THE NATION STATE MUST BE FOUGHT FOR

NICK CLEGG IS the Merkozy’s man on the inside. After last week’s sulk over Cameron’s rejection of European overtures, he is demanding that the prime minister ‘re-engages with Europe’.        According to a leaked e-mail in the hands of the Daily Mail, the honourable gentleman has authorized a leading City lobbyist, Roland Rudd, to try and get the various heads of blue chip firms to sign a letter demanding that Cameron ‘re-engages’ with Brussels.

                When it comes to Europe, Clegg cannot be trusted. He reminds one of those trade union leaders in the 1970s who courted the Soviet Union in the same way Clegg does a Federal Europe today.

                I believe that when he returned from Europe last week the prime minister should have called a general election, with a referendum attached to settle this issue once and for all. Instead, he now has a coalition partner who sees no future for this country outside of it becoming a European county council. I believe the phrase ‘pygmy nation’ was Clegg’s description of a Britain left ‘on the outside’ of Europe.

                I distrust all MPs; but I reserve a particular distrust for those that are driven by a cause that damages our national interest; and Nick Clegg’s cause does exactly that. But so overwhelming is his belief in it, that he will see no betrayal in going behind the prime minister’s back…even as far as the Elise.

                This business with the e-mail is merely the opening salvo. More will indeed follow as Clegg tries to do what he can to undermine his coalition partners position over Europe.                Cameron was the first prime minster to use the veto – something of a diplomatic faux par as far as the EU are concerned…not even the ‘Iron Lady’ dared use, the VETO!

                Nick Clegg was always bound to have been untrustworthy on Europe from a Tory viewpoint. But, the weakness for power, overcame Cameron after the last election when coalition politics raised its ugly head for only the second time in nearly 40 years.

               

TO BE FARE TO CAMERON, the present eurozone crises (once prophesised by the sceptics) was,  at the time of the last election, yet to appear on the radar. So David Cameron sought out Lib Dem support for an administration to govern the country.

                It was an unholy alliance for both parties, and the Labour party must have gained comfort from both its  formation and Gordon Brown’s annihilation as prime minister and party leader. But as usual, the Labour party messed up by, and not for the first time, choosing the wrong man for the job – or should I say the wrong Milliband?

                Today Europe once more dominates the political agenda. Nick Clegg, has, as other liberals have done before him,  turned toward a European power…as did the Whigs, in standing against Wellington’s pursuance of Napoleon during our last conflict with France.

                We are a nation and must remain one; just as the United States is a nation and must remain one. President Obama would not see the United States reduced to the status Nick Clegg, the Merkozy and the Brussels hive, wishes the UK to be reduced to. So why are we any less important as a nation than the USA?

                If the euro zone is in crises; the crises has not come about without warning from the British. Yet, whatever happens from now on; ever since David Cameron’s worthy rejection of the Merkozy; if the euro zone collapses the British will be held to blame…it is in the nature of Europe to blame the British.

                Nick Clegg, has behaved like some teenage and ‘impressionable Marxist’, by swearing his fealty to the ideology of the modern European project, and its eventual encapsulation of Britain into its Federalist architecture .

               

THE LEADER OF the Liberal Democrats does not exemplify any kind of reality other than that of his own stupidity. The British are the British. Ever since Cameron’s rejection, poll after poll have supported his stance. We have a rich history that has built our nation’s success, at the cost of hundreds of thousands of dead. Yet those of us who wish to keep the nation state in existence are regarded as the ‘extremists’ in this debate. We are the xenophobes, the little Englanders out to rain on Nick Clegg’s parade.

                But it was not sceptics who masterminded the euro, but Nick’s comrades. At the time, the ‘extremists’ warned of the perils of a single currency, but were ignored by the ‘moderates’ who were about to create the worst financial disaster in Europe’s history. Who seems the more extreme now; the sceptics or the Europhiles?

                The ambitious Nick Clegg is manoeuvring himself into a nice little earner in Europe when he stands down from his leadership role – but alas, Cameron has now tarnished this ambition  in the eyes of the European elite. So Clegg has to work twice as hard to convince them that he remains the complete European federalist, and has tried to prove this by his anti-Cameron rhetoric, and the parliamentary sulk that left Cameron to face the Commons alone.                 Thankfully the damage that could so easily have been done by Clegg’s infantilism was not taken advantage of by the tragic Ed Milliband, who, like Neil Kinnock, on many similar parliamentary occasions before him, exposed his inadequacies for leadership in front of the whole nation.

WHEN BRITAIN WAS isolated by, and at war with Napoleon, the Whig radicals did what Nick Clegg has done. They supported the French. Wellington referred to these appeasers as ‘croakers’ and they made a nuisance of themselves at every opportunity.

                Today, despite David Cameron’s veto, we still face being absorbed into the ‘Borg’ that is European federalism.

                After over 1,000 years of, at times, a precarious nationhood, those who still believe in its existence, are, according to Nick Clegg, ‘extremists’ for defending their sovereignty.

                The extreme position is surely the one that seeks to take away our national sovereignty - not the position that seeks its retention. But to hear Nick Clegg, one would hardly think so.

