rugfish

Still Ardently Opposed to the Euro

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Sat, 19 May 2012 05:27:00 +0000

I've been ardently opposed to a single currency and have always known that the euro was an impossible political construct which defies simple economics. Whether it took 5 years, 10 or 20 years, it could never work across disparate sovereignties. (That's countries for eurofanatics).

Countries which have different social costs which reflect disparate regions within the main. Different production centres where output and manufacturing means the difference of being employed or unemployed and all that entails in terms of empty communities and mobile family units or else people on state benefits for the rest of their lives as their region (or country), fails to be able to compete as a result of a difference in its access to resources.

A single currency without monetary policies which serve regions and countries which are unable to compete, will necessitate government decision making to create government jobs in deprived areas as manufacturing does not occur to sufficient extent to provide the employment needed for the growing population in such deprived areas. It also costs more to establish health and education systems as the collection of taxes in those areas are insufficient to build and provide.

A single currency can only work with a single monetary policy and a single economic plan and a single chancellor. Thus one single political leadership is required unless you accept an elected politician without power to agree a budget for your needs, and are prepared to be told no.

Secondly, as people will essentially mobilize toward workplaces and education centres, the deprived areas become ghosts of their former selves and that leads to less consumption and the closure of retail units along their high streets along with a lowering of house prices for those who remain, as supply exceeds demand.

The euro cannot work for many more reasons but I just described some of the effects of trying to do the impossible.

The political argument is still raging on bailouts and austerity packages, make up or break up etc, and G8 summits form to talk about how they manage to keep the currency afloat.

These talks are akin to asking each other how they can all fit onto an 8 foot square piece of paper and sail safely across the Atlantic without a paddle or any lifeboats.

People who 'support' the existence of a single currency without being honest enough to say it requires a single government and essentially the end of sovereign governments across 17 nations, all with thousands of years of history, are either deceiving the public or they are mad. (Insanely supporting the impossible).

As for the fallout and whether Britain can or cannot 'recover'. This is a disingenuous proposal. It is in itself failing to accept the reality that there is nothing to 'recover' to. The euro has close to 1 Trillion in circulation. This is higher than the US Dollar. It is all debt. More euro debt exists in banks to the tune of at least 1.4 Trillion EUR.

Add to that the fact that our lifestyles (and government spending), has been occurring as a result of debt, and then once you realise that such levels of debt cannot be recovered, you begin to see the picture when you imagine 'who repays the debt', and also ask 'how'.

Britain will undoubtedly not be able to continue to 'grow' at the rate it did prior to the crash. Rather, it must cut costs and limit government borrowing until growth occurs naturally, and that means lots of lost jobs in the public sector which will lead to a lot of angry people, civil unrest and possibly war in some countries, as well as vast political change.

The only thing which can prevent the natural laws of economics working their way through the system, is to continue to delude the populations of Europe and to continue to feed them the lie that their lifestyle can return if they have more debt, and they will still be French, German, British or Greek, if they give away their sovereignties to the politicians who are hell bent on keeping a currency which cannot work.

From Northern Rock to a hard place

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Thu, 19 Jan 2012 03:12:00 +0000

Breaking silence here......

I took the self imposed gag off eventually when I read that we (I mean the government), is to decide whether to give another £17.5 BILLION of our money (I mean their money), to the IMF. Of course we all know it will happen and this so called news item is merely a political front for us thicko public who have to pay the money, but we might as well pretend to be as much outraged about it as the government is. 'Pretending' that is. Of course they must be in pretence as they know (as we do), that really they have no choice to give the money. I say 'no choice' loosely here as quite obvious as it may seem, we do have a government and a parliament that decides such matters and I guess (obviously), that they are undecided beforehand? Or is that naive or just plain daft to suppose?

I say actually that the government and we in this country, are between a rock and a hard place in terms of whether we give the IMF more money or we do not. I mean think of the consequences if we do not. Firstly: We will forevermore be made to look mean and our international investments will become threatened. It's a form of blackmail I know. But they don't see it that way obviously. However do we really want other countries pulling the plug on much of what we as a nation do to invest inside their countries, which earns the nation money?

Secondly: imagine David Cameron now. He is metaphorically with the phone in one ear to the IMF and on the other ear with the British public. The British public are shouting 'we will never vote for you again if you give money to the IMF', and the IMF are shouting 'we will never give business to you again if you don't give us your money'. Sort of like Al Capone would threaten his 'business associates'. So Cameron loses unless we can be convinced that giving money away is really a good idea, and I guess only if he is right (that the public are thicko's), will he be able to convince some of us to keep voting for him. I hasten to add 'not me'.

The money is 'apparently' to support countries and not currencies and this is where I had to remove my gag to ask 'what is the difference'? I mean it sounds good but can you or anyone else enlighten me further as to why monetary assistance would even be required for a country that had a 'strong currency'? Tick tick tick....waiting for reply, and I am definitely going to be listening to the farce, err commons debates on whether we approve as a nation (without having been asked), whether to give the Mafia, err the IMF more money. After all, we know that it won't be used to shore up the pile of cinders we call the Euro, because David Cameron has said it is for countries not for currencies and we always believe politicians don't we.

Incidentally, we are about to be given S&P's credit rating and I wonder which way it would go if we said no to the IMF? If my predictions are correct, then soon we will say yes to the IMF and S&P will say everything is fine with our credit rating. I will put my gag back on because it is really a waste of time complaining about it and since there's no democracy anywhere on the planet except perhaps in the boardroom of the Bundesbank which refuses to shore up the pile of cinders we call the Euro. Incidentally do they know something we don't?

So as I see it, we have as a nation these last few years come from Northern Rock to a hard place and interesting times lie ahead for most of us, more frugle years certainly, and it's carry on as usual for the likes of Richard Branson and for the mob at the IMF.

They seek to destroy Europe

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Thu, 16 Dec 2010 14:02:00 +0000

As RT reports riots the possiblity of riots sweeping across Europe following austerity measures, Trends Research Analyst - Gerald Celente: says; "The best solution is for the world to stop buying the crap they are fed and start looking after themselves...we are ALL guilty of feeding from the breast of the nanny states they created...Time for us All to leave the Nursery."

