With Labour neatly out of the way, having completed their project of bankrupting Britain, the next great step in the project is the Emergency Budget on June 22nd.
The media are smearing and spinning for their paymasters as they always do, attacking those sections of society that will be most affected by the (massive) cuts. Whipping up a bit of antagonism towards those sectors is a tried and tested method, divide and rule style.
So it is clear that June the 22nd will be a crucial date for everyone. Which made me wonder about the date. I have noticed that politicians often choose dates for major announcements for a symobolic reason, so why this particular date.
Operation Barbarosso was the code name for Nazi Germanys invasion of the Soviet Union and began on June 22nd 1941. It was the largest military offensive in history in terms of manpower and casualties. It was also a complete failure. Not only did they fail to defeat the Soviet Union but it was a turning point in the fortunes of the Nazi war machine towards defeat.
Could it be that Camerons own Operation Barbarroso (or is that Barroso) in Britain is to deliver such stinging, far reaching cuts that, just as the left defeated the right 59 years ago on June 22nd, that the coalition will break apart following mass outrage, leaving the socialists to sweep into permanant power?
Project complete?
Friday, 18 June 2010
Tuesday, 15 June 2010
Sunday Bloody Sunday
Base details of that very expensive report here .
It cost around £200 million for that, providing careers for lawyers and Lords for 12 years. No doubt there will be millions more paid out in compensation claims, so that the lawyers can cream even more off the taxpayer and Cameron can hand wring around the soulless Gerry Adams.
So what does this report achieve? The families of the dead claim justice and so do the IRA. Yet just glancing at the report I can see many worrying details. Like the admission that IRA snipers were there, that Martin McGuinness was heavily involved and that one of the casualties may have been armed.
Saville says 'on balance the soldiers fired first'. On balance? Therefore no conclusive evidence at all.
Casualty Gerald Donaghey was found with nails in his body, therefore indicating he was carrying a nail bomb. This is acceptable to Saville as he had not used his bomb at the point he was shot. Well that's ok then.
Further, Saville said ' with the exception of two soldiers, none of the firing was aimed at people posing a threat of causing death or serious injury'. But he obviously accepts that two soldiers were firing at people who posed a threat of causing death or serious injury. That being the case, means that there were people in the crowd who did pose a threat of causing death or serious injury, therefore the soldiers would be acting in a defensive position.
Also cue shock that the soldiers may have lied about what happened on the day. Well, if I were up against the IRA and knew my own British government gave not one jot about how many English people the IRA murdered, then I would do whatever it took to protect myself and family from that murderous crew.
There again, it is revealed in the report that the IRA had 'pre-arranged' sniper positions plus Martin McGuinness 'probably' armed with a machine gun.
So in summary, there were nail bombs, IRA snipers in position, people present who posed a threat of causing death or serious injury and Martin McGuinness armed with a machine gun. But for Saville the soldiers were to blame.
Sunday Bloody Sunday? More Hypocrisy Bloody Hypocrisy.
It cost around £200 million for that, providing careers for lawyers and Lords for 12 years. No doubt there will be millions more paid out in compensation claims, so that the lawyers can cream even more off the taxpayer and Cameron can hand wring around the soulless Gerry Adams.
So what does this report achieve? The families of the dead claim justice and so do the IRA. Yet just glancing at the report I can see many worrying details. Like the admission that IRA snipers were there, that Martin McGuinness was heavily involved and that one of the casualties may have been armed.
Saville says 'on balance the soldiers fired first'. On balance? Therefore no conclusive evidence at all.
Casualty Gerald Donaghey was found with nails in his body, therefore indicating he was carrying a nail bomb. This is acceptable to Saville as he had not used his bomb at the point he was shot. Well that's ok then.
Further, Saville said ' with the exception of two soldiers, none of the firing was aimed at people posing a threat of causing death or serious injury'. But he obviously accepts that two soldiers were firing at people who posed a threat of causing death or serious injury. That being the case, means that there were people in the crowd who did pose a threat of causing death or serious injury, therefore the soldiers would be acting in a defensive position.
Also cue shock that the soldiers may have lied about what happened on the day. Well, if I were up against the IRA and knew my own British government gave not one jot about how many English people the IRA murdered, then I would do whatever it took to protect myself and family from that murderous crew.
There again, it is revealed in the report that the IRA had 'pre-arranged' sniper positions plus Martin McGuinness 'probably' armed with a machine gun.
So in summary, there were nail bombs, IRA snipers in position, people present who posed a threat of causing death or serious injury and Martin McGuinness armed with a machine gun. But for Saville the soldiers were to blame.
Sunday Bloody Sunday? More Hypocrisy Bloody Hypocrisy.
Tuesday, 8 June 2010
UKIP MEPS' Useless?
Gerard Batten, in response to the debate about witholding TV licence fees, griped about the BBC reporter, Mark Mardell, labelling UKIP MEPs as useless. He explained quite succintly why this is not the case here .