                He calls such an arrangement a ‘pygmy nation’. Why, he sounds like the little French corporal himself! What arrogance! What loathing he must have for his nation for using such a description. Only someone who has been nursed throughout his life into the faith of European federalism could so dismiss his country without thought for the offence he may have committed.

                Over the Christmas (sorry seasonal) period, Cameron must at least consider going to the country. For the longer he remains in partnership with Clegg, the weaker his position will become. The euro crises has undermined whatever pact with the Liberal-Democrats he agreed to at the last election. Clegg, if not Cameron, realises this, and he will do whatever is needed to bring about the federalisation of Europe.

                Cameron has to decide as to whether he, like the majority of the English people, still believe in the nation state, or he believes, as his own party’s Europhiles believe, that the nation state has outlived its historical usefulness and we must absorb ourselves fully into Europe.

                If it is the former, then he must go to the country to have it underwritten by popular vote. If it is the latter, then we become a testy and rebellious people once more; as we were under Charles I.

               

               

               

                

Cameron verses Merkozy

DAVID CAMERON returns home isolated from his European colleagues; most of his coalition partners, and of course her majesty’s wretched opposition. He will however, not find such opposition among the British public. For the first time since Margaret Thatcher’s reign, this country has witnessed an act of leadership from its prime minister.

                In the coming days, as the hostility toward him grows by the column inch from those sections of the liberal media both here and in Europe, Mr Cameron will be able to ignore such critics in the full knowledge that the vast majority of the British people support what he had to do. I emphasise the had, because even if he wanted to, he could not see the most important wealth earner this country has, be undermined by taxes on transaction costs. The City and its much maligned practices pass over to treasury one pound in every six collected. As an economist has said today, this buys a whole lot of hospitals and schools.

                But the Tobin Tax apart, what Merkozy is planning for a future euro zone amounts to a cessation of national sovereignty. Their proposal is that all national budgets must be inspected and ruled upon before being presented to national parliaments.

                If this is not selling ones national soul to the devil, then what is? Each country in Europe are about to passively hand over, in the interests of the Greater Germ…sorry, I mean Europe, their very nationhood. That they have allowed this to happen so casually - as if tipping a waiter, I find shocking. The Irish for instance, have been at daggers drawn with the British for over 300 years…and what for? Why, an independent nation of course. Now they are about to betray those who sacrificed themselves to try and bring it about. From now on Ireland will become a mere canton within a Greater Europe, with no national identity left – and it was not the British that took it from them: they gave it away themselves.

                In Scotland the nationalists are in power and soon hope to hold a referendum on Scottish independence. It would be interesting to know whether, if the SNP won such a referendum, they would join Ireland as a mere political unit subsumed into the Greater Europe.

AT THE MOMENT there are 17 members of the euro, and it will soon be joined by nine more if their leaders have their way - which I hope they do not.

                There will be a slow lane and a fast lane within Europe. The euro has taught us that life in fast lane often leads to crashes. Of the 27 nations, we alone will have a whole motorway to ourselves. For we are now alone in fighting our corner.

                Our corner comprises the retention of our nationhood and the single market. Our people cannot hope to tolerate a situation whereby they elect a government to pass our laws and manage our economy; only to see these basic democratic functions taken away from them. For what is the point in voting at all, if our franchise becomes a mere gravy train for our politicians to win a ticket on.

                In Brussels yesterday we won a great victory. We did so by defending our sovereign independence. We put the continuance of individual nationhood above what our European leaders would  term European solidarity. Solidarity, the word slips easily off the tongues of X-Marxists like Barroso. It is a collectivist nomenclature that the European Left prides itself upon using. What it displays is the collectivist ideal that many in Europe would readily understand.

                Nations are not sub-divisions of one country. In America, the word state carries a different connotation. The USA (the exemplar for which the Greater Europe wishes to model itself) comprises different states within a nation. In Europe, they wish the nation state to become a state within the American meaning of the word; and the Obama administration seems sympathetic to such an approach- if only to bring an end to the sovereign debt crises in Europe that threatens, not only his country; but also his chances of re-election in 2012.

WE MUST NOW WAIT and see what happens when those leaders from the 10 nations not signed up to the euro return home to seek the support from their people after joining up with Merkozy. If their people are as patriotic of the nation state as are the majority of the British people, then I hope, but do not expect, they will refuse to abandon their nationhood to the collective.

                Fear drives those now outside the euro, but soon hope to become part of it. They fear being left behind by history, even if they still have the same doubts that kept them from joining the euro in the first place. They have been panicked into complying with the Merkozy plan for a Greater Europe.

                We have been criticised for our demands, such as they were. But did I not hear Angela Merkle refuse to allow the production of euro bonds because they would not be in the German people’s interest; and did I not also hear President Sarkozy complain of his nation’s loss of too much sovereignty.

                David Cameron is, like Merkozy, looking after his nations interest. He did not deserve Sarkozy’s blanking in Brussels after their meeting. For the French are as protective of their sovereignty, as are the British, and Sarkozy knows this. But he is fighting for his own survival in the up and coming French elections and an image of him by-passing a hand shake from ‘perfidious Albion’ will only, he hope, help confirm his re- election. 