When the secretive and despicable Euro-Gravy Train crashed taking jobs and futures away from the masses. And when people began to wise up to the reality that their own national wealth along with the ability of their nation to regain control of their real economies had been placed into private hands rather then the elected bodies who call themselves our representatives. It began to spell doom for the people and doom for their political and social interest in general, which has become exacerbated by the politicians themselves who set about to change the cultures of European nations with their insane policies of mass and uncontrolled immigration.

Yet we seldom hear mention of the fact that our jobs and economic futures have been given away by our so called representatives for the sake of what?

What economic or social benefits can be achieved by replacing the peoples of Europe, and if there are none, then why is the question, when asked, always berated as being "racist" by the very people who sought to destroy Europe as we once knew it to be?

You've Ignored the people far too long

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Wed, 03 Nov 2010 18:41:00 +0000

I thought I'd do a short piece on the mid term elections, saying as the Republican Tea Party backed candidates have proven they are a force to be reckoned with in recent results that show Obama and his party are quite likely to be out on their ears just as soon as Americans can get to the ballot box proper.

Video from the Walls Street Journal

Interesting quote in the accompanying article:

"We're humbled by the trust that the American people have placed in us," .........."Our job is to listen to the American people and follow the will of the American people." Ohio Rep. John Boehner told reporters.

The main thrust of the article is on the economy, but clearly tea party campaigners did not make that their main issue. Their main issue was the fact that politicians from all sides of the senate have shown an utter disregard for their constitution and in particular they have ignored the people's will on unfettered immigration.

I think this should be a warning for British politicians and also those other dumb asses in Europe, but I guess we'll have to wait and see whether they are happy letting the rest of us live in the pig shit they created in our countries, as opposed to taking steps to sort out the problems only the general public seems to want to talk about or understand.

Immigration 'and' the economy....are both a problems.....and were caused by fuckwitted politicians who have ignored the people far too long. There has to be an end to those politicians who fail to tackle the real problems concerning people but instead gloss over them in defiance of what the people actually want them to do. The will of the people must be adhered to otherwise there is no point to their existence, and hopefully Americans can lead the way.

Explaining Islam

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Wed, 01 Sep 2010 04:34:00 +0000

Please don't forget Ian Tomlinson

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 04:32:00 +0000

"An investigation by the BBC Radio 4 programme The Report will tomorrow find that Patel should not have been on the Home Office register when he was appointed to conduct the postmortem on Tomlinson by the City of London coroner.

Patel was not in a group practice, did not participate in peer reviewing, and did not have a contract with any police force, the programme finds, meaning he did not meet criteria for forensic pathology set out by the Home Office in 2006. The Report also claims the GMC could have prevented Patel from conducting further forensic autopsies in 2005, following a complaint over misdiagnosis in another case.

There is mounting pressure for the inquest into Tomlinson's death to be taken out of the hands of the coroner, Paul Matthews. Lawyers, politicians and supporters of the Tomlinson family have questioned the independence of Matthews and called for a high court judge to be placed in charge of the case." Report by The Guardian newspaper 30th July 2010.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/aug/19/ian-tomlinson-pathologist-not-qualified

Matthews has consistently refused to explain why he chose Patel to conduct the first postmortem. He declined to take part in the BBC programme, which also found that he refused two IPCC officials access to the original postmortem while it was being conducted by Patel.

The Report, which will be broadcast at 8pm, also points to City of London police involvement in the selection of Patel. The force, which ran the initial investigation into Tomlinson's death and tried to convince his family there was nothing suspicious about his collapse, "approved" the appointment of Patel and paid £2,500 toward his fee.

We need truth and commonsense!

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Tue, 24 Aug 2010 01:33:00 +0000

The papers are full of garbage. Garbage about who's wearing what these days and who's fatter round the hips since turning 40. News? Forget that because you and I are now in the age of cover-up, lies, deceit, spin, misinformation, and CONTROL.

I used a bit time off to think out a few things and this is what I now believe totally is happening in our world, society, country and political arena wherever you happen to be. We are being fecking brainwashed and yet there are men and women dying in wars which have still not been given any proper reason. Is there a reason why our troops knocked the shit out of three sovereign countries killing millions of innocent people in the long drawn out process, or have I missed it?

I dunno, you tell me. You tell me what reason we could possibly have for killing millions of people, deposing three leaders, and occupying their countries please because I'd really like to ****ing know!

But surely that's just one subject here and I know there are many more. Subjects such as the death of Dr David Kelly. The Chilcot Inquiry which has no legal power to order warrants. The fact we have a government noone elected. There you go, three easy subjects for you to think about, and you can also add Raoul Moat to that and tell me who was to blame, why they shot him, what proof has the public been given that he posed a real threat to lives other than his own, and why we are to believe bent coppers who act like political thugs, take drugs, and will willingly kick the doors down of innocent people because they are prepared to follow orders without question. (Like our troops overseas).

You see there is another subject already, and it is why the machine of the establishment follows orders without question. Are they all dumb, thick and stupid or are they really just prepared to keep following orders when they must surely know 'something is not right'.

I'll leave you with this guys video, which I thought was pretty good. I think he hits the nail on the head and he's a YouTube buddy of mine. Despite the mask making him look like a mad axe thrower from hell, what he says is true. We need truth and commonsense, and people with the guts to speak it. Sadly there aren't that many of us unless they are too scared to open their mouths in case the establishment sends someone out to get them. Think not? Well maybe there's another subject which someone could write about if we only had a journalist with balls big enough to investigate instead of writing crap about the size of some 40 year old's hips and cellulite.

What really gets up my nose is........

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Fri, 20 Aug 2010 19:31:00 +0000

The French President is expelling thousands of Gypsies each year from France because they can't support themselves. i.e. They don't work, build camps, scrounge a living off the backs of ordinary taxpayers, and generally leave a fecking great big mess everywhere they go.

That said, I have not much against Gypsy's except if they come round my door selling old fucking lace or flowers they went and picked out of next doors garden. But the fact the French govt is dealing with it when our pathetic excuse for a government will not, must tell you something about the dresses our prime minister and his fancy puffy partner Clegg must appear like when comparing their policies next to those of Nikolas Sarkozy's.

