Lloyd-Roberts for Newsnight.

            The subject was Female Genital Mutilation (FGM). Unfortunately I never saw Ms Lloyd-Roberts reports; but in the current climate reporting this subject in any depth requires a certain amount of courage (especially in working for the BBC), and she should be congratulated for so doing.

            FGM is abuse of the worst kind against young girls and should be stamped on by the authorities. FGM has been illegal in this country since 1988, yet there has not been a single prosecution; whereas, in France, there have been over 100 convictions over the same period.

            According to Lloyd Roberts; “…the UK… is so lax on the issue that girls are being brought into the country from elsewhere in Europe to have their genitalia sliced off, sewn up or otherwise mangled by supposed doctors in the name of cultural tradition, pseudo-religion or virginity-preservation”

            “Cultural sensitivity”, that cowardly expression devised by the Multiculturalist is said to be responsible for the torture of young girls as young as 10 years-old. When Ms Lloyd-Roberts interviewed the senior Met officer in charge of child protection, and tackled him on the question of the abysmal and gutless inactivity surrounding the practice in this country, Commander Simon Foy shamefully[2] suggested that he was "not necessarily sure that the availability of a stronger sense of prosecution will change it for the better".

            For the authorities to stand to one side and let such vile acts continue unabated, can only reflect upon their political correctness, and the extremes to which they are prepared to honour it. In such a context, they are behaving as criminally as the Nazis. I am not accusing them of being Nazis, but just acting like them.

            Now there is something very wrong indeed about the moral confusion that the dependence upon “cultural sensitivity” is causing. People are frightened to act. In Rochdale we saw young girls being literally taken from the streets by a gang of Muslims; to be used for their own or others sexual gratification. Just as with FGM, the authorities knew it was happening but  their sense of “cultural sensitivity” prevailed, and the suffering was allowed to continue.

            Is this what the politicians mean by “cultural diversity”, that other Orwellian expression found in the lexicon of Multiculturalism? FGM is most commonly practiced on the African continent; whereas the misogyny against Western women and girls is found in the Muslim world - including among British Muslim males.

THE FGM AND THE ROCHDALE abuses were of course against female children. As with many cultural practices involving other cultures; the “progressive” Left are nowhere to be seen. In particular, where are the campaigning feminists who have all to readily bared their naked breasts on behalf of women since the 1960s? If it had been white males orchestrating these two barbaric “customs”; those bare breasts would be marching on Downing Street by the thousands demanding an end to male violence.

            The duplicity of the Left know no boundaries. Their silence on both the above issues speaks volumes about their confusion and ignorance. I say ignorance, because they, as good Multiculturalists, never seemed to have believed that other cultures were capable of such behaviour. For why else would they believe in Multiculturalism and stay silent when the very gender that they are supposed to protect and stand by, are so cruelly treated?

            I was born in 1950, and could never have imagined such practices in 2012 being openly disregarded by the law then. Indeed, I could never have imagined such practices happening at all while I was growing up; because of course we would never have bought into such an ideology as Multiculturalism. If we, as we did, brought thousands of immigrants from the West Indies and, in the 1970s, Asians from Uganda; it was done so on the basis of those cultures having to adapt to the British culture. Then there was no equality between cultures. Either those coming into the UK accepted the culture of this country and its primacy; or they should return home to where their own culture was sovereign. It was up to them to accommodate themselves with us, with our culture: not  to downgrade our culture to a position of equality with all the other cultures that were, in the future, set to invade our nation.

            The lack of attention given to either FGM or Rochdale, came about because we relegated our culture and gave equal importance to the 2-300 or so different tongues now waggling in our society.

            The police have been trained into the subtleties of “cultural sensitivity” and have been putting such training before acting on such crimes involving minorities for fear, no doubt, of receiving little ot no advancement for themselves in their careers.

            This is madness brought about by the social engineering of the European liberal politicians who created this new ideology of Multiculturalism. In this country, it seems, its pioneer was Roy Jenkins who I have said ad-nauseum, later came to regret what he proposed.

            FGM is but one of the many customs which a Multicultural society will have to accept if it believes that all cultures are equal; anything less is not multiculturalism. Which is why the Left stays silent over FGM, as well as the events in Rochdale. But what else will they stay silent about in the future? I hope there are no head hunters or cannibals among the many cultures that the incompetent and  ham-fisted Multicultural politicians seek to let loose.     

FGM, AS IN France, should never be tolerated by the UK. Every white and black British citizen knows that such practices are medieval and barbaric, and in any civilised society should be brought quickly to a conclusion through the criminal justice system.

            But what do we have in this country? We have members of the Crown Prosecution Service, as well as senior policemen, all in fear of their pensions, only wanting to do what they believe the Multicultural zeitgeist demands of them. This is why Commander Simon Foy, seeks to do nothing about FGM, using the outrageous excuse that he was “not necessarily sure that the availability of a stronger sense of prosecution will change it for the better"

            Foy should be made to go for such a comment; but of course he will not do so. After all he only behaved as the politicians of all the main parties wished him to. The politicians are to a man and women, in all the main parties, believers in Multiculturalism.

            Multiculturalism is the bane of our society. The floodgates of immigration were opened by the previous government, with little or no regulation regarding numbers. Which means today that cultural anarchy rules because any opposition to such a Multicultural influx would be treated as racist if it spoke out.

            We are in a pickle of our own making, and all we can do is sit to one side and watch the whole grizzly enterprise unfold. The horse has bolted, and our politicians are left with little option but to tinker with immigration numbers and use whatever rhetoric they find suitable for them to pacify the disgruntled majority among the indigenous white population.