THE FOLLOWING SUNDAY

NOW IT IS SUNDAY THE 11^th  December, and the Coalition is under pressure. Nick Clegg, who was briefly supportive after Cameron’s return, is now castigating his coalition partner after apparently agreeing to Cameron’s negotiating position before he set off to Brussels. Now Clegg is describing the prime minister as ‘spectacularly misguided’ and his diplomatic foray as ‘potentially damaging for Britain as a whole’

                The Labour party, it now appears,  would also have done things differently. What this  amounts to however is a somewhat feeble attempt at aquiring a position; which suggests that Labour was seeking to create any minor discrepancy they could conjure-up between their policy and David Cameron’s in order to oppose the Coalition.           

                Labour's foreign affairs spokesman, Douglas Alexander, told Andrew Marr that he would have sought a seat around the euro zone table now occupied by the 26 nations. To do what exactly? Sit there like a ventriloquist’s dummy with Ed Milliband’s hand up his arse.

                The truth is, that Labour would have had to do exactly what Cameron did. The City is one of the largest financial markets in the world, and European policies such as the Tobin tax on financial transactions would have put us at a significant disadvantage. Last year the City handed £50 billion over to the revenue; and as Mr Alexander knows, this builds a lot of schools and hospitals. We are no longer the manufacturing giant we once were, and our financial sector, for all of its inflated bonuses, helps keep this country among the top six economies in the world.

                If Nick Clegg seeks to cause major problems for the coalition, which, being a Europhile, he may see it as his duty to do; then the prime minister must bring all these decades of arguing over Europe to an end. He should call an election and prepare the country for a referendum on our continuing relationship with Europe if elected. Polls in today’s Mail on Sunday suggest the public are behind him over his stand on Europe. The British have always been a Eurosceptic people; whether they voted Labour or Tory.

                The British are not xenophobes as our Metropolitan elite of London like to portray them. All they want is to remain a nation whose own parliament, which they of course elect, should be the sole authority making the laws by which they live. Is this an extreme position to take? A people must have full control over both their own as well as their nation’s destiny.

                Alliances with other nations are one thing, but handing over our national sovereignty is another. If those other nations in Europe think so little of their sovereignty that they are prepared to give it up, then they invite thraldom.

                The buzz word among the French and Germans is shared sovereignty. What this means in reality is that the Germans and the French will take much and give little. For the real power in Europe, is not the new collective, but the strongest economy among them.

                We saw in the cases of Italy and Greece, a warning of what this power can do to a democratic state. The leaders of both countries were effectively dismissed and replaced by what were unelected ‘technocrats’. In Papandreou’s case, because he dared offer his people a referendum.

                As we know, referendums are like garlic to a vampire as far as our leaders are concerned and so it proved with the Greek prime minister – but could any democrat imagine such coup as happened in Italy and Greece? Instead of causing shock and alarm, the casual treatment it received from the media and the liberal establishment would have caused an outcry among them if such an act had been perpetrated within a colonial Empire (preferably British).

WE ARE NOW, THANKFULLY, reaching the end of this long drawn out argument about the UK’s involvement with Europe. The euro crises has been like a stone thrown into a pond; it has caused the ripples that have brought about a speeding up of decisions. The British people can no longer be delicately and patronisingly cajoled toward European Federalism via treaties like that of Lisbon; which we were told, did not need a referendum because it was a mere ‘technical adjustment’.

                David Cameron had to do what he eventually did. He did so because his so-called European partners knew much beforehand what the British position would be; yet, in Sarkozy’s case he sought to embarrass Cameron by ignoring his handshake, which was meant as a gesture by Cameron of no hard feelings

                The French elections are not far off and Sarkozy wants to continue with the power in Europe that Angela Merkle has given him. So he deliberately chose to embarrass the British prime minister at a time when he faced the French electorate.

                 Cameron must continue to distance himself and his country from a blue print that only envisages the functions of a canton for a once proud nation which made its own laws, and sought its own destiny. For this is what European federalism means. It means the ending of our nation states’ history, which the British Left were never to enamoured with in the first place; which is why all of those serving the Left are not too concerned about the disappearance of the British nation state.

                Cameron has done well up to now; but only the unfolding days and weeks will determine whether he has done enough. He must not backtrack on anything he has done. For to do so will bring only grief to the vast majority of his nation who have supported him. He must not let his people down – and we as a people must not go quietly into our last goodnight as a nation.

               

                               

                  

               

                

1984

GEORGE ORWELL SAW himself as a man of the Left - as those on the Left  still see him. He was part of the of the International Brigade that fought in the Spanish civil war against Franco’s fascists. In his book Homage to Catalonia however, he targeted and chastised his own side with as much rage as he felt for the fascists. The Left as always, were split into ideological groups; anarchist, socialists, and communists…the latter being sub divided into Stalinist and Trotskyite. The Stalinists took their orders from Moscow and loathed the Trotskyites as much, or even more so than the fascists; and under orders from Stalin would not hesitate to kill what they would have regarded as counter revolutionaries.