I am disgusted however over another matter quite incidental to this issue, which if you read this you will see why: "He has linked Roma camps to drug trafficking, prostitution and the exploitation of children. He also has proposed stripping French citizenship from people of foreign origin who are convicted of trying to kill police or other public officials." Says a report in the Wall Street Journal HERE, where you can look at the full story with video and pictures if you like.

Why am I mad about this one passage?

Because it recognises that police and government officials are being threatened with death, and secondly it gives good reason to strip these people of French citizenship. But the thing that really gets up my nose is they left out what the murdering sons of bitches, thieves, rapists, drug traffickers and child sex rings are doing to ordinary people who DO have to put up with it because the government fails to recognise there is a real societal problem not contained specifically to the establishment. So it's one law for us and another for them, whilst they get protection and the rest of us have to watch we don't get hauled before a court simply for calling someone a Gypo.

Double standards? YES. Anything going to be done about it? NO. And that's what really gets up my nose.

Let's Go Global Quicker

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Mon, 16 Aug 2010 08:37:00 +0000

I got to thinking that if we people of the world are told to accept that the world according to Marx is now Global, then we should go the whole hog and have real globalism. I say this tongue in cheek of course I hasten to add, since I'm totally against the form of globalism being preached to the world by psychotically deranged mentalists who tell us they are politicians who like to say they represent the people yet do everything imaginable against them.

We can surely see who they are because they preach a one line gab of multiculturalism, economics, de-industrialisation, save the planet from man by taxing men more, and generally messing things up for everyone with their stupid wars which never really seem to have a reason and hardly ever have an end. Think about it. When were Britain and America for instance, along with so called 'coalition forces', 'not' at war over something? - Answer = NEVER!

So in light of our having been involved in a war somewhere on planet earth, since as far back as I can remember, and in light of our economy having been changed into one which I no longer recognise, in light of our population having doubled mainly as a result of steady influxes of people who simply do not share our values, and in light of our own people having absolutely no say in the matter. It may do well to leave aside all the negatives here despite they are many, and argue the case 'for' MORE globalisation.

It might sound stupid but my angle on this, is if you tackle stupidity with even greater stupidity then you should at least narrow down the visible belief in these stupid people who did all this without asking us, to begin to make them realise just how fucking stupid they really are.

So here's my list of things I want globalised:

1. Abortion, starting with those who seek political office. Globalists won't mind that being global I doubt so we can make the same arrangements for all Roman Catholics, Jews and Muslims, and I'm sure they will not have any problem with it either. Why should they disagree after all, if it is good enough for our unborn children to be thrown into a plastic bag at the hospital and later incinerated then it is surely good enough for everyone.

2. It is surely madness not to have a one world trades union congress which stands up globally for workers rights, income, pensions and environmental health and safety issues. So China and India shouldn't mind coming into line like the rest of us in western countries, and making all their stuff dearer for us to buy, because we're all in this together right?

3. I want a global political party and a global opposition. I'll be in the latter with a mind to oppose the idiocy being forced upon the world by the clowns globalists call politicians and I call mental cases.

Social Payment claims in chaos in America after this controversial video of the truth about your claimant rights

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 18:17:00 +0000

This is the link HERE

The video will explain everything but basically it shows you that the social security system in America is being ran by similar buffoons to those who run our own. Yet, it makes a couple of fair points.

1. Retirees are being stung left right and centre cash wise because no one will actually give advice on social security payments. Like our own system, you a) Either have to find out yourself, or b) Take what you get without argument if you are too dumb to check into it.

2. Literally thousands of $'s await those who do claim in the way the video explains and these claims are completely legit.

3. It is YOUR money from YOUR labour into a tax pot from which YOU are legally and morally entitled to take.

4. Good luck to any American claimant.

5. Where's ours?

Cameron whistling the Euro Anthem

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Thu, 12 Aug 2010 11:48:00 +0000

“I think if what you’re trying to do is stop supermarkets from selling 20 tins of Stella for a fiver that’s what we’ve got to go after...Where I want to try and help is ending the deep discounting on alcohol; people going and ‘pre-loading’, having bought from a supermarket where they were attracted by a price designed to bring them into the store." said Cameron.

Price drinkers out of the market and they'll stop drinking, must be the oldest gag in history for raising new taxes from ordinary folk out for a few bevvies to stem the flow of idiocy in Britain brought about by fellas like David Cameron and his ilk.

What was it George Osborne said I can't remember exactly but it was something about 'economic psychology' wasn't it. i.e. A form of economic engineering to change your psychological approach to: beer, lager, fags, anything with a green label on it, visiting historic buildings unless you got in on a free pass given to overseas 'visitors'. An end to anything which you might enjoy like making your own compost because that's the next thing they'll tax and say they are doing it for the environment because compost makes too much gas, albeit it's not the same type of gas they'd have us believe is shrinking the icecap up near Greenland precisely, but you get the picture.

Oh, but of course fast cars won't be taxed more they will just be given higher insurance premuims to stop you buying them unless you're on MP's expenses. But there's a fundamental flaw in all this and it's this:-

Not a soul in Britain asked this beggar and his wet liberal sidekicks to do ANYTHING in Britain least of all stop half the country from enjoying a can of Stella, because no one made enough votes to get either of the pair into government office. They LOST remember.

But do we call them a pair of losers, which we know they are, because we should. That is exactly what they are, they are all losers.

Last general election Cameron scored about 1% more than Michael Howard did when he was thrown out of the leadership chair for being no damn good for getting the Tories into office. 35% I think he got whereas Cameron managed 36% - after the worst government in British hisotry - had to be practically crowbarred out of government by a pissed off electorate. - Oh, there must be some fools who voted Labour don't get me wrong, it's just no one ever admits to doing so in public for some strange reason.

Fuhrermore (deliberate misspelling), Cameron hasn't batted an eye at the 50 to 80 forgotten about constituencies which are under investigation for ballot fraud and barring the electorate from voting, and instead of saying 'oh we'd best have a look to see if that makes any difference to our result, in that they may really have gotten far less than he thinks, him and Lord Snooty Clegg, carry on regardless as if it is their 'moral' right to sit in judgment over the rest of us for instance if we feel like carrying home a 6 pack from the supermarket.

But this is small beans to what they are doing and the list is far and wide. They lay some claim to have some right to change the perception that the people of this country can be in control through making local laws, when anyone with a brain cell knows everything is dictated to us by unelected money spenders in Europe.