So now you know. About 180 speeches in a parliament no-one outside it's rich interior listens to is how the UKIP MEP thinks we will leave Europe. About 180 speeches in the European Parlaiment that no-one listens to will save those people thrown onto the dole because of banker theft. About 180 speeches in the European Parliament that no-one listens to will take us out of Afghanistan and Iraq and so on.
MEPs would do well to remember that while they are tucked up in grandeur, taking ever increasing taxpayer funded wages (was that a £19,000 rise you had this year chaps?) that resentment is bubbling under the surface throughout Europe, which will lead to who knows where.
UKIP MEPs were supposed to be working to take us out of Europe, not preen over the number of 90 second speeches they have made to a parliament that no-one listens to. And what have they actually achieved other than to line their own pockets. Even the possible demise of the Euro has only been brought about by corrupt bankers.
So I have to conclude that Mark Mardell was right. It may now be a political cliche but it's time for (big) change.
So now you know. About 180 speeches in a parliament no-one outside it's rich interior listens to is how the UKIP MEP thinks we will leave Europe. About 180 speeches in the European Parlaiment that no-one listens to will save those people thrown onto the dole because of banker theft. About 180 speeches in the European Parliament that no-one listens to will take us out of Afghanistan and Iraq and so on.
MEPs would do well to remember that while they are tucked up in grandeur, taking ever increasing taxpayer funded wages (was that a £19,000 rise you had this year chaps?) that resentment is bubbling under the surface throughout Europe, which will lead to who knows where.
UKIP MEPs were supposed to be working to take us out of Europe, not preen over the number of 90 second speeches they have made to a parliament that no-one listens to. And what have they actually achieved other than to line their own pockets. Even the possible demise of the Euro has only been brought about by corrupt bankers.
So I have to conclude that Mark Mardell was right. It may now be a political cliche but it's time for (big) change.
Sunday, 6 June 2010
Hypocrisy and Revolution
Israel have stated it will reject a proposed international commission to investigate it's raid on the Gaza aid flotilla.
Cue, then, indignant outrage from those western countries, you know - the same ones that have been murdering in Iraq and Afghanistan for some time now. Better still, Iran is threatening to send in their 'Revolutionary Guards' to protect the 'peace flotillas going to the oppresed people of Gaza'. Er, weren't the people of Iran brutally put down some months ago when they fought against oppression in Iran? I've never before thought of revolutionary and peace as soulmates.
And what were Turkey doing letting the 'peace' flotillas set off in the first place. Did they tell these activists that Israel would ignore them, or give them a falafel kebab and send them on their way. Or did Turkey encourage a deliberate act of provacation? And is that what Irans 'Revolutionary Guards' will also do in the hope of starting a revolution? And what would the US would have done if a 'flottilla of peace' had arrived in Iraq protected by 'Revolutionary Guards' from a country ruled by dictators?
Back in the real world, revolution is just an excuse for the violent ignorant and easily manipulated fools to wreak havoc, murder and mayhem, while the shady organisors sweep up the goodies - think French Revolution, Russian Revolution et al. I suspect the 'peace flottilla' activists thought they were 'Revolutionary Guards' as well because I don't see how provoking Israel could be seen as any kind of peacemaking exercise.
The situation in Gaza is between Israel and Palastine and they should be left to sort their own problems out. Gaza may think it has it tough now, but if they want the international community to sort out the problems, they would do well to remember the success the international community has made of Iraq.
Cue, then, indignant outrage from those western countries, you know - the same ones that have been murdering in Iraq and Afghanistan for some time now. Better still, Iran is threatening to send in their 'Revolutionary Guards' to protect the 'peace flotillas going to the oppresed people of Gaza'. Er, weren't the people of Iran brutally put down some months ago when they fought against oppression in Iran? I've never before thought of revolutionary and peace as soulmates.
And what were Turkey doing letting the 'peace' flotillas set off in the first place. Did they tell these activists that Israel would ignore them, or give them a falafel kebab and send them on their way. Or did Turkey encourage a deliberate act of provacation? And is that what Irans 'Revolutionary Guards' will also do in the hope of starting a revolution? And what would the US would have done if a 'flottilla of peace' had arrived in Iraq protected by 'Revolutionary Guards' from a country ruled by dictators?
Back in the real world, revolution is just an excuse for the violent ignorant and easily manipulated fools to wreak havoc, murder and mayhem, while the shady organisors sweep up the goodies - think French Revolution, Russian Revolution et al. I suspect the 'peace flottilla' activists thought they were 'Revolutionary Guards' as well because I don't see how provoking Israel could be seen as any kind of peacemaking exercise.
The situation in Gaza is between Israel and Palastine and they should be left to sort their own problems out. Gaza may think it has it tough now, but if they want the international community to sort out the problems, they would do well to remember the success the international community has made of Iraq.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)