                Orwell fought with the POUM; the Trotskyite faction against Franco. One would have thought that the dystopian vision of 1984 would have been a vision of fascist domination. But Orwell perceived that the greatest threat would come from the Left. He understood how the Left thought and behaved; he not only had practical experience of its behaviour in Spain, but also the  Big Brother template that was the Soviet Union.

                Such a world vision, he believed, would come from the Left side of the political spectrum. Orwell was an English patriot who understood his country and its people better than anyone at the time. When war broke out he worked tirelessly on behalf of his country to defeat Hitler. His work for the BBC during the war (having been wounded in Spain) was patriotic propaganda; which many journalist’s today would be repulsed by. He believed in his country, if not its colonialism.

                Today Orwell would sit comfortably on the Right. He would see the idea of a European super state evolving over time, into the very entity described in 1984.

YET THIS IS WHAT IS ABOUT TO happen in Europe, and our (that is British) politicians are being panicked into seeing it come to fruition.

                Over the past few weeks we have seen two democratically elected leaders of two of Europe’s nations overthrown and replaced by what are being referred to as technocrats. On top of which both Italy and Greece have been told they must form a national government. Were these leaders replaced by the people democratically? Was it the people of these nations who demanded such a national government?

                No, they were the victims of a coup. The coup was led by Germany and France, because they objected to George Papandreou, for allowing his people a referendum on whether to make the sacrifices in order to remain part of a single currency, or to vote to leave.

                If this was not a forewarning of what was to come, then it has gone unnoticed by the journalistic benefactors of Orwell’s legacy. I find it outrageous that two European nations can be dictated to and ordered to comply by two other European nations. This could only have happened in the past if Italy and Greece were defeated in war and occupied. For this is what Germany and France’s demands amount to…an occupation.

                We are on the brink of an Orwellian nightmare. Politicians, unelected by anyone, are in control of the European machinery of government, that effectively governs us all. They are called commissioners and their power goes unchallenged by national governments. The very people whom the people elect are impotent to act.  Through treaty after treaty, they have consigned, bit by bit, our national sovereignty to the dustbin of history.

               

NOW IT IS ALL OUT in the open. The sovereign debt crises has forced, not as it should have done, the closure of the nightmare that is a Federal Europe, but encouraged its most enthusiastic proponents to demand its speeding up.

                There is now talk of our prime minister abandoning yet another promise to the electorate; that of renegotiating our relationship with Europe. Remember, this was meant to replace the call for a referendum. It was meant to appease the Eurosceptic British people and they took him at his word.

                Now the unfolding events suggest that Cameron will finesse, once more, a reason suitably desperate enough and dire in its rhetoric to hopefully frighten even the Eurosceptic British into the Orwellian nightmare.

WHAT IS FAST becoming the survival of our nation state is taking place. Its survival at one time would have been determined by Napoleon and Hitler. It never entered anyone’s mind that a few unelected European bureaucrats could orchestrate the defeat of our nation state with the blessing of our leaders… via the implementation of treaties that the British public were never given the chance to vote on.

                Remember the Lisbon Treaty which we were told by our politicians was a mere technical adjustment and needed no referendum to implement; remember the Maastricht Treaty, also dismissed on such grounds. For how much longer are we going to trust our politicians when the ‘ideal’ of Europeanization seeks to cantonise every nation within Europe led ultimately by a reinvigorated Germany?

                Hundreds of thousands of our people were killed during the last war in order to defend the nation-state. It was this sense of nationhood  that our fathers and grandfathers were prepared to die for - not to see their nation dissipated into a Federal Europe by arrogant, disingenuous, and at times mendacious politicians.

                Europe is on the brink of something cataclysmic. The troubled single currency should be done away with; instead, the unfolding tragedy has actually whetted the Eurocrats appetite for immediate monetary union. Of those 17 members of the euro, some will have to be sacrificed, and we have no need to ask who will be booted out. Among the remaining, monetary and political union will forge ahead, leaving those 10 countries who never joined to become part of  a two speed Europe.

                Although the euro will survive, it will do so because of Germany’s economic power; and with such power comes control and authority. It was seen at the time of this great European union’s birth, that Germany would be brought into the European family after two attempts at trying to rule the continent and become an equal partner in the European family.

                Now Germany once more stands on the brink of dominating Europe. She will be the piper that calls the tune in this new slimmer monetary union. No wonder a French politician has described Angela Merkle as another Bismarck.

EVER SINCE ITS creation, the European union has had, to paraphrase Ann Widdecombe, ‘something of the night about it’. It has sought its legitimacy, not through democratic procedures, but through a bureaucratic commissariat of commissioners who dispense their demands throughout the continent; and legitimately elected national governments are forced to heed their directives. They have power over national sovereignty because our politicians have salami-sliced it away through signing those nefarious treaties that the people have never had any say in agreeing to.

                We are fast approaching a time when we can legitimately ask the question; what are our elected politicians for? Having deferred so many of their powers to Brussels, their primary task as law makers is being made ever more sterile by their need to take cognisance of Europe when writing our laws – especially when it comes criminal and human rights law.