Did I say that economic changes and political policies were being made for psychological reasons or didn't I? Maybe I'm alone in thinking that the way to reach people is by psychological connery or by trick, as opposed to clear honest policies that do not seek to remove the freedoms of the individual who has a god given right to choose, but rather stick to what a democracy is all about and do what it is the people have asked you to do, when you manage to get enough votes behind you to call yourself a government. Meanwhile, without sanction of the public there are no moral grounds to make sweeping changes, no grounds for any so called 'radical agenda' like the one Nick Clegg and David Cameron are talking about, and there is not one reason other than 'we two got together and took control', which makes the pair of them anything other than a couple of sad bastards whistling the Euro Anthem.

Because the people can only judge how they see it, and that is by deed. The deed is that Cameron,d espite knowing 80% or more of the country want out of the EU, choose to ignore it. Despite knowing local government can make laws which are about as much use as a chocolate fireguard in front of a blazing fire we call the European Court, is also a bold faced lie, and while he swigs his pint there, I'd like to ask him whether he has actually carried home a 6 pack or whether he has one of his maids do it. Furthermore, I'd like to know if he had any on MP's expenses unlike the rest of us.

This is not a commercial for Stella by the way, I think it's horrible and much prefer a decent English pint, but in case anyone thinks I'm trying to psychologically persuade you to think differently about David Cameron and Nick Clegg, I'll be honest and say of course I am. Isn't that what politics is all about!

Who the fuck made that video if it wasn't me?

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Mon, 09 Aug 2010 16:47:00 +0000

There's too much to write about these days. One second I'm looking at a news story of a woman suspected of deliberately killing her children before setting the house ablaze, next I'm waiting for the Chilcot Committee to make some sort of rational reasoning out of why this country saw fit to invade Iraq not to mention Bosnia and Afghanistan which remains unquestioned by many including the MP's who sent our troops to those places and yet wring their reptile claws over a despatch box daily at the loss of innocent life.

But then I look closer to home to find that several areas of the country are birthing more children to immigrant mothers than to British mothers, whilst at the same time telling us of honor killings, rapes in Ibiza of 15 years old kids, murders too many to keep up with or count, and it appears every news story carries messages of future doom in society whilst the economy and everything in it, including Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, are literally dropping to bits and we will follow suit. They blame unemployment for out of work people being unable to afford houses as if it's a mystery. Not that I and many others didn't say this several years ago you understand but I guess these sharp fellas have all the answers as well as all our money.

In fact I can't really recall a time when news was so prolific and all so bad as it is recently, and stories like the death of Dr David Kelly have fallen on the wayside with others which will if left unattended, literally kill us off as a people.

i.e. Immigration

So I'm concentrating really hard here to narrow on the main issue of the death of my people as a race, as I understand that the rest whilst fully worthy of picking over, are not so urgent so as to deviate me from the true reason I made the above video regarding Cameron's Black Britain.

You see, if you know anything about George Orwell's novel, 'Nineteen Eighty Four'. Then you will know that nothing you are told can actually be relied upon as being true. For without clear reason then there can be no reason for war. Without immigration there could be no problem with seeing the future extinction of my people, and without 'sunny holidays' in Ibiza there could be no rape on the beach there of a 15 year old haunting my newspapers and giving her parents nightmares, and without a war in Iraq and lying conniving political conmen and dictating, warmongering sons of bitches, there could be no question of the murder of Dr David Kelly.

In short, we are living in a world of complete fucking make believe only what we see is really happening. A mother really is accused of murdering her children. Not one mother, but a few of them. Secondly, Raoul Moat is really dead and he was really shot with tasers whilst he had a shotgun to his head. David Cameron really is planning to create a non-discriminatory Britain by discriminating against the British people, and birth rates really are rising for immigrants whilst every damn bastard in this country is singing out for abortions for the children of our own people because they all think a teenage mother or any mother for that matter should be at 'work', except if the mother is of ethnic origin in a country which we are told has no ethnic origin itself. i.e. There are no indigenous British people, we don't exist, and yet I find it difficult to understand who these immigrants can be 'different' to without us existing.

Yes, it's a bit of a puzzle is that one. For if I don't exist, then could someone please tell me who the fuck is writing this article on this blog of mine, and who the fuck made that video.

Meanwhile, until I have a reasonable answer to this problem, I will cease to write anymore in case I'm really wasting a dream here when I could have been making out with Megan Fox instead of dreaming of why Dr David Kelly was killed and by whom, and having nightmares about when someone with a set of balls will do something about immigration in my country.

Call a spade a spade

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Sat, 07 Aug 2010 19:12:00 +0000

The Telegraph has a story tonight of the president of Pakistan having been pelted with shoes at what it calls a "rally". Over 1,000 muslims went berserk at him visiting to see creeping Cameron because there are devastating floods in Pakistan which you'll no doubt have heard on the news of course because floods in Pakistan would get wide coverage in Britain whereas people dying of cold here and ex-servicemen having to sleep on the streets - wouldn't.

And when 'they' protest as is quite often these days in this love everyone but the British people society, the British media call it "rioting".

Yes, it's one law for us, and another for, well 'them' shoe throwing muslims who are at a "rally".

Sweet Jesus knows the difference between a riot and a rally but surely the British media hasn't got the guts to call a spade a spade.

My Salute to Patriots today

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 17:10:00 +0000

Why Was Raoul Moat Shot

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Tue, 03 Aug 2010 04:51:00 +0000

Being honest about it there's too much out there to write about for any blogger to cope with it all. For me, I sometimes bash away at this keypad and find I've done a string of articles about issues which either got my back up reading in the news, or something I recalled from yesteryear or yesterday, which somehow just couldn't seem to leave my mind.

I also have bouts of saying fuck it like you do no doubt, and I also wonder how in the hell are people ever to regain a decent society which isn't full of thieves, liars, idiot brainwashed lefty types, and corporate controllers who lord it up over the people as if we were ants and they were giants. If anyone ever saw that Star Trek episode with the Greek Gods with unlimited power vs brains of Capt Kirk and Spok, then you'll know precisely what I'm talking about when I say we have a job which seems impossible. It is for that reason too, that I tend not to write strings of articles so much these days, because I'm aware that the messages from my previous posts are simply going to the wall once I write another. Let me say in the scheme of things it makes little or no difference what I write here, except to me I guess as it empties my mind of the thoughts which circle it on a particular subject, until finally that thought has been fully exercised and is perhaps exhausted.