                                                                                                      

---

[1] Heresy Corner is a website.

[2] Nick Cohen called it “a disgrace”

Cometh the hour cometh the man?

THANKS TO YOU TUBE, Nigel Farage, the leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), is becoming well known across the pond. I watched his interview on the Fox News channel when he described the European President  José Emanuel Barroso as an idiot for blaming America for the euro debacle. Farage’s performances in the European Parliament (also on You Tube) are exemplary pieces of theatre, which gives us Eurosceptics the hope that there is now a credible, articulate, and talented individual who can stop the rot. As Adrian Hilton, writing today in the Daily Mail, says; ‘Day by day, minute by minute, speech by speech and word by word, the United Kingdom Independence Party looks and sounds increasingly like the Conservative Party in exile’.

                Nigel Farage has positioned himself on the political spectrum where once the Tory Party felt at home over the past 100 years; but now feel distinctly uncomfortable.

                There are, however, many Tories inside and outside of parliament who bemoan their party’s retreat from the centre-Right agenda it once offered to British Conservatives – whether of the big ‘C’ or little ‘c’ kind.  Now that agenda has been captured by UKIP and is becoming more credible under Mr Farage’s leadership.

                Once known only as a single issue party, UKIP now embraces a traditional conservative agenda covering, to quote Adrian Hilton once more; ‘[UKIP’s] policies cover the economy, law and order, education, defence, patriotism, Christianity, immigration, over-regulation, tax reduction, and their support for private enterprise, traditional marriage and the family, and (of course) the thorny question of the European Union. There is no longer any credible assertion that UKIP is a ‘single-issue’ protest party or pressure group’.

THERE IS HOWEVER, one essential ingredient missing. Mr Farage is somewhat isolated and needs more talent to join him if he is to attract the attention of the British voter. At the moment, neither Europe or David Cameron has any fear of him. Only when he leads a credible party of politicians with experience, faculty and aptitude, will he pose a genuine threat to Europe and David Cameron.

                Mr Farage has captured what is called the zeitgeist. Today the British are Eurosceptic, anti-immigration, and strong believers in a more robust attitude to law and order. They have been made cynical by broken promises and empty rhetoric, used to entice their support but immediately abandoned after they have played their part in helping politicians up the greasy pole.  

                What needs to happen? Well the Tory benches are not short of talent and much of it euro- sceptical. It is among such a shoal that Mr Farage must cast his net. They must be told that the Conservative Party no longer represents their desires for the country (some of whom already believe this, but are holding back from what they consider disloyalty to the party).

                The party that David Cameron leads is Europhile from top, but not to bottom. If those Eurosceptic Tories that adorn the government benches believe, as I know they do, that this country needs to stay a nation, make its own laws, and retain its sovereignty; then they must look toward a Conservative  Party that reflects their ambitions: and David Cameron’s party is no longer such a party.

                If those Eurosceptic back benches remain seated where they are, and remain loyal to their current leader, they will surely lose this nation to a Greater European Imperium.

                To such people the party they loved and believed in has left them. They must turn toward a party where their talents are needed and pose a genuine threat to the construction of a United States of Europe in which we are told we will have to belong, ‘eventually’.

                The Conservative Party slowly drifted away from its moorings after Margaret Thatcher was driven from office, and the party has sailed haplessly ever since.

IT IS NOW UP TO UKIP and its talented leader to try and persuade experienced and gifted eurosceptic Tory politicians into joining them. After all, the Tories own voters are leading the way by turning away from Cameron’s Tory party and changing their allegiance to UKIP, according to the polls.

                The issue of Europe has set in motion a modern Reformation of the British Conservative Party. Europe has always held out the promise of dividing the Conservative party, but eurosceptic rhetoric, especially by Cameron - who one day dismisses a referendum on Europe, followed by a mere ‘hint’ of a promise to do so in order to keep his own Eurosceptics on board; throws a less than meaty bone to the Tory press, all of whom desperately want to believe that Cameron is a true blue Tory.

                We are at a turning point. Over the coming days and months Tory Euroscepticism must make a choice between a Conservative party which no longer displays the attributes of such an organisation, or turn to a party which cannot survive without them. UKIP is the way forward for traditional Conservatives. Such Conservatives could not find fault with UKIP’s political agenda; after all, it is one which they hoped Cameron would adopt. What was it the Daily Mail’s  Adrian Hilton said? ‘ [The]United Kingdom Independence Party looks and sounds increasingly like the Conservative Party in exile’: and so it does.

                If those Tory Eurosceptics took a great leap forward and abandoned the forgery of a once great party, they would be recognised by history for the work they did.

NIGEL FARAGE is a better political leader than any of those representing the main parties in Great Britain. What he lacks is a body of support that can help engineer his party’s success. This is why the Eurosceptics within the Tory Party must look beyond the comfort zone of parliament if they are genuine about keeping this nation intact.

                UKIP is a traditional Conservative Party in all but name. They began as a single issue party but have expanded into accepting the full curricula of traditional Conservativism- a curricula which the modern Cameron led his social democratic strain away from for fear of being seen as the ‘nasty party’.

                UKIP must persist with trying to bring on board the many talented Tory Eurosceptics. The Tory Eurosceptics in turn, must be prepared to listen. For without their support UKIP will no doubt fail and the Tory Eurosceptics will be left with  a Europhile leadership ready to sell the nation’s soul to a United States of Europe.

                I cannot believe that this is what Tory Eurosceptics want. If not, they now have a way out and should take it if they believe in the British nation state.