                If European federalism is not an Orwellian construct, then the Pope is not a Catholic. It is incredible that we have, though a misplaced idealism, allowed this to get so far without even being aware of its dangers.

                But of course there were people who were regarded as party-poopers who did indeed warn; first of all about the direction that European Union would take us in, as well as flag up the dangers of a single currency being created among so many divergent economies.

                At the time such people were considered as swivel-eyed fanatics. These ‘Eurosceptics’ belonged to what was regarded as the xenophobic Right. They, once Thatcher was gotten rid of, were an irritant to the Tory leaders that followed her, but never managed to stop the contagion. The Tory Left, which got rid of Thatcher, thought at the time that they had not only driven a steak through the ‘vampires’ heart but, as Europhiles, had saved the country from isolation.

                Then came the  Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM)crises, that the chancellor Norman Lamont allowed his prime minister to talk him into joining in the first place. We were humiliated on a day when Germany preferred to stand by the French and allow us to sink or swim. We should have learned from this experience but in the Tory Party the Europhile torch never dimmed. As a Labour Party supporter at the time, the sight of Norman Lamont’s humiliation in front of the media as he announced our withdrawal from the ERM, after interest rates had surged to 15 per cent during the course of the day, brought me untold joy.

               

GEORGE ORWELL knew what the Left were capable of. Today in Europe (including the UK), there are no parties that could describe themselves as Conservative. In Europe both socialists and Christian Democrats, are social democrats. For if there were a truly Conservative Party in Europe today, it would oppose political and monetary union.

                In other words, the Left dominates the European union and are determined to solidify the whole continent through political and monetary union, and are doing so by waving away any attempt at allowing the people to vote by referendum on the course of their wisdom.

                The modern European politician (including the UK’s) reminds one of the Divine Right of Kings in the way they so easily dismiss the electorate. To our modern generation of UK politicians, when it comes to Europe its people are a nuisance.

                 

               

                

IT IS TIME FOR A TORY REFORMATION

THE TORY party has threatened to split over Europe ever since Margaret Thatcher was in power. John Major, her successor, was haunted by his backbenches’ eurosceptic sniping, and was made to look weak and compromising. The Tory eurosceptics were seen by the party establishment as mad, bad, and dangerous to know. But the rank and file members were however, most supportive.

                Today, in light of the euro debacle and the sceptics warnings about  the dangers of a single currency being created among such diverse economies, the sceptics are now seen as being proved right. They have even been endorsed by the architect of the whole wretched project, Jacques Delors.

                Mr Delors has admitted in an interview with the Daily Telegraph, that the whole project was flawed from the beginning, conceding that the ‘Anglo Saxons’, i.e. Margaret Thatcher, ‘…had a point’.

                The time is approaching when trying to keep the Tory Party united over this most challenging threat to our national sovereignty, must be brought to an end. The Tory Party must split, if it wishes to remain a ‘Tory’ party; which it will no longer be if we forgo our national sovereignty and economic independence. The Tory party is a nationalist party in sway to tradition and traditional values. If it loses these by helping take this country into a European super state, then the Tory party will be effectively dead anyway; and its many party sceptics will turn toward UKIP, while its Europhile wing will join the Liberal Democrats, in the same way the Gang of Four did when they broke from Labour… after achieving only failure with the SDP.

                Until now, the party membership have had to make do with the rather weak gruel that is eurosceptic rhetoric from their leaders at conference time. Talk, as they say, is cheap; and the party establishment has provided much of this in order to keep the party united.

                David Cameron made promises on the Lisbon Treaty, and then reneged on them. He now promises to recoup the powers signed away to Brussels (especially legal powers handed over to the European Court). We will wait and see what he actually does to recover powers that should never have left a British parliament in the first place.

THE TORY PARTY LEADERSHIP today makes the right noises over Europe, but they are doing so in order to hold the party together. Elections must also be won, and a euro sceptic British public must also be courted. One gets the impression with David Cameron that after he makes a eurosceptic speech, he ring’s up his European colleges and, if not to apologise, then at least seek their understanding of his predicament.

                Cameron is no Tory; in the same way that Blair was no socialist. Cameron sees nothing intrinsically wrong in a federal Europe. Indeed (at least before the crises of the single currency) he would have seen much merit in its creation; but hoped that his party would be won over by the passage of time as well as the currency’s success. But time has now run out, and the euro lies battered and on the ropes.

                But rather than abandon the whole project, both Germany and France wish to advance speedily to the fiscal union that should have been introduced alongside political union in the first place; and this has sent danger signals to every section of the Tory Party.

                Ian Duncan Smith is talking of a referendum, and Nick Clegg is saying that a referendum is not needed because the new ‘Nicomerk’ will only apply to those 17countries that are in the euro zone.

                Ian Duncan Smith is right. What is about to happen will change fundamentally the European Union. Because at this time we are not involved in such a change does not carry any weight with the public, because we will be affected by it.

               

IF THE TORY PARTY does not take a firm stand against European political and economic union, and allow those who do believe in it to leave the party; then the party will disappear altogether in the way I suggest above.

                Those within the party who believe in Tory values would remain if the party split once and for all over this issue. I say ‘issue’, but of course it is not merely an issue like any other. It goes to the very heart of our national identity and its very existence.