On this occasion, my thoughts are about Raoul Moat because what I've read lately I have to say I do not like.

The Daily Mail I believe started this feeling in me, that despite the man is dead, despite he can do no one any injury, and despite he did have friends on this earth who probably wish to peacefully attend his funeral. The Daily Mail has to make a story out of nothing by naming these and other people with a degree of sensibility, as "Ghouls". Let me say I only have to read a headline and a few opening lines these days to know what the entire article is about, and generally I now tend to write my answer and then check to see if it fits the article rather than the other way round. You see I think that comes about because I know what the media is like. It draws on 'feelings', and stirs up those feelings because it understands that people do actually have feelings. The simple truth is that.

Yes, people have feelings so we (media) can use that to make a story (about Raoul Moat), and get a massive reaction and hey presto, our sales are up.

Editor slaps writer on back, gives beaming smile because his publisher is happy, he gets to stay in work, and meanwhile cigars are handed out around the office and perhaps a small raise might be in order 'if you can keep them coming'. - Or something like that.

But instead of mimicking Clark Kent at the Daily Globe, let's see how it really is now on planet earth here shall we.

1 Raoul Moat (was) a man on the run from police. - check reason here.

2 Raoul Moat himself knew he needed psychiatric help, asked for it and didn't get it.

3 Given that he was stopped by police 130+ times for hawking scrap metal I believe that he was, as he himself declared, being 'harassed' by police.

4 He was jailed for 18 weeks. Accordingly this light sentence testifies that he was 'not' an arch criminal nor was he the anti-Christ as the Daily Mail would have us believe.

5 The police shot him, there are doubts whether he was in any way a threat to the public at large as they stated, and no one has yet accounted for his death.

6 Raoul Moat was not charged he was 'suspected' and alleged to have committed crimes but he can never be found guilty except in his absence.

But just because a man goes berserk with a gun and happens to run from police carrying their guns, that doesn't make him evil or what the Mail describes as a 'monster'. He is just a dead man who had psychological problems and I can imagine what I would feel like if I was being harassed and hunted by police, I'd been jailed for something I said I hadn't done, my girlfriend took off with another guy who just happened to be one of my harassers whilst I was inside, my mother didn't love me, my father had left me as a child, and now my son was being taken from me along with my ability to work because I was now since branded a criminal.

So where are the lefties in society who come put with all their lefty reasons why a child murderer or rapist or paedophile should be released from prison because in their eyes the system has to show compassion?

Where are all the mental cases like the current justice minister Kenneth Clarke, who want to let criminals out of prison and what are they saying about Raoul Moat and his being done over by their 'system', by his family, by his partner and by the police and now by the media?

They're not there are they.

Yes, they are always happy to court controversy when their enemy cannot fight back, but when they have a voice then it's easier just to call them names and denigrate them regardless of this so called plea for compassion they keep espousing. Thus, they call those attending his funeral 'ghouls', and they rabbit on about how they look and what they wear as if they are a different species, instead of asking why the fuck was Raoul Moat shot by police and why do we have armed officers without training in firearms surrounding a guy with rifles and tasers ready to shoot whilst telling us they shot him to stop him pulling the trigger on his sawn off shotgun and by so doing ending his own life. Is this the action of a) A dangerous man threatening the public, or b) A man who threatened the system.

Why was Raoul Moat shot and why is the media making a campaign against him and his followers instead of looking for the truth?

Answer: Because it sells papers and stops you looking at the truth.

As for me courting controversy, well follow the line 'frankly I couldn't give a damn'....and you'll see what I think about your feelings if different to mine on this subject. Because if there's one thing always guaranteed to get me going it's when I see a hypocrite shouting with complete ignorance of the truth, that those who care enough about the truth are 'ghouls' who should be publicly derided for attending a funeral. Don't people have a right to decide themselves anymore or is it the Daily Mail that tells us what to think these days?

Remember that in Britain you are only permitted to express sympathy to people the Daily Mail think are appropriate people and always check with them before you attend a funeral or have any thought in your head that doesn't agree with those of the establishment. Or, you could just say go fuck yourselves like me.

Reinstituting Slavery In America - by Bob Livingston

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 16:34:00 +0000

July 30, 2010 by Bob Livingston

I suppose you thought the idea of American slavery ended in 1865. A United States Congressman wants to reinstate it.

Ethically-challenged Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-N.Y) last week introduced in the Armed Services Committee H.R. 5741, also known as the National Service Act. The bill would require two-years of mandatory government service—either in the military or some as-yet undefined civilian service that promotes national or homeland security—to everyone between the ages of 18 and 42 if the President declares a national emergency.

No choice. No way out. You’ve got to do it if the President declares a national emergency.

Rangel, who opposes the excursions in Afghanistan and Iraq because he believes blacks and the poor are doing the majority of the fighting and dying, has long sought to institute a draft. In the past he has stated, in effect, that by instituting a draft Americans would be less likely to support wars.

That may be. But forced labor at the point of a gun is no different from what blacks suffered under the hands of slave masters for most of a couple of hundred years in America.

It doesn’t matter if it’s the Federal government or a plantation owner, forced labor is slavery. Giving it a fancy name doesn’t change that.

And one other thing: with growing disenchantment over the fascist bent of the current administration and its assault on the rule of law, this country is likely to soon see a popular uprising. That would be the perfect excuse for the President to make his emergency declaration.

And if you’re thinking that you might resist the “draft” remember, President Barack Obama fancies himself as another Lincoln. Well, just look at what Lincoln did during the draft riots in New York.

He ordered five regiments of troops fresh from the battlefield at Gettysburg to quell the riots. The troops shot somewhere between 300 and 1,000 civilians.

Everything comes before the people in this world

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Fri, 30 Jul 2010 05:40:00 +0000

They'd have us believe anything as long as the end result is that they remain in power over the people and are still able to tell us lies and twist the reasons for mans existence on the planet.