                It comes down to this in the end. We either remain an island nation and all this implies in terms of its culture and history, or we give it all up through the mere waving of a prime ministers pen over some document, witnessed by the world’s media.

                Even the French president, Nikolas Sarkozy, has shied away from Angela Merkle’s insistence on each government within the euro zone submitting their national budgets to inspection before they announce them to their national parliaments. He has done so because it represents a diminution of French national sovereignty!

                So the French, like the British, are equally concerned about their sovereign independence. But you would not think so when you see both Merkle and Sarkozy bonded in harmony together before the world’s press.

                But in France, Sarkozy is being satirised as a puppet of Merkle; at a time when he is due to fight a general election.

                When the euro zone explodes we must be as far away from the blast as we can be; not remain determined to plant the explosives for a second blast, as our euro-beguiled Coalition seems determined to do.

                The true Tory Party represents the nationalistic instincts of patriotism which has guided our history and our many victories over our enemies along the way. We have made our own decisions, whether right or wrong; we have remained independent and fought those who challenged it.

                Now we have been in a period of submission since we gave up our colonies. Our national demeanour has been that of acquiescence and capitulation. We are a nation that has had to apologise for every mistake made by our colonial ancestors. But the people who the politicians are supposed to represent; deeply resents such overtures from colonies of the once British Empire, as well as the readiness of their politicians to comply with such requests for an apology.

                The Tory Party may not be fully aware of their fate; but the only way they can avoid it is to seek their own reformation. The party faces the greatest challenge in its long history as a party of and for the nation. The very idea of giving away national sovereignty should be anathema to a true Tory, and not seen as an extreme position to hold, as the eurosceptics are finding.

                If the party does not reform itself and continues to underperform because of the divisions over Europe; then the party will be no more. The euro crises has made the European leaders even more determined to see political and monetary union created; and for the Tory party, this means a contradiction between its original purpose as a party and the Europhiles within it who no longer see the nation state as a unit of independence. It is the Europhiles who are the enemies of Toryism, not the sceptics. The sceptics are trying to keep Britain a sovereign nation; while the Europhiles are prepared to see such ‘antiquated’ ideas thrown into the dustbin of history.

                The Europhiles are the trespassers, and should leave the party and join the Liberal Democrats; they should leave and allow the Tory Party to fulfil its original purpose of defending the nation and preserving its traditions and culture. Ken Clarke would make a fine Luther and should lead the separatists away to either create their own church or join one that, on Europe at least, they would be more at home with.

               

                 

               

                

JUDGE BROWN MOCKS JUSTICE

IT IS SAID THAT if you live long enough nothing surprises you anymore. Then along comes  a British judge to reinvigorate the anger we should all feel when an injustice is committed. The case in point is that of 22-year-old Rhea Page, who, along with her boyfriend, were returning home after a night out in Leicester.

                Rhea was approached by three Somalian women who had been drinking, and was assaulted by them. To a backdrop of racial abuse (‘kill the white slag’), she had clumps of hair ripped from her scalp and was brought to the ground and  punched and kicked. If it had not been for the intervention of her boyfriend and the arrival of the police, things may have been far worse. But even so Rhea suffered much bruising from the attack to her  head, back, legs and arms.
                The three Somalians were later arrested and appeared before judge Robert Brown, who gave each of them a six month suspended sentence. His leniency for an offence that carries a maximum of 5 years imprisonment, was due to the fact that the attackers were not used to alcohol as it is banned by their Islamic faith, and therefore they did not know what they were doing.

                Judge Brown, according to the Daily Mail, also said he accepted the women may have felt they were the victims of unreasonable force from Rhea's partner Lewis Moore, 23, who tried to defend her from the attack -  so Rhea’s partner, Lewis Moore was made to feel the real criminal by the judge.

                Were the three Somalians even charged with a hate crime? Of course not, this is reserved for white racists and does not apply to any other skin tone. The judge, apparently, never even discussed the possibility of such an offence on top of the assault. But because they were disobeying the customs of their faith by drinking in the first place, the judge decided this was, presumably, sufficient punishment.

                Sadly this is not an isolated example of the way our judiciary administers justice. Judge Brown was no eccentric; there have been example after example of Judges’ seeing the criminal as a victim and the real victim as in some way provoking the criminal - as no doubt the judge in this case saw Mr Moore, from his comments during the trial.

                RHEA PAGE NOW SUFFERS flashbacks, and has panic attacks as a consequence of her night out. She has been short changed like hundreds of others, by our justice system. Our judges are, in the main, (if we believe what we read)  like Robert Brown. There are however many judges, thankfully, that administer the law in a way intended by the politicians, who are answerable to the people – a concept, it appears, that a lot of judges find disagreeable.

                The scales of justice have long since been tipped prejudicially toward the criminal, as in Rhea’s case; and left the victim filled with anger at such a rearrangement of justice in our land.

                Our politicians seem powerless in the face of the judges. Whatever law they pass, it is either overruled by Europe or ignored by our judges. Our judges are indeed a law unto themselves, while our politicians who are supposed to be our lawmakers, just sit on sideline shrugging their shoulders and collecting their salaries and expenses.