Watch Politics on Planet Earth in Activism & Non-Profit | View More Free Videos Online at Veoh.com

I put together the above video a while back and thought I should resurrect it after reading a CNN report late last night that drew attention to what they said was a decline in business in Arizona as a result of Gov Jan Brewers immigration law. Yet earlier that day I'd read a report in the Arizona news itself which described the exact opposite. It said that a 6.5% INCREASE in hotel bookings had resulted with people spending MORE eating out in restaurants. "Hotel occupancy was up 6.5 percent in May and 10.6 percent in June from a year earlier, outpacing national gains, according to Smith Travel Research. Average room rates were flat on an above-average increase in rooms. Revenue per available room, the most closely watched measure, rose 6.2 percent and 11 percent in May and June, respectively"

Yet the CNN report basically alleged that Arizona is finished without immigrants and following up with a video report of protesters all banging on about 'their' rights. That was headlined; "Arizona's immigration law slowly drains economy", and only one of them has to be right (true).

This is precisely the issue I see when I read news and when I see people demonstrating. Firstly, news is not news it is propaganda. It is always biased and is hardly ever written with straight fact. It is a form of communication that is aimed at influencing the attitude of a community toward some cause or position and is not 'news', nor is it 'new' for propaganda has been around since the dawn of civilsation and has been used for millennium by unscrupulous people who aim to control all other people of 'their' world in which we masses are seen as termites and cockroaches. Julius Caesar's own account of his actions was in fact 'propaganda' to sway the masses to support him and politicians have not changed. They are in no way different to liars of old, including Julius Caesar who did anything but 'invade Britannia, when historical accounts and archaeological finds, confirm that he came here by invitation of the southern King Verica and that Briton had been trading with Rome for centuries before.

How can two news sources be giving entirely opposing coverage? How can a country be seeking to overthrow its own laws simply because the people want their government to actually carry out its mandate to uphold the law?

Further, how can we be witnessing people who are in a country illegally, demonstrating in that 'foreign country', for 'RIGHTS', which they shouldn't have. If they are foreigners, then they should get themselves back home and protest to their own governments, and maybe their own governments would change so that the people no longer feel the need to colonise other people's countries illegally and take their jobs.

Maybe if the people, the press and politicians stopped lying, the world might improve a bit and we Americans and Brits can get back to working on our own countries instead of working on everyone else's 'rights' before ours.

This is why I did 'Politics on Planet Earth', because everything comes before people in this world and we must change it if we are to survive as a species.

Court Grants Temporary Injunction on parts of Arizona Immigration Law

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Thu, 29 Jul 2010 06:13:00 +0000

Well those who have been following passage of the Arizona immigration law into practice today, will no doubt have learned that U.S. Federal Judge Susan Bolton has granted a preliminary stay on certain parts of the law which asks law enforcement officers to use reasonable judgement to discover whether or not a person is in the country illegally if stopped for a misdemeanor. i.e. If a person is stopped as a suspect then the officer would under the new law, be empowered to ask for I.D. in the same way an officer would ask any American citizen in the well known phrase "Can I see yer drivers licence please sir".

The law is in force today, but a judge has granted a temporary injunction in respect of giving officers the right to ask this question of suspects, and she has also given an injunction to the part where Arizona law would make it a crime for an illegal immigrant to seek employment and a crime to employ an illegal immigrant as well as a crime for an illegal immigrant not to carry papers validating their citizen status. Instead, the judge has ruled that Federal Law MUST be adhered to, which amounts to the same as Arizona simply want to assert Federal law under state law, as the Federal Govt is failing to implement it.

The judge ruled it was permissible for a citizen to sue the government for failing to carry out the law, so round one is plainly a matter of how you interpret the ruling. Personally, seeing reports of immigrants fleeing back across the border, I think the mere fact Jan Brewer has threatened such a law, has in fact done half the job she wanted. But despite this, the issue still rankles in court and it's a matter of politics as to which side has 'won' this first round. Meanwhile, Gov Brewer says that an expedited appeal will be launched by Arizona against this preliminary judgement which you can read in its entirety HERE.

Hispanic and immigrant workforce by the numbers

• 40 percent of all new workers in the U.S. workforce in 2006-07 were Latinos.

• 41 million U.S. Hispanics are estimated to account for 14 percent of the U.S. population.

• 13 percent of the U.S. labor force is Latino.

• 11 percent of all U.S. residents are immigrants; 14 percent of all workers and 20 percent of low-wage workers.

• 2 million Latino-owned businesses in the U.S. make nearly $300 million in annual sales.

Sources: Addeco: The Emerging Hispanic Workforce, Urban Institute Immigration Studies Program: A Profile of The Low-Wage Immigrant Workforce.

Read more: HERE

Cameron Shadow Boxing over Turkey

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 10:32:00 +0000

Who is he supposed to be 'fighting' when his 'argument' is simply if you don't agree with him then you must be racist, xenophobic and Islamofascist. LINK

Maybe if he wants to 'fight' then he should think first about untying the opposition's hands from his political correctness and offering the people a say on Europe for without that his 'fight' is akin to shadow boxing which makes him look even more stupid than I thought he was.

Unless he thinks the British people are complete morons then he would know that we know, that he has just flown direct from the Oval office with Obama's instruction manual in hand, and his opinions as to whether or not Turkey should join the EU are about as much use to this country as a chocolate fireguard.

Firstly, Sarkozy has already said he will not allow entry of Turkey and he's up for election soon. Secondly, Chancellor Merkel is against it too so that's a done deal Cameron. Beg all you like and plead until you're out of breath for Obama's muddled policy on a country which still hasn't recognised its illegal invasion of Cyprus, because it's not going to happen except by stealth, lies and propaganda.

Or, I guess you and Obama could resort to economic threats. You'll be good at that no doubt and far better at that I wager, than you are at real boxing with people who could destroy your argument in one sentence if only they could speak without having a hammer thrown at them by your gang of criminals.

Will Common Purpose be Investigated by the Charity Commission

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 08:39:00 +0000

I read in the Wall Street Journal this morning that the UK Charity Commission has "scolded" the charity 'Atlantic Bridge' for what it deems to be work which is politically based with a Conservative Party bias.

The charity has been running since 2003 and was established by Tory minister Liam Fox in 1997. Amongst other British politicians, it ranks George Osborne, Michael Gove and William Hague on its advisory council and has been reprimanded by the Charity Commission for "engaging in inappropriate political activity".

The charity was set up to apparently foster stronger relations between British and American politicians and has used Margaret Thatcher's credibility as the sales pitch to improve the 'special relationship' between Britain and America. David Cameron recently on tour in America referred to too much emphasis being placed on this so called special relationship so I presume he was aware of the Charity Commission's ruling when he said that, else why say it.

But this is minor surely compared to another charity set up by ex-govt head of staff Julia Middleton to promote 'Leadership beyond authority' through Common Purpose. Common Purpose obviously has links to many political organisations yet has not been reproached by the Charity Commission, when plainly its projects are based on Communism, Marxism or what we now call Communitarianism for instance in its promotion of the European Union along with the ideals of a post-democratic era.

There is much written about Common Purpose and really you need to look it up yourselves if you're unaware of its complexity. One issue for instance is the scurrilous notion that councils and organisations like regional police authorities are actually contributing taxpayers money to it yet people are unaware and have no say in this. Secondly, it operates on the basis of secrecy and elitism, often selecting children and adults for 'training', who the 'charity' deems suitable. i.e. It isn't open to everyone it is selective.

Maybe whilst the Charity Commission is looking into the activities of other charities, it could look at this one as the first and most important area to investigate, given that there are over a million links on Google about it, and that an ex-naval commander has a file about ten feet high on its activities, which he says are Fascist, secretive and evil. It is undoubtedly an evil in our midst given the content of his files on its activities, and one could only really describe it correctly by referring to it as a fifth column.

Will Common Purpose also be investigated or is the Charity Commission signed up to Common Purpose too.

WikiLeaks owner Julian Assange on Larry King

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 04:37:00 +0000

PART ONE

MOXNEWS

PART TWO

Hat tip: Gerald Celente

NATO coalition accused of War Crimes

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 19:12:00 +0000

"The Afghan war documents published by WikiLeaks appear to contain evidence of war crimes, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange told a news conference in London Monday".

LINK to Wall Street Journal.

"There does appear to be evidence of war crimes in this material," he said, adding that it would be "up to a court" to make judgements on any crimes.

He cited in particular Task Force 373, which he described as a U.S. military "assassination unit" that he said killed seven children in a "botched raid."

He strongly suggested a coverup of civilian deaths during the war, pointing to U.S. military reports on the number of people wounded or killed during specific incidents. In some of these, a high number of those killed or wounded are classified as "enemy" while very few are classified as "civilians," which Mr. Assange called "suspicious."

Asked how many incidents could potentially be investigated for possible war crimes or other reasons, he said "thousands," adding that the U.S. military would probably be forced to investigate some. "You need enough investigated to create deterrents" against similar behaviour in the future, he said.

Mr. Assange added that the information in the documents "really doesn't paint a flattering picture of the Taliban, either," noting that there are many reports of Taliban-planted explosive devices resulting in "significant loss of human life."

He said the documents don't just "reveal abuses" but paint a detailed picture of "the last six years of war," including the kinds of weapons used and the progress or setbacks experienced.

The giant document drop is bringing new attention to Mr. Assange's website and its mission to reveal government secrets. Mr. Assange said WikiLeaks has raised $1 million from the general public to fund its activities. "As a result we are able to have a fierce independence" that other information providers can't, he said.

He said WikiLeaks has in recent months built up an enormous backlog of information on a variety of topics that it aims to eventually publish. The information involves "thousands of databases and files about all sorts of countries," he said.

"We have a small team of dedicated and overworked people," he said. WikiLeaks also has 800 "part-time volunteers" and a network of "70,000 supporters," he said.

Mr. Assange declined to comment on the identity of the source who leaked the documents, or on how the source managed to copy and leak them. Asked about Bradley Manning, a U.S. Army intelligence analyst charged this month with leaking classified information, Mr. Assange said: "There is no allegation as far as we can determine" that the documents posted on WikiLeaks Sunday are "connected to Bradley Manning." He said WikiLeaks has nonetheless "committed funds" to Mr. Manning's legal defense, offering his military-appointed legal team money in case it wants to hire civilian counsel.

Mr. Assange said the source who leaked the documents was motivated by a desire "to call attention to a number of these incidents."

For his own part, Mr. Assange said he doesn't "really have an opinion about whether the war should stop."

"We just have the opinion that the abuses should stop, the abuses of war should stop," he said.

Mr. Assange said he hopes the release of the documents will lead to a "deep understanding and scrutiny of the war in Afghanistan, and, as a result, changes in policy about the prosecution of the war."

He called the publication of the documents "the equivalent of opening the Stasi archives," referring to the East German secret police. "It is a history, an enormous compendium of material which will affect many people in different ways," he said.

WikiLeaks has so far published 76,000 of the 91,000 documents in its possession, he said. It is still vetting another 15,000 and will release some of those after they've been redacted.

He said he believes the disclosure will motivate others to leak information about the war. "Courage is contagious," he said.

Asked whether the leaked material could end up harming U.S. military personnel, the WikiLeaks founder appeared to play down the idea, saying: "The material is all seven months old. There is nothing about troop movements" or military tactics. But he said some Afghanis could be "upset" by allegations of abuse that could arise from the documents. MORE

CBS "White House tries to kill the messenger"

No Moral Authority

Migrants sell up, flee Arizona ahead of crackdown

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:29:00 +0000

* Tough state immigration crackdown starts on Thursday

* Boom in yard sales as migrants sell off belongings

* Legal residents, US-born children join scramble to leave

By Tim Gaynor

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSN2514063220100725

PHOENIX, July 25 (Reuters) - Nicaraguan mother Lorena Aguilar hawks a television set and a few clothes on the baking sidewalk outside her west Phoenix apartment block.

A few paces up the street, her undocumented Mexican neighbor Wendi Villasenor touts a kitchen table, some chairs and a few dishes as her family scrambles to get out of Arizona ahead of a looming crackdown on illegal immigrants.

"Everyone is selling up the little they have and leaving," said Villasenor, 31, who is headed for Pennsylvania. "We have no alternative. They have us cornered."

The two women are among scores of illegal immigrant families across Phoenix hauling the contents of their homes into the yard this weekend as they rush to sell up and get out before the state law takes effect on Thursday.

The law, the toughest imposed by any U.S. state to curb illegal immigration, seeks to drive more than 400,000 undocumented day laborers, landscapers, house cleaners, chambermaids and other workers out of Arizona, which borders Mexico.