                Rhea Page was the victim and her assailants the criminals. But her assailants have received the ‘justice’ that was denied to her. This is an Alice in Wonderland fantasy, instead of a respected system of justice. Many, but thankfully not all, of our judges are like Robert Brown and share his liberal interpretation of justice.

                The vast majority of the British people are small ‘c’ conservatives when it comes to crime and the criminal. They wish justice to be administrated on behalf of the victim and in accordance with the wishes of the politicians they elected. They want judges to obey to the letter the laws passed by their still sovereign parliament. If not, then we must consider electing our judges in the same way they do in America.

JEREMY PULLS THE TRIGGER

JEREMY CLARKSON’S OFFENSIVE  rant on the BBC’s One Show has caused a great deal offence; not least among the Unison leadership, who are consulting their lawyers, on behalf of their over sensitive members – I hope they will be kept informed of the financial cost such a course of action will have. For you can bet that the union’s general secretary, Dave Prentice is not personally forking out for Sue, Grabbit, and Run’s advice. The thousands of pounds it will probably cost will of course come from his members subscriptions… so the legal profession will once more be left rubbing their hands in anticipation of another sumptuous gratuity.

                When asked by one of his interviewers what he would like to do to the strikers, Clarkson replied ‘I would shoot the lot of them’, adding ‘I would take them outside and execute them in front of their families’.

                His remarks were meant to antagonise, because he likes to typify the Right Wing reactionary circa 1926. His remarks made me laugh, not because I took them seriously or agreed with their sentiments. But Clarkson is the perfect antidote to those really offensive comics considered Left Wing who target the disabled.

                Those ‘edgy’ Left Wing comedians believe that when it comes to comedy and humour, nothing should be exempted, or, as they would say censored…even bad taste. Perhaps a few of them will now come to Clarkson’s aid and condemn Mr Prentice for seeking his revenge through the courts, and, more importantly, demanding Clarkson’s dismissal from the BBC.

                Despite their principles, however, I notice these modern jesters who were once described as ‘alternative’ comedians, are not so principled or ‘edgy’ when it comes to self-censorship. They profess comedic enlightenment but fall short when it comes to satirising Islam, for instance. Despite their occupancy of the moral high ground when it comes to free speech, they set their own boundaries.  The lunacy that is modern Islam is ripe for humour; political correctness is ripe for humour; over sensitive minorities are ripe for humour. The country itself is ripe and waiting for another Jonathan Swift to satirise all of these issues.

                Jeremy Clarkson may cause offense but he does not self-censor. If anything he exemplifies the principles set down by those alternative types who perform before an audience of Guardianistas every night up and down the country. Clarkson will not be tongue-tied by political correctness. He will continue to speak his mind. He may not be a performing comedian by profession, but he has wit, and does not censor it for anyone.

               

DAVE PRENTICE, on the other hand, is just playing to the gallery. He is doing what he thinks his members expect him to do. His outrage is as synthetic as a politician’s promise.

                I do not think the BBC would dare take Prentice’s demand that Clarkson be sacked seriously. He appeals to those in the country who object to having to pay a tax in order to watch a television screen. If they were to sack him, such people would find nothing left to keep them interested and would, one hopes, refuse payment of the licence fee.

                Working at the BBC, Jeremy Clarkson for many people, is like a small oasis of fertile ground in a large desert.  The BBC is an institution that is not impartial. Indeed, it is proud of its centre-left, liberal ethos. It professes impartiality, but it propagandises on behalf of Multiculturalism and European Federalism.

                If Clarkson went, then, for many people, the last reason for paying the licence fee will have gone. As for myself, I secretly hope that Prentice succeeds in his bid to remove Clarkson from the BBC. I believe that, as an institution, it has a systemic liberal bias. This in itself would not be a problem if the BBC were not harvesting its income from the general public backed by law, like all forms of taxation. Not all people in this country consider themselves Left-Wing at any level, including those within the Tory Party. But they are still forced by law to pay a tax to a state controlled company that evangelises liberalism.

                To date the BBC has had 21000 complaints probably from those in the public sector. We now know Clarkson was invited on the One Show to say something controversial about the strike. Well, if so, the BBC cannot be too disappointed at what was said. As for 21000 who rang, texted or e-mailed their disgust to the programmes’ producer; they should accept the fact that bas taste is not a crime.

               

               

                               

               

                 

NEW LABOUR'S DYSTOPIAN VISION

RESEARCH CARRIED OUT by the Joseph Rowntree Trust has shown that the white working class (yes they do still exist) feel aggrieved by the way they are treated when it comes to social housing as well as other issues.

                They see themselves as being second in the queue to minorities - although the report of the report by the Daily Mail does not say this. But all you need do is live within such a community to understand the breadth of their concerns about foreign migration.

                Council housing is just one issue. But at the top of such communities grievances is immigration and the way it has colonised their towns. White working class resentment is real but it remains sullen and fearful of speaking out because they know a single wrong word  can now be regarded as a hate crime - that Orwellian creation of Multiculturalism.