It makes being an illegal immigrant a state crime and requires state and local police, during lawful contact, to investigate the status of anyone they reasonably suspect of being an illegal immigrant.

The U.S. government estimates 100,000 unauthorized migrants left Arizona after the state passed an employer sanctions law three years ago requiring companies to verify workers' status using a federal computer system. There are no figures for the number who have left since the new law passed in April.

Some are heading back to Mexico or to neighboring states. Others are staying put and taking their chances.

In a sign of a gathering exodus, Mexican businesses from grocers and butcher shops to diners and beauty salons have shut their doors in recent weeks as their owners and clients leave.

On Saturday and Sunday, Reuters counted dozens of impromptu yard sales in Latino neighborhoods in central and west Phoenix/

"They wanted to drive Hispanics out of Arizona and they have succeeded even before the law even comes into effect," said Aguilar, 28, a mother of three young children who was also offering a few cherished pictures and a stereo at one of five sales on the same block.

She said she had taken in just $20 as "everyone is selling and nobody wants to buy."

LEGAL RESIDENTS FLEE

Arizona straddles the principal highway for human and drug smugglers heading into the United States from Mexico.

The state's Republican governor, Jan Brewer, signed the law in April in a bid to curb violence and cut crime stemming from illegal immigration.

Polls show the measure is backed by a solid majority of Americans and by 65 percent of Arizona voters in this election year for some state governors, all of the U.S. House of Representatives and about a third of the 100-seat Senate.

Opponents say the law is unconstitutional and a recipe for racial profiling. It is being challenged in seven lawsuits, including one filed by President Barack Obama's administration, which wants a preliminary injunction to block the law.

A federal judge heard arguments from the lawyers for the Justice Department and Arizona on Thursday and could rule at any time.

The fight over the Arizona law has complicated the White House's effort to break the deadlock with Republicans in Congress to pass a comprehensive immigration law, an already difficult task before November's elections.

While the law targets undocumented migrants, legal residents and their U.S.-born children are getting caught up in the rush to leave Arizona.

Mexican housewife Gabriela Jaquez, 37, said she is selling up and leaving for New Mexico with her husband, who is a legal resident, and two children born in Phoenix.

"Under the law, if you transport an illegal immigrant, you are committing a crime," she said as she sold children's clothes at a yard sale with three other families. "They could arrest him for driving me to the shops."

Lunaly Bustillos, a legal resident from Mexico, hoped to sell some clothes, dumbbells and an ornamental statue on Sunday before her family heads for Albuquerque, New Mexico, on Monday.

"It makes me sad and angry too because I feel I have the right to be here," said Bustillos, 17, who recently graduated from high school in Phoenix. (Editing by John O'Callaghan)

NATO rocket kills another 45 Afghan civilians

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:24:00 +0000

NATO rocket killed 45 Afghan civilians: government

KABUL | Mon Jul 26, 2010 9:45am EDT

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66P35Y20100726

KABUL (Reuters) - At least 45 civilians, many women and children, were killed in a rocket attack by the NATO-led foreign force in Afghanistan's southern Helmand province last week, a spokesman for the Afghan government said on Monday.

The incident happened in Helmand's Sangin district on Friday when civilians crammed into a mud-built house to flee fighting between NATO-led International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) troops and Taliban insurgents, Siyamak Herawi told Reuters.

Reports of civilian deaths and casualties caused by foreign troops are a major cause of friction between Afghan President Hamid Karzai and his Western backers and often lead to street demonstrations.

If confirmed, the Sangin incident would be among the worst of its kind during the war. At least 30 civilians were killed in a NATO air strike called in by German forces in northern Kunduz in September last year.

A spokesman for ISAF said the alliance had conducted an operation against insurgents in Sangin on Friday and was investigating the reports of civilian deaths.

"We have an assessment team there right now," Major Michael Johnson told Reuters.

Civilians were also wounded in the attack, Herawi said after a separate investigation by the Afghan government was completed.

"The investigation shows that the rocket was fired by NATO and 45 civilians, many of them women and children, have been killed," he said.

(Reporting by Sayed Salahuddin; Editing by David Fox)

Go fuck yourself Hannan

noreply@blogger.com (rugfish) — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 10:57:00 +0000

Daniel Hannan generally talks sense but on this occasion he's talking utter bollox when he attempts to label the BNP as 'leftist', whilst simultaneously using insulting references to Fascism which he doesn't bother to actually explain I might add, but I guess it fills his column up with what his editor and pals want to hear.

I mused over his likening of the old Labour Party to the British National Party, but found I couldn't contain myself for long when I found he was attempting to signal his readership that workers sharing the fruits of their labour was in some way an act of social revolution. - Add on what he says about resenting the monarchy and resenting people who get on and make themselves a few bob, and what you have is what sounds like a party of haters and jealous types as opposed to reality that there is not a damn thing wrong with recognising that this earth, this planet, and this country belongs to all of us and not specifically to a chosen few of 'his mates'.

Lastly, he left a gaping hole in his argument when he referred to the Conservative party as being 'right'.

Someone ought to tell Hannan that the Conservative Party doesn't fucking exist anymore since a democracy hating, white male hating, people getting a fair deal from their own economy hating, weak, spineless, warmongering wet gay, black, Islam loving fucking Liberal took it over and although gaining 1 degree more at the polls than Michael Howard, thrust himself into the position of chief gobshite from where Daniel Hannan obviously likewise emanated when he wrote worthless bollox about the BNP.

In fact if Daniel Hannan knows anything about history, and I know he does. And if he knows anything about politics, which I presume he does. Then he would know for certain that more people were murdered under Communism than they ever were under so called 'right wing' governments, and he's done a bad job of likening a party which has never yet seen government to the ilk of him and his kind who are stood there supporting the left wing invasions of Serbia, Iraq and Afghanistan and god knows where else, whilst trying to tell the world he's the good guy.

In short Mr Hannan, what you wrote is complete bollox and you can go fuck yourself along with the rest of your murdering maniac party who care NOTHING for the British people, and that's putting it politely.

Meanwhile, as Mr Hannan is an MEP at the European Parliament of lying twats, Marxists and tax dodgers, maybe he could write about something a little more worthwhile.