                I live in a seaside resort that once thrived on receiving holiday makers from all four corners of the country, before the cheap package holidays brought famine to the holiday industry. But Great Yarmouth has had its fair share of immigrants. Foreign languages now prevail where once only regional accents dominated during the summer months.

                Many of the people of Great Yarmouth dare only speak their concerns to each other when it comes to what after all could become a criminal act. Immigrants have, it seems to many, taken over the town. Of course this is an exaggeration. But when you walk down almost any street in the town and hear a tongue you do not understand; and when you visit your GP and find yourself as a citizen of the UK having to wait longer; and, on occasions, being the only English speaker in the waiting room; and when you visit the local hospital and see instructions written in 13 different languages; and when you receive a correspondence from the local council offering the same variety of languages; then you begin to feel alienated.

                Immigration is becoming an existential threat to the white working class, and it did not need the Rowntree Trust to say things we already knew as white and working class.

THE LAST LABOUR government from 1997 until their removal from power in 2010, deliberately sought to swamp this island with immigrants from all four corners of the world. 

                In the end, hundreds of thousands of, mainly Poles, turned up at our ports and airports. By the middle of this century, the population of Great Britain will increase from just over 60 to over 70 million people; and the pressures this will put on the country, in terms of the NHS, housing and welfare generally will cause friction, and in the present economic climate social unrest or even breakdown. It is estimated, for example, that three cities the size of Birmingham will have to be built to accommodate such an increase.

                 The Labour Party began this invasion because they deemed their traditional support among the working class was diminishing. So a whole new Labour supporting constituency had to be created – and where else would they find it, but among grateful immigrants from Europe armed with an automatic right to vote.

                Many in New Labour also saw the remnants of the white working class as racists in track suits. The chav was born; and New Labour was embarrassed. Except that the chav was just as despised among the white working class as it was among metropolitan New Labour.

               

IMMIGRATION IS THE elephant in the room as far as the Rowntree Trust is concerned. As a liberal body they dare not dig to deeply. If however they are serious about white working class sentiment, then immigration closely followed by our relationship with Europe governs their thinking and it is right that it does so.

                I hear from taxi drivers as they take me to hospital and the doctor’s surgery; I hear from people in the local pubs, as well as from friends and acquaintances in Yarmouth; all of them talk of the new tongues that are present on our streets. They are not racists, although New Labour would have convicted them as such (remember Gordon Brown at the last election?).

                By criminalising all comment on anti-immigration as racist, this country has allowed the swamping (as Margaret Thatcher referred to it) of our country by large scale immigration.

NEW LABOUR and the last Labour government have done much irreversible harm to this country and it will pay a heavy price in terms of social conflict, as future demographics threaten social cohesion.  The white working class want their nation and its culture to flourish; but both are under threat. The nation because it faces integration within a European super state; while the nation’s culture has lost all of its authority, and become just one more culture of equal rank to the dozens of others due to Multiculturalism.

                No wonder you hear from people of my generation, the now much overused phrase ‘Enoch was right’. New Labour tested the white working class’s tolerance to destruction. Their programme of ill-thought through social engineering that brought so much resentment and effectively criminalised what they were allowed to say and not to say when it came race and all other cultures, has left many a scar on my generation at least.

                I am 61 and had been a lifelong Labour voter until May of 2010. By then, enough was enough. New Labour’s cultural revolution had tested my loyalty to its limits – my God! They even  arranged for the opening hours of our pubs to become continuous, in the hope that it would foster a European cafe culture. Instead it increased the amount of inebriate behaviour on a Friday and Saturday night, which embarrassed the nation throughout the world in this multi-media age.

                I have a new ‘ism’, Metropolitanism. It is meant to describes how a uniquely London-centric multiculture has gone viral and sought influence over the rest of the country. Our Labour metropolitan elites blueprinted our white working class futures and we were left to take it or leave it. The white working class were passé as far as New Labour was concerned. Our out-datedness was, in a small way exemplified by the presence of Dennis Skinner, the ‘Beast of Bolsover’, on the then government back benches, wearing the same tired couture that he had worn since the 1970s, and was now using it as an antidote to the Armani suits of New Labour.

               

AS YOU WILL HAVE gathered, especially if you are one of the authors of the Rowntree report, and are now honouring me by reading this blog; I have not read a single word of  your report’s conclusions. The fact is, is that I know what the white working class feels most aggrieved by - as does the many Labour MPs whose white working class constituents have impressed upon them their concerns when they visit the constituencies and hold their surgeries.

                The Labour Party has to be held to account. The economic harm, they caused, particularly by Gordon Brown, is another issue and the subject of another piece. But their dystopian ventures into social engineering will do the most damage. For they loaded this country with the burden of mass immigration, and defied those who challenged their policy by labelling them racists or even fascist. Anyone who questioned them became tarred with the BNP brush.

                Most  white working class people vote Labour because they hate the Tories and for no other reason. Even those who vote who are against our Europeanization and mass immigration, remain loyal to Labour. But they are becoming fewer in number as both issues become dominant. Loyalty goes only so far, which is why, after all, New Labour sought their new constituents from the new migrants.